|
PART B
in safety. So far the depiction agrees with the literary tradition. But the inscription
near it shows that a new version of the legend is intended here. Cunningham (p. 142)
read it─Tiranuti Migila Kuchimha Vasu Guto Machito Mahadevanam. According to his eye-copy on Pl. LVI, it reads─tirami timigilakuchhimha Vasuguto māchito Mahadevānaṁ. Hultzsch[1] restored it to ─ tīramhi timiṁgilakuchhimhā Vasuguto mocito Mahādevena─ “Vasuguta (Vasugupta) rescued to the shore by Mahādeva from the belly of the sea-monster”. I do
not believe that the restoration of tirami to tīramhi is correct. As the encounter with the giant
fish takes place in the high sea, far from the shore, it cannot properly be spoken of as a rescue
‘ to the shore ’. Besides it seems doubtful to me whether the locative tīramhi could be used
in connection with mochito in the accepted sense. Further on the locative of the –a stem
in the language of the inscriptions does not elsewhere show the pronominal ending, but
always ends in –e: raje A 1, susāne B 64, Abode B 69, Naḍode B 70, Naḍode pavate B 73, B 74, Naḍodapāde B 76, Himavate B 79. I am therefore convinced that Cunningham in his eye-copy has not overlooked the ‘h’, inscribed below in ‘mhi’, but that he erroneously took some
stroke behind the first ti as standing for the akshara ra. I am also convinced that in the
beginning of the inscription we have to read timitimigilakuchhimha[2].
Whatsoever we may think about it, the hero of the story in this version is in any case
called Vasugupta, and the saviour from the calamity is named Mahādeva. In the first
instance one may suppose that Mahādeva is the name of some personality corresponding to
Pūrṇaka in the version of the Mvu. But the Mahādeva mentioned here is clearly the same
person, who in a different inscription (B 81) to which we have to refer later on, receives
the attribute ‘bhagavat’. Thus it must be the name of the Buddha[3]. The designation
of Buddha as ‘ the great god ’ does not occur, as far as I know, elsewhere in the Buddhist
literature. The Mvp. 1, 16, only gives ‘ devātideva ’ which appears for instance in the Divy.
391, 4. In our inscription Mahādeva is chosen perhaps under the influence of the text which
the sculptor was going to follow. In any case, as already mentioned. The expression is used
in the Chinese version of the story in order to show the Buddha’s foremost rank at the head
of the other gods. When the merchants appeals to the other gods in vain, the sārthavāha (in
Chavannes’ translation) says: ‘I know one great god who is called Buddhaâ.
________________________
ɀDMG. XL., p. 76.
Probably in the inscription the long vowels and the anusvāra have not been written. It might
also be possible that the last word was Mahādevanāmena.
Hultzsch rightly remarks: “Mahadeva probably refers to the Mahasatta or Bodhisattaâ.
|
