________________
116
J. W. DE JONG
ji-bźin-du spyod-pa. Yamaguchi indicates that yathābhūtaśrutārtha is quoted from the bhāṣya, cf. Nagao's edition p. 34.17: ayathārutaśrutārthavabodhāt. Read: yatharutaśrutārthavicāraņā. R. P. has the same text as Yamaguchi.
P. 101.9: visiṣṭārthaprārthanayā sutarām ātmamātrīkaraṇāt. P.: khyad-par-du 'phags-pa'i don-la smos-pas bdag śin-tu snod-du byed-pa'i phyir-ro. Read: ātmapātrikaraṇāt. R. P. has the same text as Yamaguchi.
P. 102.11: śrutārtham sarvakleśasahanadibhir apy abhedyat. P.: thos-pa'i ched-du ñon-mons-pa thams-cad la yan mi 'byid-pa'i phyir-ro. Yamaguchi adds in a note that sahana is not rendered into Tibetan. His restoration is clearly based upon a misreading: mi'byed-pa'i instead of mi-'byid-pa'i. The Tibetan translation has translated sarvakleśasahanāt rather freely: "because he does not slip in all impurities". Read: sarvakleśasahanād iti. R. P.: sarvakleśasahanadibhir apy abhedyatvāt.
P. 107.3: samadhisamapattyadikam uttarottarabhumivisistam sarvākāram nānāvasānam phalam. P.: tin-ne-'dzin brgya-la sñomspar 'jug-pa la sogs-pa sa gon-nas gon-du khyad-du 'phags-pa mchogrnams-kyi ye-ses-kyi mthar-thug-pa'i 'bras-bu. Read: sarvākārajñānāvasānam. R. P. has the same text as Yamaguchi.
It would certainly be possible to propose a different text for other passages restored by Yamaguchi, but there is not much to be gained by correcting Yamaguchi's restorations unless they can be shown to be wrong or improved by making use of parallel passages. From the examples given above it is obvious that Ramchandra Pandeya has not made any contribution towards the establishment of a more correct Sanskrit text on the basis of the Tibetan translation. In his introduction he accuses Yamaguchi of having failed to read the MS. correctly and of possessing insufficient familiarity with the complicated grammar of Sanskrit.15 Elsewhere in his preface he states that "many scholars, like Yamaguchi, have committed serious mistakes because of their preference for Tibetan or Chinese versions over original Sanskrit". Pandeya adds that "when the original Sanskrit is available, not much reliance should be placed on Tibetan
15 Pandeya does not seem to have had access to the manuscript used by Yamaguchi. For a well-founded opinion of Pandeya's carefulness in reading manuscripts see Wezler's remarks in his article: 'Some Observations on the Yuktidipika', Supplement II. XVIII. Deutscher Orientalistentag. Vorträge herausgegeben von Wolfgang Voigt. Wiesbaden, 1974, pp. 434-455.
