New Delhi: A fresh political controversy has erupted over Leader of Opposition in the Lok Sabha and Congress MP Rahul Gandhi’s reference to the Manusmriti during the Chhatraon Ki Goonj programme in Pune, Maharashtra, with BJP Lok Sabha MP Dr Nishikant Dubey strongly objecting to his remarks and advising him to read and understand other verses from the ancient text as well.
Rahul Gandhi was addressing a large gathering of female students in Pune late Saturday evening when he referred to a verse from the Manusmriti dealing with the traditional status and dependence of women. He used the reference while attempting to explain what he described as the prevailing mindset of sections of Indian society towards women.
Quoting the verse in English, Rahul Gandhi said:
“In childhood, a female belongs to her father. In youth, she belongs to her husband. When her lord is dead, she belongs to her sons. A woman must never be independent.” (बाल्ये पितुर्वशे तिष्ठेत् पाणिग्राहस्य यौवने। पुत्राणां भर्तरि प्रेते न भजेत्स्त्री स्वतन्त्रताम्॥). [1, 2]
During his Chhatraon Ki Goonj outreach programme, Gandhi described the traditional framework reflected in the passage as a “shame” and argued that women should not be treated as belonging to their fathers, husbands or sons, but should be recognised as individuals who belong to themselves.
His remarks have now drawn a sharp response from BJP MP Dr Nishikant Dubey, who took to social media to criticise the Congress leader and suggested that Gandhi should study other passages from the Manusmriti and India’s wider religious and literary traditions before commenting on the text.
Dubey said:
“You won’t be able to read Manusmriti, @RahulGandhi ji. This shloka is from Manusmriti—read it, understand it, speak it.”
Questioning Gandhi’s familiarity with India’s traditional literature, Dubey further asked whether Gandhi’s reliance on the English language meant that he was unfamiliar with India’s Vedas, Puranas, scriptures, Ramayana and Mahabharata.
The BJP MP then cited two other Sanskrit verses that, according to him, present a different perspective on the status of women:
“Yatra Naryastu Pujyante Ramante Tatra Devta” “यत्र नार्यस्तु पूज्यन्ते रमन्ते तत्र देवताः “
Where women are respected and worshipped, the gods reside.
He also cited:
“Yatraitaastu na pujyante sarvasatraphalah kriyah” “यत्रैतास्तु न पूज्यन्ते सर्वास्तत्राफलाः क्रियाः “
Where women are not respected, all works and noble deeds bear no fruit.
Dubey’s response has added a new dimension to a politically sensitive debate surrounding the Manusmriti, a text that has remained deeply contested in Indian public discourse, particularly over passages relating to caste, social hierarchy and the position of women.
The Manusmriti has long been a contentious subject among different sections of Hindu society. Several Dalit and backward-class political movements have historically opposed the text because of passages they interpret as endorsing social and caste hierarchies. Political organisations associated with Dalit and backward-class politics, including the Samajwadi Party, Bahujan Samaj Party and Rashtriya Janata Dal, have at different times expressed strong opposition to the text, with Manusmriti-burning protests also becoming part of anti-caste movements.
The Congress’s decision to bring the Manusmriti into a political discussion on women’s rights has therefore opened another sensitive front in the ongoing ideological debate.
Rahul Gandhi’s reference is particularly significant because he invoked the text while directly addressing young women and female students, linking the traditional concept of women’s dependence to what he described as attitudes that continue to influence sections of Indian society.
The controversy is also unfolding against the backdrop of a longstanding scholarly and social debate over the Manusmriti itself. While critics point to several verses dealing with caste and women’s status, some supporters of the text argue that later interpolations may have entered different versions and that certain passages attributed to the Manusmriti should not automatically be treated as representing its original form. Claims that some verses were added during or after the British period have also featured in this debate, although there is no universally accepted final resolution to the wider textual controversy.
Gandhi’s latest reference has consequently brought an already sensitive subject back into the centre of political discussion. His critics argue that selectively citing one verse gives an incomplete picture, while his supporters are likely to view the reference as part of his broader campaign against patriarchal attitudes and for greater independence and equality for women.
For the BJP, which has frequently positioned itself as a defender of Hindu cultural traditions, the controversy provides an opportunity to challenge Gandhi on questions relating to Hindu religious texts and traditions. Nishikant Dubey, who has frequently attacked Rahul Gandhi, the Gandhi-Nehru family and the Congress on political and ideological issues, has been among the first BJP leaders to respond forcefully.
मनु स्मृति पढ़ना आप से ना हो पाएगा @RahulGandhi जी, यह श्लोक मनुस्मृति का है,पढ़िए,समझिए,बोलिए ।अंग्रेज़ी भाषा के कारण आपको भारत का वेद,पुराण,ग्रंथ,रामायण,महाभारत कुछ नहीं आता है?
1. यत्र नार्यस्तु पूज्यन्ते रमन्ते तत्र देवताः⁰(Where women are respected and worshipped, the gods… https://t.co/p9RN9sy6Qi— Dr Nishikant Dubey (@nishikant_dubey) August 22, 2026
The issue now raises two larger political questions: how far the BJP will expand its campaign around Rahul Gandhi’s Manusmriti remarks, and what position the Congress leadership will officially adopt on the text.
The emerging political battle may therefore move beyond the particular verse quoted by Rahul Gandhi. The larger contest could centre on the Manusmriti itself, its interpretation, its contested verses and allegations of insult or disrespect towards Hindu traditions—potentially turning the issue into another major ideological confrontation between the BJP and Congress.
