Re: Rama's treatment of Sita (fwd)
From the Bhakti List Archives
• January 17, 1996
> Subject: Re: Rama's treatment of Sita > You have a point there. I am by no means a feminist, but I strongly > believe that in both the Hindu epics (as well as in religions that > branched off from Hinduism like Buddhism etc) a woman is not at all > treated with respect. On one side, a woman is idolised as "Ma Kaali" and > on the other she is definately treated infinitely inferior to a man. > Take the Mahabharath for instance. Ok, agreed that polygamy was a rule > of the day (a necessity even, for Kshaatriyas) but Draupathi was > considered a, well, something of a prostitute, for having 5 husbands. > And when Karna calls her so, there is no defence for her. The reason for > her having 5 husbands is that she wanted a husband with 5 of the greatest > quallities possible and it was "wrong" for a woman to desire such traits > in her man. And Arjuna could go town after town and marry as many women > as he pleased. (And so could Krishna, although "bhakti" would have been > the reason to be given to Krishna's romances, for which i have no > objection.). A woman is always considered a temptress (during times she > is not considered Maa Kali). That reflects badly, not on the woman's > fidelity, but on the man's lack of any self control or morality. > Sorry, if that was a strongly feministic argument, but I could go on and > on, about Vali just abducting Tara, Gautama rishi cursing Ahalya for no > fault of hers, Draupadi being accused as the reason behind the war, > inspite of the ultimaate insult to womanhood that she faced-derobing, not > including the not-technically-Hindu stories of Gautama Buddha totally > abandoning the woman he had promised to protect all her/his life etc etc... > Lakshmi Gopal. >
- Next message: Shashikanth Hosur: "Re: Rama's treatment of Sita"
- Previous message: vidya_at_cco.caltech.edu: "Re: Rama's treatment of Sita"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]