Mallasarul Charter of Vijayasena, time of Gopacandra year 3

Editors: Dániel Balogh, Amandine Wattelier-Bricout.

Identifier: DHARMA_INSBengalCharters00084.

Language: Sanskrit.

Repository: Bengal Copper Plates (tfb-bengalcharters-epigraphy).

Version: 2024-08-16 14:10 (3b1ee6e), last modified 2023-05-22 18:38 (5cbbbf2).

Seal

⟨1⟩ (mahā)rāja-vijaya(se)nasya

Plate

I. Āryā

⟨1⟩ [ca. 8+] [lo]ka-nāthaḥ yaḥ puṁsāṁ sukr̥ta-karmma-phala-hetuḥ

satya-tapo-maya-mūrttir lloka-dvaya-sādhano dharmmaḥ

II. Upagīti

tad-anu jita-da¿n?⟨m⟩bha-lobhā jaya⟨2⟩[nti] [nit](ya?)[ṁ] (pa)rah[i]tārthāḥ

ni[rmma]tsarāḥ sucaritaiḥ para-loka-jigīṣavaḥ santaḥ

pr̥thivīṁ pr̥thur iva prathita-pratāpa-naya-śauryy(e) mahārājādhirāja-śrī-gopa⟨3⟩[can](dr?)[e] praśāsati tad-anujña¿ptāyāṁ?⟨ptyā⟩ puṇyottara-janapadādhyāsitāyā⟨ṁ⟩ satata-dharmma-kriyā-varddhamānāyāṁ varddhamāna-bhuktau pūjyān varttamānopasthita{ta}-kārttākr̥tika-ku⟨4⟩mārāmātya-c(au)r(o)ddharaṇikoparikaudraṅgikāgrahārikaurṇasthānika-bhogapatika-viṣayapati-tad¿a?⟨ā⟩yuktaka-hiraṇya-sāmudāyika-pattalakāvasathika-devadroṇī-samva⟨5⟩ddhādīn vidhivat sampūjya vakkattaka-vīthī-samvaddhārddhakarakāgrahārīṇa-mahattara-himadattaḥ nirvr̥ta-vāṭakīya-mahattara-su⟨va⟩rṇṇayaśā⟨ḥ⟩ kapistha-vāṭakāgrah(ā)rīṇa⟨6⟩-mahattara-dhanasvām¿i?⟨ī⟩ vaṭavallakāgrahārīṇa-mahattara-ṣaṣṭh¿i?⟨ī⟩datta-śrīdattau koḍḍavīrāgrahārīṇa-bhaṭṭa-vāmanasvāmī godhagrāmāgrahārīṇa-mah¿i?⟨ī⟩datta-rājya⟨7⟩dattau śālmali-vāṭakīya-jīvasvām¿i?⟨ī⟩ vakkattakīya-khāḍgi-hariḥ madhu-vāṭakīya-khāḍgi-goIka⟨ḥ⟩ khaṇḍajoṭikeya-khāḍgi-bhadranand¿i?⟨ī⟩ vindhyapureya-vāhanāyaka⟨8⟩-hari-prabh¿u?⟨r̥⟩tayo vīthy-adhikaraṇañ ca vijñāpayanti

pūjya{ṁ}-mahārāja-vijayasenena vayam abhyarthitā Icche ’ham eta⟨d⟩-vīthī-samvaddha-vettragarttā-grāme yuṣma¿bhyo?⟨bhir⟩ ya⟨9⟩thā-nyāy¿a?⟨e⟩nopakrīyāṣṭau kulyavāpāN mātā-pittror ātmanaś ca puṇyābhivr̥ddhaye kalpāntara-sthāyinyā pravr̥ttyā puttra-pauttrānvaya-bhogyatvena kauṇḍinya-sagottrāya ⟨10⟩ vāhvr̥ca-vatsasvāmin¿o?⟨e⟩ pañca-mahā-yajña-pravarttanāya pratipā¿v?⟨d⟩ayitum iti

yato ’smābhir asyābhyartha⟨na⟩yāvadhr̥tam asty ¿o?⟨e⟩ṣo ’nukramaḥ Ubhaya-loka-vijigīṣu(bhi)⟨11⟩[s] (s)[ā]dhubhiḥ kriyamāṇa-puṇya-skandheṣu⟨.⟩ śrī-param¿ā?⟨a⟩-bhaṭṭāraka-p¿a?⟨ā⟩dānāṁ dharmma-ṣaḍ-bhāgo⟨pa⟩cayo ’smākam api pratipālayatāṁ kīrtti-śreyobhyāṁ yogaḥ⟨.⟩ Uktañ ca

III. Anuṣṭubh

yaḥ kriyāṁ dharmma-saṁ⟨12⟩yuktāṁ

manasāpy abhinandati

⟨va⟩rddhate sa yatheṣṭe¿(v)?⟨n⟩a

śukla-pakṣa IvoḍurāṬ

tat sampadyatām asyābhiprāya Ity asma¿n?⟨d⟩-vāra-kr̥tair anena dattaka-d¿i?⟨ī⟩nārā⟨n⟩ vīthyāṁ samvibhajyāsma¿n?⟨d⟩-vettra⟨13⟩garttā-grāme ’ṣṭābhyaḥ kulyavāpebhyo yathocitaṁ dānaṁ ta(d)-vīthī-samudaya Eva pranāryya voḍhavyam ity avacūrṇyāṣṭau kulya-vāpā mahārāja-vijayasenasya datt¿o?⟨ā⟩ḥ⟨.⟩ ⟨14⟩ [anenā]pi rājñāsmai kauṇḍinya-sagottrāya vāhvr̥ca-vatsasvāmine pañca-mahā-yajña-pravarttanāya tāmra-p{r}aṭṭena pratipāditā⟨ḥ⟩⟨.⟩

Atha {ca} caiṣāṁ ¿caturṣu? dikṣu sīmā bhavanti pū⟨15⟩[rvvasyāṁ di]śi godha-grāma sīmā⟨.⟩ ¿dakṣiṇyāṁ? godha-grām¿ā?⟨a⟩ Eva⟨.⟩ Uttarasyāṁ vaṭavallakāgrahāra sīmā⟨.⟩ paścimasyāṁ diśi Arddhena Āmra-garttikā sīmā kīlakāś cāttra kama(lā)⟨Page 1v⟩⟨16⟩kṣa-mālāṅkitā⟨ś⟩ caturṣu dikṣu nyastā bhavanty⟨.⟩ evam eṣāṁ kr̥ta-sīmāṅkānām asya brāhmaṇasya pañca-mahā-yajña-pravarttanenopabhuñjānasya na ⟨17⟩ kenacid etad-va¿n?śa-jenānyatamena vā svalp¿a?⟨ā⟩py āvādhā hasta-prakṣepo vā k¿a?⟨ā⟩ryyaḥ⟨.⟩ Evam avadhr̥te yo ’tha karoti sa vadhyaḥ pañcabhir mma⟨18⟩hā-pātakaiḥ sopapātakaiḥ saṁyuktaḥ syād⟨.⟩ api ca

IV. Anuṣṭubh

nāsya devā na pitaro

haviḥ piṇḍaṁ samāpnuyuḥ

(chi)nna-mastakavat tālaḥ

Apra⟨19⟩tiṣṭhaḥ patiṣyati

bhūmi-dānāpaharaṇa-pratipālana-guṇa-do¿s?⟨ṣ⟩a-vyañjakāḥ Ārṣāḥ ślokā bhavanti

V. Anuṣṭubh

ṣaṣṭiṁ varṣa-sahasrāṇi

⟨20⟩ svargge nandati bhūmi-daḥ

Ākṣeptā cānumantā ca

tāny eva narake vaseT

VI. Anuṣṭubh

Āsphoṭayanti pitaraḥ

pravalganti pitāmahāḥ

bhūmi-do ⟨21⟩ ’sma¿n?⟨t⟩-kule jātaḥ

sa naḥ santārayiṣyati

VII. Anuṣṭubh

yat kiñci¿n?⟨t⟩ kurute pāpaṁ

naro lobha-sam¿ā?⟨a⟩nvitaḥ

Api go-carmma-māttreṇa

bhūmi-dānena śudhyati

VIII. Anuṣṭubh

pū⟨22⟩rvva-dattāṁ dvijātibhyo

yat(n)ād rakṣa yudhiṣṭhira

bhūmiṁ bhūmi⟨ma⟩tāṁ śreṣṭha

dānāc chreyo ’nupālanaṁ

IX. Anuṣṭubh

Iyaṁ rāja-śatair ddattā

dīyate ca punaḥ ⟨23⟩ punaḥ

yasya yasya yadā bhūmis

tasya tasya tadā phalaṁ

X. Anuṣṭubh

taḍit-taraṅga-vahulāṁ

śriyaṁ matvā ca marttyānāṁ

na dharmma-sthitaya⟨24⟩s sadbhiḥ

yuktā loke vilopituM

ku 8⟨.⟩ dūtakaḥ śubhadatto⟨.⟩ likhitaṁ sāndhivigrahika-bhogacandreṇa⟨.⟩ ⟨25⟩ tāpitaṁ pustapāla-jayadāsena⟨.⟩ saṁvva¿D?⟨T⟩ 3 śrāva di 20 7

Seal

⟨1⟩ (mahā)rāja-vijaya(se)nasya

Plate⟨1⟩ [********] [lo]ka-nāthaḥ yaḥ puṁsāṁ sukr̥ta-karmma-phala-hetuḥ satya-tapo-maya-mūrttir lloka-dvaya-sādhano dharmmaḥ  tad-anu jita-da¿n?⟨m⟩bha-lobhā jaya-
⟨2⟩ [nti] [nit](ya?)[ṁ] (pa)rah[i]tārthāḥ ni[rmma]tsarāḥ sucaritaiḥ para-loka-jigīṣavaḥ santaḥ pr̥thivīṁ pr̥thur iva prathita-pratāpa-naya-śauryy(e) mahārājādhirāja-śrī-gopa-
⟨3⟩ [can](dr?)[e] praśāsati tad-anujña¿ptāyāṁ?⟨ptyā⟩ puṇyottara-janapadādhyāsitāyā⟨ṁ⟩ satata-dharmma-kriyā-varddhamānāyāṁ varddhamāna-bhuktau pūjyān varttamānopasthita{ta}-kārttākr̥tika-ku-
⟨4⟩ mārāmātya-c(au)r(o)ddharaṇikoparikaudraṅgikāgrahārikaurṇasthānika-bhogapatika-viṣayapati-tad¿a?⟨ā⟩yuktaka-hiraṇya-sāmudāyika-pattalakāvasathika-devadroṇī-samva-
⟨5⟩ ddhādīn vidhivat sampūjya vakkattaka-vīthī-samvaddhārddhakarakāgrahārīṇa-mahattara-himadattaḥ nirvr̥ta-vāṭakīya-mahattara-su⟨va⟩rṇṇayaśā⟨ḥ⟩ kapistha-vāṭakāgrah(ā)rīṇa-
⟨6⟩ -mahattara-dhanasvām¿i?⟨ī⟩ vaṭavallakāgrahārīṇa-mahattara-ṣaṣṭh¿i?⟨ī⟩datta-śrīdattau koḍḍavīrāgrahārīṇa-bhaṭṭa-vāmanasvāmī godhagrāmāgrahārīṇa-mah¿i?⟨ī⟩datta-rājya-
⟨7⟩ dattau śālmali-vāṭakīya-jīvasvām¿i?⟨ī⟩ vakkattakīya-khāḍgi-hariḥ madhu-vāṭakīya-khāḍgi-goIka⟨ḥ⟩ khaṇḍajoṭikeya-khāḍgi-bhadranand¿i?⟨ī⟩ vindhyapureya-vāhanāyaka-
⟨8⟩ -hari-prabh¿u?⟨r̥⟩tayo vīthy-adhikaraṇañ ca vijñāpayanti pūjya{ṁ}-mahārāja-vijayasenena vayam abhyarthitā Icche ’ham eta⟨d⟩-vīthī-samvaddha-vettragarttā-grāme yuṣma¿bhyo?⟨bhir⟩ ya-
⟨9⟩ thā-nyāy¿a?⟨e⟩nopakrīyāṣṭau kulyavāpāN mātā-pittror ātmanaś ca puṇyābhivr̥ddhaye kalpāntara-sthāyinyā pravr̥ttyā puttra-pauttrānvaya-bhogyatvena kauṇḍinya-sagottrāya 
⟨10⟩ vāhvr̥ca-vatsasvāmin¿o?⟨e⟩ pañca-mahā-yajña-pravarttanāya pratipā¿v?⟨d⟩ayitum iti yato ’smābhir asyābhyartha⟨na⟩yāvadhr̥tam asty ¿o?⟨e⟩ṣo ’nukramaḥ Ubhaya-loka-vijigīṣu(bhi)-
⟨11⟩ [s] (s)[ā]dhubhiḥ kriyamāṇa-puṇya-skandheṣu⟨.⟩ śrī-param¿ā?⟨a⟩-bhaṭṭāraka-p¿a?⟨ā⟩dānāṁ dharmma-ṣaḍ-bhāgo⟨pa⟩cayo ’smākam api pratipālayatāṁ kīrtti-śreyobhyāṁ yogaḥ⟨.⟩ Uktañ ca  yaḥ kriyāṁ dharmma-saṁ-
⟨12⟩ yuktāṁ manasāpy abhinandati ⟨va⟩rddhate sa yatheṣṭe¿(v)?⟨n⟩a śukla-pakṣa IvoḍurāṬ tat sampadyatām asyābhiprāya Ity asma¿n?⟨d⟩-vāra-kr̥tair anena dattaka-d¿i?⟨ī⟩nārā⟨n⟩ vīthyāṁ samvibhajyāsma¿n?⟨d⟩-vettra-
⟨13⟩ garttā-grāme ’ṣṭābhyaḥ kulyavāpebhyo yathocitaṁ dānaṁ ta(d)-vīthī-samudaya Eva pranāryya voḍhavyam ity avacūrṇyāṣṭau kulya-vāpā mahārāja-vijayasenasya datt¿o?⟨ā⟩ḥ⟨.⟩ 
⟨14⟩ [anenā]pi rājñāsmai kauṇḍinya-sagottrāya vāhvr̥ca-vatsasvāmine pañca-mahā-yajña-pravarttanāya tāmra-p{r}aṭṭena pratipāditā⟨ḥ⟩⟨.⟩Atha {ca} caiṣāṁ ¿caturṣu? dikṣu sīmā bhavanti pū-
⟨15⟩ [rvvasyāṁ di]śi godha-grāma sīmā⟨.⟩ ¿dakṣiṇyāṁ? godha-grām¿ā?⟨a⟩ Eva⟨.⟩ Uttarasyāṁ vaṭavallakāgrahāra sīmā⟨.⟩ paścimasyāṁ diśi Arddhena Āmra-garttikā sīmā kīlakāś cāttra kama(lā)-
⟨Page 1v⟩ 
⟨16⟩ kṣa-mālāṅkitā⟨ś⟩ caturṣu dikṣu nyastā bhavanty⟨.⟩ evam eṣāṁ kr̥ta-sīmāṅkānām asya brāhmaṇasya pañca-mahā-yajña-pravarttanenopabhuñjānasya na 
⟨17⟩ kenacid etad-va¿n?śa-jenānyatamena vā svalp¿a?⟨ā⟩py āvādhā hasta-prakṣepo vā k¿a?⟨ā⟩ryyaḥ⟨.⟩ Evam avadhr̥te yo ’tha karoti sa vadhyaḥ pañcabhir mma-
⟨18⟩ hā-pātakaiḥ sopapātakaiḥ saṁyuktaḥ syād⟨.⟩ api ca nāsya devā na pitaro haviḥ piṇḍaṁ samāpnuyuḥ (chi)nna-mastakavat tālaḥ Apra-
⟨19⟩ tiṣṭhaḥ patiṣyati bhūmi-dānāpaharaṇa-pratipālana-guṇa-do¿s?⟨ṣ⟩a-vyañjakāḥ Ārṣāḥ ślokā bhavanti  ṣaṣṭiṁ varṣa-sahasrāṇi 
⟨20⟩ svargge nandati bhūmi-daḥ Ākṣeptā cānumantā ca tāny eva narake vaseT   Āsphoṭayanti pitaraḥ pravalganti pitāmahāḥ bhūmi-do 
⟨21⟩ ’sma¿n?⟨t⟩-kule jātaḥ sa naḥ santārayiṣyati   yat kiñci¿n?⟨t⟩ kurute pāpaṁ naro lobha-sam¿ā?⟨a⟩nvitaḥ Api go-carmma-māttreṇa bhūmi-dānena śudhyati   pū-
⟨22⟩ rvva-dattāṁ dvijātibhyo yat(n)ād rakṣa yudhiṣṭhira bhūmiṁ bhūmi⟨ma⟩tāṁ śreṣṭha dānāc chreyo ’nupālanaṁ  Iyaṁ rāja-śatair ddattā dīyate ca punaḥ 
⟨23⟩ punaḥ yasya yasya yadā bhūmis tasya tasya tadā phalaṁ   taḍit-taraṅga-vahulāṁ śriyaṁ matvā ca marttyānāṁ na dharmma-sthitaya-
⟨24⟩ s sadbhiḥ yuktā loke vilopituM ku 8⟨.⟩ __ dūtakaḥ śubhadatto⟨.⟩ likhitaṁ sāndhivigrahika-bhogacandreṇa⟨.⟩ 
⟨25⟩ tāpitaṁ pustapāla-jayadāsena⟨.⟩ saṁvva¿D?⟨T⟩ 3 □ śrāva di 20 7 

Seal

⟨1⟩ (mahā)rāja-vijaya(se)nasya

Plate

I. Āryā

⟨1⟩ [ca. 8+] [lo]ka-nāthaḥ yaḥ puṁsāṁ sukr̥ta-karmma-phala-hetuḥ

satya-tapo-maya-mūrttir lloka-dvaya-sādhano dharmmaḥ

II. Upagīti

tad-anu jita-da¿n?⟨m⟩bha-lobhā jaya⟨2⟩[nti] [nit](ya?)[ṁ] (pa)rah[i]tārthāḥ

ni[rmma]tsarāḥ sucaritaiḥ para-loka-jigīṣavaḥ santaḥ

III. Anuṣṭubh

yaḥ kriyāṁ dharmma-saṁ⟨12⟩yuktāṁ

manasāpy abhinandati

⟨va⟩rddhate sa yatheṣṭe¿(v)?⟨n⟩a

śukla-pakṣa IvoḍurāṬ

IV. Anuṣṭubh

nāsya devā na pitaro

haviḥ piṇḍaṁ samāpnuyuḥ

(chi)nna-mastakavat tālaḥ

Apra⟨19⟩tiṣṭhaḥ patiṣyati

bhūmi-dānāpaharaṇa-pratipālana-guṇa-do¿s?⟨ṣ⟩a-vyañjakāḥ Ārṣāḥ ślokā bhavanti

V. Anuṣṭubh

ṣaṣṭiṁ varṣa-sahasrāṇi

⟨20⟩ svargge nandati bhūmi-daḥ

Ākṣeptā cānumantā ca

tāny eva narake vaseT

VI. Anuṣṭubh

Āsphoṭayanti pitaraḥ

pravalganti pitāmahāḥ

bhūmi-do ⟨21⟩ ’sma¿n?⟨t⟩-kule jātaḥ

sa naḥ santārayiṣyati

VII. Anuṣṭubh

yat kiñci¿n?⟨t⟩ kurute pāpaṁ

naro lobha-sam¿ā?⟨a⟩nvitaḥ

Api go-carmma-māttreṇa

bhūmi-dānena śudhyati

VIII. Anuṣṭubh

pū⟨22⟩rvva-dattāṁ dvijātibhyo

yat(n)ād rakṣa yudhiṣṭhira

bhūmiṁ bhūmi⟨ma⟩tāṁ śreṣṭha

dānāc chreyo ’nupālanaṁ

IX. Anuṣṭubh

Iyaṁ rāja-śatair ddattā

dīyate ca punaḥ ⟨23⟩ punaḥ

yasya yasya yadā bhūmis

tasya tasya tadā phalaṁ

X. Anuṣṭubh

taḍit-taraṅga-vahulāṁ

śriyaṁ matvā ca marttyānāṁ

na dharmma-sthitaya⟨24⟩s sadbhiḥ

yuktā loke vilopituM

ku 8⟨.⟩ __ dūtakaḥ śubhadatto⟨.⟩ likhitaṁ sāndhivigrahika-bhogacandreṇa⟨.⟩ ⟨25⟩ tāpitaṁ pustapāla-jayadāsena⟨.⟩ saṁvva¿D?⟨T⟩ 3 □ śrāva di 20 7

Apparatus

⟨1⟩ [ca. 8+] [lo] M DB ⬦ [1 svasti][.][jayati śrīlo] DCS; [siddhaM jayati tri°] BC • Chhabra 1953-1954, n. 2, p. 163 suggests this restoration after a discussion about the obedience of the charter. For him, the deity invoked is Viṣṇu as Cakrapuruṣa. — ⟨1⟩ [lo]ka-nāthaḥ DCS DB ⬦ (lo)ka-nāthaḥ M • Sircar 1965 suggests reading loka-nātho.

⟨2⟩ [nit](ya?)[ṁ] ⬦ [ca. 1+] [.](ya?) (pa)ra° DB; […] (pa)ra° M; [cirā]ya [para°] DCS • I insert and follow the restoration suggested in a note by Balogh et al. 2019 jayanti nityaṁ which is metrically correct and fits in with what remains legible. — ⟨2⟩ sucaritaiḥ M DCS ⬦ sucaritaḥ DB. — ⟨2⟩ pr̥thur iva M DCS DB • Majumdar [1940] 1935-1936 suggests reading pr̥thuvat, while Sircar 1965 suggests reading pr̥thāviva.

⟨3⟩ °[can](dr?)[e] DB ⬦ °c[and](r)[e] M; °[candre] DCS • Majumdar [1940] 1935-1936, p. 157 explains how he restores gopacandre without hesitation.

⟨6⟩ -ṣaṣṭh¿i?⟨ī⟩datta- ⬦ -ṣaṣṭhidatta- M DCS DB. — ⟨6⟩ vāmanasvāmī ⬦ vāmanasvām¿i?⟨ī⟩ M DCS DB. — ⟨6⟩ -mah¿i?⟨ī⟩datta- ⬦ -mahidatta- M DCS DB.

⟨8⟩ Icche ’ham DB DCS ⬦ Icche ¿’h?⟨y⟩am M • See also Mastakaśvabhra Plate of the time of Pradyumnabandhu, year 5 line 3. — ⟨8⟩ yuṣma¿bhyo?⟨bhir⟩ ⬦ yuṣmabhyo M DCS DB • As one can observe in the Mastakaśvabhra Grant of the time of Pradyumnabandhu, year 5 line 3, the absolutive upakrīya is constructed with the instrumental case. Here I suggest correcting this yuṣmabhyo which is grammaticcaly incorrect into yuṣmabhir in order to have the instrumental case expected.

⟨9⟩ kulyavāpāN mātā- ⬦ kulyavāpān mātā- M DCS DB.

⟨10⟩ °tam asty ¿o?⟨e⟩ṣo DCS DB ⬦ °tam asy ¿o?⟨ai⟩ṣo M.

⟨11⟩ -bhāgo⟨pa⟩cayo DCS DB ⬦ -bhāgo ca yo M. — ⟨11⟩ saṁ⟨12⟩yuktāṁ M DCS ⬦ saṁyu⟨12⟩ktāṁ DB.

⟨12⟩ yatheṣṭe¿(v)?⟨n⟩a ⬦ yadheṣṭe(c/v)a DB; yatheṣṭeva M; yadheṣṭe ca DCS • Sircar 1965 suggests reading yatheṣṭaṁ. By comparison of this verse with the verse numbered 151 within the Stanzas on Bhūmidāna listed by Sircar (see Sircar 1965, appendix II, pp. 170–200), I suggest reading yatheṣṭena. — ⟨12⟩ -d¿i?⟨ī⟩nārā⟨n⟩ vīthyāṁ ⬦ -dīnārā⟨n⟩ vīthyāṁ M DB; -dīnārā⟨n⟩ ⟨saṁgṛhya⟩ vīthyāṁ DCS. — ⟨12⟩ °jyāsma¿n?⟨d⟩-vettra M DB ⬦ jyāsmad-vettra DCS.

⟨13⟩ pranāryya M ⬦ pranāyyaṁ DCS; pranāyya(ṁ) DB • Majumdar [1940] 1935-1936 suggests reading praṇāyya, while Sircar 1965 suggests understanding prāṇāyyaṁ “honestly”.

⟨14⟩ [anenā]pi DCS DB ⬦ [3+]pi M • Majumdar [1940] 1935-1936 suggests restoring the gap by anenāpi and Sircar 1965 follows him by including it in its edition. — ⟨14⟩ pañca-mahā-yajña- M DB ⬦ pañca-mahā-yaśa- DCS. — ⟨14⟩ ¿caturṣu? dikṣu M DCS DB • Majumdar [1940] 1935-1936 suggests reading catur-dikṣu or catasṛṣu dikṣu, while Sircar 1965 only suggests the second reading.

⟨15⟩ Eva ⟨.⟩ ⬦ (e)va⟨.⟩ DCS DB; [e]va M. — ⟨15⟩ sīmā⟨.⟩ paścimasyāṁ DCS DB ⬦ sīmā paści¿masyā?⟨māyā⟩ṁ M.

⟨16⟩ -mālāṅkitā⟨ś⟩ ca M DB ⬦ -mālāṅkitā⟨ḥ⟩ ca DCS. — ⟨16⟩ caturṣu dikṣu M DB • As in line 14, Majumdar [1940] 1935-1936 suggests reading catur-dikṣu or catasṛṣu dikṣu, while Sircar 1965 only suggests the second reading. — ⟨16⟩ °pabhuñjānasya M DB ⬦ °pabhuñcānasya DCS.

⟨17⟩ hasta-prakṣepo M DB ⬦ hastakṣepo DCS. — ⟨17⟩ k¿a?⟨ā⟩ryyaḥ ⬦ k(ā)ryyaḥ DB; k[ā]ryyaḥ M DCS.

⟨18⟩ syād⟨.⟩ api ca ⬦ syād⟨.⟩ Api ca DB; syād api ca⟨.⟩ M DCS • Sircar 1965 suggest reading syāt⟨.⟩ Api ca.

⟨20⟩ Āsphoṭayanti M DB ⬦ Āskoṭayanti DCS.

⟨22⟩ chreyo ’nupālanaṁ M DB ⬦ chreyo ’nupālana¿ṁ?⟨M⟩ DCS.

⟨24⟩ sadbhiḥ yu° DB ⬦ sadbhi¿ḥ?⟨r⟩ yu° M DCS • The visarga is justified by the fact that there is a gap before yu due to the roughness of the plate. So as the scribe could not continue his writing he notes a visarga instead of reported the good sandhi (r above the yu) because of the gap.

⟨25⟩ saṁvva¿D?⟨T⟩ ⬦ samv{(v)}a(T) DB; saṁv{(v)}a¿D?⟨T⟩ M DCS. — ⟨25⟩ 3 □ śrāva di ⬦ 3 ______ śrāva di DB; śrāva di M DCS.

Translation by Amandine Wattelier-Bricout

Seal

Of the mahārāja Vijayasena

Plate

I

[The] Lord of the Worlds (Lokanātha)¹ who gives the fruits of good deeds to men, whose appearance is full of truth and ascetism, who produces the two worlds, who is the law —

II

After Him, the good men who seek the highest goal, who have defeated their deceit and their cupidity, unselfish, they who desire the highest world, are [always] (nityaṁ) victorious through their good deeds.

(2–8) While the mahārājādhirāja Śrī Gopacandra whose power, conduct and heroism are well-known, is governing the earth as another Pr̥thu, in the province of Vardhamāna (litt. the prosperous one) which is prospering thanks to the constant practice of Dharma,² where supremely people have been settled with his (i.e. Gopacandra’s) authorisation, Himadatta, the notable (mahattara) residing in the Ardhakaraka agrahāra belonging to the Vakkattaka territory (vīthīsambaddha); Suvarṇayaśas, the notable residing in Nirvr̥tavāṭaka;³ Dhanasvāmin, the notable residing in the Kapisthavāṭaka (Wood-apple garden) agrahāra; Ṣaṣṭhīdatta and Śrīdatta, both notables residing in the Vaṭavallaka agrahāra; Bhaṭṭa Vāmanasvāmin residing in the Koḍḍavīra agrahāra; Mahīdatta and Rājyadatta, both possessing villages given to Brahmins in Godhagrāma, Jīvasvāmin residing in Śālmalivāṭaka,⁴ Hari, the swordsman belonging to/residing in Vakkattaka,⁵ Goika, the swordsman belonging to/residing in Madhuvāṭaka, Bhadranandin, the swordsman residing in Khaṇḍajōtika, the deliverers, conducteurs, carriers and so on (vāha-nāyaka-hari-prabhr̥tayo)⁶ residing in Vindhyapura and the council of the territory greatly honour according to the rules (vidhivat sampūjya line 5) and inform the following venerables beginning with those who are dwelling here in the present the recorder (kārttākr̥tika),⁷ the princely advisor (kumārāmatya), the police officer (cauroddharaṇika),⁸ the governor of the province (uparika), the collector of the udraṅga tax (audraṅgika),⁹ the one who [supervises] the royal donation of lands (āgrahārika),¹⁰ the officer in charge of the wool factories (aurṇasthānika),¹¹ the officer in charge of the territorial unit called bhoga (bhogapatika),¹² the chief of the district (viṣayapati) and its officer (tadāyuktaka), the collector of tax in cash (hiraṇyasāmudāyika), ¹³ the superindentent of the territorial division called pattalaka (pattalakāvasathika)¹⁴ and the officer in charge of temple property (devadroṇisambaddha): ¹⁵

(8) We have been sollicited by the venerable mahārāja Vijayasena as follows:

(8–10) After having purchased it according to your (yuṣmabhir) legal proceeding (yathānyāyena),I wish to bestow eight kulyavāpas in the village Vettragarttā belonging to this territory (vīthī) in the sake of the increase of my own merit and the one of both my mother and my father to be enjoyed in succession by sons and grandsons, thanks the practice of permanent endowment, to Vatsasvāmin, belonging to the R̥gveda tradition (Bāhvṛca), disciple of Kauṇḍinya,in order to perform the five great sacrifices.

(10–11) Therefore, due to his requesting it has been ascertained by us : this is the method for the virtuous men who want to conquest the two worlds [and] who have a lot of meritorious deeds. A sixth part of merit [produced by it] is vested in His Majesty the sovereign Lord and also for us who are protecting [this gift] from the conjunction of fame and welfare.

(11) It has been said:

I

The man who, even in mind, approves a deed endowed with Dharma, he increases according to which has been given (yaṭheṣṭena) as the moon (uḍurāj) during the bright fortnight.¹⁶

(12–13) Thus (tad), considering (iti) his request is granted, after having distributed within [the officials of this] territory (vīthī) the dīnāras paid by him according to the meritorious acts made by us, the gift as it has been described must be honestly (prāṇāyyaṁ) conveyed precisely in the income of this territory of up to (the expected income of) the eight kulyavāpas belonging to our village Vettragarta.

(13–14) After having them sprinkled with powder (avacūrṇya), the eight kulyavāpas of the mahārāja Vijayasena are given. They are bestowed by the king (ie Gopacandra) and also [by him](gap at the beginning of the line 14 anena)¹⁷ thanks a copperplate to Vatsasvāmin, belonging to the R̥gveda tradition (Bāhvr̥ca), disciple of Kauṇḍinya,in order to perform the five great sacrifices.

(14–17) Then here follow the frontiers of this land in the four directions:

the Eastern boundary is Godhagrāma,
the Southern boundary is exactly Godhagrāma
the Northern boundary is the agrahāra called Vaṭavallaka ( the Banyan pole)
the Western boundary is in the middle of Āmragarttikā (the mango tree of the weaver’s workshop)

And there, pillars marked by rosaries made of lotus seeds are fixed in the four boundaries.¹⁸ Thus, concerning the enjoyment of this land whose the boundaries have been marked (and which is) devoted to the performance of the five great sacrifices by this Brahmin, any objection however small or any protestation by raising hands may be made by no one belonging to his family or by no one else.

(17–18) This having been ascertained in this way, he who does that, will be slained and will be marred by the five great sins and by all other little sins. Moreover:

IV

The Gods and his Ancestors will never receive his offering (havis) and his oblation (piṇḍa). Like a palm tree with his tuft of leaves cut, deprived of stability, he will fall [in hell].¹⁹

(19) The sacred verses describing the virtue and the dishonor of the confiscation and protection of a gift of land are :

V

The giver of land enjoys 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.²⁰

VI

The Fathers are agitating and the Grand-Fathers are bounding [when they can say] “A giver of land is born within our lineage, he alone will all deliver us !”.²¹

VII

A miserly man, whatever the sins he has committed, is purified by a gift of land, even measuring the size of a gocarman (literally a cow’s skin, here it is a unit of measurement).²²

VIII

You, Yudhiṣṭhira, most excellent of kings, must strenuously protect land previously given to brahmins. Safeguarding is even better than giving.²³

IX

Earth has been given by hundreds of kings and it will be given again and again. Whoever holds land at a given moment, to him does the fruit belong.²⁴

X

Considering the fortune of mortels is full of waves [and passed] in a flash, the deeds devoted to dharma by wise men should not be destroyed in this world.²⁵

(24–25) Eight ku (kulyavāpas), the messenger [of this gift] is Śubhadatta. It has been written by Bhogacandra, the minister presiding in negociating affairs (sāndhivigrahika), heated by the record-keeper Jayadāsa. Year 3, Śrāvaṇa (month) day 27.

Commentary

Bibliography

First reported and edited in Majumdar [1940] 1935-1936, pp. 155–161 (Majumdar published a preliminary account shortly before this in the Vaṅgīya Sāhitya Pariṣat Patrikā, no detailed reference available). Re-edited by Sircar 1965, pp. 372–378, № 46 with some improvments and new emendations. Discussed in Chhabra 1953-1954 and Chhabra 1956. Here re-edited and translated by Amandine Wattelier-Bricout and Arlo Griffiths based on photos of the plate furnished by Ryosuke Furui. The text has been encoded by Amandine Wattelier-Bricout using a digital edition created by Dániel Balogh for the Siddham project as starting point. Since some readings differ from this previous digital edition, they are reported in the apparatus.

Primary

[M] Majumdar, Nani Gopal. [1940] 1935-1936. “Mallasarul copper-plate of Vijayasena.” EI 23, pp. 155–161. Pages 155–161.

[DCS] Sircar, Dines Chandra. 1965. Select inscriptions bearing on Indian history and civilization. Volume I: from the sixth century B.C. to the sixth century A.D. 2nd edition revised and enlarged. Calcutta: University of Calcutta. Pages 372–378, item 46.

[DB] Balogh, Dániel, Csaba Kiss and Eszter Somogyi. 2019. “Siddham Epigraphic Archive - Texts in EpiDoc [Data set].” Zenodo. DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.2574901. [URL]. Item IN00132.

Secondary

[BC] Chhabra, Bahadur Chand. 1953-1954. “Note on Mallasarul Charter of Vijayasena.” Epigraphia Indica 30, pp. 161–163.

Chhabra, Bahadur Chand. 1956. “A Note on Mallasarul Charter of Vijayasena.” In: Proceedings of the Indian History Congress. Seventeenth Session: Ahmedabad. By Indian History Congress. Patna: Indian History Congress Association, pp. 122–124. Pages 122–124.

Notes

1. Chhabra 1953-1954 discusses the identity of god glorified here. According to him, the buddhist obedience of the plate maintained by Majumdar [1940] 1935-1936 is questionable and he prefers to attribute a brahmanical background to the donation. His arguments are :
- the mention of the five great sacrifices
- the identity of the recipient : a Brahmin of the Kauṇḍinya gotra, belonging to the Bāhvṛca śākha of the Ṛgveda
- Lokanātha is not only an epithet to designate Buddha, but can also refer to the gods Brahmā, Viṣṇu and Śiva
- the inconsistency between the paratext and the content of the plate : on one hand, a Buddhistic invocation and a Buddhistic seal and on the other hand, a brahmanical record
He interprets the cakra on the seal as the famous attribute of Viṣṇu and the whole seal with the two armed-deity as a representation of Cakrapuruṣa. As he found the name Lokanātha within the list of Viṣṇu’s names from the Anuśāsanaparvan of the Mahābhārata, he suggests that the glorified deity should be Viṣṇu. He also quoted the Ahirbudhnya Saṃhita as a source in which one can find eulogy of this form of Viṣṇu. After checking the content of this text from Schrader’s book (Introduction to the Pāñcarātra and the Ahirbudhnya Saṃhitā), I understand that Viṣṇu as Cakrapuruṣa in this text is a sixteen-armed deity. So it could be an argument for the identification of the obedience for our plate. The epithet Lokanātha can be found in Biyala Plate of Mahīpāla I, year 35 in line 4, Rajibpur Plate of Gopāla IV, year 2 and Madanapāla, year 2 in line 2, Rajibpur Plate of Madanapāla, year 22 in line 2 and Manahali Plate of Madanapāla, year 8 in line 2.
2. Here one can observe the attempt to give meaning to the name of the province by an semantical etymology.
3. As the suffix īya is used without vr̥ddhi, other translations can be suggested: “belonging to”, “managing” or “responsible of”. The word nirvr̥tavāṭaka can be understood as a toponym meaning “pleasant garden”.
4. As for nirvr̥tavāṭakīya, there is no vr̥ddhi elevation. So one could also translated by “belonging to Śālmalivāṭaka” or “responsible of the garden(s) in Śālmali”.
5. This place name is already mentioned in line 5.
6. I consider these three words as types of profession. For the moment, my translation is a somewhat awkward attempt which needs to be improved. One can also understand : the men residing in Vindhyapura beginning with Hari the chariot-driver (vāha-nāyaka). But there is another Hari just before.
7. Sircar 1966, p. 149 suggests the word kārttākr̥tika probably qualifies “an officer who reported to the king qbout the progress of important undertakings”. The word occurs in the Panchrol Plate of the time of Śaśāṅka line 6, in the Nālandā Plate of Dharmapāla line 8 and in the Jayarampur plate line 11.
8. Sircar 1966, p. 72 suggests the word cauroddharaṇika refers to “an official designation indicating an officer in charge of the recovery of stolen property; a police officer”. The word occurs in the Deo Baranark Inscription of Jivitagupta, Plate XV, line 9, in the Murshidabad or Indian Museum copper plate after the verse 19, in the Nālandā Plate of Dharmapāla line 12, in the Mudgagiri grant of Devapāla, regnal year 33 lines 33 and 40, in the Mahendrapāla 7th regnal year Jagajjibanpur (or Tulabhita) copper plate lines 36 and 46, in the Manahali Plate of Madanapāla, year 8 lines 35 and 40, in the Bharat Kala Bhavan Plate of Rājyapāla, year 2 line 35 and 42 and in the Khalimpur Plate of Dharmapāla, year 32 line 45.
9. Sircar 1966, p. 37 suggests the following meaning for the word audraṅgika: “collector of the udraṅga tax meaning “tax on permanent tenants or the principal tax”; sometimes mentioned side by side with the hiraṇyasāmudāyika or the collector of tax in cash”.
10. Sircar 1966, p. 11 suggests the āgrahārika is “the owner of an agrahāra; sometimes probably, the superintendent of agrahāras”. Here I opt for the second meaning.
11. Sircar 1966, p. 38 explains the word aurṇasthānika in this way: “officer in charge of an ūrṇasthāna (wool factory) or of all the ūrṇasthānas”.
12. See Sircar 1966, p. 55.
13. See Sircar 1966, p. 130.
14. I deduce this meaning of pattalakāvasathika from the explanations given by Sircar 1966, p. 245 and 40 for the words pattalaka and avasathika.
15. This translation could be supported by the different occurrences of the words kumārāmatya, viṣayapati and āyukta or āyuktaka as technical vocabulary to designate several positions in the hierarchical administration of lands. One can find the word kumārāmatya such employed in Raktamālā Grant no. 1, year 159 in line 1, Baigram Charter of the Time of Kumāragupta I in line 1, Damodarpur #1 in line 3, A second grant concerning the Raktamālā in line 1, Kumudavillikā grant of the time of Śasāṅka, year 8 in the first line of the seal, and Manahali Plate of Madanapāla, year 8 in line 34. The word viṣayapati can be read as hierarchical designation in Biyala Plate of Mahīpāla I, year 35 in line 35, Kalaikuri-Sultanpur Plate of the Time of Kumāragupta I in line 28, A grant of land in the Tāvīra district in lines 7, 12 and 14, and Nandapur Plate of 169 GE in lines 2 and 11 . The words āyukta or āyuktaka can be found in Biyala Plate of Mahīpāla I, year 35 in line 34, Dhanaidaha Plate, Year 113 GE in line 11, Kalaikuri-Sultanpur Plate of the Time of Kumāragupta I in lines 1 and 28, Jagadispur Charter of the Time of Kumāragupta I in lines 1 and 22-23, Raktamālā Grant no. 1, year 159 in the first line of the seal, A grant of land in the Tāvīra district in line 1, Paharpur Charter of the Time of Budhagupta in line 1, A grant of land to monasteries at Śiṣīpuñja, Madhyamasṛgālikā and Grāmakūṭagohālī, line 1, A second grant concerning the Raktamālā estate in the first line of the seal, Rajibpur Plate of Gopāla IV, year 2 and Madanapāla, year 2 line 40 and Manahali Plate of Madanapāla, year 8 in line 35. Thus I deduce from this that the others words are also names of types of profession. This deduction is confirmed by the meanings given of these words by Sircar 1966 (for the word devadroṇisambaddha, see Sircar 1966, p. 88). So my understanding totally differs from the suggestion of Majumdar [1940] 1935-1936 who interprets kumārāmatya, viṣayapati and tadāyuktaka and all others words as proper names.
16. This verse corresponds to the verse numbered 151 among the Stanzas on Bhūmidāna listed by Sircar (see Sircar 1965, appendix II, pp. 170–200), except for the final comparison in the pāda d. The meaning remains identical nonetheless.
17. I follow the suggestion made by Sircar 1965 : anenāpi°.
18. On the manner to mark boundaries, see chapter 21 of Yājñavalkya’s Dharmaśāstra (Olivelle 2019, pp. 162–165), the chapter 11 of the Nāradasmr̥ti (Lariviere 1989, pp. 189–192; 371–377).
19. For the moment, I didn’t find any correspondence for this imprecatory verse.
20. This verse corresponds to the verse numbered 123 among the Stanzas on Bhūmidāna listed by Sircar (see Sircar 1965, appendix II, pp. 170–200).
21. This verse corresponds to the verse numbered 20 among the Stanzas on Bhūmidāna listed by Sircar (see Sircar 1965, appendix II, pp. 170–200), except for the final verb in the pāda d.
22. This verse corresponds to the verse numbered 159 among the Stanzas on Bhūmidāna listed by Sircar (see Sircar 1965, appendix II, pp. 170–200).
23. This verse corresponds to the verse numbered 131 among the Stanzas on Bhūmidāna listed by Sircar (see Sircar 1965, appendix II, pp. 170–200).
24. This verse corresponds to the verse numbered 23 among the Stanzas on Bhūmidāna listed by Sircar (see Sircar 1965, appendix II, pp. 170–200), but the pādas a and b present a different reading.
25. This verse expresses the same meaning with a different wording than the verse numbered 132 among the Stanzas on Bhūmidāna listed by Sircar (see Sircar 1965, appendix II, pp. 170–200).

Display Options Word Wrap Line Numbers Comments Processing Instructions

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>

<?xml-model href="https://raw.githubusercontent.com/erc-dharma/project-documentation/master/schema/latest/DHARMA_Schema.rng" type="application/xml" schematypens="http://relaxng.org/ns/structure/1.0"?>

<?xml-model href="https://raw.githubusercontent.com/erc-dharma/project-documentation/master/schema/latest/DHARMA_SQF.sch" type="application/xml" schematypens="http://purl.oclc.org/dsdl/schematron"?>

<?xml-model href="https://epidoc.stoa.org/schema/latest/tei-epidoc.rng" schematypens="http://relaxng.org/ns/structure/1.0"?>

<?xml-model href="https://epidoc.stoa.org/schema/latest/tei-epidoc.rng" schematypens="http://purl.oclc.org/dsdl/schematron"?>

<title>Mallasarul Charter of Vijayasena, time of Gopacandra year 3</title>

<resp>Original EpiDoc Encoding for Siddham</resp>

<forename>Dániel</forename>

<surname>Balogh</surname>

</persName>

</respStmt><respStmt>

<resp>Conversion of encoding for DHARMA</resp>

<forename>Dániel</forename>

<surname>Balogh</surname>

</persName>

</respStmt><respStmt>

<resp>Conversion of encoding with the template V3</resp>

<forename>Amandine</forename>

<surname>Wattelier-Bricout</surname>

</persName>

</respStmt>

<resp>intellectual authorship of edition</resp>

<forename>Amandine</forename>

<surname>Wattelier-Bricout</surname>

</persName>

</respStmt>

</titleStmt>

<authority>DHARMA</authority>

<pubPlace>Cambrai</pubPlace>

<idno type="filename">DHARMA_INSBengalCharters00084</idno>

<!--

amwb : the Siddham number was IN00132

-->

<p>This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Unported

Licence. To view a copy of the licence, visit

https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ or send a letter to

Creative Commons, 444 Castro Street, Suite 900, Mountain View,

California, 94041, USA.</p>

Balogh and Amandine Wattelier-Bricout.</p>

</licence>

</availability>

</publicationStmt>

<repository>DHARMAbase</repository>

</msIdentifier>

</msContents>

<!-- If you need to identify individual hands (EGD §7.5/) in addition to one or more paragraphs of general palaeographic description, wrap <summary> around the <p> or <p>s above, and, outside <summary>, create <handNote> elements for each hand as follows:

-->

</handDesc>

</physDesc>

</msDesc>

</sourceDesc>

</fileDesc>

<p>The project DHARMA has received funding from the European Research Council (ERC) under the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme (grant agreement no 809994).</p>

</projectDesc>

<p>Public URIs with the prefix bib to point to a Zotero Group Library named ERC-DHARMA whose data are open to the public.</p>

</prefixDef>

<p>Internal URIs using the part prefix to point to person elements in the <ref>DHARMA_IdListMembers_v01.xml</ref> file.</p>

</prefixDef>

</listPrefixDef>

</encodingDesc>

<change when="2021-09-07" who="part:amwb" status="draft">Encoding the apparatus part by comparing Daniel's edition with previous editions : bib:Majumdar1935-1936_02, bib:Chhabra1953-1954_01 and bib:Sircar1965_02.</change>

<change when="2021-09-06" who="part:amwb" status="draft">Creation of the file according to the template version 03 by copying parts from file prepared by Dániel Balogh.</change>

<change who="part:daba" when="2020-08-04" status="draft">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.</change>

</revisionDesc>

</teiHeader>

<body>

<ab><lb n="1"/><unclear reason="illegible">mahā</unclear>rāja-vijaya<unclear>se</unclear>nasya

</ab>

</div>

<div type="textpart" n="B"><head xml:lang="eng">Plate</head>

<l n="ab"><lb n="1"/><gap reason="lost" precision="low" quantity="8" unit="character"/> <supplied reason="lost">lo</supplied>ka-nāthaḥ yaḥ puṁsāṁ<!--

amwb : <unclear>yaḥ</unclear> <uncleat>puṁ</unclear><supplied reason="lost">sāṁ</supplied>

--> sukr̥ta-karmma-phala-hetuḥ</l>

<l n="cd">satya-tapo-maya-mūrttir lloka-dvaya-sādhano dharmmaḥ</l>

</lg><!--

daba: For the lost beginning, Sircar conjecturally supplies a mangala symbol, followed by svasti| jayati śrī. This is unmetrical (hypermetrical to begin with, and the pattern .-. is not permitted in the third foot). He also notes that "some" suggest trilokanātha for Viṣṇu, but with homage to dharma in the second half of this verse and santaḥ (~saṁgha) in the next verse, the flavour seems to be Buddhist, so one would expect homage to the Buddha here. However, trilokanātha is metrically correct. Alternatively one could hypothesize sa lokanāthaḥ.

--><!--

amwb : one can find the expression satya-tapo-maya in Sursruta Saṁhitā 5.5.9 where it qualifies mantra ; the expression satyataponidhi is used to qualify Vyāsa in Kṣemandra's Bharatamañjari 19.1485

--><lg n="2" met="upagīti">

<l n="ab">tad-anu jita-da<choice><sic>n</sic><corr>m</corr></choice>bha-lobhā jaya<lb n="2" break="no"/><supplied reason="lost">nti</supplied> <supplied reason="lost">nit</supplied><unclear cert="low">ya</unclear><supplied reason="lost">ṁ</supplied> <unclear>pa</unclear>rah<supplied reason="lost">i</supplied>tārthāḥ</l><!--

amwb <supplied reason="lost">yapa</supplied><unclear>ra</unclear>h<supplied reason="lost">i</supplied>tārthāḥ

-->

<l n="cd">ni<supplied reason="lost">rmma</supplied>tsarāḥ sucaritaiḥ para-loka-jigīṣavaḥ santaḥ</l>

</lg><!--

daba: For danbha in l1, Sircar prints damta; he too emends to dambha, like Majumdar. This is probably a typo in Sircar.

--><!--

daba: At the beginning of l2, Sircar tentative restores jayanti cirāya. This is again unmetrical; the pattern .-. is not permitted in the fifth foot. Also, I don't think there is a full ya at the beginning; however, there does seem to be a subscript ya there. This would mean that the lost syllable preceding this is a heavy one, which in turn means that the one with the subscript ya must also be heavy to give us four morae for this foot. The size of the lacuna also indicates that there is probably only one akṣara lost between the expected nti and the one with the subscript ya. So e.g. jayanti nityaṁ would be metrically correct and would correspond to what I can see in the rubbing.

--><p>pr̥thivīṁ pr̥thur iva prathita-pratāpa-naya-śauryy<unclear>e</unclear> mahārājādhirāja-śrī-gopa<lb n="3" break="no"/><supplied reason="lost">can</supplied><unclear cert="low">dr</unclear><supplied reason="lost">e</supplied> praśāsati tad-anujña<choice><sic>ptāyāṁ</sic><corr>ptyā</corr></choice> puṇyottara-janapadādhyāsitāyā<supplied reason="omitted">ṁ</supplied> satata-dharmma-kriyā-varddhamānāyāṁ varddhamāna-bhuktau pūjyān varttamānopasthita<surplus>ta</surplus>-kārttākr̥tika-ku<lb n="4" break="no"/>mārāmātya-c<unclear>au</unclear>r<unclear>o</unclear>ddharaṇikoparikaudraṅgikāgrahārikaurṇasthānika-bhogapatika-viṣayapati-tad<choice><sic>a</sic><corr>ā</corr></choice>yuktaka-hiraṇya-sāmudāyika-pattalakāvasathika-devadroṇī-samva<lb n="5" break="no"/>ddhādīn vidhivat sampūjya vakkattaka-vīthī-samvaddhārddhakarakāgrahārīṇa-mahattara-himadattaḥ nirvr̥ta-vāṭakīya-mahattara-su<supplied reason="omitted">va</supplied>rṇṇayaśā<supplied reason="omitted">ḥ</supplied> kapistha-vāṭakāgrah<unclear>ā</unclear>rīṇa<lb n="6" break="no"/>-mahattara-dhanasvām<choice><sic>i</sic><corr>ī</corr></choice> vaṭavallakāgrahārīṇa-mahattara-ṣaṣṭh<choice><sic>i</sic><corr>ī</corr></choice>datta-śrīdattau koḍḍavīrāgrahārīṇa-bhaṭṭa-vāmanasvāmī

godhagrāmāgrahārīṇa-mah<choice><sic>i</sic><corr>ī</corr></choice>datta-rājya<lb n="7" break="no"/>dattau śālmali-vāṭakīya-jīvasvām<choice><sic>i</sic><corr>ī</corr></choice> vakkattakīya-khāḍgi-hariḥ madhu-vāṭakīya-khāḍgi-goIka<supplied reason="omitted">ḥ</supplied> khaṇḍajoṭikeya-khāḍgi-bhadranand<choice><sic>i</sic><corr>ī</corr></choice> vindhyapureya-vāhanāyaka<lb n="8" break="no"/>-hari-prabh<choice><sic>u</sic><corr>r̥</corr></choice>tayo vīthy-adhikaraṇañ ca vijñāpayanti<!--

daba: For pr̥thur iva in l2, Majumdar suggests pr̥thuvat while Sircar proposes pr̥thāv iva. While both improve the grammar, they are in my opinion overzealous.

--><!--

daba: For the beginning of l3, Majumdar feels "no hesitation in restoring" gopacandre. He notes that of the first character in this line, the lower portion seems to be a triangle with an acute angle pointing downward, i.e. it must be ca. This is not quite visible in the rubbing. He also says that the second character was a conjunct with a subscript r. This can be more or less made out in the rubbing; the bit above the r may also well be d (compare dra of audraṅgika in l4). Sircar accepts Majumdar's restoration, which is indeed plausible.

--></p>

<p>pūjya<surplus>ṁ</surplus>-mahārāja-vijayasenena vayam abhyarthitā<!--

amwb : do we introduce a tag p for the beginning of the discourse?

--> Icche 'ham eta<supplied reason="omitted">d</supplied>-vīthī-samvaddha-vettragarttā-grāme yuṣma<choice><sic>bhyo</sic><corr>bhir</corr></choice> ya<!--

amwb : Icche'ham is also present in BC63

amwb . I corrected yuṣmabhyo into yuṣmabhir see apparatus

--><lb n="9" break="no"/>thā-nyāy<choice><sic>a</sic><corr>e</corr></choice>nopakrīyāṣṭau kulyavāpāN mātā-pittror<!--

amwb I change here because it is noted kulyavāpān n with virama and then mātā see photo kulyavapaN virama mātāpitro l9.png

--> ātmanaś ca puṇyābhivr̥ddhaye kalpāntara-sthāyinyā pravr̥ttyā puttra-pauttrānvaya-bhogyatvena kauṇḍinya-sagottrāya <lb n="10"/>vāhvr̥ca-vatsasvāmin<choice><sic>o</sic><corr>e</corr></choice> pañca-mahā-yajña-pravarttanāya pratipā<choice><sic>v</sic><corr>d</corr></choice>ayitum iti<!--

daba: For iccheham in l8, Majumdar corrects to iccheyam, and Sircar to icchaye or icchāmi. I don't know what is wrong with icche [']ham, which Sircar prints in his main text - perhaps not standard but I'm sure I've seen this form. It's correct in class 6 ātmanepada.

--></p>

<p>yato 'smābhir asyābhyartha<supplied reason="omitted">na</supplied>yāvadhr̥tam asty <choice><sic>o</sic><corr>e</corr></choice>ṣo 'nukramaḥ Ubhaya-loka-vijigīṣu<unclear>bhi</unclear><lb n="11" break="no"/><supplied reason="lost">s</supplied> <unclear>s</unclear><supplied reason="lost">ā</supplied>dhubhiḥ kriyamāṇa-puṇya-skandheṣu<supplied reason="omitted">.</supplied> śrī-param<choice><sic>ā</sic><corr>a</corr></choice>-bhaṭṭāraka-p<choice><sic>a</sic><corr>ā</corr></choice>dānāṁ dharmma-ṣaḍ-bhāgo<supplied reason="omitted">pa</supplied>cayo 'smākam api pratipālayatāṁ kīrtti-śreyobhyāṁ yogaḥ<supplied reason="subaudible">.</supplied> Uktañ ca<!--

daba: Majumdar reads asyoṣo in l10, correcting to asyaiṣo. Sircar is correct in reading astyoṣo and emending to asty eṣo.

--><!--

daba: Majumdar and Sircar supply a visarga at the end of l10 and print an unclear (sā) in l11. Not that it matters much, but I think part of a subscript s (but nothing more) is visible at the beginning of l11, which means that the first character must have been ssā and there is no need to supply a visarga.

--></p>

<l n="a">yaḥ kriyāṁ dharmma-saṁ<lb n="12" break="no"/>yuktāṁ</l><!--

amwb : I disagree with Daba's reading -saṁyu<lb n="12" break="no"/>ktāṁ; for me the line 12 begins with yuktāṁ as Majumdar reads , I changed this and reported it in app see photo yuktaṁ manasā beginl12.png

-->

<l n="b">manasāpy abhinandati</l>

<l n="c"><supplied reason="omitted">va</supplied>rddhate sa yatheṣṭe<choice><sic><unclear>v</unclear></sic><corr>n</corr></choice>a</l>

<l n="d">śukla-pakṣa IvoḍurāṬ</l>

</lg><!--

daba: In l12 Majumdar reads yatheṣṭeva; his editor says the reading seems to be yadheṣṭe ca but the intent may have been yatheṣṭaṁ ca. Sircar adopts the editor's reading and emendation. I see no better solution, but this is quite lame.

--><!--

daba: The halanta Ṭ in l12 (the first I've ever come across) seems no different from a regular ṭa, though there may be some sort of sign below it.

--><p>tat sampadyatām asyābhiprāya Ity asma<choice><sic>n</sic><corr>d</corr></choice>-vāra-kr̥tair anena dattaka-d<choice><sic>i</sic><corr>ī</corr></choice>nārā<supplied reason="omitted">n</supplied> vīthyāṁ samvibhajyāsma<choice><sic>n</sic><corr>d</corr></choice>-vettra<lb n="13" break="no"/>garttā-grāme 'ṣṭābhyaḥ kulyavāpebhyo yathocitaṁ dānaṁ ta<unclear>d</unclear>-vīthī-samudaya Eva pranāryya<!--

amwb : I read pranāryya as Majumdar and changed Daba's reading see photo pranāryya l13.png

--> voḍhavyam ity avacūrṇyāṣṭau kulya-vāpā mahārāja-vijayasenasya datt<choice><sic>o</sic><corr>ā</corr></choice>ḥ<supplied reason="subaudible">.</supplied> <lb n="14"/><supplied reason="lost">anenā</supplied>pi rājñāsmai kauṇḍinya-sagottrāya vāhvr̥ca-vatsasvāmine pañca-mahā-yajña-pravarttanāya tāmra-p<surplus>r</surplus>aṭṭena pratipāditā<supplied reason="omitted">ḥ</supplied><supplied reason="omitted">.</supplied></p><!--

daba: For pranāyya(ṁ) in l13, Majumdar reads pranāryya and emends to praṇāyya. I follow Sircar's reading, who then emends to prāṇāyyaṁ, "honestly" (MW: proper, fit, suited).

--><p>Atha <surplus>ca</surplus> caiṣāṁ <sic>caturṣu</sic> dikṣu sīmā bhavanti pū<lb n="15" break="no"/><supplied reason="lost">rvvasyāṁ di</supplied>śi godha-grāma sīmā<supplied reason="subaudible">.</supplied> <sic>dakṣiṇyāṁ</sic> godha-grām<choice><sic>ā</sic><corr>a</corr></choice> Eva<supplied reason="subaudible">.</supplied> Uttarasyāṁ vaṭavallakāgrahāra sīmā<supplied reason="subaudible">.</supplied> paścimasyāṁ diśi Arddhena Āmra-garttikā sīmā kīlakāś cāttra kama<unclear>lā</unclear><pb n="1v" break="no"/><lb n="16" break="no"/>kṣa-mālāṅkitā<supplied reason="omitted">ś</supplied> caturṣu<!--

amwb : maybe add sic as in line 14

--> dikṣu nyastā bhavanty<supplied reason="subaudible">.</supplied> evam eṣāṁ kr̥ta-sīmāṅkānām asya brāhmaṇasya<!--

amwb : here sircar notes that it is the only instance of the use of the sign ba

--> pañca-mahā-yajña-pravarttanenopabhuñjānasya na <lb n="17"/>kenacid etad-va<sic>n</sic>śa-jenānyatamena vā svalp<choice><sic>a</sic><corr>ā</corr></choice>py āvādhā hasta-prakṣepo vā k<choice><sic>a</sic><corr>ā</corr></choice>ryyaḥ<supplied reason="subaudible">.</supplied> Evam avadhr̥te yo 'tha karoti sa vadhyaḥ pañcabhir mma<lb n="18" break="no"/>hā-pātakaiḥ sopapātakaiḥ saṁyuktaḥ syād<supplied reason="subaudible">.</supplied> api ca</p><!--

daba: Neither Majumdar nor Sircar note that there is an indent before kṣa in l16. The corner is broken off, and may have been rounded or left blank to begin with. This line begins about 1 character further in than the second line on this face, and that in turn begins 2-3 characters further in than the next three lines. Thus the reading kamalākṣa may be correct, but it's also possible that another character or two have been lost at the beginning of this line, and lā at the end of the previous page is far from certain.

--><lg n="4" met="anuṣṭubh">

<l n="a">nāsya devā na pitaro</l>

<l n="b">haviḥ piṇḍaṁ samāpnuyuḥ</l>

<l n="c"><unclear>chi</unclear>nna-mastakavat tālaḥ</l>

<l n="d">Apra<lb n="19" break="no"/>tiṣṭhaḥ patiṣyati</l>

</lg><!--

daba: For mastakavat tālaḥ in l18, Sircar reads mastakavettālaḥ and emends to mastaka-vetālaḥ (then hypercorrects to °vetālo hy). I see no e mātrā over the va. The characters masta are not clear in the facsimile and there may actually be an e mātrā over the presumed sta. I don't see why a palm tree would become apratiṣṭha if its head were cut off, but a vetāla seems even more bizarre. I could perhaps imagine reading mūlakavat, though this is not very likely; the second character does not look like la.

--><p>bhūmi-dānāpaharaṇa-pratipālana-guṇa-do<choice><sic>s</sic><corr>ṣ</corr></choice>a-vyañjakāḥ Ārṣāḥ ślokā bhavanti</p>

<l n="a">ṣaṣṭiṁ varṣa-sahasrāṇi</l>

<l n="b"><lb n="20"/>svargge nandati bhūmi-daḥ</l>

<l n="c">Ākṣeptā cānumantā ca</l>

<l n="d">tāny eva narake vaseT</l>

</lg>

<l n="a">Āsphoṭayanti pitaraḥ</l>

<l n="b">pravalganti pitāmahāḥ</l>

<l n="c">bhūmi-do <lb n="21"/>'sma<choice><sic>n</sic><corr>t</corr></choice>-kule jātaḥ</l>

<l n="d">sa naḥ santārayiṣyati</l>

</lg>

<l n="a">yat kiñci<choice><sic>n</sic><corr>t</corr></choice> kurute pāpaṁ</l>

<l n="b">naro lobha-sam<choice><sic>ā</sic><corr>a</corr></choice>nvitaḥ</l>

<l n="c">Api go-carmma-māttreṇa</l>

<l n="d">bhūmi-dānena śudhyati</l>

</lg>

<l n="a">pū<lb n="22" break="no"/>rvva-dattāṁ dvijātibhyo</l>

<l n="b">yat<unclear>n</unclear>ād rakṣa yudhiṣṭhira</l>

<l n="c">bhūmiṁ bhūmi<supplied reason="omitted">ma</supplied>tāṁ śreṣṭha</l>

<l n="d">dānāc chreyo 'nupālanaṁ</l><!--

daba: In l22 I follow Majumdar and Sircar's restoration bhūmimatāṁ; other solutions would also be conceivable.

--></lg>

<l n="a">Iyaṁ rāja-śatair ddattā</l>

<l n="b">dīyate ca punaḥ <lb n="23"/>punaḥ</l>

<l n="c">yasya yasya yadā bhūmis</l>

<l n="d">tasya tasya tadā phalaṁ</l>

</lg>

<l n="a">taḍit-taraṅga-vahulāṁ</l>

<l n="b">śriyaṁ matvā ca marttyānāṁ</l>

<l n="c">na dharmma-sthitaya<lb n="24" break="no"/>s sadbhiḥ</l>

<l n="d">yuktā loke vilopituM</l><!--

daba: marttyānāṁ in l23 is unmetrical, as noted by Sircar. The character ca is smudged but plausible; ma is clear; rttya is quite clear tough its ā mātrā is not; nāṁ is unclear. Could this be marttyakāṁ? Or a completely different word in place of ca marttyānāṁ?

--><!--

daba: There is a halanta M in l24 (though earlier, there have been anusvāras at verse ends). It is a simplified full-size character looking sort of like a la or an exaggerated tilde.

--></lg>

<p><abbr>ku</abbr> <num value="8">8</num><supplied reason="subaudible">.</supplied> <space quantity="2" unit="character"/> dūtakaḥ śubhadatto<supplied reason="subaudible">.</supplied> likhitaṁ sāndhivigrahika-bhogacandreṇa<supplied reason="subaudible">.</supplied> <lb n="25"/>tāpitaṁ pustapāla-jayadāsena<supplied reason="subaudible">.</supplied> saṁvva<choice><sic>D</sic><corr>T</corr></choice> <num value="3">3</num> <space type="defect" quantity="7" unit="character"/> śrāva di <num value="27">20 7</num><!--

daba: In line 24 the text from śubhadatto to the end of the next line seems to be of slightly smaller, more condensed and less neat characters. It was presumably written afterward in a space left blank. Some of it may even have been written over an erased earlier portion - there seem to be some traces in the space before dūtakaḥ, and the word dūtakaḥ itself seems like {×dū×}dūta{×ta×}kaḥ, i.e. with deleted characters.

--><!--

daba: In l25 Majumdar reads saṁvvad, correcting to saṁvat. I'm not sure about the subscript v, which may be just some damage. Sircar reads saṁvva 33; I hate to contradict Sircar, but that character does not look like 30 to me - I think it's a halanta T with some damage.

--><!--

daba: For the second digit of the day, Sircar reads 4 and says in his note that Majumdar reads 4, which is probably a typo for 7, which is Majumdar's reading. Sircar refers to EI 24 p153, text line 46 for the use of this symbol for 4. EI24 p153 is the Cuttack Museum Plates of Mādhavavarman (incidentally edited by N G Majumdar and published after his death); the symbol there has some resemblance to the one here, but the two are far from identical. I accept Majumdar's original interpretation as 7.

--></p> </div>

</div>

<rdg source="bib:Sircar1965_02"><supplied reason="lost"><num value="1">1</num> svasti</supplied><supplied reason="lost">.</supplied><supplied reason="lost">jayati śrīlo</supplied></rdg>

<rdg source="bib:Chhabra1953-1954_01"><supplied reason="lost">siddhaM jayati tri°</supplied></rdg>

<note><bibl><ptr target="bib:Chhabra1953-1954_01"/><citedRange unit="note">2</citedRange><citedRange unit="page">163</citedRange></bibl> suggests this restoration after a discussion about the obedience of the charter. For him, the deity invoked is Viṣṇu as Cakrapuruṣa.</note>

</app>

<lem source="bib:Sircar1965_02 bib:Balogh+al2019_01"><supplied reason="lost">lo</supplied>ka-nāthaḥ</lem>

<rdg source="bib:Majumdar1935-1936_02"><unclear>lo</unclear>ka-nāthaḥ</rdg>

<note><bibl><ptr target="bib:Sircar1965_02"/></bibl> suggests reading <foreign>loka-nātho</foreign>.</note>

</app>

<note>I insert and follow the restoration suggested in a note by <bibl><ptr target="bib:Balogh+al2019_01"/></bibl> <foreign>jayanti nityaṁ</foreign> which is metrically correct and fits in with what remains legible.</note>

</app>

<!--<app loc="2">

<lem source="bib:Balogh+al2019_01">°h<supplied reason="lost">i</supplied>tārthāḥ</lem><!-\- amwb : I agree with Balogh -\->

<rdg source="bib:Majumdar1935-1936_02 bib:Sircar1965_02">°hitārthāḥ</rdg>

</app>-->

<!-- <app loc="2">

<lem source="bib:Majumdar1935-1936_02 bib:Sircar1965_02">ni<supplied reason="lost">rmma</supplied>tsarāḥ</lem><!-\-

amwb : there is a gap at the place where rmma could be written, so it is clearly lost So choose Majumdar and Sircar

-\->

<rdg source="bib:Balogh+al2019_01">ni<unclear>rmma</unclear>tsarāḥ</rdg>

</app>-->

<lem source="bib:Majumdar1935-1936_02 bib:Sircar1965_02">sucaritaiḥ</lem>

<rdg source="bib:Balogh+al2019_01">sucaritaḥ</rdg>

</app>

<note><bibl><ptr target="bib:Majumdar1935-1936_02"/></bibl> suggests reading <foreign>pr̥thuvat</foreign>, while <bibl><ptr target="bib:Sircar1965_02"/></bibl> suggests reading <foreign>pr̥thāviva</foreign>. </note>

</app>

<!-- <app loc="2">

<lem source="bib:Balogh+al2019_01">-śauryy<unclear>e</unclear></lem>

<rdg source="bib:Majumdar1935-1936_02">-śauryy<supplied reason="lost">e</supplied></rdg><!-\-

amwb I agree with Majumdar

-\->

</app>-->

<rdg source="bib:Sircar1965_02">°<supplied reason="lost">candre</supplied></rdg>

<note><bibl><ptr target="bib:Majumdar1935-1936_02"/><citedRange unit="page">157</citedRange></bibl> explains how he restores <foreign>gopacandre</foreign> without hesitation. </note>

</app>

<!-- <app loc="3">

<lem>-anujña<choice><sic>ptāyāṁ</sic><corr>ptyā</corr></choice></lem>

<rdg source="bib:Majumdar1935-1936_02 bib:Sircar1965_02 bib:Balogh+al2019_01">-anujñaptāyāṁ</rdg>

</app>-->

<!--amwb :

<lem>-kā<unclear>rttākr̥tika</unclear>-</lem>

<rdg source="bib:Majumdar1935-1936_02 bib:Sircar1965_02 bib:Balogh+al2019_01">-kārttākr̥tika-</rdg>

</app>-->

<!--<app loc="4">

<rdg source="bib:Majumdar1935-1936_02">-c<supplied reason="lost">au</supplied>r<unclear>o</unclear>ddha°</rdg><!-\-

amwb : agree with this reading

-\->

<rdg source="bib:Sircar1965_02"><supplied reason="lost">cauro</supplied>ddha°</rdg>

</app>-->

<!-- <app loc="4">

<lem source="bib:Majumdar1935-1936_02 bib:Balogh+al2019_01">tad<choice><sic>a</sic><corr>ā</corr></choice>yuktaka-</lem>

<rdg source="bib:Sircar1965_02">tadā<supplied reason="subaudible">.</supplied> yuktaka-</rdg>

</app>-->

<!-- <app loc="4">

<lem source="bib:Balogh+al2019_01">°droṇī-samva</lem>

<rdg source="bib:Majumdar1935-1936_02 bib:Sircar1965_02">°droṇī-sam<choice><sic>v</sic><corr>b</corr></choice>a</rdg>

<!-\- amwb : my own reading :

<lem>°<unclear>droṇī-samva</unclear></lem>

-\->

</app>-->

<!-- amwb : my own reading

<lem><unclear>°ddhā</unclear>dīn vidhi°</lem>

<rdg source="bib:Majumdar1935-1936_02 bib:Sircar1965_02 bib:Balogh+al2019_01">°ddhādīn vidhi°</rdg>

</app>-->

<!-- <app loc="5">

<lem source="bib:Balogh+al2019_01">-samvaddhārddha°</lem>

<rdg source="bib:Majumdar1935-1936_02 bib:Sircar1965_02">-sam<choice><sic>v</sic><corr>b</corr></choice>addhārddha°</rdg>

</app>-->

<!-- <app loc="5">

<lem source="bib:Majumdar1935-1936_02 bib:Balogh+al2019_01">-mahattara-himadattaḥ</lem><!-\-

amwb : agree with this reading

-\->

<rdg source="bib:Sircar1965_02">-mahattaraḥ himadattaḥ</rdg>

</app>-->

<!-- <app loc="5">

<lem source="bib:Balogh+al2019_01">-vāṭakāgrah<unclear>ā</unclear>rīṇa</lem>

<rdg source="bib:Majumdar1935-1936_02 bib:Sircar1965_02">-vāṭakāgrah<supplied reason="lost">ā</supplied>rīṇa</rdg><!-\- amwb:

impossible to see if there was a mark for the long a

-\->

</app>-->

<lem>-ṣaṣṭh<choice><sic>i</sic><corr>ī</corr></choice>datta-</lem>

<rdg source="bib:Majumdar1935-1936_02 bib:Sircar1965_02 bib:Balogh+al2019_01">-ṣaṣṭhidatta-</rdg>

</app>

<lem>vāmanasvāmī</lem>

<rdg source="bib:Majumdar1935-1936_02 bib:Sircar1965_02 bib:Balogh+al2019_01">vāmanasvām<choice><sic>i</sic><corr>ī</corr></choice></rdg>

</app>

<lem>-mah<choice><sic>i</sic><corr>ī</corr></choice>datta-</lem>

<rdg source="bib:Majumdar1935-1936_02 bib:Sircar1965_02 bib:Balogh+al2019_01">-mahidatta-</rdg>

</app>

<!-- <app loc="8">

<lem>-mahārāja-<unclear>vi</unclear>jayasenena</lem><!-\-

amwb search in EDG how noting that there is a scribal correction the vi is retraced

-\->

<rdg source="bib:Majumdar1935-1936_02 bib:Sircar1965_02 bib:Balogh+al2019_01">-mahārāja-vijayasenena</rdg>

</app>-->

<lem source="bib:Balogh+al2019_01 bib:Sircar1965_02">Icche 'ham </lem><!--

amwb : agree with this reading and this understanding of the text

-->

<rdg source="bib:Majumdar1935-1936_02">Icche <choice><sic>'h</sic><corr>y</corr></choice>am </rdg>

<note>See also <ref target="DHARMA_INSBengalCharters00063.xml">Mastakaśvabhra Plate of the time of Pradyumnabandhu, year 5</ref> line 3.</note>

</app>

<!-- <app loc="8">

<lem source="bib:Balogh+al2019_01">-samvaddha-</lem>

<rdg source="bib:Majumdar1935-1936_02">-sam<choice><sic>v</sic><corr>b</corr></choice>addha-</rdg>

<rdg source="bib:Sircar1965_02">-sambaddha-</rdg>

</app>-->

<lem>yuṣma<choice><sic>bhyo</sic><corr>bhir</corr></choice></lem>

<rdg source="bib:Majumdar1935-1936_02 bib:Sircar1965_02 bib:Balogh+al2019_01">yuṣmabhyo</rdg>

<note>As one can observe in the <ref target="DHARMA_INSBengalCharters00063.xml">Mastakaśvabhra Grant of the time of Pradyumnabandhu, year 5</ref> line 3, the absolutive <foreign>upakrīya</foreign> is constructed with the instrumental case. Here I suggest correcting this <foreign>yuṣmabhyo</foreign> which is grammaticcaly incorrect into <foreign>yuṣmabhir</foreign> in order to have the instrumental case expected. </note>

</app>

<lem>kulyavāpāN mātā-</lem>

<rdg source="bib:Majumdar1935-1936_02 bib:Sircar1965_02 bib:Balogh+al2019_01">kulyavāpān mātā-</rdg>

</app>

<!-- <app loc="10">

<lem source="bib:Balogh+al2019_01">vāhvr̥ca</lem>

</app>-->

<lem source="bib:Sircar1965_02 bib:Balogh+al2019_01">°tam asty <choice><sic>o</sic><corr>e</corr></choice>ṣo</lem><!--

amwb the t is visible I agree with this reading

-->

</app>

<!--<app loc="10">

<lem source="bib:Balogh+al2019_01">vijigīṣu<unclear>bhi</unclear><lb

n="11" break="no"/><supplied reason="lost">s</supplied> <unclear>s</unclear><supplied reason="lost">ā</supplied>dhubhiḥ</lem><!-\-

amwb : I agree with this reading

-\->

<rdg source="bib:Majumdar1935-1936_02">vijigīṣu<supplied reason="lost">bhi</supplied><supplied reason="omitted">ḥ</supplied> <lb n="11"/><supplied reason="lost">sā</supplied>dhubhiḥ</rdg>

<rdg source="bib:Sircar1965_02">vijigīṣubhi<supplied reason="omitted">ḥ</supplied> <lb n="11"/><supplied reason="lost">sā</supplied>dhubhiḥ</rdg>

</app>-->

<lem source="bib:Sircar1965_02 bib:Balogh+al2019_01">-bhāgo<supplied reason="omitted">pa</supplied>cayo</lem><!--

amwb : I translated with this correction

-->

<rdg source="bib:Majumdar1935-1936_02">-bhāgo ca yo</rdg>

</app>

<lem source="bib:Majumdar1935-1936_02 bib:Sircar1965_02">saṁ<lb n="12" break="no"/>yuktāṁ</lem><!--

amwb : I agree with this reading

-->

<rdg source="bib:Balogh+al2019_01">saṁyu<lb n="12" break="no"/>ktāṁ</rdg>

</app>

<lem>yatheṣṭe<choice><sic><unclear>v</unclear></sic><corr>n</corr></choice>a</lem>

<rdg source="bib:Balogh+al2019_01">yadheṣṭe<choice><unclear>c</unclear><unclear>v</unclear></choice>a</rdg>

<rdg source="bib:Majumdar1935-1936_02">yatheṣṭeva</rdg>

<rdg source="bib:Sircar1965_02">yadheṣṭe ca</rdg>

<note><bibl><ptr target="bib:Sircar1965_02"/></bibl> suggests reading <foreign>yatheṣṭaṁ</foreign>. By comparison of this verse with the verse numbered 151 within the Stanzas on Bhūmidāna listed by Sircar <supplied reason="explanation">see <bibl><ptr target="bib:Sircar1965_03"/><citedRange unit="appendix">II</citedRange><citedRange unit="page">170-200</citedRange></bibl></supplied>, I suggest reading <foreign>yatheṣṭena</foreign>.</note>

</app>

<lem>-d<choice><sic>i</sic><corr>ī</corr></choice>nārā<supplied reason="omitted">n</supplied> vīthyāṁ</lem>

<rdg source="bib:Majumdar1935-1936_02 bib:Balogh+al2019_01">-dīnārā<supplied reason="omitted">n</supplied> vīthyāṁ</rdg><!--

amwb here the i seems to be short If so, i added a choice sic corr see photo dattakadinārāvīthyā l12.png

-->

<rdg source="bib:Sircar1965_02">-dīnārā<supplied reason="omitted">n</supplied> <supplied reason="omitted">saṁgṛhya</supplied> vīthyāṁ</rdg>

</app>

<lem source="bib:Majumdar1935-1936_02 bib:Balogh+al2019_01">°jyāsma<choice><sic>n</sic><corr>d</corr></choice>-vettra</lem><!--

amwb agree with this reading

-->

<rdg source="bib:Sircar1965_02">jyāsmad-vettra</rdg>

</app>

<!-- <app loc="13">

<lem source="bib:Majumdar1935-1936_02 bib:Balogh+al2019_01">ta<unclear>d</unclear>-vīthī-</lem><!-\-

amwb agree with this reading

-\->

</app>-->

<lem source="bib:Majumdar1935-1936_02">pranāryya</lem><!-- amwb : agree with Majumdar's reading

-->

<rdg source="bib:Sircar1965_02">pranāyyaṁ</rdg>

<rdg source="bib:Balogh+al2019_01">pranāyya<unclear>ṁ</unclear></rdg>

<note><bibl><ptr target="bib:Majumdar1935-1936_02"/></bibl> suggests reading <foreign>praṇāyya</foreign>, while <bibl><ptr target="bib:Sircar1965_02"/></bibl> suggests understanding <foreign>prāṇāyyaṁ</foreign> <q>honestly</q>.</note>

</app>

<!-- <app loc="13">

</app>-->

<lem source="bib:Sircar1965_02 bib:Balogh+al2019_01"><supplied reason="lost">anenā</supplied>pi</lem><!--

amwb : I follow this emendation in my translation

-->

<note><bibl><ptr target="bib:Majumdar1935-1936_02"/></bibl> suggests restoring the gap by <foreign>anenāpi</foreign> and <bibl><ptr target="bib:Sircar1965_02"/></bibl> follows him by including it in its edition.</note>

</app>

<!-- <app loc="14">

<lem source="bib:Balogh+al2019_01">vāhvr̥ca-</lem>

</app>-->

<lem source="bib:Majumdar1935-1936_02 bib:Balogh+al2019_01">pañca-mahā-yajña-</lem><!--

amwb the jña is very clear so I think Sircar's reading is a typo

-->

<rdg source="bib:Sircar1965_02">pañca-mahā-yaśa-</rdg><!--

amwb : maybe a typo because in line 16, Sircar notes yajña. If he had really read yaśa here, he would suggest a correction

-->

</app>

<lem source="bib:Majumdar1935-1936_02 bib:Sircar1965_02 bib:Balogh+al2019_01"><sic>caturṣu</sic> dikṣu</lem>

<note><bibl><ptr target="bib:Majumdar1935-1936_02"/></bibl> suggests reading <foreign>catur-dikṣu</foreign> or <foreign>catasṛṣu dikṣu</foreign>, while <bibl><ptr target="bib:Sircar1965_02"/></bibl> only suggests the second reading.</note>

</app>

<!--<app loc="14">

<lem source="bib:Majumdar1935-1936_02 bib:Balogh+al2019_01">bhavanti pū</lem><!-\-

amwb bhavanti pū is quite erased but I can decipher it thanks the previous editions

-\->

<rdg source="bib:Sircar1965_02">bhavanti<supplied reason="subaudible">.</supplied> pū</rdg>

</app>-->

<!--<app loc="15">

<lem source="bib:Sircar1965_02 bib:Balogh+al2019_01"><supplied reason="lost">rvvasyāṁ di</supplied>śi</lem><!-\-

amwb : the plate is broken so it is really lost

-\->

<rdg source="bib:Majumdar1935-1936_02"><unclear>rvvasyāṁ di</unclear>śi</rdg>

</app>-->

<!--<app loc="15">

<lem source="bib:Sircar1965_02 bib:Balogh+al2019_01">sīmā<supplied reason="subaudible">.</supplied> <sic>dakṣiṇyāṁ</sic></lem>

<rdg source="bib:Majumdar1935-1936_02">sīmā dakṣi<choice><sic>ṇyāṁ</sic><corr>ṇasyāṁ</corr></choice></rdg>

</app>-->

<rdg source="bib:Sircar1965_02 bib:Balogh+al2019_01"><unclear>e</unclear>va<supplied reason="subaudible">.</supplied></rdg><!--

amwb : the e is clear

-->

</app>

<lem source="bib:Sircar1965_02 bib:Balogh+al2019_01">sīmā<supplied reason="subaudible">.</supplied> paścimasyāṁ</lem>

<rdg source="bib:Majumdar1935-1936_02">sīmā paści<choice><sic>masyā</sic><corr>māyā</corr></choice>ṁ</rdg>

</app>

<!-- <app loc="15">

<lem source="bib:Majumdar1935-1936_02 bib:Balogh+al2019_01">Āmra-garttikā sīmā</lem>

<rdg source="bib:Sircar1965_02">Āmra-garttikā sīmā<supplied reason="subaudible">.</supplied></rdg>

</app>-->

<!-- <app loc="15">

<lem source="bib:Balogh+al2019_01">kama<unclear>lā</unclear></lem><!-\-

amwb : for the lā of kamalā is totally erased

-\->

</app>-->

<lem source="bib:Majumdar1935-1936_02 bib:Balogh+al2019_01">-mālāṅkitā<supplied reason="omitted">ś</supplied> ca</lem><!--

amwb I agree with this sandhi

-->

<rdg source="bib:Sircar1965_02">-mālāṅkitā<supplied reason="omitted">ḥ</supplied> ca</rdg>

</app>

<lem source="bib:Majumdar1935-1936_02 bib:Balogh+al2019_01">caturṣu dikṣu</lem>

<note>As in line 14, <bibl><ptr target="bib:Majumdar1935-1936_02"/></bibl> suggests reading <foreign>catur-dikṣu</foreign> or <foreign>catasṛṣu dikṣu</foreign>, while <bibl><ptr target="bib:Sircar1965_02"/></bibl> only suggests the second reading.</note>

</app>

<!-- <app loc="16">

<lem source="bib:Sircar1965_02 bib:Balogh+al2019_01">bhavanty<supplied reason="subaudible">.</supplied> evam</lem>

<rdg source="bib:Majumdar1935-1936_02">bhavanty evam</rdg>

</app>-->

<lem source="bib:Majumdar1935-1936_02 bib:Balogh+al2019_01">°pabhuñjānasya</lem><!--

amwb ñj is very clear I think that Sircar's reading is a typo

-->

<rdg source="bib:Sircar1965_02">°pabhuñcānasya</rdg><!--

amwb : again a typo?

-->

</app>

<!-- <app loc="17">

<lem source="bib:Balogh+al2019_01">-va<sic>n</sic>śa-</lem><!-\-

amwb : maybe add the regularisation?

-\->

</app>-->

<!--<app loc="17">

<lem source="bib:Balogh+al2019_01">āvādhā</lem>

</app>-->

<lem source="bib:Majumdar1935-1936_02 bib:Balogh+al2019_01">hasta-prakṣepo</lem>

<rdg source="bib:Sircar1965_02">hastakṣepo</rdg><!--

amwb the pra is clearly here again a typo in the edition ???

-->

</app>

<lem>k<choice><sic>a</sic><corr>ā</corr></choice>ryyaḥ</lem>

<rdg source="bib:Balogh+al2019_01">k<unclear>ā</unclear>ryyaḥ</rdg><!--

amwb : for me there is no trace of something to mark the long a so I will edit k<choice><sic>a</sic><corr>ā</corr></choice>ryyaḥ

-->

<rdg source="bib:Majumdar1935-1936_02 bib:Sircar1965_02">k<supplied reason="lost">ā</supplied>ryyaḥ</rdg>

</app>

<!-- amwb : my own reading, the space is due to the roughness of the plate. Majumbar mentions this problem in his introduction p.156

<lem>°ryyaḥ<supplied reason="subaudible">.</supplied> Eva<space type="defect" unit="character" quantity="1"/>m ava</lem><!-\-

amwb : a space or da or ṭa the photo is not clear... see

-\->

<rdg source="bib:Majumdar1935-1936_02 bib:Sircar1965_02 bib:Balogh+al2019_01">°ryyaḥ<supplied reason="subaudible">.</supplied> Evam ava</rdg>

</app>

<lem>yo<space type="defect" unit="character" quantity="1"/>'tha karoti</lem>

</app>-->

<rdg source="bib:Balogh+al2019_01">syād<supplied reason="subaudible">.</supplied> Api ca</rdg><!--

amwb :

As the two previous editors noted syādapi, after examination of the plate it is written °da° (not °d A° and not °D A°)

-->

<note><bibl><ptr target="bib:Sircar1965_02"/></bibl> suggest reading <foreign>syāt<supplied reason="subaudible">.</supplied> Api ca</foreign>. </note>

</app>

<!--amwb : the spaces are due to the roughness of the plate. Majumbar mentions this problem in his introduction p.156

<lem>sa<space type="defect" unit="character" quantity="2"/>māpnuyuḥ</lem>

<rdg source="bib:Majumdar1935-1936_02 bib:Sircar1965_02 bib:Balogh+al2019_01">samāpnuyuḥ</rdg>

</app>

-->

<!-- amwb : the space is due to the roughness of the plate. Majumbar mentions this problem in his introduction p.156

<lem>bhū<space type="defect" unit="character" quantity="1"/>mi-dānāpa°</lem>

<rdg source="bib:Majumdar1935-1936_02 bib:Sircar1965_02 bib:Balogh+al2019_01">bhūmi-dānāpa°</rdg>

</app>-->

<!-- amwb : the space seems to mark the end of the sentence

<lem>vaseT<space type="defect" unit="character" quantity="1"/></lem>

<rdg source="bib:Majumdar1935-1936_02 bib:Sircar1965_02 bib:Balogh+al2019_01">vaseT</rdg>

</app>-->

<lem source="bib:Majumdar1935-1936_02 bib:Balogh+al2019_01">Āsphoṭayanti</lem>

<rdg source="bib:Sircar1965_02">Āskoṭayanti</rdg>

</app>

<!-- <app loc="22">

<lem source="bib:Balogh+al2019_01">yat<unclear>n</unclear>ād</lem><!-\-

amwb I read yatkādrakṣa so I will edit yat<choice><sic>k</sic><corr>n</corr></choice>ād

-\->

</app>-->

<!-- amwb the space is due to the roughness of the plate. Majumbar mentions this problem in his introduction p.156

<rdg source="bib:Majumdar1935-1936_02 bib:Sircar1965_02 bib:Balogh+al2019_01">dānāc chre°</rdg>

</app>

-->

<lem source="bib:Majumdar1935-1936_02 bib:Balogh+al2019_01">chreyo 'nupālanaṁ</lem>

<rdg source="bib:Sircar1965_02">chreyo 'nupālana<choice><sic>ṁ</sic><corr>M</corr></choice></rdg>

</app>

<!--amwb the space is due to the roughness of the plate. Majumbar mentions this problem in his introduction p.156

<lem>punaḥ <space type="defect" unit="character" quantity="1"/></lem>

<rdg source="bib:Majumdar1935-1936_02 bib:Sircar1965_02 bib:Balogh+al2019_01">punaḥ</rdg>

</app>-->

<!-- <app loc="23">

<lem source="bib:Majumdar1935-1936_02 bib:Balogh+al2019_01">phalaṁ</lem>

<rdg source="bib:Sircar1965_02">phala<choice><sic>ṁ</sic><corr>M</corr></choice></rdg>

</app>

<lem source="bib:Balogh+al2019_01">-vahulāṁ</lem>

<rdg source="bib:Majumdar1935-1936_02 bib:Sircar1965_02">-<choice><sic>v</sic><corr>b</corr></choice>ahulāṁ</rdg>

</app>-->

<!-- <app loc="23">

<lem source="bib:Majumdar1935-1936_02 bib:Balogh+al2019_01">marttyānāṁ</lem>

<rdg source="bib:Sircar1965_02">marttyānā<choice><sic>ṁ</sic><corr>M</corr></choice></rdg>

</app>-->

<lem source="bib:Balogh+al2019_01">sadbhiḥ yu°</lem>

<rdg source="bib:Majumdar1935-1936_02 bib:Sircar1965_02">sadbhi<choice><sic>ḥ</sic><corr>r</corr></choice> yu°</rdg>

<note>The <foreign>visarga</foreign> is justified by the fact that there is a gap before <foreign>yu</foreign> due to the roughness of the plate. So as the scribe could not continue his writing he notes a <foreign>visarga</foreign> instead of reported the good sandhi <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>r</foreign> above the <foreign>yu</foreign></supplied> because of the gap.</note>

</app>

<!--<app loc="24">

<lem source="bib:Sircar1965_02 bib:Balogh+al2019_01"><num value="8">8</num><supplied reason="subaudible">.</supplied> <space quantity="2" unit="character"/> dūtakaḥ</lem>

<rdg source="bib:Majumdar1935-1936_02"><num value="8">8</num> dūtakaḥ</rdg>

</app>-->

<!--<app loc="24">

<lem source="bib:Balogh+al2019_01">śubhadatto<supplied reason="subaudible">.</supplied> likhitaṁ</lem>

<rdg source="bib:Majumdar1935-1936_02 bib:Sircar1965_02">śubhadatto likhitaṁ</rdg>

</app>-->

<lem>saṁvva<choice><sic>D</sic><corr>T</corr></choice></lem>

<rdg source="bib:Balogh+al2019_01">samv<surplus><unclear>v</unclear></surplus>a<unclear>T</unclear></rdg><!--

amwb I disagree and see rather a final d as Majumdar and Sircar

-->

</app>

<lem><num value="3">3</num> <space type="defect" quantity="7" unit="character"/> śrāva di</lem>

<rdg source="bib:Balogh+al2019_01"><num value="3">3</num> <space quantity="6" unit="character"/> śrāva di</rdg>

<rdg source="bib:Majumdar1935-1936_02 bib:Sircar1965_02">śrāva di</rdg>

</app>

</listApp>

</div>

<ab>Of the <foreign>mahārāja</foreign> Vijayasena</ab>

</div>

<head xml:lang="eng">Plate</head>

<p n="1" rend="stanza"><supplied reason="lost">The</supplied> Lord of the Worlds <supplied reason="explanation">Lokanātha</supplied><note>

<bibl><ptr target="bib:Chhabra1953-1954_01"/></bibl> discusses the identity of god glorified here. According to him, the buddhist obedience of the plate maintained by <bibl><ptr target="bib:Majumdar1935-1936_02"/></bibl> is questionable and he prefers to attribute a brahmanical background to the donation. His arguments are :

<list>

<item>the mention of the five great sacrifices</item>

<item>the identity of the recipient : a Brahmin of the Kauṇḍinya <foreign>gotra</foreign>, belonging to the Bāhvṛca <foreign>śākha</foreign> of the <title>Ṛgveda</title></item>

<item>Lokanātha is not only an epithet to designate Buddha, but can also refer to the gods Brahmā, Viṣṇu and Śiva</item>

<item>the inconsistency between the paratext and the content of the plate : on one hand, a Buddhistic invocation and a Buddhistic seal and on the other hand, a brahmanical record </item>

</list>

He interprets the <foreign>cakra</foreign> on the seal as the famous attribute of Viṣṇu and the whole seal with the two armed-deity as a representation of Cakrapuruṣa. As he found the name Lokanātha within the list of Viṣṇu's names from the <title>Anuśāsanaparvan</title> of the <title>Mahābhārata</title>, he suggests that the glorified deity should be Viṣṇu. He also quoted the Ahirbudhnya Saṃhita as a source in which one can find eulogy of this form of Viṣṇu. After checking the content of this text from Schrader's book <supplied reason="explanation"><title>Introduction to the Pāñcarātra and the Ahirbudhnya Saṃhitā</title></supplied>, I understand that Viṣṇu as Cakrapuruṣa in this text is a sixteen-armed deity. So it could be an argument for the identification of the obedience for our plate.

The epithet Lokanātha can be found in <ref target="DHARMA_INSBengalCharters00026.xml">Biyala Plate of Mahīpāla I, year 35</ref> in line 4, <ref target="DHARMA_INSBengalCharters00071.xml">Rajibpur Plate of Gopāla IV, year 2 and Madanapāla, year 2</ref> in line 2, <ref target="DHARMA_INSBengalCharters00072.xml">Rajibpur Plate of Madanapāla, year 22</ref> in line 2 and <ref target="DHARMA_INSBengalCharters00075.xml">Manahali Plate of Madanapāla, year 8</ref> in line 2. <!--

amwb . I have to deepen this question by checking obedience of these plates and by finding clues of potential obedience in this plate

What seems to be stranged : mention of Kaundinya?? + The compound lokadvayasādhana + the name of the brahmin Vatsa is related to paśu...

What is very insteresting : the list of names of profession

-->

</note> who gives the fruits of good deeds to men, whose appearance is full of truth and ascetism, who produces the two worlds, who is the law —</p>

<p n="2" rend="stanza">After Him, the good men who seek the highest goal, who have defeated their deceit and their cupidity, unselfish, they who desire the highest world, are <supplied reason="subaudible">always</supplied> <supplied reason="explanation">nityaṁ</supplied> victorious through their good deeds.</p>

<p n="2-8">While the <foreign>mahārājādhirāja</foreign> Śrī Gopacandra whose power, conduct and heroism are well-known, is governing the earth as another Pr̥thu, in the province of Vardhamāna <supplied reason="explanation">litt. the prosperous one</supplied> which is prospering thanks to the constant practice of Dharma,<note>Here one can observe the attempt to give meaning to the name of the province by an semantical etymology.

</note> where supremely people have been settled with his <supplied reason="explanation">i.e. Gopacandra's</supplied> authorisation,

Himadatta, the notable <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>mahattara</foreign></supplied> residing in the Ardhakaraka <foreign>agrahāra</foreign> belonging to the Vakkattaka territory <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>vīthīsambaddha</foreign></supplied>;

Suvarṇayaśas, the notable residing in Nirvr̥tavāṭaka;<note>

As the suffix <foreign>īya</foreign> is used without <foreign>vr̥ddhi</foreign>, other translations can be suggested: <q>belonging to</q>, <q>managing</q> or <q>responsible of</q>. The word <foreign>nirvr̥tavāṭaka</foreign> can be understood as a toponym meaning <q>pleasant garden</q>.</note>

Dhanasvāmin, the notable residing in the Kapisthavāṭaka <supplied reason="explanation">Wood-apple garden</supplied> <foreign>agrahāra</foreign>;

Ṣaṣṭhīdatta and Śrīdatta, both notables residing in the Vaṭavallaka <foreign>agrahāra</foreign>;

Bhaṭṭa Vāmanasvāmin residing in the Koḍḍavīra <foreign>agrahāra</foreign>;

Mahīdatta and Rājyadatta, both possessing villages given to Brahmins in Godhagrāma,

Jīvasvāmin residing in Śālmalivāṭaka,<note>

As for <foreign>nirvr̥tavāṭakīya</foreign>, there is no <foreign>vr̥ddhi</foreign> elevation. So one could also translated by <q>belonging to Śālmalivāṭaka</q> or <q>responsible of the garden<supplied reason="explanation">s</supplied> in Śālmali</q>.<!--

amwb : I am wondering if we have to introduce a correction of the name with a long i śālmalī but it seems that one can find the form with a short i in Monier-Williams with the same meanig "silk-cotton tree". Can we suggest in parenthesis the enclosure/garden/plantation of silk-cotton tree?

-->

</note>

Hari, the swordsman belonging to/residing in Vakkattaka,<note>

This place name is already mentioned in line 5.

</note>

Goika, the swordsman belonging to/residing in Madhuvāṭaka,

Bhadranandin, the swordsman residing in Khaṇḍajōtika,

the deliverers, conducteurs, carriers and so on <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>vāha-nāyaka-hari-prabhr̥tayo</foreign></supplied><note>

I consider these three words as types of profession. For the moment, my translation is a somewhat awkward attempt which needs to be improved. One can also understand : the men residing in Vindhyapura beginning with Hari the chariot-driver <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>vāha-nāyaka</foreign></supplied>. But there is another Hari just before.

</note> residing in Vindhyapura

and the council of the territory

greatly honour according to the rules <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>vidhivat sampūjya</foreign> line 5</supplied>

and inform

the following venerables beginning with those who are dwelling here in the present

the recorder <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>kārttākr̥tika</foreign></supplied><!--

amwb : kārttākr̥tika occurs in this plate line 3; in Jayarampur plate in line 11 ; Panchrol plate line 6 ; Nālandā cp., Dharmapāla unknown r. y. BC95 line 8;

it seems to be a technical name I don't know its meaning and if we have to consider it in plural or in singular

-->,<note>

<bibl><ptr target="bib:Sircar1966_01"/><citedRange unit="page">149</citedRange></bibl> suggests the word <foreign>kārttākr̥tika</foreign> probably qualifies <q>an officer who reported to the king qbout the progress of important undertakings</q>. The word occurs in the <ref target="DHARMA_INSBengalCharters00064.xml">Panchrol Plate of the time of Śaśāṅka</ref> line 6, in the <ref target="DHARMA_INSBengalCharters00095.xml">Nālandā Plate of Dharmapāla</ref> line 8 and in the <ref target="DHARMA_INSBengalCharters00076.xml">Jayarampur plate</ref> line 11.

</note> the princely advisor <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>kumārāmatya</foreign></supplied>,

the police officer <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>cauroddharaṇika</foreign></supplied><!--

amwb : term used in DEO BARANARK INSCRIPTION OF JIVITAGUPTA [ PLATE XV] line 9 ; Murshidabad or Indian Museum cp., Dharmapāla r. y. 26 after the verse 19; Nālandā cp., Dharmapāla unknown r. y. line 12; Mungher cp.; Devapāla r. y. 33 at the end ; Mahendrapāla 7th regnal year Jagajjibanpur (or Tulabhita) cp. EI 42, no. 2 Ramesh \& Iyer at the end ; Manahali Plate of Madanapāla, year 8 line35 and 40; Bharat Kala Bhavan Plate of Rājyapāla, year 2 line 35 and 42 , KHALIMPUR line45

-->,<note>

<bibl><ptr target="bib:Sircar1966_01"/><citedRange unit="page">72</citedRange></bibl> suggests the word <foreign>cauroddharaṇika</foreign> refers to <q>an official designation indicating an officer in charge of the recovery of stolen property; a police officer</q>. The word occurs in the Deo Baranark Inscription of Jivitagupta, Plate XV, line 9, in the <ref target="DHARMA_INSBengalCharters00099.xml">Murshidabad or Indian Museum copper plate</ref> after the verse 19, in the <ref target="DHARMA_INSBengalCharters00095.xml">Nālandā Plate of Dharmapāla</ref> line 12, in the <ref target="DHARMA_INSBengalCharters00125.xml">Mudgagiri grant of Devapāla, regnal year 33</ref> lines 33 and 40, in the <ref target="DHARMA_INSBengalCharters00073.xml">Mahendrapāla 7th regnal year Jagajjibanpur (or Tulabhita) copper plate</ref> lines 36 and 46, in the <ref target="DHARMA_INSBengalCharters00075.xml">Manahali Plate of Madanapāla, year 8</ref> lines 35 and 40, in the <ref target="DHARMA_INSBengalCharters00108.xml">Bharat Kala Bhavan Plate of Rājyapāla, year 2</ref> line 35 and 42 and in the<ref target="DHARMA_INSBengalCharters00088.xml"> Khalimpur Plate of Dharmapāla, year 32</ref> line 45.

</note> the governor of the province <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>uparika</foreign></supplied>,

the collector of the <foreign>udraṅga</foreign> tax <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>audraṅgika</foreign></supplied>,<note>

<bibl><ptr target="bib:Sircar1966_01"/><citedRange unit="page">37</citedRange></bibl> suggests the following meaning for the word <foreign>audraṅgika</foreign>: <q>collector of the <foreign>udraṅga</foreign> tax meaning <q>tax on permanent tenants or the principal tax</q>; sometimes mentioned side by side with the <foreign>hiraṇyasāmudāyika</foreign> or the collector of tax in cash</q>.

</note>

the one who <supplied reason="subaudible">supervises</supplied> the royal donation of lands <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>āgrahārika</foreign></supplied>,<note>

<bibl><ptr target="bib:Sircar1966_01"/><citedRange unit="page">11</citedRange></bibl> suggests the <foreign>āgrahārika</foreign> is <q>the owner of an <foreign>agrahāra</foreign>; sometimes probably, the superintendent of <foreign>agrahāra</foreign>s</q>. Here I opt for the second meaning.

</note>

the officer in charge of the wool factories <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>aurṇasthānika</foreign></supplied>,<note>

<bibl><ptr target="bib:Sircar1966_01"/><citedRange unit="page">38</citedRange></bibl> explains the word <foreign>aurṇasthānika</foreign> in this way: <q>officer in charge of an <foreign>ūrṇasthāna</foreign> <supplied reason="explanation">wool factory</supplied> or of all the <foreign>ūrṇasthāna</foreign>s</q>.

</note>

the officer in charge of the territorial unit called <foreign>bhoga</foreign> <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>bhogapatika</foreign></supplied>,<note>

See <bibl><ptr target="bib:Sircar1966_01"/><citedRange unit="page">55</citedRange></bibl>.

</note>

the chief of the district <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>viṣayapati</foreign></supplied> and its officer <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>tadāyuktaka</foreign></supplied>,

the collector of tax in cash <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>hiraṇyasāmudāyika</foreign></supplied>, <note>

See <bibl><ptr target="bib:Sircar1966_01"/><citedRange unit="page">130</citedRange></bibl>.

</note>

the superindentent of the territorial division called <foreign>pattalaka</foreign> <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>pattalakāvasathika</foreign></supplied><!-- Sircar p.245 pattalaka a territorial divi-

sion; adistrict.

--><note>

I deduce this meaning of <foreign>pattalakāvasathika</foreign> from the explanations given by <bibl><ptr target="bib:Sircar1966_01"/><citedRange unit="page">245 and 40</citedRange></bibl> for the words <foreign>pattalaka</foreign> and <foreign>avasathika</foreign>.

</note>

and the officer in charge of temple property <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>devadroṇisambaddha</foreign></supplied>:

<note>

This translation could be supported by the different occurrences of the words <foreign>kumārāmatya</foreign>, <foreign>viṣayapati</foreign> and <foreign>āyukta</foreign> or <foreign>āyuktaka</foreign> as technical vocabulary to designate several positions in the hierarchical administration of lands. One can find the word <foreign>kumārāmatya</foreign> such employed in

<ref target="DHARMA_INSBengalCharters00039.xml">Raktamālā Grant no. 1, year 159</ref> in line 1,

<ref target="DHARMA_INSBengalCharters00049.xml">Baigram Charter of the Time of Kumāragupta I</ref> in line 1,

<ref target="DHARMA_INSBengalCharters00047.xml">Damodarpur #1</ref> in line 3,

<ref target="DHARMA_INSBengalCharters00057.xml">A second grant concerning the Raktamālā </ref> in line 1,

<ref target="DHARMA_INSBengalCharters00065.xml">Kumudavillikā grant of the time of Śasāṅka, year 8</ref> in the first line of the seal,

and <ref target="DHARMA_INSBengalCharters00075.xml">Manahali Plate of Madanapāla, year 8</ref> in line 34.

The word <foreign>viṣayapati</foreign> can be read as hierarchical designation in

<ref target="DHARMA_INSBengalCharters00026.xml">Biyala Plate of Mahīpāla I, year 35</ref> in line 35,

<ref target="DHARMA_INSBengalCharters00033.xml">Kalaikuri-Sultanpur Plate of the Time of Kumāragupta I</ref> in line 28,

<ref target="DHARMA_INSBengalCharters00051.xml">A grant of land in the Tāvīra district</ref> in lines 7, 12 and 14,

and <ref target="DHARMA_INSBengalCharters00054.xml">Nandapur Plate of 169 GE</ref> in lines 2 and 11

. The words <foreign>āyukta</foreign> or <foreign>āyuktaka</foreign> can be found in

<ref target="DHARMA_INSBengalCharters00026.xml">Biyala Plate of Mahīpāla I, year 35</ref> in line 34,

<ref target="DHARMA_INSBengalCharters00031.xml">Dhanaidaha Plate, Year 113 GE</ref> in line 11,

<ref target="DHARMA_INSBengalCharters00033.xml">Kalaikuri-Sultanpur Plate of the Time of Kumāragupta I</ref> in lines 1 and 28,

<ref target="DHARMA_INSBengalCharters00034.xml">Jagadispur Charter of the Time of Kumāragupta I</ref> in lines 1 and 22-23,

<ref target="DHARMA_INSBengalCharters00039.xml">Raktamālā Grant no. 1, year 159</ref> in the first line of the seal,

<ref target="DHARMA_INSBengalCharters00051.xml">A grant of land in the Tāvīra district</ref> in line 1,

<ref target="DHARMA_INSBengalCharters00052.xml">Paharpur Charter of the Time of Budhagupta</ref> in line 1,

<ref target="DHARMA_INSBengalCharters00055.xml">A grant of land to monasteries at Śiṣīpuñja, Madhyamasṛgālikā and Grāmakūṭagohālī</ref>, line 1,

<ref target="DHARMA_INSBengalCharters00057.xml">A second grant concerning the Raktamālā estate</ref> in the first line of the seal,

<ref target="DHARMA_INSBengalCharters00071.xml">Rajibpur Plate of Gopāla IV, year 2 and Madanapāla, year 2</ref> line 40 and

<ref target="DHARMA_INSBengalCharters00075.xml">Manahali Plate of Madanapāla, year 8</ref> in line 35.

Thus I deduce from this that the others words are also names of types of profession. This deduction is confirmed by the meanings given of these words by <bibl><ptr target="bib:Sircar1966_01"/></bibl> <supplied reason="explanation">for the word <foreign>devadroṇisambaddha</foreign>, see <bibl><ptr target="bib:Sircar1966_01"/><citedRange unit="page">88</citedRange></bibl></supplied>. So my understanding totally differs from the suggestion of <bibl><ptr target="bib:Majumdar1935-1936_02"/></bibl> who interprets <foreign>kumārāmatya</foreign>, <foreign>viṣayapati</foreign> and <foreign>tadāyuktaka</foreign> and all others words as proper names.

</note>

</p>

We have been sollicited by the venerable <foreign>mahārāja</foreign> Vijayasena as follows:

</p>

<p n="8-10">After having purchased it according to your <supplied reason="explanation">yuṣmabhir</supplied> legal proceeding <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>yathānyāyena</foreign></supplied>,I wish to bestow eight <foreign>kulyavāpa</foreign>s in the village Vettragarttā belonging to this territory <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>vīthī</foreign></supplied> in the sake of the increase of my own merit and the one of both my mother and my father to be enjoyed in succession by sons and grandsons, thanks the practice of permanent endowment, to Vatsasvāmin, belonging to the R̥gveda tradition <supplied reason="explanation">Bāhvṛca</supplied>, disciple of Kauṇḍinya,<!--

amwb : or belonging to Kauṇḍinya lineage... could it be a reference to Kauṇḍinya author of the pañcārthabhāṣya, the commentator of the pāśupatasūtra

-->in order to perform the five great sacrifices. </p>

<p n="10-11">Therefore, due to his requesting it has been ascertained by us : this is the method for the virtuous men who want to conquest the two worlds <supplied reason="subaudible">and</supplied> who have a lot of meritorious deeds. A sixth part of merit <supplied reason="subaudible">produced by it</supplied> is vested in His Majesty the sovereign Lord and also for us who are protecting <supplied reason="subaudible">this gift</supplied> from the conjunction of fame and welfare. </p>

<p n="1" rend="stanza">The man who, even in mind, approves a deed endowed with Dharma, he increases according to which has been given <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>yaṭheṣṭena</foreign></supplied> as the moon <supplied reason="explanation">uḍurāj</supplied> during the bright fortnight.<note>

This verse corresponds to the verse numbered 151 among the Stanzas on Bhūmidāna listed by Sircar <supplied reason="explanation">see <bibl><ptr target="bib:Sircar1965_03"/><citedRange unit="appendix">II</citedRange><citedRange unit="page">170-200</citedRange></bibl></supplied>, except for the final comparison in the <foreign>pāda</foreign> d. The meaning remains identical nonetheless.

</note> </p>

<p n="12-13">Thus <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>tad</foreign></supplied>, considering <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>iti</foreign></supplied> his request is granted, after having distributed within <supplied reason="subaudible">the officials of this</supplied> territory <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>vīthī</foreign></supplied> the <foreign>dīnāra</foreign>s paid by him according to the meritorious acts made by us, the gift as it has been described must be honestly <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>prāṇāyyaṁ</foreign></supplied> conveyed precisely in the income of this territory of up to <supplied reason="explanation">the expected income of</supplied> the eight <foreign>kulyavāpa</foreign>s belonging to our village Vettragarta.</p>

<p n="13-14">After having them sprinkled with powder <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>avacūrṇya</foreign></supplied>, the eight <foreign>kulyavāpa</foreign>s of the <foreign>mahārāja</foreign> Vijayasena are given. They are bestowed by the king <supplied reason="explanation">ie Gopacandra</supplied> and also <supplied reason="lost">by him</supplied><supplied reason="explanation">gap at the beginning of the line 14 <foreign>anena</foreign></supplied><note>

I follow the suggestion made by <bibl><ptr target="bib:Sircar1965_02"/></bibl> : <foreign>anenāpi</foreign>°.

</note>

thanks a copperplate to Vatsasvāmin, belonging to the R̥gveda tradition <supplied reason="explanation">Bāhvr̥ca</supplied>, disciple of Kauṇḍinya,<!--

amwb : or belonging to Kauṇḍinya lineage... could it be a reference to Kauṇḍinya author of the pañcārthabhāṣya, the commentator of the pāśupatasūtra

-->in order to perform the five great sacrifices. </p>

<p n="14-17">Then here follow the frontiers of this land in the four directions:

<list>

<item>the Eastern boundary is Godhagrāma,</item>

<item>the Southern boundary is exactly Godhagrāma</item>

<item>the Northern boundary is the <foreign>agrahāra</foreign> called Vaṭavallaka <supplied reason="explanation"> the Banyan pole</supplied></item>

<item>the Western boundary is in the middle of Āmragarttikā <supplied reason="explanation">the mango tree of the weaver's workshop</supplied> </item>

</list>

And there, pillars marked by rosaries made of lotus seeds are fixed in the four boundaries.<note>

On the manner to mark boundaries, see chapter 21 of Yājñavalkya's <title>Dharmaśāstra</title> <supplied reason="explanation"><bibl><ptr target="bib:Olivelle2019_01"/><citedRange unit="page">162-165</citedRange></bibl></supplied>, the chapter 11 of the <title>Nāradasmr̥ti</title> <supplied reason="explanation"><bibl><ptr target="bib:Lariviere1989_01"/><citedRange unit="page">189-192; 371-377</citedRange></bibl></supplied>.

</note> Thus, concerning the enjoyment of this land whose the boundaries have been marked <supplied reason="explanation">and which is</supplied> devoted to the performance of the five great sacrifices by this Brahmin, any objection however small or any protestation by raising hands may be made by no one belonging to his family or by no one else.

</p>

<p n="17-18">This having been ascertained in this way, he who does that, will be slained and will be marred by the five great sins and by all other little sins. Moreover: </p>

<p n="4" rend="stanza"><!--

amwb : I cannot find this stanza in Sircar; it seems to be somewhat original

-->The Gods and his Ancestors will never receive his offering <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>havis</foreign></supplied> and his oblation <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>piṇḍa</foreign></supplied>. Like a palm tree with his tuft of leaves cut, deprived of stability, he will fall <supplied reason="subaudible">in hell</supplied>.<note>

For the moment, I didn't find any correspondence for this imprecatory verse.

</note> </p>

<p n="19">The sacred verses describing the virtue and the dishonor of the confiscation and protection of a gift of land are :</p>

<p n="5" rend="stanza">The giver of land enjoys sixty thousand years in heaven; the one who challenges <supplied reason="subaudible">a donation</supplied> as well as the one who approves <supplied reason="subaudible">of the challenge</supplied> will reside as many <supplied reason="subaudible">years</supplied> in hell.<note>

This verse corresponds to the verse numbered 123 among the Stanzas on Bhūmidāna listed by Sircar <supplied reason="explanation">see <bibl><ptr target="bib:Sircar1965_03"/><citedRange unit="appendix">II</citedRange><citedRange unit="page">170-200</citedRange></bibl></supplied>.

</note></p><!--

amwb : listed in Sircar's stanzas on Bhūmidāna n°123

-->

<p n="6" rend="stanza">The Fathers are agitating and the Grand-Fathers are bounding <supplied reason="subaudible">when they can say</supplied> <q>A giver of land is born within our lineage, he alone will all deliver us !</q>.<note>

This verse corresponds to the verse numbered 20 among the Stanzas on Bhūmidāna listed by Sircar <supplied reason="explanation">see <bibl><ptr target="bib:Sircar1965_03"/><citedRange unit="appendix">II</citedRange><citedRange unit="page">170-200</citedRange></bibl></supplied>, except for the final verb in the <foreign>pāda</foreign> d.

</note> </p><!--

amwb : listed in Sircar's stanzas on Bhūmidāna n°20

-->

<p n="7" rend="stanza">A miserly man, whatever the sins he has committed, is purified by a gift of land, even measuring the size of a <foreign>gocarman</foreign> <supplied reason="explanation">literally a cow's skin, here it is a unit of measurement</supplied>.<note>

This verse corresponds to the verse numbered 159 among the Stanzas on Bhūmidāna listed by Sircar <supplied reason="explanation">see <bibl><ptr target="bib:Sircar1965_03"/><citedRange unit="appendix">II</citedRange><citedRange unit="page">170-200</citedRange></bibl></supplied>.

</note> </p><!--

amwb : listed in Sircar's stanzas on Bhūmidāna n°159

-->

<p n="8" rend="stanza">You, Yudhiṣṭhira, most excellent of kings, must strenuously protect land previously given to brahmins. Safeguarding is even better than giving.<note>

This verse corresponds to the verse numbered 131 among the Stanzas on Bhūmidāna listed by Sircar <supplied reason="explanation">see <bibl><ptr target="bib:Sircar1965_03"/><citedRange unit="appendix">II</citedRange><citedRange unit="page">170-200</citedRange></bibl></supplied>.

</note></p><!--

amwb : listed in Sircar's stanzas on Bhūmidāna n°131

-->

<p n="9" rend="stanza">Earth has been given by hundreds of kings and it will be given again and again. Whoever holds land at a given moment, to him does the fruit belong.<note>

This verse corresponds to the verse numbered 23 among the Stanzas on Bhūmidāna listed by Sircar <supplied reason="explanation">see <bibl><ptr target="bib:Sircar1965_03"/><citedRange unit="appendix">II</citedRange><citedRange unit="page">170-200</citedRange></bibl></supplied>, but the <foreign>pāda</foreign>s a and b present a different reading.

</note></p><!--

amwb : pada cd = Sircar's stanzas on Bhūmidāna n°23

-->

<p n="10" rend="stanza">Considering the fortune of mortels is full of waves <supplied reason="subaudible">and passed</supplied> in a flash, the deeds devoted to <foreign>dharma</foreign> by wise men should not be destroyed in this world.<note>

This verse expresses the same meaning with a different wording than the verse numbered 132 among the Stanzas on Bhūmidāna listed by Sircar <supplied reason="explanation">see <bibl><ptr target="bib:Sircar1965_03"/><citedRange unit="appendix">II</citedRange><citedRange unit="page">170-200</citedRange></bibl></supplied>.

</note></p><!--

amwb : listed in Sircar's stanzas on Bhūmidāna n°71

-->

<p n="24-25">Eight <abbr><foreign>ku</foreign></abbr> <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>kulyavāpa</foreign>s</supplied>, the messenger <supplied reason="subaudible">of this gift</supplied> is Śubhadatta. It has been written by Bhogacandra, the minister presiding in negociating affairs <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>sāndhivigrahika</foreign></supplied>, heated by the record-keeper Jayadāsa. Year 3, Śrāvaṇa <supplied reason="explanation">month</supplied> day 27.</p>

</div>

<!--

amwb : notes from Majumbar's edition : Plate discovered in 1929 by Dr. Sureshwar Roy and presented by him to the Vaṅgīya-Sāhitya-Parishat of Calcutta<

According to him, characters belong to the Eastern variety of th 'gupta alphabet'

the particular form of Letter y can be found in Faridpur Plates, Gunaighar plate and the lastest Damodarpur plate

The particular form of h differs from the h occuring in the Baigram Paharpur and Damodarpur plates

Examples of final t and m + numeral 3, 7, 8, 20

He dated the plate in the first half of the sixth century

amwb : the content of the plate shows some interesting peculiarities according to me

1. the list of types of profession = > social aspect and organisation of the society

2. the procedure to mark the boundaries => search in dharmaśāstra and dharmanibandha if there are others accounts of the sprinkling of the earth and the decoration of pillars

3. the presence of a particular stanza not found in Sircar which compares the relationship between sons and ancestors to a tree and his top

-->

</div>

<p>First reported and edited in <bibl n="M"><ptr target="bib:Majumdar1935-1936_02"/><citedRange unit="page">155-161</citedRange></bibl> <supplied reason="explanation">Majumdar published a preliminary account shortly before this in the <title>Vaṅgīya Sāhitya Pariṣat Patrikā</title>, no detailed reference available</supplied>. Re-edited by <bibl><ptr target="bib:Sircar1965_02"/><citedRange unit="page">372-378</citedRange><citedRange unit="item">46</citedRange></bibl> with some improvments and new emendations. Discussed in <bibl><ptr target="bib:Chhabra1953-1954_01"/></bibl> and <bibl><ptr target="bib:Siddham_Chhabra_1956"/></bibl>. Here re-edited and translated by Amandine Wattelier-Bricout and Arlo Griffiths based on photos of the plate furnished by Ryosuke Furui. The text has been encoded by Amandine Wattelier-Bricout using a digital edition created by Dániel Balogh for the Siddham project as starting point. Since some readings differ from this previous digital edition, they are reported in the apparatus. </p>

</listBibl>

</listBibl>

</div>

</body>

</text>

</TEI>