________________
JULY, 1891.)
THE INSCRIPTIONS OF PIYADASI.
239
This evidence is scattered through the 2nd, 5th and 13th of the fourteen edicts, and in the second separate edict of Dhauli-Jaugada.
In this last passage, Piyadasi expresses himself in a general manner, and without specifying any nation; he describes to his officers the conduct which they should observe towards the frontier populations, not incorporated in his dominions:
These instructions are summed up in the expression of his will that his representatives should learn to inspire his neighbours with an entire confidence in his sentiments and his intentions, that they should persuade them that he only wishes for their welfare, that he desires, so far as he is concerned, to assure them happiness and peace, and that he is like a father to them; he wishes that this conviction may dispose them to observe the dharima, so that they may thus deserve happiness, both in this world and in the next.
Elsewhere, in the 13th edict, the king contrasts with his forcible conquests the peaceful conquests of the dhama, – of the Religion. It is on these last that he congratulates himself. They are possible, both in his own dominions and amongst all foreign nations (savésu antésu). "Among them are the Greek king named Antiochus, and to the north of (or beyond) that Antiochus, four kings, Ptolemy, Antigonus, Magas, Alexander; to the south, the Chodas and the Pandyas as far as Tambapaņņi; in the same way, Hidaraja (?). Amongst the Villas and the Vrijis, the Yavanas and the Kambojas, the Nabhakas and the Nabhapamtis, the Bhojas and the Petênikas, the Andhras and the Pulindas, everywhere are followed the teachings of the religion spread by Piyadasi. And wherever messengers have been sent, there also, after having heard the teaching of the dhanma, .... people practise the dharma ....."
In the 5th edict reference is made to a more direct action, to the duties of the newlycreated dhanmamahámátras. They must occupy themselves with all sects, for the establishment and progress of the dhashma, and for the advantage and benefit of the faithful of the (true) religion; amongst the Yavanas, the Kambojas and the Gandharas, the Rastikas and the Petonikas, and the other frontier populations (áparárhta), they should occupy themselves with the soldiers, with the Brahmans and with the rich, with the poor and with the old, for their advantage and their well-being, so as to put away obstacles from the faithful of the (true) religion.30
* I cannot join in the opinion of Dr. Bühler (p. 38), either as to the manner of dividing the sentence or as to the interpretation of the term dharmayuta. The word occurs three times in a few lines, and each time Dr. Bühler gives it a different application, or even a different meaning. At line 16 (of KbAlei) he understands hitasu khaye dharma. utasa as moaning for the happiness of my faithful subjects ;' in the same line, dharmayutaye apalibodhdyd, 'for suppression of obstacles referring to the law;' and in the following line, vijitasi mama dharmayutusi, 'in my faithful kingdom.' In itself this method is perplexing. There is no special information to be deduced from the 1st passage. The construction at least is perfectly clear. As for the 2nd, one should not forget that, instead of dharmayutaya, G. has the genitive plural, dharmayutanam, and K. the genitive singular dharmayutasa; the inevitable conclusion is that in kb. and in Dh. we must take the dative in the sense of the genitive (we know how these two casos have been confounded in the PrAkrita), and translate for the suppression of the obstacles for the faithful people. In the third passage we cannot construo together vijitasi and dharmayutasi. This is forbidden by the position of the two words separated by mama, by the certain reading of Dh., savapathaviyam dharmayutasi, and by the construction of the rest of the sentence, both members of which, being terminated by iti, refer certainly to persons and consequently suppose in dharmayuta a collective noun of person. (For the juxtaposition and, if I may use the expression, the super-position of two locatives, cf. higher up in Dh. 1. 26, a passage which will be shortly explained, and Col. Ed. IV, 8, baharu panasatasahaedou janari...). I confess that hesitation appears to me to be impossible. I would add that the above, joined to a comparison with Col. Ed. VII, 1-2, where the same construction occurs, confirme me in the explanation which I have given of Col. Ed. IV, 6. It remains to determine the exact sense of dharmayula. Dr. Bühler Bees in it a title of the people who lived 'under the law of Piyadasi, -of his subjecta in fact. The constant use of dharma in a different sense in the first place rendera this interpretation somewhat unlikely; but the expression of Dh., savapathi viyath dhashmayutasi, proves that the dharmayuta (he or they) did not belong only to the empire of Piyadasi; the same conclusion necessarily follows from the former passage which places the dharmayutas among the apardntas. I can hence only adhere to my translation. It appears to me to be borne out by the recommendation made on the columns to
exhort the dharmayutas,' and elsewhere,' to teach, to exhort, the yutas.' From the passage in Dh. 1. 26 (1.16 in kb.), it is clear that the dharmayulas comprise men zealous for the dharma, firmly established in the dharma, addicted to alms.
