Theory of Government in Ancient India (Post-Vedic) c10.71

c10.71

The Śrimad Bhâgavata which is called a Purâṇa, but which is really an independent work inculcating the worship of Kṛiṣṇa, has a few political passages.² It is stated once that even a sinful monarch should not be disregarded by the people, for every monarch embodies the vigour of Lokapâlas or protectors of the universe.³ But this doctrine, akin to that of passive obedience, is later qualified by the narration of the traditional story of the tyrant Veṇa’s fate. Exasperated by his lawless conduct the Ṛiṣis declared that the wicked man was not fit to rule. They put an end to his life by their breaths.¹ The king should be virtuous and vigorous, at whose advent disorderly persons would disappear as mice disappear before a snake. Nothing is more deplorable than anarchy. If there is no king, people are burnt like worms betwixt pieces of wood.² The Bhāgavata delights in its delineation of Pṛithu’s character. True to his word, impartial to all, to his own son, as to his enemy’s son, like a father to his subjects, like a servant to philosophers, like death to the wicked, he was the delight of all.³ The Earth must be duly protected. Once when she did not receive adequate protection, she refused to bear any herbs, etc.⁴ It was the king’s function to educate his subjects into virtue, to set every one to his proper duty and to chastise the undutiful.⁵ The sceptre of dominion and the rod of justice can be wielded only by those who are versed in Vedas and Śāstras.⁶ Needless to say, the Bhāgavata repeats the traditional origin of caste, stresses Brahmanic supremacy, and wants the social order to be enforced by the state.⁷