Sampiro I want to add my kudos to the pile. Besides everything else, your post made it clear why the aliens in Plan 10 From Outer Space have beehives for heads.
One of these days, I’ve got to see that film.
But, when Draupadi married five husbands, it was made very clear that she would only spend one day with each of the five. I forgot what they did with Saturday and Sunday, but it was not gang-bang-city.
two things
#1 I feel I should point out that OTTOMH the only reason you don’t have Jewish polygamists is that the Talmud enjoins us to obey any just and moral man made law as though it came from G-d. So, bigamy laws must be followed. Jacob had two wives. Solomon had numerous wives. Some of whom weren’t even Jewish.
Re Hinduism
I’d like more posts and more cites on this. I’ve been following Draupadi’s hair care regimen and it’s been going great!
Upon reading some things, it seems that Draupadi was promsied by Shiva that every morning she would regain her virginity, after marriage. :eek: What kind of bullshit is that? I wouldn’t want that!
Sometimes it is also said she was to spend one year with each husband, and no other husband was to see her while she was with that one. If they did, they woudl be exiled for twelve years.
Each of her husbands married other women, as well. She loved Arjun (middle brother and the one who actually won her) best, but was loved by Bhima (second brother) best. I don’t blame her. I love Arjun best, too.
One day Arjun interrupted Yudisthr’s (elder brother) time with Draupadi to get weapons to protect a Brahmin (sage) and was exiled for 12 years.
The Mahabharat in many ways is the story of weak men. Yudishtr was not a good eldest brother, and had Arjun been the eldest brother, things would have gone drastically different. Yudishtr was weak and greedy and lustful - not as bad as his enemies, and he was also the strictest in religion, but he gave in a lot. Bhim was strong but not very bright.
Arjun was the best and brightest star in the family, and had he been born first, perhaps the Mahabharat (literally: great war) might never have happened.
Ironically, there is a son elder than Yudishtr, but he was a bastard (I mean as in his mom was not married when she had him) and so he could not claim his rightful place. His name was Karn.
In this day and age, Pagan with a capital P is generally understood to mean neopagans, aka “modern pagans,” and may be members of any one of hundreds of New Religious Movements or solitary practitioners with no formal group.
Add I’ll nitpick a wee bit. There are no polygamous Pagans in the US, because that’s illegal. There are plenty who are polyamorous, which is accepted by many (but by no means all, or even the majority), and I’m certain that’s who **Sunspace **was referring to. Some of them may have entered into religious/spiritual group marriages, but not legal ones, obviously.
And my answer is that it depends. Some polyamorous people are okay with group sex, some aren’t. Even when you have a “triad” or “quad” who all consider themselves (not legally) married to one another, they may or may not have group sex. It tends not to be a moral or religious issue, but a matter of personal preference and logistics.
ETA: For non-poly Pagans, it still depends. I know Pagans who are “whatever works for y’all” about the issue (more common), and I know Pagans who are harshly judgemental and die hard monogamists and think everyone should be (less common, but not hard to find). It’s not really a group that you can make generalizations about easily; there’s a huge variety of opinions on every topic you should imagine. Ask 6 Pagans a question, and you’ll get at least 8 answers.
Anaamika Could you please start a thread on the Mahabharat? I know a little about it (PBS had a live action mini series a few years back. IIRC They cut the story down to 8 hours), but I would love to know more.
Karn was the one born with a golden breastplate? And it was his spear that killed the son of Bhima and the rakshassa?
ETA You’re the second person who’s told me that there’s no -a on the end of these names. The PBS series had Arjuna, Yudishtira, and Mahabharata. I ask in all seriousness, is this a regional thing? Or does it reflect different theological traditions?
Transliteration is not a precise science. Let’s put it this way. Almost every Hindi letter comes with a short a at the end. So it’s not
K
Kh
G
Gh
D
Dh
But
Ka
Kha
Ga
Gha
Da
Dha
(This is how our alphabet begins, btw. Vowels are separate and we have more of both>)
However that short a is a tiny a. We never say ‘Arjuna’, we say ‘Arjun’. We never say Bhima, we say Bhim.
If you look at my name, Anaamika, it’s spelled like this in Hindi
*
short A
N
long A, directly attached to the N, this negates the short A
M with a long “EEE” directly attached to the M. this negates the short A
K
long A directly attached to the K, which negates the short A
*
So I tend to drop the final a’s, even though the “right” way I guess is to include them. But they are silent! I never would say Yudisthra! His name ends on the R. So it makes not much sense to me.
Karn was indeed the one born with the golden breastplate, and was a ferocious warrior in the Mahabharat - on the losing side. His story is very sad.
I think I tried to start a thread on the Mahabharat before, but it was on the TV series, which was roundly mocked. 
Admittedly it is terrible in some places, but goddamn if it isn’t my favorite story of all time. let me dig out my book on the Mahabharat so I can check my facts!
Doc Cathode:
While it is true that there is a principle of “Dina D’Malchusa Dina” (the law of the land is law) in Judaism, the ban declared circa 1000 by Rabbi Gershom is the primary reason that there are no Jewish polygamists today. While it once was considered binding only on Ashkenazic Jews, the Rabbis of the Sephardic and Eastern Jews accepted the ban as binding on their communities when the State of Israel was founded. (Grandfathered-in bigamists were allowed to remain married.) A Jew who lived under Rabbi Gershom’s ban would not marry more than one wife even if he relocated to a country where it was not illegal under civil law. (Admittedly, what you said is true as well - a Sephardic or Eastern Jew before they accepted Rabbi Gershom’s ban would be required to observe the law of the land if said land forbid polygamy.)
NM
Googling gets me a lot biographical information about Gershom, and reiterations that he made such a ban. What I can’t find is any detail about his reasoning, the torah verses he based the ban on (if any), or his authority to make such a ban. I don’t want to practice polygamy (I’d be delighted to find just one woman crazy enough to marry me). But I am confused. Without cites from the torah, how can a ruling mean anything?
ETA According to Wikipedia (I know. It ain’t a strong cite) some Jews in Yemen still practice polygamy.
More googling turns up an SDMB thread. Rabbi Gershom - Factual Questions - Straight Dope Message Board
Wherein, we may read
I’m confused. So Gershom’s ban is binding only if I choose to accept it and not for any other reason? What halacha is stopping me from moving to Yemen, declaring Gershom’s ruling null and void and becoming a polygamist?
An interesting simple question, yet no one has answered it?
Doc Cathode:
There was no Torah source for the banning of polygamy per se. However, there is a general Torah injunction to be modest, and Rabbi Gershom considered it important in fulfilling it that the Jewish people not appear immoral in the eyes of the society in which they lived, and European Catholic countries in medieval times, and polygamy was at least one thing that apparently made Jews a target for such accusations.
His authority was that of being the consensus pre-eminent Torah scholar of his generation in the Rhineland. Since the dissolution of the official Sanhedrin by the Romans in the 3rd-4th century CE, a Rabbi only has authority to the degree that the Jewish community in which he resides respects him. However, having accepted his ban’s authority upon themselves when he declared it gave it the authority of having been declared law by an earlier generation of Rabbi, so that later Rabbinic authorities (whose own authority derives from the Torah knowledge that they had been taught by those of earlier generations, and therefore they’ll hold their teachers, and their teachers’ teachers, and so forth, in high esteem) do not feel they have the right to overturn it. As such, the ban remains in effect for the descendants of those who originally accepted it, and for followers of the Rabbis who succeeded Rabbi Gershom, however many generations removed. So moving to Yemen and marrying two women would not be kosher for an Ashkenazi.
However, the Sephardic (Spanish/North African) Jews of the time, as well as the Jews of Middle Eastern communities (such as Yemen, Iraq, Iran and Uzbekistan) had a) their own Rabbis, who they respected more than Rabbi Gershom, and b) a surrounding society in which polygamy was not considered to be immoral, so from the start they never felt the ban applied to them. Since it had not been accepted back then, it does not apply to their descendants now.
First I heard of polygamy in the State of Israel, back when.
How many marriages were “grandfathered” in?
Shouldn’t many of them still be around, struttin’ their stuff and causing weird vibes among the Sephardim, let alone the Ashkenazim, let alone the (thankful) melting pot of Israel?
NOTE- In all likelihood, I am about to make an ass of myself. I am a Jew- arguably not a very good one. I feel just as being a natural born US citizen and 40 will qualify me to be President in the next election, being a Jew qualifies me to question any rabbi or sage.
Then I personally view as nothing more than a secular recommendation and non-binding.
You know the story of the two sages and G-d better than I do, I’m sure. A walking tree, a river that changes its course, walls that bend, even the voice of G-d are not valid cites when it comes to Jewish law. If Gershom had no cites from the torah, his argument was invalid.
How exactly does this work?
Why not? Seriously. If his ban wasn’t based cites from the torah, I personally feel I have the authority to overturn it. It may be a good idea. But that’s all it is.
How does the ban remain in effect for descendants? I know the laws of Noah are considered to be binding on all of humanity. If you were born, you’re supposed to follow those seven laws. I know that any Jew is considered bound by 613 laws. If you came out of a Jewish woman, you’re a Hebrew and must hold up your end of the Covenant. But I don’t know where in the Torah it says ‘if your ancestors accepted the opinion of a rabbi, then you are bound by that opinion’
BTW Gut Yontiff may you and yours be inscribed for a happy and healthy year
Hell, let’s bring it back! Let’s bring it back right now!
Doc Cathode:
Sorry for the delay in responding, I hadn’t had a lot of computer time over the weekend, and a lot of work waiting for me afterward.
It works because the rabbis who followed Rabbi Gershom’s generation were students of the rabbis of Rabbi Gershom’s generation. If their teachers acknowledged the wisdom of Rabbi Gershom’s ban, they weren’t going to consider themselves wiser than their teachers, so they as well acknowledged Rabbi Gershom’s superior wisdom and continued to maintain the ban. And the next generation wouldn’t consider itself wiser than THEIR teachers, etc, etc.
Because the underlying wisdom of it was Torah-based. The Torah does not ban polygamy specifically, but if the underlying principle of not giving the appearance of immorality does come from the Torah, then when someone of the stature of Rabbi Gershom says that the best implementation of it is to not marry more than one woman at a time, there is a respect for that.
Well, there are two principles that inform this matter:
-
The law of “Honor your mother and father.” If your parents adopted certain customs out of respect for the Rabbi from whom they heard it, that’s not something to be taken lightly. That’s not to say that if for religious reasons you find another Rabbi’s path more compelling that you may not make a principled change in your own practice, but it’s not something to do without very good reason.
-
The agreement to ban polygamy on Rabbi Gershom’s say-so wasn’t just by a mass of individuals in the community, but by the Jewish courts (Batei Din) who administered the Jewish community’s religious affairs. While they do not have the punishment powers of the old Sanhedrin, anyone defying the court’s edicts will effectively find himself socially ostracized, and back then, most cities’ courts would honor “excommunications” declared by another court. If a French/German Jew, after Rabbi Gershom’s ban had been accepted, went to Yemen and married two women, he might get away with it, but if he came back to his hometown and flouted his rejection of Rabbi Gershom, his disregard for communal norms might earn him some nasty consequences.