Ram Posted October 7, 2007 Posted October 7, 2007 thank you mr sriram...who in the F!#@$ hell says that love marriage does not exist in rural india...:giggle: So , how long did you visit this forum before registering ? :D
CricketIndia Posted October 7, 2007 Posted October 7, 2007 i am a better indian than u BRitons.......try to resolve those F*** issues of poverty, pollution, corruption instead of discussing the pros and cons of arranged marriages and love marriages dude...../
jaideep Posted October 7, 2007 Posted October 7, 2007 --------try to resolve those F*** issues of poverty, pollution, corruption ,,--------- as is said earlier mr neta...this is neither the forum nor the thread to resolve those issues...dont deviate from the topic...u r not going to solve those topics by raving and ranting abt them...if you have the B@$$S, go and do it ..:finger:dont just sit and shout from the rooftops ...remember "empty vessels sound the loudest" and also rememember this is the forum for arranged vs love marriage :yay:
CricketIndia Posted October 7, 2007 Posted October 7, 2007 arranged marriage and love marriage r not the topics to discuss in a forum....we have better issues.....u can romance around as much as u want but the fact is that i know u don't have the B***s to do that either !
jaideep Posted October 8, 2007 Posted October 8, 2007 speaking of b!@#s ,I dont think u have "A BAT" either...
fineleg Posted October 8, 2007 Posted October 8, 2007 This CricketIndia is a great joker who thinks he/she knows better than everyone else :D
jaideep Posted October 8, 2007 Posted October 8, 2007 hey cricket india...ru osama bin laden..????? :hysterical::cantstop:
jaideep Posted October 9, 2007 Posted October 9, 2007 hey ..cricket india where ru??...did u eventually have the B!#!S for love marriage or did u buy a BAT to use it after ur arranger marriage..!!!!:haha:...:hysterical::hysterical:
Gaurav Posted October 9, 2007 Author Posted October 9, 2007 relax people... dont go overboard Tera doste hai kya :tounge_smile: Tera dost hamara dost.
fineleg Posted October 10, 2007 Posted October 10, 2007 Some good quotes that I heard: Marriage is about finally finding the one special person that you want to annoy for the rest of your life. There success metric is easy now :-) Another quote: It is not how compatible you are, but how you deal with incompatibility that will make a marriage successful (I think marirs is right on target :D)
Lurker Posted October 10, 2007 Posted October 10, 2007 Another quote: It is not how compatible you are, but how you deal with incompatibility that will make a marriage successful (I think marirs is right on target :D) That is so fatalistic atitude FL... :confused_smile: Life isnt so bad you know...and us men we are just wonderful :shades_smile: so cheer up.
apocalypse Posted October 11, 2007 Posted October 11, 2007 Tera doste hai kya :tounge_smile: Tera dost hamara dost. dost hote to aisa nahin karte
sandtest Posted October 11, 2007 Posted October 11, 2007 I recommend arranged marriage thru practical experience.
Bongosamaj Posted October 11, 2007 Posted October 11, 2007 In this day and age, arranged marriage = pretty lame. Now, we are neither under the opression of the muslim rulers or the brits. We have all the chance in the world to get to know someone or fall in love- so people should have the balls and do that, instead of going for a less fun option that is no more/less likely to succeed anyways ( arranged marriage). It is far more wholesome and passionate relationship when you are with someone who YOU PICKED AND WHO PICKED YOU rather than fall in fall in love with someone PICKED FOR YOU and that you don't know. Especially, if you are going to come to the west, you better be over 30 and show an arranged marriage. if you are in your 20s or lower and got arranged married, you will have problems having a fun time in the community and making good close friends from all over. For most people the world over think its rather lame to sit around and pick a guy on income/girl on looks or some completely arbitary criteria ( the prime criteria to marriage is and always will be PERSONALITY AND ATTRACTION) instead of backing your own personality/charm etc to find someone interested. And I can't say i'd contest this perspective much either- for i know it to be true. Most guys i know from India who've gotten arranged marriage are utterly devoid of personaity, individuality and any common sense/idea on how to interact with the fairer sex. Ofcourse there were exceptions to this , but arranged marriage, form my perspective, has always looked like 'the loser's way out' in our zamanaa. Afterall, we arnt talking about dada-dadi's pre-independence days here. I consider marriage to be a pretty arbitary and external validation for the deep bond of two (or more) souls. As such, i could never contemplate getting that validation done with someone I don't even KNOW the personality of- and that stuff takes time, period. You don't find out wtf a person really is like till you date them for several months or are friends for year or more. A photo, 3-4 'meeting sessions' and a couple of 'dates after marriage date has already been fixed' seems like a rather grand insult to the concept of 'being with one you love'. Its much more of 'loving the one you are already stuck with'.
sandtest Posted October 11, 2007 Posted October 11, 2007 According to scripture of Vedas, a Hindu marriage is indissolvable in life. This should be read with a very broad mind and healthy philosophy about life in Grihastha-Ashram. In Dharmic traditions we never look at marriage in "materialistic" ways as against propagated by abrahamic religions. Hindus regard marriage as a sacrament and not just "a contract" between two persons of opposite sex. What is matchless about a Hindu alliance is that it's a union of two families through two individual souls...yes, in most Indian weddings, two "familes" get married and not just two individuals. Talking about Womens right to choose her husband, Indian history is a witness to the fact that time and again Indian princesses chose their life mates through "Swayamvaras".
Gaurav Posted October 11, 2007 Author Posted October 11, 2007 Right on the money there Bongo :two_thumbs_up:
Gaurav Posted October 11, 2007 Author Posted October 11, 2007 According to scripture of Vedas, a Hindu marriage is indissolvable in life. This should be read with a very broad mind and healthy philosophy about life in Grihastha-Ashram. In Dharmic traditions we never look at marriage in "materialistic" ways as against propagated by abrahamic religions. Hindus regard marriage as a sacrament and not just "a contract" between two persons of opposite sex. What is matchless about a Hindu alliance is that it's a union of two families through two individual souls...yes, in most Indian weddings, two "familes" get married and not just two individuals. Talking about Womens right to choose her husband, Indian history is a witness to the fact that time and again Indian princesses chose their life mates through "Swayamvaras". Theory is one thing and reality is another :D
Bongosamaj Posted October 11, 2007 Posted October 11, 2007 According to scripture of Vedas, a Hindu marriage is indissolvable in life.Nowhere in the vedas does it say that marriage should be arranged and not out of love. And no, the Vedas DO NOT say that marriage is indissolvable in the lifetime. The Vedas make mentions the woman's right to divorce- hence showing for a FACT that it does not consider marriage to be indissolvable. In Dharmic traditions we never look at marriage in "materialistic" ways as against propagated by abrahamic religions.Total nonsense. Indians ( the largest followers of Dharmic faiths) look at materialistic things far more than the 'west of abrahamic religions'. Most christians in the west i know of are actually love-marriage induced. Its the 'precious dharmic ones' that fill newspapers with stupid materialistic adverts that are often assinine, innane and stupid for marriage criterias. What is matchless about a Hindu alliance is that it's a union of two families through two individual souls...yes, in most Indian weddings, two "familes" get married and not just two individuals.Which is why hindu marriages either work out well or is one helluva unescapable nightmare. Marriage is and should be between individuals. Not families like our 'tradition' (NOT SCRIPTURES) imply. That is just recipe for disaster. And we all know of the never-ending 'saans-bahu' saagas in 99% of Indian households. Talking about Womens right to choose her husband, Indian history is a witness to the fact that time and again Indian princesses chose their life mates through "Swayamvaras".Indian history is also a witness to the fact that our amazing, highly civilized and high flying ancestors were far similar to the WESTERN concept of marriage, sexuality and love TODAY than our dumba$$ed idea of marriage, morality and sexuality. Khajuraho Temples, Kama shastra and Tantra are proof enough of how much more liberated our ancestors were and at the same time, how cowardly, deadbeat and two-faced our current marriage culture is.
sandtest Posted October 11, 2007 Posted October 11, 2007 Nowhere in the vedas does it say that marriage should be arranged and not out of love. Did I say that??. Btw....can you define "love", which now a days most of the anglicized Indians living abroad mention in every arguement. And no, the Vedas DO NOT say that marriage is indissolvable in the lifetime. The Vedas make mentions the woman's right to divorce- hence showing for a FACT that it does not consider marriage to be indissolvable. Divorce?....what is the Richa, Mandala, Sukta from vedas where it is mentioned?? You have been proved wrong SEVERAL times here about your little knowledge of Vedanta. And it should be made amply clear that Dharmic traditions NEVER consider marriage as a Contract hence there is NO question of divorce or cancelling the contract, it's a Biblical and Quranic concept which has been spitted on our face by Mclualay and Max Mueller interpretations of Dharma during British India and their Marxian supporters. Total nonsense. Indians ( the largest followers of Dharmic faiths) look at materialistic things far more than the 'west of abrahamic religions'. Only a few confused Indians, not the one with strong roots in Dharma. Marriage is essential part of Grihasth-Ashram. Sex-Lust is just a part of broader concept of love. Sex is NOT the only thing behind marriage. It seems as the most important thing for people like us because of our age (and rightly so), but there is lot more than just making sex in marraige. Most christians in the west i know of are actually love-marriage induced. Its the 'precious dharmic ones' that fill newspapers with stupid materialistic adverts that are often assinine, innane and stupid for marriage criterias. They are not dharmic but anglicized Indians....and dowry in our north India is one worst thing got radicalized during colonial era. It's not Dharma. Which is why hindu marriages either work out well or is one helluva unescapable nightmare. Practically you are wrong, it's not "either or" situtation here. In reality arranged marriages are MOST successful with LEAST divorce rates. And in present time, at least as far as I know people give full freedom to boy and girl to interact and know each other before marraige eventhough it's arranged. At least that happened with me and many others whom I know are successfully living happy life in so called arranged marriage. Marriage is and should be between individuals. Not families like our 'tradition' (NOT SCRIPTURES) imply. That is just recipe for disaster. And we all know of the never-ending 'saans-bahu' saagas in 99% of Indian households. "Saans-bahu" sagas exist because of selfishness which creeped in, instead of "selfless" values which has been expected from members of family and exhorted by Vedas and Upanishad. Marriage IS between individuals but families provide sufficiency and support in time of need and care. And this is very true even in modern time. Indian history is also a witness to the fact that our amazing, highly civilized and high flying ancestors were far similar to the WESTERN concept of marriage, sexuality and love TODAY than our dumba$ idea of marriage, morality and sexuality. It's not the "morality", but the twisted concept of sexuality in western perspective. Khajuraho Temples, Kama shastra and Tantra are proof enough of how much more liberated our ancestors were and at the same time, how cowardly, deadbeat and two-faced our current marriage culture is. Khajuraho temples were created to divert peoples mind towards sex to increase reporduction of offsprings since during that time people were moving more and more towards Bhakti and thus danger for population decline. Your obssession with "sensual" pleasure and "sense" gratification as the ONLY reason for "SEX" is against Dharma. Talk about Tantra and Sex, you have no idea that it is NOT a Sex, but symbolizes Shiva and Shakti union for Creation. I am not suprised if west considers Shiva and Shakti as some "Sex" symbol.
Recommended Posts