Hindu Administrative Institutions c7.s1: I. General Principles
Hindu Administrative Institutions c7.s1
- Language
- English
I. General Principles
c7.s1.1
THE executive edifice in ancient India was strong and enduring. It was not complex in character. At its apex stood the king, the executive head who practically controlled the state. The king was not a mere ornamental figure but a true official guiding the destinies of the kingdom. A king is generally known by the expression *rājan*, *nṛpa*. The word *rājan* is derived from the root रञ् to please—implying that a king makes his subjects always happy by ruling justly.¹ The other expression *nṛpa* is from नृन् पालयति, he who affords protection to his subjects. That this was an axiom traditionally acquiesced in is seen from an inscription of the Jain king, Kharavela (165 B.C.), and from a statement in the Buddhist canon ‘*dhammēna parē rañjēti kho Vāseṭṭha rāja*,² *rājā he evatatiyaṃ akkharaṃ Upanibbattam*.’
c7.s1.2
¹ रंजिताश्च प्रजाः सर्वास्तेन राजेति शब्दयते । (Śānti Parvan, lviii. 133.)
c7.s1.3
² Dīgha Nikāya, vol. iii, p. 93 (Aggañña Suttanta).
c7.s1.4
It would be interesting to discuss the origin of the institution of monarchy and consider whether it was hereditary or elective in character, and how far it was arbitrary or amenable to law. The origin of kingship in ancient India is shrouded in mystery. Various theories are advanced to substantiate differing points of view. The generally accepted theories are four and may be stated categorically: (1) divine origin, (2) origin in war, (3) the theory of contract, and (4) the theory of elective kingship.¹
c7.s1.5
¹ *Hindu Polity*, part ii, pp. 3-15.
Linked texts (2)
- Aggaññasutta — Pāli
- Mahābhārata — Vyāsa, Sanskrit