भारतीय इतिहास के ६ स्वर्णिम पृष्ठ (वीर सावरकर - विदेशी आक्रान्ताओं पर विजय गाथा)

Chandragupta and Chanakya. These references in Jain, Buddhist and Vedic literatures are not wholly reliable. Even in a Sanskrit drama, his character has been depicted in an unrealistic manner, for the sake of dramatic effect. As such, the ridiculous descriptions of his ugliness, or of his ungainly teeth, or the childish reports that he picked up from amongst the uneducated rustic children playing in the street one reckless Chandragupta, to be made the future emperor of India simply because he took a fancy for the child, or because his knowledge of palmistry guided his choice, cannot be taken as historical truths. However, more discerning research-workers should necessarily investigate if there is any basis for them. The Perverted Report of Chanakya’s vow 99. One such anecdote about Arya Chanakya should be discussed here as an illustration. For, it is being taught in the present-day schools in that very perverted form. The said anecdote purports to say that because he became famous as a great scholar in the University of Taxila (Takshashila) and the regions round about, Arya Chanakya was appointed the Chairman of the Grants Commission (दानाध्यक्ष) in the royal palace of Mahapadmanand at Pataliputra. While he was working in that high office, Emperor Mahapadmanand came there one day on his inspection rounds. But he laughed at his teethless ugly mouth and his unshapely body, at which Chanakya took a great affront. Therefore, Nanda pulled him down instantly and, as is written in some books, pulled his tuft of hair, till it was uprooted and finally ordered him to be driven out of the palace. The fiery Brahmin instantly retorted saying, “I shall drag you down from your throne and completely destroy the Nanda dynasty and then and then alone shall tie up my tuft of hair.” With this grave vow, he marched straight out of the palace. 100. But let it be remembered that Emperor Nanda had come there to inspect the work of the Charity Department, not to visit a beauty parlour! How is it plausible, then, that Mahapadmanand, who had himself appointed that learned scholar to the high office of the Chairman of the Charitable Grants Department, would now say that because of his ugly features Arya Chanakya was unfit for that post? The office of the Chairman of the said Grants Department required the expert knowledge of the religious sciences and judicial procedure, not physical beauty! But there is a more potent objection than this one to disprove this foolish anecdote. This anecdote implies that Chanakya revolted against Emperor Nanda, because of his personal insult alone, and that, had he not been thus insulted, he would have