________________
56
Klaus Brumm
a « marginal » development, reflecting the idiosyncrasies of isolated academic circles, and not part and parcel of Indian philosophy.
Below we quote a few scholars on Jaina scholasticism. We have to add that in Jainism scholasticism is connected with a' peculiar scientific bias and a passion for presenting a systematic and detailed view of the entire universe. A more penetrating assessment (which cannot be attempted here) would distinguish between the bed-rock of Jaina dogmatics and the more peripheral and pseudo-philosophical developments which are the basic issue of the present enquiry.
Criticism of scholastic tendencies is occasionally found in A. Weber's studies. However, this was little more than an occasional expression of the irritation which this scholar experienced while ploughing his way through the enormous manuscript material he had before him. E. Leumann, though in a similar situation, sensed the huge potential of Jaina literature in matters of dogma and philosophy. He praised Mahāvīra (« dieser kühne Systematiker, dieser Diktator des Denkens >> 67). H. Jacobi was, in his Jainological studies, more interested in true philosophy than in the endless field of scholasticism-dogmatics-philosophy so that we cannot expect from him any critical observations on our problem. W. Schubring followed E. Leumann in his very positive assessment of Mahāvīra's contribution: « Above all, however, the most versatile thinker we know of in ancient India (i.e. Mahāvīra) had a liking for figures and arithmetic, that characterizes his speeches most extraordinarily » 68. At the same time much of what is found in Jaina cosmography did not evoke Schubring's interest. While reviewing W. Kirfel's book on Indian cosmography, he observed, « daß auf Grund strenger Scheidung des Wesentlichen vom Unwesentlichen manche Ausführung hätte gestrichen und manche Tabelle, so sehr sie der Übersichtlichkeit zu gute kommt (sic!), zu knapper Zusammenfassung oder zu einem bloßen Hinweis hätte eingeschränkt werden können » 69. In fact, W. Schubring practised what he calls « knappe Zusammenfassung » in his condensed analysis of Antakrddaśāh 70. It should be added that even in Jaina circles the extent of cosmographical specialism caused some reservation when priorities of research had to be considered 71. That a scholar continuously studying Jaina texts cannot escape from the problems of scholasticism is demonstrated by the fact that W. Schubring returned to the problem in 1964
67. E. LEUMANN, Buddha und Mahāvira, p. 43 (« Zeitschrift für Buddhismus », ca. 1921, also published separately).
68. SCHUBRING, Doctrine, § 21 (p. 40); in a similar context, the Jaina doctrine is described as « das Werk eines großen Systematikers » (Doctrine, German version, § 6, p. 12). For criticism of the canonical style - on A. WEBER's lines — see Doctrine, § 5 (p. 7); Nāyā (n. 5 supra), pp. 7-8.
69. W. SCHUBRING, K1. Schr., p. 415. 70. SCHUBRING, Doctrine, S 46 (pp. 93-4); German version, p. 66. 71. BĀTHIYĀ/CORADIYĀ, Kriyā-Kośa, Calcutta, 1969, prakāśakiya."
