3 of 3
edited title
Ikshvaku
  • 17636
  • 1
  • 14
  • 72

Does the Manusmriti have verses discriminating against Brahmins?

Why does the Manusmriti have verses discriminating against Brahmins?

For example:

A twice-born person, having, through folly, drunk wine, shall drink wine red-hot; he becomes freed from his guilt, when his body has been completely burnt by it. — (90)

(Manusmriti verse 11.90 - Expiation of drinking Wine (surā)

‘Red hot’— Though the text uses the word ‘varṇa’ colour, yet it is mere heat that is meant; as is clear from what follows, about ‘the body being burnt.’—(90)

(Medhātithi’s commentary)

...according to Nārāyaṇa the death-penance is meant for all twice-born men partaking of liquor distilled from grains, and by Brāhmaṇas who have drunk any of the three kinds of liquor described under verse

(Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha)

Gautama (23.1).—‘They shall pour hot wine into the mouth of a Brāhmaṇa who has drunk wine; he will be purified by death.’

Āpastamba (1.25.3).—‘A wine-drinker has to drink exceedingly hot liquor, so that he dies.’

(Comparative notes by various authors)

This is discriminatory and against human rights. Why is the scripture so unfair to Brahmins that it prohibits them from having a simple beer?

Sometimes I feel like all the scriptures are written by Shudras and are biased toward Shudras.

Are these anti-Brahminical interpolations?

Ikshvaku
  • 17636
  • 1
  • 14
  • 72