Manava Dharmashastra 3.8

3.8

pūrvaḥ kulāśrayaḥ pratiṣedhaḥ | ayaṃ tu svarūpāśrayaḥ | yasyā kaṭuvarṇāḥ kanakavarṇā vā keśāḥ sā kapilā | adhikāṅgī ṣaḍaṅguliḥ | rogiṇī bahurogā, duṣpratikāravyādhigṛhītā ca | bhūmroniḥ matvarthīyo nityayoge vā | alomikā akeśā | lomāni keśā apyucyante | bāhumūle jaṅghāmūle vā sarvalomnāmabhāvaḥ | vācālā svalpa eva vaktavye bahulaṃ paruṣaṃ ca bhāṣate | piṅgalā akṣiregeṇa maṇḍalākṣī kapilāpaṅgalākṣī vā |

He should hot marry a maiden with tawny hair, nor one with superfluous limbs, nor one who has disease, nor one who has either no hair or too much hair, nor one who is garrulous, nor one with reddish eyes.—(8)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):
The prohibition in the preceding verse was with regard to the family of the bride; while that in the present verse pertains to her body.

The girl whose hairs are of either tawny or golden colour is called ‘kapilā.’

‘With superfluous limbs’—e.g., having six fingers.

‘Who has disease’—who is suffering from many diseases, or is overtaken by some incurable disease;—the possessive affix having the sense of many or Of permanence.

‘Who has no hair’—‘loman’— standing for hairs in general also. What the present qualification has in view, however, is the entire absence of hair in the arm-pits and between the thighs.

‘Garrulous’—who talks much and disagreeably, when it is necessary to speak very little.

‘With reddish eyes’—Whose eyes are red, on account of some disease.—(8)

This verse is quoted in Vīramitrodaya (Saṃskāra, p. 731) in support of the view that one should not many a girl with defects;—it explains ‘vācāṭā’ as ‘garrulous’ and ‘piṅgalā’ as ‘with reddish eyes.’

Smṛtitattva (II, p. 149) quotes it and adds that the defects here described do not deprive the girl, if married, of the character of the ‘lawful wife,’ as visible (physical) defects can mean only physical disabilties, and cannot affect the nonphysical spiritual or moral character of anything.

The verse is quoted also in Vīramitrodaya (Lakṣaṇa, p. 120), where ‘rogiṇī’ is explained as ‘suffering from epilepsy and such diseases,’ and ‘vācāṭām’ ‘as one who talks much of improper things,’—and not simply as ‘garrulous’, which is the explanation of the same author in another place [Saṃskāra-prakāśa, p. 731, see first note above];—also in Aparārka (p. 78) to the effect that one should not many a girl who is not endowed with the proper marks;—in Saṃskāramayūkha (p. 74);—in Saṃskāraratnamālā (p. 510), which explains ‘kapilām’, as ‘of the colour of red lice,’ and ‘piṅgalā’ as ‘of the colour of fire:’—in Smṛticandrikā (Saṃskāra, p. 200), which explains ‘vācāṭā’ as ‘garrulous,’ and piṅgalā’ as ‘with tawny eyes;’—and in Nṛsiṃhaprasāda (Saṃskāra, p. 50a).

Comparative notes by various authors
(verses 3.8-9)
Viṣṇu (24.12-16).Not one who is diseased or with excessive limbs; or with deficient limbs; nor one who is too pale, or too talkative.’

Yājñavalkya (1. 3).—‘One who is free from disease and has a brother.’

Laghu-Śātātapa (34).—[Reproduces Manu.]

Yama (Vīramitrodaya-Saṃskāra, p. 731).—‘Too hort (short?), too tall, too thin, too fat, with tawny eyes, too pale,—such girls should not he accepted.’

Viṣṇu-purāṇa (Vīramitrodaya-Saṃskāra, p. 731).—‘The wise man shall not marry a girl who hears signs of a beard, who has a masculine appearance, whose voice is cracked, who speaks insinuatingly, whose voice is like the crow’s, who looks on without, winking, whose eyes arc defective;—he shall not marry her whose thighs arc hairy, whose ankles are high, in whose, cheeks there are dimples;—he shall, not marry a girl whose skin is rough, who is pale, who is diseased, or with red eyes, or with lean hands and feet,—or one who is dwarfish, or too tall, or one whose eye-brows arc joined: nor one whose teeth have many holes, nor one with a frightful face.’

Āpastamba (Vīramitrodaya-Sarṃskāra, p. 532).—‘One named after an asterism, or after a river, or after a tree is not commended; one should avoid one whose name contains the consonants r or l or gh or jh or ḍh or ḍh or bh.’

Yama (Vīramitrodaya-Satṃskāra)—‘In selecting a wife one should avoid one named after a Veda, or a river, or a mountain or a Gandharva, or an asterism, or a tree, or a creeper.’