Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

History of Dharmashastra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v2.c28.s2: Mutual rights and duties of husband and wife

History of Dharmaśāstra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v2.c28.s2

Language
English

Contents

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

v2.c28.s2.45

¹³²³ वृद्धौ च मातापितरौ साध्वी भार्या शिशुः सुतः । अप्यकार्यशतं कृत्वा भर्तव्या मनुरब्रवीत् ॥

v2.c28.s2.46

¹³²⁴ माता पिता गुरुर्भार्या प्रजा दीनः समाश्रितः। अभ्यागतोऽतिथिश्वाग्निः पोष्यवर्ग उदाहृतः ॥ दक्ष II. 36. Verse 37 includes other persons among poṣyavarga in the case of the well-to-do. Aparārka p. 939 quotes Dakṣa II. 36–37.

v2.c28.s2.47

¹³²⁵ रक्षा च स्त्रीणां स्वदारनिरतत्वमेव न तु ताडनादिका। तया तासामनर्थोपि संभाव्येत। तथा च लौकिकाः पाञ्चालस्त्रीषु मार्दवमिति पठन्ति। विश्वरूप on या. I. 80.

v2.c28.s2.48

¹³²⁶ Vide Blackstone's commentaries on the laws of England (ed. of 1765, Oxford) Book I. chap. 15 pp. 432-433 'The husband also (by the old law) might give his wife moderate correction......the law thought it reasonable to entrust him with this power of restraining her by domestic chastisement in the same moderation that a man is allowed to correct his servants or children.........Yet the lower rank of people still claim and exert their ancient privilege; and the courts of law will still permit a husband to restrain a wife of her liberty in case of any gross behaviour'. Vide also Lush on the law of 'Husband and Wife' (4th ed. 1933) pp. 24-29 about the husband's power to beat his wife and restrain her in the past and now.

v2.c28.s2.49

As it was the husband's duty to provide residence and maintenance for the wife and as the wife was bound to stay with the husband, it follows that either party could after marriage enforce his or her rights in a court of law if the other party refused to perform her or his duties. In modern times a suit for restitution of conjugal rights can be brought and the decree can be executed against the wife by the attachment and sale of her property (if she has any), but not by detention in civil jail and against the husband by the court ordering the husband to make periodical payments of money for the maintenance of the wife and securing such payments by creating a charge on his property (vide Civil Procedure Code of 1908 Order 21 rules 32 and 33). To such a suit by the husband Indian Courts have recognised certain valid defences, such as desertion, cruelty or such conduct as endangers the health of the wife, change of religion, or keeping a concubine in the house or the husband's being afflicted with a loathsome disease (like leprosy). Vide *Bai Premkunvar v. Bhika* 5 Bom. H. C. R. (A. C. J.) p. 209 (leprosy), *Yamunabai v. Narayan* 1 Bom. 164 (cruelty), *Paigi v. Sheo Narain* 8 All. 78, *Dular Koer v. Dwarkanath* 34 Cal. 971, *Bai Jivi v. Narsingh* 51 Bom. 329. Where the courts make the husband pay maintenance, they are in principle following Yāj. I. 76 and Nārada (p. 569). Vide *Binda v. Kaunsilia* 13 All. 126 where many original Sanskrit texts are cited.

v2.c28.s2.50

Not only was the husband bound to maintain the wife, but he was called upon to cohabit with the wife and was supposed to incur the sin of embryo-murder if he refused without good cause to do so. On the other hand the husband had a right of *consortium* i. e. the wife was not to refuse herself to the husband and if she did so her delinquency was to be proclaimed in the village and she was to be driven from the house¹³²⁷.

v2.c28.s2.51

¹³²⁷ त्रीणि वर्षाण्यृतुमतीं यो भार्या नाधिगच्छति। स तुल्यं भ्रूणहत्याया दोषमृच्छत्यसंशयम्॥ ऋतुस्नातां तु यो भार्या संनिधौ नोपगच्छति । पितरस्तस्य तन्मासं तस्मिन्नरजसि शेरते ॥ भर्तुः प्रतिनिदेशेन या भार्या स्कन्दयेदृतुम् । तां ग्राममध्ये विख्याप्य भ्रूणघ्नीं निर्धमेद्गृहात्॥ बौ. ध. सू. IV. 1. 19-20, 22. विश्वरूप on या. I. 79 quotes as Baudhāyana's verses 20 and 22. संवर्त 98 is the same as बौ. ध. सू. IV. 1. 20. पराशर (4. 14-15) is similar to Baud. Dh. S. IV. 1. 20 and 22.

v2.c28.s2.52

The humane character of the legislation of the Indian sages is seen by the fact that even for adultery they do not allow the husband to drive the wife out of the house and to abandon her. Gaut. 22. 35 prescribes that a wife who violates her duty of chastity must undergo a penance, but she should be kept under guard and be given food. Yāj. (I. 70, 72) declares 'an adulterous woman should be deprived of her authority (over servants &c.), should be made to wear dirty clothes, should be given food just sufficient to enable her to live, should be treated with scorn and made to lie on the ground (not on a cot); a woman becomes pure from adultery when she has her monthly period after that, but if she conceives in adulterous intercourse she may be abandoned and also when she is guilty of the murder of her foetus or of her husband or of some sin that makes her an outcast'. The Mit. on Yāj. I. 72 draws attention to the text of Vasiṣṭha XXI. 12 'the wives of brāhmaṇas,¹³²⁸ kṣatriyas and vaiśyas who commit adultery with a śūdra may be purified by a penance in case no child is born (of the intercourse), but not otherwise' and remarks that the words of Yājñavalkya are to be understood in the same sense i. e. a wife is to be abandoned only if she be in adultery with a śūdra; and further that the abandonment consists in not allowing her to participate in religious rites and conjugal matters, but she is not to be cast on the streets; she is to be kept apart guarded in a room and to be given food and raiment (as stated in Yāj. III. 297). Vasiṣṭha XXI. 10 says that only four (types of) wives are to be abandoned viz. one who has intercourse with the husband's pupil and with the husband's *guru*, and especially one who attempts to kill her husband and who commits adultery with a man of degraded caste (like a leather-worker). Nārada¹³²⁹ (strīpuṁsa v. 91) says ‘when a woman commits adultery her hair shall be shaven, she shall have to lie on a low bed, shall receive bad food and clothing and her occupation will be the removal of sweepings of the husband’s house’. Gaut. 23. 14, Śānti-parva 165. 64 and Manu VIII. 371 are more harsh on a woman who has intercourse with a low-caste man, i. e. she is to be punished by the king with being devoured by dogs. Veda-Vyāsa (II. 49–50) says that ‘a wife¹³³⁰ who is guilty of adultery should be kept in the house but void of her rights of associating in religious and conjugal matters and of her rights over property, and should be treated with scorn; but when she has had monthly course after the act of adultery (and does not repeat it), the husband should allow her the usual rights of a wife as before.’ Manu XI. 177 asks the husband to confine an exceedingly corrupt wife to one room and compel her to perform the penance¹³³¹ prescribed for males in cases of adultery. Vide Atri V. 1–5, Parāśara IV. 20 and XI. 87 and Bṛhad-Yama IV. 36.

v2.c28.s2.53

¹³²⁸ ब्राह्मणक्षत्रियविशां भार्याः शूद्रेण संगताः। अप्रजाता विशुध्यन्ति प्रायश्चित्तेन नेतराः॥ चतस्रस्तु परित्याज्याः शिष्यगा गुरुगा च या। पतिघ्नी च विशेषेण जुङ्गितोपगता च या॥ वसिष्ठ 21. 12 and 10. The मिता० ascribes the second verse to व्यास on Yāj. I. 72 and to वसिष्ठ on या. III. 298.

v2.c28.s2.54

¹³²⁹ व्यभिचारे स्त्रिया मौण्ड्यमधः शयनमेव च। कदृन्नं वा कुवासश्च कर्म चावस्करोज्झनम्॥ नारद (स्त्रीपुंस v. 91).

v2.c28.s2.55

¹³³⁰ व्यभिचारेण दुष्टां तां पत्नीमा दर्शनावृतोः। हृतत्रिवर्गकरणां धिक्कृतां च वसेत्पतिः॥ पुनस्तामार्टवस्नातां पूर्ववद् व्यवहारयेत्॥ वेदव्यास II. 49–50.

v2.c28.s2.56

¹³³¹ Penance will be lighter or heavier according to the caste of the adulterer. According to मनु XI. 60 adultery is an उपपातक and the ordinary penance for it is गोव्रत or चान्द्रायण (मनु XI. 118).

v2.c28.s2.57

Under the English law, if the wife commits adultery the husband’s obligation to maintain her ceases altogether unless he had connived at it or condoned it.¹³³²

v2.c28.s2.58

¹³³² *Vide* Halsbury’s Laws of England vol. 16 (Hailsham ed.) pp. 609–610.

v2.c28.s2.59

The following propositions can be deduced from the texts cited above. (1) There is no absolute right of abandonment of wife in the husband on the ground of adultery; (2) Adultery is ordinarily an upapātaka (a minor sin) and can be atoned for by appropriate penance undergone by the wife; (3) the wife who has committed adultery but has undergone penance is to be restored to all the ordinary rights of wives (*vide* Vas. XXI. 12, Yāj. I. 72, Mit. thereon and Aparārka p. 98); (4) as long as the adulteress has not undergone penance, she is to be given in the house itself starving maintenance and to be deprived of all her rights as wife (Yāj. I. 70, Śāntiparva 165. 63);

v2.c28.s2.60

(5) a wife, who commits adultery with a śūdra or has had a child thereby, who is guilty of killing her foetus or of attempt to kill the husband or guilty of one of the deadly sins (mahāpātakas), is to be deprived of her right to participation in religious rites or conjugal matters and is to be kept confined in a room or in a hut near the house and to be given starving maintenance and poor apparel, even after she undergoes penance (Vas. XXI. 10, Manu XI. 177, Yāj. III. 297-98 and Mit. thereon); (6) that wives who are not guilty of acts mentioned in Yāj. I. 72, III. 297-298, Vas. 21. 10 or 28. 7 are to be given starving maintenance and residence near the house even if they do not perform penance (*vide* Mit. on Yāj. III. 298); (7) wives who are guilty of the acts mentioned in Yāj. I. 72, III. 297-298, if they refuse to perform penance, are to be refused even starving maintenance and residence near the husband's house (Mit. on Yāj. III. 298). The propositions about maintenance set out here are accepted as the modern Hindu Law by the courts in India.¹³³³

v2.c28.s2.61

¹³³³ *Vide Parami v. Mahadevi* I. L. R. 34. Bom. 278 at p. 283 (per Chandavarkar J.).

v2.c28.s2.62

It has been shown above (p. 518) that Āp. postulated the identity of husband and wife in religious matters and Manu IX. 45 declares that the husband is one with his wife. But this identity of husband and wife was not accepted by the ancient sages for secular or legal purposes. The rights of husband and wife as to each other's property and the liability of each for the debts of the other will be dealt with later on in detail. It may suffice here to point out that the wife was not ordinarily liable for the debts contracted by the husband nor was the husband liable for the debts contracted by the wife alone, unless the debt was for family purposes (Yāj. II. 46). Similarly the husband could exercise no dominion over the wife's own property (her *strīdhana* or *peculium*) except in a famine or for a necessary religious purpose, or in disease or when he was imprisoned (Yāj. II. 147). These rules prescribed centuries ago compare in their fairness or reasonableness most favourably with the rules of the English law¹³³⁴ (as they prevailed before the Married Women's Property Act of 1882, 45 and 46 Vict. chap. 75), whereby the husband by the mere fact of marriage acquired free-hold interest, during the joint lives of himself and his wife, in all estates of inheritance and life estates of which she was seised at the marriage or became seised during coverture, and an absolute interest in all the wife's personal chattels.

v2.c28.s2.63

¹³³⁴ *Vide* Halsbury's Laws of England (Hailsham ed.) vol. 16 pp. 613-614.

v2.c28.s2.64

Nārada ¹³³⁵ (strīpuṁsa, v. 89) does not allow the husband or wife to lodge a complaint against one another with their relations or with the king. The Mit. on Yāj. II. 294 remarks 'though a judicial proceeding between husband and wife as plaintiff and defendant before the king is forbidden, still, if the king comes to know personally or indirectly of wrong done by the one to the other, the king must bring round the husband or the wife to the path of duty by appropriate punishment, otherwise ¹³³⁶ the king incurs sin'. There were certain matters of which the king could take cognisance without the complaint of anybody: they were called *aparādhas* (they are ten) among which were included the murder of a woman, varṇasaṁkara, adultery, pregnancy of a widow from some person other than the husband, abortion ¹³³⁷ &c. We have seen (p. 569) that Yāj. I. 76, Nārada (strīpuṁsa, v. 95) make the husband liable to pay one-third of his estate or a fine for deserting a virtuous wife and there are many such provisions about the matters affecting the husband and wife in which the king interfered. In England ¹³³⁸ at Common Law a wife could not sue her husband in tort (till the Married Women's Property Act) nor could a husband sue the wife in tort.

v2.c28.s2.65

¹³³⁵ ईर्ष्यासूयासमुत्थे तु संबन्धे रागहेतुके । दम्पती विवदेयातां न ज्ञातिषु न राजनि ॥ नारद ( स्त्रीपुंस v. 89 ).

v2.c28.s2.66

¹³³⁶ यद्यपि स्त्रीपुंसयोः परस्परमर्थिप्रत्यर्थितया नृपसमक्षं व्यवहारो निषिद्धस्तथापि प्रत्यक्षेण परंपरया वा विदिते तयोः परस्परातिचारे दण्डादिना दम्पती निजधर्ममार्गे राज्ञा स्थापनीयौ, इतरथा दोषभाग्भवति । मिताक्षरा.

v2.c28.s2.67

¹³³⁷ Vide स्मृतिचन्द्रिका, व्यव० p. 28 quoting नारद, संवर्त and पितामह for ten अपराधs, 22 पदs, &c.

v2.c28.s2.68

¹³³⁸ Vide Salmond's Law of Torts, 9th ed. pp. 71-72.

v2.c28.s2.69

We must now turn to the position of women in general and wives in particular and the estimate of their character and worth made by ancient India. It has already been seen (p. 428) how the wife was looked upon as half of the husband, how in Vedic times women composed hymns and learnt the Vedas and how they co-operated with their husbands in all religious acts. On the whole their social position was much better (except as to rights of property) than what it became in later times. But even in the Vedic times there was an under-current of opinion which was hostile to women, sneered at them and treated them with scorn. Some of the passages from Vedic and classical Sanskrit literature eulogising women and the wife have been set out above (pp. 428ff). The passages noted below may be read in this connection.¹³³⁹ Vide Baud. Dh. S. II. 2. 63-64, Manu III. 55-62, Yāj. I. 71, 74, 78, 82, Vas. Dh. S. 28. 1-9, Atri vv. 140-141 and 193-198, Ādiparva 74. 140-152, Śāntiparva 144. 6 and 12-17, Anuśāsana 46, Mārkaṇḍeyapurāṇa 21. 69-76. The Kāmasūtra III. 2 says that women are like flowers (kusumasadharmāṇo hi yoṣitaḥ). It has been seen (pp. 146-147) how way was to be made by all for the bride and the pregnant woman and it will be shown that the general opinion was that no woman was to be killed on any account (with one or two exceptions¹³⁴⁰ in ancient writers). Some of the smṛtikāras like Atri and Devala were so liberal as to say that women who had intercourse with one not of the same caste or who had conceived by such intercourse did not become outcasts, but only impure till delivery or next period when they became pure again and could be associated with, the child born of the adulterous connection being handed over to some one else for being brought up.¹³⁴¹ If a woman was raped she was not to be abandoned, but she became impure only till her next period (Atri 197-198) and Devala (48-49) prescribes purifications for a woman raped by *mlecchas* and conceiving thereby. In the Śāntiparva 267. 38 it is said that it is not the woman who is at fault, but it is the man who is at fault (when the woman goes astray). In the Varuṇapraghāsa¹³⁴² (one of the cāturmāsyas) the sacrificer's wife had to confess if she had a lover and even when she confessed she was allowed to co-operate with her husband in the sacrifice. Vide Tai. Br. I. 6. 5, Śat. Br. II. 5. 2. 20, Kātyāyana Śr. V. 5. 6-10.

v2.c28.s2.70

¹³³⁹ न गृहं गृहमित्याहुर्गृहिणी गृहमुच्यते । गृहं तु गृहिणीहीनमरण्यसदृशं मतम् ॥ शान्ति 144. 6; नास्ति भार्यासमो बन्धुः नास्ति भार्यांसमा गतिः । नास्ति भार्यासमो लोके सहायो धर्मसंग्रहे । शान्ति 144. 16; यदा भार्या च भर्ता च परस्परवशानुगौ । तदा धर्मार्थकामानां त्रयाणामपि संगतंम् ॥ कथं भार्यामृते धर्ममर्थं वा पुरुषः प्रभो । प्राप्नोति काममथवा तस्यां त्रितयमाहितम् ॥ तथैव भर्तरिमृते भार्या धर्मादिसाधने । न समर्था त्रिवर्गेऽयं दाम्पत्यं समुपाश्रितः ॥ मार्कण्डेयपुराण 21. 69-71.

v2.c28.s2.71

¹³⁴⁰ Vide Gaut. 23. 14 and Manu VIII. 371 (both prescribe that a woman should be devoured by dogs if she had intercourse with a male of a lower varṇa), Vas. Dh. S. 21. 1-5. Even this was modified later and only परित्याग was allowed; vide Vas. 21. 10, Yāj. I. 72.

v2.c28.s2.72

¹³⁴¹ असवर्णेस्तु यो गर्भः स्त्रीणां योनौ निषिच्यते । अशुद्धा सा भवेन्नारी यावद्गर्भं न मुञ्चति ॥ विमुक्ते तु ततः शल्ये रजश्चापि प्रदृश्यते । तदा सा शुध्यते नारी विमलं काञ्चनं यथा ॥ अत्रि verses 195-196, which are almost the same as देवल 50-51. अत्रि adds बलात्कारी प्रभुक्तवा वा चौरभुक्ता तथापि वा । न त्याज्या दूषिता नारी न कामोऽस्या विधीयते । ऋतुकाल उपासीत पुष्पकालेन शुध्यति ॥ vv. 197-198.

First 78 of 106 passages. Read on

Linked texts (46)