|
EPIGRAPHIA INDICA
kings ;[1] who by the right raising of his hand has earned the strong attachment of Dharma ;[2]
who has attained wide fame by studying and remembering, by the knowledge and practice of,
grammar,[3] music,[4] logic and other great sciences ; who . . . . the management of
horses, elephants and chariots,[5] (the use of) sword and shield, pugilistic combat and other . .
. . . . . the acts of quickness and efficiency of opposing forces ;[6] who day by day is
in the habit of bestowing presents and honours and eschewing disrespectful treatment ;[7] who is
bounteous ;[8] whose treasury by the tribute, tolls and shares rightfully obtained overflows with an
accumulation of gold, silver, diamonds, beryl stones and (other) precious things ; who[9] . . .
__________________________________________________________________
[1] Compare Gupta Inscr. p. 8, l. 23, anêka-bhrashṭarâjyôtsanna-râjavaṁśa-pratishṭhâpana.
[2] In this epithet Rudradâman has been understood to be eulogized for making religious gifts ; but I have
searched in vain for passages in which ‘ the raising of the hand ’ is laid stress on or even mentioned where donations are spoken of. Both in literature and in inscriptions what characterizes the hand of a person engaged in making any kind of gift, is that it is moistened by the water (poured into the hand of the donee) ; compare e.g.,
Kâdambarî, p. 5, l. 12, anavaratapravṛitta-dân-ârdrîkṛita-karaḥ ; the Nâsik inscription in Archæol. Surv. of
West. India, Vol. IV. p. 108, l. 4, abhayôdakadâna-kilina-nibhayakarasa ; Gupta Inscr. p. 175, l. 29,
pradânasalila-kshâlit-âgrahastâravindaḥ ; Inscriptions sanscrites du Cambodge, p. 17, note 2, etc. Occasionally
the person who makes a gift is described as taking or raising the pitcher from which the water is poured into the
hand of the recipient ; see e.g. Jât. Vol. VI. p. 344, l. 10, râjâ tussitvâ gandhodakapuṇṇaṁ suvaṇṇa-bhiṁkâraṁ
âdâya . . . seṭṭhissa hatthe udakaṁ pâtetvâ ; and Râm. II. 118, 50, ahaṁ tatra Râmâya pitrâ . . . udyatâ
dâtum=udyamya jalabhâjanam=uttamam, ‘ there my father, having raised the excellent water-pitcher, proceeded
to give me to Râma.’ But that in the latter case the raising of the water-pitcher is quite an incidental matter
we see from an analogous passage in Harshacharita, p. 156, Grahavarmaṇâ kanyâṁ prârthayituṁ prêshitasya
pûrvâgatasy=aiva pradhâna-dûtapurushasya karê sarvarâjakula-samakshaṁ duhitṛidâna-jalam=apâtayat, translated by Prof. Cowell and Mr. Thomas : ‘ in the presence of the whole royal household, be poured the betrothal
water upon the hand of an envoy extraordinary, who had arrived previously with instructions from Grahavarman
to sue for the princess.’ Considering these and similar passages, I do not think that hastôchchhraya by itself
could convey the idea of donation. In my opinion the expression perhaps finds its explanation in the precept of
Manu, VIII. 2, according to which a king, when investigation cases of law, should do so seated or standing, raising
his right hand (pâṇim=udyamya dakshiṇam), etc. This explanation, which would make ‘ the raising of the hand ’
during legal investigations equivalent to ‘ the dispensation of justice ’ itself, may seem far-fetched, but it would fit
in well with the statement that by the right raising of his hand Rudradâman earned the strong attachment
of Dharma, i.e. Law or Justice personified.
[3] It may seem doubtful whether the compound śabdârtha of the original, in connection with the following
vidyânâm, should be understood to denoted two sciences,─ viz. śabda-vidyâ or grammar, and artha-vidyâ in the sense
of artha-śâstra=nîti-śâstra─ or only one, viz. the science of words and their meaning, i.e. grammar (including
lexicography). The manner in which śabdârtha elsewhere is immediately connected with nyâya (e.g. above,
Vol. VI. p. 18, l. 9, śabdârttha-nyâya-vidushâ, and Gupta Inscr. p. 35, l. 4 of the text, śabdârttha-nyâya-lôka-jñah=kaviḥ) seems to render the adoption of the second alternative more natural. Śabdhaârtha-nyâya in my opinion
would convey to a Hindu at once the notion of ‘ grammar and logic,’ because these closely together and
would hardly be separated by something so different from them as ‘ policy.’ It may be added that śabdârtha, on
account of the irregular position of its two members, in grammar is well-known compound in the sense of ‘ word
and meaning ’ and frequently occurs in this sense in the titles of grammatical, lexicographical and other works.
[4] Compare the commentary on Vishṇu-purâṇa, III. 26 : gândharva-vêdô Bharatamuni-praṇîtô nṛityagîtâdi-vishayaḥ. See also e.g. Râm. II. 2, 35 : gândharvê cha bhuvi śrêshṭhô Bharat-âgrajaḥ, where gândharvê
is explained by saṁgîta-śâstrê ; Gupta Inscr. p. 8, l. 27, and p. 81, l. 7.
[5] Compare Râm. I. 18, 27 ; gaja-skandhê ’ śva-pṛishṭhê cha rathacharyâsu saṁmataḥ.
[6] I take the sense of the whole epithet to be that by his skill in the management of horses etc. he rendered
futile the acts of quickness etc. of opponents.
[7] Compare e.g. dâna-mân-ârjava, above, Vol. III. p. 320, l. 2.
[8] See Halâyudha, II. 210 : sthûlalakshô bahuvyayî.
[9] After ‘ who ’ we evidently have to supply something like ‘ is skilled in producing compositions in.’ On the
epithet which begins here compare Prof. Bühler’s Die Ind. Inschriften und das Alter der Ind. Kunstpoesie, p. 53 ff.,
where Prof. Bühler has tried to show that the adjectives sphuṭa etc. of the text have reference to certain rules of
the Alaṁkâra-śôstra. Agreeing with him in general, I take sphuṭa, madhura and kântâ to indicate the qualities
prasâda, mâdhurya and kânti Daṇḍin’s Kâvyâdarśa (I. 45, 51 and 85) ; sphuṭa, ‘ clear,’ would thus be what is
readily understood (pratîti-subhaga) ; madhura, ‘ sweet,’ that which pleases by its sound and (refined) diction ; and
kântâ, ‘ beautiful,’ that which is free from exaggeration, is not too far-fetched, etc. Śabdasamaya being almost
synonymous with śabdanyâya in Kâvyâdarśa, l. 75, I incline to connect śabdasamayôdâra with Daṇḍin’s artha-
|
