________________
HR 63/2, 38-79 2010
87
of W. Schubring, A. N. Upadhye and W.J. Johnson. It should be pointed out here, however, that not a single student of Jainism has undertaken a full-fledged text-critical investigation of all the works attributed to Kundakunda. Therefore the conclusions possible within the framwork of this "strategy" are very tentative, as they are only based on the sutdy of a few spearate texts by the Digambara author.
It is quite evident that the analysis of the historical data extant today can only enable us to make the conclusion about the existence of a teachers, tradition associated with Kundakunda, to whom the authorship of a group of religious-philosophic treatises in Prakrit came to be attributed later in the Digambara branch of Jainism. Answering the question whether these works belong to the "pen" of the renowned teacher Kundakunda or they are the fruit of the labours of a later author (or even several authors) will be only possible after the careful philological analysis of the whole group of treatises and comparing them with other texts, both from the Jaina tradition itself and from the other trends of Indian philosophic thought that were engaged in polemic with it.
The major part of this research work is dedicated to analysis of the categoriical system of Jain ontology, epistemology and ethics as they are represented in Kundakunda;s treatises. At the same time methods and ways of the description of reality are considered too, It is an illustration of my thesis that in Kundakunda;s works we deal with the great philosophical doctrine having developed system of categories and methods of investigationg and explanation of the reality, for example, two truths doctrine, According to this theory reality can be treated from two completely different points of view. One of them is true, pure (nischay, suddha naya) while the other is practical, impure (vyavahara, asuddha naya). The problem is that interprets the theory of two truths in two different ways. On the one hand, the eternal verity can't be comprehended without the practical truth. On the other hand, the same practical truth is considered to be false. In order to explain this contradiction we should take into account that the only treatise dealing with the most pradoxical conculsions of the two truths doctrine is Samayasara (Essence of Teaching). Its analysis shows that this work formally and substantially differs from the other works believed to be written by Kundakunda. So some parts of Samayasara may be written (or arranged) by another author. But there may be another solution to the problem discussed. We may apply the main principles ot two truths doctrine to the theory itself. We may sup
