Kinship, Caste and Class

Early Societies
( C. . 600 BCE -600 CE )
1. The Critical Edition of the Mahabharata
Q. Discuss the Critical Edition of the Mahabharata
1.One of the most ambitious projects of scholarship began in 1919, under the leadership of a noted Indian Sanskritist, V.S.
Sukthankar.
2. A team comprising dozens of scholars initiated the task of preparing a critical edition of the Mahabharata. it
meant collecting Sanskrit manuscripts of the text, written in a variety of scripts, from different parts of the country.
3.The team worked out a method of comparing verses from each manuscript. They selected the verses that
appeared common to most versions and published these in several volumes, running into over 13,000 pages. The
project took 47 years to complete.
4.Two things became apparent: A. there were several common elements in the Sanskrit versions of the story,
evident in manuscripts found all over the subcontinent, from Kashmir and Nepal in the north to Kerala and Tamil
Nadu in the south.
B.Also evident were enormous regional variations in the ways in which the text had been transmitted over the
centuries.
5.These variations were documented in footnotes and appendices to the main text. Taken together, more than half
the 13,000 pages are devoted to these variations. In a sense, these variations are reflective of the complex processes
that shaped early social histories – through dialogues between dominant traditions and resilient local ideas and
practices.
6. Our understanding of these processes is derived primarily from texts written in Sanskrit by and for Brahmanas.
When issues of social history were explored for the first time by historians in the nineteenth and twentieth
centuries, they tended to take these texts at face value – believing that everything that was laid down in these texts
was actually practised.

2. Kinship and Marriage

Many Rules and Varied Practices
Q. What are the basic characteristics noticed about all families for historians
Why is it important for historians to investigate and analyse attitudes towards family ?
2.1 Finding out about families
We often take family life for granted. However, you may have noticed that
1.Not all families are identical: they vary A. in terms of numbers of members, B. their relationship with one another C. the
kinds of activities they share.
2.Often people belonging to the same family share food and other resources, and live, work and perform rituals together.
3. Families are usually parts of larger networks of people defined as relatives, or to use a more technical term,
kinfolk.
4. While familial ties are often regarded as “natural” and based on blood, they are defined in many different ways. For
instance, some societies regard cousins as being blood relations, whereas others do not.
5.For early societies, A . historians can retrieve information about elite families fairly easily;
B. it is, difficult to reconstruct the familial relationships of ordinary people.
C. Families are important, because they provide an insight into people’s thinking; it is likely that some of these ideas
would have shaped their actions.
2.2 The ideal of patriliny
Explain why patriliny may have been particularly important among elite families.
1.Mahabharata is a story about this. It describes a feud over land and power between two groups of cousins, the
Kauravas and the Pandavas. Ultimately, the conflict ended in a battle, in which the Pandavas emerged victorious.
2.After that, patrilineal succession was proclaimed. While patriliny had existed prior to the composition of the epic,
the central story of the Mahabharata reinforced the idea that it was valuable.
3.Under patriliny, sons could claim the resources (including the throne in the case of kings) of their fathers when
the latter died.
4.Most ruling dynasties from sixth century BCE onwards claimed to follow this system, although there were
variations in practice:
5.Sometimes there were no sons, in some situations brothers succeeded one another, sometimes other kinsmen
claimed the throne, and, in very exceptional circumstances, women such as Prabhavati Gupta exercised power.
6.The concern with patriliny was not unique to ruling families. It is evident in mantras in ritual texts such as the
Rigveda. It is possible that these attitudes were shared by wealthy men and those who claimed high status,
including Brahmanas.
2.3 Rules of marriage
Q. Why do we say that with the emergence of new towns social life become more complex ?
Introduction: While sons were important for the continuity of the patrilineage, daughters were viewed rather
differently within this framework.
1. Daughters had no claims to the resources of the household.. At the same time, marrying them into families
outside the kin was considered desirable.. This system, called exogamy
2.The lives of young girls and women belonging to families that claimed high status were often carefully regulated
to ensure that they were married at the “right” time and to the “right” person. This gave rise to the belief that
kanyadana or the gift of a daughter in marriage was an important religious duty of the father.
3.With the emergence of new towns social life became more complex. People from near and far met to buy and
sell their products and share ideas in the urban milieu. This may have led to a questioning of earlier beliefs and
practices
4.Faced with this challenge, the Brahmanas responded by laying down codes of social behaviour in great detail.
These were meant to be followed by Brahmanas in particular and the rest of society in general.
5.From c. 500 BCE, these norms were compiled in Sanskrit texts known as the Dharmasutras and Dharmashastras.
The most important of such works, the Manusmriti, was compiled between c. 200 BCE and 200 CE.
6.While the Brahmana authors of these texts claimed that their point of view had universal validity and that what
they prescribed had to be obeyed by everybody, it is likely that real social relations were more complicated.

Q. Discuss the evidences that suggest that Brahmanical prescriptions about kinship and
marriage were not universally followed.
Ans. i.The Brahmans considered their view-point as universally accepted. They believed that their rules were
followed every where. But in reality, it was not so. In fact, there was no universal impact of the Brahmans because
of regional diversities and lack of proper communication.
ii. In other words, we can say that the rules framed by the Brahmans were not adhered to every where. The
following evidences have been found in this regard.
(i) Diversity in Family Life:i. We accept family life usually with ease. But all families are not the same. There is
always diversity in human relations and activities. In reality, family is a part of a big group. It is a part of larger
network of people defined as relatives or kinfolk.
ii.However the familial ties are natural as they are based on blood relations. For example, such relations are kept in
different ways. Some societies regard cousins as blood relatives whereas others do not think so.
iii.We can know a lot about elite families. But it is very difficult to have a full view of the relationships of ordinary
people. The historians have made efforts to analyse and examine attitude towards family and kinship. The
Mahabharata is a story of a war between two groups of cousins i.e. the Kauravas and the Pandavas. This war was
fought for land and power. It was fought for eighteen days in which the Pandavas emerged victorious.
(ii) Rules of Marriage. i.The sons were considered important to continue the patriineage. So the daughters had no
claims to the resources of the house-hold. They were married into families outside the kin. This system was called
exogamy which literaly meant marrying outside one’s kin or gotra. The women of high status families were
married to the right persons at right time. Thus Kanayadana or the gift of a daughter in marriage was an important
religious duty of the father.
ii.As the new towns emerged, the social life became more complex. The people bought and sold their products in
the cities. So they shared the views with each other. Hence the Brahmans laid down codes of social behavior in
great detail. They expected all the Brahmans in particular and the others in general to follow these rules.
iii.Later on these rules were enshrined in Dharamashastras. These texts recognised eight forms of marriage out of
which four were considered as good and the other four were considered as condemnable. The condemnable
marriages were solemnized by those who did not accept Brahmanical norms.
iv.Inscriptions of Satavahana rulers indicate that they thd not followed the method of exogamy of Brahmanas. They
had many queens and even from their own gotra. This fact is an example of endogamy method or marital relations
within kinfolk.

2.4 The gotra of women

How far were the gotra rules preserved by the Brahmans ?
.One Brahmanical practice, evident from c. 1000 BCE onwards, was to classify people in terms of gotras.
1.Each gotra was named after a Vedic seer, and all those who belonged to the same gotra were regarded as his
descendants.
2.Two rules about gotra were particularly important:
A. Women were expected to give up their father’s gotra and adopt that of their husband on marriage .
B. Members of the same gotra could not marry.
3.One way to find out whether this was commonly followed is to consider the names of men and women,
which were sometimes derived from gotra names. These names are available for powerful ruling lineages such as
the Satavahanas who ruled over parts of western India and the Deccan .
4.Several of their inscriptions have been recovered, which allow historians to trace family ties, including
marriages. Some of the Satavahana rulers were polygynous that is, they had more than one wife. The names of
women who married Satavahana rulers indicates that many of them had names derived from gotras such as Gotama
and Vasistha, their father’s gotras.
5.What is also apparent is that some of these women belonged to the same gotra. Such marriages amongst kinfolk
ensured a close-knit community. It is likely that there were variations in other parts of the subcontinent as well, but
as yet it has not been possible to reconstruct specific details.
3. Social Differences:
Within and Beyond the Framework of Caste
Q. What do you know about origin and progress of Caste system in India? How it advantaged and
disadvantaged Indian society?
Ans. The meaning of caste system is by those classes in which our ancient society was divided. Each caste had its
own customs and members of each caste had to follow those customs. Earlier there were four castes namely
Brahmanas, Kshatriyas, Vaishyas and Shudras but later on their number was increased. At present, more than
3,000 castes and sub-castes exist in India.
Origin of Caste System : Following theories are given about the origin of caste system :-
(i) On the basis of Colour. Some scholars are of the view that first of all society was divided, in different castes,
on the basis of colour. White colour meant the Aryan people and black colour meant for non-Aryan people. White
people hardly liked to live with black people. In this way society was divided into two classes—Aryans and non-
Aryans.
(ii) On the basis of Purush Sukta. Few other scholars are of the view that caste system is given by the God.
According to Purush Sukta, Brahmanas were originated from the mouth of God, Kshatriyas from arms, Vaishyas
from thighs and Shudras from feet of the God.
(iii) On the basis of division of Labour. Modern historians are of the view that caste system originated due to
division of labour. Powerful and healthy persons were given the work of protection of the country. So a specific
caste of soldiers i.e. Kshatriyas was originated. In this way yajnas could be performed by only few people. These
few people became Brahmanas. People engaged in trade and agriculture came to be known as Vaishyas. People
who served these three castes came to be known as Shudras.
Advantages of Caste System:
(i) Indians hardly kept contacts with foreigners. As a result Indian culture remained safe from external impact.
(ii) Only because of. caste system, people used to marry within their own caste. It led to maintenance of purity of
blood.
(iii) People used to adopt occupation of their family right from their childhood. As a result, they became efficient
,specialists in their respective fields.
(iv) People with bad intentions were generally thrown out of their castes. That’s why people hardly try to move on
a wrong path.
(v) Members of each caste used to help the needy and poor members of their caste. It led to encouragement to
sense of social service and sense of sacrifice.
(vi) People had to adopt their hereditary occupation in caste system. That’s why there was no problem of finding
occupation for self as it was available exactly after the birth.
(vii) According to caste system, main function of Brahmanas was to give education. He used to teach free of cost to
his pupils.
(viii) People of other castes could convert to Hinduism through the powers of ‘Shuddhi’.
That’s why many invaders like Shakas, Greeks etc. became part of Hindu society.
Disadvantages of Caste System:
(i) Caste system was a severe blow to the sense of nationalsim. People began to think about their own caste instead
of national interests.
(ii) Because of caste system, only Kshatriyas were allowed to take military training. As a result military training
was limited to limited number of persons.
(iii) It was very difficult for people to change their hereditary occupation. As a result individual development of
persons stopped to a great extent.
(iv) Brahmanas, Kshatryas and Vaishyas used to consider Shudras as inferior to them and used to hate them. As a
result the sense of untouchability was encouraged.
(v) Brahmanas and Kshatriyas used to consider themselves superior than other castes. It led to increase in mutual
differences.
(vi) Brahmanas started few customs for their interests so that they could be more benefited. In this way many social
evils came in society.

Q . How important were gender differences in early societies ? Give reasons for your answer
Ans. There were three main reasons of gender differences in early societies and., these were
(i) Gender inequality patrilineal system
(ii) Gotra of woman
(iii) Right over property
(i) Gender inequality:Earlier societies were male dominated societies and were running according to patrilineal
system. That’s why male child was desired in every type of family as sons were important for the continuity of the
partilineage. Daughters were viewed rather differently in this system. They had no right over ancestral resources .
They were expected to marry out of their gotras. This custom of marriage is known ‘exogamy’. It means that
young girls and women of reputed families were regulated in a way that they could marry at right time and with
right person. This gave rise to belief that Kanyadana was an important religious duty of the father.
(ii) Gotra of Women : From C 1000 BCE onwards, people were classified gotras by Brahamanas. Each gotra was
named after a Vedic seer as all the members of that gotra were assumed as the descendants of that seer. There
were two important rules of gotras
(a) Woman had to adopt gotra of her husband after her marriage.
(b) Members of same gotra could not marry with each other.
i.But some evidences have been found in which these rules were not obeyed. For example some of the Satavahana
rulers had more than one wife (polygynous). A study of the names of wives of Satavahana rulers revealed that few
of them had names derived from gotras such as Gotama and Vasistha which were their father’s gotras.
ii.They probably had retained these names instead of adopting names of their husbands gotras. Some women also
belonged to the same gotra as of their husbands. This fact was against the rules of exogamy. This fact actually
exemplified an alternative practice that of endogamy or marriage within the kin group.
iii.This type of marriage still exists in many communities of South India. These sorts of marital relations give
strength to organised communities.
Satavahana rulers were identified through the names derived from that of the mother. Although this may suggest
that mothers were important but we should note down the fact that succession to the throne, among Satavahanas,
was generally patrilineal.
(iii) Access to Property :i. According to Manusmriti, ancestral property of parents should be distributed (after their
death) equally among all the sons. But eldest son should be given special share. Women could not demand their
share in these ancestral resources.
ii. But they had the right over the gifts given to her at the time of her marriage. It was known as stridhana or
woman’s wealth. This wealth could be inherited by her children. Their husbands had no right over this wealth.
iii. But Manusmriti restricts women to secretly collect any valuable goods or familial property without the
permission of their husbands.
Some evidences indicate that yet women of upper class had resources within their reach but still land, animals and
wealth were under the control of males. In other words, social differences among men and women were increased
because of the difference in access of resources or property.

1. According to the Manusmriti, the paternal estate was to be divided equally amongst sons after the death of the
parents, with a special share for the eldest. Women could not claim a share of these resources.
2.However, women were allowed to retain the gifts they received on the occasion of their marriage as stridhana
This could be inherited by their children, without the husband having any claim on it.
3.At the same time, the Manusmriti warned women against hoarding family property, or even their own valuables,
without the husband’s permission.
4.Wealthy women like the Vakataka queen Prabhavati Gupta , cumulative evidence – both epigraphic and
textual – suggests that while upper-class women may have had access to resources, land, cattle and money were
generally controlled by men.
5. In other words, social differences between men and women were sharpened because of the differences in access
to resources.
‘ Q. What did the Right to Property mean in the context of women and men in the period of Mahabharata?
1. There was a fierce competition and rivalry for long between the Kauravas and the Pandavas So Duryodhana
invited Yudhisthira to a game of dice. In the game, Yudhisthira lost all his gold, elephants, chariots, slaves, army,
treasury, kingdom, the property of his subjects, his brothers and finally himself. In fact he lost everything.
2.He was deceived by his rival. At last he staked their common wife Draupadi. He also lost her in this game of
dice. It shows that during those days, wife was considered as the property of the husband. It also shows that the
eldest brother enjoyed special rights on property.
3.Divisions of Property Among Sons. :The Dharamasutras and Dharmashastras also deal with the issues of
ownership. According to the Manu Smriti, the paternal estate was to be equally divided among all the sons after the
death of their parents. However the eldest son enjoyed a special share. But the women could not claim any share in
this estate.
4.Stridhana : Literally, the stridhana means the wealth of the woman. The women were allowed to retain the gifts
that they received on the occasion of their marriage. Her husband had no claim on her wealth. But her children
could inherit it. The Manu Smriti warned the women not to hoard family property. They were also forbidden to
hoard their valuables without the permission of their husbands.
5.Upper class women and resources (wealth):. However the upper class women like the Vakataka queen
Prabhavati Gupta could have an access to resources. However the land, the cattle and the money were controlled by
men. In fact, social differences between men and women were sharpened because of the differences in access to
resources.
5. Explaining Social Differences: A Social Contract
Q. In what ways the Buddhist theory of Social Contract different that of the
Brahmans
The Buddhists also developed an alternative understanding of social inequalities, and of the institutions required to
regulate social conflict.
1. In a myth found in a text known as the Sutta Pitaka they suggested that originally human beings did not have
fully evolved bodily forms, nor was the world of plants fully developed.
2.All beings lived in an idyllic state of peace, taking from nature only what they needed for each meal.
3.However, there was a gradual deterioration of this state as human beings became increasingly greedy, vindictive
and deceitful.
4.The institution of kingship was based on human choice, with taxes as a form of payment for services rendered by
the king.
5.At the same time, it reveals recognition of human agency in creating and institutionalising economic and social
relations. There are other implications as well. For instance, if human beings were responsible for the creation of
the system, they could also change it in future.
6. Handling Texts
Historians and the Mahabharata
Q. What are the elements considered by the historians when the analyse texts? Discuss with reference to the
Mahabharata.

Historian s consider several elements when they analyse texts.

1.They examine whether texts were written in Prakrit, Pali or Tamil, languages that were probably used by
ordinary people, or in Sanskrit, a language meant almost exclusively for priests and elites.
2.They also consider the kinds of text. Were these mantras, learnt and chanted by ritual specialists, or stories that
people could have read, or heard, and then retold if they found them interesting?
3.They try to find out about the author(s) whose perspectives and ideas shaped the text, as well as the intended
audience, as, very often, authors keep the interests of their audience in mind while composing their work.
4.Historians try and ascertain the possible date of the composition or compilation of the texts as well as the place
where they may have been composed.
5.After making these assessments that they draw on the content of texts to arrive at an understanding of their
historical significance. This is a particularly difficult task for a text as complex as the Mahabharata because the
version of the Mahabharata we have been considering is in Sanskrit ,although there are versions in other languages
as well.

6.2 Author(s) and dates

Q. Discuss whether the Mahabharata could have been the work of a single author.
Ans. It is not possible that a single author would have written the Mahabharata. It seems to have been composed
between 500 BC to 1000 BC. As a result, many episodes have been incorporated in it from time to time. Some of
the stories mentioned in it were already popular among the people. As the Mahabharata was written in a very long
time, it seems as if no single author would have written it.
Different Authors
The following suggestions are given regarding the authors of Mahabharata
(i) The original story of Mahabharata was written by Bhatt-Sarthis. They v called as Sutas. They generally
accompanied Kshatriya warriors to the battlefield. So they composed poems to celebrate the victories and
achievements of various warriors These compositions were circulated through oral method.
(ii) From the 5th century BCE, the Brahmans took over the story and began write it in the form of an epic. The
story moved around the Kurus. As the Kurus and Panchalas had attained kingdom from chiefdom, it is possible
that these new might have wanted their history to be recorded and preserved in a more systematic Besides the old
social values were replaced by new norms. So it is possible that upheavals might have necessitated the re-writting
of the epical story.
(iii) Another phase in the composition of the epical task of Mahabharta started between 200 BCE and 200 CE. This
was the time when the worship of Vishnu was become quite important. Krishna who was one of the most important
characters in. the epic, identified with Vishnu.
(iv) So between 200 and 400 CE, many didactic sections resembling the Manus were added in the main story.
Originally the text of Mahabharata had 10000 verses. But after addition of didactic section, it comprised 1,00,000
verses.
(v) However the enormous composition of Mahabharata is traditionally attribute to Vyasa, a famous sage.

Draupadi’s marriage
Drupada, the king of Panchala, organised a competition where the challenge was to string a bow and hit
a target; the winner would be chosen to marry his daughter Draupadi. Arjuna was victorious and was garlanded by
Draupadi. The Pandavas returned with her to their mother Kunti, who, even before she saw them, asked them to
share whatever they had got. She realised her mistake when she saw Draupadi, but her command could not be
violated. After much deliberation, Yudhisthira decided that Draupadi would
be their common wife.
When Drupada was told about this, he protested. However, the seer Vyasa arrived and told him that the Pandavas
were in reality incarnations of Indra, whose wife had been reborn as Draupadi, and they were thus destined for
each other.
Vyasa added that in another instance a young woman had prayed to Shiva for a husband, and in her enthusiasm,
had prayed five times instead of once. This woman was now reborn as Draupadi, and Shiva had fulfilled her
prayers. Convinced by these stories, Drupada consented to the marriage.

Q. This is what a famous historian of Indian literature, Maurice Winternitz, wrote about the Mahabharata
: “Just because the Mahabharata represents more of an entire literature..., and contains so much and so
many kinds of things (it) give (s) us an insight into the most profound depths of the soul of the Indian folk.”
Discuss.
Ans. There is no denying the fact that Mahabharata represents whole of literature and shows a very beautiful
picture of all the aspects of public life of contemporary Indian society. It describes thoughts and every thing
profound depths of the soul of the Indian folk. This epic throws following light on the life of Indians :
(i) Social Life (a) Four Varnas :Society was divided into four Varna and Verna system was not strict. There was
no restriction on people to adopt their hereditary occupation. For example Parshuram was known as Kshatriya even
if he was a Brahmana. Brahmana’s place in the society was not supreme.
(b) Status of Women : Women had very good status in the society. They were ‘ respected. They had the right to
select their husband through the custom of `Svyamvar’
(c) Age of Courage : Age of Mahabharata was an age of velour and bravery. Dying a the battlefield was
considered as very prestigious. People believed that one who dies in the battlefield goes straight to heaven.
Protection of weaker section was also considered an act of bravery
(d) Social Evils: Some social evils also existed in the society. Playing the game of dice, endogamy, betraying the
enemy were common things prevailed in the society.
(ii) Political Life
(a) Large empires Many large empires were established in this age. Pandu, Kosal, ‘Panchal etc. were such empires.
(b) Power of King : King was the head of the state and all the powers of the state vested in his hands. There was
no restriction on these powers. However there were ministers to advice king in administrative functions but the
kings were not bound to accept their advice.
(c) Life of King : Kings used to live with great pomp and show. They had very splendid palaces. They used to
adopt many titles. They had an ambition to become Chakravarti King. For this, they used to organize Ashvamedha
yajna. There were many shortcomings in their characters as well. They had many dancers in their courts. Drinking
liquor and gambling were part of their characters.
(iii) Economic Life
(a) Agriculture :Agriculture was the main occupation of the people Even kings themselves used to plough the
land. Land was very fertile.
(b) Animal Rearing : Animal rearing was another occupation of the people. Cow, Bull, horses and elephants were
important rearing animals.
(c) Trade : Trade made huge progress in this age. Guilds were made by traders. They were given many facilities
by the state.
(d) Other Occupations : Except the given occupations, people were also engaged. in other occupations like
carpenter, jeweler, potter, iron smith etc.
(iv) Religious Life
(a) Worshipping New gods and goddesses : In Mahabharata age, people started to worship new gods and
goddesses, except Vedic gods and goddesses, and some of them were Parvati, Durga, Vishnu, Brahma etc.
(b) Believe in Incarnation : People also believed that god takes birth. It was believed that god Vishnu took birth in
the form of Lord Rama and Lord Krishna and people started to worship them as well.
(c) Karma theory and Recarnation : People also believed in Karma theory and recarnation. They believed that
one has to face all of his good or bad deeds in his next life or birth.
(d) Stress on Yajnas : People in this epic age greatly stressed on yajnas. Many new methods of yajnas were started
in this age.
Actually, like any other epic, Mahabharata is an epic which shows a live picture of wars, forests, palaces and
towns. Culturally also Mahabharata is very important. This epic has given a content to sculptors, plays and dance
forms.

Producing Fine Sons

I free her from here but not from there. I have bound her firmly there, so that through the grace of Indra she will
have fine sons and be fortunate in her husband's love. Indra was one of the principal deities, a god of valour,
warfare and rain. "Here" and "there" refer to the father's and husband's house respectively.
Questions
(i) In the context of the mantra, discuss the implications of marriage from the point of view of the bride and groom.
(ii) Are the implications of the mantra identical or are there differences ?
(iii) Who was Indra ? What did the people pray him for ?
(iv) Why did the people wish for fine sons ?
Answers

(i) It was expected of the bride to give birth to fine sons. But it was expected from the bridegroom that he should
love his wife.
(ii) These mantras imply identical as well as different things. They are identical because the mutual love of the
husband and his wife can help in the birth of fine sons. It is not identical because the daughters are not expected to
give birth to fine daughters.
(iii) Indra was one of the main gods of the Hindu mythology. He was a god of valour, warfare and rain. The people
prayed Indra to seek the blessing of fine sons.
(iv) The people wished for fine sons because of the principle of patriliny. In this tradition, only the sons carried
forward the generation

Why kinfolk quarreled

This is an excerpt from the Adi Paruan (literaily, the first section) of the Sanskrit Mahabharata, describing why
conflicts arose amongst the Kauravas and Pandavas :
The Kauravas were the.........sons of Dhritarashtra, and the Pandavas.......were their cousins. Since Dhritarashtra
was blind, his younger brother Pandu ascended the throne of Hastinapura ......However , after the premature death
of Pandu, Dhritarashtra became king, as the royal princes were still very young. As the princes grew up together,-
the citizens of Hastinapura began io express their reference for the Pandavas, for they were more capable and
virtuous than the Kauravas. This made Duryodhana, the eldest of the Kauravas, jealous. He approached his father
and said, "You yourself did not receive the throne, although it fell to you, because of your defect. If the Pandava
receives the patrimony from Pandu, his son will surely inherit it in turn, and so will his son, and his. We
ourselves with our sons shall be excluded from the royal succession arid become of slight regard in the eyes of the
world, lord of the earth !"
Passages such as these may not have been literally true, but they give us an idea about what those who wrote the
text thought. Sometimes, as in this case, they contain conflicting ideas.
Questions
(i) From where has this excerpt been taken ? What does it depict ?
(ii) How did Dharitrashtra become the king of Hastinapur ?
(iii) Who was Duryodhana ? Why was he jealous of the Pandavas ?
(iv) How did Duryodhana express his anguish to his father ?

How could men and women acquire wealth ?

For men, the Manusmriti declares, there are seven means of acquiring wealth: inheritance, finding, purchase,
conquest, investment, work, and acceptance of gifts from good people. For women, there are six means of
acquiring wealth: what was given in front of the fire (marriage) or the bridal procession, or as a token of affection,
and what she got from her brother, mother or father. She could also acquire wealth through any subsequent gift
and whatever her “affectionate” husband might give her.

Questions
(i) What does Manusmriti say about the paternal estate ?
,(ii)According to, Manusmriti, by which means could the men acquire wealth ?
(iii) What were the means for the women to acquire wealth ? What was called the Stridhana ?
(iv) What warning does the Manusmriti give to the women not to acquire two kinds of wealth ?

Answers
This excerpt has been taken from the Adi Parvan which is the first section of Mahabharata written in Sanskrit. It
describes the conflict between the Kauravas and the Pandavas.
.
(i According to the Manusmriti, the paternal estate was divided equally among all the sons after the death of their
parents. But the eldest son had right in the parental estate. However the women were not entitled to claim any share
in this parental estate.
(ii) According to the Manusmriti, there were the following seven means for men to acquire wealth :
(a) Inheritance (b) Finding (c) Purchase (d) Conquest (e) Investment (f) Work , (g) Acceptance of gifts from good
people
(iii) Literally the stridhana meant a woman`s wealth. The women were allowed to keep the gifts that they received
on the occasion of their marriage. It was called as the stridhana" Her husband had no claims over this wealth,,.
However her children could inherit it.
(iv) According to the Manusmriti, the women should not hoard the family property.
They should also not hoard their own valuables without the permission of their husbands."

Why kinfolk quarrelled

This is an excerpt from the Adi Parvan (literally, the first section) of the Sanskrit Mahabharata, describing why
conflicts arose amongst the Kauravas and Pandavas:
The Kauravas were the … sons of Dhritarashtra, and the Pandavas … were their cousins. Since Dhritarashtra was
blind, his younger brother Pandu ascended the throne of Hastinapura (see Map 1) … However, after the premature
death of Pandu, Dhritarashtra became king, as the royal princes were still very young. As the princes grew up
together, the citizens of Hastinapura began to express their preference for the Pandavas, for they were more
capable and virtuous than the Kauravas. This made Duryodhana, the eldest of the Kauravas, jealous. He
approached his father and said, “You yourself did not receive the throne, although it fell to you, because of your
defect. If the Pandava receives the patrimony from Pandu, his son will surely inherit it in turn, and so will his son,
and his. We ourselves with our sons shall be excluded from the royal succession and become of slight regard in the
eyes of the world, lord of the earth!” Passages such as these may not have been literally true, but they give us an
idea about what those who wrote the text thought. Sometimes, as in this case, they contain conflicting ideas.

Draupadi’s question
Draupadi is supposed to have asked Yudhisthira whether he had lost himself before staking her. Two contrary
opinions were expressed in response to this question.
One, that even if Yudhisthira had lost himself earlier, his wife remained under his control, So he could stake her.
Two, that an unfree man (as Yudhisthira was when he had lost himself) could not stake another person.
The matter remained unresolved; ultimately, Dhritarashtra restored to the Pandavas and Draupadi their personal
freedom.

Questions
(i) Who was Draupadi ? what question had she asked from Yudhisthira ?
(ii) What were the two contradictory views about Yudhisthira's staking Draupadi to a game of dice ?
(iii) Why and when did he stake Draupadi to a game of dice ?
(iv) At last who resolved the issue and how ? -

,Answers
(i) Draupadi was the wife of the Pandavas. She asked Yudhisthira if he had lost himself before staking her or not.
(ii) To a question raised by Draupadi,_there were two contrary views :
(o) If-Yudhisthira had lost himself earlier, he could stake his wife at a game of dice as she was under his control.
(b) 1, man who had lost himself could not stake another person at a game of dice.
(iii)- Yudhisthira was deceived bv his rival. So he had lost everything at a game of dice"
He had lost his gold, elephants, chariots, slaves, army, treasury, kingdom property of his subjects.-He had also lost
his brothers as well as himself. At last he had staked Draupadi, the common wife of all the Pandavas. He had lost
her too.
(iv)Ultimately the matter was resolved by Dhritarashtra who restored personal freedom to Draupadi as well as the
Pandavas.