HomeChanakya NitiCh. 1Shloka 12
Previous Verse
Next Verse

Shloka 12

Education and Conduct — Chanakya Niti

आतुरे व्यसने प्राप्ते दुर्भिक्षे शत्रुसङ्कटे ।

राजद्वारे श्मशाने च यस्तिष्ठति स बान्धवः ॥

āture vyasane prāpte durbhikṣe śatrusaṅkaṭe |

rājadvāre śmaśāne ca yastiṣṭhati sa bāndhavaḥ ||

He who stays by you in illness, when calamity strikes, in famine, amid enemy danger, at the king’s gate (court), and at the cremation ground—he is a true kinsman.

आतुरेin illness/distress
आतुरे:
TypeAdjective
Rootआतुर
Formपुं/नपुंसक, सप्तमी, एकवचन (सप्तमी-सम्बन्धे)
व्यसनेin misfortune
व्यसने:
TypeNoun
Rootव्यसन
Formनपुंसकलिङ्ग, सप्तमी, एकवचन
प्राप्तेwhen (it) has come/occurred
प्राप्ते:
TypeAdjective
Rootप्राप्त
Formनपुंसकलिङ्ग, सप्तमी, एकवचन (क्त-प्रत्यय)
दुर्भिक्षेin famine
दुर्भिक्षे:
TypeNoun
Rootदुर्भिक्ष
Formनपुंसकलिङ्ग, सप्तमी, एकवचन
शत्रुसङ्कटेin danger from an enemy
शत्रुसङ्कटे:
TypeNoun
Rootशत्रु-सङ्कट
Formनपुंसकलिङ्ग, सप्तमी, एकवचन
राजद्वारेat the king's gate/court
राजद्वारे:
TypeNoun
Rootराज-द्वार
Formनपुंसकलिङ्ग, सप्तमी, एकवचन
श्मशानेin the cremation ground
श्मशाने:
TypeNoun
Rootश्मशान
Formनपुंसकलिङ्ग, सप्तमी, एकवचन
and
:
TypeIndeclinable
Root
Formअव्यय
यःwho
यः:
TypePronoun
Rootयद्
Formपुंलिङ्ग, प्रथमा, एकवचन
तिष्ठतिstands by/remains
तिष्ठति:
TypeVerb
Rootस्था (धातु)
Formलट्, परस्मैपद, प्रथमपुरुष, एकवचन
सःhe
सः:
TypePronoun
Rootतद्
Formपुंलिङ्ग, प्रथमा, एकवचन
बान्धवः(is) a true kinsman
बान्धवः:
TypeNoun
Rootबान्धव
Formपुंलिङ्ग, प्रथमा, एकवचन
Chanakya (Kautilya)
अनुष्टुप्
Ancient EthicsSocial HistorySanskrit LiteratureNīti-Śāstra
Kin (bāndhava)Enemy (śatru)King’s gate / royal court (rājadvāra)Cremation ground (śmaśāna)Famine (durbhikṣa)

FAQs

The verse reflects a milieu in which social reliability was tested in high-risk settings: illness and famine (household and community vulnerability), enemy threat (inter-polity conflict), the king’s gate (interfaces with royal administration, petitions, or litigation), and the cremation ground (ritual and familial duty). Such loci are common in nīti literature as markers of practical solidarity within kin and patronage networks.

Kinship (bāndhava) is framed less as a purely genealogical status and more as demonstrated presence and support under adversity. The verse presents an evidentiary model of relationship, where sustained attendance in crises functions as the distinguishing sign of a “true” relation.

Key terms are situational and institutional: rājadvāra evokes the royal threshold as a metonym for state power, bureaucracy, and legal exposure; śmaśāna signals the socially and ritually charged boundary of death. The repeated locatives (āture, durbhikṣe, śatrusaṅkaṭe, etc.) create a catalog of stress-tests, using place and circumstance as a philological strategy to define ethical reliability through context rather than abstract doctrine.