As for death of grandchildren, the text does not seem to have word abhichar anywhere. Stein seems to have made a mistake in reading or translating, a mistake that has been copied over and over again.
“Path”/course is the operation word here. The writer says that Didda caused the death just by putting her grandson on throne. Throne bore the name death. Later when the actual torturous death of Bhimagupta at the orders of Didda is described, Kalhana reminds the reader that Bhimagupta infact was not the son of her son. Not her real grandson. He was a scion member of Abhimanyu’s wife’s family. Abhimanyu’s wife had secretly passed him off as her son. So, techincally Didda had no blood relation with him. It is here the reader is told that the people believed Didda had killed off the previous two young kings too.
For the death of first grandson, we read:
“Course”/path is the operational word here. The writer means to say that Didda caused the death of the child because she continued on her path of vyabhichar. Just after the death of his beloved son (a son she kept protecting from wars, she was a loving mother), in mourning although she did a lot of pious acts of building mathas (64 no less) and giving donations, just a year later she reverted back to her old “wicked” ways and thus in a (karmic) sense caused the death of her grandchildren. And it wasn’t like these men died overnight, they actually died on the throne, each ruling a few years. Her acts made the throne cursed. According to Kalhana they died due to the character follies of her grandmother. The world of morals that Kalhana lives in, all this makes perfect sense. The verses preceding the section about death of these kings, Kalhana mention timi-fish of sacred waters eating its own (which may have given the wrong idea to the translators, caused a bad auto-suggest or a bad inception), humble peacock eating snake while meditating, heron eating unsuspecting fish. The reason Kalhana mentions this all is because he wants to illustrate that one never knows when good can turn to bad.
If one omits the word “witchcraft” from Stein’s translation, the true word-craft of Kalhana’s sanskrit becomes clear.
—
Vinayak Razdan
-0-
Shonaleeka Kaul, the author of “The Making of Early Kashmir: Landscape and Identity in the Rajatarangini” (2018) did agree that my reading of the word is correct. The text mention vyabhichar.
I am trying to read the ancient history of Kashmir, thankfully stumbled upon great writings and texts. I just have two points:-
* (from searchkashmir.org) Kalhana's writings are evident of the antiquity, accuracy and richness of the history of Kashmir, specially in the context of its matching with the chronology of history of rest of Bharata.
* I am intrigued by the huge rock-statue at Mulbekh (Ladhakh, midway between Kargil and Leh)which is referred to as Lord Buddha, but it has complete resemblance with Lord Shiva, to include Shiva's attire, hair, snakes, moon, etc. That I think a residue of erstwhile Shaivism that had extended up to and beyond Ladakh.
* I would suggest review of presentation in terms of language that should be precise and devoid of mistake.
* I commend your efforts and wonder if the same can be included in the historical studies as taught in Universities. The absence of authentic history of Kashmir and its antiquity in our history books has led to more ignorance.
* Stein's translations invariably included the hint of his own Christian background and beliefs. Stein's suggestion of Didda's witchcraft is rather based on his own belief of such pagan practices which cause the Christians to start genocides. I firmly believe that Stein too had similar prejudices that he could not hide despite his efforts.