Cultural Study of Nisitha Curni

SR No.: 001743
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Madhu Sen
Publisher: Sohanlal Jain Dharm Pracharak Samiti Amrutsar
Publication Year: 1975
Total Pages: 432
Language: English, Prakrit
Classification: Book_English, Agam, Canon, & Literature
File Size: 23 MB

Page 37

POLITY AND ADMINISTRATION
(vii) Monarchies (rajja) Detailed study of the above mentioned states are as follows:
(i) Non-ruler States--The word an ardya (anardjya) when used as a technical term does not mean anarchy, as for anarchy Hindu Politics use a special term matsya-nyaya.2 Anārajya is defined often by the scholars as a type of government where “law was to be taken as a ruler and that there should be no man-ruler.»3 Mutual agreement or social contract was the basis of such States. * According to the NC. that State is termed as anırāya where coronation of the king and crown-prince had not taken place after the death of the former king."
If this definition is analysed then as per author anarāya was only a state of monarchy, which existed during the period beginning after the death of the former king till the new ruler was coronated. It may thus be termed as a 'Non-ruler State', because in the absence of any coronated king, the people had to abide by the existing law for the proper functioning of the State. Arājaka® is another term used for anarāya in the Jaina and other classical texts. The Mahabharata ridicules the constitution of the arājaka States by saying, "when the law would not rule, the citizens of this form of government took to monarchy". In the NC. also the monks are advised 1. NC. 1, p. 133. 2. AS. 1. 4; Khalimp'ır Copper-plate (EI. IV, 248 ); Manusmrti, VII.
20; also see-Jayaswal, K. P., Hindu Polity p. 86. 3. Jayaswal, op. cit., p. 86. 4. Ibid. 5. मो रामाणे जाव मूलराया जुवरापा य एते दो वि अभिसित्ता ताव अणरायं भवति
(NC. 3, p. 198. J. C. Jain's explanation of anarāya on the basis of the Brhatka!pa Bhas ya that "after the death of the king if there were two heirs-apparent and none of them was so far anointed as the king” (LAI., p. 198; appears to be misleading. "Two' here refers to the king and the crown-prince and not to two heirs-apparent.-NC. 3,
p. 198; also Bri-V. 3, p. 780. 6. Bih. Bhā. 1, 2763; Āyārāingasitta (ed. Jacobi ), II, 3.1. 10; Mahābhā
rata, Santi Parva, Ch. LIX. 7. Mahābhārata, śānti Parva, Ch. LXVII; seeJayaswal, op. cit., pp.
87-88.