Seal śrī-tribhuvanāṁkuśa

Plates bhadraṁ syāt tri-jagan-nutāya satataṁ śrīmaj-jinendra-prabhor uddāmātata-śāsanaāya vilasad-dharmmāvalaṁbāya ca. sāmartthyāt khalu yasya duṣkali-kr̥tā doṣāś ca mitthyāodbhavā durvvr̥ttāni ca bhū-tale na vitatā śāntiś ca nityaṁ kṣiteḥ.

svasti śrīmatāṁ sakala-bhuvana-saṁstūyamāna-mānavya-sagotrāṇāṁ hārīti-putrāṇāṁ kauśikī-vara-prasāda-labdha-rājyānām mātr̥-gaṇa-paripālitānāṁ svāmi-mahāsena-pādānudhyāyināM bhagavan-nārāyaṇa-prasāda-samāsādita-vara-varāha-lāṁcchanekṣaṇa-kṣaṇa-vaśiīkr̥tārāti-maṇḍalānām aśvamedhāvabhr̥tha-snāna-pavitrīkr̥ta-vapuṣāM cālukyānāṁ kulam alaṁkariṣṇos satyāśraya-vallabhendrasya bhrātā kubja-viṣṇuvarddhano ’ṣṭaādaśa varṣṣāṇi veṁgi-maṇḍalam apālayaT. tad-ātmajo jayasiṁhas trayastrimśataM. tad-anujendrarāja-nandano viṣṇuvarddhano nava. tat-sūnur mmaṁgi-yuvarājaḫ paṁcaviṁśatin. tat-putro jayasiṁhas trayodaśa. tad-avarajaḥ kokkiliṣ ṣaṇ-māsāN. tasya jyeṣṭho bhrātā viṣṇuvarddhanas tam uccāṭya saptatriṁśataM. varṣṣāni. tat-putro vijayāditya-bhaṭṭaārako ’ṣṭādaśa. tat-suto viṣṇuvarddhanaṣ ṣaṭtriṁśataM

narendramr̥garājākhyo mr̥garāja-parākramaḥ vijayāditya-bhūpālaḥ catvāriṁśat samāṣṭabhiḥ

tat-putraḥ kali-viṣṇuvarddhano ’dhyarddha-varṣaṁ. tat-putraḥ paracakrarāmāpara-nāmadheyaḥ

hatvā bhūri-noḍaṁba-rāṣṭra-nr̥patiṁ maṁgim mahā-saṁgare gaṁgān āśrīita-gaṁgakuūṭa-śikharān nirjjitya saḍ ḍāhalā dhīśaṁ saṁkilam ugra-vallabha-yutaṁ yo bhāyayitvā catuś catvāriṁśatam abdakāṁś ca vijayadityo rarakṣa kṣitiṁ.

tad-anujasya labdha-yauvarājyasya vikramādityasya sutaś cālukya-bhiīmas triṁśataṁ. tasyāgrajo vijayādityaḥ ṣaṇ māsāN. tad-agra-sūnur ammarājas sapta varṣāni. tat-sūnum ākramya bālaṁ cālukya-bhiīma-pitr̥vya-yuddhamallasya nandanas tāla-nr̥po māsam ekaṁ.

nānā-sāmanta-varggair adhika-bala-yutair mmatta-mātaṁga-sainoyair hatvā taṁ tāla-rājaṁ viṣama-raṇa-mukhe sārddham atyugra-tejāḥ Ekābdaṁ samyag aṁbhonidhi-valaya-vr̥tām anvarakṣad dharitriīṁ śrīmān cālukya-bhiīma-kṣitipati-tanayo vikramāditya-bhūpaḥ.

paścād ahamahamikayā vikramādityāstamane rākṣasā Iva prajā-bādhana-parā dāyāda-rājaputrā rājyābhilāṣiṇo yuddhamalla-rājamārttaṇḍala-kaṇṭhikā-vijayāditya-prabhr̥tayo vigrahiī-bhūtā ĀsaN. vigraheṇaiva paṁca varṣāni gatāni. tataḥ

yo ’vadhīd rājamārtaṇḍan teṣāṁ yena raṇe kr̥tau kaṇṭhikā-vijayāditya -yuddhamalloau videśa-gau. Anye mānya-mahiībhr̥to ’pi bahavo duṣṭa-pravr̥ttād dhatāḥ deśopadrava-kāriṇaḥ prakaṭitāḥ kālālayaṁ prāpitāḥ dor-ddeaṇḍerita-maṇḍalāgra-latayā yasyogra-saāṁgrāmaikā vājñā tat-para-bhr̥ū-nr̥paiś ca śirasoā māleva sandhāryyate. nādagdhvā vinivarttate ripu-kulaṁ kopāgnir ā mūlataḥ śubhraṁ yasya yaśo na lokam akhilaṁ santiṣṭhate na bhramaT dravyāṁbhodhara-rāśir apy anudinaṁ santapyamāne bhr̥śaṁ dāridryogratarātapena jana-sat-sasye na no varṣati. sa cālukya-bhiīma-naptā vijayāditya-nandanaḥ dvādaśāvyāt samās samyaK rāja-bhiīmo dharātalaṁ. tasya maheśvara-mūrtter umā-samānākr̥teḥ kumārābhaḥ lokamāahādevyāḥ khalu yas samabhavad ammarājākhyaḥ. jalajātapatra-cāmara-kalaśāṁkuśa-lakṣaṇāṁka-kara-caraṇa-talaḥ lasad-ājānv-avalaṁbita-bhuja-yuga-parigho girīndra-sānuūraskaḥ. vidita-dharādhipa-vidyo vividhāyudha-kovido vilīnāri-kulaḥ kari-turagāgama-kuśalo hara-caraṇāṁbhoja-yugala-madhupaś śrīmāN. kavi-gāyaka-kalpatarur dvija-muni-dīnāndha-bandhu-jana-surabhiḥ yācaka-gaṇa-cintāmaṇir avanīśa-maṇir mmahogra-mahasā dyumaṇiḥ. giri-rasa-vasu-saṁkhyābde śaka-samaye mārggaśīrṣa-māse ’smiN kr̥ṣṭṇa-trayodaśa-dine bhr̥guvāre maitra-nakṣatre dhanuṣi ravau ghaṭa-lagne dvādaśa-varṣe tu janmanaḥ paṭṭaṁ yo ’dhād udaya-girīndro ravim iva lokānurāgāya.

sa samasta-bhuvanāśraya-śrī-vijāayaāditya-mahārājādhirāja-parameśvaraḫ parama-dhārmmiko ’mmarājaẖ kammanāṇḍu-viṣaya-nivāsino rāṣṭrakuūṭa-pramukhān kuṭuṁbinas sarvvaān ittham ājñāpayati

Āryyā.

kiranṇapuram adhākṣīt krar̥ṣūṇarājaāstthitaṁ yas tripuram iva mahāeśaḫ pāṇḍaraṁgaḥ pratāpī tad iha mukha-sahaśsroair anvitasyāpy aśakyaṁ gaṇanam amala-kīrttes tasya sat-sāhasānāmaM.

tasyaātmajo niravadyadhavalaḥ kaṭaka-rāja-paṭṭa-śobhita-lalāṭaḥ. tat-tanayo vijayāditya-kaṭakādhipatiḥ.

vr̥ṁttavr̥ttaṁ tat-putro durggarājaḫ pravara-guṇa-nidhir ddhārmmikas satyavādiī tyāgī bhogī mahātmā samitiṣu vijayī vīra-lakṣmī-nivāsaḥ cālukyānāṁ ca lakṣmyā yad-asir api sadā rakṣaṇāyayiaiva vaṁśaḥ khyāto yasyāpi veṁgī-gadita-vara-mahā-maṇḍalālaṁbanāya. tena kr̥to dharmmapurī-dakṣiṇa-diśi saj-jinālayaś cārutaraḥ kaṭakābharanṇa-śubhāṁkita-nāma ca punṇyālayo vasatiḥ śrī-yāpuanīya-śaṁhasaṁgha-prapuūjya-koṭimaḍuva-ganṇeśa-mukhyo yaḥ punṇyāruharha-nandi-gaccho jinanandi-muniīśvaro ’tha gaṇadhara-sadr̥śaḥ. tasyāgra-śiṣyaḫ pratitho dhāarāyāM. divaākaraākhyo muni-puṁgavo ’bhuūT yaẖ kevala-jñaāna-nidhir mmahātmā svayaṁ jinānāṁ śsadrir̥śo guṇaughe. śrīmān diradeva-munis sutapo-nidhir abhavad asya śiṣyao dhīmaāN yam prātihāryya-mahimā-saṁppannam ivābhimanyate leokaḥ

tad-adhiṣṭṭhita-kaṭakaābharanṇa-jinālayāya kaṭaka-rāja-vijñaptaieḥ khaṇḍa-sphuṭa-navakr̥tyoai pibali-prapuūjādi-satra-siddhy-artthaM. yuUttarāyanṇa-nimitte maliyapūṇḍi nāma grāmaṭikā sarvva-kara-parihāraMm udaka-puūrvvaṁ krir̥tvā dattā.

Asya grāmāvadhayaḥ. pūrvvataḥ muṁjunyauru. dakṣiṇataḥ yinimili. paścimataḥ kalvakuru. yuUttarataḥ dharmmavuramu. yeEtad-grāmasya kṣetrāvadhayaḥ. pūrvvataḥ gollani-guṇṭha. Āgneyataḥ rāviyaperiya-ceṟuvu. dakṣiṇataḥ sthāpita-śilā. nairir̥tyataḥ sthaāpita-śilaiva.paścimataḥ malkapaṟṟu koṟaboyu-taṭaākaś ca. vāyavyataḥ sthaāpita-śilaiva. Uttarataḥ duba-ceṟuvu. ĪAiśānyāM. kalvakuri-Ervvoka-ceni-siīmaiva sīmā.

Seal

Plates kṣiteḥ kṣitieḥ The e is clear in the estampage, though not in the photo. jo jayasiṁhas Though shown as clear by both editors, the first and third character in this line are vague in both surrogates available to me and ya occupies fairly narrow space. Some correction may have taken place here, possibly from a haplographic jayasiha or joyasiha. tat-putro Shown as clear by both editors, these characters are not really legible in the available facsimiles. In BVC's photo they could with some imagination be tajjeṣṭo (for tajjyeṣṭho), but the photo was retouched by hand. The t of tro is quite clear in Hultzsch's estampage, so the reading is probably correct. saptatriṁśataM saptatriṁśatāniaṁ samāṣṭabhiḥ samāṣṭas sudhīḥ -noḍaṁba-rāṣṭra- nodambarāṣṭra- -nodḍaṁba-rāṣṭra- Hultzsch's emendation may be based on the known form nolamba of this name. In the parallel stanza in the Vemalūrpāḍu plates, he likewise reads d and emends to ḍ. From what is visible in the visual aids available to me, the received spelling could be with either. As for BVC's reading (shown in his edition as नोदम्रा(म्ब)ष्ट्र), I cannot fathom it. His photo, in all probability doctored by his hand, clearly shows all characters, so a typographic error must be involved somehow, but then why does he print an emendation? Possibly a correction added by him to the print proofs was misunderstood by the typesetter to be an emendation. Note that Hultzsch and I construe this name in compound with the preceding word, while BVC (as implied by their translation) do not. A previously unpublished parallel of the stanza in the Īnteṟu grant of Bādapa clearly spells the name with ḍ. -saṁgare -saṁgare -saṁgarae BVC's (retouched) photo shows a pr̥ṣṭhamātrā e marker in the form of a vertical in front of the r, attached to the consonant at the top left. Since this form of e does not occur in related inscriptions as far as I know, Hultzsch may well be correct in reading ra. The vertical line may belong to the plate's rim, and its attachment to the consonant may be only fancy. nirjjitya saḍ ḍāhalā° nirjjitya saḍ-ḍāhalā° nirjjityataṁ saṭṭalaā° There may be a typo in BVC's reading: they are aware of the metre, but neither reading nor their emendation is metrical. The doubled consonant is clearly not ṭṭ in Hultzsch's estampage. Note that Hultzsch construes saḍ- in compound (indicated by his translation, though not in his Devanagari edition), while I take it as a separate word; see the note to the translation. bhāyayitvā cāyoydhayitvā °āgrajo Possibly a scribal mistake for °ātmajo. See the note to the translation. -nr̥po -nr̥to Typo in BVC. -sainoyair hatvā seno hatvā -saienoair hāatvā I think the stroke atop ha that Hultzsch reads as ā is a repha; ā would normally be horizontal. Hultzsch's emendation is also plausible, but I feel that my equivalent emendation reflects a more likely scribal error: the engraver mistook a subscript y the two strokes of o attached at bottom left and top right and omitted the strokes for ai. dharitriīṁ dharitrā Probably a typo in BVC. °āstamane Hultzsch emends to °āstamayane, but since astamana is a known alternative form, I prefer not to do so. °mārttaṇḍala- °mārttaṇḍala- Hultzsch observes that la may have been added by the scribe under the influence of the common word maṇḍala, which is possible. The name ākhaṇḍala, used in some cognate inscriptions, also springs to mind. I choose not to consider the unexpected syllable a scribal mistake, since the same occurs in line 23 of the Vemalūrpāḍu plates. However, line 23-24 of the Īnteṟu grant of Bādapa has the expected mārttaṇḍa in the same sentence. -pravr̥ttād dhatāḥ -pravr̥ttāoddhatāḥ See the commentary for my interpretation of this stanza on the basis of parallels. kālālayaṁ kālālaya- -saāṁgrāmaikā vājñā -saṁgrāmakāvasyājñā See the commentary for my interpretation of this stanza on the basis of parallels. bhr̥ū See the commentary for my interpretation of this stanza on the basis of parallels. -nr̥paiś ca The character overstruck with śca had i as its vowel; it may perhaps have been śi or śśi. It is positioned higher and to the left of the post-correction character, very close to the preceding pai. śirasoā śirasā śiraso See the commentary for my interpretation of this stanza on the basis of parallels. nādagdhvā nādagdhvā nādagdhvā The clear subscript component of the problematic conjunct is more likely to be dh than v; a faint shadow below this may be an additional v, or v may have been omitted. -rāśir -rāśjir The reading is clear and does not require emendation, yet the emendation proposed by BVC indeed fits the context of clouds better. jana-sat- janasaṁtā- BVC's edition in fact shows जनसेससस्ये (with the vowel marker positioned above the junction of the first and second स), but this impossible reading must be a typo; his actual reading जनससस्ये is indicated in a footnote to his translation. The anusvāra read by Hultzsch seems to be present in his estampage, but is not discernible in BVC's photo. The parallel locus in the Īnteṟu grant of Bādapa confirms BVC's intuition. dvādaśāvyāt dvādaśāvyāat Hultzsch prefers to emend the verb to āvat, the active imperfect third person of av. The parallel locus in line 32 of the Īnteṟu grant of Bādapa has the same reading, while line 31 of the Vemalūrpāḍu plates reads dvādaśādhyāt, which Hultzsch emends to aśāt (from śās), also noting that adhyāt may have been intended for the same imperfect form of adhyās. Although āvat and aśāt are both grammatically sound and metrically fitting, it is perhaps more likely that we are facing a solecism here. The composer may have intended the precative form avyāt for a past indicative, or may have meant adhyāt as a legitimate form of adhyās. samabhavad samāṁabhavad BVG's pre-emendation reading is not confirmed either by their photo or by Hultzsch's estampage. girīndra-sānuūraskaḥ girīndra-sānuv-aṁsaḥ giriīndra-sānuūraskaḥ The ī is clear in both visual representations, so i may be a typo in Hultzsch's edition. I am not sure of BVG's reading, represented in their edition as °सान्वंसः नु, with a note attached to न्वंस saying, नु in the original. The following ra is very clear in their photo (as well as in Hultzsch's estampage), but may have been interpreted by BVG as an oversized anusvāra. vilīnāri- viliīnāri- -kalpatarur -kalpatarur -dīnāndha- -diīnāndha- -mahasā The characters maha are narrow and crowded, with ha distorted in shape. They are probably a correction engraved over a single original character. -girīndro ravim The corresponding text is -girīndre ravir in CalE52 Āryyā Āryyāḥ See the note to the translation. °aāstthitaṁ yas aāsthitaṁ yas Hultzsch's sth is probably a typo in his edition. The emendation endorsed by him and adopted here was proposed in a footnote to BVC's translation (perhaps added by one of the authors to the edition prepared by the other); in the text of their edition two inferior suggestions, °as tadīyas and °as tr̥tīyas, are offered. mukha- BVC show mu as clear and Hultzsch prints it as unclear. All I can see in either surrogate is a small circle like an anusvāra. I do not see how mu might have fit in the space between ha and the edge of the plate. If mu is present, it must be tiny and is probably a subsequent addition. The preceding characters diha are also quite crammed and may have been corrected from something else. -sahaśsroair -sahaśsrair The vowel mark on śr consists of a horizontal stroke at the top left and a stroke at the bottom left; though probably intended for e, it can only be read as o. °dhavalaḥ °dhavala- °dhavalaḥ The visarga is quite clear in both visual representations, and is a subsequent addition like the next one (which is indicated as such by Hultzsch and read normally by BVC). vijayāditya- vijayādityaḥ Note that Hultzsch too interprets the text to mean that he was a kaṭakādhipati named Vijayāditya, not the kaṭakādhipati of a King Vijayāditya. tyāgī tyāgiī vijayī vijayiī vīra viīra -lakṣmī- -lakṣmiīra- rakṣaṇāyayiaiva rakṣaṇāyayiyaiva Both previous editors read ya at the end of line 47, followed by yi in line 48. BVC correct to °ya I° in the text and emend the unmetrical reading to °yai° in a footnote, probably intending to show that they interpret °ya yi° as non-standard sandhi. Hultzsch explicitly mentions this in his introduction as an example of non-standard sandhi with an epenthetic y. While the use of yi may indeed have crept into the text under the influence of spoken pronunciation, I feel quite certain that the space was not sufficient for ya at the end of line 47, and the ya there was only commenced, but never finished (and possibly struck out), to be replaced (rather than continued) by yi in the next line. vasatiḥ vasati See the note to the translation for some thoughts about this reading. yāpuanīya- yāpunīya- yāpuaniīya- koṭimaḍuva- koṭhimaduva- I accept Hultzsch's reading but note that the name could as well be koḍimaḍuva. Instances where ṭi is expected do have the same form (l27 prakaṭitāḥ, l55 grāmaṭikā), but the consonant looks more like ḍ than ṭ, with a pronounced notch in the bottom and an upper curve that turns upward at the centre rather than only at the right-hand edge. ganṇeśa- The character śa is quite blurred and seems to have some extra strokes. It may have been corrected from ṣa or ma. prātihāryya-mahimā- prāatihāryya-mahimā- Hultzsch's emendation breaks the metre and is not necessary. As BVC observe, the proper form in compound would be -mahima-. -vijñaptaieḥ -vijñapteiḥ -vijñaptaie Though I know of no occurrence of vijñapti in this context in other Eastern Cālukya grants, the form vijñāpanāt does occur several times, so an ablative would be plausible here. It is also possible that vijñaptyā was intended. The emendations proposed by the previous editors seem inferior to both of these possibilities. -navakr̥tyoai -navakr̥tyai -navakr̥tyoā- maliyapūṇḍi malliyapūṇḍi -parihāraMm udaka- A comma-like stroke below the final M may be an editorial mark signifying deletion (or flagging the adjacent mu for changing into U), but it is quite faint and is more likely to be a scratch. grāmāvadhayaḥ grāmasyāvadhayaḥ While Hultzsch's emendation is of course grammatically correct, it is more pedantic than essential. I wonder, moreover, if the terms grāmāvadhi and kṣetrāvadhi mean, respectively, boundaries on a village-level (specifying in terms of human geography the surrounding villages) and boundaries on a field-level (specifying in terms of topography the features that demarcate the limits). Further occurrences of these terms and further study is needed here. muṁjunyauru muṁjunūru nairir̥tyataḥ nairitya- nairir̥tyaāṁ sthaāpita- sthāpita- -Ervvoka- -Ervvoka- -Evvoka-

Seal

Plates

Let there ever be blessings for the irrepressibly spreading teaching of the Reverend Lord Jinendra, which is praised by the three worlds and which is the foundation of the scintillating Doctrine (dharma). Indeed, thanks its power, the faults doṣa caused by the despicable Kali age arise in vain, and bad habits do not spread on the surface of the earth, and the land obtains constant peace.

Greetings. Satyāśraya Vallabhendra Pulakeśin II was eager to adorn the lineage of the majestic Cālukyas—who are of the Mānavya gotra which is praised by the entire world, who are sons of Hārītī, who attained kingship by the grace of Kauśikī’s boon, who are protected by the band of Mothers, who are humbly devoted to Lord Mahāsena,While I consistently translate the phrase (pāda+)anudhyāta, occurring in almost all Cālukya plates, as “deliberately appointed by,” the construction here is with °ānudhyāyin. Thus, the composer of this text had in mind “meditation on feet of,” or at least a humble devotion to the respected presence. This in turn may mean that the standard phrase with (pāda+)anudhyāta was also understood to have this latter meaning by this time in the Cālukya chancellery. Compare 109. 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. His son Maṅgi Yuvarāja, for twenty-five. His son Jayasiṁha II, for thirteen. His brother of inferior birth, Kokkili, for six months. After dethroning him, his eldest brother Viṣṇuvardhana III, for thirty-seven years. His son Vijayāditya I Bhaṭṭāraka, for eighteen. His son Viṣṇuvardhana IV, for thirty-six.

King bhūpāla Vijayāditya II who was called Narendramr̥garāja and who had the courage of a lion mr̥garāja, reigned for forty years together with eight.

His son Kali-Viṣṇuvardhana V, for a year and a half. His son, also called Paracakrarāma,

Having killed in pitched battle Maṅgi, the king of the populousI construe bhūri- in compound with nodaṁba-rāṣṭra, as Hultzsch does, and understand it to mean “large/populous/plentiful/mighty.” It is also possible to construe bhūri as an adverb, as translated by Butterworth and Venugopaul Chetty, in which case Vijayāditya III defeated Maṅgi summarily or repeatedly. With this latter interpretation, saḍ must be construed in compound to the following word; cf. the next note. Nodamba country, having summarily defeatedI construe saḍ as an adverb with nirjjitya. Hultzsch construes it in compound with the following word, translating, the excellent Ḍāhala. Both interpretations are plausible grammatically, and the choice matters little ultimately, but I feel that while an enemy country may be described as bhūri (cf. the previous note) to emphasise the king’s prowess even more, the adjective sat would not be used for the country of a defeated enemy. the Gaṅgas ensconced on the top of Gaṅgakūṭa, and having intimidated Saṁkila, the lord of Ḍāhala together with the vicious Vallabha, he protected rakṣ- the earth as Vijayāditya III for forty-four years.

The son of his younger brother—Vikramāditya, who had attained the rank of heir-apparent yauvarājya—this son Cālukya-Bhīma reigned for thirty years. His elder-born sonThe word agraja, literally “fore-born,” is established in the sense of elder brother, yet Vijayāditya IV was the son of Cālukya-Bhīma. The word may have been used by the composer in an unconventional sense here (compare agra-sūnur in the next item and a possible use of agra-janman in line 32 of the Kalucuṁbaṟṟu grant of Amma II). More probably, °āgraja may be a mistake for °ātmaja. Vijayāditya IV for six months. His firstborn son Ammarāja I, for seven years. After assaulting his underage son, King nr̥pa Tāla—the son of Yuddhamalla, the paternal uncle of Cālukya-Bhīma—for one month.

Thanks to his excessively fierce valour, His Majesty King bhūpa Vikramāditya II—the son of King kṣitipati Cālukya-Bhīma—slew at the front line of rugged battle that King rājan Tāla together with groups of diverse barons sāmanta who possessed a superior force and an army of raging elephants, and then soundly protected rakṣ- the earth—wrapped in her girdle of oceans—for one year.

Then, upon the demise of the Sun of Valour Vikramāditya, collateral dāyāda princes rājaputra—such as Yuddhamalla, Rājamārtaṇḍa and Vijayāditya of the Locket kaṇṭhikā—materialised like demons rākṣasa upon the setting of the sun, yearning for kingship out of egomania and bent on oppressing the subjects. Five years passed in nothing but strife. Then—

he who slew Rājamārtaṇḍa among these pretenders and who through battle banished Vijayāditya of the Locket and Yuddhamalla to a foreign country—

the scimitar graceful like a frond, wielded by his arms like iron bars, has also dispatched to the abode of Death many other kings who were otherwise respectable but, being struck by depravity, were blatantly wrecking the country; and his command, even when it relates to vicious battle, is borne on the head like a wreath even by kings of other lands—See the commentary about the problems with the reading and interpretation of this stanza.

the fire of his anger would never cease unless it has burned the enemy’s family to the root; whose bright reputation would never stand still unless it has ranged all over the world; the cloudbank of his wealth would never fail to rain on the good crop that is the populace, though it be seared day after day by the inexorable sunblaze of poverty—

he, the grandson of Cālukya-Bhīma and son of Vijayāditya IV, King rājan Bhīma II, soundly ruledI translate the expected meaning, but the word avyāt is problematic; see the apparatus to line 32. the surface of the earth for twelve years.

To him Bhīma II, who was like Maheśvara in form, a son named Ammarāja II, who resembled Kumāra, was born from none other than his queen Lokamahādevī, who was like Umā in appearance.

The palms of his hands and the soles of his feet are marked with the omens of the conch,Alternatively, jalaja may mean a fish or perhaps a lotus. This latter is how Butterworth and Venugopaul Chetty translate this word (while Hultzsch does not bother to translate this stanza). the parasol, the chowrie, the jar and the elephant goad. His two playfully moving arms are like iron bars and extend to his knees. His chest is like a cliff of a majestic mountain.

He is majestic, familiar with the sciences appropriate for kings, expert with various weapons, skilled in the lore of elephants and horses and a bee to the lotus that is the foot of Hara Śiva. The families of his enemies have melted away.

He is a wish-granting tree to poets and singers, a cow of plenty surabhi to Brahmins dvija, ascetics muni, the afflicted, the blind and his kinsfolk, a wish-fulfilling jewel to crowds of supplicants, a jewel among kings, and the jewel of the sky the sun by his great and fierce glory.

In the year that has the numbers of mountains, flavours and the Vasus 867, right to left in the Śaka reckoning, in this month of Mārgaśīrṣa, on the dark thirteenth day, a Friday, under the asterism nakṣatra Maitra =Anurādhā,

when the sun was in Sagittarius dhanus and the ascendant lagna was Aquarius ghaṭa, in the twelfth year after his birth he donned the royal turban to the delight of the people, as the lordly Mountain of Sunrise dons the sun to tint the world red.

That shelter of the entire universe samasta-bhuvanāśraya, His Majesty Vijayāditya, Supreme Lord parameśvara of Emperors mahārājādhirāja, the supremely virtuous Ammarāja II, commands the householders kuṭumbin—including foremost the territorial overseers rāṣṭrakūṭa—who reside in Kammanāṇḍu district viṣaya as follows:

What follows is moraic verse.This word is not an address meaning “Gentlemen!” as translated by both previous editors. Although theoretically, the king might address the above people in this way, there is no parallel for this in any related grant. Rather, it was intended for a label (compare the label vr̥ttaṁ in line 46 below, and the use of both vr̥ttaṁ and āryā as labels in several other Eastern Cālukya grants (e.g. line 8 of the Raṇastipūṇḍi grant of Vimalāditya). However, the present label is incorrect; the following stanza is not in a metre of the āryā family.

It would be impossible even for one who had a thousand mouths to recount in this world the honourable daring acts performed by that man of spotless reputation: the courageous Pāṇḍaraṅga who burned Kiraṇapura while Kr̥ṣṇarāja was stationed there, as Maheśa Śiva burned Tripura.

His son Niravadya Dhavala had his head decorated with the turban of the castellan kaṭaka-rāja. His son was the castellan kaṭakādhipati Vijayāditya.

What follows is syllabic verse.

His son Durgarāja, a repository of eminent qualities and a residence of heroic majesty, was virtuous, honest, selfless, opulent, magnanimous and victorious in battle; moreover, his sword ever served solely for guarding the royal majesty of the Cālukyas, and his famous lineage bamboo cane ever served solely as a support prop to the superb great country called Veṅgī.

On the southern side of Dharmapurī he built a beautiful temple of the good Jina and a monastery vasati marked by the auspicious name Kaṭakābharaṇa “Jewel of Kaṭaka”, an abode of merit.I believe vasati is used as a noun in this stanza, and therefore emend to vasatiḥ; see the apparatus to line 49. There are thus two separate items featured here: a temple and a monastery. This is confirmed by the presence of the connective ca. The name Kaṭakābharaṇa probably designates both singly or jointly, but syntactically, it is applied to the monastery in this verse. Hultzsch apparently understands vasati as a verb and translates it, with some stretch, as “there is;” accordingly, he speaks only of a temple. Butterworth and Venugopaul Chetty also do not emend vasati; their translation is harder to follow than Hultzsch’s, but probably also uses “there is” to render vasati as a verb. However, they do seem to think that two separate items are mentioned, an excellent temple saj-jinālaya and a holy temple puṇyālaya?. In my interpretation, although the noun vasati is feminine, construing puṇyālayo (masculine) in apposition to it is not syntactically problematic, since ālaya is itself a substantive. The compound ending in nāma is used adverbially in the neuter accusative.

Now there was a lord among ascetics resembling a gaṇadhara: Jinanandi of the Nandi gaccha of auspicious merit, who was the foremost of the leaders of the worshipful Koṭimaḍuva gaṇa belonging to the reverend Yāpanīya saṁgha.

His foremost disciple was a bull among sages famed on earth by the name Divākara, a great soul and a storehouse of absolute knowledge kevala-jñāna who in his myriad virtues resembled the very Jinas.

His disciple was the intelligent ascetic the Reverend Diradeva, a repository of noble austerity whom the people esteem as one possessed of miraculous power prātihārya.

Upon the request of the Castellan kaṭaka-rāja, on the occasion of the winter solstice the hamlet named Maliyapūṇḍi has been donated with a remission of all taxes to the Jain temple Kaṭakābharaṇa superintended by him Diradeva, the donation being sanctified by a libation of water, for the renovation of what is broken and cracked khaṇḍa-sphuṭa and for the purpose of offerings, worship and suchlike, and charity satra.

The boundaries of this village are as follows. To the east, Muṁjunyaru. To the south, Yinimili.Or perhaps Inimili, given the scribe’s propensity to add an epenthetic y before initial vowels. To the west, Kalvakuru. To the north, Dharmavuramu.I.e. the village or town referred to in stanza 17 as Dharmapurī. The boundaries of this village’s fields are as follows. To the east, the Gollani pond. To the southeast, the Rāviyaperiya tank. To the south, a demarcation stone. To the southwest, ditto a demarcation stone. To the west, Malkapaṟṟu and the Koṟaboyu tank. To the northwest, ditto a demarcation stone. To the north, the Duba tank. In the northeast, the border is none other than the border of the ervvoka fieldThe word ervvoka is probably the Telugu word ēṟuvāka or ēruvāka, apparently meaning the commencement of cultivation. The term ervvoka-ceṇu also appears in line 27 of the Cevuru plates of Amma I. of Kalvakuru.

Seal

Plates

Que le bonheur échoie à l’enseignement du seigneur illustre Jinendra, éternel sujet de louange pour les Trois Mondes, dont l’autorité s’étend aux êtres sans retenue, et qui est le support aimable du dharma, lui par la puissance duquel les méfaits de l’âge de Kali et les vices adviennent en vain, les mauvaises actions ne se répandent point à la surface de la Terre, et l’univers connaît toujours la paix !

Prospérité ! Kubja Viṣṇuvardhana, frère de Satyāśraya Vallabhendra, qui orne la dynastie des Cālukya, illustres, du même gotra que les descendants de Manu, loués dans l’univers entier, fils de Hārīti, ayant reçu leur royaume par l’excellente faveur de Kauśikī, protégés par les Mères réunies, méditant aux pieds du seigneur Mahāsena, eux dont les cercles ennemis ont été soumis en un instant à la vue du signe de l’excellent sanglier, faveur octroyée par le bienheureux Nārāyaṇa, eux dont les corps ont été purifiés grâce aux bains consécutifs au sacrifice du cheval, a protégé le maṇḍala de Veṅgī pendant dix huit années. Son fils Jayasiṁha pendant trente-trois ans ; Le fils d’Indrarāja, frère cadet de ce dernier, Viṣṇuvardhana, pendant neuf ans ; Le fils de celui-ci, Maṁgi, le prince héritier, pendant vingt-cinq ans ; Son fils Jayasiṁha pendant treize ans ; Le frère cadet de ce dernier, Kokkili, pendant six mois ; Son frère aîné, Viṣṇuvardhana, après l’avoir chassé, pendant trente-sept ans ; Le fils de celui-ci, Vijayāditya, l’illustre seigneur, pendant dix-huit ans ; Son fils Viṣṇuvardhana pendant trente-six ans ;

Le fils de ce dernier, nommé Narendra Mr̥garāja, qui avait le courage du lion, le roi Vijayāditya pendant quarante ans ;

son fils Kali Viṣṇuvardhana pendant un an et demi ; son fils, dont l’autre nom est Paracakrarāma,

qui a tué dans la gande bataille Maṁgi, le roi du puissant Noḍambarāṣṭra, qui a vaincu les Gaṅga réfugiés au sommet du Gaṅgakūṭa, qui a terrifié Saṅkila, roi des vertueux Dāhala, qui s’était allié au puissant Vallabha, VijayādityaCorr. à Guṇagāṁka. a protégé la terre pendant quarante-quatre ans ;

le fils du roi Vikramāditya, frère cadet de ce dernier,De Guṇagāṁka. qui avait reçu les droits du prince héritier, Cālukya-Bhīma a protégé la terre pendant trente ans ; Son fils aîné, le roi VijayādityaCorr. à Kollabhigaṇḍa. pendant six mois ; Son fils aîné, Ammarāja, pendant sept ans ; Après avoir attaqué le fils de celui-ci,Vijayāditya V. alors qu’il était enfant, le fils de Yuddhamalla, oncle du côté parternel de Cālukya Bhīma, le roi Tāla a protégé la terre pendant un mois ;

Après avoir tué le roi Tāla, à la tête d’une bataille difficile, d’une très puissante énergie, avec ses armées d’éléphants furieux, avec la foule de ses divers vassaux, accompagnés de forces immenses, le fils de l’illustre Cālukya Bhīma, le roi Vikramāditya a protégé, avec justice, la terre entourée du cercle des océans pendant un an ;

Ensuite, convaincu de leur supériorité, lorsque Vikramāditya s’éteignit, occupés à opprimer leurs sujets, comme des Rākṣasa opprimant les créatures au coucher du soleil, les princes prétendant au trône, aspirant à la conquête du pouvoir, Yuddhamalla, Rājamārtaṇḍa et Kaṇṭhīkā Vijayāditya en tête, se firent la guerre. Cinq années de guerre passèrentCette époque correspond dans les autres inscriptions au règne de Yuddhamalla qui dura sept ans. Il y a donc un décalage de deux ans dans la chronologie de cette praśasti, de même que dans l’inscription de Vemalūrpāḍu. puis,

celui qui, parmi ces derniers, tua Rājamārtaṇḍa, qui contraignit à l’exil Kaṇṭhīkā Vijayāditya et Yuddhamalla,

qui précipita au royaume de la mort nombre d’autres hommes, qui, bien qu’ils fussent de respectables souverains, s’enorgueillissaient de leur conduite criminelle et se révélaient source de calamité pour le pays, de la lame de son cimeterre, mû par son bras puissant, lui, le combattant puissant, dont les ordres sont portés telle une guirlande pour leur tête, par les rois des terres ennemies dévoués à cette tâche,

dont le feu de la colère ne s’éteint pas sans avoir consumé totalement l’armée ennemie, dont la gloire resplendissante ne s’arrête pas sans parcourir l’univers entier, dont les nuages de richesses, bien qu’immenses, ne se répandent pas en pluie jour après jour, puisque ces blés que sont les hommes ne sont pas cruellement soumis à la très intense brûlure de la pauvreté ;

ce petit-fils de Cālukya Bhīma, fils de Vijayāditya, le roi Bhīma a gouverné avec justice la terre pendant douze années entières.

De ce dernier, manifestation de Maheśvara, et de Lokamahādevī, qui avait revêtu l’aspect d’Umā, pareil à Kumāra, naquit le nommé Ammarāja.

Les paumes de ses mains et les plantes de ses pieds portent les marques du lotus, du parasol, du panache, de la coupe et du croc à éléphant. Les barres d’acier de ses deux bras charmants se déploient jusqu’à ses genoux, son torse est pareil au plateau du Roi des Montagnes.

Il a acquis la science royale, il est expert dans les diverses armes, il a fait disparaître les troupes ennemies, il est expert dans la science des éléphants et des chevaux, illustre, il est une abeille butinant les doubles lotus que sont les pieds de Hara.

Il est pour les poètes et les chantres l’arbre à vœux pour les brahmanes, les ascètes, les malheureux, les aveugles, les amis, la vache céleste, pour les solliciteurs la pierre combleuse de désirs, joyau des rois par son grand et puissant éclat, joyau du jour.

Lors de l’année qui se compte en montagnes, rasa, vasu, dans l’ère śaka, au mois de Mārgaśīrṣa, en ce treizième jour de la quinzaine sombre, le jour de Bhr̥gu sous la constellation de Mitra,

sous le signe de l’arc alors que le soleil est en conjonction avec le Pot, dans la douzième année depuis sa naissance, il a revêtu la couronne par affection passionnée pour l’univers comme le soleil sur la grande montagne du levant.

Celui-ci, refuge de l’univers entier, l’illustre Vijayāditya, souverain suprême des grands rois, premier seigneur, roi très juste, ayant convoqué tous les chefs de familles de la circonscription de Kammanāṇḍu, les raṣṭrakūṭa en tête, ordonne pour l’éternité ceci :

Nobles seigneurs !

Lui qui brûla Kiraṇapura où régnait le roi Krṣṇa, comme Maheśvara brûla Tripura, Pāndarāṁga, ardent, Dans ce monde, même celui qui serait doté de milliers de bouches ne pourrait faire le compte des vertueux coups d’audace de ce seigneur à la gloire immaculée.

Son fils était Niravadyadhavala, il portrait sur son front le turban brillant du kaṭakarāja; Son fils était Vijayāditya, un kaṭakādhipati;Autre terme qui désigne le chef de camp du roi, Vijayāditya hérite de la fonction de son père.

Voici les vers :

Son fils Durgarāja, trésor d'excellentes vertus, vertueux, dont les serments étaient sincères, généreux, jouissant de richesses, magnanime, victorieux dans les combats, héros qui séjournait auprès de Lakṣmī, protégea uniquement et éternellement la fortune des Cālukya, lui, dont la famille était renommée, dont dépendait la grande et excellente contrée appelée Veṅgī.

Il éléva au sud de Dharmapurī un temple jaïn tout à fait charmant. Il se consacra à un temple auspicieux dont le nom, de bon augure, est Kaṭakābharaṇa.Il semblerait que, comme le roi, le chef de camp donne son nom aux temples.

Là était l'excellent seigneur des Koṭimaḍuvagaṇa, vénéré par le YāpanīyasaṁghaNom d’un groupe religieux. le seigneur des ascètes, Jinanandi, semblable aux Gaṇadhara,Ce sont les onze premiers disciples directs du 24ième Jina, Mahāvira. appartenant au vertueux et méritant Nandigaccha.

Le premier de ses disciples, célèbre sur terre, portait le nom de Divākara, chef éminent des ascètes, réceptacle de l’Omniscience, magnanime, semblable aux Jina par la masse de ses qualités.

L'illustre ascète Diradeva était son érudit disciple, réceptacle de sévères austérités que le monde considère doué de la puissance d'accomplir des miracles.Le mot prātihārya signifie dans un contexte bouddhique et jaïn "qui accomplit des miracles", St. Petersburg Dictionary.

Nous donnons au temple jaïn Kaṭakābharaṇa, administré par ce dernier, à la requête du kaṭakarāja, en vue de l'accomplissement des offrandes, du culte, etc., et d'un sattraLieu où l’on distribue gatuitement de la nourriture, cf. D. C. Sircar, 1966, p. 306. avec la rénovation de ce qui est tombé en ruine,L’inscription n° 46 présente une formulation très proche : khaṇḍa-sphuṭita-nava-karmmārttha[ṁ*], mais ne mentionne pas le bali, sattra et prapūja. Le sens de ce dernier terme reste obscur. à l'occasion du solstice d'hiver, le village nommé Maliyapūṇḍi, exempté de toute taxe, après avoir fait une libation d’eau.

Les limites de ce village sont : A l'est, Muñjunyuru ; Au sud, Yinimili ; A l'ouest, Kalvakuru ; Au nord, Dharmavuramu. Les limites des terrains de ces villages sont : A l'est l’étang Gollani ; Au sud-est, le réservoir de Rāviyaperiya ; Au sud, une pierre dressée ; Au sud-ouest, une pierre dressée aussi ; A l'ouest, Malkapaṟṟu et l'étang de Koṟaboyu ; Au nord-ouest, une pierre dressée aussi ; Au nord, le réservoir de Duba ; Au nord-est, la limite est aussi la limite de Evvokacenu à Kalvakuru.