________________
SOTERIOLOGY IN EARLY JAINISM
KLAUS BRUHN, Berlin
The present essay concentrates on the kasāya concept: for reasons which will become clear in the course of the article we have chosen a general title. The discussion is opened by 99 1-3 which proceed from general to more specialized aspects. $1 is concerned with general methodic problems, $ 2 with soteriology, and $ 3 with the nature of our texts.
$ 1 Sectional studies On three previous occasions (1983: Repetition, 1987a: Canon, 1987b: Ritual), we have tried to describe an approach which we now call "sectional" (sectional studies). The starting point for such studies is a historical subject like - Jainism or the Indian epice which ensures a certain amount of coherence for the entire scheme, forming a "frame" for the respective studies. The frame subject is consequently subdivided into sections. The isolation of these sections will follow either the pattern of new disciplines (e.g. soteriology as a discipline or subdiscipline) or the pattern of conferences or workshops (e.g.
canone as a conference theme). Systematicity is not the basic consideration in the set-up of sections, and different sections will often overlap. In spite of such problems we can say that the division into sections will lay open the infrastructure of the frame subject. On the lower level, the infrastructure of the individual sections will be laid bare by subdividing them into still smaller units (chapters, topics etc.).
The rationale of sectional studies can be described in more than one way. Here we mention only the principle of completeness. Sectional studies can be characterized as "flächendeckend" (comprehensive). They do not aim at over-detailedness, but rather involve a procedure where facts of comparable importance receive comparable attention. We may add that this does not only apply to research proper