influenced by Schopenhauer, he wrote almost exclusively around themes of
Buddhism and Indian spirituality. ‘The Pilgrim Kāmanīta’ was published in
German in 1906, and translated into English in 1912 – published by E.P.Dutton &
Co. of New York. On similar themes to ‘Kāmanīta’ are: ‘The Sacrificial Fires’ (a
play inspired by the Upanishads); ‘The Wife of the Perfected One’ (on Princess
Yashodharā, the bride of the Buddha‐to‐be, Siddhartha Gotama, before his
renunciation of the palace life); and ‘The World Wanderers’ (a contemporary
Indian spiritual tale). After this period he returned to Christian themes and in
1917 he was awarded the Nobel Prize for literature.
Secondly, the material and format of this book: it should be noted that
although Karl Gjellerup has been very faithful to the original scriptural texts,
particularly with respect to individual events and teachings of the Buddha, he
has been extremely liberal with the principal characters, their relationships and
the time sequences of events.
For example, the central incident of the tale comes from Discourse No. 140
of the Middle Length Sayings, the
Dhātuvibhanga Sutta. One doesn’t have to go
very far into this text before finding that the central character is called Pukkusāti,
not Kāmanīta, and that, unlike our hero, he realises the identity of the person
speaking to him. I do not want to get ahead of the story but it is very important
to realise that some of what you read here is faithful to the scripture and some is the
fabrication of the Weaver of the Yarn. (For the sake of interest to the reader the
whole of the sutta mentioned above has been included at the end of the book – in
Appendix 2).
Thirdly, the reader might also be interested in how it came to be that the
book I found was in Thai and English, when it seems to have started life as a
novel by a Dane written in German.
It seems that a pair of talented Thai academics (Prof. Phra Anuman
Rajadhon – ‘
Sathirakoses’ – and Phra Saraprasert – ‘
Nagapradipa’) discovered the
book, in the English version, sometime in the 1930’s when they were studying at
Oxford. They translated it into elegant and polished Thai and also fleshed out the
text in a few places. Curiously enough they also published it anonymously (as
they had done with Grey’s Elegy and a few other classics) to help it be
disseminated without preconception or bias within Thai society; it was well
received, both as a work of fine literature and also as a good learning text for
Buddhist principles. After a year they revealed its provenance as a work by a
European – to the great surprise of many Thai people – and King Rama the
Seventh adopted and promoted it as his ‘chosen literary work for the nation’ (a
custom of the previous members of his dynasty). A section of it was used as part
of the standard high school textbook on Thai literature.
x
We then move forward to about 1952, when Sulak Sivaraksa, the famous
Thai social critic and reformer, was a student in London. He knew of the book in
Thai and managed to borrow a copy of the English version from the Buddhist
Society library. He was interested in how the two versions compared (he
preferred the Thai) and, when back in London again many years later, in 1977, he
looked once again for the book but it had vanished from the Buddhist Society’s
shelves. Eventually he tracked down a copy in the S.E. Asian Studies department
of U.C. Berkeley, California; taking this he produced an edition with both Thai
and English together. This was published in 1977 and then reprinted, together
with the illustrations included in this volume, in 1985. This latter edition having
been produced by ‘M
ATICHON
’ – a well known newspaper and publishing house
in Bangkok.
The worst thing that could happen to a story to be read for pleasure is to
have it surrounded by footnotes and appendices. This is true; but it’s also true
that some readers might like to know: “Did this come from the Buddha?” “Where
can I find the rest of that quote?” “That tradition sounds interesting, I wonder
what it symbolises?” What we have done, therefore, is to create an appendix of
notes and references, outlining the sources (as far as we are able to track them) of
all the derived material that Karl Gjellerup used. The main body of the text is not
marked in any way to indicate these notes; however, if you are curious about a
certain passage, go to Appendix 1, look for the page and quotation in question
and see if there’s a comment or reference for it. This way, if you just want to read
the story and ignore the rest you can easily do so, or, if you are interested in
finding out more and checking the facts, the origins are mostly outlined there for
you. We will also be delighted to hear of any mistakes, omissions or unwanted
intrusions that any reader might find in these notes – feedback will be helpful for
any future editions. Also, gentle reader, please note that the author (K.G.)
switched freely between using Sanskrit (the language of the Northern Buddhist
and Hindu scriptures) and Pāli (the language of the Southern Buddhist
scriptures) during the course of his tale. In our efforts to be true to his original
style we have maintained this mixture of usage.
One last point that I should make is that, in editing this work, I have tried
to be as faithful as possible to the original author’s text. I felt that my remit was
simply to put it into a language that people of the late 20
th
/early 21
st
Century
could easily understand, and yet for it still to be in a form that the author would
be glad to read. I know how agonizing it can be to see your works butchered by
others in the cause of “improvement” (Mikhael Bulgakov’s ‘Black Snow’ is a
great essay on this subject). I have to confess, however, that there were a few
passages that I did rewrite. These were altered for a variety of reasons: some to
cover up the author’s occasional inaccurate representation of the Buddha and his
xi