Pedestal from Trà Kiệu

Editors: Salomé Pichon, Arlo Griffiths.

Identifier: DHARMA_INSCIC00173.

Language: Sanskrit.

Repository: Campa (tfc-campa-epigraphy).

Version: (a2d4f44), last modified (14faddc).

Edition

Face A.

⟨1⟩ <siddham>

I. Anuṣṭubh

yasya śokāt samutpannaṁ ślokaṁ brahmābhipū(jati)

ab

[vi](ṣṇoḥ) puṅsaḥ purāṇasya manu(jasyā)tmarūpiṇaḥ

cd
II. Anuṣṭubh

⟨2⟩ [rāmasya] (ca)ritaṁ kr̥ts[n]aṁ kr̥taṁ (yenābhisādhanaṁ)

ab

kaver ādyasya maharṣṣer vv(ā)lmīkeś cāvaner iha

cd

Face B.

III. Anuṣṭubh

⟨1⟩ (pūjāsthānaṁ) punas tasya kr̥ta ⎼ Cy ⏓ ⏑ ⎼ ⏑ ⎼

ab

prakāśadharmmanr̥patis sarvvārigaṇasūdanaḥ

cd
IV. Anuṣṭubh

⟨2⟩ vidyāśaktikṣamālakṣ(m)īkīrttidhairyya[guṇā]n(v)i(taḥ)

ab

(jaya)ty eṣa jagatkāntaś śārade ntarite [v]i[dhau]

cd

Apparatus

⟨Ib⟩ ślokaṁ ⬦ ślokam Mus 1928.

⟨Ic⟩ puṅsaḥ ⬦ pumsaḥ Mus 1928 • Doubtless a printing error for puṁsaḥ.

⟨Id⟩ manu(jasyā)tma° ⬦ mānuṣasyātma° Mus 1928.

⟨IIa⟩ [rāmasya](ca)ritaṁ kr̥ts[n]aṁ ⬦ x x x x ritaṁ kr̥tyaṁ Mus 1928 • Our reading presupposes that this pāda is directly based on Vālmīki’s Rāmāyaṇa 1.2.30a.

⟨IIb⟩ (yenābhisādhanaṁ)yenābhiṣecanaṁ Mus 1928.

⟨IId⟩ cāvaner iha ⬦ śru ⏑ ⎼ r iha Mus 1928.

⟨IIIa⟩ sthānaṁ ⬦ °sthānam Mus 1928 • The word pūjāsthāna is attested in two other dedication inscriptions of the same king, viz. C. 79 and C. 136

⟨IIIb⟩ kr̥ta ⎼ Cy ⏓ ⏑ ⎼ ⏑ ⎼ ⬦ kr̥ta x x y ⏑ ⎼ ⏑ ⎼ Mus 1928 • Compared to Mus, we assume one akṣara less before and one more after the one bearing a subscript y, on the supposition that we may restore something like kr̥ta[vān] ya ....

⟨IIId⟩ sarvvāri° ⬦ sarvāri° Mus 1928.

⟨IVc⟩ (jaya)ty eṣa ⬦ x x ty eṣa Mus 1928.

⟨IVd⟩ [v]i[dhau][r]i[pau] Mus 1928 • It seems unlikely that the enemy would be equated with the autumn, as Mus’ reading implies. This is precisely the season associated with beauty of the moon (vidhu) due to its proverbial clear skies. The idea rather seems to be that the autumn moon itself would be eclipsed by the king.

Translation

Having restored here the place of worship for the primordial poet and great[est] sage of the earth, Vālmīki, from whose anguish was born the verse that Brahmā praised, (and) who has composed the complete, ... (abhisādhana?) acts of Rāma, the human own/bodily form of the ancient male, Viṣṇu, this king Prakāśadharman, who subdues all (worldly and internal) foes, who is cherished by the world (or: the goddess Earth), being endowed with the virtues of knowledge, power, forbearance, wealth, fame, and patience, is victorious as the beloved of [all] creatures, the autumnal moon having been eclipsed (by his glory)!

Commentary

The text alludes to, and even directly replicates phrases from, the Bālakāṇḍa of Vālmīki’s Rāmāyaṇa. See the observations of Mus 1928. The new reading of stanza II presented here adds significantly to the extent of our poet’s dependence on Vālmīki, and simultaneously removes the need to presume, as did Mus, that Vālmīki is being identified as Viṣṇu. For the significance of the expression arigaṇa, see the commentary on C. 137. Since the word pūjāsthāna in the inscriptions of Prakāśadharman seems to refer each time either to the inscribed pedestal itself or to the place where that pedestal was installed, we cannot follow the reasoning in Trần Kỳ Phương 2000 identifying this ‘place of worship’ as the different and more famous pedestal from Trà Kiệu that is decorated with elaborate sculptural reliefs.

If abhisādhanaṁ is indeed the correct reading, perhaps it can be understood either as an adjective with the sense ’propitiating’ (cf. Monier-Williams s.v. abhisidh) or as a noun, ’propitiation’, in apposition to caritaṁ. We therefore tentatively propose interpreting this quarter-verse to mean: ’who composed, [as an act of] worship/propitiation, the complete Acts of Rāma’.

Bibliography

Secondary

[claeys-1927] Claeys, Jean-Yves. 1927. “Chronique: fouilles de Trà-Kiệu.” BEFEO 27, pp. 468–482. DOI: 10.3406/befeo.1927.4404. [URL]. Page 478.

[tkp-2000] Trần Kỳ Phương. 2000. “The wedding of Sītā: A theme from the Rāmāyaṇa represented on the Tra Kieu pedestal.” In: Narrative Sculpture and Literary Traditions in South and Southeast Asia. Edited by Marijke J. Klokke. Leiden: Brill, pp. 51–58. Pages 55–56.