Theory of Government in Ancient India (Post-Vedic) c4.23

c4.23

learning and priestly functions received many privileges, but it was never contemplated to establish an ecclesiastical organisation like the Roman Catholic Church or the English Church. Society itself included, as part and parcel of its being, what were called Church and State in Europe. The conflict between the secular and religious powers which raged in medieval Europe and gave rise to a good deal of political theory, had no counterpart in ancient India. The problem of the relations of Church and State, which is still a topic of European political thought, does not arise in Sanskrit literature. It is the relations of the government with the social order and life as a whole which call for comment and guidance. From the very nature of the social theory, government could not be regarded as Sovereign in the Austinian sense of the term. It did not impart validity to the Order; rather, it shared in its validity. It could not alter it at will; other parts of it were as valid as itself. It sustained the social order but that was merely its function. It embodied the coercive power of the community and was bound to use it in the social interest just as the priest or trader was bound to use his spiritual or economic power in the social interest. Sovereignty was really diffused throughout the community and was embodied in the Law which had its ultimate source in the Divine Will. On the part of the individual there can be no unified allegiance, no single loyalty, except to society as a whole. No component part, not even government, can claim to be absolutely sovereign. Here the monistic theory of sovereignty as applied to the state or government, fails completely; only a pluralistic theory can grasp the Indian phenomena. The state was only one of the groups to which the individual belonged, or rather, the state was merged in the social order as a whole. It is only the principles which lay at the root of the social and moral order that are omnipotent. They are summed up as Dharma, Law, Virtue, or Duty. The law, conceived in this wide sense, is above all individuals or groups. It limits the power of the government; it regulates its exercise. It is above man; it is divine. With the government rests the ultimate power of adjusting social relations but the adjustment must proceed according to Dharma. Such are the principles in the light of which the Indian theory of government has to be examined. Every survey of political ideas ought to be conducted in the light of contemporary institutions. But the student of Hindu theory can observe the rule only in a very imperfect manner. It is rarely possible to be sure of the exact dates of the writers or to visualise the practical working of institutions at a given epoch. All that is possible is to keep in view the general features of the administration.