________________
A Recent Study of Bhagawattsūtra Reviewed
redundant compound items of the lists concerned, is pretty bollow More over the questions raised in these Jatakas are such that even in cowbooting with the simple items the answers that are yielded are la most cases the same as would have been yielded if these were not take no accoma (The same can be said about the numeral qualifications that are ascribed to the concerned being-types in the fatakas 31-32 and 35-41 That # to say, in this connection too the answers that are yielded are in most case the same as would have been yielded if these numeral qualifications were not taken into account Hence our misgivings about Prof Deleu's thess thet the ascription of these numeral qualifications--'the application of the futet method of quaternary arithmatic as he calls it--Is the characterizing speciality of the Satakas in question] All this becomes evident coough when it is noted that the latakas 2641 which are 16 out of the total 41 cover bardly 55 out of the total 980 pages of the text. The conclusion och to bo that these fatakas are more of the nature of 'excrcisCS 10 a particular methodology' than of the nature of the elaboration of particular content
The features of the Satakas 26-41 that are bere being emphasized Prak. Deleu too has noticed though 10 his own way Thus he recamarks "The sub divisions show clearly that XXVI-XLI have been conceived a a whole by itself the sub-saya-subdivision of XXXIII-XL and the uddew-subdivision of XL follow the uddesa-subdivision of XXXI-XXXII, nord the uddesa-subdivision of XXXIII-XXXIV follows that of XXVI-XXX". (p 22. But instead of drawing any far-reaching conclusion from the Pour Deleu rather counsels caution 'This does not mean', be says that the wholo has been built up of one piece', (ibid) Prof Dolou's fat seem to be that somebody might come out with the suggestion that those who are all from the pen of one author, a fear which he spelu to duped by polnting out that the application of quarter pary anhmatic # abront le the fatakas 26-30 and 33-34 [Then he goes on to offer blow apua tion of this absence, an explanation we have alrcady consideredy. As a matter of fact, what needs to be surmisod 19 just this that the lomban x41 are from the pen of authors who shero certain typlont methodologies tendencies Not that the problems discussed by there authon are not going devoid of interest, but they are here used merely as pretende for phulung vent to the methodological tendencies in question As for the authorship these fatakas it is quite possible that someone wrote foro than one OK of them but it is equally pagsible that each of them was written by 1 d orant person, the point is not much in portent
Then we come to Prof Delou's second question which relates to the bataka 25 and asks whether it too is a later accretion, Schubeing bad malan tained that this fataka well goes with the latakas 1-20 which are original
