In Rajasthan, the Congress government is trying to register child marriages and the BJP is vociferously opposed. When people ask what is Hindu modernity, well, this is Hindu modernity.
Bal Gangadhar Tilak opposed the increase of marriage age consent to 12 during colonial times. One can understand both sides of the argument there since we didn’t rule ourselves. But to pretend - as many do that we are not free anymore, however imperfectly - is to fool oneself.
How should we approach such an issue? For some groups, making forcing girls to get married before they turn women maybe optimal from their point of view - as defined by some men. What about the individual women/girls? What about their rights? Or are their views of no consequence?
It raises a problem at heart of group rights: who speaks for the group?
It also raises an issue at the level of a civilisation: if groups do not inter-mingle who gets to speak for the civilisation?
The answer is to have a democracy with individual rights - with some exceptions.
It also raises an issue at the level of a civilisation: if groups do not inter-mingle who gets to speak for the civilisation?
The answer is to have a democracy with individual rights - with some exceptions.
For example, Apastamba concedes that "aspects of Dharma not taught in Dharmasastras can be learned from women and people of all classes". Of course we do not have to stop at his concession-we can question what is also taught in the Dharmasastras just in the spirit of Yuga Dharma.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
