« PreviousContinue »
associations, Hiouen Thsang dwells at great length, and with that lingering and minutiose reminiscence which marks a credulous and fervid piety.
That, in very early days, Benares attained to promi"Liste des Mots Abrégés ou Corrompus," I noticed the entry "Polo-nac, faute pour Po-lo-ni-88e (Vârâņaçi);" and I was thereby unavoidably misled to the conclusion that Po-lo-naï, the so-called shortened or depraved form of Po-lo-ni-sse, must be employed in the original, the passage or passages containing it being left undesignated by the translator.
No one can give much thought to the labours of M. Julien, without detecting that they were never executed in contemplation of circumspect perusal. Warned by my past experience, and weighing the premises just recited, I at once suspected management, issuing in the obliteration, in two places, of the river Varaņâ. I had recourse to Professor James Summers, a distinguished Sinologist; and my suspicion was changed into certitude.
Especially ought M. Julien to have abstained from mending his text here by guess, above all unconfessedly, inasmuch as, where the name Po-lo-ni-sse is first introduced, there is, in the Chinese, a gloss,-delusively appropriated by the translator, as we have seen,notifying that the kingdom so named had aforetime been called, by mistake, Po-lo-naï ; the spelling, in passing, of the Foě Kouě Ki. It was not, surely, to be expected, that, close to this notification, we should find-and not once only, but twice,-Po-lo-nie (Varaņa), if Polo-ni-sse (Vârâņasî) had been intended. M. Julien, however, deemed otherwise ; and he unavowedly took for granted, besides, that, in both these instances, Po-lo-nie was a corruption of the already corrupt Po-lo-naï.
Father Vivien de Saint-Martin, in his geographical commentary on M. Julien's translation, is pleased to substitute, for “fleuve de Po-lo-ni-sse (Vârâņaçî),” “rivière Po-lo-ni-ssé (Varâņasî);" and he proceeds to suggest,--as I have shown above, in note 2 to p. xviii.,that the city of Benares borrowed its appellation from that of this imaginary stream, held, by him, to be identical with the 'Epévvedis of Arrian.
More than this, M. Julien, in one of his Indexes, writes “ Vârâņaçi, rivière, aujourd'hui Barna, l'Erinésès des Grecs;" and the violence which Father Vivien de Saint-Martin does to his text has, thus, his
nent fame is a conclusion scarcely indicated by documentary evidence. And so it was during the period of the Buddhists. So far as we know, these sectaries, unlike the Muhammadans, never assumed an attitude of implied acquiescence. So important an alteration of opinion as that herein involved certainly called for specific acknowledgment in his “Errata Alphabétique,” a list which extends to seven pages.
In fine, M. Julien has no Sanskrit authority whatever for his “ Vârâņaçi,” i.e., Vârâņasî. Po-lo-ni-sse may, indeed, stand for Vârâņası, but — so indeterminate is the Chinese alphabet, — may just as well disguise Vârâņasi, Varâņasi, Varaṇasi, Bârânasi, and scores more of quadrisyllables. M. Julien allows us an option between Po-la-na-sse, Po-lo-ni-8se, Po-lo-ni-se, and P'o-lo-ni-sse, and between “Varâņaçi” and “Vârâņaçi.” It cannot be proved that Hiouen Thsang did not hear, and do his best to spell, as the names of the river and city, Barņâ—the very word now used,--and Barânas. Indeed, the balance of probability is overwhelmingly in favour of the position, that the Indian proper names translettered by Hiouen Thsang were Prakrit, not Sanskrit. Perhaps it is not strange that M. Julien, in drawing up his suicidal Méthode, and even earlier, chose to shut his eyes to this presumption. Vide supra, p. xxvii., note 2.
“With M. Julien's method, mathematical certainty seems to have taken the place of learned conjectures.” So we read, in the Saturday Review, Vol. XI., p. 247 (1861), in an article lately republished as Professor Max Müller’s. Finding M. Julien's method to be much more precarious than it appears at first sight, I took occasion, some years ago, with ample detail of reasons, to reclaim against this heedless hyperbole of encomium. Continued examination has multiplied my arguments of protest; and I am convinced that one will do well to use M. Julien’s volumes, valuable and instructive as they are, with constant caution.
That M. Julien, for all the self-complacent air of his Méthode, has struck out a single idea, save of detail, that was unknown to M. Rémusat and the editors of the Foě Kouě Ki, I have not succeeded in discovering
Mémoires sur les Contrées Occidentales, etc., Vol. I., p. 354; Vol. II., pp. 345, 360, 361, 479, 562: Foě Kouě Ki, p. 307: Histoire de la Vie de Hiouen-Thsang, etc., pp. 83, 132, 429, 464: Chips from a German Workshop, Vol. I., p. 296: Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal, for 1861, pp. 334-336.
vehement hostility as against the Hindus. Not only was the character of their religion pacific, but at no time during their presence in India' were they, albeit in the ascendant, beyond doubt a majority of the people. It
| How the Buddhists came to leave India has not yet been shown satisfactorily. The Sankara-digvijaya of Mâdhava—which professes to abridge an older work, but which, perhaps, has no better basis, for the most part, than oral tradition, eked out by romance,-bears witness, it is true, to a ferocious spirit of opposition to those religionists; and such a spirit, if entertained after they had become strangers to the country, may have been entertained while they were still face to face with Hindus. Nevertheless, we have no historical proof that India was ever the theatre of a Buddhist persecution. Few Sanskrit manuscripts exist that were copied more than four or five centuries ago, at which time Indian Buddhists must have been very rare, if there were any at all. Neither among the Hindus nor among the Jainas has one ever observed anything like that liberality of literary curiosity which would be at much pains to perpetuate, by transcription, the holy writ of an antagonist creed ; and the fact of a persecution of the Buddhists cannot, accordingly, be deduced from the fact that their books are now but very rarely met with in the possession of natives of India.
Considering the character of their respective beliefs, the Buddhists and the Hindus were under no obligation to be truculently inimical to each other. There is even reason to believe that there were medieval Indian kings who, from motives of policy, adiaphorized between the two great classes of the faithful into which their subjects were divided. For instance, a position of practical indifference in respect of the prevailing superstitions seems to be ascertained with reference to Harsha, king of Kanauj in the seventh century. Hiouen Thsang speaks of him much as if he were a Buddhist; and Bâņa, in the Harsha-charita, writes of him as if of a Hindu. Further, we find that monarch figuring as dedicatee of the Nagananda, and also of the Ratnávali, two dramas, severally Buddhist and Brahmanical.
For the Harsha-charita and the Nagananda,—of which I discovered copies, after these works had slumbered neglected for many generations,—see my Vásavadattá, Preface, pp. 12–18 and 50-54; and the Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal, for 1862, pp. 12, 13. See, further, on the Buddhists in Southern India, Professor Wilson's Mackenzie Collection, Vol. I., Introduction, pp. lxiii. lxvi.
was but natural for their founder, in the course of his mission, to take thought of the centres of population; and the spots which he and his disciples signalized by their teachings were reverently regarded, in after ages, as consecrated ground. These spots were, however, in the neighbourhood of cities,—as Gayâ, Mathurâ, Ayodhyâ, and Benares, rather than in the cities themselves; and it was not till after Buddhism had passed its prime on Indian soil, that these towns acquired the special repute which now attaches to them. As for Benares, the attribution to it of peculiar sanctity seems to date from the period of the Purâņas;’ and some of these compositions may, unquestionably, claim a very respectable antiquity.
A diligent perusal of the copious inanity of the Kasikhanda might lead to the discovery of its era, and
It is very true, that, all the way between Benares and the towers at Sârnâth, the fields are thickly strewed with bricks and other remains of former buildings. But I am not aware that Colonel Wilford has any authority for speaking of “the old city of Benares, north of the river Burna," which old city, he says, is sometimes called Sonitapura. Asiatic Researches, Vol. IX., p. 199.
2 Professor Wilson asserts, characteristically, that Benares “has been, from all time, as it is at present, the high place of the Saiva worship.” Translation of the Vishnu-purâņa, Book V., Chapter XXXIV., last note.
In the twelfth century, as we learn from the Haima-kośa, Benares was already distinguished as Sivapurî, “ the city of S'iva;” and we may thence gather that the worship of Siva especially predominated there at that time.
3 « There is every reason to believe the greater part of the contents of the Kasi-khanda anterior to the first attack upon Benares by Mahmûd of Ghaznî.” Thus pronounces Professor Wilson, in his translation of the Vishnu-purana, Vol. I., Preface, pp. LXXII., LXXIII. It would be interesting to be put in possession of even a single reason out of those to which the Professor alludes.
to other chronological determinations. In so recent a composition, and one having to do with real localities, there must, almost of necessity, be many facts interwoven with the fictions: the attempt to discriminate them would, perhaps, be remunerated. The Benares of the present day offers numerous and varied objects of interest to the contemplation of the devout Hindu; and yet, a very few of them excepted, to speculate touching their age, in reliance on the data hitherto made available, would be much too perilous for prudence.
1 Unless we are deceived by identity of names, scores of these are enumerated in the Kasî-khanda.
In the last chapter of that work, cycles of pilgrimages are prescribed, as means to particular ends, precisely as at this hour. Thus, there is one round to warrant the practitioner from liability to further metempsychosis; another, to secure the attainment of Rudrahood; a third, to ensure emancipation before death. These for samples.
Saints whose aspirations are less ambitious are promised store of good things in future for repeating the Panchatirthika daily. This consists in: (1) ablution, without disrobing, in the pool of Chakrapushkariņî, with a propitiation-service addressed to the gods, manes, Brahmans, and beggars ; (2) reverential salutation to Âditya, Draupadi, Vishņu, Daņdapâņi, and Maheswara; (3) visual contemplation of Dhundhivinayaka; (4) a dip of the fingers in the Jnânavâpi well, with adoration of Nandikeśa, Târakeśa, and Mahâkâleswara ; and, finally, (5) a second visit to Daņdapâņi.
Of seven preeminently holy places Kâsî is named first; the others being Kântî, Mâyâ, Ayodhyâ, Dwâravatî, Mathurâ, and Avantika:
काशी कान्ती च मायाख्या वयोध्या द्वारवत्यपि ।
VI., 68. Mâyâ is 'Hurdwar. I am not sure whether or not Kântî is the same as Kânchî. The rest are well known. These places are, all,