The word vivāha means leading away (of the bride from her father’s house); taking a wife either with or without instruction (dīksa). We attempt to understand vivāha as used in the ancient times with current trends as an indicator of social mores.
In the rishis’ definition, the primary focus of vivāha is ‘the baby’ as the objective of nature (Brahma, the Creator). Social acceptance is preferable, but societies must not ostracise a child from a socially unsanctioned marriage. Provisions for their acceptance into the social mainstream should be part of social values. They ensured no matter how societies evolved, the definition of vivāha remained universally applicable, giving the primacy to the child and not to his/her parents.
This view point is, perhaps, based on the Kālachakra and the concept of Asta Laksmī — Laksate sarva anaya iti Laksmi (meaning: laksate — keeping vigil, gaze, aim; sarva — all; anaya — evil course, ill luck, misfortune, adversity. Laksmī, ‘she who keeps constant vigil and guards everyone against evil courses and misfortune’.) There are eight kinds of marriage as defined in Manusmriti applicable to the four varnas. These are Brāhma, Daiva, Āra, Prājāpatya, Āsura, Gāndharva, Rākśaśa and Paiśāca.
Manu states the dharma of each ‘varna’ imbibes its guna, except for saints. For example, it would be the nature of a criminal to beguile or kidnap a woman and force her into vivāha. A musician would woo her with music and poetry. The nature of one’s vocation has a strong bearing on the kind of life we lead and this is called varnadā. This determines an individual’s destiny, that includes marriage. This vivāha karma
experience is not restricted to one birth alone; it also affects progeny. There is no escape from karma.
Socially acceptable marriages traditionally begin with an engagement followed by the wedding. Different cultures have different rituals.
adbhireva dvijāgryānām kanyādānam viśisyate |
itaresām tu varnānāmitaretarakāmyayā || Manusmriti iii.35
Manu holds the view that mutual consent (engagement is an expression of mutual consent) should be contracted among all varnas while among the Brāhmana, kanyādāna with libations of water is most auspicious. Most marriages are accompanied by social contracts like dowry, bride-price and in royal and feudal unions were contracts that assured protection and support. Manu doesn’t advise this for the Brāhmana varna (intellectuals) who should marry without any contractual obligation in the form of wealth, power or business. Marriage must be a completely free acceptance of a life-long bond with the understanding that spouse is the ‘first witness’ in the court of god after death.
Though the socially evolved try to get society to emulate this idea of vivāha, not all are intellectually advanced to accept dowry as the evil it is. Among even highly educated business families, dowry, business contracts and power associations continue to dominate marriage considerations.
Jyotisa Notes: Engagement is seen from the third and ninth houses of the jātaka which, for a Brāhmana, include the dharma bhāva (ninth house) and the guru upadeśa (third house). A Brāhmana (intellectual) is expected to have the highest ideals in these two houses and is advised by Manu to refrain from any kind of commercial transaction, exchange of money or even a promise of protection or land etc, in exchange for marriage. Jupiter is the natural significator of the ninth house and the Brāhmana is expected to keep the third and ninth houses pure with the regular recitation of the gāyatrī mantra (Hindu’s following the Satya Sanātana dharma while others following other religions or spiritual paths can recite their dharma prayers regularly). Upadeśa of the gāyatrī is supposed to have been received at seven, eight or nine years of age while the Śiva pañcāksarī should be received at the time of entering the gurukula (about age five) by all, irrespective of class.)
Manu has explicitly divided the eight types of vivāhas into two groups of four each.
The first group — Brāhma, Daiva, Ārsa and Prājāpatya — is called ‘blameless marriages’ that free the karmic debts for the couple as well as for generations of relatives. Manu adds the progeny are radiant with Vedic knowledge, honoured by the śista (honourable people), posses beauty and sattva guna, wealth and fame, and are righteous minded and have long lives up to a hundred years.
For the second group comprising Āsura, Gāndharva, Rākśaśa, and Paiśāca — ‘blameworthy marriages’—there is no freedom from the karmic bondage of sensual gratification without the higher purpose of dharma; instead of emancipation, rebirth is assured. The progeny tend to be cruel, liars, deceitful in their social conduct and hate the Vedas and dharma. Hence it becomes the duty of society to nurture them to prevent them becoming criminals.
In a good marriage, the couple shares similar tastes, hobbies and values as much as possible. With this objective, marriages between similar varna (caste) groups was prescribed. Their families would also have similar bonds to encourage the couple to make the marriage successful.
Manu considers Brāhma vivāha the best kind of marriage. It symbolises the desire of God as the Creator. It is an arranged marriage in which the parents of a boy who has finished his schooling seek the hand of a suitable girl from her parents.
ācchādya cārcayitvā ca śrutaśīlavate svayam
āhūya dānam kanyāyā brāhmo dharmah prakīrtitah| (Manusmriti iii.27)
Manu advises that the groom should be knowledgeable in at least of one Veda (Rig veda) or four in Kali Yuga. The bride’s parents are advised to note the groom’s behavior, conduct and learning before giving their consent. There is no dowry or bride price as marriage and the word alankāra (ornament) of the bride is her knowledge and good conduct and not gems and jewellery.
Translators like Georg Būhler have grossly misinterpreted this śloka as “decking her (with costly garments) and honouring her (by presents of jewels)” perhaps because of the word of kanyā dānam or the ‘donation of a girl’. This is Manu’s world view and is not purely Vedic (Maharsi differ) as it attaches a property value to womanhood, essentially amounting to degradation of women. The Vedic view of Brāhma vivāha is that both the bride and groom are well lettered, well behaved, of good conduct and of noble character and the proposal is to be taken by the groom’s father or family and not from the bride’s family thereby giving due respect to the learned woman.
daśa pūrvānah parānah vamśyānātmānam caikavimśakamh
brāhmīputrah sukrtakrtmocayatyenasah pitrnh | Manusmriti iii.37
Manu calls this the best kind of marriage, which when performed and maintained with meritorious deeds brings the divine blessing of emancipation of 10 generations of ancestors, 10 generations of descendants and the couple themselves as the 21st.