Chapter 2 - Considerations about the Troubles of the King and of His Kingdom

[Sanskrit text for this chapter is available]

The king and his kingdom are the primary elements of the state. The troubles of the king may be either internal or external. Internal troubles are more serious than external troubles, which are like the danger arising from a lurking snake. Troubles due to a minister are more serious than other kinds of internal troubles. Hence, the king should keep under his own control the powers of finance and the army.

Of divided rule and foreign rule, divided rule, or rule of a country by two kings, perishes owing to mutual hatred, partiality and rivalry. My teacher says that foreign rule which depends upon its winning the affection of the people is for the enjoyment of others in its own condition.

No, says Kauṭilya: divided rule between father and son or between two brothers has similar consequences and is under the clutches of a minister. But foreign rule brought into existence by seizing the country from its king still alive thinks that the country is not its own, impoverishes it and carries off its wealth, or treats it as a commercial article; and when the country ceases to love it, it retires, abandoning the country.

Which is better, a blind king, or a king erring against the science?

My teacher says that a blind king, i.e. a king who is not possessed of an eye in sciences, is indiscriminate in doing works, very obstinate, and is led by others; such a king destroys the kingdom by his own maladministration. But an erring king can be easily brought round when and where his mind goes astray from the procedure laid down in sciences.

No, says Kauṭilya, a blind king can be made by his supporters to adhere to whatever line of policy he ought to. But an erring king, who is bent upon doing what is against the science, brings about destruction to himself and his kingdom by maladministration.

Which is better, a diseased or a new king?

My teacher says that a diseased king loses his kingdom owing to the intrigue of his ministers, or loses his life on account of the kingdom; but a new king pleases the people by such popular deeds as the observance of his own duties and the act of bestowing favours, remissions (of taxes), gifts, and presents upon others.

No, says Kauṭilya, a diseased king continues to observe his duties as usual. But a new king begins to act as he pleases, under the impression that the country, acquired by his own might, belongs to himself; when pressed by combined kings (for plunder), he tolerates their oppression of the country. Or having no firm control over the elements of the state, he is easily removed. There is this difference among diseased kings: a king who is morally diseased, and a king who is suffering from physical disease; there is also this difference among new kings; a high-born king and a base-born king

Which is better, a weak but high-born king, or a strong but lowborn king?

My teacher says that a people, even if interested in having a weak king, hardly allow room for the intrigues of a weak but high-born person to be their king; but that if they desire power, they will easily yield themselves to the intrigues of a strong but base-born person to be their king.

No, says Kauṭilya, a people will naturally obey a high-born king though he is weak, for the tendency of a prosperous people is to follow a high-born king. Also they render the intrigues of a strong but base-born person unavailing, as the saying is, that possession of virtues makes for friendship.

The destruction of crops is worse than the destruction of handfuls (of grains), since it is the labour that is destroyed thereby; absence of rain is worse than too much rain.

* The comparative seriousness or insignificance of any two kinds troubles affecting the elements of sovereignty, in the order of enumeration of the several kinds of distress, is the cause of adopting offensive or defensive operations.

[Thus ends Chapter II, “Considerations about the Troubles of the King and of His Kingdom,” in Book VIII, “Concerning Vices and Calamities” of the Arthaśāstra of Kauṭilya. End of the hundred and eighteenth chapter from the beginning.]