________________
Sectional Studies
13
The subsectional lists follow in their general structure the sectional lists, but the quality of the subsections is not identical with that of the sections. The diversification is now more subtle, and the lists are, as indicated already, more fluid. Different scholars would set up different lists, and thus there is the likelihood of continuous remodelling. At the same time, we can say that the subsections are more effective and more original than the sections. All sections (FS, S, SS) exercise formal pressures, since they demand completeness in terms of "material" research (study of texts etc.), as well as completeness in terms of "formal" (methodological) research. But it is natural that, in this respect, the main burden is carried by the subsections, which thus become the basic units of research. The subsections are, after all, more specialized than the sections. However, as mentioned already, the systematic specialization cannot be extended beyond the subsections. Subjects within the subsections can be itemized, but such items are not elements of the general scheme. To introduce a new term, we will designate frame subjects and sections as "microcosms" (see below). Subsections are, of course, not "microcosms". However, a subsection is also a well-defined area: a subject sui generis, as well as a category which must be surveyed in its entirety. More pertinent is the aspect character of the subsections. The pluralism of subsections produces a pluralism of aspects, which is not achieved by the sections. Each and every subject is viewed from all conceivable angles. We are thus better guarded against changing attitudes and changing research priorities which are, in the end, symptoms of changes in the Zeitgeist. But, naturally, the concept of subsections, and to a lesser extent even the concept of sections, produces problems of overlapping. If more and more sections are pressed into each frame subject- and more and more subsections into each section-overlapping becomes inevitable. This trend is reinforced by further methodological attempts which are not connected with our lists (§§ 4-5). But the technical disadvantage is, the price to be paid for the more intrinsic advantages of the
scheme.
The implementation of the three subsectional lists will follow in § 3 and on pp.30-37 of § 4. Furthermore, the sections will be considered again in the general description of the scheme on pp.15-18 of § 2. Here, we shall mainly add observations on the Eigencharakter of the sections (i.e. FS and S), as implied already by the use of the term "microcosm".
A description of the sections (FS and S) as microcosms can be drawn up on a formal and on a material, or content-oriented, level. In the first case, the section is simply viewed as the radius of effect of the different methodological procedures. It is also viewed as one out of so many positions in a specific list i.e. as an element in our architecture of sections. In the second case, we change the "point of view" and look at the sections not merely from without, viewing them as constituent elements within our scheme, but primarily from within, in order to get direct access to their
14
K. Bruhn
peculiar character, and only after this from without, because their peculiar character can only be properly assessed if two, or more than two, sections are compared with one another.
In the second case, the main thrust is not on the comparatively small sections, but on the frame subjects. Each frame subject will appear as a world in its own right and as a material, or content-oriented, microcosm. The German language provides a large number of semantically related words which we can add to the term Eigencharakter. We mention here individuelles Gepräge, Lokalkolorit, Atmosphäre, Kulturstil, Ganzheit und Gestalt. Form-oriented terms are relative Abgeschlossenheit und Überschaubarkeit. English equivalents will be found in ROGET's Thesaurus under the catchwords "individuality" and "whole". But we suppose that English authors would rather describe the elements of the Eigencharakter than use a single abstract term.
In certain contexts, the German terminology also provides words denoting a "central idea" (Wesen, Mitte) and it is from this angle that we have to understand E. LEUMANN's description of Jainism: "Jedenfalls hat er [Mahavira] mit souveräner Bestimmtheit die gesamte Wirklichkeit zusammen mit den mönchischen Grundvorstellungen seiner Zeit... begrifflich geordnet zu einem halb-religiösen, halb-philosophischen System, und er hat gewiß nicht bloß... imponiert durch seine asketische Strenge, sondern ebensowohl... eingenommen durch seine umfassenden und geordneten Begriffsreihen." See LEUMANN Bu: 43. At least we can say that LEUMANN viewed Jainism, which he more or less understood as the product of Mahavira's intellectual efforts, as a comparatively coherent whole with a distinctive character.
If we try to give an example of Eigencharakter, we have to choose an appropriate element of the Jaina tradition. Theoretically, the Jainist tendency to value non-activity more than good actions (List Three: 3.11) could be accentuated, but the discussion of this point has only started (BRONKHORST Me: p.26 et passim). Jainism is also not indifferent to goodness. Moreover, non-activity would be a type of concept which can be claimed as central, but which does not affect Jainism in its entirety. Like any religion, Jainism is a cultural phenomenon with many different facets. Therefore we will stress in the present context a different point, namely the interface of narrative literature, a very important element in Jaina tradition, and the dogmatic world-view. Although we use the familiar term "cosmography" for the Jaina description of the world, we must add that the Jaina world is not only the world of cosmography. Within the Jaina world we also have to include chronology (or "ages of the world"), the sixtythree great men, and finally the numerous, active or passive, gods and goddesses which surface during different periods of Jainism. In Jaina stories this superworld appears time and again, and its presence is felt in large sections of the narrative literature, mainly in the "history of the sixty-three great men", now used in the sense of a great literary ensemble (UH). Generally speaking, in narrative literature we can isolate
