z:\ ambedkar\vol 04\vol4 05.indd MK SJ DK YS 23 9 2013/YS 8 11 2013 226
RIDDLE N O . 19
THE CHANGE FROM PATERNITY TO MATERNITY. WHAT DID THE BRAHMINS WISH TO GAIN BY IT?
Mr. Mayne in his treatise on Hindu law has pointed out some anomalous features of the rules of Kinships. He says:
“No part of the Hindu Law is more anomalous than that which governs the family relations. Not only does there appear to be a complete break of continuity between the ancient system and that which now prevails, but the different parts of the ancient system appear in this respect to be in direct conflict with each other. We find a law of inheritance, which assumes the possibility of tracing male ancestors in an unbroken pedigre extending to fourteen generations; while coupled with it is a family law, in which several admitted forms of marriage are only euphemisms for seduction and rape, and in which twelve sorts of sons are recognized, the majority of whom have no blood relationship to their own father.”
The existence of this anomaly is a fact and will be quite clear to those who care to study the Hindu Law of marriage and paternity.
The Hindu Law recognizes eight different forms of marriage, namely
(1) Brahma, (2) Daiva, (3) Arsha, (4) Prajapatya, (5) Asura, (6) Gandharva,
(7) Rakshasa and (8) Paisacha.
The Brahma marriage is the gift of a daughter, clothed and decked to a man learned in the Veda, whom her father voluntarily invites and respectfully receives.
The Daiva marriage consists of the giving of the daughter by father to the family priest attending a sacrifice at the time of the payment of the sacrificial fee and in lieu of it.
Arsha marriage is characterized by the fact that the bridegroom has to pay a price for the bride to the father of the bride.
Prajapatya form of marriage is marked by the application of a man for a girl to be his wife and the granting of the application by the
This is an eleven-page typed chapter. Except the title of the chapter no other additions are found in the handwriting of the author.—Ed.