There is nothing like dynastic rule in democratic India. In ancient times the Rashtra or the State was administrated by an eminent personality from a restricted class of Kshatriya (Royals) clan. He was often referred to as “Gopa” (Protector of Cows) and “Samrat” (Supreme Ruler). He governed the people with their consent and approval. Samrat’s main duty was to protect the people and their cattle. The main intention of the Samrat along with protecting his people was to uphold Dharma, the righteousness. He had Sabha (House of People) and Samiti (Committee) which assist him in governance. He was aided by two functionaries, the Raja Purohita, a learned person who was masters in four arts of Mantras (all rituals), Economics, Politics and Warfare and a Senani, the Army Chief.
The legacy would continue for the generations and that was called Dynasty. The society at that time had four class of work force. The first was the teaching/artist class, the second was the warrior/fighter class, and then we had business/trading class and finally the working/service class. Now, if we carefully observe this category was based on the nature of the individual.
An individual who had Sattva Guna alone in predominance was categorised as Brahamana (Teacher/Scholar/Artist).
An individual who had Sattva and Rajas with Rajas in prominence was a Kshatriya (Warrior/Ruler/Administrator).
An individual who had Rajas and Tamas with Tamas in prominence was a Vaisya (Businessmen/Merchant/Tradesmen).
An individual who had Tamo Guna alone in predominance was categorised as Sudra (Worker/Craftsmen/Servicemen).
All the four category of work force did not depend on the dynastic hierarchy, except for the Kshatriya and Vaishya clan which required the hereditary factor. While for the Kshatriya clan the requisite depended on the ancestral gene of strength and vigour, and for the Vaishya the tactics and strategy of trading was in the gene. The twisting strands of DNA would tell the tale of every individual in both these classes. Moreover these two classes had inheritance which was a major factor, a Prince would inherit the Kingdom from the King and the business tycoons’ son would inherit the business empire. The other two classes did not require the gene for their endeavour. The teacher/scholar/artist class and the worker/craftsmen/servicemen never depended on the parents’ genealogy, neither was the property of ancestry of any use to their ventures.
So, it became important of the Kshatriya to be born in a Royal family and the Vaishya to be born in the family doing business. The Brahmana and Shudra could be anyone; in fact we have a story of how King Kowshika who was born in the royal family became Vishwamitra (Friend of the Universe) by subduing his Rajo Guna and elevating his Sattva Guna. Our puranas too mention many instances where the successful vaishyas yielding to gratify their senses fuel the Tamo Guna.
Now in recent times we are not ruled by anyone we have a people’s representative who looks after the administration. There is no necessity that one has to be born in certain family to get elected to represent us. In democracy anybody can elect anyone depending on his caliber to deliver and dynasty exists only in business class in this present era. It is idiocy to think our country runs on the Dynastic Rule. If we agree to that most of the country runs on the dynasty, then the meaning of Democracy is lost......What say???