The Political Institutions and Theories of the Hindus: A Study in Comparative Politics c16.s1.t4: c) The Doctrine of Varnâsrama

The Political Institutions and Theories of the Hindus: A Study in Comparative Politics c16.s1.t4

Language: English

c) The Doctrine of Varnâsrama

Out of *mâtsya-nyâya* evolves *dharma* through the fiat of *danda*. Now *dharma* has need to be embodied, i. e. the *Kultur-Staat* must have to materialize itself in space and time. This is accomplished in the *râstra*, which provides *aisvarya* (sovereignty) with "a local habitation and a name". It is in and for the *râstra* that the state institutes *mamatva* and *dharma*. Property, law, justice and duty are concretely realized through this medium. The doctrine of *râstra* thus furnishes the crowning arch in the Hindu theory of the state.

c16.s1.t4.3

What is this *râstra*? It signifies "the country". Both "movable and immovable things" are indicated by the term.¹ It is a territorial concept comprehending an aggregate of human beings and material possessions and thus constitutes the "physical basis" of the state. It may be taken almost as equivalent to *res publica*. The doctrine of *râstra* would therefore naturally consist of two parts: (1) the doctrine of property and (2) the doctrine of *prajâ*, *prakriti* or population. The doctrine of property has already been investigated. Let us now examine the doctrine of population in its bearing on the theory of the state.

c16.s1.t4.4

¹ IV, iii, line 2.

c16.s1.t4.5

In the *mâtsya-nyâya* condition there is the people, but no state, because there is no *danda* to enforce *dharma*. If the *prajâ* is not to remain ad infinitum an amorphous mass of selbständig atoms, it must have to follow *sva-dharma*, i. e. the members of the society must perform their respective "duties", which, as we have seen, are really "laws" turned inside out. The observance of these duties would necessarily imply the organization of the people into a unified state, a *samûha* or a *pada*.

c16.s1.t4.6

Now, communally speaking, the *prakriti* or members of a society naturally fall into economic and professional groups, classes or orders, the so-called castes of India. The alleged classification of a society into four occupational groups, e. g. Brâhmaṇa, Kṣatriya, etc., is however a conventional myth, at best, a legal fiction. Students of *Realpolitik* like Śukra² are aware that the actual number of these orders or castes is "unlimited". The reason, as may be guessed, is stated in the *Śukra-nîti* to be the “intermixture of blood through marriages”. These orders of *prajâ* or classes of members of the state are known as *varṇas*¹ i. e. colors, probably designated after some typical (or hypothetical?) ethnic complexion. Further, from the standpoint of the individual, we have to notice that people pass through well-marked physiological stages, e. g. infancy, adolescence, etc. These stages or periods of life in every person are called the *âśramas*.² They are arbitrarily known to be four in the span of human existence.

c16.s1.t4.7

² IV, iii, lines 22–23.

c16.s1.t4.8

¹ *Kâmandaka*, II, 18—21.

c16.s1.t4.9

² *Ibid*, II, 22—31.

c16.s1.t4.10

The total population with all its interests and problems of all the different periods of life is then comprehended by the two categories, *varṇas* (classes) and *âśramas* (stages). If therefore the people is to constitute a state, every member of each of the *varṇas* (no matter what their number and what their occupations) must have to perform the duties (*sva-dharma*) of his “station” at each of the four *âśramas* or periods of life. Thus, the soldier at the front must “do or die”, the young man while at school must not marry, the king must keep to the coronation oath, and so forth. This is the doctrine of *varṇâśrama*,³ the counterpart of the Platonic correlation of “virtue” and status (*Republic*, II, III, IV).

c16.s1.t4.11

³ *Kâmandaka* II, 35; *Pos. Back.* Vol. II, p. 90.

c16.s1.t4.12

As soon, therefore, as the *prajâ* is organized into a state, be it in any part of the world or in any epoch of history, a *varṇâśrama* spontaneously emerges into being. It is inconceivable, in this theory, that there should be a state and yet no *varṇâśrama*. To say that the state has been born and yet the various orders or classes of the people do not follow *dharma* would indeed be a contradiction in terms, a logical absurdity. *Sva-dharma* leads inevitably to *varṇâśrama*, the two are “relative” terms. They indicate coexistent phenomena in the social world. In other words, the doctrine of *varṇâśrama* is a corollary to that of *dharma* as duty, *varṇâśrama* is but *sva-dharma* “writ large”.

c16.s1.t4.13

The non-existence of *varṇâśrama* is possible only under conditions of non-performance of duty. Suppose the *varṇas* do not follow *dharma*, e. g. the soldier flies from the enemy in a cowardly manner, the husband does not maintain the wife, the judge encourages the fabrication of false evidence, the king violates the *samaya* or compact with the *prakriti*, and so forth. According to Śukra⁴ the offenders are to be rectified by the *daṇḍa* of the state. This is the supreme moment for the exercise of *aiśvarya* (sovereignty). Why, even the king is not immune from penalty.

c16.s1.t4.14

⁴ IV, iv, 6, 82—83.

c16.s1.t4.15

Rather, as Manu¹ declares "the settled rule", wher "a common man would be fined one *kârṣâpaṇa*, the king shall be fined one thousand". Really, a state is no state unless it can enforce as duty the *dharma* that it has enacted as law. This should be postulated in the irreducible minimum of the state's functions. One can therefore easily understand with Kâmandaka² why if *dharma* is violated by the members of the state there is bound to be a *pralaya* or dissolution of the world. Verily, with the extinction of *varnâśrama* there is a reversion to *mâtsya-nyâya*. The violation of *sva-dharma* and of *varnâśrama* brings back the "state of nature", and the state automatically ceases to exist.

c16.s1.t4.16

¹ VIII, 336.

c16.s1.t4.17

² II, 34.

c16.s1.t4.18

*Varnâśrama*, though obviously a socio-pedagogic and ethnico-economic term, is thus fundamentally a political concept. It is an indispensable category in an organic theory of the state. It is identical with *râstra* from the demographic (*prajâ* or population) aspect. The doctrine of *varnâśrama* is therefore the doctrine of *râṣtra* minus the doctrine of property; and further, the doctrine of *dharma* (as law and duty) applied to the total *prakriti* (or members of the state) coincides with the doctrine of classes and stages. The doctrine of *varnâśrama* then is clearly an integral part in a consistent philosophy of politics.

Linked texts (2)

Mānava Dharmaśāstra — Manu & Bhṛgu, Sanskrit
Kāmandakīya Nītisāra — Kāmandaki, Sanskrit