________________
Sectional Studies
K. Bruhn
(iv) We use the term "synonymy" (total or partial synonymy) only in its modern sense and with special reference to the field of dogmatics. In BRUHN So and BRUHN Ma (pp.191-92) we have tried to put the study of the prolix kaşaya synonymy and antonymy on a firmer basis. The jiva synonymy has been studied by K. BUTZENBERGER and B. BHATT (BUTZENBERGER Id, p.183, fn.606-08; BHATT Co, pp. 134, 138). BUTZENBERGER has also examined the buddhi synonymy in the Upanisad.s and in the philosophical parts of the Mahabharata (BUTZENBERGER Id, p.94, fn.299). Different from investigations of this type is the study of the different literary forms of synonymy. There are sequences of synonyms in prose texts (SCHUBRING Ch: 69-70) and
e find Niryukti verses consisting only of lists of synonyms (LEUMANN Da: 602 and METTE Oh: 10-19). Metrical compositions using synonymy and antonymy form yet another area of employment, which is related to poetics. What has so far been said in "v" is more or less outside the area of current research. Therefore at the end of "v" we also refer the reader to CAILLAT Vi, a paper which studies synonyms in early canonical texts according to the current form of philological research.
5. Organization of research
As a continuation of the research schemes "-"v" we offer further proposals in the present chapter which are likewise independent from our sectional architecture Subjects from the current canon are now mentioned without restriction so that the sometimes cumbersome distinction between current canons and extended canon can be dispensed with. The general title, organization of research has been chosen with due deliberation, and we use the term strategy" as explained in $2 for the three subjects, namely adaptation, «quantity management, and language.
In the first place, adaptation may be used in the general sense of updating discipline x by the execution of certain essentials which are well-known from other related disciplines but not yet available in discipline x (e.g. dictionaries, grammars, encyclopedia of one type or another). Adaptation thus stands for the elimination of research deficits which are all too obvious. A closely related strategy would be «institutionalizations. All established disciplines are institutionalized, but some more so than others. In this case we are concerned with certain forms of organization (journals, symposia, bibliographies etc.) which are not as developed in minor or "younger" disciplines as elsewhere, Jainology being a case in point. In both cases we are concerned with a combination of true influx and the extension of developments which have already started within a given discipline.
in both cases.
If we compare Sanskrit studies with classical studies (Greek and Latin) we find a general difference, for example, in the standard of the dictionaries. We also notice a conspicuous lack of glossaries for individual works (or authors), as well as a lack of easily accessible computerized versions of Sanskrit works, such as contained in PRP (Vol. 1). Especially as a substitute for glossaries, but for other reasons as well, we need in particular kwic indices (key-word in context indices) of Sanskrit works. Another requisite for the study of Sanskrit is the publication of modern commentaries, which again are highly developed in classical studies, but rare in the case of Sanskrit texts. This lack is especially obvious to teachers of Sanskrit. Time and again teachers have been troubled by difficult words, such as dharmaksetra at the beginning of the Bhaga. vadgită and by difficult topics, such as the lokapalas in the Nalopakhyana. It is not that one is desperate for commentaries which try to solve all philological problems, but rather for those containing, as much as possible, references to literature on the subject. One would prefer that these commentaries also indicate the unsolved problems in the texts, some of which are clearly evident while others are easily overlooked. No doubt, it will never be possible to reach full agreement concerning the distinction between problems which need to be pointed out and those which do not, but this does not mean that such devices are useless. That progress in the interpretation of larger texts has been made in some cases (Princeton translation of the Rāmāyana, and Chicago translation of the Mahābhārata) is obvious, but so far there is no sign of this being a major trend.
From Sanskrit studies we shall turn to Jainology. Many deficits are too obvious to require much comment (Jainology has, for example, no generally accepted system of abbreviations for canonical and exegetical work titles), and many projects (e.g. editions of all the important unedited works) cannot be carried out because the num ber of researchers is too small. It is in this connection important to note that, so far, all the major projects have been executed or started by Indian scholars, e.g. the Jaina. Agama-Series started by MUNI PUNYAVUJAYA (1895-1971) as well as the numerous detailed editions of Prakrit and Sanskrit works published by A.N. UPADHYE (1906-75; - Bk). Under the circumstances, we merely point to two mutually related problems in the field of early Jaina literature. On the one hand, many works have only been studied up to a certain point, and on the other hand, glossaries for the works have not been prepared on a very large scale. Some of the works are massive in their extent and complex in their subject matter, so that they must be studied according to special schemes devised for the individual case. But even medium-sized and fairly "normal" works, such as the Jhätādharmakathanga Sotra, have until now not been analysed from cover to cover (SCHUBRING Le: 6 "Unstern der Nichtvollendung"). Again, glossaries not only serve linguistic purposes (see OBERLIES Av), but they also form a link
The discussion of the actual strategy of adaptation will start with Sanskrit studies and proceed from there to Jainology. The number of suggestions given will be limited
