North Indian Inscriptions

THE SIDDAPURA EDICTS OF ASOKA.

Edict agrees with the Rûpnâth version or with that of Śiddâpura, or if it tells us something still different, as M. Senart thinks, will be discussed on another occasion. I, of course, admit that M. Senart is right in rejecting Dr. Bhagvânlâl’s conjectural emendation husaṁ te for saṁta, which, in 1877, I inserted in my text. I now believe that saṁta does not require any alternation.

......7. Kâmaṁ, ‘in any case,’ may also be translated by ‘at his desire.’

......8. The sermon which is spoken of here and at the end of this section, consists only of the six words beginning with khudakâ cha and ending with pakameyu ti, and it does not, as I thought formerly, go as far as diyaḍhiyaṁ vaḍhisiti. The ti after pakameyu proves the correctness of the former statement. The use of an additional pleonastic yathâ in No. II at the beginning of the sentence is in accordance with classical Sanskṛit usage ; see the examples quoted in the larger St. Petersburg Dictionary under yathâ.

......9. The correct explanation of aṁtâ has first been given by M. Senart. If further proof were needed, it is furnished by the additional mai, i.e. me of our version.

......10. As stated already in the introductory remarks, I still believe the word Vyûtha to refer to Gautama-Buddha, and the figure to the number of years elapsed since the Nirvâṇa. But I now admit that Vyûtha-Vivutha may be derived from vivas, and I take it as representative of Vyushṭa. The verb vivas occurs indeed not rarely in the sense of ‘to elapse, to pass away ;’ see, e.g., Gôbhila’s Gṛihyasûtra, ii. 8,– jananâd daśarâtrê vyushṭê, which Professor Oldenberg renders correctly : “When ten nights have elapsed after (the child’s) birth ;” and Pañchatantra, ii. p. 25, l. 11 (Bombay S. Ser.),— anêna vârttâvyatikarêṇa rajanî vyushṭâ.

......11. The correct beginning of the second edict has been first recognized by M. Senart.

......12. Garutva, which (if the correct reading) is analogous to the form tadatva (Rock-Edicts, Kâlsî, X.), can of course be used like gaurava¹ in the sense of ‘respect for.’ Drahyitavyaṁ is the future passive participle formed from the stem of the present drahyati, which corresponds to the Sanskṛit verb dṛih, though the participle daḷha and its derivatives show that one must have existed.

......13. If the reading ku is the correct one, the word must be taken as a representative of khu or kho ; compare the Shâhbâzgarhî version of the Rock-Edicts, IV. 9, etc.

......14. Pakitî has here either the meaning of svarûpa or of yôni, which the Sanskṛit prakṛiti has so often. Dharmasya or âchârasya must be understood.

......15. Compare Manu, ii. 121 :— Abhivâdanaśîlasya nityaṁ vṛiddôpasêvinaḥ | chatvâri tasya vardhanta âyur vidyâ yaśô balam || and the parallel passages quoted in the Synopsis to my Translation.

.____________________________

No. 23.─ UDAYENDIRAM PLATES OF NANDIVARMAN.

.....................BY F . KIELHORN, PH.D., C.I.E. ; GÖTTINGEN.

......This inscription has been previously published, with a photo-lithograph, by the Rev. T. Foulkes, in the Indian Antiquary, Vol. VIII. pp. 167 ff., and in the Manual of the Salem District, Vol. II. pp. 349 ff. I re-edit it from an excellent impression received from Dr. Hultzsch, to whom the original plates, which are at Udayêndiram in the Guḍiyâtam tâlukâ of the North Arcot district, were lent by the Acting Collector of the district, Mr. F. A. Nicholson, I.C.S.

......The inscription is on three copper-plates, each of which measures 8¾” long by 2⅝ ” high. The first and second plates are inscribed on both sides, and the third is inscribed on one side
__________________________________________________________________________________________

......¹ See the passages quoted in the two St. Petersburg Dictionaries.