Gujarati Path Samiksha Pravrutti Gai Kal Ane Aavti Kal

Here is a comprehensive summary of the provided Jain text in English:

Book Title: Gujarati Path Samiksha Pravrutti: Gai Kal ane Aavti Kal (Gujarati Textual Criticism Activity: Yesterday and Tomorrow) Author: Ratilal Borisagar

This document is an insightful analysis of the history and future of textual criticism (path samiksha pravrutti) in Gujarati literature. It highlights the evolution of this crucial scholarly activity, its challenges, and proposes solutions for its revitalization.

The Genesis and Evolution of Gujarati Textual Criticism:

• Early Beginnings (1860s-1870s): The tradition of Gujarati textual criticism began in 1860 with Narmad's editing of Dayaram's poetry collection. Later, in 1871, Navalram scientifically edited "Mameru," laying down fundamental principles.
• Navalram's Critique: Navalram, in the preface to "Mameru," critically examined the state of older Gujarati texts. He lamented that many printed texts were full of errors, with editors either publishing them as they found them (resulting in impure versions) or making arbitrary changes based on their personal judgment. He emphasized the importance of preserving the original form of texts, even if imperfect, so that a true copy of the original manuscript is available to readers. He stated that when editors make their own changes, it becomes impossible to distinguish the original from the editor's additions, eroding trust in the authenticity of the text.
• Dr. Harivallabh Bhayani's Assessment (Nearly a Century Later): Dr. Harivallabh Bhayani echoed similar concerns about the state of Gujarati textual criticism nearly a century after Navalram. He noted that despite hundreds of ancient and medieval Gujarati works being edited, there was a lack of systematic discussion or articulation of the principles and standards of scholarly editing in Gujarati. He pointed out that no book on the science of editing existed in the Gujarati language.
• The Goal of Editing: Bhayani defined the primary aim of textual criticism as reaching the original text of a work based on all available material. This involves eliminating interpolations and changes that have crept in over time, and accurately determining the original form of the words, their arrangement, meter, and overall structure.
• Shortcomings in Practice: Bhayani further elaborated on the persistent weaknesses:
  • Lack of Thoroughness: Editors often did not consult all available manuscripts, especially when a single manuscript seemed sufficient.
  • Incomplete Recording of Variants: Variations in texts were not meticulously recorded.
  • Subjectivity and Personal Preference: Instead of using all available manuscripts (or at least the most important ones) and strictly noting variants, editors often made changes according to personal preference and subjective criteria, leading to texts that were not fully authentic or reliable.
  • Neglect of Scholarly Standards: Crucial aspects like determining the interrelationship between manuscripts, establishing principles for text selection, critically analyzing meter and language to aid in textual decisions, and engaging in systematic discussion of textual variants were often overlooked due to ignorance or perceived lack of necessity.
• The Persistence of the Problem: Borisagar observes that a century later, the core issues identified by Navalram and Bhayani in Gujarati textual criticism remained largely the same, with only minor changes in detail and language.

Acknowledging Progress and Persistent Challenges:

• Pioneers and Scholars: The text acknowledges the foundational work of Narmad and Navalram. It also lists numerous other eminent scholars and editors who contributed significantly to Gujarati textual criticism, including Ichharam Suryaram Desai, Mohanlal Dalichand Desai, K. H. Dhruva, C. D. Dalal, Muni Jinavijayji, K. K. Shastri, Bhogilal Sandesara, Maganbhai Desai, Manjulal Majumdar, Anantrai Raval, K. B. Vyas, Harivallabh Bhayani, Ramanlal Chimanlal Shah, Bhupendra Balakrishna Trivedi, Umashankar Joshi, and Shivlal Jesalpura.
• Quality vs. Quantity: While acknowledging that considerable work has been done in terms of the quantity of edited texts and adherence to standards in some cases, Borisagar states that the qualitative picture of Gujarati textual criticism is largely disappointing.
• Contributing Factors to the Disappointment:
  • Lack of Pride in Heritage: As a society, there has been a lack of sufficient pride and appreciation for the valuable medieval Gujarati literary heritage preserved in manuscripts.
  • Neglect of Manuscripts: Proper care for precious manuscripts has been lacking, particularly for non-Jain literary works, leading to their deplorable state. Some manuscripts have been found in municipal garbage bins or sold by scrap vendors.
  • Need for Institutional Support: Textual criticism is not a task that can be done effectively in isolation. It requires institutional support and adequate funding, which has been a major challenge for institutions involved in editing, especially for non-Jain literature.
  • Lack of Assistance and Modern Tools: Editors have historically lacked the support of assistants. The use of modern tools like computers has not yet been widely adopted, even as the century draws to a close.
  • University Indifference: Except for M.S. University, other universities in Gujarat have not taken the study and practice of textual criticism seriously.

Looking Towards the Future: Recommendations for Revitalization:

Given the somber assessment of the past, the text expresses concern about the future of Gujarati textual criticism. The current generation of experienced scholars is aging, and the younger generation's interest in medieval Gujarati literature and textual criticism appears to be waning. Therefore, concrete steps are urgently needed. Borisagar proposes the following:

1. Establish a Centralized Institution: A central institution is critically needed to coordinate and promote textual criticism activities. This institution should include representatives from institutions and universities involved in this work. Leading scholars in the field should be its honorary members. The state government should provide financial assistance for infrastructure and equipment. The government should fully fund the salaries of permanent staff, provide 50% grant for editing and publication costs, with the remaining expenses met through societal contributions. This institution should undertake the editing of medieval Gujarati texts without any discrimination (Jain or non-Jain).
2. Compile a Comprehensive Catalog of Manuscripts: This central institution should facilitate the creation of a consolidated list of all available Gujarati manuscripts.
3. Provide Systematic Training: The institution should offer systematic training in editing methodologies to bright young faculty and teachers. A training certificate from this institution should be considered an additional qualification for appointment as a teacher of medieval literature.
4. Integrate Medieval Literature Study in Universities: Every university in Gujarat should offer M.Phil. level courses in the study and editing of medieval literature. Similar to postgraduate diploma courses in linguistics, diploma courses in the study and editing of medieval literature should be introduced. Proficiency at the diploma level should be mandatory for teaching at the graduate level, and M.Phil. level for postgraduate teaching.
5. Utilize Computer Technology: Computer technology should be integrated into textual criticism activities, with the central institution providing necessary training. While digitizing all manuscripts might seem unrealistic now, it should be feasible within the first twenty-five years of the 21st century.

The ultimate goal is to unite those concerned with preserving the medieval Gujarati literary heritage and to foster a strong resolve for its future.