Re: VRI Kacc. numbering errata

Bhante,

> It's not terribly good. I'm only using it because I want to
> make an e-text of the Tha Ma O edition with footnotes giving
> the variant readings from the Mahachula edition of the so-called
> Muulakaccaayana ...

This is all "a great leap forward" for Kaccayana.  When I started my
own project more than two years ago it seemed that nothing was
happening anywhere --but even the production of this 2005 Burmese
edition is quite a significant step in my opinion.
Making an e-text available will also be of great utility (it certainly
could have spared me the trip to Lampang...).

I agree with you that the footnotes in the Tha-Ma-O edition consist of
comparisons of Kacc. to non-comparable texts.  This could confuse many
readers who do not have a clear understanding of the differences
between the texts (e.g., as you mention, that Kacc. is not identical
to Muul-Kacc., etc.).  I *do not* intend to incorporate those
foot-notes into my own work, so it is good that they will be available
through your e-text edition; obviously, a footnote with a comparative
reference to Mogg. or one of the pseudo-Kaccayanas is only useful for
those who are actively comparing these texts or studying them
simultaneously.  I think "Muul-Kaccayana" is really a genre of texts
rather than a title --the Cambodians seem to have several works under
that heading that will not be the same as the Thai text that you
describe.

Further discussion of those texts "is outside the scope of my current
research".  Ha ha ha.

E.M.