Epigraphia Indica Vol 07

Author(s): E Hultzsch
Publisher: Archaeological Survey of India

Page 83

EPIGRAPHIA INDICA
(VOL. VII.
Sivakhadaguta (Sivaskandagupta) in the year 14, on the 1st day of the 4th fortnight of the rainy season."
There is no means of deciding whether this inscription emanates from Vasishthipatia l'alumayi like Våsik No. 3, or from Gautamiputra Satakarņi like Kärle NOB. 4 and 5. I incline however towards the first bypothesis. The phraseology is quite identical in Nasik No. 3 and in the present inscription, and the break which, to our regret, we find here, could be filled cxactly by what precedes inapayali in Nasik No. 3.- Måmåla or Mamala has been identified (AS. p. 24) with the modern Mawal or Maul along the Ghauts. Regarding ahara, compare Dr. Fleet's Gupta Inscriptions, p. 173, note. The final e of par.gata. masu and the e of lenesa and Valurakesu seem to prove that we have to read in each case the locative plural in éshu, and that the three Words are connected, the first being only an epithet of the second. I propose to restore it as parigatadhumesu, wbich might be a proper epithet of these places, wholly devoted to religion.' it is quite clear on the other hand that the analogy of the parallel passages (Nasik Nos. 3; 2; 4, 2) would make us expect in this place the proper name of the officer. It is only out of despair, and especially under the influence of the final su, that I have recourse to this hypothesis. The phrase has to be explained by comparing Kärle No. 13, 1. 4, from which an additional argument iu favour of the reading Válurakesu is derived, and Nâsik No. 3, l. 12 f: bhikhuhi . . . . wikâyena Bladůyaniyehi. The 13th edict of Asoka (Khálsi, 1. 38) alrearly employs nikiya in the particular meaning of religious corporation. Though pavajila and bhikhu are equivalent in meaning, we find the two words combined elsewhere, e.g. in Nâsik No. 5, 1. 8. As regards the construction and the details of the translation, I refer to the remarks on Kärle No. 14, of which I have stated that our text intentionally imitates the wording. I will only add here that the construction of lahúsaghiyana as in apposition to nikayasa, which is forced on us by the comparison of Násik No. 3, but which is a little puzzling to us, has at least one analogy, which the genitive günasa Karajakána (1. 4) makes obvious, in the frequent construction of grima with a proper noun, the occurrence of which in the plural seems to indicate that originally it designated less the locality than its inhabitants.
Bühler (p. 111) proposed to take maga (marga) as the name of a territorial division, which is not found in other documents. He quoted the analogy of pathaka which occur's elsewhere in a similar sense. We have to wait for fresh facts to confirm this conjecture; but even in its current meaning uttara márga, the northern road,''the northern direction,' gives a sufficiently good sense.
Whatever may be the cause of the erroneous form bhikhuhalela, it can only be meant for bhikhuhalan. Unfortunately the meaning of this expression, which occurs not only here, but also in Nâsik No. 3, is far from distinct. Hala designates in certain cases a measure of land (Ep. Ind. Vol. I. p. 8, note), the extent of which varies according to the word which precedes and determines hala; see dharmahala, Haritasmpiti quoted by Kullûka on Mana, VII. 119; urihaddhala, inscription of Harsha (Ep. Ind. Vol. II. p. 125), etc. But hala has also the meaning of cultivated field,' as in dévabhôgahala ;' compare brahmananin halakahétra in the Uruyupalli plates (Ind. Ant. Vol. V. p. 52, text line 23), etc. With these expressions we may certainly compare that of onr text. In the Buddhist language, bhikhuhala is the equivalent of those religious donations which in the Brahmaņical phraseology are termed dérabhôgahala, devadaya (above, Vol. III. p. 274, 1. 60) and brahmadéya, and convey, like the bhikhuhala (here and Nasik No. 3, etc.), certain privileges,-parihara, which the Maliyâ copper-plates (Dr. Fleet's Gupta Inscriptions, p. 167) sum up by the formula uchitá brahmadéyasthiti). There, as here, the king grants not only a certain portion of land, but the village itself is given away. by him as bhikhuhala and participates in its entirety of the immunities implied by this
1 Above, Vol. III. p. 146, 1. 13 f. Admitting that the authenticity of this donation is doubtful, it would be nevertheless certain that it borrows its phraseology from genuine documents.
Above, Vol. III. p. 146: sarvaparikar8pétaddrababgahala'.