agniveer.com http://agniveer.com/polygamy-hinduism/

Agniveer

Polygamy in Hinduism

This article is also available in Hindi at http://agniveer.com/4982/polygamy-hinduism-hi/

Immediately after I published my analysis of Dr Zakir Naik’s views on Hinduism, Istarted receiving hate mails. However I also received a soft-copy of another book ofhis “Answers to Non-Muslims’ Common Questions about Islam”. This is anothermasterpiece of his sophism. I have already glimpsed through videos of his lectureswhere he recites this book line by line. Many rebuttals of this book are alreadyavailable.

However what perturbed me, was another set of misconceptions he attempts to breed regarding Hinduism throughhis self-proclaimed research. I can understand why Dr Zakir Naik has to spend so much space discussingHinduism in an article on Muslims, and so much space discussing Islam in an article on Hinduism (See in FAQ onHinduism)! This apparent confusion emerges from the fact that in current political, social and cultural situation, 80crore Hindus form the most ideal conversion ground for Islamic Research Foundation. Peace TV managed by DrZakir Naik even announced this a few months ago that they would make Hindustan a Darul-Islam in next 5 years.

Further, many Muslims believe in a prophecy that once India is conquered, only then would Jesus Christ comeagain and will bring end of the world. After that, Judgment Day would happen and they will go to Paradise to havetheir virgins and luxuries forever! The lure is too tempting for the uncultivated mind to drop all sense of reasoning!

In this article, I shall cover the first question he addresses – POLYGAMY.

Dr Zakir Naik has tried to prove that Hinduism is inherently a polygamous religion. He states on Page 4 of thebook:“The Qur’an is the only religious book, on the face of this earth, that contains the phrase ‘marry only one’. There isno other religious book that instructs men to have only one wife. In none of the other religious scriptures, whetherit be the Vedas, the Ramayan, the Mahabharat, the Geeta, the Talmud or the Bible does one find a restriction onthe number of wives. According to these scriptures one can marry as many as one wishes. It was only later, thatthe Hindu priests and the Christian Church restricted the number of wives to one.

Many Hindu religious personalities, according to their scriptures, had multiple wives. King Dashrat, the father ofRama, had more than one wife. Krishna had several wives.”

He continues giving some census data from sources best known to him alone that polygamy is more popularamong Hindus than Muslims.

I shall not dwell into what Polygamy means in Islam of Zakir Naik – whether marrying 4 wives in total in entire life,or keeping the total number of existing wives at 4 by divorcing old ones as one marries new ones, or havingspecial provision of 9/11/16/++ for those having revelations, or permitting marriage with babies, or whetherkeeping unlimited slaves and not counting them as legal wives and thus skewing census data. These issues havebeen dealt with by a large number of people including women-rights organizations, Muslim reformers and ex-Muslims worldwide. Internet lists a large number of such reference sources that you can google upon.

The 4 VedasComplete (English)

The focus of this article would be explode the myth that “according to Hindu scriptures one can marry asmany as one wishes.”

POLYGAMY IN VEDASWe start with the Vedas because Vedas are considered the foremost authority in matters of Dharma.1. There is no single mantra in the entire 4 Vedas that even give a hint of supporting more than one wife or morethan one husband.

2. Three mantras of Rig Veda, 1.124.7, 4.3.2 and 10.71.4 contain “Jaayeva Patya Ushatee Suvaasaah”. Thismeans that knowledge comes to the scholar in same manner as a dedicated joyous wife comes only to herhusband. “Jaaya” means wife and “Pati” means husband. Both appearing in singular implies that only onehusband-one wife relation is considered ideal.

3. Rigveda 1.3.3 states that God is like a dedicated wife with high character and purity. This also implies thatmonogamy alone is considered ideal.

4. Rigveda 10.149.4 compares love between God and devotee like that between dedicated wife and husband.Both “Jaaya” meaning wife and “Patim” meaning husband are used in singular number implying strict monogamy.

5. Rigveda 10.85.20 appeals a bride to expand happiness for her husband. Again both husband and wife arereferred in singular.

6. Rigveda 10.85.23 appeals to wife and husband to always have self-control. Its obvious from reference to self-control and singular numbers for both wife and husband that monogamy alone is recommended.

7. All mantras relating to marriage are addressed in dual number to a couple of husband-wife implying one wife forhusband and one husband for wife. Some examples are Rig Veda 10.85.24, 10.85.42, 10.85.47 and almost entire14th Chapter of Atharva Veda which deals with subject of marriage. Most mantras pray for faithful relation forentire life-time.Please note that Sanskrit has a dual number apart from singular and plural, specifically to remove this confusionthat people may have.

8. In Atharva Veda 7.35.4 both husband and wife state that, “You establish me in your heart so that our mindsbecome one and same.”

9. In Atharva Veda 7.38.4, wife says that “You should only be mine. You should not even discuss about otherwomen.” What can be a more clear prohibition of polygamy than this!

10. Atharva Ved 3.30.2 and 14.2.64 also appeal husband and wife to be devoted and faithful to each other.

11. Perhaps Veda provider Ishwar knew that despite all this, some self-proclaimed experts may still find reasons tojustify polygamy. Thus certain mantras in Vedas describe demerits of Polygamy.

- Rig Veda 10.105.8 compares existence of multiple wives with multiple worldly miseries.

- Rig Veda 10.101.11 states that a man with two wives is pressed from both sides and weeps like a horse thatneighs when pressed from both sides by spokes while driving a chariot.

- Rig Veda 10.101.11 state that two wives make life aimless.

- Atharva Veda 3.18.2 prays that may a woman never face threat of another co-wife.

12. The only mantra that skeptics try to give in favor of polygamy in Vedas is Rig Veda 8.19.36 that contains“Vadhoonaam” and “Satpati” words. However, “Vadhoo” does not mean bride here and instead means powers thatprovide happiness. “Satpati” means protector of good, just as “Bhoopati” means protector of earth. This is alsoevident from the Devata or Key subject of the Sukta in which this mantra comes – prayers for charity and donation(Daanastuti). The mantra means that Ishwar gives variety of powers to those who protect truth and good.

POLYGAMY IN RAMAYAN

While it is admitted that Dashrath practiced polygamy, but the essence of entire Ramayan is that polygamy leadsto troubles. The polygamy of Dashrath is considered to be the cause of trouble and grief that everyone faced. Ramis considered “Maryada Purushottam” or the “Ideal Man” because he re-established the Vedic norm ofmonogamy. Same was followed by all his brothers.

POLYGAMY IN MAHABHARAT

By the time of Mahabharat, the moral values of society had declined a lot. Thus none of the characters, apart fromKrishna, is considered exemplary in Mahabharat. And that is exactly the reason why Krishna has been targetedthe most for character assassination by a variety of forces.

Mahabharat is an extremely adulterated text and is not taken as authentic in totality. The original text was muchsmaller and over a period of time it expanded to include a lot of things. Unlike Vedas, there was no mechanism tostop adulterations from it. However a close analysis easily exposes that certain popular stories in Mahabharat arepure myths. I give a list here:

a. Krishna was wedded to none except Rukmini. The mythof 16000 wives came from a story where he liberated 16000captive girls from Narkasur. The story itself is questionable.Further the story never states that Krishna married 16000girls. It says he protected them, which is true if story iscorrect. had Krishna married 16000 of them, it would havetaken him more than 10 years even at rate of 4 marriages aday as per the prevailing rituals!

b. Krishna was so strictly disciplined that he observedcomplete Brahmacharya for 12 years before planning tobe a father. That is why Krishna is such a role model for entire society. The narrator of Geeta had no time foranything except nation-building in those testing periods.

c. Krishna never had any love-games with any Gopi. These are figments of imaginations which got popularduring dark age of foreign rule when rulers of small states indulged in wasteful enjoyments after acceptingsupremacy of foreign rulers. Further the whole story of Radha is a figment of imagination. It exists only in BrahmaVaivart Puran which is another unscrupulous book like Bhavishya Puran that insults legends like Krishna andRam. The concept of Radha grew popular only in very recent times during dark age of India when rulers ofprincely states were busy only in considering themselves Krishna incarnate and indulging into lustful activities bydemeaning just a legendary Brahmachari character! Mahabharat does not contain these.Please read this excellent article by Dr Satya Pal Singh, Police Commissioner of Police, Pune: Lord Krishna –Lord Krishna – an enlightening personality

POLYGAMY IN GENERALWhile polygamy was practiced by certain rulers at various points in time, it was restricted only to ruling class andnever became a mainstream in larger population. That is why Hindus had no discomfort or objection to formalintroduction of monogamy as a law after independence.

All the great legends of Hinduism, whom many consider to be near God, were purely monogamous orbrahmachari- Vishnu, Shankar, Ram, Lakshman, Bharat, Shatrughna, Hanuman and Krishna.

Thus it is a gross myth that Hinduism accepts Polygamy.

On contrary, Vedas are unambiguous over recommendation of monogamy alone. The same has been the trendfor general population and our role models.

If there is any philosophy that condemns polygamy and specifically demands monogamy, it is the HinduDharma based on noble precepts of Vedas.

Addendum:On an additional note, I would like to address a few sophism that Dr Zakir Naik indulges into to justify polygamy:

1. Naik – Average life span of women is more than that of men.By this logic, polyandry (one wife- multiple husband) should be allowed. Because, on average, one wife wouldrequire more than 1 husband to cover her entire life!

2. Naik – World female population is more than world male population.This contradicts previous point. If one looks at 2008 data of World Population as published by UN StatisticsDivision, there are 2% more males than females in the world! The same is also true for marriageable agediscarding children and elders. Does he recommend Polyandry now?

3. Before we get further, let us also look at the countries with worst gender ratio. You can view the list athttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_sex_ratioThe table has facility to sort by fields. What we observe is that the top 9 countries with more men than women areall Muslim countries. Stricter the Islamic Law, more adverse the gender ratio. There are 2.74 times more men inUAE and 2.46 times in Qatar. India and Pakistan are also is not far off with their significant Muslim population!

4. Naik – Muslim women in due faith could bear a small personal loss to prevent a greater loss of letting otherMuslim sisters becoming ‘public properties’.We just saw the data above. Does Dr Naik recommend the inverse now?

5. In civilized societies like Vedic Dharma, each women apart from one’s wife is viewed as mother, by default. Thebasic rule is “Matrivat Paradaareshu – All except wife are like my mother”. That is why the question of someonebecoming public property does not arise. In wars, legends like Shivaji would bow to imprisoned women and callthem mother! And in a society that respects women, the question of adverse gender ratio does not arise as ishappening in conservative Muslim countries.

6. What is important is use of word “property” for women. Dr Naik recommends that polygamy enables womento be private property rather than “public property” at small personal loss. This small loss is a great insult to entire

The 4 VedasComplete (English)

womanhood. If sharing of husbands is haram, why is sharing of wife merely a small personal loss? Vedas do notdiscriminate at all between men and women and provide them equal rights and privileges in all matters includingmarriage.

Next he lists 4 reasons why polygamy is permitted but polyandry is not permitted:a. This will help identify father of the child!(But now we have DNA testing available!)b. Man by nature is more polygamous!(What is the proof for this except that polyandry is stoned to death? Is this not a ploy to insult entire womanhoodby justifying polygamy?)c. It is biologically difficult for women to be polyandrous and rear children!(This is again another shameless reason to justify keeping multiple wives and concubines, in name of religion andsocial service!)d. High chance of acquiring sexual disease!(On contrary, medical science proves that it is women who are more susceptible to contract such diseases frompolygamous men than vice versa. Being a medical student sometime, Dr Naik should have verified at least thismuch before publication. Or perhaps he never got a chance to practice or get back to medical books!)

Wise can decide themselves the mentality of this admirer of Osama bin Laden.

In summary, Polygamy is a malpractice, quite aptly condemned by the Vedas. Hinduism guided by Vedas and itsrole models has always emphasized on monogamy and self-control as the only way for humans.

Efforts to justify polygamy, through whatever reasons, is an insult to entire womanhood.

May such deviant minds introspect and come into the shade of Vedas. May they inculcate feeling of respect forentire Matru-Shakti.

This article is also available in Hindi at http://agniveer.com/4982/polygamy-hinduism-hi/