Manusmriti

The Manusmṛti (or "Laws of Manu", Sanskrit Manusmṛti मनुस्मृति; also known as Mānava-Dharmaśāstra मानवधर्मशास्त्र) is the most important and earliest metrical work of the many Dharmaśāstras of Hinduism. It was one of the first Sanskrit texts translated during the British rule of India in 1794, by Sir William Jones, and used to formulate the Hindu law by the colonial government.

Over fifty manuscripts of Manusmriti are now known, but the earliest discovered, most translated and presumed authentic version since the 18th-century has been the "Calcutta manuscript with Kulluka Bhatta commentary". Modern scholarship states this presumed authenticity is false, and the various manuscripts of Manusmriti discovered in India are inconsistent with each other, and within themselves, raising concerns of its authenticity, insertions and interpolations made into the text in later times.

The text is in Sanskrit, is variously dated to be from 2nd century BCE to 3rd century CE, and it presents itself as a discourse given by Manu on dharma topics such as duties, rights, laws, conduct, virtues and others. The text's fame spread outside India, long before the colonial era. The medieval era Buddhistic law of Myanmar and Thailand are also ascribed to Manu.

Nomenclature

The title Manusmriti is a relatively modern term and a late innovation, probably coined because the text is in a verse form. The over fifty manuscripts discovered of the text, never use this title, but state the title as Manava Dharmasastra in their colophons at the end of each chapter. In modern scholarship, these two titles refer to the same text.

Chronology

Eighteenth century philologists Sir William Jones and Karl Wilhelm Friedrich Schlegel assigned Manusmriti to the period of around 1250 BCE and 1000 BCE respectively. Later scholarship, shifted the chronology of the text to between 200 BCE and 200 CE. Olivelle adds that numismatics evidence, and the mention of gold coins as a fine, suggest that text may date to 2nd or 3rd-century CE.

Most scholars consider the text a composite produced by many authors put together over a long period of time. Olivelle states that the various ancient and medieval Indian texts claim revisions and editions were derived from the original text with 100,000 verses and 1,080 chapters. However, the text version in modern use, according to Olivelle, is likely the work of a single author or a chairman with research assistants.

The text shows the obvious influence of previous Dharmasutras and Arthashastras. In particular, the Manusmriti 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 procedure.

Structure

The modern version of the text has been subdivided into twelve Adhyayas (chapters), but the original text had no such division. The text covers different topics, and is unique among ancient Indian texts in using “transitional verses” to mark the end of one subject and the start of the next. The text can be broadly divided into four, each of different length. and each further divided into subsections:

1. Creation of the world
2. Source of dharma
3. The dharma of the four social classes
4. Law of karma, rebirth and final liberation

The text is composed in metric Shlokas (verses), in the form of a dialogue between a exalted teacher and disciples who are eager to learn about the various aspects of dharma. The first 58 verses are attributed by the text to Manu, while the remaining more than two thousand verses are attributed to his student Bhrigu. Olivelle lists the subsections as follows:

Creation of the world

The Sarvasya Sambhavah (Origin, creation of the World) section has one hundred nineteen verses.

Sources of the law

The Dharmasya Yonih (Sources of the Law) has twenty four verses, and one transition verse. These verses state what the text considers as the proper and just sources of law:

वेदोऽखिलो धर्ममूलं स्मृतिशीले च तद्विदाम् । आचारश्चैव साधूनामात्मनस्तुष्टिरेव च ॥

Translation 1: The whole Veda is the (first) source of the sacred law, next the tradition and the virtuous conduct of those who know the (Veda further), also the customs of holy men, and (finally) self-satisfaction (Atmana santushti).
Translation 2: The root of the religion is the entire Veda, and (then) the tradition and customs of those who know (the Veda), and the conduct of virtuous people, and what is satisfactory to oneself.

— Manusmriti 2.6

वेदः स्मृतिः सदाचारः स्वस्य च प्रियमात्मनः । एतच्चतुर्विधं प्राहुः साक्षाद् धर्मस्य लक्षणम् ॥

Translation 1: The Veda, the sacred tradition, the customs of virtuous men, and one's own pleasure, they declare to be the fourfold means of defining the sacred law.
Translation 2: The Veda, tradition, the conduct of good people, and what is pleasing to oneself – they say that is four fold mark of religion.

— Manusmriti 2.12

This section of Manusmriti, like other Hindu law texts, includes fourfold sources of Dharma, states Levinson, which include Atmana santushti (satisfaction of one's conscience), Sadachara (local norms of virtuous individuals), Smriti and Sruti.

Dharma of the four Varnas

Further information: Varna (Hinduism)

• 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 – 6.96) (contains the longest section of Manusmriti, 3.1, called dharmavidhi)
• 3.1.1.2 Rules of Action for a King (7.1 – 9.324) (contains 960 verses, includes description of institutions and officials of state, how officials are to be appointed, tax laws, rules of war, the role and limits on the power of the king, and long sections on eighteen grounds for litigation, including those related to non-delivery under contract, breach of contract, non-payment of wages, property disputes, inheritance disputes, humiliation and defamation, physical assault, theft, violence of any form, injury, sexual crimes against women, public safety, and others; the section also includes rules of evidence, rules on interrogation of witnesses, and the organization of court system)
• 3.1.1.3 Rules of Action for Vaiśyas and Śūdras (9.326 – 9.335) (shortest section, eight rules for Vaishyas, two for Shudras, but some applicable laws to these two classes are discussed generically in verses 2.26 – 9.324)

• 3.1.2 Rules of Action in Times of Adversity (10.1 – 11.129) (contains revised rules on the state machinery and four varnas in the times of war, famine or other emergencies)

• 3.2 Rules Relating to Penance (11.1 – 11.265) (includes rules of proportionate punishment; instead of fines, incarceration or death, discusses penance or social isolation as a form of punishment for certain crimes)

The verses 6.97, 9.325, 9.336 and 10.131 are transitional verses. Olivelle notes instances of likely interpolation and insertions in the notes to this section, in both the presumed vulgate version and the critical edition.

Determination of Karmayoga

The verses 12.1, 12.2 and 12.82 are transitional verses. This section is in a different style than the rest of the text, raising questions whether this entire chapter was added later. While there is evidence that this chapter was extensively redacted over time, however it is unclear whether the entire chapter is of a later era.

• 4.1 Fruits of Action (12.3-81) (section on actions and consequences, personal responsibility, action as a means of moksha - the highest personal bliss)
• 4.2 Rules of Action for Supreme Good (12.83-115) (section on actions and personal responsibility as a means of supreme good)

Contents

The structure and contents of the Manusmriti suggest it to be a document predominantly targeted at the Brahmins (priestly class) and the Kshatriyas (king, administration and warrior class). The statement of rules for the Vaishyas (merchant class) and the Shudras (artisans and working class) in the text is extraordinarily brief. Olivelle suggests that this may be because the text was composed to address the balance "between the political power and the priestly interests", and because of the rise in foreign invasions of India in the period it was composed.

Manusmriti, states Olivelle, was not a new document, it drew on other texts, and it reflects "a crystallization of a accumulated knowledge" in ancient India. The root of theoretical models within Manusmriti rely on at least two shastras that pre-date it: artha (statecraft and legal process), and dharma (an ancient Indian concept that includes duties, rights, laws, conduct, virtues and others discussed in various Dharmasutras older than Manusmriti).

The Manusmriti was compiled with a focus on the "shoulds" of dharma rather than on the actuality of everyday practice in India after the decline and collapse of the Maurya Empire.

Authenticity and inconsistencies in various manuscripts

Patrick Olivelle, credited with a 2005 translation of Manusmriti published by the Oxford University Press, states the concerns in postmodern scholarship about the presumed authenticity and reliability of Manusmriti manuscripts. He writes (abridged),

The MDh [Manusmriti] was the first Indian legal text introduced to the western world through the translation of Sir William Jones in 1794. (...) All the editions of the MDh, except for Jolly's, reproduce the text as found in the [Calcutta] manuscript containing the commentary of Kulluka. I have called this as the "vulgate version". It was Kulluka's version that has been translated repeatedly: Jones (1794), Burnell (1884), Buhler (1886) and Doniger (1991). (...)

The belief in the authenticity of Kulluka's text was openly articulated by Burnell (1884, xxix): "There is then no doubt that the textus receptus, viz., that of Kulluka Bhatta, as adopted in India and by European scholars, is very near on the whole to the original text." This is far from the truth. Indeed, one of the great surprises of my editorial work has been to discover how few of the over fifty manuscripts that I collated actually follow the vulgate in key readings.

— Patrick Olivelle, Manu's Code of Law (2005)

Other scholars point to the inconsistencies and have questioned the authenticity of verses, and the extent to which verses were changed, inserted or interpolated into the original, at a later date. Sinha, for example, states that less than half, or only 1,214 of the 2,685 verses in Manusmriti, may be authentic. Further, the verses are internally inconsistent. Verses such as III.55-62 of Manusmriti, for example, glorify the position of women, while verse such as IX.3 and IX.17 do the opposite.

Nelson in 1887, in a legal brief before the Madras High Court of British India, had stated, "there are various contradictions and inconsistencies in the Manu Smriti itself, and that these contradictions would lead one to conclude that such a commentary did not lay down legal principles to be followed but were merely recommendatory in nature." Mahatma Gandhi commented as followed in the observed inconsistencies within Manusmriti,

I hold Manusmriti as part of Shastras. But that does not mean that I swear by every verse that is printed in the book described as Manusmriti. There are so many contradictions in the printed volume that, if you accept one part, you are bound to reject those parts that are wholly inconsistent with it. (...) Nobody is in possession of the original text.

— Mahatma Gandhi, An Adi-Dravida's Difficulties

Commentaries

There are numerous classical commentaries on the Manusmṛti written in the medieval period.

Bhāruci

Bhāruci is the oldest known commentator on the Manu Smṛti. Kane places him in the late 10th or early 11th century, Olivelle places him in the 8th century, and Derrett places him between 600-650 CE. From these three opinions we can place Bhāruci anywhere from the early 7th century CE to the early 11th century CE. The surviving portion of Bhāruci'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.

Medhātithi

Medhātithi commentary on Manu Smṛti has been widely studied. Scholars such as Buhler, Kane, and Lingat believe he was from north India, likely the Kashmir region. His commentary on Manusmriti is estimated to be from 9th to 11th century.

Comparison with other dharmasastras

Further information: Dharma and Dharmashastra

Modern reception and Criticism

The Manusmrti is considered an important source for the sociological history of ancient and medieval India. Since it forms the basis of the varnas, economics, etc. it has been subject to appraisal and criticism. In 1927, B. R. Ambedkar had burned a copy of Manusmrti.

The Manu Smriti was one of the first Sanskrit texts studied by the European philologists. It was first translated into English by Sir William Jones. His version was published in 1794. He considered Manu's laws to be older than the laws of Solon as well as the Lycurgus. He also mentions that the latter had been adopted from Manu. William Jones writes:-

The laws of Manu very probably were considerably older than those of Solon or even of Lycurgus, although the promulgation of them, before they were reduced to writing, might have been covered with the first monarchies established in Egypt and India.

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.

In his book Bible in India, Louis Jacolliot writes that:-

Manu Smriti was the foundation upon which the Egyptian, the Persian, the Grecian and the Roman codes of law were built and that the influence of Manu is still felt in Europe.

The "Law of Manu" was cited favorably by Friedrich Nietzsche. He:

• deemed it "an incomparably spiritual and superior work" to the Christian Bible.
• 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."
• endorsed the political exclusion that Manu's system was considered to bring.
• considered the caste system to be a good idea, and stated that "caste-order, order of rank is just a formula for the supreme law of life itself", a "natural order, lawfulness par excellence".
• wrote that 'To prepare a book of law in the style of Manu means to give a people the right to become master one day, to become perfect, - to aspire to the highest art of life.'

The Law of Manu was also cited unfavorably by Nietzsche. He:

• 'denounce[d] the way Manu dealt with the outcastes, saying that "perhaps there is nothing that outrages our feelings more" ... .'
• wrote: 'Toward a critique of the Manu Law Book[:] The whole book is founded on the holy lie. ... We find a species of man, the priestly, which ... believes in its own superiority ... . ... Power through the lie ... . Fanatics do not invent such carefully thought-out systems of oppression—The most cold-blooded reflection was at work here ... .'

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. Thapar writes that archaeological evidence casts doubt on the claims of Buddhist persecution by Pushyamitra. Support of the Buddhist faith by the Shungas at some point is suggested by an epigraph on the gateway of Bharhut, which mentions its erection "during the supremacy of the Shungas" Hinduism does not evangelize.

A prominent Hindu revivalist and reformist Swami Dayananda Saraswati held the text to be authentic and authoritative. A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami,. The founder of the modern day Hare Krishna Movement in the west has said "...Even up to today, those who are Hindu follow the Manu-samhita." Other admirers of the text have included Annie Besant, P.D. Ouspensky, Pandurang Shastri Athavale, Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan among others.

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." Contra Nietzsche, W.A. Borody has coined the phrase "sublimation-transmogrification logic" to describe the underlying 'state of mind' lying behind the ethical teaching of the Manu Smṛti—a 'state of mind' that would have found Nietzsche's concept of the Dionysian Übermensch abhorrent, and a 'state of mind' or 'voice' that has always been radically contested within India's various philosophical and religious traditions.

Editions and translations

• The Institutes of Hindu Law: Or, The Ordinances of Manu, Calcutta: Sewell & Debrett, 1796.
• Translation by G. Bühler (1886). Sacred Books of the East: The Laws of Manus (Vol. XXV). Oxford. Available online as The Laws of Manu
• Olivelle, Patrick (2004). The Law Code of Manu. New York: OUP. ISBN 0192802712.
• Olivelle, Patrick (2005). Manu's Code of Law: A Critical Edition and Translation of the Mānava-Dharmaśāstra. Oxford: Oxford University Press. ISBN 0-195-17146-2.
• Pranjivan Harihar Pandya (ed.), Manusmriti; With a commentary called Manvarth Muktavali by Kullooka Bhatt, Bombay, 1913.
• J.I. Shastri (ed.), Manusmriti with Kullukabhatta Commentary (1972-1974), reprinted by Motilal Banarsidass, ISBN 9788120807662.
• Ramacandra Varma Shastri, Manusmr̥ti: Bhāratīya ācāra-saṃhitā kā viśvakośa, Śāśvata Sāhitya Prakāśana, 1997.

See also

• Classical Hindu law
• Classical Hindu law in practice

References

• Flood, Gavin (1996). An Introduction to Hinduism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0-521-43878-0.
• Hopkins, Thomas J. (1971). The Hindu Religious Tradition. Belmont, California: Wadsworth Publishing Company.
• Keay, John (2000). India: A History. New York: Grove Press. ISBN 0-8021-3797-0.
• Kulke, Hermann; Rothermund, Dietmar (1986). A History of India. New York: Barnes & Noble. ISBN 0-88029-577-5.
• Thapar, Romila (2002). Early India: From the Origins to AD 1300. Berkeley, California: University of California Press. ISBN 0-520-24225-4.
• Herbermann, Charles, ed. (1913). "The Laws of Manu" . Catholic Encyclopedia. New York: Robert Appleton Company.
• Olivelle, Patrick (2010). "Dharmasastra: A Literary History". In Lubin, Timothy; Krishnan, Jayanth; and Davis, Jr., Donald R. (ed.). Law and Hinduism: An Introduction. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 9780521716260.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: editors list (link)