Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
REFERENCES
Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article:
https://www.jstor.org/stable/442160?seq=1&cid=pdf-
reference#references_tab_contents
You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms
and are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Western
Political Quarterly
D. MACKENZIE BROWN
1 This article includes portions of a forthcoming book entitled The White Umbrella - Indian Political
Thought from Manu to Gandhi published by the University of California Press. Acknowledgment
is hereby given of permission to publish.
2 Young India (Ahmedabad), September 11, 1924, p. 298.
3 Etienne Gilson, The Philosophy of St. Thomas Aquinas (2d ed.; London: Herder, 1939), p. 327.
243
The conception of dharma was a far-reaching one embracing the whole life of man. Th
writers on dharmasastra meant by dharma not a creed or religion but a mode of life
or a code of conduct, which regulated a man's work and activities as a member of
society and as an individual and was intended to bring about the gradual developmen
of a man and to enable him to reach what was deemed to be the goal of human
existence.4
It is not surprising, therefore, that Hindu law began with duties rather
than with rights as in the West. The elaborate symbolism of deities and
signs afforded a means of illustrating and emphasizing for the citizen the
various obligations of the dharma system. The sacredness of the cow,
which has been a source of Hindu-Moslem friction, may in part have
developed as a recognition of the vital role of the cow and ox in Indian
agriculture and family economy - demanding therefore certain protective
patterns of behavior from the population. Nehru speaks in this theme of
duty when he says: "The rights of the individual must be balanced by
the obligations of the individual to the social organism. Without obliga-
tions there can be no real rights." 5
Politics was entitled the "Master Science" since, dealing with dharma,
it covered that vast range of human relationships that MacIver has so aptly
termed "the firmament of law." 6 In this respect, the dharma is the creator
of the state, and political science is more than a study of government.
However, some modern Indian positivists follow the Austinian school of
legal theory and contend that dharma is itself the creation of government
since it is obeyed only because of the coercive power of the latter.7 This
is contrary not only to Hindu tradition but to the findings of such modern
scholars as MacIver.8 The most significant portion of the dharma literature
from the viewpoint of the political scientist is known as the rajadharma,
or "duty of kings," which is considered pre-eminent and to contain all
dharma, thus emphasizing that the science of politics embraces the whole
of society. Artha, denoting substance, utility, property, also suggests a wide
area of political topics. Kautilya (fourth century B.C.) says, "That science
which treats of the means of acquiring and maintaining the earth is
arthasastra, the Science of Polity." 9 But arthasastra is itself considered to
be in the final analysis subordinate to dharmasastra for, in case of conflict,
the rules of the latter are theoretically superior. This reaffirms the dharma
concept as the ultimate basis of Indian political thought.
10 E. W. Hopkins, "The Social and Military Position of the Ruling Caste in Ancient India as Represented
by the Sanskrit Epic," Journal of the American Oriental Society, Vol. XIII (1889), p. 154.
11 XXVIII. 16.
12 K. P. Jayaswal, Hindu Polity - A Constitutional History of India in Hindu Times (Bangalore: Banga-
lore Publishing Co., 1943), pp. 3-186.
13 Maha-parinibbana Sutta I. 1.5.
matters under the direction of the governing committees. The village itself
was the basic unit of Hindu society and higher government administrative
divisions were based on groupings of communities. Although these self-
governing villages survived until modern times, the ancient republics were
submerged in the great Maurya empire.14
Hindu theories of the origin of government and the state cast light
upon their legal nature and administrative purposes. In the first place, the
early literatures elaborate a theory of man's decline reminiscent of Rous-
seau's account of human degeneration following the "state of nature."
Mankind is said to have lived in four great ages, each progressively less
virtuous, until now he lives in the most evil kaliyuga where the guiding
power of dharma is only one-fourth of its original strength. Thus the
Mahanirvana Tantra says: "Now the sinful Kali Age is upon them, when
dharma is destroyed, an Age full of evil customs and deceit." 15 Accord-
ingly, government became necessary for the protection of the dharma and
to save men from their own evil tendencies--the state originating as a
form of divine aid to struggling humanity. The ancient Code of Brihaspati
explains: "In former ages men were strictly virtuous and devoid of mis-
chievous propensities. Now that avarice and malice have taken possession
of them, judicial proceedings have been established." 16
As in the West, the government created to meet the problems of
human society is explained by both the divinity and social contract theories.
The ancient Aryan god Indra represents kingship, and he, in turn, owes
his appointment to the will of Prajapati, chief of the gods.17 The king
is therefore the earthly embodiment of Indra or divine will. However, he
is himself bound to rule by the principles of dharma, and since the citizens
have a corresponding duty to obey the king's edicts and support his ad-
ministration, there is an implied social covenant. In some sources, the
contract theory is set forth more specifically. The Mahabharata tells of
men living in a state of social chaos who approach the god Brahma and
request the appointment of a king. Brahma then suggests Manu, but the
latter agrees to serve only after the people guarantee to respect his rule.'8
An early Buddhist account in the Digha Nikaya refers to a definite con-
tract between an elected king and his people.19 Kautilya says,
People suffering from anarchy, as illustrated by the proverbial tendency of a large fish
swallowing a small one, first elected Manu . . . to be their king and allotted one sixth
of the grains grown and one tenth of the merchandise as sovereign dues.20
14 B. K. Sarkar, "Democratic Ideals and Republican Institutions in India," American Political Science
Review, Vol. XII (November, 1918), pp. 599-600.
15I. 37.
6eI. 1.
17 D. R. Bhandarkar, Some Aspects of Ancient Hindu Polity (Benares: Benares Hindu Univer
pp. 127-31.
s1 Santiparvan LXVII.
9 Aggannasuttanta XX. 21. See also Jayaswal, op. cit., pp. 189-92.
20 Arthasastra I. 13.
21 Dr. Jayaswal's thesis of popular sovereignty is refuted in detail by U.N. Ghoshal, The Beginnings of
Indian Historiography and other Essays (Calcutta: Ramesh Ghoshal, 1944), pp. 143-57.
22 Manusamhita IX. 245, 249, 254.
23 III. 3.
24X. 90. 12.
And the privileged brahmana or ksatriya must use his high position f
good rather than for selfish indulgence lest his lot in a future life be th
of the downtrodden. In our own day, the origins of caste division hav
been explained by the great liberal writer Tagore as India's attempt to
solve her complex social and racial problems by a system of specializatio
and toleration that minimized the frictions of ruthless competition.25 It
clear, certainly, that the major groups provided the framework of th
Hindu state and made government a class function.
To this last, however, must be added a reservation. Although rulin
was normally, in the healthy state, a ksatriya prerogative, the early writing
refer in effect to a sort of governing cycle whereby political degenerati
may result in the seizure of power by other classes according to the general
condition of the state. The emphasis is not on the form of governmen
as in the well-known cycles of democracy and oligarchy of Plato a
Aristotle. Rather, the concern is with the particular major caste group
which wields power. Thus the ancient Harivamsa predicts, referring to t
course of events in the present age: "the ksatriyas will be disinherited o
kingdoms... the sudras will be held in honour in spite of their ungodly
views." 26 Other classes would in turn assume power in a continuin
political cycle. In modern times the dynamic Vivekananda has describe
Indian political development as a revolving of caste rule, one succeedin
the other in the exercise of control.27
Nevertheless, and the factor of the ancient small republics notwith
standing, most Hindu political theory deals with the ksatriya king and h
functions. These last were precisely stated in the arthasastra literature a
the details of his internal administration were elaborately defined - in
particular as regards those two cornerstones of modern government, pe
sonnel and finance.28 There is also described a well-organized judic
framework with carefully developed legal procedures and different types of
courts.29
The various administrative activities were sufficiently extensive to b
termed paternalistic. Agriculture was encouraged. Travelers and the si
were given assistance. Scholars and universities were endowed.30 Howeve
the Hindu state could not be called socialistic since popular control
these activities was not established. Furthermore, the vaisya caste was co
sidered primarily responsible for trade and productive enterprise.
In this royal state a precise code of international relations and powe
diplomacy was worked out. It cannot be said to have provided a system
25 Rabindranath Tagore, Nationalism (New York: The Macmillan Co., 1917), pp. 115-55.
26 CLXXXII-CLXXXIII.
27 See his Modern India (Almora: Advaita Ashrama, 1923), pp. 8-43.
2 R. Shamasastry, Kautilya's Arthasastra (4th ed.; Mysore: Wesleyan Mission Press, 1951), pp. 45-167.
29 B. G. R. Rao, Ancient Hindu Judicature (Madras: Ganesh & Co., 1920), pp. 1-7.
30 Beni Prasad, The State in Ancient India (Allahabad: India Press, 1928), p. 513.
31 N. N. Law, Inter-State Relations in Ancient India (Calcutta: Luzac, 1920), pp. 1-39.
32 Shamasastry, op. cit., pp. 293-459.
33 Arthasastra I. 6.
34 Compare Taraknath Das, "India -Past, Present and Future," Political Science Quarterly, Vol. LXII
(June 1947), pp. 295-304.