• This forum contains old posts that have been closed. New threads and replies may not be made here. Please navigate to the relevant forum to create a new thread or post a reply.
  • Welcome to Tamil Brahmins forums.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our Free Brahmin Community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.

It was never Love

Status
Not open for further replies.
This is news!! So all this love for Mumtaz is just a facade!! It is plain lust that Shahjahan had for his 3rd (or was it 4th?)wife..He killed her husband to marry her..Post her death he married his sister....That still did not satiate his prurience!! He married two more !!
PS: The author of this article is not a RSS or any other Sangh Pariwar idealogue but a Pakistani!! A Doctorate in IT to boot!!

It was never Love



By Dr Irfan Zafar


Over the years we are fed with folk tales of love and passion without ever divulging into the deeper meanings of what they really stood for. Almost every tale ends with the glorification of love without realizing that the final destiny of love has never been associated with getting married. May it be Heer-Ranjha, Sassi-Punoo, Mirza-Sahiban or Sohni-Mahniwal, all ending up in tragedy with eloping couples encountering varied fates, nothing whatsoever to do with marriage, or more particularly, Love.The starting point to define love or otherwise can be to first look at the eternal symbol of love, The Taj Mahal. Emperor Shah Jahan built Taj Mahal for Empress Mumtaz Mahal. Mumtaz was Shahjahan's 4th wife out of his 7 wives. Have always wondered at the entrepreneurship of our king's to handle multiple wives for in all practicality, handling even one in the present age is a herculean task. Shah Jahan killed Mumtaz's husband to marry her. In other words, he was dating Mumtaz for a long time and finally murdered the poor husband to satisfy his hunger (Lust). Ever heard the word morality? Making babies, as we all know, is our favorite sport. This mastery was achieved by the great Emperor Shah Jahan with ravishing ferocity by keeping his beloved pregnant all the time. The poor lady, for the sake of love, endured this pain for almost fifteen years but finally ran out of luck (breath) and died during her 14th delivery. To give final ending to his love, Shah Jahan married Mumtaz's sister and built Taj Mahal in the memory of his "beloved" wife Mumtaz. Looking at the character of the king, he for sure must have been dating Mumtaz’s sister. Empress Mumtaz must be turning in her grave visualizing her husband’s encounters with her sister. Just wonder where the hell was love in all this?Heer-Ranjha is the most popular tragic romances of Punjab. It tells the story of the love of Heer and her lover Ranjha. After a quarrel with his brothers over land, Ranjha leaves home and arrives in Heer's village and falls in love with her. Heer offers Ranjha a job as caretaker of her father's cattle. This act of heer was commendable considering the job situation in the market even at that time. Although the salary offered to Ranjha is not mentioned, but he for sure was getting a packaged deal of job and love; thus mixing work with pleasure. They used to meet each other secretly for many years until were caught by Heer's uncle, Kaido. The problem with luck is that it runs out one day. Ranjha instead of finding another similar job opportunity becomes a Jogi (parasite) to have an easy sailing. The story ends with heer poisoned by her uncle Kaido and Ranjha killing himself by poisoning himself. This was pure suicide, nothing else. Instead of taking heer to the doctor to save her life, he preferred to end his own life for had he been married to her, his life would have been terrible considering heer's affluent background and her demands for a better cushy living. He already lost a job and could not find another; hence committing suicide was an easy way out.Sassi-Punhun is a famous Sindhi folktale of love. The story is about a faithful wife (do we still have around) who is ready to undergo all kinds of troubles that would come her way while seeking her beloved husband Punhun. Well she was not the Sassi of today's age who would have preferred to seek another wealthy husband instead of seeking her separated hubby. Punhun’s father and brothers were against his marriage to Sassi; Punhun being a prince and Sassi being a washer man’s daughter. What Punhun's family did not realize was that the washer man had a great future in waiting and one day could become the top designer in the country.Hence the brothers of Punhun intoxicated him during the marriage function with wine (not-soft drinks) and carried him away when he got totally drunk. The point to be noted here is that instead of being with Sassi during the marriage function, Punhun was having hell of time drinking liquor which is now prohibited in this land of the pure. The next morning, when Sassi got up (wonder how could she sleep on the wedding night without looking for her husband), she realized that she was cheated. She became mad with the grief of separation from her lover and ran barefoot towards the town of KechMakran where Punhun was taken. Had she been sensible, she should have worn nice shoes and taken a ride instead of running like a crazy women. But maybe she was short of money or wanted to save them for her expected kids. She finally and understandably died of hunger and thirst. Punhun while trying to find her meets the same fate. The tale speaks more of stupidity than love. Then we have another tragic love story of Sohni-Mahniwal. Here, the heroine Sohni, unhappily married (as if happily married couples exist?) to a man whom she despises (who does not?), swims every night across the river where her beloved Mehar herds buffaloes (today's livestock business). This is a perfect example of a married women going astray and indulging in adultery. This also depicts the modernity prevalent at that time whereas the women were allowed to freely swim without having to worry about the moral ramifications. One night her sister-in-law, must be a pious women, replaces the earthenware pot, which she uses to keep afloat in water, with a vessel of unbaked clay, which dissolves in water and she dies in the whirling waves of the river. In essence, she deserved to be drowned or even stoned to death had there existed the real Shariah. Mirza-Sahiban is another tale in which Mirza is sent to his relatives' house to study, where he meets Sahiban and they fall in love. This is the perfect example of wasting parent’s hard earned money. He was sent to study but instead started romanticism. When, later in life, Sahiban is to be wedded, Mirza sahib arrives during Sahiban's mehndi ceremony and carries her away. Nowadays we call it abduction. Trying to avoid any bloodshed between her brothers and Mirza, she breaks Mirza's arrow. So when Sahiba's brother got hold of Mirza, he had nothing to fight with and was killed. Stupidity of Sahiban can be judged from this foolish act. Subsequently she kills herself with Mirza's sword. Her self annihilation seems more out of shame of eloping with the lover than out of love. So for generations our children are told these stories highlighting the romanticism these carried. In truth, they are based either on lust, passion, stupidity, immorality or betrayal. Another lesson from these tales is that for any happy or tragic ending, getting married is never an option. Will never be! I am sure that next time when we will recite these so called love tales, we should not fool our kids for they are not as stupid as we tend to believe.

The writer is a PhD in Information Technology, alumni of King’s College London and a social activist. He is life member of the Pakistan Engineering Council and senior international editor for IT Insight Magazine. He has authored two books titled Understanding Telecommunications and Living In The Grave and several research papers. The writer prefersto avoid human interaction and finds peace & happiness being alone, in silence with his own self.

http://nation.com.pk/columns/02-Nov-2013/it-was-never-love
 
Why cant a person love more than one?
Its entirely possible to love more than one person..just like we love all our children.

Marrying another after the death of a spouse does not mean we forget the earlier spouse...the spouse always remains like an app in the mind which can be activated anytime in the form of memories.

The heart has 4 chambers...one can sing..

In the chambers of my heart..many shrines I have for thee..come O life..come O love..come thou dwell with me.

The candles of my love are burning bright for thee..come O life....come O love..come thou dwell with me.
 
Last edited:
Taj Mahal is an Indian Monument.

The Taj Mahal meaning Crown of the Palace is an ivory-white marble Building on the south bank of the Yamuna river in the Indian city of Agra.............

Any association with Humans are murky stories.
It is a monument that attracts millions to visit India.

These are the facts.


Some Indians cannot accept that Muslim are Indians. They can build, conquer a land, a building etc.

Most of the stupas and the State symbol of India was created by Buddhists, not Hindus. (Asoka converted to Buddism from Hinduism).

220px-Emblem_of_India.svg.png


Indian Railways was created by British. They were not Hindus.

The first train in India ran from Red Hills to Chintadripet bridge in Madras in 1837. It was called Red Hill Railway. It was hauled by a rotary steam engine locomotive manufactured by William Avery. It was built by Sir Arthur Cotton. It was mainly used for transporting granite stones for road building work in Madras.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Railways



Not all Indians are Hindus, and that is a fact.


Why can we not accept that?

This Bashing of everything that is not Hindu (whose definition?) is sickening.

And now the new ruling is that everything that is not approved by BJP is anti-Indian is dangerous to India.
 
On the wall of my bathroom I saw yesterday two cockroaches engaged in the dance of love. I could hear the male cockroach singing "come closer, come closer and listen, that beat of my heart has been missing, oh my heart goes boom bang a bang boom bang a bang boom........" The female cockroach said" come on that is an old song by Lulu. Try to act original. Sing a different song now". The male cockroach withdrew from the scene and vanished as the ancient and primoridal act of procreation had alre3ady been completed.

Love is a decent name given to the oldest primordial act of procreation arising from the basic desire and need to sustain life on earth. Poets, film directors et al add a lot of masala and make money. Period.

When you sublimate such a basic driving force, it becomes bhakti. And it is another cup of tea.

In the four chambers of heart we can have four hundred different heroes/heroines. Only the lower chambers have lesser space and the heroes/heroines should not complain of over crowding. LOL.
 
Last edited:
On the wall of my bathroom I saw yesterday two cockroaches engaged in the dance of love. I could hear the male cockroach singing "come closer, come closer and listen, that beat of my heart has been missing, oh my heart goes boom bang a bang boom bang a bang boom........" The female cockroach said" come on that is an old song by Lulu. Try to act original. Sing a different song now". The male cockroach withdrew from the scene and vanished as the ancient and primoridal act of procreation had alre3ady been completed.

Love is a decent name given to the oldest primordial act of procreation arising from the basic desire and need to sustain life on earth. Poets, film directors et al add a lot of masala and make money. Period.

When you sublimate such a basic driving force, it becomes bhakti. And it is another cup of tea.

In the four chambers of heart we can have four hundred different heroes/heroines. Only the lower chambers have lesser space and the heroes/heroines should not complain of over crowding. LOL.

The lower chambers are the ventricles..the ventricles are larger than the upper chambers(atrium).

So no overcrowding in the lower chambers.
 
Why cant a person love more than one?
Its entirely possible to love more than one person..just like we love all our children.

Marrying another after the death of a spouse does not mean we forget the earlier spouse...the spouse always remains like an app in the mind which can be activated anytime in the form of memories.

The heart has 4 chambers...one can sing..

In the chambers of my heart..many shrines I have for thee..come O life..come O love..come thou dwell with me.

The candles of my love are burning bright for thee..come O life....come O love..come thou dwell with me.
Renuka,

You cannot have love as a spouse for more than one person. Period. Period. Period. Mother, Father, Spouse, Children are more or less on the same pedestal. In the case of mother, father it is really a take relationship though you may give later. in the case of spouse it is give and take and in the case of children it is really a give though you may take later.

Generally I feel whenever "take" is there as in the case of parents and spouse you ideally have a single source, the extreme example being taking from God. Whenever "only give" is there you can have many equally just like helping the needy in the society.

So you can love all the children equally but ideally love only one man or woman
 
So are we saying that Dashratha did not love three wives?
Are we saying Draupadi did not love Pancha Pandavas?

Or Krishna did not love all those wives?


It is a bold statement to make.


Vaagmiji, In his usual styles, said that Love and sex are two different things.


We might be monogamous, but love multiple people at the same time.
We love our parents, siblings, Children etc. at the same time.
 
Renuka,

You cannot have love as a spouse for more than one person. Period. Period. Period. Mother, Father, Spouse, Children are more or less on the same pedestal. In the case of mother, father it is really a take relationship though you may give later. in the case of spouse it is give and take and in the case of children it is really a give though you may take later.

Generally I feel whenever "take" is there as in the case of parents and spouse you ideally have a single source, the extreme example being taking from God. Whenever "only give" is there you can have many equally just like helping the needy in the society.

So you can love all the children equally but ideally love only one man or woman

I disagree Sravna..
Only one who views spouse tru the lense of sex feels possesive and is unable to love more than 1 spouse.

As Prasad Ji said..Draupadi was a devoted wife to all 5 even though she loved Arjuna the most cos it was he who actually won her.

Dasharatha too loved all his wives with a soft corner for Kaikeyi.

Krishna too loved all His wives.

Muruga too loved Valli and Devasena.

These days many people divorce and remarry..they also love more than one person.

To be honest..the human is wired to love many but economically its easier being monogamous...thats all.

You should watch a video in You tube about a polyandrous community in north of india ..the woman marry all brothers in a home and she says she loves them all.

Try not to drag in sex..we can feel love.
 
Renukaji,

I note that your post has not gotten any thumbs down. Likely you have many poly-amory supporters in the forum.
 
But I agree there is no indication that the multiple wives people had, whether Pandavas or Mughals was because of love. Lust is probably a more likely cause.
 
Please understand that love can be complete with one person though certain relationships such as parent to children may be one to many. I explained the rationale in my previous post. So you are actually saying the reverse. Only sex based relationships require many. Pandavas and Draupadi relationship was an unusual one because it was not based on sex but was divine. Divine relationships are driven by higher purpose. The lens of human mind may give a misleading understanding.
 
Last edited:
Please understand that love can be complete with one person though certain relationships such as parent to children may be one to many. I explained the rationale in my previous post. So you are actually saying the reverse. Only sex based relationships require many. Pandavas and Draupadi relationship was an unusual one because it was not based on sex but was divine. Divine relationships are driven by higher purpose. The lens of human mind may give a misleading understanding.

Yes...all human relationships are divine.
Sex is only for procreation.

So a man can love all his wives and a woman can love all her husbands or any other combination.

Its all about having a spiritual outlook that the same spark of divinity is in all humans.

So we can love anyone.

Sravna..i am surprised you cant grasp this concept.
 
Yes...all human relationships are divine.
Sex is only for procreation.

So a man can love all his wives and a woman can love all her husbands or any other combination.

Its all about having a spiritual outlook that the same spark of divinity is in all humans.

So we can love anyone.

Sravna..i am surprised you cant grasp this concept.


Sometimes we do not mean what we preach.

Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam is hollow words.
 
But I agree there is no indication that the multiple wives people had, whether Pandavas or Mughals was because of love. Lust is probably a more likely cause.

Even in monogamy..lust could be the basis of marriage itself.

Lust is given a bad name but lust is the stepping stone for deep love.

Lust is a deep desire fuelled by basic human instinct to procreate to channel the energy within.

Even Devas are not spared..Ahalya and Indra lusted for each other.

Even poets describe godesses in lust dripping words but divinely written.

Lust is not entirely bad..its for the lust to maintain creation that the earth revolves around the sun.

Its for the lust to illuminate that the sun lends the earth its rays.

Shot tru the heart and you're too blame..you give LUST a bad name!
 
Renukaji,

I note that your post has not gotten any thumbs down. Likely you have many poly-amory supporters in the forum.

Cant be too sure...at times some of my carbon dated posts gets unearthed and given a thumbs down by the raider of the losts posts.
 
Dear Renuka,

I am talking of the ideal though the real world does not work that way. A husband and his wife are complements coming together for a higher purpose. The best combination is half and a half and not a half and two quarters or four quarters. The learning in the latter cases gets more difficult and there is more noise.
 
Dear Renuka,

I am talking of the ideal though the real world does not work that way. A husband and his wife are complements coming together for a higher purpose. The best combination is half and a half and not a half and two quarters or four quarters. The learning in the latter cases gets more difficult and there is more noise.

Nope..I disagree.
Actually there is no need even for another half in the real sense.

Its becos of the need for procreation one needs a partner and cultural conditioning led to marriage and economic and psychological reasons prefered monogamy.


If you remove all those basic needs of procreation.. psychosocial and economic needs you would realize that you can extend love to anyone.

Its that simple..you in fact do not even need to marry a person to feel love for him/her.

Its like the suns rays...the ray of love falls on all alike when we become a Prema Bhaskara.

This is what spirituality is all about.

I can see you are struggling to let go of attachment to having only one man one woman..the reason is becos its not easy for a man to imagine that a woman too can love many..so its easier to imagine Eka Patni Vrat so that one hopes a wife too remains Eka Pati Vrat but the truth is

अयं निज: परो वेति गणना लघुचेतसाम् ।
उदारचरितानां तु वसुधैव कुटुम्बकम् ॥

ayam nijaH paro veti gaNanaa laghuchetasaam
udaaracharitaam tu vasudhaiva kutumbakam
 
Renuka,

It is not love in general I am talking about which definitely can be shown to all but the love you have for a spouse. In my view the ideal, that is, from the spiritual point of view is one to one only.

The way to understand that love is sublime while sex is not is to understand higher reality tends towards unity whereas physical reality tends towards many.
 
I would say that the characters in Rama avatar of Vishnu show how relationships should be, whether husband-wife, father-son, mother-child, brotherhood, friendship. leader-follower and so on. So if one were to search for the ideal in relationships, Vishnu's Rama avatar is where you will find them.
 
Last edited:
Renuka,

It is not love in general I am talking about which definitely can be shown to all but the love you have for a spouse. In my view the ideal, that is, from the spiritual point of view is one to one only.

The way to understand that love is sublime while sex is not is to understand higher reality tends towards unity whereas physical reality tends towards many.

Dear Sravna...many remarry after divorce or death of spouse.

Many love a girlfriend or boyfriend..than marry another and love their spouse too.


This is where you have to apply spirituality..

1 + 1 + 1 and so on = 1.

Ekam Premam..Viprah Bahuda Vadanti.
 
Dear Sravna...many remarry after divorce or death of spouse.

Many love a girlfriend or boyfriend..than marry another and love their spouse too.


This is where you have to apply spirituality..

1 + 1 + 1 and so on = 1.

Ekam Premam..Viprah Bahuda Vadanti.

Renuka,

Spirituality says one should not blindly apply anything. It is according to the case and situation. Subtleties are there.
 
Renuka,

Spirituality says one should not blindly apply anything. It is according to the case and situation. Subtleties are there.

Spirituality also says not to be possesive of anyone be it Mama..machan or Ponjathi!
 
Dear Sravna...the day one learns to love all the same unconditionally thats the day one is truly spiritual.

Its so easy to preach but even you cant practice it.
 
Yes Renuka I am for unconditional love but love has nuances like love for parents, love for spouse and so on
 
Yes Renuka I am for unconditional love but love has nuances like love for parents, love for spouse and so on

If you dissect our emotions we can feel no difference in love for parents and spouse.

Mostly think its different becos we screw spouse!LOL
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest ads

Back
Top