• Military Menu                       

• Introduction
• Systems
• Facilities
• Agencies
• Industry
• Operations
• Countries
• Hot Documents
• News
• Reports
• Policy
• Budget
• Congress
• Links

• WMD
• Intelligence
• Homeland Security
• Space

Nomistic Brahmanism

The fourth phase of Brahmanism, like the third, probably had its origin in the need of organized resistance to the growth of rationalistic thought and liberal opinions. It may be called Nomistic Brahmanism, because it represents that period in Indian religious history when the Brahmans composed codes of law (smriti-sastra, dharnta-sdstra) and laid down precise rules for the constitution of the social fabric, for the due co-ordination of its different orders, and for the regulation of every-day domestic life.

Indeed, in proportion to the laxity and liberty allowed by Brahmanism in regard to all forms of religious and philosophical thought, is the unbending rigidity of the rules and ordinances by which every act of a man's social and domestic life is fettered and controlled. These rules are contained in three principal codes — (i) the code of Manu; (2) that of Yajnavalkya; (3) that of Parasara. The first is held to be the most sacred of the three, and is certainly one of the most remarkable literary works that the world has ever produced. It was originally a mere local code, embodying rules and precepts — perhaps by different authors, some of whom may have lived in the fifth century BC, or even earlier. It was current among a particular tribe of Brahmans called Manavas, who probably occupied part of the North-western region between the rivers Sarasvati and Drishadvati. The name of the real author of this remarkable work (the present form of which is now held to be less ancient than was once supposed) is concealed under the title Manu1. The code of Yajnavalkya is founded on that of Manu, but introduces many additional rules, some of which are probably as late as the first or second century of our era. It is always associated with its commentary, the Mitakshara. The code of Parasara is a still more modern work. It enacts special laws adapted to the fourth or most depraved age of the world (called Kali). The three codes together constitute a kind of bible of Nomistic Brahmanism, much in the same way as the Brahmanas of the three Vedas are the exponent of Ritualistic Brahmanism. But the Brahmanas are concerned with public Vedic ritual and sacrifice (sruti-karman), the law-books with domestic ceremonies (smriti'karinati).

In short, the three chief codes are mirrors of Indian domestic manners, little affected as these have been by the lapse of more than two thousand years. They illustrate very strikingly the close intertwining of law, politics, and social life with religion and religious ordinances. 'The root of all law,' says Manu, 'is the Veda and the traditions of those who know the Veda.' Accordingly we find that in Manu's code the rules of judicature and of caste are mixed up with the dogmas of religion and philosophy and with high religious and moral precepts—many of them worthy of Christianity—while the punishment assigned to every kind of offence is carried beyond the grave into future states of earthly existence, the doctrine of transmigration of souls through celestial and terrestrial bodies from gods to stones being implied throughout.

The superiority of the Brahmans is the hinge on which the whole social organization turns. They form the great central body around which all other classes and orders of beings revolve like satellites. Not only are they invested with divine dignity, but they are bound together by the most stringent rules, while the other castes are separated from them and from each other by insurmountable barriers. The doctrine of Manu was that the deity created distinct kinds of men, as he created varieties of animals and plants; and that Brahmans, soldiers (Kshatriyas), agriculturists (Vaisyas), and servants (Sudras) were born and must remain from birth to death as distinct from each other as elephants, lions, oxen, and dogs, wheat, barley, rice, and beans. A Brahman, however, could have four wives, and marry a woman belonging to any of the three lower castes. Inter-marriage could also take place between mem bers of all the four classes, or, again, between the castes which resulted from such intercourse. Hence arose an almost endless number of mixed castes, every one of which is theoretically restricted to its own occupation and bound by its own rules.

So long, then, as a man holds to the rules laid down by the ancient law-givers and assents to the great Vedanta doctrine that the one all-pervading impersonal Spirit Brahma underlies everything in existence, and that the spirit of man is identical with that Spirit, he is at liberty to hold any other religious opinions he likes, and may even assent to the truths of Christianity. Perfection is attained by him alone who is a strict observer of the duties of his caste and accepts the above doctrine. Those Brahmans who are sound in the faith with regard to Brahma, and are obedient to Brahmanical caste-law and tradition (smriti), especially as handed down by the great Vedantist Sankarac'arya, are called Smartas.