India Before Islam

Perhaps in return for conquest, arrogance and spoliation, India will teach us the tolerance and gentleness of the mature mind, the quiet content of the unacquisitive soul, the calm of the understanding spirit, and a unifying, a pacifying love for all living things.

—Historian Will Durant1

If I were asked under what sky the human mind has most fully developed some of its choicest gifts, has most deeply pondered over the greatest problems of life, and has found solutions of some of them which well deserve the attention even of those who have studied Plato and Kant, I should point to India.

—Philologist Max Müller2

The key Hindu concept of dharma—the right way, the sanctioned way, which all men must follow, according to their natures—is an elastic concept. At its noblest it combines self-fulfillment and truth to the self with the ideas of action as duty, action as its own spiritual reward, man as a holy vessel.

—Nobel laureate V.S. Naipaul3

To us the most striking feature of ancient Indian civilization is its humanity.

—Historian A.L. Basham4

Contact (between religions) is good. One should listen to and respect the doctrines professed by others. Beloved-of-the-Gods, King Piyadasi, desires that all should be well-learned in the good doctrines of other religions.

—Edicts of Ashoka #125

Those nanny goats, ewes and sows which are with young or giving milk to their young are protected, and so are young ones less than six months old. Cocks are not to be caponized, husks hiding living beings are not to be burnt and forests are not to be burnt either without reason or to kill creatures. One animal is not to be fed to another.

—Edicts of Ashoka #5

From delusion lead me to Truth

From darkness lead me to Light

From death lead me to Immortality.

—Brihad-Aranyaka Upanishad6

In speaking of the India that existed before the Islamic invasion it is probably best to conceive of it not as an individual nation but as a polyglot continent like Europe. It was an enormous territory, more than half the size of Europe, which had developed a distinct civilization all its own.7 Furthermore, it was a civilization which had been in continuous existence and development for more than 4,000 years. Even in the 21th century, Indian Brahmins still memorize and recite hymns which were composed more than a thousand years before the birth of Christ. Ordinary people still remember shadowy figures out of legend from even earlier.8

One of the hallmarks of this ancient civilization was, as numerous travelers remarked upon, its relative humanity. The words of A.L. Basham may stand for an impression shared by many:

Yet our overall impression is that in no other part of the ancient world were the relations of man and man, and of man and the state so fair and humane. In no other early civilization were slaves so few in number, and in no other ancient lawbook are their rights so well protected as in the Arthaśāstra. No other ancient lawgiver proclaimed such noble ideals of fair play in battle as did Manu. In all her history of warfare Hindu India has few tales to tell of cities put to the sword or of the massacre of non-combatants.9

Nature provided the people of India a great bounty of simple pleasures and luxuries. Perhaps in response to this, the civilization which developed there also developed impulses toward both self-denial and asceticism and occasional strenuous effort.10 As a general rule, Indian civilization was not acquisitive—a quality which shows up in various ways over the centuries, and not always to India’s benefit.11

In this chapter we will focus on the India governed by the Gupta Empire and immediately after. This period, which occurred between the 4th and 6th centuries AD, is commonly regarded as India’s Golden Age. It is the era when much of what we know of as Hinduism acquired its fullest and freest development. We will also consider the empire of Harsha Vardhana, who ruled a large expanse of northern India in the 7th century, a half century prior to the Muslim invasion. The civilization which Islamic invasion changed radically over fourteen centuries was shaped decisively by the Guptas and Harsha.

GOVERNANCE AND POLITICS

The Gupta Empire was ruled by kings, but the concept of kingship was much different from what emerged in Europe or Arabia. One critical difference is that the king was thought of primarily as a protector, not a figure concerned with human laws and regulations. Law was regarded as something provided by divine authority and social custom. A king who infringed upon social custom could quickly find himself in trouble with the Brahmins or the common people. The protection a king was expected to provide was both physical and moral—a king defended the social order and the proper way of life which was laid down in the sacred texts (the Vedas).12

A critical concept here is the idea of dharma. This word is difficult to translate with any precision, but it refers to what one might call cosmic justice—the sense of a “divinely ordained form of good conduct.”13 The king was expected to protect the dharma, or as we might call it, the sacred law. Dharma is part of the basis of Indian ethical thought. Dharma was essentially looked upon as inviolable, and a king’s commands were merely applications of sacred law rather than new law. Some remarkable rulers such as Asoka did issue orders which amounted to new law, but this is quite rare in Indian political history.14

The expectation that kings would rule in an ethical manner amounted to a practical limitation on kingship. Indian history provides examples of kings being overthrown by their councilors after failing to heed their advice and running into disaster. Moral perversity could prevent an heir to the throne from succeeding his father. One of the great Gupta rulers, Samudra Gupta, actually came to the throne for this reason after his father nominated him to succeed over other rival claimants.15

Another critical difference between Indian civilization and European or Arabian involves political conquest. According to custom and most of the sacred texts, three forms of conquest were recognized. One of these, known as “righteous conquest,” meant that one king defeated another then forced the defeated king to pay him homage and tribute. The defeated kingdom became a vassal of the victor, still ruled by the same ruler or his bloodline, but existing in a kind of feudal relationship of lord to king. A second form of empire was regarded as greedy conquest. The victor demanded booty and portions of territory from the defeated king. A third, known as “demoniac conquest” involved the political annihilation of the defeated kingdom and the complete incorporation of his territory into the kingdom of the victor. Almost all Indian sources and time-honored custom disapproved of the latter two types.16

As a result, pre-Islamic India was typically governed by patchworks of kingdoms existing in various complicated relationships as vassals. A vassal kingdom could range in influence from petty lords of the manor who were kings only in name to mighty lords in their own right who still mustered armies in their own name and posed significant threats to their overlords.17 Under strong rulers such as the Guptas and Harsha a unity of governance was imposed upon a wide area and vassals were comparatively unimportant, but under weaker kings the old patchwork of petty squabbling kingdoms would reemerge. When the Muslim invasions began in the 7th century, northern India was in one of these periods of disarray.

Some kings ignored the customary disapproval of absorbing conquered states. Samudra Gupta notably waged the second type, “conquest for gain,” upon several rivals and added them to the enormous Gupta Empire. By and large, however, the doctrine was that war should be waged for glory and homage rather than wealth and power. Righteous conquest “was the ideal which Hindu kings were expected to follow, and it is evident that they usually did so.”18

Rulers were also expected to hold to certain ideals of fair play and quasi-chivalric order in combat. Targeting of civilians, women, and children was almost unheard of. Execution of prisoners was shameful. While it was understood that in the heat of battle soldiers would infringe upon the rules out of expediency or necessity, by and large war was not particularly harsh as compared to other ancient civilizations.19

In one important respect the practice of ancient Indian government could be described as unfortunate based on later events. Taxes and other government income were typically stored for use in dire emergencies. As a result, even small kingdoms could accumulate significant hoards of wealth. Their reserves in turn became tempting targets for their rivals. It is certain that reports made by Muslim travelers of the royal treasures they saw in India were a significant factor “in encouraging the invasions which ultimately destroyed Hindu India.”20

CULTURAL ADVANCES

During the Gupta period and after it was expected that kings would be great patrons of art, letters, and learning. Some of the kings were creative themselves and left behind works of poetry and drama. Samudra Gupta was famous in his time as a talented musician.21 One of the greatest Gupta kings, Chandra Gupta II, gathered a circle of poets, philosophers, artists, scientists, and scholars to his capital.22 The emperor Harsha was also a patron of the arts who wrote three dramas which still survive.23

Consequently, the Gupta period was a time of great civilizational advance. So-called Arabic numerals, which can be found on the Rock Edicts of Ashoka (c256 BC, 1,000 years before Muhammad was born), were developed into a clear decimal system by Hindu scholars. A great Hindu mathematician named Aryabhata who lived during the Gupta period in the fifth century is credited with comprehending the number zero. He also divined that the earth rotates on its axis and explained solar and lunar eclipses by scientific methods.24 Algebra was also developed in India simultaneously with Greek developments.25

The prototype of chess was also developed in the Gupta empire. Four pieces corresponding to the modern pawn, knight, bishop, and rook were used. The pieces were made in imitation of the four basic divisions of the Hindu military: infantry, cavalry, elephants, and chariots (respectively).26 Like modern chess, the Indian game, which dates to the 6th century (although early precursor games have been found as far back as 2600 BC), features pieces with different abilities and victory depended upon the fate of one piece (the modern king).

In this period two of the great literary achievements of Hindu poetry acquired their final form. The epic Mahabharata became an enormous work of 107,000 octameter couplets built up by a series of poets over centuries. The Baghavad-Gita is a late addition to this poem—a text Will Durant refers to as “the New Testament of India, revered next to the Vedas themselves, and used in the law-courts like our Bible.”27 Interestingly, in this part of the poem the warrior prince Arjuna expresses the lofty religious goal of being unwilling to fight, while the god Krishna advocates that Arjuna fulfill his duty by entering combat. Durant speculates that the poem may be an attempt “to shake the Hindu soul … into a willingness to fight for India.”28 The romantic epic Ramayana also attained its final form just before the Gupta era, around the second century AD. Somewhat like Homer’s Odyssey, it tells the tale of a hero’s hardships and wanderings and his wife’s patient waiting to reunite with him.29

India made particularly notable advances in medicine and medical treatment. A Chinese traveler named Fa Xian who visited during the Gupta period to acquire Buddhist manuscripts remarks on the existence of free hospitals and other charitable institutions in the Gupta empire.30 In one of the religious texts, Arthava-veda, we find a list of diseases with their symptoms among the religious hymns and ceremonies.31 Hindu physicians were so well respected, Caliph Haroun al-Rashid imported several to organize hospitals and medical schools in Baghdad.32

Unfortunately, some of India’s most magnificent cultural creations from the Gupta period no longer exist. When Muslim invaders sacked the former Gupta capital of Kanauj in 1018, they reportedly destroyed 10,000 temples there.33 Northern India received the brunt of the damage, particularly during the first few centuries of Islamic invasion. Most of the architectural achievements of the fifth and sixth centuries were completely destroyed.34 Durant has said, “We shall never be able to do justice to Indian art, for ignorance and fanaticism have destroyed its greatest achievements, and have half ruined the rest.”35

THE IMPORTANCE OF ETHICS

One of the most-remarked upon features of ancient Indian civilization was the relatively law-abiding nature of its people. The Greek traveler Megasthenes in the third century BC observed this quality. The Chinese Buddhist Fa Xian noted the same, in particular “the peacefulness of India, the rarity of serious crime, and the mildness of the administration.” He even claimed he was able to travel from one end of the country to the other without being molested or needing to provide a passport. Early Arab travelers reported similar aspects of the culture.36

Fa Xian traveled during the reign of Chandra Gupta II (c380 – 413 AD), when the Empire was at its peak. During that time, humanitarian ideals seem to have moderated the formerly fierce legal punishments of earlier days. Whereas before there were provisions for the death penalty, Fa Xian noted that it was never used during his stay and that most crimes were punished by fines (although repeat offenders were subject to having their right hands cut off).37 Legal affairs were taken very seriously. Brahmins, who were normally exempt from significant punishments, could have their property seized if they were unjustor corrupt judges. Interestingly, the sacred texts also provide psychological tests to be used on witnesses to determine their validity; Basham reported these tests are quite sound.38

A guiding theme was that it was better to do one’s own duty (that is, fulfill one’s dharma) badly than to do another’s well. Society was conceived of as an ordered hierarchy of classes of people each doing their assigned duties. Brahmins were to worship and uphold the sacred law. Kshatriyas were to fight and govern. Vaisyas were to work and trade. Sudras were tradesmen and handicraft workers who operated much like the later European guilds.39 Calling the system a caste system is somewhat inaccurate, as many scholars have noted. It may be more accurate to think of these four “castes” as social classes.40 As Basham has argued, it was really after Muslim invasions that Hindus began to cling mightily to the caste system as a way of maintaining their cultural identity:

The Hindu, living under an alien political order imposed from above, retained his cultural individuality largely through his caste, which received most of the loyalty elsewhere felt towards king, nation and city.41

Interestingly enough, the caste system was used by ancient Indians to accommodate invaders and visitors of all races and walks of life. Prior to the Muslim invasions, it was possible for any invader to be adopted into the social order of India via addition to the rank of Kshatriya. The great Hindu lawgiver Manu describes the warlike peoples on the fringes of Indian civilization—the Greeks, Scythians, and Parthians—as Kshatriya people who could be re-incorporated into Indian society by returning them to their dharma.42

Particularly noteworthy, given the changes that Islamic invasion would bring, is the role of the slave in ancient India. Virtually every ancient civilization made use of slavery, but nowhere else was it such a mild and little-used institution as in India. Slaves were not simply chattel in India. Masters owed duties to them and did not have a right over their lives or to abandon them in old age as often happened elsewhere in the world. Some of the Indian books on dharma severely limit the master’s right to punish his slave physically.43

In the Arthaśāstra, there are particularly liberal regulations laid down for slaves. Composed by the Brahmin lawgiver Chanakya in the third or fourth century BC, this text grants rights to slaves almost unheard of in the ancient world. Slaves are allowed to own and inherit property and to spend their own money as they wish. Slaves of the upper classes were not forced to perform duties which would defiled them. Significantly, the chastity of slave girls was protected. A master who raped his slave must set her free and pay compensation. If she were to have a child by this act, both mother and child were to be set free.44

Under the emperor Harsha northern India experienced a great humanitarian age. The eating of meat was discouraged or forbidden. Harsha himself instituted a charity festival to be performed at five-year intervals. All the leaders in Harsha’s territory were invited, and the surplus wealth in the state treasury was distributed amongst the needy. A Chinese traveler who witnessed one of these festivals describes his astonishment at the sheer amount of wealth involved.45

THE HINDU RELIGION

It would take far too long to explain all the ins and outs of Hindu religious and philosophical thought. We will focus therefore on several of its most defining characteristics and the qualities which are most at odds with Islam. One particularly noteworthy quality is how the religion spurred interest in sciences. Indian astronomy and mathematics were initially developed by Brahmins eager to learn more precise methods for the performance of their religious duties. Grammar and philology were also highly developed as scholars sought to better understand the Vedas and other religious texts left behind by their predecessors.46

Another feature is the proliferation of different systems of thought in Hinduism. Durant identifies six prominent systems which he considers “orthodox.” All six make assumptions which he describes as the bases of Hindu thought: that the Vedas are inspired, that reasoning is less reliable as a guide to reality and truth than direct perception or feeling, that the purpose of knowledge and philosophy is release from the world not control of it, and that the goal of thought is freedom from suffering.47 Two prominent schools of Hindu philosophy are Yoga and Vedanta.

At the same time, there is no distinct sense of “heresy” in ancient Hindu thought. Hindus themselves arranged the systems of philosophy in two categories, Astika systems which affirm, and Nastika systems which deny. But what the systems are affirming or denying is the authority of the Vedas. Nastika systems include religions such as Buddhism, which were still generally accepted in Indian culture. Durant concludes that Hindu philosophy placed no significant barriers against free thought. A thinker always had wide latitude for speculation—the only practical requirement for intellectual respectability being that one follow the dharma.48

The focus of Hindu philosophy and religion was on epistemology and ethics rather than dogmatic or exclusivist theology. Thinkers tried to address questions such as how do we know what we think we know and what constitutes a believable authority. Disputations were much enjoyed. In the Upanishads we read about a king who set apart one day during a religious festival for a philosophical competition. The winner received 1,000 cows and a pile of gold.49 Simply put, this approach to philosophy was destroyed by the Islamic invasions.50

Learning was so prized that ancient India developed several major universities and provided funds to maintain them. One of the most famous of these was the Buddhist university of Nalanda. Founded soon after the death of the Buddha, this university received state support to conduct its inquiries. At its height, it had 10,000 students, 100 lecture areas, immense libraries full of books, and six large dormitories four stories high. Candidates for study were presented with philosophical problems as a barrier to entry. Those who were admitted received free tuition, room, and board. But they also had to hold to a rigid monastic discipline. Interactions with women were forbidden and celibacy was required.51 Almost every university in northern India was destroyed by Muslim invaders.

In 1197 Nalanda was burned to the ground and its monks butchered.52 Its library was left burning for six months.

The importance of the temple in Hindu culture is also worth noting. Most cities were built around two primary points of interest: the palace and the temple. In some cases, the temple could be quite elaborate, forming a “city in miniature.” Temples were major employers and paid people from the wealth provided to them from pilgrims and the faithful who donated it. Temples also maintained schools and refuges for sick men and animals. They provided charity for the poor.53 In later chapters, you will read a lot about the destruction of these temples. Keep in mind the importance of each to the religious and cultural life of the people who lived in the area.

ORDINARY LIFE

Government in ancient India took an active interest in organizing and regulating the lives of its people. Many resources such as mines, pearl fisheries, and large forests were either directly worked by criminals or serfs under government observation or kings would hire out entrepreneurs to work them and collect a percentage of their profits in return. Large-scale farming was carried out on a share-cropping basis and proceeds stored in state granaries. During the Gupta Empire, the state owned manufactories for the production of finished goods such as textiles. These manufactories would often be staffed with poor women in need of money, not unlike the houses of industry established to help the indigent in Elizabethan times.54

As a rule, people were well-educated. Durant estimates that literacy was higher under Ashoka than in the India of 1938.55 Most students would attend school for reading, writing, and arithmetic as one would expect, but the focus of ancient India education was on the development of moral character rather than intellect. Children would study at a grammar school from age five to age eight then if they wished would apprentice to a guru until age 20. During the latter education they would learn arts and crafts, medicine, logic, grammar, and philosophy. There were public provisions to help poor children attend school and learn.56 Women were also educated, and most women of the upper classes were literate.57

The family was the basic unit of society, and the Indian family was typically large. Anyone who was in line to inherit property was typically included as a member of the family under a patriarch. Although in most places the family was patriarchal and patrilineal, women were not excluded from inheritance. Elder sons did not receive the whole of the estate as happened often in Europe, but would typically get only a small bonus.58 The picture of children is that they were pampered and much humored by doting parents.59 Most ordinary people were monogamous, with only kings or very wealthy men having multiple wives. Even then, polygamy was discouraged by the sacred law.60

Ancient Indian civilization was not perfect or Utopian, but by any standard it must rank high for sheer humanity and peacefulness. However, some of its qualities left it particularly vulnerable to the Muslim invasions which began in the 7th century. One such quality is the relative lack of central authority outside of the passing presence of strong kings. When Harsha was crowned emperor of northern India in 606, he ruled with wisdom and tact. He would travel the breadth of his empire with a small roadside pavilion and listen to the suits and complaints of his people. He spent the entire 41 years of his reign holding a fractured mass of petty states together by personal magnetism and force.61

When Harsha died, northern India again became a patchwork of conflicting kingdoms. The same thing had happened during the Gupta Empire in the mid-sixth century under the pressure of invading barbarians who may have been an offshoot of the Huns. Indian civilization put a premium on vassalage rather than conquest and acquisition which made it difficult to build and maintain a large empire. As Muslim invaders began pouring into the Sindh full of religious fury and old-fashioned greed, there was no unified nation to meet them.