| Reply to Thread New Thread |
06-08-2010, 09:46 AM
|
#21 |
|
|
Dear NN,
nara, ...had a woman posed this question,i would empathise.but you sir,is one of my species.i sense mischeiviousness. No NN, I have always tried to be as open and straight forward in the forum as possible. There is no mischievousness on my part. I ask you not base your empathy on who is asking the question, but on the justice or injustice of a given practice. Okay, that is it from my side on this topic ..... Cheers! |
|
|
06-08-2010, 10:35 AM
|
#22 |
|
|
... Okay, that is it from my side on this topic Two points, (i) it is not long gone, and (ii) being good is the best way to not look bad. It is probably true that the most dreadful parts of this tradition like shaving the head etc. are not practiced any more. The educated and affluent TBs have no problem getting their widows remarried, and I applaud that. In this very forum there was a case of a father of a young widow looking for a new lease of life for an unfortunate young lady. But, the status of a poor widow is still very much a precarious one. I am a personal witness to a young childless widow of a very close confidante of the head of a Brahmnical Matam, who died in a terrible car accident in the course of Matam business, being spurned by the Matam. This happened about 4 years ago. We all know the young man would not have been spurned if the wife had died. Strangely enough, the justification that a widower has to marry again for the sake of taking care of the young children, does not apply for the widow, who probably needs help taking care of young kids more than the man. My own grandfather did when my father's mother died in childbirth. I hope all this is "moot point" like NN claims, but it is still a festering issue. It will be a great day indeed when it really becomes a moot point. The second objection that this makes "us" look bad is not a serious one. To look good one must stand up for compassion and justice. Sweeping the dirt under the rug is not the right approach. Cheers! |
|
|
|
06-08-2010, 01:56 PM
|
#23 |
|
|
nara,
Dear NN, this topic about widow being a eye-sore treatment is disgusting.when my widowed mother refused to come in front of the ceremonies,i insisted so dangerously,that my relatives yielded to my whim.i even has pictures taken with my mom,but she insisted my uncle & aunt do the honors during my marriage.she gave me a stupid reasoning of acharyals don't permit it.more often when it suited,acharyals were selectively chosen by my elders,which by itself was so infuriating for me.either do everything the acharyas says or dont act as if you are one great sishyas.thankfully she did not insist having her hair sheared nor resort to wearing a white sari,though some things she did follow.so,basically ara-korai followers.she never visited acharyas,as she knew the customs.nor did i insist and i stopped visiting the matam itself.for me my mother is prathama guru then only everybody else. she did remove her thirumangalyam though and melted it for future generaion of daughter-in-law with a new design.my wife wears it and i told her the significance of it.living in india,these have symbolic meaning behind it.the culture and tradition,for women was indeed very honorable.present generation of women,are a mixed bag.they question 'why' of every religious ceremony and so the boys also are part of the bandwagon.these are symbolic representation of a 'show' to honor & protect.by not following it,nothing is going to happen to anybody,unless one wants to keep these traditions alive,as heritage. No NN, I have always tried to be as open and straight forward in the forum as possible. There is no mischievousness on my part. I ask you not base your empathy on who is asking the question, but on the justice or injustice of a given practice. Okay, that is it from my side on this topic ..... Cheers! what can i say about,whether it was justice or injustice.i personally feel women shud be treated well,and made not to undergo many painful practices of segregation.but to say,women were treated badly,is wrong,becoz the love such widowed women got from extended family,when joint famly system was in existence,was truly unbelievable.today,if parenst were just able to live even with their own kids,its a miracle.so,tradition has its place,but inability to convince or influence in a logical manner is amiss,owing to cinema,drama,media blitz,educational impartataion of knowledge..so life is becoming artificial,to some extent,but then everything changes from generation to generation. |
|
|
|
06-08-2010, 02:12 PM
|
#24 |
|
|
,i insisted so dangerously,that my relatives yielded to my whim.i even has pictures taken with my mom |
|
|
|
06-08-2010, 02:21 PM
|
#25 |
|
|
nara,
First, sorry NN and others, I spoke a little too soon, I have just one more thing to say. This speaks to one of NN's concerns, and I am paraphrasing NN, why harp on long gone practices that only make "us" look bad. Two points, (i) it is not long gone, and (ii) being good is the best way to not look bad. i think 60 years back is long gone to me.kindly define,what according to you is good and what is bad? It is probably true that the most dreadful parts of this tradition like shaving the head etc. are not practiced any more. The educated and affluent TBs have no problem getting their widows remarried, and I applaud that. In this very forum there was a case of a father of a young widow looking for a new lease of life for an unfortunate young lady. sir,maybe as a tb its dreadful for us,becoz its an imposition on our loved women folks.its torture literally.but,if you happen to visit tirupathi venkatachalapathy ,women happily shave their heads for the lords blessings.by and large this nb do it,and men in our tb do it.so,its not something like anathema for our culture,women never shave their heads.that way brahmin women are a minority. But, the status of a poor widow is still very much a precarious one. I am a personal witness to a young childless widow of a very close confidante of the head of a Brahmnical Matam, who died in a terrible car accident in the course of Matam business, being spurned by the Matam. This happened about 4 years ago. We all know the young man would not have been spurned if the wife had died. sorry to hear,such an unfortunate incident Strangely enough, the justification that a widower has to marry again for the sake of taking care of the young children, does not apply for the widow, who probably needs help taking care of young kids more than the man. My own grandfather did when my father's mother died in childbirth. i am all for widow re-marriage.chinna veedu set up. I hope all this is "moot point" like NN claims, but it is still a festering issue. It will be a great day indeed when it really becomes a moot point. i replied,hope you understand my position now. The second objection that this makes "us" look bad is not a serious one. To look good one must stand up for compassion and justice. Sweeping the dirt under the rug is not the right approach. Cheers! becoz of compassion and justice was followed,such a system existed.in our conservative society that it became is owing to 1200 years of burqa rules and victorian prudes,some cleverly or deliberately miss,while debating thi significant factor.so sad. |
|
|
|
06-08-2010, 07:05 PM
|
#26 |
|
|
[QUOTE=nachi naga;49169]nara,
i am all for widow re-marriage.chinna veedu set up. [/QUOTE I am sorry to interfere in a debate charged with a good amount of emotion unrelated to the subject matter in question, but one doubt and some observations of mine. The question, how are widow remarriage and chinnaveedu set up related? I had so far been under the impression that the former is a legal one, though not sanctioned by orthodox brahminism while the latter is outside the purview of the Hindu personal law. Am I wrong? Now, my observations. It is true that NN's observations about the treatment meted out to TB widows has improved a lot but there are sensitive issues still lurking. The widows now cannot be distinguished unless one has personal knowledge of the person or the special ability to see whether she wears a thaali or a simple gold chain. It is difficult even for women to do so. I know a few cases where a group of women visit a house, all are given "manjal-kumkumam-some gift item" when they take leave, and later some one from the group or otherwise informs the guest that X in the group was a widow. Even now there are women who fear that some evil will befall them as a result of giving manjal-kumkumam to a widow. We (my wife and I) once tried to convince such a superstitious person saying that there is a custom (this is also traditional, just like sumangali prArthhanai) in some families to include a widow - custom required a 'pATTi' with shaven head and all that as must, but since it is quite difficult to find such people, they are inviting widows - in the women honoured by Sumangali praarthhanai ritual but they call it "athiSaya poNDugaL" (I am not sure if I have the correct name), but her reply was even in such families they will not give manjaL-kumkumam to the widows so invited!) This function is done even today before the sons' upanayanam, marriage and seemantam, and is not applicable for the functions related to daughters. It, therefore, appears that even though people had to conform to the strict requirements of the society in the treatment of a woman on her losing her husband, some elders even in those days wanted to give a token recognition of their role also. The discussion topic being about thirumangalayam, it is not an item in a vedic marriage. It was a later introduction into the brahmin community in the south, from the ancient Tamil practice of tying a "tALi" - piece of palmyrah leaf, the one which was used to write our grantHas; the tALi used to have the name of the husband written on it. This was to give notice to others that this particular woman was the property of so-and-so. (Incidentally, I think a similar scheme was followed in the early days of converting the SUdras into Christianity, because I remember seeing , in my young days, this sort of tALiyOlai pendant tied by a black thread worn on their necks by women as also some men, from the working class; being abjectly poor, they wore no other ornament.) This was adapted by the vEdic people who came south and it has come to be nurtured and bolstered to an unimaginable degree of importance by all possible means. But that should not preclude a discussion about how and when this practice came into our community. Incidentally, when the Shivsena, itself owing allegiance to Hinduism, started an anti-madrasi agitation (I don't remember the year but it was during the 70's or 80's) women from the south stopped wearing taali whenever they went out and restarted it only after the agitation ceased. One last doubt, as a new, junior member - what differentiates the patrons in this forum from the other members, pl.? |
|
|
|
06-08-2010, 07:09 PM
|
#27 |
|
|
I read the replies to my original post. Thank all for the different types of views. My only doubt is this "Is it fair for a married lady to hang the thaali on the wall nails along with the Upaveetham of her husband(when he is alive of course). This thread has generated so much heat and dust already without bothering to involve any woman to get the opinion of them who are concerned directly about the தாலி . Why? I thought I should involve them and get their views on that. Luckily we had a family function last Sunday where there was big crowd of women of our families Their opinion from 3 different groups 1 Women who have தாலி (சுமங்கலி) 2 Women who lost their தாலி (Widows) 3 Women yet have Thali(Kumaris or yet to be married) are below Group 1 (சுமங்கலி ) My wife My D in L 1 & 2 (Age Bet 30 and 60 years) 1) D in L 2. I have not done this and may never do it No advise on this It is personal No guidance solicited or stricture passed 2) My wife I have not done it. But you did it for me! (I remember in 1987 When hospitalized for coma she was in respirator for 2 days with tracheotomy I removed her தாலி and was in my pocket till she recovered). No I have not done it or I think I will do it .It is my conviction.You have say in this . 3) My D in L 1 What cheek? I have done it and I will do it again when there is a need. When I land in US or Europe in mid night all alone before check in to a Hotel I remove my தாலி as well as பொட்டு and lock it in the locker in the lobby. I don"t want to be mugged or robbed I cannot loose my தாலி It is not part of my jewelery or my cosmetic Lakme kit which I can loose. தாலி is more than that with sentiments. Zero tolerance on any guidance or advise on this I can manage my affairs myself. Group 2(Widows) My 3 sisters one S In L and my M in L(Age Between 60 & 85) The general agreed opinion with slight variation Never felt awkward to have the தாலி removed after his death The ceremonies related this was not hurting I lost him why not the தாலி? I cherish this தாலி as a souvenir of his remembrance . I will have it safe not loose it About பூ & பொட்டு . We all have பொட்டு But never குங்குமம் sort of substitute with sticker etc compulsion of habit or even as cosmetic குங்குமம் they believe has sentiment and sanctity Not comfortable when offered by அர்சகர் to them? Most of them could identify They offer only விபூதி Some times this happens and we take it but not wear it on forehead Take home and put them in the Pooja room Group3(Kumaris /to be married) 4 girls spread between New York & New Delhi (Below 25) I would definitely have a தாலி for my wedding Why I will have ஊஞ்சல் நலங்கு and all. Real Fun. But தாலி மடிசார் They are different. Sentiments go with them If my wedding is conventional with in the caste fine. Even other wise I would like to have a brahmin wedding தாலி & மடிசார் attended by crowds of my relatives. I do not see any Upaveetham in this Jambu 
|
|
|
|
06-08-2010, 10:29 PM
|
#28 |
|
|
=sangom
i am all for widow re-marriage.chinna veedu set up. I am sorry to interfere in a debate charged with a good amount of emotion unrelated to the subject matter in question, but one doubt and some observations of mine. welcome. The question, how are widow remarriage and chinnaveedu set up related? I had so far been under the impression that the former is a legal one, though not sanctioned by orthodox brahminism while the latter is outside the purview of the Hindu personal law. Am I wrong? as per legal issue,its a crime. Now, my observations. It is true that NN's observations about the treatment meted out to TB widows has improved a lot but there are sensitive issues still lurking. The widows now cannot be distinguished unless one has personal knowledge of the person or the special ability to see whether she wears a thaali or a simple gold chain. It is difficult even for women to do so. I know a few cases where a group of women visit a house, all are given "manjal-kumkumam-some gift item" when they take leave, and later some one from the group or otherwise informs the guest that X in the group was a widow. Even now there are women who fear that some evil will befall them as a result of giving manjal-kumkumam to a widow. We (my wife and I) once tried to convince such a superstitious person saying that there is a custom (this is also traditional, just like sumangali prArthhanai) in some families to include a widow - custom required a 'pATTi' with shaven head and all that as must, but since it is quite difficult to find such people, they are inviting widows - in the women honoured by Sumangali praarthhanai ritual but they call it "athiSaya poNDugaL" (I am not sure if I have the correct name), but her reply was even in such families they will not give manjaL-kumkumam to the widows so invited!) This function is done even today before the sons' upanayanam, marriage and seemantam, and is not applicable for the functions related to daughters. It, therefore, appears that even though people had to conform to the strict requirements of the society in the treatment of a woman on her losing her husband, some elders even in those days wanted to give a token recognition of their role also. thank you for validating my impressions succintly. The discussion topic being about thirumangalayam, it is not an item in a vedic marriage. It was a later introduction into the brahmin community in the south, from the ancient Tamil practice of tying a "tALi" - piece of palmyrah leaf, the one which was used to write our grantHas; the tALi used to have the name of the husband written on it. This was to give notice to others that this particular woman was the property of so-and-so. (Incidentally, I think a similar scheme was followed in the early days of converting the SUdras into Christianity, because I remember seeing , in my young days, this sort of tALiyOlai pendant tied by a black thread worn on their necks by women as also some men, from the working class; being abjectly poor, they wore no other ornament.) This was adapted by the vEdic people who came south and it has come to be nurtured and bolstered to an unimaginable degree of importance by all possible means. But that should not preclude a discussion about how and when this practice came into our community. it appears to me,all of are very knowledgeable of life during vedic time.and when questioned when or who wrote the vedas,we all chirp saying its apoureshyam,time immemorial.as far as my common sense dictates,we as human evolved over a period of time.we lived as humans without wearing a single shred of cloth,to beginwith.slowly started to hide our private parts and so on.... the crux is,wearing a thirumangalyam is symbol of a woman being married to another man,so plz accord due respect.now,if women themselves today revolt and say,its all man made not woman made laws,why we shud listen to this crap,better for men to wear thirumangalyam and trot around,displaying i am married man,women stop flirting with me,as i will yield to temptations. Incidentally, when the Shivsena, itself owing allegiance to Hinduism, started an anti-madrasi agitation (I don't remember the year but it was during the 70's or 80's) women from the south stopped wearing taali whenever they went out and restarted it only after the agitation ceased. women removed south indian style thaali and wore maharastrian style thaali.its not that they did not have a thaali at all.for fear of physical intimidation,as well as pyschological intimidations by goons of shiva sena,this has happened. One last doubt, as a new, junior member - what differentiates the patrons in this forum from the other members, pl.? number of posts,i think. |
|
|
|
06-09-2010, 07:04 AM
|
#29 |
|
|
Is Second TALI required for 60th marriage wedding anniversary?
|
|
|
|
06-09-2010, 07:13 AM
|
#30 |
|
|
...number of posts,i think. Cheers! |
|
|
|
06-09-2010, 07:25 AM
|
#31 |
|
|
....as per legal issue,its a crime. Here, a widow remarrying is perfectly legal, even if not sanctioned by Brahminism. Whereas, chinna veedu is outside Hindu law as that would be considered immoral? I wonder whether chinna veedu is illegal? It may be grounds for divorce, but is it illegal? BTW, NN may not have meant it this way, but suggesting chinna veedu set up as a possibility is quite offensive. What the woman wants to do is her business, nobody has the right to characterize it in pejorative language. Our role is to support and respect her. Cheers! |
|
|
|
06-09-2010, 08:43 AM
|
#32 |
|
|
Is Second TALI required for 60th marriage wedding anniversary? 
|
|
|
|
06-09-2010, 12:27 PM
|
#33 |
|
|
48 hours i have spent ruminating over nachi's note to me. more an introspection of what i have been saying in this post.
to an extent, i have to grudgingly agree, that i have overemphasized a unsavoury past, which is a reflection of my own experiences. i do not mean to generalize it, and considering modern day 180 degree turn in the fortunes of our women folk, my narratives re physical uglification of widows sounds rather quaint, albeit perhaps horribly quaint. we are indeed fortunate enough to live in the 21st century, which inspite of its warts, atleast has succoured many offences and inequalities. this is the age of redemption and upliftment. in our own way we TBs too have been uplifted. we may have uneasiness about our increasing prosperity, but overall i suspect we do enjoy it. bar a few. i have not heard from any womenfolk in my household any desire to return to the 'good ole days'. when my wife married me, she indicated her biggest 'looking forward to' in canada, was the freedom that it afforded her. perhaps TB women in india are like that now too, or close enough. i for one, am happy that we do not deface our widows any more, that we by default educate our daughters as much as our sons, and in many ways treat our children the same, gender neutrally. so, here's to nachi, i dedicate this post of rumination. or as nara would say, 'cheers' or as *** says at the tailend of his every post, 'all the best'. |
|
|
|
06-09-2010, 03:20 PM
|
#34 |
|
|
One more opinion from women (Age above 60 Widows)
You had a long enjoyable innings together OK அடுத்த ஜன்மத்திலேயும் You think you will go for the same partnership? Filmy question. We are not the "Made for each other" stuff like Wills Filter. The known devil argument may not influence our decisions in next ஐன்மம். There could be unknown angels also Do not expect an answer like அடுத்த ஜன்மம் என்ன ? ஏழு ஏழு ஜன்மத்ம்திலேயும் we will make it. This is all non sense. If it were to happen we will not grudge. But the decision will be ours, considering various factors other then the known devil and similar facts. and finally his decision is as important as mine. Jambu 
|
|
|
|
06-09-2010, 04:20 PM
|
#35 |
|
|
nara,
NN, Shri sangom is talking about your grand declaration in post #25, "i am all for widow re-marriage.chinna veedu set up." BTW, NN may not have meant it this way, but suggesting chinna veedu set up as a possibility is quite offensive. What the woman wants to do is her business, nobody has the right to characterize it in pejorative language. Our role is to support and respect her. Cheers! sorry if i was offensive.i am not saying we shud indulge,but such possibilities do exist outside mainstraem minus thirumangalyam.so such relationships were zamindars domain.women are not dis-respected but then i am wondering from your viewpoint too. |
|
|
|
06-09-2010, 04:22 PM
|
#36 |
|
|
48 hours i have spent ruminating over nachi's note to me. more an introspection of what i have been saying in this post. |
|
|
|
06-14-2010, 03:09 PM
|
#37 |
|
|
In Sathapatha Braahmanam.in Kanya Dhaanam,where it is written about "Thirumangalyam"(Thaali) ? As one of the interactors has written only in Draavida Sampradhaayam Thaali is there.In Gauda Sampradhaayam there is No "Mangalyam Thanthuna'--Thanthuna means "Kayaru-or Charadu"
|
|
|
| Reply to Thread New Thread |
«
Previous Thread
|
Next Thread
»
Linear Mode
| Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|
