History of Dharmashastra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v4.c62.112

v4.c62.112

Kauṭilya (I. 5) starts by saying that the three vidyās (except daṇḍanīti) in the case of the prince depend upon daṇḍa, that daṇḍa in its turn is based upon discipline, which is of two kinds, natural and induced (or acquired). Vidyās produce discipline (of the 2nd kind) in him who possesses the qualities of intellect specified above. Then he goes on to say that the prince should learn the alphabet and arithmetic after his *caula* is performed (in the 3rd year or later) and after *upanayana* he should learn the three vedas and ānvīkṣikī from the *śiṣṭas* (those learned in the veda), vārtā from the heads or superintendents (of the various departments thereof) and daṇḍanīti from expounders (of the *vidyā*) and from practical politicians. Vide Manu VII. 43 (= Matsya 215. 54 and Agni 225. 21-22) for directions as to from whom the prince was to learn the four vidyās. Kauṭilya prescribes that the prince should study these up to the 16th year, should then marry and that in order to foster the growth of the discipline of the intellect he should always associate with those who are advanced in the vidyās enumerated above (after his 16th year) and that the king should spend the first part of the day in practising the riding of elephants, horses, chariots and in the science of arms and the latter part of the day in listening to Itihāsa which comprises Purāṇa, history, stories, panegyrics, dharmaśāstra and arthaśāstra. A king whose intellect is thus disciplined and who is devoted to disciplining his subjects also and to doing good to all will be the sole ruler of the earth. The Nitivākyāmṛta (p. 162) defines *vinaya* as 'acting with humility towards those who excel in vratas, vidyās and are aged.' Manu VII. 38-39. Kām. I. 19-20 and 59-63, Śukra I. 92-93 (taken from Kām. I. 19-20) extol the value and importance of *vinaya* and waiting upon the aged and the learned. Manu (VII. 40-42) states that many kings perished with their vast paraphernalia through want of discipline while others, though residing in a forest (i. e. without an army &c.), gained kingdoms through vinaya, and names Vena, Nahuṣa, Sudās son of Pijavana and Sumukha Nimi as those who perished through lack of *vinaya* and gives Pṛthu and Manu as examples of those who secured kingdoms through *vinaya*. Matsya 215.53 is the same as Manu VII. 40. Ancient Indian writers harp on the education of the prince so much because their ideal of kingship was that the king should be a *rājarṣi* (a royal sage). Kālidāsa frequently speaks of this e. g. in Śākuntala II. 14 and Raghuvaiṁśa (I. 58). They were aware, like Socrates, that until either philosophers became⁶⁴ kings or kings philosophers States will never succeed in remedying their short-comings (vide p. 50 above). Not only was an extensive course of intellectual training prescribed for the king, but both dharmaśāstra and arthaśāstra works strongly and frequently insist upon the necessity of moral discipline and the right direction of the emotions and will in the case of the king.