War in Ancient India c4.s6.t6.5

c4.s6.t6.5

An examination of this war fought by Śeṅguṭṭuvan on the banks of the Ganges shows that it was not a defensive one, but was due to the aggressive impulse on the part of the monarch. ‘If you would avoid war, study human beings, study in particular the impulses of aggression; and study them first where they are more readily open to inspection in yourself.’⁵⁷ Whatever views theorists may hold on the defence-complex, it is not possible to deny that aggression may be caused even by a slight provocation. We cannot get over the fact that impulses of aggression have led to several wars in ancient India. For the effective discharge of such aggressive impulses, sadistic and masochistic, war-mongering provided, as it even now does, an admirable channel, though the belligerents on either side knew full well that in injuring others they injured themselves. In several cases when we speak of defence as one of the causes of war, we speak, possibly consciously, in terms of aggression. If we turn to the pages of the Purāṇas we find that the Haihaya king was responsible for the death of Jamadagni, father of Paraśurāma. The natural thing for Paraśurāma would have been to avenge his father’s murder. Instead of stopping with this, in a fit of exasperation he resolved to ruin root and branch the Kṣatriya race for twenty-one generations. It was a mad venture, we may say, based on an aggressive spirit. Animated by such destructive impulses, Paraśurāma went on persecuting one Kṣatriya prince after another. There would not have been a Kṣatriya community after him, had not some princes hidden themselves in caves and forests out of his sight and come out after the bloody conqueror had ceased fighting.