198 



JOURNAL, R,A.S. (CEYLON). 



[Vol. X. 



satisfactory discussion regarding General Cunningham's wonderful dis- 

 coveries at Bharhut. We must wait for further details, but meanwhile 

 it seems so important that erroneous impressions should not be allowed 

 to pass unchallenged, that I hope I may be allowed to make a few 

 remarks on Professor Childers' letters in your two last numbers, and 

 Mr. Beal's in your last. 



So much depends on the correctness of General Cunningham's 

 readings, that I am delighted to find Mr. Childers is able to bear such 

 distinct testimony to the accuracy of his interpretation of the legend 

 attached to the bas-relief representing the acquisition of the Jetavana 

 garden. This is an enormous gain to Buddhist literary history, but 

 I wish he had taken the opportunity to revise or recall the emendation 

 he made in your previous issue on the inscription which the General 

 reads as " Erapatra the Naga Raja worships Buddha (Bhagavat)." 



I feel convinced the Professor must be mistaken in his alteration ; 

 in the first place, because that part of the inscription which is visible in 

 the photographs (one half is in shadow) is so clear and distinct — the 

 letters so deeply and sharply cut, that it seems inconceivable that one 

 so long familiar with this simplest of alphabets could have made such 

 a mistake. A more important point, which anyone looking at the 

 photographs can decide for himself, is that the tree which Erapatra is 

 worshipping is not the Bodhi tree of the last Buddha at all, but one of 

 a totally different species. Fortunately, in the same photograph, there 

 is another bas-relief from another pillar, representing a tree which two 

 men are worshipping — in a rather eccentric manner, it must be 

 confessed, by holding their tongues between their fingers and thumbs. 

 Above, flying figures — Gandharvas — are bringing wreaths as offerings ; 

 and below is a perfectly distinct inscription, which General Cunning- 

 ham reads: " Bhagavato Saka munino Bodhi" ("The Bo tree of 

 Sakya Muni,") Now it requires only a very slight knowledge of botany, 

 and still slighter familiarity with the sculptures at Sanchi, to see at 

 once, even without the inscription, that this sculpture is intended to 

 represent the Pipul tree (Ficus religiosa), which is, and always was, the 

 Bo tree of the last Buddha, and which, or whose lineal descendants, 

 still grows at Buddha Gaya and Anuradhapura. On the other hand, the 

 tree which Erapatra is worshipping, is a flowering tree of a totally 

 distinct species, but for the identification of which the photograph is 

 not sufficiently clear. Although, therefore, the Professor's emenda- 

 tion may make the inscription more grammatical, — on this I am not 

 competent to express an opinion, — it appears to me to have the 

 insuperable defect that it contradicts the facts represented in the bas- 

 relief to which it is attached. The G eneral's interpretation, on the 

 contrary, perfectly accords with them. 



The same facts, if I mistake not, equally dispose of Mr. Beal's 

 theory that the altar in front of these trees represents " the seat or 



