Faridpur Undated Charter of Dharmāditya
Version: (3e68bda), last modified (3e68bda).
Edition
Seal
⟨1⟩ [vāraka-maṇḍala-viṣayādhika]-
⟨2⟩ [raṇasya]
Plates
⟨Page 1r⟩
⟨1⟩ svasty⟨.⟩ Asyāṁ pr̥¿bh?ivyām apratirathe nr̥ga-na¿gh?uṣa-yayāty-a-
⟨2⟩ mbarīṣa-sama-dhr̥tau mahārājādhirāja-śrī-dharmmāditya-bhaṭṭāraka-rā-
⟨3⟩ jy¿ai? tad-anumodanā-la¿d?dhāspado navyāvakāśikāyāṁ mahā-prati-
⟨4⟩ hāroparika nāgadevasyāddhyāsana-kāle nenāpi vāraka-maṇḍala-
⟨5⟩ -viṣayādhiniyuktaka-vyāpāra-k(ā)raṇḍaya-gopāla-svāmī⟨.⟩
⟨6⟩ yato sya samv⟨y⟩avaharato vasud¿ā?va-svāminā sādaram abhigamya
⟨7⟩ jyeṣ¿r?a-kāyastha-nayasena-pramukham adhikaraṇam mahatt¿ā?ra-
⟨8⟩ -somaghoṣa-purassarāś ca viṣayā¿ṇaṁ? mahattarā ¿vijñāptāḥ?
⟨9⟩ Iccheyam bhavatā¿n? prasādād yathārgheṇa ¿bhavaddhyor? eva kṣettr(ā/a)-khaṇḍalaka(ṁ)-
⟨10⟩ (krī)tvā mātā-pittror ātmanaś ca puṇyābhivr̥ddhaye guṇavat-kāṇva-{d}vā-
⟨11⟩ jisi¿i?neya-lauhittya-sagottrāya brāhmaṇ¿e? somasvāmiṇe prati-
⟨12⟩ pratipāditu⟨ṁ⟩⟨.⟩ tad ¿arhatty assad-vijñāpa-vasā nyānam āṁsam vitakumvi? Etad ¿ā?vā-
⟨13⟩ bhyarth¿ā?nam adhikr̥ttyāsty etat prā{r}k-kriyamāṇaka-maryyādā caturddīnārikkya-
⟨14⟩ -kulya-vāpena kṣettrāṇi vikrīyantānīty asmād vasu⟨deva⟩-svāminaḥ
⟨Page 1v⟩
⟨15⟩ khila-(satvātprapyardha)-kulya-vāpasya (pravartta)-vāpādhikasya dīnāra-
⟨16⟩ -dva{ṁ}yam ādāya yathārhañ ca ṣaṣṭharggaṇḍayavāptrayurasmāni
⟨17⟩ śātpalāni (śrī)mān-mahattara-thoḍa-samvaddha-kṣettra-khaṇḍalakātasanī
⟨18⟩ pustapāla-jaṁmabhūter avadhāraṇayāvadhr̥ttya (pūrtteddhunivadapratīta)-
⟨19⟩ -dharmma-śīla-śivacandra-hastāṣṭaka-navaka-nalenāpaviñchya ⟨va⟩sude-
⟨20⟩ va-brāhmaṇā vikkrītam a¿t?enāpi kkrīta⟨ṁ⟩| sīmā-liṅgāni cāttra
⟨21⟩ pūrvvasyāṁ (so?)ga-tāmrapaṭṭa sīmā| ⟨dakṣiṇasyāṁ⟩ vr̥ddha-stha-paṭṭuki-parkkraṭī-vr̥kṣa sī-
⟨22⟩ mā⟨.⟩ paścimasyāṁ gorathya-sakr̥t-parabhās tāṭaka-stha-dvaṇḍerasyāpi-
⟨23⟩ nḍetiścya nau-daṇḍaka sīmā| Uttarasyāṁ gargga-svāmi-tāmrapaṭṭa sīmā
⟨24⟩ bhavanti cāttra dharmm¿ā?-śāstra-ślokāni|| ṣaṣṭiṁ varṣa-sahasrāṇi
⟨25⟩ svargge modati bhūmida⟨ḥ⟩ ākṣept¿a? cānumantā ca t{y}āny eva
⟨26⟩ narake vaseT| sva-dattām para-dattām vā yo hareta vasu-
⟨27⟩ ndharā⟨ṁ⟩ śva-(vi)ṣṭhāyā⟨ṁ⟩ kr̥mir bhūtvā pitr̥bhi⟨ḥ⟩ saha pacya(te|)
<?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>Faridpur Undated Charter of Dharmāditya</title>
<respStmt>
<resp key="contributor">Original EpiDoc Encoding for Siddham</resp>
<persName ref="part:daba">
<forename>Dániel</forename>
<surname>Balogh</surname>
</persName>
</respStmt>
<respStmt>
<resp key="contributor">Conversion of encoding for DHARMA</resp>
<persName ref="part:daba">
<forename>Dániel</forename>
<surname>Balogh</surname>
</persName>
</respStmt>
<respStmt>
<resp key="creator">intellectual authorship of edition</resp>
<persName ref="part:daba">
<forename>Dániel</forename>
<surname>Balogh</surname>
</persName>
</respStmt>
</titleStmt>
<publicationStmt>
<authority><ref target="https://dharmalekha.info">DHARMA</ref></authority>
<pubPlace>Berlin</pubPlace>
<idno type="filename">DHARMA_INSSiddham00129.xml</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-sa/4.0/">CC BY-SA 4.0</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>
<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>
<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">
<div type="textpart" n="A"><head xml:lang="eng">Seal</head>
<ab><lb n="1"/><supplied reason="lost"><!-- CHECK if <unclear> applies better.-->vāraka-maṇḍala-viṣayādhika</supplied><lb n="2" break="no"/><supplied reason="lost"><!-- CHECK if <unclear> applies better.-->raṇasya</supplied><!--
Pargiter does not edit the seal inscription, noting only that just a few characters are legible, but what remains is consistent with the seal of %IN00130. There are facsimiles of the seals in IA39 (next ot p208), but my scan is poor, so even for %IN00130 I cannot be sure where the line break is. I can see dhi near the end of the first line, but I cannot tell if there is a ka next to it or just some noise. In the second line only sya is discernible; raṇa can be seen with some imagination; there is probably no ka here.
--></ab>
</div>
<div type="textpart" n="B"><head xml:lang="eng">Plates</head>
<p><pb n="1r"/><lb n="1"/>svasty<supplied reason="subaudible">.</supplied> Asyāṁ pr̥<choice><sic>bh</sic><corr>th</corr></choice>ivyām apratirathe nr̥ga-na<sic>gh</sic>uṣa-yayāty-a<lb n="2" break="no"/>mbarīṣa-sama-dhr̥tau mahārājādhirāja-śrī-dharmmāditya-bhaṭṭāraka-rā<lb n="3" break="no"/>jy<choice><sic>ai</sic><corr>e</corr></choice> tad-anumodanā-la<sic>d</sic>dhāspado navyāvakāśikāyāṁ mahā-prati<lb n="4" break="no"/>hāroparika nāgadevasyāddhyāsana-kāle nenāpi vāraka-maṇḍala<lb n="5" break="no"/>-viṣayādhiniyuktaka-vyāpāra-k<unclear>ā</unclear>raṇḍaya-gopāla-svāmī<supplied reason="subaudible">.</supplied> <lb n="6"/>yato sya samv<supplied reason="omitted">y</supplied>avaharato vasud<choice><sic>ā</sic><corr>e</corr></choice>va-svāminā sādaram abhigamya <lb n="7"/>jyeṣ<choice><sic>r</sic><corr>ṭh</corr></choice>a-kāyastha-nayasena-pramukham adhikaraṇam mahatt<choice><sic>ā</sic><corr>a</corr></choice>ra<lb n="8" break="no"/>-somaghoṣa-purassarāś ca viṣayā<choice><sic>ṇaṁ</sic><corr>nāṁ</corr></choice> mahattarā <sic>vijñāptāḥ</sic></p><!--
The beginning of the inscription is indiscernible in my digital copy of the facsimile in IA39. IN00128 opens with a mangala symbol, but editors do not report one for this inscription.
--><!--
Pargiter (1910:211-212) explains vyāpāra-kāraṇḍaya (l5) as one who has to regulate trade, citing a rare suffix aṇḍa which forms a noun of agency. He derives vyāpāraṇḍya in %IN00130/3 directly from vyā-pr̥ with the same suffix. Sircar suggests that vyāpāra-kāraṇḍaya may be equivalent to vyāpāra-kāraṇḍīya, one in charge of boxes [of documents] relating to administration".
--><p><lb n="9"/>Iccheyam bhavatā<sic>n</sic> prasādād yathārgheṇa <sic>bhavaddhyor</sic> eva kṣettr<choice><unclear>ā</unclear><unclear>a</unclear></choice>-khaṇḍalaka<unclear>ṁ</unclear><lb n="10" break="no"/><unclear>krī</unclear>tvā mātā-pittror ātmanaś ca puṇyābhivr̥ddhaye guṇavat-kāṇva-<surplus>d</surplus>vā<lb n="11" break="no"/>jisi<sic>i</sic>neya-lauhittya-sagottrāya brāhmaṇ<sic>e</sic> somasvāmiṇe prati<lb n="12" break="no"/>pratipāditu<supplied reason="omitted">ṁ</supplied><supplied reason="subaudible">.</supplied> tad <sic>arhatty assad-vijñāpa-vasā nyānam āṁsam vitakumvi</sic><!--
At the boundary of l9-10, Pargiter reads kṣettrā khaṇḍalakai/rkkrītvā, noting that kṣettrā should be emended to kṣettrāṇi and that Hoernle's reading is khaṇḍalakaṁ. Sircar keeps Pargiter's reading but hyphenates kṣettrā, taking it as a compound, and emends to kṣettra-khaṇḍalakaṁ or -kān krītvā. My scanned facsimile is very poor, but I see neither a superscript r, nor a doubled k in the first character of l10. In l9, kṣettra certainly ends with something that may be an ā mātrā, but it does not curve upward as much as other ā mātrās do, so it may just be a slip of the tool. The last character may have an ai mātrā over it, but it is very unclear and may be a couple of random scratches - if Hoernle deemed an anusvāra possible, then I think we should give the engraver and composer the benefit of doubt.
--><!--
For the gibberish in l12, Pargiter notes that all letters are clear except that nyā may also be bhyā. Nothing is visible on my facsimile. Pargiter suggets the reconstruction tad arhathāsmad-vijñāpa-vaśā nyānamāṁsam vibhaktum iti, taking vijñāpa for vijñāpanā and vaśā for vaśāt (cf. sakāśā in %IN00128/7). He does not hazard an interpretation for nyānamāṁsam. Sircar's reconstruction is tad arhnty asmad-vijñāpya-vaśād yathānyāyena prasādaṁ kartum iti. I believe Pargiter's vibhaktum to be more realistic; compare tad arhatha matto mūlyaṁ gr̥hītvā viṣaye vibhajya dātum iti in %IN00128-7-8.
--></p>
<p>Etad <choice><sic>ā</sic><corr>e</corr></choice>vā<lb n="13" break="no"/>bhyarth<choice><sic>ā</sic><corr>a</corr></choice>nam adhikr̥ttyāsty etat prā<surplus>r</surplus>k-kriyamāṇaka-maryyādā caturddīnārikkya<lb n="14" break="no"/>-kulya-vāpena kṣettrāṇi vikrīyantānīty asmād vasu<supplied reason="omitted">deva</supplied>-svāminaḥ <pb n="1v"/><lb n="15"/>khila-<unclear>satvātprapyardha</unclear>-kulya-vāpasya <unclear>pravartta</unclear>-vāpādhikasya dīnāra<lb n="16" break="no"/>-dva<surplus>ṁ</surplus>yam ādāya yathārhañ ca ṣaṣṭharggaṇḍayavāptrayurasmāni <lb n="17"/>śātpalāni <unclear>śrī</unclear>mān-mahattara-thoḍa-samvaddha-kṣettra-khaṇḍalakātasanī <lb n="18"/>pustapāla-jaṁmabhūter avadhāraṇayāvadhr̥ttya <unclear>pūrtteddhunivadapratīta</unclear><lb n="19" break="no"/>-dharmma-śīla-śivacandra-hastāṣṭaka-navaka-nalenāpaviñchya <supplied reason="omitted">va</supplied>sude<lb n="20" break="no"/>va-brāhmaṇā vikkrītam a<choice><sic>t</sic><corr>n</corr></choice>enāpi kkrīta<supplied reason="omitted">ṁ</supplied>|<!--
For vikrīyantānīty in l14, Pargiter notes that this was probably meant to be a present participle in the neuter plural nominative, but vikrīyanta iti would be better. I agree with Pargiter; Sircar just emends to vikrīyamāṇānīti.
--><!--
Neither Pargiter, nor Sircar offers an interpretation for satvātprapyardha and pravartta in l15, except noting that the reading appears to be so [implying that it is not quite certain]. The facsimile is illegible. Apparently Vasudeva gave the authorities 2 Dinars, and fields here sell at 4 Dinars per kulyavāpa, so he should be buying half a kulyavāpa. Suppose we read khila-satvāt prāpyārdha-kulyavāpasya pravartta-vāpādhikasya, meaning something like "Because of its being uncultivated land, we received from him two Dinars for the half kulyavāpa that [he] intended to purchase, plus a pravarttavāpa", supposing that a pravarttavāpa is a small measure of land which comes in addition to the half kulyavāpa, because 4 Dinars/kv are for arable land, and this is unbroken, so he gets a bonus? Sircar also takes this bit to mean that there is an additional area, and says it must have been small, so it cannot be the same as a pravarti or an Oriya pauṭi, which seems to be a huge measure of 10 kulyas. He also thinks the corrupt bit in l16-19 describes the price of the additional bit (see below).
--><!--
For the gibberish in l16-17, Pargiter only notes that this is what the text looks like, except that ṣaṣṭha could also be samva. Sircar tentatively hazards ṣaḍ-gaṇḍakādhika-tri-rūpakāny api gr̥hītāni. The scanned rubbing is too poor for me to guess, but could perhaps ṣaṣṭharggaṇḍaya be kṣetra-khaṇḍala? And could asmāni be asmābhi(ḥ)? śātpala is reminiscent of śādvala, but I don't see how that would fit in the picture.
--><!--
For thoḍa-samvaddha in l17, Pargiter notes that thoḍa-sastaddha (for saṁstabdha) or thoḍasa-mr̥ddha (sic) are also possible. For the last, he notes in his translation that mr̥ddha may be an older/Sanskritised form of the modern-day word mirdhā, a title applied to a zamindar's head peon in the region. (But isn't this mirzā?) Alternatively, could thoḍa be a deśī word as in Hindi थोड़ा, making this a reference to the bonus land?
--><!--
For the end of l17, Pargiter says the last three characters could also be nasabhī. Sircar in a note - not saying if he is emending this bit or just guessing at the intent - mentions khaṇḍalanān dīyatām iti, or °kān tāmraśāsanīkr̥tya. Again, maybe read asmābhi?
--><!--
For the end of l18, Pargiter conjectures pūrvedyu(s) for pūrtteddhu. At the end he prints putata and notes that pu seems to be a badly formed pra, while the first ta is inserted beneath (unfortunately, he doesn't say beneath what). He also says there is a blurred vowel mark above that might be ī - but he again doesn't say above what he sees this. He believes the word may be pratīta. My facsimile is hopeless, but I think I can see his pra, followed by what may be tī, and possibly a second ta below the tī. Pargiter's description implies a different arrangement. For this string, Sircar offers paṭṭeṣu nibaddhaṁ or tāmrapaṭṭadharmeṇa. I don't see wher he wants to read the latter word - perhaps that is his own gloss? He adopts Pargiter's pratīta, printed as unclear.
--><!--
Pargiter and Sircar both print the punctuation in l20 (and 21) as original. It is indiscernible in the rubbing, but may be a short horizontal dash in both places.
--></p>
<p>sīmā-liṅgāni cāttra<lb n="21"/>pūrvvasyāṁ <unclear cert="low">so</unclear>ga-tāmrapaṭṭa sīmā| <supplied reason="omitted">dakṣiṇasyāṁ</supplied> vr̥ddha-stha-paṭṭuki-parkkraṭī-vr̥kṣa sī<lb n="22" break="no"/>mā<supplied reason="subaudible">.</supplied> paścimasyāṁ gorathya-sakr̥t-parabhās tāṭaka-stha-dvaṇḍerasyāpi<lb n="23" break="no"/>nḍetiścya nau-daṇḍaka sīmā| Uttarasyāṁ gargga-svāmi-tāmrapaṭṭa sīmā<!--
As Pargiter notes (and Sircar follows), parkkraṭī in l21 is probably intended for parkaṭī, which is a kind of fig. (Both spell it parkaṭi, but MW gives parkaṭī). Sircar adds that vr̥ddhasthapaṭṭuki may be a place name. I wonder if paṭṭuki may be a spelling mistake for pakkuṭi, which in turn could be the vernacular word for parkaṭī.
--><!--
For the gibberish in l22-23, Pargiter notes that this is how the letters appear, but he cannot make sense of them. He also notes that everything is a compound from gorathya to sīmā, which is how he treats the other boundary statements too. I disagree; the stem forms such as vr̥kṣa and nau-daṇḍaka must have been meant for nominatives. However, my spaces and hyphens are entirely arbitrary and tentative. Sircar adds that naudaṇḍa means naupatha (a navigable canal? MW shows neither of these words). His conjecture for the gibberish is: gorathya-sakr̥tprabha-taṭākastha-daṇḍo smin daṇḍe tiryag naudaṇḍaka.
--></p>
<p><lb n="24"/>bhavanti cāttra dharmm<choice><sic>ā</sic><corr>a</corr></choice>-śāstra-ślokāni||<!--
The punctuation in l24 is a double horizontal.
--></p>
<lg n="1" met="anuṣṭubh">
<l n="a">ṣaṣṭiṁ varṣa-sahasrāṇi</l>
<l n="b"><lb n="25"/>svargge modati bhūmida<supplied reason="omitted">ḥ</supplied></l>
<l n="c">ākṣept<choice><sic>a</sic><corr>ā</corr></choice> cānumantā ca</l>
<l n="d">t<surplus>y</surplus>āny eva <lb n="26"/>narake vaseT|<!--
The punctuation at the end of the verse is clearly a single horizontal dash.
--></l>
</lg>
<lg n="2" met="anuṣṭubh">
<l n="a">sva-dattām para-dattām vā</l>
<l n="b">yo hareta vasu<lb n="27" break="no"/>ndharā<supplied reason="omitted">ṁ</supplied></l>
<l n="c">śva-<unclear>vi</unclear>ṣṭhāyā<supplied reason="omitted">ṁ</supplied> kr̥mir bhūtvā</l>
<l n="d">pitr̥bhi<supplied reason="omitted">ḥ</supplied> saha pacya<unclear>te|</unclear><!--
The punctuation at the end of the verse is not discernible in the facsimile and neither Pargiter nor Sircar print original punctuation here, but there are some marks after what I take to be cyate which may well include a dash like above.
--><!--
As Pargiter notes, the reason why this plate bears no date may be that the space is filled up completely by the text.
--></l>
</lg>
</div>
</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>