Defenders of the Faith, Mahasiddlias, etc. One of the best guides we possess for the reconstructions of these lama names, is the "Mahavyutpatti," an encyclopedia containing all the Buddhist nomenclature in four languages. Griinwedel has supplied us likewise with an excellent dissertation on the successive increase of the Pantheon of Buddhism, which was in connexion with the propagation of Buddhism and the development and variation Buddhism was undergoing in the different countries. 'J'liere are many thousands of these deified Buddhist Arhats, etc., but this monograph is not intended to give either a systematic list of thein [as was successfully initiated by Mr. Pander] or to enter into any closer discussion of the whole scheme of this evolution out of the limited, original forms, as has been exposed by Griinwedel in his " Buddhistische Kunst in ludien." I think, however, that the name of the Tibetan Lamas, though being the translations of Sanskrit names, must not necessarily be translations of Buddhas or Buddhist saints and holy priests, reported in Buddhist legends, etc., who have actually lived. After all, the origin of the name "Padmapani" "being simply an adjective in substantive form" (vide Griinwedel's op. cit. p. 168j is a good specimen of such a nomenclatui'e. I am of the opinion that the adoption of simple distinguishing names for the Lamaist High Dignitaries, or of mere epithets, also worn by deceased illustrious priests or legendary Saints, often occurs according to the general form of conferring religious names upon the simple novices. Of course, in the latter case only the head lama of the monastery (usually), officiating
at the initiation of the novice, gives the names, while
