Swaveda

Arthashastra · Chapter 49

Book 2 (The Duties of Government Superintendents), Chapter XVIII: DEFAMATION

Translated by R. Shamasastry (1915, public domain), 1915. Public domain.

  1. 1

    Original script forthcoming

    CALUMNY, contemptuous talk, or intimidation constitutes defamation.

  2. 2

    Original script forthcoming

    Among abusive expressions relating to the body, habits, learning, occupation, or nationalities, that of calling a deformed man by his right name such as ‘the blind’, ‘the lame’, etc. shall be punished with a fine of 3 panas; and by false name 6 panas. If the blind, the lame, etc., are insulted with such ironical expressions as ‘a man of beautiful eyes’, ‘a man of beautiful teeth’, etc. the fine shall be 12 panas. Likewise when a person is taunted for leprosy, lunacy, impotency and the like. Abusive expressions in general, no matter whether true, false, or reverse with reference to the abused, shall be punished with fines ranging above 12 panas, in the case of persons of equal rank.

  3. 3

    Original script forthcoming

    If persons abused happen to be of superior rank, the amount of the fines shall be doubled; if of lower rank, it shall be halved. For calumniating the wives of others, the amount of the fines shall be doubled.

  4. 4

    Original script forthcoming

    If abuse is due to carelessness, intoxication, or loss of sense, etc., the fines shall be halved.

  5. 5

    Original script forthcoming

    As to the reality of leprosy and lunacy, physicians or

  6. 6

    Original script forthcoming

    neighbours shall be authorities.

  7. 7

    Original script forthcoming

    As to the reality of impotency, women, the scum of urine, or the low specific gravity of faeces in water (the sinking of faeces in water) shall furnish the necessary evidence.

  8. 8

    Original script forthcoming

    (Speaking ill of habits.)

  9. 9

    Original script forthcoming

    If among Brahmans, Kshatriyas, Vaisyas, Stidras, and outcastes (antdvasdyins), any one of a lower caste abuses the habits of one of a higher caste, the fines imposed shall increase from 3 panas upwards (commencing from the lowest caste). If any one of a higher caste abuses one of a lower caste, fines imposed shall decrease from 2 panas.

  10. 10

    Original script forthcoming

    Contemptuous expressions such as 'a bad Brdhman' shall also be punished as above.

  11. 11

    Original script forthcoming

    The same rules shall apply to calumnies regarding learning (sruta), the profession of buffoons (vdgjivana), artisans, or musicians, and relating to nationalities such as Prdjjunaka, Gadndhara, etc.

  12. 12

    Original script forthcoming

    If a person intimidates another by using such expressions as ‘I shall render thee thus’, the bravado shall be punished with half as much fine as will be levied on him who actually does so.

  13. 13

    Original script forthcoming

    If a person, being unable to carry his threat into effect, pleads provocation, intoxication, or loss of sense as his excuse, he shall be fined 12 panas.

  14. 14

    Original script forthcoming

    If a person capable to do harm and under the influence of

  15. 15

    Original script forthcoming

    enmity intimidates another, he shall be compelled to give life-long security for the well-being of the intimidated.

  16. 16

    Original script forthcoming

    * Defamation of one's own nation or village shall be punished with the first amercement; that of one's own caste or assembly with the middlemost; and that of gods or temples (chaitya) with the highest amercement.

Commentary

Book 2 of Kauṭilya's Arthaśāstra, Chapter XVIII. 16 paragraphs from Shamasastry's 1915 English translation. The Arthaśāstra is a treatise on statecraft, economic policy, and military strategy attributed to Kauṭilya (Cāṇakya), advisor to Chandragupta Maurya. Shamasastry's translation, the first into English, was published from his discovery of a 4th-century manuscript at the Government Oriental Library in Mysore. Modern critical editions (Olivelle 2013, Kangle 1965) are more philologically rigorous; we cite them but do not reproduce.