8 types of Marriages in the Dharmasastras

http://blokesablogin.rediffblogs.com/2006_12_11_blokesablogin_archive.html was an article I wrote years ago after watching Water, the controversial film by Deepa Mehta. While Choti Bahu is not a story about a baal vivaah (child marriage), it is interesting to understand the types of marriages that are defined in our Dharmasastras (scriptures relating to living life with a certain code of conduct). Here is an excerpt from the same:

Of the eight kinds of marriages defined in the Sastras (brahma, daiva, aarsha, prajapatya, gandharva, asura, rakshasa, pishacha), the marriage based on Kanyadaan (common to the first four types), was hailed as the ultimate of all "giving" or daan. It was considered the ultimate desire-free act that could possibly be performed by a householder (grihasta). The state of innocence and purity of the young girl who has no sexual desires (yet), who is the symbol of everything beautiful and tender is "given away" into the keeping of "Mahavishnu Himself" (the groom is given the duty of caring for the bride just as Vishnu cares for the world). The brahmavivaha was ordained primarily for the brahmanas and not the other castes. In this scenario, there is no desire at the socio-economic level to profit from. It was purely the union of two individuals who were united in the phyical realm to persue the spiritual path. The blessing was also given for spiritually-oriented children to be born of that union who go beyond the material plane.

The kshatriyas were encouraged to perform daiva (where the parents like the family of the groom/girl), aarsha, for political gains (gains for the larger society or community, not familial - to be noted), prajaapatya (for honor), gandharva vivaha (love marriage where partners choose each other - therefore no more "kanyadaan" in play).

Asura (for monetary purposes), rakshasa (resulting after rape/ by force: shotgun weddings of the wild west!), pishacha (under the influence) were highly frowned upon but permitted for certain vaisyas or merchants, under extreme circumstances. They were also encouraged to contract marriages like the kshatriyas with parental consent, and so was it for the shudras. This generic classification did not mean that the other castes could not perform a brahmavivaha. It is one thing to write in a law book and not expected to perform but another to say is not allowed to perform - which was not the case.

In the context of CB, while tradition would have demanded a brahma vivaaha for a Raj prohit, owing to Dev's love for Radhika, it became a Gandharva type but got the blessings of a Brahma vivaha. So, the current story line proves it- as far as rads and dev are concerned their "gandharva vivaha" has already taken place. That was the kind of marriage that Dushyanth had with Shakuntala.

I welcome readers to share more based on their knowledge of the scriptures.

dee- this was for u- the "religious" piece!LOL!

Thanks so much blokes, I really loved reading the piece as I am not well versed with scriptures.

Two questions:

- what was amma talking about when she insisted Radhika was just put as an object in the marraige with Dev? where does this come from?

- I assume RaDev well could not have been a brahma wedding because her background is not known? But Vishaka was assumed to be the bride and she is the daughter of a priest, so how that translate into a wedding ritual? In the eyed of God it was a Gandharva vivah but in the eyes of family, was it that too?

Thanks again!

Oh forgot to mention, nice blog!

These days the C-B forum is an altered place. There is so much fun and exchange of information ... 😊

Blokes, your posts are so informative. I learned a lot today. ❤️

Its a pity that most American universities do not teach Sanskrit and the scriptures. The Western culture could certainly profit by implanting some Eastern values into its diverse population.

C-B has taught me volumes about the Indian culture and my forum friends have added their unique insight ... and today, I am a rich netizen ...

Blokes, thank you for being here. 😊

Originally posted by: deefan

Thanks so much blokes, I really loved reading the piece as I am not well versed with scriptures. <br><br>Two questions:<br><br>- what was amma talking about when she insisted Radhika was just put as an object in the marraige with Dev? where does this come from?<br><br>- I assume RaDev well could not have been a brahma wedding because her background is not known? But Vishaka was assumed to be the bride and she is the daughter of a priest, so how that translate into a wedding ritual? In the eyed of God it was a Gandharva vivah but in the eyes of family, was it that too?<br><br>Thanks again!<br>

While it is true that "substitutions" are part of Indian cermonial rites, it is not so for the marriage- especially when the panigrahnam is done- the hand fast- where the father takes the hand of his daughter and places in the keeping of the groom. In proxy weddings, which were common during war times etc. where it was difficult for the groom and bride to be in the same place, the "sagai" would take plae and the bride who is "engaged" is sent to the husband's place and then the shanti muhurtham is performed before they actually are pronounced man and wife.

Therefore amma is "using" her knowledge of the scriptures to ensure the future of her granddaughter. As for Radhika being of unknown origin, the scriptures are very clear on this too- 1. I am amazed that sashtri ji did not adopt her directly- it would have been a simple ceremony and she would have been pronounced "brahmin" that very day. In the case of a daughter eitherways, it is not important what jaat the girl is from as long as she marries into a good jaat- yes, there are several stories to proe this point. Also, a girl from the bramin will be ostracized if she marries "below" her into kshatriya or vaishya or shudra whereas a girl from the "lower" classes can marry up!

Lots of interesting rules of society here... The story of Kaccha and Devyani in the Mahabharatha illustrate this interesting feature.

Thanks 4 d article...........it was informtve👏👏

thanks alot, Blokes..

thanks a lot bokes ur posts r always so full with informations n i really get to learn a lot. just 1 question:
Is the marriage ceremony b/n radev both gandharva vivah n bramha vivah if yes then where does vishaka come in.?
what is the relationship b/n dev n vish called?
pls. comment

Originally posted by: radevfanitaly

thanks a lot bokes ur posts r always so full with informations n i really get to learn a lot. just 1 question:
Is the marriage ceremony b/n radev both gandharva vivah n bramha vivah if yes then where does vishaka come in.?
what is the relationship b/n dev n vish called?
pls. comment

the marriage between dev and rads as far as the phere and all went was the brahma vivah type. gandharva vivah is done in secret where only the two people involved know about it- that is the kind that means a mingling of hearts- which has already happened! There are no "rituals" to follow except for an exchange of garlands that the couple do- in this case, it did not happen earlier.

Oh Vishaka, as sastri ji rightly told his wife is living in sin!! As for Ammaji's corelation with tulasi vivah, it is ridiculous as the sastras themselves maintain that it is not a "pure" wedding- as Tulasi is already wed to an asur. Therefore, as much as she is worshipful, she does not live "inside" people's homes. She stays in the angan (courtyard).