Chapter 1 - The Aggregate of the Calamities of the Elements of Sovereignty

[Sanskrit text for this chapter is available]

The Aggregate of the Calamities of the Elements of Sovereignty

When calamities happen together, the form of consideration should be whether it is easier to take an offensive or defensive attitude. National calamities, coming from Providence or from man, happen from one’s misfortune or bad policy. The word vyasana (vices or calamities), means the pursuit of a course of action opposed to six-fold policy, or the absence of one or many of the seven elements of sovereignty, or disaffection of local or foreign people or both, or addiction to women, gambling and other vices, or distress due to fire, floods, and other eight kinds of calamities. That which deprives (vyasyati) a person of his happiness is termed vyasana (vices or calamities).

My teacher says that, of the calamities, viz. the king in distress, the minister in distress, the people in distress, distress due to bad fortifications, financial distress, the army in distress, and art ally in distress—that which is first mentioned is more serious than the one coming later in the order of enumeration.

No, says Bhāradvāja, of the distress of the king and of his minister, ministerial distress is more serious; deliberations in council, the attainment of results as anticipated while deliberating in council, the accomplishment of works, the business of revenue collection and its expenditure, recruiting the army, the driving out of the enemy and of wild tribes, the protection of the kingdom, taking remedial measures against calamities, the protection of the heir-apparent, and the installation of princes constitute the duties of ministers. In the absence of ministers, the above works are ill-done; and, like a bird deprived of its feathers, the king loses his active capacity. In such calamities, the intrigues of the enemy find a ready scope. In ministerial distress, the king’s life itself comes into danger, for, a minister is the mainstay of the security of the king’s life.

No, says Kauṭilya, it is verily the king who attends to the business of appointing ministers, priests and other servants, including the superintendents of several departments, the application of remedies against the troubles of his people, and of his kingdom, and the adoption of progressive measures; when his ministers fall into troubles, he employs others; he is ever ready to bestow rewards on the worthy and inflict punishments on the wicked; when the king is well off, by his welfare and prosperity, he pleases the people; of what kind the king’s character is, of the same kind will be the character of his people; for their progress or downfall, the people depend upon the king; the king is, as it were, the aggregate of the people.

Viśālākṣa says that of the troubles of the minister and of the people, the troubles of the people are more serious: finance, army, raw products, free labour, carriage of things, and collection (of necessaries) are all secured from the people. There will be no such things in the absence of people, next to the king and his minister.

No, says Kauṭilya, all activities proceed from the minister: activities such as the successful accomplishment of the works of the people, security of person and property from internal and external enemies, remedial measures against calamities, colonization and improvement of wild tracts of land, recruiting the army, collection of revenue, and bestowal of favour.

The school of Parāśara say that of the distress of the people and distress due to bad fortifications, the latter is a more serious evil; for it is in fortified towns that the treasury and the army are secured; they (fortified towns) are a secure place for the people; they are a stronger power than the citizens or country people; and they are a powerful defensive instrument in times of danger for the king. As to the people, they are common both to the king and his enemy.

No, says Kauṭilya, for forts, finance, and the army depend upon the people; likewise buildings, trade, agriculture, cattle-rearing, bravery, stability, power, and abundance (of things). In all countries people do not generally reside on fortified mountains and islands owing to the absence of an expansive country. When a country consists purely of cultivators, troubles due to the absence of fortifications (are apparent); while in a country which consists purely of warlike people, troubles that may appear are due to the absence of (an expansive and cultivated) territory.

Piśuna says that of the troubles due to the absence of forts and to want of finance, troubles due to want of finance are more serious; the repair of fortifications and their maintenance depend upon finance; by means of wealth, intrigue to capture an enemy’s fort may be carried on; by means of wealth, the people, friends, and enemies can be kept under control; by means of it, outsiders can be encouraged and the establishment of the army and its operations conducted. It is possible to remove the treasures in times of danger, but not the fort.

No, says Kauṭilya, for it is in the fort that the treasury and the army are safely kept, and it is from the fort that secret war (intrigue), control over one’s partisans, the upkeep of the army, the reception of allies and the driving out of enemies and of wild tribes are successfully practised. In the absence of forts, the treasury is to the enemy, for it seems that for those who own forts there is no destruction.

Kauṇapadanta says that of distress due to want of finance or to an inefficient army, that which is due to the want of an efficient army is more serious; for control over one’s own friends and enemies, the winning over the army of an enemy, and the business of administration are all dependent upon the army. In the absence of the army, it is certain that the treasury will be lost, whereas lack of finance can be made up by procuring raw products and lands, or by seizing an enemy’s territory the army can be strengthened. With the army finance is secured. The army being ever at hand, it can exercise the functions of a minister.

No, says Kauṭilya, the army is dependent upon finance. In the absence of finance the army may go to the enemy, or murder the king himself, and bring about all kinds of troubles. But finance is the chief means of observing virtuous acts and of enjoying desires. Owing to a change in place, time, and policy, either finance or the army may be a superior power; for the army is (sometimes) the means of securing the wealth acquired; but wealth is (always) the means of securing both the treasury and the army. Since all activities are dependent upon finance, financial troubles are more serious.

Vātavyādhi says that of the distress of the army and of an ally, the distress of an ally is more serious—an ally, though he is not fed and is far off, is still serviceable; he drives off not only the rear-enemy and the friends of the rear-enemy, but also the frontal enemy and wild tribes; he also helps his friend with money, army, and lands on occasions of troubles.

No, says Kauṭilya, the ally of him who has a powerful army keeps the alliance; and even the enemy assumes a friendly attitude; when there is a work that can be equally accomplished either by the army or by an ally, then preference to the army or to the ally should depend on the advantages of securing the appropriate place and time for war and the expected profit. In times of sudden expedition and on occasions of troubles from an enemy, a wild tribe, or local rebels, no friend can be trusted. When calamities happen together, or when an enemy has grown strong, a friend keeps up his friendship as long as money is forthcoming. Thus the determination of the comparative seriousness of the calamities of the various elements of sovereignty.

* When a part of one of the elements of sovereignty is under troubles, the extent, affection, and strength of the serviceable part can be the means of accomplishing a work.

* When any two elements of sovereignty are equally under troubles, they should be distinguished in respect of their progressive or declining tendency, provided that the good condition of the rest of the elements needs no description.

* When the calamities of a single element tend to destroy the rest of the elements, those calamities, whether they be of the fundamental or any other element, are verily serious.

[Thus ends Chapter I, “The Aggregate of the Calamities of the Elements of Sovereignty,” in Book VIII, “Concerning Vices and Calamities” of the Arthaśāstra of Kauṭilya. End of the hundred and seventeenth chapter from the beginning.]