6

If a person were to write a new Hindu smriti, to what extent is that allowed and would that be appreciated by the Hindu community?

  • 5
    If he is knowledgeable sage like Vyasa or Valmiki, then i think Sanatana Dharma has no objection. But real problem is identifying such true Rishi in midst of charlatans. – The Destroyer Apr 17 '16 at 14:30
  • It's really good if someone updates "PURANA (HISTORY)". – The Destroyer Apr 17 '16 at 14:35
  • Well there is Sri Krishna Premi Swami who has written many books on Lord Vishnu as well as on books on Krsna's devotees such as Sri Vaishnava Samhita, Bhakta Ratnavali and others. Though these are not Smriti, they are just retellings of Lord Vishnu's avataras, and the life histories of many saints. He has also written many commentaries and general teachings on how to lead life. – Surya Apr 17 '16 at 16:42
  • Its impossible in Kaliyuga new chaps pop out of nowhere and say that they are rishis but they don't even qualify to be scholars if they don't have basic knowledge of shastras(which requires rigorous study of vedas). – Yogi Feb 1 '17 at 11:43
2

Swami Vivekananda thought that new Smritis would come.

There are two sorts of truth we find in our Shâstras, one that is based upon the eternal nature of man — the one that deals with the eternal relation of God, soul, and nature; the other, with local circumstances, environments of the time, social institutions of the period, and so forth. The first class of truths is chiefly embodied in our Vedas, our scriptures; the second in the Smritis, the Puranas. etc. We must remember that for all periods the Vedas are the final goal and authority, and if the Purânas differ in any respect from the Vedas, that part of the Puranas is to be rejected without mercy. We find, then, that in all these Smritis the teachings are different. One Smriti says, this is the custom, and this should be the practice of this age. Another one says, this is the practice of this age, and so forth. This is the Âchâra which should be the custom of the Satya Yuga, and this is the Achara which should be the custom of the Kali Yuga, and so forth. Now this is one of the most glorious doctrines that you have, that eternal truths, being based upon the nature of man, will never change so long as man lives; they are for all times, omnipresent, universal virtues. But the Smritis speak generally of local circumstances, of duties arising from different environments, and they change in the course of time. This you have always to remember that because a little social custom is going to be changed you are not going to lose your religion, not at all. Remember these customs have already been changed. There was a time in this very India when, without eating beef, no Brahmin could remain a Brahmin; you read in the Vedas how, when a Sannyasin, a king, or a great man came into a house, the best bullock was killed; how in time it was found that as we were an agricultural race, killing the best bulls meant annihilation of the race. Therefore the practice was stopped, and a voice was raised against the killing of cows. Sometimes we find existing then what we now consider the most horrible customs. In course of time other laws had to be made. These in turn will have to go, and other Smritis will come. This is one fact we have to learn that the Vedas being eternal will be one and the same throughout all ages, but the Smritis will have an end. As time rolls on, more and more of the Smritis will go, sages will come, and they will change and direct society into better channels, into duties and into paths which accord with the necessity of the age, and without which it is impossible that society can live. Thus we have to guide our course, avoiding these two dangers; and I hope that every one of us here will have breadth enough, and at the same time faith enough, to understand what that means, which I suppose is the inclusion of everything, and not the exclusion. I want the intensity of the fanatic plus the extensity of the materialist. Deep as the ocean, broad as the infinite skies, that is the sort of heart we want. Let us be as progressive as any nation that ever existed, and at the same time as faithful and conservative towards our traditions as Hindus alone know how to be.

In plain words, we have first to learn the distinction between the essentials and the non-essentials in everything. The essentials are eternal, the non-essentials have value only for a certain time; and if after a time they are not replaced by something essential, they are positively dangerous. I do not mean that you should stand up and revile all your old customs and institutions. Certainly not; you must not revile even the most evil one of them. Revile none. Even those customs that are now appearing to be positive evils, have been positively life-giving in times past; and if we have to remove these, we must not do so with curses, but with blessings and gratitude for the glorious work these customs have done for the preservation of our race. And we must also remember that the leaders of our societies have never been either generals or kings, but Rishis. And who are the Rishis? The Rishi as he is called in the Upanishads is not an ordinary man, but a Mantra-drashtâ. He is a man who sees religion, to whom religion is not merely book-learning, not argumentation, nor speculation, nor much talking, but actual realization, a coming face to face with truths which transcend the senses. This is Rishihood, and that Rishihood does not belong to any age, or time, or even to sects or caste. Vâtsyâyana says, truth must be realised; and we have to remember that you, and I, and every one of us will be called upon to become Rishis; and we must have faith in ourselves; we must become world-movers, for everything is in us. We must see Religion face to face, experience it, and thus solve our doubts about it; and then standing up in the glorious light of Rishihood each one of us will be a giant; and every word falling from our lips will carry behind it that infinite sanction of security; and before us evil will vanish by itself without the necessity of cursing any one, without the necessity of abusing any one, without the necessity of fighting any one in the world. May the Lord help us, each one of us here, to realise the Rishihood for our own salvation and for that of others!

The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda, Volume 3, Reply to the Address of Welcome at Madura in 'Lectures from Colombo to Almora'

2

NO scope of any new Smritis .Its not like that anyone will write a book and it will be equivalent to a Purana.

Similarly, not everyone can write a book and it becomes a Dharma Sastra.

Quoting from this page:

There are eighteen main Puranas and an equal number of subsidiary Puranas or Upa-Puranas.

The 18 main Puranas are: Vishnu Purana, Narada Purana, Srimad Bhagavata Purana, Garuda (Suparna) Purana, Padma Purana, Varaha Purana, Brahma Purana, Brahmanda Purana, Brahma Vaivarta Purana, Markandeya Purana, Bhavishya Purana, Vamana Purana, Matsya Purana, Kurma Purana, Linga Purana, Siva Purana, Skanda Purana (Kartika Purana) and Agni Purana.

How many Puranas are there and what are they are already well described in scriptures as follows:

enter image description here

And, all these Puranas already exist.So there is no scope of any new Puranas.

Also,which are in all the Dharma SHastras(the Smritis) are described in Yajnavalkya Smriti as follows:

enter image description here

Manu,Atri,Vishnu,Harita,Yajnavalkya,usana,Angira,Yama,Apastambha,Samvarta,Katyana,Vrihaspati,Parashara,Vyasa,Sankha,Likhita,Daksha,Gotama,Satatapa and Vashishta are the promulgators of Dharma shastras(Smritis).(Yajnvalkya Smriti,Chapter 1)

So,to believe that new Smritis will be composed in future is as good as not believing the Shastras.If they were to be composed then the above Yajnavalkya list would have mentioned their authors or at least some other Scriptures would have surely mentioned about them in advance

  • 2
    But Ithihasas do fall under Smriti. Ramacharat Manas falls under Smriti. Right? So, why shouldn't we accept new smriti if a well knowledged Trikala jnani Rishi writes a story? – The Destroyer Apr 22 '16 at 6:51
  • Although, I am not an expert on this, I would agree with @TheDestroyer on this. 'That which is heard' is called Sruti i.e. the Vedas. Hence, itihasas should be classified under Smriti? – Amit Saxena Apr 22 '16 at 11:31
  • Ohh.. Is there any rule that Smriti should be written by sage Vyasa? Can we call other works which describe historical events of Gods as Smriti? – The Destroyer Apr 22 '16 at 11:31
  • hinduism.stackexchange.com/questions/8591/… This says that Itihasa can be considered as Smriti – Amit Saxena Apr 22 '16 at 11:37
  • 1
    @TheDestroyer Ramcharitra manas isn't a smriti only north indians accept it, whereas south indians accept kambam ramayana. The universally accepted smriti is Valmiki Ramayana. Good citations rickross +1 – Yogi Feb 1 '17 at 14:07

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .