[Bibliotheca Buddhica I:] Çikshāsamuccaya. A compendium of Buddhistic teaching compiled by Çāntideva chiefly from earlier Mahāyāna-sūtras. Edited by Cecil Bendall. St.-Pétersbourg, 1897 (I), 1898 (II), 1901 (III), 1902 (IV).
As the Introduction gives all that I have at present to say
on the text itself, the present remarks are confined to some explanations
of my own work upon it.
The Introduction deals with the text from several points
of view; but one important aspect is left untouched: namely, its
value as an exposition of Mahāyāna-teaching. In spite of the
difficulty in getting Oriental translations published I am continuing
the preparation of a translation of the text, and I hope
either in connection with this, or as a separate essay, to bring
out the more important doctrinal features of the book, feeling as
I do that it contains much matter likely to interest a wider circle
of readers than a publication such as the present can commmand.
The argument of the book, however, will be at once gathered
from the Summary, which follows the Introduction; and it is
hoped that the notices of subject-matter added in Index I will
also serve to illustrate not only the Çikshāsamuccaya but also
the numerous works (mostly lost in then- original text) from
which it draws its inspiration.
The considerable bulk of the ‘Additional Notes’ constitutes
a rather heterogeneous feature in the work. My object in writing
foot-notes was to render the study of this often difficult text as
attractive as might be to students acquainted with non-Buddhistic
Sanskrit only: — lokāvarjanāya as Çāntideva would say.
My desire was to spare such readers the annoyance of turning to
a commentary as well as to a glossary at the end of the book.
A further advantage has accrued from this arrangement in the
shape of various criticisms that the notes have received during
the progress of the edition, so that I have been enabled to correct
and to supplement. For this reason and more especially on account
of the great progress made in Buddhistic studies during the
seven years occupied in the work, I have after all to request my
readers to refer to the Additional Notes as well as to the footnotes,
particularly in the early part of the hook.
The Glossary (Index II) follows the same lines as the notes.
I have included in it some rare words even though registered
in the two dictionaries of Böhtlingk. In the hope of advancing
the interpretation of Buddhistic terminology I have often preferred
to the discreet silence of the mere in de x verborum an
explanation which I felt to be only provisional and liable to correction
in the light of future research. Both Index II and
Introduction § 4 are of course to be regarded as contributions
merely, not as exhaustive catalogues of the lexical and grammatical
There remains now only the pleasant duty of acknowledging
varied help received. My friend Serge d’Oldenburg, who some
eight years ago induced me to undertake this edition, has aided
me from first to last by many useful suggestions and by unobtrusive
help the more appreciated because given by him often during
times of great personal affliction. His place as acting editor was
occasionally taken by Dr. C. Salemann, whose sympathies and
knowledge extend beyond the Iranian studies by which he is best
Professor E. B. Cowell to whom the work is dedicated,
gave me much help and encouragement in the earlier stage of
Help from Chinese Sources from the late Thomas Watters,
acknowledged in the Introduction to Fasc. I, was continued up
to my friend’s lamented death in January 1901. By an extraordinary
piece of good fortune my help from the Far East did
not end here. For in the same year Prof. Leumann read a
portion of Fase. I with his Japanese pupil Mr. U. Wogihara,
and put me into communication with this gentleman whose dexterity
in handling the vast Chinese literature of translations from
the Sanskrit is astonishing. The results of his identifications of
many passages are registered in Index I and in Additional Notes.
His skill in finding his way through literary jungles is only equalled
by his courteous promptitude as a correspondent.
Prof. Leumann himself has been good enough also to read
the proofs of § 4 of the Introduction. My friend and former pupil
Mrs Bode was kind enough to write out for press the Indices,
which I had jotted down, very roughly; and most kindly volunteered
for the dreary labour of verifying each index-reference in
Last but not least comes my γνήσιος σύζυγος, associated both
as an editor of Çāntideva and in the present Bibliotheca, Louis
de la Vallee Poussin. His keen interest in the Mahāyāna no
less than his friendly sympathy for my work have made him my
most active helper (Note 1: Other literary help is acknowledged in the notes; but I must add a word
here as to aid in photography from my friends Dr. F. J. Allen and Miss
E. Ridding), and every sheet of the book has in some
way profited by his suggestions. The intimate relation of his
commentator Prajñāramati to the Çikshāsamuccaya is
explained in the Introduction § 3 ; and if this worthy has sometimes
deceived his readers by a parade of ‘borrowed plumes’ of
erudition, I can only say with the poet:
Utiliter nobis perfidus ille fuit.
I cannot conclude these remarks without once more referring
to the liberality of the Imperial Academy of Sciences in the inception and carrying out of the present international series. The
Academy worthily maintains its great traditions of patronage for
Oriental learning, and sets a noble example to all nations, especially
such as number amongst their-fellow subjects adherents of
Oriental faiths, amongst which the ‘Good Law’ of Buddha must
ever take a prominent place.
Cambridge, August 1902.
PDF-filesThe entire volume
Random news: Announcements
On April 9, 2018, at the meeting of the Academic Council of the IOM RAS, Dr. I.V. Gerasimov will submit his lecture Islamic Culture in the Tangut Homeland.