PK AS 6D
Images loaded from
The metre is 21/21/18/13: a-b = 8/7/6 or 8/6/7 (mostly 5+3 + 4+3 + 6), c = 9/9 (4-5/4-5 or 7-7-4), d = 7/6 or 6/7.
a1. The segmentation of the syllables before the end of the pāda remains uncertain. Based on the reading by Lévi, lañc has been interpreted as a verbal form followed by uwe ‘learned, smart’. Accordingly, lañc is registered by the handbooks as a subjunctive form of lä-n-t- with a 2. singular suffix pronoun lañ-c. But the connection with the following context, which contains a 2. plural imperative, is irrational. Therefore, one may conceive that the pāda ends with something like (śau)l añcuwe or (came)l añcuwe with añcuwe being an adjective matching the TA adverb āñc ‘below, inferior, down’. Be that as it may, it is relatively certain that this story illustrates the commentary of the stanza Uv 31.26, which is about the control of anger. Since in this story there is apparently a famine, no doubt caused by a drought, it can be attributed to the anger of nāgas (i.e., water spirits), who decided to abandon the country of Magadha. Most probably the Bodhisattva pacified them by telling this precise stanza causing them to come back.
a2. At the end of the pāda 103a the colon aiśi yāmtsi mäkte nauṣ has seven syllables instead of the usual six. This does not mean, however, that this line is incorrect because the preceding colon could have six syllables.
a4. One can see erased text below the present one from the beginning down to spe. The number 103 is still readable right in front of the schnurloch. Because of that one may assume that the scribe has corrected a previous incorrect line (either miscopied or a false redaction with respect to the meter).
a5. In the commentary to the Udānavarga quoted by Rockhill 1883: 167, note 1 it is mentioned that the following stanza was told by the Buddha in order to convert the brahmin Pipralīkasāra. Later in line b2 he is referred to by the epithet Skt. vipratyanīka-, a reinforced variant of Skt. pratyanīka- ‘hostile, opposed, withstanding’. This epithet has been chosen because the Udānavarga stanza in question contains the form Skt. pratyanīkasāra- referring to a person resisting to the teaching of the Law. The story is based on the capacity of the Buddha to read minds and to know in advance the intention of his questioners.
a7. In the second syllable of mäsketrä the vowel was originally written as 〈ī〉 as in the previous occurrence in a 4 and later corrected. The suggested restoration of the infinitive parktsi leaves us with one missing syllable. In any case, one may imagine that the original text had something like: “I will go in the presence of the Buddha and I will try to ask him questions in mind only.”
b3. Skt. subhāṣitam (Uv 31.27b) is translated elsewhere by TB kartse weweñu, see, e.g., B 20 b 1 (= Uv 8.11a), but here it would not fit the meter. Therefore, kartse ākṣu seems possible.
b4. The translator has used the conjunction wat twice in contrast to a single occurrence of Skt. vā in Uv 31.27d. Apart from metrical considerations, this repetition is probably used in order to ascertain the cohesion of the nominal clause.
a2. Due to metrical considerations, in the syntagma māgatṣeṃ ypaunane the adjective is masculine instead of feminine.
a4. At the beginning of the line kare is certainly the end of a 3.pl. active preterite verb form followed by a demonstrative. Very tentatively one may restore a complete colon (lakle yai)kare ceu “they drove away this suffering”.
b1. The allative pūdñäkteśca shows preservation of the final vowel -ä, which is here written as -a as sometimes happens in the case of graphemes without fremdzeichen; such preservation in front of a colon boundary is not uncommon even in classical texts. All other allative forms in this text are written as -ś showing simplification of the cluster common to classical texts. In addition, this -ś in virāma position is written with non-fremdzeichen, which is actually also quite common for any final -ś in virāma position in standard texts.
b3. The Skt. compound pratyanīkasāra- ‘being hostile on principle’ has been literally translated by klaṅkälyñe-prakre ‘having doubt as fundament’; note that the second member is not the abstract prakrauñe ‘essence, substance’, which is used elsewhere to match Skt. sāra-, because of metrical requirements.
Lévi 1933: 76-77.
Georges-Jean Pinault (in collaboration with Melanie Malzahn and Michaël Peyrot)
Date of online publication: February 2012
Bernhard, Franz (1965) Udānavarga. Band I, Einleitung, Beschreibung der Handschriften, Textausgabe, Bibliographie. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck und Ruprecht (Sanskrittexte aus den Turfanfunden X).
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.
Rockhill, W. Woodville (1883) Udânavarga. A collection of verses from the Buddhist canon. Compiled by Dharmatrâta. Being the Northern Buddhist Version of Dhammapada. Translated from the Tibetan of the Bkah-hgyur. With notes and extracts from the commentary of Pradjnavârman. London: Trübner.
http://www.univie.ac.at/tocharian/?PK AS 6D
Medieninhaber: Universität Wien, Institut für Sprachwissenschaft | Inhalt: Melanie Malzahn | Programmierung: Martin Braun | Design: Patricia Katharina Hoda