The incident of burning the book “Manusmriti” is one of the most significant symbolic events in the history of social movements in India. Although burning any book, regardless of its content, is inherently an act that is rejected and counters values of tolerance and freedom of expression, this act gained strong symbolic meanings when carried out by Dr. B. R. Ambedkar on December 25, 1927, in protest against the social oppression and class discrimination that this book embodies. So, what is the book “Manusmriti,” why was this method chosen for the protest, and what messages did the protesters aim to convey?
The Laws of Manu
“Manusmriti,” also known as the “Laws of Manu,” is one of the ancient Hindu texts that established a strict legal and social framework to organize the lives of the Hindu community. This text is attributed to Sage Manu, who is considered the first lawgiver in India and regarded in Hinduism as “the father of mankind.” Manu is the first to lay down the laws that govern society according to Indian traditions, prominently appearing in ancient texts like the Rigveda and the Mahabharata Purana, but most notably associated with the text “Manusmriti.”
This book defines the duties and rights for each class within Hindu society, starting from the Brahmins (the priestly class) to the Shudras (the lower classes) and the Dalits, who have been described as “the untouchables.” Critics argue that the text justifies and establishes the dominance of the upper classes (Brahmins) over the rest of society, legitimizing the enslavement of lower classes.
A Protest Step
On December 25, 1927, Dr. B. R. Ambedkar, one of the prominent leaders of the Dalits and the architect of the Indian Constitution, burned a copy of “Manusmriti” during a large public assembly. Although book burning is a controversial and unacceptable act under normal circumstances, Ambedkar’s choice of this method carried deep symbolic meanings. This act was a symbolic expression of rejection of the caste system that affects millions of marginalized people in India.
Ambedkar saw this text not merely as a religious or philosophical book, but as an intellectual and legislative foundation for a social system based on discrimination and enslavement, embodying the persecution practiced by the upper classes over the lower classes, and an ideological tool to justify this oppression.
The book presents a stringent vision dividing society into four main classes (Brahmins, Kshatriyas, Vaishyas, and Shudras), known as the “Varna system,” placing the Dalit class or “untouchables” outside this system. Thus, the book classified a large portion of Indian society as the lowest level in the social hierarchy, depriving them of basic rights.
The book described Dalits as less than human, unworthy of education or engaging in occupations deemed respectable by society. According to this text, they were even prohibited from approaching Brahmins or touching their belongings for fear of defilement. The jobs designated for Dalits were menial in nature, such as cleaning streets, removing waste, and carrying the dead, and they were not permitted to change this status or improve their situation, leading to the inheritance of oppression across generations.
The Inferiority of Women
The “Manusmriti” places women in a subordinate position to men throughout their lives, stating that a woman must be under the guardianship of her father during childhood, her husband after marriage, and her sons after her husband’s death. The book deprives women of any economic, social, or intellectual independence, considering them as beings incapable of making decisions on their own. It stipulates that a woman should serve her husband and endure any mistreatment from him without complaint, thereby legitimizing domestic violence against her. Furthermore, the book restricts a woman’s role in society merely as a tool for reproduction, giving her no significant standing in public or religious spheres.
Ambedkar realized that any change in Indian society must include the liberation of women from this oppressive system. He worked to promote women’s rights in education, employment, and participation in public life, emphasizing that the “Manusmriti” was a major obstacle to achieving these goals. Ambedkar considered that discrimination against women is not merely a gender issue but part of a broader system that perpetuates social and economic oppression.
Slavery in the “Manusmriti”
The text contains explicit instructions calling for the subjugation of the lower classes by the upper classes, who are viewed as eternal servants expected to provide their services to the Brahmins and Kshatriyas without complaint or grievance. According to the text, the relationship between the upper and lower classes is one of control and submission, where the lower classes are considered private property of the upper classes and can be exploited in any way without any obligation to provide something in return.
Ambedkar argued that the social slavery legitimized by the “Manusmriti” is the foundation upon which all other forms of discrimination are built; this system has led to the destruction of opportunities for the lower classes in education, employment, and social advancement. He saw this oppression as not merely a legal or social issue but also a moral one that requires a comprehensive review of the values upon which traditional societies in India are established.
Book Burning is an Unacceptable Act
In academic and intellectual circles, book burning is generally considered an unacceptable act as it contradicts the values of dialogue and intellectual debate. Even books that contain rejected ideas should be responded to with criticism and refutation, not with burning. However, those who burn the book justify their actions by stating that the protest emphasizes the importance of building a society based on equality, as dreamed of by Ambedkar, where everyone lives with dignity and respect. They see it as a call to end all forms of class and gender discrimination in Indian society and as a clear message rejecting ideas that promote class and gender discrimination, establishing the dominance of a certain group at the expense of the majority.
In conclusion, the burning of the “Manusmriti,” though a controversial act, served as a declaration of rebellion against an unjust social system and a clear message rejecting ideas that legitimize class and gender discrimination. Despite the debate surrounding this step, the symbolism of this act lies in the call for a just society that respects humanity regardless of class or gender. Ambedkar’s vision transcended symbolic protest to the construction of a new society based on the principles of freedom and dignity, a dream that continues to inspire millions in India and beyond.
————–
Read the article in Arabic
This post was originally published on here
