Contents
1. Introduction
2. Political
background of Pre-vedic period
3. Political
background of Vedic period
4. Political
background of Epic period
5. Political
background of Buddhist period
6. Conclusion
7. Bibliography
Introduction
Indian political philosophy evolved in the ancient times, and created
well organized and advanced organizations of state. There was a clear difference
between “nation and state” and “religion and state”.
The Hindu states used constitutions which developed over time and were
based on political and legal discourses
as well as dominant social institutions. The institutions of state were generally
divided into governance, administration, defense, law and order. Major
governing frame contains of the King, Prime Minister, Commander in chief of
army, Chief Priest of the King. Prime Minister heads the committee of ministers
along with head of executive (Maha Amatya).
“Chanakya” is a well
known political philosopher regarded as among the greatest of all times. His
thesis Arthashastra was not only a great ancient text but as recent as Niccolo
Machiavelli’s book
“Prince” to reflect his views. “Sacra Neeti sara” is another thesis of ancient
Indian political philosophy which is still extant. I would like to illustrate
my knowledge about this topic with the guidance of above essays and specially
regarding Buddhist suttas.
Political
background of Pre-vedic period
The
early Vedic period is marked by the subversion of Aryan peoples into the Indian
sub-continent and their contact with the Dravidian people. Aryans spread
into the Ganges River valley about 1000 B.C.E. About that time, they developed
the use of iron tools and weapons. They used iron axes to clear forests for
agriculture and as their agricultural practices succeeded, their population
grew vastly. As their populations grew, their political structure grown
also. The local chiefdoms became kingdoms ruled by kings in permanent cities.
These kings depended on the services of professional administrators to handle
the day to day tasks of governance. Still, they did not establish large states.
Only in the 4th century B.C.E. did any Aryan state equal the size of Harappan
society.
The
political units during the Rigvedic or the early Vedic period contained of
Grama (village), Vish and Jana. The biggest political unit was that of Jana,
after which came Vish and then, Grama. The leader of a Grama was called
Gramani, of a Vish was called Vishpati and that of Jana was known as Jyeshta.
The rashtra (state) was governed by a Rajan (King) and he was known as Gopa
(protector) and Samrat (supreme ruler). The king ruled with the consent and
approval of the people. There were four councils, namely Sabha, Samiti, Vidhata
and Gana, of which women were allowed to attend only two, Sabha and Vidhata.
The duty of the king was to protect the tribe, in which he was assisted by the
Purohita (chaplain) and the Senani (army chief).
Political
background of Vedic period
In that period, kingship was a normal feature
of the society. There are few references to elected kings otherwise most of the
times the office was heritable. There are references in the Atharva Veda
regarding the election of the king by the people. The Brahmanas and the later
Samhitas state that the king had divine origins. The kings started adopting
various titles like Adhiraj, Rajadhiraj, Samrat, Ekarat, Virat and Savarat. The
king was the head of the state and was above law but he was not a absolute
ruler. He was dependent upon his ministers who were referred to as Ratnins.
They performed Rajasuya and Asvamedha Yajnas to show the extent of their
powers. The Rajsuya Yajna was performed at the time of the coronation of the
king. It conferred supreme power on him. The most important Yajna was
Ashvamedha Yajna. It meant unquestioned control over an area in which the royal
horse ran uninterrupted. After the completion of this Yajna the king assumed
the title of Chakravartin. It improved the power, prestige and prosperity of
king. The king performed various duties such as administration, justice,
extention of his territory, welfare of his subjects; fighting battles. In
Manusmuti, text of Vedic laws, mention about duties of Kshatriya king. “The Kshatriya he commanded to protect the
people, to bestow gifts, to offer sacrifices, to study the Veda, and to abstain
from attaching himself to sensual pleasures.”
With
the expansion of the territories ordinary people could not travel long distance
to attend the meetings. They could not remove the king from the power. Women
were no longer permitted to sit in the sabhas.King was the fountain head of
judiciary. Criminals were given more simple punishments as compared to the
Vedic period. Capital punishments became prevalent. King appointed various
ministers to dispense justice.Theft, robbery, adultery, abduction, killing of
man, treachery and drinking intoxicating liquor were offences punishable with
death.
Political background of Brahmic period
When the
tribal organization based on kingship relations was no longer suitable to meet
the pressures on social organization, the ruling nobility grew gradually
dependent on the brahman priests to provide new principles
of legitimation which could justify political authority. By the later Vedic age
the priests had come to control the sacrifice and through the sacrifice the
means of salvation. At this time the ideas of karma and migration
began to assume a central importance. Every soul, according to this belief, has
existed from eternity and journeys through a series of rebirths until it has
earned eternal bliss. Each thought and action has consequences for the destiny
of the soul and determines one’s position and status in society. In the light
of these doctrines it would be extremely difficult to settle religious interest
with social reform. As Max Weber remarked, the approval for traditionalism was
as complete as any forced by the mind of man. With the brahman priest at the top of the class structure and karma ideology as its foundation, we are confronted with a
society so effectively integrated by religion that political institutions need
play only a minor role in adaptable battle. And, indeed, throughout most of
Indian history social coordination was accomplished through caste and village
institutions.
In
the political theory of this time, most of which is found in brahman texts, that the
authority of the brahmans
is considered superior to that of the king and that the priests are independent
of the secular power. Mitra, the old Vedic god who was taken to represent the
priesthood, at one time stood apart from Varuna, who in this instance symbolized
power. That is, mind was conceived to be independent of will. But just as will
relies on intelligence, regnum
(ksatra)
could not exist without sacerdotium
(Brahmā).
Political background of Epic period
In
epic periods, MahŒ BhŒrata and RamŒyana
mentioned royal sacrifices. According to the MahŒ BhŒrata,
when prince Udisthira became kingship in his kingdom, he desired huge sacrifice
by getting advice from Brahmins. Because he had to war with relatives and
people were suffering bad result of cutting bloods. He completed that huge
sacrifice, if called as Asvameda (sacrifice of horse). According to RŒmŒyana,
king Rama did huge horse sacrifice. He sent his royal horse around other
provinces, but not one province’s king could catch that royal horse. There were
two acetic princes named Lava and Kush (kusa), both they could control that
horse fight with king’s solders. King RŒma was became
angry, and went near to princes, and they were started to war each other. King
RŒma
does not know both those princes were sons of his, as well as both Lava and
Kush do not know, both brothers are war with their own father king. Through
that war, princess SitΠcomes and stopped war and introduced
king to their sons. King became happy, and gave his kingship to his son Lava.
King Lava builds SrŒvasti or “Sᾱvatti in Pali” as his
capital. Once time, the great warrior Arjuna disliked to do war with their
relatives, because they kill each relatives. At that time, the god Krisna
advised to Arjuna, you should do some things, which are give bad result but as
king for benefit to people, there is no sin in those kind of evil.
Political background of Buddhist period
The Buddha came from a
warrior caste and was naturally brought into association with kings, princes
and ministers. Despite His origin and association, He never resorted to the
influence of political power to introduce His teaching, nor allowed His Teaching
to be misused for gaining political power. But today, many politicians try to
drag the Buddha's name into politics by introducing Him as a communist,
capitalist, or even an imperialist. They have forgotten that the new political
philosophy as we know it really developed in the West long after the Buddha's
time. Those who try to make use of the good name of the Buddha for their own
personal advantage must remember that the Buddha was the Supremely Enlightened
One who had gone beyond all worldly concerns.
The Buddha once said, 'When
the ruler of a country is just and good, the ministers become just and good,
when the ministers are just and good, the higher officials become just and
good, when the higher officials are just and good, the rank and file become just
and good, when the rank and file become just and good, the people become just
and good.(Anguttara Nikaya)
In the Cakkavatti SihanŒda Sutta, the Buddha said that immorality and crime, such as theft, falsehood,
violence, hatred, cruelty, could arise from poverty. Kings and governments may
try to suppress crime through punishment, but it is futile to eradicate crimes
through force.
In the Kutadanta Sutta, the Buddha suggested
economic development instead of force to reduce crime. The government should
use the country's resources to improve the economic conditions of the country.
It could board on agricultural and rural development, provide financial support
to capitalists and business, provide adequate wages for workers to maintain a
decent life with human dignity.
In the JŒtaka, the
Buddha had given to rules for Good Government, known as 'Dasa RŒja Dharma'. These ten rules can be applied even today by any government which wishes
to rule the country peacefully. The rules are as follows.
1) be liberal and avoid
selfishness,
2) maintain a high moral character,
3) be prepared to sacrifice one's own pleasure for the well-being of the subjects,
4) be honest and maintain absolute integrity,
5) be kind and gentle,
6) lead a simple life for the subjects to emulate,
7) be free from hatred of any kind,
8) exercise non-violence,
9) practise patience, and
10) respect public opinion to promote peace and harmony.
2) maintain a high moral character,
3) be prepared to sacrifice one's own pleasure for the well-being of the subjects,
4) be honest and maintain absolute integrity,
5) be kind and gentle,
6) lead a simple life for the subjects to emulate,
7) be free from hatred of any kind,
8) exercise non-violence,
9) practise patience, and
10) respect public opinion to promote peace and harmony.
Regarding the behavior of
rulers, He further advised
- A good ruler should act neutrally
and should not be biased and discriminate between one particular group of
subjects against another.
- A good ruler should not
harbor any form of hatred against any of his subjects.
- A good ruler should show
no fear whatsoever in the enforcement of the law, if it is justifiable.
- A good ruler must possess
a clear understanding of the law to be enforced. It should not be enforced just
because the ruler has the authority to enforce the law. It must be done in a
reasonable manner and with common sense.(Cakkavatti
SihanŒda Sutta)
In the Milinda Panha,it is stated as 'If a
man, who is unfit, incompetent, immoral, improper, unable and unworthy of
kingship, has enthroned himself a king or a ruler with great authority, he is
subject to be tortured‚ to be subject to a variety of punishment by the people,
because, being unfit and unworthy, he has placed himself unrighteously in the
seat of sovereignty. The ruler, like others who violate and transgress moral
codes and basic rules of all social laws of mankind, is equally subject to
punishment; and moreover, to be censured is the ruler who conducts himself as a
robber of the public.” In a Jataka story, it is mentioned that a ruler who
punishes innocent people and does not punish the offender is not suitable to
rule a country.
Conclusion
To conclude, there is an
inherent problem of trying to interact religion with politics. The basis of
religion is morality, purity and faith, while that for politics is power. In
the course of history, religion has often been used to give legitimacy to those
in power and their exercise of that power. Religion was used to justify wars
and defeats, harassments, murders, revolutions, ruin of works of art and
culture.
When religion is used to
pander to political whims, it has to sacrifice its high moral ideals and become
debased by worldly political demands.
The push of the Buddha
Dhamma is not directed to the creation of new political institutions and
establishing political arrangements. Basically, it seeks to approach the
problems of society by improving the individuals constituting that society and
by suggesting some general principles through which the
society can be guided towards greater humanism, improved welfare of its
members, and more reasonable sharing of resources.
The Buddha discussed the
importance and the basics of a good government. He showed how the country could
become corrupt, degenerate and unhappy when the head of the government becomes
corrupt and unjust. He spoke against corruption and how a government should act
based on uncaring principles. Therefore the Buddha became the ideal guider who
guided the society well more than royal majesty.
Bibliography
Primary
Resource
Ø Anguttara Nikaya /Sutta Pitaka
Ø Cakkavatti Sihananda Sutta (Sutta pitaka,
Digha nikaya 3)
Ø
Kutadanta
Sutta (Sutta pitaka, Digha nikaya 1)
Secondary Resource
Ø Bhaktivedanta
Swami A. C. (1998), Bagavt Gita It Is, Bhaktivedanta Book Trust International,
3764 Watseka Avenue, Los Angeles, Califoniya 90034, USA. pg. 71.
Ø Gerard Fussman, Revisiting the History of Ancient
India (2009), Royal Netherlands Acadeny of Arts and Sciences, The Netherlands.
Ø ghoshal, upendra N. 1959 A History of Indian Political Ideas:
The Ancient Period and the Period of Transition to the Middle Ages. Oxford Univ. Press.
Ø http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/vin/mv,
8:50 am, 7-21-2013
