Understanding Raj-Dharma, Part 2
Several months ago, while idly surfing the web, I stumbled on a somewhat oddly titled monograph*. It read: “Passage to Hindu State: DharmaRajya and RajaDharma” – A Socio-Political Study of the Mahabharata”
It was a serendipitious discovery. I can hardly claim to be an authority on ancient history or the socio-political traditions of the Vedic period but I feel that Dr Nagarajan‘s work deserves serious study – and wider dissemination. The main focus of his research has been to develop a socio-political constitution for this sub-continent from the point of view of “Dharma” and “Artha”. I started reading his monograph on “RajaDharma and DharmaRajya” a while ago. Today I would like to publish some excerpts that refer to Raja-Dharma – to continue the “Understanding Dharma” series. I intend to read a lot more of his work in the days to come . Pl read on (emphasis mine, throughout):
From Pg 39
The greatest duty (dharma) of the king was to take action against the impious and guilty and protect the pious and innocent. He should never flee from battle. Those who knew dharma expected the king to exhibit both forbearance (kshama) and rage (krodha), be generous (dana) and be ungenerous, cause fear (bhaya) and remove fear, extend aid (anugraha) and impose penalty (nigraha), depending on the circumstances. (14-14 to 17)
Pg 43
(- Draupadi again): This spokesperson of the Isvara school of thought pointed out that Dandaniti warned the king not to use coercive power, danda, in an arbitrary manner and without giving thought to its implications. If he did mot exercise the power given by it against the guilty because of indolence or complacency, like the fish, the mighty in the world of commoners would swallow the weaker. Dandaniti required state power to be used to protect the weak against coercion and exploitation by the mighty. If its provisions were not used, social hierarchies would be upset and there would be no good and honest men left in the world, this school warned.
Pg 44
“Danda” became operative when the king was intelligent and wise and could distinguish correctly among the three values, dharma, artha and kama and spoke only the truth, that is, when he upheld the Vedic laws based on truth (satya). Dandaniti in its origin was a severe deterrent.
Pg 45
It (Dandaniti) controlled the king too and penalized him if he was given to lust and deviated from social (and state) laws, dharma. It had provisions by which the king and his clan could be executed for violation of the laws. Dandaniti could harass his fort and kingdom (that covered the rural areas) and his settled as well as mobile populations and also the sages who lived in the open space (akasa) and the nobles (devas) who refused to accept it.
It had inter-state jurisdiction and could not be challenged by any state. When it was proclaimed kings were stationed in forts and had jurisdiction over the adjoining rural areas. Dandaniti extended their authority to the urban areas where the nobles resided and the open areas where the sages had their abodes. This took away the immunities and privileges the two cadres enjoyed. Draupadi was referring to the pre-varna socio-political order as it prevailed during the Upanishadic times.
Dandaniti could not be invoked by a foolish or lustful king or by one who had no approved associates. It was to be invoked only by kings who functioned under politico-economic constitutions and not by despots and autocrats. Only one who was pure and followed the policy science (nitisastra) and had good companions and was wise could implement its provisions. He should be just to the people of his state and harsh with his enemies and keep his friends disciplined. He should be patient with the jurists (Brahmans) who freely and fearlessly expressed their views. Such a king would be popular even if he was poor.
Pg 88
For kings nothing except this adherence to truth could become the cause (karanam) for the trust placed in them. A king who had good character (sheela), and had conquered his sense organs (jitendriya) and was generous and soft and a good guide (sudarsha) with a large objective (and wide outlook) (sthula-lakshya) would never become corrupt by possession of wealth, Bhishma opined. He asked Yudhishtira to be upright in all projects (karya) and reexamine his views with reference to state policy (naya) (that was determined by the nobles) and the bounds prescribed by the three Vedas (trayi). (56-17 to 20)
*** End of Excerpts ***
Looking at our present-day polity, it is hard to believe that this is the very same Punya-Bhumi that nurtured such an amazing flowering of intellectual thought and nourished such extraordinary minds…
Related Posts:
A humble attempt at understanding “Dharma†– Part I
K Harapriya’s series on What is “Dharma?” (concluding part with all previous links)
* Part of this book, including “Bhishma on Raja Dharma” are here
Shantanuji
Happy to see that your exploratory mind always look out for ever new things. There has never been paid sufficient attention to the contribution of India in diverse field. There are diverse areas including music, mathematics, astronomy, biology, psychology, socio-political structure and its constitution where India’s genius is still unparalleled & unmatched.
You have hit upon one crucial area today by finding this work on Dandaniti. When one honestly probe and compare Socio-Political structure given by India and other country, we find India was much ahead in time in giving peaceful and righteous policy regarding social order. This theory of Rajdharma was not theoretical, but was implemented fully in India. It was taken care that every person follows his dharma or duty according to his position in society.
Indian society was duty based society as compared to today’s western society which is based on rights. Duty was integral part of Dharma and was emphasized at every stage of person. Concept of Duty always entails self responsibility & improving one’s own conduct rather putting blame on others.
On the contrary, right based societies always ask for more rights to fulfill selfish interest and putting oneself above everybody else. That’s why we see the movements for rights in these countries – where everybody is competing to outrun others. This narrow focus on rights only leads to competition, ruthlessness and self-centeredness.
India’s contribution to the world does not lie only in the spirituality – it encompasses whole range of areas. If there is one country in the world that fulfills the criterion of “Survival of Fittest†– it is only INDIA. Its existence of last 15,000 years is a testimony of crucial principle of survival.
This unmatched survival of India (as compared to other nation whose rise and fall covers only few centuries) is possible only due to the policy of Rajdharama. We had clear separation of power. We never gave the erroneous idea of philosopher king (Plato). If we read the history of India, we find that as compared to other nation of the world – list of cruel king in India is minuscule. Even in folk memory, we hardly have any notion of cruel king in India. Number of Benevolent & Righteous king far outnumbered cruel King in India.
One last thing that is unique while discussing law or Rajdharma is: – In India, if Higher classes committed any crime they would get severe penalty or punishment as compared to lower classes. In other part of the world including Rome, Greece, Egypt, China, Babylonia etc., and punishment given to people were more severe for lower classes and gradually less severe for higher classes.
Ram – Indore
Basic reason for the kings being good was there high level of God consciousness. All the kings were saintly so to say. They were called Raj-rishis. They were Rajas but they were highly learned and advanced in self-realisation. We know that the kings always used to build temples.
They were spiritually advanced.
And this holds good even now. Inorder to have a leadership that can guide the todays civilization to sanity is one that is advanced in Spirituality.
Most likely, there was no internet those days, and no nosy media. That is why the king (para from page 88 above) with all those lofty qualities could be imagined.
Does anyone really believe that it is possible to find people of such exceptional qualities? And if the answer is yes, is such a person ever likely to win a single election anywhere in India?
@Praksh:
Will you vote to such person? First of all would you believe him/her?
If you wish to see change then be the change. Start endorsing good things. I’m ready to say that I’ll be righteous and uphold raj dharma.
Is it possible for you to support me and start campaigning for me and people like me?
Only point is, we must start believing we can be the righteous and can uphold dharma.
Jai Bharat!
dear Sir,
India did at one time permit conscription for war. This was under Ashoka who paid a bounty of gold for the head of evey Jain Muni. Unfortunately, a Buddhist monk, a good friend of our great and loving Sovereign, had lost his clothes in a flood. He was beheaded. Ashoka then, with immense kindness, stopped the bounty on killing Jains.
Truly, he was such a beautiful exponent of Ahimsa that I lose control of my own bowels and plentifully shower the sublime gardens of your face with excrement.
The Indian mode of production- far from being slavish is actually Trade Unionist- and like Trade Unionism or Syndicalism or Guild Socialism- essentially makes war a matter of mercenaries or, the incursion of stupid foreigners who will reduce the tax burden because they don’t know our elasticities of supply.
Okay the British killed off a lot of people by setting the wrong tax- but a lot of us guys made money from it- and our kids survived, those who died didn’t have kids.
If India, like Malaysia, like Singapore, like any proper country, introduces conscription, THEN IT IS A COUNTRY.
At the moment, it is the ruin of an Empire.
Mention of Hinduism is utterly wrong in this context.
Unlike Xtianity and Islam- Hinduism wants you to get DELIVERANCE!
Full Deliverance!
As a person belonging to Extremely Backward to becoming Utterly Backward Caste and wholly Untouchable to my own shit- which I insist my secretary should lick off- also I should be provided a Secretary immediately due to the hygenic situation re. my rectum is becoming untenable- I think we should all read Sanjeev Sahblok’s crap.
Why? Well, it would make you feel better about being stupid- which I take it is the purpose of this blog.