Indian Political Thought

Page | 1
Table of Contents
Kautilya.................................................................................................................. 1
A Picture of India............................................................................................. 1
Effect of Alexanders invasion.........................................................................1
Anarchy........................................................................................................... 2
Strong king...................................................................................................... 2
Indian Political Thought

Kautilya
A Picture of India
We get it from Megasthenes. There was no slavery. There was equality before
law. Law did not play much part. People did not like going to courts.
However, treachery was prevalent as king was shifted from palace to palace to
guard against any assassination plot.
Tensions between spiritual and material had started. On scientific side,
Megasthenes says earth is spherical. On the spiritual side, there are ideas about
immortality of soul and judgement after death. Death was regarded with
indifference because people believed in immortality of soul.
A pessimistic view of life was prevalent which said that there was constant war
going on between good and evil in the body. The body is a prison house and we
must overcome our desires to escape the evil. This was contrary to earlier view
in which ancient seers used to enjoy the world. They took pleasure in the
beautiful colours of surroundings and the sunlight. The contemporary worldview
was different. It said that earthly pleasures were an obstacle to realization of
god. This led to increase in the respect for Buddhists.
A definite all-India came into existence. Megasthenes says that Indians were not
interested in conquering others. They are not aggressive by nature. This does not
mean there were no wars. Battles between neighbouring kingdoms were
frequent. However, territorial expansion did not hold much currency in the
prevalent thought. Also, Kautilya says that a king will be called chakravrtin if he
conquers all the territory south of Himalayas.
Effect of Alexanders invasion
At this time, there was much disunity prevailing in the country. There were
frequent wars and murders by treachery were common. Political centre in India
Page | 2
was weak. Alexanders invasion jolted the complacency of Indian mind. It
produced Kautilya.
Kautilya delved into practical politics while paying lip service to the spiritual. He
wrote with complete detachment and cynicism about politics. He was revered for
his frank and candid ideas. This was in contrast to Machiavelli who was
denounced for similar views. Kautilya emphasized the need for a strong centre in
India. He also outlined a structure of politics and government suitable for the
society.
Anarchy
Kautilya is a vehement opponent of anarchy. He even says that tyranny is better
than anarchy. He says that a weak king is preferable to anarchy. He uses the
simile of big fish eating small fish to emphasize his point. Anarchy endangers
security of an individual, his enjoyment of pleasue and order in the society.
Strong king
Kautilya emphasizes the need of a strong ruler to maintain order. He was
convinced that society cannot be at peace without a strong king. He is conscious
that a week king encourages impoverishment and greed. When people are
greedy, they side with the opponent and overturn the state.
Divine Theory
Kautilya says that a diseased king is preferable to a new king because of 2
reasons: (a) he is well versed in tradition and is bound by it. (b) People are loyal
to high born kings. Thus, Kautilya supports dynastic principle.
However, once the idea of heredity is granted, Kautilya becomes quite liberal. He
warns the king against despotic tendencies, so as to guard against
impoverishment, greed and disloyalty in people.
Restrictions on King
Although Kautilya was in favour of dynastic principle, he was not in favour of
absolute monarchy. He imposes many restrictions on the king. In this, he follows
Dharmashastra tradition. Firstly, all political questions were discussed in the 2
houses of Pura- janapad. This restricted kings power. Secondly, Kautilya equates
king to a wage earner. He says that In the happiness of his subjects, lies his
happiness, in their welfare his welfare.
Supremacy of King
Kautilya gives the Saptang theory which constitutes King(rajan),
ministers(amatya), country(janpad), fort(garh), treasury, army, friends and
enemies. He says that a strong king can improve the most defective
constituents.
Page | 3

Indian Political Thought

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Indian Political Thought

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Indian Political Thought

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Page | 1

Indian Political Thought

You might also like