Floor slabs from apsidal temple of site 1 at Nagarjunakonda — reign of Siri-Vīrapurisadatta, year 18

Editors: Arlo Griffiths, Vincent Tournier.

Identifier: DHARMA_INSEIAD00028.

Hand description:

Language: Middle Indo-Aryan.

Repository: Early Andhra (tfb-eiad-epigraphy).

Version: (a154659), last modified (77e39b7).

Edition

⟨1⟩ si(dhaṁ) ~namo bhagavato budhasa cetiyaghar⟨e⟩ mahāraja(sa) (v)i(rūpakhapat)imahāsenaparigahitasa Agihotagiṭhomavājapeyāsamedhayājisa Anekahiranakoḍigosatasahasahalasatasa⟨hasa⟩padāyisa savathesu Apatihatasaṁkapasa vāseṭhiputasa Ikhāku⟨ku⟩lasa siricātamulasa sahodāra bhagini mahātalavarasa vāseṭhiputasa pugiyāna khaṁdasirisa bhariya mahātalavari khaṁdasāgaraṁnagamatā cātisiri Apano jāmatukasa raño maṭhariputasa Ikhakunaṁ sirivirapurisadatasa Ayuvadhanike ve(ja)yike ⟨2⟩ Apano ca Ubhaya(lo)kahitasukhanivānatha(nā)ya bhagavato saṁmasa(ṁ)budhasa dhātuparigahitasa ma⟨⟨hā⟩⟩cetiyapādam(ū)le pavajitānaṁ nānādesasamanāgatānaṁ savasādhūnaṁ mahā(bhi)khusaghasa Apa(no) ca Ubhayakulasa Atichita m anāgatavaṭamanake nikapanike (ca) parinā(me)tunaṁ Aparamahāvinaselīyanaṁ parigahe savaniyuta cātusalaparigahitaṁ selamaṁṭava patiṭhapitaṁ raṁño sirivīrapurisadatasa saṁvacharaṁ Aṭhārasaṁ 108hemaṁtapakhaṁ chaṭhaṁ 6divasaṁ paṁcamaṁ 5savasatānaṁ hitaya sukhāya hotu ti

Apparatus

⟨1⟩ cetiyaghar⟨e⟩ ⬦ cetiyaghara Vogel 1929–1930 • By contrast with Vogel, who took cetiyaghara as a nominative singular, we follow here the suggestion of Sircar 1942, p. 227 n. 2; Sircar 1965, p. 236 n. 3, in interpreting it as a mistake for cetiyaghare. This is supported by the similarity of construction with the pillar inscriptions, where mahācetiye opens the main sentence after the opening invocation. — ⟨1⟩ Agihotagi- ⬦ Agihot⟨ā⟩gi- Vogel 1929–1930 • It is tempting to follow Vogel’s emendation, although it is not impossible to understand the form transmitted by this inscription as reflecting a MIA sandhi. — ⟨1⟩ -hiranakoḍi- ⬦ -hiranakoṭi- Vogel 1929–1930 • The form usually encountered is -hiraṁṇakoṭi- (e.g., EIAD 9, l. 3; EIAD 12, l. 3). — ⟨1⟩ siricātamulasa ⬦ siricātamūlasa Vogel 1929–1930. — ⟨1⟩ sahodāra ⬦ sahodār⟨ā⟩ Vogel 1929–1930. — ⟨1⟩ pugiyāna ⬦ pugiyāna⟨ṁ⟩ Vogel 1929–1930. — ⟨1⟩ bhariya ⬦ bhariy⟨ā⟩ Vogel 1929–1930. — ⟨1⟩ sāgaraṁnagamatā ⬦ sāgaraṁnagam⟨ā⟩tā Vogel 1929–1930. — ⟨1⟩ jāma(tu)kasa ⬦ jām⟨ā⟩tukasa Vogel 1929–1930 • The tu is unusually realized, as in l. 2 dhātu. — ⟨1⟩ maṭhariputasa ⬦ m⟨ā⟩ṭhariputasa Vogel 1929–1930. — ⟨1⟩ Ikhakunaṁ ⬦ Ikh⟨ā⟩kunaṁ Vogel 1929–1930.

⟨2⟩ -nivānathanāya bhagavato ⬦ -(nivāṇathanāya) Vogel 1929–1930 • Note that Vogel and Sircar omit a whole word. — ⟨2⟩ dhātuparigahitasa • This compound occurs elsewhere as dhātuvaraparigahitasa. While it is possible that the two syllables ⟨vara⟩ to have been omitted by the engraver, similarly to his obvious omission of ⟨hasa⟩ (l. 1), this might also constitute a significant variant. — ⟨2⟩ mahā(bhi)khusaghasa ⬦ mahābhikhusa(ṁ)ghasa Vogel 1929–1930. — ⟨2⟩ -vaṭamanake ⬦ -vaṭamānake Vogel 1929–1930. — ⟨2⟩ -selīyanaṁ ⬦ -seliy⟨ā⟩naṁ. — ⟨2⟩ savaniyuta ⬦ savaniyuta(ṁ) Vogel 1929–1930. — ⟨2⟩ cātusala- • Vogel 1929–1930, pp. 21, n. 4 suggests to emend the reading into catusāla-, but the parallel formula in EIAD 24 also shows cātu-. — ⟨2⟩ selamaṁṭava ⬦ selamaṁṭava(ṁ) Vogel 1929–1930. — ⟨2⟩ patiṭhapitaṁ ⬦ patiṭh⟨ā⟩pitaṁ Vogel 1929–1930. — ⟨2⟩ sirivīrapurisadatasa ⬦ sirivirapurisadatasa Vogel 1929–1930. — ⟨2⟩ Aṭhārasaṁ ⬦ Aṭhāra saṁ Vogel 1929–1930. — ⟨2⟩ hitaya ⬦ hit⟨ā⟩ya Vogel 1929–1930.

Translation

(1) Success! Homage to the Bhagavant, the Buddha!

(1–2) At the shrine hall (cetiyaghara), Cāntisirī — uterine sister of Great King Vāsiṭṭhīputta Siri-Cāntamūla of the Ikṣvāku family, favored by Mahāsena who has Virūpākṣa as his lord, sacrificer of the Agnihotra, the Agniṣṭoma, the Vājapeya and the Aśvamedha, giver of many times tens of millions of (pieces of) gold, hundreds of thousands of cows and hundreds of thousands of plows (of land), whose will is unimpeded in all matters; wife of the Great Talavara Vāsiṭṭhīputta Kandasiri of the Pūkīyas, Great-Talavara-wife, mother of Khandasāgaraṇṇaka — in order to increase the lifespan and leading to victory after victory of her son-in-law, King Māṭharīputta Siri-Vīrapurisadatta of the Ikṣvākus, and for the sake of bringing about well-being and happiness in both worlds and nirvāṇa for herself, at the base of the Great Shrine of the Bhagavant, the Perfect Buddha, who is ensconced in the excellent relic [or: element (i.e., nirvāṇadhātu)], for the great community of monks (consisting) of all good renunciants who come from various countries – having dedicated (the merit) to the past, future and present members of her family on both sides and to nikapanīka –, established in the possession of the Aparamahāvinaseliyas a stone pavillion equipped with everything and enclosed by a quadrangular compound.

(2) In the eighteenth — 18th — year of King Siri-Vīrapurisadatta, in the sixth — 6th — fortnight of winter, on the fifth — 5th — day. May it be for the well-being and happiness of all beings.

Commentary

This inscription has the particularity of writing many syllables with expected ā as a. Vogel corrects them by editing [ā], which should correspond to [ā] of our conventions but in fact indicates here an editorial addition, having the same function of [*x], when the editor supplies a missing anusvāra in pugiyāna (l. 1), or in his edition of other inscriptions (see for instance EIAD 30). Elsewhere, he uses the brackets [...] to mark damaged akṣaras that can still be read (cf. Vogel 1929–1930, pp. 21, n. 2), which corresponds to our use of these brackets. In order to clarify as much as possible this inconsistent practice, we have thus marked Vogel’s suggested editorial additions with pointy brackets ⟨ ⟩ in our apparatus. Also, since the number of missing markers of vowel lengths is substantial, we have made only a minimum of corrections to the text.

Bibliography

First described and edited by Vogel 1929–1930, pp. 14, 21–2 (E), and then by Sircar 1965. Edited again, from the EI estampage, by Sircar 1942, pp. 227–8 and Sircar 1965, pp. 236–7. Re-edited here from Vogel’s estampage and after autopsy of the stone slabs.

Secondary

Srinivasan, P. R. and S. Sankaranarayanan. 1979. Inscriptions of the Ikshvāku period. Epigraphical Series 14. Hyderabad: Govt. of Andhra Pradesh. Page no. 20.

Tsukamoto Keishō 塚本啓祥. 1996. インド仏教碑銘の研究 I, Text, Note, 和訳 Indo Bukkyō himei no kenkyū I: Text, Note, Wayaku [A comprehensive study of the Indian Buddhist inscriptions, Part I: Text, Notes and Japanese Translation]. Kyōto-shi 京都市: Heirakuji Shoten 平楽寺書店. Page no. Naga 18.

Raghunath, K. 2001. The Ikṣvākus of Vijayapuri: A study of the Nagarjunakonda inscriptions. Delhi: Eastern Book Linkers. Pages 111–2 (no. 14).

Soundara Rajan, K. V. 2006. Nagarjunakonda (1954–60), volume II: The historical period. Memoirs of the archaeological survey of India 75. New Delhi: Archaeological Survey of India. Page 164.