Rape in the Brhadaaranyaka Upanishad

[Aupmanyav]

What I gather is that Brahmacharya is having a sex life according to 'dharma', that is a restricted meaning. The enlarged meaning is to live in 'dharma' in all aspects of life.

 

[Stormcry]

Marriage is an overwhelming thing prescribed by Shastra to control desire of sex. The very goal of marrying woman is to control the most horrible desire - sex.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Sex, Horrible? Where did you get that? No sex, no children? Where will the next generation of Hindus will come from? Without the progeny you will not even be allowed on to the steps of heaven? It is one of the 'purusharthas'. Control and abandonment are two different things. Gandhi was a wise man. He took up celebacy after four children.

 

[Stormcry]

Sex, Horrible?

No other bondage to Jeeva is greater than Woman.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Don't say that. You will pull even the pitris out of heaven. Women are mothers, grandmothers, sisters, daughters. They are the other wheel of life, if men are one.

 

[Kirran]

The context of BAU verses are clear,a man married his wife to have children and a family.And the wife refuses to bear his children even after many friendly dialogues.If both husband and wife decided to live together without having any children,then the man would have not approached the wife in the fist place.Yes,there are couples who can't have children because of infertility,but this case is out of the present context.

OK, I accept that in this context, that's what they got together for.

But I think that there is no possible context in which it is permissible to beat somebody and force yourself on them if they won't have sex with you.

Brahmacharya doesn't always mean living without marriage.Even Vedic Rishis had wives
Brahmacharya actually refers to the student stage in which we need to study the Vedic texts.But in modern times,the meaning have been changed.

Yes, fair enough. I was unclear.

 

[Aupmanyav]

What I gather is that Brahmacharya is having a sex life according to 'dharma', that is a restricted meaning. The enlarged meaning is to live in 'dharma' in all aspects of life.

Sex in 'grhasthashrama'. I think one of the partners will say 'enough is enough' after 25 years of sex life.

 

[Kirran]

No other bondage to Jeeva is greater than Woman.

What about for women, and men who are homo- or bisexual?

 

[Vinayaka]

Yes, sexuality (and it's pleasures) is one of life's greatest of life's attachments. But it's for both genders to resolve, not just one. Since the soul is genderless, any statements regarding 'woman' or 'man' are relevant only on the temporal physical plane. Depending on personality, and karmic traits, other attachments like wealth, success, could well be greater for any individual. Any disdain or hatred for something indicates an attachment to the subject at hand perhaps greater than love for it. True detachment is affectionate. One cannot renounce the world filled with hate for it.

 

[Kirran]

Yes, sexuality (and it's pleasures) is one of life's greatest of life's attachments. But it's for both genders to resolve, not just one. Since the soul is genderless, any statements regarding 'woman' or 'man' are relevant only on the temporal physical plane. Depending on personality, and karmic traits, other attachments like wealth, success, could well be greater for any individual. Any disdain or hatred for something indicates an attachment to the subject at hand perhaps greater than love for it. True detachment is affectionate. One cannot renounce the world filled with hate for it.

Fantastically said.

 

[atanu]

In reading the Brh Upa, I've come across this quote, which many of you may have seen before.

"When she has changed her clothes at the end of her menstrual period, therefore, one should approach that splendid woman and invite her to have sex. Should she refuse to consent, he should bribe her. If she still refuses, he should beat her with a stick or with his fists and overpower her, saying: 'I take away the splendor from you with my virility and splendour.' And she is sure to become bereft of splendour." - Brhadaaranyaka Upanishad 6.4.6-7
Sorry if this has come up before.

Kirran

I believe that the horrified reaction that most of us are having at this is on account of translation.

I understand (although I may be wrong) that this is about gaining control over ever changing splendorous attractions of mAyA. It is about realising that the splendours attributed to changing mAyA forms are all of Self alone. The main purport of the Brihadaraynaka is about that.

I understand that, as with other shruti, the cited verse although apparently applicable for the mundane- vayvarik-phenomenal level, is primarily imparting knowledge for gaining liberation.

 

[atanu]

A friend of my wrote in HDF the following:

Note that the scriptures are quite esoteric - Just because you note words like husband, wife etc does not make them necessarily connected with worldly things.

In general, the causal principle is considered to be the male ( puruSha), his power of producing an effect is the female ( prakRiti) and the effect is the child. This symbolism is present throught the scriptures.

Examples -

jnAna yogi [ husband] + jnAna yoga [wife] --produces---> jnAna (child)
karma yogi [ husband] + karma yoga [wife] --produces---> chitta shuddhi(child)

yogi ( husband) + ahiMsa ( wife) -> vaira-tyAga ( child)
adharma + niRRiti (calamity) --> mRtyu ( child)

The shAstra-s expounding polygamy ,polyandry, superiority of the male etc are quite symbolic and must be understood in its proper context.

The male denoting the doer must dominate over the process he uses to acheive an end. Else he would fail in his mission. The wife of the shAstra-s is a symbol of the shakti ( or sAdhana) of the male and is not separate from him.

Have you noted that almost every Rishi or yogi ( with very few exceptions) in the scriptures is a male? Does it mean women can't be Rishis or yogis? That is why the symbolism is important. If you stick with ritualistic interpretations and translations of the veda, you would have to come to absurd conclusions.

We do not gain much by rejecting the authority of the scriptures or avoiding its contents. Instead we must probe deeper to understand what they mean.

I have similar understanding. This part of the Brihadaraynaka upanishad is related to Vajpeya yajna.

First, a translation, especially if from a mischievous source, can easily distort meaning of any text. Second, when the primary purpose of the Upanishad is to impart knowledge of Brahman, the vese, as translated, appears to be totally out of place. Third, if really required, the meaning of this verse must be got from one's guru. Speculation will not help.

 

[Tyaga]

Namaste,

But I think that there is no possible context in which it is permissible to beat somebody and force yourself on them if they won't have sex with you.

As I said earlier,the chapter specifically deals with conceiving a child.A husband and wife must unite to have a child.The chapter is not about abducting and/or sexually assaulting some random women,which is the proper 'rape' in modern sense.

 

[Stormcry]

What about for women, and men who are homo- or bisexual?

Most of seekers of Moksha are men, straight men...The body of Purusha is supreme than that of woman, as far as Moksha is concerned. So it was a general statement.

 

[Chakra]

Respectfully disagree here. Anyone can get Moksha, provided that they follow the code of Dharma and do not commit sins. In the end, it is Vishnu's decision, and he doesn't look at sex, race, age, etc.

 

[Aupmanyav]

What about for women, and men who are homo- or bisexual?

I think, for women, men are the biggest bondage.

Most of seekers of Moksha are men, straight men ..

I heard that Madhva makes 'moksha' possible only for men. However, the Devis will come to the rescue of women.

 

[Kirran]

Kirran

I believe that the horrified reaction that most of us are having at this is on account of translation.

I understand (although I may be wrong) that this is about gaining control over ever changing splendorous attractions of mAyA. It is about realising that the splendours attributed to changing mAyA forms are all of Self alone. The main purport of the Brihadaraynaka is about that.

I understand that, as with other shruti, the cited verse although apparently applicable for the mundane- vayvarik-phenomenal level, is primarily imparting knowledge for gaining liberation.

Thankyou for your thoughts here, and in the other post.

I think it's probably true that this is down to translation. Many words have levels of meaning and symbolism, both as a result of the language and the culture the texts are born from. Naturally, this can't all be translated into English.

I think the imagery used is a little unfortunate, but may well be rather less horrifying in the original Sanskrit.

And yes, indeed, excessive speculation here is unwise, when I don't really know much about the scriptures or how to read them.

As I said earlier,the chapter specifically deals with conceiving a child.A husband and wife must unite to have a child.The chapter is not about abducting and/or sexually assaulting some random women,which is the proper 'rape' in modern sense.

I get that. But I don't think it's OK in the context of a husband and wife either. Marital rape can and does happen.

I think, for women, men are the biggest bondage.

I don't know, for some women it may be chocolate, or politics

 

[Aupmanyav]

Generally for Indian women, they are. My wife jumps up even if I say 'aah'. Poor girl. I am eternally indebted to her.

 

[Satyamavejayanti]

Ahh, people who have not read the Kama sutra will not understand this Upanishad, and it's too hard to explain for just now, those who fear sex are but Ignorant of indian charvak and lokyat traditions. Anyone here fermilier with DBMS and role play ???

 

[Stormcry]

think, for women, men are the biggest bondage

Gold & Beauty as well