[\q 205/]


[This Sutta having been incorporated, word for word, as Sections 15-19, inclusive, in the last Sutta, the reader is referred to the translation given there.

The Mahàli Sutta must have already included, when the Dãgha was put together, this Jàliya episode. For there would otherwise be no reason for the Mahàli Sutta being put into the Sãlakkhanda Vagga, the Sãlas 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 Section 23 of the Kassapa-Sãhanàda Sutta, is set out afterwards, in full, in the Udumbarãka Sãhanàda Sutta (No. 25 in the Dãgha). But there the whole episode is not given twice in full. Such cross-references are fairly frequent in the Piñakas, and are of importance for the history of the literature. One of the most striking cases is where the Saüyutta quotes a Sutta, now contained in the Dãgha, by name. (Sakkapa¤ha Sutta, S. III, 13; compare Sum. I, 51; Mil. 350.)]