Fwd: Digest bhakti.v003.n144

[Guest guest]

RSrin

bhakti-request

Re: Digest bhakti.v003.n144

Fri, 6 Nov 1998 08:41:02 EST

Dear Sahridayas,

 

May I begin my urgent quest with:

Sri AndAl sametha Sri RangamannAr Tiruvadigale Saranam..

Sri RanganAyaki sametha Sri RanganAtha paraBrhmane namaha

Sri AlarmEl mangA sametha Sri Srinivasa Para Brahmane namah...

Oh, these very beginnings turn me ecstatic in the smaranams of Divyadampathis,

whose amsha we are or atleast seek to be.

I am no religious leader nor scholar, just a poor bhakta, at best with social

awareness. let me put forth my plea to the sahridayas here and get an

unequivocal answer that has set many hours of uneding discussions in the

circles I interact with.

This is regarding a vivaha shubha muhUrtha pattrika, which begins with such

epithets as above, they being the divine witness to the divine alliance on

earth that is proposed. Having stated the purpose, I wish to ask how and why

in our tradition have we perpetuated a system of seeming hypocrisy by tracing

patriarchy of the girl and the boy to be wedded for three generations and

conveniently leave any reference to the girl or boy's Mothers. Interestingly,

even the Mother's Father is referred to as the boy and the girl being the

douhitri or douhitran, but it is the Father's daughter marrying the Father's

son on a holy alliance with the blessings of the divine couple and requesting

couples of relatives and bandhus to come and bless the couple!

I have tried reason, but it is thrown out of the wondow; sentiment, it is

labelled as paranoia or feminist stand; then the only alternative I had was to

say the marriage may go on without the Mother if she is not included in the

invitation..to which the orthodoxy replied that no wedding can take place

without the sahadharmini at the side of the karta!...

It is only a name; yes...it is a sampradaya (custom) , as diff from

shastroktam (tradition) I agree... but purAnamityeva na sAdhu sarvam! says our

tradition..To begin with the man's name at the invtn is not in question, for

he may be the eldest living member; what is in question is why seek to

obliterate the Mother in Bhuloka when we evoke the Mother along with the

Father in Svarloka? PLEASE come back with as many comments, knowledgeable

sahridayas here...it is NOT a feminist was I am trying to foght, but am

certainly keen to put back the imp. sthana of the woman in the practice of our

religious philosophy..

Adiyen dasi Radhika