Seal śrī-tribhuvanāṁkuśa

Plates

svasti. śrīmatāṁ sakala-bhuvana-saṁstūyamāna-mānavya-sagotrāṇāṁ hārīti-putrāṇāṁ kauśikī-vara-prasāda-labdha-rājyānāṁ mātr̥-gaṇa-paripālitānāṁ svāmi-mahāsena-pādānudhyātānāṁ bhagavan-nārāyaṇa-prasāda-samāsādita-vara-varāha-lāṁchanekṣaṇa-kṣaṇa-vaśīkr̥tārāti-maṇḍalānāM Aśvamedhāvabhr̥tha-snāna-pavitrīkr̥ta-vapuṣāṁ calukyānāṁ kulam alaṁkariṣṇoḥ śrī-maṅgi-yuvarājasya priya-pautraḥ nija-bhuja-bala-vāarjitāśeṣa-bhūṣpāla-maṇḍalasya Aneka-tulā-dhr̥ta-suvarṇa-dāna-varddhitāvadāta-kīrteḥ sarvalokāśraya-śrī-viṣṇuvarddhana-mahārājasya priya-tanayaḥ sva-pratāpāvanata-samasta-sāmanta-cakraś cakravartti-lakṣaṇopeto niravadyodāra-guṇa-gaṇālaṁkr̥taḥ parama-brahmaṇyaḫ parama-maāheśvaro mātā-pitr̥-pādānudhyātas samasta-bhuvanāśraya-śrī-vijayāditya-mahārājādhirāja-parameśvara-bhaṭṭārakaḥ prakuṇora-viṣaye dinakādu nāma grāmam adhivasato rāṣṭrakuūṭa-pramukhān kuḍṭuṁbinas sarvaān ittham ājñāpayati

viditam astu vo ’smābhiḥ vaṅgipaṟu-vaāstavyāya bhāradvāja-sagotrāya mādhava-caturvedi-pautrāya śivama-caturvedi-putrāya mādhava-caturvedi-śarmaṇe dvedi sūryya-grahaṇa-nimitte. grāma-pūrvataḥ. Asyāvadhiḥ pūrvataḥ moṭṭapaṟiti pulaṁkarusu. dakṣiṇataḥ vallar-boya-kṣetraM. paścimataḥ miṟiticerla. Uttarataḥ maṁgaḍu-cenu. dvādaśa-khaṇḍi-vrīhi-vāpa-pramāṇaṁ kṣetraM. Udaka-pūrvaṁ sarva-kara-parihāreṇa dattaM. Eteṣāṁ catur-avadhi-madhya kṣetraM

Asyopari na kenacid bādhā karaṇīyaā. karoti yas sa pañca-mahāpātaka-saṁyukto bhavati. vyāsenāpy uktaḥM

bahubhir vasudhā dattā bahubhiś cānupālitā yasya yasya yadā bhūmis tasya tasya tadā phalaM sva-dattāṁ para-dattāṁ vaā yo haretia vasuṁdharāṁ ṣaṣṭi-variṣarṣa-sahasrāṇi viṣṭṭhāyaāṁ jāyate kr̥miḥ brahma-svaṁ tu viṣaṁ ghoraṁ na viṣaṁ viṣam ucyate viṣam ekākinaṁ haṁti brahma-svaṁ putra-pautrikaM

Seal

Plates dinakādu SR prints dinakādu in his edition but calls the village Dinakaḍu (sic) in his discussion. The ARIE report says the name is Dinakāḍu. Indeed, d and ḍ can look exceedingly similar. I prefer to read du here, because the consonant of this akṣara is fully identical to that of di in this word, as well as to other clear instances of d in the text (e.g. in l3, prasāda). The akṣara is, however, also fully identical to one in the next line where kuṭuṁbinas must have been intended, where I choose to read the same glyph as ḍu. There are no other instances of ḍ in the grant except as a subscript consonant. vaṅgipaṟu- varjipaṟu- śivama sivāya- SR's si is probably a typo, and his ya is a misreading. The last character is definitely ma in spite of some damage and may have a repha on top. As SR also points out, the donee is probably identical to the donee of the Nemmaḷūru grant, there named Mādhavaśarman, son of Śivaśarman and grandson of Mādhavaśarman. Before having access to the original plates, I had assumed śivarma (omitting śa) was inscribed here, but it is clearly the variant name śivama. -caturvedi-śarmaṇe dvedi caturveda-śravaṇādvedi SR translates his reading as who knows the recital of the four Vedas. I am quite confident in my own reading. In the Nemmaḷūru grant, the donee's father is spoken of as mādhava-caturvvedi-śarmmaṇaḥ, with the qualification similarly inserted into the name. There remains the word dvedi that calls for an explanation. I believe this must be a scribal correction, intended for dvivedi as a replacement of the earlier caturvedi, but I do not mark this up in the edition to reduce the complexity of the text. The donee Mādhavaśarman is described as a veda-dvayayādhyāyin in the Nemmaḷūru grant. SR in his discussion notes that this grant must be later than that one, as the donee had in the meantime acquired knowledge of two more Vedas. Given the received text, I think otherwise: the donee is still a dvivedin, but the scribe erroneously wrote him down as a caturvedin and then clumsily corrected this error. -pūrvataḥ -purvataṁ moṭṭapaṟiti meṭṭapaṟati vallar-boya- valleniyā- miṟiticerla ciṟāti-cela maṁgaḍu- magaṇa -khaṇḍi- The word expected here is khaṇḍika or khaṇḍikā. In some related grants, khaṇḍikodrava occurs, and in those cases I have emended to khaṇḍika-kodrava, assuming eyeskip omission. That explanation, however, does not work here. Either we are facing random scribal omission or a legitimate variant of the term. -pramāṇaṁ -pūrveṇaṁ

Seal

Plates

Greetings. The dear grandson of His Majesty Maṅgi Yuvarāja, who was eager to adorn the lineage of the majestic Calukyas—who are of the Mānavya gotra which is praised by the entire world, who are sons of Hārīti, who attained kingship by the grace of Kauśikī’s boon, who are protected by the band of Mothers, who were deliberately appointed to kingship by Lord Mahāsena, to whom the realms of adversaries instantaneously submit at the mere sight of the superior Boar emblem they have acquired by the grace of the divine Nārāyaṇa, and whose bodies have been hallowed through washing in the purificatory ablutions avabhr̥tha of the Aśvamedha sacrifice—; the dear son of His Majesty King mahārāja Viṣṇuvardhana III, the shelter of all the world sarva-lokāśraya, who has fended off the entire circle of kings by the power of his own arm, and whose resplendent fame was heightened by gifts of gold weighed in many a balance against his body; namely His Majesty the supremely pious Supreme Lord parameśvara of Emperors mahārājādhirāja, the Sovereign bhaṭṭāraka Vijayāditya, shelter of the entire universe samasta-bhuvanāśraya, supreme devotee of Maheśvara, who was deliberately appointed as heir by his mother and father, who has the complete circle of peripheral rulers sāmanta bowed down through his own prowess, who possesses the bodily marks of a universal sovereign cakravartin and who is adorned by a host of irreproachable niravadya and noble virtues, commands all householders kuṭumbin—including foremost the territorial overseers rāṣṭrakūṭa—inhabiting the village Dinakāḍu in PrakuṇoraThis is probably identical to the district elsewhere called Pāguṇavara. district viṣaya as follows:

Let it be known to you that on the occasion of an eclipse of the sun we have given a field to the grandson of the caturvedin Mādhavaśarman, the son of the caturvedin Śivama, namely the dvivedin Mādhavaśarman,See the apparatus to lines 16 and 17 for some textual problems associated with this sentence. I translate according to the interpretation suggested in the apparatus. a resident of Vaṅgipaṟu of the Bhāradvāja gotra. The field is to the east of the village. Its boundary to the east is the verge of the fields of MoṭṭapaṟuSR translates an elevated stone boundary. To the south, the field of Vallar-boya.I deviate from SR’s reading here; see the apparatus to line 19. To the west, Miṟiticerla. To the north, the field of Magaṇa.SR translates stone heap.. The field is of a measure sufficient for sowing twelve khaṇḍisSee the apparatus to line 20. of rice. It has been given with a remission of all taxes, sanctified by a libation of water. The field is located amid these four boundaries. Let no-one pose an obstacle to his enjoyment of his rights over it. He who does so shall be conjoined with the five great sins. Vyāsa too has said:

Many kings have granted land, and many have preserved it as formerly granted. Whosoever at any time owns the land, the fruit reward accrued of granting it belongs to him at that time.

He who would seize land, whether given by himself or by another, shall be born as a worm in faeces for sixty thousand years.

The property of a Brahmin is terrible poison: it is not actual poison that is properly called poison. Poison kills just the one man, while seizing the property of a Brahmin destroys his progeny.