Ancient Indian political thoughts

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 SitŒ comes 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.

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