Reviews Of Different Books

Page 22

64 REVIEWS Oskar von Hinuber, Studien zur Kasussyntax des Pali, besonders des Vinaya-pitaka (= Munchener Studien zur Sprachwissenschaft, Beiheft, Neue Folge, 2). Munchen, J. Kitzinger, 1968. 340 pp. Dr. Oskar von Hinuber's study of the syntax of the cases in the Vinaya-pitaka fills an important lacuna in the field of Pali grammar. It is certainly the most important publication to appear since Hans Hendriksen's Syntax of the infinite verb-forms of Pali (Copenhagen, 1944). The studies by H. O. de A. Wijesekera and A. Fahs, mentioned by von Hinuber in his introduction, are not easily accessible. No use has been made by him of A. K. Warder's Introduction to Pali (London, 1963) which pays more attention to syntax than other grammars. The choice of the Vinaya with the exception of the Parivara is an excellent one because it contains probably more ancient parts than other Tipitaka texts. Moreover, the interpretation of the Vinaya-pitaka is often far from easy. Von Hinuber intended his work to be at the same time a syntactic commentary on the Vinaya and, as such, it is of great use for a better understanding of this often difficult text. Although it is mainly based upon the Vinaya, other Pali texts are also taken into account especially with regard to more difficult problems of Pali syntax. Von Hinuber critically examines the translations of the Vinaya by Rhys Davids and Oldenberg and by Miss Horner; in quite a few places he arrives at a better understanding of the text. His text emendations are generally convincing as for instance the emendation of papato and patita into papata (3 p. sg.aor.) cf. pp. 45-46. Lexicographical problems are also studied by him, as for instance the meaning of ciraciram 'rarely' (p. 95). In a few places von Hinuber refers to the Sanskrit fragments of other Vinayas but they have not been of much help to him. Apart from the Pratimoksas of the Sarvastivadin, the Mulasarvastivadin and the Mahasamghika (badly edited by Pachow and Mishra), only some fragments of the Vibhanga of one school, the Sarvastivadin, are available. However, the Chinese canon contains complete versions of the Vinayas of five schools. In many cases, the Vinaya texts of the different schools have much in common. It must have been of particular importance to transmit the Vinaya rules as faithfully as possible. In studying the Pali Vinaya it is not possible to leave the other Vinayas entirely out of consideration. Of course, the Chinese versions can offer but little help in the study of the syntax of the Pali Vinaya. However, in places which are difficult to understand because the text is evidently corrupt or the meaning of a word not very well known, it may be useful to compare the Pali text with parallel passages in the Chinese versions of the Vinayas. An interpretation of a Pali passage, which is not confirmed by parallel passages in other Vinayas cannot be accepted without reservations. One must of course be aware of the fact that the Chinese translations must be handled with extreme caution. Their usefulness resides in the fact that one can compare the texts of four Vinayas (Mahisasaka, Mahasamghika, Dharmaguptaka and Sarvastivadin). The Vinaya of the Mulasarvastivadin is of lesser importance in this respect. Moreover, the Chinese versions, by the fact that they are translations, offer an interpretation of the text, which is quite often of greater value than the one to be found in Buddhaghosa's Samantapasadika. In discussing the existence of an absolute nominative in Pali, von Hinuber examines Vin. II.167.15 ff. viharaggena gahenta vihara ussadiyimsu ... anujanami bhikkhave anubhagam pi datum (pp. 28-30). Von Hinuber proposes to read ussarayimsu and to consider vihara as a corruption for vihare. His translation is as follows: "Nach der Zahl der Lager (die Monche) ergreifen lassend, schicken sie (die Wohnplatzanweiser) (die Monche) zu den Lagern weg." According to him ussareti means 'vertreiben, wegschicken' (Vin. I.276.8) or 'auswerfen' (Vin. II.237.32). He assumes the same meaning 'wegschicken' for Vin. IV.99.9 khadaniyam ussadiyittha"das Essen wurde weggeschickt". Von Hinuber remarks that the manuscript tradition confuses ussad- and ussar- and