Epigraphia Indica Vol 33

SR No.: 032587
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: D C Sircar
Publisher: Archaeological Survey of India
Publication Year: 1959
Total Pages: 514
Language: English
Classification: Book_English
File Size: 29 MB

Page 117

No. 11]
NOTE ON KALYANA INSCRIPTION OF SAKA 1248
the next sentence in lines 8-10 reads: Vaha[va]dinnu-viparyaye Madhukēśvaradēva-saṁ(sāṁ)dhy(or samnidhau) Karnata-löke(kaih) amjana[m] vudhikritam. Desai's emendation of the last portion as anjana-buddhiḥ krita, ' made a premature offer to embellish [the temple]', is unsatisfactory in view of the passage Madhukesvaradeva-sannidhye (or sannidhau), 'before Madhukēsvaradiva (i.e. the god Madhukēévara)', occuring in the same context, although he reads it wrongly. In our opinion, the intended reading for vudhikritam is baddhikritam in which baddha means stopped. The root anj means to celebrate', 'to honour', and anjana may indicate celebration, worship'. It therefore seems to us that all celebrations in the presence of the god Madbuksvara were stopped by the people during the troubled days of Bahauddin's rebellion. This necessitated the purification and re-installation of the god in his old temple and that is exactly what is referred to again not only in the following section of the prose part but also in the versified section that follows.
73
The third sentence reads: jalpanta: deva[h] [40]dhaniya[h*] tatra kim: na hi. In this, alpanta is apparently a mistake for jalpanti, '[the people] are talking'. This means to say that there was a talk or controversy among the people. The conflicting views in the controversy were devaḥ sodhaniyaḥ tatra kim? na hi, "Should the deity be purified [for re-installation] there [in his temple]?" "Certainly not." As already indicated above, it is possible to think that, in this controversy, the Hindu citizens of Kalyanapura were in favour of the re-installation of the god while the Muslims of the place were opposed to the idea. This state of affairs, apparently referring to the time after the viparyaya, led to the efforts of Malla or Mala, son of Naiņapāla or Naiņasimha, for the re-installation of the god.
The following section of the prose part reads: tatra tasmin [ni*lja-sthānē punar-api deva-sthāpana-pujana-vidhaye (or vishaye) sam(sat)-thaku(kku)ra-Nainapala-suta-thakura-Mala(thakkuraMallena) Sho(Khoja-samksha (samaksham) udyasah [kri]ta[h|*] Khoje[na*] prasādam(dah) dattam(ttah) yushmakam kula-dharmo varttate | tat-karaniyam (yam) | The meaning of the section is quite clear. Mala (Malla) appeared before the Khoja and made an effort in regard to the re-installation of the god in his old temple and the re-introduction of his worship. The Khoja favoured him with his permission. In case the controversy was really between the local Hindus and Musalnans, the Khōja was on the side of justice and fairplay in giving this permission against the feeling of the focal Musalmans. Praise is certainly due to him for this act of courage in those days of bigotry and religious fanaticism.
As regards the contents of the versified portion following the prose part discused above, Joshi says, "... Kalyāņa, with its increasing glory, had the chariot of Sambhu moving freely. Nainasimha's son, the best of the Kayasthas, who was perhaps a worshipper of Vishnu, did not like the idea. In 1248 Saka, cyclic year Kshaya, on the full-moon day in Kärttika, when at Seshachala god Thakur is generally worshipped, Madhukeśvara was installed." These statements are based mostly on wrong readings of the text. Desai on the other hand thinks that verses 1-2 summarise the main facts stated in the prose part. This is also based on misunderstanding.
The first four of the five stanzas in the second half of the inscription repeat only a part of what we have in the prose section analysed above and record the result of the Khoja's permission accorded to Mālā (Malla) in respect of the re-installation of the god Madhukeśvara and the reintroduction of his worship in his old temple. But the Khoja is not mentioned and there is only an indirect reference to the stoppage of Madhukesvara's worship. Verses 1-2 state that, in the night of the day of the moon (i.e. Monday) which was the full-moon day of Kärttika in the cyclic year Akshaya (the same as Kshaya mentioned in the prose part), when the nakshatra was Rōhiņi, in the Saka year counted by 8, the 4 seas, the 2 ayanas and 1 (i.e. 1248), when Suratrāna Mahimada (the same. as Suratana Mahamada of the prose part) was ruling the earth and Kamadin was his viceroy, the god Madhukeśvara was re-installed at Kalyāṇanagara by Kayastha