{"id":2921,"date":"2013-07-13T01:44:36","date_gmt":"2013-07-13T01:44:36","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/localhost\/?p=2921"},"modified":"2013-07-13T01:44:36","modified_gmt":"2013-07-13T01:44:36","slug":"29-indian-polity-vol-20-the-renaissance-in-india","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/01-works-of-sri-aurobindo\/03-cwsa\/20-the-renaissance-in-india\/29-indian-polity-vol-20-the-renaissance-in-india","title":{"rendered":"-29_Indian Polity.htm"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n\n\n
\n<\/p>\n

\n
\nXXI <\/b>
\n<\/span><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nIndian Polity <\/font><\/b>
\n<\/span><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nI<\/font> HAVE<\/b> spoken hitherto of the greatness of Indian civilisation
\nin the things most important to human culture, those activities that raise man to his noblest potentialities as a mental,
\na spiritual, religious, intellectual, ethical, aesthetic being, and in all these matters the cavillings of the critics break down before
\nthe height and largeness and profundity revealed when we look at the whole and all its parts in the light of a true understanding
\nof the spirit and intention and a close discerning regard on the actual achievement of the culture. There is revealed not only a
\ngreat civilisation, but one of the half dozen greatest of which we have a still existing record. But there are many who would
\nadmit the greatness of the achievement of India in the things of the mind and the spirit, but would still point out that she has
\nfailed in life, her culture has not resulted in a strong, successful or progressive organisation of life such as Europe shows to us,
\nand that in the end at least the highest part of her mind turned away from life to asceticism and an inactive and world-shunning
\npursuit by the individual of his personal spiritual salvation. Or at most she has come only to a certain point and then there has
\nbeen an arrest and decadence. <\/span> <\/p>\n

\nThis charge weighs with an especial heaviness in the balance
\ntoday because the modern man, even the modern cultured man,  <\/i>
\nis or tends to be to a degree quite unprecedented politikon zōon<\/i>, a political, economic and social being valuing above all things
\nthe efficiency of the outward existence and the things of the mind and spirit mainly, when not exclusively, for their aid to
\nhumanity’s vital and mechanical progress: he has not that regard of the ancients which looked up towards the highest heights and
\nregarded an achievement in the things of the mind and the spirit with an unquestioning admiration or a deep veneration for its
\nown sake as the greatest possible contribution to human culture  
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage <\/font>\u2013 384<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\nand progress. And although this modern tendency is exaggerated and ugly and degrading in its exaggeration, inimical to
\nhumanity’s spiritual evolution, it has this much of truth behind it that while the first value of a culture is its power to raise
\nand enlarge the internal man, the mind, the soul, the spirit, its soundness is not complete unless it has shaped also his external
\nexistence and made of it a rhythm of advance towards high and great ideals. This is the true sense of progress and there must
\nbe as part of it a sound political, economic and social life, a power and efficiency enabling a people to survive, to grow and
\nto move securely towards a collective perfection, and a vital elasticity and responsiveness that will give room for a constant
\nadvance in the outward expression of the mind and the spirit. If a culture does not serve these ends, then there is evidently a defect
\nsomewhere either in its essential conceptions or its wholeness or in its application that will seriously detract from its claims to a
\ncomplete and integral value. <\/span> <\/p>\n

\nThe ideals that governed the spirit and body of Indian
\nsociety were of the highest kind, its social order secured an inexpugnable basic stability, the strong life force that worked in
\nit was creative of an extraordinary energy, richness and interest, and the life organised remarkable in its opulence, variety in
\nunity, beauty, productiveness, movement. All the records of Indian history, art and literature bear evidence to a cultural life of
\nthis character and even in decline and dissolution there survives some stamp of it to remind however faintly and distantly of the
\npast greatness. To what then does the charge brought against Indian culture as an agent of the life power amount and what
\nis its justification? In its exaggerated form it is founded upon the characteristics of the decline and dissolution, the features of
\nthe decadence read backward into the time of greatness, and it amounts to this that India has always shown an incompetence
\nfor any free or sound political organisation and has been constantly a divided and for the most part of her long history a
\nsubject nation, that her economic system whatever its bygone merits, if it had any, remained an inelastic and static order
\nthat led in modern conditions to poverty and failure and her   <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage <\/font>\u2013 385<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\nsociety an unprogressive hierarchy, caste-ridden, full of
\nsemi-barbaric abuses, only fit to be thrown on the scrap-heap among
\nthe broken rubbish of the past and replaced by the freedom, soundness and perfection or at least the progressive perfectibility
\nof the European social order. It is necessary to reestablish the real facts and their meaning and afterwards it will be time to pass
\njudgment on the political, the economic and the social aspects of Indian culture.
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\nThe legend of Indian political incompetence has arisen from a false view of the historical development and an insufficient
\nknowledge of the ancient past of the country. It has long been currently supposed that she passed at once from the freer type
\nof the primitive Aryan or Vedic social and political organisation to a system socially marked by the despotism of the Brahmin
\ntheocracy and politically by an absolute monarchy of the oriental, by which is meant the Western Asiatic, type and has remained
\nfixed in these two things for ever after. That summary reading of Indian history has been destroyed by a more careful and
\nenlightened scholarship and the facts are of a quite different nature. It is true that India never evolved either the scrambling
\nand burdensome industrialism or the parliamentary organisation of freedom and self-styled democracy characteristic of the
\nbourgeois or Vaishya period of the cycle of European progress. But the time is passing when the uncritical praise of these things
\nas the ideal state and the last word of social and political progress was fashionable, their defects are now visible and the greatness
\nof an oriental civilisation need not be judged by the standard of these Western developments. Indian scholars have attempted
\nto read the modern ideas and types of democracy and even a parliamentary system into the past of India, but this seems
\nto me an ill-judged endeavour. There was a strong democratic element, if we must use the Western terms, in Indian polity and
\neven institutions that present a certain analogy to the parliamentary form, but in reality these features were of India’s own kind
\nand not at all the same thing as modern parliaments and modern democracy. And so considered they are a much more remarkable
\nevidence of the political capacity of the Indian people in their  
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage <\/font>\u2013 386<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\nliving adaptation to the ensemble of the social mind and body of the nation than when we judge them by the very different
\nstandard of Western society and the peculiar needs of its cultural cycle.
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\nThe Indian system began with a variation of the type generally associated with the early history of the Aryan peoples;
\nbut certain features have a more general character and belong to a still earlier stage in the social development of the human
\nrace. It was a clan or tribal system, Kula, founded upon the equality of all the freemen of the clan or race; this was not
\nat first firmly founded upon the territorial basis, the migratory tendency was still in evidence or recurred under pressure and
\nthe land was known by the name of the people who occupied it, the Kuru country or simply the Kurus, the Malava country
\nor the Malavas. After the fixed settlement within determined boundaries the system of the clan or tribe continued, but found
\na basic unit or constituent atom in the settled village community.
\nThe meeting of the people, viśah<\/i>, assembling for communal deliberation, for sacrifice and worship or as the host for war,
\nremained for a long time the power-sign of the mass body and the agent of the active common life with the king as the head
\nand representative, but long depending even after his position became hereditary on the assent of the people for his formal
\nelection or confirmation. The religious institution of the sacrifice developed in time a class of priests and inspired singers, men
\ntrained in the ritual or in possession of the mystic knowledge which lay behind the symbols of the sacrifice, the seed of the
\ngreat Brahminic institution. These were not at first hereditary, but exercised other professions and belonged in their ordinary
\nlife to the general body of the people. This free and simple natural constitution of the society seems to have been general at
\nfirst throughout Aryan India. <\/span> <\/p>\n

\nThe later development out of this primitive form followed
\nup to a certain point the ordinary line of evolution as we see it in other communities, but at the same time threw up certain
\nvery striking peculiarities that owing to the unique mentality of the race fixed themselves, became prominent characteristics
\n   <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage <\/font>\u2013 387<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\nand gave a different stamp to the political, economic and social factors of Indian civilisation. The hereditary principle emerged
\nat an early stage and increased constantly its power and hold on the society until it became everywhere the basis of the whole
\norganisation of its activities. A hereditary kingship was established, a powerful princely and warrior class appeared, the rest
\nof the people were marked off as the caste of traders, artisans and agriculturalists and a subject or menial caste was added, perhaps
\nsometimes as the result of conquest but more probably or more commonly from economic necessity, of servants and labourers.
\nThe predominance from early times of the religious and spiritual tendency in the mind of the Indian people brought about at the
\ntop of the social system the growth of the Brahmin order, priests, scholars, legists, repositories of the sacred lore of the Vedas, a
\ndevelopment paralleled elsewhere but here given an unequalled permanence and definiteness and supreme importance. In other
\ncountries with a less complex mentality this predominance might have resulted in a theocracy: but the Brahmins in spite of their
\never-increasing and finally predominant authority did not and could not usurp in India the political power. As sacrosanct priests
\nand legists and spiritual preceptors of the monarch and the people they exercised a very considerable influence, but the real
\nor active political power remained with the king, the Kshatriya aristocracy and the commons.
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\nA peculiar figure for some time was the Rishi, the man of a higher spiritual experience and knowledge, born in any of the
\nclasses, but exercising an authority by his spiritual personality over all, revered and consulted by the king of whom he was
\nsometimes the religious preceptor and in the then fluid state of social evolution able alone to exercise an important role in
\nevolving new basic ideas and effecting direct and immediate changes of the socio-religious ideas and customs of the people.
\nIt was a marked feature of the Indian mind that it sought to attach a spiritual meaning and a religious sanction to all, even
\nto the most external social and political circumstances of its life, imposing on all classes and functions an ideal, not except
\nincidentally of rights and powers, but of duties, a rule of their  
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage <\/font>\u2013 388<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\naction and an ideal way and temperament, character, spirit in the action, a dharma with a spiritual significance. It was the work of
\nthe Rishi to put this stamp enduringly on the national mind, to prolong and perpetuate it, to discover and interpret the ideal law
\nand its practical meaning, to cast the life of the people into the well-shaped ideals and significant forms of a civilisation founded
\non the spiritual and religious sense. And in later ages we find the Brahminic schools of legists attributing their codes, though
\nin themselves only formulations of existing rule and custom, to the ancient Rishis. Whatever the developments of the Indian
\nsocio-political body in later days, this original character still exercised its influence, even when all tended at last to become
\ntraditionalised and conventionalised instead of moving forward constantly in the steps of a free and living practice.
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\nThe political evolution of this early system varied in different parts of India. The ordinary development, as in most other
\ncountries, was in the direction of an increasing emphasis on the control of the king as the centre, head and unifying factor of a
\nmore and more complex system of rule and administration and this prevailed eventually and became the universal type. But for
\na long time it was combated and held in check by a contrary tendency that resulted in the appearance and the strong and
\nenduring vitality of city or regional or confederated republics. The king became either a hereditary or elected executive head
\nof the republic or an archon administering for a brief and fixed period or else he altogether disappeared from the polity of the
\nstate. This turn must have come about in many cases by a natural evolution of the power of the assemblies, but in others it
\nseems to have been secured by some kind of revolution and there appear to have been vicissitudes, alternations between periods
\nof monarchical and periods of republican government. Among a certain number of the Indian peoples the republican form finally
\nasserted its hold and proved itself capable of a strong and settled organisation and a long duration lasting over many centuries.
\nIn some cases they were governed by a democratic assembly, in more by an oligarchical senate. It is unfortunate that we know
\nlittle of the details of the constitution and nothing of the inner   <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage <\/font>\u2013 389<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\nhistory of these Indian republics, but the evidence is clear of the high reputation they enjoyed throughout India for the excellence
\nof their civil and the formidable efficiency of their military organisation. There is an interesting dictum of Buddha that so long
\nas the republican institutions were maintained in their purity and vigour, a small state of this kind would remain invincible even by
\nthe arms of the powerful and ambitious Magadhan monarchy, and this opinion is amply confirmed by the political writers who
\nconsider the alliance of the republics the most solid and valuable political and military support a king could have and advise their
\nreduction not so much by the force of arms, as that would have a very precarious chance of success, but by Machiavellian means,
\n\u2014 similar to those actually employed in Greece by Philip of Macedon, \u2014 aimed at undermining their internal unity and the
\nefficiency of their constitution. <\/span> <\/p>\n

\nThese republican states were already long established and in
\nvigorous functioning in the sixth century before Christ, contemporary therefore with the brilliant but ephemeral and troubled
\nGreek city commonwealths, but this form of political liberty in India long outlasted the period of Greek republican freedom.
\nThe ancient Indian mind, not less fertile in political invention, must be considered superior to that of the mercurial and restless
\nMediterranean people in the capacity for a firm organisation and settled constitutional order. Some of these states appear to have
\nenjoyed a longer and a more settled history of vigorous freedom than republican Rome, for they persisted even against the mighty
\nempire of Chandragupta and Asoka and were still in existence in the early centuries of the Christian era. But none of them
\ndeveloped the aggressive spirit and the conquering and widely organising capacity of the Roman republic; they were content
\nto preserve their own free inner life and their independence. India especially after the invasion of Alexander felt the need
\nof a movement of unification and the republics were factors of division: strong for themselves, they could do nothing for the
\norganisation of the peninsula, too vast indeed for any system of confederation of small states to be possible
\n\u2014 and indeed in
\nthe ancient world that endeavour nowhere succeeded, always it  
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage <\/font>\u2013 390<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\nbroke down in the effort of expansion beyond certain narrow limits and could not endure against the movement towards a
\nmore centralised government. In India as elsewhere it was the monarchical state that grew and finally held the field replacing
\nall other forms of political organisation. The republican organisation disappeared from her history and is known to us only by
\nthe evidence of coins, scattered references and the testimony of Greek observers and of the contemporary political writers and
\ntheorists who supported and helped to confirm and develop the monarchical state throughout India.
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\nBut Indian monarchy previous to the Mahomedan invasion was not, in spite of a certain sanctity and great authority conceded to the regal position and the personality of the king as the representative of the divine Power and the guardian of the
\nDharma, in any way a personal despotism or an absolutist autocracy: it had no resemblance to the ancient Persian monarchy
\nor the monarchies of western and central Asia or the Roman imperial government or later European autocracies: it was of an
\naltogether different type from the system of the Pathan or the Mogul emperors. The Indian king exercised supreme administrative and judicial power, was in possession of all the military forces of the kingdom and with his Council alone responsible for
\npeace and war and he had too a general supervision and control over the good order and welfare of the life of the community,
\nbut his power was not personal and it was besides hedged in by safeguards against abuse and encroachment and limited by
\nthe liberties and powers of other public authorities and interests who were, so to speak, lesser copartners with him in the exercise
\nof sovereignty and administrative legislation and control. He was in fact a limited or constitutional monarch, although the
\nmachinery by which the constitution was maintained and the limitation effected differed from the kind familiar in European
\nhistory; and even the continuance of his rule was far more dependent than that of mediaeval European kings on the continued
\nwill and assent of the people. <\/span> <\/p>\n

\nA greater sovereign than the king was the Dharma, the
\nreligious, ethical, social, political, juridic and customary law   <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage <\/font>\u2013 391<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\norganically governing the life of the people. This impersonal authority was considered sacred and eternal in its spirit and
\nthe totality of its body, always characteristically the same, the changes organically and spontaneously brought about in its
\nactual form by the evolution of the society being constantly incorporated in it, regional, family and other customs forming a
\nsort of attendant and subordinate body capable of change only from within, \u2014 and with the Dharma no secular authority had
\nany right of autocratic interference. The Brahmins themselves were recorders and exponents of the Dharma, not its creators
\nnor authorised to make at will any changes, although it is evident that by an authoritative expression of opinion they could
\nand did favour or oppose this or that tendency to change of principle or detail. The king was only the guardian, executor
\nand servant of the Dharma, charged to see to its observance and to prevent offences, serious irregularities and breaches. He
\nhimself was bound the first to obey it and observe the rigorous rule it laid on his personal life and action and on the province,
\npowers and duties of his regal authority and office. <\/span> <\/p>\n

\nThis subjection of the sovereign power to the Dharma was
\nnot an ideal theory inoperative in practice; for the rule of the socio-religious law actively conditioned the whole life of the
\npeople and was therefore a living reality, and it had in the political field very large practical consequences. It meant first
\nthat the king had not the power of direct legislation and was limited to the issue of administrative decrees that had to be in
\nconsonance with the religious, social, political, economic constitution of the community,
\n\u2014 and even here there were other
\npowers than that of the king who shared with him the right of promulgating and seeing to the execution of administrative
\ndecrees independently issued, \u2014 neither could he disregard in the general tenor and character and the effective result of his
\nadministration the express or tacit will of the people. <\/span> <\/p>\n

\nThe religious liberties of the commons were assured and
\ncould not normally be infringed by any secular authority; each religious community, each new or long-standing religion could
\nshape its own way of life and institutions and had its own  
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage <\/font>\u2013 392<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\nauthorities or governing bodies exercising in their proper field an entire independence. There was no exclusive State religion
\nand the monarch was not the religious head of the people. Asoka in this respect seems to have attempted an extension of
\nthe royal control or influence and similar velleities were occasionally shown on a minor scale by other powerful sovereigns.
\nBut Asoka’s so-called edicts of this kind had a recommendatory rather than an imperative character, and the sovereign who
\nwished to bring about a change in religious belief or institutions had always, in accordance with the Indian principle of communal freedom and the obligation of a respect for and a previous consultation of the wishes of those concerned, to secure the
\nassent of the recognised authorities or to refer the matter to a consultative assembly for deliberation, as was done in the
\nfamous Buddhist councils, or to arrange a discussion between the exponents of the different religions and abide by the issue.
\nThe monarch might personally favour a particular sect or creed and his active preference might evidently have a considerable
\npropagandist influence, but at the same time he was bound to respect and support in his public office all the recognised religions of the people with a certain measure of impartiality, a rule that explains the support extended by Buddhist and Brahmin
\nemperors to both the rival religions. At times there were, mainly in the south, instances of petty or violent State persecutions, but
\nthese outbreaks were a violation of the Dharma due to momentary passion at a time of acute religious ferment and were always
\nlocal and of a brief duration. Normally there was no place in the Indian political system for religious oppression and intolerance
\nand a settled State policy of that kind was unthinkable. <\/span> <\/p>\n

\nThe social life of the people was similarly free from autocratic interference. Instances of royal legislation in this province are rare and here too, when it occurred, there had to be a consultation of the will of those concerned, as in the rearrangement or the reconstitution of the caste system by the Sena kings in
\nBengal after its disorganisation during a long period of Buddhist predominance. Change in the society was brought about
\nnot artificially from above but automatically from within and   <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage <\/font>\u2013 393<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\nprincipally by the freedom allowed to families or particular communities to develop or alter automatically their own rule of life,
\n   <\/i>  acara<\/i>.
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\nIn the sphere of administration the power of the king was similarly hedged in by the standing constitution of the Dharma.
\nHis right of taxation was limited in the most important sources of revenue to a fixed percentage as a maximum and in other directions often by the right of the bodies representing the various elements of the community to a voice in the matter and always
\nby the general rule that his right to govern was subject to the satisfaction and good-will of the people. This as we shall see, was
\nnot merely a pious wish or opinion of the Brahmin custodians of the Dharma. The king was in person the supreme court and
\nthe highest control in the execution of the civil and criminal law, but here too his role was that of the executor: he was bound to
\nadminister the law faithfully as it stood through his judges or with the aid of the Brahmin legists learned in these matters. He
\nhad the complete and unfettered control in his Council only of foreign policy, military administration and war and peace and
\nof a great number of directive activities. He was free to make efficient arrangements for all that part of the administration that
\nserved to secure and promote the welfare of the community, good order, public morals, and all such matters as could best
\nbe supervised or regulated by the sovereign authority. He had a right of patronage and punishment consistent with the law and
\nwas expected to exercise it with a strict regard to an effect of general beneficence and promotion of the public welfare.
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\nThere could therefore be ordinarily little or no room in the ancient Indian system for autocratic freak or monarchical
\nviolence and oppression, much less for the savage cruelty and tyranny of so common an occurrence in the history of some
\nother countries. Nevertheless such happenings were possible by the sovereign’s disregard of the Dharma or by a misuse of
\nhis power of administrative decree; instances occurred of the kind, \u2014 though the worst recorded is that of a tyrant belonging
\nto a foreign dynasty; in other cases any prolonged outbreak of autocratic caprice, violence or injustice seems to have led
\n  
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage <\/font>\u2013 394<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\nbefore long to an effective protest or revolt on the part of the people. The legists provided for the possibility of oppression. In
\nspite of the sanctity and prestige attaching to the sovereign it was laid down that obedience ceased to be binding if the king
\nceased to be faithful executor of the Dharma. Incompetence and violation of the obligation to rule to the satisfaction of
\nthe people were in theory and effect sufficient causes for his removal. Manu even lays it down that an unjust and oppressive
\nking should be killed by his own subjects like a mad dog, and this justification by the highest authority of the right or even the
\nduty of insurrection and regicide in extreme cases is sufficient to show that absolutism or the unconditional divine right of
\nkings was no part of the intention of the Indian political system. As a matter of fact the right was actually exercised as we find
\nboth from history and literature. Another more peaceful and more commonly exercised remedy was a threat of secession or
\nexodus which in most cases was sufficient to bring the delinquent ruler to reason. It is interesting to find the threat of secession
\nemployed against an unpopular monarch in the south as late as the seventeenth century, as well as a declaration by a popular
\nassembly denouncing any assistance given to the king as an act of treason. A more common remedy was deposition by the
\ncouncil of ministers or by the public assemblies. The kingship thus constituted proved to be in effect moderate, efficient and
\nbeneficent, served well the purposes assigned to it and secured an abiding hold on the affections of the people. The monarchical institution was however only one, an approved and very important, but not, as we see from the existence of the ancient
\nrepublics, an indispensable element of the Indian socio-political system, and we shall understand nothing of the real principle
\nof the system and its working if we stop short with a view of the regal facade and fail to see what lay behind it. It is there
\n\u00b8 that we shall find the clue to the essential character of the whole
\nconstruction.  
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage <\/font>\u2013 395<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\n
\nXXII<\/b><\/span><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nT<\/font>HE TRUE<\/b> nature of the Indian polity can only be realised
\nif we look at it not as a separate thing, a machinery independent of the rest of the mind and life of the people,
\nbut as a part of and in its relation to the organic totality of the social existence.
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\nA people, a great human collectivity, is in fact an organic living being with a collective or rather
\n\u2014 for the word collective
\nis too mechanical to be true to the inner reality \u2014 a common or communal soul, mind and body. The life of the society like
\nthe physical life of the individual human being passes through a cycle of birth, growth, youth, ripeness and decline, and if this last
\nstage goes far enough without any arrest of its course towards decadence, it may perish,
\n\u2014 even so all the older peoples and
\nnations except India and China perished, \u2014 as a man dies of old age. But the collective being has too the capacity of renewing
\nitself, of a recovery and a new cycle. For in each people there is a soul idea or life idea at work, less mortal than its body, and
\nif this idea is itself sufficiently powerful, large and force-giving and the people sufficiently strong, vital and plastic in mind and
\ntemperament to combine stability with a constant enlargement or new application of the power of the soul idea or life idea
\nin its being, it may pass through many such cycles before it comes to a final exhaustion. Moreover, the idea is itself only
\nthe principle of soul manifestation of the communal being and each communal soul again a manifestation and vehicle of the
\ngreater eternal spirit that expresses itself in Time and on earth is seeking, as it were, its own fullness in humanity through the
\nvicissitudes of the human cycles. A people then which learns to live consciously not solely in its physical and outward life, not
\neven only in that and the power of the life idea or soul idea that governs the changes of its development and is the key to its
\n  
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage <\/font>\u2013 396<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\npsychology and temperament, but in the soul and spirit behind, may not at all exhaust itself, may not end by disappearance or a
\ndissolution or a fusion into others or have to give place to a new race and people, but having itself fused into its life many original
\nsmaller societies and attained to its maximum natural growth pass without death through many renascences. And even if at
\nany time it appears to be on the point of absolute exhaustion and dissolution, it may recover by the force of the spirit and
\nbegin another and perhaps a more glorious cycle. The history of India has been that of the life of such a people.
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\nThe master idea that has governed the life, culture, social ideals of the Indian people has been the seeking of man for his
\ntrue spiritual self and the use of life \u2014 subject to a necessary evolution first of his lower physical, vital and mental nature
\n\u2014 as a frame and means for that discovery and for man’s ascent from the ignorant natural into the spiritual existence. This
\ndominant idea India has never quite forgotten even under the stress and material exigencies and the externalities of political
\nand social construction. But the difficulty of making the social life an expression of man’s true self and some highest realisation
\nof the spirit within him is immensely greater than that which attends a spiritual self-expression through the things of the
\nmind, religion, thought, art, literature, and while in these India reached extraordinary heights and largenesses, she could not in
\nthe outward life go beyond certain very partial realisations and very imperfect tentatives,
\n\u2014 a general spiritualising symbolism,
\nan infiltration of the greater aspiration, a certain cast given to the communal life, the creation of institutions favourable to the
\nspiritual idea. Politics, society, economics are the natural field of the two first and grosser parts of human aim and conduct
\nrecognised in the Indian system, interest and hedonistic desire: Dharma, the higher law, has nowhere been brought more than
\npartially into this outer side of life, and in politics to a very minimum extent; for the effort at governing political action by
\nethics is usually little more than a pretence. The coordination or true union of the collective outward life with Moksha, the
\nliberated spiritual existence, has hardly even been conceived or   <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage <\/font>\u2013 397<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\nattempted, much less anywhere succeeded in the past history of the yet hardly adult human race. Accordingly, we find that
\nthe governance by the Dharma of India’s social, economic and even (though here the attempt broke down earlier than in other
\nspheres) her political rule of life, system, turn of existence, with the adumbration of a spiritual significance behind,
\n\u2014 the full
\nattainment of the spiritual life being left as a supreme aim to the effort of the individual
\n\u2014 was as far as her ancient system could
\nadvance. This much endeavour, however, she did make with persistence and patience and it gave a peculiar type to her social
\npolity. It is perhaps for a future India, taking up and enlarging with a more complete aim, a more comprehensive experience, a
\nmore certain knowledge that shall reconcile life and the spirit, her ancient mission, to found the status and action of the collective being of man on the realisation of the deeper spiritual truth, the yet unrealised spiritual potentialities of our existence and so
\nensoul the life of her people as to make it the Lila of the greater Self in humanity, a conscious communal soul and body of Virat,
\nthe universal spirit. <\/span> <\/p>\n

\nAnother point must be noted which creates a difference
\nbetween the ancient polity of India and that of the European peoples and makes the standards of the West as inapplicable
\nhere as in the things of the mind and the inner culture. Human society has in its growth to pass through three stages of evolution
\nbefore it can arrive at the completeness of its possibilities. The first is a condition in which the forms and activities of the communal existence are those of the spontaneous play of the powers and principles of its life. All its growth, all its formations, customs, institutions are then a natural organic development, \u2014 the motive and constructive power coming mostly from the subconscient principle of the life within it, \u2014 expressing, but without deliberate intention, the communal psychology, temperament,
\nvital and physical need, and persisting or altering partly under the pressure of an internal impulse, partly under that of the
\nenvironment acting on the communal mind and temper. In this stage the people is not yet intelligently self-conscious in the way
\nof the reason, is not yet a thinking collective being, and it does  
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage <\/font>\u2013 398<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\nnot try to govern its whole communal existence by the reasoning will, but lives according to its vital intuitions or their first mental
\nrenderings. The early framework of Indian society and polity grew up in such a period as in most ancient and mediaeval
\ncommunities, but also in the later age of a growing social self-consciousness they were not rejected but only farther shaped,
\ndeveloped, systematised so as to be always, not a construction of politicians, legislators and social and political thinkers, but a
\nstrongly stable vital order natural to the mind, instincts and life intuitions of the Indian people.
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\nA second stage of the society is that in which the communal mind becomes more and more intellectually self-conscious, first
\nin its more cultured minds, then more generally, first broadly, then more and more minutely and in all the parts of its life. It
\nlearns to review and deal with its own life, communal ideas, needs, institutions in the light of the developed intelligence and
\nfinally by the power of the critical and constructive reason. This is a stage which is full of great possibilities but attended too
\nby serious characteristic dangers. Its first advantages are those which go always with the increase of a clear and understanding
\nand finally an exact and scientific knowledge and the culminating stage is the strict and armoured efficiency which the critical
\nand constructive, the scientific reason used to the fullest degree offers as its reward and consequence. Another and greater outcome of this stage of social evolution is the emergence of high and luminous ideals which promise to raise man beyond the
\nlimits of the vital being, beyond his first social, economic and political needs and desires and out of their customary moulds
\nand inspire an impulse of bold experiment with the communal life which opens a field of possibility for the realisation of a more
\nand more ideal society. This application of the scientific mind to life with the strict, well-finished, armoured efficiency which
\nis its normal highest result, this pursuit of great consciously proposed social and political ideals and the progress which is the
\nindex of the ground covered in the endeavour, have been, with whatever limits and drawbacks, the distinguishing advantages
\nof the political and social effort of Europe.   <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage <\/font>\u2013 399<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\nOn the other hand the tendency of the reason when it pretends to deal with the materials of life as its absolute governor,
\nis to look too far away from the reality of the society as a living growth and to treat it as a mechanism which can be manipulated at will and constructed like so much dead wood or iron according to the arbitrary dictates of the intelligence. The sophisticating, labouring, constructing, efficient, mechanising reason loses hold of the simple principles of a people’s vitality; it cuts
\nit away from the secret roots of its life. The result is an exaggerated dependence on system and institution, on legislation
\nand administration and the deadly tendency to develop, in place of a living people, a mechanical State. An instrument of the
\ncommunal life tries to take the place of the life itself and there is created a powerful but mechanical and artificial organisation;
\nbut, as the price of this exterior gain, there is lost the truth of life of an organically self-developing communal soul in the body
\nof a free and living people. It is this error of the scientific reason stifling the work of the vital and the spiritual intuition under the
\ndead weight of its mechanical method which is the weakness of Europe and has deceived her aspiration and prevented her from
\narriving at the true realisation of her own higher ideals. <\/span> <\/p>\n

\nIt is only by reaching a third stage of the evolution of the
\ncollective social as of the individual human being that the ideals first seized and cherished by the thought of man can discover
\ntheir own real source and character and their true means and conditions of effectuation or the perfect society be anything more
\nthan a vision on a shining cloud constantly run after in a circle and constantly deceiving the hope and escaping the embrace.
\nThat will be when man in the collectivity begins to live more deeply and to govern his collective life neither primarily by the
\nneeds, instincts, intuitions welling up out of the vital self, nor secondarily by the constructions of the reasoning mind, but first,
\nforemost and always by the power of unity, sympathy, spontaneous liberty, supple and living order of his discovered greater
\nself and spirit in which the individual and the communal existence have their law of freedom, perfection and oneness. That
\nis a rule that has not yet anywhere found its right conditions  
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage <\/font>\u2013 400<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\nfor even beginning its effort, for it can only come when man’s attempt to reach and abide by the law of the spiritual existence
\nis no longer an exceptional aim for individuals or else degraded in its more general aspiration to the form of a popular religion,
\nbut is recognised and followed out as the imperative need of his being and its true and right attainment the necessity of the next
\nstep in the evolution of the race. <\/span> <\/p>\n

\nThe small early Indian communities developed like others
\nthrough the first stage of a vigorous and spontaneous vitality, finding naturally and freely its own norm and line, casting up
\nform of life and social and political institution out of the vital intuition and temperament of the communal being. As they
\nfused with each other into an increasing cultural and social unity and formed larger and larger political bodies, they developed a
\ncommon spirit and a common basis and general structure allowing of a great freedom of variation in minor line and figure.
\nThere was no need of a rigid uniformity; the common spirit and life impulse were enough to impose on this plasticity a law
\nof general oneness. And even when there grew up the great kingdoms and empires, still the characteristic institutions of the
\nsmaller kingdoms, republics, peoples were as much as possible incorporated rather than destroyed or thrown aside in the new
\ncast of the socio-political structure. Whatever could not survive in the natural evolution of the people or was no longer needed,
\nfell away of itself and passed into desuetude: whatever could last by modifying itself to new circumstance and environment,
\nwas allowed to survive: whatever was in intimate consonance with the psychical and the vital law of being and temperament
\nof the Indian people became universalised and took its place in the enduring figure of the society and polity.
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\nThis spontaneous principle of life was respected by the age of growing intellectual culture. The Indian thinkers on society, economics and politics, Dharma Shastra and Artha Shastra, made it their business not to construct ideals and systems of society
\nand government in the abstract intelligence, but to understand and regulate by the practical reason the institutions and ways of
\ncommunal living already developed by the communal mind and   <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage <\/font>\u2013 401<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\nlife and to develop, fix and harmonise without destroying the original elements, and whatever new element or idea was needed
\nwas added or introduced as a superstructure or a modifying but not a revolutionary and destructive principle. It was in this way
\nthat the transition from the earlier stages to the fully developed monarchical polity was managed; it proceeded by an incorporation of the existing institutions under the supreme control of the king or the emperor. The character and status of many of
\nthem was modified by the superimposition of the monarchical or imperial system, but, as far as possible, they did not pass out
\nof existence. As a result we do not find in India the element of intellectually idealistic political progress or revolutionary experiment which has been so marked a feature of ancient and of modern Europe. A profound respect for the creations of the
\npast as the natural expression of the Indian mind and life, the sound manifestation of its Dharma or right law of being, was
\nthe strongest element in the mental attitude and this preservative instinct was not disturbed but rather yet more firmly settled and
\nfixed by the great millennium of high intellectual culture. A slow evolution of custom and institution conservative of the principle
\nof settled order, of social and political precedent, of established framework and structure was the one way of progress possible
\nor admissible. On the other hand, Indian polity never arrived at that unwholesome substitution of the mechanical for the natural
\norder of the life of the people which has been the disease of European civilisation now culminating in the monstrous artificial organisation of the bureaucratic and industrial State. The advantages of the idealising intellect were absent, but so also
\nwere the disadvantages of the mechanising rational intelligence. <\/span> <\/p>\n

\nThe Indian mind has always been profoundly intuitive in
\nhabit even when it was the most occupied with the development of the reasoning intelligence, and its political and social thought
\nhas therefore been always an attempt to combine the intuitions of life and the intuitions of the spirit with the light of the reason acting as an intermediary and an ordering and regulating factor. It has tried to base itself strongly on the established and
\npersistent actualities of life and to depend for its idealism not  
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage <\/font>\u2013 402<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\non the intellect but on the illuminations, inspirations, higher experiences of the spirit, and it has used the reason as a critical
\npower testing and assuring the steps and aiding but not replacing the life and the spirit
\n\u2014 always the true and sound constructors.
\nThe spiritual mind of India regarded life as a manifestation of the self: the community was the body of the creator Brahma, the
\npeople was a life body of Brahman in the samasti<\/i>, the collectivity,
\nit was the collective Narayana, as the individual was Brahman in the vyasti<\/i>, the separate Jiva, the individual Narayana; the
\nking was the living representative of the Divine and the other
\norders of the community the natural powers of the collective self,
\nprakrtayah<\/i>. The agreed conventions, institutes, customs,
\nconstitution of the body social and politic in all its parts had therefore not only a binding authority but a certain sacrosanct
\ncharacter. <\/span> <\/p>\n

\nThe right order of human life as of the universe is preserved
\naccording to the ancient Indian idea by each individual being following faithfully his swadharma, the true law and norm of
\nhis nature and the nature of his kind and by the group being, the organic collective life, doing likewise. The family, clan, caste,
\nclass, social, religious, industrial or other community, nation, people are all organic group beings that evolve their own dharma
\nand to follow it is the condition of their preservation, healthy continuity, sound action. There is also the dharma of the position, the function, the particular relation with others, as there is too the dharma imposed by the condition, environment, age,
\nyugadharma<\/i>, the universal religious or ethical dharma, and all these acting on the natural dharma, the action according to
\nthe Swabhava, create the body of the Law. The ancient theory supposed that in an entirely right and sound condition of man,
\nindividual and collective, \u2014 a condition typified by the legendary Golden Age, Satya Yuga, Age of Truth,
\n\u2014 there is no need of
\nany political government or State or artificial construction of society, because all then live freely according to the truth of
\ntheir enlightened self and God-inhabited being and therefore spontaneously according to the inner divine Dharma. The
\nself-determining individual and self-determining community living   <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage <\/font>\u2013 403<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\naccording to the right and free law of his and its being is therefore the ideal. But in the actual condition of humanity, its ignorant
\nand devious nature subject to perversions and violations of the true individual and the true social dharma, there has to be superimposed on the natural life of society a State, a sovereign power, a king or governing body, whose business is not to interfere
\nunduly with the life of the society, which must be allowed to function for the most part according to its natural law and
\ncustom and spontaneous development, but to superintend and assist its right process and see that the Dharma is observed and
\nin vigour and, negatively, to punish and repress and, as far as may be, prevent offences against the Dharma. A more advanced
\nstage of corruption of the Dharma is marked by the necessity of the appearance of the legislator and the formal government of
\nthe whole of life by external or written law and code and rule; but to determine it
\n\u2014 apart from external administrative detail
\n\u2014 was not the function of the political sovereign, who was only its administrator, but of the socio-religious creator, the Rishi,
\nor the Brahminic recorder and interpreter. And the Law itself written or unwritten was always not a thing to be new created
\nor fabricated by a political and legislative authority, but a thing already existent and only to be interpreted and stated as it was
\nor as it grew naturally out of pre-existing law and principle in the communal life and consciousness. The last and worst
\nstate of the society growing out of this increasing artificiality and convention must be a period of anarchy and conflict and
\ndissolution of the dharma, \u2014 Kali Yuga, \u2014 which must precede through a red-grey evening of cataclysm and struggle a recovery
\nand a new self-expression of the spirit in the human being. <\/span> <\/p>\n

\nThe main function of the political sovereign, the king and
\ncouncil and the other ruling members of the body politic, was therefore to serve and assist the maintenance of the sound law
\nof life of the society: the sovereign was the guardian and administrator of the Dharma. The function of society itself included
\nthe right satisfaction of the vital, economic and other needs of the human being and of his hedonistic claim to pleasure
\nand enjoyment, but according to their right law and measure  
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage <\/font>\u2013 404<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\nof satisfaction and subject and subordinated to the ethical and social and religious dharma. All the members and groups of the
\nsocio-political body had their Dharma determined for them by their nature, their position, their relation to the whole body and
\nmust be assured and maintained in the free and right exercise of it, must be left to their own natural and self-determined
\nfunctioning within their own bounds, but at the same time restrained from any transgression, encroachment or deviation
\nfrom their right working and true limits. That was the office of the supreme political authority, the sovereign in his Council
\naided by the public assemblies. It was not the business of the state authority to interfere with or encroach upon the free functioning
\nof the caste, religious community, guild, village, township or the organic custom of the region or province or to abrogate their
\nrights, for these were inherent because necessary to the sound exercise of the social Dharma. All that it was called upon to do
\nwas to coordinate, to exercise a general and supreme control, to defend the life of the community against external attack or
\ninternal disruption, to repress crime and disorder, to assist, promote and regulate in its larger lines the economic and industrial
\nwelfare, to see to the provision of facilities, and to use for these purposes the powers that passed beyond the scope of the others.
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\nThus in effect the Indian polity was the system of a very complex communal freedom and self-determination, each group
\nunit of the community having its own natural existence and administering its own proper life and business, set off from the rest
\nby a natural demarcation of its field and limits, but connected with the whole by well-understood relations, each a copartner
\nwith the others in the powers and duties of the communal existence, executing its own laws and rules, administering within
\nits own proper limits, joining with the others in the discussion and the regulation of matters of a mutual or common interest
\nand represented in some way and to the degree of its importance in the general assemblies of the kingdom or empire. The State,
\nsovereign or supreme political authority was an instrument of coordination and of a general control and efficiency and exercised a supreme but not an absolute authority; for in all its  
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage <\/font>\u2013 405<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\nrights and powers it was limited by the Law and by the will of the people and in all its internal functions only a copartner with
\nthe other members of the socio-political body. <\/span> <\/p>\n

\nThis was the theory and principle and the actual constitution of the Indian polity, a complex of communal freedom and self-determination with a supreme coordinating authority,
\na sovereign person and body, armed with efficient powers, position and prestige, but limited to its proper rights and functions,
\nat once controlling and controlled by the rest, admitting them as its active copartners in all branches, sharing the regulation
\nand administration of the communal existence, and all alike, the sovereign, the people and all its constituent communities,
\nbound to the maintenance and restrained by the yoke of the Dharma. Moreover the economic and political aspects of the
\ncommunal life were only a part of the Dharma and a part not at all separate but inextricably united with all the rest, the religious,
\nthe ethical, the higher cultural aim of the social existence. The ethical law coloured the political and economic and was imposed
\non every action of the king and his ministers, the council and assemblies, the individual, the constituent groups of the society;
\nethical and cultural considerations counted in the use of the vote and the qualifications for minister, official and councillor;
\na high character and training was expected from all who held authority in the affairs of the Aryan people. The religious spirit
\nand the reminders of religion were the head and the background of the whole life of king and people. The life of the society
\nwas regarded not so much as an aim in itself in spite of the necessary specialisation of parts of its system, but in all its parts
\nand the whole as a great framework and training ground for the education of the human mind and soul and its development
\nthrough the natural to the spiritual existence.   <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage <\/font>\u2013 406<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\n
\nXXIII <\/b>
\n<\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n
\nT<\/font>HE SOCIO-POLITICAL<\/b> evolution of Indian civilisation,
\nas far as one can judge from the available records, passed through four historical stages, first the simple Aryan community, then a long period of transition in which the national life was proceeding through a considerable variety of experimental formations in political structure and synthesis, thirdly, the definite formation of the monarchical state coordinating all
\nthe complex elements of the communal life of the people into regional and imperial unities, and last the era of decline in which
\nthere was an internal arrest and stagnation and an imposition of new cultures and systems from western Asia and Europe. The
\ndistinguishing character of the first three periods is a remarkable solidity and stability in all the formations and a sound and vital
\nand powerful evolution of the life of the people rendered slow and leisurely by this fundamental conservative stability of the
\nsystem but all the more sure in its building and living and complete in its structure. And even in the decline this solidity opposes
\na strong resistance to the process of demolition. The structure breaks up at the top under foreign pressure, but preserves for a
\nlong time its basis, keeps, wherever it can maintain itself against invasion, much of its characteristic system and is even towards
\nthe end capable of attempts at revival of its form and its spirit. And now too though the whole political system has disappeared
\nand its last surviving elements have been ground out of existence, the peculiar social mind and temperament which created
\nit remains even in the present social stagnation, weakness, perversion and disintegration and may yet in spite of immediate
\ntendencies and appearances, once it is free to work again at its own will and after its own manner, proceed not along the
\nWestern line of evolution, but to a new creation out of its own spirit which may perhaps lead at the call of the demand now
\n   <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage <\/font>\u2013 407<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\nvaguely beginning to appear in the advanced thought of the race towards the inception of the third stage of communal living and
\na spiritual basis of human society. In any case the long stability of its constructions and the greatness of the life they sheltered
\nis certainly no sign of incapacity, but rather of a remarkable political instinct and capacity in the cultural mind of India.
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\nThe one principle permanent at the base of construction throughout all the building and extension and rebuilding of the
\nIndian polity was the principle of an organically self-determining communal life,
\n\u2014 self-determining not only in the mass and by
\nmeans of the machinery of the vote and a representative body erected on the surface, representative only of the political mind
\nof a part of the nation, which is all that the modern system has been able to manage, but in every pulse of its life and in each
\nseparate member of its existence. A free synthetic communal order was its character, and the condition of liberty it aimed
\nat was not so much an individual as a communal freedom. In the beginning the problem was simple enough as only two
\nkinds of communal unit had to be considered, the village and the clan, tribe or small regional people. The free organic life
\nof the first was founded on the system of the self-governing village community and it was done with such sufficiency and
\nsolidity that it lasted down almost to our own days resisting all the wear and tear of time and the inroad of other systems and
\nwas only recently steam-rollered out of existence by the ruthless and lifeless machinery of the British bureaucratic system. The
\nwhole people living in its villages mostly on agriculture formed in the total a single religious, social, military and political body
\ngoverning itself in its assembly, samiti<\/i>, under the leadership of the king, as yet without any clear separation of functions or class
\ndivision of labour. <\/span> <\/p>\n

\nIt was the inadequacy of this system for all but the simplest
\nform of agricultural and pastoral life and all but the small people living within a very limited area that compelled the problem of
\nthe evolution of a more complex communal system and a modified and more intricate application of the fundamental Indian
\nprinciple. The agricultural and pastoral life common at first to  
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage <\/font>\u2013 408<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\nall the members of the Aryan community, krstayah<\/i>, remained always the large basis, but it developed an increasingly rich
\nsuperstructure of commerce and industry and numerous arts and crafts and a smaller superstructure of specialised military and
\npolitical and religious and learned occupations and functions. The village community remained throughout the stable unit, the
\nfirm grain or indestructible atom of the social body, but there grew up a group life of tens and hundreds of villages, each under
\nits head and needing its administrative organisation, and these, as the clan grew into a large people by conquest or coalition
\nwith others, became constituents of a kingdom or a confederated republican nation, and these again the circles,
\nmandala<\/i>, of
\nlarger kingdoms and finally of one or more great empires. The
\ntest of the Indian genius for socio-political construction lay in the successful application of its principle of a communal
\nself-determined freedom and order to suit this growing development and new order of circumstances.
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\nThe Indian mind evolved, to meet this necessity, the stable socio-religious system of the four orders. Outwardly this might
\nseem to be only a more rigid form of the familiar social system developed naturally in most human peoples at one time
\nor another, a priesthood, a military and political aristocracy, a class of artisans and free agriculturalists and traders and a
\nproletariate of serfs or labourers. The resemblance however is only in the externals and the spirit of the system of Chaturvarna
\nwas different in India. In the later Vedic and the epic times the fourfold order was at once and inextricably the religious, social,
\npolitical and economic framework of the society and within that framework each order had its natural portion and in none
\nof the fundamental activities was the share or position of any of them exclusive. This characteristic is vital to an understanding
\nof the ancient system, but has been obscured by false notions formed from a misunderstanding or an exaggeration of later
\nphenomena and of conditions mostly belonging to the decline. The Brahmins, for example, had not a monopoly either of sacred
\nlearning or of the highest spiritual knowledge and opportunities. At first we see a kind of competition between the Brahmins and
\n   <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage <\/font>\u2013 409<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\nthe Kshatriyas for the spiritual lead and the latter for a long time held their own against the pretensions of the learned and
\nsacerdotal order. The Brahmins, however, as legists, teachers, priests, men who could give their whole time and energy to philosophy, scholarship, the study of the sacred writings, prevailed in the end and secured a settled and imposing predominance.
\nThe priestly and learned class became the religious authorities, the custodians of the sacred books and the tradition, the interpreters of the law and Shastra, the recognised teachers in all the departments of knowledge, the ordinary religious preceptors or
\ngurus of the other classes and supplied the bulk, though never the totality of the philosophers, thinkers, literary men, scholars.
\nThe study of the Vedas and Upanishads passed mainly into their hands, although always open to the three higher orders; it was
\ndenied in theory to the Shudras. As a matter of fact, however, a series of religious movements kept up even in the later days
\nthe essential element of the old freedom, brought the highest spiritual knowledge and opportunity to all doors and, as in the
\nbeginning we find the Vedic and Vedantic Rishis born from all classes, we find too up to the end the yogins, saints, spiritual
\nthinkers, innovators and restorers, religious poets and singers, the fountain-heads of a living spirituality and knowledge as distinguished from traditional authority and lore, derived from all the strata of the community down to the lowest Shudras and
\neven the despised and oppressed outcastes. <\/span> <\/p>\n

\nThe four orders grew into a fixed social hierarchy, but, leaving aside the status of the outcastes, each had attached to it a spiritual life and utility, a certain social dignity, an education,
\na principle of social and ethical honour and a place and duty and right in the communal body. The system served again as an
\nautomatic means of securing a fixed division of labour and a settled economic status, the hereditary principle at first prevailing,
\nalthough here even the theory was more rigid than the practice, but none was denied the right or opportunity of amassing wealth
\nand making some figure in society, administration and politics by means of influence or status in his own order. For, finally, the
\nsocial hierarchy was not at the same time a political hierarchy:  
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage <\/font>\u2013 410<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\nall the four orders had their part in the common political rights of the citizen and in the assemblies and administrative bodies
\ntheir place and their share of influence. It may be noted too that in law and theory at least women in ancient India, contrary to
\nthe sentiment of other ancient peoples, were not denied civic rights, although in practice this equality was rendered nugatory
\nfor all but a few by their social subordination to the male and their domestic preoccupation; instances have yet survived in the
\nexisting records of women figuring, not only as queens and administrators and even in the battlefield, a common enough
\nincident in Indian history, but as elected representatives on civic bodies.
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\nThe whole Indian system was founded upon a close participation of all the orders in the common life, each predominating
\nin its own field, the Brahmin in religion, learning and letters, the Kshatriya in war, king-craft and interstate political action, the
\nVaishya in wealth-getting and productive economical function, but none, not even the Shudra, excluded from his share in the
\ncivic life and an effective place and voice in politics, administration, justice. As a consequence the old Indian polity at no time
\ndeveloped, or at least it did not maintain for long, those exclusive forms of class rule that have so long and powerfully marked the
\npolitical history of other countries. A priestly theocracy, like that of Tibet, or the rule of a landed and military aristocracy
\nthat prevailed for centuries in France and England and other European countries or a mercantile oligarchy, as in Carthage
\nand Venice, were forms of government foreign to the Indian spirit. A certain political predominance of the great Kshatriya
\nfamilies at a time of general war and strife and mobile expansion, when the clans and tribes were developing into nations and kingdoms and were still striving with each other for hegemony and overlordship, seems to be indicated in the traditions preserved
\nin the Mahabharata and recurred in a cruder form in the return to the clan nation in mediaeval Rajputana: but in ancient India
\nthis was a passing phase and the predominance did not exclude the political and civic influence of men of the other orders or
\ninterfere with or exercise any oppressive control over the free   <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage <\/font>\u2013 411<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\nlife of the various communal units. The democratic republics of the intermediate times were in all probability polities which
\nendeavoured to preserve in its fullness the old principle of the active participation of the whole body of the people in the assemblies and not democracies of the Greek type; the oligarchical republics were clan governments or were ruled by more limited
\nsenates drawn from the dignified elements of the society and this afterwards developed into councils or assemblies representing all
\nthe four orders as in the later royal councils and urban bodies. In any case the system finally evolved was a mixed polity in which
\nnone of the orders had an undue predominance. Accordingly we do not find in India either that struggle between the patrician and plebeian elements of the community, the oligarchic and the democratic idea, ending in the establishment of an absolute
\nmonarchical rule, which characterises the troubled history of Greece and Rome or that cycle of successive forms evolving by a
\nstrife of classes, \u2014 first a ruling aristocracy, then replacing it by encroachment or revolution the dominance of the moneyed and
\nprofessional classes, the regime of the bourgeois industrialising the society and governing and exploiting it in the name of the
\ncommons or masses and, finally, the present turn towards a rule of the proletariate of Labour,
\n\u2014 which we see in later Europe.
\nThe Indian mind and temperament less exclusively intellectual and vital, more intuitively synthetic and flexible than that of the
\noccidental peoples arrived, not certainly at any ideal system of society and politics, but at least at a wise and stable synthesis
\n\u2014 not a dangerously unstable equilibrium, not a compromise or balance \u2014 of all the natural powers and orders, an organic and
\nvital coordination respectful of the free functioning of all the organs of the communal body and therefore ensured, although
\nnot against the decadence that overtakes all human systems, at any rate against any organic disturbance or disorder.
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\nThe summit of the political structure was occupied by three governing bodies, the King in his ministerial council,
\nthe metropolitan assembly and the general assembly of the kingdom. The members of the Council and the ministers were
\ndrawn from all orders. The Council included a fixed number  
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage <\/font>\u2013 412<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\nof Brahmin, Kshatriya, Vaishya and Shudra representatives. The Vaishyas had indeed numerically a great preponderance,
\nbut this was a just proportion as it corresponded to their numerical preponderance in the body of the people: for in the
\nearly Aryan society the Vaishya order comprised not only the merchants and small traders but the craftsmen and artisans
\nand the agriculturists and formed therefore the bulk of the \u00b4 .<\/i>
\ncommons, viśah<\/i>, and the Brahmins, Kshatriyas, Shudras, however considerable the position and influence of the two higher
\norders, were later social growths and were comparatively very inferior in number. It was only after the confusion created by
\nthe Buddhist upheaval and the Brahminic reconstitution of the society in the age of cultural decadence that the mass of the
\ncultivators and artisans and small traders sank in the greater part of India to the condition of Shudras with a small Brahmin
\nmass at the top and in between a slight sprinkling of Kshatriyas and of Vaishyas. The Council, representing thus the whole
\ncommunity, was the supreme executive and administrative body and its assent and participation necessary to all the action
\nand decrees of the sovereign in all more important matters of government, finance, policy, throughout the whole range of
\nthe communal interests. It was the King, the ministers and the council who aided by a system of boards of administration
\nsuperintended and controlled all the various departments of the State action. The power of the king undoubtedly tended to grow
\nwith time and he was often tempted to act according to his own independent will and initiative; but still, as long as the system
\nwas in its vigour, he could not with impunity defy or ignore the opinion and will of the ministers and council. Even, it seems,
\nso powerful and strong-willed a sovereign as the great emperor Asoka was eventually defeated in his conflict with his council
\nand was forced practically to abdicate his power. The ministers in council could and did often proceed to the deposition of a
\nrecalcitrant or an incompetent monarch and replace him by another of his family or by a new dynasty and it was in this
\nway that there came about several of the historic changes, as for example the dynastic revolution from the Mauryas to the
\n   <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage <\/font>\u2013 413<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\nSungas and again the initiation of the Kanwa line of emperors. As a matter of constitutional theory and ordinary practice all
\nthe action of the king was in reality that of the king in his council with the aid of his ministers and all his personal action
\nwas only valid as depending on their assent and in so far as it was a just and faithful discharge of the functions assigned
\nto him by the Dharma. And as the Council was, as it were, a quintessential power body or action centre taking up into itself
\nin a manageable compass, concentrating and representing in its constitution the four orders, the main elements of the social
\norganism, the king too could only be the active head of this power and not, as in an autocratic regime, himself the State or
\nthe owner of the country and the irresponsible personal ruler of a nation of obedient subjects. The obedience owed by the
\npeople was due to the Law, the Dharma, and to the edicts of the King in council only as an administrative means for the service
\nand maintenance of the Dharma. <\/span> <\/p>\n

\nAt the same time a small body like the Council subject to
\nthe immediate and constant influence of the sovereign and his ministers might, if it had been the sole governing body, have
\ndegenerated into an instrument of autocratic rule. But there were two other powerful bodies in the State which represented
\non a larger scale the social organism, were a nearer and closer expression of its mind, life and will independent of the immediate regal influence and exercising large and constant powers of administration and administrative legislation and capable at
\nall times of acting as a check on the royal power, since in case of their displeasure they could either get rid of an unpopular
\nor oppressive king or render his administration impossible until he made submission to the will of the people. These were the
\ngreat metropolitan and general assemblies sitting separately for the exercise each of its separate powers and together for matters
\nconcerning the whole people.1<\/font><\/sup> The Paura or metropolitan civic
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n
\n1
\nThe facts about these bodies \u2014 I have selected only those that are significant for my purpose
\n\u2014 are taken from the luminous and scrupulously documented contribution of
\nMr. Jayaswal to the subject.   <\/font>
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage <\/font>\u2013 414<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\nassembly sat constantly in the capital town of the kingdom or empire \u2014 and under the imperial system there seem also to have
\nbeen similar lesser bodies in the chief towns of the provinces, survivals of the assemblies that governed them when they were
\nthemselves capitals of independent kingdoms \u2014 and was constituted of representatives of the city guilds and the various
\ncaste bodies belonging to all the orders of the society or at least to the three lower orders. The guilds and caste bodies were
\nthemselves organic self-governing constituents of the community both in the country and the city and the supreme assembly of
\nthe citizens was not an artificial but an organic representation of the collective totality of the whole organism as it existed
\nwithin the limits of the metropolis. It governed all the life of the city, acting directly or through subordinate lesser assemblies
\nand administrative boards or committees of five, ten or more members, and, both by regulations and decrees which the guilds
\nwere bound to obey and by direct administration, controlled and supervised the commercial, industrial, financial and municipal
\naffairs of the civic community. But in addition it was a power that had to be consulted and could take action in the wider
\naffairs of the kingdom, sometimes separately and sometimes in cooperation with the general assembly, and its constant presence
\nand functioning at the capital made it a force that had always to be reckoned with by the king and his ministers and their council.
\nIn a case of conflict with the royal ministers or governors even the distant civic parliaments in the provinces could make their
\ndispleasure felt if offended in matters of their position or privileges or discontented with the king’s administrators and could
\ncompel the withdrawal of the offending officer. <\/span> <\/p>\n

\nThe general assembly was similarly an organic representation of the mind and will of the whole country outside the metropolis; for it was composed of the deputies, elective heads
\nor chief men of the townships and villages. A certain plutocratic element seems to have entered into its composition, as it was
\nprincipally recruited from the wealthier men of the represented communities, and it was therefore something of the nature of
\nan assembly of the commons not of an entirely democratic type,   <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage <\/font>\u2013 415<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\n\u2014 although unlike all but the most recent modern parliaments it included Shudras as well as Kshatriyas
\nand Vaishyas, \u2014 but
\nstill a sufficiently faithful expression of the life and mind of the people. It was not however a supreme parliament: for it had
\nordinarily no fundamental legislative powers, any more than had the king and council or the metropolitan assembly, but
\nonly of decree and regulation. Its business was to serve as a direct instrument of the will of the people in the coordination
\nof the various activities of the life of the nation, to see to the right direction of these and to the securing of the general order
\nand welfare of the commerce, industry, agriculture, social and political life of the nation, to pass decrees and regulations to that
\npurpose and secure privileges and facilities from the king and his council, to give or withhold the assent of the people to the
\nactions of the sovereign and, if need be, to oppose him actively and prevent misgovernment or end it by the means open to the
\npeople’s representatives. The joint session of the metropolitan and general assemblies was consulted in matters of succession,
\ncould depose the sovereign, alter the succession at his death, transfer the throne outside the reigning family, act sometimes as
\na supreme court of law in cases having a political tincture, cases of treason or of miscarriage of justice. The royal resolutions on
\nany matter of State policy were promulgated to these assemblies and their assent had to be taken in all matters involving special
\ntaxation, war, sacrifice, large schemes of irrigation etc., and all questions of vital interest to the country. The two bodies seem
\nto have sat constantly, for matters came up daily from them to the sovereign: their acts were registered by the king and had
\nautomatically the effect of law. It is clear indeed from a total review of their rights and activities that they were partners in
\nthe sovereignty and its powers were inherent in them and even those could be exercised by them on extraordinary occasions
\nwhich were not normally within their purview. It is significant that Asoka in his attempt to alter the Dharma of the community,
\nproceeded not merely by his royal decree but by discussion with the Assembly. The ancient description seems therefore to have
\nbeen thoroughly justified which characterised the two bodies as <\/span><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage <\/font>\u2013 416<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\nexecutors of the kingdom’s activities and at need the instruments
\nof opposition to the king’s government. <\/p>\n

It is not clear when these great institutions went out of
\nexistence, whether before the Mahomedan invasion or as a result of the foreign conquest. Any collapse of the system at the
\ntop leaving a gulf between the royal government, which would grow more autocratic by its isolation and in sole control of the
\nlarger national affairs, and the other constituents of the sociopolitical body each carrying on its own internal affairs, as was
\nto the end the case with the village communities, but not in any living relation with the
\n\t\t\thigher State matters, would obviously
\nbe, in an organisation of complex communal freedom where coordination of the life was imperatively needed, a great cause of
\nweakness. In any case the invasion from Central Asia, bringing in a tradition of personal and autocratic rule unfamiliar with these
\nrestraints would immediately destroy such bodies, or their remnants or survivals wherever they still existed, and this happened
\nthroughout the whole of Northern India. The Indian political system was still maintained for many centuries in the south, but
\nthe public assemblies which went on existing there do not seem to have been of the same constitution as the ancient political bodies, but were rather some of the other communal organisations and assemblies of which these were a coordination and supreme
\ninstrument of control. These inferior assemblies included bodies originally of a political character, once the supreme governing
\ninstitutions of the clan nation, kula<\/i>, and the republic, gana<\/i>.
\nUnder the new dispensation they remained in existence, but lost their supreme powers and could only administer with a subordinate and restricted authority the affairs of their constituent communities. The
\nkula <\/i>or clan family persisted, even after it
\nhad lost its political character, as a socio-religious institution, especially among the Kshatriyas, and preserved the tradition of
\nits social and religious law, kula-dharma<\/i>, and in some cases its
\ncommunal assembly, kula-sangha<\/i>. The public assemblies that we find even in quite recent times filling the role of the old general assembly in Southern India, more than one coexisting and acting separately or in unison, appear to have been variations
\n   <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage <\/font>\u2013 417<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\non this type of body. In Rajputana also the clan family, kula<\/i>, recovered its political character and action, but in another form
\nand without the ancient institutions and finer cultural temper, although they preserved in a high degree the Kshatriya dharma
\nof courage, chivalry, magnanimity and honour. <\/span> <\/p>\n

\nA stronger permanent element in the Indian communal system, one that grew up in the frame of the four orders \u2014 in the end even replacing it
\n\u2014 and acquired an extraordinary vitality, persistence and predominant importance was the historic and still  <\/i>
\ntenacious though decadent institution of caste, jāti<\/i>. Originally this rose from subdivisions of the four orders that grew up in
\neach order under the stress of various forces. The subdivision of the Brahmin castes was mainly due to religious, socio-religious
\nand ceremonial causes, but there were also regional and local divisions: the Kshatriyas remained for the most part one united
\norder, though divided into kulas<\/i>. On the other hand the Vaishya and Shudra orders split up into innumerable castes under the
\nnecessity of a subdivision of economic functions on the basis of the hereditary principle. Apart from the increasingly rigid
\napplication of the hereditary principle, this settled subdivision of function could well enough have been secured, as in other
\ncountries, by a guild system and in the towns we do find a vigorous and efficient guild system in existence. But the guild system
\nafterwards fell into desuetude and the more general institution of caste became the one basis of economic function everywhere.
\nThe caste in town and village was a separate communal unit, at once religious, social and economic, and decided its religious,
\nsocial and other questions, carried on its caste affairs and exercised jurisdiction over its members in a perfect freedom from
\nall outside interference: only on fundamental questions of the Dharma the Brahmins were referred to for an authoritative interpretation or decision as custodians of the Shastra. As with the kula<\/i>, each caste had its caste law and rule of living and
\nconduct, jāti-dharma<\/i>, and its caste communal assembly, jāti<\/i>
\nsangha<\/i>. As the Indian polity in all its institutions was founded on a communal and not on an individualistic basis, the caste also
\ncounted in the political and administrative functioning of the  
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage <\/font>\u2013 418<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\nkingdom. The guilds equally were self-functioning mercantile and industrial communal units, assembled for the discussion
\nand administration of their affairs and had besides their united assemblies which seem at one time to have been the governing
\nurban bodies. These guild governments, if they may so be called, \u2014 for they were more than municipalities,
\n\u2014 disappeared afterwards into the more general urban body which represented an organic unity of both the guilds and the caste assemblies of all
\nthe orders. The castes as such were not directly represented in the general assembly of the kingdom, but they had their place in
\nthe administration of local affairs. <\/span> <\/p>\n

\nThe village community and the township were the most tangibly stable basis of the whole system; but these, it must be noted, were not solely territorial units or a convenient mechanism for
\nelectoral, administrative or other useful social and political purposes, but always true communal unities with an organic life
\nof their own that functioned in its own power and not merely as a subordinate part of the machinery of the State. The village
\ncommunity has been described as a little village republic, and the description is hardly an exaggeration: for each village was
\nwithin its own limits autonomous and self-sufficient, governed by its own elected Panchayats and elected or hereditary officers,
\nsatisfying its own needs, providing for its own education, police, tribunals, all its economic necessities and functions, managing
\nitself its own life as an independent and self-governing unit. The villages carried on also their affairs with each other by
\ncombinations of various kinds and there were too groups of villages under elected or hereditary heads and forming therefore,
\nthough in a less closely organised fashion, a natural body. But the townships in India were also in a hardly less striking way
\nautonomous and self-governing bodies, ruled by their own assembly and committees with an elective system and the use of the
\nvote, managing their own affairs in their own right and sending like the villages their representative men to the general assembly
\nof the kingdom. The administration of these urban governments included all works contributing to the material or other welfare of the citizens, police, judicial cases, public works and the  
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage <\/font>\u2013 419<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\ncharge of sacred and public places, registration, the collection of municipal taxes and all matters relating to trade, industry and
\ncommerce. If the village community can be described as a little village republic, the constitution of the township can equally
\nbe described as a larger urban republic. It is significant that the Naigama and Paura assemblies,
\n\u2014 the guild governments and
\nthe metropolitan bodies, \u2014 had the privilege of striking coins of their own, a power otherwise exercised only by the monarchical
\nheads of States and the republics. <\/span> <\/p>\n

\nAnother kind of community must be noted, those which
\nhad no political existence, but were yet each in its own kind a self-governing body; for they illustrate the strong tendency of
\nIndian life to throw itself in all its manifestations into a closely communal form of existence. One example is the joint family,
\nprevalent everywhere in India and only now breaking down under the pressure of modern conditions, of which the two
\nfundamental principles were first a communal holding of the property by the agnates and their families and, as far as possible,
\nan undivided communal life under the management of the head of the family and, secondly, the claim of each male to an equal
\nportion in the share of his father, a portion due to him in case of separation and division of the estate. This communal unity
\nwith the persistent separate right of the individual is an example of the synthetic turn of the Indian mind and life, its recognition
\nof fundamental tendencies and its attempt to harmonise them even if they seemed in their norm of practice to be contradictory
\nto each other. It is the same synthetic turn as that which in all parts of the Indian socio-political system tended to fuse together
\nin different ways the theocratic, the monarchic and aristocratic, the plutocratic and the democratic tendencies in a whole which
\nbore the characteristics of none of them nor was yet an accommodation of them or amalgamation whether by a system of
\nchecks and balances or by an intellectually constructed synthesis, but rather a natural outward form of the inborn tendencies and
\ncharacter of the complex social mind and temperament. <\/span> <\/p>\n

\nAt the other end, forming the ascetic and purely spiritual
\nextreme of the Indian life-mind, we find the religious community  
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage <\/font>\u2013 420<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\nand, again, this too takes a communal shape. The original Vedic society had no place for any Church or religious community
\nor ecclesiastical order, for in its system the body of the people formed a single socio-religious whole with no separation
\ninto religious and secular, layman and cleric, and in spite of later developments the Hindu religion has held, in the whole
\nor at least as the basis, to this principle. On the other hand an increasing ascetic tendency that came in time to distinguish the
\nreligious from the mundane life and tended to create the separate religious community, was confirmed by the rise of the creeds
\nand disciplines of the Buddhists and the Jains. The Buddhist monastic order was the first development of the complete figure
\nof the organised religious community. Here we find that Buddha simply applied the known principles of the Indian society and
\npolity to the ascetic life. The order he created was intended to ˙<\/i>
\nbe a dharma-sangha<\/i>, and each monastery a religious commune living the life of a united communal body which existed as the
\nexpression and was based in all the rules, features, structure of its life on the maintenance of the Dharma as it was understood by the Buddhists. This was, as we can at once see, precisely the principle and theory of the whole Hindu society,
\nbut given here the higher intensity possible to the spiritual life and a purely religious body. It managed its affairs too like the
\nIndian social and political communal unities. An assembly of the order discussed debatable questions of the Dharma and
\nits application and proceeded by vote as in the meeting-halls of the republics, but it was subject still to a limiting control
\nintended to avoid the possible evils of a too purely democratic method. The monastic system once thus firmly established was
\ntaken over from Buddhism by the orthodox religion, but without its elaborate organisation. These religious communities tended,
\nwherever they could prevail against the older Brahminic system, as in the order created by
\nShankaracharya, to become a sort of
\necclesiastical head to the lay body of the community, but they arrogated to themselves no political position and the struggle
\nbetween Church and State is absent from the political history of India.
\n   <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage <\/font>\u2013 421<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\nIt is clear therefore that the whole life of ancient India retained even in the time of the great kingdoms and empires
\nits first principle and essential working and its social polity remained fundamentally a complex system of self-determined and
\nself-governing communal bodies. The evolution of an organised State authority supervening on this system was necessitated in
\nIndia as elsewhere partly by the demand of the practical reason for a more stringent and scientifically efficient coordination
\nthan was possible except in small areas to the looser natural coordination of life, and more imperatively by the need of a
\nsystematised military aggression and defence and international action concentrated in the hands of a single central authority. An
\nextension of the free republican State might have sufficed to meet the former demand, for it had the potentiality and the necessary
\ninstitutions, but the method of the monarchical State with its more constricted and easily tangible centrality presented a more
\nready and manageable device and a more facile and apparently efficient machinery. And for the external task, involving almost
\nfrom the commencement the supremely difficult age-long problem of the political unification of India, then a continent rather
\nthan a country, the republican system, more suited to strength in defence than for aggression, proved in spite of its efficient
\nmilitary organisation to be inadequate. It was, therefore, in India as elsewhere, the strong form of the monarchical State that
\nprevailed finally and swallowed up the others. At the same time the fidelity of the Indian mind to its fundamental intuitions and
\nideals preserved the basis of communal self-government natural to the temperament of the people, prevented the monarchical
\nState from developing into an autocracy or exceeding its proper functions and stood successfully in the way of its mechanising
\nthe life of the society. It is only in the long decline that we find the free institutions that stood between the royal government and
\nthe self-determining communal life of the people either tending to disappear or else to lose much of their ancient power and
\nvigour and the evils of personal government, of a bureaucracy of scribes and officials and of a too preponderant centralised
\nauthority commencing to manifest in some sensible measure.  
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage <\/font>\u2013 422<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\nAs long as the ancient traditions of the Indian polity remained and in proportion as they continued to be vital and effective,
\nthese evils remained either sporadic and occasional or could not assume any serious proportions. It was the combination of
\nforeign invasion and conquest with the slow decline and final decadence of the ancient Indian culture that brought about the
\ncollapse of considerable parts of the old structure and the degradation and disintegration, with no sufficient means for revival
\nor new creation, of the socio-political life of the people. <\/span> <\/p>\n

\nAt the height of its evolution and in the great days of Indian
\ncivilisation we find an admirable political system efficient in the highest degree and very perfectly combining communal
\nself-government with stability and order. The State carried on its work administrative, judicial, financial and protective without
\ndestroying or encroaching on the rights and free activities of the people and its constituent bodies in the same departments. The
\nroyal courts in capital and country were the supreme judicial authority coordinating the administration of justice throughout
\nthe kingdom, but they did not unduly interfere with the judicial powers entrusted to their own courts by the village and urban
\ncommunes and, even, the regal system associated with itself the guild, caste and family courts, working as an ample means of
\narbitration and only insisted on its own exclusive control of the more serious criminal offences. A similar respect was shown
\nto the administrative and financial powers of the village and urban communes. The king’s governors and officials in town
\nand country existed side by side with the civic governors and officials and the communal heads and officers appointed by the
\npeople and its assemblies. The State did not interfere with the religious liberty or the established economic and social life of the
\nnation; it confined itself to the maintenance of social order and the provision of a needed supervision, support, coordination and
\nfacilities for the rich and powerful functioning of all the national activities. It understood too always and magnificently fulfilled its
\nopportunities as a source of splendid and munificent stimulation to the architecture, art, culture, scholarship, literature already
\ncreated by the communal mind of India. In the person of the   <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage <\/font>\u2013 423<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\nmonarch it was the dignified and powerful head and in the system of his administration the supreme instrument
\n\u2014 neither
\nan arbitrary autocracy or bureaucracy, nor a machine oppressing or replacing life
\n\u2014 of a great and stable civilisation and a free
\nand living people.  
\n<\/span><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage <\/font>\u2013 424<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\n
\nXXIV <\/b>
\n<\/span><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nA<\/font> RIGHT<\/b> knowledge of the facts and a right understanding
\nof the character and principle of the Indian socio-political system disposes at once of the contention of occidental
\ncritics that the Indian mind, even if remarkable in metaphysics, religion, art and literature was inapt for the organisation of
\nlife, inferior in the works of the practical intelligence and, especially, that it was sterile in political experiment and its record
\nempty of sound political construction, thinking and action. On the contrary, Indian civilisation evolved an admirable political
\nsystem, built solidly and with an enduring soundness, combined with a remarkable skill the monarchical, democratic and other
\nprinciples and tendencies to which the mind of man has leaned in its efforts of civic construction and escaped at the same time the
\nexcess of the mechanising turn which is the defect of the modern European State. I shall consider afterwards the objections that
\ncan be made to it from the evolutionary standpoint of the West and its idea of progress.
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\nBut there is another side of politics on which it may be said that the Indian political mind has registered nothing but
\nfailure. The organisation it developed may have been admirable for stability and effective administration and the securing of
\ncommunal order and liberties and the well-being of the people under ancient conditions, but even if its many peoples were each
\nof them separately self-governed, well governed and prosperous and the country at large assured in the steady functioning of a
\nhighly developed civilisation and culture, yet that organisation failed to serve for the national and political unification of India
\nand failed in the end to secure it against foreign invasion, the disruption of its institutions and an agelong servitude. The political system of a society has to be judged, no doubt first and foremost by the stability, prosperity, internal freedom and order
\n   <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage <\/font>\u2013 425<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\nit ensures to the people, but also it must be judged by the security it erects against other States, its unity and power of defence and
\naggression against external rivals and enemies. It is not perhaps altogether to the credit of humanity that it should be so and a
\nnation or people that is inferior in this kind of political strength, as were the ancient Greeks and mediaeval Italians, may be spiritually and culturally far superior to its conquerors and may well have contributed more to a true human progress than successful
\nmilitary States, aggressive communities, predatory empires. But the life of man is still predominatingly vital and moved therefore
\nby the tendencies of expansion, possession, aggression, mutual struggle for absorption and dominant survival which are the first
\nlaw of life, and a collective mind and consciousness that gives a constant proof of incapacity for aggression and defence and
\ndoes not organise the centralised and efficient unity necessary to its own safety, is clearly one that in the political field falls
\nfar short of the first order. India has never been nationally and politically one. India was for close on a thousand years swept
\nby barbaric invasions and for almost another thousand years in servitude to successive foreign masters. It is clear therefore
\nthat judgment of political incapacity must be passed against the Indian people.
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\nHere again the first necessity is to get rid of exaggerations, to form a clear idea of the actual facts and their significance and
\nunderstand the tendencies and principles involved in the problem that admittedly throughout the long history of India escaped a
\nright solution. And first if the greatness of a people and a civilisation is to be reckoned by its military aggressiveness, its scale of
\nforeign conquest, its success in warfare against other nations and the triumph of its organised acquisitive and predatory instincts,
\nits irresistible push towards annexation and exploitation, it must be confessed that India ranks perhaps the lowest in the list of the
\nworld’s great peoples. At no time does India seem to have been moved towards an aggressive military and political expansion
\nbeyond her own borders; no epic of world dominion, no great tale of far-borne invasion or expanding colonial empire has ever
\nbeen written in the tale of Indian achievement. The sole great  
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage <\/font>\u2013 426<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\nendeavour of expansion, of conquest, of invasion she attempted was the expansion of her culture, the invasion and conquest of
\nthe Eastern world by the Buddhistic idea and the penetration of her spirituality, art and thought-forces. And this was an invasion
\nof peace and not of war, for to spread a spiritual civilisation by force and physical conquest, the vaunt or the excuse of modern
\nimperialism, would have been uncongenial to the ancient cast of her mind and temperament and the idea underlying her Dharma.
\nA series of colonising expeditions carried indeed Indian blood and Indian culture to the islands of the archipelago, but the ships
\nthat set out from both the eastern and western coast were not fleets of invaders missioned to annex those outlying countries
\nto an Indian empire but of exiles or adventurers carrying with them to yet uncultured peoples Indian religion, architecture, art,
\npoetry, thought, life, manners. The idea of empire and even of world-empire was not absent from the Indian mind, but its world
\nwas the Indian world and the object the founding of the imperial unity of its peoples.
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\nThis idea, the sense of this necessity, a constant urge towards its realisation is evident throughout the whole course of Indian
\nhistory from earlier Vedic times through the heroic period represented by the traditions of the Ramayana and Mahabharata
\nand the effort of the imperial Mauryas and Guptas up to the Mogul unification and the last ambition of the Peshwas, until
\nthere came the final failure and the levelling of all the conflicting forces under a foreign yoke, a uniform subjection in place of
\nthe free unity of a free people. The question then is whether the tardiness, the difficulty, the fluctuating movements of the process
\nand the collapse of the long effort were due to a fundamental incapacity in the civilisation or in the political consciousness and
\nability of the people or to other forces. A great deal has been said and written about the inability of Indians to unite, the want
\nof a common patriotism \u2014 now only being created, it is said, by the influence of Western culture
\n\u2014 and the divisions imposed
\nby religion and caste. Admitting even in their full degree the force of these strictures,
\n\u2014 all of them are not altogether true or
\nrightly stated or vitally applicable to the matter, \u2014 they are only  
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage <\/font>\u2013 427<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\nsymptoms and we have still to seek for the deeper causes.
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\nThe reply made for the defence is usually that India is practically a continent almost as large as Europe containing a great number of peoples and the difficulties of the problem have been
\nas great or at least almost as considerable. And if then it is no proof of the insufficiency of Western civilisation or of the political incapacity of the European peoples that the idea of European unity should still remain an ineffective phantasm on the ideal
\nplane and to this day impossible to realise in practice, it is not just to apply a different system of values to the much more clear
\nideal of unity or at least of unification, the persistent attempt at its realisation and the frequent near approach to success that
\nmarked the history of the Indian peoples. There is some force in the contention, but it is not in the form entirely apposite,
\nfor the analogy is far from perfect and the conditions were not quite of the same order. The peoples of Europe are nations very
\nsharply divided from each other in their collective personality, and their spiritual unity in the Christian religion or even their
\ncultural unity in a common European civilisation, never so real and complete as the ancient spiritual and cultural unity of India,
\nwas also not the very centre of their life, not its basis or firm ground of existence, not its supporting earth but only its general
\nair or circumambient atmosphere. Their base of existence lay in the political and economic life which was strongly separate
\nin each country, and it was the very strength of the political consciousness in the Western mind that kept Europe a mass of
\ndivided and constantly warring nations. It is only the increasing community of political movements and the now total economic
\ninterdependence of the whole of Europe that has at last created not any unity, but a nascent and still ineffective League of Nations struggling vainly to apply the mentality born of an agelong separatism to the common interests of the European peoples. But
\nin India at a very early time the spiritual and cultural unity was made complete and became the very stuff of the life of all this
\ngreat surge of humanity between the Himalayas and the two seas. The peoples of ancient India were never so much distinct
\nnations sharply divided from each other by a separate political  
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage <\/font>\u2013 428<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\nand economic life as sub-peoples of a great spiritual and cultural nation itself firmly separated, physically, from other countries by
\nthe seas and the mountains and from other nations by its strong sense of difference, its peculiar common religion and culture.
\nThe creation of a political unity, however vast the area and however many the practical difficulties, ought therefore to have
\nbeen effected more easily than could possibly be the unity of Europe. The cause of the failure must be sought deeper down
\nand we shall find that it lay in a dissidence between the manner in which the problem was or ought to have been envisaged
\nand the actual turn given to the endeavour and in the latter a contradiction of the peculiar mentality of the people.
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\nThe whole basis of the Indian mind is its spiritual and inward turn, its propensity to seek the things of the spirit and
\nthe inner being first and foremost and to look at all else as secondary, dependent, to be handled and determined in the light
\nof the higher knowledge and as an expression, a preliminary, field or aid or at least a pendent to the deeper spiritual aim,
\n\u2014 a
\ntendency therefore to create whatever it had to create first on the inner plane and afterwards in its other aspects. This mentality
\nand this consequent tendency to create from within outwards being given, it was inevitable that the unity India first created for
\nherself should be the spiritual and cultural oneness. It could not be, to begin with, a political unification effected by an external
\nrule centralised, imposed or constructed, as was done in Rome or ancient Persia, by a conquering kingdom or the genius of a
\nmilitary and organising people. It cannot, I think, justly be said that this was a mistake or a proof of the unpractical turn of
\nthe Indian mind and that the single political body should have been created first and afterwards the spiritual unity could have
\nsecurely grown up in the vast body of an Indian national empire. The problem that presented itself at the beginning was that of
\na huge area containing more than a hundred kingdoms, clans, peoples, tribes, races, in this respect another Greece, but a Greece
\non an enormous scale, almost as large as modern Europe. As in Greece a cultural Hellenic unity was necessary to create a fundamental feeling of oneness, here too and much more imperatively  
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage <\/font>\u2013 429<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\na conscious spiritual and cultural unity of all these peoples was the first, the indispensable condition without which no enduring
\nunity could be possible. The instinct of the Indian mind and of its great Rishis and founders of its culture was sound in this matter.
\nAnd even if we suppose that an outward imperial unity like that of the Roman world could have been founded among the peoples
\nof early India by military and political means, we must not forget that the Roman unity did not endure, that even the unity of
\nancient Italy founded by the Roman conquest and organisation did not endure, and it is not likely that a similar attempt in the
\nvast reaches of India without the previous spiritual and cultural basis would have been of an enduring character. It cannot be
\nsaid either, even if the emphasis on spiritual and cultural unity be pronounced to have been too engrossing or excessive and
\nthe insistence on political and external unity too feeble, that the effect of this precedence has been merely disastrous and
\nwithout any advantage. It is due to this original peculiarity, to this indelible spiritual stamp, to this underlying oneness amidst
\nall diversities that if India is not yet a single organised political nation, she still survives and is still India.
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\nAfter all the spiritual and cultural is the only enduring unity and it is by a persistent mind and spirit much more than by
\nan enduring physical body and outward organisation that the soul of a people survives. This is a truth the positive Western mind may be unwilling to understand or concede, and yet its proofs are written across the whole story of the ages. The
\nancient nations, contemporaries of India, and many younger born than she are dead and only their monuments left behind
\nthem. Greece and Egypt exist only on the map and in name, for it is not the soul of Hellas or the deeper nation-soul that
\nbuilt Memphis which we now find at Athens or at Cairo. Rome imposed a political and a purely outward cultural unity on the
\nMediterranean peoples, but their living spiritual and cultural oneness she could not create, and therefore the east broke away
\nfrom the west, Africa kept no impress of the Roman interlude, and even the western nations still called Latin could offer no
\nliving resistance to barbarian invaders and had to be reborn  
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage <\/font>\u2013 430<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\nby the infusion of a foreign vitality to become modern Italy, Spain and France. But India still lives and keeps the continuity
\nof her inner mind and soul and spirit with the India of the ages. Invasion and foreign rule, the Greek, the Parthian and the Hun,
\nthe robust vigour of Islam, the levelling steam-roller heaviness of the British occupation and the British system, the enormous
\npressure of the Occident have not been able to drive or crush the ancient soul out of the body her Vedic Rishis made for her.
\nAt every step, under every calamity and attack and domination, she has been able to resist and survive either with an active or
\na passive resistance. And this she was able to do in her great days by her spiritual solidarity and power of assimilation and
\nreaction, expelling all that would not be absorbed, absorbing all that could not be expelled, and even after the beginning of the
\ndecline she was still able to survive by the same force, abated but not slayable, retreating and maintaining for a time her ancient
\npolitical system in the south, throwing up under the pressure of Islam Rajput and Sikh and Mahratta to defend her ancient
\nself and its idea, persisting passively where she could not resist actively, condemning to decay each empire that could not answer
\nher riddle or make terms with her, awaiting always the day of her revival. And even now it is a similar phenomenon that we
\nsee in process before our eyes. And what shall we say then of the surpassing vitality of the civilisation that could accomplish
\nthis miracle and of the wisdom of those who built its foundation not on things external but on the spirit and the inner mind and
\nmade a spiritual and cultural oneness the root and stock of her existence and not solely its fragile flower, the eternal basis and
\nnot the perishable superstructure? <\/span> <\/p>\n

\nBut spiritual unity is a large and flexible thing and does
\nnot insist like the political and external on centralisation and uniformity; rather it lives diffused in the system and permits
\nreadily a great diversity and freedom of life. Here we touch on the secret of the difficulty in the problem of unifying ancient
\nIndia. It could not be done by the ordinary means of a centralised uniform imperial State crushing out all that made for free
\ndivergence, local autonomies, established communal liberties,  
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage <\/font>\u2013 431<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\nand each time that an attempt was made in this direction, it has failed after however long a term of apparent success, and
\nwe might even say that the guardians of India’s destiny wisely compelled it to fail that her inner spirit might not perish and
\nher soul barter for an engine of temporary security the deep sources of its life. The ancient mind of India had the intuition
\nof its need; its idea of empire was a uniting rule that respected every existing regional and communal liberty, that unnecessarily
\ncrushed out no living autonomy, that effected a synthesis of her life and not a mechanical oneness. Afterwards the conditions
\nunder which such a solution might securely have evolved and found its true means and form and basis, disappeared and there
\nwas instead an attempt to establish a single administrative empire. That endeavour, dictated by the pressure of an immediate
\nand external necessity, failed to achieve a complete success in spite of its greatness and splendour. It could not do so because
\nit followed a trend that was not eventually compatible with the true turn of the Indian spirit. It has been seen that the underlying
\nprinciple of the Indian politico-social system was a synthesis of communal autonomies, the autonomy of the village, of the
\ntown and capital city, of the caste, guild, family, kula<\/i>, religious community, regional unit. The state or kingdom or confederated
\nrepublic was a means of holding together and synthetising in a free and living organic system these autonomies. The imperial
\nproblem was to synthetise again these states, peoples, nations, effecting their unity but respecting their autonomy, into a larger
\nfree and living organism. A system had to be found that would maintain peace and oneness among its members, secure safety
\nagainst external attack and totalise the free play and evolution, in its unity and diversity, in the uncoerced and active life of all its
\nconstituent communal and regional units, of the soul and body of Indian civilisation and culture, the functioning on a grand
\nand total scale of the Dharma. <\/span> <\/p>\n

\nThis was the sense in which the earlier mind of India understood the problem. The administrative empire of later times accepted it only partially, but its trend was, very slowly and almost
\nsubconsciously, what the centralising tendency must always be,  
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage <\/font>\u2013 432<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\nif not actively to destroy, still to wear down and weaken the vigour of the subordinated autonomies. The consequence was
\nthat whenever the central authority was weak, the persistent principle of regional autonomy essential to the life of India reasserted itself to the detriment of the artificial unity established and not, as it should have done, for the harmonious intensification and freer but still united functioning of the total life. The imperial monarchy tended also to wear down the vigour of the
\nfree assemblies, and the result was that the communal units instead of being elements of a united strength became isolated and
\ndividing factors. The village community preserved something of its vigour, but had no living connection with the supreme authority and, losing the larger national sense, was willing to accept any indigenous or foreign rule that respected its own self-sufficient
\nnarrow life. The religious communities came to be imbued with the same spirit. The castes, multiplying themselves without any
\ntrue necessity or true relation to the spiritual or the economic need of the country, became mere sacrosanct conventional divisions, a power for isolation and not, as they originally were, factors of a harmonious functioning of the total life-synthesis.
\nIt is not true that the caste divisions were in ancient India an obstacle to the united life of the people or that they were even
\nin later times an active power for political strife and disunion, \u2014 except indeed at the end, in the final decline, and especially
\nduring the later history of the Mahratta confederation; but they did become a passive force of social division and of a stagnant
\ncompartmentalism obstructive to the reconstitution of a free and actively united life.
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\nThe evils that attended the system did not all manifest themselves with any power before the Mahomedan invasions, but
\nthey must have been already there in their beginning and they increased rapidly under the conditions created by the Pathan
\nand the Mogul empires. These later imperial systems however brilliant and powerful, suffered still more than their predecessors
\nfrom the evils of centralisation owing to their autocratic character and were constantly breaking down from the same tendency
\nof the regional life of India to assert itself against an artificial  
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage <\/font>\u2013 433<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\nunitarian regime, while, because they had no true, living and free relation with the life of the people, they proved unable to
\ncreate the common patriotism which would have effectively secured them against the foreign invader. And in the end there has
\ncome a mechanical Western rule that has crushed out all the still existing communal or regional autonomies and substituted the
\ndead unity of a machine. But again in the reaction against it we see the same ancient tendencies reviving, the tendency towards
\na reconstitution of the regional life of the Indian peoples, the demand for a provincial autonomy founded on true subdivisions
\nof race and language, a harking back of the Indian mind to the ideal of the lost village community as a living unit necessary to
\nthe natural life of the national body and, not yet reborn but dimly beginning to dawn on the more advanced minds, a truer idea
\nof the communal basis proper to Indian life and the renovation and reconstruction of Indian society and politics on a spiritual
\nfoundation. <\/span> <\/p>\n

\nThe failure to achieve Indian unity of which the invasions
\nand the final subjection to the foreigner were the consequence, arose therefore at once from the magnitude and from the peculiarity
\n\tof the task, because the easy method of a centralised empire could not truly
\n\tsucceed in India, while yet it seemed the only device possible and was
\n\tattempted again and again with a partial success that seemed for the time
\n\tand a long time to justify it, but always with an eventual failure. I have
\n\tsuggested that the early mind of India better understood the essential
\n\tcharacter of the problem. The Vedic Rishis and their successors made it
\n\ttheir chief work to found a spiritual basis of Indian life and to effect the
\n\tspiritual and cultural unity of the many races and peoples of the peninsula.
\n\tBut they were not blind to the necessity of a political unification.
\n\tObserving the constant tendency of the clan life of the Aryan peoples to
\n\tconsolidate under confederacies and hegemonies of varying proportions,
\nvairājya<\/i>, sāmrājya<\/i>, they saw that to follow this line to its full conclusion was the
\nright way and evolved therefore the ideal of the Chakravarti, a uniting imperial rule, uniting without destroying the autonomy
\nof India’s many kingdoms and peoples, from sea to sea. This  
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage <\/font>\u2013 434<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\nideal they supported, like everything else in Indian life, with a spiritual and religious sanction, set up as its outward symbol the Aswamedha and Rajasuya sacrifices, and made it the dharma of a powerful King, his royal and religious duty, to
\nattempt the fulfilment of the ideal. He was not allowed by the Dharma to destroy the liberties of the peoples who came under
\nhis sway nor to dethrone or annihilate their royal houses or replace their archons by his officials and governors. His function
\nwas to establish a suzerain power possessed of sufficient military strength to preserve internal peace and to combine at need the
\nfull forces of the country. And to this elementary function came to be added the ideal of the fulfilment and maintenance under a
\nstrong uniting hand of the Indian dharma, the right functioning of the spiritual, religious, ethical and social culture of India.
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\nThe full flowering of the ideal is seen in the great epics. The Mahabharata is the record of a legendary or, it may be, a historic
\n <\/i> attempt to establish such an empire, a dharmarājya <\/i>or kingdom
\nof the Dharma. There the ideal is pictured as so imperative and widely acknowledged that even the turbulent Shishupala is
\nrepresented as motiving his submission and attendance at the Rajasuya sacrifice on the ground that Yudhisthira was carrying
\nout an action demanded by the Dharma. And in the Ramayana we have an idealised picture of such a Dharmarajya, a settled
\nuniversal empire. Here too it is not an autocratic despotism but a universal monarchy supported by a free assembly of the
\ncity and provinces and of all the classes that is held up as the ideal, an enlargement of the monarchical state synthetising the
\ncommunal autonomies of the Indian system and maintaining the law and constitution of the Dharma. The ideal of conquest held
\nup is not a destructive and predatory invasion annihilating the organic freedom and the political and social institutions and exploiting the economic resources of the conquered peoples, but a sacrificial progression bringing with it a trial of military strength
\nof which the result was easily accepted because defeat entailed neither humiliation nor servitude and suffering but merely a
\nstrengthening adhesion to a suzerain power concerned only with establishing the visible unity of the nation and the Dharma. The
\n   <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage <\/font>\u2013 435<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\nideal of the ancient Rishis is clear and their purpose: it is evident that they saw the military and political utility and necessity of a
\nunification of the divided and warring peoples of the land, but they saw also that it ought not to be secured at the expense of the
\nfree life of the regional peoples or of the communal liberties and not therefore by a centralised monarchy or a rigidly unitarian
\nimperial State. A hegemony or confederacy under an imperial head would be the nearest Western analogy to the conception
\nthey sought to impose on the minds of the people. <\/span> <\/p>\n

\nThere is no historical evidence that this ideal was ever
\nsuccessfully carried into execution, although the epic tradition speaks of several such empires preceding the Dharmarajya of
\nYudhisthira. At the time of Buddha and later when Chandragupta and Chanakya were building the first historic Indian
\nempire, the country was still covered with free kingdoms and republics and there was no united empire to meet the great raid
\nof Alexander. It is evident that if any hegemony had previously existed, it had failed to discover a means or system of enduring
\npermanence. This might however have evolved if time had been given, but a serious change had meanwhile taken place
\nwhich made it urgently necessary to find an immediate solution. The historic weakness of the Indian peninsula has always been
\nuntil modern times its vulnerability through the north-western passes. This weakness did not exist so long as ancient India
\nextended northward far beyond the Indus and the powerful kingdoms of Gandhara and Vahlika presented a firm bulwark
\nagainst foreign invasion. But they had now gone down before the organised Persian empire and from this time forward the
\ntrans-Indus countries, ceasing to be part of India, ceased also to be its protection and became instead the secure base for every
\nsuccessive invader. The inroad of Alexander brought home the magnitude of the danger to the political mind of India and from
\nthis time we see poets, writers, political thinkers constantly upholding the imperial ideal or thinking out the means of its
\nrealisation. The immediate practical result was the rise of the empire founded with remarkable swiftness by the statesmanship
\nof Chanakya and constantly maintained or restored through  
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage <\/font>\u2013 436<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\neight or nine centuries, in spite of periods of weakness and incipient disintegration, successively by the Maurya, Sunga,
\nKanwa, Andhra and Gupta dynasties. The history of this empire, its remarkable organisation, administration, public works,
\nopulence, magnificent culture and the vigour, the brilliance, the splendid fruitfulness of the life of the peninsula under its shelter
\nemerges only from scattered insufficient records, but even so it ranks among the greatest constructed and maintained by the
\ngenius of the earth’s great peoples. India has no reason, from this point of view, to be anything but proud of her ancient
\nachievement in empire-building or to submit to the hasty verdict that denies to her antique civilisation a strong practical genius
\nor high political virtue. <\/span> <\/p>\n

\nAt the same time this empire suffered by the inevitable haste,
\nviolence and artificiality of its first construction to meet a pressing need, because that prevented it from being the deliberate,
\nnatural and steady evolution in the old solid Indian manner of the truth of her deepest ideal. The attempt to establish a
\ncentralised imperial monarchy brought with it not a free synthesis but a breaking down of regional autonomies. Although
\naccording to the Indian principle their institutes and customs were respected and at first even their political institutions not
\nwholly annulled, at any rate in many cases, but brought within the imperial system, these could not really flourish under the
\nshadow of the imperial centralisation. The free peoples of the ancient Indian world began to disappear, their broken materials
\nserving afterwards to create the now existing Indian races. And I think it can be concluded on the whole that although for a long
\ntime the great popular assemblies continued to remain in vigour, their function in the end tended to become more mechanical
\nand their vitality to decline and suffer. The urban republics too tended to become more and more mere municipalities of the
\norganised kingdom or empire. The habits of mind created by the imperial centralisation and the weakening or disappearance
\nof the more dignified free popular institutions of the past created a sort of spiritual gap, on one side of which were the administered content with any government that gave them security and  
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage <\/font>\u2013 437<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\ndid not interfere too much with their religion, life and customs and on the other the imperial administration beneficent and
\nsplendid, no doubt, but no longer that living head of a free and living people contemplated by the earlier and the true political
\nmind of India. These results became prominent and were final only with the decline, but they were there in seed and rendered
\nalmost inevitable by the adoption of a mechanical method of unification. The advantages gained were those of a stronger
\nand more coherent military action and a more regularised and uniform administration, but these could not compensate in the
\nend for the impairment of the free organic diversified life which was the true expression of the mind and temperament of the
\npeople. <\/span> <\/p>\n

\nA worse result was a certain fall from the high ideal of
\nthe Dharma. In the struggle of kingdom with kingdom for supremacy a habit of Machiavellian statecraft replaced the nobler ethical ideals of the past, aggressive ambition was left without any sufficient spiritual or moral check and there was
\na coarsening of the national mind in the ethics of politics and government already evidenced in the draconic penal legislation
\nof the Maurya times and in Asoka’s sanguinary conquest of Orissa. The deterioration, held in abeyance by a religious spirit
\nand high intelligence, did not come to a head till more than a thousand years afterwards and we only see it in its full force
\nin the worst period of the decline when unrestrained mutual aggression, the unbridled egoism of princes and leaders, a total
\nlack of political principle and capacity for effective union, the want of a common patriotism and the traditional indifference
\nof the common people to a change of rulers gave the whole of the vast peninsula into the grasp of a handful of merchants from
\nacross the seas. But however tardy the worst results in their coming and however redeemed and held in check at first by
\nthe political greatness of the empire and a splendid intellectual and artistic culture and by frequent spiritual revivals, India had
\nalready lost by the time of the later Guptas the chance of a natural and perfect flowering of her true mind and inmost spirit
\nin the political life of her peoples.  
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage <\/font>\u2013 438<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\nMeanwhile the empire served well enough, although not perfectly, the end for which it was created, the saving of Indian
\nsoil and Indian civilisation from that immense flood of barbarian unrest which threatened all the ancient stabilised cultures
\nand finally proved too strong for the highly developed Greco-Roman civilisation and the vast and powerful Roman empire.
\nThat unrest throwing great masses of Teutons, Slavs, Huns and Scythians to west and east and south battered at the gates of
\nIndia for many centuries, effected certain inroads, but, when it sank, left the great edifice of Indian civilisation standing and still
\nfirm, great and secure. The irruptions took place whenever the empire grew weak and this seems to have happened whenever
\nthe country was left for some time secure. The empire was weakened by the suspension of the need which created it, for then the
\nregional spirit reawoke in separatist movements disintegrating its unity or breaking down its large extension over all the North.
\nA fresh peril brought about the renewal of its strength under a new dynasty, but the phenomenon continued to repeat itself
\nuntil, the peril ceasing for a considerable time, the empire called into existence to meet it passed away not to revive. It left behind
\nit a certain number of great kingdoms in the east, south and centre and a more confused mass of peoples in the northwest,
\nthe weak point at which the Mussulmans broke in and in a brief period rebuilt in the north, but in another, a Central Asiatic type,
\nthe ancient empire. <\/span> <\/p>\n

\nThese earlier foreign invasions and their effects have to be
\nseen in their true proportions, which are often disturbed by the exaggerated theories of oriental scholars. The invasion of
\nAlexander was an eastward impulsion of Hellenism that had a work to do in western and central Asia, but no future in India. Immediately ejected by Chandragupta, it left no traces. The entrance of the Graeco-Bactrians which took place during the
\nweakness of the later Mauryas and was annulled by the reviving strength of the empire, was that of a Hellenised people already
\nprofoundly influenced by Indian culture. The later Parthian, Hun and Scythian invasions were of a more serious character and
\nfor a time seemed dangerous to the integrity of India. In the   <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage <\/font>\u2013 439<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\nend however they affected powerfully only the Punjab, although they threw their waves farther south along the western coast and
\ndynasties of a foreign extraction may have been established for a time far down towards the south. To what degree the racial
\ncharacter of these parts was affected, is far from certain. Oriental scholars and ethnologists have imagined that the Punjab was
\nScythianised, that the Rajputs are of the same stock and that even farther south the race was changed by the intrusion. These
\nspeculations are founded upon scanty or no evidence and are contradicted by other theories, and it is highly doubtful whether
\nthe barbarian invaders could have come in such numbers as to produce so considerable a consequence. It is farther rendered
\nimprobable by the fact that in one or two or three generations the invaders were entirely Indianised, assumed completely the
\nIndian religion, manners, customs, culture and melted into the mass of the Indian peoples. No such phenomenon took place
\nas in the countries of the Roman empire, of barbarian tribes imposing on a superior civilisation their laws, political system,
\nbarbaric customs, alien rule. This is the common significant fact of these irruptions and it must have been due to one or all of three
\nfactors. The invaders may have been armies rather than peoples: the occupation was not a continuous external rule which had
\ntime to stiffen in its foreign character, for each was followed by a revival of the strength of the Indian empire and its return upon
\nthe conquered provinces: and finally the powerfully vital and absorbing character of Indian culture was too strong to allow of
\nany mental resistance to assimilation in the intruders. At any rate if these irruptions were of a very considerable character, Indian
\ncivilisation must be considered to have proved itself much more sound, more vital and more solid than the younger
\nGreco-Roman which went down before the Teuton and the Arab or survived only underneath and in a debased form heavily barbarised, broken and unrecognisable. And the Indian empire too must be pronounced to have proved after all more efficacious
\nthan was the Roman with all its vaunt of solidity and greatness, for it succeeded, even if pierced in the west, in preserving the
\nsecurity of the great mass of the peninsula.   <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage <\/font>\u2013 440<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\nIt is a later downfall, the Mussulman conquest failing in the hands of the Arabs but successfully reattempted after a
\nlong interval, and all that followed it which serves to justify the doubt thrown on the capacity of the Indian peoples. But
\nfirst let us put aside certain misconceptions which cloud the real issue. This conquest took place at a time when the vitality
\nof ancient Indian life and culture after two thousand years of activity and creation was already exhausted for a time or very
\nnear exhaustion and needed a breathing space to rejuvenate itself by transference from the Sanskrit to the popular tongues and
\nthe newly forming regional peoples. The conquest was effected rapidly enough in the north, although not entirely complete there
\nfor several centuries, but the south long preserved its freedom as of old against the earlier indigenous empire and there was
\nnot so long a distance of time between the extinction of the kingdom of Vijayanagara and the rise of the Mahrattas. The
\nRajputs maintained their independence until the time of Akbar and his successors and it was in the end partly with the aid of
\nRajput princes acting as their generals and ministers that the Moguls completed their sway over the east and the south. And
\nthis was again possible because \u2014 a fact too often forgotten \u2014 the Mussulman domination ceased very rapidly to be a foreign
\nrule. The vast mass of the Mussulmans in the country were and are Indians by race, only a very small admixture of Pathan,
\nTurkish and Mogul blood took place, and even the foreign kings and nobles became almost immediately wholly Indian in mind,
\nlife and interest. If the race had really like certain European countries remained for many centuries passive, acquiescent and
\nimpotent under an alien sway, that would indeed have been a proof of a great inherent weakness; but the British is the first
\nreally continuous foreign rule that has dominated India. The ancient civilisation underwent indeed an eclipse and decline under
\nthe weight of a Central Asiatic religion and culture with which it failed to coalesce, but it survived its pressure, put its impact
\non it in many directions and remained to our own day alive even in decadence and capable of recovery, thus giving a proof
\nof strength and soundness rare in the history of human cultures.   <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage <\/font>\u2013 441<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\nAnd in the political field it never ceased to throw up great rulers, statesmen, soldiers, administrators. Its political genius was not in
\nthe decadence sufficient, not coherent enough or swift in vision and action, to withstand the Pathan, Mogul and European, but
\nit was strong to survive and await every opportunity of revival, made a bid for empire under Rana Sanga, created the great
\nkingdom of Vijayanagara, held its own for centuries against Islam in the hills of Rajputana, and in its worst days still built
\nand maintained against the whole power of the ablest of the Moguls the kingdom of Shivaji, formed the Mahratta confederacy and the Sikh Khalsa, undermined the great Mogul structure and again made a last attempt at empire. On the brink of the final
\nand almost fatal collapse in the midst of unspeakable darkness, disunion and confusion it could still produce Ranjit Singh and
\nNana Fadnavis and Madhoji Scindia and oppose the inevitable march of England’s destiny. These facts do not diminish the
\nweight of the charge that can be made of an incapacity to see and solve the central problem and answer the one persistent question
\nof Fate, but considered as the phenomena of a decadence they make a sufficiently remarkable record not easily paralleled under
\nsimilar circumstances and certainly put a different complexion on the total question than the crude statement that India has
\nbeen always subject and politically incapable. <\/span> <\/p>\n

\nThe real problem introduced by the Mussulman conquest
\nwas not that of subjection to a foreign rule and the ability to recover freedom, but the struggle between two civilisations, one
\nancient and indigenous, the other mediaeval and brought in from outside. That which rendered the problem insoluble was
\nthe attachment of each to a powerful religion, the one militant and aggressive, the other spiritually tolerant indeed and flexible,
\nbut obstinately faithful in its discipline to its own principle and standing on the defence behind a barrier of social forms.
\nThere were two conceivable solutions, the rise of a greater spiritual principle and formation which could reconcile the two
\nor a political patriotism surmounting the religious struggle and uniting the two communities. The first was impossible in that
\nage. Akbar attempted it on the Mussulman side, but his religion  
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage <\/font>\u2013 442<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\nwas an intellectual and political rather than a spiritual creation and had never any chance of assent from the strongly religious
\nmind of the two communities. Nanak attempted it from the Hindu side, but his religion, universal in principle, became a
\nsect in practice. Akbar attempted also to create a common political patriotism, but this endeavour too was foredoomed to
\nfailure. An autocratic empire built on the Central Asian principle could not create the desired spirit by calling in the administrative
\nability of the two communities in the person of great men and princes and nobles to a common service in the creation of a
\nunited imperial India: the living assent of the people was needed and that remained passive for want of awakening political ideals
\nand institutions. The Mogul empire was a great and magnificent construction and an immense amount of political genius and
\ntalent was employed in its creation and maintenance. It was as splendid, powerful and beneficent and, it may be added,
\nin spite of Aurangzeb’s fanatical zeal, infinitely more liberal and tolerant in religion than any mediaeval or contemporary
\nEuropean kingdom or empire and India under its rule stood high in military and political strength, economic opulence and
\nthe brilliance of its art and culture. But it failed like the empires before it, more disastrously even, and in the same way, crumbling
\nnot by external attack but by internal disintegration. A military and administrative centralised empire could not effect India’s
\nliving political unity. And although a new life seemed about to rise in the regional peoples, the chance was cut short by
\nthe intrusion of the European nations and their seizure of the opportunity created by the failure of the Peshwas and the
\ndesperate confusion of the succeeding anarchy and decadence. <\/span> <\/p>\n

\nTwo remarkable creations embodied in the period of disintegration the last effort of the Indian political mind to form the foundations of a new life under the old conditions, but
\nneither proved to be of a kind that could solve the problem. The Mahratta revival inspired by Ramdas’s conception of the
\nMaharashtra Dharma and cast into shape by Shivaji was an attempt to restore what could still be understood or remembered
\nof the ancient form and spirit, but it failed, as all attempts to   <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage <\/font>\u2013 443<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\nrevive the past must fail, in spite of the spiritual impetus and the democratic forces that assisted its inception. The Peshwas
\nfor all their genius lacked the vision of the founder and could only establish a military and political confederacy. And their
\nendeavour to found an empire could not succeed because it was inspired by a regional patriotism that failed to enlarge itself
\nbeyond its own limits and awaken to the living ideal of a united India. The Sikh Khalsa on the other hand was an astonishingly
\noriginal and novel creation and its face was turned not to the past but the future. Apart and singular in its theocratic head and
\ndemocratic soul and structure, its profound spiritual beginning, its first attempt to combine the deepest elements of Islam and
\nVedanta, it was a premature drive towards an entrance into the third or spiritual stage of human society, but it could not create
\nbetween the spirit and the external life the transmitting medium of a rich creative thought and culture. And thus hampered and
\ndeficient it began and ended within narrow local limits, achieved intensity but no power of expansion. The conditions were not
\nthen in existence that could have made possible a successful endeavour.
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\nAfterwards came the night and a temporary end of all political initiative and creation. The lifeless attempt of the last
\ngeneration to imitate and reproduce with a servile fidelity the ideals and forms of the West has been no true indication of
\nthe political mind and genius of the Indian people. But again amid all the mist of confusion there is still the possibility of a
\nnew twilight, not of an evening but a morning Yuga-sandhya. India of the ages is not dead nor has she spoken her last creative
\nword; she lives and has still something to do for herself and the human peoples. And that which must seek now to awake is
\nnot an anglicised oriental people, docile pupil of the West and doomed to repeat the cycle of the Occident’s success and failure,
\nbut still the ancient immemorable Shakti recovering her deepest self, lifting her head higher towards the supreme source of light
\nand strength and turning to discover the complete meaning and a vaster form of her Dharma.
\n   <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage <\/font>\u2013 444<\/font><\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/table>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

XXI   Indian Polity   I HAVE spoken hitherto of the greatness of Indian civilisation in the things most important to human culture, those activities…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[55],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2921","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-20-the-renaissance-in-india","wpcat-55-id"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2921","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2921"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2921\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2921"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2921"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2921"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}