By Divya Munjal
Last evening, I attended the funeral of a known person in my city. He was in his seventies and had two daughters. One of the daughters lives in the United States, so she could not attend the funeral. The second daughter lives locally. She and her husband were around and were helping with the funeral arrangements.
As the ceremony began, a surprising debate emerged among the neighbours: “Who will perform the funeral rites since there is no son?”
I was taken aback. While I have often read about traditional Hindu funeral customs, seeing them unfold in real life was a different experience. The neighbours argued that, according to tradition, only a son can perform these rites. Some insisted that a son-in-law cannot step in, no matter how close he is to the family.
At that moment, I realised how outdated interpretations of tradition can sometimes overshadow practical care for the surviving family. I quietly thought, “If you ask a neighbour or a distant relative to perform these rituals, will they actually look after the surviving spouse and the family afterwards? Probably not.” The responsibility, care and continuity of support naturally fall on those who are emotionally invested: the daughters and their husbands in this case.
This brings us to a question many families face: Can a son-in-law perform funeral rites if there is no son, or if the son cannot be present?
Understanding traditional norms
In Hindu traditions, funeral rites, known as antyesti, are typically performed by the eldest son. The son is considered the primary mourner and is expected to perform rituals to ensure the departed soul’s peaceful journey. Historically, this has been tied to beliefs about family lineage, inheritance and religious obligations.
However, when there is no son, communities often face a dilemma. Some hold firmly to the idea that without a son, the rites cannot be properly completed. Others try to find a male relative or even a family pandit to fill the gap. In many cases, this creates confusion, unnecessary tension and sometimes even disputes among neighbours.
What is rarely discussed, though, is the practical side of this tradition: Who will care for the surviving spouse and maintain family responsibilities after the funeral? Who will ensure that the family continues to function emotionally and socially?
The son-in-law option
The son-in-law, or jamai, is often overlooked in this context, but in reality, he is as much a part of the family as a son would be. He shares a bond of responsibility, love and care with his wife and her family. If the daughters of the deceased are married and their husbands are willing and capable, it makes sense to entrust the funeral rites to the son-in-law.
Allowing a son-in-law to perform the rituals does not diminish tradition; rather, it reflects a practical and compassionate interpretation of tradition. It honours the spirit of care and responsibility that the rites are meant to uphold. After all, the ultimate goal of these rituals is not merely to check off ceremonial boxes but to ensure the emotional and social support of the surviving family.
Observing real-life scenarios
Returning to my experience at the funeral, I tried to gently explain this perspective to the neighbours. I said, “The son-in-law is like a son now. He will take care of the surviving spouse and the family going forward. That is what matters most.”
Initially, it required effort. Some were hesitant, deeply rooted in traditional beliefs. But once they reflected on the point that asking an unrelated person to perform the rites would not ensure the family’s welfare, their resistance softened. The emotional and practical care provided by the son-in-law was far more valuable than rigid adherence to tradition.
This scenario is not unique. Across many families in India and the diaspora, situations arise where there is no son or the son is unable to attend due to distance, work or other commitments. These are not exceptions; they are realities of modern life. Families, neighbours and communities need to adapt in a way that preserves the essence of the rituals while acknowledging contemporary circumstances.
Tradition meets modern reality
It is important to understand that traditions evolve. They are not static rules meant to create stress or conflict. Instead, they are frameworks meant to guide families through significant life events, ensuring that emotional, spiritual and social needs are addressed.
The essence of funeral rites is to honour the deceased soul and to provide support to the living person. If rigid interpretations prevent this, the purpose is defeated. A son-in-law who performs the rites, respects the deceased and supports the surviving spouse embodies the true spirit of the tradition.
In many communities, priests and elders are now accepting of son-in-laws performing the rituals, provided they carry out the ceremonies with respect and sincerity. This approach reflects both faith and practicality, allowing the family to grieve, honour their loved one and maintain social and emotional stability.
Encouraging compassion and open-mindedness
As someone observing these situations, I feel it is important to share this perspective. People often focus on who “should” perform the rites, without asking who is best suited to care for the surviving family. If the aim is to support the family after the funeral, it is logical to entrust the son-in-law with the responsibility.
Neighbours, relatives and community members may have opinions and it is natural for them to uphold tradition. However, tradition should not come at the cost of the family’s well-being. Respecting the son-in-law’s role in this context is not only practical but also compassionate.
It is about balance between maintaining the ceremonial aspects while ensuring that the living family receives care, support and continuity. By acknowledging the son-in-law (in the absence of a son) as a legitimate performer of the rites, we preserve both tradition and humanity.
A call for perspective
If you are ever in a situation where there is no son or the son cannot perform the funeral rites, consider the following:
- Who will care for the surviving spouse and family afterwards?
- Who shares an emotional bond with the family and is committed to their well-being?
- Who can perform the rites with respect, devotion and understanding?
Chances are, it is the son-in-law. Giving him this responsibility is not a departure from tradition; it is a responsible, empathetic and modern interpretation of it.
Ultimately, the ritual is about love, care and respect for the departed soul and for those who remain. Neighbours, relatives or distant family members may be able to perform the rites ceremonially, but they cannot replace the emotional and practical support that a son-in-law provides. That is why, in my view, he deserves the respect and trust to carry out these sacred responsibilities in the absence of a son.
Conclusion
At the funeral I attended, I witnessed a small yet important transformation. Once the neighbours reflected on the practical and emotional aspects, they began to accept that the son-in-law could perform the rituals. The focus shifted from rigid tradition to supporting the living family, which, in the end, is what truly matters.
Traditions are meaningful when they serve their purpose. They are not just rituals to be checked off but frameworks to honour the deceased and safeguard the living. By giving the son-in-law respect to perform funeral rites, we are not breaking tradition; we are upholding its essence in a world that often demands flexibility and compassion.
In today’s times, let us embrace this perspective gently, with respect for our customs and sensitivity to human needs. When there is no son or when the son cannot reach the venue, trust the son-in-law to perform these rites with sincerity. The family will be cared for, the rituals respected and the spirit of tradition preserved.