1885.] of the Buddha Image from Tirhut. 133 



two inscriptions were substantially the same, although the characters 

 of the two differed as much from one another as the Nagari from the 

 Bengali alphabet. Upon shewing them to Govind Ram Shastri, Mr. 

 Wilson's intelligent Pandit, and comparing the letters with the Tibetan 

 and Gya forms of the Sanscrit alphabet, the identity of the two was 

 confirmed, and several words made out, among them the titles " Ta- 

 thdgata and Mahix Sramana," both of an important Bauddha accepta- 

 tion ; but the context was devoid of meaning. The Pandit's meritorious 

 efforts were communicated to our learned Vice-President, Dr. Mill, who, 

 recognizing at once the form of the ancient dh, a semilunate letter, which 

 had been taken for a v, was enabled to complete and give the true meaning 

 of the inscription, with the exception of the initial word, which (in con- 

 sequence of the stroke at the commencement) was read ^if hie, in the 

 Sarnath version, and VJ*, in the other sentence, instead of ^ qui, in both. 

 This mistake led to the reading of the word *W?T prabhavo in the sin- 

 gular, in lieu of S *RT in the plural, and connecting with it the word 

 TTO as part of the compound instead of ^5RT separately, thus : 



the interpretation of which was thus given by Dr. Mill : 



" This is the generative source of the cause of meritorious du- 

 ties. For the cause of these hath Tathagata [or Buddha] declared. 

 But as to what is the opposing principle of these, that likewise doth 

 the Maha Sramana [the great ascetic] , declare." 



The Tirhut inscription was found to differ only from the other in 

 the substitution of two entirely synonymous words, the transposition 

 of two others, and the omission of the particle hi " for," united to 

 avadat in the second line. The translation of the passage was precisely 

 the same. Introducing the coi-rections subsequently made, (as it is 

 unnecessary to repeat the reading in its imperfect state) the text of the 

 Tirhut image will stand thus in the modern Devanagari character : 



treT ^WJP I 



We shall come to the corrected translation presently. 



It was remarked that the latter part of the passage being in the 

 present tense, as compared to avadat and uvdcha in the former part, 

 seemed to imply a continuation of the sentence ; or, at any rate, left 

 something inconclusive and unsatisfactory in the translation. 



The circumstance, however, of two sculptured inscriptions found at 

 distant places in terms of the same import, though varying in phrase 



