HomeChanakya NitiCh. 12Shloka 18
Previous Verse
Next Verse

Shloka 18

Dharma and Wealth — Chanakya Niti

विनयं राजपुत्रेभ्यः पण्डितेभ्यः सुभाषितम् ।

अनृतं द्यूतकारेभ्यः स्त्रीभ्यः शिक्षेत कैतवम् ॥

vinayaṃ rājaputrebhyaḥ paṇḍitebhyaḥ subhāṣitam |

anṛtaṃ dyūtakārebhyaḥ strībhyaḥ śikṣet kaitavam ||

Learn humility from princes, fine speech from the learned; learn falsehood from gamblers, and deception from women.

विनयम्humility/discipline
विनयम्:
TypeNoun
Rootविनय
Formपुंलिङ्ग, द्वितीया, एकवचन
राजपुत्रेभ्यःfrom princes
राजपुत्रेभ्यः:
TypeNoun
Rootराजपुत्र
Formपुंलिङ्ग, पञ्चमी, बहुवचन
पण्डितेभ्यःfrom learned men
पण्डितेभ्यः:
TypeNoun
Rootपण्डित
Formपुंलिङ्ग, पञ्चमी, बहुवचन
सुभाषितम्good speech/maxim
सुभाषितम्:
TypeNoun
Rootसुभाषित
Formनपुंसकलिङ्ग, द्वितीया, एकवचन (कृदन्त: सु + भाष् + क्त)
अनृतम्falsehood
अनृतम्:
TypeNoun
Rootअनृत
Formनपुंसकलिङ्ग, द्वितीया, एकवचन
द्यूतकारेभ्यःfrom gamblers
द्यूतकारेभ्यः:
TypeNoun
Rootद्यूतकार
Formपुंलिङ्ग, पञ्चमी, बहुवचन
स्त्रीभ्यःfrom women
स्त्रीभ्यः:
TypeNoun
Rootस्त्री
Formस्त्रीलिङ्ग, पञ्चमी, बहुवचन
शिक्षेतone should learn
शिक्षेत:
TypeVerb
Rootशिक्ष्
Formविधिलिङ् (सम्भावना/आज्ञा), परस्मैपद, प्रथमपुरुष, एकवचन
कैतवम्deceit/cheating
कैतवम्:
TypeNoun
Rootकैतव
Formनपुंसकलिङ्ग, द्वितीया, एकवचन
Chanakya (Kautilya)
अनुष्टुप্
Ancient EthicsPolitical HistorySanskrit LiteratureHistorical Philosophy
Princes (rājaputra)Scholars (paṇḍita)Gamblers (dyūtakāra)Women (strī)

FAQs

This verse reflects a genre of premodern South Asian nīti (didactic) literature that organizes social knowledge through typologies of groups (royal youth, scholars, gamblers, women). Such formulations are commonly read as products of courtly and urban milieus where moral instruction, political prudence, and social stereotyping coexisted as rhetorical strategies for teaching judgment.

Here “learning” (śikṣet) is presented as pragmatic observation: the verse frames different social groups as sources of particular behaviors or speech-forms. The structure implies that a discerning person can extract lessons—both positive (humility, good speech) and cautionary/strategic (untruth, deceit)—from social interaction.

The verse uses parallelism and antithesis: two valued qualities (vinaya, subhāṣita) are paired with two disvalued qualities (anṛta, kaitava). The dative plural endings (-ebhyaḥ) create a compact catalog of “sources” of conduct. Terms like anṛta and kaitava function as moral-lexical markers in Sanskrit ethical discourse, while the attribution of kaitava to strī reflects a conventional, gendered trope found in some didactic anthologies rather than a descriptive social survey.