UNIT 5

AGGANNASUTTA (DIGHA NIKAYA): THEORY OF KINGSHIP

INTRODUCTION
Dīgha Nikāya is a collection of the dialogues, mostly of Buddha himself, as they appear to his earliest
disciples in a series of one hundred and eighty six discourses which, according to Rhys Davids, will
occupy a place in the history of human thought. In the Sutta Pitaka or the Basket of discourses, there
are four great Nikāyas or collections, out of which the first two form a single book and are collectively
called Dīgha Nikāya, categorised in 34 long Suttas. Out of these, the twenty seventh Agganna Sutta, is
known for the evolution of Buddhist thinking on the origin and the development of the state.
Buddhism is primarily understood as a religious and philosophical concept, but Buddhism is equally
concerned with the mundane and transcendental world. Ideas of power and kingship seem out of
context in early Buddhist philosophy. Scholars like S.J. Tambiah were convinced that the king enjoyed
significant status in Buddhist philosophy, whereas others like Max Weber argued that it was apolitical.
There are scattered references to power and kingship in Pali scriptures, but there is no direct theory
supporting these references.

EVOLUTION OF KINGSHIP AND THE STATE IN BUDDHISM

The state emerges as a punitive entity tasked with imposing law and order, without which human beings
will not be able to thrive in a peaceful society. According to the contract between “the state and the
subject, one command and the other must comply with the command. In the agreement, the institution
of taxes represents payment for specific work, and taxation symbolises the contract”. As a result, it is
inescapable, and neither the subjects nor the state has any other option except to live with it”.
The institution of kingship is the most important institution of a state, and it is ruled by or centred on a
single man, the monarch. Monarchies are symbolic of the centre of a culture that has been structured
into a state. These individuals are regarded as intermediaries between the numerous elements and
interests that combine to form society’s social order and between the human and extra-human worlds.
Throughout “the Diggah-Nikaya, which is considered one of the most important Buddhist texts, the
Brahmana Vasetta inquires of the Buddha as to whether or not the Brahmanic claim to supremacy was
justified. There was a time when individuals were faultless to the end of having no physical substance to
be found in their bodies”. According to the Diggah-Nikaya, “the Agganna Sutta traces the history of
human civilization. It provides a short explanation of the first difficulty, which is creating a monarchy or
state. The changing nature of socio-political and economic phenomena is traced through history, from
embryonic to a more complicated form.
According to the Agganna Sutta, “the genesis of kingship evolved and passed through several stages of
human society before reaching its current position. These signify those ethereal creatures were in a
state of peace, happiness, prosperity, and quiet for an extended period. Differences in gender, race,
religion and other characteristics manifest, bringing life down from the ethereal to the corporeal plane.
First and foremost, “they became involved in the food gathering process. Second, through increasing
food production and cultivating agricultural lands, men began to organise themselves within their
families in the third place. Fourth, they chose to split their rice plants amongst themselves and set up
boundaries to protect their property (mariyadam thapemsu)”. After reaching the final stage, a person, in
addition to securing his own portion, also seized another’s that had not been assigned to him, and since
then, theft, blaming, false speech, and the use of force have spread among the populace as a result.
Following this crisis in society, “the beings (sattii) assembled and debated possible solutions to the
problem. They then agreed to choose a being (satta) to assist them in resolving this social issue. As
recorded in the Agganna Sutta, Mahasammata was not accorded the status of a monarch (raja)”. He was
only permitted to preserve peace and order by implementing the customary laws of the community or
tribe, which he did by the will of the people. Gokhale asserts that, as the Suttanta pointed out, “the key
intent of state is to ensure the rule of law against of every societal evil thought to provide the safeguard
to the subject like property and family and to uphold the power of righteousness over the
wrongdoings”. The Mahasammata was declared to be the king to accomplish this. Then, he was referred
to as Khattiya. He was “the Lord of the farmsteads, and Raja pleased and protected the people with his
righteousness Dhamma, which was later changed to Raja. To put it another way, the state, according to
this view, is founded on the widespread acceptance (mahajanasammata) of its objectives and
functions”.
Through the practice of Dhamma, “it is supposed to defend and safeguard the rights of individuals while
also creating conditions of happiness for those who are under its jurisdiction”.
Furthermore, However, the Buddha made an attempt to describe the position of the king in the
manner in which he believed it should be. Without question, he stated that the monarch had been
chosen and that his most essential job was to maintain peace and order while also protecting the
property of his subjects rather than levying taxes. Further, there are a few things that are extremely
important in the Buddhist notion of kingship. They are as follows: “Although the king in question was
chosen by the entire population (Mahajanasammata), he is treated as a prime inter pares (a man who is
“like unto himself and not unlike himself”) because of the equality of man after his election, even
though he is a handsome and commanding figure in his own right”. According to the Agganna Sutta, “the
Mahasammata was not only a law-giver, but he was also chosen by the people as their leader from
amongst themselves, and in return people promised to give 1/6 th of their ‘rice’ to the great elect-
Mahasammata.
Moreover, Described in the Agganna Sutta, the first monarch was chosen by the people as a means of
ensuring justice and order amongst themselves”. Mahasammata was the one who had been ‘agreed
upon’ or “allowed” to reign. Compared to Brahmanical notions of kingship, in which the king played a
“cosmic and divine function,” as Heine-Geldern puts it, and “was regarded to be either an incarnation of
a god or a descendant from a god or both,” this is a significant departure from the Western concept of
kingship. But according to the storey of this Sutta, he was neither king nor legislator. Still, he served as a
sort of executive who ensured that law and order were maintained throughout the society. Moreover,
because he was unbiased, he punished anyone who violated the customs and traditions of the group in
question. In this way, he could be seen as a law and justice authority of some sort. According to Agganna
Sutta, the state came into being during this period of kingship.
Consequently, we can deduce that the Khattiya was not only the Lord of the Lands but also the King of
State and the Supreme Ruler over his subjects. The progression of the Raja’s status demonstrates
progress in the development of kingship over time. As a result, “economic growth alone will not be
sufficient to eradicate theft from a society. On the other hand, there is no question that people steal due
to destitution and unequal distribution of wealth in society. In these circumstances, there is no
justification for punishing a person for theft who takes what is not provided simply for the sake of
maintaining their own survival”. He steals not for any other reason than the reality that he has nothing
else with which to support himself and his family. The solution for him does not lie in punishment but
rather in prudent financial management.
CONCEPT OF STATE IN AGGANNA SUTTA
According to the Aggannasutta of Digha Nikaya, “the origin of the state in Buddhism is founded on the
theory of cosmic evolution of nature. According to this discourse, the origin of the state can be
explained utilizing two evolutional theories: the evolution of cosmology and the evolution of
anthropology, both of which are significant”. Following the teachings of the Aggannasutta, “there came
a time when the world contracted, sooner or later, after an interminably long period had passed, and
the living beings reborn in the World of Radiance and made of mind and feeding on rapture, continued
to exist for an interminably long period, traversing space and continuing to exist in glory”. The planet
began to re-evolve at that point; there was only a single mass of water, obscurity, and darkness, and
living beings were referred to as simply beings. Nevertheless, the globe continued to evolve, and as “the
delicious Earth began to appear on the surface of the planet, the living species were drawn to it by their
need for it. The sun, the moon, the stars, and constellations were visible to them during their period of
reduced self-luminosity. As a result, they learned about the seasons, months, and years that followed”.
It is said that when the world revolved, they flew across the skies and observed the savoury Earth that
covered the planet’s surface. They then took possession of the ground and were stripped of their own
brilliance. The colours of their skin have altered due to the effects of the medication they have taken.
Some beings gained in attractiveness, while others lost their attractiveness. The good-looking beings
began to express their dissatisfaction with the bad-looking humans. There is ample evidence to suggest
that even at the dawn of the world, “when there was no visible distinction based on birth, there was still
societal bias based on the colour of one’s skin, and this was true regardless of the origin of one’s skin
colour. When the living beings flew through the air with self-luminous lights, the delicious soil appeared
on the surface of the Earth. It served as sustenance for the earliest human beings to consume”.
However, the delicious Earth was no longer present on the surface of the planet and eventually
vanished. When the Earth was no longer present, fungi appeared before the living beings and provided
food for them. After they were taken, there was a change in their bodies, and they subsequently
censured each other for having a horrible physical look, and the fungi departed as a result of this”. The
creepers appeared on the surface of the Earth when the fungi vanished, and they became a source of
sustenance for all living things. Creepers stayed as food for them for a short period before disappearing.
Finally, rice appeared in primitive living creatures and has been their staple diet ever since that time.
After consuming rice as a diet for an extended period, the organs gradually became male and female,
and they eventually engaged in sexual behaviour. They constructed cottages in which they could reside
separately to conceal their filthy activities”. When they started having children, their offspring began to
gravitate toward the group of people who shared their skin tone. As a result, the birth of civilization
appears to be ambiguous; only the sexual union cannot be used as a criterion of distinction in an
absolute sense. Their unity grew gradually through time, from the tiny unit to the large unit, since they
shared the same goals and followed the same procedures, which meant they had to work together to
establish a social system, which took time to develop. Later, those people came to appreciate the value
of gathering and storing food grains for later use. Further, To emphasise “the importance of the
distribution of properties, marks the beginning of social relationships as well as the commencement of a
social system. This realisation resulted in expressing oneself freely and the willingness to share what one
possesses with others. As a result, sacrifices on the part of the individual were required to further the
interests of society as a whole.”
Buddhism pointed out that the primary reason for the disintegration of absolute society was the
deterioration of moral ideals, which eventually led to the degradation of morality itself. Malpractices
committed in the name of morality brought the good and the cheerful to their knees. Because of this,
the means of reaching happiness have been watered down in their current state. According to the
Buddha’s teachings in the Aggañña Sutta., this resulted in the greatest revolution in moral standards in
the history of humanity.
THE ISSUES OF SOCIO-POLITICAL EQUALITY FROM BUDDHIST LENS
It is widely acknowledged that “the Buddha’s teachings apply to all of humanity, regardless of race,
caste, gender, skin colour, wisdom or unwiseness, wealth or poverty, and that his teachings are
universal. Buddha absolutely rejected the socio-political milieu that stood for right by birth, as
established by one’s genetic makeup”. Instead, he devised his own philosophy, according to which all
human beings have equal rights in all aspects of their lives. The Buddha specifically emphasised that all
human beings are equal in society; nevertheless, because of ignorance on both the individual and social
levels, as well as social dogma and human desire, we create disparities that threaten the very life of
society. Further, there are three primary teachings of Buddhism are the principles, Tilakkhana (three
common traits), metta (loving-kindness), and the law of Kamma. These are all considered to be Buddhist
beliefs that symbolise the equality of all humans.
The Buddhist doctrine of social justice aims to promote equality among all people; “it is important to
note that this is accomplished through the well-known principle of ‘Tilakkhaas,’ which consists of three
common ‘universal characteristics’, namely (i) Aniccatā: impermanence, (ii) Dukkhatā: state of suffering,
and (iii) Anattatā: non-self”.
Further,To understand metta, one must remember that the Buddha, in proposing the deepening and
ennoblement of character caused by metta, is not motivated by caste or social class considerations.
Finally, Buddhism emphasises the importance of the law of Kamma as a fundamental doctrine, which
means whatever kamma you create, whether with your body, voice, or thought, is your actual property,
and you must behave by the Kamma you have made.
Caste was a primary factor in “the people’s social life during the time of the Buddha. A person who was
born into a particular caste could not, under any circumstances, change their social standing during their
lifetime. Though the Buddha’s contribution is his acceptance of the notion that one’s caste can be
changed. He put this philosophy into action by inviting people from all castes, both high and poor, into
his community of monks, regardless of their social status”. The Buddha fostered brotherhood, practised
love, sympathy, and compassion, and proclaimed the equality of all human beings, regardless of caste or
gender, among all people. His teachings are geared toward eliminating the distinction between a
superior and an inferior, as well as between the rich and the destitute”.
In reality, societal bias is founded on popular views that are held by the majority of people. Human
beings were introduced as the Son of God, for example. Women have been accused of possessing the
worst characteristics of humankind. In certain circles, they are seen as the source of all of the world’s
sins. Hence, without a doubt, the Buddha was the first religious leader to provide equal and unhindered
chances for female spiritual development. The Buddha regularly attacked and questioned the
antagonistic attitude toward women on religious and societal grounds throughout his lifetime. The
Buddha, in the Kosala Sayutta, refutes “the view that the birth of a daughter was not as much of a cause
of joy as the birth of a son, a belief to which the Brahmins had contributed through their practice of
ritualism. Clearly, the Buddha saw that women had a dignified and vital role to play in society, and he
defined that role with profound clarity, integrating her smoothly into the social fabric”. The Buddha
made a concerted effort to bring about significant improvements in social views toward women.
According to current trends, women are respected and honoured in a Buddhist society, and they enjoy
equal standing with males in terms of respect and honour within their community. In the same way,
widow women have the same rights and status as any other woman, including the freedom to marry if
they so choose. This is a development of Buddhism relevant to modern society since it is concerned with
women’s equal rights and status.
Buddhism embraces everyone into its fraternity without making any distinctions because everybody has
an equal right to develop themselves. Although human beings may differ in their interests and capacities
“as a result of their diverse historical growth, their essential needs are fundamentally the same on all
three levels: material, psychological, and spiritual.
Moreover, Justiciability entailed the chance for a better life via the exercise of equal rights and liberties.
The existence of a society that denies its members equality and justice would make it impossible for that
society to function based on nonviolence. Violence is the law of the jungle, and nonviolence is the law of
the land, just as it is in the wilderness. According to the provisions of this legislation, the people’s
material and spiritual goals must be met with justice.

CONCLUSION
Digha Nikayas are a collection of the dialogues, mostly of Buddha himself, as they appear to his earliest
disciples. The Aggana Sutta of Dīgha Nikāya refers to the myth regarding the origin of the world and the
evolution of mankind. In stages, it describes the gradual deterioration of man from a perfect stage or the
original state to a stage where greed and passion erode the moral and physical qualities and man is
transformed into an ordinary human existence.
Thus, The Aggañña Sutta contains useful information related to the social evolution and dissolution,
caste system, the Buddha’s views against the caste system, the origin of kingship etc. In Buddha’s
related story as in Aggañña Sutta shows that no one can claim superior status above others. Buddha still
confirmed his idea that is against the Brahmanism on caste system. The Buddha’s explanation given was
on the ground of scientific, biological and social base. Buddha’s argument is given to support human
equality in society. In his tale, human race originated from the same race, the radiant beings from
Brahma world. A king is not from the god or any supreme power but society selection. Everyone is equal
with law and order and man can be judged good or bad on account of his/ her conduct, not from the
social class he or she belongs.