APPENDIX VII.

VEDIC AUTHORITIES FOR WIDOW

MARRIAGE.

DR. FRASER, in his learned judgment in the great Poona Defamation Case, has very clearly stated one of the grounds on which the advocates of remarriage found their argument, that remarriage is permitted to the high-caste Hindu widow in this present age. As the learned Judge has so forcibly put it, in seeking this reform, the advocates are only endeavouring to restore the purer institutions of old times. People who are, however, not conversant with the merits of the question, may be misled by the special prominence given to one minor argument in the judgment, viz., that the central period of Kali age, which is the Yuga proper, and to which alone the prohibitions against remarriage and other institutions can apply, has not yet commenced, and in fact, will commence only after some 31,000 years from this date. This special mention of it in the judgment may mislead people into thinking that the advocates have after all a very narrow basis to build their great argument upon, and it is deemed necessary that this false impression should be removed. So far from this argument being the only one the advocates ground their movement upon, the truth is that it occupied only a very secondary place in the late discussions at Poona. Dr. Fraser's attention was specially directed to it by reason of the fact that one of the accused, Vyankat Shastri, was the first to discover this line of argument, and he communicated it to Vishnu Shástrí Pandit, the great apostle of this movement on our side of India who made use of it in the late discussion at Poona and there it stood its ground, for the orthodox disputants gave no answer to it. In itself, it is, however, a very lame argument, for it has no force if the antagonist denies the validity of remarriage even in the previous ages. This was the position taken up in the late discussions, although as it is a very unsafe one, the Panch on the orthodox side in their joint decision wisely confined themselves to a statement," that by reason of the prohibitions (which apply only to this Kali-yuga) the practice of remarriage derives no countenance from the Shastras

in this Kali age," thereby impliedly admitting that in the previous ages, when the prohibitions did not exist, it was valid by the Shastras. And this is a position about which there is a general consensus of opinion of all the authorities most opposed to the concession of this liberty to widows in this age. Once however it is admitted that remarriage is authorized by the Shastras for the previous ages, Vyankat Shastri's argument comes to the assistance of the advocates of remarriage much in the way of a plea in abatement. It simply asks both parties to put up their quarrels for the present, and for 31,000 years more at which distance of time alone the prohibitions will come into force, even allowing them to have any binding character.

Be

The advocates of remarriage are, however, in a position to make out a much stronger case. They are able to show in the first instance that the remarriage of widows has the positive authority of the Shástras, which Shastra authorities hold good for all the four Yugas, i.e., for all time. They are also able to establish, that, allowing the prohibitory texts for the Kaliyuga to be in force now, they only restrict, and do not totally abrogate, the privilege enjoyed before, and that the widow's case falls under the class of the permitted circumstances of distress, in which it is lawful for a woman once married in due form, if she is unable to live a life of single devotion to her deceased husband's memory, to marry another man. fore we proceed to arrange the texts in due order, it is necessary to bear in mind that the Vedas, the Smritis, and the Puránas and Itihásas are the three-fold authorities which constitute our Law, and that the Veda texts override all Smriti texts, and these latter override all Puránas, in cases of direct conflict. When the former class of authorities are silent, then the latter are held binding and authoritative. The fiction is that all these Smriti texts proceeded from one and the same source, and they must all be reconciled together, a place being found for every text by force of the rules mentioned before, and also by a rule which allows to one institute a sort of presidential authority for its age controlling all others, if in direct conflict with it. The ordinary rules of interpretation are the same in Hindu law as in English law, that words are to be understood in their plain and grammatical meaning, that technical words are to be understood in their technical sense, that a general law is restricted in its operation by a special and particular one, and so on.

With these prefatory remarks, we enter upon the argument by which we hope to establish in this number, that the Shástras common to the four ages permit or authorize the remarriage of widows in all castes. The only difficulty in the way of the right of the widow to marry again is the fact of her completed first marriage. All texts, therefore, which permit or authorize or prohibit an údhá (or a woman whose first marriage is perfected) to marry again under certain enumerated cases of distress, authorize or prohibit, a fortiori, the remarriage of widows. We shall now enumerate the texts in their order; the Vedic texts first, the Smritis next, and after them the references in the Puránas and the Itihásas. The Vedic texts:

I. "Get up, oh woman, you who lie down by the side of this your lifeless husband. Come to this crowd of living people about you here, and may you become the wife of some person desirous of taking the hand of a widow in remarriage."

This text occurs in Yajurveda, Taittiríya Aranyaka, sixth Prapáthaka, 14th S'loka. It occurs in all the other Vedas also, and is quoted in A'svaláyana 4,2,58, and also in Baudháyana. It was discovered by the industry of Dr. Bühler. It is addressed for the wife of an Agnihotri Brahmin, deceased, who it seems had in old times by way of expressing her grief to lie down by the side of the corpse of her dead husband. Some near relation, says the Sútra, is to go to her after having recited this text, and with the right hand raise her up, and bring her back to the crowd of her relations. This is an express text, and the translation as given is taken word for word from Sáyana's Commentary. If the wife of an Agnihotrí, who has even borne children to him, may marry, all objection to the remarriage of helpless girl-widows is, a fortiori, removed.

2. "Therefore many wives to one husband there may be, but not many husbands together to one wife."

This text occurs in Aitareya Brahmana, 3 Panchika, 22 Khanda. The word saha (together) is very significant, no such word occurs in reference to the husband. It indicates that one woman cannot have many husbands together at the same time, impliedly sanctioning a second marriage when the first husband is dead and gone, &c.

3. "Your first husband was the moon, after him Gandharva became your husband. Agni was your third husband, and those born of men will be your fourth husband."

This text occurs in Rigveda, 8th Ashtaka, and is recited on the occasion of marriage. Every girl is thus the wife successively of three superhuman beings, and what is the most significant part of the text, it says, those born of men (the word is in the plural number) will, altogether, as belonging to the order of human beings, be your fourth husband, impliedly giving sanction to successive marriages with human husbands.

4. "Oh Ashviní Kumára, where do you stay during the night? Where do you remain during the day? Where do you get your desires satisfied? Where do you dwell? What priest offering sacrifices invites you to the sacrifice as a widow attracts her second husband, or a wife attracts the man who is her husband, to be present with her in her bed."

This text occurs in Rigveda, VII. 8. 18. It is useful to show that in those archaic times, it was a common illustration to speak of widows blessed in the company of their second husbands. It was no more strange, no more disreputable, than for a wife to be happy in the embrace of her husband.

5. "The mention of a didhishu husband, i.e., a man who marries a widow, or a woman who has been married once before, occurs in several places in the Vedas, as, for instance, in Taittiríya Bráhmana, 3, 4, 4, this passage occurs :—

"To the Goddess Arádhi, the sacrifice of a didhishu husband is enjoined," which passage contains an enumeration of human sacrifices to the different gods, and to some god, it seems the sacrifice of a man who was married to a widow was specially acceptable, just as others liked children or women or old men, or even Brahmins learned in the Vedas.

6. Lastly, in a passage in Atharva Veda IX., 5, 27 which was discovered by Dr. F. Kielhorn, it is expressly said, that

5. "She who having had a first husband subsequently marries another second husband, provided they two give an Aja Panchodan, they should not separate.'

The following verses are still more emphatic :

6. "This second husband goes to the same place in heaven with the twice married woman, if he gives an Aja Panchodan and additional offerings to the sun. IX. 5, 28.

Such married couples after giving a cow with her calf, a bullock, a bed, clothes and gold go to the best of heavens IX. 5, 29.

We fail to see what more man or woman can desire after this assurance.

Against all this mass of express permissive texts and incidental references, (and incidental references have in the case of the Vedas the same force as express permission,) against all this mass of evidence, there is nothing to be advanced on the other side except one solitary text.

"As about the same sacrificial post, two cords can be tied round, so one man may marry two wives. As one cord cannot be tied round two sacrificial posts, so one wife cannot marry two husbands."

This text occurs in Black Yajurveda, Ashtaka 6, Adhyaya 6, Prapáthaka 4, Anuváka 3. After all, it comes to no more than this, that one woman cannot marry two husbands at the same time. For there is nothing to prevent one cord, when loosened from the first post to which it was tied, from being wound round another post. And that this is the correct rendering will be seen by comparison of this text with the second text translated before, where the significant word together' occurs.

6

Besides this solitary text, no text expressly prohibiting the marriage of widows, or the re-marriage of a girl once married in due form, has been discovered. The Benares Pandits have sought to derive some prohibition from the use of the word Kanya (daughter) in the mantras which are recited at the time of the first marriage:

The father says to the bridegroom 'I give this my Kanyá (daughter) by pouring this water on your hand.' Now it is contended that the word Kanyá, daughter, should be restricted to the artificial sense of an unmarried daughter,' as if the relation of the father and mother to the girl, expressed by the word Kanya or daughter, ceases at the time of the marriage, and ever after. This position however cannot be sustained, for the daughter remains Kanyá to her father, inherits as such, sits in mourning as such, offers oblations to him as such as long as she lives, and long after through her sons. Moreover, there are innumerable texts in which the word Kanyá is applied to a married daughter. The Vedic texts recited at the time of the first marriage, as they contain no word of limitation, apply with equal effect to any second marriage when the father gives away his widowed daughter. The father in giving away his daughter does not part with all his rights over her. He only creates other rights and other relations, good for the time they stand. Just as when a prince gives