A History of Hindu Political Theories from the Earliest Times to the End of the First Quarter of the Seventeenth Century A.D. c14.8

c14.8

Passing from these general observations to the detailed study of the problem, it may be observed that the antecedent state of nature as conceived by the Hindu thinkers is, like the European, not of the same uniform type, but varies according to different authors. In Kauṭilya's Arthaśāstra and in chapter LXVII of the Śāntiparvan this makes the closest approach to the Hobbesian formula of *bellum omnium contra omnes*, while the description in the Buddhist Dīgha Nikāya and in chapter LIX of the Śāntiparvan which involves an original state of perfect peace and happiness followed after an interval by strife and violence, is reminiscent of Grotius, Pufendorf, and Locke. As regards the specific nature of the pact terminating the period of anarchy, it would seem to follow from what has been told above that while Kauṭilya and the author of the Mahāvastu imply or mention what should be strictly called Governmental compact in Western political philosophy, the Dīgha Nikāya and chapter LXIX of the Śāntiparvan contemplate two or more successive compacts resulting in the creation of society and the state. The notion of contract, then, in the latter case alone would approach the view of Hobbes, who, as has been observed, first developed in Europe the conception of social contract as distinguished from the earlier Governmental Pact.∗