The Origin of Marriage: From Eastern to Western Perspective

The divorce of one of Indonesia’s biggest influencers, along with many others, has led us to reflect on the fundamental origins of marriage. Alongside the compassion we feel for every partnership that lasts or ends, there remains a sense of acceptance and a question: when something begins with love, hope, and happiness, why does it sometimes end?

Traditional Eastern Approach

The Grandmaster

Long ago, in most of Eastern societies, including Indonesia and broader Asia, marriage was traditionally seen as a strategic partnership, a union meant to strengthen families, stabilize social structures, and align long-term goals. This perspective resonates closely with Islamic traditions, where marriage is considered not only a personal relationship but primarily a structured bond with defined responsibilities, shared values, and a framework for long-term alliance.

In traditional sense, to enable such a partnership strategically and ensure that both parties benefited, marriage was mostly approached in practical terms, almost like a business or political arrangement. Most of Eastern ancestors performed due diligence—assessing potential partners for character, family, finances, values, and track record. In Islam, this practice is also encouraged, as the Prophet Muhammad emphasized careful consideration in choosing a spouse (for example, through hadiths highlighting the importance of evaluating religion and character). In this context, love was often not the primary reason for union; rather, marriages were transactional in a positive sense, designed to secure alignment, stability, and mutual benefit.

Durru Shehvar Sultan of Ottoman

Beyond strategic compatibility, traditional Eastern and Islamic approaches also emphasized value and vision alignment between partners. Marriage was not just the union of two individuals but a deliberate integration of families, goals, and responsibilities. Clear roles were defined: men were expected to provide, protect, and lead, while women were often entrusted with nurturing, managing the household, and raising children. In many ways, many ancestors had a more explicit understanding of each partner’s duties, which contributed to social stability and mutual respect. Within this framework, love was often seen as a natural outcome of living in alignment and fulfilling these roles, rather than the primary reason for uniting.

In addition, traditional Christian and Catholic teachings also approached marriage as a covenantal and duty-driven institution rather than purely based on romantic attraction. It emphasizes lifelong commitment, fidelity, and mutual responsibility. While love is acknowledged, it is framed as charity, virtue, and self-giving, not the initial driver of union. Men were expected to provide and protect, women to nurture and maintain the household, similar to Eastern and Islamic traditions. Divorce was highly restricted, reinforcing the focus on stability and shared obligations over fleeting emotional desire.

While in many Eastern societies exit mechanisms are included, for example, separation, divorce, or annulment procedures, so that if fundamental misalignment or harm occurred, there was a clear and socially accepted path to dissolve the union. In Islamic law, divorce (talaq) was allowed with structured procedures, providing a regulated way to end the marriage while maintaining dignity and social stability.

From a long-term perspective, traditional Eastern and Islamic approaches treated marriage as a strategic investment, designed to maximize stability, family well-being, and social harmony over time. By carefully selecting partners with compatible values, aligning life goals, and establishing clear roles and responsibilities, couples created a foundation that allowed their relationship to grow and compound benefits across decades. Children, family alliances, and social networks further amplified the long-term “return” of a well-aligned union. Love, affection, and companionship were considered fruits of this deliberate structure, rather than the primary investment rationale. In essence, the focus was on sustainable outcomes and lifetime value, not just initial emotional satisfaction.

Traditional vs Contemporary Western Approach

The Summer I Turned Pretty

In the other world, Traditional Western societies also historically approached marriage primarily as a political, economic, or social contract, especially among aristocracy and nobility. Romantic love existed as a cultural ideal, through poetry, literature, and later art, but it rarely determined marital unions. It was only during the 18th and 19th centuries, with the rise of Romanticism, that emotional attraction began to be celebrated as the primary reason to marry. Along with the spread of pop culture, the idea of marrying because of love spread among many other modern societies across the world. 

La La Land

Over time, media, novels, and films reinforced the idea that marriage should be driven by love and personal fulfillment, gradually overshadowing strategic compatibility, long-term alignment, and structured roles that had guided unions for centuries. As a result, contemporary Western approaches often prioritize immediate emotional satisfaction, sometimes at the expense of the long-term stability, shared vision, and clear responsibilities that characterized marriages in many traditional Eastern, traditional Western, and Islamic traditions.

Neuroscience Perspective

Tyra Lee

From a neuroscience standpoint, romantic attraction is largely driven by neurochemicals such as dopamine, oxytocin, and adrenaline, which spike during early stages of a relationship. This phase—sometimes called the “lust-and-infatuation period”, creates intense feelings of excitement and attachment but is often short-lived, typically lasting 12–24 months according to research on pair-bonding. Brain imaging studies show that early-stage romantic love activates regions associated with reward and motivation, rather than those involved in long-term planning or executive function. The term we refer to as love is most of the time just “hormones at work”, tricking human beings to produce, ensuring species survival. They don’t care whether the partner is aligned with one’s values or long-term goals.

Closing Reflection

Observing these patterns across cultures and history, it’s clear that marriage has taken many forms, shaped by social, economic, and biological factors. Each partnership—whether it lasts a lifetime or not—carries its own journey of hope, learning, and connection. There is room for compassion for every union, for the intentions behind it, and for the human experience of trying to navigate love, alignment, and shared life. There’s no absolute success or failure in this context; humans are naturally conditioned to learn and grow from every stage of life they experience.