Woman under the ethnic religions

Woman under the Ethnic Religions.

BY MRS. MOSES SMITH.

CHICAGO, ILL. Woman’s Board of Missions of the Interior. 1898.

Woman Under the Ethnic Religions.

BY MRS. MOSES SMITH.

(A paper read before the World’s Congress of Missions, in Art Institute, Chicago, October 4, 1893.)

For two weeks we have been listening to the presentation of religions. We have heard philosophies of religion profound and subtile, to some minds fascinating in their grace and mysticism. It may be wholesome, if not so agreeable to have our attention now called to the practical workings of some of these religions and their effect on the life and destiny of man. Moreover, as missionary workers, it is wise for us to know not only the present needs of the people, but the religious forces which long centuries have wrought into every tissue of their thought, feeling and action.

Without question religion is the supreme force in history. Religion creates the ideals and aspirations, and so chisels the character of mankind. In the order of nature the worshiper becomes like the being worshiped. “As a man thinketh in his heart, so is he.”

The world has known many religions, some of them eminent for the tremendous power with which they have held millions in their sway over centuries of time; eminent also for profound philosophy, lofty ideals, and sometimes a high morality. Our Lord Jesus Christ gave us the test for Himself and His teaching: “By their fruits ye shall know them.” The conditions of society, temporal and spiritual, are the fruits by which any religious system may be known.

In the nature of things the factor that most universally moulds society is woman. The boy is father of the man, but the woman is mother of the boy, hence the study of the teaching of any religion concerning woman, and of her character and place in society as the result of that religion, is vital both to the correct understanding of the system and of what it has wrought for the world.

The most venerable and possibly the most powerful Ethnic religion is Brahmanism. Rising in India when that was the land of literature and art, the home of the cultured Aryans, for fifteen centuries this religion wrought unhindered on the people. At first a simple nature worship, it degenerated into a pantheon in which all the powers of nature were gods. On this was built a sacerdotalism with caste and idol worship. It became an oppressive tyranny. At this juncture, 500 years before Christ, a new and forcible factor entered the life of the people in the birth of a king’s son, Gautama Buddha, known in history as the great Reformer of Brahmanism. I have not time to speak of the fierce theological war that ensued (400 years), or of the bright coup d’etat of the Brahmans in finally accepting Buddha as the ninth incarnation of Vishnu.

Each of these systems evinces profound thought and lofty ideals, Buddhism a high morality. Each contains elements of truth, and each has been a tremendous power in the history of the race. Striving for supremacy on the same field, the result was a coalition. Together they enter the stream of history under the name of Hinduism. The time has been long enough, the field favorable and broad enough for the completest results, and the present condition of society in India affords an opportunity to see the results.

Sir Monier Williams, the distinguished Sanscrit scholar of Oxford, says: “Although India in the early periods of Brahmanism was a land of literature and science, the present characteristics are poverty, ignorance and superstition. Whatever profound thoughts lay about the roots of Hinduism, it held and still holds the 280,000,000 of India in the bondage of degradation, cruelty and immorality.” “The average income per individual is less than that of any other civilized country, barely $13.50 per year, against $20 even for the Turks, $165 for every Englishman, and $200 for every man, woman and child in the United States.”[1] Dr. John Short, Surgeon General of India, long resident among the people says: “Wherever the Hindu religion predominates, there immorality and debauchery run riot.”

[1] Rev. N. G. Clark, D. D.

[Sidenote: Teachings.]

The Code of Manu is the highest religious authority among the Hindus. You ask a Hindu about the date and age of his great law-giver and he quickly replies, “He was son of the self-existent Brahm.” Manu’s whole teaching about woman is based on the assumption of her impurity. For instance, a Brahman is enjoined “to suspend reading the Veda if a woman comes in sight.” Her ear is not pure enough to hear what the vilest man may read. “Though unobservant of approved usage, or enamoured of another woman, or devoid of good qualities, yet a husband must constantly be revered as a god by a virtuous wife.”[2]

[2] Dharma Sastra, chap. 5, page 154.

“Let the wife who wishes to perform sacred oblation wash the feet of her husband and drink the water, for the husband is to the wife greater than Vishnu.” Again, “Women have no business with the text of a sacred book, and having no evidence of law, and no knowledge of expiatory texts, sinful women must be foul as falsehood itself, and this is a fixed rule.”[3] And it has remained fixed for forty-three centuries.

[3] Dharma Sastra, chap. 5, page 155, 156.

[Sidenote: Seclusion.]

The modern Brahmans like to claim that the present custom of immuring their wives in prison-like rooms had its origin in Mohammedan invasion. This is certainly not the whole truth, for in the unalterable law of Manu, written 900 years before Christ, we read, “A woman is not allowed to go out of the house without the consent of her husband, she may not laugh without a veil over her face or look out of a door or a window.” “It may be that when the Mohammedans came, some fifteen centuries after these laws had been in force, they put the crown on the arch already waiting for them. They may have tightened the chains by which woman was already enslaved,”[4] but the teachings of Manu are sufficient to account for all we see in India to-day.

[4] Wilkins’ Modern Hinduism, page 326.

[Sidenote: Child Marriage.]

The people of the Western World have long wondered why the Hindus were so tenacious of their, to us, revolting customs of child marriage. It is only when we learn that it is not simply a custom but a part of their religion that we apprehend the reason. The sacred laws of the Hindu declare: “If a daughter is married at the age of six, the father is certain to ascend to the highest heaven. If the daughter is not married before seven, the father will only reach the second heaven. If a daughter is not married until the age of ten, the father can only attain the lowest place assigned the blest. If a girl is not married until she is eleven years of age, all her progenitors for six generations will suffer pain and penalties.”[5] When recently an effort was made to induce the Government to raise the legal age of marriage to twelve years, great excitement prevailed. The Brahmans set apart days of fasting and prayer. Multitudes came in processions to the temples, in some cases beating their breasts and calling aloud to the gods to spare them from such calamity.

[5] Women of the Orient, page 135.

The worst feature of the system of child marriage is seen among the Kulin Brahmans, the highest of all. Girls in these families must not marry into a lower caste, and the supply of Kulins is limited, so fathers who have not money to induce some young men to marry their daughters, are compelled to give their little girls to those who make a living by being husbands. Thus a child of twelve may be given as the fortieth or fiftieth wife of some old man. Although it is certain she will soon be a widow, even that is preferable to allowing her to remain unmarried.

[Sidenote: Infanticide.]

“The code of Manu forbids a woman to read the scripture or offer prayer by herself. She is to have no individuality. She exists only in her father or her husband; without a husband she is soulless.” This doctrine bears its legitimate fruit in the custom of murdering infant girls. It is easy reasoning, that it is better to murder a soulless child than not to be able to betroth her and so bring disgrace on the whole family.

[Sidenote: Widows.]

“The Hindu sacred books reach their climax of cruelty in the requirements concerning the widow. She may have only been a betrothed infant or a child of a few years. It makes no difference.” The Shasters teach that if the widow burns herself alive on the funeral pile of her husband, even though he had killed a Brahman, that most heinous of deeds, she expiates the crime. For long centuries widows have been a literal burnt offering for the redemption of husbands. The English Government has prohibited the suttee, but being considered by the family as one rejected of the gods, the widow’s life is such a degradation, such a sorrow, it would seem merciful to let her die. Manu wrote, “Let not a widow ever pronounce the name of another man, for by remarriage she brings disgrace on herself here below, and shall be excluded from the seat of her Lord.” To-day in India under the Hindu religion the widow may not take food more than once in the day. She must go without food and water for forty-eight hours twice in the month. At a meeting of the highest religious court a few years ago it was gravely decreed that, if acting on medical advice, a widow did sometimes take a little water on fast day, the offense might be condoned. O, the burning pathos of the Hindu widow’s prayer: “O God, let no more women be born in this land.” India has now 21,000,000 of widows, nearly 100,000 of them under nine years.

[Sidenote: The Nautch Girl.]

Hinduism touches its lowest depths in the degradation of woman in what the enlightened Hindu, Mr. Mozoomdar, called in the Parliament of Religions “consecrated prostitution” of the Nautch or dancing girls in the temples. The subject is too delicate and too horrible for me to speak of in detail, but as it is a much honored part of this religion it cannot be omitted. The Brahmans claim that it is a most sacred service, having its origin in prehistoric ages in a promise made by Vishnu himself. In a few words the reason and method is this: Parents who have a son very ill will vow to some god that if the son’s life is spared they will consecrate a little girl to the temple; or the parents believing that honor or wealth will be the result, consecrate a girl to the god; or the Brahmans select the most beautiful little girls, the parents rejoicing in the religious honor.

From the hour of consecration the little thing is treated with peculiar respect. She alone of the girls of the family is taught to read. When she becomes ten or twelve years old, her father, mother and nearest relatives take her to the great temple. They go with the priest into the inner shrine. The girl places her hand into the god’s hand, the priest repeats certain prayers and charms. He then hangs a string of cowrie shells around the girl’s neck and the poor little thing repeats after him her marriage vow, which vow is to prostitute herself to any pilgrim to the shrine who demands it.[6] The position of these religious prostitutes in Hindu society is so highly respectable that no festival or wedding is celebrated without their presence. They are asked to tie the wifely ornaments on the neck of the bride. They being married to a god can never be widowed and their touch is lucky. In elegant attire with costly jewels and perfumes, charmingly graceful, they lead their wretched lives, bring great sums into the treasury of the temple, and, as they are religiously taught, accumulate a store of blessing for themselves in a future state. John Short, M. D., Surgeon General of India, Member of Anthropological Society, London, says: “The Nautch girl is recognized and patronized by the Hindu religion.”