Sectional Studies In Jainology II

Author(s): Klaus Bruhn
Publisher: Klaus Bruhn

Page 19

Sectional Studies
K. Bruhn
cultures (e.g. two different literatures) and the difference must be seen from this broader view-point. What we want to emphasize in connection with the second topic is the fact that in many cases better information is possible without additional research. In other words this suggests the idea of a brochure or a series of articles giving pointed information on selected areas and serving as an introduction" to Jainism. But it goes without saying that such a scheme can only be successful if it also includes areas where research is less advanced. This brochure would, nevertheless, differ from a handbook in so far as handbooks are by necessity encyclopedic and cannot serve the same purpose as an "introduction as we understand it.
For our last strategy we use tentatively the term «anguages. Basically, «language can be understood, especially at first association, in the sense of "style". Different scholars use different styles, and these differences reflect their temperament, their partiality for certain theories, and, to some extent, also the spirit of the time. However, the number of Jainologists, more particularly of western Jainologists, has always been small, and there have never been major controversies in the discipline. As a consequence, we use the term wlanguage rarely in the sense of "style", but rather in the sense of a specific form of information". With this proviso we shall discuss below five different topics, the first three of which will be closely related to each other.
The first topic is the treatment of unsolved problems: How many canonical texts were lost, what happened at the council of Valabhi, what is a Niryukti, who was Bhadrabāhu? In this connection, we can ignore the different character of the individual cases, but it is important to consider the problem area in its entirety. The four examples mentioned are mainly taken from canonical and post-canonical Svetämbara literature, and they were chosen in order to describe a particular situation, which is that we have to choose between greater and lesser reliance on ancient tradition. This is sometimes simply a question of trust and distrust; for example, shall we take the lists of lost canonical works at their face-value or not? In other cases, the alternativ presents itself in a more subtle form: Le. shall we consider all works traditionally designated as "Niryukti.s" or "Bhāşya.s" as belonging to two related, but mutually distinct literary categories, or shall we discuss the position of these works without regard for the two traditional labels? It would be easy to prepare further lists of questions for other areas, for example for monastic discipline and for the doctrine of karma. This situation forces us to develop an idiom which spotlights rather than camouflages the problems.
Different from the problem of unknown facts is the problem of facts which are well-known, but which cannot be explained in a few words (topic two). It is convenient to speak of the 45 works of the Svetāmbara canon. But we know that the figure "45" is ephemeral and that some "canonical works" (mainly the Bhagavati Sätra) are of a higher order than ordinary works, while others (e.g. - the Kalpāvatamsika Satra) are eccentric compositions of minimal extent, which testify to the close connection between fiction and dogmatics, but do not deserve the designation "work". Another example of our second topic is the universal history, which is certainly not a "history of sixty-three great men" in the usual understanding of such an expression, but an irregular and, in certain respects, very unusual ensemble. The difference between Digambara.s and Svetāmbara.s can serve as a third example. Normally, the difference
ained in terms of dogmatics (no "salvation of women according to the Digambara doctrine) and monastic rule (the Digambara monks are always naked). But actually Svetambara Jainas and Digambara Jainas have developed different religious
PROBLEMS AND SOLUTIONS. A point which seems to deserve special attention is the fact that in Jainology there are many particulars which are midway between the known and the unknown and where a comparatively small, but concentrated, effort is sufficient to settle an issue, once for all (topic three). We have decided to point out such cases, a procedure which may appear uncommon, but which is in agreement with the typological bias of our enquiry. We also feel that attempts of this type were made, on more than one occasion, by L ALSDORF and that they even form a major facet of his scholarly work. He was, for example, the first scholar to say what a niksepa actually was and in his niksepa article one can clearly see how he virtually "jumped" at the opportunity to point this phenomenon out (ALSDORF NI). Another such case is the demonstration by J. BRONKHORST (Ta: 163-71) that Tattvartha Sūtra and Tattvärtha Bhasya were not written by the same author. A third example is the discussion of the nigoda.s in the O'FLAHERTY volume (JAINI Ka: 223 ff.). The relationship between such discoveries and the language» issue is closer than may appear at first sight. On the one hand, unsolved but solvable issues of this type are inconvenient in the description and discussion of Jainism; on the other hand, the way in which such still open questions are handled can create the impression - which is actually false
that they are either, more or less, answered or can be ignored.
The language of translations (topic four) has only recently become a subject of scholarly discussions in Indology (GOLDMAN BA: 96-117). This problem is to some extent a problem of the linguistic "purity of the translations. In other words, should we translate each and every Sanskrit and Prakrit word or should we leave a good number of words untranslated? In the latter case we must explain all the Sanskrit and Prakrit words which are used in our translation. A translation which replaces all words of the original text by a modern word is today probably an anachronism. One article by L. ALSDORF (ALSDORF It) contains no explicit discussion of the language problem, but rather solves it in a very natural manner. It goes without saying that this article is, above all, an excellent demonstration of how to handle a difficult Prakrit text.