Seal śrī-tribhuvanāṁkuśa

Plates

svasti. śrīmatāṁ sakala-bhuvana-saṁstūyāamāna-mānavya-sagotrānāṁ hārīti-putrāṇāṁ kauśikī-vara-prasāda-labdha-rājyānāṁ mātrur̥-gaṇa-paripālitānāṁ svāmi-mahāsena-pādānudhyātānāṁ bhagavan-nārāyaṇa-prasāda-samāsādita-vara-varāha-lāṁcchanekṣaṇa-kṣaṇa-vaśīkr̥tārāti-maṇḍalānām aśvamedhāvabhr̥ttha-snāna-pavittrīkr̥ta-vapuṣāṁ calukyānaāṁ kulam alaṁkariṣṇos satyāśraya-vallabhendrasya bhrātā kubja-viṣṇuvarddhano ’ṣṭādaśa varṣaāṇi veṁgi-maṇḍalāam anvapaālayaT. tad-aātmajeo jayasiṁhas trayastriṁśataM. tad-anujendrarāja-nandano viṣṇuvarddhano nava varṣāṇi. tad-anujo maṁggi-yuvarājaḥ paṁcaviṁśatiM. tat-putro jayasiṁhas trayodaśa. tasya dvaimāturaḥ kauokkiliṣ ṣaṇ māsāN. tasya jyeṣṭho bhrātā viṣṇuvarddhanas saptattriṁśataM. tat-suto vijayāditya-bhaṭṭārako ’ṣṭādaśa. tat-sūnūumr vviṣṇuvarddhanaṣ ṣaṭtriṁśataM. tat-sūnur aṣṭauottara-śata-mita-narendreśvara-karaṇāa-raṇa-gaṇāri-vijiti-saṁprāpta-kiīrttir mmuūrttimān dharmma Iva narendra-mr̥ga-rājeo ’ṣṭacatvāriṁśataM. tat-sūnuḥ kali-viṣṇuvarddhano ’dhyarddha-varṣaM. tat-sūnur mmaṁggi-hanana-kiraṇapura-dahana-vikhyāta-kiīrttir gguṇaga-vijayādityaś catuścatvāriṁśataM. tad-anuja-yuvarāja-vikramāditya-bhūbhr̥d-ātmajaś cālukya-bhīma-bhūpālas triṁśataM.

tat-putrāḥas tad-anantareṇa vijayādityo vijaityaāhave. svaienaikena gajena vāranṇa-ghāaṭaāruūḍhān kualiṁgādhipāN| Āruhyojjjvala-hema-kalpita-tulā-koṭiṁ vadānyo jaya -staṁbhaṁ kiīrttimayan nidhāya viraje ṣaṇ-māsam āsiīn nr̥paḥ.

tasyāgraḥ sūnur amma-rājas sapta varṣāṇi. tat-sutaṁ vijayādityaṁ kr̥ta-kaṇṭhikā-paṭṭa-bandhābhīiṣekaM. bālam uccāṭya tāḷaādhipopo māsam ekaM. taṁ yudhi vinihatya punaś cālukya-bhīma-bhūpātmajo vikramāditya-rājaḥ Ekādaśa māsān bhuvam anvapālayaT.

tabm bhitttvā yudhi bhīma-sannibha-balo bhiīmo ’mma-sūnor bbhaṭas san māsāṣṭakam āvad eva vasudhāṁ vyāpādyāa taṁ saṁyuge tāḷa-jyeṣṭha-suto ’tha malla-nr̥patis saptānvapād vatsaraān utsāryyaātha tam agrahīt kula-bhuvaṁ paṭṭena bhīmo nr̥paḥ. tasyaiva vyasanam iha trayaṁ ca jaātaṁ śāstrāstraābhyasanam aninditaṁ ca bhūyaḥ saṁrakṣā sakala-janasya śāstra-dr̥ṣṭyā sandānaṁ budhajanasāt-kr̥taṁ sa-mānaM. meḻāṁbāyāṁ dyuti-nuti-mati-śrī-dhr̥ti-kṣāntaimāatyām atyādityo jagati vijayāditya Ājījanad yaM dharmmendrāgni-trinayana-dhaneśodakeśādi-dharmmaṁ senā-nāthan tripura-mathanaḥ kanyakāyāṁ yathāhuḥ mitrāravinda-pratibodha-hetuḥ pradveṣi-nīhāra-vighāta-hetuḥ yasyoccchr̥ritan teja Ihaijate kau tejasvinas teja ivātipūtaM yasmin śāsati vasudhāṁ vasubhis saṁpūrnnṇṇa-sakala-janatāṁ ca. rājani dharmma-tanūje yathā manu-prokta-dharmma-saṁpanne.

sas sarvva-lokāśraya-śrī-viṣṇuvarddhana-mahārājaādhirājaḫ parama-māheśvaraḫ parama-brahmāaṇyo mātā-pitr̥-pādānudhyātaś calukya-bhīma-gaṇḍa-mahendraḥ siṁhāsthanāa-maṁṭḍapārūḍḍhaḫ pāgunavara-viṣaya-nivāsino rāṣṭrakuūṭa-pramukhān sarvvān samāhāuūyerttham ājñapayati

viditam astu vaḥ

śrīmān gautama-gotra-jo dvija-varas sad-vartma-gaḫ puṇya-bhāg nādāatte vasudhām api kṣiti-talādhīśais su-vaṁśoddhbhavaiḥ dattaāṁ tūrkkama-bhūsuraḥ krama-yutaḥ khyātaḥ kṣitau sad-guṇaiḥ dīnānanda-vidhāyi-dāna-nirataḫ pūjyas satāṁ sarvvadāN. tad-ātmajo dik-prathito guṇaughair dvijendra-vaṁśāṁbara-pūrṇṇa-candraḥ Anūna-doānāccita-bandhu-rccita-bandhu-mitro mahā-guṇaio mādhava-soma-yaājiīN. sutas tadīyo guṇi-br̥nda-vandyaḥ kalā-kalāpasya bhca pāra-dr̥śvā śruti-smr̥ti-prokta-samasta-vastu- viśuddha-dhīmaān iha viddamayyaḥ. gr̥haṁ yadīyaṁ sva-gr̥haṁ satāṁ yad dhanāni yasyārttha-yutāni pātri -samarppaṇāt sarvva-dig-asntarāṇi yadīyya-kīrtyā paribhūṣitāni. śuddhānvayaś śuddhatara-pravr̥ttir nniyukta-karmmaṇy upadhā-viśuddhaḥ satām matas sad-bahu-poṣya-vāarggas samasta-bhūta-priya-vāk-kriyaś ca.

tasmai tat-kleśātiśaya-sandtuṣmṭeair asmābhir ddiggubaṟṟu-grāmo dattaḥ

Asyaāvadhayaḥ. pūrvvataḥ krañca. dakṣiṇataḥ kranūru. paścimataḥ Uttarataḥ palukaunu. Asyopari na koenacid bādhā karttavyāḥ.

bahubhir vvasudhā dadattā bahubhiś cānupālitā yasya yasya yadaā bhūmis tasya tasya tadā phalaM. sva-dattāṁ para-dattāṁ vā yo hareta vasundharāṁ ṣaṣṭi-varṣa-sahasrāṇi viṣṭaṭhāyāṁ jaāyate krir̥miḥ.

Seal

Plates -karaṇāa-raṇa- I cannot interpret -karaṇāraṇa-, which Fleet does not emend (and does not analyse as a compound). The text as I emend is still quite awkward and it is possible that something else was intended by the composer. mmaṁggi- mmaṁdhgi The main component of the conjunct gg may be malformed and it may be a clear dh in the original, but Walter Elliot's estampage permits reading it as g, and this was clearly the intent. -putrāḥas Fleet suggests the emendation putrāṁs in addition to suggesting putras, but I do not think this would be appropriate. From Elliot's estampage it seems that the ā may have been deleted; this may be ascertained from a photo. kualiṁgā° The spelling kuliṁga may be a deliberate slur at the Kaliṅgas rather than an innocuous mistake. See also the note to the translation of this spot and the apparatus to -sanduṣmer in line 60. °āgraḥ °āgra- What I see as a visarga in Elliot's rubbing may just be noise; this could be confirmed from a photo. tat-sutaṁ °ābhīiṣekaM. This sequence, ended by what Fleet describes as a superfluous punctuation mark, is an almost correct āryā hemistich. If we reject Fleet's emendation of sutaṁ and read suta- and read kaṇṭhika instead of kaṇṭhikā, then the only remaining prosodic anomaly is syncopation from the fifth to the sixth foot, something that occurs in other āryās in the Eastern Cālukya corpus. However, I see no straightforward way to fit either the preceding or the following sequence to another moraic hemistich. I believe the composer intended this sentence to be prose, but probably adopted the entire passage with some changes from a pre-existing version in moraic verse. tāḷaādhipopo tāhaādhipopo The second character looks much like ha, but must nonetheless be ḷa. It is distinguished in this hand from ha by the fact that the final hook of the latter bends backward underneath the body, extending beyond the left edge of the body (see e.g. l2 hārīti and l3 hāsena), while ḷa has a smaller hook that does not bend below the body. In the dittography popo, the first instance is written with a cursive o (see also the palaeographic description), and the second with a traditional o of two strokes. The repetition of the syllable may be a correction of the former to the latter, or possibly a botched attempt at inscribing tāḷapādhipo. cālukya- Fleet explicitly avows that the original plate has cā here, though the vowel marker is not visible in the estampage. Nor can I make it out in Elliot's rubbing. A photo may confirm. -rājaḥ Fleet reads a superfluous single punctuation mark after this word. I see no trace of this in the estampages available to me, but a photo may confirm this. The visarga looks a bit like vertical bar in Fleet's estampage (but not in Elliot's), so Fleet may have read that character twice. māsān Here too, Fleet notes that the vowel of mā is not visible in the estampage. This is indeed the case in his estampage, but the vowel is clear in Elliot's rubbing. tabm bhitttvā tabṁ bhjitvā I believe my emendation assumes a smaller and more likely scribal error than Fleet's. Spelling bhittvā with a single t would be quite natural (compare l22, °ojvala), and although jitvā is most straightforward in the context, bhittvā is also appropriate. -sūnor -sūnour I find Fleet's emendation unnecessary. See the commentary. tāḷa- tāha- Compare the same word in line 26 above. trayaṁ trayāaṁ I see no indication of ā in either Fleet's estampage or Elliot's rubbing. Possibly a typo in Fleet's edition. His emendation is shown as part of the larger emendation of the unmetrical phrase, and may not have been intended as an emendation for this particular spot. ca I adopt the emendation suggested by Fleet. Alternatively, the hypometrical line could be corrected by supplying na instead of ca, resulting in a different tone for the stanza as a whole. Both result in a rather awkward sentence; see also the note to the translation. Ājījanad According to Fleet, this word is Ajījanad, lengthened in the first syllable only for the sake of the metre. I see no reason not to assume that the prefix ā is present; ā-jan is attested in the causative (and meaning "beget, generate") at least in the Atharvaveda. -dharmmaṁ Fleet also proposes the alternate emendation -dharmmaḥ. I feel quite certain that the qualities of these gods were thought to be present in Kumāra/Bhīma rather than in Śiva/Vijayāditya, especially as the gods include Śiva. yathāhuḥ The last character is illegible in my facsimiles. I tentatively adopt Fleet's reading, which is itself tentative. The word fits the syntax very badly (though it can fit the semantics) and may need to be revised from a photo. If correct, the visarga should probably be marked as an omitted character, since there seems to be no room for it before the edge. In Elliot's rubbing, the character looks rather like it has a subscript r, though hu is also possible assuming that the vertical line to the left of the body is damage. I wonder if the correct reading might be yathā prāK, though a final K seems as impossible to fit here as a visarga. yathā yathā- If the hyphen in Fleet's edition is not a typo, then he seems to have understood the composer to say the king was himself the son of Dharma. I prefer to construe a simile with yathā. -māheśvaraḫ Here too, Fleet notes that the vowel of mā is not visible in the estampage, but present in the original. siṁhāsthanāa-maṁṭḍapārūḍḍhaḫ The deleted th, which Fleet describes as partially erased, is very clear in Fleet's rubbing. There may also be a deleted ā attached to this character, which is only visible in Elliot's rubbing. There also seems to be plenty of noise around the preceding characters hendra si; photos of the original may tell whether something (perhaps maheśvara?) has been deleted here. For the second part of the compound, I endorse Fleet's emendation, as I am unable to come up with anything more likely. Fleet reads ru where I read rū, assuming that the bend toward the right at the end of the u marker was added to make it ū. samāhāuūyerttham Fleet does not note a correction here, but merely reads hu=ā and emends to hū. The marker for u is attached to the baseline of h and cuts twice across the extended final hook of h, which is why I believe it was added subsequently, and probably only after the following line had been inscribed. The most likely assumption is thus that an initially inscribed hā was corrected to hu (intended for hū). A proper ū, rising to body height on the right of h, was impossible to add at this stage, because the next character on the right is too close. However, it is also possible that the ā marker has been deliberately employed as a length marker for the u. In this case too, I think correction must lie in the background, either from an initially inscribed ha (adding a combined u and ā, to represent ū in a way that fits in the available space), or an initially inscribed hā (adding u and deliberately not deleting ā, with the same intent). -vaṁśoddhbhavaiḥ -vaṁśodvbhavaiḥ sarvvadāN. I agree with Fleet's observation that the superfluous final N is a scribal mistake for a double punctuation mark. guṇaughair guṇaughair The repha, though very small, is in my opinion present between the consonant and the vowel marker of the following dvi. Compare dik- earlier in this line, where the i fits the upper part of d snugly. ccita-bandhu-rccita-bandhu- According to Fleet, these four syllables (which he reads identically, without r) are repated by mistake. It seems to me that the second iteration has a small repha between the i and the consonant. Moreover, in Elliot's rubbing (but not in Fleet's estampage), the first iteration has a rather strong shadowy outline. This is present in many places in Elliot's rubbing but I wonder whether in this case it may indicate that the first iteration was deleted by paring down the copper around the letters. A possible reason for such deletion may be that the scribe omitted the repha at first, noticed this four characters later, and re-inscribed the sequence correctly. But if so, I do not know why he did not delete only cci and re-inscribe rcci over it. Photos of the original may reveal more. -yājiīN. As in line 51 above, Fleet is probably correct in assuming that a final N was mistakenly inscribed instead of a double punctuation mark. In this case, however, it also seems possible that the stem form -yājin was intended, without a punctuation mark. yad This word is superfluous. The composer may have intended it in compound with the following dhanāni, but that is associated with yasya. I therefore understand this yad as a weak and unnecessary connective particle. pātri I cannot interpret pātri or pātrin here and assume that either the composer used this word in the sense of pātra, or it is a scribal mistake for pātra. -vāarggas -vmārggas As Fleet does not offer a translation, I am not sure how he interpreted his emendation poṣya-mārggas. I see no clear way to interpreting it, while poṣya-varga is attested and fits the context. -sandtuṣmṭeair -sanduṣmṭaair Fleet reads ṣma where I read ṣme on the grounds that the left arm of the subscript m is extended in a curve identical to that in tasmai in the previous line where, in combination with an overhead vowel mark, Fleet too reads it as ai. I believe that Fleet's retention of du must be a typo. Given, however, that tat-keśātiśaya-sanduṣṭair is meaningful (though wholly inappropriate), I wonder if, in addition to the scribal mistake in ṣme, a playful draftsman's deliberate "mistake" was also involved here. asmābhir asmābhir Here too, the repha is present in the form of a short connecting segment between the consonant and the vowel marker. ddiggubaṟṟu- There is a very clear dot above ba. Fleet explicitly notes that this is not an anusvāra but a fault in the copper. In the rubbings it looks exactly like an anusvāra, but its position above the middle of a character makes it likely that it is not one. paścimataḥ Uttarataḥ There is no trace of a deletion in and around these spaces in the facsimiles, nor does Fleet mention any. The space may be a proper vacat, left blank to fill subsequently, but if so, it is quite narrow; the space at the beginning of line 62 could accommodate one narrow character at most. palukaunu Fleet primarily reads palukonu, offering au as an alternative reading. While the intent may have been a cursive o, the shape of the grapheme is rather on the au-end of the spectrum. na koenacid bādhā I follow Fleet's choice of the spot to insert the omitted na, but it would be equally appropriate at the end of this string. -varṣa- As Fleet notes, the repha is not visible in Fleet's estampage, but it is present (though not quite clear) in Elliot's estampage.

Seal

Plates

Greetings. Satyāśraya Vallabhendra Pulakeśin II 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 enemy territories 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. His brother Kubja Viṣṇuvardhana protected pāl- the country of Veṅgī for eighteen years. His son Jayasiṁha I, for thirty-three. His younger brother Indrarāja’s Indra Bhaṭṭāraka’s son Viṣṇuvardhana II, for nine years. His younger brotherMaṅgi Yuvarāja was the son, not the younger brother of Viṣṇuvardhana II. Maṅgi Yuvarāja, for twenty-five. His son Jayasiṁha II, for thirteen. His brother by a different mother, Kokkili, for six months. His eldest brother Viṣṇuvardhana III, for thirty-seven. His son Vijayāditya I Bhaṭṭāraka, for eighteen. His son Viṣṇuvardhana IV, for thirty-six. His son Vijayāditya II Narendramr̥garāja, who attained fame by constructing Narendreśvara temples numbering a hundred and eight and defeating enemies in a series of the same number of battles,My translation is based on a tentative emendation; see the apparatus to line 14. and who was like Dharma incarnate, for forty-eight. His son Kali-Viṣṇuvardhana V, for a year and a half. His son Guṇaga Vijayāditya III, whose reputation is famed for the slaying of Maṅgi and the burning of Kiraṇapura, for forty-four. The son of his younger brother the heir-apparent yuvarāja Prince bhūbhr̥t Vikramāditya, King bhūpāla Cālukya-Bhīma, for thirty.

After him his son Vijayāditya IV was king for six months, defeating in battle with just one elephant of his own the overlords of KaliṅgaThe actual spelling in the inscription is kuliṁga, which may be simply a scribal error or a reflection of local pronunciation or a deliberate slur at the Cālukyas’ enemies. The word ku-liṅga—literally “having bad/strange marks”—may refer to a person of ill omen or, more vulgarly, to one whose virility is questionable; it is also used for a rodent and several birds and may thus imply that these rulers are unpleasant pests rather than worthy enemies. In the only other known attestation of this stanza (the Varaṇaveṇḍi grant of Bhīma II) the spelling is the expected kaliṁga, so innocuous scribal error is likely in the present case. mounted on hosts of elephants, generously ascending the beam of a balance scale furnished with bright gold,That is, donating his own weight in gold. and commissioning a victory pillar representing his reputation in Viraja.

His firstborn son Ammarāja I, for seven years. After dethroning his son the child Vijayāditya V who had been consecrated for kingship with the locket kaṇṭhikā and turban paṭṭa-bandha, Tāḷādhipa, for one month. Next, having slain him in battle, King bhūpa Cālukya-Bhīma’s son King rājan Vikramāditya II protected pāl- the earth for eleven months.

Having crushed him in battle, Bhīma—whose strength resembled that of the epic Bhīma—being a soldier bhaṭa of Amma’s son Vijayāditya V, did nonetheless protect av- the earth for eight months.My interpretation of this stanza is different from that of all previous opinions. See the commentary. Overthrowing him in conflict, Tāḷa’s eldest son King nr̥pati Malla Yuddhamalla II ruled pā- the earth next for seven years. Then, having ousted him, Bhīma II, as king nr̥pa, seized the dynastic land along with the royal turban.The sentence also permits the interpretation, perhaps deliberately intended by the composer, that Bhīma II grabbed the dynastic land—visualised as a goddess—by her robes.

That same Bhīma II had a threefold vice vyasana on earth: the impeccable practice of learning śāstra and combat astra; even more, the protection of the entire populace in accordance with the views of the treatises śāstra; and generosity directed at the learned along with respect.I translate the text as emended in the edition; see the apparatus to ca in line 33. Read this way, the king’s vice vyasana in fact turns out to be virtue, but the composition of the stanza as a whole is very awkward. Alternatively, the hypermetrical first quarter could be completed with na to the effect that Bhīma did not have the triad of vices (viz., chasing women, indulgence in drinking and avid hunting), but he did immerse himself all the more in the impeccable activities listed in the next three quarters. The words bhūyaḥ and aninditam are more appropriate in this alternative, but the stanza as a whole is blander, lacking the first alternative’s figure of praising the king under the guise of censure. Parts of the composition remain awkward in this latter alternative too, especially the construction with vyasanam … trayam. The composer may have had either alternative in mind.

Vijayāditya IV, who surpassed the sun on earth, begat him Bhīma II on Meḻāmbā, who possessed effulgence, acclaim, intelligence, majesty, steadfastness and forbearance, to be a leader of armies, imbued with the essence of gods such as Dharma, Indra, Agni, the Three-eyed Śiva, Kubera the Lord of Wealth and Varuṇa the Lord of Water—just as Śiva the tormentor of Tripura is said to have begotten Skanda the Leader of Armies, imbued with the essence of these gods on the Maiden Pārvatī.

The intense energy tejas of this energetic man tejasvin shines here on earth like an extremely bright effulgence tejas that is the cause of blooming for the lotuses that are his friends and the cause of destruction for the darkness that is his enemies.Given the solar imagery in this stanza, it may perhaps be a description of Bhīma II’s father Vijayāditya. But given its location in the narrative sequence, I prefer to assume it is about Bhīma, and the solar imagery is associated with his kingship without being an allusion to his name.

While this king, who like Yudhiṣṭhira the Son of Dharma was endowed with the law dharma taught by Manu, was ruling the earth and all its populace abounding in wealth—

that shelter of all the world sarva-lokāśraya, His Majesty the supremely pious Emperor mahārājādhirāja Viṣṇuvardhana Bhīma II, supreme devotee of Maheśvara, who was deliberately appointed as heir by his mother and father, namely Calukya-Bhīma Gaṇḍa-mahendra, seated in his throne room, convokes and commands all who reside in Pāgunavara district viṣaya—including foremost the territorial overseers rāṣṭrakūṭa—as follows:

Let it be known to you that

There was a majestic and excellent twiceborn born in the Gautama gotra: the god-on-earth Brahmin Tūrkkama, learned in krama recitation. Treading the path of the true and invested with virtue, he would not accept even if the whole earth had been offered to him by kings born of a noble lineage. He was famed on earth by his good qualities, intent on generosity causing joy to the afflicted, and ever worthy of true men’s praise.

His son, renowned in all quarters by his hosts of good qualities, was the Soma sacrificer Mādhava of great virtue. A full moon in the sky that was that lineage of excellent Brahmins, he honoured his kin and friends with outstanding generosity.

His son is Viddamayya here, worthy of laudation by the flocks of the virtuous and an accomplished master of a whole array of arts, whose wisdom has been polished by all the subject matters taught in the Vedas śruti and scriptures smr̥ti.

The house of this man is home to all virtuous men; his wealth attains purpose through being offered to worthy recipients; his reputation embellishes all regions of the horizon.

Pure in descent and even purer in conduct, proven worthy of high office niyukta-karman by trials of honesty upadhā, he is esteemed by honest men, has a numerous flock of honest dependants poṣya, and is kind in speech and action to all living beings.

Being pleased with his excessive troubles undertaken on our behalf, we have granted to him the village Diggubaṟṟu.

Its boundaries are as follows. To the east, Krañca. To the south, Kranūru. To the west andIt is also possible that space was left blank for the name of the western boundary and was never filled; see the apparatus to line 61. to the north, Palukaunu. Let no-one pose an obstacle to his enjoyment of his rights over it.

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.

Seal

Plates

Prospérité ! Kubja Viṣṇuvardhana, frère de Satyāśraya Vallabhendra, ornement de la lignée des Calukya, illustres, du même gotra que les descendants de Manu, honorés dans l’univers entier, fils de Hāriti, qui obtinrent leur royaume grâce à l’excellente faveur de Kauśikī, protégés par la troupes des Mères, méditant aux pieds du seigneur Mahāsena, dont le cercle des ennemis fut soumis en un instant à la vue du signe illustre de l’excellent sanglier, faveur octroyée par le bienheureux Nārāyaṇa, dont les corps furent purifiés par le bain purificatoire de l’aśvamedha, protègea le cercle de Veṁgī pendant dix-huit années ; son fils, Jayasiṁha, pendant trente-trois années ; le fils d’Indrarāja, le frère cadet de ce dernier, Viṣṇuvardhana, pendant neuf années ; son frère cadet, Maṁgi Yuvarāja, vingt-cinq années ; son fils, Jayasiṁha, pendant treize années ; son demi-frère, Kokkili, pendant six mois ; le frère aîné de ce dernier, Viṣṇuvardhana, pendant trente-sept années ; son fils, Vijayāditya Bhaṭṭāraka, pendant dix-huit années ; son fils, Viṣṇuvardhana, pendant trente-six années ; le fils de ce dernier, qui acquit la gloire grâce aux cent huit Narendreśvara qu’il fit construire et aux cent huit victoires qu’il remporta sur les troupes ennemies, lui pareil au dharma incarné, Narendra Mr̥garāja pendant quarante-huit années ; son fils, Kali Viṣṇuvardhana, pendant un an et demi ; le fils de celui-ci, dont la gloire se répandit, incendie détruisant les forteresses,Allusion implicite aux forteresses des Asura. dont les rayons causèrent la perte de Maṁgi,Il est aussi question de ce personnage dans les insc. nos 32, str.5 ; 35, str.2 ; 37, str. 10. Guṇaga Vijayāditya, pendant quarante-quatre années ; le fils du roi Vikramāditya, prince héritier et frère cadet de ce dernier, le roi Cālukya Bhīma, pendant trente années ;

immédiatement après lui, son fils Vijayāditya, ayant vaincu au combat, avec son unique éléphant, les seigneurs du Kaliṁga, montés sur un grand nombre d’éléphants, après être monté à l’une des extrêmités d’une balance qu’il équilibra avec de l’or rutilant, dans sa munificence, et après avoir érigé un pilier de victoire fait de sa gloire, fut roi pendant six mois, dans la pureté.Mention du sacrifice du tulā-bhara, l’un des mahā-yajña, lors duquel le roi donne son poids en or.Cf. P.V. Kane, 1974, VII, part. II, p. 869 et ss.

le fils aîné de ce dernier, Ammarāja, pendant sept années ; après avoir chassé le fils de celui-ci, Vijayāditya, alors qu’il était encore jeune et avait été sacré par le bandeau royal ainsi que le collier, Tāhādhipa régna pandant un mois ; mais après avoir terrassé à son tour celui-ci au combat, le fils du roi Cālukya Bhīma, le roi Vikramāditya, protègea la terre pendant onze mois ;

ayant vaincu celui-ci au combat, Bhīma, fils d’Amma, dont la force était égale à celle de Bhīma, étant un guerrier, protègea la terre pendant huit mois ; puis, ayant tué celui-ci lors d’une bataille, le fils aîné de Tāha, le roi Malla, régna ensuite pendant sept années ; après avoir chassé ce dernier, le roi Bhīma, ayant ceint le bandeau royal, s’empara ensuite du royaume de sa lignée ;

et il avait une triple obsession dans ce monde : l’irréprochable étude des traités et des armes, plus encore la protection de tous les hommes, l’union avec la compréhension des traités,L’auteur évoque ici la mise en application plus que la connaissance. honorée pareillement par les sages ;

Dans le sein de Meḻāṁbā, douée de splendeur, d’éloges,Compte tenu de la place de ce terme dans la phrase, il faut le comprendre dans un sens objectif et subjectif : elle reçoit des éloges et loue elle-même les dieux. d’intelligence, de beauté, de fermeté, de patience, Vijayāditya, soleil suprême sur le monde, engendra un chef d’armée, qui possédait la nature de Dharma, Indra, Agni, Trinayana, Dhaneśa, Udakeśa,Mélange intéressant des Lokapāla Agni, Indra, Dhaneśa, Udakeśa, qui est peut-être Varuṇa, de Śiva, au centre, et de Dharma. etc., de même que, dit-on, le Destructeur de Tripura, engendra dans le sein de Kanyakā, le chef de l’armée.Skanda. Le statut de chef d’armée renvoie à son archétype, Skanda , et laisse suggérer une comparaison entre le roi et Śiva, la reine et Umā, le prince et Skanda.

Cause de l’éveil des lotus que sont ses alliés, cause de la ruine de ces ténèbres que sont ses ennemis, son immense majesté resplendit sur cette terre, pure comme l’éclat du soleil.Le terme tejas désigne à la fois l’énergie propre au roi et l’éclat du soleil. Ce śleṣa glose le biruda Vijayāditya.

Lorsque ce roi gouverne la terre et toute l’humanité, comblée de richesses, il est pareil au fils de Dharma, doué du dharma que Manu proclama.

Lui, refuge de tous les hommes, l’illustre Viṣṇuvardhana, roi suprême des grands rois, excellent dévôt de Maheśvara, très pieux, méditant aux pieds de sa mère et de son père, Calukya Bhīma Gaṇḍa Mahendra, installé dans le pavillon où se trouve le trône, ordonne ceci à tous habitants du viṣaya de Pāgunavara rassemblés, rāṣṭrakūṭa en tête :

qu’il soit connu de vous que :

l’illustre brahmane Tūrkama, né dans le gotra de Gautama, excellent deux-fois-né, foulant le chemin du bien, jouissant de mérites, n’a pourtant pas reçu une terre donnée par les maîtres de la surface de la terre, nés dans une excellente lignée, lui qui maîtrise la lecture progressive du Veda, qui est renommé sur la terre pour ses nobles vertus, qui se consacre à des dons qui font la joie des affligés, et qui mérite le respect éternel des hommes de bien.

Son fils, loué sur l’étendue de la terre pour le flot de ses vertus, pleine lune dans le ciel d’une lignée d’excellents deux-fois nés, qui honore ses parents et ses amis avec des présents généreux, pourvu de grandes vertus, sacrificateur de Soma à Mādhava ;

son fils, qui mérité l’éloge des hommes vertueux, qui connaît parfaitement les parties et le tout, qui posséde une claire connaissance de tous les sujets évoqués dans la Śruti et la Smr̥ti, intelligent, est ici nommé Viddamayya ;

La demeure de cet homme est la demeure des hommes de bien ; ses richesses sont pourvues d’un but grâce aux dons qu’il consentit aux gens vertueux ; tout l’espace compris entre les horizons est orné par sa gloire.

Doué d’une lignée resplendissante, doué d’une conduite tout à fait irréprochable dans les tâches qui lui sont confiées, parfaitement purifié dans les épreuves des vertus, honoré par les gens de bien, dont le chemin doit être cultivé par les hommes de bien, dont les paroles et actesC’est-à-dire : les hymnes et les oblations. sont chers à tous les êtres.

Nous, très touchés par l’excès de souffrance qu’il a subi,Il a sans doute subi une ordalie, upadhā, suite à quelques accusations dont il est sorti blanchi, viśuddha. donnons à celui-ci le village de Diggubaṟṟu.

Les limites sont : à l’est Krañca, au sud Kranūru, à l’ouest et au nord Palukonu. Aucune charge ne doit lui être imposée.

Beaucoup ont donné une terre, beaucoup l’ont protégée, celui qui possède la terre en possède le fruit.

Qu’elle soit donnée par lui ou par un autre, celui qui prend une terre renaît ver de terre dans excréments pendant soixante mille ans.