Chanakya Explored in Jaina Literature

Author(s): Nalini Joshi
Publisher: Firodaya Prakashan
Catalog link: https://jainqq.org/explore/007699/1

Page #1

*
Chāṇakya :
Explored in
the Jaina Literature
by
Dr. Nalini Joshi
(Professor, Seth H.N. Jain Chair)
With a Foreword by Dr.P.G.Lalye
(Retired Professor & Head, Dept. of Sanskrit, Osmania University, Hyderabad)
Seth H.N.Jain Chair Firodia Publications University of Pune
The correct transliteration of is Cāṇakya.
May 2014
I

Page #2

II
Chāņakya : Explored in the Jaina Literature
Written by :
Nalini Joshi
(Professor, Seth H.N.Jain Chair)
Assistant Editors
Kaumudi Baldota (Nanawati Fellow, Seth H.N.Jain Chair, UOP) Anita Bothra (Research Fellow, Seth H.N.Jain Chair, UOP)
Publisher : Seth H.N.Jain Chair Firodia Publications (University of Pune)
Available at:
Sanmati-Teerth 844, Shivajinagar, B.M.C.C. Road Firodia Hostel, Pune 411004 Phone No. (020) 25671088
All Rights Reserved
First Edition : May 2014
For Private Circulation Only
Price : Rs. 500/
D.T.P. Work : Ajay Joshi Printed by : Kalyani Corporation, 1464, Sadashiv Peth, Phone : 2441405, Pune. 30

Page #3

III
FOREWORD
It is a highly astonishing event in the cultural history of India that the Arthaśāstra of Kautilya has left obvious and indelible impressions on the literary genre of the Jaina works. It's curious to think of polity-leden Arthaśāstra influencing the mythology and the cultural ethos of Ancient India. This view did receive certain adequate attention from the Brahmanic and Jaina scholars. Fortunately Dr. Mrs. Nalini Joshi has undertaken this momentous task of studying the influence of the Kautilya's Arthaśāstra on many Jaina Narrative works. She has taken laudable efforts for exploring almost all the Jaina works and tried to find out the interaction of both the thought-ferments of India.
With her deep study in Sanskrit works on polity and propound erudition in the Jaina varieties of Prakrit texts, Dr. Joshi has brought out the salient specialities of polity developed in the Arthaśāstra and numerous Jaina Prakrit texts. She has specially considered certain texts like the drama Mudrārāksasa, depicting Kauțilya as a shrewd strategist. In some of the works, Kauțilya is

Page #4

IV
referred to as Kodillaya and it is mentioned that his book (i.e. Arthaśāstra) was a part of a syllabus.
In the works like Niśītha-cūrņi and Āvaśyaka-cūrņi, various incidents in the life of Cāņakya are described. In the Āvaśyakaniryukti, Cāņakya's pāriņāmiki-buddhi is highlighted. Jinadāsagani has given a short life-sketch of Cāņakya and Candragupta. Similarly there are general observations on different stories dedicated to Cāņakya. The commentaries written by the Jaina authors exhibit their deep study of the text of the Arthaśāstra. In Haribhadra's Upadeśapada there are certain dvāragāthās throwing light on the character of Cāņakya. Among the eminent Svetāmbara writers Ratnaprabha, Hemacandra and Municandra are noteworthy.
Harişena's Brhatkathākośa is specially cited. Some Digambara authors like Somadevasūri in his Nītivākyāmsta and the other authors like Śrīcandra and Prabhācandra have been cited by Dr. Nalini Joshi. She has quoted the views of some other Jaina scholars also.
From this extensive survey, it becomes amply clear that the learned author has analysed almost all concerned Jaina texts
systematically, with a view to gather information about Cāņakya. Cāņakya's shrewdness and strategy are particularly focussed by the Brahmanic authors but with a comprehensive look on the Jaina views, Dr. Nalini Joshi rightfully quotes : “A certain respect and honour towards Cāņakya is seen in the Jaina literature due to his strict governance, selfless service, detached world-views and sublime death."

Page #5

V
She has touched new or hitherto untouched points successfully and has opened a new chapter in the Jaina literature. Dr. Nalini Joshi's work is highly commendable for making a study of the unstudied aspects of the Jaina literature and that of Kautilya. I extend my best wishes to Dr. Nalini Joshi for further exploration and systematic study of important Jaina texts.
Dr.P.G. Lalye
March 2014
Pune

Page #6

VI
PUBLISHER'S NOTE & PREFACE
'Seth Hirachand Nemchand Chair in Jain Philo
Literature, Logic and Culture', was established on 17/07/1976 in the University of Pune. Late Prof. S.S.Barlingay exerted a lot for establishing the Chair and naturally it was attached to the Department of Philosophy. Due to various reasons the Chair was defunct and produced only two-three small publications over the years. The Chair was revived in 2007 under the Vice-Chancellor of Shri Ratnakar Gaikwad and Dr. Narendra Jadhav. The concerned University authorities continued the same policy about the Chair and helped a lot to fulfil the aim of the Chair viz. “To promote and spread the Jainological Studies by Research, Popular Activities and Publications."
Firodia Publications' is a wing of Seth H.N.Jain Chair which was specifically created to publish books on various Jainological topics. We are very much glad to publish the 11th book under Firodia Publications titled - "Chāņakya : Explored in the Jaina Literature” which is the outcome of a research project

Page #7

VII undertaken by the Jain Chair.
When we cast a glance on the list of publications given on the back-page of this book, we immediately come to know that almost equal importance is given to the academic work and the popular writings. The research-oriented publications are in English and the Jainological writings for a novice are purposefully written in Marathi and Hindi. The two post-doctoral research assistants of the Jain Chair, viz. Dr. Anita Bothara and Dr. Kaumudi Baldota had presented their research papers in Marathi and Hindi in various prestigious conferences. We are planning to publish the collection of the research-papers in Hindi, in the near future.
It is noteworthy that four of our publications are available on the website viz. “jainaedu@gmail.com” and we are getting world-wide encouraging response of the concerned viewers. The work of uploading the rest of the publications is persued by our experts.
The present book is dedicated to the thorough quest of Cāņakya in the whole Jaina literature. The seed of the subject was sown in my mind before nearly ten years ago, when I was engaged in preparing word-slips for the comprehensive dictionary of Prakrits. The seed of the subject germinated when we undertook the project under the auspices of the Jain Chair in 2011. Literally hundreds of references were gathered, scrutinized, debated, discussed and translated by our research team. Final plan of the book was made in August 2013. The finished product is presented in the form of

Page #8

VIII
this book - "Chāṇakya : Explored in the Jaina Literature”.
It is our solemn duty to provide the rationale for a reader to go through this book.
The distinctive features of this book can be enumerated as
Cāṇakya alias Kautilya is an interesting personality for
*
any educated and cultured Indian.
* Kautilya and his Arthaśāstra is studied worldwide by the Orientalists, Sanskritists, Historians and experts in the science of Polity.
* Hindu Purāṇas and ancient Pāli texts have preserved very little personal data of Cāṇakya's life while the Jaina literature is really flooded with stories, narratives, legends and myths about Cāṇakya.
The biography of Caṇakya from his birth to death is documented in the Jaina texts.
Some of the scholars have opined that, "The Buddhas and Jainas generally despise Caṇakya'. This opinion is totally wrong in the case of Jainas because the sense of awe and regard about Cāṇakya is seen in the Jaina literature from the 3rd century A.D. upto 15th century A.D.
* Kauţiliya Arthaśāstra is a part of Magadhan literature and the authentic history of the Jaina canons is closely connected with Magadha.
*
*
*
The Jaina connections of the famous Sanskrit political drama Mudrārākṣasa are explored and exploited in one of the

Page #9

chapters of this book.
IX
The Svetambara and Digambara biographics of Cāṇakya
are compared with critical remarks.
* Each and every Jaina reference is originally documented, translated and brought under proper scrutiny.
* The Jaina code of conduct for monks and householders are revisited from the viewpoint of Kauṭilīya Arthaśāstra.
We can increase the list of the salient features in various ways but in nutshell, we can say that, the legendary history of Caṇakya preserved by the Jainas will open up new vistas for the scholars of Kautilyan Studies.
NALINI JOSHI
May 2014
Pune

Page #10

x
Contents
Page No.
Chapter 1 :
Introduction
15
Chapter 2:
Cāņakya : Reflected in the Brahmanic Sources
27
Chapter 3:
Interpretation of the Mudrārākşasa from the Jaina Perspective
Chapter 4:
47 Cāņakya : Revealed through the Jaina Literature
171
Chapter 5:
From the window of Arthaśāstra
227
Chapter 6:
Concluding Remarks
Bibliography
241

Page #11

CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
[1] How my attention was drawn towards this subject ?
[2] The rationale behind the present exploration
[3]
The starting point of the authentic history of India
Travel-accounts of the foreigners and the discovery of the Arthaśāstra
[4] Whether Kautilya is the author of the Arthaśāstra or not?
[5] Decreasing popularity of the Arthaśāstra in the brahmanic
literature

Page #12

CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
[1] How my attention was drawn towards this subject ?
While preparing the articles for Prakrit-English-Comprehensive-Dictionary, a joint and giant project was undertaken by Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute and Sanmati-Teerth a Research Institute, it came to my notice that in ancient and medieval literature of the Jainas, copious references about Cāņakya are found in the form of stories, incidents, parables, analogies, narratives, examples and biographies. The number of references was really overwhelming. I felt it necessary to go deeper in the subject for bringing out the exact connection between the Jaina tales of Cāņakya and traditional brahmanical tales in the broader light of the present version of Kauțilīya Arthaśāstra.
Though Cāņakya is famous as Kautilya and Vişnugupta, the Jaina authors have mostly preferred the name 'Cāņakya'. At three to four places it is suggested clearly that these three names identify the one and same personality.
The Kauțilīya Arthaśāstra is a science of polity. It is of course a excellent blend of Politics, Economics, Ethics as well as History. This world-famous treatise is extensively studied by Orientalists, Indologists and Sanskritists all over the world. The Kauțiliya Arthaśāstra contains 15 adhikaraṇas and 150 adhyāyas. It is a practical guidebook for a sovereign king. There is no need to describe the greatness and all-time-relevance of the Arthaśāstra. It is noticed that almost each finance budget of India, when tabled into

Page #13

3
the parliament, necessarily contains suitable quotations from the Kautilya's Arthaśāstra.
It is really a paradox that very little information about the personality of Cāṇakya is found in the Hindu and Buddhist sources. Eaxctly opposite is the position in the Jaina literature. It is full of stories, narratives, examples and illustrations of Caṇakya. [2] The rationale behind the present exploration :
When we fathomed the whole Jaina literature and explored each and every reference to Caṇakya, one fact become crystal-clear to us that the Jainas tell many new things about Cāṇakya which are not told in the Brahmanic and Buddhist literature. Generally a high regard, praise and honour about Caṇakya is seen in the Jaina literature.
In the meantime, a sentence written in the introduction of the Kautilīya Arthaśāstra by B.R.Hivargaonkar startled me. He says, "It is noted in the Brahmanic, Buddhist and Jaina literature that Kautilya was the amatya of the king Candragupta. A sense of disregard and reproach towards Cāṇakya is seen in the Buddhist and Jaina literature, while the Brahmanic sources praise Caṇakya."
Further on, Mr. Hivargaonkar defends his view as follows : "He himself being a brahmin, possesses very staunch and strict views against pāṣaṇḍins. Naturally the Bauddhas and Jainas despise Caṇakya and Brahmanic texts praise Caṇakya." (Introduction p.22)
We cann't say anything about the Buddhist texts at this juncture but it is really surprising and amuzing that a reputed scholar like Hivargaonkar had passed a remark about the Jainas without going into the scruting of the Jaina references. In the same introduc

Page #14

tion he says that, the Nandīsūtra mentions the text of Kautilya as a ‘kutila-nītiśāstra' in which the negative attitude of the Jainas towards Cāņakya is reflected. (Introduction p.4)
The other reputed scholar Durga Bhagvat has tried to bring
out the Buddhist connections with the Arthaśāstra but has totally
neglected the Jaina references which are enormous in number.
The same attitude of negligence about the Jaina sources is seen in the introduction of the Mudrārāksasa written by Dr.R.D.Karmarkar (Introduction p.13-14). He has mentioned the Buddhist sources of Mudrārāksasa in a bit detailed manner but had said nothing what the Jainas have documented. In his mind, he might have thought that the Jainas repeat the same things what the Buddhists say.
Thus an upright attempt has been made in this book to underline and examine all the Jaina sources of Cāņakya and the Arthaśāstra with the hope to remove away the previous misconceptions. [3] The starting-point of the authentic history of India :
It is a known fact that the authentic history of India is reconstructed by the historians from Alexander's invasion to India. Though the antiquity of Magadha is traced by the Indologists right from the Rgaveda, the Siśunāgas, Nandas and Mauryas are the hallmark dynasties noted in the authentic history. Yuan Chwang's travelaccounts (629 A.D.) display a picture of Mauryan empire and particularly mentions Chandragupta (I), as a great emporor. Nothing is written about Cāņakya by Yuan Chwang, a politician of prevading genius who was the prime minister of the great empire. When Yuan Chwang's book was translated, it was read, studied and almost devoured by all the students and scholars of Indian History.

Page #15

[4] Travel-accounts of the foreigners and discovery of the
Arthaśāstra :
The discovery of Cāņakya's Arthaśāstra is a great event much greater than the discovery of Yuan Chwang's travel-accounts in western countries. Shamshastry discovered a manuscript of the Kauțilīya Arthaśāstra in 1909 and he published it in the same year. Shamshastry, T.Ganapatishastri, Dr. Jolly Meyor, Dr. Winternitz, Father Zimmerman, Mr. B.R.Hivargaonkar, Dr. R.P.Kangle, Dr. D.R.Bhandarkar were the great pioneers of the Kauțilyan studies.
Dr.Jolly and Dr. Winternitz claimed that the Kauțilīya Arthaśāstra is not authored by Kauțilya, the prime minister of Candragupta. According to them, "Kautilya' is an imaginary personality and not an actual master in polity. Sombody collected all ancient thoughts on polity and wrote down the treatise using the pen-name of Kautilya in the 3rd century A.D. However, Dr. Jolly admitted that there are some legends about the fabulous minister who was looked upon as the master and creator of the art of polity.
The above-mentioned inference was based on the travel
accounts of Megasthenese, who was a Greek ambassador in the court of Candragupta and who actually resided at Pāțaliputra. The absense of Kautilya's name in his travel-accounts actually led Dr. Jolly to the conclusion that Kautilya was an imaginary personality. Mr. B.R.Hivargaonkar and some other scholars have criticized this view. This is not a place to note down all the arguments in the debate. But in nutshell, we can say that ultimately the Indian Indologists have established that the main core of Kauțilīya Arthaśāstra is written by Kautilya (Cāņakya/Vişnugupta) approximately in the fourth century before the Christian Era.

Page #16

Several reasons can be enumerated why Megasthenese might not have mentioned Kautilya and his Arthaśāstra. His travel-accounts are not available in lucid, homogenius form. At many places the text is corrupt as well as concise and scattered. After all his writtings are not historical books and are based on inadequate information. Dr. Shwanbek, the editor of ‘Megasthenis Indika' specifically says that, “Though some portions of his accounts might have written on the basis of first-hand information, but many of the accounts seem to have documented by using secondary sources and are not totally acceptable on its face-value." (alfestu 372f2017, fed illa , Kaal, p.23-24)
Mahāmahopādhyāya Haraprasad Sastry was a well-known Indologist and a scholar of great repute. He wrote an extremely important book entitled 'Magadhan Literature in 1923. At that time, an enthusiastic team of Indologist was working on the Kautilya’s Arthaśāstra with full vigour. Sastry had noted down the comparison between Yuan Chwang’s India and the India reflected in the Kauțilya's Arthaśāstra. It will not be out of place to quote the full passage from Sastry's book. The passage is as follows -
Yuan Chwang came to India in 629 A.D. and remained here for sixteen years. Kautilya was a native of India, bred up and born here, and he flourished about a thousand years before Yuan Chwang. Yuan Chwang was a mere traveller, at best a devout pilgrim. But Kauțilya was a politician of prevading genius and he was the primeminister of a great empire. Yuan Chwang was interested in Buddhism only and that in its higher phases. But Kautilya was interested in everything Indian. Yuan Chwang was a religious man and looked at Indian society from the religious point of view. Kautilya

Page #17

7
was an administrator and a man of the world. His interest in India. was that of an administrator and a patriot. Yuan Chwang's account of India was partial and one-sided, that of Kautilya thorough and many-sided. (Magadhan Literature, Lecture III, p.49)
[5] Whether Kautilya is the author of the Arthaśāstra or not? :
The authorship of the Kauṭiliya Arthaśāstra can be confirmed from the text itself. It is noted in the beginning, in the middle and at the end of the book that Kautilya alias Viṣṇugupta has composed this śastric text. There is no valid reason for disbelieving the texual reference about it's authorship.
At the end of the first adhyāya of the first adhikaraṇa it is told that -
सुखग्रहणविज्ञेयं तत्त्वार्थपदनिश्चितम् । कौटिल्येन कृतं शास्त्रं विमुक्तग्रन्थविस्तरम् ।।
"Kautilya prepared this sastric treatise which is easy to understand, in which technical words are used with specific meanings and the lengthy details are avoided to make it concise."
At the end of the tenth adhyaya of the second adhikarana Kautilya says
सर्वशास्त्राण्यनुक्रम्य प्रयोगमुपलभ्य च । कौटिल्येन नरेन्द्रार्थे शासनस्य विधिः कृतः ।।
"Having followed all sciences and having observed practice also, the rules of drawing up writs are framed by Kautilya for the benefit of the king."
This ascribes the authorship to Kautilya but it does not name the king for whom it was intended. The remark of Kautilya suggests that this science of polity is useful for any king as such. The piece of information is given by Dandin (approximately the 6th century

Page #18

8
A.D.) in the eighth chapter of his famous work Daśakumāracarita in the following words अधीष्व तावत् दण्डनीतिम् । इयमिदानीम् आचार्य्यविष्णुगुप्तेन मौर्य्यार्थे षड्भिः श्लोकसहस्रैः संक्षिप्ता ।
'Read dandanīti. This has just now been presented in an abridged form extending to 6000 slokas by ācārya Viṣṇugupta for the benefit of Maurya.'
According to the Arthaśastra, the author is Kauțilya, but in the Daśakumaracarita, it is mentioned that the Arthaśāstra was written by Viṣṇugupta. But they were not two different persons. Because at the end of the fifteenth adhikarana of Kauṭilīya Arthaśāstra, the author himself says
दृष्ट्वा
fayfaufà बहुधा शास्त्रेषु भाष्यकाराणाम् । स्वयमेव विष्णुगुप्तश्चकार सूत्रं च भाष्यं च ।।
"Having seen discrepancies in many ways on the part of the writers of bhāṣyas on the śāstras, Viṣṇugupta has himself written both the sūtra and bhāṣya."
Thus with the help of all these references we can conclude that kautilya and Viṣṇugupta must be the one and the same person. But was the author really the prime-minister of Candragupta in the 4th century B.C. ? This doubt is cleared with the help of the verse noted down in the tenth adhyaya of the second adhikaraṇa of Kauṭilīya Arthaśāstra. It runs thus
येन शास्त्रं च शस्त्रं च नन्दराजगता च भूः ।
अमर्षेणोद्धृतान्याशु तेन शास्त्रमिदं कृतम् ।।
"This sastra has been made by him who, under provocation, quickly rescued from chaos the science of polity and of war, as well as the earth from the hands of the Nandas."
While searching the legacy of Kauṭilīya Arthaśāstra in the
-
-

Page #19

9
brahmanic sources, the landmark-treatise of Kamandaka i.e. the Kamandakīya Nītisāra carries utmost importance. From the traditional information about Kāmandaka, we know that he was the disciple of Caṇakya and presented a short version of the Kauțiliya Arthaśāstra in poetrical form. Putting aside the controversy of Kamandaka's date we have to admit that he is an sncient authority on polity and is more explicit in giving us an account of the Arthaśāstra and its author. He says
यस्याभिचारवज्रेण वज्रज्वलनचेतसः । पपात मूलतः श्रीमान् सुपर्वा नन्दपर्वतः ।। 1.4 ॥ एकाकी मन्त्रशक्त्या यः शक्त्या शक्तिधरोपमः । आजहार नृचन्द्राय चन्द्रगुप्ताय मेदिनीम् ।। 1.5 ।। नीतिशास्त्रामृतं धीमानर्थशास्त्रमहोदधेः ।
समुद्दध्रे नमस्तस्मै विष्णुगुप्ताय वेधसे ।। 1.6 ।। "Salutation to Viṣṇugupta, the veritable providence, powerful like thunderous fire, by whose thunder-like rites, fell root and branch the mountain like Nanda dynasty firm in all its political strata ; who like Karttikeya in valour, single-handed, procured by dint of his statesmanship the whole earth for Candragupta; who from the ocean-like science of polity churned out, so to say, the nectar of polity."
When we observe the legacy of Kauṭilīya Arthaśāstra we find a compact and neat version of the Arthaśāstra i.e. the Nītivākyāmṛta of Somadevasūri, a Digambara Jaina monk of the 10th century A.D. The details are given in a separate chapter of the present book. [6] Decreasing popularity of the Arthaśāstra in the brahmanic literature:
Now we will see the impact of the Kauțiliya Arthaśāstra and

Page #20

10
kauțilīya-nīti which is reflected in the brahmanic literature, of course in a brief manner. From this brief sketch we come to know, 'How the popularity of the Kauțilīya Arthaśāstra decreased serially ?? At the end of this brief survey we will discuss the reasons of the decreasing popularity and how this valuable treasure of knowledge, was lost in darkness uptill its discovery in 1909 A.D.
In the Vyākaraṇa-Mahābhāsya of Patañjali it is quoted that Maurya kings were greedy of wealth and gathered ample wealth with a lot of devices to fill their treasure.
In the dramas and one-act-plays of Bhāsa, who is the oldest among the available Sanskrit dramatists, the shadows and reflections of the terms, ideas, motifs and points enumerated in the Kautilīya Arthaśāstra are found in frequent manner. Two of his dramas viz. the Pratijñā-yaugandharāyaṇa and the Avimāraka are full of the terms and devices used by Kautilya. Scholars have pointed out the parallel references from Bhāsa's Pañcarātra and Abhiseka also.
From the literature of Kālidāsa, particularly from the Raghuvamsa and the Sākuntala, it can be well-inferred that Kālidāsa might have gone through the Kautilya's Arthaśāstra thoroughly. But the famous verse of Kālidāsa which he put into the mouth of Sakuntalā, throws light on the fact that Kālidāsa does not carry full regard or honour towards Kautilya. Sakuntalā says sarcastically, ‘परातिसन्धानमधीयते यैः विद्येव ते सन्तु किलाप्तवाचः ।'
In this remark it is reflected that the Arthaśāstra was regarded at that time as a science of deceitful means and studied by cunning persons.
If we place Bāṇabhțța, famous for his “Kādambarī, after Kālidāsa, the same attitude towards Kautilya is seen. In his excla

Page #21

11
mation, for at dei hiyd 191 244-81142T HU: 34GER:', it is implied that the ministers always suggest crooked ways to their lords oferta 372f4a, gif maa, tadH (?), p.26). In the same book, Bāṇabhatta describes Cāņakya as nrśassa, krūra and nirghrņa (i.e. malicious, cruel and pitiless) (Solferta 3792114, af rad,
dhi (?), p.4).
Though in the works of Dandin and in the Pañcatantra, the references to Kautilya are found, we cannot draw a conclusion that they possess a background of thorough study of the Kauțilīya Arthaśāstra. At the very beginning, the pañcatantrakāra enumerates the śāstras as, a FITOT HOICIA, 378f91FaIO AURUCIA, कामशास्त्राणि वात्स्यायनादीनि ।'
If we carefully study Viśākhadatta's Mudrārākşasa, a totally political play dedicated to Cāņakya-Candragupta and Rākṣasa, we come to know Viśākhadatta's deep study of the Arthaśāstra, but at the same time, it creates adverse impact by his famous terminology, Hilferu: goosufa: l’. Cāņakya's egoist remarks, the impropriety in addressing 'vrşala’ to the king Candragupta, the pseudoconflict with Candragupta in the third act and so many other things are quite eloquent to suggest the growing disregard toward Cāņakya's intelligent crookedness. More details are given in a separate chapter written on the Mudrārākṣasa.
The growing impact of smộti literature, particularly the Manusmrti (Mānava-dharma-śāstra) and the Yājñavalkya-smrti were the last blow on the studies of Arthaśāstra. The Kathāsaritsāgara and the BỊhatkathāmañjarī depicted Cāņakya as a well-versed brahmin in the rites of magical lores. Silently the important topics of the Arthaśāstra, lost their popularity and negative side came forward.

Page #22

12
The topics like gudha-puruṣa-praạidhi, yoga-vāmana, upa-jāpa, apasarpa-praņidhi, durga-lambhopāya and para-ghāta-prayoga gained popularity and over-shadowed the practical and ethical values of the Arthaśāstra.
Cāņakya's Arthaśāstra is evidently an important part of Magadhan literature. Magadha's connection with śramaņic culture is a proved historical fact. The Nandas were pro-Jaina. Sakațāla, the minister of the last Nanda was a Jaina layman. That is why his son Sthūlabhadra accepted the Jaina dīkņā and became the chief monk of the whole Jaina samgha. The brahmanic traits of Cāņakya are quite clear though the Jainas depict him as a layman or a monk. Candragupta seems to be pro-Jaina. Otherwise he would not have allowed the first conference of the Jaina Canons at Pāțaliputra. Brahmanic sources depict Candragupta as a śūdra. Some say that he was born from Murā dāsi. In the Mudrārākṣasa, Cāņakya calls Candragupta, literally hundreds of times as vrşala. Candragupta's son Bindusāra was probably a pro-Jaina king and his grand-son Samprati was surely a Jainized king. Bindusāra's son, king Aśoka was certainly a Buddhist king.
Thus due to the śramaņic connection of Magadha, the staunch brahmanic dharmaśāstrakāras might have a concealed rage against Cāņakya because he was a mentor of pro-Jaina Candragupta who was a sūdra by birth.
Dharmaśāstrakāras always give importance to‘dharma puruşārtha’. Cāņakya gave equal importance to dharma-artha and kāma. Though Cāņakya was favourable to the traditional system of varņāśrama, his views are comparatively mild and fair. Cāņakya proclaimed, “ZTERIJMUHT TH: l’ While the Smțitikāras proclaimed,

Page #23

13
'धर्मानुलोमो व्यवहारः ।'. Slowly the religious and ritualistic views of smrtis, particularly of Manu and Yājñavalkya gain popularity over the secular, ethical and practical nature of the Arthaśāstra. Yājñavalkya omitted many technical parts of the Arthaśāstra, related to kingdom and inter-state relationship etc. He concentrated on ācāra, vyavahāra and prāyaścitta. Hence the study of the smstis become a regular part of syllabus and the popularity of the Kauțilya's Arthaśāstra decreased. Though Yājñavalkya has taken a lot from Kautilya, still his treatise surpassed the Arthaśāstra.

Page #24

14

Page #25

CHAPTER 2
CANAKYA: REFLECTED IN THE BRAHMANIC SOURCES
15
[1] The Mahabhārata (Ādiparva)
[2] Rājarṣi Cāṇakya in the Skandapurāṇa and the Matsyapurāṇa
[3] Cāṇakya's single-line references in the Viṣṇupurāṇa, the Vāyupurāṇa and the Matsyapurāṇa
[4] The story of Caṇakya in the Kathāsaritsāgara
[5] The Bṛhatkathāmañjarī of Kṣemendra
[6] A brief review of Cāṇakya's personality in the brahmanic
sources

Page #26

16

Page #27

17
CHAPTER 2
CĀŅAKYA : REFLECTED IN THE BRAHMANIC SOURCES
When we start to fathom the Indian literature for getting the information about Cāņakya (Kauțilya/Vişnugupta), we have to take a start from the brahmanic literature. Cāņakya's being a brahmin, his tuft of hair, his well-versedness in vedavidyā, his intellectual brilliance, short-temperedness and vindictive nature comes forward immediately. His monumental work Arthaśāstra also reflects his brahminhood. Thus we will start our quest from the brahmanic sources.
In the present chapter, we will deal with the Cāņakya-references in the Mahābhārata, some important purāṇas and two Sanskrit-collections of narratives viz. the Kathāsaritsāgara and the Brhatkathāmañjarī. [1] The Mahābhārata (Ādiparva) :
In the appendix of the Ādiparva, Kautilya is referred to by Vidura, the most eminent nītikāra in the galaxy of the personalities in the Mahābhārata. The verse is
विदुरो धृतराष्ट्रस्य जानन्सर्वं मनोगतम् । केनायं विधिना सृष्टः कौटिल्यः कपटालयः ।।
इत्येवं चिन्तयन् प्राज्ञो ---
Mahābhārata, Adiparva (Appendix) 85.10.2 Here, Kautilya is described as the abode of deceitfulness' by the great intelligent thinker Vidura. When we search the next part of the text with the expectation of some Cāņakya-narrative, we are disappointed. In the critical edition of the Mahābhārata, prepared by

Page #28

18
BORI, this portion is excluded because anachronism is evident in this case. In the later version of the Mahābhārata, some writer might have added it spuriously probably when the disregardful attitude towards Cāņakya came in vogue i.e. after 8th-9th century A.D. One observation is noteworthy that when the last saṁskaraṇa of the Mahābhārata was in vogue, the Ardhamāgadhi Jaina canons were prevalent in oral tradition. None of the old Ardhamāgadhī canons contains any reference of Cāņakya. This fact supports the view that the above-mentioned reference of Cāņakya in the Mahābhārata is certainly spurious and carries no weightage.
In the 59th adhyāya of the Sāntiparva, four arthaśāstrakāras are mentioned viz. Viśālākşa, Bāhudantī, Bșhaspati and Uśanas (or Sukra). These names are quoted in the Kauțilīya Arthaśāstra as pūrvasūris. In continuation with these ancient thinkers of the Arthaśāstra, somebody might have added the name of Cāņakya in the Mahābhārata. [2] Rājarși Cāņakya in the Skandapurāņa and the Matsyapurāņa :
In the 155th adhyāya of the Revākhanda (5), the Skandapurāņa mentions the greatness of suklatīrtha. It starts with this verse -
3&0104491 751 AMR-14 14: l’Once upon a time, there was a king born in Ikṣvāku dynasty, who was religious and whose name was Cāņakya. It is mentioned at the end that he went to the suklatīrtha and donated cows, gold and land with great benevolence. Afterwards, he obtained siddhi at this place. The Matsyapurāņa refers the same story in the following words -
शुक्लतीर्थं महापुण्यं नर्मदायां व्यवस्थितम् । चाणक्यो नाम राजर्षिः सिद्धिं तत्र समागतः ।।
Matsyapurāņa 192.14

Page #29

19
When we read this story of Caṇakya, it immediately comes to our mind that though the similarity of name is there, this sage-like king of Ikṣvāku dynasty is not in any way connected with the arthaśāstrakāra Caṇakya, who was a brahmin prime-minister of Candragupta Maurya.
However, Hariṣena, the famous Digambara Jaina author of the Bṛhatkathā has incorporated these details of the Skanda and the Matsya-purāṇa in his Cāṇakya-muni-kathānakam. Surprisingly enough, Harisena mentions, 'चकार विपुलं राज्यं चाणाक्यो निजबुद्धितः’ (Bṛhatkathākoṣa, Cāṇakyamunikathānakam, verse 71) in which he says that Cāṇākya (?) ruled over the country for a long time with his great intelligence. The impact of the above-mentioned purāņas was so deep on Hariṣeṇa, that according to him Cāṇākya (?) went to Krauñcapura and attained siddhi by embracing samādhi-maraṇa. (Bṛhatkathākoṣa, Cāṇakyamunikathānakam, verse 84)
The threads of the story of Caṇakya-rajarṣi are skillfully woven in the depiction of Hariseṇa's Cāṇakya-narrative. It is not only Harisena to mix the two different tales but Pt. Mahadevshastri Joshi in his Bhāratīya-samskṛti-kośa had done the same thing. He quotes, 'The reference of the Matsyapurāṇa probably tells us about the last days and death of this great person.'
This is the classic example of creating a new legend by blending various details with added imagination!
[3] Cāṇakya's single-line references in the Viṣṇupurāṇa, the
Vayupurāṇa and the Matsyapurāṇa :
Almost every scholar engaged in Caṇakyan study, has invariably mentioned that we find the references of Caṇakya in the purāṇas and specially in the Viṣṇu, Vayu and Matsya-purāņas. But when

Page #30

20
we actually go through them, we are completely disappointed. Visnupurāņa starts with the history of Magadha by mentioning Siśunāga dynasty. Afterwords it mentions Nandin, Mahānandin and Mahāpadmanandin. It treats Mahāpadma as a ksatriya born from a śudrā. It is noted that Mahāpadma and his sons ruled for hundred years. Here enters the brahmin Kautilya, who killed the nine Nandas and who installed Candragupta Maurya on the throne. It is told that ten Mauryan kings will rule the country for 173 years. The whole history of these dynasties is presented by using future tense. The same accounts are repeated in the Vāyu and the Matsya - purāņas. (Vişnupurāņa, Aṁśa 4, adhyāya 24, verses 20-32 ; Vāyupurāņa, Khanda 2, prakaraṇa 61, verses 188-192 ; Matsyapurāņa, 272.21).
Thus the purāņic sources provide no additional information or legends except a single line that Cāņakya was a brahmin and he concecrated Candragupta Maurya on the throne of Magadha. [4] The story of Cāņakya in the Kathāsaritsāgara :
We find the story of Cāņakya in the Kathā', in a slightly developed form than that of the purāņas. This story book, lit. 'the ocean of narratives' is written in the 11th century A.D. by a sanskrit scholar Somadeva. Though Kathā' is included in the brahmanic literature, it is in real sense ‘secular'. Though the sanskrit version is done by Somadeva, originally the legends and tales were gathered by Guņādhya in one of the oldest Prakrit language, Paiśācī. Guņādhya is related to the Sātavāhana kings. So the date of his Baddakahā (Bțhatkathā) goes to the 2nd_ 3rd century A.D. In fact it was the treasure of legends from which the Hindus, Jainas and Buddhists had drawn a lot. The Vasudevahindī, one of the few Prakrit classics, owes much to the Baddakahā.

Page #31

21
Concerned purāṇas are generally interested in giving the detailed lists of Nanda and Maurya dynasties. Passing references of Caṇakya are found in them. The Katha is in real sense the first source documenting legendary history of Caṇakya. The story in the Katha (1.5.114) can be summarized in the following manner -
In Patalipura, Nandas were ruling. The last among them was Yogananda. (A short story is given why he was called 'Yogananda'.) Śakaṭāla was his minister. For some reason, Śakaṭāla wanted to take revenge on Yogananda. (The details are given inbetween the story.) On one occasion, he saw a brahmin named Cāṇakya who was digging kusa grass upto its root because the grass pricked the sole of his foot. Sakaṭāla thought that he was a proper person to retaliate Yogananda. He invited Cāṇakya in the palace of Nanda for śrāddhabhojana. Cāṇakya occupied the seat of honour (agrāsana). The seat was actually reserved for a brahmin called Subandhu. Śakaṭāla reported the situation to Nanda. Nanda told Śakaṭāla that Subandhu will adorn the seat and none other. Sakaṭāla reported this message to Caṇakya and requested to vacate the seat. Due to this insult, Caṇakya became furious. He abruptly loosened his tied tuft of hair and exclaimed, 'Within seven days I will destroy Nanda and then only I will tie down my tuft of hair.'
Nanda was overpowered by anger. Without giving him a chance to take any action, Cāṇakya ran away. Śakaṭāla, as if waiting for this opportunity, gave shelter to Caṇakya in his house. Śakaṭāla made all the arrangements for Caṇakya's practice of black-magic (kṛtyā-sādhanā). The black-magic started showing it's effects on Nanda by creating inflammatory fever. Within seven days Nanda died.

Page #32

22
After the death of Nanda, Śakațāla killed Nanda's son Hiranyagupta and made Candragupta the king, who was in true sense 'a son of a previous Nanda' (pūrvanandasuta). Sakațāla persuaded Cāņakya and made him Candragupta's chief-minister because he knew that Cāņakya is bright like Bịhaspati. Having completed this intended task, Sakatāla went to forest. Thus he overcome the grief of the death of his beloved sons and led a peaceful spiritual life.
Some Observations on the Kathāsaritsāgara : * The main focus of this story is on Sakațāla. Cāņakya’s appearance
is secondary. * It provides more data about Cāņakya, in comparison with the
purāņas. * Śakațāla and Subandhu are not mentioned in the purāņas. * The references of śrāddha and śikhā confirm the brāhmaṇatva of
Cāņakya. * In the Jaina narratives it is told that, Subandhu was revengeful to
Cāņakya, but the reason is not given. With the help of the Kathā
we find the missing link in the Jaina narratives. * The story of Sakațāla is very popular in the Jaina tales but the
relation between Sakatāla and Cāņakya is not established in the
Jaina tales.
* The impact of this story is evidently seen in the Cāņakya-muni
kathā of Harişeņa but he might have taken the story from the Prakrit version of the Kathā' because the date of Harisena is the
gth-9th century and the date of the Kathā' is the 11th century A.D. * The Śvetāmbara Jaina writers have told that Śakațāla was the
minister of the last Nanda and he had two sons named Sthūlabhadra

Page #33

23
and Śrīyaka. Later on Sthulabhadra became a Jaina monk and was the leader of the Jaina samgha. It is depicted in the Kathāsaritsāgara that Sakaṭāla's sons were killed in the dry well where Nanda had put the whole family of Sakaṭāla as a punishment of some offence. These details are not in congruence with the Jaina tradition. Therefore the whole Sakaṭāla-account is given by Harisena as a story of Kavi (or sometimes Kāvi), who was also one of the ministers of Nanda.
In the Katha, it was Śakaṭāla who installed Candragupta on the throne and persuaded Caṇakya to become his minister. In the Bṛhatkathāmañjarī and also in the Jaina sources, Cāṇakya himself installed Candragupta on the throne and became his chiefminister.
*
The Katha regards Candragupta as 'pūrvanandasuta' and suggests his 'kṣatriyatva'.
* According to the Katha, Cāṇakya killed Nanda by some occult practices of black magic. This is the main point of difference in the Brahmanic and the Jaina sources. This action of Caṇakya described in the Katha belittles the bravery of Candragupta and political tacticks of Cāṇakya.
[5] The Bṛhatkathāmañjarī of Kṣemendra (10th century A.D.):
In the 10th century, Kṣemendra, a Kashmirian brahmin wrote the sanskrit version of Guṇāḍhya's Baḍḍakahā. But the later version of Somadeva i.e. the Kathāsaritsagara surpassed the Mañjarī due to its poetic values. So we have also dealt with the Kathāsaritsāgara first and then the Bṛhatkathāmañjarī. The story of Caṇakya presented in the Mañjarī is brief than the Kathāo.
The story of the Mañjarī, basically describes the episode of

Page #34

24
Vararuci and Sakațāla. Cāņakya's reference is found in four verses (214-217, guccha 2, ch.1). The details are almost same as that of the Kathā° but the only difference is, it is Cāņakya who installed Candragupta (a pūrvanandasuta) on the throne and not by Sakațāla. Cāņakya’s ministership is not mentioned in the Mañjarī.
In nutshell, both the Kathāo and the Mañjarī had gone a step forward than that of the purāṇas in the case of Cāņakya, but the importance is given to Sakațāla. It is noteworthy that none of these authors have mentioned that the Arthaśāstra was written by Cāņakya. [6] A brief review of Cāņakya's personality in the brahmanic
sources:
* In the travel-accounts of the Greek ambassador Megasthenes and
Chinese traveller Yuan Chwang, Candragupta is mentioned with high regards but Kautilya or Cāņakya is not mentioned. Due to this, a team of scholars of Indology advocated that Kautilya is a mere myth and the Arthaśāstra was written by some other per
son, in the 3rd_4th century by using the name of Kautilya. * After the discovery of the Kautilīya Arthaśāstra, a team of Indian
scholars exerted a lot to prove the fact and it is now an established fact that the present Kautilīya Arthaśāstra is written by Kautilya alias Cāņakya alias Visnugupta around the fourth century B.C. Some changes or interpolations might have done after
wards but the main core is same. * There are two later versions of the Arthaśāstra. One is the
Kāmandakiya Nītisāra of the brahmanic tradition and Somadeva's
Nītivākyāmsta written by a Jaina scholar. * The above mentioned three versions do not throw much light on
the personal accounts of this genius.

Page #35

25
* The Vișnu', Vāyu' and Matsya-purāṇas have majorly documented
the history of the Nanda and the Maurya dynasties while describing the legendary history of Magadha. Cāņakya and Candragupta are mentioned but not a single piece of information
is given about Cāņakya's personality. * In the dramas of Bhāsa and in the literature of Kālidāsa, some
sūtras, terms, terminologies and details in polity are mentioned here and there. The treatment given to Cāņakya and his Arthaśāstra by Bāņa and Dandin is not taht of full regard because they highlight Cāņakya's crookedness and shrewdness. The
pañcatantrakāra's reference is brief and formal. * The decreasing popularity of the Arthaśāstra due to the rise and
popularity of the smộtis, particularly the Manu and the Yājñavalkya, went to such an extent that this landmark work rested in dark
ness for many centuries. ' The Mudrārāksasa of Visakhadatta popularized the phrase 'कौटिल्य:
gabeaufa:'. Cāņakya's personality pictured in this drama creates a confused and debatable sketch of Cāņakya. The details of Cāņakya's birth and death are missing in this drama because the dramatist has chosen a particular part of Cāņakya’s life. But it is certain that he has gone through deeply the text of Arthaśāstra.
The Mudrārākşasa, the only political play of this genre, is studied and edited by many Sanskritists and Indologists. A lot of research work is done with many perspectives. So far to my knowledge, nobody has brought out the Jaina-connections of this play.
Even the eminent scholar like Dr. R.D.Karmarkar had not paid any attention to the Jaina sources. In the introduction of his edition we find the title as - ‘The Buddhist and Jaina Sources of the

Page #36

26
Mudrārākṣasa'. But we are disappointed because not a single reference is given with any appropriate citation. (Mudrārākṣasa, Ed. R.D.Karmarkar, Introduction, pp.13-14)
Thus in the next chapter, an attempt has been made to reconsider the Mudrārākṣasa from the Jaina perspective.
܀܀܀

Page #37

27
CHAPTER 3
INTERPRETATION OF THE MUDRĀRĀKŞASA
FROM THE JAINA PERSPECTIVE
[1]
Rationale of the topic
[2]
The Jaina characters in the play
[3]
Cāņakya's character in the Mudrārāksasa
[4]
Brāhmaṇatva of Cāņakya
[5]
Cāņakya's tuft of hair
[6]
Srtict laws of Cāņakya
[7]
Wisdom of Cāņakya
[8]
Cāņakya's address to Candragupta
[9]
Conflict between Cāņakya and Candragupta
[10] Use of Prakrits in the Mudrārākṣasa
[11] Main theme of the Mudrārākṣasa
[12]
Some minor similarities
[13]
Critical Comments

Page #38


Page #39

CHAPTER 3
INTERPRETATION OF THE MUDRĀRĀKŞASA
FROM THE JAINA PERSPECTIVE
[1] Rationale of the topic :
In the galaxy of Sanskrit dramas, the Mudrārākşasa of Viśākhadatta, is the unique political play, dedicated to the historical personalities, viz. Cāņakya and Candragupta Maurya. The date of the Mudrārākṣasa is vastly discussed and debated by various sanskrit scholars as well as historians around the world. The approximate date of this play can be ascertained as the 7th-8th century A.D. The cross-references found in the Āvaśyaka-cūrņi and the Niśītha-cūrņi are full of Cāņakya-Candragupta-narratives and myths. This fact supports the above-mentioned inferred date of the Mudrārākṣasa, because important cūrņis were written by Jinadāsagani in the 7th century A.D.
The popularity of the the Mudrārākṣasa was so wide-spread that at modern times, many Indian authors have written the fictions dedicated to Cāņakya and Candragupta with the help of the lifeaccounts pictured in the Mudrārākṣasa. For example, in Marathi literature, the 'Candragupta' of H.N.Apte, the ‘Nộpanirmātā Cāņakya' of R.C.Dhere, the life-account of Cāņakya documented in the 'Bhāratiya-saṁskṛti-kośa' and the novel 'Ārya' written by Vasant Patwardhan - all of them have basically relied upon the Mudrārākṣasa. We are quite sure that the same fact is true about the legendary histories written in all Indian regional languages.
When we go through the editions of the Mudrārākṣasa, it is
found that the esteemed scholars have mentioned the Buddhist and

Page #40

30
the Jaina sources about Cāņakya and Candragupta in a very brief manner in their prefaces and forewords. The Buddhist sources are discussed in a little detailed manner but a total injustice is done to the Jaina sources though they are ample in number and cover the major life-accounts of Cāņakya and Candragupta.
Therefore, at present, an attempt has been made to interprete the Mudrārākṣasa from the Jaina perspective, by writing a separate article. [2] The Jaina characters in the play : (a) Jīvasiddhi Ksapanaka :
In the plot of the Mudrārāksasa the role of Jīvasiddhi Kșapanaka carries a certain weight. The name “Jīvasiddhi' is a compound of two padas viz. “jīva' and 'siddhi which connote certain philosophical background of the Jainas. Jivasiddhi means a person who is trying to attain liberation. “Kșapaņaka' is a nude (Digambara) monk who has achieved a certain spiritual progress. All the Sanskrit scholars of the Mudrārāksasa unanimously agree that Jīvasiddhi Kșapanaka is a “Jaina Bhikṣu'. Of course he is a spy appointed by Cāņakya for getting the information from the camp of Amātya Rākṣasa. Jīvasiddhi is not a real Jaina monk. Cāņakya's friend Induśarmā assumes a disguise of a Jaina monk. Cāņakya is sure that a Jaina monk can win trust of Amātya Rākşasa who is totally loyal to the last Nanda king Dhanānanda. From the inscriptions of Khāravela at Orissa, it is confirmed that Nandas have taken away the idol of 'Jina' from Kalinga.
Taking into consideration all these Jaina connections, we come to know the propriety of the character of Jīvasiddhi Ksapaņaka in the play. No other classical sanskrit play than the Mudrārāksasa

Page #41

31
possesses such a character.
If we examine the dialogues of Jīvasiddhi from the languagepoint-of-view, we can designate it as the specimen of Māgadhī Prakrit. Every now and then Kșapaņaka says, '373E-CIUT MUTHIH' or Hraunferri uffavte HETI Doului2. Jīvasiddhi greets others many a times with the specific greeting, ‘धम्मसिद्धी होदु सावगाणम्''. Amātya Rākṣasa addresses Jīvasiddhi as 'bhadanta”4.
Thus the role played by Jīvasiddhi in the play is quite noteworthy. in the first act, Cāņakya himself refers the importance of the role of Jīvasiddhi Ksapaņaka. 5 The fourth and fifth acts are full of the dialogues between Rākṣasa and Jīvasiddhi. Jīvasiddhi suggests a proper muhūrta to Rākṣasa. It is remarkable that in the early history of the Jaina monastic conduct, it is depicted that the Jaina monks were well-versed in fortune-telling. (nimitta, sakuna
etc.)
We can conclude that the role of Jīvasiddhi Kșapaņaka is quite eloquent to throw light on the intimacy of the Jainas to the history of Cāņakya-Candragupta and especially Amātya Rākṣasa alias Subandhu. (b) Candanadāsa :
It is not directly told in the play Mudrārākṣasa whether the chief city-merchant Candanadāsa was a Jaina householder or not. In the narrative literature of the Jainas, generally the merchant class and especially the nagara-śreșthin is always depicted as a Jaina person. The Jaina tales have pictured vividly that Cāņakya gathered ample wealth from rich merchants to fill up the treasury of Magadha. Actually Candanadāsa is a maņikāraśreşthin i.e. chief of the jewellers. We find the term “maņikāra' in the ancient Ardhamāgadhĩ text

Page #42

32
Jñātādharmakathā.' Candanadāsa and Amātya Rāksasa are very close friends. As Jīvasiddhi being a Jaina monk was reliable for Amātya, like-wise Candanadāsa might possibly a Jaina house-holder, is equally reliable for him. Amātya handed over the responsibility of the protection of his family to Candanadāsa. The name of Candanadāsa's close relative is Dhanasena', which is again a typical Jaina name.
In the fifth act, the monologue of Candanadāsa carries some suggestions about his being a Jaina. Candanadāsa speaks in Sauraseni and uses the term cārittabhanga-bhīru for himself.S 'Cāritra' is a peculiar Jaina term connoting ‘right conduct'-one of the Jaina triratnas. The verse ‘mottūņa āmisāim” is in Mahārāștrī Prakrit and the references of 'strict vegetarianism' and 'avoiding meat' also point at his being a faithful Jaina. (c) Sarvārthasiddhi :
Amātya Rākşasa is very eagar to install Sarvārthasiddhi on the throne of Magadha. He is a person having the lineage of Nandas. Very surprisingly, ‘sarvārthasiddhi is the name of a supreme heavenly abode (anuttara devavimāna) in the hirarchy of the Jaina
heavens.
Secondly, sarvārthasiddhi is the oldest famous commentary of Pūjyapāda (5th century A.D.) on the well-known philosophical Jaina text viz. the Tattvārthasūtra of Umāsvāmī, a resident of Kusumapura.
Amātya Rākşasa's quest for Sarvārthasiddhi is a really strong Jaina connection while considering the Mudrārākṣasa.
[3] Cāņakya's character in the Mudrārākṣasa :
Though the names Vişnugupta and Kautilya are used at some places in the play, the name "Cāņakya' is continued through the

Page #43

33
whole play as a speaker of his dialogues. Likewise, in the Jaina literature mostly the name Cāņakya (Cāņakka, Cāņikya, Cāņākya) is found and references to Kautilya and Vişnugupta are very few. [4] Brāhmaṇatva of Cāņakya :
The Mudrārākṣasa depicts the brāhmaṇatva of Cāņakya by calling him ārya"), batu", brāhmaṇa, bhatta!?, upādhyāyal and Visnugupta.!4 Viśākhadatta never uses a term or epithet which is suggestive of his being a Jaina.
In the Jaina literature, the Śvetāmbaras depict him as a śrāvaka and the Digambaras especially Harișeņa presented Cāņakya as a Jaina monk leading a group of 500 sādhus which is glaringly an exaggeration. [5] Cāņakya's tuft of hair :
The point connected with the brāhmaṇatva of Cāņakya is the reference of his long, black tuft of hair. Among all the brahmanic legends about Cāņakya, the main legend is of his vow to destroy Nandas completely. It is told that at the end of the vow he released his long braided tuft. When Cāņakya completed his vow and consecrated Candragupta on the throne of Magadha, he again tied his tuft.
In the Mudrārāksasa, the incidents are presented in a different manner. Cāņakya is not ready to tie his tuft until he manages to install Rākṣasa on the seat of chief-minister (Amātya) of the king Candragupta. The dreadful description of his long black tuft occurs in the first act of the Mudrārākṣasa. He compares his released tuft with a black, poisonous female serpent which is suggestive of the crooked and cruel means of Cāņakya to fulfil his target. He exclaims -
नन्दकुलकालभुजगी कोपानलबहुललोलधूमलताम् ।

Page #44

अद्यापि बध्यमानां वध्यः को नेच्छति शिखां मे I
34
(Mudra, Act 1, verse 9, p.8)
At the end of the play, when helpless and blackmailed Rākṣasa accepts the chief-ministership of Candragupta, Cāṇakya ties his tuft with the following remarks
पूर्णप्रतिज्ञेन मया केवलं बध्यते शिखा ।
-
(Mudra, Act 7, verse 17, p.310)
The Jaina authors are not ready to highlight Caṇakya's brahmanatva and are interested in depicting Cāṇakya as a śrāvaka. Therefore the incidents of releasing and tieing of tuft are absent in the Jaina references. In the Avaśyaka-cūrṇi the reference of tuft is totally absent. In the Parisiṣṭaparva of Hemacandra, the verse related to śikha (tuft) is added in the footnote.
Almost all the Jaina biographies have quoted one Sanskrit verse in which Caṇakya's oath (or vow) is expressed. The verse runs thus -
कोशेन भृत्यैश्च निबद्धमूलं, पुत्रैश्च मित्रैश्च विवृद्धशाखम् । उत्पाट्य नन्दं परिवर्तयामि, हठाद् द्रुमं वायुरिवोग्रवेगः ।।
AvCū.(I) p.563
We have tried our best to locate this oft-quoted verse in the brahmanic literature viz. the Kathāsaritsāgara, the Purāṇas and the play Mudrārākṣasa. Unfortunately this verse is untraceable in the brahmanic sourses. Thus the Jaina reference becomes important. [6] Strict laws of Cāṇakya :
For maintaining the law and order situation, Cāṇakya and Candragupta are very strict. Ample examples can be quoted from the play in this connection. The following references truely depict the strictness of the kingly orders -

Page #45

35 1) 5Ghzoted carpet alaselea mafia - Mudrā”, Act 1, p.36 2) Rafal Gufufafa: - Mudrā”, Act 1, p.40 3) fab4410g 34751451 - Mudrā', Act 2, p.96 4) trafaud carey gud - Mudrā', Act 3, p.112 5) 44 ald-44151|2|9a: - Mudrā', Act 3, p.132 6) E-GJUHA 37514&heleda - Mudrā”, Act 4, p.176 7) płggi Tropfited UGG21444854fa - Mudrā”, Act 5, p.212
The discussion about ‘a mistake' (aparādha) and “law-breaking' (ājñābhanga) is found at length in Niśītha-cūrņi while prescribing rules for monks and nuns. It is declared that law-breaking is more serious than a mistake or error. A narrative of Cāņakya is quoted in the Niśītha-cūrņi, as an example of this rule. It is mentioned that when the particular villagers disobeyed Cāņakya's order, he taught them a lesson by setting fire to the whole village. The cruel act of Cāņakya is defended by the cūrņikāra. A comment is made at the end that, the rules laid down by the Jinas are like the strict orders of Mauryan kings. They should be followed faithfully otherwise severe punishment in the form prāyaśchittas, would be
given. 15
Thus, the appreciation of the strictness of Candragupta and Cāņakya is found in the Mudrārāksasa and in the Jaina narratives. [7] Wisdom of Cāņakya :
Sharp intellect is the prominent feature of Cāņakya. All the shades of buddhi i.e. intelligence, wisdom, power of reasoning etc. are present in Cāņakya. In a true sense, he is a genius. In the Mudrārākşasa, it seems that he is very much aware about what type of intelligence he possesses. He enters in the first scene with the
words -

Page #46

36
‘कौटिल्य: कुटिलमतिः स एष येन क्रोधाग्नौ प्रसभमदाहि नन्दवंशः ।'
Mudrā', Act 1,verse 7, p.8 In the 25th verse of the first act Cāņakya says, glaista hu '44' i.e. 'Let everything else leave me except my intelligence.' According to the Jaina epistemology, intelligence is fourfold. Autpattiki is inborn ; vainayiki is the knowledge which we get through the instruction by gurusevā; karmajā is acquired skill and pāriņāmiki is the wisdom which one gets through the life-long experiences. The Āvaśyaka-cūrņi depicts various incidents in the life of Cāņakya as the examples of pāriņāmiki-buddhi. A bit underestimation is seen in the ĀvCū. Haribhadra, the literary mayestro of the 8th century depicts Cāņakya as a possessor of threefold intellect i.e. autpattiki, vainayikī and pāriņāmikī. 16 Though the Jainas have high regards for Cāņakya, according to them the epitome of intelligence is Abhayakumāra, of course, a prominent personality in the Jaina his
tory.
Cāņakya in the Mudrārākṣasa is kutila-mati i.e. an adept in all crooked ways. In fact Cāņakya and Rākṣasa are both intelligent conspirators but Cāņakya is always one-step-ahead. Both of them respect each other. In short we can say that Cāņakya in the Mudrārākṣasa is extremely sharp, scheming, crooked, confident and to a certain extent, arrogant. [8] Cāņakya's address to Candragupta :
In the whole drama, he addresses Candragupta as vrşala i.e. an epithet showing the lower caste of Candragupta.
From the Jaina perspective of Cāņakya, it is shocking and almost impossible that every now and then he refers the low birth of

Page #47

37
Candragupta. The Jaina references are mostly found in the form of narration, giving very little scope for dialogues. The epithets used for Candragupta are ‘vatsa' or 'rājan' and not a term like ‘vrşala' showing disregard towards Candragupta. it is irrational, illogical and not at all convincing that the intelligent and towering person like Cāņakya addresses the emperor in such a reproachful manner. [9] Conflict between Cāņakya and Candragupta :
The psudo-conflict (Kệtaka-Kalaha) between Cāņakya and Candragupta which is depicted in the third act of the drama, has no scope in the Jaina literature. Some scholars suggest that there is a possibility of true conflict between Cāņakya and Candragupta due to the identity crisis of both the personalities in the last lapse of the life of Cāņakya. We do not find neither true conflict or pseudoconflict between Cāņakya and Candragupta in the Jaina references.
The Svetāmbaras depict a conflict between Bindusāra, the son of Candragupta and Cāņakya. The conflict was deliberately created by Subandhu (most probably the Jaina counterpart of Amātya Rākşasa) and the conflict terminated into the terrible death of Cāņakya. Like Viśākhadatta, the Jainas also wish to depict Cāņakya as one-stepahead of his enemy. Therefore with a great conspiracy, Cāņakya managed to end the life of Subandhu. [10] Use of Prakrits in the Mudrārākṣasa :
Prakrit languages are profusely used in the Mudrārākṣasa and it is very amusing that Cāņakya-Candragupta narratives are available in the Jaina Prakrit literature from the 4th century A.D. upto the 15th century A.D.
The Prakrits used in the Mudrārākṣasa are mainly Māgadhi, Saurasenī and Māhārāștrī. Other sub-dialects are also employed

Page #48

38
occasionlly. Sixteen characters of the Mudrārāksasa speak in Prakrit.
The snake-charmer Āhitundika specifically mentions that he is a Prakrit-poet."
Amātya Rāksasa mentions the verse of the snake-charmer as a ‘gāthā'. The relation of Prakrit and Jainism is very close. The Jainas have created a huge literature in all types of prakrit. Especially Cāņakya-narratives are scattered over in the Prakrit literature. [11] Main theme of the Mudrārākṣasa :
At the very outset, it should be noted that the main plot and the happenings in the Mudrārākṣasa, are absent in the Jaina literature. The imaginary name Rākşasa never occurs in the Jaina references. But we can find the reason behind the name Rākṣasa with the help of the Jaina stories. The Jainas say that Subandhu (or Subuddhi), a minister of Nandas, was waiting for a long time to retaliate upon Cāņakya. Ultimately he succeeded in setting fire to Cāņakya. Due to this brutal act, one can call him Rākṣasa - having a demonic mentality.
There are two versions of the Subandhu episode in the Jaina literatue. Some narratives connect Subandhu with Bindusāra while others (especially the Digambaras) say that the minister of the Nandas, viz. Subandhu fleed away from Pāțaliputra and became a minister of a king of a southern country. When Cāņakya became a Jaina monk and wandered towards south with his samgha, Subandhu recognized him and put him to death.
The main plot of the Mudrārākṣasa consists of various means and ways undertaken by Cāņakya to persuade Rākṣasa by hook or by crook, for being a minister of Candragupta. All these conspira

Page #49

39
cies are not noted in the Jaina references. The Jainas might have thought that it is impossible to imagine Subandhu to work for Candragupta because he was totally loyal to the Nandas. Considering the revengeful mindset of Subandhu, there is a logical possibility that Subandhu may retaliate Cāņakya and specially Candragupta after being a chief-minister of the Mauryan kingdom.
In nutshell we can say that though the Mudrārākṣasa is a successful political play, it's uniqueness left no impact on the later Jaina narratives. From this we can conclude that the legendary material available for the Jainas about Cāņakya was different than that of the brahmanic literature and its antiquity starts before the Christian Era. [12] Some minor similarities :
(a) Pāțaliputra : Pāțaliputra bears an important position in ancient history of Magadha and is closely connected with the history of the Nandas and Mauryas. Naturally, we find often references of Pāțaliputra in the Mudrārākṣasa and in the Jaina literature.
The names Pāțaliputra, Kusumapura and Pușpapura are randomly used in the Mudrārāksasa and also in the Jaina narratives. The Prakrit versions of Pātaliputra viz. Pādaliputta and Pādaliutta are found in the Prakrit portions of the Mudrārākṣasa.
Pāțaliputra possesses a certain important position in ancient history of the Jainas, because the first conference of Ardhamāgadhi canons was held at Pāțaliputra in the regime of Candragupta Maurya. It is noteworthy that the first Jaina Sanskrit philosophical text the Tattvārthasūtra of Umāsvāti was written at Kusumapura.
(b) Cāņakya's parņakuti : In the 15th verse of the third act of Mudrā° the simple hut-type residence of Cāņakya is described. Here,

Page #50

40
a person (i.e. Kañcukī) admires the desireless and detached outlook of Caṇakya. Particularly the reference of dried cow-dung-cakes and dried grass are noteworthy from the Jaina perspective.
The Jaina authors admire Cāṇakya due to his selfless attitude and detached views. Hemacandra rightly says,
'18
While describing the death of Caṇakya, Hemacandra has noted down the following verse
धूपाङ्गारेणानिलास्फालितेन प्रोद्यज्ज्वाले द्राक्करीषस्थले तु ।
दारुप्रायो दह्यमानोऽप्यकम्पो मौर्याचार्यो देव्यभूत्तत्र मृत्वा ॥
(Pariśīṣṭa-parva, Sarga 8, verse 469) The oldest Digambara reference of the Bhagavatī Ārādhanā had mentioned that Cāṇakya was burnt by Subandhu at gobbaragrāma. He tolerated all the pains with calm and composed mind. 19
The Bhagavati Ārādhanā mentions gobbara-grāma while the word 'gomaya' occurs in the description of parṇakuti in the Mudrārākṣasa.
(c) Parvataka and Viṣakanyā: Reference of Parvataka and his death caused by Caṇakya by employing a viṣakanyā - these incidents are common in both the Mudrārākṣasa and the Avaśyakacūrṇi in almost the same manner. The episode of Malayaketu is totally absent in the Jaina references.
(d) Caṇakya's power of observation : Cāṇakya's unique skill of minute observation is noted down in the second act of the Mudrārākṣasa. It is described that Cāṇakya suspected the danger to Candragupta's life by minutely observing a line of ants (पिपीलिकापङ्क्तिम् अवलोक्य) coming from the hollow places of the broad walls of Candragupta's palace.20
In the Avaśyaka-cūrņi, it is told that a person called Naladāma

Page #51

41
was killing ants by deeply digging the ground because the ants had done harm to Naladāma. By observing this act of Naladāma, Cāṇakya thought that, he was a proper person for finding out and killing the harmful persons of the Nandas. The Avaśyaka-cūrṇi notes down the account briefly, in the following manner -
तिदंडी बाहिरियाए णलदामं मुइंगमारगं दठ्ठे आगतो, रण्णा सद्दावितो, दिण्णं आरक्खं, वीसत्था कता, भत्तदाणे सकुडुंबा मारिया । (AvCū. (II) p.565)
(e) Cāṇakya : A kingmaker or a shadow-king?
When we think of the relation between Caṇakya and Candragupta with the help of the Mudrārākṣasa, it is quite clear that Caṇakya is really dominating minister. His supremacy is crystalclear. Cāṇakya says that Candragupta's kingdom is 'sacivāyatta' i.e. dependent upon ministers." The preceptor-disciple relationship between them is mentioned.22 Candragupta expresses his inability to transgress Caṇakya's words. 23 Not only in the third act dedicated to pseudo-conflict but at other places also the supremacy of Caṇakya is quite evident. The strict orders of Caṇakya are mentioned in the 6th act.24 In the 7th act which is the climax of the drama, the dramatist gives a specific art-direction to the character of Candragupta - viz. राजा चाणक्यमुखमवलोकयति ie the king looks at the face of Cānakya.
The truth of Caṇakya's supremacy is openly told in the Avaśyaka-cūrṇi. The astrologer says to Caṇakya's father that, 'He will be a shadow-king'. 25 Many a times Cāṇakya stops Candragupta by merely raising his eyebrows.26 Cāṇakya openly says in front of a group of merchants that, 'The king is under my thumb' ( a). The preceptor-disciple relationship between Cāṇakya and Candragupta is also noted down in the AvCū. Hemacandra uses the

Page #52

42
word ‘mauryācārya' at the end of the biography of Cāņakya.
The highest exaggeration is seen in the Harişeņa's Bịhatkathākośa. It is told that actually Cāņakya became a king and ruled the country for many years.28 [13] Critical comments :
If we try to know the biography of Cāņakya from the brahmanic sources, the Purāņas, Brhatkathāmañjarī and Kathāsaritsāgara, it provides scanty information. Many scholars have tried to understand Cāņakya with the help of his monumental treatise Kauțilīya Arthaśāstra. Some other scholars prefer to study the Mudrārākṣasa of Viśākhadatta for the better understanding of Cāņakya.
Here, we have tried out best to interprete the text of Mudrārākşasa from the Jaina viewpoint. We hope that they are unexplored up till now and will throw new light on the Mudrārākṣasa.
Though the Mudrārāksasa is a political play, it is full of poetic values and rich with imaginative power. But we think that before writing such a play, the author Viśākhadatta might have gone through thewritten and oral material available to him. If we assume the date of Viśākhadatta as the 7th-8th century A.D., we know that the stray references in the Digambara literature and the Śvetāmbara references in the Avaśyaka and Niśītha-cūrņi were available to the author. At least ample oral Prakrit narratives of the Jainas were prevalent in the society. Through these Prakrit legends he might have come to know the last phase of Cāņakya's life, particularly his sad death.
Viśākhadatta has chosen a particular part of Cāņakya's life in his drama. But if we supply the data before the author with the Jaina narratives, we immadiately come to know why he has chosen

Page #53

43
the name Rākṣasa for Amātya Subandhu. The names of Jīvasiddhi Kșapaņaka and Sarvārthasiddhi are definitely connected with the Jaina environment. The Jaina concept of Cāņakya’s being a
bimbāntarita rājā is reflected in the third act of the drama titled 'pseudo-conflict'.
Thus we have to admit that the Mudrārākşasa, observed from the Jaina viewpoint, reveals many new things which are not studied before. It is noteworthy that with a single exception of the Jugāijiņinda-cariya, the Mudrārāksasa had left no impact on the Jaina literature up till the 15th 16th century.
It is very interesting to note that, in the colophone of the Niśītha-cūrņi, it is told that, “This cūrņi is written by Viśākhagaņi'. It is very curious to know that the Niśītha-cūrņi is full of Cāņakyanarratives and it appreciates the strict rules of Cāņakya.
The other coincidence is also noteworthy. The Digambara sources tell us that Candragupta was re-named after his initiation as 'Viśākhācārya’.
In the Jaina narratives and the Mudrā', extreme regard for Cāņakya's political wisdom is seen. Both the sources honour Cāņakya for his selfless attitude in spite of his shrewd methods. The Mudrā° highlights a particular portion in the political life of Cāņakya and Candragupta, in such a manner that it acquired a unique position in the galaxy of classical Sanskrit dramas. The Jainas are interested in giving the whole biography of Cāņakya, full of various dramatic incidents but they never tried to write a drama, which is of course a difficult form of litera
ture.
If a curious reader wishes to know more about Cāņakya, he can

Page #54

knew it by going through the Jaina sources. particularly, the tragic end of Caṇakya and Subandhu (viz. amatya Rākṣasa) depicted in the Jaina literature, satisfies the readers by leading them to the logical end of the story. It is a particular tendancy of the Jainas that they never prefer loose ends in the philosophy and even in the narratives.
Note:
The references of Mudrārākṣasa are given from the edition of
Dr. G.K.Bhat.
The abbreviation of Mudrārākṣasa is 'Mudra" in the present article.
44
List of References
-
1) Mudra Act 5, p.192
2)
Mudra Act 4, p.186
3)
Mudra Act 4, p.186
4) T&TH: भदन्त अपरैः सांवत्सरिकैः सह संवाद्यताम् - Mudrā' Act 4, p.188
5) चाणक्यः स मया क्षपणकलिङ्गधारी नन्दवंशवधप्रतिज्ञानन्तरमेव कुसुमपुरमुपनीय सर्वनन्दामात्यैः सह सख्यं ग्राहितो विशेषतश्च तस्मिन् राक्षसः समुत्पन्नविश्रम्भः ।
-
· Mudra Act 1, p.18
6) तत्थ णं रायगिहे णंदे णामं मणियारसेट्ठी परिवसइ | Nāyādhammakahā,
adhyayana 13, p.72
7)
Mudra Act 1, p.38
8)
Mudra Act 6, p.286
9 ) चन्दनदासः - मोत्तूण आमिसाई मरणभएण तिणेहिं जीअन्तम् । वाहाणं मुद्धहरिणं
ärgi ant 114 ft || Mudrāo Act 7, verse 3, p.286
10) Mudra Act 1, p.22
11) Mudra Act 2, p.78

Page #55

12) Mudrā Act 1, p.20 13) Mudrā Act 1, p.20
14) Mudrā Act 1, p.44
15) NisCu. Part IV, p.10-11
45
16) Upadeśapada-ṭīkā Part I, verses 42,44,50,128 17) पाउडकवी अहं । Mudrā Act 2, p.68
18) Pariśīstaparva, Sarga 8, verse 201
19) Bhagavati Ārādhanā, verse 155
20) Mudrā Act 2, p. 80
21) Mudrā Act 3, p.126
22) चाणक्यः - शिष्येण स्वैररुचयो न निरोद्धव्या: । Mudrā° Act 3, p.126
-
23) न शक्नुमो वयमार्यस्य वाचा वाचमतिशयितुम् । Mudra' Act 3, p.142
24) अज्जचाणक्काणत्ती Mudrā Act 6, p.254
अज्जचाणक्कादेसं Mudrā° Act 6, p.266
25) एत्ता व बिंबंतरितो भविस्सति । āvCu p.563
26) चाणक्केण भिगुडी कता, णियत्तो । āvCu. p.565
27) āvCŪ. p.565
28) चकार विपुलं राज्यं चाणाक्यो निजबुद्धितः । Brhatkathākośa story 143,
verse.71
܀܀܀

Page #56

46

Page #57

41
CHAPTER 4
CĀNAKYA : REVEALED THROUGH THE JAINA
LITERATURE
[1 ] Introduction
[2] References of Cāņakya in the Svetāmbara literature
(A) 44 references in tabular form (B) Translation, explanation and observations on each
reference
[3] References of Cāņakya in the Digambara literature
(A) 13 references in tabular form (B) Translation, explanation and observations on each
reference

Page #58

48

Page #59

49
CHAPTER 4
CĀNAKYA : REVEALED THROUGH THE JAINA LITERATURE
[1] Introduction :
When we consider all the brahmanic sources alongwith the Mudrārāksasa, we come to know that we get a meager information about the special features of Cāņakya's personality, the incidents of his life, his relationship with Candragupta and his contribution in the governance of the Magadha kingdom.
When we cast a glance to the entries given in the kośas like the Marathi Viśvakośa or the Bhāratīya-saṁskṛti-kośa, they quote brahmanic sources like the Purāņas, the Kathāsaritsāgara, the Mudrārāksasa and some unknown legends without giving their exact literary sources. Generally they relie on the fanciful and imaginary novels like the ‘Nșpanirmātā Cāņakya’ of Dr. R.C.Dhere or the ‘Arya' authored by Shri Vasant Patwardhan.
The eminent scholars like Durga Bhagvat and Mr. B.R.Hivargavkar had given only one or two passing references from the Jaina literature, which are poorly interpreted by them. Without going into a deeper search, Mr. Hivargavkar says, “In the Brahmanic, Buddhist and Jaina literature, it is noted that Kautilya was a prime-minister of Candragupta. The Brahmanic books praise Kautilya while a kind of disregard and censure is seen in the Buddhist and Jaina literature. A harsh attitude towards pāşandas (heretics i.e. the Jaina and Buddhist monks) is seen in the Kauțilīya Arthaśāstra, naturally the Buddhists and Jainas have expressed a disdainful and contemptuous attitude towards Cāņakya.” (Hivargavkar, H II, p.22)

Page #60

50
A pet model of the scholars of the first half of the last century is seen in this remark. They generally assume that, 'Since the Jainas and Buddhas are heretic sister systems, they possess the same view on certain points' - which is not true in every case. The other method of these scholars is to use the phrase - 'The Buddhas and Jainas' in which the antiquity of the Jainas is totally neglected.
As noted in the prologue of this book, we have limited our scope to the Jaina literature. With a Cursury look to the Buddhist literature, one can know immediately that there are very few tales and narratives about Cāṇakya in the Buddhist literature while the whole Jaina literature, both the Svetambara and Digambara, is literally flooded with the references to Caṇakya, from the 2nd century B.C. to 15th century A.D. From the language-point-of-view, we find the references in Ardhamāgadhī, Jaina Māhārāṣṭrī, Jaina Śaurasenī, Sanskrit and Apabhraṁśa i.e. in all the languages adopted by the Jainas through several centuries.
In the introduction of the Mudrārākṣasa, the reputed scholar Dr. R.D.Karmarkar had noted the Hindu, Buddhist and Jaina sources of the play. (Introduction of the Mudrārākṣasa, R.D.Karmarkar, pp.1314) It is queer that he had noted down four Buddhist sources and had completely ignored the Jaina sources.
It is a solemn duty of a true academician to highlight the neglected part in a certain area of research and to give justice to it. With this honest intention, we fathomed the whole available Jaina literature and classified it considering the century, language, author, title of the book and the gist of the references. The legacy of the Caṇakya-narratives is divided into two parts. At first, the Svetambara references are presented in a tabular form and then the Digambara

Page #61

51
references are tabularized in the same manner. Both the tables are supplied with the summary of each reference with some important critical remarks. [2] References of Cāņakya in the Śvetāmbara. Literature :
(A) 44 references in tabular form
The serial order mentioned in this chart is likewise :
Serial No. - Century - Name of the Language - Title of the Work - Name of the Author - Reference Number - Gist of the Reference.
Language - abbriviations used : AMg. = Ardhamāgadhi ; JM. = Jaina Māhārāstrī ; Skt. =
Sanskrit.
1.
3.
1st-2nd ; AMg. ; Anuyogadvāra ; Ārya Rakṣita ; sūtra 49 ; The name of the book viz. ‘Kautilīya’, included in the list of the popular heretic texts. 3rd_4th ; Old JM. ; Āvaśyaka-niryukti ; Bhadrabāhu ; Niryuktisaṁgraha, p.93 gā.51 ; Name of Cāņakya in the list of examples given for pāriņamiki-buddhi. 3rd 4th ; Old JM. ; Pinda-niryukti ; Bhadrabāhu ; gā.500 (single verse) ; Reference suggestive of a short story about mystic powers of a monk. 3rd 4th ; Old JM. ; Ogha-Niryukti ; Bhadrabāhu ; gā.418 (single verse) ; A rule of conduct prescribed for a monk. 4th-5th ; JM. ; Upadeśamālā ; Dharmadāsa-gani ; gā.74, 150 ; Passing references of Cāņakya and Candragupta. 5th ; AMg. ; Nandīsūtra ; Devavācaka ; gā.80 (single verse) ; Name of Cāņakya in the list of examples given for pāriņāmikibuddhi.
4.
5.
6.

Page #62

5th; AMg.; Nandīsūtra; Devavācaka; sūtra 41; The name of the book Kautilīya, included in the list of heretic texts.
5th; JM.; Atura-Pratyakhyāna II (Prakīrņaka); gā.23 (single verse); Death of Caṇakya.
5th; JM.; Bhaktaparijñā (Prakīrṇaka); gā.162 (single verse); Death of Caṇakya.
5th; JM.; Maraṇavibhakti (Prakīrṇaka); gā.479 (single verse) ; Death of Caṇakya.
10. 5th; JM.; Saṁstāraka (Prakīrṇaka); gā.73,74 (two verse); Death of Caṇakya.
11. 5th; JM.; Ārādhanāpatākā (Prakīrṇaka); gā.824 (single verse) ; Death of Caṇakya.
12. 6th; JM.; Vyavahārabhāṣya
7.
8.
52
9.
1.91 (716) (single verse);
Destruction of the enemies by Cāṇakya.
6th; JM.; Vyavahārabhāṣya; 1.132 (952) (single verse);
Dandanīti of Kautilya.
6th; JM.; Vyavahārabhāṣya; 10.592 (4420) (single verse); Death of Caṇakya.
13. 6th; JM.; Niśītha-bhāṣya; gā. 616, 4463, 4464, 4465, 5137, 5138,5139; These gāthās are connected to the rules of the Jaina monastic conduct.
14. 7th; JM.; Avaśyaka-cūrṇi; Jinadāsa-gaṇi; p.156 (single line) ; The Arthaśāstra written by Kautilya.
7th; JM.; Avaśyaka-cūrṇi; Jinadāsa-gaṇi; p.281 (short story) ; Praising of heretics.
7th; JM.; Avaśyaka-cūrṇi; Jinadāsa-gaņi; pp.563-566; Full biography in brief manner.

Page #63

53
15. 7th; JM.; Niśītha-cūrṇi Part II; Jinadāsa-gani; p.33; A story concerned to the rule prescribed for a monk. 16. 7th; JM.; Niśītha-cūrṇi Part III ; Jinadasa-gani; pp.423-424; A story concerned to the rule prescribed for a monk; Reference of the severe drought.
17. 7th; JM.; Niśītha-cūrṇi Part IV; Jinadāsa-gaņi; pp.10-11; A story concerned to the strict orders of the Maurya king. 7th; JM.; Niśītha-cūrṇi Part IV; Jinadāsa-gaṇi; p.395 Total verses 3 (in prasasti); Niśītha-sūtra written by Visakhagani.
18. 7th; JM.; Ācārānga-cūrṇi; Jinadāsa-gaṇi; p.49 (a single line); Wife of Caṇakya, Destruction of the Nanda-dynasty. 19. 7th; JM.; Sūtrakṛtānga-cūrṇi ; Jinadāsa-gani; p.166 (a brief reference); The Arthaśāstra written by Kautilya.
7th; JM.; Sūtrakṛtānga-cūrṇi; Jinadāsa-gani; p.167 (a brief reference); Collecting money in deceitful manner. 20. 7th; JM.; Daśavaikālika-curņi; Jinadāsa-gani; pp.81-82; The remaining biography of Canakya in continuation with the Avaśyaka-cūrṇi, in brief manner.
21. 8th; JM.; Avaśyaka-ṭīkā; Haribhadra ; p.342; An example of
pāśaka (in brief).
8th; JM.; Avaśyaka-ṭīkā; Haribhadra; p.405; Advice given to Candragupta (in brief).
8th; JM.; Avaśyaka-ṭīkā; Haribhadra; p.423; The Arthaśāstraan example of vainayiki buddhi (in brief).
8th; JM.; Avaśyaka-ṭīkā; Haribhadra; p.428; Example of pāriņāmiki-buddhi (in brief).
8th; JM.; Avasyaka-ṭīkā; Haribhadra; pp.433-435; A short biography of Cāṇakya imitating the Avaśyaka-cūrṇi.

Page #64

54
gth ; JM. ; Āvaśyaka-tīkā ; Haribhadra ; p.817 (short story) ;
Praising of heretics. 22. 8th ; JM. ; Daśavaikālika-țīkā ; Haribhadra ; p.435 (short
story) ; Collecting wealth from merchants. 23. 8th;JM.;Upadeśapada;Haribhadra ; gā.17,42,44,50,128,139,196
; Various stories suggested in brief manner. 24. gth; JM. ; Kuvalayamālā ; Uddyotana ; Passing reference of the
Arthaśāstra. 25. 9th ; Skt. ; Ācārānga-tīkā ; Sīlānka ; p.100 (single line) ; Wife
of Cāņakya ; Destruction of the Nanda-dynasty. 26. 9th ; Skt. ; Sūtrakrtānga-tīkā ; Śīlāñka ; p.169 (single line) ;
Deceitful means to gather wealth. 27. 9th ; JM. ; Dharmopadeśamālā ; Jayasimha ; Two short stories,
p.129,138 ; (i) Gathering wealth from merchants (ii) Death of
Cāņakya and Subandhu. 28. 11th ; JM. ; Kathā-kośa-prakaraṇa ; Jineśvara ; pp.176-177 ;
Duties of a king without naming Kautilya's Arthaśāstra. 29. 11th ; Skt. ; Sthānānga-tīkā ; Abhayadeva ; p.281 (single line)
; Examination of various monks. 30. 11th ; Skt. ; Samavāyānga-țīkā ; Abhayadeva ; p.55 (single
line) ; Kautilya-śāstra causing harm to the beings. 31. 11th ; Skt. ; Jñātādharmakathā-tīkā ; Abhayadeva ; p.12 (single
line) ; The Arthaśāstra - a book for creating wealth. 32. 11th ; JM. ; Uttarādhyayana-tīkā (Sukhabodhā) ; Nemicandra ;
pp.57-69 ; Selected stories of Cāņakya. 33. 11th ; Skt. ; Ogha-niryukti-tīkā ; Droņācārya ; p.152 ; Short
reference of strict orders of Cānakya.

Page #65

55
34. 12th ; JM. ; Vyavahāra-țīkā ; Malayagiri ; pp. 76-77 ; Story of
Naladāma, destructing favorite persons of Nanda. 35. 12th ; JM. ; Yugādi-jinendra-carita ; Vardhamāna ; pp.50-55 ;
Whole biography of Cāņakya - a part of Kuņāla-kathā. 36. 12th ; JM. ; Višeşāvaśyaka-bhāsya-tīkā ; Maladhāri-Hemacandra
; tīkā on gā.464; Secret script developed by Cāņakya. 37. 12th ; JM. ; Upadeśamālā-tīkā ; Ratnaprabha ; pp.354-363
(total gāthās 182); Whole biography of Cāņakya with author's
remarks in-between. 38. 12th ; JM. ; Upadeśapada-tīkā ; Municandra ; pp. 109-114 (to
tal gāthās 178) ; Whole biography of Cāņakya. 39. 12th ; Skt. ; Upadeśapada-tīkā ; Municandra ; p.154 ; Complete
faith of Candragupta on his guru - Cāņakya. 40. 12th ; Skt. ; Parisista-parva ; Hemacandra ; Sarga 8, pp.77-86,
gā. 194-469 ; The longest biography of Cāņakya with rich
poetic values. 41. 12th ; Skt. ; Abhidhāna-cintāmaņi-nāmamālā ; Hemacandra ;
gā.853-854 ; Noted by scholars as synonyms of Cāņakya. 42. 13th ; JM. ; Tarangalolā ; Nemicandra-gaại ; gā.853 ; Passing
reference of the duties of a female messenger. 43. 14th ; Skt. ; Pinda-niryukti-avacūri ; Kșamāratna ; p.92, tīkā on
gā.500 ; Incident during severe drought at Pāțaliputra. 44. 14th ; Skt. ; Vividha-tīrth-kalpa ; Jinaprabha ; Ch.36, p.69 ; A
Kalpa (chapter) dedicated to Pāțaliputra. Passing reference of Cāņakya.

Page #66

56
[B] Translation, explanation and observations on each reference : [1] The Anuyogadvāra of Ārya Rakṣita is the late Ardhamāgadhī or old Jaina Mahārāștrī text. Traditionally Ārya Rakṣita belongs to the 1st-2nd century A.D.
It is mentioned in the 49th sūtra of the Anuyogadvāra that, # किं तं लोइयं भावसुयं ? जं इमं अण्णाणिएहिं मिच्छादिट्ठीहिं सच्छंदबुद्धि-मइविगप्पियं। JET-ARÉ TAPI for too olfsgi-----a a agi d i
Here, kodillaya is certainly the treatise of Kauțilya which is designated as 'laukika bhāvaśruta' (viz. worldly or conventional scripture). It is mentioned that all these scriptures are composed by ignorant heretics with the help of their fanciful imaginations.
A sense of disregard is explicitely seen in this expression. But we have to interprete it in the light of the ‘naya-theory'. From the viewpoint of niscaya-naya (spiritual outlook) the above-mentioned texts are less important than the ganipițaka, containing the eleven angas constructed by the Jinas. Still, from the viewpoint of vyavahāra-naya (popular outlook) the enumeration of laukika bhāvaśruta is done.
Devavācakagani is aware of the fact that it is not proper to dismiss the popular texts totally. So one additional comment is seen in the Nandisūtra regarding these texts.
Some scholars have interpreted the word 'kodillaya' as 'kuțilaśāstra' i.e. 'a text written by a cunning person'. But when we observe the list, we realize that it is certainly a syllabus of fromal education at that time. The word kodillaya refers to the Kautilīya Arthaśāstra, a text containing economics, politics and ethics together. This is probably the oldest Jaina reference of the Kauțilīya Arthaśāstra noted down in the early centuries of Christian Era.

Page #67

57
[2] The Avaśyaka-niryukti of Bhadrabāhu (2nd) is an old Jaina Māhārāstrī text which belongs to the 3rd or 4th century A.D. Bhadrabāhu
says -
खवगे अमच्चपुत्ते चाणक्के चेव थूलभद्दे अ ।
पारिणामिअ-बुद्धीए एवमाई उदाहरणा
Niryukti-samgraha, gā.51 (p.93) Here Cāņakya is mentioned as an example of PāriņāmikiBuddhi, i.e. the intellectual capacity or wisdom acquired by experi
ence.
The examples and stories connected with pāriņāmiki-buddhi are explained at length in the later texts. Many of the texts present a lot of Cāņakya-episodes as the examples of pāriņāmiki-buddhi. The sense of appreciation and regards towards Cāņakya is quite evident in these examples.
We know that the Kauțilīya Arthaśāstra is really a treasurebook which illuminates various aspects of human life in general and a miraculous blend of contemporary political thoughts, economy and socio-moral values in particular. We can easily conjucture that it is the essence of Cāņakya's life-long experience of good governance. It is sure that Bhadrabāhu (II) had appreciated his text i.e. Kauțilīya Arthaśāstra by including him in the examples of pāriņāmiki-buddhi.
It seems that Arya Rakṣita had a little hesitation to quote the text of Kautilya, but Bhadrabāhu appreciates his wisdom wholeheartedly along with the revered Jaina monk Sthūlabhadra, a contemporary of Cāņakya. [3] The Piņda-niryukti of Bhadrabāhu (2nd) is an old Jaina Māhārāștrī text written in the 3rd 4th century A.D. The gāthā runs as

Page #68

follows
चुन्ने अंतद्धाणे चाणक्के पायलेवणे जोगे । मूले विवाहे दो दंडिणी उ आयाण परिसाडे ।।
58
gā.500, p.91 b (pothi form)
The first line of this gāthā is connected with one incident in the life of Caṇakya. Two young disciples of a Jaina ācārya used cūrṇa (fine powder) to disappear temporarily for the naked eye. Cāṇakya realized the device and forced them to appear in front of the common eyesight. (comm. चूर्णेनान्तर्द्धानेऽदृष्टिकरणे चाणक्यविदितौ क्षुल्ल निदर्शनम् ।)
This story is explained in three bhāṣyagāthās of the Pindaniryukti. Further on, this account found place in the Niśīthacūrṇi and in the life-history of Cāṇakya presented in the later storyliterature.
Kṣamāratna (14th century A.D.) had written a full story while explaining this gāthā, in his Pinda-niryukti-avacuri. We will give our comments on the story when we come chronologically to the 14th century A.D.
It is noteworthy that the Jainas have imbibed not only the name of Caṇakya but have carried forward the tales about Cāṇakya in their commentarial literature.
[4] The Ogha-niryukti of Bhadrabahu (2nd) is an old Jaina Māhārāṣṭrī text written in the 3rd-4th century A.D. The concerned portion of the text is
उग्गहकाईयवज्जं छंडण ववहारु लब्भए तत्थ । गारविए पन्नवणा तव चेव अणुग्गहो एस ।।
gā.418, p.152 (pothi form)

Page #69

59
The commentary of Droņācārya (11th century A.D.) helps a lot to understand the text properly. It referes to the strict orders of Cāņakya, prohibiting the disposal of excreta and urine in the populated area. The commentary runs like this -
"TEFY YETIGSU afghafa , TTISET H21C3: , 7 a ted: YfUE: , da: focalfart: Halà 1 --- Je autosta fot31 - ' काइअं न वोसिरइ ततो अदोसो ।' अयमित्थंभूतस्तत्र व्यवहारो लभ्यते , तत: colici a frusia ”?
The above-mentioned niryukti is of utmost importance because it is directly connected with the rules of monastic conduct. The chedasūtrakāra Bhadrabāhu (Bhadrabāhu I) was most probably a contemporary of Cāņakya. “The similarities between the chedarules and Cāņakyan rules’-is a big interesting topic for a researcher. The present niryukti-gāthā and it's commentary is really helpful to establish the connection of the both.
Later on the rule of paristhāpanā-samiti or utsarga-samiti was included in the daily routine conduct of a monk. The Tattvārthasūtra, the highly honoured Jaina philosophical text of the 4th century A.D. explains utsarga-samiti in the following manner - *Correct disposal of excreta means depositing stools, phlegm, spit, urine somewhere not occupied by mobile or immobile life-forms.' (Tattvārthasūtra, ed. Nathmal Tatia, 9.5) [5] The Upadeśamālā of Dharmadāsagani is a text written in old Jaina Māhārāstrī during the 4th-5th century A.D.
The book deserves the first and the foremost position in the long list of didactic books, written in the Jaina tradition. It contains542 dvāragāthās in which 70 narratives are interwoven. The 150th dvāragāthā of Upadeśamālā says -

Page #70

लुद्धा सकज्जतुरिआ , सुहिणोऽवि विसंवयंति कयकज्जा ।
जह चंदगुत्तगुरुणा , पव्वयओ घाइओ राया ।। The context of this gāthā is altogether different. The author says, “Nobody should trust even one's own son.” For this he gives the example of Śreņika (Bimbisāra) and Kuņika (Ajātaśatru). It is known that Kuņika put his father Śreņika in the jail and afterwards killed him treacherously. One more example of treachery is given in the above- mentioned gāthā. It is mentioned that, "The greedy and impatient persons who are very much eagar to achieve their goal, deceive their own kinsfolk. See, how the guru of Candragupta killed king Parvataka by treacherous means.'
The concerned dvāragāthā provides enough scope for the commentator to give the full biography of Cāņakya. Taking into consideration the tone of disregard reflected in this dvāragāthā, the commentator Ratnaprabha describes the deceitful and cunning nature of Cāņakya by giving a lot of examples from Cāņakya's life-story. Ratnaprabha belongs to the 12th century A.D. So, when we proceed to the 12th century-references chronologically, we will give more details of his story with critical remarks.
At present, when we think over the above-mentioned dvāragāthā, three things are sure that -
(i) Cāņakya is mentioned as the guru (preceptor) of Candragupta.
(ii) With the help of king Parvataka (Puru or Selyucus ?) Candragupta overpowered the kingdom of Magadha.
(iii) It was Cāņakya, who advised Candragupta to kill Parvataka in order to become a sole king.
Jinadāsagani, the author of the Āvaśyaka-cūrņi, has incorpo

Page #71

61
rated these facts in his Cāņakya-kathā, but his perspective is different. He depicts these facts as the examples of Cāņakya's “pāriņāmikibuddhi’, in which a tinge of appreciation can be guessed. [6] The Nandīsūtra of Devavācakagaņi is written in later Ardhamāgadhi or old Jaina Māhārāsțrī during the 5th century A.D. The concerned passage runs thus -
से किं तं मिच्छसुयं ? मिच्छसुयं जं इमं अण्णाणिएहिं मिच्छद्दिट्ठीहिं सच्छंदबुद्धिमतिवियप्पियं, तं जहा - भारहं रामायणं हंभीमासुरक्खं कोडिल्लयं -----चत्तारि य वेदा संगोवंगा , एयाई मिच्छद्दिहिस्स मिच्छत्तपरिग्गहियाई मिच्छसुयं , एयाणि चेव सम्मद्दिहिस्स सम्मत्तपरिग्गहियाई सम्मसुयं । अहवा मिच्छद्दिट्ठिस्स वि सम्मसुयं , catal? 447237107377 | (sūtra 72 (1))
In this passage, the mithyāśrutas (heretic scriptures) are enumerated. According to the author of Nandi (i.e. Devavācakagani) the following heretic scriptures are full of falacies and free-willed imaginations. The texts are the Bhārata, the Rāmāyaṇa --- the book written by Kautilya (i.e. the Kauțilīya Arthaśāstra) --- the four Vedas with the angas and upāngas.
But in the same passage, it is clearly mentioned that if they are studied by a person having samyaktva (enlightened worldview or right faith) then the same śāstras become samyakśruta i.e. source of right knowledge.
Almost all Indologists and particularly experts in the Kautilyan studies, interprete this passage with the presumption that the Jainas possess a sense of reproach about Cāņakya and censured his treatise as a mithyāśruta.
When we see the weightage given to the Cāņakya-narratives in the Jaina literature, we come to know that the Jaina ācāryas are very well conversent with the text of the Arthaśāstra and have

Page #72

keenly documented the floating legends of Cāņakya whenever they got the opportunity.
The other noteworthy thing is, when Jainas pictured Cāņakya or Kautilya as parama-śrāvaka, his treatise becomes a samyakśruta automatically.
Thus it is not proper to interprete the passages describing mithyāśrutas in the Anuyogadvāra and the Nandi on its face-value, but a deeper insight is necessary. [7] The Atura-pratyākhyāna (II) is an old Jaina Māhārāstrī text, enumerated under the old prakīrņakas. This anonymous text is probably included in the traditional 45 Ardhamāgadhi canons during the 5th century A.D.
The 23rd gāthā of the prakīrņaka mentions - एसो (एवं) सुहपरिणामो चाणक्को पयहिऊण नियदेहं ।
उववन्नो सुरलोए, पच्चक्खायं मए सव्वं ।। The religious minded person, who has accepted the willful death (sasthārā) exclaims, “Cāņakya allowed to burn his body, remaining in the pure state of mind (or soul). Due to this noble act, he was reborn in the heaven. Likewise, I will also abandone all my attachments.”
The prakīrņaka and mostly all of the old prakīrņakas deal with paņdita-maraņa (i.e. the death of wise persons). Cāņakya’s unpurturbed mental state, unparallelled power of endurance and detached view towards life at the last moment of his life are highly appreciated and praised in the prakīrņakas. The same regard is seen in one of the oldest Digambara text named the Bhagavati Ārādhanā.

Page #73

[8] The Bhakta-parijñā is a prakīrṇaka text written in old Jaina Māhārāṣṭrī during the 5th century.
The 162nd gathã of this text runs -
पाडलिपुत्तम्मि पुरे चाणक्को नाम विस्सुओ आसी । सव्वारंभनियत्तो इंगिणिमरणं अह निवन्नो ।।
63
From this single verse, we learn that Cāṇakya belonging to Pataliputra was very famous at that time when this text was written. Many legends about Caṇakya were in vogue in the society. The narratives were handed down from generation to generation. The adjective suggest that though Cāṇakya was active in politics throughout his life, at the fag end of his life, he completely abstained from violence. His death is described as fş-f14'. In this type of death, a person never takes any help of others for his upkeep. The gaāthā suggests that the death of Cāṇakya might have happened nereby Pataliputra.
The same gatha is found in Samstāraka-prakīrṇaka. The sense
of regard towards Caṇakya is evident.
[9] The Maraṇa-vibhakti is also an anonymous prakīrṇaka written in old Jaina Māhārāṣṭrī around the 5th century A.D.
Gāthā 479 gives the details as follows
गोब्बर पाओवगओ सुबुद्धिणा णिग्घिणेण चाणक्को ।
दड्ढो न य संचलिओ, साहु धिई चिंतणिज्जा उ ।।
The information given in this verse can be analysed in the following manner -
We find more details about Cāṇakya's death than that of the previous prakīrṇakas.
* 'Subuddhi' was extremely pitiless and he burnt Cāṇakya in alive
state.

Page #74

64
* This incident took place at the village 'gobbara'. * The death of Cāņakya is designated here as 'WP1444' or
YIG419147. * His unperturbed mental disposition is the ideal for every monk. * The name 'gobbara' reminds us a place, where lord Mahāvīra
once resided during his varṣāvāsa (i.e. a stay during the rainyseason). * We can connect the adjective fejut' to the personality of "T&TA', depicted in the drama Mudrārākṣasa of Viśākhadatta.
This verse almost matches with the verse quoted in the BhagavatīĀrādhanā, a revered Digambara work of the the 4th century A.D. [10] The Samstāraka prakīrņaka quotes two gāthās about Cāņakya's death, gāthā 73 is similar to Bhakta-parijñā.
Gāthā 74 runs in the following manner - अणुलोमपूयणाए सह से सत्तुंजओ (? सत्तू जओ) डहइ देहं ।
सो वि तह डज्झमाणो पडिवन्नो उत्तमं अटुं ।। His (Cāņakya’s) enemy put fire on him in the disguise of performing pūjā. He endured all the pains afflicted on him and attained that which is extremely attainable' (i.e. heaven or libera
tion).
* Here, the name of Cāņakya's enemy is not given but one more detail is provided that he approached Cāņakya to adore, but actually he put fire on him. [11] The Ārādhanā-patākā prakīrņaka repeats almost the same details about Cāņakya's death with very few new details. It is told in the 824th gāthā that -
किं न सुओ चाणक्को सड्ढो गुढे सुबंधुणा दड्ढो । इंगिणिमरणपवन्नो धीरो चलिओ न झाणाओ ।।

Page #75

We can summarize the verse as follows - * The words for 7 931' suggest the oral tradition of the Cāņakya
narratives.
* Cāņakya is called 'HE' i.e. a Jaina householder. * The horrific incident happened in a cow-pen ('TE'). * Subandhu put fire on him. * His death is designated as 'sts- UT. * Cāņakya's outstanding courage ("') is honoured. * At that time Cāņakya was in deep meditation.
Thus, the prakīrņakas provide the details of Cāņakya's death. Each reference tells something new. On this background it is queer that the brahmanic (or Hindu) sources have kept a mum about the death of Cāņakya. [12] The Vyavahāra-bhāșya holds an important position among the traditional commentarial literature on the Jaina canons. It is conjunctured that the three famous bhāsyas viz. Kalpa, Nisītha, Vyavahāra are probably written during the 4th-5th century A.D. in Ārsa Prakrit or in old Jaina Māhārāstrī. The authors are unknown and the bhāsya texts are found mixed with the niryuktis. All the bhāșyas contain myths, legends, hearsays and popular stories alongwith the rules and regulations of the monastic conduct.
In the original gāthās of the Vyavahāra-bhāșya, three references are found which are concerned to Cāņakya. Without the help of Malayagiri's commentary (12th century A.D.) it is impossible to understand the brief and passing references. We will discuss the whole stories when we will reach up to the 12th century of this survey. At present, only the bhāsya-gāthās are mentioned with a
brief summary.

Page #76

[A] Vyavahāra-bhāṣya 1.91 (716):
66
नंदे भोइय खण्णा आरक्खिय घडण गेरु नलदामे ।
मुईग गेह डहणा ठवणा भत्तेसु कत्तसिरा ।।
It is specifically mentioned here that for the welfare of the society how Caṇakya completely eradicated the trouble-shooters who were pro-nandas. Taking into consideration the noble purpose behind Caṇakya's ruthless measures, a sense of regard towards Cāṇakya is seen here. Malayagiri gives the full account at length by using the sources documented in the Avaśyaka-cūrṇi. [B] Vyavahara-bhāṣya 1.132 (952):
भंभीयमासुरुक्खे, माढरकोडिण्ण (? ल्ल) दंडनीती । अथऽलंचऽपक्खगाही, एरिसया रूवजक्खा तु ।।
Though the full meaning is not clear, it is sure that this gāthā refers to the science of dandanīti employed by Kautilya i.e. the Kauṭiliya Arthaśāstra. It is noted that in the regime of Kautilya there was no scope for bribary and his attitude was impartial.
The tone of admiration towards Cāṇakya is quite clear in this gāthā in spite of some ambiguity in it.
[C] Vyavahara-bhāṣya 10.592 (4420) :
पडिणीययाए कोई, अग्गिं से सव्वतो पदेज्जाहि । पादोवगते संते जह चाणक्कस्स व कसे ।।
9
Pandita-marana of Canakya is highlighted here by designating it as pādapopagamana. It is mentioned that how Caṇakya's enemy put fire on him. It is told that one should remember the courage of Caṇakya when one accepts saṁthārā. We have already seen that the same thing about Caṇakya's death is repeatedly told in the prakīrṇakas.

Page #77

Thus, the Vyavahāra-bhāṣya throws light on the three major
things about Cāṇakya -
(i) His harsh measures to eradicate enemies.
(ii) His impartial attitude reflected in his sastric work on
67
dandanīti.
(iii) His horrific death with his extra-ordinary power of
endurance.
[13] The Niśītha-bhāṣya is one of the oldest triad of bhāṣyas, viz. Kalpa-Vyavahāra-Niśītha belonging to the 4th-5th century A.D. It is written in Arṣa Prakrit or Old Jaina Māhārāṣṭrī. According to the tradition, Samghadāsagaṇi is the author of this bhāṣya who is of course different from the author of the Vasudevahiṇḍī. The number of bhāṣya-gāthās is 6703, which are divided into 20 uddeśas.
In the Niśītha-bhāṣya, there are three sets of bhāṣya-gāthās which contain the seeds of the Caṇakya-narratives. These suggestive stories are further elaborated in the Niśītha-cūrṇi. Therefore, at this place, we will only enumerate the references in a brief manner. (A) Niśītha-bhāṣya, gāthā 616:
णासा मुहणिस्सासा, पुप्फजियवधो तदस्सिताणं च । आयाए विसपुप्फं, तब्भावितमच्च दिट्टंतो ।।
The bhāṣya is connected with certain monastic rule in which smelling of live flowers are strictly prohibited for monks, due to many reasons. In the second line of the verse, it is told that there is a famous story of Caṇakya the prime-minister who anointed the brich-leaf with some poisonous fragrance. The detailed story is given in the cūrṇi.
It is noteworthy that while prescribing the code of conduct to the monks and nuns, the bhāṣyakāras, every now and then remem

Page #78

ber Canakya. (B) Nisitha-bhāsya, gathās 4463 ; 4464; 4465 :
जंघाहीणे ओमे , कुसुमपुरे सिस्स जोगरहकरणं ।
खुड्गदुगंऽजणसुणणं , गमणं देसंत ओसरणं ।। भिक्खे परिहायंते , थेराणं ओमे तेसि देंताणं ।
सहभोज्ज चंदगुत्ते , ओमोयरियाए दोब्बल्लं ।। चाणक्कपुच्छ , इट्टालचुण्ण दारं पिहेउ धूमो य ।
दिस्सा कुच्छ पसंसा , थेरसमीवे उवालंभो ।। The connected Niśītha-sūtra prescribes atonement to a monk who enjoyes the food not by begging alms but by stealing the food in invisibly by enchanting some occult mantra. The bhāșyakāra immediately remembers the same situation in the history of CāņakyaCandragupta. He describes in a brief manner, the story of the preceptor Susthita and his two junior disciples. The cūrņikāra elaborates the story with interesting details and appropriate conversa
tions.
It seems that, the severe drought in Magadha, led the Jaina ācāryas to formulate new rules for the monks and nuns. (C) Nisitha-bhāsya, gāthās 5137; 5138 ; 5139 :
मुरियादी आणाए , अणवत्थ परंपराए थिरकरणं । मिच्छत्तं संकादी , पसज्जणा जाव चरिमपदं ।। अवराहे लहुगतरो , किं णु हु आणाए गुरुतरो दंडो । आणाए च्चिय चरणं , तब्भंगे किं न भग्गं तु ।।
भत्तमदाणमडते , आणठ्ठवणंब छेत्तु वंसवती । गविसण पत्त दरिसिते , पुरिसवति सबालडहणं च ।।
The main topic of discussion in the Niśītha-sūtra is - "Whether 'a fault' is more serious or breaking a particular order' is more serious offence ?'' The word 'muriya' is Candragupta Maurya. It is

Page #79

69
told that in the reign of Candragupta, ‘ājñābhanga' is the most serious offence. It is mentioned that Cāņakya punished the whole village by putting fire to them because they didn't follow the written order of the king.
The whole story is given at length in the Niśītha-cūrņi. Thus there are total seven gāthās in the Niśītha-bhāsya which are connected to the rules of the Jaina monastic conduct. All of them reflect the high appreciation of the strict law-code laid down by Cāņakya. [14] The Āvaśyaka-cūrņi of Jinadāsagani-mahattara carries a special position when we ponder over the Cāņakya-references found in the Svetāmbara Jaina literature. Traditionally the authorship of almost all the cūrņis is given to Jinadāsagani and it is told that he belongs to the 6th - 7th century A.D. The Āvaśyaka-cūrņi and the Niśītha-višeşa-cūrņi written in mixed Prakrit are highly praised by the scholars of Indology. These two treatises are literally a rich mine of minute details encompassing all the contemporary cultural features of India.
At three places, Jinadāsa has mentioned Cāņakya in the cūrņi. (i) Āv Cū (Part I) p.156 : Passing reference of the Kauțilya's Arthaśāstra and its origin. (ii) Āv Cū (Part II) p.281 : Praise of the heretics by Cāņakya and its after-effects described in a small narrative. (iii) Āv Cũ (Part II) pp.563-566 : Except two major incidents describing the last lapse of Cāņakya's life, the whole biography of Cāņakya is noted down here in a brief manner. All the happenings are dpicted as the examples of ‘pāriņāmiki-buddhi.' (i) Āv Cū (Part I) p.156 presents the whole biography of Rșabhadeva. It is described that how the first Tīrthankara introduced 72 arts for

Page #80

70
men and 64 arts for women. One of these art was ‘dandanīti'. The cārnikāra comments - ‘अत्थसत्था कोडिल्लयमादी तदा उप्पन्ना ।' It is remarkable that though the cūrņikāra has given credit to Rşabhadeva, as an originator of dandanīti he is fully aware that it is Kauțilya who has presented the Arthaśāstra in its final shape.
The concerned reference removes all the doubts whether Kautilya or Cāņakya has authored the Arthaśāstra or not. (ii) Āv Cū (Part II) p.281 presents a small narrative in the following manner - “परपासंडपसंसाए - पाडलिपुत्ते चाणक्को, चंदओत्तेण भिच्छुयाणं वित्ती हारिता, ते तस्स धम्मं कहेंति, राया तूसति, चाणक्कं पलोएति, ण पसंसति त्ति ण देति, तेहिं चाणक्कभज्जा ओलग्गति, तीए सो करणं कारितो तेहिं कहिते भणति - तुब्भेहिं पसंसितं, सो भणति - मए पसंसितं अहो सव्वारंभपवन्ना किह लोगवत्तियावणगाणि करेंति त्ति, पच्छा ठितो, कतो एरिसगा ? तम्हा ण कातव्वा।।"
The same narrative is given in the Yugādi-jinendra-carita of Vardhamāna (12th century A.D.) which is a classical book written in Jaina Māhārāstrī. With the help of Yugādi's story, the Avaśyaka story can be freely translated as - "The subject of the story is ‘praising the heretics' (i.e. one of the five transgressions of samyaktva). Cāņakya was at Pāțaliputra. Candragupta stopped the charity grants of the livelihood of the medicants. They delivered religious surmon to Candragupta. The king was happy.
Candragupta looked at Cāņakya. He was not satisfied and impressed. He didn't praise the heretics. Candragupta offered no donations to them. The ascetics approached Cāņakya's wife and requested her to persuade Cāņakya in favour of them. When they again presented their surmon in the court, Cāņakya exclaimed, 'Wellsaid !' The king releived their grants and offered them a lot more.
On the next day Cāņakya asked the king, “Why so much

Page #81

71
generosity ?' The king said, 'You have praised them.' Cāņakya explained, 'My intension was not that. These mendicants are always engaged in various sinful acts like violence and non-celebacy. How can they carry on their business of professing ethical values to the people ?' With this explanation the king again stopped the grants.
Cāņakya was able enough to bring the things on right track. But how many people have this ability ? Therefore it is better to refrain always from the praise of the heretics." Interpretation of the Narrative :
According to the Jaina tradition, Cāņakya was a Jaina householder. Therefore it is depicted in this story that he was against the non-Jaina ascetics.
Some of the modern interpreters of the Kauțilīya Arthaśāstra claim that Cāņakya's view about the Jaina and the Bauddha bhikṣus was harsh. They want to depict Cāņakya as a re-installer of vaidikaārya-dharma.
We think that both these views carry extremism. When we have a deeper view in the Kauțilīya Arthaśāstra, we know that though Cāņakya is a bit partial to the śrotriya brahmins, his attitude towards all types of ascetics, mendicants or monk-class, is the same. He did not allow any householder to accept dīkņā in the young age without the permission of his family-members because the deserted families become the liability of the king and become a burden to the government-treasury. A punishment is prescribed for such type of mendicants. One more thing is told that such wandering monks should work as informers or spies for the good of the state.
In nutshell, we can say that if we remove the Jainification from the story, the truth remains that Cāņakya was against the

Page #82

72
charity in the name of religion, when it becomes a liability to the royal treasury. Cāṇakya prohibits such charities particularly when the economy of the state is in crisis. In some of the Jaina narratives it is told that the financial position of the Maurya kingdom was not well at that time.
(iii) Av Cũ (Part II) pp.563-566 presents almost the whole biography of Caṇakya excluding the last phase of Caṇakya's life. Here the whole original story is divided in suitable parts and literal English translation of each part is given. At some places while translating, a certain liberty is taken because the language of cūrṇi is a bit hard due to the brevity, which is the stylistic peculiarity of the language. The story runs in the following manner
Passage 1 : चाणक्के - गोल्लविसए चणियग्गामो, तत्थ चणिओ माहणो, सो य सावओ, तस्स घरे साधू ठिता, पुत्तो से जातो सह दाढाहिं, तेण साधूण पाएसु ufs3ìì, àf¿ vfùci, uen àfèfafa, àm fäfari मा दोग्गतिं जाइस्सइत्ति दंता agı, yuìì fa 3⁄4ukuvi onfeci, àfé ufùrdi - fån hoog ? galèfa fädakal भविस्सति
।
-
In golla region, there was a village called Canika (? Caṇaka). There lived a brahmin named Canika. He was a (Jaina) layman. Once, some (Jaina) mendicants resorted to his house. At that time a boy was born to him. The baby had molar teeth right from the birth. Canaka kept the baby at the revered feet of the mendicants. They told, ‘He will be a king.' He thought, 'Since the king has to do many sinful activities (knowingly or unknowningly), he may go to hell in the next birth.' With this thought, he filed the baby's molar teeth with a chisel. He told the mendicants what he had done. They exclaimed, 'What else shall we do? In spite of your efforts, he will be a pseudo-king (i.e. a kingmaker)'.

Page #83

73
Passage 2 : उम्मुक्कबालभावेण चोद्दस विज्जाठाणाणि आगमियाणि, सोवि सावओ संतुट्ठो, एगाओ भद्दमाहणाओ आणिया भज्जा से, अण्णदा कम्ही कोतुए भज्जा से मातिघरं गता, केति भणंति - भातिविवाहे गता, तीसे य भइणी अण्णेसिं खद्धादाणियाणं दिण्णेल्लियाओ, ता अलंकितभूसिताओ आगताओ, सव्वो परिजणो ताहिं समं लवति, सा एगंते अच्छति, तीसे अद्धिती जाता, घरं आगया, अद्धितिलद्धा अच्छति, णिब्बंधे सिट्टं, तेण चिंतियं - णंदो पाडलिपुत्ते देति तत्थ वच्चामि, गतो ।
When the boy passed his childhood and became a teen-ager, he acquired mastery over the fourteen branches of knowledge (the veda, the vedanga etc.) The layman (his father) was very happy. From a noble brahmin family he brought wife for his young son. On some occasion, she (Canakya's wife) went to her mother's house. Some say that she went there for the marriage of her brother. Her sisters were married in very rich houses. They came there, adorned with precious ornaments. All the relatives talked with the rich sisters. She secluded herself in a corner. She become depressed and restless. The same mood continued when she came back. Caṇakya (her husband) insisted her to tell the reason. He thought, 'In Pataliputra the king Nanda gives out ample donations. I will go there.' He arrived there.
Passage 3 : कत्तियपुण्णिमाए पुव्वण्णत्थे आसणे पढमे णिविट्ठो, तं च तस्स साल्लियातस्स राउलस्स सता ठविज्जति, सिद्धपुत्तो य णंदेण समं तत्थ आगतो भ
एस बंभणो णंदवंसस्स छायं अक्कमिऊण ठितो, दासीए भणितो - भगवं ! बिति आसणे णिवेसाहित्ति, अस्त्विति बितिए आसणे कुंडियं ठवेति, एवं ततिए दंडगं, चउत्थे गणेत्तियं, पंचमे जण्णोवइयं, धिट्ठोत्ति निच्छूढो, पादो पढमो उक्खित्तो, भणति य “कोशेन भृत्यैश्च निबद्धमूलं, पुत्रैश्च मित्रैश्च विवृद्धशाखम् ।
उत्पाट्य नंदं परिवर्तयामि, हठाद् द्रुमं वायुरिवोग्रवेगः ।। "
He went there on the full-moon-day of the month of kārttika and sat on the first (foremost) seat. The seats were already arranged
-

Page #84

74
with some protocol. The seat was reserved for the chief brahmin in the royal court (? : the brother in law of the king). Nanda entered the hall with the siddhaputra (a fortune-teller). He pointed out that, “This brahmin has overshadowed the seats reserved for the persons belonging to the Nanda family.'
One female servant approached Cāņakya and told him, “Sir, please have the next seat.’ ‘Alright, he said and put his water-pot (kamandalu) on the second seat, his staff (danda) on the third, rosary on the fourth and the secred thread on the fifth seat. Due to this arrogancy, he was expelled from the hall. When he took his first step, he exclaimed - “As the terrific wind uproots a big tree though deeprooted and fully grown with branches, I shall uproot the Nanda family though deeprooted with enormous wealth and a band of servants and extensively spread due to the assistance provided by kinsfolk and friends.'' Passage 4 : णिग्गतो, पुरिसं मग्गति, सुतं च णेणं बिंबंतरितो राया होहामित्ति, नंदस्स मोरपोसगा, तेसिं गामं गतो परिव्वायगलिंगेणं, तेसिं महत्तरस्स धीताए चंदपीयने डोहलो जातो, सो समुदाणेतो गतो, ताणि तं पुच्छंति, जदि ममं दारगं देह तो णं पाएमि चंद, पडिसुणेति, पडमंडवो कतो, तद्दिवसं पुण्णिमा, मज्झे छिदं, मज्झण्हं गते चंदे सव्वरसालूहिं दव्वेहिं संजोएत्ता आसण्णे थालं भरितं कतं, सद्दाविता, पेक्खति पियति य, उवरि पुरिसो उच्छाडेति, अवणीते पुत्तो जातो, संवड्डति, इमोऽवि धातुबिलाणि मग्गति ।
He (Canakya) came out swiftly. Searched for a proper person. He had already heard from his father that he is going to be a kingmaker. Nanda had some peacock-keepers. Having dressed like an ascetic, he went to their native place. At that time, the daughter of the village-head had preganancy-longings to drink the moon. During his alms-wanderings, he went there. The relatives asked his

Page #85

75
help. He agreed to give them the solution on one condition. He said, 'If you will give the custody of the child to me, then only I will fulfil her longings. They agreed.
An open shade was erected. The top was covered with a cloth. It was a full-moon-night. There was a proper hole in the middle of the shade-cloth. It was midnight. A sweet-dish was prepared and was garnished with all attractive food-articles. The dish was kept exactly beneath the hole. The moon was shining in the middle of the sky with calm splendor. A man, on the roof uncovered the hole for some time. The moon was reflected in the dish. The pregnant daughter drank the preparation. The man covered the hole again. When longings were fulfilled, she was satisfied and delivered a son. The son was growing. At that time he (Cāņakya) was busy in search of wealth with the help of the science called 'dhātuvidyā”. Passage 5 : A GRU HH Tufa, run fautht, auch gyffus, पेच्छति, तेण विमग्गितो, अम्हवि दिज्जतु, भणति - गावीओ लहेहि, मा मारेज्ज कोति, भणति - वीरभोज्जा पुहवी, णातं जथा विण्णाणं से अत्थि । तो कस्सति दारएहिं कहितं - परिवायगपुत्तो एस, अहं परिव्वाओ, जामु जा ते रायाणं करेमि, alfsen
The boy loitered in the play with his friends. He always played a role of a king. The second version of the story is - Cāņakya returned. He saw the boy donating cows to the supplicants. Cāņakya said, 'Give some cows to me.' The boy answered, “Take away any of the cows.' Cāņakya said, 'Don't give me other's cows. The owners will kill you.' He said, “The whole earth is enjoyed by a person who possesses valour.' Cāņakya thought that the boy was a genius.
Some boys approached Cāņakya and informed that this boy was given to a nendicant. he said, 'It's me. Let us go. I shall make

Page #86

76
you a king.' They started their journey.
Passage 6 : लोगो मिलितो, पाडलिपुत्तं रोहितं, णंदेणं भग्गो परिव्वायगो, आसेहिं पुट्ठिते लग्गो, चंदउत्तो य पउमसरे णिबुड्डो । इमो उपस्पृशति, सण्णाए भ बोलियत्ति, उत्तिण्णा णासंति, अण्णे भणंति - चंदउत्तं पउमिणीसंडे छुभित्ता ओ जातो, पच्छा एगेण जच्चकिसोरगगतेण आसवारेण पुच्छितो भ एस पउमसरे पविट्ठो, ततो तेण दिट्ठो, ततो घोडगो चाणक्कस्स अल्लिविओ, तत्थेव खग्गं मुक्कं, जले पवेसणट्ट्याए कंचुयं मुयति ताव खग्गेण दुहाकतो, चंदगुत्तो वाहित्ता चडावितो, पलाया, पुच्छितो - तंवेलं किं तुमे चिंतितंति ? भणति ध्रुवं एतं चेव सोभणं, अज्जो चेव जाणतित्ति णातो जोग्गो, ण एस विपरिणमतित्ति ।
Many people joined them. They encircled Pataliputra. Nanda's people chased the mendicant (Cānakya ) and he fleed. Some horsemen ran after Cāṇakya and Candragupta. Candragupta took shelter in a lotus-pond. Caṇakya stood by the pond sipping water, as if pretending a religious rite. When the horsemen asked him about Candragupta, Caṇakya told them by sign that he is under the water. They plunged down to search him. in the meantime, both ran away. The other version of the story is - Caṇakya caused Candragupta to hide in the lotus-creeper and himself acted like a washer-man. Afterwards, a horse-man mounted upon an excellent horse, asked Caṇakya about Candragupta. He said, 'Oh ! he has just entered into the lotus-pond.' The horse-man saw Candragupta. He kept the horse in the custody of Caṇakya. Left his sword nearby. When he was engaged in removing his dress, before entering the water, Caṇakya swiftly picked the sword and cut him into pieces.
Caṇakya called out Candragupta, both mounted on the horse and ran away. Cāṇakya asked Candragupta, 'What do you think at that time when I told about you to the horseman ?' Candragupta said, ‘What you have told, will be in my favour only. Sir, it is you who
-
—

Page #87

know perfectly what is beneficial for me.' Cāņakya realized that he is a perfect man to achieve his goal. He will never misunderstand me. Passage 7 : पच्छा छुहाइओ, चाणक्को तं ठवेत्ता अतिगतो, बीभेति - मा एत्थं णज्जेज्जामोत्ति, माहणस्स बहिं णिग्गयस्स पोट्टं फालितं, दधिकरंबं गहाय गतो, जिमितो, अण्णत्थ गामे रत्तिं समुदाणंति, थेरि य पुत्तभंडाणं विलेवितं देति उण्हं, एक्केण मज्झे हत्थो छूढो, दड्डो रोवति, ताए य भण्णति - चाणक्कमंगलोसि, पुच्छियं, भणति - पासाणि पढमं घेप्पति ।
At some other time, Candragupta was hungry. Cāņakya asked him to stay at a particular place and went elsewhere to arrange food for him. Cāņakya was anxious and thought, “That, nobody should recognize them.' He saw a brahmin, wandering in the outskirts to empty his belly. (Cāņakya knew that he has just finished his dinner.) Canakya tore open his belly. Took out the curd-rice. He made Candragupta to eat rice. Once they were wandering in search of food at a village. They saw that an old woman was serving hot gruel to her grandchildren. One of the child put its fingers in the middle of the hot gruel and its fingers were burnt. The child cried aloud. She exclaimed sponteneously, 'Are you mad like Canakya ?' Cāņakya came forward and asked her the reason. She told, 'First he should have taken the portions around Magadha.' Passage 8 : गता हिमवंतकूडं, पव्वइओ राया, तेण समं मित्तया जाता, भणति - समं समेण विभयामो रज्जं, ओतवेन्ताणं एगत्थ णगरं ण पडति, पविठ्ठो तिदंडी, वत्थूणि जोएति, इंदकुमारियाओ, तासिं तणएण ण पडति, माताए णीणाविताओ, पडितं णगरं ।
After this, both went towards the hilly region of the mount Himālaya. Parvataka (Puru or Sellyukus ?) was the king. They became friends. They decided to divide the kingdom into two equal parts after the victory. One city nearby Pāțaliputra was difficult to

Page #88

78
take over. Cāņakya entered the city in the apparel of a tridandi (a mendicant with a staff.) He inspected carefully all the objects of hindrance in the city. He saw the idols of Indrakumārī deities. Due to the occult protecting-power of the deities, they were unable to capture the city. With his yogic power (māyā) Cāņakya removed the influence of the deities and captured the city. Passage 9 : पाडलिपुत्तं रोहितं, णंदो धम्मदेवारं मग्गति, एगेण रहेण जं तरसि तं णीणेहि, दो भज्जातो एगा कण्णा दव्वं च णीणेति, कण्णा चंदउत्तं पलोएति, भणिता जाहित्ति, ताए विलग्गंतीए चंदगुत्तस्स रहे णव अरगा भग्गा, तिदंडी भणति - मा वारेहि णव पुरिसजुगाणि तुज्झं वंसो होहितित्ति, अतिगता, दो भागा कता ।
They besieged Pāțaliputra. Nanda asked dharmadvāra (a way to go away). Canakya said, "Take away a chariotful load with you.' He took away two of his wives, one daughter and some precious things with him. The princess cast a glance at Candragupta when the chariot went forward. Her father said, 'Go with him.' When she was mounting Candragupta's chariot, nine spokes of Candragupta's chariot broke down. Canakya said, 'Don't prevent her. (This is actually a good omen.) Your lineage will prosper for nine generations.' All of them entered the city. The city (and the kingdom) was divided into two equal parts. Passage 10 : एगा कन्नगा विसभाविया, तत्थ पव्वतगस्स इच्छा, सा तस्स दिण्णा, अग्गिपरियंचणे विसपरिगतो मरितुमारद्धो, भणति - वयंसग ! मरिज्जति, चंदगुत्तो रुंभामित्ति ववसितो, चाणक्केण भिगुडी कता, णियत्तो, दो रज्जाणि तस्स जाताणि ।
Cāņakya prepared a poisonous maiden (vişa-kanyā). Parvataka was attracted to her. Their marriage was settled (by Canakya). At the time of the secred rounds of fire, Parvataka perspired. Due to the contact of the perspired hand, the poison of the bride spread in the

Page #89

79
body of Parvataka. He was fainting. He said, “My friend Candragupta save me, I am dying.' Candragupta stepped forward to save him. Cāņakya lifted his eyebrows. Candragupta stopped and became the lord of both the kingdoms. Passage 11: णंदमणूसा चोरिगाए जीवंति, सो चोरग्गाहं मग्गति, तिदंडी बाहिरियाए णलदामं मुइंगमारगं दठ्ठ आगतो, रण्णा सद्दावितो, दिण्णं आरक्खं, वीसत्था कता, भत्तदाणे सकुडंबा मारिया ।
Nanda's men were living around stealthily. Cāņakya wanted to search and kill them. He was in search of a person who would do this task. Once he saw Naladāma, burning the hiding places of ants (or bugs). He told the king that he had searched a proper person. The king called him and provided security for him. Naladāma gave assuarance to Nanda's people and invited them for dinner (lunch ?). Afterwards he killed them with their families. Passage 12 : आणाए - वंसिहि अम्बगा परिक्खित्ता, विपरीतेकते रुट्ठो, पलीवितो सव्वगामो, तेहि य गामेल्लतेहिं तस्स कप्पडियत्तणे भत्तं ण दिण्णंति काउं ।
Once Cāņakya issued order in the name of some villageheads that they should cut the mango-trees and protect bamboothickets by making compound-wall of mango-wood. The villagechiefs thought over it and carried out the order in exactly the opposite way. Cāņakya was furious. He ordered his men to set fire on the whole village because in difficult days of his wanderings they refused to give him food. Passage 13 : कोसनिमित्तं परिणामिता बुद्धी, जूतं रमति कूडपासएहिं, सोवण्णं थालं दीणारभरितं जो जिणति तस्स, अहं जिणामि एक्को दायव्वो । अतिचिरंति अण्णं उवायं चिंतेति ।
Later on, Cāņakya applied his pāriņāmiki-buddhi (i.e. wisdom acquired through experience) to gather wealth for the royal treasury.

Page #90

80
First he prepared false (ficticious) dices and invited people to play Dyūta. He declared, 'If the opponent wins, I shall give him a plateful of golden coins. If I win, the player should give me only one coin.' Due to the tricky dice-playing, he always won. He thought that it will take a long time to gather ample wealth. Therefore he wanted to implement other effective method. Passage 14 : नागराणं भत्तं देति, मज्जपाणं च दिण्णं, मत्तेसु पणच्चितो भणति गायंतो -
दो मज्झ धातुरत्ताओ, कंचणकुंडिया तिदंडं च ।
राया मे वसवत्ती, एत्थवि ता मे होलं वाएहि ।। Cāņakya arranged a grand dinner for the wealthy citizens. He provided a liquor-bar also. When all the rich guests were under the influence of liquor, he started dancing (as if a druncard) and started to sing the self-composed song - "I have two red clothes and a golden pot with a golden staff. But see, the king is under my control. Oh drummers, beat the drums over my success." Passage 15 : अण्णो असहमाणो भणति -
गयपोयगस्स (भद्दस्स, मन्थरगइए उ) जोयणसहस्सं ।
पदे पदे सतसहस्सा, एत्थवि ता मे होलं वाएहि ।। A rich guy did not tolerate the song of Cāņakya and boasted, "If a young one of an elephant walks slowly the distance of thousand yojanas, I can pour one lakh golden coins on each step of the elephant. Such is my wealth. Oh drummers, beat the drums on my riches." Passage 16 : अण्णो असहमाणो भणति -
तिलआढगस्स वुत्तस्स, णिप्फण्णस्स बहुसइतस्स ।
तिले तिले सतसहस्सं, एत्थवि ता मे होलं वाएहि ।। The other jealous person started singing, “If I saw sesame

Page #91

81
seeds measuring one ādhaka and if I get excellent crops, I can put one lakh golden coins for each sesame. Oh drummers, beat the drums on my riches." Passage 17 : अण्णो भणति -
णवपाउसंमि पुण्णाए, गिरिनइयाए य सिग्घवेगाए ।
एगाहमहितमेत्तेणं, णवणीतेण पालिं बंधामि ।। Another rich person came forward and announced, “If a mountain-river, full of water, flows forcefully in rainy season, still I can build a weir of butter which is produced by churning one day's butter-milk. Now beat the drums for me.” Passage 18 :
जच्चाण वरकिसोराणं, तद्दिवसं तु जायमेत्ताणं ।
केसेहिं णभं छाएमि, एत्थवि ता मे होलं वाएहि ।। One other rich person added, “I am able to cover the sky with the hair of the young ones of the excellent horses, born on the same day in my stud-farm. Now beat the drums for me !" Passage 19 :
दो मज्झ अत्थि रतणाणि, सालिपसूई य गद्दभिया य । छिण्णा छिण्णावि रूहंति, एत्थवि ता मे होलं वाएहि ।। सेतुसुक्किल्लो णिच्चसुगंधो, भज्ज अणुव्वय णत्थि पवासो ।
णिरिणो य दुपंचसतो य, एत्थवि ता मे होलं वाएहि ।।
The another rich farmer added, “I have two excellent species of rice-grain. If we sow the first type, we can reap any variety of rice as per our will. The second type viz. gardabhikā is so wonderful that, if we cut it, it grows again and again. So beat the drums for me too."
The last one declared, “I possess vast flower-gardens and fruit-farms, having excellent fragrance ; my wife is loyal ; I never go

Page #92

82
on tour ; I have no loan at my credit and I possess thousand golden coins. Oh drummers ! beat the drum on my happy (satisfied) life !" Passage 20 :
एवं णाऊणं रयणाई मग्गिऊणं गोट्ठागाराणि सालीणं भरियाणि रयणाई गद्दभियादीणि पुच्छितो छिण्णाणि छिण्णाणि जायंति, आसा एगदिवसजाता मग्गिता, एगदिवसियं णवणीतं मग्गितं । एस परिणामिता चाणक्कस्स बुद्धी ।
Thus having known the abundance of wealth of rich persons, Cāņakya asked for the jewels, the species of grains, the horses born during one day and the butter produced in one day. Thus Cāņakya filled up the royal food-grannaries and treasury.
All these are the examples of Cāņakya's wisdom-acquired through experience.
We observe that the famous cūrņikāra Jinadāsagani has given the life-story of Cāņakya-Candragupta up to this point. From the cūrņis on Niśītha and daśavaikālika, we know that the cūrņi of Āvaśyaka contains the whole biography of Cāņakya up to his death. But in spite of our rigiorous search, we were unable to find it in the ĀvCū. So, in continuation with the story of the ĀvCū, the further
life-story is added here from the Nis Cū. and the DasaCū. to know
the whole biography of Cāņakya at a glance. The translation is mostly according to the original text with a bit freedom. [15-17]
Niśītha-cūrņi of Jinadāsagani-mahattara belongs to the 6th - 7th century A.D. The other name of this cūrņi is Niśītha-veśeșa-cūrņi. The salient features of this cūrņi are almost like the AvCū. Three important references to Cāņakya are found in the 2nd, 3rd and 4th parts of the concerned text. All the references are connected with the Jaina monastic conduct. The original textual parts and its summary is given herewith.

Page #93

[15] The Niśītha-cūrņi (Part II) p.33 quotes that -
‘अमच्चो' चाणक्को, तदुवलक्खितो दिटुंतो, जहा - तेण चाणक्केण योगविसभाविता गंधा कता सुबुद्धिमंत्रिवधाय । इदमावश्यके गतार्थम् ।
"The brief analogy is about the minister Cāņakya. It is said that Cāņakya prepared a fragrant poison by secret method for killing the minister Subandhu. The incident is already given in the Āvaśyaka.”
We were unable to trace the full incident in the ĀvCū., but the Daśavaikālika-cūrņi gives the full story. Critical observations are noted after the text of DaśCū, therefore they are avoided at this place. [16] Niśītha-cūrņi (Part III) pp.423-424 Passage 1 : अप्पाणं अंतरहितं करेंतो जो पिंडं गेण्हति सो अंतद्धाणपिंडो भण्णति । तत्थ उदाहरणं -
If one partakes food with somebody remaining invisible to the eyes then it is called 'antardhāna-pinda'. Such food is prohibited for a monk. The example for this is as follows - Passage 2 : पाडलिपुत्ते णगरे चंदगुत्तो राया, चाणक्को मंती, सुठ्ठिया आयरिया । ते य - अप्पणा गंतुं असमत्था ओमकाले सीसस्स साहुगणं दाउं तं सुभिक्खं पठ्वेति। तस्स य सीसस्स अंतद्धाणजोगं रहे एकांते कहेति । सो य अंजणजोगो दोहिं खुड्डोहिं सुतो ।
King Candragupta was ruling at Pāțaliputra. Cāņakya was his chief-minister. The Jaina preceptor Susthita, was living there. He was physically unable to wander (as per the monastic code of conduct). Therefore at the time of severe drought, he handed over the group of monks to his immediate disciple and sent the monks to a prosperous region. Before their departure, he imparted a mantra to the chief of disciples in seclusion, due to which one can disappear

Page #94

84
for a specific time by applying collyrium to the eyes. Two junior monks overheard the mantra. Passage 3 : ततो सो गच्छो पयट्टो जतो सुभिक्खं । ततो खुड्या दो वि आयरियणेहेण पडिबद्धा देसंताओ गच्छस्स ओसरित्ता आयरियसमीवं आगया । ततो ते थेरा जं लब्भंति तं तेसिं खुड्डगाणं समतिरेगं देंति, अप्पणा ओमं करेंति ।
Next day the whole group started its journey towards a prosperous region (where one can get alms easily.) The two junior monks returned from the boundary of the nearby place because of the love and regard towards their guru. They started living with the guru. The senior monk (Susthita) started a practice to distribute the major part of the alms among those two monks, leaving a little for himself. Passage 4 : ततो तेहिं दोहिं वि खुड्डोहिं सो अंतद्धाणजोगो मेलिओ, एगेणं अक्खी अंजिता बितितो ण पस्सति । एवं लद्धपच्चया भोयणकाले सह रण्णा चंदगुत्तेण भुंजंति, जं रण्णो सारीरयं भत्तं तं ते अंतद्धिया भुंजंति, ततो रण्णो ओमोयरियाए दोब्बलं जायं ।
Then both the junior monks tested the mantra of antardhāna. When one of them anointed his eye with collyrium, the other could not see him. Thus, when convinced, they went to Candragupta and started sharing his food at the time of meals. They devoured the food by entering into Candragupta's stomach invisibally. Day by day Candragupta became weaker and weaker. Passage 5 : ततो चाणक्केण पुच्छितो कीस परिहाणी ? भणाति - “मज्झ भत्तं कोति अंतद्धितो पक्खिवति त्ति, ण जाणामि ।” ततो चाणक्केण समंता कुड्डे दाउं एगदुवारा भुंजणभूमी कता । दारमूले य सुहुमो इट्टालचुण्णो विक्खित्तो । राया अंतो एगागी णिविट्ठो । ताहे खुड्डा आगता, पविठ्ठा अंतो । दिट्ठा पयपद्धती चुण्णे ।
Cāņakya asked, “Why you are looking weak, day by day ?' He replied, “Somebody eats my food invisibally when it enters into

Page #95

85
my stomach.' Then Cāņakya closed all doors of the dining hall and kept open only one door. He scattered some fine brick-powder at the doorsteps. The king ate his food in seclusion. At that time, the two monks arrived. Entered into the hall, leaving their footmarks on the brick-powder. Passage 6 : चाणक्केण णायं – पादचारिणो एते, अंजणसिद्धा । ताहे दारं ठवेउं धूमो कतो, अंसुणा गलंतेण गलितं अंजणं, दिलु खुड्डादुगं । चंदगुत्तो पिच्छति – “अहमेतेहिं विट्टालितो ।” ततो चाणक्केण भणियं - "एते रिसओ कुमारसमणा, पवित्तं ते एतेहिं सह भोयणं, तुमे सव्वसो अपवित्तेण एते विट्टालिता ।"
Cāņakya realized that those were the footmarks of the añjanasiddha yogins. He closed the doors and filled the hall with smoke. The smoke caused tears in their eyes and the collyrium faded out. The two monks were now visible. Candragupta commented, “These persons defiled me.' Cāņakya remarked, “These are pious and celibate young sages. It is actually meritorious to share food with them. In fact they are polluted because of your carnality.' Passage 7 : ततो अप्पसागारियं चाणक्केण णीणिता । थेराणं समीवं चाणक्को गतो - “कीस खुड्डेण सारवेह ?' ततो थेरेहिं चाणक्को उवालद्धो – “तुम परमो सावगो, एरिसे ओमकाले साधूवावारं ण वहसि” त्ति । तेण भणियं – “संता पडिचोदणा, मिच्छा मे दुक्कडं" ति । गतो, खुड्डाण य वावारंतो पवूढो ।
जे भिक्खू जोगपिंडं , भुंजेज्ज सयं अहव सातिज्जे । सो आणा अणवत्थं , मिच्छत्त-विराधणं पावे ।।
Bhāsyagāthā 4468
The two monks were driven out by Cāņakya. Cāņakya went to the senior monk with those two junior monks and asked, 'Don't you have a control over your juniors ?' Then the monk said surcastically, 'You are an excellent layman. In these days of drought, is it not your responsibility to provide them food ?' Cāņakya said in apologetic

Page #96

tone, 'I agree that it is my fault. Please forgive me for my wrong behaviour.' From that day he personally looked after the well-being of the two junior monks.
The concerned bhāṣyagāthā of the Niśītha is - "A monk who himself earns the alms by using his yogic powers or enjoyes such food brought by the others, he is the law-breaker of the Jina-śāsana and due to this, he deviates from the right faith."
[17] The Niśītha-cūrni (Part IV) pp. 10-12 includes a story in which it is discussed that, 'transgressing an order', is a more serious offence than a mistake'. The concerned text is
एत्थ दिट्ठतो मुरियादि । मुरियत्ति मोरपोसगवंसो चंदगुत्तो । आदिग्गहणातो अण्णे रायाणो । ते आणाभंगे गुरुतर डंडं पवत्र्त्तेति । एवं अम्ह वि आणा बलिया । चंदगुत्तो मोरपोसगो त्ति जे अभिजाणंति खत्तिया ते तस्स आणं परिभवंति । चाणक्कस्स चिंता-आणाहीणो केरिसो राया ? कहं आणातिक्खो होज्ज ? त्ति । तस्स य चाणक्कस्स कप्पडियत्ते अडंतस्स एगम्मि गामे भत्तं न लद्धं । तत्थ य गा बहू अंबा वंसा य । तस्स य गामस्स पडिणिविट्ठे णं आणट्ट्वणणिमित्तं लिहियं पेसियं इमेरिसं “आम्रान् छित्वा वंशानां वृत्तिः शीघ्रं कार्ये” ति ।
तेहि य गामेयगेहिं दुल्लिहियं ति काउं वंसे छेत्तुं अंबाण वती कता । गवेसाविया चाणक् “किं कतं ?” ति । आगतो, उवालद्धा, एते वंसा रोधगादिसु उवउज्जंति, कीस भे छिण्णा ?, दंसियं लेहचोरियं - “अण्णं संदिट्ठ अण्णं चेव करेहि” त्ति डंडपत्ता । ततो तस्स गामस्स सबालवुड्ढेहिं पुरिसेहिं अधोसिरेहिं वतिं काउं सो गामो सव्वो दड्ढो । अण्णे भांति - सबालवुड्ढा पुरिसा तीए वतीए छोढुं दड्ढा । The purport of the text can be summarized in the following
manner -
""
86
-
"Here, an analogy of Maurya is given. 'Maurya' means 'Candragupta' who was born in the family of peacock-breeders. This narrative is applicable to the other kings also. They punish the law-breakers severely. Likewise, ‘an order' is more important for
us.'

Page #97

87
Those Ksatriyas who knew about the lower caste of Candragupta, disobeyed his orders. Cāņakya thought, 'What is the use of this type of king ? How can we strengthen his power ?' When Cāņakya was wandering in search of food in his bad days, he has not got food in one of the village. There were a lot of mango-groves and bamboothickets in that village. For giving a harsh punishment to the villagers, he sent a written oder - 'Cut the mangoes and make a compound wall to protect the bambooes, as soon as possible.'
The villagers thought that there is a mistake in the order. So they cut the bambooes and fenced the mango-groves. Cāņakya send a man to follow their activities. The man told the truth. Cānakya taunted, “The bambooes are valuable. Why do you cut them ?' The villagers showed the fault in the order. He said, 'You are told to do something but you have done it otherwise, so you are worthy to be punished.' Then the whole village was burnt including the children, aged people etc., after having hanging them with their heads down. Some say that Cāņakya made the villagers inside the compoundwall and put fire on them.
Critical Comments:
The cūrņikāra compares the strict orders of the Jīnas with the strict orders of Cāņakya. Candragupta's lower caste is highlighted and it is told that the other ksatriyas humiliate him due to this reason. Cāņakya's method was no doubt inhuman but it was praised by the cūrņikāra because it was beneficial to keep good gover
nance. General observations on the story of Cāņakya in the Āvaśyaka
cūrni and Niśītha-cūrni:

Page #98

88
* It is the oldest continuous life-story of Cāņakya found in the Jaina
literature, whether the Švetāmbara or Digambara, documented in
a very brief manner. * If supplied with the Niśītha-cūrņi, the story not only reveals the
whole biography of Cāņakya but also the Jaina attitude to look at
him. * All the later Jaina narratives are only the elaborations of the
episodes documented in the Āvaśyaka-cūrņi. Even Hemacandra's Cāņakya-account in the Pariśīsta-parva is not the exception to this fact. ‘Golla' is the birthplace of Cāņakya. If the name designates the region at the bank of the river Godāvari, then it supports the view of T. Ganapathi Shastry, that probably Cāņakya belongs to the southern part of India because, the oldest manuscript of the Kauțilīya Arthaśāstra is found near Trivendrum. This view is not accepted by many scholars. The name of the village viz. Canaka and the name of his father viz. Caņika are conspicuously ficticious and imagined after the name of 'Cāņakya’. On this analogy, some Jaina authors say that the name of his mother was Caņeśvarī. But it is true that the Jaina tradition accepts the name “Cāņakya’ as his first name and has very rerely used his other two names i.e. Vişnugupta and
Kautilya. * When the incidents are narrated, the ĀvCū. invariably calls him
3447 alucht but when it refers to Cāņakya's anthological treatise, it says, '3Trent falfsgenic agi 3449|| \ In the Anuyogadvāra and Nandi also, we find the name of the śāstra as Jolfsge.

Page #99

* The efforts of Cāṇakya's Jainification are not seen in the Avaśyakacūrni except in the story 'पर - पाखंड - पसंसा'. Though Cānakya's father is depicted as a Jaina householder, the brahmanic elements in Caṇakya are obviously stronger.
We find two important references to Caṇakya's wife in the AvCu. but her name is not given. She belongs to a brahmin family and it is told that she is partial towards brahmin-ascetics. Due to her depressed mood, Caṇakya approaches Nanda to get reasonable donation.
*
89
*
Caṇakya's inborn teeth, the prophecy of the Jaina mendicants, filing of the teeth and his being the king-maker all these details are found only in the Jaina tradition and are most probably fanciful.
The famous account of Cāṇakya's insult in the royal palace is almost similar to that of their Hindu or Brahmanic counter-parts but the incident of occupying many seats by keeping his staff, water-pot, rosary etc. is new in the AvCu. No reasonable explanation for this queer act is found in the later Jaina literature. The occult yogic powers of Cāṇakya are reffered to in some incidents but as the Hindusources depict, we cannot designate them as a 'black-magic' (kṛtyā-prayoga).
The AvCu. and NiśCu. specifically say that Candragupta was not a kṣatriya. He was a grandson of a peacock-keeper of the Nandas. The name of Candragupta's father is not mentioned. He was called 'maurya' due to his mother's lineage. It is specially noted down that some people didnot honour Candragupta because of his lower caste. Still it is not depicted anywhere that Caṇakya disregarded Candragupta due to his being a low-born. Unlike the

Page #100

90
Mudrārākṣasa's Caṇakya, he never calls him 'vṛṣala'. The incident of fulfilling the pregnancy-longings of Candragupta's mother is the free-lance display of the curṇikāra's power of imagination, certainly carved after 'the mirror and the moon' episode of lord Rama's childhood.
Cāṇakya's first meeting with Candragupta when he was a teenager, is documented with some other versions. We can guess that there would be some floating myths about this in the soci
ety.
The story of 'the old lady and hot gruel' is a peculiar Indian motif, oftenly used in the story literature. We find the same motif in the biography of Shivaji mahārāja in the later literature. Caṇakya's political wisdom and Candragupta's bravery, loyalty and power of organization is evident in their joint-ventures to defeat the powerful Nanda kingdom with the help of Parvataka (might be an administrator appointed by Alexander the Great.) All these magnificiant qualities are belittled if we read the Hindu sources carefully, where Caṇakya kills Nanda by performing the magical rites.
The preceptor-disciple-relationship between Cāṇakya and Candragupta is effectfully highlighted in the AvCū. and NiśCū. at many places. It leaves no scope for the conflict between them whether real or pseudo, as depicted in the Mudrārākṣasa. According to the NiśCū. it was Bindusāra, who dishonoured Caṇakya, after the death of Candragupta, because of the malicious reporting of Subandhu, the enemy of Cāṇakya.
* It is already noted down that all the references in the Niśīthabhāṣya and Niśītha-cūrṇi are closely connected with the Jaina

Page #101

91
monastic conduct. In fact, we can infer that many of the rules in the cheda-sutras came into vogue due to the strict law-code of Cāṇakya.
It can be said that the curṇikāra was a thorough reader of the Kauṭiliya Arthaśāstra because in the interesting story of merchants, the measures implimented by Caṇakya to fill the royal treasury are obviously taken from the 92nd adhyaya of Arthaśāstra viz. 'kośa-samgraha'.
* It is curious that the cūrṇikāra does not throw light on the previous relationship between Cāṇakya and Subandhu. He has not identified him with Sakaṭāla.
The horrific story of Caṇakya's death is almost the same in the Śvetambara and Digambara literature.
In totally we can say that, the cūrṇikāra basically has presented Caṇakya as an example of pāriņāmikī-buddhi. Though Cāṇakya has implimented harsh measures and deceitful tacticks, it was all meant for the well-being of the king and the kingdom. This genius chief-minister was personally so detached and selfless that the Jainas adore him for his loyalty, and his serene state of mind, at the time of death.
[18] The Acaranga-cūrṇi is a text which is traditionally ascribed to the famous cūrṇikāra Jinadāsagani (6th-7th century A.D.) But when we closely examine the language, it resembles the classical Jaina Māhārāṣṭrī than the old Jaina Māhārāṣṭrī. It contains only a passing reference about Cāṇakya and the text does not provide any clue or cross-reference of the Avasyaka-cūrṇi.
(1) The context of this reference is very peculiar. At the very beginning of the first uddeśaka of the second adhyayana of Acārānga

Page #102

(I), a long list of close relatives is given
माया मे पिया मे
भज्जा मे इच्चत्थं गढिए लोए वसे पत्ते ।
➖➖➖
92
Ācārā. 1.2.1
At the end, it is told that due to the emotional engrossment in these relations, one gets entangled and becomes malicious. Here the cūrṇikāra notes down many mythological and historical examples. In the context of 'wife' (bhajjā), the author writes ‘अणलंकिया हसियत्ति चाणक्केण णंदवंसो उच्छादितो' (ācārānga-cūrni p.49)
Caṇakya's wife was ridiculed and neglected by the relatives because she was not adorned with jewellery. Considering her anxiety, Caṇakya went to the king Nanda hoping gracious donations. He was insulted in the court of Nanda and ultimately rooted out the Nanda dynasty.
We see that, no new details of Cāṇakya are provided here but a particular incident of Cāṇakya's life is examined here from different viewpoint. The story of Caṇakya's wife was well-known. The cūrṇikāra thinks that his wife was ultimately responsible to instigate Caṇakya for asking donations to Nanda. And the remote cause of the destruction of Nandas is Cāṇakya's wife and his attachment towards her.
When we read the same story in the Avaśyaka-cūrṇi, we do not feel that Caṇakya's wife is blamable for the curṇikāra. It is a subject of debate whether the cūrṇikāras of the Avaśyaka and Acārānga are the same or not. But one thing is certain that while explaining scriptural texts, the commentators remember Caṇakya, every now and then.
(2) We find some special features of golladeśa in the Acārāngacūrņi. According to Dr. J.C.Jain, 'golla' is the region situated near the

Page #103

93
river Godāvarī. Some customs of golladeśa are mentioned. It is told that in the month of caitra, there is cold weather in golla. The slices of raw mangoes are dried in sunshine and a drink called 'ambapāņaga' is prepared. The wheel of a potter-man is called 'asavattaa' in this region. (910 Hilera dal sitETH, J.C.Jain, p.213)
We are unable to confirm that whether it is the same ‘golladeśa' where Cāņakya was born or not, because it is not noted in the Ācārānga-cūrņi. The Āvaśyaka refers golladeśa but the above-mentioned description is not documented there. Thus the puzzle of Cāņakya's birth-place remains unsolved. [19] The Sūtrakṛtānga-cūrņi which is probably written in the 8th9th century, is anonymous and its language is designated nearer to the classical Jaina Māhārāstrī. (1) While commenting on a gāthā (Sūtrakịtānga 1.8.5), the cūrņikāra quotes Cāņakya as an example of deceitfulness.
The concerned cūrņi says -
'माइणो कटु मायाओ कामभोगे समाहरे' - तेण चाणक्क-कोडिल्लं ईसत्थादी मायाओ अधिज्जति जहा परो वंचेतव्वो । तहा वाणियगादिणो 3401940-D MUGIFE 37701 shfruifa 1 (Sūtrakrtānga-cūrņi p.167)
Those who want to deceive others, learn the science based on crookedness. Likewise the merchants etc. gather wealth by bribing and treachery General Observations: * Probably this is the first Jaina refeence in which Cāņakya's
censure is explicitly seen. * Cāņakya and Kautilya, both the names occur in the same
sentence. Probably the cūrņikāra might have thought that Cāņakya is his first name and Kautilya is an adjective which is really meaningful.

Page #104

94
The anonymous cūrṇikāra opines his own view that the merchants etc. have learnt the art of gathering wealth from Caṇakya. The Avaśyaka-cūrṇi quotes the story of merchants as an example of Cāṇakya's pāriṇāmikī-buddhi, in which a sense of admiration is seen, while in the Sūtrakṛtānga-curņi a sense of reproach is quite evident.
(2) Sūtrakṛtānga 1.8.4 reads
सत्थमेगे तु सिक्खंता, अतिवायाय पाणिणं । एगे मंते अहिज्जंति, पाणभूयविहेडिणो ॥
While commenting upon this gāthā, the cūrṇikāra says एगे असंजता, न सर्वे अथवा सर्वे कारणा अस्त्रशास्त्राण्यधीयते, हंभीमासुरुक्खं कोडल्लगं बावत्तरिं वा कलाओ सुठु सिक्खति ।
(Sūtrakṛtānga-cūrṇi p.177)
———
The tentative translation will be as follows
Some householders or unrestrained monks, or (we can say) all, learn astraśāstras (i.e. the science of weapons or warfare) for particular reason and who are keen in harming or killing others, learn thesciences like the Hambhīmāsurukkha (?), Kautilyaka and all the 72 arts (or sciences).
General Observations:
Here, Kautilya is mentioned as a promoter of astraśāstra and not of arthaśāstra. The cūrṇikāra prefers the reading 'atthasattha' because he wants to despise Kautilya (he has not used the name Cāṇakya) for his deceitful activities and violence.
It is sure that Jinadāsagaṇi is not the author of this cūrṇi because these views are totally against the views expressed in the curṇis on the Avaśyaka, Niśītha and Daśavaikālika.
We observe that though Caṇakya is generally praised for his pārināmikī-buddhi and pandita-marana in the previous litera

Page #105

95
ture of the curṇikāra, he is very bold and transparent in his assessment of Caṇakya. The present cūrṇikāra has connected Cānakya with the vices like ‘māyā', ‘vañcanā' and ‘prānātipāta'. It is noteworthy that the stalwarts like Haribhadra, Śīlānka, Abhayadeva, Malayagiri, Jayasimha and even Hemacandra have not paid any attention to the views expressed in the Sūtrakṛtāngacūrṇi and have retained the same position that of Jinadāsagaṇi. [20] (1) The Daśavaikālika-cūrni (pp.81-82) quotes that, ‘The whole story of Cāṇakya is given in the Avaśyaka-cūrṇi up to the death of Candragupta and the coronation of Bindusāra.' Immediately after this remark, the rest of the story of Caṇakya upto his death is told.
Passage 1 : नंदसंतीओ य सुबंधू नाम अमच्चो । सो चाणक्कस्स पदोसमावण्णो छिड्डाणि मग्गइ, अण्णया रायाणं विण्णवइ, जहावि तुम्हेहिं अम्ह वित्तं (? चित्तं) न देह तहावि अम्हेहिं तुज्झ हियं वत्तव्वं, भणइ - तुम्ह माया चाणक्केण मारिया, रण्णा धाती पुच्छिया, आमंति, कारणं न पुच्छियं ।
Subandhu was the minister of the Nandas. He was very much jealous of Cāṇakya and always awaited the opportunity to slander Caṇakya in front of the king Bindusāra. Once Subandhu approached Bindusāra and told, 'Sir, though I am not in your service (or though you do not pay attention to me) it is my duty to tell the truth which is beneficial to you. See, Cāṇakya has killed your mother.' Bindusāra asked the old wet-nurse. She said, 'Yes'. He did not ask the reason or background.
Passage 2 : केणवि कारणेण रण्णो य सगासं चाणक्को आगओ, जाव दिट्ठि न देइ ताहे चाणिक्को चिंतेइ, रुट्ट्टो, अहं गयाऊत्ति काउं दव्वं पुत्तपोत्ताणं दाऊणं संगवित्ता य गंधा संजोइया, पत्तयं च लिहिऊण सोवि जोगो समुग्गे छूढो, समुग्गो चउसु मंजूसासु छूढो, तासु छुभित्ता ततो गंधोव्वरए छूढो, तं बहूहिं खीलियाहिं सुघट्टियं करेत्ता

Page #106

96
दव्वजायं णाइवग्गं च कम्मे नियोएत्ता अडवीए गोकुले इंगिणिमरणं अब्भुवगओ।
For some other work, Cāņakya came to Bindusāra. Bindusāra didn't pay attention to him. He thought that the king is displeased with him. It is better to give up the ministership and go elsewhere. Having distributed the wealth to the sons and grandsons, he collected some poisonous aroma, wrote a letter and he kept that letter fragrant into a pouch. He put that pouch inside four big chests. He kept the biggest chest in a room (lit. a fragrant-hall). The room was tightly closed by driving several nails into the door. Having done proper arrangements of his wealth and having appointed the relatives for the supervision of the work, he accepted voluntary death (inginimarana) in a cow-pen near a forest. Passage 3 : रण्णा आपुच्छियं - चाणक्को किं करेइ ? धाती य से सव्वं जहावत्तं परिकहेइ, गहिय-परमत्थेण य भणियं - अहो मया असमिक्खियं कयं, सव्वंतेउरओरोहबलसमग्गो खामेउं निग्गओ, दिट्ठो यऽणेण करिसि मज्झे ठिओ, खामिओ सबहुमाणं, भणियं चणेणं - नगरं वच्चामो, भणइ - मए सव्वपरिच्चागो कउत्ति ।
The king asked the old wet-nurse, 'What had Cāņakya done at that time ?' She told him about all the true events. (This episode is noted down in the commentary of Dharmopadeśamālā, which is translated hereafter). When Bindusāra knew the facts, he exclaimed,
'Oh ! what a blunder I have done !' With the harem and army he
marched towards Cāņakya to confess his blunder. He saw Cāņakya meditating in the cow-pen, sitting between the dried cow-dungs. The king apologized and said with a great honour, “Sir, let us go to the capital.' Canakya replied, I have abandoned all the worldly things.' Passage 4 : तओ सुबंधुणा राया विण्णविओ - अहं से पूयं करेमि, अणुयाणह, अणुण्णाए धूवं डहिऊण तम्हि चेव एगप्पदेसे करिसस्सोवरिं ते अंगारे परिठवेइ, सो य

Page #107

97
करीसो पल्लितो (? पलित्तो), दड्ढो चाणक्को, ताहे सुबंधुणा राया विण्णविओ चाणक्कस्स संतियं घरं, मम अणुजाणह, अणुण्णा गओ ।
Subandhu requested the king, 'I will honour him. Please give me consent.' After getting the consent, he went to that place where Cānakya was. He put some fragrant sticks (dhūpa) on blazing charcoal. Secretly put that fire inbetween the heap of cow-dungs. Thus Cāṇakya was burnt in the blazing fire. Subandhu requested the king, 'Sir, please permit me to inspect Caṇakya's house which is near to my residence.' The king permitted him to do so. He went to Cāṇakya's house.
Passage 5 : पच्चुवेक्खमाणेण य घरं दिट्ठो अपवरगो घट्टिओ, सुबंधू चिंतेइ - किमवि एत्थ, कवाडे भंजित्ता उग्घाडिया जाव समुग्गं मघेतगंधं सपत्तयं पेच्छइ, तं पत्तयं वाएइ, तस्स य पत्तगस्स एसो अत्थो - जो एयं चुण्णं अग्घाति, सो जइ हाति वा समालभइ अलंकारेइ सीतोदगं वा पिबति महीए सेज्जाए सुयइ जाणेण गच्छइ गंधव्वं वा सुणेइ एवमादी अण्णे वा इट्ठा विसया सेवइ जहा साहुणो अच्छंति तहा सो जइ न अच्छइ तो मरइ ।
-
While inspecting his house, Subandhu saw an inner apartment which was tightly closed. Subandhu thought, 'Something is hidden here.' He opened the door, opened the chests and at the end saw the fragrant pouch accompaning a letter. He read out the letter. The meaning was like this - "Whosoever smells this powder and then bathes, adorns oneself, drinks cool water (unboiled water), sleeps on elevated bed, goes by cart, hears music or enjoyes the other sensual pleasures, will die immediately. But if he observes the rules of monastic conduct, he will not die.”
Passage 6 : ताहे सुबंधुणा विण्णासणत्थं अण्णो पुरिसो अग्घाइत्ता सद्दाइणो विसया भुंजाविओ मओ य, ताहे सुबंधूवि जीवितासाए अकामो साहू जहा तहा अच्छइ, किं सुबंधू तहा अकामो अतो साहू भण्णइ ? एवमभुंजमाणो कामे संकप्पसंकिलिट्ठत्ता

Page #108

98
चागी न भण्णइ ।
For examining the predictability of the letter, Subandhu made some person smell the powder and enjoy the sensuous pleasures. The person died immediately. Thus out of compulsion, Subandhu led the life of a monk. But can we say that Subandhu was a real sādhu? Of course not. In the same manner, if a person helplessly abandons the pleasures and sorrowfully remembers those in his heart, then it is not considered as true renunciation.
[20] (2) The Daśavaikālika-cūrṇi, which ismost probably authored by Jinadasagani (6th-7th century A.D.) supplies the reader with two valuable references of Caṇakya.
(1) Sāmaṇṇapuvvayam' is the second adhyayana of Daśavaikālika. Its second verse is
-
वत्थगंधमलंकारं, इत्थीओ सयणाणि य ।
अच्छंदा जे न भुंजंति, न से चाइ ति वच्चई |
"One who does not enjoy clothes, perfumes, ornaments, women, beds etc. due to helplessness or compulsion, is not in real sense a self-disciplined monk.'
While commenting on the verse, the cūrṇikāra has given the story of Bindusara-Subandhu and Cāṇakya. The main purpose of this story is to highlight the deceptive monkhood of Subandhu. But it is so closely connected with Caṇakya that the curṇikāra describes the tragic end of both Subandhu and Cāṇakya in a very elaborate
manner.
We have already translated the story and given our comments on the story because in fact, it is the extention of the story given in the Avaśyaka-cūrṇi.
(2) The second reference of the Daśavaikālika-cūrṇi is connected with one of the variety of kathā, i.e. arthakatha. The cūrṇi says -

Page #109

99 “अत्थकहा जा अत्थनिमित्तं कहिज्जति सा इमाए गाहाए अणुगंतव्वा । तं जहा - favull-f444491311 --- 3772TCHET | 11 |93 Il”
The word uvāya (upāya) is explained as - gang fa gri - façait a1277061, a Hot G7115 ---'
The stories in which the measures of gaining wealth are described is called upāya. In this context, the cūrņikāra remembers Cāņakya. The story of gathering wealth for the royal treasury is mentioned here. The cross-references of the Āvaśyaka-cūrņi and Hāribhadrīya-tīkā are given by the editor. He mentions - 3419.7.95 ५६५ ; हारिभद्रीय टीका-पत्र ४३५.
We have already translated the story given in the Āvaśyakacūrņi, however we can observe that -
While enumerating the varieties of kathā, arthakathā is invariably mentioned. When the Jaina writers comment on arthakathā they immediately remember Cāņakya's Arthaśāstra and the measures adopted by Cāņakya to create or gather wealth. We cannot claim that arthakathās given in the Jaina literature are true stories. But it is quite sure that they have studied the Arthaśāstra minutely, have chosen some seeds or motifs and developed them in full narratives with their unique power of imagination.
The overall impact of Cāņakya and his Arthaśāstra is thus seen through the Daśavaikālika-cūrņi. [21-23] Cāņakya : Quoted by Haribhadra (8th Century)
Haribhadra was an all-rounder genius. He had equal proficiency in Sanskrit, Jaina Māhārāstrī and Apabhraíśa. Through his writings he encompassed various subjects and various forms of literature viz. Astronomy, Cosmology, Didactics, Ethics, Eulogy, Narratives, Yoga, Canonical commentaries, Philosophy, Metrics and Biography (Carita). His contribution to the Jaina literature is unparalled.

Page #110

100
His impartial attitude and love for learning without any sectarian bias has brought him a good name in the Jaina and non-Jaina circles.
Basically being a brahmin by birth, he might have studied the Arthaśāstra in his educational career. We find the reference to Caṇakya in his commentarial and narrative literature in various context.
[A] References in the Avaśyaka-ṭīkā and Daśavaikālika-ṭīkā (i) Avaśyaka-ṭīkā p.342
A small incident is noted down here in the form of an anology for explaining the rereness of human birth. In the Avaśyaka-niryukti 832, ten dṛṣṭāntas are enumerated, among which 'pāśaka' is mentioned. The short story is
‘पासग’ त्ति, चाणक्कस्स सुवण्णं नत्थि, ताधे केण उवाएण विढविज्ज सुवण्णं ?, ताधे जंतपासया कता, केइ भणंति - वरदिण्णगा, ततो एगो दक्खो पुरिसो सिक्खावितो, दीणारथालं भरियं, सो भणति-जति ममं कोइ जिणति सो थालं गेण्हतु, अह अहं जिणामि तो एगं दीणारं जिणामि, तस्स इच्छाए जंतं पडति अतो ण तीरइ जिणितुं, जहा सो ण जिप्पइ एवं माणुसलंभोऽवि, अवि णाम सो जिप्पेज्ज ण य माणुसातो भट्ठो पुण माणुसत्तणं ।
The analogy of pasaka can be explained thus - Cāṇakya had no gold (in the royal treasury). He thought, 'How can we gather gold ?' He prepared gambling-dices having peculiar magical power. Some say that he obtained the dices as a boon from a deity. He trained a clever person. Filled up a big plate with deenāras (golden coins). The trained person said, 'If somebody wins, I will bestow on him the whole plate. If I win, I will take only one golden coin.' The clever person had a full control over the dices. Therefore it was impossible to defeat him. As the possibility of his defeat is very low, likewise when a person looses his human birth, it is almost impossible to obtain the same birth again.
-

Page #111

101
Observations : * The same story is given in the Avaśyaka-cūrņi but in a very brief
manner.
Haribhadra quotes the same story with a slight elaboration in
different context to explain the extreme importance of human
birth.
* The words 7ş Huifa' indicate that, there were different oral
versions of Cāņakyan tales in the society. * It is very interesting to note that in the 77th adhyāya of the 3rd
adhikaraṇa of the Kauțilīya Arthaśāstra, the rules and regulations of the dice-play (dyūta) are mentioned. According to Kautilya it was the privilege of dyūtādhyaksa to produce the authorized dices. It seems that the details of the concerned adhyāya are used in the narrative as a motif. If it is true, then it throws light on the minute study of the
Kauțilīya Arthaśāstra among the circle of the Jaina ācāryas. (ii) Āvaśyaka-tīkā p.405
An incident is quoted here as an example of vimarśa. This word has several meanings and almost all meanings are applicable in the present case. It is about deliberation, consideration, examination, impatience and dramatic change.
The text is - aing - EGUH INIT MUUT 4f07317 - Yrferifa किंपि करेज्जासि, सुसीसो य किर सो आसि, अंतेउरे धम्मकहणं, उवसग्गिज्जंति, अण्णतित्थिया य विणवा, णिच्छूढा य, साह सद्दाविया भणंति - जइ राया अच्छइ तो कहेमो, अइगओ राया ओसरिओ, अंतेउरिया उवसग्गेति, हयाओ, सिरिघरदिद्रुतं कहेइ।
The story is so concise, that the exact meaning is not clear. It is not found in the Āvaśyaka-cūrņi. Hemacandra elaborates this story in the Parisista-parva (Sarga 8, gāthās 415-435, p.85). With

Page #112

102
the help of Hemacandra we can summarize the story in the following
manner
Cāņakya advised Candragupta, 'Do something good for the life hereafter.' Candragupta was an obidient disciple. The heretics deliver religious sermon in Candragupta's harem. There was a peep-hole in the wall between the preaching-hall and harem. When Candragupta left they gathered around the hole and peeped into the harem. Knowing the lack of control of the heretics Cāņakya managed to spread fine brick-powder on the floor near the hole. he showed the foot-marks of the heretics to Candragupta. Candragupta ordered to drive them away. They left brazenly. Cāņakya invited the Jaina monks to preach. They preached and observed the rules of celebacy strictly. They didnot indulge into the shameful act of peeping into the harem. Candragupta accepted them as gurus after their tough examination. From that day he became aloof from the heretics. (iii) Āvaśyaka-țīkā p.818
Here, Haribhadra presents a small story of parapāsandapasaṁsā (i.e praising the heretics) exactly in the manner of the Āvaśyaka-cūrņi (pp.817-818). It has been already translated and commented upon previously. While reflecting on Haribhadra's story, we can see that - * Cāņakya is depicted as a Jaina householder while Candragupta
originally believes in the brahmanic tenets. * The opinion of Cāņakya was important to Candragupta during
decision-making. * Cāņakya's wife was in favour of the heretics. She was strong
enough to lodge a complaint against the injustice done to the heretics.

Page #113

* The reference of Caṇakya's wife is important because it is very rare. The reference is not found in the Hindu and Buddhist
sources.
103
The effects of Cāṇakya's Jainification are incessantly seen in the previous and the present story.
* If we go through the details about the ascetic-class in the Kauțiliya Arthaśāstra, we see that Cāṇakya's attitude is overall strict to the ascetic-class and at some places he is leanient to the śrotriyabrahmins. Exactly contrary situation is seen in the above-mentioned story which is really hard to digest and provides scope for implanted Jainification.
It is depicted here that Cāṇakya was not only the guru of Candragupta in politics but guided him in the religious matter also. This anecdote is emplyed by Hemacandra to describe the conversion of Candragupta from the brahmanic faith to the Jaina faith. Whether it was intended by Haribhadra or not is a dubious matter. It seems that Haribhadra wants to focus on the examination or consideration part of the story.
* The motif of 'spreading the fine brick-powder' is explicitely picked up from the Niśītha-cūrṇi.
(iv) The Daśavaikālika-ṭīkā contains a passing reference to Cāṇakya while explaining a dvāragāthā of the Avaśyaka-niryukti.
जहा
The concerned sentence is - उवाए त्ति दारं दिट्ठतो चाणक्को, 'बे मज्झ धातुरत्ताई' एवमादीहिं चाणक्केण उवाएहिं धणोवज्जणं कतं । (Daśavaikālika-ṭīkā p.435)
The story of Cāṇakya's dhanopārjana for the royal treasury was famous in the oral tradition of Jainas and the Jaina writers oftenly quote the story probably imitating the Avaśyaka-cūrṇi. Haribhadra has quoted the same story here in a brief manner.
———

Page #114

[B] References in Upadeśapada
The Upadeśapada is a didactic work of Haribhadra written in Jaina Māhārāṣṭrī, which is a collection of traditional narratives presented in 1039 dvaragāthās. These dvaragāthās contain hundreds of stories in a very brief manner. Municandrasūri has written a voluminous commentary on these dvaragāthās in the 12th century A.D. At this place only the dvāragāthās are mentioned with their numbers and subjects, which are connected with the anecdotes of Cāṇakya.
The numbers of gathās are - 7; 50; 139; 196.
(i) Upadeśapada, gāthā 7
104
जोगियपासिच्छियपाडरमणदीणारपत्तिजूयम्मि । जह चेव जओ दुलहो धीरस्स तव मणुयत्तं ।।
Here, the analogy of pāśaka is indicated to explain the rareness or infrequency of human birth. The short story is documented in the Avaśyaka-ṭīkā (p.342) by Haribhadra.
(ii) Upadeśapada, gāthā 50
खमए अमच्चपुत्ते चाणक्के चेव थूलभद्दे य । नासिक्कसुंदरीणंद वइर परिणामिया बुद्धी ।।
Two gāthās (No.49-50) are dedicated to enumerate the famous personalities possessing pāriņāmikī-buddhi (wisdom acquired through experience). Cāṇakya is one of them. In the Avaśyaka-ṭīkā (pp.433-435), Haribhadra has written the life-story of Caṇakya up to the incident of filling the royal treasury, following the cūrṇikāra, without any major changes.
(iii) Upadeśapada, gāthā 139 -
चाणक्के वणगमणं मोरियचंद तह थेरि रोहणया । उवयारत्थग्गहणं धणसंवरणं च विन्नेयं ।।

Page #115

105
The whole life-story of Caṇakya from birth to death is indicated here with few key-words. Municandra, the commentator of Upadeśapada, elaborates the biography in total 178 gāthās. (iv) Upadesapada, gāthā 196
जह चेव चंदउत्तस्स विब्भमो सव्वहा ण चाणक्के । सव्वत्थ तहेतस्सवि एत्तो अहिगो सुहगुरुम्मि ।।
The content of the gathā can be summarized as -
When a disciple has a complete faith in his preceptor, he becomes a recipient of immense spiritual progress. For explaining this fact, the example of Cāṇakya and Candragupta is given. And it is noted that due to the impeccable faith in Caṇakya, Candragupta enjoyed the royal prosperity.
On the whole, we can say that the reverence for the both, Cāṇakya and Candragupta, is seen even in the short and suggestive dvaragāthās of the Upadesapada.
[C] Satirical reference in the Dhūrtākhyāna
Haribhadra's satirical work Dhūrtākhyāna (Dhuttakkhāṇa) is enumerated among the few celebrated classics in Jaina Māhārāṣṭrī Prakrit. We do not find any direct reference of Caṇakya in this small poem (khanda-kavya) but it is worth-seeing how Haribhadra describes Khaṇḍapānā, 'the lady don' among the five hundred rogues. He says
अह भणइ खंडवाणा विहसंती अत्थसत्थणिम्माया ।
बुद्धी अहिअबुद्धी धुत्ते तुल्लेउं वयणमिमं ।। Dhūrtākhyāna 5.1 (p.24) "Taking into consideration all the narrations of the rogues (dhūrtas), Khaṇḍapānā, the creator of the Arthaśāstra, the most intelligent lady-rogue started her narration with a cunning smile on her face."

Page #116

106
When Haribhadra paints a picture of an intelligent, shrewd and crooked lady using deceitful means to acquire wealth, he immediately remembers Cāņakya and says ironically that (as if) she is the composer of the Arthaśāstra, a science of polity. Indirectly Haribhadra has highlighted the aspects of shrewdness and crookedness in the personality of Cāņakya. General Remarks on Haribhadra's Cāņakya : * Haribhadra is very keen on depicting Cāņakya as a Jaina house
holder.
* He emphasises the skill of Cāņakya to gather wealth. * According to Haribhadra, the pair of Cāņakya-Candragupta is the
pair of ideal guru-śișya. * Haribhadra might have minutely studied the Kauțilīya Arthaśāstra
during his formal education. * He highlights Cāņakya's pāriņāmiki-buddhi again and again but the
part of Cāņakya's death is missing in his writing. * In spite of the satirical attitude reflected in the Dhūrtākhyāna,
generally the sense of appreciation is seen through all the refer
ences found in Haribhadra's literature. [24] The Kuvalayamālā of Uddyotanasūri is a grand novel written in classical Jaina Māhārāstrī during the gth century A.D. This text is written in campū style and is full of rich cultural data. We find the references of Cāņakya in this text, in the following manner (i) “ a upr Jun 22701377 37791-416-Y? , --- firardovifa galut delocolas aluc42215 7 1” (Kuvalayamālā, p.56 - lines 27-28)
“There, in the city of Vārāṇasī people were wealthy and munificient. Young people were instructed in various arts and sciences as well as the sciences composed by Cāņakya etc.”

Page #117

It is noteworthy that Uddyotana's reference is very specific. In the 8th century, the study of Caṇakya's Arthaśāstra was in vogue along-with the other Arthaśāstras.
(ii) At another place, while describing 16 types of deśī dialects, Golladeśa is referred to in the following manner
तत्थ य (हट्टमग्गे) पविसमाणेण दिट्ठा अणेय - देस - भासा - लक्खिए देस - वणिए ।
तं जहा
-
107
कसिणे णिठुर-वयणे बहुक - समर - १ ‘अड्डे’ उल्लवंते अह पेच्छइ गोल्लए तत्थ ।।
"When he entered the busy market-streets of the city, he saw the merchants of various regions speaking their dialects. They were mentioned as - People of golladeśa were black, harsh-speaking, excessively passionate, combative and brazen. They were repeatedly using the word 'adde' in their conversation."
If we presume that golla is the region around the river Godāvarī, then we can ascribe Cāṇakya as a 'dākṣiṇātya'. The Śvetambara writers generally have accepted golladeśa, as the birthplace of Caṇakya. In that case the Digambara accounts of the arrival of Caṇakya to dakṣiṇāpatha, at the end of his life, cannot be negeted totally.
In nutshell, the Kuvalayamālā's references to caṇakya-śāstra and golla are both important for exploring Cāṇakya in the Jaina literature.
[25-26] Śīlānka's Views about Cāṇakya
Śīlānka, famous for his 'Cauppanna-mahā-purisa-cariya' has written two Sanskrit commentaries on the first two anga canons (viz. the Acārānga and Sūtrakṛtānga) in the 9th century A.D. (i) Acārānga-ṭīkā runs as -
- भुंजए अलज्जे य ।

Page #118

108
भार्यानिमित्तं रागद्वेषोद्भवः, तद्यथा - चाणाक्येन भगिनीभगिनीपत्याद्यवज्ञातया Hypefur alleda 7-Gifts Gantefyuunda 1918-comes an ART I (Ācārāngatīkā p.100)
The point of discussion is - 'How the feelings of attachment and aversion are created while interacting with our dear ones ?’ For explaining the point, the example of Cāņakya and his wife is given.
In the above-mentioned passage, many incidents are noted briefly viz. humiliation of Cāņakya's wife by her sisters and their husbands ; Cāņakya's arrival to the court of Nanda for getting donation ; his insult in the palace and his revenge on Nanda. Sīlāňka follows the Āvaśyaka-cūrņi in this small passage but the context and presentation is different. Secondly, he uses the word Cāņākya in Sanskrit, following Harişeņa, a Digambara ācārya. (ii) In the Sūtrakstānga-țīkā, we find one-line comment on Cāņakya.
7911 EURTHERIUT RI Joelfcousetuig-TefH 1 (p.169)
According to Śīlānka, Cāņakya intends that one should employ deceitful means to acquire wealth.
“With the help of Sīlāňka's passing remarks, one cannot know his exact attitude towards Cāņakya. The revengeful nature and deceitful means of Cāņakya are looked at with a sense of reproach.” [27] Cāņakya : From Jayasimha's outlook
The Dharmopadeśamālā with vivarana is a collection of traditional narratives written with new prespective during the 9th century A.D. The dvāragāthās and stories both are written by the same author, Jayasimha. Two stories of Cāņakya are found in this text. Both the stories start with dvāragāthās. The stories are not new because the author himself has given references of the Āvaśyakaniryukti-cūrņi-tīkā and Upadeśamālā. But it is the contribution of

Page #119

109
Jayasiṁha to provide new context and new outlook to the old stories. (i) Dharmopadeśamālā, dvāragāthā 40 (p.129) is as follows -
हिययगयं सब्भावं गिव्हिज्जा तयणुरूव-चिट्ठाहिं ।
जह गिण्हइ चाणक्को वणियाणं नच्चमाणाणं ।। “For knowing the truth, hidden in the minds of others, one should behave and act like them to win their belief. The example of Cāņakya is revealing because he made the merchants to dance and knew the details about their real financial position.”
A sense of appreciation is clearly seen in the above-mentioned dvāragāthā. The story of merchants is presented at length with a few changes after this dvāragāthā. We have already seen that Śīlānka disregards Cāņakya for his deceitful means to gather wealth. Jayasimha looks at the episode from a different angle and praises him. (ii) Dharmopadeśamālā, dvāragāthā 50 (p.138) is as follows -
भावं विणा करेंतो मुणि-चेटुं पावए मोक्खं ।
अंगारमद्दओ विव अहवा वि सुबंधु-सचिवो व्व ।। “One who observes the monkhood outwordly and does not enhance the spirit of religion in his mind, will never attain liberation. Their are two examples. One is that of angāra-mardaka and the second is of the minister - Subandhu.”
After quoting this dvāragāthā, a story containing forty lines is given. it covers the last part of the life of Cāņakya and Subandhu. Cāņakya's death is designated as ingiņi-maraņa. It is noted that like an excellent Jaina householder, he distributed and donated his wealth to‘Jina-sādhu-samgha-śramaņa-brahmaņas'. We do not find the reference of his wife, sons, grandsons or other relatives. The detached attitude of cāņakya is highlighted.

Page #120

110
The story of Subandhu - after the death of Cāņakya, is focused by Jayasimha because Jayasimha wants to unveil the pseudo-monkhood
of Subandhu.
Remarks :
Thus, from the both stories, it can be guessed that Jayasimha possesses a feeling of honour and regard towards Cāņakya. In the first story the author wants to highlight Cāņakya's great skill of mind-reading and in the second story, Cāņakya's detached and selfless attitude towards life. [28] The Kathākosaprakarana of Jinesvarasāri, a collection of narratives written in the 11th century A.D., is a Jaina Maharastri text, which represents Cāņakya in a unique manner. Muni Jinavijayaji has written a studied introduction to the Kathākosao. Jinavijayaji has located textual references given by Jineśvara from Ayurveda, Dhanurveda, Nāțyaśāstra, Kāmaśāstra and particularly the Kauțilīya Arthaśāstra (Intro.pp.123-124). The Sundarīdattakathānaka of the Kathākoșa' provides a lot of details by paraphrazing the actual words of Kautilya in Jaina Māhārāstrī Prakrit. The related passage can be quoted at this place, as a specimen. The text runs as follows(i) “किं रज्जं सुकरं काउरिसेहिं ? --- नियकलत्तस्स वि न वीससियव्वं । निययपुत्ताण अमच्च-सामंताण परिक्खणं कायव्वं । करि-तुरय-वेज्ज-पउमतार-महासवइ-दूयसंधिविग्गहिय-पाणिहरिय-महाणसिय-थइयावाहय-सेज्जवाल-अंगरक्खाइयाणं चड्डणा कायव्वा । पडिराईण य पहाणमंतियण-सामंतभेयणं विहेयं । ---अवि य - पडिरायगोहववएसेणं कूडलेहकरणेणं सुवण्णपेसणभूमिविलंभेण य नियमंतिसामंता परिक्खियव्वा । पुत्ता वि मंतीहिं सामंतेहिं य गुत्तमंत्तेहिं भाणियव्वा, जहा - रायाणं गेण्हिय तुमं रज्जे ठावेमो त्ति । --- सुकट्ठाणेसु वणिज्जारए पेसिय लंचादाणेण सुंकभंग काराविय कारणिया परिक्खियव्वा । इच्चेवमाइ सव्वत्थ अविस्सासो कायव्वो । --- अंब ! जो रज्जसिरिं पालिउं समत्थो सो पव्वज्जं पि पालिउं समत्थो।” (pp.176177)

Page #121

111
We can locate almost each sentence of this passage in the Kauṭiliya Arthaśāstra, particularly in the first adhikaraṇa and more precisely in the adhyāyas from 8 to 20. A queen is persuading her son to accept kinghood. The prince explained to her as to why he was reluctant to become a king. He says, "One has to rear a feeling of constant disbelief while ruling a country. At every moment you have to be cautious. You have to put spies on almost each and every important person. Oh mother, I think, one who is able to govern a country, can observe the monkhood very easily."
The above-mentioned passage reflects the author's acquaintance with the Arthaśāstra and also his regard for Cāṇakya, who guided the king Candragupta and accepted detached life, at the end of his life-span.
(ii) In the Sundarīdatta-kathānaka, a merchant named Sagara, highlights the importance of the Arthaśāstra, because charity, enjoyment and religious ceremonies are related to the financial condition of a person. Sāgaradatta's thoughts remind us the famous Cāṇakyasūtra, viz. ‘अर्थमूलौ धर्मकामौ ।'
(iii) Jineśvara, in his another text viz. the Pañcalingi-prakaraṇa mentions, “A kind-hearted person should not study Cāṇakya, Pañcatantra, Kamandaka etc. because these treatises encourage deceitful activities, treachery, breach in trust and so many bad things." (Kathākoṣa", Introduction p.56).
To sum up, we can say that, instead of giving Caṇakyanarratives, Jineśvara prefers to paraphrase the actual text of the Arthaśāstra which is his unique way to follow the legacy of Cāṇakya in the Jaina tradition.

Page #122

[29-30-31] Abhayadeva's understanding of Kautilya and the
Arthaśāstra
112
Abhayadeva was a versatile literary personality of the 11th century A.D. Among his vast literature, his commentaries on nine canonical texts are important, due to which he got the epithet - 'navāngi ṭīkākāra'. Like his predecessors Abhayadeva has not repeated the famous Cāṇakyan tales. His references about Cāṇakya and his Arthaśāstra are occasional and brief. The language is Sanskrit.
(i) Commentary on Sthānāṁga 4.4.361, p.281
Context: A monk endures various kinds of troubles (upasargas) afflicted upon him by human beings, gods and animals. The mancreated upasargas are further divided into four kinds. The third subvariety is vīmaṁsā (troubles created during discussion or consultation). Abhayadeva quotes theexample in the following words “विमर्षाद्यथा चाणक्योक्तचन्द्रगुप्तेन धर्म्मपरीक्षार्थं लिङ्गिनोऽन्तःपुरे धर्म्ममाख्यापिताः क्षोभिताश्च साधवस्तु क्षोभितुं न शकिता इति । ”
"Caṇakya advised Candragupta to test the religiosity of heretics (brahmin ascetics) and (the Jaina) monks. Candragupta kept all the monks in the vicinity of his harem.
Heretics were agitated due to the rise of erotic feeling in their minds while the Jaina monks remained unpurturbed."
Abhayadeva quotes this story on the line of the Avaśyakacūrṇi but very briefly and in the different context of parisahas. Hemacandra documents this incident in his Parisiṣṭa-parva in the elaborative manner. Abhayadeva depicts Cāṇakya as a Jaina lay votary and proves the superiority of the Jaina monks after proper examination. Abhayadeva here wants to glorify Cāṇakya for his impartial justice based on sufficient evidence.
-

Page #123

113
(ii) Commentary on the Samavāyānga 30 gā.26, p.55
Abhayadeva explains the word 'kathādhikataṇāni” as follows'कथा - वाक्यप्रबन्धः शास्त्रमित्यर्थस्तद्रूपाण्यधिकरणानि कथाधिकरणानि - कौटिल्यशास्त्रादीनि प्राण्युपमर्दनप्रवर्त्तकत्वेन तेषामात्मनो दुर्गतावधिकारिकत्वकरणात्, कथया वा क्षेत्राणि कृषत गामसूयतेत्यादिकया अधिकरणानि तथाविधरूपाणि ।”
The purpose of this long sentence is to establish the relation between the Jaina technical term 'adhikarana' and the fifteen adhikaranas (chapters) of the Kauṭilīya Arthaśāstra.
According to the Jaina terminology ‘adhikaraṇa' means the base or support of various acts of violence. In fact, many times this word is used as a synonym of violence (himsā). Abhayadeva knows that various adhikaranas (chapters) of the Arthaśāstra are written to encourage the subjects in farming, cattle-breeding etc. According to the Jaina notions, all these activities incurr violence and therefore all are 'sinful activities'.
Abhayadeva looks at the Kauțiliya Arthaśāstra as a science which creates trouble to the earth, vegetation, animals etc. He adds that one who follows this science, causes durgati to one's self.
From the context, it is clear that Abhayadeva negates the study of the Arthaśāstra for monks and nuns by giving the etymology of the word 'adhikarana'. We have to understand that Abhayadeva does not intend to extend this rule to the lay-votaries which owe to the merchant-class, whose traditional vocations are कृषि - गोरक्ष-वाणिज्य (i.e. farming, cattle-rearing and commerce).
(iii) Commentary on the Jñātādharmakathā, 1.15, p.12
Abhayadeva quotes
“अर्थशास्त्रे - अर्थोपायव्युत्पादग्रन्थे कौटिल्यराजनीत्यादौ ।”
Here, Abhayadeva describes prince Abhayakumāra who was well-versed in various sastras. In the long list of sastras he enumer

Page #124

114
ates the Kautilya's Arthaśāstra, which is a treatise on polity and which encourages to create and increase wealth. The word 'TG-CAICI suggests that at the time of Abhayadeva (i.e. 11th century A.D.) there were many treatises on polity among which the Kauțilīya Arthaśāstra was probably the first and foremost. Conclusive Remark :
Thus, after the scrutiny of the Cāņakya-references given by Abhayadeva, we come to know that, for him, the study of the Arthaśāstra is necessary for a good governance and the prosperity in the mundane life but for a monk, who is engaged in the spiritual progress of the soul, there is no need to study the Arthaśāstra because it is full of adhikaraņas (means of violence). [32] The Sukhabodhā-tīkā of Nemicandra alias Devendragani is a reputed commentary on Uttarādhyayana. The explanations are given in Sanskrit while the concerned traditional stories are written in Jaina Māhārāștrī prakrit, during the 11th century A.D. This book is widely studied by the Indian and foreign scholars of Prakrit. Two references are found in this commenatry. (i) Commentary on Uttarādhyayana 2.17
It records some of the important details in the life of Sthūlabhadra. The narrative starts from the history of the rise and fall of some important cities in the Magadha kingdom. The details are given in the following manner -
“'In ancient times, Kșitipratisthita city was prosperous. When it's glory perished, Caņakapura was settled. After that Rṣabhapura became glorious, then Rājagțha, then Campā and then Pāțaliputra. Śakațāla was the minister of the 9th Nanda.”
Though Hemacandra has written the whole Śakatāla-Sthūlabhadra narrative in the gth canto of the Parisista-parva on the same lines of

Page #125

115
Sukhabodhā, still the history of Magadhan cities is the unique feature of Sukhabodha. Though the sources are taken from the Avasyaka (DET KETRİ 39ky - p.31) the history of the above-mentioned
cities is absent there.
(ii) Commentary on the Uttaradhyayana 4.1
At this place, Devendra notes the ten traditional examples of the rareness of the human birth, given in the niryuktig
etc. While explaining ‘pāsaga', viz. dices, the story of the miraculous dices produced by Cāṇakya is mentioned. Though the small episodes of pasaga was sufficient, Devendra could not resist the temptation to give the life-story of Cāṇakya. Thus he copied the first half of the Caṇakya-narrative.
The story is a mere repetition, still it is noteworthy that Devendra has passed a favourable remark about 'cāṇakya-nīti, which is not found in the Avaśyaka-cūrṇi or even in the latter literature. When Parvataka was about to die, Candragupta came forward to save him. Cāṇakya stopped him by raising his eyebrow. Devendra remarks
-
चाणक्केण भिउडी कया इमं नीतिं सरंतेण “तुल्यार्थं तुल्यसामर्थ्यं, मर्मज्ञं व्यवसायिनं ।
अर्द्धराज्यहरं भृत्यं, यो न हन्यात्स हन्यते ।।” (Sukhabodhā-ṭīkā p.58b)
It means, "It is almost a rule in the politics that if one does not kill a person (lit. servant) who has equal wealth and strength, one who knows the secrets, who is industrious and who is the master of the half of the kingdom, then it is likely to be killed by him at the earliest opportunity."
The above-mentioned verse quoted in the defence of Cāṇakya

Page #126

116
is sufficiently eloquent in depicting the soft attitude of the author towards Cāņakya. [33] The Oghaniryukti-tīkā includes a passing reference of Cāņakya on niryukti gā.418 in which the strict orders of Cāņakya about passing excreta and urine are mentioned. The commentary on Oghaniryukti is written by Droņācārya in the 11th century A.D. We have already discussed this reference in the 4th number of this chapter. So, the reader may go through the details given at that place. [34] The Vyavahāra-bhāsya-tīkā of Malayagiri written in the 12th century A.D. holds a peculiar position among the chedasūtras because it contains the narratives of the revolutionary personalities like Ārya-Rakṣita, Arya-Kālaka, king Sātavāhana, anārya king Murunda, the versatile monk Pādalipta, amātya Cāņakya, thief Rohiņeya, muni Vişnukumāra and many others.
The term vyavahāra carries multiple meanings viz.daily routine, behavior, work, dealing, trade, commerce, legal dispute or procedure etc. But especially in the Jaina monastic conduct, the term designates nine or ten types of prāyaścitta (expiation or atonement). When a monk (or nun) transgresses a general rule of conduct, it is compulsory for him (or her) to expiate properly. Context : Vyavahāra-bhāsyagāthās from 715 to 718 (continuous numbers) and the concerned commentary of Malayagiri, is dedicated to the topic of 'pravacana-raksā' i.e. 'protection of the preaching of the Jinas and the fourfold samgha’. It is told that one should adopt sober ways to make the king favourable to the pravacana. As far as possible hot discussions should be avoided. A monk can use his miraculous powers, chants or powders etc. to persuade the king. In spite of this, if the king does not change his merciless and malacious

Page #127

117
attitude towards pravacana and samgha, then he should be uprooted with the help of others.
While commenting gāthā 716, the story of Cāņakya and Naladāma (name of a weaver) is given by Malayagiri. In the Āvaśyaka-cūrņi, the story is given in a brief manner. Malayagiri gives the narrative in a very elaborate manner.
The summary of the story is -
Nanda was driven away by Cāņakya. Candragupta was installed on the throne. After some time, the followers of Nanda created nuisance by theft and robbery. They bribed the policemen and continued their anti-king acts. Cāņakya was in search of a reliable and faithful person to curb their activities. He saw Naladāma who was busy in burning the holes of insects because his son was bitten by the insects. Cāņakya appointed Naladāma to teach a lesson to the followers of Nanda. Naladāma followed the advice of Cāņakya. He called all of them for dinner with their families and cut off their heads. While commenting on gā.91, Malayagiri says - “तदेवं यथा चाणिक्येन नन्द उत्पाटितो यथा नलदाम्ना मत्कोटकाश्चोराश्च समूला उच्छेदितास्तथा प्रवचनप्रद्विष्टं राजानं समूलमुत्पाटयेत् । --- ते सर्वे शुद्धाः YHTYEN TAUT sqacara li” (Vyavahāra-bhāşya p.77) Observations : * At first, we feel that it isvery odd that a monk, who observes a complete vow of non-violence, is preached here to retaliate a king by employing ruthless measures. But when we think of the situational difficulties, it seems natural and practical (vyavahārya) from the point of view of pravacana-rakṣā (survival of the Jaina faith). * Malayagiri has categorically pointed out that if a monk is involved in eradicating a king who is completely adverse to the pravacana, he is not liable to a blame or stigma. Further, it is noted that if he dwells

Page #128

118
at the royal residence more than two or three days, he should expiate cheda or parihāra. * For the bhāsyakāra and Malayagiri, Cāņakya and Naladāma are so praiseworthy that they are represented here as the idols for monks. In nutshell, we can say that Cāņakya is admired here for the purity of his intentions in spite of his harsh and ruthless measures of
administration and thus confirms the relation between chedasūtras
and cāņakyasūtras. [35] The Yugādi-jinendra-carita written by Vardhamānasūri is also known as Ādinātha-carita. Vardhamānasūri was busy in his literary activities during the 11th century A.D. In this book, the whole lifehistory of Cāņakya is found at length (pp. 49-55). Context : King Samprati of the maurya dynasty is adored in the Jaina history. According to the Jaina tradition, he was a complete Jainized king. Therefore the Jaina writers thought that it is necessary to narrate the complete history of mauryas while depicting Samprati. In the present text, Vardhamāna started Kuņāla-kathā (Kuņāla - the blind father of Samprati) with the life-sketch of Cāņakya-Candragupta. Language and Style : The big narrative is written in the classical Jaina Māhārāstrī. Vardhamāna's style is very lucid, properly embellished with alamkāras and decorated with crisp dialogues. It is written mainly in prose but Sanskrit and Prakrit verses are used inbetween to maintain the interest of the readers. The details of Cāņakya-Candragupta are taken from the cūrņis on Āvaśyaka and Daśavaikālika. It seems that Vardhamāna knows the narratives of Cāņakya written by all his predecessors viz. Haribhadra, Jayasimha and specially the non-Jaina dramatist Viśākhadatta.

Page #129

119
Some observations on Vardhamana's Cāṇakya-kathā :
Probably this is the largest prose narrative written in JainaMāhārāṣṭrī.
An attempt has been made by Vardhamana to depict the whole continuous biography without topic-wise division like - pāriņāmikibuddhi, rareness of human birth, gathering of wealth for the royal treasury, ājñābhanga etc. In his story, every episode seems to be the natural culmination of the previous one and the springwell of the next one.
Although the brāhmaṇatva of Caṇakya is clear, every possible occasion is exploited to hammer the śrāvakatva of Cāṇakya, from start to end. Especially the nine verses put in the mouth of Cāṇakya after the acceptance of inginī-maraṇa, throw light on the well-versedness of Caṇakya in the Jaina religion. In the last verse it is noted that due to the pandita-marana, Cāṇakya was reborn in the heaven.
*
* In this context, it is quite surprising that Vardhamāna has omitted the incidents of (i) praising the heretics and (ii) the account of famine and two disciples of Sussthitācārya. Probably he has not gone through the Niśītha-cūrṇi. Vardhamāna repeates the verse कोशेन भृत्यैश्च --- from the āvaśyaka-cūrni. ‘तुल्यार्थं तुल्यसामर्थ्यं --- is the verse, which is quoted by Vardhamāna as well as by Devendra in the Sukhabodhātīkā. Both the works are contemporary.
*
In the present narrative, Cāṇakya addresses Candragupta: 3 ! वृषल ! स्वतन्त्र इव लक्ष्यसे, नेदं कर्तव्यं'. This sentence reminds us of the drama Mudrārākṣasa of Viśākhadatta. The vocative frequently used for Candragupta by Caṇakya is 'vṛṣala'. It seems that Vardhamana is acquainted with the Mudrārākṣasa. The Avaśyaka

Page #130

cūrṇi notes that Candragupta was born in the caste of mauryaposakas, which is a lower caste. Therefore Vardhamāna has chosen the word 'vṛṣala' for Candragupta imitating Viśākhadatta. Subandhu-Caṇakya - episode is written at length. In the last monologue, Cāṇakya's repentance is expressed in peculiar Jaina terminology. It is noted that Caṇakya begged for forgivance for all except Subandhu.
Caṇakya's death is designated as 'anaśana' or 'ingiṇī-maraṇa'
a perfect religious death according to the Jaina norms. Vardhamana has not added his disregardful comments anywhere in the whole biography of Caṇakya. Cāṇakya's good governance is appreciated. Nowhere his kauțilya (crookedness) or māyā (deceitfulness) is despised.
The author's perception about Caṇakya can be truely described in Vardhamana's own words
मइमाहप्पं सो च्चिय चाणक्को धरउ जीवलोगम्मि ।
120
Long live the fame of Caṇakya in the world, the brilliant one! [36] The Viseṣāvaśyaka-bhāṣya-ṭīkā of Maladhārī Hemacandra is a text written in the 12th century A.D.
While commenting on the word 'सुबहुलिविभेयनिययं', which occurs in gāthā 464 of the Viseṣāvaśyaka-bhāṣya. The commentator
says
तत्र सुबह्वयो या एता अष्टादश लिपयः शास्त्रेषु श्रूयन्ते, तद्यथा । तह अनिमित्ती य लिवी चाणक्की मूलदेवी य ।
In this passage, total eighteen scripts are enumerated. Cāṇakyīscript is one of them.
Dr. Hiralal Jain has made an effort to explain all these scripts with the help of Yasodhara's commentary on the Kāmasūtra. About the caṇakyi-script Dr. Hiralal Jain says -
भूयलिवी
-
हंसलिवी

Page #131

"In kauṭiliyā (or cāṇakyī ) script, the letter kṣa () is added at the end of each word. Short and long vowels are mutually exchanged. Anusvāras and visargas take place of each other. The tradition of caṇakyī and mūladevi script is very old and people used them for a long time.” (भारतीय संस्कृति में जैनधर्म का योगदान, p.286)
In the Ardhamāgadhī text Samavāyānga, a list of eighteen scripts is given but cāṇakyī and mūladevī scripts are not mentioned. It is noteworthy that in the narrative literature of the Jainas, Mūladeva is a famous personality like Caṇakya.
Thus, the rarest reference of caṇakyi-script preserved by Maladhārī Hemacandra is really valuable.
[37] The Upadeśamālā-ṭīkā of Ratnaprabhasūri is a didactic text full of narratives written in the 12th century A.D. The dvaragāthās are written by Dharmadāsagaṇi and the commentary is written by Ratnaprabhasūri. We find two references of Cāṇakya in this text. The first one is a passing reference and the second one is the full lifeaccount of Caṇakya given in a very different context with the author's remarks inbetween.
(i) Upadeśamālā-ṭīkā p.347 line 3:
121
अहो महिला पगईए चेव चाणक्कवंकभावं विसेसेइ ।
While describing the natural deceitful attitude of womanfolk, Ratnaprabha comments, 'Oh a woman instinctivly surpasses the crookedness of Caṇakya very easily.'
The author's sweeping remark throws light on his attitude towards womankind in general and towards Cāṇakya in particular. (ii) Upadeśamālā-ṭīkā Dvāragāthā 150, pp.354-363
Context of the Dvaragāthā :
In the 149th dvāragāthā, Dharmadāsagaṇi discusses the reliability of one's own son through the example of Śrenika and Konika.

Page #132

122
In the present dvāragāthā he says -
लुद्धा सकज्जतुरिआ , सुहिणोऽवि विसंवयंति कयकज्जा ।
जह चंदगुत्तगुरुणा , पव्वयओ घाइओ राया ।। “The person who is greedy and very much anxious to fulfil his motive it is seen that after the fulfilment of his purpose, he betrays even his close friend. See ! how the preceptor of Candragupta (i.e. Cāņakya) killed the king Parvataka by treacherous means !”.
The present dvāragāthā provides sufficient clue to the commentator to despise various deeds of Cāņakya. Following this guideline, Ratnaprabha presents the whole biography of Cāņakya with his own critical remarks in total 182 gāthās. The language is Jaina Māhārāstrī with the occasional use of Sanskrit and Apabhraṁsa. It will not be out of place if we provide some examples for understanding Ratnaprabha's viewpoint. (a) During his wanderings with Candragupta, Cāņakya tore up the belly of a brahmin to get curd-rice to feed Candragupta who was extremely hungry. Dharmadāsa exclaims, HECHIEFHBTT GHT, I Hottes de tefte 13 I (p.357 gā.60)
None other than Cāņakya will dare to perform a sin of brahmahatyā i.e. killing a brahmin of one's own caste! (b) Cāņakya's ungrateful nature is censured in the episode of Parvataka, in harsh words. The author remarks - (तत्रापि मित्रोत्तमे) । कौटिल्य: कुटिलां क्रियामिति दघौ धिग्धिक्कृतघ्नान् जनान्।
(p.358 gā.86) “Parvataka was their best friend (who contributed a lot to acquire the kingdom). Still the crooked Kautilya acted treachously to him. Down with such ungrateful persons !" (c) While commenting upon the episode of grāma-dāha (burning the village) Ratnaprabha exclaims - ‘371: Jej
s y ftabat'

Page #133

'What a great taste in merciless acts!'
And he further adds, 'सोऽयं कटुकुटिलमतेर्निर्विवादः प्रमादः' (p. 359 gā.98) i.e 'It is certainly a serious offence of that crooked Caṇakya.' Observations :
123
Though Ratnaprabha uses a lot of pejorative phrases to describe Cāṇakya, it is surprising that he depicts the end of Cāṇakya in the traditional manner. It is noted that Caṇakya accepted inginimaraṇa after a great lament of repentance.
जह जह करीसजलणेण तस्स धन्नस्स डज्झइ देहो ।
तह तह पलयं पावंति, कूरकम्माई कम्माई ।। (p.363 gā.175)
"As the body of the blessed one (i.e. Cāṇakya) was burnt by the blazing fire in the cow-dungs, all his cruel deeds slowly disappeared." The author further adds, 'Due to the pure meditation and equanimity of mind, Cāṇakya acquired heavenly realm of birth.'
Thus in spite of all the cruel, ungrateful and crooked acts undertaken by Caṇakya throughout his life, Caṇakya stands as an iconic figure to Ratnaprabha due to his noble death!
[38-39] The Upadeśa-pada-ṭīkā of Municandra is a collection of narratives written in poetical form during the 12th century A.D. The narratives suggested in the dvaragāthās by Haribhadra are expounded in Jaina Māhārāṣṭrī Prakrit by Municandra.
(i) Dvaragāthā 139 contains the life-story of Caṇakya in nutshell. Municandra spares 178 gāthās to document it (pp.109-114). Each and every incident noted down by all the previous writers is included in this biography. In the story-line, nothing is new. Therefore literary translation of gāthās is avoided. The noteworthy points of this story
are -
"
* Every opportunity is exploited to depict Cāṇakya as a Jaina house
holder from start to end. Even the voluntary death of Canakya is

Page #134

124
designated as an outcome of his pāriņāmiki buddhi. * The legacy of the traditional verse viz. Ista pita ---' is
retained. * Municandra's large narrative is not simply a collection of scattered
accounts but he has joined each incident to the next one with a great skill. The description of the fierce war between Candragupta and Nanda, is Municandra's new addition. He might have thought that it is necessary to highlight the valour of Candragupta and parvataka. It adds a new measure to the traditional character of Candragupta
as a 'puppet-king'. * Generally Municandra avoids to pass his own remarks inbetween the story but at the horrific incident of grāma-dāha he remarks
बारनिरोहेण पलीविऊण गामो सबालवुड्ढो सो । Get GraEAŞTIUTUT AM464100 II (p.111 gā.89)
“Cāņakya, the evil-doer, closed all the gates of the village and with his puffed-up crooked intellect, burnt the whole village including children and old persons.” * At the incident of famine, the Niśītha-cūrņi documents the name
of the preceptor as 'Susthita', but Municandra gives the name as
“Sambhūtavijaya'. * Municandra specifically mentions that Cāņakya was the
‘śāsanapālaka' i.e. the actual administrator, through Candragupta was a throned king, Municandra's Cāņakya gives his word to Sambhūtavijaya to take care of the pravacana i.e. the religious
order of the Jinas in Candragupta's kingdom. (gā.128) * The author depicts Cāņakya as an expert surgeon. Cāņakya saved
the foetus of the queen by a precise cut on her belly. (gā.134) The exaggeration is quite clear in upgrading Cāņakya as a skilful

Page #135

125
surgeon.
When Caṇakya decided to accept voluntary death, Municandra says, 'He distributed his wealth among his sons, grandsons and relatives.' This reference is not reliable because the author has not mentioned elsewhere about Caṇakya's family except his wife. * The incident of the death of Caṇakya caused by Subandhu, the exminister of Nanda is presented by Municandra in a slightly different manner. The author says
7 0 734 fa fuż ydyfamfuri au eat |
चाणक्केण पेसुन्नकडुविवागं मुणंतेण ।। (p. 114 gā.160)
After having realized the false allegation of Subandhu, Cāṇakya kept mum and told nothing to the king because he knew that parapaiśūnya (slandering others) is enumerated among the 18 pāpasthānas.
The word 'adhikaraṇa' used in the gathā 170 consists a pun because it is used in the sense of 'violent acts' as well as in the sense of 'chapters of the Kauṭiliya Arthaśāstra'.
* From this long narration, it is evident that Municandra possesses high regards for Cāṇakya and looks at his death as an essence of his pāriņāmiki-buddhi. Municandra further adds that due to his repentance and the true meditation of pañcaparameṣṭhin, all the sinful acts of Cāṇakya burnt away slowly along with his body. (p.114 gā.170-171)
(ii) While commenting upon the 196th dvāragāthā of Upadeśapada, municandra explains - "As Candragupta acquired the excellent prosperity in the form of kingdom, due to his firm faith on his guru Cāṇakya, likewise a true loyal disciple acquires hundred times more glory in the form of his spiritual upliftment due to his firm faith in

Page #136

126
his spiritual preceptor.”
Thus Cāņakya and Candragupta both are the idols for the Jaina tradition. [40] The Parisişta-parva of Hemacandra (1088-1172 A.D.) is famous by the name - ‘Sthavirāvalīcaritram’. This treatise, written in Sanskrit holds a peculiar position among the legendary histories (viz. prabandhas) written by the Jaina authors. In 'Trişaşțisalākāpuruṣa-caritra’, Hemacandra has documented the history of the powerful or most aptly the “illustrious' Jaina personalities. In the present work, he has documented the biographies of the ‘sthaviras', viz. Jambūsvāmī, Prabhava, Sayyambhava, Yaśobhadra, Bhadrabāhu, Sthūlabhadra, Sambhūtavijaya, Ārya Mahāgiri, Ārya Suhasti, Vajrasvāmī and Arya Rakṣita in 13 cantoes (sargas).
The Parisista-parva is closely connected with the political history of Magadha. While describing the biographies of Bhadrabāhu and Sthūlabhadra, Hemacandra takes into account the royal dynasties viz. the Nandas and Mauryas. Hemacandra has given a deep thought to all the available material whether oral or written about Cāņakya, the kingmaker. The Āvaśyaka-literature is his main source still he has not negelected the latter narrative and didactic literature. Cāņakya-carita, written by the Svetāmbara ācārya Hemacandra, is the first and authentic biography written in the classical Sanskrit.
The actual Cāņakya-account starts from the 194th verse of the eighth canto and ends at the 469th verse of the same canto. The episode of Subandhu extends upto the 13th verse of the ninth canto, where the Cāņakya-story really ends. Comparative remarks on Hemacandra's Cāņakya-kathā : (1) The Golla region, Caņaka village, Caņī brahmin are the same like the Āvaśyaka-cūrņi. The name Caņeśvarī, Cāņakya's mother is

Page #137

127
added, which is most probably imaginary one. (2) The prophesy of the baby-boy was told by a sādhu in the ĀvCū. Hemacandra presents it in a more Jainized way. He says, 'ŞIRAH tyta: ufatnya aga' - The knowledgeable Jaina monks reside for some time at the house of the householder Caņi (8.195) (3) The śrāvakatva of Cāņakya is described very effectively, in the following manner
चाणक्योऽपि श्रावकोऽभूत्सर्वविद्याब्धिपारगः ।
19Toda a H ea: UGTI (8.200-201) The layman Cāņakya was well-versed in all vidyās. He possessed contented attitude due to his being a layman (a Jaina householder). (4) Name of Cāņakya's wife is not mentioned in the ĀvCū and PariP. The incident of her insult due to her poverty is described at length in the Pari-P. Cāņakya's decision to approach Nanda at Pāțaliputra for getting some donation is same in both of the texts. Šīlānka's perception is a bit different. In the Ācārānga-tīkā he presents this incident as an example of rāga-dveșa i.e. Cāņakya's attachment towards wife and hatred towards the king Nanda. (5) The episode of Cāņakya's insult in the court of Nanda is almost same. The ĀvCū mentions the specific day as the full-moon-day in the month of kārttika. Hemacandra ignores the day. The ‘siddhaputra in the AvCū is the ‘Nanda-putra' in the Pari-P. In both of the texts, Cāņakya was actually driven away by a female-servant (dāsī). (6) The famous verse quoting Cāņakya's oath viz. 301917 yppee -- -' etc. is not literary quoted by Hemacandra. He paraphrases the same purport in the following manner -
सकोशभृत्यं ससुहृत्पुत्रं सबलवाहनम् ।
tray-koff heralfa 544 11 (8.225)

Page #138

128
(7) The often-quoted incident of śikhāmocana (unfastening the tuft of the hair) is absent in the ĀvCū. Hemacandra has not included it in the main Sanskrit text but it is given as a foot-note by quoting one Sanskrit and one Prakrit verse. (8) Cāņakya's quest for a proper person to retaliate upon Nanda is mentioned briefly in the ĀvCū and Pari-P. It is not clear in both of the texts whether the daughter of the mayūraposaka of Nandas was pregnant due to Nandas or not. Candragupta's birth in the low-caste is told in a suggestive manner without any comment. (9) The fulfilment of the pregnancy-longings and the birth of Candragupta is described at length by Hemacandra. (8.230-8.239) (10) A number of episodes are documented in the Pari-P according to the ĀvCū uptill Candragupta becomes a sovereign king after the death of Parvataka. At this particular juncture, Hemacandra mentions the exact date of Candragupta's coronation in the following verse -
एवं च श्रीमहावीरमुक्तेर्वर्षशते गते ।
408400||2gfelch ArsTSH04: 11 (8.339) “Thus after 155 years after Mahāvīranirvāṇa, (i.e. 372 B.C.) Candragupta became the king.'
The exact date is not given in the ĀvCū and thus throws light on Hemacandra's sense towards historicity and provides important literary evidence for the date-fixation of Candragupta's coronation. Hemacandra's attitude towards chronology is really worthy of appreciation. (11) The incident of appointing a guard for the vigilance of Nanda's followers is same in the AvCū and Pari-P. (12) The episode of grāma-dāha is repeated with a slight elaboration. In the Niśītha-cūrņi it is presented as an example of ājñā-bhanga

Page #139

129
(disobeying the orders) and Cāṇakya is praised for his strictness. Hemacandra avoids to pass his personal comments on the varied cruel acts of Cāṇakya.
(13) Two instances are given to exhibit Caṇakya's efforts to increase the royal treasury. The incident of kūṭa-pāśaka (fake-dices) is mentioned in the AvCū as an example of Cāṇakya's pāriņāmikī-buddhi. In the Pari-P it is just an episode in the flow of narration without any title-tag. In the Dharmopadeśamālā and Upadeśapada-ṭīkā, the example of kūṭa-pāśaka is told to underline the rareness of human birth.
The second instance in which Caṇakya instigates the merchants to disclose their wealth is very popular in many Jaina storybooks written in Jaina Māhārāṣṭrī. The Dharmopadeśamālā quotes this story as a device to know the real intention of the people. Almost all other writers present the story as an example of pāriņāmikībuddhi. In the Pari-P Cāṇakya is praised for such brilliant ideas to increase the royal wealth. Hemacandra exclaims
चक्रे समर्थमर्थेन तेन मौर्यं चणिप्रसूः ।
धियां निधिरमात्यो हि कामधेनुर्महीभुजाम् ।। (8.376)
"Caṇakya made the Mauryan kingdom financially very sound. The prime-minister, having such brilliant ideas is like a kāmadhenu for the king".
(14) The severe famine of twelve years and the story of ācārya Susthita is narrated at length in the NisCu to explain a rule for a Jaina monk. In the Pinda-niryukti-bhāṣya also the story is presented to prohibit antardhana-pinda. The Pari-P dedicates 37 verses (i.e. 8.377 upto 8.414) to narrate the story. Every now and then Hemacandra emphasizes the laymanship of Cāṇakya.
(15) Hemacandra thinks that the story of para-pāsaṇḍa-pasaṁsā can

Page #140

130
be employed to highlight the inclination of Candragupta towards heretics and Caṇakya's firm faith on the Jaina religion (8.415 upto 8.435). At the end of this story Hemacandra specifically mentions that, "When the king saw the detachment of the Jaina monks and attachment of the heretics in sensual pleasures, he was practically converted to the Jaina faith."
The AvCu presents this story in brief. The role of Caṇakya's wife is important in the AvCū, but it is dropped in the Pari-P. The Avcu wants to convince that one should not praise the heretics even out of courtesy. It creates a breach in faith which is told as a transgression of samyaktva.
Vardhamana in the Yugadi-jinendra-carita and Abhayadeva in the Sthānanga-ṭīkā have presented this story in the same context of samyaktva. Hemacandra goes a step forward and describes Candragupta's acceptance of the Jaina faith.
(16) The scattered details of Cāṇakya's life are thus gathered and properly presented by Hemacandra in the Pari-P. He mentions Candragupta's death as 'samādhimaraṇa' but the date and other details are not given.
The story of Bindusāra's birth is documented in short. It is mentioned that Subandhu was appointed as a minister by Caṇakya with the consent of Candragupta. Subandhu's ministership was continued in the regime of Bindusāra. After the sad demise of Candragupta, Subandhu conspired against Cāṇakya due to jealousy and vindictiveness. Subandhu become successful in creating ill-feelings and disregard towards Cāṇakya in Bindusāra's mind. When Cāṇakya grasped this attitude of aversion in Bindusara, he decided to retire from his position as a prime-minister and accepted the vow of voluntary death (anaśana) after distributing his wealth etc. to the needy people.

Page #141

131
In spite of Bindusāra's efforts to persuade him, Cāṇakya remained stable in his vow. At the end, Subandhu deceitfully set fire on Caṇakya. With a great determination, Cāṇakya endured the severe pains and embraced death with a great courage. He acquired 'devagati in the next life.
In the ninth canto, the story of Subandhu is seen extended up to the 13th verse. Cāṇakya's life-account in the Pari-P ends here. The narrative of Caṇakya, Subandhu and Bindusāra is quoted in the NisCu in different context than that of the Pari-P. It is prescribed in the Niśītha-sūtra that, "A monk should not smell and enjoy the sacitta gandha and if he smells, a punishment is there in the form of atonement." The example of Subandhu is given who smelt the poisonous birch-leaf kept in a box by Cāṇakya and became a monk unwillingly.
In the Dharmopadeśamālā, this story is presented in a different context. The writer wants to teach a lesson that, "If renunciation is outwardly imposed upon somebody, it is futile because one cannot attain spiritual progress by observing vows out of compulsion."
The same story is found in the Upadeśapada-ṭīkā and Upadeśamālā-ṭīkā in Jaina Māhārāṣṭrī with the comments of the authors inbetween. The regardful mention of Caṇakya's religious death is noted in various prakīrṇakas like the Aturapratyākhyāna, Samstāraka, Bhaktaparijñā, Maraṇavibhakti and Ārādhanāpatākā. Caṇakya's death is designated as anaśana, inginī and prāyopagamana. Salient Features of Parisiṣṭa-parva:
Systematic collection of Prakrit narratives presented in 288 San
skrit verses.
Authentic Svetambara version of Caṇakya-biography.
Historical importance due to mentioning two important dates (corona
*

Page #142

tion of Candragupta and death of Bhadrabahu).
* No direct contact between Bhadrabāhu-Sthūlabhadra and Cāṇakya
Candragupta.
Abrupt end of Candragupta at Pāṭaliputra.
Death of Caṇakya near Paṭaliputra.
Mention of 12 years famine at Magadha.
* Bhadrabahu's journey towards Nepal and not towards the south.
* Repeated use of the same name 'Cāṇakya' (not Kautilya or
*
*
132
Viṣṇugupta).
Purposeful use of the Jaina terminology to underline Caṇakya's
laymanship.
Constantly emphasizing the brahmanic features of Cāṇakya. Absense of the most favourite myth of ‘unfastening the tuft'. Hemacandra's acquaintance with the Mudrārākṣasa can be guessed from the Subandhu episode.
No direct mention of Caṇakya's Arthaśāstra, Bhadrabāhu's Chedasūtra or the first Pataliputra-vācanā of Śvetāmbara canons. Comprehensive rating of Cāṇakya reflected in the Parisiṣṭa-parva:
The Avasyaka and Niśītha literature presents Cāṇakya with the sense of extreme regard. In the later texts, particularly in the Upadeśapada-ṭīkā and Upadeśamālā-ṭīkā, Cāṇakya's deceitful nature, crookedness, anger and vindictive nature is mentioned and commented upon. At very few places, hemacandra mentions Cāṇakya as निस्त्रिंश (ruthless 8.268) ; धूर्त ( rouge 8.300) and उग्रधी (furious 8.455). But when we see Hemacandra's Cāṇakya in a broad perspective, a profuse use of honourific epithets is seen every now and then. Hemacandra's sense of extreme regard can be sensed through his conclusive remark
दारुप्रायो दह्यमानोऽप्यकम्प्यो मौर्याचार्यो देव्यभूत्तत्र मृत्वा ( 8.469)
*

Page #143

133
[41] The Abhidhāna-cintāmaņi-nāmamālā of Hemacandra (12th century A.D.) is a lexicon dedicated to the proper-nouns of famous
personalities. This Sanskrit work provides valuable information about
Cāņakya in the following verse -
वात्सायने मल्लनाग: कौटल्यश्चणकात्मजः । GIFHSS: afatestament fabricants & Tea : 11 853 |||
According to Hemacandra, these eight proper-nouns are synonyms. It means Hemacandra has mentioned seven other names of Cāņakya. He has personally chosen the name 'Cāņakya’, still in the course of narration he has used the names - ‘caņiprasū' and *caņakātmaja' for metri-causa. In the Pari-P none of the other names are employed.
In the self-commentary of the above-mentioned verse, Hemacandra provides us the etymology of each name with the concerned grammatical rules. The detailed scrutiny of each word is a vast subject of research. At this place, we will neglect the grammatical part and try to gather the additional information provided by Hemacandra.
Hemacandra has enumerated three popular names of Cāņakya in the concerned verse. Therefore, whatever the modern thinkers opine, at least for Hemacandra, it is certain that Kautilya, Cāņakya and Vişnugupta are the names of the same person.
Some Indologists like A.B.Keith mention that, 'According to Hemacandra, the kāmasūtrakāra Vātsyāyana is none other that the arthaśāstrakāra Kautilya. Actually it is not clear in the citation quoted by Hemacandra that by the name Vātsyāyana he intends to mention kāmasūtrakāra.
If we accept the etymology of dramila as 'द्रमिले देशे भवो द्रामिल:', then the birthplace of Cāņakya is modern Tamilnāda. In that case the word “golla-visaya' mentioned in the most of the Svetāmbara

Page #144

134
texts can be interpreted as a region around the river Godāvarī. We can locate the word 'adde' mentioned in the Kuvalayamālā in Tamil language. It is a very supportive fact that the old manuscripts of the Kauțilīya Arthaśāstra are in the Tamil and Telugu scripts. The Digambara writers hold the view that Cāņakya came to the southern region in his last days. So, for conjucturing the south-Indian origin of Cāņakya, Hemacandra's present citation is favourable.
A peculiar physical feature of Cāņakya is noted in the name ‘aṁgula’. The citation can be interpreted in two ways -
(i) One, who is benefit of one fingure. OR (ii) One, having deformity in one of the fingures.
The myth about the teeth of Cāņakya is repeated in many of the Svetāmbara texts. But the deformity of his fingers is noted only in the present citation. If we generalize the myths into Cāņakya's ugly appearance, it contradicts the reference of Kāmandaka where he says that Cāņakya was 'darśanīya'. Thus the riddle of Cāņakya's physical appearance remains unsolved.
Hemacandra uses the word ‘Kauțalya’ (not Kautilya) and mentions -
कुटो घटस्तं लान्ति कुटला: कुम्भीधान्या: तेषां अपत्यं कौटल्यः ।
In this etymology, he follows the Kāmandakīya Nītisāra. Some scholars think that it is a ficticious etymology. If we suppose the ficticiousness for a time being, still one fact remains that Hemacandra is totally against the word ‘Kautilya' which indicates the crookedness of Cāņakya. It seems that Viśākhadatta's famous terminology color: gofessura:' was not acceptable to Hemacandra.
While explaining the word Caņakātmaja, Hemacandra introduces Cāņakya's father as a ‘rși'. The peculiar word underliness the brahminhood of Cāņakya's father and raises question-mark on his

Page #145

135
laymanship. This contradiction provides scope for the elements of Jainification in the case of Caṇakya's father and to some extent Caṇakya also.
The name 'mallanāga' is explained thus
चासौ नागश्च मल्लनागः - which means - “Who is like a wrestler as well as like an elephant in eradicating 'nine' (or 'the new') Nandas." Hemacandra's etymologies of the names and ‘विष्णुगुप्त’ do not provide any noteworthy information.
Thus, Hemacandra's explanatory citation of the Abhidhānacintāmaṇi provides valuable information about Cāṇakya which we do not get from the Hindu puranic sources and not even from the other Jaina sources.
-
[42] The Samkṣipta-tarangavatī-kathā (Tarangalolā) is technically a khaṇḍakāvya written in the classical Jaina Māhārāṣṭrī by Nemicandragani during the 13th century A.D.
We have already seen that in the Kathākoṣaprakarana of Jineśvara, the paraphrase of some of the kautilyan sūtras is found at particular places. Likewise, in the Tarangalolā, wherever the situation ariese, Nemicandra quotes the concerned part of the Arthaśāstra in his own words.
It is mentioned by Nemicandra in the introductory verses of the poem that his book is based on the romantic and miraculous poem Tarangavatīkathā of Pādalipta (2nd-3rd century A.D.). The references to the Arthaśāstra and Arthaśāstrakaras might have occured in the text of Padalipta who is always enumerated among the list of the 'prabhāvaka ācāryas' in the Jaina tradition. Nemicandra describes a female messenger in the following manner -

Page #146

136
तो भणति अत्थसत्थम्मि वण्णियं सुयणु सत्थयारेहिं । çait yfya-çat a Els tough forecche Il gā.853 11 “Oh young lady, it is told by the śāstrakāras in the Arthaśāstra
that when a female-messenger is humiliated, she becomes unable to
fulfil her given task successfully.”
This verse and the next two verses actually describe the same content expressed in the 16th adhyāya of the 1st adhikaraņa of the Kautilīya Arthaśāstra titled, 'Sending a messenger and his performance.'
These type of references exhibit the well-versedness of the Jaina authors in the pan-Indian śāstric knowledge and at the same time, shows the deep-rootedness of Kautilya's polity in the medieval history of India. [43] The Piņdaniryukti-avacūri of Kșamāratna is a Sanskrit commentary written on the Pindaniryukti with bhāsya during the 14th century A.D.
The story of the severe drought and Susthita ācārya with his two disciples, is repeated in this avacūri (gā.500 - bhāşya 35,36,37 ; p. 91). This small story is actually the literal Sanskrit version of the story quoted in the Niśītha-cūrņi. Slight differences can be enumerated as - * Cāņakya is designated as a 'mantrīn' and not as an ‘amātya'. * The author is not very keen to depict Cāņakya as a Jaina house
holder. The Jainification is almost absent in the whole story. * The use of hybrid Sanskrit vocabulary is quite noteworthy. viz. 2
(two junior monks), facilea (contaminated), Hrafesit (freed) etc. [44] The Vividha-tīrtha-kalpa of Jinaprabhasūri holds an important position among the prabandha literature of the Jainas. The

Page #147

137
mythological and legendary history of 40 places of pilgrimage in India is documented in 40 chapters (kalpas). Jinaprabha has used both the languages i.e. Sanskrit and Prakrit (Jaina Māhārāstrī). This fourteenth-century-text is widely studied by Prakritists, Sanskritists and particularly by Orientalists due to its historical importance.
We get the reference to Cāņakya (Jinaprabha refers his name as 'Cāņikya') in the 36th chapter entitled 'Pātaliputra-nagara-kalpa'. Since Cāņakya is supposed to be a historical personality and the history of Jainism and Cāņakya is related with Magadha and particularily with Pāțaliputra, we gather a lot of information from Jinaprabha. But we become totally disappointed when we find only two passing references to Cāņakya in this chapter. Jinaprabha documents one-line-story as below -
____ तत्रैव च चाणिक्यः सचिवो नन्दं समूलमुन्मूल्य मौर्यवंश्यं श्रीचन्द्रगुप्तं Ralfagfggryfard 1 (p.69)
"There, Cāņikya-the minister completely uprooted Nanda. The great Candragupta of the mauryan dynasty was installed upon the throne by him.”
After this, Jinaprabha has enumerated Candragupta's successors very briefly in a single line. Samprati's contribution to Jainism is underlined. The story of femine is repeated here in a brief manner. The only remarkable thing is, among all the names of Cāņakya, Jinaprabha has used the name 'Visnugupta', which is very rare in the Jaina tradition.
We can conclude that during the 14th century A.D., the Cāņakyanarrative was on the verge of disappearance from the horizon of the svetāmbara literature.

Page #148

138
[3] References of Cāņakya in the Digambara literature:
(A) 13 references in tabular form The serial order mentioned in this chart is thus -
Serial No. - Century - Name of the Language - Title of the Work - Name of the Author - Reference Number - Gist of the Reference. Language-abbriviations used :
JS. - Jaina Saurasenī ; Skt. = Sanskrit ; Apa. = Apabhraṁsa 1. 3rd ; JŚ. ; Bhagavatī Ārādhanā ; Ācārya Śivakoți ; gā.1551, one
verse ; Death of Cāņakya. 3rd ; JŚ ; Bhagavatī Ārādhanā ; Ācārya Śivakoti ; gā.2070, one verse ; Names of Sakațāla
Vararuci & Mahāpadma-nanda. 2. 4th ; JŚ. ; Mūlācāra ; Vattakera ; Passing reference to Kautilya's
book as a heretic text. 3. 6th ; JŚ. ; Tiloya-Pannatti ; Ācārya Yativrṣabha ; 4.1481, one
verse ; Initiation of Candragupta. 10th ; Skt. ; Brhatkathākośa ; Harişeņa ; Story no.143, Total 85 verses ; Whole Biography. 10th ; Skt. ; Nītivākyāmộta ; Somadeva ; Abridged version of the
Arthaśāstra. 6. 11th ; Apa. ; Kahakosu ; Śrīcandra ; Sandhi 50, kadavakas 11
18 ; Short Biography. 7. 11th ; Skt. Mūlācāra-tīkā ; Vasudevanandi ; Two-fold explana
tion of the word kauțilya-dharma. 8. 11th ; Jś. ; Gommațasāra (J.) ; Nemicandra ; one verse ; The
names of the heretic texts.
9.
12th ; Skt. ; Pūnyāśrava-kathā-kośa ; Rāmacandra-mumuksu ; Story no.38 ; Selected incidents from the whole biography.

Page #149

10. 13th; Skt. ; Ārādhanā-katha-prabandha (Kathākośa); Prabhācandra; Story no.80, pp.212-217; Short version of Hariṣena's story.
11. 14th-15th; Apa. ; Bhadrabāhu-Cāṇakya-Candragupta-kathānaka ; Raidhū; kaḍavakas 8,9; Small part of a short poem having total 28 kaḍavakas.
12. Cāṇakyarṣi-kathā; Devācārya; Manuscript noted in Jinaratna
139
kośa.
13. 16th; Hindi ; Hindi commentary on Punyāśrava-kathā-kośa ; Pt. Daulatram Kashaliwal ; pp.155-157; old Hindi translation.
(B) Translation, explanation and observations on each reference [1] The Bhagavatī Ārādhanā (Ārādhanā/Mūlārādhanā) is probably the oldest Jaina Saurasei treatise of the Digambaras, documenting the death of Caṇakya as a religious or voluntary death called pādopagamana.
A list of distinguished persons with the brief accounts of their voluntary death is given in several verses i.e. from ga.1534 up to gā.1553.
gā. 1551, runs thus
गोट्ठे पाओवगदो सुबंधुणा गोब्बरे पलिविदम्मि । उज्झतो चाणक्को पडिवण्णो उत्तमं अट्ठे |
"Even if set on fire by Subandhu at gobbara-grāma, in that blazing condition at a cow-pen, Cāṇakya accomplished the ultimate aim of human life (i.e. acquired higher heaven or liberation)." Comments:
The horrific end of Cāṇakya is documented along-with the name of his rival Subandhu.
-

Page #150

140
* The Svetāmbara texts contemporary to the Bhagavatī Ārādhanā are
the Anuyogadvāra and the Niryuktis (Āvaśyaka, Pinda' and Oghao). These texts highlight the intellect of Cāņakya and some
other details but Cāņakya's death is not mentioned. * We get the reference to Mahāpadma-nanda and his two ministers
named Sakațāla and Vararuci in the 2070th verse of the Bhagavati Ārādhanā. The sucide of Sakațāla is treated there as a religious death. This information matches with the details given in the
Kathāsaritsāgara.
Commentators of the Bhagavatī Ārādhanā do not throw light on both the verses (No.1551 and No.2070) hence we get little information about Cāņakya.
[2] The Mūlācāra of Vattakera is a Jaina Śaurasenī text written during the 3rd 4th century A.D. The Digambaras treat this text as an authentic guidebook of the monastic conduct. A stray reference to Kautilya occurs in the 257th gā. of the Mūlācāra in the following
manner -
कोडिल्लमासुरक्खा भारहरामायणादि जे धम्मा ।
होज्ज व तेसु विसुत्ती लोइयमूढो हवदि एसो ।। “The religion preached in the book of Kautilya, in the texts dedicated to the well being of a human (i.e. ayurveda) as well as the texts like (Mahā) Bhārata and Rāmāyaṇa is of course based on misconceptions (laukika-mūdha) and common people are misguided by these texts.” (Further on, disregard towards the vedas is shown in the next verse.) Comments : * Vattakera has cautioned the monks against the mithyā-śrutas (false
scriptures of the heretics).

Page #151

141
* The same attitude is seen in the contemporary Śvetāmbara texts viz.
the Anuyogadvāra and Nandi. Vattakera and his commentator is totally against the study of these texts and particularly against the writings of Kautilya while nandīkāra has smoothen his tone and advises to the monks to read it with samyak-drsti (enlightened
world-view). * The commentator Vasudevanandī (Vasunandi ?) belonging to the
11th century A.D., has explained the verse fully and harsh com
ments are passed. [3] The Triloka-prajñapti of Yativrṣabha is a Jaina Saurasení text which is enumerated under 'karaṇānuyoga' and is written inbetween the 5th century A.D. and 8th century A.D. The text is divided into nine mahādhikāras (i.e. chapters). The 148th gāthā of 4th mahādhikāra runs as follows -
मउडधरेसुं चरिमो जिणदिक्खं धरदि चंदगुत्तो य ।
तत्तो मउडधरा दुप्पव्वज्जणेव गेण्हति ।। “Among the crowned kings, Candragupta was the last one, who was initiated in the tradition of the Jinas. Further on, none of the crowned king accepted such dīkņā.” Observations : * In the Triloka-prajñapti, Candragupta is mentioned and we find no
reference to Cāņakya or Kautilya. * Many scholars have suggested that this Candragupta is not a
Mauryan king but a king belonging to the Gupta dynasty. * If this text belongs to the 6th - 7th century, the authors of the cūrņis
and tīkās of the Ardhamāgadhi texts might not have failed to mention Candragupta Maurya's dīkņā-ceremony. Even Hemacandra, an alrounder genius possessing certain historical sense describes

Page #152

142
Candragupta Maurya's death in a very simplified manner. He says -
बिन्दुसारे प्रपेदाने वयो मन्मथवल्लभम् । समाधिमरणं प्राप्य चन्द्रगुप्तो दिवं ययौ ।।
Pari-pa, sarga 8 verse 444 This reference confirms that Candragupta Maurya has not taken dīksa and has not moved towards south as depicted by Harișeņa. Hemacandra never associated this Mauryan king with the first
Bhadrabāhu.
[4] The Bșhatkathākoşa of Harişeņa is the oldest collection of the narratives available in Sanskrit which is written during the 10th century A.D. Harișeņa is a Digambara writer who collected 157 traditional narratives of the famous historical personalities. In these narratives he has given the full life-accounts of Bhadrabāhu, Vararuci, Svāmi Kārttikeya etc. These narratives are written in poetical-form. It seems that Harişeņa has got the inspiration from the Bhagavatī Ārādhanā in which the names of the personalities are referred to in a brief manner.
The 143rd tale is titled as, “Cāņakya-muni-kathānakam' (pp.336338) in which Cāņakya’s whole biography is documented in 85 Sanskrit verses. As the main source of the Svetāmbara narratives of Cāņakya is the Avaśyaka literature, likewise Harisena's Cāņakyamuni-kathā is the spring-well of the legacy of Cāņakya in the Digambara literature.
Here, an attempt has been made to give literal translation of each verse of Cāņakya-kathā accurately as far as possible. Afterwards, the sailent features of this narrative are noted in comparison with the Svetāmbara accounts of Cāņakya.

Page #153

143
Cāņakya-muni-kathānakam (1) पुरेऽस्ति पाटलीपुत्रे नन्दो नाम महीपतिः ।
सुव्रता तन्महादेवी विषाण(?)दललोचना ।। Once upon a time, Nanda was the king of Pāļalīputra. Suvratā was his chief queen, having the eyes like lotus petals. (2) कवि: सुबन्धुनामा च शकटाख्यस्त्रयोऽप्यमी ।
समस्तलोकविख्याता भूपतेरस्य मन्त्रिणः ।। There were three famous ministers of the king viz. Kavi, Subandhu and Sakata. (3) अस्मिन्नेव पुरे चासीत् कपिलो नाम माहनः ।
तद्भार्या देविला नाम चाणक्यस्तत्सुतः सुधीः ।। In the same city, there was a māhana (? brahmin) called Kapila. Devilā was his wife and Cāņakya was their son, who was intelligent. (4) वेदवेदाङ्गसंयुक्त: सर्वशास्त्रार्थकोविदः ।
समस्तलोकविख्यातः समस्तजनपूजितः ।। Cāņakya was wellversed in the vedas, vedāngas and in different śāstric texts. Due to his intelligence and learning, he became famous and adorable to the people. (5) नीलोत्पलदलश्यामा पूर्णिमाचन्द्रसन्मुखी ।
यशोमतिः प्रिया चास्य यशोव्याप्तदिगन्तरा ।। Yaśomatī was his wife, having a lustre like a blue lotus, possessing a moon-like face and whose fame was spread over far and wide. (6) कपिलस्य स्वसा तन्वी नाम्ना बन्धुमती परा ।
विधिना कवये दत्ता मन्त्रिणे कपिलेन सा ।। Bandhumatī was the sister of Kapila. She was given in marriage to the minister Kavi with a proper religious ceremony. (7) प्रत्यन्तवासिभूपानां क्षोभो नन्दस्य भूभुजः ।
कविना मन्त्रिणा सर्वो यथावृत्तो निवेदितः ।।

Page #154

144
One day the minister Kavi told the king Nanda about the actual facts of the agitation and outbreak of the negihbouring kings against him. (8) कविवाक्येन भूपालो नन्दो मन्त्रिणमब्रवीत् ।
प्रत्यन्तवासिनो भूपान् धनं दत्वा वशं कुरु ।। Having thought over the report of Kavi, Nanda suggested Kavi to pacify the agitated kings by offering handsome amount of money. (9) नरेन्द्रवाक्यतोऽनेन मन्त्रिणा कविना तदा ।
वितीर्णं लक्षमेकैकं राज्ञां प्रत्यन्तवासिनाम् ।। As per the suggestion of the king, Kavi distributed one lac golden coins to each of the agitated negihbouring kings. (10) अन्यदा नन्दभूपालो भाण्डागारिकमेककम् ।
पप्रच्छेदं कियन्मानं विद्यते मद्गृहे धनम् ।। On another occasion, king Nanda asked his treasurer confidentially, 'Oh, tell me how much wealth is there in my treasury ?' (11) नन्दवाक्यं समाकर्ण्य धनपालो जगावमुम् ।
भाण्डागारे धनं राजन्न किंचिद्विद्यते तव ।। After having heard the querry of Nanda, the treasurer told the fact that there is nothing left in the treasury. (12) प्रत्यन्तवासिभूपानां कविना तव मन्त्रिणा ।
नरेन्द्र दत्तमेतेषां त्वदीयं सकलं धनम् ।। He added, “Oh king, Kavi, your minister has given out all your wealth to the negihbouring kings.' (13) निशम्य तद्वचो राजा पुत्रदारसमन्वितम् ।
अन्धकूपे तक वेगान्मन्त्रिण निदधौ रुषा ।। After having heard the report, the king was enraged and gave immediate orders to throw the minister into an old hidden well, along-with his family. (14) एकैकं सकलं तत्र शरावं भक्तसंभृतम् ।
दीयते गुणयोगेन कवये हि दिने दिने ।।

Page #155

145
The king ordered his servants to provide the meal to Kavi in the earthenware plate, on each day. (15) अत्रान्तरे कविः प्राह कुटुम्बं निजमादरात् ।
अन्धकूपसमासंगदुःखसंहृतमानसः ।। (16) वैरनिर्यातने यो हि समर्थो नन्दभूपतेः ।
स परं भोजनं भुक्तां शरावेऽत्र सभक्तके ।। In the meantime, Kavi, who was extremely hurt due to the seclusion in the well, addressed his family with a great concern, "Whoever among you is able to retaliate the enmity of the king Nanda, should take this platterful of meal daily.' (17) कविवाक्यं समाकर्ण्य तत्कुटुम्बो जगाद तम् ।
त्वमेव भोजनं भुंक्ष्व शरावे सौदनं द्रुतम् ।। After having heard the speech of Kavi, the family-members exclaimed unanimously, “Sir, you should immediately start to dine the rice-plate in order to bring the desired effects.' (18) उक्तं कुटुम्बमेतेन कविनासन्नवर्तिना ।
अन्धकूपान्तरे खात्वा बिलं तत्तटगोचरम् ।। (19) तत्तटस्थः प्रभुञ्जान: शरावे सौदनं तदा ।
एवमुक्त्वा बिलं कृत्वा कविस्तस्थौ रूषान्वितः ।। Kavi explained his whole scheme to his near and dear ones. He told that he intend to dig an opening at the other end of the burrow and it is possible for him if he has a meal every day. Thus he carried out his scheme, nurturing great fury in his mind. (20) वर्षत्रयमतिक्रान्तं तत्रस्थस्य कवेः स्फुटम् ।
जीवनं चास्य संजातं मृतमन्यत् कुटुम्बकम् ।। In this manner, three years of Kavi's life elasped. At the end, all his family-members passed away and his life was spared. (21) किंवदन्तीं तकां ज्ञात्वा कवे: कोपारुणक्षणैः ।

Page #156

146
प्रत्यन्तवासिभि: भूपैर्वेष्टितं नन्दपत्तनम् ।। When the negihbouring kings knew the hearsay about Kavi, they furiously beseiged the capital-city of Nanda. (22) स्मृत्वा कवेः क्षणं राज्ञा नन्देनायमुदारधीः ।
__पादयोः पतनं कृत्वा कूपादुत्तारितः पुनः ।। When this calamity occured, Nanda immediately remembered his intelligent minister Kavi. The king saluted his feet and rescued him from the well. (23) क्षमापणं विधायास्य नन्देनायं प्रचोदितः ।
वरं ब्रूहि महाबुद्धे प्रसन्नोऽस्मितव स्फुटम् ।। Nanda asked Kavi to forgive him and told him, 'Oh intelligent one, I am pleased. I offer you a boon. please express your wish, I will fulfil it.' (24) नन्दस्य वचनं श्रुत्वा कविरूचे नरेश्वरम् ।
स्वहस्तेन मया द्रव्यं दातव्यं ते न चान्यतः ।। Having heard Nanda's boon, Kavi told king Nanda, I will surpervise all the transactions of the treasury. It is my privileage to give out the wealth from the royal treasury and of none others.' (25) निशम्य वचनं तस्य भूभुजा मन्त्रिण: कवेः ।
प्रतिपन्नं सभामध्ये बालवृद्धसमाकुले ।। The king accepted the condition of the minister Kavi, in the assembly full of (the ministers as well as) children and elderly persons. (26) अन्यदा भ्रमताऽनेन कविना द्रव्यमिच्छता ।
दर्भसूचीं खनन् दृष्टश्चाणाक्यश्चात्र संगतः ।। Once Kavi was wnadering here and there, thinking about the means of gathering wealth for the royal treasury. Suddenly he saw Cāņākya (Cāņakya) who was deeply engrossed in digging out the root of the
needle-like grass.

Page #157

147
(27) दृष्ट्वाऽमुं कविना पृष्टश्चाणाक्यः स्वपुरः स्थितः ।
भट्ट किं कारणं दर्भसूचीं खनसि मे वद ।। When Kavi saw Cāņākya in front of him, he asked, 'Oh brahmin, why are you digging out this darbha grass ?' (28) कवेर्वचनमाकर्ण्य चाणाक्यो निजगावमुम् ।
दर्भसूच्याऽनया विद्धो व्रजन् पादे सुतीक्ष्णया ।। After having heard the words of Kavi, Cāņākya answered, “The sharp point of this darbha grass pierced my foot.' (29) पश्य पादमिमं भिन्नमनया रुधिरारुणम् ।
शेषतोन्मूलयाम्येतां दर्भसूची नरोत्तम ।। 'Oh gentleman, see my bleeding foot. I am going to dig this sharp grass upto its root.' (30) अवाचि कविना भूयश्चाणाक्य: खिन्नविग्रहः ।
खातं बहु त्वया विप्र पर्याप्तं खननेन ते ।। When Kavi saw Cāņākya completely fatigued with exertion, he said again, 'Oh brahmin, you have dug it sufficiently. So now stop it.' (31) कविवाक्यं समाकर्ण्य चाणाक्यो निजगावमुम् ।
तदाग्रहसमुद्भूतविस्मयव्याप्तमानसः ।। Cāņakya was surprised at Kavi's insistence and said his mind was averwhelmed by wonder and he exclaimed (32) मूलं नोन्मूलते यस्य तत्किं खातं भवेद् भुवि ।
स किं हतो नरैरज्ञैश्छिद्यते यस्य नो शिरः ।। "What is the use of the digging unless the thing is completely uprooted ? Foolish are those persons who intend cpmplete destruction of a man and still do not cut his head off.' (33) यावन्मूलं न चाप्नोति दर्भसूच्याः कृताग्रसः ।
भूयो भूयः प्रबन्धेन तेन यावत् खनाम्यहम् ।। ‘Unless I reach theroot of this wretched grass, I will dig again and

Page #158

again.'
(34) निशम्य तद्वचः सत्यं नन्दस्य सचिवः कविः ।
दध्यौ स्वचेतसि स्पष्टं विस्मयाकुलमानसः ।।
When Kavi heard that passionate utterances (of Cāṇakya), first he wondered and ascertained in his mind clearly about the personality
of Cānakya.
(35) नन्दभूपालवंशस्य समर्थस्य महीतले ।
नाशं करिष्यति क्षिप्रं एष कोऽपि महानरः ।।
148
This great person is quite capable to destroy quickly the whole dynasty of the Nanda kings, who are mighty on the earth. (36) चिन्तयित्वा चिरं तत्र सभामध्ये जनाकुले ।
श्लोकमेकं लिलेखेमं कविर्विस्मितचेतसा ।।
Greatly amazed at his revelation, kavi wrote a verse thoughtfully, on the central pillar of the court of Nandas, always bustled with people, in an astonished mood.
(37) नरेणैकशरीरेण (? शक्यमेकसहस्रेण) नयशास्त्रयुतेन च ।
व्यवसायेन युक्तेन जेतुं शक्या वसुन्धरा ।।
A person wellversed in the science of polity and having great resolve with efforts, is able to win the whole earth with the help of a
thousand warriors.
(38) अन्यदाऽयं विलोक्यात्र श्लाकमेकं विचक्षणः ।
लिलेख निजहस्तेन चाणाक्यो धीरमानसः ।।
(39) नरेणैकशरीरेण नयशास्त्रयुतेन च ।
व्यवसायेन युक्तेन जेतुं शक्या वसुन्धरा ।।
Once Caṇakya saw the verse (written on the pillar). The witty and courageous Cāṇākya wrote another verse with his own hand (carrying out a slight important change). 'A person alone, wellversed is able to win the whole earth.'

Page #159

149
(40) इमं लिखितमालोक्य कवि: श्लोकं मनोहरम् ।
चाणाक्योपरि संतुष्टश्चेतसाश्चर्यमीयुषा ।। Kavi saw the new verse written in an attractive manner by Cāņākya. The verse was a pleasant surprise for Kavi (which confirmed his conjencture about Canakya's ability.) (41) अन्यदा भार्यया सार्धं चाणाक्योऽत्र निमन्त्रितः ।
कविनाश्चर्ययुक्तेन तदगृहं स गतोऽशितुम् ।। At another time, Kavi invited Cāņākya for meal at his house along with his wife. Cāņākya went there wondering why he was invited. (42) ततोऽपि कविना तेन चाणाक्यस्य गृहाजिरे ।
दीनारा बहवः शीघ्रं निक्षिप्तास्तं परीक्षितुम् ।। Moreover, Kavi buried abundant dīnāras (golden coins) in the courtyard of Cāņākya very swiftly (in the meantime) to test him. (43) यशोमत्या गृहीतास्ते दीनाराः स्वगृहाङ्गणे ।
आदाय तान् पुरस्तुष्टा जगौ चाणाक्यमादरात् ।। Yaśomati took those dīnāras which were buried in their courtyard. With a feeling of satisfaction, she addressed Cāņākya ardently - (44) ददाति कपिलां नन्दो ब्राह्मणेभ्यो मन:प्रियाम् ।
तदन्तिकं परिप्राप्य गृहीत्वाऽऽगच्छ तामरम् ।। “Nanda donates attractive brown cows to the brahmins. Please go to him and bring the cow as soon as possible.' (45) भार्यावचनमाकर्ण्य चाणक्यो निजगाद ताम् ।
त्वद्वाक्यत: प्रगृह्णामि गत्वा तां कपिलामहम् ।। After having heard the request of her spouse, Cāņakya said to her, 'I will go and bring the cow only to respect thine wish.' (46) तत्संप्रधारणं श्रुत्वा कविमन्त्री कुतूहलात् ।
इदं निवेदयामास नन्दस्य प्रीतचेतसः ।। (47) बहुदुग्धसमायुक्तं महाराज समुज्ज्वलम् ।
गोसहस्रं प्रदेहि त्वं माहनेभ्य: सुभक्तितः ।।

Page #160

After knowing the decision, Kavi - the minister, told Nanda anxiously when Nanda was in a good mood that, 'Your excellency, I suggest you to donate thousand cows, having abundant milk and lustre, to thousand brahmins, in charity, with a mind full of devotion (which is a meritorious act ). '
(48) कविवाक्यं समाकर्ण्य नन्दोऽपि निजगाद तम् ।
150
गोसहस्रं ददाम्येव ब्राह्मणानानय द्रुतम् ।।
Hearing Kavi's request, Nanda declared, ‘Quickly invite the brahmins,
I will give them thousand cows.'
(49) ततश्चाणक्यमाहूय नरेन्द्रवचनादरम् । कविर्निवेशयामास प्रधानाग्रासने तदा ।।
Immediately after Nanda's order, Kavi invited Cāṇakya and caused him to sit on the chief and foremost seat.
(50) उपविष्टः स चाणक्यो दर्भासनकदम्बकम् ।
कुण्डिकाभिर्बृशीकाभी रुद्ध्वा तस्थौ नृपान्तिके ।।
Caṇakya sat on the seat meant for Nanda and occupied many darbhāsanas (seats made up of darbha grass) with his water-pot, sacred staff etc.
(51) ततोऽयं कविना प्रोक्तो भट्टनन्दो जगाविदम् ।
तदर्थमासनं चैकं मुञ्च विप्राः समागताः ।।
Kavi told Caṇakya, "The king Nanda has arrived. please vacate one seat for him and see, all the brahmins have entered the hall." (52) तद्वाक्यतो विहायैकं विष्टरं स द्विजः पुनः ।
एकैकमासनं मुक्तं भूयः प्रोक्तोऽमुनेदृशम् ।।
On his (Kavi's) request, the brahmin ( Cānakya ) vacated one seat and sat on the next. In this way Caṇakya vacated the seats one by
one.
(53) भट्टनन्दो वदत्येवं भवन्तं भक्तितत्परः ।
अग्रासने परो विप्रो गृहीतो भूभुजा महान् ।।

Page #161

151
(Kavi sent somebody to Cāņakya and he said,) 'king Nanda regards you a lot but this seat is reserved by the king for a great brahmin.' (54) भव राजगृहाद् दूरे निर्गत्य त्वरितं द्विज । __ गत्वा बहिर्गृहद्वारे तिष्ठ त्वं सुसमाहितः ।। (The person continued,) 'Oh brahmin, leave this palace immediately and wait patiently for your turn at the door place.' (55) निशम्य वचनं तस्य चाणक्यो रक्तलोचनः ।
जगाद् कर्तिकाहस्तस्तं नरं परुषस्वनः ।। When Cāņakya heard this humiliating message, his eyes became red with anger and keeping a pair of scissors in hand exclaimed in a harsh tone, addressing that person in a loud voice (so that all would hear)(56) इदं न युज्यते कर्तुं भवतो न्यायवेदिनः ।
भोजनार्थं निविष्टस्य त्वद्गृहे मन्निरासनम् ।। 'Oh king, since you are the well-versed in the laws, it is not proper on your part to banish me from the royal palace, when I have already occupied a seat to dine.' (57) अर्धचन्द्रं गले दत्वा चाणक्यो धाटितोऽमुना ।
तन्निमित्तं रुषं प्राप्य निर्गतस्तद्गृहाबहिः ।।। He (Nanda or Nanda's servant) turned out Canakya seized by the neck. Burning with insult and fury, Cāņakya left the palace. (58) नन्दवंशक्षयं शीघ्रं विदधामि विसंशयम् ।
एवं विचिन्त्य चाणाक्यो निजगाद वच: स्फुटम् ।। 'I will definitely ruin the Nanda dynasty’-Cāņakya thought and exclaimed loudly (59) यदीच्छति नरः कोऽपि राज्यं निहतकण्टकम् ।
ततो मदन्तिके शीघ्रं तिष्ठतु प्रीतमानसः ।। 'One who wants to rule a kingdom, devoid of enemies (lit. thornless) he should quickly stand by my side, delighted at heart.'

Page #162

152
(60) चाणाक्यवचनं श्रुत्वा नरः कोऽपि जगाविदम् ।
अहमिच्छामि भो राज्यं दीयतां मे द्रुतं प्रभो ।। After having heard Canakya's speech, some person (came forward and) told, 'Sir, grant me the kingdom quickly since I long for it.' (61) निजहस्तेन तं हस्ते समादाय त्वरान्वितः ।
चाणक्यो रोषसंपूर्णो निजगाम पुरादरम् ।। Cāņakya immediately held his hand and angrily went elsewhere from the city. (62) वातवेगं समारुह्य तुरङ्ग प्रीतमानसः । __ अवाहयत्तकं शीघ्रं चाणाक्यो निजलीलया ।। Cāņākya being delighted at heart, caused the person to mount a horse, swift as wind and carried him away with his expertise in horse-riding. (63) जलदुर्गं प्रविश्यासौ वार्धिमध्ये सुधीरधीः ।
राज्यमन्वेषयंस्तस्थौ चाणाक्यः कृतनिश्चयः ।। Cāņākya, the brilliant one, entered with him into a sea-fort, situated in the middle of an ocean, waiting for a suitable opportunity to acquire kingdom, with a great resolve. (64) एवं हि तिष्ठतस्तस्य नरेणैकेन वेगतः ।
प्रत्यन्तवासिभूपस्य निवेदितमिदं वचः ।। When Cāņakya was staying there, one person (spy) of the neighbouring country (of Nanda) promptly informed his lord in these words - (65) जलदुर्गे महानेकः समुद्रजलसंभवे ।
तिष्ठति प्रीतचेतस्को नरनाग: सुबुद्धिमान् ।। 'At the sea-fort in the middle of the ocean, there stays an intelligent and distinguished person (resembling an elephant), calmly waiting (for an opportunity).' (66) प्रत्यन्तवासिभूपोऽपि निशम्यास्य वचः परम् ।
निनाय तं निजस्थानं चाणक्यं मतिशालिनम् ।।

Page #163

153
After getting such valuable information, the neighbouring king led Canakya, possessing great intelligence, to his own country. (67) पर्वतान्तं परिप्राप्य भूपाः प्रत्यन्तवासिनः ।
भक्तं प्रवेशयामासुर्धनं च सकलं तदा ।। The neighbouring kings brought Cāņakya (and the other person) in the hilly region (or to the king Parvataka). They provided all necessary things like food, wealth etc. to him. (68) ततोऽमी नन्दभूपालं भूपैः प्रत्यन्तवासिभिः ।
उपायैर्भेदमानीतास्तस्थुस्तद्वेषमागताः ।। Then he (Cāņakya) created discord among the ministers of Nanda by using all deceitful means, with the help of the neighbouring kings. The ministers became malicious to Nanda. (69) प्रत्यन्तशत्रुभूपालैनन्दो दण्डं प्रयाचितः ।
अयं वक्ति न तं नूनं ददामि भवतां करम् ।। The neighbouring kings asked for heavy fines to Nanda. Nanda said (arrogantly,) 'I will not give you the taxes.' (70) ततोऽभिनन्दभृत्यानां मन्त्रभेदं विहाय च ।
निर्धाटनं छलेनैषां भ्रान्तिसंभ्रान्तिचेतसाम् ।। (71) स्वेन नन्दं निहत्याशु सुपुरे कुसुमनामनि ।
चकार विपुलं राज्यं चाणाक्यो निजबुद्धितः ।। Then Cāņākya created a breach of counsel among the persons appointed by Nanda. The confused and perplexed ministers were driven away by Cāņakya with deceitful means. Afterwards he himself killed Nanda in Kusumapura (i.e. Pāțaliputra) and ruled over the vast empire for many years with his great (administrative) talent. (72) कृत्वा राज्यं चिरं कालं अभिषिच्यात्र तं नरम् ।
श्रुत्वा जिनोदितं धर्मं हित्वा सर्वं परिग्रहं ।। (73) मतिप्रधानसाध्वन्ते महावैराग्यसंयुतः ।
दीक्षां जग्राह चाणाक्यो जिनेश्वरनिवेदिताम् ।।

Page #164

154
After having ruled the kingdom for a long period, he consecrated that person (i.e. candragupta) as a king. When he heard the preaching of the Jinas, he abandoned all his possessions and with a completely detached mind, accepted vows of monk which are proclaimed by the Jinas, from a preceptor having deep insight (or intellect). (74) विहरन् गतियोगेन शिष्याणां पञ्चभिः शतैः ।
वनवासं परिप्राप्य दक्षिणापथसंभवम् ।। (75) तत: पश्चिमदिग्भागे महाक्रौञ्चपुरस्य सः ।
चाणक्यो गोकुलस्थाने कायोत्सर्गेण तस्थिवान् ।। Wandering in a natural course with his five hundred disciples, he (Cāņakya) arrived at a place called vanavāsa, which was situated in the southern region (dakṣiṇāpatha). In the westward direction of vanavāsa, there was a city called Mahākrauñcapura. In the cowhouse of that city, Cāņakya stayed in kāyotsarga meditation. (76) बभूव तत्पुरे राजा सुमित्रो नाम विश्रुतः ।
तत्प्रिया रूपसंपन्ना विनयोपपदा मतिः ।। Sumitra was the famous king of that city. Vinatamatī was his charming wife (queen). (77) मन्त्री सुबन्धुनामास्य नन्दस्य मरणेन सः ।
चाणक्योपरि संक्रुध्य तस्थौ तच्छिद्रवाञ्छया ।। Subandhu, the previous minister of Nanda, who was angry at Cāņakya and seeking the flaws of Cāņakya - (78) ततः क्रौञ्चपुरेशस्य महासामन्तसेविनः ।
सुबन्धुर्बन्धुसंपन्न: समीपे तस्य तस्थिवान् ।। Having approached the king of Krauñcapura, who was a refuge of many eminent feudatory kings, Subandhu lived there with his kins
men.
(79) अथ क्रौञ्चपुराधीशः श्रुत्वा मुनिसमागमम् ।
महाविभूतिसंयुक्तस्तं यतिं वन्दितुं ययौ ।।

Page #165

155
Once, the king of Krauñcapura got the news of the arrival of the sages. With a great paraphernlia, he went there to salute him. (80) चाणक्यादिमुनीन् नत्वा स तत्पूजां विधाय च ।
महाविनयसंपन्नो विवेश निजपत्तनम् ।। He bowed down to Cāņakya and all the other sages and performed pūjā. With a great respect in his mind, he came back to his city. (81) ततोऽस्तमनवेलायां यतीनां शुद्धचेतसाम् ।
__साग्निं करीषमाधाय तत्समीपेऽपि रोषतः ।। (82) विधाय स्वेन देहेन पापराशेरुपार्जनम् ।
महाक्रोधपरीताङ्गः सुबन्धुर्नरकं ययौ ।। At the time of sunset, Subandhu went towards them angrily and kept burning cow-dungs around the pure-minded ascetics. Thus, encompassed with a great fury, Subandhu acquired a heap of evil and entered the fierce hell. (83) चाणक्याख्यो मुनिस्तत्र शिष्यपञ्चशतैः सह ।
पादोपगमनं कृत्वा शुक्लध्यानमुपेयिवान् ।। The revered sage Cāņakya along with his five hundred disciples, accepted wilful death, engaging himself in śukladhyāna, the supreme type of meditation. (84) उपसर्ग सहित्वेमं सुबन्धुविहितं तदा । ___समाधिमरणं प्राप्य चाणक्य: सिद्धिमीयिवान् ।। Cāņakya endured the troubles created by Subandhu at that time. He accepted samādhimaraṇa and attained liberation. (85) तत: पश्चिमदिग्भागे दिव्यक्रौञ्चपुरस्य सा ।
निषद्यका मुनेरस्य वन्द्यतेऽद्यापि साधुभिः ।। At the western part of the divine Krauñcapura, there exists one platform created in the memory of this sage (Canakya) even now, which is adored by the monks.

Page #166

156
Some observations on Harişeņa's Cāņakya-narrative : * As the Āvaśyaka-cūrņi is the main source of the Cāņakya-narra
tives in the Svetāmbara sect, likewise Harișena's Cāņakya-munikathānakam is regarded as the main source by all the later writers
of the Digambara sect. * Before Harişeņa, we find some passing references of Cāņakya in the
Digambara literature but Harișena's Cāņakya-kathā containing
85 Sanskrit verses is the first and foremost biography of Cāņakya. * Harişeņa, being a brahmin by birth, uses mostly the brahmanic
sources viz. the Skandapurāņa, Matsyapurāņa and Kathāsaritsāgara (probably the early version of the Kathāsaritsāgara) with some
changes. * Influence of the main theme of Višākhadatta's Mudrārāksasa is
not found in Harișeņa. * Harişeņa uses both the words Cāņakya and Cāņākya according to
the requirement of the metre. * The details of Cāņakya's mother, father and residence are differ
ent in Svetāmbara literature. The incidents of Cāņakya's childhood are completely dropped. His brahminhood and teachership is
highlighted * Cāņakya's śrāvakatva is not explicitly told by Harişeņa but sug
gested by using the word 'HEH:'. It is really startling that he abruptly became a Jaina muni in the last phase of his life. The Jainification of Cāņakya depicted in the Svetāmbara literature, though superimposed, is more logical and convincing because Cāņakya's laymanship is focused and described by creating three
or four stories. * Harisena always prefers the name 'Cāņakya' (or 'Cāņākya'). He
has never mentioned his name as 'Vişnugupta' or 'Kautilya’ and

Page #167

157
had not underlined the crookedness or wickedness of Caṇakya. When broadly comprehended, it would be seen that the 'kutilamatitva' of Caṇakya/Kautilya is noted down by the Śvetambaras and Digambaras after the 12th century A.D. We have already observed that, in the brahmanic literature the signs of disregard for Cāṇakya's is seen from the 11th-12th century onwards, when the dharmaśāstras overpowered the legacy of the Arthaśāstra.
The various small incidents noted down in the Avaśyaka and Niśītha-cūrṇis about Cāṇakya, are totally neglected by Hariṣeṇa. He had not incorporated these small accounts in his biography. Three reasons can be given for this -
(i) He should have thought that these accounts are fanciful, artificially created and added wilfully to Caṇakya's biography by the Śvetambara writers.
(ii) He neglected the stories totally because of the strong secterian bias against the authenticity of the Svetambara literature.
(iii) He was not ready to accept the relationship of guru-sisya between Canakya and Candragupta Maurya depicted in the Svetambara literature. In his Cāṇakya-muni-kathā, Hariṣeṇa had never mentioned Candragupta Maurya, instead he mentions :' by using the pronoun in third person singular.
In the 'Bhadrabāhu-kathānakam' (Kathā No.131; p.317 of Bṛhatkathā), Hariṣena presents a story of Bhadrabahu (probably the second Bhadrabāhu famous as the niryuktikāra) and Candragupta, probably a 'gupta' king and not a 'maurya' king. The Candragupta belonging to the gupta dynasty, accepted dīkṣā and was renamed as Viśākhācārya. He went to dakṣiṇāpatha along-with Bhadrabāhu (IInd). In the Bhadrabahu-kathānaka, not

Page #168

158
a single reference to Caṇakya is found. The Hariṣena's Caṇakya is totally a different personality having no connection with the Candragupta and which is more close to brahmanical purāṇas, who personally killed the king Yogananda by black magic, ruled over the kingdom for a long time, accepted munidīkṣā and obtained liberation by voluntary death.
Hariṣeṇa never mentions that Cāṇakya has written a treatise on polity. In fact the reference to Kautilya's Arthaśāstra is found in Tiloyapanṇatti (Trilokaprajñapti) - a revered ancient Jaina text written by Yativṛṣabha, a renowned Digambara sage. Therefore it is likely that Hariṣeṇa might have regarded Kautilya as a different person than Caṇakya - who become a Jaina muni and came to south.
* The whole Svetambara tradition presents Canakya as an example
of pārināmiki-buddhi. Hariṣeņa shows the sense of extreme regard towards Cāṇakya by using the terms like f: (v.3); नरनागः सुबुद्धिमान् (v.65) ; चाणक्यं मतिशालिनम् (v.66) and चकार विपुलं Ag: (v.71) etc. Harisena praises the intelligence and wisdom of Caṇakya in general without using the terminology of the fourfold buddhi. It is natural because the Digambaras never explain the Jaina Epistemology in the terms of fourfold buddhi.
*
Hariṣena is successful in portraying the image of Cāṇakya as a brave revolutionary, expert in the skills like horse-riding, a political visionary who manages the chief of the neighbouring countries with great wisdom and an able administrator having good governance. The image of Caṇakya portrayed by Hariṣena is not seen in the Śvetambara literature because they treat him as a bimbāntarita-rājā while Hariṣeņa depicts him as an actual king.

Page #169

159
[5] Cāņakya : Reflected in the Nītivākyāmộta - (An abridged ver
sion of Arthaśāstra)
When we go through the chronology of Cāņakya-legacy in the
Jaina literature, we have to take a big halt at the Nītivākyāmrta of
Somadevasūri written in the 10th century. The legacy of Nītivākyāmsta is aptly quoted by R.Shamashastri in the introduction of his edition of the Kautiliya Arthasāstra. He says, “सोमदेवसूरिणा नीतिवाक्यामृतं नाम नीतिशास्त्रं विरचितं तदपि कामन्दकीयमिव कौटिलीयार्थशास्त्रादेव संक्षिप्य संगृहीतमिति तद्ग्रन्थपदवाक्यशैलीपरीक्षायां निस्संशयं ज्ञायते ।''
Somadevasūri is a Digambara writer having supreme command on Sanskrit language. He has written the Yaśastilaka-campū, one of the prestigious campūkāvyas which exhibits his mastery over the classical Sanskrit. Somadeva's second available work is the Nītivākyāmsta. In spite of being a Jaina monk, his keen interest in the science of polity (Arthaśāstra) is noteworthy. He is a thorough scholar of anviksiki and dharmaśāstras.
Though Somadeva's work is the abridged and simplified version of the Kauțilīya Arthaśāstra, it is remarkable that he neither imitates nor Jainifies the revered work of Kautilya. Generally he has followed the sūtra-style of Kautilya. We can locate many such sūtras from the Nītivākyāmsta which are similar to the Kauțilyan sūtras. Interested readers may go through the similar sūtras quoted in the introduction written by Pt. Nathuram Premi.?
Somadeva has selected the ethico-religious part of the Arthaśāstra and presented it in a unique way to guide any common Indian as such. Though he has followed the traditional system of varņāśrama, unlike the Manu and Yājñavalkya smstis, the brahmin-focused and brahmin biased viewpoints are moderated and softened so skilfully

Page #170

160
that it becomes an ethical-value-based text, ideal for day-to-day guidence.
Its uniqueness is evident from the very beginning. The initial benediction is dedicated to the kingdom or nation. He says अथ धर्मार्थकामफलाय राज्याय नमः ।
In spite of being a Jaina monk, he written three chapters on the three puruṣārthas, viz. dharma, artha and kāma. He has woven the chief Jaina tenets of samatā and ahimsa so beautifully in the sūtras that the general appeal becomes universal. He says, ‘udurdy fề u4a1 सर्वाचरणानां परमाचरणं' ie equality to all living beings is the best way of conduct. About non-violence, his sūtra runs like this 'न खलु
भूतगुहां कापि क्रिया प्रसूते श्रेयांसि' i.e. one who harms the living beings, his
actions do not create any good or merit for him.
Although he has treated the topics like swāmī, amātya, janapada, durga, kośa etc. on the lines of Kautilya, the brilliance of his genius is seen in the topics like - divasānuṣṭhāna, sadācāra and vyavahāra. With this explanatory background we will scrutinize the specific references of the Arthaśāstra and Cāṇakya, imbibed in the Nītivākyāmṛta and its commentary. The observations can be enumerated in the following manner -
* Neither Somadeva nor his commentator have expressed the debt of Caṇakya or Kautilya directly.
At the very outset, Somadeva mentions that for acquiring the jitendriyatā (control over one's senses) one should study the Arthaśāstra i.e Nītiśāstra (Ethical science). Though in this aphorism, direct reference of Kauțilīya Arthaśāstra is not given, Somadeva certainly intends to highlight the ethical side of the Arthaśāstra.3
* In the third aphorism of mantrisamuddeśa, Somadeva says, "If a
=

Page #171

161
great person install a stone, it becomes a god. If it is so, then what about a human being ?”4 The author Somadeva immediately remembers Cāņakya and Candragupta. he says, 7211 alirud fasul-IGHLAIG fechnisfq foties ar 4: 4464914' - i.e. It is heard that though Candragupta was not the ligitimate heir of the throne, he acquired the seat under the patronage of Vişnugupta.”
The word '377ri' employed in this aphorism is very peculiar. We can infer that, at Somadeva's time, the heresay and legends about Cāņakya and Candragupta were prevalent. Up to the time of Somadeva, ample narrative-data about Cāņakya was available even in the Jaina tradition. According to this data, Candragupta was not eligible to adorn the throne.
The commentator provides more information. He identifies ‘Vişnugupta’ with 'Cāņakya’. he quotes one verse as
महामात्यं वरो राजा निर्विकल्पं करोति यः । एकशोऽपि महीं लेभे हीनोऽपि वृहलो यथा ।।
Nītivākyāmsta comm. on 10.4 In this verse the word 'qed is of course qu' - which is used literally hundreds of times in the drama “Mudrārākṣasa'. According to the commentator, Candragupta is 'Hif choice and HR is a lower caste. * One more reference to Cāņakya is found in the 13th chapter of the
Nitivākyamrta. It says, 'श्रूयते हि किल चाणक्यस्तीक्ष्णदूतप्रयोगेणैकं नन्दं Handfa l' (sūtra 14)
“It is heard that by sending a sharp-witted and shrewd messanger, Cāņakya killed one of the Nandas."
This particular incident told by Somadeva is important because this legend is not available in other written narratives of the Jainas.
The Kathāsaritsāgara mentions that Cānakya killed Nanda and his

Page #172

162
sons by applying black-magic while living at the residence of Sakaṭāla." The same story is given in the Bṛhatkathāmañjarī. The Svetambara sources have not painted Caṇakya as a killer of Nanda.
In the chapter dedicated to amatya, it is noted that the minister having revengeful disposition, creates calamity. Two examples are given that of Sakuni and Śakaṭāla.
In the Kathāsaritsāgara (lambaka 1), it is told that Śakaṭāla, the minister of Nanda who was displeased by some reason, ultimately chose Cāṇakya to retaliate Nanda. Hariṣena, the Digambara writer, tells the same story in his Bṛhatkathākośa but he uses the name ‘Kavi' instead of ‘Śakaṭāla’. (Chapter 143, h4)
* In the chapter vyavahārasamuddeśa, it is noted in the 38th sūtra that, ‘स सुखी यस्य एक एव दारपरिग्रहः ' -i.e. ‘The householder can live happily if he has one wife.' For explaining the sūtra, the commentator quotes two and half verses of Cāṇakya (Cāṇikya). The purport of the passage is - "When there are two wives in a house, there is always quarrel and conflict. That man is happy and enjoys heavenly pleasures who possesses one wife, three issues, two ploughs, ten cows, five thousand golden coins and who daily performs Agnihotra rites."
The concept of happy life is noted by Cāṇakya, according to the commentator. It reflects the thirstless and contented attitude of Caṇakya towards life. The high regard for Cāṇakya is seen in almost all the Jaina references about Cāṇakya. It is due to his wisdom, his aspirations for the betterment of the people, his strict and just attitude and his ideas about contented life.
* In nutshell we can say that the Nītivākyāmṛta of Somadevasūri is itself a tribute to Cāṇakya, given on behalf of the Jaina tradition. All the anuśrutis, legends and narratives preserved in the Jaina

Page #173

163
tradition, might have inspired Somadevasūri to revive the Kautilīya Arthaśāstra in the form of an ethical guidebook without bringing any elements of Jainification. The easy, lucid and communicative style of the sutras adds more value to the coarse subject. While exploring Caṇakya in Jaina literature, the Nītivākyāmṛta is an unavoidable stop.
List of References
1) Introduction of Nathuram Premi to Nītivākyāmṛta, p.5
2) pp.6-7
3) अर्थशास्त्राध्ययनं वा । Nītivākyāmrta 1.9
4) महद्भिः पुरुषैः प्रतिष्ठितोऽश्मापि भवति देवः किं पुनर्मनुष्यः । Nītivākyāmrta
10.3
5) Nitiväkyāmṛta 10.4
6) Kathāsaritsagara, Lambaka 1, verse 122-123
[6] The Kathakoṣa (Kahakosu) of Śrīcandra is a famous collection of narratives written in Apabhramśa during the 11th century A.D. Śrīcandra has selected certain gāthās from the Bhagavatī Ārādhanā, in which traditional narratives pertaining to famous personalities are suggested in few words. The narrative of Caṇakya is given as an example of an ascetic, who endures the troubles afflicted by the enemy with great equilibrium of mind and attains heavenly abode (Kahakosu pp.508-512).
Śricandra generally follows Hariṣena's Sanskrit Kathākoṣa. In the case of Caṇakya-muni-kathā, Śrīcandra's main purport is Hariṣena's narrative, still we can enumerate the changes and peculiarities of Śrīcandra in the following manner -
* Like Hariṣeņa, he mentions three ministers of Nanda viz. Kavi (sometimes Kāvi), Subandhu and Sakaṭāla.

Page #174

164
The brahmanic elements in the personality of Caṇakya are highlighted and his śravakatva is not mentioned.
Śrīcandra is not satisfied with the vague reference to Candragupta in the story of Cāṇakya. Unlike Hariṣeṇa, he says ता रज्जत्थिउ नंदहो केरउ, चंदगुत्तु नामे दासेरउ । पुट्ठिहे लग्गउ तं लेप्पिणु धणु, गउ चाणक्कु णंदमारणमणु ।। (p.511)
Thus according to Śrīcandra, Candragupta was a dāsīputra of Nanda (as suggested in the Avaśyaka literature) and had an ambition to be a king.
At one place, Śrīcandra uses the name 'Saśigupta' for 'Candragupta' which is a peculiarstyle of the classical Apabhramsa poetry. Unlike Hariṣeṇa, Cāṇakya offers the kingship to Candragupta and becomes his chief-minister. This is probably the effect of the concept of 'bimbāntarita rājā' seen in the Svetambara narratives. There is no direct reference of Caṇakya's Arthaśāstra and his strict discipline. Still in the following lines Kahakosu mentions Cāṇakya's mastery over polity
अप्पणु पडिगाहिउ मंतित्तणु चिंति देसु को सुहि परियणु । (p.511) Subandhu's hatred and enmity towards Caṇakya is described at length very effectively.
The death of Caāṇakya is ascribed as samādhimarana. In spite of Caṇakya's monkhood and his hearty repentance, Śrīcandra is not ready to offer him 'siddhigati'. He says
धीरधीरु गुरुगुणहिँ गुरुक्कउ, गउ सव्वट्टहो मुणि चाणक्कउ ।। (p.512)
"The sage Cāṇakya, who was extremely courageous and virtuous, attained the supreme heavenly abode sarvārthasiddhi."
In nutshell, we can say that Śrīcandra's attitude is more logical and convincing than that of Hariṣeṇa. He has done justice to the great personality of Caṇakya by corporating some of the Svetambara
*

Page #175

165
elements. But following the footsteps of Harisena, he has not given the full life-account of Caṇakya in a detailed manner.
[7] The Commentary on Mūlācāra was written by Vasunandi (? Vasudevanandi) in the 11th century A.D. While commenting upon gāthā 257, he had written a lot about ‘laukika' texts of heretics which are based on misconceptions and preach violence.
He criticizes Kautilya alias Caṇakya in the following mannerकोडिल्ल-कुटिलस्य भावः कौटिल्यं तदेव प्रयोजनं यस्य धर्मस्य सः कौटिल्यधर्मः ठकादिव्यवहारो लोकप्रतारणाशीलो धर्मः परलोकाद्यभावप्रतिपादनपरो व्यवहारः । आसुरक्खा-असवः प्राणास्तेषां छेदनभेदनताडनत्रासनोत्पाटनमारणादिप्रपंचेन वञ्चनादिरूपेण वा रक्षा यस्मिन् धर्मे स आसुरक्षो धर्मो नगराद्यारक्षिकोपायभूतः । अथवा कौटिल्यधर्मः, इंद्रजालादिकं पुत्रबन्धुमित्र पितृमातृस्वाम्यादिघातनोपदेशः चाणक्योद्भव आसुरक्षः मद्यमांसखादनाद्युपदेशः । इत्येवमादिका असद्धर्मप्रतिपादनपरा ये धर्मारतेषु या भवेद्विश्रुतिर्विपरिणामः एतेपि धर्मा इत्येवं मूढो लौकिकमूढो भवत्येष इति ।।
This passage can be summarized thus -
———
9
"Absense of straightforwardness is the nature of Kautilya. The science of administration is written by him and is called kauṭilyadharma. In this popular science, established rules and practices of cheats and swindlers are mentioned. Here, the inclination towards cheating the people is obvious. This heretic text proclaims the absence of life beyond the present life. 'Asurakkha' is that in which the people and other beings are beaten, killed and tormented by using deceitful means for the sake of well-being of one's own. Or ‘āsurakso dharmo' can be explained as the means or devices used by the so called protectors of the town, village etc. Or we can explain kauṭilyadharma in which jugglery and tricks are employed to slaughter one's own sons, relatives, friends, father, mother or even master. What type of 'āsurakṣa' is given by Cāṇakya ? He preached us to eat flesh

Page #176

166
and enjoy liquor. He suggested medical treatments to strengthen the sexual ability and to remove the diseases. All such practices create adverse effects and misconceptions in the common people.” Observations :
This passage exhibits the most severe and contemptuous criticism on kauṭilya-śāstra and āsurakṣa. In the whole Jaina literature such an open contempt towards Caṇakya is not found elsewhere. * The author is sure that Kautilya and Caṇakya are the names of ths
same person.
He confuses between the 'science of polity' (Arthaśāstra) and the 'science of life' (Ayurveda) and advances critisism against them by using the same parametres.
* He might have gone through the text of Arthaśāstra which gives importance to three puruṣārthas (i.e. dharma-artha-kāma) and omits the goal of mokṣa. The Jaina tradition, is totally mokṣacentred. Hence the strict rules, laws and punishments which were used in the administration are despised by the writer Vasunandi, because such type of violence does not lead oneself to mokṣa. He totally neglects the fact that the eminent Svetambara and Digambara writers have shown their high regard and honour to Cāṇakya, for Cāṇakya's unparallelled intelligence, detached views, selfless attitude and his forbearance in accepting voluntary death.
In nutshell we can say that this is the extreme case of complete misunderstanding and underestimation of the science of polity in the whole senario of Caṇakya-references found in the Jaina tradition. [8] The Gommața-sāra of Nemicandra (Siddhānta-cakravarti) is a Jaina Śauraseni text written during the 11th century A.D. The same gāthā “g¶¶¶ (Mūlācāra 257) is quoted in the first part of this text viz. Jīvakāṇḍa, with a remarkable change. The text reads
*

Page #177

167
आभीयमासुरक्खं भारहरामायणादि उवएसा । तुच्छा असाहणीया सुयअण्णाणेत्ति णं बेंति ।।
(Gommața-sāra (J.)gā.304, p.510) The first word quoted in the concerned gāthā of Mūlācāra is altogether omitted here. Probably Nemicandra knows that Cāņakya or Kautilya is praised and adored in the text like Bhagavatī Ārādhanā for accepting the sublime way of death, i.e. pādopagamana. Therefore while giving the examples of śruta-ajñāna (i.e. texts based on ignorance) Nemicandra prefers the variant 'आभीत' and omits 'कौटिल्य'.
Perhaps, as a royal guru of the Ganga dynasty, he does not want to blame the science of good governance laid down by Kautilya. Though his contemporary writer Vasudevanandi passes several caustic remarks on kauțilya-dharma, he calmly omits the controversy by replacing the word. [9] The Puṇyāśrava-kathā-koșa is a collection of traditional narratives written in Sanskrit prose during the 12th century A.D. by the author named Rāmacandra-mumuksu. The concerned topic is 'Upavāsaphala-varṇanam'. The title of the 38th story is ‘Bhadrabāhu-CāņakyaCandragupta-kathā.'
In this prose narrative, the episode of Sakatāla and Cāņakya is described in a brief manner. It was Šakatāla who chose Cāņakyadvija for the destruction of the king Nanda. The incident of the insult of Cāņakya in the royal bhojanaśālā (dining hall) is described in short.
According to the author, Candragupta was born in a kșatriya dynasty. Cāņakya and Candragupta jointly uprooted Nanda's kingdom with the help of neighbouring kings. It is clearly mentioned that Cāņakya made Candragupta the king of Pāțalīputra.
The whole biography of Cāņakya is not given in this text.

Page #178

168
The author is more interested in documenting the story of Bhadrabāhu and Samprati (also called Candragupta II).
Raidhū, the Apabhraíśa poet follows Rāmacandra and adds the description of the kings called Kalkis to this narrative. [10] The Ārādhanā-kathā-prabandha (Ārādhanā-kathā-kośa) of Prabhācandra is a Sanskrit text pertaining to the 13th century A.D.
As the name suggests, the whole book is written to explain the stories noted in the Bhagavati Ārādhanā, in a very compact form.
The 80th story of this text, documents the Cāņakya-Subandhu episode in a very focussed manner and ascribes 'prāyopagata' death to Cāņakya. This story is written on the lines of Harişeņa. The only difference is, it is written in prose-form in Sanskrit. Kavi is invariably mentioned as Kāvi. Kāvi spotted Cāņakya to fulfil his purpose to retaliate against the king Nanda. Like Harişeņa, the author has not disclosed the name of Candragupta. Cāņakya himself killed Nanda and enjoyed the kingdom for a long period.
In the Bhagavatī Ārādhanā, it is told that Subandhu killed Cāņakya. In the narratives of Harişeņa, Śrīcandra and Prabhācandra, it is Subandhu who sets fire to five hundred monks along with Cāņakya. Prabhācandra exaggerates further and says, “All of them attain Siddhi (i.e. liberation).'
One more story about Cāņakya is found in the Ārādhanākathā-prabandha in the context of the rareness of the human birth. He starts the subject with the following words
GH tasail 404054 90.21 (p.262) The ten allegorical stories are famous in the Svetāmbara literature. The pāśaka-dịştānta is always explained by quoting the narrative of Cāņakya. Prabhācandra explains the drstānta in the same
manner but the name of Cānakya is replaced by a brahmin called

Page #179

169
Śivaśarman. In a way, this is a mute consent to the brahminhood of Cāņakya.
The impact of Harișeņa's story is clearly seen and the details added by Prabhācandra are almost negligible. [11] The Bhadrabāhu-Cāņakya-Candragupta-kathānaka of Raidhū is a small poem containing 28 kadavakas. This small Apabhramsa book pertains to the 14th-15th century A.D.
Out of 28 kadavakas, two kadavakas are dedicated to the episode of Sakațāla, Cāņakya and Candragupta. Raidhū is not interested in giving the full life-account of Cāņakya up till his death.
Sakațāla and Cāņakya get acquainted with each other in the incident of digging out and burning the kusa grass. On the request of Śakațāla, Cāņakya agrees to take his daily meal in the royal bhojanaśālā of Nanda, by occupying the golden seat. On a particular day, Śakațāla intentionally changes the golden seat and places a bambooseat instead. Cāņakya takes this change as an insult and accepts the vow to uproot Nanda from the kingdom. He, along-with Candragupta, joins the enemy-king (Puru or Parvataka) and completely annihilates Nanda. He consecrates Candragupta on the throne of Pāțalīputra.
We do not get any new information about Cāņakya in this tale. According to Raidhū, the search of Cāņakya for retaliating Nanda was done by Sakațāla and not by Kavi (Kāvi) as mentioned by Harișeņa and Śrīcandra. From this aspect, his story goes nearer to the Kathāsaritsāgara. Raidhū depicts the incident in the royal dining hall, more convincingly than his previous writers. According to him, the capital city of Nanda is Pāțalīpura and not Pāțalīputra.
We find a small story of Candragupta (II), the son of Kuņāla (Nakula ?) in this text, who is the disciple of Bhadrabāhu (II) and

Page #180

170
who went towards daksināpatha along with Bhadrabāhu and other
12000 monks.
[12] The Cāņakyarşikathā of Devācārya is given in the Jina-ratnakośa of Prof.H.D. Velankar, published by Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, Pune. It is found in manuscript-form and probably not published up till now. Detailed information is not given but we can guess that it is a small biography of Cāņakya written in Sanskrit, probably written by the Digambara ācārya (Devācārya), following Harişeņa's Cāņakya-muni-kathānakam.
We have to take a note of this independent kathā because except this book, we do not find separate carita of Cāņakya in the Jaina tradition. Cāņakya-narratives are presented either in the form of examples, analogies or incorporated in the life-sketches of Bhadrabāhu and Sthūlabhadra. [13] A commenatry on the Puṇyāśrava-kathā-kośa is written by Pt. Daulatram Kashliwal in the old Hindi during the 16th Century A.D. It is actually the old Hindi translation of the Punyāśrava-kathā-kośa. The narrative of Cāņakya is given on pp.155-157.
Nothing is remarkable in this old Hindi version but it proves that the legacy of Cāņakya-narratives was continued in the Jaina tradition from 3rd century A.D. upto 16th century A.D.

Page #181

CHAPTER 5
171
FROM THE WINDOW OF ARTHASASTRA
[1] The seeds of Cāṇakya-narratives explored in the Kauṭilīya Arthaśāstra
[2] Some glimpses of the socio-cultural similarities in the Arthaśāstra and Ardhamāgadhi canons
[3] Common terminology in the Jaina ethical texts and Kauṭilīya Arthaśāstra
[5]
[4] The Jaina code of conduct (from the perspective of Kauţiliya Arthaśāstra)
Re-interpretation of the Jaina monachism in the light of Kautiliya Arthaśāstra

Page #182

172

Page #183

173
CHAPTER 5
FROM THE WINDOW OF ARTHAŚĀSTRA
[1] The seeds of Cānakya-Narratives explored in the Kautilīya
Arthaśāstra
In the previous chapter, the narratives of Cāņakya noted in the Jaina literature are translated, scrutinized and compared very carefully. Here we intend to caste a glance at the narratives from the
window of the the Kautilīya Arthaśāstra.
At the very outset, it is remarkable that Kautilya presents lists of narratives in his treatise in which some traditional stories are included in an abridged manner. This peculiar style is seen in the 6th, 20th and 95th chapters (adhyāyas) of the Arthaśāstra. In the 6th chapter, twelve such persons are mentioned who were ruined due to the lack of control over their senses. In the 20th chapter it is prescribed for a king that he should not visit his queen's apartment without proper inspection. Seven examples of Bhadrașeņa etc. are given who were killed by the queens treacherously. In the 95th chapter, six personalities related to the king are mentioned who took the hint from subtlest actions that they are out of favour of the king and immediately left the king.
Niryuktikāra Bhadrabāhu (i.e. Bhadrabāhu II) (3rd 4th century A.D.) has developed this peculiar style of presenting the list of traditional narratives in his niryuktis. The examples of pāriņāmikibuddhi are enumerated in the Avaśyaka-niryukti 51 (p.93) in which Cāņakya is included. In the list of Pindaniryukti 500, surprisingly enough, again Cāņakya is enumerated. Twelve examples of pāriņāmiki-buddhi are mentioned in Nandi gā.74. This peculiar style of quoting dvāragāthās is followed by the later Jaina writers in

Page #184

the
Upadesapada, Upadeśamālā,
174
Dharmopadeśamālā,
Akhyānamaṇikosa etc.
One observation should be noted that the stories mentioned by Caṇakya are mostly untraceable in the Brahmanic and Jaina literature.
Most of the Caṇakya-narratives in the Jaina literature are related to the content of the Kauțiliya Arthaśāstra. The Jaina writers might have gone through the text of Kautilya and picked up some motifs which are suitable to convert them into stories, tales, parables, examples and legends. It is really a big job to explore fully the text of Arthaśāstra from this point of view. At this place, an attempt has been made to trace the connection between the text of Arthaśāstra and the narrative literature of the Jainas, as a specimen or a sample study.
[A] The 23rd adhyāya of Arthaśāstra informs about the preservation of forest, specially meant for elephants. Kautilya mentions, 'if one wishes to trail a male elephant, the female elephants can do it, if one anoints the path and bushes with the excreta and urine of the elephant.'
In the narrative of Abhayakumāra, Āmradevasūri has used the same motif with a slight change. When Udayana wishes to abduct the famous elephant of king Pradyota viz. Nalagiri, he uses the same method mentioned in the Arthaśāstra. Udayana fills four big pots with the urine of Nalagiri and the female elephant Bhadravatī trails the elephant by smelling the sprinkled urine. By using this device, Udayana and Vāsavadatta complete their journey from Avanti to Kauśāmbi. The concerned verses of the Abhayakkhyāna are - उस्सिंघइ जाव तयं हत्थी ता हत्थिणी पवणवेगा । पणुवीसजोयणाइं गया पुणो नलगिरी पत्तो ।।

Page #185

तो अवरा मुत्तघडीउतप्पुरो पाडियाओ जा तिन्नि । ता संपत्तो को बिनियपुरिं उदयणनरिंदो ।।
175
[ākkhyānamanikośa,
Abhayākkhyāna gā.243-244 (p. 16)] [B] The 30th adhyāya of Arthaśāstra is dedicated to the examination of the officials. Three types of officials are mentioned. Mūlahara is the one, who devours all the wealth accumulated by the forefathers. Tādātvika keeps the capital safe and consumes the profit completely. Kadarya accumulates wealth by inflicting pains to oneself and others.
This motif is seen in the famous Ardhamāgadhī-mūlasūtra text (viz. Uttaradhyayana) in the particular context of 'the rareness of the human life.' Three type of merchants are mentioned which are comparable to mūlahara etc. In the last verse it is told that the human life is the capital, divine life is the profit and if we loose the capital, we have to go in the animal kingdom or hell. The concerned gāthās
are -
जहा य तिण्णि वणिया मूलं घेत्तूण निग्गया । एगोऽत्थ लभई लाभं एगो मूलेण आगओ ।। एगो मूलं पि हारेत्ता आगओ तत्थ वाणिओ । ववहारे उवमा एसा एवं धम्मे वियाणह ।।
माणुसत्तं भवे मूलं लाभो देव भवे । मूलच्छेएण जीवाणं नरग - तिरिक्खत्तणं धुवं ।।
(Uttarādhyayana 7.14-15-16)
Sukhabodha, the reputed commentary on Uttaradhyayana has developed the story in a very interesting manner.
[C] The 48th adhyāya of Arthaśāstra is about courtezans and harlots. At the end of this chapter, Kautilya expects espionage from them. In the Abhayakkhyāna, Caṇḍapradyota and Abhayakumāra

Page #186

176
both have used the gaṇikās for the abduction of each other. In the 192nd verse of Abhayākkhyāna, the gaņikā says to Candapradyota -
तं निसुणिऊण विनवइ नरवई चमरहारिणी गणिया ।
आइससु देव ! मं झत्ति जेण बंधिय तमाणे हं ।। In verse 260, it is told that Abhayakumāra went to Avanti to abduct Candapradyota with two gaņikās.
गणियाओ दोन्नि घेत्तूण सा गओ नयरिमुज्जेणिं । गुडियकयावररूवो रायदुवारम्मि आवणं घेत्तुं । पारद्धो ववहरिउं अभओ अह अन्नदिवसम्मि ।।
[Ākkhyānamaņikośa,
Abhayākkhyāna gā.260-261 (p.16)] At the end of this narrative, it is described how Abhaya abducted Pradyota by employing a servant of the same name who acted like an insane person. This motif is seen in the 12th adhyāya of Arthaśāstra.
The other details about gaṇikās are discussed under the head of 'the socio-cultural and political conditions' in the same chapter. [D] Rules about gambling are found in the 22nd, 77th and 87th adhyāyas of Arthaśāstra. The main theme of the 22nd chapter is - 'How to populate a new village ?' It is told that there should a ban on the plays like gambling. The 77th chapter is totally dedicated to gambling, dices and other crimes. it is suggested that the 'gambling houses' should be run by the government and private gambling should be totally prohibited. In the 87th chapter, it is catagorically mentioned that, 'Fake dices are strictly banned.' A strict punishment is prescribed for such crimes. Kākaņī dices are authorized for gambling and others are banned.
The motif of acquiring wealth by fake gambling is one of the

Page #187

177
popular theme in the Jaina narratives of Cāņakya. The Āvaśyakacūrņi quotes this as an example of pāriņāmiki -buddhi of Cāņakya. Haribhadra employes the short story of kuța-pāśaka as one of the ten examples to explain the rareness of human birth.'
It is very queer that the Jaina writers do not hesitate to portray Cāņakya as a law-breaker in the matter of gambling. Or they might have thought that Cāņakya can be excused because these efforts were made to gather wealth for the royal treasury and not for any personal benefit. [E] In the 80th adhyāya of Arthaśāstra, eight unforeseen calamities are enumerated. The last calamity is noted as an advent of evil spirits. The implemented measures are described thus -
“On some holy day, one should errect a sacred platform under a caitya-vřkṣa (holy tree). It should be decorated with an umbrella and handmade flags. A goat should be slaughtered for banishing the evil spirit. A brahmin, wellversed in the Atharvaveda should help the concerned person to perform these rites.”
Exactly the same description is found in one of narratives of Vasudevahiņdī. At the end of the story, there is a turn according to the Jaina philosophy. A Jaina sage recognizes the goat by employing his spiritual power and tells the sons of the brahmin that the goat is their father. Their dead father is reborn as a goat. The writer comments at the end that the sons of the brahmin accept the vow of non-violence and observe it permanently.
Thus, when we scrutinize the motifs of the Jaina narratives and especially the old Prakrit tales, we find that the Jaina writers have utilized the details given in the Arthaśāstra to teach the Jaina tenets more effectively.

Page #188

178
[F] The 44th adhyaya of Arthaśāstra deals with the duties of the officer who supervises the vocation of thread-spinning. It is mentioned that the wives of errant husbands, the women who are crippled, aged, unmarried ladies and others who are unable to leave the house for earning livelihood, should be given the work of spinning the thread through the female servants serving in the factory.
In the Sūtrakṛtānga-cūrṇi, a story of Ārdraka-kumāra is given at length in the chapter called Ārdrakīya (Sūtrakṛtānga-cūrṇi II, p.414 onwards). Once, the wife of Ardraka was spinning the yarn at home. Her son asked, 'Mother, why are you doing this work when my father is here ?' She told, 'Oh my dear son, your father is leaving us very soon. So I am practising to spin.' The innocent son approaches his father and takes twelve rounds with the thread to tie him. Ārdraka, the father counts the round and stays at house for twelve more years.
This is a remarkable specimen indicating the skill of the Jaina writers to interweave the motifs provided by the Arthaśāstra in their tales. It also throws light on the social condition of women at that time.
[G] The 87th adhyaya of Arthaśāstra deals with the punishments given to the criminals. The punishments like 'cutting the hands, feet and other limbs' are considered in this chapter. At the end of the chapter Kautilya mentions -
"The judge should use the power of discretion before giving the punishments to the convicts. The punishments are of three types - highest, medium or lowest. The punishment depends upon the nature of the crime and the criminal, the reason, intension, time, place, the social and royal status of the criminal and many other things."

Page #189

179
In the collection of the Prakrit stories called 'Prāksta-vijñānakathā' Shri Vijaykastura-sūri mentions the story titled 'FIRHAMAT air fhaal', in which it is depicted that three persons are punished in three different ways though their crime is the same.
The content of the 87th chapter of Arthaśāstra is as if transformed into a story-form in this Jaina narrative. It is noteworthy that the Jaina model of dravya-kşetra-kāla-bhāva is also very much suitable to develop such type of stories. [H] The Jaina writers have given utmost importance what is told in the 92nd adhyāya of Arthaśāstra dedicated to the emergency devices used to gather wealth for the royal treasury. The chapter viz. ‘kośasaṁgraha' has inspired the writers to develop Cāņakya-episodes right from the Āvaśyaka-cūrņi up to the Parisista-parva of Hemacandra. The most attractive and classic story is presented in the Dharmopadeśamālā-vivaraṇa.
Kautilya notes, “In the case of emergency, the king should ask the citizens to donate. The wealth of heretics, the deva-dravya gathered by people other than śrotriyas, the wealth of a widow and naval merchants can be snatched away in a particular situation. The political persons should declare their wealth and should compell the rich persons (merchants etc.) to declare their wealth by hook or crook. Then the treasurer should ask certain legitimate amount from them. But this device should be applied once (adhyāya 92)”. We find the exact reflection of this content in the Dharmopadeśamālā.
The Avaśyaka-cūrņi presents a story titled 'parapāşandaprasaṁsā' [ĀvCū (II) p.281] in which it is told that Cāņakya snatched away the maintenance-amount of the heretics. It is evident that the cūrņikāra has literally quoted it from the text of Arthaśāstra. The

Page #190

180
same attitude towards heretics is mentioned in the 18th adhyāya of
Arthaśāstra.
Since the Jaina śrāvakas owe to the merchant-class, the motif of 'gathering the wealth' might have appealed to them a lot. [I] In the 94th adhyāya of Arthaśāstra, Kauțilya says, “Generally the fire will burn a body or a part of a body, but when a king is enraged he will kill a person along with his whole family.”
In the Niśītha-bhāsya, we find the story of 'grāma-dāha' in which it is depicted that when the villagers broke Cāņakya's orders, the village was set on fire by Cāņakya. It is very interesting that the bhāsyakāra does not blame Cāņakya for his cruel act. Likewise the story of the weaver Naladāma occurs in the Āvaśyakacūrņi and Parisista-parva where Naladāma kills the people of Nanda by adding poison in their food. The strict administration of Cāņakya is admired in spite of the cruel punishments provided by him.
Both the narratives are as if the concrete examples of the purport expressed at the end of the 94th adhyāya of Arthaśāstra. [J] In the 84th adhyāya of Arthaśāstra, the examination of a person having sudden death is dealt with. The details of the funeral rites are given in such cases. Kautilya says, “A person whether male or female, commits suicide with anger, jealousy or other sinful intentions, or causes others to do so, then his feet should be tied with a rope and a lower-caste person should drag him with rope on the royal highway. His relatives are not allowed to perform the funeral rites like śrāddha. One who breaks this rule, would be punished in the same way.”
When we see the reflection of this rule in the Ardhamāgadhi text Bhagavati-sūtra, we really get startled. In the 15th śataka (chap

Page #191

ter) of this book, the end of Gośālaka's life is described. Gośālaka, the leader of Ajivakas accompanies lord Mahāvīra in the initial years of his penance, but in the last lapse of Gośālaka's life, he becomes hostile to Mahāvīra and tries to burn him by his vicious power (tejoleśya). When his power rebounds, it becomes fatal to him. When he gasps his last breath he gives orders to his followers as
“नो खलु अहं जिणे जिणप्पलावी
- समणे भगवं महावीरे जिणे जिणप्पलावी
तं तुब्भं णं देवाणुप्पिया ममं कालगयं जाणित्ता वामे पाए सुंबेणं बंधेह, बंधेत्ता
महापह-पहेसु आकट्ट-विकट्टिं महया अणिड्ढी-असक्कार - समुदएणं ममं सरीरगस्स नीहरणं करेज्जाह,
fargal yè 3¿ghë
करेह । एवं वदित्ता कालगए ।”
———
➖➖➖
———
• सावत्थीए नगरी
181
———
(Bhagavati; Śataka 15, sūtra 141)
"I am not a Jina (the conqueror), not a proper person to be called as Jina. The great ascetic lord Mahāvīra is in true sense a Jina and fit to be called as Jina. Oh gentlemen, after my death, please tie a rope to my left foot, spit on my mouth three times, drag my dead body on the roads and highways of the city of Śrāvasti. Dispose of my body unceremoniously."
The secterian bias expressed in this passage is quite evident and a subject of a separate article but the Prakrit terminology used in this passage is the exact echo of words used in the 84th adhyāya of the Kauṭiliya Arthaśāstra.
The 15th śataka of Bhagavati-sūtra is designated as one of the oldest specimen of Ardhamāgadhi by the scholars. Thus the similarity between the above-mentioned passage and the Kauṭiliya Arthaśāstra is useful for the date-fixation of the Bhagavati-sūtra. If we accept the upper limit of the eleven angas as the 5th century A.D., we can draw a conclusion that the available version of the Arthaśāstra was popular among the Jaina circle during the 5th century A.D.

Page #192

182
[K] Jñātādharmakathā, the sixth Ardhamāgadhi canonical text is totally comprised off narratives and analogical tales. The 14th chapter that of the first part contains a story of Tetaliputra Amatya. When read the story carefully with all intricacies, we feel that the whole story of Tetaliputra Amatya is overshadowed with the lifestory of Amatya Cāṇakya, somehow knowingly or unknowingly. The wicked king; rearing up of a prince by the minister; anointing the prince on the throne; the smooth administration in the initial years; king's changed attitude towards the minister; the minister's childlessness and voluntary death at the end - certainly reminds the reader the story of Amatya Cāṇakya described in the Avaśyaka and Niśītha-cūrṇis which is neatly presented in the Parisiṣṭa-parva.
We can find the sources of the story of Tetaliputra in the biography of Cāṇakya in a very elaborate manner, but since it is a subject of a separate research paper, we cannot lengthen the subject at this place. It is also noteworthy that the 10th chapter of Rṣibhāṣita, one of the old Ardhamāgadhī text, repeates the same story of Tetaliputra Amatya in an abridged form, where he is called 'nītiśāstraviśārada' i.e. 'wellversed in the science of polity.'
-
The Jñātādharmakatha is traditionally known as the Mahāvīravāṇī. The later ācāryas might have thought that they cannot include the Caṇakyan tales in canonical literature due to the fault of anacronism. Many of the chapters of Jñātādharmakatha are written in the classical Ardhamāgadhi which is nearer to the Jaina Māhārāṣṭrī than Ārṣa Ardhamāgadhī. When we grasp the shadow of Cāṇakyakatha in the chapter of Tetaliputra, we can straightly proceed to the conclusion that this chapter is surely an interplotation.
[L] In the 14th adhyāya of Arthaśāstra, (viz. Aupaniṣadika) contains four adhyāyas (146 upto 149). All types of abhicāras, mantras,

Page #193

183
rites based on black magic and fatal miraculous powers of medicinal plants are described in this 'adhikaraṇa'. It is told in the beginning that those deceitful means should be employed to preserve caturvarnya and to punish the sinful persons.
The writer of the Mūlācāra (i.e. Acarya Vaṭṭakera) openly condemns Cāṇakya most probably concentrating on the 14th adhikarana of Arthaśāstra.
The Niśītha-cūrṇi presents a story based on añjanasiddhi (III. 423-424). In the story it is depicted that the two disciples of Susthita Acārya utilized the 'power of disappearing' against Candragupta. Caṇakya revealed them. At the end of the story, Caṇakya appologizes the Jaina guru by saying 'micchāmi dukkaḍam', which is totally an unbelievable Jainification.
One more story of Caṇakya is given in the Niśītha-cūrṇi II. p.33. Here, Cāṇakya retaliates against Subandhu, his enemy, by besmearing fragrant poison to the birch-leaf. It is depicted that Caṇakya compels Subandhu to initiate.
It is observed that the Svetambara writers defend Caṇakya in spite of his māyācāras when the Digambara texts like Mūlācāra despise Cāṇakya for the same.
Observations :
When we look at the Cāṇakya-narratives in the Jaina literature, through the window of Kautilīya Arthaśāstra, we know immediately that numerous details of the Arthaśāstra are used as motifs. It throws light on the fact that the Jaina authors have gone through the text of Arthaśāstra very minutely.
But when we think of the authenticity and historicity of the Cāṇakyan tales, we find that they are incredible and not reliable because many of the motifs and details of the Arthasästra are

Page #194

184
presented as if they are the actual events in the life of Caṇakya.
The Jainas have created a perfect thought-model to present Cāṇakyan tales. Each and every chapter of the Arthaśästra is the outcome of Caṇakya's pāriņāmiki-buddhi (acquired knowledge through experience). Therefore they imbibed each and every incident in Caṇakya's own life-story. Thus the Caṇakyan stories are a perfect blend of legends, myths and superimposed fantacies. The whole biography of Caṇakya is chronologically adequate and logically sound at many times but we cannot claim that it is factually reliable. [2] Some glimpses of the socio-cultural similarities in the Arthaśāstra and Ardhamāgadhi Canons
The oral tradition of the Ardhamāgadhi Canons, particularly of eleven main (angas) texts started from the 6th century B.C. and the texts were finalized after approximately one thousand years (i.e. 5th century A.D.). Even though a long rope is given for the time-to-time interpolations, we have to admit that the socio-cultural environment apparently matches with the conditions of the Arthaśāstra of Kautilya - the unique text on polity available to us at present.
-
The similarities are so many and so striking, that if we enumerate and document them in an essay-form, it would convert a lengthy article with hair-splitting discussions. Here, an attempt has been made to present some glimpses of the socio-cultural similarities in the both, in a concise form. In this matter, the original Sanskrit words and citations from Arthaśāstra and the original words and citations from Ardhamāgadhī texts are quoted side by side, in devanāgarī script. The titles of the subject-matter are given in English. English translation of each and every word is not given because we intend to highlight the phonetic similarities between Sanskrit and Prakrit terms.

Page #195

For the convenience of the common readers and researchscholars, a simple method is adopted. The socio-cultural references which are more important, are noted and discussed first. Comparatively less important and miscellaneous references are dealt afterwards.
185
Like the previous topics, a sample study is presented here. We can extend the study on these lines, in multiple ways. The remarkable similarities are -
[A] Castes :
Four principal castes (ie. ब्राह्मण, क्षत्रिय, वैश्य, शूद्र) are mentioned in both which was an obvious fact in the contemporary society. But many of the subcastes were found due to inter-caste marriages and relationships of which are also mentioned with great details and that too without any reproachful attitude, in the Arthaśāstra and Ardhamāgadhi scriptures. The staunch and disregardful attitude towards these sub-castes or so called lower castes is remarkably absent in the Arthaśāstra and ancient Jaina scriptures.
In the 63rd adhyāya of Arthaśāstra, the various castes originated due to the anuloma and pratiloma marriages are referred to. They are - अंबष्ठ, निषाद (पारशव), उग्र, व्रात्य, क्षत्य, आयोगव, चांडाल, मागधव, पुक्कस, वैदेहक, सूत, कूटक, वैण, कुशीलव, श्वपाक and अंतराल. We can trace many of these inter-castes in Ardhamāgadhī texts in the following manner -
(i) अंबट्ठ (अंबष्ठ) : Sūtrakrtānga 1.9
(ii) णिसाय (निषाद) : Deśīnāmamāla 4.35
(iii) 3 (34): Jñātādharmakathā 1.108, p.105 ( edn.); Dhavalā
(iv)
(V)
Book 13, p.387-389
() Supāsaṇāhacariya 197
(B): Sūtrakṛtānga 1.8; Uttaradhyayana 1.10; 3.4

Page #196

186
(vi) बोक्कस (पुक्कस) : Uttarādhyayana 3.4
(vii) वइएह, वेदेह (वैदेहक) : Sthānānga Comm. p.358 (viii) सोवाग ( श्वपाक ) : Uttarādhyayana 12.1 ; 12.37 [B] The servants appointed in the harem :
In the Ardhamāgadhi scriptures, a long list of female servants and others is given, who were the persons appointed in the harems of kings and in the harems of rich merchants. A representative list from the Jñātādharmakathā can be given as follows -
तए णं से मेहे कुमारे--- बहूहिं खुज्जाहिं चिलाइयाहिं वामणि-वडभिबब्बरि-बउसि-जोणिय-पल्हविय-ईसिणिय-धोरुगिणि-लासिय-लउसिय-दमिलिसिंहलि - आरबि- पुलिंदि-पक्कणि - बहलि- मुरुंडि - सबरि-पारसीहिंचेडियाचक्कवाल-वरिसधर-कंचुइज्ज - महयरगवंद - परिक्खित्ते--- सुहंसुहेणं वड्ढइ ।
[Jñātādharmakathā 1.1.96 (p.92)] (ब्यावर edn.)
The 12th adhyāya of Arthaśāstra is dedicated to the appointments of the spies in the royal harem. Herewith, two citations from the 12th adhyaya are noted, from which the similarity with the Jaina scriptures can be easily observed. Kautilya says -
‘रसदाः (चाराः) कुब्ज - वामन - किरात - मूक-बधिरजडान्धछद्मानो स्त्रियश्चाभ्यन्तरं चारं विद्युः । अन्तर्गृहचरास्तेषां कुब्ज-वामन-षण्डकाः । शिल्पवत्यः स्त्रियो मूकाश्चित्राश्च म्लेञ्छजातयः ।’
In the Jaina scriptures, it is seen that all these persons are actually appointed while Kautilya advices to appoint 'rasada' type of spies in disguise of the above-mentioned males and females.
———
———
While describing the personal security-guards of a king, Kautilya repeates many such names of females and males. He saysशयनादुत्थितस्स्त्रीगणैर्धन्विभिः परिगृह्येत । द्वितीयस्यां कक्ष्यायां कञ्चुकोष्णीषिभिर्वर्षं वराभ्यागारिकैः । तृतीयस्यां कुब्ज-वामन-किरातैः । (Arthaśāstra adhyāya 21)

Page #197

187
Kautilya uses the word ':' in the 12th, 70th and 146th adhyayas but all the dastes are not enumerated. It is very interesting that the Ardhamāgadhi text Praśnavyākaraṇa presents a full list of F and a comment is passed that these people are seen active in violent acts.
'इमे य बहवे मिलक्खुजाई, के ते ? सग - जवण-सबर- बब्बर- - पुलिंदडोंब --- चीण-लासिय- -खस-खासिय- - हूण- - रोमग- - रुरु-मरुया चिलायविसयवासी य पावमइणो ।' (Praśnavyākarana 1.1, p. 23) (ब्यावर edn.)
[C] Festivals :
S
It is surprising that social festivals are not enumerated independantly in the Arthaśāstra. In the 80th adhyāya, eight unforeseen calamities are mentioned. Various pūjas, homa, bali and svastivācana are referred to for dispelling the calamities. Such pūjas are social 'devakāryas'. Certain deities are mentioned which are worth-worshipping viz. Nadī, Indra, Gangā, Parvata, Varuṇa, Samudra, Draha, Naga and Caityavṛkṣa.
The more vivid picture of festivals and pilgrimages is seen in the Ardhamāgadhi scriptures. The Jñātādharmakathā mentions अज्ज रायगिहे नयरे इंदमहे इ वा खंदमहे इ वा एवं रुद्द - सिव- वेसमण-न क्ख-भूय - नईई - तलाय - रुक्ख - चेइय - इ वा उज्जाण - ग- गिरिजत्ता इ वा ? (Jñātādharmakathā 1.1.96) (
-नाग
edn.)
In this passage, 'मह' is a festival and ' जत्ता' is ‘यात्रा' means a pilgrimage or jatrā which means 'a local fair'. Almost the same list is found in the Acārānga 2.10.2.3 and Bhagavati 9.33.158 (Ladnu
edn.)
After going through the lists carefully, one can realize that both the references almost point to the same strata and time of the society.

Page #198

188
[D] Deities :
When we consider the Brahmanic deities and Jaina deities (i.e. devaloka) it is obvious that the Jaina concept of heaven, the varieties and subvarieties of devas, their Indras and their abodes are very systematically presented than that of the brahmanic (both vedic and purāņic) deities. Kautilya refers various deities in the 25th adhyāya in which he deals with the topic ' 91 (i.e. habitating a castle). Kautilya says, “In a middle of the fort-city, the temples of Aparājitā (Lakşmī), Apratihata (Visnu), Jayanta (Kārtika), Vaijayanta (Indra), Siva, Kubera, Asvinīkumāra, Madirā (Cāmundā) etc. should be built. Vāstudevatās should be installed at the proper places in those temples. The idols of Brahmā, Indra, Yama and Kārtika should be installed at the entrance. At particular directions, particular (ten) deities should be placed.”
It is known that in the ancient Jaina texts, Kubera is called Vaiśramaņa and Kārtikeya is called Skanda. We have already seen that in the list of festivals, Ardhamāgadhī books have referred the deities viz. Indra, Skanda, Rudra, Siva, Vaiśramaņa and Mukunda, which are of course the contemporary brahmanic deities. But the philosophical text Tattvārthasūtra mentions the five highest abodes of gods. Their names are Vijaya, Vaijayanta, Jayanta, Aparājita and Sarvārthasiddha (Tattvārtha. 4.20). The ancient Jaina Saurasenī text Trilokaprajñapti (3171) mentions that Soma, Yama, Varuna and Kubera are four lokapālas and serially protect four directions i.e. the east etc. The Jainendra-siddhānta-kośa gives detailed information of the dik-kumāras, dik-kumārīs and dik-pāla-devas. The Pratisthāsāroddhāra, a book dedicated to rituals quote the names of some other deities as Jayā, Vijayā, Ajitā, Aparājitā etc.

Page #199

189
The similarity of the names seen in Kautilyan and Jaina deities is really stunning. [E] The custom of arcā :
At present, the term “arcā' is used as a twin term used with the term “pūjā”. The separate meaning of arcā is forgotten and is dominated by the word pājā. When going through the studied introduction of the Arthaśāstra written by Mr. Hivargaonkar, I stumbled at the reference which occured on p.22. He remarks, “The custom of arcā for obtaining the wealth is mentioned by Kautilya, in which a beast is sacrificed by the worshipper. Asoka was a staunch follower of non-violence. Therefore the custom might have prevalent during the period of Candragupta and Bindusāra because how can Asoka allow this violent act ? Thus it is certain that the Arthaśāstra is written before Aśoka.”
We can accept Mr. Hivargaonkar's conjecture if it is supplied by some other parallel reference. It is very much revealing that we find the word accā (Skt. arcā) in the Ardhamāgadhī texts like Sūtrakstānga (1.13.17; 1.15.18 ; 2.2.6) and Sthānānga (comm.p.19) in the sense of 'body'. The Ācārānga 1.1.6 (sūtra 140 - Ladnūn edn.) quotes in hissā-viveka-pada that afh-370117 34tely defa, 37147 34ffung geld - which means, “Some people kill animals to get the body, some others kill to get the skin' etc. Here, the term “acca' means the 'body'.
In the light of the Jaina references, it is quite clear that the custom or ritual called “arcā”, noted in the Arthaśāstra which is performed to get wealth is a lower type of ‘animal sacrifice'. [F] The meaning of kulaidaka :
If we extend this point a little, one similarity between the Arthaśāstra and the Ardhamāgadhi text Uttarādhyayana is notewor

Page #200

190
thy. Some debatable words in the Arthaśāstra are discussed by the Kautilyan scholar J.S.Karandikar after the introduction of Hivargaonkar. The word ' is used in the 137th and 141st adhyāyas of Arthaśāstra. Shamshastry and Ganapatishastri explain it as 'A ram or sheep which is deviated from the flock.' Karandikar has opposed this meaning because it is not in accordance with the context. He is of the opinion that the word means - 'A ram (or sheep) nurtured in a house for the purpose of sacrifice (killing).'
The meaning suggested by Karandikar is more appropriate when we suppliment it by the poening verses of the Elaijja (or Urabbhijja) adhyayana of Uttarādhyayana. The verses are - जहाएसं समुद्दिस्स, कोइ पोसेज्ज एलयं ।
ओयणं जवसं देज्जा, पोसेज्जा विसयंगणे ।। (Uttaradhyayana 7.1)
-
तओ से पुट्ठे परिवूढे, जायमेए महोदरे ।
पीणिए विउले देहे, आएसं परिकंखए ।।
(Uttaradhyayana 7.2)
The pictursque description of a fat elaya (Skt. ) nurtured in the courtyard of a house, is found in the Uttaradhyayana. It is told that actually it is a waiting period for the ram because as soon as a guest arrives, it is cut into pieces and served to him in a meal. Thus the word ‘कुलैडक’ can be explained in the light of Uttaradhyayana, more convincingly.
[G] Seven-fold kingdom and four-fold nīti :
These two concepts are the distinctive core-concepts of the Arthaśāstra. We expect that we will find it very easily and at many times in the ancient Jaina literature. But to our surprise, these two concepts occur in the Jñātādharmakathā which is comparatively a later canonical text.

Page #201

The seven bodies of the kingdom are called 'Prakṛtis'. स्वाम्यमात्यजनपददुर्गकोशदण्डमित्राणि प्रकृतय: ( Arthaśāstra-adhyāya 97). Sāma, dāna (upapradāna), daṇḍa and bheda are the four devices mentioned by Kautilya to tackle the enemies, neighbouring kings and others.
191
The exact definitions and the nature of these nītis are explained at various places in the Arthaśāstra. (adhyāya 13; 14; 31)
The prince Abhaya, who was the prime-minister of the king Śrenika is described in the Jñātādharmakathā in the following man
ner -
(अभय णामं कुमारे) सामदंडभेयउवप्पयाणणीइ अत्थसत्थमइविसारए सेणियस्स रण्णो रज्जं च रट्ठे च कोसं च कोट्ठागारं च बलं च वाहणं च पुरं च अंतेउरं च सयमेव समुपेक्खमाणे विहर ।
———
(Jñātādharmakatha 1.1.15, p.22) ( edn.)
The same passage is repeated in the 14th adhyayana of the same text in context of Tetaliputra Amātya. It is already noted that the whole narrative of Tetaliputra carries a close comparison with the life story of Amatya Cāṇakya.
[H] Amayta Cāṇakya :
We find that four words are repeatedly used in the Arthaśāstra, very loosely viz. अमात्य, मन्त्रि, सचिव and प्रधान. Their exact designation and hirarchy is not mentioned. Still one fact is clear that Kautilya places amatya immediately after rājā. The whole 8th adhyaya 'amatyottpatti' is dedicated to describe amatya. While dealing with mantri and purohita, Kautilya starts with enumerating the qualities of amatya and explains each of the quality catagorically (adhyāya 9). In the 10th adhyaya the touch-stones for examining the amātyas are provided. Taking into consideration the importance given to the

Page #202

192
amātyas, the Jaina authors have always referred him as Amātya Cāņakya. Many of the Jaina prakrit narratives begin with the following words, Yfya EGUT PII 374071] autant l’The Jainas have never called him mantri or saciva. [I] Geographical regions and kingdoms :
The Kautilīya Arthaśāstra is a prominent text of Magadhan literature. The ancient history of Jainism is closely associated with Magadha region and Ardhamāgadhī language. Therefore we find a close resemblance between the Arthaśāstra and the ancient Ardhamāgadhī texts in which various geographical regions and kingdoms are noted which were politically important at that time.
The Anuyogadvāra gives ten synonyms of the word 'skandha' [Anuyogadvāra-sūtra 58, p.55 (102 edn.)] in which the word gana is the first one. Scholars of Indology say that this word is suggestive of the gañarājyas like licchavi, vajji, malla etc. in ancient
India.
While explaining the laukika-āgamas, Anuyogadvāra refers the four vedas with angas and upāngas. The commentator of this text mentions four upavedas of four main vedas. According to him the Arthaśāstra is the upaveda of Atharvaveda. (Anuyogadvāra p.412, ouillo edn.) Though Kautilya eliminates the Atharvaveda from trayī, still he preaches people to chant the mantras of Atharvaveda on various occasions.
With all this background, there is no wonder if we find the names of various kingdoms which are common in the Arthaśāstra and ancient Jaina texts. While documenting various myths, Kautilya mentions Paundra, Kosala, Magadha, Avanti, Vanga and particularly king Pradyota of Ujjayini and his son 'Pālaka' (adhyāya 95).

Page #203

193
The spies called vaidehaka and magadha are certainly related to their concerned regions (adhyāya 12). Kautilya says that Magadha, Paundra, Kāśī, Vatsa and Mālava are famous for cotton clothes (adhyaya 13) and Kalinga, Anga, Saurāṣṭra, Daśārṇa and Pañcanada (Punjab) are famous for elephants.
These kingdoms and regions occur in the Ardhamāgadhī and old Jaina Māhārāṣṭrī texts for literally hundreds of times. Almost all traditional narratives of the Jainas start with the names of the
janapadas mentioned above.
[J] Miscellaneous cultural references in brief :
i) All the details of gaṇikās are documented in the 48th adhyāya of Arthaśāstra. Gaṇikās and rūpājīvās (veśyās) are differenciated. Kautilya says that each ganika should note and declear her rate of service. The Jñātādharmakathā mentions that a particular gaṇikā was available at one thousand (golden coins) per day (Jñātādharmakathā 1.3.46). In the Jaina Māhārāṣṭrī narrative literature, the high social and cultural status of gaṇikās and veśyās is seen frequently. Their roles in the 'crime-world' are painted in the texts like Akkhyānamaṇikośa, Kumārapālapratibodha and Manoramākathā. ii) The 40th adhyāya of Arthaśāstra is dedicated to the 'weights and measurements'. The weights and measurements like māṣa, angula etc. frequently occur in the contemporary Jaina texts. One remarkable thing is, Kautilya suggests to use the standard weights which were prepared in Magadha. Māgadha-prastha is referred to in the Anuyogadvāra p.230, p.423 ( edn.)
iii) Kautilya mentions various types of liquor, wine and alcohol in the 46th adhyāya. The varieties are mentioned as madhu-maireyasură-sīdhū etc. The Jñātādharmakathā repeats the same list in the

Page #204

194
same order while describing the preparations made for the svayasvara of Draupadi (jñātādharmakathā 1.16.118). iv) A list of wild beasts and animals is seen in the 38th adhyāya of Arthaśāstra from which human beings get leather, teeth, horns, hair etc. for their use. The same list of animal products are mentioned in the Ācārānga (1.1.140 Ladnun edn.), where it is told that this type of violence should be avoided by accepting the vow of non-violence. v) In the 36th adhyāya of Arthaśāstra, the lists of Heal, arauf,
aulaf, Geoliedrf, galiodof, paçaharf, mahaf etc. are mentioned. Majority of the eatable articles are seen in the chapter called foucaun in the 2nd śrutaskandha of Ācārānga. In some of the cases, we actually get the Prakrit renderings of the Sanskrit words quoted in the Arthaśāstra. For example, Kautilya quotes -
#ahiygasuaared Mcgal mauaf: (adhyāya 36)
The Daśavaikālika gives a list of prohibited articles prescribed for a monk in the third chapter. It quotes -
सोवच्चले सिंधवे लोणे , रोमालोणे य आमए । सामुद्दे पंसुखारे य , कालालोणे य आमए ।। सव्वमेयमणाइण्णं णिग्गंथाण महेसिणं ।।
(Daśavaikālika 3.8.11) vi) The title of the 32nd adhyāya of Arthaśāstra is gyako ya i.e. "The examination of the excellent articles which are worthy to deposit in the royal treasury.” The whole chapter reveals the ultimate richness of our country by enumerating the varieties of pearls, ornaments, jewels and diamonds, sandlewoods, scents and fragrances, exclusive leathers, wools and decorated woolen articles, silks and silken clothes and cotton of the highest quality.
When we go through the minute details provided by the Nisīthacūrņi, we find almost every detail in a very elaborate manner.

Page #205

195
Especially, the references of leather-types, sandlewood, wools and blankets are a big surprise for a scholar. It is impossible to note each detail because they are innumerable. At this juncture, it is requested that an interested reader may go through the book of Dr. Madhu Sen titled, 'A Cultural Study of Niśītha-cūrņi.' vii) The 33rd adhyāya of Arthaśāstra is dedicated to metallurgy in which mines, ores, mints and coins are discussed. The Āvaśyakacūrņi provides an important reference in its depiction of Cāņakya's brief biography. When Cāņakya conspires with the help of Candragupta and parvataka to snatch away Nanda's kingdom, the first step taken by Cāņakya was to gather the information about the mines of valuable metals. The Āvaśyaka-cūrņi says, 'HEGACIUL Huid l’. The important coins mentioned in the Arthaśāstra (adhyāya 33) are pana, māșa and kākaņī. The references of “paņa' as a coin, are very few in the Ardhamāgadhī literature but the words āvana, āvanavīhi and āvanīya are very common.
The frequent use of the words 'HTC' and of count' is seen in the Prakrit narratives. Uttarādhyayana quotes -
जहा कागिणिए हेउं , सहस्सं हारए नरो ।
__ अपत्थं अंबगं भोच्चा , राया रज्जं तु हारए ।।
(Uttarādhyayana 7.11) “As one loses thousand to get a kākiņi, likewise the king lost his kingdom by transgressing his dietary regimen by eating a mango.” In the 8th adhyayana, it is mentioned that - जहा लाहो तहा लोहो , लाहा लोहो पवड्डइ । दोमासकयं कज्जं कोडीए वि न निट्टियं ।।
(Uttarādhyayana 8.17) “As one gains some profit, one's greed increases. I started this work to get two māsas but my lust does not end even after getting

Page #206

crores.'
196
In the Upadesapada (gā. 545) it is noted that one kākiņi is
equal to twenty cowries.
The reference of Kumārapālapratibodha is important because it tells a story about Candragupta, Bindusāra, Aśoka and his son Kuṇāla. The verse runs as -
चंदगुत्त- पपुत्तो य बिंदुसारस्स नत्तुओ । असोगसिरिणो पुत्तो अंधो जाय काकिणं ।।
(Kumārapālapratibodha p.170)
"The great-grandson of Candragupta, the grandson of Bindusara and the son of the great Aśoka is a blind begger who is begging a kākiṇī." As the story advances, the other meaning of kākiṇī is explained as 'a kingdom', which is very rarely used in Sanskrit. The Samavāyānga provides altogather new information about 'kākini'. In the 14th samavāya (chapter), it is mentioned that a Cakravartin possesses fourteen excellent things in which a precious diamond called kākiṇī is included.
Observations :
There are numerous socio-cultural resemblances in the Arthaśāstra and especially in the ancient Prakrit literature of Jainas. A colourful spectrum is presented here which is seen through the window of Arthaśāstra. On one hand, these resemblances put light on the hidden socio-cultural facts of the Jaina literature while on the other hand, due to this parallelism, the facts of the Arthaśāstra are confirmed. [3] Common terminology in the Jaina ethical texts and Kauţiliya Arthaśāstra
Generally the conduct of householders and monks is covered under the title 'Ethics'. Śrāvakācāra and Sadhuācāra contain general and specific rules and its transgressions in the Jaina literature dedi

Page #207

197
cated to ethics. Since the Kautilīya Arthaśāstra is a science of
governance and administration, it is expected that each person should follow the rules laid down for him as a citizen, in spite of one's religion. When the Jaina writers codified their ācāra-saṁhitā, naturally they carefully studied the Arthaśāstra. The Kauțilīya Arthaśāstra is an important part of Magadhan literature, where Jainism flourished in its initial centuries. Therefore, there is no wonder that we find ample examples of common terminology in both.
Here, some important words and expressions are considered with the relevant citations, as a sample study. If the whole data is fully exploited, it can be easily converted into a doctoral thesis. [i] Śāsana :
The 31" adhyāya of Arthaśāstra gives all the details of the king's edict i.e. written order. At the very outset it is told that these types of written orders are called 'śāsana'. It is a duty of a king to draw such edicts and it is the duty of a citizen to follow it without any breach. Several types of orders are described in this chapter at
length.
It is seen that the words śāsana and jinaśāsana are very popular in the old Ardhamāgadhī texts. It is expected that every Jaina person particularly a monk should follow the strict orders of the Jinas or Tīrthankaras because they carry no less importance than that of a king's verdicts. The Sūtrakstānga (1.3.69) notes that -
एवमेगे उ पासत्था पण्णवेति अणारिया ।
इत्थीवसं गया बाला जिणसासणपरंमुहा ।। In this verse it is told that, “The Pārsvasthas (the followers of Pārsvanātha) have detered themselves from the order of the Jinas (Jinaśāsana) because they are subjected to womanfolk.

Page #208

198
The Daśavaikālika expects the calmness and quietness of mind in a monk because it is a natural culmination of the Jinaśāsana. (311427 7 "TOUT Heali furgui - Daśavaikālika 8.25) The Uttarādhyayana advises a monk to remain unperturbed in any type of adversity because he has heard the order (or preaching) of the Jinas (Uttarādhyayana 2.6). The same text mentions that king Sanjaya abadoned the kingdom and became a member of the realm of the Jinas (Uttarādhyayana 18.19). The word Jinaśāsana is repeatedly used in the 18th chapter of the Uttarādhyayana.
It is very curious to note down the traditional slogan of all the Jainas despite of sects and subsects viz. जैनं जयति शासनम् । [ii] Adhikaraṇa :
Kautilya uses the word ‘adhikaraṇa' for the chapters in his Arthaśāstra. There are 15 adhikaraṇas and 150 adhyāyas in the book. Seven different meanings are noted of the word ‘adhikaraṇa' in common Sanskrit dictionaries. The word is normally used in the judicial matter or in the grammar.
Tattvārthasūtra, the Jaina phylosophical text uses the word “adhikaraṇa' in different sense. It says -
3Tfc Tuj salsiat: (Tattvārtha 6.8) “The instrument of long-term karmic-flow are both - sencient and non-sencient entities.”
The later writers simply say that there are 108 varieties of the karmic bondage, viz. hiṁsā (violence). The commentator of Mūlācāra has located two different meanings of 'adhikaraṇa' and says that, “The adhikaranas (chapters) of Arthaśāstra are in true sense the instruments of karmic-bondage due to violence involved in
it.'

Page #209

199
[iii] Vyavahāra :
The term 'vyavahāra' is used literally hundreds of times in the Arthaśāstra. Normal Sanskrit dictionaries mention eleven meanings of the word 'vyavahāra'. We can group the meanings into four catagories. The first one is normal work, matter or affair. The second one is related to conduct, behaviour or action. The next one is related to commerce and trade. The fourth one takes care of legal disputes and legal procedures. Though Kautilya uses the word at different places with different meanings, the word “vyavahāra' used in the 58th adhyāya is very peculiar. It is limited to the 'witness' or ‘testimony'.
In the Jaina literature, we find several meanings of vyavahāra, but one meaning is more peculiar and technical which is implied in the word 'vyavahārasūtra'. The Kalpa-Niśītha and Vyavahāra are the three important ancient Chedasūtras written by the 1st Bhadrabāhu in the language, Ardhamāgadhi. The Vyavahāra is a law-book for a monk or nun in which general and specific rules of behaviour are given and atonements are prescribed, in the form of penances, if the rules are transgressed knowingly or unknowingly. When we go through the three bhāsyagāthās of Vyavahāra (viz. 1.91 ; 1.132 ; 10.592), we know immediately that they are concerned with Cāņakya, his administration and his death. This fact throws light on the connection of the Arthaśāstra and the Jaina code of conduct. [iv] Pāşanda (Pākhaņda):
The terms pāşanda and pāşandin (viz. heretics) are used in almost ten adhyāyas of the Arthaśāstra. All the subsects of non-vedic schools are designated as pāşaņdas. The Śākyas (Bauddhas), Ājīvakas and Jainas are enumerated among pāşandas. The overall treatment

Page #210

200
given to the pāşandas is very rude and strict. Kautilya keeps close watch on the ascetic class. He is comparatively soft towards śrotriya (vedic) brahmins while too harsh towards all pāşandas. Kautilya's attitude can be seen thus a) Heretics can be sent to the other states as messengers. (adhyāya
16)
b) If necessary, the contribution collected by the groups of heretics
can be snatched away and added to the royal treasury. (adhyāya
18) c) The dwellings of heretics and lower castes (cāņdālas) should be
beyond the bound aries of the crematory. (adhyāya 25) d) The dwellings of heretics etc. should be properly searched from
time to time. (adhyāya 57) e) The heretics and others (i.e. āśramavāsins) should live together peacefully without creating nuisance to each other. (adhyāya 73)
The Prakrit terms ‘pāsaņda' and particularly ‘para-pāsanda’ are seen in the Āvaśyaka-sūtra under the transgressions of samyaktva’ (right faith on the Jaina tenets). There is a close connection between the Āvaśyaka literature and Kauțilīya Arthaśāstra. The first full biography of Cāņakya is found in the Āvaśyaka-cūrņi. Probably at that time (6th-7th century A.D.) the legends and myths about Cāņakya were at the zenith of its popularity. Side by side, the Jaina writers were studying the text (i.e. Kautilīya Arthaśāstra) carefully. They might have stumbled at the despicable term “pāşanda' used for them. Naturally the cūrņikāra presents the story of Cāņakya as an example of para-pāşanda-prasaṁsā in which Cāņakya is depicted as a Jaina householder and praises brahmanic ascetics erroneously (ĀvCū. II, p.281)

Page #211

201
This is the natural reflective reaction of the harsh and strict attitude towards heretics depicted in the Kauțilīya Arthaśāstra.
Later Jaina authors have avoided the word para-pāşanda and have used the word “anya-drșți’ (Tattvārtha 7.18). Likewise the Jainas created the new word ‘mithya-drsți' or 'mithyātvi 'to replace the word “pāşanda'.
It is noteworthy that the liberal-minded monarch Asoka offered a new measure to the word “pāşanda' in his rock-edicts. According to him “pāșanda' is 'sect' whether it is one's own or of the others and expects that there should be an equal honor towards 'ātma-pāşanda and ‘para-pāșanda'. [5] Tīrtha :
The term “tīrtha' carries a peculiar meaning in the Arthaśāstra and in the Jaina religion, based on the etymological meaning viz. a passage, way, road, ford or a descent into a river.
In the 12th adhyāya of Arthaśāstra, Kautilya uses the phrase 'अष्टादशेषु तीर्थेषु' in which eighteen departments of the government are implied. We find the same meaning of the word in the Rāmāyaṇa (Hivargaonkar, Introduction p.43). According to Kautilya, mahāmātra is the chief of each department and in this sense the person is the tīrthakara.
In the second chapter of the work “Nītivākyāmsta' which is a later version of the Arthaśāstra, the Digambara writer Somadeva says, "444491RA: Alf44a1aez 9691: l'It is seen that Somadeva includes the officers in the definition of tīrtha, who look after the religious matter as well as carry out the legislative, judicial and executive functions of the government.
The Tīrthankara or Tīrthakara is a Jaina Arhat who is a
sacred preceptor, who shows the right path of liberation. He is

Page #212

202
always called a 'ford-maker' or creator and guide of four departments (samghas) i.e. sadhu-sadhvi and śrāvaka-śravikā. In the Jaina literature we find the words like अन्यतीर्थिक (Samavāya 60) तीर्थसिद्ध, 3fff (Sthānanga 1) etc. Instead of using reproachful term pāṣaṇḍa or pakhanda, the Jaina texts prefer the word 'anyatirthika' to describe their non-Jaina cult.
Thus, the old stock-word 'tirtha' was taken and developed by Kautilya and the Jaina tradition in different directions.
[6] Samgha and Gaṇa :
In the science of polity, two technical words viz. ‘samgha' and 'gana' carry extreme importance. Like the word 'tīrtha', these two words are also stock-words used in the brahmanic and śramanic culture with a slight difference.
Kautilya uses the word 'samgha' in two senses. In the 14th adhyāya he says, ‘तेन संघभूता व्याख्याताः ।' Here, the groups or corporations of labourers and workers are referred to. But in the 17th adhyāya, when he says, ff:', the word suggests the type of governmental system or polity. The scholars who have studied the ancient literature of Jainas and Bauddhas, opine that the words 'samgha' and 'gana' point out to the free, autonomus, independant republic states of the contemporary political India. (see Hivargaonkar, Introduction p.31-32)
The Jainas and Bauddhas have used these words in the constitution of their religions. Buddha, Dhamma and Samgha - these three are adorables in the Buddhism. The Jainas declared that the 'fourfold samgha' is the base of their religious activities. Besides this, like Kautilya, the Jaina texts use the words 'samgha' and 'śreṇī' which denote the corportations or gilds of skilled workers. In the 8th chapter of Jñātādharmakatha, we find the references of

Page #213

203
kumbhakāra-śreņi, citrakāra-śreņi etc. [1.8.80 (p.382) od edn. ; 1.8.90 (p.390) Quid edn.]. The Jaina texts like Șațkhandāgama have used the word śreņi which suggests the spiritual status of an aspiror. The doctrine of guņaśreņi is found elaborately in the Șațkhandāgama (1st century A.D.)
The term 'gana' in the Arthaśāstra possesses a common meaning i.e. “a group'. Kautilya refers ‘ksatriya' and 'śreņi' as the examples of samghas (republican states) but he does not recognize it as samgha-rājyas or gaņa-rājyas. (Hivargaonkar p.32)
The reference of Ācārānga is extremely important in this matter because it presents a list of the modes of administration. The text runs as - अरायाणि वा गणरायाणि वा जुवरायाणि वा दोरज्जाणि वा विरुद्धरज्जाणि वा ।
(Ācārānga 2.12.1.7) The names of gañarājyas (republic states) are noted by the Indologists by the help of the Greek historians. Therefore the mention of gañarājyas in the Ācārānga is valuable. We find the example of dveirājya' (Prakrit-dorāyā) in the Avaśyaka-cūrņi, in which dual kingship of Candragupta and Parvataka is mentioned.
The term “gaņa' is used in the Jaina history for a particular group of monks. There were eleven ganadharas who got instructions from lord Mahāvīra and divided these religious preachings into eleven anga-granthas.
Furtheron, the Jaina mūlasmghas were divided into different ganas and gacchas. Here the word gana is used in its narrower sense.
Thus the usage of the terms ‘gana' and 'samgha' goes back to the ancient political history of Magadha, Anga, Vanga and Kalinga. [7] Danda :
There is no need to say that Kautilya is very much cautious

Page #214

204
about danda and dandanīti. The 2nd adhyāya opens with the names of fourfold vidyās, viz. ānvīksīki, trayī, vārtā and dandanīti. In the 5th adhyāya he says that the fourth one is at the base of the other three vidyās. The 4th adhyāya discusses about तीक्ष्णदण्ड, मृदुदण्ड and
UTEGUS categorically. In the 13th adhyāya, the four measures to satisfy the dissatisfied ones are told, viz. sāma, dāna (upapradāna), danda and bheda. In the 31st adhyāya, the definitions of these four measures are given. With a great thought-clarity Kautilya says, “Killing (violence), torture (ill-treatment) and snatching away the wealth (fine) is called danda (punishment)”. The famous cāņakyasūtras throw light on the importance of danda and dandanīti.
The Jaina code of conduct, discusses a lot about danda, arthadanda, anarthadanda, manodanda, vacanadanda, kāyadanda, dravyadanda, bhāvadanda, and so on and so forth, but witha slight different manner. Danda is violence. Arthadanda is violence with some purpose or reason. Anarthadanda is purposeless violence. The Uttarādhyayana says -
दंडाणं गारवाणं च, सल्लाणं च तियं तियं । ut furę alus Ato , À 3775 H5 II (Utt.31.4)
The three types of dandas mentioned here are the inauspicious activities of mind, speech and body which are harmful to one's self and other living beings. Anartha-danda-viramana is the third guņavrata among the 12 vows prescribed for a Jaina householder. This is the vow to abstain from frivolous and harmful activities which do not serve any human purpose (Tattvārtha. 7.16).
Though the word “danda' is same in the Arthaśāstra and Jaina ethics, the implications are different. Kautilya's danda is the punishment inflicted by the king to the criminals but the Jainas think

Page #215

205
that when we lead an uncontrolled life, we are criminals because we inflict unnecessary punishments to the organisms around us.
The Āvaśyaka-sūtra (sūtra 80) provides all the details of anartha-danda, which is significient because we have already observed the close connection between the Āvaśyaka and its literature with Arthaśāstra. [8] Vrşala-Vrsalī
Now, we will consider the most debated words ‘vrşala' and ‘vrsali' in the light of (i) Arthaśāstra (ii) the drama Mudrārākṣasa and (iii) its Prakrit equivalents.
In the 12th adhyāya of Arthaśāstra, Kautilya deals with the wandering spies. While describing female-espionage, he says -
ufafsohl: --- MICH SEV: --- HEIHEI 37fMESTE I He adds - gael yusi qart 1CIN: 1
In this passage, it is clear that the brahmin female ascetics are called ufafscht:'. Furtheron, Kautilya expects the same duties from the tonsured vrşalīs. Many of the Kautilyan scholars translate the word as 'female ascetics of lower-caste (PGT)'.
All the translators and scholars of the drama Mudrārāksasa think that Cāņakya addresses Candragupta as ‘vrsala' due to his birth in the lower-caste. This hypothesis is not true when we examine the reference of Arthaśāstra. In the same chapter on espionage, the word ‘śramaņa' occurs which includes all the non-vedic cults. In the 77th adhyāya, we get the reference as - शाक्य-आजीवकादीन् वृषलप्रव्रजितान् देवपितृकार्येषु भोजयतरश्शत्यो दण्डः ।
Here, the word vrsala is used for the monks who are initiated in the Buddhist, Āvīvaka and other (Jaina) samghas. This is certainly a list of non-vedic (śramaņa) monks. It is possible that some of them might have arrived from lower-caste but there is no proof that

Page #216

206
the word 'vrsala' necessarily means sūdra. On the other hand the non-vedic root of them is confirmed by the close examination of the above-mentioned references in the Arthaśāstra.
After the critical examination of the Prakrit words to (ara, वृषिन्) ; वुसी (वृषी) and also बुसि etc. quoted in the dictionary Paiasadda-mahannavo, we know that this term is used for a ‘muni' initiated in a non-vedic tradition. When we go through the citation, TH TH CH3TT', which is repeated in the Sūtrakstānga (1.8.19 ; 1.11.15) and Uttarādhyayana (5.18) we come to the final conclusion that the terms vrşala and vrşalī are closely connected with the Jaina monks. Observations :
In this small article, eight key-words are chosen and brought under the scanner. Each word possesses a basic etymological meaning. Kautilya uses it with the shade of the meaning which is suitable for the writing his treatise on polity. Ancient Jaina texts incorporate the same words with the meanings suitable for their ethical and philosophical framework. These are some of glimpses of our common heritage - called the 'Indian Culture’. We can extend the study with more words like - sfra-3410R ; 3.089 ; TAUN; Joly Roh ; 341914 ; TRER and so on. [4] Jaina code of conduct from the perspective of Kauțilīya
Arthaśāstra
In this topic we are not going to discuss the whole Jaina Ethics which is distinctily divided into (i) the code of conduct for the Jaina householders and (ii) the code of conduct for the Jaina monks. Jaina Ethics is a wide and independent branch of the Jaina literature which is flourished through centuries and expressed in various old, middle and modern Indo-Aryan languages.

Page #217

207
It is already noted that the Ardhamāgadhī texts and particularly the anga, mūlasūtra and chedasūtra texts are closely connected with the history of Magadha. Śrāvakācāra (the conduct of householders or laymen) is documented in the anga-text Upāsakadaśa while Mūlasūtras and Chedasūtras contain sadhuācāra. The Avaśyaka mentions both the acaras. Whether a sadhu or śravaka, he is basically a citizen of this country. Though the Kautilīya Arthaśāstra is a comprehensive treatise on Polity, one part of the Arthaśāstra provides rules of conduct for the citizens and if transgressed, recommends various type of punishments.
Almost all the scholars of Kautilyan studies have commented upon Kautilya's attitude towards ascetic class in general and his attitude towards the Jaina and Buddhist monks in particular. While dealing with different topics, Kautilya speaks many times about saṁnyāsī, siddha, tāpasa, śrotriya, brahmin, parivrājaka, bhikṣu, kṣapaṇaka and paṣaṇḍin. Though he is a little bit liberal and partial to śrotriya brahmins, his overall attitude to ascetic class is harsh, practical and full of expectations from them. But it is clear that Kautilya basically treats them as the citizens of the country and expects from them the following of the general rules of conduct with very few exceptions.
The fourth adhikarana of Kautilīya Arthaśāstra titled 'kantakaśodhana', deals with the search of criminals and proper punishments are prescribed accordingly. When a person, well-versed in the Jaina Ethics goes through the adhyāyas of Arthaśāstra from seventy-eight upto ninety of the 4th adhikaraṇa, he immediately remembers the Jaina code of conduct, prescribed for an householder (śrāvaka). Jaina śrāvakācāra is based on vratas (vows) and aticāras

Page #218

208
(transgressions). Surprisingly enough, the title of the 90th adhyāya is ‘aticāradanda'.
A layman is expected to follow the five smaller vows (aņuvratas) and to avoid five transgressions of each aņuvrata. In each of the five smaller vows, the word ‘sthūla' is added because a householder is expected to observe the vows grossly, in the perspective of an ideal monk who observes the bigger vow with all the subtle implications. Afterwards three guņa-vratas and four śikṣā-vratas are mentioned in order to stabilize the śrāvaka in the five aņu-vratas. If we see the nature of these seven vratas, they are more or less religious and spiritual. The first five aņu-vratas are related to ethics and morality which is expected from every human being irrespective of class, caste or religion. Among these five, the last one is parigrahaparimāņa i.e. limiting one's own needs or possessions. We cannot generalize the exact scope of this vow. So we can treat it as an ethical principle and not as an ethical rule. The first four smaller vows can be converted into ethical rules if a deep thought is given. Thus with the help of the text Upāsakadaśā (1st adhyāya), four aņu-vratas and its transgressions can be documented in a consolidated form. But since our purpose is to corelate it with the Kautilīya Arthaśāstra, after documenting each vow and each transgression, the concerned part of the Arthaśāstra is quoted. 1st Aņuvrata : The vow of desisting (abstaining) from gross injury (non-violence)
The five transgressions are enumerated as vadha, bandha, chaviccheda, atibhāra and bhaktapānaviccheda. (i) Vadha :
One should not kill and beat the animal (and also the human being).

Page #219

209
Arthaśāstra :
The 88th adhyāya is totally dedicated to the crime titled 'vadha'. Here, crimes related to humans and animals are enumerated. Corporal punishments and fines are prescribed by Kauțilya. In the 50th adhyāya, it is mentioned that if one beats or abducts animals, he should be punished by capital punishment. Fine is prescribed for harming animals (adhyāya 76). (ii) Bandha :
One should not keep the animal (and human being) tied so as to cause discomfort. Arthaśāstra :
In the 74th adhyāya, it is specifically mentioned that one who deliberately keeps a man or woman tied, a fine of 1000 paņas is prescribed.
(iii) Chaviccheda :
One should not cut or pierce the animal (or human being) in any part of the body. Arthaśāstra :
A whole paragraph on ‘chaviccheda’ is given in the 76th adhyāya by giving the examples of cutting hands, legs, ears or breaking teeth are mentioned. A severe fine is prescribed. The punishment of fine is extended for the ‘chaviccheda' of animals and trees in the same adhyāya. In fact the whole topic on ‘dandapārusya' is summarized by the Jaina ācāryas in the title of the transgression i.e. chaviccheda. (iv) Atibhāra :
One should not overload or burden an animal which is un
bearable.

Page #220

210
Arthaśāstra :
If the bullocks (50th adhyaya), horses (51st adhyāya) and elephants (52nd adhyāya) are overloaded and utilized carelessly, severe fine is prescribed.
(v) Bhaktapānaviccheda :
One should not underfeed the animal or disturb it during it's
feeding.
Arthaśāstra:
In the 50th adhyaya, it is mentioned that if an animal dies due to underfeeding, the caretaker should be punished. A proper care should be taken of the calves, old cows and diseased animals. Observations :
Many scholars, who have studied the householder's conduct of Jainas, express their surprise that the five transgressions of 'gross non-violence' are majorly connected to animals and not to human beings. This riddle can be solved easily if we read the concerned chapters of the Arthaśāstra. The Jaina householders generally owe to merchant class (vaiśya-varna). Kautilya notes four vidyas among which the third one is vārtā. He says, 'कृषिपशुपाल्य वाणिज्या च वार्ता' (adhyaya 4) i.e agriculture, cattle-rearing and trade is called 'vārtā '. In the 3rd adhyaya, Kautilya says that the vaisyas earn livelihood by these three occupations. Naturally rules and regulations prescribed for paśupālana are important for the Jaina householders of that time.
At the advent of time, the Jaina householders concentrated on 'vānijjya' due to many reasons, but in the Ardhamāgadhi canonical texts there is equal stress on the occupation of cattle-rearing. The behavioural patterns of the Jainas have changed but the rules of

Page #221

211
śrāvakācāra are the same. Thus, there is no wonder that the abovementioned transgressions of gross-non-violence reflect the Kautilyan views on ‘paśupālana’. In fact the concept of aticāras is based on the 90th adhyāya of Arthaśāstra i.e aticāradanda.
2nd Aņuvrata : The vow of desisting (abstaining) from gross
falsehood.
Sthūla-mşşāvāda-viramaņa-vrata is elaborated in two ways. Sahasā-abhyākhyāna etc. are the five transgressions which are traditionally known and noted in the Upāsakadaśā and Āvaśyaka-sūtra. Among these five, four are concerned with personal ethhics but the last transgression is important because of it's social importance.
(i) The last transgression is kūtalekha-karana i.e. to make false documents.
In the 80'h adhyāya of Arthaśāstra, Kauțilya says, “Deporation is the proper punishment for the persons who prepare false agreements.' In the 86th adhyāya, there is a separate paragraph on the clerk (lekhaka) in the court who dabbles with the facts, changes it, adds something new or ministerpretes the documents. A severe fine is prescribed for preparing such type of kutalekha.
(ii) A further account of the 2nd aņuvrata mentions a number of events in which ambiguous, misleading or deceitful behaviour is likely to occur. However, it is pointed out that such deceitful behaviour is no less a transgression though it is common or natural.
Falsehood regarding the engagement or wedding of a girl is known as kanyālīka. 89th adhyāya of Arthaśāstra titled ‘kanyāprakrama' takes notice of all the crimes regarding unmarried girls. No doubt, the transgression ‘kanyālīka' covers all these crimes.
Falsehood regarding selling or buying of cattle is called

Page #222

gavālīka. We can easily connect this transgression to the subjectmatter discussed in the 50th, 51st and 52nd adhyāyas of Arthaśāstra.
Falsehood regarding selling or buying of land is bhūmyalīka. The 64th, 65th and 66th adhyayas of Arthaśāstra deal with the crimes and punishments regarding immovable properties, sale deeds of land, medows-pastures-cultivated lands and many other land-connected issues. We can claim that the transgression called bhūmyalīka can take care of all these issues.
212
(iii) Falsehood regarding the deposits is called nyāsāpahāra. Kautilya speaks a lot in this matter in the 83rd adhyāya. He says स्तेन-निधि-निक्षेप-आहारप्रयोग- गूढाजीविनामन्यतमं शङ्केतेति शङ्काभिग्रहः ।
(iv) False-witness (kūṭasākṣī) is the last transgression enumerated under the second aṇuvrata. In the 81st adhyāya, Kautilya says, 'deportation is the proper punishment for the false witness'. The words 'kūṭa' and 'gūḍha' are oftenly used in the 81st adhyāya. All types of falsehood are enumerated in this chapter. Thus we can say that the transgressions of falsehood described in the Jaina śrāvakācāra might have some connection with 81st chapter of the Arthaśāstra. The following terms and sentences are quite eloquent to endorse this guess
गूढजीविनं शङ्केत ।
*
*
'ग्रामकूटमध्यक्षं वा सत्री ब्रूयात् ।
कृतकाभियुक्तो वा कूटसाक्षिणोऽभिज्ञाताऽनर्थवैपुल्येन आरभेत । ते चेत्तथा कुर्युः ‘कूटसाक्षिण:' इति प्रवास्येर न् ।
कूटपणकारकाः, कूटरूपकारकं, कूटसुवर्णव्यवहारी and so on.
The word kūṭa used in the transgressions of the 3rd aṇuvrata
in a very apt manner.
3rd Aṇuvrata: The vow of desisting (abstaining) from appropriating

Page #223

213
that which belongs to others.
The crime of 'theft is considered by Kauțilya in total six adhyāyas (78th, 79th, 85th, 86th, 87th, 88th). At the end of the 78th adhyāya, a noteworthy comment is passed. A long list of specific occupations is given and a caution is given that a king should keep an eye on the concerned person. He says, 'actually we can't count them as thieves but they are as good as thieves. A vigilence is necessary on the merchants, businessmen, artizens, ascetics, flatterers, snake-charmers and magicians.'
The title of the 79th adhyāya is, 'To protect the subjects from merchants and traders.' When we go through the minute details, we immediately realise the connection between the transgressions of the 3rd anuvrata and the Arthaśāstra.
(i) The first transgression is stenāhsta i.e. buying a stolen good. Adhyāya 86 takes care of this and a severe fine or deathpenalty is recommended.
(ii) Taskaraprayoga is encouraging a thief. The crime is noted in the 88th adhyāya and a punishment is prescribed for providing shelter, food, clothing for a thief or even giving advice to him.
(iii) The third transgression is viruddha-rājyātikrama which means cheating the state of its dues and all type of conspiracies against the government. All the seditious activities are mentioned elaborately in the 88th adhyāya and the horrific punishments like burning and snatching away one's tiunge are prescribed.
(iv) “Cheating in weights and measures’-is the 4th transgression of the 3rd aņuvrata of a householder. Kautilya uses the same wording in the 79th adhyāya for which a strict punishment is given.
(v) Adulteration and producing duplicate things are mentioned

Page #224

214
in the 5th transgression. These two are cognisible offences which are dealt with in the 79th and 81st adhyāyas. A long list of articles is given by Kautilya where there is a possibility for adulteration. Observations :
We have already seen that the first aṇuvrata is specially applicable to cattle-breeders. In the same manner, the third aṇuvrata and its transgressions are categorically mentioned for the merchantclass, which is almost based on the 79th adhyāya of Arthaśāstra.
4th Aṇuvrata: The vow of restricting one's sexual life only to one's wife (or one's husband)
The last two adhyāyas (viz. 89th and 90th) of the 4th adhikarana of Arthaśāstra deal with all kinds of sexual crimes. In the 89th chapter, the sexual crimes regarding unmarried girls are dealt with. The offence of rape is discussed in the 90th chapter. If we go through the wording of Arthaśāstra and the five transgressionsof the 4th aṇuvrata, the reader is astonished due to the striking similarities among them. The five transgressions noted down in the 4th aṇuvrata
are -
(i) Sexual enjoyment with a kept woman.
(ii) Sexual enjoyment with an unmarried woman or a widow.
(iii) Unnatural and perverted intercourse.
(iv) Obsession with sexual desire even in relation to one's wife. (v) Interest in match making.
The last transgression is to be understood in the total context of the Jaina life. We can keep it aside for a moment because of its particular religiosity but the other four transgressions are described in details with appropriate punishments in the 89th and 90th chapters of Arthaśāstra.

Page #225

According to Kautilya, the following are sexual crimes -
215
(i) Rape on an unmarried girl.
(ii) Sexual intercourse without the consent of another's wife or a
widow.
(iii) Rape on a sex-worker or her daughter without consent.
(iv) Unnatural or perverted sexual activities.
(v) Raping one's wife without her consent.
(vi) Sexual intercourse with animals and birds.
(vii) Sexual activities with the idols of gods and goddesses.
We can say that these details of the Arthaśāstra are as if reflected or echoed in the five transgressions of the 4th aṇuvrata. Especially the sexual intercourse with animals and birds and sexual activities with the idols of gods and godesses are covered under the vow called 'svadārasamtosa'.
In the Jaina code of conduct, seven bad habits (sapta-vyasanas) are enumerated with the advice to shun it totally. Two among the seven are veśyagamana and para-strī / para-purușa-gamana, which are sexual crimes from the viewpoint of religion as well as the lawcode of the state. Observations :
It is argued that Jaina religion is not an independant religion because it does not owe separate code of conduct than that of the Hindus. Since the Jainas live in the same socio-cultural environment of the Hindus, they might have felt that a separate law-book is not necessary. It is a great contribution of the Jaina law-makers, particularly who codified the conduct of the Jaina householders, to accomodate the state laws into their religious vows and its transgressions. We do not find this type of gṛhasthadharma even in

Page #226

216
brahmanic smstis and dharmaśāstras. The Buddhist śrāvakācāra in the form of pañcaśīla does not contain minute details as the Jainas have, in the transgressions of vows. It is noteworthy that the sources of the Jaina śrāvakācāra are deeply rooted in the Kautilīya Arthaśāstra. This is one of the convincing reason, why the Jainas have so much regard and honour towards Cāņakya alias Kautilya.
Ahiṁsā, Satya etc. are no doubt the universal values which are applicable to all human beings. But the Jaina mentors are not satisfied with preaching the sādhāraṇa-dharmas. They have made a successful effort to collaborate the višeșa-dharmas by mentioning transgressions of each vow in order to bring it in the domain of practicability. In this process, the Kautilya's Arthaśāstra helped them a lot.
Guņavratas and Śikṣāvratas are based on the distinct religious, philosophical and ritualistic tenets of the Jainas. Thus the whole śrāvakācāra is the unique example of assimilation and iden
tity.
[5] Re-interpretation of the Jaina monachism in the light of
Kautilīya Arthaśāstra Scholars of Indology always claim that the śramaņic traditions in India are basically renunciative in nature. This fact is aptly applicable to the Jaina tradition, which is almost the most ancient so called 'atheist' spiritual tradition. Austerities, penances and meditation are the benchmarks of the renunciative reflections gathered together in the ancient Ardhamāgadhi scriptures of the Jainas, which is the first stage of the Jaina literature. We can call it as a preCāņakyan stage. Ardhamāgadhi mūlasūtras like the Āvaśyaka, Uttarādhayayana and Daśavaikālika, represent the second stage of

Page #227

217
Jaina monachism in which a separate and systematic code of conduct for the bhikṣus and bhikṣunīs is prescribed. The antiquity of these treatises can also go upto the pre-Cāņakyan period. The third stage is seen - (i) in the Ardhamāgadhi chedasūtras (viz. Niśītha, Kalpa, Vyavahāra) (ii) in the niryuktis, and bhāsyas on mülasūtras and (iii) in the Saurasenī texts like Mūlācāra, Bhagavatī Ārādhanā and Kundakunda's literature. Some of the texts of the third stage are contemporary to Cāņkya and some are written in the post-Cāņakyam period. The code of conduct prescribed for the bhikṣus and bhikṣunīs at this stage is nicely carved out and is accomplished with the rules and transgressions. The punishments are provided in the form of various atonements (prāyaścittas). Chedasūtrakāra Bhadrabāhu is closely connected to the history of Candragupta and Cāņakya.
Thus, this is an interesting task to re-interprete the Jaina monachism with the help of the commentarial literature of Ācārānga, Uttarādhyayana, Daśavaikālika and Niśītha. The sādhu-ācāra is presented in the Saurasenī texts in the form of mūlaguņas and uttaraguņas while Ardhamāgadhī scriptures consider it under the five mahāvratas, five samitis, three guptis and tenfold dharmas. It is impossible to explore each and every detail of the sādhu-ācāra in the light of the the Kauțilīya Arthaśāstra. An attempt has been made here to highlight the impact of the Arthaśāstra on the Jaina sādhu-ācāra with few important examples and observations.
We can enumerate at least thirty references in the Arthaśāstra where the ascetic class is mentioned by using the terms like bhikṣu, sādhu, parivrājaka, siddha, tāpasa, kşapaņaka, saṁnyāsī, pāşandi etc. Some of them are mentioned by Kautilya as āśrama-vāsins (i.e. residing at one place) and caras or parivrājakas (i.e. wandering from

Page #228

218
place to place). We can guess that, the ascetic-class was so noticeable in the contemporary social structure, that Kautilya has no other way than giving a strict code of conduct for the monks and nuns. [1] The general attitude of Kautilya to look at a sādhu is very strict in spite of his being a Brahmin, Buddhist or Jaina. In the 73rd adhyāya, he says, “Any type of misbehaviour will not be tolerated even in the case of a saṁnyāsi. A monk is liable to be punished by a king in the case of any misconduct.”
If we cast a glance at the second śrutaskandha of Ācārārga, we know immediately that each and every activity of a monk and nun is brought under a scanner. The details can be enumerated as - (i) Pindaişaņā : Details of acceptable food-articles and alms-begging. (ii) Śaiyyaişaņā : Details of residence (both temporary and during
rainy season). (iii) Iryaişaņā : Details of wanderings and begging tours. (iv) Bhāṣaişaņā : Details of speech and communication. (v) Vastraişaņā : Details of clothing. (vi) Pātraişaņā : Details of the pots and other utensils which are
permissible for a monk.
(vii) Avagrahaisanā: Asking permission of five concerned authorities
before utilising the necessary things. (viii) Uccāraprasravana : The rules about urination and excretion. [2] The close connection between the Daśavaikālika and Ācārānga (II) is quite noteworthy. The chapters of Daśavaikālika titled Pindaişaņā, Suvākyasuddhi, Ācārapraạidhi, Vinayasamādhi and Sabhikṣu describe the same details of Ācārānga (II). In fact, we can say that the systematic presentation in prose-form is seen in the Ācārānga with some important additions to its prior version named Dasavaikālika.

Page #229

219
[3] Kautilya expects from the ascetic class to follow the orders of the state, as they are citizens frist and then the religious and spiritual achievers. The rules laid down by the state are ajñāpatras and the same are called ‘śāsana' (government) in totality. The Jaina ācāryas say that the rules laid down by the Jinas are called jinaśāsana in totality. As various punishments are given for the law-breakers in the Arthaśāstra, various atonements in the form of fasting are prescribed for the transgressors of the jinaśāsana in the Niśītha, Kalpa and Vyavahāra.
[4] If one renounces the world without the permission of the elders and without making proper future provisions for the family, asevere fine is prescribed by Kautilya in the 22nd adhyaya of Arthaśāstra.
In the text called Antakṛddaśā, Kṛṣṇa (Vāsudeva) proclaims, "Whoever wants to renounce the mundane world, I will take care of his or hers family." (Antakṛddaśā, Varga 5, p.103, edn.) In one of the chapters of Uttaradhyayana, it is depicted that the two young sons ask permission of their father and mother to enter into monkhood. The parents are not ready to allow the sons to go away like this without fulfilling their duties (Uttaradhyayana, Adhyāya 14). The same discussions are seen in the first chapter of Jñātādharmakathā.
[5] In the 77th adhyaya of Arthaśāstra, it is specifically mentioned that whoever will invite a Buddhist or Jaina monk or a lower-caste person for the meals provided in the deva-karya (festivals of gods) and pitṛ-karya (an offering to the manes) will be punished by the king.
In the Acārānga, there is a strict prohibition for a monk or a nun to enter into a charity-food (samkhaḍī). The concerned text of Acārānga runs like this

Page #230

220
इंदमहेसु वा खंदमहेसु वा
तहप्पारे
भिक्खू वा भिक्खुणी वा महामहेसु वट्टमाणेसु असणं वा पाणं वा णो पडिगाहेज्जा । (ācārānga
2.1.2, p.22, ब्यावर edn.)
The Niśīthasūtra prescribes atonements for acepting food in a samkhadi (common meals) in the following manner -
तं
जे भिक्खू संखडिपलोयणाए असणं वा पाणं वा पडिग्गाहेइ सेवमाणे आवज्जइ मासियं परिहारट्ठाणं उग्घाइयं । (Nisītha, Uddeśa 3, sūtra
14)
———
———
———
The Niśīthasūtra mentions three types of exceptions for the general rules prescribed for a monk. The sentence runs as - नन्नत्थ रायाभिओगेण वा गणाभिओगेण वा बलाभिओगेण वा । (Niśītha, Uddeśa 9)
Thus it is expected from a monk or nun to honour the law of a king or the law passed in the gaṇarajya system.
[6] In the 73rd adhyāya, Kautilya says, “The hermitage-dwellers and pāṣaṇḍins (Jaina, Buddhist and Ājīvaka monks) should live in a ascetic-dwelling (matha etc.)without creating nuisance to others.” The Acaranga goes one step forward and says that in such type of dwellings where there is a continuous disturbance due to the coming in and going out of the travellers, the monk and nun should specifically avoid that place. The concerned text is
से आगंतागारेसु वा, आरामागारेसु वा, गाहावइकुलेसु वा, परियावसहेसु वा, अभिक्खणं अभिक्खणं साहम्मिएहिं उवयमाणेहिं णो उवइज्जा । (ācārānga
II, Uddeśa 2)
[7] In the 57th adhyāya of Arthaśāstra, a severe fine is prescribed for evacuation of the faeces and urinating at improper places.
The 10th adhyayana of Acārānga (II) is totally dedicated to this topic. Uccaraprasravaṇa-samiti is enumerated among the five

Page #231

221
samitis (i.e. proper or careful physical activities). Acārānga says तहप्पगारंसि थंडिलंसि अचित्तंसि तओ
fugal furgunta
संजयामेव उच्चारपासवणं परिट्ठविज्जा ।
=
(Acārānga 2.10, p.259,
edn.)
The Uttaradhyayana gives a list of prohibited places where one should avoid to pass the urine etc. (Uttarādhyayana 22.2; 24.18)
[8] 'Tenfold dharma' is a famous topic given in the code of conduct of a Jaina monk. The ten points given in the Tattvārthasūtra 9.6 are religious and spiritual. The Sthānāṁgasūtra enumerates 'daśavidha dharmas' from the social point of view as well as religious point of view. The Sthānanga quotes
दसविहे धम्मे पण्णत्ते, तं जहा -गामधम्मे, णगरधम्मे, रट्ठधम्मे, पासंडधम्मे, कुलधम्मे, गणधम्मे, संघधम्मे, सुयधम्मे, चरित्तधम्मे, अत्थिकायधम्मे । (Sthānānga 10.135)
The first seven dharmas depict social elements and the last three are connected with the Jaina religion. It is remarkable that Sthānanga relates the term sthavira (thera) for the heads of the village, city, state etc., side by side with the senior monks (Sthānāṁga 10.136). We can interprete the terms like 'kula', 'gana' and 'samgha' more meaningfully in the light of Arthaśāstra.
[9] In the 20th adhyāya, Kautilya states clearly that the womenfolk in the harem should avoid the contact of the shaven-headed or longhaired monks and black-magicians.
———
Niśītha-sūtra might have taken notice of this rule in the following manner :
जे भिक्खू रायपिंडं गेण्हइ गेण्हंतं वा साइज्जइ तं सेवमाणे आवज्जइ चाउम्मासियं परिहारट्ठाणं अणुग्घाइयं ।
(Niśītha, Uddeśa 9, p.181, edn.)

Page #232

222
It seems that taking into consideration the strict rules of Cāṇakya, the rule-makers of Jainas might have come to the conclusion that it is always better for a monk and nun to beg the food at other places than at the palaces of kings.
It is mentioned in the 15th adhyāya of Arthaśāstra that other than a śrotriya brahmin, nobody is worthy to be invited on the occasion of an yearly ritual of a dead person (śrāddha). The Niśītha prescribes to avoid agrapinda for a monk (Niśītha, Uddeśa 2, sūtra 32). The word agrapinda can be interpreted in the light of either a sacrificial rite or a funeral rite. In both of the cases the philosophical and religious background does not allow a Jaina monk to accept such type of food.
[10] Cases of defamation are considered in the 75th adhyaya of Arthaśāstra. Details are provided in this chapter under which circumstances, a faulty person can be sued for the libel. Any kind of slander, using contemptuous language or scornful acts against somebody, disdainful remarks about one's religion, sect, caste, lineage, nation or about one's close relatives, purposeful taunting, despising one's occupation, using abusive or foul language, threatening sombody by using weapons, hands or by using the index finger, satirical remarks against one's physical disabilities, making someone ashmed in his family and society, seeking excuses to support wrong views etc. - are the instances of defamation and punishments are prescribed in the form of fine according to the gravity of the crime.
If we closely examine the chapters related to bhaśaiṣaṇā in the Jaina monachism, we really get startled. The above-mentioned adhyāya of Arthaśāstra is literally reflected in the concerned parts of the Acārānga (II), Uttaradhyayana and Daśavaikālika which de

Page #233

223
scribe bhāṣā-samiti and vacana-gupti. The only difference is of the language. Jaina compilers have presented Kautilya's views about defamation in Prakritized form.
The reading of the ācārānga [2.4.1, p.181-182, ब्यावर edn.] goes like this
सेभिक्खू वा भिक्खुणी वा तहप्पगारं भासं सावज्जं सकिरियं कक्कसं
कडुयं णिट्ठरं फरुसं अण्हयकरिं छेयणकरिं भेयणकरिं
भासं णो भासिज्जा ।
It is mentioned in the Acārānga and Daśavaikālika that a monk and nun should catagorically avoid the contemptuous language against one's social status and occupation, viz.
सेभिक्खू वा भिक्खुणी वा णो एवं वइज्जा - होले त्ति वा, गोले त्ति वा, वसुले त्ति वा कुपक्खे त्ति वा, घडदासे त्ति वा, साणे त्ति वा, तेणे त्ति वा । (ācārānga 2.4.1, p.181-182, ब्यावर edn.)
One verse from the suvākyaśuddhi adhyayana of Daśavaikālika
is worth-quoting. It says
-
———
———
———
तहेव काणं काणेत्ति, पंडगं पंडगे त्ति वा ।
वाहियं वा वि रोगि त्ति, तेणं चोरेत्ति णो वए ।
(Daśavaikālika 7.12)
The Uttaradhyayana goes one step ahead and gives advice to a monk that he should noteven praise the alms because it shows a monk's lust for food and creates pride in the donor due to the flattery.
[11] Rules about crossing the river, sea or lake etc. are discussed in the 49th adhyāya of Arthaśāstra titled ‘nāvādhyaksa'. Kautilya discusses a lot about the ports, revenue and licences for those who travel through water with a boat or ship. It is specifically mentioned that the licences should be provided free of cost to the brahmins, ascetics, children, old people, diseased persons, ambassadors and

Page #234

224
pregnant women. It means that a licence was compulsory for all.
In the framework of the monastic conduct, the use of a boat or ship comes under īrya-samiti. In the 12th uddeśaka of Niśītha-sūtra, this topic is discussed. Total 47 bhāṣyagāthās are dedicated to this topic (gā. 4208-4255). Five big rivers are mentioned. The regions viz. Anga, Vanga, Kalinga and punjab are mentioned. It seems that at the time of the Niśītha-bhāṣya (i.e. 5th-6th century A.D.) travelling by boat was allowed for a monk or nun. The Niśītha-sūtra 3.12 quotes, "A monk or a nun is not prohibited to cross the river but if one crosses the river twice or thrice in a month, he or she should undergo a particular atonement." The Samavāyānga says clearly that a monk can cross the river once in a month (Samavāyānga 21). We find the references of nāvāgamana in the Acārānga and Uttaradhyayana also. (Ācārānga 2.3.1, p.156, edn. ;
Uttaradhyayana 36.50-54)
From the chedasūtras, we come to know that crossing the water was not totally banned at that time but now a days, all the Jaina monks and nuns who wander on foot, do not use a boat or ship because it is a type of vehicle.
Observations :
So far we have seen that all the important rules laid down by Kautilya are skilfully
incorporated in the monastic conduct of the Jainas.
If we go through the eight-point-programme (eṣaṇās) of the Acārānga II, we immediately come to know that all the rules prescribed for a citizen are taken care of.
* Close association with the king is avoided as far as possible.
* Any kind of friction with the non-Jaina ascetic-class is kept away.

Page #235

225
* Kautilya expects two important tasks to be done by the ascetic class
- (i) working as a spy and (ii) working as an ambassador. He mentions specifically that the heretics (pāşandins ) should be employed to do this work or any other person should do this work in the disguise of a pāşandin. Though the Jainas are accomodative in nature, avoid conflicts as far as possible and though they are peace-loving, they are very much keen in observing their strict monastic rules and penances. The development in the Jaina monastic conduct is seen in three stages. none of this stage allows a monk or a nun to be a spy or an ambassador. It is likely that in the course of time, it would have been made compulsory for them to do this work, that is why the chedasūtras like Niśītha include a line, ETA FRUMUT TO||1973710 TI OT1937TTU AU
ľ
* When a careful scrutiny of all the references of ascetic class in the
Arthaśāstra is done, it is evident that Kautilya is in favour of the
śrotriya brahmins and harsh toward pāşandins. * The frequent references of purohit class, vedavidyā, yajñakarma,
atharvaveda, uñchavștti, dakṣiṇā, āśramavāsī, devotsava, pitļkārya, śāntimantra etc. support the fact clearly that Kautilya owes to the brahmanic tradition and not at all a Jaina householder or a monk. Jainification of Kauțilya alias Cāņakya is
definitely superfluous. * A certain respect and honour towards Cāņakya is seen in the Jaina
literature due to his strict governance, selfless service, detached
world-views and sublime death.
* In the 145th adhyāya, Kautilya says that there should be a complete
ban on violence during the important fifteen days of cāturmāsa.

Page #236

226
There is a tradition to quote cāņakyasūtras at the end of Arthaśāstra. One of the aphorism is - 315HTS&TUTT ETH:'. This quotation might have attracted the attention of the Jaina ācāryas while rating the personality of Cāņakya.

Page #237

227
CHAPTER 6
CONCLUDING REMAKRS

Page #238

228

Page #239

229
CHAPTER 6
CONCLUDING REMARKS
The sum and substance of the revelation of Cāņakya through the Jaina literature can be summarized in few paragraphs with the suitable titles in the following manner - [1] Application of the two-fold methodology :
According to the Jaina philosophy a thing, person or incident can be looked at or observed from various facets, attitudes or standpoints. The nature of truth or reality is complex. For the subtler and deeper knowledge, the linear method of observation is less useful. In this book (project) twofold methodology is applied for the better revelation of the complex personality of Cāņakya.
In the initial chapters of the book, all the Hindu (Brahmanic) and Jaina (both the Svetāmbara and Digambara) references about Cāņakya are collected, arranged, translated and compared in a detailed manner.
Keeping aside the whole comparative data, again the Jaina literature is observed through the window-frame of the reputed text of Cāņakya (Kautilya) viz. the Arthaśāstra. The study of each and every aphorism is not the aim of this book. So in the perspective of the original words (and not the translation) of Kautilya, the Jaina narratives, myths, analogies and particularly the Jaina code of conduct appears altogether different. Thus the observations noted in the fifth chapter of this book is the unique outcome of the twofold methodology applied for discovering the deep connections between the Jaina literature and Arthaśāstra. [2] Māgadha-connection of the Arthaśāstra and Jaina literature :
The known confirmed history of the ancient India starts from

Page #240

230
the history of Magadha. The Arthaśāstra is no doubt an important part of Magadhan literature. Likewise the first conference of the Ardhamāgadhī canons surely took place in Magadha after the severe famine of twelve years. While describing the lineage of kings before, after and contemporary to Lord Mahāvīra, many of the important Jaina texts describe serially the king Prasenajita-Sreņika (Bimbisāra)-Koņika (Ajātaśatru)- Udāyī-nine of the NandasCandragupta (Maurya)-Bindusāra-Asoka-Kuņāla and Samprati. The Jainas necessarily refer Sakatāla, the minister (amātya) of the ninth Nanda because he is the father of the revered Jaina ācārya Sthūlabhadra under whose supervision, the first conference of the Ardhamāgadhī canons took place. That is the reason why the political, socio-cultural and religious conditions reflected in the Arthaśāstra grossly match with these conditions reflected in the ancient Ardhamāgadhi canons. [3] Why older Cāņakya-narratives are in Prakrit ?
The śramanic traditions are connected with the region Magadha and the colloquial languages of Magadha i.e. Ardhamāgadhi and Pāli. The initial history of the compilation of the Ardhamāgadhi canons is connected with Pātaliputra. The chedasūtrakāra Bhadrabāhu codified the rules of monastic conduct during the reign of mauryan dynasty. The mūlasūtras and particularly the Āvaśyakasūtra came into vogue during this period. Naturally the commentarial literature, which was in ārsa Prakrit, contains the contemporary floating myths, tales and narratives. There was a great awe, fear and regard towards the strict administration of Cāņakya in the ambience. Following the foot steps of Lord Mahāvīra, the Jaina ācāryas preach their religion through the colloquial languages - Ardhamāgadhī, Sauraseni

Page #241

231
and Māhārāstrī. A good treasure of oral traditional stories was available for the Jaina authors in Prakrits. Vaddakahā (Bșhatkathā) was a great collection of tales in Paiśācī by Guņādhya. The Jaina counterpart of Vaddakahā is Vasudevahindi - probably the oldest huge story-collection in India. This is the canvas of Prakrits on which the narratives of Cāņakya were portrayed with a perfect blend of traditional oral narrations mixed with the power of imagination. It is the unique contribution of the Jaina ācāryas who imbibed the story-material in their commentarial literature.
It is a different but an important subject to locate the hybrid Sanskrit and deśī words in the Arthaśāstra, which are found in the cūrņi and are connected with the things, ideas and articles of the common people. [4] The first Jaina occurances of Cāņakya :
The oldest Śvetāmbara reference occurs in Anuyogadvāra (1st-2nd century A.D.) and the oldest Digambara reference occurs in Bhagavatī Ārādhanā (2nd_ 3rd century A.D.). The points of references differ in both the texts. The Anuyogadvāra stamps Kautilyaka-śāstra as a mithyā-śruta (heretic text). The Digambaras pay homage to Cāņakya because of his sublime religious death. These two references give two important clues, viz. the non-Jaina character of the treatise and the utter reverence towards Cāņakya for his exalted way to welcome death. [5] Nandi's unique approach to Arthaśāstra :
Nandīkāra Devavācakagani went one step ahead. He opened the doors to study Kautilya-śāstra for the Jainas by declaring that, “The mithyā-śrutas become samyak-śrutas when studied with the right attitude.” The effects of this new attitude are seen in the later

Page #242

232
literature of the Jainas. From the 6th - 7th century onwards, Cāņakyan tales, narratives and analogies are found in the Jaina Māhārāstrī, Jaina Saurasenī and Sanskrit literature. [6] The modes of references in the Śvetāmbara texts :
Around 50 references of Cāņakya are found in Svetāmbara literature. Somewherer only the name is given. At other places a particular story or incident is given in two-three verses. Cūrņis present scattered stories or the whole biography in prose-form but very briefly. The commentaries of Upadeśapada and Upadeśamālā contain Cāņakya's biography in around 200-250 Prakrit verses. Hemacandra's Cāņakya-kathā in Sanskrit is the ultimate collection of all the previous episodes. [7] Cāņakya's personality depicted in the Svetāmbara and
Digambara texts :
Digambaras honoured Cāņakya mainly for his peaceful and pious death. Digambara-references are approximately one-third in number and scope in comparison with the Svetāmbara-references. While dealing with Cāņakya, the Digambara writers throw awfully dim light on the personality of Candragupta. They present Cāņakya himself as a king or a sage-like-king. Harișeņa's Cāņakya leads a big group of 500 ascetics and marches towards dakṣiṇāpatha. We observe a slow steady growth in the Cāņakya-narratives of the Svetāmbaras but in the Digambara literature, Harişena's Cāņakya-muni-kathā is exhaustive and it prevailed over all the later Digambara-tales. Cāņakya in Śrīcandra's Kathākosa is more real and convincing than Harișeņa. The influence of Hindu purāṇas on Harișeņa is evident. Though Harișeņa gives references to Cāņakya's durga-gamana etc.

Page #243

233
still his Canakya and Candragupta do not reveal neither their valour nor their excellence in polity. Cāṇakya-muni's travel-tour towards Krauñcapura create a puzzle. Due to this reference, there is a remote possibility of Caṇakya's being a south-Indian. Because if the golla-deśa referred by Svetambaras is the region on the bank of Godavari, there might be a possibility about Caṇakya to arrive at the birth-place. There could be a connection between these two things the discovery of the manuscripts of Arthaśāstra in Tamil and Malyalam and the golla-deśa being the birth-place of Kautilya. Otherwise, the Śvetāmbaras are confirmed that the death-place of Cāṇakya is a place called gokula-sthāna near Pāṭalīputra. [8] The variety of themes in the Svetambara-references :
Hariṣena's Cāṇakya-kathā is the most standardised story in the Digambara literature while the Śvetāmbaras present Cāṇakya in multiple ways. They are enthusiastic in imagining, creating and remembering Caṇakya on different occasions. They have presented Cāṇakya as an epitome of intellect. They have appreciated Caṇakya's interesting ways of gathering wealth for the royal treasury. His strict orders, rules and punishments are also praised and compared with the jinājñās.
[9] The elements of historicity in the narratives :
Actually and frankly speaking there is no proof for the historicity of the Caṇakya-narratives. When we look at the stories from the window of Arthaśāstra, we feel that the tales are quite logical and mostly match with the cultural details depicted in the Arthaśāstra. Many of the narratives carry seeds from the Arthaśāstra, therefore we cannot dismiss the stories as a total display of imagination.

Page #244

234
[10] Arthaśāstra : The spring-well of the code of conduct of the
Jainas :
When we go through the details of the Arthaśāstra and particularly with the help of the chapters dedicated to the rules, crimes and punishments, we immediately come to know that the Jaina ācāryas have accommodated the contemporary civic rules in the conduct of a Jaina monk and a householder. The similarity between the Cāņakyan rules for merchants and the Jaina transgressions of aņuvratas is really stunning.
Monachism found in angas and mūlasūtras is of prescriptive nature. Bhadrabāhu (I), a contemporary of Cāņakya added punishments in the monastic conduct in the form of various penances during this period. Later on, the study of chedasūtras and prāyascittas was made compulsory for a bhikṣu who desires to lead the samgha.
In nutshell, we can say that the duties and rules prescribed for a Jaina householder or a Jaina monk are connected with the Kautilīya Arthaśāstra and remained the same through the several centuries. It is interesting to note that the description of grhasthāśrama and saṁnyāsāśrama is not so neatly carved in the brahmanic tradition and gone through several changes during the centuries. [11] The attitude to look at Cāņakya and the Arthaśāstra :
Though the Arthaśāstra is enumerated among the list of the books of the brahmanic literature, its overall liberal attitude, secular nature and the pure Polity (rājanīti ) was not appreciated by the latter dharmaśāstrakāras and smrtikāras. We observe that the high regard towards Cāņakya and his Arthaśāstra is slowly diminishing in the brahmanic tradition. In the Jaina tradition the same awe, honour and regard for Cāņakya and his Arthaśāstra is seen through
centuries.

Page #245

235
When brahmanic tradition was revealing the dispassionate attitude towards the text of Arthaśāstra, by not protecting the manuscripts of Arthaśāstra in brāhmī, śāradā or grantha scripts, the Jainas were enthusiastically enagged in creating new stories and protecting oral traditional stories of Cāņakya in various Prakrits as well as
Sanskrit.
[12] The Jaina version of the Arthaśāstra :
The Nītivākyāmrta of the Digambara ācārya Somadevasūri, is the highest homage paid by the Jaina tradition to Cāņakya's Arthaśāstra. Having kept aside the typical religious śrāvakācāra, Somadeva prepared a purely ethical code of conduct which was based on the Arthaśāstra. In the scholarly field, the Nītivākyāmrta is enumerated immediately after the Kāmandakīya Nītisāra, a version of the Arthaśāstra in poetical form. It is the greatness of Somadeva, that he has the courage to document śrāvakācāra for every human-being after having documented the traditional religious Jaina śrāvakācāra in his Yaśastilakacampū. [13] Depiction of the life-story of Cāņakya :
Pūrāņas provide few mechanical details of royal dynasties while describing the kingdom of Magadha. There is only one prominent story of Cāņakya repeated in the Pūrāṇas and Kathāsaritsāgara. The insult of the brahmin Cāņakya, his being wellversed in the vedas, his tuft of hair and his revengeful oath in the royal hall is the only important episode. The Kathāsaritsāgara emphasizes on the black-magic-part of Cāņakya and does not reveal his intelligence or political skills.
In fact, Hindu sources in general do not provide the details of his birth, death and his life - which is full of varied incidents.

Page #246

236
Mudrārākṣasa, the unique political Sanskrit drama provides some details of the personalities of Caṇakya, Candragupta and their relationship. Of course, it is noteworthy that Viśākhadatta had gone through the minute details of the Arthaśāstra while writing his play. The Mudrārāksasa popularized the phrase 'कौटिल्य: कुटिलमति:', but otherwise the playwright prefers the name Cāṇakya, everywhere in the play. The incidents in Mudrārākṣasa carry a limited time-span. We cannot expect full life-story of Caṇakya and Candragupta in the Mudrārākṣasa. If the Mudrārākṣasa is read in the light of the Jaina background and environment, it will reveal many more facts which are otherwise unexplained.
Exactly opposite is the case of the Jaina and particularly of the Svetambara literature. Caṇakya's mother, father, birth-place, some incidents in his childhood, the prophesy of the child, his marriage, his wife, his journey to Pataliputra for getting wealth in charity, his insult by Nanda, search of a proper person, meeting of Candragupta, his search of golden mines, association with the king Parvataka (may be Sellucus-Sailaukas), seeking the kingdom, Parvataka's death by deceit, well-being of the state, enriching the royal treasury, his strict rules and orders, Candragupta's death, insult by Bindusāra, his decision of voluntary death, his retirement in the gokula-grāma, his meditation, the revenge of Subandhu by putting fire on Caṇakya's residence, the calm and peaceful acceptance of death by Caṇakya and the death of Subandhu caused by Cāṇakya - these are some of the selected details of the Caṇakyanarratives documented by the Śvetāmbaras and presented in a consolidated form in the Parisiṣṭa-parva by Hemacandra.

Page #247

237
[14] The Jaina-references: Useful in removing many doubts :
The Jaina references are valuable because they help the scholars to remove many doubts about Candragupta, Cāṇakya and his Arthaśāstra. They are -
(i) Cāṇakya and Candragupta Maurya both are the histiric personalities. The date of Candragupta's coronation is documented in the Parisiṣṭa-parva with reference to the year of Mahāvīra-nirvāṇa. (ii) Cāṇakya, Kautilya and Viṣṇugupta are the names of the same person. Probably 'Viṣṇugupta' is the birth-name, 'Cāṇakya' after the name of his birthplace and ‘Kautilya' - no doubt an epithet.
(iii) The Kautilya's Arthaśāstra was an important part of syllabus in the prominent Indian study-centres like Nālandā.
(iv) The Arthaśāstra is not a tentative collection on Polity but a deliberate effort of a genius called Cāṇakya and an epitome of the śastric knowledge combined with the real experiences of his own. That is why the Jainas call the Arthaśāstra as the ultimate expression of Cāṇakya's pāriṇāmikī-buddhi.
(v) Cāṇakya-Candragupta-relationship was that of an ideal guru and a faithful disciple. Caṇakya was really Candragupta's mentor, guide and philosopher.
[15] A total justice given to Cāṇakya's personality :
When we reflect comprehensively on the personality of Cāṇakya from the Jaina point of view, we observe that - he possesses detached world-views; is deviod of personal vested interests and ambitions; a total ‘aparigrahi' by nature and also by having no issues; who distributed all his meager wealth among the relatives before accepting wilful death very bravely; his liberal and practical

Page #248

238
views towards society in general ; the importance given by him to a arth and kāma in congruence with dharma ; his shrewd political wisdom directed with the aphorism - 314a Ya {15:”; a prominent economist who snatched wealth and prosperity for the well-being of the people ; a psychologist having a power of mind-analysis with the ingita and ākāra ; a nationalist with a deep insight in the rural and urban areas of India and the last but not the least - an eminent author having a comprehensive grasp to document the wisdom of his predecessors and his own in the form of a monumental treatise the Arthaśāstra - All these details are available directly from the text Arthaśāstra as well as from the Jaina literature with a stunning similarity. [16] Excessive Jainification :
It is a standard habit of the Jainas to depict all the influential personalities with excessive Jainification. This typical mentality and methodology is seen through the big-sized and still increasing model of salākāpuruṣas. The Jainas went on adding the list of the illustrious personalities at the advent of time. In the same line they proclaimed Cāņakya as being a Jaina. The Svetāmbaras portray him as a śrāvaka while the Digambaras claim that he was a muni leading a samgha of 500 sādhus - which is simply impossible and out of reason considering his strict attitude towards ascetic class. The Jainas have made Cāņakya to appologize with the traditional phrase - ‘मिच्छामि दुक्कडं'. They have written thestory in which Canakya praises 941905' (heretics). When Cāņakya accepts religious death with a calm and composed mind, the Jainas have labelled his death as YG474147, 34721 or - by using a particular terminol
ogy.

Page #249

239
In spite of all the efforts of excessive Jainification, Cāṇakya's brahminhood and vedic legacy is quite evident. We should give a long rope to the Jainas in this matter considering the justice given by them to the personality of Caṇakya.
The last remarks:
The full biography of Caṇakya from the birth to death; his personal characteristics; his contribution to the ancient Indian polity ; his life flooded with hundreds of details and particularly his timeslaught mentioned as the 4th century B.C. - is an apt answer given to the doubts raised by some of the scholars about the authenticity and historicity of Caṇakya and his Arthaśāstra by the Jaina tradition. Accepting the limits of the literary sources for establishing the historicity of the happenings, an impartial researcher has to admit that the Jaina-portrait of Caṇakya is very convincing except the Jainification because they have skilfully filled it in the religio-sociocultural framework of comtemporary India. In other words we can say that Caṇakya's portrait painted by the Jainas is the solemn homage paid to this great personality.
For the last two years, I was deeply engrossed in exploring, discovering and revealing all the conspicuous and hidden details of Caṇakya documented in the Prakrit and Sanskrit literature of the Jainas, with my enthusiastic and dedicated research team. At the end, it is our confident opinion that the branch of Kautilyan studies will remain always incomplete if we neglect the valuable literary sources of the Jainas.
Or, in a more generalised way, we can say that any issue concerned to ancient India should be observed, examined and paraphrased in the broader light of the contemporary literature written

Page #250

240
in Sanskrit, Prakrit and Pāli. In the domain of research, one research project is the harbringer of the next research project. May the Almighty bless us to explore many such new aspects of the Jaina studies in the future !!
܀܀܀

Page #251

BIBLIOGRAPHY
241

Page #252

242

Page #253

243
BIBLIOGRAPHY 1. अणुओगद्दाराई : आर्यरक्षित, सं. पुण्यविजय, श्री महावीर जैन विद्यालय, मुंबई,
१९६८. 2. अनुयोगद्वार-सूत्र : सं.नेमीचन्द बांठिया, श्री अखिल भारतीय सुधर्म जैन
संस्कृति रक्षक संघ, जोधपुर, ब्यावर, २०१२. 3. अभिधानचिन्तामणि-नाममाला : हेमचंद्र, श्री जैनसाहित्यवर्धक सभा,
अहमदाबाद, वि.सं.२०३२. 4. आचारांगसूत्र (भाग १,२) : अनु. अमलोकऋषिजी, सं.पं. शोभाचन्द्र
भारिल्ल, श्री अमोल जैन ज्ञानालय, धुलिया (महाराष्ट्र)२००६ आचारांग-सूत्र (भाग १,२) : सं. नेमीचन्द बांठिया, श्री अखिल भारतीय
सुधर्म जैन संस्कृति रक्षक संघ, जोधपुर, ब्यावर, २०१०. 6. आचारांग-चूर्णि : सम्यक् ज्ञानभांडार, रावटी जोधपुर, ऋषभदेव केसरीमल
पेढी, रतलाम. 7. आचारांग-टीका : शीलांक, आगमोदयसमिति मेहसाना, १९१६. 8. आराधना-पताका : पइण्णयसुत्ताई (भाग १,२) महावीर जैन विद्यालय,
१९८७. 9. आर्य : वसंत पटवर्धन, विश्वकर्मा साहित्यालय, पुणे १९८०. 10. आवश्यक-सूत्र : सं. नेमीचन्द बांठिया, श्री अखिल भारतीय सुधर्म जैन
संस्कृति रक्षक संघ, जोधपुर, ब्यावर, २०११. 11. आवश्यक-सूत्र-चूर्णि (पूर्वभाग, उत्तरभाग) : जिनदासगणि, श्री ऋषभदेवजी
केशरीमलजी श्वेतांबर संस्था, रतलाम, १९२८, १९२९. 12. आवश्यक-टीका (पूर्वभाग, उत्तरभाग) : हरिभद्र, आगमोदयसमिति, मेहसाना,
१९१६. 13. ओघनियुक्ति (वृत्ति) : द्रोणाचार्य, आगमोदयसमिति, मेहसाना, १९१९. 14. उत्तरज्झयणाणि : जैन-विश्व-भारती, लाडनूं (राजस्थान), १९९७.

Page #254

244
15. उत्तराध्ययन-सूत्र (भाग १,२) : सं. नेमीचन्द बांठिया, श्री अखिल भारतीय
सुधर्म जैन संस्कृति रक्षक संघ, जोधपुर, ब्यावर, २०१०. 16. उपदेशपद-टीका : हरिभद्र, टी. मुनिचंद्र, श्रीमन्मुक्तिकमलजैनमोहनज्ञानमन्दिरम्,
वडोदरा, १९२५. 17. उपदेशमाला-टीका : धर्मदासगणि, सं. हेमसागरसूरि, धनजीभाई देवचंद्र
झवेरी, मुंबई, १९५८. 18. उपासकदसांग-सूत्र : सं. नेमीचन्द बांठिया, श्री अखिल भारतीय सुधर्म जैन
संस्कृति रक्षक संघ, जोधपुर, ब्यावर, २०१२. 19. कथाकोषप्रकरण : जिनेश्वरसूरि, सं. जिनविजयमुनि, सिंघी जैनशास्त्र विद्यापीठ,
भारतीय विद्याभवन, मुंबई, १९४९. 20. कथासरित्सागर (प्रथमखंड) : अनु. केदारनाथ शर्मा, बिहार राष्ट्रभाषा
परिषद्, पटना, १९६०. 21. कहाकोसु : श्रीचंद्र, सं. हिरालाल जैन, प्राकृत ग्रंथ परिषद, अहमदाबाद,
१९६९. 22. कामंदकीय नीतिसार : खेमराज श्रीकृष्णदास, मुंबई, शके १८७४. 23. कुवलयमाला : उद्योतनसूरि, सं. ए.एन्.उपाध्ये, सिंघी जैनशास्त्र विद्यापीठ,
भारतीय विद्याभवन, मुंबई, १९५९. 24. कौटिलीय अर्थशास्त्र (पूर्वार्ध, उत्तरार्ध) : ब.रा.हिवरगांवकर, प्रस्तावना :
दुर्गा भागवत, 'वरदा', सेनापती बापट मार्ग, पुणे, १९८८. 25. गोम्मटसार (जीवकांड - कर्मकांड) : नेमिचंद्र, जे.एल्.जैनी, लखनौ, १९२७. 26. जिनरत्नकोश : एच्.डी.वेलणकर, भांडारकर प्राच्यविद्या संशोधन संस्था,
पुणे, १९४४. 27. जुगाइजिणिंदचरिय : वर्धमानसूरि, सं. रूपेन्द्रकुमार पगारिया, लालभाई दलपतभाई
भारती संस्कृति विद्यामंदिर, अहमदाबाद, १९८७. 28. ज्ञाताधर्मकथा-टीका : अभयदेवसूरि, रामचंद्र येशु शेडगे, आगमोदयसमिति,
निर्णयसागर प्रेस, १९१९.

Page #255

245
29. तत्त्वार्थसूत्र : उमास्वाति, सुखलाल संघवी, पार्श्वनाथ विद्यापीठ, वाराणसी,
२००७.
30. त्रिलोकप्रज्ञप्ति : यतिवृषभ, ए. एन्. उपाध्ये, जैन संस्कृत संरक्षक संघ, सोलापुर, १९४३.
31. दशवैकालिक-सूत्र : अनु. घेवरचंदजी बांठिया, अखिल भारतीय साधुमार्गी जैन संस्कृति रक्षक संघ, सैलाना, १९८३.
32. दशवैकालिक-सूत्र
:
सं. नेमीचन्द बांठिया, पारसमल चण्डालिया, श्री
अखिल भारतीय सुधर्म जैन संस्कृति रक्षक संघ, जोधपुर, ब्यावर, २०११. 33. दशवैकालिक - चूर्णि : जिनदासगणि, श्री ऋषभदेवजी केशरीमलजी श्वेताम्बरसंस्था, इन्दौर, १९३३.
34. दशवैकालिक (निर्युक्ति, चूर्णिसहित) : शय्यंभव, प्राकृत ग्रंथ परिषद, अहमदाबाद, १९७३.
35. धर्मोपदेशमाला-विवरण : जयसिंहसूरि, सं. जिनविजय, सिंघी जैन ग्रंथमाला, मुंबई, १९४९.
36. धूर्ताख्यान : हरिभद्र, सं. जिनविजय, भारतीय विद्याभवन, मुंबई, १९४४. 37. नंदीसूत्र : पारसकुमार, श्री अखिल भारतीय सुधर्म जैन संस्कृति रक्षक संघ, जोधपुर, ब्यावर, २०११.
38. नंदीसूत्र-टीका : मलयगिरि, आगमोदयसमिति, मुंबई, १९२४.
39. निर्युक्ति-संग्रह : भद्रबाहु, सं. विजयजिनेंद्र, हर्षपुष्पामृत जैन ग्रंथमाला, शांतिपुरी (सौराष्ट्र), १९८९.
40. निशीथसूत्र : सं. नेमीचन्द बांठिया, श्री अखिल भारतीय सुधर्म जैन संस्कृति रक्षक संघ, जोधपुर, ब्यावर, २००९.
41. निशीथसूत्र-चूर्णि (भाग १,२,३,४ ) : जिनदासगणिमहत्तर, सं. अमरमुनि, मुनि कन्हैयालाल ‘कमल’, भारतीय विद्या प्रकाशन, दिल्ली, १९८२.
42. नीतिवाक्यामृत : सोमदेवसूरि, सं. पन्नालाल सोनी, माणिकचन्द्र दिगम्बर जैन ग्रंथमाला, बम्बई, १९२३.

Page #256

246
43. परिशिष्टपर्व : हेमचंद्र, श्री जैनधर्म प्रसारक सभा, भावनगर, १९११. 44. पिण्डनियुक्ति (तथा पिण्डनियुक्तिभाष्य) : भद्रबाहु, देवचंद लालभाई जैन
पुस्तकोद्धार फंड, सूरत, १९५८. 45. पुण्याश्रव-कथाकोष : रामचंद्रमुमुक्षु, हिंदीभाषाटीका, पं. दौलतरामजी
काशलीवाल, हिंदी ग्रंथरत्न भांडार, गिरगाव, मुंबई, ४. 46. प्रश्नव्याकरण-सूत्र : अनु. रतनलाल डोशी, श्री अखिल भारतीय सुधर्म जैन
संस्कृति रक्षक संघ, जोधपुर, ब्यावर, २०११. 47. बृहत्कथाकोश : हरिषेण, सं.डॉ.ए.एन्.उपाध्ये, भारतीय विद्याभवन, मुंबई,
१९४३. 48. बृहत्कथामञ्जरी : क्षेमेन्द्र, निर्णयसागर प्रेस, मुंबई, १९३१. 49. भगवती आराधना : शिवकोटि, देवेंद्रकीर्ति, दिगंबर जैनग्रंथमाला, कारंजा,
१९३५. 50. भद्रबाहु-चाणक्य-चन्द्रगुप्त-कथानक : रइधू, सं. राजाराम जैन, श्री गणेश
वर्णी, दि. जैन संस्थान, वाराणसी, १९८२. 51. भारतीय संस्कृति में जैनधर्म का योगदान : डॉ. हिरालाल जैन, मध्यप्रदेश
शासन साहित्य परिषद, भोपाल, १९६२ 52. Magadhan Literature : MM. Haraprasad Sastry, Sri Satguru
Publication, Delhi, 1986. 53. मत्स्यपुराण : डॉ. श्रद्धा शुक्ला, नाग पब्लिशर्स, २००४. 54. मुद्राराक्षस : विशाखदत्त, अनु. गोविन्द केशव भट, महाराष्ट्र राज्य साहित्य
संस्कृति मंडळ, मुंबई, १९७४. 55. मूलाचार : वट्टकेर, सं. कैलाशचन्द्र शास्त्री, भारतीय ज्ञानपीठ प्रकाशन,
१९८४. 56. वायुपुराण : सं. श्रीराम शर्मा, संस्कृति-संस्थान, बरेली (उ.प्र.), १९९७. 57. विविधतीर्थकल्प : जिनप्रभ, सिंघी जैन ग्रन्थमाला, शांतिनिकेतन (बंगाल),
१९३४.

Page #257
247 58. विशेषावश्यकभाष्य : मलधारि हेमचंद्र, शहा हरखचंद भूरभाई, बनारस, वी.सं. 2441. 59. विष्णुपुराण : सं. श्रीराम शर्मा, संस्कृति-संस्थान, बरेली (उ.प्र.), 1997. 60. व्यवहारटीका (प्रथम भाग): मलयगिरि, वृत्तिसहित, त्रिकमलाल उगरचन्द्र, तलियानी पोल, अहमदाबाद, 1928. 61. व्यवहार-भाष्य : वाचनाप्रमुख-तुलसी, सं. महाप्रज्ञ, जैन विश्वभारती संस्थान, लाडनौ, 1997. 62. संक्षिप्त-तरंगवती-कथा (तरंगलोला) : सं. भायाणी, लालभाई दलपतभाई भारतीय संस्कृति विद्यामंदिर, अहमदाबाद, 1979. 63. समवायांग-सूत्र : सं. नेमीचन्द बांठिया, श्री अखिल भारतीय सुधर्म जैन संस्कृति रक्षक संघ, जोधपुर, ब्यावर, 2009. 64. समवायांग-टीका : अभयदेवसूरि, आगमोदयसमिति, मेहसाना, 1918. 65. सुखबोधा-टीका : नेमिचंद्र, शेठ पुष्पचंद्र खेमचंद्र, अहमदाबाद, निर्णयसागर मुद्रणालय, 1937. 66. सूत्रकृतांग-सूत्र : अनु. अमोलकऋषि, श्री अमोल जैन ज्ञानालय, धुलिया, 2002. 67. सूत्रकृतांग-सूत्र (प्रथम, द्वितीय श्रुतस्कन्ध) : सं. नेमीचन्द बांठिया, श्री अखिल भारतीय सुधर्म जैन संस्कृति रक्षक संघ, जोधपुर, ब्यावर, 2009, 2012. 68. सूत्रकृतांग-नियुक्ति-चूर्णिसहित : भद्रबाहू, पुण्यविजय, प्राकृत ग्रंथ परिषद, अहमदाबाद, 1975. 69. स्कन्दमहापुराण (पञ्चमो भागः) (उत्तरार्धम्) : गोपाल प्रिंटिंग वर्क्स, कलकत्ता, 1962. 70. स्थानांग-सूत्र : सं. नेमीचन्द बांठिया, श्री अखिल भारतीय सुधर्म जैन संस्कृति रक्षक संघ, जोधपुर, ब्यावर, 2010, 2011. 71. स्थानांग-टीका : अभयदेव, वेणिचंद्र सूरचंद्र, आगमोदयसमिति, निर्णयसागर मुद्रणालय, 1918. //////