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 6

1922: 32 (M.); SCHUBRING: 1924 (KI. Schr. 436: M.); SCHUBRING 1932 (K1. Schr. 111: Ch. and M.); SCHUBRING 1962: 8 40 (Ch. and M.); SCHUBRING 1966: 2 (Ch. and M.); KAPADIA 1941: 35-36 (Ch. and M.) and 41-47 (M.); KAPADLA in CBM: xvi-xix (M.); CAILLAT 1975: 176-77 (header pagination; Ch. and M.); WRIGHT 1967 (quoted according to CAILLAT 1975, Ch. and M.); and ALSDORF 1977: 7 (M.). The greater or lesser importance attached to the two terms reflects different "attitudes". WEBER wrote in 1883 (p.446): "Der Name Chedasútra ... (cheda, Schnitt, Abschnitt?) ist sehr verschiedener Deutung fähig. Eine authentische Erklärung ist mir dafür nicht zur Hand." Similarly in 1885 (p.41): "Worauf dieser Name (M.) sich bezieht, ist mir annoch unklar... Auch ist derselbe bis jetzt für die betreffenden Texte erst in ganz modemer Zeit nachweisbar." In other words, WEBER expressed a scepticism about literary traditions (= traditions relevant to literary history) which was due to his lack of familiarity with the prayascita decad (CAILLAT 1975: p.93 of the header pagination), but which is even then expedient to this day. There can be little doubt that the terms cheda and mula are identical with the terms for prayascitta.s VII-VIII (WRIGHT 1967); but this does not help us to understand the strange redactorial arrangement as a whole (the titles "Ch." and "M." as well as the Mula category as such). It can also be asked why the important texts of the Müla category (which includes Utt. and Dasav., two very old texts of the canon) have never found an adequate place in the ensemble of Agama lists. We shall return to KAPADIA ("third Mülasutra" or Avasyaka) in & 2.3. The title "Avasyaka" plays a prominent part in a list contained in the Nandi (WEBER 1885: 10-18; BRUHN 1987: 102-03), but this throws no light on the later Müla lists. It may be added that the growth of the Av.-literature was not a matter of course. We do not know why the enormous complex of the Av.-literature was erected on the narrow basis of the Āv. Sútra. Moreover, the Av. Sūtra does not belong to a very early stratum of the canon. The twelvefold dharma of the householder in Av. Sutra VI (BALBIR 1993a: 37) is an enlargement of the relevant section of Upasakadasa I, and the whole of the Av. Sūtra as we know it is basically written in Jaina Måhäråstri, not in Ardhamågadhi. The e-nominatives found in Av. Sutra VI have been taken from the Upåsakadaśa. See also BALBIR 1993a: 34-35 for the question of monastic and laic portions in the Av. Sutra. Finally it is difficult to understand why an atypical literary composition like the Av. Sutra (largely concerned with moral obligations, and precursor of innumerable ritualistic manuals) was chosen as the basis of a literature with mixed dogmatical contents in the first stage (Av. Niryukti and prose commentaries) and with primarily theoretical contents in the second stage (Višeşāvaśyaka Bhāşya).
$ 2. Avasyaka studies in retrospective $ 2.1. The foundations: Georg BUHLER and Albrecht WEBER Avasyaka studies are as old as modern Jainology. They started with the introduction of manuscripts into this branch of Indology, and this means that they were connected with the name of Georg BÜHLER (1837-98). BŪHLER's merits are not forgotten, but we may not remember the enormous impact of his activities on Indology in the nineteenth century. This is already reflected in the long list of obituaries which appeared immediately after his death in the Indian Antiquary (vol.27: the December issue of the year 1898) and in the biography published in 1899 by J. JOLLY in the Encyclopedia of Indo-Aryan Research. E. LEUMANN observes on p.369 of his obituary for BÜHLER in the Indian Antiquary (27: 368-70): "Thus he rescued two whole branches of literature from oblivion, viz., the Kashmiri branch which comprises Vedic and Sanskrit texts and the extensive Prakrit and Sanskrit literature of the Svetåmbara Jains." He concludes (p.370) by saying: "So, once more, we may state fairly that
. 124