When Buddhism and Jainism emerged on the subcontinent, there were sixteen great
mahajanapadas. They were Kasi (Benaras), Kosala (Gonda region), Anga (eastern Bihar), Magadha (central Bihar), Vajji, Malla, Cedi (Bundelkhand),
Vatsa (Allahabad), Kuru (Delhi region), Pancala (Rohilkhand), Matsya (Jaipur), Surasena (Mathura), Assaka (Godavari region),
Avanti (western Malwa), Gandhara with its capital at Taxila (eastern Afghanistan), and Kamboja (north-west frontier province
of
Pakistan). Of these
mahajanapadas, Magadha was on the point of becoming dominant and the core of a north Indian empire that was to emerge in the fourth century
BCE.
1Initially, Buddhism began as a schismatic movement against the orthodox brahmanical outlook. To a great extent, Buddhism was
a protest against the various malpractices that had crept into Hindu ritual and thought. The latter development, argued the
Buddhists, was due to the increasing power of the Brahmins. The artisans and the traders known as
setthis constituted a great proportion of the populace of the cities – Kausambi (near Allahabad), Sravasti, and others – and they
supported Buddhism. The Buddhist
sanghas (assemblies) were supported by the traders and merchants. The commercial class provided support to Buddhism because, in accordance
with strict brahmanical orthodoxy, the traders and merchants, despite possessing economic wealth, were regarded as social
and cultural inferiors to the Brahmins and the Kshatriyas. Both Mahavira and Buddha challenged the hereditary caste system.
And unlike brahmanism, Buddhism encouraged sea voyages, which the merchants engaged in overseas trade undertook frequently.
2 Loans and debts were taken on interest. At times letters of credit functioned as substitutes for money. The
Gautama dharmasutra prescribes a limit on the interest chargeable by the creditor. The lawful limit was 1.25 percent per month or 15 percent
per year. The interest could not exceed the principal, however long the debt remained unpaid. Again, in Buddhism, the interests
of the creditors and the moneylenders were protected, and the debtors were reminded of their obligations. By contrast, the
brahmanical lawgivers despised the moneylenders. The emphasis on truth, justice, honesty, and so on, present in the Buddhist
system supported the concept of private individual property. Such ethics suited the activities of the traders and moneylenders.
3Sacrifice was an integral part of the brahmanical system.
4 The Buddhist critique of Brahmin-mediated sacrifices suited the mentality of the profit-
oriented commercial class.
5 Then, the doctrine of
ahimsa was invoked by the heads of the peasant communities, which were expanding into the domains of the forest tribes who lived
by hunting and killing. The latter occupation was considered blameworthy by the
ahimsa preachers, and this justified the subjugation of the forest dwellers at the hands of the expanding rural peasant society.
Thus, the rural
gahapatis (householders) found the
ahimsa of Buddhism, and to an extent that of Jainism, attractive.
6 Again, the brahmanical rituals involved killing as many as 600 bulls at a time for a particular yagna. The vedic religious
philosophies, writes R. S. Sharma, did not suit the newly established plough agriculture, which was dependent on animal husbandry.
By contrast, the Buddhist emphasis on non-injury to animals was attractive to the practitioners of plough agriculture. The
Pali canons stressed non-violence towards animals rather than towards men. The early Buddhist text
Sutta-nipata states that cattle should be protected because they provide
annada,
vannada and
sukhada (food, beauty and happiness/peace).
7 At least some streams within the brahmanical tradition also opposed the unnecessary waste of animal lives. For instance,
the
Chandogya Upanishad points out the importance of not killing any living creature unnecessarily.
8 So Buddhism and Jainism probably derived some ideas from these brahmanical strands.
Mahavira was born around 550
BCE and died around 480
BCE, while Buddha (Gautama/Siddhartha) was born roughly around 480
BCE. According to another tradition, Buddha was born about 560
BCE and died around 486/484
BCE.
9 He left his wife and son and became a wandering ascetic. Buddha first sought enlightenment in Hindu philosophy and then in
ruthless asceticism. Neither brought him liberation. Then he sat for meditation under the Pipal tree (later known as Bodhi
tree or tree of wisdom) on the outskirts of the town of Gaya in Magadha and found enlightenment.
10 Buddha preached for over forty years. He spent his last
year in Kusinara near Gorakhpur and then passed away.
11 Buddha frequently reminded his disciples of the importance of travelling in order to facilitate preaching and spreading Buddhism.
12 The early (Theravadin) Buddhist tradition enumerates several councils that were held in order to recite and codify the Pali
canon. The First Council was held just after the death of Buddha, and between that time and the death of Asoka, two more councils
were held. King Ajatasatru of Magadha (accession to kingship 491
BCE) gave patronage to the First Council, which was held at Rajagriha and attended by 500
bhikkus.
13 During the First Council, while some leading brethren expounded the
dhamma, other monks repeated their formulations. This was the beginning of the system of
bhanakas (reciters), which has been instrumental in the making of the Buddhist (Pali) canon. The Second Council was held at Vaishali
about 100 years after the First Council. The Third Council was held at Pataliputra and presided over by a monk named Moggaliputta
Tissa. The division between Theravada and Mahayana Buddhism occurred during the early centuries of the Christian era.
14 The term ‘Theravada’ means ‘School of Elders’.
Thera means elder;
stha means to stand over; and
vada refers to theory, doctrine or school.
15In the Buddhist tradition,
dhamma refers to Buddha’s doctrine and teaching.
16 Buddha’s philosophy is the middle way between rigorous asceticism involving mortification of the flesh, as propounded by
a branch of Jainism, and the extreme sensuality of the Carvakas (a branch of materialist philosophy that gave rise to the
realist
kutayuddha tradition). Buddhism lays stress on service on behalf of others in order to help them to escape the endless cycles of rebirth.
17 Buddhism placed the inculcation of ethical values on a high practical pedestal.
18 Buddha advised his disciples to work for the welfare of society. The attempt to work for the welfare of society is embedded
in the Buddhist concept of
karuna (compassion). It is the sentiment that inclines one to help those who are in
distress.
19 The basic virtues are benevolence, compassion, joy and equanimity.
20 Buddha encouraged mildness in justice and attempts to establish peace in times of war. According to one story, Buddha intervened
when the Sakyas and the Koliyas were fighting and persuaded them to hold diplomatic parleys. The
Dhammapada, an early collection of Buddhist verse, notes that enmity can never be appeased by enmity but only by non-enmity. This is
the eternal law. Secondly, victory breeds hatred. Calmness and happiness require giving up thoughts of victory and defeat.
21Rupert Gethin claims that even within the Buddhist framework of
dhamma, limited violence is allowed in certain contexts. The advice to rulers is to pass judgement not in haste or anger but appropriately,
so that the punishment fits the crime. If war is necessary, then care should be taken to minimize and contain the acts of
violence. Buddhism accepted the idea that the duties of the king involved the implementation of a limited amount of violence
for the purpose of deterring external enemies and to maintain law and order in the society. Even when violence on the part
of the king becomes necessary, his mind must still be motivated by aversion.
22 The person killing must act out of compassion and charity, so that inner peace is not disturbed. Another argument within
Buddhism is that since destiny is pre-determined, it is no sin to put someone to death.
23 One
sutta notes that someone who kills another person is not necessarily reborn in hell. In fact, at times, a soldier might be reborn
in the heavenly realm. This point seems to be taken from the
Bhagavad Gita. In the Pali commentaries, the victim’s lack of virtuous qualities diminishes the burden of killing on the part of the person
who kills.
24 In one story from the
Mahaparinirvana Sutra of Mahayana Buddhism, Buddha is said to have encouraged his followers to take up arms in defence of the Buddhist Order. Having
recourse to violence in order to protect the doctrine against aggressors is acceptable in the Buddhist framework. At times,
it is necessary to kill one in order to save two or more persons.
25 It seems that Buddhism could justify defensive warfare, which can be categorized as a sort of
dharmayuddha.
According to one view, Mahavira was not the founder of the Jaina religious system. He was the twenty-fourth and last
tirthankara of the Jaina faith. The other important
tirthankaras were Rishbhanatha and Arishtanemi. Their names appear in the
Rig Veda. The twenty-third
tirthankara was Parshvanatha/Parsva, who came some 250 years before Mahavira.
26 According to one tradition, under Parasva (877–777
BCE), the kings of Gandhara, Videha, Pancala, Vidharbha and Kalinga accepted Jainism.
27 Mahavira’s childhood name was Vardhamana. He was the son of Siddhartha (not to be confused with Gotama or Gautama Buddha),
a chief of the clan associated with the Lichchavis of Vaishali (Bihar). Vardhamana, like Buddha, left home at the age of thirty,
leaving his wife and daughter behind him. He moved with the ascetic group called
nirganthas (free from bonds). He was with them for twelve years. In the thirteenth year, Vardhamana became
Jina (the conqueror). For thirty years he taught and journeyed. He starved himself to death at the age of seventy-two in the town
of Pava near the Magadhan capital of Rajagriha.
28Had Mahavira insisted on rigorous asceticism on the part of all his followers, then Jainism would have become the religion
of a microscopic minority. Mahavira’s Third Order was comprised of numerous laymen. Sankha Sataka headed this order. These
laymen were householders who could not actually renounce the world, but they could at least observe five small vows called
anuvrata. The similarity of their religious duties, not in kind but in degree, resulted in a close union between the laymen and the
monks. Most of the regulations meant to govern the conduct of the laymen were apparently intended to make them participate,
to an extent and for some time, in the merits and benefits of monastic life without obliging them to renounce the world altogether.
29Paul Dundas asserts that world renunciation of the sort followed by the Jains and the Buddhists was an institution that entailed
not so much as the abandonment of social ties for a career of mendicant quietism as an entry into a heroic way of life that
involved raiding and plundering and the purificatory practice of celibacy by the Kshatriyas, at least in north India during
the seventh and sixth centuries
BCE. The Mallas (a community of wrestlers), despite engaging intensively in martial arts,
were supporters of Mahavira and Gautama Buddha (both members of the Kshatriya, i.e., warrior class).
30 Again, the Gangas, the Rashtrakutas and the Hoysalas, powerful dynasties in medieval south India, were supporters of Jainism.
31 According to Jaina tenets, violence in self-defence is justifiable under certain circumstances. This is elucidated clearly
in the
Uttaradhyayana Sutra, a text composed around the third century
BCE. The
Bhagavati Sutra, composed at the beginning of the Common Era, does not condemn war. This text makes clear that going to war when commanded
by one’s leader is obligatory. However, when going to war it is necessary for soldiers to observe Jain values.
32A Jain Digambara monk founded the Hoysala Dynasty in the twelfth century in Karnataka and recommended a defensive form of
violence. The Digambara sect of Jains, which flourished in early medieval south India, preached that a warrior who died in
battle became a true Jain ascetic. Medieval Jain poetry extolled heroic action and compared the heroism of the warrior to
that of the ascetic striving monk.
33Robert J. Zydenbos writes that Jainism accepted the idea that for lay people, who are involved in the working of day-to-day
life, some
himsa is unavoidable. If the attitude of the person is right, then such
himsa is considered accidental and will have a minimal
karmic effect on him. So
himsa with proper self-control is acceptable, but not any violent act that is premeditated. Somewhat like the
Bhagavad Gita, the Jain doctrine assures the lay follower that if violence is associated with his or her occupation, and if such acts are
carried out dispassionately with a sense of inner detachment, then the person can still be a good Jain. But violence inspired
by self-interest leads to evil and darkness. Zydenbos concludes that
ahimsa is not a goal in itself. It is a way of manipulating the flow and working of
karma.
Ahimsa is a persuasive device in Jainism. The objective is to cultivate restraint, conscious self-control, in order to improve the
overall conduct of the people.
34A similar strand of thought for the purpose of limiting violence emerged in ancient China. Confucius lived from 551 to 479
BCE. The Confucian emphasis on benevolence functioned as a corrective to the self-destructive brutality of the Legalists. The
Legalists focussed on inflexible bureaucratic regimentation. Confucius claimed that government should be based on the benevolent
sentiments of educated gentlemen, while the Legalists derided benevolence. Confucius accepted the existence of armed forces
and the necessity that rulers would occasionally have to use them. The three essentials of a state for him are food, the confidence
of the people and the soldiers.
35 Confucian thought probably emerged in reaction to the indiscriminate and continuous violence of the Warring States Era (403–221
BCE).
Buddhism and Jainism both emphasize
ahimsa, each in its own way.
Ahimsa is connected to sacrifice in the
Chandogya Upanishad.
Ahimsa is equated with
tapas (austerity),
danam (generosity/gift),
daksina (sacrificial gifts), truthfulness and integrity.
36 In Buddhism and Jainism,
ahimsa retains the other qualities presented in the
Chandogya Upanishad but is otherwise completely delinked from sacrifice. The
ahimsa of Jainism and Buddhism should not be confused with passive non-violence, which Gandhi followed between the 1920s and the
1940s.
37 Now, let us see how Buddhism operated in practice under its greatest practitioner, Asoka.
As far as governance was concerned, Romila Thapar rightly says that there were two options before Asoka. One option was ruthless
control of the subject populace with the aid of the army, self-deification of the emperor, and so on, as practiced by Asoka’s
near-contemporary Emperor Huang-Ti in China. The other option was that of the king declaring himself in favour of a new belief,
an eclectic collection of views from varying groups; the dominance of other groups could thus be undermined, and the central
authority could increase its power and sway. Asoka followed the second policy, and such a policy was also followed by the
Mughal Emperor Akbar 1,800 years later, when the latter introduced
Din-i-Ilahi.
38 In fact, it could be argued that Asoka, like Plato (427–347
BCE), was no
pacifist, although both believed that politics and philosophy should be pursued for the sake of peace and not war.
39Asoka assumed that the adoption of a new faith and its propagation through the state apparatus would produce some sort of
ideological unity among the various cultural groups that inhabited his empire. A new religion could be used as an emblem or
symbol of a new unity, and it could be an effective means of propaganda. Thus, such a measure would aid in the consolidation
of the Mauryan Empire. Asoka emphasized good communication not only for the purpose of quickly transferring military assets
during times of trouble and for encouraging trade and commerce, but also for the propagation and infiltration of his
dhamma.
40 The
Uttarapatha (northern road) extended from Bengal to Taxila; another road branched from the juncture of the Ganga and Jamuna rivers and
continued to the Narmada basin and from there to the Arabian seaport of Broach in Gujarat in west India. The
Dakshinapatha (southern road) branched southward from Ujjain to the provincial capital of Suvarnagiri.
41 Asoka included his message – i.e., his
dhamma – in the various rock and pillar edicts that he constructed in different parts of his empire. Some sort of ceremonial, congregational
reading of the edicts on certain occasions, either in select gatherings comprised of high-level Mauryan bureaucrats or in
larger gatherings in which the state’s officials played an important role, was common during Asoka’s reign. His rock and pillar
edicts are somewhat similar to the pillar edicts of Darius. For instance, the polished nature of the Mauryan and Achaemenid
pillars and the use of certain common sculptural motifs, such as the lotus, was to an extent a product of cultural interaction
between India and Iran. However, there is a difference. While Darius’s pillars propagated military victories and the military
might of the Achaemenid monarch, Asoka’s rock and pillar edicts portray his quasi-benevolent message of a ‘caring’ emperor.
In other words, while Darius’s pillars portray a kingship that was martial in nature, the Asokan pillars portray a kingship
that was moral and didactic in nature. Upinder Singh points out the Buddhist influence on the Asokan pillars. In her eyes,
the lion emblem included in the Asokan pillars is a motif taken from Buddhism.
42In Burton Stein’s view, Asoka became a devotee of Buddhism around 250
BCE.
43 However, Asoka did not become a monk but remained the ruler, albeit a changed ruler, emphasizing righteousness, social justice
and peace. John Ferguson rightly says that there is no evidence of any account of
nirvana or the Four Noble Truths or the Eightfold Path in the edicts of Asoka.
44 Krishna Mohan Shrimali points out that though the Third Buddhist Council was held during the reign of Asoka (270–34
BCE), the emperor’s edict does not mention it.
45 Andre Wink notes that as far as the formulation of Asoka’s policies was concerned, the Buddhist
sanghas remained passive, and the emperor had no Buddhist religious advisors.
46 Further, Asoka also patronized other religious orders like the Ajivikas.
47 Asoka’s
dhamma was an amalgamation of ideas from different religions including Buddhism, Jainism, and others.
Dhamma is the Prakrit equivalent of the Sanskrit word
dharma.
48 The term
dhamma in Asoka’s paradigm refers not to religion but to sacred and filial duties plus ethical values.
49 D. N. Jha writes that
dhamma is an ethical code aimed at fostering an attitude of social responsibility among the people. One of the basic principles
of
dhamma is toleration.
50 Asoka proclaimed religious toleration.
51 This was necessary to prevent religious strife among the various sects. As a point of comparison, it could be said that to
a great extent, the Western Roman Empire was brought to ruin by continuous conflict between the various sects of Christianity
and between Christians and pagans.
52 Asoka exhorts his subjects to avoid anger and killing and injuring human beings and animals.
53 The Second Minor Rock Edict urges compassion towards and avoidance of injury to living beings. The Second Pillar Edict advocates
avoidance of fierceness, cruelty, anger, pride and envy.
54 The
Ssu-ma Fa is a Chinese text that could be dated around the fourth century
BCE. It says that the important virtues on which the government should rely are benevolence, righteousness, faith, trust, loyalty
and wisdom.
55 The
Ssu-ma Fa notes: ‘In general, with regard to the people: rescue them with benevolence; engage them in battle with righteousness; make
decisions through wisdom … exercise sole authority through credibility…. Thus the mind must embody benevolence and actions
should incorporate righteousness.’
56Megasthenes, the Greek ambassador to the Maurya capital at Pataliputra, tells us that the Mauryas practiced a form of limited
or just warfare. Even when battles raged between two armies, the peasants in the vicinity of the battlefield continued to
cultivate their land, and the soldiers were strictly instructed not to molest the peasants.
57 However, the Kalinga (Orissa) expedition (262
BCE)
58 was an exception. Kalinga rebelled during the later part of Bindusara’s (the father of Asoka) reign. Asoka conquered Kalinga
because this region bred war elephants. Further, he wished to secure the trade route to central and south India, and to reconquer
a territory that had rebelled against the imperial government.
59 The inability to recover lost territory would have encouraged further rebellions. About 150,000 people were deported from
Kalinga after the war.
60In the Thirteenth Major Rock Edict, Asoka speaks of his remorse at the death of over 100,000 people as a result of the military
campaign and bemoans the sufferings caused by war.
61 In the dialogues between Socrates and Alcibiades, which are authored by Plato, Socrates’ message is that warfare cannot be
judged in isolation from the issue of justice. And the preservation of virtue stands above the purely physical results of
war. The overall message of the dialogue, according to Henrik Syse, is that when war is undertaken for personal reasons, it
brings ruin.
62 Again, Socrates claimed that besides courage, the soldiers must learn other virtues like moderation, justice and prudence
(practical wisdom) for waging
‘just’ war.
63 The Thirteenth Rock Edict proclaims Asoka’s remorse over the human suffering caused by his own action, that is, the Kalinga
campaign.
64 T’ai Kung’s
Six Secret Teachings dates from the Warring States period (403–221
BCE). T’ai Kung notes that the ruler, and by implication all the members of the government, should intensively cultivate universally
acknowledged virtues like benevolence, righteousness, loyalty, credibility, sincerity, wisdom and so on.
65Socrates views true courage as pursuing the right course in spite of unwanted consequences. Socrates goes on to say that waging
war against those who act justly is unlawful.
66 In the Thirteenth Rock Edict, Asoka says that there should be no more territorial conquests and that his descendants should
also abjure conquest by arms. However, being a realist, write Irfan Habib and Vivekanand Jha, he does not make the ban on
conquest by arms absolute. If conquest by arms becomes necessary, it should be undertaken with mildness and light punishment.
67 Asoka speaks of conquest by means of
dhamma as opposed to military violence.
Immanuel Kant’s
Perpetual Peace (1795) aspires to an ideal and views peace as a moral objective.
68 Asoka, somewhat like Rousseau and Kant, seems to have believed that war is antithetical to the rational order of the polities.
69 Asoka – despite his emphasis on
ahimsa, derived from Buddhism and Jainism – did not disband his large army. Asoka may not have engaged in any further military adventures
after the conquest of Kalinga, but the army remained the principal instrument for deterring enemies, both inside and outside
the frontiers of the Mauryan Empire. Nor did Asoka emphasize general disarmament. Soldiers occupied an important place in
the Maurya society. Megasthenes tells us that Indian society was divided into seven classes, of which soldiers constituted
one of the most important.
70 Military power remains the last option for pacification, if persuasion fails.
71Buddhism pushed the concept of
cakravattin/
cakavattin, that is, the universal monarch who is defined as a just ruler and who rules in accordance with the regulations of
dhamma. If he fails to rule justly, then the wheel (the symbol of royalty) sinks to the ground and disappears.
72 The
cakravartin is the moral center of the political world, and the ruler is seen as regulating the wheel of righteousness.
73 The symbols accompanying the image of the
cakravartin are known as the seven jewels and consist of the wheel – signifying universal power – the goddess of fortune, the queen,
the
yuvaraj (crown prince),
mantra (minister), imperial
hasti (elephants) and
asva (horse). The Buddhist and Jain concept of
cakravartin was an integral part of Asoka’s
dhamma. The
cakravartin is regarded as a universal emperor whose dominion included the whole of Jambudipa (the subcontinent). Such a ruler is just,
and his reign is prosperous. He is so virtuous that he is regarded as having the power of divinity.
74Asoka rejected or modified certain elements of Buddhism while formulating his
dhamma. Early Buddhism preached the theory of
Mahasammatta, the Great Elect, a contractual theory based on an agreement between the population and the person whom they elect as king.
The king was regarded as serving the state, the collection of taxes being his due. In his edicts, Asoka did not regard himself
as the Great Elect in his relations with his subjects, but rather portrayed himself as a father-figure. He stressed the father-child
relationship between the king and the populace. The monarch was portrayed as a powerful paternal benefactor and not as the
servant of the state. This paternal attitude was a new feature of kingship and replaced the
Mahasammatta theory, reflecting the trend in governance towards centralization.
75 The paternal concept of kingship becomes more rigid and elaborate in Kautilya’s
Arthasastra and Kamandaka’s
Nitisara.
T’ai Kung in China emerges as a strong proponent of the doctrine of the benevolent ruler, with its consequent administrative
emphasis on the people’s welfare. Wei Liao-tzu, in a book composed around the fourth century
BCE, writes that the policies of the king must be directed towards aiding and sustaining the people rather than towards self-aggrandizement
and the glorious exercise of power. Confucius (551–479
BCE) in his
Analects demands courage and resoluteness in the practice of
righteousness. Warfare is considered inappropriate for civilized men.
76 According to Confucian thought, which became the state philosophy under the Former Han Dynasty (206
BCE–8
CE), the ruler need only cultivate his virtue and implement benevolent policies.
77 Asoka’s
dhamma’s emphasis on the welfare of the subjects was related to the Buddhist idea that serving others secures one’s path to salvation.
78In addition, there were instrumental reasons for pushing the welfare concept in the
dhamma. Asoka realized that his centralized monarchy would be strengthened if the subjects’ welfare at all levels was attended to
by the monarch, in particular, and by the state in general. In one of his edicts, Asoka speaks of the welfare of the state’s
prisoners. Prison was considered not as a house of torture and terror but as a reformatory (quite a modern concept). Until
the prisoner was released, his family was cared for by the state.
79 However, Asoka never banned capital punishment. In the Thirteenth Rock Edict, he exhorts the forest dwellers to behave properly
so that they do not have to be killed. The same rock edict says that obedience to persons placed above oneself is a crucial
part of
dhamma. As regards internal pacification, in the Fourth Pillar Edict, Asoka says that if any of his subjects breaks
dhamma, that person sins against other persons and needs to be punished. In such a scenario, the
rajukas should exercise
samata (moderation) when awarding punishment.
80 The Sixteenth Rock Edict notes: ‘An officer fails to act impartially owing to the following dispositions, viz., jealousy,
anger, cruelty, hastiness, want of perseverance, laziness and fatigue…. The root of the complete success of an officer lies
in the absence of anger and avoidance of hastiness.’
81These measures are in accordance with the Buddhist ideal of maintaining a balance between sin and punishment. Lambert Schmithausen
notes that Asoka became a Buddhist lay follower. Not only Asoka, but before him Ajatasatru was also influenced by Buddhism.
Schmithausen continues that it is possible to an extent to reconcile the Buddhist emphasis on
ahimsa with good governance. Buddha did not apply
ahimsa to the specific situation of a king or to the case of an invasion. Defensive military measures are allowed to an extent.
One Buddhist text notes that soldiers are asked not to retreat but are warned not to kill indiscriminately. Schmithausen says
that according to the Buddhist
cakravartin ideal, neighbouring kings should submit to the righteous ruler. Here, Buddhism is probably referring to what modern-day international
theorists call deterrence. The implication is that if these kings do not submit, then the righteous ruler is justified in
attacking and subduing them. If deterrence fails, then military attacks are allowed. Overall, it is left to the ruler to decide
whether and to what extent the concept of non-violence is to be applied in the domain of politics (i.e., public violence,
like warfare and capital punishment). The warrior is to observe the Buddhist norms wherever they do not conflict with his
specific duties as a ruler. In case a warrior has to indulge in limited warfare, he can compensate for his sin through lavish
donations to the Buddhist order. In fact, one text notes that it is a sin for a good ruler not to censure, punish or exile
those who deserve it.
Milindapanha notes that corporal punishment should be applied to thieves because they deserve it owing to their bad
karma. The Mahayana and Vajrayana texts view the killing of ‘bad’ persons as compassionate.
82This trend of justifying the use of minimal violence for good governance is also in line with Confucianism. Mencius (371–289
BCE), the second great Confucian, advocated punitive military expeditions to chastize evil rulers and relieve the people’s sufferings.
Hsun-tzu, a Confucian of the late Warring States era, wrote about the inescapable necessity of armies and warfare.
83The concept of aggressive expansion was inherent in brahmanical ideology, with the central role of sacrificial rituals like
the
asvamedha and
rajasuya ceremonies eulogizing wars of aggrandizement. Buddhism, by contrast, eulogized the role of
dharmaraja, which made such rituals irrelevant.
84 In accordance with the principles of
dhamma, Asoka
banned the ritual sacrifice of animals, a move that hit the class interests of the Brahmins. Both the Roman Emperor Constantine
and the Mauryan Emperor Asoka used religion for political purposes. Asoka’s
dhamma and Constantine’s Christianity forbade sacrifices at home and festive meetings and gatherings, reflecting the fear that such
religious gatherings might transform themselves into politically subversive groups.
85In two rock edicts, Asoka says that the inhabitants of his empire are like his children and that he would strive for their
welfare just as he would for his own siblings’. Asoka’s public welfare measures involved providing medical assistance and
other sorts of relief for the travellers and animals on the roads.
86 He constructed rest houses and veterinary establishments.
87 The Buddhist monks studied medical lore and treated fellow monks and laymen. Buddha himself is called
mahabhisaja, that is, the great physician.
88 Asoka ordered the digging of wells and planting of trees along the roads.
89Asoka appointed a special class of officers known as
dhamma mahamattas. Superficially, they were supposed to attend to the welfare of the subjects and to bring about an infiltration of
dhamma into all levels of the society. In reality, they were organs of surveillance. They had the power to enter the homes of people
of all classes of society, even members of the royal family and their relatives. With the passage of time, the power of the
dhamma mahamattas to interfere in the lives of the people increased. These officials operated not only in the heart of the empire but also
in the distant frontier regions and among neighbouring peoples (of the vassal states). The
dhamma mahamattas worked among both religious communities and secular groups. Besides the
dhamma mahamattas, Asoka had another class of officers known as
pativedikas who bought news of the people to the monarch.
90 The Sixth Rock Edict tells us that Asoka appointed
pativedakas (reporters) who would report to him about conditions among the people. The Third Rock Edict and First Rock Edict inform us
that officials were ordered to make tours of inspection every three to five years.
91 One could surmise that the
pativedakas also
functioned as news writers/intelligence agents, that is, as spies. Kautilya
Arthasastra also put forward the scheme that the
vijigishu should made use of monks, religious mendicants and nuns plus professional spies as
charas.
Asoka also started the practice of
dhamma yatras. He toured the country for the furtherance of
dhamma and to gain firsthand knowledge regarding the state of affairs in his empire. Before Asoka, monarchs toured their domain
during military expeditions, hunting excursions and pleasure trips. Hunting expeditions were ended by Asoka.
92 In the pre-modern era, an army gained collective training for warfare while conducting hunting expeditions. One can surmise
that Asoka’s ban on hunting expeditions reduced the combat effectiveness of the Mauryan Army in the long run.