View: Go to ancient precepts for a modern turn | Economic Times

Nearly 70 years ago, without any prompting from advertisements, speeches or articles, my mother refused to follow several rituals deemed 'essential' for a Bengali wedding. She did not don those red-and-white "shakha-pola" bangles that were considered mandatory for married Bengali women. She did not agree to wear sindoor. And she flatly refused to throw a handful of rice over her shoulder to symbolise 'repaying' her debt to her mother.There was consternation in the family and mutterings about yet another example of my mother's famously stubborn, willful nature. My maternal grandmother-no shrinking violet herself when it came to laying down the law-regarded her fourth daughter with a certain degree of exasperation but not beyond the pale. And my paternal grandmother was too diplomatic to insist on anything that could lead to confrontation. So, my mother had her way.That she got married despite her father having passed away suddenly just seven months before-ie, earlier than the 'stipulated' year-long mourning period-with the agreement of both families, also indicated how much Hindu 'traditions' can be modified. Tradition is largely a convenient excuse these days for rituals attributed to (or blamed on) ancient theological 'shastras' that most lay Hindus know very little about.The 'debate' sparked off by a recent advertisement of a wedding wear brand that called for 'kanyamaan' rather than 'kanyadaan' is a case in point. Even if the Dharmashastras prescribe this ritual-whereby a bedecked Lakshmi (daughter) is given by her father as an oblation (daan) to the embodiment of Vishnu (the groom)-there are enough exceptions to make it less than mandatory. Especially since there are eight types of Hindu marriages!Given that the Hindu faith has no single holy book, set of commandments or even a definitive word of God (revealed via one prophet or many) and there are plenty of theological and philosophical treatises propounding even contradictory precepts, there are no imperatives. Marriages have been solemnised in whatever manner couples want. And a rather wide range of alternatives are available.For instance, many Indians living together these days and fondly imagining they are being very modern may be surprised to know that one of those eight ancient Hindu nuptials included 'gandharva vivaaha', in which the consummation of their mutual attraction is the 'marriage' ritual. The other seven types of marriages cited in the Dharmashastras are: Brahma, Daiva, Arsha, Prajapatya, Asura, Rakshasa and Pisacha. The last three, by their very names, are clearly disfavoured as they entail, respectively, payment of bride price, abduction and forcible consummation when the woman is disorientated or confined.The form of marriage now under fire is the first one-Brahma-which was said to be the 'best' as there were no economic riders attached, just the 'daan' of a bedecked 'kanya' to the godlike groom. How it was corrupted to include fat dowries and the pre-eminence of the groom, his family and their demands is not difficult to figure out. But that was not the intention.So to say that a cute actor in a bridalwear commercial propounding 'kanyamaan' has struck a seminal blow against 'patriarchy' is overstating the matter. Hindu weddings have been a work in progress; practically every generation has brought some change into it. Regardless of what ancient commentators like Baudhayana, Apastambha or Manu may have said about the relative merits of the types of Hindus marriages, no bride-or groom-is obliged to go by what any or all of them say. In fact, many recommended changing with the times. Kanyadaan, no kanyadaan, or mutual daan of the bride and groom to each other, there is always room for flexibility. But most Hindus today don't know that.Disrespecting brides began when the faith was derailed by greed and powerplay. Blaming patriarchy, tradition or faith, is passing the buck. Paradoxically, returning to the original ancient precept of flexibility in marriage rituals is the most modern 'change' we can bring about. My mother's clinching argument against sindoor, shakha-pola and rice throwing, after all, was that these practices cannot be traced back to the ancient shastras!