REVIEWS 373

das Nichtwissen hat”. He renderedavidyavadvis.aya with “Reich derUnwissenden” (cf.Kleine Schriften, Wiesbaden, 1978, pp. 78 and 73).

P. 31, n. 52 Oberhammer quotesSankara’s commentary on theMan.d.ukya-Up.:es.a hi svarupavasthah. sarvesvarah. sadhidaivikasyabhedajatasya sarvasyesita naitasmaj jatyantarabhuto ‘nyes. am iva /“pr an. abandhanam. hi somya mana” iti sruteh. . He translates: “Dieserist im Zustand seines Eigenwesens der Herr von allem; dieser istder Beherrscher aller unterschiedlichen Gegebenheiten, einschliesslichder himmlischen. Nicht gibt es unter den sozusagen anderen [Wesen]eines, das Ursprung ware, der von ihm unterschieden ist, da dieSruti[sagt]: ‘Denn das Denken, mein Lieber, ist mit dem Pran.a verbunden.’“It is not possible to begin a new sentence withnaitasmaj. SwamiGambhırananda translatednaitasmaj, etc. as follows: “ and contrary towhat others believe in, He (the Lord of all) is not something intrisicallydifferent from this one (that is Prajna)” (Eight Upanis.ads, Volume two.Fourth Impression, Calcutta, 1978, p. 190).

There are a few minor misprints in the texts which the reader caneasily correct. P. 44, note 80, line 4 readadhıyatefor abhidıyate. P. 75,line 4 from below readausserer Gegenstandfor anderer Gegenstand,cf. p. 85, line 23.

4 Jansz Crescent J.W. DE JONG

Manuka ACT 2603Australia

Yuktidıpika. The Most Significant Commentary on the Sam. khyakarika.Critically edited by Albrecht Wezler and Shujun Motegi. Vol. I (Alt-und Neu-Indische Studien, Band 44). Stuttgart, Franz Steiner Verlag,1998. XXVII. 347 pp. DM/sFr 96,– (oS 701,–) ISBN 3-515-06132-0

The editio princeps of the YD (Yuktidıpika) was published in 1938 byPulinbehari Chakravarti. The importance of this text was soon realizedand already in 1941 Maria Nowotny studied the text for her dissertationwhich remained unpublished. Chakravarti’s edition was based upon asingle manuscript from Poona (P). A much better edition, based upontwo manuscripts (P and A) was published in 1967 by Ram ChandraPandeya and prompted the publication of many studies in Japan, Indiaand the West as can be seen from the bibliography which lists 68publications (pp. 271–276). However, the imperfections of this secondedition of the YT were clearly pointed out by Wezler who in 1972

Indo-Iranian Journal 42: 373–375, 1999.

374 REVIEWS

obtained microfilms of both P and A. Wezler was able to locate threemore manuscripts of which the most important one is K, aSaradamanuscript, which contains nearly 300 notes or comments. ManuscriptD is a modern transcript of K and B contains only about one fifth of thetext (pp. 224–270). All manuscripts have extensive lacunae in commonand must go back to a common source. Missing is the commentary onSK 11–12, 60–63 and 65–66.

In the Introduction Wezler and Motegi list the differences of theiredition with the previous ones, describe the manuscripts used by them,and construct a stemma codicorum. They indicate how the text has beenconstituted by them and which typographical devices have been used.They point out the importance of the marginal notes. As to the title ofthe text they remark that the title Yuktidıpika is found at the end ofeach of the elevenAhnikas and in the second of the concluding verses.However, in the case of the sole two later authors referring to the YDthe name used is Rajavarttika and marginal note refers to the work ofRajanagopalaka. They remark that “a work of he class called Varttikaand written by the member of the family, or clan, of the Rajanas, orby a person bearing the title “almost a king” (rajanaka), could aptlybe referred to by the name “the Varttika of Rajan”.” As to the date theauthor of the YD quotes several times Dignaga’s Praman.asamuccayaand once the Kasika. According to Frauwallner Dignaga lived from 480to 540 and according to Oberlies the Kasika can be dated to 680–700.For the YD they arrive at the date 680–720 as the lower limit but hesitateto propose an upper limit which is too far removed from Dharmakırtiwho lived from 600 to 660 according to Frauwallner.

Wezler and Motegi have spared no pains to make this edition asperfect as possible. With the help of five manuscripts they have beenable to constitute a much better text than their predecessors. Theyhave also proposed many more emendations. Thevarttikas have beenmarked off in text. They have been able to identify more passagesas quotations and references. Of special importance are the variousAppendices: Bibliography, texts of the Sam. khakarikas as found in thecommentary to the corresponding verse and in other contexts, index ofverses quoted, Pada index of verses quoted, indices of prose passagesquoted according to the sources and in alphabetical order.

It will now become possible to make full use of this important text.A second volume will contain a word index to the whole of the YD. Asto the translation of the text Wezler and Motegi mention a translation byKumar and Bhargava (1990–1992), a Japanese translation in progress by

REVIEWS 375

Murakami (parts I and II published in 1983 and 1989) and an Englishtranslation in preparation by Edeltraud Harzer.

In 1975 Wezler announced a new edition of the YD. It has takenalmost twice seven years but it was worth while waiting for this splendidedition for which we must be very grateful to both Wezler and Motegi.

4 Jansz Crescent J.W. DE JONG

Manuka ACT 2603Australia

Oskar von Hinuber, Entstehung und Aufbau der Jataka-Sammlung.Studien zur Literatur des Theravada-BuddhismusI (Akademie derWissenschaften und der Literatur, Abhandlungen der Geistes- und sozial-wissenschaftlichen Klasse, Jahrgang 1998, Nr. 7). Mainz, Akademieder Wissenschaften und der Literatur; Stuttgart, Franz Steiner Verlag,1998. VII, 223 pp. DM 84,– ISSN 0002-2977 ISBN 3-515-07342-6

In his Handbook of Pali Literature (cf. IIJ 41, 1998, pp. 182–183)von Hinuber paid particular attention to the formal structure of thetexts, their mutual relationships and their chronology. In his latest studyhe examines in the same way in great depth the collection of 547 Jatakas.According to v.H. they were probably brought together about 500 p.Chr.with the title Jatakat.t.havan.n.ana. Each Jataka consists of five parts: theintroduction, story of the present (Paccuppannavatthu) telling the occa-sion for relating the Jataka; the Jataka proper, the story of the past(Atıtavatthu) in which are imbedded the canonical verses (Gatha) andtheir commentary (Veyyakaran. a); the connection between present andpast (Samodhana). The present text is the result of the activity of editorsas is obvious from the great number of cross-references which v.H.studies in the first part of his book: Der Aufbau der Jataka-Sammlung(pp. 7–121). v.H. examines first the titles of the Jatakas and showsthat the existence of two titles of a Jataka shows perhaps the existenceof two or three old traditions: the canonical collection of verses, theJatakapal.i, in which the name is taken from the first Gatha; the oldAt.t.hakatha from the prose of which the name is taken, in connectionwith which one must take into account the existence of two differentrecensions with different prose and different titles. Thereupon v.H.examines one by one the different parts of Jatakas. The titles of thesections in which v.H. examines the Paccuppannavatthu indicate clearlythe thoroughness of his research: Das Paccuppannavatthu; Verweise

Indo-Iranian Journal 42: 375–378, 1999.