Spiritual Authority and Temporal Power in the Indian Theory of Government c2.s1.13

c2.s1.13

Our starting point will be ŚB. IV. 1. 4, where the Mixta Persona of Mitrāvaruṇau is the “Counsel and the Power” (*krátūdákṣau*) and “these are his⁶ two (selves), (*asyaitāv‿ātmanaḥ*).⁷ . . . Mitra is the Counsel and Varuṇa the Power, Mitra the Sacerdotium (*brahma*) and Varuṇa the Regnum (*kṣatra*), Mitra the Knower (*abhigantṛ*) and Varuṇa the Executive (*kartṛ*).⁸ Now at the beginning these two were distinct (*ágre nánā*),⁹ the Sacerdotium and the Regnum: then Mitra the Sacerdotium could subsist apart from Varuṇa the Regnum, but Varuṇa the Regnum could not subsist apart from Mitra the Sacerdotium.¹⁰ Whatever deed (*kárma*) Varuṇa did that was not quickened (*áprasūtam*) by Mitra the Sacerdotium, was unsuccessful (*ná . . . sámāndrdhe*). So Varuṇa the Regnum called upon Mitra the Sacerdotium, saying: ‘Turn thou unto me (*úpa mā́vartasva*) that we may unite (*sámsṛjāvahai*); I assign to you the precedence (*púras tvā karavai*); quickened by thee (*tvat prasūtáḥ*) I shall do deeds.’ That is, therefore, the origin of the Purohita’s office. . . . Whatever deed, quickened by Mitra the Sacerdotium, Varuṇa did thenceforth, succeeded (*sám . . . ānṛdhe*).” The choice is mutual; if either the Purohita or the King be ill-chosen by the other it is called a commingling of right and wrong (*sukṛtáṁ ca duṣkṛtáṁ ca*).