Krishna said to Arjuna:

This imperishable yoga I imparted to Vivasvat; Vivasvat transmitted it to Manu, and Manu conveyed it to Ikshvaku.

Thus, handed down in succession (parampara), from teacher to pupil, the Royal Sages (rajarshis) knew it. But, owing to the long lapse of time, this yoga was lost to the world, O Parantapa.

This same immemorial teaching of yoga I have declared to thee today; for thou art my devotee (bhakta) and friend (sakha), and this esoteric teaching (rahasya) is truly exalted.

(Bhagavad Gita, Chapter 4, verses 1-3, Concord Grove Press edition)

~ * ~

The name or term “Manu” is used so often in Theosophy, particularly in the writings of H. P. Blavatsky, that any serious student of these teachings is liable to eventually wonder “Who or what is Manu?”

As a Sanskrit word, it is very closely related to Manas (the Sanskrit word for “mind”) and to our English word “man,” which is derived from that. The Hindu philosophical term “Manvantara,” frequently used in Theosophy for a period of universal, cosmic, or planetary evolutionary activity, is actually “manu-antara,” meaning a period of time “between Manus.”

This article will not answer the question entirely, partly because it would take too long and be too difficult to attempt to do so, and partly because the more one learns about this subject the more one realises that it is of so esoteric and sacred a nature that the Masters of Wisdom – the custodians of the Secret Doctrine itself – have not permitted very much of it to be directly spelt out or fully explained.

First, it may be worth remembering that this term “Manu,” like many other Hindu terms, is not actually used by the Trans-Himalayan Esoteric School or Brotherhood in their own direct teachings and sacred texts. And why would it be, seeing as that School is the School of the real Esoteric Buddhism rather than of Hinduism? But the Trans-Himalayan Adepts, such as the Mahatma K.H. and Mahatma M., saw fit for many Hindu terms to be used in the book “The Secret Doctrine,” for example, so as to aid the understanding of Western (and Indian) readers, who – then and to a large extent even now – have greater familiarity with Hindu terms, references, and language, than that of Tibetan and Trans-Himalayan Buddhism.

“The informing intelligences, which animate these various centres of Being, are referred to indiscriminately by men beyond the Great Range [i.e. beyond the Himalayas; Tibet and the Trans-Himalayan region is “beyond the Himalayas” from the perspective of someone in India, whilst this passage is written from the perspective of someone in Tibet or the Trans-Himalayan region] as the Manus, the Rishis, the Pitris, the Prajâpati, and so on; and as Dhyani Buddhas, the Chohans, Melhas (fire-gods), Bodhisattvas, and others, on this side. The truly ignorant call them gods; the learned profane, the one God; and the wise, the Initiates, honour in them only the Manvantaric manifestations of THAT which neither our Creators (the Dhyan Chohans) nor their creatures can ever discuss or know anything about.” (An Esoteric Commentary translated by H. P. Blavatsky in “The Secret Doctrine” Vol. 2, p. 34)

In a footnote on the same page, HPB clarifies: “The term Pitris [i.e. like that of Manu, etc.] is used by us in these Slokas to facilitate their comprehension, but it is not so used in the original Stanzas, where they have distinct appellations of their own, besides being called “Fathers” and “Progenitors.””

We will focus in this article on just some of the key points to be aware of.

One is that HPB quite often discourages the idea of thinking of Manu as a distinct individual or a particular Being or entity. She implies it is a symbolic and collective term and that Manu should be thought of as a merely allegorical personification or anthropomorphisation. For example:

“Manu is a convertible type, which can by no means be explained as a personage. Manu means sometimes humanity, sometimes man.” (“Isis Unveiled” Vol. 2, p. 271)

“When the word “Manu” is analysed it is found that Orientalists state that it is from the root “Man” to think, hence the thinking man. But, esoterically every Manu, as an anthropomorphized patron of his special cycle, or Round, is but the personified idea of the “Thought Divine” (like the Hermetic Pymander).” (“Transactions of The Blavatsky Lodge” p. 98-99)

“Vaivasvata Manu (the Manu of our own fifth race and Humanity in general) is the chief personified representative of the thinking Humanity of the fifth Root-race; and therefore he is represented as the eldest Son of the Sun and an Agnishwatta Ancestor.” (“Transactions of The Blavatsky Lodge” p. 99)

“Q . Is it possible to say that Manu is an individuality?

“A. In the abstract sense certainly not, but it is possible to apply an analogy. Manu is the synthesis perhaps of the Manasa, and he is a single consciousness in the same sense that while all the different cells of which the human body is composed are different and varying consciousnesses, there is still a unit of consciousness which is the man. But this unit, so to say, is not a single consciousness: it is a reflection of thousands and millions of consciousnesses which a man has absorbed. But Manu is not really an individuality, it is the whole of mankind.” (“Transactions of The Blavatsky Lodge” p. 99-100)

Nonetheless, on those very same pages we find statements on this subject such as “Each of the Manus, therefore, is the special god, the creator and fashioner of all that appears during his own respective cycle of being or Manvantara.” (p. 99) This definitely suggests that a Manu is in fact a Being and, even if one should not imagine that Being to be someone like a human being, a Manu still functions and works in a way which – to us at least – would appear like the functioning and work of an individual of some exalted kind.

The types of Manu most frequently mentioned in Theosophy are (1) the Manu of a Root Race, (2) the Root Manu, (3) the Seed Manu.

The concept of a Root Race Manu is the more simple to understand. Human evolution on this (or any) Earth takes place through seven major vast epochs of development and civilisation, according to Theosophy, and these are also known as Root Races. The present Root Race (called the Aryan, in its original and non-racist meaning, because it began in Aryavarta, an old name for India) is said to be the fifth of these seven. The fourth, which preceded it, was the Atlantean, and the third was the Lemurian. Since everything is in reality sevenfold, each Root Race consists of seven sub-races. The sixth sub-race of the fifth Root Race is now starting to come into being, particularly in America, especially North America.

It is thus comparatively easy to form at least some mental conception of each Root Race being instigated or set into motion in some way by a very advanced great Being.

“Vaisvaswata (Sk.). The name of the Seventh Manu; the forefather of the post-diluvian race, or our own fifth humankind. A reputed son of Sûrya (the Sun), he became, after having been saved in an ark (built by the order of Vishnu) from the Deluge [i.e. a reference to the great floods that brought about the destruction of Atlantis], the father of Ikshwâku, the founder of the solar race of kings. (See “Sûryavansa”.)” (HPB, “The Theosophical Glossary” p. 359)

“The Secret Doctrine” briefly discloses, however, that each of the seven sub-races of a Root Race also has its own Manu or forefather or progenitor and this passage seems to again suggest that Manus on Earth are actual beings, comparable to Rishis (great Sages) or even to gods: “. . . the seven sub-races of the new Root-Race, in each of which there will be a “Manu,” . . . Notwithstanding the terrible, and evidently purposed, confusion of Manus, Rishis, and their progeny in the Purânas, one thing is made clear: there have been and there will be seven Rishis in every Root-Race (called also Manvantara in the sacred books) as there are fourteen Manus in every Round, the “presiding gods, the Rishis and Sons of the Manus” being identical.” (Vol. 2, p. 614)

But what about a Root Manu? Despite the great similarity of terms, a Root Manu and a Root Race Manu are not the same.

“There are “root-Manus” and what we have to clumsily translate as “the seed-Manus” – the seeds for the human races of the forthcoming Round (a mystery divulged, but to those who have passed their third degree in initiation).”

“Vaivasvata thus, though seventh in the order given, is the primitive Root-Manu of our fourth Human Wave [i.e. the major evolutionary life cycle more typically called the Fourth Round; whether the Fourth Round of the whole Earth Chain or just on our Earth globe is a matter of secondary importance]: (the reader must always remember that Manu is not a man but collective humanity), while our Vaivasvata was but one of the seven Minor Manus who are made to preside over the seven races of this our planet. Each of these has to become the witness of one of the periodical and ever-recurring cataclysms (by fire and water in turn) that close the cycle of every Root-race. And it is this Vaivasvata – the Hindu ideal embodiment called respectively Xisuthros, Deukalion, Noah and by other names – who is the allegorical man who rescued our race when nearly the whole population of one hemisphere perished by water, while the other hemisphere was awakening from its temporary obscuration. . . .

“Just as each planetary Round commences with the appearance of a “Root-Manu” (Dhyan Chohan) and closes with a “Seed-Manu,” so a Root- and a Seed-Manu appear respectively at the beginning and the termination of the human period on any particular planet. It will be easily seen from the foregoing statement that a Manu-antaric period means, as the term implies, the time between the appearance of two Manus or Dhyan Chohans; . . .” (HPB, “The Septenary Principle in Esotericism,” also quoted in “The Secret Doctrine” Vol. 2, p. 308-309)

How a Manu can be both “collective humanity” and “allegorical” and at the same time a Dhyan Chohan, i.e. an actual god, is hard to understand, although it is for certain that the stories about the adventures, feats, and activities of Manus found in Hindu scriptures such as the Puranas should never be taken as literal historical accounts, even if many of them do indeed contain elements of truth and esoteric history.

It may assist our understanding to know that the collectivity of Lunar Pitris (“pitris” meaning “fathers,” “progenitors”) who produced the astral forms for our humanity on this Earth in this Fourth Round, thus “giving birth” (in a sense) to our First Root Race, can be thought of as our Root Manu. The Lunar Pitris were certainly not just one individual entity but they were nonetheless a collectivity of Dhyan Chohans who represented the highest humanity that had been on the Lunar Chain – the Moon – of which our Earth is the reincarnation. This then helps to solve some of the apparent contradictions in HPB’s statements.

“You may say that Manu is a generic name for the Pitris, the progenitors of mankind. They come, as I have shown, from the Lunar Chain. They give birth to humanity, for, having become the first men, they give birth to others by evolving their shadows, their astral selves. They not only give birth to humanity but to animals and all other creatures.” (“Transactions of The Blavatsky Lodge” p. 100)

As for the Seed Manus, they are sometimes termed Sishta or Sishtas, pronounced Shishta(s). We should not expect to fully or clearly understand their work and nature for, as we read, they are “a mystery divulged, but to those who have passed their third degree in initiation.” But here are some words from HPB regarding this subject:

“. . . those still occupying animal forms after the middle turning-point of the Fourth Round – will not become men at all during this Manwantara. They will reach to the verge of humanity only at the close of the seventh Round to be, in their turn, ushered into a new chain after pralaya – by older pioneers, the progenitors of humanity, or the Seed-Humanity (Sishta), viz., the men who will be at the head of all at the end of these [Seven] Rounds [of our Earth Chain].” (“The Secret Doctrine” Vol. 1, p. 182)

“Sishta (Sk.). The great elect or Sages, left after every minor Pralaya (that which is called “obscuration” in Mr. Sinnett’s Esoteric Buddhism), when the globe goes into its night or rest, to become, on its re-awakening, the seed of the next humanity. Lit. “remnant.”” (“The Theosophical Glossary” p. 300)

“. . . some of the great adepts will return in the Seventh Race, when all Error will be made away with, and the advent of TRUTH will be heralded by those Sishta, the holy “Sons of Light.”” (“The Secret Doctrine” Vol. 2, p. 531)

““The Imperishable Sacred Land.” The reasons for this name are explained as follows: This “Sacred Land” – of which more later on – is stated never to have shared the fate of the other continents; because it is the only one whose destiny it is to last from the beginning to the end of the Manvantara throughout each Round. It is the cradle of the first man and the dwelling of the last divine mortal, chosen as a Sishta for the future seed of humanity. Of this mysterious and sacred land very little can be said, . . .” (“The Secret Doctrine” Vol. 2, p. 6 – the “Imperishable Sacred Land” typically refers to some mysterious region near the North Pole, which is where the First Root Race came into being; a little-noticed statement in “The Secret Doctrine” Vol. 2 reveals that the “Imperishable Sacred Land” really refers to Siberia – large parts of which are in the Arctic Circle – and which is the vast Asian part of Russia; for the explanations regarding this, please see the last section of the article The Occult Importance of Central Asia.)

One might conclude from these quotes that the Seed Manu and Root Manu are actually one and the same group of beings. This seems to be confirmed in “The Secret Doctrine” Vol. 2, p. 164, where the Lunar Pitris – who, as said above, produced the astral forms for our humanity on this Earth in this Fourth Round, thus “giving birth” (in a sense) to our First Root Race – are called, in the words of an Esoteric Commentary, “the ‘Spiritual Lives’ projected by the absolute WILL and LAW, at the dawn of every rebirth of the worlds. These LIVES are the divine ‘Sishta,’ (the seed-Manus, or the Prajâpati and the Pitris).” However, we see on p. 309 of Vol. 2 that the names applied in Hinduism to the various Root Manus and Seed Manus are never identical, even though sometimes similar.

In “The Secret Doctrine” Vol. 2, p. 72, we read that “we are taught that our present physical mankind – or the Vaivasvata humanity – began only 18 millions of years ago.” Similarly, on p. 310, we read of “the Vaivasvata Manvantara” beginning “18,000,000 odd years ago.” Those familiar with the book will recognise 18-million years as the duration said to have elapsed since the “lighting up of Manas” occurred, for details of which the reader is invited to examine Manas – The Mystery of Mind, Ego Is Not A Bad Word, and Human Evolution in The Secret Doctrine. But that monumental event – which made humanity true, intelligent, self-conscious human beings, each possessing an individual reincarnating soul, instead of just remaining “animal-man” – took place in the Third Root Race, the Lemurian. We do not generally associate the name of Vaivasvata Manu with the Lemurian Race but usually only with our Fifth Race and with the Fourth Round as a whole. What then could be meant by this?

“. . . as the moon receives its light from the Sun, so the descendants of the Lunar Pitris receive their higher mental light from the Sun or the “Son of the Sun.” For all you know Vaivasvata Manu may be an Avatar or a personification of MAHAT, commissioned by the Universal Mind to lead and guide thinking Humanity onwards.” (“Transactions of The Blavatsky Lodge” p. 100)

As we said in The Great Sacrifice & The Mystery-Land of Shambhala:

“It was the Light of Manas (Mind) that was most prominently received in that great Epoch but, earlier in the Lemurian Age, this Maha-Guru of whom we are speaking incarnated on Earth along with the Sons of Will and Yoga and established the Great Brotherhood at Shambhala. . . . from “The Secret Doctrine” (Vol. 2, p. 282) we learn that “Out of the seven virgin-men (Kumara) [i.e. a reference to “the “Sons of Will and Yoga,” the immaculate progeny of the Androgynous Third Race,” according to the footnote] four sacrificed themselves for the sins of the world and the instruction of the ignorant, to remain till the end of the present Manvantara. . . . Higher than the “Four” is only ONE on Earth as in Heavens – that still more mysterious and Solitary Being described in Book I.” If this is so, it would certainly be correct to speak of this Maha-Guru as the one ever-present Supreme Avatar, the supreme and constant incarnation on Earth of the Universal Logos itself. In this connection, HPB’s otherwise enigmatic remark on p. 100 of the “Transactions of the Blavatsky Lodge” may begin to make much more sense: “For all you know Vaivasvata Manu may be an Avatar or a personification of MAHAT, commissioned by the Universal Mind to lead and guide thinking Humanity onwards.””

It is therefore our understanding that, in one of its meanings, the name of Vaivasvata Manu applies to “the “Nameless One” who has so many names, and yet whose names and whose very nature are unknown. He is the “Initiator,” called the “GREAT SACRIFICE.” For, sitting at the threshold of LIGHT, he looks into it from within the circle of Darkness, which he will not cross; nor will he quit his post till the last day of this life-cycle.” (“The Secret Doctrine” Vol. 1, p. 208)

Mahat, as indicated, is a term for the Universal Mind or Cosmic Mind, also termed the Third Logos. Having read this far, we may now find somewhat more comprehensible and meaningful the following important passage from “The Secret Doctrine” Vol. 2, p. 310-311:

“Thus it is shown that there is no real discrepancy in speaking of the Vaivasvata Manvantara (Manu-antara, lit. “between two Manus”) 18,000,000 odd years ago, when physical, or the truly human man first appeared in his Fourth Round on this earth; and of the other Vaivasvatas, e.g., the Manu of the Great Cosmic or sidereal Flood (a mystery), or again the Manu Vaivasvata of the submerged Atlantis, when the racial Vaivasvata saved the elect of Humanity, the Fifth Race, from utter destruction. As the several (and quite different) events are purposely blended in the Vishnu and other Purânas in one narrative, there may yet be a great deal of perplexity left in the profane reader’s mind. Therefore, as constant elucidation is needed, we must be forgiven unavoidable repetitions. The blinds which conceal the real mysteries of Esoteric philosophy are great and puzzling, and even now the last word cannot be given. The veil, however, may be a little more removed and some explanations, hitherto denied, may now be offered to the earnest student.

“As somebody – Colonel Vans Kennedy, if we do not mistake – remarked, “the first principle in Hindu religious philosophy is Unity in diversity.” If all those Manus and Rishis are called by one generic name, this is due to the fact that they are one and all the manifested Energies of one and the same LOGOS, the celestial, as well as the terrestrial messengers and permutations of that Principle which is ever in a state of activity; conscious during the period of Cosmic evolution, unconscious (from our point of view) during Cosmic rest, as the Logos sleepeth in the bosom of THAT which “sleepeth not,” nor is it [i.e. THAT, the Absolute, which is the Source of the Logos and thus of all manifestation] ever awake – for it is SAT or Be-ness, not a Being. It is from IT that issues the great unseen Logos, who evolves all the other logoi, the primeval MANU [i.e. the primeval Mind or Thought, literally, if we recall the actual meaning of the word] who gives being to the other Manus, who emanate the universe and all in it collectively, and who represent in their aggregate the manifested Logos. Hence we learn in the “Commentaries” that while no Dhyan Chohan, not even the highest, can realise completely “the condition of the preceding Cosmic evolution,” “the Manus retain a knowledge of their experiences of all the Cosmic evolutions throughout Eternity.” This is very plain: the first Manu is called Swayambhûva, “the Self-manifested,” the Son of the unmanifested FATHER. The Manus are the creators of the creators of our First Race – the Spirit of mankind – which does not prevent the seven Manus from having been the first “pre-Adamic” men on Earth.

“Manu [i.e. the historical Manu of ancient India, described in “The Theosophical Glossary” as “The great Indian legislator. . . . the first Legislator, almost a Divine Being.”] declares himself created by Viraj, or Vaiswanara, (the Spirit of Humanity), which means that his Monad emanates from the never resting Principle in the beginning of every new Cosmic activity: that Logos or UNIVERSAL MONAD (collective Elohim) that radiates from within himself all those Cosmic Monads that become the centres of activity – progenitors of the numberless Solar systems as well as of the yet undifferentiated human monads of planetary chains as well as of every being thereon. Each Cosmic Monad is “Swayambhûva,” the SELF-BORN, which becomes the Centre of Force, from within which emerges a planetary chain (of which chains there are seven in our system), and whose radiations become again so many Manus Swayambhûva (a generic name, mysterious and meaning far more than appears), each of these becoming, as a Host, the Creator of his own Humanity.” (bold and underlining added)

One does not need to understand all of that but hopefully some of the most important points have come across. Perhaps one of the most surprising was to see that in that passage the Manus are implied to be a different class or grade of Being than the Dhyan Chohans and that in contrast with even the highest Dhyan Chohans, the Manus “retain a knowledge of their experiences of all the Cosmic evolutions throughout Eternity.” Be that as it may, the situation is made much less clear by such statements from HPB as the following:

“Esoteric doctrine teaches that the Dhyan Chohans are the collective aggregate of divine Intelligence or primordial mind, and that the first Manus – the seven “mind-born” Spiritual Intelligences – are identical with the former [i.e. the Manus are identical with the Dhyan Chohans]. Hence . . . the Dhyani-Energies are the Manus, or Manu-Swayambhûva collectively. The direct connection, moreover, between the “Manus” and “Mahat” is easy to see.” (“The Secret Doctrine” Vol. 1, p. 452)

“Fohat runs the Manus’ (or Dhyan-Chohans’) errands . . .” (“The Secret Doctrine” Vol. 1, p. 63)

Raghavan Iyer, in his article “Mahat, Manu and The Avatar” which comments on some of the same passages we have been discussing in this article, says in part:

“It is through Mahat that the highest independent intelligences, one with the Unmanifest Logos, become the Manus, the guiding spirits of thinking humanity. . . . at the heart of the entire process of manifestation, it is impossible to have a cosmos without Dhyani Buddhas. The failure to recognize this has been the terrible conceit of the West in the modern age. To some it may seem more scientific to refer to these Dhyanis as rays, and more religious to speak of them as Buddhas. Yet all of this merely arises out of confusion. When, through the experience of meditation, one goes beyond form into a deeper sense of being, one enters a realm of space and time where these polarities and contrasts do not apply. Through meditation one may touch the pure ground of true bliss, the experience of which is the basis of all devotion. . . . On the plane of Higher Manas, correlative with Mahat, though not identical with it, subjectivity and objectivity have to do with fields and entities which precede the gross differentiation of the terrestrial plane. It is only by understanding this through a maturity in consciousness gained through meditation that one is prepared to consider that Vaivasvata Manu may be an Avatar of Mahat commissioned by the Universal Mind to guide all humanity.

“To discount the conception of Manu as a being, preferring the metaphor of a focussing of rays, suggests that one is threatened by the facts of evolution, foolishly determined to run away from one’s spiritual progenitors, preceptors and teachers. And to run away is to cheapen the concept of such beings through the popular notion of an arbitrary personal god. This only arose, and held a hypnotic sway over many people, because it crudely concretized that which is essentially true. Only through the awakened devotional heart may one begin to grasp the indescribable majesty of such beings. Only through a sense of their reality may one begin to apprehend the archetypal meaning of the long pilgrimage of mankind, within which every unit bears fundamental responsibility, but receives divine guidance. . . . comprehending the conception of Manu as the embodiment of a Mahatic plan . . . It is in relation to the unmanifest Logos, symbolized here as the primeval Manu, that the particular Manus within manvantaric time may be considered as Avatars of the manifested Logos or Mahat.”

Finally, we ought to mention the ancient Hindu text known as the Laws of Manu, Ordinances of Manu, or simply the Book of Manu. Its Sanskrit name is Manusmriti and it is also called the Manava Dharma Shastra.

As we saw in that lengthy “Secret Doctrine” quote a few minutes ago: “Manu [i.e. the historical Manu of ancient India, described in “The Theosophical Glossary” as “The great Indian legislator. . . . the first Legislator, almost a Divine Being.”] declares himself created by Viraj, or Vaiswanara, (the Spirit of Humanity), which means that his Monad emanates from the never resting Principle in the beginning of every new Cosmic activity: that Logos or UNIVERSAL MONAD . . .” The historically known Manu who first authored this text could perhaps thus also be seen as a type of Avatar.

The book, considered a scripture, is essentially a discourse on duties, rights, laws, conduct, virtue, etc. and how they should be applied in Indian life and society. Contemporary historians consider it no older than about 2,000 years but Theosophy holds it to be much more ancient in its original form. And that is the important point here: the Laws of Manu as they exist today are not in their original form. H. P. Blavatsky speaks positively regarding some of their contents but we also find her saying:

“The Brahmins [i.e. the orthodox Hindu priesthood] have embellished their laws of Manu in the post-Mahabharatean period [i.e. sometime within the past 5,000 years or so]. . . . It is the loss of the keys to symbolism and to the laws of Manu which has produced all the errors and all the abuses that have infiltrated into Brahmanism.” (“Misconceptions,” an article in “Theosophy: Some Rare Perspectives”)

“. . . the disfigured laws of Manu . . .” (“The Secret Doctrine” Vol. 2, p. 748)

It appears that the original and most ancient version of the Laws of Manu is not publicly accessible or available to the world nowadays. Instead, we unfortunately have a version filled with caste-prejudice extolling the superiority of the Brahmins and also with many extremely misogynistic statements which are highly offensive to women as well as demeaning to men. To take one verse of this nature: “Husbands may be lacking virtue, may be sexual perverts, may be immoral and devoid of any good qualities, and yet women must constantly worship and serve them.” In our compilation The Elevation of Woman, one can see just how HPB and the Masters would respond to such horrendous trash. The scripture also contains absurd statements such as “Wise people should avoid sitting alone with one’s mother, daughter or sister. Since carnal desire is always strong, it can lead to temptation.” Only an extremely perverted or degraded mind could have ever thought such a restriction necessary.

There are many articles online written by Indian women exposing and condemning the Manusmriti, such as “By Burning Manusmriti, We Are Burning Discrimination” which begins with the words “Time and again, women are asked to adhere to the various roles and the principles set for us, ‘for our own good.’ We are asked to keep our heads low and our voices lower. We are told to restrict ourselves to the boundaries of our houses, and our opinions within the confines of our mind. These codes of conduct are embedded in the Hindu dharma, and compiled together as the Manusmriti.”

Jay Lakhani, who passed away in 2020 and was the most prominent representative of Hinduism here in the UK, has several YouTube videos in which he argues that the Laws of Manu are “long past their use-by date” and should be discarded and forgotten about since they are harmful to both the public image of Hinduism and to those who read and accept them as true. Interestingly, he says that he doesn’t know any Hindu who ever reads or uses the Manusmriti nowadays; one short video titled “Manusmriti is Outdated” can be seen here. Like many Hindus, however, he did not recognise that there may have been an earlier, older version of the Laws of Manu which was actually fully in harmony with spiritual truth and universal principles.

So it is important for Theosophists to be aware of these details and to be careful, whenever speaking of the Laws of Manu, to never give the impression that Theosophy endorses or admires the text as it exists and as it is known today.

“In India . . . the great Rishis and Manus had appeared in the beginning of our Race, but now appear no longer.” (H. P. Blavatsky, “The Secret Doctrine” Vol. 2, p. 178)

~ * ~

Please visit the Articles page for the complete list of over 300 articles about all aspects of Theosophy and the Theosophical Movement. You can also use the search function (magnifying glass symbol at the top of the page) to help find answers to questions you may have about these teachings.

~ BlavatskyTheosophy.com ~