|
The Indian Analyst
|
|
South Indian Inscriptions |
EPIGRAPHIA INDICA chakra in the back-ground representing perhaps the ‘Wheel of Law.’ Below the figure occurs in raised letters the legend [Mahā]rāja-Vijaya[sē]nasya, i.e. ‘Of the Mahārāja Vijayasēna,’ which is partly defaced.”[1] Further on, commenting on the opening verses of the inscription, Mr. Majumdar says : “The figure on the seal of the copper-plate may be a representation of Lōkanātha, although it is too indistinct to admit of a definite identification.”[2] By Lōkanātha, Mr. Majumdar evidently means the Buddha; for, his remarks on the invocatory Āryās in the beginning run as follows : “The record opens with an eulogy of the god Lōkanātha, of Dharma, and of the saints (santaḥ), i.e. the Buddhist Saṅgha.”[3] It may be pointed out that there is no other evidence in the record of its being Buddhistic. On the contrary, there is ample proof in it to the fact that it is Brahmanical. The grant of land, for instance, is made ‘to a Brahmin named Vatsasvāmin of the Kauṇḍinya gōtra, belonging to the Bahvṛicha śākhā of the Ṛigvēda, to enable him to perform the “five great sacrificial rites” ’.[4] It need not be pointed out that these details do not assort well with a Buddhist record. It is easy to understand as to how Mr. Majumdar came to take the invocation as offered to the Buddhist triratna, ‘Three Jewels’ : the Buddha, the Dharma and the Saṅgha. We have seen how he is inclined to explain the chakra device on the seal as standing for the ‘Wheel of Law’ or the Dharma-chakra of the Buddhists. Through the association of this, he naturally took Lōkanātha in the opening couplet as standing for the Lord Buddha, although ordinarily the appellation Lōkanātha is applicable to the gods Brahman, Vishṇu and Śiva quite as well as to the Lord Buddha. It is in extension of the same chain of association that Mr. Majumdar takes the word dharma in the first Āryā as referring to the Dharma of the Buddhist triratna and the word santaḥ in the second Āryā as referring to the saṅgha of the same ‘Three Jewels.’ It may be pointed out that there is no justification for explaining the word sant (or sat) in the normal course as synonymous with the Buddhist arhant (or arhat), through which Mr. Majumdar obviously comes to lake santaḥ of the record as arhantaḥ, i.e. collectively speaking, the Buddhist Saṅgha.
Mr. Majumdar has, it looks, totally neglected to observe the inconsistency resulting from the view accepted by him : the nature of the record being Brahmanical, while that of its seal and invocation being Buddhistic. This inconsistency can easily be obviated if we take the chakra on the seal for the Sudarśanachakra of the god Vishṇu. In that case, even Lōkanātha of the invocation will have to be taken as meaning Vishṇu. We have, in fact, the name Lōkanātha included in the thousand names of Vishṇu : Lōkabandhur=Lōkanāthō Mādhavō Bhaktavatsalaḥ.[5] As for the words dharma and santaḥ in the invocation, they may be taken in their normal sense of ‘law’ and ‘good folk’ respectively. Dharma can be taken even as another name of Vishṇu.[6] In this way, there is nothing inconsistent in the charter. __________________________________________________
[1] Ibid., p. 155.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| > |
|
>
|
