Book Reviews

Author(s): J W De Jong
Publisher: J W De Jong

Page 30

226
REVIEWS
other words, the work of translating begins with a recapturing of the insight which entered the consciousness of the 'seer' and which he communicated to his disciples, so that they too could participate in his experience” (p. 51). Probably no serious scholar would ever be prepared to claim that he has recaptured this original insight! The authors distinguish a Dynamic Equivalence translation and a Formal Equivalence translation and conclude that for an Indian text a Dynamic Equivalence translation is most appropriate, fitting well with the Indian tradition and setting (p. 84).
Chapter three examines commentaries on the Gītā both in Sanskrit and in vernacular languages, and contains an alphabetical list of Sanskrit commentaries. As the authors refer to several recent commentaries in Indian languages, it would have been appropriate to mention at least some translations into other languages which contain detailed notes and commentaries, for instance those by Hill, Zaehner and Tsuji.
The three remaining chapters present a bibliographical survey of translations into Indian languages, into English and into other languages. Information is given on the different languages into which the Gītā is translated and, in order to illustrate the ways in which the Gītā was translated, renderings of verses 1.1 and 2.47 are given in several sections. The supplementary bibliography (pp. 342-385) is meant to complete the lists of Gītā editions, commentaries and translations found in the respective chapters. In addition it lists many books and articles relating to one or more aspects of the Gītā. A very good general index is added (pp. 386–399).
The authors have modestly characterised their work as being limited to some introductory remarks and to a substantial survey of translations (p. 48). They indicate that the survey can be used for research in two directions: for a study. of translations of the Gītā in the early 19th century in both Indian and non-Indian languages; or for a study of translations made into one language, focussing one's attention on the development of that language over two centuries. As to how far . this second approach would be useful for the study of modern Indian languages, that must be decided by specialists. A chronological study of translations made in one or more languages might be of some interest for the history of Bhagavadgitā studies; it is therefore a pity that the bibliographies have been listed in alphabetical order and not in chronological order, although this is partially remedied by historical surveys.
Opinions of other scholars are profusely quoted, sometimes rather uncritically. For instance, the authors write: "S. P. Gupta and K. S. Ramachandran summarize recent opinion as follows: 'The Mahabharata war is a reality and not a myth... Astronomical calculations favour 15th century B.C. as the date of the war, etc." (p. 62). When they express their own opinion, it is not always possible to subscribe