Mpu Mano

Editor: Arlo Griffiths.

Identifier: DHARMA_INSIDENKMpuMano.

Hand description:

Same hand as that seen in Gajah Mada? See Griffiths 2020. Also same as hand of Singasari fragments published in Hasan Djafar & Trigangga 2019.

Languages: Old Javanese, Sanskrit.

Repository: Nusantara Epigraphy (tfc-nusantara-epigraphy).

Version: (6ec918b), last modified (f510d28).

Edition

⟨Page 1r⟩⟨left: 1⟩ ⟨1r1⟩ || ✤ || namo ’stu sarvvabuddhăya || ✤ ||

svasti śakavarṣātīta, 888, śrăvaṇa-māsa, tīthī, Aṣṭamī kr̥ṣṇa-pakṣa, ha, va, ra, vāra, sinta, ⟨1r2⟩ bāyabyastha grahacāra, rohiṇī-nakṣatra, prajāpati-devatā, mahendra-maṇḍala, harṣaṇa-yoga, vijaya-muhūrta, śaśī-parvvaiśa, ⟨1r3⟩ kolava-karaṇa, siṅha-rāśi,

Irika divāśanira, mpu mano, muṇyākən· lmaḥ sīma, kaputrāṅśanira, kalilīranira saṅke kavvitanira ⟨1r4⟩ Ikaṁ harahara, kidul i pomahanira, hīṅanya lor· kidul iṁ pagər· kinalihan·, muAṁ mpu mano, hīṅanya kulvan· Aṅalihī pagər·, muAṁ ⟨1v5⟩ Iṁ paviḍəṅan·, hīṅanya vetan·, Aṅalihi pagər·, muAṁ Iṁ kalampayan·, hīṅanya kidul·, Ikaṁ pagər· lor· saṁke kalimusan·, ya t⟨Page 1v⟩⟨1v1⟩ekā pinuṇyakənira Iṁ mpuṅku ⟨Iṁ⟩ susuk· pagər·, muAṁ mpuṅku Iṁ nairañjanā, Arthahetoḥ mpu buddhivāla, paknanya gavayənnira kuṭi, dharmma lpa⟨1v2⟩s· kapodgālikanani kulasantānānira mpuṅku Iṁ nairañjanā,

kunaṁ kramanya, Ikaṁ savaḥ kidul iṁ kuṭi, təmpaḥ, 3, ya ta sinaṇḍā mpuṅku ⟨Iṁ⟩ su⟨1v3⟩suk· pagər·, muAṁ mpuṅku Iṁ nairañjanā, Iṁ mā kā 2(,) ya ta dharmma mpuṅku, Iṁ susuk· pagər·, muAṁ mpuṅku Iṁ naira¿g?⟨ñ⟩janā, An· paminta I⟨1v4⟩ka lmaḥ tumpal ika savaḥ lor· damlənira kuṭi, ya ta kăraṇanyan· ¿linbas?⟨tinbus⟩ ikaṁ savaḥ saṇḍanira mpu mano, Iṁ mā kā 3, mapa⟨1v5⟩k(na) bhuktyana saṁ hyaṁ kuṭi, saṅka ri gə:ṁnyām¿bha?⟨bhək⟩ mpu mano, ya¿t?⟨n⟩· dharmma donanya, Apitovin ana riṁ dharmma parṇnaḥ mpu mano, denira mpuṅku Iṁ

Apparatus

⟨1r1⟩ tīthī ⬦ tithi B. — ⟨1r1⟩ kr̥ṣṇapakṣa ⬦ śuklapakṣa B • Damais’ suspicion of an error in Brandes reading is thus confirmed.

⟨1r2⟩ -muhūrta ⬦ -muhūrtta B. — ⟨1r2⟩ -parvvaiśa ⬦ -parvveśa B.

⟨1r3⟩ kolava- • The taling stands at the end of line 2 but is repeated at the start of line 3. See another occurrence of this (actually rather widespread) phenomenon at the transition between lines 5 and 6. — ⟨1r3⟩ kalilīranira ⬦ kaliliranira B.

⟨1r3-1r4⟩ kavvitanira Ikaṁ ⬦ kavvitanira, Ikaṁ B • No punctuation sign is engraved between these words.

⟨1r4⟩ Aṅalihī ⬦ Aṅalihi B.

⟨1r5-1v1⟩ ya t⟨Page 1v⟩⟨1v1⟩ekā • The taling stands at the end of line 1r5, but is repeated at the start of line 1v1. See also 1r2–1r3 above.

⟨1v1⟩ mpuṅku ⟨Iṁ⟩ susuk· ⬦ mpuṅku susuk· B • Since in most cases we find Iṁ between the words mpuṅku susuk·, I assume that we must emend mpuṅku Iṁ susuk· here and in 1v2–1v3. — ⟨1v1⟩ mpuṅku Iṁ nairañjanā ⬦ mpuṅku I nairañjanā B.

⟨1v2-1v3⟩ mpuṅku ⟨Iṁ⟩ susuk· ⬦ mpuṅku susuk· B • See line 1v1.

⟨1v3⟩ mpuṅku Iṁ nairañjanā ⬦ mpuṅku I nairañjanā B. — ⟨1v3⟩ kā 2(,) ya ⬦ kā 2 ya B • The punctuation sign is very faint. — ⟨1v3⟩ dharmma mpuṅku, Iṁ ⬦ dharmma mpuṅku Iṁ B • The punctuation sign was not read by Brandes. — ⟨1v3⟩ Iṁ naira¿g?⟨ñ⟩janā ⬦ I nairañjanā B • Brandes did not observe that the plate here shows an error for the spelling of the toponym seen repeatedly in this text.

⟨1v4⟩ tumpal ika ⬦ tumpalikaṁ B • I think the cecak read by Brandes is actually just a scratch above the ka, although perhaps we do need a cecak here, if we are to understand tumpalnika(ṅ). — ⟨1v4⟩ damlənira ⬦ damlira B. — ⟨1v4⟩ ¿linbas?⟨tinbus⟩ ⬦ linbus B • I do not see the needed suku.

⟨1v5⟩ gə:ṁnyām¿bha?⟨bhək⟩ mpu mano ⬦ gə:ṁnyā, mpuṅku mano B • The emendation is supported by analogous phraseology in several Parva texts, thought to date to roughly the same period as this inscription. See Ādiparva, p. 97: saṅka ri gə̄ ṅni prabhāvanira; Bhīṣmaparva, p. 84: saṅka ri gə̄ ṅniṅ krodha saṅ bhīmasena; Uttarakāṇḍa, p. 126: saṅ hyaṅ indra ta jugāgə̄ ṅ vəlasny ambəknira. On the spelling bh in the word ambək, consistently found in the Majapahit-period manuscript of the Dharma Pātañjala, see Acri (2017, p. 55/ 2018, p. 40). — ⟨1v5⟩ ya¿t?⟨n⟩· ⬦ yat B • — ⟨1v5⟩ parṇnaḥ ⬦ parṇnah B.

Translation by Arlo Griffiths

(1r1–1r3) Homage to every Buddha! Hail! Elapsed Śaka year 888, month of Śrāvaṇa, eighth tithi of the waning fortnight, Haryaṅ, Vagai, Sunday, (the vuku) Sinta, the grahacāra in the Northwest, the lunar mansion Rohiṇī, the deity Prajāpati, the maṇḍala in the East, the conjunction Harṣaṇa, the muhūrta Vijaya, the regent of the astronomical node being the Moon, the half-tithi (karaṇa) Kolava, the zodiac sign Leo.

(1r3–1r5) That was the time that Mpu Mano made a meritorious donation of sīma land that was his patrimony as child, his inheritance from his ancestors, the uncultivated field (hara-hara) south of where he resided. Its northern limit is south of the fence (pagər) shared with Mpu Mano. Its western limit shares the fence with Paviḍəṅan. Its eastern limit shares the fence with Kalampayan. Its southern limit is the fence north of Kalimusan.

(1r5–1v2) That is what he made a meritorious donation to the Master of Susuk Pagər and Master of Nairañjanā, [whose name mentioned here only] for practical necessity [is] Mpu Buddhivāla, to serve for the monastery (kuṭi) to be made by him (Mpu Mano), a tax-exempt foundation (dharma ləpas) that is to be individual property (kapodgalikan) of the lineage of the Master of Nairañjanā.

(1v2–1v5) As for its details: the wet-rice field south of the monastery (kuṭi), [measuring] 3 təmpah, had been taken in security by the Master of Susuk Pagər and Master of Nairañjanā for 2 kāṭi of gold. That (field) was the foundation of the Master of Susuk Pagər and Master of Nairañjanā, who (an) requested a border land, the wet-rice field to the north, (to be used) for his (Mpu Mano’s) founding of a monastery. That is the reason why the wet-rice field given in security by Mpu Mano was redeemed by him for 3 kāṭi of gold, to serve for being used as resource by the Holy Monastery (kuṭi), out of the greatness of the intent (ambək) of Mpu Mano that (yan) Dharma should be striven for by him. The more so as regarding the foundation (dharma), the relation of Mpu Mano to the Master of ...

Commentary

(1r3) On the meaning of kaputrāṅśan, see §6.1.

(1r4) On the meaning of hara-hara, see §6.2.

(1r4) On the way I translate pagər, see §6.3.

(1r5) Zoetmulder (1982) records the word viḍəṅ in the meaning “(= yuyu) crab”, but cites only one occurrence. If paviḍəṅan is derived from that word in that meaning, it would have to mean ‘crab farm’, or such. But it seems imaginable that the word is to be connected rather with hiḍəṅ/iḍəṅ “(subst.) standing still”, iniḍəṅ “(pf) to make st. the constant object (of meditation, etc.)”, mapahidəṅan “to stand one’s ground, recover, rally” (Zoetmulder (1982)). The meaning of paviḍəṅan could then be ‘place for solitary retreat (for meditation)’ or ‘rallying ground’. But it can also simply be a toponym, as I assume for the time being. The word does not occur elsewhere.

(1r5) Or kalampayan could be a common noun connected with lampyay ? kalampyayan ? “a part. kind of plant (creeper)?” (Zoetmulder (1982)). The word does not occur elsewhere.

(1r5) In origin, at least, kalimusan must be a common noun derived from limus “a part. kind of fruit (mango? cf sund.; GR: = timun)” (Zoetmulder (1982)), i.e., ‘limus orchard’. The word occurs as the name of a sīma in an inscription which I suspect may be a reissue of a grant originally issued in the 11th century (Kalimusan, see Machi Suhadi and Richadiana Kartakusuma (1996, p. 7). In its two occurrences in the Waringin Pitu inscription (ed. Boechari 1985–1986, pp. 125–136, ll. 8r2, 11r3), it could be either toponym or common noun, although the former seems a bit more likely, because of the occurrence of the toponyms Malaṅe and Kamalagen in the same contexts. An occurrence of the former in the Balawi inscription of 1305 Śaka has been identified by Hadi Sidomulyo (2018, p. 237) with a village situated about 40 km northwest of Trowulan, but homonymic villages may of course have existed elsewhere; the latter is the name of a sīma known from the Kamalagyan inscription of 959 Śaka, which mentions it in close association with Variṅin Sapta, none other than the sīma which is the focus of the Waringin Pitu charter. (On that charter, see also §6.2.)

(1v1) On the meaning of arthahetoḥ, see §6.5.

(1v1) This name appears as Boddhivāla in the Sobhamerta inscription. It seems that a single person called Mpu Buddhibala (or something like that) was master of two establishments, one called Susuk Pagər and the other Nairañjanā, although the text does not consistently mention both affiliations.

(1v2) On the meaning of kapodgalikan, see §6.4.

(1v3–1v4) An alternative translation might be: ‘That (field) was the endowment (dharma) for the Master of Susuk Pagər and Master of Nairañjanā, such that (an) he requested a border land, the wet-rice field to the north, (to be used) for his (Mpu Mano’s) endowment of a monastery.’

Bibliography

First edited by Brandes (1913). Re-edited here by Arlo Griffiths from photos of Nationaal Museum van Wereldculturen with the inventory number RV-4801-1.

Primary

[B] Brandes, Jan Laurens Andries and Nicolaas Johannes Krom. 1913. Oud-Javaansche Oorkonden: Nagelaten transcripties. Verhandelingen van het Bataviaasch Genootschap van Kunsten en Wetenschappen 60 (parts 1 and 2). Batavia; 's-Hage: Albrecht; Nijhoff. [URL]. Item 55, pages 116–117.

Secondary

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]. Pages 116–117, item A. 129.

Zoetmulder, Petrus Josephus. 1982. Old Javanese-English dictionary. 2 vols. 's-Gravenhage: Nijhoff.

Boechari. 1985–1986. Prasasti koleksi Museum Nasional, Jilid I. Jakarta: Proyek Pengembangan Museum Nasional, Departemen Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan. [URL]. Pages 126–137, lines 8r2, 11r3, item E. 67.

Machi Suhadi and Richadiana Kartakusuma. 1996. Laporan penelitian epigrafi di wilayah Provinsi Jawa Timur. Berita penelitian arkeologi 47. Jakarta: Proyek Penelitian Arkeologi Jakarta, Pusat Penelitian Arkeologi Nasional, Departemen Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan. Page 7.

Acri, Andrea. 2017. Dharma Pātañjala: A Śaiva scripture from ancient Java, studied in the light or related old Javanese and Sanskrit texts. Second Edition. Śata-Piṭaka Series 654. New Delhi: International Academy of Indian Culture and Aditya Prakashan. Page 55.

Acri, Andrea. 2018. Dharma Pātañjala: kitab Śaiva dari Jawa zaman kuno, kajian dan perbandingan dengan sumber Jawa Kuno dan Sanskerta terkait. Naskah dan dokumen Nusantara 36. Jakarta: Kepustakaan Populer Gramedia; École française d'Extrême-Orient. Page 40.

Hadi Sidomulyo. 2018. “Notes on the topography of ancient Java: Identifying four sīma territories from the Majapahit period.” In: Writing for Eternity: A Survey of Epigraphy in Southeast Asia. Edited by Daniel Perret. Études thématiques 30. Paris: École française d'Extrême-Orient, pp. 223–241. Page 237.