Shraddha Mantram

[sangom]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp Email Share Link

Well, we all know the legend of Parasurama. His mother who at the mere admiration of the sight the shadows of Gandharvas was supposed to have lost her chastity.

By recalling the stories of moral turpitude of the present times, what purpose is going to be served?

Deviations will always be there, but to portray them in a manner as to justify them will end up throwing the society into chaos. It is like arguing that as most Indians have scant regard for traffic rules, we might abandon those altogether.

It is very unfortunate that elderly members instead of showing the deviations in a perspective as to promote ideal behaviour, blow them up as any tabloid newspaper does for titillating the readers.

Shri Swami,

You have bracketed all "elederly members". I would like to know, for my information, whether my post looks to you as not "promoting ideal behaviour".

 

[SwamiTaBra]

Shri Swami,

You have bracketed all "elederly members". I would like to know, for my information, whether my post looks to you as not "promoting ideal behaviour".

Point 1 -- Were Nanavati and his wife brahmins? If not where is the
relevance to the title?
Point 2 -- The question raised by the member jpoosha relates to legitamacy
of parentage. Nowhere in the Nanavati case such an issue came
up.
Point 3 -- Every husband living alone in distant lands to make a
livelihood will start suspecting his wife. Will it be healthy?

Why stop with only Nanavati, you could talk about Robert Mortimer- Wheeler's wife, or about the kin of Mirza Ismail's who abandoned her husband and her children to be with her lover who eventually killed her for appropriating her property, and about the Charles-Camilla-Diana-Al-Fayed affairs.

Responsibility would also imply downplaying the unhealthy behaviour and highlighting the exemplary ones.

In the salivating discussion amongst the elderly here , sadly there was nothing to highlight the exemplary ones.

With regards,
Swami

 

[sangom]

Point 1 -- Were Nanavati and his wife brahmins? If not where is the
relevance to the title?
Point 2 -- The question raised by the member jpoosha relates to legitamacy
of parentage. Nowhere in the Nanavati case such an issue came
up.
Point 3 -- Every husband living alone in distant lands to make a
livelihood will start suspecting his wife. Will it be healthy?

Why stop with only Nanavati, you could talk about Robert Mortimer- Wheeler's wife, or about the kin of Mirza Ismail's who abandoned her husband and her children to be with her lover who eventually killed her for appropriating her property, and about the Charles-Camilla-Diana-Al-Fayed affairs.

Responsibility would also imply downplaying the unhealthy behaviour and highlighting the exemplary ones.

In the salivating discussion amongst the elderly here , sadly there was nothing to highlight the exemplary ones.

With regards,
Swami

Dear Shri Swami,

I concede that you have a right to express your views.

But having said that, I feel you should be ready to allow the same right for all the other members also. Each person will look at a topic, even a sentence, in a different light and will respond accordingly.

Here, in this thread, the start was the śrāddha mantra which themselves cast doubts (so to say - this is not my view) about the fidelity of women. Then Shri Krishnamurthy in post # 19 said, "I do not know why anyone should get upset or annoyed with such mantras in our religious texts.I really appreciate the learned Scholars for understanding human behaviour and making provision in the religious texts for such a situation which may be in a few cases." He referred also to the Nanavati case. Then, naturally, as usually happens in this forum, different views/comments were posted. As you know very well, such deviations are common in this forum.

Now coming to my post #21, my argument was that Sylvia had one rule for her (she thought she could violate the fidelity norms) but could not allow the same freedom to Ahuja. She could have just kept quite, but perhaps she feared some blackmailing by Ahuja in the future, and divulged everything to her husband Nanavati. This was the main point of my post and I don't think there is anything like "highlighting unhealthy behaviour, or downplaying exemplary behaviour"; on the contrary I was saying that fidelity must be from both spouses.

You have raised 3 points of objection; my views on these are as under:-

Point 1 -- Were Nanavati and his wife brahmins? If not where is the
relevance to the title?

As I already said, the posts here do not necessarily follow the title; deviations are common and not prohibited. Secondly, when talking about infidelity - which was one aspect which came out of the discussion on the śrāddha mantra, I do not feel there is any difference between brahmin infidelity and NB infidelity. But if your case is that only brahmin women could be unfaithful, because of the insurance cover provided by the śrāddha mantra, then it is a different topic altogether.

Point 2 -- The question raised by the member jpoosha relates to legitamacy
of parentage. Nowhere in the Nanavati case such an issue came
up.

jpoosha did not refer to parentage at all. His first post was, "The meaning of shraddha mantram is very disheartening..particularly against women. I am referring to "Yanme mata pralu.....".

Can anyone shed some light as to why such a mantra is used for the homam in a shraddam and even as to why such a mantra exist, questioning what aspect of their life?? "
It was clearly the impact of the mantra on women. So, sorry, your point is way off the mark.

Point 3 -- Every husband living alone in distant lands to make a
livelihood will start suspecting his wife. Will it be healthy?

I do not accept the argument that "Every husband living alone in distant lands to make a
livelihood will start suspecting his wife.", just because some posts have been made here. There are ever so many real instances coming out in the media almost daily and, if at all, the men in foreign countries will be reading those and not these posts. If the media reports can exist, our discussions can also exist without being castigated as "unhealthy".

Why stop with only Nanavati, you could talk about Robert Mortimer- Wheeler's wife, or about the kin of Mirza Ismail's who abandoned her husband and her children to be with her lover who eventually killed her for appropriating her property, and about the Charles-Camilla-Diana-Al-Fayed affairs.
...In the salivating discussion amongst the elderly here , sadly there was nothing to highlight the exemplary ones.

Now, you are contradicting yourself because your sound judgment seems to have been overpowered by a false prudery, it seems to me. That is why your memory immediately brings back so many cases, and I suspect, you find them "salivating" as well. But, as one grows old, this "salivation" tapers down and we gain a capacity to discuss matters objectively. This capacity can also come to people of young age, for example, young male obstetricians/gynaecologists.

Responsibility would also imply downplaying the unhealthy behaviour and highlighting the exemplary ones.

Sir, this is not a school class, nor a school text-book, where the above rule is very relevant. Today, parents find that internet parental controls like netnanny are "hacked" (see here) and young kids merrily surf even adult porn sites!! And you are talking about such innocuous matters. I wonder in which world you live!!

 

[SwamiTaBra]

Respected Sir,

But having said that, I feel you should be ready to allow the same right for all the other members also.

Firstly, I don’t have the right to stop anyone from expressing his views. I’m not like the one esteemed member of this forum who throws abuses on others, but when retaliated pleads with the founder/moderated to see that one who has retaliated is censured and censored. (If you want I can cite the specific instance in a private mail.)

He referred also to the Nanavati case. Then, naturally, as usually happens in this forum, different views/comments were posted. As you know very well, such deviations are common in this forum.

Now coming to my post #21, my argument was that Sylvia had one rule for her (she thought she could violate the fidelity norms) but could not allow the same freedom to Ahuja. She could have just kept quite, but perhaps she feared some blackmailing by Ahuja in the future, and divulged everything to her husband Nanavati. This was the main point of my post and I don't think there is anything like "highlighting unhealthy behaviour, or downplaying exemplary behaviour";

The nub lies here. In what manner Nanavati case is germane to the mantra under discussion? Did Sylvia bore an illegitimate child? You could perhaps have reminded Sri. Krishnamurthy about that aspect, but went on expatiating about what she was expecting from her paramour and all that. Coming as did from someone like you was regrettable, in my view.

But if your case is that only brahmin women could be unfaithful, because of the insurance cover provided by the śrāddha mantra, then it is a different topic altogether.

In fact, the higher the position of the women in the social ladder, greater is the premium on her fidelity. Even the most die-hard critics cannot dimiss the significance of jauhar practice amongst royalty of Rajputana and the sati practice that was prevalent until a few centuries ago.

jpoosha did not refer to parentage at all. His first post was, "The meaning of shraddha mantram is very disheartening..particularly against women. I am referring to "Yanme mata pralu.....".

The question would not have arisen if the putative father and the the biological father happen to be same in all cases. Definitely the issue is about the father which you too have clarified in your post specifically on the mantra.

If the media reports can exist, our discussions can also exist without being castigated as "unhealthy".

So you would not like this forum elevated at higher pedestal and also would not be in favour of exercising restraint.

But, as one grows old, this "salivation" tapers down and we gain a capacity to discuss matters objectively.

Many of the posts by the elderly do not bear out your observations.(not necessarily in this thread).

Sir, this is not a school class, nor a school text-book, where the above rule is very relevant.

There could many viewers, quite young (in their 20s and 30s) and it is our responsibility to intill values, who by now would have familiar about porn literature. Facts are certainly to be presented in a manner that promotes a healthy society.

I am sure, you would have read Vivekananda and his views on the Indian womanhood. He did not at any instance (at least as far as I know) refer to Brihaspathi’s wife having an affair with Chandra and begetting Budhan, despite the fact that Brihaspati was a Brahmin. This is what I meant by responsibility. (you may turn around to say that I’m salivating that too; unlike few others I am not inclined to dismiss the story as as interpolation because it does not suit my line of argument).

If you imagine that the elderly members in this forum are more respected than Vivekananda, certainly you are living in a fool’s paradise.


With regards,
Swami

 

[sangom]

Respected Sir,

Firstly, I don’t have the right to stop anyone from expressing his views. I’m not like the one esteemed member of this forum who throws abuses on others, but when retaliated pleads with the founder/moderated to see that one who has retaliated is censured and censored. (If you want I can cite the specific instance in a private mail.)

Dear Shri Swami,

I would like to know exactly what you are referring to. Kindly e-mail me.

The nub lies here. In what manner Nanavati case is germane to the mantra under discussion? Did Sylvia bore an illegitimate child? You could perhaps have reminded Sri. Krishnamurthy about that aspect, but went on expatiating about what she was expecting from her paramour and all that. Coming as did from someone like you was regrettable, in my view.
In fact, the higher the position of the women in the social ladder, greater is the premium on her fidelity. Even the most die-hard critics cannot dimiss the significance of jauhar practice amongst royalty of Rajputana and the sati practice that was prevalent until a few centuries ago.

Infidelity is the first step which gives rise to illegitimate child/son. That I think is the linkage. Now with no disrespect to anyone - Sylvia or Nanavati, or any one else - has any enquiry been made as to when the Ahuja-Sylvia affair started and what the ages of Nanvati's children were then, etc. And an illegitimate son need not necessarily require an illicit extra-marital affair for a number of days or months.

The question would not have arisen if the putative father and the the biological father happen to be same in all cases. Definitely the issue is about the father

which you too have clarified in your post specifically on the mantra.

Again you seem to omit jpoosha's explicit remarks concerning how women are depicted in the light of the mantra, and not the putative father.

So you would not like this forum elevated at higher pedestal and also would not be in favour of exercising restraint.

What "higher pedestal" is can vary from person to person. Now supposing you find this of very low level it may be more appropriate for you to address a post - in this thread itself - addressed to the owner/moderators and request them to intervene. I think now you are trying to impose your standards of morality/prudery. I don't know if Shri Praveen or the moderators are of the same view.

Many of the posts by the elderly do not bear out your observations.(not necessarily in this thread).

Please see this and let us know if this is also putting this forum down into the nadir, or, it is high scriptural discussion.

There could many viewers, quite young (in their 20s and 30s) and it is our responsibility to intill values, who by now would have familiar about porn literature. Facts are certainly to be presented in a manner that promotes a healthy society.

I do not think that a discussion on infidelity etc., in a web forum like this will jeopardise the health of the society, any more than what media reports.

I am sure, you would have read Vivekananda and his views on the Indian womanhood. He did not at any instance (at least as far as I know) refer to Brihaspathi’s wife having an affair with Chandra and begetting Budhan, despite the fact that Brihaspati was a Brahmin. This is what I meant by responsibility. (you may turn around to say that I’m salivating that too; unlike few others I am not inclined to dismiss the story as as interpolation because it does not suit my line of argument).

If you imagine that the elderly members in this forum are more respected than Vivekananda, certainly you are living in a fool’s paradise.


With regards,
Swami

First of all Vivekananda is of no relevance to this forum because he was not a brahmin (your rule in Sylvia-Nanavati case). Why should you bring a NB name at all here? could you not have cited some real brahmin instead? So, you are setting one set of rules to yourself and another for the rest. I do not agree to such an approach please.

Secondly, the elderly members here are not making posts here with intentions similar to that of Vivekananda; these people are merely making their views on different issues/topics known. These are all drawn from various walks of life, different outlooks, differing view points about morality, etc. Different views will come in, just as yours is one. We have the choice to skip whatever does not suits our taste.

 

[SwamiTaBra]

Different views will come in, just as yours is one. We have the choice to skip whatever does not suits our taste.

You might as well have chosen to ignore my posts if you are not in agreement with me!!

With regards,
Swami

 

[medha.gayathri]

thought provoking and very useful discussion - many thanks

 

[B Suresh Kumar]

Great effort by MR Sangom in coming out with the Manthra and the meaning.
My personal feeling is our blind faith in our mother will never permit us to doubt her fidelity.
So the forefathers / gurus with a great foresight have included this manthra only to ensure that our oblations reached our bilogical father.
It is similar to the exceptions we write in programming languages today where we do not want the system to crash in case we do not handle an unforeseen exceptions.

 

[jpoosha]

The reply, attempt for an insight into the thought process for the mantram are quite alright, but the perceived circumstances for mantram (loaded with such a meaning) for a homam is beyond my comprehension, after all, only two couplets were required for the two homams for the pitrus..any attribute could have been taken..the question remains though ! To equate with crash proof code writing or zero error sum game..!! my question was why to enter into such territory where there could be controversary..attributes for a father/ mother are so many, an appropriate couplet invoking those would rather be satisfying..isn't it. I think aloud - wondering what Kanchi Mahaperiyaval would have said or would he have attempted to bring about a vadiga change across all practising veda pandiths to this effect.

 

[sangom]

The reply, attempt for an insight into the thought process for the mantram are quite alright, but the perceived circumstances for mantram (loaded with such a meaning) for a homam is beyond my comprehension, after all, only two couplets were required for the two homams for the pitrus..any attribute could have been taken..the question remains though ! To equate with crash proof code writing or zero error sum game..!! my question was why to enter into such territory where there could be controversary..attributes for a father/ mother are so many, an appropriate couplet invoking those would rather be satisfying..isn't it. I think aloud - wondering what Kanchi Mahaperiyaval would have said or would he have attempted to bring about a vadiga change across all practising veda pandiths to this effect.

I am not competent to say anything about the thought processes of the persons who incorporated these mantras into the ritual. But my limited feeling is that they believed that each male owed a debt to his biological parents (unless exempted by the religiously sanctioned "adoption" rite) and each person had to do the antyeshti, annual sraaddha and tarpanas. This was in conformity with the view we find in the rigveda, that the dead go to another world ruled by the king Yama and live there for ever; transmigration is not there in rigveda, although researchers sift out one or two bits here and there and try to establish that the later theory of transmigration has its roots firmly in the earliest veda. (Nor do we find the concept of hell and heaven; people on their death go to Yama's world and enjoy luxuries in proportion to the "merits" acquired by them by living in conformity with the eternal law or ritam.)

Thus directing the oblation/s in the sraaddha homa to be delivered to the biological father was, most probably seen IMHO, not as any aspersion on the mother, grandmother and great grandmother, but as an attempt to fulfil the obligation towards the biological father. If it was the question of chastising the womenfolk for being unfaithful, they would have devised ways and means for that, would and could they not - that too in a highly male-dominated society?

 

[aquaris328]

I came to this thread thinking that I will learn something exceptional but here most of the stuff was in some Asian Language that I could not understand. Wish I could so I could get some new knowledge. You won't believe how mad I 'm about Meditation. I'm doing research like passionate

 

[sangom]

I came to this thread thinking that I will learn something exceptional but here most of the stuff was in some Asian Language that I could not understand. Wish I could so I could get some new knowledge. You won't believe how mad I 'm about Meditation. I'm doing research like passionate

aquaris,

This thread is not about "meditation" but about the annual remembrance rites for the manes, which are performed by many Indians. If you search the forum threads you may find some threads about yoga, meditation, etc.