Epigraphia Indica Vol 30

Author(s): Hirananda Shastri
Publisher: Archaeological Survey of India

Page 80

No. 10)
EPIGRAPHIC NOTES
A.D.) the feet of Vamasambhu were worshipped by Kalachuri kings squares with the fact that the expression Vāmadeva-păd-änudhyāta occurs in almost all records of the Kalachuris of Tripuri from Karna downwards". But he next sets forth certain "reasons" for which he is "inclined to look with suspicion on the statements in the Malkāpuram inscription about the early pontiffe of the Gölaki matha." These "reasons" are, however, extremely unlikely to satisfy all students of history. As for instance, Professor Mirashi points out the absence of epigraphic evidence to prove the existence of Kalachuri rulers at Tripuri about the time when the Malkāpuram inscription was engraved. But the possibility of the scions of the imperial Kalachuri house of Tripuri ruling over parts of Dābala in the thirteenth century at least as minor chiefs can hardly be ruled out. A writer on the history of the Kalachuris says at the end of his account of the Tummāņa Kalachuris who represented a branch of the Tripuri house : "It is certain that the Muslims never succeeded in establishing their power in the Chhattisgarh division and there is evidence to show that the Kalachuris continued to figure as chiefs of Chhattisgarh right up to the 18th century. The Khalari stone inscription of the Kalachuri king Haribrahmadēva (son of Ramadēva and grandson of Simhana) is dated in 1415 A.D. while the Arang plate of the Heibaya king Amarasimhadēva is dated ag late as 1737 A.D". The absence of Vāmadēva's name in the records of the Kalachuris of Chhattisgarh scarcely proves that the Saiva saint was not held in veneration by the Kalachuris of the thirteenth century. This may merely show that their esteem for Vámadēva was not as remarkable as in the case of the Kalachuri monarchs of Tripuri. Professor Mirashi's doubt regarding the authenticity of the statement in the Malkāpuram inscription on the basis of such weak" reasons ” can therefore hardly be taken quite seriously.
Vāmadēva, referred to in the records of Kalachuri Karna and his successors, is endowed with imperial titles just like the kings who are said to have been his päd-änudhyāta. Professor Mirashi Bays," the use of imperial titles in connection with him would be difficult to explain for we have not till now come across a single instance of the assumption of such titles by spiritual teachers ". Of course the epithet Paramabhaffäraka applied to the Saiva priest Vimalabambhu or siva in the Mamdāpur inscription of Saka 1172 noticed in the Corpus Inscriptionum Indicarum, Vol. III, 1888, p. 17, note 3, has been passed over in silence together with some of my observations published at later dates. It was pointed out by me that the Saiva saint Vámadēva (Vämasambhu) was represented as an emperor because the Kalachuri kings, Karna and his successors, regarded their dominions as belonging to the saint and themselves as the latter's deputies just as the Guhilots of Chitor and the kings of Travancore considered themselves viceroys respectively of the gods Ekalinga and Padmanābhasvāmin. The tradition regarding the dedication of the Marathā empire by Siväji in favour of his guru Ramadāsa was also referred to. It was further pointed out with quotations from a number of epigraphic records that the god Jagannatha or Purushottama of Puri is mentioned as the overlord of the reigning Ganga monarch in several later Ganga inscriptions." Now it seems that Professor Mirashi may be satisfied if he finds inscriptions in which a Saiva saint is unmistakably endowed with regal or imperial epithets. Fortunately I am able to draw his attention to several such records.
Recently I had occasion to examine a number of impressions of the Achalgarh (Mount Abu, RĀiputānā) inscription of the Dövda Chāhamāna Tējahsimha of Chandravati noticed in the Archæological Survey of Western India, No. 2, Appendix, p. xv, No. 58 ; Frogress Report of the Archæological
1 Ray, DHNI, Vol. II, p. 815. For fuller lists of the Kalachuri rulers of Chhattisgarh (Ratanpur and Raipur branches), see Hiralal, Inscriptions in the C. P. and Berar, 1932, pp. 205-07.
* See my paper entitled 'Ganga Bhanudēva II and Purushottama-Jagannatha' in JKHR8, Vol. I, June 1946, pp. 251-53. According to the Oriya chronicle Madala Paniji, Anangabhima III dedicated his kingdom in favour of the god Purushottama-Jagannatha and for that reason the said Ganga king and his successors became Rautas (feudatories) of the deity (cf. Orissa Historical Research Journal, Vol. I, No.-1, pp. 48-51; above, p. 19).