Sekoddesa: A Critical Edition of the Tibetan Translations.

• Author: Wayman, Alex

This work is in the field of Buddhist Tantra, in particular the Kalacakra-tantra, for which the Sekoddesa is the canonical "initiation" (abhisekha) section, and has the additional importance that three commentaries are preserved in Tibetan translation, with one of these (by Naro-pa) having been edited in Sanskrit, while another was used in Sanskrit MS form(1) by Gnoli. The Tibetan for the Sekoddesa is preserved in the Kanjur (translations of the scriptures), while commentaries thereon are preserved in the Tanjur (translations of commentaries, etc.). Orofino had the great fortune - which I presume is deserved - to have had various scholars provide versions of the Tibetan Sekoddesa from all sorts of Kanjurs, whether easily available or rare, or only remotely accessible. These were all variations of two distinct translations - the so-called Eastern one (A) by the Indian pandit Somanatha and the Tibetan 'Bro (ses rab); and the so-called Western one (B) by the Indian pandit Samantasri and the Tibetan Rwa (chos rab). Orofino has edited the two Tibetan versions in 174 verses, printed on opposite pages, so to be easily compared. The second translation - that of Rwa - mentions in its colophon that there had been consultation of the earlier translation by 'Bro. In fact, there are numerous differences between the translations, that of 'Bro more literal, that of Rwa more literary - while clearly from approximately the same Sanskrit text. From the footnotes of variants - the Rwa (B version) has the preponderance of these - we conclude that this version was the more difficult to edit. Orofino deserves great credit for so editing these two main versions and getting them printed in the given manner. I believe he was successful in this task, which has an importance not only for study of the Kalacakra-tantra, but also for study of the Tibetan language used by these two Tibetan translators.

Probably, Raniero Gnoli's edition of the Sanskrit text (pp. 127-51) proceeded pari passu with the editing of the Tibetan versions. Of this text of 174 verses, about 100 were either extant in an integral form, since there are two versions of the first leaf of the MS, two commentaries accessible in Sanskrit, and citations elsewhere. Such verses Gnoli will completely italicize - or present in partial italics where the remainder of the verse is certain, yet not italicized. That leaves about 70 verses which Gnoli reconstructed with the help of commentaries and the Tibetan...