Chitralekha

Author:Laxman Burdak, IFS (R)

---

Chitralekha with Usha

Chitralekha (चित्रलेखा) was a friend of Usha, daughter of Kumbhada/Kubhand/Kumbhananda , minister of Banasura. Banasura ruled the present-day central Assam with his capital at Sonitpur (present-day Tezpur, Assam). We find mention of queen Chitra-lekha in Bayana inscription of dated 955 AD. Usha was wife of Aniruddha, grandson of Lord Krishna.

According to a legend Usha fell in love with Aniruddha in her dreams, not knowing that he was the grandson of Krishna. Her companion Chitralekha identified him by painting his portrait from Usha's description.

Usha in love with Aniruddha

Banasura had a beautiful daughter named Usha. When Usha became young, number of proposals came for her marriage but Banasura accepted none. Wary, that Usha might fall in love with men other than his choice, he kept Usha in a formidable fortress called Agnigarh with her friends. Usha one day saw a young man in her dream and fell in love with him. Chitralekha was a friend of Usha and daughter of Kumbhada, minister of Banasura. She was a talented artist who helped Usha to identify the young man seen in the dream of Usha by painting the portrait. He was Aniruddha, the grandson of Lord Krishna. Chitralekha through supernatural powers abducted Aniruddha from the palace of Krishna and brought him to Usha. Usha and Aniruddha secretly married and lived together as husband and wife in the Agnigarh.

Story of Usha and Aniruddha

A Daitya princess named Usha, daughter of Banasura, fell in love with Aniruddha and had him brought by magic influence to her apartments in her father's city of Sonitpur in Assam. On discovering that Aniruddha had been carried away, Krishna, Balarama, and Pradyumna went to rescue him. Bansura was a great devotee of the god Shiva and had 1000 arms, as a result of which no one had ever been willing to fight him. Blinded by his pride, he asked Shiva to give him a chance to fight with someone as strong as himself. Shiva therefore cursed him to defeat in war by Krishna.

Only after some months Krishna came to know where his grandson was and launched an attack on Banasura with a big army. Thus a great battle was fought.

When the army laid siege to his city, Banasura staged a fierce counter-attack. At this point, Lord Shiva joined the battle against Krishna because he had promised protection to Banasura. The fight was intense in all directions, and Siva (also known as Mahesvara) caused a mighty fever with three heads and three legs (Mahesvari jvara). But Krishna generated a counter-fever. Ultimately Krishna’s forces were close to victory and Krishna himself was vigorously cutting off the myriad arms of Banasura. Siva again intervened because of his promise to Banasura.

Krishna, however, assured Siva that he had no intention of killing Banasura, but would leave him with only four arms so that his power would be limited. However, in honour of the demon’s boon from Siva, Krishna promised that Banasura would have nothing to fear from anybody in the future.

Gratefully, Banasura prostrated before Krishna and then had Aniruddha and his bride, Usha, brought to Krishna in a regal chariot. All then returned to Dvarka, where Krishna’s victory in the combat with Siva was celebrated with festivity.

Bana was defeated, but his life was spared at the intercession of Shiva, and Aniruddha was carried home to Dwaraka with Usha as his wife. He is also called Jhashanka and Ushapati. He had a son named Vajra, whose lineage is traced to the royal family of Bharatpur.

Chitralekha of Bharatpur

Hukum Singh Panwar (Pauria) mentions....But we have evidence to show that the Usha temple of Bharatpur was actually built by Chitralekha; the queen of Laxaman, a Pratihar ruler of Bayana in 956 A.D¹⁹. The scenario of the marriage of Anirudha, as hinted at by Wilson, was South-Western India²⁰ and Bana, his mythological father-in-law, was shown as an Asura whereas - Rukmaratha his actual father-in-law, was substituted by Rukmin who is nowhere given in the genealogy of the rulers of Vidarbha²¹.

---

Notes

18. Shastri, Yoginder Pal; Jat Kshatriya Itihas, Kankhal, p. 130.

19. Singh, Ganga; op.cit., p. 22.

20. Wilson, op.cit., p. 467, fn. I; Wiltoro, As. Res. Vol.IX, p. 199; or in Assam (As. Res., Vol. XIV, p. 443).

21. Wilson, op.cit., p. 338-39; Pargiter, AIHT, p. 269; Cr. also Siddhantashastree, op.cit., p. 137-141.

Jat History

Hukum Singh Panwar (Pauria) mentions Chitralekha with reference to Bharatpur Jat rulers....The literary evidence, however, supports the presence of the Yadava, Andhaka-Vrsnis in the Mathura territory . But, as our investigations have a ready indicated, the Satvata-Andhaka-Vrisnis were not Yadava, nor the archaeological (BRW) findings, nor numismatic evidence, nor even the inscriptional testimony corroborate their occupation of the region. No doubt, sporadic evidence of BRW commonly associated with the Yadavas, (800 B.C. to 300 B.C.) as available from Bayana and Bharatpur ⁷ area but we know that the Yadavas had, for fear of Jarasandha, fled the area for good and lived in Dwarka where they were destroyed by their internecine massacres. The PGW genrally associated with the Pauravas and the Aiksvakas (Surasenas-descendents of Shatrughana) was succeeded by BRW in the region.

The BRW may as much be attributed to the Matsyas⁸ who dominated the area from the Rigvedic times, as it is ascribed to the occasional advances⁹ of the Yadavas towards north from their permanent home in South-Western India. Although Dr. Arun Kumar^9a

---

The Jats:Their Origin, Antiquity and Migrations: End of p.96

---

rejects completely the Aryans and the Dravidians as the authors of the BRW, yet the opinion of the archaeologists^9b weigh in favour of the latter. But they were not Yadavas.

The contiguous region of Mathura was held by the Surasenas by the time of Varahamihira. They were subdued by the Guptas (Dharana Jats) and Harshavardhana, (the Virka Jat). The triangular territory, including Bayana and Bharatpur, formed by Agra, Delhi and Jaipur, was swept, as the Inscriptional and nunusmatic evidence show, by the Arjunayanas, the Yaudheyas, Uddhehikas and the Salvas¹⁰, the republican tribes, whose descendents¹¹ are now unmistakably found in the Jats and Rajputs of the region. From 8th century A.D. to the 12th century A.D., the Tomar¹² Jats held sway over Delhi, Mathura, Bayana, Gwalior and Malwa. Of course, there are some pockets of the Ahirs, known as Ahirwal or Ahirvati, but they are the descendents of the Abhiras who cannot be sensu stricto called Yadava. They got their genealogies confused with the Yadavas¹³ and are not, in fact, Yadava.

Notwithstanding all this, the most unfortunate thing is that the Charans and Bhats never mentioned any of these tribes and their ethnic names in their accounts. Instead, however, they never exhausted their ink and efforts to implant the Yadavas in the region under review with one pretext or the other. Over and above the spuriousness of the genealogy under review, we also come across a number of glaring instances of distortion of historical facts, perpetrated and perpetuated, at the instance of vested interests, by the legendary minstrels and encomiasts of the medieval chiefs of the region not only render them all still more unworthy of trust but also' vitiated history to mislead the successive generations of the teachers and students of the subject.

As for instance, Bayana was made the scene of the marriage of Anirudha, the grandson of Krishna. But we know it for certain from the Visnu Purana¹⁴ that "Krishna demanded in marriage for his grandson, the gallant prince Anirudha, the grand-daughter of Rukmin; and although the latter was inimical to Krishna, he betrothed the maiden (who was his son's daughter) to the son of his own daughter (her cousin Anirudha)". The cross-cousin marriage, undoubtedly, reflects a southerly custom. "Upon the occasion of the nuptials Rama (Balrama) and other Yadavas accompanied Krishna to Bhojakata, the city of Rukmin, where he solemnised the wedding. Krishna, taking with

---

The Jats:Their Origin, Antiquity and Migrations: End of p.97

---

him the newly wedded Anirudha and the Yadava tribe, returned to Dwarka"¹⁵. In addition to this, the Purana, describes another marriage of Anirudha with Usha, daughter of Bana, son of Bali of the eastern Anavas ¹⁶. But it is astonishing to note that this marriage was celebrated through the magic power of her companion - princess friend, Chitralekha, the daughter of Kubhand, the minister of Bana, only in the dream-land of mythology¹⁷.

Further, the extremely surprising fact is that the bhats ignored the real marriage of Anirudha, who is represented in the 45th generation of the alleged Yadava genealogy concocted for the Bharatpur dynasty, and planted the scene of his mythological wedding with Usha, daughter of Bana, at Bayana. The town is said to have derived its name from Bana (Asura), which is a philological fallacy. Anirudha is made to have constructed a temple in memory of Usha, which is said to still exist there¹⁸. But we have evidence to show that the temple tale is also a fabrication. Actually the said temple was built by Chitralekha; the queen of Laxaman, a Pratihar ruler of Bayana in 956 A.D¹⁹. The scenario of the marriage of Anirudha, as hinted at by Wilson, was South-Western India²⁰ and Bana, his mythological father-in-law, was shown as an Asura whereas - Rukmaratha his actual father-in-law, was substituted by Rukmin who is nowhere given in the genealogy of the rulers of Vidarbha²¹.

The Pauranics, in fact, mythologised history and their modern counterparts or disciples, the bhats, tried to "historicalize" those mythological legends, thus making the confusion of the myths more confounded. Cunningham has very aptly observed "that the ascription of a demon character or demoniacal attributes to certain historical individuals, or to certain probably really plain human personages whose memory is preserved in Indian traditions, or to certain ancient tribes of India, was simply a cunningly designed piece of malicious spite on the part of the old Brahman hierarchy, in order to stigmatise and cast odium upon certain individuals who denied or refused to recognise the self-assumed universal superiority and supremacy of the Brahman hierarchy ... and sought to damn and render odious the whole race, and even the very descendents of such persons for ever"²².

---

The Jats:Their Origin, Antiquity and Migrations: End of p.98

---

The installation of Anirudha at Indraprastha after the fratricidal massacre of the Yadavas at Dwaraka, is another example of Brahmanical concoction, for we know that, besides the women, Vajra was the only male Vrishni member. the supposed Yadava who was escorted by Arjuna to Indraprastha where only he and not Anirudha, was established as chief of the remnant women (and children) of the Yadavas²³. Even the correctness of the Vajra episode, as noted before, is questioned by C.V.Vaidya²⁴. Vajra is said^24a to have belonged to the Vrishnis, who were Varshneya Vaishyas^24b. They are shown as a sub-section in the Yadava genealogies^24c. There is, however, no unanimity among scholars whether Vajra was installed by Yudhishthira at Indraprastha or Mathura or Hastinapur²⁵. Latest investigation indicate that Vajra was most probably used as "lectio difficilior" for Vajranabha Aiksvaka by the Puranakrt²⁶. If this is correct, it means the authors of the Epic and the Puranas interpolated Vajranabha as merely Vajra in the Yadava genealogy in the manner in which Surasena, son of Shatrughana was represented as Sura in the Vrishni line. That Vajra is often called Vajranabha, all the more confirms our suspicion that the diminutive of the latter's name was exploited in the ancient literature.

In the interest of historical veracity we must learn to disregard such absurd fables. We have to "school our minds to forget and for ever to discard, with suspicion and contempt", the web of lies woven round fictitious persons in order, arbitrarily, to fabricate genealogies to please royal houses, as was obviously the case of the one connected with the Bharatpur dynasty. To us it is clear that these concoctions and inventions concerning the origin of this dynasty are totally garbled and perverted, by the bardic hierarchy of the medieval days, for a consideration. For example, there is one Sindhupal, the alleged Jadon Rajput, represented at 98th step in the Yadava genealogy constructed for and associated with Bharatpur rulers. He is said to have come from Orissa and to have-re-established Yadava rule in the region, popularly known as Saurasena or Braja, in the 7th century of the vikrami era²⁷. The historians generally quote the Gazetteer of Rajputana which depended in turn on the manuscript of the bhats who are not considered genuine sources of information on the origin commonly ascribed to the various tribes and rulers of Kshatriya families of medieval India.

---

The Jats:Their Origin, Antiquity and Migrations: End of p.99

---

Notes

7. Ghurye, G.S.; Vedic Ind., pp. 380f. 385, 398f.

8. Ibid. Romila Thapar, "Puranic Lineages and Archac. Cultures" in Puratattva. No. 8, 1975-76, pp. 86-98.

9. Ibid.

9a. The Prow-historic BRW, A Plea for Neolithic Origin, India, Vol. xi, No. 1, Bombay, March, 1975, p. 22.

10. S.B. Chaudhuri, M.K Saran, K.K. Das Gupta, Bela Lahiri, KP. Jayaswal, M.R. Singh, S.M. Ali, etc. may please be referred to.

11. Discussed in chaps. VII & VIII of the book.

12. Cr. Reference no. 34 infra.

13. Upadhyaya, B.S.; Feeders of Ind. Cul., N. Delhi, 1973, p. 81; Wilson, H.H.; Eng. Trans. of Vishnu Purana, Punthi Pustak, Calcutta-4, 1961, p. 367, fn. 64.

14. Wilson, op.cit., P. 457.

15. Ibid., 458.

16. Ibid., pp.465-66.

17. Ibid., p. 466.

18. Shastri, Yoginder Pal; Jat Kshatriya Itihas, Kankhal, p. 130.

19. Singh, Ganga; op.cit., p. 22.

20. Wilson, op.cit., p. 467, fn. I; Wiltoro, As. Res. Vol.IX, p. 199; or in Assam (As. Res., Vol. XIV, p. 443).

21. Wilson, op.cit., p. 338-39; Pargiter, AIHT, p. 269; Cr. also Siddhantashastree, op.cit., p. 137-141.

22. Cunningham, Arch. Sur. Rep., Vol. VI, p. 63.

23. Wilson, op.cit., p. 480, fn. 13.

24. Vaidya, C.V.; Mahabharata (A Criticism). pp. 18-21,32,159.

24a. Pargiter, AIHT. p. 284 and fn. 7.

---

The Jats:Their Origin, Antiquity and Migrations: End of p.110

---

24b. Manu, X, 23; Shafer, Ethnog. of Anc. Ind., p. 152.

24c. Sec Ref. No. 62 infra.

25. Ganga Singh installs him in Braj (op.cit., p. 25), some even say that he was made ruler of Mathura or of Hastinapur.

26. U.N. Sharma use Vajranabh instead of Vajra (Loc. cit.).

27. Sharma, Upendra Nath; Jaton Ka Navin Itihas, Mangal Prakashan, .rarpur, 1977, p. 57.

Bayana Inscription of Mahipaladeva V. 1012 (955 AD)

The relevant inscription recording the fact is incised on a slab in the pavement of the Ukha mosque at Bayana, now transformed into the Ukha mandir.

The temple was constructed by Mahipaladeva in ca. 950 or sometime before AD 955 as the Bayana inscription dated VS 1012 (AD 955) suggests that Sripatha was the seat of Mahipala Deva.

The Bayana inscription of Chitralekha (955 AD)74 refers to the collection of three drammas for a deity at the mandapika of Shripatha and of a similar sum at the mandapika of Vasavata. Both the mandapikas appear to have been noted for trade in horses, as the local queen donated in favour of a Visnu temple .

An inscription found at Bayana in Rajasthan, dated VS 1012=955 AD, refers to one Maharajadhiraja Mahipala. The Bayana region must have been within the Pratihara dominions, for Rajor, lying further to its north-west.

Up to V. 1012 (955 AD), Sripatha appears to have been ruled by the Surasena dynasty.

Bayana inscription of queen Chitra-lekha (dated 955 AD) mentions prostitutes attached to temples.

Bayana formed part of the kingdom of Kanauj in Vikrama year 1012 = 955 ad, the date of the epigraph, nobody would probably ... and this supposition is doubtless to some extent strengthened by the evidence of the Rajor inscription...

बयाना, जिला भरतपुर

विजयेन्द्र कुमार माथुर ने लेख किया है .....बयाना, जिला भरतपुर, राज., (AS, p.607): इस स्थान का प्राचीन नाम 'बाणपुर' कहा जाता है। इसके अतिरिक्त, इसके अन्य नाम 'वाराणसी', 'श्रीप्रस्थ' या 'श्रीपुर' भी उपलब्ध हैं।

किंवदन्ती के अनुसार वाणपुर का सम्बन्ध बाणासुर तथा उसकी कन्या ऊषा से बताया जाता है। ऊखा मन्दिर ऊषा का ही स्मारक कहा जाता है। 956 ई. के एक अभिलेख में, जो ऊखा मन्दिर से प्राप्त हुआ था, यहाँ के राजा लक्ष्मण सेन का उल्लेख है। एक अन्य अभिलेख बाबर के समय का (934 हिजरी या 1527 ई.), जिससे इस वर्ष में [p.608]: बाबर का बयाना पर अधिकार सूचित होता है। अवश्य ही बाबर के हाथ में यह प्रदेश राणा संग्राम सिंह के कनवाहा (=खानवा) के युद्ध (1527 ई.) में पराजित होने पर आया होगा। बाबर के सेनापति महमूद अली का महल भीतरवाड़ी में अब भग्नावस्था में है।

महमूद अली के प्रधानमंत्री अजब सिंह भांवरा थे, जो जाति के ब्राह्मण बताए जाते हैं। इनके नाम से बयाना में भांवरा गली प्रसिद्ध है। इस गली में अजब सिंह के बनवाए हुए चौका महल, गिदोरिया कूप तथा अनासागर बाबड़ी आज भी वर्तमान में हैं।

बयाना बहुत समय तक जाट रियासत भरतपुर की रिज़ामत (ज़िला) था। हाल ही में 1137 ई. (1194 वि. सं.) का एक अभिलेख पाल नरेशों के समय का मागरौल नामक ग्राम से प्राप्त हुआ है, जो इस प्रकार है— संवत् 1194 अगहन स्वस्ति श्री ठाकुर साहू राम कील माहड़ ग्राम भाँगसरुवास हर्डखे श्री देवहज श्री पाल लिखी मिति 3'।

यहाँ के पाल नरेशों में विजयपाल प्रसिद्ध है। इन्हीं के नाम से स्थापित विजय मंदिर गढ़ आज भी भग्नावस्था में यहाँ स्थित है. विजयपाल के पुत्र तिहिनपाल के तीन पुत्र थे, जो पाल भाई नाम से प्रसिद्ध हुए। 1243 विक्रम संवत=1186 ई. का एक अन्य हिन्दी अभिलेख भी यहाँ पर मिला है।