REVIEWS OF BOOKS 177

DER VAJRA: EINE VEDISCHE WAFFE. By TAPAN KUMAR DAS GUPTA. (Alt- und
Neu-Indische Studien 16.) pp. viii, 119. Wiesbaden, Franz Steiner Verlag, 1975.

The kindest verdict on this book can only be "not proven", for the evidence really will
not support the construction placed upon it. Das Gupta starts with the representation of the
vajra in Tibetan and other Buddhist art and proceeds via the Gandharan representations
(with a sideways look at Zeus' thunderbolt) to an analysis of Vedic references, before briefly
looking at the "anthropomorphic figures" of the Gangetic Copper Hoards, which it is his
contention are the remains of actual vajra weapons.
The author struggles valiantly to make the Vedic descriptions fit his identification but
has to resort to undue forcing of the evidence. Thus, one citation of the vajra as possibly
narya and one as mdnusa (in contrast to its amanusa victim) are enough to establish its
anthropomorphism (pp. 39—40). The sphya is interpreted as "shoulder" (pp. 42—3) rather
than the "shaft" or "pole" which is compatible with later developments of meaning. On pp.
49—50 the obvious parallelism in the listing of the parts of the vajra in one text and of an
arrow in others quoted is disrupted by his interpretation. On p. 58 three passages are adduced
in support of a "boomerang effect" but on the next page as many allusions to the vajra
burning are dismissed as metaphorical. When he cites on p. 76 another researcher's using a
model "anthropomorphic figure" to test this effect, he omits to point out that this was with-
out the shaft which is vital to his attempts to integrate the textual and artistic evidence with
the actual shape of these objects. One could go on, but most decisive is simply the fact that
he quotes on pp. 72—3 a dating by thermoluminescence of the occasionally associated
Ochre Coloured Ware which rules out linking these "anthropomorphic figures" with the
Vedic Aryans, but does not attempt to counter this.
Beside such points the way that the book is produced from typescript, with far too
many mis-spellings, wrong divisions of words between lines, and other disfigurements, is of
small account.

J. L. BROCKINGTON.

SANSKRIT: AN INTRODUCTION TO THE CLASSICAL LANGUAGE. By MICHAEL

COULSON. (Teach Yourself Books.) pp. xxx, 493. London, Hodder and Stoughton, 1976.
£2.95.

The first thing that should be said of this book is that it is excellent value for money:
over 500 pages, including much Nagari and heavily-pointed roman, and on the whole
attractively produced - all for under £3. There will be few who will deny that Dr. Coulson's
work is, in addition, a more usable and helpful introduction to a "difficult" language than
the courses devised by Perry and Antoine, to name only the best of the rivals to this latest
publication. If people fail to teach themselves Sanskrit by using this book, it will be fairer to
blame the student or the subject than to blame Coulson.
This much said, certain reservations must be voiced. They have to do more with the
"presentation" of the book than with its contents, which are not likely to meet with much
reproach (indeed certain sections, in particular those dealing with questions of usage, are
exemplary). It should, for example, have been specified somewhere — perhaps in the remarks
on "Using this book" - that the system of transliteration adopted differs in various respects
from the normal version. Instead, to name but one instance, the reader is told on p. 6 that
the macron is never used with the vowels e and o because they are always long; but 30 pages
later he will encounter n> eksate, with an erroneous n> ecchati on the page following. The
apparent contradiction is resolved by the knowledge that e and 6 are used to represent the
products of particular sandhi-junctions; but this is not made clear (or rather, the contra-
diction seems not to have been noticed).
A similar difficulty occurs with the denotation of the various different types of nominal
compound (which may cohabit within a single word) by means of various substitutes for
and additions to the conventional hyphen. Combined with the attempt to distinguish the

https://doi.org/10.1017/S0035869X00134665 Published online by Cambridge University Press

 178 REVIEWS OF BOOKS

different types of sandhi-junction, such as the use of the macron noted above, this can pro-
duce excessively complicated-looking results. A fairly mild example is aikala^sep^arha (p.
106). The explanation of compound-formation, though sound, is also prone to overcom-
plexity: the use of superscript numerals to indicate case-relationship in a tatpurusa is blame-
less, but how many learners (even those in whom there resides "a somewhat greater degree
of sophistication . . . than in students proposing to teach themselves a language such as
French", p. xii) will be able to follow virajat:katipayaikomala:danta:kutmal):agra (p. 109)?
Other defects exist. The "sandhi grids" facing p. 36 will be very useful no doubt, but it is
deplorable that no attempt was made to account in generalized terms for the regularities they
reveal: one general rule is easier to learn than a dozen specific instances. There is no prefatory
statement explaining the distinction between the parenthesized transliterations (in which the
rules of sandhi have not been applied) and their non-parenthesized counterparts. Obscurities
of expression sometimes mar the general clarity: e.g. the laconic comparison of the redupli-
cated aorist with the periphrastic perfect on p. 245, or the qualification labelled (1) on p.
251. The debt to Macdonell is very much more considerable than the brief reference (on
p. 278) suggests. And - a fundamental question - is Sanskrit dramatic prose really the ideal
introductory form of the language?
Most of these deficiencies, as already remarked, "presentation". But surely "presentation"
is vitally important in helping students to master a language — especially, if teaching them-
selves. It is for the instructor to simplify, not to complicate further, the clues his students
will follow in coming to understand the intricacies of their chosen subject.
Despite these strictures, Coulson's book is very welcome. It is full, it is interesting, it is
perceptive, and, goodness gracious, it is cheap.

J O H N D. SMITH.

INDIAN RIDDLES: A FORGOTTEN CHAPTER IN THE HISTORY OF SANSKRIT

LITERATURE. By LUDWIK STERNBACH. pp. 132. Hoshiarpur, Vishveshvaranand Vedic
Research Institute, 1975.

Riddles have been one of the chief sources of intellectual entertainment throughout the
civilized world since time immemorial and they form an important element of the folk
literature of every country. The literature of the classical language of India alone, leaving
aside the Prakrita dialects and modern Indian languages, abounds in thousands of riddles.
While many other branches of Sanskrit literature have been studied in great detail, the riddle
literature has so far received scant attention from scholars. Dr. Sternbach is therefore to be
congratulated on his pioneer work on this forgotten chapter in the history of Sanskrit litera-
ture. He has for the first time given a detailed analysis of the various categories of Sanskrit
riddles and shown the sources in which many of them are preserved.
A glance at the contents shows how thoroughly the author has dealt with the subject in
the eight chapters of his book. In the first chapter he traces the development of riddles from
the earliest works of Indian literature, the Vedas, and passes on to the epics, the Buddhist
and Jain literature, the Sanskrit katha literature, the Puranic literature, the romantic tales,
and the Kamasutra, till he comes to Dandin's Kavyadaria which for the first time defines
and categorizes riddles. While noting that the word prahelika and its various synonyms are
used to denote "riddle" in Sanskrit, the author proceeds to observe that the broad term
riddle or puzzle covers at least seven categories of enigmatic questions, notably the logo-
graph, the anagram, the enigma, the charade, the rebus, and the conundrum, and that almost
all these categories and many others existed also in ancient Indian literature.
Ch. ii gives the division of riddles according to Dandin's Kavyadaria and the
Visnudharmottara purana with suitable illustrations. Ch. iii takes up the classification of
riddles according to Subhasita sangrahas and gives a detailed analysis with selected examples
of each of the twelve categories together with their sub-categories. The following chapter
briefly discusses the division of riddles according to Dharmadasa's Vidagdhamukhamandana.
In the fifth chapter the author discusses the various collections of riddles. He rightly observes

https://doi.org/10.1017/S0035869X00134665 Published online by Cambridge University Press