Ancient Indian political thought is deeply intertwined with religion and spirituality, reflecting the socio-cultural fabric of the times. The governance systems, ethical principles, and societal organization were profoundly influenced by religious texts, rituals, and philosophical discourses.

Religious Basis of Ancient Indian Political Thought

The political philosophy of ancient India derived its foundation from religious texts and doctrines such as the Vedas, Upanishads, Dharmashastras, and Arthashastra. These texts, while primarily spiritual, also laid down guidelines for governance and societal order.

1. Vedas as a Source of Governance Principles
   The Vedas, considered the earliest and most sacred scriptures, do not explicitly discuss politics but provide a framework for social harmony. They emphasize Rta (cosmic order) as the guiding principle for both the universe and governance. The king was expected to uphold Rta through Dharma (righteousness), ensuring justice and moral conduct.

2. Upanishadic Influence
   The Upanishads introduced philosophical underpinnings to governance by discussing concepts like Brahman (universal soul) and Atman (individual soul). These ideas influenced the ethical and spiritual responsibilities of rulers, suggesting that governance should align with spiritual ideals for the welfare of society.

3. Dharmashastras: Codification of Duties
   Texts like the Manusmriti explicitly linked political authority to religious and moral obligations. Kings were portrayed as representatives of divine will, entrusted with maintaining Dharma. The Dharmashastras delineated the duties of the king, ministers, and subjects, emphasizing justice, charity, and adherence to religious rituals.

King as a Religious Authority

The role of the king in ancient Indian political thought was intrinsically religious. He was seen as “Chakravartin” or the universal ruler, embodying both temporal and spiritual authority. This dual role underscored the religious orientation of politics:

• Divine Sanction of Kingship
  The king was considered a representative of the gods, often described as a protector of Dharma and a participant in rituals to ensure prosperity and peace. His legitimacy derived from his alignment with religious principles.

• Sacred Duties
  Kings were required to perform yajnas (sacrificial rituals) and uphold social order through justice. Their power was conditioned on their ability to serve as custodians of Dharma, making their political actions inherently religious.

Concept of Dharma and Its Political Implications

The concept of Dharma formed the cornerstone of ancient Indian political thought. Unlike modern political theories, which often separate politics from religion, ancient Indian governance was a means to establish Dharma. This holistic approach emphasized:

• Moral Governance
  Dharma prescribed ethical guidelines for rulers, including truthfulness, non-violence, and compassion. Governance was not merely administrative but aimed at fostering a spiritually uplifting society.

• Social Stratification
  The Varna system, based on religious doctrines, organized society into hierarchical classes. While it provided stability, it also led to rigid structures that linked political power to religious authority.

Kautilya’s Arthashastra: A Pragmatic Yet Religious Text

The Arthashastra, attributed to Kautilya (Chanakya), is often seen as a departure from purely religion-oriented political thought due to its pragmatic and sometimes amoral strategies. However, it too integrates religion into politics:

• State as a Protector of Dharma
  Despite its emphasis on realpolitik, the Arthashastra underlines the king’s duty to protect Dharma. Kautilya advocates for the use of religious symbols and rituals to legitimize political authority.

• Integration of Ethics and Strategy
  Kautilya acknowledges the importance of ethical behavior in maintaining public trust and stability, suggesting that even pragmatic governance cannot ignore religious and moral considerations.

Integration of Spirituality and Statecraft

In ancient India, politics was viewed as an extension of spirituality. This integration is evident in practices such as:

• Rituals and Ceremonies
  Political decisions were often accompanied by religious ceremonies to seek divine blessings. Examples include the Ashvamedha Yajna, performed by kings to assert sovereignty and cosmic harmony.

• Temple Administration
  Temples were centers of political and economic activity, demonstrating the intersection of religion and governance. Rulers often patronized temples to legitimize their authority.

Criticisms and Limitations

While the religion-oriented nature of ancient Indian political thought provided a moral foundation, it also led to certain limitations:

1. Rigidity of the Caste System
   The association of governance with religious doctrines entrenched the caste system, limiting social mobility and political participation.

2. Resistance to Change
   The emphasis on tradition and rituals sometimes hindered adaptability to new political challenges.

3. Overlap of Religion and Politics
   The lack of separation between religion and politics could lead to exploitation of religious sentiments for political purposes.

Legacy and Modern Implications

The religion-oriented approach to political thought in ancient India has left a lasting legacy. It influenced later political systems in the Maurya and Gupta empires, and its principles are reflected in modern Indian values of secularism, justice, and moral leadership. However, the blending of religion and politics also serves as a reminder of the importance of balancing ethical governance with inclusivity and progress.

Conclusion

Ancient Indian political thought, deeply rooted in religion, offered a unique blend of spirituality and governance. The integration of Dharma into politics emphasized moral leadership and the welfare of society, showcasing an idealistic vision of statecraft. While this approach provided a strong ethical foundation, it also posed challenges in terms of rigidity and exclusivity. Nevertheless, the religion-oriented principles of ancient Indian politics continue to inspire debates on the role of ethics and spirituality in modern governance.

The Manusmriti, often referred to as the Laws of Manu, is one of the most significant texts in ancient Indian legal and political thought. Composed during the early centuries of the Common Era, the text outlines a comprehensive system of law, ethics, and governance, deeply rooted in the religious and philosophical traditions of its time. Among its many contributions, the Manusmriti provides detailed views on law and punishment, emphasizing their role in maintaining social order and upholding Dharma (righteousness).

Manu’s Conception of Law (Dharma)

The foundation of Manu’s legal philosophy is the concept of Dharma, a multifaceted term encompassing righteousness, duty, morality, and law. In the Manusmriti, Dharma is presented as the cosmic order governing all aspects of life, including individual behavior, social relationships, and governance. Manu viewed the law as a divine mandate, with its ultimate goal being the preservation of social harmony and cosmic balance.

1. Sources of Law
   Manu delineated four primary sources of law:

   • Vedas (Sruti): The foundational scriptures seen as divinely revealed.
   • Smriti: Texts like the Manusmriti that interpret and expand upon Vedic principles.
   • Customary Practices (Achara): Local traditions and customs observed by communities.
   • Conscience of the Learned (Sadachara): The judgment and conduct of virtuous and wise individuals.

   These sources underscore the religious and moral orientation of Manu’s legal framework.

2. Dharma and Social Hierarchy
   Manu’s legal philosophy was intertwined with the Varna system, a hierarchical social order. Each caste (Brahmins, Kshatriyas, Vaishyas, and Shudras) was assigned specific duties and privileges under Dharma, with laws tailored to their roles. This stratification was justified as essential for maintaining societal stability, although it often led to inequality and rigidity.

Manu’s Philosophy of Punishment (Danda)

Punishment, referred to as Danda in the Manusmriti, occupies a central place in Manu’s legal system. Manu regarded Danda not merely as a tool for deterrence but as a sacred instrument to uphold Dharma and ensure justice. His views on punishment are characterized by a blend of pragmatism, moral reasoning, and hierarchical considerations.

1. The Divine Nature of Danda
   Manu personifies Danda as a divine force entrusted to the king, describing it as the embodiment of justice and authority. He states:

   “Danda alone governs all beings; Danda protects them; Danda watches over them while they sleep.”

   This underscores the sanctity and indispensability of punishment in governance.

2. Objectives of Punishment
   According to Manu, punishment serves multiple purposes:

   • Deterrence: To prevent individuals from committing crimes by instilling fear.
   • Reform: To correct the behavior of offenders and guide them back to the path of Dharma.
   • Retribution: To ensure that justice is served by imposing consequences proportional to the offense.
   • Restoration of Order: To maintain societal harmony and protect the vulnerable.

3. Gradation of Punishment
   Manu’s system of punishment is characterized by a graded hierarchy, reflecting the Varna-based social structure. The severity of punishment depended on the offender’s caste, the victim’s caste, and the nature of the crime. For example:

   • Crimes committed by a Brahmin often incurred lighter penalties, as they were considered custodians of Dharma.
   • Offenses by lower castes, especially Shudras, were punished more harshly, reflecting the rigid social hierarchy.
   • Crimes against higher castes were seen as graver than those against lower castes, emphasizing the protection of societal elites.

Types of Punishments

Manu prescribed various forms of punishment, which were both physical and monetary. These punishments were designed to align with the nature and gravity of the crime:

1. Corporal Punishment
   Manu sanctioned physical punishments, such as flogging, mutilation, or execution, for severe crimes like theft, treason, or murder. The severity was often dictated by caste considerations, with lower castes receiving harsher treatments.

2. Fines and Compensation
   Monetary penalties were a common form of punishment, especially for offenses involving property or contractual violations. These fines were often calibrated according to the offender’s caste and wealth.

3. Exile and Ostracism
   For certain crimes, such as adultery or defiance of caste norms, offenders could be exiled or ostracized from the community. This punishment aimed to preserve social purity and deter others from transgressing societal boundaries.

4. Religious Atonement (Prayaschitta)
   Manu also emphasized penance and ritual purification as means of atonement. Offenders could seek redemption through specific rituals, fasting, or pilgrimages, reinforcing the religious dimension of punishment.

Justice and Inequality in Manu’s Legal System

While Manu’s legal philosophy aimed to uphold Dharma, it has been criticized for its inherent inequality and rigidity:

1. Caste-Based Discrimination
   The graded punishments often favored the upper castes, particularly Brahmins, who were exempt from many harsh penalties. This discrimination perpetuated caste-based privilege and subjugation.

2. Gender Bias
   Manu’s laws also reflected a patriarchal worldview, with women subjected to strict controls and penalties. For instance, adultery by women was punished more severely than by men, and their rights in matters like inheritance and autonomy were heavily restricted.

3. Harshness Toward Shudras
   The Manusmriti imposed disproportionately severe punishments on Shudras and those who violated caste boundaries, reinforcing social stratification.

Manu’s Legacy and Modern Interpretations

Manu’s views on law and punishment have left a lasting impact on Indian legal traditions. While his principles of Dharma and justice influenced ancient Indian governance, their rigid application led to social inequalities that have been criticized in modern times. The Manusmriti’s hierarchical and patriarchal biases have drawn significant critique from social reformers like B.R. Ambedkar, who regarded it as a tool for caste oppression.

In contemporary India, Manu’s legal philosophy is studied more as a historical and philosophical text than a practical guide. The principles of justice, fairness, and moral governance, stripped of their discriminatory aspects, remain relevant, but they must be contextualized within modern values of equality, democracy, and human rights.

Conclusion

Manu’s views on law and punishment reflect a sophisticated yet deeply hierarchical legal system rooted in religious and moral principles. By intertwining Dharma with governance, he provided a framework aimed at maintaining social order and cosmic harmony. However, the caste-based and patriarchal biases in his philosophy underscore the limitations of his approach in ensuring universal justice. While the Manusmriti continues to be an important source of historical and cultural insight, its relevance lies more in its philosophical ideals than its practical application in a modern, egalitarian society.

• According to Indian traditions, Manu is manasaputra of Bramha (originator of the universe). He is the first law-giver, and he has told what is dharma of different varnas.

Introduction

• The Manusmriti is also known as the Manava-Dharmasastra or Laws of Manu.
• Manusmriti, belonged to the tradition of dharmashastra. It is believed to be the first ancient legal text and constitution among all Dharmasastras.
• It was one of the first Sanskrit texts to be translated into English in 1776, by British philologist Sir William Jones.
• It was used to construct the Hindu law code for the East India Company administered enclaves.

Manu’s ideas related to dharma

• The Manu-smriti prescribes to Hindus their dharma—i.e., that the set of obligations incumbent on each as a member of one of the four social classes (varnas) and engaged in one of the four stages of life (ashramas).
• Manu emphasized on the ‘principle of Dharma to implement the principle of justice’.
• He was an ardent believer of Justice and Dharma.

Components of dharma as per Manusmriti

• Purusharthas: These are four goals of life: dharma, artha, kama, moksa. These four purusharthas view life in a comprehensive sense, i.e. from the material to sensual pleasures. Hence these represent a balanced way of life.
• Ashrams: These are the different stages of life. There are specific goals in each stage. These are: Bramhacarya ashram, grihastha ashram, vanaprastha ashram, sanyas ashram.
• Varnas: Hindu society was divided into chatur-varna system of social and economic hierarchy, i.e. brahmin, kshatriya, vaisya, shudra. Each varna has to follow their dharma, i.e. the varna based economic division of labour and duties.
• Sanskar: There are sixteen essential rituals in Hinduism. These starts from garbhadhana samskara and ends with antyeshthi sanskar.

Justification of inequality

1. Social Justice

• Manu did not believe in equal treatment for members of all the classes, or in the equality of all human beings.
• To Manu, the Brahmins are superior human beings who deserve special treatment. As per him, “The Brahmin is declared to be the creator of the world, the punisher, the teacher, and a benefactor.”
• Even the kings are not permitted to show disrespect to the Brahmin.
• K.P. Jayaswal views that the theory of the divinity of the king was advanced by Manusmriti to support the Brahmin empire of Pusyamitra, and to counteract the Buddhist theory of the origin of the state by contract.
• V.R. Mehta is of the view that Vaishaya Varna is least preferred for manuscript because Vaishaya always seeks their own profit rather than working for well-being of others.
• V.R. Mehta also views that there are two contradictory features manuscript. On the one hand, Varna is based on birth, but on the other hand, it shows Varna is based on the Karma (Deeds).

2. Gender Justice

• In Dharmashastra, it is written that ‘God lived there wherever women are worshiped’.
• However, the public role of women is not permitted. Society appears patriarchal.
• Manu also says that women should be kept under the regulation of men. In childhood – under regulation of father, an adult lady – under control of husband, in old age – under control of son.

3. Varna System

• Manu viewed that caste system formed an essential part in ancient Hindu society.
• Varna system would preserve the social harmony of the society.
• He viewed that the king came into existence to protect the Varna system and any failure on the part of the ruler would make him unworthy ruler.

Manu’s Political Ideology

Manu’s Conception of Kingship

• Manu treats the king as a divine creation. According to him, this institution was created by God for the protection of the people against insecurity.
• In order to ensure social harmony and promote people’s welfare, the state should be governed by selfless and enlightened Yogi King, who would uphold principles of Dharma.
• The king possesses unique qualities of all the major God- Indra, Vayu, Yama, Kuber, Agni, Varuna and Chandra. Thus, king is considered as embodiment of God on earth.
• Any disobedience or betrayal to king’s order will be considered as betrayal to God.
• The king is neither allowed to create new rules nor to change the existing principles of Dharma. He is only expected to uphold and preserve it.
• According to Manu, everyone doesn’t possess the qualities of king. Thus, here he has openly supported monarchical form of governance, instead of democratic ruler.
• Lord Brahma, the creator, decided to give the King the duty to maintain law and order and punish those who encroached upon the rights of others.
• When individuals are swayed by evil tendencies, they violate the principles of Dharma. Dandaniti controls the evil tendencies of humans. According to Manu, King is symbol of Danda created by God in order to save the world from anarchy and evils.
• The king was bound to deliver duties. This included protection of subjects, providing security, maintaining the law and order, and the dispensation of justice.
• Manu did not disapprove the wars. He sees wars necessary for expansion and protection of territory. However, as per Manu, the king should use force only as a last resort. The king should use it to protect his kingdom and also to destroy its opponents.
• Manu also wants the king to perform certain social welfare functions. e.g. looking after the helpless and needy such as the poor, the sick, the old aged, widows, childless women etv.
• Manu specified certain things which the king should avoid. E.g. drinking, dice, woman, hunting, gambling, violence, seizure of property etc.
• If the king refuses to obey the dictates of Dharma, he should be doomed along with his family and will be denied Moksha. Hence, Manu’s view of kingship departs from western views where monarchy is considered as ‘Agent of God’ and believes in principles of ‘king can do no wrong’.
• In words of Dr. D.R. Bhandarkar, “For the first time, we find a trace of the real divine origin of the kingship similar to that propounded by the western thinkers.”

Political expediency

• Again Manu was also seen combining the principle of righteousness with political expediency.

Manu’s ideas on Political Administration

• The king should appoint seven or eight ministers taking into account the principles of hereditary and virtues of courage and wisdom.
• Besides appointment of ministers, the king must also appoint ambassadors to other states so that the king remains informed about the activities of the other states.
• Manu also has given guidelines which the king needs to follow while collecting revenues, organizing local government, maintaining army and appointing civil servant.

Manu’s Views on Danda and Justice

• According to Manu, harmony and order in a state are possible only if the element of punishment or Danda is made an integral part in running the administration.
• Manu wanted the king to use punishment and force at an appropriate time for the good of the community and not use it for the promotion of his personal interest.

Judicial system and justice

• He suggested that justice should be based on dharma or righteousness.
• He claimed that a king cannot rule without justice.
• He believed that a good ruler would always ensure quick and cheap justice to the needy and those who deserve it.
• He emphasized on reformatory theory in punishment rather than retaliatory.
• He expected the king to be well-versed in Dharma Shastras and other literature for the proper pronouncement of justice as per the well-established customs and practices.
• Manu also clarified that if a wrong judgment is given, it must be reversed.
• He also suggested corporal punishment and fines.

On taxation

• According to Manu the system of Taxation should be such as to enhance the nation’s wealth.
• He also empowered the king the right to collect taxes for providing protection to the people. Thus, taxation was linked to wage theory.
• He also mentioned very clearly that the tax must be collected from both land as well as cattle.
• He fixed the percentage of tax on land, and cattle as not less than 25 percent and 20 percent, respectively.
• Manu advised the king that taxes should be levied keeping in view the capacity of the subjects and their occupation.
• According to him the king is entitled to 1/50th of gold ,1/6th of crop and 1/12th of commerce.

Criticism

• The Manu Smriti is one of the most heavily criticized of the scriptures of Hinduism, having been attacked by colonial scholars, modern liberals, Hindu reformists, Dalit advocates, feminists, and Marxists.
• Much of its criticism stems from its unknown authority, as some believe the text to be authoritative, but others do not.
• There is also debate over whether the text has suffered from later interpolations of verses.
• The law in Manu Smriti also appears to be overtly positive towards the brahmin (priest) caste in terms of concessions made in fines and punishments.
• The stance of the Manu Smriti about women has also been debated.

Evaluation

• The Manu Smriti is written with a focus on the “should” of dharma rather than on the actuality of everyday practice in India at the time.
• Still, its practical application should not be underestimated.
• Through intermediate forces, such as the instruction of scholars, the teachings did indeed have indirect effects on major segments of the Indian population.
• It is also an invaluable point of common reference in scholarly debates.
• It seems likely that the book was written in a manner which was very mindful of the dangers facing the Brahmin community during a time of much change and social upheaval.
• The principal objectives of Manusmriti seems to be generalize and systematize the rules of conduct that had come over from previous “ages” for the purpose of reconstructing or reorganizing the hindu society.
• It is considered to be the most authoritative text of human religious, social and political organization.

Kautilya, also known as Chanakya or Vishnugupta, was an ancient Indian philosopher, economist, and political strategist. His seminal work, the Arthashastra, provides a comprehensive treatise on statecraft, economic policy, and military strategy. Composed during the Mauryan era, the Arthashastra lays out a meticulous and pragmatic framework for governance, emphasizing the importance of the state as a central institution for ensuring social order, economic prosperity, and political stability. The scope of the state’s functions, as envisioned by Kautilya, is vast and multidimensional, covering administrative, economic, social, military, and judicial domains.

Protection of the State and Sovereignty

A primary function of the state, according to Kautilya, is the preservation of sovereignty and protection of its territory. Kautilya underscores the role of the ruler (or king) as the guardian of the state, responsible for safeguarding it from both internal and external threats. This includes:

• Defense against External Aggressors: The state must maintain a strong military to protect its borders and deter invasions. Kautilya discusses the importance of fortifications, standing armies, and alliances in ensuring national security.

• Internal Security: The state must protect its citizens from internal disturbances such as rebellions, uprisings, and criminal activities. The Arthashastra emphasizes a robust intelligence system to preempt and neutralize threats to internal stability.

Maintenance of Law and Order

Kautilya views the enforcement of justice as a cornerstone of effective governance. The state must establish and uphold a legal framework that ensures harmony within society. Key aspects include:

• Codified Laws and Judicial System: The Arthashastra advocates for well-defined laws that cover civil, criminal, and commercial matters. It specifies punishments for various offenses to deter wrongdoing and maintain societal order.

• Role of the King as Chief Justice: The ruler is depicted as the ultimate arbiter of justice, ensuring fairness and equity. However, Kautilya also stresses the delegation of judicial responsibilities to qualified officials to maintain efficiency.

• Protection of Vulnerable Groups: The state has a moral obligation to protect the rights of women, children, and marginalized communities, ensuring their safety and dignity.

Economic Administration

Kautilya’s Arthashastra places significant emphasis on the economic functions of the state, viewing economic prosperity as the foundation of political stability and power. The text elaborates on various economic activities the state must oversee:

• Revenue Collection and Taxation: The state should implement a fair and efficient taxation system, ensuring that revenues are sufficient to fund public projects and maintain the administration. Taxes should not be oppressive but balanced to encourage economic activity.

• Promotion of Agriculture and Trade: Agriculture is regarded as the backbone of the economy. The state must provide irrigation, prevent famines, and promote agrarian practices. Similarly, the state should facilitate trade by building roads, ports, and marketplaces, and by regulating commerce to prevent exploitation.

• State-Controlled Enterprises: The Arthashastra advocates for state involvement in key industries, such as mining, forestry, and textile production. The state’s monopoly over critical resources like metals and salt ensures a steady revenue stream.

• Regulation of Economic Activities: Kautilya highlights the need to regulate prices, wages, and market practices to prevent exploitation and ensure fairness in trade. The state also monitors weights and measures to ensure standardization.

Welfare of the People

The Arthashastra articulates a welfare-oriented approach to governance, emphasizing the king’s duty to prioritize the well-being of his subjects. Key welfare functions include:

• Public Infrastructure Development: The state is responsible for constructing and maintaining infrastructure such as roads, bridges, irrigation canals, and fortifications to facilitate economic activity and improve the quality of life.

• Disaster Management: The state must prepare for and respond to natural calamities such as droughts, floods, and famines. This includes storing grain reserves and organizing relief efforts.

• Education and Culture: Although not explicitly detailed in the Arthashastra, the state’s role in promoting education and preserving cultural heritage is implied through its emphasis on the intellectual and moral training of the king and officials.

• Healthcare: The state must ensure public health by preventing epidemics, maintaining sanitation, and supporting Ayurvedic practices.

Diplomacy and Foreign Relations

Kautilya’s Arthashastra devotes considerable attention to the management of foreign relations, recognizing the importance of diplomacy in statecraft. The text outlines a pragmatic approach to international relations based on realpolitik, including:

• Mandala Theory of Inter-State Relations: Kautilya’s famous “circle of states” theory categorizes neighboring states into allies, enemies, and neutral parties. The state’s foreign policy should be guided by its strategic interests, focusing on expanding power and influence.

• Use of Alliances and Treaties: Alliances are crucial for mutual defense and economic cooperation. However, Kautilya advises caution, advocating for alliances only when they serve the state’s interests.

• Espionage in Diplomacy: The state must employ espionage to gather intelligence on rival states and assess their strengths and weaknesses.

• War and Peace: The Arthashastra outlines strategies for war, peace, and negotiation, emphasizing that these decisions must be based on a cost-benefit analysis.

Regulation of Social and Religious Practices

Kautilya recognizes the role of religion and social customs in maintaining societal cohesion. While advocating for the king’s neutrality in religious matters, the Arthashastra permits state intervention to curb practices that disrupt public order or morality. This includes:

• Support for Dharma: The state is tasked with upholding dharma (moral law) as a guiding principle for governance. This ensures social harmony and ethical conduct.

• Control over Caste and Occupations: The text reflects the social hierarchy of its time, advocating for the regulation of caste-based duties and professions to ensure societal stability.

Military and Strategic Functions

The Arthashastra views military strength as essential for the state’s survival and expansion. It provides detailed guidelines for the organization, training, and deployment of the armed forces. Key military functions include:

• Maintenance of a Strong Army: The state must invest in a well-equipped and disciplined military to protect its sovereignty and assert its dominance.

• War Strategies: Kautilya outlines various strategies for conquest, defense, and guerrilla warfare, emphasizing adaptability and psychological tactics.

• Defense Infrastructure: The state should build fortresses, maintain stockpiles of weapons, and ensure the logistical support of troops.

Conclusion

Kautilya’s Arthashastra presents a holistic and pragmatic vision of the state, encompassing a wide array of functions aimed at ensuring security, prosperity, and justice. The text’s emphasis on strong leadership, efficient administration, and welfare-oriented governance underscores its relevance even in modern times. By articulating the responsibilities of the state in such detail, Kautilya establishes a framework for governance that balances the pursuit of power with the need to serve the public good. His insights continue to influence political thought and policy-making, highlighting the enduring legacy of the Arthashastra.

Introduction

• Kautilya was the great Prime Minister of Chandragupta Maurya.
• Kautilya’s Arthasashtra is a magnificent work on the art of government in ancient political thought which was composed between 3rd-2nd Century B.C.
• In his political and administrative ideas, the focus of attention was the king.
• According to his beliefs, for the smooth functioning of administration and for the welfare of the people, the king had to be acquainted in the four Vedas and four sciences of government (Anvikashaki Trai, Varta and Dandniti).

Thinkers views

• T.N.Ramaswamy said, “The Arthasastra is truly an anthology of political wisdom and theory and an art of statecraft, scattered in pre-Kautilyan writings, streamlined and reinterpreted by Kautilya in his attempt to construct a separate and distinct science of statecraft.”
• Arthashastra is defined by Dr. A.L. Basham as a ―treatise on polity, an encompassing enough view but not enough to separate it from other popular guides.
• Dr. D.D. Kosambi refers to Arthashastra as a ―science of material gain.
• Dr. R. Boesche translates Arthashastra as a ―science of political economy.

Kautilya’s view on working of the state and administration

• Kautilya’s administrative and judicial structure was hierarchical in nature.
• As for impartiality, he emphasised on the principle of equity and immediacy.
• As for law and order, he believed that law was an imperial command enforced by sanctions.

“Material well-being alone is supreme. For, spiritual good and sensual pleasures depends upon material well-being.” (Kautilya)

• Arhashastra, the ancient treatise on statecraft is firmly predicated on two seemingly divergent strands – artha and dharma, the former alluding to material well-being and the latter to spiritual good.
• Interestingly, and innovatively, Kautilya weaves these two together and presents to us a theory of state which is both rational-prudent and abstract-ideal.
• The primary theme of Arthashastra is ruling well.
• At the level of the state, government plays an important role in ensuring the material well being of the nation and its people.
• Therefore, Arthashastra includes guidance on the productive enterprises, taxation, revenue collection, budget, and is in this manner the ―scene of economics.
• According to Kautilya, a state policy which aims at material progress would necessarily bring about the happiness of the people.
• This interlinkage between economic progress and righteousness is a logical corollary of the text’s materialist stance – “Material well-being alone is supreme. For spiritual good and sensual pleasures depend on material well-being.”

Consequently, for Kautilya, there is no duality between life and livelihood; they are one composite whole.

• The term ‘artha’ denotes land (inhabited by humans) which is the well-spring of all economic activities.
• Arthashastra is the science of protection of this land as a source of material well-being.
• The materialist undercurrent of statecraft entwines both life and livelihood inseparably.

Elements of the state/Saptanga Theory

• One of the most significant contributions of Kautilya in the realm of political thought is his Saptanga theory (sapta prakriti) of the state.
• Kautilya held the view that a state is a combination of seven elements i.e.

Swamin (the Lord or the Sovereign)

• The ruler is equivalent to the head in a human body.
• Kautilya did not believe in divine origin of kinsgship. He believed it to be a human institution.
• An ideal king, according to Kautilya is one who has the highest qualities of leadership, intellect, energy and personal attributes.
• The king must be able to gain confidence in others.
• He must be easily accessible, truthful and a pioneer.
• He should have a sharp intellect, be brave, prompt and must possess a strong mind.
• To Kautilya, the swamin could be one person or a number of persons.
• However, to Kautilya the swamin is a veritable sovereign owing allegiance to none.

Some of the main duties assigned to the king by Kautilya are:

• Ensuring people’s welfare
• To maintain dharma or prescribed duties of all human being.
• To protect his subjects from internal and external threats.
• Protection of people from eight types of calamities
• Maintenance of law and order in the state.
• To ensure universal and free education for all the citizens
• To display Atma vrata (self-control) and to do this, the king had to abandon six enemies – kama (lust), krodha (anger), lobha (greed), mana (vanity), mada (haughtiness), and harsha (overjoy).

Amatya (The ministers)

• Amatya represents eyes of the state.
• According to Kautilya the Amatya refers to a minister or any kind of high officials, who are involved in all functioning of the government.
• Kautilya says that the Amatya must be a native of the country and must possess devotion towards the Swamin.
• Apart from the king, there are three top positions in the council of ministers – the mantri or the prime minister (closest political advisor of the king), the commander-in-chief (involved in military planning and conduct of foreign policy) and the crown prince who alternates between political and military assignments.
• These four posts form the supreme body of political deliberations.
• Kautilya did not fix the number of ministers which depends on requirement.

Janapada (The population)

• Janpada represents the legs of the state.
• Janapada to Kautilya implies the land and the population.
• According to him fertility is an essential component of janapada.
• In this element, Kautilya discussed the functioning of the village and towns including their organization.
• Kautilya believed that the rural population has a stronger physical and mental make-up than the urban population.
• That is why; he did not approve of the urban style entertainment like alcohol consumption and gambling for the countryside.
• Under land reclamation policy, Kautilya favours allotment of land to shudra peasants for cultivation

Kosha (the treasury)

• Kosha is considered as the mouth of the state.
• Kautilya opined that a good state is one which is rich in gold and silver, as well as big and variegated that it may be capable of withstanding calamities for long and uninterruptedly.
• Kautilya attached great importance to the growth of treasury as he believed that treasury played an important part in the maintenance of internal and external independence of a state.

Durga (the fort)

• Durga represents the arms of a state.
• Security of treasury and army would depend on fortification of the state.
• Durga or the fort is considered as an extremely important element in a state, as it is related to the defence of the empire.
• Usually, forts were constructed on the borders of the territory.
• Kautilya divided the forts into four categories: surrounded by water (Audak fort), hills (Parvat fort), desert (Dhanvan fort) and forest forts (Van fort).

Bala (the Army)

• It is equivalent to brain in a human body.
• The military force consist of cavalry, infantry and chariot riders.
• He considered Kshatriyas as excellent material for the army as they are good warriors.
• He does not prefer the Vaishyas and Shudras for joining army when the state is confronted with emergency.
• Kautilya divides the armies into six categories i.e.
  • Hereditary forces
  • Hired troops
  • Soldiers of fighting corporations,
  • Troops belonging to an ally
  • Troops belonging to an enemy
  • The soldiers of wild tribes

Mitra (the ally)

• A mitra represents ears of a state.
• According to Kautilya, an ideal ally is one who is a friend of the family for a long time, constant and powerful in support, amenable to control, shares a common interest, can mobilise his army quickly and is not someone who would double cross his friends.

According to Kautilya there are two types of allies

• Sahaja mitra: It consists of those persons whose friendship was derived from the time of father and grandfather and were situated close to the territory of the immediately neighboring enemy.
• Kritrim mitra: Kritrim mitra refers to an acquired ally whose friendship was reported for the protection of wealth and life. Kautilya held that the ally of the first category was superior to the ally of the second category.

Welfare nature of the state

• According to Kautilya, the primary objective of the state is to ensure the welfare of the people.
• Kautilya gives immense power to the king. He also attaches an element of divinity.
• To Kautilya the powers of the king are derived from three sources i.e. prabhushakti (Power of the Army and The Treasury) Manta Shakti (advice of wise men specially the council of minister) and Utsha Shakti (Charisma).
• In Arthashasrtra Kautilya never advocated the “Theory of Divine Origin” of monarch. Kautilya was of the view that as the state is a human institution, so it should be governed by a human being. As such, the king should be the protector of the whole society.

“In the happiness of his subjects lies the king’s happiness; in their welfare his welfare.”

• In this statement (taken from Arthashastra), Kautillya refers that the King is a father figure for his subjects, so the king should treat his subjects in the same way as his children.
• Welfare of subjects is the first and foremost duty of a king.
• Kautilya identified an ideal ruler as one “who is ever active in promoting the welfare of the people and who endears himself by enriching the public and doing well to them”.
• The king should render selfless service to his subjects.
• It is the first and foremost duty of the King to protect the life and property of his subjects and to save the people from anti-social elements or as well as natural calamities, such as fire, floods, earthquakes etc.
• To Kautilya only when the subjects are happy, the King can be happy.
• Thus, Kautilya conceptualized the idea of a welfare state for the very first time in Ancient Indian political writings.

Principles of Statecraft

Introduction

• Statecraft theory is in political Science an approach to understanding politics, policy change and political leadership, which focuses on the interests of the political elite.
• It was first developed by British academic Jim Bulpitt to understand the government of Margaret Thatcher.
• In common parlance statecraft means skillful management of state affairs.
• Kautilya was a proponent of a welfare state but definitely encouraged war for preserving the power of the state.

Kautilya’s Views

• He thought that the possession of power and happiness in a state makes a king superior hence a king should always strive to augment his power. This actually coincides with Weber’s view that there is no morality in international politics which means that states must be at war all the time.
• Kautilya believed that for the prosperity of a state, the state must be devoid of internal conflict and the King should be in control of the state. To maintain this internal peace, he believed in a just and realistic rule of law.
• His definition of a state was one which had power and wealth and hence he put property rights and protection of wealth as one of the important themes in his jurisprudence. In fact, he advocated that one could get rid of corporal punishment by paying off fines.
• Kautilya believed that nations acted in their political, economic and military self-interest.
• He thought that foreign policy or diplomacy will be practiced as long as the sell-interest of the state is served because every state acts in a way to maximize power and self-interest.
• The protection and promotion of political, military and economic interests of a State rested on six constituent elements, viz. the king, the ministers, the fortress, the countryside, the treasury and the army.
• For the purpose of settlement of disputes, four methods were advocated, namely, ‘Sama’ (conciliation) , ‘Dana’ (appeasement), ‘Bheda’ (dividing), and ‘Danda’ (use of force) to be employed as the last resort.
• According to Arthashastra, the State should follow a six-fold policy with other States: (1) Sandhi (treaty of peace); (2) Vigrah (war); (3) Asana (neutrality) (4) Yana (marching) – presumably a threat; (5) Samsrya (alliance) and (6) Dwidibhava (making peace with one and end war with another).
• Among more cynical advices Kautilya offered to the king are about
  • his stress on diplomatic manoeuvres and espionage activity.
  • his ‘doctrine of silent war’ or a war of assassination against an unsuspecting king,
  • his approval of secret agents who killed enemy leaders and sowed discord among them,
  • his view of women as weapons of war,
  • his use of religion and superstition to bolster his troops and demoralize enemy soldiers,
  • the spread of disinformation.

Kautilya described three types of political system namely rule making, rule application and rule adjudication and has been recognized for his contributions to bringing diplomacy at the helm of state’s affairs.

Kautilya and Machiavelli

Introduction

• ‘Arthashastra’ is recognized as the masterpiece of Kautilya while ‘The prince’ earned laurels for Machiavelli.
• Comparison is often made between Kautilya and Machiavelli, (the great modern European thinker) as both these two thinkers evolved ways and means to ensure practical administration in the state.

Similarities between Kautilya and Machiavelli

• Both Kautilya and Machiavelli laid stress upon gathering first-hand information about the activities, designs and strengths of the neighboring enemy states.
• Besides another common element between Kautilya and Machiavelli was that they both relied upon earlier records of historical evidence about the actions of enemy states.
• Both believed in the principle of political expediency.
• Both Kautilya and Machiavelli hold almost similar views regarding the conception of the state. Both believe in a strong monarchy as the best form of government.
• Both attach importance to force and its use in keeping order and hence the necessity of a powerful king as head of the state.
• The law of punishment must remain ever vigilant to prevent the people of the four castes and orders from swerving from their respective duties and avocations. He looked upon Royalty as the most vital factor in the body-politics.
• Both emphasize the need for a strong and powerful army in a prosperous state. Both hate the idea of keeping mercenaries or discontented soldiers.
• Kautilya goes into greater details about the classification of armies and soldiers and how to deal with each arm than Machiavelli. The latter advises that a wise prince should not deem that “a real victory which is gained with the arms of others,” whether auxiliaries or mercenaries and must turn to his own arms.

Difference between Kautilya and Machiavelli

Background and Context

• Kautilya (Chanakya): Kautilya was an ancient Indian philosopher, statesman, and advisor to Emperor Chandragupta Maurya in the 4th century BCE. He wrote the treatise “Arthashastra,” which encompassed political, economic, and military aspects of governance.
• Machiavelli: Machiavelli was an Italian political philosopher and writer during the Renaissance period in the 15th and 16th centuries. He is famous for his work “The Prince,” which focuses on political leadership and the acquisition and maintenance of power.

Nature of Leadership and Morality

• Kautilya: Kautilya emphasized the importance of a virtuous and moral leader. He believed that a ruler should uphold dharma (righteousness) and work for the welfare of the people. However, he also recognized the pragmatic aspects of politics and acknowledged the necessity of employing certain unethical means to ensure stability and security.
• Machiavelli: Machiavelli argued that a ruler should prioritize political effectiveness over moral considerations. He famously stated that “the ends justify the means,” suggesting that a ruler should be willing to employ deceit, violence, and manipulation to maintain power and achieve political goals.

Purpose of the State and Governance

• Kautilya: Kautilya believed that the state’s primary purpose was to ensure the well-being and prosperity of its subjects. He advocated for a strong and centralized state, with a well-organized administration, efficient taxation, and a robust military. Kautilya’s Arthashastra encompassed various aspects of governance, including economic policies, diplomacy, and the management of internal and external threats.
• Machiavelli: Machiavelli focused on the acquisition and maintenance of power for the ruler. He believed that a ruler should prioritize stability and security, even if it meant using ruthless tactics. Machiavelli stressed the importance of maintaining a strong army and creating a sense of fear among the populace to deter potential challenges.

Relationship between the Ruler and the People

• Kautilya: Kautilya emphasized the importance of a symbiotic relationship between the ruler and the people. He believed that the ruler’s legitimacy stemmed from the consent and support of the governed. Kautilya advocated for a just and compassionate ruler who prioritized the welfare of the people.
• Machiavelli: Machiavelli viewed the relationship between the ruler and the people as one based on pragmatism rather than benevolence. He suggested that a ruler should be willing to act in ways that might be contrary to popular opinion if it served the interests of maintaining power and stability.

Contextual Factors

• Kautilya: Kautilya’s political thought was deeply rooted in ancient Indian culture, ethics, and the prevailing social order. He considered factors such as dharma, the varna system, and the role of the king within the broader framework of Indian civilization.
• Machiavelli: Machiavelli’s political thought emerged during the Renaissance in Italy, a period of political instability and power struggles among city-states. His work was influenced by the political context of his time, which included constant warfare, the influence of powerful families, and the emergence of nation-states.

Contemporary Relevance and Criticisms

• Kautilya: Kautilya’s ideas continue to be studied and applied in various fields, including politics, economics, and management. His emphasis on the welfare of the people and effective governance resonates with contemporary discussions on good governance and leadership ethics.
• Machiavelli: Machiavelli’s ideas have generated debate and controversy. Critics argue that his approach neglects moral considerations and promotes a cynical view of politics. However, his work continues to be studied for its insights into the realities of political power and the dynamics of leadership.

Views on corruption by Kautilya

• According to Kautilya, human nature possesses corruption. It is the human psyche.
• He said That as it is impossible not to taste the honey that is found at the trip of the tongue. So it is impossible for a government servant not to eat up at least a bit of the King’s revenue.
• The government servant employed by the government can never locate corruption.
• The level of corruption is steady and maybe there could have been marginal fluctuations.
• He believed that “men are naturally fickle minded” and are comparable to “horses at work who exhibit a constant change in their temper”.
• Kautilya provides a comprehensive list of 40 kinds of embezzlement.
• To gist those, practices and acts that can be termed corrupt such as, causing loss of government, misuse of government property, misappropriation of revenue, falsification of documents, inequality in work, false budgeting, inequality in  price, weight, numbering, and quality of the production, obstruction in lawful process, exploiting public, corrupting the officials, taking bribe, failure of expenditure under work, false measurement, allocating expenditure under wrong heads, cheating with weight etc.

Kautilya suggests ways to overcome corruption

• Psychology or mental set up of the corrupt officers should be changed so that it should be eliminated forever.
• To Prevent and control corrupt practices and officers, law should be  followed strictly.
• In corruption cases, all the concern senior or junior officers in  that  particular department  should  be checked.
• The non-corrupt supporter of corruption should also be treated as corrupt-hiding a crime of corruption is another crime.
• Working procedure of the officers should be supervised regularly. For that purpose a special supervisory officer should be appointed. This supervisor must be continuously  in  contact with  the  king  so  that  the king  should know  about malpractices taking place in the department.
• In collection of revenue and other cesses, if there     should     be any     difference, the concern officer or public    servants    should    be enquired immediately.
• The public servants should be transferred continuously from one department to another so that they should not get a chance to make corruption boldly in any new department.
• There should be ‘Information Organization’. The informer should inform the king about corruption in any department. A person who is working as an Informer should be kept undisclosed.

Theory of Mandala

Introduction

• Interstate relations and foreign policy find a prominent place in Kautilya’s Arthashastra.
• He has tried to explain the dynamics of interstate relations through his mandala theory.
• Kautilya has also explained upayas (peace politics) and shadgunyas (six war tactics).
• He also emphasised that a king should have a detailed system of diplomatic relations with different states.
• Kautilya argued that welfare of a state depends on its active foreign policy and he highlighted that there are links between the domestic factors and foreign policy of a state.

Concept Of Mandala

• Mandala is a Sanskrit word which means circle.
• Mandala projects the world in terms of geometry.
• Kautilya used the shape of mandala to develop a political geometry that accounts for different political realities.
• It was not a new concept given by Kautilya as it was earlier discussed by Manu and there were indirect references to it in Rigveda.
• However, it was Kautilya who gave a comprehensive theory of mandala for security and survival of state.

Basic understanding

• The Mandala concept is one in which there are circles of friends and foes with the central point being the King and his State.
• Mandala theory of foreign policy, is based on the geographical assumption.
• This embraces twelve kings in the vicinity and he considers the kingdoms as neighbors, the states which are the enemy’s neighbors are his enemies’ friends and the next circle of states are his friends.
• He also believes that the states which are his neighbors and are also neighbors of his enemies are neutral and should always be treated with respect.
• He believes that this circle is dynamic and the King should strive to be expanding his central position and reduce the power of the other kings in the vicinity.
• He also proposes to build alliances with states which are two degrees away from the center to create a balance of power.
• In the Kautilyan world he did recognize the importance of middle powers.
• In addition he mentions that war is an outcome of a power struggle and state sovereignty hence he treats diplomacy as a temporary phenomenon.

Peace Politics or Upayas

• There are four upayas to realise an objective or aim and they have existed since the period of epics and the Dharmashastra.
• These include Sama (conciliation), Dana (concession or gift), Bheda (punishment), Danda (dissension).
• These upayas were to be used in times of peace by the king in his foreign relations.
• He said that foreign relations would be determined by self-interest, not by ethical concerns.

War Tactics or Shadgunyas

He elaborates on the six forms of diplomacy which scholars find very interesting.

• Sandhi: This means accommodation, which means that kings seek to accommodate each other and do not resolve to hostile means.
• Vigraha: This means hostility shown to a neighbor or a state. Kautilya strongly believed that the states are always at war and seek power.
• Asana: This means indifference and he choose this policy for states which are neutral in his mandala concept of nations.
• Dvaidhibhava: This means double policy which was very well practiced by Bismarck. Kautilya advocates this foreign policy for states which are superior militarily. Kissinger followed this strategy where he made an alliance with China such that at no time Russia and China could become closer in ties than US and China. Kautilya advocated the same concept within his Mandala framework.
• Samsarya: This policy of protection is followed where a stronger state intervenes and shelters a weak state.
• Yana: This policy is to attack. Kautilya does mention that peace and stability in a state make the state even powerful but never shies away from attacking the weak and unjust king.

Conclusion

• Much of our knowledge about state policy under the Mauryas comes from the Arthashastra written by Kautilya.
• Though it was written at the end of the fourth century B.C, it appears to have been rediscovered only in 1905.
• Kautilya is described by historians as both the emperor’s prime Minister and economist of the Mauryan state.
• Most agree that his work can be read as an adequate description of his time yet also serving as a practical manual of how to govern.
• Kautilya stresses on the importance of religion as an important force to depoliticize the masses when confronted with state power, thus reducing the risk of rebellion.

Current relevance of Kautilya’s view

• It is obvious that according to Kautilya, the aim of statecraft in the present situation is to be focused on the population in terms of their well-being.
• Covering various topics on administration, politics and economy, it is a book of law and a treatise on running a country, which is relevant even today.
• He provided valuable basis for economic science.
• It contains very useful economic ideas on foreign trade, taxation, public expenditure, agriculture and industry.
• Good governance and stability are inextricably linked. If rulers are responsive, accountable, removable, recallable, there is stability. If not, there is instability.
• This is even more relevant in the present democratic setup.
• Heavy taxation should be avoided. If tax rates are high, public will not be willing to pay the tax and find out the ways of tax evasion.
• Low rate of taxation will yield more revenue to the state. He was fully aware that terms of trade were not just depending on economics but also on various parameters.
• Social welfare is the centre point of kautilya’s economic ideas.
• The State was required to help the poor and helpless and to be proactive in contributing to the welfare of its citizens.
• The emphasis that Kautilya gave to human capital formation is relevant in current times because development is not possible without human capital accumulation.
• Apart from these ideas there are a number of things in Arthsashtra which is very relevant such as conservation of natural resources.

The ancient Indian text Manusmriti, attributed to Manu, is a seminal work on Hindu law and philosophy. It serves as a comprehensive guide to dharma (moral and social duties), governance, and the principles of justice. Among its various contributions, the concept of the state and sovereignty stands out as a cornerstone of ancient Indian political thought. Manu’s vision of the origin of the state and the nature of sovereignty is deeply rooted in religious, ethical, and practical principles, reflecting the social and political realities of his time.

The Origin of the State

Manu traces the origin of the state to a divine mandate, emphasizing its sacred and moral foundation. According to Manusmriti, human society, in its early stages, lived in harmony, guided by the principles of dharma. However, as human desires grew, leading to conflicts, disorder, and lawlessness, the need for a governing authority became apparent. Manu’s explanation for the emergence of the state involves both a philosophical justification and a practical response to the challenges of social life.

1. The Age of Dharma and Decline into Anarchy
   Manu posits that in the Satya Yuga (the age of truth), people naturally adhered to dharma, and there was no need for a ruler. Society functioned harmoniously without governance, as individuals were self-disciplined and virtuous. However, as the ages progressed (Treta, Dvapara, and Kali Yugas), human behavior deteriorated. Greed, jealousy, and violence emerged, disrupting societal balance. This decline necessitated the creation of a central authority to enforce order and ensure the adherence to dharma.

2. Divine Creation of Kingship
   Manu emphasizes that the institution of kingship is divinely ordained. The Manusmriti states that the Devas (gods), witnessing the chaos on earth, created a king to restore order. The king is depicted as a manifestation of divine will, embodying qualities of justice, power, and protection. Manu writes that the king is a representative of deities such as Indra, Yama, Varuna, and Kubera, endowed with their virtues to execute justice and govern effectively.

3. Social Contract Theory in Manusmriti
   While Manu’s perspective is primarily religious, it hints at a rudimentary form of the social contract theory. He suggests that people, recognizing the need for order, willingly submit to the authority of a ruler in exchange for protection and justice. The king, in turn, is expected to rule according to dharma and ensure the welfare of his subjects. This mutual understanding underscores the functional necessity of the state in regulating society.

Nature of Sovereignty

Manu’s conception of sovereignty is deeply intertwined with moral authority and religious principles. Unlike modern notions of sovereignty, which often emphasize absolute power, Manu’s idea is both limited by dharma and guided by ethical considerations.

1. The King as the Embodiment of Dharma
   Manu envisions the king as the upholder of dharma, the moral law that governs individual and societal behavior. The king is not above dharma; rather, he is its executor, ensuring that all members of society adhere to their duties. Sovereignty, in this context, is not about arbitrary power but about the responsibility to maintain cosmic order (Rta).

2. Divine Authority of the King
   The Manusmriti elevates the king’s position by associating it with divine sanction. Manu describes the king as a representative of God, ruling on behalf of the divine. This divine legitimacy grants the king immense power, but it also imposes strict moral obligations. The king’s authority is seen as a sacred trust, and any abuse of power is considered a violation of divine will.

3. Responsibilities of Sovereignty
   Manu outlines specific duties of the king, reflecting his vision of sovereignty as a moral and administrative responsibility:

   • Protection of Subjects: The primary duty of the king is to protect his people from internal and external threats. This includes safeguarding their lives, property, and dignity.
   • Administration of Justice: The king is the chief judicial authority, responsible for resolving disputes and punishing wrongdoers. Manu emphasizes that justice must be impartial and in accordance with dharma.
   • Maintenance of Social Order: The king must ensure the proper functioning of the caste system (Varna), with each caste performing its prescribed duties. This hierarchical order is viewed as essential for societal harmony.
   • Welfare of the People: Sovereignty involves promoting the well-being of subjects through economic stability, public works, and disaster management.

4. The Limitations on Sovereignty
   Despite his extensive powers, the king is not above reproach in Manu’s framework. The king is bound by:

   • Dharma: The ultimate standard against which all actions are judged.
   • Counsel from Advisors: Manu advocates for a council of ministers and learned Brahmins to guide the king’s decisions.
   • Accountability to the People: While implicit, Manu’s writings suggest that the king must maintain the trust of his subjects to retain legitimacy.

5. Punishment as a Tool of Sovereignty
   Manu introduces the concept of Danda (punishment) as a cornerstone of sovereignty. Danda is portrayed as the king’s instrument for maintaining law and order. However, it is not merely punitive but also reformative, aimed at deterring crime and encouraging virtuous conduct. Manu likens Danda to a divine force, asserting that its proper use ensures societal harmony, while its misuse leads to tyranny and chaos.

Manu’s Contribution to Political Philosophy

Manu’s ideas on the origin of the state and sovereignty are a synthesis of religious doctrines, ethical values, and pragmatic governance principles. His framework reflects the socio-political realities of ancient India, where the state was deeply intertwined with religion and caste-based social structure. Key contributions include:

• Integration of Religion and Politics: Manu’s conception of the state is inseparable from dharma, highlighting the moral responsibilities of rulers.
• Theocratic Justification of Kingship: By rooting sovereignty in divine will, Manu provides a sacred legitimacy to the institution of kingship.
• Early Social Contract Theory: His acknowledgment of the people’s consent in accepting a ruler reflects an early understanding of governance as a mutual agreement.
• Focus on Welfare and Justice: Manu’s emphasis on the king’s duties towards his subjects anticipates modern notions of welfare-oriented governance.

Critique and Legacy

While Manu’s ideas on the state and sovereignty have been influential, they are not without critique. The rigidity of the caste system endorsed by Manu has drawn criticism for perpetuating social inequality. Additionally, his religious justification of kingship may appear inconsistent with secular governance models. However, Manu’s focus on the moral responsibilities of rulers and the centrality of dharma in governance remain relevant in discussions of ethical leadership.

In conclusion, Manu’s vision of the state and sovereignty in the Manusmriti provides a foundational framework for ancient Indian political thought, blending religious ideals with practical governance. By emphasizing the divine origin of the state, the moral responsibilities of the king, and the centrality of dharma, Manu creates a vision of sovereignty that is both authoritative and accountable. His ideas continue to resonate as a historical reflection of the intertwining of morality, religion, and statecraft in human society.

The ancient Indian political ideas were much influenced by the general conditions prevailing in the country. Multiplicity of states and existence of despotic monarchy and republican systems in different states, offered a wide and rich field for investigation into different institutions, laws and customs prevalent in various parts of the country. All these factors sowed the seeds of political speculation in the ancient Indian political thoughts and institutions, which had certain distinct features. Some of the prominent features are as follows:

(1) Continuity

An important feature of Indian political thought is its continuity. Some scholars have contended that the later political thinkers merely reproduced the treatises of the earlier thinkers. This is not acceptable, as B. A. Saletore states it would be ‘incorrect to maintain that the ancient theorists merely echoed one another, on the other hand they carefully maintained what their predecessors had said in regard to political thought, recorded wherever necessary divergent opinions and thereby added to the totality and continuity of the subject. Their conservatism was by itself one of the factors which enable our subject to possess a continuity of its own.”

(ii) Religion and ethics

The ancient thought was intimately linked with religion and ethics as well as the development of the moral standard of the people. Though the offices of the king and priest were kept separate, yet religion occupied a position of prominence. The king and the priests never worked at cross purposes and their relations were based on mutual help and co-operation. As Beni Prasad said, “The conflict between the secular and religious powers which raged in medieval Europe and gave rise to a good deal of political theory, had no counterpart in ancient India. He asserted that the relations between the king and the priest were generally very smooth and cordial.

(iii) Realistic and practical character

Despite the religious and moral undertone, the political thought of ancient India was intensely realistic and practical in character. The political ideas of the Hindus were simple and laid down rules of policy, which were founded upon the accumulated wisdom of past masters that the rulers were expected to follow.

(iv) Monarchical states

The political ideas were to a large extent influenced by the monarchical states that were predominant, mostly in northern India.

(v) Conservative attitude

The Hindu political thought was often conservative. It justified caste system and inferior rank of Sudras. The ancient political thinkers were unprogressive and not prepared to accept any dynamic change.

(vi) Hindu habit of synthesis

In ancient India, politics was intimately linked with other subjects and was not treated as an isolated subject of study. It was intimately linked with other branches of human activities. This was in keeping with the Hindu habit of synthesis and all embracing idea of the state.

(vii) Dominant position in the society

A notably feature of ancient political thought is that the priestly and ruling classes occupied a dominant position in the society. However, later on the priestly class was not given this status and in Arthashastra, Kautilya excluded them from the list of component factors (angas) of government (rajayam).

(viii) Didactive and destructive

Ancient thought is largely didactic or instructive, ideological and practical. The writings of the ancient thinkers were mostly treaties on ethics and state administration.

Thus, one finds that ancient Indian political thought had some distinct features of its own and it would be wrong t to say that political thought did not make any significant progress during the ancient times.

One can trace the development of ancient Indian political ideas in Rigveda Samhita, the earliest literary works of Indo-Aryans and the famous epic Mahabharata. In the Mahabharata, Sri Krishna and Bhisma are described as great political philosophers and sages of all time to come. In fact, Sri Krishna is considered to be an Avatar (an incarnate God) and his message is well described in the famous Bhagavad Gita. Krishna Dvaipayan Vyasa is the author of the Mahabharata and hence it is pertinent to study his writings in order to know ancient Hindu political philosophy. The Mahabharata is a legend, but it vividly described the nature of ancient Indian polity.

Political Philosophy as Enshrined in Bhagavad Gita, Mahabharata, Ramayana and Vedanta

The tradition of political thinking starts with the Vedas and Upanishads. Different theories of the nature of the state were formed and different forms of states have been experimented with over time. The historical development of political ideas find that the concept of Swaraj, self government, constantly inspired the mind. From the Vedas and Upanishads, through the writings of Jnaneshwara and Shivaji, to the political ideas of Tilak, Aurobindo, and Gandhi, Swaraj has been constantly discussed.

Ancient Indian political thought has been significantly represented by the Vedas, the Upanishadas, and the Bhagavad Gita. The political thought found in the great epics, the Mahabharata and the Ramayana is more complex and comprehensive. • The Manusmriti, along with other smritis, dealt with every political institutions and the entire panorama of human life vertically and horizontally. The vertical perspective led to the concept of the state. The horizontal perspective led to the concept of Dharma. Both these concepts were supported equally by philosophy and science. Therefore; it is no wonder that the contemporary Indian political thinkers have unanimously appreciated Raj Dharma as the sound basis of polity.

The Manusmriti, a foundational text of ancient Indian law and philosophy, offers a detailed account of the king’s position and duties. As a comprehensive treatise on dharma (moral and social order), the Manusmriti underscores the king’s role as the guardian and enforcer of dharma, portraying him as both a divine figure and a servant of the people. The king’s responsibilities encompass governance, justice, protection, and the maintenance of social harmony, reflecting a vision of kingship that balances spiritual, ethical, and administrative dimensions.

The Divine Position of the King

In the Manusmriti, the king is depicted as a divinely ordained figure, chosen to uphold dharma and restore cosmic order. The text asserts that kingship is not merely a human institution but a sacred office entrusted by the gods.

• Representative of Divine Will: The Manusmriti states that the king is endowed with the qualities of the deities Indra, Yama, Varuna, and Kubera, reflecting his role as the earthly embodiment of divine authority. This divine legitimacy grants the king immense power but also imposes strict moral obligations.

• The Protector of Dharma: The king is seen as the ultimate guardian of dharma, ensuring that all members of society adhere to their prescribed duties. His position is central to maintaining the balance between spiritual and material life.

• A Trustee of the People: Despite his exalted status, the king is not an absolute ruler. His authority is conceptualized as a trust, and he is expected to prioritize the welfare of his subjects above all else.

Duties of the King

The Manusmriti outlines a comprehensive set of duties for the king, emphasizing his role as a protector, legislator, administrator, and moral guide. These duties are rooted in the principles of dharma and reflect a holistic approach to governance.

1. Protection of Subjects

One of the king’s foremost duties is to ensure the safety and security of his subjects. This encompasses protection from both internal and external threats.

• Defense Against Enemies: The king is responsible for safeguarding the kingdom from invasions and external aggression. He must maintain a strong military force and exercise vigilance over the state’s borders.

• Maintenance of Law and Order: The king must protect his people from internal disturbances, including crime, rebellion, and injustice. He is tasked with ensuring a stable and peaceful environment in which his subjects can thrive.

• Protection of the Vulnerable: The Manusmriti emphasizes the king’s duty to protect vulnerable groups, including women, children, the elderly, and the impoverished. This reflects the text’s broader concern for social justice and equity.

2. Administration of Justice

Justice is a central theme in the king’s duties, and the Manusmriti devotes significant attention to outlining the principles of fair and impartial adjudication.

• Role as Chief Judge: The king is the highest judicial authority in the kingdom, responsible for resolving disputes and ensuring that justice is served. He is expected to base his judgments on dharma, custom, and the guidance of learned Brahmins.

• Punishment and Reform: The concept of Danda (punishment) is pivotal in the Manusmriti. The king wields danda as a tool to enforce the law, deter wrongdoing, and uphold social order. However, punishment must be proportional, ethical, and aimed at reforming the offender.

• Impartiality: The king is expected to remain impartial in dispensing justice, treating all individuals equally, regardless of their social status or wealth.

3. Maintenance of Social Order

The Manusmriti emphasizes the king’s duty to preserve the hierarchical structure of society, particularly the varna (caste) system. This reflects the text’s belief in the importance of social harmony.

• Enforcement of Varna Duties: The king must ensure that each varna performs its prescribed duties. For instance, Brahmins are expected to pursue knowledge and spiritual practices, while Kshatriyas are tasked with governance and protection.

• Prevention of Intermixing: The Manusmriti assigns the king the responsibility of preventing social disorder caused by the violation of caste boundaries, such as inter-caste marriages or occupations.

4. Economic Responsibilities

The king’s duties extend to ensuring the economic prosperity of the kingdom. The Manusmriti provides guidelines for taxation, resource management, and public welfare.

• Fair Taxation: The king is entitled to collect taxes but must do so equitably and without burdening his subjects. Taxes are conceptualized as a form of payment for the king’s protection and services.

• Promotion of Agriculture and Trade: The king must encourage agricultural production, trade, and industry, ensuring the kingdom’s economic stability and self-sufficiency.

• Public Works: The king is responsible for infrastructure development, including roads, irrigation systems, and temples, to enhance the quality of life for his subjects.

5. Moral and Spiritual Guidance

The Manusmriti envisions the king as not only a political leader but also a moral and spiritual guide. His actions set an example for his subjects.

• Adherence to Personal Dharma: The king is expected to lead a disciplined life, adhering to dharma in both his personal and public conduct. This includes maintaining self-control, humility, and generosity.

• Promotion of Religion and Education: The king must support religious institutions, encourage the study of scriptures, and uphold rituals that maintain cosmic balance.

• Consultation with Brahmins: The king is advised to seek the counsel of learned Brahmins and other advisors to ensure that his decisions align with dharma.

Limitations and Ethical Constraints on the King

While the Manusmriti grants the king significant authority, it also imposes several ethical and practical constraints to prevent the abuse of power.

• Bound by Dharma: The king is not above dharma. His actions are subject to the same moral and ethical standards that govern his subjects.

• Advisory Councils: The king must rely on the guidance of ministers, priests, and other advisors to ensure wise and just decision-making.

• Accountability to the People: Although implicitly stated, the Manusmriti suggests that the king’s legitimacy depends on his ability to fulfill his duties and maintain the trust of his subjects.

• Proportional Use of Power: The king’s use of danda must be just and tempered with compassion. Excessive punishment or tyranny is condemned as a violation of dharma.

The Ideal King in the Manusmriti

The Manusmriti presents a vision of the ideal king who embodies a balance of strength, wisdom, and virtue. Such a ruler prioritizes the welfare of his people, upholds justice, and remains steadfast in his commitment to dharma.

• Moral Integrity: The ideal king is free from greed, anger, and ego. He is self-disciplined and guided by a sense of duty.

• Service to the People: The king views his position as a sacred trust, dedicating himself to the service of his subjects.

• Strategic and Pragmatic: While adhering to ethical principles, the king must also be pragmatic in dealing with challenges, ensuring the kingdom’s stability and prosperity.

Conclusion

The Manusmriti’s depiction of the king highlights the intricate interplay between divine authority, moral responsibility, and practical governance. The king’s duties, encompassing protection, justice, social order, economic welfare, and moral leadership, reflect a vision of kingship that is both idealistic and pragmatic. By emphasizing the centrality of dharma, the text ensures that power is exercised ethically and in service of the greater good. While some aspects of the Manusmriti’s vision, such as its endorsement of the caste system, may appear outdated, its core principles of ethical leadership and accountability remain timeless, offering valuable insights into the nature of good governance.

Kautilya, also known as Chanakya or Vishnugupta, was an ancient Indian political philosopher and strategist whose treatise, the Arthashastra, remains one of the most comprehensive works on statecraft, economics, and governance. Among its numerous contributions, the Arthashastra offers a sophisticated and pragmatic framework for understanding interstate relations, rooted in realism and guided by strategic considerations. Kautilya’s views on interstate relations are notable for their emphasis on power dynamics, diplomacy, and pragmatism, providing a detailed blueprint for managing relationships between states in a competitive and often hostile political landscape.

Philosophical Foundations: Realism and Pragmatism

At the heart of Kautilya’s approach to interstate relations is a profound understanding of human nature and power dynamics. Unlike idealistic or moralistic frameworks, Kautilya adopts a realist perspective, asserting that states must act in their self-interest to ensure survival and expansion.

• State as the Primary Unit: Kautilya views the state (rajya) as the central entity in international politics, with its primary goal being to maximize power, wealth, and security.

• Self-Interest Above All: According to Kautilya, interstate relations are driven by the pursuit of self-interest (artha). Moral considerations are secondary to the practical necessities of protecting and advancing the state’s interests.

• Dynamic Power Structures: Kautilya recognizes that interstate relations are fluid, shaped by shifting alliances, conflicts, and power balances. His theories are designed to navigate this ever-changing landscape effectively.

Mandala Theory of Interstate Relations

The Mandala Theory, one of the most important contributions of the Arthashastra, is a systematic framework for analyzing interstate relations. It envisions a circle of states surrounding the ruler’s kingdom, each classified based on its relationship with the central state.

• Core Concepts of the Mandala:
  • The Vijigishu is the ambitious ruler seeking conquest and expansion.
  • The Ari is the enemy state, typically the neighboring kingdom with conflicting interests.
  • The Mitra is the ally, often a state beyond the immediate neighbor that shares mutual interests.
  • The Udasina is the neutral state, one that remains uninvolved in conflicts.
  • The Ari-Mitra and Mitra-Mitra are secondary classifications for states aligned with the enemy or the ally, respectively.

Kautilya’s theory emphasizes that the enemy’s neighbor is a natural ally, and alliances should be based on strategic calculations rather than sentiment or ideology. The Mandala framework provides a dynamic map for understanding potential allies, enemies, and neutrals, enabling rulers to devise strategies tailored to their geopolitical context.

Sixfold Policy of Diplomacy (Shadgunya)

Kautilya outlines six primary strategies (shadgunya) for managing relations with other states. These policies reflect the ruler’s position relative to other powers and offer a flexible toolkit for responding to various scenarios.

1. Sandhi (Peace): Making treaties with other states, typically to buy time, consolidate power, or address internal challenges. Peace agreements are seen as temporary and are to be used strategically.

2. Vigraha (Hostility): Engaging in direct conflict or war when it serves the state’s interests. Kautilya advises war only when it is likely to yield significant benefits.

3. Asana (Neutrality): Remaining neutral in a conflict to avoid unnecessary risks or when the outcome of a conflict is uncertain.

4. Yana (Marching): Preparing for or initiating military campaigns to expand territory or influence.

5. Samsraya (Seeking Shelter): Forming alliances with stronger powers for protection, especially when the state is under threat.

6. Dvaidhibhava (Double Policy): Pursuing dual strategies, such as forming an alliance with one state while secretly undermining another. This reflects Kautilya’s pragmatic and often duplicitous approach to diplomacy.

Diplomacy and Alliances

Kautilya places great importance on diplomacy as a tool for achieving strategic objectives without resorting to war. He offers detailed advice on how rulers should manage alliances and interactions with other states.

• Qualities of a Good Envoy: Diplomats (dutas) play a crucial role in interstate relations. They must be intelligent, persuasive, and discreet, capable of representing their ruler’s interests effectively.

• Temporary and Flexible Alliances: Alliances are viewed as temporary arrangements based on mutual self-interest. Kautilya advises rulers to be wary of betrayal and to dissolve alliances when they no longer serve their purpose.

• Balancing Power: By forming strategic alliances, weaker states can counterbalance the power of stronger adversaries. This reflects Kautilya’s understanding of the importance of maintaining a balance of power in the Mandala.

War and Espionage

While diplomacy is preferred, Kautilya acknowledges that war is sometimes necessary for achieving strategic goals. His approach to warfare is highly pragmatic, emphasizing preparation, strategy, and the use of unconventional tactics.

• Types of War: Kautilya classifies wars into three categories:

  • Prakashayuddha (Open War): Conventional warfare conducted openly between states.
  • Kutyuddha (Concealed War): Guerrilla tactics and covert operations designed to weaken the enemy from within.
  • Mantrayuddha (Psychological Warfare): Using propaganda, deception, and diplomacy to undermine the enemy’s morale and alliances.

• Espionage as a Key Tool: Espionage is central to Kautilya’s strategy for interstate relations. He advocates the use of spies to gather intelligence, create divisions within enemy ranks, and spread misinformation.

• Winning Without Fighting: Kautilya’s ultimate goal is to achieve victory without engaging in costly wars. Diplomacy, espionage, and psychological tactics are preferred to direct confrontation.

Economic Dimensions of Interstate Relations

Kautilya emphasizes the role of economic strength in shaping interstate relations. A prosperous and self-sufficient state is better positioned to defend itself, form alliances, and project power.

• Trade and Resources: The Arthashastra highlights the importance of controlling key resources and trade routes to strengthen the state’s position in the Mandala.

• Economic Sanctions: Kautilya advises the use of economic sanctions or blockades to weaken adversaries without resorting to war.

Ethics and Realpolitik

While Kautilya’s views on interstate relations are often seen as ruthless, they are grounded in the belief that the end justifies the means when it comes to ensuring the survival and prosperity of the state.

• Ethical Constraints: Kautilya acknowledges that rulers must operate within certain ethical boundaries to maintain their legitimacy and the trust of their subjects.

• Pragmatic Realism: However, he also argues that rulers must prioritize practical considerations over moral ideals when faced with existential threats or opportunities for expansion.

Legacy and Relevance

Kautilya’s views on interstate relations reflect an advanced understanding of geopolitics, strategy, and diplomacy that remains relevant in modern international relations. His emphasis on power dynamics, strategic alliances, and the use of intelligence resonates with contemporary theories of realism in international relations.

• Influence on Modern Thought: The Mandala Theory has been likened to the balance of power concepts in modern geopolitics, while Kautilya’s insights into diplomacy and espionage continue to inform strategic thinking.

• Timeless Principles: Kautilya’s emphasis on adaptability, pragmatism, and the pursuit of national interest provides timeless lessons for navigating the complexities of interstate relations.

Conclusion

Kautilya’s Arthashastra presents a realistic and highly strategic vision of interstate relations, grounded in the pursuit of self-interest and the pragmatic use of power. Through his Mandala Theory, sixfold policy, and emphasis on diplomacy and espionage, Kautilya offers a comprehensive framework for managing relationships between states in an inherently competitive environment. His insights, rooted in ancient Indian political thought, continue to be studied and admired for their relevance and depth, underscoring the enduring significance of his work in the study of statecraft and international relations.

Introduction

• Dharmashastra occupies the central importance in Hindu political thought. It is a series of texts about the regulation of life in the entire sphere – political, economic, domestic, religious, legal and cultural.
• Dharmashastra refers to the “science of dharma”, which teach the eternal immutable dharma found in Vedas. Dharmashastra is considered as embodiment of complete knowledge given to Manu by Lord Brahma.
• Establishment of Dharma or cosmic order is the primary goal of the state. Power and Authority of king is secondary.

Thinkers’ Views

• As per Thomas Pantham, the crux of Indian Political Thought revolves around Dharma.
• Bhiku Pareek views that Indian Political Thought deals with material life as well as metaphysical life.
• According to Rig-veda, ‘Prithvim dharmam dhritam’.  i.e. Dharma is what that which holds life on earth. When dharma is not followed, it will lead to arajakata (anarchy), and ultimately to pralaya (catastrophe).
• Nowhere in the world, human mind has dealt with the various questions and dharmas of life in such a depth as in case of India. – Max Muller

Concept of dharma

• Dharma refers to the cosmic law of the universe. It is not like religion in the traditional sense.
• In Hinduism, dharma signifies refers to the behaviors that are in accordance with Ṛita, the order that makes life and universe possible.
• It includes duties, rights, laws, conduct, virtues and “right way of living”.
• Dharma is a key concept with multiple meanings in Indian religions. There is no single-word translation for dharma in Western languages.
• Hindu political thinkers conceptualised political life in terms of two central concepts namely, dharma and danda.
• Indian Political thought is also known as Dandaniti. The term danda means discipline, force, restraint, constraint or punishment.
• Dharma is derived from the Sanskrit root ‘dhr’ meaning to hold. Society could be held together when each individual and group does their specific duties. This is achieved by following the Varna Ashrama Dharma.

Divine Origin of State

• According to this theory, the state was established and governed by God, the King is the representative of God.
• In early society, the religious and political authority were combined into one.
• The authority of the king was to be accepted and obeyed due to the fact that he represented divine power.
• The Jews were exponents of this theory.
• The king bore responsibility only to God for his acts.
• G.H. Sabine in “A History of Political Theory” writes that the new monarchies that came into existence after Alexander was predestined to be absolute in which the king was identical with the State. Later on, the kings have also enrolled, among the Gods of the big cities. “Thus, the belief in the divinity of the king” came into European thought and persisted, in one form or another, down to modern times.”

Nature of State

• The governmental organisation and politics were looked at as a part of the larger whole called society.
• Nature of state is organic.
• State is compared with a human organ.
• State is comprised of seven parts like seven organs of the human body.
• For a better state, all organs should be stronger.
• King maintains dharma (i.e. law and order) in society, and for preserving dharma, danda is essential.
• The divine is ominipotent and is visible in the formation of society and government.
• The divine purpose is to be enforced by the king, divine punishment reinforces earthly punishment and sometimes supplants it.
• Sovereignty was, infact, ultimately sourced in the divine will.

Significance of Dharmashastra

• The most succinct statement on dharma is found in Dharma shastra and Dharma sutras which can be divided into three categories:
  • Rules for good conduct
  • Rules for legal procedures
  • Rules for penance
• The Dharma shastra prescribed rules for all of society so that each person might live according to dharma.
• These texts are attributed to the ancient rishi or sages.
• Manu was the most important of these and is the most famous and his manavdaharmashastra (Laws of Manu) is the most famous of all the texts. It is also called manusmriti (smriti means what is remembered).
• It is in the form of dharma revealed by brahma to manu, the first man, and passed on through Bhrigu one of the ten great sages.
• The divine origin is claimed for all the Dharma shastras to facilitate their general acceptance.
• The dharmasastras were legalistic and religious in orientation.
• The monarch or the head of political institutions was the upholder of Dharma, and it was the primary duty of the monarch to provide all the necessary conditions for Dharma to be followed as a social, political and moral code of conduct in the society.

Relationship between Dharmashastra and Arthashastra

• The very essence of Philosophy of dharmashastras was rooted in his belief that in the universe there exists only one ultimate reality which is termed as the ‘supreme spirit’, and all the dharmashastras trace their origin directly or indirectly from supreme spirit.
• Hence all the power of State as prescribed in the dharmashastras are derived from Dharma or order created by supreme spirit.
• In the Arthashastra the power of State is vested in the Swami (King), the identities of king and state coincide when looked through the prism of power and authority. The King is sovereign to none but can only exercise powers when he is able to gain and sustain popular support. Hence the power of the State is vested in popular support in the form of king.
• The writers of dharmashastra concentrated on exploring the dharma of individuals and social groups, including the government. They, however, did not attempt to provide political dharma as a distinct and autonomous subject of investigation. What they did was to provide a code of conduct covering the entire human life. Politics was incidental to this main concern.
• In contrast to the approach of the dharmasastras, the authors of arthashastra were interested in the organisation and mechanics of Danda.
• The Arthashastra of Kautilya gives us a detailed account of the nature and organisation of government, the nature and method of exercising coercive power, how power could be acquired, strategies and mechanics of retaining power, the possible threat to the varnas, prakritis or the elements of state and the best way to deal with them. The works of the authors of arthashastra were specifically political.

Conclusion

• To conclude we can say that the two approaches of dharmashastras and arthashastra differed mainly in their subject matter.
• One choosing to explore political life from the stand point of dharma, the other from that of danda.
• The dharmashastras were legalistic and a religious in orientation, whereas the arthashastras concentrated on institutions and politics and were secular in orientation.
• Neither approach was complete by itself, nor this is fully appreciated by its followers. The two together constitute the Hindu traditions of political thought.

INTRODUCTION

Human society is inherently divided into four orders. The first order is the intelligent class, second is the martial class, third is the productive class and the fourth is the labour class. The emergence of these divisions has been touched upon by many scholars and different reasoning have been put up for the same. This project has been taken up to explore such various possible interpretations for the emergence of Varnashrama Dharma.

Varnashrama Dharma is a Sanskrit name given to the divisional structure of the Indian society. When this order of society is intertwined with the four orders of life or the ashramas, i.e. Brahmacharya or the student life, Grihastha or the householder’s life, Vanaprastha or the retired life and Sanyasa or the devotional life, it gives rise to the Varnashrama dharma. It can also be put as the presence of varna in different ashramas of life. This term paper will delve into the deeper questions of the origin of this dharma in the Indian subcontinent. The description of the emergence of this dharma supported by texts from ancient epics will support the theory of origin. Subsequently different interpretations or theories of emergence would be deliberated upon. Often Varnashrama dharma is also thought to be synonymous with the caste system which is very much endemic to India. The term paper will clarify the difference between the two concepts.

THE EMERGENCE OF THE DHARMA

In order to bring out the meaning of the word- Varnashrama dharma, delving deeper to bring out the meaning of the fragments in required. According to Manu, Dharma is that which is practised by those who know the Vedas and the Shastras and are people without any bad quality like jealousy and passion. It includes practices recognised by the mind as correct. Varna is the organised division of the human society into four blocks depending upon the occupation which one pursues and Ashramas are the four stages in a person’s life i.e. celibacy, family life, semi saintly life and life after renunciation. The Varna system mingled with the four Ashramas of one’s life on the path of dharma becomes the Varnashrama Dharma.

In Hindu society this dharma was divided into four different groups of people who pursued four different dharmas in their life to attain the ultimate goal of their life, i.e. realisation of god. The first of such kind was the Brahmana Dharma. According to Manu, learning Vedas, teaching of Vedas, conducting yagnas and conducting yagnas for others, giving alms and taking alms for others are the six important duties in a Brahman’s life. The greatest Tapas a Brahman can do is to chant Vedas again and again. The next group of people were the Kshatriyas. They were those people who belonged to the clan of the kings and soldiers and used to look after the safety of their territory and the people. Looking after people, collecting weapons to punish those who did wrong, engaging in dharmic wars, winning over enemies’ army and ruling the world were the essential duties of a kshatriya. The third varna was the Vaishya Dharma. Manu says that the vaishyas should give charity, perform yajnas, should get knowledge, carry out trade in cereals, gems, gold, silver and other articles, should give money on loan and cultivate the land. The fourth Varna, i.e. the Shudra dharma encompassed service to people of other dharmas. He has also talked about Varna Sadharana Dharma which included those dharmas which would have been common to the people of all the four varnas.

The first reference to the Varnashrama system is made in Purush Sukta  verses of the Rig Veda (book 10, hymn 90) where the different sections of the society are regarded as the limbs of the great self. When objectively viewed, these Varnas were sophisticated organisation of the society that intelligently divided the population into different groups that would help the society function smoothly. Another property of the varna system was that what may be desirable for one section of the society could be degrading for another. For example: absolute non violence which includes refraining from animal sacrifice is considered unworthy of a Kshatriya. Underlying all these differences is the one common goal of advancing in spiritual life based on Sanatana dharma.

THEORETICAL INTERPRETATIONS OF THE VARNA SYSTEM

The complicacies of this fourfold division of the society lead us to think about the main question on which this paper is based, i.e. the origin of this dharma. This organisation of the society has been there in Indian society since time immemorial but there are different theories regarding the emergence of this dharma. Firstly, it should be accepted that in any kind of society, different fragments of people perform different services and based on such services a division is formed. Such division among the intelligentsia and the working class existed in all civilisations. It has been deduced that such division was healthy. For instance, the clergy, the nobility, the burghers and the serf and proletariat into which European society was divided was similar to the four varnas. Even Iran was divided into four fold divisions namely Atharva (priest),Rathestha (warrior), Vastrya Fsuvant (head of the family) and Huiti (manual worker) which corresponds to the four fold division in our society.

The origin of the Varnashrama dharma is traced by two theories. One is the Brahmanical view and the other is the western view. The western view mainly focuses on the existence of this organisation in the Aryan society. It is believed that the Aryans brought this sophistication into Indian land which was subsequently adopted by other tribes of that time. At that time, the dasyus were the original inhabitants of India who are said to be the ancestors of the Sudras. When the Aryans conquered India, they suppressed and enslaved the dasyus who were dark in colour. Varna also means colour. So it was also proposed that the division was also based on the colour of one’s skin but then division existed even among the fairer group. History suggests that there was always a rift between the Aryans and the dasyus (and between their religious observances) and that might be the reason for the exclusion of the Sudras from the religious rites of a vedic type.

The Rig Vedic society was mostly composed of pastoral lands and cattle were considered to be the wealth. War was a means of livelihood. The chief income of the king used to come from the spoils of war. The priest also used to take a substantial share from it. In the later vedic period, the society got fragmented from a tribal set up to a kind of occupational segregation in which the intellectual class started asserting its power over the serving class subsequently.

The other theory is the Brahmanical view which supports the divine sanction. The Purusha Sukta in Rig veda mentions the purusha who is the world spirit who has produced the Brahmana from his mouth, the Kshatriya from his arms and the Vaishya  from his thighs. The Shudra is said to have sprung from his feet. Manu states the reason of such creation of different groups as “for the sake of preserving the universe the being (Brahma, the creator) devoted separate duties to those who sprang respectively from his mouth, his arms, his thighs and his feet”. But it has always been meant to be guna karma, i.e. quality work rather than body based restricted scope of work to each of the four groups, i.e. varna karma. Backing the divine origin theory, Geeta says that the order is created on the basis of quality work- Chaturvarnayam  mayasrushtam  gunakarma  vibhagasaka. This fourfold division was not meant to be a rigid compartment of fixed occupations and it is quite clear when Geeta says – tasya kartaramapi mam vidyakartaramavyayam.  According to the divine origin theory, the organisation of this fourfold division was to serve the society but with the coming of Kali yuga, this division which was flexible before became rigid due to the formation of many sub castes and with one sect at loggerheads with the other. Sticking to one’s own caste became the norm. The Marxist theory gives another interpretation to this division and bases the varna system on class division.

The Varnashrama dharma is often confused to be the same as the caste system imbibed in the Indian society. The Varnashrama is a natural organised division of the society which would lead to a content society that would be interdependent on each other. The purpose of the Varnashrama social system is to provide a structure allowing people to work according to their natural tendencies and to organize society so that everyone, regardless of their position, makes spiritual advancement. This philosophy says that people can only work together with a co operative spirit if there is a central point of focus. It is different from the caste system in a way that it has not got a hint of racial prejudice.

THE PRESENT PICTURE OF THE VARNASHRAMA DHARMA

With the passage of time, Varnashrama got rigidly compartmentalised and rituals and traditions started to be followed very strictly. With the coming of the Muslim empire, the Hindus got aware of their identity and the constant ‘identity tussle’ made them exhibit their religion as superior to that of the others. Mingling with other factors, this led to the transformation of the Varnashrama dharma to a compulsory form of segregation that accepted the form of caste system in India. The orthodoxy that fell on the defence at the very approach of Islam thought it wise to respond to the new challenges by imposing restrictions on marriage and other ceremonies. Anuloma or Exogamy was no more practised and the group within which one could marry shrinked smaller and smaller. No varna remained a single unit and groups among them based on diet, religious practices etc were formed. The all embracing idea that people from all caste are children of the god was now practised only on spiritual sphere. There was no equality on the social sphere because of the accretion of parrabdha and sancit karma. The decline in harmony in the society was reemphasised by the inferior position of women and people from the lower castes. This led to the advent of social evils like sati, child marriage, child widows etc.

Lord Metson quoted in “The Untouchables of India” that caste moderates personal ambition and checks the bitterness of competition. It gives a man, whatever his station in life, a society in which he can be at home even when he is among strangers. For the poor man, it serves as a club, as a trade union and a mutual benevolent society, all rolled into one. It ensures continuing and a certain inherited skill in the arts and crafts. And in the moral sphere it means that every man lives in content with that place which destiny has allotted him, and uncomparingly does his best.” But practically none of the plight of those who were the victim of the system was beyond addressable. But with the coming of the European and the spread of English culture in some parts of India, the Indian scholars who took up to  rational thinking found the system too suffocating to live in. And from there started the string of reforms. A pioneer of such reform movements was Raja Ram Mohun Roy who raised his voice against social evils.

With the advent of twentieth century and the coming of many modern means of communication, the hiatus between different caste and religious groups got plugged in. Some famous reformers introduced various societies to cover up the social evil of untouchability. The Brahmo Samaj founded by Raja Ram Mohun Roy was one of the societies that aimed at removed social evils like sati, untouchability, etc. He was a great social thinker to suggest inter-caste marriage as the only remedy for breaking down barriers of caste system. The leading social reformer Mahadev Govind Ranade founded the Prarthna Samaj under the inspiration of Keshab Chandra Sen. It also aimed at forming a heterogeneous society where no social impediments would exist nurturing a healthy environment for budding India. The Arya Samaj which was inspired by the Brahmo Samaj was founded by Dayanand Saraswati, made Veda as the centre of purifying all the evils gulping the rational behaviour of human beings at that time. The efforts of Ramakrishna Paramhansa and Swami Vivekanand could not be left behind while counting the number of steps that we have moved ahead of the unfortunate days. The Theosophical society founded by Madame H.P. Blavatsky and Colonel H.S. Olcott has also contributed its part. The contribution of all these enlightened men has brought us to a phase which is vastly different from the landscape of ancient India. The evil of casteism is not totally obliterated from the social picture but the condition has substantially improved giving rise to a harmonious heterogeneous existence.

CONCLUSION

Tracing the path of origination of the varna system, this project acquaints us to the Brahmanical and the western theory of interpretation of the emergence of the varna system. Taking in excerpts from the Geeta and emphasising on the words of Manu, it can be concluded that the varna system has reshaped itself over time. Four major varnas were formed due to societal segregation for various reasons but it has eventually taken a rigid form. The contribution from various scholars in transformation of this system has led to a different picture that exists in today’s time. The division of society has existed in all times and will keep on existing in some other form if not in this form.