1892.] 
L. A. Waddell —On the site of Buddha's death. 
39 
“ mutilation, given it a pair of silver goggle-eyes and a hooked gilt silver- 
“ ed nose and the form is concealed from view by cloths and chaplets of 
“ flowers ; but remove these and there is no doubt of the image having 
“ been intended for the ‘ ruler of all, the propitious, the asylum of cle- 
“ mency, the all-wise, the lotus-eyed comprehensive Buddha.’ ” 
This large image of Buddha is called by the more learned Lama-visi¬ 
tors Munir Muni Mahamuni , i. e., ‘ the Sage of Sages The Great Sage.’ 
It is the original image of the shrine, and is stated by the Brahmanic 
priests, who call it Mddhab , to be of divine origin and an actual embodi¬ 
ment or avatar of the god, in contra-distinction to the other images which 
are called mere ‘ murtis ’ or hand-fashioned copies of typical forms of the 
respective gods represented. This may merely mean that the Brahmans 
found this image here, while the others were brought from the neigh¬ 
bourhood or elsewhere. What seems to be the history of the mutilation 
of this image is found in the account of the invasion of the Koch king¬ 
dom of Lower Asam by the Musalmans under Mir Jumlah in 1661 A. D. 
This chief issued “ directions to destroy all the idolatrous temples and 
“ to erect mosques in their stead. To evince his zeal for 
“ religion, the General himself, with a battle-axe broke the celebrated 
(t image of Narain, the principal object of worship of the Hindus of 
“ that province.”* Narayana is one of the names of Madhab and a 
patronymic of the Koch raja’s ; and Hajo was a seat of the Koch rajas. 
And it was at Hajo that Mir Jumla took the Koch king prisoner,f 
The other images, not mentioned by Dalton, but which must have 
existed at the time of his visit, are also of stone and are placed on 
either side of the large image. They are four in number and are of con¬ 
siderable size. According to the Lama-pilgrims they are all Buddhist 
images; but the crypt was so dimly lit, and the images so enveloped in 
clothes and wreaths of flowers that I could not distinguish their specific 
characters, with the exception of the head and peculiar trident of the 
first, and the head of the second, which were characteristic and justified 
their recognized names, viz. : — 
No. 1.— Ogyen Guru to the left of Mahamuni. 
,, 2.— Dorje DolbX to the right of ,, 
,, 3.— Shahya Thuba ,, ,, ,, No. 2. 
,, 4.—‘ Sencha' Muni. ,, ,, ,, „ 3. 
Although Hindu priests, as a rule, are not very methodical in their 
bestowal of names upon the images which they have appropriated from 
* Stewart’s History of Bengal, p. 289. 
f Beveridge, Cal. Review July 1890 p. 12. 
