🔎︎

[Error: Requires JavaScript.]

Announcements

Work in progress

PK NS 49B

Known as:PK NS 49B; Pelliot Koutchéen Nouvelle Série 49b; K 13
Cite this page as:Georges-Jean Pinault; Melanie Malzahn (collaborator); Michaël Peyrot (collaborator). "PK NS 49B". In A Comprehensive Edition of Tocharian Manuscripts (CEToM). Created and maintained by Melanie Malzahn, Martin Braun, Hannes A. Fellner, and Bernhard Koller. https://cetom.univie.ac.at/?m-pkns49b (accessed 22 Jul. 2024).

Edition

Editor:Georges-Jean Pinault; Melanie Malzahn (collaborator); Michaël Peyrot (collaborator)
Date of online publication:2012-02

Provenience

Main find spot:Duldur-akur
Specific find spot:Angle ouest grande cour
Expedition code:DA 28,2
Collection:Bibliothèque nationale de France, fonds Pelliot Koutchéen (Paris)

Language and Script

Language:TB
Linguistic stage:classical
Script:classical

Text contents

Title of the work:Karmavibhaṅga
Text genre:Literary
Text subgenre:Doctrine
Verse/Prose:verse

Object

Manuscript:Karmavibhaṅga ε
Material: ink on paper
Form:Poṭhī
Size (h × w):8.4 × 12.3 cm
Number of lines:6
Interline spacing:1.3 cm

Images

Images from gallica.bnf.fr by courtesy of the Bibliothèque nationale de France, Département des Manuscrits, Pelliot koutchéen.

Transliteration

a1/// ce¯ ¯u a sta ro na kṣa ra nma (–) (·)[k](·) nt[e] sa śle ///
a2/// krā ke wi ke ta¯ ¯r kre ntau na pā kri ma ske nta¯ ¯r ///
a3/// yā mo rnta ntso nau ta lñe wñā wa ñi¯ ¯śä ma ///
a4/// : kuce yā mo rya ma nt(·) kreṃ [n](·) yo laiṃ cwī kyā ///
a5/// (·)[e]¯ ¯u yā mo rmeṃ ·[a] ///
a6/// yo lo m(·) [k](·) ///
b1/// [n]o lme ke(·) ts(·) [ñt](·) ///
b2/// ta¯ ¯r mai tre ya : ///
b3/// (·)[kn](·) 20 5 te ykne sa y[ā] [m](·)¯ ¯r y(·) lai no ///
b4/// tā kaṃ kuse wno lme kre nto ko wä rpna ta¯ ¯r ///
b5/// śle kra no krau pna ta¯ ¯r 20 6 ke ktse ñtsa ///
b6/// (·)[pnā] ntra skwa nma snai ke śma k· [y]· ma ntrā kka ///

Transcription

lf///
a1n1 /// ceu astaron= akṣaranma(p)k(a)ntesa śle ///
a2/// krāke wiketär krentauna pākri mäskentär ///
a3n2 /// yāmorntantso nautalñe wñāwa ñiś ma… ///
a4/// : kuce yāmor yamant(rä) kreṃn(t) yolaiṃ cwīk yā(morntse) ///
a5/// (c)eu yāmormeṃ ·a ///
a6/// yolo m(a)k(ā-ykne) ///
b1/// (o)nolme ke(k)ts(e)ñt(sa) ///
b2n3 /// …tär maitreya : ///
b3/// (makā-y)kn(e) 20-5 te-yknesa yām(o)r y(o)lai= no ///
b4/// tākaṃ kuse wnolme krent oko wärpnatär ///
b5/// śle-k rano kraupnatär 20-6 kektseñtsa ///
b6n4 /// (wär)pnāntra skwanma snai keś mak(ā)-y(kne) mäntrākka ///

Translation

a1... with this obstacle consisting of pure syllables ...
a2... the dirt is eliminated, the virtues become manifest ...
a3... I told of the disappearance of the deeds ...
a4... Which deed they will do, good [and] bad, of this deed precisely ...
a5... from that deed ...
a6... evil of many (kinds) ...
b1... the being with the body ...
b2... O Maitreya! ...
b3... of (many?) kinds. 25. But a bad deed of such kind ...
b4... which being will be ..., he enjoys the good fruit ...
b5... likewise also he accumulates ... 26. With the body ...
b6... [forms] of happiness without number of many kinds are (enj)oyed. Exactly in that way ...

Other

a4Welche Tat sie [auch] tun, gut [oder] böse, (die Frucht) von eben der Tat ... (Schmidt 1974: 443)

Commentary

Remarks

On the verso side in lines 4-5 at the right margin one sees a trace of a vertical line marking the margin (?); there is no trace of this on the recto side. Therefore this fragment may belong to the right side of the leaf.
Associated with PK NS 49A, but not from the same manuscript.

Philological commentary

n1From the remnants of the signs, a simple reading kante (it is impossible to read kantwa, as per Lévi) is not likely. A ligatura would explain the somewhat dense form of the 〈ka〉, if the visible florish indeed belongs to a 〈ka〉.
n2yāmorntantso with o-mobile must stand at the end of a pāda or colon.
n3°tär can, of course, be the end of a 3.sg. or 2.pl. middle verb form, or belong to sūtär ‘sūtra’. The next word seems to be the expected vocative of TB maitreye ‘Maitreya’.
n4From the remnants of the manuscript, wärpnānträ is the only likely restoration that would make sense semantically. However, one has to assume that this metrically syncopated nasal form was written with the wrong suffix in contrast to the correct spellings of such syncopated forms in two other instances on this fragment (wärpnaträ, kraupnatär).

References

other

Lévi 1933: 98, 107; Sieg 1938: 54

Translations

Meunier 2013: a2 (133), a4 (180); Schmidt 1974: a4 (443)

Bibliography

Lévi 1933

Lévi, Sylvain. 1933. Fragments de textes koutchéens. Udānavarga, Udānastotra, Udānālaṁkāra et Karmavibhaṅga, publiés et traduits avec un vocabulaire et une introduction sur le «tokharien». Paris: Imprimerie Nationale.

Meunier 2013

Meunier, Fanny. 2013. “Typologie des locutions en yām- du tokharien.” Tocharian and Indo-European Studies 14: 123–85.

Schmidt 1974

Schmidt, Klaus T. 1974. “Die Gebrauchsweisen des Mediums im Tocharischen.” PhD, Universität Göttingen.

Sieg 1938

Sieg, Emil. 1938. “Die Kutschischen Karmavibhaṅga-Texte der Bibliothèque Nationale in Paris.” Zeitschrift für Vergleichende Sprachforschung 65: 1–54.