DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.29591#0333
Commentary: Chap. 13
329
sumano (which is given as a pathdntara by S.), but the first part
is dubious. Perhaps it might be retained, and rendered somewhat
like this: yad bhiJcsavah silagunopeta iha yatante sumano ’smijato
’that monks endowed with piety and virtue are exerting themselves
here1 — and I have become well pleased (with that)’.
But there is another question of much greater weight attached
to this verse. From its connection with the g. 8 of the Jataka it
is quite clear that there was originally complete coincidence
between this chapter and the Jataka, and that our chapter in
some points was subjected to considerable emendations. I hope
this will be quite clear from the following brief comparison af the
two texts:
Uttar, ch. XIII Jataka 498
v. 6
» 10, 11, 12 -
» 18
» 26 -
» 27 -
» 30
» 32 cp.
g- U
* i» 3, 8
» 16
» 20
» 21
» 22
» 24
From this comparison it is at once evident that v. 6 is
wrongly placed, for otherwise the verses and the gatha’s follow
after each other in the same order, although there are other verses
between them which are not related to each other. Further, in
Uttar, vv. I — 3 are later additions (cp. supra), as is certainly also
v. 4, for it is not the king but the ascetic who ought to speak
the verses concerning the former births. Vv. 5—7 are certainly
original, but I have a firm conviction that 8—9 ought to be
rejected as late, because 8 speaks of the nidana, which is made
the main theme of the chapter in the Jain version, though it is
never mentioned in the Jataka, while 9 was already shown by
Leumann to be suspect, and the reasons he gave were convincing,
1. c. 134 sq. Then v. 10 is spoken by the king (Leumann),
but not to the ascetic. From its coincidence with g. 1 it is
clear that the Uttar, knew the story of the man who brought
1 This, of course, is to be understand as the contents of the
song mentioned in the first half-verse. S. tries to render ihajjayante
as = iha arjayante, but this would certainly give iha-m-ajjayante.
329
sumano (which is given as a pathdntara by S.), but the first part
is dubious. Perhaps it might be retained, and rendered somewhat
like this: yad bhiJcsavah silagunopeta iha yatante sumano ’smijato
’that monks endowed with piety and virtue are exerting themselves
here1 — and I have become well pleased (with that)’.
But there is another question of much greater weight attached
to this verse. From its connection with the g. 8 of the Jataka it
is quite clear that there was originally complete coincidence
between this chapter and the Jataka, and that our chapter in
some points was subjected to considerable emendations. I hope
this will be quite clear from the following brief comparison af the
two texts:
Uttar, ch. XIII Jataka 498
v. 6
» 10, 11, 12 -
» 18
» 26 -
» 27 -
» 30
» 32 cp.
g- U
* i» 3, 8
» 16
» 20
» 21
» 22
» 24
From this comparison it is at once evident that v. 6 is
wrongly placed, for otherwise the verses and the gatha’s follow
after each other in the same order, although there are other verses
between them which are not related to each other. Further, in
Uttar, vv. I — 3 are later additions (cp. supra), as is certainly also
v. 4, for it is not the king but the ascetic who ought to speak
the verses concerning the former births. Vv. 5—7 are certainly
original, but I have a firm conviction that 8—9 ought to be
rejected as late, because 8 speaks of the nidana, which is made
the main theme of the chapter in the Jain version, though it is
never mentioned in the Jataka, while 9 was already shown by
Leumann to be suspect, and the reasons he gave were convincing,
1. c. 134 sq. Then v. 10 is spoken by the king (Leumann),
but not to the ascetic. From its coincidence with g. 1 it is
clear that the Uttar, knew the story of the man who brought
1 This, of course, is to be understand as the contents of the
song mentioned in the first half-verse. S. tries to render ihajjayante
as = iha arjayante, but this would certainly give iha-m-ajjayante.