Dr. Saurabh Mishra, Research Fellow, spoke on “Imaging Kautilya: Popular and the Real” at the Monday Morning Meeting held on 21 October 2024. The session was moderated by Col. Vivek Chadha (Retd.), Senior Fellow, and was followed by insightful remarks by the Director General of MP-IDSA, Ambassador Sujan R. Chinoy, and other scholars.

Executive Summary

Dr. Saurabh Mishra offered an in-depth exploration of Kautilya’s Arthashastra by unravelling its complexities and addressing its misinterpretations. The session delved into the philosophical, historical, and strategic dimensions of the ancient text while examining its relevance in contemporary global discourse.

Detailed Report:

The session commenced with remarks by Col. Vivek Chadha (Retd.), who emphasised the significance of the topic. Col. Chadha reflected on the complexities surrounding ancient Indian texts, pointing out how misconceptions, criticism, and oversimplifications often cloud their true essence. He noted the Western appropriation of ancient Indian ideas, such as the reductive comparison of Kautilya to Machiavelli which fails to capture the depth of the Arthashastra.

Dr. Saurabh Mishra began the session by identifying the wide gap between the popular perception and the historical and philosophical reality of Kautilya’s Arthashastra. He emphasised that the text is often oversimplified, reduced to a mere realist manual, and inaccurately compared to Machiavelli’s works. These comparisons, he argued, fail to capture the richness of the Arthashastra’s philosophical roots, its scientific methodology, and its comprehensive approach to governance and strategy.

Dr. Mishra noted that popular interpretations often caricature Kautilya as a Machiavellian figure, focused solely on deceit and manipulation. He highlighted how text like Mudrarakshasa have contributed to this image, with their portrayal of Kautilya as a cunning strategist devoid of moral considerations. However, such depictions neglect the ethical and philosophical dimensions of the Arthashastra. The text’s emphasis on balance between ethics, material well-being, and strategic interests shows Kautilya’s deep understanding of governance as a multifaceted discipline. He also critiqued Western academic stereotyping, which tends to pigeonhole Kautilya as an amoral realist, ignoring the broader philosophical underpinnings of his work.

Dr. Mishra outlined the two major phases in the study of the Arthashastra:

1. First Phase (1905–1992): The discovery of the Arthashastra in 1905 marked the beginning of its consolidation as a foundational text in Indian thought. During this phase, scholars focused on the nationalist dimensions of the text, highlighting its value as evidence of India’s ancient tradition of strategic and political thinking. This period was also marked by efforts to translate and compile the text, with major contributions by scholars like R.P. Kangle.
2. Second Phase (Post-1992): This phase saw a shift toward exploring the Arthashastra’s relevance in modern strategic studies. With the rise of global interest in indigenous knowledge systems, the text became central to discussions on decolonising intellectual discourse. Scholars began to examine its strategic insights, particularly in the context of international relations, warfare, and statecraft.

Moreover, Dr. Saurabh Mishra emphasised that the text is deeply grounded in Indian philosophical traditions, particularly Sankhya, Yoga, and Lokayata (materialist) systems. These traditions inform the Arthashastra’s empirical and scientific approach, enabling it to address the practical realities of governance while maintaining a philosophical foundation. The integration of Sankhya’s dualist perspective, Yoga’s harmonizing practices, and Lokayata’s materialist outlook creates a holistic framework that balances ethics, material well-being, and political strategy. This synthesis, according to Dr. Mishra, makes the Arthashastra unique in its approach to governance and statecraft.

While transitioning to its strategic relevance, Dr. Mishra highlighted several strategic insights from the Arthashastra:

• Mandala Theory: Kautilya’s nuanced understanding of state relations categorised neighbouring states as allies, adversaries, or vassals based on their behaviour and interests. Contrary to popular misconceptions, Kautilya did not see all neighbours as enemies but recognised the potential for alliances and cooperation.
• Priority of Intellect: Dr. Saurabh emphasised Kautilya’s preference for intellectual and diplomatic strategies (Mantra Shakti) over brute force (Danda). This approach underscores the value of wisdom and planning in achieving political objectives.
• Ethical Governance: The Arthashastra advocates for governance that prioritises the well-being of subjects, asserting that the happiness of the people is central to the ruler’s success. This ethical dimension challenges the notion of Kautilya as a purely utilitarian thinker.

While explaining contemporary implications, Dr. Mishra dwelt upon global intellectual contributions. He argued for the integration of Kautilyan thought into global academic discourse. The Arthashastra offers valuable insights into governance, strategy, and ethics that are relevant in today’s multipolar world. Its emphasis on balance and pragmatism provides a counterpoint to Eurocentric theories in international relations. Moreover, he highlighted ongoing efforts by Indian scholars to position the Arthashastra within post-Western theoretical frameworks. By engaging with global intellectual history and decolonising knowledge systems, these efforts aim to expand the text’s influence in international academic circles.

In terms of managing perceptions in the neighbourhood, he elaborated that Kautilya’s principles offer practical guidance for managing relations with smaller neighbouring states. Dr. Mishra emphasised the need for India to address regional perceptions through consistent diplomacy and gestures of goodwill. By applying Kautilyan strategies, India can reassure its neighbours of its non-expansionist intentions and foster trust.

Finally, while explaining the challenges and opportunities, Dr. Mishra addressed the challenges of engaging with the Arthashastra in contemporary contexts. Decolonising strategic studies requires overcoming entrenched stereotypes and resistance from both Western and Indian academic traditions. However, these challenges also present opportunities for India to lead in the development of inclusive and indigenous frameworks for global discourse. He concluded by emphasising the enduring relevance of Kautilya’s Arthashastra. Far from being a relic of the past, the text offers valuable lessons for modern governance, strategy, and international relations. By addressing misconceptions and integrating the Arthashastra into global discourse, India can not only reclaim its intellectual heritage but also contribute to a more inclusive and balanced understanding of global strategy.

Following the Presentation, Amb. Sujan R. Chinoy, Director-General, MP-IDSA, observed that it is intriguing that the discovery of an ancient text remained unnoticed by foreign scholars, including missionaries, Arabs, and Chinese, despite their extensive explorations in India. He observed that strategic thought has been increasingly dominated by China, with institutions like the U.S. Army War College focusing heavily on Sun Tzu, while Indian strategic traditions remain underrepresented. He emphasised the need for India to promote its strategic heritage globally, especially given the historical advocacy of Chinese contributions by Westerners like Edgar Snow. Lastly, he pointed out Pakistan’s growing acknowledgment of figures like Kautilya, suggesting that India must proactively assert its heritage to prevent appropriation, as recently seen with Pakistan’s narrative on Buddhism.

Q & A Session:

During the Q & A session, a range of questions were posed on various themes, including the discovery of the Arthashastra in 1905 and its subsequent recognition, emphasising its delayed integration into academic and public discourse. Moreover, questions were raised about why foreign scholars overlooked this text in earlier periods despite its foundational significance. The discussion delved into how India’s neighbours perceive its strategic posture, with references to Kautilya’s Matsya Nyaya (law of the fish) and the management of relations through diplomacy and assurances against expansionist intentions. The Arthashastra’s perspectives on neighbouring states—classified as friendly, vassal, or hostile—were examined in the context of modern regional dynamics.

The session also addressed the presence of democracy in ancient Indian texts, noting that while the Arthashastra references oligarchies and early forms of democracy in Himalayan and Ganges regions, it does not align with modern democratic concepts. However, Kautilya did not oppose democratic structures but viewed centralised monarchy as more effective for building empires. Questions were also raised about India’s engagement with its own knowledge systems, particularly in the global academic context. It was acknowledged that while American scholars actively study the Arthashastra, India needs to further assert its intellectual heritage. The discussion also critiqued how disciplines like history and science often overshadow India’s strategic contributions.

The session was concluded by Col. Chadha, with encouragement for deeper academic engagement with ancient Indian texts and their relevance to modern strategic, political, and cultural debates. Participants were urged to explore these works to better understand India’s historical and intellectual legacy.

The Report was prepared by Mr. Mohana Sakthivel J. Research Analyst, ALACUN Centre, MP-IDSA.