Kautilya's Maxims
8
Choosing Ministers
(ArS 1/8:1-8, 10-29)

Bharadvaja: [The ruler] should make his fellow-students his ministers, since their character and ability are known to him, and they will have his confidence.

Visalaksha. No. Having been his intimates, they will treat him with disrespect. He should choose those who resemble him in personal qualities. Since they have the same foibles and vices, they will fear that he knows their secrets, and so will not dare offend him.

Followers of Parasara: But this works the other way also: fearing that they know his secrets, he will acquiesce in what they do or do not do. He should choose those who have aided him in danger, since their loyalty has been proved.

Pisuna. No; this is mere devotion, not intelligence. He should choose those who have shown their ability by bringing in the expected income, or more, from assigned projects.

Kaunapadanta. No; these will not necessarily possess other qualities which are necessary in a minister. He should choose those inherited from his father and grandfather, since their reliability is known. Being kindred, they will not desert him even if he behaves badly. This principle may be seen even among animals, for cattle, passing by a herd of unrelated cattle, will abide rather with those that are their kin.

Vartavyadhi. No; these will take charge of everything, and act as though they were the masters. He should choose new men, versed in politics. New men, looking on the wielder of the rod of punishment as though he were the God of the Underworld, will not cause problems.

Bahudantiputra. No; one familiar with principles but inexperienced in affairs might fail in practice. He should choose those of noble birth, intellect, integrity, courage, and loyalty, these being the supremely important qualities.

Kautilya: All these criteria are justifiable, for ability is best judged from performance. Assigning rank in accordance with their ability, and giving them suitable assignments, he should appoint all of them as ministers - but not as counsellors.

Each criterion offers grounds for a favorable expectation of future performance. Note the distinction between those appointed for skill in execution (ministers) and for advice in planning (counsellors). The "ministers" at this time included some who were merely managers (the criterion of Pisuna envisions exactly that sort of responsibility) and not high policy advisors, as would be typical of a relatively simple and early governmental structure, in which specialization of function has begun to occur, but has not yet been formalized in named offices. See further Kautilya's advice on advising, given in the next few maxims.

We have removed the interruptive sloka 1/8:9. On the other hand, 1/8:29, the Kautilya saying, is not suspect even though it is in verse, since it occurs at the end of the chapter, where material previously in the text may have been later versified. As for the selection criteria mentioned by the various authorities, it is notable that birth is not the only one; it is not even very common. The idea that performance counts more than background may be expected to occur at times of social broadening. For Chinese examples of advice offered in such conditions, see LY 6:6 (c0460) and, even more reminiscent of the present Kautilya saying, LY 6:8. Choosing staff according to ability was a typical recommendation of the 04c Chinese statecraft writers; see for example MZ 8 (c0360) and GZ 3:17 (c0340), with an echo in the somewhat later Mencius (MC) 1B9 (c0315).

 

Kautilya's Maxims is Copyright © 2001- by E Bruce and A Taeko Brooks

Contact The Project / To Overview / Exit to Kautilya Page