Guest guest Posted March 7, 2006 Report Share Posted March 7, 2006 "BVK Sastry" <sastry_bvk Shastra and Sagotra marraiges - way out RE: Digest Number 287 Namaste >From within the Shastra, depending upon which model one prefers to look at the argument for Sagotra, the 'Yes-No-Doubtful' understanding can be fished out. This debate is neither new nor unnoticed. I recall that this issue has been debated in Kulluka's commentary, Govindarajeeya, and also Dharma sindhu/nirnaya sindhu. The previous parama-Acahrya of Sri Sringeri Peetham had passed a generic guidance on this. And this should be available as recorded evidence. Each historic period and society lives its own version and understanding of the Revelations to explore the path leading to the realization of the four fold values of life. In summary, - The 'sapinda' condition guides the current law on 'sagotra' marriage' - The definition of 'Sapinda' is dynamically linked to contemporary living conditions, economic styles and human relations. - If the rule of 'ten days impurity' (dashaaha ashaucha in birth and death is broken), if the living is under separate roofs and separate family leaderships (==which is true in many modern families), if the previous three generations did not have any 'entanglements of religious, relational or economic issues). - And if the primary condition of 'Varna -identity' is lost due to the conditionalities of 'Vratya', for what ever reasons of individual, relations, forefathers, parents and the like, THEN the scope of the rule ab initio is indeterminate. For there is no bearing to mark the 'Varna' reference so critical for the operation of the 'sagotra'-sapinda' restrictions. The entire rule base is 'a-varna' according to sahstra frame of thinking. This calls for an investigation in to at least three family generations of the bride and the groom. Question is How many have retained this lineage ( gotra pravara links, names, the family connections and the like)? And even if they have, would they allow the investigations ? And eventually if some thing turns out, how are you going to present it to the modern bride and groom for the consequences? Why does it matter? If you investigate further on this, the stress currently being laid on 'Horoscope matching' in modern Hindu society instead of the 'Vamsha- Gotra' investigation which was the classical traditional style ( which information is used in the long chants of the vedic priest in vaidika vivaha samksara, publicly declared, before the 'muhoorta' -'akshataaropana, seeking the acceptance of the society members, relatives at large. The farce of practice need not be blamed on the design of the system. This is what I call as the drift from Varna society model to the 'a-varna' society model. The 'sagotra' marriage issue is one of the sub clauses in the Varna model- Aarsha Vaidiak vivaha samskara. Even here, if the parties /parents opted for other model of vivaha samskra, where a choice from out of eight formats is there, the sagotra debate does not find any relevance. One does not have to be ashamed of the current scenario. Let us just accept that as human and intelligent and religious were our forefathers, they lived their best version of 'Veda Dharma' and groomed us to be what we are now. It is for us now to take the mantle and proceed further. There is no need to blame the 'Pitru's'. It would be a religious sin. One may argue out that irrespective of the choice of the vivaha format, the 'sagotra' issue some how operates from the 'DNA' level! Come on, Get the Human Genome level details and analyze the details. Dharma sahstra kara was not a gentics expert or Genetics study have any love for the Veda- dharma -smriti shastra rules. Prove first that the Gotra has some chemical component identifiable in the DNA/Genes and that is going to stay for millennia! And this element is not going to be influenced by the 'samskara' and the like, as suggested in the dharma shastra rule books. In short, the hunch hypothesis linking the 'Sagotra vivaha ban as a religious practice' is a potential candidate for a high level Human genome project research. Choices - Either the Bramhins do it in the (survival !?) interest of their own stock and validating the Dharma shastra rule from sciences Or wait for others to make suggestions about what is the DNA parameter linked to 'Bramhana Pravara Gotra' based on a study from westerns scholars and orientalist's; and then fight that the Sanskrit translations are inaccurate. What one does beyond the shastra frame is a social context issue. If the majority of society is 'Varna' compliant, then the reference rules would be Dharma shastra. The rule base for complying to a Varna standard is given in the shastra books. It is individuals choice preference to live that life style before claiming for a membership stake. If the defaulting members are not being eased out in the club, that is a pointer to the lack of authority. The convenience adopted is 'expand the definition', so that more numbers come to the base of the pyramid, without diluting the standards at the top. This is how Vedic tradition extends from the 'Rishi' model phase, Vaidika-avaidiak model (historic 500 BCE period, Buddhism / Jainism) - Varna-Ashrama model ( guided in its falvors of Puranas, smarta traditions, Vaishnava / Shaiva streams, Vedanta flavor identity of Varna, region flavored identity of varna) till 17th century. In the same period, we have the 'jati-mata-kula model for the society at large, who do not come under the 'varna' rule base. Historical transition due to the break down of rigidity of marriage is varna model density in society changing to 'jati-mata-kula' tags, proliferation of 'jati tags'. The dahrma shastra addresses this complex balance of society from two perspectives: If the majority of the society is varna complaint, then the major prescriptive dharma shastra rule would be for the 'Varna-ashrama' teams; the exceptional rules would be for the 'avarna society. If the majority of society is 'a-varna' then the dharma shastra rule would provide the idealistic model on the Varna ashrama model and suggest that avarna society align to the ideals of Vedic purushartha goals. The contextual parameters operate. The serious error in the current understanding is drawing the rule of varna model in avarna society and contexts and debating in the backdrop of modern social ethics and a society which is 'non- vedic'. These directives have been the guideline adopted in practice in the hindu communities for centuries beyond the narrow segment of 'bramhin tagged groups'. It is presumed that the members of this narrow group have done their part to retain the membership of the 'bramhin' society - through diligent observance of the 'Vaidika karma's - which at the barest minimum is 'Mitra -upaasana' according to the technical word used by Manu ( and practical terms- doing their sandhya rites-gayatri. The text reads: kuryaat anyat na vaa kuryaat, maitro braamhana uchyate). How a generic human being can move on the ladder of 'Varna' to become a 'Bramhin', the responsibilities associated with the process and status, what causes a fall from this status, how to undertake a religious prayaschitta and raise back and continue the journey ( in historical reference smrities) - is a different line of discussion. (In Sanskrit expression, it means - The Achaarya's (==Dharma-kaama, alooksha, sammarshinah, shreyas wishing bramahanas) guides the individual, family, society to live its desha-kala - achaara Veda. Now let us see what are the sub-strands in this debate: 1. Marriage in 'Sagotra' and 'Sapinda' is a linked intricate issue. 2. When the talk of 'shaastra' comes up two points need to be clearly presented: 2a) Are you talking of the Veda (Shruti segment) - Obviously Not; for these rules are not in the scope of this domain. 2b) Understanding of Vedic directive and living it in historic times as presented in the Dharma shastra/ nibandha works. This opens up the next options: 2b-i) What is your reference point - historically - Manu, Yajnavalkya, Haarita, Gautama etc; .. OR the Gruhya sutras of your 'own' shakha? Subsets of questions: 2b-i- 1)If you accept one of the above why reject others - grounds 2b-i- 2)If you want to put a historic date, how on earth are you going to fix the dates and value references? Every dharma shastra-smriti kara points the nose back to poorvaacharya / Veda; knowing fully well that the their own contemporary society has drifted way away from the vedic reference standards. The rule base gets more and more tightening on the small segment of the compellingly rule conforming 'bramhana samaja', causing it to shrink in numbers and power by restricting the options in profession- movement- education. Do you want to trace this and set right the deviations? That offends the 'most traditionalists', 'swami's', religious institutions. 2b-i- 3)If you want to pick the latest, then how sure you are that the selection of 'Dharma sindhu / nirnaya sindu / vaidyanatheeya et al' is globally (- or even across Indian landscape / communities / sampradayas/ langauges; or still narrower - within the sub splits of the each Guru (- by philosophy of Advaita / Vishistadvaita / Dvaita; Vyasaraya - uttaradi matha ; tengalai -vadagalai; Maharasthrian bramhin vis-à-vis vaishnava bramhin from Bengal vis-à-vis Namboodri from Kerala vis-à-vis a vadyar /purohota from other traditions ? ) The facial mark to put on the face of the animal (elephant) became a prestigious legal issue to be decided in the Supreme court! Not to speak of the complications entangling the status of 'sanyasi' as the head of institution or a representative of the religious community / spokes person - signatory for financial resource ? figure head of institutionalized religions? The debates of many religious institutions entangled to the properties may be pursued in this regard. The breed of modern Gurus, global guru's and yogi's of Hinduism blessing all sorts of marriages and renunciation from family life styles is a different story altogether! 2b-i-4) How are you going to address the needs of Dharma -artha-kama where all three get integrated in the issue of 'marriage' and decide the Varna or the jati or the kula ? What is the role of Samskara approach? Looking large, are the Dharam-sahstra addressed to the narrowing lane of the 'Bramhin title claimants' (like the Indian Tax laws always encroaching on the smokers / drinkers and the working class in the employment! ) OR do they have a larger perspective? When one starts deliberating on these issues, the need for looking at the 'Dharma-shastra model' for the 'Avarna' society needs to be reviewed and brought in an updated form. The upgrade from 'avarna society' is a challenging task. It sure is a proud privilege to be admitted to the membership of the 'Bramhinical heritage' by birth. It is a parental gift, head start and golden spoon in the mouth inheritance. It sure is a privilege to be admitted to the membership of the 'Bramhinical heritage' by initiation through an Acahrya. It is a parental/ Educators gift for the next generation in the process of grooming. It sure is a privilege to be admitted to the membership of the 'Bramhinical heritage' by contemporary society. It is an achievement through self effort and exertion. One does not guarantee the other or obliterate others. One who has passed through all three stages successfully has all reason to be proud and be a model for the society. That is a sign of 'power of the bramhinical Vidyas reforming a willing member of the community'. The worst part is indiscreetly carrying the pride of first part to the last part without any exertion. The basis for this is the injunction - 'Bramhanena nishkarano shadango vedo adhyetavyah'. This never meant that the bramhin had a religious obligation to live a poor life of subjugation working in a temple/community priest. Some generations opted for this life style due to their preference of the 'Vedanta -philosophical affiliation' and ' as a way to protect Veda- serve an obligation to society by providing a living model of Vedic life style'. The historic choice on profession, motivated by a desire to 'serve the community at the cost of self prestige' for livelihood is NOT a binding on the Bramhins. There is no dharma shastra rule asking bramhin to be a temple priest or a 'purohita'.On the contrary, there are rules which makes an injunction that a 'bramhin shall not accept the profession of a temple priest / manager of a charity food service institution'. The famous line attributed to Acahrya shankara says 'Let me not have the options of paurohitya (priest service for a fees) and maathapatya ( head of a religious institution)'. [ Paurohityam rajani charitam, .. maathapatyam .. janma janmaantarepi maa bhoot]. In spite of this, if a narrow segment of Bramhins helped the society in this direction, it needs to be appreciated. It is not a matter of shame. Now let us see - Can the narrow segment of Bramhins dharmically live without a temple - temple priest or a religious institution and a sanyasi heading it? Certainly yes. The prescribed practice of Veda (Svadhyaya) and performance of Yajna's with mutual community help ( ritviks of bramhin community) is the prescribed path. Can the large number of 'a-varna' members of society live dharmically without a temple - temple priest or a religious institution and a sanyasi heading it? and still calim to be religious ? Certainly NOT. Bramhinical religious identity and life style is based on 'apaurusheya' vedic model. Thus time space-history restrictions do not limit the bramhinical religious identity. In all other cases, where the religious identity isderived from the 'hsitory' this problem is unavoidable. When the 'other Varna' identity was postioned in the 'Shruti revelation - Purusha sukta' to 'Virat Purusha' or in Gita to 'Guna -karma', the reference transcends the limitation of History. The history of life styles of vedic traditions in India shows this very clearly. It is time that historical epithet 'daridro braamhanah' is given go bye and bring out the vibrant power of the vedic traditions. If one trusts Veda, then one has to respect why Veda chose Bramhana and the promise made there in - 'Vedao ha vai braamhanam aajagaama, gopaaya maam shevadhiste ahamasmi' Veda came to Bramhin as a choice selection and promised -'Nurture and Protect me; I will bring you welfare (in this world and beyond)'. It is this balance that is reflected in the statement of the 'Manu' when he says 'Gruhastha' is the support of the three ashramas; Gruhastha status is linked to marriage; Marriage brings in the issue of Varna- Gotra compatibility. And the dynamic rules come up from time to time. Regards BVK Sastry Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
srimodegunta Posted November 21, 2010 Report Share Posted November 21, 2010 "BVK Sastry" <sastry_bvkShastra and Sagotra marraiges - way out RE: Digest Number 287 Namaste >From within the Shastra, depending upon which model one prefers to look at the argument for Sagotra, the 'Yes-No-Doubtful' understanding can be fished out. This debate is neither new nor unnoticed. I recall that this issue has been debated in Kulluka's commentary, Govindarajeeya, and also Dharma sindhu/nirnaya sindhu. The previous parama-Acahrya of Sri Sringeri Peetham had passed a generic guidance on this. And this should be available as recorded evidence. Each historic period and society lives its own version and understanding of the Revelations to explore the path leading to the realization of the four fold values of life. In summary, - The 'sapinda' condition guides the current law on 'sagotra' marriage' - The definition of 'Sapinda' is dynamically linked to contemporary living conditions, economic styles and human relations. - If the rule of 'ten days impurity' (dashaaha ashaucha in birth and death is broken), if the living is under separate roofs and separate family leaderships (==which is true in many modern families), if the previous three generations did not have any 'entanglements of religious, relational or economic issues). - And if the primary condition of 'Varna -identity' is lost due to the conditionalities of 'Vratya', for what ever reasons of individual, relations, forefathers, parents and the like, THEN the scope of the rule ab initio is indeterminate. For there is no bearing to mark the 'Varna' reference so critical for the operation of the 'sagotra'-sapinda' restrictions. The entire rule base is 'a-varna' according to sahstra frame of thinking. This calls for an investigation in to at least three family generations of the bride and the groom. Question is How many have retained this lineage ( gotra pravara links, names, the family connections and the like)? And even if they have, would they allow the investigations ? And eventually if some thing turns out, how are you going to present it to the modern bride and groom for the consequences? Why does it matter? If you investigate further on this, the stress currently being laid on 'Horoscope matching' in modern Hindu society instead of the 'Vamsha- Gotra' investigation which was the classical traditional style ( which information is used in the long chants of the vedic priest in vaidika vivaha samksara, publicly declared, before the 'muhoorta' -'akshataaropana, seeking the acceptance of the society members, relatives at large. The farce of practice need not be blamed on the design of the system. This is what I call as the drift from Varna society model to the 'a-varna' society model. The 'sagotra' marriage issue is one of the sub clauses in the Varna model- Aarsha Vaidiak vivaha samskara. Even here, if the parties /parents opted for other model of vivaha samskra, where a choice from out of eight formats is there, the sagotra debate does not find any relevance. One does not have to be ashamed of the current scenario. Let us just accept that as human and intelligent and religious were our forefathers, they lived their best version of 'Veda Dharma' and groomed us to be what we are now. It is for us now to take the mantle and proceed further. There is no need to blame the 'Pitru's'. It would be a religious sin. One may argue out that irrespective of the choice of the vivaha format, the 'sagotra' issue some how operates from the 'DNA' level! Come on, Get the Human Genome level details and analyze the details. Dharma sahstra kara was not a gentics expert or Genetics study have any love for the Veda- dharma -smriti shastra rules. Prove first that the Gotra has some chemical component identifiable in the DNA/Genes and that is going to stay for millennia! And this element is not going to be influenced by the 'samskara' and the like, as suggested in the dharma shastra rule books. In short, the hunch hypothesis linking the 'Sagotra vivaha ban as a religious practice' is a potential candidate for a high level Human genome project research. Choices - Either the Bramhins do it in the (survival !?) interest of their own stock and validating the Dharma shastra rule from sciences Or wait for others to make suggestions about what is the DNA parameter linked to 'Bramhana Pravara Gotra' based on a study from westerns scholars and orientalist's; and then fight that the Sanskrit translations are inaccurate. What one does beyond the shastra frame is a social context issue. If the majority of society is 'Varna' compliant, then the reference rules would be Dharma shastra. The rule base for complying to a Varna standard is given in the shastra books. It is individuals choice preference to live that life style before claiming for a membership stake. If the defaulting members are not being eased out in the club, that is a pointer to the lack of authority. The convenience adopted is 'expand the definition', so that more numbers come to the base of the pyramid, without diluting the standards at the top. This is how Vedic tradition extends from the 'Rishi' model phase, Vaidika-avaidiak model (historic 500 BCE period, Buddhism / Jainism) - Varna-Ashrama model ( guided in its falvors of Puranas, smarta traditions, Vaishnava / Shaiva streams, Vedanta flavor identity of Varna, region flavored identity of varna) till 17th century. In the same period, we have the 'jati-mata-kula model for the society at large, who do not come under the 'varna' rule base. Historical transition due to the break down of rigidity of marriage is varna model density in society changing to 'jati-mata-kula' tags, proliferation of 'jati tags'. The dahrma shastra addresses this complex balance of society from two perspectives: If the majority of the society is varna complaint, then the major prescriptive dharma shastra rule would be for the 'Varna-ashrama' teams; the exceptional rules would be for the 'avarna society. If the majority of society is 'a-varna' then the dharma shastra rule would provide the idealistic model on the Varna ashrama model and suggest that avarna society align to the ideals of Vedic purushartha goals. The contextual parameters operate. The serious error in the current understanding is drawing the rule of varna model in avarna society and contexts and debating in the backdrop of modern social ethics and a society which is 'non- vedic'. These directives have been the guideline adopted in practice in the hindu communities for centuries beyond the narrow segment of 'bramhin tagged groups'. It is presumed that the members of this narrow group have done their part to retain the membership of the 'bramhin' society - through diligent observance of the 'Vaidika karma's - which at the barest minimum is 'Mitra -upaasana' according to the technical word used by Manu ( and practical terms- doing their sandhya rites-gayatri. The text reads: kuryaat anyat na vaa kuryaat, maitro braamhana uchyate). How a generic human being can move on the ladder of 'Varna' to become a 'Bramhin', the responsibilities associated with the process and status, what causes a fall from this status, how to undertake a religious prayaschitta and raise back and continue the journey ( in historical reference smrities) - is a different line of discussion. (In Sanskrit expression, it means - The Achaarya's (==Dharma-kaama, alooksha, sammarshinah, shreyas wishing bramahanas) guides the individual, family, society to live its desha-kala - achaara Veda. Now let us see what are the sub-strands in this debate: 1. Marriage in 'Sagotra' and 'Sapinda' is a linked intricate issue. 2. When the talk of 'shaastra' comes up two points need to be clearly presented: 2a) Are you talking of the Veda (Shruti segment) - Obviously Not; for these rules are not in the scope of this domain. 2b) Understanding of Vedic directive and living it in historic times as presented in the Dharma shastra/ nibandha works. This opens up the next options: 2b-i) What is your reference point - historically - Manu, Yajnavalkya, Haarita, Gautama etc; .. OR the Gruhya sutras of your 'own' shakha? Subsets of questions: 2b-i- 1)If you accept one of the above why reject others - grounds 2b-i- 2)If you want to put a historic date, how on earth are you going to fix the dates and value references? Every dharma shastra-smriti kara points the nose back to poorvaacharya / Veda; knowing fully well that the their own contemporary society has drifted way away from the vedic reference standards. The rule base gets more and more tightening on the small segment of the compellingly rule conforming 'bramhana samaja', causing it to shrink in numbers and power by restricting the options in profession- movement- education. Do you want to trace this and set right the deviations? That offends the 'most traditionalists', 'swami's', religious institutions. 2b-i- 3)If you want to pick the latest, then how sure you are that the selection of 'Dharma sindhu / nirnaya sindu / vaidyanatheeya et al' is globally (- or even across Indian landscape / communities / sampradayas/ langauges; or still narrower - within the sub splits of the each Guru (- by philosophy of Advaita / Vishistadvaita / Dvaita; Vyasaraya - uttaradi matha ; tengalai -vadagalai; Maharasthrian bramhin vis-à-vis vaishnava bramhin from Bengal vis-à-vis Namboodri from Kerala vis-à-vis a vadyar /purohota from other traditions ? ) The facial mark to put on the face of the animal (elephant) became a prestigious legal issue to be decided in the Supreme court! Not to speak of the complications entangling the status of 'sanyasi' as the head of institution or a representative of the religious community / spokes person - signatory for financial resource ? figure head of institutionalized religions? The debates of many religious institutions entangled to the properties may be pursued in this regard. The breed of modern Gurus, global guru's and yogi's of Hinduism blessing all sorts of marriages and renunciation from family life styles is a different story altogether! 2b-i-4) How are you going to address the needs of Dharma -artha-kama where all three get integrated in the issue of 'marriage' and decide the Varna or the jati or the kula ? What is the role of Samskara approach? Looking large, are the Dharam-sahstra addressed to the narrowing lane of the 'Bramhin title claimants' (like the Indian Tax laws always encroaching on the smokers / drinkers and the working class in the employment! ) OR do they have a larger perspective? When one starts deliberating on these issues, the need for looking at the 'Dharma-shastra model' for the 'Avarna' society needs to be reviewed and brought in an updated form. The upgrade from 'avarna society' is a challenging task. It sure is a proud privilege to be admitted to the membership of the 'Bramhinical heritage' by birth. It is a parental gift, head start and golden spoon in the mouth inheritance. It sure is a privilege to be admitted to the membership of the 'Bramhinical heritage' by initiation through an Acahrya. It is a parental/ Educators gift for the next generation in the process of grooming. It sure is a privilege to be admitted to the membership of the 'Bramhinical heritage' by contemporary society. It is an achievement through self effort and exertion. One does not guarantee the other or obliterate others. One who has passed through all three stages successfully has all reason to be proud and be a model for the society. That is a sign of 'power of the bramhinical Vidyas reforming a willing member of the community'. The worst part is indiscreetly carrying the pride of first part to the last part without any exertion. The basis for this is the injunction - 'Bramhanena nishkarano shadango vedo adhyetavyah'. This never meant that the bramhin had a religious obligation to live a poor life of subjugation working in a temple/community priest. Some generations opted for this life style due to their preference of the 'Vedanta -philosophical affiliation' and ' as a way to protect Veda- serve an obligation to society by providing a living model of Vedic life style'. The historic choice on profession, motivated by a desire to 'serve the community at the cost of self prestige' for livelihood is NOT a binding on the Bramhins. There is no dharma shastra rule asking bramhin to be a temple priest or a 'purohita'.On the contrary, there are rules which makes an injunction that a 'bramhin shall not accept the profession of a temple priest / manager of a charity food service institution'. The famous line attributed to Acahrya shankara says 'Let me not have the options of paurohitya (priest service for a fees) and maathapatya ( head of a religious institution)'. [ Paurohityam rajani charitam, .. maathapatyam .. janma janmaantarepi maa bhoot]. In spite of this, if a narrow segment of Bramhins helped the society in this direction, it needs to be appreciated. It is not a matter of shame. Now let us see - Can the narrow segment of Bramhins dharmically live without a temple - temple priest or a religious institution and a sanyasi heading it? Certainly yes. The prescribed practice of Veda (Svadhyaya) and performance of Yajna's with mutual community help ( ritviks of bramhin community) is the prescribed path. Can the large number of 'a-varna' members of society live dharmically without a temple - temple priest or a religious institution and a sanyasi heading it? and still calim to be religious ? Certainly NOT. Bramhinical religious identity and life style is based on 'apaurusheya' vedic model. Thus time space-history restrictions do not limit the bramhinical religious identity. In all other cases, where the religious identity isderived from the 'hsitory' this problem is unavoidable. When the 'other Varna' identity was postioned in the 'Shruti revelation - Purusha sukta' to 'Virat Purusha' or in Gita to 'Guna -karma', the reference transcends the limitation of History. The history of life styles of vedic traditions in India shows this very clearly. It is time that historical epithet 'daridro braamhanah' is given go bye and bring out the vibrant power of the vedic traditions. If one trusts Veda, then one has to respect why Veda chose Bramhana and the promise made there in - 'Vedao ha vai braamhanam aajagaama, gopaaya maam shevadhiste ahamasmi' Veda came to Bramhin as a choice selection and promised -'Nurture and Protect me; I will bring you welfare (in this world and beyond)'. It is this balance that is reflected in the statement of the 'Manu' when he says 'Gruhastha' is the support of the three ashramas; Gruhastha status is linked to marriage; Marriage brings in the issue of Varna- Gotra compatibility. And the dynamic rules come up from time to time. Regards BVK Sastry Please see the attachment for how the relations are formed The marriage is not acceptable to me .... but some elders are trying for this relation Untitled 1.pdf Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.