History of Dharmashastra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v4.c63.t2.338

v4.c63.t2.338

¹⁴⁹⁸ The change in the meaning of *śulka* is interesting. One meaning of *śulka* is 'tax or toll on merchandise'. Vide Viṣṇu Dh S. III. 29, Yāj. II. 173, 261, Vas. 19. 37. Pāṇini V. 1. 47 uses that word in that sense (तदस्मिन्वृद्ध्यायलाभशुल्कौपदा दीयते) and the Kāśikā explains it as रक्षानिवेशो राजभागः शुल्कः. Another sense is 'the fee paid to the bride or her parents by the bridegroom in consideration of marriage'. The word occurs in Gaut. 28. 23 and in Śaṅkha (*svayaṁ śulkaṁ voḍhā*) q. by V. R. p. 521. In very ancient days there appears to have been a practice to offer in some cases considerable wealth to the father of the bride to induce him to give her in marriage. Ṛg. I. 109. 2 refers to this: ‘O Indra and Agni! I have heard that you are more liberal than even an unsuitable (or deficient) son-in-law or even a brother-in-law’. Yāska (VI. 9) in explaining this verse remarks that the southern people speak of the husband of the bride that is purchased as ‘vijāmātṛ’ (विजामातेति शश्वद् दाक्षिणाजाः क्रीतापतिमाचक्षते असु-समाप्त इव वरोऽभिप्रेतः). But this verse also shows that the bride's brother (*śyāla*) had to give wealth to his sister's husband. Vide H. of Dh. Vol. II. pp. 503-506 for passages about the sale and purchase of girls in marriage from ancient times right down to 1800 A. D. Though sometimes girls were purchased for marriage, popular feeling gradually asserted itself against this. In the Vanaparva (115. 23) Gādhi claims as the custom of his family one thousand horses of the best kind from Ṛcīka when the latter preferred his suit for the hand of Gādhi's daughter (उचितं नः कुले किञ्चित् पूर्वैरुत्प्रवर्तितम् । एकतः श्यामकर्णानां पाण्डुराणां तरस्विनाम् । सहस्रं वाजिनां शुल्कमिति विद्धि द्विजोत्तम ॥). Vide Anuśāsana 4 12 (for a similar statement) and 2. 31, Manu III. 51 forbids the taking of even a small gratuity through greed by the father when giving away his daughter in marriage and says that if he does so he would be guilty of the sale of his child and in III. 54 (almost the same as Anuśāsana 46. 1-2) Manu says that when agnates do not appropriate to themselves the gratuity paid (by the bridegroom) for the bride but hand it over to the bride then it is not sale, but it is honour shown to the girl and is merely kindness to her. The Mit. defines śulka as the gratuity after getting which the girl is given. The V. C. p. 139 defines it as what is obtained from the husband on condition of furnishing household gear &c. ‘गृहोपस्करादिकरणोपाधिना स्त्रिया गृहपतितो यल्लब्धं तच्छुल्कमित्यर्थः’.