________________
420
Albrecht Wezler
die on the field of honour than to even consider the alternative of taking to flight. Rulers, military leaders, etc., of all times and countries obviously can't seem to avoid giving considerable thought to the methods by which they could make their armies as effective in combat as possible and eradicate what they find particularly annoying, viz. lack of courage, taking to flight and desertion. And naturally Mand is no exception to this ", as can be seen e.g. in the Arthasästra" and in the yodhopadeśa section of the Nitimayükha".
70. Hopkins, however, maintains that no low man gets a reputation for bravery or even cowardice. He is but a brick in a row (The Social and Military Position of the Ruling Caste in Ancient India as Represented in the Sanskrit Epic in JAOS 73 (1889), p. 185 and 189, fn. 5).
71. Viz. 10.3.27 ff. Cf. also P. V. KANE, History of Dharmasastra. Vol. III, 1973, p. 211 f. The second of the two verses quoted (apiha slokau bhavataḥ... iti) at 10.3.30-31, viz.
navam saravam salilasya purnam susamskṛtam darbhakṛtottariyam/
tat tasya ma bhan narakam ca gacched
yo bhartṛpindasya krte na yudhyet II.
has provoked quite some discussion as it is also found in the Pratijñāyaugandharayana ascribed to Bhasa, viz. at 4.2, and with minor variants only at that (salilaiḥ supürnam and sa (gacched)); cf. N. P. UNNI, New Problems in Bhasa Plays, Trivandrum, 1978, p. 213 ff. I do not want to continue this discussion here, but a few remarks seem relevant. What Kane says (op. cit., loc. cit., fn. 277) about the verse in the play, viz. that there it also appears to be a quotation being introduced with the words śrvantu bhavantah is nonsense; for, the prose introduction is quite clearly only meant to attract the attention of those whom Gätrasevaka wants to address at this point. As for the Arthasästra, there is no doubt that the two verses form genuine quotations; but R. P. Kangle's opinion (The Kautilya Arthasästra, Pt. II. Bombay, 1963, p. 509 fn. on paragraph 28) that they are a later addition deserves careful consideration (although one will hesitate to agree with him that AS 10.328 and 329, too, are part of this later addition). Nevertheless, I think H. Scharfe is right in stating (Untersuchungen zur Staatsrechtslehre des Kautalya, Wiesbaden, 1968, p. 4) that one cannot be sure that the play of Bhasa is the source. Further, it should be noted that Kangle's interpretation of navam saravam, etc., viz. (op. cit., loc. cit.) that it clearly refers to the vessel from which libations of water are offered to the deceased, is to be preferred to that given by T. Ganapati Shastri (The Arthasästra of Kautilya with the commentary "Srimala "... repr. with an elaborate Introduction by Dr. N. P. Unni, Delhi-Varanasi, 1984, Vol. III, p. 116), according to whom the verse means: sardvam påtraviseṣaḥ / tad dhy udakapūrṇam manträbhimantranasamskärayuktam darbhasamvitam yuddhajayabhyudayakalikam prabhṛtam bhartrpindärtham ayudhyamanasya labhyam na bhavati, narake ca sa patati.....
The warrior taking to flight in fear
421
And one of the methods adopted to keep a warrior from doing what he should not, is to threaten him with punishment; and logic demands that this punishment be such that it really has a preventative effect. It is equally understandable that the punishment is not confined to this world, the remaining span of life; for, in the case of a warrior it is but realistic to extend the threat to the period after death". In fact, M. 7.94 and 95 refer to this period exclusively in so far as they deal with a warrior taking to flight who has been slain by the enemy >> and completely disregard the possibility of a successful though disgra ceful escape "
Not correct is also Unni's remark (op. cit., loc. cit) that according to a commentator of the Arthasästra viz. Madhava Yajvan, as one is forced to find out on one's own after no little search the quotation is from the Manuniti through it cannot be traced; for, the passage referred to in the Nayacandrika (Arthasästra of Kautilya. A New Edition by J. Jolly... and R. Schmidt, Vol. III, Lahore, 1924, p. 180) runs thus: manunitav api manugitataya purano 'pity arthah; it is not at all clear to which word or sentence of the mula text this refers and what it is that is predicated as being purana; if in fact it refers to the two verses, or rather the prose sentence preceding them, it could be taken to mean that the idea expressed in these verses is old as it is found in the Manusmrti (not uncommonly called Manuniti in the South) also, and this would then be an implicit reference to Manu 7.88 and 89, on the one hand, and to 7.94 and 95, on the other. Finally, attention may be drawn to an article of V. Raghavan's, viz. Kalidasa and Kautilya in Proceedings of the All India Oriental Conference Nagpur, 1946, pp. 102-108, in which it is rightly pointed out that the verse quoted at AS 10.3.31 helps in reaching a full understanding of Malavikägnimitra 5 11/12 where the king tries to console a parivrdjikd whose brother has been slain in battle by addressing her thus: bhagavati tanubhṛtäm idrst lokayātrā / na socyas tatrabhavan saphalikṛtabhartrpindah (... by whom the lump of food received from his master has been made fruitful, i.e. who has in not turning to flight duly paid back what he has received from the king); cf. also the expression niskṛtih svämipindasya in the passage from the Adityapurana quoted at Viramitrodaya, Rajanitiprakasa, Benares, 1916, p. 408.
72. Niti Mayakha by Nilkanth Bhatta, ed. by M. G. Bakre and V. R. Lele, Bombay, 1921, p. 100 ff., contained also in the reprint entitled Bhagavantabhaskara, Delhi, 1985, Vol. I.
73. This is richly evidenced by the material drawn upon by P. V. KANE, History of Dharmasastra, Vol. III, Bombay, 1973, p. 211 and the relevant portions of Nibandha texts like e.g. Mitramiśra's Viramitrodaya, loc. cit. (cf. fn. 71).
74. Cf. e.g. the passage quoted by E. W. HOPKINS, op. cit. (cf. fn. 70), p. 186.