in the Muhammadan legend, for Muhammad rides upon an animal called Buraq, riding being more in accordance with Arabian ideas than driving. The word Buraq is probably derived from the Hebrew baraq, "lightning," which in Arabic is barq, though a Pahlavi derivation is also possible.

Before passing on to consider other points, it should be noticed that the Book of Enoch contains a long account of the wonders of earth, hell and sky which Enoch saw in his 1 vision (οράσει). This apocryphal work no doubt had its influence on the legends contained in the "Visio Pauli" and the "Testament of Abraham" and thus upon the Muhammadan fable; but we can hardly suppose that the Arta Viraf Namak was affected, except perhaps indirectly, by these works. However, that is a question which does not affect our present inquiry.

Now regarding the Tree of Life in the Garden of Eden the Jews have many marvellous 2 legends, which may have been borrowed from the Accadian tales about the "Sacred Tree of Eritu," mentioned in some of the earliest inscriptions found at Nippur

1 Liber Henoch, capp. xiv, xv, sqq.
2 In the Targum of Jonathan, for example, we are told that the Tree of Life was 500 years' journey in height! The Muslims confound this with the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, which they take to have been the wheat plant. Of it we are told that it presented itself before Adam to tempt him to eat of it. Adam rose to his full height, "500 years' journey" to avoid it, but the plant grew and kept on a level with his mouth (Qisasu'l Anbiya, p. 17).

by Dr. Hilprecht. Into these we need not now enter at any length, merely observing how great a contrast there is between all such legends and the simple narrative of fact contained in Genesis. The Jewish legends have affected the Muhammadan account of the heavenly Paradise, because the Muslim belief is that the Garden of Eden was situated in heaven. They therefore transfer to the heavenly Paradise much that the Jews have related about the earthly. In this respect they may have been led into error by the Christian apocryphal books, for the description of the four rivers, &c., given in the "Visio Pauli" (cap. xlv) evidently springs from the same strange fancy. It is hardly necessary to say that these apocryphal books were never accepted by any section of the Christian Church as of any weight or authority, though some of them had at one time a considerable degree of popularity with the ignorant multitude. Some of them have long been known, others have only recently been recovered after having been lost for centuries. Whether the Muhammadans derived their account of the tree Tuba' from the Zoroastrians or from Jewish fables, or whether both the latter (being of common origin) have not had some influence on the story, we need not inquire. The four rivers that Muhammad saw are those of the "Visio Pauli," and these latter are identical with the rivers of Eden, owing to the error which we have noticed above.