HomeChanakya NitiCh. 13Shloka 12
Previous Verse
Next Verse

Shloka 12

Human Nature — Chanakya Niti

बन्धाय विषयासङ्गो मुक्त्यै निर्विषयं मनः ।

मन एव मनुष्याणां कारणं बन्धमोक्षयोः ॥

bandhāya viṣayāsaṅgo muktyai nirviṣayaṁ manaḥ |

mana eva manuṣyāṇāṁ kāraṇaṁ bandhamokṣayoḥ ||

Attachment to sense-objects brings bondage; a mind free of objects brings liberation. For humans, the mind itself is the chief cause of both bondage and release.

बन्धायfor bondage
बन्धाय:
TypeNoun
Rootबन्ध
Formपुंलिङ्गः, चतुर्थी, एकवचनम्
विषयासङ्गःattachment to objects
विषयासङ्गः:
TypeNoun
Rootविषयासङ्ग
Formपुंलिङ्गः, प्रथमा, एकवचनम्
मुक्त्यैfor liberation
मुक्त्यै:
TypeNoun
Rootमुक्ति
Formस्त्रीलिङ्गः, चतुर्थी, एकवचनम्
निर्विषयंfree from objects
निर्विषयं:
TypeAdjective
Rootनिर्विषय
Formनपुंसकलिङ्गः, प्रथमा/द्वितीया, एकवचनम्
मनःmind
मनः:
TypeNoun
Rootमनस्
Formनपुंसकलिङ्गः, प्रथमा, एकवचनम्
मनःmind
मनः:
TypeNoun
Rootमनस्
Formनपुंसकलिङ्गः, प्रथमा, एकवचनम्
एवindeed/alone
एव:
TypeIndeclinable
Rootएव
Formअव्ययम्
मनुष्याणांof humans
मनुष्याणां:
TypeNoun
Rootमनुष्य
Formपुंलिङ्गः, षष्ठी, बहुवचनम्
कारणंcause
कारणं:
TypeNoun
Rootकारण
Formनपुंसकलिङ्गः, प्रथमा, एकवचनम्
बन्धमोक्षयोःof bondage and liberation
बन्धमोक्षयोः:
TypeNoun
Rootबन्धमोक्ष
Formपुंलिङ्गः, षष्ठी/सप्तमी, द्विवचनम्
Chanakya (Kautilya)
अनुष्टुप्
Ancient EthicsSanskrit LiteratureHistory of Political ThoughtHistorical Philosophy
Mind (manas)Sense-objects (viṣaya)Bondage (bandha)Liberation (mokṣa)

FAQs

In the broader Sanskrit intellectual milieu, concise aphoristic verses frequently link governance-oriented ethics (nīti) with widely circulating renunciant and philosophical vocabulary. This śloka reflects a cross-genre conceptual exchange in which terms such as viṣaya (sense-object), bandha (bondage), and mokṣa (liberation) are used to frame moral psychology, a theme present across classical Indian traditions and later compendia of didactic literature.

Bondage is described in causal relation to viṣayāsaṅga, i.e., the mind’s attachment to objects of experience, while liberation is associated with a nirviṣaya state, i.e., a mind characterized as lacking object-directed entanglement. The verse attributes both outcomes to the mind (manas) as the central explanatory factor, emphasizing an internal, psychological account rather than an external or ritual mechanism.

The construction “bandhāya… muktyai…” uses parallel dative forms to mark contrasted ends (telic datives), creating a balanced causal antithesis. The compound viṣayāsaṅga (“attachment to viṣayas”) condenses a common moral-psychological diagnosis into a single term, while nirviṣaya (“without viṣaya”) is a compact descriptor that can be read philologically as ‘objectless’ or ‘disengaged from sense-contents,’ foregrounding the mind as the locus of causation in the final line (“mana eva… kāraṇam”).