Saṃskṛta-nāṭaka - Viśākha-datta - Mudrārākṣasa (Part 4)

Because he was so smart, Cāṇakya always exercised caution in his actions; he was all eyes at all times; he was able to estimate the enemy’s strategy by merely listening to Dāruvarmā’s replies and Stanakalaśa’s poems; he gathered the kind of ploys Rākṣasa had plotted to eliminate Candragupta and came up with counter-strategies for each. He ensured that the deeds of his enemies only worked against those who had hatched the plans.

Cāṇakya gets most of his activities carried out through his spies and imposters. His operational principle can be called aśruta-gati – footsteps that cannot be heard. In fact, many a time, his spies wouldn’t know all the details of his strategy – he informs only as much as required to each person; nevertheless, we don’t see that the partial knowledge of the activities that the spies possessed had affected them in any way; his students are everywhere and he has a string to pull at all junctures; he plays his game of dice at all situations; it is as if his eyes and limbs are all over. Cāṇakya’s men keep a close eye on every person belonging to the enemy team – Kṣapaṇaka was a spy who closely followed Rākṣasa, Siddhārthaka watched over Śakaṭadāsa, and Bhāgurāyaṇa pretended to be a close aide of Malayaketu; none of his enemies even suspected that they were being watched over; Cāṇakya never let anyone know all parts of his plan; he should really be called mahā-gupta – the keeper of massive secrets. Candragupta too, at times, is amazed by Cāṇakya’s ability to pretend and put up faces; it even scares him at times.

In sum, Cāṇakya is an extraordinary individual; just as we are thrilled by his success and awestruck by his shrewdness, we might feel scared by his plots and ploys. But, he is not cruel or selfish; throughout the play (and all other historical records), we see that he was generous, recognised the best of qualities in the other, and was detached; he was cognizant of his opponent’s qualities very well too – he had great appreciation for Rākṣasa’s loyalty to his lords and his skill at administration; Cāṇakya  honestly praised Rākṣasa both in his presence and absence.

The following is the description of Cāṇakya’s house –

Upalaśakalam-etad-bhedakaṃ gomayānāṃ

vaṭubhirupahṛtānāṃ barhiṣāṃ stūpam-etat|

śaraṇam-api samidbhiḥ śuṣyamāṇābhirābhi-

-rvinamita-paṭalāntaṃ dṛśyate jīrṇa-kuḍyam|| Act 3, verse 15

ಇದೊ ಗೋಮಯವೊಡೆಯುವ ಕಲ್

ಇದೊ ವಟುಗಳ್ ತಂದು ಕುಶಗಳಿದುಮೊಣಗಿಸಲೊ।

ಡ್ಡಿದ ಸಮಿಧೆಯ ಭಾರದೆ ಬಾ

ಗಿದ ಸೂರಿನ ಕುಸಿದ ಕೊಡೆಯರೆಮನೆ ಕಾಣ್ಗುಂ ।।  

Here lies a stone piece for breaking dry lumps of cow dung; there lies a handful of sacred kuśa grass brought by young pupils; the house with its worn-out walls, appears to have the edge of its roof bent down due to the samits (sacrificial sticks) that are laid upon it for drying.

Cāṇakya hardly cares for anyone or anything. He even addresses the king as vṛṣala[1]. He possesses immense self-confidence and is brave at heart; he never loses his mind nor does he rely only upon fate; he even looks down upon the weak who only anchor upon luck and declares, “only the ignorant attribute everything to Fate.”

However, we must remember that luck was on Cāṇakya’s side; he procured Rākṣasa’s signet ring, thanks to his good fortunes; even if he hadn’t got the ring, we can be sure that Cāṇakya would have been successful in his strategies; nevertheless, we must agree that the signet ring eased his job; it played a crucial rule in Cāṇakya’s victory and Rākṣasa’s defeat. To his misfortunate, luck was not on his side and Rākṣasa failed in everything he tried; moreover, he did not have the best of people and means on his side either; his spies were not as sharp as those of Cāṇakya; Malayaketu and Candragupta cannot be compared with each other – they were, in a sense, candidates for the throne of Kusumapura on the side of Rākṣasa and Cāṇakya respectively. Candragupta was like an offspring of Cāṇakya; the two always thought alike; when the situation arose, Candragupta even pretended to fight with Cāṇakya and it appeared to the world as if the two had fallen apart; Malayaketu was not that smart; he did not understand people or situations well. In fact, Cāṇakya was no match for Rākṣasa’s skill in physical combat and valorous deeds; but, Cāṇakya was much superior to Rākṣasa in his shrewdness and strategic planning; he had gathered his enemy’s strengths and weaknesses well; on the other hand, Rākṣasa hadn’t gauged Cāṇakya’s intellectual prowess; out of his naivety, he believed that Cāṇakya and Candragupta had fought and fallen apart. Rākṣasa was not someone who would suspect every move of the other; he was straightforward, well-meaning, and was also a family main; his soft nature made him bend when the situation demanded and helped him overcome his own stubborn nature. In contrast, Cāṇakya was stone-hearted; we don’t see his eyes turning wet anywhere in the story. The sāttvic nature of Rākṣasa manifests as love for his family, affection for his friends, compassion for the helpless, and loyalty towards his lord. Cāṇakya takes advantage of these very qualities to trap him. He knew the tremendous devotion Rākṣasa had towards the Nandas; he realised that the intensity of Rākṣasa’s devotion and loyalty was worth emulating, but the only problem was that it was directed towards the wrong set of people; he wanted to turn these qualities of Rākṣasa in Candragupta’s favour; he therefore, works hard to get Rākṣasa to accept the post of Candragupta’s minister; once Rākṣasa accepts the post, Cāṇakya knew that he would work for Candragupta with utmost sincerity and commitment. He knew that Rākṣasa would serve Candragupta with the same devotion that he served the Nandas with. In sum, the two are brilliant characters – they are dhīrodāttas.