Sectional Studies In Jainology II

Author(s): Klaus Bruhn
Publisher: Klaus Bruhn

Page 12

Sectional Studies
K. Bruhn
vast area where the SP occur on a scale which is unusual, even by the standards of ancient Indian thought and theory. The systematic study of the SP seems, therefore, inevitable in the case of Jainology. But even here, the SP have not received the attention which they actually deserve. Nobody can deny the fact that the SP material of Jainism includes extremes of sophistry. However, to this day the texts where the SP are most prominent (monastic discipline of the Svetambaras and doctrine of karma of the Digambaras) have partially remained a terra incognita. An obstacle of a more general character is the "formal character of the SP. They are not relevant to the study of "content", "reality", or "history" (see also POLLMANN Li on E.R. CURTIUS and Toposforschung). The lack of reality, i.e. of Wirklichkeitsbezug, clearly discourages research on the subject.
Another problem is the lack of a perceptible common denominator. The description of the SP as "formal" is too loose to serve any practical purpose. To be sure, if taken by themselves, the structural phenomena» form a fairly well-defined area, where the arguttara pattern could be mentioned as a standard example. But in the case of the second element - «further peculiarities - we have to mention quite different items, none of which could be called a standard example. As random examples we point out the abundance of parallel versions (pp.37-39 below) and the impact of normalization (BALBIR No) in Jaina narrative literature. In the case of "normalization", imported stories, mostly of Brahmanical origin, are adapted to the ideology of Jainism, as explained below. It is obvious that we cannot characterize the SP in their entirety if we already face difficulties in connection with the description of «further peculiarities, i.e. of the second element alone.
Although we are not in a position to mention a common denominator for SP. we can give certain hints which make the creation of the term «SPmore plausible. On the one hand, it is obvious that some scholars have shown more interest in SP than others, a fact which suggests that the SP have at least some form of internal unity. On the other hand, we are often faced with the question of whether we should study a phenomenon of the SP type "as such". The study of the niksepa can thus be restricted to cases where it is a true part of the general argument, while it is ignored whenever it is little more than a dialectic ornament. But it is likewise possible to study the ni ksepa, content or no content, "as such". Again, the study of "normalization" can take place as part of the discussion of individual stories and with emphasis on a special case which may be more interesting than others. But there is also the alternative to survey the entire evidence - i.e. the phenomenon as such" - whether it is interesting or not.
study of a limited subject x' we often have the choice between concentrating on the subject x' alone and treating it as part of a more extensive subject ? (performing an "a minore ad maius" operation). For the sake of illustration, we shall equate x' with a single verse, and with the relevant text in its entirety. This case is simple in so far as a text (x”), whether well-known or little known, is normally a well-defined unit. A problem can arise if we want to proceed from the text (x) to a still higher unit x', normally a cluster of works, a literary genre, or a shastra-like body of literature. Such a higher unit is not necessarily "well-defined", and, as a consequence, some effort may be required to find at least a working definition. Although each case must be judged on its own merits, the sectional scheme will on the whole, be in favour of the a minore ad maius operation, which is a step towards better «integration of a topic or a subject - and also a step from the part to the whole.
The example given should only enable us to construe the «SP. per analogiam. If we take, for example, the sthana pattern as x' then we expect broader areas like xor above the level of x'. The overlying concept for all the relevant phenomena would be the «SP» in foto. This line of argument reflects the general tendency to study the individual phenomena, not in isolation, but as part of a larger and at least quasicoherent ensemble. Naturally, this problem is greater in the case of the «SP) than in the case of "verse, text, and genre", since we are not concerned with x as the last member in an established sequence but with x or was standing for a new subject, namely SP.
AD HOC PHILOLOGY. The sectional principle can be applied to SP in a very rigorous manner if we study the relevant facts on the level of individual works or limited bodies of literature. The "SP evidence" contained in such a narrow orbit is often very limited, but if the studies which are already available mention in their sup plements or introductions minor observations connected with current research - e.g. observations on grammar or metre -- they might likewise mention minor observations on SP, which they already do in a number of cases. In Jainology as elsewhere we already possess a number of studies which show to a greater or lesser extent the combination just mentioned: HOERNLE Uv (1888: App. III), SCHUBRING AC (1910: 45-63), BLOOMFIELD Pa (1919), ALSDORF Ha (1936), CAILLAT Ca (1971), ar Da (1982). Under the circumstances it is quite sufficient to give more profile to the SP, since the adequate type of treatment already does exist. There is yet another advantage connected with ad hoc philology. Whenever a single work or a small body of literature is somewhat isolated, a concentrated effort may be necessary to make the specific character of the text(s) better known and better understood. This applies to the texts in general, i.e. irrespective of the issue of SP. We mention as examples iconographic texts, Hindu, Buddhist, or Jain (MALLMANN Ag: p.XII), Jaina works on
A METHODOLOGICAL PRINCIPLE ("A MINORE AD MAIUS"). The concept of «SP can also be viewed as the result of a more general methodological principle. In the