Rammohan Roy on ancient female rights

 

 The "Brief Remarks on Ancient Female Rights" is a tract by Raja Ram Mohan Roy, published in 1822 as part of his Persian journal Mirat-ul-Akhbar, in which he argued for women's property inheritance rights based on ancient Hindu law. This work was one of his many efforts to improve the status of women in Indian society, using scriptural arguments to challenge prevailing social injustices. The text below is simplified from its original version using LLM. The reference link of the origina text is here:

https://cuny.manifoldapp.org/read/raja-rammohun-some-selected-essays-for-sociology/section/9c1f1fb0-22e5-4522-a82a-002f2642ba21

 

Rights of Women to Property (1822)

Brief remarks on how modern laws have taken away the ancient inheritance rights of women

I am writing this to show the public how much our ancient lawmakers cared about the comfort of women. I want to compare the ancient inheritance laws, which allowed women to enjoy their lives, with the modern laws that have slowly taken away almost everything that makes life pleasant for them.

All the ancient lawmakers universally agreed that a mother should get an equal share of her dead husband's property alongside her sons, so she would not have to depend on her children. This is clear from the following quotes:

• Yajnavalkya: "When a father's property is divided after his death, the mother should get a share equal to her sons".
• Katyayana: "When the father dies, the mother should inherit an equal share with the son".
• Narada: "After a husband dies, a mother should receive a share equal to each of his sons".
• Vishnu: "Mothers should receive shares equal to the portions given to the sons".
• Vrihaspati: "After the father's death, a mother is entitled to a share equal to her sons. Step-mothers also get equal shares. Daughters get one-fourth of a son's share".
• Vyasa: "Wives who have no sons get equal shares with their stepsons, and all grandmothers (including mothers and step-mothers) are treated the same as mothers". (Vyasa likely left out birth mothers here because older lawmakers had already made their rights very clear).

Now let us look at the modern lawmakers.

The authors of the Dayabhaga and Dayatattwa (the modern guides to Hindu law in Bengal) have severely restricted these ancient rights. They state that if a father divides his property while he is still alive, he must give equal shares to his childless wives. But if he dies without formally dividing the property, his wives have no claim to it at all. These modern writers twist ancient quotes to mean that step-mothers get absolutely nothing when the sons divide the property after the father's death. They completely ignore the needs of step-mothers, who naturally have less hope of being supported by their step-sons.

According to these modern experts, even a mother with only one son gets no property. Everything goes to the son. If that son dies, the property goes to his son or his wife. The mother is left totally dependent on her son or daughter-in-law. Furthermore, if there are multiple sons, they can rob their mother of her share simply by choosing to live together as a joint family without officially dividing the property.

Some current legal experts have reduced a mother's rights to almost nothing. They rule that if a man dies leaving a widow, sons, and grandsons (whose father is dead), the property is split between the sons and grandsons. The widow gets absolutely no share in this situation.

In short, modern law dictates that a widow gets nothing if she has no children. She gets nothing if she has only one son. She gets nothing if she has multiple sons who refuse to divide the property. She only gets a share if she has two or more surviving sons who willingly decide to divide the property. Because of these strict limits, both mothers and step-mothers are left completely poor, and a widow's right to property only exists in theory, unknown to the general public.

As a result, a woman who is the respected head of the household one day becomes completely dependent on her sons the next day, suffering the insults of her daughters-in-law. She cannot spend a tiny amount of money or give away the cheapest item without permission from the children she used to command. Cruel sons often take their wives' side in family arguments, deeply hurting their dependent mothers. Step-mothers, who are common because polygamy is allowed, are treated even worse and are shamefully neglected by their step-sons.

Hindu widows do not burn themselves on their husbands' funeral pyres just because of religious beliefs. They do it because they see the miserable, insulting lives that other widows are forced to endure daily. This extreme misery makes them stop caring about their own lives, which leads them to commit suicide.

Additionally, because the law no longer requires men to financially support their wives with equal property, it highly encourages polygamy (having many wives). Some high-born Brahmans marry 10, 20, or 30 women just to collect money or satisfy their lust, leaving these women poor and abandoned. Everyone in the native public knows the horrible misery this causes.

After their husbands die, these women only have three choices:

1. Live a miserable life as a total slave to others.
2. Turn to a life of sin and prostitution to survive.
3. Burn to death on their husband's funeral pyre and be praised by their neighbors.

The number of female suicides in Bengal is almost ten times higher than in other provinces. We can easily blame this on the fact that men in Bengal take multiple wives and completely refuse to provide for them.

This extreme polygamy goes completely against ancient laws. Yajnavalkya stated that a man can only take a second wife if his first wife drinks alcohol, has an incurable disease, is deceitful, cannot have children, wastes money, constantly uses offensive language, only gives birth to girls, or openly hates her husband.

• Manu (Chapter 9, Verse 80): "A wife who drinks alcohol, acts immorally, hates her husband, is incurably sick, is mischievous, or wastes property can be replaced by another wife".
• Manu (Chapter 9, Verse 81): "A wife who cannot have children can be replaced in the eighth year; one whose babies all die, in the tenth year; one who only has daughters, in the eleventh year; and one who speaks cruelly can be replaced immediately".
• Manu (Chapter 9, Verse 82): "But a sick wife who is kind and virtuous must never be disgraced, and her husband can only take a second wife if she agrees to it".

If the government required men to prove these accusations to a judge before they were allowed to marry a second wife, the suffering of women and the number of suicides in Bengal would drop significantly.

According to the following ancient authorities, an unmarried daughter is supposed to inherit one-fourth of a son's share:

• Vrihaspati: "Daughters should get one-fourth of the sons' share".
• Vishnu: "Unmarried daughters get shares based on the sons' portions".
• Manu (Chapter 9, Verse 118): "Brothers must give unmarried daughters one-fourth of their own shares. Those who refuse will be condemned".
• Yajnavalkya: "Brothers should purify their sisters by giving them a fourth part of their own inheritance".
• Katyayana: "Unmarried daughters get one-fourth, and sons get three-fourths. If the property is too small to split, the sons keep it but must pay for the sisters' weddings".

However, the modern author of the Dayabhaga completely ignores daughters' rights. He claims they get no property at all, and that the ancient quotes merely suggest brothers should donate money for their sisters' weddings.

Today, many lower-status Brahmans and high-status Kayasthas in Bengal actually use their daughters and sisters to make money. Instead of paying for their weddings, they "sell" the girls to whoever pays the highest dowry. They often marry their female relatives to old, sick, or defective men just for the money, ruining their lives and quickly turning them into widows. This cruel, unmanly practice completely violates the ancient laws of Manu:

• Manu (Chapter 3, Verse 51): "A father must never take money for giving his daughter in marriage. Taking money is the exact same as selling your child".
• Manu (Chapter 9, Verse 98): "Even a lower-class man should not take a fee for his daughter, because that is a secret sale".
• Manu (Chapter 9, Verse 100): "Good people have never approved of selling a daughter under the disguise of a wedding gift".
• Kasapa: "Greedy people who sell their daughters for money are the image of sin and commit a terrible crime".

Both common sense and the law view this practice as human trafficking. Kind-hearted Hindus deeply regret this practice, as well as the fact that modern lawyers have destroyed women's property rights. They hope the government will step in to fix these laws, just as the government successfully fixed cruel criminal laws in the past.

It is heartbreaking to see that daughters in a rich family get absolutely no inheritance if they have even one living brother. At the same time, these girls are often married off to men who already have multiple wives and no money to feed them.

If a widow or daughter tries to fight for her legal rights in court, the native legal experts usually just split into arguing factions. Because lawsuits are incredibly difficult for a native woman to handle, she usually just gives up. If she tries to stay virtuous, she lives in miserable poverty; sadly, many are driven by this desperation into a life of sin.

In 1793, very few European officials knew Sanskrit or Hindu law, so the government hired native Pundits to advise the courts. But today, many European officials understand the law well on their own. It would be much better for Hindu society if these European officials decided inheritance disputes directly.

I am not trying to insult the character of all educated Hindus. I am simply stating that, right now, the native public trusts the honest judgment of European officials more than their own countrymen. However, if native Indians receive the exact same quality of education and moral training as Europeans, I am confident they will become equally trustworthy and respected by everyone.

 

************************************************************************************** 

Translations of the Sanskrit Slokas

(Note: Raja Rammohun Roy included the English translations for these Sanskrit verses directly within the body of his original essay. Here they are matched together for clarity.)

On the Rights of Mothers and Widows to Equal Property:

• Yajnavalkya: पितुरुर्ध्व विभजतां माताप्यंशं समं हरेत्। Translation: “After the death of a father, let a mother also inherit an equal share with her sons in the division of the property left by their father.”
• Katyayana: माता च पितरिप्रेते पुत्रतुल्यांशहारिणी। Translation: “The father being dead, the mother should inherit an equal share with the son.”
• Narada: समाशहारिणी माता पुत्राणां स्यान्मतेपतौ। Translation: “After the death of a husband, a mother should receive a share equal to that of each of his sons.”
• Vishnu: मातरः पुत्रभागानुसारभागहारिण्यः। Translation: “Mothers should be receivers of shares according to the portion allowed to the sons.”
• Vrihaspati: तदभावे तु जननौ तनयांशसमांशिनी। समांशा मातरस्त्वेषां तरीयांशस्त कन्यका:॥ Translation: “After his (the father’s) death a mother, the parent of his sons, should be entitled to an equal share with his sons; their step-mothers also to equal shares; but daughters to a fourth part of the shares of the sons.”
• Vyasa: असुतास्तु पितुः पत्न्यः समानांशाः प्रकीर्तिता:। पितामह्यश्च ताः सर्वा मातृतुल्याःप्रकीर्तिताः॥ Translation: "The wives of a father by whom he has no male issue, are considered as entitled to equal shares with his sons, and all the grand-mothers... are said to be entitled as mothers."

On the Strict Rules for Taking a Second Wife (Polygamy):

• Yajnavalkya: सुरापी व्याधिता धूर्ता वन्ध्यार्थध्न्या प्रियंवदा। स्त्रीप्रसूश्चाधिवेतव्या पुरुषद्वेषिणी तथा॥ Translation: "A second marriage is only authorized under these circumstances: The vice of drinking spirituous liquors. Incurable sickness. Deception. Barrenness. Extravagance. The frequent use of offensive language. Producing only female offsprings. Manifestation of hatred towards her husband."
• Manu (9.80): मद्यपाऽसाधुवृत्ता च प्रतिकूला चया भवेत्। व्याधिता वाऽधिवेत्तव्या हिंस्रारर्थघ्नी च सर्वदा॥ Translation: “A wife who drinks any spirituous liquors, who acts immorally, who shows hatred to her lord, who is incurably diseased, who is mischievous, who wastes his property, may at all times be superseded by another wife."
• Manu (9.81): वन्ध्याष्टमऽधिवेद्याऽन्दे दशमे तु मृतप्रजा। एकादशे स्त्रीजननी सद्यस्त्वप्रियवादिनी॥ Translation: “A barren wife may be superseded by another in the eighth year; she, whose children are all dead, in the tenth; she, who brings forth only daughters, in the eleventh; she, who is accustomed to speak unkindly, without delay."
• Manu (9.82): या रोगिणी स्यात्तुहिता सम्पन्ना चेव शीलतः। सानुज्ञाप्याधिवेतव्या नावमान्या च कहिचित्॥ Translation: "But she, though afflicted with illness, is beloved and virtuous, must never be disgraced, though she may be superseded by another wife with her own consent."

On the Rights of Daughters to 1/4th of the Inheritance:

• Vrihaspati: तुरीयांशास्तु कन्यकाः। Translation: “The daughters should have the fourth part of the portion to which the sons are entitled."
• Vishnu: अनुढ़ाश्च दुहितरः पुत्रभागानुसाराः। Translation: “The rights of unmarried daughters shall be proportioned according to the shares allotted to the sons.’’
• Manu (9.118): स्वेभ्योंऽशेभ्यस्तु कन्याभ्यः प्रदद्युभ्रातिरः पृथक्। स्वात् स्वादंशाच्चतुर्भागं पतिताः स्युरदित्सवः॥ Translation: “To the unmarried daughters let their brothers give portions out of their own allotments respectively. Let each give a fourth part of his own distinct share..."
• Yajnavalkya: चासंस्कृतास्तु संस्कारय्या भ्रातृभिः पूवसस्कृतः ॥ भागिन्यश्च निजादंशादत्वांशन्तु तुरीयकम्॥ Translation: “...let them also purify the sisters by giving them a fourth part of their own portion.”
• Katyayana: कन्यकानामदत्तानां चतुर्थोभाग उच्यते । पुत्राणां च त्रयो भागःस्वाम्य स्वल्पधन स्मृतम्॥ Translation: “A fourth part is declared to be the share of unmarried daughters, and three-fourths of the sons..."

On the Sin of "Selling" Daughters for Dowry/Gratuity:

• Manu (3.51): न कन्यायाः पिताविद्वान् गृहीयात् शुल्कमण्वपि। गृह्न् हि शुल्कं लोभनस्यान्नरोऽपत्यवित्रयी ॥ Translation: “Let no father, who knows the law, receive a gratuity, however small, for giving his daughter in marriage; since the man, who, through avarice, takes a gratuity for that purpose, is a seller of his offspring."
• Manu (9.98): आददीत न शूद्रोऽपि शुल्कंदुहितरं ददन् । शुल्कं हि गृह्न् कुरुतेछन्नं दुहितृविक्रयम्॥ Translation: “But even a man of the servile class ought not to receive a gratuity when he gives his daughter in marriage, since a father who takes a fee on that occasion, tacitly sells his daughter."
• Manu (9.100): नानुशुश्रुमजात्वेतत् पूर्वर्वेष्वपि हि जन्मसु। शुल्कसंज्ञेन मूल्येन छन्नं दुहित विक्रयम्॥ Translation: “Nor, even in former births, have we heard the virtuous approve the tacit sale of a daughter for a price, under the name of nuptial gratuity.”
• Kasapa: शुल्कन ये प्रयच्छन्ति स्वसुतांलोभमोहिताः। कन्याविक्रयिणः पापा महाकिल्विषकारिणः॥ Translation: “Those who, infatuated by avarice, give their own daughters in marriage, for the sake of a gratuity, are the sellers of their daughters, the images of sin, and the perpetrators of a heinous iniquity.”