Raja Dharma (राजधर्मः)

This article needs editing. Add and improvise the content from reliable sources.

This is equivalent to the modern Constitutional Law, Rajadhaima regulated the power and duties of the King. The Atrisamhita declared that there were five fundamental duties of a king :-

दुष्टस्य दण्डः सुजनस्य पूजा न्यायेन कोषस्य च संप्रवृद्धिः । अपक्षपातोऽर्थिषु राष्ट्ररक्षा पञ्चैतेव यज्ञाः कथिता नृपाणाम् ॥

Meaning : To punish the wicked, to honour (protect) the good, to enrich the treasury by just methods, to be impartial towards the litigants and to protect the kingdom -these are the five yajnas (selfless duties) to be performed by a king.

Even in the hoary past, the duties and responsibilities of the king were regulated by Raja Dharma. To inculcate the desire to implicitly to obey Rajadharma was part of the education of the princes, who were to succeed to the throne. While the form of Government was kingship the substance was Democratic.

In conformity with this spirit of Raja Dharma, Kautilya, in his famous " Artha Sastra" (P-39) (the Constitutional Law of ancient India (compiled around 300 B.C) summed up the duties of the king (State) thus ;-

प्रजासुखे सुखं राज्ञः प्रजानां च हिते हितम् । नात्मप्रियं हितं राज्ञः प्रजानां तु प्रियं हितम् ॥

Meaning : In the happiness of the subjects lies the king's happiness, in their welfare his welfare; what pleases himself the king shall not consider good but whatever pleases his subjects the king shall consider good.

The king was required to conform to the above rule of Raja Dharma and act only in the interests of the people and not according to his likes or dislikes or whims and fancies. He was directed not to act capriciously or arbitrarily. It was pointed out that his interests and the interests of his subjects were inseparable. What was good for the people was to be regarded good for him irrespective of any disadvantage or inconvenience caused to him.

Every prince before assuming office as king was required to take an oath that he would rule the kingdom strictly in accordance with Dharma.

The more important aspect relating to assumption of office as king at the coronation ceremony was, it was regarded as 'Samskara' for the commencement of selfless discharge of duty as a king during his entire tenure of office and not assumption of power. On this aspect K.M.Panikkar observes:

"Great importance was, therefore, attached to the coronation ceremony. Not only was it a dedication to the service of the people but also an affirmation of the covenant between the people and the ruler.

The coronation was a Diksha, a dedication, and a king bearing the crown became a Vrati, i.e., a person devoting his life to a cause (in this case, the service of the people )."

The Mahabharata has expressed the ideal with great clarity and precision. Shanti Parva Verse 3(1), Chapter-90, says:-

धर्माय राजा भवति न कामकरणाय तु ।

Meaning : "The proper function of the king is to rule according to Dharma (the law) and not to enjoy the luxuries of life".

The above directive principle laid down five thousand years ago is of eternal value. It is very relevant now as many consider that securing political power is the golden opportunity to amass wealth indulging in extravagant and ostentatious living, enjoying all luxuries of life, conferring privileges on their kith and kin, undertaking foreign tours etc., misusing the power and position of the office, disregarding the law and morals, which is the root cause of rampant corruption, misappropriation of public funds and abuse of power which are prevailing now.

The above ideal is worthy of emulation by all those who take oath of office in different capacities according to the relevant Constitution under the present day Democratic system of Government; and they would do well to remember always that they are not merely wielders of power but they stand charged with the duty of rendering selfless service to the people in conformity with the constitution and the laws of the land.

It was also made obligatory for the king to give equal protection to all his subjects without discrimination. On this subject, 'Manu Smriti' on Raja Dharma (IX-31) says :-

यथा सर्वाणि भूतानि धरा धारयते समम् । तथा सर्वाणि भूतानि बिभ्रतः पार्थिवं व्रतम् ॥

Meaning : Just as the mother earth gives equal support to all the living beings, a king should give support to all without any discrimination.

Narada Smriti vide Dharmokosha P-870 laid down thus:

पाषण्डनैगमश्रेणीपूगव्रातगणादिषु । संरक्षेत्समयं राजा दुर्गे जनपदे तथा ॥

Meaning : The king should afford protection to compacts of associations of believers of Veda (Naigamas) as also of disbelievers in Veda (Pashandis) and of others.

These most ancient provisions, show how, in this land, where the Vedas were regarded as Supreme, the disbelievers in the vedas were to be respected and protected.

THE ORIGIN OF RAJA DHARMA AND ITS PURPOSE

The origin of the State (Rajya) as well as the office of the king and the evolving of Raja Dharma -the law conferring power on the king to maintain the rule of law and the directives for the exercise of power -has been explained in Shantiparva of the Mahabharata. After the devastating war of Kurukshetra between the Pandavas and the Kauravas in which the former came out victorious, Yudhistira the eldest of the Pandava brothers requested Bhishma, who was the master of Rajadharma to expound the same to him and he did so. The Shanthiparva of Mahabharata incorporates Bhishma's authoritative exposition of the origin and purpose of the state, the rule of law, the institution of kingship and the duties and the powers of the king. Great stress is laid on the personal character and qualities which a king in whom vast political power is vested must possess for the proper and effective discharge of his functions. Rajadharma, so clearly laid out is vast like an ocean, consists of invaluable and eternal principles worthy of emulation under any system of polity and by all persons exercising political power. The Mahabharata discourse on the topic of Rajadharma discloses that in the very early periods of civilization in this country great importance was attached to Dharma and it was self-imposed by individuals. Consequently, everyone was acting according to Dharma and there was no necessity of any authority to compel obedience to the laws. The existence of such an ideal ' Stateless society' is graphically described in the following verses:

नैव राज्यं न राजाऽऽसीन्न दण्डो न च दाण्डिकः । धर्मेनैव प्रजाः सर्वा रक्षन्ति स्म परस्परम् ॥

naiva rājyaṁ na rājā''sīnna daṇḍo na ca dāṇḍikaḥ । dharmenaiva prajāḥ sarvā rakṣanti sma parasparam ॥

Meaning : There was neither kingdom nor the king, neither punishment nor the guilty to be punished. People were acting according to Dharma and thereby protecting one another.

The above verse gives a clear picture of an ideal stateless society, which appears to have been in existence in the hoary past. Such a society was the most ideal one for the reason that every individual scrupulously acted according to the rules of right conduct by the force of his own culture and habit and not out of any fear of being punished by a powerful superior authority like the state. Consequently, there was mutual cooperation and protection. The society was free from the evils arising from selfishness and exploitation by individuals. The sanction which enforced such implicit obedience to Dharma was the faith of the people in it as also the fear of incurring divine displeasure if Dharma was disobeyed.

However, the ideal society so beautifully described did not last long. While, the faith in: the efficacy and utility of Dharma, belief in God and the God fearing attitude of people continued to dominate society, the actual state of affairs gradually deteriorated. A situation arose when some persons, out of selfish worldly desires, began to flout Dharma, and became immune to the fear of divine displeasure. They were infatuated with pleasure and prompted by their own muscle power, began to exploit and torment the weaker sections of society for their selfish ends. The tyranny of the strong over the weak reigned unabated. The danger to peaceful co-existence and consequent uncertainty and anxiety about the safety of life and property of individuals, was brought about by such individuals. It was as though the rule of 'Matsyanyaya' (big fish devouring small fish) governed society. This situation forced the law abiding people to search for a remedy. This resulted in the creation of the institution of kingship and the establishment of his authority (kingship or the state) and formulation of Raja Dharma which corresponds to modern constitutional law which specifies and limits the exercise of power of the different limbs and departments of the state.

Kautilya, who was the Prime Minister to the powerful Maghada Emperor, Chandragupta Maurya, in his celebrated work on Polity (Arthasastra) also explains the origin of the institution of Kingship:

मात्स्यन्यायाभिभूताः प्रजाः मनुं वैवस्वतं राजानं चक्रिरे । धान्यषड्भागं हिरण्यं चास्य भागधेयं प्रकल्पयामासुः । तेन भृता राजानः प्रजानां योगक्षेमवहाः ॥ Kaut Arth P-22 (P 24 S)

mātsyanyāyābhibhūtāḥ prajāḥ manuṁ vaivasvataṁ rājānaṁ cakrire । dhānyaṣaḍbhāgaṁ hiraṇyaṁ cāsya bhāgadheyaṁ prakalpayāmāsuḥ । tena bhr̥tā rājānaḥ prajānāṁ yogakṣemavahāḥ ॥

Meaning : People suffering from anarchy, as illustrated by the proverbial tendency of the bigger fish to devour the small ones, first elected Manu, the Vaivasvata, to be their king, and allotted one-sixth of grains grown and one-tenth of merchandise as sovereign dues. Being fed by this payment, the kings took upon themselves the responsibility of assuring and maintaining the safety and security of their subjects (Yogakshemavahah) and of being answerable for the sins of their subjects when the principle of levying just punishment and taxes had been violated.

IDEAL AND PURPOSE OF THE STATE

There was no difference between the ideals kept before the state by Rajadharma and those enshrined in the hearts of individuals. The ideals placed before the individual, for purposes of the welfare and happiness of himself and all others in this world, were Dharma, Artha and Kama (Trivarga or the three Purusharthas. See Ch-ill). Every individual was asked to reject Artha and Kama (material wealth and desires) if they were in conflict with Dharma. The ideal of Rajadharma placed before the state was to assist and support the achievement by individuals of the threefold ideals (Trivarga) and to ensure that they secure wealth (Artha) and fulfil their desires (Kama) in conformity with Dharma and do not transgress Dharma.

नीतेः फलं धर्मार्थकामावाप्तिः | nīteḥ phalaṁ dharmārthakāmāvāptiḥ | Barhaspatya Sutra 11-43

Meaning: The goal of polity (Rajaniti) is the fulfillment of Dharma, Artha and Kama. Barhaspatya Sutra 11-44 adds that Artha (the wealth) and Kama (desire ) must stand the test of Dharma. Kautilya declares that a king must strive for the achievement of Trivarga. Kamandakiya, after an elaborate discussion of the seven constituents of the state, concludes thus:

गृहीतमेतत्रिपुणेन मन्त्रिणा त्रिवर्गनिष्त्रिवर्गनिष्पत्तिमुपैति शाश्वतीम् || Kamandakiya IV-7

gr̥hītametatripuṇena mantriṇā trivarganiṣtrivarganiṣpattimupaiti śāśvatīm ||

Meaning: The state administered with the assistance of sagacious ministers secures the three goals (Trivarga) in an enduring manner.

Somadeva begins his Nitivakyamrita in a characteristic way when he performs obeisance to Rajya (the state) which yields the three fruits of Dharma, Artha and Kama. The Dharmasastra authors held that Dharma was the supreme power in the state and was above the king who was only the instrument to realize the goal of Dharma.

The theory about the origin of kingship and its purpose and of Raja Dharma as set out above is reiterated by all the works on Rajadharma which declare with one voice that the highest duty of a king is to afford 'protection to his subjects (praja) and to dedicate himself to their welfare and happiness'.

RAJADHARMA IS THE PARAMOUNT DHARMA

Simultaneously with the bringing into existence of Rajya and the institution of kingship its founders felt the necessity to define its structure, the powers and duties of the king and the liability of the people to contribute a part of their income by way of taxes, which should be placed in the hands of the king for purposes of the defence of the realm and to maintain peace, safety and order in society and also to undertake various welfare measures for the benefit of the people. The necessity was met by making provisions regulating the constitution and organisation of the state, specifying the power and duties of the king and all other incidental provisions and treating these provisions also as part of Dharma under the title "Rajadharma" (law governing kings). In the Dharmasastras and Smritis, Rajadharma is dwelt upon as a topic separate and independent from civil, criminal and procedural law. In view of the great importance of the topic of Rajadharma, several eminent writers wrote independent treatises on it under various titles such as Rajanitisara, Dandaniti, Nitisara and it is also dealt with as part of Arthasastra. The monumental work Arthasastra is by Kautilya, who was the Prime Minister of Magadha Empire which had its capital at Patalipura (modern Patna, in the State of Bihar). P. v: Kane refers to the other extensive literature available on the subject.

The important ones are the Mahabharata -Shanti parva, Manu Ch. VII and IX, Kamandaka Nitisara, Manasollasa of Someswsara, Yuktikalpataru of Bhoja, Rajaniti Ratnakara of Chandeswara, Rajaniti Prakasha of Mitramisra and Dandaniti of Keshava Pandita. The system of government envisaged by all the works on Rajadharma was the Rajya (the State) headed by a king. The provisions in the Dharmasastras, Smritis and other works on the topic mentioned above, covered varieties of subjects such as the constitution and organisation of the Rajya, Kingship, the manner of assuming office by the king (coronation), the code of conduct for the king, the succession of kingship, the education of young princes, the appointment of council of ministers, the chief justice and other judges of the highest court, the administrative divisions, and the powers and duties of the king.

The propounders of Dharmasastra declared that the king (State) was absolutely necessary to maintain the society in a state of Dharmawhich was essential for the fulfillment of Artha and Kama. Rajadharma, which laid down the Dharma of the king, was paramount.

सर्वे धर्माः सोपधर्मास्त्रयाणां राज्ञो धर्मादिति वेदाच्छूणोमि । एवं धर्मान् राजधर्मेषु सर्वान् सर्वावस्थं संप्रलीनान् निबोध ॥ (Maha Shan Parv Ch 63, 24-25)

sarve dharmāḥ sopadharmāstrayāṇāṁ rājño dharmāditi vedācchūṇomi । evaṁ dharmān rājadharmeṣu sarvān sarvāvasthaṁ saṁpralīnān nibodha ॥

Meaning : All Dharmas are merged in Rajadharma, and it is therefore the Supreme Dharma.

Raja, THE MAKER OF THE AGE

The paramount importance of kingship and the profound influence a Raja has on the state of society has been pithily expressed in the Mahabharata.

कालो वा कारणं राज्ञो राजा वा कालकारणम्। इति ते संशयो माभूद्राजा कालस्य कारणम्।।

kālo vā kāraṇaṁ rājño rājā vā kālakāraṇam। iti te saṁśayo mābhūdrājā kālasya kāraṇam।।

Meaning: Whether, it is the king who is the maker of the age or the age that makes the king is a question about which there is no room for doubt. The king is undoubtedly the maker of the age.

The above affirmation is an eternal truth. The ruler, under whatever system of polity, is largely responsible for the state of the nation or society and whether people in general are virtuous or not largely depends upon the character and conduct of the ruler and his capacity to enforce Dharma, i.e., the rule of law. It is for this reason that Rajadharma was considered supreme as the protector of the people since Dharma was entirely dependent upon the effective implementation of Rajadharma.

The opening verse in Manu Smriti of the chapter of Raj a Dharma reads thus:-

राजधर्मान्प्रवक्ष्यामि यथावृत्तो भवेन्नृपः । संभवश्च यथा तस्य सिद्धिश्च परमा यथा । । ७.१ । ।

rājadharmānpravakṣyāmi yathāvr̥tto bhavennr̥paḥ । saṁbhavaśca yathā tasya siddhiśca paramā yathā । । 7.1 । ।

Meaning: I will now declare Rajadharma, the law to be observed by kings, how kingship was created, how a king should conduct himself and how he can obtain the highest success.

The Rajadharma laid down in Manu VII and IX and in other Smritis and various works on Rajadharma referred to earlier was the constitutional law in ancient India.

Politically the whole of India never came under the rule of anyone emperor or king. The territorial extent of a kingdom depended on the prowess and capability of each king. Therefore, innumerable kings ruled over different parts of the sub-continent, each of whom was independent of the others, except in cases where one became a vassal of an emperor.

Politically the whole of India never came under the rule of anyone emperor or king. The territorial extent of a kingdom depended on the prowess and capability of each king. Therefore, innumerable kings ruled over different parts of the sub-continent, each of whom was independent of the others, except in cases where one became a vassal of an emperor.

However, the importance given to the principle of Dharma, indicates another fundamental aspect accepted by the people as well as the rulers of the various kingdoms of India. According to this principle of dharma, the Raja had no legislative powers. To this extent the doctrine of separation of the law making and law enforcing powers had been brought about. Political power of any state in the whole of India was subordinated to the power of the entire people as a whole. The sanction behind all the laws including Rajadharma (collectively called Dharma) lay in its acceptance by the people. Dharma held sway for thousands of years and no king questioned its authority over and above him. Thus, the entire political system in this country was based on Dharmic Supremacy.

As a result, though the States were very many and under different kings, the Rajadharma ( constitutional law) uniformly applied to all of them and regulated the constitution and organisation of all the kingdoms as also the civil and criminal laws, including procedural law, subject to local variations on the basis of approved usage and custom, which were recognised as one of the sources of law.

The position therefore was that India consisted of several independent sovereign states but one people governed by one legal, judicial and constitutional system -the Vyavahara Dharma and Raja Dharma, meant for the implementation of doctrine of TRIVARGA.

Rule of succession

The implicit faith of the Rajas in Raja Dharma (Constitutional Law of ancient Bharath) has been the basis of the smooth functioning of the State as also peaceful transfer of power from a king/emperor to his successor since ancient times.

The rule of succession prescribed as part of 'Raja Dharma' was Primogeniture. According to this, eldest son of a king alone was entitled to royal succession. This rule which has been in existence from the most ancient times has been incorporated in Sukraniti-I 684-688:-

राजकुले तु बहवः पुरुषा यदि सन्ति हि | तेषु ज्येष्ठो भवेद्राजा शेषास्तत्कार्यसाधकाः ||

rājakule tu bahavaḥ puruṣā yadi santi hi | teṣu jyeṣṭho bhavedrājā śeṣāstatkāryasādhakāḥ ||

Meaning: If a Raja has many sons male children (to a Raja), the eldest among them is to be the Raja (in succession); the others are to assist him.

ज्येष्ठोऽपि बधिरः कुष्ठी मूकोऽन्धः षण्ड एव यः | स राज्यार्हो भवेन्नेव भ्राता तत्पुत्र एव हि ||

jyeṣṭho'pi badhiraḥ kuṣṭhī mūko'ndhaḥ ṣaṇḍa eva yaḥ | sa rājyārho bhavenneva bhrātā tatputra eva hi ||

Meaning: If the eldest prince is deaf, dumb, blind, leprous or a eunuch, he is unfit to rule and, in such a case, the king's brother or grandson (the son of the eldest son) should succeed to the throne.

Arthasastra of Kautilya which codified Raja Dharma around 300 BC, declared that except in exceptional cases of calamity, sovereignty falls on the eldest son, Whereas according to the law governing interstate succession to the property of an individual, the sons of the deceased persons were entitled to equal share in the property of the father, Sukraniti indicated the reason for the difference between the succession to the property of the father and kingship and said that in the case of the former as it was the property of the father, the sons became entitled to it in equal shares but the kingdom was not the property of the king. He was only a person entrusted with the power of ruling the State and there should be only one ruler and therefore the Rule of Primogeniture was evolved.

It is true that there was no constitutional court wherein usurpation of the power by anyone not entitled to succeed to kingship could be challenged. But in view of the implicit faith in and allegiance to Raja Dharma, the rule of primogeniture was being obeyed by all concerned and as a result there used to be smooth transfer of power. This Dharma abiding instinct in the rulers and the people was more powerful and effective than the power of the courts. This was the basis on which Bharata refused to be crowned even though he was requested by all to do so.

According to the story of the Ramayana, Sri Rama being the eldest son of Dasharatha was to be crowned as the king of Ayodhya in accordance with the Rule of Primogeniture incorporated in Raja Dharma. However, it so happened that on account of the demand made by Kaikeyi, the mother of Bharata, in terms of the promise to grant her whatever she asked for by the king Dasharata and the latter being firmly committed to keep up his words, had no other alternative but to cancel the coronation ceremony of Sri Rama and to ask him to go away to the forest for fourteen years and also to crown Bharata as the king of Ayodhya. Bharata had the golden opportunity of securing political power and becoming the king of Ayodhya by superseding the claim of Rama, once and for all, if allurement of power prevailed in his mind over Raja Dharma -constitutional convention. The general impression is that it was the intense love of Bharata towards his elder brother Sri Rama, which prevented Bharata from ascending the throne. It may be partly true, but the real reason for Bharata to refuse to ascend the throne was the Rule of Primogeniture laid down as part of Raja Dharma and his firm commitment not to transgress Raja Dharma. This is discernible from the firm stand taken by him when he was requested to become the king of Ayodhya.

After the return of Bharatha from Mithila, the Council of Ministers appraised Bharatha of the unfortunate events which had already taken place during his absence, which had led to the cancellation of the coronation of Rama and his exile to the forest and the death of Dasharatha and the proposal to crown Bharata as the King of Ayodhya. Bharata unaffected by the lure of office of kingship stated thus:

ज्येष्ठस्य राजता नित्यम् उचिता हि कुलस्य नः । न एवम् भवन्तः माम् वक्तुम् अर्हन्ति कुशला जनाः ॥२-७९-७॥

रामः पूर्वो हि नो भ्राता भविष्यति मही पतिः । अहम् तु अरण्ये वत्स्यामि वर्षाणि नव पन्च च ॥२-७९-८॥

jyeṣṭhasya rājatā nityam ucitā hi kulasya naḥ । na evam bhavantaḥ mām vaktum arhanti kuśalā janāḥ ॥2-79-7॥

rāmaḥ pūrvo hi no bhrātā bhaviṣyati mahī patiḥ । aham tu araṇye vatsyāmi varṣāṇi nava panca ca ॥2-79-8॥

Meaning: The convention that the eldest son of the king alone should succeed to the throne has been firmly established and has been regarded as a commendable rule of succession. Therefore, you, being well versed in the convention ought not to request me to ascend the throne. Sri Rama being the eldest son of the king, he alone shall be the ruler. I would rather reside in the forest for fourteen years (instead of Sri Rama). Having firmly stated as above to the council of ministers, Bharata proceeded to Chitrakoot where Sri. Raffia was staying. Here again Sri Raffia, the eldest son and the rightful heir exhorted Bharata agree to be crowned and become the king respecting the words of 'mother Kaikeyi and father Dasharatha. Bharatha's faith in and allegiance to the constitution were in very firm and he was of the view that it could not be changed or amended ~ the king or the queen. Bharata replied thus:-

रामस्य वचनं श्रुत्वा भरत: प्रत्युवाच ह । किं मे धर्माद्विहीनस्य राजधर्म: करिष्यति ।। २.१०१.१ ।।

शाश्वतो ऽयं सदा धर्म्म: स्थितो ऽस्मासु नरर्षभ । ज्येष्ठपुत्रे स्थिते राजन्न कनीयान् नृपो भवेत् ।। २.१०१.२ ।।

स समृद्धां मया सार्द्धमयोध्यां गच्छ राघव । अभिषेचय चात्मानं कुलस्यास्य भवाय न: ।। २.१०१.३ ।।

rāmasya vacanaṁ śrutvā bharata: pratyuvāca ha । kiṁ me dharmādvihīnasya rājadharma: kariṣyati ।। 2.101.1 ।।

śāśvato 'yaṁ sadā dharmma: sthito 'smāsu nararṣabha । jyeṣṭhaputre sthite rājanna kanīyān nr̥po bhavet ।। 2.101.2 ।।

sa samr̥ddhāṁ mayā sārddhamayodhyāṁ gaccha rāghava । abhiṣecaya cātmānaṁ kulasyāsya bhavāya na: ।। 2.101.3 ।।

Meaning: How can the rule prescribed for succession he violated? I am out side the range of that code. I have no right to occupy the throne being the younger son of the king Emperor. The rule is that the eldest son alone can succeed to the throne. Oh. Jewel among Men, so long as the eldest son is alive, I can never be the king. Therefore return with me to Ayodhya.

Despite the advice of the council of ministers, the desire of mother Kaikeyi granted by king Dasharatha and, more than all the exhortation by Sri. Raffia himself, who was the constitutional successor to the throne, Bharata would not budge, as none of these could alter Raja Dharma.

This firm commitment to Raja Dharma and the refusal to secure or accept power by Bharata is all the more relevant now and serves as an example even to present day rulers to remain true to their Dharma.

Introduction

"Dharma is that which upholds, nourishes or supports the stability of the society, maintains the social order and secures the general well-being and progress of man-kind

(Supreme court of India)"

The smritis laid down a code of conduct which should be scrupulously observed by the kings and applied to every kind of political ruler and officers exercising governmental powers. Its directives were invariably followed both in letter and spirit by the royal families.

"

iztklq[ks lq[ka jkK% iztkuka p fgrs fgre~A
ukRefiz;a fgra jkK% iztkuka rq fiz;a fgre~A
KAUT: 9-39
In the happiness of his subjects lies the king's happiness: in their welfare,
his welfare, whatever pleases himself the king shall not consider as good,

but whatever pleases his subjects, the king shall consider as good."

The code of Conduct for Kings as mentioned in the Shastras are as follows

THE CODE OF CONDUCT FOR RULERS

The smritis laid down a code of conduct which should be scrupulously observed by the kings which on all fours applies to every kind of political rulers and officers exercising governmental powers. They are:

Personal qualities to be acquired by the king

इन्द्रियाणां जये योगं समातिष्ठेद्दिवानिशम् | जितेन्द्रियो हि शक्नोति वशे स्थापयितुं प्रजाः || Manusmriti

indriyāṇāṁ jaye yogaṁ samātiṣṭheddivāniśam | jitendriyo hi śaknoti vaśe sthāpayituṁ prajāḥ ||

The king must subdue his senses:

Day and night the king must strenuously exert himself to conquer his senses for he alone who has conquered his own senses can keep his subjects in obedience.

The king must shun the following vices:

दश कामसमुत्थानि तथाऽष्टौ क्रोधजानि च | व्यसनानि दुरन्तानि प्रयत्नेन विवर्जयेत् ||

कामजेषु प्रसक्तो हि व्यसनेषु महीपतिः | वियुज्यतेऽर्थ धर्माभ्यां क्रोधजेष्वात्मनैव तु ||

मृगयाऽक्षादिवास्वप्नः परिवादः स्त्रियो मदः | तौर्यत्रिकं वृथाऽट्या च कामजो दशको गुणः ||

पैशुन्यं साहसं द्रोहः ईर्ष्यासूयार्थदूषणम् | वाग्दण्डजं च पारुष्यं क्रोधजोऽपि गुणोऽष्टकः ||

daśa kāmasamutthāni tathā'ṣṭau krodhajāni ca | vyasanāni durantāni prayatnena vivarjayet ||

kāmajeṣu prasakto hi vyasaneṣu mahīpatiḥ | viyujyate'rtha dharmābhyāṁ krodhajeṣvātmanaiva tu ||

mr̥gayā'kṣādivāsvapnaḥ parivādaḥ striyo madaḥ | tauryatrikaṁ vr̥thā'ṭyā ca kāmajo daśako guṇaḥ ||

paiśunyaṁ sāhasaṁ drohaḥ īrṣyāsūyārthadūṣaṇam | vāgdaṇḍajaṁ ca pāruṣyaṁ krodhajo'pi guṇo'ṣṭakaḥ ||

Meaning:

1. Let him shun the ten vices springing from love of pleasure and the eight proceeding from wrath, which end in misery.
2. The king who is attached to vices springing from love of pleasure loses his virtue and wealth, and he who is given to vices arising from anger loses even his life.
3. Hunting, gambling, sleeping during day, censoriousness, libidinousness, drunkenness, an inordinate love for dancing, singing and music, and useless travel are the ten vices flowing from love of pleasure.
4. The four vices -drinking liquor, gambling Glibidinousness and hunting, arising out of love of pleasure, are the most pernicious in the same order
5. Tale bearing, violence, treachery, envy, slandering, unjust seizure of property, reviling and assault are the set of eightfold vices flowing from wrath; out of these, doing bodily injury, reviling and seizure of property are the most pernicious.

Death preferable to vicious life

अदेश्यं यश्च दिशति निर्दिश्यापह्नुते च यः । यश्चाधरोत्तरानर्थान्विगीतान्नावबुध्यते । । ८.५३ । ।

adeśyaṁ yaśca diśati nirdiśyāpahnute ca yaḥ । yaścādharottarānarthānvigītānnāvabudhyate । । 8.53 । । Manu VIII 53

Meaning: In a comparison between vice and death, vice is declared to be more harmful because a vicious man sinks to the nethermost hell while he who dies free from vice goes to heaven.

The king must guard himself against going astray

वश्येन्द्रियं जितात्मानं धृतदण्डं विकारिषु । परीक्ष्यकारिणं धीरं अत्यन्तं श्रीर्निषेवते ।। ००३ ।।

शौर्यविद्यार्थबाहुल्यात्प्रभुत्वाच्च विशेषतः । सदा चित्तं नरेन्द्राणां मोहं आयाति कारणात् ।। ००४ ।।

तस्माच्चित्तं प्रबोद्धव्यं राजधर्मे सदा द्विजैः । पवित्रं परमं पुण्यं स्मृतिवाक्यं न लङ्घयेत् ।। ००५ ।।

आत्मीये संस्थिता धर्मे नृपाः शक्रत्वं आप्नुयुः । अवीचिवासिनो ये तु व्यपेताचारिणः सदा ।। ००९ ।।

vaśyendriyaṁ jitātmānaṁ dhr̥tadaṇḍaṁ vikāriṣu । parīkṣyakāriṇaṁ dhīraṁ atyantaṁ śrīrniṣevate ।। 003 ।।

śauryavidyārthabāhulyātprabhutvācca viśeṣataḥ । sadā cittaṁ narendrāṇāṁ mohaṁ āyāti kāraṇāt ।। 004 ।।

tasmāccittaṁ praboddhavyaṁ rājadharme sadā dvijaiḥ । pavitraṁ paramaṁ puṇyaṁ smr̥tivākyaṁ na laṅghayet ।। 005 ।।

ātmīye saṁsthitā dharme nr̥pāḥ śakratvaṁ āpnuyuḥ । avīcivāsino ye tu vyapetācāriṇaḥ sadā ।। 009 ।। KAT. 3-4, 5-9

Meaning:

Glory very much resorts (to a king) whose senses are under control, who can curb his passions, who wields (the rod of) punishment against those who fall victims to temptations, and who does (every act) after due deliberation, and who is extremely calm and steady.

By reason of their being endowed with an abundance pf valour, learning and wealth, and particularly on account of the supreme power (they wield), the minds of kings always tend to go astray ( even) for the slightest reason (or impulse).

Kings who abide by the duties especially prescribed for them attain the position of Indra, but those who go astray deviating from the path of Dharma go to hell (after death).

The above texts reveal the great stress laid on the character and qualities a king should possess. To this end, imparting an all round education and training to princes, and instilling in them the traits of good character and discipline was emphasised.

The aforesaid directives were invariably followed both in letter and spirit by the royal families. The princes, who were in the line of succession to kingship, underwent strenuous courses under their teachers (in Gurukulashramas). In addition to education, a prince/king was required to lead a disciplined life and keep the company of respectable persons who could shape his character, thought and outlook to the ensure the public good.

That is how it was possible to produce outstanding kings known to history, who exhibited remarkable ability in administration, skill in warfare and mastery of the arts. A few who disregarded these guidelines became unpopular and stood condemned. Manu enjoins kings to shun vices as they lead them to excesses in the enjoyment of power and wealth resulting in the neglect of the affairs of state.

The great stress laid on character and discipline on the part of kings applies with equal force to all persons who come to exercise political and administrative power under any system of government, if the people are to be really benefited. They are the internal checks which automatically control the evil propensities of men in power and position and prevent them from swerving from the path of rightenousness. These in-built traits are more effective than all the external constitutional and legal checks and inquiry commissions, though their importance cannot in any way be minimised.

Apart from laying down the code of conduct, the king was also required to ensure that there was no arbitrariness in state action. In this aspect Kautilya declared that the welfare of the people was the king's chief concern.

प्रजासुखे सुखं राज्ञः प्रजानां च हिते हितम् । नात्मप्रियं हितं राज्ञः प्रजानां तु प्रियं हितम् ॥

prajāsukhe sukhaṁ rājñaḥ prajānāṁ ca hite hitam । nātmapriyaṁ hitaṁ rājñaḥ prajānāṁ tu priyaṁ hitam ॥

Meaning: In the happiness of the subjects lies the king's happiness, in their welfare his welfare; what pleases himself the king shall not consider good but whatever pleases his subjects the king shall consider good.

King Chandrapida and the Cobbler

Kamandaka called upon the kings to protect people against his favourites and officers.

आयुक्तकेभ्यश्चौरेभ्यः परेभ्यो राजवल्लभात् | पृथिवीपतिलोभाच्च प्रजानां पञ्चधा भयम् | पञ्चप्रकारमप्येत पोह्यं नृपतेर्भयम् ||

āyuktakebhyaścaurebhyaḥ parebhyo rājavallabhāt | pr̥thivīpatilobhācca prajānāṁ pañcadhā bhayam | pañcaprakāramapyeta pohyaṁ nr̥paterbhayam || (Kamandaka 82-83)

Meaning: The subjects require protection against wicked officers of the king, thieves, enemies of the king, royal favourites (such as the queen, princes etc ), and more than all, against the greed of the king himself. The king should ensure that the people are free from these fears.

Most of the kings were very conscious of their duties towards their subjects and did provide relief to the aggrieved against actions of their own officers or favourites. There is an illuminating case recorded in Rajatarangini as to how Chandrapida, the king of Kashmir who reigned between 680-688 A.D. gave protection to a poor 'charmakara' (cobbler) from the intended action of his own officers. The gist of the case is related below.

The officers of the king undertook construction of a temple of Lord Tribuvanaswami on a certain site. On a portion of that site there was a hut belonging to a charmakara ( cobbler). He refused to remove his hut in spite of being asked to do so by the king's officers. Thereupon the officers complained to the king about the obstinacy of the charmakara. However, to their surprise, the officers got a rebuff from the king, who censured them for lack of foresight in encroaching upon the site belonging to the charmakara and starting construction without taking his consent. The king ordered thus:

नियम्यतां विनिर्माणं यद्वान्यत्र विधीयताम् | परभूम्यपहारेण सुकृतं कः कलङ्कयेत् ||

ये द्रष्टारः सदसतां ते धर्मविगुणाः क्रियाः | वयमेव विदध्मश्चेत् यातु न्यायेन कोऽध्वना || (Rajatarangini 4.59-60)

niyamyatāṁ vinirmāṇaṁ yadvānyatra vidhīyatām | parabhūmyapahāreṇa sukr̥taṁ kaḥ kalaṅkayet ||

ye draṣṭāraḥ sadasatāṁ te dharmaviguṇāḥ kriyāḥ | vayameva vidadhmaścet yātu nyāyena ko'dhvanā ||

Meaning:

Stop construction or build (the temple) somewhere else. Who would tarnish such a pious act by illegally depriving a man of his land?

If we who are the judges of what is right and what is not right, act unlawfully, who then will abide by the law ?

Truly, the supremacy of the law (Dharma) prevailed. With the aid of the law, a 'weak' charmakara prevailed over the - 'strong' the officers of the king.

Thereafter, the charmakara got an audience with the king at his own request. He represented before the king thus: "What the palace is to Your Majesty, the hut is to me. I could not bear to see its demolition. You can very well appreciate the plight of a man who is deprived of his dwelling. However, if your majesty were to come to my hut and ask for it, I shall give it up having due regard to the code of good manners.

The king with all humility went to the charmakara's hut and with his consent purchased the hut by paying a price which was far more than he had expected and to his entire satisfaction. The charmakara then spoke with folded hands thus:

राजधर्मानुरोधेन परवत्ता तवोचिता | स्वस्ति तुभ्यं चिरं स्थेया धर्म्या वृत्तान्तपद्धतिः | दर्शयन्नीदृशीः श्रद्धा श्रद्धेया धर्मचारिणाम् ||

rājadharmānurodhena paravattā tavocitā | svasti tubhyaṁ ciraṁ stheyā dharmyā vr̥ttāntapaddhatiḥ | darśayannīdr̥śīḥ śraddhā śraddheyā dharmacāriṇām ||

Meaning: Yielding to another (however low), adhering to the principles of Rajadharrna, is the appropriate course for a king. I wish you well. May you live long, establishing the supremacy of the law (Dharma). Seeing in you such faith in Dharrna others will also act accordingly.

Conclusion

What an inspiring example for upholding the rule of law by the suo-motu exercise of judicial power by the king and granting relief to a poor man against the arbitrary action of his own officers. How valuable is the commendation of a poor subject to the king compared to the sycophancy of selfish individuals.

Now it has become clear that unless a Dharma-abiding nature is ingrained in the individuals who exercise power of the state, either as ministers or elected representatives or as bureaucrats, the whole social fabric will be torn into pieces. It is only by the internal check in the form of Dharma, which can destroy sinful thoughts in the mind of the individuals who exercise state power and inspire them to serve the people, for which purpose they are elected or appointed.

THE SUPREMACY OF DHARMA

Having evolved the concept of enforceability of the law through the institution of kingship, ancient Indian jurists proceeded to define the law. The law was recognised as a mighty instrument necessary for the protection of individual rights and liberties. Whenever the right or liberty of an individual was encroached upon by another, the injured individual could seek protection from the law with the assistance of the king, however, powerful the opponent (wrong doer) might be. The power of the king (state) to enforce the law or to punish the wrong doer was recognised as the force (sanction) behind the law which could compel implicit obedience to the law. After declaring how and why the Kshatra power (i.e.; the King) was created, the Brihadaranyakopanishat proceeds to state, finding that the mere creation of kingship was not enough, that the most excellent Dharma (law), a power superior to that of the king, was created to enable the king to protect the people, and gives the definition of law (Dharma) as follows:

तदेतत्-क्षत्रस्य क्षत्रं यद्धर्मः | तस्माधर्मात्परं नास्ति | अथो अबलीयान् बलीयांसमाशंसते धर्मेण | यथा राज्ञा एवं ||

tadetat-kṣatrasya kṣatraṁ yaddharmaḥ | tasmādharmātparaṁ nāsti | atho abalīyān balīyāṁsamāśaṁsate dharmeṇa | yathā rājñā evaṁ ||

Meaning: The law (Dharma) is the king of kings No one is superior to the law (Dharma) ; The law (Dharma) aided by the power of the king enables the weak to prevail over the strong. Commenting on the above provision, Dr. S. Radha krishnan observes that even kings are subordinate to Dharma, to the Rule of law.2 The utility and the necessity of the power of king to enforce the law is explained thus:-

सर्वो दण्डजितो लोको दुर्लभो हि शुचिर्नरः । दण्डस्य हि भयात्सर्वं जगद्भोगाय कल्पते । । ७.२२ । ।

sarvo daṇḍajito loko durlabho hi śucirnaraḥ । daṇḍasya hi bhayātsarvaṁ jagadbhogāya kalpate । । 7.22 । ।

Meaning:

There is hardly an individual in this world, who on his own, is pure in his conduct.

The king's (sovereign's) power to punish, keeps the people in righteous path. Fear of punishment (by the king) yields worldly happiness and enjoyment.

One aspect discernible from the definition of 'law' given in the Brihadarayaka Upanishat and accepted in the Dharmasastras is, that the law and the king derive their strength and vitality from each other. It was impressed that the king remained powerful if he observed the law and the efficacy of the law also depended on the manner in which the king functioned, because it was he who was responsible for its enforcement. There was also a specific provision which made it clear to the king that if he was to be respected by the people, he was bound to act in accordance with the law. Thus the first and foremost duty of the king as laid down under Rajadharma was to rule his kingdom in accordance with the law, so that the law reigned supreme and could control all human actions so as to keep them within the bounds of the law. Though Dharma was made enforceable by the political sovereign -the king, it was considered and recognised as superior to and binding on the sovereign himself. Thus under our ancient constitutional law (Rajadharma) kings were given the position of the penultimate authority functioning within the four corners of Dharma, the ultimate authority.

Rules of Dharma were not altere able according to the whims and fancies of the king. The exercise of political power in conformity with "Dharma" was considered most essential. This principle holds good for every system of government and is a guarantee not only against abuse of political power with selfish motives and out of greed but also against arbitrary exercise of political power.

The belief in the supremacy of Dharma among the people was the best guarantee for the proper functioning of kings. In other words, 'Dharmic Supremacy' generally prevailed, which corresponds to constitutional supremacy under the present day written constitutions. Every king was required to take oath at the time of coronation that he would rule according to 'Dharma'. Thus Dharmarajya means the Rule of Law.

In this regard, the famous historian R.C. Majumdar in his book "Ancient India" observes thus :-

The duty of the king was clearly defined in the Sastras. It would have created as much a sensation in those days, if the king had failed in his duties as would follow the violation of people's rights in modern days.

Historical records prove that Raja Dharma formed the fundamental law which regulated the Constitution and the organisation of every kingdom (State) in the country throughout the centuries.

Dharma is universal. It is a code of conduct for all human beings for all time to come. It is eternal and unalterable just as you cannot alter the property of fire of burning and of water of flowing.

DHARMA binding on the Rulers and the Ruled

Following the principles of Dharma was considered essential both for the ruled and the ruler. The importance of the observance of Dharma, considered essential for the purpose of exercising political power, is contained in the advice given by Raffia to Bharata at Chitrakut while sending him back, to rule the country. This has been forcefully brought out in the celebrated work "Sitayana" by Dr. K.R. Srinivasa Iyengar. The excerpts are :

"Bharata, commandments of Dharma like Nature's laws, admit of no meddling, When Dharma's imperatives determine legitimacy, and say, This is right, and thus must you act; it's wrong to look round for escape routes;

All power, Bharata, is like poison; We need the sovereign Grace of the Lord, both to exercise power and be immune from its deadly poison; In our total submission to Dharma, there's the sure promise of Grace; but those that rely on power alone must perish by its poison."

The above advice by Rama is of eternal value for all those who exercise political power under any system of government. The meaning is, just as those who handle electric power wear a rubber hand glove for safety, those who exercise political power must wear the hand glove of Dharma. C. Subramaniam in Bhavans Journal dated 15th April 1995 says thus:

Gandhiji's ideal of an ideal polity was Ramarajya. It stood for a society wherein a high, ethical standard of life is characterised by the pursuit of purusharthas -Dharma, Artha, Kama and Moksha. It is the prevalence of Dharma, which characterises an ideal society. Such a society is possible only if the governance of the country is based on clear, efficient and transparent administration. In the past, the king was not only a symbol, but was the ruler and administrator and the king had to observe the Dharma of the ruler, functioning in a selfless manner for the prosperity, harmony and happiness of his people. This is Gandhijis concept of Ramarajya. Today, we have responsible governments run by elected representatives.

If the rulers do not observe Dharma, it will become a Ravanarajya. We have to make a choice, between Ramarajya and Ravanarajya.

While the observance of Dharma by every individuals is essential for harmonious living, it is also a condition in conformity with which the political power was required to be exercised and that holds good for all Nations and for all times to come.