Manusmriti

[Chandran, Nanda (NBC)]

>> Sometime back I'd asked the knowledgeable to respond to the
>> validity of a scripture like Manusmriti being treated as a valid source
of
>> knowledge, but that message didn't elicit any response.
>> Shouldn't we clear this up?

>I don't recall that question.  What do you want to know?

Anybody who's read the text is aware of the level of discrimination
expounded against castes, women in the text. And as equality and
egalitarianism is observed in the current world and definitely on this list,
my question was that, then can the Manusmriti be considered as a valid
source of knowledge?

Ram Chandran replied something to the effect that since the text has been
written ages ago and since we're not really aware of the scenario then,
there's no point questioning it.

Doesn't seem like a strong argument to me. For if we're following texts
which are millennia old, we should follow them as they've been expounded. Is
it correct if we follow parts which suits us and abandon others which don't?
If it's correct, then shouldn't we be outright in classifying texts which
expound otherwise as worthless?

Personally it's none of my business who learns Vedanta or not, and I
sincerely feel sincerity is all that's needed. But in a school of thought
where TRUTH is the thumb rule, this kind of hypocrisy stinks!

        Because e-mail can be altered electronically,
        the integrity of this communication cannot be guaranteed.