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 365

EPIGRAPHIA INDICA
260
[VOL. XXXIII of the Vatsagulma branch the successors of their contemporaries of the Nāndivardhana-Pravarapura branch. Another group of scholars assigned Pravarasēna II of the Nändivardhana-Pravara pura branch, who was supposed to have been a predecessor of Dēvasēna and Harishēņa, to the eighth century A. D. on the basis of the identification of his maternal grandfather Dēvagupta with Adityasēna's son of that name ruling over Magadha about 680-700 A. D. It is, however, now known that the two branches of the royal family sprang from Vindyasakti's son Pravarasēna I, the end of whose reign is referred to in the historical section of the Puranas, which was compiled when the Gupta empire was confined to Bihar and Eastern U. P., i.e. about the second quarter of the fourth century A. D. We now also know that the maternal grandfather of Pravarasēna II of Nandivardhana-Pravarapura was not Dēvagupta of the so-called Later Gupta dynasty but the Imperial Gupta monarch Chandragupta II who ruled in the period 376-413 A. D. In the Vatsagulma branch, Pravarasēna I was followed by: (1) his son Sarvasēns ; (2-3) his sons Vindhyasakti II and Pțithivishēņa; (4) Pravarasēna II, son of Prithivishēņa; (5) his son whose name is lost; (6) his son Dēvasena ; and (7) Dēvasēna's son Harishēņa. In the other house, Pravarasēna I was followed on the throne by : (1) his grandson Rudrasēna I, son of Gautamiputra ; (2) his son Přithvishēņa I ; (3) his son Rudrasēna II ; (4-6). his queen Prabhāvatiguptā,, daughter of Chandragupta II, and sons Damodarasēna and Pravarasēna II ; (7) 'Pravarsēna's son Narēndrasēna ; and (8) his son Prithvishēņa II.
Since Sarvagēna began to rule about the second quarter of the fourth century, it is difficult to believe that the reign of his grandson's great-grandson Harishēna extended beyond 500 A.D. Harishēņa's father Dēvasēna again was the sixth in descent from Pravarasēna I exactly as Pravarasēna II of the other branch, who was the daughter's son of Chandragupta II (376-413 A. D.) and could not have ended his reign much later than the middle of the fifth century A. D. Since, however, Gautamiputra of the other branch apparently predeceased his father and did not rule, Narēndrasēna, son and successor of Pravarasēna II of that branch, may be regarded as a contemporary of Dēvagēna of Vatsagulma. Even then the rule of Dēvasēna and Harishēna should have to be attributed to a period before the close of the fifth century."
The inscription is written in Sanskrit and its orthography resembles that of the contemporary Vākataka inscriptions. Consonants following have often been reduplicated. There are some orthographical errors. The object of the inscription is to record that the image, on the pedestal of which it is engraved, was the gift of a person who was the owner of the monastery', i.e. who built Cave IV at Ajanţā.
The epigraph begins with a damaged Siddham symbol and this is followed by the two sentences in which the record is written. The first sentence states that the object on which the inscription is incised (i.e. the Buddha image) was the dèya-dharma or gift of a person named Mathura who was the son of Abhayanandin and Skandavasu and belonged to the Kārvaţiya götra. Apparently Abhayanandin was the name of Māthura's father and Skandavasu that of his mother, although female names like Skandavasu are not often met with. The Kārvațiyā götra is not known from ancient Indian literature. Mathura is further described as the Vihärasvamin or 'the owner of the monastery'. The monastery referred to is undoubtedly Cave IV at Ajanţă, in which the Amage of the Buddha bearing the inscription under study is enshrined.
The second sentence, with which the inscription ends, states, in the usual Mahāyāna style, that the merit accruing to the pious act of Mathura was meant for the attainment of the supreme knowledge by all beings including his parents and others.
1 See OII, Vol. III, Introduction, p. 15. * For the dates of these Vakataka kings, see The Classical Age, pp. 177 ff.
. It does not appear to be a singlo namo reading Abhayanandiskandavasu. It is also doubtful whether we can suggest Abhayanandin alias Skandavasu.