________________
Aruņa Mabāsālaputta (33), cp. Āruņi, and the latter himself : Addalaga= Uddalaka (35), the brahmanical prototypes known to us, clearly come to light. The epithet mahana-parivyāyaga stamps Pinga (32), Isigiri (34) and Sirigiri (37) as Brahmans; the pariyvāyaga Ambadat belongs here, as well as his interlocutor Jogamdharayaņa, i.e. Yaugamdharayaņa (25). Thus also Madhurayaņa (15) Āriyāyaṇa (19), and vitta Tarāyaṇa (36), who are not described in detail, and about the last of whom along with some others, one more word will have to be said just now, as also about Angarisi (4) and Varisavakaṇha (18). Buddhists appear in mahai-MabākāsavaMabakaśyapa (9) and Sa(t)iputta buddha = Sariputra (38), and in view of the disfigurations of well-known names it is, I suppose not too bold too see in Vajji(ya)putta (2) the head of the school of the Vatsiputras, i.e. Vatsiputra,5
P. 493
For want of clues we cannot linger with Pupphasālaputta (5), Ketali. putta (8), Vidu (17) Gahavaiputta taruna (21) Harigiri (24), Mātanga (26), and Vau sacca-samjutta (30)6. On the other hand, some of the aforementioned ones are known to us from Jaina literature : Bahuya (14), and Divāyana (40) we find mentioned in Süyagada 1, 3, 4, 2, the latter with Ambada (26) in Uvavaiya § 76 and most exhaustively in the legend of the end of Dvāravati (Jacobi ZDMG 42, 493 ff.); Angarisi Bharaddaya (4) is according to Thāņa 390 a, divided into two sub-gotras of the Goyama (Gautama), named Bharadda and Angirasa, a further one is, ibidem, Varisakaṇha, to whom here the Rși Varisavakanha (18) corresponds; one wonders whether both forms are not rather based on Varsaganya ? Tārāyaṇa (36) at last is called Tārāgaña in Suy. 1, 3, 4, 2, but by silānka ibid. Nārāyaṇa. Rāmagutta, who appears in the same place, is probably the same as Rāmaputta (23).
While, with the Jainas these Rșis appear only by names, others are the main figures in the stories named after them. For Jogamdharāyaṇa, it is true, this can only be inferred from a statement in the Abhidhānarajendra, according to which he occurs in the Āvassayacuņni, which is not accessible. Deva Nāraya (1) makes us think of the devarşi Nārada of the epic, but we are in fact rather concerned with Prince Naraya of Baravai. Vasudeva questions him, this is reported by Yaśodeva in his
4. Cp. Charlotte Krause, Prinz Aghata. Die Abenteuer Ambadas (Leipzig 1922), p.
155 ff. 5. The Paddhati of the Rşimandalavrtti (Weber II 948) just as it finds a risi in Angarisi,
also perpetrates the dissection of vajji(ya)putta into the two pratyeka-buddhas Vajra
and Putra. 6. Ketaliputta looks like a perplexity variant of Tetaliputta (10). Vidu is only the
adjective going back to vedic viduh according to Pischel Gramm. $ 411.
