Book Title: Jain Thought and Culture
Author(s): G C Pandey
Publisher: University of Rajasthan

Previous | Next

Page 55
________________ The Riddlc of Chanakya and Kautilya 45 The Arthasastra material which is of obviously later date is too massive to be explained by the theory of interpolations Similarly, The suggestions that the present Arthasastra is a revised version of an original work of the Maurya period or that it is a product of a school of theorists founded by Kautilya are quite untenable The treatise gives every impression of being the work of a single individual That this author was Kautilya himself has been unmistakably emphasised in the work itself Therefore if he wrote his work towards the close of the third century AD (as his posteriority to Bhasa, Asvaghosha and Vatsyayana, his reference to the Lichchhavi and Madraka republics, his mention by Dandin as a 'recent' author and other arguments discussed above suggest) it would naturally follow that the tradition contained in the last but one verse of the Arthasastra (which makes its author Vishnugupta the destroyer of the Nandas) and literature of the Gupta age (which makes Kautilya identical with Chanakya, the Prime Minister of Chandragupta Maurya) is wrong In other words Kautilya, the author of the Arthasastra, was a different individual from Chanakya, the politician of the Maurya age This theory first adumbrated by H Jacob1,34 has been worked out in detail by EJ Johnston35 and T Burrow 36 Unfortunately it has so far not attracted the attention it deserves But to us it appears to be the correct solution of the riddle of Kautilya and Chanakya The following arguments are strongly in favour of this theory Firstly, this theory keeps Kautilya's authorship of the Artha sastra, which is clearly established by the text itself, intact, and at the same time obviates the difficulties involved in the Maurya dating of this work Further, it does not make it necessary for us to doubt the historicity of Chanakya, the Chancellor of Chandragupta Maurya so strongly emphasised in the Indian tradition Secondly, almost in all the early versions of the story of Chanakya, only this name (not Kautilya or Vishnugupta) occurs The 34 THQ, III, pp, 669 ff He, however, believed that there was once a Prakrit poet on Niti called Chanakya whom people afterwards confused and identified with Kautilya, the author of the Arthasastra 35 JRAS. 1929, D 88 Following Romila Thapar (Asoka and the Decline of the Mauryas, pp 218 ff.) K C Ojha (IHQ, XXV, pp, 265 ff) wants to keep the identity of Chanakya and Kautilya and to separate Vishnugupta as a different individual This he combines with a theory of the gradual evolution of the Arthasastra from the original sutras composed by Kautilya alias Chanakya to its final redaction based on a mass of previous material by Vishnugupta which is the present work There is nothing to support such a complicated theory 36 ABORI, Golden Jubilee Number, pp 17 if

Loading...

Page Navigation
1 ... 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195