North Indian Inscriptions

INSCRIPTIONS OF THE CHANDĒLLAS OF JĒJĀKABHUKTI

To note the contents of the inscription, it begins with an auspicious symbol for Siddham, are goes on to state that the image (rūpaṁ) of Śānti, i.e., the Jaina Tīrthaṅkara Śāntinātha, which bestows on prosperity, was caused to be made with praise, i.e., out of devotion to the deity, by the Śrēshṭhins Pāhila and Jījū. Section B says that Vāsavachandra, apparently the same as Vāsuvēṇḍu of Section A, bows down to the Jina i.e., to the Tīrthaṅkara ( whose image was set up and a verse in Anushṭubh in Section C records that the statue was set up in the kingdom (i.e., during the reign of) Kīrttivarman, the son of Vijayapāla and during the administration of a group of his hereditary ministers.¹The concluding part of the inscription records the Saṁvat as we have seen above, and it is followed by what I take to be an auspicious symbol resembling chha.²

Vāsavēndu or Vāsavachandra, as his name figures in Sections A and B, respectively, appear to have been the sage who influenced Pāhila and Jījū to set up the image and not their preceptor as remarked by Dr. Sircar in his paper in the Ind. Hist. Quarterly, referred to above. Similarly I do not see any reason to take Pāhila and Jījū to be the ministers under Kīrttivarman, as taken by Dr. Sircar. The reading tatkulāmātya-vṛindasya in stanza 2, which is in a separate section C, can hardly be connected with the names of these two persons figuring in an altogether separate stanza in Section A. Again, of the two ministers under Kīrttivarman, the first, that is Pāhila is proposed to be identified, by Dr. Sircar, with Pāhilla of the Grahapati family, who was the of Śreshṭhin, Dēdū and who is known from the Khajurāgō Jaina image inscription of V.S 1215 (1158 A.C.).3 The difference between the years of these two records is of 83 years ; and Dr. Sircar’s suggestion can be accepted only if we presume that the Pāhila who caused to set up the present image when he was at least a young man could have enjoyed a life of more than hundred years. The name Pāhila also figures in another inscription at Khajurāhō, dated to V.S. 1011 (955 A.D.). showing that it was a very common name.

Since Kīrttivarman is mentioned in the present record as the son of Vijayapāla, there is no difficulty in taking him to be the well-known Chandēlla monarch of that name. The earliest known date his king is offered by the Kālañjara stone inscription, to be V.S. 1147 or 1098 A.C.; and the present inscription, which gives for this king a date 15 years earlier than that of the record from Kālañjara, is of inestimable value as it offers a clue to solve the problem of the Kalachuri-Chandēlla contest, as will be seen below while dealing with the following inscription.

TEXT⁴
[Metre: Anushṭubh]

________________________
¹ Dr. Sircar translates it as ‘or belonging to king’s kul-āmātya-vṛinda’.
² It is taken to be an ornamentation by Dr. Sircar.
³ See below, No 124.
⁴ From the facsimile in I. H. Q., Vol XXX, between pp. 184 and 185.
⁵ Expressed by a symbol.
⁶ Sircar corrects this word to : and takes it as an adjective of ; but an adjective. of , it requires no emendation.
⁷ By a break in the horizontal stroke the fourth letter appears as , as in some other contemporary inscriptions.
⁸ The loop forming the lower portion of the preceding letter is broken ; but to me is appears to be and not as read by Sircar.
⁹ In Sircar’s reading in I. H. Q. this appears to be a zero ; but I take it to be the letter chha , as found to be the symbol of prosperity in some of the contemporary inscriptions.