6

As discussed in this QnA: What is the recommended age for marriage for girls as per Shastra?

We have lots of guidelines for how much "younger" a bride must be compared to her groom. For instance:

A man, aged thirty years, shall marry a maiden of twelve who pleases him, or a man of twenty-four a girl eight years of age; if (the performance of) his duties would (otherwise) be impeded, (he must marry) sooner.

In another answer, as to why marriage must happen just before a girl reaches puberty, it's quoted by the OP as:

The aim is to ensure that the foundation of marriage is based on innocent attraction and attachment before kama/carnal desire enters mind.

So, reconciling both the answers, it becomes clear that "innocent - attraction" must only happen for the girl and not the man. Since we can still have a groom as old as 30 marrying a 12 year old girl. A 24 year old person is not "innocent" in the sense of the word.

Clearly, as per "modern-standards", the girl is still a child while the man is a grown up adult. Even when the girl will have menarche (which is around 14/15 years of age), she'll still be a child legally while the man is a 26/27 year old adult.

So, my question is -

Is this huge age-gap (of at least 10 or 15 years) between the wife and husband are necessarily prescribed by the Śhāstras? Is there any scripturally prescribed "critical age" for men?

Just like we have for females the "puberty" as a deadline to get married, is there something similar for males too?
Also, is the claim of "innocent-attraction" derived from any canonical or authoritative source ?

Vivikta
  • 13,289
  • 4
  • 18
  • 81
  • 3
    that claim is sourced in my answer itself. you should also add that marriage does not imply sexual relations, and that sex does not happen before puberty & maturity - which is a big issue when talking about this subject in today's societal climate, especially if you only mention the marriage-age without the context of sex-age – ram Jun 06 '21 at 16:01
  • 4
    regarding men, marriage is once he does Samavartana (graduation) after studies (usually around age 20 = upanayana at 7 + 12 years for learning 1 veda + 1 year to search for, find, engage and marry). How much/how long he wants to study is up to him, he can study all 4 vedas till age 48 (12 per veda) if he wants. But it is recommended to 'start gruhastha fires before hair turns grey' - i can't find reference for it handy. – ram Jun 06 '21 at 16:16
  • So in that case, if he chooses to study all the four Vedas, and thus turns 48 when finding a bride, he'll still have to find a 12-year-old pre-pubescent girl only (and not a teen or a bit "mature" girl, considering marrying a post-pubescent girl is a scriptural sin), for his bride? @mar – Vivikta Jun 07 '21 at 02:19
  • 4
    probably.. the case of Chyavana Rishi who was very old, marrying a young bride as a result of her poking his eye out, and how she was still devoted to him, and as a result Ashvini Kumaras made a churnam that got the Rishi back his youth, and hence why we call it 'ChyavanPrash', is well-known. Although above maybe exceptions, the actual practical cases of someone marrying at 48, let alone marrying a young girl, are almost none. If they are able to curb their hormones till age 48, they've probably chosen the path of naishtika brahmachari. – ram Jun 07 '21 at 06:08
  • 3
    again, you have to keep in mind, these are exalted folks for whom the only purpose of marriage is sat-putra. they have sex only for procreation - hence probably once or twice in their lifetime. no concept of contraception, or pre-pubescent sex, any other sexual deviancy. marriage != sex. degenerates in kali yug cannot even fathom this level of spirituality, so they'll immediately jump to the only thing their carnal mind takes them to - pedophilia. – ram Jun 07 '21 at 06:09
  • Well, I think if the sole purpose is procreation only, that purpose can very well be served by a woman who's of age and mature by physiology too (i.e., past at least 20 years). It's not about the denigrated attitude of 'Kaliyugi People' but a valid question that: "If the sole purpose of marriage for these 'exalted-people' is begetting a sata-puta, then why just focus one's eyes on an 'overtly-young girl'. when the same purpose can be fulfilled by a fully mature woman (obviously not a menopaused one) too.'. The idea of "innocent-attraction" is not convincing too . @mar. – Vivikta Jun 07 '21 at 06:40
  • @mar ,The idea of "innocent-attraction" is not convincing too . beacuse if that's the case then age must be same for both. Ascribing and generalizing "lustful thoughts" to one gender and thus justifying that they must be young always for marriage, while claiming the other gender is "free from lustful thoughts" - if that's the reasoning, then IMHO that's definitely not convincing. "Lustful-thoughts" are not gender-favoured. Anyone can be subject to them. Even our Pauranika stories symbolize that, when Shiva gets swayed by MAyA (obviously that's leela), but the message is highlighted well. – Vivikta Jun 07 '21 at 06:44
  • 4
    you're probably swayed by today's fashion trend to equalize male and female physiology and psychology. it is much more important for a woman to remain chaste than for a man. the keyword is 'Sat-Putra'. not just any 'Putra'. For that, it is paramount that the girl does not have any (or multiple) sexual partners prior to marriage. and since kama is very strong, a societal protective barrier called marriage must be tied around young girls just as it is done for young saplings, to prevent random goats from grazing it. – ram Jun 07 '21 at 14:38
  • 4
    you might immediately counter with exceptions from Puranas about non-wedded women giving birth to exalted men - but all those are Deva Avataras. If you're not a deva, you have to follow human rules. – ram Jun 07 '21 at 14:40
  • I don't need to counter archaic reasonings. Physiology is underdeveloped for a girl (to bear a child properly) until 20 as per science and that's enough evidence. Period. @mar, Male and female physiology being different is no rocket science, however "attributing" prejudiced patriarchial nonsense of "kama" to specifically women might take some theological rocket science though. Now, any rant against Science is falsifiable as Adi Sankara observes - Even a hundred statements of Shruti (let alone other Shashtras) are of no use if they call fire cold or light non-luminous." – Vivikta Jun 07 '21 at 16:33
  • 4
    "until 20 as per science and that's enough evidence" - nonsensic false evidence. Period. Even the age of consent in 'liberal' european countries contradicts your claim. If you don't believe shastras on how chastity is different for men and women, that's your headache. I have alread talked about falsifiability here. Not all truths are objective. Subjective truths are not falsifiable, but verifiable. – ram Jun 07 '21 at 19:50
  • 4
    If you can prove to me that sugar tastes sweet without requiring that I taste it first, I'll accept your claims on science being superior. "as Adi Sankara observes" - by your logic, a blind man can claim that shastras which says "light is lumious" is wrong, or a thief can claim shastras which say "thieves must be punished" is biased. Individual perception can never supersede Shastras. – ram Jun 07 '21 at 19:54
  • Not interested in your petulant "typical whataboutery based straw-man arguments (thief, blind people, et al.)" with you dear @mar. You may vent your anger and anxiety against modernity and people not following their religion to the "T" with someone else below. For me, it ends here. Thanks for your valuable time. !! OM Hari OM - tatsat !! – Vivikta Jun 08 '21 at 03:02
  • it's not whataboutery. it's an analogy. Learn to vent your anger against shastras to their original author (Bhagavan), and hopefully he sets you right. – ram Jun 08 '21 at 14:43
  • 1
    @Vivikta It's not a sin to marry a post-pubescent girl, since that's the main form of marriage for non-brahmanas since they do love marriages, which is recommended for kshatriyas, etc. and that's only possible after puberty. – Ikshvaku Jun 08 '21 at 20:26
  • 1
    @Vivikta Science doesn't support women giving birth in their 20s. Women giving birth very late in their 20s and 30s is a very recent development in human history that arose due to industrialism and equal rights movements. Biologically, women are ready for childbirth as soon as menstruation starts. – Ikshvaku Jun 08 '21 at 20:28
  • @Vivikta System will notify Mods when to move comments to chat.. Mods move comments to chat when there are many offtopic conversations. if conversations are useful, there's no need to move comments to chat Please don't flag too many flags. – The Destroyer Jun 09 '21 at 03:42
  • @Vivikta And if one Mod is not sure of a flag, he waits for opinion of other mods. So, be patient if your flag is not handled immediately. – The Destroyer Jun 09 '21 at 04:24

1 Answers1

5

Is there a scripturally recommended age of marriage for men?

For dvijas (brahmin, kshatriya, and vaishya), it's immediately after Vedic study is completed. The time when Vedic study is completed is entirely flexible:

Gautama (2. 52. 54).—‘One should keep up his studentship over one Veda, for twelve years;—or for twelve years over each Veda;—or over all, till they have been got up.’

But once Vedic study is done, whenever that is, he should immediately try to find a wife:

Manu 3.2 - Having learnt, in due course, three Vedas, or two Vedas, or one Veda, he should enter upon the state of the householder, having never broken the vow of brahmacharya.

This doesn't apply for shudras, since there is no Vedic learning for shudras. And since there is no fixed time prescribed for shudra males to get married, it follows that there is no specified time for shudra males to get married.

This is what's written in the dharma shastras. In actual practice, the marriage custom of age difference of bride and groom is seen to vary slightly in the Puranas, Itihasas, and Indian history. What is seen is that usually the girl is around the age of puberty and the man is in his late teens or early 20s.

Ikshvaku
  • 22,130
  • 2
  • 39
  • 116