On Women Marrying Younger Men

[kunjuppu]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Share Link

Aura and Sophistication

I have found an aura or mystery and sophistication, whenever I see a woman with a younger spouse. There is usually more affection and love, shown overtly than in your average marriage. 'What is it that they found in each other which went against the norms of age hierarchies of the sexes?' I wonder!
This is not a yet common sight, and as you can imagine, it is always love marriages. I am yet to see an arranged marriage where the ages of the spouses are reversed.

In these kind of unions, often, this fact is kept under wraps, though personally I think it would be good for the entire community if it is kept open, and eventually becomes a non-event in the process of finding pairs.

But, look carefully at affectionate couples, and wonder if she is older to him. A woman is usually more level headed, and it may be hard for her to look up to an older oaf who is her husband. A younger man is more companionable, a stand in for brother in affection, an eager lover and a great husband.

Let us have more of this type of unions within our community.

 

[fire]

love marriage and rational thoughts

Hi,
Nice questions and expectedly a lot of rational answers . Actually i need to learn much about the subject. Can anyone/who are interested to define what is love for them? How would you find 'true love'? What is not so true love? Where does it exist ( I mean what may be the percentage of the lover do u believe come under ur classification as true lovers) ?

Does it require no constraints?

Does it necessarily one to one ? Or can it be many to one? (Some articles claiming that man is scientifically polygamous.So sexual laws should be watered down in India.Of course Shah Jahan's Meharunnisa was his second wife.) Or can it be many to many(If its with man why not for woman) ?

Should it have age restriction? Should it have gender restriction?

My questions are running long. A hypothetical question.Assume one person is seperated from their parents in young age. He falls love with someone who is his/her immediate relationship (Love within family...Is it sacred? Are is it Anti Tamil? Do we need to search rational answers here.But just to say its a sin and not followed.So we dont).....Will the love take precedence here?

Assume one's lover is becoming braindead before marriage. What should they do?

Does love come without any expectations from both sides ( what percentage do u think) ?

 

[Ramaa]

Agniji (if I may call you so),

Asthi, Bhaathi and Priyam are not defineable (anirvachaneeya) yet it is innately known to one's own self!

 

[fire]

I agree

Yes !!!! I agree. But I guess my above questions are still valid and answerable .

Agniji (if I may call you so),

Asthi, Bhaathi and Priyam are not defineable (anirvachaneeya) yet it is innately known to one's own self!

 

[Ramaa]

Dear Agniji,

A definition is logical. Love is not logical for the following reason.

Two guys look at a girl. One falls in love with her while the other is not. Can anyone explain it? Is there a rhyme or reason for anyone to fall in love?

Regards,
Ram

 

[suresh*]

Dear Agniji,

A definition is logical. Love is not logical for the following reason.

Two guys look at a girl. One falls in love with her while the other is not. Can anyone explain it?

For the same reason that you like strawberry, and I chocolate. Simple, isn't?

Is there a rhyme or reason for anyone to fall in love?

There is. It's called lust.

 

[N.R.Ranganathan]

On Women marrying....

Bhoomaji,

Sri Nannilam Vaidyanatha Dikshithar has written a book titled ' Dharma
Sastram ', published by 'Vaidika Sri '.

He says that a woman marrying a man who is younger to her is prohibited
by the Sastras. The Bridegroom must be senior in age to the bride by
at least one or two years. I am trying to locate the Smriti and its author.

Our Sastras, including Manu Smriti, recognize eight types of marriage.
They are Braahmam, Daivam, Aarsham, Praajaapathyam, Aasuram,
Ghaandarvam, Raakshasam and Paisaasam.

Ghaandarvam is what is now known as Love marriage !

 

[Vikram Alladi]

I think it is a matter of maturity and partnership. Age in my opinion is only a number. You can be 25 and be a tatha or patti in your mind, and 65 and still be a kid in your heart. It is in manasu othuporadhu, and age is probably very secondary. I think the original reason why this distinction was made by the periyavas was because women after a certain point age faster than men, and hence to compensate for that. When the female hormones are running, they are fine, but once it stops they get all kind of problems like osteoporosis, etc. However survival in women is also more than men.

 

[Ramaa]

Agniji,

It is not right to equate the undefineable and the defineable such as love and the lust. Our saasthra says "Aathmanasthu kaamaaya sarvam priyam bhavathi", i.e. 'by the love of one's own Self everything becomes dear'. This statement is made to hilite that everyone love himself/herself more than anyone else however close that person is. Also it hilites that if you do not have this love of one's own Self (this is by the way is really not an option for everyone loves himself that is why Aathma is defined as Priyam) you cannot love anyone else.

Regards,
Ramaa

 

[balaiyer2]

Can Young-Men marry older-women?

Dear Bhoomaji,
As your name suggests, you have put in a bomb in this forum. i am quite surprised to see prompt responses from all those who i thought to possess more wisdom and concern for the community, its religion and its good values. In a way, discussing such issues, and giving legitimacy to such things from established mentors and seniors of this forum, i am afraid, slowly we are moving towards 'self-destruction'.

One is not arguing that such issues should not be brought in for discussion at all. But the way we legitimize things. Traditons per se are not wrong, or bad, but only some part of it. If we are not ready to make value additions to the great traditions of our culture, at least, we can refrain from damaging them. If not, what is the difference between some of the dravidian thinkers from Periyar's times to todays Dr. M. Karunanidhi's times? We comfortably, criticize them because they have been anti-brahminical in their attitudes; but what are we doing it? we are equally making a mockery of some of the great traditions we followed from time immemorial. If young men can marry older women, then why not any man can marry any woman? why not i marry my own sister, younger or elder? and this kind of questions would not end just like that and go up to asking why not i marry my own mother? I know, your valued wisdom(!) would consider my writing as 'rubbish'; i agree; but my point is to bring out the rubbishness in our thinking processes as well.

As far as the custom of following the age difference b/w men and women, biologically, women grow faster than men. Moreover, when civilization began for any order to exist, there has to be certain norms and rules. Perhaps, only when certain standard norms and codes are followed by communities, Civilization itself began, prior to that only huminids and homosapiens existed. So, in a family set-up, there has to be some sort of order and hence, over a period of time societies have evolved certain norms in marrying; for example, in Islam, marrying of maternal uncle's son/daughter is prohibited; while in Hindus it is allowed; on the otherhand, marrying of our own 'Chittappa' or 'Periyappa's son/daughter is prohibited in hindus, while it is permitted in Islam. There are many such codes, norms are followed by communities. I do not want to extend this social-history or evolution of sociological stuff here.

But, i am worried that a forum which is also read by a number of young people, young men and women with some amount of education, it is they who are to bring in more maturity and are expected to show more responsible behaviour, have to bring in a much awaited social transformation among the Tamil Bramin communities, when they go through the kind of stuffs which are not only perverted but also reflect deranged minds, what is the lesson they get by reading our opinions. There are very many sites (web sites) there you can discuss all such 'intellectual stuffs' ( you will be annoyed, if i state 'perverted stuffs , please, read it as highly intellectual dialogues), and leave this site for only healthy debates and discussions for ordinary people like me. We can take the readers of this forum to a much refined state both in terms of personal and public morality point of view.

After reading this particular 'discussion' and the responses from our distinguished members, i am disillusioned now; may be, this is the fate of the community we all belong to. May be, this is also 'God's Leela'. One is left with no option but sincere prayers for the welfare of this unique community in the world as a whole.

I would request replies from the young readers, particularly, the ones in their 20s, 30s and also from others who have not reached the state of 'intellectual nirvana' which legitimises anything and everything.

with regards,
balaiyer.

 

[fire]

Rationalism Vs Tradition

Ramaaji,

Yes. I am not equating them. We also definitely equate what love is (in many love and arranged marriages in my view) cannot be equated with the philosophical love(which pure,priceless etc etc).Of course if one is loving oneself what is the need for marriage? If one is loving everyone why we have to do only one marriage?

I also wanted to know how far can we allow rationalism into the tradition.

Agniji,

It is not right to equate the undefineable and the defineable such as love and the lust. Our saasthra says "Aathmanasthu kaamaaya sarvam priyam bhavathi", i.e. 'by the love of one's own Self everything becomes dear'. This statement is made to hilite that everyone love himself/herself more than anyone else however close that person is. Also it hilites that if you do not have this love of one's own Self (this is by the way is really not an option for everyone loves himself that is why Aathma is defined as Priyam) you cannot love anyone else.

Regards,
Ramaa

 

[N.R.Ranganathan]

On women marrying ...

Sir,

I checked up regarding the age difference between the bridegroom and the
bride. Bride must be younger than the bridegroom by at least two to three
years. There is one book titled ' smriti mukthapala nibandhana grantham '
written by sri Vaidyanatha Dikhsitar. This learned author studied all the
smritis and wrote this book which runs into six volumes. It contains almost
all the dharma sastras.

 

[N.R.Ranganathan]

Of women marrying.....

Ramaaji,

You seem to be a Bramhavadini. The quotation is from Brahadaranyaka
upanishad ( 2-4-5 ). The context is different. Sage Yajnavalkya explains
to his wife Maitreyi the philosophical significance of the word ' Priyam '.

The husband's love for his wife, the wife's for her husband, the love of
children , wealth and such other love ( here the word used is priyam )
- all these lead to the love of self. Because love of all other things
and persons gives happiness to the indwelling self, he loves others.
Therefore, the SELF is personification of all that is love and bliss.
Once a man or woman realizes this cardinal truth, he or she will see
everything as ATMASWAROOPA . Then there will be love only and no
hatred at all .

All the forms of priyam towards men, women, animal and other things
is an exercise to see the Divine .

 

[N.R.Ranganathan]

On women ....

Dear sri Bala Iyer,

May I be permitted sir to point out something in your posting ?

Bhooma has nothing to do with bomb.

This word ' Bhooma ' is mentioned in Chandyokya upanishad, vide
7.23.1 aand 7.24.1.

Yo vai bhooma thath sugam, na alpe sugamasthi, bhoomaiva sugam,
bhoomathveva vijignasithavya ithi , bhoomanam bhagavo vijignasa ithi
( 7. 23.1 )

Yatra naanyath pacyathi, naanyach srunothi .............na mahimnithi
( 7.24.1 )

This is called Bhoomavidya.

Bhooma means big , Infinite or say Brahmam. True bliss comes out of
knowing this Infinite and not in ordinary small things.

Sir, I am sorry for this intrusion. Kindly pardon me if I have hurt you.

 

[KRS]

Dear Sri balaiyer2 Ji,

With due respect to what you have said above in your posting:

If we blindly follow all the edicts in our Sastras, some of which were added on or deleted for the convenience of certain times, we will have more mess than what we have in our society.

We used to follow polygamy, polyandry etc. in old times. If your logic of following the edicts of our ancient culture today, then we should follow these anachronistic practices today. You may say that these practices are illegal. Yes, but then marrying a older woman today is legal. So, as such there is nothing wrong in discussing this topic as a valid part of our conversation.

No one is advocating everyone to start marrying older wives. We are discussing whether there is anything wrong in doing that in some exceptional cases. Remember, this practice is an exception and not the norm. I think that this will remain an exception given all the natural and cultural stigmas attached to it.

There are a few practices in our culture regarding marriage and a grahastha life that are odious and deserve to be relegated to a dustbin. This definitely is not one of them.

Pranams,
KRS

 

[N.R.Ranganathan]

On women marrying...

Dear Sri KRS,

My answer is to the question : is it wrong if a woman marries a man
who is younger to her . If one has to say it is right or wrong, there must
be a yardstick and that yardstick for the Hindus is the sastras. I have
just quoted what is found therein.

I am not expressing a view that all must follow the sastras. One may or may
not, and it depends upon the individual.

 

[KRS]

Dear Sri N.R. Ranganathan Ji,

I did not comprehend your statement about the 2 to 3 years difference of age requirement in my posting above.

My posting above only addresses what Sri balaiyer2 ji has posted.

The problem we have today with our religion, as acknowledged by some of our Gurus, is that we do not have a modern rewrite of the Manu Smrithi. And your citation of the synthesis of our Shastra about having a 2 to 3 year difference between the ages of the husband and wife is probably based on good logic. But then, in my opinion, while the above could be a guideline, one can not take it as the final law and therefore shun all other valid, lawful exceptions.

I am opening up a 'Pandora's box' here, but anyways, I will. Take a particular celebration called 'Sumangali Prarthinai' in our culture. This is a very noble practice, celebrating the lives and spirits of the ladies who just were lucky enough to depart from this physical world before their respective husbands. Now, my mother was an early widow, and I know quite a few of my relatives held her (and her horoscope) responsible for my father's untimely death. My feeling today is that there should be a 'non-sumangali prarthinai' for her, just to celebrate her life as a widow, where she brought up her children courageously, without the help of any one and in the face of all the prejudices against an innocent widow.

Now what do our Shastras talk about a widow?

Dear Sri N.R. Ranganathan Ji, no amount of talking in a Shastra about how to treat a widow that goes against my above belief will change my mind. This is where our Shastras fail us. They do not take in to account how we live our lives today.

Pranams,
KRS

Dear Sri KRS,

My answer is to the question : is it wrong if a woman marries a man
who is younger to her . If one has to say it is right or wrong, there must
be a yardstick and that yardstick for the Hindus is the sastras. I have
just quoted what is found therein.

I am not expressing a view that all must follow the sastras. One may or may
not, and it depends upon the individual.

 

[silverfox]

Dear Sri KRS:
Kudos to you! I completely agree with you. Same goes for my mother, who, no fault of hers, became a widow at the age of 25!! The whole world shunned her (especially our own Brahmin community!). If the sastras told us to have our widows shave their heads and be shunned, then the sastras be damned and I will have NO part of those sastras! This goes for our 'gurus', too, who had a hand in all these charade!

 

[N.R.Ranganathan]

On women marrying.....

Dear sri KRS,

I am sorry you are hurt. Let me clarify once again. I have only repeated
what is said in the sastras about a woman marrying a man younger to her.
I have never said you must follow it. It is left to the individuals concerned
depending upon their own station and situation in life.

There are many other injunctions which are not observed now. Upanayanam
must be performed at the age of five, failing which at least at the 7th year.
We are not following this strictly. A brahmachari is supposed to do sandhya
thrice a day . We do not have time. Again a brahmachari must do samitha-
thanam. Are we doing so ? In the olden days, the girls were married
at a very young age - balya vivaham. This is now illegal following the
Sharada Act. I am only pointing out that things have changed quite a lot.

I am sorry to read what you say about your mother. I have personal
knowledge of many widowed mothers bringing up their children against
all odds. It is inhuman to treat them badly. On the other hand, a rational
man is expected to regard her with deep reverence and respect.

I do not understand how a wife is responsible for the husband's demise.
You know astrology sir. Her mangalya sthanam must be afflicted. The
native's ayuskaraka and / or lagna lord must be weak or aspected by
malefic planets or maraka dasa must be ruling at that time. The native's
horoscope is more relevant. Ignorant and half-baked people only pass
such irrelevant comments.

 

[Ramaa]

Dear Sri Silverfox and everyone,

First of all, to all those folks who have widows in their family, let me say that my mother too died as a widow as also many of my relatives.

By a very simple statistics, the choice of a woman dying as a Sumangali is just 50%. Birth and death are due to our poorva karma. "Punarapi jananam, punarapi maraNam, punarapi jananee jatarE sayanam" is the sage's vaak. We all have grievance against death and that is reflected in our saasthras in talking about deathlessness (amritham). That is our final goal, our parama purushaarthaa. And our sage says you can achieve this by "Bajagovindam, Bajagovindam".

Of the other goals of Dharma, Artha and Kaama are pursued when a person is a Grihastha which implies that he has a wife alive and well. That Shakthi is celeberated in the 'Sumangali Praarthanai'. This is the crux of our Saasthras. One should not negatively look at it and say that our Saasthras are against widows. Not only on this widow issue but on many others, there are some people who have the habit of looking at our Saasthraas negatively. There isn't much we can do to satisfy them. Unlike other religions, our religion does not prohibit a person from doing anything. All that our Saasthras are saying is that there is always a karmaphala involved in every action.

So for such of those who wants to do 'amangali praarthanai', they can do as they please, but what is surprising is the demand that it be incorporated into the saasthraas. When someone asked Bhagavan Ramana on the question of free will and destiny, Bhagavan said: "You can do what you want" with a rider "but the outcome is always the same"! In other words, your enjoyment and suffering in this life (including the fretting for a widowed person) were preordained yet we can be good, bad and indifferent on various issues and such acts of being good, bad and indifferent are our karmas that brings about their own karmaphala.

Let me bring in yet another basics. A person cannot be a Christian if he does not accept Jesus as the saviour. Such a belief is essential to be a Christian. A person cannot be a Muslim if he does not believe that Mohammed is the last prophet. Such belief is essential to be a Muslim. To these religions contrary beliefs are blasphemy. But to a Hindu there is nothing to believe. You can be a Hindu (people were Hindus before this word Hindu was coined) with no idea of our Saasthras! There is no belief requirement for us. This is because where other religions say that you would go to heaven or hell on the basis of observing the dos and don'ts and yet only at the mercy of their Lord Jesus or Mohammed, we contend that you are already the goal (Brahman) only that you do not know! If at all you have a goal it is that you are trying to know yourself which would be nothing new!

Regards,
Ramaa

 

[vijisesh]

Folks and Pundits !

I just wanted to post a few queries relating to the posts above :

First to Sri Rama ji, when he says ...In other words, your enjoyment and suffering in this life (including the fretting for a widowed person) were preordained

If a person can be made to justify the " Happenings " in his Life time as " Pre-Ordained " , it would imply that " Nothing in this world in under his control " and " He cannot change anything with the karma's of his present life " ............. Defying Logic sense !!

I feel that the Good Karma's in this Life can definitely change the " Fate " of a person to some extent ! and in order to get the prescription of " Good Karma's" , we are burning the midnight oil over knowing our shastra's -- aren't we ??

And about Mr Ranganathan ji' statement that ....

Her mangalya sthanam must be afflicted. The
native's ayuskaraka and / or lagna lord must be weak or aspected by
malefic planets or maraka dasa must be ruling at that time !

That cannot be TRUE as If the present life Karma can super cede the position of the stars in one's horoscope , then the Star's will be more than happy to settle down in FRIENDLY houses and have clear aspects , the sapthavarga charts could change !!

At one end , Being mere mortals having NO ANSWER to the DECISION of the Almighty , we need to DO OUR DUTY , living by the RULES AND IDEOLOGIES that are LOGICAL rather than BLINDLY follow the Shastras which could carry DEFORMATIONS due to the long path traversed by them !

There are many calamities , stories of sorrow that are un-explained and totally under zero control by the poor human ! Surrendering to the Almighty can be the only TRUE solution ! rather blaming it on one's Chart's - No one can be sure of the accuracy of the timing of one's birth , and the accuracy of predictions!, IF AT ALL ASTROLOGY IS TRUE !

 

[Ramaa]

Dear Sri Vijisesh,

You (or anyone else) could do whatever you want. No bar! When you do you always think that whatever you do is going to bring you pleasure. Is it not? Because no one is going to do anything for bringing pain on himself. You can assert that your action will bring you pleasure (or avoid pain) but it is only a probability not a certainty. The real outcome is always uncertain as you embark on an action.

Do you agree on the above?

I will answer your second question after receiving answer to the above.

 

[KRS]

Dear Sri N.R.Ranganathan Ji,

No, I am not hurt at all. My point is that our Sastras have meaning when it comes to how to worship, how to build a temple etc. They are useful when they address the various Yajur Veda methods.

But they have not been updated when it comes to modern life. When the Smritis, which connect the life of a people to the Strutis (philosophy of our religion), it has to be done in light of our current lives. If a religion does not do this, then we are in danger of having a religion that has no relevance to today's life.

This is my point. While there are Sastra edicts in the realm of religious rites and such are perhaps not time sensitive, there are edicts on the social interactions and living ways, that are probably out of date. As long as we blindly follow these on a selective basis, our society can only become a shell, not really living a life of what was intended for us, the Brahmins.

I have heard many folks say, that Varna system itself is not bad, but the problem with untouchability etc. arose in our society because people did not understand the 'pure' intentions of the Varna system. But Sir, it is what it is! The very people for whom the Varna system was designed for (the unfortunate in our society) are the very people who were badly hurt by the system over time and they are the very people who do not want anything to do with that system anymore! A 'system' is only workable if the components who make up that system want it to work.

So, similarly, what is the use of having a series of so called rules in our Sastras, if we can at will not follow them? Either the Sastras need to be thrown out, or we need to come up with a new set of rules that govern and promote our current way of life that will benefit all our brethren.

By the way, I invoked the status of my mother only to illustrate this point. I agree with your views on that subject.

Hope, this explains.

Pranams,
KRS

 

[KRS]

Dear Sri Ram Ji,

Please refer to my response to Sri N.R. Ranganaths Ji to address the first part of your posting.

The portion that I have copied below, however requires a response.

Sir, you are comparing apples and oranges. You are taking what is canonical in other religions and are comparing to what is not in Hinduism.

For example, if one does not believe that our Vedas and Upanishads are not those 'what were heard' then, one is not a Hindu. This corresponds to the examples you cite in other religions. We have other canons as well, refutation of which, will make you a non believer in Hinduism.

What is codified in the Sastras is a way of life. Same is true for other religions with their 'how to live' codes. For example, Islam does not allow a Muslim to drink alcohol. Is a person, who then drinks alcohol and follows Islam committing a blasphemous act? Hardly. It is because, this does not raise to the level of blasphemy.

Blasphemy in any religion occurs when one speaks against the very basic canonical beliefs of that religion. In Hinduism such a situation occurs by definition when a professed Hindu speaks against our Strutis. Fortunately in our religion there are no harsh punishments such as ex-communication, cutting of the tongue or death, associated with committing blasphemy. That is the difference.

Pranams,
KRS

Dear Sri Silverfox and everyone,

Let me bring in yet another basics. A person cannot be a Christian if he does not accept Jesus as the saviour. Such a belief is essential to be a Christian. A person cannot be a Muslim if he does not believe that Mohammed is the last prophet. Such belief is essential to be a Muslim. To these religions contrary beliefs are blasphemy. But to a Hindu there is nothing to believe. You can be a Hindu (people were Hindus before this word Hindu was coined) with no idea of our Saasthras! There is no belief requirement for us. This is because where other religions say that you would go to heaven or hell on the basis of observing the dos and don'ts and yet only at the mercy of their Lord Jesus or Mohammed, we contend that you are already the goal (Brahman) only that you do not know! If at all you have a goal it is that you are trying to know yourself which would be nothing new!

Regards,
Ramaa

 

[KRS]

Dear Sri Silverfox Ji,
I think one of the efforts this Forum can contribute to is to try encourage all the various 'Sastra controlling' factions to the table and start drafting a current day Sastra that supports our current day life.

Pranams,
KRS

Dear Sri KRS:
Kudos to you! I completely agree with you. Same goes for my mother, who, no fault of hers, became a widow at the age of 25!! The whole world shunned her (especially our own Brahmin community!). If the sastras told us to have our widows shave their heads and be shunned, then the sastras be damned and I will have NO part of those sastras! This goes for our 'gurus', too, who had a hand in all these charade!