भारतीय इतिहास के ६ स्वर्णिम पृष्ठ (वीर सावरकर - विदेशी आक्रान्ताओं पर विजय गाथा)

Chandragupta and Chanakya. These references in Jain, Buddhist and Vedic
literatures are not wholly reliable. Even in a Sanskrit drama, his character
has been depicted in an unrealistic manner, for the sake of dramatic effect.
As such, the ridiculous descriptions of his ugliness, or of his ungainly teeth,
or the childish reports that he picked up from amongst the uneducated rustic
children playing in the street one reckless Chandragupta, to be made the
future emperor of India simply because he took a fancy for the child, or
because his knowledge of palmistry guided his choice, cannot be taken as
historical truths. However, more discerning research-workers should
necessarily investigate if there is any basis for them.
The Perverted Report of Chanakya’s vow
99. One such anecdote about Arya Chanakya should be discussed here as
an illustration. For, it is being taught in the present-day schools in that very
perverted form. The said anecdote purports to say that because he became
famous as a great scholar in the University of Taxila (Takshashila) and the
regions round about, Arya Chanakya was appointed the Chairman of the
Grants Commission (दानाध्यक्ष) in the royal palace of Mahapadmanand at
Pataliputra. While he was working in that high office, Emperor
Mahapadmanand came there one day on his inspection rounds. But he
laughed at his teethless ugly mouth and his unshapely body, at which
Chanakya took a great affront. Therefore, Nanda pulled him down instantly
and, as is written in some books, pulled his tuft of hair, till it was uprooted
and finally ordered him to be driven out of the palace. The fiery Brahmin
instantly retorted saying, “I shall drag you down from your throne and
completely destroy the Nanda dynasty and then and then alone shall tie up
my tuft of hair.” With this grave vow, he marched straight out of the palace.
100. But let it be remembered that Emperor Nanda had come there to
inspect the work of the Charity Department, not to visit a beauty parlour!
How is it plausible, then, that Mahapadmanand, who had himself appointed
that learned scholar to the high office of the Chairman of the Charitable
Grants Department, would now say that because of his ugly features Arya
Chanakya was unfit for that post? The office of the Chairman of the said
Grants Department required the expert knowledge of the religious sciences
and judicial procedure, not physical beauty! But there is a more potent
objection than this one to disprove this foolish anecdote. This anecdote
implies that Chanakya revolted against Emperor Nanda, because of his
personal insult alone, and that, had he not been thus insulted, he would have