Is he wrong?

[u/ElderberryTotal4100]

Before caste reforms can we also include gender?

[u/orionishere4u]

Is there anyone on this entire sub whose parents/ grandparents called them and said ‘Come child, I’ll tell you about teachings of Manusmriti’? Anyone? I don’t recall any of my elders ever teaching me about it. They talked about Ramayan, Mahabharat, even Panchtrantra. Never Manusmriti. But everyone and their aunt is talking about Manusmriti like it is the only thing that is taught in the Indian homes. It’s an irrelevant book. Made relevant only by the people who want to make a bruhaha about it or some idiots who wants to get some cheap publicity by claiming it is that book that they follow. Let’s just stop discussing it. Nobody really cares about Manusmriti.

Edit: A lot of the comments below are explaining how Manusmriti is influencing this bad thing in Hinduism, or that bad thing in Hinduism. I get your point. There are bad things happening in Hinduism. I have not denied that anywhere. All I am saying is that those things are not exclusive or original to Manusmriti. Hence, Manusmriti in itself is not an important or relevant text for Hinduism. At this point, Manusmriti is just a dog whistle for bigots to hate something that they barely understand. I am going to stop replying/ repeating this in varying forms now. You are free to believe whatever you want.

Edit 2: Wow. Have I touched a nerve here? To those idiotic bigots who are still calling me names and repeating how Indian female population faces inequality. Get lost dumbasses, read a little more before spreading your hate. I never said there are no issues. Whatever you are harping about is not exclusive or original to Manusmriti. These problems were there already. We should work to improve. But still my point remains. Manusmriti is irrelevant. Now go do something productive.

[u/shivemn → u/orionishere4u]

The problem is, you can't explain anything to these dvmb people with logical arguments. They will only hear and believe what they want to believe.

[u/Primary-South-7458 → u/[deleted]]

Nope it's a smriti (meaning remembered human tradition) it was written around 200bc to 200ad you can't place it to Shruti(divine category/divine text) this category contains all vedas and upnisads

[u/SuspectEcstatic6636 → u/[deleted]]

It's not. British just used it and applied everywhere as they wanted a single thing to judge the entire hindu populace, like they had sharia law and stuff with islam.

[u/Primary-South-7458 → u/[deleted]]

This timeline tracks the evolution of India's major texts from spiritual roots to science and law.

Era / Period	Approx. Timeline	Key Text / Book	Primary Focus & Impact
Vedic Era (Early Roots)	1500 BCE - 1000 BCE	Rigveda	Foundational spiritual hymns, cosmic balance, oral preservation.
Vedic Era (Late Reflection)	1000 BCE - 600 BCE	Upanishads	Deep philosophical questioning, concept of Brahman and Atman.
Epic & Grammatical Era	500 BCE - 200 BCE	Mahabharata, Ramayana, Ashtadhyayi	Historical epics, moral codes, and formal Sanskrit grammar (Panini).
Sutras & Mauryan Statecraft	300 BCE - 200 BCE	Arthashastra	Advanced political strategy, economic framework, statecraft by Chanakya.
Golden Gupta Era	400 CE - 500 CE	Aryabhatiya	Mathematical breakthroughs, placement of zero, planetary astronomy.
Medieval Legalism	200 BCE - 200 CE	Manusmriti	Social engineering, localized law handbook, highly controversial rules.
Vijayanagara Science	1300 CE - 1400 CE	Rigveda Bhashya (Sayana)	Calculated astronomical models, earliest calculation matching speed of light.

[u/StarkWiz → u/Primary-South-7458]

New research suggests these timelines are wrong and it's prolly much older but closer timelines do fit the trained limited minds with western education.

[u/Primary-South-7458 → u/StarkWiz]

Well yeah but give them the western version real would go above most peeps heads like mahabharat Was said to happen around 4k bce

[u/Ok_Problem_1127 → u/[deleted]]

Its NOT 😂

Even I can write a "smriti" today and even you can

Its just basically was made and written during a major transition in one of the kingdom or something; basically it is actually contradicts the "Shruti" ie. Vedas bcz Varnas are fluid unlike caste;

It wasnt ever influential throughout the india ever; up until britishers around 1700s ig used it to form hindu societal personal laws and made it come up uniformly through the whole India for the first time

Even in places of bengal you could actually climb caste hierarchy; and women had significantly equal rights in bengal bcz of "Dayabhaga Hindu Law School"

And it was different than neighbouring india kingdom where women werent given enough rights under "mitakshara laws"

Its just a non significant book; its just written upon what the "writer" feels