This is the most puzzling part of the verse for modern readers. Today, "usurer" implies an exploitative moneylender. But in ancient Hindu legal texts, usury (charging interest on loans) was not entirely forbidden; it was regulated but considered a morally inferior profession.
kitavān kuśīlavān krūrān pāṣaṇḍasthāṃśca mānavān | vikarmasthān śauṇḍikāṃśca kṣipraṃ nirvāsayet purāt || 225 || Literal English Translation:
“Na strī svātantryam arhati” – “A woman does not deserve independence.”
कितवान् कुशीलवान् क्रूरान् पाषण्डस्थांश्च मानवान् ।विकर्मस्थान् शौण्डिकांश्च क्षिप्रं निर्वासयेत् पुरात् ॥ २२५ ॥ Transliteration (IAST):
: Those who commit violent acts or harbor malice. manusmriti chapter 9 verse 225
1. The Ideal of a Harmonious State ( Ramrajya / Dharmic State )
"Gamblers, dancers and singers, cruel men, men belonging to heretical sects, men addicted to evil deeds, and dealers in wine—these the King shall instantly banish from his town."
Ganganatha Jha’s translation states: 3. Key Subjects for Banishment The verse targets specific groups deemed social disruptors:
The "Deep Feature" of Manusmriti 9.225 is that It argues that the moment a society stops "making an effort" ( yatnāt ) to protect its most alienated members, it loses the moral and structural standing to govern the rest. It is an ancient argument for a welfare state that extends even to those who hate it—a paradox necessary for the survival of civilization. This is the most puzzling part of the
"Gamblers, actors, cruel men, men belonging to heretical sects, those addicted to forbidden occupations, and liquor-vendors—all these the King shall immediately banish from his town." Context & Review
Specifically fraudulent gamblers or those who use deceit in games of chance. Kuśīlavān (Dancers/Performers):
In contemporary legal and human rights discourses, verses like Manusmriti 9.225 are viewed through a critical lens.
"Yeṣāṃ hi nāsty aṅgakṛtaḥ sadācāro na parāṅmukhaḥ | Tāṃś ca yatnād gopayet tāsāṃ rakṣāṇāṃ hi mūlam idam ||" Key Subjects for Banishment The verse targets specific
What is undeniable is this: Verse 225 has outlived its legal utility. Its continued relevance lies not in its application—which is impossible in a constitutional democracy—but in the debate it fuels about the role of ancient texts in modern religious identity. It forces us to ask a difficult question: Can a community revere a text while explicitly rejecting some of its verses? The answer, for most thoughtful practitioners of Hinduism today, is a decisive . The Manusmriti is a museum of Indian legal history, not a blueprint for 21st-century justice.
The , also known as the Laws of Manu , is a central legal and social text of ancient Hinduism. Chapter 9, Verse 225 (Manusmriti 9.225) specifically addresses social order and the King's duty to maintain public morality by banishing individuals deemed harmful to the community . 1. Sanskrit Text and Transliteration The original metrical Sanskrit for this verse is:
Beyond social justice, also critique the verse within the context of its chapter, arguing that the same authoritarian logic used to banish "undesirables" from the town is the same logic used to justify the subjugation of women within the home. They see it as part of a patriarchal blueprint.
user wants a long article on Manusmriti Chapter 9 Verse 225. I need to follow the search plan outlined in the hint. The plan has three rounds. I'll start with Round One, which involves specific, targeted searches to locate the verse and its context. I'll use the search tool with the specified queries. search results have provided some initial information. Result 0 from the first query shows a translation of Manusmriti Chapter 9. Result 3 from the second query shows the Sanskrit text for Verse 9.225. Result 0 from the fifth query shows a translation. Result 0 from the sixth query shows a commentary. I will now open these to gather more details. opened pages provide useful information. The Sanskrit text and an English translation of Verse 9.225 are available. The commentary page for Verse 9.225 might contain more details. I need to open the comparative notes for Verse 9.225. I'll also search for scholarly articles or books that discuss this verse. search results have provided the verse text, translation, commentary, and some scholarly references. Now for Round Two, I need to gather historical, legal, social, and critical perspectives. I'll search for these aspects. search results have provided various perspectives. For Round Three, I need to gather more details on historical acceptance, modern views, comparisons with other texts, and notable critiques. I'll search for these. have gathered a substantial amount of information from various sources. The search results include the verse text, translation, commentary, historical context, and critical perspectives. I will now structure a long article covering the verse's Sanskrit text, translation, context within the Manusmriti, significance, interpretations, historical impact, and modern relevance. The article will be organized into sections: introduction, the verse and its translation, context within chapter 9, detailed analysis of groups mentioned, commentary and interpretations, role in statecraft and social control, historical impact and colonial legacy, modern perspectives and controversies, and conclusion. I will cite the relevant sources. the sprawling legal and ethical universe of the Manusmriti , a cornerstone of ancient Indian jurisprudence, Chapter 9 is best known for its intricate regulations concerning the family—defining the duties of husbands, wives, and sons. Within this domestic framework, however, lies a powerful and evocative verse that shifts focus entirely. Verse 225 abruptly commands the king to act as a purifier of the public sphere, ordering the expulsion of a specific set of individuals from his realm. This verse provides a unique window into the ancient state’s concern for its moral and social character, revealing who was considered a threat to the righteous order, or dharma .