Himavan's judgement on Sumedha - Page 2

Originally posted by: shruti.nil

Interesting Topic Vrish...👍🏼

I think what Himavan did was right-look at it practically and from a fathers point of view-Sumedha was wasting her life over someone who would not even come,after all could a father watch his daughters life just waste away just because she is waiting for someone they have absolutely no clue about?,in the long run as Himavan said it would only give her pain and it would be a waste of the life God gave her...Had i been a Parent maybe i would have done the same thing!

Maina said that having an illusion or a dream need not necessarily get converted into reality,the Guy Sumedha was waiting for could be anything and may not even meet up the hopes she had for him,hence holding to such a dream only spoils ones life!

Parvati and Sumedhas story runs in parallels upto a point-beyond which they do not have any likeliness...

Parvati too had never met Mahadev,but for starters she was destined for him,also Parvati very gustily went and not only Found Mahadev,Met Him,but put in all the considerable amounts of efforts needed to marry him-something which i dont think Sumedha did...Parvati came to know him completely through her present and past life experiences-she made efforts to understand him,and had the will power and patience to make herself worthy of him...Most importantly Mahadev was Parvatis and Parvati was of Mahadev they were part of each other,hence it wasnt like she was marrying a total stranger,he was one of her own!

So in relation to Sumedha Himavans decision was right,but when it comes to Parvati the circumstances will be quite diffrent,so you cant really relate the two stories beyond a certain point!

it will be left to be seen what Himavan does when the same situation comes up for Parvati!

@bold

what do you mean by practical? and what do you mean by parent's point of view?. if a person chooses to live like what he wants, its up to that person. Moreover marriage is a life decision you cannot just live with some person just because your parents want. either you accept a person wholeheartedly or you don't there is no practical or theoretical in that .

and also there is no parents point of view. there is only one point of view in this kind of decisions and that is the person himself. if she wants to marry she will otherwise she wont and that should end the discussion. it is for her to decide regarding what she wants to do in the life. No body and not even King or Parents have any right to do so.

it might seem illogical and impractical but what you have is your only life you cannot live on whims and fancies and judgements of others.

regards
Krishna

Originally posted by: .Vrish.

Mnx

One thing I'm not following here - if destiny is what rules, and her parents were on a pilgrimage, shouldn't they have determined what Sumedha's destiny was before agreeing to promise her to the merchant in question?

Originally posted by: .Vrish.

Vanadhi

One thing that you said that they kept reminding her about that engagement throughout her growing up - did they? That wasn't mentioned in the update, nor did I catch the merchant mentioning it when he described the problem to Himavan. Logically speaking, they must have, or else, how would a 3 year old girl remember that w/ no help from her parents over years of growing up? And if they actually did that, they share a good portion of the blame.

I agree that it was irresponsible of her parents to betroth her to someone when she was just 3, w/o knowing how the future holds. In fact, see my response to Vibs further down.

My answer is NO.

IndigoBlues,

What I meant was that if Sumedha was to marry someone else, she should first be convinced to do so. Himavan could have found a groom for her but how she would be accepted when her in-laws come to know that she had lived with the thoughts of being another man's wife is really questionable. She should have atleast be given time to come to terms with the truth.

If the daughter makes a wrong choice, parents can always show her the right way. If a person has taught his/her children how to discern right from wrong, then just reasoning out will solve the problem of any wrong decision the child may take. If my daughter wants to marry an abusive alcoholic, I'd take her to such a person's home and show her how the children suffer there. There are many ways to reason out. Parents who know and understand their children can always find a way to communicate and reason out with them.

Whatever pleasures her parents want to give her, Sumedha can enjoy them if and only if she has the mind to do so. Throughout her life she lived with the thought that her husband was the merchant's son. All her life, she had seen chaste women living with only one man in their thoughts. She had grown up hearing stories about virtuous women and was instructed to follow them. And now, all of a sudden they as her to forget the man whom she had thought of as her husband and accept someone else - she'll be destroyed inside out. It will feel as though she has been living a lie all her life. Any girl in her situation would behave very much the same. I don't think trying to living up to the ideals you set for life as unhealthy. If there is something you believe in and you want to continue to do so in spite of all hurdles, I don't think its unhealthy. Her parents must be proud of her rather than whining to Himavan.

She may not be a sadhu or saint trying to attain moksha, but if she didn't want to marry anyone else, the only peace she'll get is by living like an ascetic. She'd be respected too.

Besides, love isn't just an emotion or feeling alone. Its not like a person feels sad one day and then the next day something cheers him/her up and he/she is happy. Its much more than that. Its the decision and dedication of accepting another person into your life - sharing a lot more than formal greetings or what the society demands. But I agree it is destructive / self-destructive at times though the reason for it may vary.

That's why I feel Himavan as a king should have put forth all the facts in front of Sumedha and asked her to decide.

About women's rights - most of the royal women and some others may have been given freedom but not all women.Maybe Satya Yug was much better than my imagination. Men were told to respect their wife (or wives) and give them the right to say in whatever the husbands decide. The story of Bahmati is a good example. Probably suppression of women started much later, maybe in Tretha yuga.

On a lighter note, I think that men get their wife's opinion like the way Lord Vishnu did in today's episode 'Of course, I do know everything but it sounds so much better when you say it in your sweet words'. 😆 I'm not flaming Lord Vishnu - just using him as a (good 😉) example. Its really cute 😳.


Vrish,

I don't think the option of Swayamvar was open to all classes of the society.

It was in vogue those days to promise someone their daughter or to ask for a girl who is beautiful and brought up well at a very early age. But they usually keep in touch and it was considered the responsibility of the groom's family to seek the girl out for marriage.

I agree with you that a girl surely can't remember without her parents prompting that she was promised to someone at the age of 3. Seeing how firm she is on living with the same guy, they must have enforced it in her mind that she already has a husband who will come to marry her.

And i don't think the minister had searched for the boy. Sumedha's parents must have submitted the case for king's court and the minister was probably announcing it in style. Her parents must have searched for the groom for some time and then when their neighbours started talking decided to marry her off to someone else. I don't know how they could have managed to pull it off. She had been living with the thought of being the merchant's daughter in law and must have told her friends, relatives, and rejected other proposals on the same basis. If it was universally known, how could they have brought another guy and said he is Sumedha's husband. No matter how you look at it, the truth will be out when the groom's family interacts with Sumedha's relatives or neighbours.

As I had explained above, I don't think her struggle to live up to the high standards she set for herself was unhealthy. This was supposed to be way much earlier than Sita being rejected by the people but its not a fair comparison - there are too many differences and facts to be considered omitting the fact Sita was Lakshmi's incarnation.

It is true that parents would feel sad to see their kids suffer or face difficulties but rather than complain why not be proud that the son or daughter they had raised is living up to such high standards? Rather than discourage their children from any decision that might give them difficulty, why not support them. The children can achieve much better results if they are supported by their parents on the hardest endeavours they take. If the parents keep telling them "I feel sad on seeing you like this." "You are not satisfying your parents by doing this.", etc., the kids will never come to their parents even when they suffer. Only when parents give an assurance that when their kids approach them with a problem, they have the strength and courage to listen to it and guide them properly are they ever going to do so. If a girl tells her mother that she has some problems and if the mother gets agitated, worried, anxious and distresses the daughter even more, she is never going to tell her mother anything again. What she had learnt from this experience is that telling her mother is not a good idea. Whether she thinks that telling her mother will pain her mother rather than solving her problem or she thinks that telling her mother is not going to help her at all, the result will be the same - the girl is never going to discuss her problems with her mother again. I can't blame it on the kids - they don't know everything when they are born and the only people they know in the early years are the ones who bring them up. So, when parents act agitated, by nature, kids don't want to do it again simply because they don't want to be in the situation again. There are some things that can be discussed with parents only - no one else (except probably a sage or God) can fill in for them. It is really uncomfortable for kids if they can't approach their parents for such issues. I do agree it is not easy but parents should be really strong and open minded when especially when kids grow up. They must come back to their parents not just for duty but with respect and companionship (and of course, gratitude). I do find this repeated very often - parents teach their kids high ideals but when the kids want to live up to those ideals, parents discourage them.

In a debate, a guy asked the question "When I tell my parents I want to become a doctor or an engineer, they are happy. If I tell them I want to become a businessman or a teacher, they still accept my decision. If I tell them I want to be like Gandhi they want to beat some sense into me. All my life, I've been taught by my parents and teachers, that Gandhiji was a great man and his ideals are to be followed. When I want to follow them, why is everyone against it?"

In Sumedha's example, if she has been married off to someone else and she faces a lot of problems due to the fact that she couldn't get over her past, where would she go? Himavan can only order her to marry someone else but that won't change Sumedha's mind. The maximum her parents can tell her is to adjust to whatever happens in her husband's house.

I agree she was considered off limits to anyone but she can be accepted if both the groom and bride are willing to live together.

---

Again on a lighter note, when I saw the episode, wanted to scream, "Himavan theerpai maathi sollu!" (Himavan change (and declare) the verdict). 😆 😆

Originally posted by: Vibhishna

Again on a lighter note, when I saw the episode, wanted to scream, "Himavan theerpai maathi sollu!" (Himavan change (and declare) the verdict). 😆 😆

Originally posted by: vanadhi

Hey Vibhishna

U mean "Natamai Theerpai maathi sollu" ...🤣 Though kaap pachayat or Himavan court ,they always hear elder's pov not the younger ones ...😆

Yes, but I substituted Himavan instead of Naatamai (Village - Panchayat Head, though the word actually translates to administrative head). 😉

When Himavan declared this is Parvat Naresh Himavan's decree, the first thing that came to my mind was 'Naataamai, theerpai maathi sollu!' 🤣 😆

I was hoping Karikaal Vazhavan's story would have favoured youngsters but no such luck but he came quite recently. I thought in those days, be it elder or younger, they would at least listen if they know the person is educated.

Originally posted by: Vibhishna

Yes, but I substituted Himavan instead of Naatamai (Village - Panchayat Head, though the word actually translates to administrative head). 😉

When Himavan declared this is Parvat Naresh Himavan's decree, the first thing that came to my mind was 'Naataamai, theerpai maathi sollu!' 🤣 😆

I was hoping Karikaal Vazhavan's story would have favoured youngsters but no such luck but he came quite recently. I thought in those days, be it elder or younger, they would at least listen if they know the person is educated.

Naah, you can talk Tamil movies all you want. 😆 At any rate, Shruti & Minakshi rule here, so they'll be the judge of that 😆 Maybe Minakshi can ding you if she doesn't like your opinions on your fav stars 😈