« 이전계속 »
this work. He raU9t in all likelihood have become a celebrated member of the Assembly, as he was trained up to the functions and duties of his profession by the greatest and most renowned disciples, such as Mankalan, Thariputra and Kathaba.
81. It is Impossible to assign the motive that may have induced the compiler of Budha's life, to insert in his work a long episode on the celebrated physician Dzewaka. The story is in itself uninteresting and throws no light whatever on the history of the supposed originator or reformer of Budhism. For this reason, it has been thought quite unnecessary to give a complete translation of the whole passage. The name oi Dzewaka is quite familiar with the adepts of the medical art in Hannah. Many times the writer has made inquiries respecting the works of the Hipocrates of India, but he has never been able to meet with a mention of, or allusion to, such compositions. Hence he has been led to suppose that the father of medicine in these countries has left after him no writings to embody the results of his theoretical and practical favorite pursuits. Surgery appeal's to have been no novelty to our great Doctor, since we see him on an occasion extracting from the body of a prince, by means of an incision, a snake that pat his life fa peril.
The numerous quacks, who, in Burmah, assume the name of physicians, and ■re ever ready to give medicines in all cases, even the most difficult and complicated, are ignorant of the very elements of the Surgical art. They possess a certain number of remedies made up with plants, which, when applied under proper circumstances and in certain cases, work out wonderful cures. But the native physicians, nnable in most intances to discern the true symptoms of diseases, give remedies at random, and obtain in too many cases results most fatal to the unfortunate patient. In medicine as well as in religion, ignorance begets superstition, and recourse to magical practices. We may positively assert that the black art is with native practitioners, an essential concomitant to the knowledge of medicine. When a physician has exhausted the limited stock of remedies that he possesses, and he ft .ids in spite of his exertions, that the disease bids defiance to his ■kill, he gravely tells ths relatives of the patient that some evil spirit is interfering with 'his remedies, and that he must be expelled, ere there could be any chance of relieving the sufferer and obtaining his recovery. Whereupon a shed is erected with the utmost speed on a spot close to the house of the patient. Offerings of rice, fruits and other articles are made to the pretended evil spirit who is supposed to have got hold of the sufferer's body. Dances of the most frantic character are carried on by his relatives, until their strength at last failing them, they drop down in state of complete exhaustion and prostration. They appear to have lost entirely their senses. In that state, they are supposed to have propitiated the evil spirit Interrogated by the physician on the nature of the disease, and the proper remedies to be applied for eradicating it, they give answers, or rather they become the channels through which the spirit, satisfied with the offerings made in bis honor, condescends to declare that he has now left the patient, and that by placing him under a certain treatment that he fails not to indicate, he will soon recover his health. Such like occurrences are exceedingly common. Tney are called by natives festivali of the Natpan or the possessing spirit.
82. The rebuke given by Budha to his disciples who had made without a permission, such a display of miraculous power, though intended for the promotion of his glory, was designed to operate as a salutary check to the pride that might find its way Into the heart of even the most privileged beings. Such a lesson was deemed of the greatest importance, since we find in the book of Budnistic ordinations, the sin of boasting of, or pretending to the power of working wonders Sec, ranked among the four capital sins excluding a Hahan for ever from the society of the perfect, and depriving him of his rank and dignity. Budha, it seems, wished to reserve to himself alone the honor of working miracles, or to give the permission, when circumstances should require it, to some of his disciples to do the same in his name and for the exaltation of his religion.
The following story of Parana and his five associates, holds a pre-eminent rank among the events that have rendered Budha so celebrated. Gaudama, as it has been already mentioned in some foregoing note*, was an ascetic who had studied philosophy under eminent masters, who belonged to the Brahminical school. In many of his opinions us well as in his mode of life, there was no perceptible difference between him and the followers of the Brahmins, The writings of the latter
ETHNOLOGY OF THE INDO-PACIFIC ISLAND9. *
By J. R. Logan:
THE HACKS AND 1ANGTJAGE8 OF 8. E. ASIA CONSIDERED IN
EELATION TO THOSE OF THE INDO-PACIFIC ISLANDS.
Ohaptbr Y. (Continued).
ENQUIRIES INTO THE ETHNIC HISTORY AND RELATIONS OP THE DRAVI
RIAN FORMATION,—EMBRACING NOTICES OP THE PINO-JAPANBSE,
CAUCASIAN, INDO-EUROPEAN, 8EMITICO-APRICAN,
EU8EARIAN AND AMERICAN LANGUAGES.
Sec. 11. GL08SARIAL INDICATIONS OP THE ETHNIC HISTORY AND RELATIONS OP THE DRAVIRIAN LANGUAGES.
As numerals are based on definitives, the principal test of their antiquity in a particular language is their mutual dependence, and their relation to the definitives preserved in pronouns, substantival prefixes or postfixes, directives &c. If their elements are the same that occur in these particles, and if the terms for the higher numbers are connected by composition or flexion with those for the lower, it may be concluded that the numerals are native, that is, belong to the earliest era of the language, or of the formation of which it is a member or derivative. If the different terms have no connection with the other particles of the language, it may be inferred that they are extraneous or of foreign origin; and this inference will be greatly strengthened if there is also an absence of connection amongst the numerals themselves. But, in the latter case, the heterogeneous character may be either that which they had in the single foreign language of their immediate origin, or it may be a consequence of successive displacements of old terms by new ones derived from several influential foreign languages. Tried by this test the Dravirian numerals must be considered as very archaic, and as native in the linguistic formation to which the ancient Indian languages belong. It may be remarked amongst their archaic characters that they are not only qualitive
* Continued from p. 52.
as in oilier systems, but the roots are always clothed with a possessive or qualitive postfix, so that the series is literally "one-of," "two-cf ", "three-of" &c>
Rejecting the possessive postfixes, the S. Dravirian roots appear to be 1, on, vo; 2, ir, er, ira, era, re, ra (euphonically ren &c) ; 3, mu; 4, nal; 5, ai, (euphonically ain, an, #c); 6, a; 7, e; 8 (2, 10); 9 (1, 10). If -du, -zhu, -ju, -ndu, -nju &c, -ru, -lu, -nu, -tu, -da, -zha, -ta, -la, -ar, -di, -ji, -ti, -de, -d &c. are all merely fiexional variations of the possessive postfix, as is evidently the case the root of 5 is ai, and not ain, an or anj. If this view of the basis of the Dravirian numerals be correct, it follows that it was originally formed from a few definitives, further distinctness having ultimately been attained in each term by slight variations or flexions both in the roots and in the common postfixual possessives, variations similar to what take place in all agglutinative and fiexional languages. Thus in Tamil the postfix takes the forms •ru, 1, 3, 6; -du, 2, 9; -lu, 4 ; -ju, 5; -zhu, 7; -tu, 8; -ta, 9; —in Malayalam -na, 1; -da, 2, 9; -ar, 3; -ra, 6; -la, 4 ; -ja, 5; -zha, 7; -ta, 8, 10 ;—in Tuluva -ji, 1, 5, 6 ; -d, 2; -lu, 4 ;-l, 7; -nu, 5; -tu, 10;—in Karnat. -du 1, 2, 5; -ru, 3, 6 ;-l, 4 ; -lu, 7; -tu, 8,
9, 10;—in Telugu, -ti, 1; -du, 2, 3, 5, 7 ; -lu, 4; -ru,6; -di; 8, 9, 10;—in Todava, -da, 1, 2; -du, 3 ; -n, 4; -j, 5; -ra, 6 ; -ta, -t, 8,9,
10. From the easy convertibility of most of these forms, any original regularity in their flexion—if such ever existed—was not likely to be preserved. But some of the languages maintain a manifest connection between 1 and G, and between 8, 9 and 10, the former being probably dependent on an archaic quinary scale, while the latter intimates that when the scale became decimal, the lower numbers in the vicinity of 10 were named with reference to it.
From the general character of the variations in the forms of the
•See Appendix A. Comparative Vocabulary of the Numerals of the Dravirian Formation. The following are examples of the terms.
postfixes and the faintness of any traces of real flexion, it is probable that none of them had ever any function but the simple possessive. They are similar to the ordinary variations of the possessive, the consonant being d, t, r, I, n, j, zh, nd, nt, nr, and the vowel u generally, but sometimes a (Malayalam),ori (Tuluva). [See the remarks on the final vowels affected by different dialects]. The only other particle found amongst the postfixes is the guttural. It occurs in 4 in Anc. Tamil n&n-gu, Teltigu nalu-gw, Karnataka nul-ku, Toda non-A, Union na-M. It appears also to have been an archaic postfix of a labial term for "one" preserved in Kol but now lost in all the southern dialects save Toda and Telugu, although keeping its place in 10 and higher numbers as well as in 3. In the Telugu vo-ka-ti, the original poss. ka of the term voka appears to have become concreted and the secondary possessive -ti (the form in the Gond \m-di) to have then been appended, as in the Drahui mu-«-(, 4; and Kol m-ia-d, 1. In Telugu the -ka of voka-ti is lost, the dental only being preserved in the sonant form (pa-di 10, in iru-va-i 20, rau-pa-i 30 &c the d is dropped). The other dialects, with one exception, have also lost the guttural. The exception is Ancient Tamil which has on-b&-ku-du 9, i. e. "one (from) ten," oru-pa-ku-du 10 "one-ten," ira-pa-ku-du 20 (2, 10) &c. In some vocabularies of Toda it occurs in 5 yajj-Mw, khu. It appears to be the definitive found in the dative (-ku, -aim, -nka, -ki, -ge &c.) and in the compound possessive and dative -yo-ha, -yo-k. The additional postfixes in Uraon, Gond, Male (1) and Brahui appear to bo attributable to these languages having left the home circle of the Dravirian family. Gond has even a prefix in 5 and 6 (s-ai-jhan 5, sa-rong 6).
The mutual connection of the roots themselves is somewhat obscure. 1, 2 and 3 appear to be distinct roots. 1, on, (no, o, in the Toda 11, nu in most of the dialects in 100, but on in Toda) is definitive in Dravirian as in many other languages, in several of which it is also used as the unit, " the," " this," " he," "it" &c. for "one," ''a". In South Dravirian it occurs as a demonstrative, generally in the curt form o (followed by definitive postfixes marking the gender). Tuluva has ayi, Khond yan, and the Kol dialects ini, uni "he" &c, nea, noa, nia, ni, " this," eno, ana, hono, "that." Tuluva has also in-chi "here," an-cAi «there."