The Manuscript of the Vajracchedikā Found at Gilgit
Description
Since the Gilgit manuscript of the Vajracchedikā has already been edited twice, the reasons for another edition may not be altogether apparent. There are, however, several good reasons for a reedition. First of all, the manuscript of the Vajracchedikā—which contains in addition three other texts—is one of the most carefully written of the Gilgit finds. In the introduction to his edition Chakravarti, for example, notes with regard specifically to the text of the Vajracchedikā that the manuscript "is remarkably free from errors. . . . The few mistakes which occur are mainly orthographical or are due to oversight."[1] The Gilgit text of the Vajracchedikā is, in fact, a fine example of what a Prajñāpāramitā text in Sanskrit prose actually looked like in the sixth or seventh century, as opposed to how we—under the watchful eye of Pāṇini and the influence of the expectations derived from much later, mostly Nepalese, manuscript traditions—might think it should have looked. In consequence the manuscript has considerable significance for the history of the "style" of this literature, as well as for the history of the language as it was actually written. This is especially so in regard to syntax and the use of sadhi and sandhi forms.
But, if all of this is true, then it is of some importance to have as accurate an edition of the manuscript as is possible, and this brings us to a second good reason for making another edition of the text: both of the previous editions are full of mistakes and distortions. Since all of these will be signaled in my notes, there is no reason to cite them here and we might simply note the broad types of errors that occur in the editions. (Schopen, introductory note, 95)
- Schopen, Gregory. "The Manuscript of the Vajracchedikā Found at Gilgit: An Annotated Transcription and Translation." In Studies in the Literature of the Great Vehicle: Three Mahāyāna Buddhist Texts, edited by Luis O. Gómez and Jonathan A. Silk, 89–139. Ann Arbor, MI: Collegiate Institute for the Study of Buddhist Literature and Center for South and Southeast Asian Studies, The University of Michigan, 1989.