Verse 3.12

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

सवर्णाऽग्रे द्विजातीनां प्रशस्ता दारकर्मणि ।
कामतस्तु प्रवृत्तानामिमाः स्युः क्रमशोऽवराः ॥ १२ ॥

savarṇā'gre dvijātīnāṃ praśastā dārakarmaṇi |
kāmatastu pravṛttānāmimāḥ syuḥ kramaśo'varāḥ || 12 ||

For ‘twice-born men’ a girl of equal caste has been recommended for the first marriage-sacrament. For those, however, who take to it through mere desire, these (following) should be regarded as preferable in due order.—(12)

 

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

In verse 4, we had the words ‘the twice-born person should take a wife,’ where the wife has been spoken of by means of a word ending in the Accusative, which makes the wife th e primary, and the marriage the secondary, object; and yet the singular number (in ‘wife’) is meant to be duly significant; since it forms part of the predicate of the sentence; just as we have in the case of the assertion, ‘he cuts the sacrificial post.’ In the case of a thing whose character is determined and known from other sources,—if such a thing happens to be referred to in connection with the Injunction of some other act, it is always understood to be referred to exactly in the form in which it has been known; e.g., in the case of the injunction, ‘wash the cup;’ and this for the simple reason that all ‘references’ are based upon wḥat is previously known. Thus, in connection with the ‘cups,’ their number is already known from such statements as ‘at the morning-extraction the Adhvaryu takes up ten cups;’ their use also is already known from the statement, ‘libations are poured with the cups;’ hence, in the subsequent statement, ‘wash the cup,’ no significance is attached to the singular number in the word ‘cup,’—this statementbeing construed in connection with what is already known about it. In the present instance, on the other hand, the thing concerned—the ‘wife’—is one whose character has not been determined anywhere else; in fact, it is only from the present text that we derive our knowledge of what the ‘wife’ is: hence, we understand it exactly as it is here described; so that due significance is to be attached to the number, just as much as to the basic noun itself. All this we shall discuss with detailed arguments under discourse V.

Thus then, due significance being attached to the (singular) number (in the word ‘wife,’ as used in verse 4),—if one happens to marry a second time, even though the marriage-rites might be duly performed, she does not become a ‘wife;’ just as when one Āhavanīya is already there, the second fire, even though duly kindled, does not become ‘Āhavanīya.’ But, under certain circumstances, the taking of a second wife is considered desirable; and it is in connection with this second marriage that we have the rules propounded in this and the following verses. It is in view of this that Gautama has said—‘If one’s wife is endowed with virtue and offspring, one should not take another; in the event of failure on either of the two points, one may have another.’

‘Of equal caste,’—i.e., of the same caste.

‘For the first,’—first of all; i.e., for one who has not taken a wife from a different caste; ‘has been recommended.’

Having married a girl of his own caste, if the man finds that she does not inspire his love; or if the act of child-begetting is not fulfilled,—then there comes about the man’s desire for another wife; and then these—going to be mentioned below—‘are to be regarded as preferable’— superior—on the strength of the scriptures.

This, then, is an exception to the rule regarding having only one wife, as also to that of having a wife from one’s own caste.

Objection:— “The restriction appears to be upon the taking of a second wife from one’s own caste; as the plurality (of wives) does not appear to be sanctioned regarding girls of one’s own caste.”

Answer—All that the present text permits is the exceeding of the number ‘one.’ And, if what is sanctioned is the exceeding of it by means of marrying a girl of a different caste,—what is there that would prevent one’s marrying (again) a second girl of his own caste? It is for this reason that what Gautama has declared applies equally to all—‘if there is failure in regard to either of the two, one may take another wife.’ In the following verse also we read, ‘she and one of his own caste,’ where also the second wife from one’s own caste is permitted.—(12).

 

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha

This verse is quoted by Jīmūtavāhana (Dāyabhāga, p. 209);—and in Madanapārijāta (p. 143) as providing permissible substitutes for the proper ‘wife’;—it explains ‘avarāḥ’ (which it reads in place of ‘varāḥ’) as jaghanyāḥ, ‘lower’;—in Saṃskāramayūkha (p. 98), which adds the following notes:—There are three classes of Marriage—(1) for Dharma, (2) for offispring and (3) for physical pleasure; that for offspring is obligatory, and for this one should have a girl of the same caste as himself; and in that for Pleasure, or for avoiding the sin of not entering the second life-stage, one may have girls of other castes, even a Śūdra girl; in the former also, if no girl of the same caste is available, girls of other castes may be taken.

The first half of the verse is quoted in Vīramitrodaya (Saṃskāra, p. 747), which adds the following explanations:—The term ‘varṇa’ stands for caste;—‘agre’ means the first marriage;—the term ‘dvijāti’ indicates also persons born of the Śūdra through mixed marriages, ‘natural’ as well as ‘inverse—‘praśastā’ means that she is recommended as the first and best alternative for taking a wife for the purposes of (1) enjoyment, (2) begetting a son and (3) helping in religious acts (these three being ‘dārakarma’ the function of the wife).

This is quoted also in Parāśaramādhava (Ācāra, p. 493), where we have the following notes:—‘Agre’ means ‘at the first marriage of the Accomplished Student.’;—‘dārakarmaṇi’—for the performance of the Agnihotra and other rites;—‘Savarṇā’—‘she who has the same caste as the bridegroom’ is recommended;—i.e., the Brāhmaṇī for the Brāhmaṇa, the Kṣatriyā for the Kṣatriya and the Vaiśya for the Vaiśya. Having, for the sake of religious acts, married a girl of the same caste, if one is desirous of ha ving more wives for purposes of physical enjoyment, he may marry girls of lower castes (‘avarāḥ’) in due order;—and in Smṛticandrikā (Saṃskāra, p. 205), which says that the implication of the text is that after one has married a girl of the same caste, he may marry others of other castes also, but they will be less and less desirable in order; this means that for the sake of Dharma one should marry a girl of the same caste.

 

Comparative notes by various authors

(verses 3.12-13)

Baudhāyana (1. 8. 2-5)—‘For the Brāhmaṇa there are four wives, in the order of the castes; for the Kṣatriya, there are three; for the Vaiśya, two; for the Śūdra, one.’

Viṣṇu (21. 1-1).—[Same as above.]

Viṣṇu (Parāśaramādhava, p. 191).—‘For the twice-born, the Śūdra wife can serve no spiritual purpose; the only purpose she can serve is that of lust and hence she has been permitted only for one who is blinded by lust.’

Yājñavalkya (1. 57).—‘In the order of ṭhe castes, there are three wives for the Brāhmaṇa, two for the Kṣatriya and for tho Vaiśya; for the Śūdra, there is only the wife of the same caste.’

Vaśiṣṭha (1. 24-25).—‘In the order of the castes, there are three wives for the Brāhmaṇa, two for the Kṣatriya, one each for the Vaiśya and the Śūdra;—according to some people, the Shíidra girl may also he married, but without mantras.’

Pāraśara (1.4. 8-1.1).—‘For the Brāhmaṇa, there are three wives, in the order of the castes;—two for the Kṣatriya;—one for the Vaiśya;—for all, the Śūdra wife also, hut without mantras.’

Yama (Vīramitrodaya-Saṃskāra, p. 747,).—‘For all men the first alternative is to have a wife of the same caste as oneself.’

Yama (Vīramitrodaya-Saṃskāra, p. 748).—‘In the order of the castes, the Brāhmaṇa may have four wives; the Kṣatriya, three; the Vaiśya, two; the Śūdra, only one, the Śūdra.’

Paiṭhīnasi (Vīramitrodaya-Saṃskāra, p. 748).—‘In the event of his not obtaining a girl of the same caste as himself, the Brāhmaṇa may beget, a son on a Kṣatriya wife, or on a Vaiśya wife, or according to some, on a Śūdra wife.’

Nārada (Vīramitrodaya-Saṃskāra, p. 748).—‘Apart from the Brāhmaṇa wife, there are three wives, in the descending order of the castes; for the Śūdra girl, there are (apart from the Śūdra husband), three husbands in the ascending order of the castes; for the Kṣatriya there are two wives, in addition to the one of his own caste; for the Vaiśya only one; for the Vaiśya girl there are two husbands and for the Kṣatriya, one only—in addition to that of her own caste.’