Soon after the rise of the T'ang dynasty, the Parinirvāna Sūtra seems to have lost its popularity, and in the second half of the seventh century its place is definitely taken by the Lotus Sūtra. Out of a total of fifty-six dated texts, no fewer than twenty-nine are sections of this work.

IN the Introduction to his edition of the Āvaśyaka tales the late Professor Leumann wrote on p. 1 : “ Since-as may be easily understood—Jacobi, when he endeavoured to utilize the language and contents of the Jaina tales for Indology, started with the Uttarādhyayana Ṭikā, of Devendra which was in his possession, and since this author, belonging as he does to the period of decadence and therefore more familiar with Sanskrit, writes a rather doubtful Prakrit—therefore the editor was chiefly concerned with the establishing of a thoroughly reliable Prakrit text … that was to be suitable for clearing the way for a more correct judgment and utilization of medieval Jaina Prakrit.” The appearance of the first portion of Leumann's text was welcomed by Pischel in his Pkt grammar (§ 21) in the following terms: ” The most important text in JM is : Die Āvaśyaka-Erzählungen. Herausgegeben von Ernst Leumann. 1. Heft. Leipzig 1897. The absence of any commentary unfortunately renders the understanding rather difficult; some passages remain wholly obscure. But even these few forms show that from texts in JM we may yet expect much new and important material.”

IT is proposed here to offer some considerations on the representation of certain Malayalam sounds. It is not the purpose of these note s to present a detailed laboratory account of the acoustic and physiological phenomena to be symbolized, but while characterizing these phenomena sufficiently for the reader to appreciate their general nature, rather to consider certain specific phonetic circumstances of their occurrence and the significance of these in the elaboration of a notational system.

WHILE I was in Isfahān at the end of June, 1932, a young of Yazd, came to see me before going on to his school in Shīrāz. We met four times, and before leaving he requested an acquaintance of his, a young man, Qobād, who was visiting Isfahān, to come to see me. Qobād's home was with his parents in Teheran, so that he had little opportunity to use this dialect. In August of the same year I was able to visit Yazd for one week, and there found a young school-teacher, Mehrabān born in the neighbouring village of Maryābād (or Mōriābād).

Since Motoori Norinaga invented the term kakari, lit. “nexus”, more than 150 years ago Japanese scholars have been labouring to find out the precise signification of the word he had left unexplained beyond vaguely applying it to several grammatical devices which included the uses of the particles wa, mo, zo, and koso.

STEIN MS. Ch. 00269 is a report by haḍa (”), who call themselves ñaśa bīsa (“ humble servants”), on behalf of seven rispura (“ princes ”). It consists of 120 lines, but of that a considerable part cannot yet be translated. The report is concerned with the cities of Ṣacū and Kaṃmicū. Danger from robbers is reported and an investment of the city of Kaṃmicū, so that food and cattle are lacking.

It has seemed desirable to make known at once certain information of interest to Central Asian studies contained in Khotan texts of the British Museum and India Office. This information may here be conveniently grouped under the heads (1) the animal cycle of twelve years, (2) the names of the months and seasons in Khotan, (3) dates androyal names.

THIS question arises out of some remarks made by Professor Abdul Haq of the Osmaniya University, Hyderabad, Deccan, who, criticizing views on Khaṛī Bolī (=KB) which I had expressed in my Hist, of Urdu Lit., pp. 5, 8, 9, 13, said :—

hamẽ is se hūī ki ḍākṭar ṣāḥab ne is ko rafa‘ kīā hai, lekin aṣl mẽ yeh bhī mubtilā haī: khaṛī aur kharī kā farq inhõ ne bahut ṣaḥiḥ batāeā. hai, lekin ma‘ne taqrīban vohī rakkhe haī jo kharī ke haī, ya‘ne murawaja, ‘ām, mustanad (standard) zabān ; aur dūsrā gaẓab kīā hai ki Khaṛī Bolī ko ek zabān qarār dīā hai, aur us kī do batāī haī, ek Hindī aur dūsrī Urdū … Khaī Bolī ke ma‘ne Hindostān mẽ ‘ām par gãvārī bolī ke haī jise Hindostān kā, bacca bacca jāntā, hai; voh na koī khāṣ zabān hai, aur na zabān kī koī (Urdu, July, 1933, p. 590.)

The bibliography of the literature of Tibet is beset with extraordinary difficulties. The access to the literary treasures of this country is not easy and our knowledge in this domain is therefore exceedingly limited. If we exclude the two great Collections of Translations (the Kanjur and the Tanjur) which are tolerably well known from the bibliographical standpoint, we must confess that the great ocean of the original Tibetan literature, the literature of Tibet proper, remains almost entirely unknown.

There was a prevailing opinion in English linguistic literature that the modern prose Hindī, High Hindī, or Kharī bolī, was invented by the English.

This point of view was maintained some time ago by such a highly authoritative scholar as Sir G. A. Grierson. Thus, in the preface to his work on the history of Hindī literature he says : “ The first half of the nineteenth century … was the period of the birth of the Hindī language, invented by the English, and first used as a vehicle of literary prose composition in 1803 under Gilchrist‘s tuition, by Lallū Jī Lāl, the author of the Prem Sāgar.”

Ch. 47 is an incomplete roll of the Stein collection at the India Office, measuring 130 X 31 cm. The accompanying photograph shows the roll except the lower part (32 cm.) containing six short vertical lines (a business account) in Chinese, the last 10 cm. being blank. The reverse of the roll contains the Chinese version of the Aparimitāyuh Sūtra, and one line in Tibetan script.

In the course of studies connected with the social order of Iranian antiquity, I have broached, without expounding it in context, a problem contained in the expressions vispatiš, visō puθra, and vāspuhr. The matter has been taken up by H. H. Schaeder in his contribution to the volume dedicated to Sir George Grierson “ Ein parthischer Titel im Soghdischen,” where, while adopting the main results which I had abstracted from my epigraphical material, he argues against opinions imputed to, but never put forth by me. I may, therefore, be allowed to explain the view I really hold.

The life of Zoroaster has been the subject of both comprehensive and exhaustive study since Hyde and Anquetil. The amount written on this difficult question and the discussions which have takenp lace among scholars are disproportionate to the insufficient and fragmentary materials which we possess. Even the available data are lacking in precision and are not very reliable. However, every old document available relating to Zoroaster has been carefully examined and most of them collected by students of Iranian history. The outstanding collection of these scattered fragments, so far, is the famous work of Professor A. V. W. Jackson, Zoroaster, the Prophet of Ancient Iran, to which some subsequent additions have been made by the author himself, his pupils, and others.

The (Vedânta-)Siddhântamuktâvalī of Prakāśânanda, a work of the sixteenth century, written in refutation of Rāmânuja's Tattvasāra, has been edited and translated in another manner by A. Venis in the Pandit, N.S., vols. 11 and 12, and reprinted separately, Benares, 1912. In our version we have endeavoured to be absolutely literal without employing the customary phraseology of Sanskrit scholarship, some of which is actually misleading, and other parts obscure to the general reader.

In the Sitzungsberichte der Kgl. Preussischen Adademie der Wissenschaften, Jahrgang, 1904, pp. 1136–7, K. F. Geldner published a transcription of a fragment of a Pahlavi-frahang found in Turfan and now preserved in the Museum für Völkerkunde in Berlin (registered as TM 195 (PI)). As some graphic peculiarities and especially the ligatures occurring in this fragment may be of particular interest for the history of the Pahlavi system of writing, I think it may be worth while to reproduce a photograph of it, obtained through the kind assistance of Dr. W. Henning and Dr. Gelpke, Berlin.

Tant que le dvandva n'est pas devenu, comme c'est le cas dans l'histoire de l'indien, un precédé de style, un mode d'abréviation qui finit par ne plus se distinguer d'un composé, il reflète certaines notions prégnantes d'une culture et d'un culte hérités. On n'a pas assez tenu compte des enseignements que donnent à ce point de vue les dvandvas avestiques, dont une liste (sujette à révision) a été dressée par Bartholomae, BB. x, pp. 267 sq. Et cependant il s'y conserve autant et même plus d'antiquités que dans ceux du védique.

Neither in Hobson-Jobson nor in Dalgado's excellent Glossário Luso-Asiático is found a single word concerning a word post(ā), meaning an infusion or decoction of opium, which seems to have played rather an important role in Mogul times. As several passages in the works of older European authors give the word in the form post (or at least something very near to it) I shall here put together what I have found about it. Probably several passages have so far escaped my attention and may be added later on.

The plate in question has been the subject of great controversy. The facsimiles of the plate have appeared in Epigraphica Indica, vol. iv, and in Indian Antiquary, vol. liii. Translations of the plate with comments have been published by Dr. Gundert (Madras Journal of Literature and Science, vol. xiii, part i, pp. 115–125), Kookel Kelu Nair (ibid., vol. xxi, pp. 35–8), Venkayya (Epigraphica Indica, vol. iv, pp. 290–7), and Mr. K. N. Daniel (Indian Antiquary, vol. liii, pp. 185–196, 219–229, 244–251, and 257–261).

Le problème de cette espèce de gánitif a átá traitá a fond par F. de Saussure (De l'emploi du gánitif absolu en Sanscrit, 1881, ráimprimá dans le Recueil des publications scientifiques de F. de S., Heidelberg 1922). Au dábut du mámoire on lit: “Un premier fait, constatá depuis longtemps, c'est l'absence du gánitif absolu dans les monuments de la páriode vádique.”

Ilya eu un verbe indo-iranien pour désigner le labour: RV. imp. ; il s'y rattache des substantifs désignant le sillon: av. karša-, karši- f.; RV. sans doute ŚBr.

Par contre les noms Sanskrits de la charrue n'ont pas de correspondants connus dans l'lran.

L'un de ces noms, qui vit encore aujourd'hui, skr. hala-, n'est pas attesté avant Pānini. Est-il cependant plus ancien que le Sanskrit? On en a proposé plusieurs étymologies indo-européennes, dont malheureusement aucune ne s'impose (v. Walde-Pokorny, Vergl. Wb. der. Indog. Spr., i, p. 629; Scheftelowitz, ZII., ii, p. 278). Le Rgveda offre deux autres noms encore: