@Doyelpakhi
I never said that Anandi and Jagya need to stay together even if there is no love or mutual respect between them! I am not talking about law or social obligation with the intention of pointing out that J and A need to stay together.
I am talking about making a mockery of all laws and obligations to suit one's own selfish needs!
He could have separated from her by consulting a lawyer in the first place or by doing a search on the net about such laws and complications.
He wanted to take all matters in his hands and twisted every rule out there to fit his own ends!
I again repeat - Anandi should have filed a case against him, but rejected him from her life., refused to take him back in her life!
You say, Jagya might think she's jealous or taking revenge. Then does it mean we should never take action in such cases of adultery/divorce etc., fearing that other person might not start calling us bad or jealous?
Thinking about our own reputation in eyes of wrong-doer and his/her accomplice is more important than upholding justice?!
Should women like A never take any action just to protect their reputation in eyes of their wrong-doer husband? Should even parents think before supporting their DIL lest they end up ruining their own or their DIL's reputation in their son's eyes?!
Does Anandi need validation from Jagya to maintain her self respect? Does self respect come from one's own self or does it need certification and testimonials from others?
As for begging - Jagya is not really begging! For him, it is ''asking''. And ''asking'' is different from begging! It's not like he's on his knees, grabbing Anandi's feet, and begging with cupped hands in front of her or trying his best to convince her to have pity on him and give him money!
He is ''asking''. For him it's like a ''favour'' which he feels Anandi would naturally do since she can't ever go against him.
He has accepted it like any other ''rule'' of his frustratingly adarshvaadi, domineering, ziddi father! He feels bad, but he channelises those bad feelings not in thinking that his own ego is getting hurt, but by thinking that he's some sort of martyr, bearing this so-called punishment or ''zulm'' meted out by Bapu sa, since he hurt his ego by not sticking with the woman chosen by his Bapusa!
Is he realising what he did was wrong? His ways were wrong? He still thinks he is in fact, the wronged party!! And is bearing ill-treatment because he fought for personal freedom! He thinks of himself as a lone crusader or martyr or some misunderstood innocent lamb!
He bears (and has borne) many things which he doesn't enjoy, only to get to do things which he does enjoy and can't bear to give up!
It was shocking for him seeing his family desert him. But see, he knew they would come down like a ton of bricks on him when he enters the house with Gauri and they learn of his new marriage! He never wanted to come to the house! He tried his best to dissuade even Gauri from visiting them and tried to convince her to forget about them and their approval!
It's not like he was always hoping for approval! His hope only woke up a bit when he saw DS declaring that G is also beendni and has all rights. He thought maybe DS would make everyone accept everything, like she covers up all his blunders since his birth!
Again I reiterate, is he realising why the family is so angry at him? What wrong has he done? No! He breaks down thinking no one understands him, even DS now ignored him (did not cut off but ignored) and that he is wronged party! He's a victim! He doesn't realise that he has also victimised his family by doing things the wrong way!
He is ready to forget all about them and move on (like he was earlier, before going to Jetsar with Gauri). He still feels their backlash was natural since he defied them and hurt their ego, ruined their reputation!
About legal disowning - If Bhairon had legally disowned Jagya first. Then Jagya would have had no right to go to court asking for property! Property, disowning etc., these decisions lie with the person who has hold over the property. If they has first disowned him and deprived him of family name and property and dissociated from him legally, as parents. Then J could not have been able to do anything to harm their family prestige!
To say that they didn't take such an action fearing about family prestige, well, if they kick out son, make DIL as daughter, send her to school or let her go door-to-door as social worker, even that would have made people of that area point fingers at them and their family prestige! Jagya has already done enough to harm family prestige by going around with Gauri painting the village red!
Law and relationships:
Again and again I say, Anandi and Jagya need not be together due to law! I am not calling out for law to safeguard their relationship and make them stay together even if there is no love!! NOPE!!
Leaving a partner is NOT wrong-doing!!! Keeping a person in dark for years, cheating on her, bringing another woman to house and expecting that old one should be kicked out or left to do her own thing - that is all that is wrong!!!
Not even once did I mention that leaving Anandi was wrong! Not leaving her in the proper manner was wrong! Cheating her for 5 years was wrong! Marrying second time without separating from the first wife was wrong! Ignoring first wife, thinking she would be illegal anyways was wrong! Not bothering about laws was wrong! Lying in a court of law was wrong! Bribing and twisting rules was wrong!!
It is not leaving Anandi, but the way he left her, that is wrong! He is liable for punishment for this, not for thinking of leaving her!!
Anandi-Jagya's relationship is neither love or dating nor live-in relationship. It was marriage. Proper marriage socially and legally after they turned 18! Examples of live-in relationships or love before marriage don't make sense here. That's not even the topic.
Yes a person must focus on herself/himself and his/her well-being.
But Anandi did not even want Jagya to know of these laws, to even learn that what he had done was wrong!! She had refused to take action earlier also!
Did she take this decision for family prestige and DS? Or did she take this decision because she was attached to Jagya, had some loyalty towards him - and as she used to cover up his blunders in teenage but remained truthful in her own conduct, so she covered up this blunder also, but remained what she was??!!
Is this decision for self-preservation? Or loyalty and emotional attachment to others?!
Anandi was not alone. She could have easily focused on rebuilding her life. While her Bapu sa, Sumitra, Basant, Gehna and even DS were there to support her in that court case and share its burden! She could have fought the case too.
When you take someone else to court, does it mean you ruin chances of rebuilding your own life? Are all those people who go to court, in case of adultery or illegal marriages, cheating etc. foolish and killing time of court and wasting their own lives?
Then why only in case of relationships? Even in case of rape, a victim should concentrate on overcoming the trauma, building her life from a scratch rather than filing a case! In case of murder, the family should try to forget the past, accept that their family member has gone to heaven, and try to move on, rebuild their lives and stay safe?
If there's a theft in my house, I ought to secure my house, learn to be safe and overcome fear. No need to take action against thief.
Do we always have to think only as individuals? Or also as citizens who have some duty or responsibility?
Do you agree that there should be NO laws in case of relationships?! Family courts and laws are useless and redundant?! Did law-makers make a mistake somewhere by adding such laws?
Are these laws for benefit of citizens or are these there only to provide more earning opportunities to lawyers and give more work to courts?!
Gehna-Basant:
Did Basant really reform? I think we saw him hitting Gehna some months ago! Gehna used to have marks of beatings and physical violence on her face. She had started sleeping outside of the room!
Basant bahaar did not reform!! He returned to his patjhad ways quite soon!
Gehna is living with Basant only due to her son and because she has nowhere else to go except her maayka. She cannot afford to be another burden on her parents who already have two more daughters to deal with. She could also not afford to jeopardise marriage prospects of her sisters, by leaving her in-laws! - In context of the backward background.
And why should reform apply only to women? Why don't we, as viewers demand to see men accepting reforms and changes in women?! Why does a Jagya laugh and make a mockery of Anandi's efforts to bring herself up to be worthy of his status?
Women should allow men to change and accept them. Men can be okay, even if they don't give chances to women or laugh at their efforts to change themselves!
Do women get chances to reform? No!
But as I said earlier, men can always get to have their own way whether they reform themselves or not!
Society is not changing really. Still heavily biased in favour of men and their supporters.
I again ask:
Is Anandi being strong and setting herself free by refusing to drag him to court?
Or does her decision stem from an unresolved attachment and sense of loyalty towards Jagya?!
Just as King Dhritrashtra couldn't bring himself to check Duryodhan, curb his wrong-doings and let him do anything, instead of performing his duties as a king and upholder of justice.
Isn't Anandi leaving Jagya to his own thing out of moh/attachment?
Dhritrashtra knew his son was wrong. But he always pleaded his hands were tied due to putr ka moh.
Are Anandi's hands also tied due to pati/bachpan ke mitr ka moh?😲
When Lord Ram made Sita go through agni-pariksha, did he do so as revenge, to make her pay for crossing the Lakshman Rekha? Or did he do so to uphold justice and fairness as an ideal King/leader/citizen?
In Sikh religion, there is the story of Baba Atal, who was the son of Guru Hargobind, the sixth Guru of Sikhs. Baba Atal had divine powers being the son of the Guru. Guru always used to tell him never to use his powers to his heart's content or make a show of them. But one day, Baba Atal, made his dead friend come to life with his divine powers. Guru Hargobind was enraged by this and admonished his son for trying to challenge God's will, by restoring that friend's life.
After this incident, Baba Atal (who was only 9 years old) had to decide to give up his life and return to heavenly home. He offered prayers, took a sacred bath and died.
Guru was not shaken by his son's death. He only said that it is God's Will that whoever is born, must someday die.
Now, did the Guru admonish his son and did the son give up his powers and his life - for punishment or revenge? Or did this all happen, because they wanted to uphold the sanctity of God's Will and Nature's Law?
Are laws or Constitution only there for cosmetic purposes?! Show off? Do we turn to them for personal gain, personal vengeance or is it also because as citizens it is our duty to uphold the integrity of law and respect of individuals?
Personal revenge would be if someone tries to use laws to deliberately or FALSELY ''frame'' a person! Not if you're actually wronged!
Whenever an Anandi or such a woman in real life, files a case or protests or goes to an NGO, is she doing it for just herself? Her revenge? Or does it also show that you can't trample on another human being's life and that the law is there to protect the integrity and rights of every individual?!
Wouldn't Anandi's case have set an example for other women? Wouldn't it have shown people that they are not alone, they need not be helpless and have others walking all over them, because the law is there for them?
Anandi wants to change the system. And system is basically made up of individuals. Individuals like Jagya are a part and product of that system too. If she can't let the Law punish Jagya (she doesn't have to punish Jagya, the law has to!) or deal with such individuals, then how can she be hopeful of changing the system?!!
When tomorrow, she will talk to other women about child marriage in her social work, she will also come across women like her who were trashed thinking they were illegal wives and had no rights. What if some of those women, were still in love with their husbands, had no support from in-laws, did not want to get educated or have a career but only wanted their husband back? Then, wouldn't Anandi educate them about such laws??
With what face will she educate them, if she has let another man go scott-free and have his cake and eat it too?!
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Is Anandi's decision towards Jagya - a sign of her strength and power? Or is it symbolic of her weakness and powerlessness owing to life-long attachment and loyalty for her husband/childhood friend?
If there's some poisonous plant that is harmful and needs to be eliminated - do we need to just attack its roots? Or do we also need to check that its ''fruits'' also don't grow and reach others and new seeds don't get scattered & give rise to new plants?!
I need enlightenment on this. I am not posting this for the sake of having one-up in an argument.
comment:
p_commentcount