• The Zotero library underlying the CEToM bibliography is now public and can be viewed here.
  • We would like to thank Prof. Dr. Thomas Oberlies and Pratik Rumde from the Seminar für Indologie und Tibetologie of the Georg-August-Universität Göttingen for providing our project with scans of the nachlass of Wilhelm Siegling. The nachlass includes letters to and from Siegling throughout his career that are of great importance to the history of the field of Tocharian studies. This material will be published on CEToM, accompanied by transcriptions of the letters, in the course of 2024.

Work in progress

PK NS 10

Known as:PK NS 10
Cite this page as:Georges-Jean Pinault; Hannes A. Fellner. "PK NS 10". In A Comprehensive Edition of Tocharian Manuscripts (CEToM). Created and maintained by Melanie Malzahn, Martin Braun, Hannes A. Fellner, and Bernhard Koller. (accessed 26 Feb. 2024).


Editor:Georges-Jean Pinault; Hannes A. Fellner
Date of online publication:2014-07-29


Main find spot:Duldur-Akhur
Expedition code:881e 3
Collection:Bibliothèque nationale de France, fonds Pelliot Koutchéen (Paris)

Language and Script

Language:TB; Sanskrit
Linguistic stage:late

Text contents

Title of the work:Karmavācanā
Text genre:Non-literary
Text subgenre:Vinaya


Material: ink on paper
Size (h × w):5.8 × 18.4 cm
Number of lines:4
Interline spacing:1.6 on the recto; 1.2 on the verso cm


a1/// [pr]· v· «ra» ṇā pā ñ[c]a da śi ka ma mā pya dya dha rma va sya
a2/// [so] haṃ dha rma va rmo bhi kṣu – – – ntaṃ saṃ ghaṃ tṛ bhi sthā nai pra vā ra yā
a3/// [a] va va da tu māṃ saṃ [gha] [a] – [u] [ś]ā sa tu māṃ saṃ gha a nu kaṃ
a4/// – pa ttiṃ ya thā dha rmaṃ pra ti ka [ri] [ṣ]y· m· e vaṃ d·i ra pi t[ṛ] ra pi : ||
b1/// (– – –) ṇā pā ñca da śi ka sa ce tsaṃ gha sya prā pta kā laṃ kṣa ma te a nu jā nī yā tsaṃ gha ya : saṃ gha sa
b2/// (–) [k]· ntse pra va ri¯ ¯t ya ma ṣle || ja ya te dā naṃ dha rma dā naṃ ca sa rvaṃ : ja ya te ra tiṃ dha rma ra tiṃ śca sa
b3/// (–) ya te su khaṃ sa rva tṛ ṣṇā ni ro [dha] : re ki we ṣle pa lsko lsa e rṣa lle ña ke sa ṅkaṃ tse pra
b4/// [t]· rma va rme ṣa mā ne tse pra va ri¯ ¯t ste śa śpi śa ṣṣe wa te tri sa we ṣle • te sa


a1 n1 /// pr(a)v(ā)raṇā pāñcadaśika mamāpy adya dharmavasya
a2 n2 /// so 'haṃ dharmavarmo bhikṣu(r) (bhada)ntaṃ saṃghaṃ tṛbhi sthānai pravārayā-
a3 -(mi) /// avavadatu māṃ saṃgha a(n)uśāsatu māṃ saṃgha anukaṃ-
a4 -(pāṃ)n3 /// (ā)pattiṃ yathādharmaṃ pratikariṣy(ā)m(i) evaṃ d(v)ir api tṛr api : ॥
b1 n4 /// (pravāra)ṇā pāñcadaśika sacet saṃghasya prāptakālaṃ kṣamate anujānīyāt saṃgha ya : saṃgha sa…
b2 /// (saṃ)k(a)ntse pravarit yamaṣle ॥ jayate dānaṃ dharmadānaṃ ca sarvaṃ : jayate ratiṃ dharmaratiṃś ca sa…
b3 /// (ja)yate sukhaṃ sarvatṛṣṇānirodha : reki weṣle palskolsa erṣalle ñake saṅkaṃtse pra-
b4 -(varit)n5 (yamaṣle) /// t(a)rmavarme ṣamānetse pravarit ste śa{ś/k}piśaṣṣe wate tri«te»sa weṣletesa


a1 Sanskrit
a2 Sanskrit
a3 Sanskrit
a4 Sanskrit
b1 Sanskrit
b2 The Pravāranā should be done by the community. Sanskrit
b3 Sanskrit. The speech should be said [and] it should be evoked by the mind. Now the Pra(vāranā should be done) by the community ...
b4 (This) is the Pravāranā belonging to fifteen (days) should be said by the monk Dharmavarman a second time [and] a third time. Thereby ...


Linguistic commentary

The Tocharian part of this fragment exhibits certain flaws. One would expect tarmavarmeṃ instead of tarmavarme. Furthermore, ṣamānentse would be expected instead of ṣamānetse in a classical text. These featrues indicate late provenance of the text.

Philological commentary

Side a was taken as the verso by Couvreur 1957a: 315-316 as corresponding to the Sanskrit text edited by Härtel 1956: 122 (§84) and side b as corresponding to text Härtel 1956: 122 (§83). However, it is more likely that the Tocharian B part follows the Sanskrit part.
n1 In the word pravāraṇā the akṣara 〈ra〉 has been added as a correction somewhat below the line.
n2 The form tṛbhi is a hypercorrect form for tribhi.
n3 The form tṛr is a hypercorrect form for trir.
n4 The sequence saṃgha ya is partly corrupt. The complete correct sentence would be anujānīyāt saṃgho yat, cf. Härtel 1956: 122 (§83). For the end of the line one may restore saṃgha sa(magraḥ) 'the complete community', cf. Härtel 1956: 122 (§83).
n5 The adjective śaśpiśaṣṣe should be for śak-piśaṣṣe attested in m-pkns100 a4, also in a Pravāraṇā context, cf. Bernhard 1958: 100.


This fragment is the right part of a leaf. There is no trace of a string hole, possible indicating that there never was one. It exhibits two different ductus of script. On the recto side the script is large and coarse without regular spacing between the lines. By contrast, the script on the verso side is small and minute. However, the seize of the akṣaras is significantly bigger in line b3 and b4. It is thus not excluded that these lines have been written by a different hand.



Couvreur 1957a: 315-316; Ogihara 2009: 156-157, 463-464


Bernhard 1958

Bernhard, Franz. 1958. “Die Nominalkomposition im Tocharischen.” PhD thesis, Universität Göttingen.

Couvreur 1957a

Couvreur, Walter. 1957a. “Review of: Karmavācanā. Formulare für den Gebrauch im buddhistischen Gemeindeleben aus ostturkestanischen Sanskrit-Handschriften.” Indo-Iranian Journal 1: 315–17.

Härtel 1956

Härtel, Herbert. 1956. Karmavācanā. Formulare für den Gebrauch im buddhistischen Gemeindeleben aus ostturkestanischen Sanskrit-Handschriften. Sanskrittexte aus den Turfanfunden, III. Berlin: Akademie-Verlag.

Ogihara 2009

Ogihara, Hirotoshi. 2009. “Researches about Vinaya-texts in Tocharian A and B [Recherches sur le Vinaya en tokharien A et B].” PhD thesis, Paris: École Pratique des Hautes Études.