This is a part of a longer discussion.
IHM: We Indians go out of our way to prevent marriages where a man and a woman have chosen each other… (so called, ‘Love marriages’).
‘In India man and woman are considered sub set of family, which is in turn considered a sub set of community. Individuals who want to opt out of being such subset of subset should eschew related benefits too.
Community living is a responsibility; while it provides enormous advantages to its members through strength of relationship, it also requires the members to reciprocate, to foster the customs of the community and to strengthen it.
If these two ‘willing people’ are swayambhus, i.e., people who took birth on their own and grew up by themselves, let them do whatever they want.
But if they have been brought up by a community, they owe something to that community, they owe not to put their selfish interest above reasonable community practices.” (click for an example of one such reasonable community practice)
I have some questions here,
1. Are the members free to opt out if they eschew the related benefits?
2. Do all members benefit or only those who are in positions of power? I fear some family politics and financial status might decide who is in power.
3. Who decides if the practices are reasonable? Those who benefit from the practices, or those who must sacrifice?
I know a lot of Indians believe this. What do you think? What do the children owe to their parents?