|
|
|
|
|
|
|
d. Some Strategies for the Practice of Reading Amalananda and Aquinas Together |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The challenge posed to the reader by the juxtaposition of the texts cannot be reduced even to the more complex acts of recognizing and arranging similarities and differences; the practice is always richer and more potent than these component activities, and it is a mistake to reduce comparative work to them. In the following pages I highlight how one might attentively manage the extended practice of comparing juxtaposed texts, by presenting, in the briefest of sketches, five models for that practice. I sketch two possibilities drawn from the Advaita tradition and three from contemporary theological and literary studies: i. the Advaita practices of "coordination" (upasamhara)
9 and ii. "superimposition" (adhyasa);10 iii. the notion of "a comparative theological conversation;" iv. Philip Wheelwright's understanding of metaphor; v. Jacques Derrida's practice of "collage.'' |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i. Coordination (upasamhara): Rules for Using Texts Together11 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In Chapters 2 and 3 we examined coordination as a practical strategy adopted by the Advaitins to facilitate their judgment as to how texts from different upanisads could, or could not, be used together in meditation. The practice of coordination developed in continuity with other Mimamsa strategies for the adjudication of differences among ritual texts, although the Advaitins had to refine a position of their own on how texts relate to Brahman as their (extra- and posttextual) referent. Coordination enabled the Advaitins to use texts together, taking advantage practically of their common terms, parallel structures and conclusions. They succeeded in meeting this practical need, while moving toward the position that because Brahman is one, some textual material is reusable outside its original context and beyond the usage warranted by the text and its context, and while at the same time continuing to preserve the distinctness of any two texts which were considered together. Texts were used together, not melded into one. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It is possible to think of the use together of Christian and Advaita theological texts as an instance of coordination, aimed |
|
|
|
|
|