A History of Hindu Political Theories from the Earliest Times to the End of the First Quarter of the Seventeenth Century A.D. c7.29

c7.29

We have endeavoured to trace the history of the doctrine of the King's divinity in the Vedic Saṁhitās and the Brāhmaṇas. It is however only in the latter works that this dogma is held to justify the king's authority over his subjects. The point is foreshadowed in a passage of the Taitt. Saṃ. purporting to explain the nature of one of the so-called especial (ahīna) sacrifices. It is there declared that the priest should make offerings to the gods Agni, Soma, Indra, and Varuṇa, on behalf of a person who is mutually at variance with his fellows. The result of this act is thus stated, "So him becoming Indra, his fellows recognise as superior; he becomes the best of his fellows."∗ This passage evidently seeks to base the king's authority upon his divinity which is attained through the omnipotent sacrifice. The Brāhmaṇas mark a further advance upon the theory of Divine Right. It is indeed in these works that we can trace the beginnings of true political speculation among the Hindus. How is it, ask the authors, anticipating a famous question put centuries later into the mouth of king Yudhiṣṭhira in the Mahābhārata, that the king who is One rules over his subjects who are Many? In one place indeed the answer is given in the stereotyped dogmatic fashion of the Brāhmaṇas. There the Śat. Br., describing one of the rites of the Horse-sacrifice, states, "One additional (oblation) he offers, whence one man is apt to thrive amongst (many) creatures (or subjects)"†. Another passage of the same work answers the question in a wholly different fashion. The Rājasūya comprises a rite in which the Kṣatriya has to shoot to a certain distance with an arrow. Explaining the meaning of this rite the Śat. Br. states, "And as to why a Rājanya shoots, he the Rājanya, is the visible representative of Prajāpati (the lord of creatures) : hence, while being one, he rules over many.”∗ This passage is of great interest in the history of Indian political thought, as it seems to enunciate for the first time a doctrine which became the cornerstone of the theories of kingship in the later canonical works, namely, that of the king’s rule by virtue of his divinity.