The Sanskrit Epics, page 817
SECTION XLV
“‘YUDHISHTHIRA SAID, “IF a person, after having given dowry for a maiden, goes away, how should the maiden’s father or other kinsmen who are competent to bestow her, act? Do tell me this, O grandsire!”
“‘Bhishma said, “Such a maiden, if she happens to be the daughter of a sonless and rich father, should be maintained by the father (in view of the return of him who has given the dowry). Indeed, if the father does not return the dowry unto the kinsmen of the giver, the maiden should be regarded as belonging to the giver of the dowry. She may even raise offspring for the giver (during his absence) by any of those means that are laid down in the scriptures. No person, however, can be competent to wed her according to due rites. Commanded by her sire, the princess Savitri had in days of old chosen a husband and united herself with him. This act of hers is applauded by some; but others conversant with the scriptures, condemn it. Others that are righteous have not acted in this way. Others hold that the conduct of the righteous should ever be regarded as the foremost evidence of duty or morality.287 Upon this subject Sukratu, the grandson of the high-souled Janaka, the ruler of the Videhas, has declared the following opinion. There is the well-known declaration of the scriptures that women are incompetent to enjoy freedom at any period of their life. If this were not the path trodden by the righteous, how could this scriptural declaration exist? As regards the righteous, therefore, how can there be any question or doubt in respect of this matter? How can people condemn that declaration by choosing to conduct themselves otherwise? The unrighteous dereliction of eternal usage is regarded as the practice of the Asuras. Such practice we never hear of in the conduct of the ancients.288 The relationship of husband and wife is very subtile (having reference to the acquisition of destiny, and, therefore, capable of being understood with the aid of only the inspired declarations in scriptures). It is different from the natural relationship of male and female which consists only in the desire for sexual pleasure. This also was said by the king alluded to of Janaka’s race.”289
“‘Yudhishthira said, “Upon what authority is the wealth of men inherited (by others when they happen to have daughters)? In respect of her sire the daughter should be regarded the same as the son.”
“‘Bhishma said, “The son is even as one’s own self, and the daughter is like unto the son. How, therefore, can another take the wealth when one lives in one’s own self in the form of one’s daughter? Whatever wealth is termed the Yautuka property of the mother, forms the portion of the maiden daughter. If the maternal grandfather happens to die without leaving sons, the daughter’s son should inherit it. The daughter’s son offers pindas to his own father and the father of his mother. Hence, in accordance with considerations of justice, there is no difference between the son and the daughter’s son. When a person has got only a daughter and she has been invested by him with the status of a son, if he then happens to have a son, such a son (instead of taking all the wealth of his sire) shares the inheritance with the daughter.290 When, again, a person has got a daughter and she has been invested by him with the status of a son, if he then happens to take a son by adoption or purchase then the daughter is held to be superior to such a son (for she takes three shares of her father’s wealth, the son’s share being limited to only the remaining two). In the following case I do not see any reason why the status of a daughter’s son should attach to the sons of one’s daughter. The case is that of the daughter who has been sold by her sire. The sons born of a daughter that has been sold by her sire for actual price, belong exclusively to their father (even if he do not beget them himself but obtain them according to the rules laid down in the scriptures for the raising of issue through the agency of others). Such sons can never belong, even as daughter’s sons, to their maternal grandfather in consequence of his having sold their mother for a price and lost all his rights in or to her by that act.291 Such sons, again, become full of malice, unrighteous in conduct, the misappropriators of other people’s wealth, and endued with deceit and cunning. Having sprung from that sinful form of marriage called Asura, the issue becomes wicked in conduct. Persons acquainted with the histories of olden times, conversant with duties, devoted to the scriptures and firm in maintaining the restraints therein laid down, recite in this connection some metrical lines sung in days of yore by Yama. Even this is what Yama had sung. That man who acquires wealth by selling his own son, or who bestows his daughter after accepting a dower for his own livelihood, has to sink in seven terrible hells one after another, known by the name of Kalasutra. There that wretch has to feed upon sweat and urine and stools during the whole time. In that form of marriage which is called Arsha, the person who weds has to give a bull and a cow and the father of the maiden accepts the gift. Some characterise this gift as a dowry (or price), while some are of opinion that it should not be regarded in that light. The true opinion, however, is that a gift for such a purpose, be it of small value or large, should, O king, be regarded as dowry or price, and the bestowal of the daughter under such circumstances should be viewed as a sale. Notwithstanding the fact of its having been practised by a few persons it can never be taken as the eternal usage. Other forms of marriage are seen, practised by men, such as marrying girls after abducting them by force from amidst their kinsmen. Those persons who have sexual intercourse with a maiden, after reducing her to subjection by force, are regarded as perpetrators of sin. They have to sink in darkest hell.292 Even a human being with whom one has no relationship of blood should not form the subject of sale. What need then be said of one’s own issue? With the wealth that is acquired by doing sinful deeds, no action leading to merit can be performed.”’“
SECTION XLVI
“‘BHISHMA SAID, “THEY that are conversant with ancient history recite the following verse of Daksha, the son of Prachetas: That maiden, in respect of whom nothing is taken by her kinsmen in the form of dowry cannot be said to be sold.293 Respect, kind treatment, and everything else that is agreeable, should all be given unto the maiden whose hand is taken in marriage. Her sire and brothers and father-in-law and husband’s brothers should show her every respect and adorn her with ornaments, if they be desirous of reaping benefits, for such conduct on their part always leads to considerable happiness and advantage. If the wife does not like her husband or fails to gladden him, from such dislike and absence of joy, the husband can never have issue for increasing his race. Women, O king, should always be worshipped and treated with affection. There where women are treated with respect, the very deities are said to be filled with joy. There where women are not worshipped, all acts become fruitless. If the women of a family, in consequence of the treatment they receive, grieve and shed tears, that family soon becomes extinct. Those houses that are cursed by women meet with destruction and ruin as if scorched by some Atharvan rite. Such houses lose their splendour. Their growth and prosperity cease. O king, Manu, on the eve of his departure for Heaven, made over women to the care and protection of men, saying that they are weak, that they fall an easy prey to the seductive wiles of men,294 disposed to accept the love that is offered them, and devoted to truth. There are others among them that are full of malice, covetous of honours, fierce in disposition, unlovable, and impervious to reason. Women, however, deserve to be honoured. Do ye men show them honour. The righteousness of men depends upon women. All pleasures and enjoyments also completely depend upon them. Do ye serve them and worship them. Do ye bend your wills before them. The begetting of offspring, the nursing of children already born, and the accomplishment of all acts necessary for the needs of society, behold, all these have women for their cause. By honouring women, ye are sure to attain to the fruition of all objects. In this connection a princess of the house of Janaka the ruler of the Videhas, sang a verse. It is this: Women have no sacrifices ordained for them. There are no Sraddhas which they are called upon to perform. They are not required to observe any fasts. To serve their husbands with reverence and willing obedience is their only duty. Through the discharge of that duty they succeed in conquering heaven. In childhood, the sire protects her. The husband protects her in youth. When she becomes old, her sons protect her. At no period of her life does woman deserve to be free. Deities of prosperity are women. The person that desire affluence and prosperity should honour them. By cherishing women, O Bharata, one cherishes the goddess of prosperity herself, and by afflicting her, one is said to afflict the goddess of prosperity.”’“
SECTION XLVII
“‘YUDHISHTHIRA SAID, “THOU art fully conversant with the ordinances of all the scriptures. Thou art the foremost of those that are acquainted with the duties of kings. Thou art celebrated over the whole world as a great dispeller of doubts. I have a doubt, do thou explain it to me, O grandsire! As regards this doubt that has arisen in my mind, I shall not ask any other person for its solution. It behoveth thee, O thou of mighty arms, to expound as to how a man should conduct himself who is desirous of treading along the path of duty and righteousness. It has been laid down, O grandsire, that a Brahmana can take four wives, viz., one that belongs to his own order, one that is a Kshatriya, one that is a Vaisya, and one that is a Sudra, if the Brahmana wishes to indulge in the desire of sexual intercourse. Tell me, O best of the Kurus, which amongst those sons deserves to inherit the father’s wealth one after another? Who amongst them, O grandsire, shall take what share of the paternal wealth? I desire to hear this, viz., how the distribution has been ordained amongst them of the paternal property.”
“‘Bhishma said, “The Brahmana, the Kshatriya, and the Vaisya are regarded as the three regenerate orders. To wed in these three orders has been ordained to be the duty of the Brahmana, O Yudhishthira. Through erroneous judgment or cupidity or lust, O scorcher of foes, a Brahmana takes a Sudra wife. Such a wife, however, he is not competent to take according to the scriptures. A Brahmana, by taking a Sudra woman to his bed, attains to a low end in the next world. He should, having done such an act, undergo expiation according to the rites laid down in the scriptures. That expiation must be twice heavier or severer if in consequence of such an act, O Yudhishthira, the Brahmana gets offspring. I shall now tell thee, O Bharata, how the (paternal) wealth is to be distributed (among the children of the different spouses.) The son born of the Brahmana wife shall, in the first place, appropriate from his father’s wealth a bull of good marks, and the best car or vehicle. What remains of the Brahmana’s property, O Yudhishthira, after this should be divided into ten equal portions. The son by the Brahmana wife shall take four of such portions of the paternal wealth. The son that is born of the Kshatriya wife is, without doubt, possessed of the status of a Brahmana. In consequence, however, of the distinction attaching to his mother, he shall take three of the ten shares into which the property has been divided. The son that has been born of the wife belonging to the third order, viz., the woman of the Vaisya caste, by the Brahmana sire, shall take, O Yudhishthira, two of the three remaining shares of the father’s property. It has been said that the son that has been begotten by the Brahmana sire upon the Sudra wife should not take any portion of the father’s wealth, for he is not to be considered an heir. A little, however, of the paternal wealth should be given to the son of the Sudra wife, hence the one remaining share should be given to him out of compassion. Even this should be the order of the ten shares into which the Brahmana’s wealth is to be divided. All the sons that are born of the same mother or of mothers of the same order, shall share equally the portion that is theirs. The son born of the Sudra wife should not be regarded as invested with the status of a Brahmana in consequence of his being unskilled (in the scriptures and the duties ordained for the Brahmana). Only those children that are born of wives belonging to the three higher orders should be regarded as invested with the status of Brahmanas. It has been said that there are only four orders, there is no fifth that has been enumerated. The son by the Sudra wife shall take the tenth part of his sire’s wealth (that remains after the allotment has been made to the others in the way spoken of). That share, however, he is to take only when his sire has given it to him. He shall not take it if his sire does not give it unto him. Some portion of the sire’s wealth should without doubt, be given, O Bharata, to the son of the Sudra wife. Compassion is one of the highest virtues. It is through compassion that something is given to the son of the Sudra wife. Whatever be the object in respect of which compassion arises, as a cardinal virtue it is always productive of merit. Whether the sire happens to have children (by his spouses belonging to the other orders) or to have no children (by such spouses), unto the son by the Sudra wife, O Bharata, nothing more than a tenth part of the sire’s wealth should be given. If a Brahmana happens to have more wealth than what is necessary for maintaining himself and his family for three years, he should with that wealth perform sacrifices. A Brahmana should never acquire wealth for nothing.295 The highest sum that the husband should give unto the wife is three thousand coins (of the prevailing currency). The wealth that the husband gives unto the wife, the latter may spend or dispose of as she likes. Upon the death of the childless husband, the wife shall enjoy all his wealth. (She shall not, however, sell or otherwise dispose of any portion of it). The wife should never take (without her husband’s knowledge) any portion of her husband’s wealth. Whatever wealth, O Yudhishthira, the Brahmana wife may acquire by gift from her father, should be taken (after her death) by her daughter, for the daughter is like the son. The daughter, O king, has been ordained in the scriptures, to be equal to the son, O delighter of the Kurus. Even thus hath the law of inheritance been ordained, O bull of Bharata’s race. Remembering these ordinances about the distribution and disposal of wealth, one should never acquire wealth uselessly.”
“‘Yudhishthira said, “If the son born of a Sudra woman by a Brahmana father has been declared in the scriptures to be disentitled to any wealth, by what exceptional rule then is a tenth part of the paternal property to be given to him? A son born of a Brahmana wife by a Brahmana is unquestionably a Brahmana. One born of a Kshatriya wife or of a Vaisya wife, by a Brahmana husband, is similarly invested with the status of a Brahmana. Why then, O best of kings, are such sons to share the paternal wealth unequally? All of them, thou hast said, are Brahmanas, having been born of mothers that belong to the three higher orders equally entitled to the name of regenerate.”
“‘Bhishma said, “O scorcher of foes, all spouses in this world are called by the name of Data. Although that name is applied to all, yet there is this great distinction to be observed. If, having married three wives belonging to the three other orders, a Brahmana takes a Brahmana wife the very last of all yet shall she be regarded as the first in rank among all the wives, and as deserving of the greatest respect. Indeed, among all the co-wives, she shall be the foremost in consideration. In her apartments should be kept all those articles that are necessary in view of the husband’s baths, personal decorations, washing of teeth, and application of collyrium to the eyes. In her apartments should be kept the Havya and the Kavya and all else that the husband may require for the performance of his religious acts. If the Brahmana wife is in the house, no other wife is entitled to attend to these needs of the husband. Only the Brahmana wife, O Yudhishthira, should assist in these acts of the husband. The husband’s food and drink and garlands and robes and ornaments, all these should be given by the Brahmana wife to the husband, for she is the foremost in rank and consideration among all the spouses of the husband. These are the ordinances of the scriptures as laid down by Manu, O delighter of the Kurus! Even this, O monarch, is seen to be the course of eternal usage. If a Brahmana, O Yudhishthira, led by lust, acts in a different way, he shall come to be regarded as a Chandala among Brahmanas.296 The son born of the Kshatriya wife has been said to be equal in status to the son born of the Brahmana wife. For all that, a distinction attaches to the son of the Brahmana wife in consequence of the superiority of the Brahmana to the Kshatriya in respect of the order of birth. The Kshatriya cannot be regarded as equal to the Brahmana woman in point of birth. Hence, O best of kings, the son born of the Brahmana wife must be regarded as the first in rank and superior to the son born of the Kshatriya wife. Because, again the Kshatriya is not equal in point of birth to the Brahmana wife, hence the son of the Brahmana wife takes one after another, all the best things, O Yudhishthira, among his father’s possessions. Similarly, the Vaisya cannot be regarded as the equal of the Kshatriya in point of birth. Prosperity, kingdom, and treasury, O Yudhishthira, belong to the Kshatriya. All these have been ordained for the Kshatriya. The whole earth, O king, with her belt of seas, is seen to belong to him. By following the duties of his own order, the Kshatriya acquires an extensive affluence. The sceptre of royalty is held by him. Without the Kshatriya, O king, there can be no protection. The Brahmanas are highly blessed, for they are the deities of the very deities. Following the ordinances laid down by the Rishis, the Kshatriyas should worship the Brahmanas according to due rites. Even this is the eternal usage. Coveted by thieves and others, the possessions of all men are protected by Kshatriyas in the observance of the duties assigned to their order. Indeed, wealth and spouses and every other possession owned by people would have been forcibly taken away but for this protection that the Kshatriyas afford. The Kshatriya, as the king, becomes the protector or rescuer of all the others. Hence, the son of the Kshatriya wife shall, without doubt, be held to be superior to him that is born of the Vaisya wife. The son of the Kshatriya wife, for this, takes a larger share of the paternal property than the son of the Vaisya mother.”
