Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

Social and Political Life in the Vijayanagara Empire (A.D. 1346 – A.D. 1646) v2.c17.s1: Section I. Dharma in Relation to Society

Social and Political Life in the Vijayanagara Empire (A.D. 1346 – A.D. 1646) v2.c17.s1

Language
English

Section I. Dharma in Relation to Society

v2.c17.s1.1

THE huge and costly forces, some aspects of which we have described, were necessary in an age when the rulers stood as champions of the thought and culture of the people. In the statement of an epitaph that Bukka-mahipati was a reincarnation of Kṛṣṇa, who "re-appeared as a king to deliver the world when it was overspread by *Mlechchhas*", we have one of the most salient features of the Hindu classical lawgivers expressed in terms of contemporary history. The Vijayanagara age, as we have elsewhere remarked, saw the resuscitation of Hindu life. And this was only possible with a revival of the ancient Dharma modified to some extent by the experience of ages.

v2.c17.s1.2

The monarchs as well as the people were aware of the relationship of Dharma to society. It was the endeavour of the former to protect the *varṇāśrama dharma*; it was the ambition of the latter to follow the classical precepts without endangering the prosperity of the land. To the Hindus, as is well known, the word *Dharma* covered a large field of human activity : it was used to denote the whole social order with its attributes of law, conduct and worship. It was, therefore, as vast in its range as it was complex in its character.¹ Its end could only be realized by the united action of the people led by the king. The ancients invented a singular method of securing their object. They instituted the four *varṇas* or castes (and the four *āśramas* or orders) and gave the system a touch of divinity, reiterating the interdependence of the different parts. The four castes and the duties assigned to each of these are too familiar to need a description here. Nevertheless in understanding the interdependence of the four castes and in the consequent solidarity of the whole system, we cannot help noting the following words by Manu : "The king has been created (to be) the protector of the castes (varṇa) and orders, who, all according to their rank, discharge their several duties"². Then again : "Abstention from injuring (creatures), veracity, abstention from unlawfully appropriating (the goods of others), purity, and control of the organs", Manu has declared to be the summary of the law for the four castes.³ Hence we have in Vaśiṣṭaḥ : "(To live according to) the rule of conduct is undoubtedly the highest duty of the men. He whose soul is defiled by vile conduct perishes in this world and in the next."⁴

v2.c17.s1.3

¹ It is difficult to define Dharma. We can only repeat the words of Dr. Kielhorn: "I find no English word by which I could fully express all the meanings of the Sanskrit dharma...." *Ep. Ind.*, IX., p. 113, n. (7).

v2.c17.s1.4

² Manu, VII., 35, p. 221.

v2.c17.s1.5

³ Ibid., X., 63, p. 416.

v2.c17.s1.6

⁴ *Vaśiṣṭha*, VI., 1, p. 34.

v2.c17.s1.7

Manu, who is our main authority on the subject, has minutely delineated the duties pertaining to every one of the four castes. He has laid down their mutual obligations, and, further he has allowed them a latitude, in the matter of adhering to their own duties in ordinary times and of assuming the functions of their inferiors on extraordinary occasions, which is especially seen in the social activities under Vijayanagara. The apparent diversity of the four *varṇas*, which seems to be a prominent feature of the system, was according to Manu, by no means a source of conflict between them. In the following regulations he tells us, firstly, about the interdependence of the Brahmans and the Kshatriyas, and, then, about the importance of the Vaiśyas and the Śūdras in the social order. "When the Kshatriyas became in any way overbearing towards the Brāhmaṇas, the Brāhmaṇas themselves shall duly restrain them, for the Kshatriyas sprang from the Brāhmaṇas. Fire sprang from water, Kshatriyas from Brāhmaṇas, iron from stone, the all-penetrating force of those (three) has no effect on that whence they were produced. Kshatriyas prosper not without Brāhmaṇas, Brāhmaṇas prosper not without Kshatriyas; Brāhmaṇas and Kshatriyas, being closely united, prosper in this (world) and in the next".¹ Then, again, Manu says: "The Brāhmaṇa is declared (to be) the root of the sacred law and the Kshatriya its top."² This explains why in the Institutes of Gautama we have the following: "It has been declared in the Veda: 'Brāhmaṇas, united with Kshatriyas, uphold gods, manes, and men.'"³ About the importance of the third varṇa Manu says: "For when the Lord of creatures (Prajāpati) created cattle, he made them over to the Vaiśya; to the Brāhmaṇa and to the king, he entrusted all created beings."⁴ Further we have the following as regards the interdependence of the Vaiśyas and the Śūdras: "(The king) should carefully compel Vaiśyas and Śūdras to perform the work (prescribed) for them; for if these two (castes) swerved from their duties, they would throw this (whole) world into confusion."⁵ The Hindu society, therefore, according to the ancients, was divided into a number of component parts, each of which, while it had some specific duties to perform, was also required to work for the common purpose—the realization of the Dharma. Therefore "one may detect beneath the outer garb of dogma a keen appreciation of the principle of specialization and division of labour as well as that of the organic unity of society."¹

v2.c17.s1.8

¹ Manu, IX., 320-2, p. 399.

v2.c17.s1.9

² Ibid., XI., 84, p. 447.

v2.c17.s1.10

³ Gautama, XI., 27, p. 238.

v2.c17.s1.11

⁴ Manu, IX., 327, p. 400.

v2.c17.s1.12

⁵ Ibid., VIII., 418, p. 327. See Gautama, X., 1-2, p. 227 for the occupations common to all twice-born men.

v2.c17.s1.13

¹ Ghosal, *Hind. Pol. Theor.*, pp. 60-1 (1st ed.); p. 36 (2nd ed).

v2.c17.s1.14

The Vijayanagara conception of the social order was, on the whole, modelled on the classical precepts. That the rulers were aware of the *varṇāśrama dharma* is proved by numerous records as well as by references in literature. Harihara Rāya II, in A.D. 1399, is said to have been "engaged in upholding the observances of all the castes and orders", and to have been "the supporter of the four castes and orders".² In A.D. 1403 the same monarch is described to be protecting the duties of the various castes (*Harihara-mahārāyaru Vijeyanagariyal(l)i śrī-Virūpāksha-dēvara sannidhiyalli varṇāśrama-dharman-gaḷan(n)u pālisutta*).³ The same phrase is used in connection with him and with his son Virūpāksha in the next year.⁴ In A.D. 1404 and A.D. 1405 Bukka (II) is also represented as protecting the *varṇāśrama dharma* from Vijayanagara.⁵ From A.D. 1407 till A.D. 1432 we come across various inscriptions in which Dēva Rāya II is said to be protecting all the *varṇā-śrama dharmas* (*sakala-varṇāśrama dharmamavannu pālisutta . . .*).⁶ In A.D. 1423 the phrase *sakala-varṇāśrama-dhar-maṅgaḷan(n)u pālisutta dharma-mārgada sakala-sāmbrājya-van āḷu* is used both in regard to Dēva Rāya and Śrigirinātha Oḍeya (son of Kammaṇa Oḍeya), the Viceroy over Āraga.⁷ Mallikārjuna Mahārāya, from A.D. 1448 to A.D. 1451, is also depicted as upholding the duties of all the castes.⁸ The idea of the *varṇāśrama dharma* survived the shock of the battle of Rākshasa-Taṅgaḍi, as is evident from the use of the phrase in connection with Sadāśiva Rāya in A.D. 1566.¹ In an inscription dated A.D. 1577, of the times of Śrīraṅga Rāya, we have the following about the Emperor Sadāśiva—*purarājyaṁ praśāsati varṇāśrama-sad-āchāra-paripālana-pūrvakam*.²

v2.c17.s1.15

² *Ep. Ind.*, III, p. 125.

v2.c17.s1.16

³ *E. C.*, VI., Kp. 52, p. 86, text, p. 334; *E. C.*, VIII., Tl. 133, p. 190.

v2.c17.s1.17

⁴ *E. C.*, VIII., Tl. 9, Tl. 13, pp. 164-6, Tl. 196, p. 206.

v2.c17.s1.18

⁵ *Ibid.*, Tl. 11, 12, 126, pp. 164-5, 187.

v2.c17.s1.19

⁶ *Ibid.*, Tl, 122, p. 187, Tl. 190, text, p. 82, Tl. 131, p. 189, Tl. 222, p. 211; *E. C. VII.*, Sh. 70, p. 27; *E. C. VIII.*, Tl. 205, p. 208, Tl. 142, p. 191, Tl. 148, p. 192, Tl. 144, p. 191; Tl. 2. p. 161, Tl. 14, p. 165; *E. C. VII.*, Sh. 71, p. 27; *E. C. VIII.*, Tl. 23, p. 168.

v2.c17.s1.20

⁷ *E. C.*, VIII., Tl. 14, text, p. 450, op. cit.

v2.c17.s1.21

⁸ *E. C.*, VI., Kp. 32, p. 81, text, p. 317, Kp. 44, p. 83, text, p. 325. The name Dēva Rāya given to the king in this latter inscription is to be interpreted as Immaḍi Dēva Rāya. See also *E. C.*, VIII., Tl. 155, p. 193.

v2.c17.s1.22

¹ E.C., VIII., Nr. 1, p. 126.

v2.c17.s1.23

² Ibid., Tl. 5. text, p. 418.

v2.c17.s1.24

But these were not the only monarchs who were credited with the observance of the *varṇāśrama dharma*. The picture of Sāḷuva Nṛsiṁha, as given in the *Sāḷuvābhyudayam*, makes us believe that that ruler maintained the traditional dignity of the sovereigns as Defenders of the Faith. As we have already remarked, Sāḷuva Nṛsiṁha appeared like Indra pledged to uphold the cause of the Dēvas, when he was seated on an elephant during the usual royal perambulations in the south.³

v2.c17.s1.25

³ Ante., Vol. I., Chapter V.

v2.c17.s1.26

But no Vijayanagara monarch could put forth such substantial claims for the honour of defending and promoting the Hindu Dharma as Kṛṣṇa Dēva Rāya. Sōmanātha in his *Vyāsayōgicharitam* showers an uncommon eulogy on that ruler which, but for the fact that it is confirmed by foreign as well as Indian sources, would have been given hardly any credence by students of history. Kṛṣṇa Dēva Rāya was the crest jewel of kings—शिरोमणिः भूपतीनां, and when he died, after making obeisance to the celebrated Vyāsarāya, his *guru*, it seemed to the people that Kṛṣṇa himself had departed from the ken of mankind at the end of His *avatāra*.

v2.c17.s1.27

तत्र समहीपतिः भगवंतं यतिमघवतं नमस्कृत्य विदांवर
परलोक यथाधिरोहिणीमिव तस्य महतीम आशिपम्
आदरेणादाय प्रयाणे लीलावियीकृत नंदनस्य देवकी
नंदनस्य पुनरपि स्मरयन्नवरौकः कदंबानि बहुजन्म
सुकृतेन वासववास्तव्य भावमभजत⁴

v2.c17.s1.28

⁴ Vyāsayōgicharitam, Intr., pp. clxi, clxxii, 66, 76-7.

v2.c17.s1.29

This encomium lavished on Kṛṣṇa Dēva Rāya is to be traced to the feeling of patriotism and benevolence which characterized that able champion of the Hindu Dharma, and which made the people believe that his rule was like a shower from heaven blossoming the world at the commencement of spring.

v2.c17.s1.30

तदनु समस्तभुवनमंगलकंदलसमयसलिलधारायमाणशासनचातुरिक:¹ How ardent Kṛṣṇa Dēva Rāya himself was that his people as well as posterity should judge him as the Defender of the Dharma can be gathered from the concluding lines of his own composition styled *Jāmbhavatī Kalyāṇa*, where, with the characteristic humility of a truly noble mind, he prays that the fruits of his rule might last to the remotest periods of time:

v2.c17.s1.31

धर्मे पाद चतुष्टयेन कृतवत् स्थैर्य समालंबतां । चातुर्वर्ण्य
उपैतु कर्म सततं स्वस्वाधिकारोचितम् । शेषक्षमाधनायकस्य
कृपया सप्तार्णवीमध्यगं रक्षन् गामिह कृष्णराय
नृपतिः जीयात् सहस्रं समाः ।²

v2.c17.s1.32

² Jāmbhavatī-Kalyāṇa, The Sources p. 143; Venkoba Rao, Vyāsa-yōgicharitam Intr., p. clxxiii.

v2.c17.s1.33

Foreigners, who personally interviewed the great ruler, have given us many details about the grandeur of his court and the number of his troops. But none has given such an admirable sketch of his character and person as Paes. It is worthwhile to take his words into account in our estimate of the greatest monarch southern India has ever seen. "This king," says Paes, "is of medium height, and of fair complexion and good figure, rather fat than thin; he has on his face signs of small-pox. He is the most feared and perfect king that could possibly be, cheerful of disposition and very merry; he is one that seeks to honour foreigners, and receives them kindly, asking about all their affairs whatever their condition may be. He is a great ruler and a man of much justice, but subject to sudden fits of rage, and this is his title—¹ Crisnarão Macacão, king of kings, lord of the greater lords of India, lord of the three seas and of the land.' He has this title because he is by rank a greater lord than any, by reason of what he possesses in (?) armies and territories, but it seems that he has (in fact) nothing compared to what a man like him ought to have, so gallant and perfect is he in all things."¹ Coming as this does from a foreigner who was ignorant of the ideas of Hindu Dharma, it confirms the fear, love and esteem in which the people held Kṛṣṇa Dēva Rāya the Great.

v2.c17.s1.34

¹ Vyāsayōgicharitam, p. 66. Cf. The popular conception of the same ruler as given in E. C. X., CB. 4, p. 198, op. cit. (Ante., Vol. I., Chapter IV), and in the two triumphal verses composed by the court poets during his campaign of Kondavidu, The Rāyavachakamu, The Sources, p. 122, op. cit. (Ante., Vol. I, Chapter IX.)

Linked texts (5)