Kāṭlapaṟṟu grant of Vijayāditya III

Editor: Dániel Balogh.

Identifier: DHARMA_INSVengiCalukya00086.

Language: Sanskrit.

Repository: Eastern Cālukya (tfb-vengicalukya-epigraphy).

Version: (7554ccb), last modified (e18436c).

Edition

Seal

⟨1⟩ śrī-tribhuvanāṅkuśa

Plates

⟨Page 1r⟩

⟨Page 1v⟩ ⟨1⟩ o(n) nam(o nārāya)¿n?⟨ṇ⟩āya⟨.⟩ svasti⟨.⟩ (ś)rī(matāṁ sa)kala-bhuvana-saṁstūyamāna-māna(v)ya⟨2⟩-sagotrāṇāṁ hārīti-putrāṇā(ṁ) kauśikī-vara-prasāda-labdha-rājyānām (m)ā(t)r̥-(ga)[ṇa]⟨3⟩-paripālitānāṁ svāmi-mahāsena-pā(d)ānudhyātānāṁ bhagavan-nārāya(ṇa-pra)⟨4⟩sāda-samāsādita-vara-varāha-lāñchanekṣaṇa-kṣaṇa-vaśīkr̥tārāti-(ma)ṇḍa(lānā)⟨5⟩m aśvamedhāvabhr̥tha-snāna-pavitrīk(r̥)ta-vapuṣāṁ

I. Anuṣṭubh

cālukyānām abhūd va(ṁ)⟨6⟩śe

a

vijayāditya-vallabhaḥ

b

satyāśraya Iti khyāta-

c

-nāmnāpi bhuvi viśr(u)⟨7⟩taḥ|

d
II. Anuṣṭubh

tasyānujaḥ prabhuḥ khyāto

a

viṣṇuvarddhana-saṁjñitaḥ|

b

sa durjjayaṁ samuccāṭya

c

veṅgī-ma⟨8⟩ṇḍalam āptavāN|

d
III. Anuṣṭubh

Aṣṭau daśa ca va⟨r⟩ṣāṇi

a

kr̥tvāsau rājyam uttamaM

b

yayau nāka-va(dhū)⟨9⟩-bhoga-

c

-vā(ṁ)chayā marutāṁ padaM|

d
IV. Anuṣṭubh

tat-putro jayasiṁhākhyo

a

bhūri-siṁha-parā(kra)⟨Page 2r⟩⟨10⟩(maḥ)

b

trayastriṁśat samāḥ p¡ri!⟨r̥⟩thvī¡ṁm!⟨m⟩

c

abhuṁktā-catur-aṁbudhi|

d
V. Anuṣṭubh

viṣṇurājas tad-anujasy-

a

(e)ndrar(ā)⟨11⟩jasya nandanaḥ

b

sa dhātrīn nava varṣāṇi

c

pālayām āsa līlayā|

d
VI. Anuṣṭubh

tasyāpi tanayo ⟨12⟩ maṁgi-

a

-yu(va)rājākhya-bhūpatiḥ

b

nyāyenāpālayad dhātrīṁ

c

vatsarān paṁcaviṁśatiṁ(|)

d
VII. Anuṣṭubh

⟨13⟩ tasmā(j jā)taḥ sutaḥ śrīmāN

a

jayasiṁho mahīpatiḥ

b

sa trayodaśa varṣāṇi

c

⟨14⟩ rājyaṁ cakre nr̥pottamaḥ|

d
VIII. Anuṣṭubh

dvaimāturas tad-(a)nujaḥ

a

kokkilir ¿ṇ?⟨n⟩nāma viśrutaḥ

b

⟨15⟩ ṣaṇ-māsa-mātram evāsau

c

pālayitvāmucad dharāṁ|

d
IX. Anuṣṭubh

tad-agrajas t(u) vikhy(ā)⟨16⟩to

a

viṣṇuvarddhana-nāmavāN

b

saptatriṁśat samāḥ p¡ri!⟨r̥⟩thvīṁ

c

rarakṣa sakalā(m) i(m)ā(ṁ|)

d
X. Anuṣṭubh

⟨17⟩ sūnus tadīyo vijayā-

a

ditya-nāmā mahīpatiḥ

b

so ⟨’⟩pi pālitavā(n urvvī)m

c

aṣ(ṭ)(au?) (da)⟨18⟩śa ca vatsarāN|

d
XI. Anuṣṭubh

(v)iṣṇu-bhūpas tato jāto

a

viṣṇuvad bali-mard¿(dh)?⟨d⟩anaḥ

b

ṣaṭtriṁśa[d va]⟨Page 2v⟩⟨19⟩tsarān dhātrīm

c

āpālya prayayau divaṁ|

d
XII. Anuṣṭubh

tasya sūnur abhūd dhīmān

a

vi(ja)yāditya-saṁ(jñ)i⟨20⟩taḥ

b

Aṣṭottara-śata-khyāta-

c

-yuddha-labdha-jayonnatiḥ|

d
XIII. Anuṣṭubh

tāvaṁty eva punaḥ kr̥tvā

a

śa(ṁ)bh(o)⟨21⟩r āyatanāny api

b

catvāriṁśat samāḥ p¡ri!⟨r̥⟩thvīṁ

c

pralīnārim apālayaT|

d
XIV. Anuṣṭubh

(vi)ṣṇuvarddhana⟨22⟩-nāmābhūt

a

tat-sūnu(r) vvijitāhitaḥ

b

so ⟨’⟩pi varṣaṁ sa-ṣaṇ-māsaṁ

c

bu(bhuje dharaṇī)-tala(ṁ|)

d
XV. Anuṣṭubh

⟨23⟩ jātā paramakāṁbāyāś

a

cendrarājasya cātmajā

b

śīlakāṁbā (bhavā)nīva

c

menā⟨24⟩-himavatos satī|

d
XVI. Anuṣṭubh

tasyāṁ ca śīlakāṁbāyāṁ

a

jāt¿ā?⟨as⟩ tad-viṣṇu-(bhūpa)teḥ

b

vi(ja)yā⟨25⟩ditya-nāmāṁkaḥ

c

sūnur ā-vārddhi-bhūpatiḥ|

d
XVII. Anuṣṭubh

yenaikenaiva khaḍgena

a

(catu)r-dig-(m)aṇḍa⟨26⟩lādhipāN

b

vijitya suyaśaḫ prāptaṁ

c

tac-chira⟨ḥ⟩-stha-pada-dvay(a)ḥ|

d
XVIII. Śārdūlavikrīḍita

yasmi(n pā)ti (bhu)vaṁ pu⟨27⟩rātana-nr̥pācāra-śrutau kautukaṁ

a

loko ⟨’⟩yaṁ tyajati sphu(ṭa)m manu-mu(ner ddharmmo)⟨Page 3r⟩⟨28⟩pa(de)śo (h?)y ayaṁ

b

yasyācāra-pa(thai)kadeśa Iva yat-kīrttes samastaṁ jaga(d)

c

v(e)śmat(v)aṁ ⟨29⟩ (ga)mitaṁ sa cāru vijayādityo (vi)bhāty uttamaḥ|

d
XIX. Sragdharā

Ā seto rāma-mukta-pra(vara)⟨30⟩-ka(pi-ba)lābaddha-śailendra-br̥ṁdād

a

ā kailāsāc ca pār(vv)aty-avacita-(su)mano-ramya⟨31⟩-vr̥kṣānta-s¿a?⟨ā⟩nor

b

ā tuṁgāc cāsta-śailād uḍu-kusuma-cayād ā punaś codayādre⟨32⟩r

c

yyāvanto madhya-vartti-kṣitipati-nikarā¿t?⟨s⟩ tair nnuto yo vibhāti|

d
XX. Anuṣṭubh

yasya ⟨33⟩ pratāpa-santāpa-

a

-khidyamānāri-bhūmipāḥ

b

pāda-(cchā)y(ā)n na muñcanti

c

dvī⟨34⟩pāntara-samāgatāḥ|

d
XXI. Anuṣṭubh

yasyaivājñāmayan tejo

a

jagad-antaḥ-pu(r)e (bhra)mad

b

durjja⟨35⟩nocchedanāyālaṁ

c

śodhanā-dīpikāyate|

d
XXII. Anuṣṭubh

yat-prasāda-taror aindram

a

apakva-phala⟨36⟩vat padaṁ

b

yasya (krodh)ānalasyāpi

c

vahnir aurvvaḥ ka¿n?⟨ṇ⟩āyate|

d
XXIII. Anuṣṭubh

yan-mahat⟨t⟩vaṁ sam(u)d(d)iśya

a

⟨Page 3v⟩ ⟨37⟩ merus tr̥ṇa-lavāyate

b

yasyaivāgādha-gāṁbhīryyaṁ

c

jānudaghnāyate ⟨’⟩(ṁ)bu(dh)i(ḥ|)

d

(E)va(ṁ) ⟨38⟩ sthite|

XXIV. Anuṣṭubh

Āsīt prāvaca(na)-khyāta-

a

-vipra-vaṁśa-kulottamaḥ

b

kāṭūru-vāyulūr-ākhya-

c

⟨39⟩-grāma-dvaya-patiḥ prabhuḥ|

d
XXV. Anuṣṭubh

tatrā(ś)eṣa-deśaika-

a

-(nā)yako gu¿n?⟨ṇ⟩a-lā¡ḷ!⟨l⟩itaḥ

b

kumāra⟨40⟩mū(r)tti-nāmāṁka¿(ṁ?)?⟨ḥ⟩

c

śrī(mān bh)ūri-yaśo-dhanaḥ

d
XXVI. Anuṣṭubh

jaya-mānoddhr̥taṁ hastaṁ

a

bhūpates toṇḍa⟨41⟩māninaḥ

b

(no?)(ddharā?)my adya tan nūnaṁ

c

kāḍuveṭṭi-mahīśa te

d
XXVII. Anuṣṭubh

Ity uktvā saṁ(pa)ri⟨42⟩(t)yajya

a

deśaṁ mā(na-dha)nānvitaḥ

b

(ve)ṁgī-deśaṁ praviśyāsāv

c

uṇḍy-ākhya-grāma⟨43⟩(m āya)y(au)|

d
XXVIII. Anuṣṭubh

tatra (sthi)t(vā sa) tanayaṁ

a

lebhe dvija-kulottamaṁ

b

viddiśarmmākhyam anaghaṁ

c

⟨44⟩ (khyā)taṁ (sat)yābhimāninaṁ|

d
XXIX. Anuṣṭubh

so ⟨’⟩py ārādhya mahāsenaṁ

a

cirāyājījanat sutaṁ

b

ku(mā)⟨45⟩(raḫ peddana?)ś (c)e(t)i

c

(nā)ma-dvaya-samanvitaṁ|

d
XXX. Anuṣṭubh

tasmāt tu cānamāṁbāyāṁ

a

sūnur jjā⟨Page 4r⟩⟨46⟩to (mahā-yaśā?)ḥ

b

(rājādit)ya Iti khyāto

c

rā(j)īva-(s)ama-loca(n)aḥ(|)

d
XXXI. Anuṣṭubh

du(s)sādhyān sādhayi⟨47⟩(tvārīN)

a

svasyaiv(ai)kāsi-dhārayā

b

dravyāṇy āhr̥tya bhūyāṁsi

c

(svā)mine yaḫ pra⟨48⟩(ya)cchati|

d
XXXII. Anuṣṭubh

satya-śīlābhimānoru-

a

-tyāga-śauryyādibhir gguṇaiḥ

b

ye(na) tulyo ⟨49⟩ (na lo)ke ⟨’⟩sti

c

nāsīn na ca bhaviṣyati|

d
XXXIII. Anuṣṭubh

yasya jātas suta⟨ḥ⟩ khyātaḥ

a

pedda(nā)khy(o dvi)⟨50⟩(jā)dhipaḥ

b

svāmi-bhakti-vrata⟨ḥ⟩ śrīmāN

c

dig-vikīrṇṇa-mah(ā)-yaśāḥ|

d
XXXIV. Anuṣṭubh

dhīraś śū⟨51⟩raś śuciḫ prājño

a

devādibhyo ⟨’⟩nr̥ṇaḥ paṭuḥ

b

kulān{n}y u(ddh)r̥tavāN sa(rvvāN)

c

⟨52⟩ svāśritābhaya-daḫ prabhuḥ|

d
XXXV. Anuṣṭubh

Evaṁ-bhūtaṁ sutaṁ labdhvā

a

rājādityas sa Uttama(ṁ)

b

⟨53⟩ prāptaḫ paramam ānaṁda¡ṁm!⟨m⟩

c

aihikāmutrika-kṣamaM|

d

tatra sa vijayāditya-rājā⟨54⟩dhirāja-parameśvara-(pa)rama-bhaṭṭārakaḥ parama-brahmaṇyas sārvvabhaumo nirvvarttitā⟨Page 4v⟩⟨55⟩śeṣa-jagad-vyāpāro bhūtvā dharmmaika-niṣṭha⟨ḥ⟩ saN premānurakta-cittata(yā A)⟨56⟩sādhāraṇa-karuṇayā ca tasmai rājāditya-dvijottamāya sūryya-grahaṇa-(nimi)⟨57⟩tte kāṭlapaṟṟu nāma grāmaM sarvva-kara-parihāreṇa AgrahāraM (prādā)T⟨.⟩ ⟨58⟩ datvā ca veṁgī-sahasra-grāma-deśa-rāṣṭrakūṭa-pramukhāN kuṭumbina Ittham ā⟨59⟩jñāpayati

viditam astu vo ⟨’⟩smābhir vveṁgī-sahasrākhya-viṣaye ⟨60⟩ rājādityāyāsmai kāṭlapaṟṟu-grāmas sarvva-kara-parihāre¿n?⟨ṇ⟩ā(gra)⟨61⟩hāro datta Iti⟨.⟩ Asya grāmasyāvadhayaḥ⟨.⟩ pūrvvataḥ velivroluḥ sīmā| ⟨62⟩ (Ā)gneyataḥ Elaṁbaṟa-ceṟuvu| dakṣiṇataḥ virppaṟṟu(|) nairr̥tyāṁ virppaṟṟ(u-grā)⟨63⟩ma-kṣetraṁ| paścimataḥ rāvulapaṟṟu| vāyavyataḥ (gogu)lamaṇḍa| Uttarataḥ ⟨Page 5r⟩ ⟨64⟩ ba(m)(m?)(i)ni(pa)ṟ(ṟu) bo(d)yama(p)ūṇḍi| (Ai?)śānyān diśi (ve?)li(vrol)i-k(ṣ)etraṁ| Eta(d-aṣṭa-dik-sī)⟨65⟩m(ā?)-(madhya-var)tt(i grāmaḥ| A)syopa(r)i (na) kenacid bā(dhā) ka(r)tta(v)yā| yaḥ karoti sa pa(ṁ)⟨66⟩(ca-mahāpātaka-saṁy)ukto bha(va)ti| bha(gava)tā vyā(senāp)y (uk)taṁ|

XXXVI. Anuṣṭubh

(bahubh)ir vva(su)⟨67⟩(dhā da)ttā

a

ba(h)ubhiś cānupālit(ā|)

b

yasya yasya (yadā bhū)mis

c

tasya tasya ta(dā) ⟨68⟩ (phalaM|)

d
XXXVII. Anuṣṭubh

(sva-da)ttāṁ para-dattāṁ vā

a

yo hareta vasundharāM|

b

ṣaṣṭi(ṁ?) varṣa-sa(ha)⟨69⟩(srāṇi)

c

(viṣṭhā)yāṁ jāyate k¡ri!⟨r̥⟩(m)iḥ|

d
XXXVIII. Vasantatilakā

ma(d-vaṁ)śa-(jāḫ para)-mahīpati-v(aṁ)śa-(jā)ś (ca)

a

⟨70⟩ (pāpād ape)ta-manaso bhuvi bhāvi-bhū(pāḥ|)

b

(ye) pālayanti mama dha(rmmam imaṁ sa)⟨71⟩(mastan)

c

t(eṣā)m mayā (v)ira(c)ito ⟨’⟩ṁ(j)alir e(ṣa) mūrddhni|

d

Ā(j)ña(p)tir asya pā(ṇḍa)rāṁgaḥ⟨.⟩ (śi)⟨72⟩vam astu| (śān)tir a(st)u|

⟨Page 5v⟩

Apparatus

Seal

Plates

⟨1⟩ o(n) ⬦ om RS.

⟨7⟩ va⟨r⟩ṣāṇi ⬦ varṣāṇi RS.

⟨10⟩ abhuṁktā-catur- ⬦ abhukt⟨v⟩ā catur- RS • RS’s emendation makes no sense in the context. The anusvāra is clear, and the reading is identical to that in verse 5 of the Kākamrāṇu grant of Bhīma I.

⟨14⟩ tad-(a)nujaḥ • This may have been corrected from tadānujaḥ.

⟨17⟩ aṣ(ṭ)(au?) ⬦ aṣṭā- RS • The plate is effaced here and RS may be right, but because of the presence of ca and the parallel in the Kākamrāṇu grant of Bhīma I, I prefer aṣṭau.

⟨25⟩ khaḍgena • The na is very narrow and may have been corrected from a final N.

⟨28⟩ (h?)y ⬦ ⟨’⟩py RS.

⟨32⟩ -nikarā¿t?⟨s⟩ ⬦ -nikarāt RS.

⟨33⟩ (cchā)y(ā)n • There are some strokes below yā that resemble the character vi. This may be random or a remnant of something inscribed earlier on the plate; no syllable is missing either here or at this point in the next line. — ⟨33⟩ ka¿n?⟨ṇ⟩āyate ⬦ kaṇāyate RS. — ⟨33⟩ -mahat⟨t⟩vaṁ ⬦ -mahatvaṁ RS.

⟨39⟩ tatrā(ś)eṣa-deśaika- • The quarter needs one more syllable, e.g. tatra cāśeṣa-deśaika- or tatratyāśeṣa-deśaika-.

⟨40⟩ -nāmāṁka(ṁ?) ⬦ -nāmāṁka⟨ḥ⟩ RS • An anusvāra seems to be present here, though it may be random damage. I cannot securely interpret this passage, but emendation to a nominative may be warranted even if the anusvāra is genuine. See also the translation and the commentary. — ⟨40⟩ -dhanaḥ ⬦ -dhanaḥ| RS • If a punctuation mark is present here, it is very faint and very close to the next character. I rather think it is only the upraised edge of the engraving on the left side of the next character. — ⟨40⟩ toṇḍa⟨41⟩māninaḥ ⬦ toṁḍa⟨41⟩māninaḥ RS.

⟨41⟩ te ⬦ te| RS • There is definitely no original punctuation mark here.

⟨45⟩ ku(mā)⟨45⟩(raḫ peddana?)ś (c)e(t)i • RS print all of this stretch as clear. The reading is probably correct, but in the published estampage, only the barest vestiges are visible of the first few characters of line 45. — ⟨45⟩ (mahā-yaśā?)ḥ • Again, RS print the text as clear, but it is illegible in the published estampage, though probably correct.

⟨54⟩ -bhaṭṭārakaḥ ⬦ -bhaṭṭāraka- RS. — ⟨54⟩ -brahmaṇyas sārvvabhaumo ⬦ -brahmaṇya sārvabhaumo RS. — ⟨54⟩ -deśa- • Having this word in compound makes for poor syntax; I would expect -deśe or -deśa-nivāsino.

⟨60⟩ rājādityā◯yāsmai ⬦ rājāditya āsmai RS. — ⟨60⟩ parihāre¿n?⟨ṇ⟩ā° ⬦ parihāreṇā° RS.

⟨63⟩ (gogu)lamaṇḍa ⬦ (go)gūlamaṇḍa RS.

⟨64⟩ bo(d)yama(p)ūṇḍi ⬦ bedyamapūṇḍi RS. — ⟨64⟩ (Ai?)śānyān ⬦ Īśānyān RS • The first character is far from clear in the printed estampage, but does not look like initial Ī. Although this word often occurs in cognate plates in the form īśānya, in this case the spelling appears to be with Ai; compare initial E further on in this line, or a clearer one in line 62. — ⟨64⟩ -(sī)⟨65⟩m(ā?) ⬦ -sī⟨65⟩ma RS.

⟨68⟩ ṣaṣṭi(ṁ?) varṣa- ⬦ ṣaṣṭir vvarṣa- RS • I cannot exclude that there was a repha on the va, obscured by a blotch of damage at the right spot, but I am quite certain that a subscript va is not present, so the original reading was either ṣaṣṭiṁ or ṣaṣṭi-. — ⟨68⟩ (viṣṭhā)◯yāṁ ⬦ viṣṭāyāṁ RS.

Translation by Dániel Balogh

Seal

Plates

(1) Om! Obeisance to Nārāyaṇa.

(2–5) Greetings. [In the dynasty of the] majestic [Cālukyas, who are] of the Mānavya gotra which is praised by the entire world, who are sons of Hārīti, who attained kingship by the grace of Kauśikī’s boon, who are protected by the band of Mothers, who were deliberately appointed (to kingship) by Lord Mahāsena, to whom the realms of adversaries instantaneously submit at the [mere] sight of the superior Boar emblem they have acquired by the grace of the divine Nārāyaṇa, and whose bodies have been hallowed through washing in the purificatory ablutions (avabhr̥tha) of the Aśvamedha sacrifice—

I
In [this] dynasty of the Cālukyas was born Vijayāditya Vallabha (Pulakeśin II), also known on [this] earth by the epithet Abode of Truth (satyāśraya).
II
His renowned and mighty younger brother was named [Kubja] Viṣṇuvardhana. He obtained the country (maṇḍala) of Veṅgī after extirpating Durjaya.1
III
Having ruled most excellently for eight and ten years, he passed on to heaven because he was eager to enjoy the divine ladies.
IV
His son, named Jayasiṁha (I) and possessing the valour of many lions (siṁha), possessed (bhuj-) for thirty-three years over the land up to the four oceans.
V
The son of his younger brother King Indra was King Viṣṇu (Viṣṇuvardhana II). He effortlessly protected (pāl-) the earth for nine years.
VI
His son in turn, the king (bhūpati) called Maṅgi Yuvarāja, protected (pāl-) the earth justly for twenty-five years.
VII
From him was born a majestic son, King (mahīpati) Jayasiṁha (II). That most excellent king reigned for thirteen years.
VIII
His younger brother by a different mother was widely known by the name Kokkili. Having ruled (pāl-) it for a mere six months, he relinquished the earth.
IX
That one’s famous elder brother, Viṣṇuvardhana (III) by name, protected (rakṣ-) this entire earth for thirty-seven years.
X
His son was the king (mahīpati) named Vijayāditya (I). He in turn protected (pāl-) the earth for eight and ten years.
XI
From him was born King (bhūpa) Viṣṇu(vardhana IV), a crusher of the mighty just as Viṣṇu {is the crusher of Bali},2 who went on to heaven after protecting (pāl-) the earth for thirty-six years.
XII
His son was the clever one named Vijayāditya (II), prominent because of his victories attained in a hundred and eight famous battles.
XIII
Afterward erecting just as many (i.e. 108) abodes of Śambhu, he ruled for forty years over an earth devoid of enemies.
XIV
His son was named Viṣṇuvardhana (V) who conquered his enemies. He possessed (bhuj-) the earth for a year and six months.
XV
A {chaste} daughter, Śīlakāmbā, was born to Paramakāmbā and Indrarāja as {Satī} Bhavānī (Pārvatī) was born to Menā and Himavat. 3
XVI
A son of that King Viṣṇu (Viṣṇuvardhana V) was born from that Śīlakāmbā. Marked by the name Vijayāditya (III), he became king as far as the oceans.
XVII
He attained great fame by defeating the rulers of the circuit of four directions with a single sword, placing his pair of feet atop their heads.4
XVIII
When he protects the world, the populace loses its interest in listening to the deeds of the kings of yore, for this (Vijayāditya) is [himself] obviously a parable about the dharma of the sage Manu. A mere fraction, as it were, of the ways of his conduct have turned the entire world into the residence of his fame. That dear Vijayāditya shines supreme.5
XIX
Whatever the number of the hosts of kings that there are within—as far as the Causeway whose flock of mountains was constructed by the army of eminent monkeys unleashed by Rāma (in the south); as far as (Mount) Kailāsa whose slopes are hemmed by trees (made) beautiful with flowers gathered by Pārvatī (in the north); as far as the lofty Sunset Mountain (in the west) and likewise as far as the Sunrise Mountain with its clusters of stars (in the east)—he shines, praised by them (all).6
XX
Enemies, (even) coming from other continents, are ever so enervated by the sunlight of his valour that they do not relinquish the shade of his feet.
XXI
The flame consisting of his command, as it roams the palace that is the world, serves as the perfect searchlight for rooting out miscreants.7
XXII
The position of Indra is like [only] an unripe fruit of the tree of his favour, and Aurva’s fire is dwarfed by the blaze of his wrath.
XXIII
In perspective to his greatness, (Mount) Meru becomes a chip of straw, and (in perspective) to his immeasurable profundity, the ocean appears knee-deep.

(37–38) In these circumstances,

XXIV
There was a supreme scion of a Brahmanical lineage reputed for (its learnedness in) the Prāvacana [sūtra]: the masterful lord of two villages named Kāṭūru and Vāyulūr.
XXV
Cherished on account of his virtues ¿by? the sovereign lord of all the land there, he was marked by the name Kumāramūrti, majestic and rich in copious glory.8
XXVI
[Kumāramūrti said,?]” I will certainly not ¿accept from you now the hand offered with honour and (wishes of) victory?, King Kāḍuveṭṭi, [because you are?] a king of Toṇḍamān.”
XXVII
Having said so and having left [that] country with honours and gifts, he entered the country of Veṅgī and came to the village named Uṇḍi.
XXVIII
Staying there, he had a son named Viddiśarman, the best of his Brahmanical family, sinless, famous and proud of his truthfulness.
XXIX
He in turn, after worshipping Mahāsena, at long last begat a son, who possessed two names, Kumāra and Peddana.
XXX
A glorious son was born to him from Cānamāmbā. Known as Rājāditya, his eyes are like dark waterlilies (rājīva).
XXXI
Overcoming indomitable enemies by the blade of his single sword, he seizes great riches and offers them to his lord.
XXXII
There is not, was not, nor will (ever) be anyone in the world comparable to him in qualities such as truthfulness, morality, pride, great generosity and valour.
XXXIII
A famous son was born to him: a king among Brahmins named Peddana, who is majestic, immersed in dedication to his lord, with his great glory spreading to (all) directions.
XXXIV
Steadfast, heroic, pure, wise, intelligent, cleared of debt to the gods and so forth,9 he is a lord who grants security to those who take refuge with him and has (thus) elevated all (his) families.10
XXXV
Having obtained such a most excellent son capable of (serving ends pertaining to) both this world and the otherworld, that Rājāditya experienced utter happiness.

(53–59) Thereupon that Vijayāditya, the supremely pious Supreme Lord (parameśvara) of Emperors (rājādhirāja), the Supreme Sovereign (parama-bhaṭṭāraka) and Universal Ruler (sārvabhauma), having concluded all worldly activity and being dedicated solely to dharma, with a fondly loving mind and with extraordinary sympathy, has on the occasion of an eclipse of the sun given the village named Kāṭlapaṟṟu, as a Brahmanical holding (agrahāra) with an exemption from all taxes, to that most excellent Brahmin Rājāditya. And having given it, he commands the householders (kuṭumbin)—including foremost the territorial overseers (rāṣṭrakūṭa)—of the Veṅgī thousand-village territory (deśa) as follows:

(59–66) Let it be known to you that we have given the village Kāṭlapaṟṟu in the district (viṣaya) called the Veṅgī-thousand to this Rājāditya as a Brahmanical holding (agrahāra) with an exemption from all taxes. The boundaries of this village [are as follows]. To the east, the border is Velivrolu. To the southeast, the Elaṁbaṟa reservoir (ceṟuvu). To the south, Virppaṟṟu. To the southwest, the fields [belonging to] the village Virppaṟṟu. To the west, Rāvulapaṟṟu. To the northwest, Gogulamaṇḍa. To the north, Bamminipaṟṟu [and] Bodyamapūṇḍi. In the northeastern direction, the fields of Velivrolu. The village is situated in the midst of these boundaries in the eight directions. Let no-one pose an obstacle (to the enjoyment of rights) over it. He who does so shall be conjoined with the five great sins. So too has the reverend Vyāsa said:

XXXVI
Many (kings) have granted land, and many have preserved it (as formerly granted). Whosoever at any time owns the land, the fruit {reward (accrued of granting it)} belongs to him at that time.
XXXVII
He who would seize land, whether given by himself or by another, shall be born as a worm in faeces for sixty millennia.
XXXVIII
Hereby I offer my respectful obeisance (añjali) to [all] future kings on earth, [whether] born in my lineage or a different royal lineage, who with minds averted from sin observe this provision (dharma) of mine in its integrity.

(71–72) The executor (ājñapti) of this [provision] is Pāṇḍarāṅga. Let it be well. Let there be peace.

Commentary

Obscured caesura in v18a and d (śārdūlavikrīḍita).

Up to stanza XIV, the text is identical to that of the Kākamrāṇu grant of Bhīma I, down to the level of some spelling idiosyncrasies, except that the opening stanza in praise of Bhīma is not present here. Our stanzas XX and XXII also appear there, describing Bhīma while here they describe Vijayāditya III. These two charters represent the earliest occurrences of a full king list among the Eastern Cālukya charters known to me, and the only instances of a fully versified king list. It cannot be ascertained whether this list was composed in the reign of Vijayāditya III or Bhīma I, since the present grant may well have been issued when Vijayāditya III was no longer active. At any rate, given the awkward (or incorrect) syntax in some of the stanzas not shared with the Kākamrāṇu grant (including much of the donee’s description), I suspect that the verse king list was composed by someone with a better command of Sanskrit, and the writer of the present grant simply adopted it from the official records.

XXV–XXVI
These two stanzas are not quite intelligible to me. The earlier editors Ramesh and Sampath may have interpreted it as I do, but all they say about them is that the donee’s ancestor Kumāramūrti “developed differences with his erstwhile lord mentioned as Toṇḍamān and Kāḍuveṭṭi” (Ramesh and Sampath [1992] 1977-1978, pp. 37–38). The reason for the passage’s opacity is primarily the poor Sanskrit used by the composer; in addition, better knowledge of the context may help reconstruct what is being hinted at here. The plates also have some damage here, but the only real ambiguity as regards the received reading is whether or not an anusvāra is present at the beginning of line 40 (see the apparatus). I agree with RS that a visarga is needed here, and whether the emendation is to replace an anusvāra or to correct an omission is of little import. Assuming that the name Kumāramūrti is in the nominative, stanza XXV should then mean that he was the lord of the entire country and not just of two villages. This seems unlikely, since the ancestor would not be named then, while his grandson would bear the name Kumāra (stanza XXIX). However, our composer has already (in stanza XVII) shown a cavalier attitude to active and passive construction. I therefore propose that the other nominative in the stanza, nāyako, is to be understood as the agent of the passive participle lāḷitaḥ, resulting in a coherent and plausible stanza. What happened next is, however, even more opaque. Stanza XXVI seems to mention two kings, one of Toṇḍamān (though bhūpates toṇḍamāninaḥ is a strange expression and may mean something else) and one called Kāḍuveṭṭi. These two may or may not be a single person and either, none or both may be identical to the local ruler introduced above. The phrase ity uktvā in stanza XXVII makes it clear that the speaker of at least the second half of stanza XXVI (with the finite verb uddharāmi in the first person) was the donee’s ancestor, and what he said resulted in his leaving the country where he had lived. The situation is all the more unfortunate because the verb is much the same as the earlier uddhr̥tam, but probably used in a different meaning among the wide choice of senses derivable from either hr̥ or dhr̥ with the prefix ud. It seems most likely that the whole of stanza XXVI is meant to be a direct quote, but if so, then we learn nothing about the occasion that prompted Kumāramūrti to say this. My understanding is that the two references to a king mean a single person. This ruler, I believe, offered recognition as an underlord (or the command of an army) to Kumāramūrti, who may have been already a military leader rather than a simple country Brahmin. This is implied by bhūri-yaśo-dhanaḥ in stanza XXV and by the fact that his descendant the donee was also a general. Assuming this is the case, the virtue on account of which Kumāramūrti was cherished (stanza XXV) may have been military success rather than a generic platitude. However, precisely because he had already been cherished by his local ruler, it is perhaps most likely that the present offer came from someone else. Kumāramūrti apparently refused the distinction, so noddharāmi in stanza XXVI is to be understood as “I will not take as my own.” The position of bhūpates toṇḍamāninaḥ in the sentence may imply that the grounds for Kumāramūrti’s rejection was the king’s Toṇḍamān lineage or territorial affiliation. (Or possibly, the Sanskrit word mānin is to be understood here, in the sense “[only] a pretender to Toṇḍai kingship”.) To complicate matters further, the phrase māna-dhanānvitaḥ in stanza XXVII suggests that Kumāramūrti departed in honour rather than fleeing from a king’s wrath. The account may simply be putting a good face on what had actually happened. But I could also imagine that this is a further implication of what I propose above: if Kumāramūrti was solicited by a rival of the local ruler or by a king aspiring for suzerainty over the region, and Kumāramūrti refused out of loyalty to his local ruler, then it makes sense that he would have to depart out of fear of the other ruler, yet receive honours from his former ruler.

Bibliography

Reported in Krishnamacharlu 1952, p. 7, appendices A/1938-39, № 3 with discussion at Krishnamacharlu 1952, p. 72, § 5. Edited from estampages by K. V Ramesh and M. D. Sampath ([1992] 1977-1978), with facsimiles, without translation. The present edition by Dániel Balogh is based on a collation of Ramesh and Sampath’s edition with their estampages.

Primary

[RS] Ramesh, K. V. and M. D. Sampath. [1992] 1977-1978. “Kāṭlapaṟṟu grant of Vijayāditya.” EI 42, pp. 35–43.

Secondary

Krishnamacharlu, C. R. 1952. Annual report on South Indian epigraphy for the year ending 31st March 1939. Delhi: Government of India. Page 7, appendixes A/1938-39, item 3.

Krishnamacharlu, C. R. 1952. Annual report on South Indian epigraphy for the year ending 31st March 1939. Delhi: Government of India. Page 72, section 5.

Notes

  1. 1. See Sankaranarayanan 1973, pp. 87–88 for some speculation on who this Durjaya may have been. The name, if a name it is, is said to occur only here and in the Kākamrāṇu grant of Bhīma I, but compare durjjayād balito hr̥tāṁ in line 7 of the Kalucuṁbaṟṟu grant of Amma II. There remains the possibility that durjaya is to be understood metonymically in the vague sense of “a tough enemy,” and it is also quite possible that veṅgī-maṇḍala was not actually conquered by Kubja Viṣṇuvardhana, this act being projected backward onto him.
  2. 2. Sankaranarayanan (1973, p. 88), as well as RS (Ramesh and Sampath [1992] 1977-1978, p. 37) are convinced that the name Bali signifies a victory of Viṣṇuvardhana over a king of the Bāṇa lineage, who traced themselves from the demon Bali. While the possibility of such an allusion cannot be ruled out, I find it more likely that Bali is to be understood as a name only in the context of Viṣṇu, and in the prima facie meaning it simply stands for “powerful enemies.”
  3. 3. As RS (Ramesh and Sampath [1992] 1977-1978, pp. 37–38) observe, the Indrarāja referred to here is probably the Rāṣṭrakūṭa Indra, younger brother of Govinda III.
  4. 4. The syntax is awkward here, as the stanza appears to be a single sentence, but its logical subject Vijayāditya III is in the instrumental (as the agent of a passive construction) in the first three quarters, and in the nominative (as the subject of an active construction) in the fourth. See also the commentary.
  5. 5. Again, the syntax of the stanza is awkward, and the images are not very coherent. The sentence about Vijayāditya being a parable (dharmopadeśa) can be fitted into the whole by assuming that is is the thought of the people, but this is not explicitly indicated by anything. The syntactical role of the compound ending in °aikadeśa is not clear; I have assumed it to be a locative expressing a condition, but the passive causative participle gamitam would expect an instrumental expressing an agent here, as in the translation.
  6. 6. Again, I find the stanza awkward. The first image of course refers to Rāma’s Causeway, but it is not clear to me whether the poet speaks about the monkey army constructing that causeway from rocks (called mountains here), or to some episode I am not aware of in which the monkey constructed mountains. The second image is about Kailāsa as the home of Pārvatī (and, implicitly, Śiva), but the flowers seem to have been picked by Pārvatī elsewhere, then hung (as garlands?) on the trees.
  7. 7. I do not know any attestation of the compound śodhanā-dīpikā, but it seems to be a lantern carried by a night guard as he patrols a palace. My translation “searchlight” may invoke too modern an image, but I use it nonetheless because it is close to a literal translation.
  8. 8. This passage is rather obscure. See the commentary.
  9. 9. The reference is to the three debts: that to the gods, to be paid by performing sacrifices; that to one’s ancestors, to be paid by performing rituals in their honour and begetting descendants; and that to the sages, by reciting the Vedas.
  10. 10. If “two families” had been mentioned here, then the text would clearly mean his paternal and maternal family. Since the text strongly implies more than two, either the family of his lord is to be understood as the third, or this Peddana II traced his descent from more than one matriline (e.g. his grandmother as well as mother may have come from notable families).