Bibliography Of Studies Connected With Avasyaka Commentaries

SR No.: 269496
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Klaus Bruhn
Publisher: Klaus Bruhn
Total Pages: 18
Language: English
Classification: Article
File Size: 2 MB

Page 5

Further observations on LEUMANN's Avaśyaka studies will follow in $ 2.2. Here we have introduced his Obersicht only in order to tell the reader in a general manner which information on the Avasyaka issue he may find in the work and which not. Methodologically, future work on the Av.-literature will certainly differ from LEUMANN's approach, however, largely in the sense that LEUMANN's writings must be decoded and that ways must be found of providing LEUMANN's high-tech philology with a sound didactic fundament. New methods certainly have to be introduced here and there, but in most cases minor adjustments will be sufficient to carry LEUMANN's ways smoothly from the nineteenth to the twenty-first century. We shall not conclude our discussion without quoting SCHUBRING's dictum on LEUMANN which is well-known amongst Jainologists: "By this great work (the Obersicht) he was many decades ahead of his time (Lehre: $ 4; Doctrine 66). It is only fair to repeat that there is no magical door to the exegetical literature. Our exposition has also demonstrated that, as late as one hundred years after LEUMANN, we are not even in a position to present the entire subject in a comprehensive and systematic manner.
$ 1.3. Niryukti.s and Mülasūtra.s in the Jaina tradition The Jaina tradition of the canonical and post-canonical writings consists of numerous lists (BRUHN 1987). We have not tried to base our exposition on such data, but it is necessary to say a few words on those two lists which are relevant to the exegetical literature. There is a list of ten Niryukri.s which includes the Av. Niryukti. It exists in two versions: Av. Niryukti 84-85 (Ubersicht: 21"-22") and Rsimandalasūtravștti (JACOBI 1881: 12). See also Doctrine 6 43, ALSDORF 1977: 5-7, BALBIR 1993a: 39-41 (and p. 64, line 20). Most of the titles in the Niryukti list are identical with the headings of our "literatures". In connection with references to the Niryukti list we usually find a date suggested by LEUMANN (Übersicht, column 28": "80 A.D."). But refer to KHADABADI 1991: 28 for later datings. Mülacăra V 82 mentions an Aradhana Niryukti which does not appear in the list (Übersicht 16 and 21). The Mülasutra lists are parts of Agama lists, and they also include an Avašyaka text. There are basically two Agama lists, both not yet sufficiently analyzed: JACOBI (1881: 14) and R.L. MITRA (WEBER 1883: 227). They have in their Mula sections respectively "Uttaradhyayana, AVAŠYAKA, Dasavaikälika, Pinda Niryukti" and "Utt., VIŠEŞÁVAŠYAKA, Dasav., Päksika". See H.R. KAPADLA for discussion and further sources (CBM: xvi-xix and KAPADIA 1941: 41-47). The Niryukti list is to be understood as a list of commentaries, but the Mülasútra.s are a part of the canon itself. BŪHLER's list requires an additional comment. The list (45 titles in all) has been published by JACOBI to whom it had been supplied by G. BÜHLER (JACOBI I.c.). It is not known how BÜHLER came into its possession. It was the basis of A. WEBER's description of the canon. In the case of "Avasyaka", WEBER described the Avaśyaka Niryukri (WEBER 1885: 53). SCHUBRING originally followed BÜHLER's list with its 45 titles verbatim (1926: VIII-IX). However, he defined the Mülasūtra category as "Uttarajjhāyā, Avassaganijjutti, Dasaveyaliya, Pindanijjutti", reading Avafvaka as Avatyaka Niryukri. Later on, SCHUBRING presented in s 41 of his Doctrine the traditional list with adjustments, though he still mentioned the figure "45" in 40. The figure "45" is in fact supported by the medieval Svetambara tradition (KAPADIA 1941: 58), and although not very old it may be earlier than the details of BOHLER'S list. SCHUBRING called the third Mülasūtra in the Doctrine again Avassayanijjutti". A case like this, involving the categories of Niryukti.s and Mülasūtra.s, shows that we must use the ancient traditions with caution. The terms "Mülasutra" and "Chedasutra" have been discussed repeatedly: WEBER 1883: 446-47 (Ch.): WEBER 1885: 41-43 (M.); CHARPENTIER
- 123