|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
which never refers to Sankara's upanisadic commentaries to explain his UMS Bhasya. I have also not engaged in a search for the "Sankara of history," for what we might know about his life and times, etc. If we do become interested in the search for the historical Sankara, and even if we take up the project as a legitimate corrective to our ignorance in various areas, we must at least admit that however we conceive our project we are using the Text differently than did its commentators; and we must still read the Text on its own terms. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
47. Barthes suggests that "the Text must not be thought of as a defined object . . . [rather, it] is a methodological field . . . the Text reveals itself, articulates itself according to or against certain rules . . . the Text is experienced only in an activity, a production." (1979, pp. 74-75). It is not there merely to be consumed. By contrast, the "work" is ''concrete, occupying a portion of bookspace . . . While the work is held in the hand, the Text is held in language: it exists only as discourse." (1979, pp. 75-76) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
48. My comments on the transformation of the reader complement and situate textually the fine philosophical study of Sankara in this regard undertaken by Taber (1983). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Chapter 2.
The Texture Of The Advaita Vedanta Text |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1. Throughout, I refer to Advaitins as "readers," though early on "hearers" is of course the accurate term. Though there are striking differences to be expected in the responses of hearers and readers, the latter is the primary focus of this study. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2. Iser's emphasis (1978, p. 86) on the role of textual "strategies" is a useful starting point. A text is comprised in part of materials "selected from social systems and literary traditions." These make up its repertoire,and the reader actively engages this material in order to construct the meaning of the text. The strategies function "to organize this actualization . . . [they] organize both the material of the text and the conditions under which that material is to be communicated." The meaning of the text cannot be abstracted from these strategies, whose organizational importance "becomes all too evident the moment they are dispensed with. This happens, for instance, when plays or novels are summarized, or poems paraphrased. The text is practically disembodied, being reduced to content at the expense of effect. The strategies of the text are replaced by a personal organization, and more often than not we are left with a peculiar 'story' that is purely denotative, in no way connotative, and therefore totally without impact." At the heart of the problem is the |
|
|
|
|
|