Chapter L: Three Tales About Artists. 194

1. THE IVORY CARVER AND THE PAINTER. [195]

There lived an ivory carver in Madhyadeśa who, after he had carved a few grains of rice made of ivory, travelled with them to the Yavana land, and there took up his abode in the house of a painter. In the absence of the husband, he said to the wife, “Wife of my friend, cook this rice and serve it up to me.”

The woman began to cook the rice, but her store of wood came to an end, and yet the rice remained uncooked. When the painter came home, he asked, “Good wife, what is the meaning of that?”

She told him the whole story. The man looked at the rice, perceived that the separate grains were carved out of ivory, and said to his wife, while setting her right:

“Good wife, the water is salt. He must bring us fresh water; the rice will then get cooked.”

The wife said to the ivory carver, “Fetch us fresh water.” Now the painter had painted a picture of a pond hard by, with a dead dog’s body beside it. The ivory carver took a water jug, and went towards the place where he imagined there was a pond. When he saw the dead dog he held his nose, and then he tried to get the water. But he only smashed his jug, and came to the conclusion that he had been fooled.

2. THE MECHANICIAN AND THE PAINTER. [196]

In olden times there was a painter in Madhyadeśa, who travelled on business to the Yavana land, and took up his abode there in the house of a mechanician. In order to wait upon the wearied traveller, the mechanician sent an artificial maiden whom he had framed. [197] She washed his feet, and then stood still. He called to her to draw near. But she made no reply. As he was of the opinion that the mechanic had no doubt sent her to him for his enjoyment, he seized her by the hand and tried to draw her towards him. Thereupon, however, the artificial maiden collapsed, and turned into a heap of chips. Being thus befooled, he said to himself, “I have been made a fool of here in private. But in return I will make a fool of the mechanician in the midst of the king’s retinue.”

So he painted his own likeness on the door, just as if he had hanged himself, and then he hid behind the door. When the time had gone by at which he was wont to rise, the mechanician came to see why the painter had not made his appearance, and imagined he saw him hanging there. While he was considering what could be the painter’s reason for depriving himself of life, he saw that the artificial maiden had collapsed and turned into a heap of chips. Thereupon he fancied that the painter had hanged himself out of vexation at having been made a fool of.

Now it was the custom in the Yavana land, that whenever any one died suddenly in any house, the funeral could not take place until information thereof had been given to the king. So the mechanician went to the king and told him that a painter from Madhyadeśa had put up at his house, and that he had sent an artificial maiden to wait upon him, and that the painter had seized her by the hand and tried to draw her towards him, whereupon she had turned into a heap of chips; and that the painter, out of vexation at being made a fool of, had hanged himself. And he besought the king to have the corpse inspected, in order that he might be able to bury it.

The king ordered his officials to undertake the inspection. When the officials reached the spot, and began to consider how they should get the hanged man down, some of them recommended that the rope should be cut, and accordingly an axe was fetched. But when they were about to cut the rope, they perceived that what was before them was only a door, and that the mechanician had been made a fool of. Then the painter came forth from his hiding-place and said, “O inmate of this house, you made a fool of me in private. But I have made a fool of you in the midst of the royal retinue.”

3. THE COMPETITION BETWEEN THE TWO ARTISTS. [198]

In olden times a dispute arose between two painters in a hill-place, each of the two affirming that he was superior in art to the other. They went before the king, and fell at his feet. Then each of them explained how he was a better artist than the other. As the king could not settle their dispute, he pointed to the entrance hall, and ordered each of them to paint one of its walls. When their work was finished, he would be in a position to decide which of them was the better artist.

They set to work, divided from one another by a curtain. One of them painted a picture, and completed it in six months. But the other in six months covered the surface of his wall with mosaic work. Having finished his picture, the first artist came before the king and said, “O king, my picture is finished, may it please you to set eyes upon it.”

When the king, attended by his ministers, had passed through the doorway and gazed upon the picture, he was well pleased and said, “The painting is excellent.” Then the other artist fell at his feet and said, “Now vouchsafe to look at my picture.” When he had drawn the curtain aside, and the king saw several figures standing well out, he marvelled greatly and said, “Of the two paintings this is the most excellent.” Then the artist drew the curtain once more in front of his work, and fell at the king’s feet and said, “O king, this is no painting. I have decorated the wall in mosaic.”

Thereupon the king’s astonishment waxed still greater, and he said, “This is the one who is the best artist.”

NOTES

[1] “Buddhism,” by T. W. Rhys Davids (Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge), pp. 199–211 and 250.

[2] “Lectures on the Origin and Growth of Religion, as Illustrated by some Points in the History of Indian Buddhism” (being the Hibbert Lectures for 1881), pp. 189–192.

[3] Whose statements are based upon those made by C. F. Köppen, in his standard work upon “Die lamaische Hierarchie und Kirche.”

[4] “Geschichte der Ost-Mongolen: Aus dem Mongolischen übersetzt von Isaac Jacob Schmidt,” pp. 25–27. St. Petersburg, 1829.

[5] According to Schlagintweit, “‘Constructed Vessel,’ a work on moral subjects forming part of the Kanjur.”

[6] Emil Schlagintweit, “Buddhism in Tibet,” pp. 60–70.

[7] “Buddhism,” p. 207.

[8] In a letter to the writer of the Introduction.

[9] In Hungarian his name would be written Körösi Csoma Sándor; in French, Alexandre Csoma de Körös; in English, he signed himself Alexander Csoma Körösi, the name Körösi being an adjectival form, meaning “of Körös.”

[10] The exact date of his birth has not been ascertained, but one of his Hungarian biographers states that he was about thirty when he started eastward in 1820. Another asserts that he was born in the Transylvanian village of Körös, on the 4th of April 1784.

[11] In a letter, containing a brief sketch of his life up to that time, which was published in 1834 in the first volume of the “Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society,” and from which are taken the passages cited above as quotations.

[12] Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal, vol. xiv., part 2, p. 824.

[13] Quoted by Dr. Campbell from an editorial article by Professor H. H. Wilson in the supplement to the Government Gazette of 9th July 1829. Journal of Asiatic Society of Bengal, vol. xi., part 1, p. 305. A second article by Dr. Campbell, including a letter from Lieut.-Colonel Lloyd, was published in vol. xiv., part 2, pp. 823–827.

[14] In an interesting article on Tibet in the Revue des Deux Mondes, vme série, tom. 19 (July 1847).

[15] “The work of Csoma de Körös is that of an original investigator, and the fruit of almost unparalleled determination and patience,” says H. A. Jäschke, in the preface to his “Tibetan-English Dictionary.”

[16] Colonel Lloyd says that he thinks Csoma Körösi remained at Titalya till November 1837. Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal, vol. xiv., part 2.

[17] Dr. Malan is not certain about the date of his first interview with Csoma Körösi, but his Tibetan lessons began not later than August 1838.

[18] For this piece of information I am indebted to Lieut.-Col. T. W. Lewin, who has himself been our Resident at Darjíling, and who availed himself of his stay in Sikkim to study the Tibetan language, of which he has published a Manual.

[19] “Chips from a German Workshop,” i. 278.

[20] “Die Ungarische Sprachwissenschaft,” Literarische Berichte aus Ungarn. Budapest, 1877. Bd. i., heft i., pp. 54–97. For this and other references to Hungarian works and German works published in Hungary, I am indebted to Mr. E. D. Butler, of the British Museum, whose acquaintance with Hungarian literature has led to his being elected an honorary member of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences.

[21] See, however, an account of Tibetan non-Buddhistic works in Journal of A. S. of B. 1881.

[22] “Chips,” i. 193.

[23] M. Léon Feer has adopted the form Kandjour in his translation of Csoma Körösis’s “Analysis” (Annales du Musée Guimet, tom. 2); but he says in a footnote to p. 143, “J’écris Kandjour contrairement à mes principes d’orthographe, parce que Kandjour est une forme qui imite la prononciation et n’est point du tout le calque du mot tibétain.”

[24] Written bkah-hgyur, the italicised letters not being sounded.

[25] Csoma Körösi’s analysis of the Tibetan sacred books has been translated by M. Léon Feer, and was published in 1881 under the title of “Analyse du Kandjour et du Tandjour,” in the second volume of the “Annales du Musée Guimet,” the sumptuous work due to the munificence of M. Guimet. M. Feer has appended to his translation a most useful “Vocabulaire de l’Analyse du Kandjour,” giving all the names which occur in Csoma Körösi’s Analysis, with the explanations it contains, together with an index and a “Table Alphabétique des Ouvrages du Kandjour,” and several appendixes. The fourth volume of the “Annales du Musée Guimet” is to consist of “Extraits du Kandjour,” translated by M. Léon Feer.

[26] In a very interesting paper printed in the “Bulletin Historico-Philologique de l’Académie de Saint-Pétersbourg,” tom. iv., 1848, pp. 321–339.

[27] In an account of the works, in the languages of Eastern Asia, belonging to the library of the University of St. Petersburg, printed in the “Mélanges Asiatiques” of the St. Petersburg Academy of Sciences, tom. ii., 1856.

[28] A complete list of Professor Schiefner’s writings is given in a memoir by F. Wiedemann, read at a meeting of the Imperial Academy of Sciences, December 11, 1879, and reprinted in the 16th volume of the “Russische Revue.” From this it appears that he was born at Reval in 1817, the son of a merchant who had migrated thither from Bohemia; he studied in the University of St. Petersburg from 1836 to 1840, and then for two years in the University of Berlin. In 1848 he was appointed one of the librarians of the Imperial Academy of Sciences, of which he became a member a few years later.

[29] For special information about Tibet and Tibetan Buddhism the following works may be consulted:—Emil Schlagintweit’s “Buddhism in Tibet,” London, 1863; C. F. Köppen’s “Die Religion des Buddha,” Berlin, 1857–59, the second volume, entitled “Die lamaische Hierarchie und Kirche;” the “Souvenirs d’un Voyage dans la Tartarie, le Tíbet, et la Chine, pendant les années 1844, 1845, 1846,” Paris, 1853, by the French missionaries MM. Huc and Gabet, and “Le Christianisme en Chine, en Tartarie, et en Thibet,” by the same authors; P. E. Foucaux’s “Rgya Tch’er Rol Pa, or Développement des Jeux, Traduit sur la version Tibétaine du Bhahhgyour, et revu sur l’original Sanskrit (Lalitavistâra),” Paris, 1848, containing an immense amount of valuable information in the Introduction and the Notes; Eugène Burnouf’s “Introduction à l’Histoire du Buddhisme Indien,” Paris, 1844, and “Le Lotus de la Bonne Loi,” Paris, 1852; the “Narratives of the Mission of George Bogle to Tibet, and of the Journey of Thomas Manning to Lhasa, edited with Notes, an Introduction, &c., by Clements R. Markham,” London, 1876, the Introduction containing a great deal of interesting information about Tibet and its explorers; Brian H. Hodgson’s “Essays on the Languages, Literature, and Religion of Nepál and Tibet,” London, 1874; General A. Cunningham’s “Ladák,” 1854; A. A. Georgi’s “Alphabetum Tibetanum,” Rom, 1762; Colonel Yule’s “Cathay;” the “Travels in the Himalayan,” by W. Moorcroft and G. Trebeck, London, 1841; Isaac Jacob Schmidt’s “Forschungen im Gebiete der älteren religiösen, politischen und literarischen Bildungsgeschichte der Völker Mittel-Asiens, vorzüglich der Mongolen und Tibeter,” St. Petersburg, 1824, his translation from the Tibetan of the “Dsanglun, der Weise und der Thor,” St. Petersburg, 1843, and his “Index des Kanjur,” St. Petersburg, 1845; T. D. Thomson’s “Western Himálaya and Tibet,” London, 1852; L. Torrens’s “Travels in Ladâk, &c.,” London, 1862; S. Turner’s “Account of an Embassy to the Court of the Teshoo Lama in Tibet,” London, 1800; G. T. Vigne’s “Travels in Kashmír, Ladak, &c.,” London, 1842; Col. Prjevalsky’s “Mongolia, &c.,” translated by E. D. Morgan, London, 1876; the French and German translations of V. Vasilief’s Russian work on Buddhism; Anton Schiefner’s “Tibetanische Studien,” and a great number of articles in periodicals, the titles of which are given in the list by E. Schlagintweit, from which most of the foregoing references are taken. Among linguistic works may be mentioned Csoma Körösi’s “Grammar of the Tibetan Language,” Calcutta, 1834, and his “Essay towards a Dictionary, Tibetan and English,” Calcutta, 1834; I. J. Schmidt’s “Grammatik der Tibetanische Sprache,” St. Petersburg, 1839, and his “Tibetisch deutsches Wörterbuch,” St. Petersburg, 1841 (an adaptation for a German public, according to Jäschke, of Csoma Körösi’s work); P. E. Foucaux’s “Grammaire de la Langue Tibétaine,” Paris, 1858; Col. T. W. Lewin’s “Manual of Tibetan,” Calcutta, 1879; and what is now the standard work on the subject, H. A. Jäschke’s “Tibetan-English Dictionary,” London, 1881.

[30] An account of the different classes of stories which turn upon wishes has been given by Benfey, “Panchatantra,” i. 496–499.

[31] Asiatic Journal, New Series, vol. ii., 1833.

[32] With the story of his birth may be compared the similar account of the birth of Śṛingabhuja in the Kathá Sarit Ságara. See Mr. Tawney’s translation, vol. i. p. 355.

[33] Book xii. chap. 72, vol. ii. p. 180 of Mr. C. H. Tawney’s most valuable translation, now being published in the “Bibliotheca Indica” by the Asiatic Society of Bengal.

[34] See Rhys Davids’s “Buddhist Birth-Stories,” pp. xiv, xlvi; and “Gesta Romanorum,” No. 45.

[35] This story is to be found in divers places, the Talmud included.

[36] The story of the suitors whom Viśākhā shut up in chests and put to shame occurs as a folk-tale in Miss Maive Stokes’s “Indian Fairy Tales,” No. 28, “The Clever Wife.”

[37] See Gubernatis, “Zoological Mythology,” ii. 311.

[38] A good account of the story is given by Sir George Cox in his “Mythology of the Aryan Nations,” i. 111–121.

[39] “Ueber einige morgenländische Fassungen der Rhampsinit Sage,” in the “Bulletin” of the St. Petersburg Academy of Sciences, tom. xiv. pp. 299–315.

[40] “Contes populaires de l’Égypte Ancienne.” Paris, 1882. Pp. xxxvii–xli.

[41] Sakellarios, “Cypriaques,” iii., p. 157. Quoted by M. Émile Legrand in his “Recueil de Contes populaires grecs.” Paris, 1881. Pp. 205–216.

[42] “Kathá Sarit Ságara,” book x. chap. lxiii. The story occurs in vol. ii. part 7, of Mr. Tawney’s translation. Calcutta, 1881.

[43] J. F. Campbell’s “Tales from the West Highlands,” No. 18, on which see the exhaustive notes by Reinhold Köhler in “Orient und Occident,” ii. 303.

[44] For a full account of “swan-maidens” and the mediæval romance of “The Knight of the Swan,” see Baring Gould’s “Curious Myths of the Middle Ages.”

[45] Mr. Tawney’s translation, i. 142.

[46] E. Legrand, “Contes Populaires Grecs,” Paris, 1881, pp. 228–230. The story is European by language only, not by domicile, for it was found at Smyrna.

[47] Mr. Tawney’s translation, i. 265.

[48] “Wald- und Feldkulte,” 2 vols. Berlin, 1875–77.

[49] Prof. Monier Williams, “Indian Wisdom,” 3d edit., pp. 514–516.

[50] “The same power of the wind which is signified by the harp of Orpheus is seen in the story of Amphion” (Cox’s “Mythology of the Aryan Nations,” ii. 249). “The pipe is a symbol of the storm-song (of the Maruts) which makes all things dance” (Mannhardt, “Germanische Mythen,” p. 174).

[51] The bibliography of the Griselda story is given at length by Dr. Reinhold Köhler, in an article fifteen columns long, in Erschand Gruber’s “Allgemeine Encyklopädie,” section i., vol. xci. Leipzig, 1871.

[52] i.e., his last birth before attaining Buddhahood.

[53] Kathā Sarit Sāgara, vol. i. p. 444, of Mr. Tawney’s translation.

[54] “Hindoo Tales, or the Adventures of Ten Princes.” Freely translated from the Sanskrit of the Daśakumāracharitam, by P. W. Jacob, pp. 261–266.

[55] Vol. ii. p. 101 of Mr. Tawney’s translation.

[56] For an account of this literature, see Mr. Rhys Davids’s “Buddhist Birth-Stories,” p. xxix.

[57] Kah-gyur, vol. ii. pp. 169–180. This Avadāna, of which Burnouf speaks in his “Introduction,” p. 79, is contained in the eighteenth chapter of the Divyāvadāna. As there are many gaps in the Sanskrit MS. to which I had access, I have thought it best to keep to the more complete recension existing in the Kah-gyur.—S.

[58] Mahāpurusha is “a great man, eminent personage, great saint or sage, great ascetic, &c.”

[59] Mān dhāyatu, mān dhāyatu.—S.

[60] A different account is given in the Vishnupurāna, on which see Lassen, Ind. Alt. (1st edition), Anhang I. p. v. note 7. The derivation of the name from the root dhā calls to mind the attempt to recognise in Athene “the unsuckled one.” Cf. Eusthatius on the Iliad, p. 83 (p. 71 of the Leipsic edition), and Pott, Etymolog. Forschungen, Wurzelwörterbuch, I. i. p. 180.—S.

[61] An account of the duration of Śakra’s life is given at the end of this tale.

[62] Edelstein-streu is Professor Schiefner’s rendering of the Tibetan word which appears to represent the jewels which were to be scattered at the coronation.

[63] See Böhtlingk-Roth on Kati. Sāketa is a name of Ayodhyā or ancient Oude.—S.

[64] Amanushya.—S.

[65] For a full account of these seven treasures, see Rhys Davids’ Hibbert Lectures, pp. 130–134.

[66] Klarsichten is Professor Schiefner’s rendering of the Tibetan equivalent of the Pāli word Abhiññā. Mr. Rhys Davids has kindly sent me the following explanation:—“There are five such Abhiññās, which are five kinds of insight or intuitive perception; that is, the intuitive perception of five classes of things.”

[67] A koṭi is equal to ten millions.

[68] The word employed by Professor Schiefner is Flechten.

[69] “A yojana is four leagues.”—Rhys Davids’s “Buddhist Birth-Stories,” p. 35.

[70] An account of these various divinities is given by M. Eugène Burnouf in his “Introduction à l’Histoire du Buddhisme Indien” (1876, pp. 180, 535–557). With respect to the “ever-elevated” (or, to use Professor Schiefner’s expression, “die stets betrunkenen”) gods, he says (p. 538): “Le troisième étage est le séjour des êtres qu’on nomme, suivant Georgi, ‘buveurs et stupides,’ et qui ont en tibetain le nom de Rtag myos. Ces deux monosyllabes se traduisent littéralement par ‘continuellement enivres,’ et cette interpretation s’accorde bien avec la notion que Georgi nous donne de ces dieux.”

[71] Cf. Dhammapada, śl. 186, &c.—S.

[72] This number, in the German text, is given as 36,000; but that is probably a misprint. The German word which is here rendered by “evanescences” is Schwunde. It appears to define the period at the end of which Śakra’s life comes temporarily to a close. For a different computation of the length of Śakra’s life, see Hardy’s “Manual of Buddhism,” p. 25. “The déwalóka of Sekra or Indra, on the summit of Maha Méru, in which one day is equal to 100 of the years of men; and as they live 1000 of these years, their age is equal to 36,000,000 of the years of men.”

[73] Kah-gyur, vol. ii. pp. 188–192. See “An Eastern Love Story. Kuśa Jātakaya, a Buddhistic legend; rendered into English verse from the Singhalese poem of Alagiyavanna Mohoṭṭāla, by Thomas Steele.” London, 1871. See also critical remarks on the work in the Göttinger Gelehrten Anzeigen, 1872, stück 31, pp. 1205–1225, by Dr. Reinhold Köhler, who has called attention to the previously overlooked redaction in chap. xiii. of the Dsanglun (p. 91 of the translation). In the Tibetan original, the king’s name, Mahāśakuni, has been corrupted into Mahāschakuli. The name of his son, Woodblock, may be explained by the fact that kuśa, in the Chinese transcription kiu-che (or keou-che?) is a word of ambiguous meaning. In the Böhtlingk-Roth Sanskrit Dictionary, kuśa occurs in the sense of “wood.”—S.

[74] Kah-gyur, book ii. pp. 198–201. We have here a simpler and at the same time more concrete recension of chap. xxxi. of the Dsanglun, with a continuation which includes chap. xxxix. of that work, with the latter of which Benfey’s remarks in his introduction to the Panchatantra (i. 394) are to be consulted, as well as Sukhomlinof’s account of “The Tale of Shemyaka’s Judgment” in the Zapiski of the St. Petersburg Academy of Sciences, 1873, vol. xxii. book i. The decision in the second part of the continuation is attributed in the Dsanglun, chap. xxxix. to King Mdges-pa.—S.

[75] Kah-gyur, iv. 132–135. One of the oldest of popular tales is the story told by Herodotus (bk. ii. chap. 121) of the treasury of Rhampsinitus, which its builder’s two sons are in the habit of robbing, until one of the thieves is caught in the snares set for their feet, whereupon the other, to prevent a discovery, cuts off his brother’s head and runs away. The king gives orders to expose the corpse, and to keep watch so as to see whether any one weeps and wails over it. The surviving son, forced by his mother’s threats to look after his brother’s burial, comes to the spot provided with skins of wine, makes the watchmen drunk, shaves off the right side of their beards, and carries away the dead body. Thereupon the king’s daughter is obliged to yield herself to every one who will relate to her the cleverest and most scandalous trick he has ever played in his life. The doer of the deed comes and betrays himself. But when the princess tries to seize him, he leaves in her hold, not his own hand, but that of the dead man. At last the king promises his daughter’s hand to the doer of this deed, so the thief reveals himself and receives the princess. As a like legend is connected with the treasury of Hyrieus in Orchomenus, where Trophonius cut off the head of his brother Agamedes (Pausan. ix. 37), and as according to Charax (Schol. ad Aristoph. Nubes, v. 508) the same story is told also of the treasury of Augeias at Elis, we can easily understand why some commentators, like C. O. Müller, wish to claim the legend for the Greeks, while Buttmann (Mythol. ii. 228) wishes to trace it to the East. See Liebrecht in his edition of Dunlop’s “History of Fiction,” p. 264, and Grimm, Kinder- und Hausmärchen iii. 260.—S.

[76] A skull-carrying Śiva-worshipper.

[77] Compare Loiseleur Deslongchamps, “Essai sur les Fables Indiennes” (Paris, 1838), ii. 124, and Reinhold Köhler in Benfey’s “Orient und Occident,” ii. 303–313. In the Gaelic tale of “The Shifty Lad,” the thief is found out by having a golden apple given to him by a child. R. Köhler adds, “In the story of Dümmling, who wishes that the princess may have a child (Hahn, No. 8; Grundtvig, ii. 308; Müllenhof’s “Sagen,” p. 481; “Zeitschrift für Deutsche Mythologie,” i. 38), the hero is discovered to be the father of the princess’s child, inasmuch as it offers him a golden apple in preference to all the other men who have been invited.” In the variant of the tale in Basile’s “Pentamerone,” i. 3, the boy embraces his father. In a Gaelic story (Orient und Occident, ii. 124), the princess recognises the father of her child among the men of Erin by the fact that a bird alights upon his head.—S.

[78] Kah-gyur, ii. 202–209.

[79] What is said here about the Nāga is referred to an elephant (= nāga), as Professor Minayef reminds me, in a Pāli recension of the Viśvantara Jātaka. The king of Kalinga, in whose realms there was a famine due to want of rain, sent eight Brahmans to Jayaturā, the capital of Śibi, to obtain from Viśvantara the white elephant which had the power of producing rain. See Spence Hardy’s “Manual,” p. 116, and Köppen’s “Religion des Buddha,” p. 324.—S.

[80] See Tāranātha’s “History of Buddhism in India,” p. 70, where Nāgārjuna conjures the goddess Chaṇḍikā into the Manjuśri temple by the insertion of a wedge of Khadira-wood.—S. The Khadira is the Acacia Catechu.

[81] In Sanskrit, Amoghapāśa.—S.

[82] Butterschaum, perhaps a kind of clotted cream.

[83] “A family priest, a king’s domestic chaplain, a priest who conducts all the ceremonials and sacrifices of the family, &c.”

[84] See Böhtlingk, “Indische Sprüche,” 2d edit., No. 2627.—S.

[85] This passage is extremely obscure. It is evident that Professor Schiefner was puzzled by it, for he has on the sheets prepared for the present translation made considerable alterations in his version as it originally appeared. There appears to be good reason for supposing that the Crocodile and the Butterfly, the Sad and the Gay, the Weeper and the Laugher, are names of rivers, but at present we must be contented with a hypothesis. The German text originally ran as follows: “Viele Flüsse, die mit zehntausend Alligatoren angefüllt sind, musst du überschreiten. Krokodile, Schmetterling, ein Betrübter, ein Bunter, ein Weinender, ein Lachender, Schlangenreicher und rohrreicher Fluss; im Krokodil ist Rākshasī-Zorn, im Schmetterling ein Dämon, in dem Betrübten viele Meerungeheuer,” &c. As altered by Professor Schiefner it runs: “Krokodile, Schmetterling, eine Betrübte, eine Bunte, eine Weinende, eine Lachende, ein Schlangenreicher und rohrreicher Fluss,” &c. The whole passage has been submitted to various experts, who are inclined to accept the fluvial hypothesis.

[86] Dharma-rāja, “‘king of justice,’ an epithet of Yama.”

[87] Rohiṇī, “name of the ninth Nakshatra or lunar asterism (personified as a daughter of Daksha, and the favourite wife of the moon, called ‘the Red one,’ &c.)”

[88] The word Aśoka means “without sorrow: not feeling or not causing sorrow.”

[89] “The tree Ægle Marmelos (commonly called Bel),” and “the elephant or wood-apple tree, Feronia elephantum.”

[90] The Sanskrit Sudhā, “the beverage of the gods, nectar, &c.”

[91] Kah-gyur, vol. iii. pp. 50*–67*. Spence Hardy has given in his “Manual of Buddhism,” pp. 237–249, a portion of Jīvaka’s wonderful cures, and also some varying accounts of his origin.—S.

[92] For an account of the origin and history of these nobles, see Spence Hardy’s “Manual,” p. 235.

[93] Properly a house with a belvedere or small tower.—S.

[94] A few lines have been omitted here.

[95] Literally “having lizard-arrow-spokes” [Eidechsen-Pfeil-Speichen]. There is perhaps a connection between godhana, a kind of arrow with a broad point, and godhā, “an iguana, a very large sort of lizard” (Childers, p. 149).—S.

[96] Or Jīvakakumārabhṛtya, the first form in Burnouf, “Lotus de la Bonne Loi,” 449, the second in Childers sub voc. Komārabhacco. See Böhtlingk-Roth under Kumārabhṛtya, a branch of the medical art [“care of a young child, care of a pregnant or lying-in woman, midwifery.”—Monier Williams.] Both names are personifications of the healing art. See also Hardy, “Manual of Buddhism,” p. 238.—S.

[97] See Böhtlingk-Roth under gulma [“any glandular enlargement in the abdomen, as that of the mesenteric gland, &c., so as to be seen externally,” &c.—Monier Williams.]—S.

[98] Kodrava, “a species of grain eaten by the poor, Paspalum Scrobiculatum.”

[99] Kah-gyur, iii. 71*–80*. Cf. Benfey, Ausland, 1859, p. 487, “Die kluge Dirne;” Spence Hardy, Manual of Buddhism, pp. 220–227, 364.—S.

[100] See Spence Hardy, Manual, p. 227.—S.

[101] Kah-gyur, vol. xi. fol. 53–87.

[102] Cf. Gaal, Märchen der Magyaren, Wien, 1882, p. 196. Der Vogel Goldschweif, especially p. 213: Hahn, Gr. und alb. Märchen, Leipzig, 1864, i. 227. Das goldene Huhn: Haltrich, “Deutsche Volksmärchen.” Berlin, 1856. “Der seltsame Vogel:” Miklosich, Ueber die Mundarten der Zigeuner, IV. No. vi., Die Diamanten legende Henne.—S.

[103] “Vaiśravaṇa, ‘son of Viśravas,’ epithet of Kuvera, the god of wealth.”

[104] Cf. “Ardschi-Bord chi-Chān” in Jülg’s Mongol. Märchensammlung, Innsbruck, 1868, pp. 197, et seq.—S.

[105] Cf. “Śukasaptate,” in the Greek version of Galanos, 4th night, p. 10.—S.

[106] Properly speaking a Kshatriya, as will be seen farther on.—S.

[107] As regards the king’s peacock, see the Śukasaptati, 21st night, in Galanos’s translation, p. 34.—S.

[108] Among the explanations of kaksha given in Monier Williams’s Sanskrit Dictionary are “the interior of a forest, a forest of dead trees, a dry wood, &c.”

[109] “This seems to refer to the shape of the earrings,” says Professor Schiefner; but the repartee still remains obscure. The same remark may be made about several of Viśākhā’s wise sayings.

[110] The obscurity of some of the allusions in this conversation is probably due to the fact that they involve a play upon words which could not always be fully rendered by the translator of the Tibetan text.

[111] The German text runs: “Als der Brahmane ... einen Fuss hineinsteckte, schlug sie rasch einen Pflock hinein.” The sense appears to be doubtful.

[112] Compare Benfey, Pantschatantra, i. 127, and Liebrecht in Jahrbuch für rom. und engl. Literatur, iii. 147, and in Pfeiffer’s Germania, v. 53.—S.

[113] Cf. Śukasaptati, 37th Night, in the translation of Galanos.—S.

[114] Cf. Śukasaptati, 38th Night.—S.

[115] This appears to be a correct restoration of the Sanskrit name, though the parrot’s name is given further on as Māṭhara.—S.

[116] Śārikā, Gracula religiosa, Predigerkrähe.—S.

[117] Cf. Pabst, “Bunte Bilder, d. i. Geschichten in Ehstlands, &c.,” Reval, 1856, i. 14, and Mannhardt’s “Germanische Mythenforschungen,” Berlin, 1858, p. 39.—S. Also the burning of Lankā in the Rāmāyana, due to the attempt to punish the monkey-general Hanumat by setting his tail on fire.

[118] Cf. “Les Avadānas, trad. par Stan. Julien,” Paris, 1859, ii. 48.—S.

[119] See note on p. 168.

[120] Kah-gyur, vol. ix. pp. 26–42.

[121] Andropogon muricatus.—S.

[122] Jambu: “Name of a fabulous river, said to flow from the mountain Meru, and to be formed by the juice of the fruits of an immense Jambu-tree on that mountain.”

[123] Nirgrantha, “Freed from all ties or hindrances; a saint, a devotee, who has withdrawn from the world, &c.”

[124] “A fast-day, day of preparation for the Soma sacrifice, &c.”

[125] Kah-gyur, vol. viii. pp. 216–273.

[126] From utpala, the blue lotus, varṇa, colour, &c.

[127] Takshaśilā was “a city of the Gandhāras, the Ταξιλα of Ptolemy in the Paṅjāb.”

[128] Maudgalyāyana “was the name of a pupil of Śākya-muni.”

[129] Kah-gyur, xi., pp. 122–130. The principal theme of this tale occurs in the 25th chapter of the Dsanglun, but the Bhikshuṇī Utpalavarṇā is the heroine of the story. Kṛiśā Gautamī (Kisagotamī among the Southern Buddhists) has been made known by the work translated by Captain Rogers from the Burmese under the title of “Buddhagosha’s Parables” (London, 1870, pp. 98, &c.), and has afforded a subject for comparisons with certain points in Greek tales to Prof. Rohde (see Zeitschrift für das Gymnasialwesen, 1876, Feb., p. 118).—S.

[130] Kah-gyur, xi. 93–99. When Utpalavarṇā appeared in the form of a Ćakravartin to the Buddha Śākya-muni on his return from the realm of the Thirty-three Gods, and Udayin recognised her by the lotus-fragrance which exhaled from her, the Buddha related this tale, with reference to the fact that Udayin had already recognised her in a previous existence by that fragrance.—S.

[131] Compare Panchatantra, iv. 7.—S.

[132] Compare Panchatantra loc. cit., Benfey’s remarks, I. 468, and Weber, Indische Studien, II. 339, &c.—S.

[133] Compare with this the variants which Reinhold Köhler has supplied to Laura Gonzenbach’s Sicilianische Märchen, II., p. 242, especially the Bulgarian on p. 245.—S.

[134] Kah-gyur vii. ff. 221–229.

[135] See Childers’ Dictionary of the Pali Language, under the word Vimána.—S.

[136] Mahoraga, “a great Nāga or serpent-demon, forming one of the classes inhabiting Pātāla.”

[137] Kah-gyur, vi. fol. 89–99.

[138] Kah-gyur, iv. fol. 136, 137. A Buddhistic version of the well-known narrative in the Mahābhārata, i. 9999, &c., and the Rāmāyana, i. 8, &c.—S.

[139] Kah-gyur iv. ff. 192–200. Printed as the Wessantara Játaka in Spence Hardy’s Manual of Buddhism, p. 116.—S.

[140] In the recension given by Hardy, the elephant is accredited with the power of producing rain. Has not the double meaning of the word nāga caused a characteristic of the Nāgas to be attributed in that case to the elephant?—S.

[141] In Hardy’s Southern Recension, the boy is called Jāliya and the girl Krishnāyinā (Manual, p. 116).—S.

[142] Properly “lotus-arrow.” According to Maximowicz, the young lotus leaves are reed-like or arrow-like in appearance.—S.

[143] Kah-gyur, iv. ff. 233–236.

[144] In Tibetan, Sartsi-ldan, which is evidently a corrupt form.—S. Professor Schiefner has in one instance altered the name from Sarjarasin to Archismant.

[145] The equivalent of the Sanskrit yogapaṭṭa. See Böhtlingk-Roth.—S. “The cloth thrown over the back and knees of an ascetic during meditation.”

[146] Kah-gyur, iv. ff. 186–189.

[147] Ksheman·kara, “promoting well-being, causing peace and security, propitious,” &c.

[148] The opposite of Ksheman·kara, from pāpa, bad.

[149] Kah-gyur iii. f. 103. The end of this may be compared with Panchatantra, ii. 3. The beginning is a well-known theme. See Liebrecht on “Die vergifteten Gefährten” in Orient und Occident, i. 656.—S.

[150] Kah-gyur, iv. f. 171.

[151] Caṇḍāla, “the generic name for a man of the lowest and most despised of the mixed tribes, born from Sudra father and Brāhman mother.”

[152] Gandhamādana, “intoxicating with fragrance.... Name of a particular mountain, forming the division between Ilā-vrita and Bhadrāśva, or to the east of Meru, renowned for its fragrant forests.”

[153] This passage has been slightly modified.

[154] Kah-gyur, vol. iv. ff. 183–191. See Benfey, Panchatantra, i. 436, &c.—S.

[155] The Tibetan word appears to answer to the Sanskrit sudhâ [“the milk-hedge plant, the plant Aletris hyacinthoides,” &c.]—S.

[156] Kah-gyur, vii. 194.

[157] Vilva, “the tree Ægle Marmelos (commonly called Bel).”

[158] The number six is chosen, because it has reference to the group of Bhikshus, known as the Six.—S.

[159] Kah-gyur, ix. ff. 67–69.

[160] “The first of the twelve months constituting the Hindū solar year (answering to April-May).”

[161] “Bent grass, panic grass, commonly Panicum Dactylon.”

[162] Andropogon muricatus.—S.

[163] Kah-gyur, iii. ff. 189–193. Here we have the Tittira Jātaka, which is also printed in Fausböll’s Jātaka (London, 1875), p. 218. [See “Buddhist Birth Stories” Translated by T. W. Rhys-Davids. London, 1880, p. 310, No. 37.] In the latter only the partridge, the monkey, and the elephant take part in the question as to age, the hare does not occur. The same is the case in the Chinese recension in “Les Avadānas trad. par Stanislas Julien,” ii. p. 17.—S.

[164] In the German version the bird is called a “Haselhuhn.” For the sake of convenience, the name given in the “Tittira Jātaka” has been adopted here.

[165] Kah-gyur, iv. ff. 213, 214.

[166] Kah-gyur, iv. ff. 212*, 213*. This story is very intimately connected with that contributed by me to Benfey’s Panchatantra i. 194. See also ii. 128.—S.

[167] Kah-gyur iv. f. 181.

[168] Aniyatarâśi. See Childers on the word râsi. By this word may be represented the mass of the merits obtained by means of earlier deeds.—S.

[169] Kah-gyur, iv. f. 256.

[170] Kah-gyur, iv. f. 287.

[171] Kah-gyur, vi. ff. 228–231.

[172] Kah-gyur iv. ff. 248*, 249.

[173] Kah-gyur, iv. f. 293. Cf. Panchatantra, v. 7, and Benfey’s remarks on the passage, i. 494.—S.

[174] Kah-gyur, vi. ff. 239–243. Benfey has called attention, in his Introduction to the Panchatantra, to the story in the Siddhi-Kûr of the fox which sets the lion and the bull at variance, and brings about the destruction of both. The story occurs as the twentieth tale in B. Jülg’s “Mongolischer Märchen-Sammlung,” Innsbruck, 1868, pp. 171–176. [“Mongolische Märchen,” pp. 35–40.]—S.

[175] Kah-gyur, ff. 94*, 95.

[176] Kah-gyur, iv. f. 244*.

[177] Kah-gyur, iv. f. 255. Cf. Panchatantra, i. 10, and Benfey’s remarks thereon, pp. 224–5; Hitopadeśa, iii. 7; A. Weber, Indische Studien, iii., 349, 366.—S.

[178] Kah-gyur, iv. f. 293.

[179] Kah-gyur, iv. f. 222.

[180] Of the Kāndakīllaka or Symplocos racemosa. See Böhtlingk-Roth.—S.

[181] Kah-gyur, iv. f. 212.

[182] Kah-gyur, iv. ff. 247, 248.

[183] Kah-gyur, iv. ff. 244*–245*.

[184] Kah-gyur, ii. ff. 115–116. This story is given in Spence Hardy’s “Manual of Buddhism” (London, 1853, p. 113), under the title of “The Tinduka Játaka.”—S.

[185] Diospyros embryopteris.—S.

[186] Kah-gyur, iv. 246.

[187] Kah-gyur, iv. f. 247.

[188] Kah-gyur, iv. f. 249. Cf. A. Weber in the “Monatsberichten der K. Akademie der Wiss. zu Berlin,” 1860, p. 69, and “Indische Streifen,” i. 246 (Berlin, 1868).—S.

[189] Kah-gyur, iii. f. 90.

[190] Kah-gyur, iv. f. 221.

[191] Kah-gyur, iv. f. 231.

[192] Kah-gyur, iv. ff. 232, 233; and Cf. Benfey’s Panchatantra, i., iii., ii., 360.—S.

[193] This is a variant of the fourteenth story of the fifth book of the Panchatantra, in which figures a bird named Bharanda, having one body but two beaks. The first beak devours an ambrosia-like fruit, which it refuses to share with its companion. The aggrieved beak, out of spite, eats a poisonous fruit and the bird dies. With this may be compared the following passage, quoted from the Muṇḍaka Upanishad by Prof. Monier Williams (Indian Wisdom, p. 42), “Two birds (the Paramātiman and Jīvātman, or supreme and individual souls), always united, of the same name, occupy the same tree (abide in the same body). One of them (the Jīvātman) enjoys the sweet fruit of the fig (or fruit of acts), the other looks on as a witness. Dwelling on the same tree (with the supreme soul), the deluded (individual) soul, immersed (in worldly relations), is grieved by the want of power; but when it perceives the Ruler, separate (from worldly relations) and his glory, then its grief ceases. When the beholder sees the golden-coloured maker (of the world), the lord, the soul, the source of Brahmā, then, having become wise, shaking off virtue and vice, without taint of any kind, he obtains the highest identity.”

[194] In S. Beal’s “Romantic Legend of Śākya Buddha,” pp. 93–96, it is related how the son of a man of quality in Vārāṇasī, in order to obtain the hand of a blacksmith’s daughter, applied himself to making fine needles, and made such progress in the art that he included, among the needles which he showed to the smith, one which could float on the surface of water. This tale occurs in a somewhat different shape in the Mākandikāvadāna in the Divyāvadāna, p. 239 of the St. Petersburg MS. A Brahman’s son in a hill-place, entering the house of a smith in order to collect alms, falls in love with the smith’s daughter, but learns that her father will give her to that man only who can equal or surpass him in art. The Brahman youth applied himself to the art of making needles, and then came to the smith’s house, and offered him needles for sale. All the seven needles which he produced as a test of his skill are of such a nature that they float upon water, even the largest among them not being excepted.—S.

[195] Kah-gyur, ii. f. 285.

[196] Kah-gyur ii. f. 283.

[197] On an artificial elephant which could move by means of machinery, see Mahākātyāyana and Tshaṇḍapradyota (Mém. de l’Acad. des Sciences, viie., Série, T. xxii., No. 7, p. 36). In the Jyotishkāvadāna, p. 108, artificial fishes which can be set in motion by machinery, appear under a crystal floor. The entering guest takes this for water, and is about therefore to take off his shoes.—S.

[198] Kah-gyur, ii. f. 283.