The document explores the contract theory of the origin of the state in Indian history, analyzing its development through various ancient texts such as the Brahmanas, Digha Nikaya, and Arthashastra. It highlights the differences between Indian and Western theories of political contracts, emphasizing the obligations of kingship and the relationship between rulers and subjects. The conclusion asserts that the contract theory represents an original contribution to political thought by ancient Indian scholars and contrasts with the ideas of Greek philosophers like Plato and Aristotle.

1. SEMINAR
Transition From Pre – State to State
Society in Indian History
TOPIC : THE CONTRACT THEORY
ALBERT JOSEPH
1ST M.A.HISTORY
ROLL NO - 503

2. Introduction
• Attempts have been made to find out the counter
part of the western theories of the origin of the
state in ancient Indian texts, but this has been
done without much care for the age and the
historical background of their sources. The task is
rendered difficult because of the uncertainties
which hang over many texts in regard to their
dates and contents. Any attempt of the
reconstruction of history of a political theory,
such as the contract theory of the origin of the
state, will be provisional in nature.

3. • In some traces were generally accepted the
chronology of the texts, which include the
Brahmanas, the DikhaNikhaya, the Arthasastra
of Koutilya, the Mahavastu and the
Rajadharma section of the Santhiparva. This
chronological order is, however not followed
some scholars, like Koutilya. It is significant
that the chapter 67 which deals with the
contract theory of the origin of the state and
chapter 65 refers to the Pahlvas (Parthians).

4. Contract Theory of the Origin of the
State
• Contract Theory of the Origin of the State
considered as the counter parts of the origin of
the state in western theory in ancient Indian
texts. The first faint traces of the contract theory
of the origin of the state are to be found in two
Brahmanas, (Aitreya Brahmana and Taitreya
Brahmanas Ab and Tb), which refer to the origin
of the kingship through election among the gods
on account of the compelling necessity of
carrying successful war against the Asuras.

5. • In one Brahmana one idea is further developed in
connection with the great coronation ceremony
of Indra. It is stated that headed by Prajapati the
gods said to one another, that amongst them
Indra was the most vigorous, the most strong, the
most perfect, the best in carrying out any work.
“So they decided to install him in kingship and
accordingly to perform his Mahabhisheka, in
which he was consecrated for different forms of
royalty. Obviously, election implied some sort of
consent on part of the electors as well as the
elect, but their mutual obligations are not
specified in the text.

6. • Nevertheless, since necessities of war form the
background of election in which stress is laid on
the physical qualities of the king, the
obligations of obedience on the part of the
subjects and that of command and protection
on the part of the king are implicit in the
transaction. This speculations represents the
real nature of kingship in the later Vedic period
is difficult to say. The election in divine society
may be regarded as a reflection of the practice
in early Vedic tribal society, by the end of the
Vedic period kingship had been fairly
established on hereditary basis.

7. • It is said that the Brahmanas anticipate in
some measure the celebrated theory of social
contract of later times. But if we take a narrow
view of social contract or later times it means
that people agree amongst themselves to
respect the family and property of one
another and thus lay the foundations of
society. This idea is not advanced in the
Brahmanas, which seem to visualize some
kind of political contract.

8. • Although, the contract theory of the origin of the
state is anticipated by early Brahminical
literature, the first clear and developed
exposition of this theory is found in the Buddhist
canonical text DikhaNikaya, where the story of
creation reminds us of the ideal state of Rousseau
followed by the state of nature depicted as by
Hobbes. It is said that there was a time when
people were perfect, and lived in a state of
happiness and tranquility. This perfect state,
lasted for ages but at last the pristine purity
declined that the set in rottenness.

9. • Differences of sex manifested themselves, and
there appeared distinctions of color. Now shelter,
food and drink were also required for earthly life.
People gradually entered into a series of
agreements among themselves and set up the
institutions of the family and property. Therefore
people assembled and agreed to choose as chief
a person who was “the best favoured”, the most
attractive and the most capable. On their request
he consented ‘to be indignant’ at that where one
should be rightly indignant, which should be
rightly ensured.

10. • In return, they agreed to contribute to him a
portion of their paddy. The individual, who
was thus elected, came to hold in a serial
order three titles : ‘Mahasammata, Khatiya,
Raja.
• According to the text, the first means One
chosen by the whole people;
• The second means the Lord of the fields;
• The third means one who charms the people
by means of Dharma.

11. • This idea was adumberated in the middle ganga plains,
where paddy was the basis of the economy of the
people. Although, excavations at Hatinapura take back
the existence of paddy in north-east India to about the
8th century B.C. It was only in the age of Buddha, that it
had come to be widely cultivated. The story of creation
gives the impression that one of the chief sources of
discord was the hoarding of rice by some people over
and above what they required for their consumption,
and what is worse, the stealing of rice fields, the
repeated occurrence of which is regarded to be an
important factor leading to the election of the chief.
But this political impact is precedented by the
establishment of a social compact, which distinguishes
the Buddhist contract theory from the one which can
be inferred from the Brahmanas.

12. The Digha Nikaya and the Political
Compact
• In the Digha Nikaya, it is evolved in stages,
which first refer to the creation of family and
then to that of private property. Political
compact as developed as in the Digha Nikaya
not only lays a different types of emphasis on
the qualifications for election as king but also
clearly states the obligations of the two
parties. It mentioned in the Ab, to that of
beauty, popularity, attractiveness and its
ability.

13. • Accordingly, the contractual relation between the
king and the people reflects the proprietory right
of the oligarchy over land. Originally the
agreement takes place between a single kshatriya
one hand and the people on the other, but at a
larger state, it is extended to the kshatriyas as a
class. Towards the end of the story of creation in
the Digha Nikaya it is stated that thus took place
the origin of the social circles of the nobles,
‘Khattiyamandala’. The obligations imposed on
the ruler in our text are impressive. The earliest
brahminical exposition of the contract theory of
the origin of the state in clear terms occurs in the
Arthasastra of Koutilya.

14. • This theory is propounded by initially or
incidentally in connection with the refutation of
the brahmanas claim to social supremacy,
similarly in the Arthasastra it is expounded
causality in the coarse of a talk amongst the spies
about the nature of royal power. The koutilyan
speculation is in keeping with an advanced
economy, when the different kinds of grain were
produced so that the king laid claim not only to
an unspecific part of paddy but also to a fixed
part of all kinds of grain produce. Finally, the fact
that even the inhabitants of the forest are not
exempted from taxes is an indication of the
comprehensive character of the Koutilyan state.

15. • The contractual origin of the kingship in the
Arthasastra is not intended to impose
limitations on royal power. On the contrary,
the obligations put upon the people are
burdensome and are designated to strengthen
royal authority. Hence Koutilya’s contract
theory is purported to buttress royal power as
that of Hobbes, rather than to limit it as that
of Locke.

16. • The next stage in the history of the contract theory of
the state is indicated by the Mahavastu, a biography of
the Buddha written in the first century B.C in, what is
regarded by some scholars, Buddhist hybrid sanskrit.
The Digha Nikaya refers to the ideal state of life in the
beginning followed by degradation leading to the
establishment of the family and property by a series of
agreements, finally cemented by the foundation of the
state as a result of the election of the most gracious
and mighty as the king, who is known as the
Mahasammata. But there are some significant
diffrerences in regard to be the terms of contract,
which are enlarged by this text directly and indirectly.

17. • This title, therefore, indicates the right of the king
rather than his duty towards the people, whose
obligation towards the king is stipulated earlier in
very clear terms. In return for this pledge on the
part of the king the people promise to pay him
one-sixth of the produce of the paddy fields,
which is specified in the Digha Nikaya and is in
consonance with that given by Koutilya.
Regarding the origin of kingship, the Santhiparva
contains two speculations, both of which may be
interpreted as embodying elements of the
contract theory of the origin of the state.

18. • The next stage in the rise of the state is indicated
by the formulation of political compact. The
important element common to the two theories
in the Shantiparva is the fact that none of them,
unlike the Buddhist theory, refers to the election
of the king. From the viewpoint of the ancient
Indian definition of the state, the second contract
theory, involves the king and the people who
respectively correspond to the swami and the
Janapada. The people’s obligations to pay taxes
and render military service to the king clearly
imply the presence of the elements of Kosa and
Danda.

19. • Thus, four important elements can be
distinctly discerned in the statement of the
contract theory in the Santhiparva. Although
the Gupta period was prolific in the
production of varied types of literature, it
cannot boast any fruitful contribution to the
contract theory of the origin of the state,
which may have been finally compiled during
this period. Ghoshal holds that the Koutilyan
theory is a brahmanized adaptation of the
Buddhist theory of contract.

20. Conclusion
• THE CONTRACT THEORY OF THE ORIGIN OF THE
STATE should be regarded as an original
contribution of ancient Indian thinkers to political
thought, for even the Greek thinkers Plato and
Aristotle, who had established political science
practically as an Independent discipline, did not
think in terms of contract between the king and
the people. Plato points out in the Republic that
when even three or four people come together
for the satisfaction of their mutual needs that
leads to the rise of the state.

21. • This, therefore, implies some idea of social
compact. In the laws, while enunciating his view
of history, Plato states that in the beginning
people lived at peace in a natural age. Thus, the
oath followed the rise of the state and was not a
preceding condition of its rise, and it cannot be
interpreted as implying the contract theory of the
origin of the state. Perhaps the origin of the
contract theory in India may be attributed to the
prevalence of oligarchical rule in the age of the
Buddha, either with the object of justifying with
that of limiting or overthrowing it.

22. References
• Sharma, R.S. ‘Aspects of Political Ideas and
Institutions in Ancient India’ , Motilal
Banarsidass Publishers, Delhi, 1959, pp. 64-79.