2. _K|oṭiyato| gaṇato |Praśna|vâha|na|kato kulato
Majhamâto śâkhâto...sa nikâye bhati gâlâe thabâni_...
It may, however, be inferred from the fragments of the first line that the
dedication was made by a woman who was described as the wife
(_kuṭumbinî_) of one person and as the daughter-in-law
(_vadhu_) of another. The first part of line 2, restored as above
gives—"in the congregation of ... out of the Koṭiya school, the
Praśnavâhanaka line and the Majhamâ branch...." The restoration of the
two names Koṭiya and Praśnavâhanaka seems to me absolutely certain,
because they exactly fill the blanks in the inscription, and because the
information in the _Kalpasûtra_ (S. B. E. vol. XXII, p. 293)
regarding the Madhyamâśâkhâ points in that direction. The latter work
tells us that Priyagantha, the second pupil of Susthita and Supratibuddha,
founded a śâkhâ, called Madhyamâ or Majhimâ.
As our inscriptions show that Professor Jacobi's explanation of the terms
_gaṇa, kula_ and _śâkhâ_ [Footnote: _S. B. E_. vol.
XXII, p. 288, note 2.] is correct and that the first denotes the school,
the second the line of teachers, and the third a branch which separated
from such a line, it follows that the śâkhâs named in the
_Kalpasûtra_ without the mention of a _gaṇa_ and _kula_,
must belong to the last preceding _gaṇa_ and derive their origin
from one of its _kulas_. Hence the Madhyamâ śâkhâ doubtless was
included in the Kauṭika gaṇa, and an offshoot of one of its
_kulas_, the fourth of which is called Praśnavâhanaka or
Paṇhavâhaṇaya. The correctness of these inferences is proved by
Râjaśckhara's statement regarding his spiritual descent at the end of
the _Prabandha kosha_, which he composed in Vik. saṁ 1405. He
informs us that he belonged to the Koṭika gaṇa, the Praśnavâhana
kula, the Madhyamâ śâkhâ, the Harshapurîya gachha and the Maladhâri
samtâna, founded by the illustrious Abhayasûri.
For the last words of l. 2 I do not dare to propose an emendation; I
merely note that the gift seems to have consisted of pillars,
_thabâni_, i. e. _stambhâḥ_.
4. The Koṭiya gaṇa seems finally to be mentioned
in pl. xiii, No. 2, where the copy of line 1, 2nd
side may be corrected as,—
_Siddha—sa 5 he 1 di 10 + 2 asyâ purvvâye Koṭ(iya)_.
5. Names of an older _gaṇa_ and of one of its
_kulas_ occur in No. 10 plate xiv, where the copy,
which is faulty, may allow the following partial
restoration,—-
L. 1. _Sa 40 + 7 gra 2 di 20 etasyâ purvvâye
Vâraṇe gaṇe Petidhamikakulavâchakasya Rohanadisya
sîsasya Senasya nivatanam sâvaka-Da_
2. ..._pashâṇavadhaya Giha..ka.bha..
prapâ [di]nâ..mâ ta_...
which I translate—
"The year 47, the summer (month) 2, the day 20,—on the above date a
drinking fountain was given by ..., the ... of the lay-disciple Da ...
(this being) the _nivatana_ of Sena the pupil of Rohanadi
(Rohanandi) and preacher of the Petidhamika (Praitidharmika) line, in
the Vâraṇa school."
_Varane_ must be a mistake for the very similar word _Chârane_.
The second _kula_ of this _gaṇa_ which, according to the
_Kalpasûtra_ (_S.B.E_. vol. XXII, p. 291) was founded by
Śrîgupta, the fifth pupil of Ârya Suhastin, is the Prîtidharmika
(p. 292). It is easy to see that a similar name is hidden in the compound
_Petivamikakutavâchakasya_ 'of the preacher of the Petivâmika line';
and an inscription excavated by Dr. Fuhrer at Mathurâ mentions the
Petivâmika (_kula_) of the Vârana _gaṇa_. With the second
line little can be done: if the letters _prapâ_ are correct and form
a word, one of the objects dedicated must have been a drinking fountain.
6. The inscription No. 20, plate xv offers likewise slightly corrupt and
mutilated names of a _gaṇa_, a _kula_ and a _sâkhâ_,
mentioned in the _Kalpasûtra_. In the lithographed copy lines 3-7 are
hopeless and there is no rubbing to help. The word _thitu_ 'of a
daughter' in line 6, and the following _ma.uya_ which is probably a
misreading of _mâtuye_ 'of the mother' show that this dedication also
was made by a female. The last four syllables _vato maho_ are
probably the remnant of another namaskâra—_namo bhagavato
Mahâvîrasya._ As regards the proper names, Aryya Rehiniya is an
impossible form; but on comparison with the next inscription to be
mentioned, it is evident that the stone must have read
_Aryvodchikiyâto_ or _Aryyadehikiyâto gaṇâ[to]_. [Footnote:
_Wiener Zeitshe. f. d. Kunde der Morgenl._, Bd. II, S. 142 f.]
According to the _Kalpasûtra_ (_S.B.E_. vol. XXII, p. 291)
Ârya-Rohaṇa was the first pupil of Ârya Suhastin and founded the Uddeha
gaṇa. The latter split up into four śâkhâs and into six kulas. The
name of its fourth śâkhâ, Pûrṇapatrikâ, closely
resembles—especially in its consonantal elements—that of the inscription,
_Petaputrikâ_, and I do not hesitate in correcting the latter to
_Ponapatrikâ_ which would be the equivalent of Sansk.
Paurṇapatrikâ. Among the six kulas is the Parihâsaka, and considering
the other agreements, I believe it probable that the mutilated name read
as _Puridha.ka_ is a misreading of _Parihâka_, We may emend the
first two times and read as follows,—
L. 1. _Siddha|m| namo arahato Mahâvir|a|sya devanâśasya
| râjña Vâsudevasya saṁvatsare 90 + 8
varshamâse + divase 10 | 1 etasyâ_.
2. _purvv|â|y|e| Aryyo-D|e|h|i|kiyâto gaṇâ|to|
P|a|vi|hâsa|k|a|kula|to| P|ou|ap|a|trikât|o| śâkâto gaṇ|i|sya
Aryya-Devadatta|sya| na_... ...