No. 6 Ajaнта cave inscription. (pl. lviii). The characters in which the inscription is written belong to the central group of alphabets. They differ from the southern types of the Chalukya, Kаdamba, and other inscriptions in the forms of na and ta, which resemble those used in the Valabhи and Gurjara щаsanas. They come very close to the inscriptions in Caves XVI and XVII, and probably belong to the latter half of the sixth or beginning of the seventh century A.D. The language is faulty and ungrammatical Sanskrit, containing a number of peculiar Buddhistic phrases. It is such as might be expected to be written by a Bauddha Аchаrya (vs. 19) who, like the Jaina Yatis of our days, possessed only a superficial knowledge of the Brahmanical idiom. According to the inscription, the person who ordered Cave XXVI to be excavated, and provided the funds for the work, was a monk called Buddhabhadra (vs. 13). His agents were the monk Dharmadatta and his own pupil Bhadrabandhu (?), who superintended the actual work. Buddhabhadra seems to have been no common monk (vs. 7). The nature of the work which he performed clearly indicates that he possessed considerable wealth. His friendship with the minister of the king of Asmaka, in whose honour the cave was excavated, and the epithet "abhijanopapanna" (vs. 16), which seems to mean that he was of noble family, indicate, too, that he was more than a common begging friar. Perhaps we shall not err, if we assume that he occupied a position analogous to that of a Jaina Щrиpуj and was the spiritual head of some Bauddha sect. The fact that he mentions "his striving for the welfare of the people" (vs. 16), and "his having taken upon himself the care of the people," may be adduced in support of this view. It is at present impossible to trace the two ministers of the Aщmaka king, Bhavvirаja and Devarаja, who held office one after another. But the Sthavira Achala, who is mentioned (vs. 6) as one of the former builders of Vihаras, is known from Hiwen Thsang's Meъmoires (tom. ii. p. 152). It is stated there that the Arhat, 'O-che-lo, a native of Western India, traced his mother (who had died, but had been born again as a woman) to a village in Mahаrаштra, converted her to Buddhism, and, touched by the kindness he had received from her who had born and nursed him, and thinking with emotion of the acts in her former life, caused a convent to be built (on the eastern frontier of the kingdom of Mahаrаштra) in order to thank her for her great benefits. M. St. Julien transliterates 'O-che-lo by Аchаra, but that is certainly a mistake, as Achala comes much closer to the Chinese sounds. Moreover, the epithet kрitakрityenаpi satа, "though his desires were fulfilled," which is applied to Sthavira Achala, seems directly to refer to the story of 'O-che-lo's finding and converting his mother. If the identification of our Achala with Hiwen Thsang's 'O-che-lo be accepted, the conjecture that Hiwen Thsang meant to describe Ajaнта in his account of the monastery on the eastern frontier of Mahаrаштra gains in probability (ASWI)

Text.

[1.] jayati lokahitаvahitodyato- . . . . . sukhаntakaraх paramаrthavi[t|] trividhanirmmalasarvvaguнodayo-mu[шitabhих] karuнаmalachandrika[х ||1||]
[2.] puнar api maraнаdi yena samya . . . ivam ajarаmaradharmmatа cha labdhа [|] щиvam abhayam anаlayaм gatopi-praщamapuraм jagatам karoti chаrttha[м ||2||]
[3.] tato namaskаraguнаbhidhаna[м]-bhavaty avandhyaм vipulaм mahаrtthaм [|] pradattam ekaм kusumaм cha yatra-svarggаpavarggаkhyaphalasya hetu[х || 3 ||]
[4.] ata iha viduша Tathаgateшu-prathitaguнаdhikalokavatsaleшu [|] kрitam anusaratа janena kаryyа-drava-karuнахрidayeшv atи-
[5.] va bhakti[х] || [4 ||] devа nirastavijayаs savipattikatvаch-chhаpena Щaмbhur api kаcharalochanobhуt | Kрiшнovaщopi vaщam аpatitontakasya-tasmаj jayaмti
[6.] Sugatа bhayavipramuktах ||[5||] Sthavirаchalena muninа щаsanam udbhаvayaмkрitajгena [|] kрitakрityenаpi satа щailagрihaм kаritaм щаstuх ||[6||]
[7.] prаg eva bodhisattvair bhavasukhakаmaiщ cha mokшakаmaiщ cha [|] saмvidyamаnavibhavaiх kathaм na kаryyа bhave kиrttiх ||[7||] yаvat kиrttir loke tаvat svargge-
[8.] шu modati cha dehи [|]chandrаrkkakаlakalpа kаryyа kиrttir mahиdhreшu ||[8 ||] anekajanmаntarabaddha-sauhрidaм-sthiraм kрitajгaм sudhiyaм vipaщchitam [|]
[9.] surаsurаchаryyamateшu kovidaм-mahаnubhаvащmakarаjamantriнam ||[9||] lokajгam ekаntasamantabhadraм-sarvvаrtthinаm artthakaraм suvаcham [|] guнonnataм praщraya-
[10.] nаmramуrttiм-khyаtiм gataм sachcharitaiх pрithivyам ||[10||] daндasаdhyаni kаryyанi vyаyаmaikarasаny api-yas sаdhayati sаmnaiva nрipater mantрipuкgava[х] ||[11 ||] itthaм
[11.] bhуtosya putropi Devarаjo dhuraмdharaх [|] pitaryy uparate yena padam unnаmita[м] guнaiх ||[12||] taм Bhavvirаjam uddiщya mаtаpitaram eva cha [|] bhikшuна Buddhabhadreнa
[12.] kаritaх Sugatаlaya[х ||13||] аgamya Dharmmadattaг cha bhikшuм sachchhiшyam eva cha [|] Bhadrabudhum idaм veщma tаbhyам niшpаditaм cha me || [14||] yad atra puнyaм tat teша[м]
[13.] jagatа[м] cha bhavatv idaм [|] sarvvаmalaguнavyаtamahаbodhi-phalаptaye || [15||] yo Buddhaщаsanagatiм samabuddhya jаto-bhikшur vvayasy abhinavebhijanopapanna[х|]
[14.] bahuvrataх щиlaviщuddhachetа-lokasya [mokша]ya kрitаdhikаraх || [16 ||] na saмsаrаpannaм щubham api[tu k]iкchich chhubhakaraм-vipаko divyo
[15.] Я я я я я я Я Я chа nиyamа [|] я Я lokаrtthаya prasрitamana Я puнyamahato-[dhи]rана[м] bbavati sukha . Я
[16.] na jagatаm ||[17||] Я Я Я я я Я я Я valabhirnnаnандaja- Я я Я [|] golаngуlaninаdapуritadare prаgbhаravi Я я Я _ Я Я Я я я Я я Я я я я
[17.] yogищvarаdhyаsite veщmedaм jana Я я Я janakabhуtyai Я pratiшthаpitaм || [18 ||] pуrvvаpi cheyam tenaiva dribddhаchаryyeнa saugati [|] lokachi[ntаmu]pаdаya . . . . . . . .[|| 19 ||]

Notes (ASWI)
_____________________
L 2. The sign after samya is not clear. Pandit Bhagwаnlаl reads it as kшi, which, in my opinion, is impossible. I believe that it is meant for gji, and that the phrase must be read samyag-jitam, instead of samyag-jivam.(ASWI)
L 6. Read udbhаvayat, as Pandit Bhagwаnlаl suggests.(ASWI)
L 10. Read namramуrtiм;- mantripuкgavaх.(ASWI)
L 12. The last ligature in the second name is uncertain. It looks like dhdhum. But Pandit Bhagwаnlаl's emendation, bhadrabandhum, is probable.(ASWI)
L 13. Read sarvvаmalaguнavyаpta-. Pandit Bhagwаnlаl's reading, dhyаta-, is against the facsimile; -vyаtta- would also give sense.(ASWI)
L. 15. Possibly prasрitamana[sаm] puнyamahatаm is to be read; Pandit Bhagwаnlаl's restoration, sukha[bhogаya], cannot stand, as na is distinct before jagatаm (line 16).(ASWI)
L 17. Possibly jana[sevitaм] or jana[saмstutaм] may have been the original reading; read dрibdhаchаryeнa; it must remain doubtful if saugatи or saugatиm is the correct reading. In the former case the word would have to be taken with praщastiх, which doubtlessly stood in tbe last pаda of the mutilated anuштubh; in the latter it belongs to lokachi[ntам].(ASWI)