The Political Institutions and Theories of the Hindus: A Study in Comparative Politics c15.65

c15.65

Śukra certainly goes far beyond the poets, when he declares categorically that the king's position is really one of *dâsyatva*, i. e. servitude “The ruler has been made by Brahmâ (the highest God) a servant of the people. His revenue is the remuneration for his services. He is sovereign or master solely in order that he may protect.”¹ The king of the *nîti-śâstras* is thus a trustee for the *prakriti*. He is a mere wage-earner in Baudhâyana’s *Institutes*² also, and is logically liable to fines according to Manu,³ for his duty is, as Hincmar (805—882)⁴ would say in Carolingian Europe, to “govern according to laws”. This conception is the farthest removed from the message of Bodin and Bossuet with their doctrine of absolute monarchy as a *gouvernement de droit divin*.