There were slight rain showers outside as I came out of the washroom after a bathe. It was a Saturday, a long day after heavy soccer trainings. I laid down on the couch with a plump of files, to browse through the remaining notes as the finals were coming ahead soon. Contracts to Criminal and then back again to Family law.
Family law was one of my favorites. It was nothing but for those thought provoking disclosures of Sir A.H.M.D Nawaz, one of the Deputy Solicitor Generals at the Attorney General’s Department that kept me liking the subject. Every single theory behind family law was some interesting stories. They were stories for life. Stories never to miss.
There are no countries with restrictions, formally or informally. Some embrace them happily and some do not. Some reject the Divorce; some bitterly chuck infidelity while the others are smart about them. Monogamy is what is accepted and expected. Hardly one could voice that being infidel is adventure, a way to form needs that are unfulfilled or a way to be happy for the unhappy. I was told and taught in school: that infidelity wrecks life down the years and so does divorce at times. But later at Law College I was questioned: “dennatama ekata inna bari nam mokada wenne?” (What would be if both the partners can’t stay together?) .
After all it’s the attitudes that create walls; stop us from jumping walls, or to cry our hearts loud of what we really feel. There was one colleague who raised himself. ‘If two partners cannot stay together, one cannot tie their legs by law, after all we are humans, feelings change, circumstances change, sometimes maturity diminishes with marriage. He feels that he is too young, too old, too fat, too thin, too poor, too stupid, or too whatever to be desirable and thus tend to go behind someone else other than for his legal partner. Therefore marriage shouldn’t be an entrapment.’ He is correct. Although many might disagree with the thought. Couldn’t it be that culturally and socially marriage is linked with morality rather than a pure civil contract in the hands of law in this country? Not surprisingly the damage is worse when a marriage is irretrievably broken for little reasons.
Keep away the marriage aside.Mr. Nawaz was one of those men I liked. I liked the way he taught. Obviously it is the experience that mirrored his words. He had his favorite quotes. “No hell a fury like a woman scorned”. This was one such. The quote was a bit familiar and sounded very Shakespearian to me. Man was I wrong! Later research taught me that the words were taken off by William Congreve’s play named “Love for Love”. There was something gripping about the quote. I was in love with the quote as much as Mr. Nawaz did.
One afternoon we were interpreting a few divorce cases. Mr. Nawaz came up with horrendous situations where women were acting “the gonibilla” in front of their men. There were women who slapped and chocked, those who threatened with arms and fire and even those women who brashly took off the man’s pants in public. The women were so desperate to know that their men were sleeping with other women or having sexual encounters. I was left with pity for men. William Congreve was right. Women can give hell even worse than hell. Especially when they are rejected or spurned. The fact was just plain and neatly parceled in those women in the few cases.
One could say it’s right for a woman to fight over his man. Not to have his man shared by many. Because natural instincts still govern human relationships. But I believe that “Dhamma “governs everything. Whether we like it or not or even if we could hardly comprehend its dimensions. As a habit, every morning “bana” is being played in radio at our home. I was the last to leave home that day. There was a statement made by the priest. Quite similar to Congreve’s quote. He was questioning as to why women are despaired by their men who go out with other woman. And some even think of dying because of such men. We know things. We know how thunder causes, we know the directions. We know from where the sun rises and from where the sun will set. But there are things that are abstract of which the processes are mystifying and obscure. Why bother over a soul not resident? It’s Thanha that leads to assertion and claim. Why suffer over husband’s karma? A man’s desire for such infidelity is some inherited karma, a collection of sins in previous lives may be. No woman is ought to carry her partner’s karma or vice versa. Let the man have the life he deserves. Let the other women share his body. Divulge from attachment and “ashawa” that causes suffering.
One could arguably say that the man is wrong. He betrays the woman. But at times karma is too complicated that we got to twist and turn things to see the full picture. Buddha has always emphasized that one may inquire to himself to confirm things and not just to depend on books or what somebody said. One may interpret infidelity,Thanha or attachment in many ways as possible. This could be one way to ease the pain of seeing another or a partner being infidel. Just saying. That’s all.
0 comments:
Post a Comment