Customer Reviews

A Sanskrit-English Dictionary

5 star:		(4)
4 star:		(0)
3 star:		(2)
2 star:		(2)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

Originally published in 1899, it remains the only comprehensive Sanskrit-English dictionary, comprising 160,000 words. This is the edition published by Oxford in England, and is much clearer print and well worth it if you can't do fine print where the Devanagari script is often ink-smudged(the Indian Edition). However, if your reading vision is good, the Indian edition is exactly the same content and cheaper($48-65), but poorer quality binding as well. I recommend buying it from the Vedanta Press or South Asia books, who also have a website with online ordering. SUPPORT INDEPENDENT BOOKSELLERS.

I agree with the previous two reviewers. There is no need to search further. This is the definitive Sanskrit-English Dictionary to get. Not only are, as the previous reviewer wrote 160,000 terms defined, but there is also a reliable "List of Works and Authors", which I have found to be quite useful. Preface and Introduction are still quite readable after 100 years. This is truly an amazing feat of scholarship. My copy (Oxford Univ. Press - Motilal Banarsidass Publishers, India, 1993 reprint) has held together remakably well, thanks to careful usage and application of Elmer's Glue to the Binding (Thanks Jerry at South Asia Books). However, the paper is beginning to yellow badly and it is showing signs of becoming brittle. If you will be using this Dictionary frequently, in the long run, there is no savings in buying the Indian Edition. Therefore, my next purchase will definetely be the English Edition. - It's really worth it.

As another reviewer put it, this is quite simply the only definitive Sanskrit-English dictionary. The monumental feat of scholarship required to compile this resource is staggering to imagine. It has completely answered every query for which I have consulted it and deserves 5 stars for this fact alone.

Nonetheless, it delivers in several other ways. The organization, which admittedly takes some getting used to due to such counterintuitives as the dual alphabetical ordering of the anusvara, turns out to be an extremely effective way of improving vocabulary because it groups several derivatives and compounds under their basic roots. Connections to other Indo-European cognates has the side effect of creating a work that is a valuable linguistic reference outside of ancient Indian studies.

It is extremely comprehensive in certain entries, perhaps indeed encyclopaedaic as another reviewer mentioned, but this has its benefits. Sometimes readers need more background information on deceptively complex terms than provided in a particular piece of literature where the word is found, because the author assumes that his readers already possess this knowledge.

As to the end product of the mammoth undertaking that this must have been for Monier-Williams, I have no complaints. This is what I expect of any "final authority" reference.

The Monier-Williams Sanskrit Dictionary is one of the heaviest books I own. If you are working in any field related to Indolology or Indian linguistics, you need it - it is the best by far. In every entry you feel that Monier-Williams spoke Sanskrit and loved India - a wonderful book, you can spend hours just browsing in it. The Monier-William and Platt's Urdu, Classical Hindi and English Dictionary represent the apex of British Indological Scholarship. A digital edition would be extremely useful...

The first problem people seem to be having with this famous dictionary is that some of the more recent reprints of the original Clarendon Press edition (especially the Indian ones) are physically of very poor quality: not only are they poorly printed on inferior paper, but they also come with a shoddy binding that is just not going to stand up to the sort of handling a heavy dictionary gets. Books such as this (and there are many being published today) seem to me almost to have been deliberately designed to self-destruct after minimal use.

The only solution to this problem is not to buy a later reprint in the first place. Instead, look for a used copy of the earlier UK-produced Clarendon Press edition. This was well-printed on quality paper, stitched so that it opens flat without the spine cracking, and bound in a durable cloth. If you are lucky enough to find one of these you will be getting a real book that will be a pleasure to handle and will stand up to many years of heavy use.

The second problem that some people run into is that the dictionary itself can, because of its arrangement, be difficult to use. An excellent solution to this problem has been provided by Charles Wikner in his 'A Practical Sanskrit Introductory' (1996).

This is a superb and extremely useful 146-page Sanskrit tutorial in 15 lessons which, besides teaching Sanskrit pronunciation, Devanagari, and some basic principles, has also been designed, as Wikner says, "to lift the English-speaking student who knows nothing of Sanskrit to the level where he can intelligently [use] Monier-Williams' dictionary."

He explains that Lessons 12-14 "penetrate Monier-Williams' dictionary through its four levels of alphabetical order, and suggest strategies for finding difficult words." After studying these three lessons, users should have no further difficulty with the dictionary; in fact, it will become a real pleasure to use.

The author has generously made his book freely available and it can be downloaded from: http://sanskritdocuments.org/learning_tutorial_wikner/index.html

1. The majority of words in this dictionary are provided in transliteration and a minority are additionally in devanagari script. This is a drawback as it requires learning of the transliteration conventions, it makes spotting words more difficult, and is a distraction all round.

Appalling work by an appallingly biased and bigoted author, Monier Williams was well-known for his anti-Indian views and mentions in the preface that the primary reason for this compilation was to encourage the christianization of the natives by preaching to them in their own language. The definition of a great many terms reflects this terrible bias, as well as the unnecessary encyclopaedic entries which reflect the general state of 19th century Indology, which was more propaganda and thinly veiled racism than a proper effort to understand Indian scriptures. Most outdated theories that have no basis or evidence in archaeology find mention in this wok as well, such as that of a mythical 'Aryan invasion' for which no evidence has ever been found.

Avoid this work if you are a serious student of Sanskrit or need a good definition of terms, whatever your purpose. Use the ancient Indian dictionaries and compilations instead, such as the Amara Kosha or Siddhanta Kaumudi for grammar. I say this as a Sanskrit scholar.

Pranaamam,

G.S.Acker.

Price is $200. However the quality of the printing just looks like a elementary student's work. Paper is very akward.
I regret to buy this dictionary.

I remember having this book a few years ago, but I did not keep it for a long time.

Besides the poor print quality and the fact that the entries are not in the alphabetical order, so that a beginner in Sanskrit has hard time finding their words, I did not like it for two other reasons:

1. There are so many abbreviations that most of the time it was very difficult to tell them apart from the actual translation, especially in the case of some short words or words with multiple meanings. You get something like: abbr., abbr., abbr., abbr., word, abbr., abbr., abbr., word, abbr., abbr., abbr., abbr., word, abbr., abbr., abbr., and try to find a word inside.

2. There is too much information not really belonging to a dictionary. For example in the entry about Krishna there is a whole story recounted about Krishna, his childhood, his life and exploits. This is not what I expect from a dictionary. In the one I use now (Woerterbuch Sanskrit-Deutsch, Langenscheidt) one can find that Krishna is: I adj., black, II Name of a hero, later of a god identified with Vishnu, (and a few more meanings amounting to only 8 lines of explanations). This is all I expect from a dictionary.

So, if you do not mind spending half an hour (or more), looking up one word, this dictionary is OK. I minded and this book found a place in the local library. It was simply unmanageable.