A History of Hindu Political Theories from the Earliest Times to the End of the First Quarter of the Seventeenth Century A.D. c8.s3.118

c8.s3.118

restricted by the strict definition of their science to the domain of practical politics alone, contrived to incorporate a mass of abstract speculations in their teaching. In judging the attributes of the early Arthaśāstra thought, we cannot but mention, at the very start, its striking originality. Not to speak of its categories, the Arthaśāstra in some of its branches such as those dealing with the administrative organisation and statecraft, virtually broke new ground. Nor must we omit to mention the new light that the authors who are quoted in the Śāntiparvan threw upon questions which were debated by the contemporary canonical writers, the questions, for example, relating to the nature of the king's office and the Brāhmaṇa's position in the society and in the State. Originality in respect of political ideas however, is a quality shared by the Arthaśāstra with the Dharmasūtras as well as the Buddhist canon. The distinctive merit of the Arthaśāstra, it seems to us, is to be sought in its fearless freedom of thought. We thus find, in the list of these secular teachers and schools, those that did not hesitate to exclude the Vedas from the category of sciences on the ground of their uselessness in practical life, and those who set up the gospel of naked self-interest of the king or even of the individual minister as the grand canon of statecraft.∗ With this boldness of speculation is allied a spirit of boundless enthusiasm which makes the teaching of the authors quoted by Kauṭilya vibrate with the animation of personal rivalry even at this distance of time. While such may be held to be the merits of the Arthaśāstra, the candid critic must not ignore its blemishes and defects. The authors cited by Kauṭilya often betray some degree of want of balance⁎ or else of stiffness and formalism of thought.† These authors, in short, had many of the defects of youth and inexperience. Yet even this was not without some compensating advantages. There had not, so far as we can judge, yet appeared on the scene a commanding personality whose voice might hush the rest into silence and impose a common standard upon the whole science. Hence the writers of this period were free to indulge their convictions or even idiosyncracies without let or hindrance. Thus they bear in most cases the stamp of a richly diversified individuality, such as is rare in the subsequent periods of our history.