Forward or back

The role of a woman in society has evolved and undergone what many may call radical change. In the developed world, although there are allegations of glass ceilings and male dominated board rooms, the woman as an individual in society is pretty much equal in the eyes of her society, in the eyes of the law and the constitution. Traditions which placed women at a disadvantage in some manner or those where the woman was referred to as an object for Men to hand over or exchange or play around with are non existent in the developed world. Sadly, that is not the case in many other countries, India being one of the foremost examples. Of course, Islamic countries have their own set of rules and laws but for the moment I will focus on how for over 4000 years, the Indian - Hindu woman has been manipulated in the name of religion, tradition, Hinduism and rituals.

I recently discussed the concept of kanya daan which comprises the woman being "given away" by her father to the bridegroom at the marriage ceremony. This ritual symbolises the superiority of the husband in the relationship; is meant to convey in no uncertain terms that the woman / daughter is a burden/gift and the father's greatest ever act of generosity is to give away his daughter to a suitable groom. Moreover, after some digging I learnt that in the Kanya Daan ceremony, the father (through of course the ubiquitous priests) requests the bridegroom to care for his daughter and hopes that he will treat her as an equal in the relationship. The operating word here of course is "hopes".

The concept of Kanya Daan is spoken about by none other than the big daddy of the Vedas. In the "Laws of Manu", written about 1500 BC, we are told to understand Kanya Daan. Of course Manu also goes on tell us about the caste system and how one would go to eternal hell if one were to kiss another belonging to a lower caste. Manu also tells us a lot more arrant nonsense and rubbish which any society with common sense, morals and a shred of liberty will reject completely. And indeed, I am proud to say that after hundreds of years of practices like "Sati'', polygamy, devdasis etc, many laws have been framed to weed out the more barbaric of Manu's suggestions or divine words whichever way you want to interpret it. We got rid of Sati mainly thanks to the Brits; we have laws which forbid the caste system mainly thanks to Ambedkar but we weren't able to get around ritualistic zealotry simply because religion in India is enshrined in a no man's land. A holy grail which neither legislators nor judiciary can tread on with too much authority.

But wait a minute, we aren't talking about laws to rid ourselves of symbols such as "kanya daan". Instead what one would hope for would be a larger public consciousness wherein people, young & old alike realise that humanity as a whole has progressed to a more evolved state of being and will accept that while some symbols are important, ones that involve blatant throwbacks to rituals dating 4000 years need to be re-examined. Follow symbols by all means but don't be unmindful of what they represent, their interpretations. Hindu rituals paint the woman / daughter as Goddess Lakshmi, but yet at the same time these rituals see it fit for the parents to wash the feet of the bridegroom and plead with him to look after their daughter. What can be the interpretation of this symbol? Where is room for equity and liberty?

I could go on but will end here. This is further validation of my opinion that the Geeta is in fact the foremost of Hindu scriptures. I am not sure if there was a point to this post, but sometimes catharsis follows strange paths. Much like sitting at the bottom of a dry well with a baseball bat. But that's a story for another day.