• 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.

Is Sarada Act?Best Option for women.

Status
Not open for further replies.

nachi naga

Well-known member
It is not in my hands to make sure that the rulers rule justly, strictly adhering to dharma. Sannyasins like me have nothing to do with the government. But I believe that, as the head of a Matha with the duty of protecting dharma, I have a responsibility with regard to the other two matters. How does a religious head see to it that a woman adheres to her dharma, remains true to her husband? The trends seen today are contrary tc stridharma (code of conduct for women). I have the title of "guru" and so it is my duty to warn womanhood against things that are likely to undermine their dharma. When child marriages were prevalent there was little opportunity for women to go astray. If a girl is already married before she attains puberty she will develop strong attachment for her husband. If she is not married at this age she is likely to feel mentally disturbed. But our hands are tied because of the Sarda Act.

But, if I have not entirely washed my hand of the subject, it is because of the hope that public opinion could be created against the Sarda Act and the government compelled to respect it. After all, so many other laws have been changed in response to public opinion or otherwise. Unfortunately, the attitude of parents and of women in general has become perverse. Instead of trying to conduct the marriage of their daughters in time, parents send them to co-educational colleges and later to work along with men. When I see all this I inwardly shed tears of blood: I am losing my confidence in my ability to arrest this trend.

My Duty from the Chapter "The Vedas", in Hindu Dharma : kamakoti.org:
 

aramakrishnan1

Active member
The minimum age for marriage as per law is 18 and 21 for female and male. But most of TBs don't perform marriage even at these ages. The male takes time to complete studies, engage in a job and then prepares his house before getting married. By the time, the male gets ready for marriage his age is almost in the range of 28, 29 and in some cases even 31+. In this course of time upto his readiness for marriage, everyone seeks some sort of company, many fall in love and some go out of the way to all extra-marital relations. This is the current trend and most men and women undergoes such affairs in their lifetime. Society is lacking in moralities due to these affairs and erroneous behaviour. If the parents can support their Children along with their daughter in laws, I think it is ideal to make marriages at the minimum age determined by the law. As per Paramacharya's view even this age stipulated by the govt. is contrary to the Dharmashastras.
Afterall, marriage is done to enable men and women to perform the Grihastha dharma - earn wealth, vamsa vriddhi and take care of the Brahmacharyas and Sanyasins.
I learnt of a family where at the age of 45 (and her husband at 49), a lady completed the marriage of here Son and daughter. Such a couple would get the maximum time to serve for Lord and the devotees.
 
OP
OP
nachi naga

nachi naga

Well-known member
ak,

I too believe your sentiments,but todays boys and girls dont want to depend upon parents.They want to be independent before marriage.But,acharyas view is very ancient,but it worked then.I think,by 18 girls shud get married,and do whatever studies or married life they need.Boys also regardless of career shud be married by 21.But a tall order,imho.
 

sangom

Well-known member
It is not in my hands to make sure that the rulers rule justly, strictly adhering to dharma. Sannyasins like me have nothing to do with the government. But I believe that, as the head of a Matha with the duty of protecting dharma, I have a responsibility with regard to the other two matters. How does a religious head see to it that a woman adheres to her dharma, remains true to her husband? The trends seen today are contrary tc stridharma (code of conduct for women). I have the title of "guru" and so it is my duty to warn womanhood against things that are likely to undermine their dharma. When child marriages were prevalent there was little opportunity for women to go astray. If a girl is already married before she attains puberty she will develop strong attachment for her husband. If she is not married at this age she is likely to feel mentally disturbed. But our hands are tied because of the Sarda Act.

But, if I have not entirely washed my hand of the subject, it is because of the hope that public opinion could be created against the Sarda Act and the government compelled to respect it. After all, so many other laws have been changed in response to public opinion or otherwise. Unfortunately, the attitude of parents and of women in general has become perverse. Instead of trying to conduct the marriage of their daughters in time, parents send them to co-educational colleges and later to work along with men. When I see all this I inwardly shed tears of blood: I am losing my confidence in my ability to arrest this trend.

My Duty from the Chapter "The Vedas", in Hindu Dharma : kamakoti.org:

It has been recorded by Agnihotram Ramanuja Thathachariar in his book titled "ஹிந்து மதம் எங்கே போகிறது" (Nakkiran Publications, Chennai, 2008 Edn. Pages 335-343). To summarise, in my free language, the Paramacharyal was very concerned about Sanatana Varnasrama Dharma being given protection from Governmental interference, as happened in the case of the Sarada Act. He convened a secret meting of Astikas at night in a Mandapam near Aduturai to assess their views in the matter and give a Memorandum to the Parliamentary Delegation (PD) which was coming to finalise the matters regarding independence. The Sishyas opined that it might not be proper to approach the PD in such matters. "If the Govt. makes some changes in our Personal law for betterment would it not be welcome?", they said. But Sankaracharya (S) did not agree and told Thathachari (T), "Thathachari, only you and I are left." S was of the view that although the followers were not enthusiastic, the idea should not be abandoned and he wanted T to prepare and submit the Memorandum to the PD. Immediately telegrams were sent to Delhi (the Govt.) from 100 different centres so as to give an impression that there is a widespread opinion. Then S wanted T to personally meet PD, explain what our Sanatana Varnasrama Dharma meant to us and ask for its independence from Govt. legislation. Accordingly when the PD visited The Hindu newspaper office in Madras, its then editor Sri K. Srinivasan, introduced T to the PD member Mr. Sorencen, who advised T to give a Memorandum and to meet him in Delhi. When a group of people knowledgeable in Hindu Sampradaya and Advocates went to Delhi with the Memorandum, Mr. Sorencen had gone to Assam. So, a copy was sent to him at Assam and subsequently met the PD at Delhi. Nothing happened. Then a Cabinet Delegation came from London and the Memorandum was given to it. The Cabinet Delegation said that it was a matter for the Govt. of Independent India to prepare a Constitution and it was for them to include such guarantee under the Constitution. So, T with a small group, met Sardar Vallabbhai Patel who said, "Your views about Sanatana matham (religion) and the matams is correct....but the matadhipatis enjoy royal comforts with their disciples and do not have any social involvement, especially in the advancement of harijans. Ask them to do that first."

T replied that things might have been like that in the past but the Matadhipatis will get socially involved in the emerging free India, but Patel did not agree.

S, when told about Patel's reaction, replied that what Patel said was true and wanted T to meet Nehru next. After hearing T for a few minutes and after glancing through the Memorandum, Nehru replied, "If you want to talk about religion, you go outside from this nation. We don't allow speciality to any religion. Here all are equal...Don't talk to me about religion, understand..."

S then wanted to unite all the Matams of the sub-continent and exhort the Matadhipatis to leave their secluded comfortable lives and get involved more and more in social advancement schemes (as suggested by Patel) and T put in a lot of effort to contact the innumerable Matams and convene a conference in Delhi. One Shri Kulittalai Annadurai Ayyangar who was a staunch devotee of S came forward to convene the conference. He and T went personally to almost all Matams including one in Sindh, Karachi. Finally at the appointed venue for the conference the only Matadhipati who came to attend was the one from Karachi, no one else came!

Thus ended Maha Periyaval's attempt to safeguard the Sanatana Varnashrama Dharma.
 
Last edited:
OP
OP
nachi naga

nachi naga

Well-known member
sangom,
It has been recorded by Agnihotram Ramanuja Thathachariar in his book titled "ஹிந்து மதம் எங்கே போகிறது" (Nakkiran Publications, Chennai, 2008 Edn. Pages 335-343). To summarise, in my free language, the Paramacharyal was very concerned about Sanatana Varnasrama Dharma being given protection from Governmental interference, as happened in the case of the Sarada Act. He convened a secret meting of Astikas at night in a Mandapam near Aduturai to assess their views in the matter and give a Memorandum to the Parliamentary Delegation (PD) which was coming to finalise the matters regarding independence. The Sishyas opined that it might not be proper to approach the PD in such matters. "If the Govt. makes some changes in our Personal law for betterment would it not be welcome?", they said. But Sankaracharya (S) did not agree and told Thathachari (T), "Thathachari, only you and I are left." S was of the view that although the followers were not enthusiastic, the idea should not be abandoned and he wanted T to prepare and submit the Memorandum to the PD. Immediately telegrams were sent to Delhi (the Govt.) from 100 different centres so as to give an impression that there is a widespread opinion. Then S wanted T to personally meet PD, explain what our Sanatana Varnasrama Dharma meant to us and ask for its independence from Govt. legislation. Accordingly when the PD visited The Hindu newspaper office in Madras, its then editor Sri K. Srinivasan, introduced T to the PD member Mr. Sorencen, who advised T to give a Memorandum and to meet him in Delhi. When a group of people knowledgeable in Hindu Sampradaya and Advocates went to Delhi with the Memorandum, Mr. Sorencen had gone to Assam. So, a copy was sent to him at Assam and subsequently met the PD at Delhi. Nothing happened. Then a Cabinet Delegation came from London and the Memorandum was given to it. The Cabinet Delegation said that it was a matter for the Govt. of Independent India to prepare a Constitution and it was for them to include such guarantee under the Constitution. So, T with a small group, met Sardar Vallabbhai Patel who said, "Your views about Sanatana matham (religion) and the matams is correct....but the matadhipatis enjoy royal comforts with their disciples and do not have any social involvement, especially in the advancement of harijans. Ask them to do that first."

i think T has written a true picture that was existing.Patel asking gurus to involve in social emancipation schemes is also a welcome suggestion,which younger generation gurus took up to reforming sanathnana dharma.so,patel is at peace with progress of gurus initiatives.

T replied that things might have been like that in the past but the Matadhipatis will get socially involved in the emerging free India, but Patel did not agree.

which also have happened,as is evident.

S, when told about Patel's reaction, replied that what Patel said was true and wanted T to meet Nehru next. After hearing T for a few minutes and after glancing through the Memorandum, Nehru replied, "If you want to talk about religion, you go outside from this nation. We don't allow speciality to any religion. Here all are equal...Don't talk to me about religion, understand..."

nehru has been quoted elsewhere for his secular credentials.owing to his views,christanity is the fastest growing religion in india followed by islam.within few centuries,these two religions will replace sanathna dharma,as the values getting eroded is visibly seen in the nation.

S then wanted to unite all the Matams of the sub-continent and exhort the Matadhipatis to leave their secluded comfortable lives and get involved more and more in social advancement schemes (as suggested by Patel) and T put in a lot of effort to contact the innumerable Matams and convene a conference in Delhi. One Shri Kulittalai Annadurai Ayyangar who was a staunch devotee of S came forward to convene the conference. He and T went personally to almost all Matams including one in Sindh, Karachi. Finally at the appointed venue for the conference the only Matadhipati who came to attend was the one from Karachi, no one else came!

Thus ended Maha Periyaval's attempt to safeguard the Sanatana Varnashrama Dharma.

having an intent to unite and having failed to do so at that time,owing to presence of british nostalgia,could also be one of the reasons.maha periaval worked tirelessly from the age of 13 to safeguard sanathana dharma,however outdated some values may seem to be.

in todays world,girls not marrying boys and vice versa, at appropriate age,is a source of irritation.by following an age old custom,which is no longer relevant,is a good progress.but some repurcussions are being felt.imagine a man or woman,enjoying kama sutra pleasure at ages of 26-30?woman being virgins till marriage at least upto age 24?if they arein professional courses!imagine boys start frequenting brothel's to satiate a bodily need?
 

Nara

Well-known member
... Society is lacking in moralities due to these affairs and erroneous behaviour.

Hi,

Moral acts get defined in terms of sexual relationships because it is men who got to define what is moral and immoral, including the great Thiruvalluvar. Morality in its essence is about love, compassion, justice, freedom, respect, and such qualities. It is downright silly to define morality on the basis of the circumstances of who sleeps with whom.

Cheers!
 

Nara

Well-known member
Hello folks,

I think everyone should read this blog post by Shri vikrama. It is a reproduction of an e-mail he received from one தனுரானந்தா with the title "சற்றே சிந்தியுங்கள்"

This article is another case of -- it is all the girl's fault. The girl is weak both physically and mentally. She needs to be protected. So what should we do, get her hooked up before she can dare to think for herself. Tie her down like a cow to a post. Provide a drain for her to channel her uncontrollable emotions. Our caste is not just one among hundred, it is special and must be protected by controlling the boy-crazy girls. Taken straight from Cho I think.

There are things that are more important than this hallowed caste. We need to go beyond this caste fence and try to think what the girls really want. I suspect they don't want to be treated like their mothers were treated by her in-laws and her own husband in many instances.

Treating girls as human beings with a vibrant mind and showing love and support for all her choices will yield better results than this "Taliban" type approach.

I give below three particularly vile statements from the article.

  • பெண் இயற்கையிலேயே பலவீனமானவள். உடலாலும் உள்ளத்தாலும் பருவமடைந்த பெண் தனக்கு ஒரு பாதுகாப்பு வேண்டும் என்று உணர்கிறாள்.
  • இந்தப் பையன் கறுப்பு, அந்தப் பையன் நெட்டை என்று உங்கள் பெண் நொட்டாங்கு சொல்லக் கூடிய துணிச்சல் வருவதற்குள் உங்கள் விருப்பப்படி ஒரு சிறந்த வரனை நிச்சயம் செய்து விடுங்கள்.
  • ஜாதிகள் பல உண்டு இந்த நாட்டில். நூற்றோடு நூற்றி ஒன்றாக எண்ணப்படுவது அல்ல நமது ஜாதி.
Cheers!
 
Last edited:
OP
OP
nachi naga

nachi naga

Well-known member
Hello folks,

I think everyone should read this blog post by Shri vikrama. It is a reproduction of an e-mail he received from one தனுரானந்தா with the title "சற்றே சிந்தியுங்கள்"

This article is another case of -- it is all the girl's fault. The girl is weak both physically and mentally. She needs to be protected. So what should we do, get her hooked up before she can dare to think for herself. Tie her down like a cow to a post. Provide a drain for her to channel her uncontrollable emotions. Our caste is not just one among hundred, it is special and must be protected by controlling the boy-crazy girls. Taken straight from Cho I think.

There are things that are more important than this hallowed caste. We need to go beyond this caste fence and try to think what the girls really want. I suspect they don't want to be treated like their mothers were treated by her in-laws and her own husband in many instances.

Treating girls as human beings with a vibrant mind and showing love and support for all her choices will yield better results than this "Taliban" type approach.

I give below three particularly vile statements from the article.

  • பெண் இயற்கையிலேயே பலவீனமானவள். உடலாலும் உள்ளத்தாலும் பருவமடைந்த பெண் தனக்கு ஒரு பாதுகாப்பு வேண்டும் என்று உணர்கிறாள்.
  • இந்தப் பையன் கறுப்பு, அந்தப் பையன் நெட்டை என்று உங்கள் பெண் நொட்டாங்கு சொல்லக் கூடிய துணிச்சல் வருவதற்குள் உங்கள் விருப்பப்படி ஒரு சிறந்த வரனை நிச்சயம் செய்து விடுங்கள்.
  • ஜாதிகள் பல உண்டு இந்த நாட்டில். நூற்றோடு நூற்றி ஒன்றாக எண்ணப்படுவது அல்ல நமது ஜாதி.
Cheers!

yes nara,women have been repressed by our community of tamils and globally also women are shabily treated.men are goons including me.:clock:
 

sangom

Well-known member
In my view men and women are of the same kind. It is true that women were kept repressed by men for ages. Now is a transition stage; soon women will have the upper hand and will start repressing the menfolk. That seems to be inevitable. In this sort of a global situation, to wail about our microscopic TB community or B community and to invent schemes and methods to bring back the golden age of male chauvinism, is just laughable. Is it not better to swim along with the tide?
 
OP
OP
nachi naga

nachi naga

Well-known member
sangom,
In my view men and women are of the same kind. It is true that women were kept repressed by men for ages. Now is a transition stage; soon women will have the upper hand and will start repressing the menfolk. That seems to be inevitable. In this sort of a global situation, to wail about our microscopic TB community or B community and to invent schemes and methods to bring back the golden age of male chauvinism, is just laughable. Is it not better to swim along with the tide?

i reAlly dont think women will take revenge on men,for having them repressed for eons.becoz,women by and large love with their core,as an instinctive gift,as most women breast feed naturally to nourish a life.

male chauvinism will stay for a long time,as men will never ever allow willingly to let the upper hand go away.some may do crudely rudely while some may do it very sophisticated manner.regarding the sarada act itself,i think our political leaders did take on the religious leaders on a big way,and won the battle of the day but not the war as yet,imho.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top
Thank you for visiting TamilBrahmins.com

You seem to have an Ad Blocker on.

We depend on advertising to keep our content free for you. Please consider whitelisting us in your ad blocker so that we can continue to provide the content you have come here to enjoy.

Alternatively, consider upgrading your account to enjoy an ad-free experience along with numerous other benefits. To upgrade your account, please visit the account upgrades page

You can also donate financially if you can. Please Click Here on how you can do that.

I've Disabled AdBlock    No Thanks