On this ground professor Kern thought this Indian prince as inexplicable as the other one we saw in the porch before the entrance. The two kings wear the _prabha_, or disk of light, on the back part of their heads. _Buddha_ does not, or no more; for this may have been fixed to the wall of the temple, and afterwards fallen down after that the image itself had slidden from its seat, or before its having been placed there[11]. On account of the posture of his hands before his breast there are some Dutch scholars who suppose this _Buddha_ to be the first _Dhyâni-Buddha Vairotyana_, and the two other princes they think to be _Bodhisattvas_ or future Buddhas, whilst the one on the north-easterly wall is said to be the _fourth_ Dhyâni-Bodhisatthva, _Padmapâni_ because of his being provided with a small image of the fourth Dhyâni-_Buddha_, _Amitâbha_, in his crown. Which Bodhisatthva we then must see in that other image nobody could tell us, because it misses all attributes. This however, is also the case with the buddhistic king’s image, and though it may be provided with a Buddha image in its crown, occasionally given to some Bodhisatthvas, yet it doesn’t characterise every wearer as such. Moreover, I more than once demonstrated that _all_ the crowns are provided with no other image but the one of the Buddha himself in his posture of _meditation_ (or rest after death), and therefore we can’t accept these images to be Bodhisatthvas, or more especially _Padmapâni_, the Bodhisattva of the fourth Dhyâni-Buddha who, after all, should have been characterised by this Bodhisatthva’s usual attribute, the _padma_ or lotus placed near his face. But these two images also miss this flower and the stem of the lotus which the Bodhisatthvas generally keep in their _left_ hands. Sometimes however, we see them in their _right_ hand, and the flower with the symbol above one or two leaves. So the meaning of the mentioned scholars _doesn’t explain these 3 images_ whereas Siam’s king, on his visiting this temple in 1896, satisfactorily interpreted the north-westerly image, wearing, like he does himself, a Buddha image in his crown, to be perhaps the king of the buddhistic empire, under whose reign the Båråbudur was built. Further he supposed the other image to be the latter’s not-buddhistic father and predecessor whilst both father and son (the latter afterwards became a buddhist), might have been honoured by their descendants who brought together the two images in this sanctuary under the _blessing_ of the only Buddha, the redeemer of this world. So this Buddha image has nothing to do with any _Dhyâni-Buddha_, and by no means with the _first_ of them. [Illustration: Tyanḍi Mĕndut. Imagery in front of the entrance of the ruin. _Hâritî_, the goddess of the _Yakshas_, with some of her 500 children.]