No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 15 March 2011
About sixty years ago the Rev. Dr. Stevenson, in the Journal Bombay As. Soc., vol. i, p. 148 ff., published a kind of facsimile and a translation of an inscription, a copy of which had been received from Major Wilkinson, Resident at Nāgpur in the Central Provinces. Dr. Stevenson also laid before the Bombay Society a transcript of the text in Nāgarī characters, but this has not been made public. Through the kindness of my friend Dr. Fleet I have long been in possession of excellent paper impressions of this inscription, and I have briefly referred to its contents already in Ep. Ind., vol. iv, p. 257. As the inscription, though fragmentary, contains several points of considerable interest, I now give a fuller account of it, together with the text so far as I can make it out from the materials at my disposal, and part of a translation.
page 617 note 1 The translation is a literary curiosity. A few examples will show what Dr. Stevenson's text may have been like, and how some otherwise quite incomprehensible passages of the translation may perhaps be accounted for. The words āsīt=kshitau kshitipatiḥ at the beginning of verse 5 were misread urīsīkshitau kshitipatiḥ, and translated therefore by ‘ the Sovereign Lord of Urīsī (Orissa).’ In verse 25 a king, by a well-known rhetorical figure, is described as “ a preceptor (guru), yet striving to learn his lessons.” Here the word guru was misread turu, and the translation accordingly became: he ‘ wandered through Turu, exerting his mind in the study of holy science;’ to which was added the note that “ this must be Turan or Tartary,” and that “ perhaps Tibet might be included under this name, and a visit to the Grand Lama one object of the pilgrimage.” At the end of verse 38 we have the words srag-ivōjvalā, ‘ splendid like a garland.’ The sign for g being similar to the sign for ś, the four last syllables were read śivō jvālā, and explained to denote, and translated by ‘ the year 711.’ What curious meanings were derived from even quite simple verses may be seen, e.g., from the translation of verse 16: “ After having for a long time journeyed patiently, enduring privations, the associate of bears, and ravenous beasts, the lord of the earth married one of the Pāṇḍava family, and a child called Udayana being born to him, he had the happiness of possessing a son.”
page 618 note 1 For other impressions I am indebted to Dr. Burgess and to Mr. Cousens.
page 618 note 2 The inscription is decidedly earlier than the Shērgaḍh (Kōṭā) Buddhist inscription of the Sāmanta Dēvadatta of the (Vikrama) year 847 Northern List, No. 11), of which I possess Dr. Fleet's impressions.
page 619 note 1 There may have been a short prose passage, containing a date, at the end of line 17.
page 619 note 2 This name also occurs in the Shērgaḍh (Kōṭā) inscription mentioned above; see Ind. Ant., vol. xiv, p. 46, lines 6 and 11. Cf. on the name M. Senart's note in the Mahāvastu, vol. ii, p. 543.
page 620 note 1 Verse 28 gives another appellation of his, apriyavaiśika, ‘ not fond of harlotry,’ but this does not look like a proper name.
page 621 note 1 See Archœol. Survey of India, vol. xxi, plate ix, L. I possess several impressions of the inscription.
page 621 note 2 The original has the three syllables ntīshṭakā twice, at the end of line 2 and the beginning of line 3.
page 621 note 3 See Gupta Inscr., p. 294, and Ep. Ind., vol. vii, p. 104.
page 621 note 4 See my Southern List, No. 634.
page 621 note 5 For a translation of the verse see below, p. 631.
page 622 note 1 According to a Khārōḍ inscription Indrabala had another son named Īśānadēva; see Mr. D. R. Bhandarkar in Progress Report of Archæological Survey of W. India for the year ending 30th June, 1904, p. 54, No. 2038.
page 622 note 2 Compare e.g. Kern's Manual of Ind. Buddhism, p. 70; Warren's Buddhism in Translations, p. 397.
page 622 note 3 See his Dictionary, under sikkhā.
page 622 note 4 Cf. ProfessorWackernagel's, Altind. Grammatik, vol. ii, 1, p. 327Google Scholar.
page 623 note 1 In addition to the above, there is a passage in the mutilated verse 42 of this inscription to which I should like to draw special attention. The words chakrē=sau vāyasānāṁ sphurad-urukaruṇaḥ satram of that verse seem to me to be certain, and the only way I could translate them would be: “ full of great compassion, he made a sattra (i.e. place of refuge, asylum, etc.) for crows.” From those who are better acquainted with Buddhist literature than I am myself I should like to hear whether there would be any objection to such a translation, and whether similar acts of compassion are recorded elsewhere.
page 624 note 1 Denoted by a symbol.
page 624 note 2 Read sattvo.
page 624 note 3 I should have expected =paśyann=.
page 624 note 4 Read chiraṁ vaḥ.
page 624 note 5 The reading is quite doubtful.
page 625 note 1 Read vaṁśō = tra.
page 625 note 2 The original perhaps has oparūshā.
page 625 note 3 The reading ia doubtful. The syllable dhā, so far as I can judge, was originally omitted, but seems to be engraved above the line.
page 626 note 1 The exact number of missing syllables cannot be given here, because the metre is Āryā.
page 627 note 1 Here, again, the exact number of missing syllables cannot be given.
page 628 note 1 Read dānaṁ.
page 628 note 2 Read osattva-samaḥ.
page 628 note 3 Read = ōjjvalā.
page 629 note 1 The verse is well-known. The second half of it is: sakalam = idam udāhṛitaṁ cha buddhvā na hi purushaiḥ para-kīrttayō vilōpyāḥ.
page 629 note 2 It is impossible to say whether, after verse 39, there was any writing at the end of line 17, and to give the exact number of syllables, if there was any. The probability is that, as is the case with the original portion of the Pathārī pillar inscription, the inscription originally ended here with a date, for which there would have been just sufficient space after the verse.
page 629 note 3 Read mīmāṁsā (?).
page 629 note 4 Read sattram=.
page 629 note 5 This is very doubtful.
page 629 note 6 After this verse the original, in line 20, contains another verse in the Sragdharā metre, the five last aksharas of which are broken away at the end of the line. So many aksharas of this verse are effaced or doubtful that it would be useless to transcribe here those which may be read with certainty.
page 630 note 1 I.e. Kāma, Māra.
page 630 note 2 The idea of course is, either that many princes bowed down at Sūryaghōsha's feet or that he placed his foot on the heads of many princes. For various ways of expressing this idea compare e.g. Ep. Ind., vol. ii, p. 185, l. 19, bhūpāla chūḍāmaṇi-chchhāyāḍambara-chumbit-āṁhrikamala; Journ. As. Soc. Bengal, vol. lxvi, pt. 1, p. 289, l. 8, bhūpāla-maulimaṇi-chumbita-pādapīṭha; Ep. Ind., vol. iv, p. 60, l. 15, anēkāvanibhṛin-maulimaṇi - chuṁbi-padāṁbuja; ibid., p. 340, l. 4, parabhūpāla-maulimālā-līḍh-āṁghridvandvāravinda ; Ep. Ind., vol. ii, p. 12, l. 16, praṇamat-samastasāmantaśēkhara-śirōmaṇi-raṁjit-āṁhri; Unā plates of Mahēndrapāla, l. 47, pratāpapraṇata-samastasāmanta-maulimālārchita-charaṇayugala ; Ep. Ind., vol. v, p. 116, l. 28, akhilakshitipālamauliśrēṇī-nighṛishṭa-charaṇa ; Ep. Ind., vol. i, p. 197, l. 3, aśēshanarapati maulishu viśrānta-kāntapadakamala; Journ. As. Soc. Bengal, vol. lxvii, pt. 1, p. 110, l. 45, bhūbhṛichchhirō-nivēśita-pāda; Harshacharita, p. 215, kshmāpatīnāṁ śiraḥsu … prayachchha pādanyāsān ; etc. In this Journal, 1904, p. 654, Dr. Hoernle has objected to my having translated the similar epithet vikhyātakshitipāla-maulirachanā-vinyasta-pādāmbuja, in a Khajurāhō inscription (Ep. Ind., vol. i, p. 127, l. 16), by “ who had put down his lotus-foot on rows of diadems of famous princes.” According to Dr. Hoernle, the passage should have been taken to mean “ he made himself notorious by putting down his lotus-foot on (i.e. preventing) the coronation of Kshitipāla.” But if this were the meaning, the Indian author would have formed a wrong compound, and would have used the words maulirachanā and vinyastapāda in senses which these words in my opinion cannot convey. The word rachanā being synonymous, in one of its senses, with vṛinda or vyūha, maulirachanā undoubtedly is equivalent to maulimālā, mauliśrēṇī, maulipāti, makuṭagaṇanikara, and other compounds in similar epithets.
page 630 note 3 Compare Ep. Ind., vol. vii, p. 159, note 2.
page 631 note 1 It is impossible to bring out the full meaning of the verse by a translation. Īśvara is a common name of the god Śiva ; this Īśvara is durgāśrayin, i.e. attached to his consort Durgā; he bears the moon (kalāvat) on his head; and his body is stained with ashes (bhūti). Applied to the king, abhūtiparusha would also convey the notion that his sternness brought misfortune (abhūti).
page 631 note 2 Literally ‘ bearing teeth’ (danta - dhārin = dantura). Compare, in the Pathārī pillar inscription of Parabala, varavāraṇa-kumbha-mukta-muktāphala-pratata-nirmmala-dantamālā.… kṛipāṇa-pālī, “ the sword-blade, on which rows of spotless teeth are spread by the pearls shed by the frontal globes of choice elephants.”
page 631 note 3 I.e. re-birth in a new existence, transmigration (to put an end to which is the goal of a religious life).
page 631 note 4 The king here spoken of is that son (tanūjanman) of Udayana's who mast have been mentioned in verse 17, but whose name is lost. My translation of the words jyēshṭhaṁ ch = ānuyatā balam, as applied to the king, is conjectural. I take bala to denote, on the one hand, Indrabala (whom we know to have been a son of Udayana's), and, on the other, Balarāma. This seems to me preferable to taking the words, when applied to the king, to mean ‘ following his excellent forces,’ because the king would have led his forces, not followed them. That Bala might stand for both Indrabala and Balarāma is, of course, proved by the classical instance Satyabhāmā, for which we may say either Satyā or Bhāmā.
page 632 note 1 Viz. Bhavadēva, who is mentioned in verse 19 as the fourth son (in my opinion, of the king spoken of in verse 18).
page 632 note 2 In another sense, ‘ without levying taxes and without any commotion of the realm.’
page 632 note 3 The first words of the verse might also perhaps convey some such meaning as ‘ though a circle, he was a straight line.’ The virōdha or virōdhābhāsa in the description of the king may be removed by translating the verse thus: “ He was of good conduct, endowed with majesty, worthy of honour, intent on chastising (the wicked), day by day eager to eradicate blemishes, fully conversant with all arts, in person yellow with a mass of gold, and beloved of the castes; he had completely annihilated his adversaries, and beamed with brightness for the welfare of men.”
page 632 note 4 The wonder finds its explanation in the fact “ that he showered (gifts on people) so as to fulfil their desires (āśā), and was not sullied (by vice).”
page 632 note 5 I.e. Bṛihaspati.
page 633 note 1 Viz., with the help of the Brāhmaṇ spoken of in verse 34, whose name has been lost.
page 633 note 2 Jāti really is a particular figure of speech; it might also have heen translated by ‘ metres.’ With the whole verse compare e.g. verse 9 at the beginning of Bāṇa's Kādambarī.