Professional Documents
Culture Documents
net/publication/298789343
CITATIONS READS
0 947
3 authors, including:
Nyna Amin
University of KwaZulu-Natal
28 PUBLICATIONS 43 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
All content following this page was uploaded by Nyna Amin on 18 March 2016.
Abstract
Marriage is an important social convention in Hinduism, as it is a vital step on the
path to liberation from the recurrent cycle of life and death. A woman’s most
important role, it transpires, is to support her husband in his quest for moksha.
Sacred Hindu texts mention eight marriage forms: Brahma, Daiva, Arsha,
Prajapatya, Asura, Gandharva, Paisacha and Rakshasa. In seven of the forms,
marriage is an arrangement made by men. Fathers, it can be deduced, play a
critical role in the selection of life partners. It is only in the Ghandarva form that a
female is involved in selecting a marital partner. A critical gender reading makes
apparent the ways in which patriarchy operates jointly with religious values to
oppress women and to subject them to cultural, social and religious norms in at
least five ways. First, accepting gifts by the bride’s family signifies the
commodification, exploitation and vulnerabilities of women and transfer of the
father’s authority over the bride to her husband. Second, unsanctioned Hindu
marriages are legitimised through the complicity of all parties involved. Third,
arranged marriages sublimate romantic love and freedom of choice. Fourth,
Hindu priests disapprove of same-sex marriages and fifth, the possibility for
resistance is compromised by internalised gendering. Finally, the Marxian
concepts, use-value, exchange-value and surplus-value reveal the nature of the
subject positions of women in Hindu marriages.
Introduction
The western view of marriage can generally be divided into two
competing views: the conjugal view and the revisionist view.3 The former
is a union between a man and a woman while the latter accepts
marriage between same or opposite sexes. Hinduism, by contrast offers
1
Dr Lokesh Ramnath Maharajh is a lecturer in the School of Education, University of
KwaZulu-Natal. He teaches assessment and foundations in education and research
methodology. His research interests include assessment in higher education, values and
religion education. Email: <maharajhlr@ukzn.ac.za>.
2
Dr Nyna Amin is a senior lecturer in the School of Education and university distinguished
teacher, University of KwaZulu-Natal. A former Fulbright scholar, she has published articles
in the fields of higher education, teacher education, medical education and gender. Email:
<amin@ukzn.ac.za>.
3
Sherif Girgis, Robert P. George and Ryan T. Anderson, What is Marriage? Man and
Woman: A Defense. New York: Encounter Books, (2012).
78 Maharajh & Amin
eight types of marriage, all of which are consistent with the conjugal
view. Irrespective of religion or belief, the conjugal view implies
differences between the sexes, their roles within marriage and the
impact on individuals within the institution of marriage. Surprisingly, a
report by Zaher in the first decade of the twenty-first century revealed
that women have no legal standing in the United States.4 In the same
decade, a number of studies indicated that there were mutual economic
benefits for husbands and wives with more money, less debt and better
family life.5 6 7 8 Other studies highlight the toxic nature of marriage for
women which include among others, high levels of stress,9 sexual
violence,10 and the development of mental illness.11
Against this backdrop, this article seeks to interrogate the eight forms of
Hindu marriage from a critical gender perspective. In particular, we
describe the eight religious forms of marriage, unpack its gendered
agenda and unveil the sociocultural power lines that impact on Hindu
women in India. In the absence of empirical data, we interpret religious
texts and practices and draw on scholarly works and gender theories to
produce a critical analysis. The focus on texts is important as it
prescribes the purposes of life, the roles and functions of human beings,
social practices, cultural mores and spiritual benefits. Written more than
five thousand years ago, texts like the Rg Veda, the Gita, the Ramayana
and the Manusmriti are central to Hindu ways of life and underpin
4
Claudia Zaher, “When a Woman’s Marital Status Determined her Legal Status: A
Research Guide on the Common Law Doctrine of Coverture,” Law Library Journal 94, no. 3
(2002): 459-486.
5
Sarah Avellar and Pamela J. Smock, “The Economic Consequences of the Dissolution of
Cohabiting Unions,” Journal of Marriage and Family 67, no. 2 (2005): 315-327.
6
Michal Grinstein-Weiss, Min Zhan and Michael Sherraden, “Saving Performance in
Individual Development Accounts: Does Marital Status Matter?” Journal of Marriage and
Family 68, no. 1 (2006): 192-204.
7
Thomas A. Hirschi, Joyce Altobelli and Mark R. Rank, “Does Marriage Increase the Odds
of Affluence? Exploring the Life Course Probabilities,” Journal of Marriage and Family 65,
no. 4 (2003): 927-938.
8
Daniel T. Lichter, Deborah Roempke Graefe and J. Brian Brown, “Is Marriage a
Panacea? Union Formation among Economically Disadvantaged Unwed Mothers,” Social
Problems 50, no. 1 (2003): 60-86.
9
Joyce O. Ogunsanmi and Theresa O. Owuamanam, “Stress among Married Female
Sandwich Undergraduates in Southwest Nigeria,” Journal of Emerging Trends in
Educational Research and Policy Studies (JETERAPS) 5, no. 8 (2014): 138-142.
10
Mahesh Puri, Jyotsna Tamang and Iqbal Shah, “Suffering in Silence: Consequences of
Sexual Violence within Marriage among Young Women in Nepal,” BMC Health 11, no. 29
(2012): 11-29.
11
Indira Sharma, Balram Pandit, Abhishek Pathak and Reet Sharma, “Hinduism, Marriage
and Mental Illness,” Indian Journal of Psychiatry 55, no. 12 (2013): S243-S249.
A Gender Critique of the Eight Forms of Hindu Marriages 79
common law, customary law and the laws of property rights and
inheritance in India and Nepal and social and cultural customs in other
parts of the world where Hindus reside.
12 nd
Julius J. Lipner, Hindus: Their Religious Beliefs and Practices (2 ed.), London:
Routledge, (2009).
13
Jayādvaita Swami, Vanity Karma: Ecclesiastes, the Bhagavad- Gītā, and the Meaning of
Life (Los Angeles, Stockholm, Johannesburg, Sydney: The Bhaktivedanta Book Trust,
2015), 12.
14
Paras Diwan, Modern Hindu Law (Allahabad: Allahabad Law Agency, 2008).
15
Sekhar Bandyopadhyay, Caste, Culture and Hegemony: Social Dominance in Colonial
Bengal (New Delhi: Sage Publications, 2004).
16
The Taittiriya Samhita consists of 8 books subdivided into chapters which are further
subdivided into individual hymns.
80 Maharajh & Amin
17
The Aitareya Brahmana is the sacred prayer (Brahmana) of the Rg Veda, an ancient
Indian collection of sacred texts and hymns.
18
Pandurang Varnan Kane, History of Dharmaśāstra. Vol. I. Part 1. Poona: Bhandarkar
Oriental Research Institute (Government Oriental Series, Class B, No. 6, 1978).
19
Mark A. Yarhouse & Stephanie Kaye Nowacki, “The Many Meanings of Marriage:
Divergent Perspectives Seeking Common Ground,” The Family Journal 15, no. 1 (2007):
36-45.
20
Arvind Sharma, “Marriage in Hindu Religious Tradition,” Journal of Ecumenical Studies
20, no. 1 (1985): 69-80.
21
Zaher, “Woman’s Marital Status,” 461.
22
Mariam George, “Religion, Patriarchy and the Subjugation of Women in India,”
International Journal of Interdisciplinary Social Science 3, no. 3 (2008): 21-30.
A Gender Critique of the Eight Forms of Hindu Marriages 81
Even at present, many Hindu females live under the protection of males:
fathers before marriage, husbands during marriage and a
son/uncle/brother-in-law during widowhood. This gives credence to the
claim that power over females comes not only from above (God) and
outside (culture), it also “comes from below” (e.g. sons).28 In almost all
societies, most females are prohibited from engaging in behaviours that
deviate from the normative religious, moral and social practices, and, at
best, they are restricted to a narrow range of acceptable deviancy and in
some instances, a deviancy may be fatal.29
The failed execution of Malala Yousufzai is, perhaps, the most well-
known contemporary example of the risks women court. The Yousufzai
case, though not directly related to marriage, exemplifies the relationship
between religious belief and treatment of females. Overzealous, religious
fundamentalists viewed the pursuit and promotion of the education of
girls by Malala as heresy, eventuating in the assassination attempt.
However, patriarchal and religious oppression of women under religion is
quite complex and does not apply to all, even to adherents of the
23
Pamela J. Prickett, “Negotiating Gendered Religious Space: The Particularities of
Patriarchy in an African American Mosque,” Gender and Society 29, no. 1 (2015): 51-72.
24
Susan Rakoczy, “Religion and Violence: The Suffering of Women,” Agenda: Empowering
Women for Gender Equity 18, no. 61 (2004): 29-35.
25
Upinder Singh, A History of Ancient and Early Medieval India: From the Stone Age to the
th
12 Century. Delhi: Pearson, Longman, (2008).
26
Michel Foucault, Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison, Alan Sheridan (trans.)
(New York: Vintage, 1979), 138.
27
Singh, “Ancient and Medieval India,” 295.
28
Michel Foucault, The History of Sexuality, Volume 1: An Introduction. Robert Hurley
(trans.) (New York: Vintage, 1990) 94.
29
Bandyopadhyay, “Caste, Culture and Hegemony.”
82 Maharajh & Amin
30
Prickett, “Negotiating Gendered Religious Space.”
31
Kane, “History of Dharmaśāstra.”
A Gender Critique of the Eight Forms of Hindu Marriages 83
Brahma Marriage
The Brahma form characterizes marriage as a father’s prerogative to gift
his daughter to a suitor he has approved of on her behalf. The marriage
is an arrangement between the men, initiated by the groom’s family. The
acceptance of the groom is based on the qualities the bride’s father
desires of her future husband: learned in the Vedas, of good conduct
and of good family reputation. In return, the groom gains a wife
bedecked with jewels and a substantial trousseau. The Brahma form is
the most popular because it rests on the ideals promoted by parents
about the value of education, the reputation of families, maintaining
Varna purity (of the same class and caste) and the parents’ rights to
choose. While there is no commercial transaction involved in this form of
marriage it certainly is a social transaction that purports to enrich both
parties socially and culturally. The goal of the Brahma marriage is
religious in nature because it supports the dharmic advancement of the
two families. Whilst it may appear to treat the couple more kindly during
negotiations, the personal desires of the couple are sublimated and
sacrificed for the social and cultural advancement of the families.
Daiva Marriage
The Daiva form of marriage is based on the principle of sacrifice. Fathers
seek young Brahmin suitors for their daughters. The Brahmin, a priest,
who is usually approached while he is conducting a sacrificial prayer, is
offered the daughter as a wife and as an item of sacrifice. In other words,
offering a daughter is constituted as the ultimate sacrifice a parent can
make to placate the gods or to fulfill his karmic duty. In Hinduism the
benevolence shown to a Brahmin is looked upon as a supreme act of
devotion and a daughter is the means to do so. The construction of the
father as benevolent giver is simultaneously a dismissal of the daughter
to service male karmic and dharmic ends.
32
Anant S. Alteker, The Position of Women in Hindu Civilization from Prehistoric Times to
nd
the Present Day. (2 ed.) (Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1987), 46.
84 Maharajh & Amin
Arsha Marriage
In the Arsha form of marriage, the arrangement is, once again, a
decision between men. The daughter is given away as a bride to a sage
or a rishi (holy man) in exchange for two cows, reminiscent of the
practice of lobola in Africa. The sage is often quite old and receives
nothing in return (except the bride). Parents agree to this type of
marriage when they are unable to pay the costs of a wedding but are still
able to fulfill their duty to marry off a daughter. The groom may or may
not have suitable qualities to be a husband, which appears to be
immaterial to the bride’s family. The exchange of cattle for a bride is thus
an economic transaction which ignores the future aspirations and desires
of a girl and commodifies females. In this type of marriage, the female is
a pawn in the Hindu game of life of a holy man. In order to meet the
requirement of going through the four phases, the sage must also satisfy
the grhastha stage and the acquisition of a wife is an important step in
his quest to achieve his dharmic aims.
Asura Marriage
Unsuitable or undesired suitors are accommodated in the Asura form of
marriage. In this form, a man purchases a wife by paying an enormous
sum of money to her family, kinsmen and to the bride. The father gives
his daughter away in exchange for the acquisition of wealth. According to
Kane this form of marriage is “practically a sale of a girl for money” or
money’s worth.33 Kane explains further that the difference between the
Asura and the Arsha forms is that in the former there is no limit to what is
taken from the bridegroom while in the latter a “pair of cattle is offered as
a matter of form.”34 In other words, there is a subtle difference based on
the size of the purse. At a social level, two cows for a bride are
acceptable while a larger payout is frowned upon. From a critical gender
perspective, both token and prodigious payments are objectionable as
daughters are perceived as merchandise to be traded, exchanged or
discarded.
Prajapatya Marriage
The commonality amongst the Brahma, Daiva, Asura and Arsha forms is
that the quest for a bride is undertaken by a groom or his family. In the
fifth form, Prajapatya, by comparison, it is the bride’s father who actively
seeks a marriage partner for his daughter. Although there is no trading or
33
Kane, “History of Dharmaśāstra,” 519.
34
Kane, “History of Dharmaśāstra,” 519.
A Gender Critique of the Eight Forms of Hindu Marriages 85
Gandharva Marriage
The Manusmriti III, 32, describes the Gandharva marriage as the
voluntary union of a maiden and her lover. In the verse (III, 32),
Manusmriti says that such a union springs from desire and has sexual
intercourse for its purpose, ignoring the fact that in all marriages there is
an expectation to consummate the relationship. Sexual activity in the
absence of mutual desire is the norm and the explicitness of sexual
desire signified by the mutual attraction of a couple is an uncomfortable
tension within the confines of a religion that stresses purity, virginity and
eventual renunciation of worldly and emotional ties. For Gupta, the
Gandharva marriage is the nearest to what may be referred to as “free-
choice,” “romantic” or “love” marriage.35 Pandey avers that the
Gandharva marriage is one of the earliest and was the most common
form of marriage in Vedic times.36 A verse in the Atharva Veda suggests
that parents usually allowed a daughter to select her lover.37 According
to the Manusmriti, however, the Gandharva marriage may be suitable for
males from warrior, military, administrator and royal families, suggesting
that free choice is reserved for the upper castes.38 While there is no
consensual theory to explain why Gandharva marriages declined over
time, Meyer maintains that the priestly class of India declared them as
inappropriate because traditional marriages such as the Brahma
marriage were good sources of income.39 Recent trends suggest,
35
Giri Raj Gupta, “Love, Arranged Marriage, and the Indian Social Structure,” Journal of
Comparative Family Studies 7, no. 1 (1976): 76.
36
Rajbali Pandey, Hindu Saṁskāras: Socio-Religious Study of the Hindu Sacraments
(Jawahar Nagar, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass Publishers, 1969).
37
The verse reads thus, “May O Agni! 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.”
38
Johann Jakob Meyer, Sexual Life in Ancient India: A Study in the Comparative History of
Indian Culture (Jawahar Nagar, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass Publishers, 1989).
39
Meyer, “Sexual Life in Ancient India.”
86 Maharajh & Amin
Rakshasa Marriage
The Rakshasa form condones bride abduction following an attack on the
bride’s kinsmen who have been slain or beaten and wounded. The
women are doubly victimized through the loss of family and captured as
prizes of violent conquests. The acquisition of brides in this way means
that there is no recourse to a family that has been slain, and fear of
violence against surviving relatives prevents any acts of agency.
Paisacha Marriage
The Paisacha form occurs through planned dishonourable means or
opportunities available to engage in premarital sexual activity with a
female. The female is raped when she is asleep, intoxicated or in a
disordered state of mind. This can be compared to the modern
description of ‘date rape’. This form takes advantage of the shame
associated with premarital sex and sexual contamination of females and
eventuates in the family disowning daughters or agreeing to the marriage
as a tainted girl is ‘spoilt goods’. The excessive value attached to
virginity and purity makes a girl extremely vulnerable to exploitation by
dishonourable men and abandonment by her own family. Once again,
the future of a female resides in and derives from religious values and
principles of a patriarchal system.
Both the Rakshasa and Paisacha forms of marriage are not sanctioned
by any of the sacred texts. In response to the question about the legality
of the Rakshasa and Paisacha forms of marriage by capture or stealth
Kane avers thus:
What they [ancient sages] meant was that these were the means of
securing wives and that there are not really eight kinds of vivaha, but
rather there are eight ways in which wives may be secured. It is for this
reason that Vatsa says that if a fine girl cannot be secured by any
means she may be approached even in private by stealth and married.
40
The sages condemned in no measured terms the Paisacha.
40
Kane, “History of Dharmaśāstra,” 520.
A Gender Critique of the Eight Forms of Hindu Marriages 87
Discussion
In this section, we analyse the forms and interpret them from critical
gender perspectives to bring to fore the implication for and impact on
women’s lives. Five themes constitute this section: i. marriage, exchange
of gifts and commodification of women; ii. marriage rituals: legitimacy
and complicity; iii. arranged marriages and the sublimation of romantic
love; iv. marriage, gender, and heteronormativity; and, v. marriage,
resistance and internalised gendering.
In the modern form of marriages that are taking place in India, the
system of giving gifts to the groom has deteriorated to a pernicious form,
41
Gupta, “Love, Arranged Marriage.”
42
Kane, “History of Dharmaśāstra.”
43
Bandyopadhyay, “Caste, Culture and Hegemony.”
44
Mahasweta Devi, Imaginary Maps: Three Stories. Gayatri C. Spivak (trans.) (New York:
Routledge, 1995), XX.
88 Maharajh & Amin
45
Paras Diwan, “Modern Hindu Law.”
46
Padma Srinivasan and Gary R. Lee, “The Dowry System in Northern India: Women's
Attitudes and Social Change,” Journal of Marriage and Family 66, no. 5 (2004): 1108-1117.
47
Sumona Vohra, “The Practice of Dowry from the Context of Hinduism,” Critical Half 1, no.
1 (2003): 33-35.
48
Stanley J. Tambiah, “Dowry and Bridewealth and the Property Rights of Women in South
Asia,” in Bridewealth and Dowry, (eds) Jack Goody and Stanley J. Tambiah (London:
Cambridge University Press, 1973), 62.
49
Ruth Vanita, “Wedding of Two Souls: Same-Sex Marriage and Hindu Traditions,” Journal
of Feminist Studies in Religion 20, no. 4 (2004): 119-135.
50
Kane, “History of Dharmaśāstra.”
A Gender Critique of the Eight Forms of Hindu Marriages 89
The forms of marriage are also linked to one’s caste. According to Hara,
“of these eight forms of marriage, the applicability of lawfulness and
unlawfulness differs from one caste to another.”51 For instance, the
Rakshasa form of marriage is approved exclusively for the Kshatriya52
caste. In the Brahma, Daiva, Arsha and Prajapatya forms of marriage a
notion of giving is implied. Hara, therefore, concludes that the Rakshasa
form of marriage should be interpreted in the light of what it means to be
a Kshatriya.53 If we have to accept the explanation that the eight forms of
marriage are caste dependent, then it means that each form is not there
as an artifice to increase the number of forms. It does indicate, though,
that each form is a practice that coheres with intentions that can be
either morally grounded or perverse. The outcome of married life for
Hindu brides depends then on the generosity, beneficence or depravity
of the groom and his family.
51
Minoru Hara, “A Note on the Rakshasa Form of Marriage,” Journal of the American
Oriental Society 94, no. 3 (1974): 296-306.
52
According to Rossen (2002), Kshatriya is made up of two words: ‘kshat’, which means
hurt and ‘trayate’, which means to give protection. A Kshatriya is therefore one who
protects from harm or violence.
53
Hara, “Rakshasa Form of Marriage.”
90 Maharajh & Amin
54
Gupta, “Love, Arranged Marriage.”
55
Vanita, “Wedding of Two Souls.”
56
Gupta, “Love, Arranged Marriage.”
57
Religioscope, www.religion.info
A Gender Critique of the Eight Forms of Hindu Marriages 91
58
Shakuntala Devi, The World of Homosexuals (Mystic, Connecticut: Lawrence Verry
Incorporated, 1977).
59
Vanita, “Wedding of Two Souls.”
60
Sharada Sugirtharajah, “Hinduism and Feminism: Some Concerns,” Journal of Feminist
Studies in Religion 18, no. 2 (2002): 97-104.
61
J. Sheela & N. Audinarayana, “Mate Selection and Female Age at Marriage: A Micro
Level Investigation in Tamil Nadu, India,” Journal of Comparative Family Studies 34, no. 4
(2003): 497-508.
62
Vanita, “Wedding of Two Souls,” 125.
63
Vanita, “Wedding of Two Souls.”
92 Maharajh & Amin
64
Isobel Julia Leslie, “Essence and Existence: Women and Religion in Ancient Indian
Texts,” in Women’s Religious Experience: Cross-Cultural Perspectives, ed. Pat Holden
(London: Croom, 1983), 89-112.
65
Alteker, “Women in Hindu Civilization.”
66
Gail Omvedt, “Towards a Theory of Brahmanic Patriarchy,” Economic and Political
Weekly 35, no. 4 (2000): 187.
67
Leslie, “Essence and Existence.”
68
Vanita, “The Self is not Gendered, Sulabha’s Debate with King Janaka,” NWSA Journal
15, no. 2 (2003): 79.
A Gender Critique of the Eight Forms of Hindu Marriages 93
69
Vanita, “The Self is not Gendered,” 78.
70
Devi, “Imaginary Maps,” 81.
71
Devi, “Imaginary Maps,” 107.
72
Devi, “Imaginary Maps,” xxvii.
73
Devi, “Imaginary Maps.”
94 Maharajh & Amin
Conclusion
In this article we have described and unveiled the ways in which each
form of Hindu marriage (apart from the Ghandarva marriage)
compromises and complicates women’s lives when a groom or his family
relegates them to the subject position of exploitation and bondage.
Parents, particularly fathers, play a vital role in marriage and are
complicit in the commodification and disposal of daughters. The different
forms of marriage discussed here indicate the religious and patriarchal
arrangements of marriage (both sanctioned and non-sanctioned) in
Hinduism which attain their legality through the simple ritual of
circumambulation of fire. The forms of marriage and the pathological
construction of women illustrate the ways in which power flows and
circulates for the benefit of men. There seems to be an objectification
and victimization of (and in some instances, a total disregard for) women
in the eight forms of marriage described.
74
Phyllis Chesler, “Worldwide Trends in Honor Killings,” Middle East Quarterly 17, no. 2
(2010): online.
75
Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak, In Other Worlds (New York: Routledge, 1998), 107.
A Gender Critique of the Eight Forms of Hindu Marriages 95
Bibliography
Alteker, Anant S. The Position of Women in Hindu Civilization from
Prehistoric Times to the Present Day. Second edition. Delhi:
Motilal Banarsidass, 1987.
Avellar, Sarah and Pamela J. Smock. “The Economic Consequences of
the Dissolution of Cohabiting Unions.” Journal of Marriage and
Family 67, no. 2 (2005): 315-327.
Bandyopadhyay, Sekhar. Caste, Culture and Hegemony: Social
Dominance in Colonial Bengal. New Delhi: Sage Publications,
2004.
Chesler, Phyllis. “Worldwide Trends in Honor Killings.” Middle East
Quarterly 17, no. 2 (2010): 3-11.
Devi, Mahasweta. Imaginary Maps: Three Stories. Gayatri C. Spivak
(trans.). New York: Routledge, 1995.
Devi, Shakuntala. The World of Homosexuals. Mystic, Connecticut:
Lawrence Verry Incorporated, 1977.
Diwan, Paras. Modern Hindu Law. Allahabad: Allahabad Law Agency,
2008.
Foucault, Michel. Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. Alan
Sheridan (trans.) New York: Vintage, 1979.
Foucault, Michel. The History of Sexuality, Volume 1: An Introduction.
Robert Hurley (trans.). New York: Vintage, 1990.
George, Mariam. “Religion, Patriarchy and the Subjugation of Women in
India.” International Journal of Interdisciplinary Social Science 3,
no. 3 (2008):21-30.
Girgis, Sherif, Robert P. George and Ryan T. Anderson. What is
Marriage? Man and Woman: A Defense. New York: Encounter
Books, 2012.
Grinstein-Weiss, Michal, Min Zhan and Michael Sherraden. “Saving
Performance in Individual Development Accounts: Does Marital
Status Matter?” Journal of Marriage and Family 68, no. 1 (2006):
192-204.
Gupta, Giri Raj. “Love, Arranged Marriage, and the Indian Social
Structure.” Journal of Comparative Family Studies 7, no. 1 (1976):
75-85.
Hara, Minoru. “A Note on the Rakshasa Form of Marriage.” Journal of
the American Oriental Society 94, no. 3 (1974): 296-306.
96 Maharajh & Amin
Steven J. Rossen (ed.). Holy War: Violence and the Bhagavad Gita.
Virginia, USA: Deepak Heritage Books, 2002.
Sharma, Arvind. “Marriage in Hindu Religious Tradition.” Journal of
Ecumenical Studies 20, no. 1 (1985): 69-80.
Sharma, Indira, Balram Pandit, Abhishek Pathak and Reet Sharma.
“Hinduism, Marriage and Mental Illness.” Indian Journal of
Psychiatry 55, no. 12 (2013): S243-S249.
Sheela, J. & N. Audinarayana. “Mate Selection and Female Age at
Marriage: A Micro Level Investigation in Tamil Nadu,
India.” Journal of Comparative Family Studies 34, no. 4 (2003):
497-508.
Singh, Upinder. A History of Ancient and Early Medieval India: From the
Stone Age to the 12th Century. Delhi: Pearson, Longman, 2008.
Spivak, Gayatri Chakravorty. In Other Worlds. New York: Routledge,
1998.
Srinivasan, Padma, and Gary R. Lee. The Dowry System in Northern
India: Women's Attitudes and Social Change. Journal of Marriage
and Family 66, no. 5 (2004): 1108-1117.
Sugirtharajah, Sharada. “Hinduism and Feminism: Some
Concerns.” Journal of Feminist Studies in Religion 18, no. 2
(2002): 97-104.
Swami, Jayādvaita. Vanity Karma: Ecclesiastes, the Bhagavad-Gītā, and
the Meaning of Life. Los Angeles, Stockholm, Johannesburg,
Sydney: The Bhaktivedanta Book Trust, 2015.
Tambiah, Stanley J. “Dowry and Bridewealth and the Property Rights of
Women in South Asia.” In Bridewealth and Dowry, edited by Jack
Goody and Stanley J. Tambiah, 59-169. London: Cambridge
University Press, 1973.
Vanita, Ruth. “The Self is not Gendered: Sulabha’s Debate with King
Janaka.” NWSA Journal 15, no. 2 (2003): 76-93.
Vanita, Ruth. “Wedding of Two Souls: Same-Sex Marriage and Hindu
Traditions.” Journal of Feminist Studies in Religion 20, no. 4
(2004): 119-135.
Vohra, Sumona. “The Practice of Dowry from the Context of
Hinduism.” Critical Half 1, no. 1 (2003): 33-35.
Yarhouse, Mark A. & Stephanie Kaye Nowacki. “The Many Meanings of
Marriage: Divergent Perspectives Seeking Common Ground.” The
Family Journal 15, no. 1 (2007): 36-45.
98 Maharajh & Amin