Jaina Political Thought

Author(s): G C Pandey
Publisher: Prakrit Bharti Academy

Page 47

tappadirūpaga-vavāhare". Here viruddha-rajiaikkame is one of the transgressions to be avoided by a member of the Jaina lay community. This phrase was later on clearly understood to mean 'acting against the authority of the king, though an earlier interpretation took it to mean the crossing of the boundaries of other kings. Thus the comentary on Tattvartha says "Viruddhe hi rajye sarvam eva steyam adanam bhavati." All acceptence becomes theft if it is in contravention of the state. Thelate Jawahar Lalji Maharaj pertinently pointed out that what is referred to here is not the king but the state, rajja. What is prohibited here
nsgression against the state, not simply disobedience of the ruler or only the unauthorised crossing of frontier posts to avoid the payment of dues. The avoidance of taxes and other dues within the boundaries of the state is also prohibited under this rule. Thus although viruddha-raijaikkame may have a territorial and economic emphasis, it does iniply that the authority of the state within its territories and boundaries inust be obeyed as a moral rule even when it imposes finacial dues which a merchant may be specially tempted to evade. Such evasion is here considered the moral equivalent of theft.
It should be noticed, however, that obeying the king per se is not treated here as a moral obligation. The king has the right to taxation and this ought to be respected as part of a moral conception of property. In the first place property has to be respected and it is this that makes adattadana a form of behaviour to be desisted from i.e., a moral rule formulated negatively. The emphasis is not on the inherent respectability of property but on the restriction of acquisitivness. Possessions are basically an encumbrance or upadhi. 'Not accepting what is not given recognizes individual possession and at the same time prohibits forcible interference with individual possession. It is in this context that the present rule of viruddha-rājjā-ikkame recognizes the right of the state to interfere with individual possession by levying dues and lays down the moral obligation of not evading such dues.
This is in line with the generally accepted ancient principle that since the king has theduty of providing protection to life and property, he is rightfully entitled to levy taxes. As to the extent and mode of such taxation, issues which have loomed large in modern political thought, we have to remember that these were determined by customarylaw in ancient times, a law which may be seen reflected in Brahmanical canonical law. Although in practice the taxes varied according to time and place, they tended to follow custom even though they might be formally sanctioned by charters issued by ruling authorities. The character of the Jaina canon rules out any detailed reflection of such laws. In the commentarial literature, however,
34