Cultural Study of Nisitha Curni

Author(s): Madhu Sen
Publisher: Sohanlal Jain Dharm Pracharak Samiti Amrutsar

Page 41

POLITY AND ADMINISTRATION
21
doubtful conduct could be easily imprisoned and punished." If the first two definitions of verajja, indicating it as 'States in hostility' are accepted, it is not clear as to what was the difference between a verajja and the virud dharajja. Perhaps, the fundamental difference between the two was that, in spite of the strained relations and hostility, general trade and commerce as well as communication at the social and economic level were permitted to be continued in the verajja, whereas these were strictly restricted in the viruddharajja. 2
(v) Two-ruled States--Dorajja or dvairājya was the type of government where “sovereignty vested in the hands of two rulers, both claiming their rights to the throne, and struggling hard to appropriate the kingdom, violence being the only means to decide the issue”. 3 According to Jayaswal, in this type of government “the legal principle of joint property was transferred to the region of politics and acted upon”. * Mention of the word daiya (dayaka-a claimant)s in the NC. clearly indicates that such kingdoms came into existence when there were two or more claimants to the throne, neither of whom was inclined to leave his right. Very often it would lead to conflict and disharmony. Kautilya characterises dvairājya or 'the rule of two' as "a constitution of rivalry and mutual conflict leading to final destruction.'» The author of the NC. also does not recommend the constitution of dvairājya."
(vi ) Republics---Gañarajja in ancient India denoted a form of government where the power vested not in the
1. Ibid. 2. See p. 20, note 8; also Brh. V. 3, p. 781. 3. OTTICHTET TIZI FUT FTTHÍ TETTE Å TEE HOU-NC. 3,
p. 198; also Brl. V?. 3, p. 780. 4. Jayaswal, op. cit., p. 86. 5. See above Note 3. 6. राज्यवैराज्ययोः द्वै राज्यमन्योन्यपक्षद्वषानुरागाभ्यां परस्परसंघर्षेग वा विनश्यति ।
--Arthašāstra, VIII. 1-2. 7. NC. 3, p. 198. The nature of dvairājya mentioned by Kālidāsa is
quite different from that of the NC. The dvairājya mentioned in the Malavikāgnimitra does not refer to a joint rule and responsibility,