sumangali dress code

[Guest guest]

Dear friends: I'm writing about two posts by Sri M.G. Vasudevan

and Sri. Mani. The saree blouse is NOT part of traditional Hindu

womens' attire, much less Srivaishnava women. It is a recent

introduction starting from the late 1800s onwards - when Victorian

thinking British officials deemed it unacceptable for Indian women

to wear saree without a blouse. My koLLu pAtti never wore a

blouse, and she lived well into my childhood years.

 

Today we find padams of lakshmi, saraswati, ANdAL and other

thAyArs with podavais and blouses. This is entirely misleading (not

that we cannot percieve our deities in forms that are pleasing to us,

but because it gives the false impression that blouses were always

in use since ancient times).

 

STITCHED garments have never been used by Hindus since time

immemorial (only flowing ones which were presumably woven using

the "wheel"). To present them today as if they were always a part

of our traditions is like saying that running water, sanitation,

electricity

and modern transport have been available throughout the ages!!

 

Lastly, many of the so-called standards of "modesty" that are

espoused today are again of Victorian origin - it will serve us well

to remember this so we don't have to re-write our traditions in

order to satisfy the externally imposed requirements of other

(non-vedic) societies.

 

-Srinath C.

-----------

 

"M.G.Vasudevan" <mgv

 

First for "sumangali sthree"- [viz. Married women with husband living]

Such

sumangalis after their bath must wear 2 vasthrams in red colour. [one

sari

and another one as jacket].

-----------

 

Mani Varadarajan <mani

 

It is interesting to also read the recommendation that sumangalis

wear two garments. I am told by my grandmother and others that

orthodox women in the old days eschewed tailored blouses as a modern

invention, considering them polluting. They only used a single sari

to cover their entire body.

 

[Guest guest]

Dear Srinath

 

On your observations I have the following comments. It may not be so

correct to say that earlier days the ladies covered their upper part with

the same one piece sari and the jacket is victorian era legacy.

 

Actually jacket also has a meaning a casing or covering, besides the meaning

of a sleeved short outer garment worn on the upper part of the body.

Nowadays men's upper garment with some style is also called jacket. Safety

jackets, life jackets etc for example.

 

The blouse what you have referred has a meaning "women's loose usually light

weight upper garment buttoned and collared". May be your usage of the word

is absolutely correct, blouse can be attributed to the victorian era since

stitched buttoned etc came into usage during this era.

 

My usage of jacket as a covering is also correct to the extent that it

covers the upper part. Of course I used this word in a little loose sense

meaning an upper piece of cloth only and not in a very strict meaning of

sleeved etc as defined in the dictionary.

 

In ancient tamil literature you have a word "kachchu" which means a long

piece of cloth specially worn on the bosoms. Of hand I can not quote these

literature reference. In the ancient temples like Srirangam or other old

temples, which we are sure that they are built before victorian era, you

find in almost all statues of women, this kachchu with a tied knot at the

back.

 

To quote few lines from dhivya prabhandham itself, where you have reference

for this "kachchu" or "vaar" as this kachchu is also called

Vaar aNintha kongai aaichchi 2-2-11 periyaazhvaar thirumozhi - as you know

kongai is bosoms, the upper garment is clearly identified here, the

aaichchi- the mother yasOdhaa and or the aaippaadi ladies had the upper

garment of kachchu is clear from this.

Kachchodu pattaik kizhiththu kaambu thugil avai keeri nichchalum theemaigal

seivaai- 2-7-3 periyaazhvaar thirumozhi

Kachchu, thugil are two pieces of cloth are worn by a particular women.

Krishna enjoys his pranks on this woman by tearing of her kachchu and

thugil. Please note the "plural" usage by the word "avai".

 

On "thugil", in case, you have a doubt, whether it is upper or lower garment

or a common name, yes it is a common name for all clothes but here see a

specific usage.

 

Poonthugil sEr algul kaamar ezhil vizhal uduththu - perumaaL thirumozhi by

kulasekara 9-7

 

Algul is the private parts and the cloth covering that algul is the thugil

which is like a flower in nature- so poonthugil- the thugil here is the

lower garment and same usage in periyaazhvaar thirumozhi quoted above also.

 

 

So it not wrong to say that women have and had worn two pieces of clothes.

Similarly it is also correct and not correct to say that it is imposition by

somebody. That is in real sense it is the evolution and due to times

changing, culture changing, the dress code also changes.

 

Just to quote another argument, "dhroupathy had five husbands then, why not

now also". For this the learned and revered Paiyampaadi Sri Venkata

varadhachar swamy, anujan of Sri uththamoor swami said "that was the yuga

dharmam in that yuga. Now it is kaliyuga and same yuga dharmam can not

adopted". So changes will come, and in my opinion we need not simply stretch

certain arguments as traditional non traditional, srivaishnava non

srivaishnava.

 

Dhaasan Vasudevan M.G.

 

Srinath Chakravarty [sMTP:xsrinath]

Wednesday, November 22, 2000 3:24 AM

bhakti-list

sumangali dress code

 

Dear friends: I'm writing about two posts by Sri M.G. Vasudevan and

Sri. Mani. The saree blouse is NOT part of traditional Hindu womens'

attire, much less Srivaishnava women. It is a recent introduction starting

from the late 1800s onwards - when Victorian thinking British officials

deemed it unacceptable for Indian women to wear saree without a blouse. My

koLLu pAtti never wore a blouse, and she lived well into my childhood years.

Today we find padams of lakshmi, saraswati, ANdAL and other thAyArs

with podavais and blouses. This is entirely misleading (not that we cannot

percieve our deities in forms that are pleasing to us, but because it gives

the false impression that blouses were always in use since ancient times).

STITCHED garments have never been used by Hindus since time

immemorial (only flowing ones which were presumably woven using the

"wheel"). To present them today as if they were always a part of our

traditions is like saying that running water, sanitation, electricity and

modern transport have been available throughout the ages!!

Lastly, many of the so-called standards of "modesty" that are

espoused today are again of Victorian origin - it will serve us well to

remember this so we don't have to re-write our traditions in order to

satisfy the externally imposed requirements of other (non-vedic) societies.

-Srinath C.

 

----------

-

 

"M.G.Vasudevan" <mgv <mgv >

 

First for "sumangali sthree"- [viz. Married women with husband

living] Such sumangalis after their bath must wear 2 vasthrams in red

colour. [one sari and another one as jacket].

 

----------

-

 

Mani Varadarajan <mani

<mani >

 

It is interesting to also read the recommendation that sumangalis

wear two garments. I am told by my grandmother and others that orthodox

women in the old days eschewed tailored blouses as a modern invention,

considering them polluting. They only used a single sari to cover their

entire body.