‘The wife is half the man,
the best of friends,
the root of the three ends of life,
and of all that will help him in the other
world.’
— The Mahabharata
The institution of marriage goes back a long way. In the Indian mythology, Goddess Shakti, the embodiment of the creative female energy, is determined to make a householder out of the hermit, Shiva, the embodiment of the potent male energy.
By marrying Shiva and initiating him into the sexual act, she makes him acknowledge and interact with the material world. The union transforms the self-immersed hermit into a benevolent and attentive Shankara, a householder, who is responsive to worldly matters and the wild and untamed goddess into fertile and nurturing Gauri.
Together, they embrace the worldly life and embark on the path of the householder which aims at fulfilling the three ends of life (trivarga)—piety (dharma), wealth (artha), and desire (kama).
One of the most striking features of the Indian sociology is that the life of an individual was divided into four age-based stages or Ashramas. The first stage or first quarter of life was spent as a celibate student (Brahmacharya Ashrama) that was aimed at preparing the individual for material life. The second stage or second quarter was spent by the individual as a productive householder (Grihastha Ashrama) that aimed at acquiring wealth and enjoying the material and corporeal life. In the third stage, he was expected to live a retired life (Vanaprastha Ashrama) by supporting his son and teaching his grandson. And, in the final stage, he was expected to renounce (Sannyasa Ashrama) the worldly life.
Although all the stages had their perks and limitations, it is the second stage of the householder which has proven to be the greatest challenge to date. For it is primarily during this stage that the three aims of life come into conflict with each other. Though the three aims or goals are set in descending order of importance—piety, wealth, and desire, the underlying basis in the pursuit of wealth and in the indulgence of sexual pleasure is meant to be piety. But as flawed as human nature is and as vulnerable as human will is, desire surfaces its seductive head time and again and poses a threat to the society in general and the socially constructed institution of marriage, in particular.
The society, which is a by-product of civilisation, functions on rules and regulations, roles and responsibilities, and rights and duties. As responsible members of the society, we are duty-bound to adhere to the civilised code of conduct (dharma) that sustains the society. When we disregard them and submit to our primal instincts, seductive passions, unbridled desires, and fantasies, the social order collapses. This leads to the moral decay of the society and causes unrest and chaos.
However, the responsibility of the moral decay and the consequent social upheaval has been directly and singularly attributed and appropriated to a woman’s character, or rather the lack of it. This attitude reeks of a patriarchal mindset. In the Indian epic Mahabharata, Draupadi, the feisty daughter-in-law of the Kuru dynasty, though legally married to the five Pandava brothers, is accused of being a wanton in the royal assembly. Karna, her (illegitimate) brother-in-law argues that a virtuous woman has only one husband. While it was acceptable for the king and the chiefs to have several wives and mistresses in their harem, a legally married woman was publicly called immoral for having five husbands.
Ironically, in Ramayana, which is signified as the Indian householder’s epic, the female protagonist Sita, known to be the epitome of female virtue, was abandoned by her husband, Ram. Sita was neither unfaithful in thought nor in deed, but by her mere association with another man (Ravana), her reputation was soiled, and she became a blemish on the royal glory.
It is this hypocrisy of the society, with its dual moral standards based on gender, that has enraged its women. Men have the freedom to choose between a hedonist’s, hermit’s, or householder’s way of life, but a woman’s role is limited to home-building and child-rearing. Unless the moral paradigm of patriarchy, which indulges its men to have a hedonistic way of life and also to have an authority over a woman’s sexuality, is checked, the society is bound to collapse by the tilt, sooner or later.
For a harmonious society to exist, both sexes have to be honoured and given their due importance. It cannot choose to relegate one sex (female) to a second position because, by its very nature, men and women complement each other. Hierarchy of the sexes is a man-made construct and is based on the false premise of male superiority. Evidence of this can be seen in the Chinese philosophy, where all manifestations are seen as the dynamic interplay of two polar forces. The yin, which represents the female, symbolises the intuitive female mind and maternal element, and the yang, which represents the male, symbolises the rational male intellect and strong creative power. A healthy relationship between yin and yang can only be achieved through their dynamic balance.
The society is going through a transitional phase at present—the role of a woman is neither confined to the four walls of her house nor is it restricted by childbearing. The modern woman is not at the mercy of the man in her life for self-preservation. She is as unapologetic about exploring her sexuality and her freedom as her male counterpart. In this segment, we shall explore the change in the dynamics of the relationship between a man and a woman which has given a whole new shade to the institution of marriage. Not only has the role of a woman taken on a new mould, which includes being financially and biologically independent, but the fast-paced development in technology has turned the world into a global village, too. The influx of the Internet, satellite television, social media, etc., have also added new pressure on interpersonal relationships as they offer opportunities and private space to men and women like never before.
Due to its convenience, extramarital relationships have become rampant in the society; we see it as an escape from our current situation. Instead of making an effort to work on our current relationship, we choose the easy way out: we walk out of an imperfect relationship. An imperfect relationship is different from a dysfunctional relationship where it is best to part ways. But our busy lives leave us with little time to reflect on the nature of our relationship, and we assume it to be dysfunctional because we compare it to what the others are projecting.
The world of advertising, social networking, and media use our sense of disquietude to their advantage and magnify the possibility of a picture-perfect life. Our gullible self gives in to this projection and starts to chase the impossible—the perfect relationship or the happily ever after.
There are couples who are compatible and there are couples who are not. This means that for some couples getting along comes naturally, while for some it requires a bit of hard work. Even the couples, who seemingly get along well, do make an effort.
The role of a householder is no child’s play; it is a huge responsibility. One should take it up only if they feel worthy of carrying it out with sensibility. Being part of a couple for life in the present-day scenario of easy distractions is tough. But, if our values are firmly anchored, we will survive the winds of change.