[INDOLOGY] Kathāsaritsāgara 1.1.10-11

jacob at fabularasa.dk jacob at fabularasa.dk
Mon Apr 7 12:12:52 EDT 2014


Once again, thanks for the many inputs and references. This time to 
Andrew Ollett, George Hart, Adheesh Sathaye, and Dominik Wujastyk. While 
it may be a while before I can study the Perunkatai in the original, I 
appreciate the feedback from you all. It is most helpful in adjusting 
and expanding my view of the verses in question.

Sincere regards,
Jacob

Andrew Ollett skrev den 2014-04-07 08:39:
> I would add Ryutaro Tsuchida's 2002 article (Über die direkte Quelle
> für die kaschmirischen Versionen der Bṛhatkathā) in Indologica
> Taurinensia 28: 211-250, where the verses in question (1.1.10-12) are
> translated as follows:
>   
> Das vorliegende [Werk] ist genau so beschaffen wie das Originalwerk
> [Guṇāḍhyas]. Es gibt nicht die geringste [inhaltliche] Abweichung
> [des einen von dem anderen]. Der Unterschied [zwischen den beiden
> Werken] besteht lediglich in Länge und Kürze des Textes und in der
> Sprache. [Einerseits] wird Bewahren der Angemessenheit des Ausdruckes
> nach Kräften bewirkt; [andererseits] wird Zusammenstellung des
> Buches, das in sich mehrere Züge der Kunstdichtung hat, unternommen,
> ohne dass dabei dem Inhalt der Erzählungen und der poetischen
> Stimmung irgendein Abbruch geschieht. Meine Bemühungen zielen hier
> nicht darauf ab, dass ich Ruhm in dichterischer Gewand[t]heit erwerbe,
> sondern darauf, dass [der Leser] die verschiedener Netze von
> Erzählungen leicht im Gedächtnis behalten könne.
> 
> On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 12:17 AM, George Hart <glhart at berkeley.edu>
> wrote:
> 
>> The Tamil Peruṅkatai was probably earlier than Somadeva’s work
>> and is thought my many to be based on the Bṛhatkathā.  I would
>> think the first thing to do would be to look at that work.  And if
>> you seriously want to study the Kathāsaritsāgara and its
>> antecedents, it would be important to know Tamil, as I would think
>> the Peruṅkatai is an indispensable link.  Note that R.
>> Vijayalakshmy has written a study of the Peruṅkatai. — see
>> 
> http://www.amazon.com/study-Perunkatai-authentic-Publication-International/dp/B0006EC8I2
>> [1]. George Hart
>> 
>> On Apr 6, 2014, at 1:40 PM, Adheesh Sathaye <adheesh1 at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> 
>>> Dear Jacob,
>>> 
>>> One could also consider also that Somadeva is writing after (and
>> therefore responding to) Kṣemendra; thus could it be that both his
>> usage of the technical term “aucitya” and his comment on the
>> relative value of kathā (narration) vs. kāvya (aesthetic
>> discursus) were directed towards his predecessor?
>>> 
>>> On another note related to your query, I’ve always wondered,
>> and perhaps there are new opinions out there, on whether this
>> “original Paiśācī” Bṛhatkathā ever existed. Everyone seems
>> to take it for granted, but is there any actual evidence for its
>> existence as a fixed, circulated text? Or is it simply a very nice
>> meta-story about a storytelling tradition that crossed many language
>> boundaries—including perhaps Persian?
>>> 
>>> Best wishes,
>>> Adheesh
>>> 
>>> 
>>> ----
>>> Adheesh Sathaye
>>> Department of Asian Studies
>>> University of British Columbia
>>> 
>>> On Apr 6, 2014, at 13.18, jacob at FABULARASA.DK wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Thanks to Michael Hahn, Willem Bollée, and Roland Steiner for
>> responding to my query. You have all given me something to think
>> about.
>>>> 
>>>> I am aware of the disputed translation history of the verses as
>> given in Speyer (1908) and Lacôte (1908), but no consensus appears
>> to have been arrived at since then. I am curious to find out whether
>> Somadeva is hinting that he translated the work from the original
>> Paiśācī and/or versified or rearranged its contents. While the
>> former would only confirm what we already suspect, the latter might
>> tell us something new about how he reworked the popular story
>> material he was working with.
>>>> 
>>>> Best wishes,
>>>> Jacob
>>>> 
>>>> Roland Steiner skrev den 2014-04-06 17:35:
>>>>> See also J.S. Speyer: Studies about the Kathāsaritsāgara,
>> Amsterdam,
>>>>> 1908, esp. p. 22 f.:
>>>>> "My interpretation of çl. 11 is different from that of Lévi.
>> This is
>>>>> partly in consequence of a various reading, partly because he
>>>>> misunderstood the meaning of the words aucitya and anvaya. As
>> to the
>>>>> difference of reading, vidhīyate (Durgapr.'s ed.) seems
>> preferable to
>>>>> abhidhīyate (Brockhaus); but in 1886 the ed. of Durgapr. had
>> not yet
>>>>> appeared. Aucitya does not mean 'les convenances littéraires';
>> it is
>>>>> the technical term to signify 'appropriateness' [p. 23] taken
>> in the
>>>>> widest sense of the word and bearing as well on the different
>> objects,
>>>>> characters, individualities to be represented in a poetical
>>>>> composition as on the adorning implements and the choice of
>> words,
>>>>> expressions and images. Aucityānvaya, then, is the same as
>>>>> aucityānvitatvam, literally 'the being provided with
>> appropriateness'.
>>>>> Lévi also misunderstood kāvyāṃçasya yojanā. Mańkowski
>> rightly objects
>>>>> that the sing. kāvyāṃçasya cannot at any rate mean
>> 'chacune des
>>>>> sections du poème' [...], but his own interpretation, that
>> kāvyāṃça
>>>>> should be referred to some special part of the poem, is right
>> neither.
>>>>> To catch the meaning of kāvyāṃça, it must be compared with
>> devāṃça,
>>>>> aṃçāvataraṇa and the like. Somadeva declares that he does
>> not claim
>>>>> the pretension of making a kāvya out of the Bṛhatkathā, he
>> has only
>>>>> admixed a small portion of kāvya qualities to the simple
>> collection of
>>>>> popular tales. In other terms, aṃça has here the
>> signification not
>>>>> unlike °gandhi at the end of compounds taught by Pāṇini V,
>> 4, 136, 'a
>>>>> tinge of', 'a little of'. My translation of çl. 11 is
>> accordingly: 'I
>>>>> have taken care to preserve the appropriateness (of
>> description,
>>>>> diction etc. of the original work) and I have added to it some
>>>>> qualities proper to a kāvya, without, however, spoiling by
>> this the
>>>>> flavour of the tales', v. a. I have added elegance of style and
>> many a
>>>>> poetical ornament, yet so that I have not deprived the tales of
>> their
>>>>> power to express the rasa's or sentiments aimed at."
>>>>> Best,
>>>>> Roland Steiner
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> INDOLOGY mailing list
>>>>> INDOLOGY at list.indology.info
>>>>> http://listinfo.indology.info [2]
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> INDOLOGY mailing list
>>>> INDOLOGY at list.indology.info
>>>> http://listinfo.indology.info [2]
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> INDOLOGY mailing list
>>> INDOLOGY at list.indology.info
>>> http://listinfo.indology.info [2]
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> INDOLOGY mailing list
>> INDOLOGY at list.indology.info
>> http://listinfo.indology.info [2]
> 
> 
> 
> Links:
> ------
> [1]
> http://www.amazon.com/study-Perunkatai-authentic-Publication-International/dp/B0006EC8I2
> [2] http://listinfo.indology.info
> 
> _______________________________________________
> INDOLOGY mailing list
> INDOLOGY at list.indology.info
> http://listinfo.indology.info




More information about the INDOLOGY mailing list