Re: Rare Pali editions at the EFEO, Vientiane

Hi all --I take it that Dr. McDaniel is trying a new "tone of voice",
as per our (good-humoured) discussion off-list.

I also am aware that various subjects veer away from Grammar
--however, rare editions of Pali texts has been an accepted subject.

So far as rare editions go, it is quite possible that a set of these
books ended up in an antiquarian shop in Paris; so it is hardly
academic to draw the attention of persons on the list to its
(putative) existence; and my impression is that all the members of the
list are interested in rare Pali editions.

Were I to refrain from posting, I would have remained in ignorance;
the differences between these editions are certainly not something I
can "look up" in a reference book.

I don't think I need to comment further on the Brahma-idol/murder
incident: I purchased the Saturday/Sunday issue of the Bangkok Post,
and it had a full-page special on the incident, as well as opinion
pieces, and none of them mentioned any basis for the claim that the
man was insane.  I still have not read any stated basis reported.  It
is very easy to label anyone as "insane", and newspapers do so at
their liberty; it is another thing to read an account that specifies
when and where a person sought council or medication for illness in
the past.

It is needless to say that "not all the newspapers contained all the
facts", and, moreover, "I do not read each and every newspaper"; I
think it was abundantly clear from my comments that I have no claim to
know/read everything --but I have found much that is quizzical in what
I have read.

Re: E.F.E.O. editions, I believe the only confusion here was my use of
the verb-phrase "write off".  I must speak some odd dialect in which
this doesn't have negative connotations; McDaniel and I discussed the
matter, and he gave me various reasons (primarily the nature of the
binding) to effectively "write off" the possibility that there are
significantly more volumes of that edition in Luang Phabang.  I did
not mean to imply that there was anything "irrational" or "hasty" in
the act of "writing off"; on the contrary, I imagine the latter to
have rational and methodical connotations --such as a person going
through a check-list.

The crux of the thing is this: I thought that McDaniel had told me
that only one volume had been produced of what we're calling the
white-cover edition --and I now found three volumes.  Formerly, as
quoted, I had seen 20 volumes of the same set, in one glass case.

I think I use the term "observation" in a self-evidently broad sense:
I *saw* some very interesting texts in Luang Phabang (and I evidently
became only more confused through my dialogue with the patient Dr.
McDaniel) and the binding that I saw matches the binding of the three
volumes at the E.F.E.O.  I believed that McDaniel had formerly told me
that there was only one volume published, and that the binding of the
Lao-Pali edition was dis-similar to these two examples I have now
observed.  So, with various degrees of error on my part, this seemed
to me an interesting finding; and it still seems interesting.  I
asked, in the past, for more explanation of which edition was which,
i.e., what kind of typography (vs. hand-written facsimile) I should be
looking for, etc., but, evidently, I did not have enough information
to work from, and I'm sorry it has been so terribly bothersome for my
observations to have been posted for replies.  The white-cover edition
certainly has every pretense of being a Lao-Pali edition; this did
confuse me, as I had thought that McDaniel's earlier suggestion was
that such a text would merely be a white cover put over a (Northern)
Thai edition --on the contrary, the adaptation was considerably more
than that, and I am still not clear as to in what way precisely the
Lao (white-cover) edition from Luang Phabang is "based on" the Chiang
Mai / Yuan edition.

Re: the library at Wat Ong Teu, I think the only difference here is
the question of how "open" is "open to the public".  The statement
that "you just have to get permission from the abbot" is itself a
glaring contradiction that a library is "open to the public" in any
unconditional sense of the term.  Some members of the public have much
more trouble getting permission from monks than others ... I will
leave the rest up to your imagination.

> They are not a
> "Lao edition," but copies of the Northern Thai (Yuan) script
> edition. This was largely a ceremonial printing it seems. The
> first three volumes may have been seen as ceremonially
> representing the entire tripitaka. There is another, red
> cover, edition.

This is hardly something I could be expected to know without being
told; further, I should say, that every indication I could find in the
"white cover edition" seemed to indicate that it was Lao in origin
--in any case, they had removed any trace of Thai Royal patronage to
provide Luang Phabang monarchial symbols throughout.

> I told him this. I also give a slightly fuller description
> below. I can write more on this, but since it does not relate
> to Pali grammar directly, I won't waste everyone's time.

Thank you very much --it has not been a waste of my time, and I thank
you for your patience.

So far as McDaniel's ALL-CAPS requests as to what evidence I have that
further volumes (beyond three) exist of the white-cover edition, I
again have only my former observation to refer to:

> There were 20 volumes visible --it is possible that more
> volumes were in one
> of the wooden cases (i.e., with no windows) in the same room.
>
> Of the 20 volumes, almost all were suttapitaka --there was
> just one vol.
> from the Abhidhamma pitaka, and I counted (and wrote down) how
> many were
> from the Vinaya (maybe 4? I don't have my notebook with me).
>
> Whether or not that particular set is complete, the visible
> volumes do
> indicate that it was the entire tipitaka that was published;
> as mentioned,
> the text on the spine was Lao-Dhamma --apparently
> photo-facsimile from
> hand-writing.
>
> The actual title was as reported (i.e., in Pali) --although I
> could only
> read the spine, not the front cover, nor any publication data
> within.

> JM wrote:
> I think I have some of what you saw. They were printed in a
> very small number and are not available anywhere I have
> looked, including France. I will look in the Library of
> Congress and send you a short description of what I have soon
> (the volumes are in my office). I have a 1957 set in White
> (based on the Yuan version and a Red set (not complete) in
> Tham from 1975 (I think). I remember being surprised at the date.
> More soon,
> justin

E.M.