Originally posted by: soapwatcher1
Does not matter how or why Anuj lived with Maaya, it is still wrong. If Anuj followed his child who wanted to go with her birth mother, it is okay? But if Anupama wanted to go to her kids in their time of need, it is wrong?
Did Anuj know the reason why Maaya took his child? Did Choti Anu ho with Maaya willingly?
Did Anupama go to Shah House only for her children? Are we adding Kavya, Leela-Hansmukh, Vanraj to that category?
Were her "kids" underage like Choti Anu to not be able to take their own decisions or not live their life on their own terms or travel without a guardian? .
Also, whatever the reason Anuj lived with Maaya, he did live with her. He did not contact Anupama who was his legal wedded wife for months while he lived with Maaya. That’s okay? But not Anupama going to the house that was her home for 20+ years where her kids were? Every time Anuj lands with a woman in his home (like Shrew) or in the woman’s home (Maaya), he is bechara?
How come the second part of discussion was conveniently ignored?
He asked her if they both did not matter to her tow which he was told, "Aap Pagal hain kya?" After the Holi fiasco.
Also, Anuj left Amdavad aimlessly, distressed, bare foot to Mumbai. How come Anupama never bothered checking on him especially given the state in which he left? He could have met with an accident, anything could have happened even.
She left Kapadia Mansion the following day, instead.
It was only Ankush who persistently looked out for him.
Besides, communication is a two way street, right?
And "20+ years are kids"?
Even after knowing that the man is lusting on her and his mother and he are consipiring to get her back in their home, was she right in going and staying there?
Also, yes, kanyadhan is done by parents, whether they are divorced, living together or not. Here in the U.S., divorced (and re-married to others) parents of all cultures do come together as “parents” of the bride or groom being married. Even amongst Indians here, I have attended a couple of weddings where the parents were divorced but sat together to do the marriage rituals with the bride and groom. The respective spouses of the divorced parents were on the dais but did not sit with the parents. So kanyadhaan or marriage rituals is done by the parents, parents maane mother and father who gave birth and raised the child, that parental relationship doesn’t change whether the father and mother are no longer together or are divorced. So yes, it is completely okay for Anupama to sit with Vanraj for their kids’ weddings. Their roles as co-parents to the children they birthed does not change just because their affections and loyalties to each other has changed.
First of ALL, ALL Hindu rituals are done by married couples "Together". In this case, Vanraj and Kavya and Anuj and Anupama. Whatever is done wherever in the world, at best is for their own convenience. Like it is being told here.
It is simply NOT OK. in facts, it is a disrespect to the culture that it carries.
Anuj had no such excuse. He did not birth Dimpy with Maaya, so to sit with her for the rituals was wrong, period, especially when he has a lawful wedded wife.
comment:
p_commentcount