Book Title: Indian Antiquary Vol 53
Author(s): Richard Carnac Temple, Stephen Meredyth Edwardes, Krishnaswami Aiyangar
Publisher: Swati Publications

Previous | Next

Page 143
________________ JUNE, 1924) HISTORICAL GLEANINGS FROM THE KAUTILIYA. 135 than Kautilya, still the sastra as such is certainly very much older than he. Mention has above been made of the development of the Kamasastra before Vâtsyâyana, and in the second note on p. 959 (p. 132, note, of this translation), reference has already been made to the point that CârAyaņa, the writer on Sadharanam Adhikaraṇam (Kamas. 1. 1, p. 6) i.e., the way in which a lover should conduct himself, and Ghotakamukha, the author of the Kanyaprayuktam (ibid.) i.e., the way in which one should have to wife a maiden, are probably identi. cal with the authors, Dirgha Carayana and Għotamukha, cited by Kautilya ; 18 accidental similarity of names is indeed improbable, since the same accident must be supposed to have happened in two cases. If therefore the existence of two parts or lectures of the Kamasa stra (Adhikaranas 1 and 3) is likely for the time of Kautilya, it is certain for the sixth lecture (the Vaisika )19, because on the occasion of treating of the instruction of the courtesans, Kautilya mentions (II. 27, p. 125) MEI foram pret fra at ** Ter u el That, however, the predecessors of Våtsyâyana wrote in Sanskrit cannot indeed remain a matter of doubt; otherwise Vâtsyâyang would certainly have preferred the claim of being the first to teach his science in Sanskrit.20 None would however assert that the Kamasastra was cultivated only within the limits of the priestly schools. This appears to me to be excluded in the case of the Dharmasastra too. That such a one (i.e., a Dharmasastra) existed at the time of Kautilya is certain, because he mentions it in a passage to be referred to once more. The contents of it, in so far as things spiritual did not belong to it, we come to know in details from the third Adhikarana of the Kautiliya, viz., the Dharmasthiya (pp. 147-200), which we (964) must regard as a piece of legislation for the kingdom of the Mauryas. Therein occurs the consideration of the most diverse facts of the practical life, the knowledge and understanding of which would be found least of all in the priestly schools. If, in spite of this, the Dharmaddstra was composed in Sanskrit—and of this there cannot be any doubt-then Sanskrit was no more an exclusively school dialect, but a literary language understood by all classes. Dharma, Artha and Kama, whose systematic treatment has been laid down in the Sanskrit works, referred to all men, and not to the learned only, much less to the priestly schools alone. And more than this : Sanskrit was also the official language which the prince used in his letters and decrees. The proof of this statement is to be found in the Sasanddhi. kara, II. 28, pp. 70-75. This chapter treats of the letters and orders proceeding directly from the king, which his private secretary, the Lekhaka, has to prepare, i.e., to compose and copy fair, according to what the king may have said. A lekhaka should possess the qualifications of a king's minister amatyasampadopetah; what these consist in, is mentioned in I. 9, p. 15, para. 1." He should be, among other things, Kytafilpah and Cakxunman, i.e., he should know the arts and should possess Sastracaksumatta; in other words, he should thoroughly understand the Sastras. The knowledge of different local languages is not ordained, as would necessarily have been the case, bad diplomatic correspondence been carried on in Prakrit. Now, in a great political action of one king against his neighbours and rivals, there was involved the consideration, besides these, of the four princes (kingdoms) situated in front of him, 18 That is, in that part of V. 5, which treate of the marks of royal disfavour. That part is introduced with the words, bhayas ca vakayama), and could therefore be a completion, originating from Kautily himself of what his predecessors had taught. 19 According to Kamasutra, I. 1, p. 7, among the seven parts of the Kamasdaira, the Vaidika was the Arst to be ever independently treated, and that was done by Dattake. 20 Reference is made, in a different connection, to the difference between Sanskrit and Desabh Asa. vhere it is said of a någaraka (I. 4, p. 60):- Arya ARI MUTI uitsig ud i all 31 Compare, VI, 1, p. 255 f. (=257 f. of the 1919 edn.),

Loading...

Page Navigation
1 ... 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392