of wedding rings and mindfulness

The very first couple I married decided they needed no rings - as they were Buddhists, and needed no outward symbols.
But their family felt that rings were important. So the couple went out and got wooden rings on the morning of their wedding. The ceremony was outdoors, in December, and we were all freezing. When they put on their rings, the wood snapped. Everyone else gasped, but the couple simply said - "you see? all material goods are impermanent!" They were VERY happy.

Here is an appropriate reading - which we also posted on the front page -

When two people are at one
in their inmost hearts
They shatter even the strength of iron, of bronze

And when two people understand each other
in their inmost hearts
Their words are sweet and strong
like the fragrance of orchids.
--from the I Ching

For a discussion of conflict-free diamonds and sapphires and conflict-free gold, see our other blog, ethicalceremonies

Here is a Shakespearean reference to rings symbolizing committment:

During Shakespeare's time, the wedding and engagement rings indicated commitment. The rings Portia and Nerissa gave to Bassanio and Gratiano, that they were never to remove, were just that. "I give them with this ring, Which when you part from, lose, or give away, Let it presage the ruin of your love And be my vantage to exclaim on you" (3.2.171-4).

Rings were common mainly among the richer parts of society, who could afford such a token. Mary Queen of Scots sent a diamond ring to Thomas Duke of Norfolk to indicate her willingness to marry him. However, peasants would give smaller tokens or none at all. It was usually the case that everyone in a village knew who was married, so no symbol was necessary. In the case that a man wishes to break a wedding contract, he must give back double all of the tokens he has received, usually a collection of small items. This made it even less practical for the poorer people in society to give rings.