Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

Hindu Polity: A Constitutional History of India in Hindu Times c7: Chapter I: Scope and Sources

Hindu Polity: A Constitutional History of India in Hindu Times c7

Language
English

Chapter I: Scope and Sources

c7.2

§ 1. It is proposed to outline here certain chief features of Hindu Polity. The Hindu race has experimented in great and various systems of state and political machinery. We are not yet in a position to reconstruct a complete history of the constitutional development of the race. Nevertheless some outstanding facts and the principles underlying them may be noticed with profit.

c7.3

The topics to be discussed here¹ are:
(1) the Sovereign Assembly of the Vedic times,
(2) the Judicial Assembly of the Vedic times,
(3) Hindu Republics (1000 B. C. to 600 A.C.),
(4) Hindu Kingship (from the Vedic times to 600 A.C.),
(5) the Jānapada or Realm Diet, and the Paura Assembly of the Capital (600 B. C.—600 A. C.),
(6) the Council of Ministers under Hindu Monarchy (1000 B. C.—600 A. C.),
(7) Judiciary under Hindu Monarchy (700 B.C.—600 A.C.),
(8) Taxation (1000 B. C.—600 A.C),
(9) The Hindu Imperial Systems (1000 B.C.—600 A.C.), and
(10) Decay and Revival of Hindu constitutional traditions (650 A. C.—1650 A C ).

c7.4

¹ In some cases, very briefly.

c7.5

§ 2. The sources of our information extend over the vast field of Hindu literature—Vedic, Classical and Prākrita, and also the inscriptional and numismatic records of the country. We are fortunate in having also a few technical treatises on Hindu Politics left to us in the original. They are, however, mere remains of a considerable library, contributed to by a long series of political thinkers and statesmen of Hindu India. The *Artha-Śāstra* of Kauṭilya¹ (300 B.C.), which may be called the Imperial Code of Governance of the Early Mauryas, is such a remnant. It is avowedly based on previous authorities. Such authorities, cited by name in Kauṭilya's Code, number eighteen or nineteen. There are some others mentioned elsewhere. For instance, the *Mahā-Bhārata*, which gives a brief history of Hindu Political Science,² mentions, in addition Gaura-Śiras. The Āśvalāyana *Grihya-Sūtra* mentions one more, Āditya.³ The catalogue of this large number of writers shows that politics had been studied for centuries before Kauṭilya's time, and had become a recognised subject when the *Kalpa Sūtras* were still being completed.⁴

c7.6

¹ Mysore State's Bibliotheca Sanskrita, No. 37, edited by Mr. Shama Sastry, 1909. Translation by Mr. Shama Sastry, 1915, Mysore, is not quite satisfactory. The text in places is not beyond doubt: compare the quotations in the commentary on the Kāmandakīya-Nīti-Sāra published by the Travancore Government which at times differ greatly from the published text. See also Dr. Sorabji Taraporewala's *Notes on the Adhyakṣapracāra* (1914). The name of the author should be 'the Kauṭilya,' it being his *gotra* name (J. B. O. R. S. II. 80, also Śaṅkarārya on Kāmandaka, I. 6), but to avoid heaviness, the has been omitted here throughout.

c7.7

² Śānti Parvan, LVIII. LIX. It is possible that Gaura-Śiras is later than Kauṭilya. The point in favour of the antiquity of Gaura-Śiras is that he is placed in a group of ancient writers. The Śānti Parvan, in its present shape, is later than the Kāmandakīya whose author it seems to know. See Ch. cxxiii. See also § 3 below, p. 5, n. 6.

c7.8

³ Āśvalāyana Gṛihya Sūtra, III. 12. 16.

c7.9

⁴ The Artha-Sāstra literature had existed before the earliest Dharma-sūtras were compiled. See Āpastamba Dh. S., II. 5. 10. 14. 'राजा पुरोहितं धर्मार्थकुशलम्'; Haradatta 'धर्मशास्त्रार्थशास्त्रज्ञं च स कुशलं पुरोहितं........'

c7.10

If we allow an interval of even twenty years for each of these known authorities, we shall have to date the literature of Hindu Politics as far back as *circa* 650 B. C. This date is corroborated by the *Jātakas*, which are regarded as pre-Buddhān (*i.e.*, anterior to 600 B. C.): they recognise *Artha*, that is, *Artha-Śāstra*, as a chief science for the guidance of successful ministers.¹

c7.11

¹ Cf. Fausböll, J II. 30, 74.

c7.12

§ 3

c7.13

The treatises on political theories and practical governance were originally called Dᴀɴᴅᴀ-Nɪ̄ᴛɪ or the 'Principles of Government'² and Aʀᴛʜᴀ-Śᴀ̄sᴛʀᴀ or the 'Code of Common-wealth. Kauṭilya defines the latter: "*Aʀᴛʜᴀ* is "human population, that is to say, territory with human popula-"tion. The Code of Artha (Common-wealth) is a code "dealing with the means (art, *upāya*) of acquisiton and "growth of that territory."³ *Daṇḍa-Nīti* was the title adopted by Uśanas,⁴ and *Artha-Śāstra*, by Bṛhaspati,⁵ for their repective works which were very famous in Hindu Classical times. A book, rather an encyclopædia, under the title *Daṇḍa-Nīti*, ascribed to Prajāpati, is mentioned in the *Mahā-Bhārata*.⁶ The subject is also called *Rāja-Śāstra*⁷ or the 'Code for the Rulers,' and *Rāja-Dharma* or

c7.14

² Śānti Parvan lviii. 77-78 (Kumbakonam (80-81).

c7.15

³ मनुष्याणां वृत्तिरर्थः मनुष्यवती भूमिरित्यर्थः, तस्याः पृथिव्या लाभपालनोपायः शास्त्रमर्थशास्त्रमिति। Bk. xv, p 424 *sfe*; *lāva* is explained by the following मनुष्यवती. It has therefore to be taken as वृद्धिसंपादनम् (काम्रे विभु ). *Pālana* has the sense of growth, not mere maintenance. This is borne out by the description of *Daṇḍa-nīti* given by Kauṭilya (I. 4. p. 9) : दण्डनीतिः अलब्धलाभार्थी, लब्धपरिरक्षणी, रक्षितविवर्धनी, etc; and also by "अप्राप्तलाभी लब्धपरिपालनं प्रतिपालितवर्धनं चेत्यर्थानुबन्धः।" Nītivākyāmṛita, II.

c7.16

⁴ Mudrā-Rākshasa, I.

c7.17

⁵ Vātsyāyana, Kāma-Sūtra, I.

c7.18

⁶ Śānti P., C. 59 (Bengal) (58, Kumb.) Cf. Kāma S. I.

c7.19

⁷ Śānti P., C. 58 (Bengal) (57, Kumb.)

c7.20

the 'Law for the Rulers.' Under the latter term, it has been treated in the *Śānti-Parvan* of the *Mahā-Bhārata*. The *Mahā-Bhārata* draws on materials generally old, but handled as late as the fifth century after Christ, with an earlier systematization, cir. 150 B.C.¹

c7.21

¹ For the date of the Śānti-Parvan see my *Tagore Lectures*, I. The authors who are treated as historical persons in Kauṭilya's Artha-Śāstra have been taken to be divine and mythological in the Śānti P. The Śākas and the Tokharis are mentioned as having come under Hindu kings (Ch. lxv)—a fact of the early fifth century A. C. It should be also noticed that the political science book of the ‘Great Rishis’ which had been current in the time of Kāmandaka (viii. 23) disappeared when the Śānti Parvan was completed (c. 343, 52, Kumb.)

c7.22

Later, the terms *Nīti* (‘Policy’ or ‘Principles’) and *Naya* (‘Leading,’ ‘Principles’) seem to have superseded the old words *Artha* and *Daṇḍa*. Kāmandaka calls his metrical treatise a *Nīti-sāra*. The book ascribed to Śukra, which, in its present shape is a revised edition of an earlier well-known work, probably based on the ancient Uśanas’ Daṇḍa-Nīti, is also called a *Nīti-sāra* (*Śukra-Nīti-sāra*).² The *PañchaTantra*, which is a book on politics put into fables for the early education of princes and would-be statesmen, adopts the term *Naya-Śāstra* to denote the literature.³

c7.23

² This work is quoted by law-commentators of the Middle Ages and later. I could not find the quotations in the text of the current ŚNS. It must have been, therefore, revised about the 17th century. It, however, embodies mostly ancient doctrines.

c7.24

³ ‘नय-शास्त्र-कर्तृभ्यः’ : Pañcha-Tantra, Ch. I.

c7.25

It is interesting to note that the study of Hindu Politics was continued, like the study of Hindu Law, during Muhammadan times. I was agreeably surprised to find that the famous lawyers, the Nibandhakāras Chaṇḍeśvara, Mitra-Miśra and Nīlakaṇṭha, have compiled works on Hindu Politics. There is a Rājanīti-Ratnākara, and there is a Vīra-Mitrodaya Rāja-Nīti; similarly, there is also a Mayūkha, called Rāja-Nīti-Mayūkha.⁴ As to the value of these latter-day works, they, of course, are products of the decadent period. They may be classed together with the political science portions of the Purāṇas. The Nibandhakāras and the Purāṇas have no originality. The Purāṇas merely copy some chapters from some well-known authors, e.g., the *Agni-Purāṇa* borrows from an author called Pushkara.¹ The Hindu jurists of Muhammadan times, however, evince a strong desire for collecting materials, and the great value of their work consists in the extracts from authorities which are otherwise unknown. They are, moreover, witnesses to living traditions in ceremonial matters. Better materials, next in value only to regular treatises, are to be found in the Aphorisms and Codes of Dharma, under the chapter styled the 'Laws for the King,' which represent the constitutional laws as defined by Dharma-writers.

c7.26

⁴ An old copy of this is in the library of the well-known Sanskritist, Mr. Govinda Das of Benares The Vīramitrodaya-Rājanīti has been published in the Chaukhambha Sanskrit Series. Chaṇḍeśvara's RN.-Ratnākara I am editing for the Bihar and Orissa Research Society. Before Chaṇḍeśvara, two other digest-writers had composed Digests of Hindu Politics: one was Laksmīdhara, the well-known author of the law-digest *Kalpataru*, and the other was the author of the Kāmadhenu. These scholars compiled *Rājanīti-Kalpa-taru* and *Rājanīti-Kāmadhenu*, respectively. They have been quoted by Chaṇḍeśvara.

c7.27

¹ Cf. also Matsya, Chs. ccxv-xxvii.

c7.28

§ 4. We must not lose sight of another class of mediæval productions. The little book *Brihaspati-Sūtra*, recently edited by Dr. F. W. Thomas (*Le Muséon*), is one of them. It is a piece of Artha-Śāstra literature in *Sūtras*. But in its present shape, it is a product of the Middle Ages, though portions therein are undoubtedly based on ancient materials. It gives, as we shall see, some very valuable information. Similarly, the Nīti-Vākyāmṛita by Somadeva who flourished in the tenth century A.C., is in *Sūtras*. It is an eclectic work based generally on old authorities.¹ The *sūtras* are generally quotations which the Jaina author calls, not altogether without justification, 'immortal essence' (*amṛita*) of 'political maxims.'

c7.29

¹ Somadeva quotes a Sūtra from Manu, indicating that his was not the Svāyambhava M., *i.e.*, the author of the Dharma-Ś. In other words, he quotes from the Mānava Artha-Śāstra:—

c7.30

§ 5. Ethico-political writings are kept out of our scope. Opinion, for instance, would be divided as to the true character of certain works in our vernaculars, like the *Dāsa-Bodha* ('Address to the Enslaved') by the Teacher Rāma-Dāsa, the great text-book of the time of Śivajī Chhatrapati, and the Hindi books of Guru Govinda-Siṃha. Mystic and non-political interpretations would be given by religious enthusiasts to many views apparently political. It is therefore better to leave them out in our present studies.

c7.31

यदाह वैवस्वतो मनुः । खण्डषट्‌भागप्रदानेन वनस्था अपि तपस्विनो राजानं सम्भावयन्ति । ततो य समुत्यान् यक्षांन् नोपावति । इति. N. V. 6.

Linked texts (18)