________________
जून २०१०
bhattakāle upatthite forms together with the foregoing words (so tassa geham pāvekkhi), a complete sentence (“When mealtime had arrived, he entered his house”). Francke, upon comparing the two, concluded that the incomplete line in the former has in fact its main clause not in the verse but in the preceding prose words (pavisitvā ...gehadvāram patto). He asserts, moreover, that this is an example of an element belonging to the prose being wrongly placed in the verse and represents clear proof that Jātaka verses were influenced by the existing prose of the Jātakas.
Oldenberg,4 on the other hand, argues that the problematic phrase in J 539 was not misplaced as a result of prose influence, and he makes the following points. First, the ascetic, according to the customs of the Indian ascetics, arrived at the arrow-maker's house “to beg for food." Therefore, even though the expression may be incomplete, there is nothing unnatural about its presence in the verse. Furthermore, the fact that a brahmin or samaņa goes to beg of a householder “when mealtime has arrived” is also mentioned in the Suttanipāta (Sn 130), and it is indeed quite probable that this phrase derives from the well-known words of the “Vasala-sutta” in the latter and was applied to a similar situation in the Jātakas. He suggests that this incomplete expression is the result of its having been adduced from another work.
Such are the arguments of the two scholars. First, there can be no doubt that Francke's views have potential importance when considering the secondary character of Jātaka verses, for verses are sometimes modified in conjunction with changes to the narrative, and in such cases the verses can be said to be clearly under the influence of the prose. But is this so in the present case? Oldenberg, on the other hand, convinced of the more recent origins of the Jātaka prose, rejects Francke's hypothesis, but his explanation lacks somewhat in persuasiveness, and his method of seeking the reason for the
