Agam 05 Ang 05 Bhagvati Vyakhya Prajnapti Sutra

SR No.: 001628
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Jozef Deleu
Publisher: DE Tempel Brugge
Publication Year: 1970
Total Pages: 372
Language: English
Classification: Book_English, Agam, Canon, & agam_bhagwati
File Size: 19 MB

Page 24

them provide the pattern for the sub-saya- and uddesa-subdivision of these sayas. The subdivisions show clearly that XXVI-XLI have been conceived as a whole by itself: the subsaya-subdivision of XXXIII-XL and the uddesa-subdivision of XLI follow the uddesa-subdivision of XXXI-XXXII, and the uddesa-subdivision of XXXIII-XXXIV follows that of XXVIXXX. This does not mean that this whole has been built up of one piece, which is improbable indeed since XXVI-XXX and XXXIII-XXXIV, though full of calculations in which the number four plays quite a role (four possibilities of binding etc. karman, four creeds, four hundred cases of A1 being reborn as A1), in fact seem to stand outside the jumma-calculations discussed above. XXXIII-XXXIV treating the special case of A1 (indicated already in XXV 8) has been prefixed to XXXV which starts the 'great numbers' of A1; and XXVI-XXX, dealing with the binding etc. of karman and the creeds, may have been conceived as a suitable introduction to the whole.
§ 7. Saya XXV, another accretion? Obviously, if we want to look for other possible accretions in the Viy., our first suspicion will fall on XXV, the saya that according to SCHUBRING (see 3 above) corresponds with ('entspricht') the nucleus sayas I-XX, although it stands between the two groups of manifestly accreted sayas XXI-XXIV and XXVI-XLI.
I must confess that, at the present stage of the investigation, I hesitate to pronounce on the subject. Several considerations might induce us to regard XXV as secondary, whilst a few others seem to imply that we must not preclude the possibility that at least part of it has always belonged to the nucleus. Let us consider the facts.
If XXV originally followed on XX it is rather difficult to explain why XXI-XXIV were inserted before it and not appended to it. It is true that part of the subject treated in XXI seqq. was actually inserted in XI 1-8, which are an interpolation since the preceding udd. X 7-34 obviously introduce XI 91; cf. § 22, IX 3-30 and XI 1-8. It is also true that the notion 'simultaneity of rebirth' connects XXI seqq. with XX 10. Yet the first fact, clearly, is the result of an attempt to make the
22