Family Structure in Sanatana Dharma (सनातनीय कुटुम्बव्यवस्था)

The family is the basic unit of society, the backbone of our social structure. It represents both an association as well as an institution. Every person is born in the family and it is from this association he learns language, behavioral pattern and social norms. He is also dependent on this association for education and food. A family is a universal group, it exists in tribal, rural, and urban communities among the followers of all religions across cultures. Protection and furthering the development of a society are two important things that are dependent on the family. Undivided families were the backbone of Bharatiya lifestyle until the recent centuries. Parivar or family was gave paramount importance to Gotras. Gotra means a family or a group of families who are descendants of important ancestors who were the founders of the family. This important factor is highly respected and followed even to the present day. It was rarely seen in other civilizations of ancient times.

We shall discuss about family with Bharatiya perspectives, their associations, functionality, the continuity of the family, importance of vivaha samskara, and modern outlook in this article.

परिचयः॥ Introduction

Human nature is defined as the inevitability of having to breathe, eat and drink, sleep, procreate, eliminate waste matter. While some of these functions, are performed individually, others cannot be so performed until humans organize themselves into cooperative groups. The groups that come into existence have the above reasons as a cause and the binding forces include several simple and complex principles of integration. Most obvious is the relationship between different members of a family based on marriage and on descent. Primarily, relationship is of three-fold nature, that between

• husband and wife
• parents and children
• siblings (children of same parents)

Bharatadesha referred to as India, is characterized by certain unique geographical features such as the isolation afforded by the northern Himalayan mountain ranges, the southern peninsula, the tropical heat and rainfall and presence of large tracts of alluvial plains in the north. On the historical front it is the seat of highly developed civilization, called Indus Valley civilization. Many social-anthropologists opine that both the geographical and historical features have a direct or indirect bearing on shaping the Indian society. The typical social features of the Indian society, involve the following factors

• Ashrama dharmas
• Varna vyavastha
• Gotras or lineages
• traditional joint families
• cultural aspects

In spite of the universal nature of the family one can see vast differences in its structure in different societies. In tribal and agrarian societies people of several generations live together. Such families are called "undivided families". These societies have large and joint families. However, in the modern industrial society the family is limited to husband, wife and their children. Sociologists call it a "nuclear family".

The family is composed of a number of members living together in a home. They have definite purposes in living together. Thus a family is an associated group of people governed by certain rules and procedures. In this sense the family is an institution.

In India, the gotra system has greatly contributed to the evolution of family structure across various cultural groups in India. Vivaha samskara is based on the gotra system, thus directly playing a role in the family structure. Indian society has been unique in world history because of its value system. The value system embedded in the dharmic lifestyle has shaped the social behavior of a person as well as the social institutions. The traditional value system was laid down by the ancient Indian seers, and they include the knowledge and actions based on concepts such as karma, punarjanma, purusharthas, varnas, ashrama, and samskaras.

कुटुम्बस्योद्गमः॥ Origin of Family

Much sociological and anthropological research has gone into examining the historical origins of the family. In the late 19th century, sociologists started investigation about the Hindu families. Western researchers like J. F. Mc Lennan (1827-1881), Lewis Morgan (1818 - 81), Westermarck He and Briffault propounded their theories about the origins of the family. For example, Morgan concluded that the family was unknown among the simplest and the rudest of peoples. The earliest form of social groupings and primitive society was formed of free sexual relationships, and ignorance of the role of paternity. Westermarck denies Morgan's scheme and concludes that the origin of family was the outcome of male possessiveness and jealousy, and sense of property. While a few such theories have been propounded, many later sociologists regarded the relative futility and uselessness of such historical approach. Data collected by conscientious investigators from all parts of the globe, at all levels of culture, have borne evidence to the existence of the family structure in communities.

Australian aborigines and the even more primitive Andaman Islanders, do have the family as a vital and socially significant grouping. Within the subcontinent of India, the most backward, materially and socially, of tribes like the Kadar, the Paniyan, the Malapantaram, the Chenchu, the Birhor and so on do have the familial organization.

The family is based on simple and obvious facts. It involves the recognition of just those who are closely related to one’s self through constant physical contiguity, physical cooperation, emotional bonds, and blood ties. Many sociologists consider that the family must have always existed, coevolving with the human culture.

Aspects about origin of family are always unclear and not definite, just like when we search for origin of a river above the surface we are unaware of any underground streams which feed the river. Such matters are always shrouded in the sands of time and social scientists can only hypothesize based on few evidences. Origins of hindu family have been mentioned in a few texts of Bharatiya samskuti.

One of the earliest hypothesis was that relationships between man and woman did not have any definite rules and free sexual interactions were led by promiscuity, free marriages (without any social rule basis) and hetaerism (general and temporary continued sexual relations out of wedlock) and evolved to group marriages, polygamy and communal marriages. Later a more rule based marriage system evolved in India. In Mahabharata, Anushasana parva, and Karna parva we find descriptions and discussions about such relationships and the consequent laws that have been implemented. However, we do not find references to the above hypothesis in Vaidik Sahitya which is earlier than Mahabharata. It should be emphasized that mantras related to marriage in the Atharvaveda (14.1.18) stressed on the following aspects about the relationship between a man and his wife

- the marriage ties the bride to her husband's family after leaving the father's house

- the wife lives with her husband in his house after marriage (soubhagyavati)

- the wife along with the husband participates in maintaining a home and raises a family (she becomes a putravati)

Rigveda (10.85.42) also states that the married couple stay in grhastha ashrama without ever separating from each other and enjoy all comforts with a long life.

All these blessings would be worthless if the promiscuity was the basis of a relationship between man and women. Atharvaveda (14.1.52) further states that during marriage when the groom holds the hand of the bride and states that she should live a long life (100 years) together with him. Such wish of staying together would be futile in the first place when conjugal relationships with many partners was the basis of a relationship. It should be noted that nowhere in the Brahmana, Dharmasutras and smrtigranthas, uninhibited conjugal relationship between man and woman were advocated or even described as a basis for the origin of a family. In such contradictory instances from Mahabharata and Vedas, Vedic injunctions are considered as pramana for origin of hindu families.

कुटुम्बस्य परिभाषा॥ Definition of Family

A number of modern sociologists and social scientists have defined the family in a number of ways. Many opine that the family is a definite and long-term group defined by the conjugal relationships that reproduce and bring up children. A family may include other blood-relations also but it is mainly formed by living together of man, woman and their children. The unit formed by their living together is called family. When people of many generations and relatives can also live together in a family. The unit that is thus formed is called ‘dynasty’ by Ogburn and Nimkoff. They distinguished between family and dynasty.

The families of India, however, comprised of the husband, wife, children, brothers and sisters, and parents, as is fully indicated by various rites given in the Grhyasutras. The grhasthashrama of a person is considered the basis of a family. A grhastha is the householder, who founds a family after vivaha samskara and supports people who are in other ashramas. Grhyagni was the symbol of a household and each household must possess its own Grhyagni. Families in India, since ancient times, were mostly patriarchal in character. In the Grhyasutras we find various samskaras and grhya yajnas involving different members of the family, the rights and duties entailed for them. For example, in the Grhapravesha ceremony, the sutras enjoin that the husband enters the newly-built house in the company of his wife and eldest son, and the daughter or sister are to light the fire in the kitchen in the new house. A family includes even the student, who along with the wife, son, daughter and brother of the householder has the authority to perform regular worship in the Grhyagni of a grhastha, in his absence. In case the son decides to have a separate household, his Grhyagni would be separate from that of his father. The existence of a joint family system is indicated by several Sutras.

Contrary to the sociologists' views of just the husband, wife and children constituting a family, the Indian family system advocated a united undivided family consisting of the parents, siblings and even students. It is no wonder that our seers expressed that the world is one family, "vasudaiva kutumbakam" which aptly depicts the inclusiveness of the sanatana kutumba vyavastha.

अयं बन्धुरयं नेति गणना लघुचेतसाम् । उदारचरितानां तु वसुधैव कुटुम्बकम् ॥ ७१॥ (Maha. Upan. 6.71)

We find the following version of the same purport in usage.

अयं निजः परो वेति गणना लघुचेतसाम्। उदारचरितानां तु वसुधैव कुटुम्बकम्॥

ayaṃ nijaḥ paro veti gaṇanā laghucetasām । udāracaritānāṃ tu vasudhaiva kuṭumbakam ॥

The vidhi given in the Grhyasutras that only the eldest son should kindle the Grhyagni, after the death of the householder, shows that after the householder passes away, the eldest son alone moves into the position of the householder, if all the brothers continue to live together without partitioning their inheritance. This vidhi is found in Sankhyayana, Kaushika and Gobhila grhyasutras.

पित्र्यमग्निं शमयिष्यञ्ज्येष्ठस्य चाविभक्तिन एकाग्निमाधास्यन् १ (Kaus. Sutr. 69.1)

This vidhi refers to the joint family system and undivided families, where the eldest son becomes the head of the household after the father. Until recent centuries, families in India chose to stay united as joint family.

Joint Family

A dharmic society in India owes its very existence to the united family system. Even after repeated invasions and influence of foreign rulers for thousand years, if a dharmic society is still seen today, it is due to the family structure. Even after 300 years of contrary education, people have remained faithful to the dharmas propounded by our seers. However, as with any lengthy battles, our family system has been gradually weakening while the education system introduced by McCauley and others are steadily gaining ground over centuries. We have seen how the world which is steadily imitating countries like America is a land of broken families. The dharmik values which shape the moral and ethical values of a person are not easily awakened unless given adequate exposure.