Nandapur Plate of 169 GE Original EpiDoc Encoding for Siddham Dániel Balogh Conversion of encoding for DHARMA Dániel Balogh EpiDoc encoding for DHARMA of parts not yet encoded for Siddham Dániel Balogh intellectual authorship of edition Arlo Griffiths Dániel Balogh European Research Council (ERC), grant agreement no 809994 DHARMA Berlin DHARMA_INSBengalCharters00054.xml CC BY-SA 4.0 2019-2026 DHARMAbase DHARMA_INSBengalCharters00054

Noteworthy shapes of M, ṅha. Line 4: -svāmine: the ne has a special shape, apparely meant to reinforce the fact that the akṣara marks the end of a clause, a fact also indicated by following space. Line 18: shape of gg in svargge.

Encoded in TEI/EpiDoc according to the DHARMA Encoding Guide for Documentary Editions, version 2

 Script information added Updating toward the encoding template v03 further revisions after discussion with part:daba started manual revision of file imported by part:daba; removed editorial punctuation, inserted space elements, inserted abbr elements, inserted avagrahas, revised readings on the basis of RTI Initial import: harmonising file structure with DHARMA inscription template v02. Text and comments as inherited from the Siddham archive of January 2019, unless otherwise indicated (by a name and date in the comment). Comments are offered "as is" and do not represent a thoroughly considered or researched opinion.

svasty amvila-grāmāgrahārāt sa-viśvāsam adhikaraṇaM jaṅgoyikā-grāme brāhmaṇottarān saṁvyavahāryy-ādi-kuṭumvinaḥ kuśalam anuvarṇṇya bodhayanti likhanti ca

vijnāpayati naḥ viṣaya-pati-chattramahaḥIcchāmy ahaṁ sva-puṇyābhivr̥ddhaye nanda-vaitheya-khaṭāpūraṇāgrahārika-cchāndoga-kāśyapa-sagottra-brāhmaṇa --svāmine pañca-mahā-yajña-pravarttanāya khila-kṣettra-kulya-vāpa-tucatuṣṭayaṁ kkrītvātisraṣṭuMyuṣmad-viṣaye ca samudaya-vāhyādya-stamva-khila-kṣettrāṇāṁ śaśvad-ācandrārka-tāraka-bhojyānām akṣaya-nīvyāḥ dvi-dīnārikya-kulya-vāpa-vikkrayo 'nuvr̥ttas tad arhatha matto 'ṣṭau dīnārān upasaṁgr̥hya jaṅgoyikā-grāme khila-kṣettra-kulya-vāpa-catuṣṭayam akṣaya-nīvyās tāmra-paṭṭena dātum iti

yataḥ pustapāla-pradyotasiṅha-vandhudāsayor avadhāraṇayāvadhr̥tam astīha viṣaye samudaya-vāhyādya-stamva-khila-kṣettrāṇām akiñcit-pratikarāṇāṁ dvi-dīnārikya-kulya-vāpa-vikkrayo 'nuvr̥ttaḥEvam-vidhotpratikara-khila-kṣettra-vikraye ca na kaś cid rājārttha-virodhaḥ dīyamāne tu parama-bhaṭṭāraka-pādānāṁ dharmma-ṣaḍ-bhāgāvāptis tad dīyatām ity etasmād viṣaya-pati-chattramahād aṣṭau dīnārān upasaṁgr̥hya jaṅgoyikā-grāme gorakṣita-tāmra-paṭṭa-dakṣiṇena gopāli-bhogāyāḥ paścimena khila-kṣettra-kulya-vāpa-catuṣṭayaṁ dattaM ku 4

te yūyam evaṁ viditvā kuṭumvināṁ karṣaṇāvirodhi-sthāne darvvī-karmma-hastenāṣṭaka-navaka-nalābhyām apaviñchya cira-kāla-sthāyi-tuṣāṅgārādi-cihnaiś catur-ddiṅ-niyamita-sīmānaṁ kr̥tvā dāsyatha datvā cākṣaya-nīvī-dharmmeṇa śaśvat-kālam anupālayiṣyathavarttamāna-bhaviṣyaiś ca saṁvyavahāribhir etad dharmmāpekṣayānupālayitavyam iti Uktañ ca bhagavatā vyāsena

sva-dattāṁ para-dattāṁ vā yo hareta vasundharāṁ sa viṣṭhāyāṁ kr̥mir bhūtvā pitr̥bhiḥ saha pacyate ṣaṣṭi varṣa-sahasrāṇi svargge modati bhūmidaḥ Ākṣeptā cānumantā ca tāny eva narake vaseT

saṁ 100 60 9 vai śu di 7

adhikaraṇaM adhikaraṇāaM Reading ṇā here would imply that the akṣara has a different shape from all other cases of ṇā in this inscription, which show a clockwise stroke at the bottom to make the ā (e.g. in line 9 pratikarāṇāṁ). By contrast, we can avoid the need to make any emendation by simply reading the expected ṇa, which does not seem problematic if we compare the forms of ṇa and M observed, e.g., in line 8 avadhāraṇayā, line 4 atisraṣṭuM, line 13 dattaM. saṁvyavahāryy- saṁvyavahāry- bodhayanti likhanti bodhayantiti likhantiti Majumdar proposes to emend to bodhayati likhati, but he has not understood that adhikaraṇam is the subject of the sentence; the editorial note 1 on p. 55 of Majumdar's article provides a manner to escape from the necessity of emendation, but likewise misunderstands adhikaraṇam as object. Sircar refrains from making the emendation in the text, although he proposes it in a note (p. 382 n. 2), where he correctly explains the situation as follows: Plural number was used through confusion apparently because the adhikaraṇa or board of administration consisted of several members: cf. vijñāpayati naḥ below. -brāhmaṇa- -brāhmaṇā- The akṣara that was read ṇā by Majumdar and Sircar but is read ṇa here has the same shape as the one read thus in adhikaraṇaM in line 1. See the apparatus entry thereon. kkrītvāti° krītvāti° -nīvyāḥ -nīvyāḥ -nīvyā Sircar's reading is a silent emendation. Removing the visarga is justified by the fact that we find akṣaya-nīvyā in parallel passages in the Baigram plate, l. 5, and the Paharpur plate, l. 9. -vidhopratikara- -vidhotpratikara- We find -vidhāpratikara- in the parallel passage in the Baigram plate, l. 12. With reference to a term udbalika (348), Sircar argues (3833) that -vidha-utpratikara- is acceptable because the otherwise unattested word utpratikara could mean the same same as apratikara and akiñcitpratikara. Although the very unclear akṣara dho could equally well be read as dhā to take us one step closer to -vidhāpratikara-, we would still be stuck with an intrusive t to be removed by emendation, and so I accept Sircar's explanation. Even if utpratikara is otherwise unattested, ut as a negative prefix is relatively well attested (e.g., utkaca, uddāma). gopāli-bhogāyāḥ gopāli-bhogāyā -sīmānaṁ -saṁmānaṁ -paṁmānaṁ Sircar's reading must be a printing error. 7 8 Majumdar's edition as printed contains the reading 7, which is corrected to 8 in the Additions and Corrections to this article in EI. Obviously Sircar failed to take notice of that correction when he copied Majumdar's text for his own edition.

Hail! From the agrahāra of the village Amvila, the members of the council which enjoys the king’s confidence, having offered greetings to the administrator(s) and other landholders kuṭumbin at the village Jaṅgoyikā, brahmins being foremost among them, inform and write:

The district chief Chattramaha respectfully requests from us: In order to increase my own merit, I wish to buy four kulyavāpas of uncultivated land and give them to the Chandoga (i.e., Sāmavedic) Brahmin svāmin of the Kāśyapa gotra and resident of the Khaṭāpūraṇa agrahāra in the Nanda territory vīthi, for the purpose of the regular performance of the five great sacrifices. And in your district, it is customary to sell for two dīnāras a kulyavāpa of uncultivated land that is without revenue charges and covered with original shrubs, as permanent endowment to be enjoyed in perpetuity as long as the moon, the sun and the stars will last. Therefore, be so kind as to accept from me eight dīnāras and to give four kulyavāpas of uncultivated land in the village Jaṅgoyikā with a copper-plate of permanent endowment.

Wherefore it has been ascertained through the investigation of the record-keepers Pradyotasiṁha and Bandhudāsa that it is customary in this district to sell for two dīnāras a kulyavāpa of uncultivated land that is without revenue charges and covered with original shrubs, yielding no tax at all; and that there is no conflict whatsoever with the interest of the king in selling such uncultivated land that yields no tax; but that, when it is given, his majesty obtains a sixth of the merit; so that it ought to be given.

After eight dīnāras had been accepted from this district chief Chattramaha, four kulyavāpas of uncultivated land have been given in the village Jaṅgoyikā, to the south of Gorakṣita’s gift land tāmrapaṭṭa, to the west of Gopālibhogā Gopālī’s property. 4 kulyavāpa.

You there mentioned at the start of the grant, having understood this, shall separate them off using two reeds, eight by ninefold with the ladle-work darvīkarma cubit in a place that does not conflict with the cultivation of the landholders; shall make a boundary delimited in the four directions with long-lasting markers such as pots filled with chaff or charcoal; shall make the donation and shall protect it in perpetuity according to the rule of a permanent endowment. And out of deference to this rule it is to be protected by present and future administrators.

And it has been said by the Lord Vyāsa:

The one who would steal land given by himself or another becomes a worm in shit and is cooked with his ancestors.

The giver of land resides sixty thousand years in heaven; the one who challenges a donation as well as the one who approves of the challenge will reside as many years in hell.

Year 169, month of Vaiśākha, waxing day 7.

Line 1: the expression saviśvāsam adhikaraṇam may be compared with Raktamālā charter, no. 1, l. 21; Raktamālā charter, no. 2, l. 20; and with Damodarpur plate of the time of Budhagupta (163 GE), ll. 2–3.

Line 9: the qualification ādya-stamba is found also in the Baigram plate, ll. 4–5, the only other inscription in the group of Gupta-period land-sale grants with the precise string of characteristics found here; the interpretation covered with original shrubs is that of D.C. Sircar 3824, accepted by R. Furui 42–43.

Line 14: on darvīkarma, see 43, 5332.

Lines 14–15: the phrase cira-kāla-sthāyi-tuṣāṅgārādi-cihnaiś catur-ddiṅ-niyamita-sīmānaṁ kr̥tvā recalls expressions in the Baigram plate and the Tāvīra grant. See 42–43.

First edited, with English translation and photos of estampages of the plate, by N. G. Majumdar (); basically the same text was published again, with addition of some explanatory footnotes, by D. C. Sircar (48A382-384). The text is re-edited here by Arlo Griffiths and Dániel Balogh based on RTIs of the plate, using a digital edition created by Dániel Balogh for the Siddham project as starting point. (Since the readings in that digital edition don't differ from the printed editions, its variant readings are not recorded in our apparatus.)

48A382-384