Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

Social Life in Ancient India: Studies in Vatsyayana's Kamasutra c8.s6.t7: Widow Re-marriage

Social Life in Ancient India: Studies in Vātsyāyana's Kāmasūtra c8.s6.t7

Language
English

Widow Re-marriage

c8.s6.t7.1

The position of a widow who wished for a second husband, has been clearly defined by Vātsyāyana. There was no regular marriage for a widow; but if a woman who had lost her husband, was of weak character and was unable to restrain her desires, she might ally herself for a second time to a man who was a seeker after pleasures (*bhogin*) and was desirable on account of his excellent qualities as a lover, and such a woman was called a *punarbhū*. Vātsyāyana quotes the opinions of several teachers as to how far, in the selection of her second master, the *punarbhū* should be swayed by the excellence of the qualities of the man of her choice or by the chances of participating in the joys of life, and he concludes that in his opinion it was best for her to follow the natural inclinations of her own heart. The connection with her was of a loose character and she enjoyed a degree of independence unknown to the wife wedded according to sacramental rites. When the *punarbhū* seeks her lover's house, she assumes the role of a mistress, patronises his wives, is generous to his servants and treats his friends with familiarity; she chides the lover herself if he gives any cause for quarrel. She shows greater knowledge of the arts than his wedded wives and seeks to please the lover with the sixty-four *Kāmakalās*. She takes part in sports and festivities, drinking parties, garden picnics, and other games and amusements. She might leave her lover (*nāyaka*), but if she did so of her own accord, she had to restore to him all presents given by him, except the tokens of love, mutually exchanged between them; if she is driven out, she does not give back any thing.¹

c8.s6.t7.2

¹ *Kāmasūtra*, pp. 238-40 (*sūtras* 39-59). विधवा विन्दियदोर्व्यादातुरा भोगिनं गुणसंपन्नं च या पुनर्विन्येत सा पुनर्भुः (*sūtra* 39); सौख्यार्थिनी सा किलान्त्यं पुनर्विन्येत (*sūtra* 41); सा प्रभवितुरेव तस्य भवनमाप् यात् (*sūtra* 48); समाज्ञापानकीयानयाविहारमीलता चेति पुनर्संज्ञपम् (*sūtra* 59), etc.

c8.s6.t7.3

The position of the *punarbhū* is therefore quite distinct from that of the wedded wife who participated with her husband in all religious observances and had to live with decency in the *antaḥpura*; the position of the *punarbhū* approaches nearer to that of a mistress than that of a wedded wife. In the king's harem where there were separate quarters and suites of chambers for the various types of women, the *punarbhūs* occupied a position midway between the *devīs* or queens who were quartered in the innermost apartments, and the *gaṇikās* and actresses in the outermost, and this exactly indicates also the position occupied by them in society. Vātsyāyana indicates this in another place where he places the *punarbhū* between the virgin (*kanyā*) and the courtesan (*veśyā*)¹ and says that the establishment of sexual relations with either the courtesans or the *punarbhūs* was not considered as right, neither was it absolutely condemned, because pleasure was the guiding motive in all such connections.² It is clear that in Vātsyāyana's opinion there could not be any second marriage of the widow. Manu, whose code must have received its present from about that time, declares in unmistakable terms that in the sacred texts concerning marriage, the re-marriage of widows was nowhere prescribed.³ Vātsyāyana's attitude towards the question of widow-remarriage shows that in his days, public opinion allowed the widow to live with the man of her choice as his mistress, just as public opinion was not particularly nice or fastidious about making love to courtesans, but she could never receive the same regard, nor acquire the same position, as the married wife.

c8.s6.t7.4

¹ Ibid, p. 243, (*sūtra* 78); and तत्र नायिकास्त्रिः, कन्या पुनर्भू श्च — p. 60 (*sūtra* 4).

c8.s6.t7.5

² वेश्याः पुनर्भुश्च न शिष्टं न प्रतिषिद्धः सुखार्थत्वात् — Ibid, p. 59 (*sūtra* 3).

c8.s6.t7.6

³ न विवाहविधावुक्तं विधवावेदनं पुनः — *Manu*, ix. 65.

c8.s6.t7.7

About the question of marriage in general, Vātsyāyana gives it as his considered opinion that for a man of any of the four *varṇas* or castes, *kāma* or desire should be provided its scope in the acceptance, according to the prescriptions of the holy writ, of a maiden who belongs to the same caste as himself and who had no contact with any one before, and this, he says, leads to progeny and to fame and is also sanctioned by popular usage; and again, he affirms, in another connection, that when a maiden of the same caste, not given to any one before, is married in accordance with the prescriptions of the holy writ, then one secures *dharma* and *artha*, offspring, high connection, an increase of friends and partisans, and also genuine, untarnished love. He further adds definitely that the contrary procedure of marrying girls of higher castes or of those who had previously been accepted by others, was absolutely prohibited, but that public opinion was indifferent with regard to connection with women of the lower castes (if not actually outside the pale of Aryan society), as also with widows and courtesans, for such relations were not considered as amounting to marriage at all, but entered into merely for pleasure for its own sake.¹

c8.s6.t7.8

¹ *Kāmasūtra*, p. 59 (*sūtras* 1-3); and p. 184 (*sūtra* 1).

Linked texts (2)