REVIEWS

G.H. Schokker, The Padata~titakaof ,~yamilaka, A Text-criticalEdition, Part I ( = Indo-Iranian Monographs, Vol. IX). The Hague, Paris, Mouton and Co., 1966. 389 + XIII pp. with 8 figures. The Padata.ditaka ('The Kick') of ~yfimilaka is one of the four bhavas which have been discovered in 1922 and which represent the earliest specimens of this type of dramatic compositions. These four one-act monologue plays have been published under the collective title Caturbh6tlifirst by M. Ramakrishna Kavi and S. K. Ramanatha Sastri (Trichur, 1922) and subsequently by dr. Motichandra and V. S. Agravala (Benares, 1959). Both editions, though valuable in several respects, are unsatisfactory in that they do not furnish a critically reliable text. The merit of having been the first to undertake a critical edition of one of the four bh6ras is due to dr. J. R. A. Loman who re-edited the Padmaprabhrtaka with the help of the available manuscripts (Amsterdam, 1956). The present edition of the Padata@taka by dr. Schokker must be hailed as a further welcome contribution in this field. Dr. Schokker has preceded his edition by a detailed introduction dealing with (a) the manuscript material, (b) the poet of the bhava, his date and language, and (c) the dramaturgical aspects of the bha.nain general (pp. 1-64). Moreover, the author has considered it part of his duty as an editor to subjoin an elaborate commentary which contains a lot of useful information (pp. 140-302). Several appendixes and an extensive bibliography conclude the work. The manuscript material of the Padatad.itaka, as is well-known, is rather scanty. The text is handed down in six manuscripts only, four of which (T1, %, B, H) are palm-leaf manuscripts in Malayalam script, whereas the remaining two (M1, M~) are modern nagari transcripts of palm-leaf manuscripts in Malayalam writing. Moreover, of the six available manuscripts only three (T1, Tg, ]3) contain the complete text. The other three (M1, H, M~) are incomplete, the former two showing the text from the beginning up to 87.5 (with some gaps) and the third one from 88.6 to the end. Obviously the archetypus of these manuscripts had been split up in two parts at some time, as is not unprecedented in Indian codicology (el. the fate of the archetypus of the RajataraYigivi). The position of the editor is consequently far from favourable, the more so as the poet of the work was a native of Kashmir and there is hence every reason to surmise that the available manuscripts constitute the terminus of a long history of palaeographical vicissitudes with all its implications. In carrying out his editorial task dr. Schokker has proceeded with great care. He has accurately studied the available material, minutely noted all particularities shown by the manuscripts and taken great pains to elucidate the history of the manuscript tradition. Since none of the manuscripts available seems to represent the original more faithfully than the others, his approach in establishing the text had naturally to be pragmatic. As a rule, though not consistently, the rule of the lectio difficilior has been applied.

REVIEWS

45

While endeavouring to penetrate into the history of the manuscript tradition dr. Schokker comes to the conclusion that there must have existed also copies of the Pddatd(litaka written in n~garL In his opinion special confusions of aksharas point to a ndgar~ original. Quotations by Kashmirian authors strengthen him in this view (p. 11). This conclusion, though not entirely wrong in itself, does not give the correct perspective. Not two, but three strata are to be distinguished in the available manuscript material. If, as rightly assumed by the author, the poet of the P~datf~h'taka was a native of Kashmir, it follows that the oldest manuscripts of the work must have been written in ~tiradfi script. Since the n~gar[ script came into use in Kashmir in the second quarter of the nineteenth century only, copies in this script may have been made after that time or, in case s'dradd copies came to India proper at an earlier date, even before. That actually .~tirada has been the original script is confirmed by the fact that this conclusion works catalysatorily in a number of misreadings, which the author is unable to explain. Dr. Schokker discerns three types of confusions: (a) confusions in Maiayalam script; (b) confusions in the ndgdrf text; (c) confusions which are palaeographically inexplicable (App. II 1-3). Among the confusions of the first group ca/~a, dha/pa, ddha/ndha, ta/nta, ya/va cannot be explained from Malayalam writing, while on the other hand they can easily be traced back to dtiradd. Some other confusions of this group (e/ai, ka/ta, ta/na) may be due to Malayalam writing, but are also found in ~firadti (and n~gari) manuscripts. Of the confusions of the second group the misreadings na/va, pa/ma, ma/sa are characteristic of g~radd. The confusions ta/bha, dha/ga, dha/~a, na/ga, which the author calls inexplicable, are known from gdradd manuscripts. Similarly, the misreadings ca/ja (45b), ~ra/~f~ (87c), la/ya (89b), pra/su (101b), te/me (106b), u-/ta- (118b) can be traced back to gdradd script. The orthographical peculiarities which the author considers to be South-Indian likewise become clear by postulating .(dradti to be the original writing. Actually the practice of writing r for ra, intervocalic va for ba and inversely, sibilant for visarga before initial sibilant, and single sibilant for double sibilant before consonant, is well-known from ~tiradd manuscripts. Dr. Schokker has tried to explain several errors, which he found in the manuscripts, from Malayalam pronunciation: ka/ga (78a), kha/gha (17.2; 41.14), ca/ja (45b), cha/ja (11.6; 50.6; 52b; 76.7), rttha/rddha (63.5), ba/va (11.5 etc.). Here again the real facts have not been clearly seen. The confusion ka/ga may be due to Maiayalam pronunciation, but is in fact already found in .~tiradfiscript. The explanation of kha/gha in the case of makha cannot be correct, since makha is pronounced in Malayalam with kh, not gh, and moreover this confusion is known from ~rad~. The misreading ca/ja need not necessarily be ascribed to Malayalam pronunciation since it occurs in .~tiradd manuscripts; if, however, as supposed by the author, ja reflects ca, it is not clear how at the same timeja could reflect cha, which would be jha. Again, the confusion rttha/ rddha cannot be due to Malayalam pronunciation, because in Malayalam th after r is pronounced th, not dh. On the other hand, Malayalam pronunciation must be held responsible for the occasional writing t for d: in Malayalam udbheda (3d) is pronounced ulbheda and I written t. For ba/va see above. In establishing the text dr. Schokker has earnestly endeavoured to reconstruct the original as faithfully as possible and to remove all foreign elements which may have crept in. Hence it is not clear why he has deviated from this principle in the orthography of a number of words and quite needlessly followed the South-Indian tradition (6.3 naipathya for nepathya; 12.1 etc. avaku~thayati for avangu.nthayati; 17b makuta for mukuta; 18c etc. gulgulu for guggulu; 69.22 visrambha for vi~rambha). In NorthIndian manuscripts the alternative forms are met with and it seems more logical to adopt these in the text. Apart from the emendations already found in the printed editions the author has adopted some emendations of his own. In several instances he is no doubt right (10.2; 63a; 76.5; 77a; 87; 100.3; 102a; 110.3). In some cases, however,

46

e,EVlEWS

the proposed emendation is not convincing. In 10.5 the reading danakamav upek~ate has been adopted as an emendation for danakarnav avek~ate (T1), though the reading na danokamav avek~ate (T2) is quite correct (na avek~ate is common in Sanskrit). The reading sa~mukhinam (58c), suggested as an emendation for sammukhinah of the manuscripts, is doubtful since adjectives of this type (abhimukha, saramukha etc.) are normally used attributively only (cf. 38.15 sa~mukhfnam enam). The emendation artham for ardham (63.5; ross. arddham), as already stated, is not justified, nor is the emendation .opaharati for -apaharati sufficiently founded (the confusion a/o is extremely rare). In 69.26 the reading tatrabhavantam anugrhitayam has been changed into tatrabhavata anug.rhftayam, though it is very unlikely that bhavantam should be a clerical error (the context seems to admit anug.rhitavatyam), In 135d sa ga~dg~a.h sidhob has been adopted as an emendation for sa ga.nd.a~ab g~thuO (mss. and ed. pr.) and sa ga.n~t~aO gidhub (ed. alt.), although sa ea.nd.a~a.hsidhub would have been correct Sanskrit syntax (cf. p. 18 kanta-ga.nd.a~a-gidhubhi.h). The conjecture pracare~u (27a) of the editio princeps, adopted by the editio altera and the present edition, cannot be right, since the confusions ca/ka and ca/ta are foreign to garada, nagariand Malyayalm script, and besides the meaning of pracara does not suit the context. In his choice between the variae lectiones dr. Schokker has proceeded with care. Occasionally one would feel inclined to prefer another reading than the editor adopted in his text. In 12b the v.1. nighanti, if correct, seems to point to an original reading nighnanti (na omitted after athava) instead of na ghnanti (cf. 20b). In 91.1, if the v.l. of ms. B is correct, should be read gffnta~ gantar~p~pam instead of ganta~ papa~ g~nta~ papam. As regards the apparatus criticus it must be remarked that neither the divergent readings of the printed editions nor the author's own emendations have been indicated here, as might be expected. For these data the reader has to consult the Commentary. Even in the Commentary, however, the variae lectiones of the printed editions have not been noted throughout. Nor have occasional omissions of the editions been stated (2.3; 19.3 pura.nagh.rtagandha; 25.3 ka gatir etc. ore. ed. alt.). In two instances an emendation of the editio altera, adopted by the editor, has not been mentioned (38 sahfik~aiO; 87c niM~tkara in the form migg~tkara). In the Commentary, apart from the palaeographical matter already discussed above, some further errors in the explanation of palaeographical peculiarities are to be noted. On account of 11.5 ma cchetsir it is said that the v.1. majesim is due to the confusion ofja and cha in Malayam script, though elsewhere (52b; 76.7) the confusion ja/cha is ascribed to Malayalam pronunciation, while in fact ja and cha are quite distinct in Malayalam writing. A similar remark could be made on account of 90.7-8 v.1. udakatailavrtya which is said to be due to the resemblance of b and v in Malayalam script. Inaccurate is the wording in 97b and 97.6 where it is stated that au is misread for 8 and n respectively. With regard to palaeographical mistakes in general it should be remembered that confusions of aksharas are confined to special positions and hardly ever cover the whole barahkadi. Furthermore, attention must be called to some of the author's interpretations which give rise to comment: la kopar# manayati does not mean here 'to honour anger', but 'to appease anger'; cf. DhVs 39.1 quoted by the author tasmfiddhfisyaprayogenapi manayitavyab strikopab where prayoge.na shows that the meaning 'to honour' cannot be correct; of. ibid. 39.3 and Hi. krodh manana; - 33b khad. iti krtva nira$thivat 'after clearing his throat he spat out her tooth'; read: 'he spat out the tooth with the sound khat."; - 62 bhad(tauhetta: it is not correct to say that as a rule dra becomes or.da in Prakrit; actually dra normally becomes dda in Prakrit; dra becomes ~/.da in Amg. and JM.; - 63.5 arthat# nama gilasyopaharati 'the name offers the real nature of the character'; as the reading of the manuscripts appears quite correct (see above), the saying concerned must read approximately 'one's name is half his character'; - 69.7 gilatalardha~ gro~ibimbenfik~ipantiva: the translation 'covering as it were half the stone seat with her round hips' cannot be correct on account of

REVIEWS

47

ira; as a rendering might be suggested 'putting to shame as it were half my stone seat by her beautiful hips' (eL MBh 3.2147). To the list of corrections and additions might be added the following errata: p. 67 line 13: vi; read: vi- or vit.a.h; p. 155 line 31 har.notpala; read: karttotpala; p. 167 line 27: devdrcanad; read: devdrcandd; p. 176 line 20: Hi. vdtula; read: Skt. Hi. vatula; p. 181 line 13: vegavithika; read: -vithika; p. 199 line 23 : les yeux; read: lesjeux; p. 224 line 8: gakarair; read: gakarair; p. 229 line 11: anavake~ayd; read: anavek~ayti; ib. line 40: PT 12.1; read: PP 12.1; p. 232 line 19: iyampratij ~; read: iyam dgfb; P. 242 line 19: k~mayam~na; read: kdmayam~na; p. 248 line 37: ka~t.aka-; read: kdr p. 350,8: udraga; read: udagra. Other typographical errors (p. 143 geunilleux instead of guenilleux etc.) can easily be corrected in reading. The value of dr. Schokker's edition mainly lies in the fact that the text of the Pddatd~titaka has been established after an accurate study of the available manuscripts, which enabled him to improve the text of the printed editions in many places. No doubt the palaeographical peculiarities shown by the manuscripts require a more thorough treatment than the author has obviously been able to undertake. On the other hand it should be stated that a satisfactory constitution of the text of the Padata~titaka does not primarily depend on the interpretation of particular palaeographical features. As matters stand at present, any editor of this bhd.na will have to take into account special limitations resulting from the nature of the manuscript tradition. A definitive reconstruction of the original will only be possible when independent evidence will be available. Amsterdam

K. de Vreese

Gero Jenner, Die poetischen Figuren der Inder yon Bhamaha bis Mammata. Ihre Eigenart ira Verhi~Ttniszu den Figuren repriisentativer antiker Rhetoriker (= Schriften des Europa-Kollegs Hamburg, Band 5). Hamburg, Ludwig Appel Verlag, 1968. 317 S. Obwohl die Erforschung indischer Dichtkunst zu den eigentlichen und zentralen Anliegen der Indologie gerechnet werden muss, erscheinen indologische Arbeiten mit vorwiegend literarischer Thematik in jfmgster Zeit relativ selten. Was heute aussteht, sind nicht nur eine gr6ssere Anzahl neuerer Untersuchungen, welche die Tradition Hermann Jacobis, Johannes Nobels, S. K. Des, u.a. fortsetzen k6nnten, es fehlt auch, was vielleicht schwerer wiegt, am Grunds~ttzlichen, der l~ngst f~lligen Neuorientierung. Leider verh~lt es sich ja so, dass unsere Kenntnis altindischer Dichtung im Wesentlichen noch einem ~ilteren Forschungsstande entspricht, w~ihrend sich, was sich inzwischen innerhalb der Literaturgeschichte als selbstiindiger Disziplin und deren Entwicklung zur Literaturwissenschaft und schliesslich zur Literaturkritik (literary criticism) abgespielt hat, auf indologischem Gebiet noch nirgendwo richtig niederzuschlagen vermoeht hat. Dies ist ein R/~ckstand, der bisher noch nicht aufgeholt worden ist. Als Neuerscheinung auf einem so vernachl~sigten Gebiet ist Gero Jennets Untersuchung der "poetischen Figuren der Inder von Bh~maha bis Mammata" von vorneherein willkommen zu heissen. Die Arbeit zeigt einige sehr gute Ansiitze und Intentionen, bewegt sich jedoch, um dies gleieh vorauszuschicken, auf Pfaden des Althergebrachten. Der Untertitel verr~it die traditionelle Ausrichtung. Jermerts Dissertation verspricht, die "Eigenart" der indischen alart~karas "im Verh~iltnis zu den Figuren repr~isentativer antiker Rhetoriker" zu beleuchten und tritt damit direkt in die Fussstapfen Paul Regnauds und dessen Rhdtorique Sanskrite,ldie sich einst gleichfalls als Paris, 1884. Obwohl l~tgst veraltet, ist Regnauds Rhdtorique in ausgew~ihlten Teilen

48

REVIEWS

ein Exposde dans son ddveloppement historique et ses rapports avecla rMtorique classique vorgestellt hat. So ist die Zielsetzung der Werke Jenners und Regnauds eine im Wesentlichen gleiche: beide wollen in erster Linie die geschichtliche Entwicklung ihres eigentlichten Stoffgebietes, der altindischen Poetik, erfassen, darfiber hinaus aber auch vergleiehen, und zwar mit jenem Literaturbereich, der sich vom Standpunkt des Sanskritisten aus als der bisher gegebenste anbieten musste, nimlich der griechischr6mischen Rhetorik. Bei Regnaud ist die Tendenz zum Vergleichen verstindlich. Sein Werk ist bereits vor achzig Jahren erschienen, als, wer sich damals mit Indien befasst hat, meist fiber die klassischen Sprachen zum Sanskrit gelangt war. Zudem hat der Schwerpunkt der littdrature comparde fast immer in Frankreich gelegen und sind ihre beiden Varianten, der historische und der ahistorisehe Komparativismus, typische Geisteskinder des 19. Jahrhunderts. Im Falle Jenners mfissen wir kritischer sein. Wenn man heutzutage die indisehe Poetik der antiken Rhetorik gegenfberstellen will, so bedarf ein solches Unternehmen schon der besonderen Begrfndung, und sic bedarf, was noch wichtiger ist, einer ausfOhrlichen Er~Srterung der vom Verfasser fox seine "Kontraststudie" verwandten Methode. Es ist sehr bedauerlich, dass Jenner fiber diese beiden - miteinander eng verbundenen - Fragenkomplexe, wie es scheint, allzu wenig nachgedacht hat. Dies hatte zur Folge, dass schon die Disposition des Stoffes nicht sehr gut geglfckt ist. So fiberrascht es den Leser, dass eine eigentliche Gegenfberstellungder indischen alatrtkaras und der Figuren der Griechen und RSmer allein im Rahmen zweier Teilabschnitte von Kapitel II, von denen der erste nur zweiundfOnfzig Seiten (S. 48-100), der zweite einundzwanzig Seiten (S. 103-124) umfasst, versucht wird, w~ihrend die fbrigen - im Inhaltsverzeichnis in Obrigens sehr verwirrender Weise aufgeffhrten - Kapitel bzw. Teilabschnitte die beiden Gebiete, d.h. das alar~kdragastra und die griechisch-r6mische Rhetorik, immer wieder gesondert behandeln. Doch ist die Arbeit, wie Jenner selbst sagt, "im Hinblick auf den Indologen gesehrieben" (S. 8) und stellt ihr Hauptanliegen die Behandlung der ala~kdras dar, welche der Verfasser z.T. zu systematisieren, z.T. auch geschichtlieh zu untersuchen versucht. Die Dissertation Jenners ist reich an Textbeispielen mad Definitionen, die teils fibersetzt, teils nur paraphrasiert werden, teils aber aueh unfibersetzt bleiben. Manchreal bedient sich der Verfasser eines sanskritisierten Gelehrten-Jargons, der recht amiisant, aber kaum zul/issig ist; so heisst es, um nur zwei besonders sch(Sne Beispiele zu nermen, auf S. 149: "Zwei versehiedene Kartr ~ haben dasselbe Verb-Kriy~", und spricht Jenner S. 53 yon "Vaidarbher-Stilisten .... im Gegensatz zu den Gau~liyern". Die t3bersetzungen der Versbeispiele sind selten genau. Von den zahlreichen Fehlinterpretationen seien hier nur als gr6bere Entgleisungen genannt:

1.

~krodann ahvayann anyan adhavan mao(lalai rudan ga vdrayati daodena d.imbha~ sasyavatdrioi~ Jenner: "Laut schreit der Knabe die Kfihe an und liuft in Kreisen um sic herum, wobei er sic mit einem Stocke daran hindert, in die Kornfelder auszubrechen" (S. 61); statt richtig: "Schreiend, andere berbeirufend, im Kreise herumlaufend und weinend, (so) hindert mit einem Stock der kleine Junge die Kiihe, die in die Kornfelder steigen." 2.

~sid a~janam atre 'ti padyami tava locane bhdvivibh~a~asao~bhar~ s~k~dtkurve tav~k.rtim Jenner: "Wlihrend ich deine Augen betrachte, bemerke ich, dass sie geschminkt gewesen immer noch brauchbar, doch fehlt sie, wie so vieles andere auch, in der nur zwei Seiten umfassenden Bibliographie der "indologischen Primir- und SekundSxliteratur" (S. 3f.) des Verfassers. i = kartr.

REVIEWS

49

sein mfissen. Ich sehe deine Gestalt vor mir, in voller Pracht des kfmftigen Schmuckes" (S. 62); statt richtig: "Ich sehe deine Augen (und denke): Hier war Augensalbe. Ich stelle mir deine Gestalt vor mit der Last des kfmftigen Schmuckes."

3.

~d~ya v~ri paritab sarit~ mukhebhya.h Men t~vad arfitam anena durar.navena k$arik.rtaq, ca va(lavadahane huta.m ca p~talakukr vinivegita~ ca

Jenner: "Der Ozean hat das Wasser aller Fl~tsse an sich gerissen, abet was macht er damit, der Erbiirmliche? Er hat es versalzen, dem H611enfeuer geopfert und im H611enschlund verschwinden lassen" (S. 76); statt richtig: "Was hat dieser bSse Ozean denn gewonnen, nachdem er ringsum das Wasser aus den Miindem ( = Mfmdungen) der Fliisse an sich genommen? (Er) hat es gesalzen und ins unterirdische Feuer geopfert und in die Bauchh/Shle der H611e eingehen tassen." 4. Im Vers nUado~avrtamanasam etc. (S. 91) ist das Wort dora ganz falsch als "Verfehlungen" (start "Fehler", "Gebrechen") wiedergegeben;pittopahatab in der zweiten Zeile zeigt ausserdem an, dass hier mit dem Ausdruck dora auch an die medizinische Bedeutung dieses Terminus angespielt wird. Sehr unzureichend sind die Bibliographien sowohl zum indischen (S. 3 f.) als auch zum griechisch-rSmischen Teil (S. 5L). - Im Zusammenhang mit der Behandlung des gle,a (S. 147ff.) hiitte m.E. auch nochmals die gleaopama Dao0ins, die als solche vereinzelt dasteht, zur Sprache gebracbt und nea fiberpriift werden m~ssen. Doch, ala.m chidranve.sa.nena! Obgleich reichlich grossziigig sowohl in der Anlage als auch in der leider nun einmal unumgiinglichen wissenschaftlichen Kleinarbeit, fehlt es Jenners Arbeit auch nicht an Verdiensten. Die Seiten 125-127 enthalten sehr brauchbare Listen ftber die Reihenfolge der alar~k&as bei Bharata, Bhfimaha, Da.n0in, Udbhata, Vamana, Rudrata und Mammata. Manches Niitzliche steht auch in den "Bemerkungen" zum jeweils untersuchten alamkara des Abschnittes "Die indischen Figuren" (S. 128-294), dem Kernsfflck der Arbeit. Grundlegend seheint mir die Auseinandersetzung mit rapaka und samadhi, die man im allgemeinen allzu gem miteinander verwechselt, da es zu Unrecht gebriiuchlich geworden ist, das rapaka mit der Metapher zu identiffzieren. Einige gute Beobachtungen finden wir auch im Abschnitt S. 48-100, indem mancher Vergleich mit den Figuren der antiken Rhetorik ein sch~rferes Licht auf den einen oder anderen alartlkara zu werfen und dadurch unser Verstiindnis der indischen Poetik wenigstens zuweilen zu erleichtern vermag. Dass sich durch ein Vergleichen der alaeak&as mit der griechisch-r6mischen Rhetorik sehr viel mehr erzielen liisst, wage ich auch zu bezweifeln. Stockholm

Siegfried Lienhard

Hartmut Scharfe, Untersuchungen zur Staatsrechtslehre des Kautalya. Wiesbaden, Otto Harrassowitz, 1968. vii, 350 pp. DM. 58.00. Kautilya's Arthadastra is one of the world's classics, outstripping Machiavelli's II Principe which it resembles. It has a particular fascination for countries with totalitarian histories, and here we have the fruits of many years of detailed study from a scholar who appears to be a worthy successor to O. Stein, B. Breloer, and the extraordinary J. J. Meyer. The tone is more suited to our age: there are few flights of fancy and the glorious ipse coniecto, ipse opinor of the teuton (unhappily copied by so many Indians) is not as obtrusive as it might well have been in a study of a text bristling

50

REVIEWS

with patent and latent problems, and defying attempts to attribute it to an age and a region, let alone an author. A considerable indological background is necessary before any problem in Kautilya can be tackled, and the fact that Kautilya is the very apex of punditry does not exempt it from liability to be tested critically and objectively as if it were a practical as well as theoretical textbook. Scharfe is equipped with such an apparatus, and indeed some of his sources strike the reader at first sight as somewhat far-fetched. However the general impression is of thorough and painstaking research, printed and published with an impeccability we expect of this publisher. This book, for all its miscellaneous nature, dealing as it does with numerous loosely connected topics and themes, will remain a standard source for scholars of ancient Indian law and statecraft, and is a notable advance in many respects besides the tone referred to above. The book is in thirds, the first dealing with the text, the second with the structure of the State, the third with the degree of cultural development evidenced in the Arthaiastra. There is therefore something for everybody, and much for many. The first third exhibits the author's philological skill and aptitude (obviously considerable), the second his intelligence and originality in practical questions (this is the most successful part of the book and probably will prove to be its most influential), and the third his interest in broader social and philosophical questions. As a visiting card it is convincing, for the author's credentials are genuine: this reviewer does not have the impression that anything substantial is lost due to any possible isolation from the main streams of occidentaMndian indological research (Scharfe studied Kautilya in Trivandrum, for example); and the image of the dry-as-dust philologist which reigned for so long as the prestige-symbol of western indology, and had so unhealthy an effect upon its imitators outside Germany, seems now to be utterly shattered and dispersed. If Scharfe is the new-German indologist speaking we have now the best of both worlds. Scharfe is inclined to see in the Kautilya-citations in Bh~truci (probably seventh rather than eighth century) and Medh~tithi actual debts to Kaufilya and not to a predecessor of Kaulilya as Schlingloff suggested (p. 4). Like F. Wilhelm, Scharfe sees a connection between Kaulilya and the Kama-s~tra, but the point of this is not evident to this reviewer. A reconstruction of I1,5,16 with the aid of the Malay~lam commentary shows (p. 7) how much is still to be learnt about the text (even after Kangle) and how common-sense comparisons can be used effectively even with small manuscript support. Most of us would have excused Kangle's failure to use that commentary at the time he settled his text: but it is now evident that its testimony (of considerable age: p. 14) is of the first importance to any serious critic, and Scharfe is the first to point out that the Sanskrit text appearing in the edition of the commentary is not in the manuscripts at all, but inserted for convenience by the editor! This correction of Kangle was as necessary as it is lamentable. A careful comparison of cross-references (pp. 9-11) goes some way to establishing the originality of the text as we have it. Scharfe's comments on the discoveries of T. R. Trautmann, "The structure and composition of the Kauliliya Artha~tstra", Thesis, Ph.D., London 1968 (unpublished), based on tests utilising a computer, would be interesting to learn. Burrow, too, testifies to the general unity of our text ("C~oakya and Kautalya", A.B.O.R.I., 1968, 17if: the two are almost certainly unconnected against Sternbach); but perhaps editorial dexterity is responsible for this, since punditry and incompetence are not synonymous. Scharfe objects to Altekar's conjecture that surunga is an interpolation (p. 1 I), a sound point of view, well argued. But titles and colophons are generally suspect (p. 15), hence the attribution to Kaulilya himself is weakened. On pages 17-47 we find a highly detailed study of the text, directed to the question of its original form. The role played by the colophons in settling the prakara.na-titles

REVIEWS

51

is investigated: if the text were indeed from one hand the oddities demonstrated here would deserve such conjectures. Since large theories can be based on details of a formal character Scharfe's doubts as to the genuineness of the formal framework of the Arthagastra have a substantive value. Verses mark the transition from one topic to another, as in the Paacatantra (p. 46). The relationship between the verse and prose is dealt with on pages 48-75. Texts common to, or closely connected with, Manu and/or the Mahdbhdrata are discussed acutely: they could be later (p. 52). At page 54 Scharfe marvellously suggests that III,7,1f. is actually copied in great part from gloka-lines, and even VII,9,50 could be traced to such a source. Since an alternative theory is that Manu, Yajfiavalkya and other texts borrowed much from the Artha~astra or its sources, such ideas are most relevant. Scharfe finds the verse material the earlier, e.g. at 1,10,16 (p. 59). These and other cases are examined with great care and plausibility. A concept of the original structure was needed in order to appreciate properly the relationship and balance between verse and prose material, but the comments on individual passages (agreeing with Breloer rather than Kangle sometimes) have independent validity. A concentration upon II,10,6-37,57-62 as an example of material used by the author is most plausibly justified (p. 72), and only a versatile indologist could have followed up the hint discovered. The little "tractate" was based on Piioini and also K~ty~tyana. Next we move to the "traces of an Ur-Artha~tstra" (pp. 76-87). "KanIalya" (Scharfe prefers that form) belongs to the class of Vy~lsa, N~rada, etc., and is an ideal, not an actual author. Vi~.nugupta may indeed be the real author, writing prose (!); the satra was much richer than the bhd~ya (p. 87). On the language of the book (pp. 88-I12), and its haphazard use by lexicographers (pp. 113-115), Scharfe makes valuable contributions. Rare words do not alone prove great age. Use of Sluszkiewicz confirms the conclusion that careful analysis of the vocabulary must point to anything but a single period for the material, and even if anything is to be added to or, in some cases, subtracted from, the evidence afforded by the large number of words classified, the result is the same. Incidentally he~la (p. 108) is found in the manuscript of Bh~ruei apparently as he/a, but because of Bh~ruci's interest in the Arthaddstra we are not entitled to class it as certainly late - it may be an archaism, and Scharfe's note seems right. So far nothing conclusive has appeared (Scharfe will not, like Burrow, pin locality upon the use of a single technical term). The author now turns to content, first political and later social and philosophical. A review cannot due justice to the acumen displayed here. In general Scharfe is prepared to take Kau01ya seriously. He offers some new ideas on the ma.n~lala which are as intricate as any pan.glit could wish, and plausible. The study of dkranda/dkrandika is valuable. This reviewer would doubt whether dega-nikr can have the sense attributed at page 137-138, since the legal sense of nik~epa as distinguished from nidhdna would seem to be clear. The level of research is indicated by the convincing distinctions between mand.ala, vis.aya, dega, andjanapada which Scharfe employs. Pages 144-223 are nominally devoted to a study of the officials, especially the mahdmdtra, and a great deal of indology is woven upon this complex thread, including a discussion of the structure and organisation of the palace: this is obviously the most detailed treatment of the subject so far to appear. A small excursus on the word pracdra, which long puzzled commentators on Manu IX.219, makes a special contribution. The chapter on the spies is delightful and typically original: kdrpat.ika/kdpatika and sattrin in particular are convincingly elucidated. That Bharuci bears out Scharfe's reconstruction of a passage of the text is most gratifying. Economy, vegetarianism, child-marriage, and philosophical (logical)terminology (Scharfe compares Kaul/ilya with Su~ruta, Caraka, and even the Tolkdppiyam) round off a display of versatility. The chapter on references to, or rather relations with, countries outside India enables the author to tackle in depth some of the points which

52

REVIEWS

previous writers had used as arguments for the late dating of the Arthagastra. Again unfamiliar ground has to be trod, and again it is trod with admirable confidence. All in all, the various independent lines of research support a date for "the" ArthagSstra in the first century A.D. The reviewer recognises in this work an indication of a most important development for European indology. The Arthagastra is a book for non-indologists as well as indologists, for historians of thought as well as historians of Indian politics. Not only Indian tradition, as such, but cultural cross-fertilisation are themes very much ~t la mode at the moment. Real scholars of India's past must fasten upon one or more branches of Indian learning, one or more g~stra. The suitability of the (mainly) secular Arthagastra was always obvious, but is nowadays becoming more and more plain. Such devotion as Scharfe has paid to the text of the book, word by word, is bound to be repaid by the gastra itself. This reviewer believes that Hartmut Scharfe and his pupils will, God willing, produce not only yet another text of Kautilya but also the cultural commentary which still remains to be written around it. They will take long to do it, 1 but so much the better: heartiest congratulations to him, and in prospect, to them! School of Oriental & African Studies University of London

J. Duncan M. Derrett

Masaaki Hattori, DignSga, On Perception, being the Pratyak$apariccheda of Dignaga's Pram~.nasamuccaya from the Sanskrit fragments and the Tibetan versions translated and annotated ( = Harvard Oriental Series, 47). Cambridge, Mass., 1968. 265 pp. Die Werke Dign~ga's (ca. 480-540 n.Chr.), des Begrfinders der logisch-erkenntnistheoretischen Schule des Buddhismus, sind fast alle nicht mehr vollstiindig im Sanskritoriginal zu#inglich; das liegt daran, dab man sp~iter nach den Werken Dharmakirti's unterrichtete. Aus demselben Grund sind die zwei tibetischen (3bersetzungen (11. und 15. Jahrhundert) des Hauptwerks Dignfiga's, des Prama.nasamuccaya, recht fehlerhaft. Angesichts dieser Fehlerhaftigkeit kommt der Sammlung von Fragmenten in der philosophischen Sanskritliteratur des 6. bis 12. Jahrhunderts eine besondere Bedeutung fiir das Versffindnis zu. Wiihrend ein Rekonstruktionsversuch Iyengars (1930) als miBgliickt bezeichnet werden muB, ist es Hattori im vorliegenden Buch in befriedigender Weise gelungen, sowohl die wichtigsten Partien des Anfangs des 1. Kapitels des Praman.asamuccaya zu rekonstruieren, als auch ftir fast alle tibrigen Abschnitte das eine oder andere brauchbare Fragment zu finden. Er konnte sich dabei auf Vorarbeiten von Muni Jambuvijaya und E. Frauwallner stiitzen. Fiir die Gesamtheit des 1. Kapitels bleiben allerdings vorl~iufig noch die zwei tibetischen Obersetzungen maBgebend; beide sind kritisch ediert und durchlaufend einander gegeniibergestellt. Eine englische Erbersetzung, die in gutem Englisch geschrieben ist, vermittelt ein wirkliches Verst~ndnis des Gedankengangs. Alle Schwierigkeiten und historischen Beziige werden ausffihrlich in Anmerkungen besprochen. Sauber gearbeitete Indices erleichtern die Auswertung des Buchs. Hattori hat seit dem Jahr 1962, in dem er mit der Niederschrift begann - "Acknowledgements" (pp. IX-X) datieren vom August 1964 -, so viel ausfeilen und verbessern k6nnen, dab wir nun ein was die philologische Durcb.fiihrung betrifft tadelloses Buch vor uns haben (zu erwLhnen witre lediglich: p. 150,1 sollte "the desire ofpradhana" 1 We already have E. Brucker, Wirtschaft und Finanzen im Staate Kautilyas unter besonderer Beriicksichtigung der historischen und sozialen Verhiiltnisse (Diss. Wiirzburg, 1966).

REVIEWS

53

stehen und nicht "the desire of puru~a"). Auch die inhaltliche Begleitung ist ausgezeichnet. Aus der japanischen Indologie kommt hier ein Beitrag ffir die Gesehichte der indischen Philosophic, den man in seiner Bedeutung mit der Vaiieshika Philosophy von H. Ui vergleichen kann. Utrecht

T. Vetter

Mkhas grub rje's Fundamentals of the Buddhist Tantras. Rgyud sde spyi.hi rnam par g2ag pa rgyas par brjod. Translated from the Tibetan by Ferdinand D. Lessing and Alex Wayman. With original text and annotation ( = Indo-Iranian Monographs, VIII). The Hague, Mouton, 1968. 382 pp. This joint effort by the late F. D. Lessing and A. Wayman, now of Columbia University, must be said to be one of the more intersting works published in recent years. It once again brings into focus the important distinction between a crib and a translation. While a crib professes to give a faithful account of the letter of the original, a translation aims at attending to its spirit. The joint authors call their effort a "translation" but what they have in mind is a "crib", as is evident from their statement in their Introduction (p. 14). Moreover, it seems that the authors considered "faithful" to be synonymous with "queer". For instance, their translation of the term de-bzhin gshegs-pa'i snying-po by "Embryo of Tathfigata" (10. 95) is neither a translation because Tatl~gata is not an English word, nor is it a crib because snying-po in Tibetan never stands for "embryo" in either sense it is used in English ("offspring of animal before birth (or emergence from egg); thing in rudimentary stage"), but for "essence", "core", "heart", or "quintessence". The Tibetan snying-po stands for both Sanskrit garbha (which has many other meanings besides "embryo") and h.rdaya. The definition of snying-po, relating to these two Sanskrit words is according to the Bla-ma'i thugs-sgrub

rdo-rje drag-rtsal-las/ zhal-gdams lain-rim ye-shes snying-po 'grel-pa ye-shes snang-ba rab-tu rgyas-pa, fol 4b: snying-po ni/ garbha'i sgra-las shun-pa dang bral-ba'i snying-po rjen-par phyungs.pa'i don te/ tshig dang spros-pa'i shun-pa dang bral-ba/ redo sngags chos-tshul kun-gyi zab-don snying-por phyungs-pa'i dan yin-pas khyad-chos bzhugs-tshul bstan tel "snying-po stands for garbha, and has the meaning of 'essence' divested of all outer layers, standing there in all its nakedness; it is (that) which has been divested of its layers of words and propositions. Since it has the meaning of the profound meaning of all Sfitras and Tantras being present in its quintessence, it points out the presence of the (ultimately) patricular." On fol. 5a of the same work we read: snying-po ni hrdaya'i

sgra-las/ bcud dam mchog-la 'jug-pas sangs-rgyas sgrub-pa-la med-du mi-rung-ba' i lam-gyi mchog snying-rje ste "snying-po stands for hrdaya. Since this means essence or the supreme, compassion is the supreme path absolutely necessary for the attainment of Buddhahood." Certainly, to ignore what the Tibetans understand by their own language is a peculiar kind of being "faithful to the original Tibetan" (p. 14). The above is only an instance where the competence of the translators may be questioned. Other oddities are their "translations" of sasrava (p. 85) by "everything with flux" or of sarvadharm~.h by "all natures". Apart from the fact that such terms as "flux" and "natures" are ambiguous the translation of sasrava by "flux" may be correct for the Jains, but Mkhas-grub-rje was a Buddhist and understood his Tibetan zag-bcas as every other Tibetan would understand it - as "impure". Similarly, dharma means "nature" in the Ny~ya-Vai~e~ika system, but in Buddhism it invariably means "an entity of reality". Apart from these and many other mistranslations of single technical terms there is little evidence that the translators had any knowledge of the subject matter they tried to

54

REVmWS

translate. Not only do they seem to be innocent of any understanding of the philosophical problem discussed by Mkhas-grub-rje, the grotesqueness of their translation is simply unsurpassable. On p. 320 Mkhas-grub-rje gives a definition of the technical term las-rgya (Karmamudrt~) "It is called las-rgya because (a person) has become a woman as a consequence of the Karma in a previous life". The Lessing-Wayman rendering (p. 321): "by reason of acts of former lives, one flings himself on the body of woman and there realizes, hence the 'Action Seal'". To point out every "howler" would be tantamount to rewriting the whole "translation". In view of the fact that the translators were blissfully oblivious to or ignorant of Tibetan grammar, syntax and idiomatic expressions as is made evident by their failure to distinguish between 'grub, grub, sgrub and bsgrub, between nouns and verbs, as well as by their incredible procedure of converting the instrumental case in connection with stong-pa (in Sanskrit the instrumental with gftnya "devoid of") into a subordinate clause beginning with "because", one wonders what the purpose was in submitting a no-translation for publication. In the following I give a selected list of passages in substantiation of the above criticism. Lessing-Wayman Version p. 19, 12 It is maintained that between the time when he had finished collecting equipment for three incalculable aeons and the time of subduing Mara at dusk,... p. 19, 18 made manifest p. 19, 25 Nor do they maintain the promulgation of the Great Verhiele p. 19, 28 his knowledge was cut off,...

p. 21, 1 Nor, furthermore, do they maintain the designation "best apparitional body" for either the Dharma-kaya or the formal body p. 21, 9 The Sautrfintika say that [argument] is refuted by the fact that [in such a case] there is no immediate retribution for making the Tath~gata's body bleed with an evil intention

p. 29, 10 There are five Abhisa.mbodhi brought

Correct translation It is maintained that up to the time of his having finished collecting the equipment (for enlightenment) during a period of three incalculable aeons, and of having subdued M~ra at dusk, realized

Nor do they claim the Great Vehicle to be the Buddha's word. (bkar is the determinate case of the noun bka' and not a verb.) his awareness ceased to exist

Apart from the Dharmak~ya and the Form-Body they do not recognize even the designation "best apparitional body"

The Sautrfintkas say that the Vaibhfi$ikas, argument about such a heinous crime as making the Tathfigata's body bleed, bringing about an immediate punishment is refuted by the fact that the Buddha nature is both worldly and supra worldly. [See for an explanation of the problem involved Abhidharmakoga IV, pp. 78-79.] There are five Abhisa .mbodhis concerning

RENEWS about by dint of the magical exploits of the teacher who appeared first, and there are the five Abhisar0.bodhi brought about by dint of the procedure for the candidates who enter later

55

the magic exploits of the previous teacher and those concerning the practice of the candidates

p. 29, 18 the intrinsic purity of the sixteen kinds of of voidness of his own supreme state of thought

He comprehended the nature of his own mind to be of the sixteen kinds ofvoidness pure in themselves.

p. 29, 27; see also 30,16,31; 31,16,31; 33, 34 In addition, there is the procedure

As to the procedure...

p. 31 in equipoise he comprehended directly the freedom from adventitious defiilement in the voidness of his own supreme state of thought. In a subsequent attainment he saw directly that freedom from adventitious defilement in the voidness of his own supreme state of thought in the form of...

In equipoise he comprehended directly the nature of his mind to be voidness free from adventitious defilement. In the post-equipoise state he realized the nature of his mind, voidness free from adventitious defilements, in the form of...

37, 13 Clear-light of the [Absolute] Object

Real Clear Light

37, 14 illusory body

apparitional body

49, 4 that all entities are void in the sense of real production

that all entities have no real existence

49, 8 the imaginary is not really produced the dependency one and the absolute one are really produced

The notional does not exist in truth, but the causal and ideal do so

49, 28 that it is really produced

that it exists in truth

49, 32 by corruptions wich have had the appearance of a self

existed in its own right under the cover of the defilements

53, 4 the citta is void in the sense of real production, but in that voidness the supreme state of thought is called "intrinsically pure" 53, 24 "real production" (bden-pargrub-pa)

The Voidness which is devoid of citta as being something existing in truth, is called the nature ofcitta, intrinsicallypure.

"to be real"

56

REVIEWS

53, 21 "really produced (which pertains to the supreme state of thought) 81, 29 Dharmaskandha (Aggregate of the Law)

not existing in truth

Dharmaskandha (Aggregate of the entities of reality)

89, 19 of natures and personalities

of things other than the self and of self

91, 35 The Sv~ttantrikas maintain that there is no distinction between "absolute production", and "real production" not even in conventional terms, and that holding such a distinction amounts to dtma-graha (adherence to the view of self). They mean that "produced by fundamental ground", "produced by individual characteristics" and "produced by instrinsic nature" is not distinguishable that those are conventional terms, and that all entities are produced in conventi onal terms likewise.

The Svfitantrikas declare that there is no difference between "to exist ultimately" and "to exist in truth" not even in commonsense parlance. If one accepts such predicates as existents one accepts an ontological premise. "To exist by way of being present", "to exist by way of an essence" and "to exist by way of factuality" mean one and the same, and such existence is valid for commonsense procedures. All things ofcommonsense do exist in this way...

93, 14 maintain that form, sound, and so forth, have no entity apart from thought, that there is no external entity, and that a substratum of unconscious substance is not demonstrable.

maintain that form, sound and so on are not something other than mind, and that the assumption of an external object or of inert matter is unfounded.

103, 9 The deities created by his seal are the Progeny, as well as their transformations by him into other deities

The deities sealed by him belong to his Family. The same (definition) applies to the other ones.

141, 25 Then how is it that an occurrence of the Hierophants's Initiation in the Kriy~ and Carya Tantras is stated

Then how is it that the Hierophant's Initiation is stated to be found also in the Kriyfi and CaryS. Tantras?

147, 8 entrance vow

engagement vow

149, 35 Holding the vow of the Mind of enlightenment amounts generating the Entrance Mind and holding it ritually

157, 18 ...to have merely the intense contempla-

It is holding the vow of a Bodhisattva, and since it is identical with holding it through the ritual of the development of the engagement mind...

...merely to contemplate the existential

REVIEWS

tion of voidness of the natural state of things and the intense contemplation of the yoga of the winds,

57

mode of the entities of reality, i.e., voidness, and to contemplate the yoga concerned with the awareness of the vibrations (that are felt)

157, 22 enter, stay, and rise

enter, stay, and pass away

157, 25 of piercing the vital centers in the uncommon means body

the specific means which is to identify oneself feelingly with the divine body

159, 27 The Self-Reality is the contemplation that is free from such concepts as singleness and multiplicity by recourse to the reasoned formulations of the M~dhyamika; and which decides that one's own mind is void because accomplished by instrinsic nature

The nature of the self here is to be in a state of contemplation after having decided properly that mind is devoid of any essence existing as such, (a realization which comes by) applying the M~.dhyamika propositions and syllogisms such as absence of singleness and multiplicity and others

177, 25 make me joyful

Be pleased with me.

179, 20 Great Symbol

Great Pledge

195, 13 because he emerges in the fashion of an illusion, even at the time of giving up the watcb, he should not release his hold on divine egoity

Since he has risen in the manner of an apparition, even when terminating the period of his practice, he retains the feeling of divine transfiguration

156, 8 If one knows how to carry away the path of the Sambhoakaya of the Intermediate State, then he will know how to carry away the Dharmakfiya of Death; and if he knows these two, then he will also know how to carry away the Nirmioakfiya of Birth

205, 8 by the lake of the snowy range

When one knows how to make the intermediate State the path of the Sambhogakfiya, one comes to know how to make Death the path of the Dharmakfiya when the four Voids have been brought about as they happen to appear in the process of dying. When one knows both procedures, one knows how to make birth the path of the Nirrr~oak~ya. Gangs-chen-mtsho (This is a proper

nalTle.) 209, 1 wherein one concludes that one's own mind is void as regards accomplishment by intrinsic nature

The nature of oneself that has been determined to the effect that one's mind is devoid of an essence existing as such

209, 17 heart

mind

58

REVIEWS

211, 2 This is the habituation in the decisve knowledge that concludes through higher cognition that all things are void and not isolated as rgards accomplishment by intrinsic nature

This is to make the certainty that all entities of reality are void of an essence as determined by the syllogisms of absence of singleness and multiplicity and so on, continue

217, 15 shows the way of subduing the Tathfigata and the Tath~gata Family

shows the way relating to the Tathfigata and the Tathfigata Family

219, 4 was expressed for subduing the ordinary candidates

was promulgated in view of the ordinary candidates

229, 6 One should not overlook the meaning of impressing with seals; it is the method of intense contemplation of a god. The impression with the seals of the four seals must not transgress that method

Since the maening of "sealing" is not to transgress, to seal the method of contemplating a god by four seals means not to go beyond this method

233, 24 84,000 doctrines

the 84,000 entities of reality

235, 28 "Super-commentary"

The First Part of the Commentary

245, 13 While reciting Thatness

While reciting this (particular mantra)

251, 3 procedure in the meaning of the subject matter

the method of making a living experience of what has been discussed

253, 17 the unshared Explanatory Tantra

The specific Explanatory Tantra

259, 7 the introductory words teach the subject matter of the inseparability that there is no distinctionin what is intrinsically pure. It is said, "The thunderbolt of mind has this proclaimed: There are no varieties of intrinsic nature"

Since the introductory words are to point out the indivisibility of Beatitude and Void, the teacher said: "Cittavajra has declared: 'Essence has no differentiations' in order to show that there is no difference whatsoever concerningpure essence

263, 6 The equal entrance into

The union of

263, 31 added

thoroughly unites with

265, 26 one accomplishes the Illusory Body from

An apparitional existence is effected from

REVIEWS the five rays of wind riding on the four Voids 267, 31 pair combined beyond learning

264, 1 Those lacking skill in the means turn the wheel of phenomenal existence upon fulfilling the Intermediate State through the winds and mind only at the conclusion of the four Voids; the one holding the precepts of skill in the means knows how to carry away the Intermediate State's Sambhogak~ya, generated as the IllusoryBody accomplished from the winds and mind only at the conclusion of the Voids

418, 23 the complete characteristics of Initiation 301, 4 Whatever be the reason for doing it that way, his goal of purification in the void responds by holding him in Nothingness 321, 17 he contemplates and controls the saravrtimaya steps of Completion, which are the arcane state of body, of speech, and of mind phases of the Steps of Completion 321, 20 in piercing the centers of the body

59

five light rays which are the motility on which the four Voids ride

the unity ('ofthe Two K~yas, Dharmak~ya and Rfipakfiya) which is no longer a matter of learning

Those who have no knowledge of the means merely return into worldliness when at the end of the four Voids the Inmediate State deriving from mere motility and mentation has set in. Those who have the instruction concerning the knowledge of the means know how to make the Intermediate State that has been brought about as an apparitional existence affected through mere motility and mentation at the end of the four Voids appearing, the path of the Sambhogakiya the Initiationcomplete in every respect If one asks what is the reason for doing it that way, the answer is that the purpose of practising the void is held to be just nothing he masters the contemplation of the Steps of Completion (consisting of) detachment from body from speech, from mentation, and the apparitional existence as commonly understood In identifying himself with this divine existence

323, 10 tip of the thunderbolt gem

the glans penis

323, 37 It purifies all the appearances constituting defilements that hinder the awakening to the essential nature of Bliss-Void

It removes the impurities which hinder the whole of appearance to rise in its nature of Bliss-Void

327, 20 expansion

evaporation

333, 14 One takes as meditative object the winds and drop in the "veins" of the body that is only serf-reproduced and independent of figments by the cognition

One concentrates on the strneture, motility, and creativity of the (genuine) body in its mere existence as such regardless of the postdates of the intellect

60

REVIEWS

335, 12 he subsequently refuted by valid reasons the thesis of the Cittam~tra school positing the Reality of the Void subjacent to preceiver and thing perceived; and stated as the meaning that just as the thesis "Voidness of the Void because all natures are truly accomplished" is established in the Set of Principles

having refuted by valid reasons the claim of the Cittam~tra school of a principle of reality devoid of subject and object, and those theses that follow it, and having established according to the Treatises on Logic a Voidness which is devoid of anything making the entities of reality exist in truth

Since the original Tibetan text is now easily available it is hoped that a translation worth the name will soon be forthcoming. University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan

H . V . Guenther

R. L. Turner, A Comparative Dictionary of the Indo-Aryan Languages. Indexes compiled by Dorothy Rivers Turner. Oxford University Press, 1969. IX + 357 pp. In 1966 the last issue was published of professor Turner's life-work, which has since become the standard reference-book for all those working in the field of Indo-Aryan languages (see IIJ, VII [1964], p. 318ff.). The only task that remained to be fulfilled was the publication of the indexes of the 140,00 words quoted in the Dictionary. Few prefaces are so impressing as the words which he wrote down on October 5, 1968, as an introduction to this volume - - words in which he could declare his life-task completed: "As I lay down my pen on this my eightieth birthday, I reflect with humility that it has been granted to me to complete, however imperfectly, a project conceived fifty years ago; and I am filled with a deep sense of gratitude to all those whose names I set down in the Prefase to the Dictionary as my helpers, but above all to her whose love has supported me through all these years and who has herself been the principal agent in compiling this volume." It is, indeed, to Mrs. Turner that we owe this volume in which all the words quoted in the Dictionary have been arranged according to the separate languages. "From a letter written by my wife in the first year of our marriage 48 years ago and recently come to light it appears that she was already engaged in arranging the first collection of slips containing entries for the projected comparative dictionary of Indo-aryan. Throughout all our life together she has continued with a task which has culminated in the compilation of this volume." The last three pages contain "Additional Corrigenda to the Dictionary". The book is a monumentum aere perennius for the exceptional devotion of Dorothy Rivers Turner. F. B. J. Kuiper

William MeCormack, with the assistance of M. G. Krishnamurthi, Kannada, A Cultural Introduction to the Spoken Styles in the Language. Madison, Milwauki and London, The University of Wisconsin Press, 1966. XII -!- 204 pp. The present course in spoken and literary Kanna~la is, as far as I know, the first attempt of the kind to provide an introduction to an Indian language in such a way as to serve as fully as possible the needs of sociologists, anthropologists and other research workers

REVIEWS

61

whom a task awaits in some Indian area. The book stands out from previous similar works by its underlying idea. It is primarily based on the conception of the close relationship between a particular language and the culture of its speakers. The author is fully alive to the fact that any transposition of Western linguistic norms on the Kanna0a language is basically wrong. The chief task of the student, he argues, is to adopt and cultivate 'his KaunacJa cultural self'. Sentence patterns, exercises, and dialogues are accordingly so devised as to enable the student to train himself in this direction and to introduce him at the same time to the interests of the native speakers. On the other hand an endeavour has been made to meet the difficulties arising from there being no dialect of Kanna~la which can be considered to be standard. To solve this problem Professor McCormack has undertaken to create a kind of interdialect variety of KannatJa based on the dialect of Davangere city which could be used in all dialect areas. This 'operational dialect' is used in the dialogues. The course consists of twenty units, gradually proceeding from Roman to Kanna0a script, from English loanwords to pure KannaOa words, and from informal to formal (literary) language. The units I-XVII in each ease introduce some grammar points followed by manifold exercises written in Roman script. The remaining units are exclusively dedicated to dialogues in informal and formal language, and to speeches, all written in the Kanna0a alphabet. A Kanna0a-English glossary of common words is added at the end. The work is well done. The grammatical material has been systematically arranged, the exercises and dialogues are carefully chosen, the whole instructional plan is wellconsidered. A few remarks may be made. In the treatment of the sentence type adu y(nu, idu pustaka (I. 14) no attention is drawn to the place of the interrogative pronoun nor to the omission of the copula (as actually done in III. 1). Similarly in the discussion of the use ofkade (III. 13) no explanation is given as to why in the case of maidan b~ 'come to the field' the postposition kad.e is omitted (cf. III. 13 t.~billu hatra tMgu). In both cases it would have been advisable to give some short rule. Likewise, in VII. 2 (on the use of positioning nouns) a somewhat more general rule about the construction of attributive adjuncts (type halli mundin tOt.a nOdu) would have been appropriate. Not quite correct is the statement (III. 1) that adu and idu are composed of the ti and i stem, nor the remark 0IL 10) that in the sentence types idu bdda, idu b~ku the forms b(da and b(ku are nouns. In XV. 2 the verb form m~dali is inaccurately called an optative. The compound verbs are not explained (except in the case of bi(lu in IX. 6), in consequence of which the relation kutkolri / k~d.ri (XVI. 1) remains unclear. In the glossary a few errors have been overlooked: ~sakti 'interesting' (read: 'interest'); bala 'strong' (read: 'strength'); jOru 'strong' ( r o d : 'strength'); d(h)ila 'loose' (read: d,(h)ila). Incidentally, the glossary gives the well-known word id.li, but not its natural complement dose. Finally, agree as I do with the author's conception of the need of adopting a Kanna~ta cultural self, and with the instructional plan of the course as a whole, I do not understand why in the glossary the order of the Roman alphabet has been followed, nor why the word Kannaga is written throughout with dental d instead of retroflex ~/. The above remarks, however, do not detract from the merits of the book. Professor McCormack and his assistant Mr. M. G. Krishnamurthi have incontestably laid under a debt all those who want to learn the Kanna~ta language for practical purposes. Amsterdam

K. de Vreese

62

REVIEWS

Festschrift far Wilhelm Eilers. Fin Dokument der internationalen Forschung zum 27. September 1966. Wiesbaden, Otto Harrassowitz, 1967. 596 pp., 1 frontispiece, 18 pl. DM 140,--.

Die Sprache. Zeitschrift far Sprachwissenschaft, XII. Band, 2. Heft (1966): Festgabe far Wilhelm Eilers. Verlag der Wiener Sprachgesellschaft. Kommissionsverlag Wiesbaden, Otto Harrassowitz; Wien, Gerold and Co., 1966. Pp. 113-288. DM 20,--. While reviewing recently Oldenberg's Kleine Schriften (IIJ, XII, p. 224-6) I expressed my misgivings about the ever-increasing vogue of Festschrifte and advocated instead the publication of the Opera minora of eminent scholars. The two volumes under review, which constitute a tribute to Professor Eilers on the occasion of his sixtieth birthday, are not of a nature to make one change one's mind in this respect. The subjects treated are extremely varied and deal not only with Oriental studies but also with such subjects as European prehistory, German literature, and philosophy. The excellence of many of the articles makes one regret that they did not appear in more appropriate places, for instance in learned journals, where they would be more easily accessible to specialists. For technical reasons this Festschrift was published in two volumes. Both have been beautifully produced, especially the Festschrift far Wilhelm Eilers. Most useful are the detailed indices of words, names and subjects in the two volumes. A bibliography of Wilhelm Eilers' publications is to be found on pages 566-572 of the Festschrift. The Festschrift is divided into five sections: A. "Sprachen und Geschichte des alten Orients"; B ."Sprachen und Geschichte Irans und der TQrken"; C. "Semitische Sprachen und Geschichte"; D. "Arch~iologie und Kunstwissenschaft"; E. "Varia". They contain the following articles: A. Guillaume Cardascia, "L'ordalie par le fleuve dans les 'Lois Assyriermes'"; Muhammad A. Dandamajew, "Die Lehnsbeziehungen in Babylonien unter den ersten Ach[imeniden"; Godfrey R. Driver, "Isaianic Problems"; Georg Fohrer, "Wandlungen Jesajas"; Johannes Friedrich, "Zu einigen seltsamen hethitischen Pronominalformen"; Richard N. Frye, "Iran und Israel"; Walther Hinz, "Zu den Zeughaust~ifelchen aus Susa"; Hans E. Hirsch, "Die 'SQnde' Lugalzagesis"; Josef Klima, "Zu einigen Problemen der altmesopotamischen Gesetzgebung"; Wolfram von Soden, "Akkadisch guk~sum '(zylindrische) Tiara' und 'Versorgungslos'". B. Jes P. Asmussen, "Babai ben Lutf's jiidisch-persisches Elija-Lied"; Harold W. Bailey, "Saka ggandramata"; l~mile Benveniste, "Hommes et dieux dans l'Avesta"; Mary Boyce, "The Zoroastrian Villages of the JQp~tr Range"; Jacques DuchesneGuillemin, "L'expansion de baga"; Herbert W. Duda, "Ba~a - Be~e"; Otto Eissfeldt, "Rechtskundige und Richter in Esther 1,13-22"; Wilhelm Heinz, "Zur Idiomatik des Neupersischen"; Karl Hoffmann, "Avest. upa.mraOd#sca N. 53"; Helmut Humbach, "/~tur Gu~nasp und Takht-i Suleimfin"; C. M. Kieffer, "Apropos de la circoncision ~t Caboul et dans le Logar. Note de dialectologie et d'ethnographie afghanes"; Otakar Klima, "Gai9fim~fi mfiniyam~fi"; Wolfgang Lentz, "Um den 'Hausherrn' der awestischen Gathas (Yasna 45,11)"; Manfred Mayrhofer, "Probleme um Datuvahya-"; Jean de Menasce, "Probl~mes des Mazd6ens clans l'Iran musulman"; Hans Robert Roemer, "Die sel~uqische Eroberung Anatoliens in tOrkischer Sicht"; Jan Rypka, "Q~t'finis Rama~nijja"; Annemarie Schimmel, "Aus den Gedichten Maul~nft Dschalfiluddin RQmis"; Riidiger Schmitt, "Avest. -a~h5 im Nominativ Plural der a-St~imme"; Geo Widengren, "Zervanitische Texte aus dem 'Avesta' in der Pahlavi-Oberlieferung. Eine Untersuchung zu Z~ttspram und Bundahi~n"; Gernot Wiessner, "Zu den Subskriptionslisten der ~iltestenchristlichen Synoden in Iran". C. Franz Altheim, Ruth Stiehl, "Der Name 'l~z~n~"; Dietz Otto Edzard, "Zum Vokabular der Ma'd~n-Araber im siidlichen Iraq"; Wolfdietrich Fischer, "Ein Stiick vorklassischer, arabischer Kunstprosa in der Umm Ma'bad-Legende"; Hans L.

REVIEWS

63

Gottschalk, " R a ~ ' ibn I7Iaiwaund der theologische Einfluss am Hofe der Marw~niden von Damaskus"; Fritz Meier, "Das Volk der Riemenbeirder"; Ulrich Noack, "Die Bedeutung der Generationenfolge for die Epochenbildung in der Geschichte des Islam"; Rudi Paret, "Sure 57, 12f. und das Gleichnis von den klugen und den tOrichten Jungfrauen"; Otto Spies, "Ober Brieftauben im arabischen Mittelalter"; Anton Spitaler, "'Wiederherstellung' von scheinbaren alten vortonigen L~ingen unter dem Akzent im Neuaram/iischen und Arabischen". D. Kurt Bittel, "Einige Doppeliixte aus Kleinasien"; Klaus Fischer, "Der sp/itsassanidische Feuertempel-Typus im Obergeschoss eines Lehmziegel-Turmes in Afghanisch-Seistan und die indo-islamische Baukunst"; Friedrich Krefter, "Zur Steinmetztechnik von Persepolis"; Christian Pescheck, "Anregungen ffir den Pr/ihistoriker aus dem Sfiden"; Hans M6bius, "Die G6ttin mit dem L6wen"; Heinz RoosenRunge, "'Naer het Leven'. Zum Wirklichkeitsgehalt von Pieter Saenredams Innenraumbildern". E. Karl-Heinz Below, "Juristische Probleme in Schillers Balladen"; Franz Bernhard, "Zur Textgeschichte und Interpretation der Strophen: Dhammapada 294, 295"; Ernst Dammann, "Der 'inhumane Akkusativ' und das Applikativum der Bantusprachert"; Ernst Grumach, "Goethes Reinschrift der Hegire"; J. Erich Heyde, "Priorit/it des Allgemeinen. Erg~inzung und Vertiefung"; Martti Riisiinen, "Slav. xp~,rn, 'Meerrettich'"; Hans Steininger, "Ein lexikographischer Beitrag zum ersten Gesang des Shih-ching"; "Bibliographic Wilhelm Eilers", zusammengestellt yon Erika Eilers; "Index" Die Sprache, XII, 2 contains the following articles: Gernot Wiessner, "Wilhelm Eilers 60 Jahre"; Alfons Nehring, "Bedeutungstheorie: Ein fOberblick"; Frithiof Rundgren, "Kausativ und Diathese"; Klaus Matzel, "Ein althochdeutscher Grammatiker"; Wolfgang Meid, "Die K6nigsbezeichnung in den germanischen Sprachen"; Oswald Szemer6nyi, "Iranica II"; Vittore Pisani, "Armenische Miszellen"; Gfinter Neumann, "Zur chinesisch-russischen Behelfssprache von Kjachta"; Ewald Wagner, "Der Jemen als Vermittler/ithiopischen Sprachgutes nach Nordwestafrika"; "Register". Australian National University

J. W. de Jong

Ernst Waldschmidt, Von Ceylon bis Turfan. Schriften zur Geschichte, Literatur, Religion und Kunst des indischen Kulturraumes. Festgabe zum 70. Geburtstag am 15. Juli 1967. G6ttingen, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1967. viii + 501 pp., 1 frontispiece, 38 pl. DM 65,--. The bibliography of the publications of Professor Waldschmidt which has been added to this volume (pp. 479-487) gives clear evidence of his wide interest in Indian culture. Although the major part of his publications deals with the study of Buddhist Sanskrit fragments from Central Asia, his numerous contributions to the study of art, religion, history, and to the history of India are of no less importance. Therefore the appearance of twenty-three of his articles, first published in various periodicals, is to be highly welcomed. Four articles deal with the study of Indian art: "Wundert~itige M6nche in der ostturkistanischen Hinay~na-Kunst" (OZ, N.F., 6, 1930, pp. 3-9); "Die Entwickelungsgeschichte des Buddhabildes in Indien" (OZ, N.F., 6, 1930, pp. 265-277); "Londoner Entsprechungen zu einer Berliner Serie musikinspirierter indischer Miniaturen" (NGA W, 1962, pp. 175-201); "Die Stuckplastik der Gandh~raSchule" (Berliner Museen, 53, 1932, pp. 1-9); two with religion: "Religi6se Str6mungen in Zentralasien" (Deutsche Forschung, 5, 1928, pp. 68-99); "Das Paritta. Eine magische Zeremonie der buddhistischen Priester auf Ceylon" (Baessler-Archiv, 17, 1934, pp. 139-150); one with epigraphy: "Eine Schenkungsurkunde auf Kupferplatten des ~ilhh.~ra-Herrschers Cittar~ja aus dem Jahre 1034 n.Chr." (ZDMG, 90, 1936, pp.

64

REVIEWS

265-297); and the remaining pieces with the study of Buddhist Sanskrit fragments from Central Asia: "Beitr~ge zur Textgeschichte des Mah~parinirvft~aasfitra" (NGA IV, 1939, pp. 55-94); "Wunderkrafte des Buddha. Eine Episode im Sanskrittext des Mah~parinlrvS,n.asOtra" (NGAW, 1948, pp. 48-91); "Vergleichende Analyse des Catu~pari~atsfitra" (Festschrift Schubring, 1951, pp. 84-122); "Zur ~rooako~ikaroaLegende" (NGA W, 1952, pp. 129-151); "Zum ersten buddhistischen Konzil in R~,jagrha" (Festschrift Weller, 1954, pp. 817-828); "Zu einigen Bilinguen aus den Turfanfunden" (NGAW, 1955, pp. 1-20); "Die Einleitung des Safigitisfitra" (ZDMG, 105, 1955, pp. 298-318); "Ein Fragment des Sarpyukt~gama aus den 'Turfan-Funden' (M 476)" (NGA W, 1956, pp. 45-53); "Identifizierung einer Handschrift des Nid~masarlayukta aus den Turfanfunden" (ZDMG, 107, 1957, pp. 372-401); "Sfitra 25 of the Nidfinasarpyukta" (BSOAS, 20, 1957, pp. 569-579); "Das Upasenasfitra, ein Zauber gegen Schlangenbiss aus dem Salt~yukt~gama" (NGA W, 1957, pp. 27-44); "Ein zweites Da~abalasfitra" (MIO, 6, 1958, pp. 382-405); "Kleine Br~hmi-Schriftrolle" (NGA W, 1959, pp. 1-25); "Die Erleuchtung des Buddha" (Festschrift Krause, 1960, pp. 214229); "l:lber einder Turfan-Handschrift TM 361 fiilschlich zugeteiltes Sanskritfragment" (Ural-Altaische Jahrbiicher, 33, 1961, pp. 199-203); "Der Buddha preist die Verehrungswfirdigkeit seiner Reliquien" (NGA IV, 1961, pp. 375-385). This beautifully produced volume is a fitting tribute to a great scholar. May we express the wish that Professor Waldschmidt's untiring activity in the field of Indian studies will soon make the publication of another volume of similar nature an absolute necessity. Australian National University

J. W. de Jong

Otto Zcller, Problemgeschichte der vergleichenden (indogermanischen) Sprachwissenschaft. Osnabrfick, Biblioverlag, 1967. 151 pp. According to the preface this little book is the first of a series of publications dealing with "Problemgeschichte": "Sie [i.e. these publications] zwingen den Leser vielmehr letztlich zu einer eigenen Stellunguahme, und der Gewinn einer Lektfire ist weniger in der Vermittlung yon Detailkenntnissen zu suchen als vielmehr in dem Versuch den Zugang zu dem zu er6ffnen, was die Welt im innersten zusammenhiilt." As far as the present volume is concerned, the author has not been able to make true this rather presumptuous claim. His book is not more than a popular history of comparative linguistics. The only interesting feature is the photo-mechanical reproduction of some pages of the publications of scholars such as Gesner, Megiser, Scaliger and Rask, together with a German translation. The linguists whose work is summarily studied are Gesner, Megiser, Scaliger, Leibniz, Friedrich Schlegel, Rask, Bopp, Grimm, Schleicber, Schrader and Hirt. Among them only three are non-Germans: Gesner, Scaliger and Rask. According to the author, comparative linguistics culminates in the work of Hirt, who has definitely proved that the home of the Indo-Europeans is to be found in the great Northern German lowland plain. I believe that the following quotations will suffice to show the sentiments which have animated the author of this book: "Und zugleich hat er [i.e. Hirt] in der Untersuchung fiber die indogermaniscbe Ursprungsfrage einleuchtend dargelegt, wie nur Nordeuropa die Voraussetzungen in sich barg, eine Bev61kerung zu erziehen, deren Expansionskraft die indogermanische Ausbreitung volbringen konnte" (p. 147). "Kormte man um die Jahrhundertwende noch allenthalben Hirts These yon der weissen Oberlegenbeit bestiitigt finden, so haben wir jetzt erlebt, wie grosse weisse Imperien zerbrOckeln, wie fiberaUdie Farbigen ihre Gleichberechtigung verlangen, trod wie die weisse BevOlkerung trotz tier Wider-

REVIEWS

65

standsk~mpfe Hitlers und einiger Koloniall/inder auf dem Rfickzug begriffen ist" (p. 148). "Die fruchtbaren aber rauhen Gefilde des europiiischen Nordens zeugen ein sthrkeres und hiirteres Geschlecht als das zartere und verfeinerte Menschentum des milderen SOdens, und aus diesem Verhaltnis entstand die Dynamik unsrer - und damit zusammenhiingend - d e r Weltgeschichte" (ibid.). I do not believe that any further remarks are needed to characterize this book, but I must confess my astonishment at seeing such a publication make its appearance in the year 1967, more than twenty years after "Hitlers Widerstandsk/impfe". Australian National University

J . W . de Jong