Hindu Administrative Institutions c6.s5: Sec. vi. State an Organism

Hindu Administrative Institutions c6.s5

Language: English

Sec. vi. State an Organism

c6.s5.1

The conception underlying both Hindu society and Hindu state is that they are organisms. That a certain amount of organic unity also existed in their concept of the state is well attested by evidence. Kauṭalya speaks of organized state (प्रत्यङ्गभूत) connoting the idea of the limbs of the state-body. It even demonstrates the fact of organic unity among these various limbs of government. The state is said to possess seven limbs (some translate as elements of sovereignty), each discharging its ordained function, all ultimately contributing to the welfare of the body-politic. The seven constituents of the state are the same whether they are found in the *Dharmaśāstra* or the *Arthaśāstra* literature. They are the king (*svāmin*), the minister (*amātya*), the territory (*janapada*), the fort (*durga*), the treasury (*kośa*), the army (*daṇḍa*), and the ally (*mitra*). Kauṭalya calls them *prakṛtis*.¹ The *Srīmulam Commentary* remarks परस्परं प्रकृष्टं उपकुर्वन्ति इति प्रकृतयः । It means that each contributes to the efficient functioning of the others.

c6.s5.2

¹ *Mbh.*, *Ādi*, 217, st. 5 ; *Śānti Parvan*, ch. lvi. 5 ; ch. lxviii. 7. Prakṛti is a technical term in Hindu political literature used in different senses, the ministry, the subjects, the various sovereigns in war, or the constituent elements of a state. Kālidāsa uses it in the first sense, *Raghu.*, chap. xxii. 12). Here the celebrated commentator Mallinātha quotes Viśvā for that interpretation ‘प्रकृतिः सहजे योनौ अमात्ये परमात्मनि’ इति विश्वः । Śukra uses it in this sense in several places. Kālidāsa again uses the same term in the second sense, namely, subjects (*Raghu.*, viii. 18). In the third sense of sovereigns to be considered in time of war, Manu uses the term एताः प्रकृतयो मूलं मण्डलस्य समासतः । (vii. 156.) In this sense it is largely used. Among these seven again, the minister, the territory, fortresses, treasury and justice are called द्रव्यप्रकृतयः, the very substratum of the state. *Svāmi* is the Lord of these five *dravyaprakṛtis*. *Svāmi* may be king or king's regent. The ministry are the councillors whose

c6.s5.3

Kāmandaka also speaks of the seven-limbed state.¹ It is said that if even one part is defective it would jeopardize the normal working of the state. To secure complete efficiency it is recommended to repair immediately the impaired parts (iv. 2). On this Śankarārya comments ‘otherwise it would impede the work that could be done only collectively.’ The same idea is expressed in the *Mānava Dharmaśāstra*.² Manu says that these limbs are so linked together as to form one single whole. It is compared to the three staves of a *śanyāsin*, well-knit together so as to form one single staff. Inter-related and inter-dependent each could not harm the other as such.³

c6.s5.4

¹ Chap. iv. 1.

c6.s5.5

² Chap. ix. 294. अन्यथा समुदाय साध्यं कार्यमतिपतेत ।

c6.s5.6

³ Chap ix. 296. अन्योन्यगुणवैशेष्‍यान्न किंचिदतिरिच्यते. Yājñavalkya, chap. i. 353.

c6.s5.7

To these Sukrāchārya adds a beautiful analogy.⁴ The state is compared here to a tree of which the king is

c6.s5.8

⁴ राज्यवृक्षस्य नृपतिः मूलं स्कंधाश्च मंत्रिणः शाखास्सेनाधिपाः सेनाः पल्लवाः कुसुमानिच । प्रजाः फलानि भूभागाः बोजं भूमिः प्रकल्पिता ॥ (v. 12-13.)

c6.s5.9

number varied. The territory consists of eight different kinds of which the grāma or the village was one. The fortresses also are of several kinds. The treasury consists of treasure, inferior metals, and precious stones. Daṇḍa is the four-fold army. The mitra is hereditary (sahaja), hostile (kṛtrima), and natural (prākṛta mitra); each helps the other in function and is inter-dependent like the three worlds and oceans, त्रिविष्टब्धकवत् (Srimulam Com., vol. ii, p. 224). (Kauṭalya speaks respectively of prakṛti sampat and prakṛti vyasana in Bk. vi, sec. 1, and Bk. viii, sec. 1. Here the nature and qualities of the elements of sovereignty as well as their difficulties and distresses are examined).

c6.s5.10

the root, the ministry the trunk, the military offices the branches, the army the leaves and flowers, the people and territory the fruits and seeds respectively.

c6.s5.11

It is natural that any limb of the body-politic may become diseased. Sometimes the disease may be great and even incurable. Though the service of that particular organ is a necessity, still life must go on with the service, co-ordinate and conjoint, with the other parts. Kauṭalya, practical statesman as he is, gives expression to similar ideas

c6.s5.12

प्रकृत्यवयवानां तु व्यसनस्य विशेषतः ।
बहुभावोऽनुरागो वा सारो वा कार्यसाधकः ॥ (Bk. viii, sec. 1.)

c6.s5.13

This means every organ is composed of different parts. For example the *prakṛti daṇḍa* is composed of hereditary, hired and voluntary recruits or soldiers, whilst the treasury consists of precious gems, valuable metals and baser metals also. If a part or parts of one or more organs get into trouble, still the work will be accomplished if that limb consists of several other parts which are really serviceable and possess good attributes.¹ Kauṭalya works up his idea further and remarks² that ‘if two of the elements are equally hit by troubles still the project must be embarked upon, having distinguished both the progressive and the regressive states of things, provided the import of the rest of the elements is not well expressed. Again, ‘If the *vyasana* or distress of a single organ would contribute to the ruin that each contributes to the efficient functioning of the others.

c6.s5.14

¹ The Śrīmulam commentator furnishes a new interpretation on this passage, *vide*, vol. iii, p. 10.

c6.s5.15

² द्वयोस्तु व्यसने तुल्ये विशेषो गुणतः क्षयात् । शेषप्रकृति साद्गुण्यं यदि स्यान्नाभिधेयकम् ॥ (Bk. viii, sec. 1.)

c6.s5.16

c6.s5.17

¹ Chap. iv. 1.

c6.s5.18

² Chap. ix. 294. अन्यथा समुदाय साध्यं कार्यमतिपतेत् ।

c6.s5.19

³ Chap ix. 296. अन्योन्यगुणवैशेष्ान्न किंचिदतिरिच्यते. *Yājñavalkya*, chap. i, 353.

c6.s5.20

To these Sukrāchārya adds a beautiful analogy.⁴ The state is compared here to a tree of which the king is

c6.s5.21

c6.s5.22

number varied. The territory consists of eight different kinds of which the grāma or the village was one. The fortresses also are of several kinds. The treasury consists of treasure, inferior metals, and precious stones. Daṇḍa is the four-fold army. The mitra is hereditary (sahaja), hostile (kṛtrima), and natural (prākṛta mitra); each helps the other in function and is inter-dependent like the three worlds and oceans, त्रिविष्टब्धकवत् (*Srimulam Com.*, vol. ii, p. 224). (Kauṭalya speaks respectively of prakṛti sampat and prakṛti vyasana in Bk. vi, sec. 1, and Bk. viii, sec. 1. Here the nature and qualities of the elements of sovereignity as well as their difficulties and distresses are examined).

c6.s5.23

the root, the ministry the trunk, the military offices the branches, the army the leaves and flowers, the people and territory the fruits and seeds respectively.

c6.s5.24

c6.s5.25

c6.s5.26

This means every organ is composed of different parts. For example the *prakṛti daṇḍa* is composed of hereditary, hired and voluntary recruits or soldiers, whilst the treasury consists of precious gems, valuable metals and baser metals also. If a part or parts of one or more organs get into trouble, still the work will be accomplished if that limb consists of several other parts which are really serviceable and possess good attributes.¹ Kauṭalya works up his idea further and remarks² that ‘if two of the elements are equally hit by troubles still the project must be embarked upon, having distinguished both the progressive and the regressive states of things, provided the import of the rest of the elements is not well expressed. Again, ‘If the *vyasana* or distress of a single organ would contribute to the ruin of all other organs of the state, then certainly that distress is serious, whether that element be important or no.'¹

c6.s5.27

¹ The Śrīmulam commentator furnishes a new interpretation on this passage, *vide*, vol. iii, p. 10.

c6.s5.28

² द्वयोस्तु व्यसने तुल्ये विशेषो गुणतः क्षयात् । शेषप्रकृति साद्रुण्यं यदि स्यान्नाभिधेयकम् ॥ (Bk. viii, sec. 1.)

c6.s5.29

¹ शेषप्रकृतिनाशस्तु यत्त्रैकव्यसनाद् भवेत् । व्यसनं तद्रोयस्यात् प्रधानस्येतरस्यवा ॥ (Bk. viii, sec. 1.)

c6.s5.30

Thus it is clear that there are several organs differentiated in function, each contributing to the whole which is the well-being of the state. The disease of the one may or may not affect the other parts of the system. There are some diseases which affect the whole physical system, and others which deter the proper functioning of that particular organ. In the same way Kauṭalya is of opinion that a certain part of these elements may or may not harm the progressive working of the state. All these limbs are imperatively necessary for the satisfactory working of the state organism. Though certain *aṅgas* are defective still the normal work could go on undisturbed. It is for the practical statesman at the apex of the administration to judge of it as it deserves. Thus with Sarkar we may say ‘the organismic conception in Hindu *nīti* philosophy is not merely structural or anatomical, but also physiological in the sense that it is functional. In giving currency to the doctrine of *saptāṅga* Hindu political philosophy does not popularize an arbitrarily strung system of seven categories. It embodies really a psychological attempt to conceive and classify political phenomena in their logical entirety.’² tress and in prosperity. Wisdom lies in helping each other. Their predominance by means of acquisition and protection makes the state prominent (i. 18-19). In commenting on the latter verse, Śaṅkarārya remarks:

c6.s5.31

² *Positive Back-ground of Hindu Sociology*, Bk. ii, part 1, p. 39. Kāmandaka speaks of a seven-limbed kingdom as ‘सत्वबुद्धि व्यपा-क्षयम्राज्यं.’ On this the commentator remarks ‘सत्वं व्यसनेऽभ्युदयेच, यदविकारं, बुद्धिः शुश्रूषादिलक्षणा, तदुभयमाश्रयो राज्यस्य ताभ्यां प्राधान्येन लाभपालनयोगात्’ । ‘A kingdom must be strong both in dis-

c6.s5.32

‘राज्यं राजत्वं, यद् राजेत्याभिधानप्रत्ययः प्रकृतिमित्तम्’

c6.s5.33

Ghoshal translates this ‘rājyam’ kingship or kingly function which is used to signify the appellation and connotation of the term ‘king’. On this he takes it that the category of seven elements implies the concept of sovereignty or government rather than state or kingdom. But Śaṅkarārya explains why it is rājya or rājatva. The term rāja is well known. It demonstrates that the king is the most important of the constituent parts. It may mean the element of sovereignty elsewhere, but whenever it is mentioned in connection with a state it always refers to the constituent parts only. Ghoshal misinterprets this so as to suit his statement, that the Hindu political philosopher drew no line of demarcation between state and government.

c6.s5.34

*Hindu Political Theories*, pp. 84-85. *Rājatvam* means simply sovereignty or governmental sovereignty. And sovereignty is the chief characteristic of statehood. It is not government. For, government is ‘the organization of the state, the machinery through which the state will is expressed.’ If the Hindu philosophers have only realized government and not state, it surpasses one’s comprehension how there could be any organized government without a state. There could be a government provided there was a properly organized state. Hence there is reason to believe that the political philosophers in Ancient India realized this fact and evolved the ideas of both state and government. As a matter of fact there are numerous examples of different forms of state such as monarchical, republican, etc. In the face of this to deny the existence of the state as separate from government is a mere allegation that has no evidence to support it.

Linked texts (6)

Kauṭilīya Arthaśāstra — Kauṭilya, Sanskrit
Mānava Dharmaśāstra — Manu & Bhṛgu, Sanskrit
Yājñavalkyasmṛti — Yājñavalkya, Sanskrit
Mahābhārata — Vyāsa, Sanskrit
Raghuvaṃśa — Kālidāsa, Sanskrit
Kāmandakīya Nītisāra — Kāmandaki, Sanskrit