[Y-Indology] Fwd: are canakya and kautilya are one?

[Guest guest]

> What is KA? if it is artha sastra, it is discovered by shama sastry

> in mysore and published fully in 1908/09. (published perhaps in parts

> in 1905 in indian entiquerry)

May be better Indian Antiquary ?

>

> though it is agreed by every one that Kangle has written more

> authentic version /commentary.

>

 

It is very strange, that I should write it. For the expert the difference

between the publication based on one manuscript and the critical

publication, based on all known manuscripts and on all known comments is

simply obvious. It is not the "version" and not the "comment" (Kangle did

not publish comments, he gives only the basic text). This is critical

edition of the text, the unique authoritative edition. So, for example,

hardly there will be a Sanskritist who will write about a Mahabharata, using

the Bombay edition considering as the "version" the Pune critical edition.

Though from the letter it is visible, that you did not use the Sanskrit

text. By the way there are also other publications and translations of

Arthashastra (for example, J.Jolli, Meyer), based on the other manuscripts.

By the way, again, text of Nitisara mentions not Chanakya, but Vishnugupta,

naming its treatise as nitishastra etc.

About Shamashastri translation, which is used. To this translation it will

be fast hundred years. It is considerably obsolete. Many features of this

translation - " passport system ", etc. were natural for the beginning XX

centuries, but now they look fondly, also, as well as " the Prime minister

". Except for obvious mistakes, there is still a set of others. It only

sometimes is used by the separate Indian authors who are not engaging in the

Sanskrit text. Translation of Kangle, though it not without lacks, now

unique authoritative translation.

But I wrote not about it. In 3 vol. R.P.Kangle's work (300 pages) discusses

all questions about which it is spoken in your letter, to it I recommended

to address, as to the most accessible source of the information. Still it is

possible to address to work of P.V. Kane.

 

DL

[Guest guest]

> On the other hand, I only mentioned that (so far as I know) it is

> shama sastry who has discovered Artha sastra.

 

Not Shamashastri, but Ganapati Shastri, famous pandit. Shamashastri prepared

onle first translation of the text.

>

> As I mentioned on this forum, I am also looking for S.R.

> Goyal's "Kautiliya Arthasastra Its Author

> Date and Relevance for the Maurya Period".

>

> If u have read it, please post about it.

>

I read any publications of mr. Shankar Goyal, not this. That's why firstly I

ask you - if he create new conception or find any new materials about KA -

as for example the grant of Ravivarman Kadamba, where mentioned Niti,

created by Vishnugupta etc. Or in his book are discussed only old arguments,

which we can read from other books.

 

DL

[Guest guest]

What is KA? if it is artha sastra, it is discovered by shama sastry

in mysore and published fully in 1908/09. (published perhaps in parts

in 1905 in indian entiquerry)

 

though it is agreed by every one that Kangle has written more

authentic version /commentary.

 

so far as the post of PM is concerned, it is generally used by many

historians and text books, hence, my usuage. it has no specific

meaning or i did not say that the post of PM existed at the time of

mauryans.

 

kishore

 

INDOLOGY, "Dmitriy N. Lielukhine" <lel@L...>

wrote:

> This question had diskussed many times (from 1905, when KA was

discovered by

> Ganapati Shastri and publ., based on the Malayalam comm.). That's

why I

> write about critical publ. of KA. (As I remember here you can find

materials

> about Canakya, too).

>

> Are you mean any new information about authorship of Arthashastra ?

>

> Specially interesting for me. You write "prime minister" - how you

imagine

> this "official" in the Ancient Indian (or any other) society ?

> DL

>

> -

> kishore mohan <kishore_future>

> <INDOLOGY>

> Saturday, June 26, 2004 4:43 PM

> [Y-Indology] Re: Fwd: are canakya and kautilya are one?

>

>

> > Thnx for the reference. Basically what i m looking at is whether

> > arthasastra is really written by the mauryan prime minister or

not.

> >

> > If some one has read S.R. Goyal's "Kautiliya Arthasastra Its

Author

> > Date and Relevance for the Maurya Period", kindly post a message.

> >

> > kishore

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > Links

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

[Guest guest]

Dear Kishore,

If you want an eminently readable, and technically relaible introduction to the

world of Arthasastra, without being burdened by scholarly/literal

translations,you must not miss the translation /adaptation of Rangarajan,

published by Panguin Books.

C.Rajendran

 

 

Dr.C.Rajendran

Professor of Sanskrit

University of Calicut

Calicut University P.O

Kerala 673 635 Phone: 0494-2401144

Residential address:28/1097,Rajadhani Kumaran Nair Road,

Chevayur, Calicut Kerala 673 017 Phone: 0495-2354 624