Question
2. "Patriarchy replaced Matriarchy as Accumulation of Property made Monogamous Marriage a Social Necessity."- Please clarify.
Response
In the matriarchal societies mother is considered as the head of the family. When the society advanced from hunting stage to cattle rearing and agriculture states the concept of acquisition of property came into being. As the males were stronger in physical strength properties came to be held more by males than females. Moreover on the demise of a male member proper identification of a father and his son became necessary for passing on the inheritance to the property. Hence polyandry (having more than one husband) and matriarchy gave place to monogamy (one male having one wife) became necessary for social harmony. This development took centuries to come into a shape.
Question
3. Rama was an avatar before Krishna which implies that the concept of monogamy was already in its inception-to-evolved practice, by then. Now Krishna or the time of Mahabharata was after Rama's period. Why did polygamy start all over again? And did such practices prevail in highly knowledgeable times?
Response
Polygamy did not start all over again during the time of Krishna. Even in Rama’s time polygamy existed as Ram himself had three mothers – one real and two step mothers. Even today polygamy exists indirectly and illegally although it is legally banned in many countries. The relationship between a male and a female outside marriage is nothing but polygamy e.g. Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky for which the former had to face impeachment proceedings and worldwide indignation. These practices exist in all times – knowledgeable or primitive, whether in a so called highly evolved society as of now or in the cave days. Human nature to eat the forbidden fruit is the same whether in Ramayana/Mahabharata days or the days of Bill Clinton.
II - Dharma
Question
4. Also, Dharma says, that u should fight for injustice. This is the biggest teaching. Now Bheeshma, Dronacharya, kulguru kept quite when Draupadi was insulted. So this was the biggest mistake they all made. Now, when there was a discussion over whether Mahabharat battle must take place, why did Lord Krishna send petitions of peace to Hastinapur king Drutarashtra? Wasn't the insult to a woman, one of the biggest sin? Why to ask for peace?
5. And why did not Bheeeshma leave adharma clan of Duryodhan? Isn't Dharma a bigger compensatory practice over a Pratigya?
Response
Venerable elders like Bheeshma, Drona kept quite when Draupadi was being disrobed in the assembly. This is one of the extremely debatable instances in the scriptures (like Sita’s agnipariksha in Ramayana) particularly when Bheeshma could have stopped it. Instead he was debating what his dharma was and came to the conclusion that because he was eating the salt of Duryodhana he was not to antagonize Kauravas however much he loves Pandavas. This is the beauty of Mahabharata which is a mirror of human frailties and shows that in life there are no black and white answers to many questions and that there is always grey area. Shantiparva and Yakshaprasna in MB are entirely devoted to the question of analyzing dharma from various angles.
The next question is that when a woman (Draupadi) was insulted how Krishna could pursue peace efforts and was it not a wrong step on his part. The answer is that it was not a wrong step to pursue peace efforts even when Draupadi was insulted because war brings forth more calamities to the kingdom as a whole when compared to humiliation to an individual woman, for after all an individual is nothing before a nation. That is why saam (talking and discussion), daan (charity, bribing), dand (use of force) and bhed (divide and rule) were the four methods prescribed by Kautilya in his Arthasastra to convert the opponent to one’s own thinking. Among these use of force comes as the last resort when everything else fails. So Krishna’s peace efforts as Pandava’s ambassador to Kauravas were his last minute effort to avert the Great War.
Question
6. If it was the dharma of a king to win a kingdom and marry the girl of that kingdom. Why doesn't every other caste get this right?
Response
This question relates to the dharma of the four castes of the Hindu society. Please see the discussion below.
Question
7. Who and why were these dharmas made so unevenly? And how does someone decide that, ok, this practice is the correct dharma?
Response
This question relates to the evolution of the concept of dharma in Hinduism. Please see the discussion below.
DEFINITION OF DHARMA
There is no proper equivalent word in English for the Sanskrit term Dharma. It is very difficult to define Dharma. Dharma is generally defined as ‘righteousness’ or ‘duty.’ It is also the principle of unity.
Bhishma says in his instructions to Yudhishthira that whatever creates conflict is Adharma, and whatever puts an end to conflict and brings about unity and harmony is Dharma. Anything that helps to unite all and develop pure divine love and universal brotherhood is Dharma. Anything that creates discord, split and disharmony and foments hatred is Adharma.
The rules of Dharma have been laid down for regulating the worldly affairs of men. Dharma brings as its consequence happiness, both in this world and in the next. Dharma is the means of preserving one’s self. If you transgress it, it will kill you. If you protect it, it will protect you.
In the matter of Dharma, the Vedas are the ultimate authority. Reason cannot be the authority in the matter of Dharma.
Just as a doctor prescribes different medicines for different people according to their constitution and the nature of their disease, so also Hinduism prescribes different duties for different people. Rules for women are different from the rules for men. The rules for different Varnas (castes) and Asramas (stages in life) vary. But, non-violence, truth, non-stealing, cleanliness and control of the senses, are the duties common to all.
Dharma depends upon time, circumstances, age, degree of evolution and the community to which one belongs. The Dharma of this century is different from that of the tenth century. What is Dharma in one set of circumstances becomes Adharma in another set of circumstances. That is the reason why it is said that the secret of Dharma is extremely profound and subtle. Lord Krishna says in the Gita: “Let the scriptures be the authority in determining what ought to be done and what ought not to be done”. That is the truth of Dharma.