365bet娱乐

Asoka breathed his last either in 234 or 232 B.C. B.C We are not concerned here with the controversy of a possible division of the Mauryan Empire and would confine our account to the Chronicle. According to Kalhana, Asoka was succeeded by his son Jalauka in Kashmir, who "has more appearance of reality than 2 3 Kunala". This prince, was able to crush the Mlechchhas or Greeks in the lifetime of his father. Jalauka is not heard of in any of the Buddhist works and we may offer a credible reason for this. According to the Chronicler, he had pronounced leanings towards Hinduism, 4 or more accurately, Saivism. As such, it is quite natural for the Buddhist accounts to be silent about him. Recently, Dr. Thapar has come forward with the suggestion that Jalauka and Kunala, who have also been identified with Suyasa and Dharma-Vivardhana, are one 1. Thapar, R., Asoka and the Decline of the Mauryas, pp. 50-51; Raychaudhuri, H.C., Political History of Ancient India, p. 348; Barua, H.B., Asoka and His Inscriptions, p. 13. However, if the Buddha's Parinirvana took place in 486 B.C., according to the Chinese 'dotted record', then Asoka's death may have occurred in 236 B.C. (cf. Ibid., p. 228). 2. Smith, V.A., Early History of India. p. 201. 3. Rajatarangini by Kalhana, I, 1, 107. 4. Ibid., I, 1, 112-13.

1 32 and the same person. She even goes to the length of suggesting that Kunala in the Brahmi script was transformed into Jalauka and this transformation was later on accepted in Kashmir without any doubts or questioning. We, however, are not inclined to accept this suggestion for several reasons. In the first place, Kunala is associated not with Kashmir but with Taxila 2 in Buddhist legends. Secondly, if we accept the suggestion, we shall have to accept that Kunala, even after his blindness, could lead victorious marches into the heart of India so far as Kanauj, as stated by the Chronicler in the Rajatarangini. Thirdly, Kunala is stated to have had Buddhistic leanings, and if the tradition is to be believed, he was cured of his blindness by a Buddhist monk. Jalauka, on the other hand, had nothing to do with Buddhism and was a staunch Saiva. Fourthly, scholars are not inclined to treat Kunala as the successor of Asoka on the basis of 3 1. Thapar, R., Asoka and the Decline of the Mauryas, p. 188 ff.: Kunala has also been identified with Tivala of the Queen's Edict by Dr. B.M. Barua (Asoka and His Inscriptions, p. 54,) and he calls him Kunala - Tivala or Kunala-Dharmavardhana. (Ibid., p. 56). 2. Vide Barua, B.M., Asoka and His Inscriptions, p. 56, where he cites both Divyavadana and Fa-hien as his authorities for this assertion. 3. Beal, Si-Yu-Ki., pp. 183-84.

- 33 1 Buddhist accounts; Raychaudhuri goes to the extent of likening his position to that of Dhritarashtra. We are also not prepared to accept her suggestion that Jalauka 2 was a Kushana king and not a son of Asoka. It is also strange that though she offers the above suggestion, yet she credits Jalauka as having expelled the Mlechchhas. According to her, "It would seem that the Mlechchhas i a i a referred to the Bactrain Greeks and other foreigners 3 on the North-west." It goes against the very grain of history to consider Kushanas anterior to Bactrain-Greeks as she suggests. Dr. Thapar's suggestion of the transformation of the characters of Brahmi script from Kunala to Jalauka is not only fantastic but also beyond reason, for it is well known that the regions as far as Khotan had Kharosthi and not Brahmi as their script. Jalauka, as we shall see presently, seems to have introduced the Mauryan principles of administration which were based on the Arthasastra, his 18 offices (Karmasthanas) obviously being 18 thirthas of the same. It has already been pointed out that Jalauka had suppressed the Mlechchhas during the later part of his 1. Raychaudhuri, H.C., Political History of Ancient India, p. 325. 2. Thapar, R., Asoka and the Decline of the Mauryas, p. 188 ff. 3. Ibid.

34 father's reign. It is noteworthy that the Chronicle mentions again Jalauka's victory over the Mlechchhas after his consecration. Verse 107 of the First Book of the Chronicle refers to the suppression of the revolt; the following verse (108) refers to his verse consecration and 116 of the same Book again refers to ren 1 his victory over them. We are, therefore, inclined to treat these incidents separately. As to the Mlechchhas who had rebelled earlier, it has been seen that the reference is overwhelmingly suggestive of the Bactrian Greeks. Opinions are, however, divided about the identification of these Mlechchhas whom he conquered later on. Some scholars have tried to identify them with the Turanians, whereas others have taken them as Bactrian Greeks. The Buddhist account refers to Kunala and his successors holding sway over Gandhara and regions around it with its capital at Takshasila³. As such, it is possible that, taking advantage of his physical incapabilities, the Bactrian Greeks tried to 2 1. Rajatarangini by Kalhana, I, 1, 107-16. 2. Dutta, R.C., A History of Ancient Indian Civilization, p. 54; Bamzai, P.N.K., History of Kashmir p. 65. 3. Vide Barua, B.M., Op. cit.; Raychaudhuri, however, has, on the authority of Taranatha, pointed out that Virasena "ruled in Gandhara and was, as Dr. Thomas suggests, probably the predecessor of Subhagasena of Polybius" (Political History of Ancient India, p. 350; cf. also Barua, Op.cit., p. 61).

35 expand themselves, since the mighty Asoka was no more. As for Turanians, it does not seem possible that they would have crossed into Kashmir without encountering the opposition of the Greek pockets and also of the later Mauryan forces before reaching the Valley. We would, therefore, suggest that Jalauka had to curb the activities of the Bactrian Greeks who were trying to take advantage of the unsettled conditions after the demise of Asoka. 1 It should also be borne in mind that several princes seem to have been active on the north-west and many of them are stated to have belonged to the Mauryan lineage. Dr. Bagchi has pointed out that one of Asoka's sons, Kustana by name, founded the city of Khotan in the extreme north-west of Kashmir. If the legend of Kustana has any value, obviously Jalauka and Kustana (brothers) were both active on the north-west. Jalauka, by all accounts, was a devout Saiva whereas Kustana was a staunch Buddhist. The career of Kustana in the Khotanese legends is reminiscent of that of Mahendra; the former seems to 1. Bapat, P.V., 2500 years of Buddhism, p. 66. 2. Ibid.

36 have confined his activities in the north whereas Mahendra, along with Sanghamitra, carried the torch of Buddhism to Ceylon in the south. No political importance, therefore, can be attached to Kustana. After having routed the Mlechchhas at a place called Ujjhatadimba, Jalauka is said to have extended his sway as far as Kanauj. 1 It appears that Jalauka took considerable pains to re-establish the fourfold Brahmanical order in Kashmir, which was quite in keeping with his religious zeal. This factor would also involve the natural assumption that the regions in proximity of the foreigners were more suited to the Buddhist idea of a casteless society. In this way, Jalauka could indirectly check the influx of foreigners much in the same way as renascent Hinduism did a few decades later in the time of the Sungas. Brahanism was re-established in the Valley and the social order came to be guided on its precepts. m Jalauka made radical changes in the administrative set-up of the Valley and replaced its bureaucracy of seven main traditional state-officials by eighteen 1. Ujjhatadimba has not been properly identified though (demb) suggests a marshy tract of land, the nearest approach to this name, as suggested by Stein, would be Ujyardemba. See Stein's footnote on Rajatarangini by Kalhana, I, i, i 16.

37 Karmasthanas which, however, faithfully correspond to be 18 tirthas of Kautilya. Jalauka married Isanadevi, a lady shose lineage 2 is, unfortunately, not disclosed and who is said to have established Matrichakras at the gates (dvaras) of Kashmir and also elsewhere in the Valley. The Matri chakra, equated with Devichakra by Kalhana, is obviously a Tantric practice to ward off evils. It seems that folk-cults, popular beliefs and superstitions were rife as ever even in those days all over the country. The king is also credited to have built two shrines, one of Jyeshtha-Rudra at Srinagar and the other at 3 Nandikshetra for Bhutesa. Kalhana emphasises his devotion to Saivism and his frequent visits to Sodara. 5 4 Also, he details the king's visit to Vijayesvara and the legend of the Sorceress. The following can be made out from his somewhat detailed account. It appears that the king had, for certain reasons, become displeased with the Buddhists and ordered demolition of their Viharas. Through the manifestation of that sorceress (Kritya) a change of heart was effected; no doubt the king (Jalauka) was reminded of his father's liberal 1. The eighteen tirthas and the bureaucratic setup is more on the lines of Mahabharata and the poet himself gives the clue by the analogy of Yudhishthira. Rajatarangini by Kalhana, I, 1, 120; cf. Pandit's Note. 2. Rajatarangini by Kalhana, I, 1, 122. 3. Ibid., I, 1, 124. 4. Ibid., I, 1, 123. 5. Ibid., I, 1, 131-147.

38 attitude towards all religions. Thereafter the king built a Vihara, Krityasrama Vihara, by name. This legend seems to have had some historical truth as Stein found at Kitshome the ruins of 'a rough quadrangular enclosure....... which contained a mound some 15' high, obviously 'the remains of a stupa. The king is also stated to have stablished numerous agraharas like 2 Varabala, etc.