Indian Antiquary Vol 58

Author(s): Richard Carnac Temple, Charles E A W Oldham, S Krishnaswami Aiyangar, Devadatta Ramkrishna Bhandarka
Publisher: Swati Publications

Page 196

180
THE INDIAN ANTIQUARY
a regular system of transfer from one station or district to another, designed to prevent the abuses apt to arise when officials remain too long in a particular locality." There are certain aspects of the question which have to be discussed before the proposed interpretation can be accepted as
final.
The first thing we have to note is how far the Sukraniti is to be considered as an authority. It is a very late work, which I would hesitate very much to depend on. Secondly, there is no mention of cabinet ministers in the passage of the Sukraniti referred to by Mr. Jayaswal.3
"The Sukraniti provides for the transfer of cabinet ministers with their two under-secretaries every three, five, seven or ten years." The passage as translated by Prof. B. K. Sarkar is as follows: "He should always appoint three men for each department, the wisest of them all at the head and the two others as overseers, for three, five, seven or ten years, and having noticed each officer's qualifications for the work entrusted, he should never give office for ever to anybody and every'body. He should appoint men to offices after examining the fitness of the persons for them. For who does not get intoxicated by drinking of the vanity of offices !" 5
As this translation does not appear to be very literal, I venture to translate it as follows: "There should be one chief officer, under whom there will be two overseers of that department. The transfer is to be made after 3, 5, 7 or 10 years. His (i.e., the officer's) work and cleverness in doing it have to be considered in 'transferring him. Seeing that he is fit for that post, he is to be appointed to that post, for every man gets intoxicated by enjoying a post for a long time. For that purpose he is to be appointed to some other post, provided that he is fit for it."
Mr. Jayaswal assumes that "a defined period of office was regarded as a salutary provision as reminding the Ministers of their
limited
[ SEPTEMBER, 1929
sojourn and making them mindful of their res ponsibility."7
May I submit my reason for not accepting his view ?
First, I beg to refer to the Sukraniti itself, where the king is advised to appoint his chief advisers to each post by rotation.8
3 JBORS., vol. IV, pt. i (p. 37).
4 The Sacred Books of the Hindus series.
There does not seem to be any question of going out. And the reason is explained in the next bloka, which says that "the king should not make his officers more powerful than himself."
There is another reason-a very strong one, and this we can trace in the Edicts themselves. In the very Edict where the term occurs, we are told that the officers were to proceed for their other business, this being their lay business which had to be included with the special purpose, i.e., the inculcation of the Law of Piety. The Provincials' Edict also lays down that "in accordance with the Law of Piety, I shall send forth in rotation every five years such persons as are of mild and temperate disposition and regardful of the sanctity of life, who knowing this my purpose will comply with my instruction." And it continues, "when the high officers aforesaid ..proceed on transfer in rotation, then without neglecting their own (ordinary) business, they will carry out the we consider in king's instruction." And when this connection that the great king Asoka himself had tours of piety, when he visited ascetics and Brahmanas, with10 liberality to them, visited elders with largess of gold, visited the people of the country with instructions in the Law of Piety and discussion of that Law, we can safely say that his subordinates also, from the Râjukas downwards, had to perform these tours of piety. Taxila and Ujjain were very far off from the capital, and hence the tours of piety to these two places were to be undertaken after 3 years, i.e., shorter periods 11 had to be observed, in view of the longer distance from the capital.
J. N. SAMADDAR, 13
......
5 Prof. Sarkar adds the following note-"Here are rules for the management of each Adhikára or jurisdiction, i.e., department. Daréaka-inspectors, overseers. Hayana-year. The term of office or tenure of appointment is for 3, 5, 7, or 10 years according to Karyakausalya, i.e., qualification. Sukracharya warns the king against bestowal of permanent offices. Appointment to posts should be according to time, during good behaviour. If the pride of position bewilders the officer, and he proves unworthy of the responsibility, he should be dismissed. Work is the sole test and recommendation for office."
I am indebted to Prof. S. N. Majumdar for helping me to translate it. 7JBORS., IV, 39.
These very terms have been used in the Sukraniti.
8 II, 107 and 108, paribardha. 10, 1 (Rock Edict VIII).
11 Mr. V. A. Smith observes: "We cannot explain with certainty why it was thought necessary to transfer the officials in the outlying provinces every three years." Aloka, p. 197. I venture to submit the above explanation.
12 This note, written by the late Professor J. N. Samaddar about four years ago would appear to have been mislaid in the press.-JOINT-EDITOR.