Military Adages and Stratagems in the Kautilya Arthaśāstra | 2013

National Seminar on Kautliya's Arthasastra
Speaker: Col Harjeet Singh ( Retd)
October 08, 2013

[@KannapiranArjunan-vm2rq]

Alas! "Epporul yaar yaar vaai ketpinum apporul meipporul kaanbadharivu" Thirukural 423. Meaning: From whomsoever one hears about a thing, it is wisdom to understand the truth import of it. Chanakyathanam is ayokiyathanam! Chanakyan was a scoundrel and a cruel murderer who cut open the pregnant Queen and took the baby Bindusaran son of Chandragupta but queen died. Bindusara’s minister Subandhu had burnt Chanakya alive. Like any other dynasty Maurya did collapse and Kushan took over. Chanakyas idealogy neither saved him nor maurya kingdom. On Religious front also Chanakya is a total failure, Chandra gupta followed jainism and left the Kingdom. ASHOKA FOLLOWED BUDDHISM AND SPREAD IT GLOBALLY. With the Arthasastra on hand, India was ruled by invaders after invaders for 2000yrs none of the so called science techonology or arthasastra were helpful. So its all puranic gossips! Chanakya is painted as a scheming manipulator who could stoop to even the meanest level to serve his purpose. Encyclopaedia Britannica reported that Chanakya or Kautilya (Artha -shastra) presented no overt philosophy. But implicit in its writings is a complete skepticism, if not cynicism, concerning human nature, its corruptibility, and the ways in which the ruler-and his trusted servant-can take advantage of such human weakness. Chanakya openly advised the development of an elaborate spy system reaching into all levels of society and encourages political and secret assassination. So he is a treacherous murderor and morally corrupt. Artha sastra was written after Guptas period when sanskrit borrowed the Nagari script of Dravidian Nagars. Chanakyan lived in 300 bc when there was no sanskrit script so Who wrote Arthasastra? Not Chanakyan. Although the book was considered to be lost for many centuries, a copy of it, written on palm leaves, was rediscovered in 1904 AD. No palm leaf manuscript can stand for 2100yrs . So arthasastra is a hoax or plagiarism like Sushurata and other sanskrit texts. According to KC Ojha, Vishnugupta was actually a redactor of Kautilya’s original work, which suggests that Kautilya and Vishnugupta are different people. full of puranic story of copying or plagiarism..shameful acts of whom?

[@KannapiranArjunan-vm2rq]

Artha sastra was written after Guptas period when sanskrit borrowed the Nagari script of Dravidian Nagars. Chanakyan lived in 300 bc when there was no sanskrit script so Who wrote Arthasastra? Not Chanakyan. Although the book was considered to be lost for many centuries, a copy of it, written on palm leaves, was rediscovered in 1904 AD. No palm leaf manuscript can stand for 2100yrs . So arthasastra is a hoax or plagiarism like Sushurata and other sanskrit texts. According to KC Ojha, Vishnugupta was actually a redactor of Kautilya’s original work, which suggests that Kautilya and Vishnugupta are different people. full of puranic story of copying or plagiarism..shameful acts of whom?