Sanskrit Fragments Of Kasyapaparivarta

This document is a scholarly article by J. W. De Jong titled "Sanskrit Fragments Of Kasyapaparivarta," published by J. W. De Jong. It focuses on the analysis and reconstruction of newly discovered Sanskrit fragments of the Kāśyapaparivarta, a significant text within Mahayana Buddhism.

Here's a comprehensive summary of the article's key points:

Discovery and Initial Analysis of Fragments:

• Hoernle Fragments: The article begins by discussing two Sanskrit fragments (Hoernle No. 143 S.B. 38 and No. 143 S.B. 39) of the Kāśyapaparivarta, discovered in Khadalik and sent to Kuno Hoernle in 1903. These fragments were found to belong to the same leaf and correspond to sections 128-136 of the Kāśyapaparivarta edition by A. von Staël-Holstein.
• Missing Verses and Prose Content: Hoernle noted that the fragments contained only the prose portions of sections 128-133, with the verses missing. However, they did include the beginning of section 136.
• Chinese Versions and Dating: Hoernle observed that two Chinese versions, from the Chin and Ch'in dynasties, corresponded more closely to the Sanskrit text of these fragments, suggesting the Sanskrit text existed between the 3rd and 5th centuries AD.
• Hoernle's Reconstruction Limitations: De Jong points out that Hoernle's reconstruction of the missing parts of the leaf had inaccuracies in readings and did not fully account for the missing portions.
• Reuter Fragment: Critically, Hoernle was unaware that a fragment from the same leaf had been edited twenty years earlier by J. N. Reuter. This third fragment contains passages corresponding to sections 130-135 and fills a gap in the leaf edited by Hoernle.

De Jong's Contribution and Methodology:

• Combined Edition: De Jong presents an edition of all three fragments, based on photocopies from the India Office Library and the Mannerheim fragment provided by Professor Pentti Aalto.
• Editorial Conventions: He outlines the specific conventions used in his edition to indicate missing syllables, letters, partially read characters, restored characters, and features like holes in the manuscript. He also highlights his identification of a punctuation mark (colon) in the manuscript that von Staël-Holstein had missed.
• Reconstruction and Normalization: De Jong details the process of reconstructing the text of the leaf, including normalizing spellings and sandhi (vowel combinations), acknowledging that the original manuscript might have had more irregularities.

Content of the Reconstructed Text (Sections 128-136):

The article then presents the reconstructed text of the leaf, covering:

• Sections 128-130: These sections use similes to illustrate the ineffectiveness of superficial religious practice. They compare those who accumulate vast knowledge of Dharma but do not quell their desires to a physician whose medicine has failed or a sick person who takes kingly medicine but dies within a year, highlighting that true benefit comes from applying the knowledge to overcome afflictions.
• Sections 131-133: These sections continue with analogies. A jewel fallen into a dirty place is like the fruitless pursuit of fame and honor for a knowledgeable person. A garland on a dead person is likened to a person of bad conduct wearing the saffron robe. A prince adorned with flowers is contrasted with a person of bad conduct wearing the saffron robe, emphasizing that outward appearances without inner virtue are meaningless.
• Sections 133-134: The Four False Ascetics: This is a significant part of the text. It identifies four types of individuals who are false representations of virtuous practitioners ("duḥśilāḥ śilavatpratirūpakāḥ"):
  1. A monk who adheres to the prātimokṣa vows and disciplinary rules, is virtuous in conduct, and fearful of even the smallest transgression, yet is an "ātman-believer" (self-centric).
  2. A monk who is a guardian of Vinaya, lives according to discipline, but harbors a "corrupt view of the self" (satkāyadṛṣṭi).
  3. A monk who practices loving-kindness (maitrāvihāri) and compassion, but is frightened when hearing about the emptiness (śūnyatā) of all conditioned phenomena.
  4. A monk who observes the twelve dhūta (ascetic) practices but is opinionated, boastful, and self-important.
• Section 135: The True Nature of Virtue (Śīla): This section defines true virtue (śīla) not as adhering to specific rules or outward appearances, but as a state characterized by the absence of self (no soul, no self-likeness), no action or inaction, no conduct or mis-conduct, no name or form, no cessation or pacification, no grasping or release, no being or proclamation of being, no speech or proclamation of speech, no mind or proclamation of mind, no world or non-world, no reliance or non-reliance, and no boasting of one's own or others' virtue. True virtue is described as stainless, boundless, transcending the three realms of existence, and free from all support.
• Section 136: This section marks the beginning of the Buddha's speech, indicated by "atha khalu bhagavām tasyām velāyām" (At that time the Blessed One said...).

Further Research and Comparisons:

• Vorob'ev-Desjatovskij's Fragments: De Jong also discusses two fragments published by V.S. Vorob'ev-Desjatovskij in 1957, noting corrections to the transliteration and observations on their content, particularly concerning agreements and disagreements with Chinese versions.
• Comparison with Chinese and Tibetan Versions: The article extensively compares the readings and content of the Sanskrit fragments with various Chinese translations (Han, Chin, Ch'in, Sung) and the Tibetan translation. This comparison helps to trace the textual history and identify variations in different recensions.
• Textual Evolution: De Jong notes that the Kāśyapaparivarta appears to be a text where the verse parts are later additions to the original prose. The language of the prose parts is closer to standard Sanskrit, while the verses often use Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit.
• Dating and Transmission: The article delves into the dating of the Kāśyapaparivarta based on its quotations in other texts (like the Śikṣāsamuccaya, Mahāyānasūtrālamkāra, and Prasannapadā) and its translation history into Chinese and Tibetan. It suggests that the text was likely established in a form similar to the one found in von Staël-Holstein's manuscript and the Tibetan version between Sthiramati and Candrakirti. The presence of certain comparisons in older Chinese translations than in later Sanskrit manuscripts points to a complex textual transmission history.
• Authorship: The article touches upon the possibility that the translation of the Kāśyapaparivarta into Chinese might be attributed to Lou-chia-ch'an, a translator active during the Han period.

Overall Significance:

J. W. De Jong's article is a crucial scholarly contribution to the study of the Kāśyapaparivarta. It provides a meticulously edited and annotated reconstruction of important Sanskrit fragments, offering new insights into the text's language, content, and historical development. The comparative analysis with other language versions and the discussion of quotations shed light on the complex transmission and evolution of this significant Mahayana Buddhist scripture.