Review article. Ācārya Joindu, Paramātmaprakāśa (Paramappapayāsu) Jérôme Petit

To cite this version:

Jérôme Petit. Review article. Ācārya Joindu, Paramātmaprakāśa (Paramappapayāsu). Orientalistis- che Literaturzeitung, Ed. Neumann, Hans, 2013, 108 (4-5), pp.327-329. ￿hal-01113258￿

HAL Id: hal-01113258 https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01113258 Submitted on 4 Feb 2015

HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. © Akademie Verlag. This document is protected by German copyright law. You may copy and distribute this document for your personal use only. Other use is only allowed with written permission by the copyright holder.

a ṃś for the Comparative ṃśa found a ἄρουρα

āya of Siddha-hema- (Paramappapa- The Apabhra 1 ζείδωρος arities may be attributed to arities may (1088–1172) in the eighth section, Translated from the German [of and an incorrect reference in and an incorrect reference ja. See Richard Pischel: and ā ātmaprakāśa. īndu probably during the sixth cen- Param “Light on the Supreme Self” (hence- 327 Ἀγαμέμνων

āśa . Revised edition …. (Bombay Sanskrit Series 60.) ā. Revised edition k rya: āś Prakrit Grammar. The Eighth Adhy

ā c sana (Hemacandra’s Prakrit Grammar) with his Own Com- Ā κρείων u of this multi-faceted language under which we (2013) 4–5 (2013) ṃśa, which was more accessible than Sanskrit or )

ātmaprak 108 abdānuśā ś mentary, Prak Poona: Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute 1956. devoted to Prakrit languages, of his Siddhahemacandra, a grammar writ- ten for the Gujarati king Siddhar Grammar of the Prakrit Languages. L. 1957; and, Banarasidass 1900] by Subhadra Jha. Delhi: Motilal P. Vaidya (ed.): su). Hindi transl. by Jaykumar Jalaj. Mumbai: Hindi su). Hindi transl. by Jaykumar Jalaj. It is a pity that this handsome volume is marred by a handsome volume is marred by It is a pity that this It has been described by Hemacandra

1 SÜDASIEN DOI 10.1524/olzg.2013.0042 Joindu, title of the book is Paramappapayāsu with the characteris- tic final - have to consider many languages used to compose popular poetry between the fifth and fifteenth centuries. Instead of tury AD. It expounds the different aspects of the self as seen by Jain doctrine, and the way to realise it. The popu- larity of the text has been assured by the author’s use of Apabhra Prakrit at that time. Diachronically, Apabhra place between Prakrit and pre-modern Indo-Aryan lan- guages like old Hindi, old Gujarati, etc. yā Nathuram Premi Granth Karyalay 2007. 72 S. 8° = Pandit ISBN 978-81- Research Series, 9. Brosch. Rs 60,00. 88769-09-4. Bspr. von Jérôme Petit, Paris. Param Jain mysticism, com- forth PP), is a very popular text of posed by Joindu/Yog feeding of horses, including horses of a deity, with Vedic horses of a deity, horses, including feeding of and suggests the simil passages, millennium in the second of Indo-Aryans the presence outcomes discusses the two R.-P. Ritter briefly Near East. ac- provides a stimulating Tichy Armenian. E. of IE *r in provided by Homeric formulae such count of the evidence as (εὐρὺ pre-Greek origins of the Greek hexameter. pre-Greek origins of of misprints, including a garbled final rather high number by Andrés-Toledo, two differ- sentence in the contribution article ent titles for Eichner’s pa- of Skjærvø’s article. Some of the the running header would have benefitted from check- pers written in English are However, such complaints ing by a native speaker. of the editors in minor in comparison with the achievement of articles and in assembling such a valuable collection the birthday of Jean bringing the volume out on time for Kellens.

ō na- a-p-d- yazata . In my ī. Indo- r Paippal- (cf. OP āpadā āṣṭ r ā ā-pad- ātar-; but they Orientalistische Literaturzeitung Literaturzeitung Orientalistische because in its y ‘to roast, bake’. āpadana- ) optative form , this would imply , this would imply ‘place of approach, ‘place of nah im Avesta’ pro- giri- jj- 19) on the one hand arə v āna- -dāna- /bhṛ x a plural conception (which e)’, observing that Greek that Greek e)’, observing MS, KS Yašt und ‘fall’ is not attested with pre- ‘fall’ is not attested bhrajj- āt gadhī and Jaina-Mah pad- represent a different conception as ā śa- optative and must be based on the pre- from ´ ā and the noun’s literal meaning was not and the noun’s literal ‘Fortune, Kingly Glory’ on the other. ‘Fortune, Kingly Glory’ on the other. p ‘water’) towards “an assertion of primordial ‘water’) towards “an assertion of primordial ṛjjá- ’, G. Lazard ‘Qu’est devenue la préposi- ‘Qu’est devenue Lazard ārīh’, G. nah -yet- pad- ə p- context it cannot mean ‘husband’s sister’ and li, Ardham may be a calque on the OP verb calque on the OP may be a ā 19.19.9–11 the early in order to confirm ṇa’s āt (found only in ar v ‘place of worship’) was remodelled to ‘place of worship’) ūtra ṃhit , and secondly that if original * , and secondly that ?’) are less substantial. M. Janda suggests OP Janda suggests OP substantial. M. ?’) are less ā ō Finally, we note some fine papers dealing with Old Among the studies of mythology, M. A. Andrés-Toledo of mythology, M. A. Andrés-Toledo Among the studies āyadana- compounds in on the analogy of that the root bhṛjyéyur, and argues that it represents the oldest known example of a Indo-Aryan and other branches of Indo-European. T. Got Indo-Aryan and other branches of Indo-European. T. P. Swennen ‘Indra entre Inde et Iran’ follows up a discus- Swennen ‘Indra entre Inde et Iran’ P. his previous pub- sion about Indo-Iranian onomastics from must have been a god lications and emphasizes that Indra of the Indo-Iranian pantheon. discusses the Yajurvedic (

‘the Indo-Iranian noose of death’ seeks to establish the noose of death’ seeks to establish ‘the Indo-Iranian my term to eschatology, but, in transference of a hunting the image and its view, he does not succeed in delineating for instance, in early linguistic expression sharply enough: Vedic Varu recognized even by native Iranian speakers. recognized even by ā-pad- explained as a-n should be falling (in obeisanc place of προσπίπτειν the too lightly some difficulties on opinion, he dismisses that Iranian side, firstly lifetime in punish- the deity fetters humans during their Lincoln ‘Implica- B. ment for oath-breaking or falsehood. Mythology of tions of Grammatical Number in Iranian Vegetation’ traces a shift from from Indo-Iranian in it might be added is clearly inherited the case of ā to refer to ele- unity” indicated by an increasing tendency the Younger Avesta, ments of vegetation in the singular in Oettinger ‘Zum N. and above all in the Pahlavi texts. Verhältnis von Apąm Nap verb Frašgird-kard tion

Apąm Nap poses that an original Indo-Iranian god representing ‘the poses that an original Indo-Iranian minor Avestan fire in the water’ has split into the A. Griffiths and A. Lubotsky reedit and translate Griffiths and A. A. āda Sa sent stem bh and the x Gṛhya S meaning ‘husband’s brother’s wife’ for they think a shift in meaning to ‘wife’s sister’ or ‘brother’s wife’ is unlikely under the social conditions of Vedic In- dia. J. Sakamoto-Gotō traces the employment of optatives with a preterite value in late Vedic, Epic, Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit, Pā reject the sense ‘sister-in-law’ for Aryan and Iranian have innovated independently but this careful study supplies interesting typological comparisons for the better known Old Iranian developments. H. Eichner compares some Hittite rituals and prayers involving the © Akademie Verlag. This document is protected by German copyright law. You may copy and distribute this document for your personal use only. Other use is only allowed with written permission by the copyright holder.

) - ā ), ā āt-

īlī pary- ) and vah to ūjyap bahis- ṣadic world, ndu starts to īndu starts darśana- āra verse (146) a and P ). These aspects ). These tā puṇṇa amha m ). Yog āhuḍ tman simply sees and kara. This kind of con- parama- ) only. From an absolute ) only. From an absolute īya) and flexible (lac even if he be a busy lay- ātman- Mokkhap ātm ) “the Ā ṭṭa Prabhā āra, an important work which , p. 5). Nothing is said about the 5). Nothing is , p. ranaya- ā ) and undergoes modifications ( ) and undergoes modifications . He mentions the fact that Joindu has tī hai a- ). The modifications are caused by kar- ). The modifications

cayanaya- ), and supreme ( ), and supreme , the realisation). vyavah Samayas guṇ niś ), personal ( āna- jñ siddhi- antara- ādhitantra (2013) 4–5 (2013) sahaj ṃśa section. Jalaj describes this language as the tman does not bring about bondage and liberation Ātman does not bring about bondage and ī tarah bahꞋ 108 , etc.) and the clear and concise exposition of the goal Sam ). It has only two qualities: vision ( ). It has only two ā k In the short introduction of the present book (pp. 5–8),In the short introduction of the present book (pp. founded the basis of Jain mysticism. Joindu probably knew founded the basis of Jain mysticism. the same topics, but this text, by the reference he made to quote Kunda- neither he himself nor his commentators that Kundakunda kunda a single time. In the same way Jewels of Jainism invited readers not to follow the Three but to prefer the (right faith, knowledge, and conduct), knows: him” (Upadhye: 34). which are caused by Karman for to a large extent in These two points of view are developed Kundakunda’s language of the people; “it spreads like the wind” ( hou), said Joindu to Bha of mysticism tradiction to common sense is a hallmark real nature of the self, which invites one to contemplate the religious prac- rather than to indulge oneself with external tice. It reminds one of the famous Samayas in which Kundakunda says that a chain binds a man, whether it be made of gold or of iron. This philosophical Jain tradition is also influenced by the Upani as shown by the vocabulary used to describe the soul ( man- to attain ( Jaykumar Jalaj reminds us, following Upadhye, of the influence of Kundakunda’s hav point of view ( knowledge ( been quoted in Hemacandra’s Prakrit grammar in the Apabhra natural ( search for the supreme self, Joindu invited his pupil not to search for the supreme self, Joindu invited 2,60): merits will look for merits (here PP 183; Upadhye and pride to demerits!bring wealth, wealth leads to pride, ( “So, may there be no merit to us” da’s number of verses and the decision to gather the two chap- ters in one. Further, the reader, man, could need some bibliographical references in order to go further if the text speaks significantly to him. As Indic texts are generally not stable, the list of verse begin- nings at the end of the book (pp. 67–72) is very helpful. ndu, the former questioning the latter questioning Yogīndu, the former and his teacher ( nature of the self on the real āya- so they are real from a conventional mic associations, point of view ( three kinds: external ( the self is of three kinds: explain that internal ( renounce one should of the path to liberation: give an idea the realise the supreme self by knowing the external self to the main exercise consists in separating internal self. The an from the sphere of the soul, which is sphere of the body free from karman. The diffi- embodiment of knowledge, is a substance, and as such it was born culty is that the soul with qualities ( , la Lu- Pa- kara īvā ma’s ā Bulletin It has 2 sal ā ndu”, ādhitantra ra, another ī ma K ṭṭa Prabhā etc., in which etc., in which ā Sam Orientalistische Literaturzeitung Literaturzeitung Orientalistische de Yog Yogasā āra da’s soraṭha ā es in one single chapter. re published: a French translation iting an ancient text needs ūjyap modern readership in India easy and vivid style, with a easy and vivid style, caupaī, ”, Ibid.: 249–318). ā, āra or P century). This kind of vernacular century). This kind rendering by Daulatar rendering th Yogas āṣā huḍa 16 {1998}: 233–247), and a transcription, together . (Rivages poche, Petite bibliothèque 281.) Paris: Payot (Colette Caillat: “Le Yogas a et du

hapā āra āś ), one of 126 verses (118 + 8), the other of 219 Aṭṭ Yogas metres used in Prakrit works, Apabhraṃśa intro- in Prakrit works, metres used āya- ātmaprak ā ram d’Études Indiennes with a detailed glossary, of both texts (Nalini Balbir: “Glossaire du The PP is traditionally edited in two chapters mière de l’Absolu & Rivages 1999. Besides, two papers we of the The PP was edited along with the adhy A French translation was made by Colette Caillat and Nalini Balbir: (1692–1772) by Brah- of a Sanskrit commentary written 13 madeva (approx. the PP is mostly composed. The second reason of its popu- The second reason mostly composed. the PP is Braj Bh larity is a

been published by the Shrimad Rajachandra Ashram in been published by the Shrimad Rajachandra known in 2000). In- Agas with several reprints (the latest apparatus of that stead of the 386 pages and the critical can be utilised at any publication, the work presented here of 72 pages, well- moment of every-day life. It is a booklet a short introduction printed with a clear typographical font, verses. The title page by the translator, and an index of the Manish Modi, though mentions that the text is “edited” by we would rather have expected the term “prepared” or in the transmission “published” – also a very noble term process of knowledge – since ed without stinting manuscript references. In the last decade, on his energy, Manish Modi has published several texts of the Jain Digambara philosophical tradition such as Kunda- kunda’s ( which both had influenced Joindu. These publications are given with Hindi translations by Jaykumar Jalaj, making ancient texts accessible to a and abroad. The text depicts a discussion between Bha 2 The present edition gives 337 vers gāth in pre- have been appreciated forms that duced metrical like doh modern poetry, 328 small text of Joindu on the same topics, by A. N. Upadhye small text of Joindu on the same topics, (1906–1975) in 1937, together with Brahmadeva’s com- of Daulatar mentary, a modern Hindi translation translation, fashionable in the Jain milieu, had assured the in the Jain milieu, had assured translation, fashionable philosophical texts composed in Prakritpopularity of many a accessible to a large audience or Sanskrit by making of in a scholarly language. In the case concise work written a third reason to explain its popularity: the PP, we can add in a quite the text is written of repetitions in the verses themselves, successive number with the syntax system of concatenation or between verses, assuring helpful mnemonic tools. rendering, and a critical introduction of a hundred pages. rendering, and a critical introduction due to the quality of This edition is a referential book, both of the study. the work and the intellectual acumen verses (214 + 5), taking into account the “interpolatory verses” (Upadhye), for a total of 345 verses (332 + 13). © Akademie Verlag. This document is protected by German copyright law. You may copy and distribute this document for your personal use only. Other use is only allowed with written permission by the copyright holder.

. sa ā The 1 rudatta ā gnimitra C ā sa is not the is one. The sa based on sa based sa’s lavik sa mention that ā ā ā ī’s judgement on ākya M lid str sa’s authorship and sa’s authorship and ā ā ūtav Śā sa? If Bhā ā D sa in not later than the ā apati , including a century long ṇ (“The envoy’s speech”) con- (“The envoy’s speech”) sa-Project” supervised by Prof. supervised by Prof. sa-Project” ākya ā Dūtav sa’s (fourth/fifth century AC) remark on Dūtavākya 329 ā sa”, or another Bh ā lid sa problem. And it will surely remain like ā ā sa and his works is another serious and un- sa and his works is another serious sa’s authorship, his authorship of a few plays sa’s authorship, his authorship of a ā ā (2013) 4–5 (2013) sa’s full authorship of all the plays; he dated Bh sa’s full authorship of all the plays; 108 ā sa is or is not the author of thirteen plays, the so-called sa is or is not the author of thirteen plays, sa in the introduction to his play sa is concerned or being discussed? That is an endless The first chapter, the introduction (“Einleitung”) does The first chapter, the introduction But the doubts do not cease. Did K in this journal, 107 (2012): 57–60. Cf. the review by Roland Steiner (2004), another drama ascribed to the same author. (2004), another drama The book under review is a serial volume presenting re- a serial volume presenting under review is The book of the “Bh search output Heidrun Brückner (Würzburg University). The main pur- University). The (Würzburg Heidrun Brückner of plays a complete edition project is to prepare pose of the dramatist Bhā to the South Indian ascribed sec- manuscripts. The volume is the collation of existing Anna Aurelia Esposito to the project, ond contribution of in dedicated to drama and theatre published in a series was an edition of Bh South Asia. Her first 1 sists of four chapters concluded with a bibliography and concluded with a bibliography sists of four chapters two indices. on remarks of a general character indeed give introductory the context of the publication on the controversy concerning its authorship, namely whether controversy concerning its authorship, Bhā “Trivandrum plays” of which the concluding answer. question still remains without a the authorship issue Esposito presents an overview of 2–14)(pp. beginning with Ga of the thirteen plays that particular matter. The first editor (Trivandrum Sanskrit Series 1912–1915) held the opinion of Bh to the fourth century AC. However, in course of time to the fourth century AC. However, date were raised by doubts regarding the authorship and a complete de- scholars. Thus we have various opinions: nial of Bh only, anonymous authorship of the “Trivandrum plays”. only, anonymous authorship of the Dating Bh we find ex- solved problem. Among different proposals BC up to the sixth to treme datings, from the first century most probable time tenth centuries AC. However, the AC. A point of seems to be the second to fourth centuries reference is K Bhā That fact supports placing Bh fourth century. “Trivandrum Bh author of all the plays, they might have been created by various persons and in the long span of centuries. So which Bhā query; I may point out that for the last half a century or so a scholarly discussion, or speculation, has been centring round this question without offering a final solution to the so-called Bh that unless there is new evidence that illuminates the issue, and does not obscure it more. Until then only old argu- ments and counter-arguments for Bh

, ī . t < ṃ nā ān se ānꞋ ṃ cukꞋ āryo a puṇu ). When ṇ āc viriu (skt. aur j ī gu

), Jalaj adds ), Jalaj adds jo karmo ā hai akti, which is ānī ś y ) to Hindi. For ) to Hindi. (“etc.”) is in- ī ātm k

Orientalistische Literaturzeitung Literaturzeitung Orientalistische m dī Ꞌ , the reason being, in , the reason (“the qualities of that yā ā sirph dekhꞋt cukā hai aur keval jñ Trivandrum-Dramen ra has also been pub- > ā ākya. Die Wörter des by ātm ko choṙ hai, vah parꞋ oul and its qualities: ndradeva, I bow to them”, while ndradeva, I bow to them”, llow as closely as possible ī ā ṃ tav ṇai naz a is close ( has been replaced by other words are sometimes useful consid- also clear and accessible, and ū ) which is less powerful. Sometimes) which is less powerful. ṃś siness, pointed out by Jalaj also D keval ). In the first verse, the author says “I ). In the first verse, the (the Yogas se pare ne a Research Series – named after the liwczyńska, Warschau. ī āś labdh kar cuk Ś ādi par-dravyo ādi us dravya ke guṇ haiṃ which do not have the same meaning or the same which do not have the same meaning or the appā dekkhai mu ādhuoṃ ena (PP 19–22), Jalaj gives a positive sentence with ṇa (PP 19–22), Jalaj gives ż ā ko upꞋ ma’s rendering in his times. m Prem tmaprak ā ā an, jñān ā aur s r ś ā hai, deh Anna Aurelia: (“and its qualities are vision and knowledge”) is trans- ṇāṇu (“and its qualities are vision and knowledge”) da in the diffusion of these important and potent dar thū Ein Einakter aus den ā u ), invites translators to fo ā āyoṃ ī ṇ uddh and anant n Param ś sa ā jyap (“the soul only sees and knows”), restoring accuracy. (“the soul only sees and knows”), restoring accuracy. s ), the masculine force par excellence, by the word rya-), the masculine force par excellence, by the ū ī ā

Boten. Esposito, texts among Hindi speakers. We hope that Jalaj’s transla- tion will provide the same popularity to Joindu in our times as Daulatar lished in 2007 with a Hindi translation by the same Jayku- mar Jalaj), so we are glad to see it joining Kundakunda and P great Jain scholar who edited and published many Jain works – would not be complete without the publication of the the peculiar rhythm of the verses. Apart from these consid- erations, Jalaj’s translation is the N hai

As we see, the translation says more than the original, in- As we see, the translation says more cluding commentaries which the slight technical ering the concise nature of the text. But level of this work and its ea ( lated by ṇi wise men” (tiṇṇi mu Joindu says “three example, when ( and the ascetics” the teachers, “i.e. the masters, daṃ the words of Jalaj, that Apabhra the words The translation of Jaykumar Jalaj is sometimes of Jaykumar Jalaj The translation cum more a ‘rendering’ because the which is actually useful than a pure translation, commentary no Sanskrit chā no footnotes and edition contains

Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz 2010. 190 S. gr. 8° = Drama und Theater in Südasien 10. Brosch. € 48,00. ISBN 978-3-447- 06294-7. Bespr. von Bo upādhy its power: in verse 24, the translator avoids the repetition, the text loses the repetition of the key-word term ādi substance are vision, knowledge etc.”); the (vision and knowl- convenient because the soul has only two qualities case. A few verses later edge), which is of primary importance in this (64), Jalaj translates like expressing the completeness of something: “One who has completely of something: “One who has completely expressing the completeness who has completely abandoned substances freed himself from karmans, the body etc., and who has completely realised other [than the self], like self” ( the self rich in omniscience, that one is the supreme the word impact on the reader. In the same verse, he translates v detail is the transla- the feminine aspect of the force. Another important tion of verse 58 which describes the s bowed to them”; Jalaj adds “Me, Yog bowed to them”; Jalaj is actually revealed only in verse 7. Where Joindu the name of the author of the self with the repetitive usegives the negative definition of the negative particle “different from (the list)” ( “different from (the list)” the translation is very good, following the original while remaining ac- good, following the original while remaining the translation is very of22 where the translator follows the repetition cessible, like in verse in verse 15 with the repetition of the verb the negative particle, or se sampann ātm mukt ho cuk