Manava Dharmashastra 3.13

3.13

varṇabhede sati savarṇāniyamaḥ | yathaiva brāhmaṇasya kṣatriyādikhriyo bhavanti evaṃ śūdrasya jātinyūnā rajakatakṣakādikhiyaḥ prāptāḥ | ataḥ savarṇaivamucyate | utkṛṣṭajātīyā tu pūrvatra kramagrahaṇādaprāptā | sā ca śūdrā svā ca vaiśyā vaiśyasya | te ca vaiśyāśūdre svā ca rājanyasya | evamagrajanmano brāhmaṇasya | brāhmaṇakrameṇa nirdeśe kartavye śūdraprakrameṇa nirdeśaḥ pūrvoktamevārthaṃ upodbalayati | yaduktaṃ "vikalpa ānupūrvyeṇa nāvaśyaṃ samuccayaḥ" |

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):
There being a distinction of castes, ‘one’s own caste’ constitutes the (upward) limit. Just as for the Brāhmaṇa, there are Kṣatriya and other wives, so it would seem as if for the Śūdra also there would be wives belonging to the lower orders of ‘washer-woman and carpenter.’ In order to preclude this possibility, the text lays down the restriction that the Śūdra can have a wife from his own caste only. A wife of the higher caste is precluded by the qualifying phrase, ‘in due order,’ in the preceding verse.

‘She’—i.e., the Śūdra woman—‘and girl of his own caste’—i.e., the Vaiśya woman—‘for the Vaiśya.’

‘Those two’—the Vaiśya woman and the Śūdra woman,—‘and the girl of his own caste’— ‘for the Kṣatriya.’

Similarly, ‘for the Brāhmaṇa.’

The right order would appear to be that the verse should begin with the ‘Brāhmaṇa,’ but it begins with the ‘Śūdra’ which only goes to lend strength to the aforesaid notion (that a wife of the higher class is not permitted).

In this connection, it has been declared that ‘what is meant by the text is that there should be option in order, and not a combination of all (the several kinds of wives).’—(13)