The Supreme Court decision to ban meals on the occasion of marriages solemnised at hotels, marriage halls and other public places has been received warmly across the country as the right step in the right direction. The decision of the superior judiciary has come after a long course of legal battle during which pros and cons of the issue were weighed, traditions of the Muslim culture and teachings of Islam were taken into consideration and the need of the Pakistani society was given due weight.
There were legal experts to represent the parties that were opposing serving of meals and those who wanted to maintain the tradition and keep it going for various reasons. Arguments from both the sides had reasons appealing to common-sense.
The reasons put forward for the continuance of wedding meals were many. There were arguments that serving meal at a wedding was part of an old tradition of hospitality unique in its style and meaning that the host was expected to extend toward his guests. The hospitality that is in existence today across the Indo-Pak sub-continent, has its roots in the sense of caring for each other's needs that sensitive people have.
It is to an extent the remnant of tribal culture where hard-earned food, either through farming crops or hunting animals, was offered to visitors from another tribe who had either come with an offer of developing bonds of friendship or with a warning of a war on some pretext.
The sociologists hold offering of food as a gesture of welcome and adds value to this tradition. To them this tradition has been the main factor of peace and brotherhood among various tribal societies.
It is not the food that counts but the eagerness and earnestness in the welcome of a guest that has been symbolised by the variety of dishes and the way these were served. The value is that of presentation and not the stuff is served.
The number of dishes at wedding parties and the decor of the dining hall adds to the entire environ of the blessed occasion where the young and the old men and women assemble to meet each other and congratulate the groom's and the bridegroom's families. The occasion also provides an opportunity to build new relationships and develop acquaintances with other families that have common culture and customs.
The new found friends often become relatives and partners in times of social needs. Many such chance-meetings end in lasting relationships.
Wedding party is a social forum for the exchange of views on serious matters and pleasantries on trivial issues that take place in one's life. It is a happy occasion where lighter moments should be enjoyed. It is an occasion to enjoy and join in other's happiness. Joshing and joking among the girls of marriageable age is another scene that enlightens the occasion-occasion of coming closer and building confidence in each other. Food is just an excuse to make guests mobile and feel good about the host and acknowledge his concerns about the comfort of his guests.
However, the purpose of serving good food to guests is not the total acknowledgement of their profound love and affection and good wishes that they bestow upon the newly wedded couples but is just a token of acknowledgement of their presence on the most happy occasion of a family.
The presence of guests and relatives in the Pakistani society on occasions of joy and mourning of a family is also a reflection of strength, credibility and distinction of that family and a recognition of participants' will to maintain social, religious and cultural heritage passed on to them through generations. It enhances social status and gives strength and confidence to a family to contribute its share of good work in the society and to the guests contentment that comes from a feeling of closeness to his host. It all brings a happiness that is genuine and pure.
Those who oppose extravaganzas at marriage parties think that it encourages wastage of money and resources on inconsequential things. They strongly believe that it has encouraged exhibition of affluence. Those who can afford it put societal pressure on those who can not match their resources and thus give birth to rat race that ends in misery. It puts people in a vicious circle that is ever increasing in its circumference. The ill effect of this social evil has, unfortunately, been taken as sacred and has been accepted by the marrying parties as an indispensable constituent of the marriage ceremony.
In their opinion most of the parents beg and borrow and arrange money for food for their guests. This puts them under hardships for many more years after the marriage has been solemnised. The collection of dowry, a few sets of jewellery and clothes are other essentials that go into the completion of marriage arrangements. Occasions of henna, engagement ceremony and post-wedding dinners are the other ceremonies that need money.
The need for money does not end here. Exchange of expensive gifts for the parents of the brides and bridegrooms and their close family members is another head of expenditure. The cumulative effect is colossal on a middle-income family, which has only one source of income. The decision to impose ban on serving meals at weddings will save the poor from unnecessary expenditure on feasting the guests, at least.
Those who agree with the decision of the apex court, have criticised the permission to serve food even within the boundaries of a house. This permission is counter-productive, as the past experience has shown that the marrying parties at their respective places hold expensive dinners. Even many owners of big houses in posh localities used to offer their lawns on rent for holding wedding parties. Many caterers were famous for helping in this aberration of laws.
The variety of food and countless number of dishes representing different countries such as China, Italy, Thailand and nearer to home Afghanistan and Iran is the expression of large heartiness of the host. It is the way he welcomes his guests and values their presence on the happy occasion of marriage of his children.
Another tradition of sending food to bride and bridegrooms' houses for their respective guests also cames into being. The food so sent used to be in plenty and the variety countless. In fact this trend was more expensive than serving food as usual. In coming marriages there will be as many dishes as one can count and as expensive as one can imagine. Even soft drinks and dessert will be included in the consignment sent to the bride and bridegrooms' houses. The wastage of food either served at a public place or at homes is always there.
"Such bans remain ineffectual as long as the practice does not begin from the top. In this case the elite of the city will have to take the responsibility of setting up example of austerity. They should cut down the number of excuses they try to find out to offer food. The ban on meals is intended to help those who cannot afford to spend money on this "wasteful ritual" but these people are the first to defy the ban. The elite and the rich should show them the path to prosperity. Laws will not help.
Comments
Comments are closed.