Th[i]z fiu il[u]str[e]shonz wil ekspl[e]n, ei h[o]p the esenshal diferens in the aplik[e]shon ov f[o]netiks tu filoloji and deialektoloji, and wil sh[o] that in the former our br[u]sh m[u]st ov nesesiti be br[w]d, hweil in the later it m[u]st b[i] fein. It iz bei miksi[n] [u]p t[ue] separ[e]t leinz ov reserch, [i]ch heili important in itself, that s[o] m[u]ch konfiu[z]on haz ov l[e]t b[i]n ok[e][z]ond. The valiu ov piurli f[o]netik obzerv[e]shonz shud on no akount b[i] [u]nderr[e]ted; b[u]t it iz nesesari, for that veri r[i]zon, that deialektikal az wel az filolojikal f[o]netiks shud b[i] konfeind tu th[e]r proper sf[i]r. The filolojist haz m[u]ch tu lern from the f[o]netishan, b[u]t h[i] shud never forget that h[i]r, az elshw[e]r, hwot iz br[w]d and tipikal iz az important and az seientifikali akiuret az hwot iz miniut and speshal.

Hwot iz br[w]d and tipikal iz often m[o]r akiuret [i]ven than hwot iz miniut and speshal. It meit b[i] posibel, for instans, bei a f[o]tografik proses, tu reprezent the ekzakt pozishon ov the t[u][n] and the inseid w[w]lz ov the mou[t] hweil w[i] pronouns the Italian vouel i. B[u]t it wud b[i] the gr[e]test mist[e]k tu s[u]p[o]z that this imej givz [u]s the [o]nli w[e] in hwich that vouel iz, and kan b[i], pronounst. Th[o] [i]ch individiual m[e] hav hiz [o]n w[e] ov plesi[n] the t[u][n] in pronounsi[n] i, w[i] hav [o]nli tu trei the experiment in order tu konvins ourselvz that, with s[u]m efort, w[i] m[e] v[e]ri that pozishon in meni w[e]z and yet prodius the sound ov. i. Hwen, th[e]rfor, in mei "Lektiurz on the Seiens ov La[n]gwej," ei g[e]v piktiurz ov the pozishonz ov the vokal organz rekweird for pronounsi[n] the tipikal leterz ov the alfabet, ei tuk gr[e]t k[e]r tu m[e]k them tipikal, that iz, tu l[i]v them r[u]f skechez rather than miniut f[o]tografs. Ei kanot beter ekspres hwot ei f[i]l on this point than bei kw[o]ti[n] the w[u]rdz ov Haeckel:—

"For didaktik p[u]rposez, simpel sk[i]matik figiurz ar far m[o]r y[ue]sful than piktiurz prezervi[n] the gr[e]test f[e][t]fulnes tu n[e]tiur and karid out with the gr[e]test akiurasi." ("Ziele und Wege," p. 37.)

[The following three letters, now introduced, will complete the Phonetic Alphabet—

[dh] [ch] [sh]

for the sounds heard in—then, cheap, she.]

Tu ret[u]rn, after [dh]is digre[sh]en, tu Mr. Pitman'z alfabet, ei rep[i]t [dh]at it rekomendz itself tu mei meind bei hwot [u][dh]erz k[w]l its inakiurasi. It [sh]ez its r[i]al and praktikal wizdom bei not atempti[n] tu fiks eni disti[n]k[sh]onz hwi[ch] ar not absol[ue]tli nesesari. If, for instans, w[i] t[e]k [dh]e g[u]t[u]ral teniuis, w[i] feind that I[n]gli[sh] rekogneizez w[u]n k [o]nli, [w]l[dh]e its pron[u]nsi[e][sh]on v[e]riz konsiderabli. It iz s[u]mteimz pronounst s[o] az tu prodius [w]lmost a [sh]arp krak; s[u]mteimz it haz a d[i]p, hol[o] sound; and s[u]mteimz a soft, l[e]zi, mouille karakter. It v[e]riz konsiderabli akordi[n] tu [dh]e vouelz hwi[ch] fol[o] it, az enibodi m[e] h[i]r, n[e] f[i]l, if h[i] pronounsez in s[u]kse[sh]on, kot, k[ue]l, kar, kat, kit. B[u]t az I[n]gli[sh] d[u]z not y[ue]z [dh][i]z diferent kz for the p[u]rpos ov disti[n]gwi[sh]i[n] w[u]rdz or gramatikal formz, w[u]n br[w]d kategori [o]nli ov voisles g[u]t[u]ral [ch]eks haz tu b[i] admited in reiti[n] I[n]gli[sh]. In [dh]e Semitik la[n]gwejez [dh]e k[e]s iz diferent; not [o]nli ar kaf and kof diferent in sound, b[u]t [dh]is diforens iz y[ue]zd tu disti[n]gwi[sh] diferent m[i]ni[n]z.

Or if w[i] t[e]k [dh]e vouel a in its orijinal, piur pron[u]nsi[e][sh]on, leik Italian a, w[i] kan [i]zili pers[i]v [dh]at it haz diferent k[u]lorz in diferent kountiz ov I[n]gland. Yet in reiti[n] it m[e] b[i] tr[i]ted az w[u]n, bek[w]z it haz b[u]t w[u]n and [dh]e s[e]m gramatikal inten[sh]on, and d[u]z not konv[e] a niu m[i]ni[n] til it eks[i]dz its weidest limits. Gud sp[i]kerz in I[n]gland pronouns [dh]e a in last leik [dh]e piur Italian a; wi[dh] [u][dh]erz it bek[u]mz br[w]d, wi[dh] [u][dh]erz [t]in. B[u]t [dh]e it m[e] [dh][u]s osil[e]t konsiderabli, it m[u]st not enkr[o][ch]; on [dh]e provins ov e, hwi[ch] wud [ch][e]nj its m[i]ni[n] tu lest; nor on [dh]e provins ov o, hwk[ch] wud [ch]enj it tu lost; nor on [dh]e provins ov u, hwi[ch] wud [ch]enj it tu lust.

[Dh]e difik[u]lti, [dh]erfor, hwi[ch] Ar[ch]bi[sh]op Trench haz pointed out iz r[i]ali restrikted tu [dh][o]z k[e]sez hwer [dh]e pron[u]nsi[e][sh]on ov vouelz—for it iz wi[dh] vouelz [ch][i]fli [dh]at w[i] ar tr[u]beld—v[e]riz s[o] m[u][ch] az tu [o]verstep [dh]e br[w]dest limits ov w[u]n ov [dh]e rekogneizd kategoriz ov sound, and tu enkr[o][ch] on an[u][dh]er. If w[i] t[e]k [dh]e w[u]rd fast, hwi[ch] iz pronounst veri diferentli [i]ven bei ediuk[e]ted p[i]pel, [dh]er wud b[i] no nesesiti for indiketi[n] in reiti[n] [dh]e diferent [sh][e]dz ov pron[u]nsi[e][sh]on hwi[ch] lei betw[i]n [dh]e sound ov [dh]e [sh]ort Italian a and [dh]e lo[n] a herd in father. B[u]t hwen [dh]e a in fast iz pronounst leik [dh]e a in fat, [dh]en [dh]e nesesiti ov a niu grafik eksp[o]nent wud areiz, and Ar[ch]bi[sh]op Trench wud b[i] reit in twiti[n] f[o]netik reformerz wi[dh] sa[n]k[sh]oni[n] t[ue] speli[n]z for [dh]e s[e]m w[u]rd.

Ei kud men[sh]on [dh]e n[e]mz ov [t]r[i] bi[sh]ops, w[u]n ov h[ue]m pronounst [dh]e vouel in God leik G[w]d, an[u][dh]er leik rod, a [t]erd leik gad. [Dh]e last pron[u]nsi[e][sh]on wud probabli b[i] kondemd bei everibodi, b[u]t [dh]e [u][dh]er t[u] wud rem[e]n sa[n]k[sh]ond bei [dh]e heiest [w][t]oriti, and [dh]erfor ret[e]nd in fonetik reiti[n].

S[o] far, [dh]en, ei admit [dh]at Ar[ch]bi[sh]op Trench haz pointed out a r[i]al difik[u]lti inh[i]rent in f[o]netik reiti[n]; b[u]t hwot iz [dh]at w[u]n difik[u]lti komp[e]rd wi[dh] [dh]e difik[u]ltiz ov [dh]e prezent sistem ov I[n]gli[sh] speli[n]? It wud not b[i] onest tu trei tu ev[e]d hiz [ch]arj, bei s[e]i[n] [dh]at [dh]er iz b[u]t w[u]n pron[u]nsi[e][sh]on rekogneizd bei [dh]e y[ue]zej ov ediuk[e]ted p[i]pel. [Dh]at iz not so, and [dh][o]z h[ue] n[o] best [dh]e beioloji ov la[n]gwej, no [dh]at it kan[o]t b[i] s[o]. [Dh]e veri leif ov la[n]gwej konsists in a konstant fri[sh]on betw[i]n [dh]e sentripetal f[o]rs ov k[u]stom and [dh]e sentrifiugal fors ov individiual fr[i]dom. Agenst [dh]at difik[u]lti [dh][e]rfor, [dh]er iz n[o] remedi. [O]nli h[i]r agen [dh]e Ar[ch]bi[sh]op s[i]mz tu hav overlukt [dh]e fakt [dh]at [dh]e difik[u]lti belo[n]z tu [dh]e prezent sistem ov speli[n] n[i]rli az m[u][ch] az tu [dh]e fonetik sistem. [Dh]er iz b[u]t w[u]n rekogneizd w[e] ov speli[n], b[u]t everibodi pronounsez akordi[n] tu hiz [o]n idiosinkrasiz. It wud b[i] [dh]e s[e]m wi[dh] f[o]netik speli[n]. W[u]n pron[u]nsie[sh]on, [dh]e best rekogneizd, wud hav tu b[i] adopted az a standard in fonetik reiti[n], l[i]vi[n] tu everi Ingli[sh]man hiz fr[i]dom tu pronouns az s[i]me[t] gud tu him. W[i] [sh]ud l[ue]z n[u][t]i[n] ov hwot w[i] nou pozes, and [w]l [dh]e advantejez ov f[o]netik reiti[n] wud rem[e]n [u]nimp[e]rd. [Dh]e r[i]al st[e]t ov [dh]e k[e]s iz, [dh][e]rfor, [dh]is—N[o]w[u]n defendz [dh]e prezent sistem ov speli[n]; everiw[u]n admits [dh]e s[i]ri[u]s injuri hwi[ch] it inflikts on na[sh]onal ediuk[e][sh]on. Everibodi admits [dh]e praktikal advantejez ov fonetik speli[n], b[u]t after [dh]at, [w]l eksklem [dh]at a reform ov speli[n], hw[o]der par[sh]al or kompl[i]t, iz imposibel. Hwe[dh]er it iz imposibel or not, ei gladli l[i]v tu men ov de w[u]rld tu deseid. Az a skolar, az a stiudent ov [dh]e histori ov la[n]gwej, ei simpli m[e]nten [dh]at in everi riten la[n]gwej a reform ov speli[n] iz, s[ue]nler or l[e]ter, inevitabel. N[o] dout [dh]e [i]vil d[e] m[e] b[i] put of. Ei hav litel dout [dh]at it wil b[i] put of for meni jener[e][sh]onz, and [dh]at a r[i]al reform wil probabli not b[i] karid eksept konk[u]rentli wi[dh] a veiolent so[sh]al konv[u]l[sh]on. Onli let [dh]e kwestion b[i] argiud f[e]rli. Let fakts hav s[u]m w[e]t, and let it not b[i] s[u]p[o]zd bei men ov [dh]e w[u]rld [dh]at [dh]oz h[ue] defend [dh]e prinsipelz ov [dh]e Fonetik Niuz ar [o]nli t[i]totalerz and vejet[e]rianz, h[ue] hav never lernd hou tu spel.

If ei hav sp[o]ken stro[n]li in s[u]port ov Mr. Pitman'z sistem, it iz not bek[w]z on [w]l points ei konsider it siup[i]rior tu [dh]e sistemz prep[e]rd bei [u][dh]er reformerz, h[ue] ar d[e]li inkr[i]si[n] in n[u]mber, b[u]t [ch][i]fli bek[w]z it haz b[i]n tested so larjli, and haz stud [dh]e test wel. Mr. Pitman'z F[o]netik J[u]rnal haz nou [1880] b[i]n p[u]bli[sh]t [t]erti-[e]t y[i]rz, and if it iz non [dh]at it iz p[u]bli[sh]t w[i]kli in 12,000 kopiz, [i][ch] kopi reprezenti[n] at l[i]st for or feiv r[i]derz, it m[e] not s[i]m so veri f[ue]li[sh], after [w]l, if w[i] imajin [dh]at [dh]er iz s[u]m veital pouer in [dh]at insiguifikant jerm.]



V.

ON SANSKRIT TEXTS DISCOVERED IN JAPAN.

Read At The Meeting Of The Royal Asiatic Society, February 16, 1880.

It is probably in the recollection of some of the senior members of this Society how wide and deep an interest was excited in the year 1853 by the publication of Stanislas Julien's translation of the "Life and Travels of Hiouen-thsang." The account given by an eye-witness of the religious, social, political, and literary state of India at the beginning of the seventh century of our era was like a rocket, carrying a rope to a whole crew of struggling scholars, on the point of being drowned in the sea of Indian chronology; and the rope was eagerly grasped by all, whether their special object was the history of Indian religion, or the history of Indian literature, architecture, or politics. While many books on Indian literature, published five-and-twenty years ago, are now put aside and forgotten, Julien's three volumes of Hiouen-thsang still maintain a fresh interest, and supply new subjects for discussion, as may be seen even in the last number of the Journal of your Society.

I had the honor and pleasure of working with Stanislas Julien, when he was compiling those large lists of Sanskrit and Chinese words which formed the foundation of his translation of Hiouen-thsang, and enabled him in his classical work, the "Methode pour dechiffrer et transcrire les noms Sanskrits" (1861), to solve a riddle which had puzzled Oriental scholars for a long time—viz., how it happened that the original Sanskrit names had been so completely disguised and rendered almost unrecognizable in the Chinese translations of Sanskrit texts, and how they could be restored to their original form.

I had likewise the honor and pleasure of working with your late President, Professor H. H. Wilson, when, after reading Julien's works, he conceived the idea that some of the original Sanskrit texts of which the Chinese translations had been recovered might still be found in the monasteries of China. His influential position as President of your Society, and his personal relations with Sir John Bowring, then English Resident in China, enabled him to set in motion a powerful machinery for attaining his object; and if you look back some five-and-twenty years, you will find in your Journal a full account of the correspondence that passed between Professor Wilson, Sir J. Bowring, and Dr. Edkins, on the search after Sanskrit MSS. in the temples or monasteries of China.

On February 15, 1854, Professor Wilson writes from Oxford to Sir John Bowring:—

"I send you herewith a list of the Sanskrit works carried to China by Hwen Tsang in the middle of the seventh century, and in great part translated by him, or under his supervision, into Chinese. If any of them, especially the originals, should be still in existence, you would do good service to Sanskrit literature and to the history of Buddhism by procuring copies."

Chinese Translators of Sanskrit Texts.

It is a well-known fact that, even long before the time of Hiouen-thsang—that is, long before the seventh century of our era—large numbers of Sanskrit MSS. had been exported to China. These literary exportations began as early as the first century A. D. When we read for the first time of commissioners being sent to India by Ming-ti, the Emperor of China, the second sovereign of the Eastern Han dynasty, about 62 or 65 A. D., we are told that they returned to China with a white horse, carrying books and images.(72) And the account proceeds to state that "these books still remain, and are reverenced and worshipped."

From that time, when Buddhism was first officially recognized in China,(73) there is an almost unbroken succession of importers and translators of Buddhist, in some cases of Brahmanic texts also, till we come to the two famous expeditions, the one undertaken by Fa-hian in 400-415, the other by Hiouen-thsang, 629-645 A. D. Fa-hian's Travels were translated into French by Abel Remusat (1836), into English by Mr. Beal (1869). Hiouen-thsang's Travels are well known through Stanislas Julien's admirable translation. Of Hiouen-thsang we are told that he brought back from India no less than 520 fasciculi, or 657 separate works, which had to be carried by twenty-two horses.(74) He translated, or had translated, 740 works, forming 1,335 fasciculi.

I say nothing of earlier traces of Buddhism which are supposed to occur in Chinese books. Whatever they may amount to, we look in vain in them for evidence of any Chinese translations of Buddhist books before the time of the Emperor Ming-ti; and what concerns us at present is, not the existence or the spreading of Buddhism towards the north and east long before the beginning of the Christian era, but the existence of Buddhist books, so far as it can be proved at that time by the existence of Chinese translations the date of which can be fixed with sufficient certainty.

In the following remarks on the history of these translations I have had the great advantage of being able to use the Annals of the Sui Dynasty (589-618), kindly translated for me by Professor Legge. In China the history of each dynasty was written under the succeeding dynasty from documents which may be supposed to be contemporaneous with the events they relate. The account given in the Sui Chronicles of the introduction of Buddhism and Buddhist works into China is said to be the best general account to be found in early Chinese literature, and the facts here stated may be looked upon as far more trustworthy than the notices hitherto relied upon, and collected from Chinese writers of different dates and different localities. I have also had the assistance of Mr. Bunyiu Nanjio, who compared the names of the translators mentioned in the Sui Annals with the names as given in the K'ai-yuen-shih-kiao-mu-lu (Catalogue of the Buddhist books compiled in the period K'ai-yuen [A. D. 713-741]); and though there still remain some doubtful points, we may rest assured that the dates assigned to the principal Chinese translators and their works can be depended on as historically trustworthy.

With regard to the period anterior to Ming-ti, the Sui Chronicles tell us that after an investigation of the records, it was known that Buddhism had not been brought to China previously to the Han dynasty (began 206 B. C.), though some say that it had long been spread abroad, but had disappeared again in the time of the Khin(75) (221-206 B. C.). Afterwards, however, when Kang-khien was sent on a mission to the regions of the West (about 130 B. C.), he is supposed to have become acquainted with the religion of Buddha. He was made prisoner by the Hiungnu (Huns),(76) and, being kept by them for ten years, he may well have acquired during his captivity some knowledge of Buddhism, which at a very early time had spread from Cabul(77) towards the north and the east.

In the time of the Emperor Ai (B. C. 6-2) we read that Khin-king caused I-tsun to teach the Buddhist Sutras orally, but that the people gave no credence to them. All this seems to rest on semi-historical evidence only.

The first official recognition of Buddhism in China dates from the reign of the Emperor Ming-ti, and the following account, though not altogether free from a legendary coloring, is generally accepted as authentic by Chinese scholars: "The Emperor Ming-ti, of the After Han dynasty (58-75 A. D.), dreamt that a man of metal (or golden color) was flying and walking in a courtyard of the palace. When he told his dream in the Court, Fu-i said that the figure was that of Buddha. On this the Emperor sent the gentleman-usher Tsai-yin and Khin-king (who must then have been growing old) both to the country of the great Yueh-ki(78) and to India, in order to seek for such an image."

An earlier account of the same event is to be found in the Annals of the After (or Eastern) Han dynasty (25-120 A. D.). These annals were compiled by Fan-yeh, who was afterwards condemned to death as a rebel (445 A. D.). Here we read(79) (vol. 88, fol. 8 a seq.): "There is a tradition that the Emperor Ming-ti (58-75 A. D.) dreamt that there was a giant-like man of golden color,(80) whose head was refulgent. The Emperor wanted his retainers to interpret it. Then some said, 'There is a god (or spirit) in the West who is called Fo, whose height is sixteen feet, and of golden color.' Having heard this, the Emperor at once sent messengers to Tien-ku (i. e. India), to inquire after the doctrine of Buddha. Subsequently, copies of the image of Buddha were drawn in the middle country (i. e. China)."

The emissaries whom the Emperor Ming-ti had sent to India obtained a Buddhist Sutra in forty-two sections, and an image of Buddha, with which and the Shamans Kasyapa Matanga and Ku-fa-lan, they returned to the East. When Tsai-yin approached (the capital), he caused the book to be borne on a white horse, and on this account the monastery of the White Horse was built on the west of the Yung gate of the city of Lo to lodge it. The classic was tied up and placed in the stone house of the Lan tower, and, moreover, pictures of the image were drawn and kept in the Khing-yuean tower, and at the top of the Hsien-kieh hill.

Here we seem to be on terra firma, for some of the literary works by Kasyapa Matanga and Ku-fa-lan are still in existence. Kasyapa Matanga (or, it may be, Kasya Matanga(81)) is clearly a Sanskrit name. Matanga, though the name of a Kandala or low-caste man, might well be borne by a Buddhist priest.(82) The name of Ku-fa-lan, however, is more difficult. Chinese scholars declare that it can only be a Chinese name,(83) yet if Ku-fa-lan came from India with Kasyapa, we should expect that he too bore a Sanskrit name. In that case, Ku might be taken as the last character of Tien-ku, India, which character is prefixed to the names of other Indian priests living in China. His name would be Fa-lan, i. e. Dharma + x, whatever lan may signify, perhaps padma, lotus.(84)

M. Feer,(85) calls him Gobharana, without, however, giving his authority for such a name. The Sutra of the forty-two sections exists in Chinese, but neither in Sanskrit nor in Pali, and many difficulties would be removed if we admitted, with M. Feer, that this so-called Sutra of the forty-two sections was really the work of Kasyapa and Ku-fa-lan, who considered such an epitome of Buddhist doctrines, based chiefly on original texts, useful for their new converts in China.

It is curious that the Sui Annals speak here of no other literary work due to Kasyapa and Ku-fa-lan, though they afterwards mention the Shih-ku Sutra by Ku-fa-lan as a work almost unintelligible. In the Fan-i-ming-i-tsi (vol. iii. fol. 4 b), mention is made of five Sutras, translated by Ku-fa-lan alone, after Kasyapa's death. In the K'ai-yuen-shih-kiao-mu-lu catalogue of the Buddhist books, compiled in the period K'ai-yuen (713-741 A. D.), vol. i. fol. 6, four Sutras only are ascribed to Ku-fa-lan:—

1. The Dasabhumi, called the Sutra on the destruction of the causes of perplexity in the ten stations; 70 A. D. This is the Shi-ku Sutra.

2. The Sutra of the treasure of the sea of the law (Dharma-samudra-kosha?).

3. The Sutra of the original conduct of Buddha (Fo-pen-hing-king); 68 A. D. (taken by Julien for a translation of the Lalita-vistara).

4. The Sutra of the original birth of Buddha (Gataka).

The compiler of the catalogue adds that these translations have long been lost.

The next patron of Buddhism was Ying, the King of Khu, at the time of the Emperor Kang, his father (76-88). Many Shamans, it is said, came to China then from the Western regions, bringing Buddhist Sutras. Some of these translations, however, proved unintelligible.

During the reign of the Emperor Hwan (147-167), An-shi-kao (usually called An-shing), a Shaman of An-hsi,(86) brought classical books to Lo, and translated them. This is evidently the same translator of whom Mr. Beal ("J. R. A. S." 1856, pp. 327, 332) speaks as a native of Eastern Persia or Parthia, and whose name Mr. Wylie wished to identify with Arsak. As An-shi-kao is reported to have been a royal prince, who made himself a mendicant and travelled as far as China, Mr. Wylie supposes that he was the son of one of the Arsacidae, Kings of Persia. Mr. Beal on the contrary, takes the name to be a corruption of Asvaka or Assaka—i. e. Ἱππάσιοι.(87)

Under the Emperor Ling, 168-189 A. D., Ki-khan (or Ki-tsin), a Shaman from the Yueh-ki (called Ki-lau-kia-kuai by Beal), Ku-fo-soh (Ta-fo-sa), an Indian Shaman, and others, worked together to produce a translation of the Nirvana-sutra, in two sections. The K'ai-yuen-lu ascribes twenty-three works to Ki-khan, and two Sutras to Ku-fo-soh.

Towards the end of the Han dynasty, Ku-yung, the grand guardian, was a follower of Buddha.

In the time of the Three Kingdoms (220-264) Khang-sang-hui, a Shaman of the Western regions, came to Wu(88) with Sutras and translated them. Sun-khuean, the sovereign, believed in Buddhism. About the same time Khang-sang-khai translated the longer text of the Sukhavativyuha.

In Wei,(89) during the period Hwang-khu (220-226) the Chinese first observed the Buddhist precepts, shaved their heads, and became Sang—i. e. monks.

Even before this, a Shaman of the Western regions had come here and translated the Hsiao-pin Sutra—i. e. the Sutra of Smaller Matters (Khudda-kanikaya?)—but the head and tail of it were contradictory, so that it could not be understood.

In the period Kan-lu (256-259), Ku-shi-hsing (Chu-shuh-lan, in Beal's "Catalogue") went to the West as far as Khoten, and obtained a Sutra in ninety sections, with which he came back to Yeh, in the Tsin period of Yueen-khang (291-299), and translated it (with Dharmaraksha) under the title of "Light-emitting Pragna-paramita Sutra."(90)

In the period Thai-shi (265-274), under the Western Tsin (265-316), Ku-fa-hu(91) (Dharmaraksha), a Shaman of the Yueeh-ki, travelled through the various kingdoms of the West, and brought a large collection of books home to Lo, where he translated them. It is stated in the Catalogue of the Great Kau, an interlude in the dynasty of Thang (690-705 A. D.), that in the seventh year of the period Thai-khang (286) he translated King-fa-hwa—i. e. the Saddharma-pundarika (Beal, "Catalogue," p. 14).(92)

About 300 A. D. Ki-kung-ming translated the Wei-ma (Vimala-kirtti) and Fa-hwa (Saddharma-pundarika).(93)

In 335 the prince of the Khau kingdom (during the Tsin dynasty) permitted his subjects to become Shamans, influenced chiefly by Buddhasimha.(94)

In the time of the rebel Shih-leh, 330-333, during the Tsin dynasty, a Shaman Wei-tao-an, or Tao-an, of Khang-shan, studied Buddhist literature under Buddhasimha. He produced a more correct translation of the Vimala-kirtti-sutra (and Saddharma-pundarika), and taught it widely; but as he was not an original translator, his name is not mentioned in the K'ai-yuen-lu. On account of political troubles, Tao-an led his disciples southward, to Hsin-ye, and dispatched them to different quarters—Fa-shang to Yang-kau, Fa-hwa to Shu—while he himself, with Wei-yuean, went to Hsiang-yang and Khang-an. Here Fu-khien, the sovereign of the Fus, who about 350 had got possession of Khang-an, resisting the authority of the Tsin, and establishing the dynasty of the Former Khin, received him with distinction. It was at the wish of Tao-an that Fu-khien invited Kumaragiva to Khang-an; but when, after a long delay, Kumaragiva arrived there, in the second year of the period Hung-shi (400 A. D.), under Yao-hsing, who, in 394, had succeeded Yao-khang,(95) the founder of the After Khin dynasty, Tao-an had been dead already twenty years. His corrected translations, however, were approved by Kumaragiva.

This Kumaragiva marks a new period of great activity in the translation of Buddhist texts. He is said to have come from Ku-tsi, in Tibet, where the Emperor Yao-hsing (397-415) sent for him. Among his translations are mentioned the Wei-ma or Vima-la-kirtti-sutra (Beal's "Catalogue," p. 17); the Saddharma-pundarika (Beal's "Catalogue," p. 15); the Satyasiddha-vyakarana sastra (Beal's "Catalogue," p. 80). He was a contemporary of the great traveller, Fa-hian, who went from Khang-an to India, travelled through more than thirty states, and came back to Nanking in 414, to find the Emperor Yao-hsing overturned by the Eastern Tsin dynasty. He was accompanied by the Indian contemplationist, Buddha-bhadra.(96) Buddhabhadra translated the Fa-yan-king, the Buddhavatamsaka-vaipulya-sutra (Beal's "Catalogue," p. 9), and he and Fa-hian together, the Mo-ho-sang-ki-liu—i. e. the Vinaya of the Mahasanghika school (Beal, "Catalogue," p. 68).

Another Shaman who travelled to India about the same time was Ki-mang, of Hsin-fang, a district city of Kao-khang. In 419, in the period Yuean-hsi, he went as far as Patali-putra, where he obtained the Nirvana-sutra, and the Sanghika, a book of discipline.(97) After his return to Kao-khang he translated the Nirvana-sutra in twenty sections.

Afterwards the Indian Shaman Dharmaraksha II.(98) brought other copies of the foreign MSS. to the West of the Ho. And Tsue-khue Mung-sun, the king of North Liang, sent messengers to Kao-khang for the copy which Ki-mang had brought, wishing to compare the two.(99)

When Ki-mang's copy arrived,(100) a translation was made of it in thirty sections. Dharmaraksha II. translated the Suvarna-prabhasa and the Nirvana-Sutra, 416-423 A. D. The K'ai-yuen-lu ascribes nineteen works to Dharmalatsin in 131 fascicles.

Buddhism from that time spread very rapidly in China, and the translations became too numerous to be all mentioned.

The Mahayana school was represented at that time chiefly by the following translations:—

Translated by Kumaragiva: The Vimalakirtti-sutra (Beal, "Catalogue," p. 17. The Saddharmapunndarika-sutra (Beal, "Catalogue," p. 15) The Satyasiddhavyakarana-sastra (Beal, "Catalogue," p. 80)

Translated by Dharmalatsin, or Dharmaraksha II.: The Suvarnaprabhasa-sutra (Beal, "Catalogue," p. 15) The Nirvana-sutra (Beal, "Catalogue." p. 12)

The Hinayana school was represented by—

The Sarvastivada-vinaya by Kumaragiva (Beal, "Catalogue," pp. 67, 68).

The Dirghagama-sutra, by Buddhayasas, 410 A. D. (Beal, "Catalogue," p. 36).

The Vinaya of the four Parts, by Buddhayasas.(101)

The Ekottaragama-sutra (Anguttara), translated by Dharmanandin, of Tukhara (Fa-hsi).

The Abhidharma disquisitions, by Dharmayasas,(102) of Kophene.

During the period of Lung-an (397-401) the Ekottaragama (Anguttara) and Madhyamagama-sutras(103) were translated by Sanghadeva of Kophene. This is probably the Magghima Nikaya, translated by Gotama Sanghadeva, under the Eastern Tsin dynasty, 317-419.

In the period I-hsi (405-418) the Shaman Ki-fa-ling brought from Khoten to Nanking, the southern capital, the Hwa-yen Sutra in 36,000 gathas, and translated it. This may be the Buddhavatamsaka-sutra, called the Ta-fang-kwang-fo-fa-yan-king (Beal's "Catalogue," pp. 9, 10). This translator is not mentioned in the K'ai-yuen-lu.

In 420 the Tsin dynasty came to an end.

The Emperor Thai-wu (424-452), of the N. Wei dynasty, persecuted the Buddhists, 446; but from the year 452 they were tolerated. This dynasty lasted from 386 to 535, when it was divided into two.

In 458 there was a conspiracy under Buddhist influences, and more stringent laws were enforced against them.

In 460 five Buddhists arrived in China from Ceylon, via Tibet. Two of them, Yashaita, and Vudanandi, brought images.(104) In 502 a Hindu translated Mahayana books, called Fixed Positions and Ten Positions.(105)

During the dynasties of Khi (479-502), Liang (502-557), and Khin (557-589), many famous Shamans came to China, and translated books.

The Emperor Wu of Liang (502-549) paid great honor to Buddhism. He made a large collection of the Buddhist canonical books, amounting to 5,400 volumes, in the Hwa-lin garden. The Shaman Pao-khang compiled the catalogue in fifty-four fascicles.

In the period Yung-ping, 508-511, there was an Indian Shaman Bodhiruki, who translated many books, as Kumaragiva had done. Among them were the Earth-holding sastra (bhumidhara sastra?) and the Shi-ti-king-lun, the Dasabhumika sastra, greatly valued by the followers of the Mahayana.(106)

In 516, during the period Hsi-phing, the Chinese Shaman Wei-shang was sent to the West to collect Sutras and Vinayas, and brought back a collection of 170 books. He is not, however, mentioned as a translator in the K'ai-yuen-lu.

In 518 Sung-yun, sent by the queen of the Wei country from Lo-yang to India, returned after three years, with 175 volumes. He lived to see Bodhidharma in his coffin. This Bodhidharma, the twenty-eighth patriarch, had arrived in Canton by sea in 528, in the time of Wu-ti, the first Emperor of the Liang dynasty. Some Sanskrit MSS. that had belonged to him, and other relics, are still preserved in Japan.(107)

In the time of the Emperor Wu, of the Northern Kau dynasty (561-577), a Shaman, Wei-yuean-sung, accused the Buddhist priests, and the Emperor persecuted them. But in the first year of Kao-tsu, the founder of the Sui dynasty, in 589, toleration was again proclaimed. He ordered the people to pay a certain sum of money, according to the number of the members of each family, for the purpose of preparing Sutras (the Buddhist canon) and images. And the Government caused copies of the whole Buddhist canon to be made, and placed them in certain temples or monasteries in the capital, and in several other large cities, in such provinces as Ping-kau, Hsiang-kau, Lo-kau, etc. And the Government caused also another copy to be made and to be deposited in the Imperial Library. The Buddhist sacred books among the people were found to be several hundred times more numerous than those on the six Kings of Confucius. There were 1,950 distinct Buddhist books translated.

In the period Ta-yeh (605-616) the Emperor ordered the Shaman Ki-kwo to compose a catalogue of the Buddhist books at the Imperial Buddhist chapel within the gate of the palace. He then made some divisions and classifications, which were as follows:—

The Sutras which contained what Buddha had spoken were arranged under three divisions:—

1. The Mahayana. 2. The Hinayana. 3. The Mixed Sutras.

Other books, that seemed to be the productions of later men, who falsely ascribed their works to greater names, were classed as Doubtful Books.

There were other works in which Bodhisattvas and others went deeply into the explanation of the meaning, and illustrated the principles of Buddha. These were called Disquisitions, or Sastras. Then there were Vinaya, or compilations of precepts, under each division as before, Mahayana, Hinayana, Mixed. There were also Records, or accounts of the doings in their times of those who had been students of the system. Altogether there were eleven classes under which the books were arranged:—

1. Sutra. Mahayana 617 in 2,076 chapters. Mixed 487 in 852 chapters. Mixed and doubtful 172 in 336 chapters. 2. Vinaya. Mahayana 52 in 91 chapters. Hinayana 80 in 472 chapters. Mixed 27 in 46 chapters. 3. Sastra. Mahayana 35 in 141 chapters. Hinayana 41 in 567 chapters. Mixed 51 in 437 chapters. Total 1962 in 6,198 chapters.

Search for Sanskrit MSS. in China.

It was the publication of Hiouen-thsang's Travels which roused the hopes of Professor Wilson that some of the old Sanskrit MSS. which had been carried away from India might still be discovered in China.(108)

But though no pains were spared by Sir John Bowring to carry out Professor Wilson's wishes, though he had catalogues sent to him from Buddhist libraries, and from cities where Buddhist compositions might be expected to exist, the results were disappointing, at least so far as Sanskrit texts were concerned. A number of interesting Chinese books, translated from Sanskrit by Hiouen-thsang and others, works also by native Chinese Buddhists, were sent to the library of the East India House; but what Professor Wilson and all Sanskrit scholars with him most desired, Sanskrit MSS., or copies of Sanskrit MSS., were not forthcoming. Professor Wilson showed me, indeed, one copy of a Sanskrit MS. that was sent to him from China, and, so far as I remember, it was the Kala-Kakra,(109) which we know as one of the books translated from Sanskrit into Chinese. That MS., however, is no longer to be found in the India Office Library, though it certainly existed in the old East India House.

The disappointment at the failure of Professor Wilson's and Sir J. Bowring's united efforts was felt all the more keenly because neither Sanskrit nor Chinese scholars could surrender the conviction that, until a very short time ago, Indian MSS. had existed in China. They had been seen by Europeans, such as Dr. Gutzlaff, the hard-working missionary in China, who in a paper, written shortly before his death, and addressed to Colonel Sykes ("Journal R. A. S." 1856, p. 73), stated that he himself had seen Pali MSS. preserved by Buddhist priests in China. Whether these MSS. were in Pali or Sanskrit would matter little, supposing even that Dr. Gutzlaff could not distinguish between the two. He speaks with great contempt of the whole Buddhist literature. There was not a single priest, he says, capable of explaining the meaning of the Pali texts, though some were interlined with Chinese. "A few works," he writes, "are found in a character originally used for writing the Pali, and may be considered as faithful transcripts of the earliest writings of Buddhism. They are looked upon as very sacred, full of mysteries and deep significations, and therefore as the most precious relics of the founder of their creed. With the letters of this alphabet the priests perform incantations(110) to expel demons, rescue souls from hell, bring down rain on the earth, remove calamities, etc. They turn and twist them in every shape, and maintain that the very demons tremble at the recitation of them."

Another clear proof of the existence of Sanskrit MSS. in China is found in the account of a "Trip to Ning-po and T'heen-t'hae," by Dr. Edkins. After he had arrived at Fang-kwang, he ascended the Hwa-ling hill, and at the top of the hill he describes a small temple with a priest residing in it. "Scattered over the hill," he adds, "there are various little temples where priests reside, but the one at the top is the most celebrated, as being the place where Che-k'hae spent a portion of his time, worshipping a Sanskrit manuscript of a Buddhist classic." On his return he arrived at the pagoda erected to the memory of Che-k'hae, the founder of the Theen-t'hae system of Buddhism, in the Chin dynasty (about 580 A. D.). And a little farther on, situated in a deep dell on the left, was the monastery of Kaon-ming-sze. This is particularly celebrated for its possession of a Sanskrit MS., written on the palm leaf, once read and explained by Che-k'hae, but now unintelligible to any of the followers of Buddhism in these parts. The priests seemed to pay uncommon reverence to this MS., which is the only one of the kind to be found in the East of China, and thus of great importance in a literary point of view. It is more than 1,300 years old, but is in a state of perfect preservation, in consequence of the palm leaves, which are written on both sides, having been carefully let into slips of wood, which are fitted on the same central pin, and the whole, amounting to fifty leaves, inclosed in a rosewood box.

This may account for the unwillingness of the priests to part with their old MSS., whether Sanskrit or Pali, but it proves at the same time that they still exist, and naturally keeps up the hope that some day or other we may still get a sight of them.

Materials on which Sanskrit MSS. were written.

Of course, it might be said that if MSS. did not last very long in India, neither would they do so in China. But even then, we might expect at least that as in India the old MSS. were copied whenever they showed signs of decay, so they would have been in China. Besides, the climate of China is not so destructive as the heat and moisture of the climate of India. In India, MSS. seldom last over a thousand years. Long before that time paper made of vegetable substances decays, palm-leaves and birch-bark become brittle, and white ants often destroy what might have escaped the ravages of the climate. It was the duty, therefore, of Indian Rajahs to keep a staff of librarians, who had to copy the old MSS. whenever they began to seem unsafe, a fact which accounts both for the modern date of most of our Sanskrit MSS. and for the large number of copies of the same text often met with in the same library.

The MSS. carried off to China were in all likelihood not written on paper, or whatever we like to call the material which Nearchus describes "as cotton well beaten together,"(111) but on the bark of the birch tree or on palm leaves. The bark of trees is mentioned as a writing material used in India by Curtius;(112) and in Buddhist Sutras, such as the Karanda-vyuha (p. 69), we actually read of bhurga, birch, masi, ink, and karama (kalam), as the common requisites for writing. MSS. written on that material have long been known in Europe, chiefly as curiosities (I had to write many years ago about one of them, preserved in the Library at All Souls' College). Of late,(113) however, they have attracted more serious attention, particularly since Dr. Buehler discovered in Kashmir old MSS. containing independent rescensions of Vedic texts, written on birch bark. One of these, containing the whole text of the Rig-Veda Samhita(114) with accents, was sent to me, and though it had suffered a good deal, particularly on the margins, it shows that there was no difficulty in producing from the bark of the birch tree thousands and thousands of pages of the largest quarto or even folio size, perfectly smooth and pure, except for the small dark lines peculiar to the bark of that tree.(115)

At the time of Hiouen-thsang, in the seventh century, palm leaves seem to have been the chief material for writing. He mentions a forest of palm-trees (Borassus flabelliformis) near Konkanapura (the Western coast of the Dekhan),(116) which was much prized on account of its supplying material for writing (vol. i. p. 202, and vol. iii. p. 148). At a later time, too, in 965, we read of Buddhist priests returning to China with Sanskrit copies of Buddhist books written on palm leaves (peito).(117) If we could believe Hiouen-thsang, the palm leaf would have been used even so early as the first Buddhist Council,(118) for he says that Kasyapa then wrote the Pitakas on palm leaves (tala), and spread them over the whole of India. In the Pali Gatakas, panna is used in the sense of letter, but originally parna meant a wing, then a leaf of a tree, then a leaf for writing. Patta, also, which is used in the sense of a sheet, was originally pattra, a wing, a leaf of a tree. Suvanna-patta, a golden leaf to write on, still shows that the original writing material had been the leaves of trees, most likely of palm-trees.(119) Potthaka, i. e. pustaka, book, likewise occurs in the Pali Gatakas.(120)

Such MSS., written on palm leaves, if preserved carefully and almost worshipped, as they seem to have been in China, might well have survived to the present day, and they would certainly prove of immense value to the students of Buddhism, if they could still be recovered, whether in the original or even in later copies.

It is true, no doubt, that, like all other religions, Buddhism too had its periods of trial and persecution in China. We know that during such periods—as, for instance, in 845, under the Emperor Wu-tsung—monasteries were destroyed, images broken, and books burnt. But these persecutions seem never to have lasted long, and when they were over, monasteries, temples, and pagodas soon sprang up again, images were restored, and books collected in greater abundance than ever. Dr. Edkins tells us that "in an account of the Ko-t'sing monastery in the History of T'ian-t'ai-shan it is said that a single work was saved from a fire there several centuries ago, which was written on the Pei-to (Pe-ta) or palm leaf of India." He also states that great pagodas were built on purpose as safe repositories of Sanskrit MSS., one being erected by the Emperor for the preservation of the newly arrived Sanskrit books at the request of Hiouen-thsang, lest they should be injured for want of care. It was 180 feet high, had five stories with grains of She-li (relics) in the centre of each, and contained monuments inscribed with the prefaces written by the Emperor or Prince Royal to Hiouen-thsang's translations.

Search for Sanskrit MSS. in Japan.

Being myself convinced of the existence of old Indian MSS. in China, I lost no opportunity, during the last five-and-twenty years, of asking any friends of mine who went to China to look out for these treasures, but—with no result!

Some years ago, however, Dr. Edkins, who had taken an active part in the search instituted by Professor Wilson and Sir J. Bowring, showed me a book which he had brought from Japan, and which contained a Chinese vocabulary with Sanskrit equivalents and a transliteration in Japanese. The Sanskrit is written in that peculiar alphabet which we find in the old MSS. of Nepal, and which in China has been further modified, so as to give it an almost Chinese appearance.

That MS. revived my hopes. If such a book was published in Japan, I concluded that there must have been a time when such a book was useful there—that is to say, when the Buddhists in Japan studied Sanskrit. Dr. Edkins kindly left the book with me, and though the Sanskrit portion was full of blunders, yet it enabled me to become accustomed to that peculiar alphabet in which the Sanskrit words are written.

While I was looking forward to more information from Japan, good luck would have it that a young Buddhist priest, Mr. Bunyiu Nanjio, came to me from Japan, in order to learn Sanskrit and Pali, and thus to be able in time to read the sacred writings of the Buddhists in their original language, and to compare them with the Chinese and Japanese translations now current in his country. After a time, another Buddhist priest, Mr. Kasawara, came to me for the same purpose, and both are now working very hard at learning Sanskrit. Japan is supposed to contain 34,388,504 inhabitants, all of whom, with the exception of about 1 or 200,000 followers of the Shinto religion,(121) are Buddhists, divided into ten principal sects, the sect to which Mr. Bunyiu Nanjio belongs being that of the Shinshiu. One of the first questions which I asked Mr. Bunyiu Nanjio, when he came to read Sanskrit with me, was about Sanskrit MSS. in Japan. I showed him the Chinese-Sanskrit-Japanese Vocabulary which Dr. Edkins had left with me, and he soon admitted that Sanskrit texts in the same alphabet might be found in Japan, or at all events in China. He wrote home to his friends, and after waiting for some time, he brought me in December last a book which a Japanese scholar, Shuntai Ishikawa, had sent to me, and which he wished me to correct, and then to send back to him to Japan. I did not see at once the importance of the book. But when I came to read the introductory formula, Evam maya srutam, "Thus by me it has been heard," the typical beginning of the Buddhist Sutras, my eyes were opened. Here, then, was what I had so long been looking forward to—a Sanskrit text, carried from India to China, from China to Japan, written in the peculiar Nepalese alphabet, with a Chinese translation, and a transliteration in Japanese. Of course, it is a copy only, not an original MS.; but copies presuppose originals at some time or other, and, such as it is, it is a first instalment, which tells us that we ought not to despair, for where one of the long-sought-for literary treasures that were taken from India to China, and afterwards from China to Japan, has been discovered, others are sure to come to light.

We do not possess yet very authentic information on the ancient history of Japan, and on the introduction of Buddhism into that island. M. Leon de Rosny(122) and the Marquis D'Hervey de Saint-Denys(123) have given us some information on the subject, and I hope that Mr. Bunyiu Nanjio will soon give us a trustworthy account of the ancient history of his country, drawn from native authorities. What is told us about the conversion of Japan to Buddhism has a somewhat legendary aspect, and I shall only select a few of the more important facts, as they have been communicated to me by my Sanskrit pupil. Buddhism first reached Japan, not directly from China, but from Corea, which had been converted to Buddhism in the fourth century A. D. In the year 200 A. D. Corea had been conquered by the Japanese Empress Zingu, and the intercourse thus established between the two countries led to the importation of Buddhist doctrines from Corea to Japan. In the year 552 A. D. one of the Corean kings sent a bronze statue of Buddha and many sacred books to the Court of Japan, and after various vicissitudes, Buddhism became the established religion of the island about 600 A. D. Japanese students were sent to China to study Buddhism, and they brought back with them large numbers of Buddhist books, chiefly translations from Sanskrit. In the year 640 A. D. we hear of a translation of the Sukhavativyuhama-hayana-sutra being read in Japan. This is the title of the Sanskrit text now sent to me from Japan. The translation had been made by Ko-so-gai (in Chinese, Khang-sang-khai), a native of Tibet, though living in India, 252 A. D., and we are told that there had been eleven other translations of the same text.(124)

Among the teachers of these Japanese students we find our old friend Hiouen-thsang, whom the Japanese call Genzio. In the year 653 a Japanese priest, Dosho by name, studied under Genzio, adopted the views of the sect founded by him,—the Hosso sect,—and brought back with him to Japan a compilation of commentaries on the thirty verses of Vasubandhu, written by Dharmapala, and translated by Genzio. Two other priests, Chitsu and Chitatsu, likewise became his pupils, and introduced the famous Abhidharma-kosha-sastra into Japan, which had been composed by Vasubandhu, and translated by Genzio. They seem to have favored the Hinayana, or the views of the Small Vehicle (Kushashiu).

In the year 736 we hear of a translation of the Buddhavatamsaka-vaipulya-sutra, by Buddhabhadra and others(125) (317-419 A. D.), being received in Japan, likewise of a translation of the Saddharma-pundarika by Kumaragiva.(126)

And, what is more important still, in the ninth century we are told that Kukai (died 835), the founder of the Shingon sect in Japan, was not only a good Chinese, but a good Sanskrit scholar also. Nay, one of his disciples, Shinnyo, in order to perfect his knowledge of Buddhist literature, undertook a journey, not only to China, but to India, but died before he reached that country.

These short notices, which I owe chiefly to Mr. Bunyiu Nanjio, make it quite clear that we have every right to expect Sanskrit MSS., or, at all events, Sanskrit texts, in Japan, and the specimen which I have received encourages me to hope that some of these Sanskrit texts may be older than any which exist at present in any part of India.

The Sukhavati-vyuha.

The text which was sent to me bears the title of Sukhavati-vyuha-mahayana-sutra.(127) This is a title well known to all students of Buddhist literature. Burnouf, in his "Introduction a l'Histoire du Buddhisme" (pp. 99-102),(128) gave a short account of this Sutra, which enables us to see that the scene of the dialogue was laid at Ragagriha, and that the two speakers were Bhagavat and Ananda.

We saw before, in the historical account of Buddhism in Japan, that no less than twelve Chinese translations of a work bearing the same title were mentioned. The Chinese tell us at least of five translations which are still in existence.(129)

Those of the Han and Wu dynasties (25-280 A. D.), we are told, were too diffuse, and those of the later periods, the T'ang and Sung dynasties, too literal. The best is said to be that by Ko-so-gai, a priest of Tibetan descent, which was made during the early Wei dynasty, about 252 A. D. This may be the same which was read in Japan in 640 A. D.

The same Sutra exists also in a Tibetan translation, for there can be little doubt that the Sutra quoted by Csoma Koeroesi ("As. Res." vol. xx. p. 408) under the name of Amitabha-vyuha is the same work. It occupies, as M. Leon Feer informs me, fifty-four leaves, places the scene of the dialogue at Ragagriha, on the mountain Gridhra-kuta, and introduces Bhagavat and Ananda as the principal speakers.

There are Sanskrit MSS. of the Sukhavati-vyuha in your own Library, in Paris, at Cambridge, and at Oxford.

The following is a list of the MSS. of the Sukhavati-vyuha, hitherto known:—

1. MS. of the Royal Asiatic Society, London (Hodgson Collection), No. 20. Sukhavativyuha-mahayanasutra, sixty-five leaves. Dated Samvat 934 = A. D. 1814. It begins: Namo dasadiganantaparyantalokadhatupratishtitebhyah, etc. Evam maya srutam ekasmim samaye Bhagavan Ragagrihe viharati sma. It ends: Sukhavativyuha-mahayanasutram samaptam. Samvat 934, karttikasudi 4, sampurnam abhut. Srisuvarnapanarimabanagare Maitripurimahavihare Srivakvagradasa vagrakaryasya Gayanandasya ka sarvarthasiddheh. (Nepalese alphabet.)

2. MS. of the Bibliotheque Nationale, Paris (Collection Burnouf), No. 85; sixty-four leaves. It begins, after a preamble of five lines, Evam maya srutammekasmi samaya Bhagavan Ragagrihe viharati sma Gridhrakute parvvate mahata Bhikshusanghena sarddham. Dvatrimsrata Bhikshusahasraih. It ends: Bhagavato mitabhasya gunaparikirttanam Bodhisattvamavaivartyabhumipravesah. Amitabhavyuhaparivarttah. Sukhavativyuhah sampurnah. Iti Sri Amitabhasya Sukhavativyuha nama mahayanasturam samaptam.(130) (Devanagari alphabet.)

3. MS. of the Societe Asiatique at Paris (Collection Hodgson), No. 17; eighty-two leaves. (Nepalese alphabet.)(131)

4. MS. of the University Library at Cambridge, No. 1368; thirty-five leaves. It begins with some lines of prose and verse in praise of Amitabha and Sukhavati, and then proceeds: Evam maya srutam ekasmim samaye Bhagavan Ragagrihe nagare viharati sma, Gridhrakutaparvate mahata Bhikshusanghena sarddha, etc. It ends: iti srimad amitabhasya tathagatasya Sukhavativyuha-mahayanasutram samaptam. (Nepalese alphabet, modern.)

5. MS. given by Mr. Hodgson to the Bodleian Library Oxford (Hodgson 3). It begins with: Om namo ratnatrayaya. Om namah sarvabuddhabodhisattvebhyah, etc. Then Evam maya srutam, etc. It ends with sukhavativyuhamahayanasutram samaptam. (Nepalese alphabet, modern.)

But when I came to compare these Sanskrit MSS. with the text sent to me from Japan, though the title was the same, I soon perceived that their contents were different. While the text, as given in the ordinary Devanagari or Nepalese MSS., fills about fifty to sixty leaves, the text of the Sutra that reached me from Japan would hardly occupy more than eight or ten leaves.

I soon convinced myself that this MS. was not a text abbreviated in Japan, for this shorter text, sent to me from Japan, correspond in every respect with the Chinese Sutra translated by Mr. Beal in his "Catena," pp. 378-383, and published in your Journal, 1866, p. 136. No doubt the Chinese translation, on which Mr. Beal's translation is based, is not only free, but displays the misapprehensions peculiar to many Chinese renderings of Sanskrit texts, due to a deficient knowledge either of Sanskrit or of Chinese on the part of the translators, perhaps also to the different genius of those two languages.

Yet, such as it is, there can be no doubt that it was meant to be a translation of the text now in my possession. Mr. Beal tells us that the translation he followed is that by Kumaragiva, the contemporary of Fa-hian (400 A. D.), and that this translator omitted repetitions and superfluities in the text.(132) Mr. Edkins knows a translation, s. t. Wou-liang-sheu-king, made under the Han dynasty.(133) What is important is that in the Chinese translation of the shorter text the scene is laid, as in the Japanese Sanskrit text, at Sravasti, and the principal speakers are Bhagavat and Sariputra.

There is also a Tibetan translation of the short text, described by Csoma Koeroesi ("As. Res." vol. xx. p. 439). Here, though the name of the scene is not mentioned, the speakers are Bhagavat and Sariputra. The whole work occupies seven leaves only, and the names of the sixteen principal disciples agree with the Japanese text. The translators were Pragnavarman, Surendra, and the Tibetan Lotsava Ya-shes-sde.

M. Feer informs me that there is at the National Library a Chinese text called O-mi-to-king, i. e. Amitabha-sutra.(134) The scene is at Sravasti; the speakers are Bhagavat Sariputra.

Another text at the National Library is called Ta-o-mi-to-king, i. e. Maha Amitabha-sutra, and here the scene is at Ragagriha.

There is, besides, a third work, called Kwan-wou-liang-sheu-king by Kiang-ling-ye-she, i. e. Kalayasas, a foreigner of the West, who lived in China about 424 A. D.

We have, therefore, historical evidence of the existence of three Sutras, describing Sukhavati, or the Paradise of Amitabha. We know two of them in Sanskrit, Chinese, and Tibetan—one long, the other short. The third is known as yet in Chinese only.

Of the two Sanskrit texts, the one from Nepal, the other from Japan, the latter seems certainly the earlier. But even the fuller text must have existed at a very early time, because it was translated by Ki-lau-kia-khai, under the Eastern Han dynasty (25-220 A. D.)—i. e. at all events before 220 A. D.

The shorter text is first authenticated through the translation of Kumaragiva, about 400 A. D.; but if the views generally entertained as to the relative position of the longer and shorter Sutras be correct, we may safely claim for our short Sutra a date within the second century of our era.

What Japan has sent us is, therefore, a Sanskrit text, of which we had no trace before, which must have left India at least before 400 A. D., but probably before 200 A. D., and which gives us the original of that description of Amitabha's Paradise, which formerly we knew in a Chinese translation only, which was neither complete nor correct.

The book sent to me was first published in Japan in 1773, by Ziomio, a Buddhist priest. The Sanskrit text is intelligible, but full of inaccuracies, showing clearly that the editor did not understand Sanskrit, but simply copied what he saw before him. The same words occurring in the same line are written differently, and the Japanese transliteration simply repeats the blunders of the Sanskrit transcript.

There are two other editions of the same text, published in 1794 A. D. by another Japanese priest, named Hogo. These are in the possession of Mr. Bunyiu Nanjio, and offered some help in correcting the text. One of them contains the text and three Chinese translations, one being merely a literal rendering, while the other two have more of a literary character and are ascribed to Kumaragiva (400 A. D.), and Hiouen-thsang (648 A. D.).

Lastly, there is another book by the same Hogo, in four volumes, in which an attempt is made to give a grammatical analysis of the text. This, however, as Mr. Bunyiu Nanjio informs me, is very imperfect.

I have to-day brought with me the Japanese Sanskrit text, critically restored, and a literal translation into English, to which I have added a few notes.

TRANSLATION.

Adoration to the Omniscient.

This is what I have heard. At one time the Blessed (Bhagavat, i. e. Buddha) dwelt at Sravasti,(135) in the Geta-grove, in the garden of Anathapindaka, together with(136) a large company of Bhikshus (mendicant friars), viz. with thirteen hundred Bhikshus, all of them acquainted with the five kinds of knowledge,(137) elders, great disciples,(138) and Arhats,(139) such as Sariputra, the elder, Mahamaudgalyayana, Mahakasyapa, Mahakapphina, Mahakatyayana, Mahakaushthila, Revata, Suddhipanthaka, Nanda, Ananda, Rahula, Gavampati, Bharadvaga, Kalodayin, Vakkula, and Aniruddha. He dwelt together with these and many other great disciples, and together with many noble-minded Bodhisattvas, such as Mangusri, the prince, the Bodhisattva Agita, the Bodhisattva Gandhahastin, the Bodhisattva Nityodyukta, the Bodhisattva Anikshiptadhura. He dwelt together with them and many other noble-minded Bodhisattvas, and with Sakra, the Indra or King(140) of the Devas, and with Brahman Sahampati. With these and many other hundred thousands of Nayutas(141) of sons of the gods, Bhagavat dwelt at Sravasti.

Then Bhagavat addressed the honored Sariputra and said: O Sariputra, after you have passed from here over a hundred thousand Kotis of Buddha-countries there is in the Western part of a Buddha-country, a world called Sukhavati (the happy country). And there a Tathagata, called Amitayus, an Arhat, fully enlightened, dwells now, and remains, and supports himself, and teaches the Law.(142)

Now what do you think, Sriputra, for what reason is that world called Sukhavati (the happy)? In that world Sukhavati, O Sriputra, there is neither bodily nor mental pain for living beings. The sources of happiness are innumerable there. For that reason is that world called Sukhavati (the happy).

And again, O Sariputra, that world Sukhavati is adorned with seven terraces, with seven rows of palm-trees, and with strings of bells.(143) It is inclosed on every side,(144) beautiful, brilliant with the four gems, viz. gold, silver, beryl, and crystal. With such arrays of excellences peculiar to a Buddha-country is that Buddha-country adorned.

And again, O Sariputra, in that world Sukhavati there are lotus lakes, adorned with the seven gems, viz. gold, silver, beryl, crystal, red pearls, diamonds, and corals as the seventh. They are full of water which possesses the eight good qualities,(145) their waters rise as high as the fords and bathing-places, so that even crows(146) may drink there; they are full of golden sand, and of vast extent. And in these lotus lakes there are all around on the four sides four stairs, beautiful and brilliant with the four gems, viz. gold, silver, beryl, crystal. And on every side of these lotus lakes gem trees are growing, beautiful and brilliant with the seven gems, viz. gold, silver, beryl, crystal, red pearls, diamonds, and corals as the seventh. And in those lotus lakes lotus flowers are growing, blue, blue-colored, of blue splendor, blue to behold; yellow, yellow-colored, of yellow splendor, yellow to behold; red, red-colored, of red splendor, red to behold; white, white-colored, of white splendor, white to behold; beautiful, beautifully-colored, of beautiful splendor, beautiful to behold, and in circumference as large as the wheel of a chariot.

And again, O Sariputra, in that Buddha-country there are heavenly musical instruments always played on and the earth is lovely and of golden color. And in that Buddha-country a flower-rain of heavenly Mandarava blossoms pours down three times every day, and three times every night. And the beings who are born there worship before their morning meal(147) a hundred thousand Kotis of Buddhas by going to other worlds; and having showered a hundred thousand of Kotis of flowers upon each Tathagata, they return to their own world in time for the afternoon rest.(148) With such arrays of excellences peculiar to a Buddha-country is that Buddha-country adorned.

And again, O Sariputra, there are in that Buddha-country swans, curlews,(149) and peacocks. Three times every night, and three times every day, they come together and perform a concert, each uttering his own note. And from them thus uttering proceeds a sound proclaiming the five virtues, the five powers, and the seven steps leading towards the highest knowledge.(150) When the men there hear that sound, remembrance of Buddha, remembrance of the Law, remembrance of the Assembly, rises in their mind.

Now, do you think, O Sariputra, that these are beings who have entered into the nature of animals (birds, etc.)? This is not to be thought of. The very name of hells is unknown in that Buddha-country, and likewise that of (descent into) animal natures and of the realm of Yama (the four apayas).(151) No, these tribes of birds have been made on purpose by the Tathagata Amitayus, and they utter the sound of the Law. With such arrays of excellences, etc.

And again, O Sariputra, when those rows of palm-trees and strings of bells in that Buddha-country are moved by the wind, a sweet and enrapturing sound proceeds from them. Yes, O Sariputra, as from a heavenly musical instrument consisting of a hundred thousand Kotis of sounds, when played by Aryas, a sweet and enrapturing sound proceeds, a sweet and enrapturing sound proceeds from those rows of palm-trees and strings of bells moved by the wind. And when the men hear that sound, reflection on Buddha arises in their body, reflection on the Law, reflection on the Assembly. With such arrays of excellences, etc.

Now what do you think, O Sariputra, for what reason is that Tathagata called Amitayus? The length of life (ayus), O Sariputra, of that Tathagata and of those men there is immeasurable (amita). Therefore is that Tathagata called Amitayus. And ten Kalpas have passed, O Sariputra, since that Tathagata awoke to perfect knowledge.

And what do you think, O Sariputra, for what reason is that Tathagata called Amitabhas? The splendor (abhas), O Sariputra, of that Tathagata is unimpeded over all Buddha-countries. Therefore is that Tathagata called Amitabhas.

And there is, O Sariputra, an innumerable assembly of disciples with that Tathagata, purified and venerable persons, whose number it is not easy to count. With such arrays of excellences, etc.

And again, O Sariputra, of those beings also who are born in the Buddha-country of the Tathagata Amitayus as purified Bodhisattvas, never to return again and bound by one birth only, of those Bodhisattvas also, O Sariputra, the number is not easy to count, except they are reckoned as infinite in number.(152)

Then again all beings, O Sariputra, ought to make fervent prayer for that Buddha-country. And why? Because they come together there with such excellent men. Beings are not born in that Buddha-country of the Tathagata Amitayus as a reward and result of good works performed in this present life.(153) No, whatever son or daughter of a family shall hear the name of the blessed Amitayus, the Tathagata, and having heard it, shall keep it in mind, and with thoughts undisturbed shall keep it in mind for one, two, three, four, five, six, or seven nights, that son or daughter of a family, when he or she comes to die, then that Amitayus, the Tathagata, surrounded by an assembly of disciples and followed by a host of Bodhisattvas, will stand before them at their hour of death, and they will depart this life with tranquil minds. After their death they will be born in the world Sukhavati, in the Buddha-country of the same Amitayus, the Tathagata. Therefore, then, O Sariputra, having perceived this cause and effect,(154) I with reverence say thus, Every son and every daughter of a family ought to make with their whole mind fervent prayer for that Buddha-country.

And now, O Sariputra, as I here at present glorify that world, thus in the East, O Sariputra, other blessed Buddhas, led by the Tathagata Akshobhya, the Tathagata Merudhvaga, the Tathagata Mahameru, the Tathagata Meruprabhasa, and the Tathagata Mangudhvaga, equal in number to the sand of the river Ganga, comprehend their own Buddha-countries in their speech, and then reveal them.(155) Accept this repetition of the Law, called the "Favor of all Buddhas," which magnifies their inconceivable excellences.

Thus also in the South, do other blessed Buddhas, led by the Tathagata Kandrasuryapradipa, the Tathagata Yasahprabha, the Tathagata Maharkiskandha, the Tathagata Merupradipa, the Tathagata Anantavirya, equal in number to the sand of the river Ganga, comprehend their own Buddha-countries in their speech, and then reveal them. Accept, etc.

Thus also in the West do other blessed Buddhas, led by the Tathagata Amitayus, the Tathagata Amitaskandha, the Tathagata Amitadhvaga, the Tathagata Mahaprabha, the Tathagata Maharatnaketu, the Tathagata Suddharasmiprabha, equal in number to the sand of the river Ganga, comprehend, etc.

Thus also in the North do other blessed Buddhas, led by the Tathagata Maharkiskandha, the Tathagata Vaisvanaranirghosha, the Tathagata Dundubhisvaranirghosha, the Tathagata Dushpradharsha, the Tathagata Adityasambhava, the Tathagata Galeniprabha (Gvalanaprabha?), the Tathagata Prabhakara, equal in number to the sand, etc.

Thus also in the Nadir do other blessed Buddhas, led by the Tathagata Simha, the Tathagata Yasas, the Tathagata Yasahprabhava, the Tathagata Dharma, the Tathagata Dharmadhara, the Tathagata Dharmadhvaga, equal in number to the sand, etc.

Thus also in the Zenith do other blessed Buddhas, led by the Tathagata Brahmaghosha, the Tathagata Nakshatraraga, the Tathagata Indraketudhvagaraga, the Tathagata Gandhottama, the Tathagata Gandhaprabhasa, the Tathagata Maharkiskandha, the Tathagata Ratnakusumasampushpitagatra, the Tathagata Salendraraga, the Tathagata Ratnotpalasri, the Tathagata Sarvadarsa, the Tathagata Sumerukalpa, equal in number to the sand, etc.(156)

Now what do you think, O Sariputra, for what reason is that repetition of the Law called the Favor of all Buddhas? Every son or daughter of a family who shall hear the name of that repetition of the Law and retain in their memory the names of those blessed Buddhas, will all be favored by the Buddhas, and will never return again, being once in possession of the transcendent true knowledge. Therefore, then, O Sariputra, believe,(157) accept, and long for me and those blessed Buddhas!

Whatever sons or daughters of a family shall make mental prayer for the Buddha-country of that blessed Amitayus, the Tathagata, or are making it now or have made it formerly, all these will never return again, being once in possession of the transcendent true knowledge. They will be born in that Buddha-country, have been born, or are being born now. Therefore, then, O Sariputra, mental prayer is to be made for that Buddha-country by faithful sons and daughters of a family.

And as I at present magnify here the inconceivable excellences of those blessed Buddhas, thus, O Sariputra, do those blessed Buddhas magnify my own inconceivable excellences.

A very difficult work has been done by Sakyamuni, the sovereign of the Sakyas. Having obtained the transcendent true knowledge in this world Saha, he taught the Law which all the world is reluctant to accept, during this corruption of the present Kalpa, during this corruption of mankind, during this corruption of belief, during this corruption of life, during this corruption of passions.

This is even for me, O Sariputra, an extremely difficult work that, having obtained the transcendent true knowledge in this world Saha, I taught the Law which all the world is reluctant to accept, during this corruption of mankind, of belief, of passion, of life, and of this present Kalpa.

Thus spoke Bhagavat joyful in his mind. And the honorable Sariputra, and the Bhikshus and Bodhisattvas, and the whole world with the gods, men, evil spirits, and genii, applauded the speech of Bhagavat.(158)

This is the Mahayanasutra called Sukhavativyuha.

This Sutra sounds to us, no doubt, very different from the original teaching of Buddha. And so it is. Nevertheless it is the most popular and most widely read Sutra in Japan, and the whole religion of the great mass of the people may be said to be founded on it. "Repeat the name of Amitabha as often as you can, repeat it particularly in the hour of death, and you will go straight to Sukhavati and be happy forever;" this is what Japanese Buddhists are asked to believe: this is what they are told was the teaching of Buddha. There is one passage in our Sutra which seems even to be pointedly directed against the original teaching of Buddha. Buddha taught that as a man soweth so shall he reap, and that by a stock of good works accumulated on earth the way is opened to higher knowledge and higher bliss. Our Sutra says No; not by good works done on earth, but by a mere repetition of the name of Amitabha is an entrance gained into the land of bliss. This is no better than what later Brahmanism teaches, viz. "Repeat the name of Hari or of Krishna, and you will be saved." It is no better than what even some Christian teachers are reported to teach. It may be that in a lower stage of civilization even such teaching has produced some kind of good.(159) But Japan is surely ripe for better things. What the worship of Amitabha may lead to we can learn from a description given by Dr. Edkins in his "Trip to Ning-po and T'heen-t'hae." "The next thing," he writes, "shown to us was the prison, in which about a dozen priests had allowed themselves to be shut up for a number of months or years, during which they were to occupy themselves in repeating the name of Amida Buddha,(160) day and night, without intermission. During the day the whole number were to be thus engaged; and during the night they took it by turns, and divided themselves into watches, so as to insure the keeping up of the work till morning. We asked when they were to be let out. To which it was replied, that they might be liberated at their own request, but not before they had spent several months in seclusion. We inquired what could be the use of such an endless repetition of the name of Buddha. To which it was answered, that the constant repetition of the sacred name had a tendency to purify the heart, to deaden the affections towards the present world, and to prepare them for the state of Nirvana. It was further asked whether Buddha was likely to be pleased with such an endless repetition of his name. To which it was answered, that in the Western world it was considered a mark of respect to repeat the name of any one whom we delighted to honor. The recluses seemed most of them young men; some of whom came out to the bars of their cage to look at the strangers, but kept on repeating the name of Buddha as they stood there. It appeared to us that nothing was more calculated to produce idiocy than such a perpetual repetition of a single name, and the stupid appearance of many of the priests whom we have seen seems to have been induced by some such process."

Is it not high time that the millions who live in Japan, and profess a faith in Buddha, should be told that this doctrine of Amitabha and all the Mahayana doctrine is a secondary form of Buddhism, a corruption of the pure doctrine of the Royal Prince, and that if they really mean to be Buddhists, they should return to the words of Buddha, as they are preserved to us in the old Sutras? Instead of depending, as they now do, on Chinese translations, not always accurate, of degraded and degrading Mahayana tracts, why should they not have Japanese translations of the best portions of Buddha's real doctrine, which would elevate their character, and give them a religion of which they need not be ashamed? There are Chinese translations of some of the better portions of the Sacred Writings of Buddhism. They exist in Japan too, as may be seen in that magnificent collection of the Buddhist Tripitaka which was sent from Japan as a present to the English Government, and of which Mr. Beal has given us a very useful Catalogue. But they are evidently far less considered in Japan than the silly and the mischievous stories of Amitabha and his Paradise, and those which I know from translations are far from correct.

I hope that Mr. Bunyiu Nanjio and Mr. Kasawara, if they diligently continue their study of Sanskrit and Pali, will be able to do a really great and good work, after their return to Japan. And if more young Buddhist priests are coming over, I shall always, so far as my other occupations allow it, be glad to teach them, and to help them in their unselfish work. There is a great future in store, I believe, for those Eastern Islands, which have been called prophetically "the England of the East," and to purify and reform their religion—that is, to bring it back to its original form—is a work that must be done before anything else can be attempted.

In return, I hope that they and their friends in Japan, and in Corea and China too, will do all they can to discover, if possible, some more of the ancient Sanskrit texts, and send them over to us. A beginning, at all events, has been made, and if the members of this Society who have friends in China or in Japan will help, if H. E. the Japanese Minister, Mori Arinori, who has honored us by his presence today, will lend us his powerful assistance, I have little doubt that the dream which passed before the mind of your late President may still become a reality, and that some of the MSS. which, beginning with the beginning of our era, were carried from India to China, Corea, and Japan, may return to us, whether in the original or in copies, like the one sent to me by Mr. Shuntai Ishikawa.

With the help of such MSS. we shall be able all the better to show to those devoted students who from the extreme East have come to the extreme West in order to learn to read their sacred writings in the original Sanskrit or Pali, what difference there is between the simple teaching of Buddha and the later developments and corruptions of Buddhism. Buddha himself, I feel convinced, never knew even the names of Amitabha, Avalokitesvara, or Sukhavati. Then, how can a nation call itself Buddhist whose religion consists chiefly in a belief in a divine Amitabha and his son Avalokitesvara, and in a hope of eternal life in the paradise of Sukhavati?

POSTSCRIPT: Oxford, March 10, 1880.

The hope which I expressed in my paper on "Sanskrit Texts discovered in Japan," viz. that other Sanskrit texts might still come to light in Japan or China, has been fulfilled sooner than I expected. Mr. A Wylie wrote to me on March 3 that he had brought a number of Sanskrit-Chinese books from Japan, and he afterwards kindly sent them to me to examine. They were of the same appearance and character as the dictionary which Dr. Edkins had lent me, and the Sukhavati-vyuha which I had received from Japan. But with the exception of a collection of invocations, called the Vagra-sutra, and the short Pragna-hridaya-sutra, they contained no continuous texts. The books were intended to teach the Sanskrit alphabet, and every possible and impossible combination of the Devanagari letters, and that was all. Still, so large a number of books written to teach the Sanskrit alphabet augurs well for the existence of Sanskrit texts. There was among Mr. Wylie's books a second Chinese-Sanskrit-Japanese vocabulary, of which Mr. Kasawara has given me the following account: "This vocabulary is called 'A Thousand Sanskrit and Chinese Words' and it is said to have been arranged by I-tsing, who left China for India in 671, about twenty-seven years after Hiouen-thsang's return to China, and who is best known as the author of a book called Nanhae-ki-kwei-kou'en, on the manners and customs of the Indian Buddhists at that time.

"This vocabulary was brought from China to Japan by Zikaku, a Japanese priest, who went to China in 838 and returned in 847. It is stated at the end of the book, that in the year 884 a Japanese priest of the name of Rioyiu copied that vocabulary from a text belonging to another priest, Yuikai. The edition brought from Japan by Mr. Wylie was published there in the year 1727 by a priest called Jakumio."

The following curious passage occurs in the preface of Jakumio's edition: "This vocabulary is generally called 'One Thousand Sanskrit and Chinese Words.' It is stated in Annen's work, that this was first brought (from China) by Zikaku. I have corrected several mistakes in this vocabulary, comparing many copies; yet the present edition is not free from blunders; I hope the readers will correct them, if they have better copies.

"In the temple Horiuji, in Yamato, there are treasured Pragnaparamitahridayasutram, and Son-shio-dharani, written on two palm leaves, handed down from Central India; and, at the end of these, fourteen letters of the 'siddha' are written. In the present edition of the vocabulary the alphabet is in imitation of that of the palm leaves, except such forms of letters as cannot be distinguished from those prevalent among the scriveners at the present day.

"Horiuji is one of eleven temples founded by the prince Umayado (who died A. D. 621). This temple is at a town named Tatsuta, in the province Yamato, near Kioto, the western capital."

Here, then, we have clear evidence that in the year 1727 palm leaves containing the text of Sanskrit Sutras were still preserved in the temple of Horiuji. If that temple is still in existence, might not some Buddhist priest of Kioto, the western capital of Japan, be induced to go there to see whether the palm leaves are still there, and, if they are, to make a copy and send it to Oxford?

F. M. M.

SECOND POSTSCRIPT: Oxford, August 2, 1880.

At the end of my paper on "Sanskrit Texts in Japan" I mentioned in a postscript (March 10) that I had received from Mr. Wylie a copy of a vocabulary called "A Thousand Sanskrit and Chinese Words," compiled by I-tsing, about 700 A. D., and brought to Japan by Zikaku, a Japanese priest, in 847 A. D. The edition of this vocabulary which Mr. Wylie bought in Japan was published by Jakumio in 1727, and in the preface the editor says: "In the temple Horiuji, in Yamato, there are treasured Pragnaparamitahridaya-sutram and Sonshio-dharani, written on two palm leaves, handed down, from Central India."

Horiuji is one of eleven temples founded by Prince Umayado, who died in A. D. 621. This temple is in a town named Tatsuta, in the province Yamato, near Kioto, the western capital. I ended my article with the following sentence: "Here, then, we have clear evidence that in the year 1727 palm leaves containing the text of Sanskrit Sutras were still preserved in the temple of Horiuji. If that temple is still in existence, might not some Buddhist priest of Kioto, the western capital of Japan, be induced to go there to see whether the palm leaves are still there, and, if they are, to make a copy and send it to Oxford?"

Sooner than expected this wish of mine has been fulfilled. On April 28 Mr. Shigefuyu Kurihara, of Kioto, a friend of one of my Sanskrit pupils, Mr. Bunyiu Nanjio, who for some years had himself taken an interest in Sanskrit, went to the temple or monastery of Horiuji to inquire whether any old Sanskrit MSS. were still preserved there. He was told that the priests of the monastery had recently surrendered their valuables to the Imperial Government, and that the ancient palm leaves had been presented to the emperor.

In a chronicle kept at the monastery of Horiuji it is stated that these palm leaves and other valuables were brought by Ono Imoko, a retainer of the Mikado (the Empress Suiko), from China (during the Sui dynasty, 589-618) to Japan, in the thirty-seventh year of the age of Prince Umayado—i. e., A. D. 609. The other valuable articles were:

1. Nio, i. e., a cymbal used in Buddhist temples;

2. Midzu-game, a water vessel;

3. Shaku-jio, a staff, the top of which is armed with metal rings, as carried by Buddhist priests;

4. Kesa (Kashaya), a scarf, worn by Buddhist priests across the shoulder, which belonged to the famous Bodhidharma;

5. Haki, a bowl, given by the same Bodhidharma.

These things and the Sanskrit MSS. are said to have belonged to some Chinese priests, named Hwui-sz' (Yeshi) and Nien-shan (Nenzen), and to four others successively, who lived in a monastery on the mountain called Nan-yo (Nangak), in the province of Hang (Ko) in China. These palm-leaf MSS. may, therefore, be supposed to date from at least the sixth century A. D., and be, in fact, the oldest Sanskrit MSS. now in existence.(161)

May we not hope that His Excellency Mori Arinori, who expressed so warm an interest in this matter when he was present at the meeting of the Royal Asiatic Society, will now lend us his powerful aid, and request the Minister of the Department of the Imperial Household to allow these MSS. to be carefully copied or photographed?



INDEX.

Academic freedom not without dangers, 39.

Adams, H. C., quoted, 25.

Alphabet, phonetic, table of, 150; reading according to, 151 sq.

Amyot, quoted, 131.

Analogies, false, in comparative theology, 98 sq.

Anaxagoras, quoted, 56.

Anglo-Saxon names for the days of the week, 118.

Apostles, The, read the Veda, 127.

Archbishops have no official position in English universities, 8.

Aristotle, disrespectful remarks about, 38; quoted, 56.

Babylonian system of dividing gold and silver still found in the English sovereign, 19; of reckoning time found on the dial-plates of our clocks, 19.

Beveridge, Bishop, quoted, 30.

Bochart, quoted, 98.

Brackett, A. C., quoted, 88.

Budha, day of, 121.

— and Buddha, distinction between, 115, 119.

Buddha, a personal and historical character, 122; repetition of his name meritorious, 235.

Buddhism, when recognized in China, 191 sq.; Japan converted to, 213; and Scandinavian mythology, connection between, 113 sq., 122.

Buhler, Dr., quoted, 208.

Burnouf, quoted, 112.

Cassius, Dio, quoted, 118.

Chinese translators of Sanskrit texts, 189.

Christian religion, historical and individual, 62.

Cicero, quoted, 72.

Clement of Alexandria, quoted, 58, 61.

Clodd, E., quoted, 84.

Coincidences between Jewish and Pagan religious, 98 sq.

Colbourne, Wm., quoted, 153.

Counting possible without language, 67.

Daphne, meaning of, 82.

Davids Rhys, quoted, 16.

Dictionaries, value of, 17.

Dogmatic teaching, evil of, 31.

Donar, 120.

Du Bois-Reymond, quoted, 9.