DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.29591#0026
22
Charpentier, Uttaradhyayanasutra
and upholders of other doctrines. But it is only the punas 3 —
10, consequently eight out of fourteen, that are called pravada's,
and, as far as I know, there is nothing, except the statements re-
garding the AjIvika’s (and Terasiya’s) quoted above, that could
imply the conclusion that they merely consisted of discussions.
Moreover, there are in the Buddhist scriptures quite a number of
passages where Buddha refutes the doctrines of his opponents, and
these must equally have been uninteresting to his followers later,
and certainly to a greater degree, for the Buddhist doctrine has
undergone alterations and innovations much more important than
has that of the Jains, and still these scriptures are preserved intact.
Now I think that the Hindus have always taken great delight
in these pravada's and in the quotations of different doctrines and
opinions, which is clearly, proved by their philosophical sutra's
and commentaries, and in more remote times by the Brahmana’s
and Upanisad’s h And I do not quite realize why the Jains should
have differed so widely from the common standard of the Hindus
on this point.
Finally Leumann, Actes du VIe Congres des Orient. Ill: 2,
558 ff., propounds a totally different view as regards the loss of the
drstivcida. Starting from undeniable coincidences between a tantric
text and the table of contents drawn up for the drstivcida in ahga
4 and the Nandi, he concludes that this book must have con-
tained a great number of texts concerning tantric rites, sorcery,
astrology &c., and that this would be the real reason for its be-
coming obsolete. But even if it is admitted that the drstivcida really
contained in its first part some sort of tantric text, the same does
not hold good as regards the puna's; for these constituted the third
part of it, or, more correctly speaking, originally the last, as the
afiga’s are many times referred to as ending with the (loga)bindu-
sdra, the 14th purva. And the puna's could not certainly be
considered as containing tantrci, although sorcery and magic rites
have always been popular with the Jains. Consequently Leumann's
explanation is to me by no means convincing.
All these explanations seem to me to have one fault in common,
viz. that of suggesting that the drstivccda (or the puna's, which is
1 Works like the Kautiliya also contain a great number of quota-
tions and refutations of different opinions, cp. Jacobi SBPrAW. 19x1,
p. 958 ff.
Charpentier, Uttaradhyayanasutra
and upholders of other doctrines. But it is only the punas 3 —
10, consequently eight out of fourteen, that are called pravada's,
and, as far as I know, there is nothing, except the statements re-
garding the AjIvika’s (and Terasiya’s) quoted above, that could
imply the conclusion that they merely consisted of discussions.
Moreover, there are in the Buddhist scriptures quite a number of
passages where Buddha refutes the doctrines of his opponents, and
these must equally have been uninteresting to his followers later,
and certainly to a greater degree, for the Buddhist doctrine has
undergone alterations and innovations much more important than
has that of the Jains, and still these scriptures are preserved intact.
Now I think that the Hindus have always taken great delight
in these pravada's and in the quotations of different doctrines and
opinions, which is clearly, proved by their philosophical sutra's
and commentaries, and in more remote times by the Brahmana’s
and Upanisad’s h And I do not quite realize why the Jains should
have differed so widely from the common standard of the Hindus
on this point.
Finally Leumann, Actes du VIe Congres des Orient. Ill: 2,
558 ff., propounds a totally different view as regards the loss of the
drstivcida. Starting from undeniable coincidences between a tantric
text and the table of contents drawn up for the drstivcida in ahga
4 and the Nandi, he concludes that this book must have con-
tained a great number of texts concerning tantric rites, sorcery,
astrology &c., and that this would be the real reason for its be-
coming obsolete. But even if it is admitted that the drstivcida really
contained in its first part some sort of tantric text, the same does
not hold good as regards the puna's; for these constituted the third
part of it, or, more correctly speaking, originally the last, as the
afiga’s are many times referred to as ending with the (loga)bindu-
sdra, the 14th purva. And the puna's could not certainly be
considered as containing tantrci, although sorcery and magic rites
have always been popular with the Jains. Consequently Leumann's
explanation is to me by no means convincing.
All these explanations seem to me to have one fault in common,
viz. that of suggesting that the drstivccda (or the puna's, which is
1 Works like the Kautiliya also contain a great number of quota-
tions and refutations of different opinions, cp. Jacobi SBPrAW. 19x1,
p. 958 ff.