Book Reviews

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

Page 20

230
REVIEWS
Śantarakṣita's Tattvasamgraha is a critical study of the different schools of Indian philosophy and has nothing whatsoever to do with Yogatantra.1 The text translated by Śraddhakavarman and Rin-chen bzan-po is an entirely different text, the full title of which is Sarvatathāgatatattvasamgraha. The Sanskrit text of it was recently edited by K. Horiuchi (cf. IIJ 19, 1977, pp. 125-127). The fact that Santarakṣita is depicted on a mural at Alchi is no sufficient reason to assume that his Tattvasamgraha was of special significance for the Kadampa order.
NOTE
1 Cf. David Seyfort Ruegg, The Literature of the Madhyamaka School of Philosophy in India (Wiesbaden, 1981), pp. 89-90.
The Prince Who Became a Cuckoo, A tale of liberation by the Lama Lo-drö of Drepung. Translated by the Lama Geshe Wangyal. New York, Theatre Arts Books, 1982. XXIV, 200 pp. $ 6.95 paperback.
The story of the prince who became a cuckoo is a well-known legend. The complete title in Tibetan is Byan-chub-kyi sems mna'-ba'i bya mgrin-snon zla-ba'i rtogs-pa brjod-pa 'khor-ba mtha'-dag la snin-po med-par mthon-ba rnams-kyi rna-rgyan, "Story of the bird mGrin-snonzla-ba who possesses the thought of awakening (bodhicitta), Ear-ornament of those who see that the entire transmigration is without essence." In 1937 Jacques Bacot translated a section of the fourth chapter (ff. 48b-55a) and edited the corresponding Tibetan text (La Vie de Marpa le "traducteur" suivie d'un chapitre de l'Avadana de l'oiseau Nilakantha, pp. 63-71 and pp. 108-115). Recently Dieter Schuh published a detailed synopsis of the story (Tibetische Handschriften und Blockdrucke. Teil 8, Wiesbaden, 1981, pp. 23-38). Schuh also presents text and translation of the prophecy on the writing of the story and of the colophons. The colophons were also translated by Jacques Bacot ("Titres et colophons d'ouvrages non canoniques tibétains', BEFEO 44 (1954), pp. 309-310). Schuh shows that the date mentioned in the colophon is 1737. Lama Geshe Wangyal states in his preface that the story was written in 1857. This is of course impossible because a Mongolian translation was published in 1770 (cf. Schuh p. 26). Both Bacot and Schuh refer to a blockprint edition of the text in 133 folios. Although many Tibetan texts have been published in recent years in India, Nepal and Bhutan, this text does not seem to have been reprinted. If one compares Bacot's and Lama Geshe Wangyal's translation on ff. 48b-55a, it is obvious that Lama Geshe Wangyal has not tried to translate accurately the Tibetan text, whereas Bacot's translation follows closely the Tibetan text. Lama Geshe Wangyal's translation is very free and omits phrases or parts of phrases. In some instances, his translation is entirely wrong. The chapter begins by telling that during the day (ñin-gyi dus-su) the king, the prince, the ministers, and the queens occupied themselves with amusements and with discussions on the Dharma. Lama Geshe Wangyal translates: "The days passed and the king, his son, the queens and ministers lived happily together, passing the nights in discussing the Dharma." When the princess Svarasvati and the prince Laganana are conspiring against prince Dharmananda, the followers of Makaradhvaja (i.e. Kāmadeva) gathered like clouds behind Laganana (de 'i dus-su chu-srin rgyal-mtshan-gyi sder gtogs-pa rnams-kyis la-ga-a-na'i phyi-na sprin-ltar 'thibs-te gnas-so). Lama Geshe Wangyal translates: "As she said these words, dark clouds gathered over the banners of victory upon the palace walls" (p. 77, lines 14 and 13 from below). Bacot's translation is not entirely correct: "A ce
Indo-Iranian Journal 27 (1984)