Sign in with Facebook
From Fire to Light Quotes
From Fire to Light: Rereading the Manusmriti
by
Arvind Sharma1 rating, 4.00 average rating, 1 review
Open Preview
From Fire to Light Quotes
Showing 1-6 of 6
“It is clear, therefore, that there is enough evidence of historical memory in India to render the line of investigation adopted here worth pursuing. It is true that Hindu India does not possess a sustained tradition of historiography of the kind we find in other ancient cultures such as Greece, Rome and China. Sometimes cultures exhibit such civilizational gaps. For instance, China has a long history, a history of warfare and chivalry as well, and of course a literary tradition right from Confucius onwards, but it did not produce an epic of the kind we find in Greece, Rome and India.
One reason behind this histographic gap in India could be that historical events in ancient India were recorded on stone rather than paper. This renders the facts narrated above particularly signficant, as they are cut in stone. India has more than 90,000 inscriptions, most of which are still unread.”
― From Fire to Light: Rereading the Manusmriti
One reason behind this histographic gap in India could be that historical events in ancient India were recorded on stone rather than paper. This renders the facts narrated above particularly signficant, as they are cut in stone. India has more than 90,000 inscriptions, most of which are still unread.”
― From Fire to Light: Rereading the Manusmriti
“Perhaps the most immediately impressive of all Guptan sculptures is the Great Boar, carved in relief at the entrance of a cave at Udayagiri near Bhīlsā. The body of the god Viṣṇu, who became a mighty boar to rescue the earth from the cosmic ocean, conveys the impression of a great primeval power working for good against the forces of chaos and destruction, and bears a message of hope, strength and assurance. The greatness of the god in comparison with his creation is brought out by the tiny female figure of the personified earth, clinging to his tusk. The deep feeling, which inspired the carving in this figure, makes it perhaps the only theriomorphic image in the world’s art, which conveys a truly religious message to modern man.45
There is virtually no historical element in Basham’s appreciation of this piece. This emerges in the interpretation by H.C. Raychaudhuri, who writes:
According to sacred legends Viṣṇu in the shape of a Boar had rescued the earth in the aeon of universal destruction. It is significant that the worship of the Boar Incarnation became widely popular in the Gupta-Chalukya period. The poet Viśākhadatta actually identifies the man in whose arms the earth found refuge when harassed by the Mlechchhas, who ‘shook the yoke of servitude from the neck’ of his country, with the Varāhītanu (Boar form) of the Self-Existent Being. Powerful emperors both in the north and south recalled the feats of the Great Boar, and the mightiest ruler of a dynasty that kept the Arabs at bay for centuries actually took the title of Ādivarāha or the Primeval Boar. The Boar Incarnation then symbolized the successful struggle of Indians against the devastating floods issuing from the regions outside their borders that threatened to overwhelm their country and civilization in a common ruin.46
The reference to the poet Viśākhadatta in the passage just cited is an allusion to the concluding verse of Viśākhadatta’s drama Mudrārākṣasa which, while dealing with events of the time of Candragupta”
― From Fire to Light: Rereading the Manusmriti
There is virtually no historical element in Basham’s appreciation of this piece. This emerges in the interpretation by H.C. Raychaudhuri, who writes:
According to sacred legends Viṣṇu in the shape of a Boar had rescued the earth in the aeon of universal destruction. It is significant that the worship of the Boar Incarnation became widely popular in the Gupta-Chalukya period. The poet Viśākhadatta actually identifies the man in whose arms the earth found refuge when harassed by the Mlechchhas, who ‘shook the yoke of servitude from the neck’ of his country, with the Varāhītanu (Boar form) of the Self-Existent Being. Powerful emperors both in the north and south recalled the feats of the Great Boar, and the mightiest ruler of a dynasty that kept the Arabs at bay for centuries actually took the title of Ādivarāha or the Primeval Boar. The Boar Incarnation then symbolized the successful struggle of Indians against the devastating floods issuing from the regions outside their borders that threatened to overwhelm their country and civilization in a common ruin.46
The reference to the poet Viśākhadatta in the passage just cited is an allusion to the concluding verse of Viśākhadatta’s drama Mudrārākṣasa which, while dealing with events of the time of Candragupta”
― From Fire to Light: Rereading the Manusmriti
“A hint of this approach is offered by the historian K.M. Panikkar when he writes:
The service which a small priestly class rendered to a whole people at the time of the destruction of their political power is paralleled only by the action of the Jewish rabbis when the Temple was destroyed and Jews dispersed by the Romans. At the time when the Jewish people sank into despair, a group of learned men under Johanan ben Zakkai established the great academy at Jabneh in the heart of Roman Palestine itself and guarded zealously the doctrine of Judaism. It sent its messages to the Jewish people dispersed all over the world and thus saved Judaism for the future. That is what the Brahmins did in the 13th and the 14th centuries in the Gangetic Valley.43
Panikkar is referring here to the second crisis created by the loss of political power that the Hindu community had to face under Muslim rule, but he drops a hint which might prove helpful for us as we investigate the first crisis, to which the Manusmṛti constituted a response.
It so happens that the Jewish community also faced a crisis caused by the loss of political power in the first century, when the Romans destroyed its Temple in Jerusalem. Panikkar, in the passage cited earlier, refers to this incident and as to how the community was saved at this moment by the creation of Rabbinic Judaism, which was centred not on worship in the Temple, but in following Jewish Law as collected in the Mishnah, a compendium of oral law which was compiled through the efforts of Rabbi Yohanan Ben Zakkai. The fact that the Manusmṛti was similarly compiled around the same time provides an interesting parallel. This was especially so as its goal was also to save a community which had lost political power, by placing its focus on what we might call ‘social power’ as a counterblast to it—a society so”
― From Fire to Light: Rereading the Manusmriti
The service which a small priestly class rendered to a whole people at the time of the destruction of their political power is paralleled only by the action of the Jewish rabbis when the Temple was destroyed and Jews dispersed by the Romans. At the time when the Jewish people sank into despair, a group of learned men under Johanan ben Zakkai established the great academy at Jabneh in the heart of Roman Palestine itself and guarded zealously the doctrine of Judaism. It sent its messages to the Jewish people dispersed all over the world and thus saved Judaism for the future. That is what the Brahmins did in the 13th and the 14th centuries in the Gangetic Valley.43
Panikkar is referring here to the second crisis created by the loss of political power that the Hindu community had to face under Muslim rule, but he drops a hint which might prove helpful for us as we investigate the first crisis, to which the Manusmṛti constituted a response.
It so happens that the Jewish community also faced a crisis caused by the loss of political power in the first century, when the Romans destroyed its Temple in Jerusalem. Panikkar, in the passage cited earlier, refers to this incident and as to how the community was saved at this moment by the creation of Rabbinic Judaism, which was centred not on worship in the Temple, but in following Jewish Law as collected in the Mishnah, a compendium of oral law which was compiled through the efforts of Rabbi Yohanan Ben Zakkai. The fact that the Manusmṛti was similarly compiled around the same time provides an interesting parallel. This was especially so as its goal was also to save a community which had lost political power, by placing its focus on what we might call ‘social power’ as a counterblast to it—a society so”
― From Fire to Light: Rereading the Manusmriti
“Evidently the narrator himself, who at one level can be identified with the historical author of the text, heard the text presumably from the seers; or he has been eavesdropping on Bhṛgu’s instruction of the seers. This narrator is the fourth ‘hearer’. There is then the implied fifth ‘hearer’, that is, all those who listen to or read this text, including modern scholars. The last verse of the book, possibly part of an interpolated section, is directed at this audience: ‘When a twice-born recites this Treatise of Manu proclaimed by Bhṛgu, he will always follow the proper conduct and obtain whatever state he desires.34
It may also be worth noting that Manu was not a brāhmaṇa but a kṣatriya, a king. Did this also play a role in the invocation of his authority by the brāhmaṇas?”
― From Fire to Light: Rereading the Manusmriti
It may also be worth noting that Manu was not a brāhmaṇa but a kṣatriya, a king. Did this also play a role in the invocation of his authority by the brāhmaṇas?”
― From Fire to Light: Rereading the Manusmriti
“The Gārgīsaṃhitā section of the Yuga Purāṇa assesses the damage caused by the invasion of Śakas (Scythians) as follows: caturbhāgaṃ tu śastreṇa nāśayiṣyanti prāṇinām/ śakāḥ śeṣaṃ hariṣyanti caturbhāgaṃ svakaṃ puraṃ. Vinaṣṭe śakarājye tu śūnyā pṛthvī bhaviṣyati. In other words, these wars of conquest reduced the population of north India by ‘one half, 25 per cent being killed and 25 per cent being enslaved and carried away’.27 The Yuga Purāṇa further informs us that during this period even women took to ploughing, presumably as a result of the decimation.28 Indian opinion at the time seemed to blame Aśoka’s pacifism for this disaster, for the same Gārgīsaṃhitā declares: ‘the fool established the so-called conquest of dharma’ (sthāpayiṣyati mohātmā vijayaṃ nāma dhārmikam),29 though it does not refer to Aśoka by name.
Even more telling is the fact that his favourite title ‘beloved of the gods’ (devānāmpiya) became a synonym for a ‘fool’ in classical Sanskrit.30
From this point of view, the fact that the famous praśasti or panegyric of Samudragupta by the Jaina Hariṣeṇa is inscribed on an Aśokan pillar is of more than mere archaeological interest. It may possess a historical dimension, as if the Hindu reaction had come full circle. An Indian empire had now once again emerged, after an earlier one had been virtually destroyed by the policies of Aśoka. It was now carving an account of its martial exploits on Aśoka’s pillar as if to say that is what emperors do, rather than converting arsenals into monasteries. Rama Shanker Tripathi notes that:
[W]ith his ideal of war and aggrandisement, Samudragupta was the very antithesis of Aśoka, who stood for peace and piety. The former’s achievements formed the subject of an elaborate panegyric by the court poet Hariṣeṇa, and, strangely enough, Samudragupta chose to leave a permanent record of sanguinary conquests by the side of the ethical exhortations of Aśoka on one of his pillars, now inside the fort of Allahabad.31”
― From Fire to Light: Rereading the Manusmriti
Even more telling is the fact that his favourite title ‘beloved of the gods’ (devānāmpiya) became a synonym for a ‘fool’ in classical Sanskrit.30
From this point of view, the fact that the famous praśasti or panegyric of Samudragupta by the Jaina Hariṣeṇa is inscribed on an Aśokan pillar is of more than mere archaeological interest. It may possess a historical dimension, as if the Hindu reaction had come full circle. An Indian empire had now once again emerged, after an earlier one had been virtually destroyed by the policies of Aśoka. It was now carving an account of its martial exploits on Aśoka’s pillar as if to say that is what emperors do, rather than converting arsenals into monasteries. Rama Shanker Tripathi notes that:
[W]ith his ideal of war and aggrandisement, Samudragupta was the very antithesis of Aśoka, who stood for peace and piety. The former’s achievements formed the subject of an elaborate panegyric by the court poet Hariṣeṇa, and, strangely enough, Samudragupta chose to leave a permanent record of sanguinary conquests by the side of the ethical exhortations of Aśoka on one of his pillars, now inside the fort of Allahabad.31”
― From Fire to Light: Rereading the Manusmriti
“The statesman who turned civil administrators into religious propagandists, abolished hunting and jousts of arms, entrusted the fierce tribesmen on the North-West Frontier and in the wilds of the Deccan to the tender care of ‘superintendents of piety’ and did not rest till the sound of the kettle-drum was completely hushed and the only sound that was heard was that of moral teaching, certainly pursued a policy at which Chandragupta Maurya would have looked askance. Dark clouds were looming in the north-western horizon. India needed men of the calibre of Puru and Chandragupta to ensure her protection against the Yavana menace. She got a dreamer. Magadha after the Kaliṅga War frittered away her conquering energy in attempting a religious revolution, as Egypt did under the guidance of Ikhnaton. The result was politically disastrous as will be shown in the next section. Aśoka’s attempt to end war met with the same fate as the similar endeavour of President Wilson.25”
― From Fire to Light: Rereading the Manusmriti
― From Fire to Light: Rereading the Manusmriti
