Consanguineous Marriages

[renuka]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Share Link

Dear all,

I want to ask a question here..as far as I know Consanguineous Marriages of the Mama kind(marrying ones own sister's daughter) is only practised in Tamil Nadu by various communities regardless of the Caste Hierarchy.
Where did this practise originate from or was it already prevalent in Tamil Nadu and was adopted by any community which settled there or was it brought in to Tamil Nadu by any other community which enforced it on everyone else?
But as far as I know its only practised in Tamil Nadu and this practise contributes immensely to the Kollywood Film Industry cos Mama sentiment has given rise to various Rasaathis and Rosapoos songs.

Some argue that on technical grounds the Akka ponnu is not the same Gotra as the Mamoi..so its allowed...so why is it not practised by other communities and some other communities also view it as Incest.

But frankly speaking one's sister is one's own flesh and blood so how can a man marry what comes out of his own sister..shouldnt the Akka ponnu be considered as ones own daughter also even though the Mamoi and Akka ponnu might be almost of the same age.

And also in engagements of Tamil Non Brahmins i am not sure of Brahmins..the Thai Maman( who is not marrying the girl) often garlands the bride 1st symbolic that the Mamoi had given consent for her to get engaged to the groom( thank God my dad objected to this practise and I never went thru this ritual)
Why so much liberty given to the Thai Mamas even as to consent for marriage?

Was this type of Consanguineous Marriage started in a situation where a particular community had a low female to male ratio(less girls) to marry and they devised this practise since on technical grounds the Gotra differs so they could minimize marrying outside their community?

Can anyone shed some light on this rather questionable practise which seems peculiar to Tamil Nadu?

 

[gopaindu]

mama marrying his neice in Tamil Nadu

This practice could have started with a view to ensure that the property remains intact within the family. In the absence of sons to the daughters in a family and also that the divided property between the son and the daughter remains intact through the marriage, this practice should have come into existance. This should have started in lower castes initially and later adopted by those who happen to belong to brahmin hereditary. As per Shastras,( I have heard ) being practiced in the northern part, marriage does not take place either in the gotra of mother or father as the daughters were not entitled to any property. In Kerala, in some community, only daughters are entitled to property which was handed over to them for doing service to the temple and coming matrilinear. This practice is still being adopted in Kerala. N.Rajagopalan,[email protected]

 

[renuka]

This practice could have started with a view to ensure that the property remains intact within the family. In the absence of sons to the daughters in a family and also that the divided property between the son and the daughter remains intact through the marriage, this practice should have come into existance. This should have started in lower castes initially and later adopted by those who happen to belong to brahmin hereditary. As per Shastras,( I have heard ) being practiced in the northern part, marriage does not take place either in the gotra of mother or father as the daughters were not entitled to any property. In Kerala, in some community, only daughters are entitled to property which was handed over to them for doing service to the temple and coming matrilinear. This practice is still being adopted in Kerala. N.Rajagopalan,[email protected]

Dear Gopa,

In the Jaat community of North India for example..marriage is not allowed in either the mothers Gotra and Fathers Gotra( as you have said that you have heard before.)

What baffles me..if you feel it was practised by the so called Lower Caste Hierarchy and later on adopted by the Brahmins how come Brahmins were so willing to adapt to a new practise which might not be right to the beliefs they were originally brought up in and further more the so called Lower Caste as far as I know dont really have a Gotra so how were they so aware which types of relationships can marry and which can not marry?

In the absence of a Gotra how did they determine this sort of arrangement?

 

[subbudu1]

What baffles me..if you feel it was practised by the so called Lower Caste Hierarchy and later on adopted by the Brahmins how come Brahmins were so willing to adapt to a new practise which might not be right to the beliefs they were originally brought up in and further more the so called Lower Caste as far as I know dont really have a Gotra so how were they so aware which types of relationships can marry and which can not marry?

Brahmins did not adopt any new practise suddenly. They have always been celebrating marital relationship with local tribes. Its but natural that the children of such people and their subsequent descendants pick up the culture where they live and the gods that dwell there. An american Indian is very keen about adapting to the local culture. That is it. Adopt the cultural practices of the tribe with whom you come to live.

 

[renuka]

Brahmins did not adopt any new practise suddenly. They have always been celebrating marital relationship with local tribes. Its but natural that the children of such people and their subsequent descendants pick up the culture where they live and the gods that dwell there. An american Indian is very keen about adapting to the local culture. That is it. Adopt the cultural practices of the tribe with whom you come to live.

Fair enough since DNA analysis of those present in Tamil Nadu supports your post but what is the earliest documented evidence that this practise was prevalent in the local residents and later on adopted by Brahmins..cos we are just assuming.. can anyone shed light here ? i dont get much info online also...

 

[happyhindu]

Brahmins did not adopt any new practise suddenly. They have always been celebrating marital relationship with local tribes. Its but natural that the children of such people and their subsequent descendants pick up the culture where they live and the gods that dwell there. An american Indian is very keen about adapting to the local culture. That is it. Adopt the cultural practices of the tribe with whom you come to live.

Shri Subbudu,

It seems you are saying brahmins did not originate from local tribes, but instead they came from somewhere else and started marrying local tribes. If so, please explain from where did 'brahmins' come. Please can you explain how and why would "brahmins" celebrate marital relationships with "local tribes" (??) And that too by defying the dharmashastras which are so strict about endogamy ?

 

[Nacchinarkiniyan]

It is impossible to trace the origin of most of the customs. But we can guess the reasons for many customs. In the case of Brahmins the wife(Sahadharmini) plays an important role in the rituals. She has to know the rituals in detail. Marrying from the same family or sub sub caste ensures that the the wife is already familiar with the rituals. But then this is only a wild guess. This theory also gets negated when we think back about child marriages.

The Hindu Joint family system depended on getting girls who would agree to continue the Joint Family system. A girl within the family is more likely to accept the joint family. Less likelihood of conflicts. A known Devil.... Again a wild guess.

And then there is always the aspect of landed and other property. A marriage within the family would lead to a consolidation.

We will never know why certain customs are practiced by only certain segments of the Hindu society.

In North India they carry the idea of the married girl belonging to a different family to extremes. Once when I was visiting the house of my friend's sister, I was shocked to note that he would not take meals in her house. I had my food there. Then he explained that taking of food in a sister's house is prohibited. He said that his father would not even take water where he being modern at least takes tea.

The Gotra system of the Jats has no relation to the Gotras of the Brahmins. There the Gotras are some kind of village/area identity. Even this is not defined well. The Khap Panchayats decide about the Gotras. There seems to be no common, well defined rule.

Marriage between close relatives is known in all old civilizations. In Egypt The King married his sister. Cleopatra married her brother.

The theories of marriages between close relatives being harmful is relatively new.

You can not apply new theories to old social customs. Again since these theories are based on statistical analysis, Doctors only warn the prospective couple that the statistical chances of their child being born with an inherited defect is higher than those who are not related. There is no cause and effect relationship established.

 

[subbudu1]

Shri Subbudu,

It seems you are saying brahmins did not originate from local tribes, but instead they came from somewhere else and started marrying local tribes. If so, please explain from where did 'brahmins' come. Please can you explain how and why would "brahmins" celebrate marital relationships with "local tribes" (??) And that too by defying the dharmashastras which are so strict about endogamy ?

There are many possibilities and I dont know which is the truth. But it is fairly talked about in TN that brahmins have come from outside the south , migrating and intermarrying with people. I believe that historians think that brahminism never existed in south India. So there was some migration to south. May be it was a small percentage and the greater percentage was drawn from local population. I dont know and I am just putting forward a possibility.It is also possible that before they came south , tribes of north India converted wholesale to brahminism.

 

[Nacchinarkiniyan]

The Brahmins and also many Indians believe that Intelligence is inherited. In fact they attribute heredity to many of the qualities of an individual. This is one of the reasons for marriage among close relatives.

 

[subbudu1]

The Brahmins and also many Indians believe that Intelligence is inherited. In fact they attribute heredity to many of the qualities of an individual. This is one of the reasons for marriage among close relatives.

Not only intelligence, they believe that wholesale traits and characters run in the family. But it may be also due to other factors such as property division.

 

[B.Krishnamurthy]

Dear Shri.Subbudu1,
There is a book on'Kasi Sesha sastry and his descendents"reported to be available in all public libraries and is used as a learning tool in one of the university in America to study the life style and the historical biography of Brahmins who lived in earlier periods.Kashi Sesha sastri lived in 17th century and belonged to vadama sect,Koundinya Gothram,Bodayana sect.According to that book all vadamas came from north.One group initially settled in Chola Desa and another group settled in Arcot.Thereafter they slowly migrated to Palaghat,Mysore etc.
Dr.Praveen Kumar a practicing Doctor is direct descendant of Kashi Sesha Sastri
(available on Email Id '[email protected]).He is also running a forum for brahmin Community where only orthodox view point of Sankara mutt,Shringeri/kanchi will be allowed.Many knowledgeable persons from different part of the world are members and sharing their knowledge.
About marriages in close relations,this topic was discussed sometime back and I am unable to locate the thread.

 

[renuka]

Dear Shri.Subbudu1,
There is a book on'Kasi Sesha sastry and his descendents"reported to be available in all public libraries and is used as a learning tool in one of the university in America to study the life style and the historical biography of Brahmins who lived in earlier periods.Kashi Sesha sastri lived in 17th century and belonged to vadama sect,Koundinya Gothram,Bodayana sect.According to that book all vadamas came from north.One group initially settled in Chola Desa and another group settled in Arcot.Thereafter they slowly migrated to Palaghat,Mysore etc.
Dr.Praveen Kumar a practicing Doctor is direct descendant of Kashi Sesha Sastri
(available on Email Id '[email protected]).He is also running a forum for brahmin Community where only orthodox view point of Sankara mutt,Shringeri/kanchi will be allowed.Many knowledgeable persons from different part of the world are members and sharing their knowledge.
About marriages in close relations,this topic was discussed sometime back and I am unable to locate the thread.

Dear sir,
where is that forum..i would like to know more..is it strictly for Brahmins or open to everyone? Can you please try to get info..like the name of the forum..

 

[Nacchinarkiniyan]

The existence of such a book or its contents does not prove the imigration theory. Historically it is not proved, though many of the Tamil Brahmins would like to believe in it.

 

[B.Krishnamurthy]

Dear Smt.Renuka Karthikayan,
I suggest you to send a email to Doctor Praveen,a nice cultured gentleman.He is the founder of'viprasamhita forum(google groups).Since you are more spiritually inclined person,in my opinion,you are more than qualified than a Brahmin by birth like me to be eligible to get into such forums.If you have no objection,I can send a mail to him about you and report back to you.
You may,ifyou like ,viewthe following:-
www.avsrinivasan.com/epics/brahmins.html.
Dr.A.V.Srinivasan is the founder,Connecticutvalley Hindu Temple Society. He lives in Glastonbury,CT and serves as Vice-Chairman Town Council.I read his article about the origin of'Caste System' in Hindu Society and how it was wrongly interpreted at a later date.It was well written.

 

[renuka]

Dear Smt.Renuka Karthikayan,
I suggest you to send a email to Doctor Praveen,a nice cultured gentleman.He is the founder of'viprasamhita forum(google groups).Since you are more spiritually inclined person,in my opinion,you are more than qualified than a Brahmin by birth like me to be eligible to get into such forums.If you have no objection,I can send a mail to him about you and report back to you.
You may,ifyou like ,viewthe following:-
www.avsrinivasan.com/epics/brahmins.html.
Dr.A.V.Srinivasan is the founder,Connecticutvalley Hindu Temple Society. He lives in Glastonbury,CT and serves as Vice-Chairman Town Council.I read his article about the origin of'Caste System' in Hindu Society and how it was wrongly interpreted at a later date.It was well written.

Dear Sir..

Thanks a lot..

 

[B.Krishnamurthy]

I agree with the views of Shri.Nacchinarkiniyan that ordinary mortals like me cannot create historical evidence for the posterity (after 300 years) to believe that one Krishnamurthy was born in the year
1933 and was alive till 8th,May,2011till 01-48am.But someone publishes a book in the year 1925 about some person who lived in 17th centuary and a decent person says that he is the
descendant of that person,one can accept as historical truth.
I request interested members to google about KASI Sesha Sastry and see for themselves.

 

[happyhindu]

There are many possibilities and I dont know which is the truth. But it is fairly talked about in TN that brahmins have come from outside the south , migrating and intermarrying with people. I believe that historians think that brahminism never existed in south India. So there was some migration to south. May be it was a small percentage and the greater percentage was drawn from local population. I dont know and I am just putting forward a possibility.It is also possible that before they came south , tribes of north India converted wholesale to brahminism.

Shri Subbudu,

If priests came from outside tamilakam would that make them 'outsiders'? Dieties majorly favored in South was Shiva and Amman. Naturally priests and philosophers were brought in from other centres of India where Shiva and Shakti were primary dieties, such as Kashmir and Bengal. And it is very much possible that these priests married local women.

But how different were the Kashmiri and Bengali priests from the native ones? Were they 'vedic brahmins' or were they just priests and philosophers? This paper (that you quoted in another thread) says Iyers and Iyengars of Tamil Nadu are closley associated with Brahmins of West Bengal. And all 3 of them (that is, Iyers, Iyengars and Bengali Brahmins) cluster or show close affinity with Mahisya and Bagdi groups of West Bengal.

Mahishya are fisher folk and Bagdi are farmers. The Mahishya finding makes sense with SN Sadasivan who states an account from Vishnu Purana wherein Ripunjaya, a Bengali king drove out existing brahmin priests from his realm and promoted (tribal) priests as brahmins (from the tribes of Kaivarttans, Pulindas, Madrakas, and Patus), who still like their forefathers love Fish as their staple food. It would seem that inspite of being converted into brahmins, they still retained fish consumption in their diet.

The Vyasokta brahmins of Bengal were also converts from fisher folk into Brahmins just like the Matti brahmins of Karnataka. Similarly an economically well-off community of Weavers in Bengal clamoured for Brahmin status and got it. Clamouring for brahmin status was nothing new, and back in time, kings of low origin converting tribal priests into brahmins was also IMO fairly common (because it favored their own scheme of things wherein such 'kings' promoted themselves as 'kshatriyas').

Regards.

 

[sangom]

AFAIK, the maamaa-marumaaL kalyaanam among tabras was due directly to the penury and high fertility experienced by many families even in the second half of the last century. One of my friends (a Palghat Iyer) once told jokingly that among them the grandmother, mother, sister and niece would be pregnant contemporaneously . Under such conditions if a particular couple had, say 5 or 6 daughters and then one or two sons, the poor vaideeki brahman (PVB) father used to find it difficult to marry off the daughters. Hence a sense of family responsibility fell (indirectly though) that the PVB must be helped by his unmarried and age-wise eligible brother-in-law to shoulder the life-time responsibility of at least one of the girls. And in many families this happened also. I was told about such marriages even in my grandfather's generation, but the oldest instance I know in detail is about 60 years old. The girl is now 87, husband (her maternal uncle who was about 9 years elder) is no more, their 3 children (2 boys and a girl) and grandchildren are all hale and healthy.

Another, much later instance, the couple did not have any issue and so they have adopted a girl child as per law.

 

[subbudu1]

Shri Subbudu,

If priests came from outside tamilakam would that make them 'outsiders'? Dieties majorly favored in South was Shiva and Amman. Naturally priests and philosophers were brought in from other centres of India where Shiva and Shakti were primary dieties, such as Kashmir and Bengal. And it is very much possible that these priests married local women.

But how different were the Kashmiri and Bengali priests from the native ones? Were they 'vedic brahmins' or were they just priests and philosophers? This paper (that you quoted in another thread) says Iyers and Iyengars of Tamil Nadu are closley associated with Brahmins of West Bengal. And all 3 of them (that is, Iyers, Iyengars and Bengali Brahmins) cluster or show close affinity with Mahisya and Bagdi groups of West Bengal.

Mahishya are fisher folk and Bagdi are farmers. The Mahishya finding makes sense with SN Sadasivan who states an account from Vishnu Purana wherein Ripunjaya, a Bengali king drove out existing brahmin priests from his realm and promoted (tribal) priests as brahmins (from the tribes of Kaivarttans, Pulindas, Madrakas, and Patus), who still like their forefathers love Fish as their staple food. It would seem that inspite of being converted into brahmins, they still retained fish consumption in their diet.

The Vyasokta brahmins of Bengal were also converts from fisher folk into Brahmins just like the Matti brahmins of Karnataka. Similarly an economically well-off community of Weavers in Bengal clamoured for Brahmin status and got it. Clamouring for brahmin status was nothing new, and back in time, kings of low origin converting tribal priests into brahmins was also IMO fairly common (because it favored their own scheme of things wherein such 'kings' promoted themselves as 'kshatriyas').

Regards.

Very very interesting. The connections could run far more. Let me quote from wikipedia about Mahishya who are linked to Iyers and Bengali brahmins.

The Bengali peoples historian Sevananda Bharati is of the opinion that the ancient home of the Mahishya race is near the present day Ratnavati on the bank of the Narmada River, which was then known as Mahishamati.[2] For whatever reason, the Mahishyas migrated from Ayodhya and entered what is now Midnapore through the Chota Nagpur Plateau.[2] Biharilal Kalye believes that the founder of the Ganga Dynasty of Orissa, Anantavarman belonged to the Mahishya race

This is where again many Iyers have come from - the banks of Narmada. Many Iyers pray to Narmada everyday. Most Bengali brahmins are also supposed to have migrated from Kannauj during the rule of a sena king.

 

[B.Krishnamurthy]

I think the views expressed by Shri.Sangom could be a valid and convincing reason for close relation marriages. Even in my family there were many close relation marriages and all had children except in one case.

 

[renuka]

Got this from another forum:



[h=1]Marrying a maternal uncle's daughter (mAtulakanyA vivAha)[/h]





Regarding marriage matters, the dharma sindhu says,
"स्वकुलदेशाचाराविरुद्धस्यैव शास्त्रस्य विवाहेऽनुसर्तव्यत्वात्", one must
follow the shAstra that does not conflict with the tradition of one's own
family and of one's geographical location. एवं मातुलकन्यापरिणयनेऽपि, this
has to be also followed in the matter of marrying one's maternal uncle's (or
paternal aunt's) daughter. A shruti mantra in support of marrying a maternal
uncle's daughter is stated: " तृप्तां जहुर्मातुलस्येव योषा भागस्ते
पैतृष्वसेयी वपामिव ", इति मन्त्रलिंगैः| O Indra! Accept as your share this
animal fat offering (vapA used in the animal sacrifice) just as the daughter
of a maternal uncle or paternal aunt is accepted (as wife). This occurs in
the sarpa sUkta of the R^ig Veda.

Also, in practice, a daughter can marry her maternal uncle. Note that in
the shruti above, there is no mention of daughters of the maternal aunt or
paternal uncle. So these girls are treated as one's sisters.

But there are smR^itis that prohibit such marriages between cousins. In
support of this view, a smR^iti statement is quoted:

मातुलस्य सुतामूढ्वा मातृगोत्रां तथैव च। समानप्रवरां चैव त्यक्त्वा
चान्द्रायणं चरेत्॥

If one marries the daughter of his maternal uncle or a girl claiming the
gotra of her maternal grandfather or a girl with the same pravara, he should
abandon her and observe the chandrAyaNa penance. It is later clarified that
such abandonment of the girl, should she belong to the brAhmaNa varNa, means
the abandonment of sexual relations with her and doing dhArmic activities
without her. She is still to be cared for and provided food, shelter, and
clothing, and must be looked after by the "husband" as his own mother.
mAtR^ivat paripAlayet.

However, reconciling the opposing views, the dharmasindhukAra opines:

इत्यादि स्मृतीनां बाधाद् येषां कुले मातुलकन्यापरिणयः परंपराप्राप्तस्तैः स
कार्यः "गोत्रान्मातुः सपिंडाच्च विवाहो गोवधस्तथा" इति मातुलकन्याविवाहस्य
कलिवर्ज्यत्ववचनमपि येषां कुले देशे मातुलकन्याविवाहो नास्ति तत्परम् ।

Those, in whose family there is a tradition of marrying a maternal uncle's
daughter, may do so. Marrying a girl from the same gotra or a girl in
mAtrusapiNDa relation, killing a cow for the madhuparka are prohibited in
the Kali Yuga. Marrying the daughter of a maternal uncle is also included in
the list. (But this) prohibition of marrying the daughter of the maternal
uncle applies only to those whose family and locality do not have the
tradition of marrying the maternal uncle's daughter.

मातुलकन्यापरिणयनस्यानेकश्रुतिस्मृतिसिद्धत्वात्| There are many statements
from the shruti and smriti that support marriage with a maternal uncle's
daughter.

 

[renuka]

Just want some feedback:

A shruti mantra in support of marrying a maternal
uncle's daughter is stated: " तृप्तां जहुर्मातुलस्येव योषा भागस्ते
पैतृष्वसेयी वपामिव ", इति मन्त्रलिंगैः| O Indra! Accept as your share this
animal fat offering (vapA used in the animal sacrifice) just as the daughter
of a maternal uncle or paternal aunt is accepted (as wife). This occurs in
the sarpa sUkta of the R^ig Veda.


In the above line..It says Accept. But as in which context its not specified..It really doesnt say accept as wife..but its assumed in the translation that it means wife.
Need someone to shed some light here.

 

[renuka]

I dont know if I am right here but Vapaa means fat/marrow and here its assumed that an animal is sacrificed for the fat.

But Ghee is also Fat of Animal Origin so I was just wondering if the above translation is 100% correct ?

I might be wrong and if anyone can shed some light here..I would be glad.