Ajātaśatru: King of Kāśī

When one hears the name Ajātaśatru, immediately the personality that comes to one’s mind, considering a certain amount of awareness with Indian history, is that ever indomitable fifth century BCE Haryaṅka monarch of Magadh — Ajātaśatru. But, do you know that there was another Ajātaśatru? A king whose tales of wisdom were considered important enough to be specifically mentioned in the sacred Vedic literature by its composers. A king who reigned in a different time and a different place. This blogpost is about that Ajātaśatru, who was a king of Kāśī.

Painting of Varanasi by Satheesh Kanna (Source: fineartamerica.com)

Background

The information about ancient India particularly in the pre-Buddha period can be gleamed from the enormous body of our sacred Vedic literature. In this case, the information is furnished from two Upaniṣads – the Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad and the Kauṣītaki-Brāhmaṇa Upaniṣad. The Upaniṣads give various examples of kings i.e. Kṣatriyas as teachers who were an important part in the intellectual life of our civiliztion.¹ On of the example is of King Janaka of Videha (probably the most famous example of this) who counters sage Yājñavalkya in an argument as a result of which Yājñavalkya has absolutely no hesitation in receiving instructions from him. Though, on later occasions, Yājñavalkya himself taught Janaka on various important topics.²

The other examples are of the Pāñcāla king Pravāhaṇa Jaivali who as per Chāndogya Upaniśad taught scholars like Śīlaka, Dālbhya, Śvetaketu and his father Uddālaka on subjects like the doctrine of rebirth. King Aśvapati Kaikeya, King Pratardana, King Jānaśruti are also mentioned for their intellect. Mookerjee mentions how the Āruṇis, father and son, once sought the teachings of King Citra-Gāṅgāyani.³ And in the list of such intellectually gifted kings was one Ajātaśatru, the king of Kāśī, whose discussions with the learned sage and very distinguished Brāhmaṇa scholar Dṛpta Bālāki Gārgya⁴ form the topic of today’s post.

Bālāki Gārgya

Sage and scholar Bālāki was the son of Balāka⁵ and belonged to the clan of Garga and that’s why he was called Gārgya Bālāki. In the time that he lived, he became famous as a man of great reading and was known as a very learned scholar in the scriptures to several people like Uśīnara, Satvat-Matsyas, Kuru-Pāñcālas, and Kāśī-Videha.⁶ In the Upaniṣads, he is given the epithet of Dṛpta meaning proud. Such esteemed scholars imparted their knowledge and used to have conversations and discussions with various personalities including kings. And so it happened that one day, Bālāki approached King Ajātaśatru of Kāśī and told him: ‘I will tell you about Brahman — brahma te bravāṇīti.’⁷ Thus started the intellectually stimulating discussion between a king and a scholar.

The Conversation

There are actually two versions of the conversation that happens between Ajātaśatru and Bālāki. While a very detailed version is mentioned in the Kauṣītaki Upaniṣad, a slightly different and somewhat shorter version is mentioned in the Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad. Whereas Gārgya offers sixteen definitions of the Brahman in the Kauṣītaki Upaniṣad which are disagreed upon by the king Ajātaśatru, sage Gārgya offers only twelve in the Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad. Here, we are going to discuss the conversation that has been explained in the Kauṣītaki Upaniṣad.

“There are found many differences between both the recensions in the order of sequence and the counter-clarifications of Ajātaśatru. The basic thought underlying can be designated as the superiority of Prāṇa-Brahman over the forces and the phenomenon of nature (the Puruṣas of Gārgya) and over the psychical organs in man.”⁸

As stated above, when Bālāki told the king that he will elucidate about Brahman, the king said:

“taṁ hovāca ajātaśatruḥ sahasraṁ dadma iti,
etasyām vāci janako janaka iti vā u janā dhāvantīti.”⁹

“To him, Ajātaśatru then, said: ‘A thousand cows we give to you.’ At such a speech as this verily, indeed, people would run about saying, Janaka, Janaka.”¹⁰

The king here offers a gift of thousand cows at such an occassion when a learned Brāhmaṇ has decided to impart knowledge to him like the famous king of Videha-Janaka who had become proverbial not only due to his own intellect but also due to his magnanimity to the learned Brāhmaṇas.

Now the narrator of the Upaniṣads himself visualizes various phenomenons which work as a table of contents — so to say — a sort of clue words of the subsequent conversation before he continues on the main points of the speech. These are as follows:

“āditye bṛhac, candramasy annam, vidyuti satyam, stanayitnau śabdo, vāyāv indro vaikuṇṭha, ākāśe purṇam, agnau viṣāsahir iti, apsu teja ity adhidaivatam; athādhyātmam: ādarśe pratirūpaśchyāyāyāṁ dvitīyaḥ, pratiśrutkāyām, asur iti śabde mṛtyuh, svapne yamaḥ, śarīre prajāpatiḥ, dakṣiṇe akṣiṇi vācaḥ, savye’kṣiṇi satyasya.”¹¹

“In the sun the great, in the moon food, in lightening truth, in thunder sound, in wind Indra Vaikuṇṭha, in space fullness, in fire the vanquisher, in water light, thus with reference to the divinities. Now with reference to the self: in the mirror the reflection, in the shadow the double, in the echo life, in sound death, in sleep Yama (the lord of death), in the body Prajā-pati, in the right eye speech, in the left eye truth.”¹²

Now Bālāki said to the king, “The Spirit (or the person i.e. puruṣas) in the Sun, on him indeed do I meditate. To which the king replies, “Do not make me converse on him. I meditate on him who is the great, clad in the white raiment (bright-robed), the supreme, the head of all beings. He who meditates on him thus becomes indeed supreme, the head of all beings.”¹³

And in this way as sage and scholar Bālāki continues to give his focus of meditation i.e. the persons (puruṣa) in the various phenomenons, the king of Kāśī continues to give his counter-points. When the sage says he meditates on the person in the moon, the king says “Do not make me converse on him. I meditate on him as the self of food (or nutrition). He who meditates on him thus becomes, indeed, the self of food.” Deussen explains this – “The moon is annasya Ātmā, the self of nutrition, so far as he, by virtue of his waxing through consuming souls, and by virtue of his waning through its being consumed owing to the descent of souls, is the prototype of that eats and is eaten.”¹⁴ Thus it is explained that under whatever qualities we meditate on the Supreme we ourselves become possessed of those qualities.¹⁵

When Bālāki says that he meditates on the person in the lightning, the king replies that he meditates on him as the self of truth and those who meditate on him become self of truth. When the sage says that he meditates on the person in the thunder the king counters and asks to not make him converse. He says that that he meditates on him as the self of sound and those who meditate on him themselves become self of sound. When the learned scholar mentions the air, the king says that he meditates on the air as Indra Vaikuṇṭha, the unconquered army and those who do meditate on him indeed, become unconquerable (parair jetum aśakya-śīlah)¹⁶ and conqueror of others. In the same vein when the sage mentions the space, the king says that he meditates on him as the full non-active, unmoved Brahman and those who do as such become filled with off-spring, cattle, fame, radiance of Brahma knowledge and the heavenly world and reaches full term of life.¹⁷

When Bālāki mentions his focus of meditation the fire, the king counters it saying that just as he does, those who meditate on him as the irresistible, themselves become irresistible. To the sage’s mention of water, the king says to not make him converse on this and that he meditates on him as the self of light. Those who do as such themselves become the self of light. And in this way, the sage and the king end their conversation on the divinities. Now the sage mentions the focus of his meditation in the self, to which the king is prompt in replying to not ask him to converse and that he himself meditates on them. The sage mentions that he meditates on the person in the mirror, the king says that he meditates on him as the “reflected likeness” (pratirūpaḥ) and those who do as such, “a very likeness of him is born in his off-spring.”

When Bālāki says that he meditates on the person in the shadow, Ajātaśatru answers that he meditates on him as the inseparable second and those who do as such “obtains from his second (the wife) and becomes possessed of his second (putra pautrādibhir bhavati).” When the learned Brahman mentions that he meditates on the person in the echo, the king counters that he meditates on him as the life and those do as such do not pass into unconsciousness before their time. To Bālāki’s mention of the person in the sound, the king says that those who meditate on him as death just like he does, they do not die before their time. To the scholar’s mention of the person who, while asleep, moves about in a dream as his focus of meditation, the king says that he meditates on him as King Yama and those who do as such, all here is subdued for his excellence (śraiṣṭhayāya). The deep sleep has been compared as being in the state of Brahman, the dream sleep has been compared in the preceding stage of staying with Yama.¹⁸

When the scholar mentions that he meditates on the person who is in the body in him, to that Ajātaśatru replies, that he meditates on him as the Prajāpati (the lord of creation) and those who do as such, become increased (prajāyate) with offspring, cattle, fame, the radiance of sanctity, the heavenly world, and reach the full term of life.¹⁹ When Bālāki says that he meditates on the person in the right eye, the king counters that he meditates on him as the self of speech, fire and light and those who do as such become the self of all these. And when the sage says that he meditates on the person in the left eye, the king as usual says, “Do not make me converse on him.” He says that he meditates on the left eye as the self of truth, lightning and light. Those who do as such themselves become the self of all these.

tata u ha bālākis tūṣṇīm āsa, taṁ hovāca ajātaśatruḥ, etāvann u bālāka iti, etāvad iti hovāca bālākiḥ,..²⁰

“After this Bālāki became silent. Then Ajātaśatru said to him, ‘Thus far only (do you know), O Bālāki?’ ‘Thus far only,’ replied Bālāki.

Then Ajātaśatru explains to the sage that only Him (the creator), the maker of these persons (puruṣa) whom you have mentioned, he of whom all this is the work, he alone is to be known. Then Bālāki with graciousness and with his inherent interest to know more, approaches the king and asks him to accept the sage as his pupil. Ajātaśatru is understandably surprised and says that this goes against the nature that a Kṣatriya should receive a Brāhmaṇa as a pupil but the king’s interest to teach and the scholar’s interest to learn is such that the king accepts the proposal and thus the king takes the scholar’s hand and takes him to a person who is sleeping. The king says, “Where in this case, O Bālāki, has this person lain, what has become of him here, from where has he returned here? But Bālāki didn̍t know this. To this Ajātaśatru gave his explaination: In man are channels or arteries called the Hitā, that extend from the heart and surround the body (some scholars interpret the body here as pericardium i.e. the sac that contains the heart).

These channels are as minute as the hair split thousandfold and are filled with a thin essence- white, black, yellow and red. In these one remains while asleep and sees no dreams. And then he becomes one with Prāna, the life-breath. And then enters in him the speech with all the names, eye with all forms and ear with all the sounds, the mind with all the thoughts. When he wakes up, as if sparks fly all around from the blazing fire, the same way out of the Ātman, all life forces i.e. the speech, eyes, ears and Manas come forth as per their location, from these life forces come forth the divinities, (Agni, Sūrya, Diśah, Candramāh)²¹ and from them come forth the worlds (names, forms, sounds and thoughts). Just as a razor is concealed in its case and the fire in the fireplace, in the same way, Prajñātman has entered the body as the self, down to even the hair and nails. And on this self, the organs (the other selves) are depended like the servants are depended on the chief. Like this relationship of inter-dependence between a chief and his servants, this relationship of inter-support also exists between the self (Prajñātman) and those other selves.²²

As long as Indra didn’t understand the Self, the Asuras could overpower him but after he had known, he could overpower and thus defeat the Asuras. He gained victory, supremacy, independence and sovereignty over all gods and all the creatures. In the same way, when man attains this knowledge of the Self, he repels all evil and gains supremacy and sovereignty over all beings-he who knows this, yea, he who knows this (paryeti ya evaṁ veda, ya evaṁ veda).²³ And this is how a such a captivating conversation on the meaning of the Self happened between a king and a scholar.

The Envious King

But as learned as the king Ajātaśatru was and as sharp as his intellect was, he evidently was envious of the king of Videha- Janaka. Such magnificent was the patronage by Janaka that the king complained. He said that all the learned men of his time were going to that famous king of Videha and were settling in his court. He complained that he, the king of Kāśī could not find any learned men to patronize.²⁴

Ajātaśatru – A Brahmadatta?

There emerges some important evidence that provides us hints as to the dynasty to which king Ajātaśatru belonged. This fact has also been mentioned in a previous post of mine – Who were The Brahmadattas of Kāśī ? Raychaudhuri suggests that Ajātaśatru of Kāśi is in all probability the same as that king of Benares who has been mentioned in the Uddālaka Jātaka as a Brahmadatta. The Brahmadatta dynasty was very famous and important enough to be mentioned in the Purāṇas and the Mahābhārata.

Ajātaśatru’s Son

Some more information is provided by the Vedic literature regarding this family. There is a mention of a son and successor of Ajātaśatru named Bhadrasena Âjātaśatrava,²⁵ who as per Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa was bewitched by Uddālaka Āruṇi.

Conclusion

Such was the time period and such were the personalities in ancient India where learned Brahmanas use to spread their wisdom and knowledge, where kings also had intellectual discussions on such deep philosophical subjects and the ideas were exchanged in such stimulating environment. How can one be not proud of such legacy !

References

1. Mookerji, R. (1944). GLIMPSES OF EDUCATION IN ANCIENT INDIA. Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, 25(1/3), 63-81. Retrieved April 22, 2021, from http://www.jstor.org/stable/41688549 p. 77.
2. ibid. p. 76
3. ibid. p. 77
4. ibid. p. 78
5. Paul Deussen, Sixty Upaniṣads of The Veda Part One. p. 51
6. Radha Kumud Mookerjee, Ancient Indian Education. p. 118, 134
7. S. Radhakrishnan (Editor) The Principal Upaniṣads. p. 184
8. Deussen, Sixty Upaniṣads , p. 51, 52
9. S. Radhakrishnan (Editor) The Principal Upaniṣads. p. 784
10. ibid.
11. ibid.
12. ibid.
13. ibid. p. 785
14. Deussen, Sixty Upaniṣads , p. 53
15. S. Radhakrishnan (Editor) The Principal Upaniṣads. p. 785
16. ibid. p.786
17. ibid.
18. Deussen, Sixty Upaniṣads , p. 55
19. S. Radhakrishnan (Editor) The Principal Upaniṣads. p. 788
20. ibid. p.791
21. Deussen, Sixty Upaniṣads , p. 57
22. ibid. p. 58
23. S. Radhakrishnan (Editor) The Principal Upaniṣads. p. 791
24. Radha Kumud Mookerjee, Ancient Indian Education. p. 117, 141
25. H. C. Raychaudhuri, Political History of Ancient India from Accession of Parikshit to the Extinction of the Gupta Dynasty. p. 36