Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

Theory of Government in Ancient India (Post-Vedic) c11: Chapter VIII. Buddhist and Jaina Theories of Government

Theory of Government in Ancient India (Post-Vedic) c11

Language
English

Contents

Chapter VIII. Buddhist and Jaina Theories of Government

c11.2

The post-vedic Brahmanic literature falls into several sections and reflects some social and political development, but, as a whole, it is characterised by the same tone and temper. In the sphere of governmental theory, the Epics, the political and legal treatises, the Purāṇas and general literature start from the same fundamental assumptions. But from the fifth century B.C. onwards, Brahmanism had to contend with two vigorous protestant movements—Buddhism and Jainism. They experienced many vicissitudes of fortune until one of them disappeared from India and the other sank into a small sect, but they produced a vast literature and gave rise to many social theories.

c11.3

It is the Aśokan Edicts of the third century B.C. which, in the light of the latest researches, have a claim to be examined before any literary works for Buddhist ideas on government. The ‘beloved of the gods’ appears as the moral teacher and spiritual guide of his subjects. The state over which he presides is a missionary state exerting its utmost resources in the propagation of Buddhism and piety and morality in general. The third Rock Edict, for instance, requires administrative officers to proceed on circuit every five years “as well for their other business, as for this special purpose, namely, to give instruction in the law of piety.” Censors were appointed to watch over the Law and the operation of justice.¹ Asoka enunciates the paternal character of his government in so many words. In the Borderer's Edict of the Kalinga group, he wants his officers to make the people realise that "the king is to us even as a father; he loves us even as he loves himself; we are to the king even as his children." Hospitals, alms-houses, rest-houses, watering places, shady trees on the highways, and irrigation works are provided by the state.² The use of meat was hedged round by restrictions.³ The example and precepts of Asoka had a profound influence on Buddhist theory of government. The new element which is introduced is that the state is given dynamic missionary functions.

c11.4

¹ Asoka's Rock-Edicts, V, XII.

c11.5

² Pillar Edicts, VII.

c11.6

³ Pillar Edict, VII.

c11.7

The dates of Buddhist works are almost as doubtful as those of Brahmanical literature. The word of the Buddha is supposed to be contained in the Tripitaka or Three Baskets, (1) Sutta comprising the five Nikayas or collections, (2) Vinaya giving rules of monastic life for monks and nuns in five sections—the Patimokkha, Mahavagga, Chullavagga, Suttavibhanga and Parivara, and (3) Abhidhama, comparatively inferior, in which metaphysics is discussed in seven works. The whole canon exists in two versions; (1) in, Pali the hieratic language of the Buddhists of Ceylon, Siam and Burma, and (2) in Sanskrit or mixed Sanskrit, the sacred language of Buddhism in Tibet, China and Japan. Rhys Davids, who relied chiefly on the Pali canon, worked on the hypothesis that the four Nikayas—the Digha or Long, Majjhima or Middle, Samyutta or Miscellaneous and Anguttara or Numerical, representing the sayings of the Buddha, were put together, "out of older material at a period about half-way between the death of the Buddha and the accession of Aśoka,” that is, in the fourth century B.C. Other sayings, ascribed mostly to the Buddha’s disciples, had been put into a supplementary fifth Nikāya, the Khuddaka or Minor Collection to which additions were made as late as the reign of Aśoka. But latterly there has set in a reaction against the acceptance of Buddhist traditional chronology. The dates of the Buddhist Councils, including the third one believed to have been held under the reign of Aśoka about 247 B.C., have been called in question. The Ceylonese tradition is, from the chronological point of view, now almost entirely set aside. It is argued that the whole Buddhist canon is posterior to Aśoka and could not have taken shape before the second or first century before Christ. Sylvain Levi shows that the Pâli idiom itself, which is the language of the southern canon, did not arise till sometime after Aśoka. Buddha and Mahâvira, the founder of Jainism, preached in some form of Prâkṛit, Mâgadhi or Ardha-Mâgadhi. Nor does Aśoka use Pâli in his Edicts. For purposes of discussion, therefore, one must start only with the assumption that the Nikâyas existed about the first century B.C. The Pâli canon is earlier than the Sanskrit. It is impossible to assign definite dates to the various books. It can only be surmised that the Nikâya which is mentioned last is probably later than the others. It is clear that the Nikâyas do not represent the work of a single mind or age.¹

c11.8

¹ See Rhys Davids, Preface to the Dialogues of the Buddha (Sacred Books of the Buddhists, Vol. II) pp. ix—xxii. Rhys Davids and Oldenberg referred the Vinaya and the Sutta Piṭakas to about the 4th century B.C., Sacred Books of the East Series, Vol. XIII, p. xxiii; Vol. XI, p. x. But the tendency of later research is against so early a date. See the Literary History of Sanskrit Buddhism (from Winternitz, Sylvain Levi, Huber), by G. K. Nariman. Sylvain Levi holds that the Vinaya of the Sanskrit canon was first codified in the third or fourth century after Christ (p. 9). In Sanskrit works Pâli expressions and titles naturally appear in Sanskrit form.

c11.9

Buddhism branched off into the southern Hinayâna and northern Mahâyâna paths and later still into Mûlasarvâstivâda and other sects, but it need hardly be added that Buddhists of all schools and particularly of the northern Sanskrit took over many Brahmanic ideas on society but, as rebels against Brahmanism, they recast their heritage and in several respects furnish a welcome antidote to the old tradition. Buddhists did not believe in a creator and could not call his interference to explain every earthly phenomenon. They indulge in fancy and mythology, but reason necessarily plays a greater part in their speculations than in those of Brâhmaṇas. In their political theory, human initiative and enterprise replace the divine hand and, altogether, count for more in social philosophy.

c11.10

Indian political theory generally keeps close, perhaps too close, to political facts, but there is one form of Utopianism which is occasionally met with. The philosopher was sometimes lost in the poet, and soared into a golden age with which the world began. But, as time passed, he quickly descended to the more solid earth, forgot his heavenly excursions, and busied himself with the phenomena around him. Thus, in the Digha Nikâya, one of the most important of Buddhist works, the Brâhmaṇa Vasettha (Vasiṣṭha) enquires of the Buddha, if the Brahmanic claim to supremacy was just. The Buddha, or rather the author, replied in the negative, and called a fanciful history to support his view. There was a time when people were perfect, so perfect that they had nothing corporeal about them. The ethereal beings shone in splendour, enjoyed peace and effulgence, danced in the air, and lived for long. The trance of happiness and tranquillity lasted for ages. But at last the pristine purity declined, and rottenness began. Differences of sex manifested themselves, and then came distinctions of colour. In a word, life fell from the ethereal into the physical plane. Now shelter, food and drink were required. People entered into agreements among themselves and set up the greatest of human institutions—the family and private property. But now problems arose. There appeared theft and certain other forms of unsocial conduct. Once more the people gathered together and agreed to choose a chief who would maintain the social order and judicially inflict punishment. In return they would give him a part of their paddy. So the most gracious and powerful of individuals was elected Chief. He was the Mahâ-sammata or Great Elect. He was the Râjan—one who delighted the people. The king is the leader and guide of the people. In the Kûtadanta Sûtta, a king supplied food, seed-corn, capital and wages to the followers of various occupations according to their needs and thus freed his realm from disorder, increased his revenue and brought peace and security to all. The same story occurs in a ‘mixed Sanskrit’ Life of the Buddha, the Mahâvastu Avadânam, which is full of Jâtaka and other tales and which displays strong Brahmanic influence. Here creatures gather together and raise the mightiest of individuals to the kingship in order to reward goodness and punish evil.¹

c11.11

¹ Agganna Suttanta, Dîghanikâya, Vol. 3, Sec. 27, P.T.S. Edition. Mahâvastu, ed. Senart, I. 347-48. Rhys Davids, Dialogues of the Buddha, 175-177. Ghoshal, Hindu Political Theories, 119. It is interesting to compare the Buddhist Golden Age with the Stoic Golden age. The Sukhâvatîvyûha, of which the Sanskrit original has disappeared and which is known only from Chinese translations,

c11.12

A fuller version. The Buddhist tradition of the origin of society and government is faithfully reproduced in the fifth volume of the Tibetan Dulva, the Vinaya compilation (in thirteen volumes). It appears as the story of the renovation of the world after its destruction. Many of its previous inhabitants had been born in the region of the Ābhāsvara devas where they had ethereal bodies, free from all impurity, perfect in appearance, radiant with light, feeding on joy, moving at liberty through space and living to great ages. Gradually, solid earth was formed, the sun and moon and stars appeared; distinctions of time became perceptible. The manifestation of sex was followed by feelings of love and conjugal relationships. When the practice of eating commenced, differences in the quantity and quality of food produced differences of colour. Then "sinful beings" commenced the practice of building houses and of hoarding, which led to heart-burning and to the deterioration of the grain itself. "Then these beings assembled together in sorrow, grief, and lamentation, and said, "Sirs, formerly we had ethereal bodies......Let us draw lines of demarcation and establish boundaries between each one's property." They did so and said, "This is thine—this is mine." Theft appeared a little later. Then the people thought, "Let us, in view of what has just happened, assemble together, and choose from out of our midst those who are the finest-looking, the largest, the handsomest, the strongest, and let us make them lords over our fields, and they shall punish those of us who do what is praiseworthy, and from the produce of our fields and of the fruits we gather we will give them a portion." So, they selected a Chief and made him lord over their fields with these makes another startling effort of the imagination. It paints a paradise of kalpavṛkṣas, trees of plenty, lovely rivulets, no mountains, and perfection in physique and mind.

c11.13

words; "Henceforth thou shalt punish those of us who deserve punishment, and thou shalt recompense those of us who deserve recompense, and we will give thee a portion of the produce of our fields and of the fruits we gather." The Chief was a regular King. From his receiving the homages of many, he was called 'Honoured by many, or Mahâsammata,' and as he was lord over the fields and kept them from harm, he received the name of 'Protector of the fields or Kṣatriya'; and as he was a righteous man and wise, and one who brought happiness to mankind with the law, he was called 'King or Râjâ.'¹ Sometime after appeared caste, based on distinctions of occupation. Noticing the origin of property in the first building of houses, the author remarks that the lawfulness or otherwise of the division of houses depends on the decision of the king "who is the lord of the law."² With the exception of a few passages, a similar account is given in the third volume of the Dulva.³ Here divine interposition is conspicuous by its absence; reason and expediency alone determine the formation of the state. Government derives its validity from consent. It exists to fulfil certain definite needs. It is difficult to ascertain whether the idea of the pact originated with the Buddhists or they borrowed it from previous Brahmanic thinkers and merely stripped it of its supernatural elements. The latter hypothesis is the more probable. But it is clear that the idea owes its full development to Buddhist influence. It lost ground in the age of the Smṛitis and Purâṇas but it did not altogether die out. A Hindî

c11.14

¹ The Life of the Buddha.........derived from Tibetan works in the Bkah-Hgyur and Bstan-Hgyur, translated by W.W. Rockhill, pp. 1-7.

c11.15

² Ibid., pp. 8, 5.

c11.16

³ Ibid., p. 1.

c11.17

Ms. of Bundela genealogy of the 17th century has a curious preface in which government originates in a pact though supernatural aid is also called in.¹

c11.18

¹ The genealogy is preserved in the State Library of Chhatarpur in Central India. For a detailed notice, Beni Prasad in the Journal of the U. P. Historical Society, 1922.

c11.19

Buddhism represents a revolt against Brahmanism. Buddhist social theory confers no privileges on Brāhmaṇas.

c11.20

| No privileges conferred on Brāhmaṇas. | It denies sanctity to those who commonly passed as Brāhmaṇas. Referring obviously to Brahmanic practices, the northern Dhammapada, an anthology of verses taken chiefly from five Nikāyas, remarks that nakedness, long hair, dirt, fasting, sleeping on the ground or sitting motionless does not bring purity and does not resolve doubts. One does not become a Brāhmaṇa by his family, by his long looks, by his lineage. Real Brāhmaṇas are those who are endowed with virtue and purity and who know the law.² The Majjhima Nikāya admits the primacy of the Brāhmaṇas and Kṣatriyas in social etiquette,³ but later in the dialogue of the Madhura Sūtta, it expressly denies the utility of caste in securing happiness in this life or in the next. It denies caste privilege before the law and more than anything else insists that caste is wholly immaterial in ascetic life.⁴ In the Digha Nikāya, a Brāhmaṇa, Ambaṭṭha, repeats the current Brahmanical

c11.21

² See the Udānavarga, translated by Rockhill, Ch. XXXIII. Dhammapada, Ch. XXVI. Max Müller's translation, pp. 90–96. The Udānavarga is a collection of verses from the Buddhist canon compiled by Dharmatrāta representing the northern Buddhist version of Dhammapada. It has been translated by Rockhill from the Tibetan of the Bkah-Hgyur.

c11.22

³ Majjhima Nikāya, 90, Kaṇṇakathala Sutta.

c11.23

⁴ Majjhima Nikāya, 84, Madhura Sūtta. See also Vinaya Piṭaka, Cullavagga, IX, 1, 4.

c11.24

doctrine that Kṣatriyas, Vaiśyas and Śûdras had been created to serve Brâhmaṇas but the Buddha does not admit the claim and silences the interrogator by some awkward questions on his own parentage. In the same dialogue, Kṣatriyas are shown to be higher than Brâhmaṇas.¹

c11.25

¹ Dîgha Nikâya, III, 1, 15. Rhys Davids, Dialogues of the Buddha, pp. 114–117, 119–122. The Sonadanda Sutta (Ibid., 144–159) makes another attack on Brahmanic supremacy.

c11.26

A similar sentiment about caste-prerogatives is evident in the Jâtakas, the stories of the Buddha's previous births, one of the noblest monuments of Buddhist literature. Tradition will have it that 550 Jâtaka stories were taken by the royal missionary Malinda to Ceylon during the reign of Aśoka in the middle of the third century B.C. They were translated from the Pâli into Singhalese and back into Pâli by Buddhaghoṣa in the fifth century A.D. It is in this translation that the Jâtakas have come down to us. But in accordance with the tradition they were long believed to reflect the thought and conditions of the Buddha's time or the period immediately following. Recent research, however, has considerably brought down their dates. "The Jâtaka book," remarks Prof. Keith, "is a strange conglomerate of old and new verses with new prose; some of its tales, as we know from Buddhist sculpture and a stray citation or two, go back to the Aśokan epoch or shortly after; as folklore its contents are often of undeniable age, but as Buddhist fables their antiquity is uncertain."² The bulk of the Jâtaka stories may be presumed to have existed about the commencement of the Christian era, though some are later still. In numerous passages, they breathe a Purāṇic atmosphere. All the more it is interesting to compare their tone and ideas with those of the contemporaneous Brahmanical literature. In the Jātakas caste is assumed to exist. The institution was too powerful to be ignored or uprooted. But the exaggerated claims based on birth are not admitted. In the Dasabrāhmaṇa Jātaka, a debate between two young men on birth or action as the basis of caste, is referred to Gautama who declares that the followers of pastoral, agricultural, industrial, commercial or martial pursuits could not be called Brāhmaṇas. Here the obvious allusion is to those who claimed Brahmanic privileges on the score of caste but who had renounced scholastic or priestly callings. The Jātakas do not proclaim like the Brahmanic dharmaśāstras that one of the prime duties of the king is to enforce the rules of the social order and set every one to the performance of his caste function. Times without number it is emphasised that caste is useless for Nirvāṇa, the summum bonum of life. In many stories again, Brāhmaṇas play a rather ignominious role.¹ From the point of view of governmental theory, it is highly significant that in the Jātakas Kṣatriyas are generally mentioned before Brāhmaṇas. Here, as Fick observes about the Pāli texts as a whole, the term Khattiya is to be understood that for the text of the Jātakas, we must, strictly speaking, be satisfied with the time of Vaṭṭagāmaṇi, 88-76 B.C., when the Buddhist canon was reduced to writing. The Jātakas or stories of the Buddha's previous births, and Avadānas, deeds of heroism or their narration, sometimes as Bodhisattva Avadāna, identical with Jātakas, formed the most popular theme for Buddhist writers. I-tsing (tr. Takakusu, p. 166) testifies to the popularity of Jātakas in the 7th century.

c11.27

² Keith, Buddhist Philosophy, p. 22. Fick (tr. Maitra, pp. ix-x) assigns the Jâtakas as a whole to the age of Buddha, remarking that "many of the Jâtakas are undoubtedly very old and belong, so far as their origin is concerned, to the pre-Buddhistio period." Rhys Davids (Buddhist India, p. 207) inclines definitely to an earlier period. Max Müller (Preface, p. xv, to the first volume of the Sacred Books of the Buddhists Series) perceived

c11.28

¹ For instance, see the Sambhava Jātaka, V. 27. Junha Jātaka, IV, 96.

c11.29

in a rather narrow sense roughly corresponding to Védic Râjanyas and thus practically confined to the ruling class. They symbolise the state. But excepting a few passages in the early Brâhmaṇas, no Brahmanic writer would accord them precedence over Brâhmaṇas. It is probable that the Jâtakas only reflect the actual state of things in some part of the country, probably Eastern India, where Buddhism had obtained a firm hold.¹ It is possible to glean something further about social and political conditions from the Jâtakas, but unfortunately, these long works contain very little governmental theory. In the Daśarâjadharma or the catalogue of Ten Duties for the king, there is nothing political. The king is required to lead a religious, upright life, *inter alia*, to cultivate patience and a yielding disposition and ‘not to cause any pain to anybody.’² In other passages the king is enjoined to be truthful, righteous, and incorruptible and to refrain from cruelty and drunkenness.³ In the paucity of direct political theory, it may be permitted to refer to a tragedy in the Padakusalamānava Jātaka which illustrates the author's conception of the position and duties of the king vis-a-vis his subjects. A young Brāhmaṇa discovers a king and his purohita to be thieves and cries out to the people:—

c11.30

¹ See the Uddâlaka Jâtaka. “Khattiya, Brâhmaṇa, Vessa, Sudda, Chaṇḍâla and Pukkusa can all be virtuous, self-restrained and can attain Nirvâṇa; is there any among them, when they have all attained peace of the soul, who is better or who is worse?” Also the Sîlavîmaṁsa Jâtaka (III, 194). Ambâ Jâtaka, IV, 205. “Among the Khattiyas, Brâhmaṇas, Vessas, Suddas, Chaṇḍâlas and Pukkusas, he is the best from whom one can learn what is right.” In the Tittira Jâtaka (I, 217), on the other hand, some Buddhist monks admit that Brâhmaṇa or Kṣatriya brethren were entitled to the best diet and accommodation. Buddha, however, would admit no such caste-privileges. For the primacy of Kṣatriyas over Brâhmaṇas, Minajacca, III, 452, V, 257. Fick, the Social Organisation in North-East India in Buddha’s Time, tr. Shishirkumar Maitra, pp. 81—90. Pukkusa means a despised mixed caste, generally, the offspring of Niṣâdas with Śûdra females. *Cf.* Manu, IV, 79; X, 18, 38; XII, 55.

c11.31

² Jâtakas, III, 274, 320.

c11.32

³ Ibid., Khantivâdi Jâtaka, II, 319; Chulladhammapâla Jâtaka, III. 178; Bharu Jâtaka, II, 169.

c11.33

"May the householders and citizens assembled here listen to me! What should be water is fire, where safety is expected, from there comes danger."

c11.34

"The king plunders the land as also the Brāhmaṇa, the purohita. Be on your guard; from your protector is your evil generated."

c11.35

The people are enraged, take up sticks and hammers and beat the king as well as his purohita to death. They raise to the vacant throne the young Brāhmaṇa who had caused the hubbub.¹

c11.36

¹ Padakusalamānava Jātaka, III, 501. For another similar incident, see Sachchampira Jātaka, I, 828.

c11.37

In the Jātakas as elsewhere in Indian literature the king is expected to protect the people against foreign aggression and any form of internal disorder or oppression and to administer impartial justice. The ministers should help the king in the performance of his duty. In the Rathalatthi Jātaka, the minister of justice who happened to be the Bodhisattva, the Buddha in a past life, impresses on the king the necessity of due investigation into a case before pronouncing the sentence.² There was an idea that the king could do as he liked with those who had violated the law but that he could not regard himself as a despotic sovereign in general.¹

c11.38

² Rathalatthi Jātaka, III, 104. "A lazy fellow given to sensual indulgence is not good, an ascetic who does not control himself is no good, a king is not good who acts without investigation, a wise man who is angry is also not good. The king should act after he has heard, O ruler! Honour and fame fall to the lot of him who acts after investigation, O king."

c11.39

¹ A king made a Yakṣiṇī his chief queen and was requested by her to grant her complete power over his kingdom. He replied, "My love, in no way do all the subjects of my kingdom belong to me, nor am I their lord; only over those who rise against the king and do wrong am I lord. Therefore, I cannot give you unrestricted power over the whole kingdom." I, 398.

c11.40

The Jātakas mention the king's share of the produce² but do not embody any theory or rules of taxation. It is clear that the property of those who died without heirs escheated to the king.³ The Jātakas mention ministers and Senāpati or commander of the forces. These officers are not always drawn from the Brāhmaṇa or Kṣatriya caste but no attempt is anywhere made to demarcate their functions.⁴ The purohita or domestic priest of the king is frequently in evidence in the Jātakas. He appears as the king's friend and adviser and now and then as a regular state officer deciding law-suits.⁵

c11.41

² Jātakas, II, 378; IV, 169. Once on the failure of crops, the king feeds the villagers who promise to pay him a share of their next crops (II, 135).

c11.42

³ Mahāyaka Jātaka, III, 299. Also IV, 485, where a king says, "Unclaimed wealth comes to us."

c11.43

⁴ The Senāpati occupied a most important position. Disappointed with king, the inhabitants of a city declare that they will inform the Senāpati of their situation.

c11.44

⁵ Jātakas, II, 376, 282, 187; IV, 270; III, 159.

c11.45

Far different in style from the Pāli Jātakas is the Sanskrit work called Jātakamālā (the Garland of Birth-Stories) ascribed to Ārya Śūra. It belongs to the northern Buddhist canon and was composed probably in the 4th century A.D. All its legends, thirty-four in number, are derived from the traditional store and have been identified with the corresponding ones both in southern and northern collections. But the author modifies them in his narration and adds touches of his own. Tārānātha, the great Tibetan

c11.46

historian of Buddhism, identifies Ārya Śūra with the well-known Buddhist poet, Aśvaghoṣa, who flourished about the first century A.D. The statement is open to doubt but the florid kāvya style of Ārya Śūra certainly points to the period when that species of narration was widely cultivated in India. Ārya Śūra has probably suffered from interpolations but the main text seems to be pure.¹ He is none too rich in political reflections but the Buddha was a king or a high personage in so many of his previous births that every Jātaka writer must sketch an ideal monarch, minister or mayor. Once when he was a king of the Śibis, he is represented as "distinguished by energy, discretion, majesty and power." He embodied all the virtues pertaining to Dharma, Artha and Kāma—a reminiscence of Brahmanic thought. Of course, the Bodhisattva "ruled his subjects as if they were his own children." He rejoiced at the sight of mendicants whom he could relieve. In all parts of the town he erected alms-houses and provided every kind of grains, goods and utensils. "In this way he poured out the rain of his gifts, not unlike a cloud of the Kṛita Yuga." Every one got what he wanted—food, drink, couches, seats, dwellings, meals, perfumes, wreaths, silver, gold or anything else. Everyone was summoned by proclamation to declare his need.² In the next story, as king of Kośala, the Bodhisattva displays the same virtues and generosity.³ In the eighth story as king Maitribala he appears as entering into all the joys and sorrows of his subjects, handling both his sword and his law in the protection of his subjects. His sword, however, was merely an ornament, for other kings waited on him respectfully for orders. He dealt out punishments and rewards without infringing righteousness.”¹ In the tenth story, Bodhisattva as a universal sovereign finds his realm afflicted by a famine and is strongly advised by his Brāhmaṇa Councillors to neutralise the disaster by performing a Vedic sacrifice. But he would not consent to sacrifice animals and gets out of the difficulty by proclaiming to assembled townsmen his intention of sacrificing a thousand blackguards and thus leading all to behave righteously. He ends by providing relief to all who were in want of anything.²

c11.47

¹ The Jātakamālā, tr., J. S. Speyer, Sacred Books of the Buddhists, Vol. 1. See Max Müller's Preface and the Translator's Introduction.

c11.48

² Jātakamālā, Story II. Speyer's translation, pp. 8-14.

c11.49

³ Ibid., Story III, p. 20.

c11.50

¹ Ibid., Story VIII, p. 56. See also Story IX, pp. 71–92. In this story, Ārya Śūra refers to his hero mastering the essential contents of the Trayī or the three Vedas and metaphysics. Writing in Sanskrit, the author found it impossible to avoid Brahmanic phraseology.

c11.51

² Ibid., Story X, pp. 93–104. See also Story XIII for righteous rule. For the Bodhisattva as an ideal prince, Story XXXI, p. 292.

c11.52

In Buddhist as in Brahmanic literature, the monarchy is the predominant type of polity but in the Digha Nikāya.

Conditions of Success in Republics

c11.s1.1

Gautama Buddha is represented as laying down the conditions which would secure prosperity to the republican Vajjian clans. He gives a dose of conservatism to those who might be inclined to rush headlong into innovations. He insists that time-honoured customs and usages must be maintained. Nothing that is not already established should be enacted. Nothing that has been enacted should be abrogated. The elders must be honoured, esteemed, revered and supported. It must be a point of duty to hearken to their words. Justice and fairness must be followed. Women or girls should not be detained by force or abducted. The spiritual interests should not be neglected. The Arhantas or the Buddhist ascetics must be protected, defended and supported. The sacred temples (Chaityas) must be revered and supported. Turning to constitutional affairs, Buddha wants the republicans to hold full and frequent assemblies. They 1. "meet together in concord and rise in concord and carry out Vajjian business in concord." So long as these wholesome rules were observed, "so long may the Vajjians be expected not to decline but to prosper." ¹

c11.s1.2

¹ Digha Nikāya, Mahāparinibbāna Suttanta, translated in Rhys Davids, Dialogues of the Buddha, Part II, pp. 79—85. Buddha repeats the same precepts in the Anguttara Nikāya, VII, 19.

c11.s1.3

One of the notable figures in Buddhist literature is Aśvaghoṣa who composed in Sanskrit about the first century A.D. and who may be regarded as the fore-runner of Kālidāsa. Sprung from a Brāhmaṇa family, he was a master of Sanskrit learning. In his Saundara Nandam Kāvyam, Aśvaghoṣa tells us that some princes founded a city but discovered that if its affairs were to prosper they must have a king. The earth without a supremo lord is like the firmament without the moon. So the princes raised to sovereignty one of themselves who was senior to the rest in age, 'discipline,' and accomplishments. Here the kingship rests on the basis of consent and is purely secular in origin, thanks to Buddhist influence. The sceptre is always to be wielded for the sake of virtue, not for the sake of selfish gratification. The king should be the guide and teacher of his subjects.²

c11.s1.4

² Saundara Nandam Kāvyam by Aśvaghoṣa, edited by MM. Hara Prasad Shastri, Bibliotheca Indica, New Series, No. 1251. Calcutta, 1910. See Canto I, pp. 7-8; Canto II, p. 9. For Aśvaghoṣa see below Ch. X. Tārānātha says that the author Matriceta was the same as Aśvaghoṣa.

c11.s1.5

In the Buddha Charita or Life of Buddha which enjoyed tremendous vogue all over the Buddhist world, Aśvaghoṣa paints Śuddhodana as the mighty and glorious leader of his people. "He illumined his people on every side, showing them the paths which they were to follow."³ He had numberless councillors.⁴ Śuddhodana was not really a king but the chief of a republican clan. But by the time of Aśvaghoṣa republics were a thing of the past and the clansmen were taken to be counsellors. Aśvaghoṣa wants that princes should receive a thorough education.¹ The king takes one-sixth of the produce as price of the protection he affords. Śuddhodhan was gentle and kind to all. Guilty persons were reformed with gentle words.²

c11.s1.6

³ Aśvaghoṣa, Buddha Charita, I, 12.

c11.s1.7

⁴ Ibid., I, 14.

c11.s1.8

¹ Ibid., II, 24.

c11.s1.9

² Ibid., II, 42, 44.

c11.s1.10

In another remarkable work called Sūtrālaṅkāra (known only through Chinese translations), a collection of pious legends after the Jātaka and Avadāna pattern, Aśvaghoṣa repeats similar ideas. In an interesting passage he wants an heir-apparent to study the following subjects:—

c11.s1.11

“The Veda, archery, medicine, sacrifices, astronomy, grammar, the origin of writing, the performance of sacrifices, eloquence, rhetoric, the art of love, interest, purity of families, the ten names, computation, chess, dice, the study of origins, music and song, the art of playing on the conch, dancing and laughter, the art of the prestidigitarian, education, the making of garlands of flowers, massage, the science of precious stones and valuable materials for clothing, silk, sealing, weaving, wax work, strategy, sewing, sculpture, painting, literature, arrangement of garlands, interpretation of dreams, interpretation of the flight of birds, horoscopes of boys and girls, the training of elephants, the art of playing on the tambourine, the rules of battle array, the domesticating of horses, the carrying of the lance, jumping, running, and fording a river.”

c11.s1.12

A still more interesting passage occurs in the Vajrasuchi, another of the numerous works of Aśvaghoṣa. Here caste is attacked on psychological ground. All human beings are “in respect of joy and sorrow, love, insight, manners and ways, death, fear and life all equal.”¹

c11.s1.13

¹ G. K. Nariman, op. cit., pp. 36–40, 200-201. Both I-tsing and Tārānātha speak of Aśvaghoṣa as a peerless poet.

c11.s1.14

Another famous Buddhist author, who, according to Tārānātha, was a king in Saurāṣṭra or modern Gujrāt, wrote a compendium called Śikṣāsamuchchaya, a commentary on his Kārikās. But he is content to repeat the ordinary precepts and is, on the whole, disappointing.

c11.s1.15

About the third century A.D. Āryadeva incidentally offered some political reflections in his Chatuhśatikā. The king is the servant of the people and the revenue represents his wages. Righteousness is supreme. If it is forsaken by a king, the world goes to ruin. In all public affairs, military or diplomatic, the rules of morality must be observed. Āryadeva did not believe in the doctrine of Reason of State.²

c11.s1.16

² Āryadeva, Chatuhśatikā, pp. 462–464, Ghoshal, Hindu Political Theories, pp. 209–212. Both Yuan Chwang and I-tsing mention Āryadeva as a great and ancient teacher of Mahāyāna.

c11.s1.17

The Lalitavistara, one of the most sacred of Mahāyāna texts, a work in Sanskrit prose and mixed Sanskrit verse, which has had many Chinese, Tibetan, and Burmese versions, gives the life of Buddha and frequently refers to royal affairs. but it is content, to repeat, in a fragmentary way, the political wisdom of its predecessors.³

c11.s1.18

³ The Lalitavistara, ed. Rajendra Lal Mitra, 1877, and Lefmann, 1902, is placed by Buddhist tradition at the period of the first Council but it is clearly a very late work.

c11.s1.19

Both the Jātakas and Dhammapada formed the subject of huge commentaries which have been ascribed to Buddhaghoṣa, The Commentaries on the Jātakas and the Dhammapada. the great Buddhist writer who flourished about the fifth century A.D. But their language and style are so entirely different from the undoubted productions of Buddhaghoṣa that the traditional authorship cannot be accepted.¹ But it has not yet been possible to discover their real authors. The two commentaries breathe the same tone; in fact, the Dhammapada commentary is dependent on that of the Jātakas. The former is probably later than the fifth or sixth century A.D. The Dhammapada Aṭṭha-kathā, as it is called, illustrates the Buddha's dialogues by 299 stories.² The Buddhists who specialised in the art of imparting moral instruction through tales, ransack all walks and situations of life to inculcate ethical doctrines. In the Aṭṭha-kathā, as in the Jātakas, kings and ministers flit across the stage. The worthlessness of regal splendour is only too often brought out but there are numberless exhortations to righteous rule, impartial justice, mercy to the distressed, protection of all. Here, as elsewhere, the ideal of a universal empire is tacitly accepted and approved.

c11.s1.20

¹ See Rhys Davids, Buddhist Birth Stories, pp. LXII-LXVI. Winternitz, History of Buddhist Literature, 152-154. Burlingame Buddhist Legends, Introduction, pp. 59-60.

c11.s1.21

² The Stories have been translated by E. W. Burlingame, in the Buddhist Legends, Harvard Oriental Series, Vols. 28-30.

Jaina Political Theory

c11.s2.1

In point of extent, Buddhist political literature is surpassed by the Jaina. The method and tenets of the science of government evolved by Brāhmaṇas in the long course of centuries were adopted by the Jainas. In its origin Jainism was contemporaneous with Buddhism or older than it. It spread to every corner of India and was professed by kings of many dynasties in the south and rest of the country. It produced a Sanskrit and Pāli-literature which, in its vastness and variety, challenges comparison with Brāhmaṇic and Buddhist lore. According to the universal tradition, Jaina Siddhānta or doctrine was reduced to writing only in the fifth century A.D. at the council of Valabhi which was presided over by Devarddhi Gaṇin, but the theological and philosophical works certainly go back to older times. Those which contain political reflections belong to the age which saw the rise of Hindu Smṛitis and Purāṇas. In the hands of Jaina authors the current theories of the origin and character of government receive a fresh turn or elaboration which merits attention. One of the finest presentations of Jaina theory occurs in the Ādi Purāṇa which was composed by Jinasenācārya and, after his death, continued by Guṇabhadrācārya, in or about the eighth century A.D.¹

c11.s2.2

¹ The text of the Ādi Purāṇa has been published with a Hindī translation by Lala Ram Jaina. Syādvāda Granthamālā Series, No. 4. For Jinasena, see the Ādi Purāṇa, Prasāvanā, 55-58, Uttarā Purāṇa, Praśasti, particularly, 11-12. The account of his life in the Hindī poem Jñānaprabodha, 9-17, is unreliable. See also Bakhat Rama's Buddhivilāsa. Jinasena lived from about 758 A.D. to about 848 A.D. Both he and Guṇabhadra spent most of their time in Mahārāṣṭra and Karṇāṭaka. The Harivaṃśa Purāṇa was composed at the same time by another Jinasena who is often confused with his more famous contemporary. The Vardhamāna Purāṇa and Jiṇendraguṇastuti which the author of the Ādi Purāṇa is believed to have written have not yet been recovered.

c11.s2.3.1

The fall of man or rather the fall of the times from pristine purity, virtue and happiness had for long been the accepted belief of Hindus. The decline had been gradual and extended over millions of centuries. The Jainas refine the idea and join to it their theories of the origin of society and government. They believe in a two-fold cycle each consisting of six ages, (1) Sukhama-Sukhama or Happy-Happy, (2) Sukhama or Happy, (3) Sukhama-Dukhama or Happy-Miserable, (4) Dukhama-Sukhama or Miserable-Happy, (5) Dukhama or Miserable and (6) Dukhama-Dukhama or Miserable-Miserable. The cycles succeed each other in the inverse order of ages so that the last age of the first, the period of intense misery, is the same in character as the first age of the second cycle. The ages vary in duration so as to allow longer spans to periods of happiness. The number of years in a whole cycle is too long to be expressed in any mathematical terms. In the first period men and women enjoyed a span of existence which baffles calculation. They had bodies of which the height is to be measured by thousands of yards. Their complexion was that of shining gold. Their countenance was as beautiful as their virtue was perfect. In that blissful state there was no question of earning a livelihood. There were numbers of Kalpa-trees which, besides being radiant sources of light, bestowed food, flowers, clothes, ornaments, musical instruments, houses, etc., on every one at the merest prompting of his heart.

c11.s2.3.2

All these blessings diminished a little in the second age and to a marked degree in the third which witnessed some profound changes in the universe. It was in this age that the sun and the moon were first seen in the heavens. At their sight, people were surprised and alarmed. They betook themselves to Pratiśruti, the only person who enjoyed a pre-eminence in that society of perfect equality. He was the first Kulakara or patriarchal lord. He explained that the light of the Kalpa-trees was fading away and the planets had therefore become visible. There was no cause for fright. The people felt reassured, profusely thanked and praised the patriarch and, in obedience to his suggestion, returned home. But as years rolled on in their countless myriads, other profound and alarming changes came into view. The stars became visible in the firmament and mountains and rivers appeared on earth. Animals which had so far been perfectly harmless now became ferocious. The innocent folk were seized with alarm but, fortunately, there appeared a series of patriarchs to teach them how to adapt themselves to the changing environment. They told them how to protect themselves from brutes, how to tame and break elephants, horses and other animals, how to climb mountains and how to make canoes for crossing the rivers. Meanwhile, the Kalpa-trees were steadily diminishing in number. The people quarrelled with ever-increasing ferocity over the remainder.

c11.s2.3.3

The fifth lord, Simantaka, marked the trees and fixed their bounds. The sixth, Simandhara, demarcated them yet more clearly. During the age of the eleventh lord, Nâbhi, the Kalpa-trees disappeared altogether. Cloud and rains came for the first time and the earth began to shoot forth ordinary trees and herbs, flowers and fruits. The people approached Nâbhi and inquired what they were like, whether beneficial or injurious. The patriarch gave them a long lecture and demonstration. He taught them how to use and cook the products of the earth and also warned them against the poisonous plants. Now the whole life of man was transformed. Ṛiṣabhadeva, the last of the patriarchs, established six occupations, martial, agricultural, literary, artistic, commercial and industrial. He instituted three castes, Kṣatriyas, Vaiśyas and Śûdras, combining in each group men who were best fitted to fulfil its purpose. He divided Śûdras into two sections, (1) washermen, barbers, etc., and (2) the rest. The latter were further subdivided into touchables and untouchables. He planned and built villages and towns, grouping the former into circles of eight hundred, four hundred and two hundred. He divided the earth among four great kings and placed a thousand smaller monarchs under each of them. He also founded the institutions of punishment and imprisonment.

c11.s2.3.4

So far, chastisement had taken the form only of mild rebukes but something harsher was now necessary.¹ The transformation of the Bhogabhûmi or sphere of enjoyment into Karmabhûmi or the sphere of action was now complete. Coercive authority was essential to the preservation of man. Nothing else could restrain the wicked from wicked ways. But for coercion the world would present a condition of the Mâtsyanyâya, the Logic of the Fish.² Briefly, such is the account of the origin of society which occurs in the Ādi Purâṇa and other Jaina works. It is an adaptation of a current belief which appears in some of the Purâṇas. In the light of the rest of Hindu political theory, its most striking feature is the elimination of the divine creation of institutions. Jainism does not believe in a Creator; it is atheism though it declares that the ordinary soul can evolve into what it calls the godhead. Jaina theory, accordingly, relates the growth of institutions to changes in the environment. It does not regard economic or political institutions as essential to pure happiness. In fact its golden age is free from the whole paraphernalia of what is called civilisation. In those aeons of perfect happiness, human nature is painted as simple and innocent. That is what explains the imperative necessity of guidance. It fell to the patriarchal lords to initiate men into economic and political life. Here is an indication of the function of government.

c11.s2.3.5

Its mission is educational in the widest sense of the term. It is to lead the whole people in all that concerns them. In the Ādi Purâṇa Ṛiṣabha leads the folk to virtue.³ The government is more than protective and paternal. In the

c11.s2.4

¹ Ibid., Parva III, XVI, 130--190, 241--245, 255--57.

c11.s2.5

² Ibid., XVI, 250--252.

c11.s2.6

³ Ibid., XVI, 271--275.

The Jaina Theory of Caste

c11.s2.t1.1

Jaina account. government is not instituted by any definite contract. Pre-eminence on one side and need of guidance on the other establish a certain relationship. In course of time, as necessity demands, this informal relationship is converted into one of rulers and ruled. To complete the Jaina theory of caste, it is to be added that after Ṛiṣabhadeva, the last of the Kulakaras and first of the Tirthakaras, his son Bharata assumed the lordship of the world. He selected a number of persons from the three castes, grouped them into a fourth caste and called it Brāhmaṇa. Thus, all the castes were created by the early lords to meet the exigencies of life. Jainism could not attribute divine creation to them, but the Ādi Purāṇa makes a rather clumsy attempt to approximate its account to the orthodox Hindu version of the Puruṣasūkta of the Ṛigveda. There the castes had sprung from the different members of the body of the primeval Puruṣa. The Ādi Purāṇa declares that Ṛiṣabhadeva instituted the order of Kṣatriyas with weapons in his hands. Indicating the ways of travel, that is, of commerce, with his thighs, he brought the Vaiśyas into being. With his feet he created Śūdras. In his turn, Bharata, teaching the Śāstras with his mouth, created Brāhmaṇas.¹ It must be remembered that, according to Jaina theory, all these castes, including Brāhmaṇas, professed Jainism. It was much later that they fell into "falsehood." Bharata himself had had some ominous dreams, which were interpreted by his father Ṛiṣabha to mean that his order of Brāhmaṇas would, in the fourth age, renounce Jainism and formulate a cult sanctioning the slaughter of animals and various superstitions. The Ādi Purāṇa is at pains to demolish the privileges of ordinary Brāhmaṇas—those who did not follow Jainism. It declares that mere birth confers no superiority; as for merits, these Akṣaramlechchhas or barbarians who knew only words without their sense were devoid of all virtue. It was absurd to respect them or to exempt them from taxes. They should be treated and taxed like others.¹ Jaina kings should not accept any blessings from them or from any other non-Jainas.² The Purāṇa provides debating arguments to Brāhmaṇas instituted by Bharata whom the other Brāhmaṇas might taunt with lack of true Brāhmaṇahood. If they were told that their family was still the same as before, they should reply that Jinendradeva had produced them from his womb of knowledge and that they had sprung from the mouth of Brahma Bhagwāna. True, the descendants of Brahman were to be called Brāhmaṇas but the real Brahman was the Jaina lord. They had attained to respect through religious meditation and practices and could not be regarded as outcasts. While demolishing the claims of ordinary Brāhmaṇas, the Ādi Purāṇa invests the Jain Brāhmaṇas with all the traditional privileges of the former, the right to receive gifts, exemption from taxes and certain punishments. In spite of its protestant note, Jaina theory is assimilated to the Brahmanic tradition and falls into line with current beliefs.³ On governmental institutions, the Ādi Purāṇa has nothing original to contribute. Here, as elsewhere, the king must embody all virtues and unremittingly give his time, attention and energy to the ‘protection’ of people. The revenue

c11.s2.t1.2

¹ Ibid., XVI, 241–245, 246.

c11.s2.t1.3

¹ Ibid., XLI, 45—55; XLII, 181—192.

c11.s2.t1.4

² Ibid., XLIII, 17—30.

c11.s2.t1.5

³ Ibid., IXL, 108—113, 114—124, 127—142; XL, 192-193; IXL, 20—22, 13-14, 154—7, 137, 127—9; XL, 40, 139, 67, 63, 192.

c11.s2.t1.6

In its controversial zeal, the Ādi Purāṇa contradicts itself and implies that when Bharata instituted his order of Brāhmaṇas, there were ordinary Brāhmaṇas in existence. Elsewhere it declares that the first Brāhmaṇas were Jainas, could be realised like the milkman milking the cows without causing hardship to the people. Jainism declares Ahimsā or non-violence to be the essence of religion but Jaina political theory idealises universal conquest.¹

c11.s2.t1.7

¹ Ibid., IV, 106-198: XVI, 254: XXV-XXVI.

c11.s2.t1.8

The Uttara Purāṇa, as the composition of Guṇabhadrācārya is called, gives biographical sketches of the twenty-three Tirthakaras who followed Ṛiṣabha at long intervals of time and of Rāma, Kṛiṣṇa, Śreṇika, Jīvandhara and numerous other Jaina heroes. Besides suzerain princes, hundreds of feudatories appear in its pages. It inculcates profuse patronage of learning by the government but its political ideas are few and old.² Another work, Harivaṁśa Purāṇa, ascribes the foundation of all institutions to Ṛiṣabha. The Padma Purāṇa adds nothing new. In the 12th century Hemachandra reiterated the theory of Jinasena in his Laghu Arhannīti. He deals with the duties and qualifications of the king and ministers, the policy they ought to pursue, the judicial system they ought to establish, and so on. The Laghu Arhannīti draws freely upon its Brahmanical predecessors. The Jaina Rāmāyaṇa by Hemachandrācārya gives a long Jaina version of Rāma's story but does not modify the political ideas imbedded in Vālmīki.³ Nor is Mahāsenācārya's Pradyumna Charita more valuable. It merely reproduces the traditional ideas on government.⁴ In a work of the 12th century A.D., Lomaprabhâchârya’s Kumârapâla Prabodha, a king is gradually converted to Jainism and led into an ideal manner of life and government by Hemachandra. From what he does appears the author’s idea of what a government ought to do. The king interdicted meat-eating, animal slaughter, drinking, prostitution, plundering and other sins. He erected Jaina temples, monasteries and alms-houses. He spent a good deal of his time in religious exercises but still attended to the business of the state, heard appeals and passed judgment on them.¹ It is interesting that the Jainas have their Purâṇas which betray deep Brâhmaṇic influence. Some of them are modelled on the Ādi Purâṇa and echo its doctrines but few of them make any fresh contribution to political thought.

c11.s2.t1.9

² The Uttara Purāṇa forms part of Ādi Purāṇa and is published along with it by Lala Ram Jaina in the Syādvāda Granthamālā. For political reflections, see Ch. LXXV, 105-115, 214-220.

c11.s2.t1.10

³ The Jaina Rāmāyaṇa, by Hemachandrācārya, edited by Jagannath Shukla, Calcutta, Vikrama Era 1980. Laghu Arhannīti by Hemachandra (Ahmedabad). Harivaṁśa Purāṇa, Canto IX, 25-70.

c11.s2.t1.11

⁴ Pradyumna Charita by Mahāsenācārya, edited by Manohar Lal Shastri and Ram Prasad Shastri, in the Manik Chand Digambar Jain Granthamālā, No. 8, Bombay, Vikrama Era 1978.

c11.s2.t1.12

¹ Kumârapâla Prabodha by Lomaprabhâchârya, edited by Muniraj Jainavijaya, Gaekwad’s Oriental Series, No. XIV, Baroda, 1920. It was composed about 1195 A.D.

c11.s2.t1.13

Nor are the Jaina Sûtras of much use for the purpose. They are concerned far too much with eternity and salvation to trouble themselves with this ephemeral existence. Where they do touch on government, it is in a rather left-handed way. For instance, the ninth lecture in the Uttarâdhyâyana Sûtras² of the Śvetâmbara sect records a dialogue between Indra, the king of gods, disguised as a Brâhmaṇa and Nami who had just received enlightenment and renounced his family and dominion of Mithilâ. Indra’s remarks indicate what was expected of a Kṣatriya monarch. He should defend his town by erecting walls, gates and battlements, digging moats and constructing those warlike instruments which were called Śataghnīs. “Bring into suction all princes who do not acknowledge you." Internal tranquillity should be established by punishing thieves and robbers, cut-purses and burglars. The royal treasure, jewellery, wardrobe and conveyances should be multiplied. But Nami argues for the superior peace, strength and joy which attend a life of spirituality and renunciation. Indra himself ends by throwing off the disguise and showering praise on Nami.¹ To the student of governmental theory, the Sûtras as a whole are rather disappointing. There is, however, one Jaina work in Sûtra form which deserves detailed notice.

First 95 of 272 passages. Read on

Linked texts (37)