________________
COMMENTARY
113
This representative of a motto is followed, from 1.38 onward, likewise as in 20, by an exposition. It states in the beginning (4.) that "freedom from desire (rāga) exists in a person who does harbour desire (saraga), but in a certain direction (apeksya) is no longer subject to infatuation (moha)". This is, it is true, the contrary of what was taught in the beginning, where sexuality was considered as a particular case of submission to Karman and vanished with the latter. Here, however, we are told to our amazement, that the particular condition of a hata-mohd is equivalent with freedom from desire right away. A second section [5] of the exposition illustrates, by a śloka, already known, the metaphysical consequences of monastic life, a third one [6] (1,45ff.) starts from the alms (pinda) conforming with prescriptions mentioned 1.34, and states that the taking of nourishment is allowed to happen for a definite purpose only, as the allegories of the cartwright, the painter in lacquer, and the arrow-smith intend to illustrate. The nyāya
of the elephant and the forest-tree etc. previously suggested, are not intellip. 565 gible, however. pāu = pātra, cp. kāu = kāya 9.30 and p.556. The partaking
of a kimpāga 21,6 an example of foolishness. One is allowed to eat in order to appease one's hunger, to be able to serve one's superiors, to fulfil the prescribed observances, and to meditate on the Dharma, as well as in order to preserve one's life. These 6 reasons stand in Thāna 359a in the Gaba :
veyaņa veyāyacce iriy'atthae ya samjam'atthae
taha pana-vattiyae, chattham puna dhamma-cintde. The stanza is probably to be inserted here too, though the length in veyana might suggest an enumeration in prose. In 1.53, tam c 'eva is correct as a reference, in 1.49 wrong for icc-ai or similar,
26.
An allegory executed in st. 8-15 in detail, but in a rather motley manner, calls the soul a field, which is to be prepared by morality. The allegory recalls Suttanipāta 1,4 (st. 177) = Samyutta-Nikāya 1,7,2,1. Many details are unclear. Besides akūdattam "honesty” (9), we require a second nom. for the comparison. In kūdesum is contained küta(ka) as part of the plough. gocchanavo (10) of unknown meaning. In 11, kasate represents the plural. nihanam "end" in 12 looks doubtful. nisitta (8) =nisita, halısa (9) = haleşa. Instead of (a)valamba in 13, one may also suppose vilamba, but then the three next syllables would not satisfy. The annihilation (nirjarā) in 15 is Identified with "removal (nişksti) of the evils", where isa (“carriage-shaft") should be acc.
With these stanzas, the motto is specified, which designates that moral event as "divine agriculture" (divyām kļşim kşşati). It recurs in 32 with part
