Women Should Be A Witness For Women In The Mahabharata

Katyayana maintains, in a similar manner that women should be a witness for women (when women are litigants), for (litigant of) the first three castes (witnesses should be of) the same caste as themselves, well balanced sudras for sudra (litigants), and men of the lowest castes, such as chandalas should be witnesses for lowest castes. 205

Brhaspati entails that in boundary disputes relating to house and field, peasants, artisans, hired labourers, headmen, hunters, gleaners, root-digger and fisherman are to act as witnesses. In relation to boundary disputes Narada’s list of false witnesses encompasses jugglers, public dancers, sellers of spirituous liquor, oil pressers, elephant drivers, leather workers, chandalas, sudras, peasants, son of shudra women and outcastes. Narada moderated the earlier provision regarding varna witnesses and provided that members of all varnas could depose as witnesses in …show more content…
212 In the Mahabharata, this concept was dissociated from heaven and earth. According to Moghe, the concept of witness in the epic is associated with punya and papa (good deed and sin). There lies the benefit for telling truth in the form of heaven and hell for telling lies. In the Mahabharata, 11.61.76, 213 it is pointed that he is called a witness who has directly heard (the conversation or) speech between the concerned persons) and kept in mind and who speaks the truth. It is further said that such a witness is never dissociated from Dharma and Artha, the two important goals of human life. What is interesting is that, it tells – whenever any sin takes place and is not censured the person who is the senior most and who is particularly present on the spot, incurs half the sin. One who is the direct performer of a sin incurs one-fourth of the sin. One fourth of the sin is however, incurred by the members of the assembly, who did not censure the censurable deed.