Documenta Nepalica

Diplomatic edition

[1r]

1⟪252⟫

1श्री­५­सरकार­
2१­

1श्री­कृष्णजि­
2२­

1श्री­उमामहेश्वर­
2३­

1श्री­हरीसंकर­
2४­

[Seal of the Patan Potā Tahasila]

1पाटं­पोता­तहसिल­अडावाट­¯ ¯१¯तर्फ­
2गुठी­वन्दोवस्त­अडालाई­लेषेको­•
3उप्रान्त­•मैले­•पुजा­गरेको­•पाटं­दरवारका­•¯ ¯२¯३¯ ¯ को­पुजा­गरेको­•५८­सालदेषि­•६३­सालतक
4को­•पुजाषर्च­र­पुजाहारी­•षान्गी­•षापेर­दिनु­भंन्या­•पाटं­पोता­•अडाका­नाउमा­प्रमान्गी­पाउन्या­
5पुजाहारी­•सहदत्त­मिश्रले­•चढाय़ाको­•विन्तीपत्रमा­•य़स्को­उजुर­स्मेत­•वुझी­जाहेर­गर्नु­
6भंन्या­•प्रमान्गी­भय़ाको­छ­भनि­विन्तीपत्र­यस­अडामा­तोकी­पठाय़ाकोमा­•सो­पाटं­दरवार
7का­देवताको­पुजाषर्च­र­•पुजाहारी­•षान्गी­दिनु­भंन्या­•तेस­अडाका­नाउमा­•सनद­भय़ाकोमा­•निज­
8सहदत्त­•मिश्रले­¯ ¯ ¯को­पुजा­गरेको­हो­होइन­•कुन­देवताको­पुजा­गरेको­छ­देवता­स्मेत्­
9वुझी­सहिछाप­गरी­पठाईदिनु­भंन्या­तेस­अडावाट­लेषि­पठायाकालाई­•पाटं­चोक­वजार
10को­पसलको­वाल­५८­सालदेषि­लगत­कसी­•असुल­तहसिल­गरी­•¯ ¯२¯३¯ ¯को­५८­सालदेषि­
11दिनु­पर्न्या­रहेछ­भन्या­ऐन­सव़ालको­•रीत­पुर्‍याई­•दिनु­भंन्या­•येस­अडा•का­नाउमा­•सनद­भया
12को­र­•¯ ¯२¯३¯ ¯ का­नित्य­पुजा­गरी­षान­पाउ­भनि­•५४­सालमा­सर्कारमाथि­विन्ति­चढाय़ाको­वमो
13जिम­•मेरा­नाउमा­दरी­पुजाषर्च­र­पुजाहारी­षान्गी­षाईआयाको­ठियो­•यो­५८­सालको­
14षान्गी­•पुजाषर्च­स्मेत­•गुठी­वन्दोवस्त­अडामा­लिन­जादा­•अव­हाञाँवाट­दिने­होइन­पाटं­पो
15ता­अडामर्फत­दिने­भय़ो­•निज­अडामा­लीन­जानु­भनि­•गुठी­वन्दोवस्त­अडावाट­भने­व़मो
16जिम­•पाटं­पोता­•अडामा­•लिन­जादा­•दिनु­भंन्या­•सनद­नभै­•दिंन­•भनि­•५८­सालदेषि­
17पुजा­षर्च­दिये़न­•जाहावाट­दिने­हो­•दिलाईदिनु­भंन्या­•गुठी­वन्दोवस्तका­नाउमा­•प्रमान्[...]­
18गरी­पाउ­भनि­•निज­•पुजाहारी­सहदत्तले­•विन्तीपत्र­चढाय़ाकोमा­•येसले­पाउने­जे­
19हो­दिनु­भंन्या­•येस­अडामा­प्रमान्गी­स्मेत­•विन्तीपत्र­आय़ाको­हुनाले­निज­सहदत्तले­कुं­
20कुं­देवता­पुजा­गरिआयाको­छ­भनि­•तेस­गुठी­वन्दोवस्त­अडालाई­•लेषोट्­गरेकोमा­६१­
21साल•को­गुठी­गुठीको­कामदार­रकमी•हरूको­•षान्गीवाली­•दिनु­पर्ने­•भनि­साविक•वाट­
22षरीदार­•गुणराज­•पाध्याले­•लेषिदियाको­षान्गी•वालीको­•लागतमा­•¯ ¯४¯ का­पुजा
23री­सहदत्त­•मिश्रके­मोहरु­१०­भनि­लेषियाको­छ­¯ ¯३¯को­दिनु­पर्ने­•भंन्या­र­सो­
24सालदेषि­अघिको­दिनु­पर्ने­भंन्या­समेत­•लेषियाको­छैन­•भंन्या­तेस­अडावाट­पुर्जिका­
25पिठमा­जवाफ­लेखि­पठायाको­र­•तेस­अडामा­चुमाव़न­तिरेका­रसिद­•स्मेत­•येस­अडामा­
26दाषिला­गरेकोमा­वुझ्दा­•¯ ¯२¯४¯ ¯ का­पुजाहारी­•भंन्या­•लेषियाको­र­•निज­सहदत्तले­•¯ ¯४¯ ­
27को­•पुजा­गरि­नआयाको­•¯ ¯३¯का­देव़ालयमा­भन्ये­•निजले­•५४­साल•देषि­पुजा­गरि­
28षाइआय़ाको­•भंन्या­•विन्तीपत्रमा­लेषियाको­र­पाटन­सोठ­तोलको­•कमलाकान्त­दे
29उभाजुले­पनि­•अघि­पुर्षाका­पालादेषि­•पुजा­गरिआय़ाको­निज­सहदत्तले­पुजाषर्च­
30पाउनु­पर्ने­होइन­•भंन्या­विन्तीपत्र­चढायामा­•भयाका­प्रमान्गी­व़मोजिम­दुवै­जना
31को­•सरजमीन­वुझीरहेको­छ­•इति­सम्व़त्­•१९६४­साल­•श्रावण­•गते­२०­रोज­१­
32शुभम्­•¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯

Synopsis

This letter, relating to the priestly charge of Kṛṣṇa, Umāmaheśvara and Hariśaṅkara temples of Patan Palace, was sent from the PatanPotā Tahasila to the Guṭhī Bandobasta Aḍḍā on Sunday, the 20th day of Śrāvaṇa in the Vikrama era year 1964. In VS 1954 Sahadatta Miśra of Mahāpāla Ṭola in Patan petitioned the government to be entrusted with the priestly duties of the Kṛṣṇa and Umāmaheśvara temples at Patan Palace, and since then had been enjoying the emolument for performing daily worship in the temples. In VS 1958, when he went to the Aḍḍā to collect his emolument, he was told that the office was no longer responsible for providing it; instead he should go to Patan’s Potā Tahasila. There, however, he was told that the emolument could not be provided to him without a sanada from the authorities. Later he submitted a petition, probably to Prime Minister Candra Śamśera, claiming the worship expenses and emolument for his service at the temples from VS 1958 to 1963. An authorization (pramāṅgī) was issued to the Patan Potā Tahasila to provide him with what he was eligible for, and a document conveying the emolument (sanada) to the Guṭhī Bandobasta Aḍḍā. In a descriptive list prepared by kharadāraGuṇarāja Pādhyā in 1961, Miśra had been mentioned as the priest of the Hariśaṅkara temple. On the other hand, Kamalākānta Deubhāju of Soṭha Tola in Patan was also claiming to be the legitimate priest of the Umāmaheśvara temple. A preliminary inquiry made by the Patan Potā Tahasila disclosed that Miśra was not the legitimate priest of the Hariśaṅkara temple. At the end of the letter, the Patan Potā Tahasila reports to the Guṭhī Bandobasta Aḍḍā that the claims of both litigants were still being investigated.

Glossary