Hathigumpha Inscription of Kharavela and Bhabru Edict of Asoka

SR No.: 006726
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Shashi Kant
Publisher: D K Print World
Publication Year: 2000
Total Pages: 196
Language: English
Classification: Book_English
File Size: 16 MB

Page 34

The Hāthīgumpha 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 Khāravela 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 Arahamtānaṁ (.) Namo sava-Sidhānam (..)
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)hamtānam B - Araha(m)tānam Since the medial i is doubtful, it would be better to read Arahamtānam.
3.