War in Ancient India c5.s2.20

c5.s2.20

Notwithstanding the love of glory and the spirit of heroism which actuated the warrior, recourse was had to war only if the instruments of diplomacy failed to effect the desired end. Generally the policies of *sāma* and *dāna* were used against inferior powers, and that of *bheda* and *daṇḍa* towards superiors and equals.⁶⁹ But this was by no means a rigid rule.⁷⁰ These different expedients were severally and jointly employed so as to bring about a compromise and avoid or at least postpone the outbreak of war. Genuine attempts were made to avoid armed contests and to keep peaceful relations. As we have seen already, aggression was the exception and defence was the rule. If diplomacy failed to bring about compromise, and if war was provoked, surely there was retaliation. Vigorous preparations were made to vanquish the enemy by attacking the vulnerable points in his line. It was considered no sin to strike the enemy at his weak points.⁷¹ We have the unimpeachable authority of the celebrated Buddhist writer of the early second century A.D., Āryadeva, to this effect. In the *Catuh-* śatika, reconstructed and edited by the late lamented Haraprasad Śāstri, the following stanza occurs: