The tradition of Brahmanism which is one of the most important pillars of Indian Political

Thought has evolved over time and various combinations and permutations have been a part
of it. However, there have been some prolific thinkers who pronounced the foundations of
Brahmanism very clearly. One such thinker is Manu. The ancient Indian Political Thought is
thought to begin from his teachings itself. Manu is often referred to as the progenitor of
mankind. Manu was the first person to systematically analyse and interpret the society and its
people. He taught the path of righteousness and guided the society to walk on the path of
dharma and hence is thought to be the first teacher and the initiator of knowledge. He showed
humans the right way to live in all spheres of life such as the royal, private, political or
economic sphere. Manu is also the first law-giver or legislator. He described and codified the
laws for avoiding conflict in society for the first time in great detail. It is believed that Manu
derived these laws by simplifying the teachings in the brahmanic scriptures- the Vedas. Manu
was even regarded as the first King by some people.
Manu has a book to his credit called Manusmriti. Manusmriti literally translates into ‘in the
memory of Manu’. Manusmriti is presumably not written by Manu, instead it is the
compilation of teachings of Manu done later, mainly by Maharishi Bhrigu, who was one of
the saptarishi that were entrusted to safeguard dharma in the world. Manu revealed his
knowledge of the man in society to Bhrigu. The saptarishi or seven sages were also called as
‘brahmin rishis’ primarily because they were thought to be the children of lord Brahma and
also because they were more knowledgeable than the rest of the society being the seekers of
knowledge. All the rishis also came up to Manu with their respective questions, subsequently
Manu answered each of their questions with the view of granting knowledge to the society.
Thus, knowledge of Bhrigu, in addition to the knowledge spread by Manu through his
preaching, was compiled and consolidated into the Manusmriti. Manusmriti, hence, is not a
continuous text. It is difficult to locate Manusmriti in exact era and date, it was written
roughly around 1200 BC- 2nd Century AD. Manusmriti is a treatise that lays down rules for
righteous conduct for people as well as rulers. It is also referred to as Manav Dharma-Shastra
because it contains social laws regarding humans.

Manusmriti poses a viewpoint of the man-cosmic relationship. It is argued that this

Dharmashastra had a very powerful and compelling philosophical and ideological base. It is
an amalgamation of majestic and mundane. It gives us, on one hand, a detailed account of
creation and on the other it discusses details of ordinary lifestyle. It advocated that
consciousness is not separate from the world and that the cosmos is a process.
Manusmriti is divided into twelve chapters with twelve associated concepts. These are:
1. Origin of the world
2. Sources of laws, dharma and the social order
3. Rules regarding law making
4. Rules of action in normal times
5. Duties of Brahmins
6. Duties of a Kshatriya/king/kingship/Rajdharma
7. Duties of Vaishyas and Shudras
8. Rules of action in times of adversity
9. Rules of penance
10. Rules of action during wars or rebellions
11. karma yoga - theory of deeds and action
12. Path of salvation (moksha)

Manu’s views on political and social life are of great relevance and so have later been
embodied in various Dharmashastras and Samhitas. V.R. Mehta regards Manusmriti as
perhaps the most influential book of rules that has been guiding ways of life since ancient
times. Manu believes that these seven laws will form the basis for the ideal society- a society
where everyone can be enabled to fulfil their dharma.

Manu’s First Social Law- Origin of Laws and Creation of the World
In the origin, primarily there is a ‘Beyond’ i.e., Brahman. Secondly, the process of cosmos
calls for differentiated reality as an extension of this supreme Brahman. Finally, it is when
man makes an effort to connect the beyond and the cosmos.
Nirguna Brahman is one of the first concepts covered by Manusmriti. It means that the
Brahman is beyond space and time and that it has no particular shape or size. This leads to
individuation and differentiation which leads to the manifestation of worlds and levels.
Another way of thought is Saguna Brahman which means “with qualities” i.e., with form. It
brings to light hundreds and thousands of gods and goddesses. However, there is not one god
or goddess which has Brahman within or is the Brahman, rather the there are certain qualities
of the Brahman that each of these gods/goddesses possess. Yoga, tantra and tapa (penance)
are the three mentioned practices to create an ‘in between’ link and to connect the manifested
with the unmanifested.
Only a part of the supreme cosmic reality, the Nirguna Brahma becomes manifest in the
endless cosmic cycles and other remain unmanifested:
o Manifest- Pneumatic (differentiated creations which follows certain rules imposed
by God himself at the point of creation to ensure order in the cosmic process)
o Unmanifest- Noetic (mysterious)
Karma-yoga is mentioned as the most important form of practice/yoga. It includes all the
other form of yoga; both ‘paravartt’ of (regulation of desires) and ‘nivritti’ (total eradication
of desires). Thus, Manu places considerable emphasis on
karma yoga. Karma yoga includes the practice of virtues that take the form of tapa (penance),
dhyana (meditation) and Japa (prayer) Manu links karma and dharma and advocates that it is
the pursuit of all individuals to break through the endless cycle of life-death and merge with
the ultimate.

Second Law of Manu- Qualities of Dharma

Dharma is one of the values of an individual. It is a law to govern human society. The source
of dharma is Rita or Riti which means cosmic or natural law. As per the ancient Indian
thought, it is dharma that sustains the universe and both the king as well as the people must
adhere to it. Only the sages had the power to interpret this dharma or the Sacred Law.
Dharma is not free floating rather it is relative to one’s situation in life. Dharma is not the
guiding light for other pursuits of life.
In summary, the passage underscores that dharma was a complex and context-specific
concept in ancient Indian society, subject to interpretation by wise sages and not rigidly
applied across all individuals and situations. It formed an integral part of the ethical and
moral framework of the time but was not the sole guiding principle for all aspects of life.

Manu gives us 10 main characteristics of dharma. They are:

1. Patience PFRNCMWKTN
2. Forgiveness
3. Restraint
4. No stealing
5. Cleanliness
6. Mortification
7. Wisdom
8. Knowledge
9. Truth
10. Not being angry

The five rules of dharma are:

1. No indulgence in violence
lOMoARc PSD|20 901098

2. Truthfulness
3. Not accumulating illegal/illegitimate wealth or property
4. Cleanliness of thought, words and deed
5. Control of senses

Third Social Law of Manu- Social Organization or varna classification

Manu divided the society into a social hierarchy with four castes i.e., the Varna system.
People chose occupations according to their natural capabilities.
1. Brahmin: They were devoted to virtue and knowledge. Brahmins were at the top of this
hierarchy as their job was selfless and in the welfare of others.
Manu also believed to some extent, that Brahmins should rule because they
were wealthy of knowledge. Brahmins were forbidden to have any contact, social or
otherwise with the Shudras. Manu had laid down a strict path of principles for the
Brahmins in respect to yoga, tapa and meditation. Manu emphasized that if these rules
were to be violated, Brahmins would receive severe punishment in hell. At times priests,
contradictorily, were also considered inferior because they used the money that was
offered in temples to the deities. There were many special privileges to Brahmins such as:
they were levied no tax, free land and gifts,
lesser amount of punishment other than theft and there were no capital punishments but only
banishment for Brahmanas.
2. Kshatriya: They were either warriors or rulers. Their job was to protect the people. They
had only a little self-interest or ambition. Kshatriyas were known for their wisdom,
courage and bravery.
3. Vaishya: They were tradesmen and businessmen. Vaishyas were considered to be the
worst in the Varna system as their interests and occupations were mostly self-concerned.
They were accumulators of wealth (for themselves) and were considered selfish.
4. Shudra: They devoted their services and physical labour to others. Their job was to help
others meet with their necessities. They served all the other three castes. He who has not
been taught the Vedas was a Shudra. If a Shudra was polite enough, he could be
considered of noble birth and stature.

Migration within varnas

Manu disagreed with the rigid structure of the society and allowed for migration within varnas
but he also adds that migration can happen only once. He believed that it was human
qualities, not birth, that must determine what a person does in life, for birth is purely
accidental. If an individual’s interests and skills make them inclined towards a different
varna, then they may migrate to that particular caste. Migration was a social decision and was
to be done amicably. Such a varna migration can take place from a lower to higher caste or
vice versa. However, it didn’t come into practice. Manu also set three criteria for being a
brahmin- (a) should have a keen interest in teaching, learning (b) should always keep the
company of wise men (c)should always greet politely. Brahmins were forbidden to have any
social relations with the Shudras. Brahmins should
practice control and should never hurt others. With regards to whose service among the four
classes were the best and the worst, Manu argued that the service of the Brahmins and
Shudras is the best and that of Vaishyas and Kshatriyas is the worst, because the former is
completely selfless and is devoted to the welfare of the others, whereas the latter is only
concerned about accumulation of property and power resp. to meet the selfish desires. He
added that Shudras are the most selfless and Vaishyas are the most selfish. He claims this to
qualitative division of society. He also talked about seniority within a particular varna. For
Brahmin the yardstick was the knowledge and Shashtarth, for Kshatriyas it was valour and
bravery, for Vaishyas wealth was the determining factor and for the Shudras it was done by
age.

Manu’s Fourth Social Law- Ashrama Dharma

Ashrama dharma was also one of Manu’s concepts. It was reflective of a person’s life
journey. A person had to go through four different ashrams in a lifetime. The first was
Brahamacharya ashram which can be translated to student hood in simple words. Second,
was Grihastashram, identified by householding or family life full of worldly affairs. The third
was Vanaprastasharam which was indicative of partial retirement and hermitage life. And
finally, Sanyasashram was complete retirement in which one becomes a wandering medicant
in search of moksh. One who undergoes these four stages, according to the prescribed
dharma, is said to have lived a meaningful life and would attain emancipation or Moksh.

STATUS OF WOMEN
Manu views the family as the most significant of all social groups. The family consists of husband, wife
and children. Manu does not allow any kind of divorce or separation between the husband and the wife
and views marriage as indissoluble during one’s lifetime. A husband can remarry under some
exceptional situations. Manu is against leading an independent and unprotected life by women.
According to him, a woman should always be taken care of by someone—by her father in childhood,
by her husband in youth and by her son in her old age. It implies that a woman is not fit for freedom.
But elsewhere Manu admired women and praised their role in family or in the household. He entrusted
the wife with the responsibility of managing financial and material resources of the house. He equates
the housewife with the Goddess of fortune because both ‘bestow illumination’.
Manusmriti declares that goodness resides where women are respected and honoured. Women
were not allowed to practice upanayana (Janaeu/initiation ceremony). Marriage was considered as
equivalent of upanayana for women. Women weren’t wage earners; they were given complete handle
of the household in an environment of love and affection. Pre-puberty marriages were promoted. There
is no mention of female students in Dharmashastra. In the later stages women were no more considered
as ‘dvija’ (twice-born) and were reduced to Shudras as they weren’t allowed to recite Vedic prayers.
Widows were supposed to lead a chaste life. They weren’t banned from festivities. They however, had
to renounce any property including her ‘stridhan’ and Manu opposed it. Manusmriti does not
recommend the practice of sati either. The Manusmriti places great emphasis on the role of women in
bearing and raising children. Childlessness was considered a significant issue, and women were
expected to fulfil their role as mothers to ensure the continuity of the family and society.

Manu’s Fifth Social Law- Marital Laws, Institutions and Inter-relationship

Marriage is viewed as a binding commitment which results in the procreation and nurturing
of future generations. Manu advocates purity of caste and therefore advocates marriage
within the same varna. Nevertheless, he recognises inter-caste marriages and gives a detailed
classification of the new castes produced through the union of two different castes. According
to Manu, the worst of all men are born through the union between a Sudhra man and a
Vaishya, Kshatriya or a Brahmin woman.
Manusmriti also gives two classifications with respect to inter-caste marriages.
 Anuloma marriage(hypergamy) is between a higher caste man and a lower caste woman
whereas
Pratiloma marriage (hypogamy)is between a lower caste man and a higher caste woman.
The former was acceptable since it led to the upward movement of the girl in the caste
hierarchy, but the latter was completely unacceptable.
For Manu, divorce was completely impermissible because marriage is a sacred bond made in
the presence of fire. Widow remarriage was completely impermissible because if a woman
remarries, she takes away the right of another woman to marry that man. Women could not
leave their husbands for any reason, and a woman who did that must be shunned, be
outcasted and morally abused by the society. Furthermore, Manusmriti writes that a woman
does not need independence, and she must always be protected by a male all her life to live a
respectful life. On the contrary, if a man’s wife is quarrelsome, rebellious or disrespectful, the
husband had a right to marry another woman. He said it was important for man to have a
submissive, good wife for him to function properly.

There are eight different types of Hindu marriages according to Manu. Out of these eight
marriages, the first four are approved by the society, whereas the latter four are not approved
by the society and thus known as adharmya vivah.
BDAPGARP
1) Brahma Vivah: Brahma vivah is the most traditional and ideal type of marriage where the
bride and groom come from the same varna. Brahmacharya Ashram should be completed by
the boy prior to the wedding and there is no dowry, financial aspect involved in the marriage.
It is done very spiritually. The ritual of kanyadaan is performed by the bride’s father. It was
so ideal that it was considered to be set up by Brahma himself.

2) Daiva Vivah: Daivya vivah literally means ‘divine marriage’. It signifies a marriage where
a father gives away his daughter to a brahmin priest as an offering, a gift to assure
improvement of her karma. There was no monetary aspect involved but it was a ritual for a
girl to be heavily ornamented.

3) Arsha Vivah (Seer’s): Under Arsha Vivah, the groom is expected to give 1 cow and a pair
of bulls to the girl’s family to finalise the matrimonial bond. This arrangement is carried out
when the bride’s family is poor, and thus the gifts will help them meet the marriage expenses
and sustain themselves once their daughter gets married. Manu did not prefer this marriage
due to the monetary aspect involved. However, it happened within the same varna.

4) Prajapatya Vivah: In this, the father performs all the rituals and is called a Prajapati. He
gives away his daughter to a worthy person with the due honour by blessing them with the
sentence: “may both of you perform together your duties”. Such a blessing is given to ensure
that the spouses enjoy marital bliss and fulfil their dharma. However, the consent of the girl
isn’t taken. Prajapatya Vivah does not always explicitly involve the consent of the girl. In
many cases, the decision is made by the father, who acts in what he believes is the best
interest of his daughter. The blessing given by the father often includes a reference to
"dharma," which means duty or righteousness. The idea is that the couple should fulfil their
respective roles and duties as husband and wife.

5) Gandharva Vivah: Gandharva vivah is brought about by the mutual love and consent of
the bride and the groom. It is an inter-caste marriage essentially. The family and father of the
bride do not have any role to play in this marriage. It should also be based on anuloma
tradition. Manu does not disapprove of this marriage, but he does not consider it ideal either.
6) Asura Vivah (Demonic): Asura marriage occurs when the groom marries the bride by
paying a significant bride-price (dowry) to her family. This form of marriage is often
criticized as materialistic and is considered less virtuous as it demeans the sanctity and
spiritual ness of the marriage.

7) Rakshasa Vivah (Fiendish): Rakshasa marriage is a forceful marriage where the groom
abducts the bride against her will. It is not a legitimate form of marriage and is considered
dishonourable.

8) Paishacha Vivah(ghoulish): It typically involves the abduction or seduction of a woman

against her will. The marriage takes place without the woman's consent. This type of
marriage is outlawed by Manu. The primary motive behind this form of marriage is often lust
or immoral desires, and it lacks the sanctity and commitment associated with traditional
Hindu marriages.

Manu’s Sixth Social Law- Inheritance Laws

In regard to inheritance, property was distributed only among brothers. Patriarchy was the
norm. In cases where a family had only daughters and no sons, a daughter could be
designated as a "putrika." A putrika had a special status, and her male child (if she had one)
would perform the last rites for her parents. However, her primary role was to ensure the
continuation of the family lineage. Her male child would do any last rites of her parents. If
there was a brother, then the daughter would have no property rights, only maintenance and
stridhan would be accorded to her. Widows would also have no rights to husband’s
immovable property; they were entitled only to maintenance. Her stridhan was to be divided
among sons and daughters and to be used during calamities. Mothers had little right to any
property. The people who were not allowed to have any property were impotent, outcasts,
born blind or deaf, insane, mentally retarded, mutes and anyone who lacked male adjacent
strength.

Manu’s Seventh Law- Crime, Punishment and Justice

Like any Brahmanic thinker, Manu also had a fear of the loss of order in society. Thus, under
his seventh social law, Manu lays down gruesome punishments for individuals for the violation
of their dharma, especially their caste or religious dharma. Furthermore, there is no equality in
the punishments meted out by Manu and he lays down different punishments for different
varnas for the same crime. It is regarded as proportionate justice.
Rules regarding Shudras 8

If a Shudra hurts a person belonging to a higher varna, then both their limbs which were used
for the attack must be cut off. If a Shudra sat at the same level as one from a higher varna, they
were beaten on buttocks and if a Shudra used his hands to beat up an upper caste, his hands
should be cut off. It was done to ensure that a Shudra remembers that they are inferior.
Furthermore, defamation was considered to be the most heinous crime. If a brahmin is defamed
by a Kshatriya, he will have to pay a fine of Rs 100, Vaishaya has to pay a fine of Rs. 150 for
the same but if a shudra does the same, he will be given corporal punishment. Similarly, if a
kshatriya is defamed then a Brahmin will have to pay Rs. 50, a Vaishya- Rs. 25 and a Shudra
Rs. 12. Manusmriti lays down that while corporal and capital punishment can be awarded to a
Shudra or a Vaishya, a Brahmin must never be slayed. For a Brahmin, the hardest punishment
is to shave their heads and send them into exile, which signifies the loss of knowledge and
degradation of status. Their body was considered pure and soulful thus had to be kept
physically intact. In case of damage to property of others, the amount to be paid should be
equal to the cost of damage. The punishment depended on the caste of the accused and the caste
of the victim. Manu spelt out 18 types of crimes which include- non-payment of loans/debts,
concerns amongst partners in business, sale and purchase issues, non-payment of wages, non-
performance of duties, sale without ownership, deposits and withdrawal, disputes between
owners and servants, resumption of gifts, disputes regarding boundaries, defamation, robbery
and theft, violence, assault, adultery, inheritance, duties of man and wife and gambling. Manu
warns the King to take account of violence else he will lose the throne. He asks the king to be
cautious while punishing people for their crimes, because a wrong conviction can destroy the
king. He also gives the theory of deterrent punishment for the smooth functioning of the society
and checking the violent tendencies in human behaviour. Manu says that if the king cannot be
fair in giving out punishments and if he cannot maintain an atmosphere of fear and respect, the
chaos will descend on the Kingdom.
Manu’s views on Kingship
Manu advocated a monarchical form of governance and prescribed the King to be belonging
to the Kshatriya clan. He considered the king to be like the Sun in the solar system, who is
central to the functioning, welfare and jurisprudence of the kingdom. A good king follows
dharma, asks others to follow their dharma and maintains order in the society and be on
righteous path. He rules by taking dharma as the foundation and will have dandaniti also.

DUTIES AND FUNCTIONS OF KING

Manusmriti talks about hereditary monarchy or kingship. Manu propagated divine origin of Kingship
According to him, it was God, who created an entity called king to save the people of region it is this
position held by the king that made people express their obedience to him. Though king appeared in
human form yet he possesses the qualities of God. Again, he said that The King possessed qualities
and power of eight guardian (Gods) of the earth i.e. Indra, Vaayu, Yama, Ravi, Agni, Chandra etc.
Thus the king was a divine creation to promote social harmony peace and welfare.
The main duty of king is to protect to good people and punish bad ones. There is no place for
offenders like smuggles, profiteers or black marketers. Again, supreme duty of the king is to protect
the weak especially orphans, widows and old. Only people with quality could form a good state. The
king along with Brahmins and his councillors presided in the court of justice. The five functions of
king according to Manu are as follows:
1. Dandaniti 2. Taxation 3. Justice and Judicial System 4. Inter-State Relations 5. Morality and
Religion.
One of the important functions of the king, according to Manu, was that of chastisement. King has to
ensure that all varnas follow their varna Dharma, that is why state has power of Dand. People should
obey the king. King has to follow his Raj Dharma. According to Manu the king who does not follow
dharma goes to hell. Manu also tell the qualities of king and routine of king. King should learn Vedas
and respect Brahmins. King should not indulge too much in hunting, gambling, drinking, dancing and
women.
CRITICISM
Manu was a political philosopher but even his ideas have been subjected to criticism on the following
grounds:
1.) Manu was a supporter of the divinity of the king and the superiority of the priestly class. It is not
consistent with democratic principles.
2.) Manu’s concept of a kingdom was nothing more than the emergence of a tribal organization into
some faint beginning of a territorial state. In other words, an imperial power had not yet emerged and
Manu did not think of a well-developed and multi-purpose political structure of the modern times.
3.) Another objection levelled against Manu is that he has laid undue emphasis of the scheme of four-
fold Varnas, which subsequently led to many other social complications and conflicts.
4.) Some of the ideas of Manu, especially his views on authority, administration and local government
are indistinct, irrelevant and one-sided.
In spite of these criticisms, Manu is considered as the father of Indian polity for his immense
contributions to the Indian society, polity and religion.
Manu gave a structured, detailed synopsis based on rationality and essentially based on dharma.
But this did not cushion it from criticisms, in fact, Manu’s third, fifth and seventh social laws are
the main points of criticisms of Manu. In the third law, while Manu gave details about social
order based on division of labour got very idealistic and did not test the practicability. Manu
while stating equality of all and equality in opportunity, neglected the conflicts within the society
and its changing nature. Although he allowed migration across caste based on merit and interests,
still, it didn’t become a reality.
While spelling out rules on marriage he took consent and inter-marriage into account despite, his
laws projected the patriarchal character for e.g., while men were allowed to remarry, independence
of women, widow remarriage or women leaving their husband was strictly prohibited.
Furthermore, the way women are treated is another point of contention. Manusmriti declares that
gods don’t reside where women aren’t respected nor honoured. Interestingly however, women
were not allowed to practice upanayana. Similarly, ashram dharma was logical, scientific and in
sync with human nature but at the same time it was very dictating and curtailing freedom of an
individual. Also, women could hardly follow such a system because of the social setup and
responsibilities. His laws on inheritance also lack elaboration. However, by codifying strict
punishments for violating one’s caste dharma ensured practice of dharma and peace, Manu
further solidified a system where something as accidental as one’s birth would go on to
determine one’s life. The punishments laid down are also highly arbitrary. Manu wanted to
address violence but instilling fear doesn't seem to rightly circumvent it. There is no concept of
equality before law in Manusmriti which resulted in disproportionately harsh punishments for
shudras.
It may be argued that Manu lived in a very different time from today, and thus his views on caste
and women can be excused. However, Manusmriti was a towering text in Brahmanical thought,
which has influenced Hindu political and philosophical thoughts for centuries so they can’t be
ignored.

CONCLUSION
Manusmriti has held a very dominant position in the Brahmanical political thought, and laid
down several important practices and philosophies that have supplemented the sastras.
Manu’s social philosophy provided a correct view of reality, and religion showed the correct
way of life. Manusmriti poses a viewpoint of the man-cosmic relationship which means that
the text is a depiction of our complex cosmic system, embedded in a conceptual structure that
encompasses the universe as a whole. Apart from it Manu thinks that politics is an integral
part of the society without which it can’t function. Manu’s social laws reveal the richness and
diversities of the social, political, economic, religious, ethical and aesthetic dimensions of
life. They form a formidable basis for law and orderly society. They were in accordance with
dharma and Danda.
Manu’s seven social laws aptly describe his social philosophy. Thus, Manu and his ideas
have had a profound impact on Indian society and in fact continue to be relevant in present
times.
Every political philosopher is a product of his own time. Manu is not an exception to it. His
philosophy reflected both localism and universalism. Manu represented the Indo-Aryan
Vedic culture, where religion played a vital role. Hence, his philosophy revolves round
Dharma or religion. His ideas like that of the benevolent king, rule of law, limited
government and theory of punishment, have universal appeal. He was one of the greatest
minds and most respected figures in the history of law-givers of antiquity.
The code of Manu or Manusmriti is a monumental work with universal appeal. It is a treatise
on statecraft, which will serve as a handbook for rulers and statesmen in times to come.
According to D. Mackenzie Brown, a philosopher, ‘To the Western world, the code of Manu
is the best-known work of its kind.’ To conclude, Manu’s contribution to Political Science is
outstanding and remarkable. He is a great thinker and philosopher of all times.