A History of Hindu Political Theories from the Earliest Times to the End of the First Quarter of the Seventeenth Century A.D. c10.108

c10.108

(dharma). To say this, however, is not to state that politics as conceived by these thinkers is derived from the sacred canon, for, as we have seen in another place, they drew freely upon the ideas of the Arthaśāstra to fill in the dim outline of the earlier canonical list of the king’s duties. The point is brought out in a characteristically dramatic fashion, in chapter CXLII of the Śāntiparvan which, as stated by the author, forms the grand *apologia* on behalf of Bhīṣma’s teaching. There we are told how the pious and gentle king Yudhiṣṭhira, after listening to the Machiavellian rules and principles of his master, can restrain himself no longer and bursts out in the agony of his soul, “ If this horrible and disreputable course of conduct is prescribed by thee even for persons like ourselves, does there exist any established usage of the robbers which thou wouldst advise me to shun? I am bewildered and thrown into grief ; my virtue (dharma) is relaxed ; however much I may try to reconcile myself to them, I have not the resolution to act according to thy precepts.” Bhīṣma makes the memorable admission that his teaching of duty to the king has not been derived from hearing the Sacred Canon alone, but is the ‘culmination of wisdom’ and is the ‘distilled honey gathered by the learned.’ This leads to a disquisition on the nature of rājadharma. The king, it is urged, should arrange for that manifold wisdom, by following which his reason is not characterised by a one-sided morality. Duty (dharma) having wisdom (buddhi) for its source as well as the practice of pious men must be always learnt from experience. Since those kings who are supreme in wisdom are capable of desiring conquests, they should counteract the 'dharma' by means of reason. The king's 'dharma' is not capable of being performed by a one-sided morality: how can a weak king acquire wisdom which he has not learnt before?* Politics, then, according to this view, is based not so much on the sacred canon as on reason and experience.†