________________
MAY, 1891.]
THE INSCRIPTIONS OF PIYADASI.
167
4. The facsimile of the Corpus, by giving the double reading hamiydyé and diséyana, has given a new meaning to this passage. The versions of Burnouf and of Dr. Kern were only ingenious makeshifts, on which it would be, I think, superfluons to dwell at length. As far as subhásité vú all is plain; for the remainder, it is of importance to explain the construction clearly. And first of all the particle chu khó, which, as I have had occasion to point out has a slight adversative shade, announces a proposition destined to complete, and, to a certain extent, to form an antithesis to what precedes. The relative & which commences the sentence, requires a correlative, which we find in tarit before vatave. So far as con. cerns the relative proposition, I have just stated my opinion regarding hamiyáyê which is the instrumental of the pronoun of the first person. Disêyan is simply the regular form of the first person of the potential. As for the meaning of the verb diś, it is determined by that of the substantive désa. I have shewn (Dh., ed. det., i. n. 7) that, in our inscriptions, it is everywhere the equivalent of the Sanskrit saruesa, and signifies, order,''commandment.' Dis will, therefore, mean not merely to shew,' but to direct,' to order. We shall thus obtain this translation; and so far as I may order myself,' that is to say, by my own authority, besides what has been positively said by the Buddha. The reading tan vatavé instead of tuivatavé, tavitavé, has put everything here in order. The construction, with the infinitive dependent on alahami is excellent. Only one slight doubt remains, viz. should we not tran.scribe vátave with an anomalous compensatory á long ? It would, however, alter nothing in the rendering of the word which is equivalent to Sanskrit vaktun. In furnishing us with the necessary antecedent tain to the relative é, this reading allows us to take, with Barnouf, sadhaimé as equivalent to the technical Buddhistic saddharma.
5. The reading vinayasamukasé, formerly given by Wilson on the authority of Capt. Bart is now confirmed, and the Sanskrit transcription would be vinaya-samutkarshah, the meaning of which it is difficult to determine. We cannot separate the word from the Pâli expression sámukkarisiká dhasamadésaná (cf. Childers, ..v.); but the bearing of this qualification is far from being established. The only point which is certain is the derivation, - sámukkannsika equivalent to simutkarshika ; that which the PAli commentaries propose is only a play upon words. Provisionally, it is perhaps safest to adhere to the established meaning of samutkarsha in Sanskrit, and to translate, subject to every reservation, the Excellence of Discipline.' We may compare the use of the verb samutkarshati in'a passage of the Maharastu (I. p. 178, 1, 1. of my edition, and the note). Under any circumstances, we are not as yet, in a position to identify this title with any of those which are known to us from literature. The conjecture of Dr. Oldenberg (Mahavagga, I. p. xi. note), who seeks for, in it, the pátimökkha, is the less probable, because he has, for several of the other titles here given, shewn their exact agreement with the titles which his consummate experience of the Pali Canon has enabled him to be the first to discover. He identifies the anagata-bhayani with the arafinaleandgatabhayasutta of the Angutaranikaya. That Sûtra 'describes how the Bhikshu, who leads a solitary life in the forests, should have always before him the dangers that might suddenly put an end to his life, serpents, savage animals. &c., and such thoughts should lead him to exercise all his energies in order to arrive at the goal of his religious strivings.' Here we have an example of how the literal translation of a title may easily become a source of error, and how these. Fears of the Future' do not treat of the fear of infernal punishment, as Burnouf had very naturally supposed. This lesson warns us not to presume to determine the exact meaning of aliyavashni (probably áryavasini), a title not identified, of the money asata, or of the upatisapasiné. About the last, we can only be certain so far as to transcribe it, with Dr. Kern, as upatishyapraína. As for the munigátha, Dr. Oldenberg recognises in it, with much probability, the same subject which is treated of in the twelfth Sûtra of the Suttanipata bearing the same title, and he compares the lághuldváda with the Sútra entitled Ambalajthikardhulóváda, the sixty-first of the Majjhimanikdya (Vol. I. pp. 414 and ff. of
My two rabbings read distyd without the anwevers. It is simply one example more of the equivalence, which has been previously mentioned, betweon a long and Dalised vowel.
