A Waste of Marriage Ceremonies
Marriage ceremonies appear to be a big waste of money. In any average Indian city one has to give 1 lac to the owner of the marriage hall. 1 lac for the dresses to the dress merchant for dresses for family and friends and another 1 lac (at least) to the caterers. I am not including the jewelry costs.
If the bride and groom and families were to decide to skip all the ceremony and donate the money to some well deserving cause, it would make a lot more sense, wouldn’t it? There are quite a lot of people who have small ceremonies, but I doubt if that is because they want to donate more money for charity. There are some people who donate quite a sum for charity as they go about spending for marriage which is a commendable act. (I am not talking about the tithing the groom’s family does so ‘magnanimously’ out of the dowry)
But I guess some where there would be people ‘strong’ enough skip the privilege of ceremonies for the sake of greater love. ‘Strong’ because this is non-conformity to the accepted customs and because it is about going against ones own natural inclinations. Anyone who gets married would want to be honored and ‘feel loved’ by the presence of so many well wishers. Such ceremonies make the memory of marriage special and cherished. If one has to deny such ‘cherished’ ceremonies for the sake of the poor and the underprivileged, it takes a lot of ‘strength’ and ‘love’.
This is just a thought, I am not trying to say that one type of marriage ceremony is better than the other. Customs and ceremonies are a part of our culture, they can’t be wrong in spite of all the prejudice imbibed in them, but to break away from them for the ‘greater good’ is commendable.
Well, yes parents do enjoy getting their children married, to deny them that may be cruel of the children. So that means the parents too should be ‘strong’ enough to stand by the ideals of their children. If parents are too rich and if they like to see their child married may be they can contribute an equal sum for charity J so that becomes an all win situation.
What I am saying is perhaps too idealistic, I don’t disagree. I can’t really say that when I get married that I would want to cut ‘all’ of the ceremony part and donate it all to charity. But may be some part of it could be eliminated.
May be instead of giving food to the ‘already fat’ Christian throng suffering from heart problems and diabetes, I could serve lunch for three days for all patients and dependents in the government hospital. Honestly, I don’t think this is idealistic or unrealistic. It is easily doable. With God all things are possible.
Some may consider such ideas to be iconoclastic as they may think that it amounts to desecrating the age old customs. No it is not, this is not about breaking away from age old customs but about being principled in what one does. It’s about allowing principles (as against accepted practices) to be the guide in every aspect of ones life.
Superman is not the ruthlessly powerful man, but the rationally principled man. Without strength none can be principled. I am sure there are people in this world who are strong enough to do it this way, but we don’t get to know them as it does not make interesting news as L.N.Mithal renting out the Lawn in Louvre Museum to have the reception for his daughter’s wedding.
In the movie, ‘Rebecca’ 1940 (the only Alfred Hitchcock movie which won an oscar for best picture and I love every time no matter how many times I watch it) the rich guy marries her in a pretty unceremonious way. Actually the way he proposes to her is classic, if you get a chance to see the movie in TCM don’t you ever miss it. Ok… lets not digress from the topic.
Strength is in ones ability to walk by principles (as set by God) even when it is against natural inclinations and accepted practices.
Option 1: Ascetic and idealistic:
Here there is no wedding ceremony everything is spent for charity. The problem with this is that this is intrinsically untenable. Let me explain, if I were to go and tell my fiance 'Honey, you know what why dont we fore go our celeberation and turn over all expenses (as an act
of love) to charity becuse there are so many people suffering in the world', her reply (looking me in the eye) would be 'yeah, darling, so many people suffering in the world need your help, so why dont you go a step further (as an act of supreme love) and become a monk and serve
them with all your heart, soul and mind'. Even the great selfless Melanie of 'Gone with the wind' may not give a different response, not even for the 'idealistic and soft' Ashely Wilkes.
The point here is that, she has a valid point.This proposition is intrinsically flawed because the kind of sacrifice demanded is that of monkhood, not family life. I did not want to put it that bluntly that is why I said she'll 'run off' and look for a 'better' guy.
Option 2: Realistic and balanced: (and cherised)
Here I suggest that one has to have the wedding ceremony but spend quite some sum on the poor and I suggested that they feed the patients and helpers in government hospitals for 3 days (if not a week). I know how much the patients there suffer, this would mean a lot to them.
This would give more cherished memories about one wedding ceremonies. And it is very easy to do, it would mean a lot of help to the helpless. In one act you would have fed the hungry and visited the sick. To do it as a part of wedding ceremony is most beautiful.
Option 2 is easily workable and it should be acceptable to the majority. If someone dares to go by option 1, I would applaud them. I would go and shake hands with them because I would know that in heave, they would be at a place much higher than I and I woudn't be able to shake hands with them then.
If the bride and groom and families were to decide to skip all the ceremony and donate the money to some well deserving cause, it would make a lot more sense, wouldn’t it? There are quite a lot of people who have small ceremonies, but I doubt if that is because they want to donate more money for charity. There are some people who donate quite a sum for charity as they go about spending for marriage which is a commendable act. (I am not talking about the tithing the groom’s family does so ‘magnanimously’ out of the dowry)
But I guess some where there would be people ‘strong’ enough skip the privilege of ceremonies for the sake of greater love. ‘Strong’ because this is non-conformity to the accepted customs and because it is about going against ones own natural inclinations. Anyone who gets married would want to be honored and ‘feel loved’ by the presence of so many well wishers. Such ceremonies make the memory of marriage special and cherished. If one has to deny such ‘cherished’ ceremonies for the sake of the poor and the underprivileged, it takes a lot of ‘strength’ and ‘love’.
This is just a thought, I am not trying to say that one type of marriage ceremony is better than the other. Customs and ceremonies are a part of our culture, they can’t be wrong in spite of all the prejudice imbibed in them, but to break away from them for the ‘greater good’ is commendable.
Well, yes parents do enjoy getting their children married, to deny them that may be cruel of the children. So that means the parents too should be ‘strong’ enough to stand by the ideals of their children. If parents are too rich and if they like to see their child married may be they can contribute an equal sum for charity J so that becomes an all win situation.
What I am saying is perhaps too idealistic, I don’t disagree. I can’t really say that when I get married that I would want to cut ‘all’ of the ceremony part and donate it all to charity. But may be some part of it could be eliminated.
May be instead of giving food to the ‘already fat’ Christian throng suffering from heart problems and diabetes, I could serve lunch for three days for all patients and dependents in the government hospital. Honestly, I don’t think this is idealistic or unrealistic. It is easily doable. With God all things are possible.
Some may consider such ideas to be iconoclastic as they may think that it amounts to desecrating the age old customs. No it is not, this is not about breaking away from age old customs but about being principled in what one does. It’s about allowing principles (as against accepted practices) to be the guide in every aspect of ones life.
Superman is not the ruthlessly powerful man, but the rationally principled man. Without strength none can be principled. I am sure there are people in this world who are strong enough to do it this way, but we don’t get to know them as it does not make interesting news as L.N.Mithal renting out the Lawn in Louvre Museum to have the reception for his daughter’s wedding.
In the movie, ‘Rebecca’ 1940 (the only Alfred Hitchcock movie which won an oscar for best picture and I love every time no matter how many times I watch it) the rich guy marries her in a pretty unceremonious way. Actually the way he proposes to her is classic, if you get a chance to see the movie in TCM don’t you ever miss it. Ok… lets not digress from the topic.
Strength is in ones ability to walk by principles (as set by God) even when it is against natural inclinations and accepted practices.
Option 1: Ascetic and idealistic:
Here there is no wedding ceremony everything is spent for charity. The problem with this is that this is intrinsically untenable. Let me explain, if I were to go and tell my fiance 'Honey, you know what why dont we fore go our celeberation and turn over all expenses (as an act
of love) to charity becuse there are so many people suffering in the world', her reply (looking me in the eye) would be 'yeah, darling, so many people suffering in the world need your help, so why dont you go a step further (as an act of supreme love) and become a monk and serve
them with all your heart, soul and mind'. Even the great selfless Melanie of 'Gone with the wind' may not give a different response, not even for the 'idealistic and soft' Ashely Wilkes.
The point here is that, she has a valid point.This proposition is intrinsically flawed because the kind of sacrifice demanded is that of monkhood, not family life. I did not want to put it that bluntly that is why I said she'll 'run off' and look for a 'better' guy.
Option 2: Realistic and balanced: (and cherised)
Here I suggest that one has to have the wedding ceremony but spend quite some sum on the poor and I suggested that they feed the patients and helpers in government hospitals for 3 days (if not a week). I know how much the patients there suffer, this would mean a lot to them.
This would give more cherished memories about one wedding ceremonies. And it is very easy to do, it would mean a lot of help to the helpless. In one act you would have fed the hungry and visited the sick. To do it as a part of wedding ceremony is most beautiful.
Option 2 is easily workable and it should be acceptable to the majority. If someone dares to go by option 1, I would applaud them. I would go and shake hands with them because I would know that in heave, they would be at a place much higher than I and I woudn't be able to shake hands with them then.