Mandsaur Inscription of Dattabhaṭa
Version: (3e68bda), last modified (3e68bda).
Edition
⟨1⟩ siddhaM ye(n)edam udbhava-nirodha-paraṁparāyāṁ magnaṁ jagad vividha-duẖkha-nirantarāyāM tittrāsunā tripadi¿r?o niradeśi dharmmas tasmai namo ⟨’⟩stu sugatā(ya gatāya) śāntiM
⟨2⟩ guptānvaya-vyomani candrakalpaḥ śrī-candragupta-prathitābhidhānaḥ Asīn nr̥po loka-vilocanānāṁ navoditaś candra Ivāpaharttā bhuvaḥ patī(nāṁ bhu)vi (bhū)patitvam ācchidya
⟨3⟩ dhī-vikkrama-sādhanena nādyāpi mokṣaṁ samupaiti yena sva-vaṁśya-pāśair avapāśitā bhūḥ govindavat khyāta-guṇa-prabhāvo govindaguptorjji⟨ta⟩-nā(ma-dhe)yaM vasundhareśa-
⟨4⟩ s tanayaṁ prajajñe sa dity-adit(y)os tanayais sarūpaM yasmin nr̥pair astam-ita-pratāpaiś śirobhir āliṅgita-pāda-padme| vicāra-dolā(ṁ) vibudhādhipo ⟨’⟩pi śaṅkā-parītaḥ
⟨5⟩ samupāruroha sen(ā)patis tasya babhūva nāmnā vāyv-ādinā rakṣita-paścimena yasyāri-se(nā)s samupetya senāṁ na kasyacil locana-mārggam īyuḥ śaucānu-
⟨6⟩ rāga-vya{ṁ}vasāya-medhā- dākṣya-kṣamādiṅ guṇa-rāśim ekaḥ yaśaś ca yaś candra-marīci-gauraṁ dadhāra dhārādhara-dhīra-ghoṣaḥ Udīcya-bhūbhr̥t-kula-candrikāyāṁ sa rā(ja)putryā(ṁ)
⟨7⟩ janayāṁ babhūva(|) nāmnātmajaṁ dattabhaṭaṁ guṇānāṁ kīrtteś ca yo ⟨’⟩bhūn nilayaḥ pi(te)va(|) dāne dhaneśaṁ dhiyi vāci ceśaṁ ratau smaraṁ saṁyati pāśa-pāṇiM yam artthi-
⟨8⟩ -vidvat-pramadāri-varggās sambhāvayāṁ cakkrur anekadhaikaM guptānvayāri-druma-dhūmaketuḥ prabhākaro bhūmipatir yyam enaM sveṣām balānāṁ baladeva-vīryyaṁ guṇā-
⟨9⟩ nurāgād adhipaṁ cakāra| cikīrṣuṇā pratyupakāra-leśaṁ tenaiṣa pitroḥ śubha-yoga-siddhyai| stūpa-prapārāma-varair upetaḥ kūpo ⟨’⟩rṇṇavāgādha-jalo (n)yakhāni| yasmi-
⟨10⟩ n suhr̥t-saṅgama-śītalañ ca mano munīnām iva nirmmalaṁ ca| vaco gurūṇām iva cāmbu patthyaṁ pepīyamānaḥ sukham eti lokaḥ| śaran-niśā-nātha-karāmalāyā
⟨11⟩ vikkhyāpake mālava-va¿ṅ?śa-kīrtteḥ| śarad-gaṇe pañcaśate vyatīte tri-ghātitāṣṭābhyadhike kkrameṇa| bhr̥ṅgāṅga-bhārālasa-bāla-padme kāle prapanne ramaṇīya-sāle|
⟨12⟩ gatāsu deśāntarita-priyāsu priyāsu kāma-jvalanāhutitvaM nātyuṣṇa-śītānila-kampiteṣu pravr̥tta-mattānyabhr̥ta-sva¿t?eṣu| priyādharoṣṭhāruṇa-pallaveṣu
⟨13⟩ navāṁ va(ha)tsūpavaneṣu kānti(M) yo dhātu-mātre hata-dhātu-doṣaḥ sarvva-kriyā-siddhim uvāca tasya| kundendu-śubhro ⟨’⟩bbhra-vighr̥ṣṭa-yaṣṭir ayaṁ kr̥to dhātu-dharaḥ sa-kūpaḥ|
⟨14⟩ Aneka-sarid-aṅganāṅga-paribhoga-nityotsavo mahārṇṇava Ivāmbu¿t?o nicaya Eṣa mā bhū⟨t⟩ kṣayī| surāsura-naroragendra-mahito ⟨’⟩py ayaṁ dhātu-dhr̥k paraitu sama-
⟨15⟩ -kālatām amara-bhūdharārkkendubhiḥ| stūpa-kūpa-prapārāmā ye caite parikīrttitāḥ loko¿n?tara-vihārasya sīmni te ⟨’⟩bhyantarīkr̥tā⟨ḥ⟩|| ravilasya kr̥tiḥ|
<?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_Schema.rng" type="application/xml" schematypens="http://purl.oclc.org/dsdl/schematron"?>
<?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"?>
<TEI xmlns="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0" xml:lang="eng">
<teiHeader>
<fileDesc>
<titleStmt>
<title>Mandsaur Inscription of Dattabhaṭa</title>
<respStmt>
<resp key="contributor">Original EpiDoc Encoding for Siddham</resp>
<persName ref="part:daba">
<forename>Dániel</forename>
<surname>Balogh</surname>
</persName>
</respStmt>
<respStmt>
<resp key="contributor">Conversion of encoding for DHARMA</resp>
<persName ref="part:daba">
<forename>Dániel</forename>
<surname>Balogh</surname>
</persName>
</respStmt>
<respStmt>
<resp key="creator">intellectual authorship of edition</resp>
<persName ref="part:daba">
<forename>Dániel</forename>
<surname>Balogh</surname>
</persName>
</respStmt>
</titleStmt>
<publicationStmt>
<authority><ref target="https://dharmalekha.info">DHARMA</ref></authority>
<pubPlace>Berlin</pubPlace>
<idno type="filename">DHARMA_INSSiddham00064.xml</idno>
<!--
If this file is moved into a named DHARMA corpus, retain the Siddham identifier as <altIdentifier>
-->
<availability><licence target="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/">CC BY-SA 4.0</licence></availability>
<date from="2019" to="2025">2019-2025</date>
</publicationStmt>
<sourceDesc>
<msDesc>
<msIdentifier>
<repository>DHARMAbase</repository>
<idno/>
</msIdentifier>
<msContents>
<summary/>
</msContents>
<physDesc>
<handDesc>
<p/>
</handDesc>
</physDesc>
</msDesc>
</sourceDesc>
</fileDesc>
<encodingDesc>
<p>Encoded in TEI/EpiDoc according to the <ref target="https://hal.science/halshs-02888186">DHARMA Encoding Guide for Documentary Editions, version 2</ref></p>
</encodingDesc>
<revisionDesc>
<change who="part:daba" when="2023-05-15" status="draft">Additional global changes for compatibility with DHARMA</change>
<change who="part:axja" when="2021-07-06" status="draft">Updating toward the encoding template v03</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>
<text xml:space="preserve">
<body>
<div type="edition" xml:lang="san-Latn" rendition="class:83225 maturity:83211"><!--
This inscription is digitally edited by Dániel Balogh from photographs of the original stone (taken at Gwalior Museum in January 2017). Some alternative opinions are cited from the edition of Garde_1947-48 (G), Sircar's SI and Agrawala's Imperial Gupta Epigraphs (A). Version of January 2019. Comments below are offered "as is" and do not represent a thoroughly researched or considered opinion.
--><p><lb n="1"/>siddhaM<!--
L1. The invocation siddham is inline and not followed by space or punctuation, but ends in a halanta m, small subscript with a line above (as other halanta m-s are in the rest of the inscription).
--></p>
<lg n="1" met="vasantatilakā">
<l n="a">ye<unclear>n</unclear>edam udbhava-nirodha-paraṁparāyāṁ</l>
<l n="b">magnaṁ jagad vividha-duẖkha-nirantarāyāM</l>
<l n="c">tittrāsunā tripadi<choice><sic>r</sic><corr>k</corr></choice>o niradeśi dharmmas<!--
L1. I adopt SI's emendation to tripadiko. Garde only observes that "tripadira" is "an unfamiliar" word in Sanskrit and suggests for comparison chaddhātura in Majjhimanikāya, sūtra 140 (could not trace this). Sircar opines that dharma is tripadika because it rests on the Buddha, Dharma and Saṅgha. Would the dharma rest on dharma?
--></l>
<l n="d">tasmai namo <supplied reason="subaudible">’</supplied>stu sugatā<unclear>ya gatāya</unclear> śāntiM</l>
</lg>
<lg n="2" met="upajāti">
<l n="a"><lb n="2"/>guptānvaya-vyomani candrakalpaḥ</l>
<l n="b">śrī-candragupta-prathitābhidhānaḥ</l>
<l n="c">Asīn nr̥po loka-vilocanānāṁ</l><!--
L2. lo is the cursive form with a loop at top and an extension to right.
-->
<l n="d">navoditaś candra Ivāpaharttā<!--
L2. Half and full-verse ends up to now had no punctuation, but ended either in a visarga or a halanta consonant. V2d is the first without either, but it does have a short space after it.
--></l>
</lg>
<lg n="3" met="upajāti">
<l n="a">bhuvaḥ patī<unclear>nāṁ bhu</unclear>vi <unclear>bhū</unclear>patitvam</l>
<l n="b">ācchidya <lb n="3"/>dhī-vikkrama-sādhanena<!--
L3. Not even a space, no end-mark at all after v3b.
--></l>
<l n="c">nādyāpi mokṣaṁ samupaiti yena<!--
L3, v3. Compare l4 of the Mehrauli pillar, IN00015.
--></l>
<l n="d">sva-vaṁśya-pāśair avapāśitā bhūḥ</l>
</lg>
<lg n="4" met="upajāti">
<l n="a">govindavat khyāta-guṇa-prabhāvo</l>
<l n="b">govindaguptorjji<supplied reason="omitted">ta</supplied>-nā<unclear>ma-dhe</unclear>yaM</l>
<l n="c">vasundhareśa<lb n="4" break="no"/>s tanayaṁ prajajñe<!--
Note the middle perfect where one would expect a causative in periphrastic perfect; compare l7. Sircar also notes this is not quite correct.
--></l>
<l n="d">sa dity-adit<unclear>y</unclear>os tanayais sarūpaM</l>
</lg>
<lg n="5" met="upajāti">
<l n="a">yasmin nr̥pair astam-ita-pratāpaiś</l>
<l n="b">śirobhir āliṅgita-pāda-padme|<!--
L5. This is the first actual punctuation sign. It is a plain horizontal dash, and so are the later ones transcribed with a single daṇḍa.
--></l>
<l n="c">vicāra-dolā<unclear>ṁ</unclear> vibudhādhipo <supplied reason="subaudible">’</supplied>pi</l>
<l n="d">śaṅkā-parītaḥ <lb n="5"/>samupāruroha</l>
</lg>
<lg n="6" met="upajāti">
<l n="a">sen<unclear>ā</unclear>patis tasya babhūva nāmnā</l>
<l n="b">vāyv-ādinā rakṣita-paścimena</l>
<l n="c">yasyāri-se<unclear>nā</unclear>s samupetya senāṁ</l>
<l n="d">na kasyacil locana-mārggam īyuḥ</l>
</lg>
<lg n="7" met="upajāti">
<l n="a">śaucānu<lb n="6" break="no"/>rāga-vya<surplus>ṁ</surplus>vasāya-medhā-
</l>
<l n="b">dākṣya-kṣamādiṅ guṇa-rāśim ekaḥ
</l>
<l n="c">yaśaś ca yaś candra-marīci-gauraṁ</l>
<l n="d">dadhāra dhārādhara-dhīra-ghoṣaḥ
</l>
</lg>
<lg n="8" met="upajāti">
<l n="a">Udīcya-bhūbhr̥t-kula-candrikāyāṁ</l>
<l n="b">sa rā<unclear>ja</unclear>putryā<unclear>ṁ</unclear> <lb n="7"/>janayāṁ babhūva<unclear>|</unclear><!--
L7. G and SI read jaṁnayāṁ, emending to janayāṁ. The dot appears to be a fault of the rubbing; no anusvāra is visible on the stone.
--><!--
L7. Note the causative in periphrastic perfect; compare l4.
--></l>
<l n="c">nāmnātmajaṁ dattabhaṭaṁ guṇānāṁ</l>
<l n="d">kīrtteś ca yo <supplied reason="subaudible">’</supplied>bhūn nilayaḥ pi<unclear>te</unclear>va<unclear>|</unclear>
</l>
</lg>
<lg n="9" met="upajāti">
<l n="a">dāne dhaneśaṁ dhiyi vāci ceśaṁ<!--
Both Garde and Agrawala interpret vāci ... īśam to mean vāgīśam. Garde (p15n8) also notes that this formation is correct according to Pāṇini II.3.39. SI seems to disagree, saying it "has been taken to mean 'the lord of speech, i.e. Br̥ihaspati in talent', although the meaning actually is 'Īśa (Śiva) in talent and speech'". I tend to agree with Garde, because I don't think Śiva is a very apt comparison here.
--></l>
<l n="b">ratau smaraṁ saṁyati pāśa-pāṇiM</l>
<l n="c">yam artthi<lb n="8" break="no"/>-vidvat-pramadāri-varggās</l>
<l n="d">sambhāvayāṁ cakkrur anekadhaikaM</l>
</lg>
<lg n="10" met="upajāti">
<l n="a">guptānvayāri-druma-dhūmaketuḥ</l>
<l n="b">prabhākaro bhūmipatir yyam enaM</l>
<l n="c">sveṣām balānāṁ baladeva-vīryyaṁ</l>
<l n="d">guṇā<lb n="9" break="no"/>nurāgād adhipaṁ cakāra|<!--
L9. G and SI (and A) print an original double daṇḍa after v10. The punctuation mark is a dash; there may be a second dash below it, but it is more likely to be damage, and since there is a double vertical punctuation mark at the end of the text, I don't thik a double horizontal is likely.
--></l>
</lg>
<lg n="11" met="upajāti">
<l n="a">cikīrṣuṇā pratyupakāra-leśaṁ</l>
<l n="b">tenaiṣa pitroḥ śubha-yoga-siddhyai|</l>
<l n="c">stūpa-prapārāma-varair upetaḥ</l>
<l n="d">kūpo <supplied reason="subaudible">’</supplied>rṇṇavāgādha-jalo <unclear>n</unclear>yakhāni|<!--
L9. Garde reads vyakhāni as clear; SI prints vya as unclear. I think nyakhāni is slightly more likely and more appropriate.
--></l>
</lg>
<lg n="12" met="upajāti">
<l n="a">yasmi<lb n="10" break="no"/>n suhr̥t-saṅgama-śītalañ ca</l>
<l n="b">mano munīnām iva nirmmalaṁ ca|</l><!--
L10. Note the different orthography of śītalañ ca and nirmmalaṁ ca.
-->
<l n="c">vaco gurūṇām iva cāmbu patthyaṁ</l>
<l n="d">pepīyamānaḥ sukham eti lokaḥ|<!--
L10. At the end of v12 a clear punctuation sign follows the visarga, so in this case at least the visarga neither replaces punctuation nor combines with it.
--></l>
</lg>
<lg n="13" met="upajāti">
<l n="a">śaran-niśā-nātha-karāmalāyā<!--
L10. Garde and SI both (also Agrawala) read a visarga at the end of this line. The faint dots in the rubbing are no different from any number of random specks. In the original stone, part of lā and everything after it is now obscured by tile adhesive.
--></l>
<l n="b"><lb n="11"/>vikkhyāpake mālava-va<sic>ṅ</sic>śa-kīrtteḥ|<!--
L11. Punctuation dash again follows visarga of kīrtteḥ.
--></l>
<l n="c">śarad-gaṇe pañcaśate vyatīte</l>
<l n="d">tri-ghātitāṣṭābhyadhike kkrameṇa|
</l>
</lg>
<lg n="14" met="upajāti">
<l n="a">bhr̥ṅgāṅga-bhārālasa-bāla-padme</l>
<l n="b">kāle prapanne ramaṇīya-sāle|</l>
<l n="c"><lb n="12"/>gatāsu deśāntarita-priyāsu</l>
<l n="d">priyāsu kāma-jvalanāhutitvaM</l>
</lg>
<lg n="15" met="upajāti">
<l n="a">nātyuṣṇa-śītānila-kampiteṣu</l>
<l n="b">pravr̥tta-mattānyabhr̥ta-sva<choice><sic>t</sic><corr>n</corr></choice>eṣu|</l>
<l n="c">priyādharoṣṭhāruṇa-pallaveṣu</l>
<l n="d"><lb n="13"/>navāṁ va<unclear>ha</unclear>tsūpavaneṣu kānti<unclear>M</unclear><!--
L13. At the end of v15 Sircar prints an original double daṇḍa, while Garde prints neither original nor supplied punctuation. There is only a subscript halanta M with line above.
--></l>
</lg>
<lg n="16" met="upajāti">
<l n="a">yo dhātu-mātre hata-dhātu-doṣaḥ</l>
<l n="b">sarvva-kriyā-siddhim uvāca tasya|</l>
<l n="c">kundendu-śubhro <supplied reason="subaudible">’</supplied>bbhra-vighr̥ṣṭa-yaṣṭir</l>
<l n="d">ayaṁ kr̥to dhātu-dharaḥ sa-kūpaḥ|</l><!--
L13. SI reads dhātu-varaḥ and comments that it really means the relics of the Buddha, but here refers to a stūpa built on such relics, normally called dhātu-garbha. Garde, correctly, reads dhātu-dharaḥ, which eliminates the need for Sircar's explanation by paronomasia. dhara is clear in the stone.
--></lg>
<lg n="17" met="pr̥thvī"><!--
L13. Slurred caesurae in v17a and c, but the caesura is clearly observed and strong in the other two quarters.
-->
<l n="a"><lb n="14"/>Aneka-sarid-aṅganāṅga-paribhoga-nityotsavo</l>
<l n="b">mahārṇṇava Ivāmbu<choice><sic>t</sic><corr>n</corr></choice>o nicaya Eṣa mā bhū<supplied reason="omitted">t</supplied> kṣayī|</l>
<l n="c">surāsura-naroragendra-mahito <supplied reason="subaudible">’</supplied>py ayaṁ dhātu-dhr̥k</l>
<l n="d">paraitu sama<lb n="15" break="no"/>-kālatām amara-bhūdharārkkendubhiḥ|</l><!--
L15. Most of this line is smeared with tile adhesive at present.
--></lg>
<lg n="18" met="anuṣṭubh">
<l n="a">stūpa-kūpa-prapārāmā</l>
<l n="b">ye caite parikīrttitāḥ</l>
<l n="c">loko<choice><sic>n</sic><corr>t</corr></choice>tara-vihārasya</l>
<l n="d">sīmni te <supplied reason="subaudible">’</supplied>bhyantarīkr̥tā<supplied reason="omitted">ḥ</supplied>||<!--
The punctuation mark transcribed as a double daṇḍa is a double vertical.
--></l>
</lg>
<p>ravilasya kr̥tiḥ|
</p>
</div>
<div type="apparatus">
<listApp>
<app loc="line">
<lem/>
<rdg source="bib:AuthorYear_01"/>
</app>
</listApp>
</div>
<div type="translation" source="bib:AuthorYear_01"><!--Indicate @resp or change @source when a translation is added -->
</div>
<div type="commentary">
</div>
<div type="bibliography">
<p/>
<listBibl type="primary">
<bibl n="siglum"><ptr target="bib:AuthorYear_01"/></bibl>
</listBibl>
<listBibl type="secondary">
<bibl n="siglum"><ptr target="bib:AuthorYear_01"/></bibl>
</listBibl>
</div>
</body>
</text>
</TEI>