BIDPAI'S FABLES .*
THROUGH the medium of some one or other of the many modern versions extant, Bidpai's Fables are tolerably familiar to most Englishmen who claim to know anything of the popular litera- ature of the East ; and the study of folk-lore will tend to interest a wider circle of readers in the famous collection of tales and apologues traditionally ascribed to the Indian philosopher. Dull and prosy as the stories for the greater part undoubtedly appear to Western critics, inculcating generally a moral some- thing more than questionable, full of childish platitudes, with such little of linked sweetness as they possess tediously drawn out, they have charmed Eastern ears for countless genera- tions, and enjoyed a degree of favour out of all proportion, one would think, to their real worth. They have made their way East and West, and have naturalised themselves in every corner of the Asiatic continent. In India they are ex- panded to form the Panchatantra, and spun out in the Afahab- haratta and the Hitopadesa. Stanislaus Julien found them in Chinese collections made twelve hundred years ago, while Schiefner traced them in Thibet. The Mongols have selec- tions of their own in the Siddi-Kier and Ardshi Bordshi Khan, and there are old versions in Hebrew and in Arabic, in Persian and in Syriac. In modern times, Bidpai has been translated into nearly as many tongues as the sacred Scriptures, and may claim to have had more readers than any other book in existence saving the Bible. Knatchbull has given us an English rendering of the Arabic text, Kalilahw' Dimnah; Eastwick and Wollaston have dealt with the Persian Antwar-i-su,haili ; and now Mr. Keith-Falconer follows with a scholarly rendering of the later Syriac version, Kalilag w' Damnag.
This recension of Bidpai will be new to many Orientalists and students of Eastern folk-stories. The original MSS., dating from the tenth century, was only recently discovered by
• /COMA and Dimnah ; or, the Fables of Ridpai. Being an Account of their Literary History, with a Translation of the later Syriac Version of the Same. By I. G. N. Keith-Falconer. M.A. Edited for the Syndics of the University Press, Cambridge. London : Dtighton, Bell, and Co. 1885.
Professor Wright, of Cambridge, who edited and published it late last year. For comparative purposes it is among the most important and useful of the many old versions that have been preserved. A mere outline of the literary history of the Fables—Which Mr. Keith-Falconer discusses at some length in his Introduction—will suffice to make this apparent.
All the stories are derived from an early Sanscrit collec- tion no longer in existence. From this a. Pehlevi transcript was made in the sixth century, it is said, by the Persian physician, Barzoye. The story goes that he went to India to obtain certain herbs and simples that had power to restore the dead to life, but came back with Bidpai's fables cut and dried ! Western readers will, of course, believe as much of this as they please, and credit the rest to the curly exuberance of Eastern imagination. From Barzoye's Pehlevi rendering, which is long lost, an Arabic as well as an old Syriac versioriwas prepared about the year 750. And from the Arabic again flowed the recently discovered Syriac recension which Mr. Keith-Falconer has now translated. Both the Arabic and the old Syriac texts, as we possess them, are more or less frag- mentary, incomplete, and defective. In Hindostan the fables have been elaborated and "artificially expanded" out of all resemblance to the primitive Sanscrit. And owing to this the Syriac Kalilag to' Damnag, based upon a better Arabic version than De Sacy's, is the most faithful representative we possess of the ancient Pehlevi transcript, and contains the fables in the form most nearly approaching that of the early Indian col- lection from which all others have been derived.
Nor is this all that can be said in favour of the Syriac recension. Bidpai's Fables have undergone many transmigra- tions, and, as was inevitable, many transformations ; they have passed through many hands and through many lands. In some, we see the working of the native mind ; in others, we can detect the impress of foreign influences. For instance, in the pretty story of the mouse changed by the Deity into a girl who desires to be mated with the sun, we have an unmistakeable product of Brahman imagination. In the allegory of the lioness that forsakes her natural food to live upon grass and herbs, we detect again the touch of the Buddhist ascetic. In the passage condemning suicide, which occurs in the story of the king who stopped up the hole in a mountain through which the wind came oat and ruined his kingdom, we have evidence of Zoroastrian influence, since the sentiment is decidedly non- Indian. In other parts the omissions, as of the references to the doctrine of metempsychosis, indicate a Moslem redaction of the Fables. And all these foreign touches and later addi- tions are preserved intact in the Syriac version. The trans- lator has altered nothing. Ile has not, in emulation of other Eastern compilers, manipulated the stories so as to bring them into harmony with his beliefs and teachings. He has liberally sprinkled his rendering with moral reflections and quota- tions from the Scriptures, and occasionally he gives a passage a doctrinal twist. But, in the main, he leaves the narratives unaltered, and contents himself with faithfully reproducing the Arabic before him. This greatly facilitates the work of the modern critic and scholar. Foreign accretions and foreign additions are more readily discriminated, and it becomes com- paratively easy to eliminate the non-Indian element incorporated in all the later collections of these Sanscrit folk-tales. The Syriac recension is interesting, too, by reason of its marking, in a very characteristic fashion, one of the striking peculiarities of the Indian apologue.
According to Mr. Keith-Falconer, the difference between the Asopic and the Indian fable is that in the former animals are allowed to act as animals, in the latter they act as men and women. This is perfectly true, and marks, no doubt, an under- lying difference of conception. But the distinction here drawn takes cognisance only of what, for want of a better word, we may term the " mode " of the fable. It ignores altogether the literary form and the moral texture of the stories, both of which possess distinctive peculiarities. The Indian apologue is characterised, in the first place, by an utter absence of the humorous element, which is so conspicuous a feature of the Esopic stories ; and in the second, by an undue exaltation of cunning, at the expense of every other needful quality. These defects are very strikingly apparent in every fable of un- • doubted Indian origin ; and the absence of humour is fatal to form and symmetry, from a literary point of view, just as the praise of successful knavery is prejudicial from an ethical standpoint. It violates our instinctive sense of fitness, anti
makes the moral repugnant and unwholesome. To the general reader, who troubles himself little about literary finish and artistic completeness, the objectionable exalta- tion of cunning and deceit will certainly seem the most conspicuous feature of Bidpai's tales. The leading apologise, that of the two jackals, Kalilah and Dimnah—which occupies with its numerous digressions more than one-third of the whole book—is the very epic of selfish knavery, unrelieved by a single touch of humour. By sheer impudence, Dimnah succeeds in getting the ear of the lion-king, Pingalak ; and then, by lying and treachery, he compasses the overthrow and death of the ox Shanzabeh, the faithful friend and counsellor of the monarch, The treacherous conduct of the jackal is subsequently made known to the king, who calls him to account. But the lion is so taken with Dimnah's craft and cunning, that, in the sur- viving Indian versions, he bothers himself no more about Shanzabeh ; Dimnah is advanced in favour, and all goes well with him ever after ! The moral is abominable, and scarcely comes within the pale of literary toleration. And the Syriac recension, as we hinted, marks the unpleasing feature of the original story in a very characteristic way. It adds an entire chapter of some sixty pages, giving an account of the defence, judgment, and death of the jackal, Dimnah ! There is not a hint of this in the Sanscrit Pauchatautra, not a line of it in the early Syriac collection. It has simply been added by the Semitic transmitters of the apologues, who could not endure that such cunning and treachery should go unpunished. But the device only makes the peculiarity of the Indian folk-fable, upon which we are adverting, more prominent in the eyes of Western students.
The shorter stories contained in the collection are even more unsatisfactory ; and those who would understand how widely the Asopic and the Indian fables differ in form and texture, cannot do better than compare some of the simpler spologues of the West with analogous tales of Indian origin ; as, for instance, the " Fox and Crow " of lEiop with the " Fox and Heron " of 13idpai ; or the Western story of the Animals Afflicted with the Plague, with the Indian narrative of the Lion and his Companions, the Wolf, the Crow, the Jackal, and the Camel. The result will be found not a little instructive, and will show how faithfully Bidpai's Fables reflect the characteristic mental bias of the Hindoo.
It is, perhaps, only fair, after our foregoing observations, to admit that there are two tales in the Syriac version which have distinctly humorous elements. They are both good in their way, and as exceptional specimens, are worth telling. One is the fable of the lion and the fox. The king of beasts is suffering from scurvy, and is recommended to try, as a remedy, the ears and heart of a jackass. His factotum, the fox, under- takes to provide the animal wanted for his master to kill. He sets out, and soon espies a likely-looking ass, with whom he scrapes acquaintance ; and by promises of a fine pasture and a pleasant companion. the foolish creature is induced to accompany him. They speedily reach the place where the lion is concealed. He throws himself upon the ass ; but the latter kicks so lustily, and brays so loudly, that the assailant is dismayed, and he succeeds in making off. The fox reproaches his master, but undertakes, nevertheless, to induce the ass to return. Reynard succeeds in doing this, and the credulous donkey is finally killed. The lion retires for a few moments to wash the blood from his paws; but while he is gone the Fox devours the ears and heart of the dead animal. When the lion returns he looks in vain for the expected dainties. "The ass has no ears and no heart," he ex- claims to his factotum. " No," answers Master Reynard, "for, if he had had ears to hear, and 'a heart to distinguish between good and evil, he would never have acted foolishly a second time." The fable drags a little, and is much more lengthily spun out in the original. The other tale is more compact. A merchant starting upon a journey deposits a hundred pounds of iron with a neighbour for safe custody. On returning he asks for his property, 'but is told "the mice have eaten it." He says nothing, but takes his neighbour's son and hides him for a short time. Soon the dis- honest fellow comes running to the merchant whom he has cheated, to inquire if the latter had seen his child.—" Yes," replies the trader; "I saw an eagle flying off with him."—" Nonsense," exclaims the other ; " birds cannot carry off lads like that. It is impossible."—" Nay," responds the merchant; "in a country where mice eat iron it is surely possible for an eagle to fly away with a child." The sequel may be imagined. These two fables are, however, quite exceptional ; and, apart from the humour that distinguishes them, their non-didactic character stamps them at once as un-Indian.
Enough has previously been said to show that the long un- known Syriac transcript of Bidpai which Mr. Keith-Falconer has made accessible to English readers is of considerable value to all who systematically study Eastern folk-lore and fables. We shall not presume to sit in judgment on a rendering which is stamped with the approval of Dr. Wright, the Cambridge Professor of Arabic, and of Professor Niildeke. of Strasburg, one of the first of Continental authorities. We would only add that the translation is literal and clear, and calculated to be of use to those who may be tempted to take up Syriac. There is an elaborate Introduction, in which the origin and vicissitudes of Bidpai's tales are discussed, with an exhaustive account of every ancient and modern version of the fables now in existence. Appended is a body of notes which throw some light upon the obscurities of the original text.
Previous page
