History of Dharmashastra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v1.c6.s14.15.1

v1.c6.s14.15.1

The first question that arises for consideration is the authenticity of the work, that is, the question whether it can be the work of the famous minister of Candragupta Maurya, who was a contemporary of Alexander, and who must therefore have flourished about 320 B.C. This question very largely depends upon the age of the work. But other considerations, more or less of a subjective character and depending upon the absence of certain things from the Kauṭilīya, must be dealt with first. Jolly, Keith and Winternitz hold that the extant Kauṭilīya is not the work of the Maurya minister. One argument, viz. that a person like Cāṇakya who had to build a vast empire such as that of Candragupta and who was bent down with the cares of the empire could not have found time to write such a work, may be brushed aside as entirely futile, being a purely subjective argument. Some persons may say that he could have found time, just as Sāyaṇa and Mādhava could find in later days, to write such a work in the midst of all cares, while others may deny the possibility of such a thing. Similarly most of the arguments from the silence of the Kauṭilīya are also quite unconvincing and lead to no certain and universally acceptable conclusion. The non-mention of Pāṭaliputra or of the empire of Candragupta is of very little use in deciding the question of the authenticity of the work.