Japan has a rich and long-standing culture of sacrifice, which inherits the mourning of the deceased and respect for life, and at the same time unites the strength of the entire family and reminds people to cherish the roots. With the approach of the traditional festival Qingming Festival, Qingming and Zhongyuan Festival have become important moments for the ancients to worship their ancestors. However, a common saying in the Qingming worship has sparked widespread discussion: "Son-in-law should not go to the grave, go to the grave to insult the ancestors." Is there any truth to this old saying?Why is a son-in-law's visit to the grave seen as an insult to the ancestors?
First of all, we need to make it clear that when examining the sayings left by the ancients, we need to think from the perspective of the ancients, rather than just criticizing them from the perspective of today. In the context of the times at that time, the ancients said that "a son-in-law going to the grave humiliates the ancestors" There is a certain truth.
First of all, the ancients passed on the bloodline through their surnames, and in ancient times it was a female clan society, and in the feudal period it was a male clan society for a long time. Since the male is the main body of the family bloodline, people stipulate the kinship relationship through the distance of the paternal bloodline, while the son-in-law is a person with a foreign surname and has no blood adhesion. Therefore, tomb sweeping and ancestor worship is regarded as a family affair, and if a person with a foreign surname participates, it is considered unruly.
Secondly, in ancient society, men were inferior to women, and women became husbands' families after marriage, and life and death were closely related to their husbands' families. During the tomb sweeping during the Qingming Festival, the woman can only worship the grave of her mother's family with her husband, and the son-in-law is not suitable for the tomb sweeping scene of the wife's mother's house.
The ancients attached great importance to the inheritance of family bloodline, mainly focusing on men rather than women. If the son-in-law goes to the grave, it will be considered that there is no male in the family, and the incense will be cut off. Therefore, the son-in-law's failure to pay homage to his own grave is seen as a sign of the family's decline and a sign of unfilial piety.
However, it is not absolutely taboo for a son-in-law to go to the grave. In the case that there is no male in the woman's maiden family or the male dies early, the ancients would solve the problem by "son-in-law", that is, the son-in-law married his daughter-in-law in the way of marriage. Through a series of complex rituals, the son-in-law becomes a member of his wife's mother's family, disalls ties with his own family, and inherits the incense of his wife's family, at which point the son-in-law can participate in worshipping the grave of his wife's mother's family.
However, with the development of society, ancient ideas were gradually broken, and the idea of equality between men and women was replaced. Modern society emphasizes the respect and equality of individuals, and no longer emphasizes male-dominated family inheritance. Therefore, the old saying "son-in-law should not go to the grave, go to the grave to insult the ancestors" is no longer applicable today. This proverb contains the ancient concept of patriarchy, which has become an outdated rule of the times, and should not become a shackle that restricts our thinking.
All in all, the sayings left by the ancients have the imprint of the times and need to be viewed and passed on with a dialectical attitude. Keeping these sayings up to date and rejuvenating them is the best way for us to respect and inherit the sacrificial culture.
The article profoundly explains the origin and cultural implications behind the ancient saying "son-in-law does not go to the grave, and insults the ancestors on the grave", as well as its rationality in modern society. It can be seen from the article that the author not only respects ancient culture in his discussion, but also thinks dialectically about it, and expresses a new era interpretation of this colloquial saying in combination with the concepts of modern society.
First of all, the article provides an in-depth analysis of the concept of blood inheritance in ancient families, and explains why the ancients believed that sons-in-law went to the grave to insult their ancestors. The relationship between kinship and kinship is defined by the distance of the patrilineal bloodline, and the male plays the main role in the family, while the son-in-law is regarded as a foreign surname and lacks blood bonding. This explanation gives the reader a better understanding of the origin of the colloquial saying and lays the foundation for the discussion that follows.
Secondly, this article focuses on the characteristics of male superiority and female inferiority in ancient society, and shows that women become husbands' families after marriage, and life and death are closely related to their husbands' families. In this case, it was considered inappropriate for a son-in-law to participate in the tomb sweeping of his wife's mother's house, reflecting the special care of ancient society for family concepts and inheritance. Such a discussion gives the reader a deeper understanding of the cultural context of the colloquialism.
Then, the article interprets the ancient idea of "there are three unfilial pieties, and no queen is great", which shows that the ancients attached great importance to the inheritance of family blood, and preferred men to women. The son-in-law's visit to the grave is regarded as a bad omen that there is no male in the family and that the incense has been cut off. This point of view gives the reader a clearer understanding of the cultural value of the proverb and why the ancients valued it so much.
Finally, the article discusses the change of concept in modern society, and points out that the saying "son-in-law should not go to the grave, but go to the grave to insult the ancestors" is no longer applicable in today's society. Modern society emphasizes the equality of men and women, and no longer emphasizes the male-dominated family inheritance, which makes the ancient ideology gradually subverted in the modern society. The author's deep thinking on this point makes the article more contemporary, and also triggers the reader's thinking about the application and inheritance of ancient culture in today's society.
In general, through the interpretation of ancient sayings and the reflection on modern social concepts, the article shows respect for sacrificial culture and thinking about tradition. Through the discussion, readers can better understand the origins of ancient culture, and at the same time provoke reflections on the culture of today's society.
Disclaimer: The above content information is ** on the Internet, and the author of this article does not intend to target or insinuate any real country, political system, organization, race, or individual. The above content does not mean that the author of this article agrees with the laws, rules, opinions, behaviors in the article and is responsible for the authenticity of the relevant information. The author of this article is not responsible for any issues arising from the above or related issues, and does not assume any direct or indirect legal liability.
If the content of the article involves the content of the work, copyright**, infringement, rumors or other issues, please contact us to delete it. Finally, if you have any different thoughts about this event, please leave a message in the comment area to discuss!