..... and the Brahmins want to glorify this kind of writing in our scriptures?
Yes Revathi, this is my pain too. Every few months somebody will come along and claim Manu Dharmashastra (MDS) is a wonderful text and those who criticize it are haters etc., etc. Among the favorite things these neo-Brahminists like to state is Brahminhood does not come from birth, a Brahmin is one who sees Brhman. If so, what does it mean when MDS says that a twice-born must take only a woman of the same caste for his first wife, as in verse 12 of Chapter 3.
Verse 12सवर्णाग्रे द्विजातीनां प्रशस्ता दारकर्मणि ।
कामतस्तु प्रवृत्तानामिमाः स्युः क्रमशोऽवराः ॥
For the first marriage of twice-born men (wives) of equal caste are recommended; but for those who through desire proceed (to marry again) the following females, (chosen) according to the (direct) order (of the castes), are most approved.
So, a Brahmin must take only a Brahmin girl for his first wife. If Brahminhood does not come from birth, who would a Brahmin girl be? How do you determine whether a girl is of equal jAti unless by birth?
Next, the verses that follow this one talks about how a woman may marry into a higher varna, but not lower down the order. Two things are clear from this, (i) varna, as described by MDS, is a hierarchical system with the Brahmins on top of the structure and Shudra at the bottom, and (ii) even if you see Brhman, you may find a need for more wives, and this person, who can see Brhman, can take any number of women as his wives, irrespective of varna, just as long as his first wife is a Brahmin.
Having prescribed the rules for taking multiple wives from all varnas, inexplicably, MDS goes on to warn a Brahmana of what may result from such unions.
Verse 17
शूद्रां शयनमारोप्य ब्राह्मणो यात्यधोगतम् ।
जनयित्वा सुतं तस्यां ब्राह्मण्यादेव हियते ॥
A Brahmana who takes a Sudra wife to his bed, will (after death) sink into hell; if he begets a child by her, he will lose the rank of a Brahmana.
Does this make any sense at all, please? First, MDS says it is alright for a Brahmin to take a Shudra woman as his wife, as long as she is not the first wife. Then, it states that if you take her to bed you will sink into hell after death. But, your very
rank as a Brahmin will be lost if she produces a male child for you!!!
Whatever convoluted justification one many come up with for this, it is clear that for MDS, Brahminhood is nothing more than a rank that will come into jeopardy if his Shudra wife, who is not his first, produces a son, daughters are apparently no problem.
Verses 55 to 60 of Chapter 3 of MDS do say women of a household must be honored. Neo-Brahminists love to cite these verses and make a sweeping claim that only Brahmin-haters twist MDS to claim it is misogynistic. But, a little bit of unbiased reflection will show:
- these verses are not about treating women with respect, but to honor some of them in a traditional sense -- otherwise men won't receive their just rewards performing religious rites.
- In an indirect way, these verses place added responsibility for the welfare of the family upon these women.
- a few verses that say women must be honored cannot erase all the other that are noxious to women. This sack contains rice alright, but it is also crawling with many worms.
The truth is, Hindu religion itself will be better off by getting rid of Brahminism that has MDS as the central organizing constitution. Brahmins must shed their exclusivity/superior mindset and join the rest of humanity on equal footing for their own good. This is possible only if MDS/Brahminism is rejected outright, without ambiguity.
Cheers!
ray:
