Ṣāḍguṇya according to Manu

Manu also describes about ṣāḍguṇya. There are six types of ṣāḍguṇya. According to the Manusaṃhitā they are—

“sandhiñca vigrahañcaiva yānamāsanameva ca
dvaighībhāvaṃ saṃśrayañca ṣaḍguṇāṃścintayet sadā ||” 7.160 ||^[1]

“Let him constantly think of the six measures of royal policy viz, alliance, war, marching, halting, dividing the army and seeking protection.”^[2]

The sixfold policy of administration primarily concerns itself with the king in relation to other powers.

Commentator to Kullūkabhaṭṭa says about ṣāḍguṇya—

“tatrobhayānugrahārthaṃ hastyaśvarathahiraṇyādinivanghanenāvābhyāmanyonyasyopakarttavyamiti niyamavandhaḥ sandhiḥ | vairaṃ vigrahācaraṇādyādhikyena, yānaṃ śatruṃ prati gamanam | upekṣaṇamāsanam | svārthasiddhaye valasya dvidhākaraṇaṃ dvaidhībhāvaḥ | śatrupīḍitasya pravalatararājāntarārśrayaṇaṃ saṃśrayaḥ | etān guṇānupakārakān sarvadā cintayet | yadaguṇāśrayaṇe satyatmana upacayaḥ parasyāpacayaḥ tad guṇamāśrayet |”

But according to Medhātithi;

“tatra hiranyādidānobhayānugrahārthaḥ sandhistadviparīto vigpahaḥ | ekāntatāṇyucyate | yānamupekṣāyāmāsam | sandhivigrahopādānaṃ dvaidhībhāvaḥ | parasyātmārpaṇaṃ saṃśrayaḥ, ete ṣaḍguṇāḥ | eteṣāṃ sasmin guṇe'vasthito manyetāhaṃ śakṣyāmi durgaṃ kārayituṃ hastinīrvandhayituṃ khanīḥ khanayituṃ vaṇikapathaṃ prayojayituṃ jatuvanaṃ chedayitum adevamātṛkadeśe kṣetrāṇi vandhayitumityevamādīni parasya vittāni vyāhartuṃ buddhividhānārthaṃ guṇamupeyādevañca sati |”

According to Sarvajñanārāyaṇa that king should march dividing the army—

‘daidhībhāvo'lpasya sainyasya vibhajya yodhanamiti’ |

The opinion of Govindarāja:

‘apakāro vigrahaḥ, abhyudaye satyuparigamanaṃ yānam,
‘ekena saha sandhiḥ anyena saha vigraho dvaidhībhāva iti |’

A King should be thoughtfull about these six measures of royal policy as:

1. sandhi (treaty),
2. vigraha (war),
3. yāna (marching)
4. āsana (halting),
5. dvaidhībhāva (double dealing) and
6. saṃśraya (seeking protection).

Vijigīṣu and ari (enemy) must promise to exchange resources, horses, elephants etc.among them which is known as sandhi (treaty). The opposite of sandhi (treaty) is vigraha (war). Setting-out against enemy king for war is known as yāna (marching). Avoiding the enemy and residing in his own state is known as āsana (halting). Declaring treaty with one of the enemy state and war with another enemy kingdom is kown as dviadhībhāvba (double dealing). According to Kullūkabhaṭṭa, dividing his army according to need is known as dviadhībhāva (double dealing). Surrendering of vijigīṣu king to a powerful king often suffering by enemy is known as saṃśraya (seeking protection).

These are ṣāḍguṇya (six measures of royal policy). According to him one of the policies among the six policies which ever the king thinks is the best for creating his fort, collecting elephants, digging mines, creating trade routes, creating forest areas to gain forest resources, creating cultivable lands for agriculture, gaining treasures of another king by strength or by trick.

Manu also says—

‘āsanaṃ caiva yānañca sandhiṃ vigrahameva ca |
kāṃryaṃ vīkṣya prayuñjīta dvaidhaṃ saṃśrayameva ca’ || 7.161 ||^[3]

“Having carefully considered the business in hand let him resort to sitting quiet or marching alliance or war, dividing his forces or seeking protection as the case may require.”^[4]

According to the commentary of Kullūkabhaṭṭa of this verse—

‘sandhyādiguṇānāṃ nairapekṣyeṇānuṣṭhānamanantaramuktaṃ , taducitānuṣṭhanārtho'yamārambhaḥ | ātmasamṛddhi parahānyādikaṃ kāryaṃ vīkṣya sandhāyāsanaṃ vigṛhya vā yānaṃ dvaidhībhāvasaṃśrayau ca kenacit sandhiṃ kenacit vigrahamityadikamanutiṣṭhet’ |

The opinion of Medhātithi of this verse—

“ekena sandhāyāparasmin yāne śaktaṃ mṛṣā vigṛhṇīyāt, evamānasanamapi sandhāya vigṛhya ca sarvametat kāryaṃ vīkṣa prayuñjīta | nātra niyatakālaḥ, yadaiva yad yuktaṃ manyeta tadaiva tadācaret” | yadi kālaniyamo lakṣayinuṃ na śakyate upadeśaḥ kimarthamevamāha—na śakyate viśeṣo durlakṣaḥ sāmānyastu sulakṣametadaṇyavudhānāmupayujyate |”

“In the previous verse Manu says that it is the duty of the king to weigh the six measures of royal policy. And in this verse he refers to the king’s duty in so far as any one of these six measures is to be actually employed for the purpose of securing the business. Thus this verse states that it is only one of the six policies that should be employed after careful consideration of the suitability of the application of all of them. To be precise, the king should weigh all the six policies but employ only one. Consideration of all the policies is a subject-matter of the preceding verse while the application of any one of them is the topic under discussion in the present stanza. The reading ‘sandhiñca vigrahameva ca’ has been accepted by us for the fact that it gives equal prominence to all the six policies. If ‘sandhāya ca vigṛhya ca’ is accepted then they are to be construed severally with Yāna and āsana, but we do not think that Manu is thinking of it though Kāmandaka suggests five different classes of Yāna and āsana. The classification of sandhi etc. has been done by Manu in the following ślokas and it does not appear to be appropriate that he will unnecessarily speak of the varieties of āsana and Yāna only in this verse.”^[5]

Manu classified each guṇa into two categories.

“sandhiṃ tu dvivighaṃ vidyād rājā vigrahameva ca |
ubhe yānāsane caiva dvividhaṃḥ saṃśrayaḥ smṛtaḥ ||” 7.162 ||^[6]

‘But the king must know that there are two kinds of alliances and of wars, likewise two of both marching and sitting quiet, and two occasions for dividing forces and seeking protection.’^[7]

“samānayānakarmā ca vipararUtastathaiva ca |
tadātvāyatisaṃyukkaḥ sandhirjñeyo dvilakṣaṇaḥ ||” 7.163 ||^[8]

“An alliance which yields present and future advantages, one must know to be of two descriptions, (viz.,) that when one marches together with an ally and the contrary, that is, when the allies act separately.”^[9]

Kullūka says about this verse—

‘tātkālikaphalalābhārthamuttarakālī—naphalalābhārthaṃ vā yatra rājāntareṇa sahānyaṃ prati yānādikarma kriyate sa samānayānakarmā sandhiḥ | ya punaḥ tvamatra yāhi, ahamatra yāsyāmi’ iti sāmpratikottarakālīnaphalārthitayaiva kriyate so'samānayānakarmetyevaṃ dviprakāraḥ sandhirjñātavyaḥ |’

It means, treaty can be of two types. The treaty where tadātva which means for immediate fruitful results or āyati which means for gaining results afterwards vijigīṣu king combines with other state so that “We would attack the enemy state together, both would get the same result, we would not leave each other and what ever we would get from the enemy state, would be yours as well as mine’ is known as ‘samānayānakarmā sandhi’.

And the opposite of this treaty where vijigīṣu king says “you attack one side of the enemy, I will lay an expedition on the other side” in this way if there is a treaty with other king to gain immediate results or future results, then that treaty is called ‘asamānayānakarmā sandhi’ |

Medhātithi says of the abovge verse—

‘samānayānakarmā yānaphalaṃ sahitau tulyau gacchāvaḥ samānaphalabhāgitayā na ca tvayāhamullaṅghanīyaḥ | yattato lapsyate tat tava mama ca. bhaviṣyati | athavā tvamanyato yāhyahamanyatra yāsyāmītyevamasamānayānakarmā viparītaḥ |’

“Medhātithi proposes besides the explanation given before another one; an alliance one most know to be of two kinds viz., that when the allies share the danger and the fruits of the expedition and the contrary”.^[10]

“svayaṃkṛtaśca kāryārthamakāle kāla eva vā |
mitrasya caivāpakṛte dvividho vigrahaḥ smṛtaḥ ||” 7.164 ||^[11]

‘War is declared to be of two kinds viz., that which is undertaken in season or out of season, by oneself and for one’s own purposes and that waged to avenge an injury done to a friend’.^[12]

Kullūka says about this verse—

‘śatrujayarupaprayojanārthaṃ śatrorcyasanādi—kamākalayya vakṣyamāṇamārgaśīrṣādikālādanyadā, yathoktakāle eva vā svayaṃkṛta ityeko vigrahaḥ, apakṛtamapakāraḥ, mitrasyāpakāre rājāntareṇa kṛte mitrarakṣaṇārthamaparo vigrahaḥ, ityevaṃ dvividho vigrahaḥ |’ govindarājena “tu mitreṇa caivāpakṛta” iti paṭhitaṃ vyākhyātañca | yaḥ parasya śatruḥ sa vijigīṣormitraṃ, tenāpakāre kriyamāṇe vyasanini śatrau iti |’ “tasmāllikhitapāḍhārthau vṛddhairgovindarājataḥ | medhātithiprabhṛtibhilikhitau svīkṛtau mayā ||”

Means, war can be of two types. Taking advantage of enemies indulgence, calamity etc. errors or weakness if a vijigīṣu king decides to attack his enemy following scriptures or (out of the rules of the scriptures) even going against them according to his wish, that kind of war is called svayaṃkṛta vigraha. If enemy king himself attacks a friendly state then to protect that friendly state vijigīṣu king decides to fight against the enemy king without marching time is also one type of war. In another case if the friendly state of vijigīṣu king attacks the enemy state, then also to help his friend vijigīṣu king may declare war against the enemy state. In this way to fullfil his own need and the need of friendly state, this two types of war may take place.

In this context the opinion of Medhātithi is—

“yadi śaṃtruṇā tadīyaṃ mitramapakṛtaṃ tadā tadvicintyākāle'pi vigrahaḥ karttavyaḥ |”^[13]

Medhātithi commented about this—

“svayaṃvigrahasya | kālo sadāvaśyaṃ svavalenotsahate paraṃ dharṣayitumutsāhayukkaḥ prakṛtayaḥ saṃhatā vivṛddhāśca svakarmakṛṣyādiphalasampannāḥ parasyaitānyaparihariṣyanti karmāṇi kṣīṇalavdhaprakṛtiḥparaḥ śakyāstatprakṛtayaḥ upajāpenātmīyāḥ kartuṃ sa svayaṃ, vigrahasya kālaḥ | akāla etadviparīta, tatrāpi vigraho mitrasyāpakṛte yadi śatruṇā tadīyaṃ mitramapakṛtaṃ tadā tadvicintyākāle'pi vigrahaḥ kartavyaḥ | yadyapi svayamapi śatroranantaraṃ mitraṃ bhavati tathāpi tena mitreṇa sahāyena śakyaḥ śatrurapavādhitum | śatroranantaraṃ mitraṃ bhavati śatrostu śatrurviṣayānantaratvam | pāṭhāntaraṃ matreṇa caivāpakṛte | tena yadyasau vādhito bhavati tadākāle'pi vigrahaḥ kāryaḥ | etadvigrahasya dvaividhyaṃ svakāryārthaṃ mitrakāryārthañca | athavātmano'bhyucchrayādekaḥ prakāro mitreṇāpakṛte vyasanini tatraiva dvitīyaḥ |”

“Medhātithi takes ‘akāla’ with second clause, and that waged out of season in order to advenge an injury done to a friend. He also mentions a variant, mitreṇāpakṛte with the following explanation—‘and that waged out of season when the enemy has been weakened by an ally,’ Govindarāja agrees with this latter view except that he takes ‘akāle’ with the first clause. The other commentators give the explanation adopted in the translation”.^[14]

“Kullūka thinks that by ‘kāla’ here Manu refers to such auspicious months as mārgaśīrṣa phālguna and cetra (VII. 182). But Medhātithi does not agree. According to him, when the king notices that his own army possesses the urge for fighting and his subjects are united and prosperous and there is abundance of crop in the country and the enemy is weak and his subjects may be won over, such a time is opportune for undertaking a fight against the enemy. In other words such an occasion is kāla and the reverse of it is akāla.”^[15]

“yadā prahṛṣṭā manyeta sarvāstu prakṛtīrbhṛśam |
atyucchritaṃ tathātmānaṃ tadā kurvīta vigraham ||” 7.170 ||^[16]

‘But when he thinks all his subjects to be exceedingly contented, and that he himself is most exalted in power, then let him make war’.^[17]

In this context commentator Kullūkabhaṭṭa says that—

“yadā amātyadikāḥ sarvā prakṛtiḥ dānasammānādyairatīva tuṣṭā manyeta, ātmānañca hastyaśvakoṣādyai śaktitrayeṇa upacitaṃ tadā vigrahamāśrayet” |

“yadā manyeta bhāvena hṛṣṭaṃ puṣṭaṃ balaṃ svakam |
parasya viparītañca tadā yāyādripuṃ prati ||” 7.171 ||^[18]

‘When he knows his own army to be cheerful in disposition and strong, and that of his enemy the reverse, then let him march against his foe’.^[19]

Commentator Kullūkabhaṭṭa says that—

“yadātmīyamamātyadisainyaṃ harṣayuktaṃ dhanādinā puṣṭaṃ tattvato jānīyāt, śatroścāmātyadivalaṃ viparītaṃ tadā taṃ lakṣīkṛtya yāyāt ||” “yadi tatrāpi sampaśyeddoṣaṃ saṃśrayakāritam | suyuddhameva tatrāpi nirviśaṅkaḥ samācaret ||” 7.176 ||^[20]

‘When ever in that condition, he sees that evil is caused by such protection, let him without hesitation have recourse to a total war.’^[21]

Kullūka says—

“agatikā hi gati saṃśrayo nāma, tatrāpi yadi saṃśrayakṛtaṃ doṣaṃ paśyettadā nisaṃśayo bhutvā śobhanameva yuddhaṃ tasmin kāle samācaret , dubaalenāpi balavato jayadarśanānnihatasya ca svargaprāpteḥ |”

“It is quite interesting to note that Kullūka clearly states that saṃśraya is the way of the helpless. If, however, saṃśraya does not improve the position and evil is apprehended it should be avoided at all costs”.^[22]

“ekākinaścātyayikekārye prāpte yadṛcchayā |
saṃhatasya ca mitreṇa dvividhaṃ yānamucyate ||” 7.165 ||^[23]

“Marching to attack is said to be twofold (viz., that undertaken) by one alone when an urgent matter has suddenly arisen and (that undertaken) by one allied with a friend”.^[24]

Kullūkabhaṭṭa says—

‘ātyayikaṃ kāyaṃ śatrorcyasanādikaṃ, tasminakasmājjāte, śaktasyaikākino yānamaśaktasya mitrasahitasyetvevaṃ yānaṃ dvividhamabhidhīyate ||’

Means, if enemy faces indulgences, calamity etc. then vijigīṣu may march against his enemy alone and if vijigīṣu himself is not so powerful then he may make an alliance with his friendly state and declare war against their enemy. So, marching against enemy may be of two types.

[Declaring war against enemy during his indulgence or calamity is the perfect time for vijigīṣu because later on the enemy king may increase his power it would become difficult to remove him from power by attacking him.]

‘ātyayikekārye’ means, the vyasana (calamity) of the enemy. If there is an unexpected turn of misfortune on the part of the enemy the king should seize this opportunity for undertaking a march. If he is very powerful, he may march alone and if he thinks that he will not succeed alone, he should march in the company of others.”^[25]

“kṣīṇasya caiva kramaśo daivāt pūrvakṛtena vā |
mitrasya cānurodhena dvividhaṃ smṛtamāsanam ||” 7.166 ||^[26]

“Sitting quiet is stated to be of two kinds (viz., that incumbent) on one who has gradually been awakened by fate or in consequence of former acts, and (that) in favour of a friend”.^[27]

Kullūkabhaṭṭa says—

“prāgjanmārjitena duṣkṛtenaihikena vā pūrvakṛtena kramaśaḥ kṣīṇahastyaśvakośādikasya samṛddhasyāpi vā mitrānurodhena tatkāryarakṣārthamityevaṃ dvividhamāsanaṃ munibhiḥ smṛtam” |

And Medhātithi says—

“vṛddhikṣayau sarvasyaitena kāraṇena bhavataḥ | tatra daivaṃ svakṛtapramādaḥ ativyaya— śīlatā, apratijāgaraṇaṃ sve vale pūrvakṛtamaśubhaṃ karmāpi | viparyayeṇa vaitad vyākhyeyam | mohāditi pāṭhāntaram | arthastu daivaśavdena vyākhyāta” |

It means, halting is also of two types. Silently waiting is known as halting. Unfortunately due to the loss of elephants, horses, treasure etc. not declaring war against enemy king or due to the request of friendly king or according to his need not declaring war against enemy king and waiting both are known as halting. So, we may conclude that halting is of two types.

“Purvakṛtena according to Medhātithi and Kullūka it means ‘in consequence of former acts i.e., in consequence of acts committed in a former existence, or in consequence of former imprudence.”^[28]

“Medhātithi says that prosperity and adversity are due to either daiva or purvakṛta. By daiva Medhātithi means one’s own carelessness, extravagant habits and absence of wakefulness with regard to one’s strength.”^[29]

“yadā tu syāt parikṣīṇo vāhanena balena ca |
tadāsīta prayatnena śanakaiḥ sāntvayannarīn ||” 7.172 ||^[30]

‘But if he is very weak in chariots and beasts of burden and in troops, then let him carefully sit quiet, gradually conciliating his foes’.^[31]

In this contex Kullūkabhaṭṭa says—

“yadā punarvāhanena hastyaśvādinā valena cāmātyadinā parīkṣīṇo bhavet tadā sāmopadāpradānādinā śatrun prasāntvayan prayatnenāsanamāśrayet |”

“balasya svāminaścaiva sthitiḥ kāryārthasiddhaye |
dvivighaṃ kīrtyate dvaidhaṃ ṣāḍguṇyaguṇavedibhiḥ ||” 7.167 ||^[32]

“If the army stops in one place and its master in another, in order to effect some purpose, that is called by those acquainted with the virtues of the measure of royal policy, the twofold division of the forces.”^[33]

Kullūka says—

‘sādhyasvaprayojanasiddhyathaṃ balasya hastyaśvādeḥ senādhipatyadhiṣṭhitasyaikatra śatrunṛpopadravavāraṇārthamavasthanamanyatra durgadeśe rājñaḥ katicidvalādhiṣṭitasyāvasthanamevaṃ sandhyādiguṇaṣaṭkopakārajñairdvividhaṃ dvaidhaṃ kīrtyate |’ Medhātithi says—‘valasya sthitiḥ svāminaśca bhedena durgasvāminaḥ svalpena valena senāpateranyatra mahatā valena yukkasya | athavā valaśapathānugrahārthaḥ kaścit kartavyo hiraṇyādilābhāpekṣayā parastvadhikenāśu | dvaidhībhāvo nāmāyamupāyaḥ sasyaitadeva rūpaṃ yadvidhā sthitirvalasvāminoratraivaṃrupasya tasyāparaṃ dvaidhaṃ vakkavyam | na ca tadanena kiñciducyate | kevalaṃ valasya svāminaśca sthitiretaddvividhaṃ tatra vakkavyaṃ māyāyāṃ dvaidhībāvastasyedaṃ dvaividhyām ucyate | sāmarthyalabhyametat parānugrahārthametat kartavyaṃ svakāryārthañcetyeṣa dvaidhībhāvaḥ |

According to Sarvajñanārāyaṇa—

“valasya senāpatyadhiṣṭhitasya puro'vasthanaṃ svāminastu sainyaikadeśena yānamityekaṃ dvaidhamaparametadviparyayāditi”^[34]

“The text really mentions one method of dvaidha (division). Hence Medhātithi thinks that in order to obtain the two kinds required, it must be understood that the measure may be resorted to either for one’s own sake or for the sake of somebody else. Sarvajñanārāyaṇa makes the two methods but by supposing that in the one case the army stops in front of the enemy under the command of a general, while the king marches with a portion of his forces, and that in the other case the contrary takes place. Sarvajñanārāyaṇa’s whole explanation consists of the quotation cited from Kāmandaka.

Kāmandaka defines dvaidhībhāva as:

valinodviṣatormadhye vācātyanaṃ samarpayan |
jadvaidhībhāvena vartteta kākākṣivadalakṣitaḥ |”^[35]
“manyetāriṃ yadā rājā sarvathā balavattaram |
tadā dvidhā balaṃ kṛtvā sādhayet kāryamātmanaḥ ||” 7.173 ||^[36]

‘When the king knows the enemy to be stronger in every respect, then let him divide his army and then achieve his purpose”.^[37]

Kullūka says—

“yadā rājā sarvaprakāreṇa balīyāṃsamaśakyasandhānañca śatruṃ budhyettadā katicidvalasahitaḥ svayaṃ durgamāśrayet, balaikadeśene ca śatruvirodhāmācaret | evaṃ dvidhābalaṃ kṛtvā bhitrasaṃgrahādikaṃ svakāṃryaṃ sādhayet |”

Means, when the Vijigīṣu king thinks that the enemy is to be the most strongest then to fulfill of his purpose he divides his force into two categories.

[When a strong enemy attacks the kingdom of vijigīṣu king and there is a very low chance of a treaty, in that case protecting his fort is the best. In such situation following dvaidhībhāva king should take shelter in fort with some of the troops and with remaining troops it should be deployed to resist the enemy. The vijigīṣu king whose army count is high may divide his army into two at the time of crisis.]

“arthasampādanārthañca pīḍyamānasya śatrubhiḥ |
sādhuṣu vyapadeśārtha dvivighaḥ saṃśrayaḥ smṛtaḥ ||” 7.168 ||^[38]

“Seeking refuge is declared to be of two kinds, first for the purpose of attaining an advantage when one is harassed by enemies, secondly in order to become known among the virtuous (as the protege of a powerful king)”.^[39]

Kullūkabhaṭṭa says in his commentary—

‘śatrumiḥ pīḍyamānasya śatrupīḍānivṛttyākhyaprayojanasiddhayarthamasatyamapi vā tatkāle pīḍāyāṃ bhāviśatrupīḍāśaṅkayā amukamayaṃ mahābalaṃ nṛpatimāśrita: iti sarvatravyapadeśotpādanārthaṃ balavadupāśrayaṇam evaṃ dvividhaḥ saṃśrayaḥ smṛtaḥ’ |

And Medhātithi says in his commentary—

“śatrubhiḥpīḍyamānasya arthasampādanārthamanyatra saṃśrayaḥ | arthapīḍānivṛttistastatsampādanārthaṃ śakyamanya—māśrayet | svadeśaṃ hitvā tatra gacchet vyāpadeśaścapīḍitepi āgāmipīḍāparihārāya vyāpadeśarthamanyaṃ saṃśrayet | eṣo'sya sahāyako vartate śakye'yamupapīḍayitumiti vyāpadeśasiddharna kenacidupapādyate | vyapadeśaprayojanasaṃśrayo vyapadeśaśavdenokka, samānādhikaraṇyena |”

It means, being affected by enemy king and unable to resist vijigīṣu king may takes shelter under a more powerful king having his own kingdom. Again even if the king is not harassed by the enemy king but there is a chance of being attacked by the enemy in such condition shelter is taken under the most strongest which is announced as vyāpadeśa [because enemy would think that vijigīṣu king is under the shelter of the strongest. So, it would not be possible to defeat him. This is another type of saṃśraya.

So, saṃśraya. is of two types.

“yadā parabalānāntu gamanīyatamo bhadet |
tadā tu saṃśrayet kṣipraṃ dhārmikaṃ balinaṃ nṛpam ||” 7.174 ||^[40]

‘But when he is very easily assailable by the forces of the enemy, then let him quickly seek refuge with a righteous powerful king’.^[41]

Kullūkabhaṭṭa says—

‘yadā tu sainyānāmamātyadiprakṛtidoṣādināḍiṇaśayena grāhyo bhavati, vala dvaidhaṃ vidhāya durgāśrayaṇenāpi nātmarakṣākṣamastadā śīghrameva dhārmikaṃ valabantañca rājānamāśrayet |’

“nigrahaṃ prakṛtīnāñca kuryād yo'ribalasya ca |
upaseveta tat nityaṃ sarvayatnairgurūṃ yathā ||” 7.175 ||^[42]

“That prince who will coerce both his (disloyal) subjects and the army of the foe, let him ever serve with every effort like a guru (venerable preceptor).”^[43]

Kullūkabhaṭṭa says—

“kīdṛśaṃ taṃ valavantamityaha nigrahamiti | yāsāṃ doṣeṇāsau gamanīmatamo jātastāsāṃ prakṛtīnāṃ yasmācca śatruvalādasya bhayamutpannaṃ tayordvayorapi yaḥ saṃśrito nigranahamastaṃ nṛpaṃ sarvayantairgurumiva nityaṃ seveta |”

“yadāvagacchedāyatyamādhikyaṃ dhruvamātmanaḥ |
tadātve cālpikāṃ pīḍāṃ tadā sandhiṃ samāśrayet ||” 7.169 ||^[44]

“When the king knows that at some future time his superiority is certain, and that at the time present he will suffer little injury then let him have recourse to peaceful measures.”^[45]

Kullūka says in his commentary in this context—

‘yadā yuddhottarakāle niścitamātmanaḥ ādhikyaṃ jānīyāttadātve tatakāle'lpadhanādyu pakṣayastadā tvalpamaṅgīkṛtyapi sandhimāśrayet |’

“sarvopāyaistathā kuryānnītijñaḥ pṛthivīpatiḥ |
yathāsyābhyadhikā na syurmitrodāsīnaśatravaḥ ||” 7.177 ||^[46]

“By all the (four) expedients a politic prince must arrange matters so that neither friends, nor neutrals, nor foes are superior to himself.”^[47]

In this context Kullūka says—

‘sarvaiḥ sāmādibhirūpāyaiḥ notijño rājā tathā yateta, yathāsya mitrodāsīna śatravo'bhyadhikā na bhavanti, ādhikye hi teṣāmasau grāhyo bhavati, dhanalobhena mitrasyāpi śātravāpatteḥ |’

According to Medhātithi—

‘upāyavacanāt sāmādibhircyastaiḥ samastairvā | sarvagrahaṇāttu yena śakyante saṃdhādināpi tathā kuryāt tena prakāreṇa yateta, nītijñaḥ arthaśāstrajñaḥ svābhāvikaprajñaḥ nayādyabhijño vā rājā yathā syāt śaktiyetrayeṇābhyādhikā mitrādayo na bhaveyustathā prakṛtyadisamādiṣṭe karmapravartane ca tebhyo'dhikamātmānaṃ kuryāt | ślokānurodhānmadhyamagrahaṇaṃ na kṛtam | so'pi tu draṣṭavyo, na mitramittyupekṣyam | svaprayojanavyatirekeṇa mitraṃ nāmāvyavasthitaṃ hi mitratvādhikyamupagataṃ svārthagativaśācca mitramapyarirbhavati | tathā ca vyāsa āhaḥ—“na kaścit kasyacinmitraṃ na kaścit kasyandid ripuḥ | sāmarthyayogād vijñeyā mitrāṇi ripavastatheti |’

Means, politician king by adopting sāma-dāna etc. expedient applies them jointly or separately, so that neither friends, or enemies can grow superior to him, [A diplomatic king would arrange in such a manner so that he could be strongest in governmental power of mighty, council power and power of energy among the others. He makes himself superior applying the princely attitude according to principles on the prakṛtis. Here even without mentioning middle king but, we would have to take him into consideration. Which means middle king is friendly, considering this we can not ignore him, because without need kings do not have friends distinctly and the kings who have turned friendly might turn into enemies due to his need.]

Footnotes and references:

[1]:

Manabendu Bandyopadhaya, (Ed.): Manusaṃhitā, p. 703.

[2]:

Ashokanath Shastri: Manusaṃhitā (7th Chapter), p.166.

[3]:

Manabendu Bandyopadhaya: Op. cit., p. 704.

[4]:

Ashokanath Shastri: Op. cit. (7th Chapter), p. 167.

[5]:

ibid., p. 168.

[6]:

Manabendu Bandyopadhaya: Op. cit., p. 704.

[7]:

Ashokanath Shastri: Op. cit., (7th Chapter) , p. 169.

[8]:

Manabendu Bandyopadhaya: Op. cit., p. 704.

[9]:

Ashokanath Shastri: Op. cit. (7th Chapter), p. 169.

[10]:

ibid., p. 170.

[11]:

Manabendu Bandyopadhaya: Op. cit., p. 705.

[12]:

Ashokanath Shastri: Op. cit., (7th Chapter), p. 170.

[13]:

loc.cit.

[14]:

ibid., p. 171.

[15]:

loc.cit.

[16]:

Manabendu Bandyopadhaya: Op. cit., p. 708.

[17]:

Ashokanath Shastri: Op. cit., (7th Chapter) , p.175.

[18]:

Manabendu Bandyopadhaya: Op. cit., p.708.

[19]:

Ashokanath Shastri: Op. cit., (7th Chapter), p. 176.

[20]:

Manabendu Bandyopadhaya: Op. cit., p. 710.

[21]:

Ashokanath Shastri: Op. cit., (7th Chapter) , p. 178.

[22]:

loc. cit.

[23]:

Manabendu Bandyopadhaya: Op. cit., p. 706.

[24]:

Ashokanath Shastri: Op. cit., (7th Chapter) , pp. 171-172.

[25]:

ibid., p.172.

[26]:

Manabendu Bandyopadhaya: Op. cit., p. 706.

[27]:

Ashokanath Shastri: Op. cit., (7th Chapter) , p. 172.

[28]:

ibid., p. 173.

[29]:

loc. cit.

[30]:

Manabendu Bandyopadhaya: Op. cit., p. 709.

[31]:

Ashokanath Shastri: Op. cit., (7th Chapter) , p. 176.

[32]:

Manabendu Bandyopadhaya: Op. cit., p. 707.

[33]:

Ashokanath Shastri: Op. cit., (7th Chapter) , p. 173.

[34]:

ibid., pp. 173-174.

[35]:

ibid., p. 174.

[36]:

Manabendu Bandyopadhaya: Op. cit., p. 709.

[37]:

Ashokanath Shastri: Op. cit., (7th Chapter), p. 177.

[38]:

Manabendu Bandyopadhaya: Op. cit., p. 707.

[39]:

Ashokanath Shastri: Op. cit., (7th Chapter), p. 174.

[40]:

Manabendu Bandyopadhay: Op. cit., p.710.

[41]:

Ashokanath Shastri: Op. cit., (7th Chapter), p. 177.

[42]:

Manabendu Bandyopadhaya: Op. cit., p. 710.

[43]:

Ashokanath Shastri: Op. cit., (7th Chapter), p. 177.

[44]:

Manabendu Bandyopadhaya: Op. cit., p. 708.

[45]:

Ashokanath Shastri: Op. cit., (7th Chapter), p. 175.

[46]:

Manabendu Bandyopadhaya: Op. cit., p. 711.

[47]:

Ashokanath Shastri: Op. cit., p. 178.