e passage does not fit in with the tenor of the entire section.
For Burzoe who was at a loss with regard to the physician's art, the
main question is, whether he should or should not become an ascetic,--a
question which must concern Ibn Moqaffa but little. The suitability of
the addenda hardly admits of proof but we may state that Ibn Moqaffa did
not simply interpolate but wove them artfully in his text and he might
have omitted something here and there.

[Sidenote: Burzoe influenced by Buddhism]

It seems to me highly probable that Burzoe allowed himself to be
influenced by the Buddhist romance, the original of which has perished
and the best representative of which, is preserved to us in the Arabic
_Bilauhar wa Budasf_ (See _Barlaam und Joasaph_ by E. Kuhn). Many a
passage of our chapter is strongly reminiscent of the sentences of the
romance, for instance, the dangers to the body remind one of those
related at p. 53; the four principles or _akhalat_ appear at p. 9, and
the parable of the man in the well is common to both. The parable which
stands at the close of the chapter is, unless one is greatly mistaken,
directly taken from the romance with little modification. It stands in
the whole of _Kalila wa Dimna_ isolated, deviates in manner and tendency
entirely from the story and also from what has issued from Ibn Moqaffa
but is consistent with the monastic predilections of Burzoe. And his
appraisement of the life of the recluse does not appear spontaneous but
something to which he has laboriously compelled himself. One may surmise
that it was really alive only in India. How far it was practised in
actual life must remain unproved. We must not omit to mention that
Burzoe points out that for an ideal physician his art earns also rich
earthly profits.

[Sidenote: English translation of the Introduction a desideratum.]

So far as I know, of this chapter there is no translation in a European
language except in the English by Knatchbull which appeared in 1819,
which reproduced the imperfect text of de Sacy and is otherwise
defective. Wolff did well to omit it in his German translation of
_Kalila wa Dimna_ of 1837, for he could not have produced a correct
rendering of de Sacy's text which was not completed till 1873 by Guidi.

[Sidenote: Difficulties of translation.]

Even now it is impossible to make a translation of Burzoe's Introduction
which can stand the test of philology. We must first see whether with
the use of