Hathigumpha Inscription of Kharavela and Bhabru Edict of Asoka

Author(s): Shashi Kant
Publisher: D K Print World

Page 76

50 The Häthigumphā Inscription and the Bhabru Edict who bore him a child in the seventh year (L 7) and Queen Sindhulă of Simhapatha (L 15). Since the latter is mentioned with the title of Queen, she appears to be identical with Agamahisi of the Svargapuri record. The location of Svargapuri is in accord with the description of Sindhulā's shrine given in our inscription and this seems to confirm the identification. We thus gather that the Chief Queen of Khāravela was named Sindhulā, she hailed from Simhapatha, she was the daughter of King Lalāka Hathisiha, and she followed the religion of her husband. Khāravela refers to her dedication of a shrine, which appears to be confirmed by her own Svargapuri record wherein she is said to have built Arahamta-prāsādam, i.e., a shrine in the honour of Arahaṁta for worship-purpose, as well as leņań, i.e., cave-dwelling for Sramaņas (ascetics).
The opening of the epigraph with the Jain hymn of obeisance, makes its author definitely a follower of Jainism. It is also confirmed by the fact that the dates mentioned are in M.E., as we have seen above. He calls himself pūjānurata-uvāsaga, i.e., ‘a lay devotee addicted to worship’. The four-fold Jain congregation consists of monks, nuns, male lay devotees and female lay devotees, and his description of himself is thus in accord with the traditional concept. The description of the assembly is also essentially Jain.
But he was not intolerant or fanatic. Nowhere does he disparage, criticise or show disrespect to other religions. In fact, he takes pride in calling himself as Sava-pāsaņda-pūjako (worshipper of all sects) and sava-devāyatana-saṁkhārakārako (embellisher of all temples) (L 17); and at the Savagahanań ceremony in Mathura he worshipped the Arahasta and at the same time gave gifts to the Brahmins (L 9). This catholicity of
The terms Arahamta and Sramana have distinct connotation. Arahamta is the reverenced (pujya) deity who has cast off transmigration and is no longer a mortal; Šramana is a revered recluse or ascetic who is a mortal like us but deserves respect for going homeless in pursuit of spiritual attainment. B.M. Barua confused the two terms in his translation cited on p. 31 supra.