244 
THE LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE OF 
been derived from Prahu Manu (die ruler Manu) who in 
different ages under different names holds the government of 
the world. I found it mentioned only in the S ivasasdna, the 
law-book of the Brahmins under the name : Dharma-sastra 
Kutara—Manavadi ; adi has here, it would seem, the true 
Indian sense “ <*’d so forth” so that the translation will be 
** the law-books, those of Kutara, Manaiva and others' 1 
Kutaraf is also mentioned by Raffles as “ a law-book,” and 
is not explained by Humboldt. lititara appears to me to be 
the same with TJttama, viz the name of the third in the line 
of Manus, The conversion of Uttama into Kutarajis quite 
possible, and supported by a passage of the Brdhmanddpura- 
na : Uta*a M<>nu , lont. 11. Uttara is the comparative, Ut¬ 
tama the superlative “ the higher” and the highest degree. 
The Ic before Utara I am inclined to regard as the Polynesian 
prefix, added through ignorance. Opposed to this conjecture, 
it is true, is the fact that the law of India must have been 
framed by the first Manu , S layambhuwa Mstnu ; but we have 
various law-books, and those are even yet not all known. 
Possibly the original Balinese law-book has been derived 
from another Indian one, although the contents are upon the 
whole the same as in that of Siayambuwa. 
This Dharmasastra Kutara Manama is either now in Bali 
and kept secret, cr it is one of the works which existed in 
Java but were lost and were not brought to Bali It is men¬ 
tioned along with the S drasa Muschaya ■* which we learn to 
be one of the Tutur’s, further along with the Kamandaka, a 
Tutur for obtaining advantage, or intrepidity. A learned 
Brahmin is expected to be acquainted with all these works. 
It was not without the greatest difficulty that I got the 
Sivasasana into my hands; however, I may hope to obtain 
in the like way insight into the remaining law-books and 
the Tulur's. The S ivasasana was borrowed by me on 
the same condition as the Brahmandapurana, viz. not to 
show it to any one of the people. The manuscript of the 
Sivasdsana in question was written on the day Mohulu 
Pahing Anggara (Tuesday) of the week S urigsang, in the 
year of S aka (S akuwarsa) 1682 (A.D. 1760). in the month 
+ Sarasa Muschaya might be explained by : “ the lotus (or the sea) of the 
nobly born ” if we take Muschaya for a corruption of Amwyydnya “ a roan of 
noble descent” person of rank/' The a was easily thrown off, as we bare 
*een in many instances, or united with the a at the end of Sarasa and becoming 
thereby a long d which however was not more recognised. Another explana¬ 
tion would be “ the lotus to be hidden if Muschaya may be regarded as a 
corruption of Musyya. Both corruptions are made possible by the frequently 
occuriing omission and addition of syllables, and the imperfection of the or|*o 
for such words. 
