Verse 3.10

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

अव्यङ्गाङ्गीं सौम्यनाम्नीं हंसवारणगामिनीम् ।
तनुलोमकेशदशनां मृद्वङ्गीमुद्वहेत् स्त्रियम् ॥ १० ॥

avyaṅgāṅgīṃ saumyanāmnīṃ haṃsavāraṇagāminīm |
tanulomakeśadaśanāṃ mṛdvaṅgīmudvahet striyam || 10 ||

One should marry a female with a faultless body, bearing an agreeable name, having her gait like that of the swan or the elephant, having fine hair on the body and the head, and fine teeth, and with tender limbs.—(10)

 

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

One whose body is free from defects is called ‘avyaṅgāṅgī;’ the term ‘avyaṇga’ standing for freedom from defects; just like such other words as ‘pravīṇa,’ ‘udāra,’ and the rest. Since the term ‘avyaṅga,’ etymologically, means ‘free from defects in the limbs,’ the second ‘aṇga’ must be taken as standing for the whole body; hence the epithet ‘avyatiya’ denotes fulness or comeliness of the bodily form.

‘Saumya,’ ‘agreeable’—it has been laid down in this book that the names of women should be sweet-sounding and easy to pronounce.

She who moves like the swan or the elephant. That is, one whose gait is as elegant and languid as that of the swan or the elephant.

The term ‘tanu,’ ‘fine,’ here does not stand for ‘small;’ it means moderate. Just as the girl who is neither fat nor leau is called ‘tanvaṅgī,’ ‘one with a fine body.’

‘Mṛdvaṇgī is one whose limbs are tender, not hard or rough.

Such a female ‘one should marry.’ ‘Female’ here must be taken to stand for the maiden, as it is the maiden that is being spoken of in the context.

“If that is so (if this verse also refers to the maiden), then the prohibition contained in verse 8 regarding ‘one who has no hair, &c.,’ is superfluous; as the positive injunction, contained in the present verse, implies that ‘one who is not as here described should not be married.’”

True, that is so; the same fact when stated by means of two verses—affirmatively in one and negatively in the other—becomes clearly understood.

In the present context, the term ‘maiden’ is used in the sense of a woman who has not experienced sexual intercourse. Says Vaśiṣṭha—‘One should acquire a wife who has had no sexual intercourse and who is similar to himself.’ But one who has been ‘consecrated’ (by marriage) by one man is no longer capable of being ‘consecrated’ by another; as there can be no doing of what has been already done. So that, if a girl has been married, and her husband goes away before she has had intercourse with him,—if she happens to be a loose woman, she cannot be married to another person, even though she is still a ‘maiden’ (in the technical sense); and it is such a maiden that is mentioned in the words of Vaśiṣṭha quoted above. In another work also it is said—‘One should marry a female, never before married by another person, who is younger than himself and has brothers’ (Yājñavalkya, Ācāra 52).—(10)

 

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha

This verse is quoted in Vīramitrodaya (Saṃskāra, p. 731) as setting forth the external signs of a marriageable girl;—also in Vīramitrodaya (Lakṣaṇa, p. 118) to the same effect;—and in Madanapārijāta (p. 132) as setting forth the external signs; and for the internal signs it refers to Āśvalāyana who has prescribed the following method;—eight balls should be made of clay brought from eight different places, and after some incantations have been uttered over them, the girl should be asked to pick up one of them; (1) if she picks up that made of clay from fields with rich corn growing, it is a sign that she would have progeny rich in grains; (2) if she picks up that of clay brought from the cattle-shed, she will be rich in cattle; (3) if that of clay from the altar, she will be an expounder of Brahman;—(4) if that of clay from a lake that is never dry, she will be endowed with all riches; (5) if that from the gambling den, she will be crafty;—(6) if that from the road-crossing, she will be inclined to wander about; (7) if that from barren soil, she will be unlucky; (8) and if that from the crematoriuûi, she will destroy her husband.

This verse is quoted in Aparārka (p. 78);—in Saṃskāramayūkha (p. 74) as laying down the external signs of a marriageable girl;—in Saṃskāraratnamālā (p. 509) which explains ‘tanulomakeśadaśanā’ as ‘one the hair on whose chest is scanty, and whose hair and teeth are fine’;—in Smṛticandrikā (Saṃskāra, p. 200);—and in Nṛsiṃha-prasāda (Saṃskāra, p. 50a).

‘Putrikādharmaśaṅkayā’—‘For fear of her having the character of the Appointed Daughter’ (Medhātithi);—‘For fear (in the former case) of her being an Appointed Daughter, and (in the latter) of committing a sin’ (Kullūka, Nārāyaṇa, Rāghavānanda, and ‘others’ in Medhātithi). Govindarāja adopts Medhātithi’s explanation so far as this phrase is concerned; but he gives a somewhat different explanation of the first half of the verse, which according to him, would mean ‘one should not marry a girl who has no brother, or whose father is not known’,—the two contingencies being independent; while according to Medhātithi, the second clause (‘whose father is not known’) is subordinate to the former,—the meaning being that the doubt regarding the girl being an ‘appointed daughter’ would arise if there were no brother, and if the father were not known; for he adds “if the father is known, there is no fear of the girl being an Appointed Daughter, as he will himself declare whether or not she has been ‘appointed’.”

According to Medhātithi, therefore, in the translation of the verse, we should have ‘and’ instead of ‘or’.

This verse is quoted in Parāśaramādhava (Ācāra, p. 474), which adds the following notes:—He shall not many a girl with regard to whom it is not known whether or not her father has the intention of making her an ‘appointed daughter;’—the sense is that where there is no fear of this, one may marry the girl, even though she has no brother. The clause ‘na vijñāyeta vā pitā’ (which, according to this explanation, means ‘the intentions of whose father are not known’) implies that it is possible for the daughter to be ‘appointed’ even without the Father making an agreement to that effect with the bridegroom;—in Saṃskāramayūkha (p. 82), which adds that this implies that the daughter can be ‘appointed,’ even without express agreement and declaration.

The verse is quoted also in Vīramitrodaya (Saṃskāra, p. 746), where it is explained as meaning that ‘one should not marry a girl with regard to whose father it is not known whether or not he has the intention of making her an Appointed Daughter’; and it adds that it is shown by this that according to all the sages a daughter can become ‘appointed’ even without being openly declared to be so;—and in Saṃskāraratnamālā (p. 414), which explains the meaning to be that one should not marry the girl with regard to whom it is not known if her father intends to ‘appoint’ her; and adds the same note as Saṃskāramayūkha.

Madanapārijāta (p. 136) quotes this verse and reproduces the same explanation as above, and deduces the conclusion that ‘one should marry the girl in whose case there is no fear of this.’

Vidhānapārijāta (p. 699) quotes the verse and adds that ‘in a case where there is no fear of the father having an intention of making the girl an Appointed Daughter, one may marry the girl, even though she may have no brother.’

This verse is quoted in Aparārka (p. 80) as indicating that it is possible for a daughter to be ‘appointed’ secretly; without her being married under that expressed agreement;—and in Smṛticandrikā (Saṃskāra p. 181), which adds the same note as Saṃskāraratnamālā.

 

Comparative notes by various authors

Laghu-Āśvalāyana (15. 2).—‘After due examination, ho shall select a girl who is horn of a good family, has a pleasing face, nice limbs, nice clothes and of agreeable looks, who has beautiful eyes and is handsome.’

Śātātapa. (Vīramitrodaya-Saṃskāra, p. 731).—‘One shall select a girl who has the voice of the swan, complexion like the clouds and eyes of the tawny colour of honey.’

Āpastamba (Vīramitrodaya-Saṃskāra).—‘One shall marry a girl who has relations, good character, and auspicious marks, and who is free from disease.’