I believe that in this case, as in many others, the Gainas claim more honour than is their due in connecting every Indian celebrity with the history of their creed. My reason for doubting the correctness of the above Gaina legend is the following. The Vaiseshika philosophy is reckoned as one of the orthodox Brahmanical philosophies, and it has chiefly, though not exclusively, been cultivated by orthodox Hindus. We have, therefore, no reason for doubting that they have misstated the name and Gotra of the author of the Sutras, viz. Kanada of the Kasyapa Gotra. No trace

has been found in Brahmanical literature that the name of the real author of the Vaiseshika was Rohagupta, and his Gotra the Kausika Gotra; nor can Rohagupta and Kanada be taken as different names of the same person, because their Gotras also differ. Kanada, follower of Kanada, means etymologically crow-eater, owl; hence his system has been nicknamed Aulukya Darsana, owl-philosophy . In Rohagupta's second name, Khuluya, which stands for Shaduluka , allusion is made to the 'owl,' probably to the Kanadas; but the Gainas refer uluka to the Gotra of the Rohagupta, viz. Kausika , which word also means owl. As the unanimous tradition of the Brahmans deserves the preference before that of the Gainas, we can most easily account for the latter by assuming that Rohagupta did not invent, but only adopted the Vaiseshika philosophy to support his schismatical views.

About the two works translated in this volume, the Uttaradhyayana and Sutrakritanga, I have little to add to the remarks of Professor Weber in the Indische Studien, vol. xvi, p. 259 ff., and vol. xvii, p. 43 ff. The Sutrakritanga is probably the older of the two, as it is the second Anga, and the Angas obtain the foremost rank among the canonical books of the Gainas, while the Uttaradhyayana, the first Mulasutra, belongs to the last section of the Siddhanta. According to the summary in the fourth Anga the object of the Sutrakritanga is to fortify young monks against the heretical opinions of alien teachers, to confirm them in the right faith, and to lead them to the highest good. This description is correct on the whole, but not exhaustive, as will be seen by going over our table of contents. The work opens with the refutation of heretical doctrines, and the same object is again treated at greater length in the