Shloka 3
Right Conduct — Chanakya Niti
हस्ती स्थूलतनुः स चाङ्कुशवशः किं हस्तिमात्रोऽङ्कुशो
दीपे प्रज्वलिते प्रणश्यति तमः किं दीपमात्रं तमः ।
वज्रेणापि हताः पतन्ति गिरयः किं वज्रमात्रं नगा-
स्तेजो यस्य विराजते स बलवान्स्थूलेषु कः प्रत्ययः ॥
hastī sthūlatanuḥ sa cāṅkuśavaśaḥ kiṃ hastimātro ’ṅkuśo
dīpe prajvalite praṇaśyati tamaḥ kiṃ dīpamātraṃ tamaḥ |
vajreṇāpi hatāḥ patanti girayaḥ kiṃ vajramātraṃ nagā-
stejo yasya virājate sa balavān sthūleṣu kaḥ pratyayaḥ ||
ช้างกายใหญ่โต ยังอยู่ใต้อำนาจตะขอช้าง—ตะขอช้างใหญ่เท่าช้างหรือ? เมื่อจุดประทีป ความมืดก็หาย—ประทีปใหญ่เท่าความมืดหรือ? แม้ภูเขายังพังเมื่อถูกวัชระ—วัชระใหญ่เท่าภูเขาหรือ? ผู้มีกำลังแท้คือผู้มีเตชัสส่องประกาย; จะเชื่อถือเพียงความใหญ่โตได้อย่างไร?
FAQs
Within the broader nītiśāstra tradition, such verses function as didactic aphorisms using familiar material culture (elephant-handling, lamps, and the mythic-symbolic vajra) to frame discussions of authority and efficacy. The imagery aligns with premodern South Asian courtly and administrative environments where control, discipline, and the perception of power were recurring themes in political pedagogy.
Power is described less as physical magnitude and more as effective capacity, represented by tejas (radiant vigor) and by the ability of a small means to produce a decisive effect. The verse’s structure suggests a contrast between apparent size and actual efficacy, treating “bulk” as an unreliable indicator of strength.
The verse relies on rhetorical questions (kim…?) and parallel examples to create a cumulative argument. Terms like tejas carry layered semantic fields in Sanskrit—ranging from brightness to moral-psychological vigor—allowing the text to move from physical phenomena (light dispelling darkness) to social-political evaluation (the locus of real strength). The elephant-and-goad analogy reflects a concrete premodern practice, while vajra and mountains add a mythic-cosmic scale to the same principle.