Kautilya’s Arthashastra is not a theoretical

treatise on political science. It does not

directly concern itself with the question of
the origin of the state.
Kautilya's Arthashastra, essentially a book
on the art of administration, gave only
passing reference to the origin of the state.
Kautilya refers to the problem of the origin
of the state only incidentally during a
discussion of spies among themselves.
According to Kautilya the state originated
when people got tired of the logic of the fish
(Matsyanyaya) according to which bigger
fish swallow the smaller ones.
People themselves selected Manu as their
King and one tenth of the merchandise and
of the whole as his share. The state
originated to fulfill the desire of the people
to have a peaceful society.King took upon
themselves the responsibility of maintaining
the safety and security of their subjects.
Kautilya does not propound any logical
theory of the state, its origin and ends, but
he appears to believe in the social contract
theory according to which the state came
into existence after such a contract between
the king and the people. He regarded the
state as a result of human nature and its
needs and it was consequently natural and
beneficial.
Thus, Kautilya imagined the original state of
nature to be one of total anarchy, where
might is right prevailed. People agreed to
pay taxes and to be ruled by one person in
order that they may be able to enjoy security
and wellbeing. Kautilya was the first
contractualists in India like Thomas Hobbes,
John Locke and Rousseau. His intention was
to replace the misrule of Nanda Dynasty by
Chandragupta who could make the strong
and powerful state.

Salient Features of Arthashastra

Conception of trinity of values: In place of
the ancient quartile of values, namely
righteousness, wealth,sex and liberation,
Kautilya has emphasized the importance of
first three and rather disregarded moksha or
liberation. He condemns the views of both
ascetics and hedonists. He formulates the
golden principle: Extremes must everywhere
be avoided.
y Realist Political Philosophy: Kautilya’s
political philosophy is realistic and has
suggested all kinds of means to achieve
common welfare by Scepticism: His
thinking was highly practical and he was not
swayed by idealist sentiments. He advises
the king to be sceptical about the motives of
others and not to rely upon anyone.
Rationalism: He is rationalist. He wants the
king to be a person of intellectual insights.
He must use his intelligence in dealing with
the problems of statecraft. y Harmony
between Worldly and transcendental: While
Kautilya has accepted the role of mystical
elements in the affairs of men, he considers
them to be of secondary importance and
encouraged human being to rely on the
efficacy of their own actions.
Promotion of good and suppression of
Evil: Being a realist, Kautilya recognizes
that there are both good and evil forces
present in every state. Accordingly, while
there are good elements like righteousness,
prosperity, and procreation instinct in the
world, there also exist side by side evil
elements like wickedness, poverty and grief.
The ability of a statesman depends upon the
promotion of good and suppression of evil.
Stress upon discipline: Kautilya
advocates the observance of discipline in
both individual and social life. According to
him, indiscipline leads to backwardness and
disintegration. Stress on civility: Kautilya
has laid great stress upon the polite manners
and behavior in human life. The
the aim of both physical and intellectual
discipline is the promotion of politeness and
good manners.
Harmony between secular and spiritual
knowledge:
According to Kautilya, a balance between
secular and spiritual knowledge is essential.
Therefore, a king should be well versed both
in secular and spiritual matters.
Qualities of the King:
According to Kautilya, a king should be well
versed in various disciplines in order to be a
successful ruler. These include political
economy, religion and statecraft. Kautilya
considers the knowledge of logical
reasoning most essential. He should also
have knowledge of trade, commerce and
animal husbandry. The king should also
have mastery over penology(the study of the
punishment of crime and of prison). Without
the system of penalties no king can rule
effectively.
Administration:
In Chapter 11 of Arthashastra, Kautilya has
described the appointment of various heads
of the department who are to supervise the
works in various spheres. In doing so
Kautilya has presented a conception of the
welfare state. In the third chapter Kautilya
has described the various types of crimes
and the penalties in respect of these.
External Relations:
In dealing with foreign relations, Kautilya
has emphasized that the king must jealously
guard the interests of his subjects and do
everything in his power to promote their
welfare. He describes in detail the foreign
relations- how and when to maintain peace
and when to declare war
. War and Peace:
In the 9th chapter the various aspects of
invasion like military formation, financial
involvement, the good and evil of attack are
discussed. In the 10th chapter, we find
discussion of matters like encampment,
March of army, forms of treacherous fight,
encouragement of one’s own army and
sowing seeds of dissension in the enemy's
army, battle with infantry, cavalry, chariots
and elephants are discussed. In 12th chapter
are discussed matters like duties of
messenger, battle of conspiracies, slaying
the commander in chief and inciting a circle
of states, spies with weapons, capture of
enemy by secret means or battle etc. In the
13th chapter are discussed matters like
sowing seeds of dissension, enticement of
kings by secret apparatuses, the work of
spies in a siege and restoration of peace in
the conquered army. In the 14th chapter are
discussed matters like means to injure an
enemy, wonderful and illusory apparatuses,
the application of medicines and matters and
the remedies against the injuries of one’s
own army. Thus we find in Arthashastra a
detailed description about the conduct of
war and the administration in time of peace.
KAUTILYA: SAPTANGA THEORY OF
STATE
The Saptanga Theory of Kautilya, is given
in his book ‘Arthashastra’. According to the
theory, the State consists of seven elements.
Kautilya adopts the seven limbs theory of
the state of Indian tradition or Saptanga
which are;
Swami,
Amatya,
Janpad,
Durg,
Kosha,
Sena
Mitra.
He suggests a state can only function when
all these elements or limbs of a body politic
are mutually integrated and cooperate well
with each other.
Swami
(The Sovereign King) The king was
referred to as the Lord or Swami and placed
at the top of the body politics. Kautilya says
a perfect king should have the following
qualities:
● He should have an inviting nature.
● He should have qualities of intellect
and intuition.
● He should have great enthusiasm.
 ● He should have qualities of self-
restraint and spirit.
● In addition Kautilya mentions the
king should be from a high family,
be non-fatalistic, Endowed with
strong character and should be
religious and truthful.
● He should be free of passion, anger,
greed, and fickleness and capable of
self-management, observing the
customs taught by elderly people and
have the capacity to make judgments
like when to go to war and when to
seek peace through a treaty.
● He should have a sense of
sovereignty and owe allegiance to
anybody and be the king of one
whole political organization and not
part of it.
Amatya
(Ministers) By Amatya Kautilya refers to
higher officials of the state like ministers
and not necessarily just ministers. The king
should keep checking the integrity of the
amatyas from time to time and he also
advises the king to appoint 3 amatyas
instead of two since two amatyas can easily
join hands and conspire against the king. He
says the qualities of a high official should
be: he must be a Janpad, a native of the
county that he is an official of, come from a
good family, be adequately trained, have
foresight, eloquence, dignity, enthusiasm,
have administrative Ability, knowledge of
scriptures, And high character.
Janpad (Territory and People)
Territory and People constitute the third
limb of the state in Kautilya’s Arthashastra.
Kautilya gives a clear-cut description of
what an ideal territory would be like. He
says the territory should be free from
muddy, rocky, saline, uneven and thorny
areas and from wild beasts. There should be
lands that are fertile with lots of timber and
elephant forests. There should be plenty of
arable land and richness of cattle and the
land should be wholesome to cows and men.
The territories should not be dependent on
rains too much and have waterways.
Also, there should be roads and good
markets capable of bearing the army and
taxation. The people populating a state
should have the qualities of being hostile to
the foes, be powerful enough to control the
neighboring kings and consist of people who
are pure and devoted. The people should
respect the rule of law and the government
Kautilya also says the people should consist
of industrious agriculturists and a majority
of lower classes of economically productive
vaishya and shudras. Also, the masters of
the people should be not too intelligent so
that they can be controlled by the king
easily.
Durg (Fort)
Kautilya identifies forts as the fourth limb
and mentions four kinds of forts that a king
needs.
He says the four kinds of forts that are
necessary are: water forts, hill forts, desert
forts and forest forts.
The water and hill forts are suitable for
defending the population and the desert and
forest forts
and suitable as headquarters for wild regions
and to serve as places to run away to in case
of emergency.
Kautilya says the power of a king depends
on the forts which should be fit for fighting
and to defend the state
Kosha (Treasury)
Kautilya mentions that the success of a state
depends upon its treasury size which should
have enough gold and silver to see the king
through long periods of calamity. y The
treasury should be legitimately acquired by
the king or his predecessors
. The treasury is easily increased when; (1)
there is opulence of the industrial
department run by the state,
(2) there is a propensity for commerce and
(3) abundance in harvest. In cases of
emergency Kautilya finds no problem with
the king raising revenue even through means
such as a higher assessment on rich classes
and fertile land and heavy taxes on
merchandise etc. He also talks about
forgiving taxes in emergencies for the king
to exploit the superstitious and religious
sentiments of the people.
Sena (Army)
Kautilya mentions the army or Sena as the
limb that the king needs to control both his
own people and his enemy’s. Kautilya talks
about six types of army;
(1) hereditary forces,
(2) hired troops,
(3) soldiers of fighting corporations,
(4) troops belonging to an ally,
(5) troops belonging to the enemy and
(6) soldiers of wild tribes. y Interestingly
the best of the six according to Kautilya is
the hereditary army composed of members
of the Kshatriya caste for they are loyal to
the king and are committed to serve the king
through weal and woe and have powers of
endurance and superior fighting skills
because they have fought many battles.
Mitra (Ally)
Kautilya finally stresses on the need for
political friends in the other states because
no state functions in isolation. Kautilya
classifies allies into two kinds; Sahaj
(natural) and Kritrim (acquired).
The sahaj ally is one who is close by
territorially and has been inherited as a
friend from fathers and grandfathers and the
kritrim ally is one who is resorted to
temporarily for the protection of wealth and
life.
Kautilya prefers the sahaj ally over the
kritrim one if the sahaj ally is free from
deceit and is capable of making large scale
preparations for war quickly and on a large
scale.
The nature of the state is organic. A strong
state consisted of these seven elements
KAUTILYA: BASIC ASSUMPTIONS
REGARDING STATE
A.B. Keith is of the opinion that Kautilya
“offers nothing that can be regarded as
serious theory of politics .but there was
intensive study of the practical aspects of the
government and of relations between the
states”. y However, Arthashastra is not
about theoretical descriptions of the state, its
origin, its functions, ideal state, etc. even
though it has some theoretical assumptions
about the state. Kautilya accepted the theory
of origin of the state of his predecessors that
it is created by humans by contract. y He has
provided some sort of speculation about the
nature of the state, not literally, but by
indications, that, the state is a “socialist
monarchy” with centralized economy, good
governance, welfare state and very
disciplined by law and order. y Kautilya also
gives primacy to religion; he even used
religion as a mean to accomplish political
ends. To deal with internal security
problems and corruption he suggested
establishing a ‘spy state’.
Despite all the realistic means or art of
government he preaches, his ultimate aim is
the prosperity and wellbeing of the subject.
y Thus, he stated a very detailed account of
duties of the king toward its subjects; as a
part, he proclaimed the king should be the
kind father of people and all his interests,
happiness is not separated from those of the
subjects. y This assumption is also in favour
of the king because it is necessary for
legitimacy. Kautilya recognized the social
justice as also a mean to strengthen the state
…which is in the king’s interests. y At the
starting of Book VI, Kautilya mentioned the
seven constituents of the state – The king,
minister, country, fortified city, treasury,
army and the ally, out of which the king is
of highest importance but all are supposed to
be functioning like different limbs of an
organism. y They should work efficiently
with highly maintained co-ordination,
because these are the fundamental elements
of the state’s power and of course, plays
wide role in external affairs as a “wise king
who possesses the personal qualities, though
ruling over the small territories being united
with the excellence of the constituent
elements (Prakritis) and conversant with
Arthashastra does conquer the entire earth,
never loses
KAUTILYA: FOREIGN POLICY
Kautilya is an expansionist who advised not
only the preservation of the state but also to
conquer territories of others. It is the
Mandala theory which is the basis of
Kautilya’s foreign policy. In other words, it
is a theory of world conquest. He has paved
the way for Vijigishu i.e., “the king who is
desirous or aspirant to world conquest,” how
to be a Chakravartin i.e. world conqueror. y
This concept contemplated in this Shastras
does not necessarily imply the conquest of
the whole world but the region lying
between the Himalaya in the north and the
sea from required sides. It denotes India.
The Mandala theory is based on the
geopolitical and geo-strategic assumption
that all neighboring states are the enemy,
and the enemy’s enemy is the natural ally. y
This circle of kingdom includes 12 kings
with explanations for their probable types of
interrelations. In this text, foreign policy is
mainly discussed from the standpoint of
Vijigishu and world conquest, and it is
summed up with the Shadguna theory i.e.
“six fold policy or six measures of foreign
policy. y This is like a formula to secure the
competency of Vijigishu for world conquest.
This formula is associated with presupposed
Mandala theory.
Shadgunya theory consists of six strategic
stances that can be employed as per the
demand of situation, and one who will use
them properly as right stance on the right
time, would become a world conqueror. y
Along with these two core concepts Kautilya
suggested four more Upayas i.e. tactics, to
overcome the enemy. y Kautilya argued that
at any given moment a kingdom is in a state
of “decline, stability or advancement” and in
the first two stages it has to focus on
defending itself by making alliances, solving
internal problems….in the last stage, if,
however, a kingdom has a prosperous
economy, well populace, no calamities,
strong leadership, is in a position to
conquest the neighbouring states. y As a
practical statesman and a realist, Kautilya
realized that every state acts to enhance its
power and self-interest; therefore moral,
ethical or religious obligation does not have
any scope in the international politics. “War
and peace are considered solely from the
point of view of the profit”. y Kautilya
assumes that every move of the king
desirous for victory towards its ally or
enemy should have to be based on its own
interests. y As Bruce Rich says, “Kautilya’s
foreign policy was the ruthless realpolitik,
intrigue and deception… Kautilya gave cold
blooded realism and treachery with some
remarkable enlightened policies”. y Most
scholars of political history, especially
Westerners, blame Kautilya for his so called
immoral recommendations in foreign policy.
But at least he is honest with his arguments
and teachings, unlike those who are the
idealist of daylight and opportunist in the
dark. y The fault of Arthashastra, as that of
Machiavelli, lies in openly saying something
that has always been actually practiced by
states everywhere. y Was Kautilya immoral?
The answer is obviously no. He just
followed principles which were actually in
practice at inter-state level at that time, and
it is still being followed now. He “was
unmoral not immoral; unreligious, not non-
religious, in his political teachings”. y
Kautilya set the goal of foreign policy
before the Vijigishu that it is not mere
preservation of the state but its expansion as
well. It is the goal of world conquest and
pertaining to this goal he propounded the
theory of Mandala or circle of the states
along with the six fold policy. y The king is
suggested to follow the right means at the
right time with the flexible planning and
complete determination. Kautilya preaches
that there is nothing like ethics and moral in
foreign policy but the goal and self-interest
only; after all, end justifies the means.

THEORY OF
MANDALA/RAJMANDALA/ CIRCLE
OF THE STATES
As per Bosche “For Kautilya, this principle
of foreign policy – that nations act in their
political, economic and military self-
interests was a timeless truth of his science
of politics or Arthashastra”. Kautilya is most
famous for outlining the Mandala theory or
the circle of the states which consists of 12
kingdoms as – y Vijigishu: Desirous for or
would be, world conqueror. y Ari: whose
territory is contagious to Vijigishu, is a
natural enemy.(Neighbour) y Mitra; it is ally
of Vijigishu whose territory is immediately
beside the enemy or Ari. y Arimitra;
enemies ally indirectly is enemy, who is
immediate beyond ally. y Mitra-Mitra: It is
ally immediately beside the enemy’s ally. y
Ari Mitra-Mitra: It is ally of enemy’s ally
situated at immediate beside Mitra –Mitra. y
Parshnigraha: The enemy, in the rear of the
Vijigishu. Means he will attack when
Vijigishu would be on the expedition in
front. y Akranda: Vijugishu’s ally in the rear
behind that of Parshnigraha.
y Parshnigrahasara: enemy’s ally, the ally of
Parshnigraha behind Akranda. y
Akrandsara: The ally of Akranda behind
Parshnigrahasara, ultimately an ally. y
Madhyama: the Middle king with territory
adjoining those of Vijigishu and Ari and
stronger than both. y Udasina: the kingdom
lying outside or neutral and more powerful
than that of Vijigishu, Ari, and Madhyama.
These schemes are based on assumptions
derived from the practical experiences found
everywhere that two neighbouring states
sharing their borders
are hostile to each other. And the hostile
state to the enemy i.e. the enemy’s enemy is
a natural ally. y The Vijigishu is situated at
exactly the centre of this circle. It does not
give the fixed account of the numbers of the
kingdom in this mandala, but refers to a
number of possible relationships that may
arise when Vijigishu would be in the quest
of global dominance. y The neighbouring
princes, samantas may normally be
supposed to be hostile but it is possible that
some may have friendly feeling toward the
Vijigishu, while others may even be
subservient to him. y Mandala theory is the
plan, the blueprint of the expedition with the
intention of world conquest because
Kautilya believes in strength and power. y
For him, “Power is the possession of
strength” and it is in three forms: ¾
Mantrashakti: power of Knowledge i.e.,
power of counsel; ¾ Prabhu shakti: Power
of might i.e., power of treasury and army;
and ¾ Utsaha Shakti: power of energy i.e.,
power of valour. y Likewise, success is also
of three fold. By this theory Kautilya
indicates towards reality, and made alert to
the king to be a conqueror or suffer
conquest. All his discussion is revolving
around the desire of victory over enemy and
world conquest to establish unified,
sovereign world empire that is the concept
of Chakravorty – imperatively the Indian
territories in between the Himalaya and the
sea. y G.P. Singh argues that the Mandala
theory is ancient India’s most notable
contribution to political theory. Singh
analysed the mandala theory as a ‘Balance
of power’ but Bosche contradicted this
statement by stating that “it was not offering
modern balance of power arguments where
the ultimate status quo and peace is the
purpose of such interstate activities in
modern time”. Moreover this theory
provides Geo strategic analysis of interstate
relations, therefore, it is the theory of
geopolitics.
SHADGUNA SIDHANTA - SIX
MEASURES OF FOREIGN POLICY
This doctrine is about the six principles of
foreign policy like a formula for attainment sure about its strength to repel attack of
of one’s national interests and goals at the enemy, should
level of international politics based on
political reality. It is the model of foreign
policy acting as a guiding force for the
Vijigishu to become a world conqueror. It
contains six basic principles as follows: y
Sandhi: (making treaty containing terms and
conditions) the general principal in foreign
policy is that, when the one is comparatively
weaker than that of his enemy, the policy of
peace i.e. Sandhi should be employed. When
making a treaty one may be required to
surrender troops or treasury or territory,
called Dandopanta sandhi, Kosopanta sandhi
and Desopanta sandhi, respectively.
Kautilya advised the king to enter in to the
treaty, thwart the strong enemy when
fulfilling the conditions of the treaty and
after bidding his time till he get strong to
overthrow the strong enemy. It means this is
the policy to seek or spare the time to
become strong and waiting for weakening of
enemy, till then one has to hold patience for
right opportunity. It is practical
opportunism. y Vigraha: (Policy of
Hostility) if one is stronger than the enemy,
policy of hostility should be adapted. This
policy has two dimensions- i. Defensive ii.
Offensive, while in first case, one who is
resort Vigraha. And in the second case, that,
one who feels from the secured position can
ruin the enemy’s undertakings or can seize
enemy’s territories, because he is engaged in
the war on another front, can go for Vigraha.
But Kautilya is very anxious about the profit
and loses as he recommends Sandhi instead
of Vigraha when both, supposed to be lead
the same result. Obviously, there are
comparatively more loses, expenses and
troubles in hostility.
Asana: ( A policy of remain quite, not
planning to march) Asana is the state in
which one is to wait in the hope that the
enemy would get weaker or find himself in
difficulties or in calamities, get involved in
war on other front and one would be strong
than the enemy. Naturally this policy is
often a parallel of the policy of the Sandhi.
But at the same time, it can be corroborated
with the policy of Vigraha. For example, by
seducing enemy’s subjects from their loyalty
by means of dissension and propaganda, one
will try to weaken enemy secretly.
Yana: (Marching on an expedition) the
policy of Yana is much clear and explicit
among all of others, which can be persuasive
in the situation when one is surely strong
than his enemy. “Normally, Yana and
Vigraha are parallel but in Yana, one is
expected to be completely dominant in
strength”.
Sansraya: (seeking shelter with another king
or in a fort) this policy is particularly
recommended for a weak king who is
attacked or threatened to be attacked by a
powerful enemy. It is also implied that the
king would be making continuous efforts to
recoup his strength and independence. The
shelter at one’s own fort is also a suggestion.
But if none of these remedies would help
then the weak king should resort the last
mean of surrender, this is vassalage. And he
should be watchful for opportunity to strike
back and obtain his previous position.
Dvadi Bhava: (The double policy of
Sandhi with one king and Vigraha with
Another at a time) It is obviously a policy of
dual purpose, where Sandhi is for seeking
help in the form of treasury and troops from
one king to wage hostility toward another
king. This policy is referred for the king
who is equally strong to enemy and he
cannot win the battle without additional
strength of his ally. The aim of provisions of
these policies is to grow stronger in the
long-term competition than the enemy,
though sometimes one may have to tolerate
temporarily, the great strength of enemy.
The expansion of one’s power and state at
the cost of its natural enemies the motive
behind this doctrine. While moving toward
the ultimate aim of world conquest, the
interests of one’s own state is the supreme
criterion for the external affairs.
FOUR UPAYAS These are the tactics or
means of overcoming opposition mentioned
as: Sama: Conciliation
Dama: Gifts
Bheda: Dissension
Danda: Force. First two are suggested to be
used with subjugate weak king and last two
are to overcome strong kings.
KAUTILYA ON CORRUPTION
He believed that “men are naturally fickle
minded” and are comparable to “horses at
work [who] exhibit constant change in their
temper”. y This means that honesty is not a
virtue that would remain consistent lifelong
and the temptation to make easy gains
through corrupt means can override the trait
of honesty any time. Similarly, he
compared the process of generation and
collection of revenue (by officials) with
honey or poison on the tip of the tongue,
which becomes impossible not to taste.
He prescribed a strict vigil even over the
superintendents of government departments
in relation to the place, time, nature, output
and modus operandi of work. All this is
perhaps indicative of widespread corruption
in the Kingdom’s administration at various
levels.
Illegal transactions were so shrouded in
mist that he compared frauds to fish moving
under water and the virtual impossibility of
detecting when exactly the fish is drinking
water. He also noted that while it is possible
to ascertain the movements of bird flying in
the sky, it is difficult to gauge the corrupt
activities of government officials. y Kautilya
was a great administrative thinker of his
times. As he argued, too much of personal
interaction or union among the higher
executives leads to departmental goals being
compromised and leads to corruption. This
is because human emotions and personal
concerns act as impediments to the
successful running of an administration,
which is basically a rule-based impersonal
affair.
Similarly, dissension among executives
when team effort is required results in a poor
outcome. Kautilya suggested that the decline
in output and corruption can be curbed by
promoting professionalism at work. The
superintendents should execute work with
the subordinate officials such as
accountants, writers, coin-examiners,
treasurers and military officers in a team
spirit. Such an effort creates a sense of
belonging among members of the
department who start identifying and
synchronising their goals with the larger
goals of the organisation, thereby
contributing to the eventual success of the
state. y Kautilya provides a comprehensive
list of 40 kinds of embezzlement. In all these
cases, the concerned functionaries such as
the treasurer (nidhayaka), the prescriber
(nibandhaka), the receiver (pratigrahaka),
the payer (dayak), the person who caused
the payment (dapaka) and the ministerial
servants (mantri-vaiyavrityakara) were to be
separately interrogated. y In case any of
these officials were to lie, their punishment
was to be enhanced to the level meted out to
the chief officer (yukta) mainly responsible
for the crime. After the enquiry, a public
proclamation (prachara) was to be made
asking the common people to claim
compensation in case they were aggrieved
and suffered from the embezzlement.
Thus, Kautilya was concerned about
carrying the cases of fraud to their logical
conclusion. y The Arthashastra states that an
increase in expenditure and lower revenue
collection (parihapan) was an indication of
embezzlement of funds by corrupt officials.
Kautilya was sensitive enough to
acknowledge the waste of labour of the
workforce involved in generating revenues.
y He defined self-enjoyment (upbhoga) by
government functionaries as making use of
or causing others to enjoy what belongs to
the king. He was perhaps alluding to the
current practice of misusing government
offices for selfish motives such as unduly
benefitting the self, family members, friends
and relatives either in monetary or non-
monetary form which harms the larger
public good. y Kautilya was also not
unaware of corruption in the judicial
administration. He prescribed the imposition
of varying degrees of fines on judges trying
to proceed with a trial without evidence, or
unjustly maintaining silence, or threatening,
defaming or abusing the complainants,
arbitrarily dismissing responses provided to
questions raised by the judge himself,
unnecessarily delaying the trial or giving
unjust punishments. y In an atmosphere of
corruption prevailing in the judicial
administration as well, Kautilya perhaps
wanted to ensure that the litigants are
encouraged and given voice to air their
legitimate grievances. He expected judges to
be more receptive to the complaints and be
fair in delivering justice. y Kautilya
prescribed reliance on an elaborate
espionage network for detecting financial
misappropriation and judicial impropriety.
Spies were recruited for their honesty and
good conduct. They were to keep a watch
even over the activities of accountants and
clerks for reporting cases of fabrication of
accounts. y On successful detection of
embezzlement cases, Kautilya advocated
hefty fines to be imposed apart from the
confiscation of ill-earned wealth. If a
functionary was charged and proved even of
a single offence, he was made answerable
for all other associated offences related to
the case. y Since taxes paid by the people
are utilised for their welfare, any loss of
revenue affects the welfare of the society at
large. This is precisely the reason why
Kautilya explicitly argued that the fines
imposed should be “in proportion to the
value of work done, the number of days
taken, the amount of capital spent and the
amount of daily wages paid”. y
Interestingly, Kautilya also dealt with the
concept of whistle-blowers. Any informant
(suchaka) who provided details about
financial wrongdoing was entitled an award
of one-sixth of the amount in question. If the
informant happened to be a government
servant (bhritaka), he was to be given only
one twelfth of the total amount. The
former’s share was more because exposing
corruption while being outside the system
was more challenging. But in the case of
bhritakas, striving for a corruption free
administration was considered more of a
duty that was ideally expected of them. y
Kautilya argued for advertising the cases of
increase in revenue due to the honest and
dedicated efforts of the superintendents by
giving rewards and promotions. Bestowing
public honour creates a sense of pride and
boosts the motivation and morale of honest
officials. They act as role models for ideal
youngsters who wish to join the
administration and serve the state. y
Kautilya also proposed a number of
measures to avoid cases of corruption
arising at all. Several positions in each
department were to be made temporary.
Permanency for such positions was to be
reserved as an award granted by the king to
those who help augment revenue rather than
eating up hard earned resources. y Kautilya
also favoured the periodic transfer of
government servants from one place to
another. This was done with the intention of
not giving them enough time to pick holes in
the system and manipulate it to their
advantage. y Kautilya wrote that “dispensing
with (the service of too many) government
servants...[is] conducive to financial
prosperity”. This is not only because of the
reduction in expenditure on salary but
rightsizing the bureaucracy also results in
faster decision making and the transaction of
government business without unnecessary
delay and red tape. This effectively reduces
the scope for bribery in particular and
corruption in general. y It is interesting to
note that the superintendents could not
undertake any new initiative (except
remedial measures against imminent danger)
without the knowledge of the king. Kautilya,
therefore, laid emphasis on some kind of an
accountability mechanism. Apart from using
the services of spies for unearthing cases of
fraud, Kautilya also talked about an intra-
departmental, self-scrutinising mechanism
under the headship of chief officer
(adhikarna) to detect and deterimminent
cases of corruption. In formulating the
details of his political ideals, principles,
plans and ethico-political strategies,
Kautilya had taken cognizance not only of
the events of his days, but also the ones that
were likely to change the entire course of
thought and action. That is why he and his
Arthashastra have their marked relevance
not only for our times, but also for the
generations to come.
RELEVANCE OF KAUTILYA’S
POLITICAL THOUGHT
Kautilya’s Arthashastra carries significance
because for the first time it liberated the
science of politics from all sorts of
limitations and developed a systematic tool
of administration of the state.
The state described in Kautilya Arthashastra
is elaborate and seeks to control every
aspect of national activity. Social life, trade,
finance, civic activities, cultivation and
almost every part of man’s organised life
was considered by Kautilya to be within the
legitimate sphere of administration. Kautilya
regarded the state to be of central
importance in ensuring order in the affairs of
society. He believed in a strong centralizing
state. For the good of the state, the king
enjoyed freedom, meaning that he was free
to practice treachery, deceit, and sacrilege if
necessary. Role of Education : Kautilya
emphasized the effective role of the state in
shaping man’s moral, economic, social and
physical life. For the progress of the society,
Kautilya believed in imparting education to
the people. It was the duty of the state to
provide grants for education as an important
constituent of state expenditure. The
teachers and school are to receive funds
from the state to import education to the
people. Kautilya attached great importance
to education. If the nation had to steer ahead,
education the masses was of great
importance. The people of the state were to
be well educated so that they could lead the
nation towards the path of progress.
Education was universal and free. y
Emphasis on Welfare and Protection of
Weak: Kautilya’s State made several laws
for the welfare of the society. A ban was
imposed on the sale and purchase of
children as slaves. This shows his immense
concern for child labour. Similarly, an
employer could not force a female slave to
become naked or hurt or abuse her chastity.
This indicates remarkable human values
which Kautilya cherished against slavery
and thus guaranteeing civil rights to shudras.
His views related to children slavery and
women liberty are significant in modern
period because today every state enacts laws
against the child labour and for protection of
women liberty. y A Reformist State: The
State should protect the Dharma of the land
as it was of fundamental importance. The
duty of the king consists in protecting his
subjects with justice and its observance
leads him to heaven. He who does not
protect his people or upsets the social order
wields his royal sceptre in vain. It was for
the first time that Kautilya associated the
shudras with certain civil rights which were
not contemplated till now. He permitted
liberty to lower class as witnesses in the
court. Kautilya recognized mixed castes and
the claims of the offspring of Pratiloma
marriage for inheritance. There was no
inflexible rigidity between the orders and the
destruction of the old nobility was the most
significant feature of the Kautilya’s state. y
Notion of Welfare State: As a practical
statesman, Kautilya looked at things from a
realistic point of view and there is nothing
unnatural when we find his state extending
its jurisdictions over almost all the spheres
of life. With all the limitations of the time,
the state activity was not only unbounded
but also distinctly socialistic and highly
beneficial to the people. The whole
economic policy was regulated and
controlled by the state. The state offered
doles to the needy. Kautilya believed that
the stability and efficiency of the state were
essential for human welfare. Mixed
Economy Model: In the economic sphere,
Kautilya suggests that the state should
promote economic development in all
spheres including agriculture. For the
promotion of the economic sphere Kautilya
laid down many responsibilities for the king
and state. The king shall carry on mining
operations and manufactures, exploit timber,
offer facilities for cattle breeding and
commerce, construct roads for traffic both
by land and water and set up own market.
Kautilya allows private property and private
ownership. Kautilya’s economic system
might fall under ‘Mixed Economy System’
as the state retained the right to interfere in
case of loss of production, or overproduction
or workers problems. The state also
regulated the trade to ensure good of the
consumers. Kautilya said the state
accordingly has to regulate the prices of the
commodities, import and export, weight and
measure etc. According to Kautilya
unrestrictedexports and imports or all
commodities were not allowed. y Kautilya’s
state assumed the nature of a welfare state. It
not only regulated the economic activities
but also actively participated and at the same
time controlled private enterprises in many
ways. The state owned all the natural
resources and even the treasure troves
belonged to the state. Kautilyan state was
interested in the promotion of trade and
commerce and protected traders and
merchants from the molestation of workers,
robbers, guards, civil servants and others.
The state took measures to provide avenues
of employment to a large body of
population. y Judicial Aspects: No
administrative system can be complete
without a well-organised judicial system.
Naturally, Kautilya also could not overlook
this aspect of administration. Judges were
appointed at all important centres to ensure
the protection of life and property, as well as
the trial and punishment of wrong doers.
Kautilya was the first lawmaker of ancient
India who gave every individual right to
judicial or protection. The basic objective of
Kautilya’s law has been to provide
intellectual and spiritual freedom to man.
Kautilya gives a detailed account of law. He
makes a distinction between civil and
criminal law. y Political Aspects: According
to Kautilya the welfare of a state depends on
an active foreign policy. Kautilya was quite
original in prescribing a foreign policy based
on expediency, diplomacy and war. His
main objective was to create a strong state
which can establish the power of dominance
over the other states. His patriotism
provoked him to create a powerful state
which can defend itself against the invaders
and enemies. y Kautilya’s expertise in the
state craft is evident from his concept of
diplomacy which has been given in
‘Mandala Theory’ of foreign policy. His
Mandala theory is a great contribution on
the study of diplomacy. The aim of Mandala
theory is to maintain a balance of power
with the other states. According to Kautilya,
the relations with other states are important
because no state exists in isolation. In fact,
every state is competing with every other for
land. This is the natural order where none is
content with what he already has .This
implies that no state can be stable unless it
takes care or its foreign relations. If such
relations are ignored, the state will soon fall
a prey to conspiracy hatched by other
princes. Kautilya attached great importance
to diplomacy in the interstate relation. y
Kautilya surrendered all moral principles to
the wisdom of King and suggested double
standard of morality like Machiavelli to
build a strong nation. Hence he suggested
his king should be clever, shrewd, cunning,
deceitful, brave and courageous in foreign
relations. By means of spies, dissension and
discord should be created in foreign policy.
In this way Kautilya’s views on state,
government, law, justice system of
administration, state function and foreign
relations are milestones in