The Dynastic History of Northern India (Early Mediaeval Period) v1.c16.245

v1.c16.245

These records show that Nayapāla ruled at least for 15 years (*c.* 1040-55 A.D.), and held portions of Bihar. It is quite likely that he ruled over a wider area, but unfortunately no other evidence has hitherto been discovered to support that conclusion. There is some possibility that the Pāla kingdom at this time came into conflict with the rising power of the Kalacuris under Lakṣmī-Karṇa (*c.* 1041-70 A.D.). The Karanbel stone inscription of Jayasiṁhadeva, the great-grandson of Lakṣmī-Karṇa, tells us that the latter was waited upon by Gauḍa and other princes.¹ The Bheraghat inscription of Alhaṇadevī, the queen of Gayā-Karṇa, the grandson of Lakṣmī-Karṇa, informs us that when the latter gave full play to his heroism, the Vaṅga trembled with the Kaliṅga.² Tibetan tradition contains stories of a war between Nayapāla, king of Magadha and the "*Tīrthika* king of Karṇya of the West." We are told that failing to capture the city, Karṇya's 'troops sacked some of the sacred Buddhist institutions and killed altogether five (men), out of whom four were ordained monks and one *upāsaka*. At this time the celebrated Buddhist monk *Dīpaṅkara Śrījñāna* (also called Atīśa) who had accepted the post of High Priest of Vikramaśilā at the request of Nayapāla, was in residence 'at the Vihāra of Mahābodhi at Vajrāsana.' When a good deal of church-furniture was carried away as booty, Atīśa showed no concern or anger. But "afterwards when victory turned towards (Nayapāla) and the troops of Karṇya were being slaughtered by the armies of Magadha, he took the king of Karṇya and his men under his protection and sent them away." Atīśa then "caused a treaty to be concluded between the two kings. With the exception of the articles of food that were destroyed at the time of war, all other things which had fallen in the hands of the parties were either restored or compensated for. Unmindful of his health even at the risk of his life, Atīśa again and again crossed the rivers that lay between the two kingdoms and thereby brought peace to all living beings.'”¹ Scholars have proposed to identify this ‘king Karṇya of the West’ with the Tripurī Kalacuri Lakṣmī-Karṇa.² Though this identification is probable, the success of Nayapāla against Lakṣmī-Karṇa is rendered somewhat doubtful by the Paikor stone pillar-inscription of the latter king recently discovered in the Birbhum district of Bengal.³ This fact coupled with the existence of independent dynasties in Eastern Bengal, seems to show that the area under the rule of the Pālas at this time did not extend much beyond portions of Bihar and Northern Bengal. It is significant that in the Tibetan life of Atīśa, quoted above, Nayapāla is described as king of Magadha, and, what is more important, from this time onward all the Pāla inscriptions are found either in Magadha or in Puṇḍravardhana-*Bhukti*.⁴ The reality, or at least the permanence of the alleged treaty between the two kingdoms, to attain which Atīśa is said to have risked his health and life, is also rendered very questionable by the fact that the *Rāmacarita* clearly refers to the struggles of Karṇa and Nayapāla’s son Vigrahapāla III.⁵ If the Tibetan account of the alliance be correct, this must be accepted as a second war waged by the Kalacuri king against the Pālas. According to Tibetan tradition Dīpaṅkara Śrījñāna Atīśa went to Tibet at the invitation of prince Chan Chub, in the reign of Nayapāla. When he started for Tibet he was 59 years old, and he died there at the age of 73. Mr. S. C. Das gives these dates as A.D. 1042 and 1055.¹ But in his *Indian Pandits in the Land of Snow*² edited by his brother N. C. Das in 1893 the date of his birth is given as A.D. 980 and that of his death as 1053. According to this calculation the date of the departure of Atīśa works out at 1039 A.D. Prof. Lévi gives this date as *c.* 1040 A.D.³ It is better to take the Tibetan date as only approximate.