Vedic Marriage: An Excerpt

March 9, 2004

We are all one. The body is a temple where God resides. God resides

in me, in you, in you, in you, in everyone. Not only in the human

beings , but also in the animals, the trees, the birds that fly in

the air, in the air that we breathe, in the clouds that give us

rain, in the stars in space. There is not a single place or a

single time where God is not. We do understand this in principle,

but when it comes to practice, we tend to differentiate a lot. ...

So, can you find this attachment that we all have together? I have

life, you have life. We are both attached to life. I can speak,

you can speak, we are both attached to speech. And there are so

many factors which are common to the seer and the seen. This is

what brings about the unity, the experience of unity as compared to

the state of diversity. We see that the division that we look at is

superficial, but if we go deep, we see the unity. The ability to

see both the diversity and the unity at the same time is given to

us. And your birthright is to experience that unity.

And the concept of marriage as it exists now in the Hindu culture

tells you how to translate this experience of unity in diversity.

If you know how to make two into one, then you know how to make

three into one; by induction process, and then you know how to make

four into one and so on. So you experience the whole entire world

collapsing into you. So this is the foundation of the concept of

marriage. ...

The bridegroom is none other than MahaVishnu, physically present as

an individual here -- I am washing his feet. Namostu, I bow down to

him. ... He is the seer. Shashvate, he is existing forever,

through all life. Sahasrakoti yugadharine namah. For thousands of

crores of eras, he has been there, and that is the Maha Vishnu who

is the bridegroom. ...

And what does the bride represent? The wealth of the lord, Maha

Laksmi, aishvarya. All the wealth in the world, all the enjoyment,

all the riches, all the experiences, they are the Maha Laksmi.

Kanyam kanaka sampannam sakala abharanih yutam. This bride is

offered as the wealth of the world unto thee, unto the God who owns

this wealth.

Then you may say, what is this giving of the bride to the

bridegroom? Is it not a sense of distortion? Should the bridegroom

not be given to the bride? Why this superiority of the male? Does

it not interfere with the relationship? But it's not so. To see

this, let us go on with the concept of marriage.

The real muhurta, when the people get married, is when they put

their hands on each others' heads, it's called sumuhurta. At that

time, what happens? ... Putting a hand on your head is a blessing.

And who blesses you? The guru blesses you. So the meaning of that

sumuhurta, the real meaning of marriage is implicit there. That the

bride becomes the guru of the bridegroom, and the bridegroom becomes

the guru of the bride. So you are mutual guru and sishya. But you

have to understand this.

Where normally, we tend to place the guru on a pedestal, high up

above, and think that we have obey or listen to whatever he or she

says. That is not the real meaning. The real meaning of the guru and

sishya relationship is that like a transmitter and receiver. When

I'm talking and you're listening, I'm the guru and you are the chela

or sishya. But when you're talking and I'm listening, you're the

transmitter and I'm the receiver; so you're the guru and I'm the

sishya. ...

If I say, I am always the guru and you're always the disciple,

there's a superiority / inferiority relationship there. But that's

not true. The relationship is built on total equality. You're

sometimes the guru, sometimes I'm the guru. Sometimes you're the

sishya, sometimes I'm the sishya. So where's the question of

superiority there? If A contains B and B contains A, then we say A

is equal to B, right? It is this relationship which is the essence

of our Hindu marriage.

If in this relationship of marriage, if we assume the dominant male

or the dominant female attitude, then the concept of the marriage is

totally lost. The marriage is supposed to be like a cart that has

two wheels, and both wheels have to move forward at the same speed

so that the cart can go forward. If one wheel stops and the other

is moving, it goes round and round, it doesn't move forward. But

equality of the two wheels which are the husband and the wife, that

is being established by this relationship, and that is the essence

of the marriage.

Love is that which integrates, which unites. It is not that which

separates. Love is a connection, a resonance. ... So love is that

where you discover the real needs of the other person and you try to

fulfill those needs. Not because you're in a position where you can

help and that person needs the help, but because it's your nature to

help, and it hurts you not to help those whom you're helping. So

you see, love is a very delicate thing which blurs the sense of

distinction between the giver and the given, or the receiver and the

received. So it is in total unity only that you can love.

If you feel separateness, then you cannot experience this love. The

purpose of marriage was to achieve the state where you make two into

one, make three into one, make many into one, and to take you into

that state where you are connected to the whole world, and become

truly a divine person, a Goddess or a God.

You think you are two separate bodies, you and your wife, or you and

your husband. But these two are connected so totally, that I know

your thoughts as if they are my own thoughts. I'm able to see

through your eyes. I'm able to hear through your ears. I'm able to

feel what you're experiencing without your having to communicate

with me. It is that total union of the spirit which enables you to

circulate into the other state of consciousness, that is the aim of

the marriage, to make two into one. To realize that in a real life

situation, that is the real purpose of marriage.

.... As I said, the marriage is between God and the world; between

Maha Vishnu and this world. Where does Maha Vishnu reside? In

everyone, right? And where does Maha Laksmi reside? In everyone.

So, you see, how can there be a divorce in such a situation? When

the bridegroom is the God and God exists in everyone. The wealth of

God also exists in everyone. And the unity of these two, how can it

be disturbed by separation? There is no concept of divorce in the

Hindu marriage. Whomever marries whomever else, it still is the

marriage of Maha Vishnu and Maha Laksmi.

You know, there is the concept of worshiping the women who come to

our house. We give them gifts and they say, "Who is it that is

giving gifts?" We tell them, "Devi, it is you who are giving gifts,

who are also receiving gifts." This is Devi puja. So, though the

names of the people are different, it is the same Goddess who is

giving and the Goddess who is receiving. So this non-distinction is

built from the beginning of our life to the end of our life, and

throughout our life. This is the real basis of Hindu marriage.

In the olden days, the Vedic times, in the Tantric times, they used

to marry the girls eight years after menstruation. Eight years

after she became a woman, she is married. What happens between

these eight years? There used to be called Gandharva vivaha, which

means you love somebody, so you are with that somebody. In modern

terms, it is called dating. In olden times it was called Gandharva

vivaha.

The bride and bridegroom are married. So who is the bride married

to? She's married to everyone, the whole world. Who is the

bridegroom married to? He's married to the whole world.

Explicitly, the vedic mantras say, the bride is married to the

purohit who is performing the marriage. She's married to the

Gandharvas. Gandharvas are those with whom she had contact earlier,

before her marriage. She's married to all of them. She's married

to agni, the fire. She's married to vayu, pritivi, apah, tejas,

vayu, akasha. All these things, she's married to. ...

Now, if you understand properly our Hindu culture, we worship the

Siva Linga. Siva Linga is the union of the universal male and the

universal female. The Linga and the Yoni are united together. We

are worshiping that, which means we are worshiping the universal

male and universal female.

In the broadest context, let us understand Siva Linga at four

different levels. The lowest level at which we understand the Siva

Linga is at the level of physical union. It is the male phallus

which is called Siva and the female yoni which is called Parvati.

It is their union that we are worshiping. There, the union is for

procreation. At the next highest level, the fire in the navel center

and the love in the heart center, their union is called Siva and

Shakti. In the next higher level still, space is considered the

womb and time is the linga which is moving. The universe of space

and time is called the Siva Linga. All the five elements, all the

ways in which we perceive, all these are considered to be lingas.

After these three levels, we reach the fourth and transcendent level

where there is no distinction between the seer and the seen. They

have become one. That is the highest form of the linga. It is

called alinga. There is no linga there. There is no characteristic

that differentiates one from the other. You are joined so totally

with the world. You have absorbed the whole world into yourself and

there is nothing other than you.

So, to reach that state is called moksa. The purpose of marriage

was to reach that state, moksa. Not by denying yourself, not by the

ascetic character of your life; but you enjoy life to the fullest,

while at the same time there is union with God. So the union

between man and woman, the union between God and his wealth, was

being proposed as a paradigm for our evolution. This is the

essential concept of marriage.

Amrita

URL for full essay: http://gurujiamrita.tripod.com/vedic_marriage.htm

March 9, 2004

Namaste,

I want to know about the Muslim Wedding are they same as Hindu Wedding.

Thanks,

Jeanine R. Reeves

Devi Bhakta <devi_bhakta wrote: