Theory of Government in Ancient India (Post-Vedic) c15.57

c15.57

From this view of the nature and character of Government it follows that it can regulate the whole material basis of life. Of *laissez-faire* as a principle, Hindu theory knows nothing. It felt that the public offer of goods in daily use was not a purely private concern. It was essentially a matter of general interest. It was assumed that in the system of private wants there was involved a public interest which demanded constant vigilance. Hence, many writers prohibit profiteering and high rates of usury. Manu declares that while thieves and robbers are hidden cheats, traders are open cheats who must be rigidly controlled by the state. He would bring the followers of many occupations under state control.¹ Kauṭalya and the Agni Purāṇa, to mention only two authorities, lay down elaborate rules on labour. Public works should constantly engage the attention of the government. The Buddha impressed their importance on King Pasenadi.² There is, in fact, nothing which is excluded from the province of the state. Kauṭalya who presents the fullest account of the Hindu theory of government brings public houses, entertainment companies and all else under its purview. Economic corporations and village communities enjoyed a good deal of autonomy in practice but theory places them, in the last resort, under state supervision. Social and religious associations were better situated but, in theory at any rate, not even they can trench upon the Law of which the government is the guardian. Everywhere, on all occasions, the Law should be upheld. That is the fundamental distinction between the state and anarchy—unspeakably horrible anarchy—to which pacts or divine interference had put an end.