New Sanskrit Fragments of the Saddharmapun.d.arı̄kasūtrain the Schøyen Collection, Norway

Kazunobu Matsuda

A

T the outset of the 20th century, chains of expeditions from various countries including those led or organized by Britain’s Aurel
Stein (1862–1943), France’s Paul Pelliot (1878–1945), Germany’s
Albert Grünwedel (1856–1935) and Japan’s Kozui Otani (1876–1948)
vied in stepping into Central Asia, excavating ruins studded along the
Silk Road, and bringing back numerous documents written in manifold
languages which they had found. Apart from these expeditions, persons
including Britain’s Hamilton Bower (1858–1940), British Indologist
A. F. R. Hoernle (1841–1918) and Russian consul general in Kashgar
Nikolaj F. Petrovskij (1837–1908) acquired by purchase found documents provided by local inhabitants while they stayed at their places of
appointment in India and Central Asia. These documents had a great
impact on the development in Buddhist studies in later years, as theoriginal (i.e., Sanskrit and Prakrit) texts of numerous important scriptures which were assumed to be lost appeared, though most of the discovered documents were fragments.
However, such discoveries have not continued to the present time.
With the findings of approximately 3,000 folios of birch bark and some
paper manuscripts at stupa ruins in Gilgit, Kashmir, in 1931, as the last
major discoveries, the expedition boom has ended. In addition, due tochanges in the world situation after the Second World War, large-scalediscoveries of manuscripts no longer seem to be plausible, though a few
manuscript findings have exceptionally been reported.
Nevertheless, the situation has dramatically changed in the last several years. The Soviet intervention in Afghanistan and the subsequent
incessant civil strife which still continues have produced the ironicalconsequence of a massive outflow of Afghan manuscripts in the world
market of ancient scriptures, albeit at the cost of local devastation. Mostof the scriptures appearing in the market have been taken over by European institutes and collectors as the final proprietors. Among them,more than 100 manuscripts in the Bactrian language were reported by
Prof. Nicholas Sims-Williams of the University of London in an article97

98

NEW FRAGMENTS IN THE SHØYEN COLLECTION

in a Japanese journal.1 What Buddhist scholars such as the present
writer should take note of are the Kharo∑†h¥ birch-bark scrolls the
British Library acquired, which have recently been referred to often,
and Buddhist manuscripts belonging to the Schøyen Collection, theresearch project in which I am involved.
Kharos..thı̄ Birch-Bark Scrolls at the British Library
In June 1996, the British Library issued a press release in London andmade public five clay pots and manuscripts found in one of them,assumed to be found at ruins near Ha∂∂a, Afghanistan, which wereacquired with the help of an anonymous benefactor.2 The manuscripts
are scrolls of birch bark, bearing Buddhist texts in Gåndhår¥ in the
Kharo∑†h¥ script, totalling 29 scrolls. It is astonishing that these scrolls
are estimated to have been copied in the first century C.E. and that they
are among the oldest Buddhist manuscripts, comparable to the Dead
Sea Scrolls. Before the press announcement, the scrolls were carefully
treated for preservation and restoration for several months, and cut into
pieces and contained in 57 sets of glass plates. It was also announced
that the initial research and publication of the scrolls was commissioned
to a team centered around Prof. Richard Salomon of the University ofWashington.
Since then, Professor Salomon has delivered lectures and papers invarious parts of the world. According to them, identified documents so
far include the Saµg¥tisËtra, Dharmapada, Anavataptagåthå and Ekottarikågama in Gåndhår¥, and a Gåndhår¥ version of the Khargavi∑åˆasËtra, which comprises the Påli Suttanipåta.3 But these justaccount for several percent of the whole. So it may be said that the taskof deciphering and examination has just started. It seems that the 29
volumes of scrolls belong to the Dharmaguptaka school, one of the
Buddhist orders which prospered then in Gandhåra. The first volume ofthe publication of the joint research into the scrolls by the British
Library and the University of Washington will be issued in the very
near future. It includes a comprehensive philological introduction byProfessor Salomon and part of the facsimile edition, and deciphered
texts and English translation will successively come out from the second volume onward.
I should add the following episode. Three months after the British
Library’s announcement, Prof. Akira Sadakata of Tokai University,
Japan, published an interesting report. It was an inquiry on the photographs of several pots and scrolls contained therein, which Mr. Isao
Kurita, president of the antiquarian dealing company, SOFRACOM,NEW FRAGMENTS IN THE SHØYEN COLLECTION

99

Tokyo, had taken in Peshawar, Pakistan, four years earlier.4 Though
Professor Sadakata doesn’t note this in the article, these are exactly thesame pots and scrolls which have later settled down at the British
Library after passing through many hands. Actually, however, the photographs taken by Mr. Kurita were to have significance afterward, while
Professor Sadakata’s report seems to be partially insufficient due to thelack of the press announcement of the British Library. The five pots
bear the inscriptions of “Dharmaguptaka” or “Sarvåstivådin” in Gåndhår¥ in the Kharo∑†h¥ script respectively. Nevertheless, when they wereacquired at the British Library, the scrolls had been taken out from thepots, so it became impossible to identify which pot each scroll had been
contained in. However, thanks to Mr. Kurita’s photographs it wasproved that a total of 29 scrolls had been contained in a pot inscribed“Dharmaguptaka.” Many Japanese viewers may also remember thematter as these scrolls were referred to in an NHK (Japan Broadcasting
Corporation) TV program series, “Budda—Øinaru tabiji” (Buddha: aGreat Journey).5
This news caused a sensation in the academic world. I remember that
items on this topic appeared many times on internet mailing lists concerning Indology. Not only researchers but the world’s manuscript collectors paid attention to the news. Among them was a Norwegian, who
promptly responded through dealers in London and built up an amazingcollection in just one year’s time.
Norway’s Schøyen Collection
About 40 kilometers from Oslo, capital of Norway, is a small town
called Spikkestad, which is not shown in maps available in Japan.
Going further into its outer suburb in an out-of-the-way hilly area,
where a Norwegian, Mr. Martin Schøyen, lives quietly with his wife.
Though his main occupation is as the chairman of a Norwegian conglomerate, he appears to dedicate most of his life to gathering scripturesfrom all ages and places of the world. Around that time, I received
Manuscripts from the Himalayas and the Indian Subcontinent, Catalogue 17, from Sam Fogg Rare Books, a London old book dealer,which includes a section concerning 108 leaves and fragments of Buddhist manuscripts.6 All are from Afghanistan and the photographs represent fragments which are written in the Gupta script and
Gilgit/Båmiyan script. Mr. Schøyen purchased these manuscripts. He
successfully purchased almost all the Buddhist manuscripts of this kindin antiquarian book markets in Europe.
In January 1997, having learned this news, I joined Prof. Jens

100

NEW FRAGMENTS IN THE SHØYEN COLLECTION

Braarvig, University of Oslo, Prof. Jens-Uwe Hartmann, Humboldt
University of Berlin (since autumn semester in 1999, University of
Munich), and Dr. Lore Sander, curator at the Museum für indische
Kunst in Berlin (presently retired), in forming a team in order to negotiate with Mr. Schøyen. Fortunately, as a result of negotiations throughProfessor Braarvig as our representative, we acquired Mr. Schøyen’s
permission for research and publication concerning all of his manuscripts, and four members of the team respectively concluded an agreement with Mr. Schøyen.
Upon receiving permission, our team visited Mr. Schøyen’s villa in
the suburbs of Spikkestad in November 1997 and 1998 to conduct onthe-spot research. Ranging from fragments in Khalo∑†h¥, which probably date back to the second century C.E., to manuscripts in the
Gilgit/Båmiyan script in the seventh–eighth century, it is no exaggeration to say that the Buddhist manuscripts we saw contain documents
written in all the Indian scripts used for several centuries. On the occasion of our visit in November 1997, the total of the fragments in the collection was approximately 6,000, and it expanded to 10,000 one year
later. The number must continue to increase even as I am writing thisreport. However, I have to add that this is the total Mr. Schøyen alleges,
and is not our count. We must note that three-fourths of the manuscripts
are fragments of several centimeters around. The total of 10,000
includes many small portions bearing one legible character. Though it
might be a rough estimation from the amount of their characters, I had
an impression that the Norwegian collection is larger than the
Stein/Hoernle collection of the British Library which I have once run
through, although it falls far short of the volume of the Turfan manuscript collection in Berlin brought by German expeditions.7
In November 1997, we shuttled between Oslo and Mr. Schøyen’s
villa for one week and carried out our research, in which we classified
to file all the fragments according to the chronological type of scripts
systematized by our colleague Dr. Sander, who is a leading Indian paleographer. Broadly speaking, the fragments fall into six kinds of script:
Kharo∑†h¥, K∑åˆa, Northeastern Gupta type, Northwestern Gupta type,
Gilgit/Båmiyan types I and II. (The last one is the same as the Siddhamtransmitted to Japan.) Manuscript materials are palm leaf, birch barkand vellum; there are no paper manuscripts. Buddhist documents onleather are very rare. It was the first time for the present writer to view
them at first hand.
According to the same account provided by dealers, most of thesemanuscripts appear to have been brought from a cave in the Båmiyan

NEW FRAGMENTS IN THE SHØYEN COLLECTION

101

valley, Afghanistan, but the accurate location is unknown. It is a natural
cave with one entrance, inside of which it splits into three chambers. On
the innermost part in one of the chambers is enshrined an image of the
Buddha, around which voluminous manuscripts were scattered. The
manuscripts changed hands repeatedly, from local residents and dealers,and flowed into the European market. But this account solely refers tomost of the manuscripts purchased by Mr. Schøyen. According to thepresent writer and his colleagues’ observations, the recently-appeared
scriptures seem to contain manuscripts found in other places in
Afghanistan or in Pakistan including Gilgit, though this is not based on
firm grounds. Although the fact that the places of discovery are unclear
is unfortunate, it might be very fortunate that such voluminous ancientscriptures have been collected from war-torn Afghanistan. In particular,
compared with the world’s Central Asian manuscript collections so far
known, the significance of the Schøyen Collection is the fact that it is
the first large-scale Buddhist manuscript assemblage discovered in theproper area of the Indian culture, i.e., Gandhåra. As a matter of course,
Gilgit manuscripts include the same kind of scriptures, but the new collection has a large number of manuscripts far more ancient than that. It
is amazing that nearly 200 Kharo∑†h¥ palm-leaf fragments were found.
Kharo∑†h¥ documents so far known are birch bark or wood, so the discovery of Kharo∑†h¥ palm-leaf manuscripts is the first in the world.
After the first research, it was decided that three copies of all the
manuscripts would be made by Mr. Schøyen himself for experts in
Oslo, Berlin and Japan. As promised, portions of the copy for myself
began to reach me one after another through Professor Braarvig in April
1998, and on the occasion of the second research in November 1998 I
received the rest, except ones being treated for restoration. All portionsof this were reproduced from the originals by the Canon digital-color
copying machine at Mr. Schøyen’s villa. Expected fading is a little bit
worrying, but the beautiful copy in natural size facilitates working.
Newly Found Documents
Through two rounds of on-the-spot sessions and examinations of themanuscripts’ color reproductions we received, we came to the processof deciphering and identifying the documents in the Schøyen Collection. To chronologically describe the documents identified at thismoment, the first should be several fragments of the Gåndhår¥MahåparinirvåˆasËtra (Ógama version), which was identified by Prof.
Richard Salomon of the University of Washington, who is kindly cooperating with us in taking charge of the deciphering and publishing of the

102

NEW FRAGMENTS IN THE SHØYEN COLLECTION

Kharo∑†h¥ manuscripts. According to the texts Professor Salomontransliterated and presented to us, the manuscripts include fragments
corresponding to the last portion of the MahåsudarßanasËtra incorporated in the MahåparinirvåˆasËtra, but the text is not identical withextant versions of MahåparinirvåˆasËtra in Påli, Sanskrit and Chinese.
The text might be in the closest proximity of the Youxing jing (Youhsing-ching; Pilgrim Sutra) belonging to the Chinese Chang ehan(Ch’ang-ê-han; Long Ógama) attributed to the Dharmaguptaka. However, the text accordance between them seems to be nearly half. It may
be another version transmitted by other group. According to my personal inquiry, Professor Salomon said that the Gåndhår¥ in the text is not
genuine but retains strong Sanskrit influence in declension. He surmised that the text might be chronologically newer than the scriptures at
the British Library.
Next, Dr. Sander and Professor Braarvig found some 40 folio fragments of the A∑†asåhasrikåprajñåpåramitå among palm-leaf manuscripts in Ku∑åˆa script. Dr. Sander infers that these fragments dateback to the second century. The language in the text is a kind of Buddhist Sanskrit, a dialect similar to that of the Mahåvastu. For example,“evaµ vutte” represents “evam ukte.” The second century is not far
from the date when the text of Prajñåpåramitå sËtras has been established, and now actual evidence has appeared. It proves the fact that theearliest Prajñåpåramitå was not completed as a genuine Sanskrit text
from the beginning, but that fairly vulgar Prakrit versions of the sËtra
existed in India preceding the Sanscritized texts. To say the least, these
are the earliest Mahåyåna texts which are extant today and written in
the beautiful Ku∑åˆa script.
I subsequently found several folios of the Ír¥målådev¥siµhanådanirdeßasËtra, including three complete palm leaves, while Professor Hartmann discovered more than 20 fragments of the Ajåtaßatrukauk®tyavinodanåsËtra (Ajatashatru’s Remorse-Dispelling Sutra) which belongs
to the same set along with previous one I found. It is also confirmedthat there are many fragments from the Sarvadharmåprav®ttinirdeßasËtra in this set of texts. All of these are important documents which
had not been confirmed as original texts in Sanskrit except for theirappearance as citations in other documents. Written in the Northwestern
Gupta type script, they are thought to have been copied in the first halfof the fourth century. If it is true, this set should also be regarded as particular manuscripts with a remarkable copy date. Though each is written
in Sanskrit in the broader sense, verb irregularity is extremely notable.
There are many forms in which aorist and present are mixed.

NEW FRAGMENTS IN THE SHØYEN COLLECTION103

The latest copies in the collection are manuscripts written in
Gilgit/Båmiyan scripts nos. I and II. Among birch-bark manuscripts inthe script no. I, I found several fragments of the Dharmapada attachedwith nidåna stories. When I made comparison with the Chinese translations including the Faju piyu jing, the fragments’ text does not accord
with them. It is probable that the fragments are part of a different version of the Dharmapada including nidåna stories. According to the factthat the text includes peculiar expressions like “etasmin” and “vastusmin,” it might be the Dharmapada of the Mahåsåµghika.
In addition, the collection includes two leather manuscript fragmentsin the Bactrian language. The deciphering of the Bactrian text is being
carried out by Professor Sims-Williams, and I have viewed a tentative
deciphered text prepared by him, based on which these fragments aredefinitely part of Buddhist and Mahåyåna inscriptions. Interestingly, thetext enumerates various names of Buddhas, which are common to thediverse denominations appearing in the Sukhåvat¥vyËha.
Furthermore, the titles of scriptures confirmed so far include the Candrottarådårikåparip®cchå, Ratnaketuparivarta, Mahåsaµghikavinaya,
Varˆårhavarˆastotra, Jåtakamålå, Aßokåvadåna, Ca∫g¥sËtra and otherfragments of Sanskrit ågama and vinaya documents, not to mention the
Saddharmapuˆ∂ar¥ka. Not a few abhidharma fragments are found,although not a single folio has so far been identified. The Ca∫g¥sËtra,which corresponds to the Ca∫k¥sutta, MN 95, in the Påli canon, is notincluded in the Chinese ågama sËtras. Written on palm leaf in the
Northeastern Gupta script, which has few documentary examples,pieces of the Ca∫g¥sËtra text including several almost-complete folios
are preserved in the collection. The text has the phrase, “dharmanidhyånak∑ånti,” which is well-known to readers of documents of theYogåcåra school. The phrase appears several times in these fragments.
As mentioned above, the manuscript fragments referred to here are
only several percent of the whole volume of the Schøyen collection.
Deciphering efforts have just commenced, as is the case with the scriptures at the British Library.
Lotus Sutra Fragments Found
It was just a few months ago (i.e. late 1998) that fragments of the Saddharmapuˆ∂ar¥kasËtra were found in the Schøyen collection. They
were found by myself and Dr. Klaus Wille, who is participating in thisteam in cooperation with the present writer and Professor Hartmann. At
this stage, just seven fragments have been confirmed, but there is agood possibility that additional fragments will be found. Of these, one

104

NEW FRAGMENTS IN THE SHØYEN COLLECTION

piece (our reference number: MS 2381-40) is a birch-bark small fragment copied in the script Gilgit/Båmiyan type I, the text of which corresponds to that of chapter 3 of the Lotus Sutra. The other six are palm
leaves, two of which (MS 2381-2, MS 2382-271) have textual portions
corresponding to chapter 3, and four (MS 2381-1a, -1b, -20, 82) tochapter 22, respectively.
It is certain that these six fragments belong to one manuscript according to the fact that they all are five-line folios as well as their content
and script. The script basically belongs to Gilgit/Båmiyan type I , but it
is not completely identical with the script used in Gilgit manuscripts.
For example, while “∑” in Gilgit manuscripts resembles “s,” “∑” appearing in this fragment retains the shape of the Gupta script, Indian type, so
there is no confusion between the two letters in this copy. It may
chronologically predate the standard Gilgit/Båmiyan type I. Though thesize of the folio cannot avoid conjecture as a complete folio has notbeen obtained yet, it might be a not-so-big oblong palm leaf, possibly,
40 × 3–3.5 cm.
With the permission of my colleagues, I handed a copy from duplication of these manuscripts to Prof. Hirofumi Toda of the University ofTokushima, a world-renowned authority in Saddharmapuˆ∂ar¥ka text
studies. According to his suggestion, the fragments contain unique readings which no other copies have, so they belong to a manuscript in an
independent lineage. The four members of the team hope that these
Saddharmapuˆ∂ar¥ka fragments will be deciphered and made public byProfessor Toda. As is mentioned here, the Lotus Sutra fragments so far
found are confined to those written in Gilgit/Båmiyan type I. It is unfortunate that copies in more-ancient, genuine Gupta script have not beenfound yet. However, the number of manuscript fragments is immense. I
think that our role should be an effort to find as many additional fragments as possible.
Leaving an extensive study and publication about this to Professor
Toda, here for readers’ reference I will print a romanized text on therecto of a folio (MS 2382-271) as an example of the fragments. This
text corresponds to that from p. 76, line 2, to p. 77, line 2, of Kern-Nanjio’s edition. Due to breaks on both ends, the folio number is unclear.
1 /// .. kumårakå˙ sarve cintayitavyå na vi∑amam aham api(ba)hukoßako∑†hågåra˙ sarvasatvånåm apy aham imåny evaµrËpåˆi [ma] ///2 /// (hai)va tasya puru∑asya m®∑åvådado∑a˙ syåt* yena te∑åµdå(ra)kånåµ pËrvaµ tr¥ˆi yånåny upadarßayitvå paßcåt sarve∑åµeva mahåyå ///NEW FRAGMENTS IN THE SHØYEN COLLECTION

3
4
5

105

/// d¥ bhavet* yat tena puru∑eˆopåyakaußalyene te kumårakå
tasmåd åd¥ptå g®hå ni∑kåsitå j¥vitenåcchåditå tat kasya heto˙[å] ////// na da[dyå]t tathå[pi] tåvad bhagavan sa puru∑o na m®∑åvåd¥syåt* tat kasya heto˙ tathå hi bhagava .. tena puru∑eˆa pËrvåm
evaitad a[nu] ////// [na m®∑åvåda] bhavati / ka˙ punar vådo ’nyena puru∑eˆaprabhËtam .. [ko]ßako∑†hågåram ast¥ti k®två putrap®yatåm eva
manyamånenå ///Related Information
Taking this opportunity, I would also like to note in a random manner
the following miscellaneous information I received over the last year
concerning the Schøyen collection and manuscripts found in
Afghanistan and Pakistan which have some relation to the collection.
(1) Thanks to the good offices of Professor Braarvig, it has been
decided that our research on the Schøyen collection will be funded by
the University of Oslo and the Norwegian Research Council, becoming
a formal research project in Norway. Further, as it is desirable that thetask be a regular project at each institution to which the team members
are affiliated, I managed to adopt this study as a subject from the newacademic year at the university institute to which I belong. In that case,
I am considering a possibility that scholars in my country will kindly
share the tasks for additional texts with which the four members cannot
deal.
(2) The results of the manuscript studies will be published in a series
under the title The Buddhist Manuscripts in the Schøyen Collection, thefirst volume of which is scheduled to appear in the near future. In that, I
am in charge of the Ír¥målådev¥siµhanådanirdeßasËtra. As a harbingerof the publication, Professor Hartmann has just published a study on a
fragment of the Ajåtaßatrukauk®tyavinodanåsËtra with Prof. Paul
Harrison of the University of Canterbury as coeditor, and I recommend
the readers’ reference to it.8 In addition, the present writer has so far
published three articles on the Schøyen collection.9(3) The annual meeting of the American Oriental Society, Western
Branch, was held for three days from October 30, 1998, at the University of Washington, Seattle. A panel on Kharo∑†h¥ manuscript research
was held, and Professor Salomon and his colleagues participated. I also
attended this session, entitled “Buddhist Texts in Transit and Transition: Sanskrit, Påli, Gåndhår¥ and Chinese,” in which 10 scholars lectured and debated. Professor Salomon himself presented his paper titled

106

NEW FRAGMENTS IN THE SHØYEN COLLECTION“Newly Discovered Fragments of a Gåndhår¥ Version of theMahåparinirvåˆasËtra” which dealt with Kharo∑†h¥ palm-leaf manuscript fragments of the MahåparinirvåˆasËtra found in the Schøyen
collection.
(4) In the autumn of 1997, a pot filled with Kharo∑†h¥ scrolls reappeared in London’s antiquarian market. According to the sources, thevolume of the scrolls seems to be larger than those at the British
Library, and the pot bears an inscription containing the year of copying.
These scrolls were purchased by a collector living in western Englandand brought to the British Library for restoration. As the scrolls’ condition was very serious and the library’s Oriental and India Office Collections were hectic in moving to the new location, the pots and scrolls
were returned for the time being. There is no further information about
this.
(5) In November 1998, on returning from the second round ofresearch, I stopped in London and visited Sam Fogg, one of the dealers
who mediated Mr. Schøyen’s acquisition of the manuscripts. The dealer
told me that he had received more manuscripts several days earlier, andlet me view them. To the best of my memory, they are large batches ofbirch-bark manuscripts approximately 10 cm in length and 60 cm inwidth; the set of the scriptures consists of three bundles with more thana dozen folios each, totalling about 50 folios. It seemed that the scriptures were not in such serious condition that they could not be separated
into each folio for restoration and preservation. The script was
Gilgit/Båmiyan type II. After taking several photos, I read through thefolios for some time and confirmed the MahågovindasËtra among
them. In copies of my photographs, Dr. Wille in Göttingen found theMåyåjålasËtra and others. These scriptures are without doubt birchbark manuscript bundles containing the D¥rgha-ågama of theSarvåstivådins.
(6) One month since returning home after viewing the D¥rgha-ågama
scriptures in London, a new report by Prof. Akira Sadakata appeared in
the January 1999 issue of the DaihØrin (Great Dharma Wheel).10 The
article was based on one photograph of the top folio of a bundle of themanuscript which Mr. Kurita of SOFRACOM had acquired from Pakistan. In it Professor Sadakata independently identified the photographas the MahågovindasËtra and presented a transliterated text and aJapanese translation. I was presented a copy by Professor Sadakata.
When I saw it, I was astonished. It was exactly the same manuscript I
had seen one month earlier at Sam Fogg in London. I contacted Mr.
Kurita for inquiry. He tried to obtain the scripture from Pakistan so as

NEW FRAGMENTS IN THE SHØYEN COLLECTION

107

to mediate it for some one. However, the scripture presently remains in
London. It is unclear where it will settle. Judging from Mr. Kurita’s
information, the manuscript was found not in Afghanistan but somewhere near Gilgit, Pakistan, by a local bee hunter. Be that as it may, I
hope that it will settle somewhere soon.
(7) The Chugai Nippo carried an article in the issue dated January
28, 1999, attached with photographs of a pot Mr. Kurita took at a dealer’s home in Dubayy and the text of the inscription written on the pot
which was deciphered by Professor Sadakata based on the photos. The
inscription on the pot is copied not in Kharo∑†h¥ but in Gupta script.
Though bearing the name of Dharmaguptaka, the pot has no content,
which seems to have already been resold. On the other hand, Mr.
Schøyen purchased another pot, which bears a Kharo∑†h¥ inscription
describing the name of the Dharmaguptaka. Inside the pot were several
manuscripts which were charred like chocolate.
(8) At the beginning of last month, Professor Sadakata once again
published another report utilizing Mr. Kurita’s photographs of a bundleof a birch-bark manuscript of the A∑†ådaßasåhasrikåprajñåpåramitå in
Gilgit-Båmiyan script type I.11 It is said that the scripture has beenobtained by Mr. Kurita. I heard the news that an anonymous Japanese,
whose name cannot be referred to here, purchased a similar kind of
scripture bundles. At a certain place, I looked at some photographs ofthem and they seemed to be a counterpart of the A∑†ådaßasåhasrikå, theother part of which Mr. Kurita procured.
How can one describe the situation I have mentioned? What I havetraced so far are just a portion of manuscripts moving in the world market. While manuscripts obtained by Mr. Schøyen will be taken care of
by our team, how about the treatment of scriptures which may come out
one after another? I earnestly desire that such manuscripts will be madeaccessible to researchers without being hold in secrecy by collectors.
We experts do not need the originals, but are satisfied with photographs.
April 5, 1999
Notes
1
Nicholas Sims-Williams, “Kodai afuganisutan niokeru shinhakken—hindËkushu
hokubu shutsudo no bakutoriago bunsho o chËshin ni” (New Findings in AncientAfghanistan—the Bactrian documents discovered from the Northern Hindu-Kush), Oriente (newsletter), no. 16, Tokyo: Ancient Orient Museum, 1997, pp. 3–17. English version is accessible at http:www.gengo.l.u-tokyo.ac.jp/~hkum/bactrian.html.
2“British Library acquires oldest Buddhist manuscripts known,” The Japan Times,

108

NEW FRAGMENTS IN THE SHØYEN COLLECTION

June 28, 1996; “Scrolls Offer a Glimpse into Buddhism’s Past,” National Geographic,
vol. 191, no. 3 (March 1997), the second page of Geographica; “Buddhism Unrolled?,”OIOC Newsletter, no. 53/54, London: The British Library, 1997, pp. 2–5.
3
Richard Salomon, “A Preliminary Survey of Some Early Buddhist Manuscripts
Recently Acquired by the British Library,” Journal of the American Oriental Society,vol. 117-2, April/June 1997, pp. 353–358.
4
Akira Sadakata, “Seihoku indo no hØzobu” (The Dharmaguptaka Branch in Northwestern India), ShunjË (Spring and Autumn), Tokyo: ShunjËsha, October 1996, pp.
20–23. Later, Professor Sadakata published the French version of this article. A.
Sadakata, “Inscriptions Kharo∑†h¥ provenant du marché aux antiquités de Peshawar,”
Journal Asiatique, tome 284, numéro 2, 1996, pp. 301–324.
5This program has been published in a book form: Budda—Øinaru tabiji (1) rinnesuru daichi, bukkyØ tanjØ (Buddha: a Great Journey 1 Land of Transmigration, the Birthof Buddhism) NHK Shuppan. This volume carries a commentary by Fumio Enomoto,associate professor at Osaka University: “Saikono butten—nendaiga tokutei dekiru
saiko no bukkyØ shahon” (The most Ancient Buddhist Scriptures: the Oldest Buddhist
Manuscripts with Identifiable Copy Dates), pp. 63–68. I felt strange when the camera in
the NHK TV program was tracing the Kharo∑†h¥ scriptures from left to right as the
script actually reads from right to left as is the case in the Arabic.
6
Sam Fogg, “Manuscript Remains of a Library probably from the Buddhist Schoolof the Mahasangika-Lokottaravadin” (108 leaves and fragments), Manuscripts from theHimalayas and the Indian Subcontinent Catalogue 17, London, 1996, pp. 46–49, item
no. 39.
7
Mr. Schøyen published a catalog including his collection. (M. Schøyen, The
Schøyen Collection—Checklist of Manuscripts 1–2393, Oslo, 1997.) We were each presented by the author a copy of the catalog’s September 1997 issue. The section of
Afghan manuscripts refers to a total of 400 scripture folios and 3,300 fragments. Thereafter, the number has increased dramatically. This catalog has been printed just inscores of copies, so it is not obtainable.
8Jens-Uwe Hartmann and Paul Harrison, “A Sanskrit Fragment of theAjåtaßatrukauk®tya-vinodanå-sËtra,” SËryacandråya: Essays in Honour of Akira Yuyama on the Occasion of His 65th Birthday, Indica et Tibetica 35, Swisttal-Odendorf,
1998, pp. 67–86.
9“Afuganisutan kara noruw„ e” (From Afghanistan to Norway), BukkyØ DaigakuSØgØ KenkyËsho hØ (Bulletin of the Research Institute of Bukkyo University), no. 13,
Kyoto: Research Institute of Bukkyo University, December 1997, pp. 24–28; “Noruw„
ni arawareta afuganisutan shutsudo bukkyØ shahon—Martin Schøyen korekushon otazunete” (Buddhist Manuscripts from Afghanistan Appearing in Norway: A Visit to
the Martin Schøyen Collection), Gekkan Shinika (Monthly Sinica), Tokyo: TaishËkan
shoten, July 1998, pp. 83–88; “Shiatoru, soshite futatabi osuro to rondon e” (Seattle,
and Again to Oslo and London), BukkyØ Daigaku SØgØ KenkyËsho hØ, no. 15, December 1998, pp. 14–16.
10
Akira Sadakata, “Girugitto shahon—‘tensonkyØ’ danpen no kaisetsu” (A Gilgit
Manuscript: An Explanation of MahågovindasËtra Fragments), DaihØrin (Great Dharma Wheel), Tokyo: DaihØrinkaku, January 1999, pp. 30–35. Photos are printed in thefrontispiece of the magazine (pp. 18–19).
11
Akira Sadakata, “Girugitto shahon—ichiman hassenju hannyakyo” (A Gilgit Manuscript: A∑†ådaßasåhasrikåprajñåpåramitå), ShunjË, February/March 1999, pp. 22–24.