On the _second_ sculpture we see him shipwreck, and after having reached the shore he finds there _four_ celestial young women who reward him for his first _good_ deed by letting him, for many years, dream a dream of perfect happiness till his _karma_ drives him away from there, successively showing him _eight_, afterwards _sixteen_, and at last _two-and-thirty_ more and more beautiful nymphs in return of the as many _kârshâpanas_ he formerly gave away to the indigent. Finally he happens to enter a castle which gate closes itself behind him, and there he sees a martyr bearing a red-hot wheel turning for ever on his head, that is, the inexorable punishment to all who insulted their father or mother. This wheel the unhappy one will always bear till another, guilty of the same deed, will release him. On the _third_, _fourth_, and _fifth_ sculpture have been hewn the encounters with the 8, 16 and 32 nymphs, though, for want of room, we can’t see 5 of the 16 and 19 of the 32 nymphs. And on the _sixth_ and last sculpture we first see Maitrakanyaka suffer under the torture of the red-hot wheel, but at a short distance from this we see him _released_ by the expression of his self-denying wish, that another, guilty of such a deed, may _never_ come to free him. I think the last group of this very same imagery should refer to the conclusion of this _karma_-legend: the Bodhisattva’s dying and his transition into the _nirvâna_.[56]. Foucher means that the four relievoes which precede the shipwreck, refer to the same _jâtaka_, and that Maitrakanyaka may have been already represented with his mother on the first sculpture where the son offered his mother a purse filled with the kârshâpanas he first gained. On the following panel, divided into two by a style of building, Foucher sees, to the right, the son in his last business which may appear from the goldsmith’s balance whereas the larger purse should refer to the very same one in which he gathered the 32 kârshâpanas. On the other, left part, Foucher thinks he also sees the mother at her son’s feet. So does Speyer, and so do I. As with regard to the following relievoes I refer to that which I already said formerly. As for the _seventh relievo_ I beg to point to my explanation, and interpretation in my “_Oudheidkundige aanteekeningen_” IV^th (page 25 and 26). According to Foucher the sculptor should not have dared to represent Maitrakanyaka as a repentant sinner, because of his being the _Bodhisattva_ himself. Anyhow, the redemption of this punishment by a deed of the highest self-denial appeared so very significant to me that it should not have been unnoticed, neither in metaphor nor in writing, but this would have been impossible if this punishment had not preceded the redemption itself.