TRADITIONAL SOUTH ASIAN MEDICINE

Founded by Rahul Peter Das and Ronald Eric Emmerick Edited by Rahul Peter Das (t)

VOLUME 2003

Ronald Eric Emmerick and the Siddhasiira: Khotanese, Iranian and Oriental Studies *

The chosen field of research of Ronald Eric Emmerick was Khotanese, the Eastern Middle Iranian language used in the first millennium in the Buddhist kingdom ofKhotan on the southern branch of the Silk Route in the present-day Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region of the People's Republic of China. He had not yet heard of this language when in Sydney, at the age of22, he read the inaugural lecture delivered in 1938 by the scholar who was to become his teacher. The reading made him so enthusiastic that he decided to study Khotanese with Harold W. Bailey at Cambridge University. I To the elucidation of the Khotanese language and texts Emmerick was to devote the best part ofhis life and research activity. After having been instructed in Imnian and Indian studies by Bailey, in the years 1963-1965 he wrote his doctoral dissertation entitled Indo-Iranian Studies: SaIra Grammar, that was subsequently revised and enlarged, and published under the title Saka Grammatical Studies, a milestone in Khotanese and Iranian

This is the revised version of a speech I delivered at the Akademische Gedenlrfeier zu Ehren V01l Prof. Dr. Ronald E. Emmerick (9. Man 1937 - 31. August 2001), at the Warburg-Haus in Hamburg on the 14th of December, 2001. It sc:cmcdappropriate to me to deal, on that occasion, with the work devoted by Ronald Emmerick to the study of the SiddhaslIra and connected rcscaroh themes, not only because that work resulted in many ground-breaking publications - three books ind some forty articles corresponding to more than four hundred printed pages - but also because presenting Emmcrick's work on the SiddhaslIra and other medical texts made it possible to give an idea of his way of doing things. - I am glad to have been able to contribute to honouring the memory ofProfcssor Emmcrick and thus to return, in a small way, the atIad:ioo and encouragement I received from him, as a teacher and friend, in the ten years or so that have elapsed since we met for the first time in Venice in 1990 on the occasion of a conference that I attended as a graduate student of the Istituto Universitario Orientale of Naples. See p. 327 (with note 37) of Ronald Eric Emmerick, 'Harold Walter Bailey, 1899-1996', Proceedings o/the British Academy 101 (= 1998 Lectures and Memoirs) (1999): 309-349.
I

studies on account of its thoroughness.:ZThe work was based on the reading of a large number of Old and Late Khotanese texts including, in particular, a fresh close study of the so-called Book ofZambasta, the largest extant Old Khotanese text, which bad been edited and translated more than thirty years before by Ernst Leumann.3 In fact, in order to provide a firm basis for the grammatical study of the Khotanese language, the interpretation of the text needed to be brought up to date and completed in the light of the advances in the knowledge of Khotanese and of the nineteen newly published folios and folio fragments of the main manuscript of the Book ofZambasta.4 Research on this text was carried out jointly by Emmerick and Bailey and their collaboration resulted in Bailey's treatment of the vocabulary and in Emmerick's new edition and translation of the text 5 In subsequent years, Emmerick was to edit and translate the extant portions of the Old Khotanese Sarangamasamiidisutra, and two other substantial Old Khotanese texts - the Suvan.za/Jhiisottamasutra and the Sanghiitasutra - were to be inteIpreted in detail by Prods Oktor Skja:rvs and Giotto Canevascini respectively, both of whom made full use of suggestions made by Emmerick him2 RoE.Emmerick. SaIaJ Grammatical Studies. London: Oxford University Press 1968 (London Oriental Series 20). 3 Ernst Leumann, Dos nordarische (saJrische)Lehrgedicht des Buddhismus. Text rmd Obersetzung. ADsdcm NacbJaB haausgegeben von Maou I.amwm Leipzig: F.A. Broc:kbaus 1933-1936 (reprint Ncndeln: Kraus Reprint (966) (Abbaodlungcn fiir die Kunde des Morgcnlandes 20). 4 V.S. Vorob'ev-Desjatovskij and M. I. Vorob'eva-Desjatovskaja, Skaztmie 0 Bhadre (Novye listy MlIrslroj rulropl3i 'E'). Fabimile td:rta, transkripcij40 penvod. prediJ/ovie. vstupitelnaja stat 'j4o parij i prilo%enie. Moskva: Izdatel'stvo Nauka 1965 (pamjatniki pis'mennosti Vostoka 1). 5 H.W. Bailey,lndo-Scythian Studies. Being Khotanese Tem. Volume VI: Prolexis to the Book o/Zambosta. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 1967; RoE. Emmerick, The Book o/ZiurIIxMta . .4 Khotonese Poem on"Buddhism. London: Oxford University Press 1968 (London Oriental Series 21). Cf. RoE. Emmcrick, 'The Wme New Fragments from the Book of lambesta', Asia Major N.S. 12,2 (1966): 148-178; R.E. Emmcrick, 'Notes on the ''Talc of Bhadra"', BuJlin o/the School o/Oriental and African Studies 30 (1967): 83-94; RoE. Emmcrick, 'Thelen New Folios ofKhotancse',biaMqiorN.S. 13,1-2 (1967): 147; R. E. Emmcrick, 'Notes on The Booko/Zambasta',JOU11IIlJ o/the Royal Asiatic Society 1969: 5974.

self.6 But, at the time of his grammatical studies, those texts and such extensive Late Khotanese texts as the MaiijuirinairatmyavatarasQtra and the medical texts Siddhasiira and JlvalaJpustalaJ had still not been translated. Since the interpretation of non-bilingual texts in Late Khotanese presents considerable difficulty due to 'the ambiguity of the truncated words in Late Khotanese, the tendency of the inflections to evaporate in the later stages of the language, the wide variety of acceptable spellings, and the philological problems presented by having to deal in many cases with hastily written copies containing omissions and repetitions as well as misreadings of earlier copies' .' the best starting point were texts with known originals, among which was the SiddhasiIra, the nature of which also ensured an exceptionally large vocabulary content. Accordingly, Emmerick decided to provide a thorough investigation and interpretation of the Khotanese Siddhasiira, a research work that - be it said parenthetically -led him to follow the traces of this treatise even in Arabic literature.' Khotanese medical texts - the SiddhasiIra, the so-called Jivakapustaka and a number of fragmentary texts - all belong to the Indian i1yurvedic tradition. The S8Dskrit original of the SiddhasiIra was composed by Ravigupta around 650 C.B. as has been suggested by Emmerlck.9 The Khotanese version of the Siddhasilra dates presumably from the tenth century. It is contained in 64 of tile

RoB. Emmerick, The Khotanese Silrangamasam4dhisiltrtJ. London: Oxford University PraIs 1970 (Loodon Oric:atal Series 23); Prods Oktor Skjavl/J, The Khotanese ~ottIl1rItUQtra. Habilitation thesis in three parts, MaiDZ1983 (to be published shortly); Giotto CaDCVISCini, 77reKhotanese Saiagluffasatra. A Critical Edition. Wiesbaden: Dr. Ludwig Reichert Verlag 1993 (Beitrige zur Iranistik 14).
6 7

R.E. Emmerick, 'The Confession of Acts', in: Varia 1976. Leiden: EJ. Brill 1971 (Acta

lranica 12), pp. 87-115; see p. 87.

. R.B. Bmmerick, 'Ravigupta's Siddhasira in Arabic', in: Hans R. Roemer and Albrecht Notb (eds.), Studlenzur Geschichte und KullUrdes Vorderen Orisnts. Festschrlftfi1r Bertold Spuler zum siebzigsten Geburtstag. Leiden: E.l. Brill 1981, pp. 28-31. See LE. ~ck, 'Ravigupta's Place in Indian Medical Tradition'. Ind%gica Taurlnensia 3-4 (1975-1976): 209-221; cf. D. Wujastyk. 'Ravigupta and Vlgbbata'. Bulletirt of the School of Oriental GIld African Studies 48 (1985): 74-78 (with 1 plate).
9

65 folios forming a Dunhuang manuscript of the British Library (Cb ii 002; f. 100 contains a different medical text). A variant of if. 5-14 ( 1.25-2.32) is pr0vided by another Dunhuang manuscript that is kept in the Bibliotheque Nationale de France (P 2892). Of the original tbirty-one chapters, ten chapters are entirely extantandftvechapters are preserved in part (1, 2, 3.0-26.12,13.27-51,14,15.1 and 15-23, 18.53-57, 19,20,21,22, 23,24,25,26.0-68 and 75-90). Though Emmerick's interest in the Siddhoslira, which dated from the time of his grammatical studies, was directed chiefly towards the Khotanese version, it was evident that 'the key to a proper understanding of the Khotanese version lies in large part in the con:ect intetpit:tation of the Sanskrit original and of its Tibetan rendering, both of which were used by the Khotanese translator' .10 Thus, work on the Siddhosil:ra opened up for Emmerick a new research subject: Indian and Tibetan medicine. By 1971, the year ofhis appointment at Hamburg University, he 'had comple1ed a preliminaIy 1IaDSlation of the Khotanese version, a transcription of the complete Tibetan version on the basis of the Derge, Narthang, and Peking editions, and a transcription of the whole of the Sanskrit text on the basis of the two incomplete manuscripts A and B' knoWn at that time. 1 I The progress made by him towinIs the understanding of the Sanskrit text corresponding to the extant parts of the Khotanese version was presented by him in 1971 in a detailed article that he published in anticipation of the complete edition of the text and 'in view of possible delays due to the discovery ofuseful ancillary inateriaI' .12 In the same year Emmerick also published an article on the second chapter of the Siddhas6ra dealing with the groups of dmgs, which exemplified how the understanding of one iyurvedic text can be improved by a comparative approach that takes into account the other Indian medical texts.13

10 R.E.

Emmenck, The SidtJluuilra ofRaviguptll. Volume 1: The Sanskrit Text. Wiesbadcn:

Steiner VcrIag 1980 (Verzeichnis dcr orientaliscben Handscbriften in Deutschland, SupplCIDCDtband 23,1), p. VIl.
FI'8DZ
II Ibid.

Emmerick, 'The Sanskrit Text oftbc SiddhasIra', Bulletin ojthe School ojOrienllJ1 and A[riCQII Studies 34 (1971): 91-112; see p. 93.
13

12 R.E.

R.E. Emmerick,

'00 Ravigupta'sg~t,Bulletin

of the School ojOrlenllJl and.4.frican

As for the Khotanese Siddhas6ra, a short article dealing with 21.2 was published by Emmerick in the same year. It demonstrates, on the basis of a careful consideration of the Sanskrit manuscript tradition and of the Tibetan and Khotanese translations, that the corresponding Sanskrit passage is in need of emendation, that the supposed Khotanese word agane is in reality a ghostword due to wrong division of words (aga 'limbs' and ne 'not'), and that the Khotanese verb ahalj- does not mean 'to contract' , but 'to control' .14 This masterful article evidenced the progress that was made possible by the joint study of the three versions of the text. It may be mentioned that the subsequent discovery by Emmerick, in 1973, of three further Nepalese manuscripts of the SiddhasiJra as a result of the activities of the Nepal-German Manuscript Preservation Project lent some support to his suggested emendation of the Sanskrit passage," and that the emendation was eventually confirmed by the discovery, some twenty years later, of two manuscripts of a Sinhalese commentary on the Sanskrit text of the Siddhasiira by Jinadasa Liyanaratne.16 On the three new Sanskrit manuscripts (C, of which B is a direct copy, D and E) Emmerick wrote a preliminary report in 1974.17 The discovery of those manuscripts caused postponement of the edition of the Sanskrit Siddhasara,

Studies 34 (1971): 363-375; cf. also Emmerick, op.cit. in note 9, and Ronald E. Emmcrick, 'Some Emendations to the Text ofRavigupta's SiddJuu6ra', in: Wolfgang Morgenroth (cd.), Sanskrit tuU1 World Culture. Proceedings of the 4th World Sanskrit Conference of the Intonational Association of Sanskrit Studies. Weimar. May 13-30, 1979. Berlin: Akademie-Verlag 1986 (Schriften zur Geschichte und Kultur des Alten Orients 18), pp. 579-586. R.E. Emmerick, 'Agane No More', Transactions of the Philological Society 1970 [1971]: 115-120; et: Emmerick in R.E. Emmerick and P.O. Sigave, Studies in the Vocabulary ofKlwtanese, 1. Wicn: Verlag dcr Ostemichiscbcn Akademie der Wissenschaftcn 1982 (Vcr61fcnt1ichungcn dcr iranischcn Kommission 12), pp. 25-27.
14 IS

See R.E. Emmerick, 'Tetanus', Transactions of the Philological Society 1974: 93-97.

Liyanarable, 'Ravigupta's Siddhas6ra: New Light from the Sinhala Version', Journal o/the European Ayruvedic Society 1 (1990): 69-84; see p. 75. R.E. Emmerick, 'New Light on the Siddhas5ra'. Bulletin o/the School of Oriental and African Studies 37 (1974): 628-654.
17

16 Jinadasa

but, at last, the publication of the critical edition of the Sanskrit text in 1980 and of the critical edition and translation of the Tibetan text in 1982 as supplementary volumes of the series Verzeichnis der orientalischen Handschriften in Deutschland crowned his wmk on the Sanskrit original and on the Tibetan version.11 Emmerick's edition of the Sanskrit text could also make use of a manuscript from South India (M) that he received when the 'edition based on the five Nepalese MSS had been submitted for publication,.19 The two volumes were most aptly descnDed by Dominik Wujastyk as 'one of the most exciting recent developments in the study of Indian medicine'.20 The identification of a further Sanskrit manuscript (F) in Kyoto in 1983 bad no consequences on the established text, since it is a copy of the Nepalese manuscript 8 a1readyused for the edition,21 whereas independent evidence concerning the textual tradition was eventually provided by the aforementioned discovery of the Sinhalese commentary.22 In an article that appeared only in 1986 but was written before the publication of the critical edition of the Sanskrit text, Emmerick enWlciated the principles that should ideally inspire research on Indian medical literature that he regarded as 'the reflection of a coherent tradition of medical lore so that no one text should be studied in isolation from the rest of the tradition'. 23He underlined the need to have recourse to the manuscripts, and for reliable text editions prepared according to the canons of textual criticism, as well as for indexes enabling quick comparison of lyurvedic texts. He did not state such principles

\I

Emmerick, op.ciL in note 10; R.E. Emmerick, The Slddhasllra ofRJZvigupta. Volume II:

The TibetaIl Version with Facing ElIgli3h Tran.rltmoll. Wiesbadcn: Franz Steiner Verlag 1982

(Verzeicbnis dcr oricntalischcn Handschriftcn in Deutscbland, Supplcmcntband 23,2).

19 Emmerick, op.ciL
20 21

in note 10, p. 5.

Wujastyk, op.ciL in note 9, p. 75.

Ronald E. Etmncrick, 'A Note on the Kyoto Siddhasira Manuscript', Studien zur Indologie und Iralli3ti1c IS (1989): 147-149.
22 See LiyaDaratne, op.ciL in note 16; cf. Jinadasa Liyauaratne, 'The Literary Heritage of Sri Lanka (A Case for the Preservation of Palm-lcaf Manuscripts)' , Studie7l zur Indolo~ ulld Irani3ti1c IS (1989): 119-127; see pp. 123f., with note 22.
23

~erick,

'Some Emendations ... ' (op.ciL in note 13), p. 580.

vaguely, but listed succinctly and neatly three operations that summarised the large amount of work to be done: 'I. collection and cataloguing of all extant Sanskrit medical MSS; 2. indexation of all texts based on preliminary editions; 3. editions of individual texts prepared with the help of the tools provided by the first two operations'. 24 In that article, continuing the exemplifi.cation he had begun with the article 'On Ravigupta's gar.uzs' , he then discussed passages of the SiddhlIsara where the text could be definitely established with the help of corresponding passages of the main ayurvedic authorities. These principles he applied not only to the identification of items of the Indian materia medica25 or to the discussion of single themes,26 but also put into practice on a grand scale. Thus, as a result of a research project funded from 1982 to 1992 by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft and carried out with the assistance ofRahul Peter Das (and other researchers), a consolidated database was produced, which provides a cumulative line index to the three main ayurvedic authorities - the SuaTUtostl1!'hita, the Cara1lsa",Jrita, and Vigbhata 's AIfDilgahfdayasQ1!Jhita and Allii1igasmigraha - as well as to Ravigupta's Siddhas6ra. From this 'it is possible to prepare individual line indexes for each of the texts, from. these again individual word indexes, reverse word indexes, and reconstituted texts, and, finally, a cumulative word index and a cumulative reverse word index'.27 In 1998, the romanised text ofa preliminary edition of

24

/bid.

2S See RE. Emmerick, 'A propos Sanskrit malakanda', Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society 1974: 42f.; Ronald E. Emmcrick, 'Arsenic and Sida', in: G. Mazars (eel.), Les mblecines tradltioneUes de I 'Asie. Acta du colloque de Paris. 11-12 juin 1979. Strasbourg: Universit6 Louis Pasteur 1981, pp. 93-99.

R.E. Emmerick, 'Some Remarks on the History Of Leprosy in India' , Indologica Taunnensia 12 (- Proceedings of the Scandinavian Confenmce-Seminar of Indological Studies (Stockholm. June Isf-5th. 1982)(1984): 93-105; RoualdE. Emmcrick, 'Die Lcprain Indico', in: Jam Henning Wolf (ed.), Aussatz. Lepra. Hansen-Krtmlr:heit. Em Menschheitsproblem 1m WandeL Tell 0: Auftatze. Wtbzburg: Dcutschcs Aussitzigcn-Hilfswcrk 1986, pp. 185-199.
26 27 Rabul Peter Das and Ronald Eric Emmcrick. Vilgbha{a's ~(6iagahrdayas"",hitil. The romanised text accompanied by line and word indexes. Groningcn: Egbert Forsten 1998 (Oro-

Vigbhata's ~1angahrdayasil1{lhitii accompanied by line and word indexes was published in book form by Das and Emmerick.28 In the sixti~, the need for historical information on Khotan prompted Emmerick's research on the available Tibetan chronicles dealing with the history of Khotan, a work which, paradoxically enough, resulted in a Tibetoiogical work being the first published book, and one of the first publications altogether, of the then young scholar of Iranian. 29 In the light of this beginning and ofhis subsequent research, it is not surprising that Ernmerick was not satisfied with devoting a couple of articles to problem words occurring in the Tibetan Siddhasiira,3Obut invested some solid worlcin the study and interpretation of the Rgyud bzhi ('The Four Tantras'), the classical handbook of Tibetan medicine that, as Emmerick has shown, has Vlgbhata's ~1Qrigahrdayasil1{lhitii among its sources.31 Thus, he translated some excerpts32 and three whole chapters from the Rgyud bzhi,33 and

Dingen Oriental Studies 13), p. ix.

28

Op.ciL in note 27.

29 R.E. Emmcrick, Tibetan Texts Concerning Khotan. London: Oxford University Press 1967 (London Oriental Series 19). 30 RoE. Emmcrick, 'Some Lexical Items from the SiddhaslJra' , in: Ernst Steinkellner and Helmut Tauscher (ed.), Proceedings o/the Csoma de KtirOs Symposium held at Velm- Y"Je1I1UJ, AII8trlIJ. 13-19 September 1981. Vol. 1: Contributions on Tibetan Language, History tmd Culture. Wien: Arbeitslaeis fUrTibetologie und Buddhistiscbe Studien 1983 (Wiener Studien zur Tibetologie unci Buddbismuskundc 10), pp. 61-68; RoE. Emmerick, 'Tibetan Lexical Notes', in: Louis Ligeti (eel.), TIbetan and Buddhist Studies Commemorating the 200th Anniversary o/the Birth of Alextmtler Csoma de K6iis. YoL 1, Budapest: Akadimiai KiadO 1984 (Bibliotheca Oricntalis Hungarica 29,1), pp. 207-210.

31 RoE. Emmerick, 'Sources of the Rgyud-bZi', in: Wolfgang Voigt (ed.), XIX. Deutscher OrientalistenttJg vom 28. September bis 4. Olctober 1975 in Frelburg in Breisgau. Vortrtige. Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner Verlag 1977 (Zeitscbrift der Dcutschen MorgenIindischen GeseUschaft. Supplement 3,2), pp. 1135-1142.

RoE.Emmerick, 'Mi-chos', in: Ludwilc Sternbach Felicitation Volume. Lucknow: Akhila Bharatiya Sanskrit Parishad 1981, pp. 883-885; R.E. Emmerick, 'Some Remarks on Tibetan Sphygmology', in: G. lan Meulenbcld (ed.), Panels of the YIIth World Sanskrit Conference, Kern Institute, Leiden. AUgust 23-29, 1987. VoL vm. MediJ:aI Literature from India, SrI Lanhz
32

wrote two further lexicological articles on words occurring in the work, 34 as well as an article on some Tibetan medical tankas dlat illustrate it.35 In the case ofKhotanese medical texts too, Emmerick did not confine himself to the Siddhasfira but paid attention also to the other largely extant Late Khotanese medical text, the so-called Jivalcapusta1ca. This is preserved in one Dunhuang manuscript of the British Library (Ch ii 003) presumably dating from the tenth century, and is said to be the teaching of the Buddha to the physician Jivaka. The work is an otherwise unknown collection of prescriptions taken from various texts and organised by type of preparations in four complementary chapters introduced by the Sanskrit auspicious formula siddham 'success'. The text is bilingual and alternates Sanskrit and Khotanese sentence by sentence in the first chapter, and paragraph by paragraph in the three other chapters. Emmerick succeeded in identifying, in other Indian medical texts, twenty-nine of the ninety-three prescriptions the text contains - fifteen of which are taken from the Siddhasara -, and in determining the relative value of measures occurring in it. 36 He also rediscovered the work already done by August

and Tibet. Leiden etc.: EJ. Brill 1991, pp. 66-72. R.E. Emmerick, 'A Chapter from the Rgyud-bZi', Asia Major 19,2 (1975): 141-162; RE. Emmcrick, 'Epilepsy according to the Rgyud-bii', in: G. Jan Mculcnbcld and Dominik Wujastyk (cds.), Studies on Indian Medical KlStory. Papen presented at the International JlYorlr:3hop on the Study of Indian Medicine held at the Wellcome Instltutefor the History of Medicine. 2-4 September 1985. Groningcn: Egbert Forsten 1987 (Groningco Oriental Studies 2), pp. 63-90; RE. Emmcrick, 'Rgas-pa gso-ba', in: Tadcusz Skorupski (cd.), Indo-Tibetan Studies. Papers in Ho1lOU1' and Appreciation of Professor David L. Snellgrove:S Contribution to Indo-Tlbetlm Studies. Tring: Institute of Buddhist Studies 1990 (Buddhica Britannica, Series Continua 2), pp.89-99.
33
34 RoE.Emmcrick, 'Some Lcxicalltems from the Rgyud-bii', in: Louis Ligcti (cd.), Pr0ceedings of the Csoma de K6iis Memorial Symposium held at MIltra}iired. HlUlgary. 24-30 September 1976. Budapest: AkadmUai Kiad6 1978, pp. 101-108; RE. Emmcrick, 'Tibetan nor-ra-re', Bulletin of the School ofOrlenttll and A.frican Studies SI (1988): S37-539.

35 RoE. Emmcrick, 'Some Tibetan Medical Tankas', Bulletin ofTibet%gy (with 12 platcs). 315

1993: 56-78

R.B. Emmcrick, 'Contributions to the Study of the J1valra-pustalal', Bulletin of the

Friedrich RudolfHoemle on the .hvakapustaka, digging out a forgotten article of his ftom an Indian Festschrift of 1917,37 as well as locating, in the Oriental and India Office Collections of the British Library, Hoernle's manuscript (Eur D 723) of a study on the ,rzvalcapustaka he had intended to publish as the second volume of his Manuscript Remains of Buddhist Literature found in Eastern Turkestan (Oxford 1916). In three articles, Emmerick reinterpreted and provided a reconstruction of the corrupt Sanskrit of the first c~ and of the prescription for the Mahasauvarcaliidi gh~ that had already been studied by Hoerole. Some other Khotanese medical ftagments have an even more chequered history. Over a period of many years, Emmerick had made repeated enquiries concerning the whereabouts of a collection of manuscripts from Khotan deposited by Oscar Terry Crosby in the Library of Congress, Washington.4O When the Crosby collection finally turned up in 1984 and a microfilm was sent to Emmerick in 1985, he immediately recognised four Khotanese fragments as belonging to a single medical text and referring to needles and cauterisation.41 Further ftagScllool of Oriental aruJAfrican Studies 42 (1979): 235-243. R.E. Emmaick, 'Hoemle and the JilHlka-Pustalca', RuUeti1Jof the School of Oriental aNi A.frictm Studies 45 (1982): 343; cf. A.F. Rudo1fHoemle, 'An Ancient Medical Manuscript fiom Eastmu TurkCstan', in: CommDnorattve Essays Presented to Sir RamlcrishlUl Gopa/ BIuuu:ltuIcar. Poona: BhandarkarOriental Research Institute 1917, pp. 415-432.
37 31

Ronald E. Emmerick, 'The Svastika Antidote', Jou11Ul1of the European Ayurvedic

Society 2 (1992): 60-81.

39 Ronald E. Emmerick, 'The Mahisauvan:alldi Ghee', in: KIaus Rohrbom and Wolfgang Veenker (eels.), MDnoriae mrmusculum: GedDlldxmdfiir A1J1Jemariev. Gabai1J. Wiesbaden: Harrusowitz Verlag 1994 (Veroffentlichungen der Societas Uralo-Altaica 39), pp. 29-42; Ronald Eric Emmerick, 'The Mabisauvan:alid ghfta in Hoemle's unpublished edition of the .lfvakapustalaJ ,, Jou11Ul1of the European Ayurvedic Society 5 (1997): 76-81. 40 R.E. Emmerick, 'The Historical Importance ofKhotanese Manuscripts', in: J. Harma1ta (ed.), Prolegome1Ul to the Sources on the Irutory of Pre-Islamic Central Asia. Budapest: Akad6miai K.iad6 1979, pp. 167-177; see pp. 175-177.

R.E. Emmerick, 'The Crosby Collection', in: Albrecht Wezler and Ernst Hammerschmidt (cds.), Proceedings of the XXXlJ IlJler1ultiolUllCongress for Asian and North A.frictl1l Studies. Hamburg, 25th-30th A.ugust 1986. Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag 1992 (Zcitschrift
41

ments of Khotanese medical texts were dealt with by him in his and Margarita Iosipovna Vorob1eva-Desjatovskaja's edition of the St. Petersburg collections.42 It was only to be expected that Emmerick, an Iranianist and a comparative philologist by education, would have investigated the concepts of disease and cure and the way they were expressed in Indo-Iranian. This he did in a detailed article he published in the festschrift for Genit Ian Meulenbeld.43 But Emmerick:'s activity was also devoted to the promotion of research. In the case ofiyurvedic medicine, this resulted in the launch, together with Rahul Peter Das, in 1990 of a new journal, the Journal of the European Ayurvedic Society. that he co-edited from the first to the sixth volume, the latter published in 200 I under the new journal title Traditional South Asian Medicine. He also reviewed a number of books on Indian and Tibetan medicine, and his keen interest in this subject is evident from the fact that, from 1990 onwards, he reviewed exclusively works on medicine.44 It may also be mentioned here that
dcr Deulschen MorgenJinctischen Gescllschaft, Supplement 9), pp. 672-674 (see p. 673); R.E. Emmcrick, 'Notes on the Crosby Collection', in: Wojciech Skalmowski and Alois van Tongerloo (eds.), MedioiranictL Proceedings o/the Intentati01llJ1Colloquium Organized by the Katholieiz Universiteit Leuvenfrom the 21st to the 23rd 0/May 1990. Leuven: Uitgeverij Peeters 1993 (Orientalia Lovaniensia Analec::ta48), pp. 57-64 (see p. S9); Ronald E. Emmcrick, 'Cr0sby, 0IK:ar Terry', in: Ehsan Yarshater (cd.), Encyclopaedia lranica. Volume VI. Costa Mesa: Mazda Publishers 1993, pp. 402b-403b (see p. 403a).
42 Fngments SI P 45.1-3 and SI P 102b4-IS: see Ronald E. Emmcrick and Margarita I. Vorob'eva-Desjatovskaja, SaIallJocuments YO. TIle St. Petersburg CoUections. London: School of Oriental and African Studies 1993 (Corpus InscripIionum Innicarurn 2: Inscriptions of the Seleucid and Parthian Periods and ofEastem Inm and Central Asia S: Saka), pp. 23-2S and 105; Ronald E. Emmerick and Margarita I. Vorob'av&-Desjatovsbja, SaIal Documents. Text volume OJ. The $I. Petersburg Collections. With contributions by H. KIIIDIlIIIOlo et aI. London: School of Oriental and Afiican Studies 1995 (Corpus Inscriptionum IranicanJm 2: Inscriptions of the Seleucid and Parthian Periods and ofEastem Iran and Central Asia S: Saka), pp. 36 and 134 43 Ronald E. Emmcrick, 'Indo-Iranian Concepts of Disease and Cure', Journal of the European Ayurvedjc Society 3 (= Studies in H01lOU1' o/Gerrlt Jan Meulenbeld presented by friends and colleagues on the occasion o/his 65th birthday on 28 May 1993) (1993): 72-93.

Reviews of: Anne-Marie Blondcau (cd. and tr.), Matirima pour I 'etude de I'hippologie et de I'hippilltrle tibetaines (a partir des manuscrits de Touen-houang). Geneve: Librairie Droz
44

Emmerick wrote the entry 'Caraka' for the Encyclopaedia Iranica;5 for which he was consulting editor for philology, and on the advisory committee of which he sat from the eighth volume onwards after having been consulting editor for linguistics for the first seven volumes. It is a well-known fact that Ronald Emmerick mastered computers perfectly. Already in the sixties, he initiated a project in Cambridge for a concordance of the Khotanese texts.46 When, in the eighties, personal computers became affordable and powerful enough, Emmerick switched to them and began writing for himself the programmes he needed. Thus, he wrote the now well-known pro-

1972 (Bulktin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 36 (1973): 698-7(0); G. J. Meulenbeld (tr.), The Mlldhavanid6na and its Chief Commentary, Chapters 1-10. Leidcn: B.]. Brill 1974 (Bulletin a/the School a/Oriental and African Studies 38 (1975): 649); Alix Raison (ed. and tr.), La HllrilJJ-stllfIhit6.texte mMlcal sans/rrlt, avec un inde%de nomenclature ciyrlm:?dique. Ponc:licbay: IDstitut F~ d'Indologie 1974 (BuJletin o/the School o/Oriental and African Studies 38 (1975): 65 If.; P. Ray, H. Gupta and M. Roy, Srdruta Smtrhit6 (A Scientific Synopsis). New Delhi: Indian National Science Academy 1980 (Bulletin of the School ofOriental and African Studies 45 (1982): 377f.); Byams-pa 'Pbrin-las, Wang Lei (translator and compiler of the origiDal edition) and Cai JiDgf'eng(English translator and annotator), nbetan Medlcal17rtmgka of the Four Medical Tantras. Lhasa: People's Publishing House of Tibet 1988 (Joumal of the EuropetJ1lAyurvedic Society 1 (990): 179); Yorl Parfionovitch, Gyurme Dorje and Fernand Meyer (eds.), Tibetan Medical Paintings: Illustrations to the Blue Beryl Treatise ofSangye Gyamt80 (1653-1705). 2 vols. London: Serindia Publications 1992 (Bulletin of the School ofOrlental and A.frican Studies 58 (1995): 403-4(6); Jinadasa Liyanaratne (ed.), Bhaqjjamailjfisil. Chapten 1-18. Oxford: The Pali Text Society 1996 (Traditional South Asian Medicine 6 (2001): 184-189); Dominik Wujastyk, The Roots of Ayurveda. Selectionsfrom Sanskrit Medical Writings. New Delhi: Penguin Books India 1998 (Traditional South Asian Medicine 6 (2001): 158-163).
45

Ronald B. Bmmerick, Caraka', in: Bhsan Yarshater (ed.), Encyclopaedia Iranlca. Vol-

ume IJ'. London: Routledge and Kegan Paull990, p. 792b.

Listed as .L 260 A concordance of Khotanese' in Computers and the Hunranities 3,5 (1969): 300 (cf. R.B. Bmmerick, 'Rcsearchon Khotanese: A Survey (1979-1982)', in: Wojcicch Skalmowski and Alois van Tongerloo (eels.), Middle Irania" Studies. Proceedings of the I"tematiolUJl Symposium Organized by the Katholieke Universileil Leuven from lhe 17th to the 20t1tof May 1982. Leuven: Uitgeverij Peeters 1984 (Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta 16), pp. 127-145; p. 134).
46

grammes Bhela.exe and Caraka.exe for Sanskrit databank management that were used for the aforementioned consolidated iyurvedic database and the indexes in the ~filiagahfdayasm"hitiivolume, as well as programmes for Tibetan and Khotanese databank management and a BlOber of ancillary programmes. In 2000 he also began developing a database programme for a dictionary of Khotanese that we were planning together. His expertise he made generously available to other colleagues by collaborating with several institutions and research projects to comply with their computing needs. In this field, he has done much more than he bas published: t\W articles on Sanskrit computing and one on Tibetan computing.47 But it is time now to return to the Khotanese Siddhasllra, which provided the first impulse to Emmerick's wide-ranging research activity on the history ofliyurvedic literature over a period of almost forty years. Unfortunately, only few results ofbis efforts on the Khotanese version have been published when compared with the huge wmk he has done on it He has dealt with the metrical introduction to the Khotanese Siddhasllra in an article on the translation techniques of the Khotanese,48 and, in a series of seven lexicological articles, has discussed

.7 RoDald E. Emmerick, '00 the Indexation of Sanskrit Medical Verses and PR:scriptioDs', in: Etudes sur la medicine indienne. Strasbourg: UDiversite Louis Pasteur 1979 (Seientia Orientalis. Cabiers do Seminaire sur les sciences et lea tccbniques co Asie 16), pp. 3-8; RE. Emmerick,'ne Indexation of Sanskrit Medical Texts: Progress and Prospects', in: G. Jan Meuleobeld (eeL), Proceedings of the IntematioNJI Workshop on Prioritia in the Study oflnditm Medicine held at the State UIIiveniJy ofGromngen, 23-27 October 1983. Groningen: Institute of Indian Studies 1984 (Publikaties van bet Instituut voor Indische Talco en Culturen 4), pp. 147-154; Ronald E. Emmerick, 'Tibetan Databank Management with Personal Computers', in: IbaIa Sh6ren and Yamaguchi ZUihfi (cds.), Trbettm Studies. ProceeJings of the 5th SemiNJr of the International Assodation for Tibetan Studies, Narlta 1989. II: Language, HUlory and Culture. Narita-shi: Naritasan Shinshoji 1992 (Monograph Series ofNaritasan Institute for Buddhist Studies. Occasional Papers 2), pp. 439-443.

RoDaId E. Emmerick, 'Some RcmaIb on Translation Techniques of the Khotanese', in: Klaus R61ubom and Wolfgang Veenker (cds.), Sprachen des Buddhumus in Zentralasien. Yortriige des Hamburger SymposiOIlS yom 2. Juli bu 5. Ju/i 1981. Wiesbaden: Otto Hamssowitz 1983 (VcrMfendichungen der Societas Uralo-Altaica 16), pp. 17-26.
48

a number of problem words and clarified the passages where they occur.49 The reinterpretations of these words were subsequently 1akenup in the three volumes of Studies in the Vocabulary ofKhotanese that he published with Prods Oldor Sijavs.50 These three volumes contain many further entries by Emmerick on the vocabulary of the SiddhasiJra. Unfortunately, the fact that many passages from the SiddhosiIra are quoted with incorrect intelpretations in Bailey's Dictio1lll1'J"1 resulted in postponement of the publication of the Khotanese Siddhasiira, because Emmerick did not want to load his edition with a heavy commentary correcting the many misinteIpretatioDS of Siddhasiira passages. 52 Emmerick attached the utmost importance to the Khotanese SiddhasiIra and continued working on it until the last days, laying aside several other works he had already brought to an advanced stage of preparation. Thus, he has left a virtually finished edition and translation of the whole text, including an appendix that contains the variants that are found in the Jivakapustaka. As for the glossary, however, though he was able to do all the preliminary work and to prepare a complete concordance, he had to leave it unfinished: only the vowels and the letter Ira are virtually complete.
RE. Emmerick, 'Kbotaoese byiIiiQ', Zeitschrift fiir vergleiclletrM Sprachjorschung 94,1-2 (1980): 282-288; RE. Emmerick, 'e/ai . ~,Miindrener StudlenZUT Sprochwissenschaft 40 (1981): 27-33; RoDaId E. Emmcrick, 'Khotanese ham8iiuna-'. Studien ZUT /ruJologie WId /ranistilc 7 (1981): 71-75; R.E. Emmerick, 'KhotaneseIDlV6la', in: LA. Hercus et aL (eds.)./ndologiCtJI and Buddhist Studies. Volume in Honour of Professor J. w.: de Jong on his 60th Birthday. Canberra: Australian NatioDal University Press 1982, pp. 137-147; RE. Emmcrick, 'Some more Loanwon:ls in Khotanese', Die Spraclre 29.1 (1983): 43-49; RE. Emmcrick, 'Khotanese vr Itir, in: OrlentIZ/iQ J. Duche.me-Gulllemin Emerito Oblata. Leiden: EJ. Brill 1984 (Acta Iranica 23), pp. 151-155; RE. Emmcrick, 'Two more Khotanesc Ghostwords', in: /rtlIIia:l Varia. Papers in Honor ofProjessor Ehsan YanhaJer. Leideo: EJ. BriIll990 (Acta Iranica 30). pp. 80-82.
49 50 RE. Emmericlc and P.O. Skja:rvs, Studies in the VocabulaTy ofKhotanese. Wien: Verlag dcr Osterreichischen Akademie der WisseDschaften 1982 (1), 1987 (11); 1997 (llI (eel. RE. Emmerick, comnDutcd by G. Canevascini et a1.}) (Ver6ffentlichUDgeD der Kommission fi1r Iranistilt 12. 17. 27). 51

H.W. Bailey, Dictionary ofKhotan Salaz. Cambridge: cambridge University Press 1979. op.cit. in note 18: Vlfi.

52 Cf.