Indian Antiquary Vol 34

Author(s): Richard Carnac Temple
Publisher: Swati Publications

Page 12

THE INDIAN ANTIQUABY.
(JANUARY, 1905.
Such is the sarcastic fashion in which Dandi in the above and succeeding passages deals with Châņakya's work, and one can hardly fail to appreciate the force of his criticisms, when one reads in the Arthasástra such passages as “25 palas of fuel will cook two prasthas of rice,"4 and "the king shall partake only of such food as is tasted in his presence by his physician, his attendant, and his cook,"6
But while Dandi thus treats the Arthasdetra, Kamandaks seems to have esteemed it so highly that he not only based his Nitiedra on the Arthasástra, but borrowed its very words and phrases for his book.
"Salutation," says Kåmandaka at the beginning of his Nitiedra, " to the creative power of Vishnagupta, who extracted the very ambrosia (of political science) from the vast ocean of the science of polity. As this science is very much appreciated by kings, I shall make a brief bat olear abridgment of the treatise of that learned scholar, who was well versed in all branches of learning."
It would take up too much space to prove by quotations how far Kamandaka is indebted to Chanakya even for words and phrases, and it would be hardly necessary, because, as a matter of fact, he employs the ipsissima verba of Chanakya, except where the exigericies of metre prevent him. Had Kamandaka, however, rendered into verse the whole of the, drthasdetra without omitting a large portion of the original, his Nitisdra would, by virtue of its clear and intelligible style, have replaced the archaic and aphoristic prose of the Arthasdstra. But in his zeal for abridgmont, he has omitted not only passages here and there in the portions which he has versified, but entire portions of the 2nd, 3rd, 4th, and 14th books. But whatever may be the practical value of Kamandaka's paraphrase, the fact that his Nitisdra is one of the most popular Sanskrit works, which the people of the island of Balis are reported to possess and is therefore believed to be earlier than the 4th century A. D., goes to prove that the Kdxtaliya Artha datra must be a genuine production of Chanakya.
With each writers as Kamandaks and Dandi to quote as witnesses, it is unnecessary to give fall references to other Sanskrit writers. It will be enough to note that the Nandi-9dtrat of the Jainas, the Panchatantra, and the Nitiváky amrita of Somadēva are among the Sanskrit works which allude to the Kdutaliya Arthaádstra.
Considering the widely-spread fame of the work among Sanskrit writers, it seems strange that MSS. of it should be very rare. Fortunately for the study of Indian historical subjects, a pandit of the Tanjore District of the Madras Presidency, who had in his poetession a 18. of the Arthaldatra, together with an imperfect commentary on it by Bhaftasvami, was generous enough to hand over the two MSS, to the Mysore Government Oriental Library. They are on palm-leaf in the Grantha characters and do not appear to be more than a century or two old. The MS. of the Arthakdatra seems to be fairly correct, with the exception of a few clerical errors and omissions of a line or two in some places. The MS, of the Commentary is not only imperfect, extending merely from the 8th to the 36th chapter of the 2nd Book of the Arthaádstra, but it is also very incorrect. As the commentator, Bhattasvami, makes references to interpretations which differ from his own, without, however, specifying the names of the commentators, there must have existed a few other commentaries earlier than his own...
• Chap. XXII., Book IL, of the Arthasdetra..
Chap. XXI , Book L., of the Arthaldatra. • See Rajendralala Mitrs' preface to his ed. of Kamandaka's Netsdra, Caloutta. 1 P. 991, Nandi-8atro, Caloutta Ed.
• Panchatantra, Ch. I. • Edited in the Kinyamila Series, Bombay.