^{page 154 note 1} Beal, , Travels of Buddhist Pilgrims, lutrod. p. xxi;Google ScholarChinese Repository, vol. x. No. 3, 03, 1841.Google Scholar

^{page 155 note 1} See an account of the Introduction of Buddhism into China, in Journal Asiatique, 1856, 08, p. 105.Google ScholarRecherches sur l&origine des ordres religieux dans l'empire chinois, par Bazin.

^{page 155 note 2} Stan. Julien, Pèlerins Bouddhistes, vol. i. p. 296.Google Scholar

^{page 155 note 3} Feer, L., Sutra en 42 articles, p. xxvii.Google Scholar

^{page 155 note 4} Le Dhammapada, , par F. H, suiyi du Sutra en 42 articles, par Léon Feer, 1878, p. xxiv.Google Scholar

^{page 155 note 5} This first translation of the Lalita-Vistara seems unfortunately to be lost. It would have enabled us to see what the Life of Buddha was in the first century of the Christian era.

^{page 156 note 1} See Journal of R.A.S. 1856, pp. 327, 332.Google Scholar

^{page 156 note 2} Beal, , l.c. p. xxiii.Google Scholar

^{page 156 note 3} Beal, , l.c. p. xxxiii.Google Scholar

^{page 157 note 1} A long list of Sanskrit texts translated into Chinese may be found in the Journal Asiatique, 1849, p. 353, seq., s.t. Concordance Sinico-Samsterite d'un nombre considérable de titres d'ouvrages Bouddhiques, recueillie dans un Catalogs Chinois de l' an 1306, par M. Stanislas Julien.Google Scholar

^{page 157 note 2} Körösi, Csoma, As. Res. vol. xx. p. 488.Google ScholarJournal Asiatique, 1849, p. 356.Google Scholar

^{page 158 note 1} cf. Beal, , Catalogue, , p. 66.Google Scholar

^{page 159 note 1} The modern paper in Nepal is said to date from 500 years ago. Hodgson, Essays.

^{page 159 note 2} M. M., , History of Ancient Sanskrit Literature, p. 516.Google Scholar

^{page 159 note 3} Burnell, , South Indian Palœography, 2nd ed. p. 84, seq.Google Scholar

^{page 159 note 4} See Sacred Books of the East, vol. i., Upanishads, Introduction, p. lxxviiiGoogle Scholar.

^{page 160 note 1} Beal's Travels of Buddhist Pilgrims, Introd. p. xlvi.Google Scholar

^{page 160 note 2} Pèlerins Bouddhistes, vol. i. p. 138.Google Scholar

^{page 160 note 3} Fausböll, , Dasaratha-Játaka, p. 25.Google Scholar

^{page 162 note 1} Le Bouddhisme dans l'extrème Orient; Revue Scientifique, Décembre, 1879.

^{page 162 note 2} Journal Asiatique, 1871, p. 386seq.Google Scholar

^{page 162 note 3} Five of these translations were introduced into Japan, the others seem to have been lost in China. Hence the translations are spoken of as “the five in existence and the seven missing.”

^{page 163 note 1} The MSS. vary between Sukhavatî and Sukhâvatî.

^{page 163 note 2} See also Loi, Lotus de la bonne, p. 267.Google Scholar

^{page 164 note 1} Journal of the R.A.S. 1856, p. 319.Google Scholar

^{page 165 note 1} I owe this information to the kindness of M. Léon Peer at Paris.

^{page 165 note 2} See Journal Asiatique, 3rd series, vol. iii. p. 316; vol. iv. p. 296–8.Google Scholar

^{page 166 note 1} J.R.A.S. 1866, p. 136.Google Scholar

^{page 166 note 2} J.R.A.S. 1866, p. 136.Google Scholar

^{page 166 note 3} Beal, , Catalogue, , p. 23.Google ScholarJ.R.A.S. 1856, p. 319.Google ScholarBeal, , Catalogue, , p. 77,Google Scholar mentions also an Amitâbha-sûtra-upadesa-sâstra, by Vasubandha, translated by Bodhiruki (Wou-liang-sheu-king-yeou-po-ti-she). There is an Amitâbha Sûtra, translated by Chi-Hien of the Wu period, i.e. 168–190 A.D., mentioned in MrBeal's, Catalogue of the Buddhist Tripilaka, p. 6.Google Scholar The next Sûtra, which he calls the Sûtra of measureless years, is no doubt the Amitâyus-Sûtra, Amitâyus being another name for Amitâbha (Fu-shwo-wou-liang-sheu-king, p. 6Google Scholar). See also Catalogue, , pp. 99, 102.Google Scholar

^{page 174 note 1} See Yule, H., Marco Polo, 2nd ed. vol. i. pp. 441–443.Google Scholar

^{page 176 note 1} Srâvastî, capital of the Northern Kosalas, residence of King Prasenagit. It was in ruins when visited by Fa-Hian (init. V. Saec.); not far from the modern Fizabad. Cf. Burnouf, , Introduction, p. 22Google Scholar.

^{page 176 note 2} Sârdha, with, the Pâli saddhim. Did not the frequent mention of 1,200 and a half, i.e. 1,250, 1,300 and a half, i.e. 1350, persons accompanying Buddha arise from a misunderstanding of sardha, meaning originally ‘with a half’?

^{page 176 note 3} Abhigñânâbhigñâtaih. The Japanese text reads abhgñâtâbhâgñâtaih, i.e. abhigñâtâbhigñâtaih. If this were known to be the correct reading, we should translate it by ‘known by known people,’ notus a viris notis, i.e. well-known, famous Abhigñâta in the sense of known, famous, occurs in Lalita-Vistara, , p. 25Google Scholar, and the Chinese translators adopted that meaning here. Again, if we preferred the reading abbigñânâbhigñâtaih, this too would admit of an intelligible rendering, viz. known or distinguished by the marks or characteristics, the good qualities, that ought to belong to a Bhikshu. But the technical meaning is ‘possessed of a knowledge of the five abhigñâis.’ It would be better in that case to write abhigñâtâbhigñânaih, but no MSS. seem to support that reading. The five abhigñâs or abhigñânas which an Arhat ought to possess are the divine sight, the divine hearing, the knowledge of the thoughts of others, the remembrance of former existences, and magic power. See Burnouf, Lotus, Appendice, No. xiv. The larger text of the Sukhavatîvyûha has abhigñânâbhigñaih, and afterwards abhigñâtâbhigñaih. The position of the participle as the uttara-pada in such compounds as abhigñânâbhigñataih is common in Buddhistic Sanskrit.

^{page 176 note 4} Mahâsrâvaka, the great disciples, properly the eighty principal disciples.

^{page 176 note 5} Arhadbhih. I have left the correct Sanskrit form, because the Japanese text clearly gives the termination adbhih. Hôgŏs text has the more usual form arhantaih. The change of the old classical arhat into the Pâli arahan, and then back into Sanskrit arhanta, arahanta, and at last arihanta, with the meaning of ‘destroyer of the enemies,’ i.e. the passions, shows very clearly the different stages through which Sanskrit words pass in the different phases of Buddhist Literature. In Tibet, in Mongolia, and in China, Arhat is translated by ‘destroyer of the enemy.’ See Burnouf, , Lotus, p. 287,Google ScholarIntroduction, p. 295.Google Scholar Arhat is the title of the Bhikshu on reaching the fourth degree of perfection. Cf. Sûtra of the 42 Sections, cap. 2. Clemens of Alexandria (d. 220) speaks of the who worshipped a pyramid erected over the relics of a god. Is this a translation of Arhat, as Lassen (De nom. Ind. philosoph. in Khein Museum, vol. i. p. 187)Google Scholar and Burnouf (Introd. p. 295Google Scholar) supposed, or a transliteration of Samana? Clemens also speaks of (Stromat, . p. 539Google Scholar, Potter).

^{page 177 note 6} Names of Disciples in Sanskrit, Pâli, Chinese, Tibetan, and Japanese MSS. Beal, , J.R.A.S. 1866, p. 140:Google Scholar

^{page 177 note 7} Indra, the old Vedic god, has come to mean simply lord, and in the Kanda Paritta (Journal Asiatique, 1871, p. 220) we actually find Asurinda, the Indra or Lord of the Asuras.Google Scholar

^{page 177 note 8} The numbers in Buddhist Literature, if they once exceed a Koti or Kotî, i.e. ten millions, become very vague, nor is their value always the same. Ayuta, i.e. a hundred Kotis; Niyuta, i.e. a hundred Ayutas; and Nayuta, i.e. 1 with 22 zeros, are often confounded, nor does it matter much so far as any definite idea is concerned which such numerals convey to our mind.

^{page 177 note 9} Tishthati dhriyate yâpayati dharmam ka desayati. This is evidently an idiomatic phrase, for it occurs again and again in the Nepalese text of the Sukhavatîvyûha (MS. 26b, 1. 1. 2; 55a, 1. 2, etc.). If it is right, it seems to mean, he stands there, holds himself, supports himself, and teaches the law. Burnouf translates the same phrase by, “ils se trouvent, vivent, existent” (Lotus, , p. 354Google Scholar). On yâpeti in Pali, see Fausböll, , Dasaratha-jâtaka, , pp. 26, 28Google Scholar; and yâpana in Sanskrit.

^{page 177 note 10} Kinkinîgâla. The texts read kankanâgalais Ka and kankanîgalais Ka, and again later kankanîunâm (also lû) and kankanîgalânâm. Mr. Beal translates from Chinese, “seven rows of exquisite curtains,” and again, “gemmous curtains.” First of all it seems clear that we must read gâla, net, web, instead of gala. Secondly, kankana, bracelet, gives no sense, for what could be the meaning of nets or strings of bracelets? I prefer to read kinkinîgâla, nets or strings or rows of bells. Such rows of bells served for ornamenting a garden, and it may be said of them that, if moved by the wind, they give forth certain sounds. In the commentary on Dhammapada, 30, p. 191Google Scholar, we meet with kinkinikagâla, from which likewise the music proceeds; see Childers, s.v. gâla. In the MS. of the Nepalese Sukhavatîvyûha (R.A.S.), p. 39a, 1. 4, I likewise find svarnaratnakinkinîgâlâni, which settles the matter, and shows how little confidence we can place in the Japanese texts.

^{page 178 note 11} Anuparikshipta, inclosed; see parikkhepo in Childers' Diet.

^{page 178 note 12} The four and seven precious things in Pâli are (according to Childers):

Here Childers translates cat's eye; but s.v. veluriyam, he says, a precious stone, perhaps lapis lazuli.

In Sanskrit (Burnouf, , Lotus, , p. 320):Google Scholar

Julien, (Pèlerins Bouddhistes, vol. ii. p. 482) gives the following list:Google Scholar

Vaidûrya (or Vaidûrya) is mentioned in the Tathâgatagunagñânakintyavishayâvatâranirdesa (Wassilief, , p. 161Google Scholar) as a precious stone which, if placed on green cloth, looks green, if placed on red cloth, red. The fact that vaidûrya is often compared with the colour of the eyes of a cat, would seem to point to the cat's eye (see Borooah's Engl. Sanskrit Dictionary, vol. ii. preface, p. ixGoogle Scholar), certainly not to lapis lazuli. Cat's eye is a kind of chalcedony. I see, however, that vaidûrya has been recognized as the original of the Greek a very ingenious conjecture, either of Weber's or of Pott's, considering that lingual d has a sound akin to r, and ry may be changed to ly and 11 (Weber, , Omina, , p. 326)Google Scholar. The Persian billaur or ballûr, which Skeat gives as the etymon of , is of Arabic origin, means crystal, and could hardly have found its way into Greek at so early a time.

^{page 178 note 13} Purobhaktena. The text is difficult to read, but it can hardly be doubtful that purobhaktena corresponds to Pali purebhattam, i.e. before the morning meal, opposed to pakkhâbhattam, after the noonday meal, i.e. in the afternoon. See Childers, s.v. Pûrvabhaktikâ is the first repast, as Prof. Cowell informs me.

^{page 178 note 14} Kâkâpeya. One text reads Kâkapeya, the other Kâkâpeya. It is difficult to choose. The more usual word is kâkapeya, which is explained by Pânini ii. 1, 33. It is uncertain, however, whether kâkapeya is meant as a laudatory or as a depreciatory term. Boehtlingk takes it in the latter sense, and translates nadî kâkapeyâ, by a shallow river that could be drunk up by a crow. Târânâtha takes it in the former sense, and translates nadî kâkapeyâ, as a river so full of water that a crow can drink it without bending its neck (kâkair anatakandharaih pîyate; pûrnodakatvena prasasye kâkaih peye nadyâdau). In our passage kâkapeya must be a term of praise, and we therefore could only render it by “ponds so full of water that crows could drink from them.” But why should so well known a word as kâkapeya have been spelt kâkâpeya, unless it was done intentionally ? And if intentionally, what was it intended for ? We must remember that Pânini ii. 1, 42 schol. teaches us how to form the word tîrthakâka, a crow at a tîrtha, which means a person in a wrong place. It would seem therefore that crows were considered out of place at a tirtha or bathing place, either because they were birds of ill omen, or because they denied the water. From that point of view, kâkâpeya would mean a pond not visited by crows, free from crows.

^{page 179 note 15} The eight good qualities of water are limpidity, purity, refreshing coolness, sweetness, softness, fertilizing qualities, calmness, power of preventing famine, productiveness. See Beal, , Catena, , p. 379.Google Scholar

^{page 179 note 16} Divâ vihârâya, for the noonday rest, the siesta. See Childers, s.v. vihâtra.

^{page 179 note 15} Krauñkâh. Snipe, curlew. Is it meant for Kuravîka, or Karavîka, a fine-voiced bird? or for Kalavinka, Pâli Kalavîka? See Burnouf, , Lotus, , p. 566.Google Scholar I see, however, the same birds mentioned together elsewhere, as hamsakrauñkamayûrasâkasalikakokila, etc. On mayûra see Mahâv. Introd. p. xxxixGoogle Scholar; Rig V. I. 191, 14.

^{page 179 note 18} Indriyabalabodhyangasabda. These are technical terms, but their meaning is not quite clear. Spence Hardy, in his Manual, , p. 498Google Scholar, enumerates the five indrayas, viz. 1) sardhâwa, purity (probably sraddhâ, faith), 2) wiraya, persevering exertion (vîrya), 3) sati or smirti, the ascertainment of truth (smriti), 4) samâdhi, tranquillity, 6) pragnâwa, wisdom (pragñâ).

The five balayas (bala), he adds, are the same as the five indrayas.

The seven bowdyânga (bodhyaiiga) are according to him: 1) sihi or smirti, the ascertainment of the truth by mental application, 2) dharmmawicha, the investigation of causes, 3) wîraya, persevering exertion, 4) prîti, joy, 5) passadhi, or prasrabdhi, tranquillity, 6) samâdhi, tranquillity in a higher degree, including freedom from all that disturbs either body or mind, 7) upekshâ, equanimity.

It will be seen from this that some of these qualities or excellences occur both as indriyas and bodhyangas, while balas are throughout identical with indriyas. Burnouf, however, in his Lotus, gives a list of five balas (from the Vocabulaire Pentaglotte) which correspond with the five indriyas of Spence Hardy, viz. sraddbâ-bala, power of faith, vîrya-bala, power of vigour, smritibala, power of memory, samâdhi-bala, power of meditation, pragñâ-bala, power of knowledge. They precede the seven bodhyangas both in the Lotus, the Vocabulaire Pentaglotte, and the Lalita-Vistara.

To these seven bodhyangas Burnouf has assigned a special treatise, Appendice xii. p. 796. They occur both in Sanskrit and Pâli.

^{page 179 note 19} Niraya, the bells, also called Naraka. Yamaloka, the realm of yama, the judge of the dead, is explained as the four Apâyas, i.e. Naraka, hell, Tîryagyoni, birth as animals, Pretaloka, realm of the dead, Asuraloka, realm of evil spirits. The three terms which are here used together, occur likewise in a passage translated by Burnouf, , Introduction, p. 544Google Scholar.

^{page 179 note 20} Iti sankhyâm gakkhanti, they are called, cf. Childers, s.v. sankhyâ. Asankhyeya, even more than aprameya, is the recognized term for infinity. Lotus, Burnouf, p. 852.Google Scholar

^{page 179 note 21} Avaramâtraka. This is the Pâli oramattako, ‘belonging merely to the present life,’ and the intention of the writer seems to be to inculcate the doctrine of the Mahâyâna, that salvation can be obtained by mere repetitions of the name of Amitâbha, in direct opposition to the original doctrine of Buddha, that as a man soweth, so he reapeth. Buddha would have taught that the kusalamûla, the root or the stock of good works performed in this world (avaramâtraka), will bear fruit in the next, while here ‘vain repetitions’ seems all that is enjoined. The Chinese translators take a different view of this passage, and I am not myself quite certain that I have understood it rightly. But from the end of this section, where we read kulaputrena vâ kuladuhitrâ vâ tatra buddhakshetre kittaprânidhânam kartavyam, it seems clear that the locative (buddhakshetre) forms the object of the pranidhâna, the fervent prayer or longing. The Satpurusha already in the Buddhakshetra would be the innumerable men (manushyâs) and Boddhisattvas mentioned before.

^{page 179 note 22} arthavasa, lit. thfe power of the thing; cf. Dhammapada, p. 388, v. 289.Google Scholar

^{page 179 note 23} I am not quite certain as to the meaning of this passage, but if we enter into the bold metaphor of the text, viz. that the Buddhas cover the Buddhacountries with the organ of their tongue and then unrol it, what is intended can hardly be anything but that they first try to find words for the excellences of those countries, and then reveal or proclaim them. Burnouf, however (Lotus, , p. 417Google Scholar), takes the expression in a literal sense, though he is shocked by its grotesqueness. On these Buddhas and their countries, see Burnouf, , Lotus, , p. 113.Google Scholar

^{page 180 note 24} Pratîyatha. The texts give again and again pattîyatha, evidently the Pâli form, instead of pratîyata. I have left tha, the Pâli termination of the 2 p. pl. in the imperative, instead of ta, because that form was clearly intended, while pa for pra may be an accident. Yet I have little doubt that patîyatha was in the original text. That it is meant for the imperative, we see from sraddadhâdhvam, etc., further on. Other traces of the influence of Pâli or Prakrit on the Sanskrit of our Sûtr a appear in arhantaih, the various reading for arhadbhih, which I preferred; sambahula for bahula; dhriyate yâpayati; purobhaktena; anyatra; sankhyâm gakkhanti; avaramâtraka; vethana instead of veshtana, in nirvethana; dharmaparyâya (Corp. Inscript. plate xv.), etc.

^{page 180 note 25} The Sukhavatívyûha, even in its shortest text, is called a Mahâyâna-sûtra, nor is there any reason why a Mahâyâna-sûtra should not be short. The meaning of Mahâyâna-sûtra is simply a Sûtra belonging to t he Mahâyâna-school, the school of the Great Vehicle. It was Burnouf who, in his “Introduction to the History of Buddhism,” tried very hard to establish a distinction between the Vaipulya or developed Sûtras, and what he calls the simple Sûtras. Now the Vaipulya Sûtras may all belong to the Mahâyâna school, but that would not prove that all the Sûtras of the Mahâyâna school are Vaipulya or developed Sûtras. The name of Simple Sûtra, in opposition to the Vaipulya or developed Sûtras, is not recognized by the Buddhists themselves; it is really an invention of Burnouf's. No doubt there is a great difference between a Vaipulya Sûtra, such as the Lotus of the Good Law, translated by Burnouf, and the Sûtras which Burnouf translated from the Divyâvadâna. But what Burnouf considers as the distinguishing mark of a Vaipulya Sûtra, viz. the occurrence of Bodhisattvas, as followers of the Buddha Sâkyamuni, would no longer seem to be tenable, unless we classed our short Sukhavatî-vyûha as a Vaipulya or developed Sûtra. For this there is no authority. Our Sûtra is called a Mahâyâna Sûtra, never a Vaipulya Sûtra, and yet among the followers of Buddha, the Bodhisattvas constitute a very considerable portion. But more than that, Amitâbha, the Buddha of Sukhavatî, another personage whom Burnouf looks upon as peculiar to the Vaipulya-Sutras, who is in fact one of the Dhyâni-buddhas, though not called by that name in our Sûtra, forms the chief object of our Sûtra, and is represented as contemporary with Buddha Sâkyamuni.† The larger text of the Sukhavativyuha would certainly, according to Burnouf's definition, seem to fall into the category of the Vaipulya Sûtras. But it is not so called in the MSS. which I have seen, and Burnouf himself gives an analysis of that Sûtra (Introduction, p. 99Google Scholar), as a specimen of a Mahâyâna, but not of a Vaipulya Sûtra.

^{page 180 note 26} La présence des Bodhisattvas ou leur absence intéresse done le fonds même des livres où on la remarque, et il est Men évident que ce seul point trace une ligne de démarcation profonde entre les Sûtras ordinaires et les Sûtras développés.“—Burnouf, , Introduction, p. 112Google Scholar.

^{page 180 note 27} L'idée d'un ou de plusieurs Buddhas surhumains, celle de Bodhisattvas créés par eux, sont des conceptions aussi étrangères à ces livres (les Sûtras simples) que celle d'un Âdibuddha ou d'un Dieu.“—Burnouf, , Introduction, p. 120Google Scholar.