Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

Pre-Buddhist India: A Political, Administrative, Economic, Social and Geographical Survey of Ancient India Based Mainly on the Jataka Stories c4: Section II. Administrative Organisation

Pre-Buddhist India: A Political, Administrative, Economic, Social and Geographical Survey of Ancient India Based Mainly on the Jātaka Stories c4

Language
English

Contents

Section II. Administrative Organisation

c4.2

SECTION II

c4.3

IN the preceding section we traversed the whole difficult field of Political History, i.e., the story of some of the kings and their kingdoms, as viewed from the *Jātakas*: from across the dim past we slowly, but steadily, emerged into the clear and easy path of our journey. Until at last, when we arrived at the *Mahājanapada* Period (800-600 B. C. and after) we felt that our guide—the *Jātakas*—were growing more and more informative. It is this period, as we have pointed out before, which should claim the right of reflecting the political, economical, social and religious conditions of the country. Thus now if we leave the political history as it was and pass on to a deeper study of the administration of the country, we should for the most part keep our eyes to this period, viz., the period just preceding the advent of the Buddha and, to a certain degree, contemporaneous with, and subsequent to him. In fact we should regard the period as circling round the luminous figure of the Buddha—two or three centuries before and two or three centuries after him.

c4.4

The material for such a study, we mean of the Administrative Machinery, furnished by the *Jātakas*, though meagre in quantity is none-the-less very valuable in quality. The *Jātakas*, as we know, are not administrative manuals which can supply us with a full connected and systematic account of the various aspects of administration of the time like the *Arthaśāstra* or the *Dharma Sūtras*. Naturally therefore we shall be dismayed if we hoped to visualise a comprehensive picture of the administrative machinery with all its intricacies, either in practice or in theory. But what we may justifiably expect and delight in expecting is this. The stories, as they flow on, give us details here and there, quite in an off-hand manner, thus very simply reflecting the normal life of the day—life true and sincere. It is of course needless to state that with such great and powerful kingdoms as Kāśī and Kosala must have existed a machinery of administrating the large kingdoms divided into villages and towns and cities : various activities of the state must have engaged a host of officers of whom only a few find the opportunity of appearing before us. Our attempt in the following pages will be to arrange this scrappy and isolated information in a systematic order, keeping our outlook broad so as to supplement the information whenever necessary from other sources.

c4.5

POLITICAL ATMOSPHERE

c4.6

INDIA DURING the Mahājanapada period presents a number of well-formed independent states, normally at peace but occasionally at war with one another. Each kingdom was divided into villages, towns and capital cities (*gāma, nigama, rājadhānī*). At the head of each state was the king who resided at the metropolis (*rājadhānī*). He was the acknowledged head of the state, who watched and warded his kingdom from the seat of his government.

c4.7

Ordinarily each state enjoyed peaceful independence. But very often this peace was disturbed by aggressive monarchs like Manoja, who aspired to universal sovereignty (*cakkavattirajjam*).¹ These aggressions, however, it should be noted, did not affect the deeper strata of the invaded kingdom but only gave an ephemeral disturbance over the surface particularly to the metropolis which was *de facto* entrance to victory over a kingdom.

c4.8

¹ The term *cakkavatti* undoubtedly implied, as Jayaswal thinks, the idea of territorial sovereignty extending upto the natural frontiers—*I.H.Q.*, I, p. 572.

c4.9

The kings of those days often aspired to universal conquest (*Cāturanta, Ekarāja*),² as we have already seen. They were never satisfied with victories.³ But what their conquests meant to the general mass of the people is clearly shown by their remaining as unaffected as ever. Invasions and retreats or in some cases occupations of the throne were no doubt going on between individual kingdoms. No well-directed imperial policy as we are accustomed to see in Medieval times is to be seen in those days. Even in cases where subordination was present, as for instance under Manoja and Daṇḍaki, no permanent subordination was possible. As a matter of fact the defeated king was never pulled down from his throne but he was allowed to enjoy it if only he, as a vassal, could accept the overlordship of the victorious power. A characteristic instance is provided by the *Soṇananda Jātaka*.⁴ A Kosala king is invaded by a Kāsī monarch. A proposal is made by the minister of the latter king to the former—“Great king, be not dismayed. There is no danger threatening your kingdom; it shall still be yours. Only submit to King Manoja.”

c4.10

² The idea of “sole monarchy”—*Ekarāja: Cāturanta*—known as early as the *Ṛgveda*, viii, 37, 3 and the *Aitareya Brāhmaṇa*, viii, 15, (*Pṛthivyai Samudraparyantāya Ekarāṭ*) and exhorted by Kauṭilya. *Arthaśāstra* IX, 1, is also known to the *Jātakas*, IV, p. 309-G 80; 310 G. 85, p. 476-G. 1670. For the meaning of the term “*Ekarāṭ*” see *Vedic Index*, I, p. 119; Jayaswal, *Hindu Polity*, ch. xxxvii; its criticism *I. H. Q.*, I, pp. 570 ff; Dikshitar, *Hindu Administrative Institutions*, pp. 79-80 and note. The *Hāthigumphā Inscription* of Khāravela mentions this idea of “*Ekarāṭ*” Line I.

c4.11

³ *Cf.* “*Rājā ca pathivim sabbam sasamuddaṃ sapabbataṃ ajjavāsa vijinitva anantarat-anocitaṃ paraṃ samuddaṃ pattheti ūnatā hi na pūrati*”—J. V, p. 450-G. 340.

c4.12

⁴ J., V, p. 316 “*mā bhāyi mahārāja n’atthi te paripantho, tava rajjaṃ tav’eva bhavissati, kevalaṃ Manojarañño vasavaṭṭi hohi*”; *cf.* also J., VI, p. 391—“*mahārāja tava yuddhena kiccaṃ natthi kevalaṃ amhākaṃ santako hohi tava rajjaṃ taveva bhavissati*.”

c4.13

The proposal is readily accepted and thus the Kāsī monarch passes on with a delightful pride that he has brought his rival under his submission. Thus overlordship and vassalage arose. There is still another interesting aspect in this connection to be gathered from the same Jātaka. It gives us an idea of how the aspiring monarch carried on his conquests. Of course the resources of a single kingdom, however great, could hardly be considered sufficient for carrying on military operations on such a large scale.¹ The general practice was that the victorious army was re-inforced by the forces of the defeated king and then was able to attack another front more powerfully. When this also was defeated, its soldiers were forced to join the invading army. In this way the march continued.² However all this may be, it is apparent that the idea of Permanent Annexations is quite foreign to the Jātakas. “The establishment of suzerainty was only a formal affair.³”

c4.14

¹ Sen, op. cit., p. 47.

c4.15

² See also J. VI, p. 392; cf. Arthaśāstra, xiii, 4, where Kauṭilya lays down similar steps leading to world power: See N. N-Law, Inter-State Relations in Ancient India, pp. 31 ff.

c4.16

³ Dikshitar, Mauryan Polity, p. 72.

c4.17

Frequent struggles between neighbouring states we have already noticed. Political developments in one kingdom were naturally keenly watched by its neighbour. Every opportunity was taken advantage of. If only a king was weak—as was Mahāsīlava⁴—or in some natural or temporary disadvantage,⁵ his neighbour was at once at the gates of the capital. Numerous references show that the dismissed servant—usually the minister—of one state was warmly received by the rival neighbour. These persons very often, as is natural, “proved to be a source of incalculable mischief and injury to the kingdoms which they had once served.”⁶ Various other diplomatic tactics were in force. Secret agencies (upanikkhittapurisā) were posted in distant countries to watch and report the military preparations there carried on or even the hostile intentions confided by a foreign prince to his most trusted minister. A graphic picture of this is furnished by the Mahāummagga Jātaka,⁷ where we hear the report sent by a secret agent to his Master at Mithilā from the capital of King Saṃkhapāla. It was generally on the basis of such reports that the enemy planned his attack with care and dexterity. It was in this way, for instance, that when a king of Kampilla invaded Mithilā, his agent secretly entered the city by its postern gate, inspite of all vigilant manouvering of the Videha Minister and successfully carried all sorts of useful news to their Master outside.⁸

c4.18

⁴ As for instance J., I, p. 262.

c4.19

⁵ J., pp. II, pp. 87 ff.

c4.20

⁶ J., III, pp. 13-5, 153; Sen, op. cit., p. 50.

c4.21

⁷ J., IV, pp. 390-3. “Tadā Ekabalaratthe Saṃkhapāla nāme rājā āvudhāni sajjāpeti senam samkaddati, tassa santike upanikkhittapuriso passa sāsanam peseti ‘ayam idha pavatti, idam nāma karissati na jānāmi, pesetva sayam tatvato jānāthā ti... ācikkhitabbayuttalam kiñci sunissāmi’.” etc,

c4.22

There also existed, we should note, peaceful relations between kings, near or far, when they were tied by dynastic or matrimonial connections.

c4.23

"Matrimony was an effective bond of alliance between different ruling families. These alliances were not always free from political considerations."¹ Thus the Asilakkhaṇa and the Mudupāṇi Jātakas² present before us a king who thinks that it would be much more useful if he can enter into matrimonial alliances with two royal houses through the marriages of his daughter and nephew. Of such alliances we have already taken notice in the course of our tracing the history of those times.

c4.24

¹ Sen, op. cit., p. 51.

c4.25

² J., I, p. 456: "mayham bhāgineyyo sabbathāpi yeva etassa aññam rājadhitaramanetvā abhisekam katvā dhitaram aññassa rañño dassāmi" evam no ñātakā bahū bhavissanti" J., II, p. 324—"mayham bhāgineyyassa aññassa dhitaram ānesāma mayham dhitaram pi aññasmin rājakule dassāma;" etc.

c4.26

Moreover, there arose other chances also of the intimate relations between kings. Their friendship might originate even in their youthful days while studying together under the same teacher at Takkasilā—the famous resort of Princes in those times.³ At times, even though the two had never known each other personally, a friendly feeling might grow up between them.⁴ "A common religious career might draw two or more kings together but such unions could possibly have no political significance in as much as these generally happened after they had ceased to take any interest in the affairs of the world.⁵"

c4.27

³ J. IV, p. 315 ff.

c4.28

⁴ J., III, p. 364 "Te dvepi rājāno aditthasahāyāva hutvā aññamaññam thiravissāsā ahesum".

c4.29

⁵ Sen, op. cit., p. 53.

c4.30

We thus see that the political atmosphere, or the foreign affairs, whether in peace or in war, did not generally affect the peaceful and routine-like day-to-day administration of different states. It was carried on as usual.⁶

c4.31

⁶ Notices of Foreigners like Megasthenes and Yuan Chwang also say the same thing. See Megasthenes, I; S. Visvanatha, International Law in Ancient India, pp. 16-9.

c4.32

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATION

I. General Principles About Kingship

c4.t1.2

OF the four principal theories or conceptions about the origin of kingship, viz., Divine origin, origin in war, the theory of contract and the theory of elective kingship,¹ the last seems to have been more, in fact the only one, familiar to the *Jātakas*. In common with the united Hindu tradition—whether Brāhmaṇa, Buddhist or Jaina—, the *Jātakas*, as of course reflecting the general Buddhist thought, envisage a state of anarchy in the pre-State epoch when there was all disorder, the stronger devouring the weaker. This is characteristically exemplified in an anecdote contained in the *Mahāsutasoma Jātaka*² which relates how the larger fish (*mahāmaccha*) used to devour the smaller ones. This story *inter alia* brings before us the papular notion of the anarchical state known as the *Mātsya Nyāya*,³ in some respects corresponds to the Darwinian "Struggle for existence", the Spencerian "Survival of the Fittest", the Marxian "Class Struggle", and is based on the avowed principle of "Might is Right". The *Ulūka Jātaka*,⁴ which is in more than one aspects a veritable embodiment of Constitutional procedure, preserves for us the then prevailing popular notion about the 'Election of the King' in the dawn of History (*pathama Kappa*). "Once upon a time," says the *Jātaka*, "the people who lived in the first Cycle of the world gathered together, and took for their king a certain man, handsome, auspicious, commanding, altogether perfect."⁵ This of course refers us to the fuller version of the famous discourse on Creation of Kingship contained in the *Ajjañña Suttanta* of the *Dīgha Nikāya*.⁶ There the elected king is called Mahāsammata or 'chosen by general consent (the Great Elect) who is known to the *Jātakas*.¹ Thus the human and at the same time elective origin of kingship is remembered by the *Jātakas*. But as regards the conditions of contract (social and governmental) formed in this connection, so fully described in the above *Suttanta* and other works, nothing is said.² However the basic principle of protection underlying the contract can indeed be gleaned through the isolated utterances in the *Jātakas*, as will be seen.³

c4.t1.3

¹ See Jayaswal, *Hindu Polity*, II, pp. 3-13; U. Ghoshal, *A History of Hindu Political theories*; D. R. Bhandarkar, *C. L. 1918*, pp. 114-39; Beni Prasad, *The Theory of Government in Ancient India*; Ajit Kumar Sen, *Studies in Hindu Political thought*; B. K. Sarkar, *Positive Background of Hindu Sociology*, 1921, 1926; K. V. Rangaswami Aiyangar, *Ancient Indian Economic Thought*; also Balkrishna, *The Evolution of the State*, in *I. H. Q.*, III, pp. 315-35.

c4.t1.4

² J., V, pp. 462-4.

c4.t1.5

³ Cf. for fuller treatment of the same, Dikshitar, *Hindu Administrative Institutions*, pp. 19-24.

c4.t1.6

⁴ J., II, pp. 352-3.

c4.t1.7

⁵ Ibid, p. 352. "*Atite pathamakappikā sannipatitvā ekam abhirūpam, sobhaggappattam, ānāsampannam sabbakāra-paripunnam purisam gahetvā rājānam karimsu.*"

c4.t1.8

⁶ III, p. 92-3; *Dialogues of the Buddha*, III, pp. 88-9 Cf. *Mahāvastu* (Senart's. edition), I, pp. 347-8; The story in its elaborate form has travelled to Ceylon, Burma and Tibet: See Hardy, *Manual of Buddhism*, p. 68, Burmese *Damathat*, tr. Richardson, p. 7; Rockhill, *Life of the Buddha*, pp. 1-9, referred to by Bhandarkar *C. L.* 1918, p. 122 n; Beni Prasad, *The State in Ancient India*, p. 118 n.

c4.t1.9

¹ J., II, p. 311; III, p. 454.

c4.t1.10

² Cf. K. V. Rangaswami Aiyangar, *Ancient Indian Economic Thought*, pp. 46-50; see Ghoshal, *Hindu Political Theories*, pp. 137, 273-278, where several attempts at establishing an analogy between the Hindu and the Western theories on this point are criticised; counter-reply: *Ibid.*, II, p. 423; pp. 195-7-; 643-4.

c4.t1.11

³ See for references to this point in other literature, Samaddar, J. B. O. R. S., VI, pp. 487-490.

c4.t1.12

A king was absolutely necessary. He was an essential factor for the well-being of the people. This was not only a theory but in actual feelings of the people of those times. As we shall see later on, the throne could on no account go vacant for a long time. Immediate steps were taken to raise a new king on the vacant throne. Well might the utterances of the people in the *Mahājanaka Jātaka*⁴ that 'the kingdom cannot be preserved without a king' echo the real feelings of the time. "A man needs king and warriors for protection" says a *gāthā* in the *Mahāukkusa Jātaka*.⁵ A condition of kinglessness (or more accurately statelessness) *arājatā* was always viewed with horror.⁶ The idea was so rampant in the minds of the people that not only human beings but "every species of animals—all bipeds and quadrupeds" were thought to have their own kings.⁷

c4.t1.13

⁴ J., VI, p. 39. "arājakam nāma ratthaṃ pāletuṃ na sakkā" Cf. "appatissavāso nāma the palace door and taking the king to ask for not having any issue. J., V, 279; IV, 317.

c4.t1.14

⁵ J., IV, p. 296-G. 59 "Rājāvatā Surāvatā ca attho sampanna sakkhiso bhavanti k'ete." Cf. "As a matter of fact ancient Indian Economics starts with the fundamental assumption that the State is a necessity. If we separate the adventitious accretions made to this idea in later writings, by the substitution of 'Monarch' for the 'State' we shall find that from our earliest literature down to the threshold of our own times there runs through the stream of Indian thought the repeated affirmation of the need of the State, the political community and group organisations." K. V. Rangaswami Aiyangar, *Ancient Indian Economic Thought*, p. 44.

c4.t1.15

⁶ Cf. Manu, vii, 3 "Arājake hi loke'smin sarvato vidrute bhayāt," and Rāmāyaṇa, II, 67,8,31 also the vivid description of the misery of anarchy in the Mahābhārata, Sānti Parva, ch. 68—J.A.O.S., XI, 255; XIII 135-6. Kautilya says "Protected by Danda the State prospers" Arthaśāstra, I, 4; Arājata King (State) lessness has up to this day come down to mean "anarchy." See discussion over this term. Dikshitar, op. cit., pp. 23 & note, 24.

c4.t1.16

⁷ Monkeys, J., I, p. 282; Birds, J., II, 352; Fish, J. V, p. 462.

c4.t1.17

The ten kingly duties (*Dasarājadhamme*) so often⁸ referred to and enumerated fully in a *gāthā* of the *Nandiyamiga Jātaka*⁹ have become a stock-phrase in the *Jātakas*. They are:

c4.t1.18

⁸ J., I, p. 260; II, p. 118, III, p. 470; IV, p. 153.

c4.t1.19

⁹ J., III, p. 274-G. 73; also J., V. p. 378-G.176,

c4.t1.20

*Dānaṃ Sīlaṃ Pariccāgaṃ Ajjavaṃ Maddavaṃ Tapaṃ*
*Akkodhaṃ Avihimsā ca khanti ca Avirodhanaṃ.*

c4.t1.21

"Alms, morals, charity, justice and penitence," "Peace, mildness, mercy, meekness, patience."

c4.t1.22

Of course, Fick¹ is right to a certain extent in saying that these duties do not give us a picture of the king, no idea of the essence of the kingly power, of the obligations and functions of the Rājan, because ‘they are nothing else than prescriptions of the general Buddhistic morality applicable to all lay disciples. However, it must be remembered that this code of morality is not purely Buddhistic. For is not the above gāthā itself reminiscent of the old Upaniṣadic Ideal² or of that which is inculcated in the Bhagavadgītā in precisely the same words³ and which runs throughout in Indian Literature?’⁴ But these are ideals, no doubt. What about realities? Yes, the Jātakas also give us more practical and realistic precepts applicable to a king, which show a considerable knowledge of, and acquaintance with, the machinery of administration as it then existed. As an instance we might cite the following remarkable gāthās from the Tesakuṇa Jātaka⁵ which is, so to say, a compendium of maxims on Political Philosophy and which is sufficiently attractive to deserve more than a passing reference:

c4.t1.23

¹ op. cit., pp. 100-1; 105. The same is the case with the five Kurudhammas which are only five general virtues (silae).

c4.t1.24

² Chāndogya Upaniṣad, 3.17.4 “Tapodānamārjavamahimsāsatyavacanam.”

c4.t1.25

³ XVI, 1-2 “Dānam Damaśca yajñaśca svādhyāyam tapa ārjavam Ahimsā Satyamakrodhastyāgaḥ śāntirapaiśunam.”

c4.t1.26

⁴ Cf. MBH. V. 59; See Hopkins, J. A. O. S., 13, p. 116.

c4.t1.27

⁵ J., V pp. 112 ff.—GG. 3-47.

c4.t1.28

“First of all, should a king put away
All falsehood and anger and scorn;
Let him do what a king has to do,
Or else to his vow be forsworn....
When a prince in his rule groweth slack,
Untrue to his name and his fame,
Should his wealth (bhoga) all at once disappear,
Of that prince it is counted as shame....
In a man energetic and bold (utthānaviriye) we delight⁶,
If from jealousy free....
To all, O great king, be a friend,
So that all may thy safety insure....
For courage as virtue he holds
And in it goodness true espies.
Be zealous to do what is right,
Nor, however reviled, yield to sin,
Be earnest in efforts for good,
No sluggard can bliss ever win......”
And again—
“The matter, my friend, is set forth
In a couple of maxims (padakāni) quite plain—
To keep whatever one has (laddhassa anurakkhana)

c4.t1.29

⁶ Cf. Arthaśāstra, I, 19; Aśoka's Edicts. R. E. VI.

c4.t1.30

And whatever one has not, to gain (aladdhassa ca yo lābho).¹ Take as counsellors men that are wise Thy interests clearly to see (atthassa kovide)² Not given to riots and waste, From gambling and drunkenness free.³ Such an one as can guard thee aright And thy treasure with all proper zeal⁴ As a charioteer guides his car, He with skill steers the realm's commonweal. Keep ever the folk (antajano) well in hand⁵ And duly take stock of thy feef (cittam).⁶ Ne'er trust to another a loan or deposit (nidhim ca iṇadānam.) But act for thyself.... What is done or undone to thy profit and loss (āyavyaya) It is well thou shouldst know. Ever blame the blameworthy, And favour on them that deserve it bestow. Thou thyself, O great king! shouldst instruct Thy people in every good way Lest thy realm and thy substance Should fall to unrighteous officials (adhammikā yutā), a prey.

c4.t1.31

¹ Kauṭilya, Arthaśāstra, I, 20, adds two more, viz., increasing what is protected and dispensing the wealth thus increased on meritorious purposes. Cf. also Junāgaḍh Rock inscription of Skandagupta, Fleet, G. I No. 14 (455-6 A. D.)

c4.t1.32

² Persons versed in the Arthaśāstra or Politics. See Arthaśāstra, XIV. 1.

c4.t1.33

³ Cf. Śukranītisāra, I, 11, 215-29.

c4.t1.34

⁴ Cf. Arthaśāstra, II, 8; VII, 5.

c4.t1.35

⁵ Is it the inner apartment, the harem, which was to be guarded carefully according to Kauṭilya?

c4.t1.36

⁶ The text has cittam, while the Commentary takes it as vittam.

c4.t1.37

See that nothing is done by thyself Or by others with overmuch speed. For the fool that so acts Without doubt will live to repent of the deed. To wrath (Kodha) one should never give way, For should it due bounds overflow, It will lead to the ruins of kings And the proudest of houses lay low.⁷ Be sure that thou never as king Thy people misled to their cost. Lest all men and women alike In an ocean of trouble be lost...."

c4.t1.38

⁷ Cf. Prāyaśaḥ Kopavaśāḥ rājānaḥ prakṛtikopaiḥ hatāḥ śrūyante. Arthaśāstra, VIII, 3.

c4.t1.39

How wonderfully these stanzas echo the clear voice of Kauṭilya and other Hindu Political Philosophers, can very well be seen from a comparison of these with Arthaśāstra works.⁸ Even the words and phrases italicised in the above citations, remarkably agree with those employed in the *Arthaśāstra* works with their technical significance.

c4.t1.40

⁸ Cf. specially Arthaśāstra, I, 19. Other references on the point may be pointed out; J., I, 280-G. 56; III, 441-2, G. 27-32; V, 99-100-G. 305-315; VI, 94-G. 95; 375-6 G.

c4.t1.41

Evils that attend to the slothful king are very aptly described in the *Gaṇḍatiṇḍu Jātaka*¹ which reflects a bold philosophy of action and does not preach passivity as is generally attributed to Buddhism. "*Appamādo amatapadam, pamādo maccuno padam*".² "Zeal is the way to Eternal Bliss, but sloth leads to Death"—is the keystone, the essence, of this sturdy doctrine. A slothful king paves the way for the ruin of himself and his kingdom which falls a prey to robbers and spoilers. Whereas the man who arising betimes (*kālutthāyin*) unwearied and orderly is, his oxen and kine thrive apace, and riches increasing are his.

c4.t1.42

¹ V, pp. 99-100 G. 305; 315; Cf. also J. III, 141-G. 175-6.

c4.t1.43

² This is repeated in *Dhammapada*, V. 21.

c4.t1.44

Says a *gāthā* of one *Jātaka*: "Right should never be violated.... If Right is destroyed, it destroys."³ This *Dhamma* then was very comprehensive, embracing the whole bundle of laws that formed the basis of social, economic and political order. To abide by these laws was the supreme duty of a king. These are no abstract principles of righteousness as the citations quoted above will show. The significant, practical and positive character of these will also be seen from the oftrepeated passages in the *Jātakas*⁴ which mean by *Dhamma* the fulfilment and maintenance of the rights belonging to relations, subjects, communities and officials and servants: "*Dhammam cara mahārāja mātāpitusu . . . puttadāresu . . . mittāmccesu . . . raṭṭhe Janapade . . . samaṇabrāhmaṇe . . . migapakkhisu.*"

c4.t1.45

³ J., III, p. 456-G. 45.

c4.t1.46

⁴ J., V, p. 123-GG. 38-47; 223-GG. 114-23; VI, p. 94-GG. 401-10.

c4.t1.47

Ideals and thoughts, whether political, social or economic, are at once the source and the reflex of actual conditions. This may not be wholly true. However the fact remains that noble and sublime kings like Aśoka rose to be so from the *Dhamma* precepts and also created the actualities for later thoughts to grow upon. The reciprocal influence of man and environment must be recognised.

c4.t1.48

The guiding motive which impelled a king to cling to this ideal was chiefly the common belief in *Sagga* (Svarga) or heaven as the *Summum bonum* to be attained for leading a virtuous life on earth. Such is the oft-repeated precept for a king, as for instance given in the *Sāma Jātaka*.⁵

c4.t1.49

⁵ VI, p. 94-GG. 401-10; also J., V, p. 123-GG. 38-47; 223-G. 123.

c4.t1.50

*Dhammam cara Mahārāja mātāpitusu khattiya*
*Idha dhammam caritvāna*
*Raja saggam gamissati.*

c4.t1.51

Again, why was Aśoka so earnest in his *Dhamma*? In his scheme of values, he considered the other world as of supreme consequence and as the objective of life (*paratrikameva Mahā-phala menāti Devānam piyo.*)⁶

c4.t1.52

⁶ Mookerji, *Aśoka*, p. 75. *Rock Edict XIII*—Cf. R. E. X. where he plainly discloses "whatever exertions King Piyadasi, beloved of the gods, puts forth are (all) with reference to the other world."

c4.t1.53

With this guiding motive in view the king was constantly advised to look after the happiness of every being. The parable enunciated by the monkey in the *Mahākapi Jātaka*¹ before the king is significant in this connection. The last of the *Gāthās* is:—

c4.t1.54

¹ J., III, pp. 370-375-GG. 84-89.

c4.t1.55

“The happiness of kingdom and of army and of steed
And city must be dear to thee, if thou wouldst rule indeed.”²

c4.t1.56

² *Ibid.* G. 89.

c4.t1.57

—an ideal inculcated even by Kauṭilya³ and so earnestly followed by Aśoka.⁴ The paternal conception so eloquently advocated by Kauṭilya and Aśoka⁵ is considered also in the *Jātakas* as one of the basic principles of good government.⁶

c4.t1.58

³ *Arthaśāstra*, I, 10.

c4.t1.59

⁴ As for instance in *R. E.*, VI, where he asserts the promotion of the good of all (*sarva-lokahita*) as the most important duty of his and in *Pillar E. II* where he refers to his many and various kind and good deeds in respect of both men and beast, birds and aquatic creatures.

c4.t1.60

⁵ *Arthaśāstra*, II, 1; IV, 3; *Separate Kalinga Edicts*. See Bhandarkar, *Aśoka*, p. 36; Dikshitar, *Mauryan Polity*, pp. 98-9.

c4.t1.61

⁶ J., III, p. 470.

c4.t1.62

As a leader and protector of his subjects, the king was entrusted with responsibilities which were of a grave nature. His was the duty to support law and order in this world. “But if he himself was unjust or wicked,” such was the idea, “how will law and order be supported?” In short, he was deemed personally responsible for all the sins and misfortunes of his subjects and even for seasonal vicissitudes.⁷ People follow the king. If the king is just, the people will be so ; if he is unjust, so will also be his followers as kine do after a bull! This is the gist of the several illuminating *gāthās* of the *Rājovāda Jātaka*.⁸ “Yes, Your Excellency,” says the ascetic of the above *Jātaka*, “in the time of unjust kings, oil, honey, molasses and the like as well as the wild roots and fruits, lose their sweetness and flavour, and not these only, but the whole realm becomes bad and flavourless.”⁹ Everything is alright only when the kings are just. Even if there is no rainfall, it is king’s fault. All the people gather together before his palace and ask him to atone for his sins. He is asked to give alms, keep the holy day, make vows of virtue and to lie down for seven days in his chamber on a grass pallet as was used to be done by former monarchs.¹⁰

c4.t1.63

⁷ *Cf.* K. V. R., Aiyangar, *op. cit.*, pp. 66, 145.

c4.t1.64

⁸ J., III, p. 111—G. 133-136.

c4.t1.65

⁹ *Ibid.* p. 111.

c4.t1.66

¹⁰ J., II, p. 368.

c4.t1.67

“For him no rain falls in the time of rain,
But out of season pours and pours amain.”¹¹

c4.t1.68

¹¹ J., II, p. 124—G. 84; *Cf.* also J. III; 458-G. 48; J., V, p. 193.

c4.t1.69

Under such an unjust king three kinds of fear overcome men, viz., fear of famine, fear of pestilence and fear of the sword.¹ An oppressive ruler is held responsible for all the miseries of mankind. An old man's foot is pierced with a thorn—it is due to the king; the poor anxious mother of two grown-up but unmarried daughters falls down from a tree and cries out in frantic anger:

c4.t1.70

¹ J., II, p. 124—"Chātakabhayaṃ rogabhayaṃ satthābhayaṃ ti imāni tiṇi bhayāni." also J., II, p. 368.

c4.t1.71

"Oh! When will Brahmadatta die,
For long as he shall reign
Our daughters live unwedded
And for husbands sigh in vain."

c4.t1.72

The ox of a ploughman is struck accidentally with his ploughshare, and for this again the king is to blame; a milkman is kicked and upset by a vicious cow early in the morning—the king is at fault; a mother-cow is sore at heart on seeing her dear dappled calf killed—for this the village boys curse the king; even a frog does not spare him when it is beaten by the hungry crows.²

c4.t1.73

² J., V, pp. 101-107,—G.G. 316, 321, 325, 330, 335, 339.

c4.t1.74

Thus a monarch was regarded as the refuge and succour of the people. And in case of his turning evil, there was no end to the miseries of the people. There is thus a great amount of truth in what the people in the *Gaṇḍatindu Jātaka* speak out oft and anon:—

c4.t1.75

"By night to thieves a prey are we,
To publicans by day,
Lewd folks abound within the realm,
When evil kings bear sway."³

c4.t1.76

³ J., V, pp. 102-106, GG. 319, 324, 328, 333, 338.

c4.t1.77

What such an oppressive rule led to, when people became desperate, we shall see later on.

c4.t1.78

Having all these dangers in view, the king was constantly advised to be up and doing everything for the welfare of his subjects. Some of the practical aspects of these teachings we have already noticed in the long extracts given in the *Tesakuṇa Jātaka*.⁴ A few others may here be noticed. The king was asked to mould his governmental policy according to the opinion of his subjects which counted a great deal, as we shall see. He must personally see things with his own eyes and give due regard to well-meaning suggestions of others.⁵ And with this end in view perhaps we find the kings of the *Jātakas* going out in disguise—*incognito*—to see for themselves and hear what his subjects do or talk about.⁶

c4.t1.79

⁴ Supra pp. 81-2.

c4.t1.80

⁵ J., V, p. 100-G. 315

c4.t1.81

⁶ J., II, pp. 2, 427; IV, p. 370.

c4.t1.82

If the king wanted to rule safely and peacefully, he must have the goodwill of the people at heart. To do this, he should put into practice the four elements of popularity (*catuhi saṅgahavatthūni*)¹ by which he could win the hearts of the people. Of all the five elements that go to constitute the strength of a king, that of wisdom (*paññā*) is considered to be the best, and the king is advised to attach the greatest importance to it which is the procurer of material interests (*atthamvindati*). The remaining four elements of power (*balam*) are *bāhubalam* (power of limb—physical strength), *bhogabalam* (power of possession—material strength), *amaccabalam* (power of counsel) and *abhijaccabalam* (power of high birth—aristocratic privileges.)²

c4.t1.83

¹ J., III, p. 470 ; IV, p. 176 ; V, p. 352 : *cf* saṅgahaka, J. III, p. 262-GG. 53-4, IV, p 110-G. 50 ; V, p 362. Childers names these four *saṅgahavatthus* as largesse, affability, beneficient rule and impartiality : Pāli Dictionary, *suv. voc.* Such were the efforts of Aśoka, who spared not a moment from out of his zealous works of public welfare. So also did Khāravela gain popularity by following these traditional methods, by constructing works of public utility (Line 3), remitting taxes and duties (L. 7) and entertaining his subjects (L. 4). *Hāthigumphā Inscription* ; Barua, *Brāhmī Inscriptions*, p. 257.

c4.t1.84

² J., V, pp. 120-121, GG. 27-29. The same enumeration of the five elements of power with almost the same phrases, is given in the MBH. V, 37, 52-55; *Cf.* Hopkins, *J.A.O.S.* 13, p. 152 note.

The King as a Man

c4.t2.1

Up till now we had been considering the position of the king as seen through those general principles and concepts which, though mainly based on theoretical speculations, must have played a considerable part in forming and moulding the character of the king as a reality. Rules and duties and responsibilities that are enjoined on the king are here, as in other works on polity like the *Arthaśāstra* of Kauṭilya or the *Dharmasūtras*, based on actual conditions and go a long way in guiding the king in his administration.³ Before actually taking up the administrative affairs we try to see the character of the king as he reveals himself in the stories themselves.

c4.t2.2

³ What Hopkins says regarding the material of the Epic, may as well be applied to our Jātaka material: "To what extent we may use in our investigation of the didactic sections concerning the Epic, is a question open to several answers. These portions are of course of late origin. Yet in a land so conservative as India we must concede that the gist of such dogmatic discourses had probably been for a long time the result of assumed and common custom, especially when the formal law of the early period essentially corroborates it; for law, as the Hindu family in class usage" *J.A.O.S.*, 13, p. 70.

c4.t2.3

The birth of a prince was eagerly longed for by people of those times.⁴ Their keen anxiety for the perpetuation of royal line, as they considered failure of heir to be a great misfortune, led them to instal a particular kind of halo about the figure of a prince.

c4.t2.4

⁴ See Hopkins's learned remarks : *ibid*, p. 138 and note.

c4.t2.5

At the conception by the queen, proper rites were performed (laddhagabbhaparihāro).¹ What ceremonies were gone through on this occasion, we are not told. Probably they included the ceremony known as "garbharakṣaṇa" or the protection of embryo in the womb, i.e., the prevention of miscarriage, which consisted mainly in reciting the particular hymns (garbhadharaṇam) of the Atharvaveda²...When, after the expiry of the period of nearly ten months,³ the child was born, there was no limit to peoples' joy and happiness⁴. In this happiness each dropped a kahāpaṇa as the boy's milk-money (khīramūlam).⁵ That very day the happy father would order his chief general to find out how many young nobles had been born that day in the ministers' houses (amaccakule). For, "a retinue must be prepared for my son".⁶ On the name-day (nāmagahaṇadivasa)⁷ the new-born babe was given a name. The Brāhmaṇas who read the different marks of the babe (lakkhaṇapāṭhakānaṃ brāhmaṇānaṃ) were paid great honours. Inquiries were made of them whether there was any danger threatening him (antarāyabhāvaṃ).⁹ From the moment of his birth, the prince was given away in charge of female nurses (dhātī) of the palace who carefully tended and brought him up.⁹ Special care was taken that the nurses were faultless.¹⁰ It was only occasionally that the queen herself would give her milk to the child.¹¹ Generally the child was sucked by the nurses. His childhood then passed away in merriment in company with his mates. They played and enjoyed in and out of the palace. Sometimes they strode off in the park to watch the elephants engaged in fight.¹² Nothing more is learnt about the activities of young princes. Their life at the palace was of course gay and prosperous, and, oftener than not, indolent. There does seem much of reality in the following description of the life of the Princes and Princesses, even allowing some margin for the stress that must be laid on the contrast that the king makes between the palace—and forest-life.

c4.t2.6

¹ J., II, p. 2; IV, p. 323; VI, p. 2.

c4.t2.7

² 6, 17 : 5, 1, 1, Kautika-Sūtra, 98-2; Bloomfield, The Atharvaveda, in Grundriss der Indo-Arischen Philologie und Altertumskunde, I, B, p. 71; Cf. Jolly, Recht und Sitte, in the above, p. 152. Cf. Kauṭilya: "When the queen attains the age favourable for procreation, priests shall offer to Indra and Bṛhaspati the requisite oblations," Arthaśāstra I, 17.

c4.t2.8

³ J., IV, p. 323—"Dasamāsaccayena" VI, p. 485-G. 1609.

c4.t2.9

⁴ J., VI, p. 2 "Deva mayaṃ pubbe anāthā, idāni sanāthā jātā sāmike no laddhi."

c4.t2.10

⁵ J., IV., p. 323.

c4.t2.11

⁶ Ibid. "Mama puttassa paricāro laddhuṃ vaṭṭati." Cf. J., V, p. 210.

c4.t2.12

⁷ Cf. Manu, II, 30, who lays down that the name-rite (nāmakaraṇa) should be performed on the 10th or 12th day after birth; Jolly, op. & loc. cit.

c4.t2.13

⁹ J., II, 328; III, p. 31; IV, p. 492; V, 298, VI, p. 3

c4.t2.14

¹⁰ The Mugapakkha Jātaka, VI, p. 3, notices the faults and merits of nurses. "If a child drinks milk, sitting on the hip of a nurse who is too tall, its neck will become too long; if it sits on the hip of one too short, its shoulder bone will be compressed; if the nurse be too thin the baby's thighs will ache; if too stout, the babe will become bow-legged; the body of a very dark nurse is too cold, of one very white is too hot; the children who drink the milk of a nurse with hanging breasts have the ends of their noses flattened, some nurses have their milk sour, others have it bitter." Cf. also, J., VI, p. 488. All this shows at least some scientific knowledge, no doubt.

c4.t2.15

¹¹ J., VI, p. 5.

c4.t2.16

¹² J., V, p. 183.

c4.t2.17

CHILDHOOD.

c4.t2.18

⁸ J., VI, p. 3.

c4.t2.19

"Fine rice has been their food and well-cooked viands hitherto ;
If they must feed on wild-tree fruit, what will the children do !
From silver dishes well-adorned or golden hitherto ;
They ate : but with bare leaves instead, what will the children do ?
Benares cloth has been their dress, or linen hitherto ;
If they must dress in grass or bark, what will the children do ?
In carriages or palanquins they've riddden hitherto ;
When they must run about on foot, what........ ?
In gabled chambers they would sleep safe-bolted hitherto ;
Beneath the roots of trees to lie, what........?
On cushions, rugs or broidered beds they rested hitherto :
Reclining on a bed of grass, what........?
They have been sprinkled with sweet scents and perfumes hitherto ;
When covered all with dust and dirt, what......?
When peacock's feathers, yak's tail fans have fanned them hitherto ;
Bitten by insects and flies, what...... ?"¹

c4.t2.20

¹ J., VI, p. 510-GG. 1883-1890. For luxurious outer appearance of princes, see J., VI. pp. 144-5 GG. 647-54 ; 217-8 GG. 931-44, 485-6 ; of princesses, J., VI, p. 590 GG. 2443-2451 ; of course, we must give greater latitude to these apparently poetical fancies and exaggeration.

c4.t2.21

The prince was respected, very often petted by the people. They would not let him do any manual work even if he wished to do², because he was a "prince". His life thus tended to be easy-going upto the 16th year, which was considered to be the age of discretion when generally he had to leave home and go abroad for purposes of higher education and training under "world-renowned teachers".³ It is conceivable that the young prince up to this time had been instructed in his father's house in the elementary sciences (the three Rs)' and physical exercise, and it was only for higher studies both in arts and sciences that he went abroad.⁴ It is Takkasilā which is invariably mentioned as the place where these young princes go for their higher studies. Takkasilā had a long-standing fame as the seat and centre of Indian culture which exercised a kind of intellectual suzerainty over the wide world of letters in India. And there is nothing to be mistrusted in the words of the Jātakas which speak of this custom of sending princes to so far away a place as Takkasilā, as Fick seems to feel.⁵

c4.t2.22

² J., IV, p. 169.

c4.t2.23

³ J., I, pp. 259, 262, 273 ; II, pp. 2, 87, 277, 319, 323, 400 ; III, pp. 122, 158, 168, 415 ; IV, 315 ; V, pp 161, 210.

c4.t2.24

⁴ According to Kautilya, Arthaśāstra, I, 5, the prince had to learn alphabet (lipi) and mathematics (samkhyāna) after the 3rd year. After the 11th he had to study the triple vedas ānvikṣiki (philosophy) and vārtā (economics) and daṇḍanīti (politics). When these were completed, it is not expressly said. See Dikshitar, The Mauryan Polity, p. 102.

c4.t2.25

⁵ op. cit., pp. 95-6.

c4.t2.26

This custom of sending princes to far-away places for their higher education seems to have been prevalent in many a State of those days. Court-life at home was necessarily felt baneful for the growing prince. All sorts of luxuries, pleasures and comforts only made a prince's life easygoing and practically, as we might see even to-day, useless for heavy responsibilities that attended a king. It was this feeling of practical utility that inspired kings of those days, "deliberately and as a matter of policy," to send their princes abroad to acquire valuable practical experience about men and affairs of the world.¹ By journeying on foot through villages and towns, plains and deserts, countries and kingdoms, they naturally gained rich experience which turned out to be a source of great help in their later life. "Now kings of former times" says the *Tila-Muṭṭhi-Jātaka*,² "though there might be a famous teacher living in their own city, used to send their sons to foreign countries afar off to complete their education, that by this means they might learn to quell their pride and highmindedness, and endure heat or cold, and be made acquainted with the ways of the world." This is in complete consonance with the spirit of Kauṭilya who urges upon the prince a thorough course of intellectual training and moral discipline.³ A thorough politician and a psychologist that he was, Kauṭilya realized the great fact that from education springs discipline and that only a prince with a disciplined mind and body can carry on administration on sound lines. Did not the kings of the *Jātakas* remember this great truth, when they sent their sons abroad?

c4.t2.27

¹ Mookerji in "Buddhistic Studies", p 239.

c4.t2.28

² J., II, p. 277. "Porāṇakarājāno ca attano putte, evam ete nihatamānadappā situnhakkamā lokacaritañu ca bhavissantīti attano nagare disā pāmokhe ācariye vijjamāne pi sippuggahanatthāya dūre tiro raṭṭham pesenti."

c4.t2.29

³ Arthaśāstra, I, 5; VIII, 3; Ghoshal, Hindu Political Theories, p. 139,; Dikshitar "The Mauryan Polity", pp 101-105.

c4.t2.30

Takkasilā was not the resort only for Princes, but also for students from other classes and ranks of society—Brāhmaṇas, sons of magnates and magnificoes, sons of merchants and tailors and fishermen. And the education imported there was in the main the same, though special courses for different students were also not absent. As this subject on education shall be dealt with in detail in a separate chapter, we shall here confine ourselves to some of the general points only which touch the life of a prince in particular, though it is difficult, we should admit, to differentiate between a prince-student and others.

c4.t2.31

Usually, though not always, the prince went to Takkasilā in company with his fellow-students—sons of the Purohita, the ministers, the commander-in-chief and other officers.⁴ He had to come out in the robe of an humble student leaving aside all those feelings of his higher position which he had upto then been, consciously or unconsciously, cherishing within himself. The interesting and very valuable material furnished on this point by the *Tila-Muṭṭhi-Jātaka*,⁵ to which a reference has already been made and to which we shall have frequently to return while dealing with this subject in detail, must here be noted, especially because it presents before us the prince-student:

c4.t2.32

⁴ J., V, pp. 247, 263; III, p. 238; V, p. 210.

c4.t2.33

⁵ J., II, pp. 277-8.

c4.t2.34

"Calling his boy to him," thus runs the story,—"now the lad was sixteen years old—he (i.e., the king of Benares) gave him one-soled sandals, a sunshade of leaves, and a thousand pieces of money with these words:

c4.t2.35

“My son, get you to Takkasilā, and study there.”

c4.t2.36

The boy obeyed, he bade his parents farewell, and in due course arrived at Takkasilā. There he enquired for the teacher’s dwelling, and reached it at the time when the teacher had finished his lecture, and was walking up and down at the door of the house. When the lad set eyes upon the teacher, he loosed his shoes, closed his sunshade, and with a respectful greeting stood still where he was. The teacher saw that he was weary and welcomed the new comer. The lad ate, and rested a little. Then he returned to the teacher and stood respectfully by him.

c4.t2.37

“Where have you come from?” he asked. “From Benares.” “Whose son are you?” “I am the son of the king of Benares.” “What brings you here?” “I come to learn,” replied the lad. “Well, have you brought the teacher’s fee or do you wish to attend on me in return for teaching you?”

c4.t2.38

“I have brought a fee with me,” and with this he laid at the teacher’s feet his purse of a thousand pieces.

c4.t2.39

The resident pupils attend on their teacher by day, and at night they learn of him: but they who bring a fee are treated like the eldest sons in his house, and thus they learn. And this teacher, like the rest, gave schooling to the prince on every light and lucky day. Thus the young prince was taught.

c4.t2.40

A long passage this, yet it brings before us practically all the principal features of the educational system of those times.

c4.t2.41

It would appear from the above passage that the prince left his home with a very modest equipment and lived at his teacher’s house as an humble student. The system thus inevitably fostered healthy feelings of comradeship, with no recognition whatsoever of earthly distinctions. In fact, we may be forced to feel that “youths of all sorts and conditions of life, of different classes and castes, had all their divisions and distinctions merged in the democracy of learning.”¹ And yet, instances are not rare where we receive a strong impression, that with what of feelings of common pursuits and of the stringency of the moral code binding all into one compact whole, that instinctive class-consciousness, specially in the aristocratic blood,² was not possible to be effaced completely. The first and the basic distinction that the “world-renowned teacher” unfortunately makes, viz., that of the paying and non-paying students receiving different treatment, must necessarily create a feeling of distinction and division.³ What must have the Prince, of course always coming with 1000 pieces as the teacher’s fee (ācāryabhāga) and hence living there as an eldest son, felt against other poor students undergoing ‘daily a course of exacting and low kind of menial service for the school’ should be easily imaginable. Reading of human psychology, particularly of the growing youth, would be erring if it tried to see harmonious relationships under such circumstances. Try hard as he would to make himself amenable to the stricter system of moral and intellectual discipline, the prince could not, possibly, forego his aristocratic consciousness. Of course it was the right and duty of the teacher to punish all defiance of rules and regulations, come from whatever corner it might. But unfortunately the proud Khattiya youth would at once consider this as an insult to, and an infringement upon, his high position. And the malicious spirit of revenge must have been lurking in his inner heart only to burst open when the opportunity presented itself, for instance, when he became the ruler of his kingdom. Such an instance is presented by the Tilamuṭṭhi Jātaka.¹ In the beginning the prince behaves well. One day he goes for a bath along with his teacher. He sees an old woman sitting and watching some white seeds that she had prepared. The youth picks up a handful and eats away without paying anything. The same thing happens on the next and the third day, when the poor old woman cries out, “Master, I have been parching some seeds, and your pupil took a handful and ate them! This he has done to-day, he did it yesterday and he did it the day before! Surely he will eat me out of house and home!” The teacher consoles her and causing two lads to take the young fellow by his two hands, smites him thrice upon the back with a bamboo stick, bidding him take care not to do it again. The youth keeps silent at the moment though the “bloodshot glare” in his eyes is not concealed, and after finishing his courses, reverently invites the teacher to come to his kingdom when he becomes the ruler. The honest teacher, then, goes there and witnesses the revengeful mien of his pupil—now a king. The story, of course, then ends with a convincing speech of the teacher dwelling on the usefulness of discipline which ultimately quiets the king. Instances of this kind can be found in other places also. The prince of the Dhoṇasākha Jātaka² is forced to hear the advice of his teacher ‘to suppress his cruel, harsh and violent nature, as, says the teacher, power that is attained by a man of violence is shortlived, and when it is gone from him, he is like a ship that is wrecked at sea.’³

c4.t2.42

¹ R. K. Mookerji in “Buddhistic Studies”. p. 244.

c4.t2.43

² The Khattiyas of the Jātakas are proud of their birth or status, what then to say of the Prince, the Khattiya par excellence?

c4.t2.44

³ In this case, it may be recalled that the older Brāhmaṇical system of ‘Gurukulas’ was

c4.t2.45

¹ perhaps more sounder as under that system it was the more usual practice for the brahmacāri to pay fees to his teacher only when he became a snātaka and ended his studentship—thus placing all students on equal level: Mookerji, op. cit., p. 240. Cf. also his paper on Ancient Hindu Education in Sir Asutosh Mookerji Silver Jubilee Volumes, III, p. 1 pp. 229-230.

c4.t2.46

² J., II, pp, 279-282, GG. 4-5.

c4.t2.47

³ J., III, pp. 158-9.

c4.t2.48

COURSE OF STUDY What were the Courses of Study that the prince could and would go through at the world-famous university of Takkasilā? The three Vedas and the eighteen or all the arts (tayo vede aṭṭhārasa vijjāṭṭhānāni or sippāni) is the conventional list of the subjects of study taught at Takkasilā.⁴ The three Vedas, of course, refer to the older Brāhmaṇic threefold knowledge—trayī vidyā—that of the Ṛk, the Yajus and the Sāman, thus showing that the Atharva Veda was not included in this curriculum.¹ We have, unfortunately, no mention of individual subjects under the sciences and arts (*Sippāni*),² though there are stray passages which name some subjects under ‘scientific and technical education,’ which may or may not come under the ‘Eighteen Sippas or *Vijjhātṭhānāni*”. Of these, we may particularly note the following: Elephant Lore (*Hatthisutta*),³ Magic Charms (*mante*),⁴ Hunting by bow (*dhanu-koṭim nissāya luddakammam*),⁵ Spell for understanding all animals’ cries (*Sabbarāvajānanamantam*)⁶ and Archery (*Issāpasippa*).⁷ These were perhaps some of the Arts and Sciences which specially attracted the prince more than the study of the *Vedas* which was the birthright of the Brāhmaṇas, though we are not specifically told so.⁸ It is rather difficult to conceive that the young prince should be prattling over the huge collection of hymns which were, presumably, not of much practical value in the governance of the kingdom. We may, therefore, without much fear of ill-imagination, dismiss the stock phrase as only conventional and take it that the general education of the prince, as Hopkins⁹ has carefully tried to show regarding the Epic prince, consisted in learning the aphorisms on horses, on elephants, on chariots, and practical uses of military machines like archery, and fine arts and a general knowledge of philosophy economics and politics—the *Anvīkṣikī*, *Vārttā* and *Daṇḍanīti* of the *Dharmasūtras* and of Kauṭilya.

First 162 of 1,235 passages. Read on

Linked texts (18)