Fwd: Hindu Perspective on Divorce - BVP Reference

194 views
Skip to first unread message

Mahamaho. Subrahmanyam Korada

unread,
Sep 28, 2023, 2:08:39 AM9/28/23
to bvpar...@googlegroups.com, vivek...@gmail.com
नमो विद्वद्भ्यः

Hindu Perspective on Divorce ---

कृष्णयजुर्वेदः - शुक्लयजुर्वेदः - पूर्वमीमांसा - कल्पः (गृह्यसूत्रम् - धर्मशास्त्रम्) - ज्योतिषम् - व्याकरणम् - अर्थशास्त्रम् - अभिज्ञानशाकुन्तलम्

The topic was briefly discussed some time ago. Anyway herewith I shall provide a comprehensive  account --

The very concept of विवाह in वैदिकधर्म / सनातनधर्म does not foresee any kind of separation of पति and पत्नी  -- 
पत्नी is called अर्धाङ्गी (half of the body of पति) --
अर्धो वा एष आत्मनो यत्पत्नी --  6-1-8-5,  तैत्तिरीयसंहिता 
अर्धो वा एष आत्मनो यज्जाया -- 5-2-1-10 , 8-7-2-3 , शतपथब्राह्मणम्
जायापत्योर्न विभागो’स्ति । पाणिग्रहणाद्धि सहत्वं कर्मसु ...- आपस्तम्बः । (There is no separation between जाया and पति....).

दंपती जंपती जायापती भार्यापती च तौ -- अमरः। ’ राजदन्तादिषु परम् ’ पा 2-2-31 गणे पाठात् जायाशब्दस्य दम् - जम् भावः वा निपात्यते।

...पत्यार्जितस्य च उभयसाधारणत्वात् ’ धर्मे चार्थे च कामे च नातिचरितव्या पाणिग्रहणात्तु सहत्वं कर्मसु पुण्यफलेषु द्रव्यपरिग्रहेषु च ’ इत्यादिवचनात् (गृह्यसूत्रे)
                                                                                                  -- पू मी  6-1-3, शास्त्रदीपिका
(since the earnings of पति are common to both - पत्नी is not to be ignored in terms of धर्म , अर्थ and काम -- on account of पाणिग्रहणम् , पत्नी
would partake in कर्म - पुण्यफल - द्रव्यपरिग्रह ...). Patanjali says पत्नी will partake पापफलम् also -- will be discussed separately.

स्ववतोस्तु वचनात् ऐककर्म्यं स्यात् -- 6-1-4-17, पू मी सू -- यागे दम्पत्योः सहाधिकाराधिकरणम् ।
(since it is stated that स्ववतोः=द्रव्यवतोः आज्यावेक्षणान्वारंभादिवचनात् ऐककर्म्यं सहप्रयोगः स्यात् -- there will be a single कर्म done by both).

परस्परसापेक्षयोरेव , अग्नीषोमयोरिव देवतात्वं , दम्पत्योः कतृत्वम् ... 6-1-4-17,  शास्त्रदीपिका |
(There  certainly is mutual requirement / expectancy - and like अग्नि and सोम, who are considered as a single देवता , the दम्पती have a single कर्तृत्वम्, not separate -- 
अग्निश्च सोमश्च अग्नीसोमौ ’ईदग्नेः सोमवरुणयोः’ पा 6-3-27 ईत् देवताद्वन्द्वे - ’अग्नेः स्तुत्स्तोमसोमाः’ पा 8-3-82 ’अग्नेः दीर्घात् सोमस्य’ महाभाष्यम् - षत्वम् अग्नीषोमौ देवता)।

पत्युर्नो यज्ञसंयोगे पा 4-1-33 पञ्चमहायज्ञसंयोगे इत्यर्थः - दंपत्योः सहाधिकारात् (पू मी अध्या 6) - पत्नी।

आम्नाये स्मृतितन्त्रे च लोकाचारे च सूरिभिः ।
शरीरार्धं स्मृता भार्या पुण्यापुण्यफले समा ॥ बृहस्पतिः (आम्नायः=वेदः ; स्मृतितन्त्रे=धर्मशास्त्रसिद्धान्ते)।

...अतस्समीपे परिणेतुरिष्यते
प्रियाप्रियापि प्रमदा स्वबन्धुभिः -- अभिज्ञानशाकुन्तलम्
(whether पति likes or not , the relatives of पत्नी like the पत्नी to be with पति only).
अन्योन्यस्याव्यभीचारो भवेदामरणान्तिकः।
एष धर्मः समासेन ज्ञेयः स्त्रीपुंसयोः परः॥ 9-101, मनुस्मृतिः
(let it be known that non-separation of पति and पत्नी till death is , on the whole, the best धर्म | व्यभीचारः - ’ उपसर्गस्य घञ्यमनुष्ये बहुलम्’ पा 6-3-129
इति दीर्घः).
तथा नित्यं यतेयातां स्त्रीपुंसौ तु कृतक्रियौ।
यथा नाभिचरेतां तौ वियुक्तावितरेतरम्॥ 9-102, मनुस्मृतिः
(once married , both , the पति and पत्नी, should always try not to get separated , even if they differ in terms of धर्म , अर्थ and काम ).
स्त्रीपुंसौ - ’ अचतुरविचतुरसुचतुरस्त्रीपुंसधेन्वनडुहर्क्सामवाङ्मनसाक्षिभ्रुवदारगवोर्वष्ठीवपदष्ठीवनक्तंदिवरात्रिंदिवाहर्दिवसरजसनिःश्रेयसपुरुषायुषद्व्यायुषत्र्यायुषर्ग्यजुषजातोक्ष-
महोक्षवृद्धोक्षोपशुनगोष्ठश्वाः’ पा 5-4-77 अच् समासान्तः, निपातितः; इतरेतरम्- ’इतरेतरान्योन्योपपदाच्च’ पा 1-3-16 निपातः।

न निष्क्रयविसर्गाभ्यां भर्तुर्भार्या विमुच्यते।
एवं धर्मं विजानीमः प्राक्प्रजापतिनिर्मितम्॥ 9-46, मनुस्मृतिः
(neither by sale nor by desertion the पत्नी can be separated from पति । We understand that this is the धर्म ordained by प्रजापति (Creator)
in former times).
On the whole , the धर्मशास्त्रकाराः are of the view that - विवाह is a संस्कार that cannot be annulled - even if either is पतित - even if the पत्नी
committed adultery (व्यभिचारः) she still remains a पत्नी and when she performs a प्रायश्चित्त for the lapse - it is not necessary to have a fresh
विवाहसंस्कार on her -- विश्वरूपः।
कौटल्य ( ’कौटिल्य ’ is an अपशब्द as per पाणिनि - विद् गणपतिशाश्त्री corrected later) in his work अर्थशास्त्रम् (3-3) rules --
अमोक्ष्या भर्तुरकामस्य द्विषती भार्या । भार्यायाश्च भर्ता । परस्परं द्वेषान्मोक्षः । स्त्रीविप्रकाराद्वा पुरुषश्चेन्मोक्षमिच्छेत् यथागृहीतमस्यै दद्यात् । पुरुषविप्रकाराद्वा स्त्री चेत्
मोक्षमिच्छेत् नास्यै यथागृहीतं दद्यात् । अमोक्षो धर्मविवाहानामिति ।
(if पति  does not accept, a hostile पत्नी cannot get divorce and vice versa . Divorce is possible if there is mutual hatred . If  पति , foresees
danger / injury  from पत्नी and desires divorce , then he has to return whatever he received during विवाह to her . If पत्नी desires divorce , 
foreseeing danger / injury from पति, then he need not return whatever was given to her during विवाह । No divorce in धर्मविवाह ।

Having said all this, if there is कुजदोष in the horoscope of either the bride or groom then there is every chance of separation --

धने व्यये च पाताळे जामित्रे चाष्टमे कुजः।
स्त्रीणां भतृविनाशाय पुंसां भार्याविनाशकम्॥
पाताळम् = चतुर्थम् ; जामित्रम् = सप्तमम् । 2-4-7-8-12 - if कुज , counted from लग्न-चन्द्र-शुक्र , is there in these houses then it is कुजदोष ।
In fact , there are other instances which cause divorce .

Wait for the post on कदळीविवाहः for some details related to विवाह ।

धन्यो’स्मि


Dr.Korada Subrahmanyam
Adju.Professor, Dept of Heritage Science and Technology, IIT, Hyderabad
299 Doyen, Serilingampally, Hyderabad 500 019
Ph:09866110741
Skype Id: Subrahmanyam Korada


---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Vivek Rallabandi <vivek...@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, Sep 16, 2023 at 5:16 AM
Subject: Hindu Perspective on Divorce - BVP Reference
To: Mahamaho. Subrahmanyam Korada <kora...@gmail.com>


MahOdaya --

My humble pranams. My name is Vivek Rallabandi; I am an undergraduate student in the USA and a member of the BVP Google group. 

I saw a post on BVP in which you referred to the increasing trend of obtaining divorces without any undergoing any accompanying samskaras, thereby rendering the legal divorce process alone Dharmically meaningless. This piqued my curiosity, given that I have struggled to reconcile the modern concept of divorce and the dictates of our Dharmashastras. 

As such, I would respectfully request that you shed light on our Dharmashastras' approach to divorce and whether any samskaras can accord a divorce Dharmic sanction. 

Thank you very much for your kind assistance with this query, which has been in my mind for long. 

Respectfully yours,
Vivek Rallabandi 

Nityanand Misra

unread,
Sep 30, 2023, 2:21:47 AM9/30/23
to भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्
On Thursday, 28 September, 2023 at 11:38:39 am UTC+5:30 Mahamaho. Subrahmanyam Korada wrote:
नमो विद्वद्भ्यः

Hindu Perspective on Divorce ---

On the whole , the धर्मशास्त्रकाराः are of the view that - विवाह is a संस्कार that cannot be annulled - even if either is पतित - even if the पत्नी
committed adultery (व्यभिचारः) she still remains a पत्नी and when she performs a प्रायश्चित्त for the lapse - it is not necessary to have a fresh
विवाहसंस्कार on her -- विश्वरूपः।
कौटल्य ( ’कौटिल्य ’ is an अपशब्द as per पाणिनि - विद् गणपतिशाश्त्री corrected later) in his work अर्थशास्त्रम् (3-3) rules --
अमोक्ष्या भर्तुरकामस्य द्विषती भार्या । भार्यायाश्च भर्ता । परस्परं द्वेषान्मोक्षः । स्त्रीविप्रकाराद्वा पुरुषश्चेन्मोक्षमिच्छेत् यथागृहीतमस्यै दद्यात् । पुरुषविप्रकाराद्वा स्त्री चेत्
मोक्षमिच्छेत् नास्यै यथागृहीतं दद्यात् । अमोक्षो धर्मविवाहानामिति ।
(if पति  does not accept, a hostile पत्नी cannot get divorce and vice versa . Divorce is possible if there is mutual hatred . If  पति , foresees
danger / injury  from पत्नी and desires divorce , then he has to return whatever he received during विवाह to her . If पत्नी desires divorce , 
foreseeing danger / injury from पति, then he need not return whatever was given to her during विवाह । No divorce in धर्मविवाह ।


Namaste

In this context, the Parāśarasmṛti offers a somewhat different view compared to other Dharmaśāstras. The text says
नष्टे मृते प्रव्रजिते क्लीबे च पतिते पतौ।
पञ्चस्वापत्सु नारीणां पतिरन्यो विधीयते॥ ४.३० ॥
“When the husband has disappeared, or has died, or has renounced the world, or is impotent, or has fallen [from Dharma]—in these five calamities for women, another husband is ordained.”
This verse implies an annulment/end of the first marriage in case the husband is क्लीब or पतित. The verse is cited by Medhātithi in his commentary on Manusmṛti 9.76. 

The अमोक्षो धर्मविवाहानामिति in the Arthaśāstra needs further explanation. As per the Arthaśāstra (3.2.10), four types of marriages (out of eight in all) are ‘dharmya’. These are ‘brāhma’, ‘prājāpatya’, ‘ārṣa’ and ‘daiva’. So by अमोक्षो धर्मविवाहानामिति, Kauṭilya implies that a release/dissolution (what may be understood as divorce) is allowed for the other four types of marriage, viz., ‘gāndharva’, ‘āsura’, ‘rākṣasa’ and ‘paiśāca’ marriages. 

Finally, it seems the following sentence in Prof. Korada's post is sourced from P V Kane with minor changes: "even if the पत्नी committed adultery (व्यभिचारः) she still remains a पत्नी and when she performs a प्रायश्चित्त for the lapse - it is not necessary to have a fresh विवाहसंस्कार on her." Here is Kane in A History of Dharmashastra, Volume II, page 620: "even if a wife committed adultery she still remains a wife and that when she performs a penance for her lapse, it is not necessary to have a fresh samskara of marriage performed on her."

BVK Sastry (G-S-Pop)

unread,
Sep 30, 2023, 9:59:56 AM9/30/23
to bvpar...@googlegroups.com, vivek...@gmail.com

Namaste Prof. Koradagaru

 

Thanks for the  most illuminating summing up of ‘ Hindu – Perspective from Shaastra – works ’  on contemporary social relational challenge of ‘ Legal Divorce  following a ‘ Vivaha- Paddhati (which is trusted to be a SAMSKARARA  but not always standing to the quality –test of ‘VAIDIKA / DHARMIKA - SAMSKARA’.  

 

The reason being statistically significant  events of ‘VIVAHA-SAMSKARA’ are performed as a ‘Dress Rehearsal’ with a Social Purpose; with little consideration or concern to put to practice the essence as ‘SAHA-CHARYAA- YOGA’ = Living together, nurturing next generation to take over the mantle of ‘Sanatana Dharma – Shaastra Samskara Paddhati, Make efforts to Transfer basics and specials of DHARMA- ABHYASA to Society. The top level serious Dharma- Practice discussions seem to end up in a practical guidance on what way to wear a  pnacha-kaccha/ saree,  what should be the inner wears, What should be the facial marks , what should be the food ingredients, should one eat sitting on floor or use a table ……  If I recall , Patanjali has an answer to this in ‘Shaastrene Niyamah kriyate’  and ‘practice yields a Phala-Vishesha ( Punya- Adrushta)! If one trusts it.

 

I submit my thoughts below and look forward for your guidance on my reshaping my understanding.

 

1. The critical test to be Conducted as audit (self or social or legal) is answering the question of

 

            ‘Saha-Charyaa’ by Dashakam Dharma Lakshanam’ which covers ‘Purushartha / Stree –Artha’ Issues’.

              The current legal framework on divorce reprioritizes ‘Saamaajika Artha- Kaama’ over ‘Vyakti/ Purusha- Stree-

               Dharma- Atma  Moksha’

 

2. The Cultural Life style, Heritage, Social models, Sacred Literature, Rituals are a good educational wrap over these values .

      Hindu Sampradaya , shaped by Puranas, Dharma –Shaastra as a Vaidka- Mata- Dharma Vyahara –Samskara – Shaasnam

       is NOT FULLY ACCOMMODATED in the BHARATEEYA SAMVIDHANA : ACTS and Rules. 

 

             - Have the parties who committed in presence of Elders or Legal registrants  

                   - when accepting the ‘RELATIONAL COMING TOGETHER

                       - TO ACQUIRE THE SOCIAL STATUS OF ‘PATI-PATNI/ LEGALLY MARRIED HUSBAND AND WIFE

                        - FOR < First:  SOCIAL PURPOSES + BUSINESS- TAX- SAFETY  as - Saamajika Artha vyavahara, >

                                   < Second  : PHYSICAL  Bodily Relations as : Kama>

                                   < Third and Last priority   : Religious – Spiritual journey together : Dharma- Moksha>.

 

Does the fundamental rights cover the ‘ Human Relational Rights and Duties: for Marriage and Conjugality’ - ? An issue to be deeply  thought of !  Should the founders of Constitution should have addressed this ? I  think so, following ‘Chankyas guidelines on ‘King –Status in the context of ‘ Rajaa – Pratyaksha – Devataa’.  The dictum does not equally extend and apply  to ‘ Prajaa- Pratinidhih- Pratyaksha Devataa’.   

 

In a way, Bharateeya – Constitution is definitely superior to ‘Mata (Religion) locked social Governance Laws of marriage regulation;  but does not get full 100% score by ‘SHAASTRA Standards’ ( Tasmat Shaastram PRamanam te’). For suiting the yuga-dharma/ Kaala dharma- ‘ Dharma (= Dashakam Dharma-Lakshanam’)  is diluted and compromised to Dharma = Religion tagged as a  ‘loose cluster of specific regulated religious (= Samskara) practices’ fuzzily regulated by prioritizing ‘Social Civic Governance (= Acts of Judiciary and Executive) overruling ‘ Religion ( = Dharma –Shaastra- Niyama).  The top line sought is if   ‘ Social Togetherness arrangement’  as ‘Marriage’ - fails to deliver  ‘Social Peaceful Productive Togetherness ( = ‘Shaanti- Samruddhi – Amrutham’  baadhaka Saha-charyaa’ ), then Dissolve the Social Togetherness – Arrangement. This in essence is  the order issued by  a Legal authority as ‘ Divorce leading to Marriage – Dissolution’.  The issue of ‘ Marriage as Vivaha = One of the SAMSKARAS  is totally out of jurisdiction and consideration of Legal Courts and probably the ‘Constitution framework itself’.

 

3. This is what is followed in American Law, widely in awarding ‘Legal Divorce’ through Court, of a ‘Marriage Officiated and Sanctioned- Declared by  a ‘Priest’. Financial part is a sub issue of  ‘separation’; including alimony, rights to children access, et al.  Re-Marriage is a rightful choice awarded by Legal decree, as the original first marriage was a ‘ personal mutual agreement : A  contract  with a clear consent’ with a ‘context’.   The Marriage official declaration in ‘ Religion frame work’ is totally  a different breed and cannot be compared to the issue of a ‘SHAASTRA – SAMSKARA’.

 

When ‘ Shaastra- Shikshana / Samskara- Abhyasa’ is socially distorted under the ‘SECUALR HAMMER (Dharma- Nirapekshataa) by Judiciary, Executive and Legislature, and prevails as ‘Desha- Aachaara Niyama’, then recalling the wish to stay by historic Dharma- Shaastra dictums is Purely a PERSONAL CHOICE. NO PARENT , MASTER, COMMUNITY can ENFORCE a LAW  or TAKE AWAY THE LEGAL RIGHT ( Especially of Women) to Make a choice of their personal relational social professional cultural adaptations.  We can say at best, this is what we like, what we have been doing, what seems to be socially and generationally good. Can we enforce any thing ? Difficult to answer. This is  Dilemma of ‘ Dasharatha -Bheeshma – Drona- Duryodhana- Dhrutarashtra’. And What did Manu say on this ?  If the ‘ Girl child is not married in pre-puberty age, then Father loses his rights in dictating the girls choice for Marriage’.  This ‘ reform of ‘ Pre-puberty marriage/ Post puberty free will marriage / has found several literary – legal – social – dimensions explored, including ‘Kalidasa’s Shakuntalam: Choice of Shakuntala to accept a marriage proposal made in ‘Privacy – Secrecy’ by Dushyanta ’.  ‘Gandharva marriage’ does not have a recourse to legal divorce proceedings !

 

I look forward for inputs from learned scholars and luminaries on this forum  for improvising my understanding of socially relevant challenge  subject discussed : ‘Hindu: Marriage dissolution as Divorce’.  Personal Hurt should not be used as limiter in law making for largesse of Nation-Citizens of ‘Naanaa- Naambhyah- Naanaa Gotrebhyah – Prajaabhyah’.  

 

Regards

BVK Sastry

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAKj2ELSOdd0P2EE8K5%2B%3DuSHm8Y4mpte%3D3d5OnTgTze9J6M35CQ%40mail.gmail.com.

Mahamaho. Subrahmanyam Korada

unread,
Oct 10, 2023, 2:09:50 PM10/10/23
to bvpar...@googlegroups.com
नमो विद्वद्भ्यः

The issue of ‘ Marriage as Vivaha = One of the SAMSKARAS  is totally out of jurisdiction and consideration of Legal Courts and probably the ‘Constitution framework itself’.

The Marriage official declaration in ‘ Religion frame work’ is totally  a different breed and cannot be compared to the issue of a ‘SHAASTRA – SAMSKARA’.

                                                                                               ------Vid BVK Sastry

You are right . Panini refers  to certain people by the name ’पूगाः’ (पूगाञ्यो’ग्रामणीपूर्वात् 5-3-112) - who are अर्थकामप्रधानाः । धर्म and मोक्ष

are not taken into account by those who framed the constitution . Aping the West in every aspect has become a fashion and those who

follow the so called ंसंस्कार / सनातनधर्म / वैदिकसंप्रदाय are looked down as छान्दसाः and ignored and the tendency still continues.

Out of the eight types of विवाहाः - ब्राह्मः प्राजापत्यः आर्षः दैवः गान्धर्वः आसुरः राक्षसः पैशाचः - the first four or six are considered to be धर्म्याः।

चत्वारो प्रथमाः धर्म्याः -- षडित्येके (गौतमधर्मसूत्रम् 4-12,13).

धर्मादनपेतं धर्म्यम् - ’ धर्मपथ्यर्थन्यायादनपेते’ यत्  पा 4-4-92.

The people at the helm of affairs did not digest the profound and sacred concept of धर्म - untranslatable as it is pregnant with meaning.

Nor did they try to understand  the impact of अधर्म  - अप्रियस्य च पथ्यस्य वक्ता श्रोता च दुर्लभः (राजन्) - रामायणम् ।

What happened to these people ? Lust for money! The वैदिककर्माणि are ignored ! विधिवशात् प्राप्तेन संतुष्यताम् - शांकरं वचनम् is forgotten.

High speed marriages have become the order of the day .  Who to blame?  

बोद्धारो   मत्सरग्रस्ताः .... जीर्णमङ्गे सुभाषितम्   - हरिः ।   


धन्यो’स्मि                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               


Dr.Korada Subrahmanyam
Adju.Professor , Dept of Heritage Science and Technology, IIT, Hyderabad                    
299 Doyen , Serilingampally, Hyderabad 500 019           
Ph:09866110741

kenp

unread,
Oct 16, 2023, 3:27:10 AM10/16/23
to भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्
Here are some links.



Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages