influential men of the tribe, who governed it.

The self-governing village bodies called sabhas of the Vedic period gradually evolved into panchayats (council of five persons). Panchayats were functional institutions of grassroots governance in almost every village in the subcontinent. The Village Panchayat or elected council had large powers, both executive and judicial. Land was distributed by this panchayat which also collected taxes out of the produce and paid the government's share on behalf of the village. Above a number of these village councils there was a larger panchayat or council to supervise and interfere if necessary. The institution of panchayat exists, nay flourishes till this day.

According to AL Basham (The Wonder That Was India) the Buddhist scriptures talk of republics in the foothills of the Himalayas and in North Bihar. These were mostly the tributary to greater kingdoms, but practiced internal autonomy. One such tribe was the Sakyas, who dwelt on the borders of modern Nepal, and to whom the Buddha himself belonged. Though in later legend the Buddha’s father, Shuddhodhana, is depicted as a mighty king living in great pomp, he was in fact a tribal chief, depending on the support of a large number of householders, who gathered regularly to discuss tribal politics in a meeting hall (in Pali santhagara). The most powerful non-monarchical state at this time was the Vrjjian confederacy, of which the chief element was the tribe of Lichhavis, and which resisted the great Ajatshatru. Similarly, Basham points out, Jaina sources tell of an inner council of thirty-six tribal chieftains controlling the affairs of Lichhavis, Mallas and allied tribes in their war with Ajatshatru. The whole confederation had a raja-in-chief, an executive head who, like the raja of the Sakyas, seems to have held office for life and often to have passed on his office to his heir.

The Buddhist clergy is apparently modeled on the constitution of one of these republican tribes, perhaps Sakyas. Buddhist monastic affairs were managed by a general meeting of the monks, with a regular system of procedure and standing orders. All decisions needed unanimous consent of the assembled monks. Differences which could not be resolved were referred to a committee of elders.

Thus, we see that India’s democratic traditions are ancient and deep-rooted. No wonder, despite being desperately poor in the initial years after independence, India has functioned as a genuinely free, liberal and successful democracy since 1947.

<< 1 2