Hindu Law and Judicature from the Dharma-Sástra of YájnavalkyaYajñavalkya
Religion
Hindu Law and Judicature from the Dharma-Sástra of Yájnavalkya
Yajñavalkya
Hindu law
When the Hindus dwelt in the country of the five rivers, and were
worshippers of the powers and phenomena of material Nature, as of
Indra, Váyu, Agni &c., cast was necessarily unknown, for the notion of
Brahmá was undeveloped.
The divisions or classes among them were conventional; there were
princes, priests, and peasants or cultivators.
But class distinction had not then crystallized into cast, into
immiscible, uncongenial yet co-ordinate elements of a so called
revealed constitution.
So soon however as the idea of Brahmá had attained fixity in the Hindu
mind, and simultaneously with it, cast was developed, as we find it
(but imperfectly) in the earliest records of Hindu philosophy, the
Upanishads.
Thus, cast governs and is antecedent to law, which must bend and adapt
itself to cast, as the overruling, intrinsic, unalterable condition of
Hinduism, of Hindu life. There is one law, one phase of obligation for
the twice-born, another for the Śúdrá. In Manu, cast is not so
fully and severely developed: Manu permits to the Bráhmaṇa four
wives, of whom one may be a Śúdrá, necessarily permitting,
therefore, a transition or quasi-amalgamation between the highest and
the lowest in the scale. Yájnavalkya permits this Bráhmaṇical
communion with the Kshattriya and Vaisyá, but not with the Śúdrá.
Later promulgators of law,[9] restrict the Bráhmaṇa to his own
class.
But although cast, once developed, admitted not of change, juridical
rules, subservient to cast, might and did progress: civil laws and
procedure became more comprehensive and exact, the criminal code more
regulated, lenient, and enlightened. And as universally, (for such is
human,) breaches and occasional disregard of rules have, silently
though surely, worked a change, or caused exceptional accessions to
the rules themselves.
The rule of the Śástras, that kingly power should belong to the
Kshattriya alone, was, even in the halcyon days of Hindu polity,
repeatedly set aside. Chandragupta, a Śúdrá, and his dynasty, held
sway over India from 315 to 173 B. C.: afterwards came Bráhmaṇical
kings, the Kánwas, from 66 to 21 B. C.: whilst the mighty Gupta kings,
from 150 to 280 A. C., were Vaisyás.
The code of Manu presents a disarranged mass of regulations, in so
much that some have supposed the disorder to have been designed.
That conclusion, however, is repelled by the comparatively succinct
arrangement of Yájnavalkya and other sages. It is more consistent to
suppose, that Manu, as originally promulgated, was, from time to time,
added to, with an accidental disregard of method.
_Áchára_, ritual, comprises the distinctive cast-ceremonies, domestic
and social usages, rites of purification, of sacrifice.
_Vyavahára_, may be called the juridical rules, embracing as well
substantive law as the procedure and practice of legal tribunals.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account