Browse articles

Antipathy to the Rajasoya why?

By Ganesh Thite

Vol. 1 · No. 3October 1972pp. 43-58English

Summary

The various Indian philosophical schools have developed distinct yet interconnected theories of sound, reflecting their metaphysical foundations. The Sāṃkhya-Yoga school considers sound as a subtle potential energy that gives rise to ākāśa (space). The Vaibhāṣika Buddhists see sound as a momentary material object, one of the forms of rūpa. The Nyāya-Vaiśeṣika tradition treats sound as a non-eternal quality of ākāśa, dependent on conditions for its production and propagation, like vibration through air. In contrast, the Mīmāṃsā (Bhāṭṭa school) regards sound as an eternal, self-subsistent substance, directly perceptible and independent of any substratum. The Jain philosophy synthesizes aspects of all these views, considering sound as a manifestation of pudgala (matter), aligning closely with modern acoustics. It categorizes sound into articulate (used in speech) and inarticulate (natural or instrumental), further classifying them in terms of origin and structure. Jain thinkers describe sound as wave-like in nature, capable of propagation through air, expanding in all directions, and subject to reflection, refraction, and diffraction—paralleling modern physical theories. The Jaina approach emphasizes both substantiality and modality, offering a scientific yet philosophical view of sound's origin, classification, and transmission.

Conclusion

The Rajasuya ritual, while symbolizing supreme kingship, is portrayed in Indian texts as a double-edged sword—imbued with divine legitimacy yet fraught with spiritual peril and societal consequences. These narratives caution that the pursuit of power through such rites risks ethical compromise and widespread harm, emphasizing the need for responsible governance over ritual grandeur.

Original PDF

Inline viewer

Checking source PDF

The viewer will load here if the archive file is reachable.