The Cambridge History of India, Vol. I: Ancient India v1.c19.s2.11

v1.c19.s2.11

We have no account of the manner in which the proceedings were conducted in the Sākiya mote-hall. But in the *Mahā-Govinda Suttanta* there is an account of a palaver in Sakka’s heaven, evidently modelled more or less on the proceedings in a clan meeting. All are seated in a specified order. After the president has laid the proposed business before the assembly others speak upon it, and Recorders take charge of the unanimous decision arrived at³. The actions of gods are drawn in imitation of those of men. We may be sure that the composers and repeaters of this story, themselves for the most part belonging to the free clans (and, if not, to neighbouring clans familiar with tribal meetings) would make use of their knowledge of what was constantly done at the mote-hall assemblies. This is confirmed by the proceedings adopted in the rules observed at formal meetings of the Chapters of the Buddhist Order. Quite a number of cases are given in the Canon Law⁴; and in no single case, apparently, is there question of deciding the point at issue by voting on a motion moved. Either the decision is regarded as unanimous; or, if difference of opinion is manifest, then the matter is referred for arbitration to a committee of referees⁵. It is even quite possible that certain of the technical terms found in the Rules of the Order (*ñatti* for ‘motion,’ *ubbāhikā* for ‘reference to arbitration,’ etc.), are taken from those in use at the mote-halls of the free clans. But however that may be, we are justified by this evidence in concluding that the method of procedure generally adopted in the mote-halls was not, as in modern parlia-ments, by voting on a motion, but rather as just above explained.