326 THE INDIAN ANTIQUARY. , [Aneusr, 1903.

ARYA SURA’S JATAKAMALA AND THE FRESCOES OF AJAa'rA.

BY HEINRICH LIIDERS, PILD.

Translated from the Nachrichten van der Kan-igl. Gesellschaft der Wiscenschaflen
zu Gdtu'ngen, Phil.-h[st. KL, 1902, pp. 758 to 762.

[The following is a translation of a paper read to the thtingcn Royal Society, 13th December,
1902. As will be seen it is based on a passage in No. 10 of the Miscellaneous publications of the
Archwological Survey of Western India (Bombay, 1881). There, at page 81, a lithograph of tracings
of inscriptions in Cave II. is given, and in the text Pandit Bhagwi‘mh‘il Indraji’s readings and
remarks on the inscriptions are interspersed with my account of their positions in relation to the
accompanying The epigraphs are often so faint that it was almost impossible to trace them
frescoes.
correctly, and mistakes were almost unavoidable: for example, in the case of No. 7 on the plate

(Dr. Liiders's last), the abrasion of the upper left arm of the m left only ch. In other cases
mislections seem to have been made in the transcripts, and in the following I shall not follow
Dr. Liiders in repeating these and then' correcting them by the facsimiles, but substitute at once the
readings of the latter in place of the transcriptions, along with his parallel quotations from the
Jfilakamdld. The paintings in question are in a small chamber outside and to the
and inscriptions
left of Gave 11., and unfortunately the former are as much destroyed as the latter, and Mr. Griffiths
made no copies of the frescoes in this apartment. — J. BURGESSJ

Tna twenty-eighth story of the Jfitakami‘ih’i, ——the Kslu‘iutijataka,1 -— is a version of the legend
of Kshantivfidin found in the Pirli collection of the Jzitakas (No. 313)2 and in the Mahfii'astu
(tom. III.
p. 357). The contents of the J fitaka, according to the representation of drya-Sfira, are
briefly as folloWs :—

The Bodhisattva As he was fond of making forbearance the

lived in a forest as a pious hermit.
the subject of his discourses, people called him Kshflntivddin —
the preacher of patience. Now
once on a hot summer day the king of the country with his harem were walking in that forest.
Becoming tired from the walk and the drinking freely of wine, he lay down to sleep. When the
women saw that their lord had fallen asleep, they wandered about at pleasure in the wood and came
to the hermitage of Ksha'intivadin, who at once employed the opportunity to give them an edifying
sermon on patience. Meanwhile the king awoke, sought for the women, and when he found them
as they were sitting in a circle round the hermit, listening to his discourse, he fell into a terrible rage.
The women seek to soothe him, but their pleading is in vain, and -— filled with fear -— they draw
back. Meanwhile Kshantivddin remains quite calm : he warns the king against too hasty action and
advises him to cultivate patience. In fierce wrath the king draws his sword and strikes off the
hermit’s right hand, but his patience is not disturbed by this ; cVen when the king backs off one limb
after another he has only a feeling of pity for the angry man. The merited punishment overtakes the
latter : as he is just about to leave the wood, the earth opens and swallows him. The people of the
country dreaded a like fate for themselves; but Kshi‘mtivfidin calmed their fears and, remaining true
to his principles till death, when dying be blessed his murderers.

This story was pictorially represented in the frescoes of a small chamber outside and to the left
of Cave II. at Ajanti‘i. In the Inscriptionsfrom the Cave-Temples of Western India, p. 81,3 Burgess
says that “on the back wall to the right of a door in
it,

man represented seated on stool

is
a

or his head
of

in plain indicatiVe Szidhu

is

dress Brahman destroyed.”

a
a

(himdrfisana)
;

[Kern’s edition in Lanman’s Harvard Oriental Series, pp. 181-192.-- J. B.]

-
3 ‘1 l

[The Jituka, ed. by E. B. Cowell, Vol. III. pp. 23-29. J. B.]

The paintings referred to here are not contained in the fine work by Griffiths —- The Paintings the
J.

of

-
Buddhist Cave-Templesof Ajunfa. have therefore been thrwghout confined to the publication by Burgess and
I

Bhagwiinlail Indraji. [See above. —- J. B.]

 AUGUST, 1903.] ARYA SURA’S JATAKAMALA AND FRESCOES OF AJANTA. 327

Under his seat, in letters of about the sixth century, is one word which Bhagwiinlsl Indraji read
“ a discourse on forbearance.” This is surprising seeing that in a foot
Ksbdntivtidili and translated
note‘ it is remarked that Kshiintiviidin was the name of Gautama Buddha in one of his previous
births. It is, of course, the name of the person represented above, as also for example in Cave
XVII., the figures are marked by accompanying inscriptions, ——as king 'Sibi or Indra.

Facing Kshantiviidin, according to Burgess, is represented another seated figure, and below is
a stripe of green colour on which an inscription is painted in two lines, so mutilated as to be untrans—
lateable. Sergius F. Oldenburg has already expressed the surmise6 that this inscription contains
verses from a version of the Jiitaka. I believe I can prove that the inscription is taken from
stanzas 4, 15 and 19 'of the KshsntijAtaka of the JetakamAla.

In the following I have printed the stanzas named, whilst immediately below I have placed the
text of the inscription from Bhagwi‘inlfil Indraji’s li'tlzographed tracings8 :—

nivasanti hi yatraiva santah sadgunabhfishanfihl

. . . . ha yatrava mints sadgu..blzushapd
tan cha tat tirthaiii tat tapovanam ll 4 ll
na......
maiigalyaiii manojiiam
tannin-.....ndjfza
manushim ani‘inabhrivarh tathendriyaihl
......
agarhitarh jfitim avfipya patnbhis
agahi. . nitim awful/a nuinusha . prigu..s tachendriyai
avaéyamrityur nna karoti yah éubharh pramfidabhiik pratyaham esha vurhchyatell 15"
ai-nkg/ami-ityu nnau'i karoti yall tub/mm pram[:i]dachd. . kyalzam ema daiimyate.
alumkriyante kusumair mahiruhiis tadidgunais toyavilambino ghaniihl
ériyanta kuaumair maltiruhtls ia.dd_quse .
. . ntinEo] ghand
sarinhsi mattahhramarais saroruhair gunair vviéeshi‘idhigatais tu dehinah ll 19 u
sardsi mantabhramales saroru . . . . .rvL-icht’lca . . . . 768/15 7117!“~

It hardly needs further proof that the two texts are identical, and in every case where the
inscription differs from the Jiitakamiilzi, it is evidently an incorrect copy! The contents of these
three stanzas clearly indicate what was the subject of the picture above. The first stanza praises
theplace in the wood where Kshzintivfidin settled; the other two verses are taken from the
had
discourse which he delivered to the king's wires. Thus the picture evidently represented this sermon,
and the figure sitting opposite to the hermit, of which Burgess speaks, was probably one of the royal
women. ‘

Under this picture there was another which Burgess describes thus: —- “Below this is a
Brahman or Piléupata, seated on a stool in plain dress and with a rudrdksha rosary about his neck.
Opposite him is another male figure, and between them a woman is seated, with her hands joined
towards the former, whilst she is speaking to the second.” Under these figures again is an
inscription, which proves to be a rendering of bloke 56 of the Kshantijataka. With the
correct text it runs thus : —

gfitrachchhedepy akshatakshfintidhiraih chittaiii tasya prekshamfinasya sridhohl

ndlrachchhedz'ty akshatakshtintz'cln'raih chit[t]a tasya preksha . . . . . . -
niisid duhkham pritiyogfin rigiparh tu bhriishtaiii dharmdd \‘ikshya sania‘ipam fipa| 56 ll
. . . , . . . yritz'saiimyrina maha hin'i nasa . . . . . mitra ’Illiil'lvatlh (1m

‘ [This footnote was added by me. —- J.

13.]
5 .Tour.Amer. Or. Soc. Vol. XVIII. p. 195.—
[See below.]
9 [I hava, as stated above, changed the transcribed readings for those of the facsimiles, printing the more
doubtful syllables in roman type. — J. B.]
" [The original is so faded and indistinct that a correct copy is
impossible. The corrections male from the
facsimile are indicated by roman letters. I omit some remarks by Dr. Liiders on the discrepancies here. —J. B.]
 328 THE INDIAN ANTIQUARY. [AUGUST, 1903.

It is scarcely possible without an examination of the fresco itself, to dctermine what part of the
story the picture represented was, to which these verses belong. They glorify rest of spirit which
did not forsake the Kshantivadin, even under the fearful tortures inflicted by the king, and from this
it might be inferred that the scene of the mutilation was represented. Burgess’ description of the
people, in whom we hare no difficulty in recognising Kshantivadin, the king, and one of the wives
praying for mercy on the ascetic, — seems, on the other hand, to indicate that the scene preceding
the actual mutilation was depicted.

The Kshfintijataka is not the only story from the Jiitakamahi which has served the Ajantzi
artists as a subject. On the right side wall of the same chamber, near the front corner, there is,
according to Burgess,‘i the figure of a king seated on a throne, which bears an inscription that Bhag
wfinhil Indraji doubtfully read as Chaitrivalorkirdjd, and explained as ‘King Ghaitra of Valorka.’
The correct reading, however, is certainly Mai'tribalo . . . rdjd,” and the picture represents
the Bodhisattva in his former birth as Maitribala. The history of this king forms the subject of
the eighth story of the Ji‘itakamzila.lo Maitri‘ibala is there held up as a pattern of human kindness;
he goes so far in his goodness that once he satisfied with his own flesh and blood five Yakshas who
asked him for food.

The correctness of my explanation is proved by the inscription which, according to Burgess, is

found above the representation of the king. It is much mutilated, but suflicient is left to identify
it undoubtedly with sloka 44 of the Maitribalajataka. The stanza, and Bhagwi‘inlal Indraji's
‘
tracing of the text run thus : —-

na
.............'nd
hriyamrigévakiisam

prasche
Q
manas
tu

tasya
diinaprityfl punah

chchhedaduhkham
punah |

vigiihitum ll
na prasehe mamas vasyd traivadull/ckd vigdln'tum

I-tsing tells us how widespread and popular was the Jatakamiilii in India at the end of the
seventh century. The inscriptions at Ajanta, in characters that belong to about the sixth century,
prove that the work held as high a reputation a hundred years earlier.

Other J'Makas in the Ajanta Frescoes.11

Dr. Sergius F. Oldenburg in 1895 published a paper on the representations of the a‘itakas on J
Buddhist monuments. His results are of the utmost value, and the communication was translated
from the Russian in the Journal of the American Oriental Society (Vol. XVIII. pp. 183 if), 1897.
In this Dr. Oldenburg expressed the difficulty of satisfactory identification of the scenes in the
almost complete absence of reproductions (z'b. pp. 195, 196). Mr. Grifliths’ work, The Paintings in
the Buddhist Cases of Ajagrtli (1896), had not then appeared. But even this great work does not
rcmoVe all impediments; for, of the 320 pieces, large and small, copied between 1872 and 1885, half
were destroyed by fire at South Kcnsington Museum soon after they were hung up, and the 159

are decorative details -

plates in Mr. Griffiths’ work represent about eighty-five
contained in the second volume.
of his canvases, and of thesa fully 40 per cent.
To study the subjects of the very interest
ing paintings in the Ajanta Cavas, a more complete series of the scenes, drawn in outline and litho
graphed, should be in the hands of scholars. Meanwhile the meagre information available has been
carefully studied; and Dr. S. F. Oldenburg, solely on the the basis of the descriptions in Notes on

9 Loc. cit. p. 82.

9 The rki standing between the two words, looks more like ki in the facsimile. It cannot, of course, be right,
but I cannot propose a satisfactory correction.
1° [Kern's ed. pp. 41-50. — J. B.]
11 [I add the following as connected with Dr. Liidcrs’s paper, and of interest to such as may not have seen
_
Dr. Oldenburg’s paper. J. 3,]
 AUGUST, 1903.] THE LEGEND OF MIRA BAI THE RAJ PUT POETESS. 329

the Bauddha Rock-Temples of Ajaprd, their paintings and sculptures, 8'0"“ has made the following
identifications: —
1. Gave IL, Nos. viii, ix, page 32 below No. 5) 53413 Mahii-Harhsa jfitaka.
2. No. xxvii, p. 38
,, ,__ 482 Burn.
3. Gave IX., No. i, p. 47 (cf. below No. 11) ... 499 Sivi.“
4. Cava X., p. 50 ... 514 Chaddanta.14, 16
5. Cave XVII., No. xix, pp. 65-66 (of. above No. 1) 534 Maln’i-harhsa.
6. Cave XVII., Nos. xxii-xxiv, pp. 66-67 W. 539 Maha-vessantara (7).
7- or NO. xxv, p. 67 516 Maha~kapi.
8. ,, Nos. xxxvi-xxxvii, p. 70 455 Muti-posaka.
9. ,, N0. xxxviii, p, 71 ... ... W. 532 Sa’ima (7),
10. 9) N0. xxxix, p. 71... ... 278 Mahisa.
11. ,, No. liv', pp. 75-76 (cf. above 3) .. 499 Sivi.m
l2. Cave II. Outside chamber to the left, pp. 81-82 313 Khanti-vfidi.

THE LEGEND or mini. BM THE RAJPUT POETESS.

BY M. MACAU LIFFE .

Mum Batan Singh Bathaur of moi-eta, a town between Bikanér and

Bar was daughter of
Jodhpur in Rajpfitfina. She was born about1504 A. D. She appears to have inherited her religious
proclivities from her mother. When Mira IBM was three or four years of age, the bridal proces
sion of a youth of position passed by the palace. All the ladies of the court, except Mirii Bei's
mother, went to the upper apartments to view the procession. She took the opportunity of their
absence to go to pray to an image of Krishna, called Girdhar Lal, which was set up in her
private apartment.

Mira Biii laid aside her playthings to follow her mother, and said to her, “ who is my bride
groom?" Her mother smiled, took her in her arms, and, pointing to Girdhar Lil, said, “ there is
your bridegroom.” Upon this Mini Bii'i instantly accepted him, and veiled her face according to the
Oriental practice, which requires a wife to veil her face even from her newly married husband. She
became so enamoured of Girdhar Lal that she could not pass an instant without seeing him. Her
love for him is compared to that of the milkmaids, Krishna’s playfellows, of Bindraban. She
indulged her passion without fear or shame, and without any regard to the traditions of her family on
the subject of the retirement of women from the public gaze.

While her affections were thus engaged, she was betrothed to Kanwar BhOjraJ, son of Rena
saega of newer. The subsequent marriage in 1516 A. D., as might well have been expected,
proved unhappy. Bhojraj went to meme in great state with a large retinue, but when the marriage
ceremony was being performed and the time came for the bride to circumambulate the pavilion
set up for the ceremony, Mira Bid walked around the idol of Girdhar Lil, and took no notice of the
bridegroom. When the time for her departure with her husband arrived, her parents wished to send
her off with suitable marriage presents, but she was miserable at leaving Girdhar L51. She grew
sad and restless, and wept to such an extent that she became insensible. When she regained

1’ Archwoloyical Survey of Western India, No. 9, Bombay, 1879.

1’ These numerals refer to the current numbers of the Janka-tales in Fausbiill's edition or to those of
Westergaard’s Catalogue .
“ Pointed out by Burgess.
15See Burgess, Report on the Buddhist Cave-Temples, 4'0. Arch. Sur. West. India, Vol. IV. pp. 45-46. Cf, L.
Fear, Le Chaddauta-jataka, Jour. Av. IX Ser. tom. V.(1895), pp. 81-35 and 189-223. [See also Cunningham,
Bharhut Stripe, pl. xxvi, fig. 6.]