Origins of State in the Hindu political theory has been extensively dealt with. It turns out that authority has always been pro-people and rulers were expected to be Pradhan Sevak
Dr Vivek Kumar Mishra
The origin and evolution of the state has been one of the greatest issues in Political Science. The Hindu scholars like Narada, Brihaspati, Kautilya, Kamandaka have discussed the origin of state. The most important textbook specifically devoted to statecraft is the Kautilya’s Arthashastra. The Arthashastra gives very detailed instructions on various issues like the management of the state, the organisation of the national economy and the conduct of war and it is the most precious sourcebook for many aspects of ancient Indian life. The other important sources are the great epics, the Mahabharata, and the Ramayana. The great body of literature generally called smriti, giving instruction in the “sacred law”, is very important in this connection.
The Hindu theorists consider the state to be an institution “necessary” to the human race if man is not to plead in the condition of matsya-nyaya (fisheries justice) under the law of beasts. Man, if he is to be man, cannot do without political organisation. He must have a state and must submit to sanction, coercion and punishment in a word, to danda.
On the basis of the writings of various scholars the article analyses some of the theories of the origin of the Hindu state in ancient India, namely: a) Evolutionary Theory b) Mystical Theory c) Contract Theories. Out of these three theories the theory of mystical / divine origin and the contractual origin are more prevalent.
Evolutionary Theory
It is the oldest theory of the origin of the state in India and has been mentioned in the Atharva Veda. According to this theory “the state is the result of evolutionary progress and it didn’t originate at a fixed time. The tenth hymn of the eighth chapter of the Atharva Veda gives a picture of the evolutionary origin of the state.” The hymns of the Atharva Veda state that “the earliest phase of human life was the stage of vairajya (stateless state). It was a state of complete anarchy.” But subsequently, with the emergence of agriculture, stable life became possible. To fulfill the needs of agricultural society, the family emerged and the head of the family became the first wielder of authority. Further, the need of co-operation in the different realms of society led to the emergence of sabha and samiti. Sabha was the organisation of elderly people and samiti was the general assembly of common people. With the emergence of sabha and samiti, organised political life began which finally culminated in the emergence of the state.
Divine / Mystical Theory
According to this theory Kingship was given divine sanction and the King was considered not to be the representative of God but Himself a God who contained the powers of important Gods like Indra, Varuna and Agni. The theory first appeared in the epics and the “law books” of Manu. It is based on the myth that: “When the world was without a king and dispersed in fear in all directions, the lord created a king for protection of all. He made him of eternal particles of Indra and the wind, Yama, the Sun and Fire, Varuna, the moon and the lord of wealth.” The king was exalted far above ordinary mortals, through the magical powers of the great royal sacrifices. The royal consecration (Rajasuya) which in its full form comprised a series of sacrifices lasting for over a year imbued the king with divine power. The king was evidently the fellow of God. In the Arthashastra it is also stated that “the king fulfils the functions of the God Indra (the king of Gods) and Yama (the God of death) upon earth, all who slight him will be punished not only by the secular arm, but also by heaven.” In ancient India, the basic notion of the origin of the state was based on divine creation.
Contract Theory
Contract theory is the most extensively discussed theory of the origin of the state in ancient India. The contract theory can be seen in the Buddhist texts like Digha Nikaya and Mahavastu and brahmanical texts like Shanti Parva and Arthashastra of Kautilya. The first clear and
developed exposition of this theory is found in the Buddhist canonical text Digha Nikaya. The summary and main stages of the story, that are stated by the Buddha to refute the
brahmins’ claim for precedence over members of all the other social classes. According to the text the first title means one chosen by the whole people, the second title means the lord of the fields, the third title means one who charms the people by means of dharma. Political compact as developed in the Digha Nikaya not only lays a different type of emphasis on qualifications for election as king but also clearly states the obligations of the two parties. The king has been assigned the task to punish the wicked people. The only definite form of punishment is the banishment of the guilty. Thus, on the whole, the obligation of the head of the state is negative.
Comparison between the Hindu Theory and the Western Theory
The Hindu theory of state is more systematic than the contract theory developed by English philosophers because in the Hobbessian contract, the absolute authority is vested in the ruler whereas in Hindu theory the ruler was considered to be the servant of the people. In the Hindu tradition Manu becomes the king after a successful dialogue with the people whereas in Hobbessian theory the ruler is not a party to the contract but he is the product of the contract. In Western tradition, contract theory was formulated to reject the theory of divine origin of the state whereas the Hindu theory finally merges with the divine theory. Thus, In Hindu theory of state, the two theories of the origin of the state are most prevalent-contract theory and the theory of mystical origin, often rather incongruously combined.
(The writer is Head of the Department of Political Science and International Relations, Gautam Buddha University, Greater Noida, Uttar Pradesh)
Comments