Tuesday, October 20, 2009

Mandasar Insctiptions No. 164 and No. 165

"May that very long banner of (the God) Sulapani destroy the glory of your enemies; (that banner) which bears (a representation of ) the bull, marked by the fingers (dipped in some dye and then) placed on him by (Parvati) the daughter of the mountain (Himalaya), who causes the distant regions in which the demons are driven wild with fear by (his) terrible bellowings, to shake; and who makes the glens of (the mountain) Sumeru to have their rocks split open by the blows of his horns."

"(L2)-He, to whose arm, as if to (the arm) of (the God) Sarangapani, the fore-arm of which is marked with callous parts caused by the hard string of (his) bow, (and which is stead-fast in the successful carrying of wows for the benefit of mankind, the earth be took itself (for succor) when it was afflicted by kings of the present age, who manifested pride; who were cruel through want of proper training; who from delusion, transgressed the path of good conduct (and) who were destitute of virtuous delights."

In line 6,there is the reference of Mihirakula. "He to whose two feet respect was paid, with the complementary presents of the flowers from the hair on the top of (his) head, by even that (famous) king Mihirakula, whose forehead (was) pained through being bent low down by the strength of (his) arm in (the act of compelling) obeisance."

There are nine lines in this inscription.

No.165 Mandasor Duplicate Pillar inscription of Yasodharman: There are nine lines. In the 6th line, there is the name Mihirakula and in the seventh the name of Yasodharman noted. The text of both the inscriptions is the same."

These two inscriptions Nos. 164, 165 are, indeed, forged ones, with no date. To fix the date which suits their purpose, they complicated the problem by introducing the story of the pilgrimages of Fa-Hian and Hieun-Tsang. besides extraneous and irrelevant arguments and information.

The No. 163 Mandasor inscription speaks of the existence of a person by name "Daksha", who had a great well dug, during Malava Samvat 589, the time of kings Yasodharma and Vishnuvardhan.(Ind. Ant. Ed. 1886 Vol. XV. P. 222 ff). That inscription at the bottom says that it is engraved by 'Govinda'. On the basis of this, the name 'Govinda' was inserted in No. 164 inscription and it was concluded that these two inscriptions were of about the same date; and our western scholars decided that the time of Mihirakula was 589 Malva samvat. They interpreted Malava Samvat to be the same as Vikrama Samvat; have deducted B.C. 57, from 589, and imagined that the date of Mihirakula was 532 A.D. On the strength of this imaginary date, by calculating backwards and forwards, by increasing and diminishing the kings, the foreign historians have brought, the five thousand years old history of the Kashmir kings to a very recent date, This is an inexcusable and intolerable impudent interpolation perpetrated by western chroniclers.

To refute the above conclusion of the western historians, it may be argued that the so called engraver "Govinda" of the inscription No. 164 may be the grandson or great grand-son or grand-father or the great grand-father of 'Govinda’ of the inscription No 163, or some other person of the same name. Then the two inscriptions differ in age. How can the date 589 of Malava-Gana-Saka of the 163 Mandasor inscription be borrowed for the undated 164 inscription?

Earlier we have shown reasons and proved that the Malava-Gana-Saka Samvat mentioned in No. 163 Mandasor inscription is not the Vikrama Era of 57 B.C. The full name of the so-called Malava-Saka is "Malava-Gana-Saka," which means the Saka promulgated by the people of Malava and its beginning was in 725 B.C. But Vikrama-Saka was the era brought into existence in 57 B.C., by Vikramaditya king of Ujjain. The name ‘Malavaganasaka’ was abbreviated into ‘Malava Saka’ and it is alleged that it was Vikrama-Saka fixed by the astrologers of Malawa; and it was stated that both are identical. Further they expressed that, in B.C., 1st century there was no king by the name of Vikramaditya, and, if there was one, he was the same as Chandra-Gupta II of the Gupta Dynasty (according to them 5th Century A.D.) who propagated this era and calculated it from 57 B.C. With such illogical and irrational arguments the westerners led our historians far astray from the right track. When the date of Chandra-Gupta II of Gupta line was B.C. 269-233; they have changed it to 5th century A.D. On the authority of the statements found in the inscriptions of Malava-Gana-Saka we have shown that it was different from Vikrama Saka and it was used in the Malwa inscriptions during the reigning periods of the Great Gupta Emporers, who flourished between 327 - 82 B.C.

No comments:

Post a Comment