|
EPIGRAPHIA INDICA
ºkarosa deyaº, I imagine that he admitted that the text was disfigured by several mistakes, and
that he restored saṁkarakarasa = saṁkharaº. But in this hypothesis the use of the genitive for
the dative and the use of kara = kâraṇa would seem inadmissible. This preconceived notion has
caused the end of the inscription after Valûrakasaṁghasa to be considered a separate sentence, Valûrakalenânaṁ being necessary for completing the following word. I believe that, if one reads
the text without prejudice and keeps in mind the customary wording of grants, one cannot fail
to connect the words sakarukaro sadeyameyo with grâmo dato, and to take them for epithets
resembling sôdraṅga sôparikara, etc., which occur in other grants in precisely the same place.
Besides, by this construction we avoid having recourse to the expedient of corrections, which
is always objectionable. The first result is to condemn the break of the sentence between Valûrakasaṁghasa and Valûrakalenânaṁ. These two terms are closely connected. The gift is
made to the Valûraka-lenas, i.e. as the preceding inscription expressed it in a slightly different
way, “to the Valûrakesu leṇavâsis,” of the Saṁgha of Valûraka. Valûraka is the general
designation of the village where the so-called Kârlê caves are situated. Doubtlessly this locality
contained still other monks besides those who had found an asylum on the slopes of the hill. To
these last ones was confined the benefit of the royal donation.
There remain the terms sakarukaro and sadeyameyo. It is well known and will be noted
again more than once how much uncertainty is felt in the explanation of technical terms repeated
incessantly in grants of all ages, which define or describe the rights and advantages conferred on
the donees. If this is the case even in quite a modern protocol, it is not surprising that we are
embarrassed by more ancient formulas which have fallen more or less into disuse. But ours is
not without analogies. Kara is so well known in the sense of ‘dues payable to Government,’ that
I need not dwell on it.[1] The same is not the case with utkara ; but uparikara, which is its exact
equivalent, appears almost invariably at the head of the customary formulas which begin generally
with sôdraṅga, sôparikara. The meaning of udraṅga is not yet established. I do not know
if kara can strictly correspond to it. At any rate, there is no doubt that nothing but a kind of
revenue is meant here, so that in a general way sakarukaro = sakarôtkaraḥ becomes the natural
equivalent of sôdraṅgaḥ sôparikaraḥ. The meaning of uparikara is as little settled as that of udraṅga, and it will not be wondered at that I cannot be positive regarding the translation of our
new term. The certain meaning of kara, combined with the modification which is implied by
ut or upari, the first member of utkara or uparikara, seems to recommend as plausible the general
sense which I have attributed to these two terms.
The adjective which follows has at least advantage that it can be translated etymologically,─ ‘together with what has to be given and what has to be measured.’ This is vague, but
not at all unintelligible. Here also, I think, the comparison of the more modern formulas can
assist us. Several grants combine with the epithets sôdraṅga and sôparikara the expression
savâtabhûtadhânyahiraṇyâdêya.[2] More commonly it is resolved into sabhûtavâtapratyâya and sadhânyahiraṇyâdêya,[3] which prove that, contrary to the hesitating conjectures of Dr. Fleet (l.c.
p. 170, note 9) and in conformity with Dr. Hultzsch’s translation, âdêya, ‘what is to be taken,’
is nothing but an equivalent of pratyâya, ‘revenue.’ Hence dhânyahiraṇyâdêya means ‘the
revenue both in grain and in specie.’ The expression used in our inscription is not quite
identical ; for we have not sâdêya, but sadêya. Nevertheless it seems to me very probable that
it corresponds on the whole to the idea expressed by the Sanskṛit formula and, like it, embraces
‘what is given or paid directly,’ i.e. the taxes in money, and ‘what is measured,’ i.e. the dues in
kind which were levied on the products of the fields.
________________________
[1] Compare in the inscriptions of Jayanâtha and Śarvanâtha (Dr. Fleet’s Gupta Inscriptions, p. 118, l. 9, and
p. 127, l. 17) : asya (grâmasya) samuchitabhâgabhâgakarapratyâyôpanayaṁ karishyatha. [2] See e.g. the Mâliyâ plates in Dr. Fleet’s Gupta Inscriptions, p. 166, l. 26. [3] See e.g. the Alînâ plates, ibid. p. 179, l. 68, and the Lunsaḍî plates, above, Vol. IV. p. 80.
|
