Verse 9.76

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

प्रोषितो धर्मकार्यार्थं प्रतीक्ष्योऽष्टौ नरः समाः ।
विद्यार्थं षड् यशोऽर्थं वा कामार्थं त्रींस्तु वत्सरान् ॥ ७६ ॥

proṣito dharmakāryārthaṃ pratīkṣyo'ṣṭau naraḥ samāḥ |
vidyārthaṃ ṣaḍ yaśo'rthaṃ vā kāmārthaṃ trīṃstu vatsarān || 76 ||

If the husband went abroad for some sacred duty, he should be awaited for eight years; if for learning, or for fame, six years; but three years, if for pleasure.—(76)

 

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

It has been said that a man may go abroad ‘on business’; the present verse proceeds to show the several kinds of ‘business,’—the time of waiting varying with the nature of the business.

The text has said nothing as to what the wife should do after having waited for the eight years. And on this point, some people on the strength of Context, say that she should maintain herself by unobjectionable industries.

This however is not right Because, if the maintaining of herself by unobjectionable industries referred to the time after the eight years of waiting,—then, before the^- lapse of that time, is she to die? Suicide is not considered desirable for her, just as it is not for the man; being, as it is, forbidden for all. Hence, the conclusion appears to be that before the lapse of the said time she shall maintain herself by unobjectionable industries; but after that she may have recourse to objectionable ones also.

Others hold that after the said time, the woman may deviate from chastity;—as says smother Smṛti text—‘When the husband is lost, or dead, or become a renunciate, or impotent, or an outcast—in the event of these five calamities smother husband is permitted for women.’ (Parāśara).

Others again hold the following view:—Even in ignorance, it is not open to the woman to renounce her chastity. In fact, it has been laid down among the duties of women (under 5.156) that ‘on the death of her husband she shall not even utter the name of another man’; so that deviation from chastity is not permissible even on the death of her husband,—what to say as to when he has only gone abroad. As regards the Smṛti-text quoted, the word ‘pati’ ‘husband,’ is used there in the sense of protector, just as in the case of such terms as ‘grāmapati’, ‘senāpati’ and so forth. So that all that the present text means is that—‘she should no longer remain dependent upon her husband, she may undertake the work of the toilet-maid or some such thing, under another man who would give her food’; and when she has entered into a contract for such service extending over six months, or a year—if the husband happen to turn up and claim her, asking the employer to give her up,—he can claim her restitution, before the lapse of the eight years; as before that she belongs to her husband.

Other matters relating to this subject have been fully dealt with under Discourse V.

This same view has been accepted by many others also.

Other people, however, hold that the text sanctions recourse to the life of the ‘remarried widow’ (after the lapse of the time mentioned). If a woman is abandoned by her husband,—or if her husband, after having made provision for her, does not return during the said time, and she is as good as abandoned by him,—‘then, she may he married by another man, according to the practice of ‘widow remarriage’; and if the former husband happen to return after that, he can say nothing, and she shall continue to be the wife of the second husband.

This however is not right; since ‘neither by sale nor by repudiation is the wife released from her husband.’ (Manu 9.46); and the uses of this text we shall explain later on.

‘For a sacred duty’— The compound ‘dharmakāryam’ being explained as a karmadhāraya—‘dharma’—‘sacred’—‘kārya’—duty; and that which is for purposes of this is ‘dharmakāryārtham.’

Objection—“For the house-holder, wherefore should there he any protracted journey abroad for a sacred duty? It is incumbent upon him to attend upon the Fires, to perform the

Five Sacrifices. How too can he remain away during the spring season? Since he has got to perform the Jyotiṣ -sacrifice during the spring. Even such acts as bathing in sacred places and the like, which are enjoined by Smṛti texts, have to be performed by him only so long as they are compatible with those laid down by Śruti texts. These could not be possible even for one who has gone abroad after having made arrangements for the maintenance of the fires and other such Śrauta rites. Since it has been laid down that ‘journeys, after proper arrangements during absence, are permissible only till the next New or Full Moon’; and it has also been declared that ‘on the New or Full Moon Day the man shall pour the libations himself.’ Even for one who has not laid the Fires, if pilgrimages were undertaken,—even though these and the performance of the Five Sacrifices would stand upon the same footing, both being laid down by Smṛti texts,—yet as both the acts are laid down as to be done by him along with his wife, there should be no pilgrimage if the wife were left behind.”

Our answer to the above is as follows:—What is said here refers to the commands of one’s elders;—‘i.e., to the case where the man is sent out by his elders, either for acquiring merit, a for attendance upon the king, or on some business of their own,—this going abroad would be ‘for a sacred duty.’ Or, it may refer to the performance of such Expiatory Rites as consist in wandering about hermitages and such places. Or, ‘for satred duty’ may stand for the acquiring of wealth,—the man being poor and seeking to earn wealth by some means. ‘Or for the sake of learning.’—

Objection—“But the taking of a wife is possible only.after one has taken the Final Bath, which is possible only for one who has completed his studies and already acquired learning; wherefore then could there be any possibility for a married man to seek for learning?”

It has been already explained that even after learning a little of what is contained in the Veda, a man becomes entitled to marry, and also to the Final Bath and other Ceremonies.

“This cannot be right; there is Final Bath only after the ‘enquiry into Dharma’ has been completed; and ‘enquiry’ consists in “coming to a definite conclusion after due consideration and clearing of doubts.”

True; but the present text does not contain the injunction that ‘one should seek for learning.’ If it were so, then it would be already included under the ‘purpose of sacred duty’. Then again, even though the man may have acquired sufficient learning to entitle him to Bath and Marriage, yet it would be open to him to seek for further proficiency and practice, specially in the new sciences.

Journey is said to be ‘for fame’, when one goes abroad for advertising his bravery or learning.

‘For pleasure’,—for instance, when one follows a prostitute; or goes about seeking for a more desirable wife.

Another Smṛti text lays down the period of time in reference to the children born:—Says Viṣṇu—‘The Brāhmaṇa shall wait till eight children are born, the Kṣatriya six and the Vaiśya four.’

There is no time-limit in the case of Śūdras. But some people declare the limit in their case to be one year.—(76)

 

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha

Kullūka, Nārāyaṇa and Rāghavānanda hold that after the expiration of the terms mentioned, the wife shall go to seek her husband. Nandana says—‘the meaning is that no sin is committed if she afterwards takes another husband’.—Medhātithi, having noted and dismissed two other explanations—(a) that ‘she should maintain herself by blameless methods’ [which is the explanation attributed to Medhātithi himself by Buhler], and (b) that ‘she may have intercourse with another man*,—propounds the explanation that ‘she may take service under another man as a toilet-woman in his house, and on the return of her husband, she may return to him, if he can induce her to go.’ He also notes and rejects the explanation of the ‘ancients’ that ‘she may marry another man.’

 

Comparative notes by various authors

Nārada (12.98-101).—‘Eight years shall a Brāhmaṇa woman wait for the return of her absent husband; or four years, if she has no issue; after that she may betake herself to another man. A Kṣatriya woman shall wait six years; or three years if she has no issue; a Vaiśya woman, for three years if she has issue; otherwise, two years. No definite period is prescribed for a Śūdra woman, whose husband has gone on a journey. Twice the above periods is ordained for eases where the absent husband is alive and tidings are received of him. The above rules have been laid down for those cases where a man has disappeared. No offence is imputed to a woman if she goes to live with another man after the fixed period has elapsed.’

Gautama (18.15-17).—‘A wife must wait for six years, if her husband has disappeared. If he is heard of, she shall go to him. But if the husband has become a Renunciate, his wife must refrain from intercourse with men. The wife of a Brāhmaṇa who has gone abroad for study must wait for twelve years.’

Vaśiṣṭha (17.75-80).—‘The wife of an emigrant shall wait for live years. After five years have passed, she may go out to seek her husband. If, for reasons connected with spiritual or pecuniary matters, she be unwilling to leave her home, she must behave in the same manner as if her husband were dead. In this manner a Brāhmaṇa woman with issue shall wait five years, and one having no issue, four years; a Kṣatriya woman with issue, five years, and one without issue, three years; a Vaiśya woman with issue, five years, and one without issue, two years; a Śūdra woman with issue, three years and one without issue, one year. After that, she shall live among those who are united with her husband, in interest, or by birth, or by the funeral cake, or by water-libations, or by descent from the same family,—each earlier named person being more venerable than the following one. But while any member of the family is living, she shall never go to a stranger.’