Ancient Sayings

I would like to write this post about an ancient Sanskrit writing and how it does not have any significance in today's world.

A Sanskrit saying from many thousands of years ago goes as follows. (Please pardon if there is a spelling mistake or a pronunciation mistake. I read this in English and not in Sanskrit.)

Uththamaa Aathmana Kyaathaa Pithaa Kyaathaa's cha Madhyama
Maathulena Dhama Sasurena Dhama Dhama

(If a person is recognized because of himself, he is the best. If a person is recognized because of his father, he is mediocre. If a person is recognized because of his uncle, he is low. If a person is recognized because of his father-in-law, he is the lowest.)

It says if someone is recognized in the street for what he/she is, then he/she is the best. For example: She is a gold medalist in our university.

If someone is recognized in the street because of his/her father, then he/she is mediocre. For example: He is our MP’s son.

(It does not address people like Jawaharlal Nehru and President John F. Kennedy. They were born to famous fathers and became more famous than their fathers.)

If someone is recognized in the street because of his/her uncle, then he/she is low. For example: She is our Managing Director’s niece.

If someone is recognized in the street because of his/her father-in-law, then he/she is the lowest. For example: He is the son-in-law of this “particular movie director”.

The above Sanskrit saying may be OK at that time when it was written. It is totally out of tune in today's world. People don't bother as to how they are recognized. They can and will say:

If my father is famous and I was born to him, it is not my fault.
If my uncle is famous and I was born in that family, it is not my fault.
If I meet a very good mannered and beautiful girl and we both fell in love and marry, don't blame me if her father is famous.

Another example of what was OK then (thousands of years ago) and out of tune today is Manusmiriti, the Code of Manu. He said a female should be protected by her father in her childhood, by her husband in her youth, and by her son in her old age. If I tell that to any woman (including my wife), she will immediately remove her shoes to hit me. I have read a little about Manusmiriti. But only in English. What he said may have been correct at that time. In his days, the world was cruel and exploitative. So he may have wanted to help women and children. Other writings by him show that he is not anti-woman. For example, he also wrote:

A house where women are ill-treated and weeping will never prosper.
If an unmarried girl gives birth to a child, it belongs to the man she is going to marry.
If a bride is pregnant at the time of marriage, the bridegroom automatically becomes the father of that child.

Pre-marital motherhood existed in ancient times? May be.

Phone is a very good example to see how things change. First there was no phone. Then phone with no numbers and you have to call the operator to give you connection. Then phone with numbers to dial. Then phone with numbers to touch. Now phone comes with us wherever we go. Had someone documented about 100 years ago how great the phone (no numbers and has to call the operator for connection) was and if we read it now.......I will leave it upto you for comments.