Amātya in the Śiśupālavadha

The great poet Māgha of the 7^th century was enlighted with the political knowledge from the ancient political scripture i.e. the Manusaṃhitā and the Arthaśāstra etc. and reflected his political ideas in his epic named Śiśupālavadha. In the social, system of state policy realizing the importance of ministers in politics, Māgha indicated in the verse number eighty two of the second canto of his epic.

We get the word amātya (minister) from the śloka no. fifty six (56) and eighty two (82) of the second canto.These ślokas are—

“guṇānāmāyathātathyādarthaṃ viṇlāvayanti ye |
amātyavyañjanā rājñāṃ dūṣyāste śattusaṃjñitāḥ ||” 2.56 ||^[1]

“Those who spoil the cause on account of the unfit application of the policies, are merely in the garb of ministers and designated as enemy and should be caused by the king.^”120

Unskilled minister is actually enemy in the guise of a minister. He does not apply the measure which is applicable among the six fold measures. Such unskilled and ignorant persons are not the friend of the Vijigīṣu king, but they stay with the king like his ministers. The Vijigīṣu king should not follow his suggestion.

So Mallinātha says—

“ataḥ stokaṃ na pratiroddhavyam iti bhāvaḥ |”

Pleasant words cause anger of the angry person. So, application of repression is appropriate for hostile Śiśupāla. With the apprehension that the ministers like Uddhava may oppose this comment Balarāma chanted this verse. Such persons deserve contempt. Those persons in the guise of ministers are really enemies. They should be given up by the king, as they are upsetters of the king’s job. They are enemy of the king in guis of friend. They are upsetters of the kings job. without applying the sixfold policy like alliance and war. Where alliance in needed they apply there war or march towards enemy. So, sure success comes to failure. Balarāma says the king should not pay heed to the words of such persons. The king should pay heed to his words. He must not oppose him.

So, Vāmana says—

vastutastu śatruriti saṃñjā eṣāṃ sañjātā śatrusaṃjñitā śatravaḥ eva te kūṭamantriṇāṃ rājñāṃ dūṣayitumarhā dūṣyā garhyāḥ tyajyāḥ iti yāvat | ataḥ stokaṃ na pratiroddhavyam iti |

[Sarvaṃkaṣā commentary of this verse]

“vuddhiśastraḥ prakṛtyaṅgo ghanasaṃvṛtikañcukaḥ |
cārekṣaṇo dūtamukhaḥ puruṣaḥ ko'pi pārthivaḥ ||” 2.82 ||^[2]

“The monarch is extraordinary whose intellect is his weapon, whose various parts of his state are his limbs, whose close counsel is his armour, whose spies are his eyes and whose messengers are his mouth.”^[3]

“Ordinary runs of monarchs are not expected to be praise worthy, paragons of administrative excellence. The king who satrikes down his enemy by dint of sober intelligence, who identifies the parts of his body such as hands, feet, head etc. with the various members of his state such as master, minister, allies etc. i.e. who considers these members of the state to be his veritable limbs wherewith he can move an act. Whose close counsel serves the purpose of a strong armour, who sees not with his own eyes but with his eye like spies, who speaks through the mouth of his messengers, is indeed a rich rarity for whom it is foolish and futile to look for parallel.”^122.a

So, without ministers a king is handicapped. It is impossible to run the administration alone for a king. When a body part is out of order then the embodied soul becomes handicapped. Like that without the ministers’ activity it is sure for the kingdom to be handicapped. Even in such circumstances a king is unable to be successful.

In this respect commentator Mallinātha said—

“tadvaikalye rājño vaikalyaṃ syāditi” |

With out ambassador the king can not complete or perform all of his work which is possible with speech.

Commntator Mallinātha said—

“sa eva mukhaṃ vāgyasyāsau dūtamukhaḥ | anyathā mukasyeva vāgvyavahārāsiddhau tatsādhya sādhyā kāryya prativandhaḥ syāt iti bhāvaḥ | evambhūtaḥ parthivaḥ kaapi puruṣaḥ anya evāyaṃ lokavilakṣaṇaḥ pumān ityarthaḥ | ato rājñā vuddhādisampannena bhavitavyam | etadeva pramattatvam | anyathā svarūpahāni syāt iti bhāvaḥ |”

The consultation with the minister should be kept secretly. If the consultation is exposed the pañcāṅgamantra will not be fruitful. So the meeting hall for such discussion should be well planned. We find about this matter in the Arthaśāstra and in the Manusaṃhitā.

Poet Māgha had the conception about this matter which is seen in verse no. two of the second canto. Vijigīṣu kings counsult in a council. This is discussed in this verse.

“sārddhamuddhava sīribhyāmathāsāvāsadat sadaḥ |
gurukāvyānugāṃ vibhraccāndrīmabhinabhaḥ śriyam |” 2.2 ||^[4]

“Then he holding the beauty of the moon followed by Jupiter and Venus in the sky, went to the council with Uddhava and the holder of the plough (Balarāma).^[5]

The mellow beauty of the moon is lightened tenfold when followed by venus and Jupiter. Physical charms of the God Kṛṣṇa received an additional beauty by being followed by Uddhava and Balarāma. Here the smile is simple. As Venus and Jupiter operate in adding to the lunar beauty, So Uddhava and Balarāma acted in embellishing the God Kṛṣṇa rare loveliness when Śrīkṛṣṇa was going to the meeting hall.

In this context Manu said—

“giripṛṣṭhaṃ samāruhya prāsādaṃ vā rahogataḥ |
arapye niḥśalākevā mantrayedavibhāvitaḥ ||” 7.147 ||^[6]

“Ascending the back of a hill or a terrace, and retiring there in a lonely place, or in a solitary forest, let him consult with them unobserved.”^[7]

If we go through the second canto of the Śiśupālavadh we come to know that Māgha has perfect Knowledge about ministers as the name of the canto is mantravarṇana because, the king consults with his ministers only.

Śrīkṛṣṇa became confused knowing the double task to be performed at the same time by him. The tasks were attending the Rājasūya sacrifice organised by Yudhiṣṭḥira and the other one to kill Śiśupāla which was requested by God through Devarṣi Nārada. He consulted with Balarāma and minister Uddhava in the meeting hall to get the way of the situation. Balarāma advised to kill Śiśupāla is the first preference but Uddhava suggested that attending the Rājasūya sacrifice is more important.

In the metting hall no one should be present except the consulting ministers.

Even there should not be any pillar in the meeting hall. But few pillars are expected in the hall.

“ratnastambheṣu saṃkrāntapratimāste cakāśire |
ekākino'pi paritaḥ pauruṣeyavṛtā iva ||” 2.4 ||^[8]

“With their images reflected upon the gemmy pillars, they, though alone, were shining as if surrounded by an assemblage of men on all sides.”^[9]

Councel chamber should be lonely. Nobody other than counsellor should be present there. Probably the poet influenced by the rules of the Arthaśāstra and the Manusaṃhitā.

In the council chamber, only the three men, Kṛṣṇa, Balarāma and Uddhava were present. None else was in that solitary company. Their images were being reflected on the golden pillars on all sides. It seemed as if, they were surrounded by other men also. There was an egregious illusion produced by the reflection of their bodies on the diaphanous pillars of gold. So, they three together formed one united body having no other persons in their company.

A king should hold consultation the palacetop or in a forest having no pillars, no windows and having no root or corner and not being seen by others-in this way kāmandaki prohibits to make the consultation-place full of many pillars. Yet, there was no fault there, because, kāmandaki also indicated the place to be solitary.

“mantrabhūmeḥ stambhaprācuryaniṣedho gamyate, tathāpi tasyāpi vijanopalakṣaṇatvāt adoṣa iti bhāvaḥ |”

(Sarvaṃkāṣā commentary of this verse).

In this context commentator Mallinātha said in his commentary of this verse—

etena vijanatvamuktam | yadyapi ‘niḥstambhe nirgavākṣe ca nirbhittyastarasaṃśraye | prāsādāgre tvaraṇye vā mantrayedavibhāvita:” ||

(Sarvaṃkaṣā commentary of Mallinātha of this verse).

In the epic of Māgha it is seen that king makes consultation with each minister separately and get advice from them.

Māgha also said about this in his epic verse No. twelve in second canto.

Śrīkṛṣṇa wants to hear the opinion from Uddhava and Balarāma in the meeting hall.

“mama tāvanmatamidaṃ śruyatāmaṅga! vāmapi |
jñātasāro'pi khalvekaḥ sandigghe kāryavastuni ||” 2.12 ||^[10]

“My opnion is this (unitl I hear yours) sirs, I should hear opinion of you two also. One when alone, though acquainted with the essence (of a thing) certainly doubts about the thing to be performed.”^[11]

A Vijigīṣu kings takes decision according to the advisory council.

Here Śrīkṛṣṇa is the speaker. He has expressed his opinion and asked to Balarāma and Uddhava to express their opinion. Though Śrīkṛṣṇa is prudent and acquainted with the essence of a thing he believes it right to take opinion of others two about the thing to be performed.

Hari dilated upon the essential pros and cons of the whole affair. He was not at all unwilling to ride roughshod over the views of the two others whose intelligence and sagacity were not to be left at a discount. Hari knew well that however through an acquaintance he might have with the important quint essential main issues and side issues unaided opinion of a single person however prudent and penetrating. He was to count for nothing unless that was corroborated with the excellent accumulated experiences of others will known for sound sense and clear comprehension. Actuated by this principle, Hari hankering after the salient sapience and calm consideration which he expected to find in both Balarāma and Uddhava.

After proper consultation king should not take much time to apply the five division of counsel otherwise it can be exposed.

In this context Māgha said—a Vijigīṣu kings should apply the five division of counsel before the beginning of his act. So, there is no counsel for king except the five division of counsel.

This can be clearly realised through the speech of Balarāma.

“sarvakāryaśarīreṣu muktāṅgaskandhapañcakam |
saugatānāmivātmānyo nāsti mantro mahībhṛtām ||” 2.28 ||^[12]

“As the Buddhists have no other soul save and except the five groups, so kings in their affairs have no counsel save and except the five divisions.”^[13]

According to Buddhistic philosophy, there is no separate entity of soul . According to this philosophy life is some total of the five skandhas–

1. rūpa,
2. vedanā,
3. vijñāna,
4. saṃgā and
5. saṃskāra.

Buddhists maintain that sould is the grand totality of these five skandha’ s. It has no distinct existence separate from them. So, the authors of political science hold that there is no counsel other than the five aṅga’ s or branches.

Kāmandaka says about this five branches—

“sahāyāḥ sādhanopāyāḥ vibhāgaḥ deśakālayoḥ |
vipatteśca pratīkāraḥ siddhiḥpañcaṅgamiṣyate ||

It is adopted by a king. In order to ensure supreme success a powerful potentate should not leave these five aṅga’s at a discount under any circumstances.

To live by them and to live in them should be the opus magnum of a cautious kings life.

After consultation the Vijigīṣu kings should not delay to start his performance.

“mantro yodha ivādhīraḥ sarvāṅgaiḥ saṃvṛttairapi |
ciraṃ na sahate syātuṃ parebhyo bhedaśaṅkayā ||” 2.29 ||^[14]

“A counsel, though marked by all its branches concealed, can not stand long for fear of divulgation to others, as a cowardly warrior though marked by all his limbs protected or covered, can not stand long for fear of being pierced by enemies.”^[15]

A warrior mightily armed and equipped, should not indulge in any guilty. Delay for such a thing is sure to end in a deprecable disaster. There is every probability of his being pierced from limb to limb by his enemies. In the same manner a counsel, carefully cogitated is sure to be divulged to others and loss its important weight, if a long delay is allowed to occur between its conception an excecution.

The idea of five divisions of counsel is reflected in the Śiśupālavadha which is discussed vividly in the Manusaṃhitā and the Arthaśāstra.

According to the political scripture testing the ministers through different types of allurement has been reflected in fifty sixth verse of second canto of this epic. According to Balarāma some persons gets the post of ministers of the king and harms his activities, basically these disguised ministers are the enemy of the king. Such type of disguised ministers do not apply six fold policy properly but they still hold the post of ministers. Though the words of Balarāma about disguised ministers specifically indicates to Uddhava but such type of ministers are really harmful for the king. Appointment of minister through allurement reminds us that poet Māgha was well versed about the quality, ability etc.of ministers according to political scripture.

The main source of increasing power of a Vijigīṣu king are council power and power of energy. The suggestions for such topic is also given by ministers. Balarāmas words give clear conception about ministers. Kings should listen the opinion of the ministers to make powerfull himself. After appropriate council if king follows perseverance than his success is sure.

Mallināytha says in this respect in the verse no seventy six of second canto of Śiśupālavadha—

‘utsāhaḥ tathā mantto'pi grāhyaḥ na tu kevalotsāhaḥ’ |

(Sarvaṃkaṣā commentary of Mallinātha of this verse No. 76).

The verse is—

“prajñotsāhāvataḥ svāmī yatetādhātumātmani |
tau hi mūlamudeṣyantyā jigīṣorātmasampadaḥ ||” 2.76 ||^[16]

“Therefore a king should try to accomplish for himself counsel and enterprise because these two are the source of the future rising prosperity of a king who is desirous of victory.”^[17]

The main source of energy of a Vijigīṣu king are counsel and encouragement. To gain the power Vijigīṣu king should be careful for these two subjects.

The king would be intellectual and encourageous also. He should give same importance to the encouraging power and counsel power. Encouragement is not enough for victory. If the Vijigīṣu king takes appropriate care about counsel then success will come sure. This verse stands for the speech of Uddhava. This statement of Uddhava is the counter statement of Balarāma.

From this verse we come to know that the power of courage and counsel both are necessary for a Vijigīṣu king to win his enemy. And this is also a characteristic feature of Vijigīṣu king.

Māgha was well versed about the amātya, which is one of the rājyāṅga. We come to know about this from the second canto of this epic verse No. ninety four. As exercise keps our body healthy similarly to make rājyāṅga healthy six fold policy must be properly applied. By accepting ministers opinion their mental strength can be increased and also the king can be successful in his activities.

Footnotes and references:

[1]:

Haridas Siddhantavagisha, (Ed.): Śiśupālavadha, p. 73.

[2]:

Haridas Siddhantavagisha: Op.cit., 85.

[3]:

Sitanath kavyaratna & Madhab Dass Sankhyatirtha: Op.cit.,pp. 234-235.; ^122a ibid., p. 235.

[4]:

Haridas Siddhantavagisha: Op.cit., p. 46.

[5]:

Sitanath kavyaratna & Madhab Dass Sankhyatirtha: Op. cit,. p. 7.

[6]:

Manabendu Bandyopadhaya: Op.cit., p. 694.

[7]:

Ashokanath Shastri: Op.cit., p. 153.

[8]:

Haridas Siddhantavagisha, (Ed.): Śiśupālavadha, p. 47.

[9]:

Sitanath kavyaratna & Madhab Dass Sankhyatirtha: Op. cit., P. 13.

[10]:

Haridas Siddhantavagisha: Op.cit., p. 51.

[11]:

Sitanath kavyaratna & Madhab Dass Sankhyatirtha: Op. cit., p. 38.

[12]:

Haridas Siddhantavagisha: Op.cit., p. 59.

[13]:

Sitanath kavyaratna & Madhab Dass Sankhyatirtha: Op. cit., p. 82.

[14]:

Haridas Siddhantavagisha: Op.cit., p.60.

[15]:

Sitanath kavyaratna & Madhab Dass Sankhyatirtha: Op. cit., p. 86.

[16]:

Haridas Siddhantavagisha: Op.cit., p. 82.

[17]:

Sitanath kavyaratna & Madhab Dass Sankhyatirtha: Op. cit., p. 218.