Manu and the Indian Constitution

Manu Smrti VIII.272
" If a Sudra arrogantly teaches Brahmins their duty, the king shall cause hot oil to be poured into his mouth and into his ears."

This is the `learned' Vedic philosophy of Pandit Manu, the single most revered law-giver of the six orthodox schools of Brahmanism (commonly misnamed `Hinduism') as expounded in his work, the Manu-Smrti. Normally, such rantings of a bigoted Brahmin three thousand years ago would be of little consequence. Not so in modern India. It is this same Manu-Smrti which is the most authoritative Hindu law-book; for a Hindu to vilify this work is to deny Hinduism itself, it is a crime considered far worse than death. For the devout and pious Hindu, it is the supreme embodiment of all knowledge and law; no other law can be superior to it. Indeed, even the Constitution of India, authored as it was by a Sudra and `nastik bauddha' [`Buddhist heretic'] to boot, Dr. B.R.Ambedkar, is not to be obeyed by the pious Hindu. Thus, the Hindutva Parivar, which wants a return to the "Vedic Golden Age of Manu" are trying to replace the Indian Constitution with the Manu-Smrti -

"Re-evaluate the Mandal Reservation System !"

After all, it is against Manu !


Asian Age, New Delhi, Saturday 29 January 2000

PM reflects RSS view

By Venkatesh Kesari

New Delhi: The genesis of Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee's determination to review the Constitution lies in the Sangh Parivar ideology. The Sangh Parivar has always viewed the Constitution suspiciously ever since it was adopted after Independence. Mr Vajpayee has been pleading for the presidential form of government as he, like many other RSS swayamsevaks genuinely believes that the Constitution lacks Indianess. The RSS swayamsevaks strongly believe that the present Constitution does not comply with the Indian ethos. The Constitution should be the modern version of ancient Manusmriti, a reflection of the essence of Indian culture, said RSS insiders.

The RSS sources said the Sangh Parivar wants to redefine the concepts of socialism, secularism and re-examine uniform civil code and Article 370 of the Constitution. They also want to re-evaluate the merits of the reservation policy and cite Dr B.R. Ambedkar as saying that the affirmative action was temporary. The Republic Day special issue of Organiser has again underscored the Sangh Parivar's objections to the Constitution. Senior RSS leader and confidante of late RSS sarsanghachalak Balasaheb Deoras Shrikant Joshi has written that "our present Constitution is, in a manner of speaking, an enlarged and revised edition of the Government of India Act, 1935, a creation of the British colonial rulers."

Although the BJP has put three contentious issues of Ram temple, uniform civil code and scrapping of Article 370 of the Constitution on hold to achieve political power, Mr Joshi wrote in his article: "The interpolation of Article 370 in our Constitution was a consequence of the misguided policies and decisions of our anglicised first Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru and his mentor, the last British Governor-General of India Lord Mountbatten, when the article was being debated upon in the Constituent Assembly."

The RSS leader reiterates in his article that the Article 370 was supposed to be temporary. "Mr Nehru had himself forcefully asserted that the article was temporary and had predicted that with the passing time the article would weaken and ultimately fade away," he added

According to Mr Joshi, even the Kargil war proved to the nation that the Article 370 could not be trusted with protection of the distinct features of the culture in Jammu and Kashmir, otherwise called Kashmiriat. Commenting on the implementation of reservations for the under-privileged, Mr Joshi said that it has proved inadequate and an extension of the provision of reservation and expansion of its application to more sections of people is required. "At the same time some other amendments will have to be carried out to our Constitution to preserve national security and national integration, civil liberty, citizens' equality, nationalism and humanitarian values," he added.

The Wondrous Teachings of Pandit Manu

With even learned and `modernised' Brahmins talking about the rationality of `restoring Manu-Smrti' and `reviewing the Mandal reservation system', without breathing even a word of what is written in this august scripture, an analysis of Manu's writings is required. Let us see what this supreme law-book of the six asik (orthodox) schools of Brahmanism, masquerading as Hinduism, really say.

Learned Pandit Manu on Sudras

Now let us see what the `learned' Pandit Manu prescribes regarding Sudroids. Kindly remember that the ancient collective name of the Dalits and Dravidians before they were split on account of the Aryan invasions is `Sudra'. It is only due to Aryan invasions that the primordial Sudroid race (the term `Sudra' is a derivative of `Sudan' - the ancestral homeland of the Sudras) split up into Dravidian, Kolarian and Dalit (Indo-Aryan speaking Sudras) branches.

Suppose a Sudroid questions his Aryan master ? What should happen ?

Manu Smrti VIII.270
" A once-born man (a Sudra), who insults a twice-born man with gross invective, shall have his tongue cut out; for he is of low origin. "

Of course the Sudras are much hated by the Aryans. Can the Untouchable Dalits (referred to in Vedic texts as `Chandallas') live with the purer Aryans ?

Manu Smrti X.51
" [T]he dwellings of Kandalas and Svapakas shall be outside the village, they must be made Apapatras, and their wealth (shall be) dogs and donkeys. "

So, now we know - Untouchability is not a CIA or ISI conspiracy - it arises naturally from the Vedic teachings of the learned Pandit Manu. Not only are the hated Chandallas supposed to live outside the village, they can only own animals. No doubt, this sprung from the Indo-Aryan belief that the Dalits were mere animals themselves !

Now, if the Dalits and Dravidians are mere animals, what is the value placed on the life of a person belonging to this race ?

Manu Smrti XI.132
" Having killed a cat, an ichneumon, a blue jay, a frog, a dog, an iguana, an owl, or a crow, he shall perform the penance for the murder of a Sudra."

So now we know - Pandit Manu and his Vedic Aryan brethren consider the life of a Sudroid Negro as equal to that of an animal.

Now let us see - who are the Sudras ? Not only the Aboriginal Negroids, but even some abrahmana Caucasoids are declared to have a status equal to that of the Adivasis !

Manu Smrti X.43-44
" [I]n consequence of the omission of the sacred rites, and of their not consulting Brahmanas, the following tribes of Kshatriyas have gradually sunk in this world to the condition of Sudras;

(Viz.) the Paundrakas, the Kodas, the Dravidas, the Kambogas, the Yavanas, the Sakas, the Paradas, the Pahlavas, the Kinas, the Kiratas, and the Daradas.

This policy is reminiscent of the Old US Confederacy, where the economic status of non-Anglo-Saxon Europeans was almost at a par with the Negroes. Enough said about Sudras, let us see what the learned Brahmins say about women.

Learned Pandit Manu on Women

Now, what happens if a wife dares to question her husband ?

Manu Smrti.VIII.371
" If a wife, proud of the greatness of her relatives or (her own) excellence, violates the duty which she owes to her lord, the king shall cause her to be devoured by dogs in a place frequented by many."

So there - the wife who somehow questions her husband is to be devoured alive by dogs ! Most Brahminist historians interpret this verse as meaning that this punishment is only meted out to adulterous wives. Even so, such inhuman punishments are attested only in Brahmanic India. However, the verse obviously includes crimes far less serious than adultery. What else do the Pandits have to say ?

Manu VIII.416
" A wife, a son, and a slave, these three are declared to have no property ; the wealth which they earn is (acquired) for him to whom they belong."

Not only is a disobedient wife to be devoured alive by dogs, but she cannot own any property ! What was the reason for this ?

Manu V.148
" In childhood a female must be subject to her father, in youth to her husband, when her lord is dead to her sons; a women must never be independant."

Manu Smrti IX.3
" Her father protects (her) in childhood, her husband protects (her) in youth, and her sons protect (her) in old age; a woman is never fit for independance"

So now we know - a woman is inherently `unfit' for independance.

Manu Smrti V.164
" By violating her duty towards her husband, a wife is disgraced in this world, (after death) whe enters the womb of a jackal, and is tormented by diseases (as the punishment of) her sin."

So not only does the disobedient wife suffer in this life, she is also reborn as a jackal in her next life. What happens if a woman's husband somehow passes away? Does a woman become free from Brahmanic tyranny then?

Manu Smrti.IX.65
" In the sacred texts which refer to marriage, the appointment (of widows) is nowhere mentioned, nor is the re-marriage of widows presented in the rules concerning marriage."

So now we know - Vedic law does not even give women freedom then. This is the law which Pandit Vajpayee and the Sangh Parivar are trying to enforce upon the women of India. Little wonder then, that no national newspaper carried even a single verse from the Manu-Smrti. Yet, when Dalitstan Journal publishes a few verses from Pandit Manu, the Brahminists shout `treason', `ISI conspiracy', and `falsehood'.

If not Manu, then Who ?

Now, some of the Brahminists have thought ahead. Some of them pretend that they want to abolish Manu, thereby feigning friendship with the Sudroids. This was done by Prof. Pathak in Nagpur recently, where he called for a ban on the Manu-Smrti. Now, the question which these Brahmins should answer is, what law-book should we follow then ? It is clear that the Brahmins are not going to follow the Thikural, the Bible or the Quran. They will follow one of the other law-givers, such as Gautama or Katyayana.

Now, how do these purported `liberals' compare to Manu ? Let us see the Vedic philosophy of Pandit Gautama, author of the Gautama Dharma Shastra, an authority next only to Manu. This is Gautama's clemency and kind treatment for Sudras :

Gautama Dharma Sutra 12.4
" Now if a Sudra listens intentionally to (a recitation of) the Veda, his ears shall be filled with (molten) tin or lac. "

Surely, Pandit Gautama's kindness towards the Sudroid Negroes is excessive! No, boiling water or hot tar would not do; it has to be molten tin because its melting point is higher, thereby causing more pain to the Sudra before his final death. Now, what does our learned Pandit Gautama say regarding Sudras who do not listen to the Vedas, but merely recite it ? For this, the learned Brahmin has prescribed another punishment, a true testimony to Brahmin genius -

Gautama Dharma Sutra 12.5
" If a Sudra recites (Vedic texts), his tongue shall be cut out. "

Now what if a Sudra does not recite or listen to Vedic verses, but somehow remembers them without telling anybody? What do our learned Brahmins say?

Gautama Dharma Sutra 12.6
" If he [ a Sudra ] remembers them [ Vedic Verses ], his body shall be split in twain. "

No doubt, many Sudras could be forced into `confessing' that they somehow 'hid' knowledge of such Vedic verses in their body somewhere!

The fact which the Brahmin brain-washing apparatus chooses to ignore is that all the other law-givers besides Manu are essentially his followers. Thus, Gautama's Chapter 12 is heavily based on Manu's Chapter 8. Many of these other Brahmin law-givers are indeed, harsher than Manu himself, bigotry and cold-heartedness being a prized characteristic amongst Brahmins. The more hatred and venom the Brahmin spewed against Sudroids, the further his fame spread and the more renowned he became.

The "Holy" Vedas on Women

Due to massive public protests against the Manu-Smrti, a section of fanatic Brahmins has now started advocating a "back to the Vedas" movement, which they falsely claim to have been a "Golden Age". In this case, they are just exploiting the ignorance of Sudras and women regarding the Vedas. Here are what these so-called `holy' scriptures say about women :

Atharva Veda.6.2.3
" Let a female child be born somewhere else; here, let a male child be born."

Rig Veda X.95.10

" The nature of women is like that of the hyena."

The Vedic Sati Hymn

Rig Veda X.18.7

" Let these women, whose husbands are worthy and are living, enter the house with ghee (applied) as corrylium ( to their eyes). Let these wives first step into the pyre, tearless without any affliction and well adorned."

Taittirya Samhita VI.5.10.3
" Hence they [ Aryans ] reject a female child when born, and take up a male."
< Sans. " Tasmat striyam jatam parasyanti ut pumamsam haranti " >

Brahma Purana.80.75

" It is the highest duty of the woman to immolate herself after her husband "

Women, Dalits, Dravidians and the other minorities of India should know what is in store for them under the guise of a `Constitution Review'. Not only are the Brahminists trying to destroy Ambedkar's work merely because he was a Dalit, but they are trying to enforce perhaps the most inhuman totalitarian system ever conceived - the Hindu caste system.


Note: Those who doubt that these scriptures actually contain such statements can verify them at the following places; these links may be out of date by the time you access this

  • Manu-Smrti: http://www.dalitstan.org/books/manu/
    http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/india/manu-full.html ;
    http://geocities.com/Athens/Olympus/2469/laws_of_manu_chapter_i.htm
  • by Hadwa Dom
    Dalitstan Journal,
    Volume 2, Issue 1, February 2000


    [ Brahmanism Index ]
    [ Main Index ]