ANCIENT INDIAN POLITY

A proper integration of the interests of the individual and the society may be said to constitutc the central problem of all social philosophy So far as the ancient Indian thinkers were concerned, they had developed in this field two distinct disciplines, namely Dharmaśāstra and Arthaśāstra. As a matter of fact, the ancient Indian concept of Dharma is very comprehensive and touches all aspects of man’s relation with the society. One such aspect is political in character and often manifests itself in the form of the relation between the subject and the state. In view of the fact that the state in ancient India was mostly monarchical, this aspect of Dharma was known as Rajadharma ( duties of kings ). Naturally enough, the Rājadharma which, by and large, corres ponded with political theory and practice, formed but one of the many topics dealt with in the larger scheme of Dharmaśāstra. Dharmaśāstra was normally divided into three main sections, namely, ācāra or rules of conduct, vj’avahāra or civil and criminal law, and prayascitta or expiation and punishment, and the Rājadharma was included in the section embodying the rules of conduct. In course of time, however, polity came to be regarded as being important enough to be recognised as an independent branch of knowledge, under the same of Arthaśāstra. As against Dharmaśāstra, Arthaśāstra may be said to have given quite a new orientation to political theory and practice. It may be presumed that this new orientation was, at least to a certain extent, the result of the movement of popular Hinduism which, incidentally, arose, on the one hand, to counteract the essentially

1. For a brief discussion about the concept of Dharma and some other allied concepts such as those of varna, Asrama, puruṣartha, samskära, etc, 8CC “Indian pattern of life and thought a glimpse of its carly phases,” published elsewhere in this Volume Also see " Man in Hindu thought" in DANDEKAR, Insights into Hinduism. ANCIENT INDIAN POLITY 349 individualistic and renunciatory tendencies of the Upanisads and, on the other, to check the growth of the heterodox religions, Indeed, it is not impossible to find some indications of this new political ideology in the Mahābhārata itself. In order to overpower the Kaurava warriors, like Bhisma, Drona, and Karna, the Pandavas are seen to have often employed, under the advice and active direction of Kssna himself, such ruses and strategies as cannot be said to have been in strict accordance with the traditional rules of righteous war (dharma-yuddha). The ultimate victory of the Pandavas over the Kauravas symbolises, in a sense, the predominance of the new Arthaśāstra ideal over the older epic ideal of chivalry. As for the essential difference between Dharmaśāstra and Arthaśāstra, it may be stated in broad and rather over-simplified terms, as follows: while Dharmaśāstra insisted on the righteous. Dess of both the means and the ends, Arthaśāstra concerned itself primarily with the attainment of the ends irrespective of the nature of the means employed for that purpose. It is not unlikely that one of the reasons why Arthaśāstra is traditionally believed to be a science ancillary to the Atharvareda is the similarity of their attitude in respect of the means and the ends, It would seem that the Arthaśāstra ideológy had completely dominated the polity of ancient India. Attempts were, however, made from time to time to reassert the superiority of Dharma śāstra over Artbaśāstra by prescribing that, in the case of a conflict between the two, Dharmaśāstra should prevail. Time was when it used to be argued that the genius of aacient ladia was so much preoccupied with metaphysical and theosophical matters that it had become intrinsically incapable of evolving any proper concepts in a secular science such as polity. Such a view, however, is now completely discounte panced. For. we know of several fields of activity in which the 2 Sce fo 12a of " The Mahabhārata: origin and growih" published clsewhere in this Volume
2. Cf. Tajñavallya Smrt If. 21. 350 EXERCISES IN INDOLOGY ancient Indians have beautifully blended together the religious and the secular. Indeed, they took a fully integrated view of human existence, interests, and ideals, and evolved such concepts as those of the three debts (rna), the four cods of man (puru sārtha), and the four stages of an individual’s life (aśrama), whereby they hoped effectively to coordinate the material with the spiritual and the personal with the social. As in the field of social thought, so too, in the field of political thought, the ancient Indians have made. ever since the early Vedic period, some very significant contributions. And these contributions, it must be added, were not always of the nature of mere description or rationalisation of a given state of political conditions. They often included the formulation, in a more or less scientific manner, of distinct theories of polity and principles of adminis tration. These political theories and administrative principles could not certainly have been mere idle speculations; they must have been vitally influenced by the various political forces and environments as much as they themselves must have, in their turn, influenced those forces and environments. It should also be remembered that they were generally of an indigenous origin, for most of them had been foșmulated at a time when there was no possibility of any foreign influence. One thing, however, has to be conceded, namely, that systematic literature on the science of polity and the art of government began to be produced in ancient India only after the period of the early Upanisads Indeed, no systematic litera ture in any branch of knowledge can be said to date earlier than that period. But, though the early Vedic texts can by no means be characterised as embodying any organised thought in political science, they do afford not a few glimpses into the political ideology of the ancient Indians - glimpses which may be derived either directly from theoretical discussions or indirectly from mythological legends and references to contemporary political conditions. In the Atharva eda, for instance, there is a distinct category of hymns called Rājakarmāni which relate to matters pertaining to rulers. In one of such hymns we get a clear ANCIENT INDIAN,POLITY 351 reference to the election of the king by the people (III. 4). Another hymn refers to the two popular assemblies, the sabha and the samiti (VII. 12).5 The Brāhmana texts contain still more numerous and varied references to political concepts and practices. For instance, there are found in them indications of kingship having arisen out of a state of nature (ŚPBr. XI, 1. 6. 24; I. 8. 1. 1-10) or as the result of the will of the Highest God (TBr. II. 2. 10. 1-2; 7,2) or as the upshot of election and social contract ( A Br. I. 14; VIII. 12). One of the Brålmana texts mentions several types of states known in that period (ABI. VIII. 12), while several others speak, in their descriptions, of the coronation ceremony and such matters as the king’s position and prestige, his entourage, and the taxes which normally accrued to him (SPBr. V.3. 1; ABr. VIII. 10-12). The question of the relative position, from the political point of view, of the different social orders is also not infrequently mooted in the Vedic texts (RV IV. 50, 7; ABr. VII. 28-29; VIII. 4; TM Br. XI. 11. 1). Naturally enough the political concepts of the Samlitā- and the Brāhmana-periods were more or less directly related to the various forms of social and political organisation which obtained in that period, such as primitive communism, tribal democracies, small territorial states (mainly monarchical jo character – the monarchy, in some cases, being tinged with some sort of popular election), confederacies for political and military purposes, and suzerainty which one state sought to enforce on other states. By their very nature the Upaniṣads cannot be regarded as constituting direct sources for the study of ancient Indian polity. But the various phases of the Weltanschauung of the Upanisads could not have failed to exert an appreciable influence on the formulation of the political thought in ancient India. There was another indirect way in which the Upanisads may be said to have helped the evolution of political thought in ancient India. The
3. See pp. 141-148 above. 5, Sce pp. 149–154 above. 352 EXERCISES IN INDOLOGY peculiar character of the teaching of the Upanisads engendered conditions which resulted in a temporary break in the continuity of the orthodox Brahmanic way of life and thought This interregnum produced by the Upani sads saw the growth of three significant thought movements which interacted upon one another Firstly, the heterodox systems of thought, like Buddhism, pushed themselves forward and sponsored a way of life and thought which was different from the orthodox Brahmanic way of life and thought Secondly, there was started, more or less as an antidote against heterodoxy, a great revivalist movement which aimed at reorganising, systematising, and consolidatiog the religious, social, and political thought and practices of orthodox Brahmanism And lastly, there was popular Hinduism, which took a strictly realistic and practical view of the religious, social, and political conditions of the period and formulated its general ideology in consonance with those conditions Each of these three ideological movements made, in its own way, some distinct contributions to the political thought of ancient India It was, for instance, the challenge with which Buddhism confronted ortho dox BrahmapSDthat was responsible for the emphasis which came to be put on the theory of social contract in connection with the origin and nature of kingshup Buddhism also seems to have introduced certain democratic concepts in Indian polity The revivalists, on the other hand, reorganised the ancient Brabmanic social and political philosophy and presented it in the form of the Dharmasūtras, spceial acecnt being given to Dharma as the guiding force of all activities in that field Iucidentally, it was these Dharmasutras which were later elabora ted in the form of Dharmaśāstra texts like the Manusmrti As suggested elsewhere, the popular Hinduism, which formally claimed allegiance to the Veda but which had actually assimilated into itself influences from various quarters and had consequently evolved quite a new ideology - an ideology which was often divergent from that of orthodox Brahmanism , must have helped the growth of political concepts and practices which eventually developed into Arthasastra as against Dharmasastra ANCIENT : INDIAN POLITY 353 The early Dharmasutras are mostly theoretical in character. They do not seem to have been specifically related to any particular set of social and political conditions. It is, therefore, possible to assume that, side by side with those Dharmasūtras, there had existed some kind of Arthasastra literature - presumably in the form of sūrras and more realistic in outlook - which served as a practical guide for the contemporary political dealings. That literature is now unfortunately not available - except perhaps in fragmeats - and is mainly known through references to it in later works. It was, however, a lucky chance that a remarkable book belonging to the second phase of the evolution of that literature - to the phase, that is to say, of thorough amplification of the older aphorisms - was discovered about fifty years ago. This was the well-known Arthasāstra attributed to Kautilya, the minister of Candragupta Maurya, who was a contemporary of Alexander the Great. This work is of exceptional interest and value, for, it has almost revolutionised the traditional view regarding certain aspects of ancient Indian history and culture. The Arthasästra of Kautilya reflects, in a striking manner. the social and political forces which were at work in the early 4th century B. C. Alexander’s incursions into India had helped to emphasise the need for establishing a central political and military power. The Arthasāstra has, accordingly, laid down policies in direct pursuance of the ideal of welding together, into a more or less unified pattern and under the control, direct or indirect, of a single authority, the variety and multiplicity of smaller states that crowded the stage of Indian history at that time. Interstatal relations thus constitute one of the main topics in Kautilya’s Arthasāsira. Kautilya defines Arthaśāstra as the science which treats of the means of acquiring and maintaining the sovereignty of the earth. And it was but natural that a practical administrator like him should have occupied himself more fully with prescribing adequate ways and means for maintaining the earth, that is, for effectively administering the government of the dominion, than with mere theorising about the fundamental principles of political science. 45ANCIENT INDIAN POLITY 355 Dharma. In this spiritual venture of his he found solace in the teachings of the Buddha. Under Asoka’s patronage Buddhism received great impetus and, consequently, it threw out a strong challenge to ancient Brahmanic traditions. The last Maurya monarch’s commander-in-chief, Pușyamitra Sunga, who over threw his master and thereby established his own dynasty in Magadha, was a strong adherent of Brahmanism. Therefore, when he came to power he made a bold bid to resuscitate the Brahmanic way of life and thought. He performed the aśva medha sacrifice, actively promoted Sanskrit language and litera ture, and tried to re-establish the Brahmanic ideals in the social sphere. It is out of this last activity that the Manusmrti has presum ably evolved. The Manusnirti represents perhaps the earliest attempt to amplify and consolidate the social ideology embodied in the ancient Dharmasītras. In the matter of political thought and art of government, however, it has not registered any significant advance. The Mahābhārata which, in its fipal literary form, is more or less contemporaneous with the Manusmrti, is definitely richer in political speculations. The entire rajadharma section of the śāntiparvan, for instance, constitutes a veritable compendium of political theories, rules of diplomacy, and details of adminis tration. But the main achievement of the Mahabharata consists in the synthesis of the older theories which it has attempted rather than in the enunciation of any new theories. And perhaps more significant than such theoretical discussions are the indi cations of political thought and practice which can be gleaned from the events actually described in the epic. At any rate, the total polity of the Sunga period may be said to have been ibe result of the attempts at blending together the political ideology of Kautilya’s Arthasästra and the social ideology of the Manusmrti. Iadeed, this continued to be, by and large, the basic pattern of polity in the succeeding periods of ancient and medieval history of Igdia. 356 EXERCISES IN INDOLOGY Among the later works in Sanskrit dealing with the subject of political science may be mentioned the Yajnaraikasmet (YS), the Kämandalija-Nitisara (KN), and the Sukrani (ŚN). The first of these words belongs to the category of Dharmaśāstra and the other two belong to that of Arthaśāstra. What Kautilya’s Arthasāsira was in relation to the Maurya period and the Manusmrtı to the Sunga period, the YS may be said to have been in relation to the Gupta period. Though the YS, like the Manusmrti, does not male any original contribution to ancient Indian polity, it reflects, to a large extent, the social changes which had been brought about by the beginning of the Gupta epoch. Like the Manusmrti it also puts great emphasis on the rarnaśramadharma being the central theme of social theory; and when we take into account the vigorous co-mingling of foreign tribes, which characterised the preceding period, such an emphasis becomes quite understandable. It would, however, seem that, in actual practice, the attitude of the Gupta rulers had been remarkably liberal and rational Nowhere is this better exemplified than in their administration of justice. The Gupta law-makers brought all persons, irrespecs tive of caste, property, and position in society, under the purvick of the king’s supreme law. No person was regarded as being above the law. For instance, the YS denied to the Brāhman15 several legal concessions which they had previously enjo It also did anay with the many legal inequities from the Sūdras suffered. The law relating to women was considerably revised and brought in line with their changeu social status. The Gupta rulers were, however. shrewd enous to hasten slowly. In all matters of socio-legal reforms tried to strike the golden mean between the progressive terasu cies encouraged by the political and social conditions of the and the traditional orthodox conservatism. Attention may drawn to another significant feature of the Gupta lawy. earlier works on Dharmaśāstra presented a queer mx secular and religious law. The YS has clearly separated two aspects of law and has discussed yyavahāra or law proper e Gupta law. The a queer mixture of learly separated these ANCIENT İNDİAN POLITY 357 more systematically. It further lays greater stress upon private law than on criminal law.? The KN, which also is traditionally ascribed to the Gupta period (circa 400 A.D.), is but a metrical conspectus of Kautilya’s Arthaśāstra. Its author shows no originality whatsoever nor are any traces to be found in it of any practical experience of governmental administration on his part. The KN can thus be said to indicate, on the one hand, the unique sway which Kautilya’s Arthasāstra held over ancient Indian polity and, on the other hand, the general fossilization of political thought in the succeeding periods. Incidentally a reference may be made in this very context to the Kural, a comprehensive work in Tamil by Tiruvalluvar, which deals with three out of the four ends of man (puruṣārthas ), namely, dharma (religion and ethics ), artha (material progress and prosperity), and kāma (aesthetic pleasure). This work probably belongs to 450-500 A. D, and, like most of the Tamil literature produced in that epoch, shows unmistakable influence of earlier Sanskrit works. Even a casual perusal of the section on polity in the Kural would make it quite evident that Tiruva lluvar was closely acquainted with Kautilya’s Arthaśāstra and had derived his inspiration and material from that work. Contrary to our expectations, therefore, the Kural does not contain any political thought which can be characterised as peculiar to South India. The last phase of the history of ancient Indian polity is represented by the ŚN, which is usually ascribed to about 800 A. D. This work also is of the nature of a conspectus of the earlier works on Arthaśāstra, but it is remarkable for its
4. Sce: DANDEKAR,“ Some aspects of the Gupta civilization: 2. Adminis. tration of justice," Gode Fe. Vol, 1960, 50-62. Also sce: DANDEKAR, “The system of governinent under the Guptas,” Bh Vid 20-21, 1963, 340-354. 8, The Sukranili i now shown to have belonged to the 16th century A.D. It glorifics Nitiśāstra in glowing terms (I. 4-19) and seeks to establish the superiority of that science over other sciences. 358 EXERCISES IN INDOLOGY detailed treatment of administrative machinery, foreign relations, and military policy. Apart from such works dealing with Dharmaśāstra and Arthaśāstra, attention may be drawn to certain other sources for the study of ancient Indian polity. Useful information about the political theory and practice in ancient India can be gleaned from the accounts of foreign travellers who visited India at different times. Then there are the large number of inscriptions belonging to the various historical periods. These epigraphic records do not, of course, contain any theoretical discussions on the subject, but they throw considerable light on the various aspects of the revenue, military, and judicial administration, the social and economic conditions, and the central and local govern mental machinery in those respective periods. And this is, indeed, what we need for a proper estimate of ancient Indian polity. For, after all, does ancient Indian polity not concero itself more with the practical problems of goveroment and administration than with an academic discussion of political theories ? [ First published: IAC 12, 1963, 1-10.)