The Mauryan Polity c12.31

c12.31

What is the underlying idea? Originally when Āpastamba propounded his theory it appealed to certain members of the community. They followed them and then their descendants. Thus the school automatically came into being. But it may be asked, how could we explain the peculiar use of “Iti Kauṭalyaḥ,” “Iti Baudhāyanaḥ” in certain works, and its absence in other books like Patañjali’s *Mahābhāṣya*? The answer is simple. In India literature is broadly classified into two heads, the *sūtra* and the *bhāṣya*. The *sūtra* is an original work composed by master minds on a certain subject or subjects. It may be philosophy, theology, or any secular science. The *sūtras* (सूचनासूत्र) in themselves are a strenuous reading and especially so, when they deal with abstruse and technical sciences. It was not possible for all persons to grasp them. Hence interpreters came into being. Their works were *bhāṣyas* or interpretations of the *sūtras* in popular style. The *sūtrakāras* generally—there are also exceptions,—used the phrase “Iti Baudhāyanaḥ”, etc., meaning thereby that that was their final conclusion. On the other hand a *bhāṣyakāra* could not speak with such definiteness. For, oftentimes, more than one interpretation may be placed upon a certain phrase or passage. It depends to a large extent on the ingenuity of the writer. Some interpretations might be ingenious but could not win general approval. Therefore, the *bhāṣyakāras* are justified in omitting their names.