Jaina studies in Europe
By Colette Caillat
Summary
Colette Caillat’s paper traces the development of Jaina studies in Europe from the nineteenth century to the present. The author begins with Ernst Leumann’s observation that the history of any science is influenced by where its source material is collected and notes that the early history of Jaina scholarship in Europe was shaped by the collection of manuscripts by Bühler, Jacobi and Weber for institutions such as the Berlin National Library and the University of Strasbourg. Because these collections consisted largely of philological works preserved in Prakrit and Sanskrit, early European research on Jainism focused almost exclusively on canonical, pro‑canonical and post‑canonical texts. Scholars studied doctrinal treatises, commentaries and grammatical literature in order to edit, translate and compare texts. For much of the twentieth century this philological orientation defined Jaina studies in Europe. Caillat describes how this situation changed in the 1970s. As migration brought Jaina communities to Britain and later North America, sociologists and anthropologists became interested in Jainism as a living tradition. Studies on contemporary Jain ritual, community organisation and diaspora identity began to complement textual research. At the same time, some European scholars trained in classical Indology broadened their scope to include art history, epigraphy and archaeology. Important works surveyed by Caillat include detailed catalogues of Jaina manuscripts in European libraries and editions of neglected texts such as the Niryukti commentaries. She also reviews bibliographies of modern studies, highlighting contributions of Klaus Bruhn, Paul Dundas and others, and discusses the role of Jainology journals and conference volumes in disseminating new research. The article concludes that Jaina studies in Europe have evolved from a narrowly philological enterprise into an interdisciplinary field that balances close textual analysis with fieldwork and material culture. Caillat emphasises that the availability of manuscripts in European libraries continues to be an invaluable resource, but suggests that future research must engage more directly with Jainism as a dynamic religious tradition practiced by diverse communities. She calls for collaboration between Indologists, linguists, historians and social scientists to explore topics such as Jain diaspora networks, the transmission of texts, and the relationship between doctrine and practice. In doing so, the paper sets an agenda for the next generation of European Jainological scholarship.
Conclusion
By charting a century of European Jainological scholarship, Caillat shows how the availability of manuscripts shaped an initial philological focus and how later social scientific approaches broadened the field. She suggests that the strengths of the European tradition—rigorous textual criticism and access to rare manuscripts—should be integrated with ethnographic and historical studies to produce a more holistic understanding of Jainism. The paper thus encourages scholars to move beyond disciplinary boundaries and to study Jainism both as an ancient textual tradition and as a living community practice.