History of Dharmashastra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v4.c62.51
History of Dharmaśāstra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v4.c62.51
- Language
- English
v4.c62.51.1
In order to magnify the importance of the kingly office, certain works state that the king has in him parts of the gods. For example, Manu says "the Creator created the king with the essential parts taken from Indra, the Wind god, Yama, the Sun, Agni, Varuṇa, the Moon and Kubera the lord of wealth and therefore he surpasses all beings by his majesty (VII. 4-5 and compare Manu V. 96); one should not disrespect a boy-king with the thought 'he is a human being (like others)' for it is a great deity that stands (before people) in human form as a king" (Manu VII. 8 = Śānti 68. 40). This conception goes back to Gautama XI. 32 ('Therefore a king and a spiritual teacher must not be reviled') and Āp. Dh. S. I. 11. 31. 5 ('he shall not speak harsh or abusive words of the gods or of the king'). Manu VII. 3-4 are the same as Śukranītisāra I. 71-72. The Matsyapurāṇa 226. 1 states that the king was created by Brahmā by taking portions of gods for wielding the power of punishment for the protection of all beings. Manu (IX. 303-311) puts forward a slightly diluted theory, viz. the king should possess the majesty of and imitate in his actions the first seven deities enumerated above with the Earth as the 8th and Manu sets out what the eight characteristic actions are. Matsya 226. 9-12 are the same as Manu IX. 303-306. The Agnipurāṇa (226. 17-20) states that as the king exercises the functions of nine deities viz.
v4.c62.51.2
the Sun, the Moon, Vāyu, Yama, Varuṇa, Fire, Kubera, the Earth and Viṣṇu he has the form of these. Vide Śukranītisāra I. 73-79 for similar ideas. These verses do not amount to the express theory of divine origin, but assimilate by analogy the king's functions to those of certain deities. The Nārada-smṛti (prakīrṇaka section, verses 20-31) contains ³⁷ several interesting dicta. It says that in the form of the king it is really Indra himself who moves about on the earth (v. 20), that a king even when devoid of qualities deserves honour from the people, that kings exercise the functions of five deities viz. of Agni, Indra, Soma, Yama and Kubera (vv. 26-31). The Mārkaṇḍeyapurāṇa (27. 21-26) mentions the same five deities. 'The Veda says that when a king is chosen it is Indra himself that is chosen; one desirous of prosperity should honour the king just as one worships Indra'—says Śānti 67. 4. Śānti 69 states that all the gods are invisible, but the king is a deity that can be seen. The Vāyupurāṇa (57. 72) remarks²⁸ that in all past and future *manvantaras* universal emperors (*cakravartin*) are born on the earth with parts of Viṣṇu. The Matsyapurāṇa (226. 1-12) mixes up the theory of the creation of the king from parts of the gods with the lesser idea of his functions being similar to those of certain deities. The Bhāgavata-purāṇa (IV. 14.
v4.c62.51.3
26-27) states that Viṣṇu, Brahmā, Śiva, Indra, Vāyu, Varuṇa—these and other gods—exist in the body of the king and that the king is full of (the parts of) all gods. It is to strengthen this conception that ancient kṣatriya dynasties and their panegyrists tried to trace for those dynasties descent from the Sun or the Moon and in later times from Fire. The practice of addressing the king as 'deva' in Sanskrit dramas is due to the same tendency of the glorification of the royal office. Aśoka was styled 'devānām priya' (beloved of the gods) and Kushana emperors like Kaniṣka and Huviṣka styled themselves Devaputra (E. I. vol. I. pp. 371 at pp. 381 and 386). This phenomenon is not confined to India. Alexander the Great and Julius Cæsar had their descent traced to gods and goddesses. Alexander was deified during his life-time in 324 B. C. by the Greek world (vide Cambridge Ancient History, vol. VI. p. 433) and Cæsar's image was carried among those of the immortal gods. Kauṭilya (I. 13) makes a spy say among pauras and jānapadas 'kings are (in) the place of (perform the functions of) Indra and Yama, since they visibly inflict punishment and bestow favours. Even divine punishment affects those who despise them (kings). Therefore kings should not be despised'. Hence it must be said that the conception of the divine nature of the kingly office was well-known in Kauṭilya's days and he was not above recommending the employment of this conception for safe-guarding the king's position.
v4.c62.51.4
Vide Rāmāyaṇa, III. 1. 18-19 and VII. 76. 37-45 and Mārkaṇḍeyapurāṇa 24. 23-28, Viṣṇudharmottara II. 2. 9 for similar ideas. The phrase 'nā viṣṇuḥ pṛthivīpatiḥ' is well-known and may be interpreted in two ways viz. the ruler of the earth is Viṣṇu incarnated as man or no king is not Viṣṇu i. e. every king is Viṣṇu. The Pañcatantra²⁹ (I. 120 p. 19) states 'Manu has declared that the king is made up (of parts) of all gods'. The Rājanītiprakāśa is careful to point out that the idea of the king having in him parts of the deities applied only to the mahārāja (the sovereign ruler), while the idea of a ruler doing the functions of five deities applies to vassal kings.³⁰ For eulogy of the kingly office, vide Manu VII. 6-17, Śānti 63. 24-30, Śānti 68, Kām. I. 9-11, Rājanītiprakāśa pp. 17-31.