The Political Institutions and Theories of the Hindus: A Study in Comparative Politics c15.31

c15.31

In Kautilya’s¹ analysis of the duties of the people we are familiar with the notion that the citizens should be on the lookout in the streets as to whether a trader has paid the toll on his commodities at the custom office. This principle of active cooperation with the state as contrasted with the passive obedience to and observance of the laws promulgated by it is laid down in the *Śukra-nîti*² in such general terms as the following: “You should never keep screened, or give protection to, men of wicked activities, thieves, bad characters, malicious and offensive persons as well as other wrong-doers”. More comprehensive touch of the people (i. e. the “society”) with the state is indeed contemplated by the theorist. For, the Śukra polity is essentially an omnipresent all-inclusive agency for the advancement of human welfare, — a *Kultur-staat*, in short. The *kâla*,¹ i. e. age or epoch (*Zeitgeist*) is as much the making of the state as its fundamental function is the promotion of *dharma*,² (law, justice, duty, culture, and what not) i. e. the “virtue” of the Greek theorists, which is as encyclopedic or extensive as life itself.