The Manu Smriti (Sanskrit: ?????????) is a work of Hindu law and ancient Indian society. It is also known as the Laws of Manu. It is one of the nineteen^[1] Dharmasastra, which are part of the Smriti literature. It is considered the oldest and one of the most important texts of this genre.^[2] Some of these codes of conduct pertain to the caste system and discuss the stages of life for "twice-born" males (the system).^[3][4] It explains itself as a discourse given by Sage Manu to rishis who begged him to enlighten them on the topic. There are 2,684 verses divided into twelve chapters.^[5]

Dating and historical context

A range of historical opinion generally dates composition of the text any time between 200 BCE and 200 CE.^[6] The dating is significant because the work was written during the period when brahminical tradition was seriously threatened by non-Vedic movements.^[7] The Manu Smriti and other dharmashastras and the views of society that they represent were brahminical responses to those threats.^[8] After the breakdown of the Maurya and Shunga empires, there was a period of uncertainty that led to renewed interest in traditional social norms.^[9] 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."^[10]

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.^[11]

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,^[12] , 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 Shivaism 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.^[13] 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.^[14] According to Avari:

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.^[15] 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.^[16] 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"^[17] Hinduism does not evangelize.^[18]

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" ^[19]

Notes

References

• Available online as The Laws of Manu

de:Manusmriti es:Leyes de Manu hi:????????? id:Manusmrti ml:????????? ja:???? pl:Manusmryti pt:Código de Manu sv:Manus lagbok th:?????????????