Bhrngara In Sanskrit Literature

Author(s): A Wezler
Publisher: A Wezler
Catalog link: https://jainqq.org/explore/269618/1

Page #1
BHRNGARA IN SANSKRIT LITERATURE 1. The first meaning given in the Larger Petrograd Dictionary for the Sanskrit noun blir gara--m. is "a golden water jug". But in the "Corrections and Addenda to the Whole Work", at the end of volume VII, it is stated that the attribute "igolden' has to be deleted inspite of the lexicographers", and this correction is duly taken into account in the smaller version as well as in the dictionaries dependant on it." in the original entry itself Bohtlingk and Roth add, however, the further information that according to the Yuktikalpataru in the Sabdakalpadruma" another, or rather a more special meaning of bhrrigara--m. is "a vase used at the inauguration of a king made of 8 different substances and having 8 different forms". It is understandable that the reference to the Yuktika., etc., is omitted by MonierWilliams e.g., but the information retained, viz. that this latter meaning is listed by (a) lexicographer(s) only, cannot but provoke the doubt whether this particular meaning is at all actual usage. 2. Such a doubt is not, however, justified. The Yuktikalpataru of/ascribed to Bhoja (11th century) has meanwhile been edited, and it is now possible to convince oneself that the Sabdakal padruma is in fact correct (cf. below $$ 3.1 and 3.2). And the situation seems to have improved in other regards also since the times of Bohtlingk and Roth, thanks to the lexicographical work done by P.K. Gode and 1. It was, however, apparently overlooked by Debrunner (of J. Wackernagel, Alrindische Grani.olk II. Die Nominalsulfixe, by A Debrunner, Gottingen 154 p. 287) and M. Mayi hofer, A Concise En mological Dictionary. Vol. II. Heidelberg 1963, p 519 - The fact that attributes meaning "gol'en" are often (cf. below) found adiled to cara" is suicient proof that Bohtlingk and Roth are right and the lexicographers wrong. 2. This is the siglum used in: An Encyclopaedic Dictionary of Sanskrit or llisto rical Principles, Indologists should in my view consider adopting its sigla. 3. If one is able to get a copy of it which turned out to be difficult in Germany. l'erhaps this edition should be reprinted. All the sections referred to in this study are, however, quoted in full in the Dharmakola (cf. fn. 83). be reprinted ned out to be pune its sigla ever, quod

Page #2
Bhrigara in Sanskrit Literature Albrecht Wezler C.G. Karve to whom we owe the revised and enlarged edition of Apte's Practical Sanskril-English Dictionary. For this contains further references which I now propose to study in the order of their enumeration) 2.1. Pratijna yaugandhara yana 4.21: karanair balubhuir yuktaih kamam id paketam (vaya / gunesu na tu me dreso blirrigarah praligrhyatam // This verse is spoken by Badar yana, the chamberlain of king Pradyota Mahasena, the father of Vasavadatta; the other persons present are Bharataroltaka, king Pradyota's councellor, and Yaugandharayana, the minister of Udayana, king of Vatsa, who has finally succeeded in escaping from Pradyota's captivity together with V.savadatta who requites his love. Evidently these are not the chamberlain's own words, but a message of Mahasena's which he only delivers to Yaugandharayana Likewise there cannot be the least doubt that with these words Pradyota wants to show himself not only forgiving, but that he also wants to honour Udayana's minister The assumption that the vessel offered to Yaugandharayana could be "a vase used at the coronation of the king is therefore completely unfounded and the translation of this verse as given by Woolner and Sarup' is on the whole,' quite correct: "Though many wiles were used, you did no wrong I have no quarrel with your qualities, pray accept the chalice". And to be sure, it is not this particular vessel itself which Yaugandharayana is requested to "accept"-as a gift, ie as a token of Pradyota's favour, but he is given a drink in accordance with age old custom and rules for the hospitable treatment of a guest. This is also so clearly stated by the author himself that nothing remains to be desired for it is thus that Yaugandharayana reacts to the message (4.22): ha dhik / gpha na nirvanti maya dipitas tathaiva lavad durdayani mantrinam / iyam tu paja mama dandadharinak kytaparadhasya hi satkrtir vadhah // This is rendered by Woolner and Sarup: << Ah me! The houses I had fired still smoulder, so it is with the hearts of ministers. Here am I honoured, who should be puni. shed, while the best honour for an offender is death." This is quite faithful a translation except perhaps for last line, the particle hi has apparently been ignored and a "while" in the sense of "inspite of the fact that" as well as a superlative have been smuggled in as it were.11 Yet what the minister says in this line is rather: "for being treated hospitably as I am by Pradyota in this way) is death for an offender (like me) (i.e. the just punishment by which his complete defeat is sealed because he is not by any means worthy of such a treatment)"; or perhaps the death i.e. the usual capital or corporal punishment) of an offender (like me) certainly (hi) is (i.e. consists in) hospitable treatment", in which case the arthantaranyasa figure of speach would be clearer still, for the emphasis would lie on the disparity between the treatment to be expected under normal conditions and that actually given. In any case Yaugandharayana himself uses the keyword sarkyti and declares himself, explicity or implicitly, to be overwhelmed by the king's most gracious treatment of him. He accepts the favour, though as if ashamed of it, and thus asks himself to be given the vase called bhrngara-which is therefore, 4. Poona 1957 (reprinted in reduced format Tokyo 1978) 3. Spilgarah as road in S. Sharma's edition. (Protijdrawpandharyonom of Rhasa..., Delhi, Patna, Varanasi 1965) is, of course, a printing error. 6. This is the meaning given in Apte's dictionary (cf. fn. 4). 7. Thirteen plays of Bhasa, translated into English (Punjab University Oriental Series 13), London 1930 (reprinted Delhi, Varanasi, Patna, Madras 1985), p. 34. & The reservation is necessary because yuktail is left out, and this in spite of the fact that this attribute has clearly a causal connotationes rightly stated by Ganapati Sastri in his commentary ( The Pratijayo. pandiarajana of Bhase with the commentary of....... Trivandrum 1920. p. 124): rray'kamay napakylam, haluprokaram chalam proywkrevanapi bharard momapakdro 'na kyta iry anumanyel madaldha vasarajumocanam tad divaranam markanyaharandy carvad kpop naham apakaram manya Ini bhavah / kural,yuktail papannai bahubby kdramall / Tani co....... 9. C P. Thieme. Der Fremdling im Reveda..., (AKM XXUL. 2), Leipzig 1938 (Repr. Nendeln 1966). p. 24f. 10. Woolner and Sarup apparently follow Ganapati Sastri who takes the interje ctions ha dhik to indicate that Y. does not want to accept the h igdra (cf. o. c.. p. 125: b'rilgarasaskaram arocayamda aho-heri/.../aro bhrrigarasarkanim prari grahltum necuhamiry abhiprayah // .) 11. O. c. (cf fr. 7). 1. c. 12. Cr. Prati You (cf. fn.2) 4. 25/26 : yadi me mahasenah prasannah, kin arah param icchami.

Page #3
Albrecht Wezler Bhrrigara in Sanskrit Literature to be sure, a particular drinking vessel, or chalice, if this is the right word, most probably a precious one, but not necessarily a svarnaracitapatra (-vilesa) as C D. Devadhar would have it." 2.2. The next passage quoted in Apte's dictionary is from a text of comparatively late date, viz. the so-called Sivabharataw of Paramananda (who died probably in 1687). The narration of Sivaji's victory over Kar Talab Khan, a general of Shayista Khan, in 1661" is wound up by a description of the loot: "Elephants and horses left in the middle of the forest by the flying enemies are brought by (his) soldiers" (29.57: vimukter afavigarbhe ripubhih prapalayibhib sainyair Iniyamanesu gajesu turagepu ca//). "and at many places his servants pile up large heaps of various vessels] left behind by the enemies when taking to fight because they were afraid of [their] weight, (viz. heaps) of plates, goblets and Bhrigaras of manifold types (1) as well as of various other golden vessels" (29.58-59: bharabhityavamuktanam apayatair araibhi/ sthalanam capakanam ca bhrngaranam ca barisah/l anyesam copy amatranam souvarnanam anekafah/ svabhrtyaih kriyamanesu parvateu ca sarvatah In. Even if the attribute sauvarnonam qualifies bhungaranam, too, there cannot be the least doubt that what the latter expression refers to here is, again, simply a particular type of vessel and, to be sure, one which is not at all connected with a/the coronation ceremony. On the contrary, it evidently forms part of the usual equipment of officers and soldiers while on an expedition, as indispensable as forage. And the enquiries of this brave man are not in vain, for (IV. 477):"" frindrarh svarnabhrrigaral pibantam vari tasya te / ranamadhye hayaradhom tam durat sanadarfayan II, "they showed him from afar that [prince) who, pained by thirst, was drinking water from a golden jug in the midst of battle, while mounted on a horse", so that he is able to kill him with a stone discharged with a sling. 2.3. The last of the passages quoted in Apte's dictionary is Kaupilya Arthasastra 1.12 (to be precise: 1.12.7). When dealing with the employment of secret servants it is said of the "desperadoes" (niksria), forming a subgroup of the stoving spies (samcara):* lesam bahyani caram chatrabhigaravyajonapadukasanayanavihanopagrahinas tiks vidyu. This is rendered by R. P. Kangle quite correctly thus :"1 "Braves (serving as ) bearers of umbrella, water-vessel, fan, shoes, seat, carriage and riding animal, should (spy on and) ascertain the out-of-door activity of those officers)." Of course, it is to be understood that this type of gudhapurugas fulfill their duties as servants of the persons referred to by the initial pronoun," viz. the mahamatras, alias furthas, the high dignitaries enumerated in the preceding sentence. It is further to be noted And this conclusion is strikingly confirmed by Kalhana; for, in his account of king Jayapida's (751-782 A.D.) fighting a battle against his brother-in-law, Jajja, who had usurped the throne during his absence, he introduces at IV. 476 the candela soldier who finally succeeds in killing Jajja with the following words: Sridevo gramacandalah prapto gramyaih saha yudhi ko 'tra jajja iti bhramyan yodhan papraccha sarvatah// 17. This is one of the passages referred to already in the Larger Petrograd Dictionary. 18 Quoted from M. A. Stein, Kelhena's Rajatarongipil.... Westminster 1900. (Repr. Delhi-Paint-Varanasi 1961). p. 164 19. Defined in 1. 12. 2 as those in the land who are brave, have given up all (thought of) personal safety (and) would fight for the sake of money, an elephant or a wild animal.." (ye janapade furas tyaktarmano hastinen vyalani va drevalere pratiyodhayeyus te ilah). The translation quoted is Kangle's (see in, 21)la view of the expression tyktajivitayodhin (Mb. (Poona) 3,51.15) Gyakratmane should not perhaps be co-ordinated but rer.dered "who fight.... ready to lose their lives / not caring for their lives." 20. C H, Scharfe, Untersuchungen zur Staatsrechtslehre des Kowalya, Wiesbaden 1968. p. 246. 21. The Kapillya Arthagistra, Pt. II, Bombay 1963, p. 28. 22. Cf, also Scharfe's translation of this passage, o. c. (cf. fn. 20). p. 253 and 267 23. Cr. Scharfe, o, c., p. 215 as well as F. Wilhelm, The Eighteen Dignitaries (Irtha-sy" in; ALB Vols. XXXI-XXXII, 1967-68, Dr. V. Reghavan Felicitation Volume, pp. 152-157; and Die achtzehn Wurdentrager" in: ZDMG, Supple. menta 1: XVII, Deutscher Orientaliscentag......Wurzburg. hrsg. von W. Voigt, Wiesbaden 1969, PP 894-897, 13. Blanagakacakram Plays Ascribed to Bhasa... (Poona 0, S. 64). Poona 1952. P. 582. 14. Ed, by V. S Aple and M. C. Apte. ASS Extra 5, Poona 1930, is. cr . S, Sardesai's "Foreword to his edition of the Parandanduk dvya of Karindra Paramananda, (GOS No. CXX) Baroda 1952, p. 1 f. 16. Cr.e. 8. Sir Jadunath Sarkar, Shivaji, Calcutta 1961, p. 83.

Page #4
6 Albrecht Wezler that in contradistinction to the "poisongivers" (rasada) whose attention is focussed on the indoor activity of the tirthas the riksnas have a secret mission to spy out the bahya cara of this group of people, i.e. the king's confidants and assistants. It is because of this 'division of labour', this specialization, that one is amazed to read in the Jayamangala commentary that the kipas as bearers of umbrella etc. are: antahpravesanarhah, "[permitted and hence] able to enter [the house of their master]", as well as: pratyasannavartino marmajnah, "stay near [to their masters and thus] know [their] weak points." But it is necessary to realize that the unknown commentator is here not primarily concerned with explaining how and why a niksna is especially qualified to keep (secret) watch on the outdoor activities of his master; rather he wants to emphasize that a tikina having been employed as bearer of umbrella, etc. is in fact able to gain information. The conclusion suggesting itself is hence that the author of the Jayamangala did not deem it necessary to address himself to this point in particular, perhaps because he took it for granted that the titles of occupation enumerated by Kautalya are selfexplanatory. In fact, it is quite clear that a high dignitary like a minister, etc., expects his bearer-of-umbrella to his functions especially when he leaves the house; and this holds equally good for the bearerof-fan and those responsible for the carriage and the riding animal; and as for the other servants, this passage of the Arthatastra is itself evidence of the fact that they, too, usually accompanied their masters. in order to fulfill their (rather) specialized duties if need be. In any case all the tikinas' duties must have been such that they could gain information about their masters bahya cara even if they were not eyewistnesses; as it was at least part of their duty to accompany their masters when leaving the house they were not only the very persons for spying out their outdoor activity, but also the only among the servants who could at all gather direct information about it which does not, of course, mean that their work as spies was exclusively limited to this field. Now, as regards the bhrigaropagrahin-and it is, of course, he to whom our attention has to be turned above all, there is no 24. Arthasastra-Vyakhya Jayamangala, ed. with Introduction by G. Harihara Sastri, Madras 1958, p. 381, 14 f. Bhrigara in Sanskrit Literature likelihood whatsoever that the vessel committed to his care has anything to do with the particular "vase used at the coronation of a king, except perhaps for its form. Evidently all the objects mentioned at 4S 1. 12. 7, including the riding animals, serve, at least first of all, practical purposes of every-day life, though on a markedly high level of prosperity or affluence: It is the well-being and comfort of the master which is to be secured with their help: he is to be protected against the parching rays of the sun, his thirst is to be quenched, he is to be fanned, and he needs the appropriate means of transport, etc. All this, together with the specialized bearer, is clearly in keeping with his extraordinarily high social position. Beyond the practical purposes which they serve, the umbrella etc. are also status symbols signalizing high rank in the political hierarchy-which is by no means necessarily identical with that of caste. It is even probable that by keeping such a domestic staff, or part of it, the mantrin, purohita etc. imitate the royal household. But, to repeat the final conclusion, nothing warrants the assumption that what is referred to by the expression bhragara is not an ordinary, though certainly precious, drinking vessel, but the particular one used in the ritual of obhiseka. This conclusion-and the deliberations on which it is based-is strikingly confirmed by a passage of Bana's Harjacarita. 20 It forms part of the description of prince Rajyavardhana's arrival from his successful war against the Hunas, at the beginning of the sixth ucchvasa; Harsa is said to have seen his elder brother (...jyestham bhrataram apatyat), amid a "throng of servants" (parljanena parivrtam) "reduced in numbers by their long and rapid march" (daradrutagamanamusitabahulyena), and this 'reduction' is specified by stating that the umbrella-bearer was wanting, the superintendent of the wardrobe legged behind, the pitcher-carrier had collapsed, the spittoon-bearer was prostrate, the betel-bearer panted and the sword-bearer 'limped'" 25. For the enumeration at A$ 1,12.7 need not imply that all the dignitaries referred to employ each and every type of servant mentioned. 26. It is listed by R. Schmidt, Nachtrage zum Sanskrit Worterbuch...... Leipzig 1928, s. v. bhrigaragrahin. The reference (196,11) is to the Bombay edition (1992)". but it can easily be located in any edition as the passage is from the second paragraph of the 6th ucchvasa. 27. Quoted from the translation of E. B. Cowell and F. W. Thomas, The HarsaCarita of Bana, London 1897 (Repr, Delhi-Varanasi-Patna 1968), p. 165.

Page #5
Albrecht Wezier Bhrigara in Sanskrit Literature (vicchinnachaitradharena lambidambaravahina bhrasabhragaragrahind cyutdcamaradharind famyattambalikena khanjatkhadgagrahind). Clearly this bhrigaragrahin, the descendant so to say of Kausalya's bhragaropagrahin, is but one of the prakasadaserakas mentioned immediately after the compounds quoted now, and it is even tempting to take this latter expression to mean-otherwise than the commentator Sankara who explains it by aturargatvan nilciyamanah, being recognized as such because of their) not riding on horse back", and his colleague Ranganathats who takes it to be equivalent to "known by name]*** (praksah prasiddhih/ namagrahanena vyapadesya ity arthah) -- rather "public servant," i.e. servant appearing publicly in the company of his master)", as distinct from and to some extent opposed to a domestic in the strict sense of the term. Yet, be that as it may, this much is quite certain: The vessel mentioned by Bana, even if it be made of gold as e.g. Ranga Intha would have it," has nothing to do with the coronation of a king. In passing only it should be noted here that Kamandaki still knew the "bearer-of-umbrella" and his fellow servants, but significantly he comes to speak of them in the section on the various types of spies (caravikalpaparakarana), viz. at 13.46:31 chatravyajanabhrrigarayanavahanadharinah / mahdmdird-(read:1ra-yale bahirvartan vidyur enye ca tadvidhah Il 2.4. The foregoing examination thus yields the-rather disappointing-result that the word bhragara does not have the meaning ascribed to it by Gode and Karve in any of the three passages. One is hence given the idea that these references have somehow been put at the wrong point by them when preparing their revised edition of Apte's dictionary in any case it has become evident that they belong to the second meaning given there, viz: "a pitcher of a particular shape". In addition it has to be noted that this semantic paraphrase is in its turn also not entirely satisfactory. For the two passages which the Chief Editors quote for it, viz. Ramayana) 5.18.12(-5.16. 12 in the critical edition and Ve(nisamhara) 6 (recte: 6+), clearly show that the particular vessel denoted is if not exclusively then at least mainly used to keep water in. And that this is in fact its (primary) function can likewise be seen in the three passages examined above ($ 2.1-2.3). Indian commentators seem to have been aware of this fact; thus, e.g. Rama remarks in his Tilaka on the R. passage referred to just now: bhrrigaraih kalafaial dhattarakusumasad Sajalapatrair ity artha iti tirthak-and (Mahesvara)tirtha's explanation" deservest attention in other respects, too, as we shall see later. That bhrngara denotes a particular vessel for water is stated also by the authors of commentaries on the Amarokopa, c.g. by Lingayasurin", who explains (and thereby implicitly refers to Unadisgtra 3.136): bhriyate puryale 28. C lara Carlia o Bdyabha with the Commentary Marmavabodhint of Ranga natha, ed. by Surabad Kurjan Pillai. (University of Kerala Sanskrit Scries, No. 187), Trivandrum 1958, p. 261. 29. Ct also Kane's "well known (servants)" (The Farshacarita of Basabharpa with Exhaustive Notes, Delhi-Patna-Varanasi 1965, p. 117 of the second part). 30. For he (o.c., 1.c.) explains bly arra as sauvarnakaraka of course, following the example of the lexicographers (cf. n. 39. 31. The reference of the Larger Petrograd Dictionary -12,44" is of course, to Rajendralala Mitra's edition of The Nirisdra or the Elemenis of Polity by Konandoki (BI 19 and 179). Calcutta 1861. The edition used by me is that published in the ASS (No. 136). 1964. 31a. It is noteworthy that the author of the Upadhyayenireprka commentary under stood the term makamotra correctly (......feddharine mehamdird- (read with the I edition fro-) bahirvartom.....mahamatri mantripurohitadaye tepim bohirgalim variy bahyavicardom wduh/), whereas Sarkarirya, mislead by the wrong reading mahamatra, regards this as a plural and takes it to mean hasiidikanle yuklah! 32. kancanair api bhriparair jahrur sallam agrarah (mandalagranasim caiva &rhyanyan prstharo yayub in 33, maharajal si/irasurabhisalilase mpros am bhoparel pdnobhajan yecedom. 34. This its function is perhaps the clue to the Interpretation of the appellative meaning of the same duskab pisara (KangU 2.6). "one whose water container is dry, i.e. empty" or "empty drinking vessel". The occurrence of this name does not, bowever, warrant the conclusion that the vessel meart is necessarily already Vedic; it is also not mentioned in W. Rau's monograph: Topferei und Tongeschirr im wedischen Indien. (Akad. d. Wisscoschaften u. d. Literatur Mainz). -Wiesbaden 1972. 35. The Ramayana of Valmiki with the Commentary (Tilaka) of Rama, ed. by V. L. Sastri Pansikar, Bombay 1930, p. 622. 36. What Mahesvaratirtha says is in fact: kacanair bh a ral kanak lukabhi bhpagdra durarakusumasadpajalapatral II 37. Amarakosa with the Unpublished South Indian Commentaries Amara padavineyti of Lingayasorin and the Amarapadaparijara of Mallinatha, ed. by A. A. Ramana than, Vol. 1 (ALS No. 10). Madras 1971, p. 503. 38. Which reads: Aprgdrabhag arau.

Page #6
Albrecht Wezler Bhrigara in Sanskrit Literature jalam atreti bhrrigara. This derivation is as such, of course, not acceptable etymologically; but it is nevertheless very interesting as a further piece of evidence for the fact that water as its (normal) contents is quite often associated with bhrrigara. To give but one more example from a commentary: In the Upadhyaye nirapeks on kam. Nitis. 13.46 quoted above ($ 2.3) the word is likewise explained by jalapatra. 2.5. Our sources, however, even permit us to form an idea atout at least some; perhaps the main, of the various purposes which a bhrigdra qua jalopatra can serve. The water kept in such a vessel is used as drinking water as is shown by the passages discussed atove ($ 2.1-2.3), especially verse 3.477 of the Rajatarorigin. The prose passage of the Venisamhara mentioned in the preceding paragraph is equally clear. In addition attention may be drawn to Caraka S. 1.144 (to be precise: Sarrasthani 15.7): In a chapter on the preparations to be made by a medical doctor (upakalpantya) it is said that sayanasanadini copanyastabhragaropratigrohani, i.e. that "the bed, the chair and similar pieces of furniture-meant for the sick person should have a bhrigara and a chamber vessel"? (or rather: a spittoon) plaeed by their side"; for, in all probability bhrigara denotes a drinking vessel here too." Another occasion for using the burngara type of vessel is foot washing, as an integral part of the honours due to a guest. This is particularly evident at Ja III: 10. 86 .:rajdaggamahesin pakkosapetva bhadde, sahayassa me pade dhova" 'il aha. Sa tassa pade dhovi. Raja suvantabhimkarena udakam asiaci. Devi pade dhovitva gandhafelena wiakkhel." The king.........called his quten-consort and asked her: My dear, wash the feet of friend! She then washed his feet and the king poured water (on them with a golden pitcher. Having washed this feet queen anointed them with scented oil." Quite similar is Harivarsa 7139" (No. 29 [312 r.) in the critical edition): padau praksalayan cakre muneh satrajiti svayam/ jaldm devah svayam krsno bhrrigarena dadau tada II For seen in the light of the Jataka passage the second line of this verse is quite naturally taken to mean that Krona himself assists Satyabhama in washing Narada's feet by pouring water from a bhupalgara--and not to refer to his offering drinking water to the muni. The same type of vessel is mentioned at Mahabharata 13 2729 (-13. 52.14 in the critical edition): (kusiko bharyayd sardham ajagama yato munin // 13) pragrhya raja bhrngarani padyam asmai nyavedayati; but in this case the service is most probably not rendered by the royal couple itself, since padas cd run thus : karayomasa sarvas ca kriyas tasya mahatmanah 11 A bhragara is used to wash the feet of an honourable guest" also in the Vasudevahindi according to A.P. Jamkhedkar." The same source contains the further information that from this very type of vessel "holy water is sprinkled over the head of a newly married couple", though it is not expressly stated which purpose this ceremonial or customary act serves. In any case it is in this connection that DN II. 172.19 ff. comes to one's mind, i.e. the story, of a fairy-tale character, of Sudassana and the appearance 39. Cr, also Padacandrika. A Commentary on the Namalienuisana of Amara...by Rayamukuta, ed. by K. K, Dutta, Vol. II, Calcutta 1973, p. 571: bibharty udakom bhynkarah/ friedrabhagaran ca' (Unadis. 3. 136) it byna arannumagaman gamdca nipalvente // .....dve (ie, bhreara and kanakaluka) suvarnoghepliafala. pirasy -That the brearais made of gold is maintained also by Mallinstha (cl. o. c. [fn. 37) 1.c. kanakakariranamani). 40. Note also that the rakjasa in the disguise of a mund repeatedly declares himself to be thirsty Urlto'smi), that he asks to be given water and shade) (sambhavayari mim kafcij jalacchayapradaneno) and that the prose passage quoted above is immediately preceded by a corresponding order by Yudhistira (kah ko'tra bhoh. salilam upapaya). 41. Cf. fn, 17. 42. This is the meaning given for pratigraha in Monier-Williams' dictionary ref erring to the Caraka S., while in the smaller Petrograd Dictionary we read: basin or pot meant for the various needs of a diseased person, in particular Spittoon." 43. The rendering (flower) vasc'' of Priyavrat Sharma (Caraka-Sanhia.. (Text with English Translation), Varanasi 1981, p. 105) is in any case not at all justiciable. 44 Pali texts, I use the abbreviations of the Critical Pall Dictionary. 45. Cf. fn, 17. 46. CT, fn: 17. 47. A. P. Jamkhedkar, Vasudevahid: A Cultural Study, Delhi 1984, p. 113. 48. The teserence to this and the other relevant passages in Pali texts I owe to the PTS's Pali-English Dictionary.

Page #7
Albrecht Wezler Bhrigara in Sanskrit Literature to him of the heavenly treasure of the wheel, whereupon the king... rose from his seat, and reverently uncovering from one shoulder his robe, held in his left hand a pitcher, and with his right hand sprinkled water up over the wheel:" In this case, too, some form of consecration seems to be intended. i ' . Yet, there is still another ceremony in connection with which a bhrngara-vessel is mentioned several times in Pali as well as Sanskrit sources, a ceremony at that of even greater significance in terms of the history of ideas, viz that of touching or pouring out water when making a donation. This custom, ascertainable not only in India but everywhere where Indian culture has spread"," has long been misunderstood. The (basically correct interpretation has been given by H. Luders in a work published as late as 1951," According to him the donation is conceived of as a treaty", and he refers to the fact that in an old formula the "lie in connection with a donation" is mentioned", by pouring out water, says Luders, the donor confirms his donation. donor says when making his donation, or even when only promising to make it, can really be trusted; or whether the donce has to be prepared for the worst, viz. to expect that the donation is not made in the end, or claimed back, or that he is accused of having unlaw. fully taken possession of it, etc. That is to say, the essential point, I think, is just like in the case of a statement made by a witness in court-to ensure that what is said by the donor is equally the truth and nothing but the truth'. Therefore the donor is expected to solemnly confirm that his statement, "I hereby give you...", is true; and like a person taking an oath he simultaneously touches water or pours out water, and this certainly meant originally, as has been shown by Luders," that he exposes himself to a cause should his word be not the truth." In a foot-note Luders refers to Ja VI. 344.10 ff., where the king takes a golden jug full of scented water and pours water on the band of the merchant receiving the gift and while doing so he proclaims the donation of the village." What the king really says is (VI. 344.11): pacinayaramaljhakagaman rajablogena bhuaja, but this is indeed nothing but a solemn and ceremonial - and as regards the rights of the future proprietor entirely precise--formulation by which the village is verbally made over to the merchant. That the king in addressing him in this manner speaks the truth, is confirmed by the accompanying act of pouring out water, and note that he does so on the hand of the person who is to receive the donation. Andwhat is particularly interesting in the context of the present studythe water is poured from a suvannabhinkara! This very ceremony is described with similar words c.g. at Ja 11. 371.13 f... Suvarnabhimkarena pupplagandhavasitam udakam Luders' rather brief remarks have, of course, to be supplemented by what he says in the whole of his introduction about the connection between Varuna, (who is to him the god of the oath) and water, and between the latter and the oath. Nevertheless I am far from being convinced that he is right as regards his interpretation of the donation being a treaty. A treaty per definitionein regulates the rights and duties of the parties, and I fail to see any such reciprocal commitment in the case of a donation. The problem with the latter is rather, at least from the viewpoint of the donce, whether what the 49, Quered from: Dialogues of the Buddha, 3rd Ed., translated from the Pali...by T. W. and C. AF. Rhys Davids, London 1951, p. 202 50. The original runs thus: arha kho Ananda raja Mala-sadassano withay dsand, ekomsam witarasancom karliva, vamena lanthena bhlikarom galeiva, dekkhinena hathena cakkaratanm abbhuk kiri....... cl. 1. 175. 17. f. Pv-a 75,5 IT, as well as Saddl 513. 51. Quoted from H Luders (cf. fn. 52). I, c. 52 The reference is to : Varuna, Aus dem Nachless herausgegeben von L. Alsdorf 1: Varta und die Wasser, Gottingen 1951. 53, 0. C. 32-The Translation is minc-as in other cases where German secon dary literature is quoted in the present study. Si. A passage of the Vidhurnpandita-Jaraka discussed by L. Alsdorf (WZKS 15, 1971 p. 46- Kleine Schriften, Wiesbaden 1971. D. 403) scems to contradict this statement. However, if Alsdorf is in fact right, what is referred to implicitly at JA VI. 309 31 is ingratitude; and its counterpositive cannot be said to form one of the objects of a donation qua treaty; besides Alsdorf himself stresses that the idea he finds expressed in this Jataka is a singular one, "to my knowledge not attested elsewhere so far." 55. Cr. Varuna...: Varinn und das Rra, Gottingen 1959, p. 655 ff. and the article published from the papers left by Laders in: ZDMG 98, 1944, pp. 1-14. Cl. also B. Kolver, Textkritische und philologische Untersuchungen zur Rajataraisial des Kalhand, Wiesbaden 1971, p. 175 fr. (Appendix 3: Eine Eides vorstellung des nordindischen Mittelalters). 56. With various problems posed by the donation ceremony I hope to be able to deal in the near future in a more detailed and comprehensive manner.

Page #8
Bhrrigara in Sanskrit Literature Albrecht Wezler paterva adasi", namely the Bodhisattva his royal elephant to certain brahmins; or at Ja I. 85. 6 ff. (...Suvannabhinikarena pupphagandhavasitamanivannaudakam adaya veluvanuyyanam pariccajanto dasobalassa hattheudakam patesi (cf. also I. 93.13 f.), The locus classicus for the donation of the Veluvana garden, however, is Vin I. 39. 14 fr., a passage which deserves attention also in that it again clearly shows that what is confirmed by the pouring of water is the truth of the words by which the donation is proclaimed; for it runs thus: atha kho raja Mogadho Seniyo Bimbisaro sovannamayam bhinkaram gahetva hlagavalo onojesi etalam bhante Veluvanam teyyanam buddhapamukkhassa hhikkhusetghassa dammiti. Thus the material from Pali sources suggests that the vessel normally used in this ceremony is precisely our bhrrigara; and this assumption is supported by Sanskrit texts; too, e.g. Harivamsa 14237 ( No. 42 B (2813) in the critical edition) where in a section which is partially rather difficult to understand Bali is said to have taken a golden bliragdra with his hand (grhya hastena sambhranto blingdram kanakodbhawan) in order to pour water (cf 2822: evam uktva balth stghrami palayam asa vai jalam)." and thereby to confirm that what he has said (viz. dasyami devadeva yad yad icchaty ayam prabhuh) is indeed true: Clearly in this case, too, the blurigara is used in a donation ceremony. There is hence a certain likelihood that the vessel which can be seen in pictorial representations of this ceremony in Indian art-their existence is mentioned e.g. by Luders and Waldschmidt-is a bhagara. In addition to throwing light on the various purposes which a blirrigara can serve, the passages drawn upon so far also warrant the conclusion that the vessel denoted by this expression should be of medium size, i.e. large enough to contain the quantity of water necessary for its various functions, but still so small that it can, most probably without exertion, be lifted and, in general, handled also with one sole hand. Besides one can hardly fail to notice that among the purposes attested by our sources not a few evidently belong to 57. Cr, also Cp. 1.3.5. 58. Cr, also E. Waldschmidt. Die Uberlieferung vom Lebensende des Buddha...pt 1. Gottingen 1944. p. 58. 59. Cr. also the half veise rare rarison aparnom himearam sa paranyfol quoted in the apparatus (196,4) of the critical edition (p. 759). 59a, In the books referred to in fn, 32 and 58 respectively. the sphere of solemn, at least ceremonial acts: It seems that a particular utensil used in the household as a drinking vessel - and in this regard also as a water container-is resorted to in certain formal acts prescribed by protocol, convention, or ritual which are essentially connected with pouring out water; but for evident reasons the bhrigara used for such higher purposes is made of more valuable or the most precious material available (the 'gold' the lexicographers associate with it) and for ordinary water a more 'refined' liquid is substituted Taken together all these observations and conclusions lend no little weight to the question one cannot but finally ask oneself, viz. why this particular type of vessel should not indeed have been used likewise in the royal consecration as affirmed by the author of the Yuktika, 3.1. For what he says is quite unequivocal, viz.: rajno bhisekapatram yad bhriigara iti ton matam , "[as) vessel (used at, or rather: appropriate for, i.e. to be used at] the coronation of a king, is considered that called bhrigara." The Yukli ko. then gives a relatively detailed description of the bliragara as abhisekapatra, introduced by the statement that there are cight varieties and that its measure(s) and its shape are also eightfold (tad asjadha tasya manam akriis capi casadha). What is referred to by the first asjadha is the material from which the vessel is made, viz, gold, silver, earth (ie clay), copper, [rock] crystal, sandalwood, iron and horn (of a rhinoceros 7). In the subsequent pair of Slokas its height and its circunference are given-but not the unit of measure intended-and it is made clear that these data refer to the tight varieties of bhrigara mentioned in the preceding verse so that the possibility that a total of 512 subspecies is taught can safely be ruled out." Next the author contes to speak of various precious 60. Yuktikalpataruh Malaraja-ribhoja-viracirah. ed. by P. Isvara Chandra Sastri, Calcutta 1917, p. 76, verse 76: 3 urartam rajatam bharmom tamray sphapikam era ca cand nam lahajapt sragam eled asfavidhan matom II 61: Verse 77-78: bharudik-nava-saptayfa. rudraloka - saronmilah/ dsao asfon samakhyala ay naparinalaj oh / dil - carurbana - vedabdhi. bapa saprotnia vytrina yathakraman sanuddistamadityadi-dasabhusan II

Page #9
Albrecht Wezler Bhrigara in Sanskrit Literature stones, etc, like ruby, diamond, beryl, pearls, etc., i.c. of the decoration of the bhrigara with such precious stones somehow permanently fixed to it;" his attention then turns to the question which of the eight varieties of bhrigora should be decorated in this manner, and to similar questions including the species of flowers to be fastened to the head of the king at the coronation and the types of precious stones to be put into the secanambhas. The description is wound up by the promise: ittham niscitya yah kuryan nspatih sekam almanak / sa cirayur bhaved blogi ito 'nyas tv anyatha caran // What is said in the bhrhgaroddefa of the Yuktika does not hence give the impression of being fanciful. It seems rather to be largely based on real custom and tradition of course, of a particular period; and this assumption is supported among others by the observation that the author takes it for granted that a king may belong to any of the four castes. In any case there is no reason whatsoever to doubt that the statement at the very beginning, viz. that the bhrigara is the abhisekapatra par excellence, is historically correct and trustworthy. 3.2. Yet, in one respect the Yuktika, does not come up to the expectations it itself creates: It does not give a description of the shape of a bhrngara. What this kind of vessel looks like cannot at all be learned from it;" obviously it is taken for granted that the vessel as such is well known to the reader. In fact, the expression akrti-so one realizes when the author specifics what he had in mind when using it--refers only to one aspect of its shape" or "appearance," viz. its decoration with precious stones. But there are other sources which come to our help here. According to Mahesvaratirtha (cf. above $ 2.4) a bhrigara "is similar to the flower of a dhattara." The plant denoted has been identified as three species of the genus Datura," a charactieristic of which is the funnel-shaped corolla. N. S Mooss's Ayurvedic Flora Medical contains a drawing showing also the flower of Datura metel Linn., and the corolla is described as "tubular-infundibuliform, 15-18 cm long or even more, often 10-12, 5 cm across at the mouth..." A vessel of this shape, and size, can indeed be used to drink out of, and it can be placed provided its bottom is flat. As Mahesvara states it only to be similar" to a Datura flower, it is least possible that the bhrigara he has in mind is some what bulbous, if not even big-bellied, and if this be true, it could well contain enough water for washing a guest's feet. On the other hand it should not be forgotten that in India there has not been a tradition of exact and detailed descriptions of objects of the natural environment or products of human workmanship.' And even if such a tradition could be found, one is left with the intricate problem posed by Mahesvara's statement in itself: We don't know what exactly he means by sadra, i.e. to what extent he at all intended to give a precise description of the type of vessel called bhrigara. His testimony, though quite interesting as such, is not clear enough to bridge the gap between "Worter und Sachen," i. e. to arrive at a clear visual idea of the object denoted. A practicable way is, however, shown by Buddhaghosa (5th century) in his commentary on the DN passage referred to above (2.5). For he adds to the expression suvarnabhinkara of the mala text the explicatory attribute hatthi-sonda-sadisa-panali (Sv 620.20f.), "with a spout similar in shape) to the trunk of an elephant." Evidently this feature was regarded by him as really characteristic of a bhrigara. And obviously the author of the Vasudeva hind also had in view the same feature when he characterized the 62. Verse 797.: padmarapas tarha vajram vaiduryan mauktikan tatha / nilami marakatau caiva mukta ca sapla kirtirah // bhragdrasaptake nyosya na bhaumo malm arhati / 63. Verse 84: Hirakan padmaragas ca valduryo nilom eva ca/ carvara monayo dheyah caturnam secandmblasi! 64. The expressions "four/fourfold (kings)", occurring in verses 82, 83(b) and 84, are explained by caturjarimahibhuj of versc 83 f. 65. The expression pratyasrom in verse 81 does not, of course, imply that the bhragara has "corners" in the proper SCDSC of the word. It is equally possible. nay even much more probable, that what is referred to by this expression are the four cardinal points projected upon the round bhyagara, the spout perhaps providing the point which is considered as the front. 66. Cf. G. J. Meulenbeld, The Madhavonidana and its Chief Commentary, Chapters 1-10. Introduction, Translation and Notes, 1974, p. 564. 67. (Vaidya Sarathy Series Book No. E 2). sec, ed., Fasciculus I, Kottayam 1978, p. 89 f. 68. 0. c. (cf. fo. 47), 1.c.

Page #10
Albrecht Wezler bliragara as being gajamuho (=gajamukha). To compare the spout of a vessel to the trunk of an elephant makes sense only if a particular similarity is referred to, i.e. if not the trunk as such is meant, but the trunk in particular position considered to be specific to this pachyderm, or perhaps the peculiar tapering form of the trunk. Unfortunately, however, quite a few positions meeting this condition come instantly to the mind of everybody only superficially familiar with elephants. The position tacitly referred to might e.g. be that of holding up the trunk so that it looks somewhat like the letters.. e.g. adopted by this animal when it trumpets. In a roll painting from Nepal in the possession of the Museum of Indian Art in Berlin (West) the Visvantara legend is depicted. It has been published by Lienhard in 198070 in an exemplary manner. Table xxiv (p.231) shows among other things the abhiseka of prince Jalini, In his detailed description and analysis of the relevant scene? Lienhard states, after having dealt with the prince himself, that two men in red frock-coats stand to the left and right of the prince... Each of the two men holds a carafe with both hands' and is ready to pour the water it contains over the head of the prince to be consecrated as king. A third man...... waves a parasol of golden yellow colour, a symbol of royal dignity and might." An identical vessel is found depicted at another point of the roll also, viz as part of a scene showing Madri in swoon." Lienhard's identification of this vessel 69. Cr. Budhasvamin's Byhurkataslokasomgrala 2.37 where a wild elephant, trum. peting as if challenging the opposing clephant to battle, is seld to be kimeld akvaciruguluh: cl. also the expressions kare kaitapaikore and compellitakarah karl--ibid., 3.14 and 15. 70. Die Legende vom Prinzen Vigvanlara. Eine nepalesische Bilderrolle aus der Sammlung des Museums fur Indische Kunst Berlin, Berlin 1980. 71. 0. c., p. 228 72. This seems to have ritual or ceremonial rather than practical reasons but cl, fo. 79. 73. It seems that Lienhard has here been carried away by his imagination. All the picture shows is that a parasol is held above the prince so that the sun is (in accordance with a corresponding rule, cf. J. Gonda, Ancient Indian Kingship... [cf. fn: 87), p. 37) prevented from shining directly on him. 74. O.c, plate XVI; the description is given on p. 176: "...the prince, making strenuous effort to awake her from her swoon, sprinkles Madri's body with water," viz. with his right hand while be holds the vessel in his left, cf. also Bplaskothajlokasamgrala 3.78: arhdigarawe time milham pantrapaharyasrarat Mladayami Usatur vokyaih sacivan snjalanilah Il Illustration No. 1 By courtesy of the Museum fur Indische Kunst, Staatliche Museen Preussischer Kulturbesitz, Berlin (West)

Page #11
Blurigara in Sanskrit Literature scarafe for water" is evidently correct; but I think in this case is definitely possible to go a step further, i.e. to do more than just termine its function, namely to connect it with its proper designaon which cannot but be bhrigara;" for one of the "carafe's" peculi. Crities is precisely the "clephant-trunk-like" spout, i.e a spout which has the form of the letter "s". On the other hand it has to be taken into account that the Berlin roll painting is dated 1837 and thus more than 1300 years younger than the information gleaned from the famous Pali commentator And such a distance in time cannot be simply passed over as entirely insignificant however marked the traditionalism of Indian culture. Fortunately, however, there are much older pictorial testimonies which can in a similar manner be connected with Buddhaghosa's remark. For Luders draws attention to "one of the most beautiful reliefs from Bharhut" showing "Anathapedika when donating the Jetavana to the Buddha, and the donation is confirmed by pouring water from a vessel similar in shape to a teapot." In a foot-note he refers to Cunningham's well-known work on the Stupa of Bhar. hut," viz. p. 14 (fl.) and plate XXVIII. In view of the text of the inscription found immediately below the sculpture the correctness of the identification of the scene is beyond any doubt. This means that it can be taken for granted that what is depicted here is a particular donation ceremony, i.e. an act with which the bhragdra has been found to be intimately connected Now, the vessel which Ansthapindika carries placed on his left hand, holding its handle with his right (or perhaps carries by the handle with his right hand, merely supporting it by his left hand)" is admittedly different from the one depicted by the Nevar artists of the Berlin roll. It has pot only an (arched, handle, but it is indeed similar to a teapot also in 75. 0. c. p. 42. 76 Its Nepati name, however, is ghara ( Page #12
118 RANDE Albrecht Wezler that it is much flatter and clearly big-bellied, covered by a lid and provided with a fat base; in addition the spout is here straight, risingi at an angle of appr. 45deg from the bottom a little beyond the level of the lid; but it evidently also tapers off towards the top to some extent at least, and it is in this respect that it, too, is, or could be regarded as, similar to the trunk of an elephant, but perhaps in another regnea also, viz. when the trunk is stretched out straight in spouting wateki It is, hence, certainly possible, nay even highly probable that what Buddhaighosa had in mind was a vessel of this type which can thus be identified as the ancient) bhrigara. Whether this teapot-like vessel represents the direct) or one of the historical precursors of the 'carafe' of the roll painting from Nepal remains to be seen. It is anyway not possible to pursue this problem further in the course of the present study: The pictorial testimonies-of which there is obviously no dearth-call for an independent treatment. In the present context it is, however, important to repeat by way of summary that thanks to a particular textual information about the vessel called bhrigara a bridge can be thrown across the gap between text and picture, and that pictorial testimonies confirm what is stated in the Yukti Ka., viz. that the bliagara is indeed used at the coronation of a king." 3.2. But this. vessel was not only used in such an abhiseka ceremony. Obviously there is more to it. For it is noteworthy that the bhrrigaroddefit section of the Yukli Ka. is quoted in the 21 80. It may be noted here that the golden bhrigora (which king Jalauka throws into the Sodara spring according to Kalhana's Rajafarang/y! 1.128 in order to carry out what could be styled an anticipation of modern underground water tesli) is not only sufirodara (for which M. A. Stein's (cf. fn, 18. p. 25j "empty" is perhaps too colourless), but also sapidhandnanal, "closed at is mouth with a lid. 81. Which would also have to examine the relation between the blurigara or 10 general the abhisekapala, bod the pinaghaja as a symbol of prosperity. In: passing only attention may be drawn to the fact that according to the Padaca drika (of In, 39, 11, p. 571) on Amarok, 2.8. 32: dve '.c.bhadrukumbha and pirnakumbha rajyabhisekaya nanatirthadijalek anak aglajasya (scil.ndman). 82. This conclusion is tiot of course, reversible: not each and every vessel that happeos to be used at the coronation of a king, or an abhiseka ceremony (ultimately) modelled on it, can be identified as bli gara-may also be seen from B. N. Sharma's article on "Abhiseka in Indian Art" to: 101, Baroda; XXI. 1971-72. pp. 108-113; cf. also fn, 120. Illustration No. 2 Source: A. K. Coomaraswamy, La Sculpture de Bharhur, Paris 1956, Plate XXVI (Fig. 67)

Page #13
Bhragara in Sanskrit Literature Dharmakota in a chapter entitled rajacihnani rajopakaranani ca." This heading - and the distinction between cihnas and upakaranas of the king is also based on a corresponding statement of the Yuktika, viz. the following one: chatradhw jasimhasanayanadibhyo yad anyat syal / rajyarlgam tad upakaranan tasmal loke visesas tu II. According to it there are certain "constitutive clements, i e. paraphernalia or insignia, of kingship"", different from the umbrella, the banner, the throne, the riding animal (viz. the elephant, etc., etc., and that they form "utensils for use."*7 Though the essential distinction between an upokarawa and the umbrella and the other rajyanigas is not made much clearer by the subsequent three lines either, they give at least a complete enumeration of the former: camaraf catha bhrrigarat casakam ca prasadhani[m] / vitauas catha sayya ca vyajanam darpanambaram / elan navakam uddistam rajopakaranakliyaya //. The group of nine paraphernalia forming the wpakaranas of a king are hence chowrie, bhrrigara, cup," comb, canopy, bed, fan, mirror and garment. It is highly questionable whether the difference between these wpakarands and the non-upakaranas among the rajyangas really consists in the fact that the former are "utensils for use" only and the latter merely "signs of the king" (rajacima) as the author of the Dharmakosa would seem to have it-though it cannot be denied that what is marked here as different from each other seems to be the private sphere, on the one hand, and that of appearing in public, on 83. Rajanitikanda, ed. by Laxmanshastri Joshi, Vol. IV, PL.V, 1979, p. 2829 and 2841a. 84. P. 72, verse 33. 85. The expression rajyonga is here evidently not used in the special terminological sense it usually has in Nuland related texts. 86. The Behatka haflokasomgraha (2.45) knows an abhisekohastin; cf, also 8 5.1. It should however be noted that yona may have the meaning "vehicle", too, and could therefore refer to the state chariot (cf. fn, 137) 87. Thus it is that J. Gonda, Ancient Indian Kingship from the Religions Point of View (Reprinted from NUMEN III and IV with Addenda and Index), Leiden 1966, p. 37. renders upakarona as found at Mbl. 12,67.86. In the Narikalpataru (cf. fo. 105, p. 174 .) mpakarana (in the compound rajatadupakarana) seems to refer not only to inanimate objects, but also to all the officers and servants of a king 88. Of course, the emendation prasddhanam would also be possible, but the feminine is met with again at Yukrika, p.78 verse 91. 89. Cf. also the quotation from the Sirabhidrala ($ 2.2).

Page #14
Albrecht Wezler the other. For it has to be taken into account that the chowrie, or to be precise: the pair of fly-whisks, together with the (white) umbrella constitute "the emblems par excellence", as rightly stressed by Gonda. There is not only textual evidence for this, but it is also strikingly confirmed by art". Hence the question arises if not at least the bhrigara, too--the other upakaranas are less likely candiJates except for the fan--has likewise to be regarded as an emblem of royalty, i.e. an identifying mark of a king. For it may be taken for granted that not an ordinary vessel of this type is meant, but one conforming to the description given subsequently, i.e. in the Whirrigaroddefa of the Yuktika. That is to say, it has to be kept in mind that neither the chowrie nor the bhpngara nor any other of the upakaranasand the umbrella, etc., certainly don't form an exception in this regard-are as such specific to a king. It is always the material, the decoration, etc., that makes a particular object one of the royal paraphernalia; and Bhoja takes quite some pains to clearly Blogara in Sanskrit Literature describe the difference between its ordinary and its royal character. Similarly it is not necessary to give much thought to the-theoretical - possibility that what is referred to here by the expression bhrigara is but the royal drinking Vessel; for, this passage of the Yuktika. cannot by any means be dislinked from the bhrig droeldesa section which after all is part of the detailed description of all the nine wpakaranas enumerated at the outset: bhrrigara as a rajopakarana is there. fore the abhisekapatra which evidently remains, with the king after his coronation and is perhaps even used by him albeit not as drinking vessel. And as to the abhisekapatra, it is perfectly understandable that it should have been regarded as another ensign of royalty in view of its extraordinary significance in the context of the royal consecration On the other hand it has to be admitted that usually one looks in vain for the bhrigara, or a vessel equivalent 16 It, in tists or enumerations of the paraphernalin or emblems of royalty. E. g. Gonda does not refer to it. But clearly his outline does not exhaust the (primary) material - nor aim at reconstructing the historical development. The assumption that this particular emblem has so far simply been overlooked by most scholars is strikingly confirmed by a recent article of G.H. Khare's." But before turning to the source drawn upon by bim attention should first be focussed of another piece of evidence, viz. one which inspite of certain philological problems it poses is nevertheless ultimately so clear that any doubts one might still entertain as to the blagara forming one of the insignia of royalty once and for all. 4. 1. what i atti alluding to is a passtige in Bharuci's commentary on the Manusmrti, a text which has unfortunately come down to us only in a fragmentary state, and the trasmission of the only extant portion, viz. the Manil-Sastra-Vivaruna on adhyajas 6-12, is also far from being good. 90. O. c. (cf. fn, 87). I. c. 91. E. 8. Kalidasa, Raghuv, 3.16 c/d (adeyam asit trayam eva bhAparel fasiprabham chartram mblie ca camare). It should be remembered that umbrella and chowrie are also named in the first place in the two sets of the Yuklike -Note that at 2.13 Dilipa is nevertheless described as onalepefrain (Bapak lantom), but that Malling tha explains: walthe perspecchettom; the only king without any insignia whoni I happened to meet in the course of my study is the lion of the vense quoted by O. Bohtlingk in his anthology Indische Sprache, Sanskrit und Deutsch, St. Petersburg 1870-73', as no. 1395 (539): ekakin vanarasiny arajalak mony an Irisastrajne saffrorkese m eparow djeti gira parigamontill rendered by the editor: In... the lord of the animals the title 'king' .... acquires its full significance." - In this connection it should also be meatloped that there are indications of the (white) umbrella being the only ensign of royalty or the ensign par excellence. Thus e. & the meaning of the expression nyparikkuda at Raghuv, 3,70 (see also fn. 109) is made explicit by Kalidasa himself by the subsequent slaaparane; and at Ja III. 117, the king who wants to share his kingdom with a friend of his divides his umbrella into two halves in order to demonstrate this his decision. Last but not least, Amarakoja 2.8.32, too, has to be taken into account here (chaltro IV deparrom Mastu apalaksmd tor), though the final words of this verse need not be interpreted as stating that the umbrella is the only ensign of a king, but could also be taken to mean that the umbrella of a kirg. i. e, if it belongs to a kirand if hence carried over his head, is an ensign, i.e. one of the royal insignia. 92. Cf. the article of B. N. Sharma's referred to in fn, 82 and that of O H. Khare (cf. In. 95), plate 1. 93. Cr, also the cojakoddesa of the Yukika. (p. 78, verse 86 ff) as well as the kumbha, argliyepafra-, padjaptra- and ecomanopiro-lakfors in the Piramiiro dara, Lek naprakasa. p. 641 ff. 94. Viz, in his work on kingship (el fo. 87). p. 37 95. "Emblems of Royalty in Art and Literature" in: ABORI LVIII and LIX, Diamond Jubilee Volume, ed. by R. N. Dandekar, Poona 1978, pp. 683-689.

Page #15
Albrecht Weiler Bhrigdra in Sanskrit Literature 25 Mam 7.6, a verse particularly interesting in the context of the ideas about kingship in ancient India, runs thus: fapaty adityavec caigam caksumpi ca mariamsi ca/ na cainam bhuvi soknoti kascid apy abhiviksitum I and Bharuci gives the following remarkable explanation: maharaja-lingena camara-cchatra-bhrigadina yukto dipimattvac caksiwyddityavat lapayati, mona isi dendapatanat). The question apart whether the characterization of the king as being furnished with the emblems of royalty is meant as reason for his burning the cyes" or as a restriction of this effect to a legally enthroned king or to the king insofar as he acts with authority, one is puzzled by the last member of the compound camara-cchatrabrigo-. J.D.M. Derrett has taken the text as it stands, but his proposal to interpret it to mean with his flywhisks, umbrella, and bees', etc." poses questions. And that he himself didn't feel happy about it becomes clear by his footnote "attendants?'. After what has been said so far in the course of this study, it can hardly come as a surprise that I, on my part, should like to suggest a conjecture here, viz. to read .bh ngdradina instead of .blurngadind. This implies that just one okjara has dropped out, and it further starts from the assumption that the contention of the lexicographer Mathuresa (17th century)" that the word bhriga is used among others in the sense of bhragara" is at best based on a crux like that in Bharuci's commentary and not at all confirmed by actual usage. That instead of bhragadina one should read Sprigadina can also safely be ruled out, for the remark found in the Vacaspatya s.v.rajatriga, viz. that this expression is semantically equivalent to rajacihnacchatra, is of no relevance here since the "umbrella (as one of emblems]"101 is already mentioned by Bharuci, and in a quite unequivocal manner at that; for a similar reason the contention of Purusottama, the author of the Trikandused," that fraga-n. has among others the meaning of cilina, can remain unchecked: In an explanation of the expression maharajalinga, given by the author himself, what one is alone justified in expecting are the names of individual ensigns, and not at all the notion "sigo" as such. Therefore I should think that the emendation proposed by me is the most natural one in the context, hence I take Bharuci to give the following explanation: "He, (i e. the great king) burns the eyes like the sun because he [tool is characterized by dazzling splendour insofar as/ify when he is furnished with the emblems of a great king, (viz.) the (pair of) fly-whisks, the umbrella, the vessel-used-for-hiscoronation, etc. (and he burns the minds because he causes punishment to be inflicted." There is no doubt hence that Bharuci (between 600 and 650 A.D. according to Derretti enumerates the bhrrigara among the emblems of royalty, and among the most important ones at that. 42 That is to say, I regard it as definitely established that the vessel called bhrrigara forms qua abhijekapatra one of the distinctive marks of a king. But I should like to stress at the same time that I neither ignore nor want to dispute the fact that this its role and function is attested to in our sources but sporadically-though it will be shown later that there is more textual evidence than has been realized until now. Nonetheless in my opinion this quantitative argument does not carry much weight and this for the following reasons: 1. In most, nay practically all cases when commentators, etc., explain expressions like raja (etc.)-laksman, --cihna, etc., or 101. The semantic development is not clear to me 102. Viz, at 3.3, 70; cf. also (according to the Larger Petrograd Dictionary S. v. frise-n.) Hem, on Medini 2.3, 25-26 103. The latter sentence has been quoted from Derrett Commentary on the Manusnyt... Vol. IL... Wiesbaden 1975, p. 34) which seems bit strange as regards the remaining part, 101. O. c. (cf. fo. 97), Introduction p. 9 f. 105. Note that rajalaka s also used in the sense of bodily marks indicating future) king" (cle. . Dasakumaracarita, ed., NR. Acarya, NSP, Bombay 1951, p. 14. 1. 12 as well as H. Kohlbrugge. "Glucks und Unglucks zeichen 96. Note that Bharuci seems to have read caira which may indeed be regarded as the older original reading 97. The edition used is, of course, that of I. D. M. Derrett, Bharuci's Commeotary on the Manusmor (The Manu Sastre-Vivaroga. Books 6-12)... Vol. 1: The Text, Wiesbaden 1975, p. 50. 98. Cr. C, Vogel, Indian Lexicography (1 History of Indian Literature, ed. by J. Gonda, V. 4), Wiesbaden 1979, p. 365 ff. 9. C. also the Larger Petrograd Dictionary ... bhpiga.. In the edition of the Sahdaranavall itself (ed. by Pdt, Manindra Mohan Chaudhuri, Calcutta 1970). the corresponding statement is found on p 192. 100. C. Trik andaseja 2. 8. 32.

Page #16
Albrecht Wezler kakud (a), they confine themselves to mentioning just two, or at the utmost three, individual ensigns, and it is perfectly understandable that they adduce by name only those which are by far the most important or best known, definitely coming to one's mind first when the concept "emblem of royalty" is mentioned, and inspite of Bharuci's testimony it is highly improbable that the bliggdra ranked among the first two or three. Blurrgara in Sanskrit Literature 27 Vivarana" by kanakacchatracamaradi. 1o At Viramitrodaya Vio (Rajonitiprakalu) 443.19 the expression cihnani rajno is explained by the immediately following dhvajapatakadini. 4.2.2. Vispudharmotturapurana II. 158.4-to which attention has been drawn by 1. J. Meyer_ tatraivayudhavarmady m chatram ketum cn pujajet/ rajalingani sarvani tathastranica pojayet // might prescribe the worshipping of the abhisekapatra, too, as part of the nirjana ceremony-although in this particular case there are some doubts since the Caturvargacintamani 19 teaches mahtras for other emblems only and ignores our vessel. But bhag. P. 1.16. 4 and 5 may be quoted as an example without hesitation for the last member of the compounds hrpalingadhara' and nodevacihnadlirk is not at all indication enough that only such signs are mcant here which a king bears on himself in the narrower sense of the word, 2. In a number of cases an author may well have had ini mind the bhrigara, too, when speaking of the signs of a king but there is no way to find this out for sure. 3. The denotatum of bhrrigara or this expression itself may have been replaced by another one, expressions often met with in comparable contexts are in particular kalasa, ghara and (para) kumbha. 4. Last but not least one has to reckon with the possibility that the role of the bhr gara as an emblem of royalty was limited in terms of its historical and/or its regional diffusion. To give a few examples: 4. 2. 1. The explicate rajaliaga of Amarakoja 3.3.92 is in its turn made clear in tne Padacandrika' by chatiradi, and in the am menschlichen Korper in: Acia Orientatio XX, 1948. bp. 36.86) well as in the sense of characterization, i. e, description of the king' cf. Vtromitrodeja (cf. fo. 110) XX, p. 165, Rajadharnakaustubha (cf. fn. 113) p. 243 and Nirikalpa. tarn (ed. by V. P. Mahajan, Poona 1956), p. 177. 106. This holds good equally when individual emblems themselves are mentioned, Likewise it should be taken into account that even if an adi or a similar expression is lacking, those ensigns which are expressly named need not be meant to form an exhaustive enumeration of the ensigns in their entirety. The verse Ja 6.22. 28-29, to which my attention has kindly been drawn by me fricod O. v. Hinuber remains difficult inspite of K. R. Norman's(cf. CPD S.. upadhil-arham) endeavours to solve the problems (cf. also 0.v Hinuber, **Two Jataka Manuscripts from the National Library in Bangkok" in:.JPTS Vol. X, 1985, 19 ff).-Cr. also Mallinatha on the passages from the Raghuv. referred to in fos, 91 and 109. 107. Padacandrika: 1 Commentary on the Namalinganufatanam of Amara by Rdyamukwa. ed. by K. K. Dutta, Vol. III, Calcutta 1978, p. 226. 4.2.3. The Ramayana commentator Rama 'of. $ 2.4 above) paraphrases bhrigara of R. 5.16.12 by kalata, and this latter expression is indeed very often met with in the context of passages dealing with the royal consecration. E.g. in his Viramitrodaja (VI. 42. 188.) Mitramigra starts his brief exposition of the abhiseka according to the Atharvamagopathabrahmana" by stating: bilvaprabhrtin sambharan samblurtya sodasa kalasan sodasa bilvani valmikasya ca mritikam sarvannam sarvarasan sarvabijani / tatra catvarah sauvarnos carvaro rajatas catvaras tamras calvaro minmayap /... And (a) golden kalata (s) is (are) mentioned in Anantadeva's Rajadharmakaustubha," in 108 Amarakofa with the Unpublished South Indian Commentaries..., ed. by A, A. Ramanathan, Vol. II, Madras 1978. p. 352 109. Appararya then quotes Rogh. V. 3.10 b, viz. (sac - Dilipah) sunawe) nirporikak dame datvarane sitatopararanaml. 110. Viramitrodayah Laksanaprakalah Mahamahopadliyayosrimitromigraviracitch sahi fyopadhyayavisnuprasadoformanasom sodhirah, Benares 1916. III. Trilogle alrindischer Mochte und Feste der Vegetation......Zurich-Leipzig. p. 127 (of Pt. II), fn. 2. 112. Cafterwargacintamani of Sri Hemadei, Vol. 11; Vratakhanda, PL. II. p. 619 | 113. Raladharmakaustubhd af Ananradera, ed. by M. Kamala Kr$na Smrlitirtha, Baroda 1935, p. 316, verse 3 and 321, v. 29.

Page #17
Blirrigara in Sanskrit Literature Albrecht Wezler Nilakantha's Nitinayakhali and in Candesvara's Rajantiratnakara... and the sudsequent instruction in the latter, viz... pirayer sarvatrhadbhir gangena payasathava / 11 clearly indicates that the abhisekapatra itself is referred to. Equally plain is Venisamhara 6.12 where Pancalaka, addressing Yudhishira and Draupadt, asks them to abandon all doubt and then adds: puryantani salilena ratnakalasa rajyabhisek aya tel. At other places or in other works of the same kind, instead of kalata the expression ghata is found, e.g. in the Viram irodaya (VI. 44.10). In the Mahabharata (1.126.36) Karna is consecrated king of the Angas "with golden ghagas [to the water contained in which) parched grain and flowers have been added" (saldjakusumair gharaih kancanai... abhisikto...). It seems that ghaja and kalasa are interchangeable in such contexts 17 yet this holds good for kumbha, too, or even pirakumbha. As to the former expression, see e.g. Viramitroda ya VI. 51.4 or 57.3, Rajadharmakaustubha 320 verse 25 fr. or Krtyakalpafan , Rajadharmakhanda 14. 12; as for the latter, Kylyakalpataru 16.7,110. of course, further and less hurried investigations are necessary in order to arrive at a well-founded interpretation of this terminological fluctuation, but a comprehensive and detailed study of the post-Vedic development of the royal consecration has anyway still to be undertaken by somebody,121 and Nibandha texts like those drawn upon by me will then be of special importance. Nevertheless it is, I think, legitimate to state that more non-occurrence of the expression bhrrigara itself in these sources does not at all warrant the conclusion that this particular type of vessel was not considered by their authors as an/the abhisekapatra. Besides, this non-occurrence is also not a total one. There is after all a passage in the Krtyakalpataru where the word is used, viz. in an enumeration of the various abhi secanika dravyas,'*among which figures a hiranmaya blir gara also (16.5), though side by side with many "decorated golden parnakumbhas". A similar list of things required for a coronation is transmitted at Dip. 11.32f; and all of them are expressly stated to "have been sent [by Asoka) for the coronation">> (rojabhiseke pesita)"", and, significantly, they include a blinkara, too:15 114. NIW Mayuk ha by Nilakantha Bhaja, ed. M. G. Bakre and V. P. Lele, Bombay 1921 (Repr. Delhi 1985): p. 171.5. 115. The Rajantti-Ratnakara by Candesrara, ed. by Kashi-Prasad Jayaswal, Patna 1924, p. 83. 115a. C. also fn, 81, On the upction fluid consisting of 16 or 17 different sorts of "water" and its preparation in Vedic times cl, J. C. Heesterman, The Ancient Indian Royal Consecration...... 's-Gravenhage 1957, pp. 79 . It should be noted that this is one of the traits of the Vedic royal consecration that has been preserved practically until the present day (cf. the study of Witze)'s referred to in In, 121). There is much evidence to be found also in the Nibandha texts; in passing only I further note Brhatkarhaslokasampraha 1.89 cd: sarvatirthambukalafuir abhyasincat sa (le, Gopalah) palakam //. In J. Sarkar's (cf. fn. 76) description of Sivaji's coronation ceremony it is stated (p. 208): "Then the or his cabinet..., who stood ready at the eight points of the horizon with gold jugs full of the wrter of the Ganges and other boly rivers, emptied them over the bends of the king, queen and crown-prince...". 116. Cr. also the verse from the Prapancasara quoted by B. N, Sharma in his article "Abhiseka in Indian Art" (cf. fo, 82). 117. At other places they are distinguished; cf. e R. Mbl. 14.64.12 and Venisamlara bhagara (cf. n. 33) versus 6. 12 kalaja (cf. 4.2.3). Cf. also fn. 119. TIR. Kyyakalpataru of Bhala Laksmidhara, Vol. XI: Rajadharmakanda, Baroda 1943. 119, In the supapatikasitra (cf. n. 138) the compound pinnakalasabhindram is found (49, 1T), explained by the commentator Abhayadevasurito mean: jolapari. puran Bhajabhadraw. An interesting information is given by Apparirya (Amarekoga with the unpublisbed South Indian commentaries..... Vol. I. Madras 1971, p. 503) for according to him bhadrakumbha and purnakumbha are rajadvara nikpipraparonokalafanaman 120. In the section entitled abbisekapatralak sona of the Viramitrodoya (cf. n. 110). p. 646 three different vessels are described (following & Vaikhanagrantha"); the third one is said robe saskhanibhakaram and opralo Jalanalakani, i.e. to have a spout-in all probability the specific mark of a blyrigara proper. 121. Much progress has, however, been achieved in this regard by M, Witzel in his contribution The Coronation Rituals of Nepal", to: Heritage of the Kathmandu Valley, ed. by N. Gutschow and A. Michaels, St. Augustin 1987. 122. Viz. p. 151, IS: this passage is part of a section said to be borrowed from the Ramdyana (cf. p. 13. 1. 19 and fn. 3); this seems to be only partially true since the parts in question are not found in the critical edition nor in any other edition of the R. I was able to check. 123. Cr, also 12.1. A parallel is Mh. 11.28. 124. I fail to understand Oldenberg's query (The Dipavamsa.... London Edinburgh 1879, p 166): -all that being worthy of a royal coronation". 125, As Dip. 11,39 (dutiyan abhisic tha.....dutiyabhiseko....) shows, the coronation referred to is a second one. .

Page #18
30 Albrecht Wezler But it has to be admttied that the present argument (SS 4.2.3) is rather weak in that all it can at best be adduced for is the statement that the blingara was in fact used as an abhisekapatra. There are, however, also passages which clearly confirm Bharuci, and it is to these that attention will now be drawn. 5.1. Among the material utilized by G. N. Khare "the story of Muladeva as narrated in Jacobi's Hindu Talesin and translated by Meyer in (sic!) English" is of relevance here. Its contents are summarized by Khare thus: "It is said that Muladeva while residing at Bennayada, the king of the country died without issue. The ministers and other state officers, therefore, let loose the five divine things of the five emblems of royalty to select the future king. When these divine things appeared before Muladeva who was sitting in a garden in the capital at the time, the elephant trumpeted, the steed neighed, the golden pitcher sprinkled him, the chowrie fanned him, and the parasol shaded his head. Here an elephant, a horse, a golden pitcher, (a pair of) chowries, and a parasol are enumerated as the five emblems of royalty..." The sentence to be considered here in the first place runs thus; tam pecchiya gulugulyam hatthina, hesiyam turangena, ahisitto bhing arena (abhisikto blyngarena), viio camarehim, thiyam uvari pundariyam, and this is perfectly clear. This part of the story of Muladeva opens, however, with (62.34): io ya the nayarie aputto raya kalagao, "now the king of that city had died sonless", immediately followed by the phrase; tatlha aliyasiyani panca divvani, and the precise meaning of these few words has given a number of scholars quite a headache. Meyer renders ahiyasia- by "deputed" and refers to "Indische Studien XV. 359 (where we find the correct translation panca divyani adhivasitani)": that is to say, he disagrees with Jacobi who derives 126. Cf. fn, 95.. 127. Actually the title of H. Jacobi's work is: Ausgewallte Erzahlungen in Maharashyri, Leipzig 1886; the story is found there on pp. 56 ff. 128. J. J. Meyer's Hindu Tales. London 1909, are "An English Translation of Jacobi's" reader; for the story of Maladeva see pp. 193 ff. 129. Quoted from Jacobi's edition, p. 621, 36, p. 130. Viz in fn, 3 on p. 131. Bhara in Sanskrit Literature Prakrit ahiyasei from Skt. adhyasayati - and proposes the rendering "to rule as a symbol" as for the Skt. original, viz. adhivasita, he refers to Weber (who quotes the phrase pance divyany adhivasitani from Simhasanadvatrimfika, but interprets it to mean "[they asked] five fateful questions") and to Tawney's translation of the Kathakosa11 (who renders divyani by "ordeals" and the verb under discussion by "appointed"). 31 The problem involved have been taken up for a fresh and much closer study by Edgerton's, and he has convincingly shown that the phrase in question means "the five divine instruments were imbued (with the superhuman power they were expected to use)">"they were consecrated", a meaning according well also with the expression panca divyany obhisiktani of the Parisistaparvan Jacobi's translation of panca divyani by the "five insignia of royalty"-to which Khare also has obviously fallen a prey-has been criticized already by Meyer who deems it "hardly correct", the reason being that "with the Jainas too these are: Sword, parasol, crown, shoes, chowries", whereas here "we have: Elephant, steed, golden pitcher, chowr.es, parasol"; similarly Edgerton's warns against confusing the five ensigns of royalty with the pancadivyani: he notes that "the neuter noun divya is frequently found in the law-books in the sense of 'ordeals" and argues that in the passages examined by him "the word is used in a concrete instead of an abstract sense", viz. that 131. The Kathakola or Treasure of Stories (Oriental Translation Fund, New Series II) London 1895; see pp. 4, 128 and 155. 132. Viz. in an article of his entitled "Pancadivyadhivasa or Choosing a King by Divine Will" published in: JAOS 33, 1913, pp. 158-166; this is also referred to in Edgerton's valuable notes on Jacobi's reader, viz. his "Notes on Jaina Maha-istri in: Indian Studies in Honor of Charles Rockwell Lanman, Cambridge Mass. 1929, pp. 27-30. 133. Cf. Stheviravall Charita or Parisishaparvan..... by H. Jacobi, Calcutta 1891, P. 166. This passage is already referred to (among many others which are partially not accessible to me) by Meyer. o. c., p. 131, fn. 3. . 134, Viz, in fn. I on p. 160 of the article referred to in fa. 132, 135. P. 166-Cf. also Kathakota Prakarana of Sri Jinesvara Sari, ed, by Jina Vijaya Muni (Singhi Jain Series No. 11), Bombay 1949, p. 73, 1, 31.

Page #19
Albrecht Wezler Bhrigara in Sanskrit Literature instead of divine ordeal or test' it means "the instrument of divine test'. I do not at all want to contradict either of the two scholars; but there are two points which I should nevertheless like to make 1. It cannot be taken for granted that throughout the whole of Indian history the ensigns of royalty have been none other than the very five enumerated by Meyer and Edgerton indeed sources have been adduced in the foregoing which testify to the contrary. 2. Of the two pentads; viz. the rajakakudani and the divyani, it cannot be disputed that the latter set is divided into two subsets, viz. the two state animals, on the one side, and "the golden pitcher, the chowries and the parasol", i.e. three inanimate objects, on the other, and that out of these three the latter two form part of the ensigns of royalty and not only the allegedly fixed set of five rajakakadas). There is hence no scope for any serious doubt that the "pitcher", i.e. bhragara, too, is here equally regarded as one of the insignia: On its part the "golden pitcher" chooses the new king in that it by itself "sprinkles him", i.e. indicates that he is to be consecrated king in a ceremony in which it will function as the abhisekapiira. Yet in thus selecting the person who is to rule the country the Whragara symbolizes royalty to the same degree as the parasol and the chowries, the state elephant and the royal steed, or the royal chariot--so that from this angle the distinction between the ensigns, on the one hand, and the panca divyani, on the other, becomes ultimately insignificant in substance. 5.2. And this latter conclusion is, if I am not mistaken, fully confirmed by the Aupapatikasatra. For, in the description of Kunika's ceremonious setting out from the city of Camps this king, seated on his elephant, is not only said to be surrounded by excellent horses, elephants and many chariots, but he is also characterized as "one above whom a white umbrella is raised" (usaviya-seya-chatte), "one who is fanned with (a) chowrie (5)" (pavia-vala-viyantye), and "one towards / by whom/whose asthe bhragara is lifted up" (abbhuggayabhrigare)." Their possible or even probable practical functions apart, the umbrella and the chowrie(s) are clearly meant here, too, as insignia of royalty: In order to honour Mahavira the king sets out in a procession in which all the royal splendour is displayed-and which forms the model, so to say, of that of ministers and other state officers as referred to by Kausalya (cf. SS 2. 3. above). Therefore it is highly improbable that nothing but a drinking vessel should be meant by the expression bhimgara, i.e. an object serving a practical purpose only, however precious the materials from which it is made. Rather there is every likelihood that this bhrigara also represents, and in the first place at that, an ensign of regal dignity. 5.3. Clearer still is the text to which I should now like to draw attention, viz. the Markandeya P. The passage I have in mind is referred to already in the Larger Petrograd Dictionary , but obviously Bohtlingk and Roth have failed to recognize its full significance. It occurs in the story of king Hariscandra who in order to keep his plighted word not only gives away the whole of his kingdom as 136. Notc however that in the Aupapatikastra (cf. fn, 138). p. 55 ($ 49.11) the flags of the umbrella are given the attribute divya. This particular use of the legal. term divya han apparently been not taken notice of by R. W. Lariviere. The Divyalariva of Raghunandana Bhaflacarya. Ordeals In Classical Hindu Law, Delhi 1981. 137. On the state chariot (poparatha etc.) sccc.. Meyer, o, C., p. 131, fn, 3. and Edgerton, I. c., p. 160. 138. E. Leumann, Das Aupapatika Sutra, erstes Upanga der Jaina, I. Theil: Einleitung, Text und Glossar. (AKM VIII, 2). Leipzig, 1883, p. 57($ 52). 139. E. Leumann renders this bahuvili compound, (o. c., p. 97), referring to the explanation given by the Skt, commentator, by the king in whose direction - the golden water jug is raised." In any case it is quite probable that the action denoted by abky-ud-gam here is not performed by the king himself; cf. also Ram 5.18,11 (partially quoted in fn. 32). 140. It owes this information, however, to Th. Aufrecht, Halayudha's Abhidhanaratno mala, London-Bonn-Paris 1861, p. 299.-The particular Parsvanathacarlia also referred to by Aufrecht, . V. blurigara, has as far as I know not yet been published. 141, That he is a king (rdjan) is stated already at the very outset: see Mark, P.8.3.

Page #20
Bhrigara in Sanskrit Literature 33 34 Albrechi Wezler daksind to Visvamitra, but is also able to clear his debts with this Rsi only with the price he gets by selling his wife, Saivya and his son to a brahmin and in the end selling himself also as servant to a candela. He is then forced to work at a cremation ground in the most abject state for more than a year when the corpse of his son, bitten by a snake, is brought there by the mother, the former queen. At first the parents do not recognize each other (ef. 8, 175: sa fdit rorudarim bharyam nabhyajanat tu parthivoh..... and 176: sapi tam carukesantam pura drspa jaralakam / nabhyajanan napasula sukuvrkso. pamam nepam // ), but soon both of them become aware of the horrible truth and fall into a swoon. When they regain consciousness, the queen, after having fainted a second time, exclaims (202-203): with the actual state, and this is done in an artistically skilful manner in verse 203 by making. Saivya expressly state that she looks in vain for what formerly used to indicate her husband's special dignity and might, viz. the insignia of royalty, and clearly blurigara, too, is one of these. For what else should be the reason for mentioning the abluisekapatra along with the umbrella, the chowrie and the fan? 5.4. The observation that, particularly in Nibandha texts, the expression kalasa is often met with instead of bhrig dra (cf. $ 4.2.3 above) permits us to present still another piece of evidence. The Krtyakalpataru contains also what is called a "cilinaridhi", and one of the effects ascribed to this ritual is the following one (198.3 f.): ha rajan jatasantapam itthom mam daaranitolat ufthapya nadya paryankam aroheti kim uyate il nady a pasyami te chatram bhrigaram athava punah / camaram vajanim capi ko 'yomt vidhiviparyayah II This is aptly rendered thus by Pargitet: "Ah, king. Why dost thou not now raise me, who am thus afflicted, from the ground and tell me to mount to thy couch ? I do not see this day thy regal umbrella, nor yet thy golden" vase, thy chowrie or fan; what is this revolution ?" camaran kalasom Sankham satapatra vitanakam bhavet tu siddhikamasya napasya phaladayakam 11. Enumerated as it is together with other "utensils for use', which are clearly ensigns of royalty and are mentioned here for none but this very reason, the vessel called kalasa cannot but have the same emblematic function; It, too, is one of the cilnas of the king, and thus indirectly confirms the result achieved with regard to the blirigara. For, whatever the exact relation between the kalasa and the bhrigara in terms of the history of Indian arts and crafts, there should no longer be any doubt that if in fact two different vessels, i. e. vessels of different shape, are referred to by these expressions, one of them has taken the place of the other in the course of time, although their function has remained the same and this function was The "contrariety of fate", the total change in Hariscandra's circumstances is described by the author by contrasting his former 142. Crverse 8.127 . for the description of Hariscandra when working at the cremation ground. 143, Note that the parallel in the Dertbhagareta, Skandha 7, adhysya 26 verse 42 old runs thus: nadya pafranite chiar siqasanam arhdpivall. 144. The Markandeya Purana transl, with noles by F. E. Pargiter (BF 125). Calcutta 1904, p. 53. 145, Obviously Pargiter still took blyilgara to mean "golden vessel"; cf. 146. Cf. also verse 8.204 ff. 147, Cl. also the section called cinesu devipajavidhi in the Viramitrodaja (cf. $ 4.2.2. p. 442; both these Nibandha works assert that they are quoting from the Devipurna. 148, On the conch seeg. Dip, 11.32 and 12.2 (cf. $ 4.2.3); as for the canopy see $ 3.2 and e. 8. Yuktika. 79 verse 98 ff. vitana-laksanami).

Page #21
36 Albrecht Wezler to serve as an abhisekapatra and therefore, to be sure, also as another of the many insignia of royalty in India. 149. There are at least two more passages which are likely to further corroborate. what forms the main result of the present study. The first is AV Parisia LXIV. 7.6 (The Parislas of the Atharvaveda, ed, by G. M. Bolling and J, von Negelein, Leipzig 1909-1910, p. 413), and the second one is Vignusmrti 63,32; the latter forms part of a chapter in which things, etc, are enumerated the sight of which is considered inauspicious when the king starts on an expedition (cf.. also P. V. Kane, History of Dharmasastra, Vol. III, Poona 1973, p. 227 f.); and the former belongs to the vast subject of dream and its interpretation in India, But I have first to consult books not available at Hamburg or in Germany before a floal conclusion can be arrived at regarding this material so that I have to postpone this to a later addendum, ADDENDA Page 1 SS 2: On "The Sources and Authorship of the Yuktikalpataru", cf. S. R. Sarma in: Aligarh Journal of Oriental Studies III, 1986, 39-54. Page 12, first paragraph: CORRIGENDA [Wrong divisions of words are, as a rule, not taken into account here, nor the non-spacing of what should have been spaced, nor the erroneous substitution of a hyphen by a dash, etc.; references are to pages and lines, the latter extending to the foot-notes also.] 1. 14 24 25 25 26 27 27 30 2. 5 12 15 22 24 26 35 37 Cf. two recent articles of H. Scharfe's, viz. "Nomadisches Erbgut in der indischen Tradition", in: Hinduismus und Buddhismus, Festschrift fur U. Schneider, hrsg. von H. Falk, Freiburg 1987, 300-308, and "Zur Einsetzung des Konigs im vedischen Indien", in: Studien zur Indologie und Iranistik 13/14 Festschrift W. Rau, hrsg. von H. Bruckner, D. George, C. Vogel u. A. Wezler, Reinbek 1988, 185-193. 3. 3 14 21 30 WRONG Yuktika.. cf II, A Debrunner 154 P 519 gol en Encyclopaedic Pratijna V savadatta nddharayana wrong i e 1978) napakrtam Ivava desired for last "the death i.e. blyngara RIGHT Yukti Ka. cf. 11,2 A. Debrunner 1954 p. 519. golden Encyclopaedic Pratijna Vasavadatta ndharayana. wrong. i.c. 1978). napakrtam tvaya desired; for the last "the death (i.c. blingara

Page #22
38 35 38 4. 11 17 18 5. 3 10 13 6. 37 39 6 21 26 29 7. 14 25 8. 15 20 21 29 30 9. 6 11 19 39 41 10. 13 20 34 11. 2 4 5 14. Tuomar 7 16 19 12. 4 7 9 16 34 36 13. 12 3 9 17 b rigara prasannah. prapalayiblih bhrugaranam sauvarnanam frspartan dealing caram tyktajiita Reg havan Wurzburg "poisongivers" Jayamangala to his functions if need be wistnesses; hierarchy...jyestham Rangaantha (caravikalpapar akarana) dharinah sauvarnakaraka 39. dictionary 5.16. 12 deservest Lingayasurin bhirngarau Venisamhara plaeed salilam upanaya). dhova" "The feet of friend feet queen 13 2729 blirngaram wheel: bhrngara-vessel viz mentioned, Nachless O.C., P cause velu bhinkaram bhrigaram bhrigara prasannah, prapalayibhih blir garanam sauvarnanam trsnartam dealing caram tyaktajivita Raghavan Wurzburg Corrigenda "poison-givers" Jayamangala to perform his functions if need be. witnesses; hierarchy ...jyestham Ranganatha (caravikalpaprakarana) dharinah sauvarnakaraka, 39). dictionary; 5.16.12 deserves E Lingayasurin bhrigarau. Venisamhara placed salilam upanaya). dhova" The feet of my friend feet the queen 13.2729 bhrigaram wheel. bhrigara-vessel viz. mentioned; Nachlass O.c., p. curse Velu bhinkaram bhragaram Corrigenda 18 19 20 35 37 15. 22 31 34 34 16. 9 11 13 32 17. 7 10 13 14 32 18. 4 14 22 25 26 19. 5 9. 24 32 36 2 20. 22 23 31 33 37 21. 3 5 15 22. 41 23. 25 29 24. 3 16 38 25. 9 20 30 cf sighram ayam Uberlieferung bhrngaram akriis Malaraja cand nam lahajam ittham Yuktika tradition catvara N. S Mooss's 10-12, 5 cm is least some what Vasudeva in particular Jalini, viz said to he 'puskare i.e commentator connected cf that use used In such note-worthy putnaghata bhadrukumbha on it. can Yuktika, chatradhvj a vitaua! G H. Khare of royalty trasmission manamisi "attendants?". P 192. context, 42 to me cf. sighram ayam Uberlieferung bhrigaram akrtis Maharaja candanan lohajam ittham Yukiika. tradition, catvaro N. S. Mooss's 10-12, 5 cm is at least somewhat Vasudeva in a particular Jalini. viz. said to be puskare i.e. commentator. connected. cf. that the use used in such noteworthy purnaghata bhadrakumbha on it, can Yukti Ka., chatradhvaja vitanas G.H. Khare of royalty disappear transmission manamsi "attendants?". p.192. context; 4.2. to me. 39

Page #23
Corrigenda a bit Glucks- und kakudia) another one; bhrngara rajalinga the my 38 18 23 4 a bit Glucks und kakud (a). another one, bhrngara rajalinga tne me ketum hesitation Rama of. kalasa (s) sarvatri thadbhir abhisikto kalasa contexts 117 16.7. 118 Witze y's wrter blrngara too: 135 opuranao abbsiekapatralaksana said ro be admittied material things of the gulugulyar (=abhisikto phrase; tailha - as for pajice problem Parisista parvan 138 Edgerton paica (usaviya - bhrngara. Saivya daaranio pasyami Markandeya sankham function; It same and 4.2.2 98T , etc are ketum hesitation; Rama (cf. kalasa(s) sarvatirthadbhir abhisikto kalasa contexts: 117 16.7.119 Witzel's water bhrigara too. 126 opurna abhisekapatralaksana said to be admitted material things or the guluguliyam (=abhisikio phrase: taliha -; as for punca problems Parisistaparvan.133 Edgerton; panca (isaviyabhragarn, 24 Saivya, S. 13 dharanio pasyami Markandeya sankham function; it same; and 18 25 27 4.2 2. 36. 7 98ff. ( , etc , are