History of Dharmashastra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v2.c26.129

v2.c26.129

Among those who support marriage with a maternal uncle's daughter the most prominent are the Sm. C. (I. pp. 70-74) and the Par. M. (I. 2. pp. 63-68). They both admit that there are passages of Manu, Śātātapa, Sumantu (all quoted above) and others condemning marriage with a maternal uncle's daughter, yet they say that there are passages of the Veda and some smṛtis in support of it and śiṣṭas (learned and respectable persons) observe this practice and so such marriages are *sadācāra* and not forbidden. They rely upon two Vedic passages; one is from the Śat. Br. I. 8. 3. 6 (S. B. E. vol. XII. p. 238) "thus the separation (of the eater and the eaten) is effected in one and the same act; hence from one and the same man spring both the enjoyer (the husband) and the enjoyed (the wife); for now kinsfolk live sporting and rejoicing together saying 'in the fourth or third man (generation) we shall unite'. And this is so in accordance with that (separation of the spoons)."¹⁰⁸⁷ The mention of the union in the third generation is understood by the Sm. C. as referring to the marriage of a person with his maternal uncle's or paternal aunt's daughter. Viśvarūpa also refers to this passage (on Yāj. I. 53), but he does not draw the inference that such marriages are authorized by the Veda. Another Vedic verse is relied upon by the Sm. C. and Par. M and other works. It is a verse from a Khila sūkta 'Come, O Indra, by commended paths to this our sacrifice and partake of your portion. They (the priests) have offered the fat seasoned with ghee that is thy portion, as the maternal uncle's daughter or the paternal aunt's daughter (is one's lot in marriage)'.¹⁰⁸⁸ This verse is referred to by Viśvarūpa on Yāj. (I. 53) but his explanation of it is different viz. that it really indicates one out of four different alternatives as regards prohibited degrees for marriage.¹⁰⁸⁹ Aparārka (p. 83) on Yāj. I. 53 reads the latter half somewhat differently and so interprets it as to spell out of it a prohibition against marrying a maternal uncle's daughter. This text is quoted in I. L. R. 7 Mad. 548 at p. 550. The Smṛticandrikā relies upon a passage of the Caturviṁśatimata that allows a marriage of persons who are third or fourth in descent from a common ancestor on both sides (on the mother's or father's side). There is also a text of Bṛhaspati which prescribes that the practices of the countries, castes and families should be guarded (or enforced) by the king as they have been in vogue from past times, otherwise the subjects become inflamed and among such practices he instances 'Brāhmaṇas in the south marry the maternal uncle's daughter'.¹⁰⁹⁰ So there is smṛti authority for such marriages. Besides southern śiṣṭas deeply read in the Vedas and acting according to the meaning of the Veda practise marriage with a maternal uncle's daughter. Here both Sm. C. and Par. M. are on very firm ground. The Smṛtimuktāphala of Vaidyanātha says 'among the Āndhras śiṣṭas deeply read in the Vedas follow the practice of *mātulasutā-pariṇayana* and among the Draviḍas respectable people allow marriage of a person with a girl who is fourth in descent from the common ancestor'.¹⁰⁹¹ Among several castes in the Deccan and the Madras Presidency, not only is marriage with a maternal uncle's daughter allowed, but it is highly commended. Even certain brāhmaṇa castes like the Deśastha brāhmaṇas of the Karṇāṭaka and Karhāḍā brāhmaṇas observe this practice in modern times. The Saṁskārakaustubha (pp. 616-620) and the Dharmasindhu support *mātulasutā-pariṇayana*.