Reviews Of Different Books

Page 27

REVIEWS 233 A. J. Alston (tr.), The Realization of the Absolute. The "Naiskarmyasiddhi" of Sri Suresvara. Translated by A.J. A. London, Shanti Sadan, 1971. xvi +269 pp. PS2.00. Suresvara's Naiskarmyasiddhi is one of the most popular Vedanta texts. Potter's Bibliography of Indian Philosophies lists five editions (Nos. 2393, 2394, 2396, 2398 and 2399) to which one must add a recent edition by Swami Satchidanandendra Saraswati: Naishkarmya-siddhi of Sri Suresvaracarya with the Klesapaharini by Swami Satchidanandendra Saraswati (Adhyatma Granthavali), Holenarsipur, Adhyatma Prakasha Karyalaya, 1968. The edition generally used is Hiriyanna's revision of Colonel G. A. Jacob's edition (Bombay Sanskrit and Prakrit Series XXXVIII, Bombay, 1925). It contains Jnanottama's Candrika, a very good introduction and many useful notes at the end. Hiriyanna has consulted four unpublished commentaries: Citsukha's Bhavatattvaprakasika, Jnanamsta's Vidyasurabhi, Akhilatman's Naiskarmyasiddhivivarana and Ramadatta's Sarartha. Hiriyanna's notes often quote from these commentaries. Especially interesting are his quotations from the Sarartha. As far as I know, neither this commentary nor the three others have as yet been edited. The Naiskarmyasiddhi has only recently been translated into English. In 1933 Ras-Vihari Das published his Essentials of Advaitism, Suresvara's Naiskarmyasiddhi explained in English (Punjab Or. Series No. 21, Lahore). This publication, which is only known to me from F. Otto Schrader's review of Hacker's Untersuchungen uber Texte des fruhen Advaitavada (ZDMG, 101, 1951, pp. 418-424), seems to give an analysis rather than a complete translation. Alston's translation appeared first in typescript form in 1959. In 1965 S. S. Raghavachar published a translation accompanied by the Sanskrit text (Naiskarmyasiddhi of Sri Suresvaracarya. English translation by S. S. Raghavachar, University of Mysore, Mysore). In his Untersuchungen uber Texte des fruhen Advaitavada 1. Die Schuler Sarkaras (Wiesbaden, 1951), Paul Hacker has made a very thorough analysis of the doctrines of the Naiskarmyasiddhi. In the course of his study he translated many verses of the text and one can only regret that he has not published a complete translation. Hacker's work is of fundamental importance for a better understanding of the Naiskarmyasiddhi. Alston has made much use of Hacker's study, to which he often refers in his notes. In his introduction Alston also mentions Saccidanandendra Svamin's 'profound and critical treatment of the Naiskarmyasiddhi in his Vedanta Prakriya Pratyabhijna (Holenarsipur, 1964), pp. 210-276. I have not been able to consult a copy of this work. The Naiskarmyasiddhi is a very interesting text. For the non-specialist in Advaita Vedanta it has the great advantage of being a short work and not a commentary. Indian scholars have praised its style, but not without reservations. Hiriyanna has noticed two defects: repetition of thought and argument, and the use of a rather large number of un-Papinean forms. Satchidanandendra Saraswati mentions the ruggedness of the style and the occasional grammatical and metrical difficulties. However, Jnanottama's commentary and Hiriyanna's notes are very helpful in understanding the text. Raghavachar's translation is very useful, although from a stylistic point of view it is much inferior to Alston's supple English. Moreover, Raghavachar has closely followed Jnanottama's interpretation, so much so that his translation is sometimes no more than a paraphrase of the latter's commentary. 'Alston's revised translation has taken Raghavachar's interpretation into account, but one has the impression that he could have derived more help from it. His translation is extremely readable but sometimes too free. In several instances there is no doubt that Alston has misunderstood the text. His revised version is a great improvement. However, there are a few places in which his original translation seems preferable. One must hope that a Vedanta specialist will critically examine Raghavachar's and Alston's translations. I have read Alston's translation with great pleasure and I only venture to make a few criticisms in