svasti tasya śrī parameśvarasya nrar̥pater bbhrātrīsutas sadguṇī nāmnā śrī yuvarāja Eva supr̥thagbhāvādikarmmodyamaḥ nānādānamakhotsavas tv api śive yoge śivasthe padāny apy ātmānam ayan tato dhikataras so śnoti sanmānase... karaśelavilair yyukte śakarāje śilāmayam· liṅgaṁ sustham araṅ kīrttyai sthāpayām āsa so dhikaḥ...

madā pu lyam̃ śrī yuvarāja mahāsenāpati yam̃ṅ· kumvan· yām̃ po ku parameśvaravarmmadeva dunan· trā kevaladharmma dauk· rajan· puṇyadāna ṅan· hitāhitavastu kam̃n· bhāva nim̃ sadākāla dunan· tum̃ sarvvaśāstrāgama sidaḥ śaivasaugatasiddhāntakulāvdhima dunan· kevala dauk· rajan· gurubhakti ṅan· śivabhakti maddan· yogadhyānasamādhi Upak· vela Udāsīna suhetu dunan· kmaiṅ· ya śa dauk· palavvīk· di loka nim̃ tra dunan· makmaim̃ nīrvvāṇapada taku yam̃ Ajarā maraṇa kaivalya nirvvikāra paramānandana niṣprapañca si jem̃ dunan· Utsāha dauk· di vastu nan· sadākāla Upak· vela Udāsīna sā nimiśamātra mam̃n· la Oḥ suhetu Urām̃ panrām̃ nim̃ ñu Adhama paputau Urām̃ di nagara nim̃ si jem̃ ra vā vala marai mak· tmuv· nagara niy· niśśeṣa Aviḥ mam̃n· ra pratiṣṭhā liṅga jayastambha dvā niy· di Ajvañ· sauy· tra di huluv· glai cnyā lac· Uttarabhāga deḥ bharuv· ra vriy· dāna kam̃n· brāhmaṇa tapasmī bhikṣu ṅan· hīnadīnānātha Avista bharuv· ra vrok· nau vijai di huriy· sapluḥ dvā klaṁ vulān· pāk· di śakarāja 972 kāla ra pratiṣṭhā liṅga niy·...

nan·vvana śrī yuvarāja sāna ya mahāsenāpati kāla nan· ṅan· hr̥ rūpa sukūla tyāga karuṇā pa pi yogadhyānasamādhi śilapaḥ . kāla ri phap· drim̃ ṅan· ma vyalī yaśa raive bodhisatva na mam̃n· ...

nrar̥pater nr̥pater supr̥thagbhāvādikarmmodyamaḥ supr̥thag bhāvādi karmmo dyamaḥ nānādānamakhotsavas nānādānamalotsavas With note indicating that one would have to read mahotsavas; being based on a wrong reading, we may forget this proposal. śivasthe śiva padāny apy ātmānam sadānyapyātmānam ayan tato ayantato With note indicating that one would have to read ayatnata, which is ungrammatical and anyhow unnecessary. dhikataras dhikatvaṁ Her proposition was unmetrical. karaśelavilair karaśailavilair It is possible that the little stroke below the vocalization of what we read as śe is indeed intended to make it śai, in which case it would have to be noted how differently the two cases of ai-vocalization in this compound have been written. We prefer to assume the mentioned little stroke is accidental, and to observe the inconsistency of orthography rather than of the shape of signs. yam̃ṅ· năṅ bhāva nim̃ bhāvani -kulāvdhima kulāgdhima Read -kulāgama or -kulāvdhimada? Upak ra pak Udāsīna suhetu dunan· kmaiṅ· ra rā puho ṅa kmeṅ tra trā makmaim̃ makmĕ nīrvvāṇapada nīivvāṇapada Typing error? taku yam̃ kaya Ajarā maraṇa kaivalya jārāparaṇa kevala. nirvvikāraparamānandana nirvvitā ra pamonandana Udāsīna sā dāsīna ha tapasmī tapasvī The intended meaning is no doubt tapasvī, but the stone clearly reads tapasmī. bhikṣu bhiksu hīnadīnānātha hinadīnānāta vijai vije 972 279 The fact that AVS misrepresents the order of the numbers also in her edition of C. 156 in the same article suggests this is no accident. pratiṣṭhā pratiṣṭā nan·vvana nanvvan The word navvan occurs several times in the corpus. We seem to have a spelling mistake for that word. sāna ya sānaya mahāsenāpati mahāsenāpatī nan· ṅan· hr̥ rūpa sukūla na pa su kūla Understand hr̥ as hrī, sukūla as sukula. tyāga karuṇā pa tyāga pi rai si śilapaḥ . kāla sila pa kāla Inspection of the stone suggests that no akṣaras were ever written where AVS supposes lacunae. ri phap· drim̃ ṅan· di p· drĭ

Inspection of the stone shows that no sign is missing at the beginning of this lign, but that an irregularity of the stone explains the shift of the margin.

AVS has not read these lines.

First edited with translation into French by Anne-Valérie Schweyer (25-33). The inscription is re-edited here by Arlo Griffiths and Salomé Pichon based on autopsy and the EFEO estampages n. 1878, n. 1879, n. 1880, n. 1881 and n. 1882.

25-33 948-953 36-47 Referred to as C. 211.