Kingship and its Divinity during Chahamana Dynasty.

 

Article: Kingship and its Divinity during Chahamana Dynasty.

Dr. Madhup Raman. 
Free lance Cartoonist, Blogger, Vlogger, Biharsharif.

Kingship and its Divinity during Chahamana Dynasty.

Kingship  : Since the king was the head of the state, he was the center of administration. It seems that it was felt necessary to raise to the throne a competent member of the ruling family. In the pre-independence period, as long as the Chahamanas acknowledged allegiance to the Pratiharas, it was not much necessary that the ruler should be endowed with distinct qualities so as to enable him to direct the ship of the state; for there was the overlord to guide him in difficult circumstances. A minor or a less capable person might very well occupy the position of the head of the state. Hence Samantaraja’s successors, like Naradeva, Jayaraja, Vigraharaja I, Chamundaraja I and Gopendraraja were all insignificant rulers.
But after the attainment of independence, it was a matter of grave concern whether the state was in capable hands or not. Interestingly enough, just in this period we find the case of suppression of legal heirs by distant relatives within the ruling family. Thus after Viryarama’s death the throne ought to have passed to his elder son Durlabharaja, but we find from our accepted sources that Viryarama was succeeded by his brother Chamundaraka.[1] 

Growing ambitions by resuming their titles. 

With the enhancement of the king’s position, his power and ambition began to increase. He was gradually actuated by the ambition of securing for himself an imperial authority, left as a legacy by the Pratiharas of Kanauj. This is evidenced by the assumption of great and high sounding titles. The early Chahamana rulers were satisfied with the simple titles of bhupa, nrpa and maharaja.
But since the time of Prthviraja I, when the Chahamanas had consolidated enough power and authority they began to call themselves as Paramabhattaraka-Maharajadhiraja-Paramesvara, etc. Prthviraja II even assumed the title of Vharatesvara [2]on account of his ambition to be the overlord of India.

In addition to these imperious titles, a divine character was also attributed to these later Chahaman rulers by their court poets and chroniclers. The Delhi Sivalik pillar inscription calls Vigraharaja IV as Purushottama [3]i.e. God Vishnu Himself. In the Hansi stone inscription, Prthviraja II is compared with Rama.[4]The Prthvirajavijaya mentions that Prthviraja III and his brother Hariraja were the two ‘incarnations of Rama and Lakshmana.’[5]

King's Qualities and Qualifications.

Let us now discuss the necessary qualities required for the king. The theoretical qualifications laid down by Sukra and Kamandaka are numerous but we need not devote much space to them, as they are the same as those described by the earlier political writers. Inscriptions and works on polity of our age emphasise that a king can became a successful ruler only if he waits upon the elders, studies the art of government, cultivates righteousness and protects his subjects as efficiently as the divine guardians. He was expected to be always in constant association with virtuous and learned men in order to derive the benefit of their experience and advice. He was to be kind-hearted and was not to oppress his subjects for his own selfish interest. A king, says Sukra, who is virtuous is divine in nature, one who is otherwise is devilish, he is destined for hell.[6] The king had to observe discipline, for it brings prosperity to him. He was to be well-versed in Sastras and in different branches of learning. A king, who is well-grounded in all the Vidyas, is respected by the good; he can never be inclined to a wrong course even if impelled by evil advisers.[7] Prowess, strength, intelligence and valour were other necessary qualities required for the king, a king devoid of these qualities, says the Matasya Purana, though wealthy, can never administer ever a small kingdom. [8]

Reqired balance between Dharma, Artha and Kama.

The king is also advised to keep an even balance between dharma, artha and Kama.

On the negative side the king is advised to give up excessive gambling and hunting. He was not expected to sleep by day, nor was he to be too much talkative. Over-indulgence in music and dancing was to be avoided. Six enemies namely excessive indulgence, anger, intoxication, envy, covetousness, and self-delusion were to be carefully guarded against. All the vyasanas were to be avoided. According to Somadeva, ‘A single vyasana is enough to destroy a powerful king, even possessing four kinds of armies,what to say if there are all of the combined.[9]A good king should exert to eradicate these evils, keeping himself in the association of the learned men and away from the evil-doors.[10]

The records of our period usually describe the kings as possessing the above qualities prescribed by the Niti works. The Ratnapur inscription of the Chedi king Jajalladeva, informs us how king Prtithvideva possessed nobility, bravery and depth.[11] 

The Khajuraho inscription dated C. 954 A.D. states that the king Harsha combined in himself eloquence, statesmanship, heroism, vigour, ambition, modesty and self-confidence.[12]

All divine required qualities for the Kingship.

The king Sallakshanavarman is described as a master of the sacred lore, a kinsman of the virtuous, a store of arts and an abode of good conduct.[13] The Pratihara records usually describe the kings as endowed with bravery, valour and modesty. The Chahamana king is described as the sun of prowess, who secured success and prosperity by his heroism.[14] 

Prithvideva is described as the sun, endowed with the most intense brilliancy.[15]

Generosity, truth, statesmanship and heroism were the qualities of the Chahamana king. The king Vairisimha is described as endowed with might, generosity, bravery, resoluteness and good fortune.[16] Intelligence, bravery, religiousness, truthfulness and gratitude were the qualities possessed by the Chahamana king, who had full control over all his senses.[17]

King of the Chahamana dynasty was the master of prosody, grammar, logic and astronomy. He was also a store of arts and could compose poetry in many languages.[18]

Divinity of the King : 

The precise attitude of our period towards the doctrine of the divinity of the king is not easy to determine. The political writers of our age have, as a rule, postulated the functional resemblance between the king and some of the deities, as is generally done by earlier works like the Manu-Smrti and the Mahabharata.Thus Sukra states ‘Like Indra, the king protects the wealth; like Vayu, he is the cause of good and evil actions; like Yama, he is the punisher of offences; like Agni, he is the purifier and enjoyer of all the gifts; like Varuna, he nourishes his subjects and like Chandra, he delights everybody by virtuous activities.[19] The Agnipurana does the same, when it states that the king assumes the forms of nine deities, namely, the Sun, the Moon, Vayu, Yama, Agni, Kubera, Varuna and Prithvi, when he

discharges the different[20] regal functions, e.g., like Chandra; the king gives delight to his subjects; like Vayu, he surveys the whole kingdom by means of spies etc. Several other Puranas like the Matsya.[21] The Padma[22]and the Markandeya[23]also accept the functional resemblance between the king and some of the deities. All this evidence shows that the king was not regarded by our political writers as divine, though they regarded the king’s office as such. They generally state that the king resembles the deities only in the performance of his regal functions. It is further to be noted that if they compare the king to some deities, they also compare him to the father, the mother and the preceptor because of a similar resemblance of functions.[24]

Kings compared with the deities for acquiring goodnesses.

Sukra, further emphatically points out at one place that kingship is due to previous merit[25] and at another place attributes it to mere valour and bravery.[26]

But at no place does he state that the kingship arises because particles of different gods enter into the body of a king, as has been crudely done by Manu. He neither invests him with infallibility, nor enjoins absolute obedience to him, even if he was a wicked or worthless ruler, as was done by Narada in the earlier period.[27] On the other hand, he regards the bad, vicious and reprobate  king as a demon incarnate, and advises the subjects not to obey him.[28]He further calls that king a dacoit, if he forsakes his duty, disobeys the high ideal of kingship and oppresses the subjects.[29]According to Sukra the question does not arise at all as to whether the subjects are to obey such a king; he openly encourages them to intrigue and conspire against him, and even to attempt to dethrone him[30] with the help of neighbouring or feudatory kings, and to offer the crown to a virtuous prince or to any other capable member of the royal family.[31] The advice was not so difficult to follow in the past, when there were several feudatory rulers aspiring to the imperial position and when the ruler possessed an army not much more efficient than the forces that could be raised by the oppressed subjects in co-operation with the feudatory, whom they wanted to enthrone.

There was however another school, probably of courtiers, which was inclined to accept the divinity of the king more or less in a literal sense. According to this school, the king was regarded as a divine incarnation. Some of the epigraphs of our age were written by authors, who subscribed to this view.

The climax of this tendency is to be seen in the practice of building temples not only in honour of dead kings, as was the case under the Kushanas, but even of living kings. In one of the Chahamana records, king Luntigadeva is said to have set up images of himself and his queen, this obviously must have been done for being enshrined in the temple.[32] It is quite possible that the prevailing tendency of ascribing divinity to the royal personages and of regarding them as divine incarnations may be responsible for the erection of temples to living kings.

Whether the advocates of this school, which regarded the king as a divine incarnation, were prepared to hold him as infallible and above public scrutiny, we do not know.
Probably they did so, as would appear from a passage in the Kadambari.[33] It is very likely that the political writers of our period like Sukra may have propounded their theories as a reply to the extreme views advocated by the courtiers and expressed in some of our epigraphs.

King's Functions and his Duties : The king was the supreme head of the executive judicial and military administration. His paramount duty as the head of the Government was to protect the people and work for their welfare. Sukra clearly states at one place that the highest Dharma of the king isto protect the subjects and to put down the wicked. [34]Kamandaka says that the protection of the subjects is possible only if law and order are preserved in society; the king should take proper steps to achieve this goal. [35]

Being the head of the judicial administration, the king was to administer law impartially and to ascertain carefully whether proper justice was administered by lower courts. The monarch, states, Sukra, who proceeds according to the dictates of law, is blessed with virtue, wealth and enjoyment.[36] Kamandaka advises the king to impose just punishment upon the culprits according to the offences committed by them.[37]

Being the head of the military administration, the king looked after the proper maintenance of the army and had to take steps to increase its efficiency. He was to make proper arrangements for the training and discipline of the fighting forces. The king, who does not increase the strength of his army, who does not protect his subjects and who does not make other princes to pay him tributes is compared to barren sesame.[38]

Besides these functions, the king had to promote Dharma, Artha and Kama for the religious, socio-economic and aesthetic progress of the society. He was to encourage virtue and morality. He was to help all the religious sects. He was to maintain or support hospitals, rest houses and educational institutions, and had to encourage trade, industry, agriculture and fine arts.

Conclusion.

We should always remember that there was always a supposition that a king should be alike Lord Rama, Lord Krishna, Ashoka the great, Samudragupta, Chandragupta II and Harshvardhan.

As it is assumed that their source or origin is from the sun or moon, so they are known as Suryavanshi and Chandravanshi respectively. The other opinions are too that the important four clans of Rajputas (son of a raja) as  Paramaras ( Malwa), Pratiharas (Rajasthan- Gujrat),Chauhans (Ajmer) and Chalukayas (Gujarat)  are born from the alters of fire, as known as Aganikulas specially known for their bravery in history throughout India. So divinity was supposed to be instilled among them and there had been always a comparison with the godly kings.

Dr. Madhup Raman.
Free lance Cartoonist, Blogger, Vlogger,

Biharsharif. Nalanda

Copyright @ M.S.Media.

  

References.

---

[1] PV, Canto V, Verse 68; Bijolia Inscription, Verse 14.

[2] PV, Canto V, Verse 8; 

[3] Delhi Siwalik Pillar Inscription (No.11) Verse 2.

[4] Hansi Stone Inscription, Verse 9.

[5] PV, Canto IX, Verse 86; JRAS, 1913, p. 278

[6] Sukra, I, 86-87

[7] Ibid., I, 148-9

[8] Agni-Purana, 239, 2-5

[9] Nvk., p. 62

[10] Ibid.

[11] EI., I, p. 35

[12] EI., I, p. 131

[13] EI., I, p. 195

[14] EI., I, p. 41

[15] EI., I, p. 33

[16] EI., II, p. 183

[17] IA., XVI, p. 205

[18] EI., XVIII, p. 95

[19] Sukra, I, pp. 73-77

[20] Agni-Purana, 225, 16

[21] Matsya-Purana; Ch.22

[22] Padma-Purana, I, 30.45ff.

[23] Markandeya-Purana, 27,21,ff.

[24] Sukra, I, pp. 78-80

[25] Ibid., I, p. 20

[26] Ibid., I, 26-27

[27] Narada, XVIII, p. 31

[28] Sukra, I, p. 87

[29] Sukra, II, 257

[30] Ibid., IV, Sect. I, 113

[31] Ibid.

[32] EI., IX, 79-81

[33] Sukanasa’s address, Kadambari, p. 206

[34] Sukra, I, 14

[35] Kamandaka , I, 15

[36] Kamandaka, VI, 15

[37] Kamandaka, VI, 15

[38] Sukra, I, 126