A History of Hindu Political Theories from the Earliest Times to the End of the First Quarter of the Seventeenth Century A.D. c10.62

c10.62

We have thus far endeavoured to show how the older ideas relating to the essential importance of the king's office and his divine nature were developed by the canonical writers of this period. As in the earlier case, these theories led as a logical corollary to the formulation of the doctrines of submission and obedience of the subjects. "Even an infant king," says Manu in one place, "must not be despised (from an idea) that he is a (mere) mortal; for he is a great deity in human form. Fire burns one man only, if he carelessly approaches it; the fire of a king's (anger) consumes the (whole) family, together with its cattle and its hoard of property." Again, he says, "The (man), who in his exceeding folly hates him, will doubtlessly perish; for the king quickly makes up his mind to destroy such (a man). Let no (man), therefore, transgress that law which the king decrees with respect to his favourites, nor (his orders) which inflict pain on those in disfavour."[^asterisk] Like Manu the author of the Śāntiparvan inculcates the submission of the subjects to their ruler. In chapter LXVII where Bhīṣma develops his view making the consecration of the king the 'chiefest' duty of the subjects, he says that the person who desires his own welfare should honour the king as he honours the god Indra. Again, he states that the people should respectfully salute the king as the disciples salute their preceptor, and they should wait upon him as the gods wait upon Indra, for he who is honoured by his own subjects is feared even by his enemies, while he who is not so honoured is overwhelmed by them : if the king is overwhelmed, all his subjects feel unhappy.∗