________________
290
THE INDIAN ANTIQUARY.
[OCTOBER, 1883.
his catalogue will no doubt supersede the old one, and be generally used.
Mr. Bunyiu Nanjio thinks that Mr. Beal was ignorant of the original arrangement of these books (p. 11). What ground he has for this opinion he does not state. Mr. Beal on p. 2 of his Catalogue speaks of the original division" of the works, and on p. 110 he writes :-"The books in this catalogue may be classed generally, and for the sake of brevity, under the heads Vinaya, Satra, Abhidharma and Miscellaneous." This also is the division adopted by Mr. Nanjio; we observe also that he has used the term sannipata (p. 9) or mahdsannipata for the last division, a term first employed by Mr. Beal in disagreement with Stanislas Julien (Beal's Catalogue, p. 3). The "irrational" character of the "tripartite division," to which Mr. Beal refers in the passage quoted by Mr. Nanjio, is, that it is made to include four sections of books; and it is irrational to attempt to put four pegs into three holes.
Why does Mr. Bunyiu Nanjio call this collection of books "a sacred canon P” It does not claim any character of sanctity. It is a collection of Buddhist books brought to China by haphazard. Of course, the imperial sanction under which the catalogue is issued, may give it a character of sacredness in the eyes of some; but we cannot let the use of cuch a phrase as "sacred canon" pass by unchallenged. The teaching of Buddha may be termed "holy," as it is so used in the original; but a series of books including travels, catalogues and dictionaries, can only be called "sacred" by a misuse of language.
Mr. Bunyiu Nanjio's account of the steps that led on to the preparation of the collection of these books in their present order in China, is interesting and exhaustive. If anything, it is too minute; but, anyhow, it will do for all time, and settle the question, which has hitherto been rather a perplexing one, as to the cause of differences which occur in the various lists respecting the number of the books and their right place in the Tripitaka. We note, too, as an important feature in this consideration, the real shown by private persons in arranging and printing these books. This alone is sufficient to show the hold which Buddhism still has on the minds of the people who profess a belief in its teaching.
Altogether there are 1662 distinct works separately named and described by the author of this Catalogue. In this respect it is a most useful help for an exact knowledge of Buddhist literature, and it will take its place beside the catalogues being now, or already, prepared, of similar books known in Nepal and Tibet. In fact our acquaint. ance with Buddhism in all its branches is becom.
ing daily more accurate and more extensive, and we look forward with interest to the solution of questions involved in the rise and progress of this religion in the East, which will be suggested by an analysis or translation of some of the books in these various collections, and an exact comparison of points of agreement and divergence between them.
Mr. Bunyiu Nanjio, in the last clause of his "Introduction," "humbly asks all students of Buddhist literature to assist him in correcting any mistakes he may have made" in compiling his catalogue; we will therefore point out a few errors. In the Maharatnakula class of books (No. 23), Mr. Nanjio has translated the symbol "lwui" in every case as: “that (spoken at) an assembly"-but why so ? The idea appears to be that each of these sútras is a portion, or part, of the "gems heaped up; " and the term hwui (saligraha) might just as well be rendered by "collection" or "portion," as by the long and unusual phrase adopted by the author.
No. 303.-Mr. B.N. translates into rather obscure English. Surely if he had consulted Stas. Julien's Méthode (1315), or the Indian Antiquary, vol. IX, (1880), p. 85, he might have explained this title somewhat more accurately.
No.399.-Mr. B. N. here risks the assertion, the term Súrangama has no connection whatever with Súra, the sun." But the explanation of the title given by Kumarajiva, viz., chien-siang," the mark of a hero";-siang here as elsewhere corresponds with lakshana,-seems to point to the Sun's rays, under the figure of horns (sringin). The possession of horns (as in the case of Alexander the Great) is especially the mark of a hero. The explanation which Mr. Nanjio seems to adopt, viz., "going from heroism," is, to say the least, unsatisfactory.
No. 551.-Mr. B. N. restores experimentally the expression leu-than to lokadhátu. But from the work Fan-i-ming-i-tsi (Book IX, fol. 19), it seems that the right restoration of this title is Pindadhana, or Pindadana.
No. 1492.-Mr. B. N. has here separated the symbol nêi from the preceding kudi, and instead of translating the whole as, "Records of the Law sent from the Southern Sea by one returning to China," he has rendered it, “Records of the Inner Law,'" &c;" but kwéi néi is "to return to China," the Inner Land.
There are other similar mistakes to be found scattered through this work. We point these out, not for the sake of fault-finding, but to show how easily the most careful writers may fall into error. With respect to the book as a whole (though the errata are quite unusually numerous), it deserves great commendation.
