Madhyadesika Madhyoddesika And Madhyuddesika

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

Page 2

Madhyadesika, Madhyoddeśika and Madhy'uddesika
139
vol. II, fasc. 9 (Copenhagen, 1975), s.v. uddisati 4.c. esp. to “point out”, i.e. to recite, the pātimokkha (and other texts); uddesaka I. expounder, reciter (of the pātimokkha). The reading madhyoddesikās is confirmed by manuscript R, cf. IIJ 20 (1978), p. 242.
In 1970 Gustav Roth published the Bhikṣuṇī-vinaya of the Ārya-Mahāsāmghika-Lokottaravādin (Patna, 1970). The text begins as follows: om namo Buddhāya / ārya-Mahāsāṁghikānām Lokottaravādinām madhy'-uddesikānām pāthena bhikṣuni-vinayasyadih (p. 1). In his note Roth quotes the colophons of two other vinaya texts of the same school, the Abhisamācārikā Dharmāḥ and the Bhikṣu Prātimokşa-sūtra: Abhisamācārikāḥ samāptāh / arya-Mahāsāmghikānām Lokottara-vādinām madhy'-uddeśa-pāțhakanām pāțheneti; samāptam prātimokşa-sūtram ārya-Mahāsāmghikānām Lokottara-vādinām madhyoddesikānām pātheneti. B. Jinananda, the editor of the first text (Abhisamācārikā, Patna, 1969) changed the reading of the manuscript to madhyadeśapāthakānām (cf. pp. XXIV and 230). W. Pachow and Ramakanta Mishra, the editors of the Prātimokşa-sūtra (The Prātimoksa-sūtra of the Mahāsānghikas, Allahabad, 1956), read mādhyād-desi
kānām, but according to Roth the reading given by him can be established . with certainty. In his recent edition of the Prātimokşasūtra, Nathmal Ta
tia also reads madhyoddesikānām (Prātimokșasūtram, Patna, 1975, p. 38. 1-2).
Apart from the Mahāvastu all the other texts have either madhyoddesika or madhy'uddesika. In his critical apparatus Senart does not indicate any variant for the reading madhyadesikānām. Senart had at his disposal six manuscripts which are probably all copies of one Nepalese manuscript (cf. Introduction, p. IX). An older manuscript (dated Nepāla samvat 777) is preserved in Nepal (cf. Roth, Introduction, p. XV) and it would be interesting to see whether it also has the reading madhyadesikānām. However, it seems likely that the original reading was madhyoddesikānām, which could easily have been corrupted to madhyāddesikāņām. Another copyist probably considered it necessary to correct this reading to madhyadesikānām.
In his History of Buddhism (Chos-'byun), Bu-ston (1290–1364 A.D.) gives an account of the Third Council in which he quotes the opinions of several authorities concerning the languages used by different Buddhist schools, cf. Obermiller's translation: History of Buddhism. II. Part (Heidelberg, 1932), pp. 96-101. Recently Yuyama has edited and translated the text of the relevant sections ('Bu-ston on the Languages Used by Indian Buddhists at the Schismatic Period', in: Die Sprache der ältesten buddhistischen Überlieferung, Göttingen, 1980, pp. 175-181). Yuyama remarks: “It admits of no doubt that Obermiller's English translation has served as the first aid for those who were unable to consult the original Tibetan text because of its inavailability ... In some cases, however, his translation is rather free and misleading, unless the original is referred to." However, Yuyama's translation is not an improvement and does not supersede Obermiller's translation.