D. R. Shackleton Bailey(ed.): The Ṡatapañcāśatka of Mātṛceṭa (Sanskrit text with Tibetan translation and commentary and Chinese translation), 9, 237 pp. C.U.P., 1951, 45s.

1954 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 199-200
Author(s):  
D. L. Snellgrove
2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (3) ◽  
pp. 89-106
Author(s):  
Tadas Snuviškis ◽  

Daśapadārthī is a text of Indian philosophy and the Vaiśeṣika school only preserved in the Chinese translation made by Xuánzàng 玄奘 in 648 BC. The translation was included in the catalogs of East Asian Buddhist texts and subsequently in the East Asian Buddhist Canons (Dàzàngjīng 大藏經) despite clearly being not a Buddhist text. Daśapadārthī is almost unquestionably assumed to be written by a Vaiśeṣika 勝者 Huiyue 慧月 in Sanskrit reconstructed as Candramati or Maticandra. But is that the case? The author argues that the original Sanskrit text was compiled by the Buddhists based on previously existing Vaiśeṣika texts for an exclusively Buddhist purpose and was not used by the followers of Vaiśeṣika. That would explain Xuanzang’s choice for the translation as well as the non-circulation of the text among Vaiśeṣikas.


1929 ◽  
Vol 61 (3) ◽  
pp. 537-552
Author(s):  
E. H. Johnston

In the Journal for April, 1927, pp. 209–26, I published some notes on the text of the first eight cantos of the Buddhacarita in the light of the old MS. in Nepal and of the Tibetan translation as edited and translated by Dr. Fr. Weller. The second part of the latter work has now appeared, containing the Tibetan text of cantos ix–xvii and the translation of cantos x–xvii, the translation of canto ix, which has gaps in the Sanskrit, being apparently reserved for further consideration. The notes in this part are full and careful and will be found of great help to all interested in the restoration of the Sanskrit text. We have every reason, too, to be grateful to Dr. Weller for undertaking the difficult task of translating the part from xiv, 33, on, for which no Sanskrit text exists, and, though, inevitably, owing to the nature of the Tibetan translation if the Sanskrit text were to be discovered minor details in Dr. Weller's translation would be found to require modification, at least we can now see clearly how Aśvaghoṣa handled the story.


2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeanine Ammann ◽  
Aisha Egolf ◽  
Christina Hartmann ◽  
Michael Siegrist
Keyword(s):  

CounterText ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 30-56 ◽  
Author(s):  
Simona Sawhney

Engaging some of the questions opened by Ranjan Ghosh's and J. Hillis Miller's book Thinking Literature Across Continents (2016), this essay begins by returning to Aijaz Ahmad's earlier invocation of World Literature as a project that, like the proletariat itself, must stand in an antithetical relation to the capitalism that produced it. It asks: is there an essential link between a certain idea of literature and a figure of the world? If we try to broach this link through Derrida's enigmatic and repeated reflections on the secret – a secret ‘shared’ by both literature and democracy – how would we grasp Derrida's insistence on the ‘Latinity’ of literature? The groundlessness of reading that we confront most vividly in our encounter with fictional texts is both intensified, and in a way, clarified, by new readings and questions posed by the emergence of new reading publics. The essay contends that rather than being taught as representatives of national literatures, literary texts in ‘World Literature’ courses should be read as sites where serious historical and political debates are staged – debates which, while being local, are the bearers of universal significance. Such readings can only take place if World Literature strengthens its connections with the disciplines Miller calls, in the book, Social Studies. Paying particular attention to the Hindi writer Premchand's last story ‘Kafan’, and a brief section from the Sanskrit text the Natyashastra, it argues that struggles over representation, over the staging of minoritised figures, are integral to fiction and precede the thinking of modern democracy.


2010 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-15 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brian Massumi
Keyword(s):  

This essay suggests an approach to the reading of Deleuze and Guattari's A Thousand Plateaus, grasped as a philosophical event that is as directly pragmatic as it is abstract and speculative. A series of key Deleuzo-Guattarian concepts (in particular, multiplicity, minority and double becoming) are staged from the angle of philosophy's relation to its disciplinary outside. These concepts are then transferred to the relation between the authors' philosophical lineage and the new cultural outside into which the Chinese translation will propel their thought. Emphasis is placed on the writing – and reading – of philosophy as a creative act of collective import and ethical force.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document