________________
Sectional Studies
17
A chronicle of its genesis is no substitute for an adequate description of a methodological scheme, and yet it can help to make such a scheme transparent. The difficulties in describing this scheme have more than one cause. They result, in the first place, from the fact that we use as elements both sections and strategies, rather than having treated the strategies in a more casual manner. Again we have not only introduced in § 4 the concept of minor research schemes (pp.37-41), but we have also included in our paper a separate chapter on «organization of research», see § 5. This latter chapter is, on the one hand, outside the scheme of sectional studies, but, on the other hand, makes use of the concept of strategies. Under the circumstances, the "chronicle" seemed to be the best way of familiarizing the reader with our methodology. However, its vocabulary is not identical with our standard terminology.
We can now start with the discussion of the strategies. In BRUHN Mã: § 11 we published a list of sixteen strategies, but such an enumeration does not measure up to higher methodological standards and is, therefore, not repeated here. However, we cannot do without some sort of inventory, if "strategy" is used as a term for a category of operations. To overcome the dilemma of the strategies, which will be explained presently, we shall treat them as methodological units, but admit, at the same time, that they are little more than convenient vehicles of our exposition.
If the subject of strategies is introduced with a note of caution, it becomes superfluous to discuss the inherent difficulties in great detail. We can refer the reader to the annotated list in BRUHN Mã and to the discussion of «order», «distinction», «adaptation>>, <<quantity management», and «<language> in the present paper. To «distinction>> we could also add «segmentation», «isolation», and «limitation», and likewise, instead of «<language», use the expression «<language and information». We do hope that the individual expositions will help both to clarify and to justify the concept of strategies. Since no attempt will be made to attach special importance to a single strategy. we shall also not try to construe a nucleus of "basic" strategies. Likewise there cannot be any hierarchy amongst the strategies. They are protean in character, they all overlap, and one and the same item can be associated with more than one strategy. There is, for example, no «order» without «distinction»>, and «distinction>> would not be emphasized if we were not also interested in «order». But without the strategies the sections would remain empty, and without the sections the strategies would lack compass. The relation of both sides is not symmetrical in so far as the sections are the products of specific strategies, e.g. «order», «distinction», «segmentation», and <<isola. tion». It is thus possible that one and the same item can be treated not only under the heading of a particular subsection, forming a complete subsection or a part of a subsection, but also under the heading of a particular strategy as its product. The strategies are, after all, largely defined in terms of their products, and, theoretically, these products may form positions in our lists. The problem is eliminated if we treat the
18
K. Bruhn
sections and subsections as independent realities, and not as products of such and such a strategy, and if, furthermore, we describe the strategies, as is natural anyway, with the help of examples which do not form positions in our five lists. A last point to be mentioned is the fact that the strategies may express both ends and means. The strat egy of «completeness», which is not treated explicitly in our paper, is an end - both in individual cases and also if taken in a more general manner. But it is also a means in order to avoid being too one-dimensional in one way or another.
as
In BRUHN Ma: 191 we mentioned that there might be a conflict between sections particularizing or "autonomous" concepts and strategies as generalizing concepts, in so far as the strategies are bound to encroach on the sections and to endanger their autonomy. This is correct as long as we define the strategies in the abstract sense which is suggested by the individual names («order» etc.). But the conflict disappears as soon as we treat the strategies not in an abstract manner, but in close connection with the sections (i.e. FS, S, and SS).
Before describing «order» as a strategy we would like to explain why "order", in a general sense, is of such importance for the study of the Jaina tradition. In the first place, it is necessary to consider the issue of order, both on account of the enor mous extent of the Jaina literature and because of the complexity of the Jaina doctrine (see JRK and JSK in our bibliography). Furthermore, order is a crucial problem here as elsewhere in Indian traditions, because we have no adequate historical matrix based on absolute dates, dynastic patronage, centres, schools, and oeuvres. Such a matrix may be of limited value, since one could ask if it always matters whether a work has been written "in the eleventh or the tenth century", but it is, at least, a first step towards a rational organization of the material. Finally, even the concept of a literary work can only be used with caution. A work which is clearly the product of one single author, whether or not the name is known, need not, for that matter, have any individual stamp, let alone true originality. The remaining works need not even have true boundaries. One work may be as good as two works, and two works may be as good as one work. Jaina literature participated in this Indian departure from the classical type of "work" to a considerable extent, a fact which must be borne in mind in every assessment of the situation in Jainology. Last but not least, we have to stress the diversity of the Jaina tradition. No doubt certain elements of the doctrine where fixed at an early date and then repeated time and again. Furthermore, there are many cases where two (or more than two) works are almost identical in their contents. But this does not affect the basic diversity of Jaina religion and culture which could some time in the future be discussed at a special symposium.
Naturally, we are here not concerned with any forms of order which are already inherent in our five lists. Likewise, we need not mention methods of creating order which do not form integral parts of the sectional scheme, such as «quantity manage
