________________
864
THE INDIAN ANTIQUARY.
[OCTOBER, 1891.
against evidence pointing in a different direction. The most important case of this kind is that of the Junagadh caves. Bavê Pyara's Math and the monastery in the Upar Ko have invariably been declared to be Buddhistic, though the inscription, found in the former, does not agree with this view. As I have pointed out when first editing it, 13 the word lc&valijnanasampraptánain, "of those or to those who have obtained the knowledge of Kêvalins," which seems to be applied either to the donees or to the prophets worshipped by them, is clearly not a Buddhist but a Jaina term. The only possible conclusion is, therefore, that this large establishment was a Jaina monastery. The authors of the Indian Ouve Templesli seem to have disregarded this important evidence, because they felt convinced that the caves belong to an early period, antecedent to the reign of Rudrasimha who must have been named in the inscription, and because they trusted to the symbols over the door of cave K. as well as to the "chaitys-window ornament." Dr. Bhagvânlal's remarks on the symbols and on his Jaina slab from Mathura, attached to the Hathigumphå inscriptions, as well as Dr. Führer's discoveries in the Kankalt Tila show that all the marks and ornaments, formerly believed to be exclusively Buddhistic, were used by the Jainas. Even the wheel and the Stupa are no longer safe guides for the archæologist. With this state of things I believe that certainly BÂvá Pyârâ's Math and probably also the caves in the Upar Kot will have to be stråck off the list of Buddhist establishments. Another case, which looks to me suspi. cious, is that of the Phänk caves, where Dr. Burgess has noticed an image of Parávanátha,15
I. BARABAR HILL CAVE INSCRIPTIONS OF PIYADASI.
B.
1. Lajina Piyadasini duvadasa-(vas=Abhi id ..10 2. isya]mh (nig]ha-kubh& di[nå å . [vi]kehil7 [1]
0. 1. Lajina Piyadasina duvi.
1. LA[ja]Piyadasi e[ku]n[a-(vi)2. dasa-vas-Abhisitônå iyan
2. sati-vas-A[bh]isi[tje ... 3. kubh Khalatika-pavatasi18
3. . . utbå ta . . . . . . 4. dina . (jivi]kéhile [19]
4. supi . ê kha . . . . . . 5. .0720
. . i
II. NAGARJUNI HILL CAVE INSCRIPTIONS OF DASHALATHA..
D. 1. Vahiyak[aja kubha Dashalathêna dêvînan piyênâ 2. anaṁtaliyam abhishitênê [Âjivikehi] 3. bhadantêhi v&sha-nishidiyâyê nishithê23 4. A-chamdama-shâliyam [1°)
18 Arch. Rep. West. Ind. Vol. II. p. 140 f.
16 See the discussion of this point at p. 196. 16 Arch. Rep. West. Ind. Vol. II. p. 150.
16 Restore bhisitEnd. 31 Restore Ulvik hf. The second letter cannot have been dl, as others have read it. But the remnants agree well with the suggestion that it was jf. And we have Ajfvikshi, us plain as possible in Dasharatha's second inscription.
This is in Sanskrit khalatika, bala, bare,' and a khalatika parvata is mentioned in the Bhabys on Varttila 4 to Panini I, 2,52 (Kielhorn, Vol. I. p. 929), bee also the larger Petersburg Diotionary sub voce khalatika.
» Restore Ajfvikthi. The first letter is not recognisable. The outlines of the blot, representing the second, agree with the supposition that it was jt.
* I do not dare to propose any restoration of the badly defaced portion of this inscription.
31 Vahiyaka, not vapiyakd as the earlier transcripts have, is the plain reading of the impression. Vahiyaka corresponds to Sanskrit vahyed, which is mentioned as a feminine name in the gana tikadi of Papini. Here it is probably the feminine of an adjective which may be derived from valya, 'palankoon' or 'sopha,' and qualifier kubha.
19 Those who believe the second sign of this word to be merely # variety of sa, not the old sign for the lingual aha, will read Dusalathena, and in the sequel abhisitand and so forth.
13 This is a clerical mistake for nishitha, as the corresponding forms in B. And O. show.
