HomeChanakya NitiCh. 13Shloka 3
Previous Verse
Next Verse

Shloka 3

Human Nature — Chanakya Niti

स्वभावेन हि तुष्यन्ति देवाः सत्पुरुषाः पिता ।

ज्ञातयः स्नानपानाभ्यां वाक्यदानेन पण्डिताः ॥

svabhāvena hi tuṣyanti devāḥ satpuruṣāḥ pitā |

ñātayaḥ snānapānābhyāṁ vākyadānena paṇḍitāḥ ||

Deities, the virtuous, and one’s father are pleased by one’s natural disposition; kinsmen by bathing and drink; the learned by the gift of words—speech and discourse.

स्वभावेनby (one’s) nature
स्वभावेन:
TypeNoun
Rootस्वभाव
FormMasculine, Instrumental, Singular
हिindeed/for
हि:
TypeIndeclinable
Rootहि
FormAvyaya
तुष्यन्तिare pleased
तुष्यन्ति:
TypeVerb
Rootतुष्
FormPresent, 3rd person, Plural, Parasmaipada
देवाःgods
देवाः:
TypeNoun
Rootदेव
FormMasculine, Nominative, Plural
सत्पुरुषाःgood men/virtuous persons
सत्पुरुषाः:
TypeNoun
Rootसत्पुरुष
FormMasculine, Nominative, Plural
पिताfather
पिता:
TypeNoun
Rootपितृ
FormMasculine, Nominative, Singular
ज्ञातयःkinsmen/relatives
ज्ञातयः:
TypeNoun
Rootज्ञाति
FormMasculine, Nominative, Plural
स्नानपानाभ्याम्by bathing and drinking/refreshment
स्नानपानाभ्याम्:
TypeNoun
Rootस्नानपान
FormNeuter, Instrumental, Dual
वाक्यदानेनby giving words (i.e., kind speech/advice)
वाक्यदानेन:
TypeNoun
Rootवाक्यदान
FormNeuter, Instrumental, Singular
पण्डिताःlearned men
पण्डिताः:
TypeNoun
Rootपण्डित
FormMasculine, Nominative, Plural
Chanakya (Kautilya)
अनुष्टुभ्
Ancient EthicsSanskrit LiteratureHistory of Political ThoughtClassical Social Norms
DeitiesVirtuous personsFatherKinsmenScholars

FAQs

In the broader Nītiśāstra milieu, such verses function as compact social observations that map relationships (divine, familial, kinship, and scholarly) to culturally recognized forms of respect and reciprocity. The categories reflect an early/classical Indian social world in which ritual purity (snāna), hospitality/refreshment (pāna), and learned exchange (vākya) were salient markers of social bonding and status.

The verse presents “satisfaction” (tuṣṭi/tuṣyanti) as differentiated by social role: some figures are associated with an intrinsic or habitual disposition (svabhāva), while others are associated with external acts—ritual/hygienic refreshment for relatives and verbal offering for scholars. The framing is descriptive of a conventional typology rather than an explicit ethical argument.

The construction sets up parallel groups linked by instrumental case expressions (svabhāvena, snāna-pānābhyām, vākyadānena), creating an aphoristic taxonomy. “Vākyadāna” (gift of words) can be read philologically as encompassing praise, respectful address, or learned conversation—speech as a social ‘offering’ analogous to material hospitality—while “svabhāva” emphasizes a notion of innate or customary temperament as a basis for contentment.