sidhaṃ ... raño gotamiputasa sāmisiriyañasatakaṇisa savachare 104 gi mhāṇa pakhe 1 divase 5 kāliyaṇavāṭhavasa negamasa Āṇa daputasa Upāsakasa Apareṇusa saparivārasa sahā kuḍubiṇiya Āṇaṃdamātukāvāriṇikāya sahā bālakena Āṇaṃdeṇa saha ca suṇhāhi Aṇadena mātuleṇa saha ca dhāmadevāya saha ca saveṇa Ahavi Āpano Āmāpitāro Udise pāvate kāṇhasele leṇaṁ koḍhi ca deyadhāmaṁ cātudise bhikhusaghe padiṭhāpitaṃ sāvasataṇi hitasughatha Etasa ca Akhayanivi datā kāhāpaṇānaṃ satāni be 200 saghasa yeva hathe paḍike sate Etha ca Ādhapaṇaṁ khetayasa kheta gāme magalaṭhāne bhojā kapati Eto saṁghaṇa dātava civariko soḷasaka paḍīko ca māso Utukāle

sidhaṃ ... sidhaṃ .. sidhaṃ .. sidhaṃ Although perhaps unexpected, the triple daṇḍa is clear. sāmisiriyañasatakaṇisa Prior scholars do not note that the final sa is inserted interlinearly. This interlinear -sa- is inordinately large for no obvious reason, perhaps suggesting that it was added at a later time by a different engraver. kāliyaṇa kāliyāṇa kālayaṇa kāliyāṇa Upāsakasa The shape of what we read as -pā- is odd, and it seems that the engraver might have first engraved a -va-, before correcting himself, thereby resulting in an ambiguous akṣara. kuḍubiṇiya kuḍubiniya kuḍubiniya kuḍubiniya Āṇaṃdamātukāvāriṇikāya Āṇadamātu juvārinikāya Āṇadamātu juvārinikāya Āṇadamātu juvārinikāya Aṇadena mātuleṇa saha ca Aṇa la sipeca Aṇa la sipe ca Aṇa la sipeca This reconstructed reading is somewhat uncertain however it fits the context well. dhāmadevāya dhāmadeviya dhāmadeviya dhāmadeviya Āpano Āpaṇā Āpaṇā Āpaṇā saveṇa veṇa veṇa veṇa West notes that “The spaces in the [seventh] and [eighth] lines are probably blank”, a correct observation given that we have kāṇhasele in l. 8. Udise Udisa Udisa Udisa padiṭhāpitaṃ paḍiṭhāpita paḍiṭhāpita paḍiṭhāpita Although we expect a retroflex here (or at least a -ti-), this is clearly a -di-, cf. l. 5 ḍu/l. 11 ḍi/l. 13 ḍī and l. 7 di/l. 8 di. sāvasataṇi sāvasatāṇaṃ sāvasatāṇaṃ sāvasatāṇaṃ kāhāpaṇānaṃ kāhāpaṇāni kāhāpaṇāni kāhāpaṇāni There is no i-mātra on the final akṣara, however this may be compared with KI00035 l. 3 Akhayanivi ca dinā kāhāpaṇāṇaṁ and KI00033 l. 8 kahāvaṇāṇaṁ śatāni 106 (perhaps cf. EIAD 200.13 kāhāpanāna ca purānasahasa Akhayaniv(i and EIAD 201.14 purāna kāhāpanāna Akhanivi . 200 This numeral extends all the way into the line below. khetayasa khetiyasa khetiyasa khetiyasa The reading is clear. magalaṭhāne Prior scholars do not note the space due to a fault in the stone. It appears that the ā-mātra here is positioned above the -th-. We find this as well in the first akṣara of KI00084 l. 6and in both cases it is unclear if the mātra is "floating" above the akṣara or if it is connected with a vertical line. bhojā kapati bhojākapati bhojākapati paḍīko paḷiko paḷiko paḷiko māso māse māse māse The reading of the final akṣara is clear, but understand māse.

Success! On the 5th day of the 1st fortnight of the hot season in the 16th year of the king Gotamiputa Sāmisiriyaññasātakaṇṇi.

A cave and koḍhi on the Kāṇhasela Mountain: the meritorious gift of the lay follower Apareṇu, son of the market councillor Anada [and] resident of Kalyan, with the retinue. Together with the kuḍubini Kāvāriṇikā, the mother of Āṇada; together with the son Āṇada and together with the daughter-in-laws; [and together] with the maternal uncle Aṇada and together with Dhāmadevā; and together with all. [The merit is] assigned to his very own mother and father. Established for the universal order of monks, for the purpose of the welfare and happiness of all beings.

And for this, an akhayanivi of two hundred — 200 — kāhāpaṇas has been given. [The interest is set at] a paḍika to the hundred in the hand of this very Saṃgha. (l. 11-13) And in this, the ownership of the half-paṇa field owner [in] a field in the village of Magalaṭhāṇa is arranged. From this, a cloth money of sixteen and a paḍika per month in the season is to be given to the Saṃgha

Prior Scholars do not make note of the use of semantic spaces throughout l. 2-9.

It seems probable that the “post-script” recording the donation of the akṣayanīvī was carved at a later time and should perhaps be considered a separate inscription. This was already noted by West who states “The last four lines being more distinct than the rest, and probably cut subsequently”. Not only are l. 10-13 carved noticeably deeper than the preceding text, they also contain no spaces between words and the ta-s are written in the looped style.

76 5 71 27 52 6 83 xxxiv, lii 561 19-21 569 213-214 262, 266-267, 305-306 84, 114-115, 158, 191-192, 252 313 n. 167 117, 120 51 61-62, 103-104 98 108 39 25 n. 74 529-530 206 231-232