This page does not need to be proofread.

INTRODUCTION
 

 
11
 

 
assumption leads to one further step, i.e. to the author-

ship of the collections. The general opinion of all

authors on Indian literature was that, despite the

tradition which accepted Cāṇakya as the author of

collections known to exist under his name, ' it is absurd'

to assume that they were really composed by Cāṇakya,

the minister of Candragupta Maurya.¹ Such an

assumption, other scholars wrote, should be excluded.

with certainty; 2 Cāṇakya was a name under which.

miscellaneous collections were passed. They were

attributed to Cāṇakya in majorem gloriam. Most

maxims dealing with polity, practical philosophy, and

worldly wisdom were attributed to Cāṇakya-the hero

of Indian tradition.5 But in reality there is no intrinsic.

reason for believing that the attribution of the various.

collections to Cāṇakya was due to any authority other

than that of the compilers of the various collections.

To enhance their own literary accomplishments, many

Indian compilers attributed them in the introductory

or concluding stanzas to Cāṇakya. J. van Manen

made a thorough study of such initial and concluding

stanzas and reached the conclusion that there was no
 

 
¹ A. B. Keith, A History of Sanskrit Literature, London, 1928,.

p. 228; CKr, p. 7.
 

 
² O. Botto, 'Dal Trattato di Scienza politica di Cāṇakya',

Rivista di Filosofia, Ser. 3, 5, p. 298.
 

 
3 S. N. Dasgupta and S. K. De, op. cit., pp. 162, 194.
 

 
4 cf. A. Weber in CNW, p. 401.
 

 
5 cf. M. Winternitz, op. cit., p. 135.
 

 
6cf. J. van Manen, op. cit.,
 

 
p. xiii.