|
|
|
|
Manu Smriti
|
| |
|
| |
, also known as Manava-Dharmasastra , is the most important and earliest metrical work of the Dharmasastra textual tradition of Hinduism. Generally known in English as the Laws of Manu, it was first translated into English in 1794 by Sir William Jones, an English Orientalist and judge of the British Supreme Court of Judicature in Calcutta. The text presents itself as a discourse given by the sage called Manu to a group of seers, or rishis, who beseech him to tell them the "law of all the social classes" (1.2).
Discussion
Ask a question about 'Manu Smriti' Start a new discussion about 'Manu Smriti' Answer questions from other users |
Encyclopedia
, also known as Manava-Dharmasastra , is the most important and earliest metrical work of the Dharmasastra textual tradition of Hinduism. Generally known in English as the Laws of Manu, it was first translated into English in 1794 by Sir William Jones, an English Orientalist and judge of the British Supreme Court of Judicature in Calcutta. The text presents itself as a discourse given by the sage called Manu to a group of seers, or rishis, who beseech him to tell them the "law of all the social classes" (1.2). Manu became the standard point of reference for all future Dharmasastras that followed it.
????
Sources and Authority
The Manu Smriti was written as the words of the original creator, the “Imperishable One,” or “Brahma”. By attributing the words to supernatural forces, the text takes on an authoritative tone as a statement on dharma, in opposition to previous texts in the field, which were more scholarly. A content analysis, however, shows the obvious influence of previous Dharmasutras and Arthasastric work. In particular, the Manu Smriti was the first to adopt the term vyavaharapadas. These eighteen Titles of Law or Grounds for Litigation make up more than one fifth of the work and deal primarily with matters of the king, state, and judicial procedures.
Author
The actual, human author of this sacred text used the eponym “Manu” in order to invoke association with the first human being and also the first king in Indian tradition. Though most scholars had previously considered the text a composite put together over a long period of time, Olivelle has recently argued that the complex and consistent structure of the text suggests a single author. However, no details of this eponymous author's life are known, though it is likely that he belonged to a conservative Brahmin caste somewhere in Northern India.
Dating and Historical Context
A range of historical opinion generally dates composition of the text any time between 200 BCE and 200 CE. After the breakdown of the Maurya and Shunga empires, there was a period of uncertainty that led to renewed interest in traditional social norms. In Thapar's view,
"The severity of the Dharma-shastras was doubtless a commentary arising from the insecurity of the orthodox in an age of flux."
The dharma class of texts were also noteworthy because they did not depend on the authority of particular Vedic schools, becoming the starting point of an independent tradition that emphasized dharma itself and not its Vedic origins.
Structure of the Text
The original treatise consisted of one thousand chapters of law, polity, and pleasure given by Brahma. His son, Manu, learns these lessons and proceeds to teach his own students, including Bhrigu. Bhrigu then relays this information in the Manu Smriti, to an audience of his own pupils.
This original narrative was subdivided later into twelve chapters. There is debate over the effects of this division on the underlying, holistic manner in which the original treatise was written. The book is written in simple verse as opposed to the metrical verse of the preceding dharmasutras. Manu also introduced a unique “transitional verse” which segued the end of one subject and the beginning of the next.
The treatise is written with a frame story, in which a dialogue takes place between Manu’s disciple, Bhrigu, and an audience of his own students. The story begins with Manu himself detailing the creation of the world and the society within it, structured around four social classes. Bhrigu takes over for the remainder of the work, teaching the details of the rest of Manu’s teachings. The audience reappears twice more, asking first to ask about how Brahmins can be subjected to death, and second to ask the effects of action.
Table of Contents
This Table of Contents comes from Olivelle's translation of the Manu Smriti and provides the transitional verses between each subject:
1. Origin of the World (1.1-119)
2. Sources of the Law (2.1-24)
"I have described to you above succinctly the source of the Law, as also the origin of this whole world. Learn now the Laws of the social classes." (2.25)
3. Dharma of the Four Social Classes (2.25-11.266)
- 3.1 Rules Relating to Law (2.25-10.131)
- 3.1.1 Rules of Action in Normal Times (2.26-9.336)
- 3.1.1.1 Fourfold Dharma of a Brahmin (2.26-6.97)
"I have explained to you above the fourfold Law of Brahmins, a Law that is holy and brings imperishable rewards after death. Listen now to the Law of kings." (6.97)
- 3.1.1.2 Rules of Action for a King (7.1-9.325)
"I have described above in its entirety the eternal rules of action for the king. What follows, one should understand, are the rules of action for the Vaisyas and Sudras in their proper order." (9.325)
- 3.1.1.3 Rules of Action for Vaisyas and Sudras (9.325-36)
"I have described above the splendid rules of action for the social classes outside times of adversity. Listen now to the rules for them in the proper order for times of adversity." (9.336)
- 3.1.2 Rules of Action in Times of Adversity (10.1-129)
"I have described above the entire set of rules pertaining to the Law of the four classes. Next, I will explain the splendid rules pertaining to penance." (10.131)
- 3.2 Rules Relating to Penance (11.1-265)
"You have described this Law for the four classes in its entirety, O Sinless One! Teach us accurately the ultimate consummation of the fruits of actions." (12.1)
4. Determination Regarding Engagement in Action (12.3-116)
"Bhrgu, the son of Manu and the very embodiment of the Law, said to those great seers: ‘Listen to the determination with respect to engagement in action.’" (12.2)
- 4.1 Fruits of Action (12.3-81)
"I have declared to you above all the fruits arising from actions. Listen now to these rules of action for a Brahmin, rules that secure the supreme good." (12.82)
- 4.2 Rules of Action for Supreme God (12.83-115)
"I have explained to you above all the best means of securing the supreme good. A Brahmin who does not deviate from them obtains the highest state." (12.116)
Nature and Purpose
The Manu Smriti is written with a focus on the “shoulds” of dharma rather than on the actuality of everyday practice in India at the time. Still, its practical application should not be underestimated. Through intermediate forces such as the instruction of scholars, the teachings did indeed have indirect effect on major segments of the Indian population. It is also an invaluable point of common reference in scholarly debates.
It seems likely that the book was written in a manner which was very mindful to the dangers facing the Brahmin community during a time of much change and social upheaval. A renewed alliance between the Brahmin and communities is clearly a goal reflected in the introduction of the vyavaharapadas. The emphasis which this topic receives can be seen as an offering of solidarity from the religious community to the ruling class.
Commentaries on Manu
There have been numerous commentaries written on the . Some of the major commentaries are listed below:
Bharuci
Bharuci is the oldest known commentator on the . Kane places him in the late 10th or early 11 century, Olivelle places him in the 8th century, and Derrett places him between 600-650 CE. From these three opinions we can place Bharuci anywhere from the early seventh century CE to the early eleventh century CE. The surviving portion of Bharuci's commentary that we have today deals mostly with the duties of the king and whether or not the king can be a source of dharma.
Medhatithi
Medhatithi is one of the most famous commentators on the , and there is some debate regarding the location in which he was writing, but scholars such as Buhler, Kane, and Lingat tend to believe he was from Kashmir or the area around Kashmir. The exact date that Medhatithi was writing is also unclear, and he has been placed anywhere between 820CE and 1050CE.
Views and criticism
The work is considered an important source for sociological, political and historical studies. Manu Smriti is one of the most heavily criticized of the scriptures of Hinduism, having been attacked by colonial scholars, modern liberals, Hindu reformists, Dalit advocates, feminists , Marxists and certain groups of traditional Hindus, namely Smartas. Much of its criticism stems from its unknown authority, as some believe the text to be authoritative, but others do not. There is also debate over whether the text has suffered from later interpolations of verses.
The Bhagavad Gita contradicts many statements in Manu Smriti, including the fixture of one's Varana at birth, and has always been accorded a higher authority by the people in daily life. In northern/southern India Vaishnavism and Shaivism were the common religious traditions, and the teachings of the Manu Smriti was not as widely followed or well-known.
In 300 BCE, Megasthenes wrote that the people around the Mathura region worshipped Harculas (Hari-Krishna) and followed the Gita as daily life principles. Also Fahn-sain did not mention anything about rigid-ness of the varna systems. Chanakya, the author of Arthashastra, never mentioned any social laws prevailing in the society during the first integrator and Mauryan Emperor Chandragupta's reign.
The Manu Smriti was one of the first Sanskrit texts studied by the British. It was first translated into English by the founder of indology, Sir William Jones. His version was published in 1794. British administrative requirements encouraged their interest in the Dharmashastras, which they believed to be legal codes. In fact, these were not codes of law but norms related to social obligations and ritual requirements. According to Avari:
The "Law of Manu" was cited favorably by the German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche, who deemed it "an incomparably spiritual and superior work" to the Christian Bible. He observed that "the sun shines on the whole book" and attributed its ethical perspective to "the noble classes, the philosophers and warriors, [who] stand above the mass."
Surendra Kumar, who counts a total of 2,685 verses, finds that only 1,214 are authentic, the other 1,471 being interpolations on the text. In reply to the criticism of the sudra caste, the verses critical of the sudras and women are considered to be later interpolations, but not later than Adi Shankara (7th-8th century CE). The law in Manu Smriti also appears to be overtly positive towards the brahmin (priest) caste in terms of concessions made in fines and punishments. The stance of the Manu Smriti about women has also been debated. While certain verses such as (III - 55, 56, 57, 59, 62) glorify the position of women, other verses (IX - 3, 17) seem to attack the position and freedom women have. The education of women is also discussed in the text. Certain interpretations of Verse (IX - 18) claim that it discourages women from reading Vedic scriptures. Verse (II - 240), however, allows women to read Vedic scriptures. Similar contradictory phrases are encountered in relation to child marriage in verses (IX - 94) and (IX - 90).
In his book Revolution and Counter-Revolution in India, Dalit leader B. R. Ambedkar asserted that Manu Smriti was written by a sage named Brigu during the times of Pushyamitra of Sangha in connection with social pressures caused by the rise of Buddhism. However, historian Romila Thapar considers these claims to be exaggerations. She writes that archaeological evidence casts doubt on the claims of Buddhist persecution by Pushyamitra. Support of the Buddhist faith by the Sungas at some point is suggested by an epigraph on the gateway of Bharhut, which mentions its erection "during the supremacy of the Sungas" Hinduism does not evangelize.
However, not all Hindus agree with the criticisms of the text, or the assertion that the Manu Smriti is not authoritative. Some prominent Hindu figures, such as Swami Dayananda Saraswati and A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami, hold the text to be authentic and authoritative. Other admirers of the text have included Annie Besant, P.D. Ouspensky, Pandurang Shastri Athavale and Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan. Friedrich Nietzsche is noted to have said "Close the Bible and open the Manu Smriti. “It has an affirmation of life, a triumphing agreeable sensation in life and that to draw up a lawbook such as Manu means to permit oneself to get the upper hand, to become perfection, to be ambitious of the highest art of living"
|
| |
|
|
