From the editorial office. We publish the latest article by Andrey Mikhailovich Samozvantsev. He left us suddenly, having managed to make a significant contribution to the development of Russian Sanskrit textology and source studies, full of new plans. A number of his works were published on the pages of our magazine, and we expected new articles from him, but it didn't work out.

This article is part of a large study of the text of the "Arthashastra of Kautilya" (hereinafter - KA) under the title "Arthashastra of Kautilya" I-II. The world of text and the world in text". This book has not yet been published. Other articles that have not yet been published are extracts from it; like the article devoted to the problem of spies in the SC, they are likely to be published in publications prepared at the Institute of Oriental Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences.

Keywords: dharmashastra, religious law, "Arthashastra of Kautili", "Narada-smriti", spies, Ancient India.

The idea to write a book "Arthashastra of Kautilya" I-II. The World of the Text and the World in the Text" appeared quite unexpectedly, but the conceptual approach to the text presented in it (and not only to the text of the KA: the material of the dharmashastras is also studied from the same angle and, probably, the material of other Indian literary monuments can be studied) has been maturing for a long time, since the late 1980s. Simply, as sometimes happens, the content of the thought did not immediately get its finished form.

This book shows the specific culture of the Indian text and demonstrates on many examples the mechanism of self-organization of this text. However, I am aware that quite private research, such as articles in terms of their material, tools, and methods of text research, is in a deliberately losing position compared to a monograph that has not yet been published. Therefore, I consider it necessary in the introduction to the article on spies in the Indian text (realizing that this, of course, makes the presentation more difficult) to touch on an important question about the phenomenon of Indian textual culture and thereby introduce my approach to the text, my understanding of the text and the material contained in it into a certain historical and cultural context.

In his book" Historical Development of Culture", published in 1991, V. N. Romanov investigated, in particular, the phenomenon of so-called theoretical culture. He noted that theoretical culture in ancient times focused its attention on a very limited range of phenomena of social practice. The fact is that in ancient times not all forms of human behavior became simultaneously the object of description, and the transition to conceptual thinking, which transforms the entire structure of the individual, took place on the basis of narrow texts that developed a specific "grid" of worldview concepts. Later, when other areas of human behavior were mastered in the same way, the initial" grid " of concepts was transformed into a new one.-

page 18
it defined, in general, a terminologically consistent and uniform perception of all values of human life. In ancient India, this initial "grid" was a system of concepts that were grouped around the concept of sacrifice, sacrifice. For this reason, the entire body of Vedic literature was painted by the Indian tradition according to the functions of the four priests who performed the so-called srauta ritual.

At the same time, theoretical culture in India was formed in the absence of writing, which led to the development of a technique for oral translation of texts from teacher to student. Hence the extremely high status of the word in this tradition, which should not have been distorted even at the phonetic level. And hence the formation of the "philological" direction in Indian culture, the purpose of which was to fix the text in its unchanging form (Romanov, 1991, p.68-70).

At the same time, in the Late Vedic period, there is an increasingly deep technical regulation, "technologization" of the ritual, accompanied by classification, ordering of its elements; the ritual develops as if in depth and at the expense of its own resources, using its inherent technical means, which is a necessary consequence of the actualization of the ritual - in this case, the shrauta ritual-as a socially significant sphere public practice.

The corresponding description of the ritual in the text indicated that the srauta ritual sacrifices were classified according to a number of characteristics and, in particular, were organized in rows, each of which was based on one of the seven types of sacrifices: agnishtoma, atyagnishtoma, ukthya, shodashin, vajapeya, atiratra and aptoryama; these are the seven forms of srauta-sacrifices are mentioned, in particular, when listing sacrifices in the relatively late Gautama-Dharmasutra 1.8.21. All the seven forms and types of sacrifice had their own modifications, but all of them were based on the archetype (prakriti) - agnishtoma, the one-day sacrifice of soma. Important elements of the agnishtoma sacrifice were elements of the other types of sacrifices. The material, therefore, is organized according to a pattern of identical elements, and the structure of the sacrifice is in all cases constructed in the same way in principle.

When in the late 1980s. I was studying the legal text of the dharmashastras, then I studied the text of the authoritative dharmashastras of the late 1st millennium BC-the beginning of the 1st millennium AD, divided into sections of secular and religious law. Then, in 1991, I published a book about it, The Legal Text of the Dharmashastra. The study showed that the dharmashastra text organizes the material in the same way as the material of earlier ritual texts is constructed, i.e. within the same ritualistic culture. Here, development was replaced by classification. In the sections of the ancient dharmasutras devoted to secular law, macro-categories of judicial cases of criminal law are distinguished, united by the theme of "field" and the law of obligations, between which there are certain semantic connections. The same macro-rites are also found in the dharmashastras, only in them the first and last rows are reversed. As already mentioned, these macro-orders consist of a series of court cases. The development of the text is expressed, on the one hand, in connecting new series (first of all, the law of obligations) to the existing series and following their model, on the other hand, in introducing examples that specify them, and both the series of court cases and the corresponding examples look equivalent at their own level (Samozvantsev, 1991, p. 237).. This is a complex construction of cubes, which is built from them according to the principle of analogy, when one cube in the system of semantic codes is connected to another cube.

And the religious law section also builds the material in the same way, adjusted for the specifics of this material. There are macro-rites of four great sins, which include rows, of which the main ones are rows of sins equated to great and lesser sins. In later texts, the series takes in an increasing number of sins, and this is done arbitrarily, and the principle of connecting "on the ob-

page 19
razzu " means more than the semantics of a particular sin; then there are new classes of sins - like mortal sins-and they all fit together: this is precisely a way of ordering and organizing material within a certain tradition using a certain set of purely technical means [Samozvantsev, 1991, pp. 237-238].

I didn't find any development of ideas from text to text. But it is noticeable that the text of "Manu-smriti" is self-contained. It completes the development of the legal branch of dharmashastra, as it provides an exhaustive coverage of the set of topics defined by the genre. Then the development of the dharmashastra text changes its direction, and in the monument of the III-IV centuries AD "Narada-smriti" one can see a purely technical regulation of the rules and norms typical of classification, and the same - sometimes colossal in size classifications-can be seen in the later monuments of the ritual branch of this genre. All classifications in "Narada-smriti" are divided into three types: digital classifications without listing ordinal elements; there are: two types of judicial process; 12 types of property, three types of general property, the rest-9 types; two guarantors of trust - a guarantor and a pledge, etc. Even more common are classifications with the inclusion of numbers and the enumeration of elements of the series, for example: there is a legal proof of two types-human and divine; three are independent in this world-the king, the teacher and the householder, etc. Only the third type of classification-a simple enumeration of the elements of a series-is found in texts earlier than "Narada-smriti", "Manu-smriti" and "Yajnavalkya-smriti" (Samozvantsev, 1991, pp. 270-271). However, digital classifications of the type found in the Narada Smriti can be found in the Kautilya Arthashastra. Only in the 10th chapter of book II 63 letters are mentioned, four varieties of words, 13 cases when the meaning appears as a product of what is written, three types of benevolence, 2 types of unforeseen circumstances, 5 types of friendly treatment, etc., and all these "varieties", "cases" and the like consist of single-order elements. KA is very similar in this respect to "Narada-smriti", but in all cases the classifications are constructed in the same way: there is a type, or archetype, to which subtypes are connected, i.e. the principle of mastering ritual material works just as effectively on non-ritual material.

In recent years, I have been working with the text of the Arthashastra of Kautilya, a famous monument of Sanskrit literature describing traditional Indian statehood. The conducted research has shown that this text develops and organizes the material in a fundamentally similar way to the dharmashastras, i.e. it exists and develops within the same ritualistic culture. It should be noted that the text of the KA is not only a composite text, but in its existing form, it is probably even later than the Narada-smriti, compiled around the middle of the 1st millennium AD. e. And in comparison with the Narada-smriti, the KA takes the next step in the direction of creating highly specialized treatises of the Middle Ages (a the content of the Narada Smriti, in contrast to the earlier dharmashastras, is reduced to law alone) and digests-nibandhas with their thematic and classification approach to the material. The concentration of prescriptions in the CA becomes the concentration of thought, of the state will, and the self-organization of the text becomes the self-organization of the state. This classification approach also "works" to the full extent in the SC text covering the activities of spies.

In a rare work on state organization in ancient and early medieval India, the question of the activities of spies in the service of the state is not even casually addressed. The truly pervasive significance of this service is usually noted, which, based on KA's knowledge of it (which, in turn, is based on earlier arthashastras, while the arthashastra tradition has influenced other texts, and in particular the dharmashastras), is truly unique not only in the East, but in the world as a whole. The Spy seems to be one of the most significant, if not the most significant, characters in KA. There are many things said about it

page 20
I. 11-12 contains a classification of types of spies, whereas in the rest of the text, spies of different types can be included in various classifications, form "rows", but there are no classifications similar to those presented in I. 11-12. This completely exorbitant, one might say self-sufficient (as will be seen later), the value of the service of spies, who even act as kings (!), in the light of our research on the specific transformation of material by means of the KA text, in our opinion, should be revised. Let's make a reservation right away that we are going to consider spies only from the point of view that we discussed above, i.e. within the framework of the approach to the KA text as a certain text culture. First, we will look at spies, how they look and act outside the classification in 1.11-12, and then-inside this classification, including in the aspect of the phenomenon of so-called text induction.

Multiple terminology is used to refer to spies in the spacecraft. A fairly complete list of terms denoting them includes: apasarpa (I. 12.17, 25, 13.1, 14.11, 18.13 and others), (I. 13. 15, 23, 14.6, 16.24 and others), (I. 16. 33, II. 25. 12, VII. 13. 43), (VII. 17.61, XI. 1. 34, XII.5.47 et al.), (I. 18. 14, 19.18, 22, V. 1. 3 et al.), (XII. 5. 49), (V. 6. 46), (I. 21. 29, IX. 3. 30, XII. 1.26), (XI. 1.34, XII. 4. 19), (I. 11.22, 12.8, 10 - 12, 24, II. 35. 15 et al.), (I. 12.5, 24), sattrin (I. 10.3, 12.8, 13.2, 17.28 - 29, 34, V. 1.5, 9, etc.), (V. 1.10, 22, 41, 43, 2.65 et al.), cāra (I. 7. 1, 12.20, 23).

The etymology of the vast majority of these terms is clear: apasarpa - "retreating", " retreating "(possibly "creeping up"), vyanjana - "appearing under someone's guise", "presenting", gudha - "secret", gudhapranihita - "secretly sent", gudhasamchara - "secretly moving", yogapurusha - "a person who uses subtle means, magic", samstha - "local, staying in one place", tikshna - "resolute", "bold", "hot", chara/samchara - "walking, moving". The semantics of the word sattra remains unclear, while how it is related to the word sattrin. In KA XIII.2.43 the expression sattracchanna occurs as a substitute for the word sattrin, meaning "changed appearance", i.e., assumed a new appearance. The latter meaning, as well as the meaning of the word chadman/chadmāna (I. 12. 9, VII. 17. 41, 50, XIV.1.2), is synonymous with the meaning of the word a in I. 18. 12 chadman and is directly used interchangeably. Carriers of the attribute or quality defined by these terms put on a mask that makes them unrecognizable. This is a clever trick designed to deceive the uninitiated, something that contains a lie. Not coincidentally in an Indian dramachadman serves as a technical term synonymous with the term "false news". Those persons who are described in the text as "hiding their faces and changing their clothes" (II.36.39) or as "changing their clothes and changing their clothes" (III.9.11) also tend to disguise themselves. Moreover, Paragraph 36. 39 most likely refers to ascetics in disguise, i.e. about the same spies. In I. 11. 7, ascetic spies are required to perform royal tasks in "such and such clothing" - apparently disguised or in clothing that has some distinctive sign.

Consequently, at least for some of the spies, the acquisition of a new quality by them was thought of as a disguise - like dressing a prince in the clothes of a master, craftsman, actor, etc. (1.18.12), thanks to which he became unrecognizable. The tsarevich here is vjanjan insofar as he is "accompanied" by companions who "also changed their appearance" But is it necessary for the spy to change clothes in all cases in order to be unrecognizable? Obviously, this is not the case. But in any case, in the Indian tradition, disguise also implies aversion to danger, magically understood evil ("Manu-smriti" IX. 256, "Yajnavalkya-smriti" II. 252, cf.KA III.9. 11), and the fact that the spy is in danger, it seems obvious: the spy needs to look, not being a spy. Together

page 21
at the same time, it would be risky to interpret vyangjan directly as a "sign", a "distinctive sign" of the spy or the person he claims to be: what special sign should spies have who pretend to be a ruler or his wife? However, the queen also appears as vyanjana (V. 1.29), and this means only that the woman here pretends to be the queen.

The types of spies are deciphered by the KA text itself only in chapters I. 11-12. In the rest of the KA text, the types of spies are largely leveled from the point of view of their purpose, which cannot but affect the translation, which also requires in most cases leveling the content of terms as meaning "spies" in general. Exceptions are made for such specific terms as - " mendicant nun "(I. 10.7, 12.4, 10, etc.), - "disciple" (I. 10.11, V. 1.14, 2.68) and rasada- "poisoner" (I. 12.3, 9, V. 1.48, etc.). others): the translation retains the proper meaning of these terms, not to mention the numerous spies called vyanjana - "acting under the guise" of ascetics, soothsayers, interpreters of signs, astrologers, healers, followers of non-Vedic teachings (non-Brahmanists), etc. The list of them in KA is truly endless, but that is why you will have to pay special attention to it: it gives a clear idea of how a text can operate with material, and this is probably a unique example of this kind in its own way.

From the point of view of the terminology used in the SC to refer to spies (outside the classification of types of spies), the latter constitute three groups. The first group includes the spies designated as apasarpa, gudha, gudhapranihita, gudhapurusha, gudhasamchara, gudhasaraparigraha, yogapurusha, pranihita, samstha, samchara/samcharin, sattrin, tikshna and chara. This group of spies is the most significant. A somewhat smaller group of spies who act as vyangjan persons of various professional (mainly) and other affiliations. That we are talking about "imaginary" merchants, hunters, ascetics, etc., can sometimes be seen only from the context. And finally, a small group consists of spies who are designated by one of their own terms, but act under the guise of someone else. Here, therefore, there is a confusion of characteristics inherent in the spies of the first two groups. Thus, sotyadatai-pranihita appear under the guise of brothel keepers, singers, actors, dancers and jugglers (XI. 1.34), as well as traitors, enemies and forest dwellers (XII. 4. 19);gudhapurusha appear as diviners, interpreters of signs, astrologers, storytellers, fortune-tellers (XIII. 1.7) and warriors (XIII.4.16); tikshna-under the guise of sorcerers (XIII.2.21) and sattrins - under the guise of craftsmen (VII. 17.33). With some exceptions (pranihita in XII. 4. 19, sattrins in VII. 17.33), these spies are not called vyanjana.

Just as it remains a fact that the SC uses multiple terminology to refer to spies, it is also obvious that the spies designated by different terms perform similar or the same functions. Thus, the sotyadatai-apasarpa deliver the prince to his father (I. 18. 13), the gudhasarapargraha protect him (V. 6.46), and the gudha save him from danger (VII. 17.51); the prince flees, escapes from danger from the gudhapranihita (VII. 17. 61), and the prince is abducted-saved from danger - sattrins-vyanjan, posing as craftsmen and craftsmen (VII. 17.33). And the same prince is killed by gudhapursha (I. 18.14).

The gudha are said to take possession of the enemy's fortifications, using weapons, poison, and fire (XII. 1.19), while the gudhapurusha are said to use weapons, poison, and fire against the tikshna enemy (IX.6.53), who are also said to use weapons, fire, and poison (IX. 6. 54). Tikshna come to the royal palace with weapons (VI. 24-25, 27), gudha are engaged in slipping weapons among the belongings of the enemy king (XIV 1.3).

The Gudhapurusha kill the heads of the branches of the army (XII. 4. 18), and the troops are destroyed by the pranihita under the guise of traitors, enemies and forest dwellers, i.e. acting as traitors.

page 22
vyanjana (XII. 4. 19). At the same time, enemy troops are also destroyed by other vyanjana-acting under the guise of hunters (XII. 4. 24), as well as tikshna, who are not vyanjana, - in the gorge-fire, in the desert - smoke (?), on vacation-poison, on the beach water - by means of crocodiles(!) and people who can act on water (XII.4.25-28). The Gudhasamcharas use suitable means against the enemy sovereign in the harem (XII. 5. 49), which in fact turn out to be snakes, poison, fire and poisonous smoke-they are let in or otherwise used against the sleeping enemy of the gudha woman (XII. 5. 48). Immediately, gatekeepers and eunuchs contribute to the destruction of the enemy (XII. 5. 51) - it is implied that vyanjana. Both yogapurusha (XII. 1.26) and tikshna (XII. 1.28) are placed at the head of the enemy's army to destroy it.

The cases of rasada (V. 1.48), gudhapra-nihita (XII.5.47), and sattrins (XIII.2.43), but it is also used by various vyanjanas: siddha, i.e. a wizard (V. 1.33, XI. 1.40, 45, 47), shaven-headed and scythe-wearing ascetics, i.e. the same wizards (XIII.3.55), healer and cook (V. 1.35-36), merchant (VII. 17.43, XII.4.11-12), the owner of a drinking establishment (XII. 4. 4-5, XIII.3.57), employees (XII. 4. 13), etc. In all these cases, the list of which could be continued, the function of the spy does not determine its name: in the same context, the spies easily change places, which means that any spy can be designated by any term (it is clear that the context also imposes some restrictions: for example, a bhikshuki will not take enemy fortifications and, more importantly, the same spy can be referred to in different terminology. If V. 2. 68 says that sattrin, through the mediation of kapatika, reports that such and such a person has a vessel for performing the royal anointing or a letter from the enemy, and in IX.3.31 - what does suttrin kill by himself or by proxy?gudhapuruish, then this probably refers to a phenomenon that is encountered in classifications. Thus, in 1.12.8, 10, the sattrina and bhikshuka spies transmit some information to the samstha spies, i.e., those who stay in one place, while the first two are samchara spies who move around.

Although in real life, of course, the spy may have passed on information to another spy or used his services in some other capacity, the fact that the KA text introduces a division of functions here - sattrin refers to kapatika, or gudhapurusha, or the samstha spy, or the latter is addressed by bhikshuks-proves that the division of functions is based on the fact that the KA text is based on the It occurs artificially in the text. The process of articulating the subject or material is carried out within the framework of the plot set by the text and usually within the classification of types/categories. And there are similar cases almost exclusively in classifications, where a large, internally organized and structured material needs to be placed in a limited space. It is not by chance that within the classification ,the very "dense" material forces spies or other subjects of activity to organize their activities, including establishing communication with each other - in I. 12.13, 22, spies are built up in a kind of living chains through which information is transmitted. And the text cannot say, let's say that information is passed from student to student, again to student, and so on: the very discreteness of operations forces the text to introduce an artificial division of functions, which is expressed terminologically in different designations of spies. Outside of classifications, where, for obvious reasons, the material is less "dense", this phenomenon is not so common.

From a number of passages in the KA text, it is also clear that the terms used to refer to spies are synonymous: in I. 13. 1, apasarpa is referred to mahamatras, in I. 12. 5-6-samchara, from I. 13.1 - 2 it is clear that apasarpa (the same samchara) and sattrins are the same persons, and from I. 14. 11-that apasarpa is mentioned in I. 14.6 sl. vyanjan. In I. 18.13 - 14, apasarpa and gudha are probably the same spies. According to I. 19. 18, 22, the king sees spies called gudhapurusha , which is, of course, a common name

page 23
spies (see the wording of the headings in I. 11-12). But the same general name for them is yogapurusha in 1.21.29. In Manu VII. 122, IX. 256, 261, 266, 298, the same designation for a spy is chara, in VII. 153, VIII. 182-pranidhi-a term that is not accepted as a designation for a spy in KA (see the expression in heading 1.12: here it means "activity", in other cases it can be used as a term for a spy in KA). meaning "use").

It can also be concluded that outside of the classification of types/categories (in relation to spies, we will discuss it below), the requirements imposed by such a classification on the organization of material (activity aspect), with rare exceptions, are not met. At the same time, the material concerning spies in the main text of the CA is so complex and diverse that it is simply impossible to squeeze it into the Procrustean bed of the classification of types of spies in I. 11-12.

The above already gives some idea of the activities of spies, as it looks in the spacecraft. In many cases, the spies are listed, lining up in rows. Some of them include people with similar professions: so, it is reported that diviners, interpreters of signs, as well as astrologers watch in their country for nobles who are hostile to the king (I. 13.23); experienced thieves, shepherds, hunters and hunters with packs of dogs penetrate into the environment of forest dwellers (IV. 5. 15); actors, dancers,etc. are united in groups. singers, musicians, actors, jugglers, and magicians (VII. 17.34), as well as cooks, bath attendants, massage therapists, bed-makers, barbers, etc. (VII. 17.40). The element composition of the series here, of course, is decisive and more significant than the function that the text ascribes to the listed characters as spies. In other cases, the attribute that allows people of different professions to be grouped together remains unclear. You can understand when merchants burn warehouses of goods (VII. 17.46), forest dwellers point out the wrong way to the troops (VII. 17.53), a siddha wizard resorts to charms (V.2.59, XIII.2.13, etc.), and cattle dealers, hunters, and blacksmiths unleash cattle, predators, and snakes on the enemy, respectively, or use fire (XII.4.14, 16 - 17), - in most cases, everyone here uses the tool that they own. But it remains unclear what unites, say, guards, mummers, healers, and pie makers when they burn houses (VII. 17.45). It is probably precisely what they burn at home: here the functional purpose is more significant than the semantic characteristic of the elements of the series. There are, however, very rare classifications that build a spatial structure: for example, it is said that in fortified cities merchants provoke the enemy, in villages - householders, on the border of the countryside - shepherds and ascetics (XII.4.1), i.e. in the spirit of KA 1.12.22, which contains the classification of sogyadatai-samstha, or staying in one place.

The most complete list of spies is probably given in IV.4.3. Here the revenue collector sends out vyangjan spies to collect information: performing under the guise of magicians, ascetics, wandering monks and wandering singers, magicians, soothsayers, interpreters of signs, astrologers, healers, madmen, mute, deaf, idiots, blind people, merchants, craftsmen, actors, keepers of drinking establishments and brothels, pie makers, rice and meat sellers, etc. To all these spies, what is said in XIII applies fully.3.49 - "such are the king's spies" as it seems worth mentioning here. We want to say that in order to understand the truth and appreciate the scope of the activities of the "spy service", even in the synthetic, artificial state of KA, it is necessary to bring this truth, as they say, to the point of absurdity. And this truth, in our opinion, allows us to open a fairly complete list of people of different professions, social ranks, etc., who are in the service of the state as spies. We do not take here the material of chapters I. 11-12.

Despite the conventionality of the translation of some terms and the proximity of the meanings of some words, this list, compiled on the basis of a survey, is mainly based on

page 24
spies-vyanjana (and therefore does not pretend to be complete), includes spies who act under the guise of: actors (VII. 17.34, XI. 1.34), ascetics (I. 16.24, IV.4.3, XII.4.1, XIII.3.48), including ascetics who left their vows (V. 3. 32), astrologers (I. 13.23, IV. 4. 3, XIII. 1.7), bath attendants (VII. 17.40), deities (XIII. 1.3), military leaders (XII. 4. 7), magicians (IV.4. 3, 5.1, V. 1. 33. 2.59, 6.48, XI. 1.40, 45, 47, XIII.2.7, 13, 15, 18), thieves (IV. 5. 12), enemies (XII. 4. 19), fortune tellers (XIII. 1.7), deaf people (IV. 4. 3), householders (V. 3. 22, XII. 4. 1, XIII.3.45) delivering tools (XIII.3.48), eunuchs (XII. 5. 51), women (V. 2. 52, XII. 5. 48), including widows (XI. 1.42), wives (VII. 17.38), mothers (V. 2. 64) and hetaerae (IV. 8. 15, VII. 17.38), jugglers (VII. 17.34, XI. 1.34), idiots (IV. 4. 3), traitors (XII. 4. 19, 5.42), dealing with fire-blacksmiths, etc. (XII. 4. 17), sorcerers (XIII.2.21), escorts (XIII.3.48), healers (1.16.24, IV. 4. 3, V. 1. 35, 2.67, VII. 14. 45), forest dwellers (VH. 17. 53, XII. 4. 19), mummers (IV. 4. 3, VII. 14. 45, 17.34, XIII.3.44), massage therapists (VII. 17. 40), masters (IV. 4. 3, VII. 17. 33, XIII.3.44), mahamatrov (XII.2.20), musicians (VII. 17.34), commanding officers of an ally, as well as an ally located in the rear of the sovereign (XIII.4.28), mutes (IV. 4. 3), hunters (XII. 4. 16, 24, XIII.3.40), hunting dogs with their packs (IV. 5. 15), bride guards (XIII.3.48), pastukhov (IV. 5. 15, XII.4.1), singers (VII. 17.34, XI. 1.34), including traveling singers (IV. 4. 3), pie makers (IV. 4. 3, VII. 14. 45), cooks (VI. 36, VII. 17. 40), buyers and sellers of cereals (XIII.3.48), madmen (IV. 4. 3), followers of non-Vedic teachings (I. 16. 24, XIII.3.44), ambassadors (X. 6. 49, XIII.1.11, 3.48), bedmen (VII. 17. 40), messengers (V.3.24), gatekeepers (XII. 5. 51), sellers of food, intoxicating drinks, etc. (IV. 4. 3, XII.4.8), diviners, or fortune tellers (IV. 4. 3, XI. 1. 49, XIII.1.7) traveling with caravans (XIII.3.48), hired workers (V. 2. 67, XII. 4. 13), including rural workers (V. 2. 23), storytellers (IV. 8. 15, XIII. 1.7), artisans (VII. 17.33, XIII.3.44), the blind (IV. 4. 3), servants (V. 2. 66-67), keepers of drinking establishments (IV. 4. 3, XII. 4. 4-5) and keepers of brothels (IV. 4. 3, XI. 1.34), allies, i.e. rulers, kings (IX. 5. 27, XIII. 4.46), including an ally in the rear (XIII.4.39, 42), and queens (V 1.29), guards (VII. 14.45), wandering or mendicant monks (IV.4.3), dancers (VII. 17.34, XI. 1.34), interpreters of signs (IV.4.3, XIII. 1.7, 2.33), merchants (1.16.24, IV. 4. 3, V. 2. 46-47, 3.22, VII. 17. 43, 46, IX. 6. 32, XII. 4. 1, 11-12, XIII.2.20, 3.44), including dealers in cattle (XII. 4. 14) and horses (XIII.3.48), pupils (1.16.24, V. 3. 22), teachers (XI. 1.7), magicians (IV.4.3, VII.17.34), barbers (VII.17.40).

This list of spies, which actually includes representatives of all strata of Indian society - a kaleidoscope of faces-cannot, of course, be a demonstration of the power of some perfect and pervasive "spy service." It simply could not exist, and the Indian state in this respect was no different from any other state in the East, which, of course, had spies - but that was all. Some might say: KA-de catalogues possible options - such and such persons may be spies. Let's add: with this approach to the material - when the plural, general, is induced from the particular, and this general includes both hunters and dogs hunting with their dogs, both idiots and madmen, both owners of drinking establishments and owners of brothels, etc. - and so the corresponding series/classifications can theoretically develop to infinities-everyone inevitably becomes a spy. The text includes almost everything - up to kings and gods, but the list cannot be endless for obvious reasons. Cataloging and classifying the material is precisely the subject of our SC research, and this endless list of spies looks through the prism of our research not as a factor of state life, but as a phenomenon of culture and the vital activity of the text.

We mentioned above that the requirements of the classification of types of spies in 1.11 - 12 for material outside the classification are not met, with some exceptions. This is an exception - the spies sattrin and tikshna. The first of them performs

page 25
mostly in the role of a spy-provocateur and informant (I. 10.3, 5, 17.28 - 29, 34, II. 9. 25, IV. 4. 5, V. 1. 12, 15, 3.47, IX. 3. 26, 6.33, XI. 1. 6, 25, 31, 41, 44 - 45, 2.25, 28, 3.1, 4, 7, 12, 15, XIII.1.20, 2.7, 11, 32), the second-mainly murderers (V. 1.10, 22, 41, 43, 45, 2.65, IX. 6. 54, X. 6. 48, XI. 1.36, 38, 47, XII.2.26, 3.2 - 3, 5.47, XIII.2.44, 49). The behavior of both spies correlates with the pattern of their behavior in I. 12. If the scope of activities of spies like gudha, apasarpa, or yogapurusha is too broad and therefore uncertain, whereas a spook like rasada can by definition only kill with poison, the field of activities of sattrins and tikshnas, although vast, has its own priorities. This phenomenon is also reflected in dictionaries. In the Petersburg Dictionary, published at a time when KA was not yet discovered, but its inherent ideas were recorded in Epigonian literature that was close to it in ideas and character and literature of other genres that were influenced by arthashastra, tikshn is not yet given the meaning of "hired killer", although sattrin means"not recognized by disguise". In the dictionary of K. Mulius published in the mid-1970s of the last century, which used both the text of KA and its translation into English by R. P. Kangle, tikshna already directly gets the meaning of "hired killer".

Here, however, two things should be distinguished: did there really exist such spies as the Sattrins and Tikshna, who specialized mainly in provocations and, accordingly, murder, which is reflected in the text, or is the text introduced as a character an actor who gives the text the functions set for this character? Rather, the latest version has the right to exist.

To understand how the text defines functions and builds models of behavior for different types of spies, you should refer to the classification of these types in I. 11-12. Elements of this classification can be traced back to I. 10. Here the text catalogues variants when it describes "finding out the purity and impurity of the amatyas by means of tricks", the mechanism of which is set in motion by spies: by the Suttrins, a mendicant nun and disciple (I. 10.3, 5, 7, 11). All three of them act as provocateurs, but their behavior in each case is specific. The Sattrins, as in many other cases, simply incite the amatyas to betray the king, the nun does this in the palace, where she is trusted and honored, and the disciple - in prison - here, under the guise of a "disciple", the spy-vyanjana acts. The compiler, therefore, cannot say: "prisoner in suttrin prison": when read literally, the situation gets the wrong meaning - the eavesdropper is imprisoned - why? "for a misdemeanor or for any other reason?" "and that violates the rules of the game." An eavesdropper cannot be imprisoned, but he can be a disciple, in whose guise the eavesdropper appears in prison, who provokes another prisoner - mamahamtra-to commit treason (I. 10. 10-11).

All spies in the headings I. 11-12 are called gudhapurusha. For comparison: in the XIII.3 they are called apasarpa. Categories in I. 12 and XIII.3 are formulated accordingly as - "Activities of spies". Spies in I. 11-12 include: a disciple who has broken his vow as an ascetic, a householder, a merchant, and an ascetic, as well as a sattrin spy, a tikshna who is determined, a poisoner, and a mendicant nun. The elements of this classification are divided between the texts of two chapters, but, as it should be in the text of the SC, they are not repeated. The first five spies are vyanjana; they are therefore only represented by a disciple who has broken his vow as an ascetic, etc. (I. 11. 1). Their characteristics are given in I. 11. 2-18. At the same time, these five are samstha, i.e. spies who stay in one place (see the wording of headings I. 11 and I. 11.22). They are probably gudha - "secret" spies. This is supported by the following considerations. According to I. 11. 18, "secret" spies are distinguished from Sattrin spies who belong to the samchara group-spies who move around (see fig. category I. 12 and I. 12. 5). Accordingly, in 1.12.24, "spies traveling with information" should be "non-secret" spies,

page 26
and "staying in one place" - on the contrary, "secret". The latter is consistent with the semantics of the word - "impersonating", "acting under the guise of", i.e. hiding. Similarly, in I. 12. 9, spies who pass themselves off (chadmāno) as hunchbacks, dwarfs, etc. can be considered" secret". In the same sutra, they are distinguished from the rasada poisoners, who are in turn spies who move about (I. 12. 3).

Of course, such an organization of the material exposes the construction of an artificial structure, a model. But the KA text is constructed by classifying and modeling the material, which is also the case in chapters I. 11-12.

The group of five spies (panchavarga) is also mentioned in the text" Manu-smriti " VII. 154. Judging by the quotations and close retelling of the text of the KA by the commentators of "Manu-smriti", these are the same "disciple who left the vow of an ascetic, a householder, a merchant and an ascetic". Only they are not called samstha in Manu - "staying in one place". And in general, since it is said that the sovereign should reflect on "all eight activities, the five categories of spies, etc.", these "five spies" (in KA - "staying in one place") constitute the entire classification of spies in the text "Manu-smriti". KA here contains much more significant material, and the articulation of this material in her text goes much further.

The last four spies listed in I. 11.1 - sattrin, etc. - are samchara spies, i.e. moving ones (I. 12. 5). They are characterized in I. 12. 1-5. If they are not considered vjanjan, then they probably do not belong to the category of "secret" (see above). In all, therefore, there are nine classes of spies: those who stay in one place and are secret, as well as those who move around and are not secret, or explicit. Should the last spies be considered "obvious" just because they move around? This remains unclear. This division is, of course, in a certain sense conditional, although it may have a definite, undisclosed meaning. Rather, the phenomenon of far-reaching classification in a developed text is reflected here, when the articulation of the subject becomes developed with the acquisition of new and diverse signs/signs. As will be seen later, spies who stay in the same place also have to move around in order to transmit the information they receive; they are just not supposed to know each other (I. 12. 12). Their places of residence are located almost all over the country (I. 12. 22-23), and in II.35.8, 11, 13-15 spies-samsthas under the guise of householders, merchants, ascetics, robbers and spiritual disciples are localized in the "native places" described in detail, and the text specifies their functions. Spies who move around may probably know each other (however, according to I. 12. 13, they communicate with each other through singing, reading, music, secret writing, and conventional signs), but all their "movement" is concentrated in the royal palace and its surroundings (cf.I. 12. 9 - 10, 13; cf. XII. 5. 49).

We are not going to comment here on the fact that among the spies, the disciple should be "knowledgeable and resourceful", the broken - vowed ascetic, the householder and merchant "intelligent and honest", and the last two should also be "deprived of the means of subsistence". These characteristics are quite important in their own way, since the text in this case tries to set types for spies - it draws their masks, which we will discuss below. But to speak of them as masks, and to analyze the meaning of these characteristics in essence would mean about the same as to interpret the receipt of ascetics at the proper time of bhaktavetana - "food and wages" (I. 11. 7). Bhaktavetana, as mentioned in the same chapter (I. 11. 21 - 22) arthamana - "money and honors", which" honor " spies, are not real food and salary, money and honors, but formulas developed by the text that convey the concept that has become a stereotype. There may be many such examples, but here we note that real spies, unlike those whose image is drawn by the text, did not receive "food and wages", nor were they honored with " money and honors-

page 27
mi", although, of course, they could receive, and received money and so on. This remark also applies to the rest of the tsar's servants.

What is more important here is that all spies-both those who pretend to be someone and stay in one place, and those who move around-look like a series of non-repeating images, or masks, a kind of literary type (and a mendicant nun in the same jatakas is such a type). These masks, which resemble the masks of any medieval theater, including the Indian one, already contain a characteristic of a particular type, which, when applied to the spy (and not only to him), can also determine the nature of his activity and function. Probably, classification and, more broadly, the text (at least, a sufficiently developed one) should, using their inherent means, turn something into a typical one, projecting this typical onto the material. Another thing is that, firstly, the text prescribes that all samstha/vyanjan spies should be engaged in informing (I. 12. 23). Secondly, not all masks, from the point of view of their functional purpose, look quite representative in the KA text, since these types of spies are not mentioned so often.

In any case, the function of "knowing the weaknesses of others and being a resourceful disciple" is expressed in the episode when, while in prison, he provokes the mahamatras (I. 10. 11), and in another case - incites a quarrel (V. 1. 14). The few cases when it is said about "ascetics" ("the "ascetic who broke his vow" is mentioned even less frequently) correlate with the type of " smart and honest "ascetic engaged in" colluding " (I. 11. 4, 7): ascetics play the role of both informers and provocateurs (I. 16. 24, XII. 4. 1). The same "smart and honest merchant" most often arranges theft of goods, sells poisoned goods, food, drink, burns commercial warehouses, etc. (V. 2. 46-47, VII. 17. 43, 46, IX. 6. 32, XII.4.11 - 12). Especially many examples characterize the activities of the "shaven-headed or scythe-wearing ascetic", who in fact appears as a siddha-samedhika, i.e., "a wizard who brings happiness" (I. 11. 13, 16). Probably, he is also a mayayogavid - " a connoisseur of magic "(cf. IV. 3. 11, 40); in IV.3.44 Both a siddha and a tapasa ascetic are considered such; the latter two are usually distinguished in the text (I. 20.24, IV.3.13, 25, etc.). The siddha provokes provocations and acts as an informant (I. 20. 24, IV. 3. 13, 25, etc.).13.15, 14.6, V. 1. 33), but more often "seduces" by resorting to magic and magic, and in reality-by staging magical actions and magic, after which he kills a hostile sovereign (V. 2. 59, 6.48, XIII.2.1-19), "lures young people" (IV. 5. 1-7), etc. In this context, it becomes clear why he often uses poison to kill the enemy (V. 1. 33, XI. 1.40, 45, 47, XIII.3.55), just as the king's prohibition on his own wives to "associate with shaven-headed or scythed rascals" becomes understandable (I. 20. 18).

The functions of samstha spies at 11: 35 are probably set by the fact that here they play the role of employees subordinate to the revenue collector (II.35.8, 13), who is engaged in replenishing the state treasury. This is the purpose of the activities of the householders in the villages (II. 35. 8-10), merchants-experts in goods and trade (II. 35. 11-12), ascetics here find out the honesty and dishonesty of farmers, shepherds, merchants and adhyakshas (apparently, royal employees in general), that is, they are engaged in informing the public. in the broadest sense (II.35.13). Brigands and apprentices are engaged in informing in a wide variety of places outside the villages (II.35.14). The functions of all spies are therefore distributed, and at the same time the listed spies operate throughout the countryside, in all social and professional groups.

KA V. text3.23 It is not interesting that the five spies here receive a salary of 500 pana, nor that this and the preceding sutras distinguish groups of spies in the panjan and samchara: the village workers, sattrins, tikshnas, rasadas, and bhikshuks are listed here in succession, but "village workers" are not included in the classification of spies in I. 11-12. The appearance of these new characters in the KA text has its own way

page 28
important: it proves that the very classifications of spies (and probably others) in terms of their constituent elements, in this case - types, had variations. It's just that these other variants have remained as if behind the scenes, outside the text of the spacecraft, but their off-screen existence suggests that the classification structures are variable and blurred; they are not given initially and thus expose the movement, development - the life of the text.

The types of spies that move are defined in the text in the same way as the types of samstha spies are defined (I. 12. 1-5). "Versed in lucky signs, palmistry, magic, magic tricks, ashram dharma, omens, and divination" sattrin spies, also known as "conversant with people", are already designed by their very characteristics to perform a variety of functions in a wide range of life situations: sattrins act in a crowd (I. 13. 2), they resort to threats (V. 1. 12), provoke the prince (I. 17.28-29, 34), start an intrigue (V. 2.68), strengthen the faith of a wavering ally (IX.3.26). They are also informers (II. 9. 25, IV.4.5), but occasionally resort to murder (IX. 3. 31, XIII.2.43). However, in most cases, as already mentioned, the Sattrins appear as provocateurs and informers.

The tikshna type is extremely brave, selfless people who are ready to fight for their lives-who? Probably the sovereign. In I. 12. 7, they appear as the king's bodyguards, serving the king's personal utensils, household items, his chariot and riding animal. In I. 12.2, tikshnas are specifically described as people who are extremely brave, ready to neglect their own lives and fight (however, for a reward) with an elephant and a tiger, i.e. they appear as the same bodyguards. Hardly in I. 14. 5, 10 (tikshna here is included in the category of "haughty" and at the same time emphasizes the nobility of origin of persons included in the category of "haughty" - that's why they are "haughty") and in II.25.3 (it refers to the prohibition of taking intoxicating drinks out of the village and accumulating them for fear that the tikshna might use force) it means "killer". This is a determined, tough, in modern terms, brutal type. The same characterization is given to the punishing royal rod when it is called in I. 4. 8 - "a severe, hard rod". For comparison: in II. 30. 30 means "hot", "skittish" horse, in II. 14.47 - an iron tool resembling a chisel, in II.12.8 - saltpeter, in II. 12. 15-iron. The term, therefore, implies something sharp, hot, sharp (it also means a weapon) - and the corresponding human type. But at the same time, it suggests that such a brutal person can kill and should be a killer, just as rasada's characteristics make him a poisoner. This is also indicated by a number of meanings of the word "damaging", "poison","death". And, following his characteristic, his type, the spy-tikshna really appears in most cases as a murderer.

If tikshna is energetic, rasada is devoid of energy. They lack physical strength and courage, but they also lack love for their relatives and are just as cruel. But, in the end, such qualities should correspond to the type of poisoner. Since they lack physical courage, they have to kill with poison.

The type of a bhikshuka is defined by the fact that she wants to find a living, is a widow, a Brahmana, is resourceful, but, most importantly, is revered in the palace, where her main activity takes place. By way of comparison, it is not illegal for a bhikshuka to live with someone's spouse (III. 3. 13, 4.9). It is no accident that a bhikshuki visits the families of mahamatras (I. 12. 4), incites them to commit adultery (I. 10. 7, V. 1. 50), tries to act through wives and other women (V. 1. 19, 50-52), and resorts to other provocations (XI. 1.52). Actually, from the point of view of the content of the text in I. 12, the nun seems to be the only living character (I. 12. 10, 13). The other spies form living chains (I. 12.13, 23), being a product of classification in its purest form and a personified embodiment of the function specified by the text.

page 29
What is the reason for such a large number of spies and the development of appropriate types of spies staying in one place? The latter are reported to be supposed to stay in "their native places" (II.35. 15). The king is required to send spies to 18 mahamatras both in his own country and in foreign countries (I. 35. 15).12.6, 20), to other sovereigns (I. 12. 20), to citizens and rural residents (I. 13. 1), etc. Moreover, the enemy also has such spies, to expose which it is necessary to use similar ones (I. 12. 24). Here it is not enough to say that the plural (general) is derived from the particular, i.e., it is induced in the text, supported by the hypertrophied role of the state. All these spies are by no means unsystematic: they form a human chain, just as the king's advisers form it (I. 12.13, 23). Only the first chain, unlike the last, covers the entire country, extends to its very borders and even further. This idea of extending the king's" eyes " - spies (I. 7. 1) throughout the country, forming part of the king's flesh, is akin to the idea of extending the king's power from the center of the country to its borders, expressed through the personified power structure of the mahamatras in I. 12. 6. Like the mahamatras, the spies cover the country from the center and up to its borders (I. 12. 22-23, 25), and the samstha spies represent a living picture of the country even more than the rest of the world.mahamatras: they are located in this space from the center to the periphery in their "native places", assigned by the text to each of them: in fortified cities - merchants, near cities - magicians and ascetics (cf.I. 11. 14), in rural areas-farmers and ascetics who have broken their vows, on the outskirts of the country - shepherds living with flocks of cattle, forest dwellers, mendicant monks, and forest tribes in the forests (a similar spatial structure is presented in XII. 4. 1). In this sequence - from cities to tribal borders - all the main elements of the country's living space are listed in the traditional sense of their meaning. The spatial structure of the location of spies - these" eyes " of the king-means here the assertion, the extension of royal power over the country.

So far, the functions of spies given to them by the text have been considered in a dispersed form, so to speak. In a concentrated form, presented as a model, the functions of spies who stay in one place (samstha), and some others from the category of vyanjan, as well as spies who move (samchara), are set in one of the headings of Chapter I. 12 - "Activities of spies". The" dense " material of the classification here forces spies of different types/types to enter into complex relationships with each other according to the specifics of their activities. It is significant that the context and some details suggest that the activities of spies are unfolding here in and around the royal palace (I. 12.7 - 9, 13 - 14). Most of the utensils and household items listed in I. 12. 7 - the umbrella, the golden drinking vessel, etc. - are mentioned in II. 27. 4: they are served by the royal hetaerae. Accordingly, although in I. 12.6 spies who move are referred to all mahamatras, including the chief of the forest tribe (and he lives somewhere on the borders of the kingdom), and although "information concerning them" in 1.12.7 refers to all mahamatras.mahamatrov, from the context it is clear that spies get their information in the palace, of course, of a hostile sovereign. How to use the spies tikshna and rasad against him is reported by KA XII.2.9 sl. And here there is a curious inaccuracy (?): in XII.2.10 it is stated that they should be used in the manner described in the chapter "Protection of the King's person". But there are no such indications in this chapter (I. 21), and they are found in chapter I. 12.

The information obtained by spies (cāra) is distinguished as" external "(bahya) and "internal" (abhyantara): the local space located closer to the royal person is "internal" in relation to the space that is correspondingly remote. You can argue about what exactly cooks, cooks, bath attendants, massage therapists and

page 30
bed servants are closer to the king's person than those who serve the royal umbrella, golden drinking vessel, etc., but you have to follow the text according to which those who serve the umbrella, golden drinking vessel, and other items of royal household tikshna extract "external" information, while cooks, cooks, bath attendants, etc. - they are the rasada, and along with them the spies of Vyangjan, disguised as hunchbacks, dwarfs, karats, mutes, and the like-they extract "inside" information. It is about the last spies that it is said that they are "spies of the inner chambers"- (I. 12. 21). In this group of spies, a subgroup of rasada - poisoners is distinguished. Here there is a direct connection with the fact that the king should in every possible way beware of poison and poisoners, which is why experts in poisons and healers are constantly near the king, and the royal food is checked for the presence of poison in it before using it (I. 21.4 - 6, 8 - 9). Therefore, it seems natural for Rasad to appear in a group of spies who are gathering "inside" information in the palace. However, the rasada, who usually act as poisoners, are simply informants in this case.

The tikshna spies, who obtain "external" information in the palace, and the rasada spies, who obtain "internal" information along with the vyanjan spies (the first two are samcharas), should forward the information received outside the walls of the royal palace to the samstha spies. Between the former and the latter there are intermediaries in the transmission of information: intermediaries between the spies of tikshna and samstha-sattrina, between vyanjana, rasada and samstha-bhikshuks, i.e., mendicant nuns. These intermediaries transmit information obtained in the royal palace by means known to them to spies of the samstha, or staying in one place, who are localized outside the palace (I. 12. 8, 10). Or this information is forwarded from the palace by other spies living in it (I. 12. 13-14).

The third stage of the transfer of information received by spies in the palace is the movement of information recorded on a letter or using conventional signs (I. 12.11, cf.I. 12. 13, 16.25) from students-spies of the samstha-to other spies of the same category (I. 12. 11-12). Together, they create "a fast-moving chain of spies seeking to learn what is happening from the enemy" - I. 12. 23). The text does not speak clearly about the further movement of information received by spies; sometimes it is reported that information in the enemy's country is obtained by spies who move around; therefore, they receive salaries both from the sovereign and from the enemy (I. 12.17-18, 16.25). These details do not change, however, the general picture of events: a living chain of spies transmits the information received through the entire hostile country to the sovereign, who - even in this case - uses the spies as his "eyes", as he uses his own advisers as his "eyes" (I. 15.56-57). This representation looks like a stereotype in the text. Manu-smriti IX. 256 also uses the expression " a king whose eyes are spies."

With some nuances, in general, this is how the "ideal" model of activity of spies of all categories is arranged, regardless of whether on the territory of their own, allied, hostile or other countries (I. 12. 6, 20).

Despite all the artificiality of this scheme of organization, including spatial ones, of the activities of spies, there is something "alive"in it. We see it in the localization of spies in and around the palace and in the introduction of a mendicant nun to this context. She is a samchara spy, but she may not be allowed access to the palace (I. 12. 13), and no other spies are mentioned. Thus, the "ideal" model of using spies is violated, it turns out to be somewhat flawed. This storyline - the royal palace and the visiting mendicant nun (brahmin, hermit, etc.) "honored in the palace" - is not specific only to the text of the KA. It is present, in particular, in the jatakas, as in jataka 546, on the example of the relationship between the Videha king and the visiting one

page 31
the palace of the hermit Bheri who feeds in it. Thus, if these considerations are correct, there is a certain contamination of the artificial, the ideal, and the more real, the mundane in chapter I. 12. And in this case, this mundane-the palace and the mendicant nun who visits it-can be considered the primary element from which other and multiple elements are induced, which are already completely artificial in function and content, but as if, in turn, mundane and included in the real event context. I would like to draw attention to this case, since the phenomenon of induction is observed everywhere in the text of KA, usually within "ideal" models, constructions, when one, a certain element gives an impetus to their organization.

list of literature

Romanov V. N. Istoricheskoe razvitie kul'tury [Historical development of Culture]. Moscow, 1991.

Samozvantsev A.M. Legal text of dharmashastra, Moscow, 1991.

Permanent link to this publication: