Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

Hindu Polity: A Constitutional History of India in Hindu Times c43: Chapter XXX: Council of Ministers

Hindu Polity: A Constitutional History of India in Hindu Times c43

Language
English

Chapter XXX: Council of Ministers

c43.2

§ 292. Was the Hindu king a personal ruler? To answer this let us examine the position of the Hindu Council of Ministers. To appreciate the constitutional position of the Council of Ministers it is necessary to recall the previous history of the Council. The Hindu Council of Ministers was a body and an organism which had differentiated and branched off from the old National Assembly of Vedic times. In the Atharva-Veda, as we have already noticed, the **rājakṛits** are a part of the 'folk around' the king who invest him with sovereignty.¹ The rājakṛits or 'king-makers' appear later as **Ratnin** High Functionaries (Commander in-chief, Treasurer, etc.) whom the king-elect worships before his consecration.² In worshipping the Ratnins, he does honour to them both as officers of the state and as representatives of the society. Their approval like the approval of the remaining representatives of the Community was solicited before the election of the would-be king. In other words, they are officers but as part of the community, and not as creatures of the crown. This origin is further borne out by the technical expression applied to denote their collective body.

c43.3

¹ See above § 204.

c43.4

² See above § 212.

c43.5

§ 293. The Council of Ministers is called the **Parishad**, in the Artha-Śāstra³ and **Parisā** in the Jātakas,⁴ the Mahāvastu¹ and Aśoka's inscriptions.² It does not interchange (until late) with other words of similar meaning. Now the *Parishad* was another name for the National Assembly of the Vedic Hindus. In the Bṛihadāraṇyaka Upanishad as already pointed out, the *Samiti* is called *Parishad*.³ The Council of Ministers, thus differentiated from the Samiti-Parishad, inherited the same name like the Parishad of Law. With that name they likewise inherited and retained the popular tradition and sense of responsibility.

c43.6

³ *Artha-Śāstra*, Bk. 1. Ch. XV.

c43.7

⁴ Vol. VI, pp. 405 and 431.

c43.8

¹ *Mahāvastu*, Vol. II, pp. 419, 442.

c43.9

² Rock Series III and VI.

c43.10

³ See above § 9, Pt. I. p. 13.

c43.11

§ 294. They never lost their Vedic prestige even in the most powerful days of the Hindu monarch. They had been *rājakṛits* or 'k i n g-m a k e r s' and 'k i n g s' (rulers) under popular constitution and they remained 'king-makers' and 'kings' in the Pāli Sūtras, and in the national epic. The Pāli Canon employs 'king-makers' as a synonym for ministers.⁴ The Rāmāyaṇa⁵ in describing the ministers who put their resolution before Bharata, calls them 'king-makers.' In the Prātimoksha Sūtra the High Ministers were called 'kings.'⁶ Aśoka calls his High Ministers 'reins-holders' [of the state] *i.e.* 'ruling ministers.'⁷

c43.12

⁴ *Dīghanikāya-Mahāgovinda Suttanta* § 32, '*rājakattāro.*'

c43.13

⁵ *Ayodhȳā-Kāṇḍa*, Ch. LXXIX. 1. समेत राजकर्तारो भरतं वाक्यमब्रुवन्; Commentary as quoted in the Kumbakonam Ed. राजकर्तारः=मन्त्रिणः।

c43.14

⁶ 'राजानो नाम पठब्या राजा पदॆसराजा मण्डलिकराजा अन्तरभोगिका अक्खदस्सा महामत्ता ये वा पन चॆञ्ञम्पेत्यं' अनुसासंतित एते राजानो नाम, quoted by Childers, *PD.*, p. 397.

c43.15

⁷ *Rajūka* in Rock Series III; and Pillar Series IV, where the *Rājūka* ministers are entrusted with complete powers of government, (*Dāyāda*.). See Jayaswal, *J. B. O. R. S.*, Vol. IV, p. 41. See also above Pt. II. p. 18 n.

c43.16

§ 295. It is a law and and principle of Hindu constitution that the king cannot act without the approval and co-operation of the Council of Ministers. The law-sūtras, the law-books, and the political treatises are all unanimous on the point. Manu calls a king foolish who would attempt to carry on the administration by himself. He regards such a king as unfit.¹ He lays down that the king must have 'colleagues,' *i.e.*, ministers; and that in their midst and along with them he has to consider ordinary and extraordinary matters of state,² even ordinary business ought not to be done by one man, not to speak of the conduct of a kingdom.³ Yājñavalkya is of the same opinion⁴ and so are the other law-givers. Kātyāyana ordains that the king should not decide even a law-suit by himself and that he should do it along with the council.⁵ Even Kauṭilya, the greatest advocate of monarchy, has to say that matters of state should be discussed by the council

c43.17

¹ See above § 245; Manu, VII, 30—31.

c43.18

² VII, 54—57.

c43.19

³ Manu, VII, 30—31, 55—56.

c43.20

⁴ Yājñavalkya, Bk. I, 311.

c43.21

⁵ *Vīra-Mitrodaya*, p. 14.

c43.22

सोऽसहायेन मूढेन लुब्धेनाकृतबुद्धिना ।
न शक्यो न्यायतो नेतुं सक्तेन विषयेषु च ॥ ३०
शुचिना सत्यसंधेन यथाशास्त्रानुसारिणा ।
प्रणेतुं शक्यते दण्डः सुसहायेन धीमता ॥ ३१
अपि यत्सुकरं कर्म तदप्येकेन दुष्करम् ।
विशेषतोऽसहायेन किंनु राज्यं महोदयम् ॥ ५५
तैः सार्धं चिन्तयेन्नित्यं सामान्यं संधिविग्रहम् ।
स्थानं समुदयं गुप्तिं लब्धप्रशमनानि च ॥ ५६

c43.23

तैः सार्धं चिन्तयेद्राज्यं etc.

c43.24

सदाचिन्तयतः सामात्यः सदाक्रमपुरोहितः ।
नयधर्मो न यत्रो राजा धर्मं नियच्छति धर्मतः ।

c43.25

of ministers and whatever the majority decides the king should carry out. It should be noted that this rule is enjoined even when there is a body of mantrins or cabinet separate from the Mantri-Parishad. The Artha-S̄āstra says:

c43.26

"When there is an extraordinary matter the Mantrins "and the Mantri-Parishad should be called together "and informed. In the meeting whatever the majority "decide to be done, should be done (by the king)."¹

c43.27

¹ Artha-Śāstra, Bk. I. Chap. 15; 11 (p. 29).

c43.28

It is remarkable that the king is not given even the power of vetoing. The Kauṭilīya in emphasising the importance of the Parishad says that Indra was called 'thousand-eyed,' although he had only two eyes, because he had thousand wise members in his Mantra-Parishad or Council of State who were regarded as his eyes.²

c43.29

² Artha-Śāstra, Bk. I. Ch. 15; 11 (p. 29.):

c43.30

The Śukranītisāra, which in matters of first principles follows tradition faithfully, prescribes:

c43.31

"Without the mantrins matters of state "should never be considered by the king "alone, be he an expert in all the sciences "and versed in policy. A wise king must "always follow the opinion of the members "of the council—of Adhikārins or Ministers "with portfolios, of the President (Sabhya, § 309) "and Subjects (Prakṛitis, § 304). He must never "follow his own opinion. When the "sovereign becomes independent (of his council) he plans

c43.32

आत्ययिके कार्ये मन्त्रिणो मन्त्रिपरिषदञ्चाहूय ब्रूयात्। तत्र यद्भूयिष्ठाः कार्यसिद्धिकरं वा ब्रूयुस्तत् कुर्यात्।

c43.33

See Jayaswal, *Ind. Ant.* 1913, p. 282.

c43.34

इन्द्रोहि मन्त्रिपरिषदृषीणां सहस्रम् । तच्चक्षुः । तस्मादिमं द्वयक्षं सहस्राक्षमाहुः।

c43.35

"for ruin. In time he loses the state and loses the "subjects.'"

c43.36

The king, according to Manu (VII. 57), should consult the ministers separately and then 'all of them together'—*i.e.*, as Medhātithi explains, in the council. This is exactly, almost verbally, what Kauṭilya lays down.² By thus discussing, the king was to derive benefit. The cleverest of the minister, who should be a Brahmin, was to be completely depended upon by the king, and entrusted with the execution of all the resolutions.³ All the business thus was to be left for execution in the hands of a Prime-Minister or Chancellor.

c43.37

² ताननैकैकशः पृच्छेत् समस्तांश्च AS., p. 28

c43.38

³ Manu, VII. 58-59.

c43.39

The Bṛihaspati Sūtra says that even 'a rightful thing (*dharma*) the king should do only on the advice of the wise.'⁴ That is, for even a lawful action in administration the king must have the authority of expert ministers.

c43.40

⁴ धर्ममपि लोकविक्रुद्धं न कुर्यात्। करोति चेदाप्तवाक्यैर्न बुद्धिमान्दिः। Br. Sūtra, I. 4—5.

c43.41

§ 296. In this connection we must also notice the very important constitutional law laid down by the Dharma School of law-givers that it was not competent for the king to make gifts

c43.42

¹ ŚNS. II., 2-4:—

c43.43

सर्वविद्यासु कुशलो नृपो ह्यपि सुमन्त्रवित्।
मन्त्रिभिस्तु विना मन्त्रं नैकोऽर्थं चिन्तयेत् कचित् ॥ २
सम्पाधिकारिक-प्रकृति-सभासत्सुमते स्थितः।
सर्वदा स्यान्नृपः प्राज्ञः स्वमते न कदाचन ॥ ३
प्रभूः स्वातन्त्र्यमापन्नो ह्यनर्थायैव कल्पते।
भिन्नराष्ट्रो भवेत्सद्यो भिन्नप्रकृतिरेव च ॥ ४

c43.44

तेषां स्वं स्वमभिप्रायमुपलभ्य पृथक् पृथक्।
समस्तानां च कार्येषु विदध्याद्धितमात्मनः ॥ Manu, VII. 57.

c43.45

even to Brahmins if the ministers "opposed" the gifts. The law is as ancient as the time of Āpastamba.¹ (*circa* 400 B. C.).

c43.46

¹ Āpastamba, II. 10. 26, 1:— भृत्यानामनुपरोधेन क्षेत्रं वित्तञ्च ददद्ब्राह्मणेभ्यो यथार्हमन्तानतीत्यानन्त्यंफलंजयति। २।१०।२६।१ For Bhṛitya in the sense of minister *see Artha-Śāstra*, p. 320 "मन्त्रिपुरोहितादि-भृत्यवर्गम्", and the reference to the Divyāvadāna below.

c43.47

With the history of the origin of Hindu Ministry and these laws of the constitution before us we can understand how the Ministry under Chancellor Rādha-Gupta refused to make further gifts to the Buddhist Brotherhood on the order of the Emperor Aśoka.² Otherwise we would have fallen into the cheap wisdom of regarding the whole story as a 'myth' and a 'Buddhist fabrication'.

c43.48

² Divyāvadāna, p. 430. *et. seq.* I regard the detail of the first gift of Aśoka as given in the *Divyāvadāna* to be substantially true, for it was in the nature of a *Viśvajit Sarvamedha*-(सर्वमेध) fee which a Sārvabhauma Emperor which Aśoka was, was expected to make, as the *Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa* describes (§ 209). The ruler gave away all that belonged to him except the land, *i.e.*, the State as Mīmāṁsā says (See § 345). In other words, he gave away the surplus revenue which he had in his treasury. To an occasional gift like this the ministers would not have objected as that was the right of the Emperor to make. But a repeated procedure of this nature would be objectionable as the Ministers of Aśoka found it to be.

c43.49

Aśoka in his Rock Series inscriptions section VI says that when he has passed an order with regard to a gift or a proclamation, should a discussion arise in the Parishad (Council of Ministers) and they (the ministers) shelve it, he should be informed of it—if there was a division of opinion with regard to his proposal in the Parishad or a total rejection, he should at once be informed of it.³ That shows that the ministers had been for some time opposing the rulings of the Emperor.

c43.50

³ *Id.*, 1913, p. 242.

c43.51

§ 297. Rudradāman was similarly opposed by his Ministers with regard to his proposal to repair the Sudarśana

c43.52

Lake. Opinion of Rudradāman's Ministers was against the king's proposal for repairing Sudarśana water-works. They refused to pay for the repairs and the king had to pay from his private purse.¹ Fortunately for Indian history the evidence of Rudradāman's inscription is as clear as any could be. It proves that the constitutional laws were not mere pious wishes, but they were as real as ordinary, municipal laws of the law-books. Thanks to the Buddhist works which have preserved the great constitutional datum on the reign of Aśoka in their pathetic lament that the Emperor of the whole of India was deprived of his sovereign authority by the ministers of state.² The *Gāthā*³ quoted by the Divyāvadāna is more ancient than the compilation of the Divyāvadāna, and the former could not have been composed many centuries after the event. The monks were to gain nothing by an invention of such a story which threw discredit on a great personage of their religious history. They would not have invented a story which would have been a bad precedent in case other monarchs wanting to imitate the munificence of the Maurya Emperor.

c43.53

¹ See § 270 above, *EI*, VIII., 44 (insc. lines 16-17).

c43.54

² Divyāvadāna, p. 430. Aśoka anxious to complete his intended gift of money to the Kukkuṭārāma monastery says, 'Rādhagupta, I do not mind the loss of money, of government, of authority,' राजाऽऽह। राधगुप्त, नाहं द्रव्यविनाशं न राज्यनाशनं न चाप्यधिपत्यभ्रंशं शोचामि।
* * * * तस्मिंश्च समये कुणालस्य सम्पदिनामपुत्रो युवराजोऽववर्त्तते। तत्रामात्यैरभिहितम्। कुमार, अशोको राजा स्वल्पकालावलम्बी, इदम् च द्रव्यं कुक्कुटारामं प्रेष्यते, कोषबलिनश्च राजानो, निवारयितव्यः। यावत् कुमारेण भाण्डागारिकः प्रतिषिद्धः। "At that particular time Kunāla's son, Saṁpadi, was filling the post of Yuvarāja. He was told by the Ministers 'Your Royal Highness, King Aśoka is temporarily in his position but he is sending away the money to the Kukkuṭārāma. Kings' strength lies in treasury. He is to be checked.' The Prince prohibited the Treasurer." [For the position of Yuvarāja as a High Minister, and resolutions going up to him from other members of the Cabinet, see below § 312].
* * * * अथ राजाशोकः संविग्नौऽमात्यान् पौरंश्च संनिपात्य कथयति। कः साम्प्रतं पृथिव्यामीश्वरः। ततोऽमात्य उत्थायासनाः येन राजाशोकस्तत्राञ्जलिं प्रगृह्योवाच। (p. 431) देवः पृथिव्यामीश्वरः। अथ राजाशोकः बाष्पदुर्द्दिननयन-वदनोऽमात्यानुवाच— दाक्षिण्यादनृतं हि किं कथयथ भ्रष्टाधिराज्या वयम्। "Now King Aśoka, very much agitated in mind, called a meeting of the Ministers and the Pauras. He asked—'Who at present is the Sovereign of the Country'? On that the Prime Minister rising from his seat approached the place where King Aśoka was and saluting him respectfully spoke, 'His (=Your) Majesty is the Sovereign of the Country.' Then King Aśoka with tears trickling down his face answered the Ministers:

c43.55

§ 298. The numerical strength of the Ministry varied from time to time. Bṛihaspati in his book on politics quoted by Kauṭilya gave the number of the council members to be sixteen. The Artha-Sāstra of the Mānavas laid down 'that the Council of Ministers should be composed of twelve ministers': mantripariṣhadaṁ, dvādaśāmātyāṁ¹ kurvīteti Mānavāḥ. Another old authority, Uśanas, enjoined in his time twenty, while Kauṭilya would not have any rigid number.² Earlier Councils were larger, as one is mentioned in the Mahā-Bhārata of thirty two members (§ 321). There has been a tendency towards a smaller body.

c43.56

¹ Kauṭilya, *Artha-Śāstra*, Bk. I, Ch. 15; 11 (p. 29). Read ºamātyāṁ instead of ºamātyān as printed in the AS.; it qualifies *mantripariṣhadaṁ*

c43.57

² *Ibid.*

c43.58

§ 299. We shall revert again to the Mantri-Parishad, and to the powers of the Ministers as a body. Let us now

c43.59

'Why do you tell an untruth on account of courtesy? We are deprived of rule†'
\* * * *
यावद्रायो नरेन्द्रोऽसौ बभौको मौयकुञ्जरः ।
जम्बुद्वीपेश्वरोभूत्वा जातोऽद्धामलकेश्वरः ॥
अद्यैः प्रभुमहीपतिरपहतश्चाधिकारी दानं प्रयच्छति किलामलकार्धमेतत् ।

c43.60

"The liberal king Aśoka, the best of the Mauryas, who was the Emperor of India, became the sovereign of a half-apple [on his plate]. That King now deprived of authority by the Ministers, gave away in charity the half-apple."

c43.61

note the official designations of different ministers. The number of the Ministry or Cabinet is recommended by Manu (VII. 54) to be seven or eight. The number eight had become nearly fixed when the Śukranīti was written, and on its tradition the Ashṭa Pradhāna, or the Ministry of Eight, of Śivāji, was founded. The eight ministers according to 'some' authorities referred to in the Śukranīti are the following:—¹

c43.62

¹ *Śukranītisāra*, II. 71-72.

c43.63

(1) The Sumantra or Minister of Finance.
(2) The Paṇḍitāmātya or Minister of Law.
(3) The Mantrin or Home Minister.
(4) The Pradhāna or President of Council.
(5) The Sachiva or Minister of War.
(6) The Amātya or Minister of Revenue and Agriculture.
(7) The Prāḍvivāka or Minister of Justice and Chief Justice.
(8) The Pratinidhi ('Representative:' See below).

c43.64

According to another view two other ministers— [(9) The Purohita or Minister of Religion,
(10) The Dūta or Minister of Diplomacy,² should also have seats in the Council]. The exact character

c43.65

² *Śukranītisāra*, II. 84-87.

c43.66

अष्टप्रकृतिभिर्युक्तो नृपः कैश्चित्स्मृतः सदा ॥
सुमन्त्रः पण्डितो मन्त्री प्रधानः सचिवस्तथा ।
अमात्यः प्राड्विवाकश्च तथा प्रतिनिधिः स्मृतः ॥

c43.67

सर्वदर्शी प्रधानस्तु सेनाविन् सचिवस्तथा ॥
मन्त्री तु नीतिकुशलः पण्डितो धर्म तत्ववित् ।
लोकशास्त्रनयज्ञस्तु प्राड्विवाकः स्मृतः सदा ॥
देशकालप्रविज्ञाता अमात्य इति कथ्यते ।
आयव्ययप्रविज्ञाता सुमन्तः स च कीर्तितः ॥
इंगिताकारचेष्टाज्ञः स्मृतिमान्देशकालवित् ।
वाक्प्रगल्भोऽभयस्वी धीमान्दूतो नृपते ॥

c43.68

of the *Pratinidhi* is not clear. He is evidently very important being given precedence over the President of the Council and the Mantrin. He was 'to press upon the King the 'business which must be done whether favourable or 'unfavourable.' He is certainly not the 'representative' of the king. He might have been the representative of the Paura-Jānapadas in the Cabinet or that of the Council in dealing with the King. He is certainly very, probably the most, important.

c43.69

The Yuvarāja is not a member of the Cabinet in this enumeration but he is certainly a Minister. He was generally a prince of the blood: uncle, brother, nephew, son, an adopted

c43.70

अहितंवापि यत्कार्यं सद्यः कर्तुं पदोचितम्।
अकर्त्तुं यद्धितमपि राज्ञः प्रतिनिधिः सदा।
बोधयेत्कारयेत्कुर्यान्न कुर्य्यान्न प्रबोधयेत्॥
भर्त्रा वा मंत्रिदासक्तं कार्यजातञ्च यत्किल।
सर्वेषां राजकृत्येषु प्रधानस्तद्विचिन्तयेत्॥
et seq up to Śl. 106.

c43.71

Cf. Śivājī's *Ashta-Pradhana*. "The Civil organization of the District was, of course, subordinate to the authorities at head-quarters, two of whom—the Pant Amatya and the Pant Sachiv, had respectively the charge of what in our time would be called the office of Finance Minister and the General Accountant and Auditor. The district accounts had to be sent to these officers, and were there collated together, and irregularities detected and punished. These officers had power to depute men on their establishments to supervise the working of the district officers. The Pant Amātya and the Sachiv were, next to the Peshwa, the highest civil officers, and they had, besides these revenue duties, military commands. They were both important members of the Board of Administration, called the *Ashta Pradhān* or Cabinet of eight heads of departments. The Peshwa was Prime Minister, next to the King, and was at the head of both the civil and military administrations, and sat first on the right hand below the throne. The Senāpati was in charge of the military administration, and sat first on the left side. *Amātya* and *Sachiv* sat next to the Peshwa, while the Mantrī sat next below the Sachiv, and was in charge of the King's private affairs The Sumant was Foreign Secretary, and sat below the Senāpati on the left. Next came Pandit-rao, who had charge of the ecclesiastical department, and below him on the left side sat the Chief Justice, [= *Nyāyādhīśa*.]" Ranade, *Rise of Maratha Power*, pp. 125-6.

c43.72

son, or a grandson.¹ Like other Ministers he was a Sahāya or ‘Colleague’ of the king. The Yuvarāja had his seal, and the set formula with which he signed. Under Aśoka, on the authority of the Divyāvadāna,² Samprati, a grandson, was the Yuvarāja, while the son, Kuṇāla was the Presidency Governor at Takshaśilā (the capital of the Northern Presidency).

c43.73

¹ *Śukranītisāra*, II. 15,

c43.74

² *Divyāvadāna*, p. 430, See above II, p. 121, n.

c43.75

A Prince royal in office was regarded as an officer. Bhaṭṭa Bhāskara calls him *Kumāra-adhyaksha* [‘Prince Officer in charge of Department’ who held the ‘reins’ of government.³ In Aśoka's inscriptions despatches to Presidency Governments are addressed to the ‘Prince’ and High Ministers, (Kumāra and Mahāmātras), the latter being called a Varga or Council.⁴ Evidently it is such a Kumāra whom Bhaṭṭa Bhāskara, rather his authority, called *niyantā* or ‘one who leads’ ‘by reins’ (*rajjubhiḥ*). The Buddhist books⁵ make Aśoka governor one time at Takshaśilā and at another at Ujjain (the capital of the Western Presidency) Maurya Princes of the blood royal governed with their Councils in the South⁶; while the conquered province of Kaliṅga was governed only by a Council of Mahāmātras. It is significant that Despatches from the Central Government, copies of which are given in the inscriptions, are never addressed to the prince by name; they are impersonal. The Princes, like the Mahāmātras (whom we shall presently discuss) were probably transferred as the two viceroyalties held by Aśoka indicate. In that case non-personal documents would be quite in form.

c43.76

³ See above, II. p. 18, n.

c43.77

⁴ See ‘Separate edicts’ of Orissa ; *J. BORS.*, IV. p. 36.

c43.78

⁵ *Divyāvadāna*, p. 372 ; *Mahāvaṃsa*, V. 46.

c43.79

⁶ See Jaugaḍa and Dhauli ‘Separate’ Rock-Inscriptions and Siddhapura Inscription.

c43.80

सजातं पितृव्यं वानुजं भ्रातृजसंभवम्
पुत्रं पुत्रीकृतं दत्तं यौवराज्येऽभिषेचयेत् ॥
क्रमादभावे दौहित्रं भागिनेयं वा नियोजयेत् ।

c43.81

§ 301. The official designations of the Ministers for different portfolios varied from time to time. The Mānava Dharma-Śāstra uses the word *Sachiva*, lit., 'helper,' 'colleague,' as a general term for Ministers¹ as against the *Amātya* (*lit.*, 'those remaining together') of the Artha-Śāstra. In the Rāmāyaṇa *Amātya* occurs in the general sense, while *Sachivas* are distinguished from the *Mantrins*.²

c43.82

¹ Manu, VII. 54.

c43.83

² Yuddhakāṇḍa, 130 17—20 (Kumbakonam), Govindarāja.

c43.84

The **Chief Minister** is called *Mantrin* (*lit.* 'Adviser'], *ie.*, the Mantrin, in the Artha-Śāstra, whose position is the first amongst the Ministers. Next to him comes in the Artha-Śāstra the *Purohita*, then the *Senāpati* and after the Senāpati comes the **Yuvarāja**.³

c43.85

³ Artha-Śāstra, Bk. V. Ch. 2; 91 (p. 245).

c43.86

The Mānava calls the Prime Minister simply *Amātya*, that is, he was *the* Amātya. In him was vested the administration or daṇḍa.⁴ He, as especially required by the Mānava (VII. 58; XII. 100.), was to be a Brahmin. In earlier times, in the Pāli Canon, the Prime Minister, *e.g.*, of **Ajātaśatru**, is styled **Agra-Mahāmātra** 'the **Foremost Minister**.' In the Divyāvadāna, the Chief Minister of Aśoka [Rādhagupta] is called the *Amātya*. He is evidently the *Mantrin* in the **Śukra-nīti**. In the Gupta period he is probably called the **Mahā-daṇḍa-nāyaka**. (§ 322).

c43.87

⁴ Manu, VII. 65.

c43.88

The Mānava Code does not specifically mention the *Purohita*. But he is very likely included in the 'seven or eight' Ministers of Manu. This Minister bears the same designation (Purohita or Purodhas, *lit.*, 'Leader') throughout, but his functions varied with a tendency to gradual extension. In the Jātakas and Dharma Sūtras⁵ he is expected to be versed both in sacred law and politics. Āpastamba¹ expects him to judge cases where *Prāyaśchitta* or penance was to be inflicted. He was also to try Brahmins on behalf of the king. The Artha-Śāstra² requires him to be learned in the Veda and its *Aṅgas*, in astrology, and in politics, and that he should also know the Atharvan rites, which were to be performed in cases of national calamities to satisfy the common people. The Śukra-Nīti³ demands a knowledge of the military science and art as well in the Purohita

c43.89

⁵ Jātaka. Vol., I. p. 437; Jātaka, vol., II. p. 30; Āpastamba Dh. S., II. 5. 10, 13—14.

c43.90

¹ Āpastamba, *Dharma-Sūtra*, II. 5. 10, 13-14, etc.

c43.91

² Artha-Śāstra, Bk. I Ch. 8; 5 (p. 15).

c43.92

³ Śukra-Nītisāra, II. 80. नीतिशास्त्राम्रव्यूहादिकुशलस्तु पुरोहितः।

c43.93

The Mānava styles the *Minister of Diplomacy* as *Dūta*,⁴ who had jurisdiction with regard to *peace and war* relations with foreign powers and "who broke up alliances." The Rāmāyaṇa (II. 100.35) knows him by that title and so does the Śukra-Nīti. But subsequently he is called *Sāndhi-vigrahika*, in inscriptions of the Gupta period, in Bṛihaspati's law and later. It is curious that this Minister is not found in the list of the Artha-Śāstra. Probably the Mantrin combined that office in himself. The office was very important in Maurya days.

c43.94

⁴ Manu, VII, 65-66. दूते संधिविपर्ययो। दूत एव हि सन्धत्ते भिनत्येव च संहतान् ।

c43.95

In the Mānava Code the king is his own *Finance Minister*.⁵ He himself holds charge of the Finance. He is not directly named in Manu but his subordinates are mentioned under the designation which the Artha-Śāstra gives to him—*Samāhartṛi*. In the Artha-Śāstra there is an allied portfolio, of the Sannidhātṛi (§ 211). Later on the two portfolios coalesce into one. In the Śukranīti the Minister of Finance is Sumantra. Govinda-rāja (§ 309) gives another designation, arthasañchayakṛit.

c43.96

⁵ *Ibid.*, नृपतौ कोशराष्ट्रे च—(65).

c43.97

The Senāpati is evidently the Minister of War. He is very important in the government of Chandragupta, coming third in precedence, taking his place above the Yuvarāja. In the Śukranīti he is called 'Sachiva'. Probably the Senāpati was both the military leader in the field and the military member in the Council as is suggested in the Rāmāyaṇa, II. 100. 31. But in the time of Kauṭilya the two offices were distinct (§ 309) and they remained distinct in later times. In the Śukra-nīti he is a civilian officer, as the eight ministers were transferred from one portfolio to the other and they all occupy equal rank (§ 320).

c43.98

The above five ministers, with the Yuvarāja in addition, made up the real governing body. The Yuvarāja is a post-Vedic development while all others had origin in the Ratnins, except probably Dūta whose function might have been performed by the Sūta as he appears to be rather important in early days.¹ The Yuvarāja, it should be marked, occupies the fourth place in the Government of Chandragupta. Then and later he is not the President of the Cabinet or the Council as there are other officers in those posts; evidently no portfolio is given to him. The Mahā-Bhārata (XII. 83. 12.) calls the cabinet a *gaṇa* and so does the Śukra-nīti (§ 312). The Mahā-Bhārata says that the king should not be partial to any one member of the *gaṇa*.

c43.99

¹ In the Mahā-Bhārata, Sañjaya becomes Minister of Finance. XIII, 42.

c43.100

There was a tendency to form a smaller body inside the cabinet. The members of this, what we may call the Inner body, were three or four, according to the Artha-Śāstra (p. 28.). It was with them that the king constantly conferred ('मन्त्रयेत'). These ministers are called the Mantrins (मन्त्रिणः) in the Artha-Śāstra and the Rāmāyaṇa and the Mahā-Bhārata. In this character the '*mantrins*' mean 'those vested with *mantra* or the policy of state,' as is evident from the expressions *mantradharas* in the Rāmāyaṇa² and *mantra-grāhas* in the Mahā-Bhārata.³

c43.101

² *Ayodhyā*, Canto 100, 16.

c43.102

³ XII 83. 50.

c43.103

The members of 'the mantra-holding' (mantra-grāha) or 'the holders of the reins' of state (II, p 18 n.) body were to be, according to the Mahā-Bhārata, 'at least three' and preferably five.¹ Kauṭilya prescribes it to be 'three or four' (p. 28). The original view probably was that such holder-of-mantra should be only one as recognised by the king. This was the view of that severe theorist, Kaṇika Bhāradvāja² (Artha-Śāstra, p. 27), and it seems to have been the view of the Mānava Dharma Code (VII. 58). Viśālāksha condemned the system of one-minister-cabinet (Artha-Śāstra, p. 27), and the Rāmāyaṇa does the same, according to which (II. 100 18) it should "neither be of one nor too many." The number three and upwards became fixed, as evidenced by the Mahā-Bhārata and the quotations in *Nītivākyāmṛita*.³ The uneven number found preference for the same reason as given by Mitra Miśra in the case of uneven jury: सङ्ख्यावैषम्यन्तु भूयोऽल्पविरोघे भूयसां स्यात् 'uneven number is to provide, against difference in opinion, for a majority.'⁴

c43.104

¹ *Ibid.*, 47, 52, 20-22.

c43.105

² We ought to recover his work. He is quoted as late as by Govindarāja.

c43.106

³ एको मन्त्री न कर्त्तव्यः । एको निरवग्रहश्चरति सुमहति च कार्य्यकृच्छे डु । द्वावपि मन्त्रिणौ न कर्तव्यौ, तौ संहतौ चरन्तौ भक्षयन्तो महतीतो च विनाशयतः ।... त्रयः पञ्च सप्त वा मन्त्रिणः कार्याः। Ch. X.

c43.107

⁴ *Vīramitrodaya*, p. 35

c43.108

§ 304. Aśoka's **rājūka ministers** (§ 318) who had the fullest authority to rule over the *prajā* (subjects) and to grant them *anugrahas*, and in whose hands the king left the prajā as a mother leaves her child in the hands of a known nurse (Pillar Proclamation IV), and who were declared supreme in the matters of *daṇḍa* (administration) and *abhihāra* (declaring hostilities), seem to be identical with the *mantra-dharas* or *mantra-grāhas*. *Rājūka* signifies the 'ruling minister,' literally it denotes 'the holder of the reins [of Government]' like Bhaṭṭa-Bhāskara's *rajjubhir niyantā* and that *Mantra grahas* of the Mahā-Bhārata. With regard to the use of the word *rājā* applied to them we should notice that the Prātimokha sūtra, quoted by Childers in his Pali Dictionary under *rājā*, says that the high ministers (*mahā-mātras*) were called *rājās*. The number of Aśoka's Rājūkas was certainly more than one, they being generally referred to in the plural.

c43.109

§ 305 In the history of the Cabinet we have a growth in number, and a change—from the authority of one to that of several. The rule of one was always found incompatible with the tradition and the whole social system of the race.

c43.110

§ 306 Apart from the cabinet of the Mantra-dharas who had the real executive authority, there was, as we have already seen, the *Mantra-parishad* or the *Mantri-parishad*. The Mantri parishad was not solely composed of the Mantrins. To the meetings of this body, the Mantrins or 'the holders of Mantra' ministers were called according to the Kauṭilīya. The Parishad was composed of (1) these Mantradharas (Inner cabinet) (2) other cabinet ministers who held portfolios, (3) ministers without portfolios, and (4) others. The number was generally large; as the numbers 32 of the Mahā-Bhārata, 20 and 16 of other authorities, and Kauṭilya's example of Indra's large council show. It thus exceeded the number of the ministers of the cabinet.

c43.111

§ 307 We have no definite information as to who composed the class (4). The Council summoned by Aśoka on the ministers refusing to carry out his orders of gifts, consisted of the Pauras (Ch. XXVIII), and the Amātyas. It seems from other pieces of evidence that the Council had some seats assigned in it to the leaders of the Paura and Jānapada. The Mahā-Bhārata (Śānti, ch. 83)

c43.112

and the Śukranīti (II. 3.)¹ suggest that. The opinion which the king was bound to follow according to the Śukra-nīti (II. 3), was of (*a*) the Sabhya, (*b*) the Adhikārins, and (*c*) the Prakṛitis, as *sabhāsads* or members sitting in the Council. The *Sabhya* according to the authority quoted by Govindarāja (§ 309) was the President of the Council or the Mantra-Parishad of Kauṭilya. *Adhikārins* were the heads of Adhikaraṇas or Departments, *i. e.*, the Ministers. The remaining one *Prakṛitis* must necessarily signify the People or Subjects (p. 70), meaning thereby their representatives—the chiefs of the Paura and Jānapada (§ 265). In the Rāmāyaṇa [A., chs. 81 (12), 82 (1, 4)] the People's representatives and the Ministers meet and hold a *Sabhā* called the 'ruling (*pragrahā*) Sabhā' to consider an *atyāyika* ('extra-ordinary,' cf. AŚ., p. 29) business.

c43.113

¹ १ सभ्याधिकारि-प्रकृति-सभासत्सु मते स्थितः। सर्वदा स्यान्नृपः प्राज्ञः स्वमते न कदाचन ॥ (ŚNŚ.)

c43.114

The Mahā-Bhārata² where it describes the Sabhā (XII. 83. verses 1-2) counts these classes :

c43.115

² २ सभासदः सहायाश्च सुहृदश्च विशेषतः। परिच्छदाश्चामात्याः कीदृशाः स्युः पितामह (MBh.)

c43.116

(1) The *Sahāyas* by whom it means the 'Ministers (*Amātyas*) colleagues (*Sahāyas*)' or the High Ministers with portolios (verses 3—4).

c43.117

(2) The *Parichchada amātyas* who should be very learned, of high birth, natives of the country, deep, wise and loyal. As the name ('Robes') denotes, they were probably ceremonial ministers and dignitaries who had grown out of the king's house-hold. One of them was the Dauvārika or Lord Mayor of the Palace occupying a very high position (§ 309). They had their Adhikaraṇas or Departments (§ 309). Out of the above the king chose his 'Mantrins' (7—8) who are referred to in the Śukranīti verse, (II. 2) preceding the one quoted above. The subject of Mantrins continues for the rest of the chapter in the Mahā-Bhārata and with a small digression is taken up again in Ch. 85, where the list of 32 ministers is given. Out of them the king is to choose 8 ministers as Mantrins or the cabinet. Whatever policy they decided upon is to be submitted to the Rāshtra and the President of the Rāshtra, *i.e.*, the Jānapada, for opinion.

c43.118

(3) The Rāshtra. This new element corresponds to the Prakṛiti of the Śukra nīti.¹

c43.119

¹ [It probably corresponds also to the *suhṛid* class of *Sabhāsads* mentioned in the opening verse of Chapter 83, along with the *Sahāya* and *Parichchada* classes. Why the representatives of the realm should be called "friends" is not very clear. The political writers have a classification by which they divide the natural friends and natural enemies of kings. Probably the Realm representatives were considered as the king's 'friends,' for unlike an ambitious relative, they were naturally interested in upholding the king's cause.]

c43.120

The Realm (*'Rāshtra'*) of the Mahā-Bhārata and the *People* (*'Prakṛiti'*) of the Śukranīti are thus identical with the Paura in the council called by Aśoka and the *Prakṛiti-sabhāsada* (A. 82, 4, 17) of the Rāmāyaṇa.

c43.121

It thus seems that the *Parishat* had not only the popular trace in its Vedic name, but a real popular element in it. Although it was now associated with the designation of the "*Mantra—*" or *Mantrin—*, it carried on in some degree the Vedic tradition of the folk assembly.

c43.122

§ 308. It is better to render the Mantri-Parishad as Council of State rather than the Council of Ministers. The form Mantra-Parishat, 'Council of State Deliberation' which Kauṭilya applies to the Mantri-parishad of Indra, should be noted in this connexion. Probably the *Mantri-parishad* there signifies the Mantra-Parishad. The tradition of a large Parishad, *e.g.* of 1000 members, is preserved both in Kauṭilya, and in the Rāmāyaṇa (where it stands rather discredited, II. 100). Probably this is a reminiscence of the Vedic Parishad.

c43.123

§ 309. There was an old grouping called 'the Eighteen Tīrthas.' The Rāmāyaṇa knows it (II. 100. 36). The Artha-Śāstra of Kauṭilya mentions it and refers to the *tīrthas* as Mahā-Amātyas (pp. 21, 22). They were heads of departments of both superior and inferior classes. They contained two offices of the royal household as well The grouping was old and was fast becoming obsolete The Mahā-Bhārata does not seem to mention it in its book on politics.

c43.124

Tīrthas are defined in a quotation given by Somadeva Sūri¹ as bodies of legal officers and officers in charge of executive works. It seems certain that Tīrtha meant the holder of a department, as all the Tīrthas mentioned in the Artha-Śāstra are in charge of departments. *Tīrtha* literally means 'a ford to pass through' *i.e.* a passage. Ministers and heads of departments acquired this name probaly because orders passed through them to their respective departments. The Tīrtha classification throws light on the significance of the technical officers. They were:—²

c43.125

¹ *Nītivākyāmṛita*, Chapter II. धर्मसमवायिनः कार्यसमवायिनश्च पुरुषाः तीर्थम् ।

c43.126

² *Artha-Śāstra*, Bk I. Ch. 12; 8 (pp. 20-21). Cf. also Bk. V., ch. 2; 91 (p. 245)

c43.127

(1) The *Mantrin*.
(2) The *Purohita*
(3) The *Senāpati*, the Minister for the Army (see *Nāyaka*, below No. 11).
(4) The *Yuvarāja*.
(5) The *Dauvārika* or the Lord Mayor of the Palace.
(6) The *Antarvaṁśika* or the Lord Chamberlain.
(7) The *Praśāstṛi*, evidently the Chief *Praśāstṛi*, as there were more than one such officers. According to the enumeration of Govindarāja, he was the minister in charge of Prisons.

c43.128

(8) The *Samāhartṛi* or the Minister of Revenue.
(9) The *Sannidhātṛi* or the Minister of Treasury.
(10) The *Pradeshṭṛi* whose functions are not clearly known.
(11) The *Nāyaka* or the Generalissimo.
(12) The *Paura* or the Governor of the Capital.
(13) *Vyāvahārika* (lit., 'Judge') or the Chief Justice, according to Govindarāja.
(14) The *Kārmāntika* or the Officer in charge of Mines and Manufactories.
(15) The *Mantri-Parishat-adhyaksha* or the President of the Council, *Sabhya* according to Govindarāja.
(16) The *Daṇḍapāla* or the Officer in charge of the maintenance of the Army.
(17) The *Durgapāla* or the Officer in charge of Home Defences.
(18) The *Antapāla* or Rāshtrāntapāla, *i.e.*, the Officer in charge of Frontiers (Artha-Śāstra, p. 245).

c43.129

This list makes it clear that *Senāpati* here is not the military Commander-in-Chief but the Minister of War. The military leader was the *Nāyaka*. The Lord Chief Justice is called the Judge instead of the *Prāḍvivāka* of later times. The President of the Mantri-Parishad is the Pradhāna of the Śukranīti. He received an allowance from the Civil List (Artha-Śāstra, p. 245). Govindarāja commenting on the "the 18 Tīrthas," Rāmāyaṇa, II. 100. 36, quotes from an unnamed work on *Nīti-śāstra* and gives a few different designations in later terminology. In the place of *Praśāstṛi* which is obscure in the pages of the Artha-Śāstra, he gives *Kārāgāra-adhikṛit* which elucidates the former. It should be translated as Inspector General of Prisons (lit., 'Corrector of Convicts.').¹ Against the tīrthas nos. 8 and 9 of the Artha-Śāstra, Govinda-rāja gives *Artha-sañchaya-kṛit* or the Chancellor of the Exchequer. The *Pradeśhṭṛi* who in the Civil List (Artha-Śāstra, p. 245) does not occupy a place amongst the *Amātyas*, appears as *Kārya-niyojaka* in Govinda-rāja and is explained as the Despatcher or Director of Royal Orders (राजाज्ञायाः बहिः प्रचारकर्त्ता). Instead of *Vyāvahārika* Govinda-rāja has the younger term *Prāḍvivāka* [the Pāli Canon knows only *Vohārika*]. The *Nāyaka* who appears in the Artha-Śāstra as the Highest Military Commander is represented by *Senā-nāyaka* and the *Paura* by *Nagarādhyaksha*. The *Mantri-Parishat-adhyaksha* corresponds to *Sabhya* (whom Govindarāja incorrectly connects with the building Sabhā). Govindarāja's authority has a new officer *Dharmādhyaksha* who is, I think, identical with *Paṇḍita amātya* of the Śukra-nīti. The order in Govindarāja is slightly altered after no 8 of our Artha Śāstra list.

c43.130

¹ The interpretations given by Mr. Shama Sastry are mostly wide off the mark. See his Trans., p. 23.

c43.131

according to the Pāli Canon, the Rāmāyaṇa and the Śukranīti. In the Rāmāyaṇa they are called the Superior, the Intermediaries and the Inferior. The Śukranīti has the same division².

c43.132

² *Ayodhyākāṇḍa*, c. 100. 25-26, मुख्य, मध्यम, जघन्य। *Śukranītisāra* ch. II. 109-110.

c43.133

into three classes in the Civil List which fixes the salaries of the permanent officers from the King down to the Historiographer and the Ministerial Establishments. The King's salary according to Apastamba should not exceed that of the "Amātyas and the *Gurus* (religious Preceptors)"³. This provision becomes clear in the light of the Artha-Śāstra Civil List. Kauṭilya says that the King is to get three times the salary of the officers of his equal acquirement (*samāna-vidya*).¹ We may regard the Prime-Minister and the Senāpati as *Samānavidya* to the king. The religious chiefs who are placed at the head of the first class of the Civil List are *Ṛitvik* and *Āchārya*. These two with the Purohita are the *Gurus* of Āpastamba. The salaries of these three put together, or the three highest ministers namely, Mantrin, Senāpati and Yuvarāja of Kauṭilya's list, should not be exceeded, in the language of Āpastamba, by that of the king. In other words, the two provisions are identical. Now the salary of the 'Gurus' and 'Amātyas' was 48,000—(silver) *paṇas* a year each.∗ The same salary is allowed to the mother of the King and the consecrated Queen.

c43.134

³ *Apastamba*, Dharmasūtra. II. 9. 25. 10. गुरुनमात्यांश्च नातिजीवेत्।

c43.135

¹ *Artha-Śāstra*, Bk. V. ch. 3 : 91 (p. 246),

c43.136

∗ The king's salary has been completely missed in the translation of the *Artha-Śāstra* by Mr. Shama Sastry.

c43.137

The second class of ministers in which occur ministers numbered 5 to 9 of our list were given 24,000 a year. The third class carried the salary of 12,000 a year. The members in this class are those numbered 11 to 18 in our above list. In this class are placed the Kumāras and their mothers.

c43.138

समानविद्येभ्यस्त्रिगुणं ततो राजा।

Linked texts (20)