________________
270
EPIGRAPHIA INDICA.
EDICT VII, 2. dhammavadhiya-cha badham vadhisati[.) Etaye-me athåye dhammasávan&ni savapitani dhammánusathini vividhani anapitâni yath[& me puldis-pi bahune janasi Ayatà ete paliyovadisamti-pi pavithalisamti-pi[.] Laj[d]ka-pi bahukesu panasatasahasesu ayata tepi-me anapita[:] hevam-cha hevar-cha paliyovadatha [1] janar dharmayu(ta)m"[.] [D]e[v]ånam-piye Piyadasi hevam-ahå[:] etam-eva-me anuvekbamane dhammathambhåni-kațâni(,) dhammanabâ mâta-kata[.pdharma(s)a[ van Je'l. kate[.]Devånam-piye Piyadasi laja-hevam dha[:] magesu-pi-me nigohani lopapitâni[:] chhâyopagani hosanti pasumunisanam [3] ambåvadikya lopapita Jadhak[0]s[i]kyani. pi-me-udupanani[2] kbânápåpitani [] nimsidhiyâ-cha" kalapita[j]âpânåni-me bahukani tata-tata kâlâpitani patibhogaye pasumunisanam[.] La[huke chu]" esa pațibhoge nama" (.) Vividhayahi sukhayanaya pulimehi-pi lajthi mamaya-cha sukhayite loke[.] Imam-chu dhammanupatipati anupațipajamtu-ti[;) etadathA-me[3] esa-kate[.] Devanam-piye Piyadasi hevam áhå[:] dharmamahåmåtd-pi-me t[@]-bahuvidhesu" athesu anugahikesu viyapata-se pavajitanam-cheva gihithanam-chas; savaspåsamdesu-pi-cha" viyapata-se[.] Sanghathasi-pi-me kate ime viyapata hoharti-ti [:] hemeva babhanesu Âjivikesu-pi-me kate[4] ime viyapata hoharti-ti[.] Nigamthesu-pi-me kate ime viy&pațà hohamti [:] nanapasamdesu-pi-me kate ime viyapat hohamti-ti (.] Pațivisitha pațivisitham tesu-tesu te-[tje [ma]hamata [.] Dhammamahamâta-chu-me etesu-cheva viya[pa]ta savesu-cha arnesu pasardesu[.] Devanan-piye Piyadasi läja-hevam Aba[:)] ete-cha anne-cha bahuka mukhå dånavisagasi viyapata-se mama-cheva devinan-cha[1] savasi-cha-me olodhanasi te-bahuvidhena a[ka]lena" tani tani tuthayatan[A]ni pați[padayamti] hida-cheva disásu-cha[.] Dålakanam-pi-cha-me kațe amnanam-cha devikumålånam ime dânavisagesu viyapata hohamti-ti[6] dhammapadánathaye dhammánupațipatiye[.] Esa-hi dhammapadane dharmapatipati-cha yâ-iyam daya dane sache sochave madave sådha(ve)-cha lokasa hevam vadhisati-ti[:]
Faintly visible are, both on Dr. Fleet's facsimile and on Sir A. Cunningham's rubbing, the following letters--ya tha .. . and the left-hand curve of ed, while the right half of sá is quite plain. The restoration is not doubtful, because there is exactly room for the lost consonants and because the phrase pulisa-pi-me "my servants" occurs above Pillar Edict, 1, 1. 7 (D. S.), 1.3 (A), and elsewhere. From Professor Kera's analysis of this edict, Der Buddhismus, vol. II, p. 385, I infer that be would restore the passage in the same manner.
* Bahone is possibly a clerical mistake for bakuke. But it may be defended by the locative pundrasune above, v. 16, 18 (D. S.).
The quantity of the second vowel of lajakd is not certain.
* The last syllable of dharmayutan bas been placed more than an inch from the rest, because there is a flaw in the rtone.
71 The restoration has been made correctly by M. Seuart. The rubbing shows the d-stroke distinctly, and the facsimile has the finale.
71 The continuation of the same flaw in the stone, which caused the separation of the syllables dharmayu and tast in 1. 2, has bere made necessary the division nimsi dhiyd (not dhayd). Of course, nothing has been lost.
7 The initial la (not sa) is perfectly plain, both on the facsimile and on the rubbing. Between la and era, three, or possibly four, syllables have been lost. The phrase was, therefore, either lakuke chu esa or lakuke chu kho esa, compare Rock Edict, XIII, 2, 1. 14 (KAlst), lahukd vu kho sa piti, and below, 1.8, tata chu lahu-se dharmaniyame.
14 The nd of ndma stands above the line, and has been added afterwards as a correction.
* Though the ta is damaged at the top, it seems probable, both according to the rubbing and the facsimiles, that the reading was to. The se after viydpud is, of course, not required. Compare also the first clause in L. 8, where another redundant ve occurs.
*The restoration has been given correctly by M. Senart.
