|
The Indian Analyst
|
|
South Indian Inscriptions |
EPIGRAPHIA INDICA SIVANVAYAL PILLAR INSCRIPTION OF PALLAVA SIMHAVARMAN record does not beat the full name of Narasiṁhavarman by which the son of Mahēndravarman. I was usually referred to in stone and copper-plate inscriptions. He might as well belong to a collateral branch of the family or a hitherto unknown member of the same family different from Narasiṁhavarman. However, should our identification prove correct, the present inscription would be the third known record of the king, the other two being those at Bādāmi[1] (Bombay) and Tirukkalukunram[2] (Madras). One fact of importance brought out by the record is that king Siṁhavarman is stated to have performed the Daśāśvamēdha and the Bahusuvarṇa sacrifices. We may recall here that the Bhāraśivas (c. 4-5th century A.D.) of Central India acquired the distinction of having performed the Daśāśvamēdha sacrifice and the Vākāṭakas, the Chaturaśvamēdha sacrifice. The Vishṇukuṇḍins (c. 5-7th century A. D.) are known to have performed the Ēkādaśāśvamēdha sacrifice. Though the Aśvamēdha is common in the cases cited, the significance of the number which in one instance is daśa, in the other chatuḥ and in the third ēkādaśa, is not easily understandable. There are instances of dviraśvamēdha also. One is led to doubt if in each case one kind of sacrifice, and that only once celebrated, is meant or whether the Aśvamēdha was performed as many times as the prefix daśa, etc., signifies. Dr. D. R. Bhandarkar was inclined to take the former view, explaining the number by stating that at the performance of a single Aśvamēdha the gifts to Brāhmaṇas were increased fourfold, tenfold or elevenfold, so that by going through one sacrifice the performer secured the merit and also claimed the distinction of having performed more than one Aśvamēdha, four, ten, and so on. In support of his view regarding Daśāśvamēdha, Dr. Bhandarkar cites a passage from the Mahābhārata[3] which incidentally throws some light on the nature of the Bahusuvarṇa sacrifice (also called Bahusuvarṇaka). From the passage in the Mahābhārata we come to know that Bahusuvarṇaka belonged to a class of sacrifices called ahīna and that it was named Bahusuvarṇaka owing to the profuse gifts of gold made during the ceremony. The ahīna sacrifice is defined by Nandapaṇḍita, the commentator on the Vishṇu-sūtras, as a ceremony connected with the repeated drinking of the sōma juice and lasting from two to twelve days.[4] Mēdhātithi (commenting on the Manu-smṛiti, XI, 196) simply defines it as a sacrifice extending over two days or more. Kullūka (commenting on the Manu-smṛiti, XI, v. 197) states that it lasts three days or more and that it is said in the Vēdas to cause impurity (ahīnayajanam=aśuchikaramiti śrutēh).[5] Dr. Vogel quotes Kern as taking Bahusuvarṇaka to be identical with Bahuhiraṇya, a sōma sacrifice.[6] It may be observed that neither Bahuhiraṇya nor Bahusuvarṇaka finds a place among the seven sōma sacrifices which form the group called Saptasōmasaṁsthā.[7] That Bahv- ___________________________
[1]S. I. I., Vol. XI, pt. I, p. 1.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| > |
|
>
|
