HomeChanakya NitiCh. 14Shloka 13
Previous Verse
Next Verse

Shloka 13

Governance and Policy — Chanakya Niti

स जीवति गुणा यस्य यस्य धर्मः स जीवति ।

गुणधर्मविहीनस्य जीवितं निष्प्रयोजनम् ॥

sa jīvati guṇā yasya yasya dharmaḥ sa jīvati |

guṇadharmavihīnasya jīvitaṃ niṣprayojanam ||

He truly lives who has virtues; he truly lives who has dharma. The life of one without virtue and dharma is purposeless.

सःhe
सः:
TypePronoun
Rootतद्
FormMasculine, Nominative, Singular
जीवतिlives
जीवति:
TypeVerb
Rootजीव्
FormPresent, Parasmaipada, 3rd Person, Singular
गुणाःvirtues/qualities
गुणाः:
TypeNoun
Rootगुण
FormMasculine, Nominative, Plural
यस्यwhose
यस्य:
TypePronoun
Rootयद्
FormMasculine/Neuter, Genitive, Singular
यस्यwhose
यस्य:
TypePronoun
Rootयद्
FormMasculine/Neuter, Genitive, Singular
धर्मःdharma; righteousness
धर्मः:
TypeNoun
Rootधर्म
FormMasculine, Nominative, Singular
सःhe
सः:
TypePronoun
Rootतद्
FormMasculine, Nominative, Singular
जीवतिlives
जीवति:
TypeVerb
Rootजीव्
FormPresent, Parasmaipada, 3rd Person, Singular
गुणधर्मविहीनस्यof one devoid of virtue and dharma
गुणधर्मविहीनस्य:
TypeAdjective
Rootगुणधर्मविहीन
FormMasculine/Neuter, Genitive, Singular
जीवितम्life
जीवितम्:
TypeNoun
Rootजीवित
FormNeuter, Nominative, Singular
निष्प्रयोजनम्purposeless; useless
निष्प्रयोजनम्:
TypeAdjective
Rootनिष्प्रयोजन
FormNeuter, Nominative, Singular
Chanakya (Kautilya)
अनुष्टुप्
Ancient EthicsNīti LiteratureSanskrit PhilologyHistory of Political Thought
Person (individual moral agent)Guṇa (virtues/qualities)Dharma (moral order/duty)

FAQs

In the Cāṇakya-nīti / nītiśāstra milieu, such statements function as compact moral-political aphorisms, reflecting a broader classical Indian discourse in which personal character (guṇa) and adherence to dharma are treated as foundations for social legitimacy and effective participation in public life. The formulation aligns with didactic literature used for instruction in conduct and governance-adjacent ethics.

The verse employs ‘living’ (jīvati) in a layered sense: biological existence is implicitly distinguished from socially and morally meaningful life. Presence of guṇa and dharma is presented as the criterion by which life is rhetorically counted as significant within the tradition’s ethical vocabulary.

The repetition of ‘sa jīvati’ creates an emphatic parallelism, using a definitional style common to aphoristic Sanskrit. The compound guṇadharmavihīna (‘devoid of virtues and dharma’) compresses evaluation into a single lexical unit, and niṣprayojana (‘without purpose/aim’) frames the critique in terms of telos (prayojana), a key category in classical Sanskrit intellectual traditions.