Manu Dharma Shastra – A Study of the Lunatic Mind

‘The Laws of Manu’ or ‘Manu Dharma Shastra’ is one of the standard books in Hindu scripture –  a text that is recognised as an arm of the ‘vedas’. Comprising 2684 verses, divided into twelve chapters presenting the norms of domestic, social, and religious life in India.  Sir William Jones assigned the work to the period 1200-500 B.C.  But scholars agree that the work is a modern versified rendition of a 500 B.C. Dharma-sutra, which no longer exists and possibly contorted to suit the BLATANT double standards of men who adapted it.

Modern day thinkers have criticised the Manu Dharma Shastra and fairly so!  While the authors show some semblance of thought every now and then, their line of thought is largely INSANE and the people who wrote this should have been locked up and the keys thrown into the ocean.  We should probably burn all reference to this text except maybe for entertainment sake!

I am going to share with you some of the idiotic verses in Chapter 9 of Manu Dharma.  Here are some gems:

Verse 1 – “I will tell eternal duties of a man and wife who stay on the path of duty both in union and in separation.”

I pity the people who listened to him!  They must have been more dim witted than this moron!

Verse 2 – “Men must make their women dependent day and night, and keep under their own control those who are attached to sensory objects.”

Excuse me???  Tiger Woods, Bill Clinton and numerous other ‘non women’ – how do we explain their sensory tendencies?

Verse 3 – “Her father guards her in her childhood, her husband guards her in her youth, and her sons guard her in old age. A woman is not fit for independence.”

“not fit for independence”??   Says who??  Do you think they might have felt threatened?

Verse 4 – “A father who does not give her away at the proper time should be blamed, and a husband who does not have sex with her at the proper time should be blamed; and the son who does not guard his mother when her husband is dead should be blamed.”

I would like to clarify here that ‘proper time’ is mainly in the context of procreation and the fertile period.  No baser or finer emotions are considered!!  A woman is born to give birth .. no more no less!!

Verse 8 – “The husband enters the wife, becomes an embryo, and is born here on earth.  This is why a wife is called a wife (jaya), because he is born (jayate) again in her.”

யப்பா! தாங்கலடா சாமி! (there is no translation that will do justice to this piece of Tamil slang that means … Maaaan, this is just toooooo much )!!

Verse 10 – “No man is able to guard women entirely by force, but they can be entirely guarded by using these means:”

சதி திட்டம் (translated it means ‘the plot thickens’)!!

Verse 11 – “he should keep her busy amassing and spending money, engaging in purification, attending to her duty, cooking food, and looking after furniture.”

For once I not only agree with but totally condone this.  No complaints about amassing, spending, cooking, keeping the bed warm or looking after furniture as long as I am not treated as one of the furniture I look after!!

Verse 13 – “Drinking, associating with bad people, being separated from their husbands, wandering about, sleeping, and living in other people’s houses are six things that corrupt women.”

இந்த ஒண்ணுலயே சுத்தமா மொத்தமா காலி… இப்போ எல்லா பொம்பளைங்கணும் கெட்டவா! கலி காலம்பா…  Ladies, we are all TOTALLY CORRUPT!!  No hope for us.  We are worse than the worst scum 🙂 BTW, sleeping refers to sleeping in the day when there is work to be done!!

Verse 14 – “Good looks do not matter to them, nor do they care about youth; ‘A man!’ they say, and enjoy sex with him, whether he is good looking or ugly.”

The man who wrote this must have been eating coloured mushrooms from his backyard!!  I am not sure I know any woman who would have sex with a random man but then again, darling, if I had to live with you and your incredible intelligence, I’d probably tempted to do it just to spite you and get up your nose!!!  For ugly men there are always brown paper bags : )

Verse 15 – “By running after men like whores, by their fickle minds, and by their natural lack of affection these women are unfaithful to their husbands even when they are zealously guarded here.”

CHARMING!!!!!!!  இந்த ஆளுக்கு சுத்தமா மறை கழண்டு பொச்சா? (has this man totally lot his marbles??)

There is so much in this book that annoys me and to articulate the reasons for my annoyance would need a series of posts.  That would keep me busy for at least 3 years!!  There is just no evidence of finer emotions.  In fact, verse 96 says – “Women were created to bear children and men to carry on the line.”   I’ll talk about all that in the days to come!

I have one request for all of you who read this.  Can you please (pretty please) write for my sake, or for entertainment sake write a set of laws to match these ones that would appeal to modern day women and I’ll put it up as a post.  I’ll start it off ….

Verse 1:  I’ll tell you all the rules that you must follow to keep your marriage happy.

Verse 2:  Brute force, emotional blackmail – we can see through this stuff, darlings.  The sun ain’t gonna rise in the West no matter how hard you try. நாய் வாலை நிமித்த முடியாது. So guys and gals, just BACK off and stop trying to change each other and let each other be …


26 thoughts on “Manu Dharma Shastra – A Study of the Lunatic Mind

  1. பார்த்தி April 14, 2010 / 2:43 am

    We can’t attach too much importance to a text that was written 2000 years ago probably reflecting the social norms of that time and compare it to the contemporary social status of women. Only as recently as less than 100 years ago women have won property rights and voting rights in the Western society. In India even more recently. Every religious scripture in all the religions of the world have passages in similar chauvinistic vain. Take the bible for e.g.: “But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.” (I Corinthians 11:3)

    And then there is this notorious quaranic hadith and the more recent Egyptial fatwa, which recommends that a woman, if forced to be in a room alone with a grown man who is neither her brother nor her husband, may do so if she breastfeeds the stranger thereby making him her child.

    The simplest answer is to not take these scriptures literally or seriously…

  2. Guddi April 14, 2010 / 7:29 pm

    This was effing hilarious Ana.. gimme a few, I’ll be back with my rules… Call the post “Queen for a day.. with hopes of making it through a life time”. 🙂
    love this love this love this!! 🙂

  3. Ana April 15, 2010 / 3:14 am

    Mr P … I am not taking it seriously at all but the fact that someone at some time took this seriously is ridiculous ….

    Guddi … will do 🙂

  4. Pramod May 9, 2010 / 3:21 pm

    The sad thing is that a large section of the world population still believes this. Not sure if this is still true, but apparently a woman cannot walk in public by herself in present-day Saudi Arabia

  5. Mahesh July 5, 2010 / 3:34 am

    Agree with you…even cursorily reading this Manu Dharma crap. This limited human shelf life is a blessing in some ways …just imagine trying to get rid of this imsanity of thought that probably had no relevance in its time and in a progressive universe would merit a rock solid punch from a woman. Trust me I know a few that can throuw a mean right hook.

    • myanasworth July 5, 2010 / 6:56 am

      🙂 🙂 Thanks for stopping by to comment Mahesh. Limited shelf life for humans is a blessing in MORE WAYS THAN ONE!!!

  6. saurav February 26, 2011 / 8:06 am

    Just follow the Vedas, the Upanishads and O sanatana, if you are not intelligent enough for the vedas, then follow the Gita.

    Throw away the ritualistic nonsense given by the most hideous and most scum on this earth namely all the Brahma sutras

  7. Vannanthurai Senthil May 29, 2011 / 4:51 pm

    Hey, it is pretty obvious that you have an extremely limited knowledge of manu smriti. Or you should be one of those demented cases who still believe in the falsified history that the Britishers wrote, in order to convert us to Protestant Christianity. Or may be you ARE a convert yourself.

    In any case, your uneducated post sure makes you my ANUS-worth, and not even a ana’s worth.

    • myanasworth May 30, 2011 / 11:11 am

      I am just going to maintain silence and my dignity … thanks for your comment.

  8. Vannanthurai Senthil May 30, 2011 / 10:24 am

    I guess I got a little over-emotional with my comment. Freedom of expression (regardless of how contrary to fact it is) must be respected. So I apologize for my concluding comment, though I still stand my ground with respect to your heavy misunderstanding of the smriti. Wish you the best.

    • Raghav July 4, 2012 / 11:36 pm

      Senthil, you made a valid point here..Giving a piece meal information may make someone to believe the agenda…What has been done here is exactly that..Politicians and Media follow these kind of propangda and of course christian missionaries do…Let me share couple of videos analogous to this..
      Video 1:
      Video 2:
      In the video-1 taking an excerpts from a paragraph without giving the entire context can be misinterpreted..I have read Parasara Smrithi and the Sanskrit is way too tough for someone who learnt sanskrit for 15 years…Think about Christian missionaries, they can easily interpret it in 15 mins… I heard a talk given by David Frawley, a professor at NM at Santa Fe, explained how it was done…This article is for LUNATIC MINDS…Let me share another link:
      You can be emotional, if truth is on your side..ALL THE BEST

      • Dravidian July 6, 2012 / 8:03 am

        Ahem, apologies for playing gooseberry amongst Manu lovers.
        I am confused about the relevance of the links to the topic.
        Are you denying – with 15 years of Sanskrit erudition – that Manu Smrithi does not state any of the above comments stated in the blog? Or you are saying it has been misinterpreted/ translated poorly by non Sanskrit speaking people?

  9. myanasworth May 30, 2011 / 11:15 am

    Thank you again Senthil! When you do have the logical case to argue your point rationally rather than emotionally, I am more than happy to listen. And I promise I will be gracious if you prove me wrong …..

    And just for the record, I not protestant!

  10. Dravidian June 24, 2012 / 12:15 pm

    Oh wonderful. Shame i stumbled on this blog only now. Me thinks, even Manu may perhaps be excused. After all he lived in stone age. But present day Manu adherents? Nenju porukkudillaye !

    • myanasworth June 24, 2012 / 10:03 pm

      Mr Dravidian, I am so glad you didn’t throw more abuse at me for this post like most others have. They think I am demeaning history. Thats not the intention .. it is just so out of date and irrelevant. thought I’d share when i read it. And thanks for following the blog too. I am not a regular blogger .. when I something I read or see inspires me, I write to share with others … thats all.

      • Dravidian June 25, 2012 / 1:09 am

        Siru thuli, peru vellam. It is small nuggets of insights that would coalesce to form deeper wisdom. Enjoyed your other blogs too. Anans worth? Thannadakkam overa illa? 🙂

  11. myanasworth June 25, 2012 / 2:47 am

    Not really. Eduvum teriyada ennavo terinja maadiri ezhudaradula enge thannadakkam irukku? 🙂

  12. Rajesh Ramasamy August 24, 2012 / 5:22 pm

    Manu’s masterpiece is the core and gem of lifestyle conduct, such a strict ordinance have proven the cultural preservation among us and you can see the lineage applicability till today in some part of India and other continents. All the verses quoted here do make sense if you make reference to what is happening now in Kaliyuga. So please don’t condemn or critique our ancestors, we are not sages or great souls to underestimate such treatise.

    To be honest, it shows your ignorance in posting such topic.

    • myanasworth August 27, 2012 / 6:43 am

      Thank you! If you look at the history of all the comments I’ve received so far, many have condemned my ignorance but no one has been able to tell me why the Manu Dharma Shastra is so relevant. Maybe you could shed light, especially on the specific section I’ve referred to. Once again, thank you!

  13. Param December 23, 2012 / 7:43 pm

    Okay. I just saw this. I am convinced you are totally mistaken. Study Manu- dont just read it. Study it. He clearly says and it is understood that any dharma smrithi (law giving document) is only for a particular period and place. It can be superseded. He gave one for that time whatever it was, may be 2000 or 1000

    Now about women and men. Men are clearly sensual and impulsive as well. Women biologically have greater control over impulsive sexuality. These are ingrained for both. You cannot change nature of men. But to guide society, it is women who have to guard sexual morality, because biologically, they have greater control over sexual impulsivity. Thus the sage places greater emphasis. All cases such as Tiger etc you quote have had women who have enabled the men. When sages talk we have to very carefully analyze, not just jump. The goal is to safeguard society from immorality
    Regarding dependency: women are weaker physically. They can be misused sexually by men again. The sage therefore cleverly charges the men, family members, with responsibility to guard them. Simple
    The sage portrays women as weaker, problems to keep men away. This is a device. It is men who are problems, not women. This device by sages has protected women who are vulnerable in any society
    Similarly he says widows need protection as they are abused

    All these are inbuilt mechanisms in the shastra. You cannot conclude from these that he did not respect women

    See 3-56 as to what he says about women

    Bible says all kinds of crazy things. Mark 16 says you have to drink poison, handle snakes. Jesus asks his followers to buy swords by selling shirts. Acts 3-23 wants people who do not listen to Jesus to be killed. So does Luke 19-27. This is bible!

    Are you a Catholic?

    If you are not a Hindu, please stop this kind of abuse. You are not asking for clarification but passing judgment without study

    Manu is just a dharma smruthi

    If you want clear guidance for all time and place follow Gita or upanisads. Not manu

    Please try not to jump into conclusions when you read. Study

  14. myanasworth December 31, 2012 / 2:38 am

    Sir, i am certainly not Catholic. i am a Hindu and a believing one at that. No matter how much I study it, I cannot justify the double standard in the Manu Shastra. Sorry, but we will have to differ.

    • dravidianstates March 21, 2013 / 6:12 pm

      Hi! Anna,
      I am Aditya.
      Basically All the Scriptures in the world (Including Manu Smriti,Ramayana , Mahabaratham,Puranas Quran ,Bible……etc) have been interpolated and the only exception is the VEDAS.
      Actually , My friend is researching on the Vedic mantras (With the help of His guru). So he is the best source for Me.
      The vedas are the first scripture to be ENCRYPTED .So all other scriptures are prone to interpolations .In Fact, In Ramayana itself, out of the 7 kandas, the last to are added ones and not the original ones at all.

      I am a follower of the vedas and not hinduism. Hinduism today is not a all good.

      The Manu smriti is clearly contradcting the vedas. So just reject them

  15. dravidianstates March 21, 2013 / 5:06 pm

    I have to say one thing.
    only the Vedas are divine.
    Manu smriti,Ramayana,Mahabharata…..all are full of interpolations.
    myself with a group of friends are researching on the Vedas.

    only the Vedas are true.
    as a matter of fact, while researching , we came across a shocking fact. the entire Vedas are encrypted.

    it would take another 5 yrs to make our research public , with proofs.

    but I can gurantee one thing , bible or the Quran is not encrypted and can easily be changed. in fact it is very well known that the bible has been changed many times. don’t get me started on the Quran….

    satyameva jayate

  16. adhi April 24, 2013 / 6:32 am

    Most of the verses are included inbetween the ages according to the responsible persons. Its not actual one..

  17. Anil June 19, 2013 / 9:31 am

    Congratulations women!! The madras high court has ruled that if a man sleeps with a women after promising her marriage then it(sex) will be regarded as an act of marriage.

    Manu says: Verse 3 – “Her father guards her in her childhood, her husband guards her in her youth, and her sons guard her in old age. A woman is not fit for independence.”

    I have to agree with him here about indian women. Our nations women will always be children who will require constant looking after. How many girls have gone to court, committed suicide because they were tricked by their boyfriends into sleeping with them? Too many indian women have made it clear that they will never grow up. They have made it clear that they are vulnerable to be tricked by men as it these women had an intelligence of a 5 yr old.

    Dear indian women, do you even deserve freedom? Can you even handle this freedom? The world is a tough place for everyone. Can you handle this world? I don’t think indian women can ever rise from innocence to responsible.

    I have not written this comment in anger. Im very serious. I fail to see any credible potential in indian women. I’m sad because what manu says about indian women is probably true.

  18. howard September 14, 2015 / 3:00 pm

    The Manu Dharmashastra (MDsh.) has loads of ideas which are offensive, inappropriate, problematic and as you rightly noted ‘insane’ to just about anyone, anywhere. However, the (MDsh) is not a text of law or a constitution of Hindu social practice in the modern sense of the term i.e. there is a LOT of doubt as to whether anything in the text was actually followed.

    I won’t justify anything that the MDsh says but, there is a certain aspect to the text which is forgotten quite often. MDsh is a text about the absolute necessity to have good governance. The text argues that while an ideal society is one in which everyone should know what the right thing to do is, live and let live; the fact is that society is never like that. As a result, the state has to come into being to make sure that no one in society has the right to give someone else a raw deal just because they can. This is quite a reasonable point.

    Given the age and the multiple millenia over which it was written, the MDsh should not be taken literally. The point is to introduce a state which prevents society from going haywire. When the text itself has started doing that, then it should be ditched and another written in its place. In fact, there are good reasons for this. Mdsh has multiple contradictions. Its a flawed piece of writing, thats the problem

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s