APPENDIX. Ixxxi 



{Far Note 3, substitute what foUou)s.) 

 (3.) The Triadic doctrine of the Aishivarikas, as above stated, seems to resolve itself 

 (so far as it is intelligible) merely into gross generative ideas of creation. Some of them, 

 however, had a more refined idea of that grand operation of the Almighty; for they 

 acknowledge a creation resulting from the volition {Dhyim) of an immaterial eternal 

 Adi Buddha. The deduction of the five Dhymii Buddhas, and five Dhydni Bodhisatwas, 

 from this Adi Buddha, will be seen farther on. This vague conception of a divine creation 

 is here, in the text, improperly mixed with the generative creations of various Teachers. 



{For Note 10, substitute what follows.) 

 (10.) This limited reply is to be attributed to my friend, and not to his books. Matter 

 is called Prakriti by the Bauddhas, as well as by the Brahmanists : and a favourite title 

 of the Supreme Dharma, or Prajna, is Prakriteswari. 



{For Note 12, substitute what follows.) 

 (12.) The « others," here alluded to, are the Swabhdvikas. Such ideas as I have been 

 enabled to form of their philosophical tenets will be found at pp. 435-440. Vol. XVI. 

 Bengal Asiatic Society's Transactions.— Perhaps I have, in that place, stated too favour- 

 ably the doctrine of the simple Swabhavikas, or party opposed to the Prdjnika Swab- 

 hdvikas : and it may at least be surmised, that the former held an eternal revolution of 

 matter {Pravritti) and inteUigence {Nirvritti) to be the system of Nature. The Prajnika 

 Swabhdvikas unitized the powers, or forces, of matter in the state oi NtrvntU ; and 

 invested that Unity with some of the essential attributes of Godhead, such as Eternity 

 and Infinity. The simple Swabhdvikas did not unitize the powers of nature in the 

 state of Nirvritti: in which state, dispersed as those powers were, and stripped too as 

 thev were of every sensible property of matter, it is no great wonder that they were 

 declared to be lost, and reduced tonothinff{Sv^YATA) by the adversaries of this school; and 

 that the followers of such tenets were, by the Brahmans, called in derision Simya-Vadis. 

 My own impression is, that the Swabhavikas, in general, never could have so utterly dis- 

 regarded the plain sense of the ancient maxim— €0; nihilo nil: and, consequently, that 

 their sunyata must be understood in another sense: for which see Note 20. 



{Note 14, modify as follows.) 

 (14.) Omit the reference at the end, which runs thus, « see on to Note 15,- and sub- 

 stitute the words (Vide Bengal Asiatic Society's Transactions) loco citato. 

 {For Note 15, sid>stitute what follows.) 

 (15 ) The text of my friend alludes in this and what follows to the tenets cf the Kdr- 

 milcas and Ydtmikas. A faint sketch of the philosophical dogmas of these schools will 

 be seen in the Bengal Asiatic Societ/s Transactions, loco citato. 



{Note 16, modify as follows.) 

 (16.) Omit the conclusion of this note, from the words, " But whose Dki/dn ? " to the 

 end. 



Vol. II. 1 



