The Social Organisation in North-East India in Buddha's Time c11.27

c11.27

In times of peace the principal work of the king seems to be to take part in the administration of justice, and indeed, from our texts we get the information that this participation was no merely formal matter. When in the Râjovâda Jâtaka it is said of the king, “ He gave decisions in law-suits ” (vinicchayam anusási, II. 2), it is clearly meant that the final administration of law rested with the king, that the final decision in law-suits as well as the final word regarding the punishment for breaking the law remained with him. With this there agrees what we learn from Pali texts about the manner of administering justice. According to the account given in the commentary on the Mahâ-parinibbâna Sutta concerning the administration of justice in Vesâlî, the chief town of the Licchavis, the process of law from the institution of a suit to its final decision was a considerably complicated affair.¹ But here also the final decision remained in the hands of the king. In the Jâtakas, where apparently the more primitive conditions of a much earlier age, which presuppose a much more simple legal apparatus, are described, the criminal is brought direct before the king and generally sentenced by him without previously consulting the opinion of the ministers. An ascetic, who on a false suspicion of theft is arrested by the owners of the stolen property, is brought before the king and the latter pronounces the sentence without further examining the case: "Go and impale him" (IV. 29). Also in other narratives (for example, in the introduction to the Vaṭṭaka Jâtaka, I. 433, in the Avâriya Jâtaka, III. 232) the king alone pronounces the judgment; it happens, however, that a protest is made from the side of the minister of justice (vinicchayâmacca) against an unjust judgment of the king. Occasions for such protests frequently arose, especially, when charges were brought by men in high position and favourites of the king against common people. A typical example of this is afforded by the following narrative: "In ancient times"—so begins the Rathalaṭṭhi Jâtaka (III. 104. sq.)—"when Brahmadatta reigned, the Bodhisatta was his minister of justice (vinicchayâmacca). Once the purohita of the king drove in his carriage to the village from which he used to collect his rents (bhogagâma) and when he came to a corner of the road he met a caravan. "Move your wagons out of the road, move them out of the road," he cried. As nobody yielded, he became angry and threw his spiked stick¹ at the driver of the nearest wagon. The stick struck the shaft of the wagon, returned and struck him on the forehead, so that there was a big bump. The [p. 72.] purohita returned and complained to the king that he was assaulted by the drivers. The king who was seated in his court-room asked the drivers to be brought before him and pronounced the judgment, without inquiring into the matter: "You have assaulted the purohita, so that he has got a bump on his forehead; you must give up all your horses." Then the Boddhisatta said to him, "O great king, without inquiring into the matter you make these give up all their horses. There are, however, men who, when they themselves strike, say, "I am struck by another." Therefore, a ruler should not act without investigation; when he has heard a matter, he should act." With these words, he recited the verses: