UNIT 2- MANU: SOCIAL LAWS

INTRODUCTION-sol

In 1772, fifteen years after battle of Plassey, the East India Company, headed by its first Governor-
General Warren Hastings made the decision to implement laws of Hindus and Muslims that, in their
understanding, “continued unchanged from remotest antiquity”. Under Hindu side, the source of those
“unchanged” laws were the Dharmasastra, though only its “religious” portions. In the context of history
of Hinduism, Dharamsastra’s major function of the Dharmasastra was to declare the boundaries of
Hindu social order, something that was never done earlier. It aimed to propose a revival for Hinduism
against the growth and consolidation of other groups like Buddhists and Jains. Further, Dharmasastra
also proposes four social classes (varna), also later called castes: the Brahmins (scholars and priests),
Kshatriya (kings and nobility), Vaisyas (farmers and merchants), Sudras (servants and laborers). This class
division was the core of Manu’s Dharma philosophy. Similarly, the life stage was also divided into four
also known as varnashramadharma: Brahmacharya, Grihastha, Varnaprastha and Sanyasa. Moreover, .
Donald R. Davis argues that Dharmsastra had both an intrinsic value as a repository of sophisticated
religious, legal, and intellectual thought and an instrumental value as a handbook of jurisprudence,
subjective law, ritual instruction and political strategy.

MANUSMRITI
The Manusmriti, or ‘The Laws of Manu’, is considered to be one of the most authoritative texts in the
Brahminical tradition which lays out social and civil laws and codes of conduct which are necessary for
the maintenance of dharma. It prescribes the conduct for men and women of the four social classes or
varnas – Brahman, Kshatriya, Vaishya, Shudra – and rules of interaction between them. It also prescribes
rules and obligations for the King – rajdharma – and laws related to civil matters like business and
contract. The purpose of these rigid social rules and boundaries is to preserve dharma – the social order
marked by hierarchical varna system, where the Brahman enjoys most social privileges and Shudra the
least. The proper sphere of activity for the Brahmin is study of the Vedas and begging, for Kshatriya is
statecraft, for Vaisya it is trade and moneylending, and for Shudra is to serve the above three. The
Shudras are not entitled to an education. All four varnas enjoy complete control over the women of
their social category. Thus the ‘Laws of Manu’ do not contain a distinction between secular and religious
laws. It is the social law which dominates the political as well as the personal sphere. Even the kingly
functions are aimed towards preservation of the social order.
Further, Manu introduced into Dharamsastric discourse is moksa or liberation, a central idea of Indian
religion that did not play major role in early Dharamsastric history. Manu has also mentioned
'Swarashtra', friendly and enemy state, Mandal rashtra, which were associated with the each other in
different friendly relationship. Some of these were central, some indifferent, neutral and desirous of the
conquest. From this it is clear that the Aryavarta, depicted by Manu, was divided into several state and
thus it was not united, from the Political point of view. It is also a reflection of Mandala theory in
Kautilya.
Historians do not consider ‘Manu’ to be one historical person. Rather, what we know as the ‘Laws of
Manu’ is handiwork of several Brahmin individuals, which was compiled in early centuries of the
Common Era in Northern India. Manu appears to be a mythological figure in Brahminical tradition and
later in the Hindu religion, who has often been called the first human being.
The 2694 stanzas divided in twelve chapters of Manusmriti talk about a range of issues: caste
restrictions, dietary restrictions, restrictions on women, penalties for breaking these rules and rules of
polity to be followed by kings. The social laws of Manu offer us a glimpse into how the powerful sections
of early India, the Brahmins who composed the work, desired the society to be. Moreover, such detailed
and elaborate rules of social control were made to avoid chaos, or what Vedic texts have called
Matsyanyaya, an anarchic situation where only the law of the stronger exists. Thus, Manusmriti appears
to be an attempt by socially powerful sections of Indian society to retain and preserve the social order of
their privilege, at a time when rapid historical changes were taking place.

MANU’S THEORY OF ORIGIN OF THE STATE-SOL

According to Manu, lord created the king when there was fear due to chaos in the society (state less
society). King was created by combining the eternal particles of Indra, Pawan, Yama, Sun, Agni, Varun,
Moon and Kuber. He presented a divine theory of political obligation devised to instruct the subjects to
obey the king, and goes as far to claim that even if the king is an infant, he should be respected and
revered because he is actually a deity in human form. Protection of subject was considered as the
primary duty of the king because that was the reason for his creation. He is expected also to protect all
castes and order. He also mentioned inflicting punishment to wrongdoers as an important duty of king
considering that the threat of punishment was essential to maintain social order. In return the subject
were obliged to pay taxes that is used by king for social welfare as well as to build a treasury for difficult
times. A king who fails in his duties shall go to hell after death.

FEATURES OF THE STATE STRUCTURE IN MANU- SOL

1. Like Kautilya, Manu also builds an organic theory of the state, i.e., it has seven limbs with
specific functions and only when each do their job well, can the state survive and prosper. His
theory is also referred as saptanga theory as it also includes seven elements with minor
differences from Kautilya. The seven elements mentioned in Manusmriti include:
a) Lord (King)
b) Minister
c) Capital (pura)
d) Rashtra (kingdom)
e) Treasure
f) Army (or force) and
g) Ally
In the Manusmriti version of Saptanga theory, fort and janapada (of Arthasastra) are replaced by
pura and rashtra, i.e., capital and kingdom. Presents an organic theory of state.

2. King is pivotal to the structure. He is the linchpin who maintains the structure and provides all
support. Appointment of the ministers is one of the central duties of the king. He used the
understanding of Arthashastra to argue that appointing the right minister to the right
department is a significant administrative duty and much depends on it for statecraft. On the
subject of appointment, he suggested five criterions: tradition, ability, examination, fulfilment of
objectives and test of courage.
3. Unlike Kautilya, Manu held that on policy matters the King should not only hold wider
consultations, but stresses that even Brahmans should be included in this deliberation. Clearly,
he suggested that administrative role of the king could not be fulfilled without the support of
Brahmans.
 4. He firmly asserted that King should behave like a father to the public and as a guardian he was
dutybound to improve the lives of his people. At the same time, he was also expected to be
most worried about the interests of the needy and the week in society including children,
women and the aged.
5. He maintained that the King should reflects the characteristics of different animals as and when
need be: he must act as a tortoise, who is an expert in protecting its weakest points whenever it
senses any threat; he must bear patience like heron and never act in haste; he should have
strength like that of lion; he should be opportunist to maximize his national interest just like
wolf snatches its prey; and it should be like hare, ever attentive and always very agile, even if it
has to retreat form a situation.
6. Like Kautilya, Manu also advocated accession of territories to increase influence. He held that
king should always be ready to use force, when need be, to protect and promote his national
interest. It is both natural and justified duty of king.
7. Unlike in Arthasastra, Manusmriti has detailed lists of immunities and privileges designed for
Brahmans. They are given special status. In fact, at times, it appears that Manu recognised two
simultaneous authorities: king as the temporal authority and the Brahman as the spiritual
authority. Both according to him were joint custodians of the sacred laws or the principles of
dharma.

DUTIES OF THE KING

 Executive: The king by virtue of being the executive head had two important duties: protection and
management. The first referred to protection of all castes and creeds with special reference to the
minors, women and aged. Management referred primarily to the fact that king was expected to
maintain the social order, which included the duty to see that each individual performed swadharma at
all costs. Together the executive function included prevention of the confusion among castes and their
duties, protecting the weak against the strong, and King’s right to receive 1/6 of the earnings of the
people for performing the duty of protection.
 Judicial: As the judicial head of the state, it was the duty of king to examine the cases on daily basis in
the court, so that no one felt that justice was being denied to them. Also, king must reach to any
conclusion based only on the merits of the case supported by evidence. He should not carryout justice in
haste without examining the evidences in details. In carrying out justice he should also consult
brahmans in order to get the religious and spiritual dimension.
 Legislative: The legislative function of the king, are, rather limited, as the rules for general
administration and conduct in society are already laid down in the ancient texts. He could however
come out with some ordinances or royal decrees for administrative purposes. But these could not be
violating the principles of dharma and should be produced only in consultations with brahmans.
 Administrative: The King being the administrative head was given task to make all appointments,
including crucial appointments of ministers. He was also expected to resolve any issues related to
administration without procrastination, no matter how small the matter would be.
 Revenue: This comprised the fixation of rates of taxes and duties. Manu believed that the king should
have good knowledge about finance and economy to supervise the economy well. He should always try
to control inflation particularly on articles that were of basic necessity. He is also advised to rationalize
the rates of taxes so that it did not oppress any class of citizens. This was particularly true for difficult
times like in case of natural calamities. It was further the duty of king to maintain the treasury and
provide all forms of relief when need be but also to charge extra taxes during emergencies like wars.
 Military: Manu held that the king being the commander-in-chief had the responsibility to be the
exemplar and lead the army efficiently. He should fight bravely and with honour. Even in war he should
not give up the principles of dharma. His armymen should be well equipped and their families be taken
care of. Good soldiers should be rewarded openly so as to inspire others. Also, the elephants, horses,
chariots should be given special attention as outcomes of wars depended on them significantly.
 Enlightened: These referred to the king being the promoter of learning and culture. He was suggested
to revere the brahmins as they were truly enlightened ones. He should always seek their blessings and
advises and always follow their guidance.

MANU ON SOCIAL ORDERS AND SOCIAL LAWS

Social order and social conduct were the central themes in Manusmriti, and it was this focus on the
aspect of the ‘social’ that differentiated Dharamsastras from Arthasastras where the later focussed
extensively on state structure, organization and its functioning. In fact for Manu to protect and promote
a stable social order based on the principles of dharma was one of the primary duties of the king. He
considered Vedas to be the source of all dharma and had firm belief in its infallibility. Any individual who
does not act according to dharma is condemned and is considered liable of punishment. (SOL)
Further, The preservation of social order – the hierarchy of caste system coupled with the control of
women – is the main concern of Manusmriti. That is why we saw that even the rajdharma laid out by the
text largely concerns itself with the King using the instrument of punishment to maintain this social
order. However, special attention needs to be paid to how the Manusmriti idealized the social system. It
advocated a social system where each caste stuck to its allotted profession, and interaction between
them was bare minimum. Therefore, it restricted marriages between different castes, and saw mixed
castes with contempt.

VARNADHARMA
The functional division of society in four varnas and the arrangement of human life into four ashramas is
at the core of Manusmriti. This becomes significant also because ethe idea of swadharma is attached to
one’s stage in life and one’s location in the varna system. Manu argued that Brahmadeva produced the
different varnas from different parts of his body. The Brahmanas were born from the mouth, the
Kshatriyas from the arms, the Vaishyas from the thighs and the Shudras from the feet. This myth was
also used to propose a form of divine validity and legitimacy for the system. This functional division was
based on the birth of an individual in a particular varna and there was no possibility of mobility.
Further, Unfortunately for Manu the determinant of this criterion was one’s birth and not merit. The
Brahamanas were virtuous and were meant to impart knowledge, Kshatriyas were dedicated to protect
others and provide security as they were brave and courageous, the Vaishyas were devoted to functions
of production of goods and services and Shudras were meant to provide service to the people of other
three varnas, primarily engaged in manual labour. This division of labour is hierarchically placed
according to social functions whereby the brahamanas are said to occupy the most coveted position
with the kshatriyas, vaishyas and shudras in the descending order of hierarchy, with shudras at the
bottom. The brahamanas were considered superior to the rest as they were pure in character, virtuous
and well-read in Vedas and hence had full knowledge about dharma.
Manu laid down a strict code of conduct for each varna with an obvious priority for the brahmans. He
asserted that the names of brahmans should be so selected that it denoted reverence, of kshatriyas
should denote power, of vaishyas should denote wealth and shudras should be named such that it
denoted insult. The privileges and reverence for brahmans is such that he claimed that even if a king is
100 years of age, he should revere a 10-year-old brahman as his father. On the other hand the services
of shudras were to be free for higher castes, in fact, they should feel lucky that they have got chance to
serve higher castes and should do it as duty. The position of brahmans is further ascertained when
Manu argued that where there are no brahmans or brahmans are not happy, that land shall be
devastated and destroyed. Equally aggressive to Manu’s advocacy for superiority of brahmans is the
limitations he sets for the shudras. He asserted that those who taught shudra pupil or were taught by
shudras deserved no respect and shall be doomed. He was clear that shudras were unfit for education
and not fit for rulership. Therefore, he suggested that it is better for all inhabitants to leave the country
where a shudra was the ruler.
Manu also devised very strict codes to control the conduct of shudras. If a shudra insulted a person
belonging to higher castes, his tongue could be cutoff. If he claims to know more than brahmans and
tried to preach religion to them, king could get burning oil poured in his mouth and ears. If a shudra man
has intercourse with high caste women, he was to put to death and all his property seized. The hierarchy
is strictly in favour of Brahmanas and there are many exceptions and immunities for their privileges.
Shudras are not only condemned, but also prohibited from any respectful enterprise. Inter-dinning and
inter-caste marriages are absolutely prohibited. Manusmriti is very strict about this functional division of
society and claimed that it was better to do one’s job imperfectly than to try and do others work. It is
therefore often considered as a reflection of the Indian social order by the leaders of Dalit-Bahujan
movements. Probably therefore Ambedkar chose to publicly burn Manusmriti as a symbol of protest
against caste discriminations in 1927.

ASHRAMADHARMA-sol
The ashramadharma is also an essential feature of ancient Indian thought. It is a structure that was
considered important to lead a balanced life between enjoyment of materialistic pleasures and
spiritualism, emphasizing the importance of the temporal as well as the transcendental life. This system
was devised compulsorily to be followed by the higher castes which included all varnas other than
shudras. The four divisions included: Brahmacharya ashram, Grihasta ashram, Vanaprastha ashram, and
Sanyaasa ashram.
The brahmacharya ashram is the first stage of one’s life and extends till the age of 25 years, where the
individual is expected to stay away from the family in the ashram of Guru and dedicate this phase to
learning. The individual is governed by disciplinary rules that the ashrams followed depending on the
teacher’s guidance and were to be devoid of any physical or material pleasure in this stage. Even the
food had to be collected as alms thereby preparing the child for extremities of life. The entire focus is to
gather wisdom and knowledge and the virtues essential for improving all his faculties.
After dedicatedly and successfully completing the brahmacharya stage, the individual entered the stage
of grihasta ashram. This spans from 25 to 50 years of age. During this period the individual is expected
to get married and contribute to the society by producing and raising children. He is allowed to enjoy
the material pleasures and perform all his duties attached to his family and society with a spirit of
dedication. Manyu mentioned about 13 samskaras that individual has to conduct during his entire life
and most of these have to be undertaken in this stage which include garbdharan, jaatkarm, naamkaran,
nishkraman, vedaarambh, samavtran, vivaah etc. He had also drawn a detailed list different forms of
marriages that were considered legitimate during his period which included brahma vivaah, deva vivaah,
aarsh vivaah, asur vivaah, gandarv vivaah, rakshasa vivaah, etc.
After 50 years came the stage of vanaprastha ashram which continued for the next 25 years where the
individual transfers all his duties and responsibilities to his son and prepares for the ultimate stage of life
along with wife. Here he is expected to perform religious duties and engage in spirituality. His food and
dress are simple and gives up all kind of worldly pleasures.
The final stage is the sanyaasa ashram. Before entering this stage, he is expected to have overcome all
his debts and performed all his duties related to his ancestors, parents, family, and society satisfactorily.
The final goal of this stage is to achieve moksha (salvation) and he has to partake this journey alone. In
this stage he had to give up everything and proceed towards place of loneliness free from all relations
and worldly affairs.
MANU ON WOMEN AND THEIR DUTIES-sol
Manusmriti also has very controversial proposals for women within its social laws, especially in the
realm of family. At several instances Manu considered that women should be respected and in countries
where women are not given respect or are insulted and humiliated, they are bound to be doomed. At
other places Manusmriti also mentioned that husband and wife should enjoy equal status and there
should sense of mutual satisfaction and happiness among them. It is mentioned that women are in no
way less, but because they are physically not so capable it becomes the duty of her father, husband and
sons to provide protection and security to her at different stages of life.
At the same time, one could also find several contradictory ideas in Manusmriti which looks at women’s
character with skepticism and devises several codes to control her social behaviour and conduct. So, it is
held that it is the nature of women to seduce men and therefore it is advised that wise men be cautious
in their company as they have capacity to make men slave of their desires. For example, wise men avoid
marrying women who had reddish hairs, redundant body part, who often fell sick, one with excessive
hairs or no hairs and one with red eyes. There are strict codes to prevent mensurating women from
participating in any auspicious occasions as they were considered impure.
One can also find an overlap of gender and caste issues in some codes. So, it is suggested that when any
person of higher caste marries a shudra women even by mistake, it leads to degradation of whole family
as all the demerits of shudra caste gets transferred to next generation. Any offerings made by such men
are not accepted by Gods nor by holy souls.
The codes are even more strict for married women. So, it is said that even if the husband possesses no
good qualities, the wife should still cling to him, as that’s the only path for her salvation. Even after the
death of her husband, the woman ought not to remarry, and should maintain her ‘chastity’. No such
burden is placed upon men who lose their wives.
Further, s, Manusmriti seems to support the idea that women are only male child producing machines
and her role is limited to bearing and rearing of children, serving her family’s needs, and keeping her
husband happy. Manu’s arguments present a clear sense of hierarchy in family and society with an
unadulterated support for male dominance and control.
Thus, the social order prescribed in Manusmriti rests on the basis of control over women and their
labour. It is through control of women that varna boundaries are sought to be maintained. In addition,
this control secures the woman’s body and labour for the exclusive enjoyment and use of men. This
order of control of women across varnas creates the situation where the woman herself would learn to
value the control exercised over her by a man as a form of protection and recognition.

CONCLUSION