Breaking down the question
The note asks you to contrast two conceptions of marriage — the sacramental and the contractual. Define both, and show how the shift from one to the other reflects wider social change.
How to approach it
Explain the sacramental view rooted in the traditional Hindu ideal, then the contractual view associated with modern civil law. Contrast them on permanence, purpose and dissolubility, closing with the direction of change.
Model answer
Marriage as a sacrament is the classical Hindu conception, in which the union is a sacred, religious and indissoluble bond rather than a mere social convenience. It is one of the compulsory samskaras, sanctified by ritual such as the saptapadi, contracted for the fulfilment of dharma, and held to endure beyond death itself. The wife is a sahadharmini, a partner in religious duty, and the tie admits neither divorce nor, ideally, remarriage of the widow.
Marriage as a contract, by contrast, treats the union as a civil agreement between two consenting adults, entered for companionship and mutual benefit and therefore dissoluble when its purposes fail. Consent, capacity and legality define it, and provisions for divorce and remarriage follow naturally. This conception underlies the Special Marriage Act and, increasingly, the reformed Hindu Marriage Act, which admits grounds for divorce.
K. M. Kapadia argued that Indian marriage has been moving from the sacramental towards the contractual pole, as legislation, education and individual choice erode the older ideal, though sacramental sentiment survives in ritual and popular attitude. Our note on family and marriage in India traces this transition.
Examiner's perspective
Examiners want both conceptions defined and contrasted on permanence and purpose. Citing Kapadia and the legislative shift, while noting that the sacramental idea persists culturally, earns full marks in this brief compass.