Picture Courtesy: Patrick Olivelle, Ashoka: Portrait of a Philosopher King, page 152.
Author - Biswarup Chatterjee.
This honorific title was used not only by Aśoka but also by his grandson Daśaratha. According to Dipavamsa, the Sinhalese chronicle, the contemporary king of Sri Lanka also adopted this title during the time of Aśoka.
The scholars claim that the use of this honorific title was influenced by the Vedic tradition. During the Vedic period, at the time of the coronation of the king, such deities like Indra, Varuṇa, Mitra, Pūṣaṇ, and others were invoked and their blessings were sou rtght. This custom, which comes from the Vedic tradition, lasted into the Mauryan period. No other king is known to have used this title after Daśaratha. According to the Siddhāntakaumudī which was composed by Pāṇini in 1630 CE, while explaining the grammatical rule ṣaṣṭhyā ākrośe (6.3.21), the author Bhaṭṭoji Dīkṣita makes a remark which led historian Radhakumud Mukherjee to state that later adherents of Brahmanical religion interpreted the honorific title ‘devānāṁ priyaḥ’ (Beloved of the Gods) as “fool.”, due to animosity towards Aśoka. in the context of the grammatical rule ‘ṣaṣṭhyā ākrośe’ (the genitive in expressions of abuse): when a word implies abuse or insult, the genitive case ending is not dropped even in an aluk compound. Dīkṣita here refers to a vārttika (supplementary grammatical rule) which states: ‘devānāṁ priya iti ca mūrkhe’ — meaning, in an aluk compound, ‘devānāṁ priyaḥ’ (beloved of the gods) can actually mean ‘a fool’. However, when the case ending is elided to form a regular compound, the word ‘devapriya’ simply means ‘beloved of the gods. According to Dharmavijayī Aśoka, which was written by Prabodh Chandra Sen, here the author interpreting the views of Radhakumud Mukherjee and as per that view: ‘The epithet ‘Devānāṁ Priyaḥ’ (Beloved of the Gods), assumed by a Buddhist king who was opposed to the worship of Hindu deities, was not received by the Brahmins properly. The brahmin community didn’t accept it cordially. As a result of that, they mocked the word (ākrośa) and interpreted the expression ‘Devānāṁ Priyaḥ’ as ‘fool’. ‘Ṣaṣṭhyā ākrośe’—that is, when conveying an expression of abuse, the genitive case (ṣaṣṭhī vibhakti) is not dropped; this principle of aluk compound from Pāṇini’s grammar (Sūtra 6.3.21) is appropriately supported by the vārttika composed by Kātyāyana: ‘devānāṁ priya iti ca mūrkhe’—which affirms the conclusion drawn. " It may be possible that this grammatical reinterpretation arose in a later period, rather than during the Ashokan own era. But if the expression of abuse associated with the word ‘Devānāṁ Priya’ had not already been in circulation since the time of the Devānāṁ Priyas themselves, such a distortion of meaning would not have been possible in the later period .
Now let’s see what the authoritative grammatical texts actually say. In the Mahābhāṣya on Pāṇini’s Sūtra 5.3.14, composed by Patañjali around the 2nd century BCE, the expression Devānāṁ Priyaḥ does not mean ‘a fool’. This is clearly evident from the three examples he provides: ‘Bhavān Dīrghāyuḥ’ (May you live long), ‘Devānāṁ Priyaḥ’ (Beloved of the gods), and ‘Āyuṣmān’ (Blessed with long life). In 7th centiry CE the gramariyan Jayaditya and Vamana repeat the formula of Paṇini. According to their interpretation of the formula ‘ saṣṭhyā Ākrośe’ (6.3.21), They didn't mentioning the meaning of this formula as 'fool', rather they simply stated in the vārttika that if the third-case ending (tṛtīyā vibhakti) in the word devānām is not dropped, then it should be understood as an example of an aluk compound. ‘Devānāṁ priya ityatra ca tatra aluk vaktavyaḥ’ — that is, in devānāṁ priya, the genitive ending remains and must be treated as ‘aluk’. Therefore, some scholars, while interpreting this formula, have clearly stated: 'The author of Siddhānta Kaumudī says, "when the sense is that of fool, the affix is not elided in devānām priyaḥ." There is no authority for this, either in the Mahābhāṣya or the Kāś 'devānāṁ priyaḥ' (beloved of the gods) was used to mean 'a fool'. By that time, the name of Aśoka had faded from public memory. In the 14th century, when Firuz Shah Tughlaq brought the Aśokan pillars from Topra and Meerut to Delhi, In the 14th century, when Firuz Shah Tughlaq transported the Aśokan pillars from Topra and Meerut to Delhi and had them reinstalled, it became evident that no one could read Aśoka’s Brahmi script—no one even knew who Aśoka was. Some called it Firuz Shah’s staff, others said it was Bhima’s mace.
The two Aśokan pillars in the villages of Areraj and Nandangarh in Champaran district of Bihar were referred to by the locals as Shiva lingams. When Aśoka himself had vanished from the memory of the common people, how could the phrase 'devānāṁ priyaḥ' (beloved of the gods) possibly be referring to him? It was, in fact, a much later Sanskrit idiom used sarcastically—much like how people mockingly say ‘prince’ when they see a poor man acting like a gentleman. That’s why Dr. Barua once remarked that at one point he felt the English translation of 'devānāṁ priyaḥ' should be ‘His Gifted Majesty’.
According to Western scholars, many of Aśoka’s inscriptions contain a title which composed of three words (devānaṁpiye piyadasi lājā), or a shortened form of it (see Figure 1)." In Indian literature, the epithet “devānaṁ piye” or “devānāṁ priyaḥ” first appears in Aśoka’s inscriptions, where the king uses it to refer to himself, as previously mentioned. According to most scholars, this is a royal title, and they often translate it as “Maharaja” rather than rendering it literally. There is no doubt that it is an honorific title. In Rock Edict VIII, Aśoka also addressed his predecessor kings with this title, indicating that he considered it a common title for the royal lineage. Ashoka’s grandson Dasharatha also used this title in his name in three of his inscriptions. (EVI)
However, in later Sanskrit usage, the term ‘Devānāṁ priyaḥ ’ came to acquire a sarcastic connotation, generally implying that the person it referred to was a fool. Historian Hartmut Scharfe has speculated that this Indian title may have originated from the Greek equivalent phrase 'friend of the king', which Hellenistic rulers used to confer upon subordinate governors. "But historian Grant Parker has pointed out that this Greek title does not appear in inscriptions, and that the Mauryan emperors likely did not acknowledge the authority of Western Hellenistic kings. Linguist Madhav Deshpande has traced many earlier precedents of this title in ancient Vedic literature. Nevertheless, it stands out as a peculiar and unique designation, which gradually faded after the Mauryan period and eventually took on a tone of sarcasm or ridicule.
—--------
References:
Olivelle, Patrick. Ashoka: Portrait of a Philosopher King. HarperCollins Publishers India, 2023.
Sen, Amulya Chandra. Asoka Charita. Reprint ed., Jinaratana Memorial Trust, 1999.
Sircar, Dines Chandra, editor. Select Inscriptions Bearing on Indian History and Civilization: From the Sixth Century B.C. to the Sixth Century A.D. Vol. 1, 2nd rev. and enl. ed., University of Calcutta, 1965.
