The Travels of Lao Ts'an . By Liu Tieh Yün (Liu E). Translated by Harold Shadick. Cornell University Press, Ithaca, New York, 1952. pp. xxiii, 277.

G. Bonsall
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0035869X00106409
1954-04-01
Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society
Abstract:combine to certify dura(ta), in 46.16 sahasram vai should be replaced, not by saha satvai (sems can lhan cig), but probably by sa hasan vai. Both the Tibetan translators and Mr. Ensink are, I think, at fault in their dealings with Mmsdsamiddham api (44. 14), which I take to be " hybrid" for himsdm asamrddhdm api " harm, even not fully carried out ". ritpasdgarabuddih of 4. 7 appears insoluble from the Tibetan (which Mr. Ensink mistranslates); perhaps read krpa-. Nor can I deduce the original from the Tibetan of 59. 5 and 59.11, though in both passages it makes good sense, unlike Mr. Ensink's reading 'srutvd in the latter. If he had looked more closely at the Tibetan of 58.13 which he professes to translate, he would have seen that its authors read -carite, not -calite ; but the line remains obscure (dasabala-, no doubt, = " Buddhas ", not " ten forces "). Mr. Ensink tells us that he does not claim to be a Tibetologue. Certainly his task did not require a profound knowledge of Tibetan, but ability to use a Tibetan translation comparatively and familiarity with Buddhist vocabulary it did require. It is a pity that the industry and seriousness of intention evident in his work should not have been supported by adequate equipment in these respects.
History
What problem does this paper attempt to address?