The Pañcatantra--- Date, Recensions, Frame- Stories

Like the great Indian epic the Mahābhārata, the

Pañcatantra belongs to the rich, age-old oral literature of India.
And at certain period (which is considered later ), the text has
undergone the same process of compilation and ascription to
the name of some Viṣ̣ṇuśarmā. But even in its written version
we find certain verbal expressions like--- “as it is told”, “as we
have heard ” “and then he said” etc.

The only collection of beast fable and the solitary

surviving work of this kind in Sanskrit is the Pañcatantra, which
has come down to us in various forms. It was originally conceived
as a work for teaching political wisdom, yet the fact should not be
forgotten that it is also essentially a story –book, in which the
storyteller and the political teacher are unified. This sort of
unification is also reflected in the unique emboxed structure of the
text. The construction of the whole work, says Arthur MacDonnell,
“comes to resemble that of a set of Chinese boxes.”1

Unfortunately, we have lost the original text of the

Pañcatantra. ”The oldest form of this proto-Pañcatantra preserved
to us is probably a Kashmir version, the Tantrākhyāyikā, which
may denote stories to illustrate politics, and at any rate indicates
the connection of the new genre with the Ākhyāyikā.”2

Among several scholars that have investigated the

history of Pañcatantra there are preeminently two, J. Hertel and
F. Edgarton. “In Hertel’s view there are only two different sources
of Pancatantra tradition; one Tantrākhyāyikā and another “K”,
archetype of all other versions and an intermediate archetype to

37
which the Southern and Nepalese versions and Hitopadeśa goes
back.”3 But Edgarton says, there are four independent streams
of the tradition flowing from one single old source:(i) Southern
Brhatkathā of which Somadeva’s and Ksemendra’s are
epitomies: (ii) Tantrākhyāyikā (iii) Southern Pañcatantra (iv) the
original of Pahlavi version. From the comparison of these various
recensions Edgarton made up the text of what he considered the
original of Pañcatantra.4 Pūrnabhadra’s recension is a combination
of Tantrākhyāyikā and Southern Pañcatantra.

Now, we are going to have some information about the

date, the various recensions, the text- structure and the text-
matter in brief.

The date

Like many other great Indian texts, the exact date of the
Pañcatantra could not be determined by the text alone. To
ascertain its date we have to incorporate many other literary
works.

Hertel records two hundred (and more) versions in about

fifty languages some of which are extra-Indian.

During the reign of King Choral Anosharwan (531A.D.—

579A.D.), a Persian physician Burzuye translated it into Pahlavi.
This Pahlavi translation is lost as also its Sanskrit original and
we have now an old Syriac version made by Bud in 570 A.D. and
in Arabic version made by Abd Allah Ibn al Muqaffa about 750
A.D.
The use of the word DINARA, it is said points to its date
as somewhere after the Christian era, and therefore, says Keith “it

38
is not sufficient to assign it to the 2nd century A.D. at the
earliest.”2

The Pañcatantra repeatedly quotes verbatim from the

most celebrated Sanskrit textbook of polity, the so-called Kautilīya
Arthaśāstra. Hence it must have been composed much after the
Arthaśāstra.

We can conclude with Edgerton’s words—“Of the date of

the original Pancatantra, all we can say with certainty is that it
was in existence by ca.A.D.500, since in the sixth century it
(already in a somewhat altered form) was translated into Pahlavi.
Since it contains quotations from the Kautiliya Arthasastra, it
must be later than that work; but the date of the latter is still open
to argument and throws no light on the date of the original
Pancatantra, which is mere guesswork (at a venture, say, between
B.C.100 and A.D. 500)”3.

The various recensions

“…It is a work which has perhaps a more interesting

history than any in world literature.”
S.K.De (A History of Sanskrit Literature,
Vol-I)

The Pañcatantra however is not a single text but a

sequence of texts; it exists in more versions than one, worked out
at different times and places, but all diverging from a single
original text. The character and extent of the transformation, to
which the work was subjected in course of time, make the problem
of reconstruction one of great intricacy, but the labours of Hertel 4
and Edgerton 5 have succeeded in a great measure in going back

39
to the primary Pañcatantra by a close and detailed examination
of the various existing versions.

Let us have a look on Edgerton’s observations:

“All the older and substantially complete occidental
offshoots derive from a translation made into Palaver (a middle
Iranian language) in the sixth century A.D., obviously from a
Sanskrit version, but one not now known to be extant. The
translator is said to have been a Persian physician named
Burzuye, whose patron Chosrau Anosharvan (dated A.D. 531-
579).

This Pahlavi translation is also not extant now. But we

have two early translations from it, one into Old Syriac, by a
certain Bud, apparently about A.D. 570, so that it is virtually
contemporary with the lost Pahlavi. This has been edited and
translated (twice) into German by modern scholars, and is
probably closer to the Pahlavi than any other descendant.

Somewhat later, about A.D. 750, the Pahlavi was

translated into Arabic, by one Abd-Allah ibn-al Muqaffa, under the
title Kalilah and Dimnah. These are distortions of Sanskrit
Karataka and Damanaka, the names of the two jackals who are
prominently mentioned in the first book of the Pancatantra.

This work became very popular in Arabic literature.

There are many manuscripts and printed texts of it. From it are
derived, directly or indirectly, all the other older western offshoots
of the Panchatantra. In the eleventh century the Arabic was
translated into Greek by one Symeon Seth, entitled Stephanites
kai Ichnelates. From this was made, apparently in the twelfth or
thirteenth century, a version in Old Slavonic, the first in any

40
Slavonic language. In later centuries, the Greek was translated
into Italian, Latin, and (in the eighteenth century) German.

The Arabic was translated anonymously into Old

Spanish (thirteenth century) and into Hebrew (twelfth or thirteenth
century; doubtfully attributed to a Rabbi Joel). These two versions,
which have been printed in modern times, seem to be quite close
to each other and to the original Arabic.

On this Hebrew version was based a Latin translation,

made by one John of Capua, about A.D.1270, entitled Liber
Kelilaae et Dimnae, Directorium Vitae Humane, which attained a
great popularity in the middle ages. It was twice printed as early
as about 1480(and reprinted in modern times). It was also
translated into various vernaculars. A German version, by
Anthonius von Pfor, was called Das Buch der Beispeliele der alten
weisen (first printed at the end of the fifteenth century, and often
reprnted later). An Italian version of John of Capua’s Latin, by one
Doni, was printed in 1552. Sir Thomas North last translated this
into English: The Morall Philosophie of Doni, London, 1570,
reprinted 1601. Thus in the reign Queen Elizabeth I the first
descendant of the Panchatatra appeared in English. It came from
an Italian version of an Arabic version of a (lost) Pahlavi version of
some (lost) Sanskrit version of the original Panchatantra.”6.

Edgerton himself has recognized the Genealogical Table

formed by N.M.Pezer.He wrote---“N.M.Penzer’s Ocean of Story, Vol-
5, Appendix I, published a Genealogical Table of the principal
versions of the Panchatantra based on data collected in my
Panchatantra Reconstructed, Vol-2.”7.

The table is showed in next page ---

41
 Lost Original Pañcatantra

Lost Paisachi
Lost Pahlavi Prakrit in Lost prototype of Tantra Lost prototype of
by Burzuye Brihatkatha by khyayika and Jain Southern and North
C.550 Gunadhya versions eastern versions

Sans. Tantrakhyayika
Sans. in
kathasaritsagar by Sans. in
Somadeva brihatkathamañjari by Sans. Various Jain versions,
11 th Century ksemendra Pañcakhyanaka etc. numerous
11 th Century other versions often contaminated
with others

Old syriac kalilag Arabic kalilah wa-

wa-Damnag by dimnah by abd allah Sans. Southern Pañcatantra whence
Bud c.570 ibn al mugaffa c.750 many translations into Dravidian Sans. northeastern versions also
languages and Thai ,Lao, Balinese Hitopadesa by Narayana (partly
Javanese, Madurese etc. drawn from another work)

Later Old Hebrew by Greek Stephanites Lost Persian by Malay Hikayat

Syriac Spanish Rabbi Yo’el kai Ichnelates by Ethiopic Nasn Kalila dam Damina
11ttt or C. 1251 12th or 13th Symeon Seth 11th 16th Allah (influenced by a
12th Century Century century 12th Tamil version
Century (?) Century before 1736)

Latin Directorium Vite Humane Old Slavonic 12th or 13th

By John of Capua C.1270 Century
Persian Anvar-I Suhayli by Husayn Ibn
Alial- Vaiz al -kashifi 15th Century

German
Das Buch Later Spanish Italian La
der Byspel Exemplario contra moral
der alten los engaños y filosophia Persian Iyas Ottoman Turkish French livre des
Wysen by peligros del mudo del Doni by –i Danish by Humayun – lumières on la
Anthonius 1493 Antoro Abu al Fazi namah by Ali conduite eas roys,
von Pfor Doni 1552 1578 Chelebi 16th composé ,par le
15th century sage compose par
century Italian Discorsi le sage Pilpay by
degli animali
ragionanti tra loro
Sahid and
by Agnolo English The Gaulmin 1644
Firenzuola 1548 Morall
Philosophie of
Doni by Thomas
North 1570 Spanish Espejo
French Contes et tables politico, y moral para
indiennes by Bidpai et principes ministros, y
de Lokman begun by todo geneno de
Galland 1724. Finished personas by Vincente
by Cardonne 1778. Bratali 1654 -1658

42
The influence of Pañcatantra on later works

Along with the generic table presented by Penzer, we

should have a brief note on the influence of this celebrated
work on world literature as well as later compositions of
Sanskrit works.

Somadeva’s Kathāsaritsāgara contains the five books

of Pañcatantra separated from one another by extraneous
materials, but preserves considerably more than Kṣemendra
does of the bulk of the narrative and Ksemendra’s text of
Pañcatantra is the most drastically abbreviated among all
versions.

The works of Sanskrit fiction written later, such as

Daṇḍin’s Daśakumāracarita and Śukasaptati employ the frame
structure of the Pañcatantra. Again, one can consider Nārāyana
Śarmā’s Hitopadeśa as one of the derivatives of the former.

Arthur MacDonnell points to its “extraordinary influence

on the narrative works of the whole Middle Ages”8 in Europe.
Chandra Rajan observes—“its influence might be detected in
works of literature so widely separated in time and place as The
Arabian Nights, the Gesta Romanorum, Boccacio’s Decameron and
Chaucer’s Canterbury Tales, The Fables of La Fontaine, some
stories of Grimm, and in the most unlikeliest of places, the Br’er
Rabbit stories current in the southern United States.” 9

Especially, La Fontaine expressly states in his preface to

the second edition of The Fables 10 (1678), that the greater part of
the new material was “derived from the Indian sage Pilpay” whose
work is regarded “as earlier than Aesop’s.”

43
 (As we have seen the name of ‘the Indian sage’
appears in some European versions as ‘Bidpai’ too.)

The text in brief

The Pañcatantra contains as the title of the book

implies, five tantras or sections: as under---

BOOK-I MITRABHEDA TOTAL NO. OF THE STORIES—22

BOOK-II MITRASAMPRĀPTI TOTAL NO. OF THE STORIES--06
BOOK-III KĀKOLŪKĪYA TOTAL NO. OF THE STORIES—11
BOOK-IV LABDHAPRAṆĀŚA TOTAL NO. OF THE STORIES--17
BOOK-V APARĪḲṢITAKĀRAKA TOTAL NO. OF THE STORIES--13

[The total number of the stories in each Book is considered

according to M.R. Kale’s edition of the Pañcatantra, which is the
principal text of our study.]

BOOK-I

The frame story begins with Vardhamāna, the merchant,

who sets out for his business tour. He has two bulls, Nandaka and
Sañjīvaka. It once happened that the leg of Sañjīvaka gets stuck in
the muddy banks of the river Yamunā. After waiting for some days
at first Vardhamāna then his troop of servants leave the bull
behind. The merchant is wrongly informed that Sañjīvaka has
died. The bull however is not dead; in fact he becomes stronger by
eating the green grass that grows on the banks of the river
Yamunā.

Eventually the bull becomes very close friend of the king

of the forest, Pingalaka. They spend their time in narrating stories
to each other and exchanging views. At this the jackal ministers,
Karataka and Damanka, get jealous over the friendship of the king

44
and the bull, for the king ignores them. So they devise a plan so
that the lion king itself kills the bull.

At last the jackal ministers have succeeded to separate

the friends. Thus the title of the Book—I, Mitrabheda is justified.

BOOK-II

Mitrasamprāpti, the second book tenders the advice to

have friends and deal with them fairly. The frame-story describes
that how the dove-king Citragrīva with his whole retinue fell into
the hunter’s net. He makes all the doves fly up together carrying
the net with them to Hiranyaka, the mouse. Hiranyaka frees the
birds. A crow Laghupatanaka , who watches Hiranyaka as he
helps the doves, succeeds in making friend with him and is
introduced by him to his old friend Mantharaka, the tortoise. A
fifth friend is added in the shape of a deer Citrānga, who in the
course of wanderings, is caught in a snare but is released finally
by his friends. Again, the slow—moving tortoise is also taken by
the hunter, but by a clever stratagem his friends rescue him.

BOOK-III

The third book Kākolūkīya illustrates the theme of war

and peace using a frame-story about the crows and the owls. The
king of the owls, Arimardana invades the retinue of the crows.
Meghavarṇa, the crow-king seeks advice from his ministers to
counter the crime. Then Sthirajīvī, one of the ministers suggests
him to stage a dissension. Sthirajīvī presents himself as a
castaway to the owls and takes their shelter. Ultimately at an
opportune moment the stronghold of the owls is set on fire by
Meghavarṇa and his force, and as a result the entire host of
owls perish.

45
BOOK-IV

The fourth book has for its central theme

Labdhapraṇāśa, the loss of one’s getting, and this is illustrated by
a frame-story about a monkey and a crocodile. Everyday
Raktamukha, the monkey entertains his crocodile-friend
Karālamukha with delicious fruits. The friendship between the two
grows so strong that Karālamukha’s wife becomes jealous. Out of
envy she intrigues his husband to bring the monkey’s heart.
Karālamukha invites Raktamukha to his home in deep water and
they set out together. On the way, however, the confident crocodile
reveals his purpose. Raktamukha declares that he left his heart
behind on the tree. Then together they go back for it. Thus
Raktamukha saves himself by his ready wit and Karālamukha
loses his belonging.

BOOK-V

The theme of the fifth book Aparīḳṣitakāraka, is hasty or

ill-considered action. The frame-story opens with the young
merchant Manibhadra mourning over the loss of his fortune. In a
dream he is bidden to slay a monk, next morning, eventually who
will turn into his lost treasure. He carries out the oracle and gets
back his wealth. A barber, having seen all this, clubs to death
several monks. He expects a lot of treasure. Instead, he receives
the death sentence at the royal court.

This is all about the text and its treatment considered

by the previous scholars. We will interpret the text–matter from
our own perspective in the later chapters.

46
 References

1. MacDonnell, A, History of Sanskrit Literature,London,1854

2. Keith, A.B., Classical Sanskrit Literature, Oxford University Press,
London,1932,pg. 104
3. Krishnamachariar, M., History of Classical Sanskrit Literature, Motilal
Banarasidass Private Limited, Delhi, 1989,pg. 427
4. Edgarton,F., The Panchatantra Reconstructed , American Oriental Society, New
Haven,1924
5. Keith, A.B., Sanskrit Literature,pg. 245
6. Edgerton, Franklin, The Panchatantra, George Allan and Unwin Ltd, London,
1965, pg. 11
7. Ibid
8. MacDonnell, A, History of Sanskrit Literature
9. Rajan, Chandra; Viṣṇu Śarma: The Panćatantra, Penguin Books India (P) Ltd.,
1993,pg-xix
10. Moore, Marianne, (tr.), The Fables of La Fontaine, The Viking Press, New
York,1954

47