No. 35. — 1887.] notes on jatakas. 



197 



has been translated by Bigaudet from the Burmese. We have in the 

 group : (1) Janaka, (2) Sitali (Thhvalee in the Burmese), and (3) the 

 arrow-maker. The scene agrees admirably with Bigaudet's account 

 (p. 420, "Legend of the Burmese Buddha," 2nd ed.), and the singular 

 gesture of Janaka as he holds up two fingers of one hand and one 

 finger of the other, as though in doubt whether to leave his wife or 

 retain her, is very interesting as showing the way in which these early 

 sculptures were made to convey their meaning. The next group on 

 the same frieze appears to be a continuation of the subject, but the 

 inscription is unfortunately worn away. Above the group in which 

 Anathapindada is represented spreading his money on the site of the 

 Jetavana, I read an inscription, " Chitiya dasila." Whether this could 

 be rendered " the gift of the site," Mr. Childers will be able to determine 

 better than I can. 



The group in which Elapatra Naga is worshipping Buddha, which is 

 also before me, but without any inscription, agrees with the translation 

 of this event which I have made from the Abhinishkramana Sutra, 

 and which will, I hope, shortly be published. I should not presume to 

 question Mr. Childers' textual correction, but I hope he will pardon 

 me for differing from him as to the worship which he supposes is being 

 paid to the Tree. Not only does the narrative of this event distinctly 

 refer the worship to Buddha (Bhagavat), but I think if he examines 

 the Sanchi sculptures he will find that they include many instances of 

 undoubted worship paid to Buddha while the worshippers are prostrate 

 before the (so-called) altar and tree. I am sorry to differ from such 

 an authority as Mr. Fergusson on this point, but the more I study 

 these groups the more I am convinced that the altar, so called, 

 represents the seat or throne (it is developed into a throne at Amravati) 

 on which Buddha was seated under the Bo tree when he arrived at 

 complete enlightenment, and that the people engaged in worship are 

 in fact worshipping Buddha, although not represented by any figure ; 

 for we know no figure was made of him for some centuries after the 

 rise of his religion. This also bears out the theory of the antiquity of 

 the Bharhut and Sanchi sculptures, compared with those at Amravati. 

 It also proves (and this is much more valuable in my opinion) that 

 the original worship of the Buddhists was a spiritual worship. 



Samuel Beal. 



The Bharhut Sculptures. * 



London, December 8, 1874. 

 I am afraid the materials do not yet exist in this country for any 



* Academy, December 12, 1874, pp. 637-8. 



