War in Ancient India c11.t1.76

c11.t1.76

Māyā: To the above-mentioned diplomatic attitudes, which are accepted by the orthodox Arthaśāstra literature, are added māyā and indrajāla. These two partake, as we shall see, of the character of base diplomacy. For the conquering king would discard the straight path, and try his best to hoodwink the enemy by a recourse to the expedient māyā. Māyā means illusion and therefore in that sense the invader would put to use all illusory powers to deceive the enemy, and strike him at his weak point. This expedient must be considered as a baser kind of diplomacy. There are different uses of this policy. But there is no reason to doubt that the application of the policy of māyā consisted of cunning and intrigue. Surely, this was one of the methods of daṇḍa as prescribed by Kauṭalya. Except for the opinion that treacherous warfare could be indulged in, there is no more detail given by him. In invoking the aid of this expedient, it can be noticed that no actual war is implied here, and the success over an adversary was to be achieved by a network of intrigue and counter-intrigue. Some interesting details can, however, be gathered from the Kāmandakīya Nītisāra. The conqueror is asked to get himself dressed as a god, or a pillar, and when the enemy comes to worship, to slay him. Other cases of disguise are mentioned. The use of parachutes in the present war perhaps approximates to this principle. The king might visit the enemy in the disguise of a woman,⁹³ of a devil, or an evil spirit, and slay him when at close quarters. The māyā was twofold, mānuṣi and amānuṣi or daiva. The Mahābhārata cites the instance of Kīcaka’s death by Bhīmasēna in Draupadī’s disguise.⁹⁴