168 
W. Theobald —Note on Some of the Symbols, ^‘c. 
[No. 3, 
device occurs on the introductory weight currency * * * but tins 
outline suggests no more intelligible solution of its real import than the 
more advanced linear configuration. The design may possibly have 
emanated from some fortuitous combination of mystic signs of local 
origin, so many of wbicb passed imperceptibly into the symbolization of 
Buddhism. General Cunningham states that this device, in its modified 
form as seen on Kunanda’s coins, is found on the necklace of Buddhist 
symbols on one of the Sanclii gateways.” 
I would here enter, eu passant, a protest against the idea of any 
“ fortuitous combination ” being responsible for the origin of religious 
symbols of any sort; indeed the terms ‘ mystic ’ and ‘ fortuitous ’ appear 
to be mutually incompatible. The reason why hair grows on some 
parts of our body and not on others, may be unknown to us, but it is 
certainly not fortuitous. The removal of the hair from a part of the 
body, in the tonsure of the priest, is also not fortuitous, but mystical in 
the highest degree ; and we should certainly err in supposing the ‘ ton- 
sure ’ a fortuitous and meaningless custom, because its origin being 
thoroughly pagan, and rooted in an impure soil (as we who have lost all 
sympathy with and almost the power of appreciating justly the old 
nature worship, would term it) is probably unknown and its import 
unsuspected by the majority of those individuals in modern Christendom 
who submit to the rite, and thereby masquerade in the cerements of a 
religion, their very souls would recoil from. The fact that the meaning 
of a rite or symbol is unknown or but little dwelt on may be used 
as an argument for suspecting that its origin, like that of many a noble 
house, is of such a character as to be dishonestly kept in the back 
ground, but not that it is in any way fortuitous, and still less that it is 
at once fortuitous and mystical likewise. 
Whether the archaic symbol referred to by Mr. Thomas as occur¬ 
ring on the weight currency was of identical import with the symbol on 
the coins of Kunanda need not here be discussed, as the authority of 
Mr. Thomas is, I consider, sufficient to settle the question affirmatively ; 
but as regards the symbol on the coins, a very simple and appropriate 
explanation presents itself to any one familiar with Buddhist manners 
at the present day in a Buddhist country, like Burma for instance. 
Viewed then by the light of modern Buddhist usage, the symbol in ques¬ 
tion resolves itself into an altar or receptacle wherein food is exposed for 
the benefit of animals, in the neighbourhood of a monastery or pagoda. 
In Burma, food may often be seen thus exposed, often lavishly, for the 
use of any passing animal, generally on the ground or on some low and 
easily accessible spot, but sometimes on a raised platform or altar con¬ 
structed for the purpose. For the use of birds, a pious Buddhist would 
