CHAPTER VIII.

HINDU MARRIAGES.

विवाह. (vivāha.)

The nuptial ceremony is considered as the complete institution of women, ordained for them in the Veda, together with reverence to their husbands. (Manu II. 67).

In giving a description of Hindu marriages, it is not intended to do more than merely allude, by way of introduction, to the institution itself, as such; nor to give a disquisition on the custom of infant marriages and the consequent evil of early widowhood, with all its attendant miseries. That were somewhat beside the object in view in this chapter, which is rather to furnish some information as to the various customs and ceremonies connected with the marriage rite itself. This is, perhaps, a more homely subject and one that does not call for such profound treatment; nevertheless it may present a somewhat interesting insight into ordinary Hindu life and ways.

All Hindu laws and regulations on the marriage question take it for granted that all men and women must marry. It is only those who may be suffering from disqualifications of mind, or body that do not marry. There are no "old bachelors" or "old maids" amongst the Hindus. The regulations and directions are all confined to the matter of how to choose, and how and when the marriage is to be performed.

It appears quite clear that in Vedic time there was some liberty of choice amongst both men and women, as to their partners; for it is thus written :

Three years let a damsel wait, though she be marriageable; but, after that term, let her choose for herself a bridegroom of equal rank:

If, not being given in marriage, she choose her bridegroom, neither she, nor the youth chosen commit any offence.

But a damsel, thus electing her husband, shall not carry with her the ornaments which she received from her father, nor those given by her mother or brethren : if she carry them away, she commits theft. (Manu IX. 90-92.)

But whatever liberty may have existed in this respect in ancient times, it is very certain that such is not the case now. The institution of child marriage has entirely destroyed that liberty. Of course there is much to say on both sides of the question as to liberty of choice in this matter, and opinions widely differ, even amongst Europeans; for, whilst amongst English speaking nations, very great liberty is given and, except in certain cases, and under certain conditions, the matter is left pretty much to the young people themselves, with most other European nations it is very different, and, to a large extent, the choice and arrangements are settled by the parents of the parties.

Amongst Brahmins, and Vaisyas (the Merchant caste) whilst a boy cannot be married until he has been invested with the marks of the twice born (upanayanam), though they are often married immediately after that event, it is imperative for girls to be married before puberty, and usually it is done whilst they are quite young. Other castes and non-castes may marry later on in life, still, even amongst them, the vows of matrimony are taken at a very early age when compared with the European custom. This necessity for marriage is often a great burden, as the choice is, more or less, limited. Marriages can only take place between those of the same caste, and the same sect, whilst there are also prohibitive degrees of tribe and family, within which marriages are not allowed. Amongst the larger sects this does not act so much as an obstacle, but amongst the smaller ones it often causes great difficulty. There are also natural likes and dislikes, some of which are thus alluded to by the great law-giver Manu, and which evidently point to a period when marriages were settled at a more

natural age, and, in what we consider, a more natural

manner :

"Let him not marry a girl with reddish hair, nor with any deformed limb; nor one troubled with habitual sickness; nor one either with no hair or with too much; nor one immoderately talkative; nor one with inflamed eyes."

Let him choose for his wife a girl whose form has no defect; who has an agreeable name; who walks gracefully like a phenicopteros, or like a young elephant; whose hair and teeth are moderate respectively in quality and in size; whose body has exquisite softness. (Manu III. 8, 80).

It may be well here to allude to the two institutions of Polyandry and Polygamy, as they do both exist in India. The former, however, cannot be said to be a Hindu institution; indeed it is utterly opposed and abhorrent to the very spirit of Hinduism. It is practised by such non-Hindus, or unorthodox Hindus, as the Todas of the Neilgherries, and the Nairs of the Western Coast, but it is only a local, and in no sense a universal custom. Polygamy, however, is a true Hindu institution, and it is duly legislated upon in the various codes. Manu lays down the law as follows::

For the first marriage of the twice born classes, a woman of the same class is recommended; but for such as are impelled by inclination to marry again, women in the direct order of the classes are to be preferred.

A Sudra woman only must be the wife of a Sudra; she and a Vaisya of a Vaisya; they two and a Cshatriya of a Cshatriya; those two and a Brahmani of a Brahman. (III. 13, 14.)

This however only alludes to a state of things in those early Vedic days; in this Kali Yuga or degenerate age, though a man may have, and in some cases should have, more wives than one at the same time, it can only be within strictly recognised caste limits. One of the stories in the Vickramarkacharitra turns upon the fact of a Brahmin being allowed to take to wife a woman from each of the four castes; although,

as it will be observed, the law-giver in the above quoted texts, only allows the Brahmin three wives; that is, one each from the two next castes besides one from his own. Now, however none, and especially a Brahmin, dare to marry outside of his own caste; but, within these limits, there are circumstances under which it is rather incumbent upon him than otherwise, for a Hindu to take a second wife. Should his wife prove barren, or should all the male issue that might be given die, then, very often, the husband will be pressed by the wife herself to re-marry, so that there may be surviving male issue, and thus the reproach of the family wiped away, and the future salvation of those concerned fully assured. This concession is, however, guarded round with conditions, some of which are thus stated by Manu :

A barren wife may be superseded by another in the eighth year; she whose children are all dead in the tenth; she who brings forth only daughters in the eleventh; she who speaks unkindly, without delay. (IX. 81.)

Another condition that is not perhaps an absolutely binding one in all cases, is that the first wife should consent to the re-marriage. It is not difficult to understand how reluctant a woman would naturally be thus to have a sharer in her husband's affection; and perhaps it is impossible for Europeans to understand her ever consenting to, much less wishing for, such a state of things. The desire, however, for male issue, indeed the absolute necessity for a son, either born or adopted, is so overpowering, that it is not so unusual a thing as might at first be supposed, for a woman, at all and any risk to her own personal happiness or position in the family, even to strongly desire her husband to seek out another suitable spouse and bring her to his home. Still notwithstanding all this, it is comparatively an unusual thing for a Hindu to have more wives than one; and this may perhaps be especially said of the higher castes. Amongst the non-caste people we do now and then meet with cases where a man is living with more than

one wife; I am bound to say, however, that in one of such cases I have met with, the domestic peace and happiness were not all that could be desired. It may be that one important deterrent to polygamy is the very great expense connected with an orthodox Hindu marriage. The attendant cost is such that once in a life time is, very often, enough to hang a load of debt around the poor man's neck, for the greater part of his natural existence.

Amongst nearly all Hindus there is a peculiar idea in the matter of degrees of relationships within which marriage is desirable; and this, amongst the Vaisyas, has become an imperative necessity; whilst most other castes think it so desirable as to be worth great effort to carry it into effect. I allude to what is called, amongst the Telugu people, Menarikam, by which a youth should marry his mother's brother's daughter, and a girl should marry her father's sister's son. Failing such relationships, the choice is left free; that is, of course, free within the proper limits of caste and sect. Much trouble is sometimes caused even in the Christian Church, by the hold this idea has upon the minds of the people; seeing that sometimes one of the parties thus eligible may be a Christian, and the other outside the pale of the church. There are, however, some sects of Brahmins who are opposed to this Mēnarikam rule, thinking the blood-relationship too close for marriage.

There is another bar to marriages amongst Hindus that does not exist amongst Europeans, and that is, that a younger brother cannot marry until the elder one is married. Neither can a younger sister marry before the elder one is disposed of. This is not a mere custom, it is according to what is strictly laid down in the code.

"He who makes a marriage contract with the connubial fire, whilst his elder brother continues unmarried, is called a parivētru; and the elder brother a parivitti. The Parivētru, the parivitti, the damsel thus wedded, the giver of her in wedlock and fifthly, the performer of the nuptial sacrifice, all sink to a region of torment." (Manu III. 171, 172.)