Vol. 3 · pages 446–450
Philosophy of Hinduism; Revolution and Counter-Revolution in Ancient India; Buddha or Karl Marx
This text was extracted automatically from the official PDF of Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar: Writings and Speeches, so it may contain small errors. Always check the original page before quoting.
PDF page 446
433
THE WOMAN AND THE COUNTER-REVOLUTION
made her an offering1 as he did to the others. Not only the king elect did
homage to the Queen, he worshipped his other wives of lower castes 2. In
the same way the King offers salutation after the coronation ceremony
to the, ladies of the chiefs of the shremes (guides 3).
In the days of Kautilya women 4 were deemed to have attained their
age of majority at 12 and men at 16. The age of majority was in all
probability the age of marriage. That the marriages were post puberty
marriages is clear from Baudhayanas’ Grihya Sutras5 where an expiatory
ceremony is specially prescribed in the case of a bride passing her menses
on the occasion of her marriage.
In Kautilya there is no law as to age of consent. That is because
marriages were post puberty marriages and Kautilya is more concerned
with cases in which a bride or a bridegroom is married without disclosing
the fact of his or her having had sexual intercouse before marriage with
another person or maiden in menses having had sexual intercouse. In
the former case Kautilya says 6:
“Any person who has given a girl in marriage without announcing
her guilt of having laid with another shall not only be punished with a
fine but also be made to return the Sulka and Stridhana. Any person
receiving a girl in marriage without announcing the blemishes of the
bridegroom shall not only pay double the above fine, but also forfeit
the Sulka and Stridhana (he paid for the bride). In regard to the latter
case the rule in Kautilya 7 is:
“It is no offence for a man of equal caste and rank to have connection
with a maiden who has been unmarried three years after her first
menses. Nor is it an offence for a man, even of different caste, to have
connection with a maiden who has spent more than three years after
her first menses and has no jewellery on her person.”
Unlike Manu Kautilya’s idea is monogamy. Man can marry more than
one wife only under certain conditions. They are given by Kautilya in
the following terms 1:
“If a woman either brings forth no (live) children, or has no male
issue, or is barren, her husband shall wait for eight years (before
marrying another). If she bears only a dead child, he has to wait for
ten years. If she brings forth only females, he has to wait for twelve
1 Jaiswal: Indian Polity, Part II, p. 16.
2 Ibid, Part II, p. 17.
3 Ibid, p. 82.
4 Sham Shastri, Kautilya’s Arthashastra, p. 175.
5 Baudhyayana, I. 7. 22.
6 Sham Shastri, Kautilya’s Arthashastra, p. 222.
7 Ibid, p. 259.
PDF page 447 (printed page 434)
434 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES
years. Then if he is desirious to have sons, he may marry another. In
case of violating this rule, he shll be made to pay her not only Sulks,
her property (Stridhana) and an adequate monetary compensation
(adhivedanika martham), but also a fine of 24 panas to the Government.
Having given the necessary amount of Sulka and property (Stridhana)
even to those women who have not received such things on the
occasion of their marriage with him, and also having given his wives
the proportionate compensation and an adequate subsistence (vrutti),
he may marry any number of women; for women are created for the
sake of sons.”
Unlike Manu in Kautilya’s time women could claim divorce on
the ground of mutual enmity and hatred.
“A woman, hating her husband, cannot dissolve her marriage with
him against his will. Nor can a man dissolve his marriage with his
wife against her will. But from mutual enmity, divorce may be obtained
(parasparam dveshanmokshah). If a man, apprehending danger from
his wife, desires divorce (mokshamichchhet), he shall return to her
whatever she was given (on the occasion of her marriage). If a woman,
under the apprehension of danger from her husband, desires divorce,
she shall forfeit her claim to her property.”
A wife can abandon her husband if he is a bad character.
“A woman who has a right to claim maintenance for an unlimited
period of time shall be given as much food and clothing (grasacchadana)
as necessary for her, or more than is neessary in proportion to the
income of the maintainer (yathapurushapari-vapam va). If the period
(for which such things are to be given to her with one-tenth of the
amount in addition) is limited, then a certain amount of money,
fixed in proportion to the income of the maintainer, shall be given
to her; so also if she has not been given her Sulka, property, and
compensation (due to her for allowing her husband to re-marry). If she
places herself under the protection of any one belonging to her fatherin-law’s family (Svasurakula), or if she begins to live independently,
then her husband shall not be sued (for her maintenance). Thus the
determination of maintenance is dealt with.”
In the days of Kautilya there was no ban on woman or a widow
remarrying:
“On the death of her husband a woman, desirous to lead a pious
life, shall at once receive not only her endowment and jewellery
(sthapyabharanam), but also the balance of Sulka due to her. If
after obtaining these two things she re-married another, she shall be
caused to pay them back together with interest (on their value). If
PDF page 448
435
THE WOMAN AND THE COUNTER-REVOLUTION
she is desirous of a second marriage (kutumbarkama), she shall be
given on the occasion of her re-marriage (nivesakale) whatever either
her father-in-law or her husband or both had given to her. The time
at which women can re-marry shall be explained in connection with
the subject of long sojourn of husbands.
“If a widow marries any man other than of her father-in-law’s
selection (svasurapratilomyenanivishta), she shall forfeit whatever
had been given to her by her father-in-law and her deceased husband.
“The kinsmen (gnatis) of a woman shall return to her old fatherin-law whatever property of her own she had taken with her while,
re-marrying a kinsman. Whoever justly takes a woman under his
protection shall equally protect her property. No woman shall succeed
in her attempt to establish her title to the property of her deceased
husband, after she re-marries.
“if she lives a pious life, she may enjoy it (dharmakama bhunjita).
No woman with a son or sons shall (after re-marriage) be at liberty
to make free use of her own property (stridhana); for that property
of hers, her sons shall receive.
“If a woman after re-marriage attempts to take possession of her
own property under the plea of maintaining her sons by her former
husband, she shall be made to endow it in their name. If a woman
has many male children by many husbands, then she shall conserve,
her property in the same condition as she had received from her
husbands. Even that property which has been given her with full
powers of enjoyment and disposal, a remarried woman shall endow
in the name of her sons.
“A barren widow who is faithful to the bed of her dead husband
may, under the protection of her teacher, enjoy her property as long
as she lives; for it is to ward off calamities that women are endowed
with property. On her death, her property shall pass into the hands
of her kinsman (Dayada). If the husband is alive and the wife is
dead, then her sons and daughters shall divide her property among
themselves. If there are no sons, her daughters shall have it. In their
absence her husband shall take that amount of money (sulka) which he
had given her, and her relatives shall re-take whatever in the shape
of gift or dowry they had presented her. Thus the determination of
the property of a woman is dealt with.”
“Wives who belong to Sudra, Vaisya, Kshatriya or Brahman caste,
and who have not given birth to children, should wait as long as a
year, two, three and four years respectively for their husbands who
have gone abroad for a short time; but if they are such as have
PDF page 449 (printed page 436)
436 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES
given birth to children, they should wait for their absent husbands
for more than a year. If they are provided with maintenance, they
should wait for twice the period of time just mentioned. If they
are not so provided with, their well-to-do gnatis should maintain
them either for four or eight years. Then the gnatis should leave
them to marry, after taking what had been presented to them on
the occasion of their marriages. If the husband is a Brahman,
studying abroad, his wife who has no issue should wait for him
for ten years; but if she has given birth to children, she should
wait for twelve years. If the husband is a servant of the king,
his wife should wait for him till her death; but even if she bears
children to a savarna husband (i.e. a second husband belonging
to the same gotra as that of the former husband), with a view
to avoid the extinction of her race, she shall not be liable to
contempt thereof (savarnatascha prajata na’ pavadam labheta). If
the wife of an absent husband lacks maintenance and is deserted
by well-to-do gnatis, she may remarry one whom she likes and
who is in a position to maintian her and relieve her misery.”
Unlike Manu every precaution was taken to guarantee economic
independence to a married woman. This is clear from the following
provisions in Kautilya’s Arthashastra relating to wife’s endowment
and maintenance:
“Means of subsistence (vruti) or jewellery (abadhya) constitutes
what is called the property of a woman. Means of subsistence
valued at above two thousand shall be endowed (in her name).
There is no limit to jewellery. It is no guilt for the wife to make
use of this property in maintaining her son, her daughter-in-law,
or herself, whenever her absent husband has made no provision
for her maintenance. In calamities, disease and famine, in warding
off dangers and in charitable acts, the husband, too, may make
use of this property. Neither shall there by any complaint against
the enjoyment of this property by mutual consent by a couple who
have brought forth a twin. Nor shall there be any complaint if
this property has been enjoyed for three years by those who are
wedded in accordance with the customs of the first four kinds
of marriage. But the enjoyment of this property in the cases of
Gandharva and Asura marriages shall be liable to be restored
together with interest on it. In the case of such marriages as
are called Rakshasa and Paisacha, the use of this property shall
be dealt with as theft. Thus the duty of marriage is dealt with.”
“A woman who has a right to claim maintenance for an
unlimited period of time shall be given as much food and clothing
PDF page 450
437
THE WOMAN AND THE COUNTER-REVOLUTION
(grasachhadan) as is necessary for her, or more than is necessary in
proportion to the income of the maintainer (yatha-purushaparivapam
va). If the period (for which such things are to be given to her
with one-tenth of the amount in addition) is limited, then a certain
amount of money, fixed in proportion to the income of the maintainer,
shall be given to her; so also if she has not been given her sulka,
property, and compensation (due to her for allowing her husband
to re-marry). If she places herself under the protection of any one
belonging to her father-in-law’s family (svasurkula), or if she begins
to live independently, then her husband shall not be sued (for her
maintenance). Thus the determination of maintenance is dealt with.”
Surprising as it may appear in Kautilya’s time a wife could bring an
action in a court of law against her husband for assault and defamation.
In short in pre-Manu days a woman was free and equal partner of man.
Why did Manu degrade her?
zz