Guest guest Posted November 16, 2000 Report Share Posted November 16, 2000 J. Phillip wrote: > > Perhaps the purport to 3.21.15 is what you are referring to? > > "Formerly, boys and girls of similar dispositions were married; the similar > natures of the boy and girl were united in order to make them happy. Not > more than twenty-five years ago, and perhaps it is still current, parents in > India used to consult the horoscope of the boy and girl to see whether there > would be factual union in their psychological conditions. These > considerations are very important. Nowadays marriage takes place without > such consultation, and therefore, soon after the marriage, there is divorce > and separation. Formerly husband and wife used to live together peacefully > throughout their whole lives, but nowadays it is a very difficult task." > With all respect for SP, I beg to disagree with the "over-simplified" presentation of the situation, while agreeing with the basic principle. Further the remarks apply mainly or only to Hindus and Buddhists and Jains of India. In all communities in the world the aim was to unite a boy and a girl with compatible qualities. Usually they were both from the same village, they and their families knew one another. Only the Brahmin community started child-marriage and relied more on the horoscope. In other cases the boy and girl were old enough to show their character and the parents could use their judgement. Living in simple communities meant also that the way of life was similar to all in any case, and diversity was rare. Marriages break up more often owing to "minor" irritations than major differences. Both were generally absent or minimal in the earlier times. So marriages had a better chance to last. But that is only one side of the picture. Did the marriages really last? Were they successful? The oldest puranic story, an allegorical description of the creation of the solar system, is the so-called Druvacharitam. Druva´s father Utthanapada sent his first wife away in favour of another woman - equivalent to divorce. I do not believe that the "persons" in the story were real, but astrophysical conditions. Nevertheless, it shows that the idea was old. Sri Rama sent Sita away. They were well-matched, but the horoscopes must have shown very little marital happiness, mostly separation and sorrow over years. A very common cause for marriages breaking up is the desire for sexual freedom. During the period when the ancient law books were written the adultery of wives seems to have been a major problem. Since the groom paid a dowry to the bride, she had a certain independence and was not afraid of a divorce. But the man did not want his money to go to his neighbour`s kid! later on the thing was reversed, the woman was financially dependent on the husband - and it was wiser to be "faithful" than to go begging. The promiscuous desires of the man had free play, a divorce was not necessary. He could have mistresses or even wives. The spleen was distributed and with mutual understanding, a sort of harmony existed. The wives were rivals, but often conspirators as well: while one kept the husband occupied, the other could have a bit of fun. And together they could a lot out of him. Also the idea of "one for fun, one for work" helped less pretty women to get and have husbands. As long as birth control etc. did not exist, nature produced more females than males, and there was usually a large surplus of women looking for security. Since having children was wished for, the less favoured wife got her share of sex as well, her mother role was enhanced, for she probably looked after all the kids. The idea of divorce started with monogamy. When it became difficult for the husband to support more than one wife, sending the wife away (to parents´home or just into the world) was very common. I personally knew of many such cases. Since no official marriage was recorded, this was simple divorce - which was a disaster for the woman. The Moslems dealt with this much better. The main reason for divorce today is the fact that sexual freedom is wished for and often practiced, but the emotional acceptance is absent. Possessiveness and jealousy have not been conquered, one takes the freedom foe oneself but is not willing to give it to the partner!!! In more recent times it was and is unfortunately a common practice to manipulate the horoscope. Since very few births were in hospitals, no official record of TOB existed. Within a few days of birth a priest casts the horoscope. All too often he tells the parents that the marriage prospects are bad - and they agree to his changing the TOB to get a better chart for future purposes! When big money is involved, the desire to merge fortunes or estates worsens this practice. Or the TOB is unintentionally taken wrong, because nobody noted it correctly. Or again, the astrologer is "blind" when consulted. This does happen! Srila P´s marriage ended in a de facto divorce! I am sure the charts were compared and found suitable. The point is: Marriage is the toughest test in life, the demand for understanding and giving at the closest level. It is not one of the things one can pass by or change easily. "Marriages are made in Heaven" - one way or other one gets married to the pre-determined person. Any attempt to change that is thwarted. An astrologer can say, "In my opinion this is not a good match" or "IMHO the chances are good, God willing!" But NEVER: this will be a good marriage. Remaining married is not the real criterion, but whether the couple is happy to be so. This WAS and IS RARE! This is my experience, not my mental thesis. regards Mani Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 16, 2000 Report Share Posted November 16, 2000 Namaste Mani, In a word - EXCELLENT! More, Please... Salaam, Mui'Min Bey Western and Vedic Astrologer 1-888-514-5342 --- subra wrote: > J. Phillip wrote: > > > > Perhaps the purport to 3.21.15 is what you are > referring to? > > > > "Formerly, boys and girls of similar dispositions > were married; the similar > > natures of the boy and girl were united in order > to make them happy. Not > > more than twenty-five years ago, and perhaps it is > still current, parents in > > India used to consult the horoscope of the boy and > girl to see whether there > > would be factual union in their psychological > conditions. These > > considerations are very important. Nowadays > marriage takes place without > > such consultation, and therefore, soon after the > marriage, there is divorce > > and separation. Formerly husband and wife used to > live together peacefully > > throughout their whole lives, but nowadays it is a > very difficult task." > > > > With all respect for SP, I beg to disagree with the > "over-simplified" > presentation of the situation, while agreeing with > the basic principle. Further > the remarks apply mainly or only to Hindus and > Buddhists and Jains of India. > > In all communities in the world the aim was to unite > a boy and a girl with > compatible qualities. Usually they were both from > the same village, they and > their families knew one another. Only the Brahmin > community started > child-marriage and relied more on the horoscope. In > other cases the boy and girl > were old enough to show their character and the > parents could use their > judgement. Living in simple communities meant also > that the way of life was > similar to all in any case, and diversity was rare. > Marriages break up more > often owing to "minor" irritations than major > differences. Both were generally > absent or minimal in the earlier times. So marriages > had a better chance to > last. > > But that is only one side of the picture. Did the > marriages really last? Were > they successful? The oldest puranic story, an > allegorical description of the > creation of the solar system, is the so-called > Druvacharitam. Druva´s father > Utthanapada sent his first wife away in favour of > another woman - equivalent to > divorce. I do not believe that the "persons" in the > story were real, but > astrophysical conditions. Nevertheless, it shows > that the idea was old. Sri > Rama sent Sita away. They were well-matched, but the > horoscopes must have shown > very little marital happiness, mostly separation and > sorrow over years. > > A very common cause for marriages breaking up is the > desire for sexual freedom. > During the period when the ancient law books were > written the adultery of wives > seems to have been a major problem. Since the groom > paid a dowry to the bride, > she had a certain independence and was not afraid of > a divorce. But the man did > not want his money to go to his neighbour`s kid! > later on the thing was > reversed, the woman was financially dependent on the > husband - and it was wiser > to be "faithful" than to go begging. > > The promiscuous desires of the man had free play, a > divorce was not necessary. > He could have mistresses or even wives. The spleen > was distributed and with > mutual understanding, a sort of harmony existed. The > wives were rivals, but > often conspirators as well: while one kept the > husband occupied, the other could > have a bit of fun. And together they could a lot out > of him. Also the idea of > "one for fun, one for work" helped less pretty women > to get and have husbands. > As long as birth control etc. did not exist, nature > produced more females than > males, and there was usually a large surplus of > women looking for security. > Since having children was wished for, the less > favoured wife got her share of > sex as well, her mother role was enhanced, for she > probably looked after all the > kids. > > The idea of divorce started with monogamy. When it > became difficult for the > husband to support more than one wife, sending the > wife away (to parents´home or > just into the world) was very common. I personally > knew of many such cases. > Since no official marriage was recorded, this was > simple divorce - which was a > disaster for the woman. The Moslems dealt with this > much better. > > The main reason for divorce today is the fact that > sexual freedom is wished for > and often practiced, but the emotional acceptance is > absent. Possessiveness and > jealousy have not been conquered, one takes the > freedom foe oneself but is not > willing to give it to the partner!!! > > In more recent times it was and is unfortunately a > common practice to manipulate > the horoscope. Since very few births were in > hospitals, no official record of > TOB existed. Within a few days of birth a priest > casts the horoscope. All too > often he tells the parents that the marriage > prospects are bad - and they agree > to his changing the TOB to get a better chart for > future purposes! When big > money is involved, the desire to merge fortunes or > estates worsens this > practice. > > Or the TOB is unintentionally taken wrong, because > nobody noted it correctly. Or > again, the astrologer is "blind" when consulted. > This does happen! > > Srila P´s marriage ended in a de facto divorce! I > am sure the charts were > compared and found suitable. > > The point is: > Marriage is the toughest test in life, the demand > for understanding and giving > at the closest level. It is not one of the things > one can pass by or change > easily. "Marriages are made in Heaven" - one way or > other one gets married to > the pre-determined person. Any attempt to change > that is thwarted. An astrologer > can say, "In my opinion this is not a good match" or > "IMHO the chances are good, > God willing!" But NEVER: this will be a good > marriage. > > Remaining married is not the real criterion, but > whether the couple is happy to > be so. This WAS and IS RARE! > > This is my experience, not my mental thesis. > > regards > Mani > > > > gjlist- > > > Calendar - Get organized for the holidays! http://calendar./ 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.