Jain Dharma ka Maulik Itihas Part 4

SR No.: 002074
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Hastimal Maharaj
Publisher: Jain Itihas Samiti Jaipur
Publication Year: 1995
Total Pages: 880
Language: Hindi
Classification: Book_Devnagari & History
File Size: 16 MB

Page 239

720
]
[
Hard Tifa sfaETRYFTY
The tatas of holy Tirumale, by consent of the blessed people of the whole kingdom, the Jainas throughout the whole kingdom having given according to them doors house by house one fanam a year (to provide) for the personal protection of the God at the tirtha of Balu-gula will with the gold so raised appoint month by month twenty servants for the personal protection (or as a body-guard) of the God, and with the remainder of the gold will cleanse and purify the ruined Jinalayas, and as long as sun and moon endure, allowing no failure in this custom, and giving (the money) year by year, will acquire fame and merit.
This rule now made who so transgrasses is a traitor to the King, à traitor to the assembly (Sangha) and to the congregation (Samudaya). Be he devotee, or he be village headman, that destroy this work of merit, they incur the guilt of killing a cow or a Brahaman on the banks of Ganges. Who takes away hand given by himself or by another is born a worm in ordure for sixty thousand years.
Subsequent addition at the top-Dvi Satti of Kallsha and Husuri Setti having made application to Bukkaraya, the tatas of Terumal came and had the, repaired. And both parties uniting bestowed on Husuri Setti the title of Sangha Nayaka."
उपरिलिखित बुक्कराय के शिलानुशासन का हिन्दी रूपान्तर इस प्रकार है :
शुभ हो । प्रत्येक सम्मान के सुयोग्य सुपात्र शाही यतियों के राज राजेश्वर, पवित्र विष्णु रामानुज सम्प्रदाय के रत्निम मन्दिरों के मुख्य आश्रयदाता (दानदाता) रंगराज (श्री रंगा के राजा) के चरण-कमलों में दास का प्रणाम ।
This inscription is commonly known as Ramanuj chari's Shashana. An erroneous version of it, made for Colonel Mackenzee, was published in 1809 in Asiatic Researches Vol. IX Page 270. The situation of the inscription is there said to be "On a stone upon the Hill of Belgola, in front of the Image". If this was correct, the stone must have been since removed to its present position, which is in the town and not on the Hill.