________________
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
