and upward to the extremity of existence, within and without, such as the sounds of horses elephants, cows, peasants 2 , goats, cars ; the sounds of weeping and wailing; of horror, of conch-trumpets, bells, tymbals ; of playing and singing; of camels, of tigers 3; of women, men, boys, girls; of righteousness (piety) and unrighteousness (impiety); of pleasure and pain; of ignorant men and iryas; pleasant and unpleasant sounds; sounds of gods, Nigas, goblins, Gandharvas, demons, Garuaks, Kinnaras, great serpents, men, and beings not human; of monks, disciples, Pratyekabuddhas, Bodhisattvas, and TatMgatas ; as many sounds as are uttered in the triple world, within and without, all those he hears with his natural organ of hearing when perfect. Still he does not enjoy the divine ear, although he apprehends the sounds of those different creatures, understands, discerns the sounds of those different creatures, and when with his natural organ of hearing he hears the sounds of those creatures, his ear is not overpowered by any of those sounds. Such, Satatasamitabhiyukta, is the organ of hearing that the Bodhisattva Mahdsattva 4 acquires ; yet he does not possess the divine ear.
Burnouf's version shows a few unimportant various readings.
Ganapadaxabda^, rather strange between the others. I sup- pose that ^anapada is corrupted from some word meaning a sheep, but I find no nearer approach to it than ^dlakini, a ewe; cf. st. 8 below.
I follow Burnouf, who must have read vy£ghra; my MS. has vidya.
This term, as it is here used, refers, so far as I can see, to the ministers of religion, the preachers. It is, however, just pos- sible that we have to take it in the more general and original sense of any ' rational being,' for all the advantages enumerated
belong to everybody who is not blind, not deaf, &c.