Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

Hindu Polity: A Constitutional History of India in Hindu Times c14: Chapter VI: Republican Origin of Buddhist Samgha and Republics in Buddhist Literature (500–400 B.C.)

Hindu Polity: A Constitutional History of India in Hindu Times c14

Language
English

Chapter VI: Republican Origin of Buddhist Samgha and Republics in Buddhist Literature (500–400 B.C.)

c14.2

§ 43. The Buddha was born in a republican people. He had Samgha neighbours around him, and he grew up amongst them. He called the community which he founded "Bhikkhu Samgha," or 'the Republic of Bhikshus.' He, probably following his contemporary teachers, adopted the name as well as the constitution of the political Samgha in founding his religious Samgha; and this was a reason why his religion and monastic organisation lasted so long. From the words of the Buddha himself, as reported in the Pāli sūtras,¹ the historical connection between the political and religious Samgha-constitutions can be demonstrated. When the 'Chancellor of Magadha,' deputed by the King of Magadha, wanted to know the opinion of the Buddha, on behalf of his master, as to the advisability of invading the Vajjis (the Vrijis of Pāṇini)—the Lichchhavis and Videhas,² the Buddha addressed his reply (not to the Chancellor, but to his foremost disciple) in these words:—

c14.3

¹ *Dīghanikāya*, *Mahāparinibbāna Suttanta* Trans. adopted from Rhys Davids, *Dialogues of the Buddha*, Pt. II, pp. 79-85; Cf. *S.B.E.*, Vol. XI, pp. 3-6.

c14.4

² For details regarding them, see below.

c14.5

"Have you heard, Ānanda, that the Vajjians often
"*hold full and frequent assemblies*."

c14.6

To this, Ānanda replied in the affirmative. The Buddha put such seven questions relating to the Constitution of the Vajjians, intended to be heard by the Chancellor. The verdict of the Buddha may be summed up in his own words as follows :—

c14.7

(1) "So long, Ānanda, as the Vajjians hold *full and frequent assemblies* :
(2) "So long as they *meet together in concord and rise in concord and carry out Vajjian business in concord* (Vajjī-karaṇīyāni—Vajjian acts of state) :
(3) "So long as they *enact nothing not already established, abrogate nothing that has been already enacted and act in accordance with the ancient institutions of the* Vajjians, as established in former days :
(4) "So long as they honour and esteem and revere and support the Vajjī-Elders, *and hold it a point of duty to hearken to their words* :
(5) "So long as no women or girls belonging to them are detained among them by force or abduction : [i.e., law and not force reigns] :
(6) "So long as they honour and esteem and revere and support the Vajjian Chaityas (sacred monuments) [*i.e.*, *follow the religion established*] :
(7) "So long as the rightful protection, defence and support shall be fully provided for the Arhants amongst them [*i.e.*, follow the established practice and keep out Brahminie religious systems] :
"*So long may the Vajjians be expected not to decline but to prosper*."

c14.8

Hearing this, the Chancellor murmured 'the Vajjians cannot be overcome by the King of Magadha.' The only possible policy was to create disunion (mithubheda).

c14.9

As soon as the Chancellor had taken leave of the Buddha, the Teacher called a meeting of the Bhikshu-Samgha in the Hall, and addressed them : "I will teach you, O Mendicants, *the seven conditions of* the welfare (of a community)."

c14.10

And he repeated the very seven conditions (with necessary modifications) which were the features of the practice of the Vajjīans and which were well-known, as testified to by Ānanda:

c14.11

(1) "So long as the Bhikkhus meet together in full and

c14.12

"frequent assemblies:

c14.13

(2) "So long as they meet together in

c14.14

"concord and rise in concord and carry out in "concord the duties of the Order (Saṃgha):

c14.15

(3) "So long as the Bhikkhus shall establish nothing

c14.16

"that has not already been prescribed, and "abrogate nothing that has already been "established and act in accordance with the rules "of the Saṃgha now laid down:

c14.17

(4) "So long as the brethren honour and esteem and

c14.18

"revere and support the Elders, the Fathers "and the Leaders of the Saṃgha, and hold it a "point of duty to hearken to their words:

c14.19

(5) "So long as the brethren fall not under the influence

c14.20

"of that craving........:

c14.21

(6) "So long as the brethern delight in a life of solitude:
(7) "So long as the brethren so train their minds....

c14.22

"So long the Bhikkhus may not be expected to decline but to prosper."

c14.23

§ 44. The history of the birth of the Buddhist Saṃgha is a history of the birth of the Monastic Order in the world. This history, therefore, of the birth of the religious brotherhood of the Buddha from the constitutional womb of the Indian Republic is of interest not only to this country, but to the world at large.

c14.24

It was a case of borrowing, no doubt, but, at the same time, there was an original idea behind it which only a great mind could conceive. The originality consisted in transferring the constitution of a political corporation to religion, and conjuring up an organisation to perpetuate the being of that religion.

c14.25

§ 45. The republics which engage the attention of Buddhist Literature were the states amongst whom the Buddha arose and lived. They covered the land to the east of the kingdoms of Kosala and Kauśāmbī and to the west of Aṅga, from the districts of Gorakhpur and Ballia to the district of Bhagalpur, to the north of Magadha and the south of the Himalayas. They were the States of:—

c14.26

(*a*) the **Śākyas**, with their capital at Kapilavastu in the district of Gorakhpur including their close neighbours

c14.27

(*b*) the **Koliyas** of Rāmagrāma;

c14.28

(*c*) the **Lichchhavis**, with their capital at Vaiśālī, modern Basāḍh, in the district of Muzaffarpur;

c14.29

(*d*) the **Videhas**, with their capital at Mithilā (in the district of Darbhanga) [the last two were conjointly called the **Vṛijis or Vajjis**¹];

c14.30

¹ Mr. Panday tells me that the Thārūs call the Aryan population of Champaran ‘Bajis.’ [See now J. BORS, vol. vi p. 261].

c14.31

(*e*) the **Mallas**, who covered a large area to the south of the Śākyas and the Vṛijis, from the district of Gorakhpur to that of Patna, divided into two units, with their capitals at Kuśinagara (Kusinārā) and at Pāvā;

c14.32

(*f*) ‘the **Moriyas** of Pippalīvana;’ and (*g*) ‘the **Bulis** of Allakappa’ who were minor communities² [they played no important part in the history of Buddhism; they were neighbours of the Mallas of Kuśinagara but their exact territories are not known³]; and (*h*) the Bhaggas (Bhargas) who were neighbours of the kingdom of the Vatsas of Kauśāmbī.¹

c14.33

² For (*a*) to (*g*), see Mahāparinibbāna Suttanta, §§ VI. 21-27; Rhys Davids, *Dialogues of the Buddha*, pp. ii. 179-90.

c14.34

³ *Buddhist India*, pp. 22-23; *Jātaka*, III. 157.

c14.35

¹ B. I., pp. 8, 9, 22.

c14.36

Politically, the most important of the group were the Vrijis and the Mallas. The former are noticed both by Pāṇini and Kauṭilya. The Bhargas were next-door neighbours of the Vatsas to the east, both according to the Mahā-Bhārata and the Pāli records (*ante* § 35, *n.*). Their seat was evidently a hill fortress (Siṁsumāra Hill), somewhere in or about the district of Mirzapur. Pāṇini found them an independent Janapada or a political ‘nation,’ important enough to be placed at the head of the eastern communities as the Yaudheyas headed the Punjab list. It seems that in the latter days of the Buddha, they passed under the sway of their neighbour, the king of the Vatsas, whose son Bodhi was ruling over them, according to the Jātaka and the Vinaya.² They were yet a separate unit.

c14.37

² J. III. 157 ; V. 2. 127, 4, 199-198, ; BI. p. 8.

c14.38

The Śākyas were the community wherein the Buddha was born, being the son of the President of the Śākya gaṇa. They were under the suzerainty of the king of Kosala, and their independence was destroyed in the life-time of the Buddha by the king of Kosala. Their council seems to have been composed of 500 members.³ The Śākyas are said to have had a law that each citizen could have only one wife.⁴

c14.39

³ See § 46, *n.*

c14.40

⁴ Rockhill, *Life of the Buddha*, ch. II. pp. 14-15.

c14.41

§ 46. I cannot do better than quote here the description of the administration procedure of these republics as typified by that of the Śākyan, so well summed up by Rhys Davids, the foremost authority on Buddhist literature. In view of the results of a special study of the republican organisation, I differ from that great scholar when he calls them ‘clans.’ The evidence does not warrant our calling them 'clans.' Indian republics of the seventh and sixth centuries B. C., as we shall see in sequence, had long passed the tribal stage of society. They were states, Gaņas and Saṁghas, though many of them very likely had a national or tribal basis, as every state, ancient or modern, must have.

c14.42

"The administration and judicial business" [says Prof. Rhys Davids¹] "of the clan [correctly speaking, 'the state'] "was carried out in public assembly, at which young and old "were alike present, in their common Mote Hall (*Santhāgāra*)² "at Kapilavastu. It was at such a parliament, or palaver, that "King Pasenadi's proposition (B I., p. 11) was discussed. "When Ambaṭṭha goes to Kapilavastu on business, he goes to "the Mote Hall where the Sākiyas were then in session.³ And "it is to the Mote Hall of the Mallas that Ananda goes to "announce the death of the Buddha, they being then in session "there to consider that very matter.⁴

c14.43

¹ B I., p 19.

c14.44

² [Skt. *Saṁsthāgāra*, lit., the House of Communal Law.]

c14.45

³ Ambaṭṭha Suttanta, translated in "Dialogues of the Buddha," I. 113. [I may quote the passage—"Once, Gotama, I had to go to Kapilavatthu on some business or other of Pokkharasādi's, and went into the Sākyas's Congress Hall. Now at that time there were a number of Sākyas, old and young, seated in the hall on grand seats." The *Lalita-vistara*, mentioning similar sessions of the Sākyas, 'has the Sākya-gaņa in session' :—सर्व्वे शाक्यगणे सन्निपतौय भीमांमंते राजा शुद्धोदन......शाक्यगणेन सार्ध संथागारे निषण्णोऽभूत् (XII. p. 115 Bib. Ind. ed.) The *S'ākya-gaņa* probably had 500 members (XII). The significance of "Old and Young" members probably is that the Elders and ordinary members were both present.]

c14.46

⁴ M. P. S., 6,23.

c14.47

"A single chief—how, and for what period chosen, we do "not know—was elected as office-holder, presiding over the "sessions, and, if no sessions were sitting, over the State. He "bore the title of *rāja*, which must have meant something like "the Roman consul, or the Greek archōn. We hear no-"where of such a triumvirate as bore corresponding office "among the Licchavis, nor of such acts of kingly sovereignty "as are ascribed to the real kings mentioned above. But we "hear at one time¹ that Bhaddiya, a young cousin of the "Buddha's was the rāja; and in another passage, Suddhodana, "the Buddha's father (who is elsewhere spoken of as a simple "citizen, Suddhodana Sākiyan), is called the rāja."

c14.48

¹ Vin., 2, 181.

c14.49

§ 47 The Jātaka calls the Lichchhavi rulers 'gana-rulers' or republican rulers.² The constitution of the Lichchhavis to which Professor Rhys Davids has alluded is detailed in a later document, the *Aṭṭha-kathā*.³ It mentions three highest officers, the President (Rājā), the Vice-President (Upa-Rājā) and the Generalissimo (Senāpati). An early authority (Jātaka, I, p. 504) adds a fourth officer: the Chancellor of the Exchequer (Bhaṇḍāgārika). There is no doubt that these were the four highest administrative officers and that they composed the cabinet or executive authority. The Jātaka says that the government was located in the city of Vaiśālī which had a system of triple fortifications. The rule (rajjaṃ) vested in the inhabitants (vasantānaṃ), 7707 in number, all of whom were entitled to rule (rājūnaṃ, 'kings'). They became Presidents (rājāno), Vice-Presidents (Upa-rājāno), Commanders-in-Chief (Senā-patino) and Chancellors of the Exchequer.⁴ What the Jātaka means to say is that the 7707 of the inhabitants, probably the foundation families, were the ruling class, that it is they who became (*honti*, 'become') the executive office-holders. The total population was much larger, divided in outer and inner citizens ('Vaisalians'), 1,68,000 in number.⁵ The rulers (gaṇa-rājās) underwent the ceremony of consecration by anointing.⁵

c14.50

² Jātaka, IV. 148, : '*Vesālinagare gaṇa-rājakulānaṃ abhiseka-pokkharaṇiṃ*'

c14.51

³ Turnour, *Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal*, VII (1838), p. 993, *et seq.*

c14.52

⁴ तत्थ निच्चकालं रज्‍जं कारेत्वा वसन्तानं येव रजूनं सत्तसहस्सानि सत्तसतानि सत्त च [...] राजानो होन्ति तत्तका ; चे व उपराजानो तत्तका सेनापतिनो तत्तका, तत्तका भण्डागारिका. J., I. 504.

c14.53

⁵ Mahāvastu, Triśakuniya J., ed. Senart, i, pp. 256, 271 [MV. and LV. being works of cir. 100 B.C., are not so old as the Pālī canon, but their tradition is old.]

c14.54

§ 48. According to the Aṭṭha-kathā when the Vaiśālians came to their House of Law (parliament), the tocsin used to be sounded at their House of Law¹. In the parliament of these rulers, they discussed not only matters political and military, but also agricultural and commercial.

c14.55

¹ Turnour, J.A.S.B., VII, pp. 994-5.

c14.56

A Buddhist book describes the Lechchhavi gaṇa in session appointing a *Mahattaka* or a distinguished member to be the envoy, charging him to deliver a message on behalf of the Lechchhavis of Vaiśālī, i. e., the gaṇa transacted business on behalf of the whole people.²

c14.57

² MV., i. 254. वैशालकानां लिच्छवीनां वचनेन.

c14.58

A parody of their constitution is thus given in another Buddhist book: "amongst them (the Vaiśālians) the rule of "having respect for the high, the middle ones, the oldest, the "elders is not observed; every one considers himself to be "the rājā, 'I am the rājā, I am the rājā.' No one becomes a "follower of another." Evidently in their councils every member had an equal right of speech and voting; and every one wanted to be the next president.³

c14.59

³ Lalitavistara, ch. iii., नोच्च-मध्य-वृद्ध-ज्येष्ठानुपालिता, एकैक एव मन्यते अहं राजा अहं राजेति। न च कस्यचिच्छिष्यत्वमुपगच्छति …

c14.60

§ 49. The President was also the highest judicial authority. There was a Judicial Minister who could be even an outsider, a paid officer.⁴ Liberty of the citizen was most jealously guarded. A citizen could not be held guilty unless he was considered so by the Senāpati, the Upa-rājā and the Rājā, separately and without dissent.

c14.61

⁴ Turnour, *ibid.*

c14.62

A careful record was kept of the decisions of the President on the 'rolls' ('Paveni-patthakān') in which the particulars of crime and punishment awarded to the citizens, found guilty, were entered. Preliminary enquiry into the case was held in the Court of the Justices (Vinichchaya-Mahāmāttas), who evidently were the regular court for civil causes and ordinary offences. The Court of Appeal was presided over by "Vohārikas"—'Lawyer-Judges.' The High Court had its Judges called the Sūtra-dharas or 'Doctors of Law.' There was yet a council of Final Appeal, called the Court of the Eight: Ashta-kulaka (§ 50). Any of these successive Courts could pronounce a citizen innocent and acquit him.¹ And if all the Courts held him guilty, the matter was still subject to the decision of the members of the Executive Cabinet mentioned above.

c14.63

¹ Turnour, J.A.S.B., VII., pp. 993-4.

c14.64

§ 50. This description of criminal procedure of Aṭṭha-kathā is in keeping with the general procedure of republican-system of justice as preserved in Sanskrit literature. In the opinion of the author of the Mahā-Bhārata, criminal justice in a republic should be administered by experts through the President (निव्रहः पण्डितैः कार्यः क्षिप्रमेव प्रधानतः),² that the Elders of the Kula Court (= Kulaka) were not expected to connive at an offence. Bhṛigu, enumerating different judicial authorities, implies that in the case of a *gaṇa* the deciding body was called Kulika and also Kula.³ Kātyāyana uses *Kula* in the sense of a jury.⁴ The Ashta-Kulaka thus would signify a judicial council of eight members, and not, as heretofore interpreted, 'Representatives of eight clans.'⁵

c14.65

² Śānti P., Ch. 107, 27. See below, § 129.

c14.66

³ Vīramitrodaya, p. 11. See quotation in chapter on *Paura* below, Ch. xxviii, § 255.

c14.67

⁴ **सविशूभिः स्यात् कतिपयैः कुलमूर्तेरविदितम्,** quoted in V. M., p. 41.

c14.68

⁵ Cf. Rhys Davids, *Buddhist India*, p. 22; Turnour, J.A.S.B., VII., 993n.

c14.69

§ 51. The Videhas and the Lichchhavis were, according to Buddhist documents, united in a league and they were together called the Saṃvajjis (lit., 'the Vajjians *together*').⁶ The two Vajji republics, however, were not confined to their own federation. The Lichchhavis once had formed a federation with their neighbours, the Mallas, according to a Jaina Sūtra.¹ The confederacy existed in the year when the Mahāvīra died (c. 545² or 527 B.C.). The Federal Council was composed of eighteen members, nine ‘Lēchchhakis’ and nine ‘Mallakis’.³ The members of the Federal Council are designated ‘Gaṇa Rājās.’ Probably it was to a federal council of this class that the technical term Rājaka of Amarasimha (§§25, 47) originally applied. These ‘eighteen confederate kings’ as Dr. Jacobi makes them, are placed by the Jaina Sūtra, in the Kāśī-Kosala area. At the time of the death of the Mahāvīra, the empire of Kosala was called the Kāśī-Kosala.⁴ The Jaina Sūtra is much younger in date than the Pāli Canon, and if the Jaina book has not made a mistake in its location, its description would imply that the Federal Council was in some sort of political alliance with the Kosalan monarchy, for there is no evidence of a Kosalan suzerainty. The republics were certainly on bad terms with Magadha, and Magadha was the deadly rival of Kosala; according to the Aṭṭha-kathā, the Vaiśālians lost one great battle with Ajātaśatru, Emperor of Magadha. The leagues naturally were formed to oppose the great powers between whom they were situated.

c14.70

⁶ *Buddhist India*, p. 22.

c14.71

¹ *Kalpa-Sūtra*, 128.

c14.72

² J.BOBS., I. 103.

c14.73

³ S.B.E., XXII, p. 266.

c14.74

⁴ *Cf. Kāśī-Kosala*, Patañjali (Kielhorn), II. p. 280 (2nd ed.).

c14.75

§ 52. The composition of the Federal Council shows that the federal states had equal votes, that the federation was based on terms of equality. The Mallas were not so great a political power as the Lichchhavis, yet in the Federal Council both had evidently equal voice.

c14.76

The Lichchhavis owing to their political importance and connection with the Buddha figure largely in Buddhist literature.¹ There are indications that the general description in the Mahā-Bhārata and elsewhere applied to them as much as to others. Their constitution was only a type, not an exception.

c14.77

¹ See further, § 54.

Linked texts (10)