mixture of truth and error in their conclusions. Their labours, accordingly, are far from entitled to that confidence which their learning and industry would, else, have secured; and a sound and comprehensive survey of the Hindu system is still wanting to the comparative analysis of the religious opinions of the ancient world, and to a satisfactory elucidation of an important chapter in the history of the human race. It is with the hope of supplying some of the necessary means for the accomplishment of these objects, that the following pages have been translated.

The translation of the Vishnu Purána has been made from a collation of various manuscripts in my possession. I had three, when I commenced the work; two in the Devanagari, and one in the Bengali, character. A fourth, from the west of India, was given to me by Major Jervis, when some progress had been made; and, in conducting the latter half of the translation through the press, I have compared it with three other copies in the library of the East India Company. All these copies closely agree; presenting no other differences than occasional varieties of reading, owing, chiefly, to the inattention or inaccuracy of the transcriber. Four of the copies were accompanied by a commentary, essentially the same, although occasionally

varying, and ascribed, in part, at least, to two different scholiasts. The annotations on the first two books and the fifth are, in two MSS., said to be the work of Sridhara Yati, the disciple of Paránanda Nrihari, and who is, therefore, the same as Śrídhara Swámin, the commentator on the Bhagavata. In the other three books, these two MSS. concur with other two in

naming the commentator Ratnagarbha Bhattáchárya, who, in those two, is the author of the notes on the entire work. The introductory verses* of his comment specify him to be the disciple of Vidyáváchaspati, the son of Hiranyagarbha, and grandson of Mádhava, who composed his commentary by desire of Súryákara, son of Ratinátha Miśra, son of Chandrákara, hereditary ministers of some sovereign who is not particularized. In the illustrations which are attributed to these different writers, there is so much conformity, that one or other is largely indebted to his predecessor. They both refer to earlier commentaries. Śrídhara cites the works of Chitsukha Yogin and others, both more extensive and more concise; between which, his own, which he terms Átma- or Swa-prakáśa, 'self-illuminator',

The verses referred to are as follows:

हिरण्यगर्भतनयो माधवस्यात्मजात्मजः ।
श्रीरत्नगर्भस्तनुते वैष्णवाकूतचन्द्रिकाम् ॥
पुराणसंहितासारं पौलस्त्याद्वैष्णवं वरात् ।
पराशरमुनिश्चक्रे पुराणं पञ्चलक्षणम् ॥
षट्सहस्रं षडंशं तट्टीकया कृतया स्वयम् ।
श्रीसूर्यीकरमिश्रातियत्नतः संकुलीकृतम् ॥

At the end of Ratnagarbha's commentary we read:
यद्स्य ग्रन्थस्य स्फुटपदपदार्थादिविदुषां
न केषामप्यर्थः स्फुरति सति सन्देहतिमिरे ।
अतो विद्यावाचस्पतिवचनदीपावलिमता
मया व्यक्तानर्थान्हृदि कुरुत सन्तः सहदयाः ॥
चन्द्राकरस्य तनयो रतिनाथमिश्रः
चोणीन्द्रमन्त्रकृदभूदथ तत्सुतेन ।

सूर्यीकरेण नृपमन्त्रिवरेण यत्ना

त्संप्रार्थितो विहितवानहमस्य टीकाम् ॥

*

holds an intermediate character.* Ratnagarbha entitles his, Vaishnavákúta-chandriká, 'the moonlight of devotion to Vishnu.' The dates of these commentators are not ascertainable, as far as I am aware, from any of the particulars which they have specified.

In the notes which I have added to the translation, I have been desirous, chiefly, of comparing the statements of the text with those of other Puráñas, and pointing out the circumstances in which they differ or agree; so as to render the present publication a sort of concordance to the whole; as it is not very probable that many of them will be published or translated. The Index that follows+ has been made sufficiently copious to answer the purposes of a mythological and historical dictionary, as far as the Puráñas, or the greater number of them, furnish materials.

In rendering the text into English, I have adhered to it as literally as was compatible with some regard to the usages of English composition. In general, the original presents few difficulties. The style of the Puráñas is, very commonly, humble and easy; and the narrative is plainly and unpretendingly told. In the addresses to the deities, in the expatiations upon the divine nature, in the descriptions of the universe, and

*

Śridhara, at the opening of his commentary, writes thus: श्रीमच्चित्सुख योगिमुख्यरचितव्याख्यां निरीच्य स्फुटं तन्मार्गेण सुबोधसंग्रहवतीमात्मप्रकाशाभिधाम । श्रीमद्विष्णुपुराणसारविवृतिं कर्ती यतिः श्रीधरस्वामी सद्गुरुपादपद्ममधुपः साधुः स्वधीशुद्धये ॥ श्रीमद्विष्णुपुराणस्य व्याख्यां स्वल्पातिविस्तराम | प्राचामालोक्य तद्व्याख्या मध्यमेयं विधीयते ॥

A new and amplified Index will be given at the end of the last volume.

in argumentative and metaphysical discussion, there occur passages in which the difficulty arising from the subject itself is enhanced by the brief and obscure manner in which it is treated. On such occasions, I derived much aid from the commentary. But it is possible that I may have, sometimes, misapprehended and misrepresented the original; and it is, also, possible that I may have sometimes failed to express its purport with sufficient precision to have made it intelligible. I trust, however, that this will not often be the case, and that the translation of the Vishnu Puráńa will be of service and of interest to the few who, in these times of utilitarian selfishness, conflicting opinion, party virulence, and political agitation, can find a resting-place for their thoughts in the tranquil contemplation of those yet living pictures of the ancient world which are exhibited by the literature and mythology of the Hindus.