MY DREAM IAS !

Kautilya, author of ancient Indian classic Atrhashtra, was an Adviser and Minister to the first Mauryan Emperor Chandragupta Maurya(C321-297 BCE). Through historical versity of Arthashatra is disputed, it nevertheless offers deep insights into statecraft, particularly theories and principles governing a state. It is described as a manual on statecraft.

In Arthashatra the focus was the king who thought to be the descendent of God and Kautilya attaches an element of divinity to the king. Monarchy, rule by an individual, was considered as a desirable form of government. Kautilya justified absoloute powers to the monarch.

Kautilya enumerates seven prakritis or essential organs of the state, viz.Swamin(the ruler); Amartya(the minister); Janapada(People); Durga(fortified capital); Kosha(the treasury); Danda(the army); and Mitra(ally). He considered that no state is complete without these elements and described in detail the role and nature of each of element of states.

Kautilya elaborated the principles of administration governing activities of various elements of state and considered it necessary to everyone associated with state activities to process the knowledge of science of public administration.

Various aspect of personal were dealt in the Arthashatra. Fear, duty and interest were considered as main motivators of employee behavior. The Arthashtra prescribes regulations for the recruitement of officials and their salary. Loyalty to king is the important requirement in all the appointments. Realising the difficulty to detect the official’s dishonesty, Kautilya elaborated on the methods of corruption and also prescribed an elaborate system of espionage and punishment.

Kautilya elaborated on the organization of government and categorized them into 18 Thrathas or units. The division of department is made according to the services required by the people and discharged by the government. The organization principles and functions of all the 18 Thrithas were discussed in details.

The Arthashatra provides philosophical foundation of monarchial form of government and the decisive role of the monarch in administration. The text asserts: “In the happiness of this subject lies the happiness of king and in what is beneficial to the subjects lies his own benefits”.

Kautilya’s approach of ends justifying means and absoloute powers to the monarch were criticised as non-relevent ideas to modern democratic states. His views arecompared by many to Machiavelli’s The Prince.

The paradox of Kautilya’s philosophy is that some of his ideas are publicaly criticized and privately practiced. Kautilya is alternatively condemned for his ruthlessness and trickery and praised for his timeless political wisdom and knowledge of human nature.