Those guilty of "Within Gotra" marriage should be ostrasized by JAT's... Yes or No ?

[sjakhars]

Marriage: Personal affair or Social institution?

Second question I want to raise is to know if a marriage is only a personal affair or a social institution?
In my opinion, it is a social institution before it is a personal affair, at least in Indian society. It is said that marriage is a relation between two families not merely a relation between two individuals.

Rest, there are many people here who are more intelligent here than me and I mean it. I am learning a lot nowadays.

 

[fateh]

Second question I want to raise is to know if a marriage is only a personal affair or a social institution?
In my opinion, it is a social institution before it is a personal affair, at least in Indian society. It is said that marriage is a relation between two families not merely a relation between two individuals.

Rest, there are many people here who are more intelligent here than me and I mean it. I am learning a lot nowadays.

Marriage, no doubt, is a voluntory union of one man with one woman to the exclusion of all others,alien it is not law. it is a contract & sanskara, it is a legal relation involving matters of status and title of persons. Marriage is the very foundation of civil society. The relations once formed, the law steps in and holds the parties to various obligations and liabilities. It is an institution in the maintenance of which the public is deeply interested, without which there would be neither civilisation nor progress. It creats mutual rights & obligations & confirms status. Ofcourse it is social institution, because it is the base/the very foundation of the society but certain matters in this institution are totally personal. regards
Now Question of ostrasize---SUCH PEOPLE WHO DONOT FOLLOW SOCIETY NORMS, THEY HAVE NO RIGHT TO BE PART OF THAT SOCIETY, but the decision should be that entire samaj will have no connection with such couple because the unsuitable law of the land, immature, ill informed, biased & greedy media, our corrupt executive & blined judiciary has to be kept in view. regards

 

[arvindc]

have you ever heard of any case of khaps ostrasizing a father/uncle or father/brother-in-law who has raped their daughter or daughter/sister-in-law? or say killing such ppl? no. that they leave to court of law in case it gets reported. but they themselves are taking the law in hand for same gotra marriage. who the hell they are

That's one more point in favour of the demand for amendement of the HMA. Once the HMA is amended accordingly, I am sure the khaps would leave the cases of same gotra marriage to the courts.

 

[ravichaudhary]

have you ever heard of any case of khaps ostrasizing a father/uncle or father/brother-in-law who has raped their daughter or daughter/sister-in-law? or say killing such ppl? no. that they leave to court of law in case it gets reported. but they themselves are taking the law in hand for same gotra marriage. who the hell they are

It would be wise to look into Khap panchyat decisions on items like this.

You might just be pleasantly surprised.

It is not a good idea to simply throw stones at random

What you are implying that Khaps support men rapoing their daughters!


When I suggested to you that read up on the history of your community I meant that.


If you had read up, you would have found that the Jat Khaps made and dispensed law. They were known for their wise decisions.

Everyone in their area followed their Law- all communities.

This went on for over 1500 years- Do you seriously think an institution could last that long , without having something going for it?

Ravi Chaudhary




Ravi Chaudhary

 

[singhvp]

How could I miss this thread for so long, a treat to read. I am amazed to see the opinion of people who are specialist in everything, constitution, political science, Physics, Biology, mathematics, Chemistry and what not. Jatland is privileged to have them here.

British constitution ke baare me ek baat padhi thi political science me, agar wo aap logon ki samajh me aa jaye to mujhe lagta hai ye jo samaj aur kanoon ki baatein hain wo thodi saral ho jayengi. Angrezi kamjor hai isliye hindi me likh raha hoon.

"British sanvidhan parampara aur sanyog ka shishu hai."

Remember that British constitution is one of the oldest constitution.

ab aap log pata laga lo kanoon kahan se aaya hai?

Jakhar ji,

Societal behaviour revolves around the three concepts thesis, anti-thesis and synthesis. If history books are to be believed, there has never been a consensus in any society on any issue concerning traditions and customs or anything else. That is why there have been social upheavals in almost all the countries in every epoch. Dissensions are natural and should be accommodated with a spirit of brotherhood and positivity. The problem is that we -Jats - are least tolerant to each other's opinion and make it a point not to be flexible. Ultimately, we have to put our daggers aside and arrive at a synthesized opinion but in the process a lot of damage to the spirit of brotherhood will already be done.

 

[ssindhu]

It would be wise to look into Khap panchyat decisions on items like this.

You might just be pleasantly surprised.

It is not a good idea to simply throw stones at random

What you are implying that Khaps support men rapoing their daughters!


When I suggested to you that read up on the history of your community I meant that.


If you had read up, you would have found that the Jat Khaps made and dispensed law. They were known for their wise decisions.

Everyone in their area followed their Law- all communities.

This went on for over 1500 years- Do you seriously think an institution could last that long , without having something going for it?

Ravi Chaudhary




Ravi Chaudhary

if khaps are wise, i wish nt to b wise

 

[fateh]

Jakhar ji,

Societal behaviour revolves around the three concepts thesis, anti-thesis and synthesis. If history books are to be believed, there has never been a consensus in any society on any issue concerning traditions and customs or anything else. That is why there have been social upheavals in almost all the countries in every epoch. Dissensions are natural and should be accommodated with a spirit of brotherhood and positivity. The problem is that we -Jats - are least tolerant to each other's opinion and make it a point not to be flexible. Ultimately, we have to put our daggers aside and arrive at a synthesized opinion but in the process a lot of damage to the spirit of brotherhood will already be done.

true, well said, education is the answer, including the knowledge of History. regards

 

[sjakhars]

Societal Behavior

I agree VP Singh Ji. Societal behavior can not be defined in a narrow concept. My reply was in answer to some posts where it was said that the Constitution is absolute. I wanted to say that the constitution is derrived from traditions, customs and rituals, it was not brought from extra-terrestrial places. That is where the above statement about British Constitution stands tall.

I wanted to say that "Human being is a social animal". The age old saying about human behavior. If people change it to "Human being is a legal animal", that's where I have a problem. The society makes the constitution not the constitution makes the society. Everything is not legal and illegal in this world. If you make it a legal world than you have to write each and verey aspect of human behavior in the constitution. Like Rakesh Ji said If a person is walking naked on the road, why anyone should have a problem as the person is legally free to walk and he has paid for the road in form of taxes like all others. Its his right to wear/not wear the clothes as he enjoys the freedom of life and he feels more free and happy without clothes, if anyone has a problem with it he can clsoe his eyes.

British constitution is nothing but a compilation of traditions which are being practised for 1000s of years and British constitution is the oldest one. Indian constitution has borrowed most of its contents from British, American, Canadian and Japanese and may be some other constitutions.

Coming to the subject of the thread, "samajik bahishkar" has been in our society for time unknown. It is done at individual level and also at group level. If a group of people do not want "roti aur beti ka rishta" with a particular person, the land of law cannot force that group to have the same with the said person. It's like my familiy (In a broader perspective where uncles, aunts, cousins are included) do not want to have relation with any one, the law can not force us. The same is called "samajik bahishkar". A village is considered a larger family that's is why "samajik bahishkar" is practisable in villages. If a person does not follow the family's old age traditions and customs, the family has a right to stop any relation with him/her.

I have never supported honor-killing but I am extremely against the same gotra marriage.

Jakhar ji,

Societal behaviour revolves around the three concepts thesis, anti-thesis and synthesis. If history books are to be believed, there has never been a consensus in any society on any issue concerning traditions and customs or anything else. That is why there have been social upheavals in almost all the countries in every epoch. Dissensions are natural and should be accommodated with a spirit of brotherhood and positivity. The problem is that we -Jats - are least tolerant to each other's opinion and make it a point not to be flexible. Ultimately, we have to put our daggers aside and arrive at a synthesized opinion but in the process a lot of damage to the spirit of brotherhood will already be done.

 

[ravinderjeet]

if khaps are wise, i wish nt to b wise

you are allready not a wise person.

 

[singhvp]

I agree VP Singh Ji. Societal behavior can not be defined in a narrow concept. My reply was in answer to some posts where it was said that the Constitution is absolute. I wanted to say that the constitution is derrived from traditions, customs and rituals, it was not brought from extra-terrestrial places. That is where the above statement about British Constitution stands tall.

I wanted to say that "Human being is a social animal". The age old saying about human behavior. If people change it to "Human being is a legal animal", that's where I have a problem. The society makes the constitution not the constitution makes the society. Everything is not legal and illegal in this world. If you make it a legal world than you have to write each and verey aspect of human behavior in the constitution. Like Rakesh Ji said If a person is walking naked on the road, why anyone should have a problem as the person is legally free to walk and he has paid for the road in form of taxes like all others. Its his right to wear/not wear the clothes as he enjoys the freedom of life and he feels more free and happy without clothes, if anyone has a problem with it he can clsoe his eyes.

British constitution is nothing but a compilation of traditions which are being practised for 1000s of years and British constitution is the oldest one. Indian constitution has borrowed most of its contents from British, American, Canadian and Japanese and may be some other constitutions.

Coming to the subject of the thread, "samajik bahishkar" has been in our society for time unknown. It is done at individual level and also at group level. If a group of people do not want "roti aur beti ka rishta" with a particular person, the land of law cannot force that group to have the same with the said person. It's like my familiy (In a broader perspective where uncles, aunts, cousins are included) do not want to have relation with any one, the law can not force us. The same is called "samajik bahishkar". A village is considered a larger family that's is why "samajik bahishkar" is practisable in villages. If a person does not follow the family's old age traditions and customs, the family has a right to stop any relation with him/her.

I have never supported honor-killing but I am extremely against the same gotra marriage.

An excellent and well moderated articulation Jakhar ji. Both - the social customs as well as the law of the land - are supplement and complement to each other for making the living in a particular society harmonious and disciplined. A complete synchronization and balancing between these social tools is essential to avoid antagonism owing to clash of interests and opinions.

Unquestionably, if an individual’s freedom and acts have an adverse bearing on the lives of his/her neighbours, they have a right to boycott him/her. But their reaction should be spontaneous and within the parameters of established law and not orchestrated by a few self-seekers who try to hijack such issues for their personal aggrandizement. There should be complete transparency, widest possible participation by the stake-holders and democracy in such decisions.

As far as walking nude on street is concerned, I am sure there must be some laws against obscenity in public places for prosecution of such offenders as mentioned by you in your post.

 

[atamjeet78]

But their reaction should be spontaneous and within the parameters of established law and not orchestrated by a few self-seekers who try to hijack such issues for their personal aggrandizement.
VPSinghji
Those few self-seekers are 64% of jatlanders.

 

[sjakhars]

VP Singh Ji, thank you very much for the post. I believe in straight questions and answers. I do not want to be diplomatic or politically correct but at the same time I try not to be rude, try not to make any personal comment at any one. I know people like diplomatic way of discussion but straightforwardness is a better way in my book.

Human behavior can not be 100% objective, there is always a portion which is driven by subjective traits. Personal aggrandizement (It took me a while though to find the meaning of this word, had to consult the dictionary) can be defined in many aspects I suppose. Lets say a person sees someone stealing something from somewhere, a good citizen will inform the police. The informer thinks he fulfilled his duty but the thief thinks otherwise, he takes it as personal harm as you have seen in present day life. The offender (Not all may be) tries to take revenge of this. So it depends how a person perceives any action as in above example, the offender thinks that the informed must have a personal gain here otherwise why he should inform the police. Here we can not say that the offender has got freedom of life so he can do anything and later he can prove it his personal deed.

My above argument is about social and legal norms. In my opinion, social traditions, customs and moral values form a base for any kind of law. The law can not be derived from vacuum. I again reiterate that the laws/constitution are derived from social and moral values.

The age old question of chicken first or egg first is not applicable here. Certainly I believe that the social customs/traditions and moral values existed long before the legal system and the constitutions.

An excellent and well moderated articulation Jakhar ji. Both - the social customs as well as the law of the land - are supplement and complement to each other for making the living in a particular society harmonious and disciplined. A complete synchronization and balancing between these social tools is essential to avoid antagonism owing to clash of interests and opinions.

Unquestionably, if an individual’s freedom and acts have an adverse bearing on the lives of his/her neighbours, they have a right to boycott him/her. But their reaction should be spontaneous and within the parameters of established law and not orchestrated by a few self-seekers who try to hijack such issues for their personal aggrandizement. There should be complete transparency, widest possible participation by the stake-holders and democracy in such decisions.

As far as walking nude on street is concerned, I am sure there must be some laws against obscenity in public places for prosecution of such offenders as mentioned by you in your post.

 

[hemanthooda]

Teen couple killed in Haryana

http://www.hindustantimes.com/News-Feed/haryana/Teen-couple-killed-in-Haryana/Article1-567445.aspx

A teenaged boy and his girlfriend were found dead under mysterious circumstances in a Haryana village, prompting fears that yet another honour killing had been committed.
The bodies of Sham Mohammad, a Muslim, and Rina, a Hindu Jat, were found in the backyard of a government school at Smain village in Fatehabad district, 50 km from Hisar on Sunday morning.
Although an empty bottle of celphos tablets — a grain preservative often used to commit suicide — was found near the bodies, the police suspect foul play.
The bodies bear injuries caused by blunt and sharp weapons, indicating the possibility of murder, officials said.
“An autopsy will reveal whether they consumed celphos tablets or were murdered,” SP Jagwant Singh Lamba said.
Sham and Rina wanted to marry each other but their families were against the alliance. Last year, the two allegedly eloped from the village, but were found in a nearby village some days later.
The village panchayat then asked Sham to leave Smain, after which he shifted to Kadyan village in Punjab. But he was back in Smain recently to meet his parents.
“This is not suicide,” alleged Nanu Mohammad, an uncle of Sham. “Both Sham and Rina have been killed by Rina’s relatives.”

 

[fateh]

Teen couple killed in Haryana

http://www.hindustantimes.com/News-Feed/haryana/Teen-couple-killed-in-Haryana/Article1-567445.aspx

A teenaged boy and his girlfriend were found dead under mysterious circumstances in a Haryana village, prompting fears that yet another honour killing had been committed.
The bodies of Sham Mohammad, a Muslim, and Rina, a Hindu Jat, were found in the backyard of a government school at Smain village in Fatehabad district, 50 km from Hisar on Sunday morning.
Although an empty bottle of celphos tablets — a grain preservative often used to commit suicide — was found near the bodies, the police suspect foul play.
The bodies bear injuries caused by blunt and sharp weapons, indicating the possibility of murder, officials said.
“An autopsy will reveal whether they consumed celphos tablets or were murdered,” SP Jagwant Singh Lamba said.
Sham and Rina wanted to marry each other but their families were against the alliance. Last year, the two allegedly eloped from the village, but were found in a nearby village some days later.
The village panchayat then asked Sham to leave Smain, after which he shifted to Kadyan village in Punjab. But he was back in Smain recently to meet his parents.
“This is not suicide,” alleged Nanu Mohammad, an uncle of Sham. “Both Sham and Rina have been killed by Rina’s relatives.”

Look, I am not at all in favour of killing any body but here, it seems to me, the boy asked for his murder, once excused, was it must to come back to the village to put ghee on fire, I would like to ask the views of anti khap people as what they have to say here. regards

 

[singhvp]

But their reaction should be spontaneous and within the parameters of established law and not orchestrated by a few self-seekers who try to hijack such issues for their personal aggrandizement.
VPSinghji
Those few self-seekers are 64% of jatlanders.

Atamjeet ji,

With due apology, I differ with your calculation. The number of self-seekers cannot be as high as 64%. Also, I have no reason and moral right to disbelieve that the reaction of 64% could be spontaneous on this issue. But at the same time the existence of a little percentage of self-seekers imposing themselves as the torch bearers, in pursuit of their personal ambition, cannot be dismissed in any movement. This is a universal truth. A healthy and critical debate on any issue is essential for the best to come out.

 

[arvindc]

In my opinion, social traditions, customs and moral values form a base for any kind of law. The law can not be derived from vacuum. I again reiterate that the laws/constitution are derived from social and moral values.

The age old question of chicken first or egg first is not applicable here. Certainly I believe that the social customs/traditions and moral values existed long before the legal system and the constitutions.

Exactly!!

The laws are meant to govern society. Society should decide how it wants to be governed (that is make laws).

Social customs/traditions and moral values are made by the society and hence, any law can not simply ignore them. The challenge that comes is that customs/traditions and moral values are different for different people. So law makers decide (based on some unknown criteria) which one of these, customs/traditions and moral values, gets into a law. May be we can take a look at the UK law, where it is totally based on what the society thinks rather then what the lawmakers think.

 

[atamjeet78]

VPSinghji,
Those were not my calculation, it was the poll result on that day on this thread which today stands at 65.96%.

 

[singhvp]

VPSinghji,

Those were not my calculation, it was the poll result on that day on this thread which today stands at 65.96%.

Atamjeet ji,

I respect majority opinion, my skepticism notwithstanding.

Regards

 

[ssindhu]

It would be wise to look into Khap panchyat decisions on items like this.

You might just be pleasantly surprised.

It is not a good idea to simply throw stones at random

What you are implying that Khaps support men rapoing their daughters!


When I suggested to you that read up on the history of your community I meant that.


If you had read up, you would have found that the Jat Khaps made and dispensed law. They were known for their wise decisions.

Everyone in their area followed their Law- all communities.

This went on for over 1500 years- Do you seriously think an institution could last that long , without having something going for it?

Ravi Chaudhary




Ravi Chaudhary

dowry has surevived for more than 1500 years, but does it mean it has something good to it?

 

[kapdal]

dowry has surevived for more than 1500 years, but does it mean it has something good to it?

Err..well...let me think. How do you ensure women get some property from their parents in a patriarchal society where the son inherits everything? That was the case for most of those 1500 years. Are you saying the daughters should have been short changed at the time of marriage; that here you go and you get nothing from your family, while your brother gets everything. I'd think most of the customs where daughters/sisters were given gifts on special occasions like marriage, peeliya, holi, diwali, etc. (diff. in diff. regions and communities) was a way of balancing things to an extent in a patriarchal society. Dowry is the present day abused form of this custom. I think the ideal way is to have equal property rights for all children and no dowry. The former exists on paper in law, but hardly practised. And there are draconian laws to stop dowry, yet the practise remains. Just shows you can't change society through laws, if the mindset of people doesn't change. And faffing about liberal ideas without understanding ground realities or the application of the ideas in a given context, is meaningless.