Was India a true Democracy in ancient times? What did it look like? Did it have four pillars of democracy? Were Indian Kings not tyrants? What was a big deal about Democracy in Ancient India?

Here I am shedding lights on these questions.

In Ancient India, the king only carried out enforcement, and executes what needs to be executed. It is contrary to the popular belief that Kings were tyrant. Ancient Indian Kings were not at all tyrants, they in fact took minimal part in making policies. Kings in Ancient India, represented what we call today Executive Branch of a Democracy.

Then who were policymakers? Who decided how individual and society should function? The answer is Ancient Indian Scientists of Consciousness, The Rishis and Munis. This folks spent their lifetime discovering laws that governs consciousness. They publish their findings in canonical texts called Upanishads, a central text, the masterpiece. Their insights defined what SHOULD be the structure of thought. I kept should in Capital letters, because Democracy never had MUST ever, it always had Should. Its not a must, one is completely free not to obey it at all, its a free will. These were the policymakers. Rishi’s and Munis in Ancient India, represented what we call today Legislative Branch of Democracy.

Now a big question, there is contradiction between free will and Policies/Legislature those SHOULD be followed, it seems like a bondage. Did we ever peek into our social norms, do they feel like bondage? Not at all. Exactly. It takes two or three generations to adopt a policy/Legislature, the structuring of though, to be specific, and at the end of it, that would become social norm, Society absorbs it, adopts it totally. The Rishi and Muni presented the SHOULDs to the Janta, the population, and takes the feedback of population that which of these should make it to legislation? This is exactly like passing the Bill in senate. To make sure the new Structure of Thought, Ethics, Moral Code, Vichar Samhita, easily gets adopted by the population who are idiots, these brilliant folks devised a corresponding Structure of Action, Code of Conduct, Achar Samhita. The enforcement is difficult for Vichar Samhita, but easy for Achar Samhita. Thus, Janata was never presented with Moral Code to be considered for enforcement, but presented with Code of Conduct to be considered for enforcement. There are multiple Code of Conduct ways to enforce same Moral Code, it is Many to one relationship. Hence there were multiple Code of Conducts were presented as candidates of making into legislation. Rishi’s presented this to public, King is not in picture, thought its presented in Kings court. The public decides which of these, majority of the public is agreeing with, and that chosen code of conduct, becomes legislation, the Law of land. So far king is not in picture. The authority that presents is Rishi, and the authority that chose the law is Public. Thus Public were directly taking part in choosing what makes it to legislature. And magically, this law becomes part of society, ingrains so well in society by two to three generation, in around 150 years, it becomes part of nature of public.

During this 150 years of process of adopting the legislature, law till it transforms as social norm, somebody had to enforce it, give appropriate punishments whoever doesnt follow it. The King did this job. The Kings job is to punish people who disobeys the law proposed by Rishi’s and enacted as law by majority of the public. King was as mentioned before was Executive Branch.

The King also held supreme court!!! It was called Kings court. King follows the laws enacted by Public, and takes hearings, and gives punishment according to laws. Other than Executive and Judicial, King had no other power, he could not propose or elect any legislation. And Kings gets warned by Rishi/Muni when he misuses his powers.

Its almost more than 5000 years, and we are so called democracy. And we brag about how far we came. In fact, Ancient India and their system of Kings executive and judicial powers, Rishi’s power to narrow down proposals for legislature, and public’s power to elect the legislature to become law, is a great example of the iconic Ancient India under the democracy that was nearly complete so early in modern history.

So why proposals were given only by Rishi Muni and Not public? Because that was these brilliant people’s way to engage generations in cyclical evolution of consciousness. The proposals from Rishi’s were in line with evolution of consciousness, and they gave it 150 years or so to permeate society to become a norm, which means its ingrained in individual consciousness. Isn’t that brilliant?

The Vichar Samhita targeting structuring of thought that these extraordinary folks Rishis wrote, is called Shruti today.

The Achar Samhita targeting Structured Action that these extraordinary folks Rishis wrote, is called Smriti today.

To the popular belief, the dynamo of Ancient Indian Civilizations, was not King, but Rishis. The evolution of Indian mind, Indian conscious owes fully to these Masters. These folks genious process of refining polishing individual consciousness indirectly, went on and on for thousands of years. As a consequence, average Indian, even an illiterate Indian, without any formal teaching is SMART compared to other civilizations.

My hats off to the Rishis of Ancient India.