husbands must love wive as themselves, vedic sanskrit texts?

[NorthWide]

Below is an excerpt explaining the level of respect a man should have for his wife. My interrogatory, is does anything simipar exist in the Confucian, Daoist, Vedic (Hindu & Buddhist) Sanskrit texts?

 

From Ephesians 5:25-33

 

Dzogchen, Bon, Jn~  texts are also acceptable.

Edited Monday at 06:56 AM by NorthWide

[心神 ~]

I don't have the answer you're looking for. But to add context to this "commandment," Saul of Tarsus (or possibly one of his followers) did write this to the church at Ephesus, and perhaps for some reason the congregation needed to be addressed in the context of martial relationships.

 

But Yeshua's perspective was much broader. In Matthew 22:35-39 (and similarly in passages in Mark and Luke), he says:

 

Quote

And one of them, a lawyer, asked him a question to test him. “Teacher, which commandment in the law is the greatest?” 

 

He said to him, “’You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind.’ This is the greatest and first commandment. And a second is like it: ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’

 

It seems strange for Saul, if he in fact wrote the Epistle to the Ephesians, to have focused on loving a singular person as yourself and emphasizing marital relations, when "Saul's teacher" spoke of loving all persons as yourself and emphasized communal relations, as did his apostles when they established various communities after Yeshua's death.

 

My point is that from the Christological perspective, a husband or wife should be loved and respected not by virtue of being a spouse, but by virtue of being a creation and a child of God.

 

In Luke 6:27-33, Yeshua is quoted as saying:

 

Quote

But I say to you who hear: Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, and pray for those who spitefully use you. To him who strikes you on the one cheek, offer the other also. And from him who takes away your cloak, do not withhold your tunic either. Give to everyone who asks of you. And from him who takes away your goods do not ask them back. And just as you want men to do to you, you also do to them likewise.

 

But if you love those who love you, what credit is that to you? For even sinners love those who love them. And if you do good to those who do good to you, what credit is that to you? For even sinners do the same.

 

If one has a spouse, they should absolutely love and respect said spouse, and we cannot love others if we don't have love and respect for ourselves, for we too are children of the Creator.

 

But what spiritual good does it do to "love" a spouse while hating others? Love of a spouse should be an outpouring of "brotherly" love (itself an outpouring of the love of God), not a gift bestowed upon a person who is seen as a singular extension of the self, either in spirit or as "property," and certainly not as a means of providing salvation to the other.

 

There's also a bit preceding the excerpt you included that says:

 

Quote

Wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands as you do to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior. Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything.

 

How interesting that Yeshua is never recorded to have said this.

 

Edited Monday at 02:29 PM by 心神 ~

[Nungali]

9 hours ago, 心神 ~ said:

I don't have the answer you're looking for. But to add context to this "commandment," Saul of Tarsus (or possibly one of his followers) did write this to the church at Ephesus, and perhaps for some reason the congregation needed to be addressed in the context of martial relationships.

 

' The Real Wives of Ephesus  County ' coming soon on  ......  

 

There was a very individual dynamic going on there with women  so they needed to be 'handled differently '   ; on the one hand ' they needed to be acknowledged and supported  as they were smart and intelligent , on the other hand  they needed to be 'settled down'   because of this . 

 

In Ephesus during Paul's time, women played varied roles, including engaging in religious practices and contributing to household economies. Some women were involved in the cult of Artemis, the city's patron goddess, particularly during childbirth. Others, like Priscilla, were active in the early Christian community, even working alongside their husbands in ministry. Additionally, some women in Ephesus were engaged in trade and craftsmanship, contributing to the city's economic life. 

 

" should be understood against the cultural background of prominent, powerful women." 

 

https://margmowczko.com/the-prominence-of-women-in-the-cultic-life-of-ephesus/

 

 

 

9 hours ago, 心神 ~ said:

 

But Yeshua's perspective was much broader. In Matthew 22:35-39 (and similarly in passages in Mark and Luke), he says:

 

 

It seems strange for Saul, if he in fact wrote the Epistle to the Ephesians, to have focused on loving a singular person as yourself and emphasizing marital relations, when "Saul's teacher" spoke of loving all persons as yourself and emphasized communal relations, as did his apostles when they established various communities after Yeshua's death.

 

My point is that from the Christological perspective, a husband or wife should be loved and respected not by virtue of being a spouse, but by virtue of being a creation and a child of God.

 

In Luke 6:27-33, Yeshua is quoted as saying:

 

 

If one has a spouse, they should absolutely love and respect said spouse, and we cannot love others if we don't have love and respect for ourselves, for we too are children of the Creator.

 

But what spiritual good does it do to "love" a spouse while hating others? Love of a spouse should be an outpouring of "brotherly" love (itself an outpouring of the love of God), not a gift bestowed upon a person who is seen as a singular extension of the self, either in spirit or as "property," and certainly not as a means of providing salvation to the other.

 

There's also a bit preceding the excerpt you included that says:

 

 

How interesting that Yeshua is never recorded to have said this.

 

 

he wasn't directly addressing dynamics as Ephesus      

[Nungali]

17 hours ago, NorthWide said:

Below is an excerpt explaining the level of respect a man should have for his wife. My interrogatory, is does anything simipar exist in the Confucian, Daoist, Vedic (Hindu & Buddhist) Sanskrit texts?

 

 

 

 

No , because they never had to address the issue of a Chritian church in a strong pagan community with strong women  integrating into a sexist society     

 

Of course, the view will change with the underlying philosophy ; 

 

• Complementary Opposites:

  Daoism sees the relationship between husband and wife as a dynamic interplay of yin and yang, not as a hierarchy or competition. 

   
• Equality and Respect:

  Neither the husband nor the wife is seen as superior or inferior. Both are valued for their unique contributions to the relationship and their individual growth. 

   
• Natural Harmony:

  The goal is to live in harmony with the natural flow of life, allowing the relationship to evolve and adapt without rigid expectations or attempts to control. 

   
• Individual Growth:

  Daoism encourages both partners to pursue their own paths and cultivate their individual strengths, while supporting each other's journey. 

   
• Love and Compassion:

  Genuine love involves understanding and accepting the other person's needs, even when they differ from one's own, and offering kindness and thoughtfulness. 

   
• Flexible and Expansive Energy:

  The relationship should allow for individual expression, learning, and growth, without negative feedback or restrictions. 

   

  ..............

   

  In Hinduism, the relationship between husband and wife is deeply rooted in religious and social ideals, emphasizing mutual respect, fidelity, and spiritual partnership. The wife is considered a 'dharma patni', a partner in performing religious duties, and a 'shadharmini', sharing in the husband's life and goals. The husband is seen as a protector and provider, responsible for his wife's well-being and spiritual growth. 

  ..........................

   

  In Buddhism, the relationship between husband and wife is based on mutual respect, love, and faithfulness. The teachings emphasize the importance of treating each other with honor, not belittling one another, and sharing responsibilities. A good relationship also involves understanding, compassion, and working together towards common goals

   

  ...................In Confucianism, the relationship between husband and wife is viewed as a partnership based on mutual respect and defined roles. The husband is considered the head of the household, while the wife is expected to support and assist him. This relationship is ideally characterized by harmony, balance, and a degree of deference from the wife to the husband. However, this deference is not intended to imply subservience or a lack of respect for the wife's opinions and feelings

   

   

[Cobie]

.

Edited yesterday at 01:17 AM by Cobie

[Nungali]

36 minutes ago, Cobie said:

 

AI forgot to mention that excluded the female feet.
For almost a thousand years they mutilated the feet of women. Rich families would sent their daughters to live somewhere else, this to avoid getting disturbed by the screaming in pain.
 

 

I had not realized it was a Buddhist practice ?  I thought it related more to Confucianism ?  I better check .... 

 

Role of Confucianism

During the Song dynasty, the status of women declined.^[44] A common argument is that it was the result of the revival of Confucianism as neo-Confucianism and that, in addition to promoting the seclusion of women and the cult of widow chastity, it also contributed to the development of foot binding.^[126] 

 

Some Confucian moralists in fact disapproved of the erotic associations of foot binding, and unbound women were also praised.^[130] The Neo-Confucian Cheng Yi was said to be against foot binding and his family and descendants did not bind their feet.^[131][132] Modern Confucian scholars such as Tu Weiming also dispute any causal link between neo-Confucianism and foot binding,^[133] as Confucian doctrine prohibits mutilation of the body as people should not "injure even the hair and skin of the body received from mother and father"

 

... and so on . 

 

Foot binding in China was a cultural practice, not directly linked to Buddhism,

 

 

 

36 minutes ago, Cobie said:

It was customary for families to sell a new born girl.

They were seen as useless (as they would leave when adult to get married). They were sold to another family with a son, to be raised there as his future bride. Sometimes in adverse circumstances, the baby girl got sold into prostitution.
 

A widow was actively encouraged to commit suicide, as she was seen as superfluous.

Look up the meanings of 陰 陽  female/wrong, male/right.

 

I don't need to . I am well aware of our human history of assuming sexual inequality .  Here I am merely  offering some views , as the OP asked for them .    ( IE, views within those religions, not my views on them  ) . 

 

36 minutes ago, Cobie said:

 

Imo for a woman there is absolutely nothing of value to be found of in the ancient eastern religions/philosophies/cultures as they developed over time.

 

Not a single thing ? Nothing ?  Zilch ? Absolutely devoid ?  

 

WOW ! ... extreme .  

 

 

36 minutes ago, Cobie said:

They also had cannibalism in TCM till c. 1950sh. According to the World Health Organisation they actually still do a bit underground.

 

I can’t be bothered to find source material, I just wrote this from memory from when I did research this about 5 years back. So take it as my opinion.

 

 

 

Indeed I have .    

[Cobie]

@Nungali I moved my post as I do not find it suitable for the open forum. Please be so kind as to remove your quotes of it in this thread. Please comment at it’s new place.

 

Edited yesterday at 01:55 AM by Cobie

[Nungali]

Well, you should have put me on ignore ages ago  as it isn't the case that 

"now I use AI " , always had since its inception . 

 

Of course I 'use'  AI  ... we all do  .... haven't you got a phone ?  

 

I think this is more of a case of me contradicting your own personal opinion on something  without reference  ( which you indicated ) and me checking it and finding alternative info .  And I know there is an element here that doesn't like people doing that ,  they want to be able to express their opinions regardless .   Well, so do I    

 

and my opinion here is ;   that practice did not relate to Buddhism ( as your butchered quoting of what I wrote suggested ) but to Confucianism .. that was my opinion Coby, just like YOU had an opinion  ... and THEN I decided to check my opinion . AI gives a quick answer ... but that is not the end of it .

 

Or are you assuming I give AI automatic validity and do not follow up where it got its references from ? 

 

Anyway, all this is on the tail end of some type of anger or  frustration you rightly have about female oppression historically in Asia , I don't need to check my opinion with AI on that one ! 

 

If you want to feel better , switch your geographical focus ; 

 

Women in ancient Persia were not only highly respected but, in many cases, considered the equals of males. Women could own land, conduct business, received equal pay, could travel freely on their own, and in the case of royal women, hold their own council meetings on policy.

Titles of respect accorded to royal Persian women seem to have derived from the earlier Elamite culture and, most likely, the Median Empire which was the immediate precursor to the Achaemenid Persian Empire (c. 550-330 BCE) founded by Cyrus the Great (r. c. 550-530 BCE). Cyrus established the Persian paradigm of freedom of religion and expression in his empire but was also responsible for maintaining the dignity and autonomy of women of every class.

 

 

 

 

Pregnant women received higher wages as did new mothers for the first month after the birth of their child.

 

Women labored alongside men in the workforce and were often supervisors and managers. Highly-paid female supervisors were known as arashshara (“great chief”) and received a larger amount of wine and grain for overseeing the work of often large groups of subordinates. There was no difference in pay based on gender; one's salary was based solely on one's level of skill and experience in the job. Pregnant women, however, received higher wages as did new mothers for the first month after the birth of their child. The mother, midwife, and physician attending the birth also received a bonus if the child was male. Sons were preferred over daughters but there is no evidence of female infanticide or the practice of exposing an unwanted infant to the elements.

Slaves in the Achaemenid Period – and throughout the history of ancient Persia – were treated like servants, received compensation for their services, and had a much higher standard of living and quality of life than slaves anywhere else in the ancient world. Under the laws initiated by Darius I, slaves could not be mistreated, beaten, or killed with impunity and a slave-owner or master of an estate who did so would face the same penalty as if the victim were a free citizen of the empire . 

 

https://www.worldhistory.org/article/1492/women-in-ancient-persia/

 

and if one asked AI about it ,  you would get responses that you can look up the references to and some will lead you right back to here . 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Nungali]

Coby !  You are an excessive editor and delete person  ! 

 

You write things, one responds to it ,  then you go back and edit out the significant bit of your post that the response  related to  . Is this  deliberate or is there some other reason going on here . 

 

No its not me having a go at you , it just happens .... I also note you even edit out  your posts in welcome forum ?  

 

maybe write your post , count to ten, do something different , then read it back to yourself before posting .

[BigSkyDiamond]

1 hour ago, Nungali said:

Of course I 'use'  AI  ... we all do  

 

it is not accurate to say "we all do" regarding use of AI.

No, we do NOT all use AI in creating posts.  Some people actually research and check for credibility of sources and information before posting.  Those who care about actually having and presenting accurate information do not use AI.  Because AI is documented inaccurate 60% of the time.  

[Nungali]

Well, of course I know that and I did qualify what I said   and it wasn't about EVERYONE using AI when they post here , was it ?  

 

WELL ???  ......  was it  ???  

 

No  I didn't say you all use it to create posts here , 

 

21 hours ago, Nungali said:

 

 

Of course I 'use'  AI  ... we all do  .... haven't you got a phone ?  

 

 

IF you could manage to actually read what I write down instead of  finding a word or two and chucking a little tantie' about it  you might realize  I am actually right ;  

 

" Here's some good news – in most cases, you don't need to do anything special to enable AI on your phone. It's typically built into the core of your device's operating system and various apps, working silently in the background to enhance your experience from the moment you start using your phone.

 

However, while AI is generally always on, there are often ways to customise or fine-tune AI features to better suit your preferences. Here are a few tips:

1.  Virtual assistants: Features like Siri (for iPhones), Google Assistant (for Android), or Bixby (for Samsung) are prime examples of AI on your phone. To get the most out of these, make sure they're set up and activated. You can usually do this in your phone's settings.
2.  Camera AI: Many phones have AI features in their camera apps. These are typically on by default, but you might find toggles for things like "AI scene recognition" or "AI beautification" in your camera settings.
3.  Keyboard predictions: Your phone's keyboard likely uses AI to predict your next words. This is usually on by default, but you can often customise it in your keyboard settings.
4.  System optimisations: Many phones use AI to optimise performance and battery life. These features are typically always running, but you might find some controls in your battery or device care settings.
5.  Face or voice recognition: If your phone has face unlock or voice recognition features, you'll need to set these up manually, usually during the initial phone setup or later in your security settings.
6.  App-specific AI: Many apps, particularly those for photo editing or fitness tracking, have their own AI features. You might need to enable these within the individual apps.

 

https://www.optus.com.au/connected/tech/what-is-ai-in-phones#:~:text=Camera AI%3A Many phones have,to predict your next words.

[Nungali]

20 hours ago, BigSkyDiamond said:

 

it is not accurate to say "we all do" regarding use of AI.

 

 

 

20 hours ago, BigSkyDiamond said:

No, we do NOT all use AI in creating posts.  Some people actually research and check for credibility of sources and information before posting.  Those who care about actually having and presenting accurate information do not use AI.  Because AI is documented inaccurate 60% of the time.  

 

I have said this before ;  I often already have done the research previously  ( I do 'know stuff' without looking up AI  , in case you never noticed )  and AI supplies a handy pre written  cut and paste .   .  .  and if you didn't know , the little upper case numbers that can appear in an AI quote  ARE the references   

 

Ooooooh  !  Hang on ... do you make posts here using your mobile phone ?  That could be (one of )  your problems .  Another problem can be   trying to debate with people that know their stuff  when you are using your mobile phone while sitting at the bus stop waiting  for a bus to take  you to work , or on the train  ..... or maybe even AT WORK . 

 

If I put something into Google search , on my lap top , the first answer is  often an AI summary , at the end of that summary is an icon you can click on and a quick list of references of various sites on the internet comes up on the  right hand side of the page  to indicate the sources and references that the AI summary came from , these can be quickly checked and have their own summary and location reference . 

 

So it appears some people here do not understand how AI can be used properly .  Its an indexing tool , it isn't supposed to replace your own intelligence ! 

 

And what makes this is even more silly is you yourself recently  posted about the many problems with AI and I liked and supported those comments .  

 

Dude  ...... I think you have some issue or bias that are clouding or masking  your perceptions !   

[BigSkyDiamond]

56 minutes ago, Nungali said:

I often already have done the research previously  ( I do 'know stuff' without looking up AI).   and AI supplies a handy pre written  cut and paste...Another problem can be   trying to debate with people that know their stuff.  If I put something into Google search , on my lap top , the first answer is  often an AI summary.  So it appears some people here do not understand how AI can be used properly .   it isn't supposed to replace your own intelligence 

 

When people "know their stuff," and do their own research. and express ideas using their own words, then they don't need to use AI.   Yes there is an AI response on Google search.  I disimiss it out of hand as unreliable.  

Edited 10 hours ago by BigSkyDiamond

[BigSkyDiamond]

1 hour ago, Nungali said:

Dude  ...... I think you have some issue or bias that are clouding or masking  your perceptions !   

 

Yes.  My bias is towards reading posts where people can express ideas in their own words.  Instead of copying off the homework of the student in class who gets F grades.  (60% error rate is a grade  F) 

 

Grade	Percentage correct
A	90–100%
B	80–89%
C	70–79%
D	60–69%
F	0–59%

Edited 10 hours ago by BigSkyDiamond

[Nungali]

1 minute ago, BigSkyDiamond said:

 

When people "know their stuff" and do their own research and express ideas using their own words, then they don't need to use AI. 

yes there is an AI response on Google search.  I disimiss it out of hand as unreliable.  

 

You are also dismissing my patient explanations out of hand as well . 

 

AS I said , I found it sometimes a handy pre written  cut and paste option  for material I already know is right  and if I don't I check the references embedded within it , 

 

Also although you agreed with me that yes there is an AI response  ..... that YOU dismiss out of hand as unreliable ,  you don't even bother to check any research on it . 

 

If you are automatically denying an AI response without checking on it , you are a bigger 'AI hater ' than I am !    

 

 

[Nungali]

2 minutes ago, BigSkyDiamond said:

 

Yes.  My bias is towards reading posts where people can express ideas in their own words.  Instead of copying off the homework of the student in class who gets D grades. 

 

I have already explained to you what I do 

 

Why do you feel the need to  change things in order to make a criticism of me ? 

[Nungali]

3 minutes ago, BigSkyDiamond said:

 

Yes.  My bias is towards reading posts where people can express ideas in their own words.  Instead of copying off the homework of the student in class who gets D grades. 

 

IN a way that's pretty funny ..... anyone here can look at my posts in my PP  and elsewhere and decide if I am doing that .   

 

I mean you and your support crew  might not be able to , but any clear and unbiased person would be able to .  

but it did remind me of my youth , when I did a training course to be able to work on the railways .  There were many migrants in the course , some with  'lower' English skills .  At the end we had an exam  . After that the teacher   gave us the results ; 

 

"  Katroupie !  " 

 

" Yes Sir ! " 

 

"  Your exam !   You copied it exactly from the person next to you ! "

 

"Yes Sir ! "

 

" Do you know how I knew that ? ... You even copied his name  at the top of the page ! "

 

"Yes Sir ! "

 

" And you openly and happily admit that  ! ... Come to think of it , during the whole course , you have been sitting up the back with your two mates there talking to each other  ....  Katroupie ... can you even speak English ? "

 

" Yes Sir ! " 

 

" No you cant !  You have been sitting here for 6 weeks , getting paid , with your mates sometimes interpreting for you , going 'Yes Sir , Yes Sir .' every time I ask you a question ." 

 

 " Yes Sir !  " 

 

" I will have to fail you ."

 

" Yes Sir !  "  

 

( but he had already been paid for 6 weeks       )  

[Nungali]

and here is the other STUPID  thing , you guys . 

 

The OP  put up  a concept from the NT about how to treat wives and asked if there was anything similar in the religious traditions he  cited . 

 

I gave him an answer ...... about similar   traditions  (   the proper way to treat wives ) in those other religions  .

 

Then it was asked  ' what about their bad practices ?!    ... that was never mentioned !   Did the OP outline bad practices  and ask if other religions did them ?

 

No he didn't ! 

 

But the OP question was not about dissimilar practices  was it ?  NO !   IT was about similar practices  about treating women respectfully .  Which I outlined .  So why would I  (or even AI )   mention those feet binding practices . That was not the question asked of AI and it was not the question asked of us as posters . 

 

And then all this stuff about AI being inaccurate !        You guys ! 

 

And of course I knew what the Busddhist claim about that would be !   Its rather obvious to anyone that already knows the teaching , same for  Hinduism and Confucianism . 

 

Now, if the OP had highlighted the near by passages   from the NT where it tells women to keep quiet in church and know their place , and then asked if  the eastern religions had  similar or oppressive  teachings or culture in regard to women ,... 

 then of course the answer would be different  and practices that did not respect women would have been compared .

 

 

I 'wonder about' some of you people .