Мне кажется, что если мы прочитаем всю работу Иосифа Флавия «О древности иудеев», мы не сможем не заметить, что Иосиф Флавий хотел показать ближе к концу второй книги, что другие народы копировали или пытались копировать еврейские обычаи. Он говорит: Ὑφ᾽ ἡμῶν τε διηνέχθησαν οἱ νόμοι καὶ τοῖς ἄλλοις ἅπασιν ἀνθρώποις, ἀεὶ καὶ μᾶλλον αὐτῶν ζῆλον ἐμπεποιήκασι. Затем он говорит, что ранние греческие философы, хотя и казались оригинальными в своих теоретических размышлениях, следовали еврейским законам в отношении практических и моральных предписаний. Затем следует это предложение: Οὐ μὴν ἀλλὰ καὶ πλήθεσιν ἤδη πολὺς ζῆλος γέγονεν ἐκ μακροῦ τῆς ἡμετέρας εὐσεβείας, οὐ δ᾽ ἔστιν οὐ πόλις Ἑλλήνων οὐδετισουν οὐδὲ βάρβαρος, οὐδὲ ἕν ἔθνος, ἔνθα μὴ τὸ τῆς ἑβδομάδος, ἥν ἀργοῦμεν ἡμεῖς, ἔθος οὐ διαπεφοιτηκε, καὶ αἱ νηστεῖαι καὶ λύχνων ἀνακαύσεις καὶ πολλὰ τῶν εἰς βρῶσιν ἡμῖν οὐ νενομισμένων παρατετήρηται. Μιμεῖσθαι δὲ πειρῶνται καὶ τὴν πρὸς ἀλλήλους ἡμῶν ὁμόνοιαν, κ.τ.λ. Находясь там, где оно находится, предложение о ἑβδομάς может означать только то, что «нет города греков или варваров, ни одного народа, где бы не распространился обычай седьмого дня, в который мы отдыхаем, и где не соблюдались бы посты, зажигание ламп и многое из того, что запрещено нам в отношении пищи. Они пытаются подражать и нашему взаимному согласию и т. д.». Гебдомада, которая первоначально означала неделю, здесь явно используется в значении седьмого дня, и хотя Иосиф Флавий может преувеличивать, то, что он говорит, — это уверенность: «что не было города, греческого или негреческого, где бы не распространился обычай соблюдения седьмого дня». 56.Grimm, Deutsche Mythologie, p. 118, note.57.In Singalese Wednesday is Badâ, in Tamil Budau. See Kennet, in Indian Antiquary, 1874, p. 90; D'Alwis, Journal of Ceylon Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society, 1870, p. 17.58.Grimm, Deutsche Mythologie, p. 276.59.Ibid. p. 151.60.Ibid. p. 120.61.Grimm, Deutsche Mythologie, pp. 137-148.62.Ibid. p. 126. Oski in Icelandic, the god Wish, one of the names of the highest god.63.Tacit. Hist. iv. 64: “Communibus Diis et præcipuo Deorum Marti grates agimus.”64.Grimm, l. c. p. 148.65.P. 125. “Pour quiconque s'est occupé d'études philologiques, Jéhova dérivé de Zeus est facile à admettre.”66.Stanislas Julien, Le Livre de la Voie et de la Vertu. Paris, 1842, p. iv.67.Montucci, De studiis sinicis. Berolini, 1808.68.See W. E. A. Axon's “The Future of the English Language,” the “Almanach de Gotha,” and De Candolle's “Histoire des Sciences,” 1873.69.The pronoun it woz speld in eight diferent wayz bei Tyndale th[p]s, hyt, hytt, hit, hitt, it, itt, yt, ytt. Another author speld tongue in the folowing wayz: tung, tong, tunge, tonge, tounge. The w[p]rd head woz vario[p]sli speld hed, heede, hede, hefode. The spelingz obay, survay, pray, vail, vain, ar often uzed for obey, survey, prey, veil, vein.70.Popular Education—A Revision of English Spelling a National Necessity. By E. Jones, B.A. London, 1875.71.“Rig-Veda-Prâtisâkhya, Das älteste Lehrbuch der Vedischen Phonetik, Sanskrit Text, mit Übersetzung und Anmerkungen, herausgegeben,” von F. Max Müller, Leipzig, 1869.72.Beal, Travels of Buddhist Pilgrims, Introd. p. xxi.; Chinese Repository, vol. x. No. 3, March, 1841.73.See an account of the Introduction of Buddhism into China, in Journal Asiatique, 1856, August, p. 105. Recherches sur l'origine des ordres religieux dans l'empire chinois, par Bazin.74.Stan. Julien, Pèlerins Bouddhistes, vol. i. p. 296.75.Dr. Edkins in his Notices of Buddhism in China (which unfortunately are not paged) says that Indians arrived at the capital of China in Shensi in 217 B. C. to propagate their religion.76.Dr. Edkins, l. c., states that Kang-khien, on his return from the country of the Getæ, informed the Emperor Wu-ti that he had seen articles of traffic from Shindo. The commentator adds that the name is pronounced Kando and Tindo, and that it is the country of the barbarians called Buddha (sic).77.Kabul or Ko-fu is, in the Eastern Han annals, called a state of the Yüeh-ki.78.Generally identified with the Getæ, but without sufficient proof.79.Translated by Mr. Bunyiu Nanjio.80.The golden color or suvarnavarnatâ is one of the thirty-two marks of a Buddha, recognized both in the Southern and Northern schools (Burnouf, Lotus, 579).81.This name is written in various ways, Ka-shio-ma-tô-giya, Ka-shio-ma-tô, Shio-ma-tô, Ka-tô, Ma-tô. In the Fan-i-ming-i-tsi (vol. iii. fol. 4 a), it is said “that K. was a native of Central India, and a Brâhman by caste. Having been invited by the Chinese envoy, Tsâi-yin, he came to China, saw the Emperor, and died in Lo-yang, the capital.” Of Kû-fa-lan it is said (l. c. vol. iii. fol. 4) that he was a native of Central India, well versed in Vinaya. When invited to go to China, the King would not let him depart. He left secretly, and arrived in China after Kâsyapa. They translated the Sûtra in forty-two sections together. After Kâsyapa died, Kû-fa-lan translated five Sûtras.82.See Vasala-sutta (in Nipâta-sutta), v. 22.83.Fa is the Buddhist equivalent for friar.84.Mr. B. Nanjio informs me that both in China and Japan Buddhist priests adopt either Kû, the last character of Tien-kû, India, or Shih, the first character of Shih-kia—i. e. Sâkya—as their surname.85.L. Feer, Sutra en 42 articles, p. xxvii. Le Dhammapada par F. Hû, suivi du Sutra en 42 articles, par Léon Feer, 1878, p. xxiv.86.In Beal's Catalogue this name is spelt An-shi-ko, An-shi-kao, and Ngan-shai-ko.87.His translations occur in Beal's Catalogue, pp. 31, 35, 37, 38, 40 (bis), 41 (bis), 42 (bis), 43, 45, 46, 47, 49, 50, 51 (ter), 52 (bis), 54, 70, 88, 95 (bis). In the K'ai-yuen-lu it is stated that he translated 99 works in 115 fascicles.88.Wû, comprising Keh-kiang and other parts, with its capital in what is now Sû-kau, was the southern one of the Three Kingdoms. Sun-khüan was its first sovereign.89.The northern of the Three Kingdoms, with its capital latterly in Lo-yang.90.See Beal, Catalogue, p. 5.91.This name, Kû-fâ-hu, is generally re-translated as Dharmaraksha. Kû is the second character in Tien-kû, the name of India, and this character was used as their surname by many Indian priests while living in China. In that case their Sanskrit names were mostly translated into two Chinese characters: as Fâ, (law = dharma), hu (protection = raksha).—B. N.92.According to Mr. Beal (Fahian, p. xxiii.), this Kû-fâ-hu, with the help of other Shâmans, translated no less than 165 texts, and among them the Lalita-vistara (Pou-yao-king), the Nirvâna Sûtra, and the Suvarna-prabhâsa-Sûtra (265-308). The K'ai-yuen-lu assigns to him 275 works, in 354 fascicles.93.Edkins, l. c. Beal, Catalogue, p. 17; 14.94.Edkins, l. c.95.The Yâos subdued the Fûs, and ruled as the dynasty of the After Khin.96.See p. 208. He is sometimes called Balasan, or, according to Edkins, Palat'sanga, Baddala, or Dabadara. In the Fan-i-ming-i-tsi (vol. iii. fol. 6) the following account of Buddhabhadra is given: “Buddhabhadra met Kumâragiva in China, and whenever the latter found any doubts, the former was always asked for an explanation. In the fourteenth year of Î-hsi (418 A. D.) Buddhabhadra translated the Fa-yan-king in sixty volumes.” This Sûtra is the Ta-fang-kwang-fo-fa-yan-king, Buddhâvatamsaka-vai-pulya-sûtra (Beal's Catalogue, p. 9). This translation was brought to Japan in 736.97.The Sang-ki-liu, rules of priesthood; i. e. the Vinaya of the Mahâsaṅghika school.98.I call him Dharmaraksha II., in order to prevent a confusion which has been produced by identifying two Shâmans who lived at a distance of nearly 200 years—the one 250 A. D., the other 420 A. D. The first is called Kû-fâ-hu, which can be rendered Dharmaraksha; the second is called Fâ-făng (law-prosperity), but, if transliterated, he is best known by the names T`on-mo-la-tsin, T`an-mo-tsin, or Dharmalatsin. He was a native of Central India, and arrived in China in the first year of the period Hiouen-shi of the Tsü-khu family of the Northern Liang, 414 A. D. He was the contemporary of Ki-mang, whom Mr. Beal places about 250 A. D., in order to make him a contemporary of Dharmaraksha I.99.Mung-sun died 432, and was succeeded by his heir, who lost his kingdom in 439. Yâo-khang's kingdom, however, was destroyed by the Eastern Tsin, at the time of his second successor, 417, not by Mung-sun.100.It is said in the tenth year of the period Hung-shi of Yâo-khang (better hsing), the copy arrived at Khang-an. But this cannot be, if Ki-mang went to India in 419. There must be something wrong in these dates.101.The four Nikâyas or Âgamas; cf. Vinayapitaka, vol. i. p. xl.102.Sâriputrâbhidharma-sâstra; cf. Beal, Catalogue, p. 80.103.Beal, Catalogue, p. 36.104.Edkins, l. c.105.Ibid.106.Beal, Catalogue, p. 77; on p. 20 a translation of the Lankâvatâra is mentioned.107.See Athenæum, August 7, 1880; and infra, p. 370.108.A long list of Sanskrit texts translated into Chinese may be found in the Journal Asiatique, 1849, p. 353 seq., s. t. “Concordance Sinico-Samskrite d'un nombre considérable de titres d'ouvrages Bouddhiques, recueillie dans un Catalogue Chinois de l'an 1306, par M. Stanislas Julien.”109.Csoma Körösi, As. Res. vol. xx. p. 418. Journal Asiatique, 1849, p. 356.110.Cf. Beal, Catalogue, p. 66.111.The modern paper in Nepal is said to date from 500 years ago (Hodgson, Essays).112.M. M., History of Ancient Sanskrit Literature, p. 516.113.Burnell, South Indian Palæography, 2d ed. p. 84 seq.114.See Sacred Books of the East, vol. i., Upanishads, Introduction, p. lxxviii.115.Dr. Bühler (Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, Bombay, 1877, p. 29) has the following interesting remarks: “The Bhûrga MSS. are written on specially-prepared thin sheets of the inner bark of the Himalayan birch (Bœtula Bhojpatr. Wallich), and invariably in Sâradâ characters. The lines run always parallel to the narrow side of the leaf, and the MSS. present, therefore, the appearance of European books, not of Indian MSS., which owe their form to an imitation of the Tâlapatras. The Himâlaya seems to contain an inexhaustible supply of birch bark, which in Kasmîr and other hill countries is used both instead of paper by the shopkeepers in the bazaars, and for lining the roofs of houses in order to make them water-tight. It is also exported to India, where in many places it is likewise used for wrapping up parcels, and plays an important part in the manufacture of the flexible pipe-stems used by hukâ smokers. To give an idea of the quantities which are brought into Srînagar, I may mention that on one single day I counted fourteen large barges with birch bark on the river.... The use of birch bark for literary purposes is attested by the earliest classical Sanskrit writers. Kâlidâsa mentions it in his dramas and epics; Sustuta, Varâhamihira (circa 500-550 A. D.) know it likewise. As is the case with nearly all old customs, the use of birch bark for writing still survives in India, though the fact is little known. Mantras, which are worn as amulets, are written on pieces of Bhûrga with ashtau gandbâh, a mixture of eight odoriferous substances—e. g. camphor, sandal, tumeric—which vary according to the deity to which the writing is dedicated. The custom prevails in Bengal as well as in Gujarât. Birch-bark MSS. occur in Orissa. The Petersburg Dictionary refers to a passage in the Kâthaka, the redaction of the Yajurveda formerly current in Kasmîr, where the word Bhûrga occurs, though it is not clear if it is mentioned there too as material for writing on. The Kasmirian Pandits assert, and apparently with good reason, that in Kasmîr all books were written on bhûrgapattras from the earliest times until after the conquest of the Valley by Akbar, about 200-250 years ago. Akbar introduced the manufacture of paper, and thus created an industry for which Kasmîr is now famous in India.”116.Dr. Burnell, Indian Antiquary, 1880, p. 234, shows that Koṅkanapura is Koṅkanahlli in the Mysore territory.117.Beal's Travels of Buddhist Pilgrims, Introd. p. xlvi.118.Pèterins Buuddhistes, vol. i. p. 158.119.Fausböll, Dasaratha-jātaka, p. 25.120.See, also, Albiruni, as quoted by Reinaud, Memoir sur l'Inde, p. 305.121.See Letter to the Times, “On the Religions of Japan,” Oct. 20, 1880.122.“Le Bouddhisme dans l'extrème Orient,” Revue Scientifique, Décembre, 1879.123.Journal Asiatique, 1871, p. 386 seq.124.Five of these translations were introduced into Japan; the others seem to have been lost in China. The translations are spoken of as “the five in existence and the seven missing.”125.See p. 192.126.See p. 192.127.The MSS. vary between Sukhavatî and Sukhâvatî.128.See, also, Lotus de la bonne Loi, p. 267.129.Journal of the R. A. S. 1856, p. 319.130.I owe this information to the kindness of M. Léon Feer at Paris.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-upadesa-sâstra, by Vasubandhu, translated by Bodhiruki (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.Srâvastî, capital of the Northern Kosalas, residence of King Prasenagit. 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.Abhigñânâbhigñâtaih. The Japanese text reads abhigñâtâbhâgñâtaih—i. e. abhigñâtâbhigñâtaih. 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. Abhigñâta 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 abhigñânâbhigñâtaih, 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 abhigñâs.” It would be better in that case to write abhigñâtâbhigñânaih, but no MSS. seem to support that reading. The five abhigñâs or abhigñânas 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 abhigñânâbhigñaih, and afterwards abhigñâtâbhigñaih. The position of the participle as the uttara-pada in such compounds as abhigñânâbhigñâtaih is common in Buddhist Sanskrit. Mr. Bendall has called my attention to the Pâli abhiññâta-abhiññâta (Vinaya-pitaka, 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.Arhadbhih. I have left the correct Sanskrit form, because the Japanese text gives the termination adbhih. Hôgŏ's text has the more usual form arhantaih. 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 Kanda 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 Koti or Kotî—i. e. ten millions—become very vague, nor is their value always the same. Ayuta, i. e. a hundred Kotis; 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.Tishthati dhriyate yâpayati dharmam ka 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.Kiṅkinîgâla. The texts read kaṅkanîgalais ka and kaṅkanîgalais ka, and again later kaṅkanîgalunâm (also lû) and kaṅkanîgalânâm. Mr. Beal translates from Chinese “seven rows of exquisite curtains,” and again “gemmous curtains.” First of all, it seems clear that we must read gâla, net, web, instead of gala. Secondly, kaṅkana, bracelet, gives no sense, for what could be the meaning of nets or string of bracelets? I prefer to read kiṅkinîgâla, 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 kiṅkinikagâla, from which likewise the music proceeds; see Childers, s. v. gâla. In the MSS. of the Nepalese Sukhavatîvyûha (R. A. S.), p. 39 a, l. 4, I likewise find svarnaratnakiṅkinîgâlâni, which settles the matter, and shows how little confidence we can place in the Japanese texts.144.Anuparikshipta, inclosed; see parikkhepo in Childers' Dict.145.The eight good qualities of water are limpidity and purity, refreshing coolness, sweetness, softness, fertilizing qualities, calmness, power of preventing famine, productiveness. See Beal, Catena, p. 379.146.Kâkâpeya. One text reads Kâkapeya, the other Kâkâpeya. It is difficult to choose. The more usual word is kâkapeya, which is explained by Pânini, ii. 1, 33. It is uncertain, however, whether kâkapeya is meant as a laudatory or as a depreciatory term. Boehtlingk takes it in the latter sense, and translates nadî kâkapeyâ, by a shallow river that could be drunk up by a crow. Târânâtha takes it in the former sense, and translates nadî kâkapeyâ, as a river so full of water that a crow can drink it without bending its neck (kâkair anatakandharaih pîyate; pûrnodakatvena prasasye kâkaih peye nadyâdau). In our passage kâkapeya must be a term of praise, and we therefore could only render it by “ponds so full of water that crows could drink from them.” But why should so well known a word as kâkapeya have been spelt kâkâpeya, unless it was done intentionally? And if intentionally, what was it intended for? We must remember that Pânini, ii. 1, 42 schol., teaches us how to form the word tîrthakâka, a crow at a tîrtha, which means a person in a wrong place. It would seem, therefore, that crows were considered out of place at a tîrtha or bathing-place, either because they were birds of ill omen, or because they defiled the water. From that point of view, kâkâpeya would mean a pond not visited by crows, free from crows. Professor Pischel has called my attention to Mahâparinibbâna Sutta (J. R. A. S. 1875, p. 67, p. 21), where kâkapeyâ clearly refers to a full river. Samatiṭṭḥika, if this is the right reading, occurs in the same place as an epithet of a river, by the side of kâkapeya, and I think it most likely that it means rising to a level with the tîrthas, the fords or bathing-places. Mr. Rhys Davids informs me that the commentary explains the two words by samatittikâ ti samaharitâ, kâkapeyyâ ti yatthatatthaki tîre thitena kâkena sakkâ patum ti.147.Purobhaktena. The text is difficult to read, but it can hardly be doubtful that purobhaktena corresponds to Pâli purebhattam (i. e. before the morning meal), opposed to pakkhâbhattam, after the noonday meal (i. e. in the afternoon). See Childers, s. v. Pûrvabhaktikâ would be the first repast, as Professor Cowell informs me.148.Divâ vihârâya, for the noonday rest, the siesta. See Childers, s. v. vihâra.149.Krauñkâh. Snipe, curlew. Is it meant for Kuravîka, or Karavîka, a fine-voiced bird (according to Kern, the Sk. karâyikâ), or for Kalaviṅka-Pâli Kalavîka? See Childers, s. v. opapâtiko; Burnouf, Lotus, p. 566. I see, however, the same birds mentioned together elsewhere, as hamsakrauñkamayûrasukasâlikakokila, etc. On mayûra see Mahâv. Introd. p. xxxix.; Rv. I. 191, 14.150.Индриябалабодхьянгасабда. Это технические термины, но их значение не совсем ясно. Спенс Харди в своем «Руководстве» (стр. 498) перечисляет пять индрий, а именно: (1) сардхава, чистота (вероятно, шраддха, вера), (2) вирая, упорное усилие (вирья), (3) сати или смрити, установление истины (смрити), (4) самадхи, спокойствие, (5) прагньява, мудрость (праджня).
Пять балаев (бала), добавляет он, те же, что и пять индрий.
Семь бодхьянг (bodhyaṅga), по его словам: (1) сихи или смрити, установление истины путем умственного приложения, (2) дхармавича, исследование причин, (3) вирая, упорное усилие, (4) прити, радость, (5) пассадхи или прасрабдхи, спокойствие, (6) самадхи, спокойствие в высшей степени, включая свободу от всего, что беспокоит тело или ум, (7) упекша, невозмутимость.
Из этого видно, что некоторые из этих качеств или достоинств встречаются как индрии и бодхьянги, в то время как балы повсюду идентичны индриям.
Бюрнуф, однако, в своем «Лотосе» дает список пяти бал (из «Vocabulaire Pentaglotte»), которые соответствуют пяти индриям Спенса Харди: а именно: шраддха-бала, сила веры; вирья-бала, сила энергии; смрити-бала, сила памяти; самадхи-бала, сила медитации; праджня-бала, сила знания. Они предшествуют семи бодхьянгам как в «Лотосе», так и в «Vocabulaire Pentaglotte» и «Лалита-вистаре».
Этим семи бодхьянгам Бюрнуф посвятил специальный трактат (Приложение XII, стр. 796). Они встречаются как на санскрите, так и на пали. 151.Niraya, the hells, also called Naraka. Yamaloka, the realm of Yama, the judge of the dead, is explained as the four Apâyas—i. e. Naraka, hell, Tiryagyoni, birth as animals, Pretaloka, realm of the dead, Asuraloka, realm of evil spirits. The three terms which are here used together occur likewise in a passage translated by Burnouf, Introduction, p. 544.152.Iti sankhyâm gakkhanti, they are called; cf. Childers, s. v. sankhyâ. Asankhyeya, even more than aprameya, is the recognized term for infinity. Burnouf, Lotus, p. 852.153.Avaramâtraka. This is the Pâli oramattako, “belonging merely to the present life,” and the intention of the writer seems to be to inculcate the doctrine of the Mahâyâna, that salvation can be obtained by mere repetitions of the name of Amitâbha, in direct opposition to the original doctrine of Buddha, that as a man soweth, so he reapeth. Buddha would have taught that the kusalamûla, the root or the stock of good works performed in this world (avaramâtraka), will bear fruit in the next, while here “vain repetitions” seems all that is enjoined. The Chinese translators take a different view of this passage, and I am not myself quite certain that I have understood it rightly. But from the end of this section, where we read kulaputrena vâ kuladuhitrâ vâ tatra buddhakshetre kittaprânidhânam kartavyam, it seems clear that the locative (buddhakshetre) forms the object of the pranidhâna, the fervent prayer or longing. The Satpurushas already in the Buddhakshetra would be the innumerable men (manushyâs) and Boddhisattvas mentioned before.154.Arthavasa, lit. the power of the thing; cf. Dhammapada, p. 388, v. 289.155.I am not quite certain as to the meaning of this passage, but if we enter into the bold metaphor of the text, viz., that the Buddhas cover the Buddha-countries with the organ of their tongue and then unroll it, what is intended can hardly be anything but that they first try to find words for the excellences of those countries, and then reveal or proclaim them. Burnouf, however (Lotus, p. 417), takes the expression in a literal sense, though he is shocked by its grotesqueness. On these Buddhas and their countries, see Burnouf, Lotus, p. 113.156.It should be remarked that the Tathâgatas here assigned to the ten quarters differ entirely from those assigned to them in the Lalita-vistara, book xx. Not even Amitâbha is mentioned there.157.Pratîyatha. The texts give again and again pattîyatha, evidently the Pâli form, instead of pratîyata. I have left tha, the Pâli termination of the 2 p. pl. in the imperative, instead of ta, because that form was clearly intended, while pa for pra may be an accident. Yet I have little doubt that patîyatha was in the original text. That it is meant for the imperative, we see from sraddadhâdhvam, etc., farther on. Other traces of the influence of Pâli or Prakrit on the Sanskrit of our Sûtra appear in arhantaih, the various reading for arhadbhih, which I preferred; sambahula for bahula; dhriyate yâpayati; purobhaktena; anyatra; saṅkhyâm gakkhanti; avaramâtraka; vethana instead of veshtana, in nirvethana; dharmaparyâya (Corp. Inscript. plate xv.), etc.158.The Sukhavatîvyûha, even in its shortest text, is called a Mahâyâna-sûtra, nor is there any reason why a Mahâyâna-sûtra should not be short. The meaning of Mahâyâna-sûtra is simply a Sûtra belonging to the Mahâyâna school, the school of the Great Boat. It was Burnouf who, in his Introduction to the History of Buddhism, tried very hard to establish a distinction between the Vaipulya or developed Sûtras, and what he calls the simple Sûtras. Now, the Vaipulya Sûtras may all belong to the Mahâyâna school, but that would not prove that all the Sûtras of the Mahâyâna school are Vaipulya or developed Sûtras. The name of simple Sûtra, in opposition to the Vaipulya or developed Sûtras, is not recognized by the Buddhists themselves; it is really an invention of Burnouf's. No doubt there is a great difference between a Vaipulya Sûtra, such as the Lotus of the Good Law, translated by Burnouf, and the Sûtras which Burnouf translated from the Divyâvadâna. But what Burnouf considers as the distinguishing mark of a Vaipulya Sûtra, viz. the occurrence of Bodhisattvas, as followers of the Buddha Sâkyamuni, would no longer seem to be tenable (“Les présence des Bodhisattûvas ou leur absence intéresse done le fonds même des livres où on la remarque, et il est bien évident que ce seul point trace une ligno de démarcation profonde entre les Sûtras ordinaires et les Sûtras développés.” Burnouf. Introduction, p. 112.), unless we classed our short Sukhavatî-vyûha as a Vaipulya or developed Sûtra. For this there is no authority. Our Sûtra is called a Mahâyâna Sutra, never a Vaipulya Sûtra, and yet among the followers of Buddha, the Bodhisattvas constitute a very considerable portion. But more than that, Amitâbha, the Buddha of Sukhavatî, another personage whom Burnouf looks upon as peculiar to the Vaipulya Sûtras, who is, in fact, one of the Dhyâni-buddhas, though not called by that name in our Sûtra, forms the chief object of its teaching, and is represented as coeval with Buddha Sâkyamuni. (“L'idée d'un ou de plusieurs Buddhas surhumains, celle de Bodhisattvas créés par eux, sont des conceptions aussi étrangères á ces livres (les Sûtras simples) que celle d'un Adibuddha ou d'un Dieu.”—Burnouf, Introduction, p. 120.) The larger text of the Sukhavatîvyûha would certainly, according to Burnouf's definition, seem to fall into the category of the Vaipulya Sûtras. But it is not so called in the MSS. which I have seen, and Burnouf himself gives an analysis of that Sûtra (Introduction, p. 99) as a specimen of a Mahâyâna, but not of a Vaipulya Sûtra.159.See H. Yule, Marco Polo, 2d ed. vol. i. pp. 441-443.160.In China, as Dr. Edkins states, the doctrine of Amitâbha is represented by the so-called Lotus school (Lian-tsung) or Pure Land (Tsing-tu). The founder of this school in China was Hwei-yuan of the Tsin dynasty (fourth century). The second patriarch (tsu) of this school was Kwang-ming (seventh century).161.See page 191.