Chanakya-Niti

For a very long time I have wanted to read Chanakya Niti, so the other day when I saw the book lying around at my friend’s I borrowed it immediately. This week, I decided to give it a shot. Most people don’t know who Chanakya was and what he did so here is a history lesson on him.

Chanakya was an adviser to the Mauryan empire in India and its chief architect around 293 BCE (very, very long time ago). He was extremely brilliant and very knowledgeable not only of the scriptures but also in the socio-sciences, economics, politics, etc. He was called as the Machiavelli of India but later generations in India say that comparison was unfair and he was really much smarter and brilliant.

Rumor has it that he was also very ugly and as a result when presented at court, the King threw him out and laughed at his ugliness. At that time, he vowed to destroy the King and his line which due to his shrewdness he succeeded in doing. Chanakya wrote 2 books -- Arthashastra and Neetishastra which is also known as Chanakya Niti. The Arthashastra discusses monetary and fiscal policies, welfare, international relations, and war strategies in detail. Neetishastra is a treatise on the ideal way of life, and shows Chanakya's in-depth study of the Indian way of life. Chanakya also developed Neeti-Sutras (aphorisms - pithy sentences) that tell people how they should behave. Of these well-known 455 sutras, about 216 refer to raaja-neeti (the do's and don'ts of running a kingdom).

So far the book has failed to impress. There are few aphorisms that sound neat but a lot of them so far have only aggravated me. Chanakya’s attitude on women is Stone Age at best. He writes how women should be obedient to their husband, not be allowed out of the house, not make independent decisions etc, all of which do not apply to the world now. His thoughts on how to raise children can raise some eyebrows. He advocates beating children until the age of 16 if they do not listen to their parents, something that happens in India past the age of 16.

He talks a lot about sons (as in the male child) and how a family is barren without one.

He cannot tolerate morons and makes clear his low threshold for idiots. There, I agree with him.

As I said earlier, most of the sutras are pretty obvious but perhaps for the time period he lived in they weren’t as obvious. And perhaps that explains his attitude towards women, who at that time and sadly even now in many parts of the world, were seen as material objects used to enhance a man’s side and not as humans with feelings, emotions and thoughts. If you keep that idea in mind throughout while reading the book, the aggravation subsides.

Very few sutras stood out so far – here are a couple:

In this world nothing lasts forever. Money comes and then goes. Life goes. Soul goes. Youth goes. The only thing that stays firm is faith.

A human comes into this world alone. Alone does he get the reward or punishment for good deeds or sins respectively. And alone he departs for heavenly abode.

The one thing that did surprise me are his thoughts on religion, how advanced they were. He advocated leaving a religion and not partaking in any activity with that religion if it did not preach kindness and love. These thoughts are pretty revolutionary at any time and anyone preaching these thoughts in 293 BCE or 2010 AD is bound to be a target by fanatics.

Makes me wonder if he was only behind on women’s rights then? Most of his thoughts apply to the masses today so he could be called a man born way ahead of his time. The one thing I cannot get out of my head is, say for instance he was born now, in this era. What would he think about women and their rights? Not that it matters but really it bothers me. If more people like Chanakya, who were considered geniuses, advocated for women’s rights since 293 BCE, India would be at a different place with their women. Maybe the world would be too.

Wishful thinking? I don’t think so.