South Indian Inscriptions

EPIGRAPHIA INDICA

Kâpura district have been given eight thousand ─ 8000 ─ stems of cocoanut trees ; and all this has been proclaimed (and) registered at the town’s hall, at the record office, according to custom.”

“Again the donation previously made by the same in the year 41, on the fifteenth of the bright half of Kârttika, has in the year 45, on the fifteenth . . . . . been settled on the venerable gods and Brâhmaṇas, viz. seventy thousand─ 70000─ kârshâpaṇas, each thirty-five making a suvarṇa, a capital (therefore) of two thousand suvarṇas. (This is registered) at the record office according to custom.”

Here the difficulties begin with the word kuśaṇa. Bhagwanlal’s vague attempts at explaining it cannot well be considered anything but a failure and the comparison with the Vedic kṛiśana does not help us any more. Literary works of not seem to have supplied to this day any instance of the word. It is but to be wondered at that the use itself to which it refers is not only foreign, but contrary to the laws of discipline as they are laid down in the Scriptures. In fact I do not think any doubt can be entertained as to the custom to which the word kuśaṇa alludes. Several inscription at Kaṇheri (Arch. Surv. Vol. V.) commemorate various endowments with a double object : chivarika soḷasaka paḷiko cha mâse utukâle (No. 15) ; chivarika bârasaka giṁhâsu paḍiko mâse (No. 18) ; chivarika solasaka paḍiko mâse cha utukâle (No. 21) ; chivarika . . . solasaka utukâlê cha [paḍiko mâse] (No. 28). This series corresponds with our own epigraph in the first member ; it is extremely probable that both correspond in the second as well, and that consequently kuśaṇa means a monthly stipend, assigned to every monk during a certain period of the year, and probably to be applied for his food. Such a proceeding of course is, from the point of view of principle, most incorrect, the monks being expected to live on alms and being precluded from even touching any money. The general interpretation seem nevertheless certain. The case is different as regards the precise meaning and etymology of the word. I know of no really probable conjecture I could suggest. Although rather numerous, the passages at Kaṇheri do not even state distinctly during which period of the year the supply was conceded. Most of them are content to speak of the ṛitukâla. As, however, the distribution of the kuśaṇamûla appears to have been strictly parallel with that of the chîvarika or ‘ money for clothes ’ reserved for the varsha time (vasavuthânaṁ bhikhûnaṁ), this ‘ season ’ kar’ εϵoxήvmust be the varsha. If No. 18 expressly mentions the hot season (giṁhesu), this is due, I suppose, to the circumstance that at that time and in that place the annual retreat began already in Âshâḍha i.e. still in summer.

The words vṛidhi paḍikaśata and vadhi pâyûnapaḍikaśata look perfectly clear, and they have in fact been translated quite naturally : ‘ the interest amounts to one hundred ’ and ‘ to seventy-five pratikas.’ The matter is, however, not quite so simple. Those expressions cannot be considered separately from others which do not admit of such an interpretation ; I mean in this inscription sahasrâṇi be ye paḍike sate and yâ sahasraprayutaṁ pâyûnapaḍike śate, and at Kaṇheri, No. 15, kâhâpaṇâni satâni be saghasa yeva haṭhe paḷike sate. It is clear from the first that a capital of 200 kâshâpaṇas cannot possibly bring in the same interest as a capital of 2000. On the other hand, the final e of paḍike and sate being secured by the threefold repetition, we must find an explanation, for the double locative which the ordinary translations in no way account for. As to vṛidhi paḍikaśata, the translation ‘ interest a hundred paḍikas ’is excluded by the consequences it would involve. Bühler was led by reasons which on the whole are, if not cogent, at least very plausible, to consider pratika as an equivalent of kârshâpaṇa. Of course he was obliged to acknowledge that those hundred pratikas were not sufficient to supply the expenses for the clothes of twenty monks, at twelve kârshâpaṇas each, because they would in that case require 240 kârshâpaṇas in all. He was obliged to assume that bârasaka (Sanskṛit dvâdaśaka) refers to some coins different from the kârshâpaṇa. But Kaṇheru No. 16, where the fee of ‘ sixteen kârshâpaṇas ’for cloth money is expressly mentioned, loaves no room for doubt ; kârshâpaṇas are