Sanskrit-English Dictionary

Rating:
Summary: Two points
Review: 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.

Rating:
Summary: Best In Show 100 years and counting
Review: As another reviewer put it, this is quite simply the only definitive Sanskrit-English dictionary. The monumental feat of scholarship required to this is staggering to estimate. 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 choices as a dual alphabetical ordering of the anusvara), is actually an extremely effective way of improving vocabulary because it groups several derivatives and compounds under basic roots. Connections to other Indo-European cognates enables this work to function as 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 to know more background information on deceptively complex terms than is provided in a given work of literature where the word is found, because the author assumes that his readers already have this knowledge.

For the mammoth undertaking that it is, I have no complaints. This is what I expect of any "final authority" reference work.

Rating:
Summary: Indispensible for Sanskrit Scholars
Review: 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.

Rating:
Summary: Encyclopedia not Dictionary
Review: 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.

Rating:
Summary: Simply the best
Review: 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...

Rating:
Summary: Dictionary with an agenda.
Review: Useful as a quick reference because the entries are primarily in Roman script with diacritics, rather than Devanagari. Some of the entries, specifically those connected with scientific views, are outdated as they are subject to the scientific understanding of the time.

What bothers me more, however, is the motivation of Monier-Williams for creating the dictionary and the possible influence that may have had on its accuracy. Often referred to as "a lover of India," Monier-Williams himself shows a different side of his interest in India. In 'Modern India and Indians', p. 247. he writes: "When the walls of the mighty fortress of Brahmanism are encircled, undermined and finally stormed by the soldiers of cross, the victory of Christianity must be signal and complete." And in the preface of this very dictionary he writes: "I must draw attention to the fact that I am only the second occupant of the Boden Chair, and that its founder, Col. Boden, stated most explicitly in his will (dated Aug. 15,1811) that special object of his munificent bequest was to promote the translation of the scriptures into Sanskrit; so as to enable his countrymen to proceed in the conversion of the natives of India to the Christian Religion."

I find it hard to believe that this kind of attitude lays a proper foundation for an objective approach to the creation of a dictionary, and want to caution the reader to bear this in mind when using it.