Life in Ancient India as Depicted in the Jain Canons, with Commentaries: An Administrative, Economic, Social and Geographical Survey c7.s5.1

c7.s5.1

There were various other sources of income to the State. Eighteen kinds of taxes are mentioned in the Jain texts :—taxes from cows (*go*), buffaloes (*mahisa*), camels (*uṭṭi*), cattle (*pasu*), goats (*chagali*), grass (*taṇa*), *palāla* grass (*puvāl* in Hindi), chaff (*busa*), wood (*kaṭṭha*) coal (*aṅgāra*), plough (*sīyā*), threshold (*umbara*, com. *dehalī*),⁷ pasture-ground (*jaṅghā* or *jaṅgā*), bullocks (*balwadda*), earthen pots (*ghaya*) hides and skins (*camma*), food (cullaga) and any other tax imposed by will (uppatti, com. svecchayā-kalpita).⁸ The tax collectors (suṅkapāla) are mentioned.⁹ Besides, there were other sources of income to the State. The Nāyādhammakahā mentions a jeweller of Rāyagiha who wanted to build a lake in the town. He visited the king with precious gifts and got his permission to do so.¹⁰ Then we hear of a goldsmith Kumāranandi of Campā, who wanted to go to the island of Pañcasela. He visited the king with a precious gift of gold and got his sanction for making an announcement to that effect.¹¹ Unclaimed property and treasure-trove were other sources of income to the king. We are told of the king Vijayasena of Candrakāntā, who, hearing the death of a certain merchant, deputed his officers and took possession of his property.¹² The Nisītha cūrṇi refers to a certain king who punished a certain merchant and confiscated the treasure-trove which he had discovered. The same king is said to have honoured a Brāhmaṇa who discovered a similar treasure-trove.¹³ Fines and forfeitures formed another plentiful source of income. The commentary on the Bṛhatkalpa Bhāṣya refers to an imposition of a fine of eighty thousand rūpakas on one who raised his sword or any other weapon to kill another person. However, if a person attacked did not die of the stroke, the amount of fine varied from country to country. In Ānandapura, for example, for such an offence a person had to pay a sum of rupees five only; for a serious quarrel, however, a sum of rupees twelve and a half was fined.¹⁴