North Indian Inscriptions

PART A

on the other hand there are 25 donations by monks^[1] and 16 by nuns.^[2] It is perhaps striking to find monks and nuns making donations, as they were forbidden to own any personal property besides some ordinary requisites. Probably we have to suppose that they collected the money required for some pious purpose by begging it from their relatives or acquaintances. It is, however, never stated in Bhārh, as in Jain inscriptions from Mathurā, that the dedication was made by a layman at the request of some clergyman. The wording of the Bhārh. inscriptions refers to the Buddhist clergyman in such a way, as if he himself had made the donation.

  In some inscriptions only the names of the donors are mentioned, while in the others we find details regarding:

(I) the places they come from,
(II) the family (gotra) or tribe they belong to, or the relationship they have to some other person,
(III) the professions they follow, and
(IV) the ecclesiastical titles they bear (in case of monks).

   The places from where the donors come are mentioned in 52 cases. Several of these place-names occur more than once, for instance, Vedisa (six times), Karahakaṭa (five times), Purikā (five times), Moragiri (five times), Chudathīla (thrice), Pāṭaliputa (thrice), Bibikāna- dikaṭa (twice), Bhojakaṭa (twice), Chikulana ( =Chekulana, twice), Nagara (twice). The other place-names occur only once, see the treatment of place-names below p. 6 f.

   The donors mentioned in A 1-4 and in A 130(?) are members of the royal family of king Dhanabhūti who apparently was a feudatory of the Śuṅgas. In A 1, Dhanabhūti is called the grandson of ‘king’ Visadeva. In A 3, he himself is called king (rāja) and his son Vādhapāla is styled ‘ prince ’ (kumāra). In A 4, a female donor of the name Nāgarakhitā is mentioned as the wife of a ‘ king ’ whose name is lost. A 130 refers to a ‘king’ and a ‘supreme king’ (adhirāja) whose name again has not been preserved. The historical bearing of these inscriptions is discussed under A 1.

   The family(gotra) of a female donor is given in A 35 as Vāsiṭhī (Vāsishṭhī), and the name of a tribe to which two female donors from Pāṭaliputra and another lady from some un- known place belong, occurs as Koḍiya (A 14, A 15) and Koḍa (A 116)^[3]. In a few inscriptions the donor’s relationship to his mother is mentioned as ‘the son of so and so’. Such is the case in A 1 where king Dhanabhūti and his ancestors appear. Here the name of the respec- tive mother refers to her gotra, e.g. Gāgīputa (Gārgīputra) Gotiputa (Gauptīputra), Vāchhiputa (Vātsīputra)^[4]. In A 100, however, the donor is mentioned simply as the son of Śrī (Seriyā puta).

   Once the relationship of the donor to his grandfather and father is expressed as fahiranatu Isirakhitaputa (fahiranaptṛi Ṛishirakshitaputra) A 50.

   The female donor Pusadevā (Pushyadevā) is referred to as ‘the mother of so and so’ e.g. Dhamaguta-matu (Dharmagupta-mātṛi) in A 120. In three other cases the name of the
________________

^[1] A 8, A 17, A 38, A 39, A 41, A 51, A 54, A 56- A 73. The titles upāsaka for male and upāsikā for female lay-worshippers, as well as bhikhu or bhichhu (bhikshu) for monks are never used in Bhārhut inscriptions. We find only bhikhunī or bhichhuni (bhikshuṇi) for nuns. The monks in Bhārhut inscriptions are to be recognized only from their ecclesiastical titles gives below. In Sāñchī inscriptions, however, upāsaka and upāsikā occur 4 and 15 times respectively, and bhikhu or bhichhu as also bhikhuni or bhichhuni occur very often.
^[2] A 11, A 12, A 24, A 29, A 37, A 42- A 44, A 52, A 74- A 80.
^[3] Cf. Koḍāyo for Koḍiya in A 116 and B 72.
^[4] Cf. Hultzsch, IA. Vol. XXI (1892), p. 227, note 11 : “The custom, in accordance with which each of the three kings bears a secondary name derived from the gōtra of his mother, has descended through the Andhras to the Kadambas and Chalukyas ; sec Dr. Flect’s Kanarese Dynasties, p. 5, note 2”.