Arranged marriage + related cow trading market

[Bongosamaj]

Btw....can you define "love", which now a days most of the anglicized Indians living abroad mention in every arguement.

Fairly simple concept ( in broad general terms): You meet ---> you are attracted to each other----> you are patient----> you find out stuff with each other and take sexuality to the level you are comfortable with at certain stages in relationship---> start living together----> get married---> have kids. More or less the same concept as any free-thinking human being would adopt.

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.

Err no, i have mixed up my sources a few time but i have NOT said anything that does not occur in there. As per richa, mandala- i don't remember off the top of my head- but i am SURE Indian scriptures give women the right to divorce- swami vivekananda himself wrote about divorce not being anti-hindu and my understanding of hinduism is predominantly from vivekananda. And to be honest, i don't think there is a SINGLE source of hinduism as credible as Vivkenanda in the last 500+ years of Indian history.

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

nontheless, you are INCORRECT about divorce. It is NOT against Dharma to leave a man/leave a woman were they incompatible with you or did something wrong. And kindly do not speak for all Dharmic traditions. I know for a fact that divorce is not illegal in Buddhism, neither is it seen as an affliction. You certainly do not understand an iota ot Buddhism so i don't know what gave you the right to speak about Dharma. There is FACTUAL EVIDENCE that divorce was practiced throughout India (pre-islamic india) from as early as 800 BCE. THAT is far more evident of our culture than some mythology books you've taken to interpreting the same way the muslim interprets the koran ( as in all true, written word of God, yadda yadda nonsense). You CAN divorce a murderer for being a criminal, you can divorce someone for being incompatible, etc etc. if there is divorce (which there most definitely is), there is NO QUESTION of marriage being inviolate. Its just that simple. That is simply hinduvta brahmanism myth (aka, twisted by brahmin interpretation of the most nonsensical kind).

[Bongosamaj]

Only a few confused Indians, not the one with strong roots in Dharma.

Sorry but that is nonsense. Every indian i've talked to will tell you the same : the concept of arranged marriage and pure marriage-ads and comparing education/salary etc. and PURELY material means is the DOMINANT form of marriage in India today.

Marriage is essential part of Grihasth-Ashram.

no. Love is. A joyless marriage is destructive, a lovely live-together is perfectly fine.

Sex-Lust is just a part of broader concept of love.

It is the chingari that lights the fire. Simple as. When you got a huge bonfire going, the chingaari is insignificant in comparison but nonetheless, essential and the FIRST STEP. Sexual attraction-lust is the similar 'chingari' to the much more broader concept of 'love' in a marital sense.

Sex is NOT the only thing behind marriage

nobody said it was.

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.

Sonny, adverts to marriage in paper outlinining material requirements are not just in english newspapers, they are in the most basic hindi,bengali,tamil, etc. newspapers. As per dowry- what nonsense ? Buddha, Mahavira and Shankaracharya THEMSELVES argued against dowry- proving that its roots in hinduism are before that of colonialism, islam, etc etc.

In reality arranged marriages are MOST successful with LEAST divorce rates.

i don't consider divorce rates as any indication to whether a marriage is successful or not. I look at the atmosphere around the house and the positives the marriage brings overall. Divorce in arranged marriage societies are very low because half the f*cking arranged marriages are in muslim countries, where you cannot divorce anyways if you are a woman ( guys dont care- they get fed up after 3 women). Plus even in India, japan etc where arranged marriages are still in vogue, there is HUGE social pressure not to divorce. So obviously, there is going to be less divorce in such societies. In reality, I have seen TONS of arranged marriages AND love-marriages and i have already told you folks- they fail/succeed more or less the same % of time because ultimately whether the marriage works or not depends on the husband and wife.

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.

Yeah. 'Son, go fall in love with the girl we are going to marry you off to'. How f*cking cowardly.

At least that happened with me and many others whom I know are successfully living happy life in so called arranged marriage.

So ? You have a happy life does not mean the method/reason behind arranged marriage is sound. As i said, success/failure of marriage does not really depend on arranged/love angle- it simply depends on how the couple understands & loves each other,which is why the success/failure rate of both are fairly the same from my perspective. You and your missus are happy not because your way is the only way, it is because you went along with it and clicked anyways. Simple as that.

"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.

Err no. Its simply because big families = far more friction involved.

It's not the "morality", but the twisted concept of sexuality in western perspective.

You have no idea of the west, do you ? Have you ever been to the west ? Do you live in the west ? The idea of west's sexuality is FAR ethical, humane, logical and natural. Not to mention, it isn't cowardly like 'fall in love with the one you are stuck with' idiocy. This is why western nations have far less STD problems than your 'precious dharmic India'. Because your way is neither dharmic and nor is it free from hypocrasy.

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.

That is mere speculation. You have no way of knowing. Otherwise, please show me where exactly you found the reason behind the building of Khajuraho. For, finding written work of the Chandelas would be a great historic discovery, given the scarcity of their own written history. Please leave such speculations outside the ballroom. Khajuraho is a temple celebrating sex. Lots and lots of different kinds of sex- including group sex. That is a fact.

Your obssession with "sensual" pleasure and "sense" gratification as the ONLY reason for "SEX" is against Dharma.

My obsession isnt with sex, my obsession is not to chicken out and take the cowardly way of getting wive mail-ordered from India. Simple as that.

Talk about Tantra and Sex, you have no idea that it is NOT a Sex, but symbolizes Shiva and Shakti union for Creation.

Tantra is all about spirituality THROUGH sex. Entire f*cking tantra is through sex.

I am not suprised if west considers Shiva and Shakti as some "Sex" symbol.

you arnt talking to a western grown man here, you are talking to an Indian. Try the western line somewhere else- i have seen both the worlds, you have not and you are wrong about the west. That is very simple, really.

[Bongosamaj]

Oh and you forgot Kamasutra. I have an entire PDF collection of Kama sutra right on my computer. If you want, i can send you a copy. Read it, then talk about what is/is not in our culture. It is a FACT that our ancestors in the peak of our known history- maurya to kushan to gupta to pala to cholas were FAR more liberal about sexuality, they were FAR closer to the WESTERN moral ideal (which is far more dharmic in its concept) than what you perceive as Dharmic- which is nothing more than Abrhamic mindset of complete inflexibility on mating rituals, purely arbitarily enforced.

[jaideep]

offf. so much so for sexuality talk...being born an indian male or female is a curse in itself...the westerners seem to be lucky that they dont have this arranged vs love wala jhamela...main to bolta hoon "single raho sukhi raho"