131 See _Journal Asiatique_, 3d series, vol. iii. p. 316; vol. iv. p.
296-298.
_ 132 J. R. A. S._ 1866, p. 136.
_ 133 J. R. A. S._ 1866, p. 136.
134 Beal, _Catalogue_, p. 23. _J. R. A. S._ 1856, p. 319. Beal,
_Catalogue_, p. 77, mentions also an
Amitâbha-sûtra-upade_s_a-_s_âstra, by Vasubandhu, translated by
Bodhiru_k_i (Wou-liang-sheu-king-yeou-po-ti-she). There is an
Amitâbha-sûtra, translated by Chi-hien of the Wu period—_i. e._
222-280 A. D.—mentioned in Mr. Beal’s _Catalogue of the Buddhist
Tripitaka_, p. 6. The next Sûtra, which he calls the Sûtra of
measureless years, is no doubt the Amitâyus-sûtra, Amitâyus being
another name for Amitâbha (Fu-shwo-wou-liang-sheu-king, p. 6). See,
also, _Catalogue_, pp. 99, 102. Dr. Edkins also, in his _Notices of
Buddhism in China_, speaks of a translation of “the Sûtra of
boundless age,” by Fa-t’ian-pun, a native of Magadha, who was
assisted in his translation by a native of China familiar with
Sanskrit, about 1000 A. D.
_ 135 S_râvastî, capital of the Northern Ko_s_alas, residence of King
Prasena_g_it. It was in ruins when visited by Fa-hian (init. V.
Sæc.); not far from the modern Fizabad. _Cf._ Burnouf,
_Introduction_, p. 22.
136 Sârdha, with, the Pâli saddhim. Did not the frequent mention of
1,200 and a half (_i. e._ 1,250), 1,300 and a half (_i. e._ 1,350),
persons accompanying Buddha arise from a misunderstanding of sârdha,
meaning originally “with a half”?
137 Abhi_gñ_ânâbhi_gñ_âtai_h_. The Japanese text reads
abhi_gñ_âtâbhâ_gñ_âtai_h_—_i. e._ abhi_gñ_âtâbhi_gñ_âtai_h_. If this
were known to be the correct reading, we should translate it by
“known by known people,” _notus a viris notis_—_i. e._ well-known,
famous. Abhi_gñ_âta in the sense of known, famous, occurs in
Lalita-Vistara, p. 25, and the Chinese translators adopted that
meaning here. Again, if we preferred the reading
abhi_gñ_ânâbhi_gñ_âtai_h_, this, too, would admit of an intelligible
rendering—viz. known or distinguished by the marks or
characteristics, the good qualities, that ought to belong to a
Bhikshu. But the technical meaning is “possessed of a knowledge of
the five abhi_gñ_âs.” It would be better in that case to write
abhi_gñ_âtâbhi_gñ_ânai_h_, but no MSS. seem to support that reading.
The five abhi_gñ_âs or abhi_gñ_ânas which an Arhat ought to possess
are the divine sight, the divine hearing, the knowledge of the
thoughts of others, the remembrance of former existences, and magic
power. See Burnouf, _Lotus_, Appendice, No. xiv. The larger text of
the Sukhavatîvyûha has abhi_gñ_ânâbhi_gñ_aih, and afterwards
abhi_gñ_âtâbhi_gñ_ai_h_. The position of the participle as the
uttara-pada in such compounds as abhi_gñ_ânâbhi_gñ_âtai_h_ is common
in Buddhist Sanskrit. Mr. Bendall has called my attention to the
Pâli abhi_ññ_âta-abhi_ññ_âta (Vinaya-pi_t_aka, ed. Oldenberg, vol.
i. p. 43), which favors the Chinese acceptation of the term.
138 Mahâsrâvaka, the great disciples; sometimes the eighty principal
disciples.
139 Arhadbhi_h_. I have left the correct Sanskrit form, because the
Japanese text gives the termination adbhi_h_. Hôgŏ’s text has the
more usual form arhantai_h_. The change of the old classical arhat
into the Pâli arahan, and then back into Sanskrit arhanta, arahanta,
and at last arihanta, with the meaning of “destroyer of the
enemies”—_i. e._ the passions—shows very clearly the different
stages through which Sanskrit words passed in the different phases
of Buddhist literature. In Tibet, in Mongolia, and in China, Arhat
is translated by “destroyer of the enemy.” See Burnouf, _Lotus_, p.
287; _Introduction_, p. 295. Arhat is the title of the Bhikshu on
reaching the fourth degree of perfection. _Cf._ Sûtra of the 42
Sections, cap. 2. Clemens of Alexandria (d. 220) speaks of the
Σεμνοι who worshipped a pyramid erected over the relics of a god. Is
this a translation of Arhat, as Lassen (“De nom. Ind. philosoph.” in
_Rhein. Museum_, vol. i. p. 187) and Burnouf (_Introduction_, p.
295) supposed, or a transliteration of Samana? Clemens also speaks
of Σεμναί (_Stromat._ p. 539, Potter).
140 Indra, the old Vedic god, has come to mean simply lord, and in the
_K_anda Paritta (_Journal Asiatique_, 1871, p. 220) we actually find
Asurinda, the Indra or Lord of the Asuras.
141 The numbers in Buddhist literature, if they once exceed a Ko_t_i or
Ko_t_î—_i. e._ ten millions—become very vague, nor is their value
always the same. Ayuta, _i. e._ a hundred Ko_t_is; Niyuta, _i. e._ a
hundred Ayutas; and Nayuta, _i. e._ 1 with 22 zeros, are often
confounded; nor does it matter much so far as any definite idea is
concerned which such numerals convey to our mind.
142 Tish_th_ati dh_riy_ate yâpayati dharma_m_ _k_a desayati. This is
evidently an idiomatic phrase, for it occurs again and again in the
Nepalese text of the Sukhavatîvyûha (MS. 26 _b_, l. 1. 2; 55 _a_, l.
2, etc.). It seems to mean, he stands there, holds himself, supports
himself, and teaches the law. Burnouf translates the same phrase by,
“ils se trouvent, vivent existent” (_Lotus_, p. 354). On yâpeti in
Pâli, see Fausböll, Dasaratha-jâtaka, pp. 26, 28; and yâpana in
Sanskrit.
143 Kiṅki_n_î_g_âla. The texts read kaṅka_n_î_g_alais _k_a and
kaṅka_n_îgalais _k_a, and again later kaṅka_n_îgalunâm (also lû) and
kaṅka_n_î_g_alânâm. Mr. Beal translates from Chinese “seven rows of
exquisite curtains,” and again “gemmous curtains.” First of all, it
seems clear that we must read _g_âla, net, web, instead of _g_ala.
Secondly, kaṅka_n_a, bracelet, gives no sense, for what could be the
meaning of nets or string of bracelets? I prefer to read
kiṅki_n_î_g_âla, nets or strings or rows of bells. Such rows of
bells served for ornamenting a garden, and it may be said of them
that, if moved by the wind, they give forth certain sounds. In the
commentary on Dhammapada 30, p. 191, we meet with kiṅkinika_g_âla,
from which likewise the music proceeds; see Childers, _s. v. g_âla.
In the MSS. of the Nepalese Sukhavatîvyûha (_R. A. S._), p. 39 _a_,
l. 4, I likewise find svarnaratnakiṅki_n_î_g_âlâni, which settles
the matter, and shows how little confidence we can place in the
Japanese texts.