Which author described the Chanakya Neeti best, or which book should I pick for Download Chanakya Neeti PDF In Hindi Free ~ चाणक्य नीति ईबुक. Chanakya applied his teachings of niti-sastra that has made him stand out as English versions of Chanakya Niti-sastra published at the close of the last. Patheos offers PDF downloads of the complete Chanakya Niti. Book Details English Miles Davis. Hindi Mihir Chandra Sharma Sanskrit.
|Language:||English, Spanish, Dutch|
|Distribution:||Free* [*Registration needed]|
App includes thoughts of The Great Chanakya. It is in Hindi and English both language. Chankya Niti Contains the quotes about: Life Politics Black Money. Chanakya Niti in Hindi Chanakya was an Indian teacher, philosopher and royal advisor. Originally a professor of economics and political science at the ancient. Two books are attributed to Chanakya: Arthashastra and Chanakya Neeti (also known as Neetishastra). The Arthashastra discusses monetary and fiscal policies .
Bhandarkar opined, "for the promotion of truth and history, the name Kautilya should be discarded and Kautalya must be adopted.
However, the name Chanakya is connected with the birth-place of Vishnugupta and has been popularly used by writers and readers. The ancient economist wrote two books as far as we know , the treatise called the "Arthasastra" or the Science of Economics, and the "Chanakya Niti Shastra," which laid a strong foundation years ago for the founding of one of history's greatest empires, the Mauryan Empire. Chanakya's protege was no less than emperor Chandragupta Maurya, who rose from a lowly background to carve out the largest empire India had known up to that time, and ruled it from to BC.
His grandson was no less than Ashoka, whose monuments and symbols still stand in India and adorn the Indian flag. The Chanakya Niti is still read today by aspiring corporate strategists trying to understand the qualities of a good leader.
Chandragupta was a great warrior and adventurous king and he obtained effective guidance from Chanakya for conquering weak and mismanaged states as well as for consolidating gains and accelerating tempo of development in the empire in order to meet requirements of the government and promote welfare amongst subjects.
It has been aptly remarked, "As any sudden military revolution is followed by an equally great statesman's work, a war-like figure like that of Chandragupta demands a statesman like wisdom like that of Kautilya, who alone can render the new unique empire secure, with its administrative machinery and fiscal management well founded".
No doubt, Chanakya played a pivotal role in the formation of the Maurya empire and in the promotion of all round development within the empire. Chanakya hailed from the ancient university of Takshashila or Taxila in modern-day Pakistan.
He also wrote the Chankya Niti or Nitishastra, which historians say dates from the period B.
Its slightly archaic style is well in agreement with the claim. It is also testified by various early Indian writers. The Chanakya Niti is a selection of sutras, pithy verses, that convey much about the ideal way of life. These sutras may very well have played a big role in the grooming of Chandragupta Maurya and other disciples of Chanakya.
The Chanakya Niti consists of expert knowledge regarding espionage, maintenance and mobilization of army, general administration, diplomacy, management of agriculture, forestry, animal husbandry; industrial production and so forth. His contribution in the field of political science is undoubtedly laudable. He set forth his opinion regarding the elements of sovereignty, remedies against external and internal troubles of the government, enforcement of rights and duties amongst various grades of administrative staff, etc.
For the enforcement of law and order in the empire, criminal and civil laws were also prescribed. Though the book had a profound influence on various writers and rulers in Indian history, the book and its author were lost to knowledge when the British ruled India.
It was only a century ago that they came to light again. A manuscript of the Chanakya's Arthashastra, and with it, a commentary on a small part of it by a writer named Bhattaswamin, was handed over by a Pandit scholar to the Mysore Government Oriental Library. Shamasastry published the English translation of the text in J.
The original text consists of some obsolete words. Credit goes to Dr. Shamasastry for translating the contents in English and bringing it to the notice of scholars and the general history of ancient India. Second and third editions were published in and Translators accept that perfect translation and a correct interpretation of the text is a difficult task.
Shamasastry writes "Still I shall feel highly rewarded for my labors, if it proves a stepping-stone for others to arrive at a correct interpretation. For want of necessary diacritical marks, the translation of the Sanskrit words could not be made as thorough as it ought to be. Although possibilities lie that in future the new translations by erudite scholars might point out some new interpretations.
Most likely, in spite of a few differences in the interpretations of those erudite scholars, there does not arise the possibility of adverse affects on the basic contents of the book. As the authenticity of the Arthasastra has been questioned by scholars of standing like Professors Keith and Winternitz, we propose to examine some of the arguments advanced by them in support of their theory with a view to demonstrate their inconclusiveness.
Winternitz refers to the verse in which Kautilya says that he had taken the kingdom from the Nandas and remarks that the real minister in a book written by the order of or intended for his king would not have written such words, for, it could not have been very pleasing to the king.
The verse under reference is a piece of internal evidence which goes to confirm the traditional story in the Puranas of Kautilya's part in the revolution which resulted in the overthrow of the ruling Nanda dynasty of Magadha and the establishment of the Mauryan dynasty.
This verse is, therefore, valuable as it demonstrates beyond all doubt that the writer of the extant work of the Arthasastra is the same Kautilya who had contributed not a little to the overthrowing of the old dynasty and to the founding of the new dynasty. Without this verse which is indeed significant the work will not appeal to us as the accredited writing of the first Mauryan Chancellor.
The objection that it is a thing not likely to have been pleasing to the king is no argument. Kautilya will not stand to lose by writing thus. There is a baseless version that Chandragupta was not a Kshatriya but of a mixed caste. Winternitz has taken pains to select one or two passages wherein Kautilya has loosely expressed his views, and on the strength of such slender basis, he dismisses the author as a mere Pandit.
No one can deny for a moment that there are some places where Kautilya is not definite or assertive. It is probable that in these particulars he was not quite convinced of the prevailing opinions; still expediency might have dictated such a policy under certain circumstances.
In such places he could have subordinated his opinion to that of the others. Apart from this construction any other cannot be placed on the so-called weak points in the treatise. But at the same time it is pertinent to remark that there is much truth in the statement that it is the work of a Pandit. And who is a Pandit?
He who is deeply versed in a science or sciences is a Pandit. If Kautilya had not established his reputation as a great author on administrative science, viz. The king would not have ordered a layman to write for him a manual on statecraft. Further only the highly learned Pandits occupied superior positions in the government as ministers, councillors, judges, etc.
If Kautilya had not been a Pandit he would have been unworthy to hold the Chancellorship of a new government which indeed involved serious responsibilities. The fact was that in ancient times the high class Pandits the sishytas and Lishytas of the Dharmasastra literature carried on the civil administration of the realm while the military administration was exercised by the Kshtriya monarch.
This does not mean that there was a cut and dried military or civil department which only this class or that class could monopolise. The departments were interdependent and by co-operation everything went on smoothly.
Examples of Pandits who had been the soul of administration from both traditional and historical accounts are not wanting. There is the tradition of Vasishtha, the Purohita of king Dasaratha. Here the king did not take the initiative in any affair without previous consultation with and advice of his Guru and friend Vasishtha.
In medieval times we know of Vidyaranya, the minister of the Vijayanagar emperor, Bukka. He was also known as Madhavacharya, the worthy brother of the worthy Sayana, the celebrated commentator of the Vedas. As there was another minister by name Madhava - we can appropriately call him Madhava Vidyaranya.
This Vidyararyya was both a Pandit and statesman. The Brhat-Katha informs us that Katyayana, the famous jurist, was a minister of the Nanda kings. At a period so late as the 17th century we find a Pandit Govinda Dikshitara as the minister of the Tanjore kings.
These were Pandit-statesmen, or statesmen pandits who have gloriously adorned many an enviable station in every Hindu state. Under this category comes Kautilya.
He was a Pandit of a rare order as also a keen statesman. If he were a mere Pandit he would not have cared for the opinions or the theories of his predecessors. For example treatises on similar subjects like the Sukranitisara or Barhaspatyasastra do not at all discuss the opinions of their predecessors. Rarely do they mention even the names of such treatises. But by discussing other views with care and attention which they deserve, Kautilya shows himself more than a Pandit, and having been acclimatised with the practical administration of the land we can call him a Pandit-statesman.
If in a few places he has shown himself a Pandit, in many places he shows himself a statesman. There is no need to call attention to these special passages.
But a reference may be made to a statement of Dr. Jolly himself who remarks that Kautilya must have been "an official in a state of medium size where he had obtained insight into the working of the administration. This means that the German scholar is prepared to grant that Kautilya possessed an intimate or first hand knowledge as regards the different methods of working an administration.
As such, he is considered as the pioneer of the field of economics and political science in India, and his work is thought of as an important precursor to Classical Economics. Chanakya is often called the "Indian Machiavelli", although his works predate Machiavelli's by about 1, years. His works were lost near the end of the Gupta dynasty and not rediscovered until Reviews Review Policy.