Although parental love, filial piety, and fraternal solidarity are said to be the
foundation of the householder’s life, abandonment of joint living as one chulah,
and complete or partial partition of the jointly owned estate, are commonly
expected to occur among the Pandits (see ibid.: ch. 8). In terms of the ideology
of the householder, fraternal strife is considered morally reprehensive, but prac-
tical considerations are allowed to override morality. Moreover, the blame for
intrahousehold bickering is cleverly placed on the shoulders of the wives who
are, of course, the a ̄matiand not the za ̄mati. And the decline of morality in the
dark age ofkaliyugis always cited as a cause of things that should not happen.
In this context it is noteworthy that the domestic scene two thousand years
ago was essentially the same as it is today in most Hindu homes. Thus, we read
in the Ma ̄nava Dharmas ́a ̄stra): “After the father and mother (are dead), the broth-
ers [may] assemble and divide the paternal estate equally, for they have no power
over two of them while they are alive” (Manu 9.104 and 111). More signifi-
cantly, apropos the contention of the decline of morality: “They [the brothers]
may live together in [mutual respectfulness], or they may live separately if they
wish for religious merit; for religious merit increases in separation, and so sepa-
rate rituals are conducive to religious merit” (Doniger and Smith 1991: 209,
210). It is, of course, questionable how much considerations of religious merit
count in contemporary times, but division of jointly owned estates does often
occur with a view to reducing the income tax burden.^4
The question of religious merit apart, performance of rituals is indeed a major
concern of Brahman and other upper caste households even if only as a matter
of convention. There are two main types of domestic rituals. Firstly, those asso-
ciated with life-cycle events (notably birth, initiation, marriage and death),
known as sam.ska ̄ra, and those that affirm the bonds between ancestors and
descendents, called the s ́ra ̄ddha. Secondly, there are the rituals that seek to estab-
lish purposive and meaningful communication between householders and
supernatural “beings.” These may be supplicatory in character as is the daily
worship to one’s chosen deities, or contractual, or even coercive. The rituals per-
formed by lower caste Hindu households may not be an exact replica of upper
caste rituals, and may not involve the specialist services of a Brahman priest, but
they too fall into the two categories mentioned above. Work-related rituals also
take place in artisan and peasant households.
Sustained by economic activity, reinforced by religious observances, the life of
the Hindu householder is nourished and legitimized by the values of love,
sharing, and solidarity. It has been explicated that, while “authority, rights and
duties, land, inheritance, the distribution of resources within the joint family,
prestations, reproduction, and so forth” are critical factors in the construction
of interpersonal relations in Bengali households, often providing the basis for
conflict, love (prı ̄ti,prema) holds them together. “If kinsmen have the proper kind
of love for one another then they will enjoy well-being and they will not be
divided by greed, selfishness, or envy” (Inden and Nicholas 1977: 87–8).
A variety of loves is said to be discernible, namely conjugal, filial, fraternal,
parental, and the love between brothers and sisters. Love may be egalitarian or
298 t. n. madan