From Mon Oct 4 17:14:37 1999
Delivered-To: listsaver-of-agathiyar@egroups.com
Mailing-List: contact agathiyar-owner@egroups.com
X-Mailing-List: agathiyar@egroups.com
X-URL: http://www.egroups.com/list/agathiyar/
Received: (listserv 1.262); by m5; 05 Oct 1999 00:17:43 -0000
Reply-To: agathiyar@egroups.com
Delivered-To: listsaver-egroups-agathiyar@egroups.com
Received: (qmail 20337 invoked from network); 5 Oct 1999 00:17:38 -0000
Received: from iron.singnet.com.sg (165.21.7.29) by qh.egroups.com with SMTP; 5 Oct 1999 00:17:38 -0000
Received: from sanjay01 (qtns03308.singnet.com.sg [165.21.168.18]) by iron.singnet.com.sg (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with SMTP id IAA12437 for ; Tue, 5 Oct 1999 08:17:34 +0800 (SGT)
Message-ID: <004301bf0ec3$85ced700$12a815a5@sanjay01>
From: "sankar"
To:
Date: Tue, 5 Oct 1999 07:52:30 +0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.1
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3
Subject: [agathiyar] Re: Manusmriti and Women
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 2433


Dear AgaSthiyars/Mr. Mani

This posting was interesting.
More so because I found some
peculiarity.
Looks like Indian Law is based
on Manusmriti.
It was shocking to me how women
are considered in Manu sashtram.

Switching to Thmizh for convenience:-)-----

சிலப்பதிகாரத்திலும் ஒருத்திக்கு
ஒருவன் தானே தவிர ஒருவனுக்கு
ஒருத்தி இல்லையே.

இராமாயணத்தில் சற்று பரவாயில்லையென்று
ஆறுதல் அடைய முடியுமா என்றால் முடியாது,
அந்த இராமனே தீக்குளிப்பு
வைத்தான் சீதைக்கு.
ஏன் அவனும் தானே தனியாய் காட்டில்
இருந்தான். சீதை கூறியிருந்தாலும்
குளித்திருப்பானோ?!:-)
காட்டில் ,சோகத்தில் இருந்தான் என்று
வேண்டுமானால் சொல்லலாம்:-)
மொத்தத்தில் மனைவியிடம் நம்பிக்கை
இருந்தும் உலகுக்கு உணர்த்த
நினைத்து செய்தான் போலும்.

மகாகவி பாரதிக்கு முன்னர் யாரும்
'பொதுவில் வைப்போம்' என்று
பேசியதாய்த் தெரியவில்லை.
இருந்தால் அறிய ஆசை.
இதனாலேயே கூட பாரதி
உச்சத்திற்கு உயர்ந்து விடுகிறான்.

வித்தியாசமான அஞ்சலை அனுப்பி
படிக்கத்தந்தமைக்கு மீண்டும் நன்றி.

அன்புடன்,
ஜெயந்தி.
Date: Saturday, October 02, 1999 4:35 AM
Subject: [agathiyar] Manusmriti and Women


>>>From an opinion piece in the Times of India at:
>http://www.timesofindia.com/021099/02edit5.htm
>
>Is the Tamil notion of Karpu much different from
>the fidelity that Manusmriti demands from women?
>Kovalan of CilapathikAram who sought the company of
>women even in Madurai (supposedly after repentance)
>seems to have behaved like most other "normal" men
>of his period. And yet, the same period seems to have
>demanded "Karpu" neRi only from women. Isn't this
>too a patriarchal notion?
>
>Mani M. Manivannan
>Newark, CA, USA
>
>-------------
>
>The Speaking Tree: Men Do Not Revere But Fear Women
>By GEETANJALI GANGOLI
>
>THE Manusmriti continues to be relevant for feminists today, given that the
>codes of conduct prescribed for men and women are of continued relevance in
>contemporary India. The Manusmriti, dated between the second century BC and
>the second century AD, was written in order to consolidate and protect a
>brahmanical world view. As such, it aims to cover a range of human behaviour
>of which gender relations form a significant part.
>
>The Manusmriti is well known for its misogynist views. Women are considered
>as being unfit for independence, and needing constant surveillance. (IX 3).
>They are denied access to upanayana (initiation), the central ritual for a
>brahmin. They are considered stupid, incapable of keeping secrets and
>potentially promiscuous. ``Good looks do not matter to them, nor do they
>care about youth; `A man!' they say and enjoy sex with him, whether he is
>good looking or ugly.'' (IX.14). Lack of fidelity to the husband, however,
>is seen as the worst possible transgression.'' A woman who is unfaithful to
>her husband is an object of reproach in this world: "She is reborn in the
>womb of a jackal and is tormented by the diseases born of her evil.'' (V.
>164)
>
>For women, marriage is considered the equivalent to initiation, serving her
>husband and household chores as equivalent to living with a guru and the
>rites of fire. Thus, while men attain salvation through study, broadening
>the intellect and a one time ritual, women have to slave in the home all
>their lives for the same. The spaces available to women are reduced further
>by their lack of rights over parental property, as the following passage
>brings out: ``A woman's property is traditionally regarded as of six sorts:
>what was given in front of the (marriage) fire, on the bridal procession, or
>as a token of affection, and what she got from her brother, mother or
>father.'' (IX. 194)
>
>Within marriage, the husband has complete rights over the wife's body. The
>woman compared to a field, and the man to be the seed. There is little
>controversy about which is more important. ``Of the seed and the womb, the
>seed is said to be more important, for the offspring of all living beings
>are marked by the mark of the seed.'' (IX. 35)
>
>The laws of Manu also focus on caste and sexual taboos. Sexual relations
>transgressing caste divisions are repugnant and unforgivable. ``No
>redemption is prescribed for a man who drinks the saliva from the lips of a
>servant woman, or is tainted by her breath or begets a son in her.'' (III.
>19) However, the punishment for such acts are less serious when committed by
>men of `higher' castes on servant women than when `lower' caste men cohabit
>with a brahmin woman. ``A man of the servant class who cohabits with someone
>of the twice born castes, guarded or unguarded, loses his sexual member and
>all his property if the person was unguarded, and his entire body and
>property if the person was guarded. (VII. 374).
>
>Ingrained in the laws is a deep fear of women and women's sexuality. While
>women are given semi-divine status as mothers, their bodies are seen as
>fearful. A menstruating woman appears to bring to the fore these fears, as
>this passage reveals. ``A man who has sex with a woman awash in menstrual
>blood loses his wisdom, brilliant energy, strength, eyesight, and long
>life.(IV. 41) It is further laid down that a priest should not look at a
>woman putting on make up, rubbing oil on her body, undressed, or giving
>birth. This would rob him of his potential for ``brilliant energy''. (IV.
>44)
>
>Combined with this fear, there is a sense of hopelessness in trying to
>control women. The passages regarding the need for control and early
>marriage of women notwithstanding, the laws also bemoan the difficulties in
>doing so. ``No man is able to guard a woman entirely by force, but they can
>be guarded by using these means; he should keep her busy amassing and
>spending money, engaged in purification, attending to her duty, cooking
>food, and looking after the furniture.'' (IX.10-11). The Manusmriti laments
>that even by these efforts, women cannot be controlled. ``By running after
>men like whores, by their fickle minds, and by their natural lack of
>affection, these women are unfaithful to their husbands even when they are
>zealously guarded here.'' (IX.15)
>
>In spite of the oft quoted passage that orders men to revere women
>(III.56-58), it is fairly obvious that honour is due only to women who
>submissively conform to patriarchal norms. Many of these attitudes are a
>part of popular and official attitudes to women in contemporary India.
>Hence, examining the Manusmriti is no idle academic venture.
>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>eGroups.com home: http://www.egroups.com/group/agathiyar
>http://www.egroups.com - Simplifying group communications
>
>
>