Shloka 14
Self-Discipline — Chanakya Niti
कुराजराज्येन कुतः प्रजासुखं कुमित्रमित्रेण कुतोऽभिनिर्वृतिः ।
कुदारदारैश्च कुतो गृहे रतिः कुशिष्यशिष्यमध्यापयतः कुतो यशः ॥
kurājarājyena kutaḥ prajāsukhaṃ kumitramitreṇa kuto'bhinirvṛtiḥ |
kudāradāraiś ca kuto gṛhe ratiḥ kuśiṣyaśiṣyam adhyāpayataḥ kuto yaśaḥ ||
Under a bad king, where is the people’s happiness? With a friend who is truly a bad ally, where is contentment? With a bad spouse, where is joy at home? For a teacher teaching a bad student, where is renown?
FAQs
In the Chanakya Niti tradition, such verses reflect a didactic genre (nītiśāstra) that circulated in premodern South Asia as compact guidance-literature for rulers, households, and students. The verse’s paired domains—kingship, alliance, household, and pedagogy—mirror common concerns of classical social order: the stability of governance, reliability of political friendship, domestic harmony, and the reputation economy surrounding teaching and learning.
Well-being is framed as contingent upon the quality of key relationships and institutions: public welfare depends on the character of rulership (kurājarājya), personal ease depends on trustworthy friendship (kumitramitra), domestic enjoyment depends on household compatibility (kudāradārāḥ), and social reputation depends on successful instruction (adhyāpana) with a capable student. The verse describes these as conditions whose failure negates the expected outcome.
The verse uses an anaphoric rhetorical pattern—repeating “kutaḥ” (“whence/how could there be”)—to build a cumulative argument. Compounds like “kurājarājya” and “kumitramitra” compress evaluation into a single lexical unit, typical of Sanskrit aphoristic style. The progression from polity to personal relations to pedagogy also functions as a structural metaphor for interdependence: disorder at foundational nodes (ruler, ally, spouse, student) is described as undermining the corresponding form of sukha, nirvṛti, rati, and yaśas.