Gwalior Inscription of Mihirakula

Editor: Dániel Balogh.

Identifier: DHARMA_INSSiddham00100.

Hand description:

Language: Sanskrit.

Repository: Siddham (siddham).

Version: 2024-10-14 16:16 (ddbe066), last modified 2023-05-15 17:33 (13a5ebf).

Edition

Logical
Physical
Full

⟨1⟩ [<mangala>]

I. Mālinī

[ja](ya)ti jalada-vāla-dhvāntam utsārayan svaiḥ

kiraṇa-nivaha-jālair vyoma vidyotayadbhiḥ

U[daya-gi](r)[i]-taṭāgra[ṁ] maṇḍaya⟨⟨n⟩⟩ yas tura(ṁ)gaiḥ

cakita-gamana-kheda-bhrānta-caṁcat-saṭāntaiḥ|

II. Mālinī

udaya-g[i](r)[i]⟨2⟩-[⏑––]-(gra)sta-cakro rtti-harttā

bhuvana-bhavana-dīpaḥ śarvvarī-nāśa-hetuḥ

tapita-kanaka-varṇṇair aṁśubhiḫ paṁkajān(ā)m

abhinava-ramaṇīyaṁ yo (vi)dhatte sa vo vyāT|

III. Āryā

śrī-tora(m)[āṇa I]ti yaḥ prathito ⟨3⟩ [bhū-ca](kra?)paḥ prabhūta-guṇaḥ

satya-pradāna-śauryād yena mahī nyāyata⟨ḥ⟩ (śā)stā

IV. Āryā

tasyodita-kula-kīrtteḥ putro tula-vikramaḥ patiḥ pr̥thvyāḥ

mihirakuleti khyāto bhaṅgo yaḥ paśupati(m a) [3×]

V. Āryā

⟨4⟩ [tasmin rā]jani śāsati pr̥thvīṁ pr̥thu-vimala-locane rtti-hare

Abhivarddhamāna-rājye paṁcadaśābde nr̥pa-vr̥ṣasya|

VI. Āryā

śaśi-raśmi-hāsa-vikasita-kumudotpala-gandha-śītalāmode

kārttika-māse prāpt¿a?⟨e⟩ gagana⟨5⟩-[patau][ni]rmmale bhāti|

VII. Āryā

dvija-gaṇa-mukhyair abhisaṁstute ca puṇyāha-nāda-ghoṣeṇa

tithi-nakṣatra-muhūrtte saṁprāpte supraśasta-d(i)ne|

VIII. Āryā

mātr̥tulasya tu pautraḥ putraś ca tathaiva mātr̥dāsasya

nāmnā ca mātr̥cetaḥ parvva⟨6⟩[ta] [–⏑] [pu](ra)-vās(t)av(y)aḥ

IX. Āryā

nānā-dhātu-vicitre gopāhvaya-nāmni bhūdhare ramye

kāritavān śailamayaṁ bhānoḥ prāsāda-vara-mukhyaM|

X. Āryā

puṇyābhivr̥ddhi-hetor mmātāpitros tathātmanaś caiva

vasatā ca giri-vare smi⟨n⟩ rājñaḥ ⟨7⟩ […] (pā?)dena

XI. Āryā

ye kārayanti bhānoś candrāṁśu-sama-prabhaṁ gr̥ha-pravaraṁ

teṣāṁ vāsaḥ svargge yāvat-kalpa-kṣayo bhavati||

XII. Āryā

bhaktyā raver vviracitaṁ sad-dharmma-khyāpanaṁ sukīrttimayaṁ

nāmnā ca keśaveti prathitena ca{|} ⟨8⟩ […] (di?)tyena||

I. Mālinī

[ja](ya)ti jalada-vāla-dhvāntam utsārayan svaiḥ

kiraṇa-nivaha-jālair vyoma vidyotayadbhiḥ

U[daya-gi](r)[i]-taṭāgra[ṁ] maṇḍaya⟨⟨n⟩⟩ yas tura(ṁ)gaiḥ

cakita-gamana-kheda-bhrānta-caṁcat-saṭāntaiḥ|

II. Mālinī

udaya-g[i](r)[i]⟨2⟩-[⏑––]-(gra)sta-cakro rtti-harttā

bhuvana-bhavana-dīpaḥ śarvvarī-nāśa-hetuḥ

tapita-kanaka-varṇṇair aṁśubhiḫ paṁkajān(ā)m

abhinava-ramaṇīyaṁ yo (vi)dhatte sa vo vyāT|

III. Āryā

śrī-tora(m)[āṇa I]ti yaḥ prathito ⟨3⟩ [bhū-ca](kra?)paḥ prabhūta-guṇaḥ

satya-pradāna-śauryād yena mahī nyāyata⟨ḥ⟩ (śā)stā

IV. Āryā

tasyodita-kula-kīrtteḥ putro tula-vikramaḥ patiḥ pr̥thvyāḥ

mihirakuleti khyāto bhaṅgo yaḥ paśupati(m a) [3×]

V. Āryā

⟨4⟩ [tasmin rā]jani śāsati pr̥thvīṁ pr̥thu-vimala-locane rtti-hare

Abhivarddhamāna-rājye paṁcadaśābde nr̥pa-vr̥ṣasya|

VI. Āryā

śaśi-raśmi-hāsa-vikasita-kumudotpala-gandha-śītalāmode

kārttika-māse prāpt¿a?⟨e⟩ gagana⟨5⟩-[patau][ni]rmmale bhāti|

VII. Āryā

dvija-gaṇa-mukhyair abhisaṁstute ca puṇyāha-nāda-ghoṣeṇa

tithi-nakṣatra-muhūrtte saṁprāpte supraśasta-d(i)ne|

VIII. Āryā

mātr̥tulasya tu pautraḥ putraś ca tathaiva mātr̥dāsasya

nāmnā ca mātr̥cetaḥ parvva⟨6⟩[ta] [–⏑] [pu](ra)-vās(t)av(y)aḥ

IX. Āryā

nānā-dhātu-vicitre gopāhvaya-nāmni bhūdhare ramye

kāritavān śailamayaṁ bhānoḥ prāsāda-vara-mukhyaM|

X. Āryā

puṇyābhivr̥ddhi-hetor mmātāpitros tathātmanaś caiva

vasatā ca giri-vare smi⟨n⟩ rājñaḥ ⟨7⟩ […] (pā?)dena

XI. Āryā

ye kārayanti bhānoś candrāṁśu-sama-prabhaṁ gr̥ha-pravaraṁ

teṣāṁ vāsaḥ svargge yāvat-kalpa-kṣayo bhavati||

XII. Āryā

bhaktyā raver vviracitaṁ sad-dharmma-khyāpanaṁ sukīrttimayaṁ

nāmnā ca keśaveti prathitena ca{|} ⟨8⟩ […] (di?)tyena||

III. Śārdūlavikrīḍita

yāvac-charvva-jaṭā-kalāpa-gahane vidyotate candramā

divya-strī-caraṇair vvibhūṣita-taṭo yāvac ca merur nagaḥ

yāvac corasi nīla-nīrada-nibhe viṣṇur vvibharty uj⟨j⟩valāṁ

śrīṁ{s} tāvad giri-mūrdhni tiṣṭhati ⟨9⟩ [śilā-prā]sāda-mukhyo rame||

Apparatus

Translation by Doe and Devadatta N.d.

Commentary

Bibliography

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>Gwalior Inscription of Mihirakula</title>

<resp>Original EpiDoc Encoding for Siddham</resp>

<forename>Dániel</forename>

<surname>Balogh</surname>

</persName>

</respStmt>

<resp>Conversion of encoding for DHARMA</resp>

<forename>Dániel</forename>

<surname>Balogh</surname>

</persName>

</respStmt>

<resp>intellectual authorship of edition</resp>

<forename>Dániel</forename>

<surname>Balogh</surname>

</persName>

</respStmt>

</titleStmt>

<authority>DHARMA</authority>

<pubPlace>Berlin</pubPlace>

<idno type="filename">DHARMA_INSSiddham00100</idno>

<!--

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

-->

<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>

</licence>

</availability>

</publicationStmt>

<repository>DHARMAbase</repository>

<idno/>

</msIdentifier>

</msContents>

<p/>

</handDesc>

</physDesc>

</msDesc>

</sourceDesc>

</fileDesc>

<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>

<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>

<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>

<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>

<ab><lb n="1"/><supplied reason="lost"><g type="mangala"/></supplied></ab><!--

Fleet supplies "oṁ" at the beginning of the inscription. Given the size of the lacuna in other lines, it's reasonable to assume that there was either a maṅgala symbol or a brief invocation such as svasti at the beginning.

--><lg n="1" met="mālinī">

<l n="a"><supplied reason="lost">ja</supplied><unclear>ya</unclear>ti jalada-vāla-dhvāntam utsārayan svaiḥ</l>

<l n="b">kiraṇa-nivaha-jālair vyoma vidyotayadbhiḥ</l>

<l n="c">U<supplied reason="lost">daya-gi</supplied><unclear>r</unclear><supplied reason="lost">i</supplied>-taṭāgra<supplied reason="lost">ṁ</supplied> maṇḍaya<add place="below">n</add> yas tura<unclear>ṁ</unclear>gaiḥ</l><!--

I'm not really comfortable with the restoration udaya-giri, since the same compound appears (almost certainly) in v2 and the repetition would not be nice.

--><!--

The n of maṇḍayan is added (reduced in size and form) below the line, between the two ya-s.

-->

<l n="d">cakita-gamana-kheda-bhrānta-caṁcat-saṭāntaiḥ|</l><!--

The punctuation mark is a single dash.

--></lg>

<l n="a">udaya-g<supplied reason="lost">i</supplied><unclear>r</unclear><supplied reason="lost">i</supplied><lb n="2" break="no"/>-<seg met="-++"><gap reason="lost" quantity="3" unit="character"/></seg>-<unclear>gra</unclear>sta-cakro rtti-harttā</l><!--

I'm also a bit unhappy with grasta, though the reading is fairly clear. I have no better alternative, but the r of (gra) looks more like a crack than an incised line to me; the crack extends beyond the stem of (g) and continues below the line for several characters' length. Incidentally, part of the same crack makes sta look like stra. Furthermore, the top left of (g) is not square like other g-s around here; in fact it looks much like śa is nāśa further on in this line. Read śastracakro? Not very likely. (Mitra reads trasta-bhaktārtti [which is impossible] and reports Cunningham [personal communication] as reading "grastacakorte".) And by the way, do we really have arti here? (Attested in MW as equivalent to ārti, but apparently rare.) Or non-standard sandhi with elision of initial ā? (See l4 for a repetition of the same.)

-->

<l n="b">bhuvana-bhavana-dīpaḥ śarvvarī-nāśa-hetuḥ</l>

<l n="c">tapita-kanaka-varṇṇair aṁśubhiḫ paṁkajān<unclear>ā</unclear>m</l><!--

The ending of paṁkajānām is again not quite satisfactory. Fleet prints ā as supplied, but I think I can see a faint ā mātrā to the right of na. The ma looks strange and very different from the next ma in ramaṇīya; it is, however, identical to ma in mahī in l3. Still, I'm not happy with the syntax: I'd expect to find a singular accusative somewhere to match ramaṇīyam (Fleet translates "creates the fresh beauty of the water-lilies", but this is very awkward). The problem remains even if we construe paṅkajānām with arti-hartā.

-->

<l n="d">abhinava-ramaṇīyaṁ yo <unclear>vi</unclear>dhatte sa vo vyāT|</l><!--

The halanta t is a reduced subscript form with a line above, and it is followed by a separate punctuation dash.

--></lg>

<l n="ab">śrī-tora<unclear>m</unclear><supplied reason="lost">āṇa I</supplied>ti yaḥ prathito <lb n="3"/><supplied reason="lost" cert="low">bhū-ca</supplied><unclear cert="low">kra</unclear>paḥ prabhūta-guṇaḥ</l>

<l n="cd">satya-pradāna-śauryād yena mahī nyāyata<supplied reason="omitted">ḥ</supplied> <unclear>śā</unclear>stā</l><!--

Fleet emends pradāna to pradhāna (translating "heroism ... specially characterised by truthfulness"), but I think this is unnecessary; pradāna is generosity as in %IN00001 (v7), and the singular ending of a 3-member dvandva would not be the greatest linguistic peculiarity of this text.

--></lg>

<l n="ab">tasyodita-kula-kīrtteḥ putro tula-vikramaḥ patiḥ pr̥thvyāḥ</l>

<l n="cd">mihirakuleti khyāto bhaṅgo yaḥ paśupati<unclear>m a</unclear> <gap reason="illegible" quantity="3" unit="character"/> </l><!--

I'm unhappy with bhaṅgo. The interpretation abhaṅgo is convincing, but the character just doesn't look like ṅgo (and abhaṅga does not seem to be attested). The top part is not open on the right, as any decent ṅ ought to be: it's a closed square-approaching-triangle, similar to va and ca in this inscription. The bottom, on the other hand, looks more like ta than ga. Mitra reads bhavot, emending to 'bhavat. Apparently he takes the subscript ta as an insertion (but the inserted na in l1 was between characters, not directly below one). I'm tempted to read bhakto, or at least read bhavto and emend to bhakto. Though on second thoughts I can accept bhaṅgo, taking the vertical line at the right-hand side for a scratch (that is what it looks like in Fleet's rubbing). For more circumstantial evidence, there's Bakker's (2014:39) point that Yaśodharman's "sthāṇor anyattra yena" etc. (IN00094, l6) seems to be a retort to Mihirakula's boast.

--><!--

Mitra (1861:266-267n13) reads paśupati-para-dama for the lacuna, construing it as one who subdues enemies. He also quotes Cunningham (personal communication) as reading varadama and adds that the reading may be also baradeva, "the noble deva". Fleet (1888:162n6) observes that we need a verb that supplies the antithesis to abhaṅgo. He does not hazard a conjecture. Bhandarkar (1929:295n4) says the lacuna was "so taken by Fleet as to mean that he broke the power of one Paśupati; and he was followed by Kielhorn." I don't know where Fleet and Kielhorn wrote these (is "Fleet" an error for "Mitra" here?). Bhandarkar also adds his own(?) suggestion for the lacune: paśupatiṁ bheje. Sircar (1965:425n6) conjectures paśupatim arcayati. #Bakker_2014:38n105 agrees with Fleet's thought that we need an antithesis to abhaṅga, with which I agree provided that bhaṅgo is the correct reading (see note above). Bakker also notes that Sircar's conjecture is unmetrical and offers paśupatim avanataḥ instead. Based on Cunningham's photo, arcayati is all but impossible, and avanataḥ doesn't fit the traces well either. As pointed out by Bakker, there seem to be three akṣaras after ma, but I have two caveats: as far as I can see, ma is not at all certain (it could be va/ca/ma/ba/pa/dā in roughly this order of decreasing probability), while the last of the three characters may well be a punctuation dash instead of an akṣara (or, even more likely, a halanta consonant with a dash above?). Upanataḥ may perhaps be more appropriate than avanataḥ, but it doesn't fit the traces any better. I'm giving up for now.

--></lg>

<l n="ab"><lb n="4"/><supplied reason="lost">tasmin rā</supplied>jani śāsati pr̥thvīṁ pr̥thu-vimala-locane rtti-hare</l>

<l n="cd">Abhivarddhamāna-rājye paṁcadaśābde nr̥pa-vr̥ṣasya|</l>

</lg>

<l n="ab">śaśi-raśmi-hāsa-vikasita-kumudotpala-gandha-śītalāmode</l>

<l n="cd">kārttika-māse prāpt<choice><sic>a</sic><corr>e</corr></choice> gagana<lb n="5" break="no"/>-<supplied reason="lost" cert="low">patau</supplied><supplied reason="lost">ni</supplied>rmmale bhāti|</l>

</lg>

<l n="ab">dvija-gaṇa-mukhyair abhisaṁstute ca puṇyāha-nāda-ghoṣeṇa</l>

<l n="cd">tithi-nakṣatra-muhūrtte saṁprāpte supraśasta-d<unclear>i</unclear>ne|</l>

</lg>

<l n="ab">mātr̥tulasya tu pautraḥ putraś ca tathaiva mātr̥dāsasya</l>

<l n="cd">nāmnā ca mātr̥cetaḥ parvva<lb n="6" break="no"/><supplied reason="lost">ta</supplied> <seg met="+-"><gap reason="lost" quantity="2" unit="character"/></seg> <supplied reason="lost" cert="low">pu</supplied><unclear>ra</unclear>-vās<unclear>t</unclear>av<unclear>y</unclear>aḥ</l><!--

Fleet reads nothing before vāstavyaḥ at the beginning of l6. I agree with Mitra that there seems to be a ra before it, though it could also be the right-hand vertical stroke of a more complex character. The obvious restoration would be pura, though what remains to the left of the tentative ra does not look like part of pu. The metre of the lacuna is only correct if both parvvata and pura are right (in which case the lost bit could also be ..., but three syllables would be too much for the available space). For a wild guess, how about parvvata-gopapura-vāstavyaḥ?

--></lg>

<l n="ab">nānā-dhātu-vicitre gopāhvaya-nāmni bhūdhare ramye</l>

<l n="cd">kāritavān śailamayaṁ bhānoḥ prāsāda-vara-mukhyaM|</l><!--

The halanta M is a simplified small subscript form. The punctuation stroke is partly above it, but seems to be separate.

--></lg>

<l n="ab">puṇyābhivr̥ddhi-hetor mmātāpitros tathātmanaś caiva</l>

<l n="cd">vasatā ca giri-vare smi<supplied reason="omitted">n</supplied> rājñaḥ <lb n="7"/><gap reason="lost" extent="unknown" unit="character"/> <unclear cert="low">pā</unclear>dena</l><!--

Fleet emends vasatā to vasatāṁ. Given the lacunae, I find this unwarranted - perhaps OK if we could read pādānām instead of pādena at the end.

--><!--

The lacuna is 5 morae in length. Mihirakula would just fit in, if we could read/emend rājño mihirakula-pādānām, but this is not very likely.

--><!--

Mitra reads padena at the beginning of l7, which is unmetrical.

--></lg>

<l n="ab">ye kārayanti bhānoś candrāṁśu-sama-prabhaṁ gr̥ha-pravaraṁ</l>

<l n="cd">teṣāṁ vāsaḥ svargge yāvat-kalpa-kṣayo bhavati||</l>

</lg>

<l n="ab">bhaktyā raver vviracitaṁ sad-dharmma-khyāpanaṁ sukīrttimayaṁ</l><!--

The first part of line 7 is completely lost now, available only in Cunningham's rubbing. Line 7 is legible on the extant stone from nāmnā. To the left of this point the break slants upward. Of bhavati in v11 only the i mātrā is left; top serifs are visible after that, and recognisable bits of letters from citaṁ onward.

-->

<l n="cd">nāmnā ca keśaveti prathitena ca<surplus>|</surplus><lb n="8"/><gap reason="lost" extent="unknown" unit="character"/> <unclear cert="low">di</unclear>tyena||</l><!--

The punctuation bar after ca seems, as Fleet notes, to be just a space filler at the end of the line

--><!--

Nothing remains of lines 8 (except an i mātrā that may belong to the first ti of tiṣṭhati) and 9.

--></lg>

<l n="a">yāvac-charvva-jaṭā-kalāpa-gahane vidyotate candramā</l>

<l n="b">divya-strī-caraṇair vvibhūṣita-taṭo yāvac ca merur nagaḥ</l>

<l n="c">yāvac corasi nīla-nīrada-nibhe viṣṇur vvibharty uj<supplied reason="omitted">j</supplied>valāṁ</l>

<l n="d">śrīṁ<surplus>s</surplus> tāvad giri-mūrdhni tiṣṭhati<lb n="9"/><supplied reason="lost" cert="low">śilā-prā</supplied>sāda-mukhyo rame||</l><!--

Mitra reads mūrddhani and then nothing else before damukhyo. I believe his ddhani is what Fleet read as dhni ti, which seems much better.

--><!--

At the end of line 8 I'd expect tiṣṭhatu instead of tiṣṭhati.

--><!--

I dislike rame at the end. According to MW, rama "pleasing" is attested only ifc; as an independent word, it only means "lover, husband".

--></lg>

</div>

<lem/>

</app>

</listApp>

</div>

</div>

</div>

<p/>

</listBibl>

</listBibl>

</div>

</body>

</text>

</TEI>