Old Javanese vocabulary remains understudied as many Old Javanese texts, primarily stone and copperplate inscriptions, have not been published or their contents were not considered in Petrus Josephus Zoetmulder’s Old-Javanese-English Dictionary (1982). Numerous Old Javanese titles also need closer examination as there is no scholarly convention about their interpretation. The paper investigates the term ācārya in Old Javanese inscriptions in its various contexts through centuries. There are hundreds or even thousands Old Javanese inscriptions while printed and online catalogues contain few hundreds texts. There are 35 Old Javanese, two Sanskrit and two Old Malay inscriptions dated from the ninth to the fifteenth centuries CE which contain the term ācārya. The paper gives relevant quotes in Old Javanese, Sanskrit and Old Malay and examines ways of interpreting them. The term ācārya was not a personal name in Old Javanese epigraphy. The title ḍaṅ ācāryya, or “revered teacher, master”, was its usual form in Old Javanese inscriptions but their Sanskrit parts as well as pure Sanskrit and Old Malay inscriptions give the word without particles, like Javanese ḍaṅ. Since the early tenth century onwards, especially in East Java kingdoms, ḍaṅ ācāryya often were officials samgat/saṁ pamgət. They served as judges and teachers of religious law. The date of the Air Asih and Parablyan inscriptions should be corrected to the 1190s Śaka/1268–1278 CE because of their similarities with the Mula Malurung and Sarvadharms inscriptions. Saṁ pamgət of Tirvan, Kaṇḍamuhi and Maṅhuri probably formed a triad and acted together in the thirteenth century.

Скачать PDF Скачать JATS

Introduction

Old Javanese inscriptions still hold many data on early and medieval history of Java despite a long history of their studies since Abraham Benjamin Cohen Stuart published their first catalogue [Cohen Stuart, 1875]. The inscriptions in Old Javanese, Sanskrit, Old Malay and Old Sundanese are the main sources for reconstructing of political history of the island since the middle first millennium CE till the early modern times. Despite Jan Gonda’s Sanskrit in Indonesia [Gonda, 1952], Petrus Josephus Zoetmulder’s Old Javanese-English Dictionary [Zoetmulder, 1982], Louis-Charles Damais’ Répertoire onomastique de l'épigraphie javanaise (jusqu'à Pu Siṇḍok Śrī Īśānawikrama Dharmmotuṅgadewa) there are still many gaps in scholarly knowledge of Old Javanese vocabulary, its loanwords, titles and place-names. Nowadays online catalogues give new clues to investigate inscriptions previously unpublished or accessible in printed catalogues [Cohen Stuart, 1875; Brandes, 1913; Naerssen, 1941; 1977; Casparis, 1950; 1956; Damais, 1951; 1952; 1955; Sarkar, 1971–1972; Nakada, 1982; Boechari, 1985–1986; 2012]. Online catalogues are still in progress but contain many new inscriptions and translations. The first catalogue is the Inventaris Daring Epigrafi Nusantara Kuno, or IDENK, or Online Inventory of Ancient Nusantara Epigraphy¹ which aims at making a comprehensive catalogue and inventory of all inscriptions found in Insular Southeast Asia. The second is the project Domestication of ‘Hindu’ Asceticism and the Religious Making of South and Southeast Asia, or DHARMA, which includes a section on the Nusantara, or maritime Southeast Asia, inscriptions.²

My paper aims to examine the term ācārya which means “knowing (teaching) the ācāra or rules, spiritual guide (esp. who invests the student with the sacrificial thread), teacher” [Zoetmulder, 1982, p. 9] in Old Javanese inscriptions. The term is a Sanskrit loan. One may hypothesize that the term ācārya also may be a name or a title. Arlo Griffiths once translated it as ‘Professor’ in his translation³ of the Wanua Tengah III inscription of 908 CE which contains an outline of Old Javanese political history and a history of a sīma, or an immunity or free-hold wet-rice field (savaḥ) of a Buddhist monastery at Pikatan (bihāra i pikatan) [Boechari, 2012, pp. 473–528]. The duplication of the sonant y in the Sanskrit loanwords is a commonplace in Southeast Asian epigraphy so there are many examples of ācāryya instead of a literary ācārya. In my paper, I follow Andrea Acri’s and Griffiths’ Romanization of Indic scripts of early and medieval Nusantara [Acri & Griffiths, 2014].

My paper brings together contexts of the term ācārya in the Nusantara epigraphy, i.e. the inscriptions in Old Javanese, Old Malay and Sanskrit while I am sure that there are probably other inscriptions mentioning the term which are still unpublished. While Antoinette Barrett Jones supposed the existence of a word Ḍaṅācārya/Dangācārya [Barrett Jones, 1984, p. 194] (see the discussion below), one should remember that ḍaṅ is a separate word as it occurs in several phrases: ḍaṅ puhavaṁ, ḍaṅ hyaṅ, ḍaṅ karayān and ḍaṅ ācārya [Damais, 1970, p. 930]. So, one may search for independent usage of the term ācārya in Old Javanese inscriptions but the phrase ḍaṅ ācārya should be treated as the two words.

The term ācārya in ninth and early tenth centuries’ inscriptions in Central and East Java

Perhaps, the earliest reference to the term ācārya in Javanese epigraphy occurs in the Old Malay Sang Hyang Wintang/Gandasuli inscription of 832 CE (A.9) which says: tathāpi āḍa ācāryya ṇḍa dhalawa nama ṇḍa that Johannes Gijsbertus De Casparis translates as “Besides, there is the Venerable Teacher called Dhalawa, a perfect master builder” [Casparis, 1950, p. 61, 65; Damais, 1970, p. 362, 499].⁴ Inscriptions in Old Javanese mentioning the term ācārya appeared seemingly in the second half of the ninth century CE. They usually give it in the phrase ḍaṅ ācāryya.

A damaged Ra Kidan I inscription (750–800 Śaka/838–878 CE, l.7) mentions a certain (p)[i]tā[maha] bhagavanta ḍaṅ (ā)[cārya] whose name is illegible [Brandes, 1913, p. 229, no. XCIX; Damais, 1970, p. 47, no. 69].⁵ While the Sanskrit loanword pitāmaha means “paternal grandfather” in Old Javanese [Zoetmulder, 1982, p. 1371], Griffiths supposes it may be a technical term meaning “a venerable one” [Griffiths, 2012, p. 482–483, n. 18]. It occurs in several inscriptions from the Dieng plateau and in the Wungkud inscription (pitāma[ha i]| vaṃkud, l.5–6) [Griffiths, 2012, p. 482].

The Kurungan/Randusari II inscription of 807 Śaka/885 CE (1v1, 10) says the ḍaṅ ācāryya Munīndra bought a wet-rice field (savaḥ) named Kuruṅan at Parhyaṅan, in the area (vatak) of Vuru Tuṅgal (tatkāla ḍaṅ ācāryya munīndra mamli savah karamān i parhyaṅan vatak vuru tuṅgal) [Damais, 1970, p. 151, 222; 507, 711, 858].⁶ The lv9 of the inscription mentions the wet-rice of the ḍaṅ ācāryya Munīndra (nikāṁ savah śīma ḍaṅ ācāryya munīndra) [Damais, 1970, p. 521, 858]. There was a certain daṅ ācārya Gandhara from the village of Galuh (1v12: ḍaṅ ācāryya gandhara saṅke vanva galuḥ) who was a witness of the transaction [Damais, 1970, p. 231, 571, 842, 891]. Griffiths renders the word ḍaṅ ācāryya as ‘master’ whereas Stutterheim gives ‘Esteemed Teacher’ (Eerwaarde Leeraar) [Stutterheim, 1940, p. 29–32; Machi Suhadi & Sukarto, 1986, p. 29–33]. Jan Wisseman Christie leaves the term ācāryya untranslated [Wisseman Christie, 2009, p. 178–179].

The Charter of Rukam of 829 Śaka/907 CE ends as follows: daṅ ācaryya uttamāṅga anak banua i mataram·iṁ parhyaṅan·haji: “the revered teacher Uttamāṅga—a commoner of Mataram in the sanctuary of the king”.⁷ The word Mataram in the text refers to a village (banua) and not the kingdom of Early Mataram.

The Wanua Tengah III inscription of 908 CE (1v9) says that in 751 Śaka/829 CE a revered teacher Devendra was a witness of a restoration of a freehold at Wanua Tengah for the monastery at Pikatan by the king Garung (vruḥ ḍaṅ ācāryya devendra) [Boechari, 2012, p. 473–528].⁸ Griffiths offers a literal translation: “Daṅ Ācārya Devendra had knowledge (of the matter)”.⁹ The same inscription (1v11) says: ḍaṅ ācāryya paṅajyan i pikatan·bhadracandra that Griffiths reads as “Ḍaṅ Ācārya for scriptural study at Pikatan, Bhadracandra”. But there is another option: “revered teacher who teaches scriptures at Pikatan, Bhadracandra”. It is worthy of note that ācārya are also mentioned in the Sanskrit verses of the Wanua Tengah III inscription (1v12–13). II. Ācāryye candrābhadrākhye,| bhadrasūryye ca partatau,| Ā{cā}ryye vihāra-pāle ⟨1v13⟩ ca,| mandane pañcavārake || III. tathāpi paramācāryye,| devendre vandya-vandite,| dhyānādi-guṇa-sampūrṇe,| subhage rāja-satkr̥te ||. Griffiths reads “with the one named Candrabhadra as Professor, with Bhadrasūrya as Partati (?), with Ārya as owner of the monastery and with Mandana as Pañcavāra; III. but with Devendra, praised by the praiseworthy, perfect in virtues such as meditation, blessed, honored by the king, as Rector”. Thus, Devendra was mentioned twice and was Rector (paramācārya, lit. “chief, highest teacher”). The Sanskrit part omits Old Javanese article ḍaṅ which seems a necessary attribute in Old Javanese texts. The Wanua Tengah inscription also names several ḍaṅ ācārya whom Griffiths calls “master (of recitation)”: Sudānta, Bhadrasena, Tatha, Padmasena, Paṇḍara; they all received a few māṣa of silver as a gift for another establishment of a freehold at Wanua Tengah III.

The Watu Ridang inscription (832 Śaka, 910-03-22, 1v13–14) was written by a revered teacher [ḍaṁ ā]cāryya Gavaiya of Kuñidīda (likhita pātra [ḍaṁ ā]cāryya gavaiya iṁ kuñi dīda).¹⁰ The undated Central Javanese Jamwi/Sinaguha inscription of the early tenth century¹¹ mentions ḍaṅ ācāryya manobhava anak vanua i samalagi vatak hasam (l. 6): “a revered teacher Manobhava, a commoner of Samalagi in the area of Hasam”.¹²

The Tulang Er/Air III inscription of 198 Sañjaya Era (914-12-30, 1r12) tells about gifts to the official-samgat of Baleṅ named ḍāṅ ācārya Praṇidhānasupāta—“revered teacher Praṇidhānasupāta” [Santosa, 1994, p. 190]—who seemingly was a Buddhist due to his name, as Tyassanti Kusumo Dewanti and Griffiths suppose.¹³

The Old Javanese-Sanskrit Sugih Manek Charter (837 Śaka, 915-09-13, B18–19) mentions a group of ācāryya—kā|cāryyan—among the beneficiaries of the savah rice-fields who obtain “12 māṣa of tapak”, i.e. a kind of tax from a land unit in gold [Brandes, 1913, p. 40, No. XXX –wāryyān; Sarkar, 1972, p. 148, idem].¹⁴

The Wintang Mas II inscription (841 Śaka, 919-10-12) calls two officials/samgat·of Maṅulihi: ḍaṅ ācāryya Bhūtī and ḍaṅ ācāryya Bāmadeva [Cohen Stuart, 1875, p. 30–31, item XX; Sarkar, 1972, p. 193, 194; Damais, 1970, p. 346, 640, 685]; all the editors leave the words ḍaṅ ācāryya untranslated.¹⁵ The Wintang Mas II describes a royal offering of silver from the village of Maṅulihi to a monastery (dharma) at Vintaṅ Mas. Ḍaṅ ācāryya may mean “revered teacher” in that context.

A damaged and undated Dieng IV stone inscription (D. 15 of the National Museum, l.12–13) says tatkāla daṅ ācāryya | … ḍapunta Śivanetra “At that time daṅ ācāryya… ḍapunta Śivanetra” [Sarkar, 1972, p. 264; Brandes, 1913, p. 228, No. XCVII; Damais, 1970, p. 503]. The term ḍapunta may mean ‘lord, master, a distinguished person’ and occurs in the enigmatic Old Malay Sojometro inscription in the phrase ḍapunta selendra which is often rendered as ḍapunta Śailendra [Boechari, 1966, p. 243–246] but this identification seems problematic [Zakharov, 2012, p. 24–25].
The Wurudu Kidul inscription of 844 Śaka/922 CE (E.63 of the National Museum; 1v16, 19) mentions two ḍaṅ ācāryya: makalaṅkaṁ samgat·dhusan ḍaṅ ācāryya beṣṇa “makalaṅkaṅ (namely) the officiant of Dhusan, master Beṣṇa” and likhita-tămvra arthahetoḥ ḍaṅ ācāryya i griḥ prāmodyajā⟨ta⟩ “the copper was engraved by the master of Grih, [whose name mentioned here only] for practical necessity [is] Prāmodyajāta” [Sarkar, 1972, p. 201, 203–204; Boechari, 1985–1986, p. 122; Damais, 1970, p. 189, 316, 649, 712, 764, 791, 896].¹⁶ The word makalaṅkaṅ occurs “among the watĕk i jro (maṅilala dṛwya haji)” [Zoetmulder, 1982, p. 773, “kalaṅkaṅ”], i.e. “collectors of royal duties” [Barrett Jones, 1984, p. 137–141] but for most cases, beneficiaries of royal donations and/or gifts [Kullanda, 1992, p. 142]. Sarkar reads makalaṅkaṅ separately from samgat dhusan, gives them in a semicolon and leaves ḍaṅ ācāryya untranslated as he believes the latter was an ecclesiastical title among others [Sarkar, 1971, p. 123, n. 119].

The Sangguran Charter of 928 CE, or Minto Stone (A6–7), mentions a certain ḍaṅ ācāryya (ḍa)|…li(ci)khya rendered as ‘Master Ḍa..licikhya’ by Griffiths and his colleagues [Griffiths et al., 2024, p. 153, 158; Damais, 1970, p. 333, 445].¹⁷

The term ācārya in the inscriptions of 929–1292 CE

Since 929 CE onwards all the inscriptions come from East Java. There was a time since the shift of the Mataram kingdom to East Java, in the rich soils of the Brantas River and Solo River basins. In the first half of the eleventh century there was a kingdom of Kahuripan established by Airlangga who in 1045 CE divided his realm between his two sons. Janggala and Kediri/Pañjalu. In 1222 CE, the kingdom of Singhasari was found by Ken Angrok who took the name Rajasa. The Singhasari came to an end in 1292 CE when the Prince Jayakatwang restored Kediri for a short time. He was overthrown by Raden Wijaya who established the kingdom of Majapahit.
Now I give an overview of the inscriptions of the time between the shift of Mataram till the fall of Singhasari. I begin, however, with a late Majapahit copper-plate copy of the original Kaladi inscription of 831 Śaka/909 CE (E.71 of the National Museum) because it was found in East Java and its discussion deal with many other records from that area. The Kaladi inscription mentions ācāryya Netra twice as a beneficiary of a donation (4r4, 9r4) [Boechari, 1985–1986, p. 150, 152; Barrett Jones, 1984, p. 178, 184–185, 190–191; Damais, 1970, p. 175, 507, 737].¹⁸ Barrett Jones treats Daṅācārya (Dangacarya in her text) as a title [Barrett Jones, 1984, p. 194] referring to Johannes Gijsbertus De Casparis’ citation [De Casparis, 1956, p. 259] of other stone inscriptions which mention the word(s): the Glagahan of 851 Śaka/929 CE [Brandes, 1913, p. 71, No. XL, 1r3] and Candi Lor (Berbek) of 857 Śaka/935 CE [Brandes, p. 87, No. XLVI, 1r38–39]. The Candi Lor inscription (D. 59 of the National Museum) speaks of ḍāṅ ācāryya Netra of Kanuruhan and enumerates ḍāṅ ācārya Jale of Vka, ḍāṅ ācārya Nanaya of Sirikan, ḍāṅ ācārya Pṛḍu of Bavaṅ. It should be stressed that Netra of the Kaladi and Netra of Candi Lor were perhaps two persons and not the one as there is no indication in the Kaladi that Netra was from Kanuruhan and there is a gap in 26 years between the originals of the both inscriptions.

Barrett Jones omits other inscriptions in Brandes’ Oud-Javaansche Oorkonden which include the spelling daṅācārya: the Kejon of 859 Śaka/937 CE (right side, l. 29, 31, 33–35: Daṅācārya Basu of Vka, Daṅācārya Niścāya of Sirikan, Daṅācārya Patha of Bavaṅ, Daṅācārya Naka of Kanu) [Brandes, 1913, p. 94, No. XLVII]; the Paradah/Siman inscription of 865 Śaka/943 CE (7.3: Daṅācārya sa… kanuruhan; 7v14: Daṅācārya Dhātrī) [Brandes, 1913, p. 98–99, No. XLVIII]; the Muncang inscription of 866 Śaka/944 CE (l. 11: samgat ḍa ṇa Daṅācārya Hitam) [Brandes, 1913, p. 108, No. LX]; the Wulig inscription of 856 Śaka/935 CE (right side, l.5: scribe-likhita Daṅācārya Ambritta (?)) [Brandes, 1913, p. 82, No. XLIV] and the undated Pabuharan copper-plate inscription (E.1.II of the National Museum). The latter inscription has two parts which seem loosely connected by a certain ḍaṅ ācāryya Ugra who made a record of the establishment of a freehold (sīma) in the village of Pabuharan (1r5–6: sampun katamra pra|śastyapagǝḥ de daṅ ācāryya ugra) and who had children and offered gifts to many officials (1v1. savǝka daṅ ācā[r]yya ugra; 1v4: irikaṅ kāla maṅaṅsǝan ta daṅ ācāryya ugra pasǝk pasǝk) [Boechari, 1985–1986, p. 13–14; Brandes, 1913, p. 250–251, No. CXV]. Noteworthy, Barrett Jones once defines ḍaṅ ācāryya as an article like si, pu or dyaḥ, before the personal name [Barrett Jones, 1984, p. 91]. So, there is a problem when and how she distinguishes between the title and the article and why she adopts different spellings—in one word or two—in various inscriptions. I think it’s a better option to read always ḍaṅ ācāryya following the independent functioning of its first word ḍaṅ in Old Javanese (see above).
The Alasantan inscription of 861 Śaka/939 CE (2r14) mentions kaṇḍamuhi ḍaṅ ācāryya nārāyaṇa which Griffiths renders as “the Kaṇḍamuhi, master Nārāyaṇa”.¹⁹ Zoetmulder gives the meaning “title or category of scholarly persons (alongside maṅuri, etc.)” [Zoetmulder, 1982, p. 789].

The Charter of Hering (870 Śaka/958 CE; d29–36) mentions ḍaṅ acāryya Basu of Vka, ḍaṅ acāryya Niścaya of Sirikan and·Hujuṅ Galuḥ, ḍaṅ acāryya Pr̥thu of Bava, ḍaṅ acāryya Netra of Kanuruhan.²⁰ The text is interesting as it says (d.28–30) parujar·i | hino kaṇḍamuhi ḍaṅ a|cāryya basu I vka which may be read as “herald of Hino (named) Kaṇḍamuhi, revered teacher Basu of Vka” or “herald of Hino, the kaṇḍamuhi, revered teacher Basu of Vka”. The former reading implies two persons, the latter the only one. If the latter is correct, it would mean Basu served as herald of Hino but came from Vka. Be that as it may, the term kaṇḍamuhi occurs in the Panggumulan Charter of 824 Śaka/902 CE in the phrase parujar ri hino saṅ kaṇḍamuhi si tuṅgaṅ anak vanua i gunuṅan vatak taṅkil [Bosch, 1926, p. 42] — “herald of Hino, revered kaṇḍamuhi Si Tuṅgaṅ, a commoner of Gunuṅan from the area of Taṅkil”. Perhaps, it implies a connection between Hino and kaṇḍamuhi while it needs a further investigation. In any case, we shall see another meaning of the term later.

The Sima Anglayang charter (in or after 968 Śaka/1036 CE, 16r3) mentions samgat·kaṇḍamuhi ḍaṅ ācāryya Arccya—“an official of Kaṇḍamuhi, revered teacher Arccya”—and, perhaps, another [ḍaṅ ācāryya] ¿yaṅ āvāryya Cittănanda who was a Brahmin/priest of a sanctuary (dharmma parhyāṅan) in Kaṇḍayuga [Titi Surti Nastiti et al., 2022, p. 165].²¹ Titi Surti Nastiti and her colleagues translate the sentence as follows: “the master (mpu) of the temple foundation (dharma parhyaṅan) at Kaṇḍayuga, (namely) the master (ḍaṅ ācārya) Cittānanda, the official of Kaṇḍamuhi (namely) the master Arcya” [Titi Surti Nastiti et al., 2022, p. 177; Titi Surti Nastiti, 2016, p. 414–420]. If their interpretation is correct, so the term kaṇḍamuhi may also mean a community and/or settlement at least in the eleventh century CE. Perhaps, earlier references to kaṇḍamuhi, e.g. in the Alasantan inscription, should be read this way as mentioning “[samgat] of kaṇḍamuhi”. But it is but a hypothesis.

The Charter of Talan of 1058 Śaka/1136 CE (Cd24–25) gives likitapātra ḍaṅ ācā|ryya prakāśa, makapramukha samgat·kəlpvan ḍaṅ ācāryya amogha that Eko Bastiawan and Arlo Griffiths translate as “The document was written by master Prakāśa, whose chief was the official of Kəlpvan (called) master Amogha” [Bastiawan et al., 2023, p. 35, 39].²² Bastiawan and Griffiths note names of these ḍaṅ ācārya “sound very Buddhist” [Bastiawan et al, 2023, p. 39, n. 176].

The Air Asih inscription (between 1177 and 1208 Śaka/1255–1284 CE; 2r1–2) calls three ḍaṅ ācāryya or spiritual teachers: Dharmmadeva, Smaradahana, Smaradeva who all were officials saṁ pamgət of various communities (saṁ pamgət i tirvan, ḍaṅ ācāryya dharmmadeva, saṁ pamgət iṁ kaṇḍamuhi, ḍaṅ ācāryya smaradahana, saṁ pam⟨g⟩ət iṁ maṅhu|ri, ḍaṅ ācaryya smaradeva).²³ Smaradahana was the saṁ pamgət iṁ kaṇḍamuhi that confirms Kaṇḍamuhi was a place-name/community name.

The Mula Malurung Charter of 1177 Śaka/1255 CE (E. 90 of the National Museum, 2r5) mentions three ḍaṅ ācāryya: Jayaṅga, Marmmananda and Agraja who were saṁ pamgat, or officials (saṁ pamgat i tirvan, puspapāta ḍa|ṅ ācāryya jayaṅga, saṁ pamgat iṅ kaṇḍamuhi, puspapāta ḍaṅ ācāryya marmmananda, saṁ pamgat i maṅhuri, puspapāta ḍaṅ ā|cāryyagraja) [Boechari 1985–1986 , p. 184; Hadi Sidomulyo, 2010, p. 106; Titi Surti Nastiti, 2016, p. 421–436].²⁴ Once again, like the Air Asih inscription, there is a strict order of saṁ pamgat: of Tirvan/Tiruan, of Kaṇḍamuhi, and of Maṅhuri. The Mula Malurung Charter adds a title puspapāta (

The Parablyan inscription (between 1177 and 1208 Śaka, 2r1) says: maṅhuri, ḍaṅ ācāryya smaradeva, i piṁsorny ājñā śrī mahārāja, kumonakən·saṁ pam(g)ə:t iṁ parablyan: “[The official saṁ pamgat of] Maṅhuri, a revered teacher Smaradeva sent an order of the great king to the saṁ pamgǝt of Parablyan…”.²⁵

The Sarvadharma inscription of 1191 Śaka/1269 CE (2r2–7) mentions ḍaṅ ācāryya Śivanātha who was rakryan·dmuṁ van, and several ḍaṅ ācāryya who were saṁ pamgət-officials and whom we have met earlier: Dharmmadeva, Smaradahana, Smaradeva, Agraja, and also mpuṅku dharmmădhyakṣa riṁ kaśe|van ḍaṅ ācāryya, i.e. “Brahmin, administrator of religious law in Kaśevan, revered teacher” Śivanātha (saṁ pamgət i tirvan ḍaṅ ācāryya dharmmadeva, saṁ pamgat iṁ kaṇḍamuhi,| ḍaṅ ācāryya smaradahana, saṁ pamgət i maṅhuri ḍaṅ ācāryya smaradeva, saṁ pamgət iṁ jamba ḍaṅ ā|cāryya śivanātha, saṁ pamgət iṁ pañjaṁ jĭva ḍaṅ ācāryyăgraja).²⁶ Agraja, thus, was an official of Maṅhuri in 1255 and of Pañjaṁ Jĭva in 1269. The coincidence between the names and offices of three ḍaṅ ācāryya in the Sarvadharma and Air Asih inscriptions seems striking. I would suppose that the date of the Air Asih and Parablyan inscriptions should be corrected to the 1190s Śaka/1268–1278 CE. While names can repeat in times, there is a lesser possibility that the same line of names and offices was used with a gap of one hundred years.

The undated Patitihan copper plate inscription of Singhasari times (2v2–4) lists few saṁ pamgət, or officials, who were ḍaṅ ācăryya: Dharmmadeva, Smaradahana, Smaradeva, Harideva Dagdharāga (saṁ pamgət ī tirvan, ḍaṅ ācăryya dharmmadeva | mapañji parama, saṁ pamgət iṁ kaṇḍamuhi, ḍaṅ ācāryya smaradahana, mapañji nirdeśa, saṁ pamgət i maṅhuri, ḍaṅ ācăryya smaradeva, ma|pañji salaḥ smu, saṁ pamgət i jamba, ḍaṅ ācāryya harideva, ⟨saṁ⟩ pamgət i pamvatan, ḍaṅ ācāryya dagdharāga).²⁷ The Patitihan inscription remains unpublished and is kept in a private collection [Griffiths, 2020, p. 131–132; Eko Bastiawan, 2023, p. 47, n. 199]. Once again, there is a list of three ḍaṅ ācăryya: Dharmmadeva, Smaradahana, Smaradeva but they all also bear the title mapañji which probably reflects their noble origin and is absent in the texts examined above. At least the term parama in the title of Dharmmadeva means “the highest/first mapañji”. Mapañji nirdeśa may mean “next or middle mapañji” according to the meanings of nirdeśa in Old Javanese— “order, command” [Zoetmulder, 1982, p. 1184] — and Sanskrit — “id.; vicinity, proximity” [Monier-Williams, 1899, p. 555]. Mapañji salaḥ smu means “the lowest mapañji” as salah sǝmu denotes “wrong (improper, uncommon, unexpected) attitude or condition” [Zoetmulder, 1982, p. 1610]. Seemingly, communities or localities of Tirvan, Kaṇḍamuhi and Maṅhuri formed a triad whose officials were treated as a single group and acted together in the Singhasari times.

The term siddhācāryyo “perfect teacher” occurs in the Sanskrit Wurare inscription of 1289 CE (B4) which praises the commemoration of the Mahākṣobhya statue [Kern, 1910, p. 99–108; 1917, p. 187–197; Poerbatjaraka, 1922, p. 427, 433 – “een toovermachtig leeraar”, “a magical teacher”].²⁸

The Sanskrit Amoghapāśa plaque of the Singhasari times now kept in the Tropenmuseum, mentions the great king of kings Śrī Kr̥tanagara and “teachers and preceptors, fathers and mothers and ancestors” (ācāryyo|pādhyāya-mātā-pitr̥-pūrvvaṁ, l.9–10).²⁹ Śrī Kr̥tanagara was the last king of the kingdom of Singhasari who ruled in 1268–1292 CE and was killed during the attack of the Prince Jayakatwang of Kediri. Thus, the Sarvadharma inscription belongs to the reign of Śrī Kr̥tanagara. Again, there is no analogue of the Javanese article ḍaṅ in the Sanskrit inscriptions of the Singhasari times.

The term ācārya in the Majapahit inscriptions

The Old Javanese-Sanskrit Sukhamerta inscription of the 1218 Śaka/1296 CE (E. 70 of the National Museum) issued by the king Śrī Kr̥tarājasa Jayavārddhana who obtained the title Ācāryyāstrarāja—“the king of arrows and teachers” (mapuṣpapāta ḍaṅ ācāryyāstrarāja, 4r5)—mentions several saṁ pamgət-officials who were ḍaṅ ācāryya: Kusumăyudharipu, Aṅgarakṣa, Rudra, Rāgavijaya, Manmatha, Mahānātha, all learned in various disciplines like săṁkya and/or nyāya (4v1–5) [Boechari 1985–1986, p. 141–142; Naerssen, 1941, p. 46–57, № III].³⁰ Śrī Kr̥tarājasa Jayavārddhana also known as Raden Vijaya was the founder and first ruler of the Majapahit Empire reigned in 1293–1309 CE. He had overthrown Jayakatwang.

The Tuhanyaru inscription of 1245 Śaka/1323 CE (2r6/2v1–5) mentions several saṁ pamgət-officials who were ḍaṅ ācāryya: Rāgavijaya, Viśvanātha, Mahānātha, Dharmmarāja, Śivanātha, Smaranātha (saṁ pamgət i tirvan, ḍa|ṅ ācāryya rāgavijaya, mapañji sāhasa, nyāya-vyākaraṇa-parisamāpta, saṁ pamgət i ka⟨ṇḍa⟩muhi, ḍaṅ ācāryya viśvanātha, mapa|ñji paragata, săṅkhya-śāstra-parisamāpta, saṁ pamgət i maṅhuri, ḍaṅ ācāryya mahānātha, nyāya-vyākaraṇa-parisamāpta, saṁ pa|mgət i pamvatan, ḍaṅ ācāryya dharmmarāja, nyāyaśāstraparisamāpta, saṁ pamgət i jāmbi, ḍaṅ ācāryya śivanātha, nyāyavyākara|ṇaparisamāpta, dharmmādhyakṣa riṁ kaśaivan, saṁ pamgət i raṇu kabayan, ḍaṅ ācāryya smaranātha, nyāyavyākaraṇapari|samāpta) [Brandes, 1913, p. 199–200, No. LXXXIII].³¹ Another ḍaṅ ācāryya named Kanakamuni was a (m)puṅku of Padəl̥gan [Brandes, 1913, p. 200], i.e. a Brahmin, local master or priest. Once again, there are saṁ pamgət of Tirvan, Kaṇḍamuhi and Maṅhuri but all ḍaṅ ācāryya bear additional and pompous titles which are a characteristic sign of the Majapahit literary style: mapañji sāhasa, nyāya-vyākaraṇa-parisamāpta — “uncontrolled/fierce mapañji, expert in logic-nyāya and grammar”; mapañji paragata, săṅkhya-śāstra-parisamāpta — “holy mapañji, expert in sāṁkhya doctrines”.

The Manah i Manuk Charter (1350–1356 CE, E. 35 of the National Museum; 3r4–5, 3v2–4r2) says: dharmmădhyakṣa riṁ kaśevan, saṅ āryya rājaparākrama, ḍaṅ ācā|ryya ⟨dh⟩armmarāja, dharmmădhyakṣa riṁ kasogatan, saṅ āryyădhirāja, ḍaṅ ācāryya kanakamuni,| boddha-śāstra-vyākaraṇa-parisamāpta, tlas karuhun saṁ dharmmapravaktă vyavahāra-vicchedaka, saṁ pamgə|t i tiruAn, saṅ āryyavaṅśādhīrāja, ḍaṅ ācāryya śivanātha, bhairavapakṣa nyăya-vyăkaraṇa-śā|stra-parisamāpta, samgət i kaṇḍamuhi, ḍaṅ ācāryya marmmanātha, mapañjy āṁśuman, sorapakṣa nyāya-vyă|karaṇa-śāstra-parisamāpta, samgət i maṅhuri, ḍaṅ ācāryya smaranātha, bhairavapakṣa nyāya-vyăka|raṇa-śāstra-parisamāpta, samgət i jāmba, ḍaṅ ācāryya jayasmara, sorapakṣa| ⟨sāṁkhya⟩-śāstra-parisamā|pta, samgət i pamuatan ḍaṅ ācāryyāgreśvara, (bhai)ravapakṣa nyāya-vyăkaraṇa-śāstra-parisamāpta, | samgət i kaṇḍaṅan rarai, ḍaṅ ācāryya munīndra, boddha-śāstra-parisamāpta [Brandes, 1913, p. 207–210, item LXXXV; Boechari, 1985–1986, p. 98].³² There are ḍaṅ ācāryya: Dharmmarāja, Kanakamuni, Śivanātha, Marmmanātha, Smaranātha, Jayasmara, Agreśvara, and Munīndra. Marine Schoettel and Griffiths synonymously translate the term ḍaṅ ācāryya as ‘master’ or ‘revered master’ in their edition of the Charter. These ḍaṅ ācāryya were officials with many titles: saṅ āryya rājaparākrama “the honorable royal brave”, saṅ āryyădhirāja “the honorable emperor/king of kings”, boddha-śāstra-vyākaraṇa-parisamāpta “expert in Buddhist doctrine and grammar”, nyăya-vyăkaraṇa-śāstra-parisamāpta “expert in logic-nyāya and grammar”, sāṁkhya-śāstra-parisamāpta “expert in sāṁkhya doctrines”, mapañjy āṁśuman “radiant mapañjy”. There are two Śaiva Orders: bhairavapakṣa “Bhairava Order” and sorapakṣa “Saura Order”. Śivanātha, Marmmanātha and Smaranātha were samgət of Tirvan, Kaṇḍamuhi and Maṅhuri respectively. They are called saṁ dharmmapravaktă vyavahāra-vicchedaka, that is, “the speakers/teachers of religious law, who settle litigations”, according to Schoettel and Griffiths.

The Old Malay-Sanskrit Stela from Bukit Gombak (N. 96) of 1278 Śaka/1356 CE (l. 11) issued by the king Śrī Ādityavarman of Pagarruyung in West Sumatra [Kern, 1917, p. 265–275; Brandes, 1913, p. 258, No. CXXII] mentions brāmhaṇācāryyopāddhyāya: “brāhmaṇas, teachers and preceptors” as translated by Griffiths.³³ Ādityavarman was born in Trowulan in East Java, the capital of Majapahit, and he was the cousin of the king of Majapahit, Jayanegara who ruled in 1309–1328 CE. It places the epigraphic tradition of Pagarruyung in the sphere of the Old Javanese and Sanskrit literacy of the Majapahit court.

The undated Batur inscription of the mid-fourteenth century³⁴ (E.50 in the National Museum in Jakarta; Ar6–Av6) mentions several ḍaṅ ācāryya: Śi[vanatha], Marmmanātha, Smaranātha, Mahā[nātha], Agreśvara and [Kanakamuni] [Boechari, 1985–1986 , p. 113].³⁵ These ācāryya were officials—saṁ pamgət/samgət—or administrator of religious law—dharmm(ā)dhyakṣa. The most of ācāryya were nyāya-vyākaraṇa-śāstra-parisamāpta, or experts in logic, grammar and scriptures but ḍaṅ ācāryya Mahā[nātha] was an expert in Buddhist logic and grammar—boddha-ta](rkka)-vyākara⟨ṇa⟩-śāstra-parisamāpta. Śivanatha, Marmmanātha and Smaranātha were saṁ pamgət/samgət of Tirvan, Kaṇḍamohi and Maṅhuri, therefore, they had their posts at least during several years in 1350s.

The Canggu inscription of 1280 Śaka year/1358 CE (3r1–3v2) mentions many ḍaṅ ācāryyas: Śivanātha, Āgreśvara, Jayasmara, Vidyānātha, Śivādhipa, Śrīghana, Samatājñāna, Nādendra, Dharmmarāja.³⁶ The text says (3r1–3r5):

mahārāja, tan kavuntat saṁ dharmmapravaktā vyavahāravicchedaka, samgət i tirvan, ḍaṅ ācāryya śivanātha, makapadasthan, saṅ āryya va|ṅśādhipati, nyāyavyakaraṇaśāstraparisamāpta, samgət i maṅhuri, ḍaṅ ācāryyāgreśvara, nyāyavyākaraṇaśāstraparisamāpta, samgət i | kaṇḍamuhi, ḍaṅ ācāryya jayasmara, saṁkyaśāstraparisamāpta, samgət i pamvatan, ḍaṅ ācāryya vidyānātha, nyāyavyākaraṇaśāstrapa|risamāpta, samgət i jambi, ḍaṅ ācāryya śivādhipa, nyāyavyākaraṇaśāstraparisamāpta, samgət i kaṇḍaṅan atuha, ḍaṅ ācāryya śrīghana,| boddhatarkkaparisamāpta, samgət i kaṇḍaṅan rare, ḍaṅ ācāryya samatājñāna, boddhatarkkaparisamāpta
“The great king (mahārāja) left behind (him) those who are speakers/teachers of religious law and who settle litigations: the official of Tirvan, the revered teacher Śivanātha, steadfast in office (makapadasthan), the honorable lord, the king of a lineage, an expert in logic, grammar and scriptures; the official of Maṅhuri, the revered teacher Agreśvara, an expert in logic, grammar and scriptures; the official of Kaṇḍamuhi, the revered teacher Jayasmara, an expert in saṁkya doctrines; the official of Pamvatan, the revered teacher Vidyānātha, an expert in logic, grammar and scriptures; the official of Jambi, the revered teacher Śivādhipa, an expert in logic, grammar and scriptures; the official of Old (atuha) Kaṇḍaṅan, the revered teacher Śrīghana, an expert in Buddhist logic; the official of New (rare) Kaṇḍaṅan, the revered teacher Samatājñāna, an expert in Buddhist logic”.
Another part (3v1–4) claims:
muvaḥ dharmmādhyakṣa riṁ kasogatan, puṁkv ī padləgan, ḍaṅ ācāryya nādendra, boddha|tarkkavyākaraṇaśāstraparisamāpta, makanaryyama, dharmmādhyakṣa riṁ kaśaivan, nāma puṣpapāta, ḍaṅ ācāryya dharmmarāja, makapadasthan·sa|ṅ āryya rājaparākrama, mahādvija-bhujaṅga-saṁrakṣaṇa-dharmmādhyakṣa-saṁyojita, sinārabhāra pāduka śrī mahārāja dharmmădhyakṣa, maka|don karakṣan para puṁku riṁ kaśaivan·, makādi mahādvija
“Also the administrator of religious law in the Buddhist monastery and (among) Brahmins at Padlǝgan, the revered teacher Nādendra, an expert in Buddhist logic, grammar and scriptures, and great commander (makanaryyama) and administrator or religious law among the Śaiva (followers), named Puṣpapāta / proclaimed as adorned with flowers, the revered teacher Dharmmarāja, steadfast in office, the honorable royal brave, [who was appointed] administrator for protection of Brahmins and great Brahmins, were appointed by the Pāduka Śrī Mahārāja the administrators of religious law with the aim to guard these Brahmins of Śaiva (faith) from the great ones…”.
The Canggu inscription, thus, shows the change among the officials of Tirvan, Kaṇḍamohi and Maṅhuri: Śivanātha was still holding the office but Marmmanātha and Smaranātha were replaced by Jayasmara and Agreśvara respectively, and Maṅhuri then turned higher and was placed before Kaṇḍamohi, contrary to their hierarchy in the previous centuries.
The Patapan I inscription (1r1) mentions ḍaṅ ācāryya Viśvanātha who was the writer of the letter, along with saṅ āryya/honorable Rājaparākrama, to the commoners of Patapan.³⁷ The text of the letter contains an abridged date of tithī, jyeṣṭa, śiraḥ, 7 (1v2) which Muhamad Yamin interprets as a reference to the [130]7 Śaka/1395 CE, i.e. to the Majapahit times and to the king Wikramawardhana who succeeded Hayam Wuruk in 1389 CE.³⁸

The Waringin Pitu inscription of 1369 Śaka/1447 CE (E. 67 of the National Museum) issued during the reign of Dyaḥ Kṛtavijaya (6v5–7r1) mentions four officials-samgǝt who all were ḍaṅ ācāryya: Naradhara, Taranātha, Arkkanātha and Jinendra [Boechari, 1985–1986, p. 130]. Naradhara and Jinendra were experts in Buddhist logic (boddhatarkkaparisamāpta) whereas Taranātha was an expert in the Vaiśeṣika doctrine, Arkkanātha in logic and grammar (nyāyavyākaraṇa). The order of samgǝt is as follows: of Old Kandaṅan, of Maṅhuri, of Pamvatan, and of New Kandaṅan. Thus, Tirvan and Kaṇḍamuhi were omitted or disappeared to the date of the Waringin Pitu inscription composing. The inscription (7r1–2) also calls two dharmmādhyakṣa, or administrators of religious law, — ḍaṅ ācāryya [I]śvara and ḍaṅ ācāryya Śāstrarāja.

Discussion

The term ācārya occurs in the phrase ḍaṅ ācāryya in all 35 Old Javanese inscriptions mentioned above, except the cases of Sanskrit and Old Malay texts where the word ḍaṅ is omitted. There are many ways to translate the term ācārya. It may denote “teacher, master, professor” or may be left untranslated if one treats it as an independent title. The choice of appropriate translations seems a bit subjective and depends on a scholar’s conception of Javanese society. Probably, if one aims to show more complex title system of early and medieval Java, so it would be better to write ḍaṅ ācāryya in all known cases. But there is no obvious objection towards the usual meaning “teacher” in a broad sense of the word: “one who teaches (others)”. At the same time, this interpretation seems most fitting the earliest contexts before 919 CE when ḍaṅ ācāryya were buyers or witnesses but their connection with official posts remains unclear outside religious and/or educational institutions (see Devendra as paramācārya “Rector” in the Wanua Tengah III inscription of 908 CE). But since 919 CE onwards, ḍaṅ ācāryya frequently were officials samgat/saṁ pamgət of various communities. For the sake of accuracy, I should stress that a tie between communities and ḍaṅ ācāryya may be more ancient as the Wanua Tengah III inscription connects ḍaṅ ācāryya with communities but gives no specific title, except ḍaṅ ācāryya itself:
“The 2 who recited/performed śānti: the master of Kavuṅ Manek (named) Sudānta and the master of Tiḍa Luaṅ (named) Bhadrasena; the 2 who performed offering (bantan): the (aforementioned) master of Vraṅ [and] the master (named) Tatha and the master of Air Hijo East (named) Padmasena. They were given 6 māṣa of silver per person. The master of recitation at Pikatan (named) Paṇḍara was given 8 māṣa of silver; the master of Air Hijo West (named) Sudānta was given 6 māṣa of silver” (translation by Arlo Griffiths; 2v12–14: maṅaji santi 2 ḍaṅ ācāryya | i kavuṁ manek·sudanta, muaṁ ḍaṅ ācāryya i tiḍa luaṁ bhadraśena, maṅajī bantan·2 ḍaṅ ācāryya i vraṁ ḍaṅ ācāryya tatha, muaṁ ḍaṅ ăcā(ryya) i air hijo vetan·padmaśena, kapua sira vineḥ pirak·mā 6 sovaṁ-sovaṁ⟨,⟩ ḍaṅ ācā|ryya paṅajyan·I pikatan·paṇḍara, vineḥ sira pirak·mā 8 ḍaṅ ācāryya iṁ air·hijo kuluan sudanta, vineḥ pirak·mā 6).³⁹

Therefore, Griffiths’ reading “master” grasps the connection between a community and/or place and the words ḍaṅ ācāryya. But when ḍaṅ ācāryya turned officials samgat/saṁ pamgət, the meaning “master” may be of lesser value because we do not know an exact meaning of samgat/saṁ pamgət which may have been “master of (a community)” too. In Majapahit, there was an obvious connection of ḍaṅ ācāryya and samgat/saṁ pamgət with “the speaking/teaching religious law and settling litigations” (saṁ dharmmapravaktă vyavahāra-vicchedaka) which may be evidence that ḍaṅ ācāryya meant “teacher” and samgat/saṁ pamgət “judge”. However, both functions may have been aspects of samgat/saṁ pamgət office whereas ḍaṅ ācāryya was simply a title and/or “revered teacher” without any particular function, like honorary doctors in many modern universities.

Conclusions

My examination revealed 35 Old Javanese, two Sanskrit and two Old Malay inscriptions which include the term ācārya, in online and printed catalogues examined. Few of these Old Javanese texts are bilingual, i.e. they have a Sanskrit part too. In some cases, they mention the word ācārya in both parts: Old Javanese and Sanskrit, as the Wanua Tengah III inscription does.
Old Javanese inscriptions give no evidence that ācārya was a personal name. It frequently occurred in the phrase ḍaṅ ācāryya which seems to be a title with the meaning “teacher, master, professor”. Sanskrit and Old Malay inscriptions or Sanskrit parts of bilingual epigraphic records from Java and Sumatra contain no analogue of Old Javanese honorific article ḍaṅ: they give ācāryya only. It recalls the Medieval Latin word comes “companion” which turned the French le comte “count, earl”.
Juxtaposing the Air Asih, Parablyan, Mula Malurung and Sarvadharms inscriptions reveals that the date of the first two texts should be corrected to the 1190s Śaka/1268–1278 CE. Communities of Tirvan, Kaṇḍamuhi and Maṅhuri probably formed a triad whose officials were treated as a single group, and acted together in the Singhasari times, i.e. in the thirteenth century. Perhaps, the word kaṇḍamuhi in the Alasantan inscription of 939 CE also was a place-name, and the original text would imply an official-samgat of Kaṇḍamuhi named revered master (ḍaṅ ācāryya) Nārāyaṇa but it needs further examination.
These conclusions are preliminary as publication of new inscriptions and/or new readings of well-known texts may change or specify them. But an important role of ḍaṅ ācāryya in early and medieval Java is obvious. The bearers of the title were among the ruling class though not its uppermost group. Many of them were officials and settled litigations. During the Majapahit times, they had knowledge of logic, grammar, laws/scriptures and various philosophical and/or religious disciplines, like Buddhism, sāṁkhya or, perhaps, nyāya if the latter word did not refer to logic in general. The connection of ḍaṅ ācāryya with teaching looks very probable, even if it was a nominal one. The Wulig Charter of 935 CE implies that ḍaṅ ācāryya could be scribes. Their literacy is evident in the available texts. It seems likely that they taught many pupils some of whom served scribes and wrote the texts of inscriptions which remain the main source of information about early history of Java.