“Women Without Religion” Posts Absurd Anti-Hindu Meme

The Facebook page Women Without Religion has published an absurd and totally inaccurate set of anti-Hindu propaganda memes using quotes from, of course, the Manusmriti.  Their latest meme states: “Hindu. But a woman who from a desire to have offspring violates her duty towards her (deceased) husband, brings on herself disgrace in this world. Manusmriti 5.161″. (See the rest of their memes below). The totally fallacious, disingenuously illogical and downright vicious claim is that this is some sort of “Hindu Law” or doctrine and that “Hinduism” is to blame for such writings. Women WithoutReligion has proven they are really Women Without Academic Integrity, because if they had even done a summary investigation into the Manusmrit they would have learned that it as authoritative to Hinduism as any American opinion piece is to the Constitution of theUnited States.

First it must be addressed that English translations of the Manu Smrit were produced by European colonialists and thus are not always reliable, however, even if these were precise translations their use in attacks on Hinduism are still invalid as this article will explain. 

One of the favorite tactics of Anti-Hindus used to defame Hinduism is to provide casteist, sexist, murderous and otherwise unjust quotes from a book called the Manusmiriti or “The Laws of Manu”.  By referring to such materials in their attempts to destroy the eternal way, these Anti-Hindus do nothing more than display their ignorance and proclivity to project their own dogmatic low-mindedness onto to others. While any personreading the Manusmiriti has just cause to find many of its elements repugnant, to suggest this book is a hallmark or defining property of Hinduism is unlearned at best, but may likely be a malicious deflection from the British Colonialists who are truly responsible for installing the Manusmuriti as law.

Hinduism Has No Central Dogma 

Because Hinduism has strong indigenous pre-civilization roots, its history is as old as mankind, yet even its civilizational history spans back more than 5,000 years, making Hinduism the oldest religion on earth:

“Although the name Hinduism is relatively new, having been coined by British writers in the first decades of the 19th century, it refers to a rich cumulative tradition of texts and practices, some of which date to the 2nd millennium bce or possibly earlier. If the Indus valley civilization (3rd–2nd millennium bce) was the earliest source of these traditions, as some scholars hold, then Hinduism is the oldest living religion on Earth.” – Hinduism, Encyclopedia Britannica

 Hinduism has no founder and no centralized text.  Though the Vedas are widely accepted by many Hindus sects as preeminent (Āstika Schools) there are many schools of Hinduism which do not hold the Vedas in this regard (Nāstika Schools) and Vedas themselves are not “one book” but compilations of “hymns” from differentschools of thought. After the Vedas come several books and scriptures which are increasingly more and more sectarian, with some scriptures being more popular than others.  Among the most popular Non-Vedic scriptures are the epics like the Ramayana and the Mahabharata.  After these there are endless lesser legends and prophecies found in the thousands of Puranas.  Though certain sectarian literature may rise and fall in importance in the Hindu community, no one book or guru or leader can ever be said to define the expanse of our ever evolving knowledge

The Manusmriti Is Not Authoritative 

Among Hinduism’s endless texts spanning back thousands of years, the Manusmiriti only appeared about 100 years BCE:

“It is attributed to the legendary first man and lawgiver, Manu. In its present form, it dates from the 1st century bce.” – Manu-smriti, Encyclopedia Britannica 

It was one of the first books translated into English by the British empire in 1794 by Sir William Jones.  Because of their total lack of understanding of Hindu pluralism, their faulty grasp on the Sanskrit language, and because the book most resembled their Abrahamic legal framework, the colonists mistook the Manusmiriti as some centralized, widely accepted, and ancient text of Hindu Law rather than the relatively recent and sectarian opinion piece of literature that it really is. This led the British colonizers to create “Hindu Law” for the governance of India, later using the Manusmirite as a basis. In 1772, the British Governor-General of India Warren Hastings declared the plan for the Administration of Justice whereby the Hindu codes of Dharma (Dharmaśāstra) which later included the Manusmiriti were Judeo-Christianized and turned into a universal legal system, something they never were until the British made them so. Thus, the Hindus of India were oppressed under British rule using British colonialist invented “Hindu Law” extracted from recently imagined sectarian literature, including the Manusmiriti:

“The British colonial administration in India affected the system of Hindu law by applying the traditional rules in a hard-and-fast way and by introducing the concept of precedent.” – Dharma-Shastra, Encyclopedia Britannica 

For reviews of the British misappropriations of Dharmaśāstra, see: Richard W. Lariviere, “Justices and Paṇḍitas: Some Ironies in Contemporary Readings of the Hindu Legal Past,” in Journal of Asian Studies 48 (1989), pp. 757–769, and Ludo Rocher, “Law Books in an Oral Culture: The Indian Dharmaśāstras,” Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society 137 (1993), pp. 254–267.

Conclusion 

Those who use quotes from the Manusmiriti in an attempt try to shame and silence Hindus may not know of this history, or they may know very well and have nothing more than a Abrahamic, Maxist or Colonialist agenda in mind.  Those who propagate such misguided or malicious information should be firmly reminded that the Manusmiriti is nothing more than a relatively modern opinion piece within Hindu literature and that it was the British colonialists who transformed it into a universal legal framework, not Hindus.  As Hindus, we are free to choose our sectarian literature of choice, and the vast majority of Hindus do not subscribe to the casteist, sexist, murderous and otherwise unjust quotes from the Manusmiriti.

What To Say To Anti-Hindus Who Use The Manusmiriti (Laws of Manu) 

1. Hinduism is not based on any one book(s) or leader(s)
2. “Laws Of Manu” were sectarian/regional opinions, not a legal system
3. Manusmiriti appeared around 100 BCE, Hinduism extends back to prehistory
4. English versions were translated by European colonialists, not Hindus.
5. The British used the Manusmiriti to create “Hindu Law”, not Hindus.
6. “Hindu Law” never existed until the British created it under colonial rule
7. With freedom of belief, most Hindus do not approve of offensive Manusmiriti quotes

 

More Anti-Hindu Memes Using the Manusmriti, the above applies 

Source: Justice For Hindus