Book Reviews

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

Page 13

REVIEWS
239
Equally convincing are the results of Dr. Falk's study of the parallels, which he finds in the Mahābhārata and in the Jātakas, of the Pancatantra fables to which he devotes the major portion of his work (pp. 9-164). The relationship between the initial episode of the frame fable of the second tantra and Mahābhārata V, 62 has already been discussed. The genesis of what remains is assuredly the samvāda between the cat and the mouse in Mahābhārata XII, 136, as previously suggested by Walter Ruben. Palita, the mouse of the samvāda, is described as mahāprajña (XII, 136, 21) and thus he must be considered the prototype of the nitivid Hiranyaka.
The source problem of the first tantra, LION AND BULL, is not so successfully solved by Dr. Falk. The author of the Pañcatantra, in my view, has preferred to blend several fables into one: the samvāda of Mahābhārata XII, 112 and the emboxed fable which he would later cite, LION'S RETAINERS AND CAMEL (Pañcatantra I, 9). The latter has been studied in detail by Ruprecht Geib and to him we owe the discovery of this additional source text. A further parallel may be mentioned here: Tantrākhyāyika I, 13 (Der lüstige Schakal); cf. Geib, op. cit., 137-142.
The third tantra, CROWS AND OWLS, and its second emboxed fable, BIRDS ELECT KING, are closely compared by Dr. Falk with the Ulūkajātaka and Mahābhārata X, 1. However, it must be remembered that the oral version of CROWS AND OWLS was already current in an ancient era, for it is referred to by Panini (Astādhyayi IV, 3, 125, where he quotes the compound kākolūkika).
The three emboxed fables of the Pancatantra, I, 11; II, 2 and Tantrākhyāyika IV, 3, are shown to be related to Mahābhārata XII, 135, XIII, 124 and VII, 164, respectively, and although Dr. Falk's chapter on these is a brief one (pages 145-164), it may serve as a model of source studies.
Dr. Geib's ideas on the underlying motives of the author of the Pancatantra in the composition of his work are not enthusiastically received by Dr. Falk. Nevertheless, it must be admitted that the "friendship-enmity motif” cannot be ignored. As I see it, it supports well Dr. Falk's "Umkehrungstheorie". The first tantra deals with the impossibility of friendship; conversely, the second deals with the possibility of friendship, and then, the third tantra denies this by depicting the enmity between crows and owls. On the basis of Dr. Geib's friendship-enmity theory, the germ of which is expounded by Hiranyaka in the second tantra, it is now possible for me to arrive at a different perception of the Pancatantra.
The main concern of the author of the Pañcatantra must surely have been the exposition of a theory of polity that would assure the gaining and keeping the political control through defeat of personal and state enemies as well as through union with personal and state allies. How does one recognize one's enemies? The keynote of the first tantra is found in the following prose statement from LION'S RETAINERS AND CAMEL: Saspabhujah pišitāśinas ca visamasambandhah (associations between grass-eaters and flesh-eaters are incongruous). Samjivaka and Pingalaka should never have become friends, no more than the tiger and jackal of Mahābhārata XII, 112. Friendship between vegetarians and non-vegetarians is not possible; it is an example of krtrimam vairam, and it is well expressed in these words: aham annam bhavan bhokta katham pritir bhavisyati? (I am your food; you are my eater; how shall there be friendship between us?) Nor should there be friendship between those of different genus and species, even though their daily activity may be similar; cf. verse 51 of the second tantra. O Yet, in the event of the rise of a paddharma, an emergency friendship may be established, and thus the associations of Mahābhārata XII, 136 and those of the second tantra, which are examples of "Umkehrung der niti". Cohabitation in the same tree between crows and owls is inconceivable, for how can diurnal and nocturnal creatures become allies? It is in the light of this that one may better understand the third tantra. The friendship-enmity motif of the fourth tantra, APE AND CROCODILE, however, is not as readily discernible, since its basis is sexuality rather subtly presented. Of different species, the vānara (male) and the married śiśumāra (male) form a friendly relationship that must be destroyed by the wife of the