78 Social Dimensions o f Early Buddhism
b a sed th e y retained their a sso cia tio n w ith lan d. T h is c o n n e c tio n is
also suggested by Fiser w ho remarks: ‘It seems probable that the
setthis invested in their transaction a certain part o f the profits
g a in ed in a g r ic u lt u r e /3^ W e h a v e an ex a m p le o f th e likely p ro ce ss
by w hich the gahapati became a setthi-gahapati in the Ahguttara N ikd ya , w here a gahapati is described as offering a loan on paym ent
lr
v j, iiA tv i v jv w u kv n u L^uaiu^t.ij, y —
ginning as p etty usurers, they probably built their capital over a period o f tim e and came to possess substantial liquid assets.
W e are n o w left to id e n tify the term setthi to w h ic h , as w e h a v e
stated earlier, there are only a few references in the early Pali canon. An im portant point about these references is that they are invari
a b ly related to a sp ec ific p lace. All the references n o t o n ly to setthis,
bu t also to setthi-gahapatis, arc made to unnam ed individuals. It is as if the setthi or setthi-gahapati o f a particular place was identification
e n o u g h and :n o furth er d etails w e r e n ecessary. For e x a m p le , refer
ences to the setthi o f Rajagaha,60 or to the setthi o f Varanasi61 sug gest that there was a close relationship between the setthi and the
p la ce m e n tio n e d . W h ile all setthi-gahapatis appear to be w e a lth y , the
setthi o f Rajagaha seems to be not only w ealthy but extrem ely im p o rtan t too. A ccording to the Cullavagga, he had a very valuable
p iec e o f s a n d a lw o o d fr o m w h ic h a b o w l w a s m ade and su sp en d ed
from a height. H e then held a com petition saying, ‘If any samana or
brdhmana be an arahant and possessed o f iddhi [psychic pow er] let him get d o w n th e b o w l and it is a g ift to h im / 62 T h e leaders o f the
ahha titthiyas all attempted to get the bowl dow n but failed. O nly Pindola Bharadvaja, a B uddhist m onk w ith psychic pow ers, suc
c e ed ed in g e ttin g the h o w l d o w n . C o n tra stin g B u d d h ists and th e
ahha titthiyas is a device normally associated with the powerful and prestigious person o f the king in Buddhist literature. Here it is
a sso c ia ted w ith the setthi o f Rajagaha. Apart fr o m the k in g , the
setthi was probably the m ost prom inent figure in society.
O n the basis o f Jataka evidence Fiser has suggested that the king could have appointed som e setthis to his ow n services. He speaks o f the occurrence o f the term setthi-thanam, o r the position o f th c setthi,
in the context o f tow ns and cities, probably held by the setthi until I, Fiser, ' T he Pr obl em o f the Setthi in the n u d d i m t jatakas', Archiv Ortetitaint,
Vol. X X IV , Praha, 1954, p. 244.
A . N . , I, p. 107. 60 Cullavagga, p. 249. Makavagga, p. 293.
The
Gahapati
79his death. T here is the possibility also o f this position being heredit ary. O n the question o f the setthi o f a particular place, like the Bard- nasi setthi, Fiser suggests that it could include in itself a distinct function or privileged position, and that the term m eant the setthi
w o rk in g for the king o f the region.6'5
A lth o u g h based on the adm ittedly later sources o f the Jatakas, Fiser’s conclusions could explain the term setthi as it appears in the
Vinaya literature. W hen it appears w ithout the qualifying gahapati
attach ed to it, and w hen associated invariably in the context o f a particular place, the term setthi signifies a very prestigious semi official position w hich the m ore com m on setthi-gahapati did not have, although he m ay have been w ealthy enough in his ow n rig h t.64 W e m ay now return to the specific-category o f the gahqpati.
Gahapati as employer o f labour
T h e im a e e o f th e oahanati as an in d e n e n d en t o w n e r o f th e m ea n s o f» i * . . .
p ro d u ctio n is reinforced jby frequent references to his em ploying labour. A lthough gahapatis as a category were generally ow nef- cultivators w h o were themselves involved in the Drocess o f cultiva-M.
tion, som e differentiation had already come into existence w ithin their ranks. T h e larger operators o f land needed to em ploy labour, as is evident from early Pali sources. T he existence o f the ddsa, kam~ makara and porisa are well k n o w n btit it is notable that they fre quently appear w ith gahapatis as their masters. A typical example is th at o f gahapati M endaka w ho em ployed a large num ber o f ddsasf kammakaras, and porisas, w h o m the family fed and paid wages, b o th in cash and in kind. His ploughm an was a slave called Punna w h o possessed psychic pow ers like the rest o f the fam ily.65 Similar ly, the B uddha exhorted th e gahapati-putta Sigala to treat his slaves and w o rk m en well, by assigning them w ork according to their strength, by supplying them w ith food and wages, by tending them in .sickness and giving them leave from tim e to tim e.66 Setthis
and settki-gahapatis w h o w ere part o f the w ider gahapati category are also depicted as em ploying slaves and others in their service.67 in fact, fro m a passage in the Sam yutta N ikdya which depicts him as re cruiting people into his service the typical em ployer appears to be
63 I. Fiser, ‘T h e Problem o f the Setthi in the Buddhist Jatakas\ Archiv Oriental tit. Vol. X X IV , Praha, 1954, pp. 2 5 0 -1 . "
80
Social Dimensions o f Early Buddhismi . L - n it gurwyun,___ 6 8 hpi____________ J i . _ i r __________________ l i j a u g u t t u v\j cmpiuy numrnuKur « j vwuR.iiicai w y m u
exist in the larger holdings o f land.69 These is w ere also like ly to have been producing for the m arket, w hich explains the fre
q u e n t n e e d to travel th at is o fte n associated w ith gahapatis in the
B u dd hist texts,70 Such activities w ould also have resulted in the gradual accum ulation o f capital, w hich ultim ately transform ed
s o m e gahapatis in to sctthi-gahapatis, and then to setthis in v e s tin g in
various business enterprises. Gahapati as a status term
A n im p ortant aspect o f the term gahapati is its frequent occurrence as a sta tu s term . It is apparent that, while the term can be used in a
f / \ t v jr v v a v u c v g jV i j $ n a i u v a n/vr\i*iT 14- #^1r a h i. a j j ^ w iL iv■* a e> +*h. qi«i ^
sense w here it "almost assumes the function o f a title’.71 A point to note is that there could be only one gahapati in each family and it
\ i r a e h o i i 7 k r \ t i t i o \ A Arl T C h n T | U i h ) 1 1 V I T 1 1 V T 1 A V A W - V V 1 U W V I U A t s n h r m l f 1 1 1 A i d ■ A A VA /J,A A r c ( i n r rW L U l l A 0 V W JL- %, A J. J fcJ
D avids, he was distinct from the subordinate m em bers o f the fami ly w h o did n o t have the control and m anagem ent o f the com m on
p r o p e r t y .72 T h is is f u r t h e r su bstan tiated b y the e x is te n c e o f the
term gahapati-putta, w hich probably referred to the son o f a gahapati
as one w ho w ould eventually succeed to the status o f a gahapati. In-
t^ f p c t’inrrU r ~ "£>* ; , t h f' P vnrA cci Ati X * ...n/llisi-n/iti-iMj ttsiI---±--- ” — --- tc riAl- rm trV ifi/l Kir c i m i l i r — - }
expressions like brdhmana-putta, khattiya-putta or sudda-putta. T he w o rd gahapati-putta had a specific connotation, similar to the term
se tth i-p u ita , w hich also represents status and an eventual succession
to the position o f a setthi. In both cases the crucial factor is that they denote econom ic functions in which the m anagem ent and control o f assets is in d ivisib ly vested in one a u th o rity. Buddaghosha definitely points to this view in describing the gahapati as gehassapati, ekageha-
68 S .N ., III, pp. 334-5.
69 T his dim ension o f th e gahapati was much sharper in the seventh century a.d. by w hich tim e th e gahapati was invariably an em ployer o f labour. The Tantra-Vartika o f K um arila states that the gahapati does not labour on his land, the kamntakaras w ork on it for him {Tantra Vartika o f LZumdrila, Poona, 1910, p. 3185).
70 5 .N ., III, p. 252; M .N ., II, p. 15.
71 T W. Rhys Davids and W. Stede, Pdli-English Dictionary, p. 248. The Jaina texts also indicate a sim ilar use o f the term gakavai which is their equivalent o f the w o rd gahapati. It appears as a status term and the same association w ith land, cattle, and ploughs is present (J.C. Jain, Life in Ancient India as Depicted in the Jain Canon, p. 143),
T he
Gahapati
81matte jetthako7* or the head and oldest m em ber o f a house. The con ception is sim ilar to th at o f the karta in Bengal, w ho is the head o f a house and in w h o m the m anagem ent and control o f the fam ily p ro p e rty is vested. T his view is supported by W agle’s conclusions on the m o de o f address adopted by the Buddha for gahapatis. T he Buddha invariably addressed them as gahapatis, not by their names. H o w e v e r the gahapati-puttas w ere never addressed by anything b ut th eir nam es. W aglc m akes a distinction betw een the use o f term s as term s o f reference and as term s o f address. In certain situations the term s o f reference arc also those o f address, but in others the term s o f reference do n o t coincide w ith the m ode o f address. In the con te x t o f the gahapati the coincidence or otherw ise betw een the term o f reference and that o f address focuses on the actual status o f the individuals con cerned .74
T h e general im pression conveyed by the early Pali texts is that, as a category, gahapatis had a prom inent place in the social structure o f early B uddhist society. T hey invariably featured along w ith
khattiyas and brahmanas as people o f high status in relation to the rest o f society. It was co m m o n to refer to khattiyas, hrdhmanas, and gahd-
patis in idealized term s, w hich stressed their high social status. For instance, in his discourses dealing w ith the great pleasure given by visible form s to a view er, the B uddha used the analogy o f an ideal w o m an : ‘A m aiden o f the khattiya, brdhmana, or gahapati family, be tw een fifteen and sixteen years o f age, not too tall, not too short, n o t too plum p, n o t too thin, n o t too dark, n o t too pale, is she then in her full flow er o f charm s and beauty?’75 Similarly, some bhikkhus
considered people born in khattiya, brdhmana, and gahapati families as deserving the highest privileges w ithin the sahgha.76 These three g ro u p s w ere also generally associated w ith authority, w ealth, and em inence. Stressing the inevitability o f death the Buddha told K ing Pasenadi, ‘Even they w ho are em inent khattiyas, em inent brahma- nas, or em inent gahapatis, m en of authority ow n ing great treasure, great w ealth, im m ense hoards o f gold and silver, im m ense aids to en jo y m en t, im m ense supplies o f goods and corn, even they being b o rn can n ot live w ith o u t decay and death. T he same association is repeated by K ing Pasenadi to the Buddha w hen he com plains
iy B uddhaghosha. Sumangala Vildsinl. p. 191.
74 N .N . W aglc, Society at the Tim e o f the Buddha, p. 53, 75 M . N . , IT p. 122; I. p. 116.
82 Social Dimensions o f Early Buddhism
that, ‘em inent khattiyas, em inent brdhmams, and em inent gahapatis,
m en o f authority. . . w ho [are] nevertheless found deliberately tell ing lies w hile seated in the ju d g e m e n t h all.,78
T hese groups w ere not only associated w ith authority, w ealth, and em inence b u t also w ith learning and w isdom . Reacting to a charge levelled by the paribhdjaka M agandiya the Buddha says, "mind w hat you say Magandiya . . . for many learned khattiyas, learned brdhmanas, learned gahapatis and learned samanas have great faith in this G otam a’.79 It is apparent from the passage that the de votion o f these categories was considered prestigious by the B uddhists. T he three categories w ere also im portant enough to have assemblies (parisas) o f their ow n and entering them required a degree o f confidence. T alking to Slha the Lichchhavi on the m erits o f alms giving, the B uddha pointed o ut that w hichever parisa the alm s-giver entered, w hether o f the khattiyas, brdhmanas, or gahapatis
he * enters u n liu u b led and w ith confidence’.HM
T h e three groups also feature together in the context o f rebirth into families o f high status. T he M ajjhima N ikdya states that a bhik- k h u w h o p o s s e s s e d c c ita in pow ers c o u ld , if lie so u csir cu , he reborn
as a w ealthy khattiya, a w ealthy brdhmana or a w ealthy gahapati.81 T h e status o f a gahapati was obviously w o rth aspiring to. C o n
v e r s e ly , it was p o s s ib le to fall from the h ig h status o f a k h a t t i y a , brdhmana, o r gahapati in this life into that o f a family o flo w status in the fu tu re .82 It m ay be relevant to point out in this context that the
gahapati C itta, a pro m inent lay follower o f the Duddlia, arid one w ho was described as an ideal layman (upasaka), is singled out for a unique h o n o u r in the B uddhist literature. O n his deathbed the deuas
and k in s m e n o f C itta e x h o r te d him to aspire to b e reborn as a
c a k k a v a tti.^ T he cakkavatti was the counterpart o f the Buddha in the social w o rld and was therefore the highest position that any lay-
_____ l . . _ r e : _ c ___ ____ i j _________________* __ j ____
m an, wuu was ctiitfiuy ui ingu sliiius, eoi-uu d sp n c to. n u u lu im ci it w as considered a potential possibility for the gahapati Citta.
T he pahanati’s O ’ x association w ith wealth
G ahapatis are associated w ith w ealth, prestige, and im portance not o n ly along w ith khattiyas and brdhmanas, bu t also on their ow n,
78 S . N ., I p. 7 5 ; K .S .t I, p. 100.
7y A I N ., H, p. 199; M .L .S ., II, p. 182. A .N ., II, p. 305; G .S ., III, p. 3 k
The
Gahapati
83Gahapatis and gahapaii-punas ate frequently m entioned in the texts along w ith people o f inferior status and in opposition to them, thus seem ing to represent a category o f superior status in relation to th e m .84 T his im age o f the gahapati as a w ell-to-do and highly re spectable person is strengthened by the great disapproval show n in Pali texts o f any attack upon them . They appear to be a category specially vulnerable to slander and physical harm and required stro n g b o d y g u ard s.85 T he royal police are depicted as seizing one such offender, binding his arms behind him w ith a stout rope, shaving his head and parading him round to the ucaL u f a harsh-
soun ding drum . Taken from street to street, and from crossroad to crossroad he was then led to the south o f the tow n and beheaded for the offence o f ‘spoiling the fortunes o f some guhupati ui gahapaii- putta by resorting to falsehood’.HA Since the offence related only to falsehood and not to som ething really criminal, the punishm ent seems unduly h a r s h : die gahapatis m ust c e r t a i n l y h a v e been v e i y
p ow erful to have exacted such severe punishm ent for offences against them .
A special association is icflcctcd in B uddhist literature between the gahapati and the pursuit o f pleasure. The only other category th a t is sim ilarly depicted is the king. T he bhikkhu is frequently de picted as being tem pted to give up his b h ik kh u status as he happens to sight ‘a gahapati or gahapati-putta indulging in the five sense plea sures. T h en he thinks: I too w hen living at hom e indulged in
. . . the five sense pleasures. M oreover since w ealth exists in my fam ily I could enjoy it and do good w ork w ith it’.87 Similarly, in the M dgandiya Sutta o f the M ajjkim a N ikd ya, the Buddha repeats the association betw een the gahapati and pleasure when stating, ‘A
gahapati o r gahapati-putta, rich or o f great wealth, o f many posses sions w ho, endow ed w ith the five strands o f sense pleasures, m ight revel in th e m ’.88 T he A h g u tta ra N ik a y a provides a vivid picture o f the gahapati. ‘A gahapati or gahapati-putta has a house w ith a gabled roof, plastered inside and outside w ith w ell-fitting doors and case m ents. T herein a couch is spread w ith a costly skin o f antelope, having a canopy overhead and a scarlet cushion at each end. H ere is
*4 A . N . , I f p. 222; M .N ., I, p. 229; D .N ., I, p. 55. S5 S .N ., H, p. 334. K .S ., 111, p. % .
87
A . N . , II, p. 131 ;G .S ., II, p. 129.
84 Social D im ensions o f E arly Buddhism
a lam p burning and four wives to wait upon him with all their charm s . . . ’H9
T h e g a h a p a t i s as e x te n d e r s o f p o p u la r s u p p o rt to B u d d h is m
Curiously enough, many prom inent gahapatis appear in Buddhist texts in the unique position o f having followers o f their own. This is unusual, since the only other people usually referred to with fol low ers o f their ow n were the leaders o f the other sects. The gahapati
Anathapindika, probably the largest donor o f the sangha, is de scribed in the Ahguttara N ik a y a as coming to see the Buddha sur-' rounded by 500 lay disciples o f his ow n.70 Elsewhere, the gahapati
D ham m adinna is similarly described as having 500 lay follow ers,91 and the com m entary to the S a m yu tta N i k a y a states that six other
gahapatis and Visakha the woman lay disciple also had a following
o f 500 disciples each.92 These disciples may have then become fol low ers o f the Buddha through thcvr o w n gahapati, which suggests that the ga hap atis played an im portant role in the extension o f popu lar su ppo rt to Buddhism.
T h e gahapati’s special relationship w ith the sahgha
A nother im portant aspect o f the gahapati was the special rela tionship some had with the sahgha, it is custom ary m the texts to depict b h ik kh u s who were ill or on their deathbeds as being visited by the Buddha and given succour in their afflictions. The custom seems to have been largely restricted to bhikkhus apart from some very rare exceptions in the context o f prom inent lay disciples. All these exceptions invariably relate to gahapatis. Thus, the gahapati
N akuiapita was visited by the Buddha when he was ailing."3 Simi larly, Anathapindika asked for Ananda when he was ill and was visited and reassured by him.94 The gahapatis Sirivaddha and Man- adinna also called for Ananda when they were ill and specially in quired about their respective futures after death.95 Their possession o f w ealth and high social status, along with their position as the largest donors o f the suhgha, gave them privileges which were nor mally restricted only to the bhikkhus. Gahapatis were clearly the m ost im portant category am ong the lay disciples of the sangha.
*9 Cm. S . , 1, p . 120; A . N . , I, p, 127. w A . N . , II, p p . 4 5 2 , 457.
91 5 .A/., IV, p. 3 4 8 . 92 K . S „ V, p. 347n.
T h e
Gahapati
85
G ahapati and gam ani
A n o th er relationship w hich w e need to explore is that betw een the
gahapati and gamani. T he term gam ani has been translated by the Pali-F.nglish dictionary as the head o f a com pany, a chief and a vil lage headm an. T he gam ani appears to have held an official p o sitio n .96 T he M ahdvagga speaks o f K ing Bim bisara giving in
stru ctio n s to 80.000 ' o vdmikas97 on w orldlv or noliticai m atters.; i w h ich points b o th to their political status as well as their num erical significance. W hile the gam ani appears to have som e relationship w ith the gahapati, there is nothing explicit in the Pali texts to indicate the actual nature o f the relationship. It is possible that the
g a m a n i was recruited from am ongst th e gahapatis and was the adm i n istra tiv e head o f the village. It is evident from a nassae-e in the
Sa m yu tta N ik d y a that the gam ani was familiar w ith the nature o f the soil and w ith agricultural operations generally, including the speci fic choices to be m ade in relation to th e m .98 T he gam ani also appears to be fully conversant w ith the official m achinery, including the sy stem o f laws and justice. T hey w ere well established, since one o f th e m possessed a com fortable rcsthouse w hich w as used bv M. • samana- brahmanas on their sojourns and sometimes by leaders o f the diffe ren t s e c ts ." We suggest that the gam ani represented the ‘political’ w ing o f the gahapati category. While the gahapati's function per tained to the econom y, the gam ani com bined econom ic and political functions as the official head o f the village. This explains the greater assurance o f the gam ani (in a Samyutta N ikdya account) w hen he de fended B u d d hist m o n k s against various charges in the k in g ’s c o u rt.100 In another incident, he also displayed a degree o f self pos session in the presence o f the B uddha w h o m he accused o f being no different fro m a m ag ician .101 The gam ani m ay possibly have been the political arm o f the gahapati category, w ielding p o w er w ith in the village and p roviding a link for gahapatis w ith the pow er struc