They claim according to their native chronology that Vijaya, the son of Sinhabahu, the sovereign of Lala, a small kingdom or Raj on the Gandaki river in Magadha, was exiled by his father for acts of turbulence and immorality.  Sent adrift on the ocean with his companions after having their heads shaved, Buddhist-Bhikshu fashion, as a sign of penitence, he was carried to the shores of Lanka.  Once landed, he and his companions conquered and easily took possession of an island inhabited by uncivilized tribes, generically called the Yakshas.  This—­at whatever epoch and year it may have happened—­is an historical fact, and the Ceylonese records, independent of Buddhist chronology, give it out as having taken place 382 years before Dushtagamani (i.e., in 543 before the Christian era).  Now, the Buddhist Sacred Annals record certain words of our Lord pronounced by Him shortly before His death.  In Mahavansa He is made to have addressed them to Sakra, in the midst of a great assembly of Devatas (Dhyan Chohans), and while already “in the exalted unchangeable Nirvana, seated on the throne on which Nirvana is achieved.”  In our texts Tathagata addresses them to his assembled Arhats and Bhikkhuts a few days before his final liberation:—­“One Vijaya, the son of Sinhabahu, king of the land of Lala, together with 700 attendants, has just landed on Lanka.  Lord of Dhyan Buddhas (Devas)! my doctrine will be established on Lanka.  Protect him and Lanka!” This is the sentence pronounced which, as proved later, was a prophecy.  The now familiar phenomenon of clairvoyant prevision, amply furnishing a natural explanation of the prophetic utterance without any unscientific theory of miracle, the laugh of certain Orientalists seems uncalled for.  Such parallels of poetico-religious embellishments as found in Mahavansa exist in the written records of every religion—­as much in Christianity as anywhere else.  An unbiased mind would first endeavour to reach the correct and very superficially hidden meaning before throwing ridicule and contemptuous discredit upon them.  Moreover, the Tibetans possess a more sober record of this prophecy in the Notes, already alluded to, reverentially taken down by King Ajatasatru’s nephew.  They are, as said above, in the possession of the Lamas of the convent built by Arhat Kasyapa—­the Moryas and their descendants being of a more direct descent than the Rajput Gautamas, the Chiefs of Nagara—­the village identified with Kapilavastu—­are the best entitled of all to their possession.  And we know they are historical to a word.  For the Esoteric Buddhist they yet vibrate in space; and these prophetic words, together with the true picture of the Sugata who pronounced them, are present in the aura of every atom of His relics.  This, we hasten to say, is no proof but for the psychologist.  But there is other and historical evidence:  the cumulative testimony of our religious chronicles.  The philologist has not seen these; but this is no proof of their non-existence.