Mahasammata

Also called: The great elect · Topic: Society in Early India: Kinship, Varna-Jati, Women · NCERT: Class 12, Ch 3 "Kinship, Caste and Class - Early Societies"

Meaning

Mahasammata, "the great elect", is the ruler whom the people chose from among themselves in a Buddhist origin myth told in the Agganna Sutta of the Sutta Pitaka [3]. His job was to punish wrongdoers and keep the peace, and the people paid him a share of their rice. It matters because it is early India's own social contract idea. The king gets his power from human choice, not from god, and taxes are his wages. This is the opposite of the divine, birth-based order of the Purusha sukta.

Explanation

Background: why the Buddhists told this story

• In the Purusha sukta of the Rigveda, the four varnas (the four social orders: Brahmana, Kshatriya, Vaishya, Shudra) came from the body of a primeval man.
• This made social rank divine and fixed. A person was born into it and could never leave it.
• From about the 6th century BCE, new thinkers challenged this claim. The Buddhists led the challenge.
• The Buddhists did not say all people were equal.
• They agreed that social differences existed.
• But they said these differences were neither natural nor permanent. People had made them, not god.

• They rejected high rank by birth. They also rejected the strong ruling unfairly over the weak.

• The Majjhima Nikaya used wealth to attack rank by birth. The mahasammata story used human choice to attack divine kingship.

The story, step by step

• The myth comes from the Agganna Sutta ("the discourse on origins"), which is part of the Sutta Pitaka (the collection of the Buddha's discourses in the Pali canon) [2][3].
• Start: an ideal first age. People and nature lived in harmony, and needs were met without effort [3].
• Decline: greed, anger and deceit grew. Humans became grasping. Ideas of private property and family appeared [3].
• Crisis: people began to steal and quarrel, and nobody punished the wrongdoers.
• Fix: the people met and chose one person from among themselves. He would punish wrongdoers, judge disputes and keep order [3].
• Payment: in return, each person gave him a share of their rice.
• Name: this chosen ruler was called mahasammata, "the great elect" [3].
• Britannica describes the story as one of decline from an ideal state. In this reading, the king is chosen to "slow the pace of decline" [3]. This adds to the NCERT point that the people selected a ruler to punish wrongdoers. It does not contradict it.

Main ideas inside the myth

• Kingship rests on human choice.
• The ruler is chosen at a public meeting. He does not rule because of divine birth.

• Buddhist and Jain accounts of how the state began leave divinity out completely [3].

• Taxes are wages.

• The rice share is payment for a service: punishing wrongdoers and keeping order.

• It is not tribute owed to a god-king.

• What humans made, humans can change.

• Society and the state are human arrangements.
• So they are open to reform. In principle, the ruler's authority is not permanent.

Results and significance

• It gave early India a different theory of the state: order comes from a public meeting, not from a god's body.
• It showed that the Brahmanical model was one vision among several. It was not an accepted fact of early Indian society.
• Together with the Majjhima Nikaya dialogue and Sangam puram poetry, it shows that early Indian ideas about society were argued over, not agreed.

Time, place and evidence

• Period: the Buddhist critique of varna and divine kingship belongs to the age of new religious thinkers, from about the 6th century BCE. The study note places it within roughly c. 600 BCE – 600 CE. The exact date of the text is not settled.
• Tradition: Buddhist. The Jain account of how the state began also leaves out divinity [3].
• Main text: the Agganna Sutta, in the Sutta Pitaka of the Pali canon [2][3].
• Related Buddhist text: the Majjhima Nikaya (also in the Sutta Pitaka). In it, Kachchana, a disciple of the Buddha, tells King Avantiputta that a rich Shudra can command servants of all four varnas.
• Text it argues against: the Purusha sukta of the Rigveda.
• How we know: only from texts. These are normative texts, which describe how things should be, so they tell us about ideals and arguments. They do not prove that any king was actually elected.
• NCERT: Class 12 Part 1, Ch 3, "Kinship, Caste and Class – Early Societies".

Don't confuse with

• Purusha sukta (Rigveda): says the varnas and the social order came from the body of a primeval being, so they are divine and fixed. The mahasammata myth says order came from a human choice at a public meeting.
• Majjhima Nikaya dialogue (Avantiputta–Kachchana): also a Buddhist critique, but it attacks rank by birth using the example of a rich Shudra. The mahasammata story attacks divine kingship using an election.
• Purananuru (Sangam, Ettuttokai): a Tamil text that praises the poor but generous chief of Irantai. It ranks people by generosity. It is not a Buddhist text and is not about choosing a king [4].
• European social contract theory (Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau): a much later idea from early modern Europe. The mahasammata myth is an ancient Indian, Buddhist version of a similar idea, with tax paid as a share of rice.

Prelims Hooks

• Mahasammata means "the great elect". He is the chosen ruler in the Buddhist origin myth [3].
• The myth is in the Sutta Pitaka, specifically the Agganna Sutta ("the discourse on origins") [2][3].
• The ruler was paid with a share of the rice. This makes tax a wage for a service, not tribute.
• Buddhist and Jain accounts of how the state began leave out divinity [3].
• Trap: the dialogue in which a wealthy Shudra commands servants of all varnas is the Majjhima Nikaya (Avantiputta and Kachchana), not the Agganna Sutta.
• Trap: the text that gives a divine origin to the varnas is the Purusha sukta of the Rigveda, not any Buddhist text.

Mains Points

• India's own social contract theory: in the Agganna Sutta, the ruler is chosen by the people, taxes are payment for service, and authority can in principle be withdrawn [3]. Use it to contrast with divine-right ideas of kingship in questions on early Indian ideas of the state.
• Early India was an argument, not one ideology: Brahmanical varna theory (divine, fixed by birth) faced Buddhist critiques. The mahasammata myth attacked divine kingship, and the Majjhima Nikaya attacked rank by birth. Do not treat varna as the single ancient Indian social system.
• Ideals versus practice: the myth shows how Buddhists thought power should be explained, not proof that kings were actually elected. Handle it with the same care as normative texts like the Dharmashastras.

Related concepts

• Buddhist critique of varna

Read more

• Critiques and alternative social visions