Dear list members,Matthew Kapstein and ( David Reigle using edition 1929 by Stcherbatsky and Obermiller) spell the word as vīkṣiṣīraṃs . Same text in GRETIL (different editions) spell it vīkṣīṣīraṃs and vīkṣiṣiraṃs
Are these misprints or alternate spellings in GRETIL? pratipatsīrann is spelled the same in these etexts
Matthew Kapstein and ( David Reigle)
sarvākārajñatāmārgaḥ śāsitrā yo'tra deśitaḥ|
dhīmanto vīkṣiṣīraṃs tam anālīḍhaṃ parair iti ||1||smṛtau cādhāya sūtrārthaṃ dharmacaryāṃ daśātmikām |
sukhena pratipatsīrann ity ārambhaprayojanam ||2||--------------------------
GRETIL abhisamayālaṃkaranāmaprajñāpāramitopadeśaśāstram
https://gretil.sub.uni-goettingen.de/gretil/corpustei/transformations/html/sa_maitreyanAtha-abhisamayAlaMkaranAmaprajJApAramitopadezazAstra.htm
input by Christian Coseru (no source book given) has;sarvākārajñatāmārgaḥ śāsitrā yo 'tra deśita /
dhīmantī vīkṣīṣīraṃstamanālīḍhaṃ parairiti // Abhs_1.1 //
smṛtau cādhāya sūtrārthaṃ dharmacaryā daśātmikā /
sūkhena pratipatsīrannityārambhaprayojanam // Abhs_1.2 //
--------------------------------------
GRETIL Abhisamayālaṃkāra https://gretil.sub.uni-goettingen.de/gretil/corpustei/transformations/html/sa_abhisamayAlaMkAra.htm Data entry: members of the Digital Sanskrit Buddhist Canon Input Project
Based on the ed. by Ramsankar Tripathi: Abhisamayalankaravrttih Sphutartha.
Sarnath : Central Institute of Higher Tibetan Studies (CIHTS), 1977.
grānthārambhaprayojanam sarvākārajñatāmārgaḥ śāsitrā yo 'tra deśitaḥ / dhīmanto vīkṣiṣiraṃstamanālīḍhaṃ parairiti // asa_1.2 // smṛtau cādhāya sūtrārthaṃ dharmacaryāṃ daśātmikām /
sukhena pratipatsīrannityārambhaprayojanam // asa_1.3 //Harry SpierOn Thu, Mar 19, 2026 at 5:30 PM Matthew Kapstein via INDOLOGY <indology@list.indology.info> wrote:Many thanks to all who replied on- and off-list. I am sorry that I was not aware of David Reigle's paper, addressing my query so precisely, beforehand, and I am grateful to him and to Asko Parpola for sharing it. Walter Slaje's helpful remarks lend some support to my thought that the benedictive form may have had an intentionally archaic nuance.MatthewMatthew T. KapsteinProfessor emeritusEcole Pratique des Hautes Etudes, PSL Research University, ParisAssociateThe University of Chicago Divinity SchoolMember, American Academy of Arts and SciencesSent with Proton Mail secure email.On Thursday, March 19th, 2026 at 3:39 PM, Asko Parpola <aparpola@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear Matthew, David Reigle ha written a paper (attached) on these very two occurrences of the benedictive.With best wishes, AskoOn Thu, Mar 19, 2026 at 11:39 AM Matthew Kapstein via INDOLOGY <indology@list.indology.info> wrote:Dear friends,In the opening verses (given below) of the Abhisamayālamkāra-śāstra (ASA), an important Mahāyāna Buddhist treatise (said to have been revealed to Asaṅga by the bodhisattva Maitreya), we find two instances of verbs that I take to be examples of “precatives” or “benedictives” (āśīrliṅ) in the middle voice (ātmanepāda) third person plural. Whitney (925) and Macdonell (150) both flatly state that the precative middle, though current in Vedic, does not occur in Classical Sanskrit. Renou (330-331) does not affirm this categorically, but suggests that the āśīrliṅ (without specifying voice) is commonly met with in kāvya and epigraphy, though unknown to Buddhist usage. Edgerton, BHS Grammar, has nothing at all to say about the āśīrliṅ, probably due to its absence in the corpus that he consulted, though the ASA is not in any case written in “hybrid” Sanskrit; its terminology is distinctly Buddhist, of course, but without peculiarly BHS grammatical forms.
Conze, in the vocabulary accompanying his summary translation of the ASA (SOR VI) offers no grammatical analysis, but treats vīkṣiṣīran as an aorist optative, “have been able to behold,” and pratipatsīran as a future optative, “will be able to make progress.” (It seems simpler to me to adopt a mildly benedictive reading of both, “that the wise may behold… and that they may easily master…”)
What I wish to ask the vyākaraṇa specialists, however, is whether I am correct to take these verbs as middle voice āśīrliṅ third person plural? And, if so, are there other instances, whether in Buddhist or non-Buddhist works, that similarly call into question Whitney and Macdonell’s assertions? I would welcome any other observations about this apparently unusual form that you may be able to share. In particular, I am wondering if it is plausible to take its use here as a deliberately archaizing gesture.
sarvākārajñatāmārgaḥ śāsitrā yo'tra deśitaḥ|
dhīmanto vīkṣiṣīraṃs tam anālīḍhaṃ parair iti ||1||
smṛtau cādhāya sūtrārthaṃ dharmacaryāṃ daśātmikām |
sukhena pratipatsīrann ity ārambhaprayojanam ||2||with thanks in advance for your observations and insights,MatthewMatthew T. KapsteinProfessor emeritusEcole Pratique des Hautes Etudes, PSL Research University, ParisAssociateThe University of Chicago Divinity SchoolMember, American Academy of Arts and SciencesSent with Proton Mail secure email.
_______________________________________________
INDOLOGY mailing list
INDOLOGY@list.indology.info
https://list.indology.info/mailman/listinfo/indology
--
_______________________________________________
INDOLOGY mailing list
INDOLOGY@list.indology.info
https://list.indology.info/mailman/listinfo/indology