国立情報学研究所 - ディジタル・シルクロード・プロジェクト
『東洋文庫所蔵』貴重書デジタルアーカイブ

the *Ta-huang hsi-ching* was a Buddhist work, which had « evidently » borrowed the mention of the
Anavatapta from the *Shih-shih hsi-yü chi* (or *chih*), a work which HERRMANN ascribes to the 5th
cent., but which, as a matter of fact, is no other than the *Hsi-yü chih*, or « Description of the Western
countries », published by Tao-an (†385 A. D.) about the third quarter of the 4th cent. But the
*Ta-huang hsi-ching* is extant and well known; it is ch. 16 of the famous *Shan-hai ching*, the often
fabulous geographical work which is prior to our era. It is of course impossible that the *Shan-
hai ching* should have known the Indian Anavatapta, and the critical edition of the *Shih chi*
published by TAKIGAWA Kametaro cites (123, 14) a note by the modern author 张 文 虎 CHANG
Wên-hu (1808-1885) saying that the passage quoted by Chang Shou-chieh does not occur in
the *Ta-huang hsi-ching*. But I think that CHANG Wên-hu has misunderstood Chang Shou-chieh.
The fable of the Jo-shui, the « Weak River », the water of which was so « weak » that, according to
some, even swan's down could not float on it, is an old Chinese fable, which has western counter-
parts (in Herodotus, Ktesias, Strabo, etc.; cf. HIRTH, *China and the Roman Orient*, 291), which we
shall meet again in the course of the present note (cf. *infra*, p. 719). The Anavatapta was the mythi-
cal lake, generally identified with the Manasarowar or « Mo-bang-tso », from which the four great
rivers were supposed to flow to the four quarters. North of it was the Gandhamādana Mountain,
which came to be designated as Mount Anavatapta. But, in the first centuries of our era, Chinese
Buddhists identified this Mount Anavatapta with the K'un-lun Mountains of Chinese legend (cf.
*Shui-ching chu*, ed. *Ssu-pu tsung-k'an*, 1, 4 *b*-5 *a*; *TP*, 1905, 566; *T'ung tien*, 192, 1 *b*; according
to the *Shih-chia fang-chih* [致, 1, 88 *a*], this equivalence was already given in the *Fu-nan chuan*,
which must be K'ang T'ai's *Fu-nan t'u-su chuan*, dated in the middle of the 3rd cent.), where Hsi-
wang-mu, the « Mother-Queen of the West », had her abode, and in the vicinity of which flowed the
« Weak River ». The *Ta-huang hsi-ching* chapter of the *Shan-hai ching* mentions the K'un-lun,
Hsi-wang-mu, and the Weak River, but of course says nothing about the Anavatapta, equally
ignored by Kuo P'o's commentary. But, in his account of western countries, mainly based on
Chang Ch'ien's journey, Ssŭ-ma Ch'ien has a paragraph on An-hsi (Arsacid Persia) and another
on T'iao-chih (Mesopotamia). Of T'iao-chih, it is said that it lay several thousand *li* west of An-hsi
and that, according to the hearsay reports of old people of An-hsi, there was in T'iao-chih Hsi-wang-
mu and the Weak River, but that none of them had seen them. About the middle of the 3rd cent.,
Yü Huan said in his *Wei lio* that the Weak River was to the west of Ta-Ch'in (Mediterranean Orient).
This is the subject of Chang Shou-chieh's remarks : « Since this Weak River [and this] Hsi-wang-mu
had been heard of by old men of An-hsi, [it means that] they had not seen them. The *Hou-Han
shu* says that, in the time of the Emperor Huan (in 166 A. D.), the King An-tun (= Marcus Aurelius
Antoninus) of the Kingdom of Ta-Ch'in sent an envoy who arrived from beyond the boundaries
of Jih-nan (= Annam) to offer presents and that some said that west of that kingdom there was
the Weak River and the Moving Sands (Liu-sha, lit. Flowing Sands), near the place of Hsi-wang-mu,
and almost where the sun sets (cf. HIRTH, *China and the Roman Orient*, 42-43). Many late scholars
(先 儒 *hsien ju*), however, quote the *Ta-huang hsi-ching* as mentioning the Weak River, and
say (i. *e*. the scholars say) that it has two springs, which both rise in the 阿 褥 達 A-nou-ta Moun-
tain (Anavatapta) which is to the north of the Kingdom of Women, and, flowing south, unite in
the Kingdom of Women, one *li* east of the capital of that kingdom; it is more than ten feet deep,