[Pramāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/) › [Studies](https://indike.org/pramana/ins) › [Polity, law and society](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity) › [The Inner Conflict of Tradition: Essays in Indian Ritual, Kingship, and Society](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.heesterman-1985) › c13.s1.3 # The Inner Conflict of Tradition: Essays in Indian Ritual, Kingship, and Society c13.s1.3 The Inner Conflict of Tradition: Essays in Indian Ritual, Kingship, and Society c13.s1.3 - **Language:** English ### [c13.s1.3](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.heesterman-1985.c13.s1.3) All this, however, does not mean that the text can be written off as a pedantic exercise in irrelevance. It purports to be—and has been valued as—a serious treatise on "acquiring and managing the earth".⁶ It is based on methodical inquiry, that is on \*ānvīkṣikī\*, which according to Kauṭilya's definition investigates by means of methodical reasoning (\*hetubhir ānvīkṣamāṇā\*) Vedic lore, so as to decide what is right or wrong; economics as to gain and loss; and politics as to appropriate and inappropriate courses of action.⁷ To underline this scientific intent, the text claims that its composition is ruled by the thirty-two devices of exposition and argumentation (\*tantrayukti\*), which are enumerated, defined, and exemplified from the text in the last part of the book. This emphasis on scientific method and on the \*tantrayuktis\* gives us, I think, a clue as to the meaning and purpose of the \*Arthaśāstra\*. - [Previous: c13.s1.2](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.heesterman-1985.c13.s1.2) - [Next: c13.s1.4](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.heesterman-1985.c13.s1.4) - [Up: c13.s1](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.heesterman-1985.c13.s1) ## Cites (1) - [Kauṭilīya Arthaśāstra](https://indike.org/pramana/in.niti.artha.kautilya) — Kauṭilya, Sanskrit --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.heesterman-1985.c13.s1.3](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.heesterman-1985.c13.s1.3) · Pramāṇa