03-15-2006, 08:10 AM
<b>The import and significance of Artha Sastra</b>
By
Prof. Lallanji Gopal,
Professor of Ancient Indian History, and
Dean of Arts, Benares Hindu University.
From his book Cultural Values in Ancient Indian Economic and Political thoughts.
Arthasastra of Kautilya was discovered in the early years of 20th century, and then commenced an impetus to the study of ancient Indian polity.
The scope of Arthasastra, was much more extensive than usually assumed as political science. According to Kautilya, the treatises of this science
were composed for the acquisition and protection of the territory ( I.1.1. Prithivyaalabhe Paalane cha). Also brings into being and preserves; spiritual good,
material well-being and pleasures and; destroys spiritual evil, material loss and hatred. Artha itself (XV. 1.1) is described as the the source of the livelihood
of men (manushyaanam vittihi), and implies land inhabited by men. (manushyavathi Bhumih) Hence according to Kautilya, Artha sastra is the science,
which is the attainment and protection of that Earth.( tasyaaha Prithivyaah laabha palanopaayah Sastram).
There existed separated treatises on Artha sastra from very early times. It was regarded as an upaveda of Rigveda. Sarvasiddhantasangraha (I.13), mentions
it as arthaveda; which brings about the acquisition of food, drink and other articles of comfort; and by their enjoyment facilitates the realization of the fourfold
ideals of life (Purushaarthas). All the earlier texts are clear that Arthasastra was not vartha (applied economics and commece, and includes Krishi, Vanijya
and Pasupalana and later Kusida), or Dandanithi (polity,-- According to Kautilya, administration of Danda constitutes the science of Danda nithi ),; and
clearly is distinct and different. A few chapters of Arthasastra deal with agriculture, cattle and trade and commerce and mines.
Dandanithi's purpose is the acquisition of things not possessed, the preservation of things possessed, the maintenance of things preserved and the bestowal
of things augmented on a worthy recipient. (I.4.3.) On account of the importance of Danda for ensuring the pursuit of Anvikhaki, trayi and vaartha, and for the
orderly maintenance of worldly life, Kautilya gave to dandanithi the largest coverage in his treatment of Arthasastra. ( The prime requirement of the rule of the king became ensuring conditions in the kingdom, where law and order, calm and security; and creation of conditions of infrastructure and enlarging the
scope of the same, which will provide livelihood and good living wherewithal , to everyone in the society.) A few authors chose to designate their
compositions on Dandanithi; as Arthasastra.
Tantraakhyaayika, mentioning Chanakya as an author on Nripasaastra, and rajanithi, nithisara. And even, just nithi. Further, Somadeva's nithivakyaamrita, Hemachandra's Laghvarhanniti and Brihaspathiniti, and Chandesvaraa's Rajanitiratnakara; Rajasastra, rajavidya are other names designated., as well as Kshatravidya, occuring in Chandogyopanishad, Khattavijja and Khattadhamma - in Buddhist tradition.
Also Vyavahaara, an important part of Dharmasastras, also got mixed up, and some aspects of polity creeped into the Smritis. And later with the increase in
number of Vyavahaara Dharmaas , Rajadharma as a separate Dharma, illustrative of the category of gunadharma, developed. It covered the scope of
Dandanithi and rajanithi, but with avowed emphasis of approach. The subject was the Dharma of the king and had to be viewed from that point of view.
The fall-out of impact of Dandanithi had to be faced. The details of the administrative measures for implementing the policies had to be worked out. As was to be expected, the darker aspects overshadowed the brighter ones. Though the composite nature of arthasastra was, for Kautilya, a legacy of his predecessors, somehow the characteristic features of arthasastra, as presented in his text, came to stick to his name, giving him an indelible notoriety. The apparent advocacy of immoral practices brought disrepute to Kautilya and his work. Like kutilamati in Mudrarakshasa, and in Bana's Kadambari, etc.
Conflicts between the dictates of Dharmasastra and Arthasastra were being discussed. Certain basic facts tend to be lost sight of by the modern scholar's general approach, of the common man in ancient India towards economic pursuits has been overcast by layers of idealism and ascetism. In ancient India, a healthy and pragmatic view towards worldly life was the normal feature, which is confirmed by the development of economic activities, agriculture, trade, and industry, and is reflected in the richness of material culture and achievements in refinement and culture of life.
Perhaps Nasthika darshanas, like Charvaka,( and Lokayatikas- supposed to be a very pragmatic system, and meaning popular perception-, and a belief that existence ends with death, and give oneself up to earthly enjoyments) encouraged the involvement of man more in material pursuits and achievements. The system advocated a life devoted to the attainment of maximum possible immediate pleasure. This was projcted as pleading for a shocking hedonism and an unbridled sex indulgence. But there is enough evidence to indicate that this was only caricaturing the views of the system. and reference is made of two groups of Charvakas -- Dhurtha and Susikshita, implying that some of the Charvakas were cultured people, who did not indulge in gross forms of enjoyment.
Some ancient sources record , in fragments, of the thought of the people, who unbothered by considerations of life hereafter, aimed at making their life a sucess from an economic standpoint .Believing that existence ends with death, they give themselves upto earthly enjoyments. Bound by innumerable desires, anger, attac, etc., they busy themselves in collecting materials of earthly enjoyments even through wrong means. They always think of their riches they earn daily, which they accumalate, and with which they fulfill their desires in the present, or wish to fulfill in the future.
In later times the system became disreputed and its influence declined. The gross immorality of some of its adherents could have been an important factor. and by the indications of the state of the society being remarkably non-creative and steriotype, shows that the system had ceased to be a living force. <b>The apathy of Sankara and his followers towards its tenets suggest that it was a spent force.</b>
Popular stories current in the society, like those contained in Panchatantra, other popular fables and tales as in epics, puranas, Brihathkatha -as could be
made out from translations in Sanskrit from original Paisachi, in Somadeva's Kathasarithsagara and in,Brihatkathamanjari, Gaatha Sapthasathi, Bhetaala
Panchavimsati, Simhasana Dwaathrimsika or vikrmarka charita, Suka sapthathi, Vethala Panchavimsati, Dasakumara charitha, Mudrarakshasa, Sahasra sirachheda chintamani, etc., represent society as being in a state of undeclared war of one class with another. The spheres of economics and ethics were considered to be mutually exclusive. In the pursuit of economic ends a man is not to be inhibited by any moral restraint. He should gain his ends by
suppressing all obstacles relentlessly and ruthlessly.
<b>Here, thus , was a frank admission that economic pursuits of different sections in society do not necessarily harmonize. Society is not a brotherhood in which the interests of all are cooperative and mutually recocileable. The inference is suggested that, in the absence of restraints and regulations, society in the pursuit of its material ends, will be torn asunder by the conflicting interests of its component elements.</b>
<b>The Dharmasastra regulations were framed to remove the possibility of such a state of affairs. The Dharmasastrakaras realized the baneful effects of class conflict. To minimise the rigours of competition, they advocated social cooperation. The idea of a competitive society is foreign to the ideal propogated by the Dharma sastras. The modern idea of "sarvodaya" will be a correct interpretation of this ideal. </b>The Dharmasastras envisage a society in which the interests of different economic classes and groups are ordered with eference to harmony of the whole, an ultimate moral and spiritual purpose informing the functioning of each social element. They plan that, in the pursuit of economi motives one class may not be unnecessarily exploited by the other.----- they cannot be brandedas being inmical to any particular economic activity and hence discouraging it. -- all such activities have their own importance in the overall set-up of society.. They also recognise, that in any economic activity there is a possibility of one class exploiting the other groups and aim at minimising the chances of competition and conflict, by framing regulations to cover all possible aspects of that matter.
<b>Even morally retrograde groups were not without protection of the Smritis, wherever their interests were likely to suffer. -- this can be seen in the rules about debt, labour and trade.</b>
By
Prof. Lallanji Gopal,
Professor of Ancient Indian History, and
Dean of Arts, Benares Hindu University.
From his book Cultural Values in Ancient Indian Economic and Political thoughts.
Arthasastra of Kautilya was discovered in the early years of 20th century, and then commenced an impetus to the study of ancient Indian polity.
The scope of Arthasastra, was much more extensive than usually assumed as political science. According to Kautilya, the treatises of this science
were composed for the acquisition and protection of the territory ( I.1.1. Prithivyaalabhe Paalane cha). Also brings into being and preserves; spiritual good,
material well-being and pleasures and; destroys spiritual evil, material loss and hatred. Artha itself (XV. 1.1) is described as the the source of the livelihood
of men (manushyaanam vittihi), and implies land inhabited by men. (manushyavathi Bhumih) Hence according to Kautilya, Artha sastra is the science,
which is the attainment and protection of that Earth.( tasyaaha Prithivyaah laabha palanopaayah Sastram).
There existed separated treatises on Artha sastra from very early times. It was regarded as an upaveda of Rigveda. Sarvasiddhantasangraha (I.13), mentions
it as arthaveda; which brings about the acquisition of food, drink and other articles of comfort; and by their enjoyment facilitates the realization of the fourfold
ideals of life (Purushaarthas). All the earlier texts are clear that Arthasastra was not vartha (applied economics and commece, and includes Krishi, Vanijya
and Pasupalana and later Kusida), or Dandanithi (polity,-- According to Kautilya, administration of Danda constitutes the science of Danda nithi ),; and
clearly is distinct and different. A few chapters of Arthasastra deal with agriculture, cattle and trade and commerce and mines.
Dandanithi's purpose is the acquisition of things not possessed, the preservation of things possessed, the maintenance of things preserved and the bestowal
of things augmented on a worthy recipient. (I.4.3.) On account of the importance of Danda for ensuring the pursuit of Anvikhaki, trayi and vaartha, and for the
orderly maintenance of worldly life, Kautilya gave to dandanithi the largest coverage in his treatment of Arthasastra. ( The prime requirement of the rule of the king became ensuring conditions in the kingdom, where law and order, calm and security; and creation of conditions of infrastructure and enlarging the
scope of the same, which will provide livelihood and good living wherewithal , to everyone in the society.) A few authors chose to designate their
compositions on Dandanithi; as Arthasastra.
Tantraakhyaayika, mentioning Chanakya as an author on Nripasaastra, and rajanithi, nithisara. And even, just nithi. Further, Somadeva's nithivakyaamrita, Hemachandra's Laghvarhanniti and Brihaspathiniti, and Chandesvaraa's Rajanitiratnakara; Rajasastra, rajavidya are other names designated., as well as Kshatravidya, occuring in Chandogyopanishad, Khattavijja and Khattadhamma - in Buddhist tradition.
Also Vyavahaara, an important part of Dharmasastras, also got mixed up, and some aspects of polity creeped into the Smritis. And later with the increase in
number of Vyavahaara Dharmaas , Rajadharma as a separate Dharma, illustrative of the category of gunadharma, developed. It covered the scope of
Dandanithi and rajanithi, but with avowed emphasis of approach. The subject was the Dharma of the king and had to be viewed from that point of view.
The fall-out of impact of Dandanithi had to be faced. The details of the administrative measures for implementing the policies had to be worked out. As was to be expected, the darker aspects overshadowed the brighter ones. Though the composite nature of arthasastra was, for Kautilya, a legacy of his predecessors, somehow the characteristic features of arthasastra, as presented in his text, came to stick to his name, giving him an indelible notoriety. The apparent advocacy of immoral practices brought disrepute to Kautilya and his work. Like kutilamati in Mudrarakshasa, and in Bana's Kadambari, etc.
Conflicts between the dictates of Dharmasastra and Arthasastra were being discussed. Certain basic facts tend to be lost sight of by the modern scholar's general approach, of the common man in ancient India towards economic pursuits has been overcast by layers of idealism and ascetism. In ancient India, a healthy and pragmatic view towards worldly life was the normal feature, which is confirmed by the development of economic activities, agriculture, trade, and industry, and is reflected in the richness of material culture and achievements in refinement and culture of life.
Perhaps Nasthika darshanas, like Charvaka,( and Lokayatikas- supposed to be a very pragmatic system, and meaning popular perception-, and a belief that existence ends with death, and give oneself up to earthly enjoyments) encouraged the involvement of man more in material pursuits and achievements. The system advocated a life devoted to the attainment of maximum possible immediate pleasure. This was projcted as pleading for a shocking hedonism and an unbridled sex indulgence. But there is enough evidence to indicate that this was only caricaturing the views of the system. and reference is made of two groups of Charvakas -- Dhurtha and Susikshita, implying that some of the Charvakas were cultured people, who did not indulge in gross forms of enjoyment.
Some ancient sources record , in fragments, of the thought of the people, who unbothered by considerations of life hereafter, aimed at making their life a sucess from an economic standpoint .Believing that existence ends with death, they give themselves upto earthly enjoyments. Bound by innumerable desires, anger, attac, etc., they busy themselves in collecting materials of earthly enjoyments even through wrong means. They always think of their riches they earn daily, which they accumalate, and with which they fulfill their desires in the present, or wish to fulfill in the future.
In later times the system became disreputed and its influence declined. The gross immorality of some of its adherents could have been an important factor. and by the indications of the state of the society being remarkably non-creative and steriotype, shows that the system had ceased to be a living force. <b>The apathy of Sankara and his followers towards its tenets suggest that it was a spent force.</b>
Popular stories current in the society, like those contained in Panchatantra, other popular fables and tales as in epics, puranas, Brihathkatha -as could be
made out from translations in Sanskrit from original Paisachi, in Somadeva's Kathasarithsagara and in,Brihatkathamanjari, Gaatha Sapthasathi, Bhetaala
Panchavimsati, Simhasana Dwaathrimsika or vikrmarka charita, Suka sapthathi, Vethala Panchavimsati, Dasakumara charitha, Mudrarakshasa, Sahasra sirachheda chintamani, etc., represent society as being in a state of undeclared war of one class with another. The spheres of economics and ethics were considered to be mutually exclusive. In the pursuit of economic ends a man is not to be inhibited by any moral restraint. He should gain his ends by
suppressing all obstacles relentlessly and ruthlessly.
<b>Here, thus , was a frank admission that economic pursuits of different sections in society do not necessarily harmonize. Society is not a brotherhood in which the interests of all are cooperative and mutually recocileable. The inference is suggested that, in the absence of restraints and regulations, society in the pursuit of its material ends, will be torn asunder by the conflicting interests of its component elements.</b>
<b>The Dharmasastra regulations were framed to remove the possibility of such a state of affairs. The Dharmasastrakaras realized the baneful effects of class conflict. To minimise the rigours of competition, they advocated social cooperation. The idea of a competitive society is foreign to the ideal propogated by the Dharma sastras. The modern idea of "sarvodaya" will be a correct interpretation of this ideal. </b>The Dharmasastras envisage a society in which the interests of different economic classes and groups are ordered with eference to harmony of the whole, an ultimate moral and spiritual purpose informing the functioning of each social element. They plan that, in the pursuit of economi motives one class may not be unnecessarily exploited by the other.----- they cannot be brandedas being inmical to any particular economic activity and hence discouraging it. -- all such activities have their own importance in the overall set-up of society.. They also recognise, that in any economic activity there is a possibility of one class exploiting the other groups and aim at minimising the chances of competition and conflict, by framing regulations to cover all possible aspects of that matter.
<b>Even morally retrograde groups were not without protection of the Smritis, wherever their interests were likely to suffer. -- this can be seen in the rules about debt, labour and trade.</b>