Tuesday, August 20, 2013

Chanakya : The God of Political Science

When I am to write about the great legendary historic personalities of our country, I should start it with them who established the first united kingdom in India and those who supported them.
Chanakya is a very popular figure in Indian history. He and his works have inspired not only Indians but also various historians and intellectuals world wide.

I have already written about Chanakya and his story in my posts dedicated to a television serial which used to come long ago. You can read the posts here: part 1 and part 2.

Chanakya was a scholar and philosopher who was responsible for the establishment of the first dynasty which ruled India as a unified India. Though not real historical evidences are present of that era, many religious texts and available scriptures and documents and study of various historians give a fair idea about the story of Chanakya.

Chanakya was a teacher in Takshashila, the most revered university of India and the one of earliest universities of the world. (Takshashila is situated near Rawalpinidi in Pakistan at present). He was a professor of political science and economics. This was in around 327 BC. It is quite possible that Chanakya was teaching at Takshashila at the time of Alexander's entering India when the king of Takshashila supported him.
Various historical and other tales suggest that Chanakya was once insulted by Dhana Nanda, the last of the Nanda kings, who were ruling the powerful kingdom of Magadh. He was thrown out of Dhana Nanda's court. At that time Chanakya took vow of vengeance that he will uproot the Nandas out of Magadh.
The kingdom of Magadh was very vast stretching from south west region of present Pakistan and going up to Eastward region of present West Bengal. The Nandas had an extensive army comprising of numerous war elephants enough to scare the army of Alexander the Great. It is believed that Alexander went back to his kingdom from Beas river when his army revolted against march to fight the Nandas (however, this is debatable). It was difficult to defeat the powerful Nanda kingdom.

It is believed that Chanakya once saw a boy of low caste playing with his friends. Impressed by the leadership skills of that boy Chandragupta, he decided to make Chandragupta Maurya his disciple. He got Chandragupta trained in Takshashila. Between 325 BC to 321 BC Chandragupta under the able guidance of Chanakya tried to win over the kingdoms where Alexander had left his satraps. Then building a good army and with help of other kings (including the king Parvateshwar aka Porus) he began to attack fiercely the Nanda capital.
Their initial attempts were unsuccessful. It is said that once Chanakya overheard a mother scolding her son who was trying to eat hot rice from the center of the plate. The mother scolded that rice is hottest at the center. It is better to separate the center rice portion from the rice at the sides and should first target the rice near the edges of the plate.
Chanakya got the idea. He made Chandragupta to win over the neighboring small kingdoms and forming a formidable army to attack Nandas when they were weakened. Chandragupta eventually overthrew the Nandas in 321 BC and Dhana Nanda was killed. Chanakya had his vow fulfilled.

Chanakya then helped Chandragupta to establish his kingdom, the Maurya Kingdom, the first kingdom of united India which stretched from present Kashmir region to the entire Deccan plateau covering the entire present Nepal and present Pakistan. Looking at the outcome of his policies, it can be deduced that Chanakya had a vision of united India. He would have felt it threatened at the time of Alexander's invasion. His dream of a united strong India fortified from enemies was realized by his disciple.

The most important contribution of Chanakya to Indian history apart from helping in formation of the Mauryan empire was the writing of Arthashastra.
Arthashastra is the oldest treatise on Political Science and Economics. It is believed to be written by someone named "Kautilya" which many believe to be none other than Chanakya. However there are debates and contradictions. I won't go into that. For me the discussion on content of the treatise is more important than discussing who really wrote it. Arthashastra was written many years ago and had been preserved for long. It is quite possible that even if Kautilya was not Chanakya, Chanakya's work had definitely inspired to write the book.

Arthashastra talks about the Duties of a king, the knowledge he must possess, the type of ministers he must keep, etc. I will not be discussing the entire book here as I am in the process of reading it. However there are few interesting points:

  • Kautilya said that the thread ceremony should be done for Brahmins at the age of 8, for Kshatriyas at the age of 10 and for Vaishyas at the age of 12; followed by 16 years of compulsory education
  • Kautilya says that Economy is meant to create and enhance Military might and it is fear of danda (punishment) that friends and foes behave properly
  • Kautilya mentions 4 pillars of Governance as Wisdom, Wealth, Punishment and Secrecy
  • Kautilya has written many chapters dedicated to Secret services and espionage. It is said that the falling of Nanda empire was a result of its weaking because of a conspiracy engineered by Chanakya and involving heavy usage of spy network, which may contribute to the opinion that Kautilya and Chanakya are the same person.
  • Kautilya's text surprisingly does not derogate women and people of low caste. He has said that single women and physically handicapped people can also become great spies.
  • Kautilya has said that income tax collected should comprise of 1/6th of the total agricultural produce, 1/10th of commercial profit, small portion of gold from citizens, 1/6th from ascetics of what they collect through alms or in forest.
  • He has also mentioned about duties of the king, princes and even duties towards harem
  • He has also mentioned about the individual duties of the superintendents of various departments like agriculture, tax department etc.
At the end of Arthashastra, it is mentioned that 'Having seen discrepancies in many ways on the part of the writers of commentaries on the Sástras, Vishnu Gupta himself has made (this) Sútra and commentary' and the name 'Vishnu Gupta' is popularly associated with Chanakya.


It is said that when Chandragupta's wife was pregnant, he fed him some of the meals prepared for him out of affection, unaware of the fact that Chanakya was mixing small quantities of poison in his food to make him immune of any toxics. Chandragupta's wife got sick after eating that food and was about to die. When Chanakya came to know of this he cut the queen open and saved the fetus. Since the child was believed to be touched by a drop of poison, he was called "Bindusar".

Little is known about Chanakya's later life. Jain text tells a story that after Chandragupta's retirement into Jainism as a monk, Bindusar's ministers who were jealous of Chanakya, misguided Bindusar to that Chanakya was responsible for his mother's death and Bindusar expelled Chanakya from his ministry and Chanakya too became a monk like his disciple. Then the jealous minister set the forest in which he went on fire and Chanakya died with other monks. When the minister went to Chanakya's house to see some secret documents he believed the clever brahmana has hidden in a box, as soon as he opened the box he died of some poisonous gas kept inside it already by Chanakya. Thus Chanakya had already planned his revenge.

The concept of using Sama (conciliation), Dama (offer money/ material wealth) Danda (punishment or violence), Bheda (cause dissension) tactics for dealing with enemies find prominence in Chanakya's methods. Chanakya had all the methods to deal with the enemies once and for all. He once stepped on a thorn. Without showing slightest pain, he removed the thorn and the thorn plant. Then he poured a mixture of milk and honey on the spot where the thorn plant used to be. The milk would be absorbed by the remaining roots of the plant under the soil and this would attract ants and ants will make sure that remaining roots are destroyed. This is complete annihilation of enemy.

The teachings of Chanakya tells a very basic and core value. The strength of a man or king or a kingdom is through knowledge and favorable surroundings (Vedic knowledge for man and king, trusted and loyal advisers for king and kingdom/ country) and a man or king or a country falls because of internal weakening (submitting to senses pleasure for man and king, internal weakening because of spies, terrorists within the country or a kingdom).

After many thousands of years, the teachings of Chanakya (or if you want to call him Kautilya or Vishnu Gupta) and his personality still shines and his theories are applicable for large sized businesses, organization and administration of the country. 

Thursday, August 1, 2013

Porus - the unsung hero

In 326 BC, the famous battle of Hydespas was fought between the God like figure from Greece, Alexander 'the great' and an Indian king Porus. King Porus used to rule kindom near Jhelum river, which according to various puranic sources is Gandhar or Kekaya regions. The Jhelum river was also called "Hydespas".
King Alexander of Macedonia (Greece) was on his quest for victory. He had already won a large number of kingdoms in bloody battles covering the entire eastward region beyond Greece.
When he entered India, he was greeted by the king of Takshashila (Taxila), Ambhi. Ambhi had bitter relations with his neighbor king Porus (sometimes called as Parvateshwar or Purushottam). It is said that he helped Alexander to rage a battle against the mighty Porus.
The ever present sad mentality of people of our country to even help an outsider to settle scores with the known ones was exploited by Alexander. Alexander's army was habitual of fighting large cavalry but was never accustomed to fight war elephants and Indians were known for the use of elephants in the battle. Huge elephants with tusks dipped in poison used to carry number of archers, kings, commanders and these warriors would use the height as an advantage to attack the enemy.

Porus, was believed to be of Puru clan. Puru clan is mentioned in Rig Vedas and also in Hindu epic Mahabharata. It was believed to be started by king Puru, who was a son of king Yayati. The descendants of Puru like, Bharatas, Kurus, Pauravas used to rule various North Indian kingdoms. Porus is mentioned as the king ruling near Jhelum river, which most possibly could be Gandhar and Kekaya kingdoms.

Porus, though being a mighty figure in the story of Alexander, is somehow I believe, an unsung hero. He is mentioned as a tall 7 ft. man with huge physique. He was a great warrior. Sitting on the back of his elephant, he along with his army created havoc in the Macedonian ranks. Battle of Hydespas is believed to be most difficult, bloody and also the last battle fought by Alexander. He lost his dear horse at the hands of Porus.

The history as we read today generally says that Alexander's army though being routed by forces of Porus, eventually was able to defeat Porus because of Alexander's military tactics. It is said that Porus lost his son in the battle and Alexander asked Ambhi to bring Porus to him alive. Ambhi, who went to take Porus as prisoner, narrowly escaped the fury of the Paurava hero.
Later when Greek army was able to subdue Porus, he was brought in front of Alexander. Alexander asked him "How should I treat you Porus ?" to which Porus proudly replied, "treat me, O Alexander, as a king !".
It is said that Alexander was so much impressed by these words and also with the bravery of Porus that he not only gave him his kingdom back and also added few of his won territories to his kingdom and appointed him as his general, who were called at that time as 'satraps'.

Porus surrenders to Alexander - art by Mrinal Rai
Now there has been a lot of debate about was Alexander actually able to defeat Porus ? or is it fabricated history that we are reading. Of course, I believe that history is written by winners and all that we know about Alexander and of his era is mainly from western historians. There are lot of things to take into consideration. I did a little research from my side over Internet and there are few points to consider:
  • It is said that after defeating Porus, Alexander wanted to defeat the powerful Nanda empire in Magadha. But the soldiers of Alexander already frightened by the war elephants of Porus, became paranoid of the Nanda army when they came to know of its strength in numbers. It is said that the soldiers rebelled against the idea of marching ahead and asked Alexander to return home. Alexander tried to persuade them but in vain. It is said that Alexander returned back from the Beas river to his land without fighting the Nandas in 326 BC. Before his departure he appointed his general Phillip as satrap of the provinces he won in west of Hydespas, and Porus and Ambhi were asked to act as satraps too.
  • Phillip was murdered soon, a year later in 325 BC, as part of a conspiracy. Alexander appointed Eudemus and Taxilas as satraps till he appoint any replacement for Phillip. But Alexander died in 323 BC from illness, which left Eudemus and Taxila started ruling on their own.
  • It is mentioned in Indian history that a king named Chandragupta Maurya defeated the satraps left by Alexander and overthrew the Nanda king in 321-320 BC and became the emperor of Magadha. It is said that he took help of a king from mountain regions (sometimes mentioned as a Himalayan king) Parvateshwar, who also claimed a share in Magadha kingdom. The clever minister of Maurya, Chanakya conspired and get this king Parvateshwar killed by sending a Vishkanya (poison maiden), or sometimes it is mentioned that he was killed by giving poison. This story is particularly backed up by an ancient play called 'Mudra Rakshas'.
  • It is mentioned in Greek history that Eudemus went to help another Greek hero Eumenes in a war against a Macedonian general Antigonus in 318-317 BC. It is said that he went from India, never to return, with a plenty of war elephants that he has got from kingdom of Porus after 'treacherously murdering him'.
  • It is said that after conquering Magadha, Maurya successfully routed all the Macedonians by 316 BC

King Parvateshwar (sometimes identified as Porus) killed in a conspiracy by Chanakya- art by Mrinal Rai
Keeping all these points in place, it seems that  the king who helped Chandragupta Maurya to defeat the Nandas was none other than the king Porus himself who was later killed in a conspiracy by the mastermind of Chankya.  
Maurya did fight against a number of Macedonian satraps. He may have fought Eudemus too. Eudemus may have sought for a peace treaty and Chandragupta may have given the war elephants to him in his fight against Eumenes, and these he may have procured after capturing Magadh and killing Porus treacherously (should be somewhere between 319-317 BC).

Now to get to our point whether Alexander actually defeated Porus or not, lets take the scenario where Alexander was unable to defeat Porus. He might have surrendered and Porus may have let him go (as general gesture of Indian kings, example, Prithvi Raj Chauhan), or, Porus, who was eyeing for Magadha might have asked Alexander to help him defeat Nanda, to which his army mutinated fearing another defeat and he was forced to go back.
It must be noted that Alexander appointed Phillip as satrap of provinces west of Hydespas and Porus's kingdom was in the east. Phillip's muder can be linked to Chanakya and Chandragupta again as they were trying to win the territories in that region that time.
Timeline of the events
According to those who believe that Porus defeated Alexander at Hydespas, this entire theory of treating Porus like a king even after defeat is so 'unlike' Alexander who had a lust of victory. Returning a defeated king with his kingdom and helping him annex other territories and then suddenly started feeling 'home sick' after a great victory sounds a bit absurd. May be westerners don't want to belittle their God like figure.

Moreover it is mentioned that army of Porus was carrying figure of Herakles, who can be made synonymous with Krishna of India.

If we believe that Porus did defeat Alexander, the personality of this great king deserves a bow. The king who may have defeated the greatest conqueror who ever walked on this earth, was defeated and killed in a treacherous way.
Whether the theory is true or not, I would say that king Porus was definitely a legend of India and deserve due respect. 
  

Monday, July 22, 2013

Buddha: the celebrated Guru

Today 22nd July is the Guru Poornima, a day we dedicate to accept the magnanimity of all teachers in the world. I have big respect for all those who have taught me something or anything in any field. I consider teachers to be the most important people in this world.
Guru Purnima is celebrated by Hindus to celebrate the birth of a great Rishi and teacher, sage Vyas. Vyas wrote many purans including Mahabharat.

Buddhists celebrate this day to honour Lord Buddha. It is believed that Buddha gave his first sermon at Sarnath on this day. The life of Gautam Buddha is inspiring and well known to people across the world. He gave birth to a new sect, a new religion when Vedic system had practically declined to an end.
Buddha is definitely one of the greatest teachers who ever walked on this earth. He inspired lives of many. Here I will outline some of the famous stories associated with Buddha and his period.


  • Angulimal: The story of bandit Angulimal is very well known. A bandit, who kills every traveller that would come to his jungle and would cut his victims' fingers and wear a garland of those fingers around his neck. This man represents the fierce and deformed face of humanity. Buddha, who was a messenger of peace and non-violence met him in the forest. When Angulimal saw Gautam Buddha walking on the path, he rushed to kill him. But in spite of running fast he couldnt catch to the speed of Buddha who is walking slowly and calmly. This represents the hysteria and frenzy that violence carries with it, against the sober calmness of peace and non-violence. When frustrated Angulimal asked Buddha to stop, Buddha replied that he had already stopped and it was now Angulimal's turn to stop. When Angulimal asked the explanation, Buddha replied that the act which involves suffering and pain of others should be stopped and he (Buddha) has already stopped doing that (by taking path of non-violence). Now, it was Angulimal's turn to do the same. Angulimal was moved. He came to a realization that violence serve no purpose. He renounced his weapons and the life of bandit and he became a monk.
Buddha and Angulimal



  • Amrapali: Amrapali, the famous royal courtesan of  Vaishali, described by Acharya Chatursen as 'Vaishali ki nagar vadhu' (the bride of the city, Vaishali) was the most beautiful woman in her town. The king of Magadha, Bimbisar was in love with her and because of her love he abandoned the mission of attacking and destroying Vaishali. He stayed with Amrapali at her house and Amrapali bore him a son. The love between two souls again conquered the bloody imperialist mindset. Bimbisar had to bear the blame of being a coward for not being able to defeat his enemies. His other son Ajatshatru imprisoned him and invaded Vaishali. Meanwhile Amrapali was convicted by her own people for she gave shelter to an enemy. She was imprisoned. It is said that Bimbisar's son Ajatshatru was so moved by the beauty of Amrapali that he burned the city of Vaishali as a revenge for imprisoning her. When Amrapali saw the carnage caused because of her, she renounced the worldly affairs. It is said that once she invited Gautam Buddha at her house for meal. Buddha, to much dismay of others, accepted the invitation. After meeting Buddha, Amrapali realized the nothingness of worldly attachments. It is said that later she too became a monk.

Amrapali

  • Virudhak: King Prasenjit of Kosal once attacked the Shakya republic, from where Buddha originally belonged. Prasenjit demanded a princess from Shakyas. The devious Shakyas sent a girl; daughter of a salve Shakya woman (Dasi). Prasenjit married that girl and the son born to them was Virudhak. When Virudhak came to know of real identity of his mother and the different treatment slaves used to get at that time, he became furious. He decided to attack the Shakya republic. Virudhak was fueled with rage and went to Shakya capital and ordered his troops to kill all the Shakyas. Some versions say that Buddha tried to stop him and some say that he attacked Shakyas after Buddha's death.An old man from Shakya republic, (Virudhak's own grandfather according to some sources) told Virudhak that he will submerge himself in water and asked the soldiers to launch attack only if he is not able to sustain for long in the water and come out. Looking at the poor state of the old man, Virudhak agreed. The old man dipped himself in the water but didn't come out for a long time. When the soldiers of Kosal dived in, they found that the man had tied his leg to a stone and had died. But the old man's sacrifice couldn't save the Shakyas and Virudhak and his army killed every single Shakya man, woman and child. It is said that Virudhak along with his army too get swooped away in a flood soon after the annihilation of Shakyas. 

    King Virudhak and the annihilation of Shakya

These three stories tell about the basic teachings of Buddha.
Buddha described dukh (grief) as "Birth is dukh, Life is dukh, death is dukh". At the core of the dukh is Trishna (lust/attachments for fruits). Only f you leave trishna, could you go on path of knowledge..

Angulimal had a lust of violence. He saw the dukh in life of a bandit, and retaliated with lust of violence. Amrapali saw the dukh in death of her people. The attachment she bore was being the nagar vadhu and royal status, which she later renounced. Virudhak, on the other hand, saw dukh in birth, core of which was lust for revenge. However, he could not suppress the lust; may be because he did not get the blessings of Buddha.

"Guru" literally means the one who removes the darkness with the light of knowledge. Gautam Buddha, the legendary guru of all times was a source of light for all those who have been blinded by lust and who have seen pain and suffering in life..