Traditions of

the Pre-Colonial
UNIT 2 ŚRAMANIC ⁎
Indian Political
Thought
Structure
2.0 Objectives
2.1 Introduction
2.2 Methodological Problems
2.3 Reactions against Brāhmanic Tradition
2.4 Basic Concepts
2.4.1 Principles of Existence
2.4.2 Theory of Karma
2.4.3 Refuge in Three Jewels
2.4.4 Madhyam Mārg (Middle Path)
2.4.5 Ashtānga Mārg (Eight fold path)
2.4.6 Vinaya / Śīla (Ethics)
2.4.7 Creation of the Social Order
2.4.8 Nirvāna (Enlightenment)

2.5 Political Thought in Śramanic Scriptures

2.5.1 Political Ideas
2.5.2 Monastic Governance as a ‘Deliberative Democracy’
2.5.3 Republics in Buddhist Literature
2.5.4 Confederation of Republics
2.5.5 Legislative Administration
2.5.6 Legislative Procedure
2.5.7 Judicial Administration
2.5.8 Ethics as the Basis of Politics
2.6 Limitations of Śramanic
2.7 Reactions towards Śramanic Tradition
2.8 Let Us Sum Up
2.9 References
2.10 Answers to Check Your Progress Exercises

⁎
Dr Ruchi Tyagi, Associate Professor, Kalindi College, University of Delhi

26
2.0 OBJECTIVES Śramanic

The aim of this unit is to familiarise you with the ideas of Śramanic tradition.
After studying this unit, you should be able to understand:

 Scope of Śramanic Tradition

 Śramanic reactions against Brāhmanic tradition
 Basic Concepts of Śramanic
 Evolution of Political Ideas and Polity
 Limitations of Śramanic
 Reactions towards Śramanic tradition

2.1 INTRODUCTION
The Jains and the Buddhist led two vigorous protestant movements against
Brāhmanic tradition from the fifth century B.C. onwards. If the centre of earlier
Vedic or Brāhmanic tradition was the eastern Afghanistan to Sapta-Sindhu to the
upper valley of the Ganga, the origin of Śramanic tradition is mainly associated
with Kośala and Magadha, the main areas of Buddha and Mahāvira. Steven
Collins has stated that the most likely time for the Buddha and early Buddhism
was 5th – 4th centuries B.C. There are three notable features of this period: first,
during this period, Brahmanism was more strongly established in the countryside
than in rising urban centres, where competing plurality of ideologies were
emerging; second, these urban centres, which arose from and encouraged a food
surplus, were market, military and administrative centres of small-scale polities,
not metropolitan capitals of large empires; third, these polities were ruled, in the
earlier part of period, by oligarchies, and gradually turned to monarchy. The
political discourse of Diggha Nikāya, according to Collins, apparently
presupposed this picture.

Mahāvira, the acknowledged founder of Jainism, was the twenty-fourth

Tirthankar, first being Rishabha and last, before Mahāvira was Pārsvanāth. A
senior contemporary of Buddha, Mahāvira formed his own monastic community,
subsequently divided into two major schools of Śvetāmbaras and Digambaras.
The Jain political philosophy was later explained by Jinasena (Ādipurāna),
Hemachandra (Yogasāstra & Trishastiśalakā-purushacharita), Somadeva
(Nitivākyāmrita) and Merutunga (Prabandha Chintāmani) etc.

In the Buddhist tradition, there are three great traditions, Therāvada, Mahāyāna
and Vajrayāna. Thervada or the school of the elder monks, includes ‘Tripitaka’
(Three Baskets) and Jātaka tales. It is mainly found in Burma, Cambodia, Sri
Lanka, Laos, Thailand and Chittagong in Bangladesh. ‘Tripitaka’ comprises
Sutta Pitak, Vinaya Pitak and Abhidhamma Pitak. Sutta Pitak, is a compilation of
Buddha’s sermons, delivered in Pāli language. The dialogues of Buddha were
collected during the first assembly just after his death; arranged according to
their length; and translated into Sanskrit. There are five Nikāyas or collections of 27
 Suttas, namely, (i) Digha Nikāya (There are 34 long Suttas), It is most important
Traditions of
for political theory purposes. (ii) Majjhim Nikāya, (iii) Samyutta Nikāya, (iv)
the Pre-Colonial
Indian Political Anguttara Nikāya and (v) Khuddaka Nikāya. The Vinaya Pitak contains rules
Thought and regulations of monastic life that range from dress code and dietary rules to
prohibitions of certain personal conducts; whereas the Abhidhamma Pitak mainly
provides philosophical and psychological discourse and interpretation of
Buddhist doctrine.

Second, Mahāyāna or the Great Vehicle tradition originated in India and later
spread to China, Korea, Japan and Vietnam etc. It coexisted with Confucianism
and Taoism. The third, closer to Mahāyāna, also known as the Tibetan tradition,
was called Vajrayāna or Tantric Buddhism and believes in esoteric healing;
deals with social activism and social transformation and is prevalent in Bhutan,
Mongolia, Nepal and Tibet.

In addition to these works written in Pāli and in mixed Sanskrit, there are some
Sanskrit works like Ārya Śūra’s Jātakmālā, Aśvaghoṣa’s Saundarananda
Kāvyam and Buddhacharita and other later works. Finally, there is a Tibetan
work on the Life of Buddha, which is a Vinaya compilation.

2.2 METHODOLOGICAL PROBLEMS

During the long evolution of Śramanic tradition, it is difficult to reach a
consensus for periodization and historicity of texts. There is no agreement among
the Buddhist scholars regarding the exact date of the Tripitaka work. A period
ranging from fourth century B.C. to fourth century A.D. has been assigned to
these works.

The Jātaka Stories have been related to the royal missionary Mahinda’s
(Mahendra) journey to Ceylon during Asoka’s reign in the middle of the third
century B.C. These Jātaka Stories were known to the world through the
translation from Pāli into Singhalese in the fifth century A.D. making it difficult
for identification and reading of primary texts and classical secondary
commentaries of political purport and relevance.

Issue of non-English vocabulary for political terms also has made indigenous
Śramanic texts as non-inviting for researchers of Political Science. For example,
Pali terms like ānā (Command), Khattiya (Lord of Fields), Adhipacca (lordship);
Issariya (imposing sovereignty), exercised through Sattharatna (seven elements)
and ‘two wheels’ of Dhammacakka (wheel of law/ Vinaya) and ānācakka (wheel
of command) require basic understanding of Pāli and Sanskrit term to appreciate
their political connotations.

Hence, dealing with the various disciplines of knowledge as branches of same

roots and an absence of specified single text dealing with polity and Political
Science in a holistic manner (like Plato, Aristotle, Machiavelli, Locke etc.), the
28 tradition invariably was treated as a school of metaphysics and failed to invite
attention of western and oriental scholars of Political Science, in spite of relevant Śramanic
content and milieu.

Check Your Progress Exercise 1

Note: i) Use the space given below for your answer.
ii) Check your progress with the model answer given at the end of
the unit.
1. Explain major methodological problems in the study of Śramanic
tradition.
…………………………………………………………………………...……
…………………………………………………………………………...……
…………………………………………………………………………...……
…………………………………………………………………………...……
…………………………………………………………………………...……
…………………………………………………………………………...……

2.3 REACTIONS AGAINST BRĀHMANIC

TRADITION
Both Jainism and Buddhism were critical of the Brāhmanic tradition:

 The Buddha countered the popular belief in the validity of Vedas as original
and ancient most source of knowledge. Confronted with the religious
pluralism of the times, he acknowledged every form of rival religious beliefs
as a possessor of some degree of truth.
 Both countered the belief in intra-cosmic Gods, the cycle of rebirth, idolatry
and resulting superstitions. Jainism insisted for the potential of human soul
for perfection. Individual souls were regarded as essentially separated and
unconnected. It was argued that they get related only due to past actions.
Buddhism denied the existence of a soul passing from life to life in
fulfillment of its past actions. Personal identity was merely a result of the
process of psychic life, which continued from birth to birth binding actions in
terms of their moral consequences. Expecting ethical merit from ablutions,
Śramanic texts argued that man’s passions, consciousness, intellect,
perception and impressions belong exclusively to the individual.
 Śramanic tradition challenged the hereditary basis of caste resulting in
stratification of society. Jayasurya (p. 47) opines that the emergent social
order reacted strongly against the rigidity and dominance, which denied
individual autonomy, human freedoms and legitimated inequalities. The new
urban mercantilism rejected this hierarchical ordering of society in terms of a
divinely destined, sacrosanct social structure made up of four social classes – 29
Kshatriya, Brāhmins, Vaishya and Śudras (including the outcastes).
  Their reaction against Brāhmanic dominance was so strong that the Jains
Traditions of
the Pre-Colonial
declared that Tirthankars would never be born in a Brāhman family.
Indian Political V.R.Mehta (p.111) narrates a story that the foetus of Lord Mahavira had to be
Thought transferred from the womb of a Brahman lady. Buddha assigned the first
place to Kshatriyas in the state.
 They exposed the practices of animal and human sacrifices and associated
rituals concerning sacrificial violence. Both Jainism and Buddhism were like
a revolt against the system of animal sacrifice. Jainism developed an
epistemological theory of Anekāntvāda and explained it through the doctrine
of non-violence. Following the story of the elephant and the six blind men, it
was argued that in a dispute, it is very rarely that one side is completely right,
while the other being completely wrong. Therefore, truth should be
considered in totality, after understanding different viewpoints. While
advocating for complete non-violence, Jainism denied even the unconscious
killing of germs while walking or speaking.
Considering the Roman Catholic Church and Brāhmanic tradition as
‘sacrificial systems’ placing the essence of religion in sacrifices, Buddhism
offered a process of self-cleansing. This led many researchers of early
Buddhism to consider it as the ‘Protestantism of the East’ and a critic and
complement to the reigning orthodox of Brāhminism.

2.4 BASIC CONCEPTS

Buddha declared metaphysical questions being irrelevant and emphasized the
significance of simple moral life in accordance with the four noble truths:

i. The world is full of suffering,

ii. Suffering is caused by human desires,
iii. The renunciation of desires is the path to salvation (Nirvān), and
iv. Salvation is possible through eight principles.

Buddhism adopted a rational position by stating that human life is governed by

causal principles, leaving no scope for divine intervention.

2.4.1 Principles of Existence

Buddhism is based on - Anicca, Anatta and Dukkha - three fundamental
principles of all existence and the phenomenal world. Anicca (anitya) denoted
that all things, including self, are impermanent, inconstant, unsteady and
changing. Anatta (anātma) explains the concept of non-self, denying the
immortality of soul, and unchanging/permanent nature of self. Dukkha (Duhkha)
describes the pain, suffering, dissatisfaction, anguish, stress, anxiety or
frustration emerging from physical/material thing, unpleasant experience or
inadequate identity. All kinds of suffering in life, like, birth, old age, sickness,
death, association with unpleasant persons or conditions, separation from beloved
ones or pleasant situations, disappointment, grief are common sufferings,
30
reflecting impermanence of happiness. Recognition of these three basic
characteristics of existence constitute the right knowledge or the four noble Śramanic
Truths, including

(i) Dukkha (the existential fact/reality of suffering),

(ii) Samudāya (it’s cause, arising or origin),
(iii) Nirodha (it’s cessation) and
(iv) Magga or Mārga (ultimately the path leading to its
cessation/suppression).

2.4.2 Theory of Karma

Both Jainism and Buddhism believed that man could transcend Karma by his
own efforts. Though they recognized functional Gods, yet emphasized that the
universal process (Samsār) was a result of certain immutable laws of action
(Karma), resulting in progress and decline. Jainism maintained that the world
was composed of infinite souls, which were trying to purify themselves of action
particles (Karma). These Karma bind the soul and accordingly embody it in
different incarnations in a cycle of birth and rebirth. The present life is
determined by our past karma. Accordingly, the ideal of liberation by one’s own
individual efforts is realized in the form of birth, death and rebirth. The Śramanic
tradition preached the value of a moral life in terms of the theory of Karma. Both
Jainism and Buddhism rejected the Lokāyata view of pleasure. Buddhists
believed that the causal chain of body and soul could achieve right knowledge,
which was kaivalya jnāna in Jainsim and Nirvāna in Buddhism. materialistic
doctrine.

2.4.3 Refuge in Three Jewels

Jainism recommends the path of three jewels (Triratna): (i) right
reverence (Shraddhā); (ii) right knowledge (Jnān); and (iii) right
conduct (Sadāchār), in order to enable the individual to
attain Nirvāna (deliverance). It also underlines the virtues of Ahimsā (non-
violence), Aparigraha (non-possession), understanding, equality, service,
Sanyam (self-restraint), Tapa (penance) and oneness in all living things. It
comprises a powerful force for co-existential outlook and reflects an attitude
of universal love for all living beings, sympathy and compassion towards those
in distress and tolerance towards those in opposition. Thus, the Jain prayer
enjoins: "Lord, I commit myself to communion with the Ātman, abjuring the
mental outlook, speech or deed that interferes with the oneness of all living
beings."

Buddhism exhilarates the three-fold submission or seeking refuges to Buddham

('Buddha'), Dhammam (the 'doctrine') and Samgham (the 'Buddhist ecclesiastical
fraternity'). In its moral aspect, it stood for Śīla (Modesty),
Samādhi (concentration or meditation) and Pragyā (wisdom), the pursuit of
which could ultimately lead one to Nirvāna (salvation). 31
Traditions of
the Pre-Colonial
Indian Political 2.4.4 Madhyam Marg (Middle Path)
Thought
If Jainism subscribed to the extreme path of self-denunciation, sacrifice and
asceticism, Buddhism advocated for non-extremism or a path of moderation,
avoiding the extremes of self-indulgence on one hand, and self-mortification on
the other.

2.4.5 Ashtānga Marg (Eight fold path)

The three basic categories of human action encouraged ‘eight-fold middle path’;
where (i) Pragyā (wisdom) includes ‘right view’(Sammā ditthi/Drishti) and
‘right intention’ (Sammā Sankappa/Sankalpa); (ii) Śīla (ethical conduct/modesty)
comprises ‘right speech’ (Sammā Vācā/Vācha), ‘right action’ (Sammā
Kammanta) and ‘right livelihood’(Sammā Ājīva); and (iii) Samādhi
(concentration/meditation) comprehends ‘right effort’(Sammā Vyāmma), ‘right
mindfulness’(Sammā Sati), and ‘right concentration’(Sammā Samādhi).

2.4.6 Vinaya / Śīla (Ethics)

Jainism emerged initially as a system of religious thought with a distinct
philosophy of its own. In the process of its evolution, it was deeply influenced by
the Hindu philosophical tradition. Jainism suggests five vows for the realization
of absolute happiness or Sukha:

(i) Ahimsā: non-violence in thought, word and deed;

(ii) Satya: pursuit of truth and avoidance of falsehood;
(iii) Asteya: satisfaction with whatever one possesses and avoidance of
stealing;
(iv) Brahmacharya: Celibacy and to be content with one's own
wife; and
(v) Aparigraha: to limit one's possessions.

These vows are prescribed not only for the ascetic, but also for the discipline
of Anuvrata.

The five Precepts, mandatory for all Buddhists, defining the Vinaya code or the
monastic code include (Collins, p.25-26):

a. ‘He cannot intentionally deprive a living thing of life’ (Ahimsā)

b. ‘He cannot take what is not given, intending to steal’ (Asteya)
c. ‘He cannot have sex’ (Brahmcharya)
d. ‘He cannot tell a conscious lie’ (Satya)
e. ‘He cannot enjoy (objects of) desire, making a store (Aparigraha)

32 Buddhist tradition stood for Śīla (modesty), Samadhi (meditation)

and Pragyā (wisdom), the pursuit of which could ultimately lead one
to Nirvāna (salvation). It denoted moral purity of thought, word and action; Śramanic
including Satya (truthfulness), Ahimsa (non-violence), Asteya (non-stealing),
Brahmcharya (refrain from sensual misconduct), and Madyavimukta (refrain
from intoxicants)

2.4.7 Creation of the Social Order

U.N. Ghoshal argues that Aggana Sutta challenges the Vedic ideas on divine
creation of the social order, while suggesting that the division of people in
society is based upon need and convenience rather than any hierarchical division.
In other words, the division in the social order, with precedence to Kshatriya over
Brāhman, is based upon functional performance of activities by the groups and
not determined by varna model.

If Brāhmanical king ideally maintained the varna division in the social order; the
Buddhist king’s primary task was to maintain a social order in which the property
and family of individuals are protected in accordance with Dhamma.

2.4.8 Nirvāna (Enlightenment)

Jainism believes that man is a slave to pleasure of senses, with no end to its
accumulation. This leads to attachment of Karmic particles, which, in turn, lead
to infinite cycles of life and death. The search for self-knowledge and self-
realization is the only way to transcend this world and attain liberation.

For Buddha, Nirvāna or Nibbāna is Magga (the path) to the cessation of Dukkha.
Buddha calls it Majjhima Patipadā (the middle path), as it seeks to avoid
extremes of pleasure of senses and self-mortification, and leads to enlightenment
or Nirvāna.

Check Your Progress Exercise 2

Note: i) Use the space given below for your answer.
ii) Check your progress with the model answer given at the end of
the unit.
1. Explain the Śramanic reactions against the Brāhmanic tradition.
…………………………………………………………………………...……
…………………………………………………………………………...……
…………………………………………………………………………...……
…………………………………………………………………………...……
…………………………………………………………………………...……
…………………………………………………………………………...……
33
…………………………………………………………………………...……
Traditions of
the Pre-Colonial 2. What are the significant basic concepts of the Śramanic tradition?
Indian Political
Thought
…………………………………………………………………………...……
…………………………………………………………………………...……
…………………………………………………………………………...……
…………………………………………………………………………...……
…………………………………………………………………………...……
…………………………………………………………………………...……

2.5 POLITICAL THOUGHT IN ŚRAMANIC

SCRIPTURES
2.5.1 Political Ideas
Jain Idealism primarily implied plurality of souls; emphasized experience in
material universe; Portrayed ideal king as puritanical character, reformist
legislation, aiming at charity and welfare of people. V.R.Mehta is of the view that
in the beginning, Jainism was a non-political, but not anti-political doctrine. It
did not contain any political statement of individualism or human equality. Even
democratic ideology was wholly absent from it. Since it regarded the world as a
bondage, the whole emphasis was on man’s efforts to gain salvation by practicing
sacrifice and penance. Jain canonist like Jinsena supported the patriarchal origin
of the state and asserted that the state is a cause of grief, a harmful drug, which
has to be taken as a necessity. Mehta (p. 117) quoting Jinsena says that even the
king should try to get rid of it as soon as possible. Politics may provide happiness
in this world, but cannot assure happiness thereafter. But Jainism reconciled itself
to the necessity of politics, resulting in two finest pieces on statecraft,
Hemchandra’s Yogasastra and Somdeva’s Nitivākyāmrita.

Buddhist Vision imbibed reformist stance towards ritualistic and aristocratic

features of early Vedic period; the origin & evolutionary nature of state in Digha
Nikāya; projection of king as Mahāsammat, Khattiya, Rājan; Asoka’s Dhamma
depicted the earliest all-inclusive ideology of state and civil society; references of
ānā, Gaṅa, and republics in Buddhist literature denoted the republican trends.

Buddhism is primarily understood as a religious and philosophical concept, while

it is equally concerned with the mundane and transcendental world. Scholars like
S.J. Tambiah were convinced that king enjoyed significant status in Buddhist
philosophy, whereas others like Max Weber considered it apolitical. There are
scattered references to power and kingship in Pāli scriptures, but there is no
direct theory supporting these references. B.K. Gokhale has outlined the
evolution of Buddhist thinking on the origin and development of the state as
outlined in Aggana Sutta (Details given in Unit-9).
34
2.5.2 Monastic Governance as a ‘Deliberative Democracy’ Śramanic

The monastic community or Samgha was governed and regulated by a well

formulated code of conduct, called the Vinaya. It was an integral part of the
Buddhist Compilation, enlisting rules and procedures governing the structure and
functioning of the monastic community. Accordingly, the brotherhood of monks
relied on the democratic foundations, where a code of law used to govern their
conduct. The social status or the seniority of monks was decided on the basis of
date of ordination. Their inter-personal relations were based on an equalitarian
liberal culture, having no formal hierarchy or dynastic favouritism. In individual
life, monk were expected to shed greed, hatred, delusion, folly, conceit, and
ignorance. They were to live with communal property and bare minimum private
possessions and in communal harmony. They were to be careful, compassionate
and responsible towards the wider society of lay persons, who cater to
community in meeting their daily chores. This monastic governance had many
similarities with the features of statecraft existing in the self-governing
confederacies and republics rather than the large monarchical kingdoms like
Kośala and Magadh.

If the monarchical kingdoms were led by Brāhmanic notions of a divinely

sanctioned superior class of rulers, the self-governing confederacies were guided
by the humanistic Buddhist ethics and skilful democratic form of conflict
resolution.

2.5.3 Republics in Buddhist Literature

In Buddha’s times, two forms of government existed in the Gangetic plains in
Northern India, Republican and monarchical in competition with each other.
The trend was to increase the size and power of monarchy at the cost of
republics. Government by discussion was the keystone of a republican form of
government.

According to Mahabharata, five republican people – the Andhakas, the Vrishnis,

the Yādavas, the Kukuras and the Bhojas – formed themselves into a
confederation and Krishna was made the confederate president. Each of the
constituent states of the confederation appeared as an autonomous unit under its
own chief called Ishvara, master or lord. Panini has referred to Ayudhajivi –
living by arms – republics. Bhandārkar has placed Panini before Buddha. It
seems that these republican states specialized in the military arts, they, according
to V.P. Varma, were like the Spartas of ancient India.

The list of Republics recorded in Buddhist literature, according to K.P.Jayaswal

(p. 42-3) includes:

a. the Śākyas (capital Kapilvastu, todays districts of Gorakhpur);

b. the Koliyas of Rāmagrāma;
35
 c. the Lichchhavis (capital Vaishali, parts of today’s districts of
Traditions of
Muzaffarpur);
the Pre-Colonial
Indian Political d. the Videhas (capital Mithila, today’s districts of Darbhanga);
Thought (last two were jointly called the Vṛijis or Vajjis);
e. the Mallas, from the districts of Gorakhpur to that of Champaran, divided
into two units, with their capitals at Kusinārā and Pāvā;
f. the Moriyas of Pippalīvana;
g. the Bulis of Allakappa, neighbours of the Mallas of Kuśnagara; and
h. the Bhaggas (Bhargas), the neighbours of the kingdom of the Vatsas of
Kauśāmbī.

Politically, the most important republics of this group were the Vṛijis and the
Mallas. The former were mentioned both by Pānini and Kautilya. The Bhargas
find reference in Mahābhārata and the Pali records. Pānini mentions them as an
independent Janapada or a political nation. Jayaswal has interpreted a Sutra of
Panini reflecting the existence of the bicameral system in some of the republics.

M.P. Singh has stated that Samghas were an intermediate stage between the
collectivism of popular tribal assemblies and fully developed monarchical
state. Aṅguttara Nikāya mentions 16 Mahājanapadas (greater territorial
communities) i.e. Kāśi, Kośala, Anga, Magadha, Vajji or Vṛji, Malla, Chedi,
Vatsa, Kuru, Pañcāla, Matsya, Sūrasena, Aṣmaka, Avanti, Gāndhāra, and
Kambōja. Dīgha Nikāya mentions first 12 Mahājanapadas and omits last four.
(Singh p. 2) Later, four kingdoms of Kośala, Magadha, Vatsa, and Avanti
emerged, out of which Kośala (incorporated the territory of the Śakya clan, to
which Buddha belonged) and Magadha became the main areas of Buddha and
Mahavira. Both were contemporaries of Bimbasāra (of Haryanka dynasty), the
king of Magadha, assassinated by his son Ajātaśatru around 494 BCE, about
seven years before the death of Buddha. Monarchy flourished in three contexts of
Individualism, urbanisation & density of population. From these early state
formations, the first state with growing ideology of Varna and class inequalities
emerged in Magadha under Mahāpadma Nanda. (R.S.Sharma)

Buddha’s ‘Bhikkhu Samgha’ or the ‘Republic of Bhikshus’ adopted the name and
constitution of the political Samghas. To maintain their independence, strengthen
their democratic form of governance and to ensure welfare of a community,
‘seven conditions’ were enlisted, which reflected notable commonality between
the self-governing republics of the Vajjians and the governance of the monastic
community or the ‘Bhikkhu Samghas’ (Jayaswal p. 40-42 & Jayasuriya p.53 ):

(i) Holding regular and frequent meeting of assemblies;

(ii) Meeting together to carry out regular tasks of governance or business
in harmony;
(iii) Enacting or establishing nothing that has not already been prescribed,
abrogate nothing that has already been enacted or established and act
36 in accordance with the existing institutions of Vajjians or rules of
Samgha;
 (iv) Honouring, listening and revering the Elders, the Fathers and the Śramanic
Leaders of Vajjis or the Samgha;
(v) Women and girls not being abducted or brethren not falling under
influence;
(vi) Honouring, revering and supporting Vajjian monuments or delight in
a life of solitude; and
(vii) Following the established practice and systems or train their minds to
prosper.

Jayasuriya has asserted that the self-governing confederacies primarily followed

the normative code of conduct based on human freedom and equality of the ruler
and the ruled. However, the issue of gender equality was raised at the ordination
of women as nuns, where Ananda, the Buddha’s trusted disciple, had to persuade
him and the nuns had to agree to abide by certain additional rules, and finally the
Buddha accepted women as ‘spiritual equals’.

The history of the birth of Buddhist Samghas is a history of the birth of the
Monastic Order in the world. The Buddha preferred a more open society
prevailing in smaller tribal oligarchies (Gana Samgha or clan republics) than the
larger monarchical kingdoms like Kośala and Magadha. The smaller tribal
oligarchies or confederacies, particularly the Vajjian confederacy proved to be a
fertile catchment for the Buddha. According to Ghoshal, the functional and
utilitarian social practice of the Vajjian clan republics, in promoting happiness
and prosperity, were filled with sense of public spirit; pragmatic form of
governance; moral righteousness; respect for elders, women and holy persons;
and receptive to the teachings of the Buddha.

Jayasuria finds similarities between Asoka’s model of governance on the one

hand and the Vajjian constitution, its legislative governance and judicial system
of self-governing confederacies on the other.

2.5.4 Confederation of Republics

The Videhas and the Lichchhavis were united in a league called the Samvajji (or
the Vajjians together). The two Vajji republics were not confined to their own
federation. It is noted that the Lichchhavis formed a federation with their
neighbours, the Mallas. This confederacy existed during the year Mahāvira died.
The Federal Council was composed of eighteen members, including nine
Lechchhakis and nine Mallakis. The members of the Federal Council were called
Gaṅa-Rājās. These eighteen ‘confederate kings’ were placed in the Kāshi-Koshal
area. The federal states had equal members, equal voice and equal votes
reflecting equality in the federation. Even though the Mallas were not as
powerful as Lichchhavis, yet both had equal number of members and equal voice
in the Federal Council.

Supporting Dr. Jacobi’s opinion, Jayaswal has stated that these ‘eighteen
37
confederate kings’ were placed by the Jain Sutra in the Kaśi-Kośala area. At the
 time of death of the Mahāvira, the empire of Kośala was called the Kāśi-Kośala.
Traditions of
It seems that the Federal Council had some political alliance with the Kośala
the Pre-Colonial
Indian Political monarchy. The Kośala republics were certainly on bad terms with Magadha. The
Thought Vaiśalians lost battle with Ajātśatru, the Magadha Emperor. It seems that the
leagues were naturally formed to oppose the great powers between whom they
were situated.

2.5.5 Legislative Administration

K.P. Jayaswal is of the view that republics of seventh and sixth centuries B.C.
had long passed the tribal stage of society and could be called “states, Gaṇas and
Saṃghas”. Their administration and judicial business was managed in public
assembly of both, young and old. Their house was called Santhāgāra (Mote
Hall). They were under the suzerainty of the king of Kośala. Their council,
according to Jayaswal, seemed to have 500 members. Even the death of Buddha
was announced by Ānanda in the Santhāgāra of the Mallas. The senior most
member used to be elected as the presiding officer and was given the title of
Rājā, and has been compared by Jayaswal with the Roman Consul or the Greek
Archon, yet, was not associated with kingly sovereignty.

The Jātaka has named the Lichchhavi rulers as Gaṇa-rulers or republican rulers.
Rhys Davids, as quoted by Jayaswal, refers to the Lichchhavi constitution. He has
mentioned three highest officers:

(i) The President (Rājā),

(ii) The Vice-Predsident (Upa- Rājā)
(iii) The Generalissimo (Senāpati).
(iv) The fourth officer mentioned in Jātaka was the Chancellor of the
Exchequer (Bhandāgārika).

These four highest officers composed the executive authority located in the city
of Vaishali, with a system of ‘triple fortification’ for security purposes. The rule
(rajjam) vested in the inhabitants (Vasantānam), who were 7707 in number, all
of them were entitled to rule (rājunam, kings). From among them, the President
(Rājāno), the Vice-Predsident (Upa- Rājāno), Commander-in-Chief (Senāpatino)
and the Chancellor of the Exchequer (Bhandāgārika) were to be selected. It
seems that with formal approval from the assembly, the members of foundation
families or the ruling class used to become the executive office holders. The total
population was around 1,68,000 divided in outer and inner citizens (Vaiśalians).
The consecration (Abhisheka) ceremony of rulers (Gana-rājās) was done in the
presence of assembly members.

2.5.6 Legislative Procedure

There were similarities in the procedure of deliberation in political Samghas and
the Buddhist Samghas. When the Vaiśalians entered their House of Law, the
38
signal (tocsin) used to be sounded. In the House, they discussed not only political Śramanic
and military, but agricultural and commercial issues as well.

Lichchhavi Gaṅa used to appoint a Mahattaka (a distinguished member) as their

envoy (leader), who could deliver a message on behalf of the Lichchhavis of
Vaishali. The Gaṅa, under the leadership of Mahattaka, used to transact business
on behalf of the whole people. The rule of having respect for the high, the middle
ones, the oldest or the elder was not observed. Every member was accorded equal
right of speech and voting; and everyone could aspire to be the next president.

All the members used to be present in the assembly on assigned seats. For the
purpose, a special officer named as Āsana-paññāpaka or Āsana-Prjnāpaka (Seat-
regulator) to designate seats for all members.

The rule of quorum was usually observed. In smaller local societies, it could be
twenty. If any business was transacted without the required number of members
being present, the act was considered as invalid and inoperative. The duty of
gathering the minimum number of members was done by one of the members
named Gaṇa-pūraka or Whip.

Deliberations were initiated with a motion called ñatti or Jñapti (notice). It was
followed by a resolution (Prtijñā) to be adopted by the Samgha. The procedure of
moving the ñatti (Jñapti) once and the Prtijñā once was called ñatti-dutīya or the
“Two- ñatti procedure”. In some cases the resolution was repeated thrice, then it
was called ñatti-chatuttha (the four- ñatti-procedure). Putting the resolution or
Prtijñā to the assembly was called Kammavāchā (Karmavāch). But, if the ñatti
was moved and no Prtijñā was formally put or if the resolution was proclaimed
and no ñatti had been moved, the act was to be treated as invalid. Similarly, as
act requiring a ñatti-chatuttha could not be lawful, if the motion was not moved
for the prescribed number of times. The order of the motion and resolution could
not be altered.

All those who approved of the resolution were expected to remain silent, but
those who opposed were required to speak. If a member did not control in
discussion and showed contradiction and misbehaviour, the ‘Procedure of
Censure’ could be applied. Lawful presence in discussion was further decided
according to the principle of representation, where the members were expected to
represent Dhamma and Vinaya.

To avoid ‘pointless speeches’, the right of deliberation was delegated to a

specifically appointed committee of the House, which can partly be compared
with today’s committee system of the legislative procedure. In the absence of
decision by such a committee, the matter was to be decided as per the Procedure-
of-Majority.

Chhanda (Vote) was an expression of free will and choice used by member.
Voting was not required for unanimous resolutions, but if division of opinion was 39
 required, then Procedure-of-Majority (Bahutara) was observed. The voting was
Traditions of
carried on with the help of coloured voting tickets (Śalākās) or pins (wood) and
the Pre-Colonial
Indian Political the voting was called the pin-taking (Śalākāgrahan). A duly appointed impartial
Thought ‘teller’ (Śalākāgrāhaka) was to explain the significance of colours and take the
votes either secretly and openly. Votes of absentees, who owing to some illness
or disability could not attend, were meticulously collected. Its omission was
treated as breach of proceedings. However, such votes were rejected if objected
to by the members.

Clerks or Recorder of the House, from among the members, were appointed to
record minutes of the deliberations and resolutions.

Finally, if the assembly remained silent, it was declared as approved and the
affected party was formally informed about the resolution. Once the matter was
settled, it could not be re-opened.

2.5.7 Judicial Administration

The President was also the highest judicial authority. There could be a Judicial
Minister, who could be an outsider or a paid officer. To ensure liberty of the
citizens, case was to be considered by Senāpati, the Upa-Rājā and the Rājā
separately and without dissent. The decisions of the President, along with the
particulars of crime and punishment, were recorded. The judicial administration
included various layers, for example,

(1) The President was also the highest judicial authority along with the Rājā,
the Upa-Rājā, Senāpati and the judicial minister.

(2) The Court of Final Appeal was called the Ashta-Kulaka (Court of the
Eight).

(3) The judges of the high Court were called Sūtra-dharas or Doctors of Law.

(4) The Court of Appeal was presided over by Vohātrikas (Lawyer Judges).

(5) Preliminary enquiry into the case was held in the court of justices
(Vinichchaya Mahāmāttas). Evidently, these were the regular court for
civil causes and ordinary offences.

This narrative of criminal procedure of Attha-kathā has reflection of the general

procedure of republican system of justice found in Sanskrit literature. For
example, in Mahābhārata, it is suggested that criminal justice in a republic
should be administered by experts. Bhrigusmriti has mentioned Kulika and Kula
as the deciding body. Kātyāyana has used Kula in the sense of jury. Similarly, the
Ashta-Kulaka (Court of the Eight) of Buddhist literature, according to Jayaswal,
may be considered as a judicial council of eight members, instead of
‘representatives of eight clans’, as has been suggested by Rhys Davids.
40
It seems that Buddha himself was well familiar with the working system of Śramanic
republics and adopted the same for the benefit of his own order, the Dhamma-
Samgha, while adopting the republican constitution. The liberal culture of the
Gana Samghas or tribal republics had notable parallel in the monastic community
or the social organization. Jayasuriya opines that this ‘deliberative democratic’
form of governance was supportive to maintain plurality of discourse, and was
similar to the Socratic method of dialogue than the prescriptive dialogue
approach of the Brāhmanic code. Irreconcilable dissent recorded in some of the
Councils of monastic fraternity (e.g. the Third Council during the reign of Asoka)
led to cordial agreement to differ and formation of different sects.

2.5.8 Ethics as the Basis of Politics

As the state grew in size and structural and functional complexities with the rise
of Nandas and Mauryas after Buddha, the concept of the Reason of the State was
gradually theorised. The morality of state was differentiated from the morality of
individual. Chandragupta, the founder of Maurya Dynasty is said to have
embraced Jainism, and Asoka, his grandson, espoused Buddhism and adopted
Dhamma as an instrument of state policy.

Referring to the relationship between moral and political values, V.P. Varma has
mentioned four important Indian schools of thought during the ancient period.
First, in Rāmāyana of Valmiki, the school of Rama advocated a synthesis of
political and ethical values. Secondly, the school of Buddhism attributed
supremacy to moral values. Thirdly, the school of the Bhagvadgītā inculcates the
legitimacy of violence. Fourthly, the Arthaśātra of Kautilya advocated the
subordination of means to ends. V.R. Mehta is of the view that while
Mahābhārata assigned importance to connecting morals with experience in the
establishment of order in the state; Buddhist texts emphasized the absolute value
of non-violence and other moral principles in the governance of society. It did
not recognise the autonomy of public or political morality. Accordingly, a king
not following Dhamma, was declared unrighteous and its impact on nature was
also to be followed in the forms of no rains or no crops etc. Game of deceit and
treachery was treated as a contempt of politics. M.P. Singh has opined that
Asoka’s transformation and emphasis on Dharmavijaya introduced a new feature
in Indian political tradition, where the unity of India came to inhere in culture
rather than direct political domination. Even though Asoka’s Dhamma was
inspired by Buddha’s Dhamma, but it was not exactly a mirror image of the
former. Yet, Romila Thapar underlines the political implications of Asoka’s
policy with the Buddhist ideal of the Cakkavatty (Chakravarty) kingship, a just
and virtuous universal emperor, whose dominions covered the whole of
Jambudvīpa. The ideal kingship was familiar to the Jainas and had antecedents in
epic heroes like Rama and Yudhishthira, who were referred to as Digvijayi and
Dharmarājā. Asoka’s centralized, bureaucratic and monarchical state went
beyond the Ṛgvedic Sabha and Samiti; Janapadas of Mauryan state; and also the
41
 Mahāsammata (the Great Elect) and Mahājanapadas of the Early Buddhist
Traditions of
theory.
the Pre-Colonial
Indian Political
Check Your Progress Exercise 3
Thought
Note: i) Use the space given below for your answer.
ii) Check your progress with the model answer given at the end of
the unit.
1. Analyze the evolution of political ideas and political system in the
Śramanic tradition.
…………………………………………………………………………...……
…………………………………………………………………………...……
…………………………………………………………………………...……
…………………………………………………………………………...……
…………………………………………………………………………...……
…………………………………………………………………………...……

2.6 LIMITATIONS OF ŚRAMANIC

 Metaphysics and ethics being the central concept of the Śramanic tradition,
identification and acknowledgment of political thought pose some serious
weaknesses.
 Both Jainism and Buddhism could not completely disassociate themselves
from Brāhmanic tradition. While the Brāhmanic tradition accepted the value
of divine grace, it did not disregard the force of Karma, whose consequences
one had to face by one’s own efforts. The Jain principle of many-sided
knowledge was similar to the Vedic principle of ‘Neti’ (this is not) or the
Upanishadic principles of relativity. With the result, Jainism could not
distinguish itself from other practices. Gradually, forms of worship, mantra
and tantra found their way in Jainism. While Jainism appreciated individual
effort, yet it did not completely disregard the intra-cosmic Gods. During the
eighth to twelfth centuries, it developed mantra, tantra and cosmological
views almost similar to the Brahmanic tradition. They laid the foundation for
the vision of conflict between the life of a householder and that of a king and
one consecrated to liberation.
 Some aspects of these doctrine were harsh and one sided, inviting critical
assaults from Shankaracharya. Jainism revised its view, but Buddhism did
not, with the result, it disappeared from the land of its birth.
 Buddhist tradition relied on Dhamma based Vinaya for establishment of
order in society, but in the absence of constitutional checks and safeguards
against the arbitrary exercise of power, Dhamma alone was insufficient
safeguard against a wicked ruler.
 By mid-fifth century, after Buddha’s death, republics collapsed partly
42
due to aggression of the monarchies, and largely due to internal
 disagreements amongst republican nobles and elders. Undisciplined Śramanic
individualism, moral indolence, individual pride and lack of discipline were
the defining features of changing times.

2.7 REACTIONS TOWARDS ŚRAMANIC

TRADITION
 Rejection of hereditary caste system by Śramanic tradition appealed to people
across civilizational boundaries beyond subcontinent, making Buddhism a
universal religion.
 It’s assertion for equality appealed to large section of society and changed
social equations. With Buddhism countering the caste system, Brāhmanism
entered into a new phase by broadening cultic practices, devising public
ceremonies and rituals. With initial spread of Buddhism, Brahmin hold over
low castes got weakened and gradually, Hinduism began to be formulated as
it is practiced today.
 Opposing Buddhism, Shankaracharya led the movement for revival, reform
and unification. With various religious movements, from Jainism and
animism to atheism, coming under the umbrella of Hinduism, Buddhism was
wiped out from the land of its birth.
 The subsequent decline of the Mauryan state finally paved the way for
beginning of the feudal state and Islamic state in the historiography of state in
India.

Check Your Progress Exercise 4

Note: i) Use the space given below for your answer.
ii) Check your progress with the model answer given at the end of
the unit.
1. Highlight major limitations of the Śramanic tradition.
…………………………………………………………………………...……
…………………………………………………………………………...……
…………………………………………………………………………...……
…………………………………………………………………………...……
…………………………………………………………………………...……
2. Point out various reactions towards the Śramanic tradition.
…………………………………………………………………………...……
…………………………………………………………………………...……
…………………………………………………………………………...……
…………………………………………………………………………...……
…………………………………………………………………………...……
43
Traditions of 2.8 LET US SUM UP
the Pre-Colonial
Indian Political The origin of Śramanic tradition is mainly associated with Kośala and Magadha,
Thought the main areas of Mahāvira and Buddha. During long evolution, periodization
and historicity of texts; identification and reading of primary texts and secondary
commentaries; non-English vocabulary for political terms are some of the
methodological concerns this tradition encounters. This tradition emerged as a
reaction against and reform of the prevailing Brāhmanic tradition, but could not
escape the influence thereof.

Its fundamental concepts and ideas, articulated by Mahāvira and Buddha and
compiled by their disciples believed in Anicca, Anatta and Dukkha as three
fundamental principles of all existence and the theory of Karma. If Jainism
believed in Triratna of Shraddhā, Jnān; and Sadāchār; Buddhism subscribed to
submission to Buddham, Dhammam and Samgham. While preaching for ‘eight-
fold middle path’, it encouraged Vinaya / Śīla (Ethics) for attainment of Nirvāna
or Enlightenment.

In Buddha’s contemporary times two forms of government existed in the

Gangetic plains in Northern India, Republican and monarchical in competition
with each other. The adopted constitutional procedures were based on
‘democratic’ non-authoritarian style of governance, communal deliberation,
honouring fraternity, cooperation and equality, face to face negotiation, regular
meetings, participatory and accommodating free and frank debate and discussion
among equals, rational enquiry, encouragement to a dispassionate and critical
attitude, majority opinions in decision making, accommodating differences of
opinion and dissent without imposing majoritarian decisions. There reflected a
consensus in collective decision-making arrived at in accord with Constitution of
the Community, code of conduct rules, conventions and form of practice.

Buddhist texts emphasized the absolute value of non-violence and other moral
principles in the governance of society. It did not recognise the autonomy of
public or political morality.

2.9 REFERENCES
 Banyopadhyaya, Narayan Chandra, (1927) Development of Hindu Polity
and Political Theories, Part I, Calcutta, R. Bombay & Co.

 Chakravarti, Uma, 1996, The Social Dimension of Early Buddhism, New

Delhi: Munshiram Manoharlal Publishers.

 Collins, Steven (ed), (2001) Agganna Sutta: An Annotated Translation,

New Delhi: Sahitya Academy, pp. 44-49. S. Collins, (2001) ‘General
Introduction’, in Agganna Sutta: The Discussion on What is Primary (An
Annotated Translation from Pali), Delhi: Sahitya Akademi, pp. 1- 26.
44
 Dialogues of Buddha (Dīgha Nikāya), (1899-1921) Translated by T.W. Śramanic
Rhys Davids, 3 Parts, London, Oxford University Press.

 Ghoshal, Upendra Nath, 1966, A History of Indian Political Ideas, New

York: Oxford University Press.

 Gokhale, Balkrishna Govind, 1994, New Light on Early Buddhism, New

Delhi: Popular Prakashan Pvt. Ltd.

 ………………………., “The Early Buddhist View of the State”, Journal

of the American Oriental Society, Vol. 89, No.4 (Oct-Dec 1969), pp. 731-
738. Available at <http://www.jstor.org/stable/596944>

 ………………………., (1966) ‘The Early Buddhist View of the State’,

The Journal of Asian Studies, Vol. XXVI, (1), pp. 15- 22.

 Jayasurya, L. ‘Budhism, Politics and Statecraft’, International Journal of

Buddhist Thought & Culture, Sep. 2008, Vol. 11, pp.41-74 Available at
ftp.buddhism.org/Publications/.../Voll1_03_Laksiri%20Jayasuriya.pdf,
Accessed: 19.04.2013.

 Jayaswal, K.P., (1967), Hindu Polity, Bangalore: Bangalore Printing &

Publishing Co. Ltd.

 Keith, A.B., (2007), Religion and Philosophy of the Veda and

Upanishads, Delhi, Motilal Banarsidass Publishers.

 Law, Narendra Nath, (1921), Aspects of Ancient Indian Polity, Oxford,

Clarendon Press.

 Mehta, V.R., (1996), Foundations of Indian Political Thought, New

Delhi, Manohar.

 Omvedt, Gail, (2001) “The Buddha as a Political Philosopher”, Economic

and Political Weekly, May 26.

 Paul, James, (2003), Development in Early Buddhist concept of

Kamma/Karma, Delhi: Munshiram Manoharlal Publishers

 Sharma, R.S., (1989), Origin of the State in India, D.D. Kosambi

Memorial Lecture, 1987, Bombay, University of Bombay Publication,

 Singh, Mahendra Prasad, (2017), “Dhamma: Buddha’s and Aśoka’s”, in

Himanshu Roy and Mahendra Prasad Singh (eds.) Indian Political
Thought: Themes and Thinkers, Noida, Pearson.

45
  Thapar, Romila, (1997), Aśoka and the Decline of Mauryas, Delhi,
Traditions of
the Pre-Colonial
Oxford University Press, Revised Edition with New Foreword, pp.144-
Indian Political 50.
Thought
 Varma, V.P., (1974), Studies in Hindu Political Thought and its
Metaphysical Foundations, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidas.

2.10 ANSWERS TO CHECK YOUR PROGRESS

EXERCISES
Check Your Progress Exercise 1
1. Your answer should highlight following points
 Periodization and historicity of texts
 Identification and reading of primary texts
 Issue of non-English vocabulary for political terms
 Absence of complete text on political science

Check Your Progress Exercise 2

1. Your answer should highlight following points
 Belief in the validity of Vedas
 belief in intra-cosmic Gods
 hereditary basis of caste system
 supremacy of Brahmins
 practices of animal and human sacrifices and associated rituals

2. Your answer should highlight following points

 Principles of Existence
 Theory of Karma
 Refuge in Three Jewels
 Madhyam Mārg (Middle Path)
 Ashtānga Mārg (Eight fold path)
 Vinaya / Śīla (Ethics)
 Creation of the Social Order
 Nirvāna (Enlightenment)

Check Your Progress Exercise 3

1. Your answer should highlight following points
 Monastic Governance as a ‘Deliberative Democracy’
 Republics in Buddhist Literature
 Confederation of Republics
46  Legislative Administration
 Legislative Procedure
  Judicial Administration Śramanic
 Ethics as the Basis of Politics

Check Your Progress Exercise 4

1. Your answer should highlight following points
 Identification and acknowledgment of political thought
 Could not completely disassociate themselves from Brāhmanical tradition
 Disappearance of Buddhism from the land of its birth
 Vinaya not an alternative for constitutional checks and safeguards
 Weakness of republics
2. Your answer should highlight following points
 Spread of Buddhism beyond Indian subcontinent
 Efforts for modification and reform of Hinduism
 Shankaracharya’s efforts for revival and unification
 Decline of the Mauryan state and beginning of the feudal state and
Islamic state

47