Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

History of Dharmashastra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v2.c28: Chapter XI. Polygamy, Polyandry and Rights and Duties on Marriage

History of Dharmaśāstra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v2.c28

Language
English

Contents

Chapter XI. Polygamy, Polyandry and Rights and Duties on Marriage

v2.c28.2

*Polygamy:* Though monogamy ¹²⁷¹ seems to have been the ideal and was probably the rule, the Vedic literature is full of references to polygamy. Ṛg. X. 145 (same as Atharvaveda III. 18) is a hymn meant as a charm for weaning the husband's affections from a co-wife. It occurs in the Āp. M. P. (I. 15) and Āp. gṛ. IX. 6–8 prescribes it for winning over the husband to oneself and for causing estrangement between him and one's co-wife. Ṛg. X. ¹²⁷² 159 is a hymn attributed to Śacī, wife of Indra, who claims to have vanquished and killed her co-wives and to rule supreme over Indra and all men. This hymn also occurs in Āp. M. P. (I. 16) and is prescribed by the Āp. gṛ. (IX. 9) as a charm always to be repeated by a wife for suppressing her co-wives. In a verse (Ṛg. I. 105. 8) Trita who had fallen into a well declares 'the rib-like sides (of the well) cause me pain all round as co-wives make it too hot (for the husband or for themselves)' ¹²⁷³. The Tai. S. (VI. 6. 4. 3) gives a dogmatic and somewhat picturesque explanation of polygamy that 'on one sacrificial post he passes round two girdles, so one man secures two wives; that he does not pass one girdle round two posts, so one wife does not obtain two husbands'. The Ait. Br. (12. 11) similarly declares 'therefore one man has many wives, but one wife has not many husbands at the same¹²⁷⁴ time'. The Tai. Br. (III. 8. 4.) when speaking of the Aśvamedha says 'the wives anoint (the horse); wives are indeed a form of prosperity'¹²⁷⁵. In the Śat. Br. (XIII. 4. 1. 9., S. B. E. vol. 44, p. 349) it is said, 'four¹²⁷⁶ wives are in attendance viz. the consecrated queen (*mahiṣī*), the favourite wife (*vāvātā*), the discarded wife (*parivṛktā* or parivṛkti) and the pālāgalī (who is low-born)'. The Tai. S. I. 8. 9 refers to the mahiṣī and parivṛkti. In the Vāj. S. (23. 24, 26, 28) there are verses which are addressed to the mahiṣī, vāvātā and parivṛkti by the brahmā, udgātā and hotā priests respectively. Hariścandra is said to have had a hundred wives (Ait. Br. 33. 1). It is not to be supposed that polygamy was confined only to kings and nobles. The great philosopher Yājñavalkya had two wives, Kātyāyanī who was worldly-minded and Maitreyī who thirsted for the knowledge of brahma and immortality (Bṛ. Up. IV. 5. 1-2 and II. 4. 1).

v2.c28.3

¹²⁷¹ Vide Ṛg. X. 85. 26 and 46. These are पूषा त्वेतो नयतु हस्तगृह्याश्विना त्वा प्रवहता रथेन । गृहान्गच्छ गृहपत्नी यथासो वशिनी त्वं विदथमा वदासि ॥...सम्राज्ञी अधि देवृषु ॥ (last quoted above in n. 1229). The word *dampatī* (which occurs very frequently in the Ṛg.) conveys in several places the idea of a monogamous marriage. Vide Ṛg. V. 3. 2, VIII. 31. 5, X. 68. 2.

v2.c28.4

¹²⁷² Vide असपत्न सपात्नघ्नी जयन्त्यभिभूवरी । आवृक्षमन्सासां वर्चो राधो अस्थेयसामिव ॥ समजैषमिमा अहं सपत्नीरभिभूवरीः । यथाहमस्य वीरस्य विराजानि जनस्य च ॥ ॠ. X. 159. 5–6. आप. म. पा. reads differently.

v2.c28.5

¹²⁷³ सं मा तपन्त्यभितः सपत्नीखि पर्शवः । ॠ. I. 105. 8; vide Ṛg. X. 116. 10 (आदित्यतिमकृणुतं कनीनाम्) where the Aśvins are said to have made च्यवन the husband of maidens.

v2.c28.6

¹²⁷⁴ यदेकस्मिन्यूपे द्वे रशने परिव्ययति तस्मादेको द्वे जाये विन्दते यन्नैकां रशनां द्वयोर्यूपयोः परिव्ययति तस्मान्न्रैका द्वौ पती विन्दते। तै. सं. VI. 6. 4. 3; *vide also* तै. सं. VI. 5. 1. 4 'तस्मादेको बह्वीर्जाया विन्दते;' तस्मादेकस्य बह्व्यो जाया भवन्ति नैकस्यै बहवः सहपतयः। ऐ. ब्रा. 12. 11.

v2.c28.7

¹²⁷⁵ पत्नयोऽभ्यञ्जन्ति। श्रिया वा एतद्रूपं यत्पत्नयः। श्रियमेवास्मिंस्तद्दधति। तै. ब्रा. III. 8. 4; *vide* शतपथब्रा. XIII. 2. 6. 7 for the same words.

v2.c28.8

¹²⁷⁶ चतस्रो जाया उपक्लृप्ता भवन्ति महिषी वावाता परिवृक्ता पालागली। शतपथ XIII. 4. 1. 9. In रामायण बालकाण्ड 14. 35 the first three out of these four are mentioned in connection with अश्वमेध 'होताऽध्वर्युस्तथोद्गाता हयेन समयोजयन्। महिष्या परिवृक्त्या च वावातामपरां तथा॥. In Ṛg. X. 102. 11 the word परिवृक्ता occurs which probably means the discarded wife.

v2.c28.9

In the times of the sūtras, some sages wanted to hold up a high ideal. The Āp. Dh. S. (II. 5. 11. 12-13) declares that when a man has a wife who is endowed with dharma and progeny, he shall not marry another wife; but if any one of the two (dharma and progeny) is wanting (in the case of the wife), he may marry another before he has consecrated the sacred śrauta fires. In another place Āp. (I. 10. 28. 19) prescribes that one who abandons his (faultless) wife should put on the skin of an ass with the hair outside and should beg for alms at seven houses for six months.¹²⁷⁷ Nārada (strīpuṁsa v. 95)

v2.c28.10

¹²⁷⁷ धर्मप्रजासंपन्ने दारे नान्यां कुर्वीत। अन्यतराभावे कार्या प्रागग्न्याधेयात्। आप. ध. सू. II. 5. 11. 12-13; खराजिने बहिलोंम दारव्यतिक्रमिणे भिक्षामिति सप्तागाराणि चरेत्। सा वृत्तिः षण्मासान्। आप. ध सू. I. 10. 28. 19; *vide* बृहत्संहिता chap 74. 13 where this प्रायश्चित्त for the husband is mentioned and it is said that it is never observed by men. अनुकूलांमवाग्दुष्टां दक्षां साध्वीं प्रजावतीम्। त्यजन् भार्यामवस्थाप्यो राज्ञा दण्डेन भूयसा॥ नारद (स्त्रीपुंस 95).

v2.c28.11.1

recommends that the king should bring round to the proper path by inflicting heavy fines a husband who abandons a wife that is obedient, not harsh of tongue, vigilant (in household work), chaste and endowed with sons. Even Kauṭ. (III. 2) prescribes that a husband should wait for eight years (before marrying another) if his wife gives birth to no child after one delivery or is sonless or is barren; he should wait for ten if she bears only still-born children, twelve years if she gives birth to daughters only. Then if he is anxious for a son he may marry another. If he violates these rules he must pay her gratuity, some wealth as strīdhana and money (prescribed to be given) on supersession and besides a fine (to the king) of 24 paṇas'.¹²⁷⁸ So far Kauṭilya appears to have only stated the ideal, because he follows up this remark by another statement which probably represented the commonly held popular view 'a man may marry several wives after giving *śulka* and strīdhana to those to whom nothing had been given at the time of marriage and money on supersession (*ādhivedanika*) and suitable provision for livelihood; for women are (married) for procreating sons.' Though Āp. and others held up the ideal of monogamy and Nārada and others prescribed a fine for marrying a second wife without sufficient cause, it is extremely doubtful whether a man was ever punished by the king for so doing. Manu V. 80 and Yāj. I.

v2.c28.11.2

80 both say that a husband may supersede a wife (and marry another) if she drinks wine, suffers from a disease (of long standing), is deceitful, is extravagant in expenditure, speaks harsh words, and gives birth to female children only. Manu V. 81 and Baud. Dh. S. II. 2. 65 allow a husband to marry another woman at once if the first is harsh of tongue. Devala ¹²⁷⁹ quoted in the Gṛ. R. says that the śūdra may have only one wife, a vaiśya two, a kṣatriya three and a brāhmaṇa four, but a king may have as many as he desires. This only reflected the prevailing practice of kings. The Ādiparva ¹²⁸⁰ gravely remarks 'to have many wives is no *adharma* on the part of men, but to violate the duty owed to the first husband would be a great *adharma* in the case of women.' The Mahābhārata (Mausala-parva V. 6) tells us that Vāsudeva¹²⁸¹ (Kṛṣṇa) had sixteen thousand wives. Several kings had in historic times as many as a hundred wives. For example, the Cedi king Gāṅgeyadeva alias Vikramāditya is said to have obtained *mukti* (salvation) at Prayāga with his hundred wives¹²⁸² (vide Jabalpur plate of Yaśaḥkarṇadeva dated 1122 A. D. in E. I. vol. II. p. 4 and the Khaira plates of the same king in E. I. vol. XII. p. 205). In Bengal the evils of Kulinism are well known.

v2.c28.11.3

The reasons for this treatment of women were many, such as the great spiritual importance of sons, early marriages and consequent illiteracy of women, the spread of the idea of the ceremonial impurity of women and their being equated with śūdras and lastly the idea of the complete dependence of women on men. One must not be carried away, however, by the notion that marrying many wives was either very common or was not looked down upon. Steele (in 'Law and Custom of Hindoo Castes,' first published in 1826) who had the most unique opportunities for observing the practices of numerous castes in the Dekhan in the first decades of the 19th century writes (p. 168, ed. of 1868) 'a man may marry as many wives as his inclination or circumstances allow. Marriages in succession, in consequence of the death of a former wife, are very common; but polygamy is not usual except on account of the barrenness of the first wife. It is practised in the Koonbee castes'. Vide also Imperial Gazetteer of India, vol. I (ed. of 1907) p. 482 'Although in theory polygamy is allowed, in practice a second wife is rarely taken while the first is alive and in India as a whole there are only 1011 wives to every 1000 husbands so that even if no husbands have more than two wives all but 11 per thousand must be monogamous'. The state of the modern case law is unsatisfactory.

v2.c28.11.4

The Bombay High Court has held that the mere fact that the husband has married a second wife would not entitle the first wife to refuse to stay with the husband. Vide *Motilal v. Chanchal*, 4 Bom. L. R. 107. In *Virasami v. Appasami*, 1 Madras High Court Reports, p. 375, the court held that a Hindu may marry any number of wives, although he may have a wife or wives living. It is submitted with great respect that that is not the ideal or the view of the best writers, nor is such a view held by the majority of Indian jurists of ancient and medieval times. Modern opinion of educated people is most favourable to making marriages monogamous and efforts are being made to secure absolute monogamy by legislative action. For example, the Madras Nambudri Act (Madras Act XXI of 1933) forbids a Nambudri brāhmaṇa from marrying a second wife when the first is living except in three cases viz. (1) when the first wife is afflicted with an incurable disease for over five years, (2) when she has not borne a child within ten years of marriage, and (3) when she becomes an outcast.

v2.c28.12

¹²⁷⁸ Vide Manu IX. 81 and Baud. Dh. S. II. 2. 65 for similar periods of waiting. Vide Yāj. II. 148 for the amount of ādhivedanika to be given by the husband.

v2.c28.13

¹²⁷⁹ एका शूद्रस्य वैश्यस्य द्वे तिस्रः क्षत्रियस्य च । चतस्रो ब्राह्मणस्य स्युर्भार्या राज्ञो यथेच्छतः ॥ देवल quoted in गृहस्थरत्नाकर p. 85.

v2.c28.14

¹²⁸⁰ न चाप्यधर्मः कल्याण बहुपत्नीकता नृणाम् । स्त्रीणामधर्मः सुमहान्भर्तुः पूर्वस्य लङ्घने ॥ आदिपर्व 160. 36.

v2.c28.15

¹²⁸¹ षोडश स्त्रीसहस्राणि वासुदेवपरिग्रहः। तासामासीन्महानादो दृष्ट्वैचार्जुनमा-गतम् ॥ मौसलपर्व V. 6.

v2.c28.16

¹²⁸² प्राप्ते प्रयागवटमूलनिवेशबन्धौ सार्धं शतेन गृहिणीभिरमुत्र मुक्तिम्। E. I. vol. II. p. 4.

Polyandry

v2.c28.s1.1.1

The passages cited above (note 1274) from the Ait. Br. and the Tai. S. that a woman cannot have several husbands at the same time make it clear that in those ancient times polyandry was unheard¹²⁸³ of. Not a single Vedic passage can be cited which clearly refers to the practice of polyandry. The most glaring example of polyandry in Sanskrit literature is that of Draupadī as the wife of the five Pāṇḍavas. Probably the tradition was too firmly rooted to allow the author to ignore it. The Mahābhārata shows that all were shocked by the resolve of Yudhiṣṭhira to make Draupadī the wife of the five brothers. Dhṛṣṭadyumna (Ādiparva¹²⁸⁴ 195. 27–29) tries vehemently to dissuade Yudhiṣṭhira, who tries to justify his action on the ground of ancient practice and the agreement of the brothers to share everything that any one of them may secure. But Yudhiṣṭhira could¹²⁸⁵ ferret out (Ādi. chap. 196) only two instances (rather mythical) in support of the practice viz. of Jaṭilā Gautamī (who had seven sages as husbands) and of Vārkṣī who had ten Prācetasa brothers as husbands. It is this fact that has led many scholars to regard the Pāṇḍus as a non-Aryan tribe somehow grafted on the Aryan stock and represented as relatives of the Kauravas by the editor of the Mahābhāratā. This too also sounds somewhat far-fetched.

v2.c28.s1.1.2

Kumārilabhaṭṭa in his Tantravārtika cuts this Gordian knot by putting forward three explanations, one of which boldly asserts that there were many Draupadīs very similar to each other and so the epic figuratively speaks of one Draupadī only.¹²⁸⁶ There were really five Draupadīs (and not one) married separately to the five Pāṇḍavas. In the Dharmaśāstra works there are traces of the knowledge of the practice of polyandry. Āp. Dh. S. (II. 10. 27. 2-4) refers to it 'One shall not make over (his wife) to strangers (for a son by *niyoga*), but only to one who is a sagotra; for they declare that a bride is given to the family (of brothers and not to one brother alone); that (*niyoga*) is forbidden on account of the weakness of men's senses.' Similarly Bṛhaspati, while illustrating the proposition that the king should not disturb popular usages even though they may be improper, cites several such practices among which he mentions 'In some other countries there is the most reprehensible practice of a brother taking (as wife) the widow of his deceased brother, and the practice of delivering a maiden to a family; similarly among the Pārasīkas (Persians) matches with a mother are seen'.¹²⁸⁷ Dr. Jolly is wrong in thinking that Bṛhaspati refers to polyandry as practised in the south.

v2.c28.s1.1.3

Bṛhaspati first referred to the practice of marrying a maternal uncle's daughter as prevalent amongst the southerners (dākṣiṇātyas) in his day and then adds that a practice of giving a girl to the family is in vogue in other countries. So he clearly means countries other than those of the dākṣiṇātyas. Prof. Keith appears to follow Dr. Jolly without any independent examination of the original passage (in E. R. E. vol. 8 on marriage, p. 453). Just as Bṛhaspati refers to the Pārasīkas, he speaks of polyandry as current among other countries (but not Aryan India). There are two types of polyandry,¹²⁸⁸ one matriarchal (where a woman forms simultaneous alliances with two or more men who are not necessarily relations of each other and therefore succession is traced through the female) and the other fraternal, where a woman becomes the wife of several brothers. The former practice once prevailed among the Nairs on the Malabar coast, but it has now died out. The latter form of polyandry is still to some extent found in Kumaon, Garhwal and among peoples in the Himalayan area up to Assam.¹²⁸⁹ Pandit Bhagwanlal Indraji (I. A. vol. 8, p. 88) says that in Kumaun between the Tons and Jumna river about Kalsi, Rajputs, brāhmaṇas and śūdras all practise polyandry and the children are attributed to the eldest brother who is alive. Nīlakaṇṭha,¹²⁹⁰ the commentator of the Mahābhārata, raises (on Ādiparva 104.

v2.c28.s1.1.4

35) the question about Draupadī's marrying five husbands and refers to the practice among very low castes in his day of one woman having two or three husbands.

v2.c28.s1.2

¹²⁸³ Vide Cambridge History of India, vol I. p. 88, Vedic Index I. p. 479.

v2.c28.s1.3

¹²⁸⁴ एकस्य बह्व्यो विहिता महिष्यः कुरुनन्दन । नैकस्या बहवः पुंसः श्रूयन्ते पतयः क्वचित् । लोकवेदविरुद्धं त्वं नार्धमं धर्मविच्छुचिः । कर्तुमर्हसि कौन्तेय कस्मात्ते बुद्धिरीदृशी । आदि. 195. 27-29; vide सभापर्व 68.35 where Karṇa speaks of Draupadī as 'bandhakī' (a harlot), because she had many men as her husbands.

v2.c28.s1.4

¹²⁸⁵ युधिष्ठिर replies 'सूक्ष्मो धर्मो महाराज नास्य विद्मो वयं गतिम् । पूर्वेषामानुपूर्व्येण यातं वर्त्मानुयामहे ॥'

v2.c28.s1.5

¹²⁸⁶ अथवा बह्व्य एव ताः सदृशरूपा द्रौपद्य एकत्वेनोपचरिता इति व्यवहारार्थापत्या गम्यते ॥ तन्त्रवार्तिक p. 209

v2.c28.s1.6

¹²⁸⁷ विरुद्धाः प्रतिदृश्यन्ते दाक्षिणात्येषु संप्रति। स्वमातुलसुतोद्वाहो मातृबन्धुत्वदूषितः॥ अभर्तृकभ्रातृभार्याग्रहणं चातिदूषितम्। कुले कन्याप्रदानं च देशेष्वन्येषु दृश्यते। तथा मातृविवाहोऽपि पारसीकेषु दृश्यते। बृहस्पति quoted in the स्मृतित्व० I. 10, स्मृतिसु. (वर्णाश्रम p. 130). Vide Jolly's Recht und Sitte, English translation, p. 102.

v2.c28.s1.7

¹²⁸⁸ Vide Imperial Gazetteer of India, vol. I. p. 483 (1907).

v2.c28.s1.8

¹²⁸⁹ Vide the authorities quoted in Jolly's Recht und Sitte (Eng. tr. p. 103 foot-notes).

v2.c28.s1.9

¹²⁹⁰ कथं तर्हि द्रौपद्याः पञ्च पाण्डवा मारिषायाश्च दश प्राचेतसा इदानींतनानां नीचानां च द्वित्रादयः पतयो दृश्यन्ते इति चेन्न देवचरितं चरेदिति न्यायेन देवतावत्कल्पेषु पर्यनुयोगायोगात् नीचानां पशुप्रायोणां चाचारस्याप्रामाण्याच्च अधिकारिविषयत्वाच्च नियोगस्य । नीलकण्ठ on आदिपर्व 104. 35.

Mutual rights and duties of husband and wife

v2.c28.s2.1

Manu (IX. 101-102) lays down in a concise form the obligations of husband and wife viz. 'they should not prove false to each other till death (as regards dharma, artha and kāma) and that their constant endeavour should be not to be separate from each other and not to break faith with each other (as to those three goals of human life)'. The detailed rights and duties of the husband and wife will be unfolded as we proceed.

v2.c28.s2.2.1

The first duty of the husband and the privilege of the wife was to require and to give respectively her co-operation in all religious acts. This has been so from the most ancient times. In Ṛg. I. 72. 5 it is said¹²⁹¹ that 'they, accompanied by their wives, worshipped the fire who is worthy of worship'. In another place it is said 'when you make the husband and wife of one mind, they anoint thee with ghee like a well-placed friend'. In the Tai. Br. III. 7. 5 occurs a passage 'may the wife unite with her husband by means of the good deeds (done by both ), they two became yoked like oxen to the sacrifice; may the two be of one mind and destroy their foes; may they attain non-aging light in heaven'. The same verse with slight variations occurs in the Kāṭhaka Saṁ. V. 4 and is relied upon by Śabara on Jaimini VI. 1. 21. This indicates that they were supposed to enjoy the fruits of their actions together. We saw above (p. 551) how in the Aśvamedha the wife anoints the horse, how in marriage the bride offers handfuls of fried grain into fire. It has already been seen (note 1208) that the Āp. Dh. S. (II. 6. 13. 17-19) requires that from the time of marriage the husband and wife work together in religious acts, that they share the reward of such acts together and that they both have dominion over the wealth of the family and that the wife can make gifts in the absence of the husband if occasion necessitates. The Āśv. gṛ. (I. 8.

v2.c28.s2.2.2

5) prescribes¹²⁹² that the fire kindled at marriage is carried by the married pair to their home (in a vessel) and that (I. 9. 1-8) since the day of marriage, the husband should worship the domestic fire himself or his wife or his son or his daughter or pupil (may offer worship in his absence), that if fire goes out, some teachers say that the wife should observe a fast, the domestic fire should be worshipped in the evening with an *āhuti* and the formula 'agnaye svāhā' and in the morning with an *āhuti* and the formula 'sūryāya svāhā' and there is to be a second oblation each time silently (to Prajāpati). According to the commentator some said that the wife and daughter could not perform the homa as they had no privilege to learn mantras, that they could only kindle the fire, while others said they could do so. In the gṛhya fire kindled at marriage one was to offer the daily mahāyajñas (Gaut. 5. 6-8) and as regards baliharaṇa, Gobhila gṛ. (I. 4. 16-19) says that both husband and wife should offer *balis*, or a brāhmaṇa may offer for them, or the wife may offer in the evening and the husband in the morning¹²⁹³. Manu (III. 121) says that from food cooked in the evening the wife should offer balis, but without mantras. This shows that though gradually women began to lose the right to repeat Vedic mantras (as shown by Manu), still she had a hand in the religious rites. She had to perform many acts in sacrifices, such as unhusking grain in sthālīpāka (*vide* Hir. gṛ. I. 23.

v2.c28.s2.2.3

3), washing the slaughtered animal (*compare* Śat. Br. III. 8. 2 and Gobhila gṛ III. 10. 29), looking at the *ājya* in śrauta sacrifices. The Pūrvamīmāṁsā¹²⁹⁴ (VI. 1. 17–21) establishes that both husband and wife own property and should join together in performing sacrifices, but that the male sacrificer alone is ordinarily to do every act in all religious ceremonies except such matters as are expressly declared to be performed by the wife also or alone (as e. g. observing celibacy, uttering benediction &c.). It is on account of the necessity of associating the wife in all religious acts that the hero Rāma was compelled to celebrate sacrifices with a golden image of Sītā by his side.¹²⁹⁵ Pāṇini (IV. 1. 33) derives the word *patnī* and says that it can be only applied to a wife who shares in the sacrifice (and its reward). It follows that wives who are not or cannot join with their husbands in yajñas are only *jāyās* or *bhāryās* (but not *patnīs*). The Mahābhāṣya says¹²⁹⁶ that the wife of a śūdra is called *patnī* only by analogy (as a śūdra himself has no adhikāra for yajña, his wife can much less have it). It is on account of this close association of the wife in all sacrifices (either śrauta or smārta) that the wife if she dies before her husband is burnt with the sacred fire or fires and with the sacrificial vessels and implements (Manu V. 167–168, Yāj. I. 89). The Tai. Br. III. 7.

v2.c28.s2.2.4

1 says ‘half of the sacrifice is destroyed in the case of that sacrificer whose wife is (in her monthly course and therefore) unavailable on the sacrificial day.’¹²⁹⁷

v2.c28.s2.3

¹²⁹¹ संजानाना उपसीदन्नभिज्ञु पत्नीवन्तो नमस्यं नमस्यन् । ऋ. I. 72. 5; अञ्जन्ति मित्रं सुधितं न गोभिर्यद्दम्पती समनसा कृणोषि । ऋ. V. 3. 2; स पत्नी पत्या सुकृतेन गच्छताम् । यज्ञस्य युक्तौ धुर्यावभूताम् । संजानाना विजहतामरातीः । दिवि ज्योतिरजरमारभेताम् । तै. ब्रा. III. 7. 5.

v2.c28.s2.4

¹²⁹² विवाहात़्निग्रग्रतोऽजस्त्रं नयन्ति। आश्व. गृ. I. 8. 5. पाणिग्रहणादि गृह्यं परिचरेत्स्वयं पत्म्यपि वा पुत्रः कुमार्यन्तेवासी वा। ...... यदि तूपशाम्येत्पत्न्युपवसेदित्येके। ...... अग्नये स्वाहेति सायं जुहुयात्सूर्याय स्वाहेति प्रातस्तूष्णीं द्वितीये उभयत्र। आश्व. गृ. I. 9. 1, 3, 8.

v2.c28.s2.5

¹²⁹³ आप. गृ. was against allowing women to perform homa even in gṛhya fire except in the case of *kāmya* rites and *bali*. स्त्रियानुपेतेन क्षारलवणावरात्नसंसृष्टस्य च होमं परिचक्षते। यथोपदेशं काम्यानि बलयश्च। आप. गृ. 8. 3-4.

v2.c28.s2.6

¹²⁹⁴ तस्या यावदुक्तमाशीर्ब्रह्मचर्यमतुल्यत्वात् । जै. VI. 1. 24.

v2.c28.s2.7

¹²⁹⁵ रामोपि कृत्वा सौवर्णीं सीतां पत्नीं यशस्विनीम् । ईजे यज्ञैर्बहुविधैः सह भ्रातृभिरचितैः ॥ गोभिलस्मृति III. 10; ‘काञ्चनीं मम पत्नीं च’ in रामायण VII. 91. 25.

v2.c28.s2.8

¹²⁹⁶ पत्युर्नो यज्ञसंयोगे । पा. IV. 1. 33; ‘एवमपि तुषजकस्य पत्नीति न सिध्यति । उपमानात्सिद्धम् । पत्नीवत्पत्नीति ।’ महाभाष्य on पा. IV. 1. 33. (vol. II. p. 214).

v2.c28.s2.9

¹²⁹⁷ अर्धो वा एतद्वय यज्ञस्य मीयते यस्य व्रत्येऽहन् पत्न्यनालम्भुका भवति । तै. ब्रा. III. 7. 1.

v2.c28.s2.10

But the wife is not authorized to do religious acts independently of her husband or without his consent. Manu (V. 155 = Viṣṇu Dh. S. 25. 15) ordains ‘there is no separate yajña for women (independently of the husband) nor vrata (vows) nor fasts (without his consent).' Similarly Kātyāyana propounds¹²⁹⁸ a sweeping rule 'whatever a woman does to secure spiritual benefit after death without the consent of her father (when she is unmarried), or her husband or her son, becomes fruitless for the purpose intended.' Vide also Veda-Vyāsa smṛti II. 19. The Nityācārapaddhati (p. 329) quotes Manu V. 155 and remarks that Manu's words are not to be taken literally but are only meant to extol the eminence of the husband.

v2.c28.s2.11

¹²⁹⁸ नारी खल्वननुज्ञाता पित्रा भर्त्रा सुतेन वा। विफलं तद्भवेत्तस्या यत्करोत्यौर्ध्वदेहिकम्॥ कात्यायन quoted in the व्यवहारमयूख p. 113. This is ascribed to मार्कण्डेय by परा. मा. II. 1. p. 37. and by हेमाद्रि (व्रतखण्ड part 1. p. 362) to आदिपुराण.

v2.c28.s2.12

Very detailed rules were laid down as to precedence among wives, if a man married several women. Viṣṇu Dh. S. (26. 1-4) concisely gives all the rules.¹²⁹⁹ If all the wives are of the same caste, then the wife whose marriage took place first was to be associated with the husband in all religious acts; if a man had wives of different varṇas (when inter-caste marriages were allowed) the wife of the same varṇa with the husband had precedence, though her marriage might have been later in date. If there is no wife of the same varṇa as himself, the husband may associate with himself in religious rites even a wife of the varṇa immediately next to his own; but a *dvijāti* should never associate a śūdra wife with himself in religious ceremonies. Vide Madanapārijāta p. 134 for similar rules. Vas. Dh. S. 18. 18 expressly says 'a woman belonging to the dark varṇa (i. e. śūdra) is meant only for pleasure and not for performance of religious rites'.¹³⁰⁰ Gobhila smṛti (I. 103-104) contains rules similar to those in Viṣṇu Dh. S., Yāj. I. 88 and Veda-Vyāsa II. 12 are to the same effect. Viśvarūpa on Yāj. remarks that though the eldest wife alone is entitled to take part in religious rites, all wives (except a śūdra wife) may be cremated with the śrauta fire. Vide Sm. C. I. p. 165. In the Pūrvamīmāṁsā (IX. 3. 20-21) Jaimini discusses the question whether the direction in the Darśa-pūrṇamāsa 'patnīm saṁnahya' (having girt up the wife) which employs the singular number should be modified into the dual or plural when the sacrificer (in a model sacrifice or its modifications) has two or more wives and establishes that no change is required. The Trikāṇḍamaṇḍana¹³⁰¹ (I. 43-44) says that there were three views when a man had several wives viz. some said that all should be associated with him in religious rites, others held that only the eldest wife of the same varṇa should be associated and the third view was that the husband should never associate with himself a wife whom he married for pleasure after he kindled the sacred fires. Manu (IX. 86-87) lays down that the wife of the same caste with the husband should always have precedence not only in the obligatory religious rites, but also in ministering to the physical comfort of the husband and if a brāhmaṇa husband gets these done by a wife of another caste when the wife of the same caste is near, he becomes like a cāṇḍāla.

v2.c28.s2.13

¹²⁹⁹ सुवर्णासु बहुभार्यासु विद्यमानासु ज्येष्ठया सह धर्मकार्यं कुर्यात्। मिश्रासु च कनिष्ठयापि समानवर्णया। समानवर्णाया अभावे त्वनन्तरयैवापदि च। न त्वेव द्विजः शूद्रया॥ विष्णुधर्मसूत्र 26. 1-4.

v2.c28.s2.14

¹³⁰⁰ कृष्णवर्णा या रामा रमणायैव न धर्माय। वसिष्ठ 18. 18.

v2.c28.s2.15

¹³⁰¹ भार्याः सन्तीह यावत्यस्ताभिः सर्वाभिरन्वितः। यद्वा सवर्णया ज्येष्ठभार्ययैव समन्वितः॥ यद्वाधानादुपव्यूढकामपत्नीविवर्जितः। त्रिकाण्डमण्डन I. 43-44.

v2.c28.s2.16

From very ancient times one of the articles of faith was that a man was born with debts, that he owed three debts to sages, gods and pitṛs and that by brahmacarya (student-hood), by performing yajñas and by procreating sons he freed himself from those three debts respectively. Vide¹³⁰² Tai. S. VI. 3. 10. 5, Śat. Br. I. 7.2.11, Ait. Br. 33.1. The last very succinctly states the purposes served by a son viz. payment of the debt to ancestors, the securing of immortality and heaven. Ṛg, V. 4. 10 (prajābhir-agne amṛtatvam-aśyām) prays 'may I obtain immortality through progeny.' Vas. Dh. S. 17. 1-4 quotes these passages of the Tai. S., Ait. Br. and Ṛg. The Ṛg. X. 85. 45 invokes the blessing of ten sons on the newly married bride and the Ṛg. is full of the yearning for a son at every step. Vide Ṛg. I. 91. 20, I. 92. 13, III. 1. 23 &c. Jaimini (VI. 2. 31)¹³⁰³ discusses the passage of the Tai S. and arrives at the conclusion that the duties laid down in it are obligatory and not left to choice and Śabara adds another explanation that these duties are obligatory on all dvijātis and the word 'brāhmaṇa' is used in the Tai. S. as illustrative only. Manu (VI. 35) enjoins upon a man that he should not think of *mokṣa* (release from saṁsāra) before he has paid off the three debts and (IX. 106) further says that by the very birth of the eldest son a man becomes free from the debt owed to ancestors. Manu (IX. 137), Vas. 17. 5, Viṣṇu Dh. S. 15. 46 contain the same verse proclaiming that a man attains all (heavenly) worlds by means of a son and Manu IX. 138, Ādi. 129. 14, Viṣṇu Dh. S. 15. 44 declare that a *putra* is so called because he saves his father from the hell called *put*. The Nirukta II. 11¹³⁰⁴ also derives the word *putra* similarly. Further the water and piṇḍas (balls of cooked rice) offered by the son to his father and other deceased ancestors were supposed to be of great efficacy for the peace of the souls of the departed. The Viṣṇu Dh. S. 85. 70,¹³⁰⁵ Vanaparva 84. 97, Matsyapurāṇa 207. 39 contain a verse 'one should desire to have many sons in the hope that one of them may repair to Gayā.' On account of these several benefits conferred by a son, the highest importance was attached to the birth of a son. The wife helped a man to discharge two of his debts, to the gods by associating with him in sacrifices and to the pitṛs by procreating a son or sons. Therefore the goal of the life of women was declared to be to get married and procreate sons. This was so much the case from very ancient times that even the Śat. Br. (V. 3. 2. 2, S. B. E. vol. 41, p. 65) says that the sonless wife is possessed with *Nir-ṛti* (ill luck or Destruction). Manu (IX. 96) says 'women are created for procreation and men have to propagate (the race): therefore in the Veda it is declared that the wife shares in common (with the husband) the performance of religious duties'. Nārada (strīpuṁsa v. 19) also declares that women are created for (procreating) children. It was on account of these ideas about the goal of woman's life and the supreme importance of a son that the smṛtis and dharma-sūtra works recommended or allowed the husband to marry a second time even when the first wife was living.

v2.c28.s2.17

¹³⁰² जायमानो वै ब्राह्मणस्त्रिभिर्ऋणवा जायते ब्रह्मचर्येण ऋषिभ्यो यज्ञेन देवेभ्यः प्रजया पितृभ्य एष वा अनृणो यः पुत्री यज्वा ब्रह्मचारिवासी। तै. सं. VI. 3. 10. 5; ऋणं ह वै जायते योऽस्ति। स जायमान एव देवेभ्य ऋषिभ्यः पितृभ्यो मनुष्येभ्यः। शतपथ I. 7. 2. 11; ऋणमस्मिन्संनयत्यमृतत्वं च गच्छति। पिता पुत्रस्य जातस्य पश्येच्चेज्जीवतो मुखम् । ...... नापुत्रस्य लोकोऽस्तीति तत्सर्वे पशवो विदुः। ऐ. ब्रा. 33. 1. वसिष्ठधर्मसूत्र XI. 47 quotes the first passage.

v2.c28.s2.18

¹³⁰³ ब्राह्मणस्य तु सोमविद्याप्रजसृणवाक्येन संयोगात्। जैमिनि VI. 2. 31.

v2.c28.s2.19

¹³⁰⁴ पुत्रः पुरु त्रायते निपरणाद्वा पुन्नरकं ततस्त्रायत इति वा । निरुक्त II. 11.

v2.c28.s2.20

¹³⁰⁵ एष्टव्या बहवः पुत्रा यद्येकोपि गयां व्रजेत् । यजेत वाश्वमेधेन नीलं वा वृषमुत्सृजेत् ॥ विष्णुधर्मसूत्र 85. 70. The मत्स्यपुराण 207. 39 reads गौरीं वाप्युद्वहेत्कन्यां for यजे ... ... मेधेन.

v2.c28.s2.21

All the smṛtis, purāṇas and the digests devote a great deal of space to the duties of a wife. It would be impossible to set them out in detail. A few striking passages alone will be cited. All are agreed that the foremost duty of a wife is to obey her husband and to honour him as her god. In the Śat. Br.¹³⁰⁶ princess Sukanyā when married to the old and decrepit sage Cyavana to mollify the sage who had been wronged by her brothers says 'I shall not forsake my husband, while he is alive, to whom my father gave me' (IV. 1. 5. 9). Śaṅkha-Likhita¹³⁰⁷ say 'a wife should not hate her husband even if he be impotent (or have swollen testicles), *patita* (guilty of mahāpātaka and so an outcast), devoid of a limb or diseased, since the husband is the god of women.' Manu declares (V. 154) 'a virtuous wife should serve her husband as if he were a god, whether he be of evil character, or lustful (loving another woman) or devoid of good qualities'. Yāj. I. 77 enjoins upon women 'this is the highest duty (dharma) of women that they should obey their husband's words; if he is guilty of some mortal sin, they should wait till he is purified (and thereafter be dependent on his words)'. The Rāmāyaṇa (Ayodhyā-kāṇḍa 24. 26-27) remarks 'the husband is the god and the master of the wife, while she is alive and she obtains the highest heaven by serving her husband.' The Mahābhārata very frequently harps upon the duties of wives.¹³⁰⁸ The Anuśāsana parva 146. 55 says 'the husband is the god of a woman, her (sole) relative, her goal'; the Āśvamedhikaparva 90. 51 declares 'the husband is the highest deity.' 'The father gives only what is limited, the brother and the son do the same; what woman would not worship the husband who gives what is unlimited or immeasurable!' (Śāntiparva 148. 6-7). The Matsyapurāṇa 210. 18 contains this last verse and adds 'the husband is the god for women and is their highest goal.' This idea of the wife's entire submission to the husband is voiced even by poets like Kālidāsa,¹³⁰⁹ who makes one of the pupils of Kaṇva say about Śakuntalā 'this is your wife, abandon her or accept her, since all-round domination of the husband over the wife is proper.' Manu V. 150-156, Yāj. I. 83-87, Viṣṇu Dh. S. 25. 2 ff, Vanaparva 233. 19-58 (Draupadī as the speaker), Anuśāsana 123 (Śāṇḍilī declares the conduct of virtuous wives), Veda-Vyāsa-smṛti II. 20-32 (wife's duties from morning till night), Vṛddha-Hārīta XI. 84 ff (wife's duties from morning), Sm. C. (vyavahāra section) p. 249 ff, Madanapārijāta pp. 192-195 and other *nibandhas* dwell at length upon the duties of the wife. A few of such duties may be indicated here.

v2.c28.s2.22

¹³⁰⁶ यस्मै मां पितादान्नैवाहं तं जीवन्तं हास्यामि । शतपथ IV. 1. 5. 9. Vide Manu V. 151 for a paraphrase of this passage. विश्वरूप on या I. 69 makes an objector rely on this Śatapatha passage to show that it allows niyoga after the husband's death.

v2.c28.s2.23

¹³⁰⁷ न भतारं द्विष्याद्यद्यप्यण्डीवलः स्यात्पतितोङ्गहीनो व्याधितो वा पतिर्हि देवता स्त्रीणाम् । शङ्खलिखित quoted in स्मृतिच० (व्यव. p. 251), परा. मा. II. part 1 p. 38.

v2.c28.s2.24

¹³⁰⁸ पतिर्हि देवो नारीणां पतिर्बन्धुः पतिर्गतिः । अनुशासन 146. 55; मितं ददाति हि पिता मितं भ्राता मितं सुतः । अमितस्य हि दातारं भर्तारं का न पूजयेत् ॥ शान्तिपर्व 148. 6; पतिर्हि दैवतं स्त्रीणां पतिरेव परायणम् । ...... मितं ददाति ...... पूजयेत् ॥ मत्स्य 210. 17-18. भार्यैकचारिणी गूढविश्रम्भा देववत्पतिमानुकूल्येन वर्तेत । कामसूत्र IV. 1. 1. Compare St. Paul's letter to the Ephesians V. 22-24 'wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord...Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in everything.'

v2.c28.s2.25

¹³⁰⁹ तदेषा भवतः कान्ता त्यज वैनां गृहाण वा। उपपन्ना हि दारेषु प्रभुता सर्वतोमुखी॥ शाकुन्तल V.

v2.c28.s2.26.1

According to Manu V. 150 'a wife should always present a smiling face, should be alert and clever in her domestic duties, should keep domestic vessels well burnished and clean and should not be extravagant in spending.' Manu IX. 11 asks the husband to set to his wife the task of conserving the wealth acquired and looking to its expenditure, of keeping things clean, of the performance of religious acts, of cooking food and of taking care of household paraphernalia. Manu (IX. 13) adds that drinking wine, company of bad people, staying away from the husband, wandering about (to *tīrthas* or elsewhere), sleep (by day), staying in the house of strangers—these six spoil married women. Ādiparva 74. 12 gives¹³¹⁰ expression to the popular notion that people do not like married women staying with their paternal relatives for a long time away from their husbands, since such a stay leads to loss of good name and character. The same sentiment is echoed by Kālidāsa in the Śākuntala (V. 17). The Mārkaṇḍeya purāṇa 77. 19 is to the same effect. Yāj. (I. 83 and 87) requires the wife to keep household utensils and furniture in their proper places, to be clever, to have a smiling face, to be unextravagant, to be devoted to doing what is agreeable and beneficial to the husband, to show respect to her father-in-law and mother-in-law by clasping their feet;

v2.c28.s2.26.2

to conduct herself decently, to restrain her senses.' Śaṅkha¹³¹¹ lays down what is decent conduct for a wife 'she should not go out of the house unless she is asked (by her husband or elders) nor without putting on an upper garment; she should not walk fast; she should not speak with a male who is unrelated to her, except a trader, a saṃnyāsin, an old man or a physician; she should not allow her navel to be seen; she should wear her garment (or *sari*) in such a way that it may reach down to her ankles; she should not expose her breasts, she should not laugh loudly without covering her mouth (with her hand or her garment); she should not hate her husband or his relatives; she should not be in the company of dancing girls, gambling women, women who make assignments to meet lovers, female ascetics, female fortune-tellers, women who live by tricks, magical and secret rites and who are of bad character; since (the wise declare that) the character of women of good family is spoilt by the company (they keep).' The Viṣṇu Dh. S. 25. 1-6 ordains 'now then the duties of wives (are declared); they should perform the same *vratas* (observances and vows) which the husband undertakes; they should honour the mother-in-law, the father-in-law, other elders, gods, guests and keep the household utensils well arranged; they should not be extravagant in giving to others; should keep the goods well guarded;

v2.c28.s2.26.3

they should have no liking for magical practices (to win love) and should be devoted to auspicious conduct.' *Vide* also Viṣṇu Dh. S. chap. 99 last two verses (quoted by Aparārka p. 107). Draupadī (Vanaparva chap. 233) states 'whatever my husband does not eat, drink or partake of, I avoid. I know the total wealth, the income and expenditure of the Pāṇḍavas'. The Kāmasūtra directs the wife to make expenditure that will be commensurate with the yearly income of the husband.¹³¹² Manu (VIII. 361) prescribes the fine of a *suvarṇa* for a man speaking with a woman with whom he is forbidden to speak and Yāj. II. 285 prescribes a fine of one hundred *paṇas* in the case of a woman who is forbidden to speak with a man (by her husband or father &c.) and a fine of two hundred *paṇas* in the case of the man who speaks with a woman with whom he is forbidden to speak. Bṛhaspati¹³¹³ says that a wife should get up from bed before her husband and elders, should partake of food and condiments after they have eaten, should occupy a seat lower than that of the husband or elders. 'A wife can engage in vratas, fasts, observances and worship (of god &c.) with the permission of her husband' say Śaṅkha-Likhita.¹³¹⁴ The Purāṇas frequently descant on *strīdharma*. A few specimens may be noted here. The Bhāgavata VII. 11. 29 says that the wife who looks upon her husband as the god Hari dwells in the world of Hari and revels with her husband. The Skanda Purāṇa (Brahma-khaṇḍa, Dharmāraṇya section, chap.

v2.c28.s2.26.4

7) has a long description of a *pativratā* 'she should not repeat the name of her husband, as such conduct leads to the increase of the husband's life and should never take the name of another male (v. 18), even when she is loudly blamed (by the husband) she does not cry loudly, even when beaten she is smiling (v. 19). A pativratā should always use turmeric, *kuṅkuma*, sindūra, lamp black (for the eye), a bodice, tāmbūla, auspicious ornaments, and should braid her hair' (vv. 28-29). The Padma-purāṇa (Sṛṣṭi-khaṇḍa, chap. 47, v. 55) says that that wife is pativratā who in doing work is like a slave, like a *hetaira* in affording sexual pleasure, like a mother in offering food and like a counsellor in adversity.

v2.c28.s2.27

¹³¹⁰ नारीणां चिरवासो हि बान्धवेषु न रोचते। कीर्तिचारित्रधर्मघ्नस्तस्मान्नयत मा चिरम्॥ आदिपर्व 74. 12; compare 'सतीमपि ज्ञातिकुलैकसंश्रयां जनोऽन्यथा भर्तृमतीं विशङ्कते। शाकुन्तल V. 17

v2.c28.s2.28

¹³¹¹ नानुक्ता गृहाङ्गिर्गच्छेत् । नानुत्तरीया । न त्वरितं व्रजेत् । न परपुरुषमभिभाषेतान्यत्र वणिक्प्रव्रजितवृद्धवैद्येभ्यः । न नाभिं दर्शयेत् । आ गुल्फाद्वासः परिवृध्यात् । न स्तनौ विवृतौ कुर्यात् । न हसेदनपावृता । भर्तारं तद्बन्धून्वा न द्विष्यात् । न गणिका-धूर्ताभिसारिणी-प्रव्रजिता-प्रेक्षणिकामायामूलकुहककारिकादुःशीलादिभिः सहैकत्र तिष्ठेत् । संसर्गेण हि कुलस्त्रीणां चारित्र्यं दुष्यति । शङ्ख quoted by the मिताक्षरा on या. I. 87, by अपरार्क p. 107 (on या. I. 83), मदनपारिजात p. 195; vide also स्मृविच० (व्यवहार) pp. 249-250 and वि. र. p. 430. As to speaking with परपुरुष, vide वनपर्व 266. 3 एका ह्यहं संप्रति ते न वाचं ददानि वै भद्र निबोध चेदम् । अहं त्वरण्ये कथमेकमेका त्वामालपेयं निरता स्वधर्मे ॥. Vide also अनुशासन 146. 43. 'मूलकारिका' in the passage of शङ्ख means one who employs herbs &c. for वशीकरण. Vide वनपर्व 233. 7-14 (the last verse is मूलप्रचारैर्हि विषं प्रयच्छन्ति जिघांसवः).

v2.c28.s2.29

¹³¹² सांवत्सरिकमायं संख्याय तदनुरूपं व्ययं कुर्यात् । कामसूत्र IV. 1. 32.

v2.c28.s2.30

¹³¹³ पूर्वोत्थानं गुरुश्वर्वाक् भोजनव्यञ्जनक्रिया । जघन्यासनशायित्वं कर्म स्त्रीणा-मुदाहृतम् । बृहस्पति quoted in स्मृतिच०, व्यव. p. 257.

v2.c28.s2.31

¹³¹⁴ भर्तुरनुज्ञया व्रतोपवासनियमेज्यादीनामारम्भः स्त्रीधर्मः । शङ्खलिखित quoted in स्मृतिच० (व्यवहार) p. 252.

v2.c28.s2.32

Special rules of conduct were laid down for a wife whose husband was away from home on a journey. Śaṅkha-Likhita (quoted by Aparārka p. 108, Sm. C., vyavahāra p. 253) contain a long statement about what such a wife should not do 'women whose husbands are away from home should avoid amusements of swing and dance, seeing pictures, applying unguents to the body, walking in parks, sleeping in open places (or uncovered).

v2.c28.s2.33

partaking of sumptuous food and drink, playing with a ball, fragrant resins and perfumes, flowers, ornaments, ceremonial brushing of the teeth, collyrium (in the eyes).' Yāj. (I. 84) puts these briefly 'a woman whose husband is gone to another country should give up play, the adornment of the body, visiting samājas (note 986 above) and festivals, laughing, going to the house of a stranger.' The Anuśāsana-parva¹³¹⁵ (123. 17) indicates that a wife whose husband is gone abroad does not apply eyesalve or *rocanā* (yellow pigment) to her body, does not take a ceremonial bath and does not use flowers, unguents or ornaments. Manu (IX. 74-75) requires the husband when going abroad to make provision for the wife's maintenance, since a woman without some means of livelihood, though originally virtuous, may go astray and adds 'when the husband goes abroad after providing for maintenance, the wife should live thereby and abide by the restrictions (laid down for such wives); if he goes away without making provision for her maintenance she should maintain herself by crafts (such as spinning) which are unblamable.' The Viṣṇu Dh. S. (25. 9-10) contains similar rules. The Veda-Vyāsa-smṛti (II. 52) enjoins upon a wife whose husband is gone abroad 'her¹³¹⁶ face should look pale and distressed, she should not embellish her body, she should be devoted to her husband, should be without (full) meal, and should emaciate her body.' The Trikāṇḍamaṇḍana¹³¹⁷ (I. 80-81 and 85) says that when the husband is gone abroad the wife may with the help of a priest perform the daily duties of *agnihotra*, the obligatory *iṣṭis* and *pitṛyajña*, but should not perform soma sacrifices.

v2.c28.s2.34

¹³¹⁵ अञ्जनं रोचनां चैव स्नानं माल्यानुलेपनम्। प्रसाधनं च निष्क्रान्ते नाभिनन्दामि भर्तरि॥ अनुशासन 123. 17.

v2.c28.s2.35

¹³¹⁶ विवर्णदीनवदना देहसंस्कारवर्जिता। पतिव्रता निराहारा शोषयेते प्रोषिते पतौ॥ वेदव्यासस्मृति II. 52.

v2.c28.s2.36

¹³¹⁷ अतोऽग्निहोत्रं नित्येष्टिः पितृयज्ञ इति त्रयम्। कर्तव्यं प्रोषिते पत्यौ नान्यत्स्वामिक्रियान्वितम्॥ त्रिकाण्डमण्डन I. 83.

v2.c28.s2.37

The rewards of the wife's single-minded devotion to her husband and her rigid observance of the rules of conduct prescribed for her are stated at great length in smṛti works. Manu (IX. 29-30 = Manu V. 165 and 164) says 'that woman who does not prove faithless to her husband in thought, word and deed (lit. body) secures the (heavenly) worlds together with her husband and is spoken of as a *sādhvī*' (a virtuous woman, a *pativratā*); but by proving faithless to her husband a woman incurs censure in this world, is born as a female jackal (in the next life) and is afflicted with very bad diseases.' Yāj. (I. 75 and 87) declares that the woman, who does not approach another while the husband is living or after his death and who is intent on doing what is agreeable and beneficial to her husband, who is of good conduct and has restrained her senses, attains glory in this world and plays with Umā (the wife of Śiva) in heaven. Bṛhaspati¹³¹⁸ defines a *pativratā* as one who is distressed when her husband is distressed, who is delighted when her husband is in delight, who is emaciated and wears dirty clothes when her husband has gone on a journey and who dies on the death of her husband.

v2.c28.s2.38

¹³¹⁸ आर्तार्ते मुदिते हृष्टा प्रोषिते मलिना कृशा ॥ मृते म्रियेत या पत्यौ सा स्त्री ज्ञेया पतिव्रता ॥ बृहस्पति quoted by अपरार्क p. 109, by the मिता. on या. I. 86 (as हारीत's). It is वृद्धहारीत XI. 199.

v2.c28.s2.39

In the Mahābhārata and the purāṇas hyperbolical descriptions of the power of the *pativratā* occur at every step. Vide Vana-parva 63 where we are told (vv. 38–39) that when Damayantī cursed by her faithfulness to her husband the young hunter who had evil designs on her, he fell down a dead man. In the Anuśāsanaparva 123 Śāṇḍilī who¹³¹⁹ had attained heavenly worlds tells Sumanā Kaikeyī how she reached that state without wearing kāṣāyas (dyed garments worn by saṁnyāsins) or bark garments and without having matted hair or without tonsuring her head (as ascetics do), but by strictly following the rules laid down for virtuous wives, such as not addressing harsh words to their husband, abandoning all food that the husband did not like. Anuśāsana (146. 4–6) names several *pativratās* of ancient times and the following verses dilate upon the rules of conduct for virtuous wives. The story of Sāvitrī in the Vanaparva (293–299) illustrates the power of a pativratā, who wrung back even from Yama, the dread god of Death, the life of her husband.¹³²⁰ Sāvitrī and Sītā have been held by the women of India for thousands of years as the highest ideals of womanly virtue, to which they have always endeavoured to approach and one may say that Indian women generally have most successfully lived up to that high and ennobling ideal that was set before them. Vanaparva (205-206) tells the story of a learned brāhmaṇa, who by his mere angry look made a female crane die when the latter voided its faeces on to the head of the brāhmaṇa and who was rebuked by a pativratā that the latter was not a crane, when the brāhmaṇa tried to frighten the virtuous woman for her tardiness in welcoming him as a guest and for looking only after her husband. The Śalyaparva (63) narrates how awful the power of a pativratā like Gāndhārī is in that she can, if she choose, burn the world, she can stop even the motions of the sun and¹³²¹ the moon. The Skanda-purāṇa III (Brahma-khaṇḍa, Brahmāraṇya section chap. 7) first names (verses 14-15) several pativratās like Arundhatī, Anasūyā, Sāvitrī, Śāṇḍilyā, Satyā, Menā and then waxes eloquent over the tremendous spiritual power of a pativratā 'just as a snake-charmer¹³²² forcibly draws out from a hole a snake, so a pativratā snatches away her husband's life from the messengers of Death and reaches heaven with her husband and the messengers of Death, on seeing the pativratā, beat a hasty retreat.'

v2.c28.s2.40

¹³¹⁹ नाहं काषायवसना नापि वल्कलधारिणी । न च मुण्डा च जटिला भूत्वा देवत्वमागता ॥ अहितानि च वाक्यानि सर्वाणि परुषाणि च । अप्रमत्ता च भर्तारं कदाचिन्नाहमब्रवम् ॥ अनुशासन 123. 8–9, 14 &c.

v2.c28.s2.41

¹³²⁰ Vide also मत्स्यपुराण 208–214 for the tale of सावित्री. सावित्री says in वनपर्व 297. 53 'न कामये भर्तृविनाकृता सुखं न कामये भर्तृविनाकृता दिवम् । न कामये भर्तृविनाकृता श्रियं न भर्तृहीना व्यवसामि जीवितुम् ॥'

v2.c28.s2.42

¹³²¹ कृष्ण says to गान्धारी 'शक्ता चासि महाभागे पृथिवीं सचराचराम् । चक्षुषा क्रोधदीप्तेन प्रवर्गुं तपसो बलात् ॥' शल्यपर्व 63. 21.

v2.c28.s2.43

¹³²² व्यालग्राही यथा व्यालं बलादुद्धरते बिलात् । एवमुत्क्रम्य दूतेभ्यः पतिं स्वर्गे ब्रजेत्सती ॥ यमदूताः पलायन्ते तामालोक्य पतिव्रताम् । स्कन्दपुराण (ब्रह्मखण्ड), धर्मारण्य chap. 7. 54-55. It will be noticed later on that the half verse व्यालग्राही occurs in numerous works.

v2.c28.s2.44

As the foremost duty of the wife was to honour and serve the husband, she must always stay with him and she had a right of residence in the house. A wife was further entitled to be maintained in the house by the husband. A verse quoted by Medhātithi on Manu III. 62 and IV. 251 and by the Mit. on Yāj. I. 224 and II. 175 and which occurs in some MSS. as a spurious verse after Manu XI. 10 says 'Manu declares that one must maintain one's aged parents, a virtuous wife and a minor son by doing even a hundred bad acts'.¹³²³ Dakṣa II. 36 ( = Laghu-Āśvalāyana ¹³²⁴ I. 74 ) defines *poṣyavarga* ( persons whom every one, however poor, is bound to maintain ) as follows: 'the parents, the *guru*, the wife, children and a helpless man who has taken shelter with one, a guest and fire constitute poṣyavarga.' Manu VIII. 389 prescribes that the man who abandons and does not maintain his parents, wife, and son, when they are not outcasted, should be fined 600 paṇas by the king. Yāj. I. 74 requires the husband to maintain a wife whom he has superseded in the same way as before, otherwise he would be guilty of great sin. Yāj. I. 76 says that if a man abandoned a wife who was obedient, diligent, the mother of a son, and agreeable in speech, he was to be made to give one-third of his property to the wife, but if he had no property he had to maintain her. Nārada ( strīpuṁsa 95 ) has a similar provision. The Viṣṇu Dh. S. V. 163 made the husband punishable like a thief, if he abandoned his wife. The husband was required by Yāj. I. 81 to be devoted to his wife, since women are to be guarded ( against falling into error ). Vide Yāj. I. 78 also. Manu IV. 133 forbids adultery with another's wife and Manu IV. 134 ( = Anuśāsana 104. 21 and Mārkaṇḍeya-purāṇa 34. 62–63) observes that there is nothing that harms one's life as much as adultery. Viśvarūpa ¹³²⁵ on Yāj. I. 80 points out that the guarding of a wife from evil can be secured only by being devoted to her and not by beating her, as, if the husband were to beat her, it might endanger her life. Manu (IX. 5–9) also calls upon men to guard women, and ( in IX. 10–12 ) says that they cannot be guarded by imprisonment or force, but by engaging them in looking to the income and expenditure, the furniture, beauty and purity of the house and the cooking and by inculcating on them the value of a virtuous life. In spite of this the husband possessed certain powers of physical correction over the wife which were the same as those possessed by a teacher over a pupil or a father over a son, viz. he could administer beating with a rope or a thin piece of bamboo on the back but never on the head. Vide Manu VIII. 299–300 ( cited above on p. 363 ) which are the same as Matsyapurāṇa 227. 152–154. It will be seen that about two thousand years ago Manu did not confer greater powers of correction and restraint of the wife on the husband than the Common Law of England allowed to husbands even in the 18th century.¹³²⁶

First 80 of 140 passages. Read on

Linked texts (55)