English
The distinctions of centuries and thousands of years cannot be effaced in a day, and young Hindus are acting wisely in shaping their progress to the gradual march of events. But the day is not far distant when men, who work together in friendliness and with a brotherly feeling towards each other, will learn to mix more closely and to celebrate inter-caste marriages ; and the Hindus of a future date will! also learn to perform their social and religious ceremonies, and to express their gratitude and devotion and love towards the Great Deity whom they worship, without the help of hereditary priests. . CHAPTER VII. DOMESTIC AND SOCIAL LIFE—THE POSITION OF eG “WOMEN, THE rules of domestic and social life which we find in the later Dharma Sastras are based on those which we have reviewed before in our account of the Rational- istic and Buddhist Periods, and often the same verses which we found in the ancient Sitras and in Manu are quoted in the Pauranik works. Nevertheless, here and there we find alterations, restrictions, or additions, which shew us how the ancient - institutions were undergoing a gradual change. . ; The permission given to the twice-born castes to marry Sadra women became restricted as the gulf between the SQdras and the upper castes became wider in later times. -Yajnavalkya distinctly declares, “It has been said that twice-born men may marry Sidra women. This is not my opinion, since one procreates himself on his wife. A Brahman may have three wives (te. of Brahman, Kshatriya, and Vaisya castes), a Ksha- triya two wives (é.¢., of Kshatriya and Vaisya castes), and a Vaisya one wife (of Vaisya caste) ; Sddras should have wives of their caste only.” 1,56 & 57. Vishnu allows the twice-born to have Sddra wives (XXIV, 1 to 3), but CHAP. VIL] | DOMESTIC AND SOCIAL LIFE. 327 contradicts himself later on, and prohibits such unions (XXVI, 4), shewing how later interpolators have been busy in making the ancient work consistent with modern customs. Later writers like Sankha (IV, 6 to 9) and Vy4sa CII, 11) prohibit the marriage of twice-born men with Sddra women. The ancient eight forms of marriage were also falling into disuse. We have seen that even in the Rationalis- tic Period, Vasishtha and Apastamba* refused to recog- nize two of these forms as marriage, and this feeling became stronger with the lapse of time. Y4jnavalkya CI, 58 to 61) like Manu names all the ancient eight forms of marriage, but distinctly declares that the first four only, vzz, the Brdkma, the Dazva, the Arsha, and the Préijépatya are meritorious and purify ancestors and descendants, Similarly, Vishnu mentions all the eight forms, but adds that the first four only are allowed to Brahmans and purify ancestors and descendants (XXIV, 18to 32). Sankha recommends the first four forms for Brahmans (IV, 3); the Rdéshasa and Gdndharva forms of marriage are allowed to the warrior-caste alone. Harita recommends the Brdhma rite alone for pious Brahmans, “although other forms of marriage aré also Prescribed according to the custom of different castes ” (IV, 2 & 3). The practice of the early marriage of pile which was : coming into vogue since the Rationalistic Period is: * See ante Vol. Ik, p. 92. : AP 328 PAURANIK PERIOD. [BOOK Vv. insisted upon by the writers of the Pauranik Period. YAjnavalkya tells us that the guardian of a girl becomes guilty of causing miscarriage if he has not given her away when her menses appear (I, 64). Pardsara has the revolting couplets which are so often quoted in modern times in support of early marriages. “6. A girl is (as pure as) Gauri at eight years, at nine she is Rohini, at ten she is simply a maiden, after that she is menstruant. “7, The father of a girl who does not give her away on her reaching the twelfth year bs od 4 * * * * _ “8. The mother, the father, and the elder brother of a girl go to hell on seeing her menstruant while yet unmarried. “g. The Brahman who, perplexed by ignorance, marries such a girl, is the husband of a foul woman; no one should speak or sit with him.” Pardsara VII. This is sufficiently strong and filthy language (we have omitted a few words), and shews the narrow and degenerate spirit of the times when it was indited, These: injunctions’ were a favorite with the writers of the age, and Yama (22 to 24) and Samvarta (66 & 67) quote them, or portions of them, word for word, while Vyasa (II, 7) has an imprecation similar to Yajna- valkya’s, : - While the marriage of girls at'a tender age became the custom of the times, the ancient custom of the mar-~ CHAP. ViL.] DOMESTIC AND SOCIAL LIFE. 329 riage of widows had not yet fallen into disuse. The practice was looked upon with disfavour from the time of Manu, but even to the very close of the Pauranik Period it was not altogether prohibited. On the contrary, we find frequent references to the marriage of widows, and to children born of such marriage, in nearly all the Pau- ranik Dharma SAstras. Y4Ajnavalkya ‘tells us that “a woman who is married a second time, whether~she be then a virgin or not, is called a remarried woman” (I, 67). Vishnu tells us that “a woman who being still a virgin is married for the second time is calted a remarried woman (Punarbhd),” and the sons of such remarried widows were recognized (XV, 7 & 8)..: Para- sara, one of the very latest of the Pauranik writers, allows the second marriage of a woman if her husband be lost or dead, or has become an ascetic, or if he is impotent, or has lost caste (IV, 26). Apastamba refers to remar- ried widows (IX, 29), although with contempt; and Sankha also refers to remarried widows (XV, 13). The religious injunction to leave male issue had induced the early Hindus to recognize irregular methods of raising issue even before the Rationalistic Age. We have seen that in that age there was a reaction against that loose custom, and. that Apastamba con- demned it altogether.* : Yajnavalkya (II, 131 to 135) and-Visinu (XV, Ito 27) enumerate the twelve kinds of sons meniioned in * See ante Val. II, Ps. 62, ef seg, 330 PAURANIK PERIOD. [BOOK v. “our account of the Rationalistic Period, but they are not acknowledged by the later Dharma Sfstras gene- rally. Pardsara, for instance, acknowledges only four kinds of sons, viz, Aurasa, Kshetraja; Dattaka, and Kritrima (IV, 19). In modern times only the legiti- mate son (Aurasa) and the adopted son (Dattaka) are recognized by Hindus. Pleasing pictures of domestic life are preserved to us in the Dharma SAstras, shewing that Hindus have ever appreciated and cultivated domestic virtues through all times and through all vicissitudes of their national fortunes. As we read Vy4sa’s account of the duties of a wife as narrated in his second chapter, we can almost fancy it is the picture of a duteous and gentle Hindu wife of modern times, trying to discharge her household duties, and seeking to please all of her husband’s family. She will rise before her lord at early dawn, clean the house, sweep and clean the room of worship, clean all the utensils and implements of religious worship and put them in order, wash all the utensils of cooking. and wipe the hearth, and having thus performed all the preliminary work of the day, will come and do obeisance to her father-in-law, mother-in-law, and others. Having then cooked the. food, she will feed the children and then her husband, and will then take her meals with the permission of her lord. In the evening her work commenees again, and after her husband has CHAP. VIL] .- DOMESTIC AND SOCIAL LIFE, 331 gone to bed and fallen asleep, she will lay herseif beside him. She is enjoined to abstain from quarrel and avoid harsh language ; to avoid extravagance, anger, duplicity, pride, scepticism, &c. ; and she is instructed to serve her husband to the best of her ability. Those who know the domestic life of modern Hindus are aware that these injunctions have not been given to Hindu wives in vain, and that in obedience and gentle- ness and a regard for their husbands, Hindu women will not compare unfavourably with women in any country in the civilized world. +/- We miss, however, in the Pauranik Dharma SAastras’ similar injunctions to men to treat their wives with the honour and respect due to equals. On the contrary, the feeling that women: were the subjeets of men, and belonged to men, and had no independent aim or exist- ence, seemed to grow with the growing degeneracy of the times ; and this feeling ultimately culminated in the prohibition of widow marriage, and in the barbar- ous and’ inhuman custom of the burning of widows. How sadly different were these degenerate customs from those of the chivalric age of the Kurus and the Pan- chalas and the Kosalas, when a Maitreyt and a Gargi were honoured and a Sita was conceived and when Hindus “ could understand and appreciate true woman- hood.”* * Oldenberg’s Buddha, 332 PAURANIK' PERIOD. [BOOK V. We have stated before that the burning of widows was unknown to the Hindus before the Pauranik times, It was originally a Scythian custom, and was pro- bably. introduced in. India by the Scythian invaders ‘who poured into India in the Buddhist Age, and formed ruling Hindu races later on. The later Dharma Sastras afl belaud the barbarous custom, which was unknown to Manu or even to Yajnavalkya. Vishnu, - Atri, Usanas, Pardsara, Vy4sa, and Daksha allude to this custom, and the passages which allude to it have been indicated in Chapter VI of this book. While the duties of a woman are thus strictly laid down, even to her immolation on her husband’s funeral pyre, the duties of aman consist mostly in the perform- ance of numerous religious rites and in hospitality and gifts.