Wurare
Version: (cacef68), last modified (a5190f0).
Edition
⟨Column A⟩
⟨1⟩ // Ādau namāmi sarba-jñaṁ, jñāna-kāyan tathāgataṁ, sarvva-skandhātiguhya-sthaṁ, sad-asat-pakṣa-varjjitaṁ, 1, //
⟨2⟩ // Anv atas sarvva-siddhim vā, vande ’haṅ gauravāt sadā, śaka-kālam idaṁ vakṣye, rāja-kīrtti-prakāśanaṁ, 2, //
⟨3⟩ // ¿yo? purā paṇḍitaś śreṣ¡ṭ!a, Āryyo bharāḍa-saṁjñakaḥ, jñāna-siddhiṁ samāgamyā,bhijñālābho munīśva□raḥ, 3, // ⟨Column B⟩
⟨4⟩ // mahā-yogīśvaro dhīraḥ, satveṣu karuṇātmakaḥ, siddhācāryyo mahā-vīro, rāgādi-kleśa-varjjitaḥ, 4 , //
⟨5⟩ // ratnākara-pramāṇān tu, dvaidhī-kr̥tya yavāvanīm̐, kṣiti-bhedana-sāmarthya,kumbha-bajrodakena vai, 5 //
⟨6⟩ // paraspara-virodhena, nr̥payor yuddha-kāṁkṣiṇoḥ, Etasmāj jāṅgalety eṣā, paṁjalu-viṣayā smr̥tā, 6 //
⟨7⟩ // kin tu yasmāt· rarakṣemām̐, jaya-śrī-viṣṇu□varddhanaḥ, śrī-jayavarddhanī-bhāryyo jagannāthottamaḥ prabhuḥ, 7 // ⟨Column C⟩
⟨8⟩ Ājanmapariśuddhāṅgaḥ, kr̥pāluḥ dharmma-tatparaḥ, pārthivānandanaṅ kr̥tvā, śuddha-kīrtti-parākramāt· 8 //
⟨9⟩ Ekī-kr̥tya punar bhūm¡ī!m̐, prīty-arthañ jagatāṁ sadā, dharmma-saṁrakṣaṇārtham vā, pitrādi-sthāpanāya ca, 9 //
⟨10⟩ yathaiva kṣiti-rājendra,ś śrī-harivarddhanātmajaḥ, śrī-jayavarddhanī-putraḥ, catur-dvīpeśvaro muniḥ, 10 //
⟨11⟩ Aśeṣa-tatva-sampūrṇno, dharmma-śāstra-vidām varaḥ, jīrṇnoddhāra-kriyodyukto, dharmma-śāsana-deśakaḥ, 11 // ⟨Column D⟩
⟨12⟩ śrī-jñānaśivabajrā¡k!ya,ś citta-ratna-vibhūṣaṇaḥ, prajñā-raśmi-viśuddhāṅga,s sambodhi-jñāna-pāragaḥ, 12 //
⟨13⟩ subhaktyā tam̐ pratiṣṭhāpya, svayam pūrvvam pratiṣṭhita(m̐), śmaśāne vurare-nāmni, mahākṣobhyānurūpataḥ, 13 //
⟨14⟩ bhava-cakre śakendrābde, māse cāsuji-saṁjñake, pañcamyām̐ śukla-pakṣe ca, vāre pa-ka-bu-saṁjñake, 14 //
⟨15⟩ sinta-nāmni ca parvve ca, karaṇe viṣṭi-saṁskr̥te, Anurādhe ’pi nakṣatre, mitre māhendra-maṇḍale, 15 // ⟨Column E⟩
⟨16⟩ saubhāgya-yoga-sambandhe, somye caiva muhūrttake, ¡k!yāte kuvera-parvveśe, tulā-(rāśy-a)bhisaṁyute
⟨16*⟩ 16
⟨17⟩ hitāya sarba-satvānām̐, prāg eva nr̥pates sadā, sa-putra-potra-dārasya, kṣity-ekībhāva-kāraṇāt·, 17 //
⟨18⟩ Athāsya dāsa-bhūto ’haṁ, nādajño nāma kīrttitaḥ, vidyā-hīno ’pi sammūḍho, dharmma-kriy⟨ā⟩sv atatparaḥ, 18 //
⟨19⟩ dharmmādhyakṣatvam āsādya, kr̥payaivāsya tatvataḥ, ¡s!aka-kālaṁ samu(ddhr̥tya), mad-rājānujñayā punaḥ, 19 ||
Apparatus
⟨2⟩ śaka-kālam K ⬦ śāka-kālam P.
⟨3⟩ śreṣ¡ṭ!⟨ṭh⟩a ⬦ śreṣṭha K P • All previous editions silently correct ṭ to ṭh. Cf. st. XIII for two clear cases of a proper ṣṭh, and XV for a clear case of ṣṭ. There is no doubt the lapicide here engraved ṣṭ. See also the remarks of Damais (1955, p. 58, n. 1, p. 79, n. 3) on the distinction ṣth/ṣṭ in Javanese inscriptions. — ⟨3⟩ bharāḍasaṁjñakaḥ ⬦ bharāḍ abhijñataḥ K P • Kern notes that the reading of i (in bhi) is uncertain, and that the whole word is suspect. Indeed one would expect bharāḍābhijñataḥ, since the figure’s known name is bharāḍa, but this would be unmetrical. The stone clearly shows saṁ instead of bhi and ka and instead of ta, and these new readings solve the textual problem here. The same expression °saṁjñaka is used by the poet twice in st. XIV.
⟨5⟩ sāmarthya • Kern (n. 3) observes “Het casus-teeken ontbreekt”. It would be possible to read °sāmarthyaṁ although the hole in the stone that could represent anusvāra can equally be treated as a cavity in the stone. However, it is seems unproblematic to consider that the whole of pāda c forms the initial part of a long compound ending with kumbhabajrodakena in d. — ⟨5⟩ bajrodakena ⬦ vajrodakena K P.
⟨6⟩ kāṁkṣiṇoḥ ⬦ kāṅkṣiṇoḥ K P. — ⟨6⟩ Etasmāj ⬦ Atasmāj K; Estasmāj P • Bosch 1919 suggested the reading adopted here. Poerbatjaraka seems to have intended to adopt Bosch’ reading but to have become confused, as he wavers in spelling this word (1922, p. 434).
Translation by Arlo Griffiths
First I bow to the Omniscient Knowledge-Body, the Tathāgata, who resides in the concealment beyond all skandhas, who transcends the positions of being and non-being,
I praise him alternatively as Omnipotent, for he is eternally venerable. After that I shall proclaim this illumination of the king’s glory in the Śaka-age.
He who (yo) was the most excellent sage of former times, called Ārya Bharāḍa (= Bharāla/Bhaṭāra); [who] was the best of sages insofar as he had gained perfection of wisdom [and] attained the supernatural faculties (of a Buddha: abhijñā).
[He was also known as] the intelligent Great Lord of Yogins, by nature compassionate with living beings; the Teacher of Siddhas, the Great Hero, free of afflictions such as covetousness.
After the division of the land of Yava, that is endowed with mines of jewels, by use of Jar- and Vajra-water, powerful enough to effect the division of the earth,
and working towards opposite ends, of two kings lusting for war, this province of Paṅjalu was for this reason called [the land of] Jāṅgala.
But since the king Jayaśrī Viṣṇuvardhana, excellent earth-ruler who had Śrī Jayavardhanī as spouse, protected this [land],
he whose limbs were pure right from birth, who was compassionate, totally devoted to dharma —, he has caused the delight of (vassal) kings due to his pure glory and valor,
and has united the land once again — whether it be for the eternal pleasure of the world or for protecting dharma, or again for installing (?) his ancestors, etc.
So that (? yathaiva) the sage king of kings (Kr̥tanagara), son of Śrī Harivardhana (i.e. Viṣṇuvardhana) and son of Śrī Jayavardhanī, ruler of the four ‘islands’ (i.e. the whole world),
accomplished in all Tattvas (?), best of Dharmaśāstra scholars, intent upon the accomplishment of (monastery/temple) restorations (jīrṇoddhāra), issuer [solely] of edicts in conformity with dharma,
called Śrī Jñānaśivavajra, endowed with the jewel of intelligence (?, cittaratnavibhūṣaṇa), whose limbs were purified by the rays of insight, expert in the knowledge of enlightenment,
devotedly installed him (i.e., Bharāḍa), who had previously been established (pratiṣṭhita) [here] himself, at the cremation ground called Vurare, modelled after Mahākṣobhya,
in the year of the Śaka-king [denoted by] Bhava (11) and Cakra (12) (i.e. 1211), in the month called Asuji, on the fifth of the bright fortnight, and the day called Paniruan, Kalivuan, Wednesday,
during the parva (i.e., wuku) called Sinta, under the karaṇa hallowed by (the Seer?) Viṣṭi, under the constellation Anurādha, with the sun in the orb of Mahendra,
in connection with an auspicious conjunction, and at a favorable muhūrta, the deity of the parva being called Kubera, joined with (?) the zodiac sign Libra,
for the eternal benefit of all living beings, but above all (prāg eva) the king with his sons, grandsons and his wife (or: their wives), for the reason that the land had been unified.
And I, being his servant called Nādajña, devoid of knowledge and full of delusion, without expertise with regard to dharma works,
have really achieved the position of dharma surveyor only thanks to his compassion, after I have again saved (?, samuddhr̥tya, reading uncertain) the Śaka-age, by permission of my king.
Bibliography
First edited by Kern (1910), whose article was re-edited with corrections as Kern 1917; edited again by Poerbatjaraka (1922). The subsequent editions published by Chatterjee & Chakravarti (1933, with translation into English) and Sircar (1983) ignore Poerbatjaraka’s work and most of the secondary bibliography. None of the previous editions accurately represents the punctuation of the original. Re-edited here by Arlo Griffiths directly from the stone and from the EFEO estampages; the apparatus is positive only for the significant variant readings observed in the editions by Kern (1917) and Poerbatjaraka.
Primary
Kern, Johan Hendrik Caspar. 1910. “De Sanskrit-inscriptie van ’t Mahākṣobhya-beeld te Simpang.” TBG 52, pp. 99–108.
[K] Kern, H. 1917. “De Sanskrit-inscriptie van het Mahākṣobhya-beeld te Simpang (stad Surabaya; 1211 Çāka).” In: Verspreide geschriften, zevende deel: Inscripties van den Indischen archipel, slot; de Nāgarakṛtāgama, eerste gedeelte. 's-Gravenhage: Nijhoff, pp. 187–197.
[P] Poerbatjaraka. 1922. “De inscriptie van het Mahākṣobhya-beeld te Simpang (Soerabaya).” BKI 78, pp. 426–462. DOI: 10.1163/22134379-90001594. [URL].
Secondary
OV 1913. Oudheidkundige Dienst in Nederlandsch-Indië: Oudheidkundig Verslag 1913. Weltevreden; 's Hage: Albrecht & Co.; Nijhoff, 1913. Page 34.
Bosch, Frederik David Kan. 1919. “Kumbhawajrodakena en Toyeng Kuṇḍi sangkeng Langit.” TBG 58, pp. 429–447. Pages 442–443.
Chatterjee, Bijan Raj and Niranjan Prasad Chakravarti. 1933. India and Java, part II (Inscriptions). Second edition, revised and enlarged. Greater India Society Bulletin 5. Calcutta: [M.C. Das, Prabasi Press]. [URL]. Pages 75–78.
Damais, Louis-Charles. 1952. “Études d’épigraphie indonésienne, III: Liste des principales inscriptions datées de l’Indonesie.” BEFEO 46 (1), pp. 1–105. DOI: 10.3406/befeo.1952.5158. [URL]. Pages 72–73, item A.174.
Damais, Louis-Charles. 1955. “Études d’épigraphie indonésienne, IV: Discussion de la date des inscriptions.” BEFEO 47, pp. 7–290. DOI: 10.3406/befeo.1955.5406. [URL]. Page 79, item A.174.
Nakada, Kōzō. 1982. An inventory of the dated inscriptions in Java. Memoirs of the Research Department of the Toyo Bunko 40. Tokyo: Toyo Bunko. Pages 116–117, item I.202.
Sircar, Dines Chandra. 1983. Select inscriptions bearing on Indian history and civilization. Volume II: from the sixth to the eighteenth century A.D. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass. Pages 700–702.
Nihom, Max. 1986. “Ruler and Realm: The division of Airlangga's Kingdom in the Fourteenth Century.” Indonesia (42), pp. 79–100. DOI: 10.2307/3351188. [URL].
Hadi Sidomulyo. 2011. “Kṛtanagara and the Resurrection of Mpu Bharāda.” IMW 39 (113), pp. 123–142. DOI: 10.1080/13639811.2010.513882. [URL].
Gomperts, Amrit, Arnoud Haag and Peter Carey. 2012. “The sage who divided Java in 1052: Maclaine Pont’s excavation of Mpu Bharaḍa's hermitage-cemetery at Lĕmah Tulis in 1925.” BKI 168 (1), pp. 1–25. DOI: 10.1163/22134379-90003567. [URL].