Republics in Ancient India, c. 1500 B.C.–500 B.C. c13.s2.141

c13.s2.141

Rhys Davids, on the authority of the *Vinaya Piṭaka*,⁷ held that no cases or motions were decided by casting votes. “The decision is regarded as unanimous; or, if difference of opinion is manifest, then the matter is referred for arbitration (*ubbāhikā*) to a council of referees.”¹ He concludes that the “method of procedure generally adopted in the mote-halls was not, as in modern parliaments, by voting on a motion.”² However, Jayaswal in discussing the procedure³ mainly relies on the Tibetan tradition,⁴ which he admits is the sole “direct reference to the technical aspect of these deliberations.” Jayaswal considers this of the “highest importance” for it puts him on the “right track”. From this he concludes that in the Sakyan assembly issues were decided by the vote of a majority.