Hindu law

Hindu law, as a historical term, refers to the code of laws applied to Hindus, Buddhists, Jains and Sikhs inBritish India.[1][2][3] Hindu law, in modern scholarship, also refers to the legal theory, jurisprudence andphilosophical reflections on the nature of law discovered in ancient and medieval era Indian texts.[4] It is oneof the oldest known jurisprudence theories in the world.[4][5]

Hindu tradition, in its surviving ancient texts, does not universally express the law in the canonical sense ofius or of lex.[6] The ancient term in Indian texts is Dharma, which means more than a code of law, thoughcollections of legal maxims were compiled into works such as the Nāradasmṛti.[7][8] The term "Hindu law"is a colonial construction,[9] and emerged after the colonial rule arrived in South Asia, and when in 1772 itwas decided by British colonial officials, that European common law system would not be implemented inIndia, that Hindus of India would be ruled under their "Hindu law" and Muslims of India would be ruledunder "Muslim law" (Sharia).[6][10]

Prior to the British colonial rule, Muslim law was codified as Fatawa-e-Alamgiri, Theravada Buddhism inthe 13th century, Manusmriti derived, Wareru Dhammathat, Jayasthiti Malla’s, also Manusmriti rooted, 14thcentury Manav Nyaya Shastra, for what would become predominantly Hindu Nepal, as was the Kuṭāra-Mānawa of Java;[11] Ngawang Namgyal’s 17th century, Tibetan Buddhism based, Tsa Yig Chenmo ofBhutan, with the Dutch codifying Tamil customarily law in the Thesavalamai, but elsewhere separate lawsfor non-Muslims – such as Hindus, Buddhists, Sikhs, Jains, Parsis – were not codified during the 601 yearsof Islamic Mughal and Sultanate rule.[12] The substance of Hindu law implemented by the British wasderived from a Dharmaśāstra named Manusmriti, one of the many treatises (śāstra) on Dharma.[13] TheBritish, however, mistook the Dharmaśāstra as codes of law and failed to recognise that these Sanskrit textswere not used as statements of positive law until the British colonial officials chose to do so.[6][13] Rather,Dharmaśāstra contained jurisprudence commentary, i.e., a theoretical reflection upon practical law, but not astatement of the law of the land as such.[14] Scholars have also questioned the authenticity and thecorruption in the Manusmriti manuscript used to derive the colonial era Hindu law.[15]

In colonial history context, the construction and implementation of Hindu law and Islamic law was anattempt at "legal pluralism" during the British colonial era, where people in the same region were subjectedto different civil and criminal laws based on the religion of the plaintiff and defendant.[16][17] Legal scholarsstate that this divided the Indian society, and that Indian law and politics have ever since vacillated between"legal pluralism - the notion that religion is the basic unit of society and different religions must havedifferent legal rights and obligations" and "legal universalism – the notion that individuals are the basic unitof society and all citizens must have uniform legal rights and obligations".[16]

Terminology and nomenclatureRelated terms?

Classical Hindu lawSources of DharmaLawyers in classical Hindu LawPunishment in classical Hindu LawOutside India

Contents

Anglo-Hindu lawModern Hindu lawSee alsoNotesReferencesFurther readingExternal links

In Hinduism, law is discussed as a subset of dharma which signifies behaviors that are considered in accordwith rta, the order that makes life and the universe possible,[18][note 1] and includes duties, rights, laws,conduct, virtues and ‘‘right way of living’’.[7][19] The concept of Dharma includes Hindu law.[8]

In ancient texts of Hinduism, the concept of dharma incorporates the principles of law, order, harmony, andtruth. It is explained as the necessary law of life and equated to satya (Sanskrit: स�यं, truth),[20][21] in hymn1.4.14 of Brhadaranyaka Upanishad, as follows:

धम�ः त�मा�मा�त् परं ना��य् अथो अबलीयान् बलीयाँसमाशँसते धम�ण यथा रा�ैवम् ।यो वै स धम�ः स�यं वै तत् त�मा�स�यं वद�तमा�र् धम� वदती�त धम� वा वद�तँ स�यं वदती�य् एत�ेवैत�भयं भव�त।।

Nothing is higher than Dharma. The weak overcomes the stronger by Dharma, as over a king.Truly that Dharma is the Truth (Satya); Therefore, when a man speaks the Truth, they say, "Hespeaks the Dharma"; and if he speaks Dharma, they say, "He speaks the Truth!" For both areone.

— Brihadaranyaka Upanishad, 1.4.xiv[20][21]

In ancient Hindu jurisprudence texts, a number of Sanskrit words refer to aspects of law. Some of theseinclude Niyama (Sanskrit: �नयम, rule), Nyaya (�याय, justice), Yuktata (यु�ता, justice),[22] Samya (सा�य,equality and impartiality in law), Vidhi (�व�ध, precept or rule), Vyavastha (�व�ा, regulation), Sambhasa(स�ाषा, contract or mutual engagement), Prasamvida-patra (�सं�वदा-प�, written contract),[23] Vivadayati(�ववादय�त,[24] litigate or dispute), Adhivakta (अ�धव�ा, lawyer), Nyayavadi (�यायवाद�, male lawyer),Nyayavadini (�यायवा�दनी, female lawyer), Nyayadata (�यायदाता, judge), Danda (द�ड, punishment, penalty orfine), among others.[6][25][26]

John Mayne, in 1910, wrote that the classical Hindu law has the oldest pedigree of any known system ofjurisprudence.[5] Mayne noted that while being ancient, the conflicting texts on almost every questionpresents a great difficulty in deciding what the classical Hindu law was. As more literature emerges, and istranslated or interpreted, Mayne noted that the conflict between the texts on every matter of law hasmultiplied, and that there is a lack of consensus between the Western legal scholars resident in India.[5]

Terminology and nomenclature

Related terms?

Classical Hindu law

Ludo Rocher states that Hindu tradition does not express law in the sense of ius nor of lex.[6] The term"Hindu law" is a colonial construction, and emerged when the colonial rule arrived in South Asia, and whenin 1772 it was decided by British colonial officials in consultation with Mughal rulers, that Europeancommon law system would not be implemented in India, that Hindus of India would be ruled under their"Hindu law" and Muslims of India would be ruled under sharia (Muslim law).[6][10][16] However, Hindu lawwas neither mentioned, nor in use, nor codified, during the 600 years of Islamic rule of India. An attemptwas made to find any old surviving Sanskrit text that mentioned elements of law, and this is how Westerneditors and translators arrived at the equation that "dharma shastra equals lawbook, code or Institute", statesRocher.[6]

Scholars such as Derrett, Menski and others have repeatedly asked whether and what evidence there is thatthe Dharmasastras were the actual legal authority before and during the Islamic rule in India.[27][28] Theyhave also questioned whether the Dharmasastras contain "precepts" or "recommendations", that is whetherthe jurisprudence mentioned in Dharmasastras was actually ever used in disputes in Indian society.[29] Earlyscholars during the British colonial rule such as John Mayne suggested that it is probable that Dharma-smrititexts reflect the "practical administration of law", at least before the arrival of Islam in India.[5][30] However,most later scholars state that Dharma texts of Hinduism are "purely or mostly concerned with moral andreligious norms which have some but not a very close relationship to legal practice".[30][31] A few scholarshave suggested that the Dharma-related Smritis such as Manusmriti, Naradasmriti and Parashara Smriti donot embody the Hindu law but are commentaries and scholarly notes on more ancient authoritative legaltexts that have been lost or yet to be found.[30]

Classical Hindu law, states Donald Davis, "represents one of the least known, yet most sophisticatedtraditions of legal theory and jurisprudence in world history. Hindu jurisprudential texts contain elaborateand careful philosophical reflections on the nature of law and religion. The nature of Hindu law as atradition has been subject to some debate and some misunderstanding both within and especially outside ofspecialist circles."[4]

In South India, temples were intimately involved in the administration of law.[32]

Śruti have been considered as the authority in the Hindu Dharma.[note 2] The Smritis, such as Manusmriti,Naradasmriti and Parashara Smriti, contribute to the exposition of the Hindu Dharma but are considered lessauthoritative than Śrutis (the Vedic corpus that includes early Upanishads).[34][note 3] The root texts ofancient Hindu jurisprudence and law are the Dharma-sūtras. These express that the Shruti, Smriti andAchara are sources of jurisprudence and law.[36] The precedence of these sources is declared in the openingverses of each of the known, surviving Dharma-sūtras. For example,[36]

The source of Dharma is the Veda, as well as the tradition [Smriti], and practice of those whoknow the Veda. – Gautama Dharma-sūtra 1.1-1.2

The Dharma is taught in each Veda, in accordance with which we will explain it. What is givenin the tradition [Smriti] is the second, and the conventions of cultured people are the third. –Baudhayana Dharma-sūtra 1.1.1-1.1.4

The Dharma is set forth in the vedas and the Traditional Texts [Smriti]. When these do notaddress an issue, the practice of cultured people becomes authoritative. – Vāsiṣṭha Dharma-sūtra 1.4-1.5

— Translated by Donald Davis, The Spirit of Hindu Law[36]

Sources of Dharma

The Smritis, such as Manusmriti, Naradasmriti, Yajnavalkya Smrti and Parashara Smriti, expanded thisdefinition, as follows,

वेदोऽ�खलो धम�मूलं �मृ�तशीले च त��दाम् । आचार�ैव साधूनामा�मन�तु��रेव च ॥

Translation 1: The whole Veda is the (first) source of the sacred law, next the tradition and thevirtuous conduct of those who know the (Veda further), also the customs of holy men, and(finally) self-satisfaction (Atmanastushti).[37]

Translation 2: The root of the religion is the entire Veda, and (then) the tradition and customs ofthose who know (the Veda), and the conduct of virtuous people, and what is satisfactory tooneself.[38]

— Manusmriti 2.6

वेदः �मृ�तः सदाचारः �व�य च ��यमा�मनः । एत�तु�व�धं �ा�ः सा�ाद ्धम��य ल�णम् ॥

Translation 1: The Veda, the sacred tradition, the customs of virtuous men, and one's ownpleasure, they declare to be the fourfold means of defining the sacred law.[37]

Translation 2: The Veda, tradition, the conduct of good people, and what is pleasing to oneself –they say that is four fold mark of religion.[38]

— Manusmriti 2.12

As a source of Dharma, only three of the four types of texts in the Vedas have behavioral precepts. Lingatnotes (abridged),[39]

For the Hindu all belief takes its source and its justification in the Vedas [Śruti]. Consequentlyevery rule of dharma must find its foundation in the Veda. Strictly speaking, the Samhitas donot even include a single precept which could be used directly as a rule of conduct. One canfind there only references to usage which falls within the scope of dharma. By contrast, theBrahmanas, the Aranyakas and the Upanishads contain numerous precepts which propoundrules governing behavior.

— Robert Lingat[39]

Bilimoria states the role of Shruti in Hindu Dharma has been inspired by "the belief in a higher naturalcosmic order (Rta succeeded later by the concept Dharma) that regulates the universe and provides the basisfor its growth, flourishing and sustenance – be that of the gods, human beings, animals and eco-formations".[40]

Levinson states that the role of Shruti and Smriti in Hindu law is as a source of guidance, and its traditioncultivates the principle that "the facts and circumstances of any particular case determine what is good orbad".[41] The later Hindu texts include fourfold sources of Dharma, states Levinson, which includeAtmanastushti (satisfaction of one's conscience), Sadachara (local norms of virtuous individuals), Smriti andSruti.[41][42][43]

Lawyers in classical Hindu Law

While texts on ancient Hindu law have not survived, texts that confirm the existence of the institution oflawyers in ancient India have.[44] The Sanskrit text Vivadarnavasetu, in Chapter 3, for example, states,

If the plaintiff or defendant have any excuse for not attending the court, or for not pleading theirown cause, or, on any other account, excuse themselves, they shall, at their own option, appointa person as their lawyer; if the lawyer gains the suit, his principal also gains; if the lawyer iscast, his principal is cast also.

In a cause where the accusation is for murder, for a robbery, for adultery, for (...), the principalsshall plead and answer in person; but a woman, a minor, an insane, or a person lacking mentalcompetency may be represented by a lawyer.

— Vivadarnavasetu, Classical Hindu Law Process[44]

Ancient texts of the Hindu tradition formulate and articulate punishment.[45][46] These texts from the last2500 years, states Terence Day,[45] imply or recognize key elements in their theories of fair punishment: (1)the texts set a standard of Right, in order to define a violation that warrants punishment; (2) they discuss thepossibility of a violation thereby defining a wrongdoing; (3) they discuss a theory of responsibility andassignability of a wrongdoing; (4) the texts discuss degrees of guilt, and therewith the form and severity ofpunishment must match the transgression; (5) they discuss approved and authorized forms of punishmentsand how these may be properly administered.[45] The goal of punishment, in Hindu law, has been retributiveand reformative.[47] Hindu law, states Sarkar, developed the theory of punishment from its foundationaltheory of what it believed was necessary for the prosperity of the individual and a collection of individuals,of state and non-state.[48]

There are wide variations in the statement of crime and associated punishment in different texts.[49] Sometexts for example discuss punishment for crimes such as murder, without mentioning the gender, class orcaste of the plaintiff or defendant, while some discuss and differentiate the crime based on gender, class orcaste. It is unclear, states Terence Day, whether these were part of the original, because the stylistic,structural and substantive evidence such as inconsistencies between versions of different manuscripts of thesame text suggest changes and corruption of the original texts.[15]

Ancient Hindu legal texts and traditions arrived in parts of Southeast Asia (Cambodia, Java, Bali, Malaysia,Thailand, and Burma) as trade grew and as part of a larger culture sharing in ancient Asia.[50] In each ofthese regions, Hindu law fused with local norms and practices, giving rise to legal texts (Āgamas such as theKuṭāra-Mānawa in Java,[11] and the Buddhist-influenced Dhammasattas/Dhammathats of Burma andThailand)[51] as well as legal records embodied (as in India) in stone and copper-plate inscriptions.[52]

In 18th century, the earliest British of the East India Company acted as agents of the Mughal emperor. Asthe British colonial rule took over the political and administrative powers in India, it was faced with variousstate responsibilities such as legislative and judiciary functions.[53] The East India Company, and later theBritish Crown, sought profits for its British shareholders through trade as well as sought to maintaineffective political control with minimal military engagement.[54] The administration pursued a path of least

Punishment in classical Hindu Law

Outside India

Anglo-Hindu law

resistance, relying upon co-opted local intermediaries that were mostly Muslims and some Hindus in variousprincely states.[54] The British exercised power by avoiding interference and adapting to law practices asexplained by the local intermediaries.[55] The colonial state thus sustained what were essentially pre-colonialreligious and political law and conflicts, well into the late nineteenth century.[53][54] The colonial policy onthe system of personal laws for India, for example, was expressed by Governor-General Hastings in 1772 asfollows,

That in all suits regarding inheritance, marriage, caste and other religious usages or institutions,the law of the Koran with respect to Mahometans, and those of the Shaster with respect toGentoos shall be invariably be adhered to.

— Warren Hastings, August 15, 1772[2]

For Muslims of India, the code of Muslim law was readily available in al-Hidaya and Fatawa-i Alamgiriwritten under sponsorship of Aurangzeb. For Hindus and other non-Muslims such as Buddhists, Sikhs,Jains, Parsis and Tribal people, this information was unavailable.[53] The British colonial officials, forpractice, attempted to extract from the Dharmaśāstra the English categories of law and religion for thepurposes of colonial administration.[56][57]

The early period of Anglo-Hindu Law (1772–1828) was structured along the lines of Muslim law practice. Itincluded the extracted portions of law from one Dharmaśāstra by British colonial government appointedscholars (especially Jones, Henry Thomas Colebrooke, Sutherland, and Borrodaile) in a manner similar toIslamic al-Hidaya and Fatawa-i Alamgiri.[58][59][60] It also included the use of court pandits in British courtsto aid British judges in interpreting Shastras just like Qadis (Maulavis) for interpreting the Islamic law.[60]

The arrival of William Bentinck as the Governor-General of British India in 1828, marked a shift towardsuniversal civil code, whose administration emphasized same law for all human beings, individualism andequal treatment to help liberate, empower and end social practices among Hindus and Muslims of India thathad received much public coverage in Britain through the publications of Christian missionaries andindividuals such as Thomas Macaulay.[16]

Governor-General Dalhousie, in 1848, extended this trend and stated his policy that the law must "treat allnatives much the same manner". Over time, between 1828-1855, a series of British parliamentary acts werepassed to revise the Anglo-Hindu and Anglo-Muslim laws, such as those relating to the right to religiousconversion, widow remarriage, and right to create wills for inheritance.[16] In 1832, the British colonialgovernment abolished accepting religious fatwa as a source of law.[61] In 1835, the British began creating acriminal code that would replace the existing criminal code which was a complex conflicting mixture oflaws derived from Muslim texts (Quran) and Hindu texts (Shastras), and this common criminal code wasready by 1855.[61] These changes were welcomed by Hindu law reform movement, but consideredabrogating religion-defined rules within the Muslim law. The changes triggered discontent, call for jihad andreligious war, and became partly responsible for the 1857 Indian revolt against the British rule.[62][63]

In 1864, after the East India Company was dissolved and India became a formal part of the British Empire,Anglo-Hindu law entered into a second phase (1864–1947), one in which British colonial courts in Indiarelied less on the Muslim Qadis and Hindu Pandits for determining the respective religious laws, and reliedmore on a written law.[16] A universal criminal code in India, that did not discriminate between people basedon their religion, was adopted for the first time in 1864.[61][64] It was expanded to include a universalprocedural and commercial code by 1882, which overruled pre-existing Anglo-Hindu and Anglo-Muslimlaws.[61] However, the personal laws for Muslims remained sharia-based, while the Anglo-Hindu law wasenacted independent of any text on matters such as marriage, divorce, inheritance and the Anglo-Hindu law

covered all Hindus, Jains, Sikhs and Buddhists in India.[65] In 1872, the British crown enacted the IndianChristian Marriage Act which covered marriage, divorce and alimony laws for Indian Christians of alldenominations except the Roman Catholics.[66]

The development of legal pluralism, that is separate law based on individual's religion, was controversial inIndia from the very start.[2]

After the independence of India from the colonial rule of Britain in 1947, India adopted a new constitutionin 1950.[67] Most of the legal code from the colonial era continued as the law of the new nation, includingthe personal laws contained in Anglo-Hindu law for Hindus, Buddhists, Jains and Sikhs, the Anglo-Christian law for Christians, and the Anglo-Muslim law for Muslims. Article 44 of the 1950 Indianconstitution mandates a uniform civil code, eliminating all religion-based civil laws including Hindu law,Christian law and Muslim law throughout the territory of India.[68] However, while Hindu law has sincebeen amended to be independent of ancient religious texts, the Article 44 of the Indian constitution hasremained largely ignored in matters of Muslim law,by successive Indian governments since 1950.[68][69]

An amendment to the constitution (42nd Amendment, 1976) formally inserted the word secular as a featureof the Indian republic.[70] However, unlike the Western concept of secularism which separates religion andstate, the concept of secularism in India means acceptance of religious laws as binding on the state, andequal participation of state in different religions.[71][72]

Since the early 1950s, India has debated whether legal pluralism should be replaced with legal universalismand a uniform civil code that does not differentiate between people based on their religion. This debateremains unresolved. The Quran-based Indian Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act of 1937remains the law of the land of modern India for Indian Muslims, while the Parliamentary, non-religiousuniform civil code passed in the mid-1950s applies to Indians who are Hindus (along with Buddhists, Jains,Sikhs and Parsees), as well as to Indian Christians and Jews.[72] In 1955, India revised its Hindu MarriageAct and it applied to all Hindus, Buddhists, Jains and Sikhs; scholars contest whether the law applies tocases where either the husband or wife is Hindu, Buddhist, Jain or Sikh, and the other is a Christian orMuslim.[69]

Comparative lawDhammasatthaDharmaDharmasastraHenry Thomas ColebrookeJīmūtavāhanaReligious lawRobert LingatShariaTraditional Chinese law

Modern Hindu law

See also

Notes

1. The Oxford Dictionary of World Religions: "In Hinduism, dharma is a fundamental concept,referring to the order and custom which make life and a universe possible, and thus to thebehaviours appropriate to the maintenance of that order."[18]

2. Elisa Freschi (2012): The Vedas are not deontic authorities in the absolute sense and may bedisobeyed, but still recognized as an epistemic authority in Hindu dharma;[33] (note: thisdifferentiation between epistemic and deontic authority is true for all Indian religions).

3. A Smriti is a derivative work, has less epistemic authority than the Vedas, and does not haveany deontic authority in Hindu dharma.[35]

1. William Musyoka (2010), A Casebook on the Law of Succession, ISBN 978-9966744852, page12

2. Ludo Rocher (July–September 1972). "Indian Response to Anglo-Hindu Law". Journal of theAmerican Oriental Society. 92 (3): 419–424. doi:10.2307/600567 (https://doi.org/10.2307%2F600567). JSTOR 600567 (https://www.jstor.org/stable/600567).

3. Werner Menski (2003), Hindu Law: Beyond tradition and modernity, Oxford University Press,ISBN 978-0-19-569921-0, Chapter 1

4. Donald Davis Jr (August 2006). "A Realist View of Hindu Law". Ratio Juris. 19 (3): 287–313.doi:10.1111/j.1467-9337.2006.00332.x (https://doi.org/10.1111%2Fj.1467-9337.2006.00332.x).

5. John Dawson Mayne (1910), A Treatise on Hindu Law and Usage (https://books.google.com/books?id=FwsTAAAAYAAJ) at Google Books, Stevens and Hynes, Harvard Law Library Series,see Preface section

6. Ludo Rocher (1978), Hindu Conceptions of Law, Hastings Law Journal, Volume 29, pages1283-1297

7. Dhand, Arti (Fall 2002). "The Dharma of Ethics, the Ethics of Dharma : Quizzing the Ideals ofHinduism". Journal of Religious Ethics. 30 (3): 351. doi:10.1111/1467-9795.00113 (https://doi.org/10.1111%2F1467-9795.00113).

8. Robert Lingat, "Les Quatre Pieds du Procés," Journal Asiatique 250 (1962), 490–1; andRichard W. Lariviere, "Law and Religion in India," in Law, Morality, and Religion: GlobalPerspectives. ed. Alan Watson (Berkeley: University of California, 1996); K.V. RangaswamiAiyangar, Rājadharma (Adyar: Adyar Library, 1941), 23;

9. P Bilimoria (2011), The Idea of Hindu Law (http://search.informit.com.au/documentSummary;dn=377009149672171;res=IELHSS), Journal of the Oriental Society of Australia, Volume 43,pages 103-130

10. Marc Gaborieau (June 1985). "From Al-Beruni to Jinnah: Idiom, Ritual and Ideology of theHindu-Muslim Confrontation in South Asia". Anthropology Today. 1 (3): 7–14.doi:10.2307/3033123 (https://doi.org/10.2307%2F3033123). JSTOR 3033123 (https://www.jstor.org/stable/3033123).

11. Creese, Helen (2009). Old Javanese legal traditions in pre colonial Bali (https://espace.library.uq.edu.au/data/UQ_185457/UQ185457_OA.pdf?Expires=1575531370&Key-Pair-Id=APKAJKNBJ4MJBJNC6NLQ&Signature=PStjEfDnfk9P1tFPVcg3nul~4ZP4N35MTK9gtum7-oZesHCGyEqB-f91e6Tw30aiMPlEc3CNsxOdt787ROXfXuyNIAeILSx3EtNDn3kcnQfsF-i8DJYiYMXwmVuEo-oVUFsOrIo9pA6s6KV-FiMwRMnwjEkzatL4Z~TwQfduMvQeHugjmqIJDuMqzcCqVOgi63H3XhhE-AaGxaCg7y5piABkqTVj7c1O3F1O37b0WtyrXYVGSuZgq7UmtrIjYTFFBXBzsQo7lyJvTAZYDCbjqD7wX75BVRCnDw9edLTlk6IKo9~MQdHr8Jby1mP50TbUO76V0gCAs7RrlpE~~KtF1w__) (PDF). p. 246.

References

12. Richard W. Lariviere (November 1989). "Justices and Paṇḍitas: Some Ironies in ContemporaryReadings of the Hindu Legal Past". Journal of Asian Studies. 48 (4): 757–769.doi:10.2307/2058113 (https://doi.org/10.2307%2F2058113). JSTOR 2058113 (https://www.jstor.org/stable/2058113).

13. Donald Davis (2010), The Spirit of Hindu Law, Cambridge University Press, ISBN 978-0521877046, page 13-16, 166-179

14. For reviews of the British misappropriations of Dharmaśāstra, see: Richard W. Lariviere,"Justices and Paṇḍitas: Some Ironies in Contemporary Readings of the Hindu Legal Past," inJournal of Asian Studies 48 (1989), pp. 757–769, and Ludo Rocher, "Law Books in an OralCulture: The Indian Dharmaśāstras," Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society 137(1993), pp. 254–267.

15. Terence Day (1982), The Conception of Punishment in Early Indian Literature, Wilfrid LaurierUniversity Press, ISBN 978-0919812154, pages 22-24

16. Susanne Hoeber Rudolph; Lloyd I. Rudolph (August 2000). "Living with Difference in India".The Political Quarterly. 71 (s1): 20–38. doi:10.1111/1467-923X.71.s1.4 (https://doi.org/10.1111%2F1467-923X.71.s1.4).

17. John Griffith (1986), What is legal pluralism?, The Journal of Legal Pluralism and UnofficialLaw, Volume 18, Issue 24, pages 1-55

18. The Oxford Dictionary of World Religions, Dharma (http://www.encyclopedia.com/topic/dharma.aspx#1)

19. Dharma, The Columbia Encyclopedia, 6th Ed. (2013), Columbia University Press, Gale,ISBN 978-0787650155

20. Charles Johnston, The Mukhya Upanishads: Books of Hidden Wisdom, Kshetra, ISBN 978-1495946530, page 481, for discussion: pages 478-505

21. Paul Horsch (December 2004). Translated by Whitaker, Jarrod. "From Creation Myth to WorldLaw: The early history of Dharma". Journal of Indian Philosophy. 32 (5/6): 423–448.doi:10.1007/s10781-004-8628-3 (https://doi.org/10.1007%2Fs10781-004-8628-3).JSTOR 23497148 (https://www.jstor.org/stable/23497148).

22. yuktatA (http://spokensanskrit.de/index.php?tinput=yuktatA&direction=SE&script=HK&link=yes&beginning=0) Sanskrit-English Dictionary, Koeln University, Germany

23. prasaMvidA (http://spokensanskrit.de/index.php?tinput=prasaMvidA&direction=SE&script=HK&link=yes&beginning=0) Sanskrit-English Dictionary, Koeln University, Germany

24. vivAdayati&direction=SE&script=HK&link=yes&beginning=0 vivAdayati (http://spokensanskrit.de/index.php?tinput=) Sanskrit-English Dictionary, Koeln University, Germany

25. NyAya (http://www.sanskrit-lexicon.uni-koeln.de/scans/MWScan/tamil/index.html) and otherwords, Cologne Digital Sanskrit Lexicon, Koeln University, Germany

26. lawyer (http://spokensanskrit.de/index.php?script=HK&beginning=0+&tinput=lawyer&trans=Translate&direction=AU) Sanskrit-English Dictionary, Koeln University, Germany

27. Werner Menski (2003), Hindu Law: Beyond tradition and modernity, Oxford University Press,ISBN 978-0195699210, pages 547-549

28. JDM Derrett (1999), Law Religion and the State in India, Oxford University Press, ISBN 978-0571084784, Chapter 2

29. Malcolm Voyce (2010), Law and Anthropology: Current Legal Issues (Editors: Freeman andNapier), Oxford University Press, ISBN 978-0199580910, page 554 with footnote 27

30. Axel Michaels (2010), Hinduism and Law: An Introduction (Editors: Lubin and Davis),Cambridge University Press, ISBN 978-0521716260, Chapter 3 and pages 58-73 withfootnotes

31. Donald Davis (2010), The Spirit of Hindu Law, Cambridge University Press, ISBN 978-0521877046

32. Donald R. Davis, Jr., The Boundaries of Hindu Law: Tradition, Custom, and Politics in MedievalKerala. Corpus Iuris Sanscriticum et Fontes Iuris Asiae Meridianae et Centralis. Vol. 5. Ed.Oscar Botto (Torino (Italy): CESMEO, 2004).

33. Elisa Freschi (2012), Duty, Language and Exegesis in Prabhakara Mimamsa, BRILL,ISBN 978-9004222601, page 62

34. James Lochtefeld (2002), "Smrti", The Illustrated Encyclopedia of Hinduism, Vol. 2: N–Z,Rosen Publishing. ISBN 9780823931798, pages 656 and 461

35. Tomothy Lubin (2010), Hinduism and Law: An Introduction (Editors: Lubin and Davis),Cambridge University Press, ISBN 978-0521716260, pages 137-143

36. Donald Davis (2010), The Spirit of Hindu Law, Cambridge University Press, ISBN 978-0521877046, page 27

37. The Laws of Manu 2.6 with footnotes (https://archive.org/stream/lawsofman00manu#page/n173/mode/2up) George Bühler (Translator), The Sacred Books of the East, Vol. 25, OxfordUniversity Press

38. Brian Smith and Wendy Doniger (1992), The Laws of Manu, Penguin, ISBN 978-0140445404,pages 17-18

39. Robert Lingat (1973), The Classical Law of India, University of California Press, ISBN 978-0520018983, pages 7-8

40. Bilimoria, Purushottama (2011), The idea of Hindu law, Journal of Oriental Society of Australia,Vol. 43, pages 103-130

41. Devid Levinson (2002), Encyclopedia of Crime and Punishment, Volume 1, SAGEPublications, ISBN 978-0761922582, page 829

42. Donald R. Davis, Jr., "On Ātmastuṣṭi as a Source of Dharma," Journal of the AmericanOriental Society 127:3 (2007), pages 279–96

43. Werner Menski, Hindu Law: Beyond Tradition and Modernity (Delhi: Oxford UP, 2003), p.126and Domenico Francavilla, The Roots of Hindu Jurisprudence: Sources of Dharma andInterpretation in Mīmāṃsā and Dharmaśāstra. Corpus Iuris Sanscriticum. Vol. 7 (Torino:CESMEO, 2006), pp.165–76.

44. Ludo Rocher (November 1969 – February 1969). " "Lawyers" in Classical Hindu Law". Law &Society Review. 3 (2/3): 383–402. doi:10.2307/3053008 (https://doi.org/10.2307%2F3053008).JSTOR 3053008 (https://www.jstor.org/stable/3053008).

45. Terence Day (1982), The Conception of Punishment in Early Indian Literature, Wilfrid LaurierUniversity Press, ISBN 978-0919812154, pages 18-22

46. John Dawson Mayne (1910), A Treatise on Hindu Law and Usage (https://books.google.com/books?id=FwsTAAAAYAAJ) at Google Books, Stevens and Hynes, Harvard Law Library Series

47. KL Seshagiri Rao (1997), Practitioners of Hindu Law: Ancient and Modern (http://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/flr66&div=60&id=&page=), Fordham Law Review,vol. 66, pages 1185-1191

48. Benoy Kumar Sarkar (March 1921). "The Hindu Theory of the State". Political ScienceQuarterly. 36 (1): 79–90. doi:10.2307/2142662 (https://doi.org/10.2307%2F2142662).JSTOR 2142662 (https://www.jstor.org/stable/2142662).

49. Terence Day (1982), The Conception of Punishment in Early Indian Literature, Wilfrid LaurierUniversity Press, ISBN 978-0919812154, Chapters 2 & 3

50. MB Hooker (1978), The Indian-derived law texts of Southeast Asia, The Journal of AsianStudies, volume 37, number 2, pages 201-219

51. Hooker 1986.52. Creese 2009a, 2009b.53. Tomothy Lubin et al (2010), Hinduism and Law: An Introduction (Editors: Lubin and Davis),

Cambridge University Press, ISBN 978-0521716260, Chapter 1

Sources

Creese, Helen. 2009a. Old Javanese legal traditions in pre-colonial Bali. Bijdragen tot de Taal-,Land- en Volkenkunde 165(2/3): 241–290.Creese, Helen. 2009b. "Judicial processes and legal authority in pre-colonial Bali." Bijdragentot de Taal-, Land- en Volkenkunde 165(4): 515–550.

54. Washbrook, D. A. (1981). "Law, State and Agrarian Society in Colonial India". Modern AsianStudies. 15 (3): 649–721. doi:10.1017/s0026749x00008714 (https://doi.org/10.1017%2Fs0026749x00008714). JSTOR 312295 (https://www.jstor.org/stable/312295).

55. Scott Kugle (2001), Framed, Blamed and Renamed: The Recasting of Islamic Jurisprudence inColonial South Asia, Modern Asian Studies, 35(2), pages 257-313

56. Ludo Rocher, "Hindu Law and Religion: Where to draw the line?" in Malik Ram FelicitationVolume. ed. S.A.J. Zaidi (New Delhi, 1972), 190–1.

57. J.D.M. Derrett, Religion, Law, and the State in India (London: Faber, 1968), 96; For a relateddistinction between religious and secular law in Dharmaśāstra, see Timothy Lubin,"Punishment and Expiation: Overlapping Domains in Brahmanical Law," (https://ssrn.com/abstract=1084716) Indologica Taurinensia 33 (2007): 93–122.

58. K Ewing (1988), Sharia and ambiguity in South Asian Islam, University of California Press,ISBN 978-0520055759

59. A digest of Moohummudan law on the subjects to which it is usually applied by British courts ofjustice in India (https://archive.org/stream/digestmoohummud00bailgoog#page/n7/mode/2up)Neil Baillie, Smith, Elder & Co. London

60. Michael Anderson (1995), Institutions and Ideologies: A SOAS South Asia Reader (Studies inAsian Topics, Editors: David Arnold, Peter Robb), Routledge, ISBN 978-0700702848, Chapter10

61. AK Giri (Editors: Pietro Costa and Danilo Zolo, 2007), The Rule of Law History: Theory andCriticism, Springer, ISBN 978-1402057441, pages 596-597

62. Rosie Llewellyn-Jones (2007), The Great Uprising in India: 1857-58, Boydell & Brewer,ISBN 978-1843833048, pages 111-112

63. David Cook (2005), Understanding Jihad, University of California Press, ISBN, pages 80-8364. JDM Derrett (1968), Religion, Law and State in India, Faber and Faber, London, ISBN 978-

057108732765. Kunal Parker (Editor: Gerald James Larson, 2001), Religion and Personal Law in Secular

India: A Call to Judgment, Indiana University Press, ISBN 0-253-33990-1, pages 184-19966. Chandra Mallampalli (2004), Christians and Public Life in Colonial South India: 1863-1937,

Routledge, ISBN 0-415-32321-5, pages 59-6467. Seshagiri Rao, K.L. (1997–1998). Practitioners of Hindu Law: Ancient and Modern. Fordham

Law Review, 66, Retrieved 15 October 200868. Shabbeer Ahmed (July–September 2006). "Uniform Civil Code (Article 44 of the Constitution)

A Dead Letter". The Indian Journal of Political Science. Indian Political Science Association. 67(3): 545–552. JSTOR 41856241 (https://www.jstor.org/stable/41856241).

69. JDM Derrett (1978), Essays in Classical and Modern Hindu Law, Brill Academic, ISBN 978-9004057531, pages 68-75

70. Singh, Pritam. 2005. "Hindu Bias in India's 'Secular' Constitution: probing flaws in theinstruments of governance." Third World Quarterly. 26:6, 909–926.

71. Donald E Smith (2011), India as a Secular State, Princeton University Press,ISBN 9781178595253

72. Gerald James Larson (2001), Religion and Personal Law in Secular India: A Call to Judgment,Indiana University Press, ISBN 0-253-33990-1

Davis, Jr., Donald R. (2005). "Intermediate Realms of Law: Corporate Groups and Rulers inMedieval India". Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient. 48 (1): 92–117.doi:10.1163/1568520053450709 (https://doi.org/10.1163%2F1568520053450709).JSTOR 25165079 (https://www.jstor.org/stable/25165079).Davis, Jr., Donald R. (2004). "Dharma in Practice: Ācāra and Authority in MedievalDharmaśāstra" (https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/42941/1/10781_2004_Article_8651.pdf) (PDF). Journal of Indian Philosophy. 32 (5): 813–830. doi:10.1007/s10781-004-8651-4 (https://doi.org/10.1007%2Fs10781-004-8651-4). hdl:2027.42/42941 (https://hdl.handle.net/2027.42%2F42941).Davis, Jr. Donald R. 1999. “Recovering the Indigenous Legal Traditions of India: ClassicalHindu Law in Practice in Late Medieval Kerala (https://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1026483519342),"Journal of Indian Philosophy 27 (3): 159–213.Davis, Jr. Donald R. 2010. The Spirit of Hindu Law. Cambridge University Press.Derrett, J. Duncan M. 1968. Religion, Law, and the State in India. London: Faber & Faber.Dhavan, Rajeev. 1992. “Dharmaśāstra and Modern Indian Society: A Preliminary Exploration.”Journal of the Indian Law Institute 34 (4): 515–540.Fuller, C.J. 1988. "Hinduism and Scriptural Authority in Modern Indian Law." ComparativeStudies in Society and History. 30:2, 225–248.Hacker, Paul. 2006, Dharma in Hinduism (https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10781-006-9002-4),Journal of Indian Philosophy 34:5.Hooker, M.B., ed. 1986. The Laws of South-East Asia. Volume 1: The pre-modern texts.Singapore: Butterworth & Co.Jain, M.P. 1990. Outlines of Indian Legal History. 5th Ed, Nagpur, Wadhwa & Co.

Jha, Ganganath (trans.), Manusmṛti with the Manubhāṣyya of Medhātithi (https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/manusmriti-with-the-commentary-of-medhatithi), including additionalnotes, 1920.Lariviere, Richard W. 2003. The Nāradasmrti. crit. ed. and trans. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.Lariviere, Richard W. 1997. "Dharmaśāstra, Custom, `Real Law,' and `Apocryphal' Smrtis." In:Recht, Staat, und Verwaltung im klassischen Indien, ed. Bernhard Kölver. Munich: R.Oldenbourg, 97–110.Lariviere, Richard W. 1996. "Law and Religion in India." Law, Morality, and Religion: GlobalPerspectives, ed. Alan Watson. Berkeley: University of California, 75–94.Lingat, Robert. 1973. The Classical Law of India. trans. J.D.M. Derrett. Berkeley: Univ ofCalifornia Press.Lubin, Timothy. 2007. "Punishment and Expiation: Overlapping Domains in Brahmanical Law,"(https://ssrn.com/abstract=1084716) Indologica Taurinensia 33: 93–122.Lubin, Timothy. 2010. "Indic Conceptions of Authority." In: Hinduism and Law: An Introduction,ed. T. Lubin, D.R. Davis, Jr., and J.K. Krishnan. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 37–53.Lubin, Timothy. 2012. "Legal Diglossia: Modeling Discursive Practices in Premodern IndicLaw." In: Bilingual Discourse and Cross-cultural Fertilisation: Sanskrit and Tamil in MediaevalIndia, ed. Whitney Cox and Vincenzo Vergiani (Paris/Pondicherry: École française d’Extrême-Orient), pp. 411–455.Lubin, Timothy, Donald R. Davis, Jr., and Jayanth K. Krishnan, eds. 2010. Hinduism and Law:An Introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Menski, Werner. 2003. Hindu Law: Beyond Tradition and Modernity. Delhi: Oxford UP.Olivelle, Patrick. 2004a. "The Semantic History of Dharma in the Middle and late VedicPeriods." Journal of Indian Philosophy 32 (5): 491–511.Olivelle, Patrick. 2004b. The Law Code of Manu. New York: Oxford UP.

Olivelle, Patrick. 2000. Dharmasūtras: The Law Codes of Āpastamba, Gautama, Baudhāyana,and Vasistha. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.Rangaswami Aiyangar, K.V. 1941. Rājadharma. Adyar: Adyar Library.Rocher, Ludo. 1978. “Hindu Conceptions of Law (http://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/hastlj29&div=57&id=&page=)”, Hastings Law Journal, 29:6, 1283–1305.Rocher, Ludo. 1972. "Hindu Law and Religion: Where to draw the line?" Malik Ram FelicitationVolume, ed. S.A.J. Zaidi. New Delhi, 167–194.Rocher, Ludo. 1956. Vacaspati Misra: Vyavaharacintamani. A digest on Hindu legal procedure.Crit. Ed., with Introduction, Annotated Translation, and Appendices. Ghent University.Rocher, Rosane. 2010. "The Creation of Anglo-Hindu Law." In: Hinduism and Law: AnIntroduction, ed. T. Lubin, D.R. Davis, Jr., and J.K. Krishnan. Cambridge: Cambridge UniversityPress, 78–88.Solanki, Gopika. 2011. "Adjudication in Religious Family Laws: Cultural Accommodation, LegalPluralism and Gender Equality in India".Cambridge and New York: Cambridge UniversityPress.Washbrook, David A. 1981. "Law, State, and Agrarian Society in Colonial India (https://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0026749X00008714)", Modern Asian Studies. 15:3, 649–721.Wezler, Albrecht. 2004. “Dharma in the Veda and the Dharmaśāstras.” Journal of IndianPhilosophy 32 (5): 629–654.

Davis, Jr. Donald R. 2010. The Spirit of Hindu Law (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,2010), ISBN 978-0521877046Lubin, Timothy, Donald R. Davis, Jr., and Jayanth K. Krishnan, eds. Hinduism and Law: AnIntroduction (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010), ISBN 978-0521716260

Anglo-Indian law

J. Duncan M. Derrett, "The Administration of Hindu Law by the British," Comparative Studies inSociety and History, 4.1 (November 1961).

Modern Hindu law

N.R. Raghavachariar, Hindu Law- Principles and Precedents, 12th Edition (Madras).Satyajeet A. Desai, Mulla's Principles of Hindu Law. 17th ed. 2 Vol. (New Delhi: Butterworths,1998).Paras Diwan and Peeyushi Diwan, Modern Hindu Law. 10th ed. (Allahabad: Allahabad LawAgency, 1995).Ranganath Misra, Mayne's Treatise on Hindu Law and Usage. 15th ed. (New Delhi: BharatLaw House, 2003).Werner Menski, Hindu Law: Beyond Tradition and Modernity (Delhi: Oxford University Press,2003).Gopika Solanki, "Adjudication in Religious Family Laws: Cultural Accommodation, LegalPluralism and Gender equality in India" (Cambridge and New York: Cambridge UniversityPress, 2011).

Further reading

External links

JDM Derrett (1961), The administration of Hindu law by the British (https://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0010417500001213), Comparative Studies in Society and History, 4(1), pages 10–52KLS Rao (1998), Practitioners of Hindu Law: Ancient and Modern (http://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/flr66&div=60&id=&page=) Fordham Law ReviewWilliam Hay Macnaghten, Principles and Precedents of Hindu Law - Mitakshara (https://books.google.com/books?id=vFEZAAAAYAAJ&pg=PAPA109), p. PA109, at Google Books Rules ofJudicial Proceedings and Rules of Evidence in 11th century CE India, Harvard Law SchoolDonald Davis Jr (2007), Hinduism as a Legal Tradition (https://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jaarel/lfm004), Journal of the American Academy of Religion, Oxford University Press, 75(2), pages 241–267

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hindu_law&oldid=969033858"

This page was last edited on 23 July 2020, at 00:41 (UTC).

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By usingthis site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the WikimediaFoundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.