Reviews Of Different Books

Catalog link: https://jainqq.org/explore/269334/1

Page #1
77 REVIEWS Beitrage zur Geistesgeschichte Indiens. Festschrift fur Erich Frauwallner. Aus Anlass seines 70. Geburtstages herausgegeben von G. Oberhammer (= Wiener Zeitschrift fur die Kunde Sud- und Ostasiens, Band XI-XIII, 1968/1969). Wien, 1968. 426 pp. The Beitrage zur Geistesgeschichte Indiens published on the occasion of the seventieth birthday of Erich Frauwallner contain thirty-three articles. Most of them deal with Indian philosophy. This gives a unity to this volume which distinguishes it from the usual type of Festschrift. A bibliography of the writings of Erich Frauwallner lists his publications but not his reviews except for three. Professor Frauwallner has made important contributions to the history of Indian philosophy. Most of his early articles, published between 1930 and 1937, deal with the works of Dignaga, Dharmakirti and Dharmottara. The study of Buddhist philosophical works, preserved in Tibetan translation, has proved to be of the greatest importance not only for the history of Buddhist philosophy but also for that of other Indian philosophical schools. During the last twenty years Professor Frauwallner has extended his interest also to earlier periods of the history of Buddhist thought, and his publications testify to the fact that he has extensively studied Chinese translations of Indian Buddhist texts. At the same time he has not neglected the study of the six darsanas and of later philosophical schools such as the Navyanyaya. His treatment of difficult technical philosophical problems is always lucid and his translations of very complicated texts are so clear and understandable that one tends to underestimate the problems which the translator had to solve. With regard to the history of the Indian philosophical systems, Professor Frauwallner has advanced from time to time more speculative theories which will have to be carefully examined by other scholars. Sometimes his critical sense seems to have been sadly lacking. The bibliography lists under the year 1941 an article, entitled "Die Bedeutung der indischen Philosophie". It contains the text of a paper, read in the autumn of 1942 in Berlin on the occasion of an "Orientalistentagung". The volume, containing the text of the papers, was published in 1944 by H. H. Schaeder. In his paper Professor Frauwallner repeated to a great extent the arguments which he had already advanced in a paper read in Bonn on the 30th August 1938 ("Der arische Anteil an der indischen Philosophie", WZKM, 46, 1939, pp. 267-291). Professor Frauwallner refers to the

Page #2
78 REVIEWS same paper in the first volume of his Geschichte der indischen Philosophie (p. 455) but without mentioning the fact that the introduction to this book omits entirely his former ideas on "wissenschaftliche Philosophie" and its creation by the Aryans. One would have welcomed a clear and unambiguous disavowal of these unscientific racist theories. Eight articles of the Beitrage deal with Buddhism. In "Verkannte MahavastuStrophen" (pp. 13-22), Ludwig Alsdorf reconstructs the text of 21 Aryas in Mahavastu I 2,15-4,10 and refers to Leumann's reconstruction which was published in 1952 in Japan by Shiraishi Shindo. Shiraishi Shindo has published in three "Hefte" Leumann's translation of Mahavastu I 1-193,12 (1952, 1957, 1962). The third "Heft" is not mentioned by Alsdorf (p. 13, n. 2). In the second part of his article Alsdorf corrects the text of III 58,18-59,1 and reconstructs a Malini stanza in III 61,16-18 (on p. 21,9 of Alsdorf's article 64, 12 must be corrected to 61, 12). In "Les idees sous-jacentes aux pratiques cultuelles bouddhiques dans le Cambodge actuel" Andre Bareau studies liturgical formulae used in present-day Cambodia (pp. 23-32). The ideas expressed in these formulas concerning the goods desired by the faithful, the beneficiaries of these advantages and the direct and indirect methods used to acquire these goods reflect magical and paganistic beliefs and Buddhist concepts which do not entirely agree with the doctrine of the Pali canon. In "Zur Interpretation der Pratityasamutpada-Formel" Franz Bernhard examines two different interpretations of the Pratityasamutpada in Prajnavarman's commentary on Udanavarga XXIX. 24, of which the first enumerates the members 1-7 and the second, ascribed to Katyayanaputra, the members 8 and 10 (pp. 53-63). According to the author the formula of Pratityasamutpada is a combination of two formulas, one beginning with avidya and the other with trsna. George Chemparathy examines and translates "Two early Buddhist refutations of the existence of Isvara as the creator of the universe" (pp. 85-100) :1. Yogacarabhumi (ed. V. Bhattacharya), pp. 144-145; 2. Visnorekakartstvanirakarana. The second text was published in Sanskrit and Tibetan by F. W. Thomas (JRAS, 1903, pp. 345-349) and by Stcherbatsky ("Buddijskij filosof o edinobozii, Zapiski Vost. Otd. Imp. Russk. Arx. Obsc., XVI, 1906, pp. 058-074). Stcherbatsky has also added a translation. The full'title is Isvarakarttvanirakstir Visnorekakartytvanirakaranam. According to Chemparathy the work was probably written by the Tantric master Nagarjuna who, in the view of A. Bareau and E. Conze, lived in the seventh century A.D. (cf. p. 91). The only reason for this ascription seems to be the fact that no scholar ascribes this work to Nagarjuna, the author of the Madhyamikakarika. It would be more prudent to state that the work is ascribed to Nagarjuna by the Tibetan tradition but that nothing is known about the author and the date of the work. Chemparathy's translation compares favourably with that of Stcherbatsky which he has not been able to consult. According to the text the Isvara produces that which exists (siddha), or that which does not exist (asiddha) or that which is both existent and non-existent (siddhasiddha). Stcherbatsky wrongly changes the text and reads atha siddham asiddham karoti instead of atha siddhasiddham karoti. He translates: "God makes that which is not existent to that which exists". Stcherbatsky's interpretation is untenable. Kajiyama Yuichi studies the dates of "Bhavaviveka, Sthiramati and Dharmapala" (pp. 193-203). He arrives at the following dates: Bhavaviveka 500-570, Sthiramati 510-570, Dharmapala 530-561.1 Kajiyama points out that the Kasyapaparivartatika was translated by Bodhiruci around 510 A.D. Therefore this text cannot have been written by the Sthiramati who lived in the sixth century as has been assumed by Ruegg (La theorie du tathagatagarbha et du gotra, Paris, 1969, p. 42). In "Der Nirvana-Begriff in den kanonischen Texten des Fruhbuddhismus" Kumoi Shozen examines the meaning of amata in canonical texts and the ideas of sa-upadisesa- and an-upadisesa-nibbana (pp. 205-213). David Seyfort 1 This date is not given by Kajiyama but see M. Hattori, Dignaga, On Perception (=H.O.S., vol. 47) (1968), p. 5, n. 25.

Page #3
REVIEWS 79 Ruegg studies the theories of "Arya and Bhadanta Vimuktisena on the Gotra-theory of the Prajnaparamita" (pp. 303-317). According to the author Arya-Vimuktisena's Abhisamayalamkaravstti is the oldest available commentary on the AA. It was followed in time -- and to a certain extent in wording also -- by Bhadanta-Vimuktisena's Varttika. The Sanskrit text of the first abhisamaya of Arya-Vimuktisena's vstti has been published by Corrado Penso (S.O.R., vol. XXXVII, Roma, 1967). The section on gotra is to be found on pp. 73-78,7. Bhadanta-Vimuktisena's Varttika has been preserved in Tibetan translation. In "Die Entwicklung des Ksanikatvanumanam bei Dharmakirti" Ernst Steinkellner studies the relation between the so-called vinasitvanumana and the sattvanumana in the work of Dharmakirti (pp. 361-377). The total structure of the sattvanumana is to be found for the first time in the Pramanaviniscaya. Several articles deal with different aspects of the Vedanta philosophy. Paul Hacker published in 1950 an article which has had a great influence on the study of Sankara and his philosophy: "Eigentumlichkeiten der Lehre und Terminologie Sankaras: Avidya, Namarupa, Maya, Isvara", ZDMG, 100 (1950), pp. 246-286. The same is likely to happen with his article "Sankara der Yogin und Sankara der Advaitin" in which he advocates the theory that Sankara was first an adherent of Patanjala Yoga, author of the Yogabhasyavivarana (Madras, 1952), and later became an Advaitin (pp. 119-147). Hacker points out the important consequences of this theory for the study of the chronology and the authenticity of Sankara's works. Also Mayeda Sengaku in his study of "The Advaita theory of perception" draws attention to similarities in Sankara's view and that of the Yoga system (pp. 221-239). According to the author Sankara's view of perception depends considerably upon Samkhya and Yoga views but possesses already the essential characteristics of the later Advaita theory of perception. Nakamura Hajime gives a bibliography of the translations of the different chapters of the Saravadarsanasamgraha and adds notes on the sources of quotations in the text: "Some notes on the Sarvadarsanasamgraha" (pp. 241-251). To the bibliography one must add E. Abegg, "Die Lehre vom Sphota im Sarvadarsanasamgraha" (Festschrift Windisch, Leipzig, 1914, pp 188-195) and Uno Atsushi's recently published translation of chapter III (Sekai no meicho, vol. I, Tokyo, 1969, pp. 399-427). Nakamura studies in detail the last chapter of the SDS which has not been translated. In "Die Theorie der Schlussfolgerung bei Parasarabhatta" Gerhard Oberhammer studies the theories of vyapti and upadhi in Parasarabhatta's Tattvaratnakara (pp. 253-273). Parasarabhatta is one of the most important Visistadvaita philosophers before Venkatanatha and lived in the second half of the twelfth century. His main work, the Tattvaratnakara, is lost but passages of it are quoted by Venkatanatha. His theory of inference was influenced by the works of Udayana and itself had an influence on Meghanadari's doctrine of vyapti. V. Raghavan compares several passages of "Bhaskara's Gitabhasya" with corresponding passages of Sankara's Gitabhasya and shows that Bhaskara quotes Sankara several times verbatim (pp. 281-294). He points out that Bhaskara also criticizes one or more other early commentators. Raghavan's article shows once again the importance of Bhaskara. An edition and translation of his Sutrabhasya by J. A. B. van Buitenen and an edition and translation of his Gitabhasya by Daniel H. H. Ingalls and Subhadra Jha are due to appear in the Harvard Oriental Series (cf. J. A. B. van Buitenen, The Adyar Library Bulletin, XXV, 1961, p. 268, n. 1). Let us hope that they will soon be published. In "Zur advaitischen Theorie der Objekterkenntnis" Lambert Schmithausen studies a passage of Prakasatman's Vivarana which contains three different theories (pp. 329-360). According to the author the first is perhaps due to Sankara, the second to Padmapada and the third to Prakasatman himself. Tilman Vetter examines the problem of the authorship of the bhasya on Gaudapadas Mandukya-Karika (GKBh), Sankara's polemic against Buddhist idealism (Brahmasutrabhasya II, 2,28-32) and finally the two kinds of avidya in his Brahmasutrabhasya: "Zur Bedeutung des Illusionismus bei Sankara" (pp. 407-423). He be

Page #4
80 REVIEWS lieves that the GKBh has been written by Sankara. According to him Sankara has proposed different concepts of the irreality of the world in the GKBh and the Brahmasutrabhasya. Finally, Sankara admits apart from an individual avidya also an avidya based on Brahman: "so ist doch die Theorie der engeren Sankaraschule, dass das Brahman Asraya der Avidya sei, in ihrer Grundlage bei ihm vorhanden" (p. 422). Vetter refers to Hacker's publications but does not mention Ingalls' articles on Sankara's polemic against the Buddhists and on the locus of avidya: "Sarkara's Arguments Against the Buddhists" (Philosophy East and West, III, 1954, pp. 291-306); "Sarkara on the Question: Whose is Avidya?" (id., III, 1953, pp. 69-72). The following articles concern Nyaya-Vaisesika doctrines. Gopikamohan Bhattacharya examines the section of the Tattvacintamanididhiti on samanyalaksana in "Raghunatha Siromani on samanyalaksana" (pp. 65-74). In "Jati et laksana" Madeleine Biardeau draws attention to the controversy between J. F. Staal (JAOS, 81, 1961, pp. 122-126) and B. K. Motilal (IIJ, VIII, 1964, pp. 85-95) concerning the extensional or intensional nature of the doctrines of laksana and samkara, and discusses the fact that jati "class" and laksana "definition" exclude each other (pp. 75-83). She concludes by pointing out that logical relations have to be studied in their own philoso phical context. Brahmananda Gupta studies briefly the "Story of the evolution of the concept of negation" (pp. 115-118). Hattori Masaaki examines the "Two types of non-qualificative perception" in the Prasastapadabhasya (pp. 161-169). The introduction of the idea of distinct and undifferentiated perception of the object itself is due to the influence of Dignaga. Karl Potter examines the meaning of the phrase astitvam ifleyatvam abhidheyatvam and its implications for the Nyaya-Vaisesika system: "Astitva joeyatva abhidheyatva" (pp. 275-280). The author concludes that "astitva, jneyatva and abhidheyatva all designate the same universal, since they apply to exactly the same individuals. Nyaya is clearly property-extensional." (p. 279). In "Textual Studies in the Nyayavartika" Anantalal Thakur shows the help which can be derived from a manuscript of the Nyayavartika from the Jaisalmir Jaina Bhandara for the establishment of a better text (pp. 379-387). The author announces a new edition of the Bhasya, Vartika, Tatparyatika and Parisuddhi (the Nyayacaturgranthika) in the Mithila Institute Ancient Text Series on the basis of manuscripts copied by the same scribe in or around Samvat 1501. Only one article deals exclusively with Yoga: V. M. Bedekar's "Yoga in the Moksadharmaparvan of the Mahabharata" (pp. 43-52). The author refers to Frauwallner's treatment of Yoga in the Epic in his Geschichte der indischen Philosophie, vol. I but does not make any mention of E. Washburn Hopkins' "Yoga Technique in the Great Epic" (JAOS, 22, 1901, pp. 333-379). Two articles relate to Bharthari's linguistic philosophy. Siegfried Lienhard studies the meaning of the terms sabdabrahman and vivarta in Bhavabhuti's Uttararamacarita: "Einige Bemerkungen uber Sabdabrahman und Vivarta bei Bhavabhuti" (pp. 215-219). For Bhavabhuti sabdabrahman is "das unentfaltete Wortmaterial", vivarta the "Dichtungen" as "dessen Entfaltungen". Gaurinath Sastri compares the monism of Bhartphari and Sankara: "Monism of Bharthari" (pp. 319-322). The importance of Jaina works for the study of Buddhist works is shown by Jaina Muni Jambuvijaya in his "A comparative study of the Utpadadisiddhitika and the Hetubindutika" (pp. 187-191). "The Jaina conception of deity" is studied by A. N. Upadhye (pp. 389-393). Three articles concern the upanisads. Jan Gonda explains one of the later upanisads, the Mudgalopanisad which contains a Visnuite interpretation of the Purusasukta (pp. 101-113). The introduction and annotations which follow the translation contain a wealth of information. Frank-Richard Hamm gives a carefully annotated new translation of Chandog yopanisad VI: "Chandogyopanisad VI. Ein erneuter Versuch" (pp. 149-159). Hamm refers to recent publications by Frauwallner, Edgerton and

Page #5
REVIEWS 81 Thieme. A carefully annotated Russian translation by A. Ja. Syrkin was published in 1965. Syrkin has been able to use W. Morgenroth's thesis: Chandogya-upanisad. Versuch einer kritischen Ausgabe mit einer Ubersetzung und einer Ubersicht uber ihre Lehren, Dissertation, Jena, 1958. According to Syrkin it contains on pp. 539-561 a "Literaturverzeichnis". In "Seit wann gibt es Philosophie in Indien?" Walter Ruben studies the materialism of Uddalaka and the idealism of Yajnavalkya (pp. 295-302). Different topics are studied in the following articles. Heinz Bechert studies "Eine alte Gottheit in Ceylon und Sudindien" (pp. 33-41). The Ceylonese God of Kataragama is identical with the South Indian God Subrahmanya or Murugan. His cult was already popular in South India in a prehistoric period. J. C. Heesterman's "On the origin of the nastika" studies the role of the nastika in the verbal contest (pp. 171-185). Dieter Schlingloff studies the enumeration of the parvans of the Mahabharata in a manuscript from Qyzil: "Fragmente einer Palmblatthandschrift philosophischen Inhalts aus Ostturkistan (MS. Spitzer)" (pp. 323-328). Additional information is to be found in Schlingloff's "The oldest extant Parvan-list of the Mahabharata" (JAOS, 89, 1969, pp. 334-338). In "The cult of the divine name in the Haripath of Dnyandev" Charlotte Vaudeville studies a sequence of 27 stanzas in old Marathi, dedicated to the praise and exaltation of the sacred name of Hari (pp. 395-406). The Haripajh is usually included in collections of Vaispava "abhangas", short poetical utterances of one single stanza on the theme of Vaispava bhakti. Australian National University J. W. de Jong K. L. Janert, R. Sellheim, H. Striedl, Schriften und Bilder: Drei Orientalische Untersuchungen (= W. Voigt, Verzeichnis der orientalischen Handschriften in Deutschland, Supplementband, 7). Wiesbaden, Franz Steiner Verlag, 1967. VIII + 87 pp., 32 plates. The German Society for Research (Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft) having decided to publish a catalogue comprising all the data about the Oriental manuscripts in Germany, the members of the executive committee met at two conferences held at Marburg in 1961 and 1965 in order to report on their studies and discoveries. The next year the various papers were published under the title Fortschritte und Forschungen bei der Katalogisiering der Orientalischen Handschriften in Deutschland, Marburger Kolloquium 1965 (= Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, Forschungsbericht, 10) (Wiesbaden, 1966). Moreover, the editor W. Voigt selected from these reports three extensive studies which lent themselves very well to their being published in the separate series of Supplements to the List of Oriental Manuscripts in Germany (see "Vorwort", pp. VII-VIII). This collection called Schriften und Bilder (Manuscripts and Illuminations) consists of the next contributions: K. L. Janert, "Studien zur indischen Schriftkunde und Religionsgeschichte: zwei fruhe indische Amulette" (Studies on Indian palaeography and history of religions: two early Indian charms), pp. 1-40, 6 plates; R. Sellheim, "Neue Materialien zur Biographie des Yaqut" (New sources concerning Yaqut's biography), pp. 41-72, 24 plates, 1 map; H. Striedl, "Die Miniaturen in einer Handschrift des judisch-persischen Ardasirbuches von Sahin (The miniatures in a manuscript of the Jewish-Persian Book of Ardashir by Shahin), Stiftung Preussischer Kulturbesitz, Tubinger Depot, Ms.or.qu. 1680", pp. 73-87, 2 plates. K. L. Janert discusses the purport of a small-sized and oval-shaped rock-crystal intaglio showing an image and a Kharosthi inscription (Museum for Indian Art, Berlin-Dahlem, catalogue-number I.C. 43.640), see pp. 1-35. He compares it with a

Page #6
82 REVIEWS similar rock-crystal intaglio bought by the late Dr. B. B. Whitehead at Rawalpindi fifty years ago, see pp. 36-40, cf.B.B. Whitehead, "Notes on the Indo-Greeks, par The Numismatic Chronicle, 6th series, vol. X (London, 1950), esp. pp. 230-231, and J. Ph. Vogel, "Seals of Buddhist Monasteries in Ancient India", Journal of the Ceylon Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society (Centenary Volume 1845-1945), N.S., vol. I (Colombo, 1950), pp. 27-32, esp. pp. 31-32. The solution of the problem depends on the interpretation of the Kharosthi inscription of the Berlin intaglio. Janert counts 13 syllables, the 8th aksara being slightly damaged whereas the remaining 12 characters are perfectly legible. Therefore in his opinion the inscription reads as follows: the-ta-ku-lam-vi-ha-ram Page #7
REVIEWS Kharosthi Inscriptions (Calcutta, 1929). Examples of the compound syllable dre are lacking. On the other hand Sten Konow's collection shows two examples of dra, viz. mudrasatasa (Plate XX, 10 opposite to p. 100) and Idradevaputrena (Plate XXX, 1 opposite to p. 157, 3d line). The second example shows the slightly curved type of dra, but the first one seems to represent the rather edgy shape that is peculiar to the final aksara of the Berlin intaglio. If completing the last-mentioned character by means of the oblique stroke representing the vocal e one gets an aksara which may be supposed to look similar to the one at the end of the Berlin intaglio's inscription. It would confirm Schlingloff's reading anyway. In the second contribution to Schrifte und Bilder R. Sellheim reports on his identification of the Berlin manucript, Staatsbibliothek, Stiftung Preussischer Kulturbesitz, Ms.or. oct. 3377, at present at Marburg. The manuscript appears to represent a copy of the second volume of Ibn al-Muwaffaq's grammar, the Kitab al-Mabahit al-kamiliya 'ala l-Muqaddima al-Juzuliya. The copyist himself was no less a person than the famous traveller and geographer Yaqut (1179-1229), which enhances the value of this manuscript a great deal. From the colophons it appears that Yaqut finished the copy only a few months after the original text had been completed by Ibn al-Muwaffaq. On the 10th of october 1223 A. D. he collated his copy with the original text in the presence of the author, who in his own person added to it a certificate, ijaza (see facsimiles on Plates VII-XI). Sellheim discusses the purport of the biography of Yaqut which al-Qifti, vizir at Aleppo, inserted in his biographical lexicon, the Inbah ar-ruwah 'ala anbah an-nuhah, immediately after Yaqut's death in 1229 A.D. (see facsimiles on Plates XII-XXX, of MS Topkapu Saray, Ahmat III 3064). Ibn Hallikan (+1282 A.D.), author of the Wafayat al-a'yan, is shown to have borrowed his Yaqut biography from al-Qifti (see pp. 66-72). A useful map is added giving a survey of the chronology and caravan-routes of Yaqut's numerous travels. In the third contribution H. Striedl makes it probable that the twenty-four illuminations of the seventeenth-century MS or.qu. 1680, Stiftung Preussischer Kultur Besitz, Tubinger Depot, are to be regarded as part of the manuscript itself as style and details point to the period of the Isfahan School's Successors. In illustration two plates are added, viz. Beshotan convenes the daughters from all the empire's provinces on behalf of Shah Bahman (Plate XXXI) and Shero's fight with the Wolf (Plate XXXII). Summarizing my impression I conclude that Schrifte und Bilder places at the reader's disposal a valuable collection of source material illustrated by no less than thirty-two plates showing facsimiles and objects of art. It will, undoubtedly, stimulate further studies in various fields of Orientalism. Rijswijk (ZH) P. H. L. Eggermont Oscar Botto (ed.), Storia delle letterature d'Oriente, Milano, Casa Editrice Dr. Francesco Vallardi, Societa Editrice Libraria, 1969. Vol. I, xxxix + 937 pp.; Vol. II, xxvi + 705 pp.; Vol. III, Xxxi + 905 pp.; Vol. IV, XXX + 871 pp. The publication of this comprehensive history of Oriental literatures in four big volumes has been achieved through the tireless efforts of Professor Botto who has been able to bring together an excellent team of scholars, both Italian and foreign. There is probably a work of similar scope in no other language. Interest in Oriental literature seems to be very great in Italy. The second volume of Le Civilta dell'Oriente (Roma, 1957) deals entirely with Oriental literatures and contains some excellent articles. The Storia delle

Page #8
84 REVIEWS Letterature d'Oriente is much more comprehensive. The articles dealing with the more important literatures are more detailed, but literatures of less importance have not been overlooked (for a detailed table of contents see IIJ, vol XIII, p. 67). For the readers of the Indo-Iranian Journal the most important volume is the third which deals with the literatures of India, Ceylon and South-East Asia. Almost half of this volume is taken up by Oscar Botto's history of the ancient literatures of India. It is an excellent and lucid survey in which no branch of Indian literature is omitted. Part I deals with Vedic literature, Part II with the epics and the Puranas, Part III with the Buddhist and Jain literatures, Part IV with classical literature and Part V with the technical literatures (philosophy, philology (grammar, lexicography, metrics, poetics), trivarga (law, politics, erotics) and sciences). An extensive bibliography (pp. 339-350) is added by the author. The second part of this volume comprises the medieval and modern Indian literatures (Indo-Aryan and Dravidian). The Indo-Aryan literatures (Bengalese and Oriya by John V. Boulton, Hindi by Ganesh Dutt Gaur, Assamese by Tarapada Mukherji, Marathi and Gujarati by Ian Matthew Paton Raeside) occupy pp. 351-555, the Dravidian literatures by John R. Marr pp. 557-626.' The penetration of Indian culture into Central Asia is studied in Mario Bussagli's article on IndoEuropean literatures of Central Asia (pp. 627-645). The literatures of Laos, Cambodia and Thailand are described by Solange Thierry (pp. 647-735). D. E. Hettiaratchi writes on Singhalese literature (pp. 737-761) and Wimal Dissanayake on modern Sinhalese literature (pp. 737-761). The volume concludes with the history of Malaysian and Indonesian literatures by Andries Teeuw (pp. 771-860). As to the other articles, mention must be made here of the article on Persian literature by Gianroberto Scarcia in volume II (pp. 243-452). This article contains a few pages on the ancient literatures of Iran (pp. 259-265). This is one of the few topics dealt with in greater detail in the second volume of the Le Civilta dell'Oriente in which Antonino Pagliaro wrote on "Letterature dell'Iran Preislamico" (pp. 301-344). Volume II contains also articles on the literatures of Pakistan and Afghanistan (Pashto) by Alessandro Bausani (pp. 581-657, 659-676). Volume IV contains articles on Burmese literature by Hla Pe (pp. 243-301), Tibetan literature by the late Marcelle Lalou (pp. 303-338) and Mongolian literature by Charles R. Bawden (pp. 339-379). In a collective volume of this nature no absolute uniformity can be expected. Most authors intersperse the text with excerpts and add a bibliography. Each volume contains an index of names of persons and literary works. The articles are illustrated by plates of which many are in colours. These four splendid volumes will be of great interest to all those who read Italian. They will be very much indebted to Professor Botto for having undertaken this exarting and arduous task and to the publisher for the care given to the material aspects of these volumes. Australian National University J. W. de Jong Hermann Jacobi, Kleine Schriften, Herausgegeben von Bernhard Kolver, 2 Teile. (Glasenapp-Stiftung, Band 4,1 + 2). Wiesbaden, Franz Steiner Verlag GmbH, 1971. XII + 1156 pp. Ln. DM 98.-.. The Kleine Schriften of Hermann Jacobi (1850-1937) is the fourth volume of the publications of the Glasenapp-Stiftung. The systematic bibliography, compiled by the editor, shows the wide range of Jacobi's interests which extended to many branches of Indology (pp. VII-XXII). His first publication, an edition of chapters III-XII of the Laghu-Jataka, was published in 1872. The last to appear during his life was his translation of Vasubandhu's Trimsikavijnapti (Stuttgart, 1932). During the span of sixty

Page #9
REVIEWS 85 years his activity resulted in a continuous flow of articles, monographs and editions and translations. It was of course not possible to reproduce all his articles, contributions to encyclopedias and reviews. The editor decided to omit the articles on poetics and aesthetics, which have recently been published by Hans Losch, and also editions and translations of Jain texts which appeared in periodicals. With one exception, Jacobi's review of Garbe's Bhagavadgita, reviews have been omitted entirely. Also omitted are the many articles, contributed by Jacobi to Hasting's Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics. However, almost all of Jacobi's articles, with the exception of the two fields mentioned above, have been included. They are systematically grouped together into the following sections: Sprachwissenschaft; Wortstudien; Metrik; Literaturgeschichte; Wissenschaftliche Literatur; Philosophie; Religion; Astronomie, Chronologie und Verwandtes; Inschriften; Verschiedenes; Nachrufe, Biographisches; Uber Hermann Jacobi. Jacobi's important articles on Prakrit, metrics, the epic, philosophy, Jainism, astronomy and chronology are all to be found in these two volumes. It is certainly superfluous to enumerate their titles because they are well-known to the Indologist. For the publications, published before 1920, the editor has based himself upon Kirfel's Verzeichnis der bis zum 11. Februar 1920 erschienenen Schriften Hermann Jacobis. Kirfel's Verzeichnis, which we have not been able to consult, seems to omitted the second of Jacobi's two articles on the Mitanni gods in the Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society: "The Antiquity of Vedic culture" (JRAS, 1910, pp. 456-464).1 One regrets that both articles are not reproduced here, not only on account of the importance of the problems discussed, but also because Oldenberg's reactions to Jacobi's theory of the Vedic character of the Mitanni gods ("On the Antiquity of Vedic culture", JRAS, 1909, pp. 1095-1100; "The Antiquity of Vedic culture", JRAS, 1910, pp. 846-850) have been included in Oldenberg's Kleine Schriften (pp. 802-812). The editor, Bernhard Kolver, deserves high praise for his excellent choice. One must also be grateful to him for the systematic bibliography of Jacobi's publications and the detailed indices (pp. 1133-1156). Australian National University J. W. de Jong .E. A. S. Butterworth, The Tree at the Navel of the Earth. Berlin, Walter de Gruyter & Co., 1970. xii + 239 pp with 31 plates. DM. 68, 1. In the concluding paragraph of this book the author writes: "This book has done no more than allude to the kingly, priestly and communal aspects of the Tree of Life and World Tree. Others have written on these matters with learning and insight. We have tried to say something about that inner nature of the Tree and its symbols of the centre of the earth and the light in the zenith which made it a figure of the source of life and the heart of the universe. It is a symbol with many aspects, and a number of forms, which could be used, like the Christian Cross, even by enemies as proper to the cause of either side ..." (p. 226f.). In 1966 Butterworth published a book on Some Traces of the Pre-Olympian World in Greek Literature and Myth. In the book here under review he still follows more or less the same track, his aim being to demonstrate that we must turn to Sumer and Akkad to discover the "inner meaning" of the Tree of Life. In that culture area the 1 Cf. L. Renou, Bibliographie vedique (Paris, 1931), No. 128-10. 2 "Some Ancient Jaina Works", The Modern Review, Dec. 1914, pp. 574-577; "Some aspects of Jainism", Mahabodhi 22, 1914, pp. 83-90; "The metaphysics and ethics of the Jainas", Jaina Antiquary 10, 1944, pp. 32-40 (see Karl H. Potter's Bibliography of Indian Philosophies, 1970, Nos. 4850 and 4931). On p. XI line 3 read: S. 67-78.

Page #10
86 REVIEWS tree had, according to him, two circles of meaning, an outer circle of ritual and public myth, and an inner circle of esoteric meaning with a background of shamanist ecstasy and the practice of yoga (p. 200f.). The author's main concern is, accordingly, to reveal this "deeper meaning" (p. 80), the "true nature" (p. 172), the "ultimate significance" (p. 176), the "inner nature" (p. 226) of this cosmic symbol and of many myths connected with it. The book focusses on Ancient Greece and the world of the Eastern Semites, where an explanation for the spiritual background of Greek religious concepts is sought. Much use, however, is made of the doctrine of the Indian KundaliniYoga, which in the author's opinion has its origin, more likely than not, in Western Asia (p. 197). The method of this book can be defined as "comparison" and "interpretation" (Deutung), and its character is, accordingly, entirely different from, e.g., The Tree of Life by E. O. James (Leiden, 1966), whose sub-title, An Archaeological Study, clearly indicates its divergent approach. An analysis of myths and archaeological finds (particularly seals) from Mesopotamia, which the author interprets in the light of what is known about shamanist religions in Siberia and Indian Yoga, leads him to explain the mountain and the Tree of Life as having originally been symbols of forms of supernatural or ecstatic discipline and experience. In the course of time, however, they became symbols of kingship and, as a result of this, the ecstatic discipline dwindled away (p. 148). The epic of Gilgamesh is held to be a story of paradise lost: Gilgamesh, by taking upon himself the Sumerian kingship, abandons the ecstatic experience of immortality for the secular duties of the ruler. Quite apart from the question whether this interpretation is correct or not, the reader cannot help wondering if the general approach of this book does not reflect, in this rather negative appreciation of worldly power, something of the mental atmosphere of the Western world in 1970. Every period is necessarily sharp-sighted (and accordingly blinded) in its own way. Anyway, this book contains a wealth of interesting material and even more interesting conclusions. Since, however, the major part of the material discussed by Butterworth is taken from fields which are not covered by this journal and which lie outside the competence of this reviewer, the latter can only confine himself to some marginal notes on the author's method, which cannot fail sometimes to provoke serious objections. 2. In the last half century or so, after an age of unsystematic comparison of religions, scholars have come to tealise that every religion should first and foremost be studied in the context of the particular culture of which it forms part. On the basis of such analyses there is, of course, ample scope for comparative studies. A return, however, to the wild guess-work which once brought "comparative religion" into disrepute would obviously threaten the scholarly character of these studies. It may be true that interpretation (Deutung) belongs to the very nature of the Geisteswissenschaften but this fact, far from being an excuse for subjective handling of the material, should rather be an earnest warning against the drawing of any ill-founded conclusion. The search for a deeper meaning, if not pursued with the utmost circumspection and a flawless method, runs the risk of being little more than a mere projection of the author's mental make-up on the ancient symbols. It is, indeed, the basic methodological weakness of the so-called humaniora that in this field the truth of a statement cannot be verified by an experiment and that many interpretations are inevitably arbitrary since they can be neither proved nor disproved. No reader of this book, whatever his admiration for the vistas it opens up, can be blind to the fact that many interpretations are mere suggestions, which are insufficiently based on facts. It is readily admitted that without some intuitive insight and empathy no results of material importance can be attained. Far too often, however, the reader meets with phrases like the following (italics mine): "It is clear in the light of the symbolism of tree and serpent, that in these stories Garuda represents the flight of the

Page #11
REVIEWS 117 ist in Wirklichkeit eine Verbesserung der Verf. gegen beide Ausgaben. Nach der Anmerkung scheint es Thakurs Text gegen paras tu der Erstausgabe zu sein. Glatte Textverbesserungen werden aber im Text sonst nicht eingearbeitet wie vacanena (p. 19, Anm. 18) mit der Erstausgabe gegen vacaneva bei Thakur, obwohl in der Ubersetzung die richtige Lesart zugrundegelegt wird. Oder asesani (p. 16, Anm. 10) gegen Thakurs asosani, wie die Verf. als Verbesserung vorschlagt, obwohl die Erstausgabe ohnedies die richtige Lesart hat. Eine schlimme Textverschlechterung stellt anyonyatvam (79,20 gegen Ende) fur anyanyatvam dar. Die Ubersetzung erweist sich dann auch als sinnlos, was aber nicht bemerkt worden sein durfte. Die wenigen Beispiele auf Grund von Stichproben zeigen, dass diese Textbearbeitung uns gegenuber der Ausgabe von Thakur keinen Fortschritt beschert hat, im Gegenteil. Man fragt sich, warum sich Verf. in keiner Weise um die anderen textlichen Zeugen bemuht hat, die geholfen hatten, uber einen blossen Nachdruck hinaus einen wesentlich besseren Text herzustellen. Leider ist auch von der Ubersetzung nicht viel Gutes zu sagen. Das kleine Werk ist ein typisches Beispiel fur den stark formal gepragten und logische Klarheit intendierenden Stil Ratnakirtis und ist ohne genauesten Nachvollzug des Gedankenganges und scharfste Beachtung des vorhandenen Textes vielfach nur schwer interpretierbar. Betrachtet man den Text nur als Anhaltspunkt um "comparative logic" treiben zu konnen, dann kann es, wie im vorliegenden Fall, geschehen, dass oft eine aus textausseren Quellen gespeiste Interpretation mit der moglichen sprachlichen nicht mehr harmoniert, sondern diese vielmehr so stark beeinflusst, dass man manchmal uber die Sanskritkenntnisse staunen muss, die so etwas erlauben. Die Ubersetzung bietet ein Kaleidoskop von Fehlern, die von problematischen Interpretationen des z.T. recht sproden Textes bis zu reinen Schlampigkeiten reichen. Besonders auffallend sind einige Falle von glatten Vergewaltigungen des Textes, fur die ich ein paar Beispiele gebe. 77,4f.: Der einleitende Vers ist ganz missverstanden. Vor allem ist nicht -rupini, sondern iha ucyate Pradikat - es liegt also nur ein Satz vor, nicht zwei -, und vaidharmyavati drstante ist kein absoluter Lokativ. Ratnakirti gibt hier keine Definition, sondern einen Sastrasarira-Vers. Ich wurde als Ubersetzung vorschlagen: "In der folgenden (Abhandlung] (iha) tragen wir die im [mit der Folge] gemeinsamen Fehlen bestehende, (auch] das gemeinsame Vorkommen implizierende Vyapti des Grundes 'Seiendsein' in einem ungleichartigen Beispiel vor," 77,7: ... iti svabhavahetuh wird ubersetzt mit "thus the reason is identity". Das sieht so aus, als ware stillschweigend die Lesart der Erstausgabe (svabhavo hetuh) ubersetzt worden, obwohl sie nur in der Fussnote - und dort als svabhavo -- erscheint. 78,8f.: Wenn ich die Ubersetzung des iti-Satzes richtig deute, verbindet sie ein Maskulinum mit einem Neutrum ("the reality (sattvam!) proved[?] lacking (vinivarta 8 Hier sind vor allem die Werke Jnanasrimitras zu nennen. Ein betrachtlicher Anteil des Ratnakirti-Textes ist durch entsprechenden Text bei Jnanasri gedeckt. Dazu kommt nun auch noch der 1968 endlich veroffentlichte Text des Nyayabhusanam, das Verf. aber offenbar noch nicht zur Hand hatte. 4 Als solcher ist er der logische Spiegel des Verses p. 62, 4f., der die Ksanabhangasiddhir anvayatmika einleitet. 6 Zur Ubersetzung von syabhavah durch "identity" mochte ich, auch wenn sie in der Fachliteratur seit langem gelaufig ist, hier nur bemerken, dass das Wort "Identitat, identity" im Zusammenhang der Logik der Dharmakirti-Schule nur als Bezeichnung fur eine Beziehung (relation) verwendet werden sollte und in diesem Sinn auch zu recht fur die Ubersetzung des Terminus' tadatmyam gebraucht wird (p. 52: "existential identity"). Der svabhavah als logischer Grund (hetuh) ist aber keine Beziehung, sondern eine logische Eigenschaft.

Page #12
118 REVIEWS manah]"), deutet das Absolutivum nivartya als Attribut im Lokativ zu ksanike ("in the transient momentary being"), liest visramyati statt visramayati und kummert sich uberhaupt nicht um die Syntax. Der die Einleitung abschliessende Satz (... iti sattvahetoh ksanabhangasiddhir apy anavadya) bleibt unubersetzt. 79,17: tatha ca samkarasya samksipto 'yam abhiprayah ("The preceding (!) is a conspectus of the opinion of Samkara."). Die mit diesen Worten in Wirklichkeit beginnenden Stellen sollen belegen, was zur Behauptung des Purvapaksa, der hetuh sei svarupasiddhah an Argumenten der verschiedenen Naiyayikas beigebracht werden kann. Dabei bezieht sich samksipta- auf das Verhaltnis zum Zitat bei Jnanasri (p. 18, 20-24), was ein Vergleich der beiden Zitate klar macht. 79,26: tad idam mata me vandhyetyadivat svavacanavirodhad ayuktam. Verf. ubersetzt "... that such (an objection) is meaningless [Anm. 55: "literally: 'I shall prove that to be useless'."], because it is a self-contradictory assertion." und ich kann fur diese seltsame Interpretation des Beispiels keinen Grund finden. 81,17ff.: Ausgehend von der vorgefassten Meinung der hier zitierte Vers musse die These des Siddhantin vertreten, weil er von Jnanasri stammt, lasst die Verfasserin den Uttarapaksa des Werkes schon hier beginnen und ubersetzt die einleitenden Worte (ayam eva codyaprabandho 'smadgurubhih samgrhitah = "Eben diesen Purvapaksa hat mein Lehrer zusammengefasst.") folgend: "Now we shall discuss that commentary communicated by our venerable teacher." Es hilft auch nichts, dass Ratnakirti den Vers am Ende seines Werkes nochmals bringt mit der Einleitung: tad ayam purvapaksasamksepah, denn das soll heissen "Thus we have explicated our revered teacher's dictum." Die Folge ist, dass der Vers inhaltlich in der Ubersetzung auf den Kopf gestellt wird. Das geht ganz einfach. Verf. findet in der ersten Verszeile dreimal na, obwohl das dritte na ein tena ist, und lasst ein te verschwinden. Auch der Rest des Verses bleibt unverstanden, weil er wohl nur in Kenntnis der logischen Struktur von Jnanasris Purvapaksa interpretiert werden kann. 81,28f.: Auch der den Siddhanta zusammenfassende Vers Jnanasris ist nicht verstanden, wobei der grobste Fehler die Auflosung badha-avidhi- sein durfte, wo eindeutig badha-vidhi- zu trennen ist (vgl. J 90,1: vidhinisedhavyavaharah). Diese Proben mogen genugen. Hier ist viel Arbeit verschwendet worden, weil sie nicht weit genug in das Material hineingefuhrt hat, weder sprachlich noch sachlich. Es war sehr verdienstvoll, auch ausserindologische Kreise auf diesen Text und seine. Problemstellung aufmerksam gemacht zu haben, aber die Gelegenheit eine Deutung vorzulegen, die Ausgangspunkt fur weitere Arbeiten sein konnte, wurde nicht genutzt. Es bleibt zu hoffen, dass die Verf. sich nicht entmutigen lasst, ihre Kenntnisse zu vertiefen, um die Erforschung dieser Literatur und philosophischen Problematik in Zukunft besser fordern zu konnen als es ihr mit der vorliegenden Arbeit gelungen sein durfte. Wien Ernst Steinkellner R. E. Emmerick, The Sutra of Golden Light. Being a Translation of the Suvarnabhasottamasutra (= Sacred Books of the Buddhists, vol. XXVII). London, Luzac & Company Ltd., 1970. xiii + 108 pp. PS 3. R. E. Emmerick's translation of the Suvarnabhasottamasutra is based upon Nobel's edition (Leipzig, 1937). Nobel used seven manuscripts, six of which are written on paper and one (G) on palmleaf. According to Nobel all six paper manuscripts derive from a common archetype. The text is much better preserved in the palmleaf MS. However, Nobel points out that of the 76 folios of this MS. 28 (1-7, 12-13, 16, 22,

Page #13
REVIEWS 119 27-34, 37, 41-43, 46-47, 49-50, 52) are missing. The writing has been obliterated in five of these folios (15, 18, 19, 23, 60) and subsequent retracing has resulted in wrong readings. The existing folios correspond to the following pages of Nobel's edition: 8-11 = 25.1-42.17; 14 = 52.1-56.12; 15+ (+ = writing obliterated and retraced) = 56.12-62.5; 17 = 65.10-67.13; 18+-19+ = 67.13-72.12; 20-21 = 72.12-77.9; 23+ = 79.11-81.10; 24-26 = 81.10-89.3; 35-36 = 106.14-113.3; 38-40 = 116.6 124.7; 44-45 = 130.16-138.10; 48 = 146.7-151.7; 51 = 158.10-162.6; 53-59 = 165.6188.9; 60+ = 188.9-192.4; 61-72 = 192.4-251. Even MS. G is not free from corruptions: especially in the verses, it is often almost impossible to arrive at a satisfactory text. Edgerton has severely criticized Nobel for inconsistencies in his treatment of Buddhist Hybrid forms (cf. JAOS, 77, 1957, pp. 184-188). However, Edgerton's criticisms hardly ever affect the meaning of the text as established by Nobel. Wherever the Sanskrit text is hopelessly corrupt, the Tibetan and Chinese versions are of great assistance. Therefore Emmerick is right in maintaining that it is quite possible to render the text adequately into a modern European language even though the words 'verderbt', 'dunkel' and 'unsicher and the like are alarmingly frequent in the apparatus of Nobel's edition. In the critical apparatus of his edition of the Tibetan version (Leiden, 1944) Nobel has made a number of corrections in the Sanskrit text. They have been listed by Emmerick in his notes. Moreover, Emmerick himself suggests some emendations based upon the manuscripts, and also on the Tibetan and Khotanese versions. Although the text as established by Nobel and corrected by himself and Emmerick is infinitely superior to that of the two preceding editions, there is still room for improvement quite apart from the inconsistencies pointed out by Edgerton. Emmerick has compared the Khotanese versions and an appendix lists the fragments previously identified and those which he himself has been able to identify. One would have expected the study of these Khotanese fragments to be helpful in suggesting emendations in the Sanskrit text, but in his preface Emmerick remarks that they require further study. Apparently it was his intention to translate the Sanskrit text first, before undertaking an exhaustive study of the Khotanese fragments. Two chapters of the text have been separately studied by Nobel: chapter 7, cf. "Das Zauberbad der Gottin Sarasvati" (Festschrift Schubring, Hamburg, 1951, pp. 123-239) and chapter 16, cf. Ein alter medizinischer Sanskrit-Text und seine Deutung (Supplement to JAOS, no. 11, 1951). Passages from chapters 6 and 12 have been translated by A. L. Basham, cf. Th. de Bary, ed., Sources of Indian Tradition (New York, 1958), pp. 181-185. This translation is not free from errors. To quote a single example: Nobel p. 74.10-75.1: ahoratram grahanakyatracandrasuryas ca samyak vahisyanti has been rendered as follows: "Planets and stars, moon and sun, will duly bring on the days and nights" (op. cit., p. 182). Emmerick translates: "Day and night, planets, asterisms, moon and sun, will move properly" (p. 28). The intransitive meaning of vah- has been rendered correctly by the Tibetan translators: gza dar rgya-skar dan zla-ba dan ni-ma yan fin-mts'an-du legs-par rgyu-bar 'gyur (p. 56.11-12). Emmerick has carefully compared the Tibetan translation which is of great help even in places more obscure than the one just mentioned. His translation is excellent and only very few improvements can be suggested. The following notes point out a number of passages or words which can be rendered in a different way. In a few passages the 1 The partial edition by Carat Chandra Das and Carat Chandra Castri (Fasc. 1, Calcutta, 1898) and the edition by Bunyiu Nanjio and Hokei Idzumi (Kyoto, 1931) have been reviewed by Nobel (OLZ, 1933, Sp. 572-575). The recent edition of the text by S. Bagchi in the Buddhist Sanskrit Texts (no. 8, Darbhanga, 1967) is based upon the edition by Nanjio and Idzumi but a 15 page appendix, entitled Errata and Variae Lectiones, lists different readings from Nobel's edition!

Page #14
120 REVIEWS text has to be corrected before a satisfactory sense can be obtained. All references are to page and line of Nobel's edition. P. 3.9: ganesvara - rather 'army chief' than 'chief servant. P. 5.4: uttapta - ripened'; 'purified as on p. 159.5 (Emmerick, p. 67.7). P. 24.11: nistrana - 'without deliverance'; 'without protection', cf. p. 53.1, 4 (Emmerick, p. 19) and Nobel, Worterbuch Tibetisch-Deutsch-Sanskrit (Leiden, 1950), s.v. skyob-pa. P. 29.2: karmavarana - 'acts (and) hindrances'; 'obstruction due to past actions', cf. Edgerton, BHSD (= Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit Dictionary), s.v. P. 38.10: nistrana - 'without salvation'; cf. above p. 24.11. P. 38.15: te sarvi sattva vyasanagataduhkhitani 'all those beings who are oppressed by the advent of trouble'; read vyasanagataduhkhita hi with MSS. ABCDEF and S (= Siksasamuccaya): all those beings who are oppressed and suffering'. P. 44.5: imaya parinamanavarnitaya - 'by means of this (Confession), which is praised (as a cause of) ripening'; Edgerton, BHSD, p. 323b with this (sc. desana) which is praised as a cause of ripening'. In his article on parinamaina Edgerton does not give the meaning 'transfer of merit', for which see L. de La Vallee Poussin, Bouddhisme, etudes et materiaux (London, 1898), p. 108 n. 1; id., JA, 1903, II, p. 439sq.; Pelliot, JA, 1914, II, p. 135; Har Dayal, The Bodhisattva Doctrine in Buddhist Sanskrit Literature (London, 1932), pp. 188-193; Nobel, Worterbuch, s.v. sro-ba. P. 48.7: sugatasasankasuvimalavaktram - 'He has the face of one who has attained bliss, pure as the moon'; read saumyasasarka" with MSS. ABCDE as against MS. F and Tib. bde-gsegs. Dharmaksema translates: "He has a face pure as the moon which is full" (Taisho, no. 663, p. 339b2). P. 48.9: tarunaruharga - 'the members of a newly-born'; tarunaruha can hardly mean 'newly-born', although Tib. has gzon-nu btsas, cf. Nobel's note, p. 48 n. 9. P. 63.3: uttamarga - 'the supreme member'; 'the head' (also p. 170.4). P. 65.2: sarvabhayaprabandhacchedakah - 'destroys the continuity of all fears'; Nobel remarks: "unsicher, die Korrektur wurde dem Tib. 'jigs-pa thams-cad-kyi rgyun gcog-pa entsprechen. ABDE sarvabhayapratisamanah; Cobhayapratisrambhena; F 'bhayaprasastena." Read sarvabhayapratiprasrambhanah 'allays all fears', cf. Edgerton, BHSD, s.v. pratiprasrambhana and Mahavyutpatti nos. 845 and 1383: rgyun bcad-pa = pratiprasrabdha. P. 72.17-73.4: sadhu sadhu maharajanah ... yad yuyam ... svastyayanam karisyatha - "Bravo, bravo great kings! ... If you ... give welfare"; "Bravo, bravo, great kings! ... since you ... will give welfare", cf. 88.14-89.3: sadhu sadhu satpurusa ... yat tvam ... samprakasayitukamah - 'Bravo, bravo good fellow! ... since you are desirous of making known' (Emmerick, p. 35). P. 80.18-81.1: maharajagunanusamsani - 'great blessings resulting from royal virtues'; read maharaja gunadeg, cf. 79.10 (ABDE maharajah), Tib. rgyal-po chen-po dug yon-tun-gyi ... Dharmaksema 'O, you, four great kings' (p. 342b12). P. 84.2-3: kiyanmatram kucalam pratyamsam - 'whatever was his share of merit'; 'only a small share of merit'. P. 98.9: etas ca maharajanah sutrendradharaka - 'And these great kings will sustain those monks'; 'And, O great kings, they will sustain those monks', cf. Tib. rgyal-po chen-po-dag ... mdo-sdei dbar-poi rgyal-po 'dzin-pa de-dag kyan. P. 100.15: yasya casti narapater visaye priyata - 'by that king of men in whose region there is affection (for it)'; 'by that king of men who has affection for his domain', cf. 77.12-13: atmanas ca sarvavisayam araksitukamo bhavet. P. 120.9: bodhayati - 'understands'; 'explains'. P. 138.4: sastrena nasa adharmas ca vinaye tu bhavisyati - Emmerick n. 62: "Instead of tu read yatra with MSS. ABCDE, supported by Khotanese kamina"; yatra is not supported by MS. G, Tib. and Dharmaksema and does not give a good sense.

Page #15
REVIEWS 121 P. 140.2: maram - 'defilement', n. 63: "Read malam with MSS. BDE(F), supported by Khotanese achei disease'", Dharmaksema 'epidemic' (p. 347c2) and Tib. 'chi death' probably render mari, mari or mara. P. 164.4: purastat - 'formerly'; Tib. 'og-tu = adhastat, cf. 164.5 urdhvam. P. 166.3: jambunadasuvarnasya vimanantarasamsthitah - 'residing in his orb of Jambudvipa gold'; 'residing in a palace of Jambunada gold'. P. 180.13-14: tenaivamrupena naimittikena dhatukausalyena pariprstena - 'as soon as ... had inquired about such skill in the elements', n. 91: "Read matrakena (cf. MS. G) for naimittikena with Nobel, Tib. p. 141 n. 119", read tanmatrakena (Tib. de tsam-zig) - 'having inquired about so little skill in the elements'. P. 185.6: tatradraksid vrksad ardhakayena devatam niskramantim - 'He saw there a goddess, with half a body, coming out of a tree'; 'He saw there a goddess coming out of a tree with half her body only', cf. Tib. lus-phyed tsam 'only half the body'. P. 196.11: ganaka - 'treasurer'; 'astrologer'. P. 206.3: avarjitamanasas - 'with humble heart'; 'with converted minds', cf. Edgerton, BHSD, s.v. avarjayati. P. 212.1-2: tayor vik sepam cakara - 'he reproached those two'; cf. Edgerton, BHSD, S.V. viksepa; here probably 'he distracted them'. P. 216.7: bhratska - 'mother'; 'brother'. P. 233.8: tisthanti te putra manapah - 'Your sons are delightful'; 'Your charming sons are alive', cf. Tib. mchis 'exist' and Dharmaksema 'your sons still exist' (p.356a27). * P. 249.9: tratam - 'delivered'; 'protected'. Australian National University J. W. de Jong Esther A. Solomon, Avidya - A Problem of Truth and Reality (=Theses Publication Series, 8). Ahmedabad, Gujarat University, 1969. XXVII + 572 pp. Die Leistung des vorliegenden Buchs besteht vor allem darin, dass fast jedes indische System unter dem zentralen Begriff des Nichtwissens beleuchtet wird und so eine Art Geschichte der indischen Philosophie entstand. An Kritik hingegen konnte vorgebracht werden: Die 1949-1953 erarbeitete (und erst 1969 publizierte) Dissertation hatte schon damals manche wichtige europaische Abhandlung vernachlassigt; inzwischen sind jedoch wichtige Arbeiten uber Teilprobleme, denen E. Solomon wie etwas Neuem gegenubertritt, erschienen. Ausserdem ist das Buch, wenn wir nicht von obiger Kennzeichnung als einer Art Geschichte der indischen Philosophie, sondern vom Titel selbst ausgehen, unnotig breit (typische Dissertation, wie sie in manchen Landern gefordert wird). Freilich muss dieser letzte Punkt im Falle E. Solomons nicht zur Kritik gereichen. Entgegen dem normalen Brauch verarbeitet sie namlich hauptsachlich keine Sekundarliteratur, sondern die Quellen selbst, und zwar der verschiedensten Richtungen, so dass man vor dieser Vielseitigkeit nur Respekt zeigen kann. Wiederholungen gleicher Gedanken in verschiedenen Schulen und damit etwas ermudende Breite, be sonders gegen Schluss des Buches, sind damit nicht ausgeschlossen. Auch die Nichtbeachtung mancher Sekundarliteratur ist bei dem gekonnten Umgang mit den Quellen im allgemeinen kein Nachteil, sondern eigentlich nur storend fur den Leser, der manche Ergebnisse schon anderweitig (insbesondere durch die Arbeiten von E. Frauwallner) kennt. Bei Zeitmangel und Materialfulle ist aber wohl die Entscheiding Solomons fur die Primarquellen immer vorzuziehen.

Page #16
122 REVIEWS Was den Inhalt betrifft, gliedert sich das Buch in Zwei Teile:I: "Avidya as a philosophical concept", II: "Avidya - logical and epistemological". Im ersten Teil werden in 23 Kapiteln (vom Veda bis Madhusudana Sarasvati) die Begriffe avidya und maya untersucht: fur die altere Zeit bemuht sich die Verfasserin um eine Bestimmung des Wortgebrauchs, bei den philosophischen Systemen notiert sie die Definitionen dieser Begriffe und beschreibt ihre Position in den verschiedenen Erlosungswegen und Kosmologien. Etwas schwach sind die historischen Einleitungen zu den verschiedenen buddhistischen Schulen (pp. 59, 125, 135, 139): unsere Kenntnisse sind heute doch wohl besser. Dies betrifft aber nicht die Ausfuhrungen uber Avidya selbst. Beachtenswert ist ferner, dass fur die Verfasserin der buddhistische Vijnanavada identisch ist mit dem Larkavatarasutra! . Zu den Ausfuhrungen uber Sankara ware folgendes zu sagen: Sankara kennt (zumindest im Brahma-Sutra-Bhasya) keine zwei Krafte der Avidya, eine avarana- und viksepasakti. E. Solomon weiss dann auch prompt - im Gegensatz zu den meisten andern Behauptungen - dafur keine Stellen beizubringen (pp. 147 und 235). Was sie dafur an indirekten Belegen bringt, ist ein Beweis fur zwei Arten von Avidya, die von Sankara systematisch noch nicht richtig verarbeitet sind (s. Vetter, "Zur Bedeutung des Illusionismus bei Sankara", WZKSO, XII-XIII, 1968, p. 407 ff.). Vor allem nach den seit 1950 erschienenen Aufsatzen von P. Hacker ist gegen die im ubrigen sachkundige Darstellung bei E. Solomon doch einzubringen: Sankara (hauptsachlich Kommentarverfasser und auf fruhere Kommentare sich stutzend!) muss an vielen Stellen mehr philologisch-historisch als systematisch untersucht werden. Im zweiten Teil des Buches behandelt die Verfasserin das erkenntnistheoretische Nichtwissen, den Irrtum. Im Vergleich etwa zu L. Schmithausens Studie zur Entwicklung der indischen Irrtumslehre in Mandanamisra's Vibhramavivekah (Wien, 1965), die sie naturlich nicht kennt, bemuht sie sich zwar bei weitem nicht so um eine Beschreibung der historischen Abhangigkeiten und Entwicklungen, bringt aber Material, das uber Mandanamisra hinausgeht (vor allem die mittelalterlichen Vedantaschulen), und gibt damit eine wertvolle Erganzung zu Schmithausens Buch. Zusammenfassend: Wenn auch Kritik im Detail - wie bei den meisten Buchern, die eine ganze Tradition behandeln - moglich ist, so verdient die Gesamtleistung doch alle Anerkennung. Und die klare Art der Darstellung macht das Buch auch zu einer empfehlenswerten Einleitung in die indische Philosophie. Utrecht T. Vetter Erich Frauwallner, Materialien zur altesten Erkenntnislehre der Karmamimamsa (=Osterreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften, Phil.-hist. Kl., Sitzungsber., 259. Band 2. Abh. = Veroff. der Komm. f. Sprachen und Kulturen Sud- und Ostasiens, Heft 6). Wien, Hermann Bohlaus Nachf., 1968. 114 pp. OS 148, Professor Frauwallner's latest publication contains text and translation of two important texts for the study of the theory of cognition in early Mimamsa: 1. Sabarasvamin's Mimamsabhasya I, 1, 1-5; Dignaga's polemic against the Mimamsa in the first and second chapter of his Pramanasamuccaya. For his edition of the text of the Mimamsabhasya Frauwallner has made use of three editions, four South Indian manuscripts and commentaries on the bhasya. His edition corrects many wrong readings in the existing editions and shows clearly the desirability of a new edition of the entire bhasya.

Page #17
REVIEWS 123 Frauwallner mentions Jacobi's translation of a small portion of the text and the complete translations by Otto Strauss and Ganganatha Jha. No mention is made of Madeleine Biardeau's Theorie de la connaissance et philosophie de la parole dans le brahmanisme classique (Paris-La Haye, 1964) in which many parts of this section of the bhasya are translated and discussed. Needless to say Frauwallner's translation is excellent. It is very convenient to have text and translation on opposite pages. It would be useful to have other important Indian philosophical texts edited and translated in the same way. Would it not be possible to publish a series of Fontes philosophiae indicae? The second part of this publication contains Dignaga's polemic against the Mimansa in Pramanasamuccaya I, 36-47 and II, 47-52. The text of both Tibetan translations is edited with the help of the editions of Derge, Narthang and Peking. As is well known, both translations are very unsatisfactory. Without an excellent knowledge of Indian philosophy it would be impossible to translate adequately the Pramanasamuccaya. It is very instructive to compare Frauwallner's translation of Pramanasamuccaya I, 36-47 with Hattori's translation which was published at the same time: Dignaga, On Perception (=H.O.S., vol. 47) (Cambridge, Mass.). There are only minor differences between the two translations. Hattori adds many words, in square brackets, whereas very few words have been added by Frauwallner. Hattori provides a detailed commentary (op. cit., pp. 161-172) which is extremely valuable. It is a good thing to have two such excellent translations of this text. Frauwallner's translation of Dignaga's polemic is followed by a study of his sources (pp. 94-103), in which he examines the theories of the Vsttikara quoted by Dignaga. According to Frauwallner this Vsttikara was Bhavadasa whose name is mentioned by Parthasarathinnisra and Sucaritamisra. On pp. 104-106 Frauwallner lists the quotations from the Vrttikara in the Pramanasamuccaya and the quotations from Bhavadasa in Sanskrit texts (see also Slokavartika I, 63 quoted by Hattori, op. cit., p. 166). According to him Bhavadasa probably lived in the first half of the fifth century. Jinendrabuddhi's tika mentions a Bhasyakara (bsad-'grel byed-pa). Hattori (op. cit., p. 167) thinks this Bhasyakara is identical with Sabarasvamin but from Frauwallner's remarks it is obvious that he must be a different person. In the last part of his work Frauwallner studies the doctrine of the Vrttikara mentioned by Sabara (pp. 107-113). According to him the doctrine of svatahpramanya was first proposed by the Vsttikara. He is also responsible for the long passage on the existence of the soul in the commentary on sutra 5. With other scholars (cf. Hattori, op. cit., p. 166) Frauwallner believes that Upavarsa is the Vsttikara. Finally Frauwallner supposes that Upavarsa's commentary is based upon the commentary by Bhavadasa. Australian National University J. W. de Jong Corrado Pensa, L'Abhisamayalamkaravrtti di Arya-Vimuktisena, primo abhisamaya. Testo e note critiche (= Serie Orientale Roma, XXXVII). Rome, Istituto italiano per il medio ed estremo Oriente, 1967. xv + 135 pp. 4.500 lire. This is a welcome and careful edition of approximately one half of a unique Nepalese manuscript of ca 1.000 A.D. The manuscript is rather corrupt, and the editor has regularly compared it with the Tibetan translation of the vrtti and the Sanskrit text of the first abhisamaya of the revised version of the Pancavimsatisahasrika as edited by N. Dutt in 1934. The result of his critical labours is a satisfactory text throughout. Vimuktisena (the Arya serves to distinguish him from the more shadowy Bhadanta

Page #18
124 REVIEWS V.) comments on both the Abhisamayalarkara (= AA) and the Pancavimsatisahasrika (= P) side by side. As for the first, it now becomes clear that Vimuktisena was Haribhadra's principal source and that the Aloka took from him much more than is indicated by the few occacions when Vimuktisena is actually quoted, and C. Pensa has everywhere noted numerous passages which have been absorbed by Haribhadra. Nevertheless the doctrine is, as one would have expected, here in a more undeveloped state, and, to give just one example, the elaborations of Haribhadra on the divisions of pratipattyalambanam (H 78-9) are here absent (pp. 78-9), as they are also in the Ta chih tu lun, and therefore constitute a late scholastic elaboration. As regards P, Vimuktisena has set himself three tasks: (1) He has coordinated the text of P not only with the divisions given in the AA itself, but with the hundreds of later subdivisions which must have developed at some time in the oral tradition and which agree in all details, except for a few trifling exceptions (e.g. at I, 2, 5), with the headings and sub-headings of the Nepalese manuscript of P.(2) He indicates the passage of P which corresponds to some item in AA by usually quoting its beginning and then summing up the remainder of its contents.(3) He picks out a number of individual terms and explains them. The commentary must have been addressed to an audience fairly familiar with brahminical Sanskrit and all the terms commented upon have some Buddhist flavour. In the present state of our knowledge these comments are the most valuable part of the work and teach us most about the thinking of the Prajnaparamita. Vimuktisena goes here often beyond Haribhadra, because he deals with words which occur in P, but not in the shorter Asta which Haribhadra had in view. Some of the lesser technical terms are treated at quite inordinate length and it is interesting that some of these uncalled-for excursions lead to the Yogacara tradition. At the end of a description of sastyargopetah svaro, two pages long (pp. 113-5), Asanga is expressly quoted as the source. Two pages on the five mithyajiva (pp. 23-6) are dragged in because, though absent in both P and AA, the explanation of the eight mahapurusavitarka (of P 21) contains the words alpeccha (cf. p. 23 1.19) and samtusta (cf. p. 25 1.19)8 and corresponds to the Bodhisattvabhumi and so does the explanation of the four dharmoddanani (p. 21), mentioned not in P, but in AAI 1, e 20. These observations do, as C. Pensa (p. XIV n. 2) points out, bode ill for A. Wayman's attempt to completely dissociate Asanga from the AA. There are a few very minor blemishes. Misprints have slipped through at 26,6; 40,21; 52,14; 60,25; 74,9; 77,8; 80,1 and 10; 90,11; 93,2; 106,14; 108,16; 112,7; 126,16 and 18. 126,15-18 should have been printed as verse. It is not quite correct to say at p. 70. n. 2 that "H ha vijnanam", when in fact one of two manuscripts, C, has the more probable vijnapanam. And in this age of microfilms, the quotations from later parts of P should have been made from one of the many Nepalese manuscripts of that text, and not from the Tibetan translation in the Tanjur. The long quotation on pp. 12-13, for instance, is from folio 476a-b of the Cambridge Ms Add 1628 and fits as V 6e, 1-3 into the scheme of the AA. We must hope that Dr. Pensa will soon bring out the second volume of Vimuktisena's work, which is such an important link in the unfolding of the Prajnaparamita literature in India. Edward Conze 1 See my The Prajnaparamita Literature (1960), p. 111. What I say there about Vimuktisena's vytti is only approximately true, based as it was on a few hasty glimpses of the Rome manuscript. : These are not just falsita, as C. Pensa says, but a monk's wrong ways of getting a living. In the lay-out of Pensa's text this far-fetched connection is not made very clear.