Reviews Of Diffeent Books

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

Page 32

226
6
Sata-pitaka Series, Volume 269.
7 Sata-pitaka Series, Volume 262.
8 Delhi, 1987.
REVIEWS
Cf. N. Iyanaga, 'Récits de la soumission de Maheśvara par Trailokyavijaya', Tantric and Taoist Studies in honour of R. A. Stein, Volume three (Bruxelles, 1985), p. 657. 10 Ed. Horiuchi, Kanjin, Vol. I (Koyasan, 1983), p. 352.
11 Cf. Z. Yamaguchi, Tibetan Studies (Oriental Studies in Japan: Retrospect and Prospect 1963-1972, Part II-17) (Tokyo, 1975), pp. 4-5. For a survey of Tibetan studies in Japan in the period 1973-1982 see Sh. Matsumoto, Tibetan Studies in Japan 1973-1983 (Asian Studies in Japan, 1973-1983. Part II-18). Tokyo, 1986.
12 Cf. Rahula Sänkṛityāyana (ed.), Pramanavārtikabhashyam of Prajñākaragupta (Patna, 1953), p. 648.
Australian National University
J. W. DE JONG
Donald S. Lopez, Jr., A Study of Svätantrika. Ithaca, New York USA, Snow Lion Publications, 1987. 483 pp. $35.00.
Indo-Iranian Journal 32: 1989.
The division of the Madhyamaka school into Prasangikas and Svätantrikas is well known, but until now no detailed study of the Svatantrika system had been undertaken. Mimaki writes that it seems that the terms Prasangika and Svätantrika were used for the first time by Pa tshab Ni ma grags. (1055-7). In the beginning of the ninth century Ye ses sde used the terms Sauträntika-måädhyamika and Yogacara-mãdhyamika for the first time.2 Tibetan scholars have made many different classifications of the Madhyamaka schools, but since Pa tshab Ni ma grags all agree in considering Bhavaviveka as the founder of the Svätantrika school. In his introduction Lopez enumerates the main works of the Svätantrika school by Bhāvaviveka, Jñanagarbha, Santarakṣita and Kamalasīla (p. 21). Bhāvaviveka is the author of two important works, the Madhyamakahṛdaya and its autocommentary, the Tarkajvälä, and his commentary on Nagarjuna's Mülamadhyamakakārikās, the Prajñāpradīpa. The latter work is said by Lopez to be a terse commentary. However, it is more extensive than the commentaries by Buddhapalita and Candrakirti. In the Derge Tanjur Bhāvaviveka's commentary occupies 214 folios, those by Buddhapalita and Candrakirti respectively 122 and 200 folios. Of Bhāvaviveka's commentary only two chapters have been. rendered into Western languages. In 1936 Rähula Sämkṛtyäyana discovered a Sanskrit manuscript of the Madhyamakahṛdaya and since 1958 several chapters of this text and its commentary have been edited and translated.4 Lopez's study of the Svätantrika system is not based primarily on the works by Bhāvaviveka and other Indian scholars but on the works of Tibe