Sacred-Texts Buddhism Index Previous Next
[This Sutta having been incorporated, word for word, as §§ 15-19, inclusive, in the last Sutta, the reader is referred to the translation given there.
The Mahâli Sutta must have already included, when the Dîgha was put together, this Gâliya episode. For there would otherwise be no reason for the Mahâli Sutta being put into the Sîlakkhanda Vagga, the Sîlas being contained only in that episode.
Why then should the episode appear also again, in full, as a separate Sutta? Is it merely because of the importance of the question? We have another instance of a similar kind, where the episode of Nigrodha's question, only referred to at § 23 of the Kassapa-Sîhanâda Sutta, is set out afterwards, in full, in the Udumbarîka Sîhanâda Sutta (No. 25 in the Dîgha). But there the whole episode is not given twice in full. Such cross-references are fairly frequent in the Pitakas, and are of importance for the history of the literature. One of the most striking cases is where the Samyutta quotes a Sutta, now contained in the Dîgha, by name. (Sakka-pañha Sutta, S. III, 13; compare Sum. I, 51; Mil. 350.)]
Return to top Next: Introduction to the Kassapa-Sîhanâda Sutta