Sambodhi 1984 Vol 13 and 14

Author(s): Dalsukh Malvania, Ramesh S Betai, Yajneshwar S Shastri
Publisher: L D Indology Ahmedabad

Page 83

J. R. Betai & R. S. Betal
(11) Manu's conception of Himsa is quite significant, and opposed to that of Buddhism He wants that on the whole, there shall be no Himsä as far as possible. Yet, under certain circumstances Himsa is necessary and not bad. One condition of this is Himsa in the sacrifices; it is no Himsa. This is evidently a firm reply to Buddhism that took everything to the extreme including its concept of Himsa. It is very much likely that Manu's view is inspired by his desire to answer very important charges against Buddhism.
78
(12) Manu again specifically refers to Vedabahya aad similar other Smrtis and works as failure leading to destruction. These Vedabahya works, in the view of Manu, fail to solve man's problems of this life as also the life hereafter. This too can be an indirect reference to Buddhism.
Several other proofs can be cited. But these should be enough for our purpose.
Actually Buddhism faced three challenges. The first came from the Gita in the sphere of wide concept of life in general and man's attitude to it. The second came from the Manusmrti in the sphere of man's social life and social philosophy. The third came from Sankara in the sphere of spiritualism and metaphysics. All the three spheres of thought in Buddhism were thus answered Credit goes to the Manusmrti to answer Buddhism by its utterly optimistic outlook on life, teaching man to adhere to his Karma rightly, taking interest in life, and trying to realize God through life and through Karma. through good turns to all living society of the Hindus. Manu has thus contributed a lot in reinstating the upsetting Hindu society and the great prestige of Brahmanism, of the twofold purpose of life etc. and in ousting Buddhism from its growing high position against the Hindu way and view of life.
Jainism Vs. Manusmrti
Even though Jainism is as old as Buddhism, may be, even older and even though so many pieces of internal evidence mentioned above can be against Jainsim, Manu does not seem to be very much against Jainism because it was not so very powerful, as Buddhism was. We have thereore preferred not to discuss the problem of opposition against Jainism. 'ong with Buddhism or independently of it.