Dhanapāla's Ṛishabhapañcāśikā (a collection of 50 verses on the 1st of the 24 Seers)
Dhanapāla's Ṛishabhapañcāśikā (a collection of 50 verses on the 1st of the 24 Seers) transl. Joh. Klatt ZdMG 33 (1879)
Ṛishabhapañcāśikā [32 of 50]
32. Like chess pieces on the chessboard of life, the beings, although carried away by the senses (secondary meaning: set in motion by the dice), when they see you (secondary meaning: the field), do not become partakers of captivity, killing and dying.[1]
[continuation … → Verse 33… https://www.om-arham.org/blog/view/18823/dhanapalas-%25E1%25B9%259Bishabhapancasika-a-collection-of-50-verses-on-the-1st-of-the-24-seers]
[1] Comm.: Samsāra eva caturaṅgatvāt phalakas, tatras tvayi deva tattva buddhyā dṛishṭe vadhādi-bhājino na (Cod. bhāṇinopi) bhavanti; api sabdasya bhinna-kramatvat, akshair indriyair hriyamāṇā api kṛishyamāṇā api. Upamām āha: yathā śārayo ‘kshaiḥ pāśakaiḥ śāri-krīḍā-phalake hriyamāṇāḥ saṃcāryamāṇāḥ bandha-vadha-mara-ṇāni kitava (Cod. kiṃtava)-pratītāni na bhajante pade dṛishṭe.
Therefore, two words have a double meaning:
1) akkha eye and dice (dice eye), as in Govardhana's Saptaśatī v. 677 pātitāksha thrown eye, i.e. thrown glance, and thrown die.
2) paīṃ, once Apabhraṅśa locative sing. of the pronoun of the 2nd person, the other time also Apabbraṅśa locative sing. of pada. Although the locative of pada should be pae or payammi by analogy with the locatives otherwise occurring in this text, there is no doubt that païṃ = pade. The meaning requires that païṃ has a second meaning besides tvayi. According to the commentary, the second meaning is pade, which in the Apabhraṅśa paï, see Hem. IV, 334, Lassen Inst. p. 462. It is not surprising that the author mixes in this Apabhraṅśa form, since he so often uses the Apabhraṅśa form paï or païṃ for tvayi.
As far as the aksha is concerned, one must remember that ancient Indian chess was played with dice, and the dice determined which piece had to move. If 5 was thrown, the king and a foot soldier (pawn) moved; if 4, the elephant (rook); if 3, the horse (knight); if 2, the boat (originally probably a chariot, now a bishop); svd Linde, Gesch. des Schachspiels, Bd. 1, first supplement.
But what is meant by the field on which the pieces may not be captured? Should we assume that such a field existed in ancient Indian chess, like the ἂσνλον in ancient Greek board games? see K. Himly, ZDMG xxvii, 127 not. Nothing else of this kind is known in India. But in Persian territory there is an analogy - Mr. Himly was kind enough to tell me this - in the Shaṭranj-i huṣūn, chess with castles, and in the "big chess" with 112 fields. In these types of chess the boards have protruding fields at 2 corners, called ḥiṣn castle. If a hard-pressed king manages to get into his castle, he is safe from all persecution and the game remains undecided, see Forbes hist, of chess p. 137 ff., illustration of such a chessboard p. 140.
Now I don't want to hide the fact that the verse alone (without the Indian commentary) does not directly indicate that the game of chess is meant. Since phalaka only means board in general and śāri also means the stone used in a game of dice, it could just mean a game of dice like the one we have in our brothel, where the following rules apply:
sa-sahāyasya śārasya parair nākramyate padam |
asahāyas tu śāreṇa parakīyeṇa badhyata it dyūta-vyavahāraḥ ||
"The field of the stone provided with a companion is not entered by the enemies, but he who has no companion is eliminated by the enemy stone, such is the rule of the game." (From Kaiyyata's Commentary on the Mahābhāshya, see Goldstücker, Sansk. dict. sub ayānaya.) The position " which cannot be invaded by the chessmen of the adversary " has the technical name ayānaya (in our puff game "a band"). Such an ayānaya position is perhaps meant here. Ṛishabha would then be the second stone, next to which the first is protected.
However, it seems to me that there is no reason to make one's own assumptions, since the commentary, which otherwise also shows understanding for its text and, for example, correctly translates the difficult form païṃ in this verse according to both its meanings, gives an explanation that cannot be refuted. I therefore stick to the commentary's explanation that the game of chess is meant here.
But then this is the earliest mention of chess in Indian literature. According to Von der Linde, Gesch. des Schachspiels I, 74, the earliest mention was in a commentary on Piṅgala's metrics, written by Halāyudha, "who apparently lived towards the end of the 10th century". But this indication of Halāyudha's age is only based on conjecture. On the other hand, for Dhanapāla, the author of our text, the year 973 AD is certain, see p. 445.
