4 ms·

It’s ok to read this work for sake of knowledge and understanding nuances of society at that time and may be some lessons might be useful, but it can’t be the b

It’s ok to read this work for sake of knowledge and understanding nuances of society at that time and may be some lessons might be useful, but it can’t be the basis of modern planning. Any system based on gentrification and divisions of humanity based on caste might have been acceptable in old times, but cannot be a good basis for modern society. Level of planning and technology used today will be considered work of god in the era this book was written, so probably it also doesn’t make sense. It’s like the book “Art of war” by Sun Tzu, which wasn’t even followed by one of the most successful war strategist ZhuGe Liang (諸葛亮) in China, but a book which comes quite often in management study strategies, like Kautilya Arthshstra in India.

jelliclesfarm 6y ago
It is very distressing and peculiar to me that you keep wanting to divert this into a post about caste. Please stop.
- dragonsh 6y ago
  Because Kautilya’s work is very good for its time, is still based on Jati (caste) and Varna (class) system and the feudal ownership of land and urban planning was based on this system and prohibit a movement of person from one Varna or Jati to other. So if one looks at this text they need to know the prevailing conditions of that time. Probably read the Arthshstra and will get an idea what I am talking about [1]. “In Kautilya’s India, religion was ubiquitous and invasive. An elaborate form of Hinduism, unlike the one practiced currently, formed the basis of people’s identity in the socioeconomic sphere, and also in matters of life and death. The class system (varnas) and the caste system (jatis) got entrenched in people’s private and public lives around Kautilya’s time. To this end, Hindu principles were supposed to be a broad framework of guidelines and morals that were meant to provide directions to individual lives, particularly for the attainment of moksha, or self-liberation, through knowledge (gyana-yoga), devotion (bhakti-yoga), and duty (karma-yoga/dharma). However, they became overly prescriptive in nature, controlling every detail of an individual’s life, such as their education, social standing, professional/occupational qualifications, and economic status. The varna system divided Hindu society into four classes: Brahmins (priests), Kshatriyas (warriors), Vaishyas (mercantile/trade class) and Shudras (slaves, lowest order workers). An individual’s placement in the varna system defined their education, social and economic status, and also their choice of work. The system was codified in such a manner so as to not facilitate any form of mobility, either upward or downward. In short, this hierarchical system, with the priests occupying the highest rung on the social ladder and the slaves occupying the lowest rung, was also hereditary. The scylla and charybdis of hierarchy and hereditary stagnated the class system, paving the way for rulers to partake of the system’s in-built oppression in order to facilitate submission and smooth rule. Furthermore, the jatis, or subcastes, that were based on a greater specialization of labor, solidified the varna-imposed hierarchy system to an even greater extent.” [1] https://archive.org/details/Arthasastra_English_Translation https://archive.org/details/Arthasastra_English_Translation
  - jelliclesfarm 6y ago
    You said “probably read the ”Arthsastra”. Have you read it? The actual work you are commenting upon..? Or did you just read the blurb/summary you cut and pasted?

jelliclesfarm 6y ago

It is very distressing and peculiar to me that you keep wanting to divert this into a post about caste. Please stop.

dragonsh 6y ago
Because Kautilya’s work is very good for its time, is still based on Jati (caste) and Varna (class) system and the feudal ownership of land and urban planning was based on this system and prohibit a movement of person from one Varna or Jati to other. So if one looks at this text they need to know the prevailing conditions of that time. Probably read the Arthshstra and will get an idea what I am talking about [1]. “In Kautilya’s India, religion was ubiquitous and invasive. An elaborate form of Hinduism, unlike the one practiced currently, formed the basis of people’s identity in the socioeconomic sphere, and also in matters of life and death. The class system (varnas) and the caste system (jatis) got entrenched in people’s private and public lives around Kautilya’s time. To this end, Hindu principles were supposed to be a broad framework of guidelines and morals that were meant to provide directions to individual lives, particularly for the attainment of moksha, or self-liberation, through knowledge (gyana-yoga), devotion (bhakti-yoga), and duty (karma-yoga/dharma). However, they became overly prescriptive in nature, controlling every detail of an individual’s life, such as their education, social standing, professional/occupational qualifications, and economic status. The varna system divided Hindu society into four classes: Brahmins (priests), Kshatriyas (warriors), Vaishyas (mercantile/trade class) and Shudras (slaves, lowest order workers). An individual’s placement in the varna system defined their education, social and economic status, and also their choice of work. The system was codified in such a manner so as to not facilitate any form of mobility, either upward or downward. In short, this hierarchical system, with the priests occupying the highest rung on the social ladder and the slaves occupying the lowest rung, was also hereditary. The scylla and charybdis of hierarchy and hereditary stagnated the class system, paving the way for rulers to partake of the system’s in-built oppression in order to facilitate submission and smooth rule. Furthermore, the jatis, or subcastes, that were based on a greater specialization of labor, solidified the varna-imposed hierarchy system to an even greater extent.” [1] https://archive.org/details/Arthasastra_English_Translation https://archive.org/details/Arthasastra_English_Translation
- jelliclesfarm 6y ago
  You said “probably read the ”Arthsastra”. Have you read it? The actual work you are commenting upon..? Or did you just read the blurb/summary you cut and pasted?