[63] These two verses are a standing formula by which the Buddha of the Canon summons the world to receive his law.
[64] This Vocabulary is a Chinese compilation, forming one of a class of catalogues drawn up in ancient times by Buddhist preachers. Such catalogues are found in the midst of canonical books, and are of high authority among Buddhists.
[65] The translation of this Sûtra is due to Mr. Beal, to whose most useful labors on Buddhism I am much indebted.—C. B. S., p. 206.
[66] This is a standing miracle on the reception of novices by Buddha.
[67] I do not pretend to any certainty that the above interpretation is correct, but I have in the main followed a trustworthy guide, Burnouf. See H. B. I., p. 491-507.
[68] The authorities do not entirely agree in the accounts they give of the speed with which these paths lead to Nirvâna. The above statement appears to me unquestionably the oldest and most authentic. It is in agreement with Eitel, Sanskrit-Chinese Dictionary, sub vocibus Sakridâgâmin, however, is omitted, and with Hardy, E. M., p. 280.
Eitel indeed adds that an Arhat, if he does not enter Nirvâna, may become a Buddha, but this is probably a Northern perversion of the original notion. In the genuine authorities, a Bodhisattva is quite distinct from an Arhat. The account derived by Burnouf (H. B. I., p. 291 ff.) from Northern sources is palpably a corruption of the oldest doctrine, proceeding from that unbounded love of exaggerated numbers which is the besetting sin of Buddhist writers. According to this version, the Srotâpanna must pass through 80,000 ages before his seven births; Sakridâgâmin, after 60,000 ages, is to be born once as a man and once as a god; the Anâgâmin, after 40,000 ages, is exempted from re-birth in the world of desire, and arrives at supreme knowledge; which the Arhat reaches after 20,000 ages. Poor comfort this to souls longing for their eternal rest. Cf. Köppen, R. B., vol. i. p. 498.
[69] Aryas is a term comprehending the several classes of believers.
[70] There is a complete translation of the Zend-Avesta by Spiegel. It contains useful introductory essays; but in the present state of Zend scholarship the translation cannot be regarded as final. Dr. Haug, in a German treatise, has elucidated as well as translated a small, but very important, portion, of the Zend-Avesta, termed the five Gâthâs. The same scholar has also published a volume of Essays on the Parsee language and religion, which contains some translated passages, and may be consulted with advantage, though Dr. Haug's English stands in great need of revision. Burnouf has translated but a very small part of the Zend-Avesta, in a work entitled "Le Yaçna." Unfortunately Dr. Haug and Dr. Spiegel—both very eminent Zend scholars—are entirely at variance as to the proper method of translating these ancient documents; and pending the settlement of this question, any interpretation proposed must be regarded by the uninstructed reader as uncertain. I cannot refrain from adding an expression of regret that Dr. Haug, to whose labors in the interpretation of these obscure fragments of antiquity we owe so much, should have so far forgotten himself as to fall foul of Dr. Spiegel in a tone wholly unbecoming a scholar and inappropriate to the subject. It is not by this kind of learned Billingsgate that the superiority of his translation to that of his rival, as he evidently considers him, or his fellow-laborer as I should prefer to call him, can be established.
[71] Throughout the Gâthâs I follow Haug; and I need make no apology for neglecting Spiegel's translation, because that scholar himself admits, with creditable candor, that even his indefatigable perseverance was baffled by the difficulties of this portion of the Yaçna.—Av., 2. xi.