Weiter zum Inhalt

Akbar's Yogavāsiṣṭha in the Chester Beatty Library


Seiten 359 - 375

DOI https://doi.org/10.13173/zeitdeutmorggese.161.2.0359




Summary:

Two emperors of the Indo-Muslim Mughal dynasty, Akbar (r. 1556–1605) and his son and heir Ǧahāngīr (r. 1605–1628), are well known for their patronage of arts and crafts. Especially painting was held in high esteem, and father and son almost vied with each other in the production of pictures and illustrated books. Usually, these pieces of art can be easily assigned to the patronage of either Akbar or his son. One of them, however, a Persian translation of the religio-philosophical Laghu-Yogavāsiṣṭha, poses a conundrum concerning its place of origin. Since this manuscript, now kept in the Chester Beatty Library in Dublin, bears an autograph of Ǧahāngīr, it was thought to be made for him.1 Nevertheless, the preface of this text proves clearly that this translation was done at Akbar's behest. The present paper deals with the question, how such contradicting statements could happen. It gives a short overview of the different Persian translations of the Laghu-Yogavāsiṣṭha and, according to a comparison with the Persian text, offers a new identification of seven illustrations in the Chester Beatty manuscript.

Halle (Saale)

1 This article is a partial result of the research project “Indo-Persische Übersetzungsliteratur” located at the Institute of Oriental Studies and the Institute of Indology (Martin-Luther-Universität Halle-Wittenberg).

2 Cf. L. Leach: Mughal and other Indian Paintings. London 1995, p. 158.

3 T. W. Lentz/G. D. Lowry: Timur and the Princely Vision. Persian Art and Culture in the Fifteenth Century. Los Angeles 1989, p. 32.

4 H. Franke: Akbar und Ǧahāngīr. Untersuchungen zur politischen und religiösen Legitimation in Text und Bild. Schenefeld 2005, pp. 133–159.

5 T. W. Arnold: The library of A. Chester Beatty: a catalogue of the Indian miniatures. London 1936, p. 22.

6 Leach 1995, p. 155.

7 The wrong date given in Leach 1995, p. 155 was already corrected in E. Wright: Muraqqaʿ. Imperial Mughal Albums from the Chester Beatty Library Dublin. Alexandria, Virginia 2008, p. 226.

8 Arnold 1936, p. 22.

9 Leach 1995, p. 155.

10 Dots mean: the paper is torn here. Questionmarks in brackets mean: the reading of the preceding word is not sure. Single letters in brackets mean: the paper is torn here but these seem to be the missing letters.

11 Cf. the translation by John Seyller in his article “The inspection and valuation of manuscripts in the imperial Mughal library.” In: Artibus Asiae 57, 3/4, pp. 243–349 (see esp. p. 300).

12 Leach 1995, pp. 155, 158.

13 The translator's name is given on fol. 3 a line 7, not as Arnold says on fol. 322, line 7 – perhaps a reading error in the process of printing. Linda Leach corrects this error, cf. Leach 1995, p. 155.

14 For “Abu ʾl-Muzaffar” as part of Akbar's name cf. H. Beveridge: The Akbar nāma. New Delhi 1989 [repr.], vol. 1, p. 145 f., n. 6.

15 The expression “Dīn wa dunya” points to Akbar's claim to reign over the temporal and the spiritual world. Cf. Franke 2005, pp. 232–239.

16 This means that Akbar extemporized these verses.

17 Manżūr Aḥsan ʿAbbāsī: Tafṣīl-i fihrist-i makhṭūṭāt-i fārisīya. Lahore, Punjab Public Library 1963, no. 22.

18 A synopsis of the text under the title Muntaḫab (“Selection”) or Ḫulāṣa (“The purest and best part”) bears witness to the interest shown in this translation. Ǧalālī Nāʾīnī and C. W. Ernst assumed this to be an independent translation. Cf. Sayyid Muḥammad Ǧalālī Nāʾīnī wa N(arayan) S(hanker) Šukla: Ǧōg Bāsišt. Dar falsafa war ʿirfan-i hind. Tarǧuma-yi Niẓām Pānīpatī. Teheran 1360 HŠ (1981) (Hind Šināsī 18), p. ṭāʾ. C. W. Ernst: “Muslim Studies of Hinduism? A Reconsideration of Arabic and Persian Translations from Indian Languages.” In: Iranian Studies 36.2 (2003), pp. 173–195, note 46. But as Mujtaba'i has proven, the Muntakhab-i Jog Basisht is a selection of various passages from the Pānīpatī-version. This is why this text cannot be considered a translation of its own. Cf. Fathullah Mujtaba'i: “Muntakhab-i Jug-Basasht or Selections from the Yoga-Vāsiṣṭha, Attributed to Mīr Abuʾl Qāsim Findiriskī. Critical edition of the Persian text and translations into English with introductory studies, notes, glossary and index” (Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, Harvard University, 1976), p. xl f.

19 Manuscripts containing the preface of Niẓām ad-Dīn Pānīpatī have the following incipit, “šukr u sipās bī-qiyās sazāwār-i ḥażrat-i dādār”. E.g. (a) London, BM, Or. 8443; (b) Kalkutta, Asiatic Society of Bengal, no. 1699; (c) Qum, ʿAzami no. 5252 (see Sayyid Aḥmad Ḥusaynī: Fihrist-i nusḫahā-yi ḫaṭṭī – kitāb-ḫāna-yi ʿumūmī ḥazrat-i Āyatullāh l-ʿĀẓamī Naǧafī Marʿašī. Vol. 14. Qum 1987 (1366 HŠ), p. 47f). (d) Qum, ʿAzami no. 6999, fol. 14–354 v (Sayyid Aḥmad Ḥusaynī: Fihrist-i nusḫahā-yi ḫaṭṭī – kitāb-ḫāna-yi ʿumūmī ḥazrat-i Āyatullāh l-ʿĀẓamī Naǧafī Marʿašī. Vol. 18. Qum 1989 (1368 HŠ), p. 170 f.).

20 The following manuscripts have no preface: (a) Oxford, Bodleian Library, Ms. Walker 117; (b) London, India Office, no. 806, (c) Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale (see E. Blochet: Cataloge des Manuscrits Persans. Paris 1905, no. 223, (d) London, British Museum Add. 5644. They all start with “brahmanān-i hind-rā dar waḥdat-i zāt-i ḥaqq subḥāna taʿāla”.

21 H. Franke: “Die persischen Übersetzungen des Laghuyogavāsiṣṭha.” In J. Hanneder (ed.): The Mokṣopāya, Yogavāṣiṣṭha and Related Texts. Aachen 2005, pp. 113–129, esp. p. 127.

22 The edition of Pānīpatīʾs translation is hardly available. My sincere thanks to Dr. David Durand-Guédy for sending a copy to me from Teheran.

23 Cp. Ǧalālī Nāʾīnī 1981, p. lām.

24 Cp. Ǧalālī Nāʾīnī 1981.

25 Cp. Husayni 1987, ms. no. 5252.

26 It is noteworthy that Akbar's translator Farmulī cooperated with the same authority, namely pathan Mišra Haǧǧīpūrī (Farmulī fol. 3a), who had already lent his support in rendering the text to Niẓām ad-Dīn Pānīpatī, cf. Ǧalālī Nāʾīnī 1981, p. 3.

27 Concerning the question, who made the translation for Dārā Šukōh, see Franke 2005, p. 117 f.

28 Since 1968a critical edition is available, cf. Tara Chand/S. A. H. Abidi: Ǧōg Bašist. Calcutta 1968.

29 There is also the Tuḥfah-i maǧlis of Šayḫ Sufi Šarif Ḫubǧahani, mentioned by Dārā Šukōh himself in the preface to his Ǧōg Bašist. But this epitome of the Laghu-Yogavāsiṣṭha contains no more than a dozen folios; this small scale forbids to count it as a proper translation. Cf. W. Pertsch: Die Handschriften-Verzeichnisse der königlichen Bibliothek zu Berlin. Berlin 1888, no. 1077/4 and Chand/Abidi 1968, p. 4.

30 Fol. 41r: wa rakhīsarān wa brahmanān wa dānāyān bar dar-i šarqī ṣaf-zada nišastaand wa bar dar-i ġarbī rāǧhā-yi buzurg wa ḫwurd qiṭār-basta istāda-and wa darwāza-i šamālī az fīl wa asb wa ʿarāba pur-ast wa darwāza-i ǧanūbī az zanān (fol. 41 v) ṣāḥib-i ḥusn wa ḫwuš-paykar bar āmūda ast.

31 Fol. 58 r: wa dar īn miyān ḥażrat-i nayyir-i aʿẓam bar kuḥ-i Aday (58 v) čunān šaraf-i ṭulūʿ farmūd ki guyā ba-ǧihat-i tamāšā-yi īn kārzār-i šigarf tašrīf āwarda ast. – The honorific formula for the sun is part of the sun worship as is was practised in connection with the Dīn-i ilāhī, see Franke 2005, p. 203.

32 Cf. Leach 1995, p. 167.

33 Fol. 94 v: badān-ki samara-yi aʿmāl wa afʿāl ba-nafs mīrasad na ba-tan wa qālab. badānči īn suḫan dil-nišīn-i tu gardad az man šinū ay ʿiṣmat-pēša wa pārsāʾī and (?). wa az nabīra-yi Harisčandra Lawana-nām rūzī tanhā'ī-yi guzīda dar ḫalwat bā dil-i ḫud guft ki ǧadd-i man Harisčandra-nām rāǧa buzurg būd ki rāǧ-sū-ǧug az ū ba-faʿl āmada. wa man ki dar nasl-i ū paydā šuda-am mī-ḫāham ki ān ǧug-rā ba-dil ba-ǧā (fol. 95 r:) āram. rāǧa Lawana ba-ašārat-i brahmanān maṣāliḥ-i ǧug-rā az rū-yi taṣawwur wa taḫayyul farāham āwarda. awwal parastiš-i rattawaǧān ki ʿibārat az šānzdah brahman ḫidmatgār-i ǧug bāšad ba-ǧā āward (below the picture:) pas az ān parastiš-i rakhīsarān ba-ǧā āward wa ǧamīʿ-i dēwathā-rā ki dar ān darkār būdand nuwēd dād.

34 Leach 1995, p. 167.

35 Fol. 100 r: Wa rāǧa pīra-zan-rā sōg-nāk wa dardmand yāfta parastārān-i ḫud-rā farmūd tā dil-āsā karda ū-rā az nauḥa girya wa nāliš bāz dāštand. pas az ān pursīd ki ay pira-zan tu kīstī wa īnǧā čūn mībāšī wa duḫtar wa duḫtarzād-hā-yi tu ki būdand. ān pīra-zan girya kunān ba-guftan dar āmad ki dar īn dihī ki pulkaštō ba nām dārad šauhar-i man (fol. 100 v) marbī-yi pulkašān ki nuʿī ast az čandālān mībūd ū-rā duḫtarī mah-rūy paydā šuda. ān duḫtar az nihāyat ṭāliʿmandī wa baḫt-warī muwāfiq-i sar-nuwišt rāǧā ʿālamgīr wa māh-rūy-rā ki īnǧā āmada būd šauhar yāft. ān duḫtar tā dīr az ān rāǧa kāmandūz gašta wa bahra-yi az ʿayš wa ʿašrat bar-girifta yik duḫtar wa dū pisar zād. wa baʿd az muddat-i madīd dar īn dīh miḥnat-i qaḥṭ-i bārān dar rasīd. az bīm-i ān hamagī sākinān-i īn dih mutafarriq gašta rū ba-gurēz nihādand wa dūrtar rafta raḫt-i hastī wa naqd-i ḥayāt firū-hištand. bikr-i mā čand zan darīn dīh-i ḫālī barā-yi dard wa miḥnat zanda mānda-īm. wa mātam wa sūk dārīm wa ba-sar-i ān ḫud-rā ba-yād āwarda nauḥa (fol. 101 r:) wa zārī mīkunīm. rāǧa az šanīdan-i suḫanān-i ān pīra-zan az rū-yi ḥairat wa taʿaǧǧub čūn naqš-i taṣwīr gardīda ba-ǧānib-i wazīrān ba-dīd. wa az šafaqat wa mihrabānī ba-har kudām (fol. 101 v:) az ān mātam-zadagān dar-ḫward-i martaba-yi har yik šaraf-i iltifāt karāmat dāšta az naqd wa ǧins ba baḫšiš dar āward […]

36 Gādhi was not standing in a river, cp. fol. 156 v, line 11 and 12 and the illustration on fol. 157b.

37 Fol. 161 v, line 7–11: Wa az ān wilāyat bar-āmada čūn šīr ba-ġār-i kūh dar āmad. wa tā yik nīm sāl dar ān ġār barā-yi ḫwušnūdī-yi bišnu ba-riyāżat mašġūl gašt wa ǧuz yik kaf-i čīẓī na-mī-ḫwurd. čūn riyāżat-rā ba-kamāl rasānīd. bišnu ba-ġāyat bar-u ḫušnūd wa mihrabān šuda čūn abr-i hawā-yi paškāl ḫwuš-namā gašta dar ān ġār dar-āmad.

38 Cf. J. Seyller: Workshop and Patron in Mughal India. The Freer Rāmāyaṇa and Other Illustrated Manuscripts of ʿAbd al-Raḥīm. Zürich 1999 (Artibus Asiae Supplementum XLII), p. 83.

39 Color illustration in Wright 2008, p. 226 f.

40 Fol. 194 r, line 2: ḫāna ki az barg-i kīla pūšīda būdand.

41 Pers. baqqālī az ṭā'ifa-yi baysa – a merchant from the community of the Vaiśya.

42 Concerning these typical notes see John Seyller: “Scribal notes on Mughal manuscript illustrations.” In: Artibus Asiae 48 3/4 (1987), pp. 247–277, esp. p. 247 f.

43 On the controversy on the identification of pictures ascribed to Imām Qulī cf. J. Seyller: “The Walters Art Museum Diwan of Amir Hasan Dihlawi and Salim's Atelier at Allahabad.” In: R. Crill/S. Stronge/A. Topsfield: Arts of Mughal India. Studies in Honour of Robert Skelton. Ahmedabad/London 2004, pp. 95–110, see p. 102 and fn. 23.

44 Rāǧ Kunwar. Chester Beatty Library, ms. 37. 132 folios, 51 illusrations. Cf. Leach 1995, pp. 189–232.

45 Leach 1995, p. 161.

46 J. V. S. Wilkinson: The Lights of Canopus. Anvār i Suhailī. London 1929, plate XV and XX and plate XXXII. Wilkinson wrote on p. 16: “[…] the artist of numbers XV and XX, whose name I cannot decipher with certainty; perhaps it is ‘Hariyā’, who may be the same as Hari, one of Akbar's artists.”

47 Leach 1995, pp. 1100, 1104 and 1106.

48 The painter Khem Karan contributed an illustration to an Akbar-nāma after he worked on the Ǧōg Bāšištha. Cf. Leach 1995, p. 1108.

49 Cf. Milo Beach who wrote, “during the years of rebellion, he [i.e. prince Salīm; HF] would certainly have been unable to patronize painters still in his father's employ.” M. C. Beach: The Grand Mogul. Imperial Painting in India 1600–1660. Williamstown, Massachusetts 1978, p. 24.

50 Dīwān of Amīr Ḥasan Dihlawī, Walters Art Museum, Baltimore, acc.no. W. 650. Cf. Seyller 2004, pp. 95–110.

51 There is, on the contrary, a Persian note on top of folio 1 r which ascribes the manuscript to Akbar: “Ǧōg Bāšisth from among the books of Akbar bādšāh; illustrated imperial work (muṣauwar-kār) in nastaʿlīq-script, very pleasing with sentitious explanations.” But since the note was penned by an anonymous writer at unknown time, it is not really an argument for Akbar's patronage. Cf. Seyller 1997, p. 300; the third line is not mentioned there. The following dates in Seyller's list belong to other inscriptions on the same folio.

Empfehlen


Export Citation