I was much affected by his words, and sighing said to myself, "This kind of man has been rare in all ages. From the time that the Great Religion began to flow eastwards, there has been no one forgetful of his life in the cause of the Faith to be compared with Fa-hsien."

Thus I came to know that there are no obstacles, however numerous, which the power of sincerity will not break through, and no meritorious services which the stimulus of determination will not achieve. And the man who brings his labours to a successful issue-is he not one who neglects the things which are generally prized and prizes the things which are generally forgotten?

NOTE

BY SHEN SHIH-LUNG

[Not identified]

As regards records of the bringing back of

Sacred Books from India, we have only the

narratives of the two priests Fa-hsien and Hsüan-tsang in the Tripitaka, and the accounts of Sung-yün and Hui-shêng in the Record of the Lo-yang Monastery which have a claim upon our attention. Yet although the Record of the Monastery is exact and agreeably written, the narratives in the Tripitaka go more into detail and are more elegant in style. Pre-eminently is this true of the Record of the Buddhistic Kingdoms, which in general scope, elegance, terseness, and comprehensiveness, is not inferior to the best models of the Chin dynasty (A.D. 265– 420).

These travels, however, differ somewhat as to the places visited. Fa-hsien went westwards by way of Tun-huang, and returned by sea from Ceylon. The predicant, Hsüan-tsang, left Liangchou by the Jade Gate (Sha-chou in Kansuh) and came back by way of Khotan. Sung-yün left by way of the Red Mountain (west of Hsining Fu, forty days' march from Lo-yang), reached the Tu-yü-han (on the shores of Lake Kokonor) and came back by the same way. Thus

they exemplify the apophthegm of Shakyamuni that "WAYS are many; they cannot all be enumerated."

With regard to the Desert of Gobi, the BolorTagh Range, the Hsüan-tu Mountains (with suspension bridges), and the Snowy Mountains, these were visited by all alike. Further, with regard to the passage in Mr Lü's "Notes," giving a quotation from Record of the Buddhistic Kingdoms as found in the commentary to the Water Classic, namely that "the Ganges flows south-east, passing through the city of Kusinagara, and that to the north of the city between two trees, etc.," I have been unable to find these words in the original text. They have probably been omitted in the process of copying, and Hsü-yüan-mêng (1650-1736) has undoubtedly grounds for what he says.

Ever since I tied up my hair in a knot, I have always felt a deep veneration for the Gospel of Mercy, though myself grovelling in the dust and abominations of the world; and though neither my teachers nor my friends have ever crossed rivers and mountains and I myself have been loath to leave home, yet whenever I hear of others risking their lives in dangerous circumstances or seeking the Truth in dark and distant spots, I feel what a dull useless creature I am, and my tears begin to flow.

Done at Hsiu-shui, by Shên Shih-lung.

NOTE

BY HU CHÊN-HÊNG

[A distinguished scholar of the Ming dynasty,

1368-1644]

"HE old title of this work was The Narrative

Tel Fa-hsien, but according to a note by a

of

Buddhist priest of the Sung dynasty (A.D. 420479), it should be called Record of the Buddhistic Kingdoms. Such a work as the latter, in one volume, occurs only in the geographical section of the History of the Sui dynasty (A.D. 581-618), so that the above statement does not appear to have sufficient foundation.

There were originally two Narratives of Fa-hsien, the first of which, in two parts, has been lost, and the second, in one volume, is the work we have now. At the end of the narrative a man of the Chin dynasty (A.D. 317–420) added these words: "I therefore urged him to write out in detail that which so far he had merely sketched, and he retold the whole story from beginning to end." This must have been the single volume, which was afterwards expanded into a more detailed account in two volumes, but never became popular in that form and disappeared.

A Buddhist priest of the Liang dynasty (A.D. 502-557), named Hui-chiao, states that there was another and more extensive Narrative of

the travels of Fa-hsien in the various countries, which should be called, by way of distinction, The Greater Narrative of Fa-hsien.

With regard to the text of the Record, there are certain points which deserve attention. For instance, "the second year of the period Hungshih (A.D. 400)" is, according to Yao Hsing's chronology, the fourth year of the Lung-an period (A.D. 400) in the reign of the Emperor An Ti of the Chin dynasty.

Again, "the Ch'ien Kuei nation" is Ch'i-fu Ch'ien Kuei's capital; namely, Yuan-ch'uan.

Similarly, the "prince of Chang-yeh" was Tuan Yeh, prince of the N. Liang State (who died A.D. 401).

And the "Governor of Tun-huang, named Li Hao," was Li Kao, prince of Liang, canonized as Wu Chao (died A.D. 417). In the third month of the above year (399-400), he was ordered by Tuan Yeh to take charge at Tun-huang; and as Fa-hsien spent his retreat at Chang-yeh before going on to Tun-huang, it is evident that he made a mistake in writing Hao, the fact that the two words are pronounced alike being the reason for his orthographical blunder (e.g. Stewart for Stuart).

So with his "Kingdom of Nou Tan"; for in the year when he passed through, Li-lu-ku, the Bald, had but just usurped the throne, and did not die until two years later, when Nou T'an reigned in his stead. Thus he was wrong in