Proposals for the Study of Quotations in Indian Philosophical Texts
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1558/rosa.v6i2.161Keywords:
authoriality, Mīmāṃsā, originality, quotations, śāstraAbstract
The study of quotations is a largely unexplored field within Indian sastric literature. Yet, this study may have major implications for the critical constitution of a text, the evaluation of its role within the historical development of the ideas it represents and the understanding of Indian compositional habits. Moreover, it may call into question Western contemporary attitudes to texts as authored entities by showing how heavily this view depends on specific historical circumstances and has, hence, not always and everywhere been the rule. This article examines these issues in comparative context before focusing on a case study from the Tantrarahasya of the post thirteenth-century Prabhakara Mimamsaka, Ramanujacarya. In this article, I study all sorts of embedded texts, even if not acknowledged to be quotations as such. Hence, the study of quotations coincides with the study of how Indian authors composed their texts re-using previous texts as building blocks. I argue that quotations may also be a useful device for understanding an author’s compositional habits and his/her ‘originality’. This concept is in bad need of a definition applicable in Indian contexts. In fact, Indian classical authors may be judged rather flawed in terms of modern views of plagiarism and are all by and large non-original. Contemporary scholars often look in vain for monographs within Indian sastra literature and find only commentaries and commentaries on commentaries. But, looking at the way texts are built through quotations and use quotations as springboards, one eventually understands that an Indian author’s skill (and hence originality) can be recognized indeed in his/her apt arrangement of earlier texts.
References
Sanskrit Texts
Jaimini, Mimamsasutra. Kashinath V. Abhyankar, Ganesasastri A. Josi (eds), Srimajjaiminipranite Mimamsadarsane: Mimamsakakanthiravakumarilabhatta-pranitatantravartikasahitasabarabhasyopetah. Anandasramasamskrtagranthavalih, 97. Punya: Anandasrama. 1970.
Kumarila Bhatta, Slokavarttika. S. K. Ramanatha Sastri (ed.), K. Kunjunni Raja and R. Thangaswamy (revs.). Slokavartikavyakhya-tatparyatika Umvekabhattaviracita. Madras University Sanskrit series, no. 13. Madras: Univ. of Madras Department of Sanskrit. 1971.
Kumarila Bhatta, Tantravarttika. For an older edition, see under Jaimini above. For a more recent critical edition, see Kataoka 2004 below.
Mandana Misra. Vidhiviveka. Rama Sastri Tailanga (ed.). Vidhiviveka and Vacaspati Misra’s commentary [Nyayakanika]. Benares: Pandit New Series. 1907.
Panini. Astadhyayi. Srisa C. Vasu (ed.), The Ashtadhyayi of Panini. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass. 1977.
Parthasarathi Misra. Nyayaratnamala. A. Subrahmanya Sastri (ed.), Nyayaratnamala with the Commentary Nayakaratnam by Sri Ramanujacarya. Varanasi: Banaras Hindu University. 1982.
Ramanujacarya. Tantrarahasya. K. S. Ramaswami Sastri Siromani (ed.), Tantrarahasya. Gaekwad’s Oriental Series, 24. Baroda: Oriental Institute. 1956. For a more recent critical edition, see Freschi 2012 below.
Sabara Svamin. Sabarabhasya. For an older edition, see under Jaimini above. For a more recent critical edition, see Kataoka 2004 below.
Salikanatha Misra. Prakarana Pañcika. A Subrahmanya Sastri (ed.), Prakarana Pañcika of Sri Salikanatha Misra: With Nyaya-Siddhi. Benares: Banaras Hindu University. 1961.
Other Sources
Burrow, John Anthony. 1982. Medieval Writers and their Work: Middle English Literature 1100–1500. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Freschi, Elisa. 2008. ‘How Do Exhortative Expressions Work? Bhavana and vidhi in Ramanujacarya and Other Mimamsa Authors.’ Rivista di Studi Orientali 81: 149–85.
Freschi, Elisa. 2012. Duty, Language and Exegesis in Prabhakara Mimamsa: Including an Edition and Translation of Ramanujacarya's ‘Tantrarahasya’, ‘Sastraprameyapariccheda’. Jerusalem Studies in Religion and Culture, 17. Leiden: Brill.
Freschi, Elisa, and Tiziana Pontillo. 2012. ‘When One Thing Applies More Than Once: tantra and prasanga in Srautasutra, Mimamsa and Grammar.’ In Maria Piera Candotti and Tiziana Pontillo (eds), Signless Signification in Ancient India and Beyond: 33–98. London: Anthem Press.
Garge, Damodar Vishnu. 1952. Citations in Sabara-Bhasya (A Study). Poona: Deccan College.
Kataoka, Kei. 2004. The Theory of Ritual Action in Mimamsa: Critical Edition and Annotated Japanese Translation of Sabarabhasya and Tantravarttika ad 2.1.1-4. Tokyo: Sankibo Press.
Kellner, Birgit. 2007. Jñanasrimitra’s Anupalabdhirahasya and Sarvasabdabhavacarca: A Critical Edition with a Survey of his Anupalabdhi-Theory. Wien: Arbeitskreis für Tibetische und Buddhistische Studien, Universität Wien.
LaFollette, Marcel C. 1992. Stealing into Print. Fraud, Plagiarism, and Misconduct in Scientific Publishing. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.
Lasic, Horst (ed.). 2000. Jñanasrimitras Vyapticarca: Sanskrittext, Übersetzung, Analyse. Wien: Arbeitskreis für Tibet. u. Buddhist. Studien, Univ. Wien.
McCrea, Lawrence. 2002. ‘Novelty of Form and Novelty of Substance in Seventeenth Century Mimamsa.’ Journal of Indian Philosophy 30: 481–94. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1022819303379
—2008. ‘Playing with the System: Fragmentation and Individualization in Late Pre-colonial Mimamsa.’ Journal of Indian Philosophy 36: 575–85. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10781-008-9043-y
Mesquita, Roque. 1997. Madhva und seine unbekannten literarischen Quellen: einige Beobachtungen. De Nobili Research Library, 24. Wien: Sammlung De Nobili..
—2000. Madhva’s Unknown Literary Sources: Some Observations. Delhi: Aditya Prakashan.
—2007. Madhvas Zitate aus den Puranas und dem Mahabharata: eine analytische Zusammenstellung nicht identifizierbarer Quellenzitate in Madhvas Werken nebst Übersetzung und Anmerkungen. De Nobili Research Library, 34. Wien: Sammlung De Nobili.
—2008. Madhva’s Quotes from the Puranas and the Mahabharata: An Analytical Compilation of Untraceable Source-Quotations in Madhva’s Works Along with Footnotes. Delhi: Aditya Prakashan.
Mülke, Markus. 2008. Der Autor und sein Text: die Verfälschung des Originals im Urteil antiker Autoren. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/9783110210439
Nikolsky, Ronit. 2010. ‘Ishmael Sacrifices Grasshoppers.’ In Martin Goodman, George H. van Kooten and Jacques T. A. G. M. van Ruiten (eds), Abraham, the Nations, and the Hagarites: Jewish, Christian, and Islamic Perspective on Kinship with Abraham: 243–62. Leiden and Boston: Brill.
Prasad, Leela. 2007. Poetics of Conduct: Oral Narrative and Moral Being in a South Indian Town. New York: Columbia University Press.
Preisendanz, Karin. 2005. ‘The Production of Philosophical Literature in South Asia during the Pre-Colonial Period (15th to 18th Centuries): The Case of the Nyayasutra Commentarial Tradition.’ Journal of Indian Philosophy 33: 55–94. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10781-004-9055-1
—2008. ‘Text, Commentary, Annotation: Some Reflections on the Philosophical Genre.’ Journal of Indian Philosophy 36: 599–618. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10781-008-9036-x
Rastelli, Marion. 2006. Die Tradition des Pañcaratra im Spiegel der Paramesvarasamhita. Wien: Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften.
Schulze, Christian. 2004. ‘Das Phänomen der “Nichtkommentierung” bedeutender Werke.’ In Wilhelm Geerlings and Christian Schulze (eds), Der Kommentar in Antike und Mittelalter Bd.2 Neue Beiträge zu seiner Erforschung: 21–34. Leiden: E. J. Brill.
Steinkellner, Ernst. 1988. ‘Methodological Remarks on the Constitution of Sanskrit Texts from the Buddhist Pramana-Tradition.’ Wiener Zeitschrift für die Kunde Südasiens 32: 103–129.
Tieken-Boon van Ostade, Ingrid. 1996. ‘Lindley Murray and the Concept of Plagiarism.’ In Ingrid Tieken–Boon van Ostade (ed.), Two Hundred Years of Lindley Murray: 81–96. Münster: Nodus Publikationen.
Trikha, Himal. 2012. Perspektivismus und Kritik. Der epistemische Pluralismus der Jainas angesichts der Polemik gegen das Vaisesika in Vidyanandins Satyasasanapariksa. De Nobili Research Library, 36. Wien: Sammlung De Nobili.