Dūta according to the Manusaṃhitā

Manu discussed the qualities of ambassador. According to him—

“dūtaṃ caiva prakurvīta sarvaśāstraviśāradam |
iṅgitākāraceṣṭajñaṃ śuciṃ dakṣaṃ kulodgatam” ||^7.63 ||^[1]

“He should employ envoys who should be versed in all the Shastas, expert in reading the intentions, the external manifestations and demeanours, honest, cleaver and of noble birth.”^[2]

“Manu has mentioned the number of ministers to be appointed by the king. But he seems to be silent on the member of envoys. It is quite obvious that the singular number in the text is not intended. The number of envoys to be appointed by the king would very according to necessity. It is to be noted that ambassador (dūta) and spy (cāra or cara) are different persons. Kauṭilya has devoted no less than four chapters to spies. Manu has not discussed the duties of cāra’s or spies. The duties of ambassador (dūta) have been mentioned by Kāmandaka: determining those who are inimical to the king to whom he is sent, winning over to his side the friends and relations of the enemy king, finding out the number and equipment of forts, the economic resources and military strength of the enemy king, collection of news as to what the enemy intends to do, bringing over to his side the officers in charge of the districts of the enemy country, collecting news about the places of the enemy where battle can be waged by his king or whence he can pass away swiftly.”^[3]

In this respect the views of Kāmandaka and Kauṭilya is the same.

In this connection commentator Kūllkabhaṭṭa said about the quality of ambassador.

“dūtañca dṛṣṭādṛṣṭārthaśāstrajñam, iṅgitamabhiprāyasūcakaṃ vacanasvarādi, ākāro dehadharmādimukhaprasādavaivarṇyādirūpaḥ prītyaprītisūcakaḥ, ceṣṭā karāsphālanādikriyā kopādi sūcikā, tadīya tattajñam, arthadānastrīvyasanādya—bhāvātmakaśaucayuktaṃ caturaṃ kulīnaṃ kuryāt |”

And commentator medhātithi said about the quality of envoy—

dūtasyāyamadhiko guṇaḥiṅgitākāraceṣṭajñatā | paraviṣaye rājño mantriṇāñca sandhitsatāmiṅgitāni dūtasyādareṇa saṃparigrahaḥ | viśvasanaṃ muhurmuhuḥ sampūrṇatadvākyasya tasya cābhinandanam | etāni viparyyastānyupekṣeta | ākāraḥ śarīravaikṛtyaṃ mlānirmukhasya varṇavaikṛtyam | tūṣṇīmbhāvo dīrghoṣṇaniḥśvāsatā evamādivikārairdainyaṃ sūcayati | asti kācidāpadasya tenāyaṃ vivarṇa iti vākyavaiśāradyam | śārīrasaṃskāraḥ prasannamukhatā evamādiḥ harṣaṃ sūcayati | śuciḥ strīgate'rthe gamanaviśeṣairyataḥ strīsamvandhe mantrabhedaḥ paribhavaśca |”

In this context commentator Rāghabānanda said—

“śāstrāviśāradaṃ śāstraṃ pratipattihetu saṃskṛta prākṛtadeśabhāṣādharmaśāstrakarapallavādi, tatra viśāradaṃ nipuṇam | iṅgitākāraceṣṭajñaṃ iṅgitākārābhyāmeva ceṣṭājñaṃ paracikīrṣitajñamiti |”

And Commentator Gobindarāja said,

“dūtaṃ ca dṛṣṭādṛṣṭārthaśāstrārthapāragamiti tasyābhiprāya sūcakasya............. vākkāyavyāpāraviśeṣasyākārasya cābhiprāyasūcakasya śarīravikārasyaceṣṭāyāśca kvacāyudhabhojanātmikāyā vijñātāramarthastrīśaucādiyukkam |”^[4]

It means the king should appoint the ambassador who is well known in all subjects. He should realise the eye expression etc. hints. He should able to understand about the happiness of the king, seeing his (kings) graceful facial expression and able to understand dissatisfaction of the king seeing his disgraceful facial expression. The ambassador should realize the mental condition of the king observing the perseverance of kings clapping, the sign made by fingers or slightest hint. And the another quality of an ambassador should be of pure character, skillful in his work and should be of noble family.

He should be pure character about women, money etc. also.

“anurakataḥ śucirdakṣaḥ smṛtimān deśakālavit, |
vapuṣmān vītabhīrvāgmī dūto rājñaḥ praśasyate ||” 7.64 ||^[5]

“Loving (hence popular), honest, clever, not forgetful, a discerner of time and place of impressive appearance, fearless and eloquent such an envoy of the king is commended.”^[6]

In this verse Manu has discussed about the quality of ambassador also. Here he discussed about the seven qualities of an ambassador. According to him an ambassador must be loving and loyal, which means that he must have affection for the people. In view of this he will not be disfavored by a rival king. Secondly, he must be incapable of being won over by any kind of gift and allurement. He is very much pure about women and money. The enemy king can not seperate this type of ambassador cheating or pretending with money and women. Thirdly, he must be very clever and should not, therefore, allow the opportune moment to pass by. Fourthly, he must have good memory so that he does not forget his message. He does not forget his masters advice. Fifthly, he must have the power to study time and place so that if required he may change the message and deliver it to the person for whom it is meant. Sixthly, he must possess an impressive personality, so that his words are accepted by a rival king. Seventhly, he must be fearless, so that he does not hesitate to communicate even an unpleasant message. Lastly he must be a good orator, so that his speech can impress even those who hold different opinions in different language. He can response his opinion with the Sanskrit, prakṛt etc. languages in respect of the argument of any kind of people or every people.

The opinions of commentator Kūllkabhaṭṭa and Medhātithi are reflected in the above said discussion.

According to the opinion of commentator Kūllkabhaṭṭa:

“yasmāt janeṣu anurāgavān tena pratirājñāderapi adveṣaviṣayaḥ | arthastrīśaucayukkaḥ tena dhanastrīdānādinā abhedyaḥ | dakṣaścaturaḥ tenakāryyakālaṃ nātikrāmati | smṛtimān tena sandeśaṃ na vismarati | deśakālajñaḥ tena deśakālau jñātvā anyadapi sandiṣṭaṃ deśakālocitamanyathā kathayati | surupaḥ tenādeyavacanaḥ | vigatabhayaḥ tenāpriyasandeśasyāpi vaktā | vāgmī tena saṃskṛtādyuktikṣamaḥ | evaṃvidho duto rājñaḥ praśasyo bhavati |”

And commentator Medhātithi said about quality of envoy. According to him—

“anuraktaḥ ahāryyo bhavati | dakṣaḥ deśakālau nātikrāmati | smṛtimānamūṣitasmṛtiḥprasaṅgena svāmisandeśaṃ kathayati | deśakālavit deśakālau jñātvā anyadapi sandiṣṭaṃ tatkālayogyaṃ kathayati | vapuṣmān svākṛtiḥ priyadarśanatvānnipuṇamucitaṃ vaktiḥ | vītabhīḥ anena nipuṇamucyate | vāgmī sandeśasyottare prativacanasamartho bhavati |”

“amātye daṇḍa āyatto daṇḍe vainayikī kriyā | nṛpatau kośarāṣṭre ca dute sandhiviparyayau ||”7.65 ||^[7]

“Under the control of a minister (in the person of the commander-in chief) is the army, under the control of the army are the acts relative to government, under the control of the king are the treasury and the country, and (likewise) under the control of the envoy are peace and its reverse(i.e.war).”^[8]

In this connection commentator Kūllkabhaṭṭa said—

“amātye senāpatau hastyaśvarathapādātādyātmako daṇḍa āyattaḥ, tadicchayā tasya kāryeṣu pravṛtteḥ | vinayayegāt vainayikī, yo vinayaḥ sa daṇḍa āyattaḥ | nṛpatāvarthasañcayasthanadeśāvāyattau rājñā parādhīnau na kartavyau | svayameva cintanīyaṃ dhanaṃ grāmaśca | dute sandhivigrahāvāyattau tadicchayā tatpravṛtteḥ |”

And according to Medhātithi—

“ukkadūtaguṇānāṃ sampādanāya tatprayojanamāha | amātye senāpatau daṇḍo hastyādivalamāyattaṃ, tadicchayā kāryeṣu pravṛtteḥ | daṇḍe vainayikī, yo vineyaḥ svapararāṣṭragataḥ sa daṇḍyo, yataḥ vinayāśritā vainayikī kriyā kāryam | nṛpatau koṣarāṣṭre āyatte | sañcayasthanaṃ kośaḥ | rāṣṭraṃ janapadaḥ | dve ca te parādhīne na kartavye svayameva vilambhanīyaphalagrāsācca | dute sandhiviparyyayau priyavacanena svāmikāryyapradarśanena sandhiḥ tadvaiparītyena vigrahaḥ etadubhayaṃ dūtāyattam |”

“This verse speaks of the part that the ambassador may play in establishing peace and prosperity or in creating trouble and disorder. It is through the efforts of an efficient ambassador that impending wars may be avoided and lasting peace may be secured. When two or more countries are involved in war the successful mediation of an ambassador may avert the catastrophe. On the other hand, it is only due to the incompetence of an ambassador that other wise peaceful countries may get involved in war. Manu emphasizes this when he say that the militia is controlled by the commander-in-chief, the subjects by the army, the treasury and the government by the king and peace and war by the envoy. Peace and prosperity of a country, therefore, largely depend on the envoy.”^[9]

It means, the army depends on the minister. That minister is the person of the commander in chief. Here army means complete army. Army consisting of four division they are elephant, chariot, horse and infantry.

These are called daṇḍa:

“hastyaśvarathapādātādyātmakau daṇḍaḥ |”

The army force become active according to the order of commander-in-chief. Punishment of the subjects depends upon complete force. Or the due control of the subjects on the army.

Here,

“It is to be noted specially that the word daṇḍa has been used in the sense of the four elements of the state i.e, elephant, horse, chariot and infantry. Hence the meaning of daṇḍa in the present context differs from the sense in which it is employed by Manu (verses—14-20) and also by other writers like Kauṭilya”.^[10]

The punishable person will be punished by the complete force who is well known in his own subject. The state and the treasure depend upon the king. These two subjects are not trustable except the king. Because, they (other) can capture money and profit. War and peace depend upon spy. If the ambassador clearly explains the purpose of his master by his polite speech to the enemy king, then the peace will be establish in between two kings. And if the spy is failure to perform his duty then war will be start. So, these two subjects depend upon the spy.

In this context Manu said:

dūta eva hi sandhate bhinattyeva ca saṃhatān |
dūtastat kurute karma bhidyante yena mānavāḥ || 7.66 ||^[11]

“For the ambassador alone makes (kings) allies and sepatates allies the ambassador transacts that business by which man are disunited.”^[12]

In this context commentator Kūllkabhaṭṭa says—

“yasmāddūta eva bhinnānāṃ sandhi sampādane kṣamaḥ saṃhatānāñca bhedane, tathā paradeśe dūtastatkarma karoti yena saṃhatā bhidyante na vā bhidyante tasmād dūte sandhiviparyayau sandhivigrahāvāyattāviti yaduktaṃ tasyaivayaṃ prapañcaḥ |”

And according to Medhātithi—

“yathā dūtaḥ sandhatte | yathoktaṃ saṃgatānekībhūtān sa eva bhinatti | anuktamapi priyaṃ sandiśati | pratikūlamanācaritamityadi | suvarṇādi dravyamapratiśrūtamityaha evaṃ bhinatti dūtaḥ | tadetat karmānantaropadiṣṭaṃ yena rājāno bhidyante na vāk pāruṣyāpannā evaṃ sambhavati |”

And

“sa vidyādasya kṛtyeṣu niguṭeṅgita ceṣṭitaiḥ |
ākāramiṅgitaṃ ceṣṭāṃ bhṛtyeṣu ca cikīrṣitam ||” 7.67 ||^[13]

“With respect to the affairs let the (ambassador) explore the expressions of the countenance, the gestures and actions of the (enemy king) through the gestures and actions of his confidential (advisers) and (discovery) his disigns amongs his servants.”^[14]

In this context commentator Kūllkabhaṭṭa says about the another duty of ambassador—

“sa dūto'sya pratirājasya kartavye ākāreṅgitaceṣṭā jānīyāt | nijūḍhāḥ anucarāḥ pratipakṣanṛpasaiva parijanāḥ tasmin niyuktāḥ tat sannidhāvapi teṣāmiṅgiteceṣṭitai bhṛtyeṣu ca lubdhalubdhāpamāniteṣu pratirājasya kartumīpsitaṃ jānīyāt |”

In this context Manu has said also—

“vuddhā ca sarvaṃ tattvena pararāja cikorṣitim tathā prayatnamātiṣṭhed yathātmānaṃ na pīḍayet ||” 7.68 ||^[15]

“Having learnt exactly (from his ambassador) the designs of the enemy king, let (the king) adopt such measures that he does not bring evil on himself.”^[16]

Setlelment or battle depend upon the information of the ambassador.

So Manu said—

“dūte sandhiviparyayau” | (7/65).

In this context Kullūka said—

dūte sandhi vigrahāvāyāttau tadicchayā tat pravṛtteḥ || (commentary of the verse No-7/65).

“This verse states according to Kullūka some more duties of the ambassador. Firstly, he should try to understand the facial expressions gestures and movements of the enemy king. Secondly, in order to win over such people in the enemy’s kingdom who are dissatisfied, avaricious and insulted, the king should instruct his ambassador to study the attitude of the enemy king towards them from the gestures and actions of officers closely associated with him. For the purpose of undermining the strength of the enemy dissension (upajāpa) is a most fruitful weapon and it is the dissatisfied, avaricious and insulted people who fall victims to upajāpa. If the enemy king is carelss in his treatment with regard to them it becomes easy to sow seeds of discord disintegration through them”.^[17]

Footnotes and references:

[1]:

Manabendu Bandyopadhaya: Op.cit., p. 660.

[2]:

Ashoka kumar Bandyopadhaya, (Ed.): Manusaṃhitā, p.120.

[3]:

Ashokanath Shastri, (Ed.): Manusaṃhitā, pp. 77-78.

[4]:

ibid., p.78.

[5]:

Manabendu Bandyopadhaya: Op.cit., p.660.

[6]:

Ashoka kumar Bandyopadhaya: Op.cit., p.121.

[7]:

Manabendu Bandyopadhaya: Op.cit.,p.661.

[8]:

Ashoka kumar Bandyopadhaya: Op.cit., p.123.

[9]:

Ashokanath Shastri: Op.cit., (7th Chap.) p. 81.

[10]:

ibid., pp. 81-82.

[11]:

Manabendu Bandyopadhaya: Op.cit., p. 662.

[12]:

Ashokanath Shastri: Op.cit., p.82.

[13]:

Manabendu Bandyopadhaya: Op.cit., p.662.

[14]:

Ashokanath Shastri: Op.cit., p. 83.

[15]:

Manabendu Bandyopadhaya: Op.cit., p. 663.

[16]:

Ashokanath Shastri: Op.cit., p. 84.

[17]:

ibid., p. 83.