D E D I C A T I O N TO TH. S T C H E R B A T S K Y

It is especially fitting that one of the first issues of the Journal of Indian Philosophy should be dedicated to the memory of Th. Stcherbatsky (F. I. ~erbatskoi). For already some 75 years ago this outstanding man, who was for many years professor of Indian studies at the University of St. Petersburg (later Petrograd and Leningrad), clearly perceived the significance of the study of Indian philosophy not only for Indology but also for the understanding of the intellectual and spiritual history of mankind. Throughout a long and active life it was his endeavour to demonstrate this fact and hence to establish the study of Indian philosophy on a sound scientific and academic footing.

While Stcherbatsky published articles on other branches of Indology such as Indian poetics (1902) and the scientific achievements of the Indians (1924) and also worked on Indian political thought, he is distinguished above all as a historian of Indian and in particular Buddhist philosophy in the strictest sense. His thesis consisted of a Russian translation of Dharmakirti's Nydyabindu (1903) and a study of classical Buddhist epis- temology and logic (1909) set in the larger framework of the history of Indian philosophy; this subject was to remain one of his chief interests throughout his life and he took it up once again in his two-volume magnum opus, Buddhist Logic (1930-2), which provides an annotated English translation of the Nydyabindu together with the only detailed general study of classical Buddhist epistemology and logic available in a West European language. Though now inevitably somewhat outdated after several decades of further research in the field, this work remains an important and stimulating treatment of the subject. It moreover possesses the very significant merit of having been written with the needs of the general student of philosophy in view.

In his endeavour to make Indian philosophy accessible to as wide a public as possible Stcherbatsky stressed the need for what he called 'philosophical' (as opposed to more literal 'philological') translations of Sanskrit and Tibetan works, and he strove to render into current Western

Journal of Indian Philosophy I (1971) 213-216. All Rights Reserved Copyright © 1971 by D. Reidel Publishing Company, Dordreeht-Holland

214 D E D I C A T I O N TO TH. STCHERBA TSK Y

terms both the ideas and the technical terminology of the original texts. This end he naturally tried to achieve to begin with by employing the vocabulary of the 19th century philosophers, especially the later Kantians and Hegelians, and he also made extensive use of the writings of J. S. Mill and Bradley; subsequently he became very interested in the writings of H. Bergson and Bertrand Russell. In his later years he also studied certain Indian doctrines with reference to the philosophical problems being discussed in the Soviet Union after 1918. Many years earlier he had devoted a short study to a critique of theism attributed to N~g~trjuna (1904).

Stcherbatsky's interest was however not exclusively confined to these aspects of philosophy. Before the first World War, and together with L. de La Vall6e Poussin, S. L6vi and U. Wogihara, he elaborated a plan for the publication of Vasubandhu's Abhidharmakoga together with the author's own commentary and Ya~omitra's subcommentary and for their translation into some of the languages of Europe; unfortunately, owing to world conditions, only a part of this grand plan could be realized, chiefly by Wogihara and La Vall6e Poussin, and the Russian and English transla- tions announced by Stcherbatsky and his pupil and colleague O. Rosenberg were never published. However, a significant product of this project on Stcherbatsky's part were his Soul Theory of the Buddhists (1919), a transla- tion of the last part of the Koga, and his Central Conception of Buddhism and the Meaning of the Word "Dharma' (1923), a study of Buddhist philosophy based on the Abhidharma. Stcherbatsky also developed at an early period an interest in the Vijfi~tnav~tda school of the Mah~ty~ma, as is shown by an article published in 1905 in the Musdon; and several years before his death he was able to publish an English translation of the first part of one of the fundamental texts of this school, the Madhydn- tavibhdga together with Vasubandhu's commentary and Sthiramati's subcommentary (1936). His interest in the other main Mahfiy~mist school, the Madhyamaka, was no less great, and his Conception of Buddhist Nirvana (1927) is a significant contribution to the study of the thought of N~g~rjuna and Candrakirti. In addition, his debate with La Vall6e Poussin on the meaning of nirvdn, a and of absolute reality in Buddhism served to bring out the very complex problems posed by Buddhist philosophy and thus contributed appreciably to their elucidation. Stcherbatsky also published in collaboration with his pupil E. Obermiller an edition of the Abhisamaydlam. kdra (1929), a fundamental treatise on the philosophy of

D E D I C A T I O N TO TH. S T C H E R B A T S K Y 215

prajhdpdramitd; but except for a short note which appeared in 1907 he did not publish extensively on this important school.

Any estimate of Stcherbatsky's work cannot wholly leave out of account the very considerable contribution he made indirectly, through his in- fluence on some highly gifted disciples. One of the earliest was O. Rosenberg, who devoted himself to the study of the Abhidharma and whose thesis on the problems of Buddhist philosophy (1918; German translation in 1924) remains one of the most interesting studies we have on the Abhidharma school which he studied for some years with its living representatives in Japan. Another of Stcherbatsky's pupils was E. Ober- miller, who specialized in the Indian and Tibetan literature on the praj~dpdramitd philosophy; and just as Rosenberg had done in the case of the Sino-Japanese schools, so Obermiller familiarized himself in depth with the living Tibetan and Mongolian exegetical traditions of Buddhism which he studied in Mongolia, and on the basis of which he published a number of valuable works. Each in his own way these two scholars carried further Stcherbatsky's own work, and in particular they reflect his keen interest in the living traditions of Buddhism.

It is thus clear that Stcherbatsky considered Brahmanical and Buddhist thought as two closely interconnected and equally important branches of Indian philosophy taken as a whole, and that he sought to follow its many developments in India, Tibet and Mongolia with whose languages and traditions he was very familiar, as well as in China and Japan. And when he died during the second World War he had behind him both an im- pressive array of substantial publications and many years of teaching activity. If his influence nevertheless did not attain the proportions that might have been expected, this was no doubt due at least in part to the fact that his disciples mentioned above, who were very actively engaged in exploring and carrying further the lines of study initiated by their teacher, who diedwhentheywerestillyoung.Andforthisreasonmanyareas of study originally investigated by Stcherbatsky and his pupils have had to be further explored in the last few decades by other scholars elsewhere. Those who work in these fields will continue to turn to his writings for guidance and important insights, and they cannot fail to be stimulated by his ideas; for even if some of his 'philosophical' (as opposed to 'philologi- cal') translations may not have always been altogether successful, and although the philosophical framework in which he sought to interpret the

216 DEDICATION TO TH. STCHERBATSKY

doctrines of the philosophers of India, as well as of Central and East Asia is now, some fifty or more years later, sometimes rather old fashioned, both the basic approach and the methods he advocated and the historical and philosophical horizons he opened up retain much of their value. It now remains to be seen what progress such scientific academic study of Indian and Buddhist thought in the humanistic tradition will be able to make in the period of crisis thorough which the universities are passing, when it is hard to find interest and support for the study in depth of the humanities in the widest, and surely the truest, sense- that is including the immense contributions to philosophy and civilization made by the peoples of Asia to which Stcherbatsky so ably and eloquently called attention in the first four decades of this century.

University of Leyden D. SEYFORT RUEGG