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 36

fragments entered under XXV 72; XIV 52 seems to be related to VII 85; XVI 61i (fourteen dreams) has been added to XVI 61b (ten dreams).24
It may be noted that in nearly all of these texts the number '10' plays a role, the exceptions being X 25, XVI 61i and XXV 724; V 78 deals with five causes and five non-causes.
In conclusion one may say that the non-dialogue texts are short glosses inserted as the reader may check for himself in the Conspectus, § 22, where they have been indicated with the letters ND-for the purpose of introducing or commenting (scil. expatiating upon) some topic or notion. As such they are similar in character to the occasional references discussed in $13. One of the references there quoted, V 48, actually is a non-dialogue text. Likewise, as a matter of fact, XXV 72 at one place refers to Uvav. Moreover, in a number of references, so it was stated in § 13, the original non-dialogue text has been adapted to the dialogue style of the Viy. The same happened (1) in the case of VII 84 and XXV 72a which, but for their dialogue style, are identical with the Thāņa-fragments preceding the ones quoted by VII 85 and XXV 725 resp., (2) in the case of VIII 81 and 2 which are Thāņa 170 a and Thāņa 317b = Vav. 10, 2 resp. dialogized.
$ 16. The Nucleus as a Primary Pannatti. On the whole the texts and fragments embodied in the Viy. by way of references and quotations derive from the systematic enunciation of the doctrine. If they are eliminated from the nucleus sayas, what is left proves to be a rather bewildering amalgam of detached teachings. The diversity of the topics discussed and in many cases that of the persons and the circumstances attending these discussions all but defy methodical description. That is because here we have a record, as a matter of fact the only really important canonical record, of what Mv.'s teaching actually was like, not of what later systematization has made of it. Of course tradition has, in many ways, formalized this record by stereotyping the description of Mv.'s peregrination, of the towns and sanctuaries he visited, of the people he met and of his method of teaching. The important point, how
34