Book Reviews

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

Page 10

226
REVIEWS
R. E. Emmerick, The Siddhasara of Ravigupta. Volume 2: The Tibetan version with facing English translation (Verzeichnis der Orientalischen Handschriften in Deutschland, Supplementband 23,2). Wiesbaden, Franz Steiner Verlag GmbH, 1982. VIII, 482 pp. DM.
180,
Volume two of Emmerick's study on the Siddhasara contains the Tibetan version edited on the basis of three blockprints (Derge, Narthang and Peking), and an English translation. According to Emmerick, the Tibetan version provides an accurate interpretation of the Sanskrit original and is often clearer than the concisely-formulated Sanskrit. Special problems are connected with the identification of plant names. Emmerick explains the six ways in which the Tibetan translators dealt with the problem of rendering the Sanskrit plant names.
The English translation does not discuss the passages which differ from the original Sanskrit nor those which contain additional information. According to the introduction these problems will be discussed in the commentary. It is only after the publication of the commentary that it will be possible to go further in to details of the translation. In reading the first few pages of the translation one notes, for instance, that in verse 2 of Chapter 1 the Sanskrit text reads puruso vyādhy-adhisthāna-mahābhūta-gunātmakah. The Tibetan version seems to be based upon a slightly different text, i.e. puruso vyadhy-adhisthānam mahābhūtagunārmakaḥ. In verse 10 of the same chapter the Sanskrit text has: dosa-dhātu-maladharo dehino deha ucyate. The Tibetan translation is rendered by Emmerick as follows: "As for the body (deha), which is the place of residence (ädhäro) of the humours (dosa-), the elements (dhātu-), and the impurities (mala-), it is called (ucyate) the body (deha)." One wonders whether the Tibetan translator misunderstood the word dehino in the Sanskrit text or preferred to give a different interpretation. In other instances neither the Sanskrit text nor the Tibetan translation are completely clear. For instance, in verse 30 of the same chapter, the Sanskrit text has the word sad-ātma-vän and the Tibetan version ran-nams dan Idan-pa. Emmerick translates this term, which I have not been able to find either in Sanskrit or in Tibetan lexicons, by possesses selfcontrol'. In verse 32 Tibetan bag-yod-pa corresponds in the usual way to Sanskrit apramatta, only it is not clear why Emmerick prefers the rendering 'respectful' to 'careful'.
In his edition of the first five chapters of Vāgbhata's Astänga-hrda yasam hita, Claus Vogel announced his intention to publish a trilingual glossary of the medical terminology. However, since the publication of the first volume of Vogel's work in 1965, no more has appeared. It is to be hoped that Emmerick, who in a very short time has published the complete Sanskrit and Tibetan texts of the Siddhasara and an English translation, will envisage the compilation of such a trilingual glossary. In his preface, Emmerick announces that Rahul Peter Das is already working on a project designed to index all the main Sanskrit medical works.
Emmerick's edition and translation of the Tibetan version of the Siddhasāra is a major contribution to the study of Indian and Tibetan medicine. We are eagerly looking forward to the publication of the Khotanese and Uighur fragments and of the commentary. This enormous undertaking could not have been placed in better hands!
NOTE
1 In Sumatiratna's dictionary, rar-bzin, 'own-nature', is given as an equivalent for ran-nams.
Indo-Iranian Journal 28 (1985).