Mathura Pedestal Inscription of the Time of Budhagupta

Author of digital edition: Dániel Balogh (daba).

Language: Sanskrit (san) [Southern Brāhmī (unspecified) (brāhmī_southern_unspecified)].

Repository: SIDDHAM (siddham).

Identifier: DHARMA_INSSiddham00066.

File path: XML-Provisional/DHARMA_INSSiddham00066.xml.

Version: 2026-09-16 10:40 (3083d2d), last modified 2026-09-16 09:24 (c200993).

Edition

⟨1⟩ s(i)ddha(M)(y)(o?) v(īkṣ?)y(a) [*******] [ba](n)dhana-niruddha(M)m(o)kṣ(ā)ya (ma)tiṁ cakkre daśa-bala-baline namas tasmai||⟨2⟩ kārayati (yaḥ) [pratikr̥tiṁ trilo?](ka)-nāthasya jagati buddhasya(|)sa bhavati sukh(ī) manuṣyo loke nayanābhirāmaś ca||⟨3⟩ kr̥tsnāṁ praśāsati mahīṁ vudhagupt[e] rājani prathita-va¿ṅ?śe|varṣa-śata Ekaṣaṣ¿ṭh?e bhādravade ṣoḍaśe divase|__⟨4⟩ pratimā-catuṣṭayam idaṁ dharm¿a?rthaṁ śaṅ(kh)ikena rāṣṭreṇa(|)bhaktyā jinasya k(ā)ritam adhun(ā) gaṅgabala-putreṇa||⟨5⟩ Atra kr̥t(au) yat puṇyaṁ nai⟨ḥ⟩śreyasam akṣayaṁ hi tat sarvvaMmātā-pitroś ca syā⟨⟨t⟩⟩ sarvveṣ¿a? c¿e?va sa¿tv?ā(nā)ṁ||

Bibliography

First reported in IAR 1982-83, p. 155 with photograph (plate 96 on page 173). Edited (with plate) in Thaplyal & Srivastava 1982; also edited in Agrawala 1983. Agrawala does not refer to Thaplyal & Srivastava’s edition, which may have been published after Agrawala finished his manuscript. Also reported in Ramesh 1985, p. 10.

Originally encoded for Siddham in the project Beyond Boundaries (Grant Agreement No. 609823) by Dániel Balogh (2019, № IN00066). Encoding updated to DHARMA conventions by Dániel Balogh.

Secondary

Agrawala, Prithvi Kumar. 1983. Imperial Gupta Epigraphs (गुप्ताधिराजलेखमण्डल). Ancient Indian Epigraphical Sources (प्रत्नाभिलेखसंहिता) 10, pt. 1 / 2. Varanasi: Books Asia, Distributed by Prithvi Prakashan. Item 51.

Display Options Word Wrap Line Numbers Comments Processing Instructions

<?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_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"?>

<title>Mathura Pedestal Inscription of the Time of Budhagupta</title>

<forename>Dániel</forename>

<surname>Balogh</surname>

</persName>

</respStmt>

<funder>European Research Council (ERC), grant agreement no 809994</funder>

</titleStmt>

<authority><ref target="https://dharmalekha.info">DHARMA</ref></authority>

<pubPlace>Berlin</pubPlace>

<idno type="filename">DHARMA_INSSiddham00066.xml</idno>

<!--

If this file is moved into a named DHARMA corpus, retain the Siddham identifier as <altIdentifier>

-->

</publicationStmt>

<repository>DHARMAbase</repository>

<idno/>

</msIdentifier>

</msContents>

<p/>

</handDesc>

</physDesc>

</msDesc>

</sourceDesc>

</fileDesc>

<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>

<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>

<body>

<p><lb n="1"/>s<unclear>i</unclear>ddha<unclear>M</unclear></p><!--

Agrawala says the word siddham is slightly below the alignment of the first line. This is not readily apparent to me, and none of the lines are too neat, so I take it as an integral part of the line.

--><!--

There is, however, a mark in the margin before line 1 that may be just a feature of the stone, but may also be a 9-shaped maṅgala mark.

--><lg n="1" met="āryā">

<l n="ab"><unclear>y</unclear><unclear cert="low">o</unclear> v<unclear cert="low">īkṣ</unclear>y<unclear>a</unclear> <gap reason="lost" precision="low" quantity="7" unit="character"/> <supplied reason="lost">ba</supplied><unclear>n</unclear>dhana-niruddha<unclear>M</unclear><!--

Agrawala reads yo viśva at the beginning; Thaplyal&Srivastava read yo vandya. I am far from certain of my reading, but it fits what's visible in the photograph and makes sense in the context. The subscript part of the ligature is definitely y, not v.

--><!--

Agrawala prints °niru(ddham|). I think ddha is quite clear. There may be an anusvāra above it, but it seems to be followed by something more complex than a punctuation dash, probably a halanta m with a dash above it, which also does the job of punctuation; compare the middle of v5.

--></l>

<l n="cd">m<unclear>o</unclear>kṣ<unclear>ā</unclear>ya <unclear>ma</unclear>tiṁ cakkre daśa-bala-baline namas tasmai||<!--

T&S: janma-kṣaya-mataṁ cakre (unmetrical), noting that what they read as kre looks like rthe. I think they probably read the preceding M and/or punctuation mark as ja, and my tentative mo as nma. Agrawala reads lakṣāya pāti cārthe, seeing la as clear but most of the rest as very uncertain. For rth, compare line 4. I'm quite convinced of my own reading, including kkre.

--><!--

The closing punctuation is a double vertical, possibly connected horizontally at about 1/3 height. All verse-end marks, transcribed as double daṇḍas, look like this. The verticals here slant to the right, but this must be accidental, since they are vertical in l2 and slant left in l4.

--></l>

</lg>

<l n="ab"><lb n="2"/>kārayati <unclear>yaḥ</unclear> <supplied reason="lost" cert="low">pratikr̥tiṁ trilo</supplied><unclear>ka</unclear>-nāthasya jagati buddhasya<unclear>|</unclear><!--

T&S: restore the gap as pratimāṁ loka°; Agrawala as pratimāṁ tu loka°. Both seem unmetrical to me.

--><!--

Agrawala puts a supplied daṇḍa after sa (in the next line by my reckoning). T&S: read a daṇḍa before sa, where again there may actually be a (horizontal) mark. Seeing this as the half-verse point yields correct metre for the second half in my reading (and for the first with my reconstruction), so I take this as an unclear daṇḍa.

--></l>

<l n="cd">sa bhavati sukh<unclear>ī</unclear> manuṣyo loke nayanābhirāmaś ca||<!--

T&S read bhavati sukhī mārasya loke. They remark that their sya looks like ṣya or hya, but careful observation shows that the preceding letter is rā (sic), not nu, so their alternative reading, mānuṣya-loke, is ruled out. Agrawala reads bhavati sarvo manuṣyo loke, interpreting it as "he becomes a complete man in himself", which is unconvincing. I am quite certain that the correct reading is what I show here, sort of halfway between the two. ṣy is certain, it is not sy. I admit nu is problematic: what looks like an arm in the rubbing is not visible in the photograph

--></l>

</lg>

<l n="ab"><lb n="3"/>kr̥tsnāṁ praśāsati mahīṁ vudhagupt<supplied reason="lost">e</supplied> rājani prathita-va<sic>ṅ</sic>śe|<!--

Agrawala: vudhagupt[*e] rājati; T&S: budhagupta-rājani.

--></l>

<l n="cd">varṣa-śata Ekaṣaṣ<choice><sic>ṭh</sic><corr>ṭ</corr></choice>e bhādravade ṣoḍaśe divase|<space quantity="2" unit="character"/><!--

Agrawala reads bhādra va di (unmetrical) and notes that ṣoḍaśa is problematic with vadi, so emends to bhādrapade. T&S read bhādravade. The intent is obviously bhādrapade, as discussed by T&S.

--><!--

L3 ends with a single horizontal, not a double vertical mark. There is space of about 2 characters after it, but T&S say it does not seem that anything was ever carved there. There are plenty of scratches here that might hide a date in number, but I see nothing recognisable as 100 or 60, so this is probably just empty space indeed. The single punctuation mark may well have been intended to show that this is the first verse of a yugmaka; I don't think it's just the carelessness of the scribe as T&S suppose.

--></l>

</lg>

<l n="ab"><lb n="4"/>pratimā-catuṣṭayam idaṁ dharm<choice><sic>a</sic><corr>ā</corr></choice>rthaṁ śaṅ<unclear>kh</unclear>ikena rāṣṭreṇa<unclear>|</unclear><!--

Agrawala reads the name as śaṅgikena. śaṅkhika sounds better and kh is quite clear in the photograph.

--><!--

Agrawala and T&S both note that rāṣṭreṇa may have been intended to mean rāṣṭriyena (Agrawala spells this too with ṇ). Ramesh_1985:10 also believes it is "obviously an abbreviation for the designation of rāshṭrakūṭa or rāshṭriya, the head of a rāshṭra or district."

--><!--

The punctuation mark at the end of this line seems to be a single vertical, a bit curved like an opening parenthesis.

--></l>

<l n="cd">bhaktyā jinasya k<unclear>ā</unclear>ritam adhun<unclear>ā</unclear> gaṅgabala-putreṇa||</l>

</lg>

<l n="ab"><lb n="5"/>Atra kr̥t<unclear>au</unclear> yat puṇyaṁ nai<supplied reason="omitted">ḥ</supplied>śreyasam akṣayaṁ hi tat sarvvaM<!--

T&S: kr̥teḥ. There is certainly no visarga. The right-hand horn of the o mātrā is all but invisible, but it may be there.

--><!--

The half-verse ends very clearly in a subscript halanta m with a dash above it; there is no separate punctuation mark (compare the middle of v1).

--></l>

<l n="cd">mātā-pitroś ca syā<add place="above">t</add> sarvveṣ<choice><sic>a</sic><corr>āṁ</corr></choice> c<choice><sic>e</sic><corr>ai</corr></choice>va sa<sic>tv</sic>ā<unclear>nā</unclear>ṁ||<!--

T&S: cāsya for ca syāt; sarvveṣāñ cāvani-satvānāṁ. This must be because they missed the t of tsa, see my next comment below.

--><!--

The ligature tsa has the sa component aligned with the rest of the line and at full size; the t component is above the line, in contact with the u mātrā of adhunā in l4. This is most probably ancient correction, first inscribed as sa and corrected to tsa afterward.

--><!--

There is a large (one akṣara-sized) squarish smudge between caiva and satvā. This may be a blemish in the stone that had already been there before the incision of the text; more probably it is ancient deletion of a wrongly inscribed character.

--></l>

</lg>

</div>

<lem/>

</app>

</listApp>

</div>

</div>

</div>

<p>First reported in <bibl><ptr target="bib:IAR1982-1983"/><citedRange>155</citedRange></bibl> with photograph (plate 96 on page 173). Edited (with plate) in <bibl><ptr target="bib:Thaplyal+Srivastava1982_01"/></bibl>; also edited in <bibl><ptr target="bib:Agrawala1983_01"/></bibl>. Agrawala does not refer to Thaplyal & Srivastava’s edition, which may have been published after Agrawala finished his manuscript. Also reported in <bibl><ptr target="bib:Ramesh1985_01"/><citedRange>10</citedRange></bibl>.</p>

<p>Originally encoded for Siddham in the project Beyond Boundaries (Grant Agreement No. 609823) by Dániel Balogh (<bibl rend="omitname"><ptr target="bib:Balogh2019_03"/><citedRange unit="item">IN00066</citedRange></bibl>). Encoding updated to DHARMA conventions by Dániel Balogh.</p>

</listBibl>

</listBibl>

</div>

</body>

</text>

</TEI>