________________
78
REVIEWS
Nagao's interpretation the words bde-dan-ldan-par do not belong to the title of the sutra mentioned in the inscription.
The Tibetan inscription contains a stanza on the merit of erecting a stupa. Ligeti proposes to read this stanza in the following way:
[gan]-Zig stoń gsum rin-chen-gyis bkan '[pha] gs-pa-rnams-la phul-ba bas / gan-gis mchod-rten gcug-lag-khan 'am skyu-ru-ra cam bžeńs-su/ bde-gšegs sku-gzugs-nas 'bru cam-žig bžugs-su bčug-pa'i bsod-nams-[kyis] / Ches-cher khyad-par 'phags-pa yin žes Khan-bu brcegs-pa'i gzuns.
According to Ligeti (p. 244, n. 36) Nagao reads:
[re și]g stoń gsum rin chen gyis bkan [dgyes ?] pa rnams la phul ba bas / gan gis mchod rten gtsug lag khan ham skyu ru ra tsam bṣen nas su / bde gšegs sku gzugs nas ḥbru tsam sig bṣugs su btsug paḥi bsod nams [ni?] / chos cher khyad [par?] ḥphags pa yin şes [?] khan bu brtsegs paḥi mdo las gzuns /
Nagao's edition is found on p. 235 and not on p. 225. In line 2 Nagao reads bṣens, in line 3 bcug, and in line 4 gsuns. In a note he remarks that chos cher is a scribal error for ches cher. In Nagao's edition of this stanza each line contains 15 syllables but in Ligeti's edition the second line has 14 syllables and the fourth line 13 syllables. The Tibetan inscription consists of 24 stanzas of four lines and of 2 stanzas of six lines. Each line contains 15 syllables. It is therefore certainly necessary to read in line 2 bźens nas-su and in line 4 brtsegs-pa'i mdo las gsuns. Accepting Ligeti's reconstructions in line 1 I propose to read the stanza as follows:
[gan]-zig ston-gsum rin-chen-gyis bkan '[pha] gs-pa rnams-la phul-ba bas/ gan-gis mchod-rten gtsug-lag-khan 'am skyu-ru-ra tsam bźens nas-su /
bde-gśegs sku-gzugs nas-'bru tsam-źig bźugs-su bcug-pa'i bsod-nams-[ni?] / ches-cher khyad-par 'phags-pa yin źes Khan-bu brtsegs-pa'i mdo las gsuns/
Line three mentions the erection of a statue of the Sugata the size of a grain of barley (nas). Ligeti does not translate the word nas which he has completely misunderstood as is obvious from his transcription (sku-gzugs-nas 'bru cam-žig), although he correctly points out that the word barley is found in the corresponding Chinese (mai), Uigur (arpa) and Mongolian (arbay) texts (p. 247). The passage of the Khan-bu brtsegs-pa'i mdo quoted by Ligeti likewise speaks of a grain of barley (sku-gzugs nas-'bru tsam), cf. p. 248. In translating this passage Ligeti renders phyogs-bži'i dge-slon-gi dge-'dun "to the universal (caturdisa) congregation (samgha) of monks (bhiksu)" with "aux moines mendiants (dge-slon) et prêtres (dge- 'dun) des quatre points cardinaux".
The stanza relating to the golden elephant has been recently studied by F. W. Cleaves (The boy and his elephant', HJAS 35, 1975). In a note (p. 252, n. 49) Ligeti remarks: "En faisant la communication au symposium le 28 sept. 1975 (sic) j'ignorais encore l'article de M. Cleaves; les références à son étude ont été ajoutées ultérieurement à mon travail." The first line of this stanza ends on the word sudur but Ligeti points out that in the facsimile the sign for d is effaced. He proposes to read su [p] ur[van-i Jasa]] u "ayant réparé le stūpa". It is interesting to note that Pelliot had already suggested the reading su[p]urxan and had also indicated that the two last letters should be Ju (cf. Cleaves, op. cit., p. 39). This is not mentioned by Ligeti. The text of the corresponding Tibetan stanza is read by him as follows:
'di-ltar snon-gyi de-bžin-gšegs-pa Dga'-Idan-gnas-nas 'phos-pa-yi //
gnis-'thun gžon-nu'i mchod-rten dkar-rcis mi žig gsos-pa'i bsod-nams-kyis // skye-žin skye-bar mtho-da'i rigs-[pa] [gser-gyi] glan-chen žon-pa-čan // ... Žin [r] gyu mthar glan-[skyon] [že] s-bya'i dgra'-bčom go-'phan thob-par gyur //
Ligeti translates: "ainsi le Tathāgata d'autrefois descendit du ciel Tuşita, / un homme répara le stūpa du jeune éléphant avec de la chaux et par ce mérite / il obtint dans chaque existence une
