This work belongs to a class of Buddhist books called Prajná Páramitá. It was translated first into the Chinese by Kumára-jíva (A.D. 405), who was brought into China from Thibet. “The King of Tsin had sent an army into that country with directions not to return without the Indian whose fame had spread amongst all the neighbouring nations. The former translations of Buddhist works were to a great extent erroneous. To produce them in a form more accurate and complete was the task undertaken by Kumára-jíva. More than eight hundred priests were called to assist him; and the king himself, an ardent disciple of the new faith, was present at the conference, holding the old copies in his hand as the work of correction proceeded. More than three hundred volumes were thus prepared.” (Edkins).

This Sútra consists of about two hundred and fifty characters. It is repeated in the course of the daily worship of the Buddhists, by rote, as a mantra would be repeated (according to Colebrooke, pp. 8, 9, Relig. of Hindoos,) by the Hindoos. In its composition it resembles, or appears to resemble, the sacred writings of the Brahmans. No author's name is attached to it. It does not even begin with the usual preface “thus have I heard” (evam mayá śrutam). But we have mentioned in it the Rishi to whom it was communicated, and the Devatá from whom it proceeded. In this particular, at any rate, it strongly resembles the Vedic model. And when we recollect that the later Buddhists attempted in every possible way to absorb the system of the Brahmans in their own, yielding so far as they dared to popular superstitions, we shall not wonder in finding so many similarities, in externals at least, between the two religions.

English translations from Oriental languages are not easily made attractive to the general reader, unless they convey some startling novelty of idea or treatment, a position which they are not often calculated to realise. If literal, they are for the most part verbose or unmeaning; if adaptations to suit the supposed taste of the home public, they become subject to the rules of ordinary criticism, and have seldom the requisite stamina to pass creditably through the ordeal. I have always thought that the true charm of Sa'dí and Háfiz rests more in the language than in the morals or poetry; consequently, that our English versions, however ably executed, are far from doing justice to the original. The airs are for a full orchestra, and we hear them on a piano or street organ. And if the Persian intellect be, as I believe, one which places sound above import, so also may we esteem that of other Eastern nations, whose poets are humble imitators of the Persians. These remarks apply with especial force to the romantic and fanciful schools of poetry, whether expressed after the fashion of an ode, a ballad, or a sonnet. I use intelligible terms, though all may not precisely correspond with the technical requirements of the Asiatic Muse.

The following brief remarks on the Agricultural and Commercial Statistics of Ceylon, past and present, may not be without interest to the Members of the Committee of Agriculture and Commerce of the Royal Asiatic Society.

First. In respect to the present great staple of the colony. In 1809, according to the records of the Local Government under the Dutch régime, the production of coffee in the island, both for consumption and export, was about 250,000 Ibs. From that period the production continued steadily to increase; but it was in 1836, when the equalization in England of the duty on East and West India Coffee took place, that European capital and skill were brought to bear, and that to a large extent, in reference to the cultivation of the berry. Prior to the equalization of the duties, the import duty on Ceylon coffee in England had been 9d. per Ib. In 1836 the duty was reduced to 3d. per Ib., or 28s. per cwt.; and as the demand for the article continued undiminished, an equal rise of the price of coffee in bond simultaneously took place, the price to the consumer remaining much as before, and the importer reaping the benefit.

In the fourth volume of my Sanskrit Texts I have collected the principal passages of the Vedic Hymns which refer to the origin of the universe, and to the characters of the gods Hiraṇyagarbha, Viṣvakarman, Vishṇu, Rudra, and the goddess Ambikâ; and have compared the representations there given of these deities with the later stories and speculations on the same subjects which are to be found in the Brâahmaṇas, and in the mythological poems of a more modern date. In the course of these researches, I have also introduced occasional notices of some of the other Vedic deities, such as Aditi, Indra, Varuṇa, etc.

It is now about two years since Sir H. Rawlinson published his discovery of the Assyrian Canon, that is to say, of a list of annual functionaries in the kingdom of Assyria, extending over a period of about two hundred and seventy years of the duration of that great empire. This is the most valuable contribution towards the recovery of ancient Asiatic chronology which has been made since the time when Selden deciphered and published the contents of the Parian Chronicle, in the reign of Charles the First; and there is every reason to believe that by means of this document, in conjunction with the well-established dates of the early portion of the Babylonian Canon, we shall be enabled, not only to fix with certainty the dates of the reigns of thirteen kings of Assyria, reaching as early as the year B.C. 907; but also, with much probability, to recover the exact date of the rise of the first Chaldean dynasty in Assyria; or, in other words, the commencement of the era of Ninus and Semiramis. Sufficient time has now elapsed for a full investigation of the contents and bearing of this valuable document, and three eminent Assyrian scholars, viz., Sir H. Rawlinson in England, Dr. Hincks in Ireland, and Monsieur Oppert in Paris, after careful and independent examination, have published their comments upon it. They are as yet undecided as to what was the exact nature of the functions of these annual officers, whether military, civil, or priestly.

The purpose of the writer of this paper is, to call the attention of Oriental Scholars to the state of our knowledge of the Malay language, and especially to the dictionaries to which we must have recourse in studying it. An Englishman naturally turns to Marsden, and there can be, little doubt that he will find it a valuable help in his labour. But the scholars of Holland, who have continued to study Malay, not only complain that Marsden's Dictionary has become antiquated, but that it cannot be relied on in a number of cases, being occasionally faulty both in the pronunciation which it teaches and in the signification which it attaches to the words. Marsden himself honestly admitted that he did not study the language until after his return to Europe, and that he had compiled his work from vocabularies made by persons who, having studied for merely practical purposes, had collected words without knowing either their orthography or correct pronunciation; hence we find in it a great many words which are never met with by readers of Malay books. Notwithstanding this defect, the work of Marsden has become the basis of the dictionaries published in Holland and Batavia, and Dutch lexicographers have worked upon it without noticing its deficiency, literally copying its gravest errors.

At the last Anniversary Meeting of the Society I announced the discovery among the Assyrian collections in the British Museum of a certain number of clay tablets, bearing legends, both in Assyrian and Phoenician; and I promised at an early period to publish these Bilingual readings in the Society's journal, in order to afford those critics of the late Sir G. Lewis's school, who still disbelieve, or affect to disbelieve, in Cuneiform decipherment, an opportunity of testing the general accuracy of the phonetic system, now accepted amongst Assyrian scholars, by comparing the signs which they suppose to be unknown with those of a known alphabet and language.