Ramanuja says that Manu by means of Yogic power attained supreme wisdom.
yogesh saxena
In his commentary on Brahma sutra 2/1/1 Sankaracharya has said whatever Manu has said is like medicine. The medicine may be distasteful, but it is good for the body. So the laws of Manu may be disagreeable, but they are beneficial.
Ramanujacharyya has also quoted the same passage in his commentary on the next sutra (Brahmasutra 2/1/2). In this connection Ramanuja says that Manu by means of Yogic power attained supreme wisdom. Sankaracharya says in another connection that Manu understood the true purport of the Vedas (Brahmasutra bhasya 2/2/17).
Sankara belonged to the 8th century A.D. and Ramanuja to the 12th century A.D. Manu samhita in the present form was compiled not later than the1st century B.C. Hence Sankara and Ramanuja got the Manu samhita in the form in which we have got it. Both of them have quoted passages which are to be found in the present Manu samhita. It has, therefore, to be concluded that Sankara and Ramanuja considered that the laws of Manu in the form in which we get them are in accordance with the Vedas and are beneficial to society. But many people now think that some laws of Manu are in human. The question arises, how could Sankara and Ramanuja speak in the highest terms about Manu, if some of his laws were in human? It must, therefore, be concluded that modern persons look at social questions from an angle of vision which is different from that of Sankara and Ramanuja, and therefore condemn as inhuman rules of conduct which were considered beneficial by the latter.
Let us take an example.
Manu prohibits remarriage of widows. Prohibition against widow remarriage is considered by modern persons to proceed from a deliberate desire to torment women unnecessarily. But the sages of old looked at the question from a different viewpoint.
It is no doubt extremely painful for a woman to be deprived of her husband. But what is the reason that a particular woman becomes a widow? Everything happens in the world according to the will of God who is just and all powerful. The woman who becomes a widow must have done some grave sins either in this life or in her previous lives. If she voluntarily lives the life of a Brahmacharini, her past sins are expiated and after her death she is blest with the company of her husband for a very long period. Thus though the short time effect of prohibition against re-marriage of widows may be undesirable, the long-time effect may be there verse.
It may be asked, if everything happens at the will of God, why do we call a doctor when we are ill? But in one sense the course of treatment means voluntary infliction of pain on the body. The patient is not permitted to take delicious food. He has to fast or take bitter medicines through the mouth or by injection. Sometimes it is necessary to have a painful operation on the body. These may well be compared to the regulations prescribed for a widow. She is not to marry. She has to take plain food and lead a simple life. She has sometimes to fast. If we consider in this way, we can realise the truth of the passage of the Veda, the injunctions of Manu are like medicine. They are both disagreeable at first, but beneficial afterwards.
It may yet be asked, – why is not the life of a Brahmacharin prescribed for a widower? Why is he allowed to marry again? The reply is that the duty of a husband to a wife is not the same as the duty of a wife to her husband. Thus, as a general rule, it is the duty of a wife to obey her husband even if she considers her husband to be wrong. But it cannot be said that it is the duty of a husband to obey his wife in the same way. The husband should of course try to meet the wishes of his wife and should certainly do so if he finds her reasonable. But it is not his duty to follow his wife even if he considers that she is wrong. The ideal wife is she who can merge her individuality in that of her husband. By doing so she can bring out the best in her character,– as did Sati, Sita and Savitri of blessed memory. But a man who merges his individuality in that of his wife is certainly not the ideal man. And hence although a woman will fall from the path of virtue if she takes a second husband after the death of her first, it cannot be similarly said that a man will fall from the path of virtue if he takes a second wife after the death of his first. You can find ideal men like Chaitanya who married a second time, but you cannot find an ideal woman who married twice. Hence although it may be necessary for a widow to follow the life of a Brahmacharini, it may not be necessary for a widower to follow similarly the life of a Brahmacharin. But the laws of Manu do not spare a man from strict discipline when considered necessary. They enjoin that the young boy of 8 years must submit to the strict discipline of a Brahmacharin in the house of his preceptor up till the age of 24 or 30 years.
In view of all these facts, it is not reasonable to think that Manu laid down some vindictive rules against the spirit of the Vedas. If he had done so, he would have been found out by eminent scholars like Sankara and Ramanuja. That Manu had no prejudice against women is clear from the fact that he says that the gods are delighted with the homes in which the woman are honoured and that there is no difference between Sree (Lakshmi) and Stree (woman).
Next consider the rules regarding untouchability. “If you touch a Chandala” says Manu “you should have a bath”. What an outrage upon humanity, thus thinks the modern mind. But our ancients looked at the question from a different angle of vision. Why is this man born a Chandala, – they enquire. The Vedas say that one who does vicious acts is reborn as a Chandala (Chandogya Upanishad 5-10-7). The question then arises, how can he atone for his vice? By repentance, by constant meditation that he has been so wicked in his previous birth that his very touch will pollute one of a higher caste. Here again we find a confirmation of the dictum of the Veda, – whatever Manu has laid down is like medicine. Just as the life of a Brahmacharini cures a widow of her previous sins, so also constant repentance cures a Chandala of his past sins. Self-inflicted pain in the former case and humiliation in the latter saves the person from greater sufferings in the future just as the bitter medicine or the sharp knife saves the patient from much greater sufferings.
Surely it cannot be the intention of Manu that the Chandala should be hated. For, in the same verse in which he lays down the untouchability of a Chandala he also lays down the untouchability of the sister and the wife during their menses. Surely it cannot be the intention of Manu that the Chandala should be persecuted, for in another verse (Manu 3/92) he says that it is a virtue to give food to the Chandala.
We must not confound the untouchability of the Hindus which has allowed the untouchables to live and multiply in India so that they now number 4 or 5 millions, with the untouchability of the western peoples which has well nigh exterminated the Red Indian and the Hottentot.
It may be considered that the custom of untouchability prevents the development of manhood. But it did not do so in the case of Haridas, Rup and Sanatan. They scrupulously applied against themselves the rules of untouchability. They would not enter the temple of Jagannath. They would not approach persons of higher caste. But that did not prevent them from attaining the highest manhood, – and in the case of Rup and Sanatan that did not prevent them from becoming the most learned men of their time.
There is more religion and morality – say among the Namasudras of Bengal than among the lower classes of Europea society, – even though the Namasudras have been considered as untouchable for generations.
holy brham rishi manu has done Herculean job of filtering the instructions from the top notch gyan vigyan contained in holy vedic i-maha darshan ( master philosophy e.g holy vedic trait vaad) ii-drashan, iii- sidhant , iv- disha ,v- niyam , vi-nirdesh
nothing ever any better thing can happen for Vedic people than the nirdesh coming from a brham rishi level person .
why ? coz this is the greatest beauty of Vedic literature only that up to Upanishad and smritis it has the full body of gyan vigyan with all the six organs as above fully grown up and perfected by Vedic rishis and maharishis and brham rishis . Religions dont hv any of these. religions have only the last organ i.e. the nirdesh or the instructions given by illiterate people who became popular as prophets later on.
Filtering or extracting the right kind of nirdesh from the remaining five organs to fulfill the lakshya of holy Vedic lakshya chatushtya for manushya prani by balancing the application of four vaads (isms) eg i-parmatam vaad ii- pran vaad iii- prani vaad and iv-padarth vaad is not an ordinary tasks.
No other rishi, maharishi, brahm rishi or even dev rishi Narad has not attempted this task.
Vedic people must feel indebted, obliged and thankful that the holy brahm rihsi Manu has burnt his midnight oil for centuries to extract the holy Vedic nirdesh (instruction) from the so ocean deep and sky wide holy vedic maha darshan , darshan , sidhant, disha and niyam for Vedic manushya prani kalyan towards lakshya chatushtya.
it is stupid for macaulay groups not to understand this and talk rubish about holy brham rishi manu.
It is so unfortunate that the real manu smriti is lost during the foreign occupation of India by Muslim and British aggressor’s Vedic libraries burning campaign. But what ever the form of manu smirit was available that has been made shuddh (purified) by Dr Surendra kumar over a six year’s hard work under six criterion. Further work can be done to justify each shloka in line with holy Vedic doctrines to avoid confusion in Vedic people’s mind and stop giving ammunition to Macaulay people. Unfortunately Arya vedic vidwans are not doing any work in this direction. A samiti of arya vedic widvans must write explanatory notes on manu smirit with above objective . it is my intuition that THIS KIND OF WORK WILL LAY THE FIRST FOUNDATION STONE FOR HOLY VEDIC JEEVAN PADDHATTI TO RETURN INTO MANUSHYA PRANI JEEVAN
VISHVA HINDU PARISHAD’s VIEW OF ‘MANU SMRITI’ and OTHER ‘SMRITIS’
The “Manu Smriti” or the “Yaagyavalkya Smriti” has no connection with Adi Manu or the Sage Yaagyavalkya. The “Smritis” were written during the reign of Pushyamitra about 2200 years ago. There is no reference of such Smritis in the Mahabharata.
There are two sections in the Smritis – one is ‘Yama’ and the other is ‘Niyama’. ‘Yama’ consists of eternal values while the ‘Niyamas’ were the periodic governing laws or codes of conduct meant for running the affairs of the state of the then kings. There are more than three hundred Smritis. They have little to do with the eternal values of Dharma. These have been responsible for gross discrimination that is alien to our concept of ‘Ekaatmataa’ (Ekaatm Bhaava/Integralism) that is expounded in our ancient scriptures – the Shrutis (the four Vedas – the eternal revealed scriptures) and the Upanishads.
Caste untouchability never existed in our society. It is the creation of the Muslim rule because those who put up a fight and did not convert to Islam were punished for their dedication and commitment to their indigenous moorings, ethos and, therefore, thrown out of the society as ‘untouchables’. These heroic people are enlisted as scheduled castes. We must differentiate between the ‘scheduled castes’ and the ‘Shudras’. Shudras were held in esteem before the advent of the Smritis and the scheduled castes are of recent origin created during the Muslim rule.
The Vishva Hindu Parishad totally rejects the “Manu Smriti” as it has no place in a civilized & cultured society. The Srimadbhagavad Gita is, in fact, the “Adi Manu Smriti” (Original Code/Law of Manu) as revealed and related by Bhagwan Sri Krishna in Chapter IV of the Gita. The Dharma Sansad and the Maargadarshak Mandal of Vishva Hindu Parishad constituted of Dharmacharyas, Sants, Mahamandaleshwars and Mahants have totally rejected caste untouchability as prevalent in the Hindu society today. They have decided to give ‘Mantra Deekshaa (initiation)’ without any discrimination.
In the Vedas, there is no discrimination amongst the four Varnas. All are considered genius and masterminds in their own fields and all were appreciative of and looked upon one another with respect. Recitation of the Vedic Mantras in daily life was practiced by the entire society irrespective of Varna. As for the Ashram Vyavastha, it enabled the individual-self to gradually unfold and expand his/her horizon of consciousness from micro-self through family, creed, nationality and ultimately attained absolute perfection by identifying with the universal self, the omnipresent divine self. Man started his journey as an individual Brahmachari, proceeded to Grihastha Ashram, then Vaanaprastha Ashram when he dedicated himself to the service of humanity, and finally accepted the Sannyaas Ashram in which he had to surrender his individual self at the feet of the divine for ultimate salvation.
--
Y.K.Saxena
