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

64. At Masaga, Alexander captured a small armed community of seven thousand, which included several women. Alexander promised them their lives on condition that they should join his army and fight with his Indian enemies, or else, he threatened them with wholesale man-slaughter, or, as a third alternative he said, he would carry them off as slaves! The leaders of the community agreed to his first proposal, but requested that they should be allowed one night for mutual exchange of views. Alexander agreed. Thereupon, these seven thousand Indians marched towards a hill, some nine miles ahead of the Greek camp. Writes Vincent Smith, “The Indians being unwilling to aid the foreigners in the subjugation of their countrymen desired to evade the unwelcome obligation.” So, they decided to give the slip to the Greeks, but Alexander came to know of their intention. So, while they were sleeping for a little rest, Alexander fell upon them, all of a sudden, with his huge army and began to cut down eveyone. There was a great havoc amongst those Indians. But within a short time, they drew up their swords and other weapons. They made a hollow circular formation, gathering the women and children inside it, and faced the Greek attack most heroically. A good number of women were also found desperately fighting with the foe. Till almost all of them were killed, they kept on fighting for the freedom of their nation. 64A. “The gallant defenders met a glorious death they would have disclaimed to exchange for a life with dishonour.” (Early History of India by Vincent Smith 1924, p. 59) The Agrashrenis
65. This little Indian republic of the Agrashrenis too, instead of surrendering, fought to the last with the vast Greek navy of Alexander, as it was making its headway to the sea through the course of the Indus. When the Greeks attacked their very capital, these brave Indian warriors erected blockades and barricades at different intervals, and fought every inch of their ground so tenaciously that Alexander could not enter the city before he had sacrificed many Greek lives. According to Curtius, “When those brave fellows could not further resist the odds, they (the Agrashrenis) set their houses on fire, and their wives and children and all threw themselves into the flames!” That is to say, they ‘made johar’ (to use a latter day phraseology). This is the Aame Johar!—Jai Har!!

66. We generally believe that this magnificent and awe-inspiring tradition of ‘johar’ or self-immolation of large groups of men and women in times of national crisis was originally practised by the Rajputs only. But instances like the one just mentioned, cited by the Greek writers who were astounded to witness them, go to prove that even before the name of the Rajputs was ever heard of, this splendid tradition was followed by our Indian warriors right from the ancient days. The word ‘johar’ is comparatively modern. It was perhaps derived from the war cry ‘Jai Har’! The Indian God of war and destruction is Har, Har, Mahadev! That is why, the Indians fought desperately, inspired by this deafening war cry! The Marathas too used the same war cry ‘Har, Har, Mahadev!’ After fighting to the last, when every hope of success was over, or every chance of escape from the enemy was lost, this johar, this martyrdom, this noblest type of self-sacrifice was resorted to by the Hindus as the last unfailing weapon to save their religion, their nation, their own self-respect and to avoid captivity, abject slavery and hateful conversion! As soon as all men of fighting age were slain on the battlefield after taking the greatest toll of the enemy blood, their wives, mothers, daughters, hundreds of them, with babies at their breasts, used to leap into the burning pyres, specially kept ready for the purpose and were reduced to ashes. This was what was known as ‘Johar’! It was not an easy job! It was the limit of valour and endurance for the sake of keeping up the prestige of one’s self and one’s own religion!
67. Whoever had donned this exceptional armour of ‘Johar’ and its leaping flames were beyond all attempts of an Alexander, an Alla-ud-Din or a Salim-why, even of Satan himself—to pollute them and convert them to his religion! Confronted with this horrible sacrificial fire, the enemy stood aghast, discomfited and crestfallen.
68. The above-mentioned ‘Johar’—collective immolation of lives—by the Agrashrenis is one of the many described by the astounded Greek writers, which the Indians preferred to the humiliation of being the captives of the Greeks. The Janapad Republic of Brahmanakas!
69. At last, when Alexander’s naval force reached the mouth of the Indus, fighting incessantly all the way, it met with yet other independent republics. These ‘janapadas’ or ‘Ganas’ were like the small Greek city-states, and had none amongst them, which could ably withstand with equal numbers, the mighty and numerous army of Alexander. Still one of them, the

‘Brahmanak janapad’ made up its mind to cross swords with, rather than submit to Alexander. This was the same ‘Brahmanak janapad’, that is referred to by Panini, says Dr. Jayaswal. It is already told how, while fighting in the Panchanad (the Punjab) Alexander had wreaked his rancorous revenge against the clan of philosophers, especially the Brahmins. When Alexander learnt that it was the same clan of Brahmins, this small state belonged to, he decided to whack his malicious stroke upon it with all his might. Plutarch (McCrindle ‘Invasion of India by Alexander’ p. 306; V.A. Smith E.H.I. p. 106) writes in his ‘Life of Alexander’, “These philosophers were specially marked down for revenge by Alexander as they gave him no less trouble than the mercenaries. They reviled the princes who declared for Alexander and encouraged free states (in India) to revolt against his authority. On this account, he hanged many of them”. (ChLIX) 69A. That little ‘Janapad’ too fought to the last with these Greeks for the sake of its national honour and independence. Pattanprastha 70. What now is called by the Muslims, Sindh Hyderabad, was at that time known as Pattanprastha. In Sanskrit language, the cities along the seashore, or at the mouths of rivers, were mostly called ‘Pattan’. Pattan is equivalent to the English word ‘port’. Perhaps the English word ‘port’ might have been a corruption of the Sanskrit ‘Pattan’. When Alexander neared the sea, this small state of Pattranprastha was confronted with a dilemma: to surrender to the enemy was most hateful to the ‘Pattanprasthis’, but they knew fully well that they would never be able to fight with the powerful Greek army on equal ground. So they resolved the dilemma by forsaking, collectively their native country, their homes and landed property and motherland with sad hearts. Alexander’s Homeward Voyage 71. That part of the ocean, where the Indus flows into it, should really be called Sindhusagar. Sindhusagar, a name for the sea to the west of India, is a fitting counterpart for the Gangasagar, a traditional name for the eastern sea. 72. On first reaching the sea, Alexander divided his army into two parts. The first batch he sent back to Iran (Persia) by a land route through what now goes by the name of Baluchistan. The whole of Alexander’s army had been thoroughly exhausted in this expedition to India. Moreover, Baluchistan at that time, was full of impregnable forests, thoroughly unknown to the Greeks. So, the Greek division, sent this way, somehow

reached Persia, after so many hazards and privations. On the other hand, Alexander himself set sail by the sea-route with another division of his army, and reached Persia. As the whole of the old Persian Empire had now formed a part of Alexander’s greater demesne, he went to his capital, namely Babylon. But he did not return to the capital in that same triumphant spirit he had started on his Indian campaign two years ago, with a view to winning for himself the vauntful title of the Emperor of India. Not only did he not return like the Emperor of India, he did not even appear to be an emperor at all. He returned just like an ordinary commander of an army, despaired and worn out, after a long-drawn and hazardous campaign. India was not Persia 73. The cause of this disappointment of Alexander was that the Greeks up to that time, knew only one empire worth the name—much more extensive than their own—that of Persia! When these Greeks marched upon that Persian emipre under their uncommonly brave and brilliant commander, Alexander, and when after only two or three campaigns the vast Persian empire fell before them like a paper palace, they were so much flushed with their victory, that they fondly considered their commander to be endowed with divine qualities, and as such unconquerable. Alexander himself could not escape the infection of pride. His ambition to win for himself the overlordship of the whole world soared to the sky. Bharat appeared to him just next to and as easy a prey as, Persia. So very vast a land and so very weak! So, he wanted to crown his Persian conquest with the glittering diadem of the Indian imperial authority. Greedily enough, he ran to have it with all haste. 74. But the experience he had was quite contrary to what he had expected. In India, he had to face the bitterest opposition at every step. Although he never lost a battle as such, his Greek army was completely exhausted and exasperated in the very process of winning them. These victories were far too costlier than the ones in Persia, and all their vauntful declarations of conquering India as easily as Persia proved to be empty words ‘full of sound and fury signifying nothing‘. And in the end, he had to return with the acquisition of only a small all of land along the Indus river. 75. Thus was Alexander disappointed and to a certain extent insulted. But that valiant emperor was not downcast. He was itching to return once again to India after stabilizing things in the newly conquered regions of India and

annexing them permanently to his vast empire like those of Syria, Persia, Babylon and others. 76. Alexander declared the annexation of the region from Hindukush and Gandhar to Taxila (Takshashila), half of the Panchanad up to the river Vyas, and that from the confluene of the Vitasta with the Indus to the sea. He appointed the Indian King Ambuj or Ambhi of Taxila his governor (satrap) of the Hindukush region, and King Porus as his governor of the Panchanad. To the third but narrow strip of land along the Indus were appointed his two trusted Greek generals, Philip and Nicanor, under whom he placed the mobile force of Greeks. He established in India some townships too, one of which was Alexandria in the direction of Taxila. Alexander’s Death 77. Before Alexander decided to stabilize things in the Indian territory he had recently captured, he learnt that the local democratic institutions refused to accept his overlordship. Even while Alexander was in Sind, he received intelligence of a revolt by the Indian subjects in Gandhar. He was about to send a fresh and large Greek army to Gandhar. But in quick succession followed another disturbing news of a fresh conspiracy being hatched in Punjab (Panchanad) to overthrow Alexander completely. But Alexander could at that time do nothing to thwart any such attempts at revolt. During his campaign against India not only his army but he himself was completely exhausted. To add to it, his addiction to drinking had grown beyond all limits of safety; he suddenly took ill and died in B.C. 323. That is to say, hardly within a-year-and-a-half of his return from India with all his army, the great Greek (Macedonian) Emperor breathed his last at Babylon. Indian Politicians Conspire 78. As has already been told, as soon as Alexander began to retreat along the Indus, some of the Indian politicians began hatching out a secret plan against the Greeks in Punjab to win back their lost freedom. But it was not merely aimed at the recovery of the lost territory. It was essentially to overhaul and revolutionize the whole gamut of the political life of India and to bring about a sweeping change in the internal life of the country. Even if Alexander had not died so soon, the deep-laid Indian plot was destined to achieve this daring political revolution. This sudden death of Alexander, however, gave Indian political workers an unexpected golden opportunity

and they were quick enough to utilize it, for the overthrow of the Greek power. Greek Governors Beheaded 79. Alexander had left behind Nicanor and Philip as the chief representatives of Greeks. When the news of Alexander’s death reached India, the Indians in the republic of the Ashvinis suddenly fell upon the Greek Governor, Philip, and assassinated him along with his small Greek regiment. The second, Nicanor, was also similarly despatched, and all those monarchies and republics along the banks of the Indus, which had acquiesced in the Greek overlordship, shook it off at once and proclaimed their independence forthwith. Greek colonies, Greek ensigns and standards — whatever signified the Greek power — were completely destroyed on the spot. The whole of the tract along the banks of the Indus right from the Panchanad to Sindh, which Alexander had conquered and annexed for ever and anon to his empire, became independent within six months of Alexander’s death. 80. Alexander had conquered states and countries and empires like Greece, Syria, Persia, Babylon, Egypt and the likes. There he founded Greek cities and Greek colonies, and even after the division of his vast empire, just after his death, his governors and military commanders and their descendants, ruled the respective regions like Babylon for centruries, together. Even now in some other countries cities exist with the name Alexandria, and Alexander’s name is ever crowned with the honorifix ‘The Great’ throughout ancient histroy. 81. But what happened in Bharat? The small states and republics in the farthest corner of India, that Alexander had annexed to his empire under the impression that he had conquered them for ever and for ever, after fighting incessantly on various battlefields for two long years and shedding the blood of millions of Greek and Hindu soldiers — those very Indian states and republics and monarchies literally uprooted his power, his standard, the Greek colonies and every hateful sign of the Greek victory — and that too within six months or at the most a year! 82. At last, not to speak of the city of Alexandria, which he had established, his own name too is not to be traced anywhere in Indian history, as if there never was any invasion, any aggression on India’s borderland of any Mlenchh (Yavan) emperor, named Alexander, who dinned the ears of the people throughout Europe with his proud title, ‘The

Great’! Curiously enough, not even a stray reference has yet been discovered in Vedic or Jain or Buddhist ancient literature. 83. Writes Vincent Smith in his famous Early History of India: “All these proceedings prove conclusively that Alexander intended the permanent annexation of those (Indian) provinces to his empire.... But within three years of his departure from India (from 325 BC to 322 BC), his officers in India were ousted, his garrisons destroyed and all traces of his rule had disappeared. The colonies he founded in India, unlike those established elsewhere in Asiatic provinces, took no root. His campaign, though carefully designed to secure a permanent conquest, was in actual effect not more than a brilliantly successful raid on a gigantic scale, which left upon India no mark save the horrid scars of a bloody war. India remained unchanged. She continued her life of splendid isolation and soon forgot the passing of the Macedonian storm. No Indian author—Hindu, Buddhist or Jain—makes even the faintest allusion to Alexander or his deed.” (p. 117) 84. Who were the most prominent leaders of this political conspiracy, which wiped out, within a period of six months or a year, the whole of the foreign political dominance caused by Alexander’s aggression right from the Panchanad to Sindh? Histroy, as yet, is ignorant of their names! Still two of them, at least, have become immortal. They are the same two men whom I have mentioned while describing Alexander’s advance up to Taxila. The first was a brilliant and smart youth, who had just completed his studies at the University of Taxila, Chandragupta. And the other was Acharya Chanakya, who had been a teacher at that University and who, later on, gave a practical lesson in political craft and political revolutions to the young Chandragupta! As they were to lead the whole of Bharat, hereafter, it is fit and proper that they should be introduced here. The Story of Chandragupta’s Birth 85. Like all other great men of the ancient world, Chandragupta and Chanakya have their life stories clouded with legends, anecdotes and imaginary accounts. Those who are interested in them for the sake of intellectual entertainment may profitably read Radhakumud Mukherjee’s ‘Chandragupta Maurya and His Times’. We shall give here only so much of their lives as appear to us to have historical sanction. 86. Some small bands of the Shakyas, amongst whom was born the great Lord Gautam Buddha, had at one time to shift to far-off regions, because of some disastrous calamity that had befallen them. They called themselves

Kshatriyas. However, in those adverse days, those displaced Shakyas began to follow other professions for their livelihood. There happened to be a plentiful breed of peacocks in the forest, where these tribes later on lived. To keep these peacocks and sell them became one of their professions. So they had ‘Moriya’ as their nickname, and the Moriya formed a class by themselves. One family of these Moriyas came back to settle in the vicinity of Pataliputra. One woman of that Moriya tribe named Mura (Mayura) somehow got access to the harem of the royal palace and soon became the concubine of the Emperor, Mahapadmanand or ‘Dhananand’, as he was generally called. Her son from this Nanda Emperor was the Emperor Chandragupta. 87. However, when Chandragupta became an emperor, the story of his birth might have appeared derogatory to his greatness and, therefore in some books of the time, the story was slightly altered to mean that Muradevi was the wedded queen of the Nanda emperor, not his concubine, which in consequence meant that Chandragupta was a legitimate royal prince and not an illegitimate one. 88. But a third anecdote seems to outdo both the above stories, saying that Mura and Emperor Nanda were in no way connected. Mura had a son from her husband of the same clan and that son was Chandragupta himself. Later on, with the help and guidance of Arya Chanakya and with his own valour, he raised his poor father and mother to eminence, and after wresting the imperial power from the Nandas, he founded the Maurya Dynasty. 89. It seems a common weakness among all human societies and communities, in a greater or lesser degree, to attempt to judge the greatness or meanness of an individual, not so much from his manifest virtues or vices as from the race, the community or the family he is born in. That is why, as the time passes, such inflated anecdotes about their family tradition are propagated and popularized through plays, poems and novels or through folk-lores. There are other anecdotes too besides the ones referred to above, which seek to ascribe greatness or meanness to Chandragupta. But for the reasons given above, they need not be mentioned here. 90. Was Chandragupta a concubine’s son? Was he not a Kshatriya? What matters though! Chandragupta could have said with justifiable pride, “More than any of you, nominal caste-born Kshatriyas, who bowed your heads to the Mlenchchas, the Greek emperor and his commanders, I, a ‘peerless’ Chandragupta, have a greater claim to being a Kshatriya in as much as with

my sword, I have completely vanquished those very Mlenchchas in every battlefield.” With the same haughty affront of Kama, he could have flung in the face of those railing enemies, the following words: सूतो वा सूत पुत्रों वा यो वा को वा भवाम्यहम् दैवायत्तं कुले जन्म मदायत्तं तु पौरुषम॥ वेणोसंहार of Bhatta Narayan, Act III, 37 [“ Whether a charioteer or a charioteer’s son, or whoever (else) I may be, (that is of no consequence!) Birth in a (noble) family depends on fate; but manliness depends on me!”] 91. The son of Mura is a Maurya! That is precisely why Chandragupta is called a Maurya. Proud of his maternal extraction, Chandragupta designated his royal family as Maurya and immortalized the name of his mother, Muradevi, in Indian history. The Maurya emperors accepted the same Moriya caste too (one traded in peacocks) that belonged to his mother. The guardian deity of the Maurya family is also a ‘peacock’. This fact is corroborated by rock inscriptions. The Ashoka pillar found at Nandangad bears at the foot, a picture of a peacock. The stories from the life of Ashoka inscribed on the celebrated ‘stupas’ at Sanchi have similar figures of peacocks carved beside them. The Emperor of Magadha 92. Mahapadmanand was the emperor ruling at that time over the vast Magadha empire. He was already very unpopular because of his many vices. His subjects were exasperated because of the heavy taxes, levied on them, in order to satisfy his lust for gold. People called him Dhananand instead of Mahapadmanand, in order to deride him for his excessive lust for money. He could come to the throne because he happened to be the brother of the earlier emperor, but he had not a single virtue, fit for an emperor. He would have proved his worth had he but taken up the challenge of Alexander and crushed him in the Panchanad, when the latter had marched on India, and when he had proudly declared his intention of conquering Magadha and becoming the emperor of India. He should have at least undertaken such a great expedition as to overthrow the Greeks, and free the Indian territory subjugated by them to deserve the title of an emperor! But he did nothing of the kind, and meekly swallowed the insult hurled at him by Alexander! This cowardliness on his part made, on the one hand, every self-respecting and nationalist Indian despise him, while, on the other, made him crafty. He

hated the selfless national politicians. In order to undermine their prestige, he insulted them publicly. A really capable person was invariably an object of his hatred and was subjected to malicious treatment. 93. From this Mahapadmanand, it is said his concubine, Mura, had the illustrious son, Chandragupta. Some anecdotes pertaining to Chandragupta’s childhood are available, but they are far too few and merely hearsay stories. What appears to be certain is only this, that the cowardly but crafty Mahapadmanand began to fear the young Chandragupta, shining with his sharp wit, his daring and ambitious spirit, seeking to exercise his rights as the heir to the throne, bastard as he was. He feared that under the leadership of this unrestrained bastard son, his antagonists would not fail to dethrone him! Mahapadmanand very well knew how his very Nanda forerunners had vanquished the original Shishunag dynasty of Magadha and usurped the throne! Under some such apprehension, there appears to have occurred some clash that Mahapadmanand used as a pretext to banish Chandragupta out of the precincts of the Magadha empire. The intervening account is permanently lost to oblivion. Hereafter, Chandragupta makes his appearance in the University of Taxila (Takshashila) as a royal prince having his lessons in politics and the science and art of war. An anecdote that is current in that region viz. that he got access to this university mainly through the good offices of the renowned and learned Arya Chanakya may have some grain of truth in it. Chandragupta had already been studying in the manner described above at this university for about six or seven years when Alexander attacked India. There, for the first time, this illustrious disciple of Chanakya, this young Chandragupta, began to shine with his exceptional brilliance in the sacred national conspiracy, that was being hatched by the Indian patriots and politicians to avenge the insults heaped on the Indian nation by the Greeks and to liberate the territory lost to them. A Marvellous half-hour in History 94. Young Chandragupta seems to have secretly wandered through the Greek camps in order to study the peculiar features of the Greek armoury, the Greek military formations and war strategy. For, he was once caught by the Greek sentries on suspicion that he was reconnoitring in the emperor’s camp. The report reached Alexander himself, and the Macedonian emperor summoned the disguised Indian youth to his presence. Some even think that the said youth went to see Alexander by previous appointment.

95. That valiant Macedonian supreme commander and emperor Alexander, in his thirties, and the future Indian captain-general and emperor Chandragupta just on the threshold of his twenties, but as yet merely a wandering nonentity, stood face-to-face, sizing up each other for a few moments! It appeared as if two lustrous suns, one fast approaching his zenith and the other, not as yet risen fully, out of the misty shroud of the early dawn, were staring at each other’s eyes.
96. This strange interview is not likely to have lasted for more than half an hour. But it has truly proved to be a historical marvel of perennial interest!
97. Even while almost all the Greek writers allude to this strange interview, nobody can say for certain what exactly transpired between the two, or what words were exchanged between them. One or two of them write only this much that Chandragupta said distinctly that he was related to the royal family of Magadha, or something to that effect. This much is certain that to the question put by Alexander, Chandragupta answered boldly and resolutely! In that strange parley, something went wrong and Alexander ordered the youth to be taken out of the camp forthwith. Instantly, the fiery youth left the camp, but in the meanwhile, when Alexander changed his mind and called again for the youth in his presence, he was nowhere to be found again. The Story of Chanakya’s Family
98. Arya Chanakya was born in a Brahmin family and his name was Vishnugupta. His name Chanakya must have probably been derived from his native town of Chanak. But he is more particularly known by his name Chanakya, Koutilya is one more name by which he is equally well-known. His great and abiding work is known as Koutiliya Arthashastra. Koutilya must have been formed from his original family (गोत्र नाम) name Kutal. He was well-versed in almost all the sciences of the time and was renowned at the University of Taxila and also amongst the learned circles of India, as a great scholar. He was ugly in apearance. Later on, when after the imperial revolution of Magadha, his name gained great fame not only all over India, but even in Greece and other foreign countries as the guide and preceptor of Chandragupta’s early years, and later as the chief minister of the Indian empire, several hearsay stories sprang up as to his early age, as they did regarding Chandragupta and Alexander. Several references to them based on solid grounds or otherwise are to be found in many literary works, dramas, folklores written many centuries after the deaths of both

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

remained a loyal servant of Mahapadmanand, that the India-wide revolution that he successfully brought about, was not for the sake of freeing the Indian land from the foreign Mlenchcha domination, but only to avenge his personal insult! For this very reason, this anecdote is clearly perverted. 101. When as a strategy in politics, Shivaji went to Agra accepting the overlordship of Aurangzeb, the latter insulted him, and when there was a clash of words, Shivaji was put under arrest. But Shivaji slipped away most miraculously and skilfully, and declared war against Aurangzeb. If, after telling this story, any wiseacre were to conclude that it was because he was personally insulted, that Shivaji bore a grudge against Aurangzeb and established an independent kingdom for himself, that he had no higher motive of the emancipation of his religion and country, it would be the height of absurdity and foolishness. Equally absurd and foolish would it be to say that it was only to avenge his personal insult by Emperor Nanda, that Arya Chanakya brought about a political revolution by exterminating the Nanda dynasty. That Anecdote should be Explained thus 102. It is not true to say that because of his personal insult, Shivaji revolted against Aurangzeb. On the contrary, Aurangzeb had taken a fright that it was to overthrow his alien religious domination, that Shivaji had taken arms, fired as he was with a glowing fervour for Hindutwa. That is why, he insulted Shivaji and relegated him to captivity! In a similar way, because Mahapadmanand had secret reports that, availing himself of the weakness of the reigning monarch, Arya Chanakya was busy conspiring against him so as to overthrow the Nanda empire, the Emperor Nanda insulted him in his royal palace, and at that very moment, the illustrious Brahmin Arya Chanakya retorted boldly, "If I am a true Chanakya I shall see to it that your tyrannical rule is overthrown so that Bharat might prosper." This is how the anecdote should be explained. 103. A very solid proof for this is available to us in the very Koutiliya Arthashastra written by Chanakya himself. While introducing the writer, it is said (in the very book): चाणक्य इति विख्यातः श्रोत्रीयः सर्वधर्मविद् —मुद्राराक्षस उपोद्घात Telang's edition p.44 येन शस्त्रं व शास्त्रं च नन्दराज गताच भूः ॥

अमर्षेणोरुधृतान्याशु तेन शास्त्रमिदं कृतम्॥ —अर्थशास्त्र p. 429 “He who destroyed the Nanda and rejuvenated the national armed strength as also the national scientific advance which were decaying under the Nanda regime, and thus caused the uplift of his Bharatbhoomi, has written this treatise.” He has not used even a single word in the introductory lines to say that he destroyed Nanda to avenge his personal insult. It is for the progress and prosperity of his own nation and motherland, that Nanda was destroyed! Chanakya’s great work itself tells it clearly! 104. The anecdote that is told in a downright dramatic way perhaps means only this, that his original nationalistic animus towards Nanda was whetted more because of this personal insult. Chanakya’s Political Activities Preceded Alexander’s onslaught 105. Chanakya had been living in the vicinity of Taxila for good many years before the aggression of Alexander. He had a first-hand knowledge of the political situation in the Bharatiya frontier territories right up to the Indus. 106. Just adjoining the borderland of India had stretched far and wide, the unitary and centrally well-organised nation, inimical to India. Chanakya was shrewd enough to understand that in the event of an aggression by such a well-organised and inimical country, the small native democracies and monarchies from the Panchanad to the Indus would utterly fail in the open battlefield, if they were to fight separately. The Greek city-states too perished precisely for this reason 107. Just then a practical demonstration of the above-mentioned axiom took place in Greece. The moment the Persian Emperor invaded Greece, the small Greek city-states like their prototypes in India, were convulsed to their bones. In the end, it is only when Philip and Alexander conquered all of those separatist Greek city-states, forged them into a powerful empire, was it possible for them to vanquish the Persian empire. Chanakya was not slow to understand its significance. 108. He arrived at the firm conviction that vis-a-vis a powerful and extensive inimical empire as its neighbour, India had only one way to defend its independence and make its administrative machinery strong enough to withstand any foreign aggression and that was to boil down all

the smaller monarchies and republics and to forge out of them, a centralized unitary and strong empire. For the Entire Undivided India 108A. But there was not a single Indian monarchy or republic throughout the whole of the region right from Gandhar, Punjab to the Indus delta, which could execute this plan of Chanakya, who had already appraised their capability and inclination. Naturally, his next choice fell on the only mighty empire of North India, namely Magadha. His head full of plans for the future Indian revolution, Arya Chanakya came again to Magadha in order to study secretly the political situation, visiting every place right from a poor man’s cottage to the royal palace. As such, he was trying to get access to the King’s court on some pretext or the other. When the question of the appointment of Arya Chanakya as the Chairman of the ‘Grants’ Department’ (दानाध्यक्ष) was mooted, Nanda did not object to it, because till then, he had known nothing else of Arya Chanakya, but of his scholarship. This appointment greatly helped Arya Chanakya perfect his secret revolutionary plans. 109. But before long, Emperor Nanda had reports that Arya Chanakya was not a scholar pure and simple, but an expert organiser of secret plots and was at that time busy plotting against him. Enraged at this, he publicly insulted Arya Chanakya as already told before, deprived him of his authority as the Chairman of the Grant’s Department, and expelled him out of his imperial precincts. Being thus outlawed, Chanakya returned again to Taxila. 110. In the meanwhile, the young bastard son Chandragupta, being exiled, as has been already told, from the Magadhan court by Emperor Nanda, went to Taxila and joined Chanakya—an incident that proved most favourable to that patriot’s ambitious plans of establishing an all-India empire. Why did Chanakya back Chandragupta alone? 111. If he were to dethrone the weak and wicked Nanda, and crown in his place on the throne of the Magadha empire any outsider, the tradition- loving important persons from amongst the feudatories, the Indian princes and even the common people would probably have opposed vehemently, even though the chosen person had been endowed with the most excellent qualities, whereas Chandragupta, though not a lawful royal prince, had yet some native blood-relation to the throne as the bastard son of the Emperor

of Magadha. He was, moreover, endowed with valour and other qualities of head and heart. As such, the arch-diplomat Chanakya shrewdly guessed that even these votaries of tradition were far less likely to oppose Chandragupta’s election to the throne of Magadha. He, therefore, determined to champion the claim of Chandragupta to the emperorship of Magadha—why even to that of the whole of India. 112. While the grand plan of an India-wide empire of Chanakya-and- Chandragupta was thus being set afoot, the unfortunate event of a foreign invasion was reported towards Persia. Alexander had already destroyed the empire of Persia and had invaded India. Although as has been related in the foregoing pages, he was staunchly opposed by the Bharatiya valour and forced to retreat home, it was plain that Alexander’s well organised imperial military might was not totally annulled. 113. Even out of this evil, some good did emerge. The republican subjects of the frontier regions, with their faith in democratic principles shaken rudely by the heavy knock of a foreign invasion and the bloody wars that followed, began to agree with Chanakya and other patriotic prophets that national independence was in peril, unless a countrywide Indian empire was established on the lines of the vast, highly centralized well-organized and unitary form of empire of the enemy. 114. The first happy sign of this revolutionary spirit was seen in the general uprising throughout the smaller states and republics, conquered by Alexander and annexed to his empire and in the fact that hardly within six months or a year of Alexander’s death, these Indian territories shook off the foreign rule and became independent. Justin, an ancient renowned writer, credits the leadership of Chandragupta with the authorship of this wonderful and noble collective uprising. “India after the death of Alexander had shaken, as it were, the yoke of servitude from its neck and put his governors to death. The author of this liberation was Sandrocottus.” The ‘Sandrocottus’ of this quotation is Chandragupta. The Greeks pronounced the name of Chandragupta in this very way. The only way to repel re-invasion? 115. Although the general rising in these frontier provinces was successful under the guidance of Chandragupta, Chanakya and others, the followers of Chanakya began to warn all princes and political leaders, that it had not as yet made Indian independence completely safe from the future Greek onslaught. They went on preaching everywhere that Alexander himself had

vowed till the day of his death, that he would invade India once again and conquer it thoroughly, that the chief officers of his state and commanders were at war with one another for the division of the Greek empire, that the triumphant one among them who would ascend the throne at Babylon would not fail to attack India with an army more powerful than before, and that the first victims to that aggression would be these very people, if they remained disunited as separate Rajakas (monarchies) and Prajakas (republics). But if they availed themselves of this opportunity of the civil feuds of the Greeks, and they could merge the whole of India into a strong empire with an efficient administration at the centre, this new Indian empire, stronger than that of the Greeks, could very easily beat the Mlenchchas, were they to come once again aggressively. Hence, they said India should be built into one strong nation! Invasion of Chandragupta and Chanakya on Magadha 116. Without wasting even a single moment of the golden opportunity of the Greek internecine wars, Chandragupta and other followers of Chanakya began openly to raise a powerful army to march first of all against Magadha, according to Chanakya’s plan of the political revolution. A few but very telling references to this fact are to be found in the critique named ‘Mahavamsha’. From these and from other sources, it appears that this invading army of Chandragupta was mainly composed of the soldiers from Panchanad, the Pauravas and the republics that were inspired with the preaching of Chanakya for a unitary Indian empire. In order to enlist the sympathies of the Parvateshwara, i.e. King Paurav, who was a powerful king in those provinces, Chanakya is said to have met him secretly. As Alexander’s sway had been completely thrown off from the Indian territories, King Paurav was no longer a subordinate satrap of the Greeks. From stray references in some books, it appears that not only King Paurav offered his support for Chanakya’s cause, but some wealthy people too helped him actively. Chanakya offered the command of the whole army to Chandragupta. After establishing their hold on all possible regions of Panchanad, they marched speedily on Magadha. The Indian populace and the local powers disgusted with and enraged at the tyrannical and weak rule of Nanda, and inspired by Chanakya’s ideal of a strong unitary empire of the whole of India, joined Chandragupta’s army as it marched ahead fighting.

117. In this daring and stormy march of theirs, Chandragupta and Chanakya had many times to face very grave dangers to their lives. Once their whole army was routed by a violent knock of the opposing forces, and Chandragupta and Chanakya had to flee into the forest to save their lives. One night they had to sleep on the bare hard ground, but undeterred by any of these calamities, Chandragupta and Chanakya formed their armies again and again and kept on marching ahead, and in the end, entered the precincts of Pataliputra, the Magadhan capital itself.
118. The arch-diplomat, Chanakya had bribed the army and the people in the capital of Nanda. On the strength of this general sedition, the daring Chandragupta fell like an arrow-shot upon the city of Pataliputra. Mahapadmanand Beheaded
119. When Chandragupta’s army rushed into the capital, blocking it very rigidly from every side, there was a great havoc everywhere. Chandragupta himself entered the royal palace but Mahapadmanand had already left it in the general disorder that had ensued, and was trying to slip out of the capital secretly. He was, however, caught on the way and beheaded almost instantaneously. Samrat Chandragupta ki Jaya!
120. Chandragupta was soon proclaimed Emperor of Magadha. He adopted Maurya as his family name after that of his mother, Mura. Hence, he and his royal dynasty came to be known for ever in history by that very name ‘Maurya’. As soon as he publicly ascended the throne of Magadha, he appointed Chanakya the Chief Minister of the empire, approximately in B.C. 321.
121. Alexander died round about B.C. 323. It means, therefore, that within about two years, Samrat Chandragupta and Chanakya effected this gigantic revolution that established the independent and powerful Indian empire, dispelling all gloom of despondency and disintegration, while on the other side, the Greek feudal lords were quarrelling amongst themselves. In order to avail himself fully of this opportunity, Chanakya immediately busied himself with the establishment of internal peace and order. The basic principle of Chanakya’s Political theory—Military Might First
122. But the peace and order of even a unitary empire ultimately depends on its military strength alone, which forms the bedrock of the whole imperial structure. This was the basic principle of Chanakya’s political

theory. Warlike spirit and armed-strength, he said, were the very life-breath not only of the political but also of the civil life of a community. Let that warlike spirit mitigate itself a bit and all religions, all sciences, all arts why the whole life of a nation is doomed! सर्वे धर्मा प्रक्षयेयुर्विवृद्धाः। क्षात्रे त्यक्ते राजधर्मे पुराणे॥ “In the event of the Kshatriyas forsaking their old kingly duty, all the religions are (bound) to perish.” A huge building without a (proper) foundation, as also, an empire without an (adequate) military strength, are bound to topple down even with a stormy wave of wind. Arya Chanakya, who preached all this, first of all began to reorganize a huge powerful army, which was well-commanded and inspired with the ambition to win in order to defend the newly-born empire. This he did with such an amazing speed, that during three or four years, not only his subjects came to have faith in his great powers but also the enemies of India began to fear it. 123. What did this huge army of Chandragupta so well planned and so well organised, amount to? 124. Hardly four years earlier, when Chandragupta-Chanakya vowed secretly to establish an independent Indian empire under a unitary command, their armed might was literally nil! That very Chandragupta who started with this ‘nil’, had now a well-equipped loyal army of 6,00,000 foot soldiers, 30,000 cavalry; 2,000 war-elephants and 4,000 chariots! 125. With this powerful army, Chanakya wiped out the chaos created by the separatist small states, republics and monarchies in north India, which wanted to lead an independent life of their own, and established peace and unitary organization. In the end, all the territory on this side of the Indus up to the Punjab, the Kingdom of the Pauravas and Sindh proper, were annexed to the Mauryan empire. 126. Had any political thinker and administrator or an Indian emperor felt proud to have established for the first time, such a unitary Bharatiya empire, it would have been but natural. India’s Frontier Hindukush not Indus 127. But Chandragupta and Chanakya were not satisfied with extending the boundaries of their empire up to the banks of the Indus only, they had vowed to establish the Bharatiya empire over the whole of India, and to annihilate the unruly Mlenchchas! At that time the (north-western) frontier of India did not rest with the eastern bank of the Indus. But it reached much farther beyond the Indus, so as to include among its fold the regions like the

Gandhar and the rivers now lost to Afghanisthan, but once well-known to Vedic Aryans, like the Kubha (the Kabul of today), the Kramu (the Kurram of today), the Suwastu (the Swat of today), the Gomati (the Gumal of today) and others, right up to the peaks of the Hindukush mountains. To that far end, were spread our republics following the Vedic religion and born of a Bharatiya race! And over these regions had been ruling the traditional royal dynasties of India. As our people in that ice-cold regions were comparatively whiter, it was also called by some “White India”. Naturally the national aspiration, as embodied in Chandragupta-Chanakya scheme of things, fortified its imperial boundaries not only up to the eastern bank of the Indus with a strong army, but it also busied itself with the planning and preparation and execution of the imperial boundaries right up to the natural geographic frontiers of India, the Hindukush mountain and yearned to hoist its flag on the top of that mountain! “These also laboured in the cause espoused by the other sages.” Greek Feuds and the Division of the Empire 128. In the meanwhile, the Greek civil feuds had temporarily ceased by dividing Alexander’s empire, ceding its vast portion from the Indian frontiers up to Babylon to Seleucos Nicator, one of the bravest and most experienced veteran of Alexander’s military officers, who ruled it as an independent sovereign. He was supposed to inherit the claim to the region beyond the Hindukush, which was formely conquered by Alexander. 129. He, therefore, demanded the surrender of that region from Chandragupta, who had appropriated it to himself. Of course, Seleucos did not realize that now the Greeks had to face not an Ambhi of Taxila as before, nor any cowardly minister, but King Chandragupta and his minister, Chanakya! They not only scoffed at this frivolous demand of Seleucos, but demanded in return the surrender of the region from Gandhar to Hindukush beyond the river Indus. Seleucos Attacks India with a Mighty Army 130. Enraged at this rebuff, Seleucos marched against India round about 315 B.C. with a Greek army, trained under Alexander. If we leave aside the little-known invasion of Gandhar by Alexander in B.C. 329, this was the second invasion of India by the Greeks after the famous one, already fully described, by Alexander in B.C. 326. 131. But this time, after he crossed the Indus, Seleucos was amazed to see that the region, instead of being divided into separate Indian republics as at