Book Reviews

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

Page 41

REVIEWS
237
It was written about 800 A.D. and translated into Tibetan in the eleventh century by Janārdana and Sa-kya blo-gros., Michael Balk explains in his introduction that the translators of the Udanavarga were guided in their rendering of the text by the explanations given in the UVV, the Sanskrit text of which they must have had at their disposal. He quotes two examples and refers to his forthcoming Ph.D. thesis for a detailed study of the relationship between the Tibetan translation of the Udanavarga and the UVV.
Balk's edition of the UVV was originally prepared for his private use, and in his introduction he briefly sets out the principles he has followed in editing the text and preparing the indices (Tibetan, Sanskrit, verses). His edition is based upon the Peking and Chone editions. From p. 525 onwards the Derge edition has also been consulted. Balk points out that his edition is basically a copy of the Peking edition. At the bottom of the page the variant readings of the Chone and Derge editions are given. It is therefore easy for the reader to adopt readings other than the ones found in the text. It is perhaps useful to give an example. In his translation of the Udanavarga (London, 1883) Rockhill often refers to the UVV in his notes. On p. 119, n. 2, he writes that the UVV mentions "a Brahman by the name of Utakatarga, who knew all the theories (sîdhanta) of the three Vedas, of the Pradjnaparamita, of Agni”. The passage referred to by Rockhill is as follows: u tka ta rga żes bya ba'i bram ze'i rigs byed gsum pha rol tu phyin pa ses rab med (CD me) dan dra bas grub pa'i mtha'thams cad mthon ba (712.24-26). Rockhill misunderstood this passage, which says that Utkatarga had mastered (paramimgata) the three Vedas and had understood all the philosophical systems by means of his fire-like intelligence. It is obvious that one must adopt the reading me which is found in the Chone and Derge editions and probably also in the Narthang edition which Rockhill consulted in the Bibliothèque Nationale in Paris. Without the help of Balk's edition it would have been a laborious task to find out how Rockhill arrived at this strange interpretation of this passage.
A few checks taken at random show that inconsistencies have not always been avoided. For instance, the name ka pi na chen po is twice written in this way (683.23 and 867.23) but once as ka-pphi-na chen po (1018.17), although the reading ka pi na is found in the Peking edition. In the index one finds sa sthi dza na sad ka, but the text itself has sa świ dza na sad ka (718.28). The first two words of a verse on p. 719 (line 29) are bśan gci but the index has bśad gci. These small flaws do not impair the usefulness of this edition which is beautifully typed and so much easier to read than the Tibetan blockprints. Prajñāvarman is also the author of commentaries on the Visesastaval and the Devatiśayastotra. A publication of these two works in the series Arbeitsmaterialien would be very welcome.