Indian Antiquary Vol 35

Author(s): Richard Carnac Temple
Publisher: Swati Publications

Page 11

JANUARY, 1906.) KHAROSTRA AND THE KHAROSTRI WRITING.
the Fan-yu-tra-ming (p. 88*) renders the same Chinese word (lou), ngo-lo-ra, that is, garda, an incomplete form of gardabha. The Fou-kiao-theu-tien (p. 36) quotes l'ia-li, bushel = khari, and k'ia-lou, the tenth of a bushel = khara. One of the clearest examples occurring in the Yin-yi of Hionen-ying, Chap. L, is the rhinoceros [=khadga). Thus in the case of k'ia-lou-chou . . . no transcription can be accepted, having other than an aspirated guttural as the initial letter; the same may be said with even more certainty (if that could be) where a word is reproduced by the author of a Yin-yi (561) professing to represent the written sounds in a scientific way, uninfluenced by the alterations often inherent in oral transmission.7
The character lou does not call for discussion ; it represents the liquid followed by a labial vowel. On the other hand the character chou, according to M. Franke, lends itself to a transcription differing from nine. "Among the divers pronunciations of this sign," he says, "the dictionary of K'ang-hi gives, beside the sounds ohou and chouo (Cantonese : chok) two sounds, both of which have a final nasal (soung and sun). It is evident from this that the said sound chou had a nasal element at the end or, at least, could have one'; this sign therefore was fitted to represent a Sanskrit ano rather than another sign chou, which, according to Kang-hi, had no nasal sound." As this is purely a question of Chinese philology I will let the Sinologists speak for themselves. M. Pelliot replies (Bulletin, III. 479-480): “It is none the less a fact, I fear, that shou is not in any case pronounced with a final nasal. Certainly the Kang-hi-trei-tien says that chou is pronounced in certain cases like the character which M. Franke transcribes song ; but to this last character belong, in reality, a whole series of pronunciations : seou, sou, chou, song, and the K'ang-hi states very distinctly that if our chou is sometimes prononnced like the other chou, it is because the latter character is pronounced chouang) (y)u, that is to say chou ... It is the same with another sign which M. Franke reads siuan. Such is, in fact, the ordinary pronunciation of the character, but there is also a subsidiary pronunciation (ong) (ts') iu = siu, and K'ang-hi here again lays down the rule that chou is pronounced like siuan when this last character is pronounced sit. Conseqnently chou can in no case be pronounced with a final nasal.” Confining myself to the field of transcription from the Sanskrit, I can put before M. Franke a fact which will doubtless convince him in the Yinyi in which Honei-yuan gives the transcription K'ia-lou-chou-tan-le, this same character chou is employed in the body of a word which can be restored withogt difficulty (Kor. 129* = Ch. 1476). The text of the Avatamsaka has Mo-lo-ti-kouo, kingdom of Mo-lo-ti. Houei-yuan adds the gloss : “It is the Mo-lo-ye-ts-chow; Mo-lo-ye is the name of a mountain ; ti-chou is the interior. It is said: that in the interior of this kingdom is the mountain Mo-lo-ye; hence its name." The Sanskrit then is Malayadeco in which chou represents the palatal sibilant followed by a labial vowel.
(552] The transcription 'chou-tan-le, employed here by Houei-yuan, is not the normal transcription of the Sanskrit group stra, I willingly admit: we should rather expect to find, as the Chinese equivalent, cho tch'a lo; the first two chö-tch'a may be found almost uniformly serving to reproduce the Sanskrit cerebrals and ţ. Here again it is sufficient, so numerous are the examples, to refer to Julien's Méthode (No. 1554) and the Index to Hionen-tsang. The group etra is rare in Sanskrit and not often to be found in the transcriptions. Still I have been able to find some. The To-lo-ni-tseu-tien contains wou-cho-tch'a-lo, translated camel = litra, or tan-cho-tch'a-lo or neny-chatoh'a-lo, translated tooth = damstră. The Fan-yi-ming-yin-yi-tsi (XVIII. 10) gives ho-lo-cha-tch'alo = răstra, kingdom. But if the form ochou-tan-le is not the usual transcription, it is not abnormal and is quite defensible. I have already quoted, following Julien (No. 1622) who borrows it from the Fan-yi (XV. fol. 19), the transcription pou-chou-po [563] = pagpa. The Fan-yi itself copies the Fa-yuen-chou-lin (Ch. 9; Tók, ed. XXXVI. 5, p. 84) which reproduces the list and the transcription
TI will ada, to be quite certain on this point, that though the Korean edition has, mistakenly, the character vi (corrooted by the gloss), the Chinese edition gives the character t'ia, us do the compilers who have reproduced this text.
• See the Special Note D on page 22 below.