Papers by Patrick Olivelle
Die Deutsche Nationalbibliothek verzeichnet diese Publikation in der Deutschen Nationalbibliograf... more Die Deutsche Nationalbibliothek verzeichnet diese Publikation in der Deutschen Nationalbibliografie; detaillierte bibliografische Daten sind im Internet über abrufbar.
Almost all modern theories of justice-from utilitarianism to Rawls' (1999, 2001) 'justice as fair... more Almost all modern theories of justice-from utilitarianism to Rawls' (1999, 2001) 'justice as fairness' 1 -are anchored, first of all, in the principle of social and economic equality and of individual liberty, at least aspirationally. Amartya Sen (1992: 12; see Schmidtz 2006: 110), one of the few scholars to deal with justice in India, claims that 'every normative theory [of justice] or social arrangement that has at all stood the test of time seems to demand equality of something'. This is stated clearly in the first principle of Rawls (1999: 53): 'each person is to have an equal right to the most extensive scheme of equal basic liberties compatible with a similar scheme of liberties for others'. Even though he disagrees with Rawls on some fundamental points, Schmidtz (2006: 107) agrees with this basic requirement of justice of his: 'We are all equal, sort of . . . what we mean by equality is best seen as political rather than metaphysical (or even moral) in nature. We do not expect people to be the same, but we see differences as having no bearing on how people ought to be treated as citizens'. Second, many modern theories of justice assume the role of advocacy. The theories are presented as blueprints for crafting a just-or more just-society. They are more prescriptive than analytical and are meant for contemporary societies. Their object of study is the modern, especially Western, nation states. Amartya Sen (2009: ix) is explicit: What is presented here is a theory of justice in a very broad sense. Its aim is to clarify how we can proceed to address questions of enhancing justice and removing injustice . . . a theory of justice that can serve as the basis
Language, Texts, and Society
In my recent article "Unfaithful Transmitters" (Olivelle 1998) I drew attention to the pervasive ... more In my recent article "Unfaithful Transmitters" (Olivelle 1998) I drew attention to the pervasive mistrust of ancient Indian commentators as reliable guides to understanding ancient Indian texts prevalent among western scholars, a mistrust that spilled over into doubts about the reliability of the textual transmission mediated by these commentators and more broadly into a mistrust of the scribal tradition as such. Drawing on examples of "critical editions" of Upanis . adic texts, especially Böhtlingk's (1889) edition of the Chāndogya Upanis . ad, and the readings preserved by the commentator Śam . kara, I tried to show there that western, primarily European, philologists were often less faithful transmitters of Upanis . adic texts than the Indian scribes and commentators they so often criticized. Native commentators and theologians did not, as often assumed, carelessly or deliberately change the received texts to suit their doctrinal or grammatical tastes. In this paper I return to that theme and this time examine closely the manner in which Haradatta, the commentator of the Āpastamba Dharmasūtra, 1 explained and transmitted that ancient text. Just as it is unfair to indict all western scholars because of the excesses of some, so it is not my intention to present Haradatta as typical of all Indian commentators. If the "Orientalist" debate has taught us anything, it is to treat traditional Indian authors as individuals, to restore "agency" to them. They are not all alike; there are good and not so good commentators. Haradatta is one of the best. Yet, I do not think that he is unique or atypical; he is good, but he also represents well the tradition from which he comes. Haradatta is what we would call today a "close reader" of the text. He does not let even the slightest irregularity, peculiarity, or quirk go unnoticed. He points out the presence or the absence of a visarga or an anusv āra (something even those of us who dabble in collating manuscripts are prone to overlook), the shortening or lengthening of a vowel, whether an "n" is dental or retroflex, whether a letter is "v" or "b" or "p", and so on. In short, he takes the text he received from the
Language, Texts, and Society
Language, Texts, and Society
Conflict, Negotiation, and Coexistence, 2016
Uploads
Papers by Patrick Olivelle