as much as possible, except in such passages as were evidently corrupt. A second MS., unfortunately incomplete, from the same collection, is of unknown date, since the latter part of the codex is lost; from the form of the characters it may be inferred that it is not much more modern than the other codex. 1 The difference between both is not very great; yet there can be no doubt that the second MS. belongs to another family. The varietas lectionis is strikingly similar in kind to what we find in the different texts of the Vajracchedika, edited by Professor Max Muller.
The former manuscript has much in common with the London codices, from which Burnouf in the notes on his translation has derived numerous various readings; it stands farther off from the Paris MS. that has formed the base of Burnouf s version, but not so far as the second Cambridge MS., which shows the greatest number of peculiar readings. The text of chapter iv in Professor Foucaux's edition of the Parabole de 1 enfant egaré is comparatively modern and bad. In general it may be said that all the known copies of the Saddharma-pundarïka are written with a want of care little in harmony with the holy character of the book.
Before closing this preface I beg to offer my sincere thanks to Professors William Wright and E. B. Cowell, at Cambridge, for the generous way in which they have enabled me to use the MSS. I wanted for my translation. My thanks are due also to the Council of Cambridge University and Mr. H. Bradshaw, for their readily complying with my wishes. "Lo Piofessor Max Müller I owe a debt of gratitude for his kindly assisting me in my task in more than one respect, a debt which I am glad here openly to acknowledge.
1 The two Cambridge MSS. are marked Add. 1682 and 1683.