An Imperial History Of India/Provincial History of the Himalayas
By K.P. Jayaswal - the Sanskrit Text, Revised by Rahul Sankrityayana
Publisher - Motilal Banarasi Dass, The Punjab Sanskrit Book Depot, Sasdmrha, Lahore| Wikified by Laxman Burdak |
PROVINCIAL HISTORY
Provincial History of the Himalayas12. Nepal The Lichcbhavi Dynasty, [and] the Western Nepal [Thakuri] Dynasty
[7th Century A.D.]
"In the North, in that time (tadā kāle), in the valley of the Himadri in the famous Province of Nepal (Nepala-Mandale) there will be king
- (1) Manavendra [Manavadeva, T.], in the dynasty of the Lichchhavis (549-50)". He "died" having kept the kingdom thiefless for 80 years (551-52). These several kings of the Himalayas (T.; S. 'of the Mlechchhas') will be worshippers of the Buddha:
- (2) Vrisha (वृष) (T.; Vavisha, in S., a wrong reading) also (called) su-Vrisha,
- (3) Bhāvasu (भावसु) also (called) Subhasu (Bhuma-subhuma in T.)
- (4) Bhakrama (भाक्रम) (Parākram-a, T.) also called (kirtyate] Padākrama and Kamala (555-56).
12 (a). Dynasty of the West
'(There will be the kings) of the West'.
- (1) Bhāgupta Vatsaka 'like the sun' (T., text lost in S.) ;
- (2-3) Udaya and Jishṇu (T.; S. Jinhuna) wUl be in the end (556-557).
12 (b) . Fall of Nepal Kingdom [c. 675 A.D. 700 A.D.]
Then there will be various kings amongst the Mlechchhas (557). They will be with fallen dignity (bhrashta-maryada) , serving aliens and eaten of the subjects (prt-
An Imperial History Of India:End of page 20
Jopabhojina, T.; S. corrupt). The adhipati kingship of Nepal will be destroyed by weapons; the vidyas will be lost; kings will be lost, they will become servants of the Mlechchha (foreign) usurper (mlechchha-taskara-sevinah) (558).
We have to take 'in that time' , bhavishyati tada kale (549) as meaning 'then in time' or 'in that time' i.e., in the yugadhame, the lowest age of this chronicle. For the Nepal Lichchhavi dynasty has to be dated from the time of Samudra Gupta (c. 350 A.D.) . (1) Manavendra is unidentified. It is not Manadeva for he flourished in 705 A.D. while the kings related here next are much earlier in the dynasty. (2) Vrisha (T.; S., vavisha, a misreading) is the inscriptional Vrisha deva of the Lichchhavi dynasty who lived about 630 A.D. (Fleet, GL, 189). In the Nepal inscriptions giving the genealogy, names before Vrisha deva have been omitted. Manavendra was probably one of them. ( 3 ) Bhavasu Subhasu corresponds with Sahkaradeva (about 655 A.D.) of the inscription, who was son of Vrishadeva. (4) Bhakrama (or Parakrama, T.) Padakrama should be the next king Dharmadeva of the inscription on account of the next kings being identified with the kings of the Thakuri dynasty.
The Lichchhavi dynasty and the Thakuri dynasty ruled together from the same place. The Thakuris ruled over the W e s t e r n Province (GL, p. 180). The Western kings (Paschima) as named in the AMMK are: (l)Bhagupta, i.e., Amsuvarman the Vatsaka, who was the founder of the family. The next two, (2) Udaya and (3) Jishnu, who are called 'the last' ones coming after Amsuvarman, are the inscriptional Udayadeva coming last (about 675 A.D.) , while Jishnugupta flourished just before him in 653 A.D. Hence we may construct a contemporary table thus:
| Lichchhavi Dynasty | Lichchhavi Dynasty | Western Thakuri Dynasty | Western Thakuri Dynasty |
|---|---|---|---|
| AMMK | Inscriptions | AMMK | Inscriptions |
| Manavendra | 12. (missing). | Bhagupta | Amsuvarman (c.635-650 A.D.) |
| Vrisha | 13. Vrishadeva (C. 630 A.D.) | Jishnu | Jishnugupta,(c.653-A.D.) |
| Bhavasu | 14. Sahkaradeva (C. 650) | Udaya | Udayadeva, (C. 675 A.D.) |
| Bhakrama | 15. Dharmadeva, son of 14. |
An Imperial History Of India:End of page 21
The Buddhist faith of the Nepal Lichchhavis is attested by Yuan Chwang, and of the family of Amsuvarman by the conversion of the great Tibetan emperor S t r o n g-t s a n-G a m p o through his chief queen who was Amsuvarman's daughter.
Fall of Nepal Kingdom
Our text affords new and correct information, which we do not get from the Nepal annals, when it says that Udaya and Jishnu were the last kings of the Nepal kingdom and that after them rulers in Nepal became dependent on Mlechchha usurpers, and kingship was lost. This refers to the absorption of Nepal into Tibet. S t r o n g-t s a n-Gampo married Amsuvarman's daughter before he compelled the Chinese emperor to give his daughter to him as the second consort in or about 641 A.D. Under this Tibetan emperor before his death (698 A.D.) Nepal evidently totally passed under Tibet's domination, until 703 A.D. when Nepal rose to shake off the foreign domination and killed the Tibetan king in war (Parkar). The AMMK is thus recording the political condition of Nepal before 703 A.D. and after 675 A.D.
13. Tibet ["China"] [629 A.D. 698 A.D.]
The next Himalayan state dealt with is 'China', i.e., Tibet as distinguished from Maha-China (=China). The text itself makes this distinction, e.g., in Chapter X (p. 88) it enumerates the kshetras of the uttarapatha mountains in this order:
- Dashabalaih kathitah kshetrāh uttarāpathaparvatāh.
- Kasmire, Chinadeśe cha Nepāle, Kāviśe tathā.
Kāviśa here is Kapisa.
Mahā-Chīna it takes next (Maha-Chine tu vai siddhi (h) siddhik- shetrāṇy aśeshatah).
"There are related several kings and several of those who will be fond of Brahmins in China and around (559). King Hiranyagarbha, however, will be one possessed of a large army and great power, an extensive political system, and a number of (political) relatives. The Mlechchhas will bow before him; he (will be) the conqueror; and a follower of the word of the Buddha" (560-61).
He as a boy had mastered the Mahavira formula. He, the great king, died at
An Imperial History Of India:End of page 22
the age of 100 (566). He obtained Buddhahood. In that country Manjughosha is a boy (568).
The only king to whom this description applies is the king Strong- t s a n-G a m p o of Tibet. (See the last comments above) . He came to the throne as a boy (629 A.D.) and became the most powerful monarch in Central Asia in the latter half of the seventh century. He introduced Buddhism into Tibet, and had the Tibetan script devised by Hindus. He was deified by the Buddhist Church. He had a long reign. (d. 698 A.D.) , a remarkable victorious career, and extended dominions.
14. Balkh-to-Kashmir
Turushka king =[Kanishka]
Turshka king in North India: "Then will rise in the North [uttarapatha] the Turushka king, of great army and great vigour. Up to the gate of Kashmir, Bashkala, Udyana (T.; S. -Udaya) with Kāviśa (570), for 700 yojanas he rules. 77,000 and 2,00,000 (revenue ?) will be his (571). 86,000 stupas he will make. 'He established in the country the Prajñāpāramitā the mother of the Buddhas and the foremost doctrine of Mahayana (Buddhism)' (574-75).
Mahā-Turushka: After him Maha-Turushka, the 'Maheśāksha', the mahāyaksha, having a large army will be king, having been recognized by his relatives (sammato bandhuvarganam raja so pi bbavishyati) . He will make 8,000 monasteries (576-579).
The description of the Turushka king is undoubtedly the description of Kanishka. The centre of his kingdom according to our text was Bashkala which was connected with Udyana-cum-Kapisa and Kashmir. The tract thus indicated by the word Bashkala is Balkh with a transposition in the second syllable lkh. According to the text, Turushka (Kanishka) was primarily a king of Afghanistan (Kavisa), Suwāt, and Kashmir on this side of the Himadri (in its wider significance) , and up to Balkh which was considered as one of the northern provinces of Bharatavarsha (I.A., 1933, p. 130).
Turushka is credited with having established in the North the Prajñāpāramitā. It should be noted that he is not credited with the holding of any Buddhist Council. Nor is Kanishka described under any other name in our history.
All Indian authorities our text, Alberuni's sources, Kalhana, etc. unanimously call Kanishka a Turushka, probably on account of his
An Imperial History Of India:End of page 23
original country being Central Asia. The Text calls the next king a mahayaksha (see below). His immediate successor is named Maha-Turushka, whose succession was approved by his relatives. Does this denote a friction between Vaseshka and Huvishka? The extensive Buddhist foundations would identify the 'Maha-Tu- rushka' with Huvishka.
The unity of the family with the Yaksha family (s-11) seems to be indicated by the Maha-Turushka being called a mahayaksha.