Risthal Inscription of Prakāśadharman
Editor: Dániel Balogh.
Identifier: DHARMA_INSSiddham00098.
Language: Sanskrit.
Repository: Siddham (siddham).
Version: (ddbe066), last modified (13a5ebf).
Edition
I. Upajāti
⟨1⟩ vāmena sandhyā-praṇipāta-kopa-
a-prasaṅginārddhena vighaṭṭyamānaM
bpinākinaś śānt(i?)-v[i](dh)[e](yam a)[r](d)dha[ṁ]
cv[ā]m[e]tara[ṁ] vaś śivam ādadhātu||
dII. Upajāti
raṇeṣu bhūyassu bhu(vo) mahimne
abibhartti ya(ḥ) ⟨2⟩ kārmukam ātata-jyaM
bjayaty asau svasya kulasya ketur
clla(lā)ma rājñāṁ bhagavat-prakāśaḥ||
dIII. Mālabhāriṇī
bhuvana-sthiti-dhāma-dhar(mm)a-setus
asakalasyaulikarānvayasya lakṣma|
bdrapavarddhana Ity abhūt pra⟨3⟩bhāva-
c-kṣapitārāti-balonnatir nnarendraḥ||
dIV. Mālabhāriṇī
śirasīva pinākinas tuṣāra-
a-sruti-śītāmala-dīdhitiś śasāṅkaḥ
bnija-va¿ṅ?śa-lalāmni yattra senā-
c-pati-śabdaḥ spr̥haṇīyatāṁ jagāma||
dV. Pramitākṣarā
sunayā(va)lambana⟨4⟩-dr̥ḍhīkr̥tayā
abala-sampadā prathitayā bhujayoḥ|
bUdapādi tena hr̥ta-śattru-jayo
cjayavarddhana-kṣitipatis tanayaḥ
dVI. Pramitākṣarā
bahalena yasya sakalaṁ paritaḥ
aparivr̥ṇvatā jalamuceva viyaT
b⟨5⟩ bala-reṇunā karabha-kaṇṭha-rucā
csthagitā babhur nna kiraṇās savituḥ||
dVII. Vaṁśastha
kirīṭa-ratna-skhalitārkka-dīptiṣu
apratiṣṭhitājñaḥ pratirāja-mūrddha(s)u|
bbalena tasyājita-pauruṣaḥ parair
cbbabhūva ⟨6⟩ rājājitavarddhanas sutaḥ||
dVIII. Vaṁśastha
makheṣu somāsava-pāna-lālase
asamāgate yasya muhur ddivas-patau|
btatāma hastāgra-niveśitānanā
cviyoga-cintākula-mānasā śacī||
dIX. Drutavilambita
śruta-vivikta-manāḥ ⟨7⟩ sthitimān balī
asphuṭa-yaśaḥ-kusumodgama-pādapaḥ|
bjagati tasya sutaḥ prathito guṇaiḥ
ckula-lalāma vibhīṣaṇavarddhaṇaḥ||
dX. Drutavilambita
sad-udayaiḥ pravikāsibhir uj⟨j⟩valair
aavihata-prasaraiḥ ⟨8⟩ śubha-rohibhiḥ|
bsu-caritaiḥ kiraṇair iva bhānumān
ckṣata-tamā¿ṅ?si jaganti cakāra yaḥ||
dXI. Viyoginī
bhuvana-sthiti-goptr̥bhir nnr̥pair
adhuram ādyair vvidhr̥tāṁ babhāra yaḥ|
bsva-kulocita-rājya-varddhanas
ctanayas tasya ⟨9⟩ sa rājyavarddhanaḥ||
dXII. Viyoginī
vilalāpa mumoha vivyathe
aviniśaśvāsa visaṁjñatāṁ yayau|
bUpatapta-manā baloṣmaṇā
cdviṣatāṁ yasya vilāsinī-janaḥ||
dXIII. Puṣpitāgrā
kṣitipati-tilakasya tasya b(ā)hu-
a-draviṇa⟨10⟩-nipīta-samagra-śatru-dīptiḥ|
bsucarita-ghaṭita-prakāśa-dharmmā
cnr̥pati-lalāma sutaḥ prakāśadharmmā||
dXIV. Puṣpitāgrā
Amalina-yaśasāṁ prabhāva-dhāmnāṁ
asakala-jagan-mahanīya-pauruṣāṇāM
bAvitatha-janatānurāga⟨11⟩-bhā(j)āṁ
csthiti-padavīm anuyāti yo gurūṇāM||
dXV. Vasantatilakā
yaḥ svānvaya-krama-paramparayopayātām
aāropitāṁ guṇa-rasāpahr̥tena pittrā
blokopakāra-vidhaye na sukhodayāya
crāja-śriyaṁ ⟨12⟩ śu(bha-pha)lodayinīṁ bibhartti||
dXVI. Vasantatilakā
Ā toramāṇa-nr̥pater nr̥pa-mauli-ratna-
a-jyotsnā-pratāna-śabalīkr̥ta-pāda-pīṭhā⟦(M)⟧⟨⟨(T)⟩⟩
bhūṇādhipasya bhuvi yena gataḥ pratiṣṭhāṁ
cnīto yudhā vitathatām adhirāja-śabdaḥ||
dXVII. Vasantatilakā
⟨13⟩ saṁgrāma-mūrddhani vipāṭha-nipātitānāṁ
atasyaiva yena mada-vāri-mucāṁ gajānāM
bĀy[ā](m)i-danta-ghaṭitāni taponidhi(bh)y(o)
cbhadrāsanāni rucimanti niveditāni||
dXVIII. Vasantatilakā
tasyaiva cāhava-mukhe tarasā ⟨14⟩ jitasya
ayenāvarodhana-vara-pramadāḥ pramathya|
bloka-prakāśa-bhuja-vikrama-cihna-hetor
cvviśrāṇitā bhagavate vr̥ṣabhadhvajāya||
dXIX. Vasantatilakā
rājñe pitāmaha-vibhīṣaṇavarddhanāya
aślāghyānubhāva-guru⟨15⟩-puṇya-phalaṁ nivedya(|)
bvistāri bindu-sarasaḥ pratibimba-bhūtam
cetad vibhīṣaṇa-saras samakhāni tena||
dXX. Vasantatilakā
Etac ca nr̥tta-rabhasa-skhalitendu-lekhā-
a-vāntā¿ṅ?śu-vicchurita-mecaka-kaṇṭha-bhāsaḥ|
b⟨16⟩ sthāṇos samagra-bhuvana-ttraya-sr̥ṣṭi-hetoḥ
cprāleya-śaila-taṭa-(ka)lpam akāri sadma||
dXXI. Vasantatilakā
sa-dvy-abda-saptati-samā-samudāyavatsu
apūrṇṇeṣu pañcasu śateṣu vivatsarāṇāM
b⟨17⟩ grīṣme ⟨’⟩rkka-tāpa-mr̥dita-pramadā-sanātha-
c-dhārā-gr̥hodara-vijr̥mbhita-puṣpaketau||
dXXII. Anuṣṭubh
lakṣma bhārata-varṣasya
anideśāt tasya bhū-kṣitaḥ|
bAkārayad daśapure
cprakāśeśvara-sadma yaḥ||
dXXIII. Anuṣṭubh
⟨18⟩ tasyaiva ca purasyā(n)tar
abrahmaṇaś cāru mandiraM
bUnmāpayad iva vyoma
cśikharair gghana-rodhibhiḥ||
dXXIV. Anuṣṭubh
Āśrayāya yatīnāñ ca
asāṅkhya-yogābhiyog(in)āM
bvyadhatta kr̥ṣṇāvasathaṁ
cbujjukāvasathañ ca yaḥ||
dXXV. Anuṣṭubh
⟨19⟩ sabhā-kūpa-maṭhārāmān
asadmāni ca divaukasāM
byo ⟨’⟩nyāṁś cānyāya-vimukho
cdeya-dharmmān acīkaraT||
dXXVI. Anuṣṭubh
tenaiva nr̥pates tasya
apūrvvajāmātya-sūnunā|
brājasthānīya-bhagavad-
c-doṣeṇādoṣa-saṅginā||
dXXVII. Anuṣṭubh
⟨20⟩ Etaj jala-nidhi-hrepi
aviśālaṁ khānitaṁ saraḥ|
bIdañ ca jaladollekhi
cśūlinas sadma kāritaM||
dXXVIII. Mālinī
kisalaya-parivarttī vīrudhāṁ vāti yāvat
asurabhi-kusuma-gandhāmoda-vāhī nabhasvāN
b⟨21⟩ sara I(dam a)bhirāmaṁ sadma śambhoś ca tāvad
cvihata-durita-mārgge kīrtti-vistāriṇī stāM||
dXXIX. Anuṣṭubh
Iti tuṣṭūṣayā tasya nr̥pateḥ
apuṇya-karmmaṇaḥ
bvāsulenoparacitā
cpūrvveyaṁ kakka-sūnunā||
dApparatus
Translation by Doe and Devadatta N.d.
Bibliography
<?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>Risthal Inscription of Prakāśadharman</title>
<respStmt>
<resp>Original EpiDoc Encoding for Siddham</resp>
<persName ref="part:daba">
<forename>Dániel</forename>
<surname>Balogh</surname>
</persName>
</respStmt>
<respStmt>
<resp>Conversion of encoding for DHARMA</resp>
<persName ref="part:daba">
<forename>Dániel</forename>
<surname>Balogh</surname>
</persName>
</respStmt>
<respStmt>
<resp>intellectual authorship of edition</resp>
<persName ref="part:daba">
<forename>Dániel</forename>
<surname>Balogh</surname>
</persName>
</respStmt>
</titleStmt>
<publicationStmt>
<authority>DHARMA</authority>
<pubPlace>Berlin</pubPlace>
<idno type="filename">DHARMA_INSSiddham00098</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/4.0/">
<p>This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Unported Licence. To view a copy of the licence, visit thttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ or send a letter to Creative Commons, 444 Castro Street, Suite 900, Mountain View, California, 94041, USA.</p>
<p>Copyright (c) 2019-2025 by Dániel Balogh.</p>
</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>
<projectDesc>
<p>The project DHARMA has received funding from the European Research Council (ERC)
under the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme (grant
agreement no 809994).</p>
</projectDesc>
<schemaRef type="guide" key="EGDv01" url="https://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/halshs-02888186"/>
<listPrefixDef>
<prefixDef ident="bib" matchPattern="([a-zA-Z0-9\-\_]+)" replacementPattern="https://www.zotero.org/groups/1633743/erc-dharma/items/tag/$1">
<p>Public URIs with the prefix bib to point to a Zotero Group Library named
ERC-DHARMA whose data are open to the public.</p>
</prefixDef>
<prefixDef ident="part" matchPattern="([a-z]+)" replacementPattern="https://raw.githubusercontent.com/erc-dharma/project-documentation/master/DHARMA_IdListMembers_v01.xml#$1">
<p>Internal URIs using the part prefix to point to person elements in the
<ref>DHARMA_IdListMembers_V01.xml</ref> file.</p>
</prefixDef>
</listPrefixDef>
</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 the Natnagar Shodh Sansthan in January 2017). Alternative opinions are cited from Salomon_1989 (S), Ramesh&Tewari_1983 (RT), Mirashi_1984b (M) and Sircar_1984c (Sir) when I consider them both plausible and significant. Version of January 2019. Comments below are offered "as is" and do not represent a thoroughly researched or considered opinion.
--><!--
The punctuation system appears to be identical to that of IN00097: double vertical at verse ends and short horizontal at half-verses; if the half-verse ends with a halanta consonant, then the stroke above the character doubles as a dash. A visarga also seems to double as a half-verse punctuation symbol (but e.g. in l8 after rohibhiḥ, there is clearly both a visarga and a dash). The double vertical is always plain (no hook etc), though in the rubbing this is not clear.
--><lg n="1" met="upajāti">
<l n="a" enjamb="yes"><lb n="1"/><!--
The first character of the text is indented from the margin by about one character width. The surface of the stone is smooth here, there is definitely no mangala symbol, but one may have been intended to be carved here subsequently.
-->vāmena sandhyā-praṇipāta-kopa</l>
<l n="b">-prasaṅginārddhena vighaṭṭyamānaM</l>
<l n="c">pinākinaś śānt<unclear cert="low">i</unclear>-v<supplied reason="lost">i</supplied><unclear>dh</unclear><supplied reason="lost">e</supplied><unclear>yam a</unclear><supplied reason="lost">r</supplied><unclear>d</unclear>dha<supplied reason="lost">ṁ</supplied></l><!--
L1. śānti, M: śānta. The end of the tail of i is visible in the stone in front of nt.
-->
<l n="d">v<supplied reason="lost">ā</supplied>m<supplied reason="lost">e</supplied>tara<supplied reason="lost">ṁ</supplied> vaś śivam ādadhātu||</l>
</lg>
<lg n="2" met="upajāti"><!--
V2. The metre is in fact pure upendravajrā, but since it is preceded by a mixed upajāti, I'm classifying this as upajāti too.
-->
<l n="a">raṇeṣu bhūyassu bhu<unclear>vo</unclear> mahimne</l><!--
L1. bhūyassu, RT and M: bhūyas sa. The bottom of the lower s is extended and hooked so it must be su. Compare ssu in l6, °varddhanas sutaḥ.
-->
<l n="b">bibhartti ya<unclear>ḥ</unclear> <lb n="2"/>kārmukam ātata-jyaM</l>
<l n="c">jayaty asau svasya kulasya ketur</l>
<l n="d">lla<unclear>lā</unclear>ma rājñāṁ bhagavat-prakāśaḥ||</l>
</lg>
<lg n="3" met="mālabhāriṇī"><!--
V3. RT identify the metre as aupacchandasika; in my understanding that is a loose category of which mālabhāriṇī is a more specific instantiation.
-->
<l n="a">bhuvana-sthiti-dhāma-dhar<unclear>mm</unclear>a-setus</l>
<l n="b">sakalasyaulikarānvayasya lakṣma|</l>
<l n="c" enjamb="yes">drapavarddhana Ity abhūt pra<lb n="3" break="no"/>bhāva</l><!--
L2. drapavarddhana, M: drumavarddhana; Sir: dramavarddhana. Salomon says the reading drapa is quite certain. I concur: the stone is wholly intact here. There is no trace of u for dru, and ma would have a more slanting left limb and a definite tail (compare jagāma right below this point). The only problem left is that drapa is so unlikely. Could it be a metri causa alteration of darpa? Could it be Upa, with a pre-drawn U misinterpreted by the artisan? (Compare Udapādi in l4, the character definitely looks different, so it needs a scribal error to work.) śrama? Would need two scribal errors.
-->
<l n="d">-kṣapitārāti-balonnatir nnarendraḥ||</l>
</lg>
<lg n="4" met="mālabhāriṇī">
<l n="a" enjamb="yes">śirasīva pinākinas tuṣāra</l>
<l n="b">-sruti-śītāmala-dīdhitiś śasāṅkaḥ</l>
<l n="c" enjamb="yes">nija-va<sic>ṅ</sic>śa-lalāmni yattra senā</l>
<l n="d">-pati-śabdaḥ spr̥haṇīyatāṁ jagāma||</l>
</lg>
<lg n="5" met="pramitākṣarā"><!--
V5. RT call this stanza and the next āryāgīti. Mora counts match but foot specifications and caesurae do not; it is, however, a perfect pramitākṣarā.
-->
<l n="a">sunayā<unclear>va</unclear>lambana<lb n="4" break="no"/>-dr̥ḍhīkr̥tayā</l>
<l n="b">bala-sampadā prathitayā bhujayoḥ|</l><!--
L3. sunayā° RT: anayā°. Salomon is definitely correct in reading sunayā°, compare Amalina in l10.
-->
<l n="c">Udapādi tena hr̥ta-śattru-jayo</l><!--
L4. hr̥ta, M: hata. The r̥ is clear in the stone.
-->
<l n="d">jayavarddhana-kṣitipatis tanayaḥ</l>
</lg>
<lg n="6" met="pramitākṣarā">
<l n="a">bahalena yasya sakalaṁ paritaḥ</l>
<l n="b">parivr̥ṇvatā jalamuceva viyaT</l><!--
L4. Sir: parivr̥ṇhatā em. parivr̥ṁḥatā. ṇv is clear in the stone.
--><!--
L4. The halanta T, in addition to a simplified subscript ta and a line above, includes a curl at the bottom that looks like an u mātrā: is this a virāma symbol? The halanta T in l12 (pīṭhāT) has some damage but does not have this curly stroke.
-->
<l n="c"><lb n="5"/>bala-reṇunā karabha-kaṇṭha-rucā</l>
<l n="d">sthagitā babhur nna kiraṇās savituḥ||</l><!--
L5. In kiraṇā, ā is attached to ṇ at the bottom right endpoint, going straight up to well above headline, then curling right. (so too in l9)
--></lg>
<lg n="7" met="vaṁśastha">
<l n="a">kirīṭa-ratna-skhalitārkka-dīptiṣu</l>
<l n="b">pratiṣṭhitājñaḥ pratirāja-mūrddha<unclear>s</unclear>u|</l>
<l n="c">balena tasyājita-pauruṣaḥ parair</l>
<l n="d">bbabhūva <lb n="6"/>rājājitavarddhanas sutaḥ||</l>
</lg>
<lg n="8" met="vaṁśastha">
<l n="a">makheṣu somāsava-pāna-lālase</l>
<l n="b">samāgate yasya muhur ddivas-patau|</l>
<l n="c">tatāma hastāgra-niveśitānanā</l>
<l n="d">viyoga-cintākula-mānasā śacī||</l><!--
L6. viyoga, Sir: viyogra em. viyoga. There must have been a fault in his rubbing, there's nothing resembing a subscript r.
--></lg>
<lg n="9" met="drutavilambita">
<l n="a">śruta-vivikta-manāḥ <lb n="7"/>sthitimān balī</l>
<l n="b">sphuṭa-yaśaḥ-kusumodgama-pādapaḥ|</l>
<l n="c">jagati tasya sutaḥ prathito guṇaiḥ</l>
<l n="d">kula-lalāma vibhīṣaṇavarddhaṇaḥ||</l>
</lg>
<lg n="10" met="drutavilambita">
<l n="a">sad-udayaiḥ pravikāsibhir uj<supplied reason="omitted">j</supplied>valair</l><!--
L7. yai is a cursive form. Regular y is looped tripartite, while this one is looped bipartite, with the loop lying horizontally to leave room above it for the pr̥ṣṭhamātrā part of ai.
-->
<l n="b">avihata-prasaraiḥ <lb n="8"/>śubha-rohibhiḥ|</l>
<l n="c">su-caritaiḥ kiraṇair iva bhānumān</l>
<l n="d">kṣata-tamā<sic>ṅ</sic>si jaganti cakāra yaḥ||</l>
</lg>
<lg n="11" met="viyoginī"><!--
V11. RT classify this verse as a gīti, which is wrong. The mora count matches, but foot specifications and caesurae do not.
-->
<l n="a">bhuvana-sthiti-goptr̥bhir nnr̥pair</l>
<l n="b">dhuram ādyair vvidhr̥tāṁ babhāra yaḥ|</l><!--
L8. °dhr̥tāṁ. RT, S: °dhr̥taṁ. M and Sir correctly read tāṁ, clear in the stone.
-->
<l n="c">sva-kulocita-rājya-varddhanas</l>
<l n="d">tanayas tasya <lb n="9"/>sa rājyavarddhanaḥ||</l><!--
L8. sta in tanayas tasya seems to be in a shallow pit on the otherwise level surface. The character may be a correction made after rubbing out an earlier character, perhaps sya (eyeskip).
--></lg>
<lg n="12" met="viyoginī">
<l n="a">vilalāpa mumoha vivyathe</l>
<l n="b">viniśaśvāsa visaṁjñatāṁ yayau|</l>
<l n="c">Upatapta-manā baloṣmaṇā</l>
<l n="d">dviṣatāṁ yasya vilāsinī-janaḥ||</l>
</lg>
<lg n="13" met="puṣpitāgrā"><!--
V13 and V14 called aupacchandasika by RT.
-->
<l n="a" enjamb="yes">kṣitipati-tilakasya tasya b<unclear>ā</unclear>hu</l><!--
L9. tilakasya tasya, M: tilaka-sthitasya. tilakasya clear in stone.
-->
<l n="b">-draviṇa<lb n="10" break="no"/>-nipīta-samagra-śatru-dīptiḥ|</l><!--
L10. dīptiḥ, M: dīpteḥ. i is clear.
-->
<l n="c">sucarita-ghaṭita-prakāśa-dharmmā</l>
<l n="d">nr̥pati-lalāma sutaḥ prakāśadharmmā||</l><!--
L10. RT and M take sutaḥ in compound with the preceding. Salomon prints lālama, which is unmetrical and must be a typo. He takes lalāma separate from sutaḥ, which sounds like a good idea; the word was also lalāman, neuter, in l2 and 3 above.
--></lg>
<lg n="14" met="puṣpitāgrā">
<l n="a">Amalina-yaśasāṁ prabhāva-dhāmnāṁ</l>
<l n="b">sakala-jagan-mahanīya-pauruṣāṇāM</l>
<l n="c">Avitatha-janatānurāga<lb n="11" break="no"/>-bhā<unclear>j</unclear>āṁ</l><!--
L10. M: jana-cāru-rāga. janatānurāga is clear.
-->
<l n="d">sthiti-padavīm anuyāti yo gurūṇāM||</l>
</lg>
<lg n="15" met="vasantatilakā">
<l n="a">yaḥ svānvaya-krama-paramparayopayātām</l>
<l n="b">āropitāṁ guṇa-rasāpahr̥tena pittrā</l><!--
L11. RT: guṇa-rasām ahr̥tena; Sir: guṇa-rasām abr̥tena (sic, typo for ahr̥tena?). Agrawal 1986:91, 1990:129 reads ahr̥tena but wants to translate "by the father who had not been captivated" i.e. that his father was not merely carried away by paternal affection. The reading pa is clear.
-->
<l n="c">lokopakāra-vidhaye na sukhodayāya</l>
<l n="d">rāja-śriyaṁ <lb n="12"/>śu<unclear>bha-pha</unclear>lodayinīṁ bibhartti||</l>
</lg>
<lg n="16" met="vasantatilakā">
<l n="a" enjamb="yes">Ā toramāṇa-nr̥pater nr̥pa-mauli-ratna</l>
<l n="b">-jyotsnā-pratāna-śabalīkr̥ta-pāda-pīṭhā<subst><del rend="corrected"><unclear>M</unclear></del><add place="overstrike"><unclear>T</unclear></add></subst></l><!--
L12. RT, M: pīṭhāM. Agrawal 1986:93, 1990:130 was first to correct to pīṭhāT. After careful scrutiny I believe both are correct in a way: the character has been corrected in the stone from a halanta M to T. The body of the former M may have been chipped off. The body of the T is now the opening curve of the former M, and a stem seems to have been added to this, but the u-like stroke/virāma is missing below the t. Also, the resulting T is too close to the previous character, and the horizontal line above it is to the right of it, above the original M.
-->
<l n="c">hūṇādhipasya bhuvi yena gataḥ pratiṣṭhāṁ</l>
<l n="d">nīto yudhā vitathatām adhirāja-śabdaḥ||</l><!--
L12. RT apparently construed yudhā+avitathatām. The correct parsing was first suggested by Agrawal.
--></lg>
<lg n="17" met="vasantatilakā">
<l n="a"><lb n="13"/>saṁgrāma-mūrddhani vipāṭha-nipātitānāṁ</l>
<l n="b">tasyaiva yena mada-vāri-mucāṁ gajānāM</l><!--
L13. ye is the cursive bipartite y like yai in l7 above. However, most instances of ye are the regular tripartite form, e.g. yena in l12, yenā in l14.
-->
<l n="c">Āy<supplied reason="lost"><!-- CHECK if <unclear> applies better.-->ā</supplied><unclear>m</unclear>i-danta-ghaṭitāni taponidhi<unclear>bh</unclear>y<unclear>o</unclear></l><!--
L13. āyāmi, M: ā(bhānti) danta; Sir ā = . danta. The left side and part of the central stem of y are clear, the rest of that character is obliterated by flaking. Part if m is clear and much of the rest is faintly visible in the chipped-off part.
-->
<l n="d">bhadrāsanāni rucimanti niveditāni||</l>
</lg>
<lg n="18" met="vasantatilakā">
<l n="a">tasyaiva cāhava-mukhe tarasā <lb n="14"/>jitasya</l>
<l n="b">yenāvarodhana-vara-pramadāḥ pramathya|</l>
<l n="c">loka-prakāśa-bhuja-vikrama-cihna-hetor</l>
<l n="d">vviśrāṇitā bhagavate vr̥ṣabhadhvajāya||</l>
</lg>
<lg n="19" met="vasantatilakā">
<l n="a">rājñe pitāmaha-vibhīṣaṇavarddhanāya</l>
<l n="b">ślāghyānubhāva-guru<lb n="15" break="no"/>-puṇya-phalaṁ nivedya<unclear>|</unclear></l>
<l n="c">vistāri bindu-sarasaḥ pratibimba-bhūtam</l>
<l n="d">etad vibhīṣaṇa-saras samakhāni tena||</l>
</lg>
<lg n="20" met="vasantatilakā">
<l n="a" enjamb="yes">Etac ca nr̥tta-rabhasa-skhalitendu-lekhā</l>
<l n="b">-vāntā<sic>ṅ</sic>śu-vicchurita-mecaka-kaṇṭha-bhāsaḥ|</l>
<l n="c"><lb n="16"/>sthāṇos samagra-bhuvana-ttraya-sr̥ṣṭi-hetoḥ</l>
<l n="d">prāleya-śaila-taṭa-<unclear>ka</unclear>lpam akāri sadma||</l>
</lg>
<lg n="21" met="vasantatilakā">
<l n="a">sa-dvy-abda-saptati-samā-samudāyavatsu</l>
<l n="b">pūrṇṇeṣu pañcasu śateṣu vivatsarāṇāM</l>
<l n="c" enjamb="yes"><lb n="17"/>grīṣme <supplied reason="subaudible">’</supplied>rkka-tāpa-mr̥dita-pramadā-sanātha</l>
<l n="d">-dhārā-gr̥hodara-vijr̥mbhita-puṣpaketau||</l>
</lg>
<lg n="22" met="anuṣṭubh">
<l n="a">lakṣma bhārata-varṣasya</l>
<l n="b">nideśāt tasya bhū-kṣitaḥ|</l>
<l n="c">Akārayad daśapure</l>
<l n="d">prakāśeśvara-sadma yaḥ||</l>
</lg>
<lg n="23" met="anuṣṭubh">
<l n="a"><lb n="18"/>tasyaiva ca purasyā<unclear>n</unclear>tar</l>
<l n="b">brahmaṇaś cāru mandiraM</l>
<l n="c">Unmāpayad iva vyoma</l>
<l n="d">śikharair gghana-rodhibhiḥ||</l><!--
L18. Sir: purasyante (sic) and yena rodhibhiḥ. purasyāntar and ghana-rodhibhiḥ are beyond doubt. However, rggha is formed in a very strange way: the g part and the gh part are completely on the same level, and the right-hand leg of g is the same stroke as the left-hand limb of gh; moreover, the repha is attached to the central limb of gh, not to the top of g. The character thus does, superficially, look like rye, but that reading would only be possible if 1. y was not looped, 2. e was a full-height pr̥ṣṭhamātrā with a footmark, and 3. e was attached to the left limb, not to the centre of y - but none of these are the case elsewhere in this inscription.
--></lg>
<lg n="24" met="anuṣṭubh">
<l n="a">Āśrayāya yatīnāñ ca</l>
<l n="b">sāṅkhya-yogābhiyog<unclear>in</unclear>āM</l><!--
L18. S: yatīnāṁ, probably a typo.
-->
<l n="c">vyadhatta kr̥ṣṇāvasathaṁ</l>
<l n="d">bujjukāvasathañ ca yaḥ||</l>
</lg>
<lg n="25" met="anuṣṭubh">
<l n="a"><lb n="19"/>sabhā-kūpa-maṭhārāmān</l>
<l n="b">sadmāni ca divaukasāM</l>
<l n="c">yo <supplied reason="subaudible">’</supplied>nyāṁś cānyāya-vimukho</l>
<l n="d">deya-dharmmān acīkaraT||</l><!--
L19. The halanta T again has an u-like curl (virāma sign?) attached to the bottom, like the one in l4 and unlike the one in l12.
--></lg>
<lg n="26" met="anuṣṭubh">
<l n="a">tenaiva nr̥pates tasya</l>
<l n="b">pūrvvajāmātya-sūnunā|</l>
<l n="c" enjamb="yes">rājasthānīya-bhagavad</l>
<l n="d">-doṣeṇādoṣa-saṅginā||</l>
</lg>
<lg n="27" met="anuṣṭubh">
<l n="a"><lb n="20"/>Etaj jala-nidhi-hrepi</l>
<l n="b">viśālaṁ khānitaṁ saraḥ|</l>
<l n="c">Idañ ca jaladollekhi</l>
<l n="d">śūlinas sadma kāritaM||</l>
</lg>
<lg n="28" met="mālinī">
<l n="a">kisalaya-parivarttī vīrudhāṁ vāti yāvat</l>
<l n="b">surabhi-kusuma-gandhāmoda-vāhī nabhasvāN</l><!--
L20. The halanta N is a slightly subscript and slightly simplified form with a line above. The line is level with the headline of the regular characters. There is almost certainly no punctuation mark after it.
-->
<l n="c"><lb n="21"/>sara I<unclear>dam a</unclear>bhirāmaṁ sadma śambhoś ca tāvad</l>
<l n="d">vihata-durita-mārgge kīrtti-vistāriṇī stāM||</l><!--
L21. RT: vihita; vistāriṇis tāM.
--></lg>
<lg n="29" met="anuṣṭubh">
<l n="a">Iti tuṣṭūṣayā tasya nr̥pateḥ</l>
<l n="b">puṇya-karmmaṇaḥ</l>
<l n="c">vāsulenoparacitā</l>
<l n="d">pūrvveyaṁ kakka-sūnunā||</l>
</lg>
</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>
Commentary