Manusmriti with the Commentary of Medhatithi

by Ganganatha Jha | 1920 | 1,381,940 words | ISBN-10: 8120811550 | ISBN-13: 9788120811553

This is the English translation of the Manusmriti, which is a collection of Sanskrit verses dealing with ‘Dharma’, a collective name for human purpose, their duties and the law. Various topics will be dealt with, but this volume of the series includes 12 discourses (adhyaya). The commentary on this text by Medhatithi elaborately explains various t...

Sanskrit text, Unicode transliteration and English translation by Ganganath Jha:

उत्तमां सेवमानस्तु जघन्यो वधमर्हति ।
शुल्कं दद्यात् सेवमानः समामिच्छेत् पिता यदि ॥ ३६६ ॥

uttamāṃ sevamānastu jaghanyo vadhamarhati |
śulkaṃ dadyāt sevamānaḥ samāmicchet pitā yadi || 366 ||

An inferior man courting a superior maiden deserves death; he who courts a maiden of equal status, shall pay the nuptial fee, if her father so wishes.—(366).

 

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

It has been said that in the case of violating an unwilling maiden, all men, be they superior or inferior, should suiter death, with the sole exception of the Brāhmaṇa; and the present verse, they say, lays down the law relating to the violating of a willing maiden.

Superior,’—in beauty, youth, caste and other points.

Inferior’—the lowest.

The man is not to be killed if there is any equality between the parties.

If a man approaches a willing maiden who is equal to him in status,—he shall pay to her father the nuptial fee, as is done in the case of the ‘Asura’ form of marriage. But if the father does not desire to receive the fee, that amount shall be paid as fine to the king.

“In as much as this would he a case of ‘Gāndharva’ marriage—marriage by mutual consent,—it cannot be right to inflict any punishment.”

Who has said that there is to be no punishment in the case of marriage by mutual consent? In fact such an act would not be one befitting a chaste woman; nor would it he regarded as ‘marriage,’ for the simple reason that it would not have a sacramental character. As for the declaration in the Mahābhārata, in connection with Śakuntalā, to the effect that ‘the Gāndharva is a form of marriage, without fire and without mantras,’—this was an assertion made by Duṣyanta while he was suffering from the pangs of love. Further, mere ‘willing intercourse’ does not constitute ‘marriage.’ Marriage has been classified under eight heads on the basis of different methods used for taking a wife; and it does not mean that there are eight kinds of marriage. So that (in the Gāndharva marriage also), the due selection of the bridegroom (even though he has been already chosen by the bride) and the subsequent rites have got to be performed.

Or, the ‘Gāndharva’ may be accepted as a ‘marriage’ only in the case of a maiden after puberty; and before that, the man is to pay the nuptial fee or a fine.

The question arises—what is to be done with the maiden?

The answer is that she shall be given to that same man. But if she has ceased to love him, she may be given to another man. But in either case the ‘nuptial fee’ has got to be paid, by way of compensation for the single act of intercourse.

If the man has ceased to love the girl, he shall be forced to accept her.—(366)

 

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha

This verse is quoted in Vivādaratnākara (p. 402), which adds the following notes:—‘Uttamām’ has to be qualified by ‘if willing’;—‘samām,’ belonging to the same caste as himself;—‘śulkam’, fee agreed upon by both the parties, as in the ‘Āsura’ form of marriage.

It is quoted in Parāśaramādhava (Vyavahāra, p. 321), to the effect that when a man of the lower caste has intercourse with a maiden of a higher caste, whether willing or unwilling, his penalty is death, but when one has intercourse with a willing maiden of the same caste as himself, then he shall present to her father a cow and a bull, if the latter be willing to accept it (and the man has to marry the maiden in this case, adds Bālambhaṭṭī); but if the father is not willing to receive the fee, its equivalent shall be paid as fine to the king (and in this case also the maiden is to be married to the man).

It is quoted in Vīramitrodaya (Vyavahāra, 157a).

 

Comparative notes by various authors

(verses 8.364-368)

See Comparative notes for Verse 8.364.

Like what you read? Consider supporting this website: