Examining Manusmriti: Tracing Women's position

Examining Manusmriti: Tracing Women’s 

position by Himani Mahawar

Today’s Indian society is very complex because of the existence of hierarchical 

social norms based on caste, class and of course gender. And if one wants to 

understand the present conceptions of gender and society, we need to trace its 

genesis in the past.

The aim of our paper is to analyse one of the premier legal text from ancient India, 

from the perspective of understanding women’s position in that period in 

relationship with the contemporary period. This text belongs to the group of texts 

known as Dharmashastras, composed in about 2nd c BCE to 3rd c CE. Manusmriti 

is one of the first Smriti texts, which is clearly prescriptive and normative. The 

original name of this text is Manavdharmashastra, compiled by the school of 

Manu, a Brahmin and deals with the prescribed duties (Dharma) of mankind from 

the priestly point of view. And the title Manusmriti is a later innovation.

This text became crucial in several ways as it was the first text that became 

available to the British and was translated in English by William Jones to frame the 

glimpse of Indian society. On the opinion of gender, we find several different 

understanding of this text. Colonial historian, James Mill, using the statements on 

women from this text, called Indian society as the most barbaric society in the

whole world. On contrary, modern historians gives us a more balanced opinion on 

this text. The relevance of the text has not reduced in the modern era either; 

where B.R. Ambedkar strongly held it responsible for caste system and women 

oppression in India and even gave a call to burn it!

In this context of the greatly varied views about this text, I decided to undertake a

study of Manusmriti to understand the position of women.

In the human creation myth, while explaining the origin of the world, Manusmriti 

mentions that ‘’the Lord divided his own body into two halves- the one half 

became a man, and the other became a woman’’. In our opinion this statement 

is quite radical and progressive as woman is described to be the half of god and 

equal to man. This is in sharp contrast to creation myths found in other cultures; 

like in the Abrahamic cultures, it is said that the first woman, Eve was created from 

just a body part, the rib of a man.

Traditional understanding of women in most of the other societies is that she is 

inferior, and therefore many modern feminist movements have sought to undo 

this. Manusmriti has a high regard for position of women in family, evident from 

an other verse which maintains ‘no difference at all between the goddess of 

good fortune, shriya who lives in house and a woman’. Hence, she is believed 

to be an image of goddess which brings good fortune, and interestingly called as 

‘Striya’. Likewise, “the mother is said to be the physical form of the Earth and 

traditionally regarded as ‘the pure Southern Fire’. Her position in society as a 

‘mother’ is considered even of greater importance than that of guru”. Similarly, the text 

prescribes respectful nature towards women in many verses.

Further the text equally emphasis on treating women well, as the very famous 

verse of Manusmriti says that- “the deities delight in places where women are 

revered, but where women are not revered all rites are fruitless’’. It is 

significant as it tells that no amount of religious rites and sacrifices can undo the 

harm done to the woman. 

An important aspect that came to our notice after reading this text is that 

primarily concerned with Indian societal behavior as whole, the whole text is 

centered to man’s life, and there is not even a chapter individually dealing with 

women’s life. Gender discrimination is strongly evident at some places.To begin 

with, when a girl child is born the celebration rites and rituals are performed 

without Vedic verses to consecrate her body and she is not given the 

initiatory thread which is given to an upper caste male. In this sense, she is 

kept aloof of Vedic learning right from her birth. .

We also didn’t find mention of any Vedic learning prescribed to women. As for 

upper caste men, they have right to Vedic education; but for women, the text 

mentions that- “the ritual of marriage is equal to Vedic learning where 

“serving her husband” is equivalent of ‘living with a guru’ and “household 

chores” are the rites of fire”. It stands in direct contrast to early Vedic and 

Upanishad age that saw women honored as great natural philosopher, renowned 

expounder of the Vedas, though few but still splendid , like the examples of Gargi 

and Maitreyi.

Throughout the text, there is a very strong urge to control female sexuality that is 

depicted in many verses. Woman is said to be unfit for allowing independence. ‘’In 

her childhood, a woman should be under her father’s control, in her youth 

under her husband’s and when her husband is dead, under her son’s. 

Therefore, she should not have independence.’’ The text claims that a man should guard his wife to keep his progeny clean. It clearly shows that the 

control over woman was made to keep the Varna dharma intact.

There are also strong verses found in the text, condemning and discouraging the 

evil practices of bride price and dowry. On bride price it mentions that, “the wise 

father (of the girl) shall not take anything by way of 'fee' from her groom. By 

taking a bride price out of greed, he becomes the seller of his offspring, and 

the sale is equated to prostitution”. Manusmriti also upholds strong critique of 

dowry in the verse, “all those deluded relatives who live off on a woman’s 

property (stridhan), are evil and go to hell’’. Through these verses the text 

shows that women were not considered as a material of sale or purchase and the 

institution of marriage was not based on such evil ‘transactional’ practices which 

we see even today.

In the aspect of property inheritance, Manusmriti interestingly recognizes women’s 

right to parental property under special circumstances. The text declares that “a 

son is just like one’s self, and a daughter is equal to a son. How can someone 

else take the father’s property when she stands for herself! ’’. This is 

noteworthy as in the absence of son, the next male relative is not immediately 

considered, the property can go to the daughter. It is significant in the sense that, 

even in most societies of present day world, women have to suffer to attain right of 

property inheritance.

Further, the rights of unmarried sisters to father’s property are also equally 

acknowledged, so that she would not be dependent on her brothers. The text 

maintains that, “The brothers should individually give their virgin sister 

something from their own portions, a quarter share of each one’s own 

portion. If they did not give this, they would fall”. But, it is also important to 

note that there is no such mention for married daughters of family other than 

“stridhan”. The idea of only unmarried sisters or sonless family’s daughter getting right to 

inheritance is lopsided.

Moreover, the text implies that the property inheritance law for women was 

prescribed to get legal acknowledgement by the administrative authority for the 

firm implementation. Evident from a verse, saying that “a king’s duty is to give 

protection of property to barren women, women without sons or bereft of family, women 

devoted to their husbands, widows, and women in distress. If their in-laws capture their 

property while they are alive, a righteous king should discipline them with the punishment 

laid down for thieves’’.

Regarding the sacred union of marriage, among the several qualities of an ideal 

wife for a twice-born; same class to that of male, right marks and being a virgin 

stood compulsorily. 

The polygamy practice also stood valid within the corpus of Manusmriti. Adding 

further, eight kinds of marriages, has been mentioned in the text varying for all 

four classes, for better and for worse, here on earth and after-death. The most evil 

and lowest kind of marriage is mentioned as ghoul marriage which appears 

more of ‘rape’ as it talks of sexual union with the girl who is asleep, drunk or 

out of her mind. Despite of it, this disgusting union with unconscious girl is 

called; Marriage which supposedly should be a sacred one. Various 

commentaries also mentioned that probably the ghoul marriage is made after the 

forced sexual union. 

Manusmriti becomes more regressive when it talks about laws of violating class 

norms through ‘anulom’ and ‘pratilom’. This is highlighted in the verse where the 

law prescribes very rigorous punishments to anyone of the three varnas if they 

have sexual union with any Brahmin woman. Hence, more emphasis was made on 

guarding upper caste females, especially Brahmin females; instead of the general 

women. 

The desire for a male child is clearly depicted in the various prescribed rituals in 

Manusmriti, that clearly resonates with the contemporary times. Regarding the 

sexual union with wife, the text went on to the extent of mentioning the concept of 

good and bad nights, claiming that-‘On the even nights, sons are conceived and 

on the uneven nights, daughters..’ The text of Mansumriti went on describing 

the daughter from a family with no male children to be avoided by twiceborn men 

for marriage.

To further rigidify the social norm the text creates duties (stridharma) of a 

virtuous wife (pativratanari), that ‘’she should not be unfaithful to her husband 

and constantly serve her husband like a god, always obey him, even he 

behaves badly, freely indulges his lust, and devoid of any good qualities.’’

Another interesting point that we noticed is that the text affirms levirate marriage 

or niyoga but only in extreme cases when the man is unable to produce son. 

Manusmriti clearly sides with those who argue that- ‘a son belongs to the 

husband of the mother, just as the crop belongs not to the owner of the seed 

but to the owner of the field’; however, it dislikes obtaining children through surrogate fathers. Manusmriti calls it as unofficial adultery and it strongly

discourages this practice but doesn’t condemn it!

The loyalty of wife is an important tenet. Manusmriti states - “The food of women 

who runs after men is semen.” A widow woman of either class is neither allowed to 

remarry nor are they sanctioned by Vedas to be used to have a child. Manusmriti 

mentions that “aspiring to follow patnidharma of being devoted to a single 

husband, she should remain patient, controlled, and celibate until her 

death.’’ Even a non-widow woman cannot leave her husband according to her will. 

While, on the contrary, men whose wife is unable to produce male-heir, completely 

barren or has died, may marry again and kindle the fires again for the second part of his 

life!

The notion of purity and pollution is in the core of the Brahmanical tradition 

which is not only depicted in class and caste norms but also associated with 

women. Menstruating women has been discussed as ‘’an agent of pollution at meal 

on the ceremony of dead, or any pious place, among untouchables, dogs, 

cock, and even a pig”. It reminds me of Tulsidas doha which says: “dhol, gawar, 

shudra, pashu or nari, ye sab tadan ke adhikari.”. The husband should neither even lie 

down in the same bed with menstruating woman nor should converse with her. 

Also, the widows herself and the son born to her after the death of her husband are 

considered as polluting agents, as the text claims. Now this is something that we can 

see in today’s life also, considering the recent example of Sabrimala temple 

controversy. Not even Brahmins but also, the own family members still consider a 

menstruating woman as polluting agent in many communities of India.

The composer of this text is prescribing things that women should avoid such as 

drinking, being separated from their husbands, wandering alone, or sleeping in 

other’s house. Manusmriti also prescribe certain similar regulations to man also, 

like- “No one should sit in deserted place with his mother, sister or daughter; 

for the strong cluster of the sensory powers drags away even a learned man”.

Infact, the text even forbids the interaction to the extent of saying that- Women 

in general are seen as seductress, and from whom the men should maintain 

limited interaction. This negative projection of women is can be seen as an 

attempt of the composer to exempt man and woman to commit adultery because 

this would lead to mixing of Varna order.

For sexual assault, Manusmriti recognizes equally harsh and insulting

punishments and penances to both the genders.. Even if a man carries any conversation to other’s wife in a private place, he is guilty of adultery according to

the law of Manu. 

‘’In the case of adultery, Manusmriti maintains that, person merits the death 

penalty; and women of all four classes are to be guarded always with the 

utmost care.’’ But here exception is provided for a Brahmin, who commits the same 

thing, the law says that he should not be killed or harmed but should be out 

casted. It implies that the rigid social order superseded the heinous crime of sexual 

misconduct.

Conclusion

In our conclusion I have attempted to summarize the factors which led to the 

creation of surpassing laws for women in this period, with some of these clearly 

resonating in today’s times too.

Firstly, the reproductive power of a woman is constantly described in the text and 

the uncontrolled sexuality was perceived as posing a threat to Varna order. The 

text clearly mentions that these norms were laid down to keep one’s progeny clean 

and to keep Varna system pristine and inviolate.

Secondly, we found in our study that this period of 2nd c BCE onwards witnesses 

emergence of private property notion that was largely absent in Vedic age. As 

the notion of private property and agriculture came up the society, rigid attempts 

were made to control female sexuality in order to prevent pollution of caste,

because the property would be inherited by the blood kins only.

Therefore, the texts like Manusmriti were complied to preach the norms of an 

ideal life, that are equally oppressive for both genders at some places. Moreover, 

the text doesn’t promote extreme backwardness for women, like its mild criticism 

of dowry, injunction against bride price and stance over property inheritance is 

very applauding, and discourages these social evils.

But the other norms and laws prescribed for woman in Manusmriti are indeed 

very patriarchal and regressive and in our understanding this changing scenario is 

the consequence of maintaining Brahmanical hegemony over society. Not only 

Manusmriti but other contemporary texts like Ramayana and Mahabharata and 

several over jataka stories project ideal images of women like Sita, Savitri and 

several others to legitimize their norms of an ideal wife and daughter through the 

rhetorical devices of Stridharma and Pativratadharma.

It can be said that the text sounds regressive, because maybe we are judging the 

text in the vague of 21st century values, but even with the older age of Vedas and 

Buddhist texts, the text is too backward; consequently women and lower caste

prominently becoming the victims. And, these are the ethos from which the 

present Indian society should and must deviate!

THANKYOU!