Notes on the 'Tale of Bhadra

7/30/2019 Notes on the 'Tale of Bhadra'

1/13

Notes on the 'Tale of Bhadra'

Author(s): R. E. EmmerickSource: Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London, Vol. 30,No. 1, Fiftieth Anniversary Volume (1967), pp. 83-94Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of School of Oriental and African StudiesStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/611817 .

Accessed: 24/04/2013 03:20

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms

of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

Cambridge University Press and School of Oriental and African Studies are collaborating with JSTOR to

digitize, preserve and extend access toBulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, University ofLondon.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 162.105.141.193 on Wed, 24 Apr 2013 03:20:50 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cuphttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=soashttp://www.jstor.org/stable/611817?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/611817?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=soashttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cup


2/13

NOTES ON THE 'TALE OF BHADRA'By R. E. EMMERICK

This article is a review of V. S. Vorob'ev-Desjatovskij and M. I. Vorob'eva-Desjatovskaja's Skazanie o Bxadre (novye listy sakskoj rukopisi 'E ').1 Thisrecent publication of what is in large part a facsimile volume of Old Khotaneseis greatly to be welcomed. We now have at last facsimiles of all the 192 folios(actually 191, see below) in Leningrad that constitute the major part of aBuddhist miscellany written in the oldest type of Khotanese. 173 of theLeningrad folios were seen by E. Leumann and described in detail in 1912.218 of these folios (336-40, 342-54), together with two (334, 335) from theAsiatic Society of Bengal in Calcutta,were edited and translatedby E. Leumannin 1919.3 These formed all the extant part of what on Leumann's calculationwas ch. 23 of the surviving portion of the MS, which he had christened 'E'after the signature he allotted to the first folios he saw, 269 and 335 fromCalcutta. All the folios known to Leumann were edited and translated by himin 1933-6 in Das nordarische (sakische) Lehrgedichtdes Buddhismus. Thisincluded all the 173 Leningrad folios, of which he had taken photographs.Only a few of these were published in facsimile (256v, 257r, 258v, 259r, 303v,304r, the right halves of 257v, 258r, and the left halves of 259v, 260r) by hisson M. Leumann in a private publication, SakischeHandschriftproben,Ziirich,1934. These photographs are excellent, but the folios chosen were particularlyfavourable for reproduction,and nothing is lost except an insignificant amountof clarity in the facsimiles of the same folios in the present volume. In othercases, however, unless the MS has deteriorated in Leningrad, the photographsare inadequate compared with those of Leumann even though the latter havefaded with the lapse of time. Thus, in E 3.72 ( = Z 14.72, see below) no traceof the word hota is visible in the facsimile on p. 297, whereas the word is quiteclear on the Germanphotograph ; and again on the following line, on the verso,instead of a clear padiya, only a broken ya is now presented to us. Probablydifferent is a case like that of folio 146v on p. 125 where the subscript hook ofhvq'ndi (1.42), clear on the German photograph, is likely to be missing onlybecause the photograph has been badly positioned.If these facsimiles are not simply the result of poor photography but areevidence of the deterioration of the manuscript, surely it is a tragedy thatfacsimiles were not published 50 years earlier. Let us hope that the Academyof Sciences sees its way clear to give the world of scholarshipas soon as possible

1 V. S. Vorob'ev-Desjatovskij and M. I. Vorob'eva-Desjatovskaja (ed. and tr.): Skazanie oBxadre (novye listy sakskoj rukopisi ' E '). (Akademija Nauk SSSR. Otdelenie Istorii. InstitutNarodov Azii. Pamjatniki Pis'mennosti Vostoka, I.) 301 pp. + errata slip. Moskva : Izdatel'stvo'Nauka ', 1965. Rbls. 1.80. (The responsible editors were L. G. Gercenbergand V. A. LiviSic.)2 E. Leumann, Zur nordarischenSprache und Literatur, Strassburg, 1912, 11-15.3 E. Leumann, Maitreya-samiti, das Zukunftsideal der Buddhisten, Strassburg, 1919.

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


3/13

84 R. E. EMMERICKa facsimile volume of all the Khotanese material it has before any furtherdeterioration can take place. For preference one would like to see this in theform of excellent photographslike those we have recently had of the documentsfrom Mt. Mugh,but any photographis better than none.Some carelessness in the preparation of the volume is revealed by theoccasional wrong numbering of the facsimiles. As the folio number is visibleeven in these photographs,there is not much excuse for numbering,for example,165r as 165v and 165v as 165ras is done on p. 132. Similarly, on p. 240, fol. 313rshould be 313v and fol. 313v should be 313r; on p. 288, fol. 423r should be423v and fol. 423v should be 423r. The clearly visible verse numbersshow thaton p. 232, fol. 302rshould be 302v and vice versa. Onp. 231, fol. 300 is numberedin reverse comparedwith Leumann'sedition (E, p. 233), but as there is no folionumber (Leumann's folio x) and there are no verse numbers the matter isdifficult to decide. In the case of folios 185 and 186 where the versos have beentransposed, only the sense and the verse numbers can decide. Both are clearlyagainst the present editors: 185v should be 186v and 186v should be 185v, asin Leumann's edition.

Most exciting, of course, is the publication of ten complete folios and nineincomplete folios that previously were known only by the description ofV. S. Vorob'ev-Desjatovskij in an article called 'Novye listy sakskoj rukopisi"E " ', Kratkie SoobbSenija nstituta Vostokovedenija,xvI, 1955, 68-71. Itwas there shown that Leumann's division into 25 chapters was incorrect. Thenew folios show the end of ch. 2 and the beginning of ch. 3, which leads onwithout a break to what is Leumann's ch. 4. It is convenient to use E to referto Leumann's work, but the new numbering should be adopted. In order toavoid confusion, I suggest the use of Z with the new numbering. Z wouldstand for Ysambasta, who ordered the book to be written (see E, p. 355).H. W. Bailey has suggested that a more poetic name for the work might be'The Book of Zambasta', and he is calling the commentary he has writtenProlexis to the Bookof Zambasta.The new discovery meant that the folios that Leumann thought were ch. 3and so printed as folios 177 and 178must belong to a differentpart of the poem.They are published here on pp. 296-7 as unplaced. There is, however, goodreason to believe that they are folios 267 and 268. A part of fol. 267 is in factextant (facsimile, p. 220). If the texts are combined, the result is convincing.Both agree in the first person singular,cf. e.g. 1. 60 bustumaand najsa'se'; andthere is agreement of context: buddha-ksettron 1. 55 followed by vasutapara~uddhd the usual epithets) in 1.56; hamd4rma ma daiya in 1. 58 followedby uhu ma tta tta daiya in 1.59 and crrdmuhama 7tca n 1.63 followed by ni jusd ace vikalpa in the other half. The line numbers also agree with this position,and there is a clear contextual link between the end of fol. 268v with itco in1.77 and ddtinauraysu in 1. 78 with hamiraysa ice in 1.79 at the beginning offol. 269r. If this proves correct, then E 3 = Z 14.

Although Leumann was able to read more than 4,000 complete verses of the



4/13

NOTESONTHE TALEOFBHADRA' 85square script of MS E almost without error,4this has not been equalled since.The reading of the new folios needs a certain amount of correction. Misprintsare few: read subhiitiin 2.151 ; siru stand in 2.158 is a misprint (cf. p. 90) forsirustand; read ndta'stain 2.168 ; read ssai in 2.175. These are not noted onthe list of correctionsat the end of the book.

Having cleared away misprints, I turn now to misreadings. In 2.139jigsdd tyau, on p. 74 'jissddtyau ? ', is misread for jisidinyau. n and t areadmittedly very similar,but the facsimile, althoughnot clear, seemsto favourn,and we have in a difficult LKh. passage (P 2891.23, KT, III, 80) jis4dy~nd.m.A similarword is jisdi in P 2024.61, KT, II, 78 with kaga' skin '. On this wordH. W. Bailey has some interesting speculations,which will appearin the Prolexis.In the same verse harm ate (two words) should be read. ham vate

'always' isfound also in Z 6.10; 11.9; 12.13 and is a shortened form of hamu vate (Z22.102 ; hamuviat Z 3.21 ; 14.35).In 2.143 u va ro should be read as one word uvdro 'noble'. It goes with

ssado praysdte 'faith, belief'. In the same verse hdmdtaseems required, buthimata is correctly read.No punctuation is visible at the end of 2.150, 156, 162, 217, 222, althougha stop is printed. On the other hand, the punctuation at the end of 2.159 isabsent in the edition.

Read rraysa haphdra 'empty distractions' in 2.155. The same phraseoccurs in Z 5.6. Read jatai 'you destroyed' in 2.173 for janai. Here thephotograph is clear. With thu ' you ' the 2 sg. is required. The 2 sg. pres. ofjan- would be *jadia(cf. jsand Z 24.50; pulda Z 3.21). The same comparison,with the phrase itai ttSdetuja~.dmngyo'you destroyed

the darkness of ignorance ',is found in Z 22.261 and 285.In 2.179 the whole sense has been lost by reading ornadyanstead of o chdyaand cindra ku instead of canduku(H. W. Bailey). The couplet thus reads:vasard ssai adkaguvaSte o chdya pasdaveuysnoricdndukuye tvi vatebalysa ssiaruyinda kari ne panadte

'Perhaps even the thunderbolt splits or the shadow leaves a being; whatevergood one does for you, Buddha, is not lost at all'. candaka- (a/i) is the formotherwise used in the poem. For guvaite, see on gvach-below.

brlyandain 2.180 should be divided as two words bri yanda. The coupletmeans: 'The mother does not exist who makes her only-born (ddau-ysdtu,compound) son as beloved as are all beings equally to you, Buddha'. Theinjunctive yanda is used, as commonly, in a hypothetical relative clause.The occurrenceof bryandama most beloved' in this same text (2.190) shouldhave given warningthat brlyanda s an impossibleform. For briyan-, cf. Z 11.6.Read pdrda' service ' in 2.185 for pdiard ' sunshine'. On pdrdasee H. W.4 I have noticed only rracye instead of rravye in E 20.7 and pani, tcampha instead of pand,tcamphd in E 25.414. tuB.a instead of ttud8dwas noted in the glossary and on p. xxxix. Onp. xxxix, metrai instead of mdtrai was corrected for E 23.280 but not for 23.282; both were,however, correct in Maitreya-samiti, p. 73. In E 6.46 I prefer to read bihaiette for bihqnte.



5/13

86 R. E. EMMERICKBailey, KT, Iv, 84. parysa- 'servant' is found in 2.50. pirysa- in Suv. 5 r 4,KT, I, 234 renders Skt. guhyaka- 'attendant'.

Read puniadydin (two words)in 2.186. dydndis nom. pl. masc. < dyinaa-.In H 144 NS 83 b 1, KT, v, 52 we have : dydinaipaskala u adydneipaskala' thevisible element and the invisible element'. The meaning of adydnaa- wasknown from Suv. 32 v 1 (KT, v, 110; ed. S. Konow, SPAW, Phil.-hist. Ki.,1935, 446): adydneina ttarandarna 'with invisible body' translating Skt.adkryair itmabhavais.Read ttatutu(one word) in 2.190. This is a new spelling for ttatatu(acc. sg.)'wealth', cf. ttatatu .. biso in 2.49. The spoken word was disyllabic as ttatain 2.30. Hence -tu- or -ta- as historic spelling is possible, cf. the intrusive -ta-in tvatar~scdtesa (Avdh. 16 r 5-v 1, KT, III, 8) beside tvarisce sa (Avdh.5 v 5,KT, I1, 1).

patabhu in 2.192 is probably to be read patichu (H. W. Bailey) and to beconnected with nmcho Z 22.110) 'refuge'. Read ttam.duin 2.194 for ttamdra.Cf. Z 5.91 : sa maro ttodtamdttandd' and this is my so great wish '. In 2.195the alternative reading ci.de should be adopted, as vi.demakes no sense. mayain 2.200 is two words ma ya, but not as in the glossary on p. 84 with ma 'not '.ka ma ya maniya means 'if one should harm me'.In 2.205 the numeral 4 is present at the end of the couplet. Similarly 9 is

present at the end of 2.230. As noted at the end of the book, 32, not 2, is foundat the end of 2.233.Read itma satvd (two words) in 2.209. ne-n-jsa vara tma satv ne ju

vardJs~ik adrnu n 2.209 is parallelwith neju varatadtmane satvdniju varsdkaMhrdnun Z 5.59 : ' There is no self there, no being, no experiencerof things '.Read bhadrra n 2.211 ; ysamthune (two words, see below) in 2.212 ; gi~toin 2.213 ; buvane n 2.216 ; ne for te in 2.217.bri va in 2.223 is a misreading for brrica 'love'. The phrase saiia brricabvimata is parallel with saiia brrikyabvamata n Z 14.39.In 2.225 a very nice word has been missed by reading as separate syllablesthe word neasasta attached' < *ni- + sri'ta-. The couplet means : ' Towardsthose is compassion greatly to be produced who are drowned in sam.sara,ttached to the kama-gunas(compound) just as a bee to honey'. Z 4.30 alsohas the ' qualities of desire ' : kma-guna pamjsa.It has been noted in the translation on p. 57 that 2.226-7 =-E 10.8-9.2.227d also = E 10.12a. 2.228a, b are similar but not exactly the same asE 10.14. Parallels can be found for a large number of phrases.Read bhadrracariya (two words) in 2.230. As one word the sense is lost.

Translate : ' who would practise, Bhadra, the six piramitas with compassion '.te in 2.235 (listed in the glossary on p. 77 under thu)is presumablya mistakeby dittography after drih4te, as the syllable is not visible in the facsimile and isnot required by the sense.buljsi-jsera in 2.239 is a compound. It is found also in Z 10.4; 12.109;22.210. Read puiyau in 2.244 for aiyau. The phraseis common.



6/13

NOTES ON THE 'TALE OF BHADRA' 87siddhame in Z 3.1 is a misreading for siddham. What appears to be -e isvirama. It is distinguished from -e by not being attached to the aksara.Read rra for rru in Z 3.8. ttfirraought to be an epithet of viysa. hamnjuyaidedasta hidva ce trdmadatana kho ya ttirra daiya viysa 'he placed in thea~jali-position both hands, which were such in appearance as one sees ttiirralotuses'. I have thought of connecting with Skt. torana- 'arch' or with OIr.*taruna-' tender' (Av. tauruna-,OInd. taruna-),but this would be at variancewith the phonology of pirna- 'arrow' < *paruna- (see H. W. Bailey, BSOAS,

xxIv, 3, 1961, 472-3). If secondary contact of r and g resulted in rr in Kh.,ttiirra- could be < *tarusa-, IE *ter- (Pokorny, 1070) with the same suffix asin Av. auru'a- 'white', OInd. arusd- 'red'.Read drrainufor drainu in Z 3.11.In Z 3.10,12, pande has been wrongly read for panye in both places. The

meaning of Z 3.10-12 is: 'You recognize the good deeds of every being, thusthen the bad by which the ignorantcome here. You recognizethe whole path ofthe three ydnas, how then the three have become only one ydna. You perceiverightly the senses of every being, covered with klesas, (but) in the middle thebodhi-germ(-= tathdgatagarbha). Cf. also Z 10.31: indriya butte... panyeuysnord'he perceives the senses of every being'.The Russian translation on pp. 49-60 appearsto be only moderately helpful.This is due partly to being based on wrong readingsbut partly also to ascribingwrong meaningsto wordsormakinga false grammaticalanalysis. Theremainingremarks are confined to an examination of the glossary, compiled by V. A.Livsic, to the ten complete folios. The vocabulary contained in the fragmentstranscribedon pp. 111-22 has not been included in the glossary. I leave asidethe fragments here as the material contained in them is unlikely to be widelyused in the absence of a translation or a glossary, both of which appear in myarticle in Asia Major, NS, xII, 2, 1966. The readershould, however, be warnedthat misreadings are especially frequent in this part of the book.

The following comments are not intended to be exhaustive. In particular,I have not listed the numerous instances in which indications of case, number,etc., are incorrect. My views on these matters will be revealed in my Englishtranslation, which will appear in The Book of Zambasta.ana-. a~yau in 2.224 is misread for puiyau, see above.apracai means 'without cause'.avamdta-. < a- (privative) and pamata- 2.100, etc.

asam.khalsta-.In 2.141 asamkhalstu, despite the ending, must be nom.sg. masc. agreeing with aysmi.

aysu. Add ma, acc. sg., in 2.200. ma in 2.203 is 'not'. On the relationshipof Kh. mama to OP mand, see A. Meillet, BSOS, vi, 2, 1931, 435-7. The finalvowel of Kh. mamais no doubt due to ma < *mai, cf. Av.Ni. Hence, contami-nation of *mana and ma would explain both the different final vowel fromSkt. mama and the nasal assimilation.ah-. Add fii, 1 sg. subj., 2.191.



7/13

88 R. E. EMMERICKata-. Remove ' praet. 3 sg. m. ite II 222 '. In 2.222 we have in fact i'te'with two subscribed hooks. A single hook is sometimes used without clear

justification but never two. The word belongs as 3 sg. subj. mid. to ah- 'toremain ', which shows the hook regularly in the 3 pl. pres. d're (2.45 +).drlh- means 'to move', not 'to hide'. n~ s vina pracai mnistadrIuihtesdanda (2.235) 'The great earth does not move without a cause' is parallelwith na s vina pracai mdsta biddabhama-divata badra ariuhdte 2.103) 'Thewhole great Earth-deity, Bhadra, does not move without a cause'. The p. p.is not irrusta- which does not occur) but drotta-(2.66). Bilingual evidence forthe p. p. was published by S. Konow, Saka studies, 91, where we have theBuddhist cliche 'the earth shook six times ' giving drotta-as the equivalent ofTibetan g-yos-so ' shook '.drsta-. Not < *d-rusta-,but p. p. < drih- 'to share' (H. W. Bailey).

dysana-. The first is a misprint for dysana- 'seat '. The second is fordysan-, pres. stem of the verb ' to adorn '. The use of -a-, which is everywherelost, is awkward and the glossary is not consistent: cf. oys-, ksimnj-, gei'ls-,gguh-, jsan-, etc., but on the other hand pasda-.aysda yan- does not mean ' to inform' but ' to protect ', see H. W. Bailey,BSOS, viii, 4, 1937, 927; A locust'sleg: studies in honourof S. H. Taqizadeh,35; Dresden, The Jdtakastava,470.

dh-. Add d'te' 2.222, see on dta- above.ii. Remove 2.191; see on ah- above.upev-. Gerund upevr4a-, not upevd-~aa-.urmaysdd-. Avestan has ahur5mazdd(nom. sg.), not ahuramazddh-?mis-print for ahura- mazdah-). OP has auramazd5 (nom. sg.), which could beinterpreted as auramazddh.The nom. sg. in -e in Kh. is < *-Sh.ulatand-. The etymology given does not take account of the form upalatdnd-

(OKh.) in Suv. 24 v 4, KT, I, 235. There is no 'gen.-loc.' case in Kh. ulatlieis loc. sg. with -ie (< *-ayc, cf. OP -dya) as in the commonssive (1.54 +) 'by,at night '.

usn.ra-. The Skt. is usn5sa-. usn.rvai in 2.233 is a monstrous loc. pl. andanyway the Buddha has only one. usnirvai is loc. sg. usniro + -4 'of him'.The contraction is like pussvai (Z 15.11) < pusso + - or the common khvai(2.127 +).uspurra-. Delete the last remarkin brackets.uysdnaa-. Read uysdnai--: the word is fem., cf. instr.-abl. uysanye jsa(Z 8.13 +).uysnaura-. Read *uz-ana-bara-or the etymology, as -nb- would not be lost,

and anyway cf. Tumiuq usanavara(v.H. W. Bailey, BSOAS, xIII, 3, 1950, 662).orn.- is to be removed, see on 2.179 above.oys- cannot be < *d-yauz-,as Kh. has dyauys- (Kha. i. 306a, 5 v 1, KBT, 8),

p. p. dyosta- (Z 4.101). Possibly


8/13

NOTES ON THE 'TALE OF BHADRA' 89karad-. Such a form could not have a gen. sg. kard. Possibly kard in 2.164is merely the adverb.kalahdra-,not kalahdraa-,as the nom.-acc. pl. kalahdra(2.210) shows.kdma-. kadmen 2.158, 159 is probably a pronominal nom.-acc. pl. likebi?*a. kIma in 2.225 is part of a compound kama-guna,see above.klaisakarma n 2.175 to be read as two words.ksam-. Add ksima (2.243), 3 sg. opt. act., not < Skt. ksema-. The p. p.< ksam- cannot be ksamotta-, which is the p. p. < ksamev- (1.189 +),but would in OKh. spelling be *ksaunda-. It is attested by LKh. ksaudi(JS 18 r 1 (76)), ksIam'da P 2801.9, KT, III, 65), see H. W. Bailey, BSOAS,

x, 3, 1940, 573.ksamova-. Read ' ksamovi II 177 '. ksamauvi in 2.211 is more likely a nounas in Z 12.84 : ne ndsteksamovu'he does not accept forgiveness '.g?ita'- to be read, see on 2.213.gguh- is not consistent with sad-, sai- for the present saima (Z 13.60).Better would be gguhad-,gguhai-. The p. p. with privative a- is attested as

aguhasta in Ch. 00266.140-1, KBT, 26. The 3 sg. opt. guhei was known inD III. 1, 8 r 5, KT, v, 69. The -dmatdabstract guhdmejsa in Si. 136 r 5, KT, I,72 correspondsto Skt. ksata- 'wounded'. Parthian wyxs- ' tre blesse ' is also< *vi-xad- (v. A. Ghilain,Essai sur la langue parthe,81).gvach-. The meaning of gvach- is 'to be digested'. gvaite, 3 sg. pres. inN 75.40 translates Skt. jiryate and the p. p. gvaha- translates Tibetan iu-bar

(Si. 134 r 5, KT, I, 68). In 2.179 the meaning 'splits' seems required forguvaite. It is likely that a different verb is concealed in guvaite. Perhaps v betweenvowels, plus -gya adjective suffix. For the -gya suffix in a compound, cf., aswell as ysdra-vargya-,ndtca-kszrgya- outlandish' (Suv. 35 r 1, KT, v, 113,

translating Skt. para?).vija- ' doctor', not abstract. viji in 2.174 is nom. sg. masc.vf.da-.

Readc.de jsa

in 2.195.vydtar-. vyatarate s 3 sg. pf. tr. m. It could not be 3 sg. pres. mid. as theverb is active, cf. 3 pl. pres. vyagarsndd Z 24.198), vydtardndd Z 24.400).suna-. Read dina-. Thephrasepamjsaggate iinatcahaurawas alreadyknownin Late Khotanese spelling in P 4099.96, KBT, 117. The dina tcahauraare thecatvdro yonayah of Mahavyutpatti 2278: jaryujdalh, andajah., samnsvedaja.h,papddukdh.*sdsa-. See on ttitd above. ssdte in 2.198 is apparently unique, but cf. ssd

in Z 24.53. Add tvT n 2.148, acc. sg. (v. on thu). Add tvi, acc. sg. in 2.232(v. on tta). Delete tutu, part of ttatutu' wealth ', see above. Add ttatiin 2.151.skauftgyaa-. Read skaungya-. For the -gyd abstract suffix, see onapCja-above.s.ta-. The 3 sg. should be removed. sta in 2.225 is part of nsasta, see above.ste is part of a new wordpatastein 2.190, which from the context means ' gives'



13/13

94 NOTES ON THE 'TALE OF BHADRA'or 'gives up'. It is likely to be a contraction of *patats(a)te,3 sg. pres.

Documents

Notes on the 'Tale of Bhadra