Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-g7gxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T08:03:33.418Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Tumshuq Karmavācanā

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 December 2009

H. W. Bailey
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In the Journal Asiatique for 1941–2 my friend the late Professor Sten Konow published an article entitled Une nouvelle forme aberrante de khotanais. This new type of Iranian is contained in the document P 410 brought back by the late Paul Pelliot from Tumšq, a ruined site near the modern Maralbashi.

For the study of the history of this region all the materials, unfortunately often fragmentary, which the various expeditions have recovered for us have proved and are still proving of great importance. The present Tumšuq fragment is a notable addition to this material.

Sten Konow gave with his study a facsimile of the MS. fragment, a transliteration (in which he had enjoyed the assistance of J. Filliozat) and a tentative translation, together with a glossary of the words according to his readings. Six years later he turned again to the document and in the Norsk Tidsskrift for Sprogvidenskap 14 (1947), pp. 156 ff., he published a second study of the document. It is a pleasure to recognize the merit of these pioneer studies, but neither could be considered as providing a clear interpretation. In one point, the reading of ai, the incorrect at is kept in the second study, although in the glossary to the first study J. Filliozat had pointed out that the sign was properly au.

The document is vitally important for Iranian dialectical studies. Hence a new treatment is well justified. The recognition that the document contains a type of Buddhist ordination service changed the whole problem of its interpretation.

Type
Research Article
Information
Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies , Volume 13 , Issue 3 , October 1950 , pp. 649 - 670
Copyright
Copyright © School of Oriental and African Studies 1950

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

page 650 note 1 I have quoted sparingly from these texts since they requīre to be treated in a special mono-graph before they can be used with safety.

page 650 note 2 The use of khotanais by Sten Konow in Journ. Asiat. 1941–2 is to be deprecated. In Khotan itself they used hvatanaa- of their own language, which as a local name is satisfactory, but to use it of another region deprives it of all value.

page 652 note 1 A metrical form occurs in the Maitreya-vyākarana, verse 73:buddham dharmam ca sangham ca gatvā tu śaranam, sodā (ed. Sylvain Lévi, Mélanges Linossier II 387).

page 652 note 2 The readings in BSOAS 10. 903 are to be corrected.

page 653 note 1 In this edition of Bendall's, C. the reading āyikā was wrongly given for āryikā ‘honoured one, nun‘, whence I took it (without at first seeing the misreading) to quote in Recent Work in “Tokharian”, Trans. Phil. Soe. 1947, 142.Google Scholar

page 654 note 1 So read for the edition ācāryā.

page 655 note 1 This I suspect indicates how the tathā of tathāgata was originally, that is as a secular word in colloquīal use, intended. The Khotanese translation has probably chanced upon the correct meaning. The tathāgata- is one whose course and position in life, his gati, is proper, right, excellent and hence prosperous. The word was therefore near akin to sugata ‘he whose gati is good’, which as a common word applies to any prosperous person, and particularly suits a Cakravartin ruler. From such secular use the word could be easily transferred to religious use, as new sects developed, from the popular language. For such a type of transfer the word ārya is an excellent example: from a tribal or national use contrasting with dāsa it was adapted in Buddhist texts to the new ethics and came to mean the bhikṣu in whom the faithful (śrāddha-) believed. Just so too the ceremonial funeral of a Cakravartin was attached to the Buddha (see J. Przyluski, Le parinirvāna et les funérailles du Buddha; and Le portage, des reliques du Buddha, Mélanges chinois et bouddhiques 4). Khotanese uses also rraṣṭa-tsūkä ‘going rightly‘. Later scholastic interpretations of sugata are given in the Mppś (I 131), where edification was the main aim. For discussions on tathagāta, see E. Lamotte, Mppś I 126 and add A. Coomaraswamy BSOS 9. 331 and Harvard Journ. Asiat. Studies 4 (1939) 139; S. Schayer, Rocznik Orientalistyczny 11 (1935) 211–13.

page 656 note 1 This is the place to correct the interpretation of Ch 1. 0021a, a 12 quoted in BSOAS 10. 888, since śāhya was wrongly sought in the word śāhaja. It has since been noticed that Khot. śāhauja means ‘umbrella‘. The following contexts show this clearly, by hendiadys, although no bilingual has been found. Jātaka-stava 13 v 4 śīya viysa bāta khu baurīnai garā drrāma śāhauja cu tvī beda budādā ‘like white lotus root, and snowy mountain, as the umbrella they carried over you‘. P 3513, 78 v 1 daja palai ksattrrū śāhauja ‘standard, banner, umbrella‘, that is the Indian dhvaja, patākā and chattra with śāhauja in hendiadys to chattra.P 2787, 48 ttyai da-jvanyai śāhaujä dīna ‘under this flame-coloured umbrella‘. P 3510, 3, 2 ysarrnā kṣsattrra śāhaujä pale uvāre ’golden umbrella (chattra), umbrella, exalted banners’. The first syllable śāha- will be connected with Old Iran, s y- as in Avestan a-saya- ‘without shade', Sogd. sy'kh (see W. B. Henning, Trans. Phil. Soc. 1942, 50), MidPers. s'yg, NPers. sāyah, beside Pašto sīyā (see G. Morgenstierne, Etym. Voc. Pashto, p. 72). For Khot. ś- from sy- (from say-), cf. śāva- ‘copper‘ from Old Iran, syāva- ‘dark colour‘. The second component of śāhauja remains uncertain. With this śāhauja ‘umbrella ‘ the śāhaja- must be connected. Hence one must read rre śūki-śāhaj , ‘monarch having the sole umbrella’ with reference to the well-known Indian conception eka-cchattra- ‘maintaining under one umbrella’, that is, ‘sole ruler’. Pali has ekacchatta and ekātapa.

page 658 note 1 I take this chance to correct a reading on this page. Read Rahnqkaitta for -kautta, with -ai- which the MS. clearly has.

page 662 note 1 This word is not to be traced to Sogd. Byvm, as is proposed in E. Benveniste, VessantaraJātaka, note on line 820, where the Mongol form is inexact.

page 663 note 1 Sogd. θβρ ‘give’, Yaghnābī tifar-, might similarly have replaced *fra-bar- y *fa-βαρ and thence *θa-βar-. See I. Gershevitch, JR.AS 1946, 181, note 3.

page 665 note 1 In this connexion I must correct the explanation of Ossetic fædes given BSOS 8. 935. As wider reading has shown, this is made from fæd ‘footstep’ and es-, jes- ‘take‘, and refers to pursuit of a malefactor.