Chapter XVI. Veshyā
Volume II: Part I pp. 637–639
The chapter dedicated to the Veśyā offers a detailed scholarly exploration into the historical trajectory of this institution, firmly establishing its presence and evolution from Vedic times onwards. This meticulous tracing of its origins underscores the deep historical roots and the intricate societal role it played within the ancient Indian context. Central to this discussion is an examination of the specific legal and social standing of concubines. Kane rigorously analyzes the various provisions and customary considerations that articulated their status, with a particular emphasis on their rights to maintenance. This analysis not only delineates the prescribed entitlements but also sheds crucial light on the frameworks through which a measure of economic and social security was, at times, extended to these women within the broader societal structure.
— Synopsis by P.V. Kane, from History of Dharmaśāstra
Chapter XVI. Veshyā
Veśyā—(Courtezan). This work dealing among other matters with the position of women and marriage in India would be incomplete if nothing were said about prostitutes and concubineṣ Prostitution has existed from the dawn of history in all countries and in the absence of statistics it is difficult to say whether it flourished more in one country than in another or whether it existed to a greater or lesser extent in ancient days as compared with modern timeṣ The article in the Encyclopædia Britannica on prostitution will be an eye-opener to many who will be inclined to turn their nose at Indian conditionṣ
From the Ṛgveda we find that there were women who were common to several men i. e. who were courtezans or prostituteṣ In Ṛg. I. 167. 4 the bright Maruts (storm gods) are said to have become associated with the young (lightning), just as men become associated with a young courtezaṇ1 It has already been seen how in Ṛg. II. 29. 1 reference is made to a woman who gives birth in secret to a child and leaves it aside. In Ṛg. I. 66. 4, I. 117. 18, I. 134. 3 and other places jāra (paramour or secret lover) is spoken of. In Gaut. XXII. 27 it is said that for killing a woman who is a brāhmaṇī by birth only and who subsists by harlotry no prāyaścitta is necessary but eight handfuls of corn may be gifteḍ Manu IV. 209 forbids a brāhmaṇa from taking food offered by harlots (vide also IV. 219); and Manu IX. 259 requires the king to punish clever (or deceitful) harlotṣ In the Mahābhārata courtezans are an established institutioṇ The Ādiparva (115. 39) narrates how a veśyā waited upon Dhṛtarāṣṭra when his wife Gāndhārī was pregnant.2 In the Udyogaparva (30. 38) Yudhiṣṭhira sends greetings to the veśyās of the Kauravaṣ Courtezans are describ-ed as going out to welcome Kṛṣṇa when he came on a mission of peace to the Kaurava court (Udyoga 86. 15). When the Pāṇḍava armies are described as about to start for battle it is said that carts, markets and courtezans also accompanied them (Udyoga 151. 58 ). Vide also Vanaparva 239. 37, Karṇaparva 94. 26. Yāj. 3 II. 290 divides concubines into two sorts, avaruddhā (one who is kept in the house itself and forbidden to have intercourse with any other male) and bhujiṣyā (concubine who is not kept in the house, but elsewhere and is in the special keeping of a person ) and prescribes a fine of fifty paṇas against another person having intercourse with theṃ Nārada 4 (strīpuṃsa, 78-79) says ' intercourse is permitted with wanton women (svairiṇī) who are not brāhmaṇa by caste, with a prostitute, a female slave, or a female not restrained by her master, if these belong to a caste lower than oneself; but it is forbidden with women of superior caste. But when these very women are the kept mistresses ( of a person ) intercourse with them by a stranger is as much a crime as intercourse with another's wife. Such women must not be approached, though intercourse with them is not forbidden (on the ground of caste &c ), since they belong to another.' On Yāj. II. 290 the Mit., after quoting the Skandapurāṇa to the effect that prostitutes constitute a separate caste being sprung from certain Apsurases (heavenly nymphs) called pañcacūḍās, states that such courtezans as are not kept specially by a person do not incur any sin, nor punishment at the hands of the king, if they have intercourse with men of the same or a superior caste, nor do men approaching them incur any penalty if they are not avaruddhā. But the men who visit them incur sin (which is an unseen result ), since the smṛtis ordain that men should be devoted to their wives (vide Yāj. I. 81 ) and the prājāpatya penance is prescribed for him who has intercourse with a veśyā (vide Atri v. 271). Nārada 5 (vetanasyāpanākarma 18) lays down that if a public woman after getting her fee refuses to receive the customer, she shall pay twice the amount of the fee and the same fine shall be imposed on a man who does not pay the (stipulated ) fee, after having had intercourse with a veśyā. Vide Yāj. II. 292 and Matsyapurāṇa 227. 144-145 for Ch. XVI] similar provisionṣ The Matsyapurāṇa chap. 70 dilates upon veśyādharma. The Kāmasūtra I. 3. 20 defines a gaṇikā as a veśyā who is most accomplished and proficient in the 64 kalāṣ Aparārka (p. 800, on Yāj. II. 198) quotes Nārada (cited above) and several verses of the Matsyapurāṇa about veśyāṣ
Concubines being recognized by society, the smṛtis provided for their maintenance. During the life-time of a person keeping a concubine, the latter has no legal right to proceed against the former. Nārada (dāyabhāga 6 52) and Kātyāyana lay down that even when the property of a deceased person escheats to the king for want of heirs (except in the case of the deceased being a brāhmaṇa) the king has first to provide for the main-tenance of the concubines of the deceased, of his slaves and for his śrāddhaṣ The Mit. says that the concubines here referred to are those called avaruddhā (and not bhujiṣyā) and that even the kept mistresses of a deceased brāhmaṇa are entitled to maintenance from his property. The Privy Council in Bai Nagubai v. Bai Monģibai have gone beyond the Mit. and have held that all concubines (whether kept in the house practically as members of the family i. e. avaruddhā or not so kept i. e. bhujiṣyā) within the exclusive keeping of a Hindu till his death are entitled to maintenance from his property after his death, provided they are continuously chaste thereafter. 7
The rights of the illegitimate children of concubines tc inheritance or maintenance will be dealt with later on under inheritance.
Out of the saṁskāras enumerated above (pp. 195-197), the Mahāyajñas, Utsarjana and Upākarma will be described under the next chapter, viz. āhnika and antyeṣṭi under āśauca.