The State in Ancient India: A Study in the Structure and Practical Working of Political Institutions in North India in Ancient Times c9.s2.t1: The character of the Epic
The State in Ancient India: A Study in the Structure and Practical Working of Political Institutions in North India in Ancient Times c9.s2.t1
- Language
- English
Contents
- c9.s2.t1.42 — 4 parts
The character of the Epic
c9.s2.t1.1
of the whole of India, but it is unsafe to draw any conclusions about the rest of the country from material of such doubtful dates.¹
c9.s2.t1.2
¹ On an analysis Pargiter (J.R.A.S., 1908, pp. 334 et seq.) concludes that "the division of the contending parties may be broadly said to be south Madhyadeśa and Pañcâla against the rest of India." See also C. V. Vaidya, Epic India. For some calculations of the date of the Mahâbhârata events, rather wide of the mark, see V. Gopal Aiyar, Chronology of Ancient India; J. F. Hewitt, History and Chronology of the Myth-making Age; C. V. Vaidya, Epic India, the Mahâbhârata, a Criticism. See also D. Von Hinloopen Labberton, J.R.A.S., 1913, pp. 1 et seq.
c9.s2.t1.3
Unlike the Brâhmaṇas and Sûtras, the Epic pulsates with life and throughout displays freedom and independence. But from the circumstances of its composition, it cannot be held to represent the customs and opinions of any single generation. Since it is impossible to fix the chronological limits of its various sections, it can only be regarded as indicating that certain practices prevailed on the banks of the Jumnâ and the upper Ganges sometime before the Christian era. The Râjadharmânuśâsana chapters of the epic are invaluable as presenting a synthetic view of Hindu political thought but they seem to stray far from practice. Their precepts are honoured more in the breach than in the observance in the story of the Epic.
c9.s2.t1.4
Throughout the Mahâbhârata the social order is based on caste and a complete theory of it occurs in the Śânti Parvan² There is, however, an arresting statement in the Vana Parvan where Yudhiṣṭhira remarks that the intermixture of races had been very great indeed, that castes had been hopelessly mixed up and that, therefore, conduct was the chief thing that mattered.¹ Mésalliances were not uncommon in aristocratic circles and were not looked down. Vidura, born of a slave-girl, plays a part more honourable than that of his half-brothers, Dhṛtarāṣṭra and Pāṇḍu. He is married, through the instrumentality of Bhīṣma, to a daughter of King Devaka by a Śūdra wife.² Non-Kṣatriya kingship was not altogether unknown. The Sabhā Parvan speaks of Śūdra kings on the western coast.³ Beyond the pale of caste lay some border peoples and foreigners like the Yavanas, Kirātas, Cīnas and Barbaras, who, according to the theory of the Śānti Parvan, were entitled to perform certain Vedic rites and make presents to Brāhmaṇas.⁴ The claims to Brāhmanic supremacy are set forth in the Śānti Parvan in the most uncompromising fashion. In so many words the Brāhmaṇas are declared independent of the state.⁵ But in the epic as a whole it is the Kṣatriyas who are most prominent, whose will prevails and who are undoubtedly supreme. In the Śānti Parvan Kṣatriyas are exhorted by heaven and hell to work in constant co-operation and harmony with Brāhmaṇas.⁶ We are assured that on the Purohita depends the growth and preservation of the king himself.⁷ That every king had a Purohita is perfectly clear from the epic. There are also instances of Ṛiṣis like Nārada being worshipped by powerful rulers like the Pāṇḍus.⁹ But in the tale as a whole, the priests hardly exercise any influence on the course of events.
c9.s2.t1.5
² See particularly Śânti Parvan, LVI, 28-29; LX, 7-16, 20-36; LXII, 4; LXIII, 1-5; LXV, 8-10; LXXII, 4-8; CLXXXVIII, 1-14 COXCVII, 3-4.
c9.s2.t1.6
Ādi Parvan, CXIV. Sabhā Parvan, LI. Śānti Parvan, LXV, 17-18. Ibid., LXXII, 10-17; LXXIII, 29-32. Cf. Vana Parvan, CXXXIII. Also Śānti Parvan, XXXIII, 2-9; XXXIV, 1-4, 6-8; 22-27; XXXV, 1; LXXV, 10-12; LXXVI, 3-13; LXXVII, 2-7; LXXXIII, 3-6. Śānti Parvan, LVI, 24-25; LXXIII, 8-13; LXXIV, 13-15, 17 LXXVII, 10-17; LXXXIII, 29. Ibid., LXXIV, 1-2. Also Ādi Parvan, CLXXII.
c9.s2.t1.7
They are simply ignored when momentous decisions are taken.¹ In the Mahâbhârata, the position of Śûdras is better than the Brahmanical legal texts would lead one to expect. The Śânti Parvan awards three of the chief offices of government to Śûdras.² In the Sabhâ Parvan there are respectable Śûdras who are invited to the royal consecration.³
c9.s2.t1.8
¹ See, for instance, Âdi Parvan, CII; Udyoga Parvan, I.
c9.s2.t1.9
² Śânti Parvan, LXXV, 6-10.
c9.s2.t1.10
³ Sabhâ Parvan, XXIII, 41-42. See the Âdi Parvan, LXIV, for the legend that when Paraśu Râma thrice bereft the earth of Kṣatriya men, the Kṣatriya race was continued by the union of Kṣatriya women with Brâhmaṇas. See the Âdi Parvan, CXXXIV, for Brâhmaṇas teaching the profession of arms to Kṣatriyas.
c9.s2.t1.11
The political horizon of the Mahâbhârata is far wider than that of any works noticed so far. It is in the epics that we first meet with a term—Bhârata or Bhâratavarṣa—which denoted the whole of India. The ideal of universal dominion is there. But in the composition of the state, feudal elements are present in a far greater measure and far more clearly than in the preceding epochs. There were many states, very small in size. It is significant that on a notable occasion Yudhiṣṭhira is ready to make peace if he be given just five villages to form a realm for himself. But every kingdom of any considerable size seems to have included a number of feudatories. The latter were called Râjan and, in contradistinction to them, the suzerain sometimes called himself Samrâṭ. A significant passage in the Sabhâ Parvan has it that there were Râjans in every house but they had not attained to the rank of Samrâṭ, which title was difficult to obtain.⁴ It appears that Râjans themselves sometimes came forward for some reason or other to select an overlord. The Sabhâ Parvan has it that Râjans selected Jarâsandha to be their head because he was the most powerful of all. Several feudatories became his officers.¹ There was another manner in which the relationship of suzerain and vassal could arise. A monarch could instal a favourite as "king" of some region, have him duly consecrated and thus formally admit him into the charmed circle. It was understood that such a new "king" must be a person of the blood royal, a hero or a high military commander. To overcome Arjuna's reluctance to meet Karṇa in a tournament, Duryodhana creates the latter "king" of Aṅga. "At that very moment," we are told, "seated on a golden seat, with fried paddy and flowers and water-pots . . . . . the mighty Karṇa was installed king by Brāhmaṇas versed in mantras. And the royal umbrella was held over his head, while camaras waved around that hero of graceful mien."² But when the untoward accident of his father's entrance revealed the 'fact' of Karṇa's descent from a Sūta, Bhīma exclaimed, "O thou, son of a charioteer! Thou dost not deserve death in fight at the hands of Pārtha (Arjuna).. And, O worst of mortals, thou art not worthy to sway the kingdom of Aṅga, even as a dog does not deserve the butter placed before the sacrificial fire." Duryodhana, however reproved Bhīma and said, ". . . Might is the cardinal Virtue of a Kṣatriya, and even a Kṣatriya of inferior birth deserves to be fought with. The lineage of heroes, like the sources of lordly rivers, is ever unknown . . . This prince among men deserves the sovereignty of the world, not of Aṅga only, in consequence of the might of his arm and my disposition to obey him in everything." There arose a confused murmur approving of Duryodhana's speech.³
c9.s2.t1.12
⁴ Sabhâ Parvan, XV, 2.
c9.s2.t1.13
¹ Ibid., XIV.
c9.s2.t1.14
² Ādi Parvan, CXXXVIII.
c9.s2.t1.15
³ Ibid., CXXXIX.
c9.s2.t1.16
A third factor which promotes the feudal tendency in the Mahābhārata is the usual bid for supremacy symbolised by the Digvijaya. The Digvijayas or "conquests of the quarters," carried out by Duryodhana and Yudhiṣṭhira do not result in any annexations. It was enough that their suzerainty was acknowledged by those whose dominions they or their lieutenants chose to enter. Again, on Pāṇḍu's Digvijaya, "the kings of the earth with joined hands waited on him with presents of various kinds of gems and wealth, precious stones and pearls and corals, and much gold and silver and first-class kine and handsome horses," etc., etc. Pāṇḍu accepted all the presents and retraced his steps towards his capital.¹ Thanks to these factors, a sort of feudalism seems to have become the order of the day. The Sabhā Parvan brings on the stage a whole crowd of feudatories in whose presence Kṛṣṇa slays his perverse relative, Śiśupāla.² In the same Parvan, again many Rājans are seen bringing excellent jars for water for the bath of Yudhiṣṭhira after the great sacrifice.³ In a private conflict Karṇa and Duryodhana attack and slay many Rājans.⁴ In the many Svayamvaras in the Epic, the number of "kings" is legion.⁵ In the Aśvamedha Parvan, a prince salutes all his seniors of the Kuru race and the other 'kings' present.⁶
c9.s2.t1.17
¹ Ādi Parvan, CXII.
c9.s2.t1.18
² Sabhā Parvan, XLV.
c9.s2.t1.19
³ Ibid., LIII.
c9.s2.t1.20
⁴ Śānti Parvan, IV.
c9.s2.t1.21
⁵ For instance, the svayamvara of Draupadī, Ādi Parvan, CLXXXVII; the svayamvara of Damayantī, Vana Parvan LV—LVII; again, Ibid., LXX-LXXI.
c9.s2.t1.22
⁶ Aśvamedha Parvan, LXXXVII, 27.
c9.s2.t1.23
As a rule, the feudatories enjoyed autonomy in their internal affairs. But certain passages in the Mahābhārata indicate that sometimes they chafed under the yoke, real or nominal. Not unoften were their relations with the suzerain characterised by distrust and jealousy.⁷
c9.s2.t1.24
⁷ Śānti Parvan, LXX, 30-31.
c9.s2.t1.25
Relations of the suzerain with the feudatories.
c9.s2.t1.26
Sabhâ Parvan Nârada suggests to Yudhiṣṭhira that conquest should be followed by earnest attempts at conciliation.¹ In the Aśvamedha Parvan a king depletes his treasury and then the feudatory princes swarm round him and cause him serious trouble.² On the other hand, it was sometimes felt that the suzerain power could not be all-sufficing and must allow feudatories to subsist. In the Āśramavāsi Parvan, Dhritarāṣṭra says that a powerful king should never seek to exterminate weak kings, for these do good to the world by cherishing the good and punishing the wicked.³
c9.s2.t1.27
¹ Sabhâ Parvan, V.
c9.s2.t1.28
² Aśvamedha Parvan, V, 12.
c9.s2.t1.29
³ Āśramavāsi Parvan, VI, 16.
c9.s2.t1.30
Round every suzerain and every feudatory chief there is an aristocracy of warriors. Strife is the law of their being throughout the Mahābhārata. They evince the highest loyalty to their chief and are always ready to lay down their lives for him. "Sweet it is to die in battle, the path to heaven lies in fighting."⁴ The Vana Parvan has it that glory is preferable to life and that a hero's real life is the life of his fame.⁵ That was the Kṣatriya way to be observed by royal and other aristocratic families. At the tragic conclusion of the domestic war, the blind, old Dhritarāṣṭra says that he does not grieve for his hundred slaughtered sons. "They have all died in the observance of Kṣatriya duties."⁶ To Yudhiṣṭhira who, with his brothers, was responsible for the extermination of the old man's progeny, he had already remarked once, "Rise up . . . Do thou now attend to thy duties . . . Thou hast conquered this earth according to the usage of the Kṣatriyas."⁷ Instances of such expressions and deeds can be multiplied almost without number.
c9.s2.t1.31
⁴ Karṇa Parvan, CIV.
c9.s2.t1.32
⁵ Vana Parvan, CCCIII, 20, 31.
c9.s2.t1.33
⁶ (Āśramavāsi) Parvan, III, 2 8.
c9.s2.t1.34
⁷ Aśvamedha Parvan, I, 7.
c9.s2.t1.35
It was under such circumstances that government was carried on during the period of which the traditions are reflected in the Mahâbhârata. The administration was presided over by the king who was expected personally to propel the machine. According to the theory of the epic, he was to be the embodiment of all virtues, all beneficence and heroism.¹ But the main story as well as the secondary episodes of the Epic show the average king falling far short of the ideal. The monarchs are addicted too much to gambling and hunting; often they are ferocious, at times licentious. In the Sabhâ Parvan there is a debate on gambling which at last is approved.² The Kuru princes use fraud; Yudhiṣṭhira loses his all, including his wife who is wantonly insulted by the winners; Bhīma vows to drink the blood of Duryodhana—a vow which, later, he fulfils to his satisfaction.³ In the Droṇa-Parvan Duryodhana wants Yudhiṣṭhira to be captured alive so as to entice him to dice and then exile and ruin him once again.⁴ Under the fascination of dice, Nala completely neglects the affairs of state. The people of the city and the officers came to the palace "unable to bear the calamity that had befallen their king conversant with virtue and welfare.” But not even at his queen Damayantī’s request would the king see them. “Those councillors of state as also the citizens, afflicted with grief and shame, returned to their homes, saying, ‘He liveth not.’”¹ A little later, Damayantī herself called a council in the name of Nala. “When the subjects in a body had come a second time, the daughter of Bhīma informed Nala of it. But the king regarded her not.”² In the Epic the Pāṇḍus are sometimes spoken of masters of the Vedas and the rest of the sacred lore, but as one traces their career step by step, one meets with no regular intellectual training on their part. On the other hand, they receive a regular military training. Arjuna’s son Abhimanyu is a full-fledged warrior and is married at the age of sixteen.
c9.s2.t1.36
¹ For the ideal attributes and qualifications of the king, Śanti Parvan, LVII, 21-22, 30-36; LXIX, 3-4, LXXX, 2-113, CXX, 40-43. Sabhâ Parvan, V. For theories of the origin of kingship Vana Parvan, CLXXXIII, Śanti Parvan, CLXCII, 7-23; LIX, 87-89; LXVII, 17-32. On the supreme imperative necessity of government, Śanti Parvan LXVIII, 8-35; LXVII, 2-4, 12-16, LVII, 40; LXIV, 2, 21-30; LXXII, 29; LXXV, 13; LIX, 133-34. On the inherent divine prestige and vigour of the king, Śanti Parvan, LXXII, 25; LXVIII, 39-47, LXV, 29; LXVII, 4, 8-11; LXVIII, 39-41, 48-50, 32-35; XXXVIII, 110. For remarks on anxieties inseparable from royalty, Ibid., CLXXVI, 10-12.
c9.s2.t1.37
² Sabhâ Parvan, LVIII.
c9.s2.t1.38
³ Ibid., LXV et seq.
c9.s2.t1.39
⁴ Droṇa Parvan, XII.
c9.s2.t1.40
¹ Vana Parvan, LIX.
c9.s2.t1.41
² Ibid., LX.
c9.s2.t1.42.1
The succession to the throne was hereditary and normally went by the rule of primogeniture. But a grave physical defect was generally tantamount to a disqualification. We are once told in the Udyoga Parvan that the gods do not approve of a defective king.³ In the Epic a new king has generally to be accepted by the people. The Mahābhārata embellishes the Brihaddevatā legend in which Devāpi declines the throne on the score of his skin disease. Pratīpa had three sons, Devāpi, Bālhīka and Śaṃtanu. The eldest, a leper, loved by the whole family, is about to be installed, when “the priests, seniors, inhabitants of the city and the country forbid his consecration.” The king yields.⁴ The blind Dhritarāṣṭra is passed over in favour of his younger brother Pāṇḍu. On the other hand, some exceptional reason might induce people to discount any physical defect. Once in the Vana Parvan they insist on having a blind man as their king.¹ On the death of Pāṇḍu, the sceptre temporarily goes to Dhṛtarāṣṭra, but the question of regular succession comes to the fore when Yudhiṣṭhira, the eldest son of Pāṇḍu, reaches majority. The story of the epic favours the view that the crown belonged *de jure* to the family of Pāṇḍu. The first move to instal Duryodhana, the eldest son of Dhṛtarāṣṭra on the throne raised a wild popular uproar.
c9.s2.t1.42.2
Much earlier when Dhṛtarāṣṭra had first inquired if his newly-born son Duryodhana would be king, ‘Jackals and other animals began to howl ominously.’² The minor episodes of the epic also point to hereditary succession and popular acceptance of the king. In the Aśvamedha Parvan the people dethrone a king but immediately proceed to invest his son Suvarcā with the rights of sovereignty.³ In the myth of the early kings when the tyrant Veṇa is bereft of life by the Ṛiṣis, the sceptre is entrusted to his son Pṛthu.⁴ In extraordinary contingencies the people practically elect a King. Thus, in the Ādi Parvan all the people chose Kuru, son of Saṃvaraṇa to be their king, for, they said, “he is a virtuous man.”⁵ Again, Janamejaya, though a mere boy, is elected king by the united voice of the people of the city. He ruled with the help of his priests and ministers.⁶ The practice of installing a prince as heir-apparent and even king during the lifetime of his father is in evidence. Thus, in the Ādi Parvan, Nahuṣa instals his son when he has secured the consent of the people of the city and the country.⁷ It is clear that in spite of the recognition of hereditary succession and primogeniture, a king has to be formally accepted by the people. Protest and tumult follow if there is anything radically wrong with the king-designate. In the epic, indeed, people appear on the stage on all extraordinary occasions.
c9.s2.t1.42.3
When Dhṛtarāṣṭra proposes to pass over his nephew Yudhiṣṭhira, the rightful heir, in favour of his own son, the people raise a fearful outcry. They meet in assemblies, streets and courtyards and demand that Dhṛtarāṣṭra should be deposed, that Yudhiṣṭhira should not only be declared heir-apparent but forthwith installed as King. Dhṛtarāṣṭra, they declared, had long ago forfeited the right to the kingdom on account of his blindness. How could he now have a right to transmit it to his son¹ Towards the close of the story, when old Dhṛtarāṣṭra leaves for forest-life, he addresses the whole multitude and commends the people to the care of Yudhiṣṭhira who speaks in his turn.² When resolved on renunciation, Yudhiṣṭhira arranged that his grand-nephew Parīkṣit should be king in Hastināpur. He called his subjects together and informed them of his plans. They were disconcerted at the news and unanimously disapproved of the king's intention to abdicate. "This should never be done." But Yudhiṣṭhira succeeded in persuading them to accept his proposals.³ (The king was expected to be accessible to all, even to agriculturists.⁴) On the other hand, the Epic, in some of its episodes, assumes that the king could do what he liked with his kingdom.
c9.s2.t1.42.4
At the game of dice which constitutes one of the central events in the plot of the Epic, Yudhiṣṭhira pawns and loses his city, his country, his lands, “the wealth of all dwelling therein except of Brâhmaṇas and all those persons themselves except Brâhmaṇas, still remaining to me.”¹ Nala similarly loses his kingdom and his wealth to his brother Puṣkara who drives him away and proclaims throughout the city that any one showing any attention to Nala would be put to death. As a result none showed any regard to their erstwhile sovereign.²
c9.s2.t1.43
³ Udyoga Parvan, CXLIX.
c9.s2.t1.44
⁴ Ibid.
c9.s2.t1.45
¹ Vana Parvan, COXCIX.
c9.s2.t1.46
² Ādi Parvan, CXV.
c9.s2.t1.47
³ Aśvamedha Parvan, V, 9.
c9.s2.t1.48
⁴ Śānti Parvan, LIX, 87–89.
c9.s2.t1.49
⁵ Ādi Parvan, XCIV, 49.
c9.s2.t1.50
⁶ Ibid., XLIV, 6.
c9.s2.t1.51
⁷ Ibid., LXXXV.
c9.s2.t1.52
¹ Ibid., CXLI.
c9.s2.t1.53
² Āśramavāsi Parvan, IX. For moving scenes on this incident see section X.
c9.s2.t1.54
³ Mahāprasthānika Parvan, I.
c9.s2.t1.55
⁴ Sabhā Paran, V.
c9.s2.t1.56
¹ Sabhâ Parvan, LXV. ² Vana Parvan, LXI. ³ Sabhâ Parvan, XIII, 4, 26, 29. ⁴ Śanti Parvan, LIX, 106-107. ⁵ Sabhâ Parvan, XXII, 41-42.
c9.s2.t1.57
The consecration of kings in the Mahâbhârata is conducted, on the whole, according to the procedure laid down in the Brâhmaṇas and Sûtras but a few additional touches are given. The king-designate ‘worships’ his ministers.³ Elsewhere he promises that by thought, word and deed he would protect the earth and religion and that he would observe the precepts of Ethics, Law and Politics in his conduct.⁴ To the consecration of Yudhiṣṭhira, Brâhmaṇas, Kṣatriyas, Vaiśyas and respectable Śûdras are invited.⁵
c9.s2.t1.58
The subjects, headed by the priests, came to see him bringing with them diverse kinds of auspicious articles. They brought earth and gold, many kinds of gems, jars of gold, silver, copper and earth, full of water, flowers, fried paddy, kuśa grass, cow’s milk, śami, pippala and palâśa, sacrificial fuel, honey, clarified butter, etc. Seated on a throne of gold, surrounded by Kṛṣṇa, Dhṛtarâṣṭra, his brothers and others, Yudhiṣṭhira touched the beautiful white flowers, svastikas, vessels full of diverse articles, earth, gold, silver and gems. He and his wife Draupadî sat on the Sarvatobhadra seat, “covered with tiger-skin and blazing with effulgence.” They poured on him oblations of clarified butter with proper mantras. Kṛṣṇa and others then poured on him water from sanctified conches. Yudhiṣṭhira who had accepted the presents offered to him now gave many more in return. The priests blessed him with all their heart.¹ Similar but less elaborate accounts of consecrations appear elsewhere in the Mahābhārata.² A consecration was often followed by a Digvijaya. Yudhiṣṭhira sends out armies to make sure of his suzerainty over the surrounding regions. The Aśvamedha Parvan seems to indicate that a successful Digvijaya was followed by a fresh consecration, a grand royal sacrifice, attended by many ‘kings’ and marked by an exchange of costly presents and by lavish gifts to priests and others.³ At the time of his own consecration, a king would sometimes consecrate his son or brother as Yuvarāja. Yudhiṣṭhira appointed his brother Bhīma, next to him in age, to that office.⁴ Besides the Yauvarājyābhiṣeka which is met with throughout Sanskrit literature, the Mahābhārata furnishes instances of the consecration of military commanders like Bhīṣma,⁵ Droṇa,⁶ Karṇa⁷ and others. Great, indeed, was the merit of sacrifices. At the conclusion of the war Kṛṣṇa said to Yudhiṣṭhira, “Do thou now celebrate many a sacrifice with suitable presents to the priests.”⁸ A little later, four sacrifices, the Rājasūya, Aśvamedha, Sarvamedha and Naramedha are recommended to Yudhiṣṭhira partly for purification from the sins of the war.⁹ Besides elaborate ritual and charity, there seems to have been an intellectual element about some sacrifices during the epic period. In the Vana Parvan, for instance, Aṣṭāvakra proposes to his uncle Śvetaketu that they should repair to Janaka’s sacrifice to listen to the discussions of Brāhmaṇas as well as to partake of excellent food.¹
c9.s2.t1.59
¹ Śānti Parvan, XLI, 1—23.
c9.s2.t1.60
² Ādi Parvan, XLIV, LXXXV, CI. Sabhā Parvan, XLV.
c9.s2.t1.61
³ Aśvamedha Parvan, V, LXXII et seq.
c9.s2.t1.62
⁴ Śānti Parvan, XLII, 7.
c9.s2.t1.63
⁵ Udyoga Parvan, CLV.
c9.s2.t1.64
⁶ Droṇa Parvan, V.
c9.s2.t1.65
⁷ Karṇa Parvan, I.
c9.s2.t1.66
⁸ Aśvamedha Parvan, II.
c9.s2.t1.67
⁹ Ibid., III, 1—8.
c9.s2.t1.68
¹ Vana Parvan, CXXXII.
c9.s2.t1.69
Ushered with pomp and ceremony into his office, the king lived in a grand style. His palace was expected to be a knot of paradise. In the Sabhā Parvan, at the request of Kṛṣṇa, Maya undertakes to build for the Pāṇḍus a palace like that of the celestials.² When finished, the mansion was all splendour and grandeur.³ Close to the royal residence was a court of justice, gambling hall, a music hall, an arena for wrestling and brute fights. A spacious area was set aside for markets at the capital. Parks were laid out for the people. Definite quarters were assigned to the common people. The “king’s city” should be laid out in six squares, the streets should be well-watered and well-lighted with lamps. Pains should be taken to make it as sanitary and beautiful as possible. A capital city in the Mahābhārata is defended by battlemented towers and seven moats.⁴
c9.s2.t1.70
² Sabhā Parvan, I.
c9.s2.t1.71
³ Ibid., III-IV. Several descriptions of great Sabhās, which are here tantamount to palaces and courts, occur in this Parvan: the Celestial Sabhā (VII); the Sabhā of Yama (VIII); the Sabhā of Varuṇa (IX); the Sabhā of Vaiśravaṇa (X); the Sabhā of Brahman (XI).
c9.s2.t1.72
⁴ Vana Parvan, CLXXXIV. Virāṭa Parvan, XXII.
c9.s2.t1.73
Besides the capital there are other towns, multitudes of villages and yet smaller settlements called ghoṣas or pallīs in the Mahābhārata.
c9.s2.t1.74
At the capital, the king was assisted in the task of administration by a number of officers of whom seven were the most important, viz., the commander of forces, the second in command, the governor of the citadel, the chief priest, the judge, the physician and astrologer.¹ Subsequently there is mention of eighteen principal officers, including the heir-apparent, chamberlain, overseers of the harem, inspectors of prisons, justice, forests and frontiers.² The theory of the Śānti Parvan speaks of more than thirty chief offices.³ In another section of the same Parvan, a king is advised to appoint officers for mines, salt, Śulka (customs), river-crossings, elephants, infantry, etc.⁴ One of the most important of all offices was that of the ambassador. It might be entrusted to any of the chief personages at the court. Drupada entrusts it once to his Purohita.⁵ Kṛṣṇa himself acted as the envoy of the Pāṇḍus. Dhritarāṣṭra once entrusted a diplomatic mission to his younger brother,⁶ and on another occasion to his charioteer.⁷ The charioteer was another great personage. Kṛṣṇa himself acted as the charioteer of Arjuna in the great war. Over all the officers and ministers stood a chief minister. "A king without a minister cannot govern his kingdom even for three days."⁸ Some of the chief officers were relations of the king. After his consecration Yudhiṣṭhira bestows many offices on his relations.⁹
c9.s2.t1.75
¹ Sabhā Parvan, V, 38.
c9.s2.t1.76
² Ibid., V.
c9.s2.t1.77
³ Śānti Parvan, LXXV, 16–10.
c9.s2.t1.78
⁴ Ibid., LXIX.
c9.s2.t1.79
⁵ Udyoga Parvan, VI.
c9.s2.t1.80
⁶ Sabhā Parvan, LVIII.
c9.s2.t1.81
⁷ Udyoga Parvan, XXII.
c9.s2.t1.82
⁸ Śānti Parvan, CVI, 11. Sabhā Parvan, V.
c9.s2.t1.83
⁹ Śānti Parvan, XLII, 8–19.
c9.s2.t1.84
Recruitment of officers. Elsewhere, too, the Śānti Parvan counsels that relations of the king or persons particularly trustworthy should be appointed to chief offices.¹⁰ In another section of the same Parvan, again, birth is prescribed as one of the considerations in making appointments.¹¹ There it is declared that to the chief offices as a whole should be appointed four Brāhmaṇas, three Kṣatriyas, twenty-one Vaiśyas, three Śūdras and one Sūta.¹ In the practice of the Mahābhārata, however, the principal officers are drawn from the aristocracy. It is possible that some of the offices were hereditary.²
c9.s2.t1.85
¹⁰ Ibid., LXIX.
c9.s2.t1.86
¹¹ Ibid., CVI, 12.
c9.s2.t1.87
¹ Śānti Parvan, CVI, 11.
c9.s2.t1.88
² For the ideal qualifications of ministers, Ibid., LXXXIII, 2—50 ; CXIX, 3—9; CXX, 48.
c9.s2.t1.89
In the Sabhā Parvan Nārada hints the advice that a king should constantly consult his ministers.³ In practice, however, the rule was not always observed. Nor was the advice of ministers, when tendered, always followed. In the Bhīṣma Parvan, Dhṛtarāṣṭra is blamed for refusing to listen to Vidura, Bhīṣma, Droṇa and Sañjaya. Sañjaya himself blames Dhṛtarāṣṭra for the evil policy he had pursued.⁴ When leaving the capital the king might entrust his affairs to the Purohita or some other dignitary. In the Āśramavāsi Parvan, when Yudhiṣṭhira goes out with his brothers, the city is left in the charge of the Purohita and Yuyutsu, a general.⁵ When for some extraordinary reason the king was unable or unwilling to perform his duties, the charge of the state might devolve on the queen and ministers. In the episode of Nala, the king forgets all in the fascination of dice. His queen Damayantī meets a deputation of citizens and herself summons a council, though she fails to rouse her husband from his stupor to attend it. Apprehensive of the worst, she asks Vārṣṇeya, the royal charioteer, to take her children to her parents in Kuṇḍina. Before obeying her command, Vārṣṇeya seeks and obtains the approval of the chief officers.⁶ In the Mahābhārata there is no fixed rule about regency during a minority. In one such contingency Bhīṣma alone guards the realm.⁷
c9.s2.t1.90
³ Sabhā Parvan, V.
c9.s2.t1.91
⁴ Bhīṣma Parvan, LXV.
c9.s2.t1.92
⁵ Āśramavāsi Parvan, XV, XXIII.
c9.s2.t1.93
⁶ Vana Parvan, LX.
c9.s2.t1.94
⁷ Ādi Parvan, CII.
c9.s2.t1.95
In the Epios, the old popular assembly has altogether disappeared. If the people occasionally make themselves felt, it is not through any constitutional channels. In place of the assembly there has grown up a court consisting of the king's relations, nobles, feudatories, priests, officers and chief men of the capital. In the Mahâbhârata the court is often the scene of festivity and rejoicing. Dancing girls form part of the retinue.
c9.s2.t1.96
In the sphere of local government, the village is the unit. Every village seems to have had an officer, called Grâmâdhipati, who looked after affairs in general and was particularly concerned with the king's share of the produce. In Vedic literature, the office of Grâmanî is the goal of a Vaiśya's ambition.¹ The Mahâbhârata furnishes no indication of the caste of the Grâmâdhipati. In the Sabhâ Parvan Nârada counsels the appointment of five officers in each village,² but that may be a counsel of perfection. We cannot be certain that even the Grâmâdhipati was regularly appointed by the government. He might sometimes have been hereditary or marked out by village opinion for the office. According to the theory of the Śânti Parvan, groups of ten, hundred and a thousand villages should form the successive administrative divisions. Here theory may be reflecting facts in a rather idealised manner. Each head of a village or an administrative division should keep his immediate superior informed of all happenings and submit regular reports. The officers seem to have been paid in kind. For instance, the superintendent of a hundred villages should receive a large village for his sustenance while the officer of a thousand villages should enjoy the revenues of a small town as his remuneration. Such a practice would inevitably promote the feudal tendencies. From this scheme of local government towns seem to have been excluded. Each town is to have an officer to itself, a Sarvârthacintaka, one who thought or cared for everything.¹ For purposes of defence garrisons were to be stationed along the borders and in towns.²
c9.s2.t1.97
¹ Taittirîya Samhitâ, II, 5, 4, 4. Maitrâyanî Samhitâ, I, 6, 5.
c9.s2.t1.98
² Sabhâ Parvan, V.
c9.s2.t1.99
¹ Śānti Parvan, CXXXVII, 3–11.
c9.s2.t1.100
² Ibid., LXIX, 6 et seq.
c9.s2.t1.101
To watch over government servants, feudatories, nobles and the people at large, a host of spies swarmed the land. Bhīṣma declares that the employment and direction of spies is one of the prime duties of the king. They are to be set in cities, provinces and the territories of feudatories. None is to escape their glance, not even the king's sons, relations, friends or counsellors. No place is to be free from their ubiquitous presence. They must frequent parks and pleasure-grounds, courts, houses, shops, meetings of scholars and crowds of common people.³ One of the functions which fell to the lot of spies in ancient India was that which falls to the lot of journalists at present. They had to submit to the sovereign regular reports on public feeling on the doings of the government in the cities and provinces.
c9.s2.t1.102
³ Ibid., LXIX, 8–12, 52; LXXXIX, 14–16; LXXXVI, 20–21; XCI, 50.
c9.s2.t1.103
Besides those directly concerned with administrative business, there were large numbers of other persons in the employment of the state. There seem to have been state factories in which multitudes of artisans worked. In the Sabhā Parvan, Nārada advises Yudhiṣṭhira to keep them regularly supplied with materials, to pay them regularly, to examine their work and to reward their merit.⁴
c9.s2.t1.104
⁴ Sabhā Parvan, V.
c9.s2.t1.105
The sources of revenue in the Mahâbhârata are wider than in the Sûtras. Theory again fixes the land-tax at one-sixth of the produce. This was supplemented by customs again on the theory that merchants should pay for the protection which they received from the state. There was no fixed rate for mercantile dues; they were to be settled after consideration of the purchases, sales, profits and standard of living. Artisans should be taxed on an evaluation of their manufactures, their expenses, receipts and their general prosperity. Justice formed another plentiful source and brought in a good deal by way of fines and forfeitures. In a curious passage, Arjuna remarks that Brâhmaṇas should be punished with word of mouth, Kṣatriyas with restriction to bare sustenance and Vaiśyas with fines and forfeiture of property.
c9.s2.t1.106
According to orthodox theory Brâhmaṇas are exempt from all taxes. They were expected to live a life of poverty and could not therefore have much to pay. But the Śânti Parvan makes it clear that if they forsook their true vocation and followed any other occupations, they were to be taxed like others. If any group of persons combined to resist taxation, they should be struck down by diplomacy or force. The brunt of taxation fell on the Vaiśyas who are called karapradâḥ or payers of taxes in the Sabhâ Parvan.¹ In the same Parvan we read of ‘love-offerings.’ Brâhmaṇas, Kṣatriyas, Vaiśyas, Sûdras, outcasts, high and low alike bring tribute to the king, for the sake of love (prîtyartham).¹ Euphemisms apart, such offerings constituted a regular source of income. Elsewhere in the same Parvan many semi-civilised tribes, like the Vairamas, Pâradas, Tungâs, Kitavas, living in woodlands or on the sea-shore, present numerous animals of various species to the king.² The forests which abounded yielded their products and were a distinct source of income. Forced labour was sometimes exacted. We are told in the Śânti Parvan that all Brâhmaṇas who did not come up to the ideal should be made to pay taxes and render the usual corvée.³
c9.s2.t1.107
¹ Śânti Parvan, LXIX, 25; LXI, 10-11, 13-16, 20-23; LXXXVII, 14-15, 18-21, 23, 35-40; LXXXVIII, 2-12; LXXXIX, 24; XV, 4; CXIX, 17; CXX, 43-44; CXXX, 9, 35; CXXXIII, 3; CXXXIV, 3-4; CXXXVI, 1-2; LXXVI, 8-11.
c9.s2.t1.108
² Sabhâ Parvan, XLVI. Cf. Âdi Parvan, CXII.
c9.s2.t1.109
¹ Sabhâ Parvan, LII. ² Ibid., LI. ³ Śânti Parvan, LXXVI. ⁴ Śânti Parvan, LXXI, 23; CXXX, 37-38, 47-48; CXXXII, 5, 9; CXXXIII, 3. ⁵ Aśvamedha Parvan, XII. ⁶ Ibid., III, 14. ⁷ Śânti Parvan, CXXXVI.
c9.s2.t1.110
The Mahâbhârata makes it clear that in emergencies like war, the king made unusual demands on his subjects. Abnormal times were regarded as governed by a morality of their own. A king should explain the situation to his people and levy extra taxes. He might force any unwilling subjects to disgorge their wealth. If war exhausted the treasury, he might seize the wealth of all except Brâhmaṇas.⁴ It is recognised that to defray the expenses of a sacrifice, a king may seize the wealth of an irreligious rich man.⁵ At the conclusion of the war, Yudhiṣṭhira declares that he could not levy dues for celebrating a sacrifice at the moment.⁶ He plainly implies that that was the usual practice. A Dasyu's wealth could also be confiscated in case of need.⁷
c9.s2.t1.111
It is difficult to obtain any clear idea of the sphere of state-activity during the Epic period. The theory of the Śānti Parvan makes it conterminous with life itself. The state should ceaselessly foster righteousness, guide, correct and control the moral life of the people, make the earth habitable and comfortable for men.¹ It is possible that the theorist had some basis of practice for his counsel when he wanted the government to reclaim land for cultivation, to excavate tanks and lakes and thus make agriculture independent of the caprices of the rains, to make loans of seed-grain to cultivators in time of need.² The king should cause wide roads to be laid out and watering-stations to be erected at proper distances.³ Robbers should be exterminated everywhere.⁴ The king is himself counselled to practise boundless charity on occasions like the Rājasūya but he must discourage and punish indiscriminate begging.⁵
c9.s2.t1.112
¹ Śānti Parvan, LXXXVIII, 14; LXXV, 19; LIX, 114-15.
c9.s2.t1.113
² Ibid., V, 17, 21; LXV, 2. Sabhā Parvan, V.
c9.s2.t1.114
³ Śānti Parvan, LXIX, 53.
c9.s2.t1.115
⁴ Ibid., LXXV, 5.
c9.s2.t1.116
⁵ Ibid., LXXV, 10; XIII, 40-41; LXXXVIII, 16-17; 23-24. For royal gifts see *inter alia* the description of Hariścandra's great sacrifice, Sabhā Parvan, XII.
c9.s2.t1.117
In the Mahābhārata the aspiration to create an empire is hallowed into an imperative, sacred duty. Yudhiṣṭhira, the epic embodiment of kingly righteousness, burns to emulate the glory of the kings of old.⁶ He must establish a glorious empire and, therefore, make short work of the mighty Jarāsandha of Magadha.⁷ Where unprovoked aggression was erected into a moral ideal, it was inevitable that diplomacy should throw all scruples overboard. Reason of state became the one guiding, overmastering principle and justified the extreme of fraud and treachery.
c9.s2.t1.118
⁶ Sabhā Parvan, XIII.
c9.s2.t1.119
⁷ Ibid., XIV. For Jarāsandha and his ancestor Vṛhadratha, Ibid., XVII.
c9.s2.t1.120
In the course of one of the most remarkable episodes in the epic Jarâsandha declares that it was a Kṣatirya’s duty to bring others under his sway by the display of his prowess and that he was justified in treating them as slaves.¹ He longs to make a hecatomb of a hundred ‘kings’ and had already collected eighty-six for the purpose when he was overpowered by Kṛṣṇa and the Pāṇḍus.² In the Vana Parvan it is stated that whatever sin a king commits in acquiring dominion, is expiated afterwards by means of sacrifices and gifts.³ While on this subject in the Śānti Parvan, Bhīṣma, the great exponent of righteousness, takes his stand on pure reason. He quotes Uśanas who, in days of yore, had told the Daityas that scriptures were no scriptures if they could not stand the test of reason. Under the pressure of abnormal circumstances, extraordinary maxims must be applied to the conduct of affairs—maxims which had brought ‘blazing prosperity’ to king Śatruñjaya to whom they were preached by an ancient sage. One should readily surrender before might and then seize the first opportunity to smash the powerful antagonist or suzerain. A king should remember that vanquished foes are always on the alert and can never be trusted. Secret diplomacy, hypocrisy of all sorts, “divide and rule,” corruption of the enemy’s forces or subjects, lavish use of gold and poison, ruthless severity, devastation of hostile territory, wholesale destruction of its population--such are the weapons recommended for dealing with enemies.⁴ The whole series of chapters on Āpaddharma in the Śānti Parvan⁵ remind one of Machiavelli. There are sentences, written with the “point of a stiletto" which may pass for quotations from "the Prince." The section, as a whole, may be styled, as Diderot proposed to style certain chapters of Machiavelli, as "the circumstances under which it is right for a prince to be a scoundrel." Like the Italian realist, the Epic poet "strips away the flowing garments of convention and commonplace; closes his will against sympathy and feeling; ignores pity as an irrelevance, just as the operating surgeon does." In both, the purpose is the same, "the secular state supreme, self-interest and self-regard, avowed as the single principle of state action; material force, the master-key to civil policy. Clear intelligence backed by unsparing will, unflinching energy, remorseless vigour, the brain to plan and the hand to strike—here is the salvation of states."¹ The political circumstances which primarily suggested these lines of thought were, in essentials, the same in medieval Italy as in Ancient India. In the Āśramavāsi Parvan, towards the close of the Mahābhārata, Dhṛtarāṣṭra enunciates to Yudhiṣṭhira the doctrine of Maṇḍala as the guiding principle of policy,² but these passages are very late.
c9.s2.t1.121
¹ Sabhā Parvan XXXII.
c9.s2.t1.122
² Ibid., XV.
c9.s2.t1.123
³ Vana Parvan, XXV. See also XXII. XXXIII.
c9.s2.t1.124
⁴ Śānti Parvan CIII, 16, 19-42; CV, 6-9, 21-25; CXXXI, 4-7, 10-12; CXXXVIII, 12-18; CXL, 7-70. CXLI, 70-71, CXLIII, 1-24. For Arjuna’s remarks to the same purpose, XV, 16-23, 25, 37-38; also X, 6-8; Sabhā Parvan XXXII. Cf. Vana Parvan XXIX-XXXIV; For Kanikas discourse in the same strain, Ādi Parvan, CXLII.
c9.s2.t1.125
⁵ Āpaddharma begins with section CXXXI of the Śānti Parvan.
c9.s2.t1.126
¹ Morley, Romanes Lecture on Machiavelli, pp. 20-21, 26-27, 33.
c9.s2.t1.127
² Āśramavāsi Parvan, VI, VII.
c9.s2.t1.128
In contrast to its precepts on diplomacy, the Mahābhārata inculcates a high standard of the Ethics of the Battlefield. A Kṣatriya may oppose deceit by deceit but should always be fair in response to fairness. He should not proceed on horseback against a car-warrior and should not wear armour when pitted against one unclad in mail. He should not strike one who has been disabled, who has fallen into distress, whose bowstring has been cut or who has lost his vehicle. A wounded enemy should be sent home or properly treated by skilful surgeons. If a wounded righteous warrior is taken captive, he should be cured and then set at liberty. "This is the eternal duty." A warrior whose armour has fallen off, who begs for quarter, saying, 'I am thine,' who joins his hands in supplication or who has laid his weapon aside, may be taken captive but should not be killed. Nor should one slay those who are asleep, thirsty, fatigued, or at meals, nor those who are seeking spiritual emancipation, who are mad or who stay trustfully. The lives of camp-followers, menial servants and other people of the sort are sacrosanct. An ambassador is not to be injured under any circumstances. A maiden, captured in war, should be detained for a year and asked to marry the victor. If she does not consent, she ought to be sent back. So, too, with slaves. In the story, this ideal is approached by many in varying degrees. But not seldom do warriors cry fie on it. In the fierce conflicts of Droṇa Parvan for instance, heroes openly throw all ideals overboard.
c9.s2.t1.129
Besides promising heavenly joys to valour, the Mahābhārata counsels a king to reward meritorious military service by double pay, excellent food and drink, promotion in the ranks and a seat equal to that of the king. The Epic lays down physical, mental and moral qualifications for soldiers, dilates on the time, season and order of manœuvres and discusses the characteristics, dispositions and chances of success of armies.¹ But the subject lies beyond the scope of the present work.
c9.s2.t1.130
¹ Śānti Parvan, LXIX, 34—40, 55; LXXXV, 26—28; LXXXVI, 5 - 15; XCIV, 1-2; XCV, 2—5, 7—14; XCVI, 1—7, 11, 16-17, 22-23; XCVII, 8, 11-12; XCVIII, 15—25, 35—48, XCIX, 1—17; C, 6—24, 30; CI, 324-5; CII, Bhīṣma Parvan, I, 24—27 et seq. For the fighting, also Droṇa Parvan, Karṇa Parvan. Hopkins, J. A. O. S., XIII, pp. 191—325, treats the subject of war in the Mahābhārata exhaustively.
c9.s2.t1.131
The kingship, tinged with feudalism, is the predominant type of government in the Mahābhārata. But there are a few passages which point to the existence of Gaṇas or oligarchies. Yudhiṣṭhira inquires of Bhīṣma how gaṇas prosper, how they can manage to keep secrets with so many in the seat of government. In reply Bhīṣma emphasises that Gaṇas must, above all, maintain internal cohesion. If disunited, they will fall an easy prey to enemies. If united, they will attain to prosperity and outsiders will seek their alliance. It behoves their wise elders to nip in the bud any disputes that may arise within the Gaṇas. If the seniors treat rising dissensions with indifference, the members will soon fall into violent mutual wrangling. It is essential to guard against dangers from within. They can uproot a Gaṇa in a single day. Gaṇas are destroyed not by the courage, diplomacy or gold of the enemy nor by the lure of female charms, but by internal dissensions. Harmony is the very law of their being. In every Gaṇa people should be taught to practise their duties, to bow before learned persons. The Executive, consisting of the ‘chief persons,’ must be trusted and suffered to keep secrets. The Gaṇas should keep their treasuries full, should regulate their policy well, employ numbers of spies and display courage, perseverance and steady prowess on the battlefield.¹ It appears that the oligarchies, non-monarchical, flourished for a while but they were torn by internal dissensions. They had an executive which sometimes found it difficult to make its authority felt. About the Andhakavṛṣṇi oligarchy Kṛṣṇa remarks that though he was entitled to one-half of the executive power, he only received bitter words from his relations.¹
c9.s2.t1.132
¹ Śānti Parvan, CVII, 10-32. F. W. Thomas (J. R. A. S., 1914, pp. 10-12) shows that Gaṇa implied absence of royalty, though Fleet (J. R. A. S., 1915, pp. 13-19) interprets Gaṇa as a tribe. With a monarchical background, however, the passages in question make little sense.
c9.s2.t1.133
¹ Śanti Parvan, LXXXI.
c9.s2.t1.134
Besides the state, feudal dominion and regular local government, there appears in the Mahâbhârata another principle of organisation. Guilds of warriors, industrial workers and traders flit across the stage. They are reckoned among the principal supports of the monarchy. A king is enjoined to avail himself of Śreṇivala which is described as equal to that of hired soldiers. It refers most probably to force which guilds of warriors could supply, obviously for a consideration. Economic guilds depend for their vitality on internal cohesion. Nothing can expiate the sin of forsaking one's duty towards one's guild.²
c9.s2.t1.135
² Vana Parvan, CCXLVIII, 16. Śanti Parvan, LIV, 20.
c9.s2.t1.136
To the Mahâbhârata was appended another work called the Harivaṃśa which describes the exploits of Kṛiṣṇa and his ancestors in 16,000 ślokas grouped in three sections. It is rather late. Nor does it throw any fresh light on political institutions. Cantos 146-7 describe a magnificent royal picnic in which the heroes, Baladeva, Kṛiṣṇa, and others spend the day in feasting, drinking, singing and dancing. Thousands of courtesans enlivened the scene.
Linked texts (6)
- Mahābhārata — Vyāsa, Sanskrit
- Taittirīyasaṃhitā — Sanskrit
- Maitrāyaṇīsaṃhitā — Sanskrit
- Harivaṃśa — Vyāsa, Sanskrit
- Sūtra — Sanskrit
- Brāhmaṇa — Sanskrit