|
The Indian Analyst
|
|
North Indian Inscriptions |
PART B 6. B 68 - 69 INSCRIPTIONS ATTACHED TO THE REPRESENTATIONS OF B 68 (699); PLATES XXII, XLVII ON a coping-stone, now in the Indian Museum, Calcutta (A 29). Edited by Cunningham, StBh. (1879), p. 94; 131, No. 10, and Pl. XLIII, 4 and LIII; Hoernle IA. Vol. X, (1881), p. 118 f., No. 1; Hultzsch, ɀDMG. Vol. XL (1886), p. 61, No. 11, and Pl.; IA. Vol. XXI (1892), p. 228, No. 11; Barua, PASB. New Ser. Vol. XIX (1924), pp. 350-352, and Pl. XV, 2; Barua-Sinha, BI. (1926), p. 85 f., No. 200; Barua, Barh. Vol. II (1934), p. 113 f., and Vol. III (1937), Pl. LXXX (108); Lüders, Bhārh. (1941), p. 21 ff. TEXT: [1]TRANSLATION:
The name of the chaitya is not known from other sources and as both miga and samadaka are ambiguous terms, the label has to be interpreted from the sculpture to which it is attached. Unfortunately the scene represented in the panel is not perfectly clear. The centre of the relief is formed by a tree with a stone seat in front of it. Six antelopes, three males and three females, are lying around it. They seem to be black bucks (Antelope cervicapra), though the horns are rather short. On the proper right side two wild animals are visible, the one facing the spectator, the other turned to the right and characterized by a mane as a lion. The antelope in the foreground is lying with its head resting on the ground. Hoernle therefore was of the opinion that the sculptor wanted to represent the antelope as having been crushed under the platform of the chaitya and, following a suggestion of Tawney, translated the inscription ‘ the deer-crushing chaitya ’ (mṛigasaṁmardakaṁ chaityam). An antelope in exactly the same attitude as in our relief is found in the relief on Cunningham’s Plate XLIII, 8, and there it is undoubtedly a dead animal bewailed by the ascetic as told in the Migapotakajātaka (No. 372). Nevertheless I think it more probable that in our relief the antelope is simply meant as sleeping, no stones being visible to indicate that it was killed by them, and as the presence of the two lions also is left unaccounted for by Hoernle’s interpretation, it does not carry conviction.
Cunningham translated the inscription[2] ‘ Deer and Lions eating together Chetiya ’,
and the derivation of samadaka from sam-ad is accepted also by Barua-Sinha who offer quite a
number of optional renderings such as ‘ the chaitya on an animal feeding-ground ’, or ‘ on a
grazing ground of the deer’, or ‘where the deer are devoured’, etc. But the antelopes in
the relief neither graze nor are they being devoured, and in my opinion it is extremely
unlikely that samadaka should have any connection with the root ad; nor can I follow Barua,
when he asserts that the sculpture refers to the Vyagghajātaka (No. 272). There it is related
how a forest is infested by tigers or, as the commentator erroneously says, by a lion and a
tiger. They kill animals of all kinds and for fear of them nobody dares enter the forest.
[1]Read chetiyaṁ. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| > |
|
>
|
