Translating Vaidya’s Harivaṃśa

Abstract

This paper is a philological and textological complement to a new translation, produced in Cardiff, of the Sanskrit Harivaṃśa, the final part of the Mahābhārata. The paper is a project report, providing a detailed behind-the-scenes account of the translation project. It discusses the specific 118-chapter published text that was chosen for translation, and the reasons for that choice; it discusses the emendations that were made to that text, and the reasons for making them; it discusses the method, process, and conventions of the translation, with particular reference to the intended audience, the accompanying apparatus, the format of the translation, its literary and linguistic register, and the treatment of specific words; and it discusses a selection of problematic passages in relation to previous translations. The paper's discussion of the Sanskrit Harivaṃśa is wide-ranging, rigorous, unprecedentedly in-depth, and makes significant original contributions in the fields of Sanskrit philology, translation studies, and world literature. The appendix to the paper is a searchable electronic version of the Sanskrit Harivaṃśa text that was translated.

The Theft of the Pārijāta Tree in Early Sanskrit Sources

“…A much awaited and anticipated English translation by Simon Brodbeck of the critical edition (CE) HV text has now appeared [5], providing unprecedented access to this historically important source of devotional Hinduism. This volume came parceled with a khila or supplement of its own, published in this journal [6]. In this piece, Brodbeck raises the question of textual emendations, and among his various problem cases is the episode of the Pārijāta tree.…”

“…Having mounted Vainateya (Garuḍa) together with Satyabhāmā, strolling about the pleasure-grounds of the gods and being reverenced by them, the great-armed one saw the great Pārijāta tree, a divine and celebrated object of worship (caitya) 6 , in a pleasurepark of Vāsava.…”

“…Sindhu S. Dange [9] meanwhile does not address this matter in her treatment of the episode. 6 The term caitya designates the tree as a sacred shrine or site of worship. I am indebted to an anonymous reviewer for raising this issue: it is intriguing that this term, which has such a centrality and presence in Buddhist and Jain constructions of sacred space, is used here together with the notion that the tree permits those in its presence to remember their past lives (yam āsādya janaḥ sarvo jātiṃ smarati paurvikīm, HV 92.64cd) -an extraordinary power that is ascribed to Buddhas and Jinas.…”