Reviews Of Diffeent Books

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

Page 33

REVIEWS
227
tan doxographers. His main sources are the Svātantrika chapter in the Grub-mtha' chen-mo by 'Jam-dbyans bźad-pa (1648-1721) and the Svātantrika chapter in the Grub-pa'i mtha'i rnam-par bżag-pa by iCan-skya rol-pa'i-rdo-rje (1717-1786). Both authors rely heavily on the works of Tson-kha-pa (1357-1419). Lopez remarks that in his work he attempts "to present ... some of the major concerns of the Svātantrika school as understood by the Ge-luk doxographers” (p.33). He is aware of the dangers of his enterprise and writes that “to conclude that the image of Svātantrika created by the Ge-luk doxographers is complete, obviating the independent study of their Indian sources, would be a serious error" (p. 31). Lopez considers his work as a preliminary study, an attempt to outline the Ge-luk tradition of interpretation of Svātantrika, a grid through which the works of the Indian masters may usefully be viewed” (p. 33).
The first part of Lopez's work is a systematic study of the Svātantrika system as described by 'Jam-dbyans bźad-pa and ICan-skya rol-pa'i-rdo-rje with frequent references to Tson-kha-pa's works. The notes give exact page references. Apart from written works Lopez refers also to oral commentaries by Tibetan scholars. Lopez does not explain how far these scholars have studied the works of Bhāvaviveka, etc. He points out that dGe-lugs-pa scholars would obtain their knowledge by studying the Grub-mtha's of 'Jam dbyans-bżad-pa and ICan-skya rol-pa'i-rdo-rje and textbooks on the structure of the path to enlightenment based on the Yogācāra-Svātantrika and Haribhadra's commentaries on Maitreya's Abhisamayālamkāra. Lopez adds that it would be a rare scholar who had devoted extensive effort to the study of the original Svātantrika texts in Tibetan translation (p. 23). What one finds in Lopez's work is an excellent description of some of the main aspects of the Svātantrika system as can be obtained from contemporary Tibetan scholars and from the sources they used.
The second part of Lopez's work comprises a translation of the Svātantrika chapter in ICan-skya rol-pa'i-rdo-rje's Grub-pa'i mtha'i rnam-par bźagpa. Lopez has used an edition published in Sarnath in 1970. Another edition was edited by Lokesh Chandra in 1977. In this edition the Svātantrika chapter is found on pages 419-659. The translation is faithful and clear though one would have liked to have more explicatory notes. The text is not always easy to understand and references to the first part of Lopez's work would have been very helpful.
It is a pity that Lopez seems to have felt obliged to follow Hopkins' example writing Tibetan names and titles in phonetic transcription and in translating Arhat by “Foe-Destroyer", paraprasiddha by "renowned to others", gnod-byed by “damaging”, dal-'byor by “leisure and fortune”, etc.