taxonomy question

[James Hartzell]

Dear All

Just a note of thanks to everyone for the kind assistance with the taxonomy
question;  i've been away from email for a couple of days, hence the late
reply.  It's certainly an intriguing issue.

Grazie!
James



On Sat, Aug 6, 2011 at 6:05 PM, Stefan Baums <baums at berkeley.edu> wrote:

> Dear Elisa,
>
> thanks for explaining and for the reference!
>
> > I cannot really understand what you mean by "since yoni here
> > serves as the cover term they were evidently not meant to be
> > covered"
>
> In the Buddhist sources (e.g., Saṅgītisūtra and commentaries,
> AKBh), yoni is not a synonym of the jarāyu kind of birth, but all
> four items are considered ‘yonis’ in a more general meaning of
> ‘kind of birth.’ This generalization of the term for a generative
> organ from the animal (and human) kingdom suggests that plants
> were not a concern of the creators of this variant of the list.
>
> All best,
> Stefan
>
> --
> Dr. Stefan Baums
> South and Southeast Asian Studies, UC Berkeley
> School of Asian Studies, Universiteit Leiden
>


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://list.indology.info/pipermail/indology/attachments/20110809/75c9928a/attachment.htm>