CHANGING NOTION OF DHARMA

An Analysis of Ancient to Medieval Times

By Mustaf Zul Shafiq

From time immemorial, the great aims of human endeavor (the purusharthas) have been
classified in India as being four: - dharma, artha, Kama and moksha, roughly translated as moral
behavior, wealth, worldly pleasures and salvation. However, the pursuit of the three objectives-
dharma, artha and Kama can contribute to the attainment of moksha. Of the three objectives
capable of being studied and practiced, dharma has always occupied the premier place. Dharma
not only signifies an absolute and immutable concept of righteousness but also includes the idea
of duty which every human being owes to oneself, to society as whole and to universal order.
Dharma is law in its widest sense- spiritual, moral, ethical and temporal. Every individual,
whether ruler or ruled, is governed by his or her own dharma. The literature on the
Dharmashastra, both original scriptures and the commentaries thereon, is very extensive but for
our purpose, we need only observe that everything in Indian Polity- the rights and duties of
rulers, ministers, priests and people- is governed by the concept of dharma.

According to Bhiku Parekh, Hindu political thinkers’ conceptualized political life in terms of the
two central concepts namely danda and dharma. For them political life or ruling a territorially
organized community ultimately consisted in using danda to maintain dharma. The term danda
means discipline, force, restraint, constraint or punishment.

Dharma comes from a Sanskrit root, dhr meaning to hold dharma is that which holds the society
together. It is used broadly to mean all duties; whereas in some references it is confined to the
religiously prescribed duties. In metaphysical way, there is a general notion that the universe is
an ordered whole governed by fixed laws. It is characterized by Rita, the inviolable order of
things. Society replicates the order of the universe and becomes an ordered whole when held
together by dharma. An Individual’s birth into particular caste of his birth. An individual’s birth
into particular caste is not accidental but a result of his Karma or actions in his previous life.
Dharma and Karma are integrally connected.

It is very difficult dharma because the word has been used in various senses and its meaning and
scope enlarged. It signifies differently in different contexts. In Mahabharata, Dharma has been
explained to be what which helps the uplifting of living beings. Therefore, that which ensures the
welfare of living beings is surely dharma. In most cases, the meaning of dharma is religious
ordinances or rites in Rig Veda.

Page 1 of 7
Dharma is an important sense denotes the moral order. Everything in this universe is under
certain rules. Man has to conform to the higher order of universal dharma in order to preserve
himself. Another sense denotes moral duty in particular. Dharma acquired this sense in the sense
in the Brahmans; the Smriti Literature and the Upanishads. As a member of the society every one
of us has certain duties which sustain the structure of the society. These duties include the
Varnashrama Dharma also.

Dharma has an ethical meaning also. Dharma as a law or convention may have an ethical basis.
According to Dr. Illa Ravi, “Dharma is the central ethical concept in the post Vedic Indian
Thought.” It is the ethical approach that links philosophy with man and society. The definition of
Dharma given by Mr. Venkesteswara in the first volume of his ‘India Culture through the Ages’
seems to cover this, he defines dharma as “the discharged of ones duty as rationality conceived
as an aspect of social ethics.”

ANCIENT NOTION
In Mahabharata there are 18 parvas or sections. One of them is called Shantiparva and there are
three Upparvas or sub-sections of Shantiparva which include: Raja dharma Parva, Apada
Dharma Parva, and Moksha Dharma Parva. Raja Dharma Parva are the moral code of
conduct or we can say duties described for kings and state heads. Apada Dharma Parva describes
the behavior and rules of conduct when one faces adversities. And Moksha Dharma Parva is
about the rules and behavior to achieve emancipation.

Manu and Kautilya

Manu Dharmashastra or Manusmriti, means reflections of Manu consists of 2685 verses on the
code of conduct on human society, like dharma, religion, duty and law. The Manu derives the
authority from the Vedas making it divine in nature. Society is an organic whole in which social
good cannot be achieved without its all organs (individuals) discharging their respective
functions and duties up to mark. Manu gives primacy to righteousness as the highest
embodiment of dharma. Since for Manu, Dharma is alone what remains when the body perishes
(MS 8.17). In Manusmriti, there is an elaborate discussion on relationship between dharma and
ruler of the state. The execution of right duties was the king’s basic responsibility and his duties
were defined under concept of raja dharma. The concept of Raja dharma is the analysis of the
dharma of the king, as referred in Dharmashastra, the Mahabharata, the Manu Smriti and
above all in the Arthashastra of Kautilya

According to Manu, the lawgiver, God created king to protect the subjects from anarchy and
exploitation of the powerful people. Ideally the king was seen as a person who would always
speak truth, is a realist and be well versed in duty and work. The king was expected to perform
various duties according to Raja dharma such as safeguarding his kingdom, to be impartial
towards his subjects, to enrich the treasury by just methods, to punish the wicked and to protect
the innocent and so on. The word raja means king. It is very common word in ancient political

Page 2 of 7
literature and is found from the Vedas onwards. Dharmashastra prescribed a list of duties for the
king s which are supposed to have Vedic sanction.

According to Kautilya, an accomplished king must be devoted to dharma. All the actions and
functions of the king should be carried out in accordance to dharma. The dominant ideal that
moved the kings in ancient India was the attainment of dharma, artha and Kama. The chief duty
of the king was the upholding and implementation of dharma making it as the constitution of the
state. Kautilya is a staunch champion of the Varnashrama Dharma. It is the philosophy of
kingship, to ensure observance of Varnashrama dharma and to contribute to the increase of
virtues essential to all, which explains and also justifies the ever-increasing role of king in the
lives of men. The raja dharma is definitely monarchical in its orientation. The connection
between the king and his people was based on theory of mutual advantage. The king was to
protect the people and do what was pleasing to them in return for the taxes that he received. For
the purpose of self-defense and the defeat of his enemies the king had to maintain a standing
army with a senapati as head. The army seems to have been recruited from all varnas, though the
Kshatriyas naturally formed the predominant element.

Apad Dharma implies the conduct of the king in the times of emergency or calamity or
disasters. In such times of exigencies, the king should open out his durga or pura to
accommodate a great substantial number of people under its shelter and generously bear the
expenses of lives and livings of his citizens from his royal treasury (kosha). The king is to extend
an equal treatment to all for maintaining the existence of the state under an emergency.

Law and Justice were also very closely related to the Dharma. According to Kautilya, any
matter in dispute shall be judged according to the four bases of justice. Theses, in order of
increasing importance, are:-

I. Dharma, which is based on truth,

II. Evidence, which is based on witness,
III. Custom, the tradition accepted by the people, and
IV. Royal Edicts, i.e. law as promulgated

Dharma holding the most important position, a king who administers justice in accordance with
dharma will be able to conquer the whole world.

The sole leader of the entire territory or the kingdom was the monarch or the sovereign who has
an absolute control over the entire state. Kautilya favored hereditary monarchy as it ensures
continuity. He had great faith in the law of primo-geniture, that is, the eldest son taking over the
reigns from the father or the king Kautilya emphasized on the need for proper upbringing of the
prince in order to avoid future problems. Kautilya also explained the plausible dangers that a
king can encounter with reference to his sovereign power. Kautilya made it very clear that
dangers to the sovereignty come from three quarters, viz., from the enemy, within the territory

Page 3 of 7
and sometimes the wrong policy of the king himself. Sovereignty is not only the King but also
the territory, the ministers, the fort, the treasury, the army and the friend.

Buddhist Notion (Aggana Sutta)

Buddhism was atheistic in the sense that it did not see the need to postulate the existence of god;
it denied the divine origin and authority of Vedas. Buddhism developed a new political theory. It
advanced a qausi-contractualist theory of origin of the government. It postulated a peaceful
existence when men had few desires and were at peace with themselves and with their fellow
men. It advocated legal and social equality.

Digha Nikaya, the Buddhist scripture is a collection of dialogues of Gautama himself. Aggana
Sutta is number 27 out of those dialogues. According to Aggana Sutta the origin of the state is
out of qausi-contractualist arrangement under which king agrees to perform specific functions
on behalf of the people in return for certain rights conferred on him, including taxation. The view
of Kingship is not that of a ‘universal emperor’, but is of the ‘Great Appointee.’ So, the basis of
kingship involves psychological factors rather than divine will. Ecclesiastical organization
founded by Buddha was based on the model of republican polity, where members were
encouraged to express their views freely. Decision making involved some consensus. State
arises as a punitive institution. The relationship between state and the subject is a contractual
obligation in which one commands and the other obeys. The state is considered to be a necessity
for orderly human society; however, Aggana Sutta challenges the Vedic ideas of maintaining
social order based on Varnashrama Dharma. Ideal Kingdom is the territory which is without
thorns (Akantaka) and untroubled (Annappila) and in which men are happy and joyous, wicked
are punished and king have the absolute power to banish the culprits from his kingdom and also
to execute.

The Aggana Sutta also makes some further interesting comments. It explains that the king is
called khattiya because he is the overlord of farms (khetta) and he pleases people with Dhamma.
Dhamma, thus, is introduced as a basic constituent of state. This dhamma is righteousness,
propriety, and norm and is equated with impartiality and justice. The state is a sovereign entity
and its sovereignty is expressed by a variety of terms such as Ana. Ana means order or command
and implies an ability to give orders to all. Sovereignty connotes total authority an ability to
reward and punish capacity to give orders to all and receive orders from none.

Medieval Notion

Zia Barani

Zia Barani was the most important political thinker of the Delhi Sultanate representing the
tradition of political expediency in the Islamic political thought. His Fatawa-i-Jahandari (1357
A,D) written as nasihat (advices) for the Muslim kings is a classic work on the statecraft which
can be compared with Kautilya’s Arthashastra. For his emphasis to follow the sharia (advices II)

Page 4 of 7
and for the views on the Hindus (advice XI. 2) he has been called as a conservative,
fundamentalist bigot as compared to relatively liberal thinker like Abul Fazal.

Kingship: - The theory of kingship by Barani makes a distinction between the personal life of
the Sultan and his political role (Advice II). In both aspects, however, he envisaged in him and
ideal person. Following the path of the sharia as he was the agent of god on earth to do the
‘welfare’ of the people, the sultan was expected to respect supplication, helplessness, poverty
and humility to compensate for the existence of monarchy which was contradictory to the
principles of Islam. He advised the sultan to possess, to achieve the objectives of Islam, attributes
of terror, prestige, pride, high status, domination and superiority. He must desist from five mean
qualities such as falsehood, changeability, deception, wrathfulness and promotion of just.

LAW: - Barani categorized the laws into two, the sharia and the zawabit. Zawabit were the
state-laws formulated by the monarch in consultation with the nobility in the changed
circumstances to cater to new requirements. However, zawabit must be in the spirit of the sharia
and enumerated four conditions for its formulation as guidelines. First, the zawabit should not
negate the sharia. Secondly, it must increase the loyalty and hope among nobles and the common
people. Thirdly, its source and inspiration should be the sharia and caliphs. Finally, if at all it had
to negate the sharia out of exigencies, it must follow charities and compensate in lieu of that
negation.

Justice: - Justice in the Barani’s ideal polity is all encompassing from remission of land tax to
supply of commodities to buyers at production cost, from civil and criminal cases to granting
monetary help to the needy from state treasury. To dispense justice the courts were divided into
civil and criminal categories and they operated at central and provincial levels. The judges were
to be appointed by the king with being himself at the apex of the judicial structure and the
fountain head of justice and highest court of appeal. He considered it absolutely essential that in
order to be just the state should have Islam as the basis.

Sovereignty: - Three functions were considered necessary by Barani for the sovereign:

 Enforcement of sharia
 Check on immoral and sinful acts and
 Dispensing of justice which included appointments to various offices.

Abul Fazal

The most authoritative exposition of the Mughal Theory of Kingship is that provided by Abul
Fazal, in his introduction to Ain-i-Akbari. First he highlights the need for a king to maintain
order and suppress crime and injustice. Then he emphasizes the divine elements in kingship.
Abul Fazal noted in Ain-i-Akbari, “Kingship is refulgence form the incomparable distribution of
justice and a ray from the sun, and the receptacle of all virtues.” He lists further requisite
elements of Mughal Kingship: -

Page 5 of 7
  A paternal love toward subjects. Thousands find rest in the love of king. Sectarian
differences do not raise the dust of strife.
 A daily increasing trust in god.
 Prayer and devotion.

As the source of all peace and stability the emperor stood above all religions and ethnic
groups mediated among them, and ensured justice and peace prevailed. Abul Fazal describes
the ideal of sulh-i-kul (absolute peace) as the cornerstone of enlightened rule. In sulh-i-kul all
religions and schools of thought had freedom of expression but on condition that they did not
undermine the authority of the state or fight among themselves. Further Akbar abolished the
tax on pilgrimage in 1563 and jiziya in 1564 as the two were based on religious
discrimination. However there was no Varna based division of society in Abul Fazal political
writing, he also divided the society into four parts, where he assigned the first place to the
warriors and rulers and second place to the learned such as scholars, astronomers,
philosophers etc. When we analyze the concept of sovereignty, Abul Fazal defined
sovereignty as a social contract in which the emperor protects the four essences of his
subject namely life (jan), property (mal), honor (namus) and faith (din) and in return
demands obedience and share of resources.

Conclusion

From ancient to the medieval the notion of Dharma is in transitive mode. The notion of dharma
which we discussed above focused on the kingship, justice and law and to some extent on
sovereignty as well. When we analyze, we find both continuity of notion as well as discontinuity.
As the Ancient notion of both Manu and Kautilya derive the states or kings authority from a
divine notion so does the medieval writers like Barani and Fazal. However there exists a
discontinuity because while they all have a divine notion of the king that he is a representative of
god that upholds the society and prevents it from anarchy but the former derive their authority
from the Vedas and the later derive it from the sharia. The contrast also exists between the
ancient thought and medieval because while the earlier accepted the authority of scriptures, they
did not accept the authority of one particular scripture. It is the Buddhist notion of the king or
state is not divine and they rejected it and put forth purely a qausi-contractual notion of state.

There is also discontinuity of thought regarding the Varnashrama dharma as a necessary dharma
that king needs to uphold. While the ancient writers have emphasized it immensely, the medieval
thoughts regarding it has no suggestions at least not in state policies however, Fazal did divide
the society into four parts but while the ancient thought gave first place to the men of knowledge,
Brahmans, Fazal places the warriors and rulers in first place. The Buddhist political theory
totally rejected the Varna based society, however according to Bhiku Parekh, “the Buddhist
political theory was not sufficiently radical and subversive. It continued to share such Hindu
beliefs as, life is full of sorrow, desires are bad and philosophy of karma and the ruler must
maintain dharma.

Page 6 of 7
Through this transition of dharma, sovereignty also underwent a transition as being one of the
main dharma of upholding the society which is the upholding the sovereignty or state. Ancient
notion of sovereignty as Kautilya has put forth is constituted by the king, the minister, the fort,
the treasury, the army and the friend. King is the sovereign and hereditary rule of kingship has to
be followed. While the medieval notion of Barani and Fazal are contradictory to each other leave
aside to the ancient notion. Barani believed that king is sovereign and that his sovereignty is
upheld when he enforces the sharia, keeps check on immoral sins and dispenses justice while
Fazal attributes sovereignty as an outcome of a social contract where emperor protects life,
property, honor and faith of people in exchange demands obedience of people and share
resources of the territory.

There is again continuity when we analyze that the kingship is monarchial in nature in both
ancient and medieval notions or to be more apt in Hindu as well as Islamic thought of kingship
however when we analyze the nature of decision making in Buddhist notion we find that there
were a room for consensual decision making and the state was somewhat republican in nature.
State is also seen as a punitive institution by all even in Buddhist notion which rejected the
violence as an option of establishing order in the society yet did not reject it completely.

So to conclude the notion of the dharma is not a static one rather transitive one. With growing
time and changing authority it also saw change in its essence thus organizing politics differently
in different times.

Page 7 of 7