Hindu Administrative Institutions c8.s4.t1: The Sabha in Later Times

Hindu Administrative Institutions c8.s4.t1

Language: English

The Sabha in Later Times

c8.s4.t1.1

Coming to the position that the *sabha* occupied in the Epics² it is interesting to see that the judicial character of it becomes increasingly dominant. We see that the king presided over this assembly invariably, but in his absence the prime minister presided over the meetings of the council. In the *Harṣacharita* we see that when Rājyavardhana died, it was the prime minister *Bhaṇḍi* who presided at the meeting convened for the purpose of selecting his successor.

c8.s4.t1.2

² See for more details *J.A.O.S.*, xiii, pp. 148-49.

c8.s4.t1.3

The qualifications of the *Sabha* members are striking. It is Draupadī who says that³

c8.s4.t1.4

³ न सा सभा यत्र न सन्ति वृद्धाः न ते वृद्धा ये न वदन्ति धर्मम् । नासौ धर्मो यत्र न सत्यमस्ति न तत्सत्यं यच्छलेनानुविद्धम् ॥ (Mbh., *Sabhā*, lxxxix. 65.)

c8.s4.t1.5

'it is no *sabhā* where there are no elders: they are not elders who do not speak the *dharma*: it is not *dharma* if it is not founded on truth; it is no truth if it is combined with fraud.'

c8.s4.t1.6

The *Jātaka* contains a similar verse.⁴

c8.s4.t1.7

⁴ नसा सभा यत्थ न संतिसंतो न ते संतो येन भणन्ति धम्मं । रागं च दोसं च पहाय मोहं धम्मं भणताच भवन्तिसंतो ॥ (See *Hindu Polity*, i, p. 19.)

c8.s4.t1.8

The *Sabha* consisted of all castes and classes. The Kṣatriyas are there conspicuous. Bhīṣma and Vidura who are Kṣatriyas and Droṇa, Bharadvāja and Kṛpa (Brahmans) are among those present.¹ These were well disciplined by the *Śastras* and highly respectable. Draupadī raised a point of law before this august assembly of sages, ministers, and courtiers, whether Yudhiṣṭhira had the right to pawn her after he had himself become a slave.² Bhīṣma justifies Yudhiṣṭhira’s right by saying that the technicalities of *dharma* are too subtle.³ Karṇa, Duśśasana, and Duryodhana justified the action on the part of Duśśasana to drag her by force into the open court though she was sparsely dressed and in her periods. But Vidura sympathized with Draupadī and appealed to the assembly for an impartial consideration of the question without fear or favour but with an eye to *dharma* and *satya*. He asks every member to speak out his opinion according to his knowledge and judgment free from *kāma*, *krodha*, and other undesirable influences. He further expatiates on the point and says⁴ that he who is a member of the assembly and fails to give out his opinion distorts the law when asked for, comes close to being a liar and quotes the classic discussion between Prahlāda and the sage Angirasa on this point. Vikarṇa, one of the brothers of Duryodhana, associated himself with the views of the sage Vidura. Bhīṣma accepts the position as a most difficult one and accepts also his inability to give a decisive reply, but added that Yudhiṣṭhira himself is the best and final authority on the subject.¹ Duryodhana too acceded to this position and ordered that every one of the five husbands could speak on the point. On this the members became extremely happy and loudly applauded him by signs of eyes and lips. But a few became distressed and cried ‘Oh, Alas!’ Bhīma spoke hot when Bhīṣma, Droṇa, and Vidura asked him to forbear. Karṇa replied Bhīma hotly and Vidura spoke of the prosecution of *dharma* in the *sabhā* and insisted that Draupadī’s position was the right one. He added that if this were overlooked the prosperity of the state would come to an end. Moved by Draupadī and others, Dhṛtarāṣṭra released the Pāṇḍavas with Draupadī from slavery and asked them to be friendly with the Kurus by ruling at Kāṇḍavaprasta.² This shows how the business of the assembly was usually conducted. That ladies could take part in the assembly discussion is seen from the fact that Maṇḍodari goes to Rāvaṇa’s court after the death of Prahasta and dissuades him by several arguments to desist from fighting Rāma.³

c8.s4.t1.9

¹ इमे सभायां उपनीतशास्त्राः क्रियावन्तः सर्व एवेन्द्रकल्पाः । गुरुस्थानागुरवश्चैव सर्वे तेषामग्रे नोत्सहे स्थातुमेवम् ॥ (*Sabha Parvan*, lxxxix. 48.)

c8.s4.t1.10

² *Ibid.*, lxxxix. 19.

c8.s4.t1.11

³ *Ibid.*, lxxxix. 59-61.

c8.s4.t1.12

⁴ यो हि प्रश्नं न विनूयाद्धर्मदर्शी सभांगतः । अनृते या फलावाप्तिः तस्याः सोऽर्धं समश्रुते ॥ यः पुनर्वितथं ब्रूयाद्धर्मदर्शी सभांगतः । अनृतस्य फलं कृत्स्नं स प्राप्नोतििति निश्चयः ॥ (*Sabha Parvan*, xc. 64-65.)

c8.s4.t1.13

¹ *Sabha Pravan*, xci. 14-21.

c8.s4.t1.14

² *Sabhā Parvan*, xcii and xciii.

c8.s4.t1.15

³ *Yuddh.* see after chap. lix, two *praksipta* chapters.

c8.s4.t1.16

Hārita’s classification of the *sabhā*.—There is an interesting chapter (V) in Caṇḍeśvara’s *Rājanīti Ratnākara* which further throws light on the *sabhā* and its constitution. This is not an original work but a compendium of the various *smṛti* texts. Hārita is quoted. According to him there are four kinds of *sabhā*: *pratiṣṭita*, *apratiṣṭita*, *mudrita*, and *śasita*. It is *pratiṣṭita* if it were established by the king himself in his royal domains; *apratiṣṭita* if it were a voluntary organization of the villagers, *mudrita* if established by the king’s secretaries or judges, and *śasita* if established by the king himself by a royal writ. The *sabhā* is likened to an organism. The head is the king, the face secretary, the arms members, the hands *śasta*, knees accountants and scribes, eyes gold and fire, and feet servants. Each of these ten members has its own individual and collective functions to perform. The secretary is the speaker, the king is the person who finally decides, members discuss questions of policy, *smṛti* is the law, gold and fire are for oath, the accountant counts the *artha* or wealth, the scribe is the writer of writs and orders, witnesses are servants, *anagnakau* (अनग्नकौ) are the plaintiffs and defendants. The judicial aspect of the assembly would be more fully treated under the chapter on the administration of justice.

c8.s4.t1.17

*Assemblies in Tamil literature.*—It would be certainly interesting to study what sort of assemblies and councils were prevalent in ancient South India. The *Silappadikāram* and the *Manimekhalai* are two classical treatises which are a mine of information for reconstructing the history and social life of ancient Drāvida. A study of these and other classical treatises shows that there must have been five big assemblies. (1) The representative assembly of the people acting as a check on the ruling chieftain (மாநாடு), (2) the assembly of ministers of religion, (பார்ப்பார்), (3) the assembly of physicians perhaps a Board of Public Health (மருத்துவர்), (4) the assembly of astrologers (நிமித்தர்) and (5) the assembly of ministers for revenue and judicial administration of the state (அமைச்சர்).

c8.s4.t1.18

There are two technical terms in Tamil literature which connote great political significance. These are ‘ஐம்பெருங்குழு’ and ‘எண்பேராயம்.’ These terms occur jointly and severally in different places in different treatises.¹ The term ‘குழு’ which is another term for ‘ஆயம்’ occurs in *Tolkāppiyam* (*kilavi*, sūtra 57), and means simply an assembly. There are two interpretations for both the terms. One interpretation for the term ஐம்பெருங்குழு is that given above, and the other has already been noticed.² The two interpretations for எண்பேராயம், otherwise known as ‘எண்பெருந் துணைவர்’ are as follows: ‘(1) கரணத்தியலவர் (account officers), (2) கருமவிதிகள் (heads of the executive) (3) கனகச்சற்றம் (officers of the treasury), (4) கடைகாப்பாளர் (palace-guards), (5) நகரமாந்தர், (citizens of the capital), (6) படைத்தலைவர் (leaders of army divisions), (7) யானைவீரர், (elephant men), (8) இவுளிமறவர், (mounted warriors).³ The *Tamil Lexicon* renders கடைகாப்பாளர் on the authority of *Divākaram*, watchman at a gate.’⁴ In our opinion this term may be identified with the Sanskrit *Kṣattṛ* meaning ‘chamberlain’. The other interpretation though interesting is loose. It is “சாந்துபூக்கச் சாடைபாக்கிலை கஞ்சகநெய்ந்த விவரென்பராய்த்தார்.” These are those who adorned the king with a *tilaka* in his forehead, who decorated him with flowers, who presented to him undergarments and other clothings, who offered him betels and betel leaves, who attended to his upper dress and who offered him ghee. This interpretation bears no political interest except the fact that the commentator's outlook of the state was too narrow. From references to the texts where these occur, we are led to infer that the ஐம்பெருங்குழு were those people of royal entourage who followed the king in public tours, processions, festivals and so forth. The எண்பேராயம் refers to the machinery of government, and on special occasions their representatives also joined the *atmperum-kulu*.

Linked texts (8)

Jātaka — Pāli
Maṇimēkalai — Cīttalaic Cāttaṉār, Tamil
Tolkāppiyam — Tolkāppiyar, Tamil
Cilappatikāram — Iḷaṅkō Aṭikaḷ, Tamil
Harṣacarita — Bāṇabhaṭṭa, Sanskrit
Mahābhārata — Vyāsa, Sanskrit
Vālmīkirāmāyaṇa — Vālmīki, Sanskrit
Rājanītiratnākara — Caṇḍeśvara Ṭhakkura, Sanskrit