CounterText ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 30-56 ◽  
Author(s):  
Simona Sawhney

Engaging some of the questions opened by Ranjan Ghosh's and J. Hillis Miller's book Thinking Literature Across Continents (2016), this essay begins by returning to Aijaz Ahmad's earlier invocation of World Literature as a project that, like the proletariat itself, must stand in an antithetical relation to the capitalism that produced it. It asks: is there an essential link between a certain idea of literature and a figure of the world? If we try to broach this link through Derrida's enigmatic and repeated reflections on the secret – a secret ‘shared’ by both literature and democracy – how would we grasp Derrida's insistence on the ‘Latinity’ of literature? The groundlessness of reading that we confront most vividly in our encounter with fictional texts is both intensified, and in a way, clarified, by new readings and questions posed by the emergence of new reading publics. The essay contends that rather than being taught as representatives of national literatures, literary texts in ‘World Literature’ courses should be read as sites where serious historical and political debates are staged – debates which, while being local, are the bearers of universal significance. Such readings can only take place if World Literature strengthens its connections with the disciplines Miller calls, in the book, Social Studies. Paying particular attention to the Hindi writer Premchand's last story ‘Kafan’, and a brief section from the Sanskrit text the Natyashastra, it argues that struggles over representation, over the staging of minoritised figures, are integral to fiction and precede the thinking of modern democracy.


2009 ◽  
pp. 541-563
Author(s):  
Clelia Bartoli

- This paper will deal with the issue of human rights and multiculturalism away from cultural relativism and universalism while taking inspiration from Nietzsche's Moral Genealogy. In particular, the concepts of karma, dharma and trivarga (an indian traditional form of particularism in the law) will be explained as they are expressed in the Bhagavad Gita, one of the most important texts of Indian philosophical literature. From this analysis it will emerge the impossibility of deducing the idea of human rights from the Sanskrit text. Not because the Bhagavad Gita adopts a communitarian conception of the self but because it entails a very complex and interesting idea of freedom which is little compatible with contemporary human rights discourse. Then, it will be quoted a criticism against the Bhagavad Gita based on the historical genealogy of cultural values, as it was formulated by B.R. Ambedkar - Chairman of the Drafting Committee of Indian Constitution. Finally, this writing will highlight some of the misunderstandings revolving around human rights and multiculturalism. This will be done while suggesting a genealogical approach where different intellectual and law traditions challenge and implement each other, rather than being locked in a sterile mutual respect.


1882 ◽  
Vol 14 (4) ◽  
pp. 733-772
Author(s):  
Monier Williams
Keyword(s):  

[The text of the Śikshā-patrī of the modern Vaishṇava Sect, called Svāmi-Nārāyaṇa, was lithographed in Samvat 1928 (A.D. 1872) by order of the Heads of the Sect. It has a Gujarātī Commentary by Nityānanda-muni. So far as I know, this is the only version of the text that has yet appeared. It was given to me by the Wartāl Māharāja on the occasion of my first visit to Wartāl in 1875. It is full of mistakes, and in preparing the following edition of the text I have taken as my guide the far more accurate manuscript and Sanskṛit commentary written by Paṇḍit Śatānanda-muni, and given to me by the Mahārāja on the same occasion.]


Author(s):  
Christopher T. Fleming

An account of theories of ownership (svatva) and inheritance (dāya) in Sanskrit jurisprudential literature (Dharmaśāstra). This book examines the evolution of different?juridical models of inheritance—in which families held property in trusts or in tenancies-in-common—against the backdrop of related developments in the philosophical understanding of ownership in the Sanskrit text-traditions of hermeneutics (Mīmāṃsā) and logic (Nyāya) respectively. Ownership and Inheritance reconstructs medieval Sanskrit theories of property and traces the emergence of various competing schools of Sanskrit jurisprudence during the early modern period (roughly fifteenth to nineteenth centuries) in Bihar, Bengal, and Varanasi. The book attends to the ways in which ideas from these schools of jurisprudence shaped the codification of Anglo-Hindu personal law by administrators of the British East India Company during the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries. While acknowledging the limitations of colonial conceptions of Dharmaśāstra as positive law, Ownership and Inheritance argues for far greater continuity between pre-colonial and colonial Sanskrit jurisprudence than accepted previously. Finally, this monograph charts the transformation of the Hindu law of inheritance—through precedent and statute—over the late nineteenth, twentieth, and early twenty-first centuries.


Religions ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 10 (6) ◽  
pp. 363
Author(s):  
Daniel M. Stuart

In an early discourse from the Saṃyuttanikāya, the Buddha states: “I do not see any other order of living beings so diversified as those in the animal realm. Even those beings in the animal realm have been diversified by the mind, yet the mind is even more diverse than those beings in the animal realm.” This paper explores how this key early Buddhist idea gets elaborated in various layers of Buddhist discourse during a millennium of historical development. I focus in particular on a middle period Buddhist sūtra, the Saddharmasmṛtyupasthānasūtra, which serves as a bridge between early Buddhist theories of mind and karma, and later more developed theories. This third-century South Asian Buddhist Sanskrit text on meditation practice, karma theory, and cosmology psychologizes animal behavior and places it on a spectrum with the behavior of humans and divine beings. It allows for an exploration of the conceptual interstices of Buddhist philosophy of mind and contemporary theories of embodied cognition. Exploring animal embodiments—and their karmic limitations—becomes a means to exploring all beings, an exploration that can’t be separated from the human mind among beings.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document