Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

The Antiquities of Orissa v2.c16.s2: Proposed Translation

The Antiquities of Orissa v2.c16.s2

Language
English

Contents

Proposed Translation

v2.c16.s2.1

Line 1. Salutation to those who have overcome all human passions, i. e., Arhats salutation to all who have attained perfection.

v2.c16.s2.2

By Aira, the great king, who has a mighty elephant for his vehicle, who has lavished his wealth in erecting Chaityas, who is distinguished by the attributes of Śākya, who is renowned for having looted the earth to its outermost limits, who is the sovereign of Kaliṅga, has this hill been excavated.

v2.c16.s2.3

Line 2. Having devoted fifteen years to juvenile pastimes, and nine years to the acquisition of (different) forms of writing, arithmetic, civil polity, and laws, he, (Aira), wishing to be a king, with a giant’s vigour and an endless army, becoming victorious in the third—

v2.c16.s2.4

Line 3. battle in the capital of the royal dynasty of Kaliṅga, receives royal unction.

v2.c16.s2.5

Devoted to the duty of kings, he causes the gates, walls and house (of the city ? or the palace ?) which had been destroyed by rain and wind to be repaired.

v2.c16.s2.6

In the city of Kaliṅga, a lake (with water) refreshing as the moon beams and a ghat, and may roads for all kinds of equipages, he causes to be

v2.c16.s2.7

Line 4. consecrated. He causes the gratification of hundreds of thousands of his subjects whose heads are bent down in salutation.

v2.c16.s2.8

In the second year (of his reign) reflecting on his interest, he causes to be placed on the west side, (strong detachments of) horses, elephants, men, war-chariots, and pike-bearers.

v2.c16.s2.9

For (the gratification of) those who had come from the Kaṅsa forest to behold (the rejoicings), as also for that of the inhabitants of the town of Tānasika, on the following year,

v2.c16.s2.10

Line 5. he causes to be celebrated an entertainment with the music of the *dampana tabhata* and other musical instruments, by persons proficient in the science of music, and a dramatic performance by dancing girls.

v2.c16.s2.11

Next, in the fourth year, in the house of the learned (he calls together ?) the Arhats who had been established by the kings of the city of Eastern Kaliṅga. Impelled by devotion to acts of religion the forsaken umbrellas,—a hundred.

v2.c16.s2.12

Line 6. urns full of jewels, which inimical kings had given up to him, he causes to be offered (to the gods ?).

v2.c16.s2.13

Now in the fifth year, king Nanda having been, by him, [ 26 ] expelled from home, went away on a swift horse to the city of Punādi—

v2.c16.s2.14

Line 7. He munificently distributes in charity many hundred thousand (panas)—a hundred—town, territory—governs well—in the eighth year—his mind—hill—

v2.c16.s2.15

Line 8. (To) the prince who caused (its) destruction he ordains the pain of the cavern (imprisons in one of the caves ?), and causes the murderer to labour by a generous requital.—Seated on the hill—lavishes bland speeches and (receives ?) obeisance—

v2.c16.s2.16

Line 9. Apes, bulls, horses, elephants, buffaloes and all requisites for the furniture of the house ;—to induce the practice of rejecting improper persons, he further bestows (or appoints) attendants of the *baiman* caste (Brāhmaṇa ?)—

v2.c16.s2.17

Line 10. The highly renowned king causes to be made the palace of fifteen victories—

v2.c16.s2.18

Line 11. Finding no glory in the capital which had been the seat of the ancient kings, a city abounding in envy and hypocrisy, and reflecting in the thirteenth years, the fall of heavenly forms—twelve.

v2.c16.s2.19

Line 12. For the profuse profit of crowded congregations, he established—Magadha kings—well governed—since Nanda rājā's—

v2.c16.s2.20

Line 13. He distributes much gold at Benares—he gives in charity innumerable and most precious jewels—

v2.c16.s2.21

Line 14. In the thirteenth year—married the daughter of the so-called conqueror of the mountains (a hill rājā).— Impelled by virtue to Arhats—

v2.c16.s2.22

Line 15. By him on a hundred sides—before perfected beings, and crowds of people—wealth—

v2.c16.s2.23

Line 16. He causes to be constructed subterranean chambers, caves, containing Chaitya temple and pillars—for congregations—kings of Ayama—kings of Surasena—caves.

v2.c16.s2.24

Line 17. For whom the happy heretics continually pray—slayer, having a lakh of equipages—the fearless sovereign of many hills by the sun (cherished)—the great conqueror of the ocean shore—

v2.c16.s2.25

"All who take an interest in Indian antiquities," says Prinsep, "will at once see the value of the above record, perhaps the most curious that has yet been disclosed to us, and will lament the irretrievable obscurity in which the dilapidation of ages has involved the greater part of its contents."\∗22 As far as its contents can be made out, it affords a most interesting account of an ancient Indian prince who, rising from the body of the people, took possession of a large kingdom, and reigned with great success for a long period. That he was a usurper is perfectly clear from the fact of no mention having been made of his ancestors in a record put up ostensibly for his glorification. He wages war because he wishes to be a king; he wrests the kingdom from the royal dynasty of Kaliṅga, says his panegyrist; he repairs the palace, strengthens the fortifications, [ 27 ] places detachments of troops in those places where danger is most apprehended; he distributes largesses, digs tanks, entertains the people with public exhibitions of dancing and music, and wins the good will of the most influential section of the community, the priesthood, by attending to their comforts;—doing in all these just what a usurper would do to strengthen his position amidst a community whose allegiance he could not secure by the prestige and hallow of a long line of royal ancestry. It is true that the record does not in so many words say that he was a usurper, but this could not reasonably be expected from his encomiast. Prinsep thinks that he "wrested the Government from some usurper," but the inscription does not afford any reason to support this inference. Had that been the case, the writer of the record, instead of saying in ambiguous terms that he acquired the kingdom "in the third battle in the capital of the Kaliṅga royal dynasty," would have clearly pointed out the character of the person who was overthrown; nor would he have been so reticent about the parentage of his hero in a document in which he thinks it important that the juvenile pastimes and early elementary education of the youth should be recorded.

v2.c16.s2.26

\∗22 *Journal, As. Soc.*, VI., p. 1088.

v2.c16.s2.27

Prinsep takes the name of the person to whose honour and glory the inscription was recorded to be Aira, and the manner in which the name is introduced fully justifies the assumption. It is possible, however, that the word Mahāmeghavāhana, which follows the title Mahārājā, was the proper personal name, and the first word was an epithet—probably the race-name. In the present state of the record this doubt, however, cannot be satisfactorily solved, and for the sake of convenience it is well that the first word, which does not readily afford a good meaning as an epithet, should be accepted as the proper name. Neither the name Aira nor Meghavāhana occurs in the temple records of Orissa, nor in any of the genealogical tables; and this fact can be best accounted for on the supposition of the person who bore it having been a usurper.

v2.c16.s2.28

Believing Aira to be a usurper, it is not necessary for me to enter into any discussion regarding his supposed relationship with Irā, Ilā, or the moon, about which Prinsep has written a most interesting note, and a part of which I quote below for convenience of reference.²³

v2.c16.s2.29.1

²³ After discussing with which of the Orissan potentates Aira can be identified, Prinsep says: of the Orphean theogony, *Gilshāh* of the Persians, and *Ilus* of Homer, (*Asiatic Researches*, VIII, 255). He has, however, omitted what appears to me a much more rational analogy both philological and mythological; namely, that between the Hindu goddess IRĀ and the JUNO of the Greeks, ‘*Hpa*’ or Hera, (Keightley derives Hpa, from *hera*, the Latin for ‘mistress!’ Others deduce it from *aer* the air and *eras* to love, both equally unsatisfactory). The name is not only identical, but to both, though not precisely in the same manner, is applied, in western and eastern fable, the decision of the question which could not otherwise be solved of the comparative pleasure to male and female in the conjugal union. Again, the son of Zeus and Hera is Ares, or MARS; a name for which, Keightley asserts, no satisfactory derivation has yet been given. Now this word is almost identical with *Airas* or *Ailas* (the daughters of Juno are by Homer entitled the Eileithyiœ in which *r* is changed to *l*?) the direct patronymic of IRĀ or ILĀ, and the name constantly employed in the Purāṇas to designate PURURAVAS, the celebrated lover of the heavenly nymph URVAŚĪ, whose tale is told in the *Viṣṇu* and *Padma Purāṇas*, and more pathetically in Kālidāsa’s play of *Vikramorvaśī* lately translated by Professor Wilson.

v2.c16.s2.29.2

“PURARAVAS or AILAS was the first monarch of the seven-fold earth, and hence might be as well entitled to be called king of Kaliṅga as of every other country. We may therefore understand in the opening passage of the inscription,—‘these mountain caverns were excavated by AILAS, the great king, the cloud-supported, the lord of Kaliṅga,’—no more than an allusion to the same tradition of the origin of these caves as that which prevails at Ellore, coupled with the other local tradition, related by Stirling, that the whole of the rocky hills of Udaya and Khaṇḍagiri, were conveyed thither from the peaks of the Himalaya, the headquarters of PURARAVAS’ earthly dominion, so well pictured in the poetic fiction of his cloud-borne chariot. “Stripped of its mythological and poetical dress, we may understand by the passage that the caves were natural chasms worn in the mountains by the action of the winds and the waves; for *irā* signifies ‘water’ the ocean;” as *airāvata*, or *airāvana*, ‘the ocean-born’, is the elephant of Indra, the god of the heavens, the atmosphere, whose name is still preserved in the sculptures at Ellora.

v2.c16.s2.29.3

“Should this interpretation of the first line be admitted, though we shall be disappointed in finding the true mundane origin of these singular monuments, we shall nevertheless have abundant reason to admire the antiquity of the Indian mythos, when we thus find in a monument undoubtedly prior by some centuries to the Christian era the selfsame story which is now repeated by the faqirs, who shew visitors over the similar stupendous relics of ancient grandeur on the west of India. In this point of view above the restoration of the Khaṇḍgiri inscription, thanks to Mr. Kittoe, must be set down as a grand point gained to confute the arguments of the modernists, as they may be called, who would bring every thing Indian within the space of ten or twelve centuries. Thus we find Sir C. Malet wavering between the following accounts of Ellora derived from opposite sources:— "The Mahomedan says, 'the town of Ellora was built by Rājā Eel, who also excavated the temples, and being pleased with them, formed the fortress of Deogiri (Daulatābād) which is a curious compound of excavation, scarping and building, by which the mountain was converted into a fort resembling, as some say, the insulated temple in the area of the Indra Subhā.

v2.c16.s2.29.4

Eel Rājā was contemporary with SHAH MOMIN ARIF who lived 900 years ago.' "The Brahman on the other hand says—that the excavations of Ellora are 7894 years old, formed by EELOO Rājā, the son of PESHPONT OF *Ellichpore*, when 3000 years of the DVĀPAR YUG were accomplished. EELOO Rājā's body was afflicted with maggots, and in quest of cure he came to the purifying water named SEWALYE, or as it is commonly called SEWALLA, that had been curtailed by Viṣṇu to the size of a cow's hoof. He built a Kuṇḍ for it and bathing therein was purified.' (*Asiatic Researches*, V1, 385). "In these conflicting stories we can trace the selfsame tradition of ILA exteracted by Wilson from the Mackenzie records. "It would be well worth while to re-examine the particular manuscript (the number of which is not, however, mentioned), to ascertain what further is said of him, and whether it be possible to consider him in the light of a real monarch of *Deogiri*; whose son could by possibility have imitated his father's propensity for forming impregnable mountain fortresses in the rocks of *Kaliṅga*: or whether the name is not rather AILA then ILA, which will make the same personage at both places, mythological or real, the originator of the excavations. Should an actual monarch, named after this demigod, have ruled in central India in the fourth century before Christ, his synonyme PURUṚAVAS would bring him satisfactorily into the conditions required for the Grecian Porus!" (*Journal, As. Soc.*, VI, pp.

v2.c16.s2.29.5

1087 to 1089).

v2.c16.s2.30

[28] The only question of importance which concerns the historian is the date of Aira. This the record does not supply. There is, however, enough in it to enable us to make an approximate guess as to the time when Aira lived. The ancient Pāli character in which the inscription is inscribed was current down to the 2nd century before Christ. No authentic record has been met with of a later date, and this fact affords us a *terminus a quo* to start with. Now we know not for certain how long before that time the character in question was current. Prinsep in his plate of ancient Indian characters, calls Pāli the character of the 5th century B.C. Whether we accept this conjecture or not, we cannot take Aira to be older than the first century after Buddha, for the Jaina or Buddhist salutation at the beginning of his record, and the reference to the Arhats in a subsequent part of it, unquestionably put a limit to his antiquity. Taking this as the *terminus ad quem* we must look for his date between the second and the fifth century before Christ. So far the inference is,

v2.c16.s2.31

“But there is another explanations of the first line, which seems more consistent with the epithet Mahāmeghavāhana, ‘the great rider upon the clouds,’—a term hardly applicable to a terrestrial monarch. It will be remarked that the termination *lunam*, ‘excavated,’ is indefinite as to time, and far different from the conclusion of every.subsequent sentence in a causal verb of the present tense, as, *kārayati*, ‘he causes to be done.’ This first line then may be independent of the rest, and may be similar to the announcements upon the other caves, also terminating in *lunam*; or in other words, it may declare the name of the cave as, ‘the cave of Aira.’ Now Stirling tells us that Indra’s wife was the last to inhabit these caves, but that they date from an age much anterior—the time of Buddha;—that is, not of Śākya, but of Buddha the progenitor of the lunar race according to Pauranic mythology;—in common parlance from ‘time out of mind.’
“Again Wilson, in his analysis of the Mackenzie manuscripts (vol. I, p. cv.) remarking that they present no satisfactory materials for tracing the ancient history of the countries north of the Krishna, cites among the few traditions recorded, that ‘the excavations at Ellora are ascribed to ILA, the son of BUDDHA, the son of the moon’. The rājās who ruled subsequently at Ellora are said to be YUVANĀSVA, DANDAKA, INDRADYUMNA, DARUDHYA, and RĀMA rāja. — (Of these INDRADYUMNA, it may be remarked, *en passant*, is the traditionary founder of the temple of Jagannāth).
“The ILA above mentioned is properly speaking not the son but the wife of BUDDHA,—in other words ILĀ or IRĀ, the goddess of the earth, or water from whom was born AILAS or PURURAVAS, progenitor of the two principal branches of the CHANDRAVAMŚA who reigned at Kāsi and Pratiṣṭhāna.
“The essays of Wilford contain frequent mention of Ila and Ilā, (for this personage is both masculine and feminine), whom he identifies with JAPHET as *Ilapati* or Jyapati; and again with *Ilys*

v2.c16.s2.32

I believe, unquestionable. For the next step we have an only guide, and that not the safest. Generally speaking identity of names is no proof of the identity of persons; but when some corroborative evidence is available in support of such identity it may, I think, be to a certain extent relied upon as probable; and in the present instance we have both identity of names and some corroborative evidence to deal with, though the latter is by no means so harmonious as to leave no room for doubt. Among the princes whom Aira overcame by his prowess occurs the name of Nandarājā, and this, it may fairly be presumed, refers either to Sunanda, son and successor of Kāsi, and grandson of Brahmadatta, king of Kaliṅga, who at the death of Śākya received a relic of the saint; or to one of the nine Nandas of Magadha. In the former case, Aira must have lived about fifty years after the death of Budhha, or in the fifth century B.C. This is, however, not probable, as there is no reason why the name of Sunanda should be written Nanda in a prose composition. The name of Magadha in connexion with Nanda in a later part of the record is also against it, and the second branch of the alternative is therefore what I am disposed to adopt.

v2.c16.s2.33

It is much to be regretted that the line in which *Magadha-rājani* and Nanda Rājās are named in close proximity is so corrupt that a complete translation cannot be afforded of it. Prinsep's facsimile also gives only the letter *dh* of Magadha, and the two first letters are so exceedingly faint in my cast, that they are all but perfectly illegible; but relying on them I am disposed to accept that the person indicated is one of the nine Nandas of Magadha. There can be no *a priori* objection to this identification. There is ample evidence to show that Kaliṅga was well-known from the time of the death of Śākya, and the Pāli Buddhistical annals prove that it bore close political relationship with Magadha, from one of whose sovereigns it obtained the tooth relic at a very early period. It is impossible now to say whether the boundary of the Kaliṅga rāj was conterminous with that of Magadha, but if the two kingdoms did not border upon each other, they were separated by a very narrow interval, and there is nothing improbable in the supposition of their having been politically related, or having indulged in border warfare. The inscription states that Aira went to Banares, and distributed largesses there very bountifully, and in his way he most probably passed through Magadha. Accepting under these circumstances, that the Nandarāja of the inscription was one of the nine Nandas, and knowing that the Nandas reigned for a hundred years, the last yielding his patrimony to Chandragupta, we may assume that the date of Aira ranged between 316 and 416 B.C.

v2.c16.s2.34

Again, according to the *Vāyu* and the *Matsya Purāṇas*,²⁴ the first of the nine Nandas who bore the second name of Mahāpadmapati reigned eighty years, and the other eight, twelve years. The period of eighty-eight years appears extraordinarily long for a single reign, and I am disposed to reduce it by at least five and twenty years. The second Nanda was called Sumālya, the last Dhana Nanda. We do not know the specific names of the other six. One of these probably was simply Nanda without any prefix, and if we accept him from that circumstance to be the prince meant in the inscription, the era of Aira will range between 325 and 340 B.C. It should be borne in mind, however, that all the nine [29] princess of Magadha were commonly known under the name of Nanda, and we are not at all in a position to say whether the writer of the inscription used the name in a generic, or a specific, sense. It is to be presumed that in giving a proper name he gave it in full, and did not strike off a syllable from it in a prose composition where a syllable more or less is of no consequence, and that consequently Aira lived at or a little before the time of Alexander's invasion in 327 B.C.; but at any rate this much may be taken for certain that he lived within the hundred years preceding the accession of Chandragupta to the throne of Magadha in 316 B.C.

v2.c16.s2.35

²⁴ *Wilson's Viṣṇu Purāṇa*, p. 468.

v2.c16.s2.36

On the religion of Aira I shall have to make a few remarks in a subsequent part of this chapter.

v2.c16.s2.37

No. 1.

v2.c16.s2.38

At the beginning of the inscription, opposite the commencement of the first and the second lines, there is a symbol like the figure shown on the margin. (Woodcut No. 1). It bears some resemblance to the Tāntric symbol called Kūrmacakra, or "the Tortoise symbol," which is deemed an essential requirement when performing mystic rites, and particularly when a person is desirous of acquiring power over mystic *mantras* by repeating them a great number of times under particular restrictions. At such times an outline of the symbol is drawn on the earth, and the performer sits upon it. According to the *Tantrasāra*: "For him who, without knowing the Kūrmacakra, peforms the rite of *japa*, (repetition of a mystic *mantra* with a view to obtain command over it and supernatural powers,) the rite proves ineffectual, and leads to mischief". Ordinarily the symbol is looked upon as that of the earth. The resemblance, however, of the Kūrmacakra with the symbol under notice is not strong, and I am not, therefore, prepared to say for certain that it is really iutended for a tortoise. The three projections on the top may pass for the head and the fore-paws of the animal, and the side ones for the hind paws, but there is no mark for the tail, and this in the Hindu symbol is generally very prominent.

v2.c16.s2.39

No. 2.

v2.c16.s2.40

Below the last occurs the well-known *svastika*, but not formed in the usual way with single lines, but with double line as shewn on the margine (Woodcut No. 2) bearing in this respect some slight resemblance to the symbol called *nandyāvarta*, (Woodcut No. 3,) which was the emblem of the twenty-third Jain-Ara. The resemblance, however, appears to be accidental, and due to the artist's adopting the double line to set off the figure to No. 3. the best advantage, and not to any defective attempt to produce the Nandyāvarta, the peculiar character of which is produced by the square which encloses the *svastika*, and not to the double lines. The *savastika* itself, however, is a Jain emblem, and is reckoned among the twenty four characteristic marks which were successively adopted by the different deified Jain saints for their emblems. These marks are thus enumerated by the Jain lexicographer Hemacandra: "The bull, the elephant, the horse, the monkey, the heron, the lotus, the *savastika*, the cresent, the shark (*makara*), the *Śrivatsa*, the rhinoceros, the buffaloe, the hog, the eagle, the thunderbolt, the deer, the goat, the *nandyāvarta*, the water-jar, the tortoise, the blue lotus, the conch-shell, the cobra, and the lion are the emblems (or flags? *dvajā*) of the Arhats." All these emblems are, however, common both to the Jains and the Buddhists, most of them, likewise, occur in the mystic writings of the Hindus. The *savastika* is particularly so; it is avowedly Jain; the Buddhists look upon it with great veneration, and many of their ancient princes adopted it for their seal, and impressed it on their coins; and in the Tantras of the Hindus it is highly extolled for its mystic virtues. Nor is it confined to India alone, "for it occurs on the oldest Greek coins, on Etruscan vases, on the Newton Stone, Aberdeen, on Celtic monuments, and in ecclesiastical sculptures, styled there the Tetragrammaton, being supposed made up of four T, and the second confounded with that of the sacred *Tetragrammaton*. Similarly the Isis worshippers of Egypt marked the sacred vases of their goddess, before using it at their rites."²⁵ It occurs further among the Gnostics, and the Freemasons have adopted it as one of their mystic symbols. A modification of it is the distinctive badge of *xaca Japonicus*; and the *crux ansata* and the *sistrum* are allied to it; and persons are not wanting who fancy the European coronation orb to be closely related to this mystic cross. Dr. Inman takes it to be a phallic symbol.²⁶ That it is intimately connected with the pre-Christian cross, none who has studied the history of ancient mystic symbols will for a moment deny; but it is not necessary for me to enter into the subject at length here, as a symbol of so wide a diffusion can be of little use in determining the religious leaning of the record.

v2.c16.s2.41

²⁵ King's *Gnostics*, p. 176.

v2.c16.s2.42

²⁶ *Ancient Faiths in Ancient Names*. *Subvoce* Svastika.

v2.c16.s2.45

No. 4 At the end of the inscription occurs a third mystic symbol, (Woodcut No. 4), which has somewhat the appearance of a street-lamp mounted on a cubic base. It has been noticed as a Buddhist monogram, and figured in Cunningham's Bhilsa Topes (Plate XXXII). That it has a phallic signification like the first three, I am very much disposed to believe, but what that signification is I am not in a position to explain. It has been suggested to me that it may be symbolic [30] representation of the *bo* tree with a rail round its trunk; but the cubic base has no similitude to the characteristic Buddhist rail. The symbol occurs at the beginning of the short inscription by the door of the Tiger Cave but there the base is divided by a cross into four compartments only, Within the cave there are several inscriptions, but of later dates some being in ill-formed and very carelessly scratched Gupta character of a degenerate type, others in equally degenerate Kuṭila. Four of these minor inscriptions occur on the east wall, three on the north wall of the second compartment, and two on the north wall of the third compartment. Prinsep thus describes these inscriptions: "The fragments (figs. 2 to 11) carelessly cut on various parts of the caves are for the most part imperfectly legible. They are in all probability merely the names of visitors as at Allahabad, Gaya, &c. The word *hotta*, 'a burnt-offering,' occurs in Nos. 3 and 6. No. 8 contains the name of KUVERAGNI, and No. 10 the title *uttoma kula vamśa*, 'descendant of an illustrious family.' It is unnecessary to dwell upon the reading of the rest, in which many letters and detached syllables might be easily transcribed, because they carry with them no trait of interest further than the fact, that the same transitions of the written character visible elsewhere are equally developed in the remains of these Kalinga monuments."²⁷ They were incised probably by idle monks who occupied the caves from time to time, or by silly visitors impelled by the same motive which leads to the carvings of obscure names under the dome of St. Paul. Lieut. Kittoe is said to have noticed a dated Kuṭila inscription of the tenth century,²⁸ but I did not find it. In Prinsep's plate (LIV. of vol. VI. *Journal, A.S.B.*), it forms No. 1 of the "Ganeśa or Elephant Cave inscription," and this shows that Prinsep identified the Ganeśa and the Elephant Caves to be the same, and no less an antiquarian than Mr. Fergusson has been misled by it so far as to assign a very modern date to the Ganeśa Cave on the strength of it. The two caves, however, are different and distinct, and the use of the alternative name with the word cave in the singular number is evidently due to a confounding of the two names from the fact of Ganeśa having an elephantine head, and being apt to be identified with an elephant. That the Kuṭila record is intended to be accepted as brought from the Elephant Cave is obvious from the inscriptions which are put below it, and described as from the same cave, and corresponding with the transcripts brought by me from the Hathi Gumphā. That Prinsep had the Elephant Cave in his mind in connexion with the record, is clear also from the remark in which he says: "The name of the king under whose just rule, the elephant cave was formed into a sacrifice cave connected with the worship of Prabhviśvara or Jagannāth, does not appear."²⁹

v2.c16.s2.46

²⁷ *Journal As. Soc.*, VI., p. 1075.

v2.c16.s2.47

²⁸ *Ibid.*

v2.c16.s2.48

²⁹ I copy the record from Prinsep's plate. name of Virajākṣetra, nor and celebrity for sacrifice. Bhuvaneśvara and its neighbourhood have the nama of Harakṣetra, the abode of Śiva, and not that of his consort Virajā, and it is not at all likely that a man versed in Sanskrit and religious lore, and local knowledge, such as the writer of the record undoubtedly was, would confound two such distant places together. The name Harakṣetra must have been, as it is now, in everybody’s mouth, in the tenth century, and it could not have been called Virajā by an intelligent person.

v2.c16.s2.49

"Under the fortunate Government of an equitable prince, this cavern (was excavated),—to endure as long as the sun and moon—for the heaven-born *munis*—(or holy ascetics), in the Virajā Kṣetra (or holy precincts) of the lord of gods (Jagannāth) as a cave of sacrifice (*ijya garbha*). In the Samvat year nine (muni)." It is just possible that this record exists in some dark corner of the Elephant Cave, which escaped my notice; but its character is such that I strongly suspect that it was taken from some other locality by Major Kittoe, and by some accident or other having been wrongly labelled was mistaken by Prinsep. Its language is corrupt and the reading very doubtful, The use of the term Virajā-kṣetra in it is particularly suspicious. That word was a well-known name of Jājapur a thousand years ago, as it is now, and the word *jājapura* is a corruption of yajñapura or "the town of sacrifice," and the presumption is strong that the record is from Jājapura, and not Udaygiri, which never had the

v2.c16.s2.50

**Pavana Gumpha:**—Immediately to the north of the Elephant Cave there is a small excavation which is known under the name of Pāvana Gumphā or the “Cave of Purification.” It is of no importance whatever as a work of art; but it has an inscription in the Lāṭ character, and the following are James Prinsep’s reading and remarks on the record:—

v2.c16.s2.51

] “*Chulakamasa paseta kothaja* (*yā*). The word *paseta* may be the Sanskrit *prasrita*, ‘the humble’, sc.—cell of Chulakama. Chūdākarma is the right of tonsure—from *cūḍā*, a single lock of hair left on the crown of the head when shaved: and some allusion to a similar purpose of this cave seems preserved in its modern name of Pawana gubha, ‘the cave of purification.’”[^30

v2.c16.s2.52

**Sarpa Gumpha:—Retracing** our steps now to the west of the Hāthi Gumphā, the first cave worthy of notice occurs on the most protruding ledge of the fracture between the Udayagiri and the Khaṇḍagiri hills (Plate XXI). It is remarkable for having in front, on the top of the entrance, a rude carving of the hood of a three-headed cobra. (Plate XX. E.1), whence its name Ajāgara Gumphā—*ajāgara*, a serpent that is able ‘to swallow’ (*gara*) ‘a goat’ (*ajā*) Under the hood of the serpent, the cave is cut in the form of a cube of 4 feet with a door just large enough to admit a man crawling in, and framed in the usual style. By the side of the door occurs a short inscription, in two parts of which the following are transcript and translation by James Prinsep:—[31]

v2.c16.s2.54

*Chulakamasa kothājayācha—kamasa—rikhi nayache pasāde.*

v2.c16.s2.55

**Bhajana and Alakapura Caves:—**“The impregnable or unequalled chamber of Chulakarma, and the appropriate temple (or place) of Karma (Crishi ?).”³¹ Similar to the last is a small cave of an irregular shape with a corresponding verandah in front called Bhajana Gumphā or the ‘Cave of Meditation.’ It measures in length eight feet in front, and fifteen feet behind with a breadth of ten feet; the height being seven feet (Plates I. K, and XVIII). It has no inscription, and is otherwise of no importance. The same may be said of the cave immediately adjoining it on the north. It is called Alakāpura or “the Palace of Indra.” (Plate I. L).

v2.c16.s2.56

³⁰ *Journal, As. Soc. of Bengal*, VI., p. 1074.

v2.c16.s2.57

³¹ *Journal, As. Soc.*, VI., p. 1073.

v2.c16.s2.58

**Tiger cave :—Further north we come to the Tiger cave or Bāgh Gumphā (Pate I.M. and Plate XXVI). In size it is similar to the last, but its exterior is cut into the shape of a tiger’s head. The distended jaws of the animal form the verandah, and the entrance to the cell occupies the place of the gullet. The head is remarkably well formed, and the chiselling is excellent. By the right of the entrance a short inscription in the Lāṭ character states that it originally belonged to one “Sasevin, a fierce antivedist.” The record, in two lines, runs as follows :—**

v2.c16.s2.59

] *ugara avedasa.* [Figure:] *sasāvino leno.*[^32

v2.c16.s2.60

Jems Prinsep takes *sasevino* to be an epithet, and *ugara avedasa* “of the fierce antivedist”, the name ; but he assigns no meaning to the former. The word *ugra aveda* is so clearly an epithet and so unlike a proper name that I have no hesitation in reversing his order. The inscription has at the commencement a Buddhist monogram very like the one at the end of the Hāthi Gumphā record, except that it has the lower square divided by a single upright line and not by three lines. At the end of the inscription occurs a *śvatikā* mark.

v2.c16.s2.61

**Urdha-bahu and minor caves :—To the north of the Tiger cave, there are several excavations, with one exception, more like the lairs of wild beasts than human habitations, whose regular angles and corners alone attest their being the handiwork of man, and not natural caverns. They are shaped like cubes, each with a small entrance, in which a man can sit up in a painful position, but not lie down, or stretch himself. They are utterly devoid of all architectural embellishment, and call for no remark. Two or three of them have short Pāli inscriptions in the Lāṭ character, but in a miserable state of preservation and largely blotted. The exception refers to the Urdha Bāhu cave,—(Plate I. N.) a one-storeyed chamber, twelve feet by six feet with a verandah of corresponding size, faced by a line of three pillars having lion capitals and brackets projecting in front, and carved like female figures. It has an inscription in the Lāṭ character ; but so mutilated, that I could make nothing of it.**

v2.c16.s2.62

**Khandagiri :—I now come to the Khaṇḍagiri Hill. It faces the east, and is accessible by a path rising from behind the Government bungalow. Its highest point measures 123 feet from the surrounding country. The path is made by scraping the side of the hill but at the upper part there are some rough-hewn steps ; at the height of about 50 feet the path devides into two branches, one leading to the right, and terminating at the foot of a terrace in front of a cave which stands at the height of between 65 and 75 feet, and the other ascending towards the left, and leading to a range of caves, which has been cut into the eastern face of the hill : these latter have no open terrace in front of them. The front of the hill is clothed with verdure, and thickly covered with trees, but on the top the rock crops up to the surface which is devoid of soil (Plate XXV).**

v2.c16.s2.63

³² *Journal, As. Soc. of Bengal*, VI, p. 1073.

v2.c16.s2.64

**Ananta Cave :**—The terrace on the right side has been made artificially by the removal of a large mass of rock so as to afford a good scarp on one side for the excavation of a cave temple to which it leads by two very broad steps. Its area is limited, but under the shade of a large *pepul* tree, it appears very romantic with the caves of Udayagiri and its fractured face in front.

v2.c16.s2.65.1

The cave temple stands to the south of this terrace, and comprises a narrow long room with four doorways and a verandah in front (Plate XVIII). The length of the room is greater in front than behind, but the reverse is the case with the length of the verandah; the greatest length of the former being twenty-four feet and six inches in front, and the shortest behind twenty-one feet and six inches, and of the latter in front twenty-five feet, and behind twenty-seven feet. The breadth of the former is seven feet and of the latter five feet. The verandah has a range of three pillars, which with the terminal piers produce four openings corresponding to the four doorways of the chamber. The pillars are divided into three sections, of which the central one is octagonal, and the lower [32] and upper ones square. They have no plinths nor any distinct capital; but each of them has in front of the place where the capital should have been a bracket projecting forwards and shaped like a woman. The architrave is heavy, and over it, supported on corbels, is a parapet formed of pyramidal battlements with intervening bunches of flowers. The walls both of the room and of the verandah are perfectly perpendicular, but the ceiling of the room is slightly arched, whereas that of the verandah is flat. The only carved ornament in the room is an image of Buddha in low relief on the centre of the back wall.

v2.c16.s2.65.2

One of the piers of the front wall has fallen down, causing thereby two contiguous doorways to coalesce into one. The mouldings round the doors are of the Udayagiri type with arched tops and intervening frieze, but the pilasters are richer and more elaborately carved (see Plate XXIV, D.3). The frieze is in five compartments corresponding with the five piers of the front wall, but one of the five is lost by the destruction of one of the piers. Beginning, therefore, with the next compartment, on the left side, we have two human figures in a running or flying position, one proceeding to the left and the other to the right. They are dressed in *dhuti* and *chādara*, the ends of which are flying in the air. Their heads are enveloped in large heavy turbans; on their wrists there are bangles; and massive rings are pendant from their ears. Each of them carries a tray of offerings in his left hand, the right hand being left free. The band of the arch to the right of these figures is in its general character similar to those of the Queen's Palace and Gaṇeśa Caves. It is formed of two fillets enclosing a line of ornamental figures. The first object at the spring of the arch is a stout athlete in a kneeling posture, over whom stands a man holding back, by its two hind legs, a lion running forward towards a man, who is busy tussling with an enraged bull, which he has caught by the left horn, and is about to strike it with an uplifted stick in his right hand.

v2.c16.s2.65.3

Then comes a lion held by its near hind leg by a man, who stands on the head of an athlete similar to the figure at the opposite spring of the arch. The crown of the arch is formed by the intertwining of the tails of two serpents, whose bodies encircle the arch, and whose triple-headed hoods form two prominent wings on its two sides. Over the arch is seen a Buddhist rail running in continuation with the parapet on the verandah. Under the rail, and the pyramidal battlements is a series of squared blocks or a corbel table for the support of the arch. Of course here the whole wall with the frieze and ornaments on it being cut out of the solid rock, the corbels are utterly uncalled for as mechanical supports, and must, therefore, be taken as attempts to represent in stone the ends of rafters which in a wooden house would form the sustaining members of cornices and other superstructure, as unquestionably most corbels are, but their presence can no more be accepted as a proof of the recent transition of the caves from wood to stone than the corbel table under the cornice of the Pantheon, be assumed to be a proof of that glory of the builder's art having been copied directly from a wooden model. As elsewhere stated, there is a spirit of survival of custom which continues long after the exigencies which gives its birth, and this is one of them.

v2.c16.s2.66.1

The semicircular space under the arch, i.e. the tympanum is occupied by a nude female figure standing amidst a lotus bush, and holding a lotus stalk in each hand (Plate XXIII, D. 1). On each side of her, there are two elephants, one standing on a full-blown lotus, and the other on a thalamus; their trunks uplifted, as if in the act of throwing a shower of water on the central figure. The group is claimed by the Hindus as peculiarly their own; and is well known in Bengal under the name of Mahālakṣhmī, or 'the great goddess of fortune'. The Vaiṣṇavas claim her as a form of Lakṣmī, consort of Viṣṇu, and the lady protectress of wealth; and the Śāktas accept her as Durgā in one of her various manifestations. The former, when engaged in worship, meditate on her, as "a lady standing amidst lotuses, bright as pure gold, being besprinkled with water from golden pitchers held by the trunks of four elephants white as the Himalaya mountain, twirling in her hand a couple of beautiful and auspicious lotuses, the emblems of encouragement, crowned with a bright diadem, and dressed in silken raiment". The latter, in describing her, use almost the identical words.

v2.c16.s2.66.2

They adore her as "the consort of Hari, seated on a lotus delicate as the heavenly creeper *pārijāta*, radiant as an image of lustrous jewels, constantly besprinkled with water from golden pitchers held by the trunks of four majestic elephants white as snow, cheering the faint-hearted by twirling in her hands a couple of lotuses".³³ The *Svatantra Tantra* reconciles the conflict between the Vaiṣṇavas and the Śāktas by saying, that "the goddess is identically the same with the lady Lakṣmī, who was produced originally at the churing of the ocean; but that when Brahmā, intent on creating the universe performed an austere fast, Śākti, the great goddess, was highly gratified, and on the night of the 9th of the waxing moon in the month of Chaitra, manifested herself as the all-powerful consort of Śiva. She abides on the breast of Viṣṇu. She is the destroyer of Kāla demons, who is the lady of the lotus seat. She was [33] (again) born on the the 8th of the wane in the month of Bhādra, as Mahāmātaṅginī, the great owner of elephants. On Thursday, the 11th of the wane sacred to Bhīma, she was born as Mahālakṣmi. She is the bestower of all blessings." A modification of the form of this goddess occurs very frequently in wild parts of Bengal and Orissa, under the name of Bāsulī, a non-Aryan goddess, who has been identified by some with Viśālākshī or the large-eyed lady, the ox-eyed Juno of Aryan India. Adverting to a counterpart of this goddess, Mr.

v2.c16.s2.66.3

Beames says : "Her rude woodland temples are found still in the mountains and sub-mountain jungles of Western Bengal, and all down the hill ranges of Oaissa, and I have even met with them on the Subarnarekhā, and along the coast of the Bay of Bengal. A fine Sanskrit name has been fitted to this wild forest divinity, and she is called by the Brāhmaṇas, Viśālākshī or the large-eyed. Her statues represent her holding in her uplifted arms two elephants, from whose trunks water pours on to her head."³⁴ Viśālākshī as portrayed in the *Tantras* is a very different personage. According to the *Ādi-yāmala Tantra*, quoted in the *Tantra-sāra*, "she is a large-eyed matron of the complexion of molten gold, two-handed, fierce, armed with a sword and a skull, adorned with a profusion of ornaments, draped in blood-red garments, perennially youthful, smiling faced, three-eyed, wearing a garland of skulls, high and large busted, seated on the person of Śiva, crowned with matted locks and a tiara, the goddes destroyeress of enemies and giver of every blessing to her adorers." This cannot possibly be the type of the lotus lady Kamalātmikā, or of the gentle Bāsulī of the woods, the titular goddess of Sāgar Island. In the Bengali *Chaṇḍī* of Kavikaṅkana, the goddess is represented as seated on a lotus on the open sea, holding an elephant in each hand, and engaged in the very unfeminine occupation of alternately swallowing and throwing up the elephants.

v2.c16.s2.66.4

In this shape, she is said to have manifested herself to the merchant Dhanapati, one of her devout worshippers, who had lost his way in the Bay of Bengal.

v2.c16.s2.67

³³ *Tantrasāra.*

v2.c16.s2.68

³⁴ *Indian Antiquary*, II., p. 187.

v2.c16.s2.69

Nor is the goddess confined to the Hindus and the aborigines. She is as frequently met with the Buddhist fanes. The cave under notice is unquestionably a Buddhist temple from the fact of a figure of Bhddha occupying the most prominent position on the centre of the hind wall of the chamber, and yet we have the goddess also on the frieze. On the tympanum of a niche or back-frame of a statue found at Manikyāla she occurs in a slightly modified form under an arch formed by the twining of the trunks of two elephants standing rampart on the two sides ; below the elephants are two bulls, and behind them a thatched hut on each side. Close by the goddess are two female attendants. The goddess holds a lotus, but there is no lotus bush beside her, or under her feet.³⁵ The bulls here noticed are probably ill-formed images of elephants.

v2.c16.s2.70

³⁵ *Journal, As. Soc.*, V., p. 471, plate XX.

v2.c16.s2.71

The Jains likewise regard this lotus lady as an auspicious one, and among "the fourteen most excellent, prosperity-foreboding, evil-destroying, wealth-conferring, fortunate, delightsome dreams" which Trisalā dreamt on the occasion when Mahāvīra was transferred to her womb from that of Devānandī, Mahālakṣmī, seated on a lotus with two elephants pouring water on her head, appears as the fourth. The dream is thus described in the *Kalpa Sūtra*, a work of the beginning of the 5th century (A.D. 411), which is esteemed as the most sacred of the scriptures of the Jains : "The fourth dream seen by her whose face was like a moon, was a vision of the goddess Lakṣmī, sitting on her lofty lotus throne. Her form was altogether excellent, one foot was firmly planted on the ground and seemed like a pillar of gold; it was elevated in the centre like the back of a tortoise, while the nails partly hid by the muscles of the toes, were stained with a brilliant dye. Her fingers and toes were soft and tapering like the leaves of the lotus; her well-formed legs were adorned with circular ornaments; her knee-bones were hid in the muscles, and her thighs tapering downward like the trunk of an elephant. Encircling her loins was an elegant zone of gold, while the circle of the navel resembled a cloud of black bees, being continuous, fine, ever-moving, soft, downy, large,elegant. The other three circles which are in the middle of the palms of her hands were also elegantly formed. Her whole body was adorned with various kinds of jewels, wholly faultless, and highly brilliant. In particular, she had a pearl necklace, intermingling with garlands of sweet-scented flowers. A circular pendant fell down between her breasts, and adorned her chest, on which it rested. She had also around her neck a string of grains and golden *dīnars* (coins). Two large earrings hung down from her ears, and illuminated the shoulders with [34] which they came in contact. Every thing about her was beautiful; her face had a noble aspect; her eyes were large and lovely, like lotus flowers; she held a water-lily, still dripping with water in her hand; and she was fanned by an agreeable wind, which set in motion her fine black braided hair. Such was the goddess, the queen saw residing in her lotus house, called Padmadraha, on the top of the Mount Himavat, and by whom stood the guardian elephant of that quarter of the heavens, bathing her with water from his trunk.''³⁶ The text thus has only one elephant, but in the plate given in Mr. Stevenson's translation, two elephants are shown standing each on a cup in the lady's hands.

v2.c16.s2.72

³⁶ *Opus cit.*, p. 44

v2.c16.s2.73

Again, in a silver didrachma of Azelisas, brought by Mr. Arthur Grote from Peshawer, and described by me,³⁷ I find on reverse a female figure to the front standing on a lotus; the left hand rests on the waist, and the right over the stomach, holding something; on each side is a lotus-stalk rising as high as the waist and bearing an expanded flower, whereon stands an elephant with its trunk extended over the head of the central figure. This reverse is evidently founded on the type of the Azas' square coin with the trident reverse (*Ariana Antiqua*, plate VII, fig. 5, p. 327), which has a female figure standing amidst twining creepers, and it may unhesitatingly be said that the figures on the coins are intended to represent the same personage whom the Hindus designate Mahālakṣmī. As the goddess of fortune and good luck, her figure was most appropriate on coins issued in the neighbourhood of India, and for currency amongst a nation entertaining at the time strong Hindu notions. It would not be very presumptuous to suppose that Mahālaksmī at the time was not worshipped as a divinity for salvation, but as the regent of good fortune, and as such, the Buddhist laity had no objection to her, and, with the natural instinct of man in favour of everything that tends to his temporal welfare, admitted her existence even as they did that of Indra, the god of rain, and showed her some respect: or possibly they got up a Buddhist version of her story, as they did of many other Hindu legends, and received her as a goddess of their own, and the Bactro-Greek sovereigns got her from the Buddhists. Anyhow, seeing that the image of the goddess occurs as frequently among Buddhist, as among Hindu remains, it would be unwarrantable to found upon her presence any theory about the religious character of the cave in question.

v2.c16.s2.74

³⁷ *Proceedings, Asiatic Society of Bengal for 1868*, p. 184. A figure of the coin is given on plate II of *Proceedings for 1869*, p. 124.

v2.c16.s2.75

The third compartment is an exact counterpart of the second; but the arch which follows has two lines of geese running with spread wings from the opposite sides towards the crown (Plate XXII). Each goose has a flower pendant from its bill. The Buddhist rail on the top occupies only the space over the heads of the serpents, being replaced on the arch itself by a pyramidal parapet. The subject of illustration on the tympanum is the *bo* tree to which a lady of rank has come to pay her adorations, and is standing before it with folded hands; one of her attendants has a garland in her hand ready for her mistress to offer it to the tree, and the others hold urns of water and trays of offerings ready for the same purpose. The whole scene is an exact counterpart of the adoration of the *bo* tree, of which so many representations occur at Sāñchī, Amarāvatī, and other Buddhist shrines. In the last compartment, the flying or running figures of the left side are repeated, but both the figures face the same (left) side, and not opposite sides.

v2.c16.s2.76

On the back wall of the verandah there are two inscriptions, one in the Lāṭ character, and above it the other in Kuṭila form of the Sanskrit. Both of the them were so broken and filled up with dirt and moss, that I could not take legible facsimiles of them; only a few letters in the middle of the Lāṭ character inscription could be made out. According to my note-book, the Sanskrit one comprises four lines of ten letters each. The Kuṭila inscription published by Prinshep as form the "Elephant or Gaṇeśa Cave," which I have not been able to trace, is in five lines of thirteen letters each, and I cannot therefore identify it with this record. It is, however, not of much importance, as the Lāṭ inscription leaves no room to doubt that the cave was cut many centuries before the Kuṭila letters came into currency in India, and that the Kuṭila record is a fictitious one got up to explain away what the writer knew nothing about.

First 82 of 175 passages. Read on

Linked texts (14)