Pedestal from Mỹ Sơn group A (C. 79), 7th century CE

Version: (3e0b233), last modified (f5cd846).

Edition

⟨1⟩ maheśvarasakhasyedaṁ kuverasya dhanākaraṁ prakāśadharmma-nr̥patiḥ pūjā-sthānam akalpayat·

⟨2⟩ Ekākṣapiṅgalety eṣa devyā darśśana-dūṣitaḥ saṁvarddhayatv īśa-dhanaṁ pāyāc cāhitatas sadā

Translation by Goodall and Griffiths 2013

1.

The king Prakāśadharman has fashioned this place of worship, a mine of riches, for Maheśvara’s (i.e. Śiva’s) companion Kubera.

2.

Spoiled in one eye by the goddess, such that he became known as Ekākṣapiṅgala, may he cause the property of the Lord to increase, and may he always protect from what is untoward (ahitataḥ).

Translation into French by Finot 1904

Ce sanctuaire du compagnon de Maheśvara, Kuvera, mine de richesses, le roi Prakāśadharma l’a édifié. Si quelqu’un est affligé d’une maladie d’yeux par la déesse Ekākṣapiṅgalā (la rousse borgne), qu’il augmente les richesses du Seigneur, et (celui-ci) le défendra du mal à jamais.

Commentary

An early version of the myth of Kubera’s companionship of Śiva is recounted in the original Skandapurāṇa, at 29.169 (see Bakker and Isaacson 2004).

Finot understood ekākṣapiṅgalety as ekākṣapiṅgalā ity and noted that the (feminine) evil spirit Ekākṣapiṅgalā was not known to him from any other source. As was seen by Majumdar, it has to be understood as ekākṣapiṅgala ity, and so the name in question is (masculine) Ekākṣapiṅgala, which is a name of Kubera, e.g., in the Himavatkhaṇḍa. He appears as Ekākṣipiṅgala in the original Skandapurāṇa. That is also the form of the name in Vālmīki’s Rāmāyaṇa (7.13.24, 30–31; 7.36.17), which perhaps gives the earliest known version of the myth. For Vettam Mani’s version, see Mani 1975, s.v. The sandhi is a bit unusual, but parallels can nevertheless be cited: the Cambodian inscription K. 524, st. I, begins with vidyāvāseti nāmāhaṁ tejasvī bhuvi viśrutaḥ; the second half of Harivaṁśa 12.16: yathotpannas tathaivāhaṁ kumāra iti viddhi mām | tasmāt sanatkumāreti nāmaitan me pratiṣṭhitam ||. Our interpretation of the two modal verbs in the second stanza as both being predicates to a single subject (eṣa) disagrees with Finot’s, following instead Majumdar’s. The latter scholar has still misunderstood the significance of darśana-dūṣita, for based on the myth to which allusion is made here, this must clearly mean an impairment at the eye (of Kubera), rather than by the eye (of the Goddess).

By contrast with Majumdar, who translates “the wealth of this king”, we consider it likely that īśa-dhana here denotes primarly the wealth of Śiva endowed to his temple (devadravya), and that a subsidiary shrine to Kubera was installed near it for protective purposes.

Bibliography

First edited by Finot (1904); edited again by Goodall & Griffiths (2013). This digital edition based on the latter, using EFEO estampages 336 and n. 2071.

Primary

[LF] Finot, Louis. 1904. “Notes d’épigraphie, XI : Les inscriptions de Mi-Sơn.” BEFEO 4, pp. 897–977. DOI: 10.3406/befeo.1904.1405. [URL]. Page 928.

[G+G] Goodall, Dominic and Arlo Griffiths. 2013. “Études du corpus des inscriptions du Campā, V: The short foundation inscriptions of Prakāśadharman-Vikrāntavarman, king of Campā.” IIJ 56, pp. 419–440. DOI: 10.1163/15728536-13560307. Pages 421–423.

Secondary

Parmentier, Henri. 1909. Inventaire descriptif des monuments čams de l’Annam. Tome premier: Description des monuments. Paris: Imprimerie nationale. [URL]. Page 357, item V.

Majumdar, Ramesh Chandra. 1927. Ancient Indian colonies in the Far East, Vol. I: Champa. Punjab Oriental (Sanskrit) Series 16. Lahore: The Punjab Sanskrit Book Depot. [URL]. Page 27, item 14.

Griffiths, Arlo, Amandine Lepoutre, William Aelred Southworth and Thành Phần. 2008–2009. “Études du corpus des inscriptions du Campā, III: Épigraphie du Campa 2009-2010: prospection sur le terrain, production d’estampages, supplément à l’inventaire.” BEFEO 95, pp. 435–497. DOI: 10.3406/befeo.2008.6118. [URL]. Page 458.