IM Yogabhāṣya zu i, 36 findet sich ein anonymes Zitat, das nach Vācaspatimiśra von Pancasikha stammt: (yatré'dam uktam):, tam aṇumātram ātmānam anuvidyâ'smi'ty evaṃ tāvat saṃprajānīte. “ Garbe hat in seinem Beitrag zum Festgruss an Rudolf von Roth (Stuttgart, 1893) „ Pancaśikha und seine Fragmente“ folgendermassen ubersetzt:,, Wenn er dieses atomgrosse (aṇu-mātra) Selbst erkannt hat, so ist er sich dessen bewusst, was es heisst, Ich bin0027;,‘ und er bemerkt dazu:,, Alle Lehrer von Īśvarakṛṣṇna (s. Kārikā, 10, 11) an erklären den Ātman (i.e. puruṣa) für alldurchdringend, allgegenwārtig, unendlich gross (vibhu, tyāpaka, parama-mahant), und es wird von ihnen geradezu gegen die Theorie, dass die Seele ein Atom sei, polemisiert. Hierin (i.e. in Pancaśikha's Lehre) ist ein ofEenbarer Einfluss der Vedānta-Philosophie auf das Sānkhya zu erkennen.“ Der Ansicht Garbe's stimmt A. B. Keith {The Sāṃkhya System, p. 43) vollkommen bei.

W. Schmidt has established, as is well known, a new family of human speech, termed by him the “ Austric ” family. It was constituted by joining an “ Austronesian ” and an “ Austroasiatic ” group of languages; the latter term was coined by Schmidt when he found that the Mon-Khmer and some other languages of the East are kindred to the Muṇḍa languages of India.

Schmidt's treatise on the matter was declared by some scholars to be “ masterly ”, whereas others, so Przyluski, advised reserve. As a matter of fact, the existence of an “ Austric” family of languages—the most widely diffused on earth—is actually uncontested.

That the morphology and the grammar of the Muṇḍa and the Mon-Khmer languages are quite different, is admitted by W. Schmidt himself. Thus he based the relationship upon some similarities in phonetics, on the use of infixes in both languages, and on the results he obtained by comparing words.

The list of words and phrases contained in this article is one of ten manuscript vocabularies bound up in a volume lettered Kŏ Kwŏ Yï Yü which forms part of the collection of Chinese books made by the well-known missionary, Morrison (who lived from 1782–1834), and has been deposited on permanent loan by University College, London, in the Library of the School of Oriental Studies.

This remarkable writer, the founder of Ḥaidarābād, and probably the first literary poet in the language, was the fourth king of the Qutb Shāhī dynasty which ruled in Golkuṇḍa, one of the five states into which the Deccan was divided after the break up of the Bahmanī kingdom. In the last number of the Bulletin I gave reasons for believing that he was an earlier writer than Vajhī, who in 1609 wrote the masnavī known as Qutb Mushtarī, in which he related a story having this very monarch for hero. Only five years after Qulī Qutb Shāh's death his works were collected by his nephew and successor. They have never been published, but the beautiful original MS. compiled under the orders of his nephew in 1616 is still in Ḥaidarābād. It consists of 1,800 pages and has perhaps 100,000 lines.

Though he lived so long ago his name is one of the greatest in Urdu. He shows wonderful human interest, for he writes of everyday matters, Hindu and Muḥammadan festivals, the customs of the country, life in his palace, the celebration of his birthday, and of natural objects such as fruit, vegetables, and flowers. The only poets who can be compared with him are Saudā, and Nazir, both of whom he excels in description of nature, while in his sympathetic account of Hindu life he is superior to all other Muḥammadan poets.

L'inscription de China est d'une importance extreme pour l'histoire du pays des Andhras et de la dynastie des Śātavāhanas. Cette inscription se trouve au Musée de Madras; mais d'où vient-elle ? —de China.

Je crois que personne n'a eu jusqu'à présent la curiosité de chercher China sur une carte. Ce serait inutile: China n'existe pas.

Au Musée de Madras, on ne possède aucun renseignement, et la pierre est présentée comme venant de China.

Dans Epigraphia Indica, vol. i, page 95, Bühler, éditant cette inscription de Gotamϊputa Siriyaña Satakañi écrivait:—

“The subjoined inscription is incised on a stone, which was originally found on the sea-shore, south of the Krishna river close to the village of China in the Kistna district, and is now deposited in the Madras Museum.”

It is natural that records of the beginnings of Urdu should be almost entirely confined to literature or quasi literature. Yet there are two classes of books which contain references to conversation; firstly, early lives of holy men (especially in the Deccan and Gujrat), whose followers wrote accounts of their sayings and doings, occasionally quoting actual words; secondly, histories such as those by Firishta and Abu'l FaẒl, in which we may find Urdu sentences spoken by emperors or kings. Urdu must often have been employed as the language of conversation in exalted circles even though the official language continued to be Persian.

When we contemplate the extraordinary diversity of doctrine which has developed from the teaching in the sixth century B.C. of the Buddha, it is perhaps the most natural conclusion that it is really impracticable to discover with any precision the doctrine which in fact he expounded. This view, however, is naturally disappointing, and it is easy to sympathize with the energetic efforts of Professor Stcherbatsky in his works on The Central Conception of Buddhism and The Conception of Buddhist Nirvāṇa to ascribe to the founder of the faith a definite system, inspired by an intelligible philsophy, which again can be regarded as arising naturally from the spiritual ferment of his time among the non-brahmanical classes of India. Incidentally we may doubt the restriction of the ferment to these classes and believe that the Brahmans played, as they have normally and regularly done, a leading part of this activity, though we need not claim that their speculations powerfully affected the Buddha. In fact, Professor Stcherbatsky elsewhere admits that in the Buddha's time the Brahmanical community was mentally alert.

In his admirable introduction to the Kharoṣṭhi Inscriptions discovered by Sir Aurel Stein in Chinese Turkestan, Professor Rapson has analysed the various compound letters of the Kharoṣṭhī alphabet in such a way that his results will generally be accepted as final. It will no doubt in future be possible to throw fresh light on some minor details, but it is hardly conceivable that any serious objection will be raised against his deductions.

My object in writing these lines is, in the first place, to join those fellow students who wish to give expression to their sincere admiration of Professor Rapson's scholarship and work, and then to bring together some additional material which, in my opinion, will have to be considered in connection with one small detail dealt with in the said introduction, viz. the interpretation of the sign which has been variously transcribed as tsa and tśa.

Haraprasād Shāstrī a publié dans le Journal de la Société Asiatique du Bengale, vol. LXVII, part i, n° 2, p. 175–84 (1898) un petit traité attribué à Āryadeva. Quelques lacunes. Le titre Cittaviśuddhi est indiqué dans le dernier vers: indication confirmée par le Subhāṣitasaṃgraha (éd. C. Bendall, Muséon, 1904) qui cite un long fragment: cittaviśuddhiprakaraṇe āryadevapādair uktam. C. Bendall n’a pas manqué de découvrir dans le Tandjour (Rgyud, 33, Cordier, p. 136) le Cittāvaraṇaviśodhana, d’Āryadeva, trad, par Jñānākara et Thsul-khrims-rgyal-ba, et de constater l’identité des deux ouvrages. Enfin, dans la première partie de ses Études sur āryadeva et son Catuḥśataka, 1923, P. L. Vaidya a diligemment résumé les doctrines du Cittaviśuddhi ou Cittāvaraṇaviśodhana.

C’est du Tantrisme très évolué et très complet. Théorie de l’ekakṣaṇābhisaṃbodhi, acquisition instantanée de la Bodhi; identification du sperme et du sang avec les cinq Bouddhas: pañcabuddhātmakaṃ śukraṃ śoṇitaṃ cāpi tādṛśam; identification de l’œil avec Vairocana, du corps avec Heruka, et le reste. Un curieux morceau de polémique contre les bains dans le Gange: si l’eau purifiait, les poissons seraient des saints.