Edited and
translated by Ramhari Timalsina
Created: 2019-05-10;
Last modified: 2020-05-06
For the metadata of the document, click here
[1r-part1]
1एकरुपैञाकागजनम्बर१।४३८९[Logo printed with vegetal motifs] [Seal of Candra Śamśera] ⟪1249 ⟫[Seal of Śrī Kumārī Aḍḍā]1तोक नम्वर⟪२४०७⟫⟪1श्री५सरकार[1r-part2]
[1r]
One rupee paper no. 1|4389
[Logo printed with vegetal motifs]
[Seal of Candra Śamśera]
249
[Seal of Śrī Kumārī Aḍḍā]
Written order no. 2407
The fivefold venerable Sarkāra
The threefold venerable great king
Venerable colonel Hemavīkraṃ Rāṇā
A petition [forwarded] from the Śrī Kumārī Aḍā
To the Guṭhī Bandovasta Aḍā under -1- (i.e., Śrī 5 Sarkāra). Regarding the [matter below], the pramāṅgī citing the marjī of -3- (i.e., Śrī Karṇaila Hemavīkraṃ Rāṇā), [issued] pursuant to the order of -2- (i. e., Śrī 3 Mahārāja) to send [this matter] to the Guṭhī Bandobasta Aḍā under -1- (i.e., Śrī 5 Sarkāra) to act in accordance with the law and the savālas, … [?]; act in accordance with the pramāṅgī.
Monday, the 2nd day of Bhādra in the [Vikrama] era year 1964 (1907 CE).
[Above this point, a petitioner should not write anything; the names of gods and masters should be written in the left- or right-hand margins.]
Glorious Viṣṇu 1
The late threefold glorious Māhārāja 2
Glorious Umāmaheśvara 3
Cyāsilīṃ Deval Kṛṣṇa 4
[A petition]
[Flower motif]
Uprānta. O caretaker of the poor, treasure of compassion, rich in justice and ocean of mercy! It has been learned that a sanada was issued to one of the ancestors of Lakṣmīlāla Jhā, who was my elder sister's husband, sanctioning him to perform worship [at] the temple of -1- (i.e., glorious Viṣṇu) located in front of the Sunaḍhokā (i.e., Golden Gate) of Patan Palace. The said Lakṣmīlāla had two elder brothers, but they too were childless, leaving only Lakṣmīlāla’s wife and Jīvalāla’s wives but no male heir to perform the worship. Recently after the death of Lakṣmīlāla, an accuser, Sahadatta Miśra, attached a summons notice and for 5/7 months consumed [the temple's income]. I could not bear it and made a direct petition to -2- (i.e., the late threefold glorious Māhārāja 1 ), and he fined Sahadatta 5 morus (i.e., mohararupaiyā̃s) and ordered me to perform the worship. In compliance with the order, I have been worshipping ever since [Vikrama era] year [19]55. The younger of two granddaughters of the sanada-holder, themselves sisters-in-law, without presenting any plaintiff- or defendant [-related] evidence, appealed a concluded inheritance case to the sarkāra, declaring herself [very poor] and as one who, having not enough food to eat, had to beg. Based upon the evidence [available], the court passed judgement, and told my elder sister to hand over a tādāta (i.e. a descriptive list) of her property. They detained her, and therefore [she] signed over her property, keeping back the share of property that she had not yet [re]paid to creditors. Among the items not [handed over] were the temple and [what] creditors [were owed]. Master! With regard to the temple, while the tasks of a priest are not performed by women, and indeed must not be performed by women, therefore, in compliance with the order, since the Vikrama era year [19]55, for some 9 to 11 years, I have enjoyed—have been doing service and performing—the tasks of a priest of -1- (i.e., glorious Viṣṇu), repairing the temple by myself when it falls into disrepair. It is not proper to count the temple as a portion of one’s property. Were you to kindly provide [me] a sanada with the necessary particulars in the name of the operator—of him who is to perform the tasks of a priest in accordance with the mandate and repair the temple when it falls into disrepair—I would continue the worship of -1- (i. e., glorious Viṣṇu) and hail sarkāra.
I came to know that a sanada has been issued to the Guṭhī Bandobasta Aḍḍā regarding six temples located in the vicinity of Patan Palace, in which temples there was no emolument for the priest, no expenses for the worship, and no guṭhī management, and [in which, therefore,] no [proper] worship was being done. [Accordingly,] for these temples, from the harvest of […], priests are to be assigned, and 10 morus for priests and 7 morus for worship expenses—altogether 17 morus—are to be provided from rent collected from individual shopkeepers who have set up shop on the plinths of the temples. Regarding the temples -3- (i.e., glorious Umāmaheśvara) and -4- (i.e., Cyāsilīṃ Deval Kṛṣṇa) given to me in accordance with the sanada, I approached the government office to claim the rent of the shops [placed on the plinths] of the temples. However, I was told: “You earlier added [those temples] to that temple [you first operated], so you are not eligible [for additional emoluments].” The accuser Sahadatta Miśra had been enjoying [the rent of the shops on the plinths of these temples]. Until the [Vikrama era] year 62, during which time the rent on the two mentioned temples could not be collected from the shops, I continued worship from the income of the temple mentioned in paragraph 1. However, now that rent on these shops is being collected, someone else has been performing the worship. I ought to be given the rent [on the temples] until [Vikrama era] year 62. I was performing the worship in compliance with the order; therefore, were you to kindly issue a pramāṅgī [containing] the order to give it to me, I would perform worship in the mentioned temples and hail sarkāra. Whatever [you] order [I shall obey].
Blessings [to you] as spoken in the Four Vedas from your servant-monk ever, Kṛṣṇacandra Jhā, resident of Cīkaṃmugala.
Wednesday, the 9th day of Śrāvaṇa in the [Vikrama] era year 1964 (1907 CE)
Signature of Kṛṣṇacandra Jhā.
There are a number of similarly named temples in Patan, which creates difficulties in identifying the temple referred in the document. However, a related document, K_0355_0060, specifies the Umāmaheśvara temple as a ḍhuṅgā devala (i.e., a temple made of stone) located near the Patan Palace. Still another document, K_0355_0063, specifies that the temple is one of six temples in the area, while the present document, too, notes that the temples are from the Patan Palace area. Therefore, it is obvious that the Kṛṣṇa temple mentioned in this document must be the one identified as LAL1240 in DANAM (see, https://nhdp-test.kjc.uni-heidelberg.de/resource/74ae042c-e6a8-11e9-b125-0242ac130002). Similarly, the Umāmaheśvara temple must be LAL1190 (see, https://nhdp-test.kjc.uni-heidelberg.de/report/34d6f310-e5e3-11e9-8bc4-0242ac130002) and the Hariśaṅkara temple must be LAL1280 (see, https://nhdp-test.kjc.uni-heidelberg.de/report/256339d6-e9d3-11e9-8bc4-0242ac130002).