Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

India as Known to Panini: A Study of the Cultural Material in the Ashtadhyayi c12.s5: Section 5. Political Sangha or Gaṇa

India as Known to Pāṇini: A Study of the Cultural Material in the Ashṭādhyāyī c12.s5

Language
English

Section 5. Political Sangha or Gaṇa

c12.s5.1

*JANAPADA AND JANAPADINS*—The country was divided into *Janapadas* demarcated from one another by boundaries (*Janapada-tadavadhyoścha*, IV.2.124). In Pāṇini *Janapada* stands for country, and *Janapadin* for its citizens. The derivative meaning of the term *Janapada* points to the early stage of land-taking by the *Jana* for a settled way of life. This process of the first settlement on land had completed its final stage prior to the time of Pāṇini. The *Janapadas* which were originally named after the peoples settled in them, dropped their tribal significance and figured as territorial units or regions. Pāṇini testifies to this process (*Sūtrakāṇḍa*, I.2.51-57) by stating that the names of the *Janapadas* did not take after their original settlers, but were then current as independent proper names for territorial units. He even goes to the extent of arguing that if the derivative meaning of such geographical names as Pañchāla was insisted upon, there might be cases in which with the disappearance of the derivative cause, the name of the country itself formed on that basis should disappear (*Lub-yogāprakhyānāt*, I.2.54; *Yoga-pramāṇe cha tadabhāve' darśanaṁ syāt*, I.2.55). This appears to be only a rational attempt to meet the views of extreme etymologists; it does not mean that in Pāṇini's time the essential relationship between the *Janapadas* and the *Janapadin* rulers had in any way weakened. We find that Pāṇini later on makes that relationship a real basis for his *sūtras*. For example, the *sūtra*, *Janapade lup* (IV.2.81) alludes to the name of a *Janapada* derived from its inhabitants but without any extra affix. Moreover, we find from Pāṇini's own statement that in the majority of the ancient *Janapadas* their original Kshatriya settlers still held sway and the political power was concentrated in their hands.

c12.s5.2

In this connection *sūtra* IV.1.168, *Janapada-śabdāt kshatriyād-a\~n*, is important. Grammatically it teaches that the affix *a\~n* comes in the sense of a descendant after a word which is both the name of a country and a Kshatriya tribe. Here the identity of the *Janapadas* and the powerful Kshatriya clans settled there is repeated. These ruling Kshatriyas inhabiting the *Janapadas* were, as we are informed by Kātyāyana, governed by two-fold constitutions; some were monarchies and others were Saṅghas or republics (*kshatriyād-ekar\~jāt sa\~ngha-pratishedhārtham*, IV.1.168.1). As monarchical states, Pāṇini mentions the following: Sālveya, Gāndhāri, Magadha, Kaliṅga, Sūramasa, Kosala, Ajāda, Kuru, Sālva, Pratyagratha, Kālakūṭa, Aśmaka, Kamboja, Avanti and Kunti. Besides these names included in the *sūtras*, there might be others which were implied in Pāṇini's rules, of which Pata\~njali mentions Videha, Pa\~nchāla, A\~nga, Dārva, Nīpa, Sauvīra and Ambashṭha, the latter two being mentioned in the *Ashṭādhyāyī* in a different context. The kings who ruled over these *Janapadas* were Kshatriyas, and the same word denoted both a descendant of the Kshatriyas, *i.e.*, a citizen and their king (*Kshatriya-samāna-śabdāt janapadāt tasya rājany-apatyavat*, IV.1.168.3). For example, Pā\~nchāla was the name of a Kshatriya descendent of the Pa\~nchāla tribe and also of the king of that *Janapada*. Similarly, *Pa\~nchālāḥ* in the plural was the name of the country as well as the name of the Kshatriya clan. Although a *Janapada* consisted of other castes also besides the ruling Kshatriya caste, still the political sovereignty was in the hands of the dominant Kshatriya clan who had founded that *Janapada*. This was a fact so patently recognized that Kātyāyana questions the advisability of including the word Kshatriya in *sūtra* IV.1.168. His point is that only the descendants of the ruling Kshatriya tribe were designated by the *apatya*-denoting suffix added after the name of a *Janapada*, (*Kshatriya-grahaṇānarthakye choktam*, IV.1.168.2). Patañjali definitely states that such words as *Kshaudrakya* and *Mālavya* denoted only a member of the Kshatriya caste, and not other sections of the population, such as the labourers or slaves living there (II.269). No doubt, there were Brāhmaṇas and other castes also inhabiting these *Janapadas*, but the political power was centred in the hands of the Kshatriyas, and only in exceptional cases of any other caste.

c12.s5.3

*SANGHA*—We have seen above that Kātyāyana takes *Saṅgha* as a form of government distinct from *Ekarāja*, where sovereignty vested in one (*ekādhīna*), and not in the many as in the *Saṅgha* (*gaṇādhīna*). This meaning is also borne out by the rules of Pāṇini. Pāṇini speaks of *Saṅgha* as a generic term, applied to the following. Firstly, *Saṅgha* means 'a multitude', as in the expression *grāmya-paśu-saṅgha*, a herd of domestic cattle. In the same sense it is also applied to a multitude of human beings. Secondly, a *Saṅgha* was a term for a *Nikāya*, which is defined by Pāṇini as a corporate body where the distinction of upper and lower does not exist (*Saṅghe chānauttarādharye*, III.3.42). This applied to a religious *Saṅgha* functioning as a fraternity without distinctions of high (*uttara*) and low (*adhara*). Thirdly, there is the *sūtra*, *Saṅgh-odghau gaṇa-praśaṁsayoḥ* (III.3.86), which speaks of the political *Saṅgha* technically known as *Gaṇa*. *Saṅgha* and *Gaṇa* were used as synonymous words for a republic. Pāṇini speaks of the Yaudheyas as a *Saṅgha*, whereas they refer to themselves as a *Gaṇa* on their coins, albeit in the post-Pāṇinian period.

c12.s5.4

*THE RELIGIOUS SANGHA*—Pāṇini mentions the religious *Saṅgha* as *Nikāya*, as we have seen. The religious *Saṅgha* was a perfect copy of the political model except in one important respect. We shall presently see that in the Kshatriya tribes organised as *Saṅghas*, the political power vested in the hands of those families which were eligible for regular coronation (*abhisheka-maṅgala*) and consecrated to rulership by that ceremony (*abhishikta-vaṁśyas*). Other castes in the *Gaṇa* did not share the political power, although they owed allegiance to the *Janapada* and the *Janapadins* (IV.3.100). This distinction between castes did not obtain in the sphere of religious *Saṅgha* based on equality. In fact, the different orders in the religious *Saṅgha* or Church were known as *Nikāyas*, of which the Buddhist *Saṅgha* in course of time developed eighteen. Not only Buddha, but other religious teachers who were his contemporaries, *e.g.* Purāṇa Kassapa, Makkhali Gosāla, and others have been called *Saṅghino*, heads of *Saṅghas*, *Gaṇino*, heads of *Gaṇas* and *Gaṇāchāriyo*, teachers of *Gaṇas*. The *Saṅgha* spirit in Pāṇini's time had influenced every sphere of public life, political, economic, religious, social and educational. Like the political *Saṅghas*, even *Gotras* and *Charaṇas* had their *aṅka* and *lakshaṇa*.

c12.s5.5

*RĀJANYA AS THE RULING CASTE IN A GAṆA*—The term *Rājanya* denoted the Kshatriya descendants of a *rājā*, whereas the others were called *rājana* (IV.1.137. For example, in the Andhaka-Vṛishṇi *Saṅgha*, only some members bore the title *rājanya*, as the descendants of Śvāphalaka, Chaitraka, Śini and Vāsudeva, whereas others like the Dvaipyas (inhabitants of the islands near the sea-coast) and Haimāyanas did not have that status although they too belonged to that *Saṅgha* (VI.2.34; *Andhaka-Vṛishṇayaḥ ete na tu rājanyāḥ*). The *Kāśikā* defines *rājanya* as *abhishikta-vaṁśya* Kshatriyas, *i.e.*, leaders of families consecrated to rulership. It appears from this that not all the members of a *Saṅgha* were entitled to exercise political power, which was the privilege of only the governing class. It appears that the descendants of the pioneer Kshatriyas who had settled on land and founded the *Janapada* state, treated political sovereignty as their privilege which was transmitted in their families from generation to generation. In spite of the growth of population in a *Janapada*, the centre of power was not altered and the main authority continued to vest in Kshatriya hands. These Kshatriyas in a *Saṅgha* bore the title *rājā* which was applied to the head of each family who represented his *kula* in the *Saṅgha* assembly. The constitutional practice in the Sabhāparva (*gṛihele gṛihe hi rājānaḥ*, 14.2) had reference to this feature of Saṅgha polity, the opposite of which was a *Samrāṭ* government (*samrāj-śabdo hi kṛitsnabhāk*). Kauṭilya speaks of *Saṅghas* as *rāja-śabd-opajīvinaḥ* (*Arth.*, XI.1, p. 378), *i.e.*, 'those whose members bore the title *rājā*. The Lichchhavis are said to have comprised 7,707 *rājans* living in Vesāli, and it is stated in the *Lalita-vistara* that each one of them thought: 'I am king, I am king,' (*Ekaika eva manyate ahaṁ rājā ahaṁ-rājeti*). Pāṇini mentions the Vṛijis, of whose confederation the Lichchhavis formed part. There is a reference in the *Jātakas* to the Lichchhavi rulers consecrated to rulership by sprinkling sacred water on them (*cf. Vesāli-nagare Gaṇa-rāja-kulānām abhiseka-maṅgala-pokkharaṇī*, *Jāt.*, IV.148). A similar custom prevailed amongst the *abhishikta-vaṁśya rājanyas* of the Andhaka-Vrishṇis and other *Saṅghas*, which justified their designation *abhishikhta vaṁśya*.

c12.s5.6

*KULA*—The phrase *Gaṇa-rājakula* used in connection with the *Saṅgha* of the Vṛijis shows that the political *Saṅgha* called *Gaṇa* was composed of various *rājakulas* or royal families and that the heads of these *rājakulas* constituted the governing body of that *Gaṇa*. This is confirmed by the *Mahābhārata* which says that the members of a *Gaṇa* were equals of one another in respect of birth and family (*Jātyā cha sadṛiśaḥ sarve kulena sadṛiśas-tathā*, Śāntiparva, 107.30). Kauṭilya also states that *kula* was the unit of a *Saṅgha*.

c12.s5.7

The *kula* basis of the tribes appears to be vitally connected with a number of Pāṇinian *sūtras* dealing with *gotrāpatya* and *yuvan* descendants. Apart from those names which were Ṛishi *gotras* Pāṇini also includes a number of tribal names in the lists dealt with in the *Gotrāpatya* chapter. For example, in the very first *sūtra* (IV.1.98) Kuñja and Bradhna were not names of Ṛishi *gotras* but of Vrātas, a class of rudimentary *Saṅghas* of the *Āyudhajīvī* pattern (V.3.113). The need for distinguishing the *gotra*-descendant from the *yuvan*-descendants should be understood clearly. In fact in the social as well as the political sphere, the family was the unit of representation, which was exercised through the head of each family, called *Kula-Vṛiddha* (Śāntiparva, 107.27). In grammatical literature, Pāṇini refers to him as *Vṛiddha*, which was a pre-Pāṇinian term for *Gotra* (*Vṛiddha-śabdaḥ pūrvāchārya-saṁjñā gotrasya*, *Kāśikā*; also Patañjali, I.248 on *sūtra* I.2.68; Kātyāyana IV.1.90.5). Pāṇini in his grammar substituted *Vṛiddha* mostly by *Gotra*, stating that all the descendants of an ancestor in a family except the son of the founder were called *Gotra* (*Apatyaṁ*

c12.s5.8

*pautra-prabhṛiti gotram*, IV.1.162). During his life-time the eldest male member who represented the family was the *Gotra* and the junior members were called *Yuvan*. Pāṇini also uses a third term, viz. *Vaṁśya*, to designate him; this also appears to be a pre-Paninian *saṁjñā* incidentally retained (IV.1.163). Each individual was given his personal name and a *Gotra* name. The latter came in for special attention by the grammarians owing to its importance in social and political life. According to Pāṇini only one member in the family at a time was to retain the title *Gotra*, the rest were called *Yuvan*. This implies that only one person, usually the eldest male member, represented his *Kula* on all important occasions and functions.

c12.s5.9

The family basis of *Gaṇa* polity preserved the hereditary character of its rulership vesting in the same families. The number and names of these families comprising the ruling class were carefully preserved as in the case of the Lichchhavis whose number is stated to be 7,707 in Pāli literature. In the capital of the Cheta state mention is made of 60,000 *khattiyas* all of whom were styled *rājāno* (*Jāt.*, VI.511), and must have represented so many Kshatriya members constituting that State. The craze for constituting new republics had reached its climax in the *Vāhīka* country and north-west India where clans consisting of as many as one hundred families only organized themselves as *Gaṇas*, as in the case of the hundred sons of Sāvitrī establishing themselves as a Kshatriya clan under the name of *Sāvitrī-putras* with the title *rājā* applied to each one of them (Vanaparva, 297.58; Karṇaparva, V.49; and Pāṇini in the *Dāmanyādi* group, V.3.116).

c12.s5.10

*BHAKTI*—Pāṇini takes *bhakti* to denote loyalty of the citizen to the State whether a kingdom or a republic, i.e. of the *Janapadins* to their *Janapada* (sūtra IV.3.100, *Janapadināṁ jana-padavat sarvam*, etc.). The *Kāśikā* mentions, as examples of this kind of *bhakti* or civic loyalty, (1) Āṅgaka (*Aṅgāḥ janapado bhaktirasya*), (2) Vāṅgaka, (3) Sauhmaka, (4) Pauṇḍraka, (5) Madraka and (6) Vṛijika.

c12.s5.11

We may also consider such terms as *Sraughnaḥ*, *Māthuraḥ*, one owning loyalty (*bhakti*) to the township of Srughna or Mathurā, as indicative of the civic devotion of a citizen to his city. Such formations as *Prāchya-sapta-samaḥ*, 'a Prāchya for 7 years', *Gāndhāri-sapta-samaḥ*, 'a Gāndhāri for 7 years' (*Dvigau pramāṇe*, VI.2.12, as explained by the *Kāśikā*) indicate citizenship acquired by domicile for stated periods.

c12.s5.12

PARTY SYSTEM—Pāṇini refers to *dvandva* denoting two rival parties, and to *vyutkramaṇa* denoting their rivalry for power (VIII.1.15). The *Kāśikā* explains it as the division of members into parties sitting separately in the House (*dvivarga-sambandhena pṛithagavasthitā dvandvaṁ vyutkrāntā ityuchyante*, VIII.1.15). There were three terms to denote a party-member, viz. (1) *vargya*, (IV.3.54), (2) *gṛihya*, and (3) *pakshya* (III.1.119). *Vagga* as a technical term of the Saṁgha vocabulary had the same Pāṇinian meaning and denoted a party, as shown by the Buddha's teaching (*sukhā saṁghassa sāmaggi ...neva Bhikkave vaggena saṁgha-kammaṁ kātavyaṁ* (*Mahāvagga*). The Party was named after its Leader (*Vargyādayaścha*, VI.2.131), e.g. *Vāsudeva-vargya*, *Vāsudeva-pakshya*, *Arjuna-vargya*, *Arjuna-pakshya*. Division of members out of allegiance to their respective parties was termed *vyāśraya* (V.4.48; *nānā-paksha-samāśraya*). This was indicated by a special linguistic formation, *i.e.* *Devā Arjunato'bhavan*, 'the Devas ranged themselves on the side of Arjuna' and *Ādityāḥ Karṇato'bhavan*, 'the Ādityas ranged themselves on the side of Karṇa'. The existence of party-system in the working of the *Gaṇas* is especially mentioned in the case of the Andhaka-Vṛishṇi *Saṁgha* (IV.2.34). Patañjali in commenting on Kātyāyana IV.2.104.11 mentions the party of Vāsudeva and that of Akrūra.

c12.s5.13

EXECUTIVE—In *sūtra* V.1.58, Pāṇini refers to the numerical strength of a *Saṁgha* which Patañjali explains as consisting of five, ten, or twenty members (*pañchakaḥ*, *daśakaḥ*, *viṁśakaḥ saṁghaḥ*, V.1.58 and 59). In *sūtra* V.1.60, he speaks of a *varga* comprising five members called *pañchad-varga* or *pañchaka-varga*, and of another *varga* comprising ten members and named *daśad-varga* or *daśaka-varga* (*Pañchad-daśatau varge vā*). This seems to refer to the Executive of a *Saṅgha*. In the *Antagaḍadasāo*, recounting the subjects ruled by Kṛishṇa Vāsudeva at Dvārāvatī, reference is made to the ten principal Dāśārhas headed by Samudravijaya (*Samuddavijaya-pāmokhāṇaṁ dasaṇhaṁ Dasārāṇaṁ*), and to five Mahāvīras with Baladeva as their leader (P. L. Vaidya’s edition of *Antagaḍadasāo*, p. 4). The Dāśārhas were a clan forming part of the Andhaka-Vṛishṇi *Saṅgha*; a reference to ten of them with a Leader implies an Executive Body corresponding to the *Daśaka Saṅgha* of Patañjali on Pāṇini’s rule. Similarly the reference to Baladeva and his four deputies constituting the Pañcha-Mahāvīras corresponds to the Inner Group called *Pañchaka Saṅgha*. The *Mahāvagga* (IX.4.1) also speaks of five kinds of Saṅghas, namely, those which had a *Varga* of four, five, ten, twenty or more members.

c12.s5.14

The *sūtra Pañchad-daśatau varge vā* (V.1.60) is of deeper significance. *Varga* here means quorum, or minimum number. It is stated in the *Mahāvagga* (V.13.2) that the Buddha vested the power of *upasampadā* by means of a regular process, in the *Saṅgha* or the whole body of Bhikkhus; but in the outlying localities (*pachantimā janapadā* IX.4.1), where the requisite number of monks was not available (*Avanti-Dakkhiṇāpatho appabhikkhuko hoti*), the quorum for initiation was to be ten (*na ūna-dasa-vaggena upasampādetabbo*, 1.31.2) and for other matters five (*pañcha-vagga gaṇa*). This was permitting *vagga-kammatā* in place of *saṅgha-kammatā* and interdicting the practice of *duvagga* and *tivagga gaṇas*. The Pāṇinian terms *pañchad-varga* and *daśad-varga* seem to have reference to such a contingency. VOTING—Vote is termed *chhandas* in the *Ashṭādhyāyī* (IV. 4.93). Decisions reached as a result of voting (*Chhandaso, nirmite*) were called *chhandasya* (IV.4.93). We read in the *Telapatta Jātaka* that the ministers and the citizens of Takshaśilā decided to elect the Bodhisattva as their king with one vote (*Atha sabbe amachchā cha nāgarā cha ekachchhandā hutvā*, *Jātaka*, I.399).

c12.s5.15

QUORUM—The idea of quorum was known. Pāṇini refers to *gaṇa-titha* as the person whose attendance completes the *Gaṇa* (*Gaṇasya pūraṇaḥ*, V.2.52; similarly *saṅghatithaḥ* and *pūgatithaḥ*). The rule of quorum was strictly observed. The *Mahāvagga* refers to a *gaṇa-pūraka* who acted as the 'whip' to secure a complete quorum (III.3.6).

c12.s5.16

STATE EMBLEMS—*Aṅka* and *Lakshaṇa*. As mentioned in *sūtra* IV.3.127 (*Saṅghāṅka-lakshaṇeshv-añ-yañ-iñām aṇ*), a *Saṅgha* had its *aṅka* and *lakshaṇa*. The *lakshaṇa* denoted the heraldic symbols or marks of a *Saṅgha* which they employed on their coins, seals and banners, etc. Pāṇini himself refers to symbols marked on cattle as *lakshaṇa*. On the tribal coins we find a great variety of symbols and these represent the *lakshaṇas* of the *Saṅghas* which issued them. The *Mahābhārata* takes *aṅka* as a synonym of *lakshaṇa* in describing the census (*smāraṇa*) of the royal cattle by branding them with proper marks (Vanaparva, 240.5). But in Pāṇini's *sūtra*, *aṅka* seems to stand for the legend adopted by the States, like *Mālavānāṁ jayaḥ* or *Yaudheya-gaṇasya jayaḥ*, as found on their coins. *Lakshaṇa* is the same as *lāñchhana* or heraldic crest of later Sanskrit.

c12.s5.17

JAYA—In the *sūtra*, *Jayaḥ karaṇam* (VI.1.202) Pāṇini refers to *jaya* as a technical term implying an instrument of victory (*jayanti teneti jayaḥ*, *Kāśikā*), which was distinguished from the other word *jaya* denoting victory by an acute accent on its initial vowel. This term is found on many *Gaṇa* coins and must be interpreted in the new light received from Pāṇini's rule. For example, the formula *Yaudheya-gaṇasya jayaḥ* on the coins of the Yaudheya republic, proclaims the coin as the symbol of Yaudheya authority. The issuing of coins was an exclusive prerogative of their sovereignty over that territory.

Linked texts (6)