Outline of Avasyaka Literature

Author(s): Ernst Leumann, George Baumann
Publisher: L D Indology Ahmedabad

Page 22

E. Leumann, An outline of the Āvaśyaka literature
"Jinabhadra's unique predisposition for dogmatics" (p. 150). It underlines how Jinabhadra inaugurated a new style and a new format for teaching various areas of knowledge, such as cosmology, which is in full contrast with the canonical procedure, and how he became the starting point of new treatises. The method of analysis applied to the Avaśyaka texts stricto sensu is again applied to the Kșetrasamāsa as a class of works in order to disentangle its textual formation and identify its stages as they are manifested either in the recensions known from the commentators and from the manuscripts, or in rewritings (labelled as "K$'"; "ks'", "k$2” and “ks”; “K$2", "Ks?", "K$"", "K$": pp. 151-55; comparative table on p. 151f.). “K$” refers to Ratnasekhara's Laghuksetrasamāsa (14th cent.), the impact of which is demonstrated by the vast number of manuscripts. In a way, this later recast became the standard work for monastic teaching. A similar process affected works of the class Samgrahani: the older work by Jinabhadra was superseded by the shorter adaptation of Śrīcandra (known as Laghusamgrahaņi or Samgrahanīratna), also a very popular cosmological work (p. 154).
The discussion of Jinabhadra differs from that of Bhadrabāhu since the historical ground is here safer and is not a central issue. Among Jinabhadra's particulars, only his regional origin is briefly alluded to: in Leumann's opinion, the use of the desī word pelu (p. 86) which is ascribed to Mahārāstra by the commentator could be a hint about the author's native place – a faint but likely hint. The introductory portion of the long discussion devoted to the Višesāvasyakabhāsya is a critical assessment: "a work of high quality. Two flaws which can be perceived are, by far, outweighed by two assets" (p. 85). This is another example of Leumann's striking formulas. But they are based on a first-hand experience of the text and 'a sound analysis of its style. The remarks on the Sanskritized Prakrit of Jinabhadra and on the format of the philosophical dialogue characteristic of the work partly define the specificity of his work within the Āvasyaka corpus (p. 85). As Leumann notes, Jinabhadra's undertaking covers only the first half of the Avaśyaka-niryukti, i.e., the Pīthikā, the Upodghāta, the Pancanamaskāra and the Sāmāyika-niryukti (p. 85). Due to the word sayalam "complete" in the opening stanza, Leumann thought more than this was intended, but this is not quite sure. Leumann understands “Višesa" in the title as meaning "extensive" (German: "ausführlich"). But it could just as well mean "special, particular, specific". This would explain that Jinabhadra dealt selectively, only with what we have and which also corresponds to the part of the “Avaśyaka" considered in the Anuyogadvāra (a name which occurs in the opening stanza too). Jinabhadra's connection with the latter is substantiated in Leumann's demonstration. Both texts have the same limits. Jinabhadra's Bhāsya is shown to have had a privileged place within the Jaina scholastic tradition, as it is either quoted or referred to by several commentators (p. 87). Moreover, it has had an enormous influence on Jaina philosophy in general (Butzenberger 1989; ubi alia).
As mentioned earlier, the Übersicht combines various academic genres and concerns. They go from macrodimensional, in the cases analysed above, to microdimensional studies. An excellent example of a combination of both approaches and of Leumann's method, including its own limitations, is Leumann's investigation of Avasyaka-niryukti XII 1-121 (= verses 1102 ff., p. 28ff.).“ It contains translations of a large number of verses (but not all), extracts (based on manuscripts, of course)
- See Appendix V regarding Leumann's system of numbering of the Av.-niryukti verses and the numbering of the printed editions available today.
XVI For Personal & Private Use Only