print

PK AS 1A

Transliteration

Transcription

Translation

Philological commentary

There is a lacuna concerning two lines on the left side, which can be evaluated to ca. 10 akṣaras for the first and ca. 12 akṣaras for the second one. In general, many punctuation signs between pādas are not spelled, and the graphemes are not used consistently.

a1. One can still read 〈ty〉 belonging to the left part of a ligatura: it can most probably be restored as (mar)ty(āṃ) being the last word of pāda 41c. At the end of this lacuna one may restore (onol)m(eṃ) translating Skt. martyāṃ.

a3. The reading kakraupaṣaṃ is certain, but we expect the nom.pl.masc. kakraupaṣ parallel to preceding yamoṣ, cf. Skt. samāhitā(ḥ). One is led to assume that this mistake is due to copying of a former spelling kakraupaṣ_\•.

a4. After ṣa[māni] there is space for a punctuation dot as compared with the preceding lines.

b2. The scribe has written mūlam_\^• in order to represent the correct accusative singular ending in -m, while the Sanskrit text has the sandhi form mūlaṃ.

b3. The form tänmastär is wrong for the expected 2.sg.mid. tänmastar as translating Skt. jāyase. Note that the 3.sg. middle was present below in the translation of pāda 2a.

b4. At the beginning of the line the traces of the first akṣara are compatible with a tentative reading 〈mā〉, which would translate Skt. na at the beginning of pāda 1c. In the lacuna one may restore (mā ci plāskau). This makes four syllables and the further addition of the eight syllables of the Sanskrit pāda 1d will fill the lacuna exactly. The last word has to be restored as tä(nmastär).

Linguistic commentary

a4. As translation of Skt. māraṃ in 42a one finds TB maraṃ, which cannot simply be taken as a mistake. This form should be understood as the oblique singular of TB mār being the regular match of Skt. māra-. Actually, the most common Tocharian expression is TB mār-ñäkte (TA mār-ñkät). We do find the expected oblique singular TB māräṃ in B 30 b 2. A first possibility would be to take TB maraṃ as analogical of the regular gen.sg. marántse < *mārä’ntse (Pinault 2008: 47). Maybe a better alternative would be to assume that this scribe (school) has chosen to inflect TB mār according to the productive pattern of TB sāṃ ‘enemy’, obl.sg. sanáṃ < *sānä’ṃ (= class 5.3. in TEB).

b1. The verbal noun meaning ‘death’ here is srūkalle, whereas we find the expected form srūkalyñe in line a 1. It is obvious that srūkalle is a rhyming form with preceding cmelle ‘birth’, which is also used before in line a 3 translating Skt. jāti-. Already in the classical language there was confusion between the verbal abstract in -l(y)ñe and the substantivized gerund in -lle with palatalized liquid. Actually, for ‘birth’ the language had the verbal abstract cmel(y)ñe, which would be perfectly parallel to srūkalyñe. Therefore, it seems that the scribe had at his disposal two variants meaning approximately the same. He may have chosen the variant in lle to make a rhyme in the sequence cmelle srūkallentse (b 1) while ktsaitsäññe srūkalyñe also is some kind of rhyme. In addition, he uses srūkalyñe to translate Skt. mṛtyu- (41d), while using srūkalle to translate Skt. maraṇa- (42d). One may thus say that the choice between the two variants was stylistically motivated.

b2. One has yśelme (= nominative) instead of the vocative yśelma found in the next line. Note that in most declination classes vocative and nominative have the same form.

References

Lévi 1911 (= JA 17): 439-449; Lévi 1933: 41f.; Pinault 2008: 46f.

Editors

Georges-Jean Pinault (in collaboration with Melanie Malzahn)

Bibliography

Bernhard 1965

Bernhard, Franz, 1965: Udānavarga. Band I, Einleitung, Beschreibung der Handschriften, Textausgabe, Bibliographie, Göttingen: Vandenhoeck und Ruprecht (Sanskrittexte aus den Turfanfunden X).

Lévi 1911

Lévi, Sylvain, 1911: "Étude des documents tokhariens de la mission Pelliot", JA, XVII, 10^e série, 431-464.

Lévi 1933

Lévi, Sylvain, 1933: Fragments de textes koutchéens. Udānavarga, Udānastotra, Udānālaṁkāra et Karmavibhaṅga, publiés et traduits avec un vocabulaire et une introduction sur le «tokharien» par M. Sylvain Lévi, Paris: Imprimerie Nationale.

Pinault 2008

Pinault, Georges-Jean, 2008: Chrestomathie tokharienne. Textes et Grammaire, Leuven/Paris: Peeters.