[INDOLOGY] [RISA-L LIST] sources on markers of girls' transition to adulthood

Sat Sep 5 21:24:54 UTC 2020

> girls married at very young ages were often not sent to live with their
husbands until after menarche

As far as my recollection goes - I am not in a position to cite sources as
I have no access to the relevant files at the moment -, the consummation of
marriage could also take place on the occasion of a so-called 'second'
marriage (*punar-vivāha*) after the ritual wedding of a prepubescent girl.
Immediately after she had reached a childbearing age (i.e. after her first
menstruation), the girl was brought from her parents' house to her
husband's house. This practice corresponds more or less to the *garbhādhāna
saṃskāra *(the rite of "impregnation") and had the sole purpose of making
the optimum use of her fertility.

Best wishes,
WS

Am Sa., 5. Sept. 2020 um 22:28 Uhr schrieb Sundari Johansen Hurwitt <
sundari.johansen at gmail.com>:

> Thank you to everyone for these very helpful responses.
>
> Amy, you have a very good question, and it's certainly part of what is
> driving my initial query. I think Patrick Olivelle's earlier response here
> is relevant, which quoted Kauṭilya’s Arthaśāstra 3.3.1 (his translation):
>
> "A woman 12 years old has reached the age for legal transactions
> (vyavahāra), as also a man 16 years old."
>
>
> To Walter Slaje's point, a marriage is a legal contract, and being able to
> enter into legal contracts has long been established as the marker of legal
> adulthood. For me that begs the question: what other binding legal
> contracts were girls and women allowed to enter besides marriage? For
> example, do we know if they were able to bring grievances to have them
> resolved via the legal system? (And this may be further complicated by
> caste/class/etc.)
>
> Another pertinent question for me: was it age, marriage, or consummation
> of marriage that marked a girl's legal adulthood? The marriage age dropped
> over time, and girls married at very young ages were often not sent to live
> with their husbands until after menarche. (It's a modern example, but here
> in the US several states have no minimum age for marriage, parental and/or
> judicial consent is all that's required. Girls as young as 10 have been
> married to men in their mid-late 20s and early 30s, fairly recently, and it
> most frequently happens in evangelical communities in the rural South. If
> married at 16 or older, they are legally an adult. But 15 or under, they're
> not, and can't even hire a lawyer or seek a divorce without permission of
> their guardian... which is their spouse.)
>
> All of the (very) helpful responses so far reminded me of a book I read a
> long while back. Narendra Nath Bhattacharyya has some interesting
> information on all of this in *Indian Puberty Rites *(p. 37-38)
> *:*
>
> “In the Dharmasūtra of Gautama it is stated that the girl should be given
> in marriage at puberty; she is allowed to remain a virgin until her third
> menstruation. [citation: XVIII.20-23] Parāśara says:
>
> ‘A girl of eight is called Gaurī; but one who is nine years old is a
> Rohinī; one who is ten years old is a Kanyā; beyond this one is Rajasvalā
> (i.e. one who has the experience of menstruation). If a person does not
> give away a maiden when she has reached her twelfth year, his Pitṛs
> (ancestors) will have to drink every month her menstrual discharge. The
> parents and also the eldest brother go to hell on seeing an unmarried girl
> becoming Rajasvalā.’ [citation: Parāśara Smṛti, VII.6-9]
>
>
> “The same is also stated in other Smṛtis. [citation: Samvarta, 65-66;
> Bṛhad-yama, III.19-22, Aṅgiras, 126-28] The Vāyu Purāṇa [citation:
> LXXXIII.44] extols the marriage of a Gaurī by remarking that her son
> purifies 21 ancestors on his father’s side and six male ancestors of his
> mother’s side. In a later work it is stated that a Brāhmaṇa should marry a
> Brāhmaṇa girl who is a Nagnikā or Gaurī, the former being a girl over eight
> years but less than ten, and the latter being one who is between ten and
> twelve and has not had menstruation. [citation: Vaikhānasa, VI.12] As the
> marriageable age of the girls came down, the rite of Caturthīkarma
> naturally became irrelevant and it was performed when the girls attained
> maturity long after the marriage and it accordingly came to be known as
> Garbhādhāna.”
>
> Just as a final thought, legal "adulthood" has for quite a large part of
> human history in most cultures been very different for women than for
> men, with differing ages, privileges, responsibilities, and legal
> implications. For that matter, both the idea of a "child" or "childhood" as
> well as what marks the boundary between "child" and "adult" have also
> changed.
>
> Speaking of... if anybody is still reading this—not to hijack my own
> thread, but I'm reminded that I'm also looking for references on children,
> children's bodies, and rules around children's participation in ritual and
> public life. Especially on girls, but I'm also interested in the
> similarities and differences as ideals represented in the texts. But that
> may be another post!
>
> Thank you all so far!
> -s
>
> --
>
> Sundari Johansen Hurwitt | sundari.johansen at gmail.com | she/her
>
>
>
> On Sat, Sep 5, 2020 at 9:58 AM Amy Langenberg <langenap at eckerd.edu> wrote:
>
>> Dear colleagues,
>> It would be helpful to know in these contexts what "marriage" means and
>> whether attaining adulthood refers to sexual maturity, or a legal/ritual
>> status, or whether the two are conflated in theory and/or in practice.
>>
>> These are very young female bodies we are talking about. I'm sure this
>> needs no mentioning, but I will mention it anyway.
>>
>> Listening in with interest!
>> Amy Langenberg
>>
>> On Sat, Sep 5, 2020 at 12:31 PM Walter Slaje <walter.slaje at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Another recommendation:
>>>
>>> Harry Falk, Die Kurus und ihre jungen Frauen. *Studia Orientalia
>>> Electronica*, 110 (2014): 93-101.
>>> Retrieved from https://journal.fi/store/article/view/45354
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Am Sa., 5. Sept. 2020 um 18:10 Uhr schrieb Martin Straube via INDOLOGY <
>>> indology at list.indology.info>:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> One small addition: On kaumārī cf. P. Thieme, "Jungfrauengatte",
>>>> Zeitschrift für vergleichende Sprachforschung, 78 (1963); reprinted
>>>> in: Kleine Schriften, 2nd ed., Wiesbaden 1984, pp. 426ff.
>>>>
>>>> Regards
>>>> Martin Straube
>>>>
>>>> Zitat von Walter Slaje via INDOLOGY <indology at list.indology.info>:
>>>>
>>>> > Below are some additional indications that could be followed up in the
>>>> > course of your research.
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > Kind regards,
>>>> >
>>>> > WS
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > 1) See *Richard Schmidt* (*Beiträge zur indischen Erotik*. 3. Aufl.
>>>> Berlin
>>>> > 1922: 645–649) with source quotes on marriage age and also marks of
>>>> > pubescence).
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > 2) See moreover *Ram Gopal*, *India of Vedic Kalpasūtras*. Delhi
>>>> 21983: 212
>>>> > with relevant quotes (p. 220, n. 59) also on the important term
>>>> *nagnikā*
>>>> > („naked“) in the context of the ideal marriage age:
>>>> >
>>>> > *nagnikām* [=] *aprāptastrībhāvām* *ayauvanarasām* *upayaccheta*
>>>> (“let him
>>>> > approach a *nagnikā* girl for intercourse in whom the sexual
>>>> > characteristics of a woman are not yet developed and in whom the
>>>> menstrual
>>>> > fluid (*yauvanarasa*) has not yet emerged.”).
>>>> >
>>>> > *nagnikā*, defined as the “best” (*śreṣṭhā*) in the above passage of
>>>> > *Mānavagṛhyasūtra* as cited by Gopal, seems actually to refer to the
>>>> > absence of pubic hair (*ajātalomnī*) as also discussed, e.g., by
>>>> > Bhaṭṭanārāyaṇa on *Gobhilagṛhyasūtra* 2.5.7. According to the latter’s
>>>> > testimony there were Ācāryas who stipulated intercourse with
>>>> prepubescent
>>>> > married girls lacking pubic hair, if these girls themselves desired
>>>> so:
>>>> >
>>>> > *yady ajātalomny evātīva puruṣābhogārthinī syāt, tathā sati, *[…]
>>>> *maithunaṃ
>>>> > kartavyam ity eke ācāryā manyante*.
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > 3) The Kashmirian *Kāṭhakagṛhyasūtra* determines the age of marriage
>>>> of
>>>> > girls at 10, at the very latest at 12 years (*daśavārṣikaṃ**
>>>> brahmacaryaṃ
>>>> > kumārīṇāṃ dvādaśavārṣikaṃ vā *KGS 19.2), on which Devapāla comments:
>>>> > *varṣadaśakād
>>>> > ūrdhvaṃ **brahmacarye kumārī **na** sthāpayitavyā pitrā **।* *agatyā
>>>> **vā
>>>> > dvādaśa **varṣāṇi nātikramaṇīyāni* ॥ (Devapālabhāṣya *ad* 19.2. ||
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > 4) *Manusmṛti*
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > *triṃśadvarṣo vahet kanyāṃ hṛdyāṃ dvādaśavārṣikīm | tryaṣṭavarṣo
>>>> 'ṣṭavarṣāṃ
>>>> > vā dharme sīdati satvaraḥ* || MDhŚ 9.94 ||
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > “A 30-year-old man should marry a charming girl of 12 years, or an
>>>> > 18-year-old, *a girl of 8 years* - *sooner, if* his fulfilling the Law
>>>> > would suffer.” (Olivelle 2005, p. 194).
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > There is a wider range of evidence for an ideal marriage age for
>>>> girls aged
>>>> > 8 (*a**ṣṭ**avar**ṣ**ā*): To start with Pārvatī, Śiva’s wife, it is
>>>> said
>>>> > that she was married at the age of eight (8), i.e. before puberty, the
>>>> > technical term for which is *gaurī* (significantly also used as an
>>>> epithet
>>>> > for her):
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > 5) Jayadratha’s *Haracaritacint**ā**ma**ṇ**i*
>>>> >
>>>> > *dev**ī** himavata**ḥ** putr**ī** k**ā**l**ī**
>>>> n**ī**lotpalacchavi**ḥ** | *
>>>> >
>>>> > *a**ṣṭ**avar**ṣ**ā** tapoyukt**ā** bhart**ā**ra**ṃ** pr**ā**pa
>>>> dh**ū**rja*
>>>> > *ṭ**im* || Hc 22.3 ||
>>>> >
>>>> > *sā krīḍantī pitṛgehe śambhunā saha pārvatī* |
>>>> >
>>>> > *dṛṣṭvā dṛṣṭvā vapuḥ śyāmaṃ nāhaṃ gaurīty alajjata* || Hc 22.4 ||
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > 6) *gaurī* = *aṣṭavarṣā* = prepubescent:
>>>> >
>>>> > *Brhadyamasmrti* (= *Parāśarasmṛti* 7.4):
>>>> >
>>>> > *aṣṭavarṣā** bhaved gaurī navavarṣā ca rohiṇī |*
>>>> >
>>>> > *daśavarṣā bhavet kanyā  ata ūrdhvaṃ rajasvalā* || YS 182v 3.21 ||
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > 7) *Aṣṭavarṣā* marriage in the *Revākhaṇḍa* of the *Vāyupurāṇa*:
>>>> >
>>>> > *puṇyāham adya saṃjātam ahaṃ tvaddarśanotsukaḥ |*
>>>> >
>>>> > *kanyā** madīyā rājendra hy aṣṭavarṣā vyajāyata* || RKV 142.18 ||
>>>> > […]
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > *caturbhujo mama sutas triṣu lokeṣu viśrutaḥ | tasyeyaṃ dīyatāṃ kanyā
>>>> > śiśupālasya bhīṣmaka* || RKV 142.20 ||
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > 8) *Rāmāyaṇa*
>>>> >
>>>> > Sītā, too, was married before the age of puberty as a “*kaumārī*”:
>>>> >
>>>> > *svayaṃ tu bhāryāṃ kaumārīṃ ciram adhyuṣitāṃ satīm |*
>>>> >
>>>> > *śailūṣa iva māṃ rāma parebhyo dātum icchasi* || Rām 2.27.8 (CE)||
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > The Gītā Press translates from an emic insight point of view: „who was
>>>> > married to you before puberty”.
>>>> >
>>>> > The commentaries *Rāmāyaṇaśiromaṇi* und *Bhūṣaṇa* on this passage (Rām
>>>> > 2.30,8) confirm *kaumārī* as “*kumārāvasthāyāṃ eva vivāhitā*”
>>>> (“married
>>>> > already in the period of life of a ten to twelve years old maiden”).
>>>> >
>>>> > *kumārī* = 1. “A young girl, one from 10 to 12 years old“ (Apte)
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > 9) A significant term for a a sexually mature, fully developed girl is
>>>> > *prauḍhā* (cp., eg., *Bhāgavatapurāṇa *4.25.21 (*a-prauḍhā* – “not yet
>>>> > fully developed”), or *ūḍhā* (cp. *nava-ūḍhā* – “having just attained
>>>> > puberty”, as in *Brahmavaivartap*., ch. 112).
>>>> >
>>>> > Am Sa., 5. Sept. 2020 um 03:08 Uhr schrieb Madhav Deshpande via
>>>> INDOLOGY <
>>>> > indology at list.indology.info>:
>>>> >
>>>> >> Hello Sundari,
>>>> >>
>>>> >>      I see these quotations from various texts embedded in the
>>>> commentary
>>>> >> Tattvabodhinī on Bhaṭṭoji's Siddhānta-Kaumudī, on rule 3168 of SK
>>>> [p. 531,
>>>> >> edition of SK with Tattvabodhinī, edited by Wasudev Laxman Shastri
>>>> >> Panshikar, 7th edition, Nirnaya Sagara press, Mumbai, 1933]:  These
>>>> are
>>>> >> comments on the word *gaurī:*
>>>> >>
>>>> >> "गौरी त्वसञ्जातरज:कन्याशङ्करभार्ययो:" ... इति मेदिनी ।..."अष्टवर्षा
>>>> तु या
>>>> >> दत्ता श्रुतशीलसमन्विते । सा गौरी तत्सुतो यस्तु स गौर: परिकीर्तित:
>>>> ।।" इति
>>>> >> ब्रह्माण्डवचनं श्राद्धकाण्डे हेमाद्रिणोद्धृतम् । एतेन "गौर:
>>>> शुच्याचार:"
>>>> >> इत्यादि भाष्यं व्याख्यातम् ।
>>>> >>
>>>> >>    The end of the above passage uses the quote fromthe
>>>> Brahmāṇḍa-Purāṇa to
>>>> >> argue that the word *gauraḥ *used by Patañjali in defining a Brāhmaṇa
>>>> >> does not refer to the skin color, but it has a Dharmaśāstric
>>>> significance
>>>> >> as "the son of a woman who was given at her age of eight to a
>>>> learned and
>>>> >> righteous Brahmin."  The same quote is used by the great
>>>> Nāgeśabhaṭṭa in
>>>> >> one of his commentaries. I have cited that in one of my
>>>> publications, and I
>>>> >> have to hunt down that reference.  But it is exactly the same
>>>> argument.
>>>> >>    On a personal level, the history of my own family shows the
>>>> gradual
>>>> >> change from that old standard for the age of marriage.  My
>>>> grandmother was
>>>> >> married when she was 9.  My two paternal aunts were married at the
>>>> age of
>>>> >> 14 or 15, and since that was considered rather too late, they were
>>>> married
>>>> >> to widowers.  My own mother was married at her age of 16.  This is an
>>>> >> interesting trajectory of history within a single family.
>>>> >>     With best wishes,
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Madhav M. Deshpande
>>>> >> Professor Emeritus, Sanskrit and Linguistics
>>>> >> University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA
>>>> >> Senior Fellow, Oxford Center for Hindu Studies
>>>> >>
>>>> >> [Residence: Campbell, California, USA]
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >> On Fri, Sep 4, 2020 at 5:09 PM Olivelle, J P via INDOLOGY <
>>>> >> indology at list.indology.info> wrote:
>>>> >>
>>>> >>> The most straightforward statement in Kauṭilya’s Arthaśāstra 3.3.1:
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> A woman 12 years old has reached the age for legal transactions
>>>> >>> (vyavahāra), as also
>>>> >>> a man 16 years old.
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> Best,
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> Patrick
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> On Sep 4, 2020, at 5:23 PM, Sundari Johansen Hurwitt via INDOLOGY <
>>>> >>> indology at list.indology.info> wrote:
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> Hi all,
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> I am looking for sources that explore the age at which a girl
>>>> >>> traditionally becomes an adult woman (meaning, she transitions into
>>>> defacto
>>>> >>> adulthood by the standards of the time) in Hindu culture, prior to
>>>> the 19th
>>>> >>> century. I'm already aware of the Indian Penal Code setting the age
>>>> of
>>>> >>> consent for marriage for girls at 10 years old in 1860, and the
>>>> history
>>>> >>> following that.
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> In particular I'm looking for primary and/or secondary literature
>>>> that
>>>> >>> mention bodily processes, rites of passage, age, or other markers
>>>> of that
>>>> >>> transition to adulthood.
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> Many thanks!
>>>> >>> -sundari
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> --
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> Sundari Johansen Hurwitt
>>>> >>> sundari.johansen at gmail.com
>>>> >>> sjohansen at ciis.edu
>>>> >>> she/her
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> _______________________________________________
>>>> >>> INDOLOGY mailing list
>>>> >>> INDOLOGY at list.indology.info
>>>> >>> indology-owner at list.indology.info (messages to the list's managing
>>>> >>> committee)
>>>> >>> http://listinfo.indology.info (where you can change your list
>>>> options or
>>>> >>> unsubscribe)
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> This message is from an external sender. Learn more about why this
>>>> <<
>>>> >>> matters at https://links.utexas.edu/rtyclf.
>>>> <<
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> _______________________________________________
>>>> >>> INDOLOGY mailing list
>>>> >>> INDOLOGY at list.indology.info
>>>> >>> indology-owner at list.indology.info (messages to the list's managing
>>>> >>> committee)
>>>> >>> http://listinfo.indology.info (where you can change your list
>>>> options or
>>>> >>> unsubscribe)
>>>> >>>
>>>> >> _______________________________________________
>>>> >> INDOLOGY mailing list
>>>> >> INDOLOGY at list.indology.info
>>>> >> indology-owner at list.indology.info (messages to the list's managing
>>>> >> committee)
>>>> >> http://listinfo.indology.info (where you can change your list
>>>> options or
>>>> >> unsubscribe)
>>>> >>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Martin Straube
>>>> Research Fellow in Pali Lexicography
>>>> Pali Text Society
>>>>
>>>> Philipps-Universität Marburg
>>>> Indologie und Tibetologie
>>>> Deutschhausstrasse 12
>>>> 35032 Marburg
>>>> Germany
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> INDOLOGY mailing list
>>>> INDOLOGY at list.indology.info
>>>> indology-owner at list.indology.info (messages to the list's managing
>>>> committee)
>>>> http://listinfo.indology.info (where you can change your list options
>>>> or unsubscribe)
>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> PLEASE post to this list ONLY from an email account that has been
>>> subscribed.
>>> PLEASE use a signature with your full name and institutional affiliation.
>>>
>>> RISA-L mailing list
>>> RISA-L at lists.sandiego.edu
>>> https://lists.sandiego.edu/mailman/listinfo/risa-l
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> PLEASE post to this list ONLY from an email account that has been
>> subscribed.
>> PLEASE use a signature with your full name and institutional affiliation.
>>
>> RISA-L mailing list
>> RISA-L at lists.sandiego.edu
>> https://lists.sandiego.edu/mailman/listinfo/risa-l
>>
> _______________________________________________
> PLEASE post to this list ONLY from an email account that has been
> subscribed.
> PLEASE use a signature with your full name and institutional affiliation.
>
> RISA-L mailing list
> RISA-L at lists.sandiego.edu
> https://lists.sandiego.edu/mailman/listinfo/risa-l
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://list.indology.info/pipermail/indology/attachments/20200905/7446edd9/attachment.htm>