Social and Political Life in the Vijayanagara Empire (A.D. 1346 – A.D. 1646) v2.c17.s2: Section 2. The Hindu View of Life

Social and Political Life in the Vijayanagara Empire (A.D. 1346 – A.D. 1646) v2.c17.s2

Language: English

Section 2. The Hindu View of Life

v2.c17.s2.1

DHARMA could only be realized by co-ordinating three other aims which have ever been associated with it. In the words of Manu,—" (Some declare that) the chief good consists in (the acquisition of) spiritual merit and wealth, (others place it) in (the gratification of) desire and (the acquisition of) wealth, (others) in (the acquisition of) spiritual merit alone, and (others say that the acquisition of) wealth alone is the chief good here (below); but the (correct) decision is that it consists of the aggregate of (those) three."² Manu, therefore, combines the two-fold path of progress (*pravṛtti*) and of abstinence (*nivṛtti*) to secure liberation or self-realization. This ideal remained unchanged till the mediaeval days. Thus does Śukra explain the rules of social polity: "The activities of all creatures are known to have happiness for their end. There can be no happiness without morality. So one should be devoted to morality (dharma). Let one not try to get mōkṣa without trying to acquire the other three (*viz.*, dharma, artha and kāma), and let them constantly follow (the path of) mōkṣa without discarding the other three. This is the (golden) mean in all religions".³ Here is "a profound appreciation of the totality of human interests" which "lies, unless we are greatly mistaken, at the root of the sociological ideas of the Hindus".⁴

v2.c17.s2.2

¹Sewell, *For. Emp.*, pp. 246-7. On p. 247, n. (2). Sewell in connection with the word Macacão, writes. "A mixture, apparently, of *Mahā*, 'great' and 'Śāh'". The word may as well stand for "*Mahārāya*". B.A.S. ²Manu, II, 234, pp. 70-1. ³Śukranīti, III, ll. 2-5, p. 102. ⁴Ghosal, *Hind. Pol. Theor*, p. 7 (1st ed.), p. 7 (2nd ed.).

v2.c17.s2.3

Inscriptional evidence proves that the Hindu monarchs were Defenders of the Dharma; foreign travellers attest to the fact that their Empire, specially in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, was almost unrivalled for its riches and splendour. The Vijayanagara monarchs realized that material wealth was indispensable for the attainment of freedom of any kind. There was of course nothing new in this: Śukra had already expressed the mediaeval view in the following words: "Man is the slave of wealth, not wealth of anybody. So (one) should always carefully labour for wealth. Through wealth men get virtue, satisfaction and salvation"¹. The ultimate significance of such a conception was indeed profound; it meant that the life of an average citizen was to be governed by considerations of material wealth rather than by those of metaphysical calculations. We may be permitted to repeat that there is no definite evidence to prove that the mediaeval treatise of Śukrāchārya influenced the thought and action of the Hindu rulers. Nevertheless we may assert, on the evidence of both foreign and indigenous accounts, that the Vijayanagara monarchs achieved remarkable success in co-ordinating the apparently divergent lines of action enunciated by legists from Manu down to Śukrāchārya.

v2.c17.s2.4

¹ Śukranīti, V. ll. 77-9, p. 264; Sarkar, Pos. Back. II, P. I, p. 79.

v2.c17.s2.5

Whether in Vijayanagara times the distinction between the rich and the poor was as acute as is depicted in the Śukranīti², and whether they adopted the "eight good ways and means" of acquiring wealth, mentioned by the mediaeval lawgiver³, it is not possible to say; but if one could judge from the opinions of writers of a later age, one may venture to remark that in Vijayanagara too there must have been as invidious distinctions between the rich and the poor as are mentioned, for example, by Vēmana. This writer tells us that "If one be possessed of wealth they look upon him as the god of love; but if he falls into poverty, and is unable to rise and help himself, be he as Cupid himself, they look upon him as a Pariar."¹ If this was the heritage which was left by Vijayanagara to the people of the seventeenth century, we may well imagine that in its own days it could not have been free from those ideas of wealth and poverty which are usually associated with material prosperity.

Linked texts (1)

Mānava Dharmaśāstra — Manu & Bhṛgu, Sanskrit