A History of Hindu Political Theories from the Earliest Times to the End of the First Quarter of the Seventeenth Century A.D. c10.75

c10.75

Let us next consider the views of the canonical authors of this period with regard to the Brāhmaṇa’s position in relation to the king and the people. Here, again, it would seem that the writers absorbed the ideas of the Arthaśāstra and the Dharmasūtras in a common synthesis. Thus Bhīṣma, to begin with, says in one place, “By honouring the Brāhmaṇas and the Kṣattriyas, the people attain happiness ; by disregarding these they assuredly perish ; Brāhmaṇas and Kṣattriyas are said to be the root of all castes.”[^FootnoteMark1] This passage obviously inculcates the old canonical doctrine relating to the joint authority of the Brāhmaṇa and the Kṣattriya over all the rest. As between these powers Manu teaches in one place the doctrine of their interdependence. He writes, “Kṣattriyas prosper not without Brāhmaṇas, Brāhmaṇas prosper not without Kṣattriyas ; Brahmaṇas and Kṣattriyas, being closely united, prosper in this (world) and in the next.”[^FootnoteMark2] Yet the whole burden of the context in which the above passage occurs is the idea of the Brāhmaṇa’s immense potency and sanctity. “Let him (viz. the king) not,” says Manu, “though fallen into the deepest distress, provoke Brāhmaṇas to anger ; for they, when angered, could instantly destroy him together with his army and his vehicles.”[^FootnoteMark3] This is followed by other verses to the same effect, but it is unnecessary to quote them here. In another place Manu declares, “The Brāhmaṇa is declared (to be) the creator (of the world),