Nitiprakasika (Critical Analysis)

by S. Anusha | 2016 | 34,012 words

This page relates ‘Author of the Nitiprakashika’ of the study on the Nitiprakasika by Vaisampayana which deals primarily with with Dhanurveda, i.e., the science of war, weapons and military strategies of ancient Indian society. It further contains details on Niti-shastra, i.e., the science of politics and state administration but most verses of the Nitiprakashika deal with the classification and description of different varieties of weapons, based on the four groups of Mukta, Amukta, Muktamukta and Mantramukta.

Author of the Nītiprakāśikā

< Previous

Next >

The text Nītiprakāśikā has the edited title “Vaiśampāyana Nītiprakāśikā” in the Madras Government Oriental Manuscripts series 24, published in the year 1953. Dr. Gustav Oppert^[1], the first to edit Nītiprakāśikā has no doubt about the identity of the author as Vaiśampāyana of Mahābhārata fame. The recent editor of the text, Dr. Urmi Shah follows the tradition and attributes the authorship of the text to Vaiśampāyana.

Oppert also holds the view that Vaiśampāyana is the same pupil of Vyāsa connected with the Yajurveda and the Mahābhārata. He has no doubt in ascribing Vaiśampāyana to such an early date since Vaiśampāyana the narrator of Mah-ābhārata and Harivaṃśa could also be the narrator of Nītiprakāśikā to Janamejaya. Further, he finds the style and language of all the above mentioned three works similar and hence decides on a common author, namely Vaiśampāyana.

T. Chandrasekaran, editor of the Madras text does not discuss the identity of the author in his preface except the statement–

“Particulars regarding the identity of Vaiśampāyana, the author of the present work, are not available”^[2].

However, in his abhimukha^[3] he writes that the author is Vaiśampāyana belonging to the group of sages including Sumantu, Jaimini and others:

[...]

This statement is also in collaboration with the view of Oppert.

Urmi Shah, the latest editor of the text with English translation goes generally with the view of others as far as the name of the authorship is concerned.

However, she says,

“Despite the above tradition and linking the present work to Mahābhārata, Vaiśampāyana‘s authorship of Nītiprakāśikā seems to be an effort to extol the work and its value.”^[4]

A.B.Keith^[5] in his History of Sanskrit Literature, makes a mere mention of Nītiprakāśikā of Vaiśampāyana. The New Catalogus Catalogorum^[6], records that Nītiprakāśikā is in eight chapters by Vaiśampāyana^[7] on the duties of kings and art of war.

Apart from the above views, the text itself poses a problem. It opens up with the verse in first person claiming the authorship without giving a name:

[...]

From the next verse onwards, the text runs in third person presentation.

It records that Vaiśampāyana the sage went to meet Janamejaya the king, at Takṣasila with a wish to impart the knowledge of rājanīti (Nītiprakāśikā I. 2-3):

[...]

The text also ends as a third person narrative (Nītiprakāśikā VIII. 100):

[...]

This raises a doubt about the author being Vaiśampāyana himself. However, the tradition of ancient writings like Purāṇas is that they would always ascribe the text to some great personality and they are often found in the third person narrative.

Again, it is to be noted that the commentator in his explanation on the first verse records that the statement ‘Nītiprakāśikā seyam tanyate sādarān maya’, is made by Vaiśampāyana himself:

[...]

For this, he draws support from Vikramārkacaritra, which says that Vaiśampāyana taught Janamejaya the Nītiśāstra comprising of eight chapters:

[...]

Hence, Vaiśampāyana can be considered as the author of the work.

Date of the author

In fixing the date of the author, the antiquity of the text is also to be considered. Oppert finds the style of Nītiprakāśikā similar to that of Mahābhārata and Harivaṃśa. He takes note of the fact that quite a number of passages in the Nītiprakāśikā are found in various texts such as the Mahābhārata, Manusmṛti and Śukranītisāra.

He writes:

“In its contents, the Nītiprakāśikā coincides in many points with the Rāmāyaṇa, especially with its first two books; but the reader is also often reminded of the Mahābhārata and Harivaṃśa. The latter part of the Nītiprakāśikā contains also passages, which may be found in works on law and on polity, as in the Mānavadharmaśāstra and the Kāmandakiya. The fact that the same passages occur in different works by no means proves that the passages in one work have been borrowed from another, especially if we have reason to suppose that there existed a period, when, the text of early compositions being still unsettled, many dicta were regarded as public property, and were, as such, embodied in various texts.”^[8]

These same ideas are taken up and argued against the antiquity of the text by Urmi Shah:

“Though, Oppert‘s ascription of the authorship to him and thus putting it in the class of works of Mahābhārata and Harivaṃśa with considerable antiquity is doubtful. In fact, the author has borrowed several verses from MS, Śukra-nītisāra, Kāmandakīya-nītisāra and such related texts or sections of texts that the antiquity of this work raises a doubt.”^[9]

Despite the arguments given above by Urmi Shah, it could be seen from the current study given in this dissertation that Nītiprakāśikā refers to weapons of yore, vyūhas of ancient times and the other war details, which seem to belong to older times to Kāmandakīya-nītisāra and Śukra-nītisāra and probably later to Agnipurāṇa.