________________
K, K. Dixit
and so might Itself be orginal On this question Prof Deleuls of two minds but he is more luclined to disagree with Schubring His discussion of the problem brloga to light certain aspects of his understanding as to the criteria for judging the originality or otherwise of a Bhagavan passage
As a matter of fact, the lataka 25 chiefly consists of two longsustained systematic expositions-ope pertaining to ontology, the other pertaining to ethics in the former copious information is conveyed about the substances (dravyas) of all sorts (le of the sorts posited by Jaida Ontology), about their constituent units (pradeta), about the configu. ration (sansthana) exhibited by physical bodies, about the lines (sreni) CAcompassing the world and the not-world In this connection numeral calculations are undertakon frequently where use is made both of the numbera sankhyata, asamkhy ata and ananta and of the numbers krta, treta, dva para and kali la the part containing the systematic exposition pertai. nlng to ethics three topics are treated one by one, viz nirgranthas (=monks) of five types, samyatas (=the self disciplined odes) of five types, tapas (apenance) of two types The Jataka closes with a brief treatment of certain problems related to rebirth and It begins with certain discussions of a ruther miscellaneous nature
This much information about the coutents of the fataka 25 should enable us to evaluate Prof Delcu's pronouncements regarding it (1) Thus about the passages containing a systematic exposition of those ethical topics be rays "they present all the characteristic features of a secondary pannatti' (p 23) By a secondary pannatti be understands the later Upanga texts like Prat pena, Joabhigama, Jambudotpaprajnapti, Suryaprajñapti and his idea Is that the Bhagavan passages to question contain as systematic an exposition as any of these texts He is correct Certainly, even earlier there occur in Bhagavalt passages that contain a systematic exposition of an ethical topic but so far as systomatic character la concerned the Bhagayatı pasaupo la question definitely surpass these earlier passages (1) Prof Delau's remarks about the passages containing an exposition of those ontological topics is less apt. For he describes them as dealing with two topla (sedhi and jumma) that will play a leading role to XXXI seqg' (ibid) As a matter of fact, frent and yugma (the numbers krta, treta, dva para and kall) are but two of the so many ontological topics discussed in the pasager la question. And as regards the fataka 31 etc-rather as regards the Satakas 26-41-we have already soon that they are noted not so much for any of their contents as for their method The concept of yugma plays I minor role in the discussions of the Satakas 31-32 and 35-41 while the conoept of frent plays in important role in the discussions of the fataka 34, but that is almost all to it, that is to say, these concepts just happen
