Sie sind auf Seite 1von 5
Jatarupa's Commentary on the Amarako?a Mahes Raj Pant " data-type="pdf-document" id="pdf-document">
Review: [untitled] Author(s): Leonard W. J. van der Kuijp Source: Journal of the American Oriental

Review: [untitled] Author(s): Leonard W. J. van der Kuijp

Source: Journal of the American Oriental Society, Vol. 123, No. 1 (Jan. - Mar., 2003), pp. 228-

231

Published by: American Oriental Society Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3217872

Accessed: 13/07/2010 12:27

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless

you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=aos.

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org. American Oriental Society is collaborating with JSTOR to

American Oriental Society is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of the American Oriental Society.

http://www.jstor.org

228228

separate

separate

but

but

together

together

Journal of the American Oriental Society 123.1 (2003)

Journal

(2003)

of

the American Oriental

Society

123.1

in

in

themselves,

themselves,

then

then

they attempt

they

attempt to

to make links and

between

make links and correspondences between

correspondences

them, and finally they end up choosing the new and pushing out the old. In Brahmabandhab's case,

them, and finally they end up choosing the new and pushing

out the old. In Brahmabandhab's case,

however, he

however,

he startedwith a

startedwith

near-repudiation of

a near-repudiation of

his

his Hindu

and

Hindu conceptualworld, thenbuilt impressive and

conceptualworld,

thenbuilt

impressive

creative bridges between his ChristianandHindu heritages, before

creative bridges between his ChristianandHindu heritages, before finally separating them completely

finally separating them completely

the

in his public and private lives. Thathe was forced to the latter move, late in life, was not simply the

in his

public

and

private

lives. Thathe was forced to the latter

move,

late in

life,

was not

simply

resultof

resultof

outcome of

changingtheological opinions. It was also a tragic outcome of

changingtheological opinions.

It was also a

tragic

personal and political

political

personal

and

frustra-

frustra-

tions,

tions,

heritage of

heritage

a

as

as well as a

well

as

growing nationalistresentment againstimperialistarrogance. In

growing nationalistresentment againstimperialistarrogance. In

lasting

anycase, the lasting

anycase,

the

of Brahmabandhab'sideas in the field

Brahmabandhab'sideas in the field of

of indigenous

indigenous Christianizing movements areChristian

Christianizing movements areChristian

monastic institutions such as

monastic institutions such as Shantivanam, established in

Shantivanam, established in 1950 by

1950 by Swami Abhishiktanandaand his

Swami Abhishiktanandaand his

associates,

associates,

in

in orderto make

orderto

make Christianitytruly Indian (p.

Christianitytruly

Indian

205).

(p. 205).

It is

It is

ironic, given

ironic, given

their

their origins in

origins

Brah-

in Brah-

mabandhab'sown

mabandhab'sown monastic

monastic experimentation, thatthe

experimentation, thatthe Vishwa

Vishwa HinduParishad roundly condemns such

HinduParishad roundly condemns such

Christianashramasas

Christianashramasas being anti-nationalcovers for missionary activity.

being anti-nationalcovers for missionary activity.

While it is

writing

While it is clear that Lipner has warmedto his task in writing this biography-through his writing

clear that

Lipner

has warmedto his task in

writing

this

biography-through

his

of char-

one

flame,

acter,nicely symbolizedby Lipner's sustained metaphorthroughout the chapterheadings of the flame,

char-

acter,nicely

aboutthis

rising

the things I most appreciate aboutthis

book is the author'srefusalto

this straightforward brandof fulfillment

breaking

breaking and laudable,yes.

lost by this straightforward brandof fulfillment

theory (Hinduismleading

theory (Hinduismleading to

Brahmabandhab'srecourseto a Sanskrit-based philosophical

the encounter?And what is the cost of

the encounter?And what is the cost of

Brahmabandhab'srecourseto a Sanskrit-based philosophical

one gets a real feel

gets

a real feel for

for Brahmabandhab's impetuousness,impatience,charisma, and strength of

Brahmabandhab's impetuousness,impatience,charisma,

and

strength

Lipner's sustained metaphorthroughout the

chapterheadings

of the

of the

of

things

I most

appreciate

what is lost by

symbolizedby

snuffed out-one

rising to a blaze and then quickly being snuffed out-one

to a blaze and then

quickly being

book is the author'srefusalto eulogize or

and

deify. Brahmabandhab's theologicalexperiments are ground-

eulogize or deify. Brahmabandhab's theologicalexperiments are ground-

laudable,yes. But, Lipnerasks,

to its true

its

true calling

calling

in

in

But, Lipnerasks, what is

Catholicism)? CannotChristiansalso be

Catholicism)?

reformedin

CannotChristiansalso be reformedin

brandof Hindu

brandof Hindu thought? Whatof Hindusfor whom Sanskritis not a backgroundtradition,or, worse,

backgroundtradition,or, worse,

thought?

Whatof Hindusfor whom Sanskritis not a

for whom it has been a tyranny?Lipner's critiques of his subject are harshestwhen it comes to the

for whom it has been a

be-

subject of

subject of

andsocial purity, whichBrahmabandhabdefendedwith pride, be-

of his subject are harshestwhen it comes to the

tyranny?Lipner's critiques

andsocial

vamrnsramadharma,

caste, vamrnsramadharma,

caste,

purity, whichBrahmabandhabdefendedwith

pride,

lieving that they were part of the divine gift of naturalreason and shouldbe maintainedin an indig-

lieving

indig-

enous

enous Christianity.Lipner notes with

some distastethatBrahmabandhab'sashramawould have been

notes with some distastethatBrahmabandhab'sashramawould have been

that

they

were

part

of the divine

gift

of

naturalreason and shouldbe maintainedin an

Christianity.Lipner

neither very Christian, because of the caste separations, nor very Hindu, since renouncersare sup-

neither

sup-

posed

posed

Muslims and Buddhists?In this, the present-dayproponents of Hindutvawould find common cause.

Hindutvawould find common cause.

Muslims and Buddhists?In

very Christian,

to

to

give

give up

up

because of the caste

personalities. And

personalities.

separations,

nor

very Hindu,

since renouncersare

their social

their social

And what of

what of

Brahmabandhab's disparaging remarksabout

Brahmabandhab's disparaging remarksabout

this, the present-dayproponents of

In the

today

In the end, Lipner leaves us with four large questions which are pertinent not only in India today

"natural"and

of

religious identity

of religious identity

of "natural"and

end,

Lipner

leaves us with four

bridgehead on

which

large questions

which are

pertinent not only

speak

in India

but also in all contexts of

but also in all contexts of

inter-religiousdialogue

inter-religiousdialogue and inculturation.Can we speak of

and inculturation.Can we

narrow should our labels

narrow should our labels

"supernatural" truthsin

"supernatural" truthsin

be? Is therea shared bridgehead on which religio-cultural discussions can stand?And is it possible to

to

be

be a

cultural-neutralterms? How

cultural-neutralterms? How

be? Is therea shared

patriotic

religio-cultural discussions

wishing

thatanswersto these

can stand?And is it

questions

were

possible

easy,

andthat

a patriotic IndianChristian? Except for wishing thatanswersto these questions were easy, andthat

IndianChristian? Except for

he had given them to us definitively, I can thinkof no criticism of Lipner's outstanding work.In pre-

he has dem-

senting Brahmabandhab Upadhyay to us in such a straightforwardyet compelling form, he has dem-

senting

he had

pre-

given

them to us

definitively,

I can thinkof no criticism of

us in such a

Lipner's

outstanding work.In

form,

Brahmabandhab Upadhyay to

straightforwardyet compelling

onstrated just

onstrated just

how

how

complex

complex

the issue of Christian

the issue

of

was

Christian indigenization was

indigenization

and still

and still

remains for Indians

remains for Indians

committedto their

committedto their country.

country.

RACHELFELLMCDERMOTT

RACHELFELLMCDERMOTT

BARNARDCOLLEGE

BARNARDCOLLEGE

Jatarupa's

Jatarupa's

Commentary

Commentary

on

on the

the Amarakosa,

Amarakosa,

pts.

pts.

1

1 and 2.

and 2. Edited

Edited

512. Rs 1295.

MOTILAL BANARSIDASS, 2000. Pp. x + 468, x + 512. Rs 1295.

MOTILAL BANARSIDASS, 2000.

Pp. x + 468,

x +

by

by

MAHESRAJ PANT. New

MAHESRAJ PANT. New

Delhi:

Delhi:

famous

known

and oldest extant lexicon

and oldest

the text that has been handed down attests to its great popularity, yet next to nothing is concretely

concretely

is surely the most famous

Amarasimha's

Amarasimha's

Ndmalihganusdsana,

Ndmalihganusdsana,

better known

better

as the

as the Amarakosa,

Amarakosa,

is

surely

the

most

extant lexicon

of the Sanskrit

of the Sanskrit language. The very large corpus of complete manuscripts of

language.

its

The

very

large corpus

yet

of

next

complete

to

nothing

manuscripts

is

of

the text that has

been handed down

attests to

great popularity,

Reviews

of Books

229

known aboutits author.Even an edition with a suitably critical apparatus is still

outstanding.Writing

in circa the sixth centuryA.D., Amarasimha begins the substanceof his worknot with one or the other

Hindu deity, but with an enumerationof twenty-five differentterms for the Buddha, from sugata to mayadevisuta.For this and two other reasons, namely that the first entry of its listing of trees is the Ficus religiosa (bodhivrksa), the treeunderwhich the Buddhaachievedhis enlightenment, andthatthe

opening stanzais suggestive of a Buddhist religiousenvironment, he is usually consideredto have been

a

must no doubt have contributedto its enormous popularitythroughout the subcontinent.It is orga-

nized into three kanda-sections comprising twenty-five chapters(varga). The first two comprise ten chapters each. The thirdhas five chapters, of which the last deals in forty-six stanzaswith a gramma- tical summary of the rulesof gender (lihgadisamgraha). Itis estimatedthatmorethan eighty commen- taries were writtenon it. The well-known histories of Sanskrit lexicographyby C. Vogel (1979) and M. M. Patkar (1981) list a good portion of this interpretiveplenum, the vast majority of which remain as unstudiedas they areunedited.The Amarakosawas also translatedinto a host of Indic languages, including Sinhalese. A Moggallana (ca. twelfth century) relied a great deal on it when compiling his Abhidhanappadipika, the earliestextant lexicon of Pali. It also exertedno uncertaininfluence beyond the subcontinent, for it was renderedinto Burmese, Nevari, Tibetanas well as Mongolian. The work under review, Mahes Raj Pant's study and edition of the oldest extant exegesis of Amarasimha's work, titled simply Amarakosatlka,by the hitherto barely known Jatarupa,represents in every respect a milestone in the field of Amarakosastudies and Sanskrit lexicography in general.

It is based on the author's discovery of two Sanskrit manuscripts that were copied in Nepal. One is

Buddhist. The fact that the Amarakosa is by no means obviously or stridently Buddhist in tenor

housed in the

lection of the National Archives, Kathmandu, andis dated1755 [= B]. They were filmed by the Nepal- German Manuscript Preservation Projectunder,respectively, Reel nos. C 121/1 and A 1031/10 (and once again underB 266/15). Unfortunately, both manuscripts are incomplete.Manuscript A originally consisted of 153 folios, but some ninety-three folios of the text are missing; manuscript B has but twenty-five folios and ends with the seventh varga of the first kanda. Part 1, pp. 57-282, of Pant's work is an incredibly detailedexaminationof these two manuscripts andtheir distinguishingfeatures; part2, pp. 3-325, formshis meticulously executed edition of both manuscripts, to which he has added five appendices(pp. 327-408) and no less than twenty indices (pp. 409-512). Needless to say, both

parts areinformed by the impressiverange of the author's erudition, as indicatedin the long bibliog- raphy(part1, pp. 7-53) and by his copious annotations.The latteraresometimesshort essays in them- selves, as is for example note 21 on the term upakdrika, which occupies some nine pages (1: 389-97).

Kaisher Library,Kathmandu, and is dated 1119 [= A];

the other forms part of the col-

Pant details "Jataruipa: His Time and Place" in part 1, pp. 283-308. Manuscript A is dated 1119

and this forms a convenient terminusad quem for Jatarupa's work. The fact that, with his stunning knowledge of a wide range of Sanskrit literature, the authorwas able to trace an unidentified quota-

tion in Jataruipa to Rajasekhara's(early tenth century)Viddhasalabhanjika drama (2: 70) leads him to

conclude that Jatariipa must have flourishedin the second half of the tenth century, at the earliest.

the absence of a sufficientnumberof exact dates, one method that needs to be used for arriving at a

more or less satisfactorydating of Jataruipa andhis commentary is to establish

among the oldest known Amarakosa exegeses; these are: (1) Sarvananda's1159-60 Tikasarvasva, (2) Ksirasvamin's undated Amarakosodghatana, and (3) Subhuticandra's equally undated Kama- dhenu (or, as Pant prefers,Kavikamadhenu). Before continuing, we must note an observationmade

by G. Cardonathatmerits repeating.Manuscripts of texts travelledacrossIndiaat a much faster pace thanis usually assumed, andthereis evidence thattwo decades or so after composition was often suf-

In

a relative chronology

ficient

for one to reach either extremity of the subcontinent. Jatarupa is cited by Sarvananda and, in

Pant's

view, by Ksirasvaminas well, so thathe would also antedatethe latter. Contrary to the dating

of Ksirasvamin proposedby C. Vogel (namely, the firsthalf of the twelfth century) and giving a more convincing interpretation of the author's colophon of Ksirasvamin's Ksiratarahginl, Pant argues that Ksirasvaminflourishedone century earlier and that, in fact, it indicates he was a contemporary of King Bhoja (ca. 1000-1055) of Malava. Beginning with Ksirasvamin, the Amarakosacommentators regularly and variously quote from this king's dense studies of grammar,literarycriticism, and poet- ics, such as the Sarasvatikanthabharanaand the Srhgaraprakada.Only Jatarupa does not do so in his

230 Journal of the American Oriental Society 123.1 (2003)

extantcommentson the corresponding Amarakosaentries.This detail provides the firstbit of circum- stantialevidence that he lived before Bhoja's literary treatises. Pant also demonstratesthat Jatarupa

was

quo for his commentary. He shows furthermore, on the linguistic evidence of the commentaryitself, that Jatarupa was most probably a native of Bengal. As is known, the term "Gauda"is often used in the sense of Bengal. Ksirasvamin critically refers to an exegete by the name of Gaudaon some seventeen occasions, of which nine occur in the relevantAmarakosaentriesfor which we have avail-

able Jatarupa's comments. Six of these give the strong impression that he targetedJatarupa, while

the remaining threetell us nothing in this regard. The authorconcludes on the strength of of circumstantialevidence that Jatarupa lived around the year 1000 and that he was

Ksirasvamin. Though not airtight, the evidence he providespoints to the very high probability thathe is right on this score. Lastly, Sarvanandacites both Jatarupa and Ksirasvamin, but not expressly Su-

bhuticandra.Pantadducesin part 2 parallel andidentical passages in the comments on AmarakosaI.1

for Jatarupa and Ksirasvamin (pp. 355-58) and Jatarupa and Sarvananda (pp. 371-82). The relative chronology of Jatarupa and Subhuiticandrais uncomplicated, for the formeris doubt- less anteriorto the latter. Fairly well known in India, Subhuticandraand his work were also quite familiar quantities in Tibetan scholarly circles, and I believe there is very little reason to doubt that he is the very same Subhuticandrawho is mentionedin the long andconvolutedtranslator's colophon

rgyal mtshan appended

('gyur byang)

to his Tibetantranslationof the enormous Aryasaddharmasmrtyupasthanastra. 1 Therewe learnthat

Pa tshab had studied the sutrain Nalanda monastery under, among others, mahapanditaAbhaya- karagupta, andthathe hadreceivedinstructionson the same from mahapandita Subhuticandrawhile at

familiarwith Sridhara's Nydyakandall of 991-92,

and thereby establishes this as the terminusa

this corpus

anteriorto

Pa tshab Lo tsa ba

("Sanskritist cum translator") Tshulkhrims

Vikramasila monastery. He says of the latter that he was "a scholar of grammar (sgra, sabda),

(snyan dngags, kavya),2 and the 'modality'

poetics

of the Sanskrit language (sgra dang / snyan dngags dang

/ legs par sbyar ba'i skad kyi lugs la mkhas pa)"; the latter phrase may, but only may, indicate lexi-

cography. The first draft of the translationwas completed, as Pa tshab says, sometime during the reign of the Pala King Ramapala, who ruled from about 1072 to 1126.3 Given that Abhayakaragupta flourishedsomewherebetween roughly 1060 and 1125-his last dated work, the enormous Amnaya-

manjari commentary

pala's thirty-seventh

on the Samputatantra

regnal year (circa

(and a great deal else besides),

was completed

in Rama-

1110)-we

can therefore predicate more or less the same of

1. The Tibetan Tripitaka,Taipei [= Sde dge] Edition, ed. A. W. Barber (Taipei: SMC PublishingInc., 1991),

vol. 15, no. 287 [#287], 65/7-6/3 [Sha,228a-9b]. We may note here that, in spite of the fact thatPa tshab expressly

indicated by his use of the expression

bkas bead, the last post-colophonic line by anunknowneditorstates:"Therealso appears some dissimilaritieswith

the obsolete terminology of yore" (yi ge'i brda sngon gyi rtving pa dang mi 'draba cung zad kyangsnang). Aside

from the usage of bkas bead, "[standards for nomenclature] determined by royal decree," and skad gsar bead, "determinationfor new terminology," in connectionwith the Tibetantranslationsof Buddhist scripturesduring the

imperialperiod,Nyang ral Nyi ma'i 'od zer (1124-92) also uses the latter expression in the ecclesiastic chronicle

wrote towardsthe end of his life, with referenceto its application in the era of the royal monk LhaBla ma Zhi

bcud, ed. Nyan shul Mkhyen rab 'od gsal, 1988), 465.

ba 'od (1016-1 111); see his

he

states that he made use

of standardized orthography and nomenclature, as

Chos 'byung me tog snyingpo sbrang rtsi'i

Gangs can rig mdzod 5 (Lhasa: Bod Ijongs mi dmangsdpe skrun khang,

2. This expression is not listed in Dbus pa Blo gsal Byang chub ye shes' (ca. 1265-1355) undatedBrda gsar

rnyinggi rnam par dbye ba, a glossary of obsolete terms(brda rnying) andtheir updated (brda gsar) equivalents;

see Mimaki Katsumi, "Dbus pa Blo gsal no 'Shin kyu goi shu' koteibon shok3,"in Asian Languages and General

Linguistics:Festschriftfor Prof TatsuoNishida on the Occasion of his 60th Birthday(Tokyo, 1990), 17-54. How-

ever, the cognate Brda gsar rnyinggi rnam gzhag li shi'i gur khang of 1536 (ed. Mgon po rgyal mtshan [Beijing:

Mi rigs dpe skrun khang, 1991], 16), attributedto Skyogs ston Lo tsa ba Rin chen bkrashis (ca. 1485-?), registers

dngags as an obsolete form of the updatedngag. Dpa' ris Sangs rgyas, Das yig rig pa'i gab pa mngonphyung, ed. Dbang phyug mtsho mo (Xining: Mtsho sngon mi rigs dpe skrun khang, 1999), 447, rightly dismisses the supposition of unnamedothers that, whereas snyan ngag denotes verse characterized by the use of poetic figures, snyan dngags refersto a treatisedevoted to an exposition of such figures.

3. D. C. Sircar, Some Epigraphical Records of theMedievalPeriod for EasternIndia (New Delhi: AbhinavPub-

lications, 1979), 31.

ReviewsReviews

ofof BooksBooks

231231

Subhuticandra, who was probably at thattime a seniorscholaras well, if only because he, too, is styled

Subhuticandra, who

styled

was

probably at

thattime a seniorscholaras

well,

if

only

because

he, too,

is

a mahapandita. Pant dates his Amarakosa commentary to about the third or fourth decade of the

the sutracan

twelfth century, but this may have to be pushed back a few decades. The translationof the sutracan

twelfth

the

a

mahapandita.

century,

Pant dates his Amarakosa

but this

may

have to be

commentary

to

about the third or fourth decade of

pushed

back a few decades. The translationof

perhaps be dated not earlierthan the first or the second decade of the twelfth century, and Subhuti-

and Subhuti-

perhaps

be dated not earlierthan the first or the second decade of the twelfth

century,

candramust already have been a senior scholarat this time. The four manuscripts of the Sanskrittext

candramust

Sanskrittext

already

have been a senior scholarat this time. The four

manuscripts of

the

of the Kamadhenuthathave been located so far areall

of the Kamadhenuthathave been located so far areall fragmentary.Judging from my (cursory) read-

fragmentary.Judging from my (cursory) read-

ing through

ing

through the

tu

the 1750-57

1750-57

(or 1748-56)

(or 1748-56)

text of the Kama-

Tibetantranslationof a virtuallycomplete text of the Kama-

Tibetantranslationof a

refers

refers

rje).4

virtuallycomplete

rje).4 The

dhenu by

by

dhenu

Si tu Panchen Chos

Si

Chos

Panchen

(1700-1774),

kyi 'byunggnas' (1700-1774),

kyi

'byunggnas'

Subhuticandranowhere

Subhuticandranowhere explicitly

explicitly

to either

of

Si tu Pan chen's source for several incomplete manuscripts of

this translationand his

this translationand his

to

Si tu Pan chen's source for several

either Jatarupa(Tib.

Jatarupa(Tib. *Skye gzugs)

gzugs)

*Skye

or

or Ksirasvamin

Ksirasvamin

(Tib.

(Tib.

ba'i

Zhi ba'i

Zhi

Kathmandu Valley was

The Kathmandu Valley was

incomplete manuscripts

the Kamadhenuhe was able to use for

the Kamadhenuhe was able to use for

other studies of

other studies of

Indo-Tibetan lexicography.

Indo-Tibetan lexicography.

Pantalso discusses the few detailsabout Jatarupa andhis

Pantalso

detailsabout Jatarupa andhis

discusses the few

scholarlypractice thatcanbe

scholarlypractice thatcanbe

from

gleaned from

gleaned

his

his

409-46).

commentary(1:

commentary(1: 409-46).

Jatarupa was

Jatarupa was probably

probably a

a Buddhist.He

Buddhist.He

points out

points

out that

that Manuscript A

Manuscript A

be-

be-

gins

sarvvajnaya///).

(om namah sarvvajnaya///).

gins

(om namah

with a line of

of

with

a

line

homage

homage to

to the Buddha

the

He

rightly

very

(namo buddhaya//)

Buddha (namo buddhaya//)

andB with one to the OmniscientOne

andB with one to the OmniscientOne

He rightly refrainsfrom concluding thatthis necessarily implies he was

that at least one of

Buddhist. Indeed, the very fact that we have these variant readings suggests that at least one of

Buddhist.

he was

refrainsfrom

concluding

thatthis

necessarily implies

a

a

Indeed,

the

fact that we have these variant

readings suggests

these reflects the

these reflects the religious sentimentsof

sentimentsof

religious

their unknown scribes. But he

their unknown scribes. But he

does indicate that

does

indicate that Jatarupa's

Jatarupa's

comment on

comment on the indeclinable particle khalu in AmarakosaIII.3.252d (2: 289)

reads atha khalu bha-

the indeclinable particle khalu in AmarakosaIII.3.252d (2: 289) reads atha khalu bha-

gavan, which is "well known from Mahayana texts."

gavan,

texts."

which is "well known from

Mahayana

The two manuscripts of Jatarupa's Amarakosatlkathatenteredthe Kathmandu Valley at anunknown

The two

Jatarupa's Amarakosatlkathatenteredthe Kathmandu Valley at anunknown

manuscripts of

time, andwere then copied there,once again demonstratethe key role the valley has played, andcon-

andcon-

tinues to

tinues to

time,

andwere then

in

play,

play, in

copied

there,once

again

demonstratethe

key

role the

valley

has

played,

the transmissionand preservation of

the transmissionand preservation of

the Indiansubcontinent'smost valuable literary

literary

the Indiansubcontinent'smost valuable

treasures.It is thus

treasures.It is

the

thus quite fitting that Pant, among the

that

quite fitting

Pant, among

very

very best

best of the scholars

of

the

scholars currently active

currently

active in the

in the

arcane

valley, has laid before us such an exquisitely arcane piece of work as this exhaustive study. It is a

valley,

a

has laid before us such an

exquisitely

piece

of

work as this exhaustive

study.

It is

monumentto the kind of scholarship thatis now, in the face of unrelentingmodernity,progressively

unrelentingmodernity,progressively

and

and

monumentto the kind of

thatis now, in the face of

scholarship

regrettably

regrettably on

on the decline.

the decline.

J. VANDERKUIJP

LEONARDW. J. VANDERKUIJP

LEONARDW.

HARVARDUNIVERSITY

HARVARDUNIVERSITY

4.

4. Ming dang rtags rjes su ston pa'i bstan bcos 'chi med mdzod kyi rgya cher 'grel pa 'dod 'jo'i ba mo,

mo,

Ming dang rtags rjes

su ston

pa'i

bstan bcos 'chi med mdzod

kyi rgya

cher

'grel pa

'dod

'jo'i

ba

Collected Works, vols. 4 and 5 (Sansal:Shesrabling Instituteof Buddhist Studies, 1990), 243-738, 2-421.

Collected

2-421.

Works,

vols. 4 and 5

(Sansal:Shesrabling

Instituteof Buddhist

Studies, 1990), 243-738,

The Haunting Fetus: Abortion,Sexuality, and the Spirit Worldin Taiwan. By MARCL. MOSKOWITZ.

MARCL. MOSKOWITZ.

The Haunting Fetus: Abortion,Sexuality, and the Spirit Worldin Taiwan. By

Honolulu:UNIVERSITYOFHAWAI'I PRESS, 2001.

Honolulu:UNIVERSITYOFHAWAI'I PRESS, 2001. Pp. viii + 206.

viii + 206.

Pp.

popu-

lar beliefs

cope

with the physical and emotional traumaof having

with the physical and emotional traumaof having an abortion.Marc L. Moskowitz's book on this

popu-

lar

cope

an abortion.Marc L. Moskowitz's book on this

subject,

subject, which is the revised version of

of

During-thepast

During-thepast three decades, the legalization of

three

decades,

from

from

the

legalization

have

have

abortioncombinedwith the importation of

importation of

abortioncombinedwith the

beliefs

and

and

practices

practices

Japan

Japan

the

reshaped the

reshaped

ways

ways

Taiwanesewomen

that Taiwanesewomen

that

to

attempt to

attempt

which is the revised version of his

his

1999 Ph.D. thesis, provides a vivid and at times moving

moving

1999 Ph.D.

spirits

spirits

thesis, provides

a vivid and at times

ethnographic accountof

ethnographic accountof

cults to fetus ghosts (yingling -l

ghosts (yingling -l

cults to fetus

(xiaogui /J\j),

) andfetus demons (xiaogui /J\j),

)

andfetus demons

widely believed to be the souls of fetuses who were aborted by their mothers or who were miscar-

ried. Moskowitz is

ried. Moskowitz is

widely

deeply personal subject, having

done

and deeply personal subject, having

done extensive fieldworkin Taiwanfrom

were miscar-

believed to be the souls of fetuses who were aborted

by

highly qualified to researchsuch a sensitive

highly qualified

extensive

fieldworkin

their mothers or who

to researchsuch a sensitive and

September 1994

September

to

1994 to

Taiwanfrom

September 1999.

September

1999. In additionto

In additionto visiting

visiting

temples

temples

the

and shrines dedicatedto the

and

shrines

dedicatedto

worship

worship

of

fetus

of fetus

spirits,

spirits,

he also interviewed

he

interviewed

also

women

forty-three women

forty-three

and twelve

of his infor-

as ninety-three friends andrelatives of people who had such experiences. The majority of his infor-

as

and twelve men who had

men

who

had experiences with

experiences

fetus

with fetus

ghosts

ghosts

or who were

or

who

were

such

appeasing such

appeasing

as well

ghosts, as well

ghosts,

ninety-three

friends andrelatives of

people

who had such

experiences.

The

majority

mantswere residentsof the capital city of Taipei, but he also conductedinterviews with people from

mantswere residentsof the

capital city of Taipei, but he also conductedinterviews with people from

the

the central and southern

central and southern parts of

parts

of the island.

the island.