Indian Political Thought: Manu

Manu: The Dharmashastras hold a central place in Hindu political thought, particularly in regulating all aspects of life—political, economic, domestic, religious, legal, and cultural. The term “Dharmashastra” refers to the “science of dharma,” comprising a series of texts that teach the eternal and immutable principles of dharma found in the Vedas. These texts expanded and reformed the ideas of dharma from the Vedic tradition. The most concise statements on dharma are found in the Dharmashastras and Dharma Sutras, which are divided into three main categories:

Rules for good conduct
Rules for legal procedures
Rules for penance

The Dharmashastras prescribe rules for all of society to ensure that each individual lives according to dharma. These texts are attributed to ancient rishis (sages), with Manu being the most prominent. Manu’s Manava Dharmashastra (Laws of Manu), also called Manu Smriti (smriti meaning “what is remembered”), is the most famous of these texts. It presents dharma as revealed by Brahma to Manu, the first man, and passed down through Bhrigu, one of the ten great sages. The divine origin claimed by the Dharmashastras helped facilitate their acceptance across society.

Manu Smriti is one of the 18 Dharmashastras that are part of smriti literature. Believed to have been written when the Brahmanical tradition faced threats from non-Vedic movements, this text, despite criticism by British scholars, social reformers, and feminists, holds a place of prominence due to its Vedic basis.

Manu and other ancient Indian thinkers provided rich political and administrative ideas. Manu Smriti is a highly influential text in Hindu literature, regarded as the oldest and best-known smriti. Described as a “work of encyclopedic scope,” it offers comprehensive insights into the social, judicial, and political life of its time. It outlines the social obligations and duties of individuals at different life stages, as well as the responsibilities of various castes. Manu Smriti is considered the most authoritative work on Hindu Law and outlines the normal structure of Hindu society and civilization, establishing the first formal code of civil and criminal law.

Translated as “Laws of Manu” or “Institutions of Manu,” Manu Smriti served as the foundational work on Hindu law and jurisprudence in ancient Indian society. It remained the standard reference for rulers who patronized the Vedic faith and for practitioners until modern times.

In Hindu tradition, Manu is regarded as the first of Brahma’s sons and the progenitor of the human race, making it difficult to determine the exact age of Manu Smriti. It is believed that the laws of Manu were known to the Vedic people long before they were codified in their current form during the post-Vedic period, with the final version likely completed by 200 BCE.

Manu Smriti envisions an ideal society, where human conduct aligns with divine will to establish social order. It proposes numerous laws to meticulously govern human life, based on the individual’s social class, duties, and responsibilities. These laws aim to instill discipline, provide a framework for rulers to enforce justice, and ensure righteous conduct for the orderly progression of society. The text emphasizes the importance of distributing power among rulers and societal guardians to aid decision-making. Manu Smriti also cautions kings about the corrupting influence of power and advises them to exercise judgment wisely to avoid sinful karma and its consequences for themselves and the world.

The laws proposed by Manu to regulate human conduct and society reflect the conditions, needs, and values of the time in which they were created. Many of these laws do not align with contemporary values. They acknowledge existing social and gender inequalities as natural aspects of human life and establish rules to govern individual behavior without allowing for changes that societal evolution might bring. As a result, many of Manu’s laws today appear archaic, outdated, and even primitive.

Manu’s laws favored a paternalistic society and family system, granting men the authority to regulate social and familial matters, while assigning women a subordinate and subservient role. The laws reflect a clear distrust of women’s integrity and autonomy, particularly in their sexual choices, suggesting that women should always be under male supervision and should not be left alone in the presence of men outside their families.

However, these laws did not completely undermine the role of women in family and domestic life. Manu also urged men to treat women with honor and respect, and to ensure that they did not suffer undue hardship.

During British rule in India, Manu Smriti was used as a reference for settling disputes among Hindus in matters of inheritance, family issues, marriage, and royal succession.

Origin of the Laws of Manu

It is traditionally believed that Manu, the ancient teacher of sacred rites and laws, authored the Manava Dharma-shastra. The work begins with an account of how ten great sages requested Manu to reveal the sacred laws, and how Manu, in response, instructed the learned sage Bhrigu—whom he had meticulously taught the metrical principles of the sacred law—to convey these teachings.

Equally widespread, however, is the belief that Manu had received the laws from Lord Brahma, the Creator, thus attributing divine origin to the text’s authorship.

Contents of Manu Smriti

The first chapter discusses the creation of the world by the deities, the divine origin of the text, and the purpose of studying it.

Chapters two to six describe the proper conduct for members of the upper castes, including their initiation into Brahminism through the sacred thread or sin-removing ceremony, the period of disciplined studentship dedicated to studying the Vedas under a Brahmin teacher, and the chief duties of a householder—selecting a wife, marriage, maintaining the sacred hearth-fire, offering hospitality, performing sacrifices to the gods, honoring ancestors with feasts, along with various restrictions. These chapters also address the responsibilities of old age.

The seventh chapter outlines the numerous duties and responsibilities of kings.

The eighth chapter details the procedures in civil and criminal cases, as well as the appropriate punishments for different castes.

Chapters nine and ten focus on customs and laws regarding inheritance, property, divorce, and the lawful occupations for each caste.

Chapter eleven discusses the different forms of penance for misdeeds, while the final chapter elaborates on the doctrine of karma, reincarnation, and salvation.

Structure of Manu Smriti

The original treatise, as imparted by Brahmā, comprised one thousand chapters covering law, polity, and pleasure. His son, Manu, learned these teachings and passed them on to his own disciples, including Bhrigu. Bhrigu, in turn, transmitted this knowledge to his students through the Manu Smriti.

This extensive work was later condensed into twelve chapters. Some scholars debate whether this subdivision affected the holistic nature of the original treatise. The text is composed in simple verse, distinct from the metrical style of the earlier Dharmasutras. Manu also introduced a “transitional verse” to signify the shift from one subject to the next.

The treatise is framed as a dialogue, with Bhrigu addressing his students. The narrative begins with Manu explaining the creation of the world and the social order, structured around four classes. Bhrigu then continues to expound the remaining teachings of Manu. The Dharma Shastras refer collectively to the law books of the Hindus, which govern their political, religious, and social life. According to one authority, 47 ancient sages contributed to these laws, although not all are recognized by every sect. The lawgiver Yagnavalkya lists 20 prominent lawgivers, including himself.

These lawgivers are:

Manu
Yagnavalkya
Atri
Vishnu
Harita
Usanas
Angiras
Apastamba
Yama
Brihaspati
Parasara
Samvarta
Katyayana
Daksha
Vyasa
Likhita
Sankha
Gautama
Shatatapa
Vashishta

Among these, Manu’s code is the oldest, most comprehensive, and authoritative. Manu is regarded as a mythical figure, the progenitor of humanity and the originator of law. His code is of great antiquity, second only to the three earliest Vedas. Later writers added to the text in the name of Manu, and some passages reflect the influence of medieval thought.

The social theory underpinning Manu’s code is based on the caste system, with the intent to uphold Brahmin supremacy, even over kinship. However, Manu also imposed strict discipline on the Brahmins, emphasizing a life dedicated to duty toward themselves and others. Following Manu, Yagnavalkya is considered the next most important lawgiver.

Parasara, however, is viewed as the most authoritative source for the Kaliyuga (the current age). According to Parasara’s code, different ages are governed by different laws: Manu’s laws apply to the Kritayuga, Gautama’s to the Tretayuga, Sankha and Likhita’s to the Dwaparayuga, and Parasara’s to the Kaliyuga.

Commentaries on Manu

Numerous commentaries have been written on the Manu Smriti. Two of the most significant are outlined below:

Bhāruci

Bhāruci is the earliest known commentator on the Manu Smṛti. Scholars vary in their estimates of his time period: Kane places him in the late 10th or early 11th century, Olivelle suggests the 8th century, and Derrett estimates between 600–650 CE. Based on these differing views, Bhāruci can be situated anywhere from the early 7th to the early 11th century. The surviving portion of Bhāruci’s commentary primarily focuses on the duties of kings and whether the king can be considered a source of dharma.

Medhātithi

Medhātithi is one of the most renowned commentators on the Manu Smṛti. While there is debate over his place of origin, scholars like Bühler, Kane, and Lingat generally agree that he was from Kashmir or its surrounding regions. The exact period of Medhātithi’s writing is also uncertain, with scholars placing him anywhere between 820 CE and 1050 CE.

Creation & the Origin of the Sacred Law

The Manusmriti begins with the concept of Nirguna Brahma, the unmanifest, supreme cosmic reality, which can be experienced through practices such as breath regulation (Pranayama), prayer (Japa), and meditation on the fundamental syllable, Aum (Dhyana). The cosmos is said to have come into being when God awakened from primeval slumber. While Nirguna Brahma becomes manifest in the endless cycles of the cosmos, a part of it remains unmanifest. According to Manu, karma-yoga is the most significant form of yoga, as it encompasses both Pravritti (regulation of desires) and Nivritti (complete eradication of desires).

Dharma

Ten Characteristics of Dharma

Patience
Forgiveness
Self-restraint
Not stealing
Cleanliness
Austerity
Wisdom
Knowledge
Truthfulness
Absence of anger

Five Basic Principles of Dharma
The Vedas, the Smriti, good conduct, and the contentment of one’s own conscience are the four key indicators of virtue (Manusmriti II.12).
These principles are:

Avoidance of violence (mental or physical) towards others
Truthfulness
Abstaining from acquiring illegitimate wealth (through theft, cheating, bribery, exploitation, or unethical professional practices)
Purity in thought, word, and deed (Trikarana Shuddhi)
Control of the senses

The struggle between good and evil is a natural reality, with good representing our participation in the cosmic process aimed at transcending beyond the ordinary. The doctrine of repaying debts to gods, teachers, parents, and society is central to human endeavor. The first step in this endeavor is to serve one’s immediate superiors—particularly one’s parents and masters.

Nature and Purpose of Manu Smriti

The Manu Smriti is written with an emphasis on the idealized principles of dharma, rather than a reflection of the actual practices prevalent in India at the time. Nevertheless, its practical influence should not be underestimated. Through intermediaries, such as scholars and teachers, the text indirectly impacted significant segments of the Indian population. It also serves as a vital point of reference in academic debates. The text appears to be consciously crafted during a period of social upheaval, mindful of the challenges facing the Brahmin community. One of its aims seems to be fostering a renewed alliance between the Brahmin and Kṣhatriya communities, as evidenced by the introduction of the vyavahārapadas (legal principles).

The primary objectives of the Manu Smriti are to generalize and systematize the rules of conduct passed down from earlier ages, with the intent of reorganizing and restructuring Hindu society. It is regarded as one of the most authoritative texts on human religious, social, and political organization.

Manu on Varna system

The Manu Smriti begins by presenting a particular perspective on the relationship between humans and the cosmos, offering a profound account of both the creation of the world and the details of daily life. Manu proposed the classification of society into four varnas—Brahmanas, Kshatriyas, Vaishyas, and Shudras—based on their hierarchical superiority. The Brahmanas, believed to have originated from the head of the creator Brahma, are placed at the top of the hierarchy and regarded as embodiments of the law.

Due to this sacred origin, Brahmanas were considered deserving of all forms of knowledge and worldly pursuits, including learning and agriculture. Manu stated that “whatever exists in the world” could be the occupation of Brahmanas, with learning as their primary focus, though agriculture was also permitted.

Next in the hierarchy were the Kshatriyas, who were said to have emerged from Brahma’s arms and categorized as warriors. Their duty was to protect society. Manu advocated for a harmonious relationship between the Brahmanas and Kshatriyas for the overall welfare of the world.

Vaishyas, believed to have come from Brahma’s thighs, were assigned roles in trade and commerce, while the Shudras, originating from Brahma’s feet, were confined to serving the first three varnas. Shudras were excluded from sacred learning and held in low esteem by Manu.

Manu emphasized that all four varnas should adhere strictly to their designated roles to avoid social disorder. This social organization, known as the Chaturvarna system, was intended to maintain the harmonious functioning of society. According to Manu, the varna system was not optional but an essential part of the socio-political structure that needed strict enforcement.

Thus, the Manu Smriti acknowledges and justifies the caste system as the foundation for social order and stability. It clearly defines the four classes—Brahmanas, Kshatriyas, Vaishyas, and Shudras—and their respective roles in upholding dharma. Brahmanas and Kshatriyas were granted privileges and leniency in matters of punishment for misconduct, while Shudras were given the fewest privileges and faced the harshest punishments, even for minor offenses.

To fully appreciate the Manu Smriti, it is important to study it with an open mind, recognizing its historical and religious significance in the evolution of Hinduism from its early days to its current form.

Origin of State

According to Manu, before the establishment of an organized state, people lived in a state of nature without any legal rules or regulations to govern their conduct. This period was marked by confusion and anarchy, and it was considered the darkest chapter in human history. In their desperation, people turned to Brahma, the creator, to save them from their harsh existence. In response, Brahma provided them with a king to maintain law and order and to punish the wicked. Thus, Manu suggests that the state was not a result of gradual evolution but was a sudden creation.

Manu further explains that the need for the state did not arise from economic necessities but from the inherent evil tendencies and uncontrollable habits of mankind.

Manu on Kingship

Manu advocated for the divine origin of kingship, asserting that it was God who created the king to protect the people. It was this divine authority that compelled people to obey the king. Although the king appeared in human form, he was believed to possess the qualities of a god.

Manu further emphasized that the king embodied the qualities and powers of the eight guardian deities of the earth, including Indra, Vayu, Yama, Ravi, Agni, and Chandra. Therefore, the king was seen as a divine creation meant to promote social harmony, peace, and welfare.

Duties and Functions of King

A good kingdom, according to Manu, is one where many saintly people reside, the population is healthy, and fruits and vegetables grow abundantly. The people are polite, fearless, and enjoy prosperous harvests and easy commerce.

The primary duty of the king is to protect the good and punish the wicked. There is no place for offenders like smugglers, profiteers, or black marketeers in such a kingdom. This concept emphasizes that the community is deeply connected to a cosmic order.

The supreme duty of the king is to protect the weak, particularly orphans, widows, and the elderly.

Manu outlines five key functions of the king:

Dandaneeti (the administration of justice)
Taxation
Justice and the Judicial System
Inter-State Relations
Morality and Religion

One of the crucial roles of the king, according to Manu, is chastisement. The king is expected to protect his subjects, and in return, he is entitled to food grains, a portion of merchandise, and a suitable bride. He must ensure that one caste does not interfere with another and work to curb corruption.

The king is responsible for regulating the social lives of his subjects, protecting them from aggression, and promoting their safety. He must maintain law and order, keep the kingdom free from robbers, protect private property, reward deserving individuals, control commodity prices, prevent food adulteration, regulate weights and measures, provide security to traders entering the kingdom, and encourage trade and agriculture.

Dandaneeti

Hindu polity placed significant emphasis on Dandaneeti, where “Danda” means punishment and “Neeti” means law. Thus, Dandaneeti refers to the laws governing punishment for crimes and the proper administration of state affairs.

Manu believed that human nature is inherently evil and corrupt, and that Danda was necessary to instill discipline. However, he also cautioned that Danda should be used sparingly and avoided whenever possible. Although Manusmriti consists of twelve chapters, it can be divided into four sections—Acara, Prayascitta, Vyavahara, and Rajadharma—based on the topics discussed. Legal procedures are not addressed until the eighth chapter, where Manu’s expertise in maintaining law and order becomes evident. Here, he emerges as a shrewd advocate capable of resolving common disputes.

The term Danda is comprehensive in its meaning, generally referring to coercion as punishment. Manu argued that a king must be well-versed in two things: Dharma (moral law) and Danda (chastisement). The king’s duty is to uphold Dharma and to punish those who violate its rules. Manu asserted that Danda holds the same divine origin as kingship itself. Before appointing a king, the lord created Danda to ensure the proper and efficient discharge of duties. According to Manu, Danda protects all creatures and upholds the law, governing and safeguarding people through the fear it instills, even when they are unaware. Danda thus maintains social order across all classes and stages of life.

Psychologically, the fear of Danda was a powerful motivator for individuals to fulfill their obligations. Manu applied the doctrine of the king’s universal jurisdiction of Danda over his subjects, regardless of their rank, status, or relationship. He believed that the king’s use of Danda was key to the prosperity or destruction of both individuals and the community.

Manu maintained that Danda keeps people within their societal roles, ensuring that they perform the functions assigned to them according to their caste. It also protects the weak from the arbitrary actions of the strong. Ultimately, Danda aids the king in preserving and promoting Dharma or righteousness.

Taxation

Manu also addressed the issue of state finances, particularly the system of taxation. He believed that taxation should be structured in a way that enhances the nation’s wealth. Manu granted the king the authority to collect taxes in exchange for providing protection to the people, thereby linking taxation to the wage theory. He made it clear that taxes should be collected from both land and cattle.

Manu specified that the tax on land should be no less than 25%, while the tax on cattle should be no less than 20%. However, he advised the king to levy taxes based on the capacity of the subjects and their occupations. According to Manu, the king is entitled to one-fiftieth of gold, one-sixth of crops, and one-twelfth of commerce.

He also warned that overburdening subjects with excessive taxes would lead to widespread frustration and discontent, potentially resulting in national calamities. Manu emphasized that all tax revenue should be used for welfare activities, such as supporting agriculture, and promoting trade and industry.

Justice and Judicial System

Manu was among the earliest ancient political thinkers in India to emphasize the importance of fair justice and proper judicial administration. He asserted that a king cannot effectively rule without justice, and he believed that a good ruler should always ensure that justice is swift and affordable for those in need.

Manu’s ideas on social organization were focused on establishing order and justice. He emphasized that justice, being of great significance, should be administered by judges selected based on their character and experience. Decisions should be rooted in equity while also considering the diverse customs and social practices prevalent in society.

Manu believed that the king should pay close attention to the entire judicial system. However, he did not advocate for equal treatment of all castes, showing a strong preference for Brahmanas. He linked justice to dharma and argued that it should be administered based on righteousness.

Manu favored the reformatory theory of punishment over retaliatory measures. He expected the king to be well-versed in the Dharma Shastras and other relevant literature to pronounce justice in accordance with established customs and practices. Manu also stated that any wrong judgment should be reversed. Additionally, he suggested the use of corporal punishment and fines as part of the judicial system.

Jury System

During Manu’s period, a form of the jury system existed, and Manu recommended that in the king’s absence, the power of judicial administration should be entrusted to Brahmins. Interestingly, the juries in the court of a Brahmin judge were also composed of Brahmins. Manu described a court consisting of three Brahmins well-versed in the Vedas and a learned judge appointed by the king, referring to it as the “court of four-faced Brahman.” While this system differed from the modern jury system in European countries, it had similarities. In ancient India, the three or five members of the judicial assembly acted as both jurors and judges, but the final decision rested with the Chief Justice. The Chief Justice decided cases with the assistance of learned Brahmins and in accordance with the law. The Adhyaksa (Chief Justice) handled cases with the help of three members of the judicial assembly. Both the Chief Justice and the puisne judges were selected for their eminent character and deep learning, and while they were usually Brahmins, occasionally judges from other castes were chosen.

Manu also outlined the qualifications for a king who could serve as a judicial administrator. Such a king needed to be truthful, act with due consideration, possess wisdom, and understand the respective values of virtue, pleasure, and wealth. A king who administered punishment justly would prosper in these three areas, but one who was cunning, partial, and deceitful would bring about his own downfall, even through unjust punishment. Manu emphasized that judicial administration should not be entrusted to a feeble-minded king, as such a ruler could destroy the entire country. The King’s Court had two types of jurisdiction: original and appellate. As an original court, it tried all cases arising within the capital’s boundaries. As an appellate court, it served as the highest court of appeal for cases initially tried by inferior courts. The King’s Court also exercised general supervision over the administration of justice throughout the country.

Following the King’s Court in importance were the principal courts located in major centers and larger towns, which served as district or sub-district headquarters. The constitution of these courts was similar to that of the King’s Court. Royal officers, assisted by persons knowledgeable in the law, administered justice in these courts. They were presided over by Adhyakshas appointed by the central government. These courts had original jurisdiction over all cases arising within the town boundaries and also handled more significant civil and criminal cases from neighboring villages. Additionally, they held a form of appellate jurisdiction over the decisions of lower courts within their respective districts or sub-districts.

Inter-State Relations

Manu addressed the important issue of inter-state relations, which he believed should be guided by both political expediency and established righteousness. He supported the idea of war under two specific conditions: when there is a threat to one’s kingdom and when there is an opportunity to expand territory.

According to Manu, the king is like a gardener who removes weeds to protect the plants, symbolizing his primary duty to safeguard the kingdom and its people while eliminating enemies. To achieve this, Manu recommended certain strategies, known as Chaturopaya, which include conciliation, sowing dissension, bribery, and the use of force. Manu favored the use of conciliation and force, with the latter being considered only as a last resort.

Manu also introduced the Mandala theory, which conceptualizes a network of kings—friendly, hostile, and neutral—where the goal is to increase the number of friendly states through six types of foreign policies (gunas). These policies include Sandhi (peace), Vigraha (war), Yana (attacking the enemy), Asana (neutrality), Samsraya (seeking protection from a more powerful king), and Dvaidhabhava (dual policy). The Dharamshastra advocates for Dharma Yuddha, a war fought to uphold the values of dharma (righteousness).

Morality and Religion

Ancient Indian political thought placed significant importance on the religious foundation of human existence and the acceptance of traditional morality. Manu strongly rejected cruelty and deceit, emphasizing the importance of the rule of law and a strict code of conduct for the Kshatriyas. However, he did allow exceptions to this code when it served the interests of the king.

Organization of state into villages, district and provinces

Manu’s principle of decentralization asserts that a larger unit should only address a problem when a smaller unit is unable to resolve it. He believed that a vast and diverse country could only be effectively governed by organizing it into smaller, more manageable units.

Manu and Kautilya

Political thought in ancient India predates the Manusmriti and Arthashastra, but the absence of written records makes it difficult to trace the political and administrative ideas of pre-Manu thinkers. Manu is thus seen as a key figure in preserving and shaping ancient thought prior to his time. While Manu embraced the sacred nature of the law, he emphasized the importance of the Trayi (the three Vedas) in providing mental steadiness, whereas Kautilya placed greater emphasis on Anvikshaki (philosophy).

Both Manu and Kautilya addressed the concept of the state, but their views on its nature differed. Manu focused on issues such as the duties of the Varnas, the purity of family life, and the sanctity of social institutions as outlined in the Dharmashastra. In contrast, Kautilya took a more pragmatic approach, discussing topics such as warfare, administration, internal and external threats to the state, and espionage.

The Manusmriti highlights the sacred nature of laws governing the four castes and the duties of the king, rooted in ancient customs. Kautilya did not reject the foundations of the Dharmashastras but introduced new political ideas and reinterpreted some existing ones. He acknowledged the importance of both sacred and state laws but placed greater emphasis on the latter.

Both thinkers provided comprehensive political and administrative insights. They shared a belief in the Vedas and the inherent goodness of human nature, but they also recognized the need to control the common man and ensure adherence to truth through the fear of punishment. To maintain peace and order, both advocated for Dandaniti, the policy of punishment.

Manu as the Father of Indian polity

Manu is regarded as the father of Indian polity for several key reasons:

Influence of Hindu Traditions: Manu’s Manusmriti was deeply influenced by Hindu traditions and philosophy, reflecting the core values of ancient Indian society.
Depiction of Ancient Society: In his smriti, he provided a detailed picture of the socio-economic, cultural, and religious environment of ancient India.
Focus on Kingship: Manu emphasized the institution of kingship as a central aspect of governance.
Chaturvarna System: Based on Hindu traditions, he presented a rigid social structure, the chaturvarna system, consisting of Brahmins, Kshatriyas, Vaishyas, and Shudras. The hierarchical relationships among these castes formed the core of his political philosophy.
Ethical Autonomy: Manu was deeply concerned with protecting the ethical autonomy of society, ensuring that religious and moral principles guided social order.
Integration of Politics with Religion: He did not treat politics as a distinct concept but discussed it in the broader context of religion and morality, emphasizing its role in achieving social and ethical goals.
Government and Functions: Although Manu did not present a formal theory of the state, he provided an account of government structure and its functions.
Division of Power: Manu stressed the division of power and the clear separation of functions within the governance system.
Judicial Administration: The Manusmriti also covers judicial administration, detailing legal procedures, evidence, and different types of courts.

Conclusion

Manu was a highly influential figure of his time, and his Manava Dharma-shastra (Laws of Manu), commonly known as the Manusmriti, is the most renowned of the ancient legal texts. It presents the dharma as revealed by Brahma to Manu, the first man, and transmitted through Bhrigu, one of the ten great sages. To ensure widespread acceptance, all Dharma-shastras, including the Manusmriti, claim divine origin. The Manusmriti describes the creation of the world by Brahma, the birth of Manu, the sources of dharma, and the key rites for the four stages of life. These stages mark the progression towards renunciation, requiring individuals to pass through the earlier stages.

The ancient people of India believed that the order and regularity of the world reflected God’s will, where divine forces triumphed over demonic ones. As a result, scholars and sages in ancient India formulated laws to regulate individual behavior and maintain the order of Hindu society. These laws are found in the 18 Dharmashastras, with the Manusmriti being the most significant and widely referenced. Unlike the Vedas, which are considered divinely inspired, the Dharmashastras are categorized as smritis—intellectual or scholarly works derived from observation, experience, analysis, and the study of the Vedas. While they were created with the well-being of humanity and society in mind, these texts are not without human flaws and exhibit caste and racial biases, making them susceptible to modern criticism.

The Manusmriti focuses on practical aspects of life and serves as a guide for human conduct. After Manu, other notable Dharma-shastras were written by figures like Yajnavalkya, Vishnu, Narada, Brihaspati, Katyayana, and others. These later Dharma-shastras evolved into more specialized legal texts, but the Manusmriti remains regarded as superior to its successors.

References

Wendy Doniger and Brian K. Smith; The Laws of Manu, 1991, Penguin Challics,
VR Mehta; foundations of Indian Political thought : An Interpretation (2008) Manohar Publication
Kumud Ranjan Singh; Civil Services for mains-Pol. Sci. – Arihant Publications Manu Smriti : I to VII
Dr. SR Myneni, Political Science Reprint :2015
U.N. Ghosal; A history of Plotical Thought (oxford,1959)