Manu Smriti - Is it authored to safeguard Kshatriya interests?

[uvsharma]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp Email Share Link

According to Swamy Sivananda, MDS is not applicable to Kaliyuga

"The laws of Manu are intended for the Satya Yuga; those of Yajnavalkya are for the Treta Yuga; those of Sankha and Likhita are for the Dvapara Yuga; and those of Parasara are for the Kali Yuga"

More details in this link

The Smritis

According to Swamy Sivananda, new law code is due now.

 

[happyhindu]

According to Swamy Sivananda, MDS is not applicable to Kaliyuga

"The laws of Manu are intended for the Satya Yuga; those of Yajnavalkya are for the Treta Yuga; those of Sankha and Likhita are for the Dvapara Yuga; and those of Parasara are for the Kali Yuga"

More details in this link

The Smritis

According to Swamy Sivananda, new law code is due now.

But sir, how many are willing to accept Swami Shivananda's explanations (except his disciples)? Those who follow other gurus will want to follow their own guru's explanations.

As such, i think all this (social changes, the accompanying outrage and public opinions) are a wake-up call for gurus and mutts.... i think the "times" are indirectly saying to gurus and mutts to be:

a) more involved in religion than anything else;
b) to look more inward towards the spiritual self than to look outward and be involved in material stuff;
c) to delve within to produce requisite literature to suit the times than to merely seek to propagate the old.....

People do not wish for brahmanism to go. That is the truth. The real truth. Even a hater of hindusim in his heart will not want hinduism to go. In his heart, he only wishes to become a part of it, in someway or the other. Can the dharma not be gracious enuf to do so, in small ways (need not be vedic education, but atleast in discarding some law portions of the shastras)?

As such, people do not wish for their faith to become more and more irrelevant in modern times. They want it to accomodate the changes in some way or the other.

This umbrella-term called "hinduism" may be so self-contradictory, but its appeal lies in the fact that it accomodates opposite views.....if it can accomodate opposing views, why cannot it make provision to accomodate all of the nation's peoples...

Reminds me to ask this to Shri Sangom.

Shri Sangom,

Is it possible that a brahmana only follows the prescribed set of rituals of his sutra; and discards the law portions of the smrithis (wrt to how other varnas shd be treated)? I mean to say, there should be no need for gurus and priests (like the Kashi one) to propagate outdated laws...from the orthodox pov, can it be possible?

Regards.

 

[sangom]

...
Reminds me to ask this to Shri Sangom.

Shri Sangom,

Is it possible that a brahmana only follows the prescribed set of rituals of his sutra; and discards the law portions of the smrithis (wrt to how other varnas shd be treated)? I mean to say, there should be no need for gurus and priests (like the Kashi one) to propagate outdated laws...from the orthodox pov, can it be possible?

Regards.

HH,

AFAIK (my knowledge is meagre) there are grihya sutras - manuals for the daily life of dvijas, srauta sutras - manuals for conduct of the various vedic sacrifices, and dharma sastras - containing law codes. The texts available to us do not follow the above guidelines strictly and there are spill overs. Even then all the general laws contained in these dharmasastras have all been superceded by the constitution except where the Supreme Court itself has depended on the Dharma sastras. As for grihya sutras and Srautasutras, they are not superceded as they form part of the freedom to follow one's own religion. Since the way of life is interleaved with many social norms also, it may not be possible to do a segregation of the type you visualize unless the Acharyas come together and make a new grihya and srauta sutra for all the Hindus. That, to me, looks impossible!!

 

[uvsharma]

But sir, how many are willing to accept Swami Shivananda's explanations (except his disciples)? Those who follow other gurus will want to follow their own guru's explanations.

As such, i think all this (social changes, the accompanying outrage and public opinions) are a wake-up call for gurus and mutts.... i think the "times" are indirectly saying to gurus and mutts to be:

a) more involved in religion than anything else;
b) to look more inward towards the spiritual self than to look outward and be involved in material stuff;
c) to delve within to produce requisite literature to suit the times than to merely seek to propagate the old.....

People do not wish for brahmanism to go. That is the truth. The real truth. Even a hater of hindusim in his heart will not want hinduism to go. In his heart, he only wishes to become a part of it, in someway or the other. Can the dharma not be gracious enuf to do so, in small ways (need not be vedic education, but atleast in discarding some law portions of the shastras)?

As such, people do not wish for their faith to become more and more irrelevant in modern times. They want it to accomodate the changes in some way or the other.

This umbrella-term called "hinduism" may be so self-contradictory, but its appeal lies in the fact that it accomodates opposite views.....if it can accomodate opposing views, why cannot it make provision to accomodate all of the nation's peoples...

Reminds me to ask this to Shri Sangom.

Shri Sangom,

Is it possible that a brahmana only follows the prescribed set of rituals of his sutra; and discards the law portions of the smrithis (wrt to how other varnas shd be treated)? I mean to say, there should be no need for gurus and priests (like the Kashi one) to propagate outdated laws...from the orthodox pov, can it be possible?

Regards.

The Taittiriya Upa-nishad(3) says.
Verse 1:11 carries a passage: “Yaani anavadhyaani karmaani, taani sevithavyaani,
no itharaani”. This means “Those acts that are irreproachable alone are to be
performed, and not those that are contrary.” In explaining “Those acts”, Swami
Sarvananda says: “The Yogavasishta lays down that what is not consistent with
reason should not be accepted even if Brahma were to tell it. No human being is
absolutely and perpetually blemishless. Love or admiration of one’s exemplar
should not prompt one to copy his imperfections…….” It means that, with due
respects to Sage Manu, one need not accept any of his sayings which one’s own
reasoning and conscience rebel against. At the same time it is not a call to us to
reject him in toto and say that he is not valid for his own age, or for our age, or for
any age for that matter.​

Upanishads are next only to Vedhas in the Scriptures order. It supersedes all other scriptures down the line like Sastras, Sutras, Puranas etc.

Swami Sivanandha is a highly learned spirutual expert belonging to Tamil Brahmin community and is not another Tom, Dick or Harry.

His Holiness Sri Swami Sivananda Saraswati Maharaj

His views are highly respected in the community.

 

[happyhindu]

Upanishads are next only to Vedhas in the Scriptures order. It supersedes all other scriptures down the line like Sastras, Sutras, Puranas etc.

Swami Sivanandha is a highly learned spirutual expert belonging to Tamil Brahmin community and is not another Tom, Dick or Harry.

His Holiness Sri Swami Sivananda Saraswati Maharaj

His views are highly respected in the community.

Yes, he is not another Tom, Dick and Harry (wonder what is wrong with that term).

However, he is not the mathadhipathi of a famous mutt that claims mulamnya jurisdiction status over other 4 mutts. He is not the kula guru for TBs. Please ask the mutt heads to come forward and say that Upanishads supercede the Smrithis.

All the best!

 

[happyhindu]

HH,

AFAIK (my knowledge is meagre) there are grihya sutras - manuals for the daily life of dvijas, srauta sutras - manuals for conduct of the various vedic sacrifices, and dharma sastras - containing law codes. The texts available to us do not follow the above guidelines strictly and there are spill overs. Even then all the general laws contained in these dharmasastras have all been superceded by the constitution except where the Supreme Court itself has depended on the Dharma sastras. As for grihya sutras and Srautasutras, they are not superceded as they form part of the freedom to follow one's own religion. Since the way of life is interleaved with many social norms also, it may not be possible to do a segregation of the type you visualize unless the Acharyas come together and make a new grihya and srauta sutra for all the Hindus. That, to me, looks impossible!!

Aiyo. What are the next available options then -- please can you think of other solution(s) then?

 

[uvsharma]

Yes, he is not another Tom, Dick and Harry (wonder what is wrong with that term).

However, he is not the mathadhipathi of a famous mutt that claims mulamnya jurisdiction status over other 4 mutts. He is not the kula guru for TBs. Please ask the mutt heads to come forward and say that Upanishads supercede the Smrithis.

All the best!

Every brahmin is attached to a Vedha (like Yajur, Sama, Rig, Adharvana) by hereditary, Rishis by hereditary, Gothram by heriditiary, Sutram by heriditiary.

Every brahmin boy is suppose to pursue truth through study of Vedhas and Upanishads immediately after Upananayanam. He can do the same himself as well as through discussions with any number of scholars. There is no restriction that he has to consult only madathipathis.

No where in the sankalpa mantras, the name of the madathipathi is mentioned.

After every Avani Avittam also the first step is `Vedha Aarambam' which every brahmin male does after Yagnobaveedha Dhaaranam.

Hence Vedhas and Upanishads supercedes all the other things and one need not consult a madaathipathi for this. Madaathipathi is just a spiritual Guru in the present life but the origin for any brahmin is only Vedhas.

All the Kula Gurus of Brahmin sects keep Vedhaas and Upanishads much above everything and they don't have to declare specifically every now and then.

When a Upanishad says some thing, it is a Supreme Statement and only the four Vedhas can supercede the same and all learned brahmins have absolute clarity on this.

The particular statement of Tatreya Upanishad is written with great vision anticipating the present age and may be the future also.

 

[happyhindu]

Every brahmin is attached to a Vedha (like Yajur, Sama, Rig, Adharvana) by hereditary, Rishis by hereditary, Gothram by heriditiary, Sutram by heriditiary.

Every brahmin boy is suppose to pursue truth through study of Vedhas and Upanishads immediately after Upananayanam. He can do the same himself as well as through discussions with any number of scholars. There is no restriction that he has to consult only madathipathis.

No where in the sankalpa mantras, the name of the madathipathi is mentioned.

After every Avani Avittam also the first step is `Vedha Aarambam' which every brahmin male does after Yagnobaveedha Dhaaranam.

Hence Vedhas and Upanishads supercedes all the other things and one need not consult a madaathipathi for this. Madaathipathi is just a spiritual Guru in the present life but the origin for any brahmin is only Vedhas.

All the Kula Gurus of Brahmin sects keep Vedhaas and Upanishads much above everything and they don't have to declare specifically every now and then.

Really? Sorry Mr.Sharma. The kula gurus are mutt followers. All iyers (minus the gurukkals) are considered as mutt followers. Even if not (on their own personal account), forget it.

But if mutts can so very well specify jaati-dharma and statements in support of it... then they might as well declare that "upanishads are above smrithis".

They can come out in the open and issue relevant statements to the same effect. And also repudiate jaati-dharma.

If they do not do it, there is no point in you saying so. You are not a mathadhipathi.

When a Upanishad says some thing, it is a Supreme Statement and only the four Vedhas can supercede the same and all learned brahmins have absolute clarity on this.

The particular statement of Tatreya Upanishad is written with great vision anticipating the present age and may be the future also.

These are just your personal opinions.

And may good thoughts come from all directions and cleanse the mind, instead of trying to find escapist routes to allow the mind to remain rusty, primitive, outdated and inapplicable in this century.

All the best!!

 

[sangom]

The Taittiriya Upa-nishad(3) says.
Verse 1:11 carries a passage: “Yaani anavadhyaani karmaani, taani sevithavyaani, no itharaani”. This means “Those acts that are irreproachable alone are to be performed, and not those that are contrary.” In explaining “Those acts”, Swami Sarvananda says: “The Yogavasishta lays down that what is not consistent with reason should not be accepted even if Brahma were to tell it. No human being is absolutely and perpetually blemishless. Love or admiration of one’s exemplar should not prompt one to copy his imperfections…….” It means that, with due respects to Sage Manu, one need not accept any of his sayings which one’s own reasoning and conscience rebel against. At the same time it is not a call to us to reject him in toto and say that he is not valid for his own age, or for our age, or for any age for that matter.

Dear Shri Sharma,
While your quote and its translation are correct, we have to go by what the Vedas say. If the freedom to interpret what is irreproachable and what is not, is given to each person, there will be only utter confusion and conflict resulting from such an unfettered freedom. Even in the best of democracies this may not be practicable. That is why in the same Upanishad it is continued:

अथ यदि ते कर्म विचिकित्सा वा वृत्तविचिकित्सा वा स्यात्।....अथाभ्याख्यातेषु ।... एष आदेशः। एष उपदॆशः । एषा वेदोपनिषत् ।एतदनुशासनम् । एवम् उपासितव्यम् ।एवमु चैतदुपास्यम् ॥
Meaning:
If at any time you get a doubt about the irreproachability of any duty or in dealing with any person who is not of good reputation, or, get confused and unable to decide, on such occasions, you should consult a learned, selfless, Brahmana who is of noble thoughts, capable of giving proper advice (to you), doing his daily duties or rituals without fail, has good relations with others (popular or held in honour) and who is intent on the Dharma being followed (by all) and follow his advice according to what he will do under similar circumstances.

This is the command of Sastras. This is the advice (of mine). This is the complete secret of the Vedas. Not only that, this is the tradition (अनुशासनम्); hence you also have to follow these rules (conduct). You have to follow these rules. (Repeated for emphasis in the original Upanishad itself as एवमु च एतद् उपास्यम् ). The sum and substance of this is that one should follow the course of action followed by people worthy of emulation and it does not give uncontrolled freedom to decide. Bhagavadgita also says, "yad yad aacharati sreshtaH tattadevetaro janAH..." and that corroborates the Upanishad.

The persons described as worthy of consulting have traditionally (again this is tradition, as the Upanishad prescribes) been the Mathams of Sankaracharya for the smartas, and similar recognised Mathams of Vaishnavas and Madhwas. These Mathams hold the smritis as their guidelines. BTW, it is not stated anywhere that only Parasara Smriti is applicable to Kaliyuga, MDS was for Satya yuga, etc. In that case there should have been no one now following Apastamba, Baudhaayana, Aasvalaayana and other smritis and only Parasara sutra should reign in Kaliyuga!!

The latter-day self-styled gurus (of which Sivananda is one) are not considered authorities to be consulted in such matters. People have accepted it as a fashion, just as they have taken to cropped hair (instead of Sikhai), not learning Sanskrit and veda, not doing Sandhyavandanam regularly, etc., but that cannot be stated as sufficient for adherence to the injunction contained in the Upanishad.

If you had not cited the Upanishadvaakya to justify, there would have been no need for me to write this.

 

[uvsharma]

Dear Shri Sharma,
While your quote and its translation are correct, we have to go by what the Vedas say. If the freedom to interpret what is irreproachable and what is not, is given to each person, there will be only utter confusion and conflict resulting from such an unfettered freedom. Even in the best of democracies this may not be practicable. That is why in the same Upanishad it is continued:

अथ यदि ते कर्म विचिकित्सा वा वृत्तविचिकित्सा वा स्यात्।....अथाभ्याख्यातेषु ।... एष आदेशः। एष उपदॆशः । एषा वेदोपनिषत् ।एतदनुशासनम् । एवम् उपासितव्यम् ।एवमु चैतदुपास्यम् ॥
Meaning:
If at any time you get a doubt about the irreproachability of any duty or in dealing with any person who is not of good reputation, or, get confused and unable to decide, on such occasions, you should consult a learned, selfless, Brahmana who is of noble thoughts, capable of giving proper advice (to you), doing his daily duties or rituals without fail, has good relations with others (popular or held in honour) and who is intent on the Dharma being followed (by all) and follow his advice according to what he will do under similar circumstances.

This is the command of Sastras. This is the advice (of mine). This is the complete secret of the Vedas. Not only that, this is the tradition (अनुशासनम्); hence you also have to follow these rules (conduct). You have to follow these rules. (Repeated for emphasis in the original Upanishad itself as एवमु च एतद् उपास्यम् ). The sum and substance of this is that one should follow the course of action followed by people worthy of emulation and it does not give uncontrolled freedom to decide. Bhagavadgita also says, "yad yad aacharati sreshtaH tattadevetaro janAH..." and that corroborates the Upanishad.

The persons described as worthy of consulting have traditionally (again this is tradition, as the Upanishad prescribes) been the Mathams of Sankaracharya for the smartas, and similar recognised Mathams of Vaishnavas and Madhwas. These Mathams hold the smritis as their guidelines. BTW, it is not stated anywhere that only Parasara Smriti is applicable to Kaliyuga, MDS was for Satya yuga, etc. In that case there should have been no one now following Apastamba, Baudhaayana, Aasvalaayana and other smritis and only Parasara sutra should reign in Kaliyuga!!

The latter-day self-styled gurus (of which Sivananda is one) are not considered authorities to be consulted in such matters. People have accepted it as a fashion, just as they have taken to cropped hair (instead of Sikhai), not learning Sanskrit and veda, not doing Sandhyavandanam regularly, etc., but that cannot be stated as sufficient for adherence to the injunction contained in the Upanishad.

If you had not cited the Upanishadvaakya to justify, there would have been no need for me to write this.

[FONT=Verdana, Tahoma, Arial, Calibri, Geneva, sans-serif]Mr Sangom,[/FONT]​

[FONT=Verdana, Tahoma, Arial, Calibri, Geneva, sans-serif]There are three points on which we had differences of opinion initially[/FONT]​

[FONT=Verdana, Tahoma, Arial, Calibri, Geneva, sans-serif]Point No.1. Supremacy of the Constitution – Since you have accepted the supremacy of the constitution, there is no difference of opinion between us on this subject.[/FONT]​

[FONT=Verdana, Tahoma, Arial, Calibri, Geneva, sans-serif]Point No.2. Vedhas and Upanishads are eternal – We don't have difference of opinion on this aspect also as you have accepted my view point. It means the downstream scriptures like Manusmithi and others are subject to variation in practice based on the circumstances. [/FONT]​

[FONT=Verdana, Tahoma, Arial, Calibri, Geneva, sans-serif]Point No.3. Interpratation of downstream scriptures - In case of any doubt, according to you interpretation has to be done by a learned scholar since this proviso should not be misused. You have also stated that Swamy Sivananda inspite of his great knowledge could not be considered as an authority and only traditional mutts can issue guidelines on this matter.[/FONT]​

[FONT=Verdana, Tahoma, Arial, Calibri, Geneva, sans-serif]Please go through the following link of Kanchi mutt where Mahaaperiyavaal has given his opinion.[/FONT]​

[FONT=Verdana, Tahoma, Arial, Calibri, Geneva, sans-serif]Tamil Content : kamakoti.org: [/FONT]​

[FONT=Verdana, Tahoma, Arial, Calibri, Geneva, sans-serif]Mahaaperiyavaal has clearly given directions in case of any doubt or difficulty in following the scriptures like Manusmirithi. It is in Tamil and I hope you can read the same. [/FONT]​

[FONT=Verdana, Tahoma, Arial, Calibri, Geneva, sans-serif]His opinion could be summarized as follows:[/FONT]​

[FONT=Verdana, Tahoma, Arial, Calibri, Geneva, sans-serif]1 Vedhas are supreme and eternal. [/FONT]​

[FONT=Verdana, Tahoma, Arial, Calibri, Geneva, sans-serif]He has given in a separate lecture that Upanishads and Brahma Sutra are also part and parcel of the original Vedhas and have been edited and compiled by Vedha Vyasar. [/FONT]​

[FONT=Verdana, Tahoma, Arial, Calibri, Geneva, sans-serif]The difference between the three great Acharyas Sankara, Ramanuja and Madhva started only when writing `bashya' for Brahma Sutra . There was absolutely no difference between all the three Acharyas as far as Vedhas and Upanishads are concerned. [/FONT]​

[FONT=Verdana, Tahoma, Arial, Calibri, Geneva, sans-serif]2. All other scriptures are sub-ordinate in nature to the above and are subject to variation/modification when it comes to actual practice. Manusmrithi is one among them.[/FONT]​

[FONT=Verdana, Tahoma, Arial, Calibri, Geneva, sans-serif]3. In case of any doubt or difficulty in following Manusmirithi or any other scriptures, we have to look to our predecessor's actions for guidance. [/FONT]​

[FONT=Verdana, Tahoma, Arial, Calibri, Geneva, sans-serif]My own interpretation for the above:[/FONT]​

[FONT=Verdana, Tahoma, Arial, Calibri, Geneva, sans-serif]It can be Past Acharyas like `Bodhendra Saraswathi Swamigal' of Kanchi Mutt who attained `jeevasamathi' at Govindapuram reciting `Rama Nama'. He has declared that reciting `Rama Nama' is sufficient for Kali Yuga and no other mantra or ritual need to be followed. There may be several similar Acharyas in Sringeri, Vaishanvite and Madhva mutts whose actions could be taken as guidance for us to follow.
[/FONT]​

[FONT=Verdana, Tahoma, Arial, Calibri, Geneva, sans-serif]It can also be from great saints like Sadasiva Brahmendral, Sridhara Aiyavaal, Sadguru Seshadri Swamigal, Ramana Maharishi and several others who cannot be listed here as the list may be infinite.[/FONT]​

[FONT=Verdana, Tahoma, Arial, Calibri, Geneva, sans-serif]4. [/FONT][FONT=Verdana, Tahoma, Arial, Calibri, Geneva, sans-serif]Consult the scholars who are learned as well as practicing the rituals with full dedication.[/FONT]​

[FONT=Verdana, Tahoma, Arial, Calibri, Geneva, sans-serif]My own interpretation:[/FONT]​

[FONT=Verdana, Tahoma, Arial, Calibri, Geneva, sans-serif]Consult our own `vaadhyar' if he is eligible for the above criteria.[/FONT]​

[FONT=Verdana, Tahoma, Arial, Calibri, Geneva, sans-serif]Otherwise consult people like Dr.Seshadrinathan, Ex Principal of Sanskrit College, Chennai who is writing about all these doubts in `Sakthi Vikatan' Tamil Magazine regularly. There may be other eminent people among us even now. Since Dr Seshadrinathan clears these type of doubts regularly through a magazine, he came to my mind.[/FONT]​

[FONT=Verdana, Tahoma, Arial, Calibri, Geneva, sans-serif]5. Our own consiousness:[/FONT]​

[FONT=Verdana, Tahoma, Arial, Calibri, Geneva, sans-serif]Mahaaperiyavaal has given this as the last option but at the same time has warned us not to jump into this option immediately as our mind may not be the best judge at all times. But at the same time, this option could be kept as the last resort.
[/FONT]​

[FONT=Verdana, Tahoma, Arial, Calibri, Geneva, sans-serif]I hope I have clarified my position on Manusmirithi's in the present age to the best of my ability and is awaiting your final conclusion statement eagerly.[/FONT]​

 

[anandb]

I came across this link detailing the text of a book originally written in Hindi answering criticisms of the Manusmriti. Don't know if it was posted before and I have not gone through it but probably the members can give their opinions on this.

Why Oppose Manu – Criticisms on Manu Smriti Answered « Hindutva Ebooks

 

[kunjuppu]

I came across this link detailing the text of a book originally written in Hindi answering criticisms of the Manusmriti. Don't know if it was posted before and I have not gone through it but probably the members can give their opinions on this.

Why Oppose Manu – Criticisms on Manu Smriti Answered « Hindutva Ebooks

anada,

the publishers ie hindutva books, i would imagine, have their own agenda. i can see this group promoting manu, just as they appear to promote a more state managed hindu theocracy. except there is no appetite for this among indians.

using logic, one can acknowledge or justify any stand or position. sometimes we have to make a choice. re manu, his views on women or dalits, do not hold water under current day's values. had it been so, it would not have been controversial.

there would have been universal acceptance of manu had he been perceived as of egalitarian in thought.

yesterday, i received a 80th birthday invitation, which among its preamble, quoted manu. it goes without saying that this was an invitation from a tamil brahmin. a relgious person, who spends a lot of time in the temple.

but this man, is either innocent of manu's teachings as a whole, or would prefer to ignore the more unsavoury bits, and i suspect the latter. in these days of so much awareness, ease of communication and transfer of knowledge, one is more aware of மனு அநீதி than மனு நீதி.

 

[happyhindu]

I came across this link detailing the text of a book originally written in Hindi answering criticisms of the Manusmriti. Don't know if it was posted before and I have not gone through it but probably the members can give their opinions on this.

Why Oppose Manu – Criticisms on Manu Smriti Answered « Hindutva Ebooks

From the link you provided:

The author, Dr.Surendrakumar, states that out of a total of 2,685 verses, only 1,214 verses 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 by the author of this booklet to be later interpolations. According to him, the need of the hour is that the original Manusmriti should be reckoned as authentic, and the opposition to Manu on the basis of interpolated slokas should be rebutted because Manu and Manusmriti are worth taking pride and not something condemnable.

I had already mentioned Surendra Kumar's work before. And there is no point doing the same old rounds. All discussions are useless if the orthodoxy is not going to acknowledge the interpolations.

Moreover, its not just Manu's smrithi alone. Try Gautama, Apasthamba, Vashista...there is hardly any diff when it comes to certain things.

Thanks and bye.

 

[anandb]

Shri. Kunjippu,

With all due respects, let us not prejudge just because it is by Hindutva books. I have gone through a few of theirs, not this one, and found them to be statistically backed up. By providing this link, does not mean I am supporting Manu or any such thing. I want people like Shri. Sangom, Shri. Nara and Shrimati HH who are pretty well versed in this subject to give their opinions. It is openly acknowledged that Manusmriti has been subject to interpolations and this is one such link which supports that view. It is up to the experts to analyse if those views are valid. I have no problem if this book is trashed but before trashing as it is normally done the contents have to be examined.

 

[kunjuppu]

Shri. Kunjippu,

With all due respects, let us not prejudge just because it is by Hindutva books. I have gone through a few of theirs, not this one, and found them to be statistically backed up. By providing this link, does not mean I am supporting Manu or any such thing. I want people like Shri. Sangom, Shri. Nara and Shrimati HH who are pretty well versed in this subject to give their opinions. It is openly acknowledged that Manusmriti has been subject to interpolations and this is one such link which supports that view. It is up to the experts to analyse if those views are valid. I have no problem if this book is trashed but before trashing as it is normally done the contents have to be examined.

thank you anandb. ofcourse not (to your first statement).

i can understand the emotional attachment many have towards manu. i am quite sure they will point out the rational and good in manu (which i am quite sure exists).

the truth of the matter is, i think, we live in an enlghtened environment, much as folks tend to dismiss this as kali yuga.

since the french revolution, man has, all over the world come to believe, that he is equal to his neighbour. This concept is even more popular today, what with instant global communication. This knowledge may be superficial, but I feel, it is deep enough to decry an hint of stratification of rights especially based on birth or caste.

It might be interesting for the public to know that England had a class system much alike our own caste. People mingled, spoke with, ate with their own class. Upper classes had an easy entry into the best schools, best jobs, best posts in the colonies and empire and above all, held a completely different viewpoint than the so called lower classes.

This class differentiation is best exemplified by the move ‘my fair lady’ where a working class cockney girl is transformed by professor Higgins to a upper crust dame. After all, the author, george Bernard shaw wanted to get across his idea, that class was only skin deep. With the right education, food, clothing and upbringing, anyone can learn to behave like the queen of England.

This idea has caught on to the masses like glue. No one, anymore I think, can ever sell an idea, where each person, has a ‘position’ in society which he has to be content with. Upward mobility in education, career and above all, social dignity is the norm of the day.

For example, in 3 generations, MK has gentrified his family. Today they are a distant past from thirukuvalai – hobnobbing as they are with india’s most powerful cliques and marrying into he most established families like that of ‘the hindu’. This is what everyone wants, and each one thinks that marrying into a caste above is one sure way to social upliftment. Is this not a great reason, to marry tamil Brahmin girls among the non Brahmins.

Personally I think all this is ok. For too long, our society has been stratified and too much intermingling within the caste. Mixing of castes will be inevitable with greater access to learning and urbanization. And all this is against Manu. Right?

Re any book published by Hindutva: I would look upon it the same as any book published by veeramani of DK. We all know their agenda. If we agree with it, then we can read their book with gullibility and get reinforced. If we do not, it is best to avoid them. I avoid DK of veeramani. I tend to do the same with hindutva stuff.

Thank you.

 

[anandb]

From the link you provided:



I had already mentioned Surendra Kumar's work before. And there is no point doing the same old rounds. All discussions are useless if the orthodoxy is not going to acknowledge the interpolations.

Moreover, its not just Manu's smrithi alone. Try Gautama, Apasthamba, Vashista...there is hardly any diff when it comes to certain things.

Thanks and bye.

To me, the orthodoxy had already stated that the Sruthis guide the Smrithi and should be followed as such. So if the Shruthis are accepted as fair that automatically sets the tone of the Smritis and anything negative are interpolated versions.

And BTW, the orthodoxy you are referring to never preached anyone to practice discrimination. All they did was for everyone to practice their varna dharma and this is not discriminatory by nature as long as everyone . I am getting a sense of deja-vu so I will stop here.

 

[anandb]

thank you anandb. ofcourse not (to your first statement).

i can understand the emotional attachment many have towards manu. i am quite sure they will point out the rational and good in manu (which i am quite sure exists).

the truth of the matter is, i think, we live in an enlghtened environment, much as folks tend to dismiss this as kali yuga.

since the french revolution, man has, all over the world come to believe, that he is equal to his neighbour. This concept is even more popular today, what with instant global communication. This knowledge may be superficial, but I feel, it is deep enough to decry an hint of stratification of rights especially based on birth or caste.

It might be interesting for the public to know that England had a class system much alike our own caste. People mingled, spoke with, ate with their own class. Upper classes had an easy entry into the best schools, best jobs, best posts in the colonies and empire and above all, held a completely different viewpoint than the so called lower classes.

This class differentiation is best exemplified by the move ‘my fair lady’ where a working class cockney girl is transformed by professor Higgins to a upper crust dame. After all, the author, george Bernard shaw wanted to get across his idea, that class was only skin deep. With the right education, food, clothing and upbringing, anyone can learn to behave like the queen of England.

This idea has caught on to the masses like glue. No one, anymore I think, can ever sell an idea, where each person, has a ‘position’ in society which he has to be content with. Upward mobility in education, career and above all, social dignity is the norm of the day.

For example, in 3 generations, MK has gentrified his family. Today they are a distant past from thirukuvalai – hobnobbing as they are with india’s most powerful cliques and marrying into he most established families like that of ‘the hindu’. This is what everyone wants, and each one thinks that marrying into a caste above is one sure way to social upliftment. Is this not a great reason, to marry tamil Brahmin girls among the non Brahmins.

Personally I think all this is ok. For too long, our society has been stratified and too much intermingling within the caste. Mixing of castes will be inevitable with greater access to learning and urbanization. And all this is against Manu. Right?

Re any book published by Hindutva: I would look upon it the same as any book published by veeramani of DK. We all know their agenda. If we agree with it, then we can read their book with gullibility and get reinforced. If we do not, it is best to avoid them. I avoid DK of veeramani. I tend to do the same with hindutva stuff.

Thank you.

Honestly, I don't understand one thing. How many people have a copy of Manu at home and diligently go through it to practice discrimination? Okay, a copy is available over the internet but is it the real reason that people practice discrimination? What about all those who practice discrimination but who have not even heard of Manu?

My point is if we get fixated on Manu then we will fail to find real time solutions to this problem. Everyone accepts that the menace exists, no question about it. By constantly harping on manu is the problem going to get solved. Hypothetically, if we assume that all copies of Manu are destroyed physically and online, do you think this menace has found an automatic solution after a generation if the mindset does not change.

On Hindutva and DK, there is a difference. Hindutva does not do hate mongering like DK. If a defensive strategy is adopted to project Hinduism in a fair manner, I don't think that is anything to be ashamed of.

 

[kunjuppu]

...On Hindutva and DK, there is a difference. Hindutva does not do hate mongering like DK. If a defensive strategy is adopted to project Hinduism in a fair manner, I don't think that is anything to be ashamed of.

anand, i could not help my laughter. i know we disagree, but hopefully always pleasantly. i think hindutva is not good for india as a whole... but that is another arguement in another post. peace now.

 

[sangom]

[FONT=Verdana, Tahoma, Arial, Calibri, Geneva, sans-serif]Mr Sangom,[/FONT]​

[FONT=Verdana, Tahoma, Arial, Calibri, Geneva, sans-serif]There are three points on which we had differences of opinion initially[/FONT]​

[FONT=Verdana, Tahoma, Arial, Calibri, Geneva, sans-serif]Point No.1. Supremacy of the Constitution – Since you have accepted the supremacy of the constitution, there is no difference of opinion between us on this subject.[/FONT]​

[FONT=Verdana, Tahoma, Arial, Calibri, Geneva, sans-serif]Point No.2. Vedhas and Upanishads are eternal – We don't have difference of opinion on this aspect also as you have accepted my view point. It means the downstream scriptures like Manusmithi and others are subject to variation in practice based on the circumstances. [/FONT]​

[FONT=Verdana, Tahoma, Arial, Calibri, Geneva, sans-serif]Point No.3. Interpratation of downstream scriptures - In case of any doubt, according to you interpretation has to be done by a learned scholar since this proviso should not be misused. You have also stated that Swamy Sivananda inspite of his great knowledge could not be considered as an authority and only traditional mutts can issue guidelines on this matter.[/FONT]​

Dear Shri Sharma,

Before I can respond to your post, let me say that, perhaps due to my poor memory, I am unable to find when we two had any debate/discussion about constitution, vedas & upanishads being eternal and, interpretation of other scriptures. The search facility also does not show all the posts by either of us.

So, Kindly give me the posts nos. If you are referring to some other thread than this one please specify the name/s of the thread/s also.

Thanks.
​

 

[Nara]

I came across this link detailing the text of a book originally written in Hindi answering criticisms of the Manusmriti. Don't know if it was posted before and I have not gone through it but probably the members can give their opinions on this.

Why Oppose Manu – Criticisms on Manu Smriti Answered « Hindutva Ebooks

Dear Anand, Greetings!

I read the pdf file in its entirety. I had the original Manu smirti in Samskritam from here, as well as English translation from Sacred-Texts site in front of me. As I read this pamphlet I went back to the original text for context and meaning.

Anand, you may think I have an agenda, but I say this in all honestly, I think this document is nothing more than propaganda. Dr. Surendra Kumar makes a lot of declarative statements without any footnotes, offers POV and claims them as proof, cites Manu's verses without giving any context and claims opposite meanings, and has a long section on Ambedkar quoting him partially and completely mangling the arguments of Ambedkar. On the whole, this is not a document that needs to be taken seriously by anyone who wishes to take an impartial look at Manu Dharmashasthra.

Some of my observations:

The author starts out criticizing the European academics for motivated translations, and the Indian critics of MDS to be following these translations blindly and not recognizing there are interpolations. Then, in the very next page, cites European scholars for crediting MDS to be universal law that would benefit all mankind, and better than Bible. So, for Dr. Kumar, any European scholar who is critical of MDS is motivated and ignorant, and those who agree with him are to be taken seriously?

Further, late in the pamphlet, the author concedes there are abhorant passages and a careful study must be made to separate out interpolations. Now, is the praise of European intellectuals, which the author cites without any footnotes, for the entire MDS text, or did they separate out the interpolations and express admiration only for the verses that Dr Kumar considers authentic? The author does not care to comment on that.

The author argues at great length that the Varna of Manu Smrithi is not by birth, but by merit and occupation. He cites a verses to establish this. Much of them are about a Brahmana falling into Sudhra varna because of not performing his Brahmnical duties. This has nothing to do with Varna by birth or not. Butt the author seems oblivious to such logical nuances.

He then cites couple of verses and claims a Shudra can become a Brahmin. But alas, one states that a subservient Shudra will become a Brahmin in the next birth. The other is about a woman born to a Brahmana and Shudra, producing children from Brahmana, and after 7 generations the line will become Brahmana. The pamphlet is full of such tall claims made with dubious references, and later, the author simply claims them as points already proved by him.

The author never gets into the verses that talk about Brahmana birth, Shudra birth, the names to be given to the babies of various varna babies etc. If varna is by merit and occupation, how is one to recognize merit and occupation at the time of birth?

The author laments that there are good things in the text but the critics only look at the horrible passages in the text. This is the lamest argument of all. If we have a glass of milk and if we dilute it with water, we can still drink it. But, if deadly poison gets added to the glass of milk it has to be thrown out, is it not dangerous to argue that we must recognize the milk in the glass and drink it. Is it possible to separate out the poison? Even if it possible, do you want to take that chance when pure nectar in another glass?

We need to attach this pamphlet to MDS and throw both into the dustbin.

Cheers!

 

[happyhindu]

There is no point giving explanations on what the orthodoxy wants. A guru clearly claimed that the Smrithi is to be held equal to the Shruti. Those who claim that dharma-shastras must be followed, should take the onus of putting out clarifications as well.

The Indian judicial system must be the most foolish in the entire world to take hindu dharmashastras into account for drafting hindu laws. No wonder the laws against rape are so weak, and have no impact whatsoever.

The so-called "dharma" shastra must be the only 'divine' scriptures in the world that permits forcible abduction of a female against her wishes for procreation:

Rakshasa Vivaha permitted for the Kshatriya in Manusmrithi:

24. The sages state that the first four are approved (in the case) of a Brahmana one, the Rakshasa (rite in the case) of a Kshatriya, and the Asura (marriage in that) of a Vaisya and of a Sudra.

33. The forcible abduction of a maiden from her home, while she cries out and weeps, after (her kinsmen) have been slain or wounded and (their houses) broken open, is called the Rakshasa rite.

 

[uvsharma]

Dear Shri Sharma,

Before I can respond to your post, let me say that, perhaps due to my poor memory, I am unable to find when we two had any debate/discussion about constitution, vedas & upanishads being eternal and, interpretation of other scriptures. The search facility also does not show all the posts by either of us.

So, Kindly give me the posts nos. If you are referring to some other thread than this one please specify the name/s of the thread/s also.

Thanks.
[/INDENT]

Mr Sangom,

There is no debate or argument between us.

When I was reading past postings in this forum, I found out that very few people starting with Dr S Ramanathan have said Constitution supersedes Manusmirthi. Since you mentioned it this thread, I thought you had different opinion earlier. It is just my mistake, I am sorry for that.

When I quoted Tatriyopanishad, you confirmed it adding few more quotes from the same and hence I said both of us have the same opinion about supremacy of Vedhas and Upanishads.

Both of us differ only about Swamy Sivananda. You have said earlier that traditional mutts have to declare. Now in my point no.3, I have given reference to Kanchi Mutt and you please go through the same and offer your opinion.

 

[sangom]

Mr Sangom,

There is no debate or argument between us.

When I was reading past postings in this forum, I found out that very few people starting with Dr S Ramanathan have said Constitution supersedes Manusmirthi. Since you mentioned it this thread, I thought you had different opinion earlier. It is just my mistake, I am sorry for that.

When I quoted Tatriyopanishad, you confirmed it adding few more quotes from the same and hence I said both of us have the same opinion about supremacy of Vedhas and Upanishads.

Both of us differ only about Swamy Sivananda. You have said earlier that traditional mutts have to declare. Now in my point no.3, I have given reference to Kanchi Mutt and you please go through the same and offer your opinion.

Dear Sharma,

Let me at the outset itself clarify that this thread was started by me for the simple purpose of stating my views on one point, viz., whether manusmriti is authored by kshatriya interests or whether kshatriyas forced brahmanas to compile it in the way it is. I have tried to present the internal evidences from the MDS itself and have tried to show that it could have been neither of the above, but is very much a text prepared by Brahmanas for gaining superiority over the other three varnas. I have, I think, not expressed any view/s on the applicability of the rules of MDS or otherwise, nor do I think I am an authority to advice the brahmin community on such matters.

When you cited a part of Taittiriya Upanishad portion so as to support Sivananda's pronouncement that what is not consistent with (one's) reason need not be followed by that individual, even if Brahma were to tell, etc., I wanted to inform the general members that it is not the orthodox point of view, and that the orthodoxy would look only to the established Mathams in such matters and not to the self-styled gurus, like Sivananda.

The web page you gave projects the orthodox pov right. I cannot say anything about the individual swamijis whose names you cite since I don't know sufficiently about them. Anyway when the established Mathams and their authorised heads (Acharyas) are still there for people to consult, why would orthodox brahmins go to anyone else?