Manu Smriti
The
Manusmriti (Sanskrit मनुस्मृति), translated
Laws of Manu (or Institutions of Manu), is regarded as a foundational work of
Hindu law and ancient
Indian society. It is one of the eighteen
Smritis of the
Dharma Sastra (or "laws of righteous conduct"); Smriti means "what is remembered" and is applied in general to a Hindu text other than the
Vedas, including traditional Indian
epics, the
Puranas, and
science and
grammar treatises. Unlike the Vedas which are considered to be eternal or of divine origin, the Smritis are considered to be of human origin and therefore susceptible to the flaws of humans. They contain
laws, rules and codes of conduct to be applied by individuals, communities and nations. Some of these laws
codify the Hindu
caste system and discuss the "
stages of life for a twice-born man". The book is ascribed to
Manu, said to be, according to the
Hindu mythology, the forefather of all humans ( Manava or Man). Manu's writings prescribe a particular ideal of Indian society, conforming to detailed moral, social and religious rules which are expressed as being in line with the universal ethical principle of
dharma. For many scholars, it is merely one (particularly influential) set of laws to which many Hindus have appealled - others guides to social practice exist, and have complemented or contradicted Manu throughout India's history and across its communities.
Manusmriti is considered an important book because it has been used for important conclusions in sociology, political and historical studies. The Varna of Manusmriti has been widely regarded as 'race' by colonial british rulers and has been used for studies such as scintific race analysis, skull measurement. The varna of manusmriti has been widely regarded as marxist 'class' by marxist analysts and has been used to justify various postulates on history and civillization . Much of the focus has been on division of labour by four varnas, called 'castes'[races] in later translation. Though Manusmriti considers all people to be shudras by birth , three out of 4 varnas of people have right to formal religious education. The vocational expertize is learned from the familly. For Brahmanas, manusmriti prescribes to live with minimum possesion, food , to be content and strictly adhering to austerity and rituals. For a living, the Brahmans are suggested to get their food by begging from the citizens, by collecting fruits and by religious duties. With these constraints however, it confers highest honour, respect and exclusivity to the Brahmanas. Some colonial era authors considered the idea of such division is static and non-evolutionary in history. Marxist scholars have shown Indian society to be evolving according to stages as postulated by Marx. Other scholars have mentioned of such division as a possibility of fighting of different races from the dawn of Indian civillization. There has been opposition to such generalizations. There has been opposition to caste . Indian constitution doesn't accept Manusmriti suggestions.
Manusmriti much criticized by low castes (
dalits or
shudras) in India they allege an agenda of institutionalized discrimination behind it in Hindu society. The low caste people were only permitted to make their living from select 'lowly' professions on the basis of their birth. They were called
untouchables (achoot) , as well as
Chandalas and regarded by the higher castes as so unholy that if a higher caste member (especially a
Brahmin) came in the shadow of an untouchable, he was considered 'polluted' and had to undergo a ritual bath. The low caste were allotted jobs such as cleaning and carrying human waste. They were supposed to live outside habitations and were supposed to make a loud clanging noise while entering an upper caste community by banging metal objects together and a ritual dance, thus announcing their arrival and warning people to move away in order to avoid getting 'polluted'. They were not permitted to read, write or get any kind of education, wealth , luxury, etc. It is also suspected that the text Manu and his writings i.e. Manu smriti was a creation of a Brahmin called Sumati Bhargava during the reign of a Brahmin king
Pusyamitra Sunga (around
185 BC) who was persecuting
Buddhists and promoting
Hinduism. He had set a prize of 100 gold coins on every Buddhist and
Jain monk's head, and hence caused a large de-population of Buddhists and Jains in the
Sunga Kingdom of
Northern India in the
first century BC. Buddhists were defaulted to low caste and were called Sramanas. The ultimate aim of creating the text of Manu (and, Manusmriti) was to justify the caste system as being of divine origin so as to make it palatable to masses practising Hinduism with the motive to make the upper caste (Brahmins) rich and influential as it promised heaven (
Svarga) to those who helped and gave alms to Brahmins (while Brahmins were also required to remain in holy poverty, many of them amassed significant amounts of wealth and social status).
Manusmriti was quoted, especially by the British Colonial rulers of India as "the law-book" of the Hindus. Many Hindus allege that the colonial rulers, like
Robert Clive and
Lord Macaulay, would have found it a useful tool. They have argued that the caste system as prescribed by the Manusmriti developed a de-facto
apartheid social system that was very easy to subjugate and rule. Some people over the ages have quoted or interpreted the Manusmriti to justify Brahmin supremacy, the sanctity of the caste system and the lower status given to the so-called
Dalits (i.e. slaves). These have been criticized as polemical attacks on Hinduism.
Manusmriti is a key text in justifying and prescribing the detailed precepts of the
caste system. In it, society consists of four (later hereditary) classes -
Brahmanas (teachers and priests),
Kshatriyas (administrators and armymen),
Vaishyas, also called as
Aryas (traders, farmers and herdsmen) and
Shudras (unholy servants). It clearly defined the relative position and the duties of the several castes, and determined the penalties to be indicted on any transgressions of the limits assigned to each of them.
While the origins of caste system in India are still not clear, Manusmriti makes the following statement on the subject:
shanakaistu kriya-lopadimah Kshatriya-jatayah |:vrashalatvam gata loke brahmna-darshanen cha ¦¦43:Paundrash-Chaudra-Dravidah-Kamboja-Yavanah-Shakah |:Paradah Pahlavash-Chinah Kirata Daradah Khashah ¦¦44:—
(Manusmritti, X.43-44)which according to
Indian History Sourcebook (The Laws of Manu) translates as follows:
43. But in consequence of the omission of the sacred rites, and of their not consulting Brahmanas, the following tribes of Kshatriyas have gradually sunk in this world to the condition of
Shudras;
44. (Viz.) the
Paundrakas, the
Chodas, the
Dravidas, the
Kambojas, the
Yavanas, the
Shakas, the
Paradas, the
Pahlavas, the
Chinas, the
Kiratas, the
Daradas and the
Khashas.
Indian History Sourcebook: The Laws of Manu, c.
1500 BC, translated by G. Buhler
The Daradas lived to north-east of
Kashmir (
Dardistan), the Paradas on river Sailoda in
Sinkiang province of
China, the Kambojas in the regions of
Pamirs (Tajikstan) and
Badakshan (
Afghanistan) north of
Hindukush, the Yavanas in Bactria (
Balkh) and the Shakas (Scythians) beyond river
Jaxartes (Syr Darya) in
Central Asia. The Pahlavas refer to the
Persians. The Yavanas of Manu Smriti refer to the
Greeks but in the after-times, the terms "Yavana" or "Yona", "Yonaka" took on a wider meaning of Mlechchas/
Barbarians and a designation to all foreign tribes or the westerners visiting India (Padama Purana, Srshtikanda, 47.69-75).
Dr.
Babasaheb Ambedkar, a lawyer and
Dalit politician, and the chief architect of
Indian constitution writes this about the Manusmriti in his book
"Revolution and Counter-Revolution in India""It (Buddhism) did not remain as one of the many diverse religions then in vogue.
Ashoka made it the religion of the state. This of course was the greatest blow to
Brahmanism. The Brahmins lost all state patronage and were neglected to a secondary and subsidiary position in the Empire of Ashoka.
Indeed it may be said to have been suppressed for the simple reason that Ashoka prohibited all animal sacrifices which constituted a part of classical Brahminism.
The Brahmins had not only lost state patronage but they lost their occupation which mainly consisted in performing rituals for a fee which often times was very substantial and which constituted their chief source of living. The Brahmins therefore lived as the suppressed and Depressed Classes 2 for nearly 140 years during which the Maurya Empire lasted.
A rebellion against the Buddhist state was the only way of escape left to the suffering Brahmins and there is special reason why Pushyamitra should raise the banner of revolt against the rule of the Mauryas. Pushyamitra was of the
Sunga Brahmin clan by
Gotra.
The Sungas were Samvedi Brahmins, who believed in animal sacrifices and soma sacrifices. The Sungas were therefore in dire straits under the prohibition on animal sacrifices throughout the Maurya Empire proclaimed in the very Rock Edict by Ashoka.
The contention the object of the
Regicide by Pushyamitra was to delegitimize Buddhism as a state religion and to make the Brahmin Gotras of his preference the sovereign rulers of the erstwhile Mauryan Empire is supported by two circumstances.
The first circumstance relates to the conduct of Pushyamitra himself. There is evidence that Pushyamitra after he ascended the throne performed the Ashvamedha Yajna or the horse sacrifice, the vedic rite which could only be performed by a paramount sovereign. As Vincent Smith observes :
"The exaggerated regard for the sanctity of animal life, which was one of the most cherished features of Buddhism, and the motive of Ashoka's most characterisitic legislation, had necessarily involved the prohibition of bloody sacrifices, which are essential to certain forms of Brahmanical worship, and were believed by the orthodox to possess the highest saving efficacy. The memorable horse sacrifices of Pushyamitra marked an early stage in the Brahmanical reaction, which was fully developed five centuries later in the time of Samudragupta and his successors."
Then there is evidence that Pushyamitra after his accession launched a violent campaign of persecution against Buddhists and Buddhism. By this proclamation Pushyamitra set a price of 100 gold pieces on the head of every Buddhist monk & hence their slaughter [f60].
Dr. Haraprasad Shastri speaking about the persecution of Buddhists under Pushyamitra says[f61] :
"The condition of the Buddhists under the imperial sway of the Sungas, orthodox and bigotted, can be more easily imagined than described. From Chinese authorities it is known that many Buddhists still do not pronounce the name of Pushyamitra without a curse."
If the Revolution of Pushyamitra was a purely political revolution there was no need for him to have launched a compaign of persecution against Buddhism which was not very different to the compaign of persecution of Hindus launched by Afghan Islamic warlord
Mahmud of Ghazni against Hinduism in later years. This is one piece of circumatantial evidence which lends credence to the argument that the aim of Pushyamitra was to overthrow Buddhism and establish Brahmanism in its place.
Another piece of evidence which shows that the origin and purpose of the revolution by Pushyamitra against the Mauryas was to delegitimize Buddhism and establish Brahmanism is evidenced by the promulgation of Manu Smriti as a code of laws.However one must note that kingdom of Sungas was a small one.Hence the above discussion does not hold good for overall Indian scenario.
The Manu Smriti is said to be divine in its origin. It is said to be revealed to man by Manu to whom it was revealed by the Swayambhu (i.e. the Creator). This claim, as will be seen from the reference already made to it, is set out in the Code itself. It is surprising that nobody has cared to examine the grounds of such a claim. The result is that there is a failure to realise the significance, place and position of the Manu Smriti in the history of India. This is true even of the historians of India although the Manu Smriti is a record of the greatest social revolution that Hindu society has undergone.
The name Manu had a great prestige in the ancient history of India and it is with the object to invest the code with this ancient prestige that its authorship was attributed to Manu. The code itself is signed in the family name of Bhrigu as was the ancient custom. "The Text Composed by Bhrigu (entitled) "The Dharma Code of Manu" is the real title of the work. The name Bhrigu is subscribed to the end of every chapter of the Code itself. We have therefore the family name of the author of the Code. His personal name is not disclosed in the Book. All the same it was known to many. The Author of Narada Smriti writing in about the 4th Century A.D. knew the name of the author of the Manu Smriti and gives out the secret. According to Narada it was one Sumati Bhargava who composed the Code of Manu. Sumati Bhargava is not a legendary name, and must have been historical person for even Medhatithe the great commentator on the Code of Manu held the view that this Manu was 'a certain individual'. Manu therefore is the assumed name of Sumati Bhargava who is the real author of Manu Smriti.
It is not possible to give any precise date for its composition. But quite a precise period during which it was composed can be given. According to scholars Sumati Bhargava must have composed the Code which he called Munu Smriti between 170 B.C. and 150 B.C. Now if one bears in mind the fact that the Brahmanic Revolution by Pushyamitra took place in 185 B.C. it can be inferred that the code known as Manu Smriti was promulgated by Pushyamitra as embodying the principles of Brahmanic Revolution against the Buddhist state of the Mauryas. That the Manu Smriti forms the Institutes of Brahmanism lends credence to the claim that Pushyamitra Revolution was not a purely personal adventure.
The Manusmriti has been severely criticized by Dalit advocates and British Imperial scholars. Manusmriti's detractors feel that its injunctions favour one caste (the Brahmins) over others. It is also accused of trying to imply that the Shudras as peoples foreign to India. Almost all of its injunctions pertaining to the Shudras are seen as tools for their exploitation. It is claimed that certain passages of Manusmriti which are highly biased against Shudras are later additions or interpolations, it must be noted that at least some of the statements in the Manusmriti against Shudras were already present by the time of Shankaracharya (7th-8th Century CE), who quotes them in some of his commentaries. So it is unlikely that these interpolations, if there were any, were done much later than the writing of the text itself.
One common defence of these passages is that they are being quoted out of context. What needs mentioning that critics of the ManuSmriti, in distorting the normative meanings of Brahminic texts, frequently remove passages from their textual and historical contexts as part of a deliberate campaign of
Quote Mining. Even when they present their citations accurately, they judge the passages based on contemporary moral standards, ignoring the fact that the majority of these passages were composed thousands of years ago by people living in cultures radically different from contemporary India. They are thus able to ignore Hinduism's long history of social progress , tolerance and pluralism and paint it instead as a primitive and parochial religion.
It is also notable that Hinduism, does not have a highly organized ordained hierarchy of clergy (there is no centralized religious figure, though there are many Acharya-s, Baba-s and Guru-s with limited following). A counter-criticism from
this website condemns the British colonialists to have made the world to regard the Manu Smriti as the supreme law book of the Hindus, so that they could ridicule the Hindu dharma and denigrate those of Indian origin.
Those who attack the Manusmriti frequently cite ancient Brahminic sources without noting subsequent developments in Hindu thought, and without making an effort to consult with contemporary Hindu authorities who can explain the role of these sources in normative Hindu beliefs.
There are 2,031 laws of Manu.
The great sages approached Manu, who was seated with a collected mind, and, having duly worshipped him, spoke as follows:
'Deign, divine one, to declare to us precisely and in due order the sacred laws of each of the (four chief) castes (varna) and of the intermediate ones.
'For thou, O Lord, alone knowest the purport, (i.e.) the rites, and the knowledge of the soul, (taught) in this whole ordinance of the Self-existent (Svayambhu), which is unknowable and unfathomable.'
He, whose power is measureless, being thus asked by the high-minded great sages, duly honoured them, and answered, 'Listen!'
This (universe) existed in the shape of Darkness, unperceived, destitute of distinctive marks, unattainable by reasoning, unknowable, wholly immersed, as it were, in deep sleep.
Then the divine Self-existent (Svayambhu, himself) indiscernible, (but) making (all) this, the great elements and the rest, discernible, appeared with irresistible (creative) power, dispelling the darkness.For the sake of the prosperity of the worlds he [Brahma] caused the Brahmin, the Kshatriya, the Vaisya and the Shudra to proceed forth from his mouth, his arms, his thighs and his feet. But in order to protect this universe, He, the most resplendent one[Brahma], assigned separate [duties and] occupations to those who sprang from his mouth, arms, thighs and feet.
To Brahmins he assigned teaching and studying [the Veda], sacrificing for their own benefit and for others, giving and accepting [of alms].The Kshatriya he commanded to protect the people, to bestow gifts, to offer sacrifices, to study [the Veda], and to abstain from attaching himself to sensual pleasures.The Vaisya to tend cattle, to bestow gifts, to offer sacrifices, to study [the Veda], to trade, to lend money, and to cultivate land.One occupation only the lord prescribed to the Shudra, to serve meekly even these [other] three castes.
The Brahmin, Kshatriya and the Vaishya castes are the twice-born ones, but the fourth, the Shudra, has one birth only.On account of his preeminence, on account of the superiority of his origin, on account of his observance of restrictive rules and on account of his particular sanctification, the Brahmin is the lord of [all] castes.Let the three twice-born castes, discharging their [prescribed] duties, study [the Veda], but among them the Brahmin [alone] shall teach it, not the other two; that is an established rule.
Knowledge is the austerity of the Brahmin, protecting is the austerity of the Kshatriya, his daily business is the austerity of the Vaisya, and service [of the 'upper' castes] the austerity of a Shudra.
Let [the first part of] a Brahmin's name [denote something] auspicious, a Kshatriya's be connected with power, and a Vaisya's with wealth, but a Shudra's [express something] contemptible. [The second part of] a Brahmin's [name] shall be [a word] implying happiness, of a Kshatriya's [a word] implying protection, of a Vaisya's [a term] expressive of thriving, and of a Shudra's [an expression] denoting service.
Kshatriyas prosper not without Brahmins [and] Brahmins prosper not without Kshatriyas. Brahmins and Kshatriyas, being closely united, prosper in this [world] and in the next. But to serve Brahmins [who are] learned in the Vedas, householders and famous [for virtue] is the highest duty of a Shudra, which leads to beatitude. [A Shudra who is] pure, the servant of his betters, gentle in speech and free from pride and always seeks refuge with Brahmins, attains [in his next life] a higher caste.
[The king] should carefully compel Vaisyas and Shudras to perform the work [prescribed] for them; for if these two [castes] swerved from their duties, they would throw this [whole] world into confusion.A Kshatriya, having defamed a Brahmin, shall be fined one hundred [panas]; a Vaisya one hundred and fifty or two hundred; a Shudra shall suffer corporal punishment.
Let him [a Brahmin] not dwell in a country where the rulers are Shudras . nor in one swarming with men of the lowest caste . Let him not give advice to a Shudra . for he who explains the sacred law [to a Shudra] or dictates him to a penance will sink together with that [man] into the hell [called] Asamvrita. Let him not recite [the Vedas] indistinctly, nor in the presence of Shudras .
When he [a Brahmin] has touched a Chandala, a menstruating woman, an outcast, a woman in childbed, a corpse or one who has touched [a corpse], he becomes pure by bathing . Let him not allow a dead Brahmin to be carried out by a Shudra while men of the same caste are at hand, for that burnt offering which is defiled by a Shudra's touch is detrimental to [the deceased's passage to] heaven.
A Brahmin may unintentionally approach a woman of the Chandala or of [any other] very low caste, who eats [the food of such persons] and accepts [gifts from them] becomes an outcast. However, [if he does it] intentionally he becomes their equal.
The dwellings of Chandalas and Svapakas [people of very 'low' caste] shall be outside the village and their wealth [shall be] dogs and donkeys. Their dress [shall be] the garments of the dead, [they shall eat] their food from broken dishes, black iron [shall be] their ornaments, and they must always wander from place to place . At night they shall not walk about in villages and in towns. By day they may go about for the purpose of their work, distinguished by marks at the king's command, and they shall carry out the corpses [of persons] who have no relatives-that is a settled rule.
A man of low caste, who, through covetousness, lives by the occupations of a higher one, the king shall deprive off his property and banish. It is better to [discharge] one's own [appointed caste] duty incompletely than to perform completely that of another; for he who lives according to the law of another [caste] is instantly excluded from his own . Let a [Shudra] serve Brahmins, either for the sake of heaven or with a view to both [this life and the next], for he who is called the servant of a Brahmin thereby gains all his ends. The service of Brahmins alone is declared [to be] an excellent occupation for a Shudra, for whatever else besides this he may perform will bear him no fruit.
No collection of wealth must be made a Shudra, even though he be able [to do it], for a Shudra who has acquired wealth gives pain to Brahmins.He who has associated with outcasts, he who has approached the wives of other men and he who has stolen the property of a Brahmin becomes [after death] a brahmarakshas [fierce devil].
Here are some selections of verses that have been criticized:
*I " 91. "One occupation only the Lord prescribed to the shudra - to serve meekly even these other three castes."
*I " 93. "As the Brahmana sprang from (
Prajapati's i.e. God's) mouth, as he was first-born, and as he possesses the veda, he is by right the lord of this whole creation."
*II " 31. "Let (the first part of ) a brahmin's (denote) something auspicious, a kshatriya's name be connected with power and a vaishya's with wealth, but a Shudra's (express something) contemptible."
*II " 100. "Whatever exists in the world is the property of the Brahmana; on account of the excellence of his origin the Brahmana is indeed, entitled to it all."
*VIII " 37. "When a learned Brahmin has found treasure, deposited in former (times), he may take even the whole (of it); for he is the master of everything."
*VIII " 270. "A shudra who insults a twice born man (i.e. upper caste) with gross invective, shall have his tongue cut out; for he is of low origin."
*VIII " 271. "If he mentions names and castes of the (twice born) with contumely, an iron nail, ten fingers, shall be thrust red hot into his mouth."
*IX " 189. "The property of a Brahmana must never be taken by the king, that is a settled rule; but (the property of men) of other castes the king may take on failure of all (heirs)."
*IX " 317. "A Brahmin, whether learned or ignorant, is a powerful divinity."
*X " 129. "No collection of wealth must be made by a shudra even though he be able to do it; for a shudra who has acquired wealth gives pain to Brahmana."
*XI " 261-62. "A Brahmana who has killed even the peoples of the three worlds, is completely freed from all sins on reciting three times the Rig, Yajur or Sama- Veda with the Upanishad."
*XII. 4. "If the shudra intentionally listens for committing to memory the veda, then his ears should be filled with (molten) lead and lac; if he utters the veda, then his tongue should be cut off; if he has mastered the veda his body should be cut to pieces."
The Manusmriti's views on women:
*IX " 3 . "Her father protects (her) in childhood, her husband protects (her) in youth and her sons protect (her) in old age; a woman is never fit for independence."
*IX " 18. "Women have no business with the text of the veda."
*IX - 17. "(When creating them) Manu allotted to women (a love of their) bed, (of their) seat and (of) ornament, impure desires, wrath, dishonesty, malice, and bad conduct."
Sacred Books of the East, The Laws of Manu, translation by G. Buhler, vol. xxv, Oxford (1886)
*
Garuda Puranam*
The Laws of Manu translation by G. Buhler, vol. xxv, Oxford (1886)
