North Indian Inscriptions

INSCRIPTIONS OF THE CHANDELLAS OF JEJAKABHUKTI

account is also in confirmation with that of the preceding inscription. The stanza that follows is again much damaged, but its first quarter is the same as that of Kālidāsa’s Kumāra-sambhava (l, 43) ; in all probability it is devoted to describe the face of the king,¹ i.e., Padmapāla. The record proceeds to state that he (i.e., Padmapāla) was succeeded by Mahīpāla who was ‘a destroyer of his enemies and was honoured by kings bowing down their heads so as to drop down their head-garlands on his foot-stools’ and ‘whose fame adorned the temples of the elephants guarding the quarters’. The next two stanzas (vv. 7-8) intend to express the majesty of the king (i.e., Mahīpāla), comparing him with the Sun, by means of double entendre, meaning that his glory spread in all quarters and he placed his feet on the heads of kings (vanquished them, as the Sun spreads his rays on the summits of mountains), removed vices (of his subjects, as the Sun dispels darkness) and was a good, i.e. capable lord.² And the last stanza (v. 9) again refers to Mahīpāla and says that ‘even the news of his approach drives his enemies away to a distance’.

Here ends the first part of the inscription, dealing with the genealogy of the royal house. Unfortunately the very name of the house to which all these kings belonged cannot be known from the portion now available, but from the genealogy which is materially the same as recorded in the inscription edited above, we may safely conclude that it refers to the house of the Kachchhapaghātas ruling at Gwālior.³ It must be admitted here, however, that in respect of genealogy, the present inscription has nothing new to say.

The latter part of the inscription which gives the object, as seen above, is separated by a sign of interpunctuation resembling a wheel with eight spokes.⁴ It also gives a long genealogical account of the person who built the temple ; and as it is not of any historical value, it will, I think, be sufficient to give here only an abstract of its contents. After eulogising the god Śiva in the form of a sacrifice (Kāla-yajvā), in v. 10, it introduces one Manōratha of the Māthura clan of Kāyasthas and says that he was the Secretary (or Accountant) of the king Bhuvanapāla (v. 12). Manōtatha’s wife was Bhāvā (?) and their son was Mānichandra (vv. 13-14), who built a temple containing statues of Smar-ārāti (Śiva) and of some other gods⁵ and who married Rāsagati (vv. 15-16).⁶ Their son was Madhusūdana ; whose younger brother Āśāchandra built (the present) temple of Hara (v. 17).⁷ Verses 18-22 are devoted to eulogise Āśāchandra as a learned and pious person doing religious and charitable works ; but this description is all poetic, specifying not even one illustration to give him the credit.

Following this account, we have two more stanzas ; the first of them records that the inscription was composed by the Jaina sage (nirgranthinātha) Yaśōdēva (v. 23),⁸ and the second (v. 24) contains the blessings of the deity. The concluding passage, which is in prose, gives the details of the date which we have seen above.

There is only one place-name Gwālikēra in the preserved portion of the record (v. 5). It is the well-known city of Gwālior where the stone was found. As noted by Hultzsch while editing the inscription, it seems to be the original form and the immediate source of the modern name ‘Gwālior or more correctly Gwālhēr.

__________________________
¹ The very name Padmapāla may have given our poet an idea to utilise this verse in his composition.
² See text, below, f.n. 9. Hultzsch suggested that stanzas 7-9 of this record seems to refer to the death of Mahīpāla, and must have recorded the name of his successor, which, however, is not certain. See Ind. Ant., Vol. XV, p. 202. Following this view, it is possible to hold that some time before this record was put up, the throne was occupied by Mahīpāla’s successor and the temple was built in his reign. But this view is not certain.
³ It is very probable that the very name of the house is lost in l .1. See text, below, f.n. 3.
⁴ See text, below, f.n. appended to verse 10.
⁵ As noted by Hultzsch in Ind. Ant., Vol. XV, p. 202, n. 8, this temple may be the smaller Sās-Bahū temple at Gwālior.
⁶ In verse 16 the reading is Janai-rāsagatir- ; and the name may be taken either to be Āsagati or Rāsagati.
⁷ According to Hultzsch, the probable site of this temple is the same as in Cunningham’s A.S.I.R., II, p. 364 and Plate Ixxxviii.
⁸ He is the same person who is called in the preceding inscription as Yaśōdēva Digambarārka who wrote it (on stone). In the present record he is called ‘a poet in six languages’, which are, as Hultzsch observes. Sanskrit, Prākrit, Śaurasēnī, Māgadhī, Paiśāchī and Dēśajā (see Ind. And., Vol. XV, p. 202, n. 10). In the preceding inscription he is called ‘a poet in all languages’ (aśēsha-bhāshāsu kaviḥ).