Hindu Administrative Institutions c6.s5.30

c6.s5.30

Thus it is clear that there are several organs differentiated in function, each contributing to the whole which is the well-being of the state. The disease of the one may or may not affect the other parts of the system. There are some diseases which affect the whole physical system, and others which deter the proper functioning of that particular organ. In the same way Kauṭalya is of opinion that a certain part of these elements may or may not harm the progressive working of the state. All these limbs are imperatively necessary for the satisfactory working of the state organism. Though certain *aṅgas* are defective still the normal work could go on undisturbed. It is for the practical statesman at the apex of the administration to judge of it as it deserves. Thus with Sarkar we may say ‘the organismic conception in Hindu *nīti* philosophy is not merely structural or anatomical, but also physiological in the sense that it is functional. In giving currency to the doctrine of *saptāṅga* Hindu political philosophy does not popularize an arbitrarily strung system of seven categories. It embodies really a psychological attempt to conceive and classify political phenomena in their logical entirety.’² tress and in prosperity. Wisdom lies in helping each other. Their predominance by means of acquisition and protection makes the state prominent (i. 18-19). In commenting on the latter verse, Śaṅkarārya remarks: