... making (an eff)ort [and] after having flattered the five [most] learned students in many ways, (the Brahmin Rudramukha) speaks to them. “[My] little sons, I have a personal word for you!”
The Brahmin Kapilavarṇa speaks: “The teacher may speak trustingly!” The Brahmin Rudramukha speaks: || In [the tune] niṣkramānt || “An ignorant king, who even has forgotten himself, by the name of Araṇemi
treated me with contempt. He drove me from his country in front of [his] retinue. Death shall be (accept)ed (?) by a wise one rather than
that he yield to this shame! The king thus called treated me with contempt: how shall I bear this?” (1.) The pupils speak: “Master! What is to be done by us
in this?” The Brahmin speaks: “Therefore be on your way by my order! The king Araṇemi has a little son named Uttara, that he loves no different than his own
life. The king, however, because of his wish for the dignity of a Buddha, is one who (gives) all [and] surely [will] give you the prince Uttara. The sufferings to be experienced [lit. seen] by him
I will give the prince Uttara to experience. If you fulfil this my wish, you will receive benefit from me according to the rule.” The Brahmins
speak: “As the master commands!” The Brahmins went out. Thereupon these Brahmins, going step by step, came to the land of the king Araṇemi. Having entered (this)
town, they speak to one another: “Well now! Well now! Who will announce our arrival to the great king?” Thereupon the [female] door warden,
having espied the Brahmins, entered the palace [and] speaks to the king with deference: “[Your] majesty! Foreign Brahmins are standing outside; to see the lord they
request.” The king speaks: “Lead them in here quickly! Benefactors these are for me! Thereupon after having entered the palace the Brahmins all show [no more] deference to the king [than] only
by lifting [their] hand. Thereupon the king Araṇemi after having risen towards the Brahmins let them sit on the throne in the manner of teachers. Thereupon ... (bl)ue ... (like) lotus ...
a2. The restoration of the tune name to niṣkramāntne is based on the often attested TA form niṣkramāntaṃ "In [the tune] niṣkramānt".
a2-a4. According to Sieg/Siegling, the meter has basically 4 x 17 syllables (6/6/5 or 5/7/5), while pāda 1b has one syllable to many. It is quite clear that it is the first colon to contain the additional syllable, because it is repeated as such in pāda 1d (where the seven syllables are correct) and, what is more, the sandhi-triggered gemination in ñiś proves that the internal ceasura cannot be restored after the pronoun.
a3. Schmidt, l.c., translates: "Er hat mich von [seinem] Gefolge [...] fortgejagt", which is, most likely, a typo for "vor [seinem] Gefolge", since this is the meaning of enepre. Cf. also Carling 2000: 357.
a3-a4. The traditional interpretation of pāda 1c is based on the restoration and correction (ri)toyt(a)r by Sieg/Siegling. Accordingly, Thomas 1957: 181 translates: "Von einem Weisen dürfte eher der Tod gesucht werden, [als] daß ihm die Ehre genommen würde [wörtl. daß die Scham fortgebeugt würde]." Differently, Schmidt KT 2001: 310, fn. 42 doubts the restoration of the verbal form and reads [n](a)noyt(ä)r. A 2sg. indeed does not make any syntactical sense, and it has to be accepted that the copyist mistook a 〈ta〉 of the original for 〈ta〉 (the signs are somewhat similar as second part of an akṣara). As for the beginning of the verbal form, one would indeed expect to see some traces of an akṣara 〈ri〉 around the lacuna, and the rather small akṣara 〈na〉, as proposed by Schmidt, would certainly fit. Since there is no trace of an upper vowel sign, 〈a〉 does indeed seem to be the best reading. It is also true that the following akṣara is a 〈na〉 rather than a 〈ta〉. However, although nānā- (Gv.) is so far the only known verb forming a Sub V and ending in -n, Schmidt's interpretation is, in my opinion, not really convincing with respect to semantics, because the (intransitive) verb means "to appear" (not passive "hingenommen werden = "to be accepted", as Schmidt translates). The genitive aiśaumyepi is most certainly the agens of a passive construction, which means that the underlying verbal form has to be a passive and not an intransitive. So far, no root that fits all these requirements is known. A similar problem occurs with the second verbal form rmoytär, which is also intransitive and not passive (pace Thomas in TochSprR(B)2: 236). Furthermore, pace Thomas in TochSprR(B)2: 236, päst (most likely with intensifying function) for syntactical reasons belongs to the first verbal form and not to rmoytär.
a5. Sieg/Siegling read ñī yaitkorsa, but the original seems to be more damaged now. Only a part of the ī and 〈ya〉 is still visible, the ai is missing.
b1. It is certain that kan(·) is a transitive 2pl. (most likely subjunctive) form of the root kän- itr. "to come about", tr. "to fulfill"; Sieg/Siegling proposed to restore to kan(aścer), which subsequently has entered the handbooks as a 2pl. Prs IXb form (see Krause and Thomas, TEB II: 181 s.v. kän-). This view was challenged with good reasons by Hackstein 1995: 235f. (followed by Malzahn 2010: 568-570), who proposed as alternative a 2pl. transitive Sub I kan(tär) based on the reading by K. T. Schmidt (p.c.). However, a close look at the original manuscript shows that the preserved remains of the second stroke of the akṣara in question can only belong to a 〈na〉 and not to the upper part of a 〈ta〉 or even 〈ta〉. Consequently, Sieg/Siegling's restoration is indeed the only philologically possible one; since the kausativium stem of kän- now in addition does show traces of A-character (see Malzahn 2010: 568-570), a 2pl. Prs IXb kan(aścer) = /känāścer/ with accent on the root is also morphologically supported. The further restoration by Sieg/Siegling to (ot) ṅke is supported by THT 78 a 3.
b6. The expression (tse)ññai uppāläṃ is proplematic from a semantic and morphological point of view: Usually, one does not construct uppāl "lotus" with the adjective "blue" in a pleonastic fashion; the normal construction is "something is blue like lotus"; second, (tse)ññai (or any other adjective in -ññe) is an obl. fem. singular, while uppāl is most likely an alternant (to be honest, only the plural uppalänta is certainly a feminine, but a plural in -nta should be an alternant). In any case, if the form referred to the eyes, we would expect a plural or dual. Therefore, one can either assume a gen.sg. uppāläṃ(ntse), or, more likely, the dot here marks virama and not anusvara (as, e.g., in line b 3). In that case one might consider an expression (tse)ññai uppāl(-yokäṃ) "the blue, lotus-colored xy (= fem.sg.)". A fitting feminine word would be āśce "head"; one may speculate that Araṇemi by bowing his head, the hair of which was blue-colored, made a further gesture of respect towards the Brahmins. This would also fill the missing number of at least 10 akṣaras before the text starts again in PK NS 35 a 3. See the commentary on PK NS 35: a 3.
Couvreur, Walter, 1954c: "Koetsjische literaire fragmenten uit de Berlijnse verzameling (naar aanleiding van Sieg & Siegling’s Tocharische Sprachreste)", Handelingen VIII der Zuidnederlandse Maatschappĳ voor Taal- en Letterkunde en Geschiedenis, 97-117.
Schmidt, Klaus T., 2001: "Die westtocharische Version des Araṇemi-Jātakas in deutscher Übersetzung", De Dunhuang à Istanbul. Hommage à James Russell Hamilton, prés. par Louis Bazin et Peter Zieme, Turnhout: Brepols (Silk Road Studies 5), 299-327.
Thomas, Werner, 1979b: Formale Besonderheiten in metrischen Texten des Tocharischen: Zur Verteilung von B tane/tne 'hier' und B ñake/ñke 'jetzt', Mainz: Verlag d. Akad. d. Wissenschaften und d. Literatur (Abhandlungen d. Geistes- und Sozialwissenschaftlichen Klasse 1979, 15).
Thomas, Werner, 1981: "Indogermanisches in der Syntax des Tocharischen: Zum Ausdruck eines Gebotes und Verbotes", Festschrift der Wissenschaftlichen Gesellschaft an der Johann Wolfgang Goethe-Universität Frankfurt am Main, Wiesbaden: Steiner, 481-497.
Thomas, Werner, 1983: Der tocharische Obliquus im Sinne eines Akkusativs der Richtung, Mainz: Verlag d. Akad. d. Wissenschaften und d. Literatur (Abhandlungen d. Geistes- und Sozialwissenschaftlichen Klasse 1983, 6).
Thesaurus Indogermanischer Text- und Sprachmaterialien (TITUS): Tocharian Manuscripts from the Berlin Turfan Collection. Transcriptions prepared by Christiane Schaefer, transliterations by Tatsushi Tamai and Katharina Kupfer. Edited by Jost Gippert, Katharina Kupfer, and Tatsushi Tamai, Frankfurt am Main, 2000–2007; at:
Tocharische Sprachreste. Sprache B. Teil I: Die Texte. Band 1. Fragmente Nr. 1-116 der Berliner Sammlung, hg. v. †Emil Sieg und †Wilhelm Siegling, neubearbeitet und mit einem Kommentar nebst Register versehen v. Werner Thomas, Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht 1983.
http://www.univie.ac.at/tocharian/?THT 81 Output automatically generated on Sun, 2014-10-26, 03:56:24.
Page cached on Fri, 2014-10-24, 20:18:40.
Page last edited on Wed, 2014-10-01, 11:07:53, by Bernhard Koller. Version 63. Page created on Sat, 2012-03-17, 18:49:56, by Automatic conversion.