________________
NOVEMBER, 1881.)
READINGS FROM THE ARIAN PÅLI.
329
dachchhina. The locative case dámane is govern correctly read and understood by my predecesed by the following noun svamini, "owner," sors. Sir E. C. Bayley doubtfully read it which in Pali may be constructed either with atreshwarası, making it a name of the monk. the genitive or locative. In full, the phrase Professor. Dowson suggested the correct word would be damane viháre svámint, "the owner of divuse, but he read the first part of the comthe Dåmana vihára." But viháre is joined to pound antra, from which no sense can be got. svá mini as a compound word, dámane remaining The first letter is somewhat puzzling. At first in the locative case, implied in the first part sight it looks like the vowel a with the sign of of the following compound; hence dámane the subscribed consonant y attached below (88 vihdrasvamini." The word iha, as shown by the in sishyasya); this, of course, is impossible. perceptible interval beween it and damane, is There can be no mistake about the lower portion a separate word, and refers not to the Dimana which is the subjoined y, but the upper portion vihara, but to the place or time of the donation. must be the semivowel v; for the conjunct vy
The record of the donation ends with the and the word vyatta are the only readings that word dadariti, in the 3rd line. The rest has will make sense. The ordinary form of v is no special connection with it, but is merely the angular, as in divase, while in the present case usual formula, whích, in different variations, is it is rounded; but that is the only irregularity. always added at the conclusion of such records Vyatta is the Sanskrit vyakta, which means of donations. Among the Mathura inscriptions "specified ;" it is just the word required; for the following variations occur: sarvvasatvánási the day is minutely specified in the preceding hitasukhiya bhavatu; saruvasatuandi hitasukhár- clause. thash bhavatu; sarvasatvahitasulchani bhavatu, Next follows a long clause, consisting of etc. Similar is the Latin formula quod bonum genitives (or datives,--for in Páli the two cases faustumque sit. The real import of the phrase are identical), bhichchhusya ......dropayato (" to was already perceived by Sir E.C. Bayley, though the monk...... who put up"). Aropayato is the he failed to read the whole correctly. But regular genitive (or dative) of the present Professor Dowson's version is quite untenable; participle of the causal verb dropaya. Professor the letters are perfectly distinct, and it is Dowson reads áropayatı." That, however, is impossible (unless by a very arbitrary assign- not a Pali form, either verbal or participial; ment of values) to get the reading hirasakhina and it could, by no possibility, have the meankartam out of them. Moreover, kartam is no ing, "they are deposited." All copies of the word at all; it is not clear of what word inscription, hitherto, give the impossible form Professor Dowson was thinking; there is Sans- drop yata. But after very careful inspection of krit kritam, "done," or káritam, “caused to be the original plate, I have satisfied myself that done"; there is also ksittam,"cut," and kartitam, the final letter is not ta but to, though the "caused to be cut"; but none of these will give cross-stroke, indicative of the vowel o, is rather a PAli form kartam."
short and indistinct, so that it might easily be It will be observed that the construction of overlooked. the main record is interrupted and again The long genitive-clause, which has been formally taken up at the end of the first line, I just explained, is governed by the verb dadashti when after completing the long and minute "they give," which concludes the donation and statement of the date, the thread of the sentence occurs near the end of the third line. Sir E.C. is resumed with the words vyattadivase "on Bayley already recognised the verb of the senthe specified day." This phrase has not been tence in that word, though he read it incorrectly,
11 In the sense of "gift" the Skr. dakshind becomes in avamichashtanaprapautrasya, where the genitive, maha PÁli both dakkhind and dachchhina. The latter is the kshatrapasya does not agree with the genitive prapas more usual form in the North-Western PAli (e. g., in the trasya, but with the genitive implied in the first part of Zeda stone inscription). But even if the original letters the compound rudmichaahtana. In full, it would be mahdadmitted this reading, it would be impossible here, as the kshatrapasya evdmichashtananya prapamtrasya.. word dachchhint is feminine.
There is another instance in the new Kahatrapa *See Kachchiyana (od. Sonart), p. 153,"after the inscription, published by Dr. Bühler, ante, p. 157: words admi, iseara, etc., both the genitive and locative saruvasatvind.it hitankhartham iti. may be need." Compare Pagini, IT, 3, 39.
1. Probably kritam is intended; but it does not 1 An exactly analogous construction oooars in the agree with the letters on the plate. Kshatrapa Inscription, published by Dr. Bahler in the * Sir E. C. Bayley ronda w puyde, which is altoIndian Antiquary, anto, p. 157,-mahakshatraparya gether inadmissible.
