You are here: Sri Vaishnava Home Page : Bhakti List : Archives : November 1998

Fwd: Digest bhakti.v003.n144

RSrin_at_aol.com
Date: Fri Nov 06 1998 - 05:45:01 PST

 

attached mail follows:


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