Misplaced Pages

#711288

106-572: Origins of Svayaṃvara can be traced back to the Vedic period and few scholars suggest that it emerged from the Gāndharva marriage tradition , diverging from more ritualistic and arranged forms of marriage, and developed as a narrative device within the epics to highlight the heroism and valor of protagonists, aligning with the Kṣatriya ethos of competition and martial prowess. Despite being closely associated with

212-495: A dakṣiṇā , had a Svayaṃvara, but chose instead to live in the forest and embrace ascetism. Subhadrā's situation was also discussed in the context of Svayaṃvara, with Kṛṣṇa advising Arjuna to abduct (elope) her rather than rely on a traditional Svayaṃvara. Additionally, Devikā and Vijayā chose Yudhiṣṭhira and Sahadeva in their respective Svayaṃvara, while Bhīma won Valandharā 's hand in marriage at her Vīryaśulkā . The daughter of King Citrāngada of Kaliṅga , rejects

318-547: A Svayaṃvara in the traditional sense, this story reflects a different form of marriage, where the woman takes the initiative, showing a variation on the theme of marriage choice. Scholars note that Svayaṃvara is conspicuously absent from the traditional lists of eight marriage types in the Dharmaśāstra , such as the Manusmṛti , though a version of it is described in the texts. Brockington also comments that absence of Svayaṃvara in

424-419: A clear indication of his divine favor and destiny as the upholder of dharma. Following Rāma’s success, King Janaka was overjoyed and immediately offered Sītā to Rāma. However, Rāma, in adherence to the cultural norms of the time, sought the permission of his father, King Daśaratha of Ayodhyā, before accepting Sītā as his wife. Once Daśaratha gave his consent, the marriage was arranged with great ceremony, marking

530-546: A girl to choose her husband in the Manusmṛti to be a significant contradiction within a legal code otherwise intent on enforcing female dependence, and raises the question of why such independence would be granted under a system aimed at preserving women’s dependence. Professor Arti Dhand clarifies this question through the concepts of pravṛtti dharma and nivṛtti dharma . In this framework, pravṛtti dharma encourages active participation in worldly life, placing high importance on

636-410: A grand public event but rather a legal provision that allows a maiden the right to choose her husband if her father or guardian fails to arrange her marriage within a specified period after she reaches puberty. This period, as outlined in various Smṛtis such as the Manusmṛti and Yājñavalkya Smṛti , is generally three years or three menstrual cycles. Sternbach explains that this provision underscores

742-466: A key event that reinforces Draupadī’s central role in the cosmic and dharmic order of the epic. M.J. Kashalikar adds that different cultural and religious retellings, such as Jain texts , portray the Svayaṃvara with variations, reflecting diverse interpretations of her role. V.S. Sukthankar notes that few aspects of Draupadī’s Svayaṃvara , although potentially a later addition, is structurally essential to

848-527: A place or purpose, Ambā returns to Hastināpura, only to be refused by Bhīṣma, who tells her that she cannot marry Vicitravīrya after having declared her love for another man. This event leads Amba to vow revenge against Bhīṣma, which becomes a significant subplot in the Mahābhārata . The Svayaṃvaras of the Kāśī princesses, particularly Ambā, are pivotal in the Mahābhārata . Ambā's confusion about whether her Svayaṃvara

954-439: A prestigious family was essential because such alliances legitimised claims to land, political power, and further connections. The svayaṃvara ceremony, although appearing to grant the woman agency in choosing her husband, was structured to fit patriarchal norms; it was essentially a ritual in which the woman was ‘gifted’ in marriage. This ceremony underscored the role of the kṣatriya as a primary giver of gifts. According to scholars,

1060-534: A rigorous contest to determine Draupadī’s future husband. The central challenge involves a massive bow that must be strung and used to shoot an arrow at a revolving target while looking at its reflection in water kept beneath—a task requiring extraordinary strength, precision, and focus. The event attracts princes and warriors from across the land, including the Kauravas , Karṇa , and the Pandavas (who are in disguise). Among

1166-452: A series of misfortunes that lead Nala to abandon Damayantī, she is left heartbroken and alone. Believing Nala to be dead, and faced with the prospect of life without him, Damayantī decides to organize another Svayaṃvara . However, this time, the purpose is not merely to find a new husband but to uncover whether Nala is still alive. The conditions she sets for this Svayaṃvara are such that only Nala, disguised as Bahuka, can fulfill them. During

SECTION 10

#1732855733712

1272-411: A suitor after our own heart come to us; may he come to this maiden with fortune; May she be agreeable to suitors, charming at festivals, promptly obtain happiness through a husband. As this comfortable cave (Oh Indra!) furnishing a safe abode hath become pleasing to all life, thus may this woman be a favourite of fortune, well beloved, not at odds with her husband! Do thou ascend

1378-597: A young sage, was chosen by Princess Kamadhyu during her svayaṃvara ceremony. However, envious suitors attacked the couple as they returned to Vimada’s home. Vimada then invoked the Ashvins, who intervened to save them. Chatterjee suggests that this instance of svayaṃvara bears a striking resemblance to those found in the epics. The Mahābhārata , with its extensive narrative scope, features numerous instances of Svayaṃvara , predominantly associated with female protagonists of noble lineage. Svayaṃvara appears approximately 23 times in

1484-469: Is driven by love and personal conviction. Secondly, the involvement of the gods in her first Svayaṃvara underscores the theme of divine intervention in human affairs, a common motif in the Mahābhārata; but unlike other instances, the gods are treated as antagonists in her story. Thirdly, the second Svayaṃvara demonstrates Damayantī's resourcefulness and determination. Faced with the possibility of losing her husband forever, she takes active steps to uncover

1590-404: Is not an evolution from an earlier concept of self-choice granted to women, but rather a distinct form that developed during the epic period of Hinduism , possibly having Indo-European roots. Hopkins also believes that the svayaṃvara may have supplanted an earlier kṣatriya practice of bride abduction, a custom that could occur with or without the bride’s consent. According to Hartmut Scharfe, if

1696-507: Is not only integral to the plot but also symbolizes unity and shared responsibility among the brothers. The significance of Draupadī’s Svayaṃvara extends far beyond the mere act of marriage. It acts as a pivotal catalyst for the myriad conflicts that propel the Mahābhārata' s narrative. This event intensifies the resentment of the Kauravas and Karṇa towards the Pandavas, laying the groundwork for

1802-449: Is only suited for males who are priests, warriors, serving in the military, administrators, nobility and rulers. Baudhayana claims that it is lawful for Vaishya and Shudra. However, he evidently thinks that maidens who make so free are not of much value after all. Narada, yet another ancient scholar who wrote Nāradasmṛti sometime between 100 BC and 400 AD, suggests Gandharva marriage belongs to everyone. Calling it sadharana ; Narada claims

1908-580: Is presented differently in various parts of the Rāmāyaṇa , leading to inconsistencies. Specifically, Robert Goldman points out that while Sītā herself refers to her marriage as a Svayaṃvara in the Ayodhyākāṇḍa, the earlier Bālakāṇḍa presents the event with different details, with the Bālakāṇḍa focusing more on the heroic aspect of the contest and the Ayodhyākāṇḍa presenting a more romanticized and dhārmic version of

2014-623: Is re-emerging. One term for couples choosing their own partners is ' love marriage ' in India which usually means a couple choosing each other of their own accord but in most cases following it up with Hindu wedding rituals. It is also called Gandharva marriage (love marriage)even when the both parents agree to do as arranged marriage but it should be done in careful way in society with no deception if not which will result in Gandharva Dosha However, to that extent 'love marriages' do not fulfill

2120-453: Is seen as an early and exceptional form, possibly reflecting an older tradition of more genuine female autonomy in marriage choices. This episode may reflect the Dharmaśāstra influence, where Svayaṃvara becomes a regulated means to ensure matrimonial compliance, diverging from the valor-centric Kṣatriya tradition. The Harivaṃśa is a significant Sanskrit text that serves as an appendix to

2226-541: The Dharmashastras , and a third form which, aligning with the societal ideals of the kṣatriya class, saw the svayaṃvara evolve into a competitive event, where the bride's choice was frequently influenced by a contest of skill or valour among suitors. Brockington adds a subsequent phase that developed after the contest style, placing greater emphasis on the bride's agency and romantic ideals, as well as Dharmashastra's ordinance to marry. The Sanskrit Dharmashastras ,

SECTION 20

#1732855733712

2332-520: The Ādiparvan (Book of Beginnings) and the Udyogaparvan (Book of Effort). The Kāśī princesses are expected to choose their husbands in their joint ceremony. Bhīṣma , the grand-uncle of the Kuru princes, attends the Svayaṃvara on behalf of his younger brother Vicitravīrya , who is too young and inexperienced to win a bride in combat. At the Svayaṃvara , Bhīṣma overpowers all the suitors and forcibly takes

2438-648: The Ādiparvan (the first book of the Mahābhārata ), 15 times in the Vanaparvan , 6 times in the Udyogaparvan , 3 times in the Dronaparvan , 2 times in the Sāntiparvan , and 1 time each in the Sabha , Bhīṣmaparvan , and Anusāsanaparvans . Draupadī’s Svayaṃvara is the most famous instance in the Mahābhārata . Textual references in the Mahābhārata provide a detailed account of this event. The Ādiparvan describes

2544-516: The Ṛg Veda , the oldest Hindu scripture, and suggests that the custom may have roots in the Indo-European tradition due to its similarity to the tale of Penelope and her many suitors in the Greek poem Odyssey . Alternatively, scholar Heramba Chatterjee Shashtri posits that Svayaṃvara possibly emerged from the Gāndharva form of marriage prevalent in ancient India. The Gāndharva marriage, which

2650-818: The Indian subcontinent was based on consensual acceptance between two people, with no rituals, witnesses or family participation. The marriage of Dushyanta and Shakuntala was a historically celebrated example of this class of marriage. In Hinduism and Buddhism , Gandharvas are male nature spirits and the masculine counterparts of the Apsaras . They are passionate lovers of women and arouse erotic and romantic passion in women. The Smritis of Hinduism recognize eight types of marriage , one of them being Gandharva marriage. The other seven are: Brahma , Daiva , Arya , Prajapatya , Asura , Raksasa and Paisacha . According to Apastamba Grhyasutra , an ancient Hindu literature,

2756-657: The Mahābhārata and only 6 times in the Rāmāyaṇa . The term is predominantly used in the Ādiparvan of the Mahābhārata and the Araṇyakāṇḍa of the Rāmāyaṇa , both of which experienced substantial expansion during the later epic phase. Thus, according to John L Brockington, "the term seems to belong not so much to the earliest, heroic phase of the epics' development as to the next, more aesthetically and even romantically motivated phase and in fact to have become much less common by

2862-696: The Mahābhārata , providing additional details about the lives of the Yādava dynasty and the divine aspects of the Kṛṣṇa's life. It expands upon and complements the main narrative of the Mahābhārata by offering enriched stories and supplementary episodes, thus playing a crucial role in the development of the epic's overarching themes and characters. In the Harivamśa , the portrayal of Svayaṃvara reveals an evolving narrative that emphasizes female autonomy. The text provides accounts of two significant Svayaṃvaras involving members of

2968-484: The Svayaṃvara of Sāvitrī, along with Damayantī, as one of the more unusual and poignant instances of this practice, primarily because it closely adheres to the literal meaning of Svayaṃvara—self-choice—rather than the more common contest-based selection of a husband seen in other instances. In the story, when Savitrī, the renowned daughter of King Aśvapati of Mādra , reaches marriageable age, no suitor comes forward to ask for her hand, intimidated by her divine qualities and

3074-455: The Svayaṃvara through hearsay, introduces a personal and emotional dimension, shifting from traditional heroic ideals to a more individualistic and romantic view. Brockington views this Svayaṃvara as a transitional phase in the portrayal of Svayaṃvaras , contrasting with Draupadī’s focus on martial prowess. The narrative of the Kāśī princesses— Ambā , Ambikā , and Ambālikā —particularly appears in

3180-457: The bow of Śiva to win Sītā . The third type, Śauryaśulka Svayaṃvara , involved a contest or challenge for the bride’s hand, exemplified by Arjuna’s marriage to Draupadī . Svayamvara was conducted after a royal girl reached puberty, or attained maidenhood. In Sanskrit literature, the svayamvara follows a highly structured sequence, as outlined by Linguist Stephanie Jamison: While the svayamvara

3286-481: The svayamvara was also a potential source of conflict and violence in many cases, often placing the bride’s family in a precarious situation. Rejected suitors were sometimes hostile, and tales of retaliatory violence are prominent in epic and classical poetry. For example, after Indumatī’s svayamvara in Kālidāsa’s Raghuvaṃśa , suitors ambush the newlyweds, leading to a dramatic confrontation resolved only by

Svayamvara - Misplaced Pages Continue

3392-430: The Ṛg Veda contains indirect references to Svayaṃvara through specific words and phrases that indicate the presence of this institution. One of the key terms she discusses is " vrá -", which she proposes might be a syncopated form of a feminine noun corresponding to the masculine "varū-", meaning "suitor" or "chooser." This term could refer to a "female chooser," implying a woman who selects her husband, which aligns with

3498-629: The Bengal Saddar Court. In 1930, Justice Abdur Rahim held that the marriage in Gandharva form was not valid in India. This ruling came from the Madras High Court, with the statement that amongst the Hindus, the Gandharva form of marriage was obsolete (as of 1930). This was appealed based on the fact that the case was in court is proof that Gandharva weddings among Hindus is not obsolete. In 1946,

3604-697: The Kṣatriya right to seize brides by force over the Svayaṃvara’s intended purpose. This reflects the tension between dharma and heroic ideals, with Bhīṣma’s actions having significant consequences for Amba, who later seeks revenge and becomes Śikhaṇḍī, playing a crucial role in Bhīṣma's death. Vanita Ruth discusses how Amba’s story illustrates the limitations of women’s agency and the tragic outcomes of male-dominated decisions and emphasizes how women were often treated as prizes in political and familial strategies. In addition to

3710-825: The Mahabharata published in 2008 and numerous articles on topics such as "Engendering Brahmanirvanam in the Mahabharata: A Conversation between Suka and Sulabha," "Hinduism and Pedagogy: Teaching Hinduism to Hindus in the Canadian Diaspora," and "The Subversive Nature of Dharma in the Mahabharata : A Tale of Women, Smelly Ascetics, and God." She was a key speaker at the 2005 conference of the London School of Oriental and African Studies . The SOAS also commends her scholarly works in her chosen field of research. Arti Dhand has

3816-597: The Patna High Court in Kamani Devi v. Kameshwar Singh, ILR 25 Pat 58 = (AIR 1946 Pat 316) held that the relationship of husband and wife, created by Gandharva marriage is binding. The husband, the court ruled, cannot escape his responsibility of financially caring for his wife married in Gandharva form. The Patna High Court went further and held that the celebration of Gandharva form of marriage must be attended with nuptial rites and ceremonies including Homa (invocation before

3922-480: The Vedas, state that actual historical records of Svayaṃvara customs are rare, and they contend that by the early Common Era it functioned more as a literary device in the epics than as a commonly practiced tradition. In the epic narratives of the Mahābhārata and Rāmāyaṇa (c. 500 BCE–500 CE), the Svayaṃvara is depicted as a knightly, splendid, and festive ceremony, which, according to Indologist Edward W. Hopkins ,

4028-508: The Yādava dynasty. Rukmiṇī 's Svayaṃvara, found in Appendix 20, though unconventional, involved her being abducted by Kṛṣṇa, whom she had already chosen in her heart. Rukmi’s daughter (Rukmiṇī's niece) held a Svayaṃvara where she selected Pradyumna , Kṛṣṇa's son, as her husband. In contrast to the Mahābhārata , Svayaṃvara in the Rāmāyaṇa is less frequent, with the term appearing six times in

4134-480: The background of the forward thinking of the present law givers. The possibility of legal validity of this form of marriage in the whole of India in near future even without being backed by custom, is too notorious to be ignored. In a sense, Gandharva form of marriage is trying to come back very fast (in India), pushing parental domination to the background." In modern India, particularly in urban regions, Gandharva marriage

4240-414: The bow by the "breadth of a hair". Arjuna, disguised as a Brahmin (priest caste), then takes up the challenge. Despite his incognito appearance, Arjuna's inherent skill and divine favor enable him to accomplish the task with ease. He successfully strings the bow and hits the target, winning Draupadī's hand in marriage. The victory of Arjuna, a Kṣatriya warrior disguised as a Brahmin, sparks outrage among

4346-437: The bridegroom’s strategic use of a magic arrow. Scholars also observe that, despite its literal meaning, most svayaṃvaras did not provide complete freedom of choice to the bride. According to Shakambari Jayal, svayaṃvara may have allowed for some degree of preference rather than full autonomy in choosing a spouse. According to Schmidt, despite the ceremony’s premise of self-choice, it is apparent in many literary accounts that

Svayamvara - Misplaced Pages Continue

4452-436: The choice was sometimes predetermined or at least heavily influenced by the family. In agreement with Schmidt, Jamison warns that the term "svayamvara" misleadingly suggests the girl has independent control, whereas her autonomy is significantly restricted. The father manages the proceedings, including inviting suitors and determining their eligibility. Few svayamvaras genuinely allow for free choice; instead, they typically follow

4558-428: The classical literature is that Gandharva marriage ignores the sacred rituals and vows the groom and bride must make to each other. Such a marriage, argued those ancient Vedic scholars, may or may not be lasting since it did not involve Agni. Over time, Gandharva marriages were either opposed or done with the use of Agni to ensure the longevity of the marriage through vows. Manu goes on to state that Gandharva marriage

4664-460: The commonly described marriage type was Gandharva, where the woman and the man had met each other in their ordinary village life, or in various other places such as regional festivals and fairs, begun to enjoy each other's company, and decided to be together. This free choice and mutual attraction were generally approved by their kinsmen. A passage in the Atharvaveda suggests that parents usually let

4770-432: The competitors, Karṇa, known for his unmatched archery skills, steps forward to attempt the challenge. However, Draupadī, who is granted a degree of choice in the matter, rejects Karṇa, citing his low birth as a sūta (charioteer), though this scene is not universally agreed upon in various recensions of the text. There are variations regarding Karṇa's participation; many renditions of the text describe him failing to string

4876-400: The concept of Svayaṃvara . For example, Jamison analyzes the phrase " svayaṃ sā varūte " (she chooses for herself) as a possible underlying expression in the Ṛg Veda . Although this formula does not appear overtly in the text, Jamison argues that it might exist in a more subtle, encoded form, suggesting that the concept of a maiden choosing her own husband was known in Vedic society. One of

4982-504: The concept of choice (central to Svayaṃvara ) was so embedded in the culture that it could be creatively manipulated by the poets. Jamision also cites that the passage the wedding of Sarañyu , mentioned in Rigveda 10.17.1, is a clear example of Svayaṃvara . James Talboys Wheeler also recognised the presence of Svayaṃvaras in the Ṛg Veda, citing the example of Svayaṃvara of Sūryā and Vimada. Ancient scholar Sāyaṇa explains that Vimada,

5088-812: The criterion of Gandharva marriage but the English term 'live-in relationship' arrives at the closest co-relate wherein the parents', state's and religion's word is irrelevant. Arti Dhand Arti Dhand is an associate professor at the University of Toronto , Department for the Study of Religion. She specialises in the Mahabharata and the Ramayana Hindu epics, Hindu ethics, gender issues in Hinduism , and religion and sexuality. She has authored several publications including Woman as Fire, Woman as Sage: Sexual Ideology in

5194-430: The cultural values of the time, particularly the emphasis on strength and valor in choosing a husband, as well as the father’s role in arranging marriages. The bow of Śiva, central to the contest, symbolizes the weight of dharma, which Rāma, as an avatar of Vishnu , is destined to uphold. Textual references from the Rāmāyaṇa underscore the significance of this event. Sītā, when recounting her marriage to Anasūyā later in

5300-497: The daughter freely select her lover and directly encouraged her in being forward in affairs of the heart. The mother of the girl thought of the time when the daughter's developed youth ( Pativedanam , post-puberty), that she would win a husband for herself, it was a smooth and happy sort of affair with nothing scandalous and unnatural about it. The translated version of the Atharvaveda (Strikaratâni, ii.36) passage is: May (Oh Agni!)

5406-485: The descriptions of Damayantī, also desires to marry her. King Bhīma invites kings and princes from across the land to participate in the Svayaṃvara . Among the suitors are not only human princes but also several gods who have disguised themselves as Nala to win Damayantī’s hand. The gods include Indra , Agni , Varuṇa , and Yama , who, despite their divine status, are unable to sway Damayantī’s heart away from Nala. When

SECTION 50

#1732855733712

5512-403: The desired man and maintaining propriety throughout the process. Scholars note that most instances of Svayamvara are found in the epics, but actual historical cases are rare. Gandharva marriage A Gandharva marriage ( Sanskrit : गान्धर्व विवाह, gāndharva vivāha , IPA : [gənd̪ʱərvə vɪvaːhə]) is one of the eight classical types of Hindu marriage . This ancient marriage tradition from

5618-616: The entire epic four in Ayodhyākāṇḍa , and one each in the Bālakāṇḍa and the Yuddhakāṇḍa . The Rāmāyaṇa emphasizes the moral and divine aspects of marriage, contrasting with the more martial and heroic portrayal in the Mahābhārata . Sītā’s Svayaṃvara is a critical event in the Rāmāyaṇa , narrated in the Ayodhyākāṇḍa of the text. Organized by King Janaka of Mithilā , the Svayaṃvara

5724-448: The epic svayaṃvara reflects an authentic tradition among kṣatriyas , it may have served as a mechanism for alleviating political pressures associated with marriage alliances. In a social class where marriages were commonly arranged to secure political alliances, often with limited consideration for the preferences of the bride, the svayaṃvara allowed the woman a degree of autonomy in choosing her husband. Alternatively, she might yield to

5830-433: The epic authors do not classify it as a "svayaṃvara." The portrayal of svayaṃvara in the Rāmāyaṇa , particularly regarding Sītā , shifts to a more religious and moral framework, emphasising the divinity of the protagonist Rāma . The concept of svayaṃvara continued to evolve in later Indian literature, often highlighting the bride’s autonomy or divine intervention. Stories such as those of Damayantī and Rukmiṇī , written in

5936-467: The epic, refers to it as a Svayaṃvara, emphasizing the traditional elements of choice and valor that defined the event (Rām. 2.110.47-52). Additionally, the description of the bow and the challenge it posed is detailed in the Bālakāṇḍa of the Rāmāyaṇa , where Janaka explicitly states that Sītā will marry only the man who can string the bow (Rām. 1.65-70). Scholars note that the account of Sītā’s Svayaṃvara

6042-506: The epic, setting the stage for the conflicts and alliances that drive the narrative. Damayantī ’s Svayaṃvara is another prominent instance in the Mahābhārata . Her story is distinct within the epic because it involves not just one, but two Svayaṃvaras , illustrating that Svayaṃvaras could be held more than one time for a bride. Textual references in the Mahābhārata provide a detailed account of Damayantī’s Svayaṃvara . The episodes involving her first Svayaṃvara , her interactions with

6148-401: The epics, Svayaṃvara is not list as a form of marriage in the Dharmaśāstra , a collection of Sanskrit texts on law and conduct. Due to this, Svayaṃvara is sometimes regarded as the ninth form of Hindu marriage. The term Svayaṃvara is derived from Sanskrit , where it is composed of two parts: "s vayam " (स्वयम्) meaning "self" and "v ara " (वर) meaning "choice" or "desire." Therefore,

6254-399: The event, Damayantī recognizes Nala despite his disguise, and it restores their marriage and reaffirms their bond. Damayantī’s Svayaṃvara is significant for several reasons. It is one of the rare instances in the Mahābhārata where the bride’s personal choice is crucial to the marriage. Unlike other Svayaṃvaras that emphasize the suitors' valor or the father's decision, Damayantī’s choice

6360-524: The events as they are narrated in the Bālakāṇḍa, indicating that the Rāmāyaṇa may have undergone textual evolution, with later additions or modifications affecting the consistency of the narrative. Another instance is the Svayaṃvara of the daughters of King Kuśanābha , mentioned in the Balakāṇḍa of the Rāmāyaṇa . When approached by the god Vāyu , the daughters refuse his advances, stating that their father will arrange their Svayaṃvara. This episode emphasizes

6466-410: The events. The word Svayaṃvara is never used in the Bālakāṇḍa; instead, the term "vīryaśulka" (prize of heroism) is repeatedly used to describe Sītā. This term contrasts with Sītā’s later description of her marriage as a Svayaṃvara in the Ayodhyākāṇḍa, where the emphasis is on her being given away by her father, Janaka. Goldman argues that Sītā's recounting in the Ayodhyākāṇḍa does not align perfectly with

SECTION 60

#1732855733712

6572-579: The evidence is too indirect and that the Ṛg Veda does not provide a clear picture of the Svayaṃvara as an established institution. He suggests that the Ṛg Vedic poets may have been more concerned with cosmic and symbolic themes than with depicting real social institutions. Schmidt proposed that though svayamvara is not present in the Vedas, but the custom reflects an older Indic custom with Indo-European parallels, particularly in Zoroastrian Iran. However, scholars such as Stephanie W. Jamison , suggest that

6678-526: The failed expectations of the Svayaṃvara and Śālva’s inability to win play significant roles in Amba’s misfortune, highlighting the limited autonomy of the princesses, who are portrayed as passive in their destinies. Scholarly assessments characterize this event as a violent assertion of power rather than a genuine Svayaṃvara where the bride has true choice. Bhīṣma’s actions disrupt the conventional contest among suitors, and he justifies his actions by prioritizing

6784-487: The father's role in deciding marriage, with the daughters showing obedience to patriarchal norms. This Svayaṃvara does not actually result in a contest but underscores the theme of parental control over marriage choices, contrasting with the supposed freedom of choice implied in the Svayaṃvara tradition. In the same section, the Rāmāyaṇa tells the tale of Somadā, a Gandharvī who persuades the sage Cūlina to marry her. While not

6890-411: The full, inexhaustible ship of fortune to bring hither to this woman the suitor who shall be agreeable to thee. Bring hither by thy shouts (Oh lord of wealth!) the suitor – bend his mind towards her. Turn thou the attention of every agreeable suitor to her. In Mahabharata , one of two major epics of Hindus, Rishi Kanva, the foster father of Shakuntala , recommends Gandharva marriage with

6996-572: The gods, and her recognition of Nala are found in the Vana Parva (Mbh. 3.51-62), while the second Svayaṃvara and her reunion with Nala are described in the later sections of the same parva (Mbh. 3.68-72). The first Svayaṃvara of Damayantī is organized by her father, King Bhīma, after he becomes aware of her deep affection for Nala, the king of Nishadha . Damayantī, having heard of Nala's virtues and character through messengers, falls in love with him even before meeting him. Nala, equally enchanted by

7102-453: The idea of Svayaṃvara . The Ṛg Vedic poets often engage in formulaic play and metonymy, where different elements are substituted within a familiar formula. For example, in some hymns, the "chariot" of the Aśvins is chosen instead of the suitors themselves, indicating the close association between the vehicle and the husband in the wedding ritual. This kind of metonymic substitution suggests that

7208-430: The influence of local cultural contexts and the specific narrative priorities of diverse communities. For instance, some South Indian versions might place greater emphasis on divine intervention and Kṛṣṇa's role, whereas northern recensions may highlight different aspects. In certain versions, the focus might be on Draupadī’s autonomy and the implications of her marriage to the five Pandavas, while others might concentrate on

7314-453: The later phase of the epic era, illustrate a shift towards individual agency and romantic ideals. Svayamvara remained as a significant plot device in many classical and mediaeval literature such as Kālidāsa ’s Raghuvaṃśa and Chand Bardai 's Prithviraj Raso . Scholars tend to classify the self-choice ceremony in the Hindu literature into two broad categories: According scholar Vettam Mani ,

7420-416: The law books of Hinduism , such as the Manusmṛti (c. 1st century CE), permit a girl to choose her own husband if her father fails to arrange her marriage within three years after her first menses. Although this is very different from the ritualised and grand customs termed as "Svayaṃvaras," many scholars consider it as a sub-type of the custom, granted to girls of all castes. Jamison finds the allowance for

7526-468: The list has led to the classification of it as the ninth form of marriage. P.V. Kane and Heramba Chatterjee suggest that the Svayaṃvara may have been a later addition to the canon of marriage practices, possibly arising from less formalized traditions like the Gāndharva marriage , a form of marriage recognized in Smṛti literature that is based on mutual consent and affection. Ludwik Sternbach explains that

7632-451: The most compelling pieces of evidence for the Svayaṃvara in the Ṛg Veda is found in the marriage of Sūryā, the daughter of the Sun. This myth, which is prominently featured in the Ṛg Vedic marriage hymn (X.85), serves as a divine model for human marriage and is often interpreted as reflecting a Svayaṃvara scenario. In this hymn, Sūryā is depicted as choosing her husband from among the gods, with

7738-770: The next phase again (that of the Śānti and Anusāsana parvans of the Mahābhārata and the Bāla and Uttara kāṇḍas of the Rāmāyaṇa ), with its more moral and religious emphasis". The origins of the Svayaṃvara are somewhat ambiguous, with scholars tracing the practice back to the early Vedic period (c. 1500–1100 BCE). Historian Hanns-Peter Schmidt suggests that its origins may lie in ancient Indic customs with parallels in Indo-European tradition , as seen in Zoroastrian Iran . In support of this, linguist Stephanie W. Jamison notes several indirect references to Svayaṃvara in

7844-440: The only methods of marriage that are wrong are those that are based on abduction, forced, violence, fraud or purchase. There is no consensus theory to explain why Gandharva marriages have declined over the ages. One theory claims that as prosperity and wealth increased, parents sought greater control of the activities and social life of their children. Pandey claims Hindu ideology shifted from diversity of marriage types to where

7950-448: The ordinary Svayaṃvara in Smṛti literature is not a formalized or celebrated event as seen in epics but rather a legal provision that grants a maiden the right to choose her husband under specific circumstances. distinguishing it from the more celebrated and dramatic Svayaṃvaras depicted in ancient Indian epics. Sternbach identifies an "ordinary Svayaṃvara" within the Smṛti texts, which is not

8056-542: The ordinary Svayaṃvara is closely linked to this concept, reflecting similar values of personal choice and agency. However, the Smṛtis emphasize that this autonomy is exercised within limits, ensuring that the marriage conforms to societal norms. Sternbach further discusses how the Smṛtis provide practical guidelines on how a woman should proceed with her choice if she finds herself in this situation, including instructions on approaching

8162-400: The other suitors, particularly the Kauravas and Karṇa. Upon returning to their mother Kuntī with Draupadī, Arjuna and his brothers inadvertently place her in a situation where she becomes the common wife of all five Pandavas. This unusual marital arrangement, while rooted in a misunderstanding, is sanctioned by divine and scriptural reasoning within the epic. Draupadī’s marriage to the Pandavas

8268-447: The outcome of a skill-based competition, which relieved her father of the responsibility of choosing a suitor, thereby avoiding potential conflicts with powerful neighbouring rulers. In the epics, the grand Svayaṃvaras function as significant narrative devices leading to the marriages of several female protagonists. Brockington asserts that the original svayaṃvaras in these epics are centred on valour, such as Draupadi’s svayaṃvara, which

8374-483: The political ramifications of the Svayaṃvara , especially in relation to the Kauravas. Scholars like J.L. Brockington and V.S. Sukthankar emphasize that Draupadī's Svayaṃvara is a quintessential example of the Kṣatriya ideal of heroism and valor. The contest where Arjuna wins Draupadī’s hand by hitting a target reflects the epic’s emphasis on martial prowess. Alf Hiltebeitel highlights the mythological and ritual symbolism of Draupadī’s Svayaṃvara , interpreting it as

8480-573: The practical concerns of ensuring timely marriages and the importance of procreation in ancient Indian society, which viewed remaining unmarried as socially and religiously undesirable. In terms of conditions and restrictions, Sternbach notes that while the ordinary Svayaṃvara grants the maiden some autonomy, her choice is still governed by societal expectations. The Smṛtis require that the chosen husband be of equal caste and rank, blameless in character, and suitable in terms of family background, age, health, and other qualities. This ensures that even though

8586-425: The preparation for the Svayaṃvara , the gathering of suitors, and the specific details of the contest (Mbh. 1.174-185). Draupadī herself refers to the event in later parts of the epic, indicating its lasting importance in her life and the broader story (Mbh. 2.62.4a). Draupadī is the daughter of King Drupada of Pāñcāla . King Drupada organizes a Svayaṃvara to find a suitable husband for his daughter. He sets up

8692-425: The previously listed more famous instances, several other instances of Svayaṃvara are attested in the Mahābhārata . Kuntī participated in a Svayaṃvara arranged by her father, where she chose Pāṇḍu as her husband out of the crowd of suitors. Devakī , the mother of Kṛṣṇa , had a Svayaṃvara that is mentioned in the epic, though details are sparse. Mādhavī , after being passed among various kings by Galava to fulfill

8798-420: The prince of Ayodhyā , at the Svayaṃvara marked a turning point in the event. Accompanied by his brother Lakṣmaṇa and the sage Viśvāmitra , Rāma stepped forward at Viśvāmitra’s encouragement. To the astonishment of everyone present, Rāma effortlessly lifted the bow, strung it, and broke it in half, thereby winning Sītā's hand in marriage. This act was not only a demonstration of Rāma’s physical strength but also

8904-404: The procreative potential of men and women. As Dhand explains, pravṛtti dharma seeks to maximise the reproductive capacity of individuals, revealing a driving logic behind the svayaṃvara: a practical emphasis on ensuring women’s marital and reproductive roles are fulfilled, particularly when their parents have neglected to arrange a timely marriage. Many scholars, though accepting its existence in

9010-412: The rivalry that ultimately leads to the great Kurukṣetra war . Moreover, Draupadī’s Svayaṃvara underscores profound themes of fate, dharma , and divine intervention in human affairs. Her marriage to the Pandavas is not just a personal union but a fulfillment of a destiny intricately shaped by her past life and divine will. The Svayaṃvara also varies significantly across different recensions, reflecting

9116-457: The sacred fire) and Saptapadi (the taking of seven steps by the groom and the bride together) for its validity. This ruling was cited in a decision by the Supreme Court in the case of Bhaurao v. State of Maharashtra. In a 1974 case, Justice Mukherji noted, "Gandharva form of marriage should not be regarded as concubinage or quasi-marital union, more so in the context of the modern Society and in

9222-456: The scripture Devī Bhāgavatapurāṇa classifies Svayaṃvara into three types. The first, Icchā Svayaṃvara , allowed the bride complete freedom to choose her husband based on her preference. It involved an assembly at which the bride-to-be simply chooses between her suitors, with Damayantī’s Svayaṃvara being a prime example. The second type, Savyavasthā Svayaṃvara , required the suitor to meet specific qualifications, such as Rāma drawing

9328-400: The social pressures compelled the girl's family to seek arranged early marriages. Yet another theory is that the priestly caste of India, who officiated Brahma marriages and religious ceremonies, over time crafted rules that declared Gandharva marriage for most Hindus as inappropriate and disapproved ( aprasasta ). In 1817, Gandharva marriages in India were ruled legal for some social groups by

9434-481: The statement “ The marriage of a desiring woman with a desiring man, without religious ceremonies, is the best marriage .” Elsewhere in Mahabharata (iii:190.36), the epic says “ No man any longer asks for the daughter, nor does a father give away his daughter, they (women) find the man for themselves .” Gandharva marriage over time became controversial, disputed and debated. Majority of ancient scholars discouraged it on religious and moral grounds. One argument found in

9540-443: The suitor Duryodhana (antagonist of the epic) by walking past him. Despite her clear refusal, Duryodhana, driven by pride and with help from Karṇa , forcibly abducts her. This event is notable as it is the only instance in the Mahābhārata where a bride is taken against her will. Although not explicitly termed as Svayaṃvara, academics comment that the narrative of Sāvitrī 's marriage closely aligns with its principles. They discuss

9646-459: The term literally translates to "self-choice". The term "Svayaṃvara" specifically refers to the formal ceremony of selecting a groom in the Sanskrit epics. It's important to note that in certain significant instances where the bride chooses a husband independently, without a formal ceremony, the term "Svayaṃvara" is not used—such as in the case of Sāvitrī choosing Satyavan. The term appears 52 times in

9752-554: The three princesses back to Hastināpura . This action aligns with the Rākṣasa form of marriage, where a bride is taken by force after defeating her other suitors. Upon their return, Ambā, the eldest sister, reveals that she was already in love with Śālva, the king of Saubha, and had intended to marry him. Hearing this, Bhīṣma, adhering to his vow of celibacy, allows Ambā to go to Śālva. However, when Ambā reaches Śālva, he rejects her, citing his dishonor in being defeated by Bhīṣma. Left without

9858-411: The time comes for her to make her choice, Damayantī, guided by her unwavering love, identifies Nala among the disguised gods. Her devotion is so strong that even the gods, recognizing her steadfast love and purity, bless the union instead of opposing it. Thus, Damayantī chooses Nala as her husband. The second Svayaṃvara occurs under much different circumstances and is unique in the epic's context. After

9964-574: The truth and restore her marriage, showing both agency and resilience. This second Svayaṃvara also adds depth to her character, portraying her not just as a passive recipient of fate but as an individual capable of shaping her destiny. Scholars describe it as a Svayaṃvara true to its literal meaning, where the bride enjoys full autonomy without paternal influence. They have noted that Damayantī’s Svayaṃvara exemplifies this ideal, with Thomas Parkhill discussing its romanticized narrative. Parkhill highlights that Damayantī’s love for Nala, established before

10070-451: The twin Aśvins being her primary suitors. Jamison points out that the repeated references to Sūryā's choice, the involvement of the Aśvins, and the emphasis on the chariot (a key element in the wedding) suggest a ritualized form of Svayaṃvara . She also notes that the Ṛg Veda uses the verb " vṛṇīta " (chooses) in contexts that imply a maiden’s active selection of her husband, further supporting

10176-514: The union in line with social expectations. Scholars observe that the svayamvara format appears to be restricted to royal daughters of the Kshatriya caste. However, a few instances of inter-caste unions are recorded, though these often led to conflict and disapproval. Historian Romila Thapar notes that svayamvaras were frequently seen as status symbols among royal families, who used them to enhance their social standing. Thapar argues that marriage into

10282-403: The union of two of the most revered figures in Hindu tradition. The Svayaṃvara of Sītā holds significant importance in the Rāmāyaṇa for several reasons. Firstly, it highlights Rāma’s role as a divinely ordained hero, whose actions are guided by higher powers. His victory in the contest is portrayed as not just a feat of strength but as a fulfillment of his destiny. Secondly, the event reinforces

10388-454: The virtue she possessed. Her father, concerned by this, instructs her to find a husband herself—a directive that perfectly aligns with the etymological essence of the term "Svayaṃvara". Savitrī travels on a chariot alone in search of a suitable match, which is unusual given the strict societal norms for women. Finally she finds her match in Satyavan, the son of a blind, exiled king. This Svayaṃvara

10494-485: The vīryaśulka model, where suitors compete in tests of valor set by the father, culminating in the girl selecting a "winner." This process resolves the father's concerns but leaves little room for the daughter’s independent decision-making. The Ṛg Veda , being one of the oldest and most enigmatic texts in Indian literature, provides limited direct evidence for Svayaṃvara . Some scholars, such as Hanns-Peter Schmidt, argue that

10600-468: The woman chooses her own husband in Gandharva marriage. They meet each other of their own accord, consent to live together, and their relationship is consummated in copulation born of passion. This form of marriage did not require consent of parents or anyone else. According to Vedic texts, this is one of earliest and common forms of marriage in Rig Vedic times. In Rig vedic opinions and classical literature,

10706-422: The woman is exercising her right to choose, her choice aligns with and reinforces the established social hierarchy. The ordinary Svayaṃvara thus serves as a corrective measure, allowing a woman to marry if her guardian fails in his duties, but still within a controlled framework that upholds social order. Sternbach also draws a connection between the ordinary Svayaṃvara and the Gāndharva vivāha . He suggests that

10812-402: Was based on mutual consent and romantic choice, might have provided the conceptual foundation for the Svayaṃvara . This contrasts with other forms of marriage prevalent in ancient India, such as Arranged Marriage or Sacrificial Marriage. Shashtri further proposes that the development of svayaṃvaras unfolded in three phases—an early form akin to the gāndharva marriage, a second form endorsed by

10918-427: Was designed to find a suitable husband for Sītā , Janaka's daughter, who was renowned for her beauty, virtue, and divine origin. The challenge set for the suitors was to string and break a colossal bow, Pināka , which had once belonged to Lord Śiva . This bow was so formidable that none of the assembled princes and warriors from various kingdoms could even lift it, let alone string and break it. The arrival of Rāma ,

11024-472: Was meant for free choice or as a contest of strength leads to her later resentment and tragic conflict with Bhīṣma. Unlike Ambikā and Ambalikā, who do not object to marrying Bhīṣma's brother, Vichitravīrya, Ambā voices her objections only after reaching Bhīṣma's home. This discrepancy turns the Svayaṃvara into a focal point for assigning blame, with Amba grappling with responsibility—whether it lies with herself, her father, Bhīṣma, or Śālva. The text suggests that

11130-425: Was not a marriage itself, it marked the woman’s selection of a partner, and additional rites often followed to formalize the union. Draupadi’s svayamvara with the Pandavas in the Mahābhārata and Indumati’s in Kālidāsa’s Raghuvaṃśa both culminate in kanyādāna -style weddings. This suggests that, in many contexts, svayamvara served as a preliminary selection process that required subsequent marriage rites to formalize

11236-457: Was written in the early epic phase of the Mahābhārata , where Arjuna , disguised as a brāhmaṇa, wins her hand through an extraordinary display of archery skill. Brockington also observes that the story of Sāvitrī, where her father is unable to find her a husband, leading her to choose one herself, closely aligns with the practices outlined in the Dharmashastra . However, despite this similarity,

#711288