Theory of Government in Ancient India (Post-Vedic) c11.s5: The Functions of the State
Theory of Government in Ancient India (Post-Vedic) c11.s5
- Language
- English
The Functions of the State
c11.s5.1
It is clear that Śukra would assign extensive functions to the state. A theoretician, he never pauses to consider whether and how his precepts could be translated into practice; but he draws up a momentous catalogue of the duties which rightfully devolve on the government. The king, that is, the state must see that no deceit was practised in weights and measures; that the articles exposed for sale were not adulterated. Agriculture should be encouraged by planting useful plants in villages and trees in forests. The state must regulate gambling, drinking, hunting, and licenses for bearing arms. It must control the medical profession. It must supervise the drawing up of deeds indicating sales, gifts or loans. Not only the sale of intoxicants and poisons, but also that of gold, silver, jewels, immovable property, cows, elephants, horses, camels and buffaloes must be supervised by the state. The sale of men into slavery must engage the attention of the authorities. The arts and sciences must be actively encouraged. Royal officers themselves must be trained in them. Every year honours and rewards must be conferred on persons who had attained proficiency in them. Nor was the moral and religious life to be neglected. The king should erect temples to Viṣṇu, Śaṅkara, Gaṇeśa and other gods and instal suitable images therein. If the king is not a perfect guide, his subjects would fall into trouble as a boat without a pilot sinks into the sea. Every one must be kind and gentle towards his wife, children and disciples. Husbands and wives, sons and fathers, brothers, preceptors and pupils, masters and servants, should live in peace. The time-honoured social institutions must be maintained. Organised bands of ruffians should be exterminated one by one. Charity should absorb 1/4 of the total income of the state. An equal amount should be devoted to popular entertainment. None should insult or sneer at his parents, respectable seniors, or "men of learning and virtuous character." None should hinder the movements of the poor, the blind and the deformed. None should obstruct tanks, wells, parks, boundaries, temples or roads.¹
c11.s5.2
¹ Ibid., 40-41, 50-51, 160-165, 136-137, 150, 10-11, 166-7. On directions about temples and images, pp. 167-182.
c11.s5.3
Not the least of the functions of the state was the correct administration of justice, which occupies a large space in Śukraniti. Offences are of four kinds—those committed through the body, through speech, through the mind, through association. Each, again, may be two-fold—known or 'approved.' Each head is further divided into four categories—temporary, constant, habitual and natural. But the broadest division is merely threefold --first, second and third, each supposed to be worse than the foregoing. In the determination of punishment, personal character should be taken into account. Men fall into three classes—first, second and third. Punishment itself may be divided into three grades—good, middling and low.
c11.s5.4
Śukra admits a large variety of fines but he lays down that financial motives should never inspire judicial administration. Imprisonment with "ignoble works" for one, three or six months or for a year or for life is prescribed, but Śukra here seems to forbid capital punishment. The State has the right to expel murderers, cheats, atheists, adulterers, corrupt officers, sedition-mongers, prostitutes, or those who violated social conventions, sold their daughters or injured their kith and kin. These and other miscreants "should be bound and transported to islands or forts, and employed in the work of repairing roads and made to live on insufficient and bad diet." Those who forsook their parents or wives and turned vagabonds should be bound in chains and set to repair roads.¹ The administration of justice stands in the forefront of the duties of the State. The wicked must be punished. The people must be protected and their welfare must be actively promoted. Enemies must be destroyed. Their destruction means "the prevention of them from committing injuries." All cases must be decided according to Dharmaśāstras. The king's justice, however, must always respect local usage. Śukra expressly contemplates a case in which one would be punished for what would be no offence in another. But in no case is punishment to be arbitrary.
c11.s5.5
¹ Ibid., 134-135.
c11.s5.6
Trials should be held in public. The king should never try cases alone. He should sit with judges and Brāhmaṇas.
c11.s5.7
The Judicial System.
c11.s5.8
Judicial appointments should mostly go to Kṣatriyas, but may also be conferred on Brâhmaṇas or Vaiśyas, well qualified, but not on Śûdras. The principle of devolution and popular justice is recognised. "The cultivators, the artizans, the artists, the usurors, corporations, the dancers, the ascetics and thieves should decide their disputes according to the usage of their guild, etc." So, too, the principle of Jury had an ample scope. "The foresters are to be tried with the help of foresters, merchants by merchants, soldiers by soldiers," and in the village (affairs are to be administered) by persons who live with both parties (i.e., neighbours). But they are not to try cases of robbery or theft. The king should give no "decisive opinion in a dispute among Brâhmaṇas regarding the interpretation of a procedure of sacrificial ritual" (p. 184).
c11.s5.9
In the judicial hierarchy, as a whole, families or Kulas came first; next, Śreṇis or corporations, next Gaṇas or communities, next Royal Officers, next the Adhyakṣa or Chief Justice, and finally, the King who is "the dictator of what should be done and what not." The court should carefully acquaint itself with the customs and institutions of the locality. The judge should put questions to both sides. No statements should be extorted from anybody. Spies and secret agents played a conspicuous rôle in the detection of crime. Roughly, criminal cases and cases of sedition or insult to the king were taken up by the courts of their own accord. Civil cases had to be instituted by one of the parties. Warrants were issued for apprehending those against whom complaints were lodged. Failure to comply was severely punished. If the defendant, when produced in court, was found to have other engagements, he was allowed to go but reasonable security was taken for his appearance. The security must be honest, wealthy, renowned and reliable. He must guarantee for the accused.
c11.s5.10
Pleaders appeared before the courts. The lawyer's fee is 1/16 of the interests involved or, it might be 1/20, 1/40, 1/80, 1/160, etc., being smaller "in proportion as the amount of value or interest under trial increases." More than one pleader was sometimes appointed. In that case, "they are to be paid in some other way." If a pleader charged more than the appointed fee, or if he injured the interests of his client, he was to be punished. Pleaders must be versed in the law and dharma, though the test of proficiency is not given. But it will appear that pleaders were largely restricted to civil jurisdiction. At any rate we are told that there are to be no lawyers in cases of "murder, thieving, adultery, taking forbidden food, abduction, harshness, forgery, sedition, and robbery."
c11.s5.11
In criminal cases, such as those of violence, thieving, felonies, abuse, assault or kidnapping, all could be witnesses. In other cases, children, forgerers, relations, enemies, prejudiced persons or inferior caste people were not to be witnesses. Nor were women to be witnesses except where female interests were concerned. Witnesses must speak the truth on risk of severe penalty. No one should speak unless he is asked to. No forced or tutored evidence was admissible.
c11.s5.12
Śukra recognises the usual ordeals:—fire, poison, vessel water, virtue and vice, rice and oaths, each more weighty than the succeeding one. The ordeal was prescribed in cases of murder, sedition, adultery, incest, or 'mortal sins,' or where other evidence was lacking. Criminal law regarding thefts would require
c11.s5.13
| | | | | Rs. |
| (1) | Fire ordeal in suits of | ... | ... | 1,000 |
| (2) | Poison " " " | ... | ... | 750 |
c11.s5.14
| | | | | Rs. |
| (3) | Balance ordeal in suits of | ... | ... | 666 |
| (4) | Water , , , , | ... | ... | 500 |
| (5) | Virtue and Vice , | ... | ... | 250 |
| (6) | Rice , | ... | ... | 125 |
| (7) | Oaths , | ... | ... | 62 |
c11.s5.15
Such are the salient points in Śukra's judicial system. Śukra wants justice to be perfect and declares that a trial may be repeated once, twice or thrice.¹
c11.s5.16
¹ For the whole judicial system, Ibid., pp. 134-135, 183-209.
c11.s5.17
It is instructive to compare Śukra with Alberūnī's realistic account of India on the eve of the Muslim conquest. He notes that a Brāhmaṇa who murdered a person of another caste was bound, according to law, only to perform an expiation consisting of fasting, prayers and almsgiving. But if a Brāhmaṇa murdered a fellow-Brāhmaṇa, the law did not allow him to perform an expiation so that he might be punished to the full in future. Such may have been the law in theory but continues Alberūnī, what rulers actually did was to expel and confiscate the property of any Brāhmaṇa or Kṣatriya who committed any of the four greatest "mortal" crimes :—
(1) The Murder of a Brāhmaṇa.
(2) The Killing of a Cow.
(3) The Drinking of Wine.
(4) Whoredom especially with the wife of one's father or teacher.
c11.s5.18
A little later Alberūnī states that for heavy theft a Kṣatriya was mutilated) by amputation of the left hand and right foot or right hand and left foot); a Brāhmaṇa was similarly mutilated as well as blinded ; while members of other castes would be put to death. For ordinary theft punishments varied according to circumstances. "Sometimes a punishment of extreme or of middling severity is necessary, sometimes a course of correction and imposing a payment, sometimes only exposing to public shame and ridicule." (Alberūnī, India, tr. Sachau, Vol. II, 161-162.) It is remarkable that neither the general law as laid down by Smṛiti or Nīti writers nor the claims of privilege accord exactly with facts. In the case of one offence, at any rate, Kṣatriyas are better off than Brāhmaṇas. All the same, caste privilege is apparent in practice. Alberūnī devotes a chapter (LXX) on law suits.
c11.s5.19
Documentary evidence was preferred ; otherwise at least four witnesses must be forthcoming. There were several kinds of oaths and ordeals. The oath itself was a kind of ordeal. Then there were the ordeals by poison, water, idols, balance, gold and hot iron, each higher than the foregoing. In the ordeal by balance, a man, after the first weighing, calls upon spiritual beings to witness to his veracity, writes down what he speaks on a piece of paper and fastens the paper to his head. When placed in the scale again, he ought to weigh more than on the first occasion to prove his innocence. (Alberūnī, India, tr. Sachau, II, pp. 158—160). Here, in spite of minor difference, Alberūnī is in substantial agreement with Śukra.
c11.s5.20
To defray the expenses of the multitudinous activities, the state must possess a plentiful treasure. Every possible means should be employed to increase the revenue. Elsewhere, however, Śukra notes that new taxes are hateful to people. The state should also keep stores of "grains, minerals, medicinal plants, grasses, wood, implements, arms, weapons, gunpowder, vessels and cloths" to serve all possible civil and military contingencies.¹
c11.s5.21
¹ Śukranīti, 138, 140, 89.
c11.s5.22
Half the revenue should be deposited in the treasury. Of the rest, one-half, that is, one-fourth of the total income, should be devoted to the army. One-twelfth of the total revenue should cover the salaries of the village headmen. The remainder is to be divided equally, that is, in shares of one-twentieth of the total income, between charity, popular entertainment, officers' salary and the personal expenses of the monarch.²
c11.s5.23
² Ibid., 43-44.
c11.s5.24
It will be remembered that Śukra confuses feudatory states with administrative areas proper. Elsewhere too, he looks askance at "protected princes." They must be carefully watched. If they did not observe the law, they must be deposed. Under certain circumstances they may be pensioned off, the amount of the pensions being determined according to their character. Courts should be established in their territories.³
c11.s5.25
³ Ibid., 47-48, 52.
c11.s5.26
On foreign policy, Śukra has nothing new. As ever, the foreign affairs of a Hindu state were dominated by two salient facts. There were numerous states and they stood close to each other. A king should, therefore, strive to get as many allies as possible. He must never be harsh towards them. Nor should he play them off against one another. On the other hand, he should assiduously attempt to cultivate the goodwill of subjects oppressed by a hostile king. He must try to detach them from their allegiance to their sovereign. In foreign affairs, force and fraud are allowed. "One should wait guardedly like the cat and the fowler and by creating confidence extirpate the enemy whose soul has been ruined by vices." While discussing the subject of foreign policy, Śukra lays down a maxim for domestic administration. "Subjects should be so governed that they can be neither too powerless nor too powerful."¹
c11.s5.27
¹ Ibid., 261, 130. For Śukra's military organisation, pp. 78 et. seq. and Ch. IV, Sec. VII. On Forts, Ch. IV, Sec. VI.
c11.s5.28
The only other Niti writer to whom reference need be made bears the name of Vaiśampāyana. His Nitiprakāśikā is interesting but contains little that is new.² Several Purāṇas contain passages which read like excerpts from Nitiśāstras.³ A good deal of Niti instruction is embodied in small poetic pieces and yet more abundantly in story books after the Buddhist fashion, but these compositions properly belong to the class of general literature and should be reviewed along with it.
c11.s5.29
² Vaiśampāyana, Nitiprakāśikā, ed. Gustav Oppert, 1882.
c11.s5.30
³ Cf. Garuḍa Purāṇa, Chs. 111—118.
c11.s5.31
During the Middle Ages many Niti works were composed closely following the lines traced out in the ancient age. Nor has the stream altogether dried up in modern days. For instance, a board of ten Paṇḍitas at the court of the Sikh Mahārāja Ranjit Siṃha at Lahore in the first half of
Linked texts (2)
- Garuḍapurāṇa — Vyāsa, Sanskrit
- Nītiprakāśikā — Vaiśampāyana, Sanskrit