[Pramāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/) › [Studies](https://indike.org/pramana/ins) › [Polity, law and society](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity) › [Republics in Ancient India, c. 1500 B.C.–500 B.C.](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968) › c15 # Republics in Ancient India, c. 1500 B.C.–500 B.C. c15: Chapter Ten: Lesser-Known Republics Republics in Ancient India, c. 1500 B.C.–500 B.C. c15 - **Language:** English ## Contents - [c15.s1 The Moriyas of Pipphalivana](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s1) — 27 parts - [c15.s2 The Bulis of Allakappa](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s2) — 6 parts - [c15.s3 The Bhaggas of Suṁsumāragiri](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s3) — 2 parts - [c15.s4 The Kālāmas of Kesaputta](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s4) — 2 parts ### Chapter Ten: Lesser-Known Republics ### [c15.2](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.2) Apart from the republics treated at length in the preceding chapters, the existence of other republican tribes is also attested by the early Buddhist texts. But the evidence regarding them is meagre, and the scanty references made to them do not permit a fuller account of their republican or quasi-republican institutions. As the data available from the sources is so limited that no coherent picture of any of these political communities can be given, we only discuss some of their features, and choose to refer to them as "lesser-known republics." We cannot call them, at this stage, minor republics or by some such similar designation. Some may have been quite important but are not mentioned at great length in the Buddhist and Jaina texts because they did not give much support to the doctrines which the Buddha and Mahāvīra expounded. There are four such republican peoples. ### [c15.3](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.3) The Moriyas of Pipphalivana¹ and the Bulis of Allakappa² were among the claimants for shares in the relics of the Buddha on the ground that they were themselves, like the Exalted One, Kṣatriyas. The Bulis got the eighth portion of the relics and erected a \*stūpa\* enshrining their portion, at their capital town and celebrated the event with a feast.³ According to the text, the Moriyas arrived after the relics had already been distributed among the eight earlier claimants, and they had to be contended with the embers (\*aṅgāraṁ\*). They likewise honoured these remains by building a \*stūpa\* over them and celebrating a feast.⁴ This story appears to be a little suspicious. Could it be that the story of the Moriyas' late arrival was interpolated at the time of Aśoka in order to link the royal family more closely with the Buddha? There is no mention of the Bhaggas of Suṁsumāragiri, and the Kālāmas of Kesaputta among those who claimed a share in the relics. This might suggest either their indifference towards Buddhism and its founder or simply that they lived too far from Kusinārā. Nevertheless, their existence is attested by some other Pāli texts. The Buddha and the Venerable Mahā Moggallāna are reported to have stayed at Suṁsumāragiri, the chief town of the Bhaggas, in the course of their wanderings.¹ The Kālāmas of Kesaputta are also explicitly mentioned in the \*Aṅguttara Nikāya\* and its commentary.² ### [c15.4](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.4) ¹ \*Dīgha\*, ii, p. 165; Rockhill, \*op. cit.\*, p. 145; \*MPS\*, pp. 448ff. ### [c15.5](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.5) ² \*Ibid.\*, p. 166; Rockhill, \*op. cit.\*, p. 147; \*MPS\*, pp. 448-9. ### [c15.6](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.6) ³ \*Dīgha\*, ii, pp. 166-7; \*MPS\*, pp. 446-7. ### [c15.7](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.7) ⁴ \*MPS\*, pp. 448ff; \*Dīgha\*, ii, pp. 165ff. ### [c15.8](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.8) ¹ \*Majjhima\*, i, p. 95; \*Aṅguttara\*, ii, p. 61; iv, p. 85; \*Vinaya\*, ii, p. 127; iv, pp. 115, 198; \*Jāt\*., iii, p. 157, etc. ### [c15.9](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.9) ² \*Aṅguttara\*, ii, p. 188; \*Man. Pūr\*., i, p. 418. ### The Moriyas of Pipphalivana ### [c15.s1.1](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s1.1) \*Name and Origin\* ### [c15.s1.2](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s1.2) The only source which contains an account of the origin and name of the Moriyas as a tribe, rather than as a ruling family, is the \*Mahāvaṁsa Ṭīkā\*.³ According to one explanation, the Moriyas were so called because they rejoiced, \*modāpi\*, in the prosperity of their city. The commentator explains that by changing the \*da\* of the \*modāpi\* to \*ra\*, the word Moriya is obtained.⁴ He further adds that being oppressed by king Viḍūḍabha, some Sakyas escaped into a delightful region of the Himālayas, which had the convenience of cool water, the shade of a grove of \*pipphali\* trees⁵ (\*pipphalivana\*) and the fresh breezes. At this pleasant spot they established a boundary wherein they measured out excellent cities.⁶ ### [c15.s1.3](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s1.3) ³ \*Vaṁsaṭṭha\*, i, pp. 180ff. ### [c15.s1.4](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s1.4) ⁴ \*Ibid.\*, p. 180. ### [c15.s1.5](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s1.5) ⁵ Normally \*pipphali\* means pepper. This, however, does not fit the context, and moreover pepper vines do not grow in the Himālayan foothills. Probably we are to take the term as equivalent to \*pipphala\*, the fruit of the \*ficus religiosa\* or \*pīpal\* tree; also \*cp. MPS\*, Skt., pp. 448-50. ### [c15.s1.6](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s1.6) ⁶ \*Vaṁsaṭṭha.\*, i, p. 180. ### [c15.s1.7](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s1.7) According to the same source, there is another tradition which connects the name with the Pāli and Sanskrit word \*mayūra\*, peacock. The city which they founded had buildings of blue stone, like the neck of a peacock (\*mayūragīvasaṅkāsa\*), and the place always resounded with the shrill cries of peacocks.⁷ The masters (\*sāmino\*) of the city, continues the commentator, were the Sakyas, but their sons and grandsons from then onward became known in the entire Jambudīpa only by the name of the Moriyas. This is why the following generations speak of their clan as the \*Moriyavaṁsa\*.⁸ ### [c15.s1.8](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s1.8) ⁷ \*Loc. cit.\* ### [c15.s1.9](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s1.9) ⁸ \*Loc. cit.\*; \*Cf. DPPN\*, ii, p. 673; \*PHAI\*, p. 194. ### [c15.s1.10](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s1.10) According to the first explanation, the word Moriya is derived from the root \*mud\*, to rejoice, and the commentator explains the change of \*da\* to \*ra\*. Then he gives an alternative etymology connecting the name with \*mayūra\*, peacock. The commentator states both traditions without committing himself to either, though his detailed explanation of the first might indicate his preference. But to us the first story seems more fantastic than the second. Neither story proves the connection of Moriya with either \*mud\* or \*mayūra\* any better than does that relating the Koliyas to the \*kola\* tree. However, we suggest that the name is not connected with \*mud\*, but with \*mayūra\*, which might well have given the name to these people, who perhaps originally looked on the peacock as their totem. The explanation that they also had buildings of blue stone, like the colour of a peacock's neck, is simply absurd. ### [c15.s1.11](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s1.11) A close examination of both stories points to the Buddhist writers' arduous attempts to establish a relationship between their Master's clan and that of the Moriyas, probably in order to connect the Mauryan emperor Aśoka with the line of the Śākyamuni. No reference to such a relationship occurs in the Pāli Canon itself and there is no other source to confirm such a blood-bond. If the tradition of the \*Parinirvāṇa\* is correct, the Moriyas were certainly not the later descendants of the Sakyas as we find both the Sakyas and the Moriyas claiming their share in the relics of the Buddha at his death.¹ The Moriyas were contemporary with the Sakyas and were probably of an old Aryan stock like the other republican peoples of the Buddhist and the Jaina texts. The only known early Buddhist source which mentions the Moriyas is the \*Dīgha Nikāya\*. Raychaudhuri and Law have both accepted the connection of the Moriyas and the Sakyas without any solid evidence.² ### [c15.s1.12](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s1.12) ¹ \*MPS\*, pp. 448ff; \*Dīgha\*, ii, pp. 165ff; \*Buddhavamsa\*, chap. xxviii, 4. ### [c15.s1.13](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s1.13) ² \*Cf. PHAI\*, p. 194; Law, \*TAI\*, pp. 288-9. ### [c15.s1.14](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s1.14) The first tradition³ also attempts to explain the naming of the Moriyan capital by stating that the spot where they founded the city was located in a \*pipphalivana\*. We have no other source indicating such a basis for the name of Pipphalivana. It would normally mean "a grove of pepper vines;" not at all suitable for giving shelter to the refugees of the tribe. ### [c15.s1.15](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s1.15) ³ \*Vamsaṭṭha.\*, i, p. 180. ### [c15.s1.16](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s1.16) The \*Dīgha Nikāya\*,¹ the \*Buddhavamsa\*,² and the \*Mahāvamsa Ṭīkā\*³ all indicate that the chief town and centre of Moriyan power was at Pipphalivana. This town is apparently identical with the \*Nyagrodhavana\* or Banyan Grove, a village in the Gorakhpur district of Uttar Pradesh which contained the famous Embers' \*stūpa\* and is mentioned by Hsüan Tsang.⁴ Fa-hsien tells that the \*stūpa\* lay four \*yojanas\* to the east of the river Anomā (Rāpti) and twelve \*yojanas\* to the west of Kusinārā.⁵ Cunningham commented that as Kāsiā (Kusinārā) lay 35 miles to the east of Gorakhpur, the Moriya town could not have been situated very far from the last mentioned city.⁶ There are no serious arguments against this identification, which we provisionally accept. ### [c15.s1.17](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s1.17) ¹ \*Dīgha\*, ii, pp. 166-7; \*MPS\*, pp. 448-50. ### [c15.s1.18](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s1.18) ² \*Buddhavamsa\*, chap. xxviii, 4. ### [c15.s1.19](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s1.19) ³ \*Vamsattha.\*, i, pp. 180ff, which also calls it \*Moriyanagara\* (p. 183); \*cf. CHI\*, i, p. 175. ### [c15.s1.20](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s1.20) ⁴ Watters, \*op. cit.\*, ii, pp. 23-4; \*CAGIM\*, pp. 491ff, 496ff; \*PHAI\*, p. 194; Pandey, \*op. cit.\*, p. 145. ### [c15.s1.21](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s1.21) ⁵ Legge, \*Travels of Fa-Hsien\*, p. 79; Watters, \*ibid.\*, i, p. 141; \*cf. CAGIM\*, p. 491; \*PHAI\*, p. 194. ### [c15.s1.22](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s1.22) ⁶ \*CAGIM\*, p. 493. ### [c15.s1.23](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s1.23) The territory occupied by the Moriyas does not appear to have been very extensive. On the basis of the above evidence the Moriyas also seem to have been close neighbours of the Koliyas, situated to the west of them. To the southwest of the Moriyas the river Anomā (Rāpti) divided them from the Kosalan kingdom. The Mallian country lay to the east, and south of the Moriyas flowed the river Ghāgrā, the Sarayū of the Epic. The region, if measured on the map, does not seem to have been more than 25 miles from east to west up to the river Anomā, and about 50-55 miles from north to south up to the river Ghāgrā.⁷ To our knowledge no other town of the Moriyas is mentioned in the Buddhist texts.⁸ ### [c15.s1.24](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s1.24) ⁷ \*Loc. cit.\*; map xi, pp. 444-5; \*cf. PHAI\*, p. 194 fn. 4. ### [c15.s1.25](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s1.25) ⁸ See our map A. ### Government and Organization ### [c15.s1.t1.1](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s1.t1.1) The Moriyas were Kṣatriyas like other republican communities of the Buddhist period, and it is on this basis that they advanced their case for a share in the relics at Kusinārā. We hear of no single Moriyan king in the Buddhist sources which refer to them, except, of course, the imperial Mauryas of later times. On the other hand, there is ground to believe that they were ruled by a republican or quasi-republican form of government. Upon hearing that the Buddha had passed away, it was the Moriyas of Pipphalivana, and not an individual Moriyan ruler, who sent an envoy to the Mallas asking for a share in the remains of the Exalted One.¹ The \*Buddhavamsa\* also alludes to the same fact,² and the Tibetan tradition further strengthens this view that the embers went to the \*Nyagrodhika\* country (Pipphalivana).³ ### [c15.s1.t1.2](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s1.t1.2) ¹ \*MPS\*, p. 448; \*Dīgha\*, ii, pp. 165ff. ### [c15.s1.t1.3](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s1.t1.3) ² \*Buddhavamsa\*, chap. xxviii, 4. ### [c15.s1.t1.4](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s1.t1.4) ³ Rockhill, \*op. cit.\*, p. 147; \*cf. PHAI\*, p. 194 ### [c15.s1.t1.5](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s1.t1.5) The \*Mahāvamsa Ṭīkā\* refers to them as the Moriya kings of the Moriya city. The \*Ṭīkā\* always mentions them in the plural, i.e. \*Moriyarājānam\*, and the young Moriyas are invariably called \*rājakumāras\* or princes.⁴ This clearly shows that the Moriyas of Pipphalivana were a republican people like the Sakyas, the Mallas, and the Licchavis, and that the college of Moriyan rulers were all called \*rājās\*. We have no definite evidence with regard to their internal administration and judicial system. But it would be legitimate to suggest that they had a general assembly of elders who chose a chief from amongst themselves, probably for life. He probably ran the administration of the republic with the help of a few members of the assembly, which was the source of his power. It was this body of the Moriyas which most likely sent an envoy to Kusinārā to claim a share in the relics of the Buddha. We do not know the number of the Moriyas who constituted this assembly and council.⁵ ### [c15.s1.t1.6](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s1.t1.6) ⁴ \*Vamṣaṭṭha.\*, i, p. 183. ### [c15.s1.t1.7](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s1.t1.7) ⁵ \*Cp.\* Altekar, \*State and Government\*, pp. 121-2, 132. ### Political History ### [c15.s1.t2.1](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s1.t2.1) We have suggested above that the Moriyas were probably an ethnic group which had moved with the eastward march of the Aryans. We have also shown that the story of the \*Mahāvamsa Ṭīkā\* has no historical truth in representing the Moriyas as an offshoot of the Sakyas. Moreover, the geographical location of the former also strengthens the evidence against the Sakya-Moriyan relationship. The Moriyas inhabited a land southeast of that of the Sakyas, while north of the Moriyas lay the Mallian territory, bordering on the Himālayan mountains. This shows that the Moriyas, as compared with the Sakyas, were by no means in the Himālayan region as the \*Ṭīkā\* would have us believe.¹ Moreover, the Koliyan territory, to the west of the Moriyas, lay between the Sakyas and the Moriyas, separating the two. ### [c15.s1.t2.2](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s1.t2.2) ¹ \*Vaṁsaṭṭha.\*, i, p. 180; \*CAGIM\*, map xi, pp 444-5; our map A. ### [c15.s1.t2.3](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s1.t2.3) The \*Mahāvaṁsa Ṭīkā\* continues the history of the Moriyas, saying that, "then did the Brāhmaṇa Cāṇakka anoint a glorious youth, known by the name of Candagutta, as king over all Jambudīpa, born of a noble clan, the Moriyas \[\*Moriyakula-sambhavo\*\], when, filled with bitter hate, he had slain the ninth Nanda Dhanananda."² The \*Mahāvaṁsa Ṭīkā\*³ and the \*Dīpavaṁsa\*⁴ also record the same tradition. These sources not only connect the founder of the Magadhan Mauryan dynasty, Candragupta, with the Moriyas, but the \*Mahāvaṁsa Ṭīkā\* further states that Aśoka's mother, Dhammā, was also a Moriyan princess.⁵ ### [c15.s1.t2.4](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s1.t2.4) ² \*Mahāvaṁsa comm.\*, chap. v, 16-17; \*cp.\* \*Arthaśāstra\*, concluding verse. ### [c15.s1.t2.5](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s1.t2.5) ³ \*Vaṁsaṭṭha.\*, i, pp. 183ff. ### [c15.s1.t2.6](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s1.t2.6) ⁴ \*Dīpavaṁsa\*, vi, 19; tr. p. 148. ### [c15.s1.t2.7](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s1.t2.7) ⁵ \*Vaṁsaṭṭha.\*, i, p. 189. ### [c15.s1.t2.8](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s1.t2.8) There was a Sinhalese clan so called,⁶ probably taking its name from the ancient republican Moriyas, hence connecting them with Aśoka and the Buddha. But curiously enough, Cāṇakya as a rule addresses Candragupta Maurya as \*Vṛṣala\*, i.e. a person of low birth, in Viśākhadatta's \*Mudrārākṣasa\*. He is also said by the commentaries of the play to have been an illegitimate son of the last Nanda king by a Śūdra woman named Murā.⁷ This is an imaginative etymology, concocted by someone who was not aware of the existence of the Moriyas in the Buddha's day. Raychaudhuri⁸ and Law⁹ both support the relationship of the Moriyas of Pipphalivana and the Maurya dynasty of Magadha on the basis of evidence produced by the Ceylonese texts, and there seems to be no valid objection to Raychaudhuri's view when he says that "the Moriyas (Mauryas) were the same clan which gave Magadha its greatest dynasty".¹⁰ But Law goes further and declares that "there may be some truth in the suggestion that the Moriyas were in some way connected with the Śākyas of Kapilavastu.” Moreover, Law states, without giving his arguments or quoting his sources, that the royal family of the Nandas was connected by matrimonial alliance with the Moriyas of Pipphalivana.¹ We have seen above that there seems to have been no historical basis for the relationship between the Moriyas and the Sakyas, and to our knowledge there is no source which would support Law’s claim of matrimonial alliances being contracted between the Moriyas and the Nandas. ### [c15.s1.t2.9](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s1.t2.9) ⁶ \*Cūlavaṁsa\*, chaps. xxxviii, 13; xli, 69. ### [c15.s1.t2.10](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s1.t2.10) ⁷ \*Mudrārākṣasa\*, act iii, pp. 82ff; \*cf.\* notes p. 232. ### [c15.s1.t2.11](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s1.t2.11) ⁸ \*PHAI\*, pp. 194ff. ### [c15.s1.t2.12](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s1.t2.12) ⁹ Law, \*TAI\*, p. 288. ### [c15.s1.t2.13](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s1.t2.13) ¹⁰ \*PHAI\*, p. 194. ### [c15.s1.t2.14](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s1.t2.14) ¹ Law, \*TAI\*, pp. 288-9. ### [c15.s1.t2.15](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s1.t2.15) In the absence of further positive evidence we can only tentatively suggest, from the linguistic and ethnographical points of view, that it is not impossible that the Moriyas of Pipphalivana and the Maurya dynasty of Magadha were related to each other, and that Candragupta Maurya was a scion of some Moriyan family, originally of Pipphalivana. But the stories so elaborately expanded and dwelt upon by the Buddhist writers, in their arduous attempt to establish a blood-relationship between the Moriyas and the Sakyas, appear to be false or at least extremely suspect. ### [c15.s1.t2.16](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s1.t2.16) In the unhistorical atmosphere of the times, it would be natural for the earnest Buddhist monks to conceive, from their extreme devotion to the Sakyan sage, that their great patron, Aśoka, must himself have been a blood relation of the Buddha. Such being the case, a story to account for his relationship would be concocted and implicitly believed, perhaps even by the monks who devised it. This would be especially true if they had felt themselves inspired by some supernatural insight. Alternatively, it is possible that the story of the connexion of the Moriyas with the Sakyas arose in Ceylon itself. The powerful Moriyan clan in Ceylon would have appreciated evidence linking it to the race of the Buddha. The monks of the Island, as well, might have wished to connect Aśoka, by whose missions Ceylon was first converted to Buddhism, with the founder of their faith. ### [c15.s1.t2.17](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s1.t2.17) We believe that the Moriyas were not the descendants but the contemporaries of the Sakyas. They appear to have ceased to be a political force soon after the death of the Buddha. They were probably defeated by Ajātasattu after he had subdued the Vajjis and their territory became part of the expanding empire of Magadha. ### The Bulis of Allakappa ### [c15.s2.1](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s2.1) We are unable to give the proper derivation of the name of the Bulis, but it may well be connected with the Sanskrit root \*bul\* (\*bolayati\*), meaning “to cause to sink” or “submerge”.¹ Their capital town, Allakappa² appears to be a compound of \*alla\*, moist or wet, and \*kappa\* (Sanskrit \*kalpa\*), “anything made with a definite object in view” or “that which is fit and suitable”.³ This would imply that their capital was “suitably damp” or “almost damp”. However, these are only suggestions. ### [c15.s2.2](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s2.2) ¹ \*Cf.\* Pāṇini, \*Dhātupāṭha\*, xxxii, 62; Monier Williams, \*Skt.-Eng. Dic.\*, \*s.v.\* \*bul\*. ### [c15.s2.3](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s2.3) ² \*Dīgha\*, ii, pp. 165ff.; \*MPS\*, pp. 434ff. ### [c15.s2.4](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s2.4) ³ \*Cf.\* \*Pāli-Eng. Dic.\*, \*s.v.\* \*alla\*, \*kappa\*; Monier Williams \*Skt.-Eng. Dic.\*, \*s.v.\* \*kalpa\*, healthy and vigorous. ### Geographical Location ### [c15.s2.t1.1](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s2.t1.1) According to Malalasekera, Allakappa country was “near Magadha,”⁴ and Majumdar Sastri connects the neighbouring Veṭhadīpa with Kāsiā.⁵ However, Hoey identified Veṭhadīpa with Bettiah in the Camparan district of Bihar.⁶ These suggestions are most likely guesses. Just as it is impossible to give an elaborate picture of this republic and its institutions, so the sources do not support us in locating them geographically. The only thing that can be said at present is that the Bulis of Allakappa were neighbours of the Veṭhadīpaka-Droṇagrāmakas,⁷ and that they were not very far from the last scene of the Buddha’s life. ### [c15.s2.t1.2](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s2.t1.2) ⁴ \*DPPN\*, i, p. 191. ### [c15.s2.t1.3](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s2.t1.3) ⁵ \*CAGIM\*, p. 714; \*cf.\* Fleet in \*JRAS\*, 1906, p. 900 fn. ### [c15.s2.t1.4](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s2.t1.4) ⁶ Hoey as quoted in \*PHAI\*, p. 193; \*cf.\* \*PHAI\*, p. 193. ### [c15.s2.t1.5](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s2.t1.5) ⁷ \*Cf.\* below, p. 248ff. Appx. E. ### Form of Government ### [c15.s2.t2.1](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s2.t2.1) There is no reference to the Bulis in the \*Aṅguttara\*, the \*Saṁyutta\*, and the \*Majjhima Nikāya\*, or any other Buddhist text. Only in the \*Dīgha Nikāya\* do they receive a mere mention.⁸ Not even the elaborate and legendary \*Jātakas\* refer to either the Bulis or to their town. The \*Dhammapadaṭṭhakathā\* gives an account of the \*Allakappa-raṭṭha\* and a king referred to as \*Allakappa-rājā\*.⁹ But there seems little truth in this last account. Allakappa can hardly be the proper name of the king. Probably it was a title by which the chief ruler of the Allakappa country was called, as the king of the Videhas was referred to as Videha,¹ and that of the Koliyas was called Koliya-\*rājā\*.² Moreover, if the government of the Allakappa country had been monarchical, the messenger who was sent to Kusinārā to claim their share in the relics of the Buddha would have spoken as an envoy of the Bulian king with proper titles, as did the ambassador from the Magadhan king.³ ### [c15.s2.t2.2](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s2.t2.2) ⁸ \*Dīgha\*, ii, pp. 165ff; \*MPS\*, pp. 434ff; Rockhill pp. 145ff. ### [c15.s2.t2.3](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s2.t2.3) ⁹ i, pp. 161ff. ### [c15.s2.t2.4](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s2.t2.4) ¹ ^1 \*Cf.\* above, pp. 147ff. ### [c15.s2.t2.5](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s2.t2.5) ² ^2 \*Cf.\* above, pp. 213ff. ### [c15.s2.t2.6](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s2.t2.6) ³ ^3 \*MPS\*, p. 434. ### [c15.s2.t2.7](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s2.t2.7) In the account of the sharing of the relics of the Buddha, the striking similarity in the manner of the claim advanced by the Bulis to that of other republican peoples makes it highly probable that the Bulis had a republican organization. The text reads that "the Bulis of Allakappa heard the news that the Exalted One had passed away at Kusinārā. And the Bulis of Allakappa \[not the king of the Bulis\] sent a messenger to the Mallas, saying, 'The Exalted One was a Khattiya and so are we. We are worthy to receive a portion of the relics of the Exalted One. Over the remains of the Exalted One will we put up a sacred cairn, and in their honour will we celebrate a feast'."⁴ ### [c15.s2.t2.8](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s2.t2.8) ⁴ ^4 \*Dīgha\*, ii, p. 165. ### [c15.s2.t2.9](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s2.t2.9) That the Bulis claimed such a share is confirmed from other versions of the \*Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra\* in Sanskrit, Tibetan, and Chinese.⁵ In this respect they are better documented than the Brāhmaṇas of Veṭhadīpa. The location of the latter, according to the Pāli version, remains vague, as we do not know of any island of that name.⁶ ### [c15.s2.t2.10](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s2.t2.10) ⁵ ^5 \*MPS\*, p. 434. ### [c15.s2.t2.11](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s2.t2.11) ⁶ ^6 \*Cf.\* Appx. E, pp. 248-49. ### [c15.s2.t2.12](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s2.t2.12) \*Government and Organization\* ### [c15.s2.t2.13](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s2.t2.13) The combined testimony of the \*Dīgha Nikāya\*, the \*Buddhavaṁsa\*,⁷ and the \*Dhammapada Commentary\* shows that the Bulis had no king in the sense that the Magadhans and the Kosalans had. On the other hand, they had a chief or president, like the other republics probably chosen for life, who was assisted by a council and an assembly. We have no positive evidence for the existence of the council. That an assembly existed at Allakappa, however, can be inferred from the \*Dīgha Nikāya\*.¹ It is beyond doubt that the messenger sent to Kusinārā, if not sent by a king, was sent by important Bulians who must have formed such administrative bodies as a council and an assembly. Smaller republics, like the Nāyas and the Koliyas, had such institutions, and the case of the Bulis of Allakappa was probably the same. ### [c15.s2.t2.14](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s2.t2.14) ⁷ ^7 Chap. xxviii, 2. ### [c15.s2.t2.15](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s2.t2.15) ¹ \*Dīgha\*, ii, pp. 165ff. ### [c15.s2.t2.16](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s2.t2.16) According to the \*Dhammapada Commentary\*, the extent of Allakapparaṭṭha was only ten leagues, as was the Veṭhadīparaṭṭha, or more accurately the Droṇagrāma settlement of the Dhūmragotra Brāhmaṇas,² ruled by Veṭhadīpaka \*rājā\*.³ We believe that the kings of Allakappa and Veṭhadīpa-Droṇagrāma were no more than chiefs, and, in the case of the former at least, only the head of a republic. This was also the case with the Koliyarājā of the Koliyas.⁴ The same source further informs us of the intimate relations that existed between the two tribes. This would suggest that the two territories were near each other,⁵ thus revealing the weakness of Kauṭilya's \*maṇḍala\* theory, according to which they should have been natural enemies.⁶ ### [c15.s2.t2.17](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s2.t2.17) ² \*Cf.\* below, pp. 248-49, Appx. E. ### [c15.s2.t2.18](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s2.t2.18) ³ \*Dhammapadaṭṭha\*, i, p. 161. ### [c15.s2.t2.19](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s2.t2.19) ⁴ \*Cf.\* above, pp. 213ff. ### [c15.s2.t2.20](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s2.t2.20) ⁵ \*Dhammapadaṭṭha\*, i, p. 161ff; \*PHAI\*, p. 193. ### [c15.s2.t2.21](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s2.t2.21) ⁶ \*Cf.\* above, pp. 123ff. ### [c15.s2.t2.22](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s2.t2.22) We have no evidence regarding their internal administration and relations with other tribes. Nor can anything be said about the true nature of their relations with the Veṭhadīpaka -Droṇagrāmakas. Like the Koliyas and the Sakyas they might have been normally on good terms, with occasional disputes and feuds. Probably both the Bulis and the Veṭhadīpaka-Droṇagrāmakas were followers of the Buddha, and hence they obtained a mention in the Buddhist sources. ### The Bhaggas of Suṁsumāragiri ### Name and Etymology ### [c15.s3.t1.1](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s3.t1.1) The word Bhagga may have the sense of broken (Sanskrit \*bhagna\*),⁷ or may be equivalent to the Sanskrit \*bhāgya\*, fortune or good luck.¹ Some scholars, however, have linked the Bhaggas with the Bhargas of the Sanskrit sources.² The earliest mention of the Bhargas is made in the \*Aitareya Brāhmaṇa\*, where a Bhārgāyana prince named Kairiśi Sutvan is referred to.³ They also figure in Pāṇini, where they are grouped with the Yaudheyas.⁴ The \*Bhīṣma Parva\* of the \*Mahābhārata\* also mentions the Bhargas along with other peoples like the Āndhras, Kirātas, Kosalas, etc.⁵ At another place in the \*Mahābhārata\*,⁶ and also in the \*Harivaṁśa\*,⁷ the Bhargas are associated with the Vatsas as well as with the Niṣādas, in the list of peoples conquered by Arjuna.⁸ The \*Harivaṁśa\* tradition describes the Bhargas and the Vatsas as the two sons of Pratardana and the Buddhist books also associate the Bhaggas with the Vaṁsa prince Bodhi, son of king Udena, who resided in a magnificant palace built for him at Suṁsumāragiri.⁹ ### [c15.s3.t1.2](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s3.t1.2) ⁷ \*Jāt.\*, i, p. 493. ### [c15.s3.t1.3](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s3.t1.3) ¹ \*Cf.\* \*Pāli-Eng. Dic.\*, \*s.v.\* \*Bhagga\*. ### [c15.s3.t1.4](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s3.t1.4) ² \*PHAI\*, pp. 192-3; Law, \*TAI\*, pp. 292-3. ### [c15.s3.t1.5](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s3.t1.5) ³ \*Ait. Br.\*, viii, 28. ### [c15.s3.t1.6](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s3.t1.6) ⁴ Pāṇini, iv, 1, 178. ### [c15.s3.t1.7](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s3.t1.7) ⁵ \*Mbh.\* (Poona Edn.), \*Bhīṣma Parva\*, chap. x, 48ff. ### [c15.s3.t1.8](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s3.t1.8) ⁶ \*Ibid.\*, ii, 30, 10. ### [c15.s3.t1.9](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s3.t1.9) ⁷ \*Harivaṁśa\*, xxix, 73. ### [c15.s3.t1.10](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s3.t1.10) ⁸ \*Mbh.\*, \*Aśvamedha Parva\*, chap. lxxxii, pp. 157ff, as quoted in \*PHAI\*, pp. 192-3. ### [c15.s3.t1.11](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s3.t1.11) ⁹ \*Majjhima\*, ii, pp. 91ff; \*Jāt.\*, iii, pp. 157ff. ### [c15.s3.t1.12](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s3.t1.12) Raychaudhuri¹⁰ and Law¹¹ both support the connection of the Bhargas of the Sanskrit texts and the Bhaggas of the Pāli sources, and there does not seem to be any evidence which disproves such a relationship between the two. We accept this connection only as the most probable one, because no other text contradicts it. But Law's adventurous suggestion identifying the Bhaggas, Bhargas and the Bhārgavas as "one and the same people"¹² is not borne out by the Pāli texts, where the Bhaggavas appear as a caste of potters.¹³ There is also a Brāhmaṇic \*gotra\* name Bhārgava and quite a few people are mentioned as Bhaggavas in the Buddhist texts and commentaries.¹⁴ There is a great possibility of the Bhargas and the Bhaggas being of the same ethnic group, and it may be possible that these people had more than one settlement. But we strongly dispute Law's suggestion of linking the Bhārgavas also with them. Bharga is apparently a simple ethnic name, while Bhārgava is a secondary formation derived from the name of the legendary \*ṛṣi\* Bhṛgu. ### [c15.s3.t1.13](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s3.t1.13) ¹⁰ \*PHAI\*, pp. 192ff. ### [c15.s3.t1.14](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s3.t1.14) ¹¹ Law, \*TAI\*, pp. 292ff. ### [c15.s3.t1.15](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s3.t1.15) ¹² \*Loc. cit.\* ### [c15.s3.t1.16](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s3.t1.16) ¹³ \*Majjhima\*, ii, pp. 237ff; \*Jāt.\*, ii, p. 80. ### [c15.s3.t1.17](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s3.t1.17) ¹⁴ \*Dīgha\*, iii, pp. 1ff; \*Sum. Vil.\*, i, p. 35; \*Therīgāthā Comm.\*, p. 2; \*cf.\* tr. \*Dialogues\*, iii, p. 7 fn 3. ### [c15.s3.t1.18](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s3.t1.18) On the authority of the epic and the \*Apadāna\*, Raychaudhuri located the Bhaggas in the Vindhyan region between the Yamunā and the Śoṇa rivers.¹ But Malalasekera proposed a more reasonable, though still vague, location of their territory, somewhere between Vesāli and Sāvatthi.² Their connection with the kingdom of the Vaṁsas (Vatsas), and the fact of their having a republican constitution, would suggest that the Bhaggan territory lay to the north of the Vaṁsan capital, Kosāmbī, and to the west of Banaras. The kingdom of Kosala lay to the north of the Bhaggan land.³ Thus, they should be located somewhere north of the river Yamunā and south of the Ganges, not far north of Kosāmbī or west of Prayāga. As they seem to have been under the control and influence of the kingdom of Vatsa, they probably inhabited some part of that kingdom. We suggest that their location between the two great rivers seems to be most appropriate, despite the objection that it is separated by Kāsi and the Kosalan kingdom on the east, and north from the other republican peoples—the Licchavis, Mallas, Moriyas Koliyas, and Sakyas.⁴ ### [c15.s3.t1.19](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s3.t1.19) ¹ \*PHAI\*, p. 193. ### [c15.s3.t1.20](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s3.t1.20) ² \*DPPN\*, s.v., Suṁsumāragiri. ### [c15.s3.t1.21](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s3.t1.21) ³ \*Cf.\* our map A. ### [c15.s3.t1.22](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s3.t1.22) ⁴ \*Cf.\* Basham's map in \*Ājīvikas\*; C. C. Davies, \*Historical Atlas\*, map ii; our map A. ### Status and Government ### [c15.s3.t2.1](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s3.t2.1) There are a number of references to the Bhaggas of Suṁsumāragiri in connection with the visits of the Buddha in the early part of his career.⁵ Bhagga appears to be the name of both the people and the land they occupied,⁶ including their capital town Suṁsumāragiri with its surrounding region. Some of the \*Vinaya\* rules for the monks were laid down there,⁷ and there are other scattered references to the Bhaggas and their country.¹ The \*Majjhima Nikāya\* also contains at least three \*suttas\* that were delivered at Suṁsumāra Hill.² The \*Dhonasākha Jātaka\* was also narrated at the Bhaggan capital.³ Moreover, there are a few references to them in the \*Saṁyutta Nikāya\*⁴ and other sources.⁵ ### [c15.s3.t2.2](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s3.t2.2) ⁵ \*Aṅguttara\*, ii, p. 61; iii, pp. 295-7; iv, pp. 85, 228ff; v, pp. 228-9, 232; \*Majjhima\*, ii, p. 91; etc.; \*cf.\* \*DPPN\*, ii, p. 1172. ### [c15.s3.t2.3](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s3.t2.3) ⁶ \*Majjhima\*, ii, p. 91; \*Jāt.\*, iii, p. 157; \*cf.\* \*DPPN\*, ii, p. 345. ### [c15.s3.t2.4](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s3.t2.4) ⁷ \*Vinaya\*, v, p. 145. ### [c15.s3.t2.5](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s3.t2.5) ¹ \*Ibid.\*, ii, pp. 127; iv, pp. 115, 198. ### [c15.s3.t2.6](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s3.t2.6) ² \*Majjhima\*, i, pp. 95ff, 323ff; ii, pp. 91ff. ### [c15.s3.t2.7](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s3.t2.7) ³ \*Jāt.\*, iii, pp. 157ff. ### [c15.s3.t2.8](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s3.t2.8) ⁴ \*Saṁyutta\*, iii, p. 1; iv, p. 116. ### [c15.s3.t2.9](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s3.t2.9) ⁵ \*Pap. Sūd.\*, i, p. 292; \*Sārattha.\*, ii p. 181. \*Dhammapadaṭṭha.\*, iii, pp. 137ff. ### [c15.s3.t2.10](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s3.t2.10) Most of the sources mentioned above merely strengthen the evidence for the existence of the Bhaggas and their chief town Suṁsumāragiri at the time of the Buddha, without giving much information about their political institutions. Yet one significant fact emerges from the study of the Bhaggas, that they had no hereditary kings, like the Vatsas, the Kosalans and the Magadhans. This suggests that they were a non-minarchical community like the Bulis, Moriyas, Koliyas, etc. However, they were not one of the claimants for the remains of the Buddha at his death. Hence, the Bhaggas might not have been absolutely free, other possible alternatives are that they were either too far away and had not heard the news, or that they were not very sympathetic to Buddhism. The mention in the \*Majjhima Nikāya\*,⁶ the \*Vinaya Piṭaka\*,⁷ and the \*Dhonasākha Jātaka\*⁸ of the Vatsan prince Bodhi's having a palace called Koṅkaṇḍa built for himself at Suṁsumāragiri could suggest the control and influence of the Vatsan king on the Bhaggas. ### [c15.s3.t2.11](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s3.t2.11) ⁶ \*Majjhima\*, ii, pp. 91ff; \*cf.\* \*Pap. Sūd.\*, ii, p. 739. ### [c15.s3.t2.12](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s3.t2.12) ⁷ \*Vinaya\*, ii, p. 127; iii, p. 199. ### [c15.s3.t2.13](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s3.t2.13) ⁸ \*Jāt.\*, iii, p. 157. ### [c15.s3.t2.14](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s3.t2.14) The \*Jātaka\* tells us that the architect who built this palace was blinded so that he could not build another like it.⁹ The \*Dhammapada\* Commentary, however, dramatically narrates that the architect had been warned of this by Bodhi's friend, and that he escaped on a magic bird.¹⁰ We do not believe that there is any truth in either version, which contains a widespread theme in folk tradition, or that such a magnificant palace even existed at Suṁsumāragiri. But the significant point, attested by almost all the sources, is that a Vatsan prince lived at the Bhaggan capital, apparently as a viceroy of his father. The texts do not explicitly state this, but the fact that the prince lived there, and erected a building at the Bhaggan capital, would strongly suggest that the Bhaggas were not free—at least in their external affairs and foreign policy. It is possible then that they were a republican tribe with modified independence. ### [c15.s3.t2.15](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s3.t2.15) ⁹ \*Ibid.\*, pp. 157-8. ### [c15.s3.t2.16](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s3.t2.16) ¹⁰ \*Dhammapadaṭṭha.\*, iii, pp. 134ff. ### [c15.s3.t2.17](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s3.t2.17) As usual the commentaries give a fanciful etymology of the chief city of the Bhaggas. They state that it was so called because when it was being built a crocodile (\*suṁsumāra\*) made a noise in a lake nearby.¹ The late \*Apadāna\* mentions the Bhaggas with the Kārushas in a list of tribes.² This throws no light on the republican institutions of this political community, but does show that the Bhaggas were remembered as a separate ethnic group. Later generations may have remembered this tribe, because of its internal independence and republican institutions, even though it was subordinate to the Vatsan king. ### [c15.s3.t2.18](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s3.t2.18) ¹ \*Pap. Sūd.\*, i, p. 292; \*Sārattha.\*, ii, p. 181. ### [c15.s3.t2.19](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s3.t2.19) ² \*Apadāna\*, ii, p. 359. ### [c15.s3.t2.20](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s3.t2.20) We know nothing of their assembly and the council, but we presume that they had such bodies like the other republican tribes of the time. Nothing is known of their administration of public business and dispensation of justice. Probably they appointed a chief who presided over the Bhaggan assembly and carried out the administration of the republic with the help of a few Bhagga elders. It is likely that they did not retain their freedom long and fell to the King of the Vatsas, as did the Sakyas to the Kosalan king. We hear of no incidents or quarrels of the Bhaggas with neighbouring peoples. This may be because they had already been assimilated into the kingdom of Udayana, as the Buddha visited Suṁsumāragiri only in the early years of his preaching career. But possibly they lost freedom during the reign of Udayana's successor for, as we have shown, from the distribution of the Buddha's relics we cannot disprove that they were independent at the time. (However, as an independent republican tribe, the Bhaggas vanished from the map of India about the time the Buddha breathed his last.) ### The Kālāmas of Kesaputta ### Name and Early History ### [c15.s4.t1.1](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s4.t1.1) The Kālāmas of Kesaputta are the least documented of the republican communities that flourished at the time of the Buddha and Mahāvīra. The striking similarity of the name of their town to the Keśins of the \*Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa\* ¹ has led historians to connect these peoples with the Keśins of the Brāhmaṇic period. Kesaputta (Sanskrit \*Keśaputra\*) and Keśin both are connected with the Sanskrit word \*keśa\*, meaning hair or mane. The connection between the two seems phonetically and linguistically obvious, but a discussion of the sources is necessary before deciding the issue. ### [c15.s4.t1.2](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s4.t1.2) ¹ \*Śat. Br.\*, xi, 8, 4, 6; \*cf.\* Pāṇini, v, 2, 109; vi, 4, 165. ### [c15.s4.t1.3](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s4.t1.3) Keśin, as the name of a people, occurs in the \*Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa\*, where their king is mentioned as learning from Khaṇḍika the atonement for a bad omen at the time of performing a sacrifice.² A Keśin Dārbhya or Dālbhya is a somewhat enigmatic figure.³ According to the \*Jaiminīya Brāhmaṇa\* this inexplicable person was the son of king Uccaiḥśrava's sister.⁴ His people, according to the \*Kāṭhaka Saṁhitā\*, were the Pāñcālas, of whom the Keśins were one of the three branches.⁵ Dālbhya was a contemporary of a fellow sage Keśin Śātyakāmi by name.⁶ ### [c15.s4.t1.4](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s4.t1.4) ² \*Śat. Br.\*, xi, 8, 4, 6ff; cf. Eggeling, \*SBE\*, 44, pp. 131-4; \*Vedic Index\* i, p. 187. ### [c15.s4.t1.5](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s4.t1.5) ³ \*Śat. Br.\*, xi, 8, 4, 1ff. ### [c15.s4.t1.6](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s4.t1.6) ⁴ \*Jaim. Br.\*, iii, 21, 1ff. ### [c15.s4.t1.7](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s4.t1.7) ⁵ \*Kāṭh. Saṁ.\*, xxx, 2; \*cf. Vedic Index\* i, p. 187. ### [c15.s4.t1.8](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s4.t1.8) ⁶ \*Mait. Saṁ.\*, i, 6, 5; \*Tait. Saṁ.\*, ii, 6, 2, 3. ### [c15.s4.t1.9](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s4.t1.9) Keith and Macdonell say that in view of the fact that the early literature mentions Dārbhya as a sage, it seems doubtful whether the commentator is correct in thinking that the \*Śatapatha\* refers to a king and a people. A sage alone may well be meant, while the \*Jaiminīya Upaniṣad Brāhmaṇa\*, which refers to him as a prince, is of no great authority.⁷ They further suggest that the "later work may have assumed that the reference in the \*Kāṭhaka Saṁhitā\* to the Keśin people signifies kingship, but this is hardly necessary".⁸ Keith and Macdonell may be right in doubting the accuracy of the commentator about the Keśin king and a Keśin sage. But in our opinion they are over-cautious when they dismiss the \*Jaiminīya Upaniṣad Brāhmaṇa\* as "of no great authority," simply because it is somewhat later than the more famous \*Brāhmaṇas\*. Even if generally accepted as unauthentic and known to be late, the text may contain some historical information, as for example do Buddhaghosa's commentaries and the \*Jātakas\*. ### [c15.s4.t1.10](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s4.t1.10) ⁷ \*Vedic Index\*, i, p. 187. ### [c15.s4.t1.11](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s4.t1.11) ⁸ \*Ibid.\*, p. 187. ### [c15.s4.t1.12](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s4.t1.12) We cannot say definitely in the face of the controversy discussed above, whether the Keśin of the \*Śatapatha\* refers to a king of the Keśins or to a sage who was a Keśin. If the text is to be believed, there were Keśin people and the question whether Dārbhya was king or sage is of no relevance for our present purpose. According to the \*Kāṭhaka Saṁhitā\*, as we have noticed above, the Keśins belonged to the Pāñcālas.¹ It is most likely that the Keśins were related to the Kālāmas of Kesaputta,² as were the Moriyas of Pipphalivana to the Mauryan dynasty of Magadha. We have seen that most of the republican peoples of northeast India appear to have been descended from Aryan pioneers who followed the example of Videgha Māthava³ in their eastward march. It would be quite in harmony with the texts if we suggest that some Keśins of Pāñcāla also established a settlement in the northeast, designating it after their tribal name Keśaputra or Kesaputta of the Pāli texts. ### [c15.s4.t1.13](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s4.t1.13) ¹ \*Kāṭh. Saṁ.\*, xxx, 2ff; \*cf.\* above, p. 231. ### [c15.s4.t1.14](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s4.t1.14) ² \*Cf. PHAI\*, pp. 99, 193. ### [c15.s4.t1.15](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s4.t1.15) ³ \*Cf.\* above, pp. 60ff. ### [c15.s4.t1.16](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s4.t1.16) We are not certain about the derivation of the name Kālāma, but Kālāma is a student of the Kalāma or Kālāpa grammar in Pāṇini,⁴ and the school of Kalāpin is often mentioned with that of the Kaṭhas.⁵ Whether Kālāma has any connection with the Sanskrit word \*kāla\*, dark or blue-back, is not certain. ### [c15.s4.t1.17](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s4.t1.17) ⁴ Pāṇini, iv, 3, 104; \*Mbh.\*, ii, 113; \*cf. Vedic Index\*, i p. 187. ### [c15.s4.t1.18](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s4.t1.18) ⁵ Monier Williams, \*Skt. -Eng. Dic., s.v. kālāpa, kālāpaka.\* ### Geographical Location ### [c15.s4.t2.1](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s4.t2.1) The Dālbhyas who appear in the \*Ṛg Veda\* are referred to as settled on the banks of the Gomati,⁶ which Raychaudhuri suggests might be the Gumti which flows between the Ganges and the Ghāgrā.⁷ But it seems strange that the Ṛg Vedic text should refer to such an eastern river. Even the Ganges is referred to only a few times in the \*Ṛg Veda\*. In Monier Williams' opinion, the Gomati referred to in some hymns fell into the Indus.⁸ It was probably in that region that the Keśins of the \*Ṛg Veda\* were settled. Probably during the later Vedic period they moved to the Pāñcāla region, from where a branch of them moved further eastwards and settled at Kesaputta, sometime before the days of the Buddha. ### [c15.s4.t2.2](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s4.t2.2) ⁶ \*ṚV\*, v, 61. ### [c15.s4.t2.3](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s4.t2.3) ⁷ \*PHAI\*, p. 193. ### [c15.s4.t2.4](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s4.t2.4) ⁸ \*ṚV\*, viii, 24, 30; x, 75, 10; \*cf.\* Monier Williams, \*Skt. - Eng. Dic., s.v.\* Gomatī under go. ### [c15.s4.t2.5](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s4.t2.5) The chief town of the Kālāmas, Kesaputta, is referred to as a \*nigama\* of the Kosalan kingdom in the \*Aṅguttara Nikāya\*.¹ Then we could locate Kesaputta \*nigama\* of the Kālāmas somewhere between the territory bounded by the river Gomatī to the west, and the river Ghāgrā to the northeast, with the Ganges to the south. Kesaputta may have been anywhere in this region south of the Moriyas or of the Mallas. We prefer to locate the Kālāmas to the south of the Mallas, below the river Ghāgrā, to the north of the Ganges and northeast of Banaras,² as such a location is consistent with Kesaputta’s being a Kosalan township. It would place them just on the borders of the other republican communities which seem to have occupied a large territory, bounded on the west by the directly governed part of the Kosalan kingdom.³ The exact location of the Kālāmas cannot be ascertained, owing to the lack of data. ### [c15.s4.t2.6](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s4.t2.6) ¹ \*Aṅguttara\*, i, p. 188. ### [c15.s4.t2.7](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s4.t2.7) ² \*Cf. CAGIM\*, map xi, pp. 444-5. ### [c15.s4.t2.8](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s4.t2.8) ³ \*Cf.\* our map A. ### [c15.s4.t2.9](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s4.t2.9) \*Status and Government\* ### [c15.s4.t2.10](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s4.t2.10) The \*Aṅguttara Nikāya\* and its commentary are the only known sources which allude to the status of the Kālāmas and indicate that they had a republican form of government. The former text says that once the Buddha, while touring amongst the Kālāmas and accompanied by a great body of monks, stayed “at the \*nigama\* of the Kālāmas, named Kesaputta”.⁴ In general, \*nigama\* ⁵ seems to imply a settlement somewhat smaller than a \*nagara\* or \*pura\*,⁶ and the use of this term indicates that they were quite a small people, perhaps not much more than a thousand families. In Malalasekera’s opinion Kālāma was probably the name of a \*gotra\* or family.⁷ This evidence would show that the region occupied by them was limited to the countryside around their town. As they are placed in the Kosalan country by the text, there is no doubt that they were under the supervision of the Kosalan king, as the Bhaggas were under king Udayana. ### [c15.s4.t2.11](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s4.t2.11) ⁴ \*Aṅguttara\*, i, p. 188. ### [c15.s4.t2.12](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s4.t2.12) ⁵ \*Cp. nigama-sabhā, Ep. Ind.\*, viii, p. 82; xv, p. 263; \*cf.\* Majumdar, \*Corporate Life\*, pp. 144-7. ### [c15.s4.t2.13](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s4.t2.13) ⁶ \*Cf. Mahāvastu\*, iii, p. 102; tr., iii, p. 101 fn. 1; \*cp.\*, I. B. Horner, \*The Book of the Discipline\*, iv, p. 379, fn. 6. ### [c15.s4.t2.14](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s4.t2.14) ⁷ \*DPPN\*, i, p. 581. ### [c15.s4.t2.15](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s4.t2.15) Raychaudhuri, on the authority of a passage in the \*Saṁyutta Nikāya\* where Pasenadi, the king of Kosala, is spoken of as ruling at the head of a group of five \*rājās\*,¹ suggested that the ruler of the Kālāmas of Kesaputta was one of them.² But the difficulty in accepting such a view is very great; neither the \*Aṅguttara Nikāya\* nor the commentary refers to a king of the Kālāmas.³ On the other hand, when the Buddha preached at Kesaputta, he referred to the Kālāmas always in the plural, and when he was directly talking to them he addressed them only as Kālāmas. Moreover, the Kālāmas were too small a tribe to be represented on the council of five which Pasenadi headed. We do not know of any such representative body of tribes in the monarchies from our sources, though in the republican confederation of the Vajjians such a principle was followed more or less. Raychaudhuri’s claim that such a council existed in Kosala is extremely dubious and we reject it on the grounds that there is no other evidence that representation on a tribal basis was a feature of ancient Indian monarchies. Morever, even if this was the case in Kosala, the Kālāmas were too insignificant a people to figure in the royal council of five; and finally they had no king as such. The reference cited by Raychaudhuri presumably implies a group of five tributary kings or vassals. ### [c15.s4.t2.16](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s4.t2.16) ¹ \*Saṁyutta\*, i, p. 155. ### [c15.s4.t2.17](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s4.t2.17) ² \*Cf. PHAI\*, p. 99; H. C. Raychaudhuri, \*Indian, Culture\*, ii, p. 808. ### [c15.s4.t2.18](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s4.t2.18) ³ \*Aṅguttara\*, i, pp. 188ff; \*Man. Pūr.\*, i, pp. 418ff. ### [c15.s4.t2.19](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s4.t2.19) Jayaswal and Bhandarkar have both discussed the question of \*nigama\*, and the latter has given it a great deal of attention.⁴ We do not agree with either in all their views, but agree insofar as the Kālāmas ruled their town through government by discussion. The commentary says that the Kālāmas were Khattiyas.⁵ Probably the Kālāma-Khattiya elders formed an assembly which chose a few members who carried out the administration of the town. The process of government should have been fairly simple, probably simpler than the present Indian \*tahsīl\* town municipalities. There was probably a \*santhāgāra\* at Kesaputta which was the political, social and religious centre of the \*nigama\* community, and probably the simple local judicial cases were also tried in this town hall.⁶ ### [c15.s4.t2.20](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s4.t2.20) ⁴ Jayaswal, \*Hindu Polity\*, p. 244; Bhandarkar, \*Car. Lecs.\*, pp. 174-8. ### [c15.s4.t2.21](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s4.t2.21) ⁵ \*Man. Pūr.\*, i, p. 418. ### [c15.s4.t2.22](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s4.t2.22) ⁶ \*Cf.\* Rhys Davids, \*Buddhist India\*, p. 20; \*CHI\*, i, p. 177. ### [c15.s4.t2.23](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s4.t2.23) There are only a few scattered references to the Kālāmas, to their famous philosopher Āḷāra, the teacher of the Buddha before the latter attained \*Sambodhi\*, and to Bharaṇḍu the Kālāma, once a co-disciple of the Buddha.¹ We do not know if the Kālāmas retained the independence of their \*nigama\* for long after Pasenadi died.² The fact that they did not claim a share in the relics of the Buddha suggests that soon after Viḍūḍabha captured the throne from his father, he annexed the territory of the Kālāmas of Kesaputta to the directly-governed Kosalan kingdom. But it is not improbable that they were indifferent towards Buddhism; if they were in fact connected with the Keśins of the \*Brāhmaṇa\* literature it is likely that they would be more sympathetic towards Brāhmaṇism. The only early source mentioning the Kālāmas is the \*Aṅguttara Nikāya\*. Their not being mentioned in the \*Jātakas\* suggests that they no longer existed as an ethnic \*nigama\* after the death of Pasenadi. ### [c15.s4.t2.24](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s4.t2.24) ¹ \*Aṅguttara\*, i, pp. 276ff; \*Man. Pūr.\*, i, pp. 458ff; cf. \*DPPN\*, i, p. 296; ii, p. 363. ### [c15.s4.t2.25](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15.s4.t2.25) ² Cf. \*PHAI\*, p. 99; Law, \*TAI\*, p. 289. ## Linked texts (40) - [Jātaka](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.theravada.sp.khuddaka.jataka.143) — Pāli - [Bodhirājakumārasutta](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.theravada.sp.majjhima.85.1.1) — Pāli - [Mahāparinibbānasutta](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.theravada.sp.digha.16.6.24.5) — Pāli - [Aṣṭādhyāyī](https://indike.org/pramana/in.vedanga.vyakarana.astadhyayi.4.1.178) — Pāṇini, Sanskrit - [Sarabhasutta](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.theravada.sp.anguttara.3.64.11.1) — Pāli - [Śatapathabrāhmaṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/in.veda.brahmana.satapatha.11.8.4.6) — Yājñavalkya & Śāṇḍilya (Vedic teacher), Sanskrit - [Mahāvibhaṅga](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.theravada.vp.suttavibhanga.maha.pc.55.2.2.9) — Pāli - [Cullavagga](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.theravada.vp.khandhaka.cullavagga.5.20.7.7) — Pāli - [Kāṭhakasaṃhitā](https://indike.org/pramana/in.veda.samhita.krsnayajur*kathaka.30.2) — Sanskrit - [Ṛgvedasaṃhitā](https://indike.org/pramana/in.veda.samhita.rg.5.61) — Sanskrit - [Taittirīyasaṃhitā](https://indike.org/pramana/in.veda.samhita.krsnayajur*taittiriya.2.6.2.3) — Sanskrit - [Maitrāyaṇīsaṃhitā](https://indike.org/pramana/in.veda.samhita.krsnayajur*maitrayani.1.6.5) — Sanskrit - [Pāthikasutta](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.theravada.sp.digha.24.1.1.1) — Pāli - [Aitareyabrāhmaṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/in.veda.brahmana.aitreya.8.28) — Mahidāsa Aitareya, Sanskrit - [Pañcattayasutta](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.theravada.sp.majjhima.102.21.1) — Pāli - [Cūḷadukkhakkhandhasutta](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.theravada.sp.majjhima.14.21.13) — Pāli - [Tatiyaadhammasutta](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.theravada.sp.anguttara.10.115.14.1) — Pāli - [Nakulapitusutta](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.theravada.sp.samyutta.3.22.1.1.1) — Pāli - [Dutiyasaṃvāsasutta](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.theravada.sp.anguttara.4.54.6.1) — Pāli - [Anutappiyasutta](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.theravada.sp.anguttara.6.15.4.1) — Pāli - [Hāliddikānisutta](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.theravada.sp.samyutta.4.35.130.2.1) — Pāli - [Sattadhammasutta](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.theravada.sp.anguttara.7.60.1.1) — Pāli - [Mahābhārata](https://indike.org/pramana/in.lit.mahabharata.vyasa.2.30.10) — Vyāsa, Sanskrit - [Apadāna](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.theravada.sp.khuddaka.apadana) — Pāli - [Mahāvastu](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.sanskrit.avadana.mahavastu) — Sanskrit - [Jaiminīyabrāhmaṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/in.veda.brahmana.jaiminiya) — Sanskrit - [Kauṭilīya Arthaśāstra](https://indike.org/pramana/in.niti.artha.kautilya) — Kauṭilya, Sanskrit - [Buddhavaṃsa](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.theravada.sp.khuddaka.buddhavamsa) — Pāli - [Dīpavaṃsa](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.theravada_postcanon.vamsa.dipavamsa) — Pāli - [Mudrārākṣasa](https://indike.org/pramana/in.lit.plays.rajacarita.mudraraksasa) — Viśākhadatta, Sanskrit - [Mahāparinirvāṇasūtra](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.sanskrit.agama.mahaparinirvanasutra) — Sanskrit - [Dhātupāṭha](https://indike.org/pramana/in.vedanga.vyakarana.khila.dhatupatha) — Pāṇini, Sanskrit - [Dīghanikāya](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.theravada.sp.digha) — Pāli - [Epigraphia Indica](https://indike.org/pramana/inp.epigraphy.corpora.ei) - [Vinayapiṭaka](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.theravada.vp) — Pāli - [Harivaṃśa](https://indike.org/pramana/in.lit.mahabharata.harivamsa) — Vyāsa, Sanskrit - [Majjhimanikāya](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.theravada.sp.majjhima) — Pāli - [Saṃyuttanikāya](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.theravada.sp.samyutta) — Pāli - [Aṅguttaranikāya](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.theravada.sp.anguttara) — Pāli - [Nāsik cave inscription No. 12 (Ksh. 9) (ed. Senart 1906)](https://indike.org/pramana/inp.epigraphy.deccan.satavahana.nasik-no-12-of-usavadata-time-of-nahapana*senart1906) — Prakrit --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c15) · Pramāṇa