Buying a bride

[Ngawang Drolma.]

From a buddhist perspective, are there any ethical issues to be considered if someone buys a bride?

[davcuts]

They probably need to make sure the bride comes with a warranty. If not they might not be able to exchange her if they don't like their purchase.

Sorry I couldn't resist

On the serious side I guess it depends on what someone's intentions are for purchasing a bride.

[jcsuperstar]

depends on what you mean by buying a bride too

[cooran]

I agree. What does the term 'buying' cover? ....Like 'buying' an automobile?

If it is part of the Custom of the Country - the traditional way things are done - then what is that to do with 'right' or 'wrong'? But if it is a transplanted custom, no longer fitiing within the laws of the land, then maybe it is suspect. In countries where it is the custom - often the bride has choices as to which of the 'applicants' to accept. But again ... depends on the law of the country, and accepted customs, where the event is happening.

metta
Chris

[Fede]

What are your thoughts on this Drolma....?

[Rui Sousa]

From the Vanijja Sutta An 5.177:

Monks, a lay follower should not engage in five types of business. Which five? Business in weapons, business in human beings, business in meat, business in intoxicants, and business in poison.

[cooran]

Hello all,

I think King Bimbisara bought one of his brides for a great amount. He was a favourite of the Buddha. So it would depend ...

Drolma ...
Could you give us an example of what made you ask the question?

metta
Chris

[Ngawang Drolma.]

Hi all, thanks for your feedback so far. I mean like a mail-order bride. In this situation I think the brides are willing because they're advertising and they presumably signed up for it. But I was thinking along the lines of what Rui Sousa wrote. My reason for asking is kind of personal, if that's okay. But I'll just say that it's not that I'm looking to be a mail-order-bride.

Thanks all

[SeerObserver]

I think King Bimbisara bought one of his brides for a great amount. He was a favourite of the Buddha. So it would depend ...

Dowry is far different from mail-order brides. So I agree that it would depend on what exactly we're talking about.

Hi all, thanks for your feedback so far. I mean like a mail-order bride. In this situation I think the brides are willing because they're advertising and they presumably signed up for it. But I was thinking along the lines of what Rui Sousa wrote. My reason for asking is that someone I know recently bought a wife and I was kind of astounded and wondering if there are ethical implications.

From the Vanijja Sutta An 5.177:

Monks, a lay follower should not engage in five types of business. Which five? Business in weapons, business in human beings, business in meat, business in intoxicants, and business in poison.

regarding Rui Sousa's post, some people subscribe to the theory that you contribute to a certain act if you support the causes and conditions for it to occur. i.e. some vegetarians regard eating meat as akusala kamma because you support the slaughterhouse. So it may also be argued that the same goes for patronage of such services as a contribution to the trade of humans.

Aside from that, what is the purpose of a mail-order bride and are there not the same ethical implications as for prostitution? Yes, it's consensual, but there are other aspects to consider along with the ethical. Consider what kind of temperament you create for yourself when urges occur and you must absolutely satisfy them right then and there without regard to laws, ethics, cleanliness, etc. A being of such temperament may find an appropriate rebirth as some lower life form.

[retrofuturist]

Greetings Drolma,

My wife's cousin got himself a mail-order bride.



I suppose there's worse things in the world.

Metta,
Retro.

[cooran]

Hello Retrofuturist, all,

Personally, I don't see why that is something to be concerned about ~ while picking someone up, half sozzled, at a nightclub or pub, then paying to take her out for a year or so, is considered a better way to meet and marry.

metta
Chris

[retrofuturist]

Greetings Chris,

No, of course it's no real concern, so long as such a decision involves mutual consent. I've always found it odd though that, in either the situation of a mail-order bride, or an Indian dowry, that one side is expected to "pay", or expected to be "bought" signifying some degree of inequality within the relationship.

I think I recall reading that in some Asian countries, marriage is more about financial security and things like that, so for many it may be a natural fit.

Metta,
Retro.

[Rui Sousa]

I think that owning a business that provides the means for someone to "order" a human being would be wrong livelihood.

Ordering a bride in itself doesn't seem as too awful, although I consider it a bit disrespectful for the bride. If a man or a woman pays money to get married with a person he/she does not know and then respects the person, treats that person well and does not develop a sense of possession that would prevent that person from leaving, then I don't see any harm in that action. It depends on intention. If you intend to have a personal slave, then it is awful and no good could come from that. If you intend to have a live partner with compatible characteristics, maybe from a poorer country, then it can be good for both parts.

Personally I feel I wouldn't be able to do such thing, because I would feel I was promoting an industry that implies suffering to those involved. (as SeerObserver mentioned)

[Fede]

Greetings Chris,

No, of course it's no real concern, so long as such a decision involves mutual consent. I've always found it odd though that, in either the situation of a mail-order bride, or an Indian dowry, that one side is expected to "pay", or expected to be "bought" signifying some degree of inequality within the relationship.

(...)
Metta,
Retro.

This of course was the origin and basis for christian marriages as well.
The church did not take an interest in marriage and its significance in "the eyes of God" until the 1500's...

There appeared to be many marriages taking place without witness or ceremony in the 1500's. The Council of Trent was so disturbed by this, that they decreed in 1563 that marriages should be celebrated in the presence of a priest and at least two witnesses. Marriage took on a new role of saving men and women from being sinful, and of procreation. Love wasn't a necessary ingredient for marriage during this era.

From this link:
http://marriage.about.com/cs/generalhis ... istory.htm

Even today, when a priest asks:
"Who gives this woman to be wedded to this man?" the priest is harking back to a time when women were viewed largely as profitable chattels, and property to be bargained for and disposed of.
Many people now opt for a 'softer' or amended version:

Many brides (and grooms) today object to the "giving" of the bride, as, to some, it symbolizes unpleasant aspects of patriarchal tradition. Presuming your house of worship has no rules otherwise, you may omit this part of the ceremony (called "The Presentation"), if you wish. A bride should consider that this portion of the ceremony is historically the big moment for the Father of the Bride, and denying your father this opportunity might be a disappointment to him. Many couples today are addressing their discomfort with the practice by improving upon it: when the officiant asks, "Who gives this woman to be married to this man?" the bride's father can respond, "She gives herself, with her parents' blessing."

From this link:
http://weddings.weddingchannel.com/wedd ... imony.aspx

Just to add to the interest....