Kanheri Cave 3 Traikuṭaka Copper Plate, year 245

Authors of digital edition: Kelsey Martini (kema), Vincent Tournier (vito).

Language: Sanskrit (san).

Version: (587d8eb), last modified (c2785b6).

Edition

⟨1⟩ namas sarvva(jñāya) tr¿a?kūṭakānā⟨ṃ⟩ pravarddhamānarājy⟨e⟩ sa⟨ṃ⟩vvatsaraśatadvaye pañcacatvāri⟨ṃ⟩śaduttare kr̥(ṣṇa)girimahāvihāre

⟨2⟩ si(ndhu)viṣayā(ntargga)tagrāme kā(ṇa)k⟨e⟩ vāstavya suprabhāyāḥ buddhaśriyā (pu)ṣyavarmmaṇaś ca (pu)tro daśabalabal⟨i⟩-

⟨3⟩ no bhagavataś śākyamunes samyaksambu(ddha)sya taddharmma(śr)āvakāryyabh⟨i⟩(kṣo)⟨ḥ⟩ ca(ra)ṇaparicaraṇakuśa(lo) buddharucir i-

⟨4⟩ daṁ tasyaiva paramamuner agryaśrāvakasyāryaśāra(dva)tīputrasya caitya⟨ṃ⟩ ghaṭitapāṣāṇ(e)ṣṭakābhir āca-

⟨5⟩ (ndr)ārkkārṇṇavapritisthitisamakālina⟨ṃ⟩ pratiṣṭhāpitavā⟨ṃ⟩s tad asya devaya(kṣa)siddhavidyādharagaṇamāṇibhadrapū-

⟨6⟩ rṇṇabhadrap(ā)ñcikāryyavajrapāṇiv(a)jraṇa(kh)ādayaḥ svasti diśantv api ca (y)ā(va)d vīc⟨ī⟩sahasrapracali(ta)makarā-

⟨7⟩ ghūrṇṇ⟨i⟩tāvarttatoya⟨ḥ⟩ kṣīrodaḥ kṣīratoyo br̥hadupalacitaẖ karkkaśo vāpi meruḥ yāvad v⟨ā⟩ yānti nadya-

⟨8⟩ s suvimalasalilas sāgaraṁ toyavatyaḥ tāvat kīrtti⟨ḥ⟩ sthireya⟨ṃ⟩ bhajatu śubhakarīsatsutaṁ puṣyanāmna⟨ḥ⟩

⟨9⟩ dāḍhā

Apparatus

⟨1⟩ tr¿a?⟨ai⟩kūṭakānā⟨ṃ⟩ ⬦ trikūṭakānāṃ B+I • There was likely originally a vowel mātra which was not preserved in the eye-copy, -ai. — ⟨1⟩ sa⟨ṃ⟩vvatsara ⬦ saṃvatsara G • Mirashi notes that "There was evidently an anusvāra on sa which is responsible for the reduplication (wrong, of course,) of v.

⟨2⟩ grāme kā(ṇa)k⟨e⟩ ⬦ grāme kāṇaka B+I; grāmikāṇaka M; grāmikāṇaka G • Mirashi translates “the village Kāṇaka”, but this implies grāmakāṇaka. Given the frequent occurrence of vastavya with a locative in inscriptions from across India (cf. EIAD 32 kaṃmākaraṭhe gāme toḍatur̥e vathavasa; III Sail 1.1 dheṇukākaḍe vāthavasa etc), it is perhaps best to read the second akṣara as -me (cf. l. 7 meruḥ) and supply an e-mātrā on the final akṣara. The name of the village may perhaps be compared with modern Kanak in Balochistan, as suggested by Pia Brancaccio (personal communication, 14/04/2025). — ⟨2⟩ vāstavya suprabhāyāḥ ⬦ vāstavya⟨ḥ⟩ B+I; vāstavya⟨ḥ⟩ M; vāstavya⟨ḥ⟩ G • There is no space on the eye-copy for a visarga, perhaps the words are in compound? — ⟨2⟩ (pu)tro • The first akṣara really rather resembles su- or a-. Was the scribe hesitant between suto and putro? A comparison with suprabhāyāḥ earlier in the line seems to rule out a reading of su-. however it is still difficult to read this as pu-, especially when compared to l. 4 -putrasya. — ⟨2⟩ daśabalabal⟨i⟩⟨3⟩no • The first akṣara really resembles de- or o-(cf. daṃl. 4). We follow Mirashi’s suggestion to restore an i-mātra to the second la.

⟨3⟩ kāryyabh⟨i⟩(kṣo)⟨ḥ⟩ • Mirashi says “The superscript r has been wrongly written like the medial i. The sign for the medial i on bhi has not come out on the lithograph”. He also states that “The superscript k of ksh is cursive like that in kshiti, in line 5 of the Pārḍi plates of Dahrasena (No. 8) [CII IV.1: 24]. Pandit Bhagvanlal proposed to read gaṇyo, but the first akṣara is probably bha.” Based on these uncertainties it is worth exploring other possible readings (including the Pandit’s), especially when we compare the two kṣ-s in l. 7. There is no room for a visarga following the supposed (kṣo), although this could just be a flaw in the eye-copy. — ⟨3⟩ ca(ra)ṇaparicaraṇakuśa(lo) • Both of the ṇa-s really resemble he-s.

⟨5⟩ (ndr) • Mirashi says “The subscript curve appear like that of medial r̥i, but it is clearly a mistake of the scribe”. — ⟨5⟩ pritisthiti • Mirashi says “The subscript curve appear like that of medial r̥i, but it is clearly a mistake of the scribe”. — ⟨5⟩ priti ⬦ kṣiti B+I; kṣiti G • Mirashi suggests that the first akṣara should be kṣi but still reads pri.

⟨6⟩ p(ā)ñcikāryya ⬦ pañcikāryya B+I; pañcikāryya M; pañcikāryya G. — ⟨6⟩ v(a)jraṇa(kh)ā ⬦ vāṅkaṇakā B+I; vāṅkaṇakā M; vāṅkaṇakā G • Understand vajranakhā. Mirashi, struggling to make sense of this term, notes that Vāṅkaṇaka “may be a follower of Vaṅkaṇa… perhaps, the presiding deity of the Vaṅka mountain mentioned in some Jātakas.” The proposed reading Vajranakha makes much better sense, although it is not very well attested in early Buddhist literature. In non-Buddhist literature, the term commonly occurs as an epithet of Narasiṃha.

⟨7⟩ vartta ⬦ varta B+I; varta M; varta G • The conjunct is clear. — ⟨7⟩ citaẖ ⬦ citaxka B+I; citaxka M; cita ka G • Perhaps the proper reading is citam ka-.

⟨8⟩ satsutaṁ puṣyanāmna⟨ḥ⟩ • This may be taken as an allusion to Śāriputra, who is commonly referred to as Upatiṣya, and understood in Mūlasarvāstivādin sources to be the son of the brahmin Tiṣya. The donor, who is himself the son of Puṣya(varman), seems to play on this, and on the pair that Tiṣya and Puṣya (and thus, Upatiṣya and *Upapuṣya) form.

Translation

⟨1–4⟩ Homage to the Omniscient One! In the prosperous reign of the Traikūṭakas, in the year two hundred increased by forty-five, in the Kṛṣṇagiri mahāvihāra, Buddharuci a resident of the village Kāṇaka, included in the Sindhu viṣaya (district), the son of the resplendent Buddhaśrī and Puṣyavarman, skilful in serving the feet of the Lord Śākyamuni, who possesses of the ten powers and is perfectly and completely awakened, (and) of the venerable monk who is an accomplished auditor in his Dharma (i.e. Śāriputra), has erected this caitya with stones and bricks joined together to last as long as the moon, the sun, the oceans and the earth will last, (which is) dedicated to the venerable Śāradvatīputra, the chief disciple of the very same supreme Muni.

⟨5–6⟩ Therefore, may gods, yakṣas, siddhas, vidyādharas, gaṇas, Māṇibhadra, Pūrṇabhadra, Pāñcika, the Noble Vajrapāṇi, Vajranakha and others grant their blessing

1.

“As long as the milky ocean, the waters of the whirl-pools of which are whirled by the alligators tossed about by thousands of (its) waves, is an ocean of milk, as long as the rugged Meru is piled with huge rocks, as long as rivers of very clear water flow with (their) water into the ocean – even so long may this lasting and auspicious fame resort to the excellent son of him (who is) named Puṣya!"

⟨9⟩ Dāḍhā(?)

Commentary

Māṇibhadrapūrṇṇabhadrap(ā)ñcikā: Māṇibhadra, Pūrṇabhadra, and Pāñcika are recognised as three yakṣasenāpatis, for instance in the Suvarṇaprabhā (for the first two), see also Hōbōgirin, s.v. Bishamon. The Mmī, which we know circulated in Maharashtra, identifies the first two as brothers living in Brahmavatī (not identified, but understood to be near Gandhāra, which is mentioned immediately after in the work), while some versions of the work interestingly locate Pāñcika in Sindh. Cf. Mmī 20, 22.

Bibliography

Primary

[B+I] Burgess, James and Bhagwanlal Indraji. 1881. Inscriptions from the cave-temples of Western India, with descriptive notes, &c. Archaeological Survey of Western India 10. Bombay: Government Central Press. Page 58.

[M] Mirashi, Vasudev Vishnu. 1955. Inscriptions of the Kalachuri-Chedi Era. Corpus Inscriptionum Indicarum 4. 2 vols. Ootacamund: Government Epigraphist for India. Page 29, item 10.

[G] Gokhale, Shobhana. 1991. Kanheri inscriptions. Pune: Deccan College Post Graduate and Research Institute. Page 59, item 14.

Secondary

Rapson, Edward James. 1908. Catalogue of the coins of the Andhra dynasty, the Western Kṣatrapas, the Traikūṭaka dynasty and the "Bodhi" Dynasty. London: Printed by order of the Trustees of the British Museum. [URL]. Page lxiii.

Alone, Y.S. 2022. “India's Deccan Upland: Historical and Cultural Geography of Western Indian Buddhist Caves.” Scientific Culture 8 (3), pp. 15–33. Page 31.

Brancaccio, Pia. 2022. “Views from the Black Mountain: The Rock-Cut Mahāvihāra at Kānheri/Kr̥ṣṇagiri in Konkan.” In: On the Regional Development of Early Medieval Buddhist Monasteries in South Asia. RINDAS Series of Working Papers 3, edited by Nicolas Mirrissey, Akira Shimada and Abhishek Amar Singh. Kyoto: RINDAS Ryokoku University, pp. 73–88. Pages 73–74.