Recently, I read in the newspaper about a group of Dalit students in Banaras who organized a program to burn Manusmriti. They are now in jail. This act raises a critical question: why do Dalits engage in such actions? They claim to follow Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, but they seem to ignore the historical context of his criticism of Manusmriti. For Ambedkar, Manusmriti represented Hindu separatism in its time. How do Dalits perceive it today? If they identify as Hindus, why oppose Manusmriti?
It’s worth noting that Manusmriti says little about Dalit castes, historically regarded as "Untouchables." Its rules are primarily directed at Shudras and women, particularly those from upper castes. If anyone should rebel against Manusmriti, it should be the Shudras, now categorized as OBCs, who ironically are some of the strongest supporters of the idea of a Hindu Rashtra.
Perhaps Dalits should demand the implementation of Manusmriti. Let it be enforced so its contradictions become evident. This will never happen because even the RSS knows that the Brahmins themselves won’t accept it. If Manusmriti were implemented under a Hindu Rashtra, the results would be catastrophic for Hindu society.
Two things would undoubtedly occur:
1. Upper-caste men and women would revolt against its oppressive rules.
2. If their rebellion were suppressed, Hindu society would regress into a dark age.
Take, for example, the fate of women under Manusmriti. If enforced, women would lose their rights to education, work, and personal freedom. Upper-caste women, who today are professionals, politicians, and leaders, would face a future limited to child marriage, domestic servitude, and widowhood in isolation. Would modern Indian women, especially those of the upper castes, accept such a fate?
 |
| Author |
The Contradictions of Manusmriti
Manusmriti contains laws that are incompatible with modern society. For example:
- It mandates celibate study of the Vedas for decades before entering household life. Would any Hindu, especially from the upper castes, dedicate 18-36 years to such a practice in today’s world?
- It prescribes child marriage, suggesting 30-year-old men marry 12-year-old girls and 24-year-old men marry 8-year-old girls. Will Hindu families accept a return to this practice, which denies women education and leads to early deaths from childbearing?
- It prohibits widow remarriage, confining widows to a life of isolation or pushing them towards practices like sati. Would modern Hindus, especially women, tolerate this regression?
These laws, if enforced, would take Hindu society back to an era of ignorance and oppression. The progress achieved by rejecting such practices would be undone.
RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat criticizes the Indian Constitution as being based on “foreign ideas,” advocating instead for a Hindu Rashtra rooted in “Indian culture.” But this vision of Indian culture is, in reality, Brahmin culture—a framework of dominance and exclusion. The dream of reviving Manusmriti is impractical because no Hindu, least of all the Brahmins, would accept its draconian rules today.
If the RSS and BJP truly believe in Manusmriti, they should implement it and face the consequences. The resulting backlash from Hindus themselves, particularly the upper castes, would expose the hypocrisy of their agenda and the inherent contradictions of using Manusmriti as the foundation for a modern society.
---
English translation from Hindi by S R Darapuri, I.P.S.(Retd), National President, All India Peoples Front
Comments
Post a Comment
NOTE: While there is no bar on viewpoint, comments containing hateful or abusive language will not be published and will be marked spam. -- Editor