________________
Albrecht Wezler
Bhrigara in Sanskrit Literature
instead of divine ordeal or test' it means "the instrument of divine test'.
I do not at all want to contradict either of the two scholars; but there are two points which I should nevertheless like to make
1. It cannot be taken for granted that throughout the whole of Indian history the ensigns of royalty have been none other than the very five enumerated by Meyer and Edgerton indeed sources have been adduced in the foregoing which testify to the contrary.
2. Of the two pentads; viz. the rajakakudani and the divyani, it cannot be disputed that the latter set is divided into two subsets, viz. the two state animals, on the one side, and "the golden pitcher, the chowries and the parasol", i.e. three inanimate objects, on the other, and that out of these three the latter two form part of the ensigns of royalty and not only the allegedly fixed set of five rajakakadas). There is hence no scope for any serious doubt that the "pitcher", i.e. bhrágara, too, is here equally regarded as one of the insignia: On its part the "golden pitcher" chooses the new king in that it by itself "sprinkles him", i.e. indicates that he is to be consecrated king in a ceremony in which it will function as the abhisekapiira. Yet in thus selecting the person who is to rule the country the Whragara symbolizes royalty to the same degree as the parasol and the chowries, the state elephant and the royal steed, or the royal chariot--so that from this angle the distinction between the ensigns, on the one hand, and the panca divyani, on the other, becomes ultimately insignificant in substance.
5.2. And this latter conclusion is, if I am not mistaken, fully confirmed by the Aupapatikasatra. For, in the description of
Künika's ceremonious setting out from the city of Camps this king, seated on his elephant, is not only said to be surrounded by excellent horses, elephants and many chariots, but he is also characterized as "one above whom a white umbrella is raised" (usaviya-seya-chatte), "one who is fanned with (a) chowrie (5)" (pavia-vala-viyantye), and "one towards / by whom/whose asthe bhragara is lifted up" (abbhuggayabhrigare)." Their possible or even probable practical functions apart, the umbrella and the chowrie(s) are clearly meant here, too, as insignia of royalty: In order to honour Mahavira the king sets out in a procession in which all the royal splendour is displayed-and which forms the model, so to say, of that of ministers and other state officers as referred to by Kaušálya (cf. § 2. 3. above). Therefore it is highly improbable that nothing but a drinking vessel should be meant by the expression bhimgara, i.e. an object serving a practical purpose only, however precious the materials from which it is made. Rather there is every likelihood that this bhrigara also represents, and in the first place at that, an ensign of regal dignity.
5.3. Clearer still is the text to which I should now like to draw attention, viz. the Markandeya P. The passage I have in mind is referred to already in the Larger Petrograd Dictionary , but obviously Bohtlingk and Roth have failed to recognize its full significance. It occurs in the story of king Hariscandra who in order to keep his plighted word not only gives away the whole of his kingdom as
136. Notc however that in the Aupapātikastra (cf. fn, 138). p. 55 ($ 49.11) the flags
of the umbrella are given the attribute divya. This particular use of the legal. term divya han apparently been not taken notice of by R. W. Lariviere. The Divyalariva of Raghunandana Bhaflacarya. Ordeals In Classical Hindu Law,
Delhi 1981. 137. On the state chariot (poparatha etc.) sccc.. Meyer, o, C., p. 131, fn, 3.
and Edgerton, I. c., p. 160. 138. E. Leumann, Das Aupapatika Sutra, erstes Upanga der Jaina, I. Theil: Einleitung,
Text und Glossar. (AKM VIII, 2). Leipzig, 1883, p. 57($ 52).
139. E. Leumann renders this bahuvili compound, (o. c., p. 97), referring to the
explanation given by the Skt, commentator, by the king in whose direction - the golden water jug is raised." In any case it is quite probable that the action
denoted by abky-ud-gam here is not performed by the king himself; cf. also
Rām 5.18,11 (partially quoted in fn. 32). 140. It owes this information, however, to Th. Aufrecht, Halayudha's Abhidhanaratno
mala, London-Bonn-Paris 1861, p. 299.-The particular Pärsvanathacarlia also referred to by Aufrecht, . V. blurigara, has as far as I know not yet been
published. 141, That he is a king (rdjan) is stated already at the very outset: see Mark, P.8.3.
