Hathigumpha Inscription of Kharavela and Bhabru Edict of Asoka

Author(s): Shashi Kant
Publisher: D K Print World
Catalog link: https://jainqq.org/explore/006726/1

Page #1
The Hathigumpha Inscription of Kharavela and The Bhabru Edict of Asoka CA RE EU ARAB SERDE DE DE SHASHI KANT

Page #2
ver since its discovery in AD 1825, Kharavela's Hathigumpha Inscription has had a fascinating course. It is not a royal panegyric merely; it is an epitome of history, specially of the so-called dark period - unveiling, as it does, the political and cultural conditions that prevailed in India during the three centuries before Christ's birth. And yet more significantly, it is the only hitherto-known document to tell the saga of its heroic author: the first historical king from India's eastern coast to lead extensive campaigns in different directions. But for this inscription, Mahameghavahana Kharavela could never have been resurrected from oblivion. Likewise personal in character is Asoka's Bhabru Edict, considered as the earliest written record of Buddhist scripture and monastic organisation. For the history of Buddhism, this little document is as important as the Kharavela's Hathigumpha Inscription is for that of Jainism. Shashi Kant's study examines afresh these inscriptions: not just for their thematic similarity, but essentially for their crucial historicity. Going into their tenor and context, it is the first ever decipherment/interpretation of the two rare documents, with the whole Jaina and Buddhist traditions in the background. The author demolishes myths, addresses controversies and, these besides, offers convincing theories that are authenticated by recent archaeological findings. Acclaimed and favourably reviewed in India and elsewhere alike, this epigraphic study is now in its second, enlarged edition -- including a whole new section on the genesis of the Prakrt languages and the ancient Indian scripts. Together with the original epigraphs, their romanised transliteration and English translation, it holds out immense appeal to the scholars of ancient Indian history, epigraphy, archaeology, and Buddhist-and-Jaina studies. www a lfary.ge

Page #3
The Hathigumpha Inscription of Kharavela and The Bhabru Edict of Asoka

Page #4

Page #5
The Hathigumpha Inscription of Kharavela and The Bhabru Edict of Asoka - A Critical Study - Shashi Kant R D.K.Printworld (P) Ltd. NEW DELHI - 110 015

Page #6
Cataloging in Publication Data -- DK Shashi Kant, 1932 - The Hathigumpha inscription of Kharavela and the Bhabru Edict of Asoka. Includes bibliographical references (p.). Includes index. 1. India - History --- 324 BC -- 1000 AD -- Sources. 2. Kharavela, King of Kalinga. 3. Asoka, King of Magadha, fl. 272 BC -- 232 BC 4. Inscriptions, Prakrit. 5. Buddhism - India - History - Sources. I. Title. First Edition 1971 Second Revised Edition 2000 (c) Author ISBN 81-246-0139-9 All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or any information storage or retrieval system, without prior written permission of both the copyright owner, indicated above, and the publisher. Published and printed by: D.K. Printworld (P) Ltd. Regd. office : 'Sri Kunj', F-52, Bali Nagar New Delhi-110015 Phones : (011) 545-3975, 546-6019; Fax : (011) 546-5926 E-mail: dkprint@4mis.com

Page #7
To those who are interested in digging up the past

Page #8

Page #9
Foreword The Hathigumpha Inscription of Kharavela is one of the few significant sources available for the dark period in the history of India between the fall of the Mauryan dynasty and the rise of the Guptas. Composed as it is in a very obscure Prakrit, and its characters badly weathered by centuries of exposure to the elements and in places quite illegible, this inscription has long been the subject of a great controversy among historians and palaeographers. Many uncertainties and ambiguities still remain. The date of the inscription is as yet not finally settled, and opinions vary over a period of about two hundred years. Certain scholars believe that it is a little later than the inscriptions of Asoka, while others would date it not long before the beginning of the Christian era. The new edition and translation of this inscription by Dr. Shashi Kant marks a great step in our understanding of this very difficult historical document. In many particulars the fresh interpretation presented here is an obvious improvement over those of previous students of the subject. After reading Dr. Kant's typescript, I find myself in agreement with him in most particulars, though I must record my doubts as to his views on the chronology of the inscription. The style of the script suggests to me a date in the first century BC, and I would prefer to interpret the obscure chronological data in the inscription itself as referring to a period 300 years after the Nanda King, and not 103. But authorities may differ, and in general I would heartily recommend this interpretation to all students of Indian history. With this is included a further study of one of Asoka's most obscure inscriptions, the Bhabru Edict. This little document is

Page #10
viii The Hathigumpha Inscription and the Bhabru Edict as important for the history of Buddhism as the Kharavela's Hathigumpha Inscription is for that of Jainism, and it arouses many questions as to the correct interpretation of the passages of scripture referred to and the relations of church and state under Asoka's regime. Here, too, Dr. Shashi Kant has produced new theories of great importance and I recommend them to all students of Indian history and religions. January, 1971 A.L. Basham Ph. D., D.Litt. Professor of Oriental Civilisation The Australian National University Canberra (Australia)

Page #11
Preface to the Second Edition It is indeed gratifying that the book has attracted notice of reputed scholars in the field. It has been extensively reviewed both in India and outside. It has also found a place in the curriculum of several universities. The compliments of Prof. Jes P. Asmussen that it is a fine piece of work, of Prof. A.L. Basham that he found it a very impressive study, of Prof. N.S. Ramaswami that it is a lucidly argued and fairly presented attempt to set out the problems and to find the answers, of Dr. Krishna Deva that the book is indeed very well written and documented, and of Dr. Mahesh Kumar Sharan that the book for the first time tackles some of the very complicated problems of Indian history from every conceivable angle, as well as the appreciation by the learned reviewers, are highly encouraging. I am grateful to all these savants for having bestowed so much thought on my book and for making some valuable suggestions, as also the editors and publishers of the Journals for sparing space for the reviews. To make the work more useful, I have added further annotations, as also Section III on the genesis of the Prakrit languages and the ancient Indian scripts. Some controversial issues, e.g., the Himavanta-Theravali, the era of dates given by Kharavela, the dates of the Buddha's parinirvana and Mahavira's nirvana, identification of Asikanagara and Kamhabemna, interpretation of coyatha, and problems relating to Satakamni and Bahasatimita, Kalinga Jina, Schism and Kharavela, the Schism, Kalinga and Jainism, Nandas and Jainism, and Asoka and Kalinga, have been discussed in Appendix III. The bibliography has been updated.

Page #12
The Hathigumpha Inscription and the Bhabru Edict In orthography, textual words and ancient names have been rendered into the Roman script with appropriate diacritical marks; the place names have been spelt as in The Oxford School Atlas (29th edn., 1997). Locations have been updated according to current geography. X The photo-plates of the Hathigumpha Inscription are being published by courtesy of the Patna Museum, Patna, that of the Bhabru Edict by courtesy of the Asiatic Society of Bengal, Calcutta, and the other photographs by courtesy of the Archaeological Survey of India. It would be ungrateful of me if I fail to put on record now that the insight to probe into the mysteries of epigraphy is a byproduct of the method of teaching Epigraphy by the late Prof. C.D. Chatterji of Lucknow University. And it would be callous on my part if I do not mention my wife Manjari who bears with me to let me burn night-light in the rough-and-tough of my literary, journalistic and research pursuits I am thankful to Mr. Susheel K. Mittal, Director, D.K. Printworld (P) Ltd., for bringing out the second revised edition. Jyoti Nikunj, Charbagh Lucknow 226004 Nov. 7, 1999 Shashi Kant

Page #13
Preface to the First Edition THE Hathigumpha Inscription is the only extant record about a forgotten epoch in Indian history. It is highly personal and that makes it all the more important for the history of its author. It is unique inasmuch as it gives the dates of earlier events, records the doings of its author in a chronological sequence regnal yearwise, and presents the earliest written exposition of Jain terminology and corroboration of the Jain scriptural tradition. The Bhabru Edict is earlier in date. It is also personal in character. The significant thing about this epigraph is that it provides the earliest written record of the Buddhist scripture and monastic organisation. The studies of these inscriptions, presented here, are independent but they have been combined as they have thematic similarity. Their interpretations suffered in the past for want of correct appreciation of the Jain and Buddhist traditions. Fresh attempt has been made here to read these inscriptions keeping in view the tenor and context, and to correlate and interpret the data with reference to relevant traditions and more recent archaeological finds. For the studies presented here I owe a debt of deep gratitude to all those savants whose patient researches enabled me to know something of our heritage. A great many of them are no longer with us, but the fruits of their toil inspire us and sustain us in the uphill task of exploring new data and appraising the known data so that the missing links in our history may be found and the coming generations may be better informed about their history and culture.

Page #14
xii The Hathigumpha Inscription and the Bhabru Edict Prof. A. L. Basham, Prof. R.K. Dikshit and Prof. K.D. Bajpai have been kind enough to go through the typescript and I am thankful to them for their appreciation. These studies would not haye taken a shape but for the encouragement I received from my father Dr. Jyoti Prasad Jain. The credit for getting it into print goes to the Prints India. Lucknow Shashi Kant December, 1971

Page #15
Contents Foreword Preface to the Second Edition Preface to the First Edition Critique Abbreviations Transliteration Chart List of Plates Maps The Empire of Asoka Maurya Dominions and Campaigns of Kharavela xxiii xxiv SECTIONI The Hathigumpha Inscription of Kharavela 1. The Inscription Introductory Decipherment Site Text Translation 2. The Date of the Inscription and its Author 3. Kharavela Personal history Campaigns Dominions

Page #16
xiv The Hathigumpha Inscription and the Bhabru Edict 4. Socio-Political Conditions 5. Jainism 6. Epilogue SECTION II The Bhabru Edict of Asoka 1. Discovery, Text and Translation 2. Magadhe or Magadham 3. Identification of Scripture 4. Buddhism and Asoka SECTION III Prakrit and Brahmi 1. Genesis of the Prakrit Languages 2. Tradition of writing, and scripts, in Ancient India 105 111 115 APPENDICES I. Reconstituted texts in Nagari characters II. Translation in Hindi III. Additional Notes IV. Chronology V. Transcription Chart of Brahmi Script VI. Symbols in the Hathigumpha Inscription 119 129 131 136 137 Plates Bibliography Index 153 161

Page #17
Critique The empire of Kharavela was short-lived, but he evidently was as important for the history of Jainism as Asoka was for that of Buddhism. The documents most important for the history of religion are the object of Dr. Kant's penetrating study. His book * certainly marks a great step in our understanding of these difficult historical texts, a fact sharply stressed by the careful text edition, the sound translation and the illuminating remarks on Jainism, Buddhism and Asoka, and the personal history of Kharavela. PROF. JES P. ASMUSSEN University of Copenhagen, Denmark (Acta Orientalia, XXXVI) Dr. Kant sums up the earlier research and gives his own translation with copious notes on other authors' views. His work gives many original suggestions. PROF. J. VACEK Academia Praha, Czechoslovakia (Archiv Orientalini, XLII) Dr. Shashi Kant's monograph is useful in understanding not only the problems, but also because of the light it throws on the brilliant career of its author, Kharavela. It will be of much help to the students

Page #18
xvi The Hathigumpha Inscription and the Bhabru Edict of ancient Indian culture because of the various readings of both the records which have been given by the author together with a comparative palaeographical chart and an exhaustive bibliography. Dr. M.K. DHAVALIKAR Deccan College, Pune (Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, LIII) An account of the socio-political conditions in Kharavela's time, describing fairs and festivals, polygamy, four-fold army, navy and political alliances or confederacies has been carefully incorporated. Two maps showing (1) the extent of Kharavela's empire and his wide military expeditions and (2) Asoka Maurya's empire, and a bibliography have added no doubt to the value of the book. Dr. B.K. MAJUMDAR Calcutta University (Quarterly Review of Historical Studies, IX, 4) Patient and diligent decipherment and intelligent interpretation of a controversial record, may reveal the past in newer and newer perspectives. Dr. Shashi Kant's book under review is an example thereof. His present study of the epigraph helps understanding this very difficult historical document better than before. A fresh meaning and interpretation of the Bhabru edict, based on relevant Buddhist traditions, is also thought provoking. DR. DEVENDRA HANDA Punjab University, Chandigarh (Vishveshvaranand Indological Journal, X)

Page #19
Critique xvii Reproduction of original epigraphs and the palaeographic chart have greatly enhanced the usefulness of the work. Prof. M.C. CHOUDHURY Kurukshetra University (Praci-Jyoti, VIII) The book, written in lucid and simple style, is a very useful and helpful contribution to the literature on the subject. Dr. M.L. SHARMA Jaipur (Journal of the Rajasthan Institute of Historical Research, IX, 3) Dr. Shashi Kant's monograph is a lucidly argued and fairly presented attempt to set out the problems and to find the answers. Nothing is more probable than that Kharavela, a pious Jaina, should have dated the events in his epigraph in the Mahavira Era which it is believed, began on the day of the nirvana of Mahavira, October 15, 527 BC. The Tamil Sangam poems refer to the Nandas. There is an old tradition of the south's contacts with them, though these might be less intense than those with their successors, the Mauryas, of whom Bindusara is said to have invaded the region. The Hathigumpha epigraph is also important in Jaina theological history. Dr. Shashi Kant seems to break new ground in explaining its significance. The Bhabru edict mentions many Buddhist scriptures, the identification of which has caused some difficulties. Dr. Shashi Kant suggests many identifications of the sacred texts mentioned in his immaculate edition of the edict.

Page #20
xviii The Hathigumpha Inscription and the Bhabru Edict This book provides much of the critical apparatus needed for each scholar to judge for himself. Dr. Shashi Kant brings to his task a profound knowledge of Jaina and Buddhist religions, the keen sense of the epigraphical scholar, and a willingness to accept the latest archaeological findings. PROF. N.S. RAMASWAMI Madras University (Journal of Oriental Research, XXXVIII, Pt. I-IV) Although one may not agree with all that Dr. Shashi Kant says about the chronology of Kharavela, his interpretation of the .unique record is highly critical, refreshing and sparkles with originality and his reconstruction of the social, cultural and religious life from the data furnished by the epigraphy is indeed brilliant. His interpretation of the Bhabru Edict of Asoka also breaks new ground and provides a scintillating approach to a difficult and knotty epigraph. The book is indeed very well written and documented and marks a valuable contribution to Indological studies. DR. KRISHNA DEVA Archaeological Survey of India (Puratattva, No. 6) The new edition and translation of the Hathigumpha Inscription of Kharavela by Dr. Shashi Kant marks a great step forward in our understanding of this very difficult historical document. In many particulars the fresh interpretation presented here is an obvious improvement over those of previous students of the subject. The Bhabru Edict of Asoka is as important for the history

Page #21
Critique xix of Buddhism as the Kharavela's Hathigumpha Inscription is for that of Jainism and it arouses many questions as to the correct interpretation of the passages of scripture referred to and the relations of church and state under Asoka's regime. Here, too, Dr. Shashi Kant has produced new theories of great importance. DR. A.L. BASHAM The Australian National University, Canberra Dr. Shashi Kant has made an unbiased study of the two important inscriptions. His approach is new and critical. DR. RAM KUMAR DIKSHIT Lucknow University Dr. Shashi Kant has studied these two important inscriptions critically. The book will go a long way in dispelling several wrong conceptions pertaining to the subject. PROF. KRISHNA DUTT BAJPAI Dr. H.S. Gaur University, Sagar The approach is scholarly but Dr. Shashi Kant's deep understanding of the subject has made the contents intelligible even to the average reader. DR. GANGA RAM GARG Gurukul Kangri Vishvavidyalaya, Haridwar

Page #22
The Hathigumpha Inscription and the Bhabru Edict No better book has come to light so far on the subject. ITIHASA-MANISI DR. JYOTI PRASAD JAIN Eminent Jainologist XX The book for the first time tackles some of the very complicated problems of Indian history from every conceivable angle, and will serve as a guideline both for the post-graduate scholars and the advanced researchers in the field. DR. MAHESH KUMAR SHARAN Magadh University, Bodh Gaya Your book is a marvellous work, many a times giving new readings and fresh interpretations. DR. M.D. VASANTHARAJ Mysore University

Page #23
Abbreviations A.B.O.R.I. : A.S.I. AD Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute Archaeological Survey of India Christian Era Appendix Dr. B.M. Barua in I.H.Q., XIV Before Christ : : : App. circa Cunn. : e.g. ed. i edn. EJ. I.A. : : compare Sir Alexander Cunningham for example editor edition Epigraphia Indica and the following footnote Indian Antiquary Indian Archaeology - A Review that is Indian Historical Quarterly the same Introduction K.P. Jayaswal & R.D. Banerji in E.I., XX Journal of Bihar and Orissa Research Society L.A.R. : i.e. 1.H.Q. ibid. Intro. : : J.B.O.R.S.

Page #24
XX11 J.D.L. J.O.R. J.R.A.S. J.U.P.H.S. K.R.E. L lit. M.A.S.B. M.E. M.P.E. M.R.E. op. cit. opp. p./pp. pl. pt. R. R.E. ref. S S.B.E. S.I. sec. Skt. tr., trans. V. vide viz. vol. The Hathigumpha Inscription and the Bhabru Edict : Journal of the Deptt. of Letters Journal of the Oriental Research Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society : Journal of the U.P. Historical Society : Kalinga Rock Edict Line literally Memoirs of the Asiatic Society of Bengal Mahavira Era : : : : 1: : : Minor Pillar Edict Minor Rock Edict The work cited : : : : plate part River Rock Edict reference D.C. Sircar in S.I. : Sacred Books of the East : Select Inscriptions by D.C. Sircar section Sanskrit translation, translator : : : : : : : : : : opposite page/pages : verse see : namely Volume

Page #25
Transliteration Chart - a a a i I A i I If 1 u u u U e e ai ai 0 o au au / 5. Bo F gh - - 15' om C/ dh o how / 1 th ph ph d d b b dh dh bh bh p m m ra la v $ Sh ks

Page #26
List of Plates I. The Bhabru Edict of Asoka L 1-12 II. The Hathigumpha Inscription of Kharavela (first part) L 1-12 III. The Hathigumpha Inscription of Kharavela (first part) L 5-17 IV. The Hathigumpha Inscription of Kharavela (second part) L 1-12 V. The Hathigumpha Inscription of Kharavela (second part) L 5-17 VI. The Hathigumpha Inscription of Kharavela (third part) L 1-12 VII. The Hathigumpha Inscription of Kharavela (third part) L 5-17 VIII. The Hathigumpha Inscription of Kharavela (fourth part) L 1-12 (concluded) IX. The Hathigumpha Inscription of Kharavela (fourth part) L 5-17 (concluded) X. The Hathigumpha XI. The Hathigumpha and other caves on the Udayagiri XII. The remains of the apsidal structure overlying the Hathigumpha XIII. Sketch of the apsidal structure XIV. The Mancapuri and Svargapuri XV. Worship scene on a frieze in the Mancapuri XVI. The Patalapuri XVII. The Rani Gumpha XVIII. Friezes in the Rani Gumpha (a) Hunting scene (b) Merry-making scene

Page #27
SECTIONI THE HATHIGUMPHA INSCRIPTION OF KHARAVELA

Page #28

Page #29
1 The Inscription Introductory THE Hathigumpha Inscription of Mahameghavahana Kharavela has had a fascinating course since its discovery in AD 1825. It is not a royal panegyric merely; it is an epitome of history. Such chronological narration of events in a matter-of-fact manner is yet to be found on rock, pillar or stone of an ancient date. It has an order and a sequence not met so far in any other inscription of comparable date and that makes it much more valuable as a historical document. Moreover, it forms the only source of information about its author and subject. The inscriptions of Devanampriya Priyadarsi Asoka, definitely earlier than this epigraph of Kharavela, give very little information of political nature and read more like sermons incised on stone. More or less contemporary Nanaghat Inscription and the later Nasik Cave Inscriptions of the Satavahanas, as also the Girnar Inscription of Rudradaman, present little as a chronological record. They, as well as the later prasastis, or eulogistic inscriptions, as they are so aptly called, generally seem to make vague claims and assertions for their royal authors or patrons through praiseful epithets. In fact, such a historically potent epigraph is yet to be discovered elsewhere in the contemporary world. In India, the place which is assigned to Kalhana's Rajatarangini among ancient historical writings, is well deserved by this inscription in the realm of epigraphy and it betrays well-informed historical

Page #30
The Hathigumpha Inscription and the Bhabru Edict consciousness among the Indians more than two thousand years ago. To use the terminology of Kautilya, it is a Prajnapana Lekha (Public Notification) engraved for the purpose of narrating (akhyanam) the principal events of the life and reign of King Kharavela, and is endowed with all the six qualities of arthakrama (proper arrangement), sambandha (relevancy), paripurnata (completeness), madhuryam (sweetness), audaryam (dignity) and spastatvam (lucidity), that make a good composition. Decipherment No wonder therefore that this inscription has been engaging the attention of the Indologists and claiming their best labours for the last nearly one-and-a-half century. The story of its decipherment is on that account no less fascinating. It was first noticed by Stirling in AD 1825 who gave an account of it in the Asiatic Researches, XV (pp. 313ff.), and was first published by Prinsep from an eye-copy prepared by Kittoe in 1837, in the Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal, VI (pp. 1075-91, plate LVIII). A tracing of the inscription was published by Cunningham in the Corpus Inscriptionum Indicarum, I (pl. XVIII, pp. 27f, 98-101, 132ff.), in 1877, and a version of it, by Raja Rajendra Lala Mitra in the Antiquities of Orissa, II (pp. 16 ff.), in 1880. The same year a cast was also taken to the Indian Museum, Calcutta. It was, however, only in 1885 that the first reliable version was given by Dr. Bhagwan Lal Indraji in the Actes du Sixieme Congres International des Orientalistes (pt. III, sec. 2, pp. 15277). He also made out the name as Kharavela. Buhler suggested certain corrections in 1895 and 1898. The first inked impression was taken in 1906 by Dr. T. Bloch and was sent to Prof. Keilhorn 1. Arthasastra, X (trans. R. Shamasastry, fourth edn., pp. 71-75). 2. "Origin of Indian Brahmi Alphabet, Indian Studies, No. III, p. 13.

Page #31
The Inscription who passed it on to Dr. J.F. Fleet. In 1910 Fleet published certain corrections in Line 161 and Luders also published a summary.2 In 1913 Prof. R.D. Banerji examined certain portions and in 1917 two inked impressions were again taken, one of which was published in the Journal of Bihar and Orissa Research Society, III, 4 (pl. I), and the other was sent to Dr. F.W. Thomas. Dr. K.P. Jayaswal discussed and read it on the basis of that impression in J.B.O.R.S., III, 4 (pp. 425ff.), and the next year he published a revised text of his reading after checking it from the rock itself.4 In 1919 Jayaswal and Banerji examined the inscription on the spot and H. Panday of the Archaeological Survey Department prepared a cast of which two paper impressions were also taken. "It is as successful a copy as the present condition of the original allowed it to be." It was published in 1927 in J.B.O.R.S., XIII. The cast and the paper impressions are preserved in the Patna Museum. In 1924, Jayaswal and Banerji went over the corrections and in 1927 and 1928 the former published the results of his further studies.5 In 1929 Dr. B.M. Barua also edited this inscription at No. 1 in his Old Brahmi Inscriptions in the Udayagiri and Khandagiri Caves. Sten Konow,6 Thomas, Muni Jina Vijaya and R.P. Chanda also added some useful information. A somewhat definitive stage in decipherment was marked by a fuller discussion of its palaeography by Banerji in the Memoirs of the Asiatic Society of Bengal, X (pp. 133ff.), as also 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. J.R.A.S, 1910, pp. 242ff, 824ff. E.I., X, App., pp. 160-61 (No. 1345). Banerji's Note is on pp. 486ff. therein. J.B.O.R.S., IV, pp. 364ff. J.B.O.R.S., XIII, pp. 221ff. ; XIV, pp. 150ff. Acta Orientalia, I, pp. 12ff. J.R.A.S., 1922, pp. 83-84. Quoted in E.1., XX; also his letter in Anekanta, 1, 6-7, p. 351. I.H.Q., 1929, p. 395f., 595.

Page #32
The Hathigumpha Inscription and the Bhabru Edict by a joint edition of the text by Jayaswal and Banerji in 192930 in the Epigraphia Indica, XX (pp. 71-89, No. 7). The latter also on that basis reconstructed the history of Kharavela in his History of Orissa, I (pp. 71-92). Barua did not agree with them and so he published his revised edition in 1938 in the Indian Historical Quarterly, XIV, 3 (pp. 459-85). In 1942 Dr. D.C. Sircar published his readings and annotations in the Select Inscriptions, I (pp. 206-13, No. 91). Perhaps no other single epigraph has been the subject of so much research and controversy. And yet it leaves much to be desired. Site Some three miles to the north and north-east of Bhubaneshwar in the Puri district of Orissa is situated a low range of hills called the Khandagiri and Udayagiri. These hills preserve some of the early specimens of rock-cut architecture in eastern India. The excavations are known in the local parlance as the gumpha, or cave. The two-storeyed Rani Gumpha on the Udayagiri represents the Orissan rock-cut cave architecture at its best.? To the west of it is the Bada Hathigumpha (Big Elephant Cave), "a natural cavern, very little improved and enlarged by art", on the southern face of the Udayagiri. On the overhanging brow of this Hathigumpha is engraved the precious record of the doings of King Kharavela of Kalinga, 1. Among further notable contributions may be added : Sircar in The History and Culture of the Indian People, II, pp. 211ff; Balchandra Jain's Kalinga-Cakravarti (in Hindi); Dr. N.K. Sahu's Kharavela, and also in A History of Orissa, pp. 327-30; Jagannath in A Comprehensive History of India, II, pp. 111-15; Dr. L.N. Sahu - Udisa mein Jaina Dharma (Hindi tr.), pp. 39-73; and Dr. J.P. Jain - Bharatiya Itihasa: Eka Dysti (in Hindi), pp. 180-90. For fuller account, see Percy Brown - Indian Architecture (Buddhist and Hindu Periods), (fourth edn., 1959), pp. 28-30. There are two Hathigumphas on the same hill. To distinguish between the two, one is called Chota (Small) Hathigumph, and the other, merely Hathigumpha or Bada (Big) Hathigumpha. a co

Page #33
The Inscription otherwise little known to history, in seventeen lines covering an area 15 feet 1 inch in length and 5 feet 6 inches in height. "The inscription begins on the southern face and is continued up to a place where the stone has actually become the roof of the cave. The last eight or nine lines occur on a sloping surface where it is difficult either to read or copy them. Below the inscription the walls of the natural cavern have been chiselled straight and at places are as beautifully polished as those of the Barabar caves. Near the floor there are sundry rock-cut partitions which do not appear to have been regular walls as they do not go up to the roof. In the dressed and polished portion of the side or the wall of the cave there are a number of later inscriptions (of about the tenth or eleventh century AD)' many of which contain proper names which are not of any historical interest. They prove, however, that the cave was visited by pilgrims up to the tenth century AD and therefore it must have been considered some sort of a sacred shrine. The bed of the cave is full of sand in front and unless it is excavated its original form cannot be determined. The Hathigumpha stands at right angles to Svargapuri and Mancapuri on its left and the Sarpa cave on its right. There are several small and large excavations on the top of the boulder which forms the roof of the cave."2 Although the entire record appears to have been very carefully inscribed, it has suffered greatly from Nature's fury. The record as it is now, is very much weather-beaten and shows signs of progressive natural decay. Three main problems confronting the epigraphists in deciphering it are: firstly, the different forms of a few letters, secondly, the misleading chiselmarks, and thirdly, the changes wrought by natural decay and weather conditions. As early as 1917 it was observed that "the rock was roughly dressed on the right-hand side. The chiselmarks of the dressing are misleading; they tend to produce 1. See, Annual Report of Achaeological Survey of India, 1922-23, p. 130. Jayaswal and Banerji (E.I., XX, p. 72). 2.

Page #34
The Hathigumpha Inscription and the Bhabru Edict misreadings. These long and irregular marks left by the original dressing, are not the only pitfalls. Rain-water which trickles down the roof of the cave has cut into the letters and produced a few letter-like marks. Natural decay produced by time has given misleading turns to numerous letters. Even hornets like to take liberty with the record of the Emperor Kharavela with perfect impunity and have added a few irregular marks on it." On the basis of the plates published in J.B.O.R.S., III and XIII, and I.H.Q., XIV,2 the inscription may be read as follows. Variants as well as my reasons for accepting a particular reading or restoration are given in the notes below. Punctuation marks have been indicated within brackets. The particles and characters which are not quite distinct but are most probably there, have also been shown within brackets. Components of compound words have been separated by hyphens where feasible. Text Line 1 Namo Arahamtanam (.) Namo sava-Sidhanam (..) 1. J.B.O.R.S., III, 4, p. 430. B.V. Nath, Superintendent of Archaeology and Museums, Orissa, had informed that an inpression was also taken by Dr. B. Ch. Chhabra in 1954. It has not been published. It may also be added that due to the progressive decay of the original the later impressions are likely to miss some characters, hence not much help can be derived from them. (Below, J stands for Jayaswal and Banerji in E.I., B for Barua in I.H.Q., and S for Sircar in S.I.) J - Ar(i)hamtanam B - Araha(m)tanam Since the medial i is doubtful, it would be better to read Arahamtanam. 3.

Page #35
The Inscription 9 Airena' Maharajena Mahameghavahanena? Cetirajava(m)sa-vadhanena Pasatha-subhalakhanena4 Caturamta-luthana-guna-upetenas Kalimgadhipatina-Siri-Kharavelena Line 2 pamdarasa-vasani siri-kadara-sarira-vata kidita Kumara-kidika (.) Tato Lekha-rupa-ganana-vavaharavidhi-visaradena Sava-vijavadatena nava-vasani Yovaraja(m) pasasitame (.) Sampuna-catuvisati-vaso tadani vadhamana-sesa-yovanabhivijayo? tatiye -- Line 3 Kalimga-rajavamse-purisayuge Maharajabhisecanam8 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. J & B - Airena S- Airena Since throughout the inscription na, and not na, has been used in the third case, it should be Airena. J & B - Mahameghavahanena S-Mahameghavahanena J - vasa B -- va(m)sa Vasa gives no sense here as it has been used in the meaning of 'year' throughout the inscription. J -- lakhanena B - lakha(n)ena J - luthita-gun-opahitena B - luthana-guna-upetena S-Lutha(na)-guna-upitena Chanda was the first to make out guna-upetena correctly. J - pasasitam B -- va sasitam, or, pasasitam Va sasitam gives no meaning. J-vadhamana-sesayo Ven-abhivijayo B -- vadha(mana) (sesa)yovanabhivijayo S.-vadhamanasesayovenabhivijayo J - Maharajabhisecanam B - Maharajabhisecanam 6. 7. 8.

Page #36
10 The Hathigumpha Inscription and the Bhabru Edict papunati (.) Abhisitamato ca padhame vase vatavihata' gopura-pakara-nivesanam patisamkharayati Kalimganagari-Khibiramo sitala-tadaga-padiyo ca bamdhapayati savayana-patisamthapanam ca Line 4 karayati panatisahi-sata-sahasehi (,) pakatiyo ca ramjayati (.) Dutiye ca vase acitayita Satakamnimo pacima-disam haya-gaja-nara-radha-bahulamdamdam pathapayati Kamhabemna6-gataya ca senaya vitasiti? Asika-nagaram (.) Tatiye puna vase Line 5 Gamdhava-veda-budho dapa-nata-gita-vadita samdamsanahio usava-samaja-karapanahi ca 1. 2. 5. J - vata-vihita - B-vata-vihata - J - Kalimga-nagari-Khibira -- - Kalimga-nagari-Khi(b)ira(m), or, Khi(pira(m), (,) S- Kalimganagari Khibi(ram) J - isi-tala - B -- sitalaJ - Satakarnim B - Satakanim J - pathapayati - pathapayati J - Kanha-bemna - B - Kanhabernam J-- vitasitam B-vitasiti The context also warrants a finite verb. J -- M(u)sika-nagaram B - Asikanagaram The character is more clearly a than mu. J-samdamsanahi B - samdasanahi 7. 8. 9.

Page #37
11 The Inscription kidapayatil nagarim (.) Tatha cavuthe vase Vijadharadhivasam ahata-puva-Kalimga-puvaraja n(i)v(e)s(i)t(i)2 - vitadha-makuta-sabila(dhi)te ca* nikhita-chata Line 6 bhimgare hita-ratana-sapateye sava-Rathika-Bhojake pade vamdapayati (.) Pamcame ca danio vase Namdaraja-tivasasata-oghatitam Tanasuliyavata 1. 2. 3. J - ca kidapayati B- kidapayati Ca is also necessary to connect the two padas (compound words). J - (nivesitam) B-n(ivesitam) Indraji - namamsitam The letters na va sa ta are sufficiently clear. Since a finite verb is needed to make the meaning of the passage sensible, these letters seem to form nivesiti. Most probably there is nothing to read between nivesiti and vitadha. This space was either left out by the scribe due to roughness of the rock or some omission was made by him which necessitated the rubbing of the rock. J-- sabilam(dhi)te B - (sabipravaji)te The characters sa bi la te are legible enough. Between la and te is a character which is more likely dhi. They seem to form sabiladhite which can mean 'caparisoned horse'. Horse was also considered to be an important insignia of royalty. It has, therefore, been bracketted with makuta (crown). This is the last component of the word beginning with vitadha. As in the following two words nikhita and hita govern the remaining components, here vitadha governs makuta and sabiladhite. J reads ca while B does not. It is distinct, as well as necessary for connecting the two principal clauses here. J - ca dani B-cedani 5.

Page #38
12 The Hathigumpha Inscription and the Bhabru Edict panadim Nagaram pavesayati sa ....? (.) Abhisito ca. ...? rajaseyamo samdasayamto sava-kara-vana4. Line 7 anugaha-anekani sata-sahasani visajati pora janapadam (.) Satame ca vase pasasato Vajiragharavati-ghusita-gharini s(a) matuku-pada pumn(o)...ta pa...?(.) Athame ca vase mahata-senaya 1. 2. 3. J - pavesa(ya)ti (1) So...... B - pavesa(yati) so....... (.) Kharavela has given the cost of all of his public works. The mutilated portion ought to contain the cost incurred on the instant work. The sentence would naturally end after mutilation. Since only the initial character is distinct, it is not possible to restore the mutilation and make out the expenses. J- ......bhisito ca B - Abhisito (ca).... Barua has correctly suggested that the mutilation contained chathe vase. J - Rajas(u)ya(m) B & Indraji - rajaseyam The following saidasayamto determines the choice. J-- vanan B -- vana - J - Poram Janapadam B - pora-janapadam J-Satamam ca vasam B - Satame ca vase All the regnal years in this inscription are given in the form given by Barua. There is no reason for making a departure from the usual practice here. J - pasasato Vajiraghara-vati-ghusita-gharini sa matukapadapumne.......(Ku)ma.....) B - (a)sasata-vajiraghara-Khatiya-sata-ghatani Samataka-padasarna samtipada??....(.) Prinsep & Cunningham - savata-khadapana narapa savitaka 4. 5. 6. 7.

Page #39
13 The Inscription (apati)hata-(bhi)ti-Goradhagirim Line 8 ghatapayita Rajagaha-napa(n) pidapayatio (.) Etinam ca kammapadana-panamdenasambita-senavahane vipamu(m)citu Madhuram apayato Yamana padajhana-sammatipada.) The characters are not so obliterated as to permit such different readings. Only vati-ghusita can be alternately read as Khatiy(a)-Sat(i) and by that the meaning retains sense. 1. In the mutilated portion beyond pumno, two letters are fairly distinct. They are ta and pa. The context suggests restoration punn(odaya)ta pa punati). J-sen(a). ...Goradhagirim B- senaya (apati)hata-(bhiti-Goradhagirim J - Rajagaharm upapidapayati B- Rajagaha(m) upapidapayati Indraji - Rajagaha-napam pidapayati Prinsep ---- Rajagabham upapidapayati Cunningham - Rajagambhu upapidapayati Konow also read napa which is clear enough. J --- Etin(a) B-etinam J - sa(m)nadena B - panadena J - samb(i)ta -- B- pabamta - Prinsep - pambata 4. 5.

Page #40
14 The Hathigumpha Inscription and the Bhabru Edict (nadim)'...? (.) Palavabhara3 Line 9 kaparukhao haya-gaja-radha-saha yamte sava gharavas(i)-puji. - Th(u). --.. ya Sava-gahanam ca 1. J - Yavana-raj(a) D(i)mi(ta)... B - Yavana-raja? mi??sa?(a)mo, Since Konow made out Dimita the readings of this passage have been generally based on the presumption that it contains a reference to Demetrius, the Greek King. This presumption is, however, not well founded. What has hitherto been supposed to read Yavanaraja, actually reads Yamananadim. The letters beyond it are indistinct. Barua also thought that Dimita could not be definitely made out. Yamana-nadim also fits more appropriately in the context. The verb apayato definitely suggests a geographical point and discounts the possibility of a reference to any person. J - ... yachati. ... B-dati???....sava(ra)-(ra)jana ca...ga(cha)ti The passage is very badly mutilated and it is difficult to make out any reading. It should contain words to indicate the direction of the Yamuna river from Kalinga or to indicate that the river lay in the Madhya-desa or something else to qualify it. Thereafter there may also be a reference to Kharavela's marching in procession attended by the satellite kings, as is suggested by the reading made out by Barua - savara-rajana ca .... gachati. This reading is, however, not free from doubt and can be taken as only a probable. J - palava. .. B - palavabhara J - kapa-rukhe B - kapa-rukha - J - sava-gharavasa-parivasane aginathiya B - sava-gharavasa-pa???? ya Prinsep - sava-gharavasapa Cunn. - sava-gharavasaya-anatikagavaya Indraji -- sava-gharavasadham The letters after gharavasa are not quite legible. The syallables pu ji tha and ya can alone be read with some certainty. The space is generally taken to contain 6 to 11 letters. 3.

Page #41
15 The Inscription karayitum Bamananam jatim pariharam dadati? (,) Arahata ca. ..2 (.). ... suvijaya Line 10 te ubhaya-Praci-tate raja-nivasam4 Mahavijaya It is now known that an important Jain Stupa existed in Mathura in the few centuries preceding the Christian era. A gateway was added to it in the second century Bc. By the beginning of the second century AD people started referring to it as 'deva-nirmite' ('made by gods") due to its long antiquity. It is quite likely that Kharavela worshipped at this Stupa during his visit to Mathura and also made a note of it in his inscription. The passage may be restored as follows: sava-gharavasi-pujita-Thupa-pujaya i.e., 'to worship the stupa worshipped by all the house-holders'. J - Bamhananam jatim pariharam dadati B -- bramhananam ja(y)a-pariharam dadati The reading mha is very doubtful. The character is more clearly ma. J - Arahato (va)... B . Arahata .....(.) Ca can be read after Arahata. The mutilated portion should supply a verb to govern Arahata. The context warrants the following restoration: Arhata ca pujati (.) i.e., 'and worships the Arahat. For this purpose obviously he should have gone to the stupa. Here also ends the record of the 8th year. J- (gi)ya(to) B - .... va suvijaya The event of making successful expedition as far as the Yamuna should have been of great significance for Kharavela and therefore he called it suvijaya. The mutilated portion before suvijaya should have contained the words: Navame ca vase. Kharavela has recorded the events year-wise and a reference to year is necessary here. J- ... k.i. mana(ti)raja-samnivasam Mahavijayam pasadan B-te ubhaya-Praci-tate(raja)nivasam Mahavijaya-pasadam (Praci-tate may also be read as Puti-tate or Puri tate.) River Prachi still flows in that region. Therefore the reading Praci can be better relied upon. 3. 4.

Page #42
16 The Hathigumpha Inscription and the Bhabru Edict pasadam karayati athatisaya-sata-sahasehi ( .) Dasame ca vase Damda-samdhi-sa(ma)mayo1 Bharadavasa-pathanam mah(i)-jayanam .... karapayati_ (.)....p(a)yatanam maniratanani-saha yatio: Line 11 - (mamdam) ca Ava-raja-nivesitama Pithudam gadabhanagalena kasayati ( , ) janapada-bhavanam? 1. J-- damda-samdhi-sa(mayo) B-dada-ni?dhita(bhisa)mayo J - mah(i)-jayanam. . karapayati B - ?hi..?yanam. . . .karapayati The sentence ends at karapayati. The mutilated portion before karapayati should have contained some word to mean "preparations' which were caused to be made by Kharavela. J- .... payatanam ca B- ????? tanam The mutilated portion before payatanam should have contained Ekadasame ca vase. Ca after payatanam is obscure as well as redundant. J - upalabhate B - saha-yati J-(mamdam) ca Ava-raja-nivesitam B - ?? puvaraja-nivesitam The initial part of Lines 11-17 has been obliterated. That much space in Lines 1-10 contains 10-12 letters. The best that can now be done to restore the lost text is to make a suggestion in keeping with the context and the size of the space. The record of the second year seems to indicate Kharavela's style of describing his expeditions with reference to cardinal points in relation to his dominions. If so, the obliteration here could have contained dakhina disam, to mean "in the southern direction". The not-so-distinct characters after obliteration strongly suggest mamdam, which also seems to fit in the context. J - Pithumdam gadabha-namgalena kasayati B -- Pithuda gadabha Nagale nekasayati J-janasa dabhavanam (janapada-bhavanam?) B -- janapada-bhavanam

Page #43
The Inscription 17 ca terasavasa-sata-katam bhimdati Tamira-dahasamghatam (.) Barasame ca vase . . . . sa(ha)sehi vitasayato? Utarapadha-rajano Line 123 Magadhanam ca vipulam bhayam janeto hathasam Gamgaya4 payayati (,) Magadha(m) ca rajanam Baha(sa)timitam pade vamdapayati (,) Namdarajanitam ca Kalimga-Jinam samnives(e)...5(,)... (gaha)rata(na)n(i) padiharehi Amga-Magadha-vasum ca neyatie (.) J- terasa vasa-satikam abhi(m)dati T(r)amiradesa-samghatam B-terasa vasa sata-katam bhidati tamiradaha-samghatam Konow -- terasavasa-sata-kata bh(i)dati -- Indraji -- - Tamara-deha samghatam J-.... hasa ke (saha)-sehi vitasayati B-?s(i)ka(nam) sa(ha)-sehi vitasayamto (or, vitasayato) The only legible characters are sahasehi vitasayato. The mutilated portion before that seems to indicate the agency through which Kharavela struck terror into the hearts of the kings of Uttarapatha. It could be some feudatory tribe or his own army consisting of thousands of brave warriors. Since he was himself marching at the head of the army and there is also the word sahasehi, the latter seems to be more probable. Restoration beyond this suggestion is not feasible. The obliteration could have contained words to mean "while going northwards". J-hathi Sugamgiya(m) B & Cunn. -- hathasam Gamgaya Prinsep -- hathasam Gamgasa J - Namda raja-nitam ca Ka(li)mga-Jinam samnive(sa)... B - Nadaraja-jita-Kalimga-jana-sam(n)i(ve)sam...?(sasa)ti Samnivesa should be more correctly read as samnivese. The mutilated portion thereafter should contain the verb pujayati. The composition suggests this restoration. J - ...(gaha)-rata(na)na(m) padiharehi Amga-Magadha-vasum ca neyati 4. 6.

Page #44
18 The Hathigumpha Inscription and the Bhabru Edict Line 13 - k(e)tu(m) jathara-lakhila-(go)purani2-siharani nivesayati sata-visikanam pariharehi? (.) Abhutamachariyam ca hathi-nava-nitam pariharatio .... haya-hathi-ratana-manikos Pamda-raja (cedani anekani) muta-mani-ratanani aharapayati idha satasa....? 2. 3. 4. B -- Kitava-naya-nipu(n)ehi Aga-Magadha-vasum neyati Indraji - gaha-ratana-pariharehi The mutilated portion before gaha should contain kosata, meaning 'from the Royal Treasury'. The description of the campaign ends in the preceeding line. The mutilation before ketu should contain words to mean "On returning home'. The following activities relate to the capital. J - Katu(m) jathara-1(i)khila barani B - tu(m)ja(tha)ra-lakhila-(go)purani J-sata-visikanam (pa)riharehi B-sata-visikana(m) pariharena J - hathi-niva(sa)-parisaram (earlier reading - hathi-navana) B-hathi-navatam pariharati Prinsep - hathi-navana Cunn. - hathi-navena J - .... haya-hathi-ratana-(manikam) B - timha-haya-hathi-ratana-maniko The characters before haya are indistinct. The context suggests that the mutilation should supply either a commodity which Kharavela should have seized along with horses, etc., enumerated thereafter or an adverb modifying the verb pariharati to mean'with little difficulty' or 'with great difficulty'. J-C=edani anekani B - (abharanam) J - sat(a).... B -sata-sa.... (restored as sata-sahasani) The restoration of Barua is acceptable. 5.

Page #45
The Inscription Line 14-sino1 vasikaroti (.) Terasame ca vase supavata-Vijayacake-Kumari-pavate Arahate2 Pakhina-samsitehi Kaya-nisidiyay(a)3 yapujavakehi Raja-bhatin(a) Cinavatan (a) Vasa-sitan(a)5 Pujanurata -uvasagaKharavela-sirina Jiva-deha-(sirita) parikhata? (.) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Report of the campaign against the Pandya King continues. The mutilation should have at least contained pamda janpadava. It can be restored as Pamda-janapada-vasino, i.e., 'the people of the Pandya country'. J - arahayate Barahate J-kaya-nisidiyaya B-kayya-nisidiyaya Jyapa-navakehi (earlier reading-yapujavakehi) Byapujavakehi, or, yapuravakehi Prinsep-yapuhavakehi Cunn. yapujakehi 19 J-raja-bhitini cina-vatani vas(a)-s(i)tani Braja-bhitini cina-vatani vasasitani The endings of these three words are determined by the following sirina. They are the epithets of Kharavela. J- puj-anurata B -- pujaya-rata -- J-jiva-deha-(siri)ka parikhita B-jiva-deha-??ka.... ta (restored as-jiva-deha-sayika-parikhata)

Page #46
20 The Hathigumpha Inscription and the Bhabru Edict Line 15-sukata2-samana-suvihitanam ca sava-disanam3 naninam tapasi-isinam samghayanam1 Arahatanisidiya samipe pabhare varakara-samuthapitahi aneka-yojanahitahi .... silahi Simhapatha-raniSimdhulaya nisayani (.) Line 166 patalake catare ca veduriya-gabhe-thabhe 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. The missing portion before sukata should contain words to mean 'On being invited by King Sri Kharavela'. It might be: Nimamtitena (or, ahutena) raja-Siri-Kharavelena. Jsukat(a) B-? sakata J & B Sircar sata-disanam sava-disanam J-nan(i)nam tapas(i)-is(i) nam samghayanam B-na?nam (sama)pasi(nam) bhi??-samgh(i)yana(m) J pa si.o.... silahi Simhapatha-rani-Si(m) dhulaya nisayani - B pakva-sisehi (or, panata-sisehi) sata-(sahasa)hi silahi sipajathabha-(ni)vadha-sayana(sa)nam va Prinsep -(sapapatha)-dhara-si dhasaya The reading of J from silahi to nisayani is highly probable and I accept it as it is also supported by extraneous evidence. The mutilated portion between yojanahitahi and silahi should supply the verb to mean 'assemble'. It may also contain words to show the number of the monks assembled. Though it is not free from doubt, panatisatehi can be made out after yojanahitahi. It would mean '3500' and may well indicate the total number of monks who assembled. The mutilation before patalake should have contained words to mean 'In front of the the Assembly Hall'. J-Patalako caturo B-patalake catare Indraji & Cunn. -- patalake - J veduriya-gabhe-thambhe B-veduriya-gabhe-thabhe

Page #47
21 The Inscription patithapayati (,) panatariya-satha-sata-(va)sehi? mukhiya-kala-vochinam ca coyatha-Amgan samtikamo turiyam upadayati (.) Khema-raja sa vadha-raja4 sa bhikhu-rajas dhama-raja pasamto sunamto anubhavamto Kalanani (.). 2. 3. It appears to be the traditional Manastambha (Pride-melting Pillar) which was set up in front of the Samavasarana (Preaching Hall) of a Jain Tirthankara. Such pillars are set up in front of Jain temples, particularly in sacred places. Since it was an assembly of monks, it could be appropriately set up in front of the place of assembly. This clue helps restoration before patalake. J - panatariya sata-sahase(hi) B -- panatariya-(sata-sahasehi) The characters other than va are fairly readable. There is a little space between ta and se, and va can be restored. J - Muriya-Kala-vochinam B ---(ma) khiya-kala-vochine Cunn. - . . . . ya-kala Indraji -- Muriya-kala J - coyath(i) Amga-satikam B - coyatha-amge satikam Prinsep -- coyatha agi satika Cunn. --- coyatha age satika Indraji - coyatha age satiku J - Vadha-raja B --vadha-raja J-Bhikhu-raja B- bhikhu-raja sa (,) J - pasamt(o) sunat(o) anubhavat(o) B - pasamto sunato anubhavamto M in sunamto is determined by the other two words immediately preceding and following it. 4.

Page #48
22 The Hathigumpha Inscription and the Bhabru Edict Line 17 - Guna-visesa-kusalo Sava-pasamda-pujako Sava devayatana-samkharakarako? Apatihata-cakavahana-balo3 Caka-dharo Guta-cako4 Pavata-cako Rajasi-vamsa-kula-vinisito5 Mahavijayo RajaKharavela-Siri (.) The style of the epigraph strongly suggests that this mutilation should have contained the date of this record. It is the beginning of the concluding line and what follows the mutilation is the name of the king with his many epithets, apparently with no other purpose except as if he had put his signatures at the end of the notification. Kharavela is very particular in giving dates. He has noted the events of his reign regnal-year-wise. He has also given the dates of some of the major historical events like the founding of the Tamila Confederacy, the opening of the Tanasuliyavata Canal and the decline of the Principal Scripture. He could certainly not leave his record incomplete by omitting the date of its recording. This date should have been in the same era in which he has given the dates of other major historical events. But unfortunately we cannot make out the recorded date due to the vagaries of Nature. The space could have contained 12-13 syllables which could make Panatariya-panatisata-vasa', to mean the year 355' in M.E. which, as we shall see below, can be deduced as the date of this epigraph. J - sava-de(v-aya)tana-samkharakarako B - sava-devayatana sa(m)karakarako J ---(a)patihata-caki-vahini-balo B --- apatihata-caka-vahana-balo J- Caka-dhura-guta-cako B - Caka-dharo guta-cako J--rajasi-Vasu-kula-viniirito B - rajisi-vamsa-kula-vini(sr)ito, or, vini(g)ito In vinisito the character is more clearly si than anything else. It is neither sri nor gi. 2. 4.

Page #49
The Inscription Translation On the basis of the above reading and proposed restorations it should be rendered into English as follows.* The restorations have been shown within ( ) and the explanatories within ( ). "Obeisance to the Arahamtas! Obeisance to all the Siddhas!! By the Hon'ble King, Mahameghavahana, His Majesty Kharavela, the Lord of Kalinga, the Increaser of Ceti Royal House, (the Owner of) glorifying auspicious marks, (and) the Possessor of virtues (the fame of which has) reached the farthest limits of the four quarters, were played for fifteen years, with a Jayaswal and Banerji (E.I., XX, pp. 86-89) and Barua (I.H.Q., XIV, 3, pp. 470--82) give different renderings. Below, J stands for Jayaswal & Banerji, and B for Barua. J - Ll Salutation to the Arhats (Arihats lit. 'Conquerors of Enemies', i.e., Jinas). Salutation to all the Siddhas. By illustrious Kharavela, the Aira (Aila), the Great King, the descendant of Mahameghavahana, the increaser (of the glory) of the Ceti (Cedi) dynasty, (endowed) with excellent and auspicious marks and features, possessed of virtues which have reached (the ends of) four quarters, overlord of Kalinga, L2 for fifteen years, with a body ruddy and handsome were played youthsome sports; after that (by him who) had mastered (royal) correspondence, currency, finance, civil and religious laws (and) who had become wellversed in all (branches of learning, for nine years (the office of) Yuvaraja (heir-apparent) was administered. Having completed the twenty-fourth B "Obeisance to Arhats, the Exalted Ones, obeisance to all Siddhas, the Perfect Saints. By His Graceful Majesty Kharavela, the great Aira king, the Sovereign lord of Kalinga, the scion of the Mahamegha family, the increaser of the

Page #50
24 The Hathigumpha Inscription and the Bhabru Edict body handsome and tawny in colour, sports (worthy of) Prince. Thereafter by the Adept in Correspondence, Currency, Accountancy, State Regulations and Laws, (and) the Clearheaded in all Sciences, (the kingdom) was administered for nine years as Crown Prince. Then on completing the twenty-fourth year, to make the remainder of his youth prosperous by conquests, being the third in descent in the Royal House of Kalinga, (he) gets anointed as Great King. And, having been anointed, in the first year (of his reign), (he) causes in the capital of Kalinga, (verily) the Abode of the Brave, the gates, ramparts and buildings, which had been year, at that time, (he) who had been prosperous (vardhamana) since his infancy (?) and who (was destined) to have wide conquests as those of Vena, L3 then in the state of manhood, obtains the imperial (maharajya) coronation in the third dynasty of Kalinga. Ceti Royal House, who is possessed of the noble and auspicious marks, who is gifted with the attributes (of one capable) of subduing the earth extending as far as the four seas, were played for fifteen years the sports befitting the young age of the prince with a handsome body of 'fair brown complexion'. Thereafter, for nine years, just the office of a Crown Prince was administered by (His Royal Highness) who was well-versed in (matters relating to) writing, coinage, accounting, procedure, and approved principle of action, whose self was purified by proficiency in all (Indian) polite learning'. Having then completed twenty-four years, he who, as he waxed great, passed the rest of his manhood in making notable conquests, gained the high state implied by the coronation of a great king in the third royal dynasty of Kalinga, in regular linear succession. And as soon as he was anointed, in the very first year, (His Majesty) caused the Kalinga-city Khibira in which the gates, walls and residential houses were damaged by stormy wind, to be repaired, and caused the

Page #51
25 The Inscription damaged by storm, to be repaired, and the embankments of the cool reservoir to be strengthened, and all the parks to be renovated, by (spending) thirty-five hundred thousands; and (he) makes (his) subjects happy. And in the second year (of his reign), paying no heed to (King) Satakarni (he) sends in the western direction a multitudinous army (consisting of) cavalry, elephants, infantry and chariots, and with his army having reached the (river) Krsnavena, strikes terror into the capital of the Asikas. Again, in the third year (of his reign), the Master of the Science of Music makes (the citizens of) the capital enjoy themselves by causing the performance of folk dances, (classical) dances, songs and instrumental music, and the celebration of festivals and fairs. Likewise, in the fourth year (of his reign), (he) dwells in the Dwellings of the Vidyadharas (which) no former king of Kalinga had ever scathed, and makes all the Rathikas and Bhojakas (whose) crown and caparisoned horse have been dashed to L4 As soon as he is anointed, in the first (regnal) year (he) causes repairs of the gates, the walls and the buildings (of the city), (which had been) damaged by storm; in the city of Kalinga (he) causes the erection of the embankments of the lake (called after) Khibira Rsi, (and) of (other) tanks and cisterns, (also) the restoration of all the gardens (he) causes to be done at the cost of thirty-five hundred thousands, and, (he) gratifies the People. And in the second year (he), disregarding Satakamni, despatches to the western regions an army strong in cavalry, elephants, infantry (nara) and chariots (ratha) and by that army having reached the Kanhaberna, (he) throws the city of the Musikas into consternation. Again in the third year, embankments of the cool tanks to be made and also) caused the work of restoration of all the gardens to be done at the cost of thirty-five hundred thousand (pieces of the standard coin), and thereby) pleased the subjects. B

Page #52
26 The Hathigumpha Inscription and the Bhabru Edict pieces, umbrella and golden pitcher have been removed and jewels and fortune have been seized, to bow down at (his) feet. And, in the fifth bountiful year (of his reign), (he) causes the Tanasuliyavata Canal (which was) opened out by the Nanda king in the year 103, to be brought into the capital [by spending ... thousands). And, having been anointed (for six years), to display (his) royal opulence (he) bestows all taxes, grants and many (other) favours (worth) hundreds and thousands upon the townsmen and villagers. J-L 5 (he) versed in the science of the Gandharvas (i.e., music), entertains the capital with the exhibition of dapa, dancing, singing and instrumental music and by causing to be held festivities and assemblies (samajas); similarly in the fourth year, 'the Abode of Vidyadharas' built by the former Kalinga king(s), which had not been damaged before .... with their coronets rendered meaningless, with their helmets(?) (bilma) cut in twain (?), and with their umbrellas and L6 bhingaras cast away, deprived of their jewels (i.e., ratana, Skt. ratna, precious objects) all the Rathikas and Bhojakas (he) causes to bow down at his feet. Now in the fifth year he brings into the capital from the road of Tanasuliya the canal excavated in the year one-hundred-and-three of B And in the second year, not (at all) bringing Satakarni into (his) thought, (His Majesty) caused a multitudinous army (consisting of) horses, elephants, foot-men and chariots to march in a western direction, and with the aid of the army that reached (the bank of) the Krsnavena (river), struck terror into the city of Asika (Musika?). Again, in the third year, (His Majesty) who was a master of the science of music -- the Gandharva lore, caused the capital to be entertained by the display of combats, dancing, singing and instrumental music, and (no less) by the arrangements made for festivities and convivial gatherings. Likewise, in the fourth year, (His Majesty caused to be done his duty to) the home of the Vidyadharas, founded by the former kings of Kalinga, which was not invaded before, compelled all the Rathikas and Bhojakas,

Page #53
27 The Inscription And, while reigning in the seventh year, she, (that is, his) wife named Vajiragharavati, (obtains) the dignity of mother (due to accumulated merit. And, in the eighth year (of his reign), having stormed the invulnerable Gorathagiri (fortress) with a big army (he) oppresses the king of Rajagyha. And sounding aloud this act of prowess (he), along with (his) army and entourage, marches to the river Yamuna (lying in the...) having liberated (the city of) Mathura. (And (he) moves with satellite kings. (?)] (Here), with a Wish-fulfilling Tree burdened with foliage, and along with (his) cavalry, elephants and chariots, (he) goes (to worship the Stupa] reverenced by all householders and, having performed the King Nanda. . . . Having been (re-)anointed (he while) celebrating the Rajasuya, remits all tithes and cesses, L7 bestows many privileges (amounting to hundreds of thousands on the City-Corporation and the Realm-Corporation. In the seventh year of his reign, his famous wife of Vajiraghara obtained the dignity of auspicious motherhood. ... Then in the eighth year (he) with a large army having sacked Goradhagiri, L8 causes pressure on Rajagaha (Rajagsha). On account of the loud report of this act of valour, the Yavana (Greek) King Dimi(ta) retreated to Mathura having extricated his demoralised army and transport.... (He) gives .... with foliage, L9 Kalpa (Wish-fulfilling) trees, elephants, chariots with their drivers, houses, residences and rest-houses. And to make all these acceptable B who were deprived of their wealth and jewels, whose royal insignia consisting of umbrellas and vases had been cast away, who were abandoned by good Brahmins(?), and whose crowns were rendered meaningless, to bow down at (his) feet. And then in the fifth year, (His Majesty) caused the canal opened out by King Nanda three hundred (or 103) years back to be brought into the capital from the Tanasuliya road.... And in the sixth year, (His Majesty) while displaying his royal prosperity, bestowed (unprecedented) favours on the inhabitants of towns and

Page #54
28 The Hathigumpha Inscription and the Bhabru Edict Sarva-grahana (ceremony), gives the community of Brahmins gifts and (worships) the Arahamta. After the well (accomplished campaign of) conquest, (in the ninth year (of his reign)], (he) builds the royal abode named Mahavijayaprasada on both the banks of the (river) Prachi by (spending) thirty-eight hundred thousands. And, in the tenth year (of his reign), the Dispenser of War and Peace causes to be made (preparations) (for) marching forth in Bharatavarsa to conquer the (whole) land. J- (he) gives at a fire Sacrifice (?) exemption (from taxes) to the caste of Brahmanas. Of Arhat.... L 10... (He) causes to be built ... a royal residence (called) the Palace of Great Victory (Mahavijaya) at the cost of thirty-eight hundred thousands. And in the tenth year (he), following (the three-fold policy) of chastisement, alliance and conciliation sends out an expedition against Bharatavasa (and) brings about the conquest of the land (or, country)... and obtains jewels and precious things of the (kings) attacked. B districts by remitting all taxes and duties amounting to many hundred thousands (pieces of the standard coin). And in the seventh year, (His Majesty caused) compact groups of hundreds of horses, (portable) diamond chambers' and warriors (to proceed to) the tranquil spot adjoining the foot of the Samataka (hill) (?). And in the eight year, having stormed with a mighty army (the fortress of) Gorathagiri of invulnerable wall, (His Majesty) brought a pressure to bear upon Rajagsha, and the Yavana King? mi???? retreated to Mathura in order to release the troops and vehicles restlessly moving on account of the uproar of reprisal on his (Majesty's) part.... returned (to Kalinga), marched back with Kalpavrksha, the Wishing Tree, burdened with foliage, and (the troops) of horses, elephants and chariots, (did something for) all householders, and to captivate all (he) offered the gift of victory to the Brahmins, (offered something to) the Arhata (recluses)....

Page #55
29 The Inscription [And, in the eleventh year (of his reign)), (carrying) with (him) gems and jewels (he) moves in the southern direction) in a slow procession and causes Pithunda, the abode of Ava kings, to be ploughed by ploughs drawn by asses, and for the wellbeing of (his) realm, breaks the confederacy of Tamila countries (which had been) formed in the year 113. And, in the twelfth year (of his reign), (marching at the head of) thousands (of brave warriors), (he) strikes terror into (the hearts of) the kings of Uttarapatha (while going northward), and engendering great fear into (the hearts of) the people of Magadha, causes (his) elephants and horses to drink (water) in the (river) Ganga, and makes the king of Magadha, (named) Bahasatimita, to bow down at (his) feet, and (worships) in the temple (enshrining the image) of Jina from Kalinga (which had been) taken away (from there) by the Nanda king, and having seized the family-jewels (from the treasury), carries away the riches of Anga and Magadha. J - L 11. .... And the market-town(?) Pithumda founded by the Ava King he ploughs down with a plough of asses; and (he) thoroughly breaks up the confederacy of the T(r)amira (Dramira) countries of one hundred and thirteen years, which has been a source of danger to (his) Country (Janapada). And in the twelfth year he terrifies the kings of the Uttarapatha with .... thousands of L 12 .... And causing panic amongst the people of Magadha (he) drives (his) elephants into the Sugamgiya (Palace) and (he) makes the king of Magadha, Bahasatimita, bow at his feet. And (he) sets up (the image) "the Jina of Kalinga' which had been taken away by King Nanda ... and causes to be brought home the riches of Anga and Magadha along with the keepers of the family jewels of.... B- And in the ninth year, (His Majesty) caused the royal residence Mahavijaya-prasada, the "Great Victory Palace", to be built on both the banks of Praci at the cost of thirty-eight hundred thousand (pieces of the standard coin). And in the tenth year, well-read and experienced in the principles of policy, (His Majesty) proceeded on a campaign for the conquest of countries in Bharatavarsa ....(?)

Page #56
30 The Hathigumpha Inscription and the Bhabru Edict (On returning home), (he) causes banners to be fixed on all the firm pinnacles of the gates (of the capital) by spending two thousand. And (it is) portentous marvel (that) leading (a force of) elephants and boats (he) seizes (with little difficulty] horses, elephants, jewels and rubies from the king of the Pandyas and at this moment fetches many pearls, gems and jewels (worth) hundreds and (thousands), and subjugates (the people of the Pandya kingdom). And, in the thirteenth year (of his reign), by the Royal Worshipper (who has) performed the vows (and is) resplendent with (supernatural) powers, the Lay Devotee (who is) addicted to worship, His Majesty Kharavela (whose) soul is dependent on body, is caused to be excavated for purposes of worship the Relic Memorial (in honour of) the Arahamtas (who have) cast off transmigration, on Mount Kumari, the auspicious mountain in Vijaya circle. [On being invited by the King, His majesty Kharavela), the Reverend Aramanas (who are) self-possessed and the Jnanis, Tapasvi-Rsis and leaders of Samghas from all directions, (coming from) many yojanas, (numbering thirty-five hundred, assemble] J - L 13.....(He) builds excellent towers with carved interiors and creates a settlement of a hundred masons, giving them exemption from land revenue. And wonderful and marvellous enclosure of stockade for driving in the elephants (he)... and horses, elephants, jewels and rubies as well as numerous pearls in hundreds (he) causes to be brought here from the Pandya King. L 14 .... (he) subjugates. In the thirteenth year, on the Kumari Hill where the wheel of Conquest had been well-revolved (i.e., the religion of Jina had B- And in the eleventh year, (His Majesty). ...went in procession with jewels and gems.... caused the grassy overgrowth of Psthudaka, founded by a former king, to be let out into the Langala (river) and destroyed the accumulation of dark swamps that grew up in thirteen-and-hundred years (and) became a cause of anxiety to the country. And in the twelfth year, .... with the aid of thousands of the Sivis(?), (His Majesty) produced consternation among the rulers of Uttarapatha,

Page #57
31 The Inscription in the well-laid out quadrangle near the shrine of the Arahamta on the top of the hill, on the stone (platform adjacent to) the shrine (dedicated by) Queen Sindhula (hailing from) Simhapatha. [In front of the Assembly Hall] (he) causes to be set up a pale red and quadrilateral pillar inlaid with beryl, and causes to be read expeditiously the peace-giving Principal Scripture, been preached), (he) offers respectfully royal maintenances, China clothes (silks) and white clothes to the monks) who (by their austerities) have extinguished the round of lives, the preachers on the religious life and conduct at the Relic Memorial. By Kharavela, the illustrious, as a layman devoted to worship, is realised (the nature of) jiva and deha. L 15 ... bringing about a Council of the wise ascetics and sages, from hundred (i.e., all) quarters, the monks (Samanas) of good deeds and who have fully followed (the injunctions) .... near the Relic Depository of the B while generating an immense fear among the people of Magadha, caused the elephants and horses to drink in the Ganges, and compelled Brhaspatimitra, the king of the Magadha people, to bow down at his feet, (did something in connection with) the settlements of the Kalinga people subjugated by King Nanda .... carried the wealth of Anga and Magadha with the aid of persons skilled in clever tactics,.... caused to be erected towering temples and gates with figures of the goddess of luck in their niches, procured at the cost of a hundred visas (of gold) the rare and wonderful trappings of elephants, the King of Pandya, rich in mettled horses, elephants and jewels and gems supplied here hundreds and thousands of apparel(?), pearls, gems and jewels, .... subdued (some people). And in the thirteenth year, on the Kumari hill in the well-founded realm of Victory, were excavated the jivadehasrayikas by His Graceful Majesty Kharavela, devoted to the worship of those who depended on royal patronage, those who had fulfilled their religious) vows, (and) those who sought shelter during the rains for use as comfortable resting places by the Arhata (recluses), the cause of whose future gliding in the course of transmigration had been greatly extenuated (and) who were (there) for fulfilling the Yapa (Rainy Season Vow).

Page #58
32 The Hathigumpha Inscription and the Bhabru Edict (that is, the Twelve Angas, (which has been) gradually declining (in volume) since the year 165. He (is a) peaceful king, he (is a) wise king, (a) mendicant king (and a) righteous king (who) questions about, listens to (and) meditates upon the wellmeaning scriptures. J- Arhat, on the top of the hill,.... with stones... brought from many miles (yojanas) quarried from excellent mines (he builds) shelters for the Simhapatha Queeen Sindhula.... L 16 .... Patalaka(?)....(he) sets up four columns inlaid with beryl... at the cost of seventy-five hundred thousands; (he) causes to be compiled expeditiously the (text) of the seven-fold Amgas of the sixty-four (letters). He is the King of Peace, the King of Prosperity, the King of Monks (bhiksus), the King of Religion (Dharma), who has been seeing, hearing, and realising blessings (Kalyanas) - For the honoured recluses of well-established reputation and the Jnatskas (?) viewing all things alike (and) the monks(?) belonging to (different) orders (and) coming from a hundred directions, with hundreds and thousands of stones quarried out of excellent quarries (and) collected from an area extending over) many yojanas by expert heads, (His Majesty caused) indeed (to be made) sleeping-and-sitting accommodations fitted with artistic pillars(?) on a slope near the Arhata resting place, and caused the columns to be set up in a beryl-set hali with an ornamental courtyard at the cost of seventy-five hundred thousand (pieces of the standard coin), and in sixty-four panels, intersected with sculptures, caused to be produced the scenes of) peaceful music. The king of severity was he, the king of prosperity, the king of renunciation, the righteous king, (capable) of perceiving, hearing and

Page #59
33 The Inscription [The year...] The Expert in extraordinary excellences, the Worshipper of all religions, the Embellisher of all temples, the (Possesser of the) might of irresistible army and entourage, the Bearer of the Wheel (of conquest), the Protector of the realm, (the One) whose wheel rolls on unimpeded, the Support of princely houses and families, the Great Conqueror, His Majesty Kharavela the King." J-L.17.... accomplished in extra-ordinary virtues, respector of every sect, the repairer of all temples, one whose chariot and army are irresistible, one whose empire is protected by the chief of the empire (himself), descended from the family of the Royal Sage Vasu, the Great Conqueror, the King, the illustrious Kharavela." experiencing things that are conducive to welfare was His Graceful Majesty Kharavela, the mighty conqueror, the upholder of the realm of royal command, the protector of the realm of royal command, the repairer of all abodes of the gods, the worshipper of all sects, accomplished by virtue of the possession of certain special qualities."

Page #60

Page #61
The Date of the Inscription and its Author An analysis of the data presented in this epigraph gives us much valuable information not only about the personality and achievements of Kharavela, but also about the political and social conditions of the times in which he lived. The most baffling problem about him is, however, his date. This is the earliest known inscription which mentions dates of past historical events. The Tanasuliyavata canal is stated to have been opened by the Nanda King in ti-vasa-sata or the year 103, the Tamila Confederacy is stated to have been formed in terasa-vasa-sata or the year 113, and the Principal Scripture of the Jains is stated to be declining in volume since panatariyasatha-sata-vasa or the year 165. The question arises -- in what era are these dates mentioned? The circumstance that the inscription was incised on the occasion of a religious ceremony, lends the clue that the era of reckoning may be one connected with the religion to which the ceremony related. It leads us to assume that these dates are in the Mahavira Era which has been as much popular among the Jains as the Anno Domini among the Christians or the Anno Hegira among the Muslims. The M.E. is said to have started from October 15,527 BC, the date of nirvana or demise, the last memorable event in the life of Mahavira, the last of the twentyfour Tirtharkaras reverenced by the Jains. 1. For a discussion of the date of Mahavira's nirvana, see Jain, Dr. J.P.,

Page #62
36 The Hathigumpha Inscription and the Bhabru Edict Taken in M.E. the above three events would fall in 424 BC, 414 BC, and 362 BC, respectively. The extant literary traditions of both the Digambaras and the Svetambaras, the principal sects among the Jains, seem to confirm that the date for gradual decline of the canonical knowledge may be M.E. 165. According to the Digambaras as well as the Svetambaras eight pontiffs after Mahavira possessed full canonical knowledge and the last of them was Bhadrabahu I. The Digambaras assign a period of 162 years to these eight pontiffs, while the Svetambaras assign 178 years.' It is possible that the period was actually 165 years since the tradition recorded in this inscription is closer to the event than any of the available literary traditions. As for placing the event of the opening of the Tanasuliyavala canal in M.E. 103 or 424 BC, it is necessary to consider the chronology of Nanda. Nanda is twice mentioned in this inscription: he opened the canal in the year 103 and he took away the image of Jina from Kalinga to Magadha. It means that this Nanda was the King of Magadha. The Jain tradition unanimously places the Nandas 60 years after Mahavira and assigns them a rule of 155 or 150 years. This is with reference to Ujjayini" and indicates that the Nanda kings of Magadha had annexed Ujjayini in 467 BC. The expression Namda-raja used in the inscription also seems to indicate that it does not refer to a particular King Nanda; it more correctly refers to a Nanda king, i.e., a king of the Nanda dynasty. The Nandas continued to rule in Ujjayini till 312 or 317 BC, when the Mauryas dislodged them. Candragupta Maurya's coup in Magadha is dated in circa 324 Bc. He may have taken some time to The Jaina Sources of the History of Ancient India, pp. 32-54; also Appendix III infra. A Tirtharkara is a religious pioneer and deified saint. J.P. Jain, op. cit., pp. 262-65 (Pontifical Genealogy of Mahavira's Successors). Ibid., pp. 255-61, (Dynastic Chronology from Mahavira's nirvana to M.E. 1000).

Page #63
The Date of the Inscription and its Author 37 consolidate his position in Magadha and may have been able to extend his sway over Ujjayini a few years later. The Maurya chronology does not cause any hindrance in assuming that the Nandas ruled over Ujjayini for 155 or 150 years after 60 years from the demise of Mahavira. As for reconciling this period with the history of Magadha, the seat of the Nanda imperial authority, it is significant that the Brahmanical Puranas assign a total of 143 years to Mahanandin, and Mahapadma and his eight sons. On the basis of Candragupta Maurya's accession in 324 BC, the Nanda dynasty's rule in Magadha ended in that year and the accession of Mahanandin took place in 467 Bc. Since the Jain and Brahmanical traditions converge on this point, Mahanandin may be taken to be the founder of the Nanda dynasty. The Buddhist tradition is firm on the point that the Buddha's death took place in the eighth year of Ajatasatru's reign. It also assigns a total of 80 years to Ajatasatru and his successors, i.e., a total of 72 years after the Buddha. The Brahmanical tradition assigns a total of 83 years to them. The traditional date of the Buddha's demise is 544 BC.? On that basis Ajatasatru's line The total period of 143 years for the Nanda rule in Magadha seems to be correctly represented by Mahanandin (43 years), Mahapadma (88 years) and Mahapadma's 8 sons (12 years). Nandivardhana (40 years) is said to have preceded Mahanandin and he is also said to have founded the Nanda line. It, however, appears that Nandivardhana and Mahanandin are identical, the latter ('the Great Nanda') being a title of the former. Al-Beruni mentions an Indian era with the initial year 458 BC, which goes back to the time of the first Nanda king (see Sachau, E.C., Al-Beruni's India, II, pp. 5-7). This also seems to suggest that the Nanda take-over in Magadha might be in 467 BC. The era might have been founded a decade later to commemorate the assumption of imperial status. This is according to the oldest tradition among the Buddhists. Geiger places the event in 483 BC on the basis of a late Cantonese tradition. It is worth noticing that while the historians have generally placed implicit reliance on the Sri Lankanese Buddhist traditions for the

Page #64
38 The Hathigumpha Inscription and the Bhabru Edict should come to an end in 472 or 469 BC. It also brings us nearer 467 Bc for the beginning of the Nanda rule. It appears that there was an interregnum of 3 to 5 years before Mahanandin could firmly establish himself in Magadha and soon after he launched Magadha on an ambitious career of conquest. In 424 BC Mahapadma succeeded him and he appears to have led the victorious arms of Magadha into Kalinga and further south. The inauguration of one's reign with a campaign of conquest, has been a popular practice with ambitious monarchs throughout the world. It is also reflected in Kharavela's desire at the time of his coronation to make the remainder of his youth prosperous by making conquests'. In the very first year of his reign, in 424 BC, Mahapadma conquered Kalinga, opened the Tanasuliyavata canal there, and took away the image of Jina from Kalinga to Magadha. He may have marched further south and subjugated the Tamila kingdoms of the far south. This must have been quite unexpected for them and so the idea of forming a confederacy should have dawned upon them. According to the instant inscription this confederacy was formed in 414 BC, ten years after Mahapadma Nanda's campaign in Kalinga. This confederacy arrested the southward expansion of the Magadha empire under the Nandas and after them, under the Mauryas. On the basis of the evidence afforded by the chronological build-up of Magadha from Bimbisara to Asoka, they have rejected the same for the date of the Buddha himself. This has been done on the basis of Sandrokottos-Candragupta Maurya synchronism and by computing the dates from Candragupta's accession to and fro. Perhaps it would be better to reconcile the points of general agreement in the different sets of traditions (Jain, Buddhist and Brahmanical) on the basis of certain firm points in those traditions. When worked on that method, a reasonable chronology can be drawn out for ancient India. I am inclined to support the traditional dates of the Buddha and Mahavira as preserved in the respective Buddhist and Jain traditions since they would hardly make a mistake on that point. Also see Appendix III infra.

Page #65
The Date of the Inscription and its Author 39 inscriptions of Asoka Maurya it can be assumed that the Magadha empire had extended as far south as the Godavari and the Krishna rivers. This region appears to have been brought under the Magadha empire by the Nandas, most probably Mahapadma whose depredations led the Tamilas to form a confederacy. Reference to the Nandas in the early Sangam literature, the oldest Tamil literature, lends support to this assumption. In Rock Edicts II and XIII Asoka lists the Colas, the Pandyas, the Satiyaputras, the Keralaputras and the Tamraparniyas (Sri Lankanese) as living to the south of his empire. They seem to represent the members of the Tamila Confederacy. The Confederacy not only held its own against the Magadha imperialism under the Nandas and Mauryas, but in course of time itself became a danger to its neighbours. This is suggested by Kharavela's motive in breaking it in his eleventh regnal year. He did it 'for the well-being of his realm'. And he could think of marching against the Pandya king in the twelfth year only after he had broken the Confederacy in the previous year, probably through diplomatic means. The above discussion strongly suggests that the dates mentioned in the instant inscription are in M.E. Unfortunately the date of the epigraph itself is missing. It has already been suggested in fn. 1 on p. 22 ante that the mutilation at the beginning of L 17 should have, in all probability, contained it. Under the existing circumstances, however, we have to ascertain it on the basis of the contemporary data available in the inscription. Names of two contemporaries are mentioned: Satakamnim in the western direction, and Bahasatimitam, the king of Magadha; the former with reference to an event in the second year of his reign, and the latter, to that in the twelfth year. Added to this is the fact that Kharavela was the third ruler of his dynasty, the Cedi-raja-vamsa. 1. Sastri, K.A.N., A History of South India, (2nd edn., 1958), pp. 85-86.

Page #66
40 The Hathigumpha Inscription and the Bhabru Edict It is generally accepted now that the Maurya Empire disintegrated soon after the death of Asoka in c. 235-234 BC. His grandsons Dasaratha, Samprati and Vigatasoka seem to have divided the empire among themselves with their centres respectively in Magadha, Ujjayini and Gandhara. Jalauka, a son of Asoka, also seems to have become independent in Kashmir. Taking advantage of the internecine feuds among the successors of Asoka, some of his servants also appear to have carved out independent principalities. The examples seem to be furnished by the founder of the Satavahana line in the Nasik region and the founder of the Cedi line in the Kalinga region. According to Prof. K.A.N. Sastri, 'the exact date of the foundation of Satavahana power cannot be determined, but the puranic lists suggest that the first king, Simuka, probably began to reign about 230 Bc'.' Dr. K. Gopalachari more surely places the event soon after Asoka's death in c. 235 BC.? The Satvahanas have been referred to as 'Andhrabhrtya' which further suggests that the founder of the line was a servant of the Maurya emperors, perhaps of the rank of a Mahamatra (member of the Imperial Service) and holding a Commissioner's or Governor's charge in the region where he proclaimed his independence, and that he originally belonged to the Andhra region. In no other way the Satavahanas appear to be connected with Andhra; all their possessions were confined to the western coast and only a very late epigraph of the 24th or 26th ruler is 1. 2. Op. cit., p. 89. A Comprehensive History of India, II, pp. 293-328. Gurty Venkat Rao's view placing Simuka in 271 bc is highly improbable. No such thing could be thought of in the hey-day of Maurya imperial power under Asoka. The political geography available in hs also discounts such a hypothesis. (Rao in The Early History of the Deccan, pt. I-VI, pp. 90ff.). Sudhakar Chattopadhyaya has discussed the controversy as regards the home of the Satavahanas in the Journal of Indian History, XLI, 3, (December 1963), pp. 749-55. He also holds that the Satavahanas were migrants to the Maharashtra region. in The Early

Page #67
The Date of the Inscription and its Author the earliest Satavahana record so far known from the Krishna district in Andhra Pradesh on the eastern coast. The founder of the Satavahana line was Simuka who is assigned a reign of 23 years. He was succeeded by his younger brother Krsna (Kanha) who reigned for 18 years. Then came Sri Satakarni whose exploits are recorded in the Nanaghat inscriptions of his queen Naganika. He reigned for ten years (c. 194-184 BC). He is said to have been a very powerful king who performed many sacrifices including the Rajasuya and the Asvamedha which proclaim political supremacy and ascendancy. 41 Two facts strongly suggest that this Satakarni should be the Satakamnim of the instant epigraph. The passage acitayitaSatakamnim indicates that Satakarni was a powerful ruler with considerable influence to the west of Kalinga and it was really a matter of great courage not to pay any heed to him and send troops in the western direction. On the basis of the available evidence Sri Satakarni appears to have possessed such influence and power, but his namesake, the sixth ruler of the line who came 36 years after him, is not credited with any military or political exploits. The tenor of the inscription suggests that Kharavela was a man of action himself and would not have referred to anybody in such a rather deferential tone unless he was convinced of his superiority as a man of action. The event relates to the second year of Kharavela's reign. A year later he himself marches into the Vindhyas and subdues the Rathikas and Bhojakas, the feudatory chiefs most probably owing allegiance to the Satavahanas and at least under their influence. This seems to indicate that the power of the Satavahanas had rather suddenly declined by that time. Kharavela did not come into direct conflict with the Satavahanas most probably because they were remote from his dominions. This discussion leads us to the conclusion that the 2nd regnal year of Kharavela should coincide with the 10th or 9th year of Satakarni's reign, i.e., 184 or 185 BC. The other fact supporting this synchronism is that a total

Page #68
42 The Hathigumpha Inscription and the Bhabru Edict of 50 years had elapsed by then since the founding of the Satavahana and Cedi lines. The latter was founded by the grandfather of Kharavela and that much period is not improbable for the two reigns, of his grandfather and father. If this Satakarni is taken to be the sixth (instead of the third) ruler of the Satavahana line, the beginning of whose reign is placed 18 or 36 years later, the intervening period between Kharavela's accession and the founding of the line by his grandfather would be at least 68 years or 86 years even if the 2nd year of his reign is supposed to be the very first year of that Satakarni's reign. The fact that Kharavela himself was coronated at the age of 24, however, lends support to the assumption that the total period of the reigns of his grandfather and father could not have been greater than 50 years. We may conclude that the coronation of Kharavela took place 50 years after the disintegration of the Maurya Empire at the death of Asoka, that the first Satakarni, the third ruler of the Satavahana dynasty, was his contemporary, and that this Satakarni's reign came to an end before Kharavela launched his successful campaign in the Vindhyas in his 4th regnal year. It would mean that Kharavela's reign began in c. 185 BC and the date of the instant inscription, which was recorded in the 13th regnal year of Kharavela, should be c. 172 BC or ME 355.1 Since there is no further record of Kharavela it is possible that his reign might have come to an end in that year. The palaeographic similarities of the instant inscription with the Nanaghat inscriptions of Sri Satakarni's queen Naganika, may be cited as a further supporting evidence for the above view. But the identification of Bahasatimitam presents a more complicated problem. Twice Kharavela went to Magadha. In the 8th year he stormed the fortress of Gorathagiri, lying a few miles to the west of Rajagrha, the ancient capital of Magadha, 1. It is significant that the obliteration at the beginning of L 17 is sufficient to contain Panatariya-panatisata-vasa (= The year 355), (ref. p. 22 fn. 1, supra).

Page #69
The Date of the Inscription and its Author but did not go further north or east. The term Rajagrha-nrpa used in this context appears to be synonymous with the 'King of Magadha', whose name was not mentioned here since no direct contact took place with him at that time. This time Kharavela perhaps had no intention of waging a war against Magadha, and the fortress was stormed most probably as a part of strategy for securing his communications in his onward march to Mathura. But the next time, in his twelfth year, he marched into Magadha and then he came into direct contact with its king, Bahasatimitam, whom he made to bow down at his feet. Literary traditions are silent about any Bahasatimita (Bphaspatimitra). Numismatic evidence shows that there was a king of this name about that time. Cast coins bearing the legend 'Bahasatimitasa' have been discovered at Kosam, the site of Kausambi." The script is Asokan Brahmi and is supposed to be of the same style as that of an inscription found at Mora in the Mathura district which also mentions 'Brhasvatimitra'.? On stratigraphic grounds these coins are assigned to circa 185115 BC.Struck coins of Bahasatimita have also been found at Kosam and they are also assigned to second century BC.4 Their palaeography is said to be similar to that of the Pabhosa Cave inscriptions which also mention 'Bahasatimitra".5 This evidence put together indicates that there was a king named Bahasatimita in eastern India in the first quarter of the second century BC, his dominions extended as far as the Vatsa region, his mother Gopali was the daughter of King Tevaniputra 1. Jagannath in A Comprehensive History of India, II, p. 107. 2. J.R.A.S., 1912, p. 120. 3. Sharma, G. R., The Excavations at Kausambi (1957-59), pp. 19, 80-85. 4. Jagannath, op. cit.; also, Allan, J., British Museum Catalogue of Coins of Ancient India, p. xcviii. 5. E.I., II, pp. 240-43. The problem of dismemberment of the Maurya Empire has been discussed in detail in my Political and Cultural History of Mid-North India.

Page #70
44 The Hathigumpha Inscription and the Bhabru Edict Bhagavata of Ahicchatra, and his daughter Yasamata lived at Mathura. King Tevaniputra Bhagavata was the son of King Sonakayanaputra Vamgapala who appears to have founded his independent kingdom in Ahicchatra in similar circumstances as did Simuka and Kharavela's grandfather but about two decades later on the death of Samprati. If so, Tevaniputra Bhagavata's daughter's son could be a contemporary of Kharavela and could be his adversary in his twelfth year in c. 173 BC. The instant inscription makes Bahasatimita the king of Magadha and it also seems to indicate that his territory included Anga to the east. An examination of the evidence afforded by the Yugapurana of the Gargi-samhita and its correlation with the information supplied by the Pabhosa Cave Inscriptions, also suggest that the Maurya dynasty in Magadha was put to an end by the confederacy of the newly formed kingdoms of Mathura and Ahicchatra and that Bahasatimita who was a prince of the Mathura house but was also the daughter's son of the then King of Ahicchatra, was installed as King of Magadha in c. 206 BC under the regency of an Ahicchatra prince. It is believed that in c. 187 Bc. Brhadratha, the last of the Mauryas, was killed by Pusymitra Sunga in Magadha and the latter founded the Sunga dynasty. On this account K.P.Jayaswal identified Bahasatimita with Pusyamitra Sunga, saying that Pusya was a star in the Brhaspati constellation. This identification has, however, not been accepted. It is to be noted that no coins of Pusyamitra Sunga have been discovered at least in 1. The tradition contained in the Yugapurana seems to suggest that the confederate forces of the Yavanas, Pancalas and Mathuras put an end to the Maurya rule in Magadha (ref. D.R. Mankad, 'A critically edited text of the Yugapurana', J.U.P.H.S., XX, pp. 32-64). These Yavanas are, however, not to be confused with the hordes of Demetrius because till c. 200 BC the Seleucids were still strong and Bactria was yet a satry. They could at best be the mercenaries employed by the kings of Mathura and Ahicchatra. The problem of Bahasatimita has been examined at length in my work cited above.

Page #71
45 The Date of the Inscription and its Author Magadha. No inscription of his or referring to him, has also been found in Magadha. In fact, no Sunga inscription has been found in that region. On one point the Jain and the Brahmanical puranic traditions converge that Pusyamitra came after the Mauryas. According to the former he ruled for 30 or 35 years and according to the latter, for 36 years. The Jain traditions relate to Ujjayini. The puranic traditions cannot be definitely located. The story of the Malvikagnimitra' suggests that the headquarters of the Senapati (=Pusyamitra Sunga) were at Vidisha, and those of the Saciva, in Vidarbha. This indicates that the event should relate to the Ujjayini branch of the Mauryas. On epigraphic evidence the eastern-most limit of the Sunga dominions appears to be Bharhut, near Nagod in the Satna district. Possibly the dominions of the Sungas, and at least of Pusyamitra, included only Malwa (Ujjayini and Vidisha) and Bundelkhand regions in central India. The mere finding of an inscription of Dhana who claims to be the sixth in descent from Senapati Pusyamitra, at Ayodhya is no conclusive evidence of Pusyamitra's sway in that region, more so since it does not mention that the findspot was included in his or in the Sunga dominions. He had an encounter with the Greeks but that took place on the Kali Sindh in central India; this also lends support to the above view. According to the Jain tradition, Pusyamitra should have ruled in Ujjayini from 204 to 174 or 169 BC. The lower limit of his reign appears to be 169 Bc since it would be in accord with the puranic tradition assigning him a reign of 36 years. The encounter with the Greeks appears to have taken place towards the close of his reign in view of two facts, firstly that his forces were commanded by his grandson Vasumitraand secondly that according to Justin, 1. 2. A play in classical Sanskrit by Kalidasa. Dhanabhuti's record on the eastern gateway mentions Suganam raje (in the kingdom of the Sungas'). (Majumdar, N.G., A Guide to the Sculptures in the Indian Museum, I, p. 95.) Vide, Malavikagnimitra. 3.

Page #72
46 The Hathigumpha Inscription and the Bhabru Edict Demetrius is placed in c. 171-136 Bc. Kharavela does not mention him as he did not come into any contact with him in the course of any of his campaigns. The above discussion leads us to the conclusion that although Pusyamitra Sunga was also a contemporary of Kharavela, he was different from Bahasatimita of Magadha. Thus, it is possible to deduce that Kharavela should have ruled in Kalinga from c. 185 BC to c. 172 BC and that since our record does not record any event after the thirteenth year of his reign, it should have been inscribed in c. 172 BC. 1. Justin says that Demetrius was 'king of Indians' when Eucratides was the king of Bactria and Mithridates was that of Parthia. The last named is placed in c. 171-136 BC.

Page #73
Kharavela Personal History The readings and constructions leave little scope for speculation about the lineage of Kharavela, yet attempts have been made to find references to the puranic Aila, Cedi, Vena and Vasu in the inscription. It has also been said that he belonged to the third dynasty of Kalinga. The passage tatiye-Kalimga-rajavamse-purisa-yuge clearly indicates that he was the third in descent in the royal family of Kalinga. Purisa-yuga = purusa-yuga, means 'generation', and the governing tatiye settles that his was the third generation. He does not mention the names of his father and grandfather, and otherwise also we do not know anything about them, except the inference from this very passage that the grandfather founded the line in Kalinga. The name Kharavela has been mentioned thrice in the inscription: in L 1, L 14 and L 17. At all the three places it is preceded by appropriate titles and epithets, as was the custom. The construction suggests that Airena ( = Aryena = by the high 1. The term occurs in the Sukhabodha commentary by Devendraganin on the Uttarajhayana Sutta while describing the episode of the breaking down of nine spokes of Candragupta's chariot as the Nanda's daughter stepped into it. Canakya dispelled Candragupta's fear of a bad omen by saying that it signified that his dynasty would last nine generations (Nava-purisa-jugani tujjham vamsam holi). Hemacandra also uses purusa-yugani in the same sense in the Parisistaparvan (VIII, v. 326). Both these sources are Jain.

Page #74
48 The Hathigumpha Inscription and the Bhabru Edict born, noble, honourable) is a mere honorific and its equation with Ailena, i.e., 'descendent of Ila or Ila, father or mother of the Pururavas', is not possible. A royal honorific was necessary at the beginning of the description of the king and this purpose could not be served by Aila. Arya has been used in the meaning of 'noble, honourable, high-born' in ancient literature usually and it was also the usual form of address in the sense of 'Sir, My Lord, Your Majesty'. The word has no pretensions to the Aryan race, the way it has been used in literature. If we leave out the epithets, the name complete with honorifics and titles would be 'Arya Maharaja Mahameghavahana Kalingadhipati Sri Kharavela' in L 1, 'Sri Kharavela' in L 14 and 'Raja Sri Kharavela' in L 17. Mahameghavahana (lit. Indra, or 'the rider of elephant') appears to be a royal title of the kings of Kalinga which they assumed or earned due to the preponderance of elephants in that region. The same honorifics and titles as Kharavela's in L 1 are borne by Kudepa whose inscription has been found in the nearby Patalapura cave.1 Kharavela is the proper name. It can be equated with Sanskrit Ksara-vella, meaning 'moving sharp as the wind' or 'the very cyclone'. His career as depicted in this epigraph is true to his name. He mentions the name of his family as Cedi-raja-vamsa which signifies that it originally belonged to the Cedi region. There is no indication for connecting it with the puranic Cedis. As already observed, the founder hailed from the Cedi (Bundelkhand) region, was posted in Kalinga, and took advantage of the weakness of the Maurya authority like Simuka who was posted near Nasik. Such migrations were always possible. The passage vadhamana-sesa-yovanabhivijayo in L 2 simply means 'to make the remainder of his youth (sesa yauvana) 1. Airasa Maharajasa Kalimgadhipatino Maha(megha)vaha(na)sa Kudepa-sirino lenam. (I.H.Q., XIV, 1, p. 160).

Page #75
Kharavela 49 prosperous (vardhamana) by conquests (abhivijayo), and there is apparently no allusion to Vena or his son Prthu. It also appears from the instant record that Kharavela never lost sight of this objective and almost every alternate year he led a campaign of conquest. The passage Rajasi-vamsa-kula-vinisito in L 17 also does not contain any reference to the puranic king Rajarsi Vasu. This epithet describes Kharavela as the 'Support or Refuge of the princely houses and families', and there is nothing unusual in it when we know of his successful expeditions against several princely houses and families. By its very nature the record is very personal and the author does not mention even the names of any of his predecessors. The possibility of mentioning any legendary heroes is thus precluded. Literal meanings convey reasonable sense and there is no need or scope for assuming references. An issue was born to him in the seventh regnal year. His name is not mentioned in this epigraph. The Mancapuri cave, in front and to the south-east of Hathigumpha, contains three inscriptions respectively in the upper storey (Svargapuri), lower storey (Patalapura) and a side wing of the lower storey (Yamapura), recording the dedications of the Agamahisi (Chief Queen) of Kalinga-Cakravarti Sri Kharavela,' of Arya Maharaja Kalingadhipati Mahameghavahana Sri Kudepa, and of Kumara Vadukha.2 This cave appears to have been reserved exclusively for the members of the royal family. The issue born in the seventh year might be either Vadukha or Kudepa, and it is also possible that Vadukha might be his childhood name and Kudepa, the proper name which he assumed on his succession. Such instances are not unusual. Kharavela had at least two wives, namely, Vajiragharavati 1. 2. Arahamta-pasadam Kalimganam-Samananam-lenam karito (,) Rajino Lalakasa Hathis(i)ha-sampanatasa dhutuna KaligaCa(kavatino Siri-Khara)velasa Agamahisina karitam. (Ibid., p. 159). Kumaro-Vadukhasa lenam. (Ibid., p. 161).

Page #76
50 The Hathigumpha Inscription and the Bhabru Edict who bore him a child in the seventh year (L 7) and Queen Sindhula of Simhapatha (L 15). Since the latter is mentioned with the title of Queen, she appears to be identical with Agamahisi of the Svargapuri record. The location of Svargapuri is in accord with the description of Sindhula's shrine given in our inscription and this seems to confirm the identification. We thus gather that the Chief Queen of Kharavela was named Sindhula, she hailed from Simhapatha, she was the daughter of King Lalaka Hathisiha, and she followed the religion of her husband. Kharavela refers to her dedication of a shrine, which appears to be confirmed by her own Svargapuri record wherein she is said to have built Arahamta-prasadam, i.e., a shrine in the honour of Arahamta for worship-purpose, as well as lenan, i.e., cave-dwelling for Sramanas (ascetics). The opening of the epigraph with the Jain hymn of obeisance, makes its author definitely a follower of Jainism. It is also confirmed by the fact that the dates mentioned are in M.E., as we have seen above. He calls himself pujanurata-uvasaga, i.e., 'a lay devotee addicted to worship'. The four-fold Jain congregation consists of monks, nuns, male lay devotees and female lay devotees, and his description of himself is thus in accord with the traditional concept. The description of the assembly is also essentially Jain. But he was not intolerant or fanatic. Nowhere does he disparage, criticise or show disrespect to other religions. In fact, he takes pride in calling himself as Sava-pasanda-pujako (worshipper of all sects) and sava-devayatana-samkharakarako (embellisher of all temples) (L 17); and at the Savagahanan ceremony in Mathura he worshipped the Arahasta and at the same time gave gifts to the Brahmins (L 9). This catholicity of The terms Arahamta and Sramana have distinct connotation. Arahamta is the reverenced (pujya) deity who has cast off transmigration and is no longer a mortal; Sramana is a revered recluse or ascetic who is a mortal like us but deserves respect for going homeless in pursuit of spiritual attainment. B.M. Barua confused the two terms in his translation cited on p. 31 supra.

Page #77
Kharavela 51 outlook and broad liberalism was the characteristic trait of nearly all the successful Indian rulers. It is also a fact that all his expeditions were purely political and military campaigns and none of them was guided by any religious motive. N.K. Sahu's suggestion that Kharavela was a Jain by birth, i.e., Jainism was his family religion,' appears to be acceptable. Considerable care appears to have been bestowed upon his education. He was given training not only in Correspondence,2 Currency, Accountancy, State Regulations and Laws," but was also taught music and was given a liberal education covering other sciences, so as to make him an accomplished and cultivated king. He was associated with administration at the age of fifteen when he was made the Yuvaraja (Crown Prince) and for full nine years he was given practical training in administration. No epigraphic record of such meticulous training of a prince has so far come to light. At the age of twenty-four he became the king. Being a yuvaraja already, there would not have been any difficulty in succession. The word papunati seems to suggest some trouble, but the context does not support such a suggestion and it appears 1. A History of Orissa, ed. N.K. Sahu, (1st edn., 1956, Susil Gupta), vol. II, p. 329. 2. 3. 4. 5. Lekha stands for official correspondence. Kautilya has dealt with the subject at considerable length (Arthasastra, trans. R. Shamasastry, 4th edn., pp. 71-75). A manual named Lekha-paddhati was also written in the time of the Calukyas of Anahilapatana. Buddhaghosa, (S.B.E., XIII, p. 201), and Kautilya, (op. cit., p. 95), have also used rupa in the sense of coins or currency. It broadly covers the science dealing with public finance. Ganana stands for accountancy and broadly covers the science dealing with public accounts. Vavahara and Vidhi stand for laws. Vavahara (= vyavahara) stands for the law as defined by practice and seems to cover the mass of precedents, State Regulations and customary laws. Vidhi denotes the positive injunctions - the laws as they were. For effective dispensation of justice, knowledge of both the Code and the Regulations (which supplement the former) is essential.

Page #78
52 The Hathigumpha Inscription and the Bhabru Edict to be a matter of style only. The event of his father's death has been ignored altogether, most probably because the record is too personal. Our record closes in his thirteenth regnal year when he was only 37 years old. Nothing is known about him after that year. Campaigns He led six campaigns in all, one in the second year, one in the fourth year, one in the eighth year, one in the eleventh year and two in the twelfth year. They appear to be merely campaigns of conquest and no annexations appear to have been made except in one case. They, however, help in determining the extent of Kharavela's Kalinga. The first campaign was in the western direction up to the capital of the Asikas on the R. Kamhabema (Krsnavena). The direction suggests that the Krsnvena should be identified with the Wainganga.Its identification with the Krishna which flows to the south of Kalinga and not to the west, is incorrect. It is not possible to locate Asikanagara which probably lay across the Wainganga. In fact, his army reached only the river and does not appear to have sacked or entered the town itself. Presence and manoeuvres of his army on his side of the river were sufficient to cause alarm to the people across the river. The object of the campaign appears to be exploratory in the main and it seems to indicate that the Wainganga formed the western boundary of the kingdom of Kalinga. The next expedition, in the fourth year, was a campaign of conquest. It was also in the western direction and was personally 1. It joins the Pranhita at Seoni, which, in its turn, joins the Godavari near Sironcha, both in the Chandrapur district, Maharashtra. Barua supports this identification on the ground that the main tributary of the Wainganga is the Kanhan which joins it in the Bhandara district (I.H.Q., XIV, 3, p. 475 fn. 166), suggesting thereby that it might be known as Kanha-Waina or Krsna-vena. I am inclined to agree with him.

Page #79
1. Kharavela led by him. He crossed into the Vindhyas1 and defeated the Rathikas and Bhojakas. These Rathikas and Bhojakas bore all the insignia of royalty, namely, crown, caparisoned horse, umbrella and golden pitcher. In the inscriptions of Asoka the Ristikas and Bhojas are listed among the aparatas or the people living in western India. They appear to have been autonomous tribes under the protectorate of the Maurya Empire. The Satavahanas coveted their friendship and did not interfere with them. Queen Naganika was the daughter of a Maharathi. They seem to have been knit together in a loose confederation, enjoying all the rights and prerogatives of sovereignty, and in alliance with the Satavahanas. Their territories seem to be interspersed in the central and western Deccan in the hilly tracts and lay between Kalinga and Nasik. Their confederate forces appear to have been defeated by Kharavela. It is, however, not known where the battle was actually fought. The battle was decisive and his western flank was fully secured as we do not hear of any further expedition in that direction. As the context shows, it should have been fought somewhere in the Vindhyas, not very far from Kalinga, across the Wainganga and below the Narmada. There does not appear to be any exaggeration in his statement that the former kings of Kalinga did not go as far as the Vindhyas, and he also did not cross the Vindhyas into Malwa so as to come into contact with the Sungas, or go very deep into the Vindhyas westward so as to come into direct contact with the Satavahanas. No annexations are claimed; he was satisfied by making his adversaries submit to him and by seizing their jewels and fortune. The third expedition, in the eighth year, is northward. He 33333 53 The Vindhyas have been referred to in the inscription as Vijadharadhivasam (Vidyadhara+adhivasam) poetically. In the Jain puranic lore these ranges are generally referred to as the abode of the Vidyadharas. Jagannath's suggestion that it refers to some sacred place of the Jains and its violation by the Rathikas and Bhojakas was the immediate cause of war, (op. cit., pp. 113-14), is not acceptable in the context. It is a geographical term pure and simple.

Page #80
54 The Hathigumpha Inscription and the Bhabru Edict first mentions the storming of Gorathagiri, near Rajagaha. It seems to indicate that to the north the boundaries of Kalinga were nearly contiguous with those of Magadha. Gorathagiri was a hill fortress, serving as a defence for Rajagyha, the ancient capital of Magadha, and it lay in the Barabar Hills, some six miles to the west of Vaibhar Hill in Rajgir in the Nalanda district of south Bihar. Its situation in the southern part of Magadha suggests the contiguity of the southern boundaries of Magadha and the northern boundaries of Kalinga. Kharavela did not go further into Magadha and seems to have turned westward to Mathura. The storming of this fortress was merely a strategic measure to secure his communications in the rear in his onward march. Since he claims to have reached the Yamuna river after liberating the city of Mathura, he appears to have marched through the tract lying below the Ganga and Yamuna. It was not intractable. A battle appears to have been fought near Mathura. It is suggested by vipamuncitu (having liberated). But the name of the adversary, who appears to have been an aggressor, is not mentioned. It has been sought to read Yavanaraja Dimita and to identify him with Demetrius. In the note on the text it has already been indicated that this reading is highly doubtful and the reading more appropriately appears to be Yamana-nadim. The event took place in c. 178 BC and if Justin is to be believed. Demetrius should have come at least seven years later. It may be that there was some depredation from the north or from any of the neighbouring kingdoms and Mathura was temporarily occupied by the aggressor, and Kharavela drove out the aggressor and restored Mathura to its legitimate ruler. It was a mere act of chivalry. Mathura was not annexed, and therefore on liberation it should have been 1. If the Yuga-Purana tradition carries any historical background, there is a strong suggesion that the Greek mercenaries who followed in the train of the confederate armies of Mathura and Ahicchatra to Pataliputra, turned hostile and on their way back, seized Mathura itself either to claim their dues or to satiate their greed for plunder or both. In all probability, Kharavela had liberated Mathura from these Greek mercenaries turned hostile.

Page #81
55 Kharavela returned to its rightful owner. His further activities in Mathura were confined to performing religious ceremonies. The real campaigns of conquest were yet to follow, and preparations for these were made in the tenth year. For the next two years he remained busy in these campaigns, marching to the south, then to the north, and again to the south. His ambition was to conquer the whole country and live up to the ideal of a Cakravartin. This is the earliest epigraphic record mentioning the name of the country as Bharatavarsa (Bharadavasa). Having made the necessary preparations in the tenth year, he first marches to the south, in the eleventh year, and sacks Pithunda, the metropolis of Ava kings. Pithunda can be identified with Pityndra, mentioned by Ptolemy as the metropolis of Maisolia and the Arvarnoi." It lay in the interior of Maisolia, the coast between the rivers Godavari and Krishna. It has been suggested that possibly it did not lie very far from Vijayapuri (of the Nagarjunikonda Inscription), Amaravati and Vijayawada, in the heart of ancient Andhrapatha. Exact location is not i.e.. supreme over-lord. This ideal is common to all the Indian traditions. According to the Jain tradition, there have been 12 Cakravartins who had conquered the whole earth, and the first among them was Bharata, the son of Rsabha, the first Tirtharkara. (See Mahapuranam, Trisastisalakapurusacarita). In the Jain tradition Bharata, the son of Rsabha, is credited with giving the country this name, while in the Brahmanical tradition Bharata, the son of Dusyanta and Sakuntala immortalised in the Abhijnana-Sakuntalam of Kalidasa, is also credited with it. Thus, in essence, both the Jain and Brahmanical traditions are unanimous as regards the name Bharatavarsa for the geographical entity now known as India. However, the Buddhist tradition calls it Jambudipa, and in his M.R.E. I Asoka mentions Jambudipa in that sense - perhaps the only epigraphic mention known so far. Ptolemy's Ancient India, ed. by S.N. Majumdar, pp. 67-68, 185. H.C. Raychaudhuri in The Early History of the Deccan, Pt. I-VI, p. 56. It is also identified with Pihunda mentioned in the Uttaradhyayanasutra, which, however, does not help in locating it. 3. 4.

Page #82
56 The Hathigumpha Inscription and the Bhabru Edict known. The Arvarnoi of Ptolemy may be identical with the Ava people, or else Ava is a misreading for Ardha, meaning the Andhra kings in the context, which is not quite impossible. The southern boundary of Kalinga appears to be the Godavari. The manner in which Kharavela marches to Pithunda, shows that it could not be very far from Kalinga and must be somewhere near the southern border across the Godavari. The way in which it was sacked, seems to indicate that the Pithunda kingdom was annexed and the southern boundary was extended as far as the Krishna. Kharavela was now face to face with the Tamila Confederacy which he set out to break for the well-being of his realm'. He claims to have broken the Confederacy, but does not mention to have marched further south and it indicates that the Confederacy was broken through diplomacy rather than warfare. The Colas? were probably the northern-most member of the Confederacy, whose territory lay between the Pithunda and the Pandya kingdoms. They seem to have been won over and he was thus enabled to march forth to the Pandya kingdom the following year. In the twelfth year he led two expeditions: one to the north and the other to the south. He marched forth into Magadha up to the Ganga' and obtained the submission of the Magadha king Bahasatimita. Although the name of Pataliputra is not mentioned the reference is evidently to that city which lay on the Ganga, and had continued to be the capital of Magadha at least since the days of the Nandas. The fact that he worshipped 1. Asoka mentions the Pandyas after the Colas. The Pandyas have also been associated with Madurai on the R. Vaigai from very ancient times, while the Colas have been associated with Thanjavur on the R. Kaveri, which lies to the north of Madurai. The reading is hathasam Gamgaya payayati, i.e., he makes his elephants and horses (hathasam =hasti +asvam) drink in the Ganga. There is no reference to the Sugangiya palace, as supposed by Jayaswal and Banerji (E.I., XX, p. 88 fn. 8). This name of the palace of Candragupta Maurya is mentioned only in a very late work of fiction, the Mudraraksasa, and it is not mentioned in any of the traditional accounts or epigraphic records.

Page #83
Kharavela 57 in the temple which enshrined the image taken away by the Nanda king from Kalinga, seems to indicate it. He simply claims to have struck terror into the hearts of the kings of Uttarapatha (Utarapadha), which means that he did not come into contact with any other king of north India and did not go beyond Magadha. Here Uttarapatha has been used in the common sense of the term, meaning North India. Two broad divisions of the country have been Uttarapatha and Daksinapatha, the former referring to the region lying to the north of the Vindhyas and the latter, to that lying to the south of the Vindhyas.1 An inference to the north-western region beyond Prthudaka (near Thanesar), cannot be drawn from Uttarapatha here as the context does not at all support it.2 After the successful expedition against Magadha in the north, he marched against the Pandyas, perhaps the most powerful member of the Tamila Confederacy, in the south. He calls his victory against the Pandyas 'a portentous marvel',3 and this seems to indicate the power of the Pandyas. The operation against the Pandyas appears to have been two-fold, i.e., military as well as naval. Elephants formed the task-force on land and boats were used on the sea. This is the earliest epigraphic reference to the use of boats for war purposes, and it seems to 1. 2. 3. More correctly the dividing line is the R. Narmada. Jagannath (op. cit., p. 114, fn.3), also takes it to have been used in a general way for North India. Uttarapatha finds the earliest epigraphic mention here. A seminar was held at Bhubaneshwar on January 16-18, 1999, at a stupendous cost of Rs. 7 lakh, they say, to put scholars' seal on Acharya Vidyanandji's highly imaginative discovery that Kharavela went on campaign to Taksasila (Taxila in Rawalpindi district, Pakistan) on the basis of the mention of Utarapadha in his inscription. And, adbhutam asacaryam it was that by spending Rs. 37000 per scholar, as they say, strenuous publicity could be given to this myth to overshadow history. Abhutamachariyam adbhutam + ascaryam, or abhutam + ascaryam. In both the cases the meaning remains the same.

Page #84
58 The Hathigumpha Inscription and the Bhabru Edict confirm the overseas activities of the Kalinga people. Kharavela is, however, not known to have led any overseas expedition although he maintained a fleet of war-ships. Dominions The kingdom of Kalinga as inherited by Kharavela appears to have comprised the entire territory known as Tri-Kalinga, including Utkala, Tosala and Kalinga.? It was bounded on the north by the R. Damodara, beyond which lay Magadha; on the west by the R. Wainganga, beyond which lived the Asikas and the Rathikas and Bhojakas; on the south by the R. Godavari, beyond which lay the Pithunda kingdom and the Tamila countries; and on the east by the Bay of Bengal. Kharavela appears to have annexed the Pithunda kingdom. The total annihilation of Pithunda signified by its being ploughed by ploughs drawn by asses, seems to suggest annexation. The boundaries were thus extended up to the R. Krishna in the south. All other expeditions of his were aimed at obtaining formal submission and allegiance so as to secure his frontiers. The capital of Kalinga (Kalimga-nagari) should lie somewhere on the R. Prachi on both banks of which Kharavela built the Mahavijayaprasada. It should not be very far from the sea coast since it is stated to have been ravaged by a cyclone. The name of the city does not appear to have been mentioned. Khibiram is merely its adjective, meaning 'the Abode of the Brave' (Ksi: dim. of ksiti: + viram). It appears to have been a See Mazumdar, B.C., Orissa in the Making, and Gerini, Researches on Ptolemy, pp. 119-39. "Kalinga had built up a great overseas empire and spread her colonies as far as Philippine islands in the east and far south into the islands of the Indian Archipelago" (Sahu, N.K., ed., A History of Orissa, vol. I, p. 62). Utkala lay between the rivers Damodar and Brahmani, Uttara Tosala between the Brahmani and the Mahanadi, Daksina Tosala or Kongoda between the Mahanadi and the Vansadhara, and Kalinga between the Vansadhara and the Godavari (vide, Banerji, R.D., History of Orissa, vol. I, map opp. p. 49). 2.

Page #85
Kharavela 59 custom in Kalinga and the neighbouring region to name the capital after the name of the people, region or kingdom, e.g., the capital of the Asikas was called Asikanagara, the principal city in the Tosala region was called Tosali, and similarly the capital of the Kalinga kingdom was called Kalinganagari. It has been sought to identify it with either Dhauli or Sisupalagarh.' Dhauli lies in the Puri district, on the metalled road from Cuttack to Puri, a little distant from the R. Prachi. A set of Asoka's Rock Edicts, including the Kalinga Edicts addressed to the Mahamatras of Tosali and Samapa, has been found inscribed on a low hill there and near that there is an open stretch of land of ancient habitation extending up to the river. It represents the site of Tosali since Tosali can be phonetically corrupted into Dhauli, and also because it lies in the Tosala region which covered the Mahanadi delta and extended up to the R. Vansadhara to the south. It is possible that Kharavela's grandfather was the Mahamatra of Tosali. There seems to be strong indication that Tosali was not adopted as the capital of the newly founded kingdom, but a site nearby, which was just on the banks of the river, was chosen for the new capital. The exact location of the Tansauliyavata canal is not known, but the context seems to suggest that it was brought into the capital from a nearby place, most probably from the old town of Tosali into the new capital. Sisupalagarh lies 11/2 miles east-southwest of Bhubaneshwar and six miles to its west-northwest are the KhandagiriUdayagiri hills. According to B.B. Lal, a presumption is raised in favour of its being identical with Kharavela's Kalinganagari on the following pieces of circumstantial evidence: no fortified town of comparable date except Sisupalagarh is known to exist near about the Khandagiri-Udayagiri hills, and the excavations did reveal a collapse and subsequent repair of the southern gateway-flank of the fortifications which seems to confirm 1. The suggestion that it might be Kalingapatnam in the Srikakulam district (E.I., XX, p. 83 fn. 19), is not worth considering since it does not answer to the description given in the inscription.

Page #86
The Hathigumpha Inscription and the Bhabru Edict Kharavela's statement that he got repaired the gateway and fortification-wall which had been damaged by a storm.1 The upper limit of the site is placed at c. 300 BC, its Early Period being 300-200 BC, Early Middle Period 200 BC-AD 100, Late Middle Period AD 100-200 and Late Period AD 200-350. It is difficult to support this presumption in view of the fact that Kalinganagari must be on the Prachi and Sisupalagarh does not fulfil that condition. Its proximity with the Khandagiri-Udayagiri is not so relevant in the context. The fortress may have served the same defence purposes for the old town of Tosali as well as the new capital, as were served by Gorathagiri for Rajagrha. 60 The new capital was a walled town, with gateways having pinnacles on which were flown the royal banners. It had cool reservoir and parks. It probably suffered from scarcity of water and so Kharavela brought the Tanasuliyavata canal into it. He also added to its beauty by building the Mahavijayaprasada on both banks of the Prachi river at a cost of 38 lakhs.2 The two portions of the palace appear to have been linked through bridges. It should have been a beautiful thing and a marvel of engineering for those times but in the absence of any physical remains, as also any reference in literature, it is not possible to catch a glimpse of it. 1. 'An early historical fort in Eastern India', Ancient India, No. 5, (January 1949), pp. 66-67. 2. The plural ending of sahasehi (sahasrani) clearly points to the cost as 'thirty-eight hundred thousands'. There is, however, no information as to the name or value of the standard in which this amount has been denoted. The finding of a silver punch-marked coin from the filling forming the terrace in front of the Hathigumpha (I.A.R., 196162, p. 37), might suggest that the costs were mentioned in terms of silver coin current in those days.

Page #87
Socio-Political Conditions LITERARY prescriptions about the education, training and accomplishments of princes in ancient India are amply confirmed by this epigraph. Sports, Correspondence, Currency, Accountancy, State Regulations and Laws, Music, Diplomacy and War, appear to have been the compulsory subjects of study. General education was also imparted to cover other subjects. Practical training in administration was also imparted through active association before the reins of government were actually handed over. The two objects of kings appear to have been to make conquests and to make their subjects happy. The numerous literary references to the duties of kings are hereby confirmed through epigraphic evidence. 4 The traditional four-fold division of army into cavalry, elephants, infantry and chariots, was in vogue. Navy was also maintained by the coastal kingdoms. Crown, caparisoned horse, umbrella and golden pitcher1 were the accepted insignia of royalty, and the kings were believed to possess auspicious marks. 1. These have been mentioned in connection with the Rathikas and Bhojakas. Makuta (mukuta) is crown, chata (chatra) is umbrella, and bhimgara (bhrngara) is golden pitcher. Sabiladhite seems to stand for 'caparisoned horse'. Bila means Indra's horse Ucchaihsravas in particular, and horse in general. With sa (= su = well) and dhite (= dhrte = maintained), it would mean 'well maintained horse', and in the context it may be translated as 'caparisoned horse'.

Page #88
62 The Hathigumpha Inscription and the Bhabru Edict Works of public welfare were executed by the state. At least two irrigation projects of ancient India are definitely known: the Tanasuliyavata canal in Kalinga and the Sudarsana lake in Saurastra. The former was carved out by the Nanda king (in 424 Bc) and extended by Kharavela 244 years later (in c. 180 BC), while the latter was executed by Candragupta Maurya (in 312 BC), about 127 years prior to Kharavela, in west India and it has a recorded history of additions and alterations by successive rulers for about 700 years. We do not know anything about the Kalinga project after Kharavela, yet it has a history of more than 250 years. Festivals and fairs' were organised by the state to entertain the people. Performances of folk dances, classical dances, songs and instrumental musicwere also organised. It also appears to have been customary to show off royal opulence and on that occasion to remit taxes, bestow grants and sanction other favours to the people. Kharavela did it in his sixth regnal year. Some distinction between the townsmen and the villagers appears to have subsisted in the matter of taxes, etc. It also Usava (= utsava = festival) and samaja (an assemblage for merrymaking, mela, convivial gathering, fair) have been used in a secular sense. The former was accompanied by public feasting while the latter, by various items of amusement. Numerous references to samaja are found in the Mahabharata and the Buddhist literature. Asoka also refers to it in his R.E. I. From the Sigalovadasutta we learn that naccam (dances), gitam (songs), vaditam (music), akkhanam (dramatics), panisaram (cymbals) and kumbhathunam (pitcherdances), used to take place in the samajas. Kharavela mentions the performances of dapa, nata (nrtya), gita and vadita. The last two stand for music, vocal and instrumental respectively. Likewise, the first two stand for dances, folk and classical respectively. The context does not allow the interpretation of dapa as acrobatics or combats. All the four should relate to the gandharvavidya. rajaseyam = rajasriyam. 3.

Page #89
Socio-Political Conditions 63 appears that Kalinga in the time of Kharavela contained several towns. Polygamy was in vogue. The title of Agamahisi (Agramahisi) for one of his queens clearly indicates that Kharavela had more than one wife. The wife who bore children appears to have been given added honour or endearment, as may be inferred from the way in which the event of the seventh year is mentioned. Kharavela endearingly calls her Gharini (Grhini), i.e., 'housewife'.1 The ploughing of a metropolis by ploughs drawn by asses appears to have been the sign of complete annihilation of its ruler.2 Political alliances in the form of confederacies were in vogue, e.g., the confederacy of the Tamila countries, as also that of the Rathikas and Bhojakas. It was customary to give the Brahmins gifts on ceremonial occasions. Image-worship was in vogue and temples were built at least in Kalinga and Magadha in Kharavela's times. The land of the Pandyas was rich in jewels, gems, pearls and rubies. Beryl was known. No precise information is available as regards the administrative set up under Kharavela. The dedicatory inscriptions in the nearby caves,3 which are palaeographically 1. The alternative reading Vajiraghara-khatiya-sati-gharini would mean 'faithful wife Vajiraghara Ksatriya'. In the adopted reading the meaning is 'wife named (ghusita - Vghush) Vajiragharavati'. 2. According to Haribhadra (Avasyakavrtti) and Hemacandra, Kunika (Ajatasatru) also ploughed Vaisali with ploughs drawn by asses after defeating the Licchavis. (J.B.O.R.S., XIII, p. 231). 3. See E.I., XIII, and I.H.Q., XIV, 1, pp. 161-66. In these inscriptions lena has been used in the meaning of cave-dwelling excavated for the residence of the Sramanas, pasada (prasada) in that of shrine for worship purposes, and kothajeya in that of circumambulatory path around the pasada.

Page #90
64 The Hathigumpha Inscription and the Bhabru Edict of the same age, seem to contain the names of some of his officers. They are: Nagara-akhadamsa Bhuti (Vyaghra-gumpha), Kamma Halakhina (Sarpa-gumpha), Culakama (Sarpa-gumpha and Pavana-gumpha), Mahamada (= Mahamatra) Bariyaya Nakiya (Jambesvara-gumpha), Atasukhapradinaka (Chota Hathigumpha), and Padamulika Kusuma (Tattva-gumpha No. II). It appears that at least two classes of officers, viz., Mahamatra and Nagara-viyohalaka (Nagara-akhadamsa) of the Maurya set up continued under the new kingdom of Kalinga. 1. All these caves except the last named are on the Udayagiri. The Tattvagumpha No. II is on the Khandagiri.

Page #91
Jainism The significance which the Bhabru Edict of Asoka has for Buddhism, the Hathigumpha Inscription of Kharavela has for Jainism, perhaps even more since it seems to preserve and confirm traditions and does not merely serve to demostrate that its author was a follower of Jainism. The Panca-namaskara, or the Five-fold Obeisance, hymn of the Jains reads: Namo Arahamtanam, Namo Siddhanam, Namo Airiyanam, Namo Uvajjhayanam, Namo loe savva Sahunam. Its antiquity is lost into oblivion. It is found in the most ancient Jain literature available, and appears to have had the same significance for the Jains as 'Buddham saranam gacchami, Dhammam saranam gacchami, Samgham saranam gacchami' has had for the Buddhists. Our inscription begins with Namo Arahamtanam Namo sava Sidhanam and serves as the earliest preserved record for this hymn in its traditional form. 1. Arahamta (who has cast off transmigration), siddha (the Released, i.e., the perfect soul in the stage after nirvana), Acarya (master of spiritual knowledge), upadhyaya (teacher of spiritual knowledge) and sadhu (ascetic), are recognised as deserving supreme veneration (paramesthi). Among the Jains, arahamta is not the common term for ascetics. The ascetics are called samana (sramana), sahu (sadhu), or, muni. It is amply clear from this inscription and the inscriptions in the nearby caves that shrines were built in the honour of the Arahamta, while cave-dwellings were excavated for the use of the Sramanas. Also ref. fn. 1 on p. 50 supra.

Page #92
The Hathigumpha Inscription and the Bhabru Edict The term Arahamta has been explained in 14 and this is also the earliest preserved record of such an explanation. Arahamta are they who have cast off transmigration (pakhinasamsitehi = Skt. praksipta samsrtah). Kunda-kunda, reputed to be one of the earliest Jain authors whose works have been handed down to the posterity and assigned to the early part of the first century AD, defines Arahamta as follows: 66 Jara-vahi-jamma-maranam ca-u-ga-i-gamanam ca punnapavam ca. Hamtuna dosakamme huu nanamayam ca Arahamto.1 Kunda-kunda appears merely to elucidate what Kharavela has explained. The Jain congregation is four-fold, consisting of monks, nuns, male lay devotees (uvasaga = Skt. upasaka, sravaka) and female lay devotees. The uvasaga should, according to Kharavela, perform the vows and be addicted to worship. Twelve vows are prescribed in the Scripture for the uvasaga or sravaka, and here again our inscription seems to corroborate the textual lore. The belief that the performance of the prescribed vows makes one resplendent with supernatural powers,2 was not unnatural. 1. 2. Kunda-kunda Prabhrta Samgraha, ed. K.C. Shastri, p. 90. It means: The Arahamta is he who has attained enlightenment, having destroyed the evils of old age, disease, birth, death, transmigration, merit and sin, and the karmas. The terms raja-bhatina (raja-bhaktinah) and cina-vatana (cirnavratanah), occurring in L 14, help in determining the sense of the following vasa-sitana. Literally it would be vas (= grow bright) - sita (white), and in the context it seems to suggest 'resplendent with supernatural powers'. + Jayaswal and Banerji have inferred offering of China clothes (silks) and white clothes to the monks from cina-vatani and vasa-sitani (ref. p. 31 supra). Silk is made from silk worms and is, therefore, not acceptable to a Jain monk of any denomination. The rhythmic second part would also not thus mean 'white clothes'. N.K. Sahu has suggested that Kharavela was the worshipper of the monks who clad in fine cloth (cinavatanam = skt. jhina vastranam) --

Page #93
Jainism 67 There is also a reference to duality of soul (jiva) and matter (deha) in the passage jiva-deha-sirita. The Jains recognise two categories as jiva (soul) and ajiva (non-soul). Soul is independent, with a separate entity altogether, and is not to be identified with the body (deha), a form of matter (pudgala which is ajiva), in which it is contained for the time being. Kharavela's statement that his soul is dependent (sirita = Skt. asrita) upon body, is quite in accord with the Jain concept. He also defines Sramana as suvihita or self-possessed. Sramana is the general term for Jain monks. Kunda-kunda defined a Jain monk in the following terms: Dehadisamgarahio manakasaehim sayalaparichatto Appa appammi rao sa bhavalimgi have sahu.? . It is again an amplification of Kharavela's definition. The order of the monks appears to have consisted of different grades which are mentioned in a descending order. First come the Sramanas who appear to have been quite unconcerned with all mundane affairs, then come the Jnanis who appear to have been masters of the Scripture, next come the Tapasvi-Rsis who appear to have laid more stress on penance, and lastly come the Samghayanas, or the leaders of the Samghas, who by the very nature of their work were concerned with organisational matters more particularly, and therefore were the less detached observed the rainy season retreat (vasasitanam), and surmised, "this probably indicates that Kharavela was an advocate of the Svetambara form of Jainism and the monks of that sect were receiving royal endowment (rajabhitinam)", (vide, Kharavela, pp. 87-88). This surmise is wide off the mark because the sect of the white-robed was yet to formalize (see App. III infra). Op. cit., p. 125. It means: Only he is an ascetic in reality who does not possess any physical belongings, has completely cast off ego or pride, and is totally absorbed in his self (soul, appa = atma).

Page #94
68 The Hathigumpha Inscription and the Bhabru Edict from mundane affairs as compared to the other three. This is the earliest recorded evidence of the existence of different Samghas of the Jain monks. In his thirteenth regnal year in c. 172 BC Kharavela convened a Council of Jain monks. No mention of it is found in the literature of either the Digambara or the Svetambara sect of the Jains possibly because it relates to a period till when the schism had not been finalised and the main object of its meeting was to avert the schism and attempt reconciliation. Since it was not palatable to the later protagonists of the two sects they thought it better to ignore and forget it. While disagreeing on the fundamentals, they seem to have agreed on this piece of practical wisdom. There was a school in Mathura which tried to keep away from schismatic tendencies till the first few centuries of the Christian era, and it might have preserved the memory of this Council, but no literature of this school has come to light. It seems to have been represented by the Aratiya yatis or the Yapaniyas. The Council met on the Mt. Kumari (the Udayagiri hill, the findspot of the instant record near Bhubaneshwar), which was 1. The Samghayana of the record recalls the Acarya of the traditional parlance, while Jnani represents the Upadhyaya and Tapasvi-Rsi, the Sahu (Sadhu). The heirachical order given here places Acarya below Sahu, but in the Panca-Namaskara current now, Acarya has superceded the Upadhyaya and Sahu. It was obviously a later manipulation by some ambitious Samghayana to invest him with authority and power over both the house-holder and the house-leaving adherents, and since it was a matter of common advantage, leaders of all the Samghas acquiesced in it irrespective of doctrinal or denominational differences. The earliest literary mention of the current namokara does not go beyond the close of the 1st century AD among the Digambaras (vide, Satkhandagama) and 5th century AD among the Svetambaras (ref. Vallabhi Vacana). The Yapaniya sect formally came into existence towards the middle of the second century AD. It was a reversion to the austere, and also an effort to bridge up the gap between the Svetambara and Digambara modes and doctrines. It has, all the same, no relation to yapujavakehi in L 14 of our inscription. 2.

Page #95
Jainism 69 somehow considered auspicious and lay in the Vijaya district. It appears to have been a well-attended assembly in which 3500 monks from all directions joined. The site of the assembly was the quadrangle near the shrine of the Arahamta on the top of the hill. This shrine was on the roof of the Hathigumpha on the face of which our record is inscribed. The quadrangle consisted of the stone platform adjacent to the shrine dedicated by Queen Sindhula. As we have already seen above, Sindhula's shrine was the upper storey of the Mancapuri which lies in front and to the south-east of the Hathigumpha, and seems to fully fit in the description. In front of the Assembly Hall was set up a pale-red and quadrilateral pillar inlaid with beryl, apparently to serve as a replica of the Manastambha, in accord with the traditional description of Samavasarana (the Preaching Hall of Tirtharkara). At the Council the Principal Scripture was given a reading. This is again in accord with the traditional description of Jain Councils as vacana (Reading), found in literature. The excavations have revealed the remains of an apsidal structure just overlying the Hathigumpha. It has an axial length of 78 feet 1 inch and a basal width of 46 feet. It was built of large laterite blocks, 8 courses of which were visible. The circular structure towards the apse might be a stupa or just a round platform on which the object of worship was placed. All this is in perfect accord with what the inscription says about the Relic Memorial (Kaya-Nisidiya) excavated by Kharavela. Further, the excavations have also revealed an ancient imposing ramp built of laterite blocks. It is 3 metre wide, rises from the foot of the hill and reaches the terrace of the Hathigumpha, and is supported on either side by retaining walls. It is wedge-shaped in plan, showing greater width near the head than at the tail. This ramp seems to represent the quadrilateral pillar mentioned in the inscription. 1. In L 14 supavata (susdim. subhal + parvata) is an adjective of Kumari Pavata (Parvata). The locative endings of cake and pavate settle the meaning

Page #96
70 The Hathigumpha Inscription and the Bhabru Edict At a certain distance from the bottom of the ramp there are two walls at right angles to support the filling below terrace in front of the Hathigumpha in sandstone and laterite. The dexter wall is of sandstone and is prominently battered; it is discernible up to the original steps leading to the cave which contains the inscription of the Chief Queen. Carved stone railings and upper part of a female statue in sandstone have been found near the steps. The railings might have embellished Sindhula's shrine. The archaeological evidence put together suggests that the shrine over the Hathigumpha, the ramp in front of it and the cave to which the dexter wall leads, were the product of a single building activity. It thus confirms the epigraphic evidence as interpreted above about the location of the shrines of Kharavela and Sindhula as well as of the site for the assembly of monks. The Jain tradition is firm on the point that the Principal Scripture consisted of Twelve argas. It is generally referred to as the Dvadasanga-Sruta in literature. This is also tacitly confirmed by Kharavela who calls it Coyatha Angas, i.e., 4+8 = 12 Angas. He also records that the Principal Scripture? had been gradually declining in volume since M.E. 165. This is also in accord with the tradition as already discussed above. The object of the Council was apparently to collect and preserve the remaining canon. Such an attempt had already been made a few decades ago by the Buddhists under the patronage of Asoka in Magadha. The institution of worship was present among the Jains. Four types of structures appear to have been built for purposes 1. Indian Archaeology - A Review, 1958-59, pp. 38-40, and 1961-62, pp. 36-37. 2. Mukhiya-kala = Mukhya-kala = Principal Utterance, i.e., the Principal Scripture as uttered by the last Tirthankara Kevalin Mahavira. It is also called Sruta, i.e., the knowledge as heard from the Tirthankara Kevalin. Dr. J.P. Jain traces the origin of the Sarasvati Movement, i.e., the movement for the redaction of the canonical knowledge among the Jains, to this Council convened by Kharavela (op. cit., p. 117).

Page #97
Jainism 71 of worship: Kaya-Nisidiya or Relic Memorial in the honour of the Arahamtas (one was excavated by Kharavela himself), Nisiya or Caitya-type structure forming part of monastery (one dedicated by Sindhula), Thupa or Stupa (worshipped by Kharavela in Mathura), and Samnivesa or temple housing an image of Jina or Tirtharkara (where he worshipped while in Magadha in the twelfth year).' The data recorded in the inscription also suggests that image worship was prevalent among the Jains in Kalinga in 424 BC when the image of Jina was taken away by the Nanda king, that Jainism was the personal faith of the king of Kalinga and his family, whom the Nanda king had defeated, and that the Nanda king was himself a follower of Jainism since otherwise he would not have taken away the image and installed it in a temple in his capital.? Mathura appears to have been a centre of Jainism in those days and there existed the age-old Stupa, as suggested in the note on the text. Here Kharavela performed the Savagahanan ceremony, which was preceded by a procession along with the Kalpa-Vrksa (Wish-fulfilling Tree) and was followed by gifts to the Brahmins and worship of the Arahasta. No such ceremony appears to be mentioned in literature. Sava-gahanam = Skt. Sarva-grahanam can mean both 'All acquisition' and 'All eclipse'. The latter appears to fit more appropriately into the context. It 1. Two torsos of naked Jain images were recovered from Lohanipur near Bankipur, Patna. These images might have been installed in that shrine. The Mauryan polish on the larger torso seems to refer to its origin in the Maurya period. The smaller torso, though identical in appearance, style and material, does not have the Mauryan polish, and thus may be earlier in date and possibly represent the Jina image brought from Kalinga in the pre-Maurya period. Jayaswal thought that a silver punch-marked coin found together with the torsos on the same level, was of variety that preceded the Mauryan coinage (J.B.O.R.S., XXII, pp. 130-32). If so, it would indicate that the shrine where these images were installed, was a pre-Mauryan structure. Ref. App. III, pp. 127-28 infra. 2.

Page #98
The Hathigumpha Inscription and the Bhabru Edict seems to suggest that for a time, however short, till the ceremony lasted, he voluntarily eclipsed and withdrew from mundane affairs. 72 The inscription also contains four symbols; one to the left of L 1-2, the second to the left of L 3-5, the third at the end of L 3, and the fourth at the end of L 16-17. The second and third symbols are respectively Svastika and Nandipada or Nandyavarta.' They are counted among the eight auspicious things required at the time of worship among the Jains. As for the first and fourth symbols which are respectively placed at the beginning and the end of the record, they do not appear to be religious symbols and perhaps represent the royal style of beginning and closing a record by appropriate sealings. Taken in that light the first symbol is probably a replica of crown and the fourth, that of royal standard. The custom of excavating caves for the use of monks was also prevalent among the Jains, as is evident from the inscriptions in the nearby caves. 2. Svastika and Nandyavarta have been found portrayed on many Jain Ayagapattas of about the beginning of the Christian era, found from Mathura and other sites. See Shah, U.P., Studies in Jaina Art, pp. 109-12.

Page #99
Epilogue BEFORE we conclude, it may be added that Kharavela has not mentioned the Mauryas simply because there was no occasion for it and no inferences can be drawn from this omission. He has mentioned the others only in a context where it was found absolutely necessary to do so since his purpose was not to give a detailed chronological history of Kalinga or even of his own dynasty. The language of the record is Prakrit and the script is Brahmi. When compared with the records of the Satavahanas and other contemporary records, a very curious fact is revealed that 2200 years ago there was no linguistic or scribal controversy in India. This is also the earliest record written in the kavya style so far discovered. The variety of information preserved in this record gives it a unique place among the sources of history. Such synchronistic, corroborative and authentic information is yet to be found in an epigraph. The evidence preserved in it may help in clearing quite a few of the historical myths created during the last few decades. Kharavela is firmly and surely placed on the historical map of India. He was the first historical king from the eastern coast to lead such extensive campaigns, and appears to be a more rightful claimant to the glory that has hitherto been given to Samudragupta who came more than 500 yeas after him, in disregard or ignorance of the data preserved in this record.

Page #100

Page #101
SECTION II THE BHABRU EDICT OF ASOKA

Page #102

Page #103
Discovery, Text and Translation THE Bhabru Edict of Asoka was a chance discovery of one Captain Burt of the late East India Company. It was found inscribed on a detached boulder on the top of the Bijak Pahar on the back of the town of Bairat on the Delhi-Jaipur road, lying 41 miles north of Jaipur, 25 miles west of Alwar and 8 miles and-a-half east "as the crow flies from Bhabru", in Rajasthan. The edict was so named after a camping station at Bhabru or Bhabra, lying "6 kos" to the west of Bairat on the old route from Delhi to Jaipur. It has since been removed to the library of the Asiatic Society of Bengal at Calcutta. Since this edict specifically mentions certain passages of the sacred Buddhist literature, the mode of addressing the Samgha and of showing reverence and faith in the Buddha, the Dharma and the Samgha, used by Asoka are typically Buddhist, and references to the Buddha and his religion as Bhagavata Budhena bhasite save se subhasite and Sadhamme chilathitike hosatiti have been traced in the Buddhist Suttas,it forms one of the most important documents for the history of the Buddhist Church and canonical literature, as also for the personal history of Asoka, and therefore it has engaged much attention of the Indologists. It was discovered in ad 1840, and the same year Capt. Kittoe and Pt. Kamala Kanta attempted to decipher it in the Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal, IX. A systematic 1. Woolner, A.C., Asoka -- Text and Glossary, Pt. I, Intro. p. xiv. Mookerji, R.K., Asoka (2nd rev. edn., 1955), p. 117 fn. 1. The expressions have been traced in the Anguttara and the Mahavyutpatti. 2.

Page #104
78 The Hathigumpha Inscription and the Bhabru Edict study of this edict began early in the nineties of the nineteenth century and over a dozen scholars have since laboured on it. This edict is one of the most well-preserved epigraphs and is contained in eight lines as follows: Li Piyadasi' Laja Magadhe i Samgham abhivadanami aha apabadhatar ca phasu vihalatam ca. L2 Vidite ve bhamte avatake hama Budhasi Dhammasi Samghasiti galaveicam pasade" ca. E kemchi bhamte L3 Bhagavata Budhena bhasite savevi se subhasite va e cu kho bhaste hamiyaye diseyavii hevam Sadhamme cilathitike hosatiti alaham hakam tam vataveviii Imam bhaste dhammapaliyayani Vinayasamukase L5 Aliyavasani Anagatabhayani Munigatha Moneyasute Upatisapasine e ce LaghuloL6 vade musavadam adhigicya Bhagavata Budhena bhasite. Etam bhamte dhammapaliyayani ichami L7 kimti bahuke bhikhupaye ca bhikhuniye ca abhikhinam sunayu' ca upadhaleyeyu ca L8 hevameva upasaka ca upasika ca. Etem bhamte imam likhapayami abhihetam ma janamta ti*. 1. For text, ref. Woolner, op.cit., p. 32; Hultzsch, E., Corpus Inscriptionum Indicarum, I, p. 172ff.; Mookerji, op.cit., pp. 212-13; Sircar, D.C., Select Inscriptions, I, p. 77; E. Senart, 1.A., XX, p. 165ff; B.M. Barua, I.H.Q., II, p. 88. Alternate readings Senart -- ii. Magadham Hultzsch - i. Priyadasi ii. Magadhe iii. abhivadetunam iv. galave v. prasade vi. sarve viii, vatave ix. suneyu x. abhipretam me janamtu ti. Barua - vii. diseyo viii. vitave

Page #105
Discovery, Text and Translation This may be rendered into English in the following way: "Priyadarsi, the King of Magadha, saluting the Samgha, and wishing them all health and happiness, thus speaks: Known is to you, Reverend Sirs, to what extent is my reverence and faith in the Buddha, the Dharma and the Samgha. Whatsoever has been said, Reverend Sirs, by the Lord Buddha, all that has, of course, been well said. But of such, Reverend Sirs, what occurs to me (to be the best) I state that so that the Saddharma (i.e., the religion preached by the Buddha) may be everlasting. 79 Reverend Sirs, these passages of the scripture as told by the Lord Buddha are the Vinayasamukase (the Buddha's teaching par excellence, i.e., the Dhammacakkapavattana Sutta), the Aliyavasani (the Ariyavamsa Sutta), the Anagatabhayani (the Anagatabhayani Sutta), the Munigatha (the Muni Sutta), the Moneyasute (the Nalaka Sutta), the Upatisapasine (the Sariputta Sutta), and the Laghulovade (the Rahulovada Sutta) on falsehood. These passages of the scripture, Reverend Sirs, I desire that most of the monks and nuns should repeatedly listen to and meditate upon, and in the same way the lay disciples, male as well female, (should act). For this reason, Reverend Sirs, am I causing this to be inscribed that they may know of my intention."1 1. Dr. B.M. Barua and Dr. Radha Kumud Mookerji (op. cit., pp. 116-18) translated it as follows: "His Gracious Majesty, King of Magadha, saluting the Samgha and wishing them all health and happiness, addresses them as follows: Known is to you, Reverend Sirs, to what extent is my reverence as well as faith in the Buddha, the Dharma and the Samgha. Whatsoever has been said, Reverend Sirs, by the Lord Buddha, all that has of course been well said. But of such, what has been selected by me that the true Dharma may be everlasting I may be privileged to state.

Page #106
80 The Hathigumpha Inscription and the Bhabru Edict Bhagavata Budhena bhasite occurring after adhigicya in L 6 should not be taken to qualify only the Laghulovade musavadam adhigicya. It appears to qualify dhammapaliyayani in L4 since all the texts cited are from the sayings of the Buddha as already stated in lines 2-4 of the edict. It would, therefore, be more appropriate to read Bhagavata Budhena bhasite with imam bhamte dhammapaliyayani and translate the passage as "Reverend Sirs, these passages of the scripture as told by the Lord Buddha are". The following, Reverend Sirs, are the passages of the scripture: 1. The excellent treatise on Moral Discipline. 2. The course of conduct followed by the Sages- modes of ideal life. 3. Fear of what may come about in future (Danger threatening the Samgha and the doctrine). 4. Poem on "who is an hermit?" 5. Discourse on Quietism. 6. The questions of Upatisya. 7. The sermon to Rahula beginning with the sermon on falsehood, as delivered by the Lord Buddha. These sections of the Dharma, Reverend Sirs, I desire that most of the reverend monks and nuns should repeatedly listen to and meditate, and in the same way, the lay disciples, male as well as female, (should act). For this reason, Reverend Sirs, am I causing this to be inscribed that they may know of my intention."

Page #107
Magadhe or Magadham THE variants in reading do not make any difference in meaning except in the case of Magadhe or Magadham in L 1. Hultzsch read Magadhe and treated it to be qualifying Priyadasi laja.1 According to him, the whole expression would be translated as "Priyadarsi, the king of Magadha". Senart read Magadham and thought that it qualified Samgham.2 The reading Magadham Samgham, to mean 'the Samgha of Magadha', has been generally rejected as the findspot of this edict in far off Rajasthan outside Magadha which traditionally comprised the Patna, Nalanda, Gaya, Rohtas and Bojpur districts of modern Bihar Pradesh, does not bear out the possibility of addressing the Samgha as the 'Samgha of Magadha'. Since the edict is inscribed on a detached boulder which can be easily transported, it is, however, not quite improbable that it might have been originally placed in a monastery in Magadha and later transplanted in its present findspot in Rajasthan, probably by a mere accident, as there is no evidence to show that a Buddhist monastery existed in the neighbourhood of Bairat in the Mauryan times or immediately afterwards. The presence of Asoka's Minor Rock Edict I in its neighbourhood does not conclusively associate the place with Buddhism as the other places where recensions of M.R.E. I have been found are not generally sought to be identifed with any 1. Hultzsch, ibid. 2. Senart, ibid. 3. Mookerji, op. cit., p. 116 fn. 5. 2

Page #108
82 The Hathigumpha Inscription and the Bhabru Edict centres of Buddhism. The presence of M.R.E. there simply denotes that Bairat (the ancient Viratanagara) was an important place in those days. Its historicity is also borne out from its references in the Mahabharata. The three Schism Edicts, also known as the Minor Pillar Edicts, were rightly set up at Kausambi, Sarnath and Sanchi, which are reputed to be great centres of Buddhism from very early times. The Bhabru Edict should also have been originally instituted at a place which was a great centre of Buddhism and the right place for its setting up would have been the monastery itself as it is addressed directly to the Samgha. The isolated evidence of the finding of this edict at the present site is, however, not quite sufficient to make this site a centre of Buddhism in the absence of any other evidence. But in the absence of any definite proof the theory of transplantation recedes into the realm of mere probabilities. More convincing appears the suggestion of Dr. J.P. Jain that till the promulgation of this edict the Buddhist Samgha was still known as the "Magadha Samgha'This suggestion of Dr. Jain finds corroboration in Dr. Bhandarkar's view that the Buddhist Samgha was undivided till the time of Asoka.? It further leads to the suggestion that by the time of Asoka the Buddhist Samgha was small and was more of local importance and that the real credit for transforming a local sect into a world religion is due to Asoka, as is also acknowledged by the Buddhists themselves. The inexplicability of Asoka's styling himself as the 'King of Magadha' in this particularly isolated instance, also tends to support this view. This discussion would make a strong presumption in favour of Magadham Samgham. 1. Other findspots are Ahraura, Sasaram, Rupnath, Gujarra, Maski, Gavimadh, Palkigundu, Siddapur, Brahmagiri, Jating-Rameshwar, Yerragudi, Rajula-Mandagiri and Delhi. Ahraura appears to be the only place connected with Buddhism, the findspot being the probable site of the Bhesakalavana where the Buddha spent one rainy season during his visit to the country of the Bhaggas. Bhandarkar, D.R., Asoka (3rd edn., 1955), p. 87. 2.

Page #109
Magadhe or Magadan On the other hand, those favouring Piyadasi laja Magadhe, seek corroboration in this edict of the Buddhist tradition about the holding of the Buddhist Council (Samgiti) under Asoka. Bhandarkar thought that Asoka should have felt the necessity of introducing himself as 'King of Magadha' as the Council might have been attended by many a Bhikkhu who did not belong to his empire." But this is a mere conjecture" in the absence of any reference to the Council in the edict itself. Asoka has mentioned several events in his edicts and there is no reason to believe that he would not have mentioned such an important event as the convening of the Council, had the edict been promulgated on that occasion. Moreover, the Council met at Pataliputra while the edict has been found hundreds of kilometres away at Bairat. The extensive distribution of the Asokan edicts in the different parts of the country also leaves little scope for an inference that the findspot of the edict was outside the empire of Asoka and hence he introduced himself as 'King of Magadha'. The extreme points are Shar-i-kuna near Kandahar in Afghanistan, Shahbazgarhi and Mansehra near Peshawar and Taxila near Rawalpindi in Pakistan, Kalsi near Dehra Dun in Uttar Pradesh, Rummindei in Nepal, Yerragudi in the Kurnool district in Andhra Pradesh, and Siddapur, Brahmagiri and JatingRameshwar in the Chitradurga district in Karnataka Pradesh. It can be explained better with reference to the administrative divisions under Asoka. The empire under Asoka appears to have been divided into five provinces: Magadha directly ruled by the Emperor with headquarters at Pataliputra, and the other provinces of Uttarapatha with headquarters at Taksasila, Avantiratha with headquarters at Ujjayini, Daksinapatha with headquarters at Suvarnagiri, and Kalinga with headquarters at Tosali, ruled by him through Kumaras or Aryaputras, i.e., the princes of blood royal, acting as his Viceroys. 1. 2. Bhandarkar, op. cit., p. 90. V.A. Smith also thinks that it is not addressed to the Council. (Asoka, p. 142 fn. 2).

Page #110
84 The Hathigumpha Inscription and the Bhabru Edict The Magadha province seems to have comprised the erstwhile janapadas of Anga, Magadha, Kasi, Kosala, Vajji, Malla, Vatsa, Cedi, Kuru, Pancala, Surasena and Matsya, its grid being roughly demarcated by the findspots of the Pillar Edicts of Asoka.1 Bairat, the traditional capital of Matsya Janapada, fell within the Magadha Province, and since this province was under the direct rule of Asoka, it was not unnatural for him to style himself as 'King of Magadha' or Magadha-raja in an edict promulgated in that province. It is also significant that nearer home, in the Barabar Cave Inscriptions, he styles himself as Piyadasi laja and not as Devanampiya Piyadasi laja. Devanampiya has been used as a synonym of raja in the different versions of R.E. VIII and K.R.E. II and has also been used as an honorific by his son Dasaratha in his inscriptions. It means that though literally it carries the sense 'beloved of the gods', it was a royal honorific equivalent to 'His Majesty', probably made current during the reign of Asoka. Piyadasi, meaning 'One whose sight is pleasing', was possibly his personal title, and was generally used with the honorific Devanampiya, but in his home province he sometimes styled himself simply as Piyadasi laja. The name Asoka appears twice in his edicts, with the appellation of Devanampiya only in the Maski recension of his M.R.E. I and complete with Devanampiya Piyadasi in the Gujarra recension of the same edict.2 This seems to settle that both Devanampiya and Piyadasi were royal honorifics or titles. In the light of the above discussion the reading Magadhe and the interpretation 'Priyadarsi, the King of Magadha', would appear to be more justified. 1. 2. The recensions of P.E. were found at Lauriya-Araraj, Nandangarh and Rampurva in the Champaran district in Bihar, at Kausambi and Meerut in Uttar Pradesh, and at Topra near Ambala in Haryana. The Schism Edicts or Minor P.E. were found at Kausambi and Sarnath in Uttar Pradesh and at Sanchi in Madhya Pradesh, and the Commemorative Pillar Edicts, at Rummindei and Nigliva in South Nepal. Maski Edict Gujarra Edict - Devanampiyasa Asokasa Devanampiyasa Piyadasino Asokarajasa -

Page #111
Identification of Scripture OF the passages of the Buddhist scripture, referred to by Asoka, the Aliyavasani has been identified with the Ariyavamsa Sutta contained in the Arguttara Catukkanipata.' The Buddha tells in this Sutta that a recluse should not grumble about cloth, food and resting place but should be contented with whatever cloth and food he gets easily and should enjoy meditation. The Anagatabhayani has been identified with the Anagatabhayani Sutta contained in the Anguttara Pancakanipata. Here the Buddha exhorts the bhikkhus to exert all the time lest old age, disease, famine, rebellion or schism should disturb them by creating unfavourable conditions. The Munigatha is the Munisutta of the Suttanipata. Here the Buddha defines a hermit as one who is homeless, detached, lonely, contented, fearless, above praise or blame, restrained, above sex, and scrupulous about non-killing of and non-injury to living beings and who lives on begging. The Moneyasute is the Nalaka Sutta of the Suttanipata. 4 This is mainly a sermon on how a bhikkhu should behave. It prescribes a code of conduct for the bhikkhus when they go to 1. 2. 3. 4. Dharmanand Kosambi, I.A., 1912, pp. 37-40. Earlier Dr. T.W. Rhys Davids sought to identify it with the Sargati Sutta (J.R.A.S., 1898, p. 639 ff; Dialogues of the Buddha, p. xiii). Kosambi, ibid. Rhys Davids, ibid. Kosambi, ibid.

Page #112
86 The Hathigumpha Inscription and the Bhabru Edict the villages and asks them mainly to restrain their tongue. The Upatisapasine has been identified with the Sariputta Sutta of the Suttanipata.' Here again the Buddha prescribes a code of behaviour for the bhikkhus and forewarns them of the difficulties of their path. The Laghulovade has been identified with the Rahulovada Sutta, also known as the Cula Rahulovada or the Ambalathika Rahulovada, of the Majjhima Nikaya (Sutta No. 61). Musavadam adhigicya helps in identification. Adhigicya has been equated with Sanskrit adhikrtya and is taken to mean 'beginning with or 'regarding'. Asoka has not indicated the subject-matter of any other passage and it is difficult to comprehend the necessity that should have occurred to him for indicating the subject-matter in this case. It may be that in his time there were several Suttas known as Rahulovada and, therefore, a distinction had to be made by indicating its subjectmatter. The sermon begins with a denunciation of falsehood in every conceivable form. The Buddha exhorts Rahula not to tell a lie even in joke. Thereafter he emphasises the need for critical examination of all bodily, vocal and mental acts. The identification of Vinayasamukase has, however, been a matter of controversy. Smith and Senart4 identified it with the First Sermon of the Buddha, better known as the Dhammacakkapavattana Sutta. A.J. Edmunds also was of the same view as he discovered in the Udana, iii, that samukkamsika was used as an adjective of dhammadesana. Kosambi was also later of the same view as he thought that perhaps vinaya could also mean'instruction' and that the First Sermon could have hardly been ignored by Asoka. 1. Kosambi, ibid., Rhys Davids sought to identify it with certain passages of the Vinaya, I. 2. Senart, ibid. 3. Smith, V.A., Oxford History of India, p. 109. 4. J.R.A.S., 1931, p. 387. 5. Kosambi, Dharmanand, Bhagavan Buddha, (Hindi, 1956), pp. 7-8.

Page #113
Identification of Scripture 87 But Barua and other scholars were guided by Vinaya in its traditional meaning in their identification of this passage. Barua identified it with the Sigalovada Suttanta of the Digha Nikaya which, according to the commentary of Buddhaghosa, contains Gihivinaya and thus applies to the house-holders as well. The Suttanta further deals with Ariyasavinaya or the Vinayasamukase in Asokan parlance which is nothing but the 'Ideal Discipline'. It also thus applies to all classes, to monks and nuns as well as to lay disciples, for whose study Asoka intended it.' S.N. Mitra, however, identified it with the Sappurisa Sutta of the Majjhima Nikaya as the words vinayadhara and 'attana ukkasseti' (= samukaso) occur in that passage.? C.D. Chatterji traced the clue to the identification of the various passages mentioned by Asoka in a story narrated by Buddhaghosa in the Visuddhimagga. It depicts an ideal monk who followed the code of conduct prescribed by the Buddha in the Rathavinita Sutta, the Nalaka Sutta, the Maha Ariyavamsa and the Tuvataka Sutta, the first three, according to Chatterji, being the same as the Upatisapasine, the Moneyasute and the Aliyavasani of Asoka. He equates the Tuvataka Sutta in which the Buddha discourses on patipada, patimokkha, and samadhi, with the Vinayasamukase of Asoka as these discourses may well make up the cream of Vinaya, and he feels, what Buddhaghosa selected as the most important and representative for a bhikkhu might well have been cited by Asoka too.3 The edict is, in fact, meant for the monks and nuns as well as the lay disciples. The other passages besides laying down the code for clergy, are also meant for the laity. The main object of Asoka in asking the laity to read and meditate upon these passages appears to be simply to enjoin on the laity the duty to see that the clergy did not degenerate. This duty could be 1. 2. J.R.A.S., 1915, p. 809. 1.A.,1919, pp. 8-11. Mookerji, op. cit., pp. 117-18 fn. 8. D.C. Sircar identified the first text with the Atthavasavagga contained in the Anguttara (J.D.L., XX).

Page #114
88 The Hathigumpha Inscription and the Bhabru Edict discharged efficiently only if the laity knew the standards by which to judge a monk or nun. It would thus be wrong to surmise that Asoka was laying down the rules of conduct for monks and nuns alone. It also passes comprehension that Asoka should have ignored the first sermon which forms the very basis of the entire Buddhist philosophy, the sara of the Buddha's teachings in Asokan parlance. The first sermon really deserved the first place and was rightly mentioned first by Asoka as Vinayasamukase. Root ni with prefix vi has been used in the meaning of 'to instruct, to educate, to direct in the Mahabharata, and the word vinaya itself has been used to mean "education, discipline, control, leading, guidance, training (moral)' in the same Epic. 1 In the Pali canon also ni with prefix vi has been used in the meaning of to teach'.2 Although in the Pali canon samukkamsa does not appear in the meaning of 'teachings of the Buddha', the expression samukkamsika occurs at several places as comprising the Four Noble Truths, namely, Dukkham, Samudayam, Nirodham and Maggam, expounded in the First Sermon. In the light of the above discussion it would be only logical to interpret Vinayasamukase (Skt. Vinaya-samut-karsah =the Vinaya par excellence) as the Buddha's teaching par excellence and identify it with the First Sermon or the Dhammacakkapavattana Sutta. It is just possible that in the days of Asoka that sermon was actually known as named by him. 1. 2. Monier-Willams, M., A Sanskrit-English Dictionary, p. 971. For example, Arguttara, IV, Sutta 111, and Majjhima, Suttas 107 and 147, cited by Kosambi, op. cit., p. 7. Ref. the Upali Sutta in the Majjhima Nikaya and the Ambattha Sutta in the Digha Nikaya. The concluding portion of the Ambattha Sutta: Yada bhagava annasi brahmanam Pokkharasatim kallacittam muducittam vinivaranacittam udaggacittam pasantacittam atha ya Buddhanam samukkamsika dhammadesana tam pakasesi dukkham samudayam nirodham maggam.

Page #115
Buddhism and Asoka SENART has pointed out that it is strange that if the Buddhist canon was defined and closed by the time of Asoka, as stated in the southern legends, he should select for indicating the Buddha's lessons pieces so little characteristic, so short and so devoid of dogmatic importance as those which he cites appear to be, and that, too, without even alluding to the great collection of which the title alone would have been infinitely more significant and to which it would be so natural to appeal when addressing the Samgha. Several of the Buddhist scholars have also since expressed doubts about the correctness of the southern legends.Three of the seven passages mentioned by Asoka have been traced in the Suttanipata of the Khuddaka Nikaya of the Suttapitaka. They are in verse. Of the remaining passages, two have been traced in the Anguttara Nikaya and one in the Majjhima Nikaya of the same pitaka. It is difficult to draw any inference from this but it may be said that the Suttanipata perhaps represents the oldest collection of the Buddha's teachings and perhaps also the verse portions are older than others. It is just possible that the Vinayapitaka as it is known today, did not exist then and perhaps only a very contracted version of the Suttapitaka represented the teachings of the Buddha. The Southern legends only hint towards an attempt at consolidating the teachings of the Buddha in the time of Asoka. 1. 2. Senart, E., Les Inscriptiones de Piyadasi. Kosambi, op. cit., pp. 6-7.

Page #116
90 The Hathigumpha Inscription and the Bhabru Edict It would be wrong to assume that the whole canon was defined and closed then. It was, in fact, in a process of evolution and this process continued at least till the first century of the Christian Era. Additions and alterations must have been continuously made suiting to the exigencis of time and land. This tendency is more clearly exhibited in the development of the various schools. The evidence afforded within the inscriptions of Asoka suggests that he did not cause any edict to be incised on rocks and pillars earlier than his twelfth regnal year. The earliest of his records are R.E. I-IV, M.R.E. I-II, and the two Barabar Cave Inscriptions, of the Year 12. In M.R.E. I he declares his association with the Samgha for the first time. He refers to his visit to the Samgha and to the installation of the Buddha's relics, as also to his setting out on pilgrimage, in this edict. His visit to the Samgha referred to therein could not have been the occasion for giving instructions to the Samgha. The position of the Schism Edict on the Allahabad Pillar just below P.E. I-VI suggests that the Schism Edicts were issued in the Year 26 simultaneously with P.E. I-VI. Asoka assumes the role of the mentor of the Samgha in the Schism Edicts. He also ordains the laity to be mindful of the conduct of the monks and nuns so that they may not violate his orders. This was also the occasion when he should have thought it fit to prescribe compulsory study of certain passages of the scripture so that all members of the congregation might be reminded of the fundamentals of the Buddha's teachings as well as of the ideal conduct prescribed for the bhiksus and bhiksunis. The Bhabru Edict thus appears to have been issued at the same time as the Schism Edicts. Possibly there were more recensions of this edict, supplied to all the important monastic establishments, but unfortunately only one recension is now available. It is not addressed to a particularly local Samgha but it is addressed to the Samgha generally. By its very nature it appears to be supplementing the Schism Edicts and seems to confirm the assumption of mentor's role by Asoka vis-a-vis the Samgha in his later days.

Page #117
Budhism and Asoka 91 The schismatic tendencies in the Buddhist Samgha had made their ugly appearance during the life-time of the Buddha himself. After Asoka had extended royal patronage to Buddhism, made a serious attempt to consolidate the Buddha's teachings by convening a Buddhist Council and planned systematic programme for propagating them not only within his empire but also in foreign lands by sending missionaries, it was only natural for him to deal with such tendencies with a firm hand. The action appears to have been two-fold: educative as in the Bhabru Edict and punitive as in the Schism Edicts. Asoka has spoken of his diligence in several edicts. The Bhabru Edict is an example of his diligence; it not only settles the controversy about his conversion to Buddhism but it also portrays him as a diligent Buddhist who had studied the scripture and obtained such mastery of the religious tenets that he could recommend even to the Samgha what it should specially read. He was, however, not a bigot. Buddhism was his personal faith and although he did much for its propagation, he was tolerant of the different creeds and gave patronage to all alike as a king. This tradition of secularism was followed by all the great kings of ancient India. Kharavela, coming fifty years after Asoka, was a follower of Jainism and his services to Jainism were also comparable to those of Asoka to Buddhism, but he took pride in styling himself as 'the embellisher of all temples' and as the worshipper of all religions'.

Page #118

Page #119
SECTION III PRAKRIT AND BRAHMI

Page #120

Page #121
Genesis of the Prakrit Languages NAMISADHU seems to have struck the right note when he explains the word prakrta as derived from prakrti in the sense of natural speech free from the rules of grammarians.1 He wrote it in AD 1068 when the literary forms of Prakrit had already been fossilised. The other explanation offered by him, deriving it from prak krta, to mean 'created of old',2 is in consonance with his faith that the language of the Arsa canon, Ardha-Magadhi, is the language of the gods, and is not very relevant to a philological discussion. In the sixties of the nineteenth century E.B. Cowell brought out Vararuci's Prakrta-Prakasa with the Manorama commentary of Bhamaha, and thenceforth Prakrit has engaged the attention of many linguists and Indologists. The pioneers in the field are Hermann Jacobi, Richard Pischel, A.F.R. Hoernle, George Buhler, Sten Konow, A.C. Woolner, Muni Jina Vijaya, Banarasi Das Jain and A.N. Upadhye. The linguistic survey of George Grierson, the philological deliberations of Suniti Kumar Chatterji, the volumes of Maurice Winternitz on the history of Indian literature, the discovery of Prakrit and Sanskrit texts, and an in-depth study of the Pali, Prakrit, Apabhramsa and Sanskrit works, as also of the epigraphic and numismatic material, during the last one-hundred-thirty years or so, have 1 1. Vide Namisadhu's commentary on Rudrata's Kavyalamkara, 2, 12. 2. Ibid. 3. Arisa-vayane siddham devanam Addhamagaha vani.

Page #122
96 The Hathigumpha Inscription and the Bhabru Edict expanded and elaborated the problem of the linguistic bases of the Indian panorama. During all this effort a bias was assiduously tilted towards finding some remote ancestry to link the Indian intelligentsia with the Eruo-Anglican rulers, to build up the myth that India was a no-man's land and it was filled by the Dasa (Dravidians). Nisada (Austrics), Kirata (Mongoloids) and Arya (Nordics, the vast Indo-European community, branching off to the IndoIranian from which shot out the Indo-Aryans who composed the Vedas in the Sapta-Sindhu), and lastly, to consign the entire literary effort, nay the speech effort itself, to the Indo-Aryan genius as if whoever preceded them were a mute people. The fallacy of this stupendous task is obvious but the emotional strains ingrained therein dissuade from an objective appraisal. To put it briefly, the Indian linguistic history has been built up on the premise that there are three strata of language development in India, firstly the Old Indo-Aryan representing successively the Vedic, the Brahmana and the classical Sanskrit (developed out of the Udicya or northern dialect of the Vedic Aryans and codified by Panini); secondly, the Middle Indo-Aryan, representing the Prakrits developing out of the Madhyadesiya and Pracya dialects of the Vedic Aryans, and the Apabhramsa, a further debasement of the Devabhasa; and lastly, the New Indo-Aryan representing different vibhasa which finally emerged as the present-day vernaculars Three potent factors have been kept out of sight in projecting this development. One such factor is that Sanskrit was confined to a small minority which assiduously maintained its aloofness from the masses; the masses spoke different tongues which were the so many patois hardly related to Sanskrit. The second important factor is that there is specific evidence on record that a lingua franca was in vogue throughout the sub-continent as far north-west as the Kabul valley, as far north as the Nepalese Tarai, as far east as the Bengal coast, as far south as the North Penner and as far west as Saurastra, which was intelligible to

Page #123
Genesis of the Prakrit Languages 97 and used by the people in general with slight phonetic variations, and was written and read in a common script throughout the land to the south and east of the Sutlej, much in the same way as Hindi written in Devanagari is intelligible to all Indians today except when they take a stance like the Sanskrit-nistha Brahmins of Asoka Maurya's days, e.g., the Urdu protagonists, or get worked up with regional chauvinism fanned for political ends. And the third substantial factor is that out of the numerous dialects only one becomes the koine or literary norm, just as Khadi-boli is the koine of Hindi language and Meridian dialect is the koine of English language and that grammar follows, and does not precede, the language. The people's language is represented by the Asokan edicts and the numerous records of the Satavahanas, Sungas and Kalingas, as also of the Greeks, Sakas and Kusanas, up to the second century AD. What has come down to us as the Prakrit literature, be it Pali of the Buddhists, Maharastri and Sauraseni as well as Ardha-Magadhi of the Jains, or Magadhi, Maharastri, Sauraseni and Paisaci Prakrit of the Sanskrit dramatists, at the time of its redaction the literary form had already been fossilised and, if not never, it seldom represented the popular medium. Although Vararuci, who wrote Varttikas on Panini and lived probably in fifth century AD, is the first to give a grammar for Prakrit, and Bhamaha (assigned to the seventh century AD) wrote commentary on it, the most important of the Prakrit grammars is the chapter VIII of the Siddha-Hemacandra of Hemacandra Suri (AD 1088-1172) and interestingly all these grammarians were Sanskritists who added only a chapter on Prakrit in their work on Sanskrit grammar. This can explain that the literary Prakrit as extant now was systematised, and the works were possibly cleansed of colloqualisms by the learned pundits to bring them in tune with the grammatical codes and at par with the language of the sista (urbanised, in essence, an adept in the use of chaste Sanskrit) of the day. The language used by Asoka Maurya (272-236 BC) in his inscriptions provides us with a window on the language of the

Page #124
98 The Hathigumpha Inscription and the Bhabru Edict masses in the first millennium before Christ. According to the phonetic variations, four groups are indicated: 1. The region to the west of the Sutlej, falling within the Viceroyalty of Taksasila, and represented by the Rock Edicts at Shahbazgarhi and Mansehra. Besides the Indian language written in the Kharosthi script, the Greek and Aramaic languages written in their respective scripts were also in use, mostly beyond the Khyber and Bolan passes. 2. The region to the east and south of the Sutlej, covering the entire Gangetic basin, with centre at Pataliputra, and represented by the Rock Edicts at Kalsi, Dhauli and Jaugad, Pillar Edicts in Haryana, Uttar Pradesh and Bihar, and the Minor Rock and Pillar Edicts in Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh and Bihar - all written in Prakrit but in the Brahmi script. -------- 3. The region controlled by the Viceroyalty of Ujjayini, and represented by the Rock Edicts at Girnar and Sopara, written in Prakrit in the Brahmi script. 4. The region controlled by the Viceroyalty at Suvarnagiri, and represented by the Edicts in Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka Pradesh, written in Prakrit in the Brahmi script. The same form of language and script continued for about 500 years after Asoka when it was supplanted by panegyrics and eulogies in classical Sanskrit of the kavya style. The earliest of the inscriptions in Sanskrit is the Sudarsana Lake Inscription of Rudradaman dated in AD 150 and the most important of the lucid panegyrics (prasasti) is that of Harisena composed for Samudragupta and inscribed on the Asokan pillar at Allahabad in c. AD 360. Incidentally, both the above records are preserved on the same sites which contain Asoka's records. Earlier to Rudradaman's records, there are only three pieces in Sanskrit: one is a small inscription of one Dhana claiming to be sixth in

Page #125
Genesis of the Prakrit Languages descent from Pusyamitra who had performed two Horsesacrifices, and is from Ayodhya; the other two are known as the Ghoshundi and Hathiwara grants and their provenance is near Jaipur; they cannot be pushed beyond the beginning of the Christian Era. It is curious to note that despite the projected zeal of the Sungas for the revival of Brahmanical ritualism and reinstatement of Sanskrit scholarship, all the Sunga records known so far are in Prakrit, and a Greek, Heliodorus by name, who consecrated a Garuda-dhvaja to propitiate Visnu in the kingdom of Sunga Bhagbhadra at Vidisha, possibly the capital, also made his record in Prakrit in the Brahmi script. The best narrative record from the historical point of view is that of Kharavela who got it recorded in c. 172 BC on the Hathigumpha on the Udayagiri near Bhubaneshwar in Orissa, in Prakrit in the Brahmi script, continuing the tradition of the Mauryan administration. This tradition was also continued by the Satavahanas in the Narmada-Godavari valley, whence they carried it down to Kanchipuram where they created the Thondimandalam and founded the Pallava Kingdom with Prakrit as the court language.1 The dynasty of Kharavela as well as that of the Satavahanas or Andhra-bhrtyas, were founded by the servants, possibly of the Mahamatra rank, of the Maurya Empire. Just as inscriptions in Sanskrit were rare before AD 150 so were inscriptions in Prakrit rare after the Gupta period, say AD 500 onwards. A notable example is provided by the record of Kakkuka, found near Ghatayala in Jodhpur District, dated in Samvat 918 (AD 861). It is in kavya style, composed in chaste Jain Maharastri, and contains 23 verses, recording the founding of a Jain temple, establishing of a market and erecting of two pillars, and inter alia mentions the curious fact that he had descended from a Brahmin father and a Ksatriya mother.2 1. 2. 99 Ref. A. Chakravartinayanar's Historical Introduction to Pancastikayasara, pp. ix-xii. J.R.A.S., 1855, Vol: 27, p. 513; Woolner, A.C., Introduction to Prakrit, pp. 146-51.

Page #126
The Hathigumpha Inscription and the Bhabru Edict The Jains and the Buddhists maintain that Mahavira and the Buddha had preached in the people's language. Among the Jains, the Svetambara Agamas are in Ardha-Magadhi and the early Digambara works in Jain Sauraseni. The Theravada Buddhist canon is in Pali. The area of both Mahavira and the Buddha was the same, namely, eastern Uttar Pradesh and north and central Bihar. Therefore the language of the two teachers ought to be the same because they wandered among the same people. But then why this divergence is there, has been a baffling question. 100 A key to this riddle is provided by the language of the Asokan edicts, especially his Calcutta-Bairat inscription where he quotes certain passages from the scripture. It postulates that there must have been some collection from which he drew upon and it was possibly in the Magadhi as spoken in that region (Region No. 2 above). The discovery of Asvaghosa's plays in Khotan further indicated that they were in a Prakrit not akin to Pali,1 and hence it would not be pertinent to suppose that the Buddha spoke Pali. Woolner notes, "Pali originally meaning a 'boundary, limit, or line' was applied to the canon of the Hinayana Buddhists. Thence it is used of the language of that canon, found also in some canonical books: all being preserved in what were originally the missionary churches of Ceylon, Burma and Siam." He also notes that Pali is not Magadhi. It has been supposed that it might be the language of Ujjain whence Mahendra took the sacred Canon to Ceylon, or it might be the language of the Kalinga country because of certain resemblances with the language of Kharavela's record, or it might be from some place near the Vindhyas because of some points of resemblance with Paisaci, or it might be an old form of Sauraseni. Woolner concludes, "Whatever may be the exact truth of the matter, it is clear that Pali contains several different strands in its composition and that it varies also according to its age. The 1. Woolner, op. cit., p. 74; Luders, Bruchstucke Buddhstischer Dramen. 2. Woolner, op. cit., p. 71.

Page #127
Genesis of the Prakrit Languages 101 oldest type is seen in the Gathas, then come the prose portions of the Canon followed by non-canonical literature and finally still later layers. The development of Pali has been influenced by Sanskrit." Similarly as the Brahmins detested the Vratyas who did not owe allegiance to the Vedic fire-cult and the Brahmanic social and religous organisation and called the Pracyas or Easterners as being asuriya or demoniac, i.e., barbarian and hostile in nature, so the Pracya Vratya thinkers boycotted Sanskrit and discarded the Brahmanic concept of social discrimination. The Buddha accordingly bade his followers to learn his teachings in their own language, and thus the ground was prepared where the original teachings could be redacted in different dialects. The Theravada Canon was reduced to writing in the first century BC. Winternitz aptly notes that 'the monks of Ceylon were bent on preserving and passing on the texts written in the language once established for them in India. In all probability these monks were just as conscientious regarding the contents as regarding the language, and preserved and handed down to us the texts of the Tipitaka which was written down in the Pali language, with rare fidelity during the last two thousand years."4 1. 2: Woolner, op.cit., pp. 72-73. Chatterji, S.K., Indo-Aryan and Hindi, pp. 60-61. Ibid., p. 64. When two Brahmin disciples of the Buddha suggested that his teachings should be translated into the learned man's tongue (Sanskrit) from the very debased vernacular of the East (Pracya dialect), he refused to accept the suggestion and, instead, recommended that men should study his word 'each in his own language' (sakaya niruttiya). (vide, Culla-vagga, v 33; cf. Majjhima-Nikaya 139). Also refer Winternitz, W., A History of Indian Literature, Vol. II, pp. 60105. Winterntz, op. cit., p. 14. 4.

Page #128
The Hathigumpha Inscription and the Bhabru Edict The redaction of the Jain Canon followed a more devious route. There is a tradition that there was a twelve-year famine in Magadha about 150 years after the nirvana of Mahavira when a portion of the Samgha migrated to South India under the leadership of Bhadrabahu I, the last of the Sruta-kevalins. After the famine a Council was convened by the members of the Samgha who had stayed behind in the north, for the restoration of the sacred canon, as so many monks who were the repositories of the sacred lore, had been dead. The representatives from the south did not join it, nor they accepted the Canon so compiled by the ascetics of the north who had become slack in ascetic practices to some extent due to the exigencies of famine. Thus followed the Schism as the Digambaras and the Svetambaras. The Svetambaras finally redacted the Canon as preserved with them at the Pataliputra Council, under Devardhigani at Vallabhi in M.E. 983 (AD 456).1 In course of time, as passed through word of mouth it was affected by the regional dialects to some extent, but in essence retained an archaic character in language. This was termed as Ardha-Magadhi. It appears to be the Magadhi which was largely influenced by Sauraseni. The Samgha that travelled to South India, redacted their procanonical literature in the Prakrit that they had brought with them. A.N. Upadhye calls it Jain Sauraseni.2 He has traced common verses in the South Indian Digambara pro-canonical literature and the Svetambara Ardha-Magadhi Agama literature, and has concluded that it proves their common heritage. The redaction of the Digambara literature started with Kunda-kunda who succeeded to pontificate in 8 BC. He wrote in Prakrit (Jain Sauraseni) 84 Pahudas.4 The Svetambaras took 102 1. A.N. Upadhye's Introduction to Pravacanasara, p. 177; Winternitz, op. cit., pp. 431-35. Upadhye, op. cit., pp. 115-17. Ibid., pp. 113-15, 123. Jain, J.P., The Jaina Sources of the History of Ancient India, pp. 12026. 2. 3. 4.

Page #129
Genesis of the Prakrit Languages 103 to writing some 450 years after Kunda-kunda. Their centre had shifted from Magadha to Ujjayini, and later on to Vallabhi, which factor contributed to their taking to Maharastri Prakrit for their pro-canonical literature. Distinct from the literary Prakrit used in Sanskrit dramas, the Maharastri Prakrit was the lingua franca of the region and was used as vehicle for their compositions by the Svetambara Jains particularly, so it came to be identified as the Jain Maharastri. The material point to be noted here is that as the Pali survived in a form in which it reached Sri Lanka, so the Ardha-Magadhi, Jain Sauraseni and Jain Maharastri survived in a form in which they were once adopted by the two sects of the Jains, and this survival was possible for two reasons one was the seclusion and removal from the centre of their origin, and the other was the sanctity imposed on the scripture as Arsa, hence not subject to interference prima facie. - It is inferred from Hathigumpha Inscription of Kharavela of Kalinga that a Council of monks for the recitation of the Canon was convened 355 years after Mahavira's nirvana, i.e., in 172 BC. There is no mention of this Council either in the Svetambara or in the Digambara literature. There is a possibility that an attempt was then made to reconcile the Schism, or it might have been simply a congregation of the Digambara monks, but nothing definite can be said. The foregoing discussion postulates a review of our approach to the study of Prakrit languages and to tracing the linguistic developments in India in an objective manner, taking Prakrit as prakrta and Sanskrit as samskrta modes of expression and basing it on the Indian scene first of all.

Page #130

Page #131
Tradition of Writing, and Scripts, in Ancient India The discovery of a script on seals belonging to the chalcolithic civilisation of the Indus Valley, has established the tradition of writing in India as far back as 3500 BC at least and has belied the speculations of the import' theory enthusiasts. Its points of resemblance with the Egyptian, the Sumerian and the ProtoElamite scripts have been analysed by G.R. Hunter: The entire body of anthropomorphic signs have Egyptian equivalents which are virtually exact; these signs have no parallels in the Sumerian or the Proto-Elamite. There are many of the signs that are exactly paralleled in the Proto-Elamite and Jemdet-Nasr tablets; they have no conceivable morphological equivalent in the Egyptian. There is a considerable proportion of signs that are common to all the three scripts, such as the signs for tree, bird, fish. The less obvious and more conventionalised ideograms, especially those that are so conventionalised that their pictographic origin is hardly determinable, show a marked correspondence, and in a lesser degree, as in the Proto-Elamite, where easily recognisable picto graphs show the same variations. He concludes that "it is possible that all three had a common ancestry, and that the Egyptian element in our script alone was

Page #132
106 The Hathigumpha Inscription and the Bhabru Edict borrowed. It is even possible that all four scripts may have had a common origin." It is accepted by all savants who have worked on the ancient civilisations in the Nile, Euphrates and Indus valleys, that there was intercommunication. There is not much evidence to support the hypothesis that these civilisations had a common ancestry. In the present state of our knowledge, as borne out by the analysis of Hunter as well, the safe surmise would be that the three civilisations developed independently and the scripts they gave were products of indigenous effort, but in course of time they benefitted and enriched by mutual intercourse. Such instances of mutual communion are known throughout the known course of history to date among the developed peoples. The Indus Valley script appears to consist of ideographs, morphographs and phonographs. Efforts at its decipherment are eluding because of one basic factor that a narrative inscription has yet to be discovered. The specimens have been found on seals, mainly clay tablets, the specific purpose of which is yet to be determined. They, however, prove the fundamental that the art of writing or redacting thoughts morphologically, was invented in the Indus Valley not later than any other civilised community hitherto known. The common writing material has always been perishable media. If today, despite all the scientific and technological advancement, we are unable to create paper which would last longer than a few hundred years with all the best care, we should not wonder if manuscripts on bhurja-patra (birch-bark) or tadapatra (palm-leaf) or some variety of paper or wood are not found 1. The Script of Harappa and Mohenjodaro and its connection with other scripts, pp. 45-47. K.N. Dikshit (Prehistoric Civilisation of the Indus Valley, p. 40) and R.B. Pandey (Indian Palaeography, pp. 34-35) would have us believe that the Nile and Euphrates civilisations were also the product of the Aryan genius of Indian origin. David Diringer (The Alphabet, p. 85) is on the other extreme and finds it hard to believe that script could originate in the Indus Valley.

Page #133
Tradition of Writing, and Scripts, in Ancient India 107 beyond a millennium. Inscribed copper or silver carries us only as far as the beginning of the Christian Era. The best preserved specimens are on stone, and a few on clay, that take us as far back as the middle of the sixth century Bc. But they provide positive evidence that writing was a common-place thing at that time. Moulding in clay and incision in stone could follow only after the draft had been written down on a common medium. Moulders and engravers would be more usually copyists though in some cases they could be calligraphists as well. This discussion leads us to the suggestion that there could not have been a void between the known specimens of the Indus Valley script, at the lower limit dating back to the second millennium BC, and the Piprahwa Vase Inscription which records the dedication of a relic casket of the Buddha by his Sakya brethren presumably immediately after his parinirvana in 544 BC. This is also indicated by the mass of literature in the form of Vedic Samhitas, Brahmanas and Upanisads, and Sramanic philosophies, besides grammar which Panini, in c. eighth century BC, stylised and codified quoting earlier authorities. The grammar of Panini presupposes the morphology of aksara or letter; the roots path (to read) and likh (to write) are positive indications. The extant specimens of earliest Indian scripts fall into two categories. One set is called the Brahmi Script which was written from left to right and was in use throughout the vast expanse of the Indian subcontinent to the east of the R. Sutlej. It is possible to trace the development of modern Indian scripts from the Brahmi from sixth century BC onwards. It was a fully developed script in the sixth century BC, with letters divided into vowels and consonants and with medials and phonetics. The other set is called the Kharosti script which was written from right to left. It was in use to the west of the R. Sutlej, mainly around Taxila in the Sindhu-Jhelum Doab and the Swat 1. Sukitibhatinam Sabhaginikanam saputadalanam Iyam salilanidhane Budhasa bhagavate Sakiyanam - I.A., XXXVI, p. 17ff. Piprahwa is in the Siddharthnagar district of Uttar Pradesh.

Page #134
108 The Hathigumpha Inscription and the Bhabru Edict valley during third ceutury BC to fourth century AD. To the east of the Sutlej it was brought to Mathura on the western bank of the R.Yamuna by the Saka Satraps who preceded the Kusanas, in the first century Bc. The Sakas, however, did not carry it to Saurastra and Ujjayini where they used the Brahmi in vogue there. It has only short vowels and short medials, and lesser number of letters as compared to the Brahmi. Its currency in India to the west of the Sutlej also ceased by the fourth century AD and traces of any developmental sequence as in the case of the Brahmi, are also not available. The decipherment of the Brahmi and Kharosti characters was a long and arduous task. It took nearly a century to complete the job. Contributions of James Prinsep, George Buhler and Alexander Cunningham are significant. Nomenclature was made easy by the Fa-Wan-Shu-Lin, the Chinese Encyclopaedia composed in AD 668. It records that the invention of writing was made by three divine powers: the first of these was Fan (Brahma), who invented the Brahmi script, which runs from the left to the right; the second divine power was Kia-lu (Kharosta) who invented Kharosti, which runs from the right to the left; and the third and the least important was Tsam-ki, the script invented by whom runs from the up to the down. It also informs that the first two divine powers were born in India and the third in China.1 The Edicts of Asoka in both Brahmi and Kharosti scripts provide positive evidence that both these scripts were in use in the third century BC. Rare manuscripts of the Dhammapada and other Buddhist works have been found in Khotan beyond the Karakoram in Central Asia which show that though the Kharosti script was forgotten in the land of its birth, it continued to be in use beyond its borders through the missionaries of Buddhism and could claim a place of honour in the Chinese Encyclopaedia in the seventh century AD. Babylonian and Oriental Records, I. 59; Pandey, R.B., Indian Palaeography, p. 25.

Page #135
Tradition of Writing, and Scripts, in Ancient India 109 It is a strange fact that the names of these scripts are not found in the Brahmanical literature. Panini also mentions only the Yavanani-lipi as an illustration.1 Asoka also ignores to give the name of the scripts used by him when he enumerates so many other things in his Pillar Edict VII. The Lalitavistara, biography of the Buddha in Sanskrit, dateable in the secondthird century AD which had been translated into the Chinese in AD 308, gives a list of 64 scripts. The list begins with Brahmi and Kharosti, and includes such regional scripts as Puskarasari (of Puskalavati), Anga, Vanga, Magadha, Dravida, Kanari, Daksina, Uparagauda and Purvavideha, besides tribal scripts such as Sakari, Darada, Khasya, Naga, Yaksa, Gandharva, Kinnara and Garuda, and foreign scripts named Cina, Huna, Asura and Uttarakurudvipa. The remaining names seem to suggest styles and are not of any help in identifying the scripts. The list does not mention the Yavana or Greek script, possibly because by the time of its composition the Greek script had ceased to be in use in India. According to the Jain tradition, Rsabhanatha, the first Tirthankara, had taught his two daughters Brahmi and Sundari respectively the alphabets and numerals, and hence the script was called after Brahmi and came to be known as the Brahmi. The Bhagavatisutra makes salutation to the Brahmi script (Namo Bambhiye liviye). The Pannavanasutra and the Samavayamgasutra give a list of 18 scripts. The list begins with Bambhi and places Kharotthi at No. 4. It includes regional scripts such as Dosapuriya, Pukkharasariya, Bhogavaiga, Paharaiya and Damili, and tribal scripts named Gamdhavva and Polimdi. The only foreign script named is Javanali or Javanaliya (Greek) and it is mentioned at No. 2; this suggests that the list is older than the Lalitavistara list; the Greek script was in use in the Seleucid Provinces ceded by Seleukos to Candragupta Maurya, was used by the Indo-Greeks, IndoParthians, Indo-Scythians and the Kusanas in the Upper Indus (now in Pakistan), and Vasudeva (AD 139-170) of the House of 1. Astadhyayi, III.2.21.

Page #136
110 The Hathigumpha Inscription and the Bhabru Edict Kaniska was the last ruler to use it on his coins. Names common to the lists of the Lalitavistara and the Jain Sutras are Brahmi and Kharosti, the regional Puskarasari and Dravida, and the tribal Gandharva. The first positive evidence of the prevalence of different scripts is provided by the widespread inscriptions of Asoka. To the east of the R. Sutlej all his inscriptions are only in one script - the Brahmi, but to the west of the Sutlej his inscriptions have been found in three scripts - the Kharosti, the Aramaic and the Greek. Inscriptions in the Aramaic script and language have been discovered at Taxila (Rawalpindi district, Pakistan), Pule-Darunt (Laghman, near Jalalabad, Afghanistan) and Shari-Kuna (near Kandahar, Afghanistan). The Shar-i-Kuna record is bilingual and it has a recension in the Greek script and language as well. A record only in the Greek script and language has also been found at Kandahar. Two recensions of Asoka's 14 Rock Edicts have been found incised in the Kharosti script and Prakrit language at Mansehra (Hazara district) and Shahbazgarhi (near Charsadda, Peshawar district) in NorthWest Pakistan. In interpreting the palaeographic evidence two factors should also be kept in view, namely the scribe's hand and the material on which the matter is inscribed. Change in general contours of letters takes a long time to take effect. In that light the stages in the development of Brahmi script would be AsokanBrahmi, Kusana-Brahmi and Gupta-Brahmi. Whereas the Asokan-Brahmi is plain, the Kusana-Brahmi develops angularities and the Gupta-Brahmi develops curvatures. Inscriptions dating prior to the Christian Era are in the AsokanBrahmi, those of first to third century AD are in the KusanaBrahmi and those of fourth to sixth century AD are in the GuptaBrahmi. In adducing the date of a record it would not be proper only to compare its style of scribing with some record found at a distant site. The internal evidence of the record itself should also be looked into to determine its date.

Page #137
{una bhagnAMzoM ke pATha jo par3he jA sakate haiM ( ) meM diye gaye haiM tathA una bhagnAMzoM ke saMbhAvita evaM prastAvita pATha jo miTa cuke haiM [ ] meM diye gaye haiN| } paMkti 1 namo arahaMtAnaM ( / ) namo sava - sidhAnaM ( 11 ) airena mahArAjena mahAmeghavAhanena ceti-sa - rAjava ( 1) sa-vadhanena pasatha-subha- lakhanena caturaMta - luThaNa-guNa- upetena kaliMgAdhipatinA siri-khAravelena 2. paMdarasa - vasAni siri-kaDAra - sarIra-vatA kIDitA kumAra kIDikA ( / ) tato lekha - rUpa- gaNanA - vavahAra - vidhi-visAradena sava-vijAvadAtena nava-vasAni yovaraja Appendix I khAravela ke hAthIgumphA lekha ke saMzodhita pATha kI nAgarI lipi meM anukRti 4 ( ) pasAsitaM ( / ) saMpuNa - catuvIsati - vaso tadAni vadhamAnasesa- yovanAbhivijayo tatiye - 3 kaliMga - rAjavaMse- purisayuge mahArAjAbhisecanaM pApunAti (1) abhisitamato ca padhame vase vAta- vihata-gopura- pAkAra-nivesanaM paTisaMkhArayati kaliMga nagari - khibIraM sitala - taDAga - pADiyo ca baMdhAyati savUyAna- paTisaMthapanaM ca kArayati panatIsAhi-sata - sahasehi (, ) pakatiyo ca raMjayati ( / ) dutiye ca vase acitayitA sAtakaniM pachima disaM haya-gaja - nara- radha bahulaM daMDa paThApayati kahanA - gatAya ca senAya vitAsiti asika-nagaraM ( / ) tatiye puna vase 5 gaMdhava - veda- budho dapa- nata-gIta-vAdita - saMdaMsanAhi usava- samAja - kArApanAhi ca kIDayati nagari ( 1 ) tathA cakuthe vase vijAdharAdhivAsaM ahata - puva-kaliMga-puvarAja (f) aa (`) (f) (f) a... vitadha-makuTa-sabila (dhi) te ca nikhita-chata 6 bhiMgAre hita - ratana-sApateye sava-raThika-bhojake pAde vaMdApayati ( 1 ) paMcame ca dAnI se naMdarAja - ti-vasa-sata oghATitaM tanusuliyavATA -paNADiM nagaraM pavesayati . ( 1 ) abhisito ca [chaThe vase] rAjaseyaM saMdasayaMto savakara-vaNa sa

Page #138
112 The Hathigumpha Inscription and the Bhabru Edict 7 anugaha-anekAni sata-sahasAni visajati pora-jAnapadaM ( 1 ) satame ca vase pasAsato vajiragharavati-ghusita-gharini* sa(I) matuka-pada puMna diyA / ta pA| punAti | ( 1 ) aThame ca vase mahatA-senAya (apati)hata-(bhi)ti goradhagiri 8 dhAtApayitA rAjagaha-napa( - ) pIDapayati ( 1 ) etinaM ca kaMmapadAna-panAdena saMbita-senAvAhane vipamu( -- citu madhuraM apayAto yamanA-[nadI] . . . savara-rAjAna ca] . . . . gachati) ( 1 ) palavabhAra9 kaparukha-haya gaja-radha-saha yaMte sava-gharAvAsa( 1 )-pUjita]-Tha ( . ) [pa] (pUjA)ya sava-gahanaM ca kArayituM bamaNAnaM jAtiM parihAraM dadAti ( , ) arahata ca [pUjati ( / ) navame ca vase] suvijaya 10 te ubhaya-prAcI taTe rAja-nivAsaM mahAvijaya-pAsAdaM kArayati aThatisAya-sata-sahasehi ( 1 ) dasame ca vase daMDa-saMdhI-sA(ma)mayo bharadavasa-paThAnaM mahI)-jayanaM . . . kArApayati ( 1 ) [ ekadasame ca vase] pa(I)yAtAnaM mani-ratanAni-saha yAti 11 dakhina disa] (maMda) ca ava-rAja-nivesitaM pithuDaM gadabha-nagalena kAsayati ( . ) janapada-bhAvanaM ca terasa-vasa-sata-kataM bhiMdati tamira-daha-saMghAtaM ( 1 ) bArasame ca vase . . . . sa(ha)sehi vitAsayato utarApadha-rAjAno . . . mAgadhAnaM ca vipulaM bhayaM janeto hathasaM gaMgAya pAyayati ( , ) mAgadha (-) ca rAjAnaM baha(sa)timitaM pAde vaMdApayati ( , ) naMdarAja-nItaM ca kAliMga-jinaM saMnivesa (') pUjayati| ( , ) [ kosAta ] (gaha)-rata (nA ) na paDIhArehi aMga-magadha-vasuM ca neyAti ( 1 ) 13 ......ka( )tu ( - ) jaThara-lakhila-(go)purAni-siharAni nivesayati sata-visikAnaM parihArehi ( / ) abhutamachariyaM ca hathi-nAva-nItaM pariharati...... haya-hathi-ratana-mAniko paMDa-rAjA (cedAni anekAni) muta-maNi-ratanAni AharApayati idha sata-sa[hasAni 14 [paMDa-janapada-vAsino vasIkaroti / / ) te ra same ca vase supavata-vijaya-cake-kumArI-pavate arahate pakhiNa-saMsitehi kAya-nisIdIyAya (1) yApujavakehi rAja-gatina (1) cina-vatAna(I) vasa-sitAna(I) pUjAnurata-uvAsaga-khAravela-sirinA jIva-deha-(siritA) parikhAtA (1) 15. nimaMtitena rAjA siri-khAravelena] sukata-samaNa-suvihitAnaM ca savadisAna janina tapasi-isinaM saMghayanaM arahata-nisIdIyA samIpe pAbhAre varAkAra-samuthApitAhi aneka-yojanAhitAhi panatisatehi] . . . silAhi siMhapatha-rajI-siMdhulAya nisayAni ( / ) 12 athavA, "vajiraghara-khatiyA)-sati-gharini"

Page #139
Appendix I 113 . . . paTalake catare ca veriya-gabhe-thabhe patiThApayati ( , ) pAnatariya-saTha-sata(va)sehi mukhiya-kala-vochinaM ca coyaTha-aMgaM satikaM turiyaM upAdayati ( 1 ) khema-rAjA sa vadha-rAjA sa bhikhu-rAjA dhama-rAjA pasaMto sunaMto anubhavaMto kalANAni ( / ) 17 [ pAnatariya-panatisata-vasa / ] guNa-visesa-kusalo sava-pAsaMDa-pUjako sava-devAyatana-saMkhArakArako apatihata-caka-vAhana-balo caka-dharo guta-cako pavata-cako rAjasi-vaMsa-kula-vinizito mahAvijayo rAjA-khAravela-siri ( 1 ) azoka ke bhAbU lekha ke anumodita pATha kI ___ nAgarI lipi meM anukRti paMkti 1 piyadasi lAjA mAgadhe saMghaM abhivAdana ___ AhA apAbAdhataM ca phAsu vihAlataM cA ( 1 ) 2 vidite ve bhaMte Avatake hamA budhasi dhamasi saMghasIti galave caM pasAde ca ( / ) e keMci bhaMte 3 bhagavatA budhena bhAsite save se subhAsite vA e cu kho bhaMte hamiyAye diseyA hevaM sadhame 4 cilaThitIke hosatIti alahAM hakaM taM vatave ( / ) imAM bhaMte dhaMmapaliyAyAni vinayasamukase 5 aliyavasAni anAgatabhayAni munigAthA moneyasUte upatisapasine e ce lAghulo6 vAde musAvAdaM adhigicya bhagavatA budhena bhAsite ( / ) etAM bhaMte dhaMmapaliyAyAni ichAmi 7 kiti bahuke bhikhupAye cA bhikhuniye cA abhikhinaM sunayu cA upadhAleyeyu ca 8 hevamevA upAsakA cA upAsikA cA ( / ) eteM bhaMte imaM likhApayAmi abhiheta ma jAnaMta ti ( 1 )

Page #140

Page #141
Appendix II hAthIgumphA lekha ke saMzodhita pATha kA hindI rUpAntara __koSThaka ( ) meM pUraka zabda haiM aura [ ] meM saMbhAvita pAThoM ke artha haiN| "arahaMtoM ko namaskAra ho| saba siddhoM ko namaskAra ho / kaliMga ke adhipati, ceti rAjavaMza kI kIrti ko bar3hAne vAle, prazasta zubha lakSaNoM se bhUSita aura cAroM digantoM meM vikhyAta guNoM se alaMkRta Arya mahArAja mahAmeghavAhana zrI khAravela dvArA pandraha varSa taka, jabaki unakA zarIra sundara aura kaDAra varNa kA thA, rAjakumAroM ke upayukta krIr3AyeM kI gaI / tatpazcAt rAjakIya lekha paddhati, mudrA zAstra, lekhA zAstra, prazAsakIya niyamoM aura adhiniyamoM meM niSNAta hokara aura vidyA ke sabhI aMgoM kA jJAna prApta karake unake dvArA nau varSa taka yuvarAja ke pada se zAsana kiyA gyaa| taba caubIsa varSa kI avasthA pUrNa karane para kaliMga ke rAjavaMza kI tIsarI pIr3hI meM, vaha apanA mahArAjyAbhiSeka karAte haiM tAki apane zeSa yauvana ko vijayoM dvArA samRddha kara skeN| aura rAjyAbhiSeka hone ke bAda prathama varSa meM paiMtIsa lAkha (mudrA) vyaya karake vaha kaliMga kI rAjadhAnI meM tUphAna se kSatigrasta gopuroM, prAkAroM aura nivAsoM kI marammata karAte haiM, zItala tar3Aga ke bA~dha ko suddar3ha karAte haiM aura saba hI udyAnoM kA prati-saMsthApana karAte haiM, aura prajA kA raMjana karate haiN| aura dvitIya varSa meM zAtakarNi kI cintA na karake vaha azvArohI, hAthI, padAti aura ratha se samanvita vipula sainya pazcima dizA meM paThAte haiM aura senA ke kRSNaveNA nadI para pahu~ca jAne para asikoM kI rAjadhAnI ko trasta karate haiN| phira tRtIya varSa meM gaMdharva vidyA meM prabuddha vaha loka-nRtya, zAstrIya nRtya, sugama saMgIta aura vAdya saMgIta ke kAryakrama karAke aura vividha utsava aura mele karAke nagaravAsiyoM kA manovinoda karate haiN|

Page #142
The Hathigumpha Inscription and the Bhabru Edict evaM caturtha varSa meM vaha vidyAdharoM ke AvAsa ( = viMdhyAcala ) meM, jise kaliMga kA koi bhUtapUrva rAjA Ahata na kara sakA thA, nivAsa karate haiM aura sabhI raThikoM aura bhojakoM se jinake mukuTa aura alaMkRta azva naSTa kara diye gaye, chatra aura bhRMgAra nikSipta kara diye gaye aura ratna evaM dhana apahRta kara liye gaye, apane caraNoM kI vaMdanA karAte haiN| 116 aura paMcama zubha varSa meM 103 veM varSa meM rAjA nanda dvArA udghATita tanasuliyavATA -praNAlI ( = nahara ) ko..... sahasra (mudrA) vyaya karake vaha rAjadhAnI meM praveza karAte haiN| tathA rAjyAbhiSeka ke chaThe varSa meM rAjya ke aizvarya ke pradarzana hetu vaha sabhI rAjya kara mApha kara dete haiM aura nagara evaM grAma nivAsiyoM para lAkhoM mudrAoM ke mUlya ke anya anekoM anugraha visarjita karate haiN| aura jaba vaha saptama varSa meM zAsana kara rahe the to [ puNya ke udaya se unakI vajiragharavatI nAma kI grahiNI ne mAtA kA pada prApta kiyaa| evaM aSTama varSa meM apratihata bhitti vAle gorathagiri kA ghAta karake rAjagRha ke rAjA ko vaha pIr3A pahu~cAte haiN| aura isa parAkrama ke kArya kI paramparA meM mathurA ko vimukta karAte hue vaha apane sainya vAhana sahita..... yamunA [ nadI] pahu~ca jAte haiM / [tathA sabhI adhInastha rAjAoM ko sAtha lekara calate haiM] pallavabhAra se yukta kalpavRkSa, azva - sainya, gaja- sainya aura ratha- sainya ke sAtha vaha saba gRhasthoM dvArA pUjita stUpa kI pUjA karane ke lie jAte haiM evaM sarvagrahaNa anuSThAna karane ke lie brAhmaNoM kI jAti ko dAna dete haiM, aura arahaMta kI pUjA karate haiM ] / [ tathA navama varSa meM] isa uttama vijaya kI (smRti hetu) prAcI nadI ke donoM taToM para vaha mahAvijaya - prAsAda nAma ke rAjamahala kA ar3atIsa lAkha (mudrA) kI lAgata se nirmANa karAte haiN| aura dasaveM varSa meM daMDa aura saMdhi ke svAmI vaha sampUrNa pRthvI kI vijaya hetu bhAratavarSa meM prasthAna ke lie (taiyArI ) karAte haiN| [ evaM gyArahaveM varSa meM vaha maNi aura ratnoM ke sAtha dakSiNa dizA meM maMda gati se prayANa karate haiM aura ava (Andha ? ) rAjAoM ke nivAsa pithaMDa nagara meM gadahoM ke hala calavAte haiM; tathA apane rAjya ke kalyANa kI dRSTi se 113 veM varSa meM bane tamila dezoM ke saMgha ko bhedate haiN| aura bArahaveM varSa meM sahasroM (vIroM kI senA ke sAtha) [ uttara kI ora prayANa karate hue ] vaha uttarApatha ke rAjAoM ko trasta karate haiM aura magadha vAsiyoM ke hRdaya meM vipula bhaya paidA karate hue apane hAthiyoM aura ghor3oM ko gaMgA meM pAnI pilAte haiM, tathA magadha ke rAjA vRhaspatimitra se apane caraNoM kI vaMdanA karAte haiM, naMda-rAja dvArA kaliMga se lAyI gayI jinendra kI pratimA kI mandira meM pUjA karate haiM, aura rAja

Page #143
Appendix II 117 koSa se gRha-ratnoM kA apaharaNa karake aMga aura magadha kA dhana le Ate haiN| vApasa lauTane para do sahasra (mudrA) vyaya karake vaha gopuroM ke sabhI suddar3ha zikharoM para ketu lagavAte haiM aura adbhuta Azcarya kA viSaya hai ki hAthI-sainya aura nAva-sainya bhejakara vaha pAMiya rAjA ke ghor3e, hAthI, ratna aura mANikya . . . le lete haiM aura vahA~ lAkhoM ke mUlya ke aneka muktA, maNi aura ratnoM kA bhI apaharaNa karate haiM evaM [pAMDya janapada ke nivAsiyoM ko vaza meM karate haiN| tathA terahaveM varSa meM rAjasI bhakta jisane vratoM kA pAlana kiyA hai, jo devI zakti se sampanna hai aura jisakA pUjA meM anurAga hai aise upAsaka zrI khAravela dvArA, jinakA jIva abhI dehAzrita hai, vijaya maMDala meM sthita kumArI parvata nAmaka zubha parvata para pUjA ke hetu saMsAra-mukta arahaMtoM kI kAya-niSidyA kA utkhanana karAyA gyaa| rAjA zrI khAravela ke AmaMtraNa para saba dizAoM se Ane vAle sukRta aura suvihita zramaNa, jJAnI, tapasvI- RSi aura sabhI saMghoM ke netA jinakI saMkhyA 3500 thI], siMhapatha vAlI rAnI siMdhulA kI nisiyA ke pAsa zilA para parvata zikhara para arahaMta kI niSidyA ke samIpa varAkAra meM ekatra hote haiN| aura [sabhAmaNDapa ke sAmane] vaha (arthAt khAravela) vaiDUrya garbhita caumukhe staMbha kI pratiSThA karAte haiM, evaM 165veM varSa se vyucchinna hotI huI mukhya dhvani ke zAntidAyI dvAdaza aMgoM kA zIghra pATha karAte haiN| aise kSamAzIla, buddhimAna, bhikSuvRtti aura dhArmika rAjA kalyANoM (= kalyANakArI zruta) se saMbaMdhita prazna karate haiM, unakA zravaNa karate haiM aura unakA manana karate haiN| [355vA~ vrss|] vizeSa guNoM meM kuzala, saba dharmoM ko pUjane vAle, saba devamandiroM kA saMskAra karane vAle, apratihata cakravAhinI ke svAmI, vijaya-cakra ko dhAraNa karane vAle, rAjya ke rakSaka, pravRtta-cakra ke svAmI, rAjavaMzoM aura kuloM ke Azraya, mahAvijayI, rAjA zrI khaarvel|" __ bhAbU lekha kA hindI rupAntara "magadha-rAja priyadarzi saMgha ko abhivAdana karake aura unake svAsthya evaM kuzalatA kI kAmanA karake aisA kahate haiM : maMte, Apako vidita hai ki buddha, dharma aura saMgha meM hamArA kitanA Adara evaM zraddhA hai| bhaMte, bhagavAna buddha ne jo kucha kahA hai vaha sabhI subhASita hai parantu bhaMte, saddharma ke cirasthAyI hone ke uddezya se hama vaha batAte haiM jo kucha hamane (unake vacanoM meM utkRSTa) dekhA hai|

Page #144
118 The Hathigumpha Inscription and the Bhabru Edict bhaMte, bhagavAna buddha dvArA kahe hue ye dharma vacana vinayasamukase (= dhammacakka-pavattana sutta), aliyavasAni (= ariyavaMsa sutta), anAgatabhayAni (= anAgatabhayAni sutta), munigAthA (= muni sutta), moneyasUte (= nAlaka sutta), upatisapasine (= sAriputta sutta), tathA bhUTha bolane ke sambandha meM lAghulovAda (= rAhulovAda sutta) haiN| bhaMte, maiM cAhatA hU~ ki ye dharma vacana adhikAMza bhikSu evaM bhikSuNI bAra-bAra suneM aura (unakA) manana kareM tathA usI prakAra upAsaka evaM upAsikA bhI (kreN)| bhaMte, maiM ise isIliye likhA rahA hU~ ki ve (ukta bhikSu, bhikSuNI, upAsaka evaM upAsikA) merA abhiprAya jAna leN|"

Page #145
Appendix III Additional Notes Himavanta-Theravali - Era of the dates - Date of the Buddha's parinirvana - Date of Mahavira's nirvana - Asikanagara and Kamhabemna-Coyatha-Satakamnim and Bahasatimita-Kalimga Jina - Schism and Kharavela - The Schism-Kalinga and Jainism-Nandas and Jainism -Asoka and Kalinga Himavanta-Theravali In his letter dated 12-4-1930, published in the Anekanta, I, 6-7 (p. 351), Muni Jina Vijaya categorically stated that on a very careful reading he found the entire Himavanta-Theravali to be a work of fiction. It would be relevant to quote him in extenso: yaha therAvalI ahamadAbAda meM paNDita-pravara zrI sukhalAla jI ke prabandha se hamAre pAsa A gaI thI aura usakA hamane khUba sUkSmatA ke sAtha vAcana kiyaa| par3hane ke sAtha hI hameM vaha sArA hI grantha banAvaTI mAlUma ho gayA aura kisane aura kaba yaha gar3ha DAlA usakA bhI kucha hAla mAlUma ho gyaa| ina bAtoM ke vizeSa ullekha kI maiM abhI AvazyakatA nahIM smjhtaa| sirpha itanA hI kaha denA ucita hogA ki himavanta-therAvalI ke kalpaka ne, khAravela ke lekha vAlI jo kitAba hamArI (prAcIna jainalekhasaMgraha, prathama bhAga) chapAI huI hai aura jisameM paM bhagavAnalAla indrajI ke par3he hue lekha kA pATha aura vivaraNa diyA gayA hai usI kitAba ko par3hakara, usa para se yaha therAvalI kA varNana banA liyA hai| usa kalpaka ko zrI jAyasavAla jI ke pATha kI koI kalpanA nahIM huI thI isaliye usa kalpaka kI therAvalI apa-Tu-DeTa nahIM bana skii| khaira / aisI rIti hamAre

Page #146
120 The Hathigumpha Inscription and the Bhabru Edict yahA~ bahuta prAcIna kAla se calI A rahI hai isase isameM hameM koI Azcarya pAne kI bAta nahIM / [This Theravali was received by me through the good offices of Pandit-pravar Sri Sukhlal ji in Ahmedabad and I went through it very thoroughly. On reading it I found the entire book to be a work of fiction and also came to know of something as to who invented it and when. I do not deem it necessary now to specially mention that. Only this much would be proper to say that the fictionist of the Himavanta-Theravali invented the narrative of the Theravali on reading the Kharavela's inscription in my book Pracina Jaina Lekha Samgraha, part I, wherein is given the text of the inscription as read by Pt. Bhagwanlal Indraji. The Theravali of that fictionist could not be made up-to-date as he could not divine the reading of Sri Jayaswal ji. Anyway. There is nothing to wonder in it because this practice is continuing with us from very old times.] Pt. Sukhlal was an eminent Svetambara scholar. Muni Jina Vijaya was himself a Svetambara Muni but he was also an unbiased scholar and an eminent archaeologist who would not be influenced by sectarian prejudice and be a party to distorting the source material. He had himself worked on the Hathigumpha Inscription with K.P. Jayaswal. On Muni Jina Vijaya's finding that the HimavantaTheravali was not an authentic work, the scholars (Jayaswal, Banerji, Barua and Sircar) who had worked so hard on this inscription, did not take any notice of it. Muni Kalyana Vijaya and Muni Punya Vijaya had tried to project it as a valuable source, but they did not pursue the matter after the categorical finding given by Muni Jina Vijaya. After some 45 years Acharya Sri Hastimala ji Maharaja revived this Theravali as an important source in his Jainadharma ka Maulika Itihasa. It is now creating confusion and misleading the scholars who are not aware of Muni Jina Vijaya's finding.

Page #147
Appendix III 121 A curious fact about this Theravali has been noted by Dr. Sagarmal Jain as late as 1994 that its original has not been available since its translation into Gujarati and its Gujarati translation by Pt. Hiralal Hansraj of Jamnagar is the only evidence of its existence (Sagara Jaina-Vidya Bharati, pt. I, p. 267 fn. 36). Hastimala ji seems to have used the original manuscript because he quotes the Prakrit text and gives the source as Himavanta Sthaviravali hastalikhita (op. cit., pt. II, pp. 476-94). It is to be specially noted that the impugned text has never been published and possibly it does not exist now. Era of the dates Sten Konow also thought that the dates given in the Hathigumpha Inscription were connected with the Mahavira Era (Acta Orientalia, I). N.S. Ramaswami also upholds this view (J.O.R., XXXVIII, p. 36). Date of the Buddha's parinirvana M. Winternitz also notes that "all the seemingly convincing evidence which we thought we had acquired in favour of various dates between 477 and 487 BC, has in every case proved to be uncertain and doubtful" (History of Indian Literature, II, p. 597). A.B. Keith also finds the usual dating 487-477 BC uncertain and says that "the case against the traditional date is insufficient to justify its rejection out and out" (Buddhist Philosophy in India and Ceylon, p. 32). Even as late as April 1988 it emerged at a symposium held at the Academie der Wissenschaften (Gottingen, Germany) that the general agreement among scholars that the Buddha died within a few years of 480 BC, had become a thing of the past (ref. When did the Buddha Live?, ed. Heinz Bechert, 1995). V.A. Smith, E.J. Thomas, G.P. Malasekhara, Mrs. Rhys Davids, Radha Kumud Mookerji and K.P. Jayaswal already support the traditional date of 544 bc for the Buddha's parinirvana (demise).

Page #148
122 The Hathigumpha Inscription and the Bhabru Edict Date of Mahavira's nirvana An entirely new chronological build-up is being suggested by some scholars and it has been summarised in a way in The Mahavira Era supplement appended to the Tulsi Prajna, XVIII, 4 (28 February, 1993). It has been edited by Dr. Parmeshwar Solanki who himself pushes the date of Mahavira's nirvana back to 1761 BC and includes an article by Upendra Nath Roy who pushes the date further back to 1834 BC. They respectively place the demise of the Buddha in 1738 BC and 1890 BC. They substantiate their view by an amalgam of Kalki myth of the Jains, Saptarsi (Seven Star) constellation, and the lore in the Vayu, Matsya and Visnu Puranas. In their zeal to press their point, Roy would dismiss the epigraphic evidence dateable in 396 Bc affirming the 544 Bc date of the Buddha's demise (ref. Dr. S. Parana Vitana: 'New Light on the Buddhist Era in Ceylon and Early Simhalese Chronology, University of Ceylon Review, XVIII, 1960, pp. 19-55), while Solanki would invent dasame ca vase Kalimga rajavasane tatiyayuge sagavasane Kalimgayuvarajanam vasakaram karapayati as the tenth line of the Hathigumpha Inscription of Kharavela. All this pushes the chronology of the historical period of Ancient India also into a mythological haze, and these dates ought not to be taken seriously therefore. Similarly, some scholars insist on 467 BC as the date of Mahavira's nirvana (demise) on the basis of some Svetambara Pattavalis including the Himavanta-Theravali and the error made by Hemacandra Suri in placing Candragupta 155 years after Mahavira's nirvana. Dr. Sagarmal Jain admits that the authenticity of the dates of pontiffs given in the Pattavalis is suspect and there is no basis to reconcile the discrepencies, but all the same he would insist on 467 BC (vide, Sagara Jaina-Vidya Bharati, pt. I, pp. 254-68). It is to be noted that the error of Hemacandra was detected by Merutunga in his Vicarasreni, and that Hemacandra himself did not have any doubt about 527 BC as the date of Mahavira's nirvana since he says in his

Page #149
Appendix III 123 Trisastisalakapurusacarita, X.12.45-46, that Kumarapala will be the king 1669 years after the nirvana, i.e., in AD 1142, the otherwise well-known date of Kumarapala's accession. Asikanagaram and Karhabeina in L 4 Dr. M.K. Dhavalikar prefers Musikanagaram to Asikanagaram and identifies it with Maski in Raichur district (A.B.O.R.I, LIII, p. 289). Dr. V.V. Mirashi, however, points out that Asika is mentioned with Asmaka in the list of territories in the Nasik Cave Inscription of Year 19 of the Satavahana Vasisthiputra Pulumavi and that the Asika region seems to be identical with Khandesh which is in accord with the geographical direction given by Kharavela. (Satavahanon aur Pascimi Ksatrapon ka Itihasa, p. 78). N.S. Ramaswami prefers to identify Kamhabemna with the R. Krishna particularly in the light of the Guntupille Inscription (J.O.R., XXXVIII, p. 36). But the difficulty in this identification is that the Krishna flows to the south of the Kalinga and not to its west. Coyatha in L 16 The reading has been consistently coyatha but it has been sought to be equated with cosatha to mean 'sixty-four'. This equation is not sustainable because neither in this inscription nor otherwise in Prakrit ya is interchangeable with sa. "Four Eight appears to be a poetic way of saying 'twelve' (dvadasa) instead of using the prosaic barasa. Barasa is used for '12' in L 11. Satakamnin and Bahasatimita Dr. V.V. Mirashi also holds that Satakamnim, the powerful adversary of Kharavela, was Satakarni, the third king of the Satavahana dynasty who ruled for 10 years after 41 years of the founding of the dynasty by Simuka (op. cit., pp. 80-81). He also thinks that when Kharavela invaded Magadha, no Sunga king ruled there but Byhaspatimitra of the Mitra dynasty

Page #150
124 The Hathigumpha Inscription and the Bhabru Edict ruled. He is also of the view that there is no basis for holding the view that the Sunga, Kanva and Andhra (Satavahana) kings ruled from Pataliputra (op. cit., pp. 75-78). This, in essence, supports my discussion. Kalimga Jina The anthropomorphic image of the deity evolved in about first century BC and it took about 500 years to fully develop at Mathura as evidenced by the finds there. But the torsos found at Lohanipur, one of which may be the Kalimga Jina, indicate that there was a school of sculpture in eastern India also where the anthropomorphic image emerged independently and earlier, too. However, not much is known about this school in the absence of any finds besides the lone torsos from Lohanipur. It is evident from the text of the inscription that the image was taken as a war trophy, but not without reverence, by the Nanda king to his capital Pataliputra where he installed it in a temple, and that Kharavela had worshipped it in that temple. There is no mention that he carried it back to Kalinga. In fact, as a worshipful lay-devotee he would not think of desecrating the temple where the image was already being worshipped. It is to be noted that the early anthropomorphic nudes from Mathura, as well as from eastern India, represented the Arahamta Jina and did not signify any particular of the 24 Tirthankaras unless the name was mentioned in the inscription on the pedestal. The distinguishing lanchanas (symbols), and other iconographic details, developed much later from the 5th century AD onwards. Therefore, it would be just hazardous to say that the Kalinga Jina, or either of the torsos, is an icon of Rsabhanatha, Sitalanatha or Mahavira, respectively the 1st, 10th and 24th Tirthankara. Schism and Kharavela The Buddhist tradition is candid in admitting that Gautama

Page #151
Appendix III 125 the Buddha had to face dissidence in his life-time; his cousin Devadatta and his own disciples in the Ghositarama at Kausambi were the trouble shooters. Among the Jains the Digambara tradition does not refer to any dissidence in the life time of Mahavira, but the Svetambara tradition refers to the emergence of dissidence in the fourteenth and sixteenth years of his ministry. However, the final schism into the Digambara and Svetambara was finalised some 600 years after Mahavira (ref. Dr. Hiralal Jain: Bharatiya Samskriti mein Jaina Dharma ka Yogadana, pp. 30-31). There is nothing in the inscription of Kharavela to suggest that he supported any of the dissident factions that may have existed in his time. The term Samghayana seems to suggest that there were several groups of monks under their respective leaders. The purpose of the Council was obviously to consolidate the extant canonical knowledge as might have been preserved by the different samghas or groups of monks. Nothing beyond that can be inferred from the text of the inscription. The Schism The schism in Jainism was formalised in circa AD 79-82 as the Digambara and the Svetambara. The major doctrinal differences can be summed up as Stri-mukti and Kevali-bhukti, and the patent appearence of the monks as nude and covered. The Digambara doctrine would not allow a woman to attain salvation and, also, would not think it necessary to take food after attaining the Supreme Knowledge (kaivalya). The Svetambara doctrine does not object to either and proclaims that Malli, the 19th Tirthankara, was a woman. Further, Mahavira of the Svetambaras preaches by word of mouth, but he of the Digambaras utters only a sound (divya dhvani) which is interpreted by the Ganadharas, all the 11 of whom were Brahmins. When the two factions parted company finally towards the close of the first century AD, some 600 years after the demise of

Page #152
126 The Hathigumpha Inscription and the Bhabru Edict Mahavira, the monks donning white robe got the nomenclature Svetambara (the White Robed); later on some other colours were also added. In course of time the sectarian differences became so prominent that the Digambaras declared the first 11 Angas as lost because the Svetambaras claimed to preserve them, and vice versa the Svetambaras treated the 12th Anga as lost because the Digambaras claimed to preserve its knowledge. Further, they made different life stories of the Tirthankaras so-much-so as altering the fact and place of birth, time and place of First Sermon and even the timing and spot of nirvana of Mahavira; began spelling the names of holy places differently (e.g., Sammed-Shikharji and Sammet-Shikharji); started observing the parva (holy days) on different days and in different ways; and rendered even the mangala-sloka differently: the Digambara saying - Mangalam Bhagavan Viro, Mangalam Gautamo Gani. Mangalam Kundakundadya, Jainadharmostu mangalam. while the Svetambara would say Mangalam Bhagavan Viro, Mangalam Gautamo Prabhuh. Mangalam Sthulibhadradya, Jainadharmostu mangalam. Kalinga and Jainism According to the Jain puranic tradition, Rsabhadeva, the first Tirthankara, is said to have named a region Kalinga after the name of one of his 100 sons to whom that region was bequeathed. But it is not possible to infer the geographical situation of that Kalinga. The coastal tract along the Bay of Bengal between the rivers Damodar and Godavari, has been known as Kalinga in the historical times. Its association with Jainism dates back to nearly 28 centuries. Karakandu, originally a prince of Campa (in Bihar) and later a king of Kalinga, is said to have been a follower of Parsvanatha (nirvana circa 777 BC), the 23rd Tirthankara. Thereafter, a sister of Siddhartha, the father of

Page #153
Appendix III 127 Mahavira (the 24th Tirthankara), is said to have been married to Jitasatru, King of Kalinga. Jitasatru is also said to have offered the hand of his daughter Yasoda to Prince Mahavira. The Digambara tradition denies marriage, but the Svetambara tradition makes Mahavira not only marry Yasoda but also to beget a daughter, Priyadarsana by name, who was to marry Jamali. Jamali joined Mahavira's Order and, incidentally, he happened to be the first dissenter in the 14th year of Mahavira's ministry. Jitasatru was in all probability a follower of Jainism as his close relationship with Mahavira seems to indicate. It cannot be said that at the time of Nanda King's invasion of Kalinga, a hundred years later, the king was a descendent of Jitasatru. But this much is confirmed by Kharavela's inscription that the personal faith of that royal family of Kalinga was Jainism because the Nanda King took away the Kalinga Jina (the image of Jina, Arahamta or Tirthankara, which was specially revered in Kalinga) as a war trophy. Nandas and Jainism The Nanda King took away the Kalinga Jina to Magadha and installed it in a temple where Kharavela himself worshipped it in his 12th regnal year (ref. L 12, p. 17 fn. 5, supra). It indicates that the Nanda King may have been an adherent of Jainism, otherwise he could have desecrated or destroyed the image. But his personal faith did not come in his way when dealing with statecraft, and he invaded and humiliated the Jain king of Kalinga for building up the Magadhan Empire The tradition writers do not, however, appear to have done justice to the Nandas. The Brahmins made them Sudra and the Buddhists called them napita (low caste of barber), because the Nandas did not subscribe to Brahmanism and Buddhism Surprisingly the Jain tradition also does not call the Nandas, noble Ksatriya, most probably because when the tradition was redacted it had been long forgotten that they were adherents of

Page #154
128 The Hathigumpha Inscription and the Bhabru Edict Jainism and the general Brahmanical bias infected the Jain writers also. Asoka and Kalinga Asoka has himself left an account of his conquest of Kalinga in the eighth year of his reign in his Rock Edict XIII. His two Kalinga Edicts also bear on his concern for the conquered people of Kalinga. There is nothing to suggest that this conquest was to punish a king or people following a different religion. It was a conquest to annex Kalinga and thus extend the borders of his empire to the eastern coast. The difference between the campaigns of Nandaraja and Asoka appears to be that while the former was a campaign of conquest and annexation, the latter was to bring it back under the imperial administration. Asoka adopted Buddhism as his personal faith more than a year after the conquest of Kalinga, and, therefore, it cannot be connected with his persecuting zeal for Buddhism. In the twelfth and nineteenth years of his reign he donated cave dwellings for the Ajivakas. In all his edicts he mentions the Brahmins and the Sramanas together and in his Pillar Edict VII, recorded in the year 27 of his reign, he specifically mentions his concern for the welfare of the Buddhist Samgha, the Brahmins, the Ajivakas and the Nirgranthas (i.e., the Jain monks and their followers). The dharma or the code of conduct prescribed in his edicts is based on the moral principles for individual and social conduct aimed at harmony and tolerance among his subjects and with his neighbours.

Page #155
544 BC 527 BC 467 BC (ME 60) 424 BC (ME 103) 414 BC (ME 113) 362 BC (ME 165) 324 BC 317 or 312 BC (ME 210 or 215) 300 BC 272 BC 260 BC 259 BC 253 BC 252 BC 246 BC 245 BC 236 BC Appendix IV Chronology Parinirvana of the Buddha; commencement of the Buddha Era Nirvana of Mahavira; commencement of the Mahavira Era Commencement of the Nanda rule in Magadha and Ujjayini Accession of Mahapadma Nanda; conquest of Kalinga and inauguration of the Tanasuliyavata canal by him Formation of the Tamila Confederacy Decline of the Principal Scripture of the Jains Accession of Candragupta Maurya in Magadha End of the Nanda rule and commencement of the Maurya rule in Ujjayini; construction of the Sudarsana lake near Girnar Accession of Bindusara Accession of Asoka Promulgation of R.E. I-IV, M.R.E. I-II, and Barabar Cave Inscriptions of the Year 12 Promulgation of R.E. V-XIV and K.R.E. I-II Barabar Cave Inscription of the Year 19 Rummindei and Nigliva records P.E. I-VI, Schism Edicts, Queen's Edict and Bhabru Edict P.E. VII Death of Asoka and disintegration of the Maurya Empire; founding of the Satavahana kingdom near Nasik

Page #156
130 The Hathigumpha Inscription and the Bhabru Edict 219 BC 209 BC 206 BC 206-172 BC 204-169 BC 194-184 BC 194 BC 185 BC 185-172 BC 185-184 BC 184-183 BC 183-182 BC 182-181 BC and of the Cedi kingdom in Kalinga Death of Samprati and further dismemberment of the Maurya Empire; founding of independent kingdoms in Mathura, Ahicchatra, and Kausambi Birth of Kharavela End of the Maurya rule in Magadha and installation of Bahasatimita as the King of Magadha Bahasatimita in Magadha and Kausambi Pusyamitra Sunga in Vidisa and Ujjayini Sri Satakarni, third ruler of the Satavahana dynasty Kharavela associated in administration as yuvaraja Coronation of Kharavela as the King of Kalinga Kharavela in Kalinga Renovation of the capital Expedition in the west up to the R. Kysnavena Musical parties, festivals and fairs in the capital Expedition in the Vindhyas and subjugation of the Rathikas and Bhojakas Tanasuliyavata canal brought into the capital Display of opulence by remitting taxes and bestowing favours A child is born to Queen Vajiragharavati Storming of Gorathagiri and liberation of Mathura; worship of the stupa and performance of the Sarvagrahana ceremony at Mathura Building of the Mahavijayaprasada on the R. Praci Preparations for the campaign of conquest Annihilation of Pithunda and breaking of the Tamila Confederacy Conquest of Magadha; worship of the Kalinga-Jina; fixing of pinnacles on the gates of the capital; and subjugation of the Pandya kingdom Excavation of the Relic Memorial on the Mt. Kumari and convening of the Jain Council near that shrine Incising of the Hathigumpha Inscription 181-180 BC 180-179 BC 179-178 BC 178-177 BC 177-176 BC 176-175 BC 175-174 BC 174-173 BC 173-172 BC 172 BC (ME 355)

Page #157
Nagari VOWELS 3T 3TT i 3 brdzchr o aM CONSONANTS Is bi ka kha Appendix V Transcription Chart of Brahmi Script ga gha Ga ca Roman a 168 a i u e ai 0 m ka kha ga gha na ca Brahmi 4,H 4,4 * L 4,D x 25 2,2 Z + 7,6 ^,0 u,w h d.d

Page #158
132 cha ja 55 5 jha Ja Ta 10 Da Dha Na 5 10 2 ta tha da y J6 D na pa pha Sto ba at s ya ra la va za The Hathigumpha Inscription and the Bhabru Edict db, do e cha ja jha na ta tha da dha na ta tha da dha na pa pha ba bha ma ya ra la va sa h cuonor I 1,6 0 l,l 4,0,0,4 1 N,L 6 m ta 4, 4, 4 blwl 1,\,/ p,p 6 l

Page #159
Appendix V 133 l,l ,kh 6, MEDIALS kA fix. ko kam m kha ` ) khi khu khe kho y s y h r

Page #160
The Hathigumpha Inscription and the Bhabru Edict du na no tha thi thi thu the tho dim du dhi WHY O O O O O O nu no to obno do Da op * bu bhim ma mu me mo Uu bl, ml

Page #161
Appendix V 135 ` ` FHZA- 4 lim MIXED CONSONANTS cya cya pra J

Page #162
Appendix VI Symbols in the Hathigumpha Inscription Mukuta Svastika Fu > XT/ Nandipada Dhvaja

Page #163
PPER 97:9 TERUSETRI De String Y DEUR I. The Bhabru Edict of Asoka L 1-12 SHEZ 137

Page #164
micron ASILIA aresztul an ecleside City II. The Hathigumpha Inscription of Kharavela (first part) L 1-12 138

Page #165
~ 4062300 SUNARE 25 TATC MERIQUANCHIE JAG TILAUKOGUDE nm m lmslm@ . YOURDIELEC Kak III. The Hathigumpha Inscription of Kharavela (first part) L 5-17 139 AL bretta

Page #166
DIALOEDDIGITAL LIFE IV. The Hathigumpha Inscription of Kharavela (second part) L 1-12 140

Page #167
V. The Hathigumpha Inscription of Kharavela (second part) L 5-17 141

Page #168
2012 +Jalata dr de d Liisavalt Fre VI. The Hathigumpha Inscription of Kharavela (third part) L 1-12 AFACIL 142

Page #169
VII. The Hathigumpha Inscription of Kharavela (third part) L 5-17 143

Page #170
VIII. The Hathigumpha Inscription of Kharavela (fourth part) L 1-12 (concluded) 144

Page #171
IX. The Hathigumpha Inscription of Kharavela (fourth part) L 5-17 (concluded) 145

Page #172
X. The Hathigumpha XI. The Hathigumpha and other caves on the Udayagiri 146

Page #173
XII. The remains of the apsidal structure overlying the Hathigumpha 147

Page #174
APSIDAL STRUCTURE, UDAYAGIRI 10 H& 4METRES POST HOLES BED-ROCK. BED-ROCK BED- O ROCK 148 ORAIN BED ROCK O CL XIII. Sketch of the apsidal structure FEET LATEST PLATFORM EARUEST STRUCTURE APSIDAL STRUCTURE LATER ADDITIONS

Page #175
XIV. The Mancapuri and Svargapuri XV. Worship scene on a frieze in the Mancapuri 149

Page #176
XVI. The Patalapuri 150

Page #177
XVII. The Rani Gumpha 151

Page #178
339333 XVIII. Friezes in the Rani Gumpha (above) Hunting scene (below) Merry-making scene 152

Page #179
Bibliography I. ANCIENT LITERATURE A. Sanskrit Abhijnana-Sakuntalam of Kalidasa Amarakosah of Amarasimha Astadhyayi of Panini Avasyakavrtti of Haribhadra Bhavasamgraha of Devasena Harivamsapurana of Jinasena Punnata Kautiliyam Arthasostram (ed. R. Shama Sastri) Kavyalamkara of Rudrata with commentary of Namisadhu Lalitavistara Lekha-paddhati Mahabharata Mahapuranam of Gunabhadracarya Malavikagnimitra of Kalidasa Mudraraksasa of Visakhadatta Natyasastra of Bharata (Kavyamala edn.) Parisistaparvan (Sthaviravalicarita) of Hemacandra (ed. H. Jacobi) Prakrta-Prakasa of Vararuci (with com. of Bhamaha) Rajatarangini of Kalhana (ed. M.A. Stein) Siddha-Hemacandra of Hemacandra Trisastisalakapurusacarita of Hemacandra Vicarasreni of Merutunga Viracarita of Hemacandra Visesa Avasyaka Bhasya Yugapuranam of the Gargi-samhita (ed. D.R. Mankad)

Page #180
154 The Hathigumpha Inscription and the Bhabru Edict B. Prakrit Bhagavati Sutra Damsanasara (Darsanasara) of Devasena Kunda-kunda Prabhrta Samgraha (ed. K.C. Shastri) Pannavana Sutra Samavayamga Sutra Satkhandagamah (Chakkhamdagama), ed. H.L. Jain & A.N. Upadhye, 1973 Sukhabodha commentary of Devendraganin on the Uttarajhayana Tapagaccha Pattavali Thananga (Sthananga Sutra) Uttarajhayana (Uttaradhyayana Sutra) C. Pali Anguttara Nikaya Cullavagga Digha Nikaya Itivuttaka Jataka, ed. V. Fausholl, III (Kumbhakara Jataka) Mahavyutpatti Majjhima Nikaya Sigalovadasutta Suttanipata Udana Vinaya-pitakam Visuddhimagga of Buddhaghosa D. Apabhramsa Karakamdacariu, ed. H.L. Jain II. MODERN WORKS A. General Histories A Comprehensive History of India, Vol. II --

Page #181
131 Bibliography 155 The Muryas and Satavahanas -- 325 BC-AD 300, ed. K.A. Nilakanta Sastri, 1957 Babylonion and Oriental Records, I Cambridge History of India, Vol. I, ed. E.J. Rapson (Indian reprint, 1955) The Age of the Nandas and Mauryas, ed. K.A. Nilakanta Sastri, 1952 The Early History of the Deccan, Pt. I-VI, ed. G. Yazdani, 1960 The History and Culture of the Indian People, Vol. II -- The Age of Imperial Unity, ed. R.C. Majumdar & A.D. Pusalker (2nd edn., 1953) B. Books and authors Aiyanger, S.K., Ancient India and South Indian History and Culture, I Allan, John, British Museum Catalogue of Coins of Ancient India, 1936 Bali, Chandrakant, Kharavela Prasasti, Punarmulyamkana (Hindi) Banerji, R.D., History of Orissa, I, 1930 - The Palaeography of the Hathigumpha and Nanaghat Inscriptions (M.A.S.B., X) Barua, Dr. B.M., Asoka and His Inscriptions, pt. I-II, 1946 -,Old Brahmi Inscriptions in the Udayagiri and Khandagiri Caves, 1929 Bechert, Heinz (ed.), When did the Buddha Live? The Controversy of the Dating of the Historical Buddha, 1995 Bhandarkar, D.R., Asoka, 3rd edn. 1955 Bhatt, Janardan, Asoka ke Dharmalekha, Hindi, 1923 Bhattacharya, V., Buddhist Texts recommended by Asoka, 1945 Brahmappa, G., Samrata Kharavela, Kannad, fiction, 1964 Brown, Percy, Indian Architecture (Buddhist and Hindu Periods), 4th edn., 1959 Buhler, G., On the Origin of the Indian Brahmi Alphabet, 2nd edn., 1898 Chakravartinayanar, A., Pancastikayasara (Intro., trans.), -- -, The Religion of Ahimsa (The Essence of Jaina Philosophy and Ethics), 1957 Chatterji, S.K., Indo-Aryan and Hindi Cunningham, A., Corpus Inscriptionum Indicarum, vol. I, 1877 Dani, A.H., Indian Palaeography Dikshit, K.N., Prehistoric Civilization of the Indus Valley Diringer, David, The Alphabet

Page #182
156 The Hathigumpha Inscription and the Bhabru Edict Dutt, N., & Bajpai, K.D., Development of Buddhism in Uttar Pradesh, 1956 Eggermont, P.H.L., The Chronology of the Reign of Asoka Moriya, 1956 Eliot, Charles, Hindusim and Buddhism, 1921 Gerini, Researches on Ptolemy Gode, P.K., and Karve, C.G., The Practical Sanskrit-English Dictionary, 1959 Gokhale, B.G., Buddhism and Asoka, 1948 Geiger, Wilhelm, The Mahavamsa, (tr.), 1912 Hardy, E., Asoka Hastimalaji Acharya, Jainadharma Ka Maulika Itihasa, I-II, Hindi, 1974 Hultzsch, E., Corpus Inscriptionum Indicarum, Vol. I -- Asokan Inscriptions (2nd edn., 1925) Hunter, G.R., The Script of Harappa and Mohenjodaro and its connection with other scripts Hunter, W.W., Stirling, A., Beams, J., and Sahu, N.K., A History of Orissa, ed. N.K. Sahu, vol. I-II, 1956 Jain, Balchandra, Kalinga Cakravarti, Hindi, 1954 Jain, Hiralal, Bharatiya Samsakriti mein Jaina Dharma ka Yogadana, Hindi, 1962 Jain, Jyoti Prasad, Bharatiya Itihasa: Eka Drsti, Hindi, 2nd edn., 1966 Pramukha Aitihasika Jaina Purusa aur Mahilayen, Hindi, 1974 The Jaina Sources of the History of Ancient India, 1964 Jain, Nirmal Kumar, The Cloud-carrier of Kalinga (Meghavahana Kharavela), fiction, 1982 Jain, Sagarmal, Sagara Jaina-Vidya Bharati, I, 1994 Jayaswal, K.P., Hindu Polity Jina Vijaya, Muni, Pracina Jaina Lekha Samgraha, I, 1917 Keith, A.B., Buddhist Philosophy in India and Ceylon, 1923 Kern, H., Manual of Indian Buddhism, 1896 Kosambi, Dharmanand, Bhagavan Buddha, (Hindi trans. Sripad Joshi), 1956 Kuraishi, M.H., List of Ancient Monuments protected under Act VII of 1904 in the Bihar and Orissa Provinces, 1938 La Vallee Poussin, L. de, Bouddhisme Etudes et Materiaux, 1898 Lamotte, E., Histoire du Buddhisme Indien, 1958

Page #183
Bibliography 157 Law, B.C., Historical Geography of Ancient India, 1954 Luders, H., Bruckstucke Buddhistischer Dramen, 1911 ---, Die Sakischen Mura, BSB, 1919, pp. 734-66 Mahtab, H.K., History of Orissa, Oriya Majumdar, N.G., A Guide to the Scluptures in the Indian Museum, pt. I Majumdar. S.N., ed., Ptolemy's Ancient India Malalasekara, G.P., The Pali Literature of Ceylon, 1928 Mazumdar, B.C., Orissa in the Making Mehendale, M.A., Bibliographical Study of Asokan Inscriptions, -, Historical Grammar of Inscriptional Prakrits, 1948 Minayeff, I.P., Recherches sur le Bouddhisme, 1894 Mirashi, V.V., Satavahanon aur Pascimi Ksatrapon ka Itihasa aur Abhilekha, Hindi, 1982 Mitra, Smt. Debala, Udayagiri and Khandagiri, 1959 Mitra, Raja Rajendra Lala, Antiquities of Orissa, II, 1880 Mittal, A.C., An Early History of Orissa, 1962 Monier-Williams, M., A Sanskrit-English Dictionary, 1951 Mookerji, R.K., Asoka, 2nd rev. edn., 1955 Nagraj, Muni, The Contemporaneity and Chronology of Mahavira and Buddha, 1970 Neumann, K.E., Reden Gotamo Buddhos, I Ojha, Gaurishankar Hirachand, Bharatiya Pracina Lipimala, Hindi, 1918 Oldenberg, H., Patimokkha, (Trans.), S.B.E., XIII Oldenberg, H. & Rhys Davids, T.W., Vinayapitakam, Vol. I, Introduction, 1879 Pandey, Rajbali., Asoka ke Dharmalekha, Hindi, 1957 - Indian Palaeagraphy Pt. I, 2nd edn., 1957 Panigrahi, K.C., Archaeological Remains at Bhubaneswar, 1961 Patoria, Kusum, Yapaniya aur unka Sahitya, Hindi, 1988 Rai, Suresh Chandra, Sungarajavamsa evan unka kala, Hindi, 1989 Rajguru, S.N., The Inscriptions of Orissa, 1959 Ray, N.R., Maurya and Sunga Art, 1945 Rhys Davids, Mrs., Sakya or Buddhist Origins, 1931 Rhys Davds, T.W., Dialogues of the Buddha Sachau, Edward C., Al-Beruni's India, II, 1910

Page #184
158 The Hathigumpha Inscription and the Bhabru Edict Sahu, L.N., Udisa mein Jaina Dharma, Hindi tr. Muni Shubhkaran, 1974 Sahu, N.K., Kharavela, 1984 Sastri, K.A.N., A History of South India, 2nd edn., 1958 Scharfe, H., The Maurya Dynasty and the Seleucids, 1971 Schumacher, Wolfgang, Die Edikte das Kaisers Asoka, 1948 Senart, E., Les Inscriptiones de Piyadasi, 1881 Shah, C.J., Jainism in North India, 1931, Hindi translation, 1990 Shah, Umakant P., Studies in Jaina Art, 1955 Shamasastry, R., Kautilya's Arthasastra, trans., 4th edn., 1951 Sharma, G.R., The Excavations at Kausambi, (1957-59), - The Defences and the Syenaciti of the Purusamedha, 1960 Shashi Kant, Kausambi, Hindi, 1965 -, Political and Cultural History of Mid-North India, 1987 Shastri, Nemichandra, Tirtharkara Mahavira aur unki Acarya Parampara, I-II, Hindi, 1974 Sircar, D.C., Select Inscriptions, Vol. I, 1942, 2nd edn., 1965 Smith, V.A., Asoka, Early History of India, 4th edn. --- , Oxford History of India, 1920 Tarn, W.W., Greeks in Bactria and India, 1939, 2nd edn., 1951 Thapar, Romila, Asoka and the Decline of the Mauryas, 1961 Thomas, E.J., The Life of Buddha Tiwary, B.K., History of Jainism in Bihar, 1996 Upadhye, A.N., Pravacanasara (Pavayanasara), Introduction, 3rd edn., 1964 Upasak, C.S., The History and Palaeography of Mauryan Brahmi Script Vasantharaj, M.D., Correlation of the Ages of Bhagavan Mahaveera and Bhagavan Gautama Buddha, 1997 Vijaymurti, Jaina Silalekha Samgraha, II, Hindi, 1952 Walleser, Max, Das Edict von Bhabra (Materalien zur Kunde des Buddhismus, I, 1923) -, Nochmals das Edikt von Bhabra, ibid., IX, 1925 Winternitz, Maurice, A History of Indian Literature, I and II, 2nd edn., 1972 Woolner, A.C., Asoka -- Text and Glossary, Pt.I, 1924 -- Introduction to Prakrit

Page #185
159 Bibliography III. Journals and Reports, etc. Acta Orientalia, I, XXXVI (1974) (Copenhagen) Actes du Sixieme Congres International des Orientalistes, pt. III, sec. 2, 1885 Ancient India (Bulletin of A.S.I.), No. 5 (Jan. 1949) Anekanta, Hindi, I (1930) Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, LIII (1972) (Pune) Annual Report of the Archaeological Survey of India, 1922-23 Archiv Orientalini, XLII (1974) (Prague) Asia Major, 5 (1930) Asiatic Researches, XV B.C. Law Volume, I Babu Chhotelal Jain Memorial Volume, 1967 Bharat Itihas Samsodhak Mandal Traimasik, 52 (1973), Marathi Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, 36, 2 (1973) (University of London). East and West, New Series, XXII, 3-4 (Rome) Encyclopaedia Jainica - Jaina Visva-kosa. Epigraphia Indica, II, VIII, X App., XIII, XX Grierson Commemoration Volume, 1933 Guru Gopaldas Varaiya Smriti Granth, Hindi, 1967 Indian Antiquary, XX (1891), XXXVI, XL, XLI (1912), XLVII (1918), XLVIII (1919), XLIX (1920). Indian Archaeology -- A Review, 1958-59, 1961-62 Indian Historical Quarterly, II, V, XIV, XXVII Indian Studies, No. III Indo-Iranian Journal, XVII, 3-4 (1975) (Leiden) Jain Hitaishi, Hindi, XV, 5, (March, 1921) Jain Journal, III, 4 Jaina Antiquary, XIX, 2 Jaina Sandesa Sodhanka, Hindi, VI, VII, XXXI (28-12-1972) Jaina Siddhanta Bhaskara, Hindi, VI, 1, XV, 2, XVI, 1-2 Journal Asiatique, 1884, 1885, 1887, 1896, 1953 Journal of Andhra Historical Research Society, II

Page #186
160 The Hathigumpha Inscription and the Bhabru Edict Journal of Bihar and Orissa Research Society, III, IV, VI, XIII, XIV, XV, XVI, XXII, XXIII, XXVIII Journal of the American Oriental Society, 95.2 (Philadelphia) Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal, VI, IX Journal of Indian History, XLI, 3 Journal of Oriental Research, XXXVIII (Madras University) Journal of the Deptt. of Letters, XX (Calcutta University) Journal of the Pali Text Society, 1896 Journal of the Rajasthan Institute of Historical Research, IX (1972), (Jaipur) Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, 1855 (Vol. 27) 1898, 1901, 1909, 1910, 1911, 1912, 1913, 1915, 1919, 1922, 1963 Journal of the U.P. Historical Society, XX Mayurbhanj Gazette, IV, 4 Memoirs of the Asiatic Society of Bengal, X Nagari, Hindi, VIII Parisasvada (4): Jain Vidya evam Prakrit (Sampurnanand Sanskrit University) Praci-Jyoti (Digest of Indological Studies), VIII Prakrit-Vidya, Hindi, April-June, 1999 Proceedings of 2nd All India Oriental Conference, Calcutta, 1922 Puratattva (Bulletin of the Indian Archaeological Society), No. 6 (1972-73) Quarterly Review of Historical Studies, IX, 4 (1972-73) (Calcutta) Rsabha Saurabh, 1999 Sacred Books of the East, XIII Sodhdarsa, Hindi, 36 Svasti Sri (Dr. B.Ch. Chhabra Felicitation Vol.) 1984 The Orissa Historical Resarch Journal, VI, 1 The Oxford School Atlas, 29th edn., 1997 Tulsi Prajna, XVIII, 4 (28-2-1993) University of Ceylon Review, XVIII (1960) Vishveshvarananda Indological Journal, V, X (Hoshiarpur)

Page #187
Index 65, 70, 77-9, 81-91, 97-8, 100, 108-10, 113, 117, 128 Asura, 109 Asvaghosa, 100 Asvamedha, 41 Atasukhapradinaka, 64 Austric, 96 Ava-raja, 16, 29, 55-6, 112, 116 Avantiratha, 83 Ayodhya, 45, 99 Acarya, 65-6 Afghanistan, 83, 110 Ahicchatra, 44, 54 Ahmedabad, 119-20 Ahraura, 82 Aila, 47-8 Ajatasatru (Kunika), 37,63 Ajivaka, 128 Al-Beruni, 37 Allahabad, 90, 98 Allan, J. 43 Alwar, 77 Amaravati, 55 Ambala, 84 Anahilapatana, 51 Andhra, 40-1, 56, 83, 98, 116, 124 Andhrabhrtya, 40, 99 Andhrapatha, 55 Anga (country) 17, 29, 31, 44, 83, 109, 112, 117 Anga (scripture), 21, 32, 70, 113, 117, 126 Apabhramsa, 95-6 Arahamta, 8, 15, 19-20, 23, 28, 30-2, 49-50, 65-6, 69, 71, 111-2, 116-7, 124-7 Armaic, 98, 110 Aratiya Yati, 68 Ardha-Magadhi, 95, 97, 100, 102-3 Arvarnoi, 55-6 Aryan, 48, 96, 106 Asika, 10, 25-6, 52, 58-9, 111, 115, 123 Asmaka, 123 Asmussen, J.P., ix, xv Asoka (Piyadasi), 3, 38-40, 42, 53, 55-6, 59, 62, Bactria, 42, 46 Bahasatimita (Brhaspatimitra), 17, 29, 31, 39, 42-6, 56, 112, 116, 123 Bairat (Viratanagara), 81-4, 100 Bajpai, K.D., xii, xix Banerji, R.D., 5-33, 56, 58, 66, 120 Bankipur, 7 Barabar Hills, 54, 84, 90 Bariyaya Nakiya, 64 Barua, B.M., 5-6, 8-33, 50, 52, 78-9, 87, 120 Basham, A.L., viii, ix, xii, xix Bechert, H., 121 Bengal, 58, 96, 126 Bhabru, 65, 77, 82,90-1, 113, 117 Bhadrabahu I, 36, 102 Bhagabhadra, 99 Bhagga, 82 Bhamaha, 95, 97 Bhandara, 52 Bhandarkar, D.R., 82-3 Bharata, 55

Page #188
162 The Hathigumpha Inscription and the Bhabru Edict Bharatavarsa (Bharadavasa) 16,28-9,55, 112, 116 Bharhut, 45 Bhesakalavana, 82 Bhogavaiga, 109 Bhojaka, 11, 25-6, 41, 53, 58, 61, 63, 111, 116 Bhojpur, 81 Bhubanesvara, 6, 57, 59, 68, 99 Bhuti, 64 Bihar, 54, 81, 84, 98, 100, 126 Bijak Pahar, 77 Bimbisara, 38 Bloch, T., 4 Bolan Pass, 98 Brahmagiri, 82-3 Brahmani (R),58 Brahmanical, 37-8, 45, 55, 99-101, 127 Brahmi, 43, 73, 98-9, 107-10 Brahmana, 15, 27-8, 50, 63, 71, 97, 99, 125, 127 Byhadratha, 44 Brown, P., 6 Buddha, 37-8, 65, 77-80, 82, 85-91, 100, 101, 107, 109, 113, 117-18, 121-2, 125 Buddhaghosa, 51, 87. Buddhism, 65, 81-2, 89, 91, 108, 127-8 Buddhist, 37-8, 55, 62, 65, 70, 77, 82-3, 85, 88 91, 97, 100, 108, 124-7 Buhler, G., 4, 95, 108 Bundelkhanda, 45, 48 Burma, 100 Burt, Capt., 77 Chakravartinayanar, A., 99 Camparana, 84 Chanda, R.P., 5,9 Chandrapur, 52 Charsadda, 110 Chatterji, C.D., x, 87 Chatterji, S.K., 95, 101 Chattopadhyaya, S., 40 Chhabra, B.Ch., 8 Chinese, 108-9 Chitradurg, 83 Choudhury, M.C., xvii Christ, 98 Christian, 15, 35, 68, 72, 90, 99, 107, 110 Cina (China), 31, 108-9 Cola, 39, 56 Cowell, E.B., 95 Coyatha, 21, 123 Culakamma, 64 Cunningham, A., 4, 12-14, 17-21, 108 Cuttack, 59 Daksina, 109 Daksinapatha, 57, 83 Damodar (R), 58, 126 Darada, 109 Dasaratha, 40, 84 Dehra Dun, 83 Delhi, 77, 82 Demetrius (Dimita), 14, 27-8, 44, 46, 54 Devadatta, 125 Devanagari, 97 Devendraganin, 47 Dhamma, 65, 77-80, 113, 117-18, 128 Dhana, 45, 98 Dhanabhuti, 45 Dhauli, 59, 98 Dhavalikar, M.K., xvi, 123 Digambara, 36, 68, 100, 102-3, 125-7 Dikshit, K.N., 106 Dikshit, R.K., xii, xix Cakravartin, 55 Calcutta, 4, 77, 100 Calukya, 51 Campa, 126 Candragupta Maurya, 36-8, 47, 56, 62, 109, 122 Cantonese, 37 Central Asia, 108 Ceti (Cedi), 9, 23-4, 40, 42, 47-8, 84, 111, 115

Page #189
Inder 163 Guntupille, 123 Gupta, 99, 100, 110 Diringer, D., 106 Dosapuriya, 109 Dravida, 109-10 Dravidian, 96 Dusyanta, 55 East India Company, 77 Edmunds, A.J., 86 Egyptian, 105 English, 97 Eucratides, 46 Euphrates (R), 106 European, 96 Handa, D., xvi Haribhadra, 63 Harisena, 98 Haryana, 84, 98 Hastimala, Acharya, 120-1 Hathigumpha, 3, 6-7, 49, 60, 65, 69-70, 99, 103, 111, 115, 120-2 Hathiwara, 99 Hazara, 110 Heliodorus, 99 Hemacandra, 47, 63, 97, 122 Himavanta-Theravali, 119-22 Hinayana, 100 Hindi, 97 Hiralal Hansraj, Pt. 121 Hoernle, A.F.R.,95 Hultzsch, E., 78, 81 Huna, 109 Hunter, G.R., 105-6 Fleet, J.F., 5 Fa-Wan-Shu-Lin, 108 Ganadhara, 125 Gandhara, 40 Gandharva, 10, 26, 62, 109-11, 115 Ganga (R), 17, 29, 31, 54, 56, 112, 116 Garg, G.R., xix Garuda, 99, 109 Gavimath, 82 Gautama, 126 Gaya, 81 Geiger, W., 37 Gerini, 58 Ghatayala, 99 Ghosundi, 99 Ghositarama, 125 Girnar, 3, 98 Godavari (R), 39, 55-6, 58, 99, 126 Gopalachari, K., 40 Gopali, 44 Gorathagiri (Goradhagiri), 13, 27, 42, 54, 60, 112, 116 Greek (Yavana), 14, 27-8, 44-5, 54, 97-9, 109 10 Grierson, G., 95 Gajarra, 82, 84 Ila (Ila), 48 India, 3, 55-7, 62, 73, 96, 102-3, 105, 108-9, 122, 124 Indian 46, 95-7, 103, 106-7 Indian Archipelago, 58 Indra, 61 Indraji, B.L., 4, 11-14, 17, 18, 20-1, 119-20 Indus, 105-7, 109 Jacobi, H., 95 Jagannath, 6, 43, 53, 57 Jain, 15, 21, 35-8, 45, 47, 50-1, 53, 55, 65-8, 70-2, 97, 99-100, 102-3, 109-10, 122, 125, 127 Jain, B.C., 6 Jain, B.D., 95 Jain, H.L., 125 Jain, J.P., xii, xx, 6, 35-6, 70, 82, 102 Jain, S.M., 121-2

Page #190
164 The Hathigumpha Inscription and the Bhabru Edict Kanva, 124 Karakandu, 126 Karakoram, 108 Karnataka, 83, 98 Kashmir, 40 Kasi, 84 Kausambi (Kosam), 43, 82, 84, 88, 125 Kautilya (Canakya), 4, 47, 51 Kaveri (R), 56 Keilhorn, 4 Keith, A.B., 121 Keralaputra, 39 Khadi-boli, 97 Jainism, 50-1, 67, 71, 91, 125-8 Jaipur, 77, 99 Jalalabad, 110 Jalauka, 40 Jamali, 127 Jambesvaragumpha, 64 Jambudipa, 55 Jating-Ramesvara, 82-3 Jaugad (Samapa), 59, 98 Jayaswal, K.P., 5-33, 44, 56, 66, 71, 119-21 Jamdet-Nasr, 105 Jina Vijaya, Muni, 5, 95, 119-20 Jitasatru, 127 Jiva, 19, 31, 67 Jodhpur, 99 Justin, 45-6, 54 Kabul, 96 Kakkuka, 99 Kalhana, 3 Kali Sindh (R), 45 Kalidasa, 45, 55 Kalinga, 6, 9-11, 14, 17, 23-6, 31, 36, 38, 40-1, 46-9, 52-4, 56-9, 62-4, 71, 73, 83, 97, 100, 103, 111-12, 115-16, 123-4, 126-8 Kalinga-Jina, 17, 29, 36, 38, 71, 112, 116, 124, 127 Kalinga-Nagari, 10, 58-60, 111, 115 Kalingapatnam, 59 Kalki, 122 Kalpa-urksa, 14, 71, 112, 116 Kalsi, 83, 98 Kalyan Vijaya, Muni, 120 Kamala Kanta, 77 Kamhabemna (Krsnavena) (R), 10, 25-6, 52, 111, 115, 123 Kamma Halakhina, 59 Kanari, 109 Kancipuram, 99 Kandahar, 83, 110 Kanhan (R), 52 Kaniska, 110 Khandagiri-Udayagiri, 6, 59, 60, 64, 68, 99 Khandesh, 123 Kharavela, 3-9, 12, 14-20, 22-3, 30-1, 35, 38-9, 41-4, 46-54, 56-60, 62-3, 65-6, 68-71, 73, 91, 99, 100, 103, 111-13, 115-17, 119-20, 122-5 Kharosthi, 98, 107-10 Khasya, 109 Khibira, 10, 24-5, 58 Khotan, 100, 108 Khyber Pass, 98 Kinnara, 109 Kittoe, Capt., 4, 77 Kongoda, 58 Konow, S., 5, 13, 14, 17, 95, 121 Kosala, 84 Kosambi, D., 85-6, 89 Krishna (district), 41 Krishna (R), 39, 52, 55, 56, 58, 123 Krishna Deva, ix, xviii Krsna (Kanha), 41 Ksatriya, 99, 127 Kudepa, 48-9 Kumarapala, 123 Kumari (Mt), 19, 30-1, 68-9, 112, 117 Kunda-Kunda, 66-7, 102-3, 126 Kurnool, 83 Kuru, 84 Kusana, 97, 108-10

Page #191
Index 165 Laghman, 110 Lal, B.B., 59 Lalaka Hathisiha, 49-50 Lalitavistara, 109-10 Langala, R., 30 Lauriya Araraj, 84 Licchavi, 63 Lohanipur, 71, 124 Luders, 5, 100 Matsya, 84 Maurya, 36-40, 42-5, 48, 53, 64, 71, 73, 81, 99 Mazumdar, B.C., 58 Meerut, 84 Meridian, 97 Merutunga, 122 Mirashi, V.V., 123 Mithridates, 46 Mitra, 123 Mitra, R.L., 4 Mitra, S.N., 87 Mongoloid, 96 Mookerji, R.K., 77-9, 81, 87, 121 Mora, 3 Mukhiya-kala (Principal Scripture) 21-2, 40, 59, 64, 70, 99, 113, 117 Muriya-kala, 21 Musika, 10, 25-6, 123 Muslim, 35 Madhya-desa, 14, 96 Madhya Pradesh, 84,98 Madurai, 56 Magadha, 17, 29-31, 36-9, 42-6,54-8, 63, 70-1, 78-9, 81-4, 102-3, 109, 112, 116-7, 123, 127 Magadhi, 97, 100, 102 Mahamatra, 31, 35, 70, 99 Mahanadi (R), 58-9 Mahanandin, 37-8 Mahapadma, 37-9 Maharastra, 40,52 Maharastri, 97, 99, 103 Mahavijayaprasada, 15, 28-9,58, 60, 112, 116 Mahavira, 35-8, 70, 100, 102-3, 122, 124-7 Mahavira Era (M.E.), 22, 35-6, 39, 50, 70, 121. Mahendra, 100 Maisolia, 55 Malasekhara, G.P., 121 Malla, 84 Malli, 125 Malwa, 45, 53 Majumdar, B.K., xvi Majumdar, N.G., 45 Manastambha, 21, 69 Mancapuri, 7, 49, 69 Mankad, D.R., 44 Mansehra, 83-4, 110 Maski, 82, 84, 123 Mathura (Madhura), 13-15, 27-9, 43-4, 54-5, 68, 71-2, 112, 116, 124 Naga, 109 Naganika, 41-2, 53 Nagara-Akhadamsa (Viyohalaka), 64 Nagarjunikonda, 55 Nagod, 55 Nalanda, 54, 81 Namisadhu, 95 Nanaghat, 3, 41-2 Nanda, 11, 17, 26-9, 31, 35-9, 47, 56-7, 62, 71, 111-12, 116, 124, 127-8 Nandangarh, 84 Nandipada (Nandyavarta), 72 Nandivardhana, 37 Narmada (R), 53, 57, 99 Nasik, 3, 40, 45, 48, 53, 123 Nath, B.V., 8 Nepal, 83-4, 96 Nigliva, 84 Nile (R), 106 Nirgrantha, 128 Nisidiya, 19-20, 69, 71, 112, 117 Nisiya (caitya), 71, 113, 117

Page #192
166 The Hathigumpha Inscription and the Bhabru Edict Nordic, 96 North Penner (R), 96 Orissa, 6,99 Psthu, 49 Prthudaka, 30, 57 Ptolemy, 55-6 Pule-Darunt, 110 Punya Vijaya, Muni, 120 Puri, 6, 15,59 Pururavas, 48 Purvavideha, 109 Puskalavati, 109 Puskarasari, 109-10 Pusyamitra Sunga, 44-6, 99 Pabhosa, 43-4 Padamulika Kusuma, 64 Pahariya, 109 Paisaci, 97, 100 Pakistan, 57, 83, 109-10 Pali, 88, 95, 97, 100-1, 103 Palkigundu, 82 Pallava, 99 Panca-Namaskara (Namokara), 65, 68 Pancala, 44, 84 Pandey, H., 5 Pandey, R.B., 106, 108 Pandya 18-19, 30-1, 39, 56-7, 63, 112, 117 Panini, 96-7, 107, 109 Parana Vitana, S., 122 Parsvanatha, 126 Parthia, 46, 109 Patalapura, 48-9 Pataliputra (Patna), 5, 54-6, 71, 81, 83, 98, 102, 124 Pavanagumpha, 48-9 Peshawar, 83, 110 Philippine Islands, 58 Pihunda, 55 Piprahwa, 107 Pischel, R., 95 Pithunda, 16, 29, 55-6, 58, 112, 116 Pityndra, 55 Polimdi, 109 Praci (R), 15, 28-9, 58-60, 112, 116 Pracya, 101 Prakrit, 73, 95, 97-100, 102-3, 123 Pranhita (R), 52 Prinsep, J., 4, 12-14, 17-21, 108 Priyadarsana, 127 Proto-Elanite, 105 Rahula, 86 Raichur, 123 Rajagrha (Rajgir), 13, 27-8, 42-3, 54, 60, 112, 116 Rajasthan, 71, 81,98 Rajasuya, 12, 27, 41 Rajula-Mandagiri, 82 Ramaswami, N.S., ix, xviii, 121, 123 Rampurva, 84 Rani Gumpha, 6 Rao, G.V., 40 Rathika, 11, 25, 41, 53, 58, 61, 63, 111, 116 Rawalpindi, 57, 83, 110 Raychoudhari, H.C., 55 Rhys Davids, Mrs., 121 Rhys Davids, T.W., 85-6 Rohtas, 81 Ray, U.N., 122 Rsabha, 55, 109, 124, 126 Rudradaman, 3,98 Rudrata, 95 Rummindei, 83-4 Rupnath, 82 Sadhu (Sahu), 65, 68 Sahu, L.N., 6 Sahu, N.K., 6, 51, 58, 66 Saka, 97, 108-9 Sakari, 109

Page #193
Index 167 Sakuntala, 55 Sakya, 107 Samapa, (Jaugad), 59 Samataka (hill), 28 Samavasarana, 21, 69 Samgha, 65, 68, 77-9, 81-2, 89-91, 113, 117, 125, 128 Samghayana, 20, 67-8, 112, 117, 125 Samgiti (Buddhist Council), 83, 91 Sammed- (Sammet-) Shikharji, 126 Samnivesa, 17, 71, 112, 116 Samprati, 40, 44 Samudragupta, 73, 98 Sanci, 82, 84 Sandrokottos, 38 Sanskrit, 95-9, 101, 103, 109 Sapta-Sindhu, 96 Sarasvati Movement, 70 Sarnath, 82, 84 Sarpagumpha, 7, 64 Sasaram, 82 Sastri, K.A.N., 39-40 Satakamnim (Satakarni), 10, 25-6, 39, 41-2, 111, 115, 123 Satavahana, 3, 40-2, 53, 73, 97, 99, 123-4 Satiyaputra, 39 Satana, 45 Sauraseni, 97, 100, 102-3 Saurastra, 62, 96, 108 Savagahanam, 14, 28, 50, 71, 112, 116 Schism, 68, 82, 90-1, 102-3, 124-5 Seleucids, 44, 109 Seleucos, 109 Senart, E., 78, 81, 86, 89 Seoni, 52 Shah, U.P., 72 Shahbazgarhi, 83, 98, 110 Sharan, M.K., ix, xx Shar-i-Kuna, 83, 110 Sharma, G.R., 43 Sharma, M.L., xvii Siam, 100 Siddhapura, 82-3 Siddha, 8, 23, 65, 111, 115 Siddhartha, 126 Siddharthnagar, 107 Simhapatha, 20, 31-2, 50, 113, 117 Simuka, 40-1, 44, 48, 123 Sindhu-Jhelum (R), 107 Sindhula (Simdhula), 20, 31-2, 50, 69-70, 113, 117 Sircar, D.C., 6, 8-10, 20, 78, 87, 120 Sironcha, 52 Sisupalagarh, 59-60 Sitalanatha, 124 Sivi, 30 Smith, V.A., 83, 86, 121 Solanki, P., 122 Sonakayanaputra, Vamgapala, 44 Sopara, 98 Sramana (Samana), 20, 30-1, 49-50, 63, 65, 67, 112, 117, 128 Sri Lanka (Ceylon), 37, 100-1, 103 Srikakulam, 59 Sthulibhadra, 126 Stirling, A., 4 Stupa (Thupa), 14-15, 27, 71, 112, 116 Sudarsana Lake, 62, 68, 98 Sugamgiya, 29, 56 Sukhlal, Pt., 119-20 Sumerian, 105 Sundari, 109 Sunga, 44-5, 53, 97, 99, 123-4 Surasena, 84 Sutlej (R), 97-8, 107-8, 110 Suvarnagiri, 83,98 Svargapuri, 7, 49-50 Svastika, 72 Svetambara, 36, 67-8, 100, 102-3, 120, 122, 125-7 Swat, 107

Page #194
168 The Hathigumpha Inscription and the Bhabru Edict Taksasila (Taxila), 57, 83, 98, 107, 110 Tamila (Tamira), 17, 22, 29, 35, 38-9,56-8, 63, 112, 116 Tamraparniya, 39 Tanasuliyavata, 11, 22, 26-7, 35-6, 38, 59-60, 62, 111, 116 Tattvagumpha, 64 Tevaniputra Bhagavata, 43-4 Thanesar, 57 Thanjavur, 56 Theravada, 100-1 Thomas, E.J., 121 Thomas, F.W., 5 Thondimandalam, 99 Tipitaka, 101 Tirthamkara, 21, 35-6, 55, 69-71, 109, 124-7 Topra, 84 Tosala, 58-9 Tosali, 59-60, 83 Tri-Kalinga, 58 Vaigai, R., 56 Vaisali, 63 Vajiragharavati, 12, 27, 49, 63, 112, 116 Vaji, 84 Vallabhi, 102-3 Vanga, 109 Vansadhara (R), 58-9 Vararuci, 95, 97 Vasantharaj, M.D., xx Vasisthiputra Pulumavi, 123 Vasu, 22, 33, 47, 49 Vasumitra, 45 Vatsa, 43, 84 Vedic, 96, 101 Vena, 9, 24, 47, 49 Vidarbha, 45 Vidisa, 45, 99 Vidyadhara (Vijadhara), 11, 25-6,53, 111, 116 Vidyananda, Acarya, 57 Vigatasoka, 40 Vijaya cakra, 19, 30, 69, 112, 117 Vijayapuri, 55 Vijayawada, 55 Vindhyas, 41-2, 57, 100, 116 Visnu, 99 Vratya, 101 Vyaghragumpha, 64 Ucchaihiravas, 61 Udicya, 96 Ujjayini (Ujjain) 36-7, 40, 45, 83, 98, 100, 103, 108 Upadhyaya, 65, 68 Upadhye, A.N., 95, 102 Uparagauda, 109 Upasaka, Upasika, 78, 113, 118 Urdu, 97 Utkala, 58 Uttar Pradesh, 83-4, 98, 100, 107 Uttarakurudvipa, 109 Uttarapatha (Utarapadha), 17, 29-30, 57, 83, 112, 116 Uvasaga (Sravaka), 19, 66, 112, 117 Wainganga, 52-3, 58 Winternitz, M., 95, 101, 121 Woolner, A.C., 77-8, 95, 99-101 Yaksa, 109 Yamapura, 49 Yamuna (R), 13-15, 27, 54, 108, 112, 116 Yapaniya, 68 Yasamata, 44 Yasoda, 127 Yerragudi, 82-3 Yugapurana, 44, 54 Vacana (Jain Council), 31, 68-70, 102-3, 125 Vacek, J., xv Vadukha, 49 Vaibhar Hill, 54

Page #195
Tal R Shashi Kant, Lucknow University's Ph.D., is a brilliant scholar of history, untiring researcher and recipient of several academic awards -- including the Uttar Pradesh Government's state honour. Besides numerous articles on varied themes from Indian history and culture, he has authored Political and Cultural History of Mid-North India: From the Earliest Times to AD 1248 - a work which, approved for publication by the Indian Council of Historical Research (ICHR), appeared in print in 1987. And like his Hathigumpha Inscription of Kharavela and Bhabru Edict of Asoka, is ready for its second updated edition. He is also editor of a research journal, entitled Sodhadarsa. Professionally a bureaucrat, Dr. Shashi Kant retired as Special Secretary to the Uttar Pradesh Government With a Foreword by A.L. Basham 2000, xxiv, 168 p.; includes 19 b/w photographs; 2 Folded Maps; Appendices; Bibliography; Index; 23 cm. ISBN 81-246-0139-9 Rs. 295 Jain Education Internation

Page #196
D.K. Printworld (P) Ltd. 'Sri Kuni F-52 Bali Nagar, NEW DELHI - 110 015 Phs.: (011) 545 3975, 546 6019; Fax: (011) 546 5926 E-mail: dkprint@4mis.com