Manu Samhita is the laws of humanity. Swayambhuva Manu: Manu Samhita: Laws of Humanity

Dedicated to His Divine Grace A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada, Founder Acharya of ISKCON

CHAPTER FIRST

The great sages approached Manu, who was sitting in peace, and, having paid him due respect, addressed him with the following words:

“O enlightened one! We wish to hear from you the sacred laws for all people in all ways of life, for all varnas and ashrams.

Oh Lord! You alone know the purpose, rituals, knowledge of the soul and the incomprehensible Supreme Lord, by whose will everything is done in this world.”

He, whose power is immeasurable, having listened to the highly revered sages, answered them with respect: “Listen!

Since time immemorial, this universe has been covered in darkness, incomprehensible, invisible, immersed in deep sleep.

Then Svayambhu, the Supreme Lord (Karanadakasayi Vishnu), invisible to the eye, manifested the universe consisting of twenty-four elements, dispelling the darkness that reigned around.

This self-luminous Lord, in whom all living beings rest, is beyond the perception of gross senses and is of a subtle, eternal and incomprehensible nature.

Desiring to produce different types of living entities from His own body, the Lord first created waters (Karana Ocean) by placing His seed in them.

This seed became a golden egg, equal in brilliance to the Sun. In this egg He manifested as Brahman (Garbhodakasayi Vishnu) the Progenitor of all living beings.

The waters are called narah. Just as the waters came from Narayana, so initially all living beings who take refuge in Him (ayana) came from Narayana. Therefore the Supreme is called Narayana.

From Lord Narayana, who is primordial, eternal and inconceivable, the world-famous Brahman (Garbhodakasayi Vishnu) was manifested.

This Divine Person stayed in this egg for a year, then He began to think: “It would be nice to divide it into two halves.” and the egg was divided into two halves.

From these two halves he created the heavens (sva) and the earth (bhur), between them the middle sphere (bhuva), the eight parts of the world - and the eternal abode of water - the Garbhodaka ocean.

TEXT 14-15

Then came the manifestation of the mind (manas), ego (ahankara) and consciousness (chitta), which are dominated by the soul. The three modes of material nature and the five sense organs also appeared.

TEXT 16-17

Through the combination of ego, mind, senses, three gunas and five material elements, He created all types of living entities. From six main components, as the sages say, the body was created.

Thus the five material elements, the immortal mind which is the cause of all creation, and with it the hidden desires and false ego were manifested. The Lord did all this.

From the parts of these seven main principles, the principles of the mahat, the ego and the five tanmatras, the universe arose, and from the eternal came the perishable.

Each subsequent element took on the qualities of the previous one, taking its place and the place of another.

The Lord then gave each created being a name, occupation and condition of life according to the injunctions of the Vedas.

Then He created the eternal sacrifice, the sadhyas and demigods, the devas, who maintain the life of the universe.

From fire, wind and sun, the Lord manifested three Vedas: Rig, Sama and Yajur Veda, which were created for eternal sacrifice.

Then He created time, the time scale, stars, planets, rivers, oceans, seas, mountains, plateaus and plains.

TEXT 25-26

The Lord also created austerities, speech, pleasures, desire and anger. He further produced dualities or opposites such as merit and demerit, heat and cold, pain and pleasure.

TEXT 27-28

Thus, subtle and gross elements came into interconnection, acting harmoniously in the universe, naturally developing and multiplying.

Whatever qualities the Lord endowed on created beings: gentleness or cruelty, love or hatred, virtues or sin, these qualities were naturally and spontaneously accepted by them.

Just as the seasons of the year have certain characteristics of weather, so the activities of embodied living beings were given to each in accordance with his qualities.

Then the Lord, for the prosperity of the world, created the brahmanas, kshatriyas, vaisyas and sudras, who emanated from His mouth, hands, thighs and feet.

Laws of Manu - an ancient Indian collection of instructions for religious, moral and social duty (dharma), also called "the law of the Aryans" or " code of honor of the Aryans". Manavadharmasastra is one of the twenty Dharmasastras.
Selected fragments are presented here (translation by Georgy Fedorovich Ilyin).

Laws of Manu

The first Manu Swayambhu (“self-existent”) is the creator of the ancient collection of laws -
"Laws of Manu" (Dharmashastra, Manavadharmashastra, Manusmriti).

Chapter 1 about the origin of the Universe, classes;
Chapter 2 rules of life during the training period;
chapter 3 rules of life for a family man-householder;
Chapter 4 - an establishment about the way of life of a brahmana;
chapter 5 rules of life, woman's duty;
chapter 6 rules of life for a wandering ascetic;
chapter 7 duties of the king;
chapter 8 duties of the king;
Chapter 9: Duty of Husband and Wife;
Chapter 10 duties of estates;
Chapter 11 contains instructions on repentance and vows to atone for sins committed;
Chapter 12 description of posthumous retribution for bad deeds in real life
Glossary to the Laws of Manu

“The Laws of Manu” (Manavadharmashastra) is the most famous monument of ancient Indian literature and historical source and the most frequently used by Indologist specialists.
From the dharmasutras grew the dharmashastras - legal treatises, more systematized, intended for study and better memorization, written in verse.
The prominent Sanskrit scholar G. Bühler argued that the basis of the Law of Manu was some kind of dharmasutra that has not reached us. His point of view met with serious objections from P. V. Kane and K. P. Jayasvala, who defended the independent nature of the emergence of the “Manavadharmashastra” (the Law of Manu). The dispute will be resolved in favor of G. Bühler, of course, only when the ancient Dharmasutra is found. But G. Bühler’s point of view is that the dharmashastra of Manu (the Law of Manu) in the form in which it has come down to us was formed in the 2nd century. BC e. - II century n. e., has become established in science. However, not all the material contained in the collection may relate specifically to the period indicated. The first and last (XII) chapters are considered relatively new. Of the remaining chapters, chapters II-VI are considered more ancient.
The Laws of Manu were repeatedly rewritten and commented on in the Middle Ages, which in itself shows the great importance attached to this ancient collection in India. Commentaries by Medhatitha (IX century), Govindaraja (XII-XIII centuries), Narayana (XIV century), Kullukabhatta (XV century), Raghavanaida (XVII-XVIII centuries), Nandana and Ramachandra (XVIII century) have reached us. ); There is also an anonymous Kashmiri commentary, also apparently quite late. The fact that the commentators were separated from the time of compilation of the “Laws of Manu” by many centuries, that they lived in an era with different social conditions and views, could not but leave an imprint on their work; and it is not surprising that when interpreting individual verses in the collection (especially in the religious and philosophical sections), the opinions of commentators are rarely unanimous. Yet the works of medieval Indian commentators (especially Medhatitha and Kullukabhatta) are of great importance - without them many verses of the Laws of Manu would have been completely incomprehensible.
The first translation of the “Laws of Manu” from Sanskrit into English was published by W. Jones in 1794; The Laws of Manu were subsequently translated several times, in whole or in part, into European languages and into some Indian languages. The most perfect are the already mentioned English translations of the “Laws of Manu” by G. Buhler, as well as by A. K. Burnell and E. W. Hopkins. Mention should also be made of the translations published by M. N. Dutt and G. N. Jha.
In 1913, a translation of “The Laws of Manu” by S. D. Elmanovich was published in St. Petersburg. Even then, Russian Sanskrit scholars were not entirely satisfied with this translation; in some respects it was indeed seriously flawed. And yet the publication of this translation was of considerable significance. The general reading public in our country was able to get acquainted in their native language with one of the most remarkable monuments of Indian literature - the “Law of Manu”, which preserved information about many of the most important aspects of the life of ancient Indian society. Not only Indologist specialists, but also historians of various profiles - historians of culture, religion, etc., lawyers, ethnographers, etc. - used the data from the “Laws of Manu” in their work.
The translation of “The Laws of Manu” by S. D. Elmanovich, published in a small edition, has already become a bibliographic rarity. Therefore, it was decided to reissue it, subjected to verification and revision.
S. D. Elmanovich translated from the text published by Delonchamp. In its time it was a good publication. In general, the numerous manuscripts with the text of the “Laws of Manu” preserved in India are distinguished by their unity - the differences in them are small. Nevertheless, it seemed appropriate to give a new edition of the translation not according to Delonchamp’s edition, but according to a newer one. The Jolly edition was chosen; This is the best edition of the text of the Laws of Manu at our disposal.
The vast majority of verses (slokas) containing regulations are written in the desired mood. In essence, the translation of the title of the collection - “The Laws of Manu” does not quite accurately convey the Sanskrit name “Manavadharmashastra”. It should be translated more accurately: “Instructions of Manu in Dharma.”
There is no word in Russian that exactly corresponds to the Sanskrit "dharma". I will give an example of how in several cases S. D. Elmanovich is forced to translate it: dignity, virtue, truth, merit, duty, sacred law, law, the most important law, law, duty, laws, rules, legal provisions, spiritual merit, prescribed duty , rewardable deed, form (of marriage), justice, right, moral conviction, custom, religious rite, justice, religious rite, duty, duty, assigned work, fulfillment of duties, religious purpose, image (of action), pious purpose. Obviously, it is better not to translate this term at all. "Dharma is one of those Sanskrit words which render futile all attempts to find an exact equivalent in English or any other language." This is how P. V. Kane begins his fundamental study “History of dharmasastra” (vol. I, p. 7).
Law is now usually understood as a mandatory norm established by the highest legislative body of government. The word "dharma" had no such meaning; it meant a set of legal, moral, ethical and other norms that determine a person’s virtue and the rules of life depending on his social status. So, the Dharmashastra of Manu is a collection of such instructions for a member of society, the fulfillment of which is considered a virtue in accordance with the prevailing belief system and religion. The Dharmashastras were only the basis of legislation, but by no means the codes of the actual laws themselves.
In the lower grades of school in pre-revolutionary Russia, the “law of God” was taught; This subject was usually taught by clergy. During the lessons, moral rules based on the “holy scripture” were instilled in the children. Much of what was condemned in the “law of God” was considered by the state authorities to be a punishable act (murder, theft, violence, fraud, etc.), but much was condemned only from the point of view of the “law of God”, but was not considered a crime from the point of view from the point of view of the current legislation (falsehood, vanity, stinginess, neglect of religious duties, etc.). It cannot be said that the “law of God” and ancient Indian dharma are the same thing, but there is a general similarity. As a result, the dharmashastras are so diverse in content - they include regulations not only regarding civil and criminal legislation, but also regarding the duties of members of various varnas, norms of family life, religious and even sanitary and hygienic regulations, etc.

Manu Samhita is the popular title of the work, which is officially known as Manava dharma shastra and is one of the central sources of later Brahminical Hinduism. Another common name for the work is Manu Smriti (smriti literally means “law that is remembered”) or “Laws of Manu.” The Code of Manu is a code of laws that is the earliest work of its kind in the post-Vedic period and the main one of the works classified as Smriti.

The authorship of Manu Samhita is the subject of much debate. According to one version, its authors were members of a group called the Manavs. Presumably they belonged to the school and lived in northwestern India near Delhi. Manu Samhita was written in the post-Vedic period, when the Brahmins established their position, however, the deities of Manu Samhita belong to, and not to, the epic. Thus Manu Samhita stands in the middle between the Vedas and Puranas.

If we ignore the opinion of academic circles and turn to the mythological version, then in Indian mythology the legendary author of the code of laws is the first person. The name "Manu" is associated with the verb "to think". Since Manu is known as the first king on Earth, most of the rulers of medieval India considered Manu to be the founder of their dynasties.

In the ancient Indian legend of Manu, in many ways he resembles both Noah and Adam. The story is as follows: “The fish, towards which Manu showed compassion, warned him that humanity would perish due to a flood. Therefore, on the advice of the fish, he built a boat. When the flood began, he tied the boat to the spike of a fish, and it carried the boat to the top of the mountain. When the flood stopped, Manu was the only one to survive. Then he made a sacrifice: he threw oil into the water and poured out sour milk. After a year, a woman was born from the waters. She proclaimed herself "the daughter of Manu." They became the progenitors of the new human race that inhabited the Earth."

The date of creation of the Samhita is also shrouded in mystery. Scientists, having analyzed the time of creation of the book from a linguistic and historical point of view, point to the period between 200 BC. and 200 n. e. According to another version, Manu Samhita was written around 1500 BC. e. In any case, Manu Samhita marks the beginning of a new era of the creation of codes of law, which became the property of subsequent generations under the name "".

Manu Samhita stands halfway between the old codes of law and the new, forming a connecting link between the ancient and modern jurists. As a body of law, it occupied the highest position in regulating the life of Hindus in India for centuries. All later legislators relied on the authority of the Laws of Manu. This kind of authority caused later writers to "augment" the book by including their views in order to make them more popular and acceptable to members of society. Thus, in the person of Manu Samhita, we have a set of legal provisions from different eras. Since we are talking about the idea of a heterogeneous mass of laws, it is difficult to understand which of them really belong to Manu and which belong to later writers.

Dating the text

Dating the text is important for science, since the Manu Smriti was written during a period when the influence of the Brahmins was threatened by non-Vedic movements, after the collapse of the Mauryan and Shunga empires, a period of social instability developed. Thus the Manu Smriti and other Dharma Shastras were the brahmins' response to these threats.

In science, the point of view of Georg Bühler has been established that “Manu-smriti” in the form in which it has come down to us was formed in the 2nd century BC. e. - II century AD e. However, not all the material contained in the collection may relate specifically to the period indicated. The first and last (XII) chapters are considered relatively new. Of the remaining chapters, chapters II-VI are considered the most ancient, but they also contain verses that are later additions. Pandurang Vaman Kane limited the dating to the period from the 2nd century BC. e. until the 1st century AD e. K.P. Jayaswala indicates an even more precise date: 150-120 BC. e.

Study and criticism

The Laws of Manu are an important sociological, political and historical monument of ancient Indian literature. He is also the subject of criticism by modern liberals, Indian reformists, feminists, Marxists and others. Much of the criticism stems from the unknown level of influence of the Manu Smriti on Indian society at the time, and there is controversy over how much the original text changed after further interpretations.

A number of evidences are given that the Manu Smriti did not have a strong influence on the society of its time. For example, the Bhagavad Gita contradicts many provisions of the Manu Smriti, including the assignment of varna to a person at birth. In North and South India, the traditional religions were Vaishnavism and Saivism, while the Laws of Manu were not widely practiced.

Surendra Kumar, who counted 2,685 verses in the Manu-smriti, believed that 1,214 of them were authentic and the remaining 1,471 were added later. It is believed that verses relating to the criticism of sudras and women were added later, but not later than Adi Shankara (7th-8th centuries).

In his book "Revolution and Counter-Revolution in India" ( "Revolution and Counter-Revolution in India") Dalit leader Bhimrao Ramji Ambedkar claims that Manu Smriti was written by the sage Maharishi Bhrigu during the time of Pushyamitra Shunga due to the social pressure of rising Buddhism. However, historian Romila Thapar believes that these attacks are fictitious and cites archaeological evidence to support her claim.

However, not all scholars agree that the Laws of Manu were not an authoritative source of law. For example, the authenticity and authority of “Manu-smriti” was recognized by Dayananda Saraswati, A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada, Annie Besant, Peter Ouspensky, Pandurang Shastri Athavale and Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan.

Text structure

There are also seven cases in which a person became a slave ( Dasa) - prisoner of war ( dhwajarta), for content ( bhaktadasa), born in the house ( grihaja), purchased ( Krita), donated ( dathirna), inherited ( paitrika) and due to punishment ( dandadasa). The slaves were incompetent, the transactions they concluded were considered invalid. The children of a slave were considered the property of the owner.

Only kshatriyas could carry weapons; other “twice-born” could take up arms only when “the time of calamity came for them.” Wars were an important source of prosperity for the state. The king was revered - a courageous warrior who obtained by force what he did not have. Most of the looted property went to the king, in particular land, weapons, gold, silver; the rest was to be divided among the soldiers. The army also performed the functions of protecting state order, for which military detachments were placed among “two, three, five, and hundreds of villages.”

The main task of the king was to protect his subjects, for which he had the right to impose a tax on them ( bali), however he had to be moderate in his collections. He was also entrusted with the administration of justice with the help of experienced brahmins; he was the guardian of all minors, the sick, and widows. The king was instructed to honor the brahmanas who knew the Vedas and act on their advice. The king also appointed a number of officials and controlled their activities.

For each village, the king should have appointed a headman, and for ten, twenty, one hundred and thousand villages - a manager.

The judicial authority was a court, which included the king, along with brahmanas and experienced advisers, or a brahmana appointed by the king, “surrounded by three judges.” Only a brahmana, or at least a kshatriya or vaishya could interpret the rules of law in court.

There were 18 reasons ( pada) legal proceedings: non-payment of debt, mortgage, sale of someone else's property, participation in a trade or other association, non-delivery of property, non-payment of wages, violation of an agreement, cancellation of a sale, dispute between an owner and a shepherd, disputes about the border (of land), slander and insult by action , theft, murder, violence, adultery, marriage, division of inheritance, dice and betting.

Much attention is paid to testimony in court. The witness had to be equal in social status to the party in the proceeding about whom he was testifying. Only in the case of serious crimes (theft, violence, etc.) were the witnesses not checked too carefully for reliability. In the absence of proper witnesses, it was allowed to accept the testimony of a child, an old man, a student (in relation to a teacher), a relative, a slave and a woman.

Property relations

The Manu Smriti talks about the statute of limitations for the use and possession of a thing, entailing the transformation of possession into property. This period was 10 years. The limitation rule did not apply to pledges and deposits. There were seven legal ways to acquire property: by inheriting a thing, receiving it as a gift, purchasing, conquest, usury, performing work, and receiving alms. The first three methods were available to all varnas, the fourth - only to kshatriyas, the fifth and sixth - to vaishyas, the seventh was the privilege of brahmanas.

Those transactions that were made through deception or violence, by a drunken or insane person, in a state of anger, grief, as well as by a slave, an old man, or a child were considered invalid.

Wage labor was unacceptable for the higher varnas, since service was a “dog’s way of life,” and a brahman should avoid it. A hired worker who did not complete the work was subject to a fine. Even in the event of his illness, rent was not paid if the work was not completely completed.

Family relationships

Marriage and family relations (“dharma of wives and husbands”) in the Laws of Manu are mainly devoted to chapters III and IX.

They highlight eight forms of marriage that were common in India. The first four, encouraged by the Brahmins, included brahma(handing over of the “jeweled” daughter to the groom by the father), dive(presenting the daughter to the priest when he performs the ritual), Arshu(the father gives his daughter to the groom after receiving from him a bull and a cow or two pairs) and Prajapatya(handing over of the daughter to the groom by the father after the words “Perform the Dharma together”). Other ("bad") types include asura(bride purchase), gandharva(voluntary union of the bride and groom without parental consent), rakshasa(bride kidnapping) and the worst kind - paisachu(violence against a girl under the influence of alcohol or drugs or insane). Taking minors as wives was not prohibited. Polygamy was not encouraged, but a husband could take a second wife if the first was prone to drunkenness, malicious or wasteful.

Marriages between different varnas were not encouraged, but were possible if the husband belonged to a higher varna than the wife. However, their children were unequal in their rights to inheritance; for example, the son of a Shudrian woman and a twice-born had no right to inheritance other than what his father gave him.

According to the Manu Smriti, a woman should have been under the protection of a man all her life (father in childhood, husband in youth, son in old age). Its main purpose was considered to be the birth and upbringing of children, especially sons. The mother's husband was considered the legal father of the child, regardless of who he actually was. The sale of a wife and children was considered possible, but was a sin, but even a sold wife was not freed from her husband. If the wife did not give birth to children, the husband could take a new wife after 8 years, if she gave birth to stillborn children - after 10 years, if she gave birth only to girls - after 11 years. If the wife was rude, the husband could take a new one “immediately.”

Wives who had lost their husbands could not remarry, but in the event of the death of a childless husband, the wife, at the request of relatives, had to give birth to his brother or another close person.

Crimes and Punishments

Great sins ( Mahapataka) according to the Manu Smriti were the murder of a brahmana, drunkenness, theft, adultery with the wife of a guru (teacher), as well as association with such a sinner. The consequence of these crimes was punishment up to the deprivation of all property and expulsion from the country. However, such a great sin as association with a great sinner was not classified as a crime.

A murderer was exempt from punishment if he defended himself while guarding sacrificial gifts and while protecting women and brahmins. It did not matter whether a guru, a child, an elderly person, or even a brahmana very learned in the Vedas was killed. Also, “killing a murderer” was not a sin.

The punishment depended on the varna of the person being punished. For example, for insulting by word or action an equal in position or a representative of a lower varna, a fine was imposed, but the same crime of a Shudra against the “twice-born” entailed corporal punishment - cutting off the tongue, lips, hands, legs, castration.

Adultery was considered a serious crime. According to the Laws of Manu, people who sexually harassed other people’s wives were to be expelled by the king and “subjected to awe-inspiring punishment.” Adultery included “helpfulness, flirting, touching jewelry and clothes, and sitting together on a bed.” All non-Brahmins guilty of adultery were subject to death penalty. However, prostitution of a wife with the consent of her husband was not punished. Depriving a girl of honor against her will entailed corporal punishment, cutting off her fingers if the offender was not of equal status with the victim. An equal in position was obliged to pay a large fine. The unfaithful wife was to be hunted down by dogs, and her partner was to be burned on a hot iron bed. For criminal cohabitation with a free woman, punishment was also imposed depending on the man’s varna.