In India, the possession of power has never implied an abandonment of the life of the mind. Indeed, some of the most remarkable rulers in Indian history regarded intellectual curiosity, patronage of the arts, engagement with philosophy and the cultivation of knowledge not as ornamental pursuits, but as integral to the responsibilities of sovereignty. The Indian tradition produced scholar-kings and philosopher-statesmen with astonishing frequency. They ruled, but they also read; they conquered, but they also contemplated; they administered kingdoms, but understood that a civilisation is sustained as much by its ideas as by its armies.
His court poet, Banabhatta, wrote the historical biography Harshacharita. Then there were rulers whose intellectual interests were directed towards questions of religion and philosophy. His court in Fatehpur Fort became a place where, at the Ibadat Khana, scholars of different faiths could debate theology, philosophy and ethics. His memoirs reveal a ruler who noticed birds, animals, plants, landscapes and artistic detail with an attentiveness unusual among monarchs. His Persian translation of the Upanishads, the Sirr-e-Akbar, and his work, Majma-ul-Bahrain, sought to explore the common ground between Hindu and Islamic spiritual traditions.
Harshavardhana (590-647 CE), who ruled north India in the 7th century CE, was an accomplished playwright who wrote Sanskrit works like Ratnavali and Priyadarshika. Amoghavarsha I (800–878 CE), Rashtrakuta emperor, was a renowned patron and practitioner of literature, and traditionally associated with the Kannada work Kavirajamarga. Someshvara III (1076–1126 CE), Western Chalukya ruler, was the author of the encyclopaedic Manasollasa, covering subjects ranging from statecraft and music to cuisine, architecture and the arts. King Bhoja (1010-1055 CE) of Dhar was legendary for the breadth of his intellectual interests, writing as many as 84 books on subjects as diverse as astrology, lexicography, Sanskrit grammar, dramaturgy, poetics and a commentary on Patanjali’s Yoga Shastras. Akbar (1505-42 CE), despite having had little conventional schooling, possessed an extraordinary intellectual appetite. His son, Jahangir (1569-1627 CE), too, was a cultivated aesthete, with a keen interest in painting and natural history. His great-grandson Dara Shikoh (1615-59 CE) went even further in his quest for a dialogue between traditions. Around the same time, Sawai Jai Singh II (1688–1743 CE), ruler of Jaipur, distinguished himself as an astronomer and founder of the great observatories (Jantar Mantars).
It is said that in his kingdom even humble weavers could compose metrical Sanskrit kavyas.
The above makes it clear that this was not a phenomenon confined to one dynasty or one geographical region. In the Indian concept of kingship, the ruler was not merely an executive head of government. He was expected to preserve dharma, which meant maintaining an ethical and social order larger than the individual ruler. This required knowledge, discernment and the ability to listen to those who possessed wisdom. The Arthashastra, the Mahabharata, the Ramayana and the Puranas all contain elaborate reflections on kingship. He needed buddhi—intelligence, judgement and discrimination. This tradition survived into modern India in the form of philosopher-statesmen. Mahatma Gandhi was a scholar of both Hinduism and comparative religion. President Dr S. Radhakrishnan, his successor, Dr Zakir Husain, and prime minister Jawaharlal Nehru were other obvious embodiments of that tradition. Maulana Abul Kalam Azad and Pandit Madan Mohan Malaviya—among several others—too combined political leadership with formidable scholarship and linguistic accomplishments. Pavan K Varma is an author, diplomat, and former member of Parliament (Rajya Sabha). The views expressed are personal
The ideal ruler therefore needed more than military prowess.
