Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

Pre-Buddhist India: A Political, Administrative, Economic, Social and Geographical Survey of Ancient India Based Mainly on the Jataka Stories c3.s3.t1: The Videhas

Pre-Buddhist India: A Political, Administrative, Economic, Social and Geographical Survey of Ancient India Based Mainly on the Jātaka Stories c3.s3.t1

Language
English

The Videhas

c3.s3.t1.1

VIDEHA HAS GAINED an immortal fame through Janaka, the great philosopher-king of the *Upaniṣads*, who even to this day is revered by every pious Hindu. The fame and prosperity of the Kingdom are known also to the *Jātakas*.

c3.s3.t1.2

It extended over three hundred leagues and was situated in Majjimadesa or Middle Country.¹ It comprised 16000 villages.² Its capital city Mithilā covered seven-leagues.³ At its four gates were four market towns (*nigama-gāmas*).⁴ The following fine description of the city is given in the *Mahāja-naka Jātaka*⁵:

c3.s3.t1.3

¹ J., III, p. 365; IV, p. 316.

c3.s3.t1.4

² J., III, p. 367-G. 76.

c3.s3.t1.5

³ Ibid., p. 365.

c3.s3.t1.6

⁴ J., VI, p. 330.

c3.s3.t1.7

⁵ Ibid., pp. 46-7; also J., IV, pp. 358-9.

c3.s3.t1.8

..This Mithilā spacious and splendid,
By architects with rule and line laid out in order fair to see,
With walls and gates and battlements—traversed by streets on every side
With horses, cows and chariots thronged, with tanks and gardens beautified,
Videha's far-famed capital gay with its knights and warrior swarms,
Clad in the robes of tiger-skins, with banners, spread and flashing arms,
Its Brahmins, dressed in Kāsī cloth, perfumed with sandal decked with gems,
Its palaces and all their queens with robes of state and diadems."

c3.s3.t1.9

Videha roughly corresponds to the modern Tirhut in Bihar, and Mithilā is identified with Janakapur, a small town within the Nepal border, north of which the Muzaffarpur and Darbhanga districts meet.⁶

c3.s3.t1.10

⁶ C. A. G. I., p. 718. The territory suffered heavily during the recent earthquake.

c3.s3.t1.11

The *Makhādeva Jātaka*⁷ and the *Nimi Jātaka*⁸ mention a king named Makhādeva as the progenitor of the royal line of Mithilā, while the *Rāmāyaṇa*,⁹ and the *Purāṇas*¹⁰ name Nimi as the founder of the Videha dynasty. Both the latter authorities, again, mention Mithi as the son of Nimi and the builder of the city of Mithilā.¹¹ Some scholars¹² are inclined to take Mithi as identical with our Makhādeva. But this is not plausible. Real identification however is to be sought, as already suggested by Raychaudhury¹ between Māthava Videgha of the *Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa*,² and our Makhādeva or Maghādeva of the *Culla Niddesa* and the Barhut Stupa Inscriptions³. The remarkable passage of the *Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa* has, since the time of Weber, been taken, perhaps rightly, to indicate the progress of Vedic Āryan civilization from the North-west towards the East from the Sarasvatī to the Sadānīrā.⁴ Whatever the merits of the interpretations given to this passage, it is certain that it refers to an earlier connection of Māthava Videgha with the Videha people. And moreover there is no difficulty, as shown by Barua and Sinha,⁵ in establishing the phonological identification between the two names, Māthava and Makhādeva, both of which are but dialectical variants of one and the same word, Mahādeva. Thus the *Jātaka* may be given the credit of preserving, in common with the older *Brāhmaṇa*, the tradition about the man who should be regarded as the earliest known king of Videha.

c3.s3.t1.12

⁷ J., I, p. 139.

c3.s3.t1.13

⁸ J., VI, p. 96.—"*tesam sabbapathamam*" Cf. the Makhādeva Suttanta, of the Majjhima Nikāya and Culla Niddesa, p. 80.

c3.s3.t1.14

⁹ I, 71, 3.

c3.s3.t1.15

¹⁰ Vāyu P., 89; Viṣṇu P., IV, 5; A. I. H. T., pp. 84, 95.

c3.s3.t1.16

¹¹ J., VI, p. 47-G. 155 names Somanassa as the builder of the city: "māpitam Somanassena."

c3.s3.t1.17

¹² Sen, op. cit., p. 14; Raychaudhury, P. H. A. I., p. 35—"Mithi is reminiscent of Māthava."

c3.s3.t1.18

¹ P. H. A. I., pp. 35-36.

c3.s3.t1.19

² I, 4, 1, et. seq.

c3.s3.t1.20

³ Barua and Sinha, op. cit., pp. 78-80.

c3.s3.t1.21

⁴ See Vedic Index, II, pp. 151, 298-9; Oldenberg, Buddha, pp. 398-9; Law, Some Kṣatriya Tribes, pp. 127-9; Bhandarkar, C. L., p. 14; C. V. Vaidya, I. H. Q., V, p. 257; Raychaudhury, P. H. A. I., p. 35. contrast Pargiter, A. I. H. T., pp. 224, 311.

c3.s3.t1.22

⁵ 1. c.; also Barua, in I. H. Q. IV, pp. 522-3. Calcutta Review, October, 1927, p. 66; Jayaswal, J. B. O. R. S., V, p. 520; for Dr. Voegel's objection to the point. J. R. A. S., 1927, p. 594.

c3.s3.t1.23

Makhādeva, in our *Jātakas*, is represented as a pious and religious ruler (*dhammiko dhammarājā*). After a long reign of peace and prosperity, he is said to have renounced the world and assumed the garb of an ascetic, on seeing his hair turn grey.⁶

c3.s3.t1.24

⁶ J., I, pp, 137-9; VI, pp. 95-6; Cf. Majjhima Nikāya, Suttanta No. 83 The scene of the finding of a grey hair is marvellously sculptured on a railing of the Barhut stupa: See Cunningham, Stupa of Barhut, pl. xlviii; Francis and Thomas, Jātaka Tales, pl. i; the idea of renouncing the world when one's hair turn grey, is to this day very common with the Hindus. Cf. a similar utterance of the King in Tagore's The Cycle of Spring.—'Phālguni.'

c3.s3.t1.25

The *Jātakas* also know of more than one Janakas reigning at Mithilā, thus agreeing with the *Paurāṇic* statements about the ‘*Janakavaṃśa*’ or the Janaka dynasty of Videha.⁷ The *Mahājanaka Jātaka*⁸ furnishes us with the following genealogical table which, of course, should not be taken as wholly reliable:—

c3.s3.t1.26

⁷ Mārkaṇḍeya P., 13, 11; Bhavabhūti, Uttararāmacaritam, Act. I, verse 7: "Janakānām"; Pargiter, op. cit., p. 96—"Janaka rājāno bahavo"; Brahmāṇḍa P., 88, 22.

c3.s3.t1.27

⁸ J., VI, pp. 30 ff.

c3.s3.t1.28

Mahājanaka I

c3.s3.t1.29

| . . . . .
| |

c3.s3.t1.30

Aritṭhajanaka Polajanaka

c3.s3.t1.31

Mahājanaka II married ........X........ Sivalidevī.

c3.s3.t1.32

| | . . . . .
|

c3.s3.t1.33

Dīghāyu.

c3.s3.t1.34

Now, which of these two Janakas is identifiable with the one known to us from the *Upanisads* and the Epics?. Dr. Raychaudhury¹ seems to be inclined to identify the *Upanisadic* Janaka with our Mahājanaka I. But the theory does not seem to be supported by strong reasons, as he himself admits. The learned doctor does indeed recognise the parallelism of a verse common to the *Jātaka*, the *Mahābhārata* and the *Uttarādhyayana Sūtra*. In the *Jātaka*,² it is Mahājanaka II who gives utterance to this famous verse:—

c3.s3.t1.35

¹ P. H. A. I., p. 37—"But", he hesitates, "proof is lacking."

c3.s3.t1.36

² J., VI, p. 54-G. 245; also V, p. 252-G. 16; *Cf.* Dhammapada, 200

c3.s3.t1.37

"Susukham vata jīvāma yesam no natthi Kiñcanam

Mithilāya dahyamānāya na me kiñci adahayathā".³

c3.s3.t1.38

³ "The utterance" so admits Raychaudhury, "indeed reminds us of the great philosopher king"—P. H. A. I., p. 38. The burning of Mithilā as suggested in this famous *gāthā* is however not a historical fact: See Rajwade, *Proceedings-First Oriental Conference*, II, pp. 115 ff.

c3.s3.t1.39

In the Great Epic,⁴ too, in a similar context, the same verse is attributed to the philosopher king Janaka of Mithilā. Whereas—and this is the one stumbling block for Dr. Raychaudhury—the *Uttarādhyayana Sūtra*⁵ attributes this saying to Nami. Thus the Epic and the *Jātaka* are at one with regard to this fact. The Jaina version should not make us hesitate in accepting the above identification. For, it is a simple fact of substitution of the name of Nami, who is more intimately known to the Jainas, for that of Janaka, the *Brāhmanic* philosopher-king.⁶

c3.s3.t1.40

⁴ XII, 18, 12—"*Mithilāyām pradiptāyām na me dahyati kiñcana*"; also XII, 219, 50.

c3.s3.t1.41

⁵ IX, 14; *S. B. E.*, XLV, p. 37.

c3.s3.t1.42

⁶ Rajwade, op. cit., II, p. 123.

c3.s3.t1.43

Furthermore, the *Jātaka* does not say much about Mahājanaka I, who is only mentioned as the father of two sons, Arittha Janaka and Polajanaka. It is, on the other hand, Mahājanaka II who is the central figure in the whole story. He is 'a towering and luminous personality, a clear-cut historical figure, having had a unique career in his early years and, in the later part of his life, exhibiting a great spirit of renunciation'.⁷ This spirit of renunciation and the general outlook on life bear a great deal of kinship with the character of the *Vedic* Janaka. And even the *Mahābhārata*⁸ relates an 'old incident' (*itihāsam purātanam*) of the Videha king's renunciation, and the discourse that follows between him and his queen who, grief-stricken, makes a pathetic entreaty to alter his resolve—which bears a remarkable resemblance to that which is related in our *Jātaka*. All this makes us feel certain about the identification of Mahājanaka II with the *Vedic* and Epic Janaka.⁹

c3.s3.t1.44

⁷ Sen, op. cit., p. 13.

c3.s3.t1.45

⁸ XII, 18, 12.

c3.s3.t1.46

⁹ This view seems to have been entertained also by Rhys Davids, *B. I.*, p. 26.

c3.s3.t1.47

With regard to the *Rāmāyaṇic* Janaka, the father of Sītā, no conclusive proof is forthcoming to identify him with the *Vedic*, the Epic and the *Jātaka* Janaka. It seems however that this Siradhvaja Janaka was a different king whom later literature, through his connection with Rāma, the divine personage, naively identified with the older *Vedic* king.¹

c3.s3.t1.48

¹ See *Vedic Index*, I, p. 273. "The identification of Janaka of Videha and the father of Sītā is less open to objection but it cannot be proved and is somewhat doubtful." Raychaudhury, *P. H. A. I.*, pp. 36, 56. It is indeed strange that Dr. B. C. Sen, *op. cit.*, p. 13, takes this identification as *fait accompli*.

c3.s3.t1.49

Neither the *Vedic* Literature nor the Epic and *Paurāṇic* accounts supply us with any information of historical value regarding the early life of this famous Janaka. And the *Jātaka* story depicting his adventures to Suvaṇṇabhūmi and his marriage with his own cousin Sīvalī seems essentially to be legendary, and no positive reliance can be put on it.²

c3.s3.t1.50

² The tradition however as embodied in the *Jātaka* can be shown to be as old as the 2nd century B. C. since a scene from our *Jātaka* is seen sculptured on a railing of the Barhut Stupa with the inscription: "*isukāro Janako rājā Sivalidevi*"—The arrowmaker Janaka. Queen Sīvalī: Cunningham, *Stupa of Barhut*, pl. xliv. Barua and Sinha, *op. cit.*, p. 94.

c3.s3.t1.51

Dr. Raychaudhury’s identification of Ariṭṭha Janaka of our *Jātaka* with Ariṣṭanemi of the *Purāṇas*³ has no good proof excepting the similarity in names.⁴ One chief objection to this identification is that Ariṣṭa(-Nemi)’s predecessor was Ṛtujit and successor Śrutāyus,⁵ while Ariṭṭhajanaka’s predecessor was Mahājanaka I and successor Mahājanaka II. This, we admit however, is not a very solid argument looking to the legendary nature of the *Jātaka* evidence.

c3.s3.t1.52

³ *P. H. A. I.*, pp. 37, 56.

c3.s3.t1.53

⁴ That Nemi should have been the son of Ariṣṭa and identical with Mahājanaka II is, as we have seen, not probable.

c3.s3.t1.54

⁵ See Pargiter, *op. cit.*, p. 149.

c3.s3.t1.55

Another Videha king who can claim some historical importance is Nimi (or Nemi) mentioned in the *Makhādeva*⁶ *Kumbhakāra*⁷ and *Nimi*⁸ *Jātakas*. The evidence at our disposal would seem to indicate that Nimi ruled after the great Janaka, as he is called the penultimate sovereign of the dynasty.⁹ His identity with the *Vedic* king Nami Sāpya (*Vaideho rājā*)¹⁰ is, as Raychaudhury remarks, more or less problematical. But as to his being identical with Nami of the *Uttarādhyayana Sūtra*¹¹ there seems to be no ground for any objection. Though Nimi appears to have been, like *Janaka*, a family title of the Videha kings, and there must have lived several Nimis, as there were several Janakas, it should be admitted that the famous and popular Nimi was one and one only, as the ‘Janaka’ was.¹²

c3.s3.t1.56

⁶ J., I, pp. 137-9.

c3.s3.t1.57

⁷ J., III, pp. 379 ff.

c3.s3.t1.58

⁸ J., VI, p. 96.

c3.s3.t1.59

⁹ J., I, p. 139; VI, p. 96.

c3.s3.t1.60

¹⁰ See *Vedic Index*, I, p. 436. It is certain however, as we saw above, that Nami Sāpya must have lived later than Māthava Videgha who should be regarded as the earliest known king, if not the founder, of the Videha kingdom. Cf. Dutt, *Aryanisation of India*, pp. 113-4.

c3.s3.t1.61

¹¹ *S. B. E.*, XLV, pp. 87 ff.

c3.s3.t1.62

¹² Raychaudhury, *P. H. A. I.*, p. 57.

c3.s3.t1.63

The *Jātakas* represent Nimi as a great king, devoted to pious and charitable activities. The greater part of the *Nimi Jātaka*, however, confused as it is, is devoted to the account of Nimi's journey to heaven and hell in company with Mātali. This is useless for our present purpose. The only thing that may be taken notice of is, that he is depicted as a searcher after the Eternal Truth. He is said to have entertained a sincere doubt whether almsgiving or holy life is more fruitful:

c3.s3.t1.64

"There is king Nimi, wise and good, the better part who chose,
King of Videha, gave great gifts, that Conqueror of his foes;
And as these bounteous gifts he gave, behold this doubt arose
'Which is more useful—holy life or giving alms? who knows?'"¹

c3.s3.t1.65

¹ J., VI, p. 102-GG. 131-2; *Cf.* a similar verse in the Great Epic: "*Dānād vā Sarpa Satyād vā kimato gurudṛśyate*" MBH., III, 181, 3; the question is asked by Yudhiṣṭhira to the snake.

c3.s3.t1.66

The *Kumbhakāra Jātaka* as well as the *Uttarādhyayana Sūtra*, as we have seen before, make him a contemporary of Dummukha of Pañcāla, Naggaji of Gandhāra² and Karaṇḍu of Kaliṅga. This may well be taken to represent a historical fact, though conclusive proof is lacking.³

c3.s3.t1.67

² A Gandhāra king and a Videha king are similarly associated also in the J., III, pp. 364 ff. referring, perhaps, to Nimi and Naggaji.

c3.s3.t1.68

³ *Cf.* Sen, op. cit., p. 6 "...there is at least some reason for regarding it as correct in as much as it may not be quite proper to think that all the different schools of writers conspired to err on this point, where we find them all agreeing in a striking manner."

c3.s3.t1.69

More valuable is the statement of the *Nimi Jātaka*, repeated in the *Makhādeva Jātaka*, that Nimi was born to round off the royal family of Videha. 'like the hoop of a chariot wheel' (—a play on the word 'Nimi'). "Great King" say the soothsayers to the king, "this prince is born to round off your family. This your family of hermits will go no further."⁴

c3.s3.t1.70

⁴ J., I, p. 139: VI, p. 96.

c3.s3.t1.71

And the *Jātaka* ends with a significant statement that "Nimi's son Kalā-rajanaka brought his line to an end."⁵ Whether we accept or not this relation between Nimi and Kalāra—for we have no other reasons for either—the association of the termination of the line of Videha with Kalārajanaka may readily be accepted as correct, in as much as we have some corroborative evidence on the point. The *Arthaśāstra* of Kauṭilya⁶ in the chapter on *Indriyajaya* mentions, among others, Karāla Vaideha as having perished along with his kingdom and relations for a lascivious attempt on a Brāhmaṇa maiden. This fact is confirmed by the poet Aśvagoṣa who says "and so Karālajanaka, when he carried off the Brāhmaṇa's daughter, incurred loss of caste thereby (*avāpa bhraṃśamapyeva*), but he would not give up his love."⁷ This Karāla, the Vaideha, must be identified, as already pointed out by Rauchaudhury,⁸ with our Kalārajanaka who, as stated above, brought the line of Videha to an end. Kalārajanaka is again identifiable with the *Paurāṇic* Kṛthi with whom the race of Janakas is said to have ended.¹

c3.s3.t1.72

⁵ Ibid., p. 129-*Putto panassa Kalārajanako nāma taṃ vaṃsaṃ upacchinditvā apabbaji.*"

c3.s3.t1.73

⁶ *Arthaśāstra*, I, 6.

c3.s3.t1.74

⁷ *Buddhacarita*, IV, 80.

c3.s3.t1.75

⁸ P. H. A. I., p. 58.

c3.s3.t1.76

¹ Pargiter, op. cit., p. 96. The *Mahābhārata* also mentions Karālajanaka, but in altogether a different colour. He figures there as a very pious king engaged in discussing with the sage Vasiṣṭha, on some philosophical doctrines. See MBH., XII. 303 *ff*. This is in agreement, if we may so take it, with the *Jātaka*, but differs widely from Kauṭilya and Aśvaghoṣa. The difference, though vital, is remarkably inexplicable.

c3.s3.t1.77

When precisely this important and memorable event, viz., the termination of the Videhan monarchy and the inauguration of an aristocratic republic, presumably the Vajjian Confederacy, took place, we are unable to decide.² But its *terminus ad quem* may, not unreasonably, be taken to be the 8th century B. C., since it must have taken at least a century for the new powerful confederacy to have been firmly established, as we find it in the time of the Buddha and Mahāvīra in the 6th century B. C.³

c3.s3.t1.78

² Raychaudhury, P. H. A. I., p. 58.

c3.s3.t1.79

³ Raychaudhury remarks: "The downfall of the Videhas reminds us of the fate of the Tarquins who were expelled from Rome for a similar crime. As in Rome, so in Videha, the overthrow of the monarchy was followed by the rise of a republic—the Vajjian Confederacy. P. H. A. I., p. 58. Cf. Ibid., pp. 82, 84-5, 129 *ff.*; Rhys Davids, *B.I.*, pp. 25-6; C. J. Shah *Jainism in North India*, pp. 82, 85, 102, 104 *ff.*

c3.s3.t1.80

Here may end, properly speaking, our discussion about the Videha kings. But there are yet several Videha kings mentioned in the *Jātakas* who must be noticed here, though for their historical existence we cannot speak with any certainty.

c3.s3.t1.81

The *Sādhina Jātaka*⁴ mentions a king named Sādhina who is said to have been very righteous in due accordance with the proverbial fame of Videha. The same *Jātaka* names Nārada⁵ as seventh in direct descent from King Sādhina, which is rather inconceivable.

c3.s3.t1.82

⁴ J., IV, pp. 355 *ff.*

c3.s3.t1.83

⁵ Ibid., p. 358—"So *kirassa sattano pana nattā*;" also *Ibid*. p. 359-G. 217.

c3.s3.t1.84

The *Suruci Jātaka*⁶ presents a rather interesting story. King Suruci I of Videha had a son named Suruci II. The latter, while a prince, was a great friend of a Barahmadatta prince of Kāsī. Both of them studied together at Takkasilā. Later on, when Suruci II was seated on the throne of Videha and Brhmadatta on that of Benars, the old friendship was strengthened by a matrimonial alliance. Prince Suruci III was married to Sumedhā, princess of Benares. The new pair had for a long time no issue.⁷ When at last a child was born, there was greet jubilation in both the kingdoms. The child was named Mahāpaṇāda. Of this Mahāpaṇāda it is said:—

c3.s3.t1.85

⁶ J., IV, pp. 315 *ff.*

c3.s3.t1.86

⁷ Ibid., pp. 319-20-GG. 101 *ff.*—"*Mahesi Rucino bhariyā ānītā pathamasmi aham*" etc.

c3.s3.t1.87

*Paṇādo nāma so rājā*
*Yassa yūpo suvaṇṇayo*
*Tiriyam solasapabbedho*
*Uccam āhu sahassadhā ..*⁸

c3.s3.t1.88

⁸ J., II, p. 334-GG. 40-2; IV, p. 325. G (?) The verse also occurs in *Theragāthā* (P. T. S.) p. 22.

c3.s3.t1.89

“This great palace of golden pillars” that he had built sunk down in the Ganges near Payāga (Allahabad).¹

c3.s3.t1.90

¹ The *Cakkavatti Sīhanāda Suttanta* of the *Dīgha Nikāya* says that the palace was recovered by King Saṅkha of Kāsi: Rhys Davids, *Dialogues of the Buddha*, III, p. 74 and note. See also *Divyāvadāna*, pp. 57 ff. which in a verse makes Saṅkha contemporaneous with Piṅgala of Kaliṅga, Pāṇḍuka of Mithilā and Elāpatra of Gāndhāra.

c3.s3.t1.91

The *Mahānāradakassapa Jātaka*² mentions a king named Aṅgati, who was a righteous ruler of Mithilā. He had a daughter named Rūjā and three ministers, Vijaya, Sunāma and Alata. Once he paid a visit to Guṇa, of the Kassapa family, an ascetic and a great scholar. The king imbibed heretical views from him. His daughter Rūjā tried hard to prove the worthlessness of Guṇa’s doctrines. It was Nārada Kassapa, however, who succeeded in winning him back to the right path. The doctrines preached by this Guṇa Kassapa,³ bear a striking resemblance with those of the famous Purāṇa Kassapa, the elder contemporary of the Buddha. Guṇa is an “annihilator’ (*Ucchedavādi*) and an unbeliever in the results of good or bad actions, that is to say, a believer in the theory of the ‘passivity of the soul’—the Jaina *Akiriyāvāda*. Such is also the philosophy of Purāṇa Kassapa.⁴ If this identification be accepted as correct, and if Aṅgati is proved to be a real historical character, which is not impossible, and to be a contemporary of Guṇa, then he must be placed some where in the earlier part of the 6th century B. C..

c3.s3.t1.92

² J., VI, pp. 219 ff. The story is a lengthy one and is presented in a confused construction, which makes it impossible for us to distinguish between the different parts of the *Jātaka*.

c3.s3.t1.93

³ Ibid., pp. 225-6--GG. 979-990.

c3.s3.t1.94

⁴ See Barua, *A History of the Pre-Buddhist Indian Philosophy*, pp. 277 ff; Law, *‘Six Heretical Teachers’ in Buddhistic Studies*, pp. 74-6.

c3.s3.t1.95

Anyhow the kings of Videha, noticed in the latter part of our discussion, are more or less doubtful characters, and they must remain as such, until further corroborative evidence comes to their help and proves them otherwise.

Linked texts (18)