*X .

5
7y
kT/
z
t
p
l
xz
7
-
'k$
i
'
x'
ày
xA
,
1jjl
p'11
4*411 1
fëq
t
?
am-''
.-.
u
A
1jll'F@MA
III SSa S

)
:
3
a
* , . , fro a
,:1
7j
.
y
;k
!k i
j
ï
a
.7
1
N
ï
'
1
' j
i
2
.
>
/
9
'r
'
y
ë:
j
i
?u
r
.#!;,.....
.
,j
:';
mh,
t-
i' -.-.r
x.t -'àk.
-l
l
z
;
i
'
.
'kN'
.
l
.N.
t
)
,!?
*
k
u
!
.)$s%
.x.6e...s.
-.zm
.
.
'
B
'
...
.
.
)
' '
'
,
,
aC
é
t
'
$
'
,
..,.-'
).
a?-
.v
...
,-
.,.-,
<.
..
...
.
.
'.
-'.
..
.. .
.
'
k
;
-.
:
.
.........,
'..
$:
. '
,.'.f!
.. ' . ...
...- ...
. .., .-.
... . .... jj 4
1
(4
2
1
)
4 :l
j
q
l
k-
ll
r
!'
:
lj
ll d
-ll
:
r
(
1l
p
1
k
-!
1
I
;7
r
-
4II
i
!
2
!
'trJ'
#Q'
M )7h -4 L.V
V1M' %. *'w'
7 s,X '''
w..'
'''
.''
v .'-
w.''' *

:qj
;j
'
;
7
j
,
î
lE,
d
ipr
7
' ' f '
1
(
6
@
.
:
,
7
f
' kj
p.r
.
'
jj. i
'
;
j
:
,.
! s'
f-
:
f
.-..,
.-y
b ;.
. iî:y...k...,,,-y1,!.,.-.k,,
.
jjg
. .kj
.;
..
i. 4,j,,
. ,.,y..
. ,- . '. .
,. ,. ;
... ,
, .......
:,k. ... ,ù-...
! .(
, . ,. .:., ..
.... -..

* 1k,1i1. .
* .t *
.r-.
:?i,,,
..
.V
;.b!
-
l
4
4t
$
,1
l
.
7
i
t?
--t;7i
'
.
''
j' A
-
., '7;ï
(;
. ..
' /'
.,-z.
j ,'..'.
A*
Kwlq !
y
/
.
-
)
;d
!
J
.
t
p,
.
n
.'
.k
sJ
.
s
,: <4k: &:ks''x'al.X
.
...
,' :
w vj- '-.'uk
'.,
'.
: ..
m,..
.. .
-
.
'...'
Fo:
,;
.
.
k
..
-
p:
.
,
,s
, :
.ç
',
;
,..,
.
.' ..,..s
.. .t
.. .
,..a. , .
.
k
. ...g. '
a
R r V Ja. .2.L..'
M. z 'â . '4
'. ''J . .....,
..
h' r.
W
.
à>kx
'èz1741
;%'.w @
$ ;.
'
km'
.
''''
) .w.
1.
)'j
'7
.8'%
.
;'x.
' '
.
)'*
. .'''..'z,
'
@ ..jx.jovkq;
' jjjp 'k'
9
k<
,f&)
,a
p
.1
'
.
9
,..; .c...
! '..'
.
...
,
,.
l
.. jjjjj ...,.,,.
g
* @ .

j
)
jr
.A .,
h wze'''
.,
'''
v:t
t
.w)
N
C
y
r
w''
.
.'
,
i
.')
,
:
!
k
:Fjl
x
rjj
j
./t
,v
.
''e?q
... ,
>,
.
s
.-
'
/
'
.
-(
.. ..'.
r
,.
'
.
.
.
a
,
''
>
t
g l
,k...
(.s
..
t . .
'
.p'
. '.
. ,
,. .
O :il:slljùqlp!
rh
' zz
r...
.-
'*> .z(' ft-e'''
- '' ' '; '''- '' œ
wh .
s e <x:t.*rSMe * >':>
1%b1ANL>x:7*. %.''='e .'..'?hq'i>..''.'.' .''.'
j.,''t
1 .y..
< ;'
:?'
,4
f.
-'
.ïr
ï.1.
lfy...
,J
(h.,'s
.'h''b--' 4.f
i'.
f;'.
? .''-..-ô'pB.'.-''.'L.'..'
y#) 111,j t
'
y1 11
,
. !
j
/
'
-, t, x.-.
,..$ ,.,
.. -., s- .. @
.
..; . .- .. ,.

@ . * *
?Aty4'':, .-
.z,hz,;) #''97.s.'A'q..-.'.
' r:'r
..: .. .

xilx
ta'
f
p.
'
E
dv
A
;y
i
Ll'
l
.
$a
'
8s
k
i
l
'
$ f'
... , .?
..
wà
ht
'jA .'
' L
'.
jjtjtlh,g.'.':.
.'
z
'
.t-;f.
.i
' x
,
.
r
s....x
a.
i
.à
sh'
x
sg?L.;
' '
.
,
.
-
$
?'
t,
..
J
x,L.a.a6.>
'-< .
.'
s'&!
x
.l
,
r''.
..h
=..
p. .-'.
.
'''
.*
.-
:
.
- '
'..
.
.z
z- A:S* ïp o,. .-
.
. : !p
2Et
.%b.. Ntil.
t.)js,
lijis' q.('
..
:',
-.&y,.z,v)...A.,x
.p.../i.;ka;t.
.j-.,
v
.
....o..,.....
. sh
zç,.sjrft,
.. çk'('2..:.:./k'.;.?.,' .
. '

#
@ & L
;
3q
6'
i
k
j
ï
'$
,
./
4
.
!
1
$
-
.
,8
t
1
4
$ d
ll
, .
i
t
'r;
.aL -'.. .. '..
. ,.. ...
.,
. 111,1
4 '..'..,.
. .
.

@ *
k 1 #gJ 6'*1& %k
.j
t
.i'
.'. . '
(
)
k
,
)
:;j
,!
.,i
j
.
i
?' .
t.
j
r
d
hi
,
.
k
h,
&ù
.
y',
jy
;
:
,
.
* v.. ='
;'
pr.
ak
.j . '?
'J
.. .,. s.ag..,..:,
......,, , .
:t
v';
-
k q4xm
w'
e$> .f..'..
kX6
'.. v' l .
frr vw...,lsyet. cf'.,.e.......-x.u n.0..' ''=....-b....'.. ::
.. qqtl.
1i4!.4jj;4> mkprrns'
r.
r
fr.
.-.
,A;1'r? ' .
*/
.rz k5'.:hi1
j jk
'l
jkhT
'6tk
% -î...w'''
. > 'JC).'..,.. -.
'..
'o'J'yZ.r.
î..8>-'
5
k. .c
.<.
..''1,
<
e... x .' '
.
'
.
dlp y
%f.
'
/z
e
;
'.v
?
,
w
>
/
1
'
.
>'
J
.
A z
!x>.
1
J
lj
z e
.
'k
m
517
.
'f @ h 'J
,s
z' c.,
.
?$:
.>l
:(t
.*.w
-.
b'
' '.
-'..y'.
;
y

* ' '., @ w%, .o.6. . '%.'.,

'f
.. . It
.s .
%L
51.'rr
!k')'
.@'y64 : . .x
.. v vfF éA,<x
,ku&,.i )r. f$ ;. s.s;' .!
t 4 ..J#* '5' .
''I
1
ç
. C br 17,
J ''' ''. ''I
.t. ?.1q iw.M.k
rg. at
.
'
-'
.s
..
u ; a .. R
4
.''' ,.''..w ('*'
.za
' J ..
r'*,O''
e'''''t'
' 2'
'
.'''s
- . ... '
QIïI!
.I
wv4jg
-rs
$r
/F'Cr.$j'r4
;r
,r
hXer
.G
w.:
''.
Je
tk p7'
Mw
l-
.-
..#
*.'oTb'
p<:z
::
fàxç ,b '5;':='
F'
.':
g>ne ''<
'..x
...' .M
r . .
'' :.a!(qexv,..w'
t' --' .''
* l
T
p
',
':
é
.
s.I
-
j
.
'
jj
.
. '
'
y
k
-
'
.t
d
:
i
)
..-... pvgz..,à'h'
lE 411,1 ù
.'
T
.',.-- ,ëi' hà'%.
-..... .v-..
.. f./d
.,,3 f
.'
.1
p-
>
.
:'$
r-
. 411,4 ,..'f..r'. 'h .
'.-
.
' . v> * ay..
-x v<....J7
* ..-' -''5 j
t
j'.
' i
ï
x
1 T2
j
.
L
h
k
L
j.
+..<
j
s
'
<
y
h
'
.
y
;
v.4'>
>
$
t
'
i
>,*
'
;
s
.î
.;
!.
*
,.
,
'
2
4
'
1u
2
.a
-5
.
/
i
'
e't'
%-
y'
.
L.s
z '-
C
'....z
'2
..
t:ls
Y..
- .lN tT .)z ''--''' ' '' ''-'''
,
/.
;
1
k :l
W
.
qy
'
x:
z
p
$.
rA
-6
e dl '1vuNet
r%m
'
* my
s.ht
.b
> 4
1.'.-,=.''?v5,A.,'.t
. ,.
. '.
'
L4
1
u
o .
k
b'ê
49s
r:J.r
v/
.ï
i
LJ
--
'
ji
=-
..k
x
' .
'
'
s . *
..
' . ,
'-
.''
.',
,.)
. .
.'
..
L.'
.
,.'
.
ï
R,s' -.
1 . c.a.t
' ..
:..
- 1

* -.: * ..1.Yk
.0,)j ' * .:.'x..
..
+.
q.wq
tz
Nyx' o1I.'7r9
' :,.jr;
z4
;; .. @ @
'.
Nj ..takw- m>.Q
-.A%qt?'$'11/7sze7'
%
.. . -A
.....,. . ''
t...%' :
11
.
II
E
i
I-
*eZ1
tf.
x.
!!l0'>
)
* +
.
gf'P' * '
*$*- ?ygt.q H%
w
o
â
kq
k
f
xw2w
v
,
.
;'
-
?
âP q
t1-
:J
-v
L''.
'
'.o.1
' e .x
, .
41* **.
'.2
.
.3
'* '
'
.
'.
'...-
.
.
. -
. 11/
Va. z t'?ïxfs3k)' ''.'
@
.
,/
.--;-
'
,
k
1 1?
-
.1
,.jy
.-.k
-
)
k 4
1
1. (.
#k-.
7
. -.,, ; '
.
-.
'k
('
.
.
.'y.
-
..,..)
.' 4
1)
. .
,z..,'
,. CVCPI
. .
W
'
. . - a lto r
 2

l
'
R E T H lN K lN G
... . .

S C R I P T U R E

ESSAY S
FR O M A
,
C O M PA R AT IV E
PER SPE C T IV E

M iriam
Levering
Editor '

ST AT E U N IV E R S IT Y O F N EW YO RK P R E SS

' ,
.
Publishedby To W ilfred CantwellSmith,
StateUnfversf%'ofNal?VrkPress,z'lll
uny ourteacherand example;
(
#)1989StateUniversityO/'NeI
.
PKri and to the m em ory of
KendallA.Folkert,
Theessay''q
scrf
yfurcasForm J/J
Conceyt:TbeirEmergence colleague and pioneer.
forllzeH'
iyternIz
pbr/fl'5yHzrïl
-j-
reffCantwellsmitb
()1989l) yWil freiCantwellSmitlt.
Allri
gbt
sreservei

PrinteiintbeUnitedStateso
fAmerica

NopartoftbisboobmaybeUJTJorreprplrfccl
.

in cély mannerwbatsoeverwitboutwrittennermission
exceptintbecaseofbrie
fquotationsemboiieiin
criticalarticlesandreviews.

Forinformation,aiiressStateUniversit
yofNawKrl
Press,StateUniversityPlaza,Albany N.#:,12246
M brary of Congress Catalogjng-Ln-publzcatjon D ata
Retltinkingscri
pture.
Inclutksiniex. '
Contents:Introduction/Miriam Levering- TLestudy
o
freligionandtbestudyoftbeBible(Wifred
CantwellSmitb- Scri ptureasform andconcept(
WïlfreflCantwellSrrlilll- Letcl.
1.Sacreibooks-blistory and critici
sm
1.Levering,M iriam,1945-
BL71.R48 1989 291.8'2 87-9919
ISBN 0-88706-613-5
ISBN 0-88706-614-3 (.
pbk.)
10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2
 C ontents

Acknowledgm ents 17(

lntroduction:Rethinking Scripture
M iriam Levering
1.The Study ofReligion and 18
the Study ofthe Bible
Wil
hedCantwellSmitb
2.Scripture asForm and Concept:Their 29
Em ergencefor the W estern W orld
Wil
fredCantwellSmith
3.Scripture and 1tsReception; 58
A BuddhistCase
M iriam Levering
4.Gscripture''in India:Towardsa
Typology ofthe W ord in Hindu Life
ThomasB.Coburn
5.Scripture asSpoken W ord 129
W illiam .4,Graham
6.The tcanons'oftscripture' 170
KenzallHz:Folkert
7.The Bride ofIsrael:The O ntological 180
StatusofScrijtureintheRabbinic
and Kabbalistlc Traditions
Barbara x4.Holdrege
Contributors 263
Index 265
 A cbnowlelgments

W earegratefultotheeditorsoftheJournalofl/leAmericanAcademyn
./-
Reli
gion forpermission to republish t'The StudyofReligion and theStudy
of the Bible,''by W ilfred Cantwell Sm ith,and tç<scripture' in lndia:
Towards a Typology of the W ord in H indu Life,'' by Thom as B.
Coburn.
M iranda Shaw prepared the index;Miranda,Debbie Myers,Joan
Riedland BarbaraH ickey spentm any hourstyping and proofreading the
text.

11(
 IN T R O D U C T IO N

R ethinking Scripture
M iriam Levering

People throughoutthe world have found words to provide a fram e for

the sacred,to m ediateknowledge oftruthsand to havem oving ortrans-
form ing power.Some H indus,forexample,have recognized speech asa
goddess(Vàc),evenascreativedivinityitself,whilecertainsounds/words
Qabtla)arethemselvesseenbyHindusaschannelsofthedivineenergyof
creation.M any com munities affirm unambiguously that certain words
(theTen Commandments,theQur'àn)comedirectlyfrom God.Others
understand theW ord asthebestmetaphorforthe self-revelation ofwhat
isultimate,even ifthat'W brd takesthe form notofwordsbutofpersons
ordeeds.
In other com munitiestrue speech ortrue writing isunderstood to
issuefrom hum an m indswith specialclarity.Even in thesecasesitiscom -
monly an importantand treasured insightthattruewordsexercisepower,
forto hearthem,recite them ,or study them isto betransform ed.
'W brdsthat are powerfully true can be occasional.Butm any com -
munitieshave found thatcertain wordscontinueto be effective overand
over again in creating and refreshing authentic life.These comm unities
have sought to crystallize and transm it theirm ostimportantverbaltra-
ditions.
ltisperhapsin thislattercaseparticularly thatone isjustified in
Speaking oftscripture,'and also of çclassic,'forthe concepts ofscripture
and classic resultfrom the hope thatthe tradition-valued word can be
transmittedjustasithasbeen received.
M uch of greatinterestto the studentof human culturaltraditions
 RETHIN KIN G SCRIPTURE
occursw hen comm unitiescrystallize scripturesand classics.M any have
noted thatthe problem of interpretation arises:how doesone relate the
tim elesstruths captured in preceptand story to the living experience of
a differenttim e?
Anothersortofconsequenceisperhapslesswidely noted.Such texts
once chosen and fixed can be m ade to bear differentburdens,and offer
different treasures,in the livesofcomm unities and individualsthan the
sametextnotyetsingled outforthisspecialtreatment(i.e.,in apre-
scripturalorpre-classicstate)coulddo.Peopledothingswith,andexpect
thingsfrom ,theseverbaltraditionsthatthey do notfrom othertexts.
Thusto say thata <scripture'isperceived astrue and experienced as
powerful,andistheobjectofan attemptatfaithfultransmission,stilldoes
notcapture allthatwem ean when we say thatcertain wordsortextsare
Kscripture.'Asvariousauthorsin thisvolume suggest,Kscripture'isarela-
tionalterm .That is,itrefers to kinds ofrelationshipsthatpeople enter
into w ith these texts.It seem shelpfulto propose that tscriptures'are a
specialclassof true and powerfulwords,a classform ed by the ways in
which theseparticularwordsare received by personsand com munitiesin
theircom mon life.
This collection of essays is entitled ulkethinking Scripture:Essays
from a Comparative Perspective.'' In what follows I wish to address
briefly the questions:why drethinking'?why <scripture'?and whya çcom-
Parative perspective'?
AV'H Y <RETH IN K IN G '?
A numberofyearsago W ilfred CantwellSm ith,in hisessay G'rhe study
ofReligionandtheStudyoftheBible''(whichisincludedinthiscollec-
tion ofessays),challenged graduateprogramsin BiblicalStudiesand the
Study of Religion to prepare teachers who could teach courses,not on
how the biblicaltextscam e to be whatthey are,buton whatthe Bible
hasbeenforJewish and Christiancommunitiessinceitbecamescripture.
H e realized thatwhilc we as scholarsnow know quite a bitabout the
religion oflsraeland of early Christian com munities,we have notyet
reflected very much on what it isfor som ething to be scripture,orfor
humancommunitiestodscripturalize'(producescripture)andtorelateto
wordsasscripture.
Somewhatlater,W illiam A.Graham and KendallFolkertbegan to
discover,asthey studied and thoughtaboutthe M uslim expcrienceofthe
Qur'àn and the scholarly treatmentofthe canonsoftheJainsofIndia
respectively,the greatpotentialinterestin opening up the topicofscrip-
ture to furthcr reflection within the comparative history of religion.
INTROD UCTIO N
They in turn inspired Sm ith to begin a globalexamination ofform sand
conceptsofscripture in m any religioustraditions.
Sm ith's interest,and the sem inars he led atH arvard for graduate
studentsandforcollegeteachers(thelatterunderNationalEndowment
fortheHumanitiessponsorship in 1982 and 1984),drew ThomasB.
Coburn,Barbara Holdrege and myself into the topic.Ashad been the
caseforFolkertand Graham ,wenoticedwith am azem entthatthehistory
of the forms and concepts of sacred textsin the traditions we studied
(Hindu,JewishandChineserespectively),topicswehadthoughtobvious
and fundam ental,had been little addressed by previousscholarship in a
truly reflective fashion.Likewise,we al1found itstriking thatthe phe-
nom enology ofreligion aspracticed by men such as' W .Brede Kristensen
and Gerardusvan derLeeuw,and the history ofreligion aspracticed by
Joachim W ach,MirceaEliade and others,had so far given very little
attention to 'sacred text'asa widespread and importantphenom enon.It
seem ed possible that there were important questionsthat had thus far
been neglected.
Therehavebeen reasonsforthisneglect.Thestudy ofnon-' W estern
religionsbegan with an overemphasison textsasthebestsourceofinfor-
m ation concerning thebeliefsand practicesofunfamiliarreligioustradi-
tions.A greatinterestin discovering,translating,and studying theorigins
and contentofthe 'scriptures'or tsacred books'of other traditionsfol-
lowed.In general during thisperiod,scholars tended to assum e uncon-
sciously thateach such text occupied a place in the religiouslife of its
community and tradition similar to thatoccupied by the Bible in some
branches of Protestantlife:a free-standing source of religiousdoctrine,
authority,and inspiration,whose meaning could be grasped withouttoo
much reference to originalor latercontexts.
The resultsofthisbeginning wereand continue to beunfortunate.
As ' W ilfred CantwellSm ith writcs in his second essay in this volume,
tçscripture as Form and Concept: Their Emergence for the W estern
W orld' ';G'W'e have tended to derive our concept of scripture from the
Bible.''Indeed,asFolkertpointsoutin hisessay,'W estern studiesofother
historic traditions have been distorted by the implicit assumption that
such traditionswould have a book,orcanon ofbooks,thatserve asthe
locus of authoritative doctrine,and that such books are read,used and
thought aboutin m uch the way Protestants read,use and think about
scripture.Even ourunderstanding oftheroleofscripturein Christian and
otherW estern religiouscom munitieshasbeen m arred by these assump-
tions,since itisclearthatourimplicitnotion oftscripture'isnotderived
from acarefulconsideration ofthewholeofJewish and Christianexperi-
ence and reflection,butonly from very sm allpartsofit.
 RETHINKIN G SCRIPTU RE
ln reaction to the narrow ness of thisapproach,phenom enologists
of religion and other later groups proposed that attention should be
focused on myths,actionsand symbplsthatexpressed religiousmeanings
ratherthan on textsand beliefs.M uch hasbeen gained thereby.An impor-
tantadvanceistherealization thattheculturesoforalpeoplesareaspro-
found and sophisticated asthe cultures of literatepeoples.An em phasis
on looking atreligiousachievem entsthrough textsprivilegesthe literate
overthe oral,and the elite strandsofa tradition over thefolk orpopular
strands.Greatreligiousinsightsand expressionscan betransmitted w ith-
outthebenefitofwritten texts.Insightsintoallhuman religiousnesshave
been attainedby asustained reflection on thereligiousexpressionsofearly
ororalcultures.
Yeta consequence ofthese stepsforward in the field seemsto have
been the neglectofthe comparative study ofthe waysin which wordsand
textin facthavesymbolicormythicpower.W hilemembersoftheseschol-
arly movementshaveacknowledgedthattextscouldbe'sacred'in waysanal-
ogoustothoseinwhich spaces,actions,andritualobjectsweresacred,little
attention waspaid to thecategory called Nacred text.''To someitmay have
seemed thatscripture orsacred text- though a commonly found phenome-
non in religioustraditionswithin chirographiccultures- wasnota form of
religiousexpression thestudy ofwhich 1ed people into the heartofhum an
religiousness,as life-cycle ritualor pilgrim ages might be.Othersperhaps
concluded that,whereaspilgrimagesmightbequitecomparableacrosstradi-
tions,sacred textsreally werenot.
Thuswhile,by developing a generic orcomparativecategory such
assacred textfree of the lim itationsofourW estern-formed conceptof
scripture,phenomenological or m orphological scholarship in religion
mightwellhaverem edied the biasintroduced by the unconsciouspreva-
lence ofthe Protestantm odel,ithasnotyetdone so.The currentusage
of<sacred text'ortnorm ative text'within thefield isastep forward.Yet
one resultof the lack in tlle writingsof Van der Leeum W ach,Eliade,
Kristensen and their followers of any substantive discussion or cross-
culturalexploration ofthe category ofsacred textisthat <sacred text'is
in practiceoften used with much thesameassumptionsthatinformed our
biased concepts of tscripture'and tcanon,'with the addition of some
insightsabout<the holy'orKthesacred'derived from Eliadian reflections.
The'category'is undeveloped:the contemporary scholar is often aware
thattheçsacred texts'ofthetradition sheorheisdescribingarenotparal-
lel to W estern scriptures as com monly understood,but finds that the
undeveloped,catch-allcategory ofTsacred text'hasgiven herorhim few
analytic toolswith which to delineate the differences.
This impasse demonstrates the potential usefulness of a self-
IN TRO D UCTIO N
consciouspursuitofa generic concept.Thuswe seek to inauguratew ith
these essays the research and reflection needed to develop concepts of
scripm re,sacred text,canon,and sacred words as categories within the
phenom enology ofreligion so thatglobal,generic,andcomparativestudy
of these im portant phenomena- fruits of the hum an tendency to
Escripturalize'- can castlighton theexperiencesand choicesfacedby reli-
giouscom munitiespastand present.W e seek to reversethepresentsitua-
tion;asW ilfred CantwellSmith states:R'W eare now illaposition where
ourunderstanding ofthe Bible,and ofm uch else acrossthe world,m ay
begin to be derived from a largerconceptofscripture.''
Ibelievethatsuch studywillalsoshow thattscripturalizing,'(the
propensitytoproducescriptures),andtheongoingreceptionofscriptures
in the contextofreligiouslife,are in factcomparable acrosstraditions.I
furtherbelievethatastudy ofthosehum an activitiesdoeslead to abetter
understanding ofthe heart of religious life,not leastbecause itiscon-
cerned with thefundam entalhum an and religiousexperience ofshaping
and being shaped in one'srelation to ultim ate and comprehensive value
through the medium ofwords.
W HY CSCRIPTU RE'?
Readersm ay question why som eofuscontinueto usetheword tscripture'
to name thegenericconceptthatwe seek.Ifbiasesand misleading expec-
tationscontinueto resultfrom ourunconsciousassumption oftheuniver-
salapplicability of W estern form sand concepts,why not use a neutral
term like ttsacred text''ortdholy book''? Furtherm ore,scripture isaterm
freightedwithProtestant(andalsoCatholicandJewish)pieties,with a11
the attendantem otionsarousedbythosein ourculture.W hy tieourselves
to these?
Some ofusdo feelforced to abandon the term tscripture.'Thomas
B.Coburn choosesto discussRthe W ord''in lndiabecause the connota-
tions of writtenness thatseem inevitably tied to the term scripture are
misleading in the Indian case.
Kendall Folkert advocatesabandoning the word scripture for the
comparative study of religion as a w hole. H e proposes substituting
Rcanon,''aterm w hich hasforhim theadvantageofpreservingthem ean-
ing of Rregulative''withoutbeing heavily freighted with other expecta-
tions.ForFolkertthere are atleast two typesofGcanon,''depending on
whether itisa t'vectored''ortxvectoring''phenomenon within the tradi-
tion.Theimplication isthattscripture,'with al1theassum ptionswemake
aboutit,isappropriate only to Canon 1,orvectoring texts.The W estern
scholarly tendency isto expectvectoring from texts,and apply Canon l
 RETH IN KIN G SCRIPTU RE
expectationsto sacred texts thatare vectored by other principalcarriers
ofreligiouslife.
The rest ofus,for a variety ofrçasons,are inclined to try to live
with theterm tscripture,'which,asthedictionary indicates,hasrecently
acquired a generic meaning.
One reason isthat connotation-free neutrality is not really gained
with tholy book'or tsacred text.''The holy'and <the sacred,'related as
they have been to concepts of hierophany, are in their current usage
within the field notneutralterms;they are termsthatbring with them
connotationsfrom acosmology.Thus,by usingAsacred'or'holy'onedoes
notentirely avoid the problem .
Another reason is thatwe are seeking to address people to whom
tscripture'isa live religiousterm .To use a neutralterm isto encourage
studentsand believers to separate study from <reallife.'Such separation
occurs too often in the mindsofstudentsin the classroom when m any
traditionsare being studied.Studentsthink thatRthey''have sacred texts,
while Rwe' 'have scripture.'W'e are notasking them to think aboutsacred
texts,we are asking people to think aboutscripture- som ething thatis
neveraneutralobjectdivorcedfrom an engagedsubjectivity.
Further,a case could be made that scholars would benefit from
using two terms.<sacred text'could continue to have the broad,unspe-
cificusage thatitnow has,able to mark the specially holy statusofmany
kindsoftexts,oraland written.<scripture'could be used to meetaneed
fora more limited category than sacred text,referring to the normative,
bounded or semi-bounded written traditionsthattypically occur in the
religionsofchirographic cultures.Forthislatter,m ore lim ited category,
scripture asahistorically developed conceptin the'W esthas,asGraham
Points out,some positive virtues.4.Tscripture',''he writes,has TTseveral
connotations that offer a solid basis for a meaningfulconceptof sacred
religious text.''Itimpliesa trelatively sizeable,usually com posite text.''
Itcontainsç<theideaofa collection ofmaterialthat,whateveritshistory,
isperceived as a unitary whole.''ItsuggestsRthe implied authority and
sacrality ofa textw ith unique claim to transcendence and truth.''And it
refers to m aterialthatatleastcan be,and usually is,eventually written
down.
Finally,my own observation isthatthe use of<sacred text'so far,
though wellm eant,has largely served to hide rather than expunge the
distorting W estern assumptionsderived from the biblicalanalogies.Per-
haps it is better to use the term 'scripture' and thereby bring these
assumptions out into the open,face them,and work through them.As
was demonstrated to a1lof uswho attended W ilfred CantwellSmith's
sum mer seminarsfor college teachersin 1982 and 1984,the stretching
IN TRODU CTIO N
thatresultsfrom abroad accumulation ofgenuinecom parativeknowledge
and reflection doesenableoneto enjoy an expanded,non-reified useof
the term , ever freer from the bias produced by unconscious W estern
m odels.
W H Y A CC O M PAR AT IV E PER SPECTIVE'?
Thisleadsusto the question aboutthe fruitfulnessofcom parative study.
There are really two questionshere.
The firstquestion is,do comparisonsamong instancesofrelations
between people and theirtexts,orbetween form sand conceptsoftexts,
lead to fruitfulgeneralizationsand also illum ine each separateterm in the
comparison? For example,do we learn things aboutwhy and how the
Bible hasbeen consequentialfor' W esternersby looking atwhattheVeda
hasm eantto Hindus?
The answerto thisquestion should beapparentfrom theessayspre-
sented here.To take one example,to com pare the Bible to the Veda in
Indiais,asCoburn'sessay show s,to be shocked outofone'sunconscious
assumptionsaboutscripture.Avesternerstend to believe scripture should
offersacred story ormoralinstructions- atthe very least,contentshould
m atter.Yetin the case of the Vedas,the power and truth of the sacred
performance of the words is in no way dim inished by the fact that no
one,neitherthe reciternorthe hearer,understandsthem .
Another assumption that W esterners have is that scriptures are
alwaysfound to befixed and bounded in canons.Yetsome among India's
oralxtextual'accumulationsthatdeseza,e comparison with W estern scrip-
tures(e.g.,thePuràpasand,arguably,theUpanifads)seem nottobehis-
torically or conceptually closed groups.To look atthe Hindu practice is
to find one'smind opened to see the actualporousnessand unsettledness
of the boundaries of scripture in the 'W est.O ne becom es aware of the
extentthat,evenafterthecanonwasclosedin Christian andJewish com-
m unitiesin theW est,wayshavebeen found to add to and subtractfrom
the corpus ofwordstreated scripturally,to allow the 'W brd in thatway
to be dynam ically recreated.
Also,to look atthe Hindu experienceisalso to seem oreclearly the
waysin w hich the scripturalpower of the Bible hasincluded itspower
assymbolaswellasthepowerrelated to itscontent.
The second question is,doesthe category of scripture dissolve as
the particularsofthe scripturalexperience of each tradition come more
fully into vicw?Asonelooksatmoreand m orecasesoftheform ,concept
and reception oftextsthatseem atfirstglance to besimilarto theBible,
do proposed similaritiesorfam ily resemblancesam ong them allasaclass
8 RETHINKIN G SCRIPTURE
seem hopelessly vague? Distorting? Forced? Or simply to fail alto-
gether?
Letusconsiderforamomentthe textsthatwewould a1lintuitively
regard asscripturesand ascomparable,textsliketheQur'àn,theVedas
andUpanijads,theJewish andChristianBibles,theTripiyakaoftheBud-
dhists,the Avesta ofthe Zoroastrians,the AdiGranth ofthe Sikhs,and
the Taoistcanon.
Certainly the fuller and m ore informed the study of even these
texts,them oredifferentthey appearto be.They differofcoursein their
genresand contents.Forexample,theProtestantO1dTestament(aswell
asthe New)containsmany historicalnarrativesand reflectionson the
significance ofhistoricalevents,as wellascomm andments.The Vedas
taken in the mostinclusive sense contain hym ns,ritualprescriptionsand
interpretations,and teachings relating to gnosis;historicalnarratives do
notfigure prominently,nor do commandmentsaboutsocialbehavior.
Further,thesetextsdifferin theirexpected and actualrolesin rela-
tiontoinstitutions,religiousspecialists,andtoindividualreciters/readers.
TheBuddhistTripiyaka isintended forand used m ainly by personswho
renounce household life,practice scrupulous ethical self-restraint,and
pursue a rigorouscourse of m ental self-examination.The .Rg Veda,on
the otherhand,designed asitisto play arole in maintaining good rela-
tionswith the gods,isand alwayshasbeen the provinceofritualspecial-
istsServing the religiousneedsofhouseholders.Any'generalizationsthat
would hold foreven thisnarrow setofsacred textswould be notterribly
illuminating.
A glanceatrecenteffortsto m ake generalizationsaboutthe charac-
teristicsofsacred textsrevealsnotonly how littlelightisshedby genera-
lizations,butalso how m isleading they may be.Letustakethefollow ing
listasasampleofthe generalizationsthatseem to suggestthem selvesto
scholarslooking forpossible parametersfor acategory ofKsacred text':
1.There are often beliefs thatthe textisof divine origin,or the
Productofspecial.
insight.
2. W hatever their origin,they are regarded and treated as sacred,
thatis,powerfuland inviolable,to be treated with respect.
3.They are regarded and consulted asnormative,authoritative for
a com munity in variousaspectsofitsreligiouslife:forworship,
doctrine,and behavior.
The texts,whether written or oral,are regarded asclosed and
fixed,not to be added to or subtracted from.In other words,
they are treated asa canon.
IN TROD U CTIO N
5.W hen the sacred textisin theform ofabook,itisregarded as
complete. lt contains everything of importance, and can be
applied to al1aspectsofhum an life.
The texts are used by m em bers of the comm unity in religious
and ritualcontexts.
7. Sacred textstestify to thatwhich isultimate.l
These are intuitively appealing generalizations,yet they are curi-
ously misleading.I suspectthatthese characterizationsare so intuitively
appealing because al1butone ofthem belong to thew idely shared com-
m on sensecharacterization oftheBible.Butafully inform ed com parative
study castsconsiderable doubton the univcrsalapplicability and fruitful-
ness of these characterizations.Characterizations thatare strongly true
and significant about the Bible or the Qur'àn at certain historical
momentsturnoutto beonlyweaklytrue,andfarlesssignificant(orsig-
nificantin adifferentsense),a.
sstatementsaboutotherscripturaltexts.
Forexample,thereclearlyarecommunities(e.g.,Hindu,Mahàyâna
Buddhist)in which neitherthe<fixity'oftextsnortheboundednessof
canon seem alwaystobe soughtafter.(See Coburn'sessay.)
dcompleteness'isanotherdubiousgeneralization.The Chineselite-
ratibeginningin theeleventh century cventually cam eto seetheChinesc
Classicsascomplete in the ' W estern sense.Yetin the casesofother gen-
erations and social classes even within China, itis doubtfulthat they
regarded theClassicsascomplete,oreven would regard completenessas
desirable.The Vedasare a corpusof sacred textswhose role isin m any
waysanalogoustothe'Ttypicall'scriptures(theQurYn,theBible,etc.),
and yetitisnotclearthatthey were expected to be a source ofwisdom,
knowledge,orlegaland ethicalstandardsforal1the importantaspectsof
life.Afterall,textslike the M anusmçtiwhich gave regulative ideals for
Brahmin life,the kind oftextwe would expectto find in a scriptural
COVPt1S,2re notfound in the Vedas.
Further,whatismeantby <complete'isprobably quite differentin
differentkindsofreligions.ThefollowersofNichiren inJapan clearly
have a scripturalbook:they regard the Lotus Sûtra asa complete source
oftruth and power to change one's life.But it would be misleading to
say that they see the Lotus q
sfjlr;las providing a com plete source from
which to derive ethicalor legalprescriptionsorholy socialinstitutions,
asJewshave done with the Torah.ln aAvestern context<completeness'
suggeststhe çcompleteness'ofTorah,notthe<completeness'ofatextthat
was never intended or used as a source for the social law s of a
com m unity.
 RETH IN KIN G SCRIPTURE
To say that whatcharacterizes a text thatisregarded as sacred is
thatitisseenaspossessedinitsownrightofa(usuallybeneficial)power,
and notto be profaned,is again to m ake a statem entfartruer ofsom e
relationshipsbetween scripturesand communitiesthan ofothers.
For exam ple,m any M ahâyàna Buddhists in China have thought
texts to possess the power to work m iracles,and some of them have
thoughtthat important.' W' e are told thatHsùan-tsang,a great8th cen-
tury Chinese Buddhist scholar and translator who m ade a lengthy pil-
grimage to India to collect scriptures for translation into Chinese,had
many experiences of the miraculous power of the scripture,the Heart
u
s:frl,thathe recited on the way.Itis said that since by the display of
m iracles Kçthe ultimate efficacy ofthisScripture had been demonstrated,
he believed thatthiswasW isdom ...thatifhe did ashe wastold,he
would withoutfailoutpassthe limitofenlightened intuition and fulfill
thewordofjtheBuddhaj.''z
But there were other Chinese M ahàyàna Buddhists,for exam ple
those of the Ch'an teaching lineages, for whom the H earts' g/rflwas
equally scripture,tow hom theideathatthestjtramightpossesmiraculous
powers,or indeed any kind of power,was completely unim portant and
even dangerousto one's practice.Likewise the idea that the m ark of a
<sacred'textis that it isone thatone does not profane,while probably
presenttosomedegreeinmostcases(thougharguablynotintheCh'an
Buddhistcase),variesfrom aweandfearontheoneendofthespectrum
to respectand courtesy on the othen:
Likewisetheemphasison theauthoritativestatusand norm ativeuses
ofscriptureasa defining characteristic may derive in partfrom aProtes-
tant concern w ith the sources of the authority ofits tradition and the
nature of the norm ative character of its Scripture.4 Being regarded as
authoritative ornorm ativein certain m attersperhapsshouldbeadefining
characteristic of the category of 'scripture'as distinguished from the
largercategory of'sacredtext.'Yetthenatureand scopeofsuch authority
or normativity may be much narrower orm uch differentfrom whatwe
who are molded by Protestantculture tend to im agine,and thepurposes
forw hich authority issoughtm ay be quite different.sA m ere statement
that normativity characterizes sacred texts leaves undislodged m any
assumptionsaboutthe universality ofattitudesthatarein factm ostespe-
cially Protestant.
Thus this kind of approach to the world-wide phenom enon of
sacred textdoesnot seem to escape the influence of W estern models.
Additionalelem entsare added,butthe influence ofW estern experience
and comm itments on the concept,while hidden,stillseem s to remain
Subtly formative.
IN TRO DU CTION
Butthe more fundam entalproblem isthat the generalizationsare
so much lessillum inatingthan they atfirstseem .Alm ostevery oueeither
failsto coverallimportantcasesorm isleadsin itslanguage oremphasis.
O nce one introducesa1lthe necessary qualificationsthe generalizations
becom e almost meaningless.It becom es clear thatthe number of cases
thattruly fitisfarsm aller than the numberthatdo notfitwellenough
to m ake the generalizations useful.The very limited success of recent
efforts at generalization by sensitive and well informed scholars gives
powerto theview that,considered asobjectsofcomparison,'scriptures'
ortsacred texts'do notm ake a singlecategory.6
Clearly there areproblem sw ith defining the category by trying to
arrive atlistsof characterizing features.Ifwe instead attend principally
to the dynamics of the relationsthatpeople have had with texts,their
waysofreceivingtextsin thecontextoftheirreligiousprojects,then the
whole matterbecomesmore hopeful.O n the one hand,for the sake of
a broaderunderstanding ofthe significant differencesthatemerge,one
allows the category to dissolve.But as one does so,paradoxically,one
findsthatdynamic structures and polaritiesemerge thatallow the cate-
gory to takeon new meanings.Asaresultonedoesnotbecom eimpatient
with itso quickly.
The essays in this volum e attempt this rather different kind of
approach.One conclusion one m ight draw from them is that m ore is
gained by looking for,notstatic,universalcharacteristics,butpolarities
and relationshipsthatrecur in the dynam ics ofhum an relationsto spe-
cially sanctioned texts.In oureffortsso far the following polaritiesand
otherdynamic patternshave com e into view.
PO LA RITIES
FormjFluiiit
y
Thefirststepistorealizehow muchwe'Westernscholars(perhaps
biblicalandchurch historiansareexceptions),haveallowed ourmindsto
be dominated by the idea thatçscripture'hasa singleform and expresses
a single concept. The second step is to see how misleading this
dom ination can be.W e can do this by becom ing aware that whatwe
believe to be them osttypical'W estern form and conceptofscripturehad
historicaloriginsastheproductofa historicalprocess.' W'eneed,however,
also to realize thatthis dom inantform and conceptin . factwas never a
static m atter:the form sand concepts ofscripture overthe 'W est'sm any
centuries of history,though tending in a certain direction,have been
continually changing.Smith'sessay tracingtheinterlinkingdevelopments
12 RETH INKIN G SCRIPTU RE
in theN earEastand M editerranean worldsshow show thet'ypicalpattern
ofW estern thinking and actingcametobe,and atthesam etimeliberates
the reader from the expectation of encountering,even in the W est,a
static,unchanging form and concept. t a divine or specialorigin.Talk abouttextsdelivered by divine messengers
Oralit
yjWrittenness
tscripture'atfirst seemsnecessarily to refer to written textsin their
character of being written.But that is not the end of the m atter.As
Graham 'sessay shows,itiscnzcialto understandingtherichnessofsczipmre
asapartofliving religiousexperience to realize thatscripturesworldwide
have never been mere booksto be read silently buthave had theirlife in
oral-auralreception.Thus,scripture,which ism ostoften a creation ofthe
transition in cultureand mentalexperiencefrom oralculture towritterlcul-
ture,nonethelessisaform through which religiouscom munitieshave con-
tinuedto recreatetheoml-auralexperiencing ofwords.Coulditbe thatsuch
oralexperienceisessentialto religiouslife?
Boundednessllyenness
It is a fallacy,as Coburn's and Folkert's essays point out in the
Hindu and Jain cases- and the same could be said forBuddhistsand
others- to expectscripturesorcanonsofscripturesto be neatly bounded.
In fact,wherevertheyappear,scripturesarecharacterized bybeingtreated
asb0th bounded and open.ln the rather rare cases where communities
saw value in losing the canon,new scripturalor semi-scripturalform s
havebeencreated(e.g.,theTalmud)toallow fortheongoingprocessof
insightorrevelation.
nvèt?toringnjê
.
L/eing r
zkl/rcf/'
KendallFolkertsuggestsin his essay that the category uscripture''
does need to be broken into two types,which he calls dicanon I' and
qdcanon 11.* Canon Itype scripturesoccurw here,asfor example in the
Protestantcase,the scripture isthe principalauthority for and carrier of
the symbolic activities of the tradition.Canon 11 sacred texts,though
importantto theirreligioustraditions,are notthe principalvectors,but
derivetheirimportancefrom othervectors(liturgy,forexample,orrules
andproceduresofmonasticpractice).'Whetheritisimportanttohavea
closed canon,whether itisimportantto regard the textasan indepen-
dent,pristinesource,ofquiteadifferentnaturefrom othertextsand com-
m entariesin thetradition,and so on,depend,Folkertargues,on whether
the text is principally a vector orwhether it isprincipally tscarried''by
othervectorsin the tradition.
IN TROD UCTION
CosmicStatusjcontingency
Another polarity clearly crucial to the concept of scripture is that
symbolized by the almostuniversalphenom enon ofattributing to the text
(e.g.,in theNearEast),ordiscovered in riversinscribedon thebacksof
turtles(in China),orcreated firstbeforetheworldiscreated (theJews)
clearly pointsto aspecialexperienceo2ehaswhileseeking truth through
studying and living in relation to these texts.Barbara Holdrege'sessay calls
our attention to the dangersof nottaking seriously these metaphorsand
claimsastestifying to an ongoing apprehension oftruth and powergiven to
thosewho cherish thesetexts.' W hereveritisalsorecognized thatthesetexts
are also at the same time contingent,historicalmanifestations (cf.the
discussion in Coburn'sand Levering'sessays,aswellasthatofHoldrege),
thiscreativepolarity emergesin itsrichestforms.
Normativit
yjselectionandReinterpretation
Thispolarity haslong been recognized asbeing atthe heartofthe
Phenom enon of 'scripture' and 'classic,' and has already captured the
attention of many scholars. Illum inating treatm ents of the relation
between authority and reinterpretation thatwe have discovered include
those ofJamesSanders and David Tracy.An issue here thatperhaps
deservesm oreattention globally isthatof'tactualcanons,''the selections
thatreligiouscommunities and individualsmake of those partsof their
scripturesthatthey truly cherish and relate to scripturally.;
M O D ES O F REC EPTIO N :
IN FO RM IN G ,SY M BO LIZIN G ,TR AN SACT IN G ,
A N D T M N SFO RM IN G
Scripturesare scripturesbecauseofthewaystheyarereceived,andbecause
they can sustain and repay thosekindsofreception.Looking attherecep-
tion ofsacred textsin aconcrete context- a conventw ithin the Chinese
Buddhisttradition- lfound,broadly speaking,fourdynam ically interre-
lated waysin which textswere incorporated into thereligiouslife ofthe
pi-cll'iu-ni(nuns):
InformativeReception
To beinform ed isto read and listen in such away asto allow oneself
to beshaped by studying,and taking seriously.theauthority and message
ofa text.
 RETH IN KIN G SCRIPTU RE
TransformativeReceytion
Buddhistnunsseek and value a path thatbringsabouta personal
transform ation toward ultim ate well-being,clarity and com passion.M ost,
ifnotall,reception ofsacred textswithin thè convent,and within Bud-
dhist tradition generally,expects that one outcom e of one'sinteraction
with them willbe personaltransformation.
TransactiveReception
Certainkindsoftexts(e.g.,rtllrllras,dbârapî)areunderstoodtohavè
been specifically made available to bring aboutcertain changes in the
experience ofothers,orin thecircum stancesaffecting one'sown practice.
M ore generally,the recitation ofeven those textsnotspecifically meant
forthe purpose oftaking action also causesthingsto happen.
SymbolicReception
Textsthatcan bereceived in such vitalways,thathavesuch intimate
connectionswith truth and power,can come to symbolize,even to be an
icon of,the truth and power thatcomesthrough them .
Itischaracteristic ofscripturesthatthey arereceived in m any ways
atonce.Sam D .Gillhasrecently suggested in an im portant essay that
we attend to two kindsoffunctionsSacred textshave:uthe inform ative
function''and 'tthe performativefunctions.''8I suggestthatin reflecting
on the reception of sacred textsin different traditionsand contexts,we
willfind thesefourm odesofreception aneven m oreusefulstartingplace.
I believe we willalso find thatwhereasformsand conceptsof scripture
are highly specific to the tradition and its sociohistoricalm oment,ways
of receiving scripture xscripturally'are simiiar enough to be compared
fruitfully,so thatthe expericnce ofone tradition can shed light on that
ofanotheng
W ehopethatreadersoftheseessayswillbechallengedtorediscover
the fruitfulnessofthe search fora.generic conceptofscripture orsacred
text.W e havefound thatitisthesearch thatisfruitful,quite apartfrom
whetller such a generic concept could everbe constructed in a m anner
satisfying to everyone.The search for such a category has de-reifying,
liberating value;yetan approach through the dynam icsofrelationships,
yielding polaritiesand modesofreception ofthe kindsjustdiscussed,
demonstrates areas in which the search can have constructive value as
well,asone m oves phenomenologically from particulars to generaliza-
tionsto a new understanding oftheparticular.
IN TRO DU CTIO N 15
A NOTE CONCERNING ITENDALL FOLKERT'S
ESSAY
A painfullossaffectsthe shape ofthisbook.Ourbeloved colleagueKen
Folkertwas killed in a motorcycle accidentin 1985 while doing field-
work among theJainsin India.Theessay included here unfortunately
was left in some respects unfinished.W e are sure that the reader will
agree that the ideas expressed are so important and provocative that it
would havebeen aseriousom ission notto include it.In orderto preserve
the power of Ken's own expression, I have left the essay largely
untouched.Ken would mostlikely have added more noteshad he had a
chance to return to thiswork before finalpublication.I have made no
attempt to supply them ,for a greatdealofguesswork would havebeen
involved.Fortunately itisKen'sideasthatm ake thispiece valuable,and
those are quitc clearasthey stand.
Itisevidentfrom the essay and from many conversationson scripture
thatKen feltvery deeply thatchangesofemphasiswould improvethework
in the field ofBiblicalStudies,changesthat,he noted in laterdiscussions,
were already beginning to happen.loInitiating a conversation with biblical
scholars on the points raised in hisessay was som ething Ken very much
hoped to accomplish with itspublication.ltismostunforttmatethatwewill
notbenefitfrom Ken'sown furtherparticipation in thatconversation.
A N O TE C O N CER N IN G
W ILFRED CA N T W ELL SM IT H 'S ESSAY
At his request,and to presetwe his ow n preferences of usage,W ilfred
CantwellSm ith'sessayshave notbeen changed to renderthem consistent
with the usagc in otheressays.
A N O TE O N T H E D ED ICATIO N
A11of usof the younger generation want to dedicate this book to our
inspiring teacherand example,W ilfred CantwellSm ith,and to ourlate
colleague KendallFolkert,in appreciation oftheir imaginative,ground-
breaking scholarship,and oftheir specialpresencc in ourlives.
N OTES
1.Thislistisbased verylooselyon N inian Smartand Richard D.Hecht's
Glntroduction'totheirSacrei'
Tàxl.
softheH'
brlfr'.
,
4 UniversalAntkology(New York:
Crossroad,1982).pp.xii-xv.
16 RETHIN KIN G SCRIPTURE INTROD U CTIO N

2.Anonymousprefacetoatranscription ofHstian-tsang'stranslationofthe 7.Cf.M iriam Levering,RscriptureasIcom''unpublishedpapergivenatthe

Heartq
% lril,Tun-huangmanuscriptS.7QQ,translationmodified from thatofLeon American Academy ofReligion,N ov.1983.
Huzwitzin <çl-lsuan-tsang(602-664)and theHeartScripture,''LewisLancaster 8.Sam D.Gill,S tNonliterate Traditionsand Holy Books:Toward a New
and LuisGomez,ed-,PrajtïâiaramitöandRelated Systems(Berkeley,California: M odel,''in Frederick M .Denny and Rodney L.Taylor,eds.,TbeHol y.800) in
BerkeleyBuddhistStudiesSeries,1977),p.110 = ComnarativePermective(UniversityofSouth CarolinaPress,1985),p.234.
3.Anevenm oreim portantcausefordissatisfactionw ith thisgeneralization 9.The attemptto characterize scripturalreception by starting from Bud-
isthefactthatthesetwohallmarksoftsacredness'bynom eansexhausttherange dhistexperienceseem sausefulcom plem enttoexistingattemptsatageneralchar-
ofattitudesmanifested by religiouspersonsto thetextsthatm ediatetheirreli- acterization of ztsacred text'' that have started from biblical or nonliterate
giousrelationshipsand aspirations.To deriveoursenseofw hatitm eansto say models.
thattextsaresacred from whatitmeanstosaythatstonesaresacred restrictsour
exploration oftheaffectivedimension ofthereception ofscripture. 1O.KendallFolkertmentionedspecificallyseveralofthechaptersinD avid
N oelFreedm an and M ichaelPatrick O 'Conner,eds.,urrheBibleand itsTradi-
4.ltisinterestingthatM axM filler,afterrejectingdivineorigin asthecrite- tions,''Michi
ganQuarterlyRevïa,
lz22:3(1983).
rionforselectingtheSacredBooksoff/leEast,settledonthefactthatthetexthad
been chosen by thetradition to be thefinalauchority in religiousmattersasthe
crucialcriterion:
ltwassuggestedthatthosebooksonly should beconsidered sacred which
professed to berevealed,orto be directly communicated by the Deity to
thegreatteachersofmankind.Butitwassoon found thatveryfew,ifany,
ofthebooksthemselvesputfozwardthatclaim.Such aclaim wasgenerally
advanced and formulated by a later generation....sowe agreed to treatas
Sacred Booksa11thosewhich had been formally recognized by religious
com munitiesasconstituting the highestauthority in mattersofreligion,
which had received a kind ofcanonicalsanction,and mightthereforebe
appealed to for deciding any disputed points of faith, morality or
ceremonial.
5.IfindhelpfulhereDavidL.Bartlett'sreflectioninhisTLeq s/lt
peofscriy
turalAutl
mrity(Philadelphia:FortressPress,1983),thatdifferentkindsoflitera-
turein theHebrew Bibleclaim and exercisedifferentkindsofauthority.Author-
ity issingleneitherin put
wiew norin nature.
6.Anotherexample isthe even more sensitively constructed chapter on
Tzscripture'inanew introductorytextbook,Relkion:xd.sIntroiuction(San Fran-
cisco:Harperand Row,1985)by T.W illiam Hall,Richard B.Pilgrim,and
Ronald R.Cavanagh.Herethegeneralizationsarederived from acombination of
reflection on Rthesacred''and utheholy,'forw hich they acknow ledgeadebtto
Eliade,andreflection on theW estern,particularly Protestantsemphasison scrip-
ture as revealing sacred history,moraland legalcodes,and rightbelief.The
authorsspeakofscriptureasRrevealingwhatisholy,''Rgivlingjevidenceofthe
holy,inspirging)experienceoftheholy''-avirtueofthisinsightisthatitempha-
sizes experience,including noncontent-based symbolic experience,as wellas
beliefandauthority.YetHtheholy''tendstobelinkedhiscoricallywithideasabout
religion asbased in an encounterwith anuminousuother'';nota11Buddhistsor
Hinduswouldbequiteascomfortableaswouldmembersofsomeothertraditions
with heavy relianceon metaphorsofHotherness-''

1 departm ents are available,highly prom ising,highly intelligent,highly
T he Study of Religion and
the Study of the B ible
W ilfredCantwellSmitb
One ofthe most exciting new developmentson college and university
campusesin recenttimes,and also one ofthe mostsignificantand poten-
tially creative developments on the religiousscene,is surely the em er-
gence and flourishing of liberal-arts departm ents of religion. Perhaps
what is happening can be sum med up mostpithily by saying that the
transition hasbeen from the teaching ofreligion to the study ofreligion.
W hcre professors used to instruct, they now inquire. They once
attempted to impartw hat they them selvesknew,and whatthey hoped
(oflate,with decreasingexpectation)to makeinteresting;now,on the
contrary,they inquire,into something that170th forthem and for their
studentsisincontrovertibly interesting,butissomething thatthey do not
C1uite understand.
Partofthe excitement and potentialsignificance derivesfrom the
fact that,for the first time in many long years,with the setting up of
religion departm entsanum berofvery bright,very concernedyoungmen
and women find them selvesenabled to throw them selveswith vigorand
thoroughnessinto aseriouswrestlingw ith religiousissues,intellectually,
w ith no prior com mitm entasto where they willcom e outin the end.
At one time the Church offered the only full-tim e employm ent for an
intellectualwith religiousinterests,ora religiousperson w ith prim arily
intellectualinterests.Thisworked well,classically,so long astheconcept
18
STUDY O F RELIGIO N
Goi signified, intellectually and emotionally, reality and truth; later,
when acommitmenttotruth began tobefeltand seen asdifferent(or
perhapsdifferent)from aChristian commitment,fewerand fewertook
up (orcouldtakeup)thechallenge.Now thatappointmentsin religion
seriousyoung people are once again able to devote themselvesunreserv-
edly to thetask ofsearching forunderstanding,knowledge,and integrity
in thereligio-intellectualfield.
The transition from the sem inary to the liberalartsdepartment,as
the locus ofinquiry,hasbeen marked conspicuously by a change,then,
in emphasisandform and mood;yetlessconspicuously than some would
likeby achangein content.Thetraditionalseminary divisionsofthesub-
ject matter or Rdisciplines,''stillcharacterize tlle religion department
m ore thoroughly than many wish.The salientupsurge of the study of
Asian religiouslife isan obviousexception.One may be allowed to won-
der,however,whether170th studentand faculty eagernessin Rl-listory of
Religion''- usually signifying the history ofreligious groupsother than
one'sow n- isaltogetherrelated to the novelcontent,orwhetheritisin
substantialparta function rather ofthe new m ood and m ethod,orienta-
tion and attitude,thatare broughtto bear in these new studiesand are
feltto be missing from the old.Doesthe popularity ofthe study ofAsia
religiously stem,atleastin part,from thefactthatthosewho study itare
able to approach it with to-day's interest, to-day's questions, to-day's
moodsand methods?ThestudyofChristian datastillseem sbound within
C1uestions,moods,methodsofan earlierera.
Letustake the field ofBible asan illustration.lfIwere chairm an
ofareligion departm ent,Iwould certainlyw ish to havein thecurriculum
a course on theBible,and on thefaculty aperson competentto teach it.
W hatkind ofcourse and whatkind ofteacher,however,would Ibelook-
ing for?
The courses actually available, and the training of those actually
available to teach them,areon the whole calculated to turn afundamen-
talistinto aliberal.Often they can do thiswith greatskill,butitishardly
any m ore a relevant task.The m ore advanced orsophisticated Biblicists
havem oved beyond this,to thepointwherethey arecompetenthistorians
ofthe religiouslifeoftheancientN earEastorofthefirst-century East-
ern M editerranean world.Thisisfine,forthatsm allgroup who happen
to be interested in the religioushistory ofthose particularsectorsofthe
totalreligioushistory ofhum ankind;butthesepeopleseem on thewhole
litrle equipped to answer a question as to why one should be especially
interested in those particulartimesand places,ratherthan in,1etussay,
classicallndia or medievalChina or modern America.
20 RETH IN KIN G SCRIPTU RE
The sort ofcourse and the sortof teacherfor whom Iwould be
lookingin thefieldofBiblewouldbedifferent.Letm cattempttodeline-
atewhat,asIsee it,m ightfruitfully be attempted.
The course thatI envisage would be concerned w ith the Bible as
scripture.Itwould begin with someconsideration ofscriptureasa generic
phenom enon.The questions to w hich it would addressitself would be
questionssuch asthese:W hatisinvolved in taking acertain bodyofliter-
ature,separating itofffrom a11others,and giving itasacred status?W hat
isinvolved psychologically;what,sociologically;and what,historically?
How and w here did itfirstcome about?How did the Christian Church
happen to take up thispractice? W hatattitudes,m agicalorotherwise,
towards writing are involved? And- once this is done- what conse-
quencesfollow?Onewould wish abriefbutperhapsstriking comparativ-
ist introduction: the concept and role of scripture in other major
communities-lewish,Hindu,Buddhist,and thelike.Salientdifferences,
aswellasstrikingsimilarities,couldbetouchedbriefly.(Forexample,the
thesiscould be considered thatin theIslamicsystem theQur'ân fulfills
a function comparable to the role played in tlze Christian pattern rather
by the person ofJesusChristwhile a closercounterpartto Christian
scriptures are the Islam ic H. adlth R'
rraditions.'')Theroleofformalized
and sacralized oraltradition in som e societies,asdistinctfrom 170th writ-
ten scripture on the one hand and ordinary colloquialdiscourse on the
other,m ightalso bebroached.Thereligioussignificance oftheintroduc-
tion ofwriting into hum an history would betouched upon,perhaps.The
basic issuewould be:scripture asa religiousform .
A11 this, however,would be introductory only.The bulk of the
coursewould be historical:an investigation into the history ofthe Bible
over the pasttwenty centuries.Before one considersthiswith any speci-
ficity,theprimepointisto recognizethatin thisfashion theBiblewould
be treated as a living force in the life of the Church.M y own field is
lslamics;and in thatfield 1 devote a fairam ountof time and energy to
trying to makevivid to my studentsthefactthattheQur'àn,ifitisto
be understood in anything remotely approaching its religious signifi-
cance,mustbe seen asnotm erely a seventh-century Arabian document
(which hastendedtobethewayinwhichWesternOrientalists,asdis-
tinctfrom religionists,have treated it)butalso asan eighth-,and a
twelfth-,and aseventeenth-,and atwentieth-century docum ent,and one
intim ately intertw ined in the lifenotonlyofArabiabutalso ofEastAfrica
andIndonesia.FortheQur'ànhasplayedarole-formative,dominating,
liberating,spectacular- in the lives of m illions of peopleyphilosophers
and peasants,politicians and m erchants and housewives,saintsand sin-
ners,in Baghdad and Cordoba and Agra,in the SovietU nion since the
STU DY O F RELIGIO N
Comm unistrevolution,and so on.Thatrole isworth discerning and pon-
dering.The attemptto understand the Qur':n isto understand how it
has fired the im agination,and inspired the poetry,and form ulated the
inhibitions,and guided theecstasies,and teased theintellects,and ordered
the fam ily relationsand the legalchicaneries,and nurtured thepiety,of
hundredsofmillionsofpeople in widely diverse clim esand overaseries
ofradically divergentcenturies.
To studytheQur':n,then,isto studymuch morethanitstext;and
much moreofsocialconditionsthanthosethatprecetkd(oraccompanied)
its first appearance in history and contributed to its formation.The
importanthistoryforanunderstandingofthisscripture(asscripture)is
notonly of itsbackground butalso,and perhapsespecially,ofitsalmost
incredibleongoingcareersince.W hatproducedtheQur'à.
n isaninterest-
ing and legitimate question,buta secondary one.Lessm inor than it,less
antiquarian,religiously much more significant,isthem atwelousquestion,
W hathasthe Qursàn produced? Indeed,any interestthatthe former
question m ay have is derivative from the power of some at least tacit
answer to the latter.Itisbecause ofwhatthe Qurgin hasbeen doing,
mightilyandcontinuingly,inhuman livesfora11thesecenturiesafterit
waslaunched,thatanyone takesthe troubleto notice itslaunching atall.
Forreligiouslife,the story offormativecenturiesislogically subordinate
tothatofsubsequentages.(Itispossibletooverlookthisfactonlyfrom
within faith;that is,ohly when the significance for the later period is
taken asgiven.)
TheQur'ân issignificantnotprimarilybecauseofwhathistorically
wentinto itbutbecause ofwhathistorically hascome outof it;whatit
hasdoneto human lives,and whatpeoplehavedone to itand with itand
through it.TheQur'ân issignificantbecause ithasshown itselfcapable
ofserving a com munity asa form through which itsm embershavebeen
able(havebeenenabled)todealwiththeproblemsoftheirlives,tocon-
frontcreatively a seriesofvaried contexts.To understand the Qur'ân is
to understand b0th that,and how,thishasbeen happening.
One m ay go further and ask:W hatisitaboutbeing human,that
onecantakesuchabook(onethatoutsidersoftendonotevenfindinter-
esting)and,havingmadeitascriptureforoneself,can gooutintothe
world and in term sofitbuild a com munity and a civilization,produce
literature and artand 1aw and com mercialstructures,and in termsofit
continueto findm eaning and couragein lifewhen thecivilization wanes,
and nobility in death when life wanes?
H e or she is a feeble and sorry historian who underestimates-
under-perceives- the power of symbols in human life,or the power of a
scripture to function symbolically alzd asan organized battery ofsymbols.
22 RETH IN KIN G SCRIPTU RE
To return to the Christian Bible.Ithasnotplayed in W estern or
Christian lifethecentralrolethattheQur'àn hasplayedin lslamiclife;
yetthe query,whatsignificance bas ithad,isclearly no m ean question.
The first point,then, is to sec the Bible not m erely as a set of
ancientdocumcntsoreven asa first-and second-century productbutas
a third-century and twelfth-century and nineteenth-century and contem-
porary agent.Since I myselfam an historian,I supposethatmy evident
predilection isto treatthis historically,and to feelthatin no otherway
can itssignificance be understood.Asalready suggested,however,1feel
thatitsrole(andindeedtheroleofanythingelse)inhistorycanbeillumi-
nated,and even m ustbe illum inated,by lightthrown on hum an history
by psychological,sociological,and com parativistperspectives.The dom i-
nantpointin thiscase isto understand the potentialand the actualroles
ofsuch ascripture in the life ofthe im agination,itsrole asan organizer
ofideas,im ages,and em otions,asan activating symbol.
Theanalyticmodethatforsometim ehasdom inated W estern intel-
lectuallife,particularly academic life,tendsto take anything thatexists
and to break itdown into parts.Historianstoo have become victimsof
this,even attimesto thcpointoffailing to recognizethatthe firstbusi-
nessofanyhistorian istobeastonished thatany given thingin thehistor-
icalstream doesexistand to try to understand how itcam e togetherand
what its coming together subsequently meant.If something has been
im portant,we mustanalysenotonlyitbutalso itsim portance;itshistory,
almost,isthehistory ofitsimportance.Theanalysisofathing isinterest-
ing and can be highly significant,butonly suLsidiarily;strictly,the his-
tory of that thing begins once itsparts are synthesized.The historian's
task is to study the process of synthesis,plus the subsequentprocessof
thatsynthesisasitmovesthrough laterhistory.
There hasdeveloped a tendency,one mightalmostsay,to Gorient
history backwards,''asthough the task ofthehistorian vis-à-visany phe-
nomenon in the courseofthe human story were to obsetweitand bitby
bitto analyse itscomponentpartsand causesand antecedents,and to trace
them fartherand fartherback into m oreand morerem oteantiquity.D oes
thehistorian need reminding thattime'sarrow ispointed theotherway?
Thatthe history ofathing isratheritsongoing life,itsram ifying results,
itsdevelopmentand growth and change,eventuallyperhapsitsdisappear-
ance or disintegration (forwards)into partsoritstransmutation into
something else?By allm eansletus,with regard to anything,know how
itbecam e;but1etusstudy furtherhow and whatitwenton becoming.
Thestudy ofhistory mustbe in largepartthe study ofcreativity.
Thefirstim perativeforthestudentoftheBible,accordingly,in the
modern world,isnotto take the Bible forgranted and then to see what
STU DY O F RELIGION 23
itsaysorwhatconstituentelem entswentinto it,oranythingofthatkind;
butratherto explain how itcame aboutasascri pture,how itcame to be
thatthevariouselementsthatcom prise itwereputtogether,and how it
came aboutthatChristianscontinued,century aftercentury,to find rea-
son to go on prizing and sacralizing it and responding to it- and with
whatresults.
O ne m inorillustration.M arcion used to beregarded asa uheretic,'
and he hasbeen studied asa person who wished to txleaveout''the O 1d
Testament from the Bible.This pre-supposes a two-Testament Bible,
instead ofbeing astounded by it.Itispossible to take M arcion,rather,as
an illustration ofthe factthatwe cannottakeforgranted thatthe Chris-
tianBibleshouldbein twoparts(letaloneexistata11),thatitshould
subsumetheJewish Bibleby adevice thatsimultaneously incorporates
and supersedes it,and so on.Involved here isthe subtle question ofthe
relation between two religioussystem sorcom munities.O ne could touch
briefly here on the somewhat comparable,som ewhatdifferent,Islam ic
handlingof170th Christian andJewishpositions,asthingsoncevalidbut
now superseded,and on the generalissue ofhow a religiousM ltanschau-
ung can cope with another com munit' y thatis historically prior to it in
time,butm ayproveincapableofcopingwith onethatarisessubsequently.
Itwould be going too far afield to explore thisissue atany length,but
any treatm entofthe Christian Bible thatfailed to dealwith it atleast
seriously,if brieily,could hardly be considered adequate.The fact that
theJewishBibleiscalled (andnotmerely called;rather,isperceivedas)
the<<OldTestament''inChristendom (andstillintheHarvardPII.D.pro-
graml)hashadprofoundconsequences170thinChristianhistoryandJew-
ishhistory(throughChristian-lewishrelations).
(A comparativistaside.ThehistoryoftheJewishBible,despitethe
sim ilarity oftext,would constituteadifferentcourse- oraseparatesector
oftheBible asscripture.The factthatthe sam em aterialhasfunctioned,
ofcourse differently,in the livesoftwo differentcom munitiesover the
centuriescould itselfbeeducative,andexciting.How differently,itwould
be the businessof such a study to unfold.That the story ofthe Exodus
served-mightily-asasymbol(activating,salvific?jofliberationforlews
in away perhapscomparable to thatof the Resurrection for Christians
couldbeexplored.Andsoon.ButhereIleavea1lthisaside.)
The facthaving been considered,then,thatthe Christian Church
decided(consciouslyorunconsciously)tohaveascripture,andconstruc-
tively determined thatitshould have thisparticularone,the storyjust
begins. The history of scriptural interpretation has been a traditional
study (itiseven asub-rubric,oroptionalextra,inthegeneralexamina-
tionsofsomepresentBibledoctorates);butthisisonlyasmallpartof
 RETHIN KIN G SCRIPTURE
theissuethatisnow raised.Theinterpretation (uhermeneutics'')ofthe
Bible,andeven astudy ofthatinterpretation,presupposesthataBibleexists
and even presupposesthatitis(orhasbeen thought)worth interpre-
ting- presupposeswithoutcom mentthe very thingsthatare m ostfasci-
nating and have been m ostdecisive. .
Thequestion isnotmerely,given ascripture,0ow did theChurch
exegete itatvariousstages;butalso,whatroles did thatscripture play,
whatdifference did the factthatthe Church had one,make in the life
of the Catacombists,in the intellectualizing ofthe Fathers,in the reac-
tionsofChristiansatRome in thetime ofthebarbarian devastations,and
so on.'W hatwasthesignificanceofaBiblein the Dark Ages,forscholas-
tic theology and for Gothic cathedrals and the religiousorders? In the
life ofthe imagination in medievaltimes,did the vignettesofincidents
from thelife ofJesusimpingeon theconsciousnessofEurope through
biblicalpassages,directly,or through staincd-glasswindow s?Later,how
did theBiblefunction in shaping themysticalimagination and thepoetry
ofSt.John ofthe Cross?
Forastudy oftheBibleand itsrole in thereligiouslifeofhumankind,
theReformationobviouslysignifiesamassivenew development.(MostBib-
licalstudiesforthe pasthundredyearsin ourseminariesand academic insti-
tutions have been studies from within that transition,rather than studies
aboutit.They haveassumed thattheBiblehasthestatusand theimportance
thattheReformation gaveto it,ratherthan scrutinizing and intemreting to
usthatstatusand importance.Itisfrom thisassumption,for instance,that
currentBiblicalscholarship and itsdoctoralprogramsarise and therein fail
to see,even to-day,thatfor the subsequent' W est,itis the Bible thathas
made ancientPalestinesignificant,notviceversa.)'
Whatthenew post-
Reformation rolefortheBibledid to people,to theirimaginations,to their
perception ofthe worldsto their sexuallife,to theirdom inatiou ofa new
continentinAmerica,aresuch mattersthat,ifonedoesnotunderstandthem,
surely one doesnotunderstand the Bible.
AlongwiththeReformationas-ofcourse-amajorfactorofhistorical
changein therole oftheBiblein Chistendom,andalongwith awiderange
ofother large and smallfactors operative ataboutthe same time,another
clearly majorfactorwastheinvention and widespreaduseofprinting.Our
envisaged course would examinewhathappened to the role oftheBible in
personaland sociallifewhen itwasnotonly translated into thevernaculars
butwasalsomultipliedmechanicallybytype-print.(Therelationofprinting
to scriptureisnotstraightforward,however.ln Christendom ,theBiblewas
virtually the first thing to be printed,and was forem ost in 'W estern
humanity'sresponse to the medium ;in the Islamic world,on the other
hand,when printing was introduced it was agreed that secular books
STU DY O F RELIGIO N 25
mightbeprintedbuttheQur':n deliberatelywasnot.)
Closely linked with the question ofprinting,whosehistoricalim pact
on the Bible has,ofcourse,been complex,the spread of literacy hmsalso
beenofmajorimpingement.W emaytakeonecolorfulexampleofthismat-
terfrom lifeon thisAmerican continent,whereamong someofustalesfrom
thepioneering daysofhom esteadersare partofthe living lorewith which
we grew up.In some fam iliesthe time isnotaltogetherrem otewhen the
Biblewasperhapsthe only book in a given home.ltwastreasured and rever-
enced in away to which the factthatitwasthe only book in the home is
surely hardly irrelevant.Clearly that situation isradically differentfrom a
m odern hom ewhere the number ofbooksisoverwhelm ing.O ur culture
hasgonethrough an intennediatephase in which agood library wasamat-
terofprideand dignits even ofprestige;a library which certainly included
theBible,probablyasan outstanding item.N owadays,in contrast,the num -
ber ofbooks pouring offour presses isinundatingly vast;a collection of
booksis a burden for which the apartment-dweller hardly knows how to
find space;and in thissituation the role of ascripturcx- no matterwhatits
contentm ightbe,norwhatone'sfaith- can hardly be thesam easitwasin
thatpioneering homestead context.
Oneneed notagreewith M ctyuhan thattheageoftheprintedbook,
the Gutenberg era,isover,to recognizethatwith the astronomicnumber
ofnew booksbeing published every year the ageof avery specialbook,
treated differently from a11otherspsychologically,metaphysically,socio-
logically,ischanged.
The m ore standardly recognized change in the W est's and the
Church'sunderstanding ofthc Bible overthe pastcentury hasbeen that
effected by the rise of historicalcriticism.Again,most recentBiblical
study hasbeen produced from within thatmovement.Theundergraduate
coursethatweare envisaging here would,rather,look atthatmovement
from the outside:would describe it,analyse it,assessit.The m ovem ent,
effectively,isover.ltcan no longerdominate,noreven setwe,ourunder-
standing of the Bible.Rather,almostvice-versa,itbecom esinstead part
ofthe nineteenth-and early-twentieth-century history ofChristian han-
dling ofscripture.Clearly a greatmotifin any modern study oftheBible
as scripture would be an inquiry into what happened to it as scripture
with the rise,struggle,triumph,of historical criticism,and what hap-
pened to the localcongregation,to the individualChristian,to personal
piety,to the Sunday service.
One ofthequestionsthatan historicalstudy ofthedevelopmentof
the Bible in religiouslife would profitably tackle,1have long felt,isits
role in the bifurcation in W estern culturaland intellectuallife between
myth and history.W e are beginning now to apprehend the historicalas
 RETHIN KIN G SCRIPTU RE
one form of human consciousness,and to see thatform arising histori-
cally,recently.N ow thatwe arebeginning also,and stillmore recently,
to have a deep and potentially authentic,although stillincipient,under-
standing ofthe roleofmyth in hum an lifeand society,wecan apprehend
much moresignificantlywhatwashappeningwhen thgBiblefunctioned
mythically.W e have notyet had m uch serious study of the historical
processby which thisfunction hasbecom edisintegratedin modern times.
To carry itoutwould requirerigorousscholarship andbrilliantsensitivity;
butitwould be enormously rewarding.
W ith the relatively recentrise in W estern consciousness,culminat-
ing in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries,ofthe new sense of
history,and the(consequentilcarefuland rigorousdistinction between
historyand myth,something majorhappened.Onemightputthematter
this way.Previously- certainly al1through the M iddle Ages,the early
Reform ation stage,and am ongpiousChristiansrightup untilthetwenti-
eth century- the Biblicalstoriesfunctioned simultaneously as170th myth
and history.W hen a sharp discrim ination between thesetwo waspressed
in W estern intellectual life,w hat happened by and large was that the
W estopted forhistory and rejected myth.Thiswastrue even ofthe
Church,which when ithad to choose decided to treattheBible histori-
cally.(Anheroicchoice?Andafatefulone.Itspeakswellfortheintegrity
and courageoftheChurch'sleadersthatthey chose relentlessly topursue
whatthey thought to be truth,in this dilem ma;but itspeaksfor their
lack ofcreativediscernm ent,thatthey,liketheircontemporaries,thought
thathistoriography hadtodowithtruthbutmyth didnot.)
M ightone almost make symbolic ofthisdevelopment,the m oment
(eighteenth century)whenBishopUssher'sdate4004B.C.wasbestowed
on the firstchapter of Genesis? Later,the Church agonized over the fact
thatthatdateforcreation waswrong.W em ay recognizenow thattheprob-
lem wasnot thatparticulardate,butany date ata1l,the giving ofa date;
thenotion thatoneisdealing herewith historicaltim e,ratherthan mythical
time.(Moreexactly:thisbecameaproblem.Fortherewasan earliertime
when itwasnotso,a timebeforeEurope had discovered thatmythsdo not
havedates.)IfinsteadBishopUssherhadused,andeditionsoftheBiblehad
putin themarginsoratthetop ofthepage,thephrase in illotempore,would
ourhistory overthe pastwhile havebeen different?
Probably not,because only now are we beginning to apprehend
intellectually orself-consciously whatkind ofrealm itis,whatdimension
ofour life,to which thatphrase,oruonce upon atime,''refers.W hen a
medievalpeasantwent to church and saw in a stained-glasswindow or
heard in a sermon an incidentfrom thelifeofJesus,heorshedid not
apprehend that incident as something that happened historically in our
STU DY O F RELIGIO N
modern sense ofhistory.Rather,their apprehension wasa complex one,
in which the counterpartfactorsto whatwe today would regard asthe
mythicalwere,1should guess,atleastassubstantialasthose counterpart
to ourm odern sense ofliteralchronologicalhistory.Through thesacra-
m entsand much else,butalso because he orshe lived before the separa-
tion between myth and history, Christ was a present reality in their
life- in away thathasceased to bethe case form ostm oderns,attheend
ofa processofdemythologization the course ofwhich am odern student
oftheBible oughtto beable to trace forus.The impetusto demytholo-
gize,and the pricethatour culture haspaid for thisand foritsinability
to remythologize,are m attersthatitisthebusinessofa religion depart-
menttostudyandtoelucidate.(Bultmannistobestudiedinrelationnot
to thefirstcentury so much asto thetwentieth;justasW ellhausen was
once interesting for an interpretation of the second and first m illenia
B.C.,butnow forthenineteenthcenturyA.D.)
M yth and history can be re-integrated by them odern intellect,per-
haps,by pondering the role ofm yth in human history.The course that
we proposewould be no lessrigorously historicalthan the m ostaustere
ofhistoriographies;butitwould be the history ofmyth thatwould be
illum inated,orbetter,the historicalfunctioning ofmyth,the history of
humanity with myth (andmorerecently- aberrantly?-withoutit).An
historicalstudy ofthe Bible,to be done well,would inherently have to
bean attempt(typical,somewould contend,ofareligiondepartment's
taskin general)tounderstandhumanhistoryasthedramaofourliving
our life in history while being consciousof living it in a context tran-
scending history.The mythical,farfrom contrasting any longerwith the
historical,can nowadaysbeseen aswhathadm adc human historyhum an.
Even thosewho do notsee this,mustrecognizethatthe mythicalhasin
substantialpartm ade hum an history whatithasin factbeen.Certainly
the history ot'the W est isin significant degree a history ofthe role of
the Bible.Our task,importantand exhilarating,isto elucidate this.
M ost illuminating ofa11to elucidate,would be how the Bible has
selwed,and form any stillserves,spiritually:W hatisthe meaning ofthe
(historical)factthatthroughitpersonsand groupshavefoundcommit-
ment,liberation,transcendence?In itover the centurieshave come into
focusforitsreadershuman destiny and a11ourultimateconcerns.Atcer-
tain historical m om ents it has given 170th shape and power to
humankind'sdrive- orcall- to socialjustice;atothermoments,to their
capacity- or gift- to endure tyranny and terror.Itisa scripture in that
itdeals,hasdealt,so farasthe actuallives ofpersonsand groupsis con-
cerned,only secondarily with finite thingsand primarily with infinite;
here hasbeen given form the hum an sense of living- in terror,fascina-
28 RETH IN KIN G SCRIPTURE

tion,mystery,and grace- in relation to w hatis more than mundane,in

oneself and beyond.Through the Bible people have found not merely
ancienthistory butpresentsalvation,notmerelyJesusbutChrist,not
merely literature but God, millions attest.Those who do not use or
understand these term sm ustwrestlewith thefactthatmul. î
.
titudesofper-
sonshave through theBible been involved with thatto which they give
2
such nam es.To study the Bible m ustbe to strive to understand it as a
channel,w hich it has observably been,between humankind and tran-
scendence.TheBible hasnotitselftransformed lives,buthasintroduced
persons and societies to that which transform s,its committed readers
affirm ,the historical obsetwer reports,and the department of religion
Scripture as Form
mustnote and interpret.
Thefinalsectorofourcoursewould dealwith the question,W hat and C oncept:
doesthe Church,whatdo moderns,do with the Bible now? N ow that
we know and understand thatthe m aterialthatconstitutesthe Bible is
what the historicalcriticstell us,whatnext? Now thatwe have some
T heir Em ergence
sophisticated awarenessof the role ofscripturesin variouskindsof cul-
ture,ofthe role ofsymbolsin variouskindsofpsychology and societ y for the W estern W orld
ofthe role of myth in human consciousness,whatnext? Now that we
have seen w hat the Bible hasbeen in human life in thepast,whatshall
it be now? Thispart of the course could be descriptive and analytic,a WilfreiCantwellSmitb
study oftheprocessofwhathasrecently been and isnow happening.It
could also,in thecaseofsome scholarsand teachersofapossibly creative
quality,be constructive.
The role of the Bible in contemporary Christian life- in personal
piety, in liturgy,in theologicalnorm ativeness, in m uch else- would be
an inquiry continuousw ith a study ofthe dynamic role ofthe Bible in
the lifeoftheChurch,and ofW estern society,overthepastmany centur- Taken forgranted forsomew hile now in the' W esthasbeen thatofcourse
1CS,aswellasinstructive in itself. many religionshave scriptures.Ofcourse these differ in whatthey have
W hat the Bible has been,has done,what role it has played in to say;yetthere hasbeen little hesitation in appiying theterm Rscripture''
human life;and whatitisdoing in m odern life,whatrole itisplaying; to them all,generically.The word isitself' W estern,and earlierhad been
and in a few caseswhere imaginative extrapolation is allowed,what it applied specifically, and only, to the Bible, as revered by Christians
may become, what role it may or might or should yet play in our and- ratherdifferently- byJews.
lives- these aresignificantquestionsywhich areligion departmentmight Everything thatexists on earth.however,has come into existence
surely tackle,170th legitimatcly andrewardingly.The relation oftheBible historically;and it isrewarding,asone considersthe history of human
to Palestine,oneisalmosttem pted to say,wem ightleavetotheoriental- affairs,to take nothing for granted,inquiring ratherinto the processby
ist departments.From religion departm ents we look for some study,I which thingsthatexisthaveemerged.Thisturnsoutespecially so ofmat-
would hope historical,ofthe relation ofthe Bible to us. tersso massively importantin hum an life asScripture haswidely proven
lfIwerechairm an ofsuch adepartment,Iwould very deeply desire itselfto be.Itisrewarding,further,to note how thingswith which we
to have acourse among the departmentalofferingson the History ofthe are familiar and thatwe take for granted,partly because they have been
BibleasScripture.Yetwherecould Ifind asçholarwith doctoraltraining withusforalongtime,haveinfactchanged(evolved,degenerated)over
time: have differed from century to century.lt is rewarding also, in
equipping him orher in thisfield? comparativistvein,to come to recognizehow differing culturesand civil-
 RETHIN KIN G SCRIPTU RE
izationsand religiousorientationshaveperceived thingsthatto hasty view
appearsimilar.Sim ilaritiesno doubtthereare,170th from century to cen-
tury and from community to community.Yetdifferencescan be no less
important,especially when they turn outto l)estark.D ifferencesofcon-
tentamong the diverse scripturesofthe variousreligiousgroupshave of
coursebeen recognized,asalready rem arked.D ifferenceso'fform ,ofcon-
cept,of the role ofScripture in human life,in piety orpolitics,ofwhat
itmcansto rcgard a cextasscriptural,havebeen lessstudied- eitherover
tim e oroverspace.
Asoursub-title intimates,thispresentinquiry isinto thehistorical
processbywhich thenotion ofscripturalizing arose,acoupleofthousand
yearsago in the NearEast.Thatprocesscan beseen ascom ing to a head,
asitwere,in theQur'àn.Itcan beseenasconstituted,gradually,ofmany
strands,some ofwhich go back very far,othersofwhich were laterthan
isoften sensed.O ur suggestion is that an understanding ofour human
situation,ofm attersin which wehavebeen and are involved,can befur-
thered by ourbecom ing m ore consciousofthatprocess.
ltisilluminating,Isuggest,to begin with theseventh century A.D.
asthevirtually culm inatingstageoftheprocess,and to traceitthen back-
wardsin tim e.
'tlslam ...is pre-eminently a...religion of the book,'' says the
phenomenologistvan derLeeuw iland any ofuswho study M uslim his-
tory orany facetofM uslim lifecan documentthatcharacterization richly.
M any yearsago Iadvanced theview thatthenotion ofaparallelbetween
theM uslim Qur'ànandtheChristianBible,astwoinstancesofthegenus
scripture,isofcourse a firstapproximation,but only that;closerto the
truth ofthe two situationsisan analogy between theroleoftheQur'ln
in lslamic lifeand thought,and the role in Christian life and thoughtof
thefigureofChrist.ForChristians,God'scentralrevelation isin theper-
son ofChrist,with theBibleasrecord ofthatrevelation.Thecounterpart
to thelatter,in theIslamicschemeofthings- therecord ofrevelation- is
the M uslim so-called u'Tradition,''Laiîtlt,a secondary group ofwritings
in the lslamic complex- decisive,yet secondary.z This thesis has been
fairly widely accepted oflate,even among sophisticated M uslim thinkers,
1etalone among comparativistW estern scholars.Qur'ân isto M uslims
what Christ is to Christians.It is difficult to exaggerate the centrality,
and the transcendence,ofthe M uslim scripture forM uslim faith.
O thercom munitieshaveproduced sacred books,asweknow;in the
lslamiccase itwasthesacred book,rather,thatproduced the com munity.
M uslims,from thebeginning untilnow,arethatgroup ofpeoplethathas
coalesced around the Qur'ân.Muhammad isimportantin the Islamic
worldview because he broughtthe Qur'àn;he deriveshissignificance
SCRIPTU RE AS FO RM AN D CO N CEPT
from thatfact.The M uslim world protested w hen,in the 19th century,
the '
W estcalled theirreligiousmovementRM oham medanism z'asthough
hewere primary.(Similarly,Christiansprotestwhen Muslimshonour
christ'tbecausehe broughtthe N ew Testamenty''asthough itwere pri-
mary.)ForMuslims,God isprimary;theirrelation to Him (islâm )is
mediatedthrough theQur'ân.Forthem,itstandsuncreated,pre-existent.
The 'W ord of God is eternal,is an attribute of God Him self;and like
otherattributes,ttitisnotHc norisitother than H e.''Apartfrom these
theoreticalconsiderations,thepracticalroleoftheQur'ân inIslamiclife
hasthroughoutbeen central:notonly morality,piety,liturgy,and what
the '
W estcallslaw,butin art- especially calligraphy- ,in gramm ar,and
SO 0n.
MuslimspayJewsand Christiansthecomplimentofcalling them
also Rpeople ofthe Book,''by which they m ean that these groupshave
whatapproximates,whether closely or in partially distorted fashion,to
religion in itstrueand properform- asdistinctfrom pagansandidolaters
who,withoutdivine revelation in thisform ,are lost.
Ihavebegun with these rem arksnotin orderto speak aboutIslam ,
butin orderto speak aboutScripture.The Islam icinstance representsthe
notion par excellence of Scripture as a religious phenom enon;and my
thesisisthatit does so asthe culm ination of an historicalprocessto be
discerned in theN earEast,gradually solidifyingoverthecenturies.Scrip-
ture asa form and asaconcept gradually em erged and developed in the
N earEast,Iam suggesting,in aprocessofslow crystallization whosevir-
tuallycompletestagecomeswith theQur'ân.
M any have of late been reconstructing the story of this m atter,
internally asitwere,for theBible;firstthe O ld Testament,and then the
New.HereweareendeavoringtoseetheemergenceoftheBible's(one
couldsay,thetwoBibles',ChristianandJewish)context.Fortheprocess
in which itwas,orthey were,involved- theprocessin w hich,one might
bettersay,theircoalescenceswerein duecourseinvolved- seemsto have
transcended their particular form ation.I am already suggesting thatit
transcended it in tim e at this end by showing up in a more developed
form in the 7th century A.D .in the Islam icm ovem ent.Ittranscended it
in tim e atthe otherend by having gotlaunched,scholarshave begun to
recognize,in Babyloniaand pre-lsraelite Canaan in thesecond millenium
B.C.,aswe shallrem ark later.It transcended it religiously,1think that
wecansee,ifwenote(movingbackwardsnow from theQur'àn)thelater
Zarathushtrian and the M anichee and the M andaean and theBabylonian
and the AncientEgyptian.
Ittranscended italso culturally,ifone takesinto account,asIthink
we must,theAlexandrian gramm arians'canonizing ofwhatwe in their
32 RETHIN KIN G SCRIPTURE
wake stillcallthe classicsof Greek literature,atroughly the sam e tim e
as,oralittlebefore,theemergence(inthesametown)oftheSeptuagint.
One could readily argue thatthese,including the Greek Septuagint,had
aninfluenceon thedevelopmentofaJewishnotion ofscriptureandthen
latera Christian one- orvice-versa:influences,ifoneisto usethatword,
were active in 170th,or1etussay all,directions.Yetrathe/than arguing
that,atleast here,I shallsuggestrather thatal1the variegated parts of
these several developm ents can best be understood as various details
within oneover-allprocess- which lam calling the em ergence ofscrip-
ture asform and conceptfor the W estern world.
'W hen Isay thattheQur'àn culminatesthisprocess,Ido notmean
to suggestthattheprocessaltogetherstopsatthatpoint.A thousand years
latertheGranth jàh
.ib,thescriptureofthethen emergentSikh commu-
nity in India,the form of itand the concept of it and itsplace in the
personalpiety and corporate polity of the Sikh com munity for the last
threeorso centuries,weremanifestly influenced in turn bytheQur'ân:
by Scripture asaform and a conceptin thereligiouslifeofthe M uslim s
withwhichtheSikhmovementemergedascontinuous.(Itwascontinu-
ousalso,inanotherwayandIthinklessclosely,with theHindu.)Even
closerto ourown day,Joseph Smith intheUnited Stateswith hisBook
ofM orm on,forexam ple,illustratesthatthe notion wasstill generative
asrecently asthe 19th century,even though in the 20th ithasbecome
ratherproblem atic even foroldertraditions.
Yet none of these instances carries our development any further.
Qur'àn andBiblehaveservedasmodelsforsubsequentinstances,butthere
hasbeennoievelopmentsincetheQur'àn.In,probably,the9thcenturyA.D.,
or in any case substantially after the M uslim conquest of Iran, a
Zarathushtrian book states that Zarathushtra t' brought the religion''and
engraved the 1200 chaptersofiton tabletsofgo1d.3Indeed,foratimemod-
ern scholarsthoughtthatthe writing down oftheAvesta in thefonn ofa
book occurred after the rise and dominance of Islam :partly in imitation;
partlyunderM uslim pressure,asaZarathushtrian responsetoexplicitIslamic
recognition ofthe higherstatus,politicaland economic aswellasspiritual,
ofcommunitieswith ascripture.4M orerecently,ithasbeen recognized that
thatprocessin the zarathushtrian case had in factbegun somewhatbefore
the rise ofIslam:yetnotvery long before.ln any case,itcame to fruition
only afterthearrivaloftheM uslimsandundertheirinfluence.A rendering
ofthe Avestainto some sortofwritten form can nowadaysbe discerned as
attested incipiently atleastin the sixth century A.D .Yetitsconsolidation
into a recognized holy book seem sdefinitely to have followed upon the
establishmentin Iran ofthe lslam ic outlookos
The Zarathushtrian case isillum inating for two reasons.Oneisits
SCRIPTURE A5 FO IkM AN D CON CEPT 33
instancing abilateralorintertwining relationship oftwo scripturaldevel-
opm ents.Indeed,notonly didcertain stepsin thelong-drawn-outIranian
processoccurunderthe influence and stimulusofthe Qur'àn,butalso
vice-versa.TheQur'âncanbeseennotonlyascontinuouswith theBibli-
caltradition ofawritten sacred book,which isexplicitwithin it,butalso
ascontinuouswith themore distinctively oral/auraltradition thatfor
long had characterized the Zarathushtrian case.Thisraisesthe second of
these points,concerning theconceptRscripture''itself,and especially the
word.
'
W hen a century ago through Oxford University PressM ax M uller
published- and this was an important event in 'Western culture- his
so-volume series ofworld scriptures,he entitled it<tsacred Booksof the
East'!Hedid nothesitateto callthem ç'books,'Iim agine.Theword RBible''
designatedbooks,and theword uscripture''designateswhatiswritten.The
word Qur,
ön,on the otherhand,signifiesnotwhatiswritten butwhatis
recited.Those who know Hebrew will recognize the Semitic root qarala
occurring in,forinstance,Isaiah 40:RA voicecrying in the wildernessn- or
çç
proclaiming''
,oncmightsay.TheQur'ânisthesacredbookparexcellence,
nodoubt;yetequally,itrepresents(asdootherscripturesalso,butsomeless
strikingly)divinerevelationasspoken and heard.Untilto-day,recitingof
theQur'l.
n isahigh art,ofreligiousmoment.TheQur'ân isthefirstbook
in the Arabic language;and the notion ofwriting is decisively included,
proudly,in itsown text.Nonetheless,alongsidereadingtheQur'ànandthe
meritarldartofwritingic,thehearingoftheQur'ânandtheattimeshighly
technicalartand thedeep devotion ofreciting italoudhavefrom theearliest
timesand untiltoday played asalientrolein the life ofM uslim culture and
Personalpiets6
The word Rscripture''signifieswhat isw ritten down;asdo allits
cognatesand counterpartsin '
w estern languages:I'
Lcriture;Scrittura;iie
Scbri
ft;plusItëgraphë,haigrapbaiintheprecedingGreek,forinstancein
the N ew Testament;and thc Hebrew Ketûbîm- thislastregularly forthe
latercomponentsoftheTanakh,orO ld Testament,used much lessoften
to include itsearlier,more basic,elem ents.W e shallsee the importance
ofthispointpresently.Similarly the word e<Bible'',the Greek biblia,the
Hebrew seper,signify 'Ebook''(aword thathasitselfchanged itsmeaning
virtuallyeverycenturyoverthelasttwenty-five).NonethelesstheBible,
overm uch ofitslife,and notonly forthose many who held itsacred and
were illiterate,hasbeen heard,aswellas- and untilrecentcenturiesno
doubtm uch more than- received through the eyes,offthe page.lthas
been said thatthe ProtestantReform ation,in stressing the Preaching of
the '
W brd,and in rejecting whatitcalled theidolatry ofthe mediœval
Church'simages,constituted a shiftfrom the visualto the auralfor at
 RETHIN KIN G SCRIPTUR.
E SCRIPTU RE AS FO RM AND CO N CEPT
leastN orthernEurope'sprim ary apprehension oftheDivine.Itsemphasis
on theBiblewaspartofthis.'
W hen the1611KingJamesVersion ofthe
English Biblecertified on itstitle-pagethatitwasuAppointed tobeRead
in Churches'' ,this did not mean that anyone who had a private copy
should repairto the localchurch building w heneverheorshewished to
peruseitspages.Rather:in tlle Christian casealso,theoralrebitation- or
proclam ation- of God's W ord,in the hearing of the people- but also
more quietly,from m em ory,in the privacy ofone'spersonallife- means
thattheword 'xscripture''in itsetymologicalsenseisnotafully accurate,
fully adequate,term forourphenomenon.?M ightone say thatno Chris-
tian service,from baptism to burial,let alone the weekly gathering on
Sunday,isformally authentic- could one say,none isofficial?- w ithout
apublic reading,aloud,from Scripture?
In the early Christian Church,by theway,the Syriacword forwhat
inthesetwicewecallRlesson''(French,leçon,recitation),orforHreading
the lesson''- to use that tautology- is qeryâna: whence, evidently,
<&Qur'J.
n*3
.8
Thisdoubleinvolvement,then,written andoral/aural,book and
recitation- although something in which the Bible hasparticipated,in
170ththeChristianandtheJewishcase(theJewish term miqra'isfrom
thesamerootl- isonceagain displayed mostfullybytheQur'àn.In this
matter,theQur'ànculminatesaNearEastern processofwhich thewrit-
ten strand maybem orecharacteristicoftheSem iticbackground,thereci-
tation aspect m ore characteristic of the lranian.For a thousand years,
what we with some uncouthness call Zarathushtrian uscriptures''were
Primarily recited,chanted,incanted;Rmurmured'' ,astheoutsiders'reports
ofPersian mattersin thisconnection regularly putit.9The Persian term s
themselveslo are rather:to learn by heart,to memorize;but apparently
thismemorizingwasregularlydoneoutloud(asisstilltrueamongBom-
bayPàrsls,aslpersonallyhavehadoccasiontoobsetve).
In the world-wideprevalenceand usage ofsacred textsasageneric
human (ordivine?)matter,onefindstwobroadtypesintowhichwemay
classify the various instances:those where reciting,or reading out loud,
isprim ary;and thosewhere thewritten form is.In severalcasesthealter-
native form isthen secondary.ln severalcasesan historicalshiftcan be
traced from theone to the other,slow ly overthe centuries,orm orerap-
idly.In somecases(butmoststrikingly onlywith theQur'àn?)thetwo
arequiteconjoined.Yetthey may certainlybedistinguished.
The Hindu instance (especially with j'
ruti) was primarily and
emphatically oralformillennia- indeed,atleastuntiltheEuropean M ax
M ûller'sprinted edition ofthe Rig-vedafrom 1854.Turning the Hindu
I/J;Iinto awritten book isan entrancing instance ofnineteenth-century
'
W estern culturalim perialism ,here quietly im posing the 'W estern sense
of 'tscripture':The pre-lslam ic Zarathushtrian instance is oral like the
H indu;yetcoming into belated buteventually fairly close contactwith
the Semiticwritten form and concept,it servesasa kind oflink.Ihave
notyetinvestigated the degree to w hich a post-persian-contactphase in
theQur'àn'sorality can bediscerned.
Although theAvestawasprobably w ritten down,atleastin part,by
550 A.D .- thatis,in stillpre-lslam ic times- itseem snotto have been
thought ofasa boob untilpost-lslamic,a couple of centuries latenllAs
hasbeen true also elsewhere attim es,at firstwriting was perceived as
simply am nemonicdevice,to facilitate orto ensurethatthe oralrender-
ing be accurate.The oralform wasclearly prim ary;and formany centur-
iesithad been unsupplemented.
Theworld,then,into which Islam and the Qur'àn emerged was
one in w hich already religious comm unities had each its scripture,in
som e form.Thiswasthe situation in the N earEastin the early seventh
century A.D.;and indeed itwasso also already in the sixth,though one
mustnotim agine thatsituation to have been static.In the middle ofthe
sixth, as we have noted, the Avesta- in a language then no longer
spoken- waswritten down,in a script invented for the purpose;and a
Pahlavi(thatis,avernacular)translationof(somepartsoi)italsoappeared
in written form .Alsoby theopening ofthesixth century the Babylonian
Talmud,many scholarsfeel,was (orwasvirtually) completed;others
speak ofthe end ofthatcentury.lzTo putthislastpointin anotherway:
Tôrnb sbepv-rf7/peb,the divine instruction to hum ankind in theform that
had been oralamongJews,reputedly sinceSinai,wasaround 500or600
A.D .crystallized in authoritative form.Thisprocesshad closed in a cen-
tury ortwo earlierfortheJewish community ofJerusalem:itsTalmud
wasççbroughtto closure''by the beginning ofthefifth centuryl3In these
two casesalso,it isinteresting to note,the authoritative or Gcanonical'
form oftheTalmud,asaconsolidated text,wasthe oralversion.Forsev-
eralcenturiesthe written form remained peripheral,secondary.l4
In the fourth century much was going on,throughout the area.
Thiswasthe century duriug which the Christian community made sub-
stantial(althoughnotyetquitefinal)progressincoalescinganew,sup-
plementary,scriptureforitself,in the form ofwhatitcame to calla New
Testament.ls(Itwasin Greek,aswerealso itspreviousScriptures,which
thereuponbecameitsOld Testament:theSeptuagint.)Alsoin thefourth
century the vigorousM anichee movem entformalized itsseven booksof
scripture,paralleling,itseem sconsciously,itsexplicitrivalcontendersfor
afollowing.l6TheM anichee movementwasup-to-datein theseandother
formalm attersfrom the start.ItsfounderM anialready in the third cen-
36 RETH IN KIN G SCRIPTU RE
tury (though thetextmay beapocryphal,perhapsfrom thefourth)is
presented assayingthatotherfoundersofnew religiousmovementswrote
no books,butrather left that to their disciples,citing Zarathushtra,the
Buddha,andJesus.l;Hehimselfwillmakenosuch mistake:heseestoit
thathismessage he himselfwillcomm itto writing.
Thisisanextremelyinterestingobservation:itseemstosukgestthat
already in the third or fourth century the idea had gotaround,at least
to perceptive minds,that religiousm ovem entshave each a book,thata
new religiousm ovem entmusthaveanew written book.O n m ore careful
scrutiny, however, the stage reached at that point is not so clearly
advanced.To have them essage ofone'sgroup'soriginalleaderpreserved
intactin written form and thusavailableisnotyetto indicate necessarily
how formally scriptural,how sacred,that writing isperceived as being
(as,forinstance,W ittgenstein'sfollowers,keentopublishposthumously
theirmaster'swords,ofcourseknowl8).Even toreverewhatsomeone
says,and then to have itwritten down,isnotyetnecessarily to have a
holy book.And aswehavesaid,itseemsto havebeen thefourth century,
rather than the third,that a crystallized M anichee canon is fairly well
congealed, though doubtless in the third the process may have got
underway.
In 1)0th centuries,w hatinterestsm e here is the wider contextin
which thiswas so.In thatwider contextthe M anichee emergence and
developm entare notmerely a symptom,though they surely are that,but
also an active and activating participant.They influenced the others,as
well as vice-versa.Itis from the fourth century also that we have our
earliestdocum entation oftheM andaean thesis,importantlater,thattheir
own and othercomm unities'scriptureswereaffirmed to bepre-existent.lg
Theyexpressedthisideain aform thattheQur'àn laterechoes,and still
later and m ore elaborately,M uslim theology and folklore;a form of
which the second-millenium -B.c.Babylonian and Canaanite m otifsat
which weshallbelooking presently are aforerunner:namely,in theidea
thatthere arebooksin heaven from before creation with humanity'sdes-
tiniesinscribed in them ;and that the Saviour had had privileged access
to thesebooks,bringingtheircontents(later,itwassaid,bringing the
booksthemselves)downtoearthtosharewithhisfellow humans.There
is som e question, however, whether it be apt to call these notions
uM andaean''thisearly.Perhaps.Thecomm unity thatcherished them and
thatgoesby thatAramaicterm forRGnostic''coalescesin the nextcen-
tury (the fifth) or so20 as a distinct identifiable and self-conscious
groupr-perhaps in part as a result of these Gnostic scripturalwritings
(thesetraditionsthatbecamewritten,becamescriptures)?
At the end of that sam e fourth century a centralizing Christian
SCRIPTURE AS FO RM AN D CON CEPT
Pope in Rome decided thata coherentunified Latin version ofthe scrip-
tures(itwouldhardlyyetbecorrecttosay,RoftheBible'')wouldbehelp-
ful;and he asked Jerome to work on it.Thislaid thebasiszlforwhat
crystallized in thesixth century or1ater22astheVulgate- which then for
athousandyears(halfagain thatmuch forRoman Catholics)wasthe
Christian Scripture for the W estern Church.Thisversion had no prede-
cessorsin Latin asaunified,boundaried,authoritative entity aScriptural
book;even though variouspartsofithad predecessors:thisand thatdis-
crete writing,in thisand thatdivergentwording- especially scattered in
N orth Africa.N ordid thenew version itselfyetconstitutesuch an entity,
althoughitdidmuchtofurthertheprocess.z3(InRomeitself,theuseof
GreekforaBiblicaltexthadcontinuedwellintothethirdcentury.)Grad-
ually the Greek word biblia,a plural,became during theM iddle Agesin
Latin a singu1ar.24
Before the fourth century,aswe have noted,the Scripture ofthe
Christian movementwas in effectthe Septuagint,zsa productof Greek
Alexandriaofthethird to firstcenturiesB.C.andbeyond;ofwhich,more
below.Forlike theM anichee,butwith am uch narrower,much lessplur-
alist,awareness,the Christian movementtoo em erged into aworld where
thereligiousmilieu ofwhich itwasaware,theJewish,alreadypossessed
ascripture(orweshouldbettersay,Gscriptures''),aswecanseeinaction
from thenumerousreferencestowhatiswritten,in thepagesoftheGos-
pels,and,to a lessextent,in the Epistles-Yet the O1d Testamentasone
knowsitto-day wasonly partially in m ind,had only partially coalesced;
asthere-iteratedphraseurrheLaw andtheProphets''illuminates(naming
t'wooutofthethreegroupsofwritingspresentlyconstitutingthecanon)
- occasionally, The Law and the Prophets and the Psalms (Luke
24:44)-andoften moresimplyareferencetowhatiswrittenbyMoses
gesusseemstohaveenvisagedMosesasliterallywritingoutthePenta-
teuch,byhand).ThecrystallizingprocesswasinJesus'sdayunmistakably
underway,yethad progressed by then only to acertain stage.Ithad gone
far enough,however,that the idea of a religious community'shaving
scriptureswasadopted,appropriated,absorbed,almostunwittingly.
O fcoursewe have scripture from thepast,theearly Christiansfelt.
The only significantperson seriously to question the ideawas M arcion,
in the second century,w ho saw thenew Christian movementassubstan-
tially differentfrom the one outof which itotherwise felt thatithad
come,yetfrom whichbynow (secondcentury)itwassharplyalienated.
Itissufficiently different,hesuggested,thatitneed notconform to previ-
ousdispensationsin thematterofScripture;justasitneed notin other
matters,such as law,or even in m onotheism .Even he doesnotseem to
havesuggested no scriptureatall,however;hisideawas,rather,the strik-
 RETHINKIN G SCRIPTU RE
ing one thatrather than continuing to have theJewish scripturesthe
Church should generatea new scriptureofitsown.Itisan anachronism ,
however,to think ofhim asadvocating simply d<theN ew Testam enty''as
we used to betold.H eproposed asetofwritingsin som ewayscom para-
b1e to,yetsharply distinctfrom ,thatasyet quite uncrystallized
k
corpus
(onemightsay:non-existentasacorpuszj.Itcomprised twoparts:an
Instrumentum,and Antitho' es:the form er constituted of an abbreviated
Lucan gospeland selected lettersofPaul,drastically amended;the latter,
ofhisown composition,a kind ofcom mentary on the former.27
H is movementwasnotwithoutresult.Itbecam e indeed a move-
m ent,especially in thethird century butenduringin Syriainto thetenth;
itwasmore than idiosyncratic.Theresultwa$notwhathehad in m ind;
yetone may see hismovem entasplaying a significantrole in theprocess
thatconcernsus.TheChurch did nôtdroptheJewish scriptureidea,but
adapteditrather,withatourdeforce,somemightsay:oneaccomplished
over the nextcouple ofcenturies.There are partialparallelslaterin par-
tialtheorythough notinpracticein theQur'àn;and 1000yearslaterthe
Sikh scripturesem ulated thisagain in a minorfashion.28Yetin the end
itcouldbecontended thatChristian scriptureistheonly instancein world
history where one m ovem ent explicitly incorporates the scripture of
anotherassuch within itsown,adding thingsnew butm aking the old
partand parcel- even if,in waysneverfully clarified,zga somewhatsub-
ordinate partand parcel.Itaccomplished thisduring the fourth to sixth
centuries,aswe have said.Itwasmoving gradually towardsitalready in
the third,ofcourse.
Thatwasthe century also in which theJewsculminated atwo-
hundred-year process in their firstcrystallizing ofwhathad been some-
whatdiffuse orallegaltraditionsinto the systematized and laterw ritten
M ishnah.3oThiswasthe century,too,in which the CorpusH ermeticum
wascompleted.3lAlso,and relatedly,in processatthistim ewasa certain
coalescing,though yetincom plete,oftextsfora movem ent thatisstill
alive and wellin m odern America,India,and elsewhere:astrology.The
world history of astrology is complex but not unm anageable: until I
began thispresentinquiry 1had notrealized how interconnected hasbeen
its elaborate and w idespread developm ent around the world,w hat a
coherent historicalprocess ithas constituted,from Egypt in Hellenistic
tim es32into W estern Civilization generally,also eastward to India,and
thence, along with the Buddhist missionary movement,to China and
011.33The chief Sanskrit translations and popularizing textsappearfrom
thesecond and especially third centuriesA.D.;34theimportantHellenistic
work Tetrabiblosofthesecond century A.D..35and thefifth-century com-
pendium ofHephaestosofThebes,36are among textsthathelped to give
SCRIPTURE AS FO RM AN D CO N CEPT 39
thism ovem entpartially systematized coherence in the W est.Yetneither
the m ovem ent,nor these or othersofitswritings,everattained a status
of the same order as the scripturalizing com munitiesthatwe callreli-
gious.M aybe I should nothave introduced thisitem into ourdiscussion
here;Ithoughtitperhapslegitimate to note thatthingswere going on
some of which did,and som e did not,attain a degree of crystallized
specialnessforw hich wordssuch asRsacred''serve.Although 1know in
factrelatively little aboutit,itseem sclear thatthe astrology movem ent,
although incorporating materialsfrom earlierBabylon,em erged basically
in the area and period that here concern us and developed then into a
world-w ideaffairw ith enormousinfluence in the history ofhumankind
since,asa more or lesscoherentsystem ofideas- and yet,neverbecame
a community,and never generated scriptures,two factswhose possible
interrelation would perhaps be worth exploring;and itm ay rem ind us
too that,pacenineteenth-century W estern interpreters'tendencies,reli-
giousm ovem entsare substantially more than systemsofideas.
The second to the seventh centuriesA.D .in the N earEast,then,
show ustheScripture movementin processofcrystallizing.The various
new religiousmovementsofthattime and placeeach participated in that
over-allprocess,in ways- and thisfocusesmy thesis- thatvaried atleast
asm uch,I getthe impression,with the century concerned as with the
particular movement under consideration: the Christian, the various
GnosticandlaterMandaean,theZarathushtrian(notexactlyanew move-
ment),theManichee,variousminorgroupings,andfinallytheIslamic.
Thisphasebeginswiththelewishmovementalreadytosomedegreepos-
sessed ofascripture,itscrystallization reputedly orsymbolically culm inat-
ingin theso-called CouncilofJavneh (Greek,Jamnia)about90A.D.,
but actually somewhat later,37and having developed to thatpointvery
gradually overm any preceding centuries.The story ofthatlong gradual
developm entisnowadaysbeing studied and told with increasing care and
emphasis,38and Ileave thetelling to others,contenting myselfwith call-
ing attention to one ortwo highlights,and chiefly suggesting onceagain
the contextwithin which itseemsto have been embedded- orbetter,to
have been dynamically involved.
In thatcontext,1notespecifically three matters:theGreek classical
tradition;the tradition from Babylon and early Canaan of a celestial-
tablets idea or divine books;and the generaltradition ofw riting.One
ought to include the Iranian developments3g and those from Ancient
Egyptalso,40but1leavcthem aside,with dueapology (awaiting further
study).(1leaveasidealsotheceremonialrecitingofancientepicsinneo-
Babylonianfestivals,andotherMesopotamianmatters.4l)
The Greek tradition isfairly perspicuous.Crucialforusistheemer-
 RETHIN KIN G SCRIPTURE
gence,in whatwe therefore have com e to callpost-classicaltim es,ofa
formalconceptofclassics.H ereaclidesPonticusalready in the middle or
moreprobably late fourth century B.C.adjudged Aeschylus,Euripides,
and Sophoclesto be the Athenian tragediansofsalientworth;and pres-
ently those three,and they alone,were notmerely read butcherished.
Theothers,and Igatherthattherehadbeenseveral,wereforgottln,their
textsare lost,and these three were launched on the career of elevated
statuswith which they have been honoured eversince,untilto-day.42On
the whole the processoccurred a little later thatlthis,especially in the
third century B.C., and especially in Alexandria, where the
z
çravl-alflpf--the word itselfisilluminating:uthose concerned with what
iswrittenn- carefully edited accurate texts,carefully adjudicated which
writingsshouldbeincludedin theircanon (1donotfind itreasonableto
callitotherwisethanthat),andestablishedacorpusofwhatwenow rec-
ognize asTdthe Greek Classics.''4:
Thereisacomplication here:forthoseclassicsweretheproductnot
only of the so-called classical Greek age;they included Homer (and
Hesiod).Already in whatwe to-day callclassicalAthensthe Iliad and
O dyssey wereaprivileged tradition:semi-scripture,ifyou like,oftheoral
type.44Alexandria in the third century turned them carefully into scrip-
ture ofthe written type,thus enabling them to serve like the writings
(yic)ofPlato,Aristotle,andthedramatists,asidealliteraturealsoforthe
non-Greek-speaking phasesof' W estern civilization since thattim e.
The Alexandria m ilieu is context for our concern herc also in
anothersense.Atvirtually thesametime,Greek-speakingJewsthereand
in upperEgyptwere involved in importantconnected developments.In
the early third century B.C.in theirEgyptian synagoguesthePentateuch
wasbeing read in Hebrew followed by a rendering in Greek;later that
century a separate Greek version appeared,asin effectalmosta book,a
formalentity.By theend ofthe nextcentury the view waspromulgated
that that translation,the so-called Septuagint,had itself been miracu-
lous:45a scripturalizing step,strikingly.By the end ofthatthird century
(bywhichtimeHebrew wasnolongercurrenteveninPalestinc,1etalone
in Egypt),the second batch ofHebrew writings,theProphets,wasper-
hapsmore orlesscanonized in Palestine,46and gradually the Septuagint
wasenlargedbysuchnew additions(butnotexactlythesameonesasits
Hebrew counterpart).By the year 1 A.D.almostthe whole of what
Christianslatercalled the O1d Testament,exceptQoheleth,wasin the
Septuagint.(Qoheleth wasaddedperhapsacenturylater.47)Imention a1l
thispartly because it strikes me that a canonizing process,especially if
one thinksofitas in partan integrating ofform er disparate orat least
indepcndentcomponentsinto one reified entity,isunavoidably hastened
SCRIPTU RE AS FO RM AN D CO N CEPT
by the translation matter.Before a notion ofcanon hasbeen formalized
orfinalized one in factmustdecidewhatto translate;whattoincorporate
into thein thiscase Greek repository;into one'sliturgically functionalas
wellasrevered and normative('tsacred'')book.
In thisdouble sense,Alexandriaplayed ahighly significantrole in
the scripturalizing process.The Septuagintwasnotmerely a translation,
however;in due course itincorporated within itself additionalwritings
composed originally in Greek.That is,it not only participated in the
scripturalizingprocess,butcarried itforward.Anotherwayofputting this
pointisto saythattheGreek-speakingJewscontinued theprocessbegun
by and now inherited from theirSemitic-speaking ancestors.
Yetthere ism ore;atriple oreven fourth sense.ForAlexandria,and
itsclassicaltradition,provided stillanotherelem entw ithoutwhich scrip-
tureisnotaviableoperating conceptand form - oratleast,notformate-
rialpreviously unscripturalized.ForthisGreek city developed thepattern
ofinterpreting allegorically ancienttextswhose literalm eaning isoutof
tune with newer conceptions. That pattern too it inherited from
uclassical''Athens;Hellenisticthinkersdeveloped itcarefully and acutely,
thephilosophic interpretation ofHomerand Hesiod specifically.48Jews
in thisenvironm entappropriated,absorbed,this;with the resultthatby
theendoftheB.C.eraGreek-speaking(legeGreek-thinking)Jewsintro-
duced this im mensely consequentialorientation into also Biblicalinter-
pretation;orwe may say,into interpretationsthatm ade aBible continu-
ingly possible.Specifically,Philo ofAlexandriawasthefirstto do so;we
al1know that he was notthe last.ln this he was sim ply following up
tendencieswellestablishedamonghisfellow HellenisticJews;andamong
hisfellow Alexandrians,pagan aswell.Putanotherway,hewasinserting
theon-going developm entofBiblicalinterpretation into the largertran-
sccnding contextoftheprocessofthe developmentofclassicized orcan-
onized ancienttexts.49
M y second consideration fortheB.C .period istheconceptofheav-
enly tablets.The Swedish historian ofreligion Geo 'W idengren noticed
som eyearsago aparallelbetween theBabylonian TabletsofDestinyidea,
attested in cuneiform from before or about 1000 B.C.,and the notion,
eventhephrasing,ofrevelationservingintheQur'àn;andhesettotrac-
ing the outworking of the idea and found it running as a continuous
thread repeatedly showing itself here and there through the alm osttwo
thousand yearsofintervenilzg religioushistory in the region.soN otevery
one of the detailsin hisargumentcarriesconviction;yetin generalitis
evidentthatheison to something major.The SemiticgodsSamasand
Adad aredepicted in the ancienttextsasgiving inscribed tabletsin abag
to the mythicalking En-me-du-ran-ki.Hammurabi(the late third or
42 RETH IN KIN G SCRIPTU RE
early second millenium B.C.)ispresented ashaving been given the1aw
code by that god Samasisland in a land where,unlike Egypt,there is
virtually no stone,thatlaw wascopied in the usualmannerofclay tablets
buttheoriginalwascutin diorite,andsetin thetempleofM arduk:repre-
senting asitdid thecosmic order,notmerely a mundane.And 1rem em -
ber the excitem ent with which only rather recently I noted that not
merely the notion but indeed the actualword,lawb . //
Ja,
Jl,initsArabic
and H ebrew forms respectively,is the same for the celestialtablets on
which theQur'àniseternally inscribedszandforthetabletsofrevelation
given to M oseson Sinai.53'w idengren elaborates the revelation idea,to
which also to-day we are in ourown way heirs;hedoesso by delineating
the ancientM esopotam ian Assem bly ofthe Godsnotion,where on N ew
Year'sDay in a book (sic)the eventsofthecoming yearon Earth are
written (.
çïc).Outstanding individualsbecome decisively importantto
their fellow hum an beings if they can som ehow ascend to heaven and
become privy to whatisin thatcelestialbook;an alternative isthatone
of the gods,preferably their chief,may take the initiative and show or
givethcbook orpartsofitto such aperson.A recentlypublished Halward
doctoraldissertation showsthatsuch an idea ofDivine Council,with a
specialhuman person som ehow having privileged access to itsrecords,
obtained also in pre-l-lebrew Canaanite lore,and arguesthatitmay have
been with thatsourceratherthan directly with Babylon thatlaterHebrew
ideaswere continuous.s4Ifwe speculate as to the situation in lsraelin,
say,1000 B.C.,we may supposethatin agiven villagetherewasno book
and perhapsnobody was literate butthataround the cam pfiresat night
tales were told and vividly received of M oses and his divine tablets
received atSinai,w ritten by the finger ofGod.
TheQur'àn asdivinerevelation isalateyetfairly exactcrystalliza-
tion ofthe process thatbeginswith thisdivine knowledge cutin stone
and m ade available to hum ankind.Lessfully yetnotnegligibly theBible
asweknow it,considered asa revealed book,isadevelopmentfrom this
campfire im agery. Later on,M oses cam e to be thought of as having
received atSinainot only <tthe ten words' cutin stone,butfive whole
booksknow n to-day asthe Pentateuch;and stilllater,ashaving received
theselatterin writing andaswellan oralinstruction (Hebrew:tôrâb)
çfinally''castinbookform byludahha-Nasibyca.200A.D.astheM ish-
nah,andeventually inmoreampleform astheJerusalem Talmudby40O
orstillmore amply asthe Babylonian Talm ud by 500 or600.Thislatter
date isthatby which theotherstream from thistradition,the Christian,
had almostclosed in on its channelof a sim ilar developm entfrom the
same source,by giving to itsscripture,by then fairly wellconsolidated,
a status that recaptures in many respects these notions of divine book
'SCRIPTU RE M FO RM AN D CO N CEPT 43
vouchsafed to earth.Imyselfgrowing up in the earlyyearsofthiscentury
on thiscontinentin a more orlessfundam entalisthom e inherited som e
such view of the Bible asa divine writing sent down among us.55w e
have already noted this with the Gnostic-M andaean m aterial;to some
extent the M anichee; and by the ninth century A.D. the
Zarathushtrian.
H indu,Buddhist,Chinese counterparts,teasingly sim ilar in other
ways,have little or none ofthisparticular notion.
Ourbriefsutwey isvirtually done,butone may closewith justa
word aboutwriting assuch.A study ofscripture should begin,perhaps,
ratherwith language,thatdistinctively and profoundly hum an character-
istic.M odern linguistshave studieditsprosedimension,notmuch itspoe-
try;1am coming to think thata trueunderstanding ofthe human must
wrestlewith threemajormodesoflanguage:prose,poetry,andscripture.
That,however,I leave aside untilanotheroccasion;here,just aword
aboutwriting.To-day weare a11so literate,havebecomeso familiarwith
writing and with books,thatwe have forgotten the aura thatonce sur-
rounded thismysteriouscontrivance;thecounterpartin ourdayhasIsup-
posebeen recently ratherthe com puter,awesometo some.And regarding
published books,which to-day inundate us, one m ay recall the story
apparently going the roundsin the SovietUnion ofthe enthusiastwho
busied himselftyping outPl'
nrand Peaceby hand and giving copiesto the
young,on the grounds that nobody these days of course takesprinted
books seriously.Itwasnotalways so.
W ritingemergedintheNearEastabout3000B.C.,inEgypt(hiero-
glyphic)andinMesopotamia(cuneiforml.s6Forlongitwastheprerogative
of a circumscribed elite,of temple and palace bureaucracies.Som ewhere
about1500 to 1200 B.C.,the alphabetwasinvented 57- a step in thedirec-
tion ofdem ocratization:from then on,whatthebureaucracy thoughtimpor-
tantcould be preserved,asbefore,butsmaller and unofficialgroupscould
now do the sameifthey wereseriousaboutit.A significantstep wastaken,
oranyway isillustrated,in 621B.C.:theJosiah refo= s8,triggeredby the
discovery ofabook in theJerusalem temple.W hethertheworkwascom-
posed and surreptitiously lodged in thetemple in orderto bediscovered so,
aswascontended for a time,orwasrather,assom e modern scholarshipsg
tendsto prefer,found thereperhapsinadvertently,doesnotaffectm y argu-
ment;sincein anycasethebookwasinfactcomposed,andinfactsetforth
innovating ideas.Illustrated here is a tmnsition from writing as a way of
fixing thestatusquo tow riting asthe manifesto ofadissidentgroup;from
writing asrecording to writing ascreative.
Prior to this,writing served to m ake perm anentw hatwasalready
established,authoritative.Here,bycontrast,theideawastoestablish what
 RETH IN KIN G SCRIPTU RE
wasnewly written.Thisbeginstheprocessto which we have a1lbecome
heir:writerswhowrite (.
çfc)new ideasto changethecourseofhistory.
The revolutionary nature ofthiswasmasked.The new ideascould
proverevolutionary only insofarasthey seem ed traditional;and thework
thatwasdiscoveredwasascribedtoMoses(whohaddiedsomesixcentur-
iesearlier)asaso-calledHprophet'figure.'W hatabrilliant,whataconse-
quential,forgery orm isunderstandingl- consolidating theoutlook ofthe
eighth- and seventh-century-B.c. prophets in a written document.
Instead ofsomething being written down because itwasimportant,this
m essage wasconsidered importantbecauseithad been written dow n.
Probably this was not simply a hoax.The book,though novelly
fonvard-lookingin thesenseofproposinginnovations,wasalso tradition-
ally backward-looking not only in that itsprogram me for reform was
couched ilzterm sofancientauthority,specifically M oses,butalso in that
the authororauthorsdid genuinely feel,itseems,thattheirprogram me
wasreviving orre-forming (in theliteralsenseofforming once again)
inherited traditionsfrom ofold.(Thereissomeevidencethatthisappeal
to a reconstructed picture ofa com munity'searlier age being presented
anew asa modelforthepresent,forinspiration and aspiration,reflectsin
an innovativefashion anew mood ofattention to thepastthatwasemerg-
ing atthatparticularperiod- around theseventh centuryB.C.- notonly
in Palestine but rather widely in the N earEast,from Egypt to Assyria
andBabylonia.6o)Reformers,astheword itselfaffirms,haveeversince
regularly presented themselves as re-establishing a pristine past while
actually proposing anovelfuture.Apartfrom thatmore generalconsider-
ation,atthishistoricalstage writing assuch wasnotyetconceived asan
instrum entforintroducing newness.
Isaid thatIwould om itfrom thishastening survey ofthe B.C.per-
iodthePersiandevelopment.Letmejustremark,however,in thematter
of written language,on the massive Behistfln or Blsitùn inscription in
lran,61about500 B.C.:thatdecisively imposing statementincised on the
vast rock-face whereby the Em peror Darius proudly asserts his accom -
plishments,desiring al1to remember them and to be impressed.M ay
AhuraM azda,heproclaim s,protectand reward him who presetwes,pun-
ish and curse him who destroys, this62 .a sentiment echoed often by
scripturalists1ater.63 0n a much sm aller scale,thisstrand in ourprocess
is continued in the Safaitic inscriptions in the Arabian desert half a
m illcnium orso later.64
In fine,my suggestion isthattheem ergencefortheW estern ' W brld
ofscripture as a form and asa concept- a form and conceptplaying a
prodigiously importantrole in hum an livesand societiesthroughoutour
hisiory untilto-day- isarich and complex process,deserdng moreatten-
SCRIPTURE AS FO RM AN D CON CEPT 45
tion than 1,certainly,have yetbeen able to give it,a processfascinating
and rewarding to study.'W'ehavetended to deriveourconceptofscripture
from the Bible;Iam suggesting thatwe are now in a position where our
understanding oftheBible,and ofm uch else acrosstheworld,may begin
to be derived from alarger conceptofscripture.
Iclose withoutdeveloping thatlarger concept,butwould wish to
stressitsimportance.An historian ofreligion,entranced to find scripture
ofone oranothervaried sort- buthow variedl- virtually acrossthecivil-
izedworld,and entranced to find hum an beingsvirtually throughoutthe
world evincing apparently some alm ost com mon human propensity to
scripturalize,isinclined to feelthatthe contentofthisorthat scripture,
howeverinteresting and howeverdiverse,needssupplem enting in schol-
arly study by thisotherinquiry into the conceptofscripture;generically,
and in particularcases.Ithasbeen an amazing idea,an astonishing form .
M oreover,thisisno antiquarian inquiry:170th ourChurch and ourcivil
society to-day need an improved understanding ofscripture.
Readerswillhave noticed my rem arking above thatthe conceptof
scripturehasnotdevelopedsincetheQurYn in theseventh century-an
astonishing fact;needing nuancing,yeta grave factforatleastthe' W est.
ltconstitutesa luxury thatwe can no longer afford.O urworld needsa
new conceptofscripture.The movementthatbegan with Spinoza with
hisnew orientation to theBibletexts,and thathasgrown into themassive
and importantenterprisecalling itselfhistoricalcriticism ,hashardly pro-
vided thatnew concept.The resultofits imm ensely illuminating work
hasbeen to dismantleforusourinherited notion ofscripture,lcaving us
w ith afocuson contentbutwithoutform;oratbest,given the new con-
cern with canon,with aform butwithoutaconcept.
Brevard Childs65and others66chide the discipline for traditionally
ignoring the problem :studying the Bible asifitwere notscripture.M y
way ofputting thism atteristo observethatmodern Biblicalscholarship,
practising w hatisdubbed historicalcriticism,hasstudied thetextsofthe
Biblein whatIcalltheirpre-scripturalphase.A morerecentdevelopment
now emerging,grown restlessw ith that,concernsitself with the Bible
in terms rather ofliterary criticism,treating those same texts not now
ulike any other historical docum ent'',to use the Spinozian phrase,but
ratherRlike any otherpiece ofliterature'' ,to usethe recentone.This,in
my view,is to considerthe Bible in itSpost-scripturalphase.The long
intervening era is om itted.Al1the textsthatm ake up the Bible existed
for a time before they becam e scripture;and as Such they can constitute
thesubject-matter,atthatlevel,ofonetypeofinquiry.They continueto
existastextsforcertain peopleto-day forwhom they no longer setwe as
transcendentlum inosity,asaheavenly word;and atthatlevel,can becom e
 RETH IN KIN G SCRIPTU RE
the focusforanother type.A stillm ore significantconcern,Im ake bold
to suggest,especially ofcourse forthoseofusin thestudy ofreligion but
indeed foran understanding in generalofthe human condition,and my
own primary interestin the matter oflate,lies,one might say,between
these two,atleastchronologically,yetbeyond and abovethem ,perhaps,
in othersenses:liesin the study oftheBible asscripture.M y suggestion
isthatthismay become a nextgreatdevelopm entin ourstudies.
The question,however,isdifficult;and the reason forthatisalso a
reason thatitis170th exciting and important:nam ely,thatwe scholarsdo
notin factunderstand whatscripture is.W edo notknow how to treata
textasscripture.'W' e do notknow whatitmeansto say thatfornigh on
two thousand yearsthe Bible was scripture fora large sectorofhum an-
kind.Yetwem ustofcoursesay it,with force;and say,too,thattheBible
issignificantata11because ofthisenigmatic fact.Also theQur'ân,the
Gita,the Chinese classics.
To the smallquestion,how did aconceptofscripture arise,Ihope
that I may perhaps have contributed here if not a preliminary partial
answer, at least a provocativc suggestion that the query is significant.
M ore importantisthe question,which Iproffcrasan issueworth wide-
spread pursuingoverthe nextsay twenty-fiveyears:how areweto under-
stand whatscripture hasbeen overthe centuries,in itsvariousinstances,
onceitarose,playing itsmonumentalrole in hum an history,sociological
andpersonal.Stillmore im portantisthenextchallenge,tob0th academ ia
and Church:to forgea new conceptthatwillserve ourunderstanding of
the world-wide phenom enon in the past,and willserve also ourliving
withourownandourfellows'scriptures(or,forthesceptics,atthevery
leastwith ourfellows'scriptures)now- and in coming centuries.
N O TES
1.ttlslam ...Vorallem ...isteinerechteBuchreligion.'G.Van derLeeuw,
PbönomenologiederReligion(Tubingen:J.C.B.MohrgpaulSiebeckj,1933),p.415.
Ihave cited from theEnglish translation:G.Van derLeeuw,Reli
gion in Essence
& Mani
festation:astuiyfAlyltenomenology,trans.byJ.E.Turner(London:Allen&
Unwin,1938),p.438.
2. '
W ilfred Cantwell Sm ith, Rsom e Sim ilarities and Som e D ifferences
Between Christianity and Islam :an essay in com parativereligio'n,'firstpublished
in:JamesKritzeckandR.Bayly' W inder,edd.,Tl
leHzbr/foflslam:stuiiesinbonour
cffl/lf/i
,K.Hitti(London:Macmillan,andNew York:St.Martin'sPress,1959),
pp.47-59 (esp.p.52),and severaltimesreprinted (mostrecently in ' W ilfred
CantwellSmith,OnUnierstandingIslam (Berlin& New York:deGruyter,(1981j,
1984),pp.233-246))alsoinUrdutranslation.(Asthisworkisgoingtopress,it
SCRIPTU RE AS FO RM AND CO N CEPT
hasbeen brought to my attention thatthisthem ewas setforth earlierin Conti-
nentalscholarship by N athan Söderblom .See Annemarie Schim mel,R' T'
he M us-
1im Tradition,'in Frank'W haling,ed.,TLeWorld'sReligiousTraiitions:currentAer-
syectivesinreli
giousstudies(Edinburgh:T.& T.Clark,1984),p.133.Iam much
indebtedfor,anddelightedby,thisinformation.j
3..
4 CatalogueoftheProvincialCJ.
pI
'/fl/Jofkrönsbahr(Pahlavitext,versionand
commentary)byJ.Markwart;ed.byG.Messina(Roma:PontificioIstitutoBiblico,
1931-AnalectaOrientalia3),p.9,b4;seealsotheremarkstothissectionon
pp.28-29,where inter alia the alternative is mentioned of his having written
ratheron 12,000 cow hides,anotherwidespread view.The word used in classical
Sanskritfor'tbook''Lpustaba)isnotofSanskritoriginbutisaloan-wordfrom the
Persian term fortçhide'
'
4.Thisposition wassetforth influentially by François N au,RLa dernière
rédactiondel'Avesta,''beingchapteriii(pp.192-199)ofhisarticleRLatransmis-
sion de l'Avesta et l'époque probable de sa dernière rédaction''
,Revuede l'histoire
Jtwrelt
jions,95(1926-27):149-199.
5. The usom e form'' of book emerged apparently during the reign of
Khosrow Anoshlravàn(A.D.531-579),probablyasacourtinitiative.Theconsol-
idatingofacanon(oral)isprobablysomewhatearlierthanthis;andthereissome
evidence fora scattered writing dow n ofpassagesfrom thatstillpredom inantly
oral-recitation tradition also from before Khosrow's tim e.Yet the elevating of
such writingsintoaform thatmayreasonablybecalled abook maybeevenlater:
itison thispointthatm yword uincipiently''isbased.W idengren,whopushes
an earlyw riting oftextsatleastasstrongly asdootherscholars,nonethelesssays
explicitly that this next step occurred after the Islam ic m ovem ent had arrived:
uw hentheArabsconqueredlran...itwasonlythenthatthey(theZoroastriansl
started thinking of Avesta asa .
Bt)pl,''containing a divine revelation received by
Zarathustra(p.52ofhisop.cit.infrawithinthisnote).Onthiswholematterfor
Iran the mostrecentsum mary isçsr heW ritten Avesta''in M ary Boyce,Zoroastri-
ans:tbeirreli
giousbeli
efsandpractices(London,Boston,&c:Routledge & Kegan
Paul,1979),pp.134-135.Forearlierstatements,seeGeoW idengren,Rl-lolyBook
and HolyTraditioninIran:theproblem oftheSassanidAvesta,''in F.F.Bruceand
E.G.Rupp,edd.,HolyBoobandHolyTradition(ManchesterUniversityPress,and
GrandRapids:Eerdmans,1968),pp.36-53;RichardFrye,TheHeritageo fpersia
(ClevelandandNew York:WorldPublishingCompany,1963),p.213;R.W.Bai-
ley,Zoroastrian Problems in f/l: N intb-century Books.RatanbaiKatracb Lectures
(Oxford:Clarendon,1943,reprinted1971),pp.169-170.Itisclearto a1lcon-
cerned thattheoraltradition took precedenceoverthewritten throughoutthis
periodandbeyond;also itiswidelyrecognized thatwhentheM uslimsconquered
Iran,they did notforthwith perceive theZarathushtriansasacom munity possess-
ing a holy book.This aspect ofthe m atteristaken up again later in our text.
6.See,forinstance,Labib al-said,TheReciteiKoran:c bistory ofthefirst
recorded version,translated and adapted by Bernard 'W eiss,M .
A .Rauf,and M orroe
Berger(Princeton:Dazwin Press,1975).Thisisan abridgementandadaptation
48 M TH IN KIN G SCRIPTU RE SCRIPTU RE AS FO RM AN D CO N CEPT 49

ofan Arabicwork:Lablbal-sa<ld,ol-
jàmêalfcwfral
-awwalli-l-our'önal-kar/m,f;fw
al-muê.ltc./al
-murattal(Cairo:DâralKâtibal-fArabl,1967).Further:F.M.Denny,
u'T'
heAiabonRecitation:TextandContext,'inInternationalCongressforl/;eStuiy
ofr/leQur'cn...Canberra...1980(Canberra:AustralianNationalUniversity,n.d.
(sc.19831,secondedition),pp.143-160;also,FredrickM.Denny,uExegesisand
Recitation:theirdevelopmentasclassicalformsofQur'anicpiety,''in:Frank E.
ReynoldsandTheodoreM.Ludwig,edd.,TransitionsandTransformationsistLe
History ofReli
gions:eowcp in honorth
-
f-/o-
çe/lM.Kitagawa (Leiden:Brill,1980)
pp.(91j-123.Forastrikingelaborationofthepointthatoriginallythewordqur'ön
served to designate a reciting of a scripturalpassage,see '
W illiam A.Graham ,
Rour'ân asSpokenW ord:an Islamiccontribution to theunderstandingofscrip-
ture,''inRichardC.Martin,ed-,Islam cnltbeHistoryo
fReli
gions(Tucson:Univer-
sityofArizonaPress,1984)andhisu' T'heEarliestMeaningoftQur'àn',''DieH/uf
JcJIslams(vol.64,1984),bothforthcoming.Cf.alsoournextnote.
7.MycolleagueW illiam A.Graham,Jr.,iscurrentlyatworkonamajorsmdy
oftheoral/auraluseofuscripture'aroundtheworld,includingatsomelengththe
Christian caseoverthecenturies.An initialfrt
zitofhisstudy in thisrealm appears
ashiscontribution to thispresentvolum e.Cf.also ourpreceding note.
8.ArthurJeffery,TLeForei
gn Jzbccsu/firyo
f tbeQur'ân (Baroda:Oriental
.
Institute,1938),pp.233-234)withthereferencestherecited.Morerecentlyand
fully:John Bowman,ul-loly Scriptures,Lectionaries and the Qur'an,''in A.H.
Johns,ed-,InternationalCongress(op.cit-,ournote6above),pp.29-37.
9.An example:the use oftheSyriac term rqnâ,som etim esaccom panied
withdisparagingadjectives.See,foraChristianinstance,HistoireieMarlabalalv,
fletroisautrespatriarcbo'
,J'unprêtreetfetkux Iaîques,nestoriens,ed.PaulBedjan
(Leipzig;Harrassowitz, 189$,p.240,line 5.The same word was used in
Zarathushtrian referencesin Jewish Aramaic:e.g.,TB q spfc/l22a,cited in Saul
Lieberman,Hellenism fs-/euz
f.
s/lPalestine:Jfufffe
.sinf/leliterarytransmission,belie
fscnJ
mannersofPalestinein tLeICenturyB.C.E.
- IV century C.E.(New York:Jewish
TheologicalSeminary,5722-1962-StroockPublicationFund),p.88,wherethis
author translatesR'
f'
he magician m um blesand understandsnotwhathesays''
. ture)oftheChurch,see,forinstance,chapters5-6-7 ofHansFreiherr von
1O.W idengren,tçl-lolyBook...''(above,ournote5),pp.45-47.
11.Seeournote5 above.
12.E.g.,H aim Zalm an D im itrovsky,summ arizing m odern scholarship in
general,in hisarticle G'
TalmudandM idrash''in theN ew EncyclopaediaBritan-
nica,15thedn.(1974),Macropaedia,17:1006-1014)onthe6th-centurydate,see
p.1008.Theresetwation impliedin my adverb ç
<virtually''in thesentencein m y
textisbasedon HermannL.Strack,IntroiuctiontotbeTalmuiandMidrasb(New
York:Atheneum-aTempleBook,1980),chap.9,Gl-listoryoftheTalmudText'' ,
pp.76ff.,andtherecentwritingofJacobNeusner,themostthorough investigator
and an advocate ofthe6O0A.D .date.
13.Dimitrovsky (ourpreceding notejustabove),loc.cit.,p.1008)and
Neusner.
14.In theacadem ies,discussion wasalwaysbasedon oraltexts.Iftherewas
aproblem regardingaparticularpassage,theRabbiscalledonthetannö',aprofes-
sionalmemorizerwho functioned theway published booksdo forusto-day.His
mem orizedversion wasauthoritative;writtentexts.in contrast,werebutnotesto
aid beginners,and were quiteprivateandw ithoutauthorits SeeLieberm an,op.
cit.(above,ournote9),t
<-
f'
hePublication oftheMishnah'
'
,pp.83fE,esp.p.88.
SeealsoBingerGerhardsson,M emoryf
7rlf/M anuscrint:oraltraiitionJsJwrittentrans-
mission in RabbinicJuiaism ani earl
y Christianity (Uppsala,Lund:C.W .K.
Gleerup;Copenhagen:EjnarMunksgaard,1961-trans.(from the(unpublished?)
Swedish)byEricJ.Sharpe,esp.R'rhetransmissionoftheOralTorah'' ,pp.71ff-;
andH.L.Strack,op.cit.(ournote12above),p.77.(1tmaybenoted,inpassing,
thatw hile Gerhardsson'sbook hasbeen criticized for itsinterpretationson the
Christian side,now superseded,evidently itrem ainsrecognized asexcellenton
Judaicmatters-)Forlong,thewrittenTorah waswhatisto-daythePentateuch;
theoralTorahwasoral.Inm yobservationsearlierinthispresentarticleregarding
anGlranian'
'predilectionfororal/auralGscripturey''Semiticforwritten,aspossi-
b1einfluenceon orcontinuitywith laterIslam ic,Iadm ittedunclarityastohistori-
ca1connectionsinthismatter;and Iadmitfurtherunclarityastopossiblecontinu-
itiesbetween Jewish uoralTorah''and M uslim oral Qur'ân,and indeed asto
possible comparable continuity between Iranian (Mesopotamian?)practiceand
Jewish developments.M orehistoricalwork isrequisitehere.
15.TheGreek so translated (n Katv'
ndittzonxqldesignated originallya
'
new divinedispensation:u'
Thiscupisthenew testam entin m yblood ...''
,Luke
22:20,KingJamesversion (cf.the Revised Standard version,ç...new cove-
nant...'').Foradiscussionofthehistoricalprocessbywhichthephrasechanged
itsm eaning to becom ethenam eofacollecion oftexts,seeW .C.Van U nnik,
U<H Katv' n ôtaorllcq-a problem in the early history ofthe canon''Lstuiia
Patristica,1(1961):221-227jin SparsaCollecta.tbecollectedessqsof F'
ZC.Zcél
Unnik (3 voll.,Leiden:E. J.Brill,1973-(inprocessl-supplementsto Novum
Testamentum,29-31),2(1980):g157j-171.Forthegeneralprocessofacanoniz-
ingofaNew Testamentasascripture(insignificantpart,ofcourse,astbescrim
Campenhausen,DieEntstehung iercbristlicben Bibel(Tùbingen:J.C.B.Mohr
(Paul Siebeck), 1968-Gerhard Ebeling, ed., Beitrâge zur historischen
Theologie,39))Hansvon Campenhausen,TLeFormationo f tbeChristianBible,
trans.J.
A.Baker(Philadelphia:Fortress,1972))andW ernerGeorgKfimmel,
$
EDie Entstehung des Kanons desN euen Testam entsy''in hisEinleitung in ias
Neuehstament(Heidelllerg:Quelle& Meyer,1973-whichisformallyarevised
17th edn.of a lgth-century Feine-Behm work ofthe sametitle),esp.pp.
420-444;in theEnglish translation,by Howard Clark Kee:Kùm m el,Introiuc-
tion tof/lcNew Testament(NashvilleandNew York:Abingdon,1975),seepp.
475-503.And seebelow:e.g.,atournotes27 ff.
16.See G.Haloun and W .B.Henning,G'
T'heManichaean Canom''being
partii,pp.204-212,oftheirH'T'
heCompendium oftheD octrinesand Stylesof
the Teaching of Mani,The Buddha of Light,''in Asia Major,(1953),pp.
(1801-212.
 RETH IN KIN G SCRIPTU RE
17.The rem arksare quoted in translation from an unpublished m anuscript
in theBerlin StateMuseum,in JohannesLeipoldtund Siegfried Morenz,Heili
ge
Scbri
ften:Betracbtungen zurReli
giotugeschicbtederantibenMittelmeerwelt(Leipzig:
Harrassowitz,1953),p.7.Thesuggestionthatthepassageisaprocryphalcomes
inHalounandHenning,op.cit.(ourprecedingnote,justabove),p.211.
18.See L.W ittgenstein,Lecturesf
7:1# Conversatiottson Aesthetics,pcc/mlo.y,
.
),and
Reli
giousBelie
f,CyrilBarrett,ed.(Oxford:BasilBlackwell(19661,1970),noting
especiallythePreface,pp.gviij-gviiij.TheopeningparagraphofthatPreface,display-
ing ourm odern sense ofabook asnotmerely composed by butcarefully proof-read
by itsauthor,reads:R' Inhe firstthing to be said aboutthisbook isthatnothing con-
tained herein waswritten by W ittgenstein him self.Thenotespublished here arenot
W ittgenstein'sow n lecturenotesbutnotestaken down bystudents,which heneither
saw norchecked.Itisevendoubtfulthathewouldhaveapprovedoftheirpublication,
at least in their present form. Since,however,they deal with topics only briefly
touched upon in hisotherpublished writings,and since forsom etimethey have
been circulating privately,itwas thoughtbestto publish them in a form approved
by theirauthors.''These '4authors''ofthe notesaredutifully listed on thetitle-page,
inasub-title:ttcompiledfrom notestakenbyYorickSmythies,RushRheesandJames
Taylon''(A1lofW ittgenstein'snow availableworkswerepublishedafterhisdeath
byhisdisciples,exceptonlytheTractatus,1921)theposthumousInvesti
kationshehad
vacillatinglyintended,onandoff,topublisk yetnot,itwouldseem,injusttheform
in which the work eventually appeared.See Ludwig W ittgenstein,Pbilosoybiscbe
Untersucbungenjpbilosophical fnfzo.li
jlfi
'
(
vl.
ç, translated by G. E. M. Anscombe,
(AnscombeandR.Rhees,edd.),Oxford:BasilBlackwell,1953;noteespeciallythe
Votwort/preface-yoreword,pp.ix-xq)
19.ThisstatementisbasedontheMandaeantextstheBoobo flohnandthe
Ginza,asinterpretedbyW idengren.SeeDashhannesbucbierMf :/ller.Einleitung,
Cbersetzung,Kommentar,MarkLidzbarski(Giessen:Töpelmann,1915),texts,pp.
137 lines6-8,242 lines7-8)trans.,pp.134,222;and Ginzâ:ierSchatz,oierJ4y
GrosseBucbderManiiier,MarkLidzbarski(Göttingen:Vandenhoeck& Ruprecht,
andLeipzig:J.C.Hinrichs,1925),Book111,line1-p.65;GeoW idengren,The
Ascetviono
ff/lcApostleandf/leHol
yBook(Kingandsaviour111),(Uppsala:Lunde-
quistska, and Leipzig: Harrassowitz, 1950- Uppsa1a Universitets ârsskrift,
1950:7),p.74inparticular,thoughseealsohischapter4,GMandaeanLiterature''
(pp.59-76)ingeneral.(Notehisnegativestatementonp.71.)
2O.SeemyMeaning andEniofReli gi
on,(gNew York:Macmillan,19631
London: SPCK, and San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1976),pp.283-284,
285-286.
21.So farastheresultingNew Testamentisconcerned,Jerome'sworkpro-
videdonlythefourGospels,ashisrevisionsofextantLatintranslations- revisions
doneinthelightoftheGreek.Probably nootherN ew Testam entbooksarefrom
hishand.In thecaseoftheOldTestament,Jerome,wholivedpartofhislifein
Palestineand knew Hebrew,adoptedforthoseChristian Scripturesthethen inno-
SCRIPTU RE AS FORM AN D CON CEPT
vativediscrim ination between thebooksin theGreek Septuagint- theChristian
Bible- thatwerealso in theH ebrew canon andtheseveralothersthatwereoriginal
inGreek,orhadbeencanonizedonlyintheGreek.Hecoinedtheworduapocrypha''
fortheselatter.Thedistinction hardly took hold,however,untilthe Reform ation.
M osteditionsoftheVulgatedo notevince it.Only itsO1d Testam entbooksfrom
the Hebrew,however,werefrom hishand in the Latin;the laatin versiollsofthe
othersthatbecameincluded(exceptoftheGreekpartsofDanielandEsther,arldof
theAmmaicofTobitandJudith)werebyothertrmslators.
22.u'
T'he first unambiguous reference to a collection ofBiblicalbooks
withinonecoveroccursintheworkofCassiodonu (Institutes,1.xii.3)7whodied
ca.580)uthe oldest known M S.containing the whole Vulgate isthe Codex
Amiatinus''
,atabouttheturnoftheseventh-eighth century.(Thesequotations
arefrom thearticleGvulgate''intheOxfordDictionaryo
ftbeCltristianCillrc/l,ed.
F.L.Cross,2nd edn.edd.F.L.CrossandT.A.Livingstone,London &c:Oxford,
1974.)Itwastheearlythirteenth century,however,beforeone-volumeVulgates
becam ecom mon,according to the carefulscholarsRichard H .Rouseand M ary
A.Rouse:Gcstatim Invenire:schools,preachers,and new attitudesto thepage,''in
RenaissanceaniReneumlintbeTwel
ftbCentury,RobertL.BensonandGilesConsta-
ble,edd.,Cam bridge,M ass.:H azward,1982,p.221:they even state thatu'
T'
he
Bible...inthetwelfthcenturyhad invariablybeeninmultiplevolumes''(ibid).
23.MediavalmanuscriptsoftheVulgatediffernotonly intext.(Itwas
withinaweekoftheninth century whenAlcuin finally produced astandardized
textand offered itto CharlestheGreatathiscoronation,who then pushed its
acceptance;even so,ucorrupt''copies,andm ixedcopieswith partlyold-Latinand
partlyVulgatereadings,remainedcurrent.)Theydifferalsotosomedegreeasto
w hatbooks,especially oftheN ew Testam ent,areincluded orexcluded.See,for
instance,Kfimmel(op cit.above,ournote1$,whoneverthelessseemsto hold
that,despitetheseadmitted variations,dçreally''theextentoftheN ew Testam ent
wasfixedGfrom thebeginningofthefifth centuryon''fortheLatinChurch(p.
501),whilenotingthatfortheGreekChurch andtheOrientalChurchesthe
situation fortheN ew Testam entwasdifferent.
The Gelasian D ecree,variously attributed to Pope Dam asus in the late
fourthcentury,toPopeGelasiusattheendofthefifth,andtoanunknow nsixth-
century hand,isrelevantto thewholedevelopmentbutnotasauthoritativelyas
once itseemed.Sim ilarly the M uratorian Rcanon,''a modernly unearthed rela-
tively early list,wasnotauthoritative perhapsatall.
24.N onetheless,itwasonlyaftertheadventofprintingandtheemergence
thereby ofarathernew conceptionofwhatisaubook,'thatthevariousChristian
Churches in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries formally defined, gave
explicitshape to,tlzeirBible- saw itasaunitwith dem arcated boundaries,and
formalizedwhatspecificRbooks''(Jfc)makeupitscontents:madeitascripture,
one mightalmostsay,in the Qur'ân sense.Had thisbeen previously attained,
theywouldpresumably nothavedivergedam ong themselvesintheirthenseries
offirstformalcanonizations.TheRoman CatholicCouncilofTrentdecreed that
 U
52 RETH IN KIN G SCRIPTURE
m ostofthe now challenged Gapocrypha''w ere indeed fully canonical,even the
few exceptionsbeing published in the Vulgate sincethattime asan Appendix.
LutherhadexcludedtheApocrypha,though included them- with stillfewerex-
ceptions- inhisGerman translation oftheBible,butalsoasan appendix,discrim-
inatingthem asgood butnotauthoritative,notRl-loly Scripture'';theKingJames
Version (1611)in English didmuch thesameuntilthenineteenthcentury,fol-
lowingoneoftheThirty-NineArticles(1562).TheEasternChurch,inthelatter
partoftheseventeenth century atthe SenateofJerusalem,determined thatfour
ofthe Greek O 1d Testam entbooksw ere canonical,but no others;in the matter
oftheN ew Testam ent,forthem theBook ofRevelation wasnotincluded.
25.See,forinstance,HansFreiherrvon Campenhausen,RD asAlteTesta-
m enta1sBibelderKirche,vom AusgangdesU rchristentum sbiSzurEntstehung
des Neuen Testaments,' in his.
?1.f
kl Jer FriibzeitJ:
.S Cbristentums:Stuiien zur
KirchensgescbicbteieserstenJéif
/zweitenlabrbunierts(Tfibingen:J.C.B.Mohrgpaul
Siebeck),1963),pp.(1521-196.Also:AlbertC.Sundberg,Jr.,TbeOlflTestament
offàeEarlyCllurc/l,Cambridge:HatwardUniversit' yPress,andLondon:Oxford
UniversityPress,1964 (HarvardTheologicalStudies,xx).
26.Speaking ofwhatstandsto-dayasourNew Testament,arecentscholar
writesthatatthattimeusuchathingdidnotexist,evenasanidea''(wf ;reinsolcbes
nicbttl
fsplc/als Vorstellung poràcnflenl-campenhausen,Entstebung...,op.cit.
(above,ournote1$,Germanp.165,Eng.p.193.
27.M odern study beginswith Harnack.The fullestrecentstudy isJohn
Knox,MarcionanilàeNew Testament:ane-çlf;
yintbeearlybistoryo
ftltecanon(Chi-
cago:UniversityofChicagoPress,1942).Foramorerecentinformativedelinea-
tion ofthem atter,see Chapter5,H' T'heEm ergenceoftheN ew Testament'' , of
Cam penhausett, Enfylcllus,ç...
,op. cit.(above,our note 15),German pp.
173-201,Eng.pp.147-164.Thissetsforth the thesis,now widely accepted
am ong scholars,that the emergence of a canonized New Testam entwas the
church's response to M arcion'sinitiative in proffering a Christian Scripture.
(Later:Afterthispresentarticlewassubmitted forpublication,the following
appeared:R.Joseph Hoffman,Marcion:OntLerestitutionofCbristianit
y...,Chico,
california:ScholarsPress,1984.ltdoesnotseem toaltermyargumentl
28.TheSriGuru Granth Sahib includesprimarily thehymnsand sayings
oftheSikh Gurus,butalso arelatively smallpercentageofotherpassagesby Rthe
Bhagats''(Panjabi;cf.Sanskritbhakth ofaslightly earliertimeornotformally
mem bersofwhathascoalesced intotheSikh com munity.
29.The relative force ofthe two Testaments,for Christian faith,is an
exceedingly subtleand involutedmatter.TheOldbegan assolely,and remained
for centuriesas more,authoritative;the two were in principle equalformany
centuries;theextentto which the New supplem ents,interprets,re-interprets,or
supersedesthe O1d defiesneatformulation.
30.See,for instance,the Lieberman chapterRpublication...''mentioned
in our note 14 above.
SCRIPTU M AS FORM AN D CON CEPT 53
31.ComusHermeticum,A.D.Nock,ed.,trans.A.-J.Festugière (Paris:
Sociétéd'édition,2 vol.,1945:secondedn-,1960;volum e3,Fragments:extraitst/e
Stobée,ed.& trans.Festugière,1954- Col1ectiondesU niversitésdeFrance:Asso-
ciationGuillaumeBudé).A goodintroductionisFestugière,Hermétismeetmystique
yugennc(Paris:AubiemMontaigne,1967).
32.Anexcellentrecentsum maryforGreek developments,with fullbibli-
ography,isZeph Stewart:RAstrologia,''pp.(588)-605,in hisHAstrologia e
magia,'being j5 ofhischap.VII,ul.aReligione''in tome2,Economia,iiritto,
reli
gione(1977)ofvol.4,LasocietàellenisticaofRanuccioBandinelli,din,Luigi
Morettieta1.,redd.,StoriaeCiviltàieiGreci(Mi1an:Bompiani,5voll.in 10
tomes,1977-1979).
33.Fortheentirem ovem ent,an excellentsurvey,with good bibliography,
from the pen ofthe Indologistand w idely erudite historian ofscience Pingree
(cf.nextnote),isavailableinthearticleGAstrology''inTheNew Encyclopaedia
Britannica,1974,M arcropaedia,2:219-233.
34.The mostconsequentialofthese in the second century thatisknow n
wasm adeca.150 A.D.atU-t l'ainbyacertainYavanejvarafrom anAlexandrian
text,butithassincebeen lostalthough awidelyinfluentialthird-century verse-
renderingofitsmaterial,byoneSphujidhvaja,theYqvanajötaka,hasrecentlybeen
publishedwith English translation and extensivecommentary (D.Pingree,ed.
andtrans-,TicYavanajâtakaof.
sl,
/lx-
#l/;su.
# gcambridge,Massachusetts:Hazvard
University Press,2 voll.,1978)Harvard OrientalSeries,DanielH.H.Ingalls,
ed.,vol.48j).Theopeningpagesoftheintroductionto thiswork (I:3-6)and
pointedlythetlndexofAuthoritiescited:1.GreekandLatin'
'(11:466-471)tell
thestory.Forasomewhatearlierand m oregeneralaccount,seethesam ew riter's
articleRAstronomyandAstrologyin IndiaandIram''Isi
s54(1963):229-246.
35.Known also astheApotelesmatt
ka.Thetexthasbeen criticallyeditedas
volum e111:1ofClaudiiPtolemaeiOperaquaeexstantpplflffl,F.Bolland Ae.Boer,
edd.((19401,revisededn-,Leipzig:Teubner,1957).Anearliereditionofthetext,
with English translation on facing pages,isavailableasPtolemy:ptrabiblos,F.E.
Robbinsed.andtrans.(Loeb ClassicalLibrary-l-ondon:Heinemann,andCam-
bridge,Mass.:HarvardUniversityPress(1940j,fourthimpn,1964).
36.Henbaestionis Tbebaniapotelesmaticorum:LibriTras,Epitomae Quflflslpr,
David Pingree, ed. (Leipzig: Teubner, 2 voll., 1973-1974-Bib1iotheca
Scriptorum Graecorum et Romanorum Teubneriana: Akademie der
W issenschaftenderDDR,ZentralinstitutfûralteGeschichteundArchxologie).
37.See,forexample,SidZ.Leiman,TbeCanonizationofblebrew Scripture:
l/IeTalmuiiccnflMiiraslticEviience(Hamden:Argon,lg76-Transactionofthe
ConnecticutAcademyofArts& Sciences,vol.47);specificallyon thequestion
ofJavneh seepp.120-124;and Jack Lewis,G'
W hatDo W eM ean By Javneh?''
in SidZ.Leiman,ed.,TlteCanonandMasorahoftbeHeôrelwBible:anintroductory
reader(New York:Ktav,1974-theLibraryofBiblicalStudies,HarryM.Orlin-
54 RETH IN KIN G SCRIPTU RE
sky,ed.).ThesetwoagreethatJavneh decidednothing.Otherscholarsarecom-
ing todoubtthatthereeverwasaJavneh affairatall.
38.Forasamplingofthevery largeand growing literatureonthism atter,
inadditiontotlletwoLeimanworksreferencedinourprecedingnotejustabove,
seeBrevard S.Childs,S
:-
f'
heProblem oftheCanon''
,beingchapter2 ofhisIntro-
Jf/cfft
?ntotheOli'
hstamentJJScri
pture(Philadelphia:Fortress,1979),p.(46j-68,
and itsextensivebibliography.(Cf.also hischapp.3,4,pp.(691-106.)In the
Leiman-edited collection,note esp.the articlesofZeitlin and Freedm an;over
againstthelatter,on u'T'
heLaw and Prophets,''which arguesforanearlydatefor
acanonizingofthesetw oclassesoftexts,seetheunpublished Swanson disserta-
tionnotedin Childs,p.49,andtheSundbergitem inournote25above.Further,
seetheimportantstudiesofJamesA.Sanders,TorabaniCanon,Philadelphia:For-
tress,1972,and Canon ani Community.
.(7guiietocanonicalcriticism,ibid.,1984.
39.Cf.tllebibliography listed in ournote5 above,wherewetouched on
some ofthe laterphasesofthese.Ihave notmuch investigated thepre-written
phases.
40.ThisareaIhavenotmuch explored.Relevantwouldbethefollowing:
JohannesLeipoldtund SiegfriedMorenz,op.cit.(ournote 17above).Cf.also
JohannesLeipoldt,t'ZurGeschichtederAuslegung,'andSiegfriedMorenz,GEnt-
stehung und W esen der Buchreligion'';1
70th in Theologische Literaturzeitung, 75
(1950):229-234and 709-716.Further,C.J.Bleeker,RlleligiousTraditionand
SacredBooksin AncientEgypt,''inBruce& Rupp,op.cit.(ournote5above),
pp.20-35.
41.lthasbeen suggestedthatoneshouldinvestigateclassicizingtendencies
in Asllurbanipal'
slibrary;and thetranslation processfrom Sum erian into Akka-
dian,with itsofcourse inescapableselectivity,m ightbe com pared to the later
Alexandrian classicizing ofGreek Texts?O nescholarspeaksofaçslong process
of canonization''of Sum erian literature:'
w illiam '
W .H allo, xdroward a H istory
ofSumerianLiteraturer''inSumerologicalStuiiesinHonoro
fThorkililacobsen(Chi-
cago:UniversityofChicagoPress,1974(TheOrientalInstituteoftheUniversity
ofChicago:AssyriologicalStudies-no.2Oj),pp.181-203;seeesp.194-201for
thisauthor'sexplicitthough som ew hatguarded use ofthe termsRcanon''and
t'canonizationa''Further,note thesection on uBellesLettres...''in '
W illiam 'w .
Hallo and'
W illiam KelleySimpson,TbeAncientNearfb.
çf;f7bistory,JohnM orton
Blum,gen.ed.(New York,etc:HarcourtBraceJovanovich,1971),pp.163-167.
Seeespecially thereferencetotheculticreciting oftheEmb jmaelisb,theRepicof
creation,''in the neo-Babylonian New Year'sfestival,p.166.
42.'
W hatism ore,a large numberofplaysby thesevery poetshad been
extantbutwasnotincluded in the corpusaspreserved,and consequently those
have been totally lost;they are notpartofwhathavebecom e in the'
W estthe
Greek Classics.
43.O n thisgeneralmattersee,among othersources,thefollowing.Albin
SCRIPTU RE AS FO ItM AN D CO N CEPT 55
Lesky,Hlnie Cberlieferung der griechischen Literatur,''being Chapter Iofhis
GescbiclttedergriechischenLiteratur(Bern,Mùnchen:Francke,(1957-19581rev.
edn.1963),pp.(15j-2O-cf.theEnglishtranslationoftherevisededition:R' rhe
transmission ofGreek literature,''in hisT/leHistory of Greek Literature,trans.
James' W illisand CornelisdeHeer(London:Methuen,1966),pp.1-6.Rudolf
Pfeiffer,HistoryofClassicalScltolarshi
.
p (Oxford:Clarendon Press,2voll.,1968-
1976)-seeespeciallyvol.1:From theBefnnings,totbe. EnJoftbeHellenisticzoe,
chiefly Part Two,G'
T'
he Hellenistic Age,''pp.85ff.;particularly its chap.5,
uAlexandrian Scholarship atitsHeight''
,pp.(1711-209,esp.p.203 totheend.
(Seealso,in hisvol.1I;From 1300to1850,p.84,adiscussionofthefirstuse,at
the Renascence,of the terms classicus,classici.) <<G.P.G.''(sc.Georges Paul
Gusdori),<çT'
heHellenisticPeriod''in hisarticletçl-lumanisticScholarship,His-
toryoP'intheN ew EncyclopaediaBritannica,1974,M acropaedia,2:1172-1173.
ErnstRobertCurtius,ul
llassik,''beingchapter14 ofhisEuropt
iisclteLiteraturund
lcfefsf
-
çc/le.
sMittel
alter(Bern:A.Francke,1948),pp.251-274 (cf.also chap.16:
S<DasBuchalsSymbol,''pp.304-351),andinEnglishtranslation:Curtius,Euro-
peanLiteratureanitbeLatinMiiilexd1e-s,trans.'
W illardR.Trask(New York:Pan-
theon,1953-Bo11ingenSeries,xxxvi),pp.247-272(cf.alsoGrrheBookasSym-
bol,''pp.302-347).
44.A good dealhasbeenwritten onthismatter,withoutnecessarily using
theconceptç
<scripture'
':including an interestingbriefpassagein thefirstlecture
ofJamesAdam's1904-1906 GiffordLectures,posthumouslypublishedashisTLe
Reli
gious'
Tèucàer.
çofGreece(Edinburgh:T.& T.Clark,1908),pp.7-15.
45.Thenotion ofthe miraclewassubsequently embellished,butisbased
on aw ork known asthe d :LetterofAristeasto Philocrates.''Thishasbeen pub-
lished,with a careful Introduction,as M osesH adas,ed.& trans-,Aristeas to
Pbilocrates(letterofAristeas)(New York:Harper& Brothers,1951,fortheDropsie
College-solomon Zeitlin,ed.-in-chief,Jewish ApocryphalLiterature).The
exactdateofthisletterwithin thesecondcenturyisstillunderdiscussion;Hadas
optsforca.130 B.C.
46.On thecanonizingprocesssee ournote38 above.
47.See,forexample,RobertH.Pfeiffer,HistoryofNaf?Testament' .
T5-cJ:
witltanintrotluctiontotLeApocryplta(New York:Harpers,1949),p.179.
48.See,forinstance,Lesky,andvol.1 ofRudolfPfeiffer,opp.citt.above,
our note 43.
49.On thisdevelopmentsee especially Jean Pépin,Mytbeetallégorie:les
ori
fnesxçrtr
cçue.
setIescontestationsy'uffla-cllrlffenne.î((1958?)2èmeédn-,Paris:ttudes
augustiniennes,1976).
50.GeoW idengren,TlteAscensionoftheApostleanitbeHeavenlyBoob(King
and Saviour111)(Uppsala:Lundequistska,& Leipzig gandW iesbaden):Harras-
sowitz,195O- UppsalaUniversitetsârsskrift1950:7);andhisMub .ammai,The
Anostleof Goi,finfbisAscension (King and SaviourV)(ibid.,1955-Uppsala
 U

56 RETH IN KIN G SCRIPTU RE SCRIPTU RE AS FO RM AN D CO N CEPT

Universitetsârsskrift1955:1).Thismaterialbringsintofocusmattersthatwere L.W .,and R.C.Thom pson,with prefatory remarksby.

E.A.W allisBudgeand
adumbrated in som e of this author'
s earlier Swedish work,Reli
gionetu P-
J/'
/J Mr.Kingl,TbeScul pturesilsJInscri
ptiono
fDariustheGreatontheRocko fBebistûn
(Stockholm:SvenskaKyrkans,Diakonistyrels,1945)andweredevelopedbyhim inPersia:cnewcollationofthePersian,Susian,crltfBabyloniantextswitbEnglisbtrans-
laterin hisrevised German translation,1969,ofthesecond edition ofthatSwed- lations,etc;witb illustrations(London:TheBritishMuseum,1907).Inadditionto
ish work:Reli
gionmhiinomenologie(Berlin:deGruyter,1969). thetexts,thisgivesagood andillustrateddescription ofthemonum ent.A m ore
recenteditionand translation oftheO1dPersian textarefoundin Roland G.Kent,
51.So the usualview.Driverand M iles,in afootnote,question thatthe
relationship between thegod and the lawsisquiteso clear,though relationship OIdPersian:grammantexts,lexicon,secondedition(New Haven:AmericanOriental
clearly there is:the dioritestele mentioned in the latterpartofoursentencein Society,1953),pp.116-135.A moreaccessiblebriefaccountisavailablein,for
thepresentation herehasatitstop an engraving ofthe god,w ith H amm urabi instance,A.T.Olmstead,History o
f l/lcPersianEmyire(AcbaemenidperftW (Chi-
reverentlybeforehim and thetextofthelawsengraved around thestonebelow. cago:University ofChicago Press,1948),pp.116-118)orin thearticle s.v.
RBtsitt
àn''in TheN ew EncyclopaediaBritannica,1974,M icropaedia,2:45.
SeeG.R.DriverandJolm C.M iles,edd.,Tbelllsy/onïcnIaws,editedwithtrans-
lation and commentary,volume1,GlvegalCommentary''(Oxford:Clarendon, 62.Theblessing and curse are to befound on lines72-80 ofthe fourth
1952),p.28,fn.4. column;intheKenttranslation,p.132 0066-67.
52.Qur'an 85:22,etc. 63.Cf.Revelation 22:18,19.Com ing asthisdoesatthe end notonly of
53.Exodus24:12,etc. theBookofRevelation,butoftheW esternChristianBible,thispassagehasoften
been read asapplyingto the Bible generally.A similarm otifiscomm on among
54.E.Theodore M ullen,Jr.,TbeDivine Councilin Canaanite ani Earl
y inscriptionsoftheGraeco-Rom an w orld,especially oftombstones;though here
Heôreu/Literature (Chico,California:ScholarsPress. 1980-Harvard Semitic thecurseisoften on thosewho disturb thetom b,ratherthan thosew ho disturb
Museum:HarvardSemiticMonographs,FrankMooreCross,Jr.,ed.. +24). thewriting assuch;noram Iclearasto the relativedatingofsuch inscriptions
55.Thisdelineation over-simplifiesby telescoping somewhattheeventual and theBehistun one.Ido notethatthistype ofcurseisevidently considerably
transition from book form to written book form ,on which we have touched more com mon am ong Greek tom bstonesin AsiaM inor than on the m ainland.
aboveinpassing atournotes5,6,7,14,24.The lgth-century view ofScripture SeeRichmond Lattimore,Tbemesin Greel eaniLatinS.pif
cr/l.
s(Urbana:University
with which Igrew up wasparticularly reified,aswastypicalofW estern 19th- ofIllinoisPress,1942- lllinoisStudiesin Languageand Literature,vol.X XVIII,
century religiousthoughtgenerally perhaps. nos.1-2),pp.106-127(compareon Christianinscriptions,pp.306-30$.
Ata m ore generallevel,notreferring specifically to awritten text,and
56.SeeDavid Diringer,TheAlpbabet:Jkq totbehistoryofmankini((Lon- withoutthecurse,cf.alsosuch passagesasDeuteronomy4:2 and 12: 32.Further,
don:Hutchinson,1948j,thirdedn.,2vol.,London:Hutchinson,andNew York: notea1soW.C.vanUnnik,<EDelarègleMn-
'
rslpocoetvatyt'
r/E'tzpslztvdans
Funk& Wagnalls,1968).Despitethcbook'stitle,thefirstt
'wochaptersdealwith l'histoireducanon,''(VtkiliaeCbristianae,3 (194$:1-361Sparsacollecta,op cit
the non-alphabetic writing ofM esopotam ia and Egypt,the cuneiform and the (above,ournote15),2:g1231-156.
hieroglyphic.
57.Ibid.
64.SeeW illardGurdonOxtoby,Somelk. scnl
pffprl.
so
ftbeSa
faiticBeiuin(New
Haven:AmericanOrientalSociety,1968-AmericanOrientalSeries,vol.50))esp.
58.11Kings22 and 23. p.17.
59.O fmodern scholarship Ihavefollowed largely E.W .Nicholson,Debv 65.BrevardChilds,BiblicalTlteologyinCrisi
s(Philadelphia:Westminster,
teronomyJJ
IJTraiition(Oxford:Blackwell,andPhiladelphia:Fortress,1967). 1970).Seealso PartIClntroduction'')oftheChildsworkmentionedabovein
our note 38.
6O.Forasituating oftheJosiah-Deuteronomy ureform''in abroadergeo-
graphic context and a linking of it with the then contemporary situation in 66.Oneexampleamong severalthatmightbeoffered:W alterW ink,Tlte
Assyria,seeW illiam FoxwellAlbright,From l/1eStonea4getoCbri
stianit
y:monotbe- BibleinHumanTransformation:ftuturlf
;newparadi
gmforBiblicalstuiy(Philadelphia:
ism fisJ tbehistoricalyrocess(Baltimore:JohnsHopkins,and London:Oxford, Fortress,1973).Seeespecially hisfirsttwobriefchapters:R'rheBankruptcy of
(1941)2ndedn.1946),pp.241-244.OntlaeAssyrianandMesopotamianrolein the BiblicalCriticalParadigm 'and çxlsBiblicalStudy U ndergoing aParadigm
ourm atterm oregenerally,cf.alsoourref.41above. Shift?''
.In the lengthy remaining,third,section the author proffershis own
61.GBehistun''isthetraditionalW estern nam e;thepresent-dayvillagenear
Jungian alternative.Seealsohispoignant<çconclusiom''pp.81- 83.
whichitstandsisinmodern PersianBlsitùnorBlsutûnorBlsotûn.SeegKing,

3 conceptwould perm itusto see how m ultidimensionalan experience the
Scripture and lts Reception:
A B uddhist C ase
M iriam Levering
IN TR O D U CT IO N
In many ofthe religioustraditionsofthe world certain wordsand texts,
whetherpreserved and transmitted orally orin written form,areregarded
in wayssomewhatsim ilarto theways' W esternersregard theirscriptures.
W esterners tend to call these words and texts ç'scriptures'' or <tsacred
texts,''buta conceptofscripturethatcan illum inatethesephenom enain
many cultures,and thatdirectsattention to theessentialordistinguishing
featuresofthese textsasopposed to others,hasso farproved elusive.
In discussing whatthesewordsand textshavein comm on,and what
distinguishes them from otherwordsand textsin the same tradition or
culture, three approaches predominate.The first points to allegations
aboutthegenesisofthese texts,orto claim sabouttheirontologicalstatus.
In thisview,what distinguishesscriptures orsacred textsfrom othersis
that they are believed to be revealed by transhuman powers,to convey
etcrnaltruths,orto replicate the speech ofthe gods.
The second isafunctionalapproach:one often hearsthatwhatdis-
tinguishesscripturaltextsfrom othersisthatthey are used asnormative
orauthoritative basesforcomm unallife in itsrelationsto the sacred.
The third pursuesthe significanceofan obsetwation aboutthe recep-
tion of such texts: they are treated as Rsacred,'' that is, powerful and
inviolable.
SCRIPTURE AND ITS RECXPTIO N 59
Clearly allofthese approachesbring into view essentialfeaturesof
whatmakesscripturedistinctive.Yetthere remain otheraspectsofscrip-
ture and itsrole in human com m unitieswhich these approachesdo not
bring fully into view.lncluding theseaspectsin oursearch fora generic
human experience ofwordsand textsasscripture is.
Theseotherfeaturescom einto view with yetanotherapproach that
includesbutgoesbeyond theapproachesm entioned above.Thisapproach
involvesseeking whatessentially characterizesscriptureby examining all
ofthewaysin w hicllindividualsand communitiesreceivethesewordsand
texts:thewayspeople respond to the texts,the usesthey make ofthem ,
thecontextsin which they turn to them ,theirunderstandingsofw hatit
isto read them,orto understand them ,and therolesthey find such words
and textscan havein theirreligiousprojects.
Such an approach reflectsa conviction thathoweverthe ''scriptura-
lity''of scripture may originate in a com munity,whatcharacterizes its
scripturality for persons and com munities is that the wordsor texts in
question are understood to be able to play specialrolesin religiouslife.
Being able to play thesespecialroles,scripturescome to beread and used
differently from other texts.They rem ain scripturalaslong as they are
foundtosustainthosedifferentwaysofbeingreadandused(whichIwill
callRmodesofreception'')in thecontextofareligiouslife.
MoiesofReceytion:TkeNeedforComlmrativeStudy
To achieve a generic conceptofscripturethatincludeswhatmodes
of reception can tellus,a comparative study of modes ofreception of
wordsand textsin many differenttraditionsisneeded.
M odesofreception are ofcoursetradition-specific.They areshaped
by the conceptsofthe sacred orultimateheld by agiven comm unity,and
byitsunderstandingofrelationshipwith thesacred and/orofultimate
self-transformation.
Yetitisnonethelesstrue thatcomparative study ofthese modesof
reception,and thedrawing ofgeneralconceptsfrom theconcretespecific-
ity of the historically found traditions,should allow what we learn of
each tradition to enhanceourunderstandingoftheothers.Thisisparticu-
larly necessary becausewhile in any given tradition m any m odesarepres-
ent, in any tradition at a given socio-historical m oment only certain
m odesarefully consciousand them atized.Itisnottoo much to hopethat
knowledge of m ore than one tradition's m odes of reception,and m ore
than one way ofinterpreting them eaning ofsuch reception,willexpand
ourawarenessofthepossibilitiesofrelation to ultim acy mediated through
scripturaltexts,even in the traditionswe know best.
 U
RETH IN KIN G SCRIPTU RE
A preliminary survey indicates that four fundam ental modes of
reception are found w hereverwordsand tcxtsarc scriptural. These are:
1. theinform ative mode:allowing textsto shapeone'sunderstand-
ing ofthe world.(An exploration ofthe informative mode
should also include exploration ofthe views ofm any subtradi-
tionsthat word,textand tradition are of limited value as mid-
wivesto wisdom.)
2.the transactive mode:çddoing thingsw ith wordso- the text is
scripture because reciting or reading itenablesone to actin the
power ofthe ultimate.
3. the transform ative mode:finding wordsa gateway to a deeper
encounterwith an O therorto atransformation ofself;exploring
the power ofthe textas symbolto m ediate transformation and
enhancementofpersonality.
4.thesymbolic mode:finding thatword ortextcan beitselfasym -
bolofthe ultim ate.l
4 CbineseBuddqistExamyle
.
In whatfollows1offera description ofthe reception ofwordsand
textsin a contemporary Buddhistconventin the Chinese culturaltradi-
tion ofTaiwan.Iwillalso supply som e historicalbackground to enable
the readerto sense theplaceofthepresentpractice in the contextofthe
tradition thatinformsit.
BACK G RO U N D
1willbegin by sketching briefly the developm entof differentattitudes
toward words and textswithin the Indian and Chinese Buddhist tradi -
tions.Theattitudesdescribed hereshould notbeconfused with themodes
ofreception themselves.Rather, such an overview should provide acon-
textforunderstanding the specificformsofthosem odeswithin the Chi-
nese Buddhisttradition.
Indian BuddbistAttitudesft
xzurl tbeTraiition-sanctioned Izlbrl
ln whatseemsto historiansto be theearlieststrata ofthe teachings
in surviving records,Buddhists,probably beginning with the Buddha,
takewhatwem ightcallan anti-authoritarian position with respectto the
word.They assertthatthe wordsofatradition, whetheritbetheBrah-
SCRIPTU RE AN D ITS RECEPTION
m anical Vedic tradition with its revealed texts or their ow n Buddhist
teachings,should notbe taken as authoritative because of their source,
butshould beregarded astrue only w hen proved to be so by theindivid-
ua1practitionerusing her own reason and experience.z
O n the otherhand,the tradition never denied the im portance of
wordsand textsin transm itting the Buddha'steaching.Properly under-
stood,the wordsdo convey the truthsone needs for successfulpractice
toward enlightenm ent.Thisunderstanding ofthe value ofwordsin the
tradition wasgiven greater em phasisfollow ing the disappearence ofthe
living teacher at the Buddha's death. The tradition relates, in the
M altâparinibbâna Sutta,thatwhen the Buddhawasasked on hisdeathbed
who should be hissuccessorassupreme teacher,he told hisdisciplesto
taketheDharma(teaching)astheirrefugeandtheir1amp.3Thetradition
also relates thatshortly after the Buddha's death five hundred realized
disciples(arlîats)mettorecitetheBuddha'steachingsin ordertoagree
on a reliableand authoritativebody ofteachings,since itwasthesewhich
would now have such importancein guiding presentand futurepractice.4
Although the teachingsofthe Buddha were handed dow n orally exclu-
sively for many centuriesafter the Buddha'sdeath,yettheirimportance
as teaching was reflected in the stress within the tradition on accurate
m em orizing and reciting ofthese texts.Teachingswereauthenticated by
the factthatonecould dem onstrate thatthe teachingswere credible,that
they had been heard by a specific hearer,that he had heard the Buddha
teach them ataparticulartim e and place,underaparticularsponsorship,
and to a particular assembly oflisteners.sThis emphasison the impor-
tance ofthe Buddha'swordsasteaching,and ofclarificationsand exten-
sionsofthem by laterdisciples,we mightcallthe kataphaticorinform a-
tive reception oftheword asauthoritative teaching.
W c find thisinform ative,pedagogicaldim ension extended in early
Mahâyànast
jtraàsuchasthePer
fectionof Wisiom inEightThousanjLines
and the Lotus usfjlrf;,where there is an extraordinary em phasis on the
importance and statusofthe st àtra,tending toward an orientation toward
the textthatcan be termed Riconic''or$4Presentational.''6Sûtrasnow are
seen as embodying,and providing a directm eansof accessto,a11ofthe
Buddha'sknowledge,wisdom ,and supernaturalpowers.Thusin theLotus
k
satra, forcxample,the Buddha jJkyamunisays';
A1ltheDltarmaspossessedbytheThusComeOne(i.e.,theBud-
.. .
dha),al1theThusComeOne'ssupernaturalpowersofself-mastery,
thetreasure houseofallthe ThusCom eO ne'ssecrets,alltheThus
ComeO ne'sprofoundaffairsareentirely proclaimed,demonstrated,
revealed and preached in thisscripture.;
 62 RETHIN KIN G SCRIPTU RE
InthePefectionofWisdom inEi
gbtTbousand1,fne.
s,asbjtrawhosemes-
sageisthateverything,includingsatrasand teachings, ist'empty''ofsubstan-
tialexistence,and which thusoffersan authoritative teaching thatteaches
detachmentfrom authoritative teaching, jâkyamuniBuddhasaysto Ananda:
Therefore then,Ananda,again and again Ientrustand transmitto
you thisperfection ofwisdom ,laid outin letters,so thatitm ay be
available forlearning,forbearing in mind.preaching, studying and
spreading wide....For the Tathâgata hassaid thatRthe perfection
of wisdom is the m other, the creator, the genetrix,of the past,
future, and present Tathâgatas, their nurse in all-knowledge.''
. . . You s
houldattend wellto thisperfection ofwisdom , bearitwell
in m ind,study itwell,and spread itwell.And when one learnsit,
oneshould carefully analyze itgram matically, letterby letter,sylla-
ble by syllable,word by word.ForastheD/lnr-a-body ofthe past,
future and presentTathâgatas isthisDbarma-text authoritative. In
the sam e way in which you,Ananda,behave towards M e who at
presentreside asa Tathàgata- with solicitude,affection,respectand
helpfulness-justso,with thesamesolicitude,affection andrespect,
and in the same virtuousspirit,should you learn thisperfection of
wisdom ,bearitin mind,study,repeat,writeand develop it, respect,
revere and worship it.Thatistheway foryou to worship M e, that
istheway to show affection,serene faith,and respectfor the past,
future and present Buddhas and Lords.. . . (Ijn thesameway in
w hich Iam yourteacher,so isthe perfection ofwisdom .8
Lay Buddhistsatfirst,and then al1Buddhists(asthedistinction
between m onastic and 1ay decreased in importance in the new M ahâyâna
movements)haddevelopedthepracticeofshowingreverenceandmaking
offeringsto the relicsoftheBuddhaenshrined in large reliquary mounds
called astgpas.''In thePalitextsthispracticeisspecifically sanctioned by
the Buddha;in the Dîgha Nflti yfithe Buddha specifically recom mends
thispractice to laypersons,saying thatitwillbring them peacefulm inds.g
The stljpa with its relicsbecam e the placewhere the continuing life of
the Buddha wasm ostpowerfully felt.loIn M ahâyàna texts such as the
Lotus u
ifjfr; the textsymbolically becom esassimilated to the relic ofthe
Buddha asthe locusoftheBuddha'spresence andpoweryllandtheobject
ofofferingsand reverence.In M ahâyânasb jtrasSuch astheLotusi îgfraand
the Perfection of W isdom sûtras the reader istold that satrasare more
worthy ofofferingsand reverencethan therelicsofBuddhas, becausethe
truth(Dltarma)thatsatrascontainandthetrainingthattheyprescribeis
the source from which Buddhascom e.12
SCRIPTU RE AN D lTS RECEPTIO N 63
TheM ahàyànasl jtrasemphasizethatthereisan all-importantprac-
tical reason why st jtras must be memorized, copied, recited, and
expounded:withoutthistransmission,no future Buddhaswould arise.l3
Sûtrasare to be the teachersoffuture generationsin the sam esense that
pàkyamuniwastheteacherofhiscontemporaries.Yetbeyond this,itis
clearthatsto theauthorsoftheM ahàyànasb jtras,yf
èlrasthem selvesm anifest
and em body the activity,wisdom ,and powerofthe transcendentD barma.
s'filrrlsaswordsthatcan be recited and copied are neitherclearly distin-
guished from the teaching thatthewordsconvey,from the transcendent
wisdom to l)erealized through theirstudy and practice,from theBuddha
whosewordsthey are,norfrom hissupernaturalpowers.Al1fourofthese
are treated in the textsasdim ensionsofthe same reality.A person who
is reciting or copying the words or making offeringsto the textor its
preachersisworshippingand givingjoyfulattention totheDbarmathey
convey,and through doing so isin the presence of,hasdirectaccessto,
and will definitely come to realize, transcendent w isdom and a11-
knowledge.In this understanding,words do not m erely express truth,
they are the living presence oftrue and powerfulreality.
In contrast,anotherattitude thatappearsfrom the early daysofthe
tradition and in the earliesttexts is the suggestion that the realessence
ofthe Buddhaand theDbarma,nam ely,the ultim ate truth to which the
Buddhawasenlightened,isbeyond thegrasp ofwordg,particularly meta-
physicalcategories,and its apprehension requiresleaving wordsbehind.
In this aniconic orapophatic attitude,wordsare usefulonly in so far as
they m ediate immediate perception of truth,which is discovered to be
inexpressible in words.Thisapophaticattitudebecomesquite m arked in
laterlndian and CentralAsian strandsofM ahàyàna,where itwasexplic-
itly taughtthatthe word ofthe Buddha,as word,isnotfully adequate
to thecommunication oftheexperienceoftheBuddha'senlightenment.l4
Thattruth transcendswords and thatwords are çem pty'asvehicles for
thetransm ission oftruth isshown,thetradition suggests,by theBuddha's
silencewhen asked m etaphysicalquestions,by Vimalaklrti'suthunderous
silence''when asked to expresshisunderstanding ofthe m eaning ofnon-
dualityls and by the oft-repeated statement thatthe Buddha taught for
forty-nine yearsand neversaid a thing.l6 In thisview the words ofthe
Buddhasare medicines to cure specific m entaldiseases;one who iswell
notonly does notneed them ,but mightbe made illby grasping onto
them .These apophaticunderstandingsoftherelation between wordsand
truth were nevereclipsed;indced,the attitude toward wordswithin the
M ahày:na in particularmay be described asapolarity between apophasis
and katapllasis,with one som etimes stressed more than the other,but
with 1 70th continually presentand in creative tension and relationship.
 U
64 RETH IN KIN G SCRIPTU RE
SCRIPTU RE AN D ITS RECEPTIO N 65
t Finally,w ithin Indian and CentralAsian M ahâyuna, in 170th itsexo- yânasatrasand comm entariesgrew in China, ChineseBuddhistscholars
ericand esoteric traditions, wefindtheview thatcertain words(mantra
J/lJrf7!çr)aregiventoadherentsbyBuddhasand Bodhisattvasto suppl, soughtwaysto grasp theirteachingssystem atically and to see theirinter-
empowerment(adlgiêt/lJut relationships.Thesescholarscreated herm eneuticalsystem sthatclassified
, T)and protection in thecourse oftheirpracticy
e thevariousteachings,and thesûtraswhich contained them , into catego-
and preaching, supportforw holesome m entalstates, and certain powers
f
or m undane and transmundane purposes.l; In som ç conceptualizations riessuch asprovisionaland ultimate,abruptand complete.zoEach school
thesewordsarepowerfulbecausethey arethevery speech ofcosmicBud- within which a hermeneuticalsystem wasdeveloped identified asûtra or
dh a group ofsûtrasasconveying the highest,com pleteand perfectteaching
as,reproducedbytheadherentinitsverysounds(oftenunintelligible of the Buddha,while others contained teachings suited to students at
to human listeners).Here the transhistoricalBuddhasand Bodhisattvas lowerstagesofunderstanding..Theseschools, such asT'ien-t'aiand Hua-
are not only teachers of Dharma, but sustainers of practice by their
empowermentLaihiçt
.bâna)andprotectionthrough mantrasanddhörapîs yen,seem to have taughtthatdevotion to and study ofthe satra contain-
It is significant that here also they offer their powers and protection. ing the perfect teaching could bring one to the highest enlightenment,
t not sim ply because that sbjtra contained the truest doctrine. but also
ihr ough the giftofwords. ln thisessentialistview, itisunderstood that
n the case of these words, there is an ineradicable correspondence because it embodied the full expression of the Buddha's mind. These
between the specific wordsas mediatorsofritualagency and the cosmi- schools combined the informative with the iconic views ofsntrasasthe
cally grounded powersthey comm unicate. w ordsofthe Buddha.
OtherChineseBuddhists,however, who began with theIndian view
thatthewordoftheBuddhaisaskillfuldevicebywhich theBuddhaenables
CbineseTrany
xrplclfonyofIndianMoiels the adherent to make progress toward niwöpa, and from the
n From the early daysofBuddhistm issionary activity in China, Chi-
. Ib
jnyavâdinjprajt
uyöramitöparadox that,although theBuddhapreachedfor
ese Buddhistsdrew upon a native modelin orderto understand how to forty-nineyearsandhisdisciplesstudiedhisteachingsLDbarma),theBuddha
had never spoken a word and there had never been a teaching to study,
B eive the sûtra literature to which they were being introduced.The
r
ec
m ived atamoreaniconicorapophaticunderstanding. HerethenativeChi-
uddha, they concluded, s,like Confucius,agreatsage (
whoseinfinitewisdom led wa him to createateachi shenpjenj, nese tradition also played a part,as Chinese Buddhistssuch as Seng Chao
tobenefitand transform the human world ng(chiahthroughwhich incorporated the insight of the author of the statement found in the
. To t
ransm itthisteaching he
created ''cltingz' a word used to translate the Sanskrit term asûtra Cltuang-tzu thatthebooksofthe sagescontain only thetracksleftby their
v'
'but mind;thereismuch thatthey cannotcomm unicatedirectly ata1l, and much
whi
C
ch wasalready in useasaterm referring to thenormative textsof the
onfucian sages. Thus,ching,textswhich arereliable in thatthey a elsethatcontactwith theirlivingpresence mightcommunicateto latergen-
word ofthe Buddha, are the preciousteaching of the Buddha and the re t
he erationsthattheirwordscannot.Even with respectto whatwordscan con-
m eansbywhich hetransform stheworldthrough transforming theminds vey,unlessthe meaning ofthewordsisgrasped in everyday experience, the
ofsentientbeings. W erethere no texts,therecould benoauthenticteach wordsremain a dead thing.U ltimately the experienceofthe meaning indi-
ing,and the transformatiou could nottakeplace.18 - cated by the words showsthatm eaning to transcend al1distinctionsupon
dhi
The Chi neseals
o needed no encour age m entfrom t
h eirlndian Bud- which wordsdepend.ChineseCh'an (Zen)Buddhistsin particularoften
l stcounterparts to revere the faithfully transmitted written text. In
affirmed that the objectofstudy ofthe Buddha'swordsisto Rgettheir
india the teachingsofthc Buddha had atfirstbeen passed dow n orally; poinq''thatis,todiscoverforoneselftheintuitivewisdom ofprajt
u ,notto
twasonly much later,approximately atthe timeoftheriseoftheM ahà- be attached to,or misled by,the study oftheir words and concepts. The
yâ following exchange is illustrative ofthe encounter betveen Chinese Bud
i na,thatthe teachings were written down and thatwe find,aswe do
-

n early M ah:yàna snlrns, adherents being urged to copy and preserve dhistsofapophaticand kataphaticpersuasions.
wr
Chi itten textsaswellasto memorize and recite them accurately.Butthe
nese received most of the Buddhistteachings in written f A lecture-master(amonk who devotedhimselflargely to giving
timewhen they already had an established tradition ofplacing gror eam al
tvatua lectureson theBuddhistsûtrasand treatises)asked:tsrrheThree
u e
ponandpreservingthewrittenclassics(c/lfnJ)19 .
Vehicles'twelvedivisionsofteachings(thatis,thetotality ofthe
Asknow ledge ofdifferencesam ong thc teachingsin Indian M ahs Buddhistscriptures)revealtheBuddha-nature,dotheynot?''u'This
weed-patchhasneverbeenspaded,''said(theCh'anmaster)Lin-chi.
 N
66 RETH IN KIN G SCRIPTU RE
'xsurelytheBuddhawould nothave deceived menl''said thelecture-
master.Ctw hereisBuddha?''asked Lin-chi. The lecture-m asterhad
no reply....
. ..
gTothewholegroupLin-chithensaid:luDoesanyoneelse
haveaquestion?Ifso, 1ethim ask itnow!Butthe instantyou open
your m outh,you are already way off. W hy is thisso? Don't you
know?Venerablejâkyamunisaid:'LDbarma)isseparatefrom words
becauseitisneithersubjecttocausation nordependentupon condi,
-
tions.'zlYourfaith in thisisinsufficient, thereforewe havebandied
wordstoday.''22
From the lecture-m aster's pedagogical-iconic point of view, the
totality oftheBuddhistsûtras, therecordofthewordsspoken by theBud-
dha him self,were notonly the authoritativerepositoriesofdoctrinalthe-
ory,they also revealed by their very nature the ultim ate truths ofBud-
dhism .From theCh'an pointofview, to try to grasp theDbarma through
stating itin words ortrying to say som ething aboutitis to make itan
objectofthoughtand thereby missit.Thestudentmustultimately dis-
coverthattheBuddhaandtheteaching(Dbarmh arerealitiesthattran-
scend words,and thatthey are completely presenteverywhere.
TH E C O N VEN T
TbeConventCommunity
Briefly, the religious com munity of the convent from which the
f
dollowing observations are drawn consists of four temples, located in
ifferent cities, towns and counties, all under the supezvision and
administration ofoneAih-
fu(roughlyequivalenttoabbess).Aroundsixty
pi-cb'iu-nitll/l/'
/
e.
sl/?çr,nuns)and afew laypeoplelivein thefourhousestaken
t
loge
i ther. The comm unity is in a Ch'an Buddhist D/urma transm ission
- Chinese form in the convent,the rubric ofthe three studiescan stillbe
neage,butdoes notemphasize seated meditation or kunpan (=lJnn)
practice.Nordoesthe practicereflectan exclusivecomm itm entto the Pure
Land tradition,though PureLand faith isvery strong, and many ofthenuns
say that rebirth in the Pure Land is their goal. The convent should be
thoughtofasbelonging to thccatholic ChineseBuddhistcommunity ofthe
presentday,wheresectarian distinctionsand D/mr/rlalineagesexistbutoften
meanverylittle.TheChinesemonasticorder(sahgba)asawholefollows
the eclectic, synthetic tradition prevalent at least since the seventeenth
century,with each abbessorabbotconstrained only by custom in herorhis
selection ofcomm unalpractices. Asto individualpractice,each nun isfree
to selectfrom among many formsofpracticeand many guiding textsthose
upon which shewillrely.
SCRIPTU RE AN D lTS RECEPTIO N
TheGoalsoftbeCommunity
There seem to be atthe conventtwo complem entary conceptions
of whata convent isand whatthe goals of the com munity should be.
First,a conventisunderstood to be acom munity ofpersonsdedicated to
cultivation oftheBuddha'spath asalife-goal:theterm thenunsused for
thisistheChineseterm Lsiu-hsing (cultivation).'
W hen asked aboutin
what bsiu-bsing consists, the nuns refer to an early Indian M ahâyâna
conception thatpracticeconsistsofthefamoustçthreestudies''(C.san-
/sfie/zl:Ma(originallythekeepingoftheprecepts,butlater,morebroadly,
eschewingevilactionsanddoinggoodactions),samât lbi(thecultivation
of mental concentration) and prajt jtj (thè cultivation of wisdom,
particularly intuitive,liberating wisdom).
But at least since the time of the Lotus q
sfifrf;,the practice of the
three studieshasbeen carried outin thedevotionalwingoftheM ahâyàna
in the context of the imm ense assistance and support one can receive,
through theirsupernorm alpowersand theirinconceivable store ofm erit,
from Buddhas and Bodhisattvas who are further along on the path.As
the nuns of thc contemporary chinese Buddhistconventundcrstand it,
this supportisexperienced to the extentthatone m akessincere efforts
and offerssincere reverence to Buddhasand Bodhisattvas,expressing that
reverence,asthe lndian M ahâyànasûtrassuggest,by offeringsofflowers,
incense,light,hymnsofpraiseand so forth (C.pai-
fh.Onealso may
participate directly in the powers of Buddhas and Bodhisattvas by
invoking theirprotection and compassionate powersin supportofone's
practice and ofone'spreaching and propagating activities.Finally,ofall
ofthe kindsofassistanceprom ised by theBuddhas,Am itàbha'spowerto
enable one to be reborn in the Pure Land isperhapsthe m ostfervently
sought.
Thus,in a devotional M ahàyâna context such as thatfound in a
used to describe the dim ensionsofLsiu-ltsing,expanding the conceptof
Ma (good actions)to include merit-cultivation,bodhisattva-actionsfor
others,andsuchhighlymeritoriousdevotionalactionsasworship(C.pai),
repentance(C.c/
ç'as-/lrffl,praiseandeulogy(C.tsan),themakingofvows,
the invocation ofempowerm entthrough dllârapîàand mantras,and the
recollection of Buddhas and Bodhisattvas through visualization or
nam e-recitation asaway ofestablishing apowerfulconnection with those
Buddhasand Bodhisattvasand theirpowers.23
In addition to providing a context for Iuiu-bsing for nuns, the
convent'sexistencehad alsoasecond m eaning,also frequently mentioned.
A conventisatao-cbnang,a place ofpracticeof'çthe'W 'ay''and aplace for
offeringsto the Buddhas,and assuch itismaintained forthe sake ofthe

68 RETH IN KIN G SCRIPTURE
world beyond itswalls.24Jtm ustofferlay peopleaplacewhere they can
pay reverenceto thcBuddhasand Bodhisattvas;w hereby offeringsto the
nunsand to the Buddhasand Bodlzisattvasthey can cultivate m eritto be
transferred to their relativesand ancestorsizsand where by the powerof
the good karma and cultivation of the nuns, 1ay people w ill feel an
attraction to thc Buddha'sway outofsuffering.
REC EPTIO N O F TEX T S IN TH E C O N VEN T
ln relation to 170th ofthesemeaningsoftheconvent'sexistence thestudy
,
and recitation of tradition-sanctioned texts, particularly asb jtras,''
'G
mantras''and utlhârapîs,''play avery largepart. N unsrecitestètras,/'
aan-
trasand ihârapîsdaily orcontinually, m entally oraloud.They copy sûtras,
expound yfilras,listen to recitationsand expositionsofsûtras meditateby
,
visualizing personagesand scenesdescribed in sgtras, and readygfrns.Lay-
people recite satras,mantrasand dltâratlts athome silently oraloud, and
go to m onasteriesto listen to m onksand nunsexpound sûtras. They copy
s
1atras,and sponsorthe publication and distribution ofsatraà. They form
ay societiesto recitestjtrastogetherattheconventbiweekly ormonthly
Ifthe convent and its lay associatesare typical, holding these wordsof
the tradition present in the mind, ear and m outh may be considered a
centraland pervasive form ofpractice chosen by nuns and laypeople in
contemporary ChineseBuddhistcomm unities. Forthesecommunitiesthe
tradition-sanctioned word supports, undergirds,and symbolizestheirreli-
giousaspirationsasmuch or more than the Bible supportsreligiouslife
i forthesameproject.
n ProtestantChristian churches.
TLeInformativeAfcde.IniividualStudyandAttendingStttraLectures
TbeGoalsofStuêy.Onenun toldmethatthereisacentralreasonwhy
there mustbe m onksand nuns:the sb jtra literature isso vastthat,forit
to be passed down with understanding, there m ustl)e those who devote
theirw hole livesto itsstudy.
Sincetherearesofew monks(inTaiwanj,
theburden ofthistask now restson nuns.
But why should this massive task be undertaken? W hy is it s
importantto the society thatthere should be personswho devote thei or
whole livesto it?
The answer was thatit isby following the Buddha'steachingsas
they were preached by the Buddha him selfthatone can crossthe sea of
suffering and attain nirvâpa.
TbeHermitanitbeStudytfsl-
ttray.Severalofthenunsregularlyreadsgtras
on their own.But the mostrevealing conversation that Ihad aboutthis
U
SCRIPTU RE AN D ITS RECEPTIO N
waswith a m an who aftervariousenlightenmcntexperienceshad taken
upthelifeofahermitin acottageadjoiningthepropertyoftheconvent.
He planted a garden,and placed in the cottage a complete copy ofthe
Ta-tsang-ching,the authoritative textcollection (often somewhat mis-
leadingly called <tcanon'')ofthe Chinese Buddhisttradition.z6Hisdaily
routineconsisted ofm editating,cooking,gardening,and reading thest kt-
rasand othertextsin the Ta-tsang-ching,al1fifty-odd volum es,massive
and difficultto read,from coverto cover.' W hen askedwhy hewasdoing
this,hisanswerhad severalparts.
First,he said,for progress on the path to Buddhahood one m ust
have 170th cbien-tiand cbiny cbieh.Cbien-tiisa matterofhaving correct
ideason which to base one'spractice.Ifthe ideasarewrong,thepractice
willgo wrong.The study ofsûtrasand theircom mentaries,aswellasthe
recorded sayingsofCh'an m asters,leadsto correctchien-ti.Butonemust
also do meditation, since correct chien-ti alone is nothing without
ching-cbieb,advancementto a higher stage in one's mentaltraining and
concentration.z?
Butsurely onecould attain a correctunderstandingw ithoutreading
through the entire Ta-tsang-ching? He replied thathisteacherhad read
. through the entire Ta-tsang-ching afterhisinitialenlightenm entexperi-
ence.Histeacherhad comm ented thatitwould be boring and stupid to
read itthrough priorto an enlightenmentexperience,butthataftersuch
an experience,itwasvery helpful.H ehimselfhad had an enlightenment
experience thathad enabled him to enterthe path,and thuswas ready
The hermit'sattitudeprovidesinsightinto theproblem sand oppor-
tunitiesofreceivingsb jtrasin theinformativem odeon one'sown.O n the
one hand,itmustbe done.Buteven with the help ofcom mentaries,it
islikely to be difficult,tothepointoffutility.Sbjtrasaretechnical,repeti-
tive,and referto phenomenaoccurring only tom editatorsin higherstates
ofconcentration.Above all,therearetoo many ofthem .Formostpeople,
itisappropriate to confinestudy and recitation to aselection only.To set
outto read them all,asthe herm itand histeacher have done,isunusual
and admirablebecause ofthe aspiration itsymbolizes.
Attending Sùtra Lectures. Given the difficulties of individual study,the
m ostpopularapproach to becom ing informed by the wordsoftheBud-
dha isattending lecturesoffered by em inentm onksand nuns.
In thelndian M ahâyâna,preaching theDbarmaon thebasisofsûtras
seems to have been an early and important institutionaldevelopment.
EarlyMahâyànasb
jtras,SuchasthePer
fectionofWislom inEi
gbtTbousand
Linesand theLotususfifra,urge thepractice ofpreachingtheDharmabased
on the sb
jtra upon a1lRbodhisattvas,''that is,adherentsofM ahàyâna.If

70 RETHIN KIN G SCRIPTU RE
thepicturedescribed in thesesntrascan be taken to reflectin som e mea-
surethe realit
'y ofearlyM ah:yànacom munitiesin Indiaand CentralAsia
then preaching on thebasisofsgtrasmusthavebeen oneofthebasicactiv-,
itiesby which comm unitieswere builtand the teaching spread.28The
writing of com mentarieson sntraswas also aprincipalexpression ofthe
study and the teaching ofthe Dllflr-tzwithin the M ahâyàna.
In China thistradition ofpreaching and writing comm entarieson
sûtrascontinued to develop.Early biographicalcollectionscalled Tltef-fpe.s
ofEminentMonksandtheContinuelJwfpe. çofEminentMonbsincludedaclas-
sificationofmonksasRexegetesg'(f-càfe/l),indicatingthatfrom earlytimes
explanation ofthe m eaning ofsûtraswasan importantactivity atwhich
certain m onksand nunsexcelled.Similarly the greatscholarsand system
atizersofChineseM ahàyâna frequently expressed theirideasascom men-
tarieson sgtras.M orebroadly,since early tim esthe ChineseBuddhisttra-
ditionhasinstitutionalized theofficeofRo/lflr-u-master''(-
a-sbih).This
title and function are given to thescholarly monk ornun who isqualified
to expound Jglrcsorally- usually only certain satrasin which he orshe
has specialized.zgAlthough today in Taiwan most monks and nunsare
called by the courtesy title çço/lflr-fl-master,''the tradition ofregarding
thisasa specialized office continues, asseen in the factthatonly certain
learned monksand nunsareregarded astruly qualified to expound sûtrns.
Asin thepast,such monksornunscontinuethepracticeofoffering peri-
odically aseriesof lectureson a given sb îtra.3o
ln the convent thatisthe subject ofthis study,no one hasyet
become qualified to be a lecturer orexpounderofsûtrasorofany ofthe
Chinese Buddhist scholastic traditions. Several. however, do regularly
attend lectures given atone ofthe larger monasteries by a m onk whose
learninginthefieldoftheHua-yen(Avatatnsaba)Sûtraanditscommen-
tarialtradition iswidely recognized. Othersattend lectureson the Lotus
usf
jfrn offered by a nun who headsa Buddhistacademy and specializesin
theT'ien-t'aischolastic tradition. These lecturesusually takea com m en-
tarialform:the nun or m onk recites and com mentson each passage in
thesûtraitzturn,starting atthe beginning;theentireexposition may take
yearsifthe satra isa long one.
TbeTrans
formativeMt
oeinLecturingJnflListening toLectures
Clearly theinform ativem odeisnotan unimportantmodeofreceiv-
ing textsin thereligiouslivesofthesepractitioners. Yetthetestim ony of
m y informantswas that transformative mode ofreception- listening to
exposition and reading for the sake of attainment of insight and the
resulting formation ofcharacter- isan equally importantdimension of
the reading and study oftexts.
r
SCRIPTU RE AN D lTS RECEPTION
For example, it was pointed out to m e that the reading and
expounding ofst ètraàispreceded by reciting the following verse to estab-
lish the rightfram e ofmind:
The unsurpassed,profoundly deep,fine,wonderfulDbarma,
Difficultto meetw ith in hundredsofthousandsofbalpas,
N ow Ican see and hear,acceptand hold it;
M y only hope isto grasp the realintention ofthe Tathâgata.
Anotherprofound comm enton the experience oflistening to st àtra
lectures was made by an intelligent and devout young lay woman, a
-
teacher ofEnglish ata Buddhisthigh school.She said thatasa young
studentshe had attended stktralecturestçto getsom ething outofit.''She
had noticed many old ladiesjustsitting back and doingtheirrecitation
ofAm itâbha'sname on theirstringsofbeadsasthey listened,nottaking
notesoreven appearing to listen too c1osely.32She had com e to seethat
these ladieshad the rightattitude:notto listen with the intentto gain
something,buttoletthemindbecomecalm (thenamerecitationwould
help),andletwhatstruck you strikeyou.Thatwastheonly way that
whatwasliving in the textand in the spiritofthe expositorwould call
forth w hatwasliving in you.
Shealso said thatin theold daysateacherwould expound apassage
from agiven st
ètra in the morning,and in the eveningthestudentswould
be called upon to expound thesamepassage again.Iftheyjustspouted
whatthey had heard theteachersay thatm orning,they were scolded,for
the ultimate resultofsuch rote learning would bethatwith each genera-
tion the life ofthe teaching would be further lost.
She also said thatin st
jtra lecturing,asin preaching,the authority
ofthe exposition com es170th from the factthatthe textistheBuddha's
word and from the perceived degree ofinnerunderstanding and attain-
ment of the sntra lecturer.M erely clever or learned expositions of the
stètras,and even rhetorically moving ones,are notonesto which people
listen day afterday orweek afterweek.Thisisbecausethe listenerlistens
b0thtothetextandtotheheart/mindoftheexpounder,andtheaim is
1)0th deeper knowledge ofthe teaching and personal transform ation of
the hearer.33
Thusthere iscontinuity between contem porary attitudesand those
ofthe earlier Indian and Chinese Buddhisttraditions.The pedagogical,
kataphatic approach to the sanctioned word vitalin b0th the Indian and
Chinese traditionsstillrem ainsimportant.Study ofthe Buddha'swords
isseen asessentialto the correctunderstanding on which sound practice
isbased.One chooses to read them,lectures on them carefully,treats
 U
1
RETHIN KIN G SCRIPTURE
them with reverenceasone seeksinstruction from them,im mersesoneself
in them with a mind open to insight.
Yet at the sam e time, contemporary nuns and their 1ay friends
emphasize the transform ationaldim ension ofstudy and listening to lec-
tures.A1lof the personsI talked with told me, in one way or another,
that words are m eaningless or useless without insight, and that study
should notbe carried outin such a way asto block the insight, causing
the teaching and the learner to become m ore nearly dead rather than
morefully alive.In tl
aissense, truth istransmitted notthrough wordsor
intelligence or cognitive understanding alone, but from an enlightened
m ind to a m ind capable of insight. I would suggest that this kind of
reflection on the transform ative dim ension of informative reception is
typicalofpersonswho are receivingtextsasscriptures, and thatonlytexts
thatcan sustain such dualreception continue to be scriptures.
TbeTransactiveM ode
From one point ofview,thisessay in itsentirety could have been
entitled ''The Reception of Scripturesas RitualAction.''To read,listen
to,recite,study,copy,and meditateupon scripturesin religioustraditions
isin every case an action, and one thattakesplace in aritualcontext.
ln discussing the transactional mode, however,we are concerned
withreceptionoftextsspecifically/rtbepurposeoftakingsomekindof
action or establishing some kind ofrelationship. '
W'e willspeak here of
the transactionalmodewhere scripturalwordsarereceived asgiven to be
used in ritualaction,notprincipallywith an eyeto one'sow n transform a-
tion butin orderto obtain protection orpowers;to create m erit;to bring
benefits to others;to enact confession or repentance;to m ake vows;to
offer devotion and praise;and to express and bring into effect relation-
shipsbetween membersofthe comm unity living and dead. and between
those membersand transhufnan agents.
Action as Understood witbin M J/IJIWK, BuddbistTraditions. 1rlthe Buddhist
tradition al1ofhuman existence isunderstood on one levelasconsisting of
actions(Sk.karma)(ofbody,speech,ormind)andthefruits(Sk
actions.Thus,any interaction witlla textisseen asameaningfulacpb ala) otf
.
tion tha
bearsfruit(hasconsequences)fortheattainmentofone'shighestaspirations
toBuddhahoodandforone'slifein thisworld(therealm ofsatnura)ln
.
IndianMah:yânaBuddhistsatrastheconceptofmerit(Sk.putt ya)isinvoked
to referto the capacity ofgood actionsto bear good worldly fruitsforthe
actor.34Likewise meritsincurred by one person thatwould ordinarily pro
-
duceonekind offruitm ay betransform ed so thattheybearfruitsofanoth
kind forthats er
am eperson,or transferred to anotherperson.
SCRIPTU RE AN D lTS RECEPTIO N
In addition to thenotion thatactionsitlgeneralarem arked by being
meritorious,harmfulor neutral,there isthe idea thatspecific actionsof
body,speech and m ind are appropriate to those who seek Buddhahood.
Thisis the case not only because they are highly m eritorious,but also
because they are tskillful,'thatis,directly instrumentalin the pursuitof
thereligiousgoal.These include among others:repentance;feeding hun-
gryghosts;giving;practicingconcentration(dhynnaj;andrecitingnames
ofBuddhas,mantrasand ihârapîsasaway ofestablishing connection and
receiving empowerm entoffered by Buddhasand Bodhisattvas.
These specificactionsm ust,however,besupplemented by thedelib-
erate creation of meritthrough a1lkinds of good actions.The need for
thiskind ofmeritcreation ispresented within therhetoricofcontempo-
rary Chinese Buddhistpractice asafunction ofthe vaststore ofnegative
habitenergiesthatourpastactionshavebroughtaboutthrough countless
aeons.D ue to the power of delusion,every thought,word and deed of
each sentientbeing during countlesslifetimesllasbeen tinged with igno-
rance and selfish desire,and thus has created negative fruits.This is a
tremendousforceworking againstenlightenm ent,aswellasagainstordi-
nary,mundane well-being.To have any hope atall,apractitioner hasto
act to create enorm ous positive m erit and eliminate past negative
accumulations.
Reciting an1 Copying Sùtray as a Generalizei M eritorious xglclfoél,Reciting,
reading and copying sûtrasare among thevastly meritoriousactionsthat
can elim inate pastnegative accumulations.M M ostM ahàyàna sbjtrasteach
thattheir own propagation through m emorizing,reciting,and copying
is an actof im mense merit.In China as in other M ahàyàna countries,
monksand nunshave taken up st jtrarecitation asaform ofpractice.This
isencouraged,forexample,bytheSbjtraofBrahma'sNet,arulebookfor
monksand nunsprobably written in China.Thistext,which from earli-
esttim eshasserved asafundamentalguideto monasticpractice,isstudied
todaybyeverynun andmonkatthetimeofordination.Itgivestenmajor
com mandments and forty-eight minor com mandments for monks and
nuns,and including the following,the 44th m inorcom mandm ent:
Asa child oftheBuddha,one mustalwayswith singlenessofheart
accept, observe, read and recite the st
àtras and vinaya of the
M ah5y:na.37
Notonlywasrecitingsntrasalwaysenjoinedon practitioners,butit
also was specifically selected by som e monks and nuns as a practice on
which to concentratetheirefforts.In Chinafrom early timesm onksand
nunstook the continualrecitation of a particularstktra as a specialprac-
 r
RETH IN KIN G SCRIPTU WE
tice.38M any believed thatchanting a given stjtra continually wasalso an
especially effective m eansforgenerating supernorm alpowers.39
M onksand nunswere by no meansthe only practitionersto devote
tlaemselvesto meritcreation and devotion through st ylrcrecitation. Since
earliesttimes in China,asin other M ahàyàna countries, laypeople have
participated indirectly by m aking offeringsto monksand nunsasççfields
of merit''for the recitation ofyfjlrtis'
,the meritthatgrowsas a fruitof
thisplanting istransferred to the ancestorsorrelativesofthe 1ay donors
or devoted to the fulfillment of other desires. Indeed,the chanting of
sûtrasisthem ostcomm on form ofmeritcultivation and transferrence by
m onksand nunsthatoccursasaresultof1ay sponsorship. The Buddhist
publishing industry also islargely supported by 1ay donorsplanting m erit
by sponsoring the copying and publication ofsgtras and other Buddhist
texts.
M ore directly,1ay people also form ed societiesthatm etregularly to
recite yfijrcs.The one founded in Hang-chou in A.D .822 by the m onk
N an-ts'ao illustratesthe fully developed form that these ynfra-recitation
societiesweretotake.InA.D.826thefamouspoetPoChfwi(722-846)
Wrotc 21lZCCOLIIA Oftlle Society:
M onk Nan-ts'ao...invited monk Tao-feng oftheLing-yin M onas-
tery to lecture on the Huayen Sùtra. W hen he heardaboutLthe
BuddhajVairoçanainthesectionoftheLotus-wombWorld,gNanl-
ts'ao became so elated thathe uttered an earnestwish, hoping that
lle could urgea group ofone hundred thousand people, monksand
laym en,to recite theH uayen u
sfjfrn. Each ofthe one hundred thou-
sand people would in turn urge a thousand others to recite one
chapter of the same sbjtra. The entire assemblage would meet
togetherquarterly.gNanj-ts'aoalsocarricdouthisearnestwishand
organized the group ittto a society, and regulated the proceedings
through quarterly vegetarl
(an feasts. From thesumm erof822 to the
. vent.44 The context is provided by Kfitigarbha's ubirthday'' on the
presentautumn,fourteen such vegetarian feastshave been held. At
eachfeast,(Nanl-ts'aoofferedincenserespectfullyandkneltbefore
theimageoftheBuddha, making thefollowing supplication, uM ay
I and every m ember of the society be reborn before Vairoçana in
hisparadise within the Golden W heelofthe PreciousLotus, float-
ing on the Great O cean of Fragrant W aters in the Lotus- womb
W orld.Then Iwillbe satisfied.'
f 'gNanj-ts'aosolicitedenoughfunds
rom the members to purchase an estate of ten clt'ing ofland, the
incomefrom which wasused to defray the expensesofthevegetar -
ian feasts....40
SCRIPTURE AN D lTS RECEPTIO N 75
Po Chù-i'sown com mentson this1ay society givean indication of
how such practiceswere conventionally regarded:
Ihaveheard thatthem eritofdonating onestrand ofhairoronegrain
of rice willnever be lost;how much greater isthe m erit gained in
preparing with ceaselessenergy theboundlessoffering offourvegetar-
ian feastsannually,supplied by the incomeofa thousand mouîIhave
heardthatthepowerofoneearnestwishandthemeritofgrecitingj
oneversewillneverbelost;how m uch greaterthen isthemeritaccnw
ing from a thousand mouths uttering the twelve divisions of the
canon?M oreover,how m uch greateralsowhenhundredsofthousands
ofearsarelistening to myriadsofJfilrtzspl
In the conventthesetraditionsofrecitation ofsatrasfor the sake of
the creation and transferof generalized meritcontinuc,m ost notably in
fourform s:
First,atthe death ofrelativesof lay members(/sfn-l,u),oron
memorialdaysand anniversariesoftheirdeaths,acertain num berofnuns
are invited to the homes of lay m embers to recite satras.The m eritis
transferred to the dead relatives.Thispractice isconducted chiefly in the
hom es offam iliesm arking a day in the funeralcycle offorty-nine and
then one-hundred days follow ing the death, and then marking yearly
anniversariesofthedeath ofa relative.42
Second, sûtras are recited intensively during the special Dharma
assemblies(C.fa-bui)held severaltimesayear(see the discussion of
Dharmaassembliesbelow).
Third,theSûtraof thePastJ'r
aw of theEarth Store (Kliti
garbha)
Bodllisattva4sisrecited daily by the nunsthroughoutthe seventh m onth,
with the merittransferred to the ancestorsofthe1ay membersofthe con-
twenty-fourth day ofthe seventh m onth,and by the factthatthew hole
month isdevoted to expressing compassion and filialpiet'
y through assist-
ance to thosereborn ashungry ghostsand in the hells.Lay people come
tojoininthosedailyrecitations,takingtheirplacesatlongtablesatwhich
the sûtra texts are set before them .During that m onth also,a special
hymn to Këitigarbha is read aspartofthe daily office.The sûtra itself
describesthe hells and their punishments in vivid detail,aswellasthe
sinsto which they correspond.Itthen describesthe vowsand actsofthe
Bodhisattva Kjitigarbha to free those reborn in the hells.Kêitigarbha
vowed to devote allhism eritto thatpurpose untila11were freed.
Fourth,on lay initiative a lay society similar to the onesmentioned
76 RETH IN KIN G SCRIPTURE
above meets regularly tw ice a month throughoutthe year atone house
ofthe conventto recitethe Lotusq sfilrfltogetherand sponsoravegetarian
meal.Them em bersofthesociety,called the RtzotusAssociationr'are a1l
women.From ten to twelve o'clock in the morning on thefirstand fif-
teenth ofthe lunar month,the wom en recite as many chapters asthey
can in the tim e allotted.The nunslead them in thisrecitation on their
rhythm instrum ents,and then atnoon perform with them an extended
service ofofferingsto the Buddha.Thisserviceincludesrequestsforthe
transferofthemeritthathasaccruedfrom the recitation to them embers'
relatives and to all sentient beings.After a short serm on by the abbess,
the twice-m onthly eventendsin theconventrefectory with avegetarian
lunch prcpared by the nuns.The activitiesofthisLotusAssociation con-
stituteoneofthemain organizcd waysin which thishouseofthe convent
interactswith 1ay people.
Reciting Texts asActionhrSpecficPuryoses:TbeDail
y Officeand I/le
DharmaAssemblies.M ore importantto the nunsthan thepracticeofsim-
ply reciting satrasin orderto createand transfergeneralized meritisthe
practiceofreciting certain word. sand textsto bring aboutspecificeffects.
To recite these textssincerely and single-mindedly is to take the action
of creating those specific fruits.Examples include texts that bring the
practitionerpowersforspecificuses;textsthattransferm erittoward aspe-
cificfruit(e.g.,rebirthinthePureLand);textsthatenableonetotake
actionsto help others,such asthose thatrelease thedenizensofthe hells
and bring them to the conventto receive food and preaching;textsthat
invokethenamesofmanyBuddhasforthepurposeofrepentance to wipe
outpasttransgressions;and textsthatconsistofvowsto setthe direction
forthe future.
Often specific m odesofreceiving thesewordsare mandated in the
canonically preselwed versionsofthe text.Thatisto say,notonly are the
wordsto be spoken prescribed,butalso whatshe isto do asshe recites
the text,whatshe isto im agine and think aboutassheissaying thepre-
scribed wordsand carrying out the prescribed actions,and whateffects
she should expect.O ften a narrative is included, to provide the reason
and contextforthe Buddha'soriginalgiftoftheword ortext, aswellas
a modeloftheway itshould bereceived.These textsexistso thatactions
can be carried outin a ritualcontext.
In addition,one can distinguish stillanotherkind oftextwhoserec-
itation constitutes a kind of action:the Rexpressive text.''An example
would bethe hymnsincluded in the m orning and evening recitation ser-
vicesthatexpressgratitude and praise.
SCRIPTU RE AN D ITS RECEPTION
RitualActionandTèa'
/.çt'
ntbeDailyOffices.Oneimportantcontextforthis
kind ofreception oftextsisthe Rdaily office''carried outin mostconvents
and monasteriesm orning and evening.4s
Com mentariestellusthatonepurpose ofthese m orning and eve-
ning recitations isto guide and sustain the practice ofm onksand nuns
by providing them w ith a Rdaily work.''Performing thisdaily work will
assurethattheyaredoingenough toward enlightenment(and making
enough merit)tojustifytheircontinuingtoreceiveofferingsfrom the
laits It also willguarantee thatbeginnershave the right understanding
ofpractice.46
Stillother goalsofthese recitations,however,are evidentfrom the
contentand purposesofthetextchosen.The daily officesconsistprim ar-
i1yoftransactivetexts(includingdltörapîs)foundintheTa-tsang-ching.
The actionsthatare taken by reciting these textsinclude:
i. Protecting the practice ofthe nunsfrom disturbing forcessuch
asdemonsand sexualdesires,and invoking,through mantrasand dbârapîs,
variousspecialconditionsand powersto prom ote successfulpractice,and
to protectthe m onastery and the nation.
Themorningdailyofficebeginswith arecitation oftheâtjraûgama
M antra,which hasthe specific purpose ofdispelling sexualtemptations,
and thusfacilitating single-m inded practice therestofthe day.1tseffec-
tivenessin defeating sexualim aginingswasm entioned to m e specifically
by m orethan one nun.Forexample,one ofthe nunstold m ethatsome-
timesin thenightsheexperiencesfeelingsofsexuallonging orimagina-
tion.Theremedy,shesays,istoreciteamantralikethejûrakamaMantra
immediately.lfonedoesthis,thefeeling willgo away.
The SûrahgamaM antraisfollowed by ten othermantrasand dhârapîs
that protect the practitioners and foster practice in specific ways;for
exam ple, one assures that the practitioner will have enough m aterial
resourcesto continue to practice.Anotherim portantdhârapîincluded in
the daily office is the Great Com passion Dllârattîof the Bodhisattva
Avalokitelvara. This specifically invokes Avalokitejvara's protection
againsta1lkindsofdemonic forces.
ii. Feeding hungry ghosts,through a tantric-derived ritualcalled
the aM eng-shanJ/;ï/l-4 f/z''
.
A shortform ofthisritualisdone daily;itmakesup a ratherlarge
part of the evening office.By the use of mantras,those who suffer as
hungry ghosts,unableto eatordrink butperpetually hungry,are enabled
to eatand drink;then seven visible grainsofrice are multiplied,thanks
to another mantra that must be said with single-minded concentration,
into millionsofgrainsofrice so thatthe hungry ghostsm ay be satisfied.
 RETH IN KIN G SCRIPTU RE
Thisdone,theDbarma ispreached to them ,and the R' rhreeRefuges''are
taken on their behalf.The nunstold me storiesabout the necessity of
keeping one's m ind on rice while the multiplication mantra was being
said.One nun had found hermind wandering to the question ofwhere
she had left her room key,and thushad created millionsof room keys
forthe hungry ghosts!
iii. O ffering praiseand gratitudeto Buddhasand Bodhisattvas.
Thisisdoneby reciting and chanting hym nsofChineseorigin.At
the very beginning of the m orning and evening officesa hym n, called
the dçincense hym n,' invokes the presence of the Buddhas and
Bodhisattvas. Later hym ns, particularly in thc evening office, praise
Amitàbha Buddha and describe hisPure Land.
iv. Repenting allfaults.
Thisisanotherratherlarge sub-ritualofthedaily office.Ritualsof
repentancehavealong history in lndian,CentralAsian and ChineseBud-
dhism,and attim eshaveconstituted aprincipalactivity ofmonks.47The
particular sub-ritualused today in the daily office is not found in this
form in acanonicaltext,and the tradition holdsthatthisparticularritual
was compiled in China.48 This ritualaccomplishes repentance through
the rccitation ofthe namesofeighty-eightBuddhas.
v. Establishing connection with Buddhas and Bodhisattvas by
invoking theirnames.
W ithin theoffice,certain namesofsûtrasand namesand titlesofBud-
dhasarerecitcd because they serveasachannelofinvocation orconnection
betaveen theindividualand powerfulBuddhasand Bodhisatwas.Thenotion
here seemsakin to the notion ofthe mantra:the name,title, image,mudrl
or mantra ofa Buddha isprovided for the cxplicitpurpose ofproviding a
meansofparticipating in the reality ofthatBuddha,with the expectation
thatabond willbe form ed and the worshippertransformed.4g
vi. Reciting Amitàbha Buddha's nam e and seeking rebirth in
Amitâbha Buddha'sPure Land.
Theevcning officeincludesaratherlong passageofrepeated recita-
tion ofAmit:bha'snam e,done asa chant,while the nunsproceed cere-
m onially around theBuddha Hall.50
vii. Refugesand vows.
Repeatedly w ithin the offices nuns take refuge in the Buddha,
chiefly through reciting differentversionsoftheR'rhreeRefuges'':<<Itake
refugc in the Buddha,Itake refuge in the Dbarma,Itake refuge in the
Satkgba(theAssembly oftheBuddha'sfollowersl.''Thenunsalso take
vows concerning their intention to practice the path and reach
Buddhahood.Thisisdone chiefly through recitingthefourutBodhisattva
Vow s''in variousversions.
SCRIPTU RE AN D lTS RECEPTIO N
ix. Transferring merit.
On every occasion thatm eritism ade,itistransferred to thebenefit
ofa1lsentientbeings.Thisisdone by a form ulaic verse.
TLe Yiur/y Dharma Assemblies.h second context for recitation asaction
wasthe cycle ofDharma assem blieson a regular schedule each year.At
each of these a central liturgical and merit-m aking activity was the
recitation oftexts.O n alloftheseoccasionslay associatesofthe convent
would come to the convent to participate in the selwices and in the
recitation oftexts,and would sponsor these occasions,so that the m erit
derived therefrom would be transferred to their ancestors or living
relatives.
The mostimportantofthese Dharma assembliesisheld forseveral
days surrounding the fifteenth day of the seventh m onth in the lunar
calendar.This is thc Ytl-lan-p'en festival.sl1ts themesare:(a) the
compassion ofthe Buddha in allowing the living to assistthe dead with
merit and sermons,so that the dead may escape the punishmentsthey
haveearned,and speedilyattain abetterbirth;and(b)thefilialdevotion
ofchildren who actto free theirparentsand ancestors.O n thefifteenth
day ofthe seventh month,theFo-shuo Fli-/avf-p/
. t
rélching (atextprobably
written in China,butsometimesreferred to in the 'W estasthe Ullambana
s'fjfraon theassumption thatithadaSanskritprototypeofthatname)is
read.52Thisdescribesthe effortsofthe monk M audgalyàyanato free his
m other from intense suffering asa hungry ghost,the compassion ofthe
Buddha who enableshim to do so,and the specificm ethod given to him
by theBuddha.Theprescribed method isto calltogetherallofthemonks
oftheten directionson thefifteenth day oftheseventh month (theend
ofthe rain retreat)and give them a spectacularfeast.The monksthen
transfer merit to the parents and ancestors of seven generations, and
M audgaly:yana'smotherisreleased.
Further,for each of three days during this festival,one part of a
three-partsermon isread to those reborn in therealmsofsuffering (in
thehells,asahungry ghost,orasan animal).Each ofthethreesections
takestwo hoursto chant,and a large number of lay people participate.
Thistext,namedSan-sbihbsi-nienfo-shib,isabasicexpositionofBuddhist
teaching on the Buddha,the Dharma and the Satïgba.ssItisrecited with
theintention ofinducing,in thehungry ghostsand denizensofthehells,
wisdom and the desire to be reborn in the Pure Land.
In the eleventh m onth anotherD barma assembly isheld,atwhich
theDiamoniSûtraisrecited,alongwiththeH' r
l/crPenance(kS/lNfc/l'n>l),a
textattributedtoaT'angdynasty(A.D.618-907)monk.54TheDiamon?
s'fiàrflisashortMahàyâna'
W isdom SchoolLprajt-
iâpt
jramitâ)workteaching
thatthe ultim ate truth isthatallthingsare em pty ofself-existence,and
 U
80 RETH IN KIN G SCRIPTU RE
thereforecannotbe grasped onto.Again,1ay peopleparticipate in therec-
itations,and the meritistransferred to theirancestorsand relatives.
Finally in thespting athird Dharma assembly isheld,thistimefeatur-
ingareadingofthePenanceo
fLiangHzk-ff,asixthcenturyemperorfnmous
forhissupportofBuddhism .ssAtthisDharmaassembly,asata1ltheothers,
theritualpopularlycalleduFangyes-kbu''(ReleaseoftheBurningMouths)
isperformed.Thisritualisperfonnedby reciting an esotericYogarittzaltext
called the ukr ti-chia yen4 ,
orf.''56Iaay people bring food offerings.The nuns,
through the dbârapî,mantras and mulrâsprescribed by the text,invite the
denizensofthe hellsand the hungry ghostsinto the conventworship hall,
opening the gatesofthehellsto makethispossible.Through theritualvlf;s-
trasand muirösthenunsthen open the mouthsofthehungry ghosts,preach
D harmato them ,feed them ,and send them away from theconvent.Thisis
a more extended version of the uM eng-shan J/If/l-. ç/lf/I''thatispartofevery
evening liturgy.
.4 The oreticalNote.W ew illreturn below to a som ew hatmore extended
note on the generaltheory thatunderliesthe modesofreception found
in the convent.1wish hereonly to mention thaton severaloccasionsthe
nunsexplained to me how they think transactionalreception i5effective.
Their explanations show that they entertain simultaneously two meta-
phors, one of external transaction and one of transaction taking place
within M ind,with the latter m etaphor considered to be the more true
one.An example from m y field notes:
Iwas talking today with Ch'en-ta shih aboutmy fam ily situation.
ShesaidthatIshouldseek thehelp ofKuan-yin (Avalokitejvara),
that Kuan-yin is compassion, is very powerful, and meets every
need.Isaidthatanotherteacherhad advised meto practicethevisu-
alization ofKuan-yin.She replied that thatwas an excellentidea,
butthatIcould also profitfrom walking around my room reciting
Kuan-yin'sname.Thiswasalsoagoodwayofpracticingting(Sk.
samâdhij,sinceone'smindquieteddownasonedidso.Sheshowed
m e how to walk,reciting the name on a four-beatpattern.I asked
w hethershe herselfhad eversoughthelp from Kuan-yin.Yes,over
this matterofher brother'sm ilitary serdce,aboutwhich she had
told me.Shehad madeavow to recitethe Gu niversalGate''chapter
oftheLotususfilrfievery m orning aspartofherpetition to Kuan-yin
to help her brother.Itis im portant,she said,that one issincere,
single-minded, in one's petition, and that one keep on seeking
Kuan-yin's help until the problem is resolved.It is sincerity that
makestheresponse(C.banying)by Kuan-yinpossible.ltislike
e1ectricity- both the electric cord and the lightbulb are necessary
SCRIPTU RE AN D ITS RECZPTIO N 81
to produce light.The Bodhisattva is in your mind,and it isyour
m ind thatisdisturbed and isseeking,and itisthe sincerity in your
seeking m ind thatmakesthe connection possible.
Alm ostalloftheworld'ssacred textscontain materialwhich is,like
m any ofthetextsm entioned above,explicitly understood to be ofaritual
nature,thatis,usefulin bringing aboutan action oratransaction ofsom e
kind.' Wrhat isstriking in the Buddhist case isthe degrec to which a11
interactionswith a1ltexts,allreceptions,areunderstood to beactionsand
transactions.Any contactwith a tradition-sanctioned textismeritorious,
and isurged on practitionersassuch.
Ihavechosen theword Tztransactional''ratherthan,forexample,the
word v'performative'' to name this category, to call attention to the
importance of the fact that in any transactional reception,actions are
being taken,and transactionsoccurring,on m any differentlevels.In the
caseswehavelooked at,transactionstakeplaceon the levelofbarma,and
also between persons and Buddhas and Bodhisattvas.They also occur
symbolically,econom ically and socially between 1ay people and nuns,and
1ay people and their families.Acting in the power of the ultim ate is
clearly a very im portant dimension of the reception of texts in this
tradition.Iwould suggestthatimpoçtantparallelsexistin othertraditions
as well, though perhaps not always so explicitly underlined by the
theoreticaldim ension ofthe tradition.
TbeTrans
formativeMoie
Texts would not becom e and rem ain scriptural unless in and
through their reception people experienced transforming power.' W hile
the informative and transactionaldimensionsofthe reception oftextsas
''scripture''are universaland important,religiouscom munitiesregularly
pointto the transform ing powerexperienced in and through textsasthe
specialmark oftheirsacredness.In accordance with the importancethat
they place on this dim ension,religious people often receive texts with
attitudes and in contexts that invite experiences of transformation
through them .
1have noted above thatas Chinese Buddhistsread,listen to,study
and comm enton satrasin orderto become informed by theiraccountof
reality,they also seek atthe same time to betransform ed in theirpersonal
capacity to experience wisdom and com passion.
Looking at other areas of their religious practice, an interesting
Pattern em erges.Aswe have seen above,certain sntras,mantras.J/larflpls,
tantric rituals,essaysand sermonsare specifically intended fortransactive
purposes,orare recited with transactive intentions.Othertexts(e.g.,
 U
RETH IN KIN G SCRIPTU RE
repentance rituals,hymnsof invocation and praise,certain dl
lârapîs and
vlnsrrfls)areintended to aidthepracticeofthepractitionerherselfrather
than some otherperson.These textsand their ritualcontextsintend and
expect transformative effects.The nuns and lay people say little about
transform ation experienced in connection with thecomm unaltransactive
sûtra and ibörapîrecitationsofthe daily office ortheD harma assemblies.
Thcy also seem to take for granted the transform ing power of the
recitations of transform ative texts included in their communalpractice,
though ifquestionedthey attestto theirtransformativepower.ln contrast,
they speak voluntarily and enthusiastically aboutthe transforming power
experienced through reciting,reading or copying sb jtrasand ihârapîs in
their individualelective practice,whether thatpractice was principally
transactivc ortransformative in intent.
Stttra Recitation.In connection with the practice ofsb jtra recitation,for
example,lwastold a good dealaboutthechangesthe nunshad observed
in an elderly 1ay wom an.
There were living in the conventcom munity severalolderwom en
who, although retaining lay status,intended to end their days there.
W hen I asked them why they were there,they replied that they had
chosen to livetheresothatthey would beabletospend theirtimereciting
sûtras and worshiping the Buddha,while enjoying the merit of a
vegetarian diet.O ne of these wom en indeed did spend the whole day
every day in thelargeBuddhaH all,sittingby awindow where the light
streamed in,silently or softly reading aloud the wordsofsatra textsthat
sheheld in her lap.
lsaw thiswoman atthe conventatintervalsoveraten yearperiod.
W hen Ifirstknew her,shewasclearly a difficultperson.Herface had a
habitually sour expression,and she seemed constantly to be finding fault
w ith the nuns.W hen lreturned to the conventseveralyears after our
firstmeeting,she appeared to be adifferentperson.Shesmiled often and
seem ed to have only kind things to say.She expressed affection for the
younger nuns,who were clearly quite fond of her.O n one of my last
visits to the conventI learned thatshe had died the previousday.The
younger nuns were m ost moved and impressed by the m anner of her
death.Despite the factthatshe wasnotill,shehad seem ed to know that
she would dievery soon,and had m ade a specialtrip to the city to see a
young nun with whom she wasclose.W hen the nun,busy atthe time,
had suggested thatshecome the followingweek,the elderly woman had
insisted thatthevisitm usttake placeim mediately.The day followingthe
visitshe had died suddenly and peacefully.Thenunssaw in thissequence
ofeventsapattern familiarfrom the tradition:theperson whose practice
isadvanced can foretellherdeath,and diespeacefully,usually in a state
SCRIPTU R.
E AN D 1TS RECEPTION 83
ofmentalcomposure(samâdhi)andwithoutsuffering.Thenunsattrib-
uted thisevidence ofthe 1ay woman'sprogresson the path to heryears
ofreading sbàtrasin theBuddha H all.
Copying Sùtras.The followingexcerptfrom my field notescontainsatell-
ing account of the transform ative effectsof copying Jgfrls as a way of
concentrating the m ind:
T'an Lao-shih (a 1ay woman)hasgradually admitted to me her
interest in Buddhist understandingsof the world.She sayssom e-
timesthatsheisnotascholarlikeme,butratherujustasuperstitious
worshiperofBodhisattvas''(an altogethertoo modestdisclaimer).
She readssûtraslike theHeartyfilra and theD iamoniSûtra overand
over,not worrying as a scholar would aboutw hether she under-
standstheoccasionaltransliterated Sanskritwords,butjustreading.
Sheisalso apainter,and showed m eoneday atherhome herpaint-
ings of Buddhas and Bodhisatt was.She is a wonderfulpainter of
eyes- allofthebeingsin herpaintingsseem alivebecausetheireyes
have realspirit.
Shesaysthatshe haslearned to 1etthingsgo,notto getupset
about things.To see that the things ofthisworld are like smoke,
soon over.One day atlunch,T'an Lao-shih told the story ofhow
she had com e to Buddhistfaith.She had arrived in Taiwan with a
childandnohusband,herselfonlyseventeen.(1gatherthatherhus-
bandhadfoughtonthecommunistsideanddiedinthecivilwan)
5he was very shy and had 1ed a sheltered life,and finding herself
having to confronta1l kinds ofproblems,wasoverwhelmed.The
governm entread her m ail and searched her drawers on suspicion
thatshe mightbekeeping in touch with herhusband'sfriends.she
worked in a factory by day and wentto schoolatnight,eventually
earning a graduate degree at ahighly respected university.N o one
understood why she did notremarry imm ediately.Shesaid thatshe
began to discipline hermind to seeeverything asnotworth worry-
ing about.Ittook a long w hile,butgradually thisdisciplinebegan
to take effect.She trained herselfnot to care whatothersthought
orsaid,notto getinvolved in the conversations ofher colleagues
atthe schoolwhere she taught,conversationsaboutwhatthiscol-
league had said orthatcolleague had done.H avingbeen trained as
achild in calligraphy,shebegan to copy sbjtrasasam entaldiscipline,
notworrying aboutwhethershe understood allthewords.She also
practiced Buddha-nam erecitation,and began thepractice ofthank-
ing the Bodhisattvasfor theirprotection.Gradually thesepractices
began to havean effect,and herm indwasable to becomevery still.
 RETH IN KIN G SCRIPTU RE
She continuesthe practice of copying sbjtras,copying in the m orn-
ing beforework,and painting in the evening.
T'an Lao-shih'spractice hasseveraldimensions;forourpurposesI
wish to callattention particularly to her practice of copying sûtrasasa
m entaldiscipline.T'an Lao-shih saysthatshereadsand copiesthest ktras
notso m uch to understand theircontentbutto drive unworthy distrac-
tionsfrom herm ind.Yet,the factthatshecopiessûtras,andnotthedaily
newspaper,showsthatthey havem eaning forherassymbolsand expres-
sions of Dharma.The inner intention here is to 1et go of a11 deluded
thoughts,ofa11mentalobjectsotherthanthosesymbolizedbythesetexts.
The actofcopying isan aid to concentration forthepurposeofrealizing
within them ind theinfinitew isdom and stillnesssymbolizedby thetext.
St-
ttra and DhlraplRecitation.One popular focus ofsuch practice ist'
wo
textsprovided w ithin the canon that serve asa specialchannelbetv een
thepractitionerandtheBodhisattvaAvalokitelvara (C.Kuan-yin),the
Bodhisattvawhopromisestorescueal1whocalluponher/him from dif-
ficultiesand dangersin the presentlife.
In the following instance itisclear thatthe nun Ch'en-chih shih,
who hastaken avow to recite a chapterofa st jtra every morning,does
notullderstand herselftobedoing thissolely becauseshewantsto impress
her m em ory with its contenq or even to have ever fresh acquaintance
with it.She isdoing itin the contextofestablishing alink orresonance
between her own mind and thatof Avalokitejvara,and text is the pre-
ferred symbolicm eansofdoing this,am eansprovided by Avalokitelvara
her/himsèlf;
Ch'en-chihshihsaidthatshehasanimageofKuan-yin(Avaloki-
tejvara)inherroom,andeverymorninggetsupandgoesthrough
a book that contains the tçuniversal Gate''chapter of the Lotus
Sfttra57and the GGreatCompassion DhârapL' ''uThe latterisdivided
into eighty-four phrases;each phrase is illustrated by a picture of
Kuan-yin thatrepresentstheform ofcompassionateactivit' y invoked
by thephrase.Sheprostratesherselffrom a standing position after
reciting each phrase and looking at each picture- that makes
eighty-four prostrations.In the winter,she says,the result is that
herwhole body iswonderfully warm .
Here Ch'en-chih shih tellsofthe transforming effecton herbody
of this practice that links her mind and the m ind of Avalokitejvara.
(W ithin thistradition thewarming effectofbowing isnotattributed
SCRIPTU RE AN D ITS RECEPTIO N
solely to theheatnormally generated in any physicalexercise.)
These morning recitationsand prostrationsare only the beginning,
however.Ch'en-chih shih told m e thatthroughoutthe day,asshe does
herwork in thekitchen orsweepsthefrontgarden,she ism entally recit-
ing theGreatCom passion D hörapî.W hen someone speaksto herand she
findsherselfinterrupted,she startsover.In addition to thisconstantreci-
tation,shealso makessurethatshedoesitw ith fullconcentration t 'wenty-
onetim esaday.Shesaysthatasaresultherm indisvery quietand accept-
ing.59ch'en-chih shih also saysthatanotherreason forreciting the Great
Com passion Dlarapîisthatitprovidesprotection from ghostsand other
m isfortunes.Hw hen you recite it as far asthe syllable *angbk''she said,
Rthe ghostsbow dow n in homage.''
In the above examples,we have seen a num ber of waysin which
interactionswith words- xfkfras,mantras,J/zlr/flfs- have been understood
to be related to transform ation in thepractitionerherself.W hatisvalued
isatransformation in one'sexperienceofdaily life;theexperienced trans-
form ation is valuable for its own sake,but perhaps m ore valuable for
being understood tobeastep forward along apath toward the totaltrans-
form ation symbolized asçenlightenment'or nirvöpa.
In some casesthetransform ation isthoughtto com eaboutthrough
thegreaterconcentrationofmindVamöibi,thesecondoftheRthreestud-
ies'')thatrecitation orcopyingmakespossible.Inothercases(e.g.,that
oftheformerlysouro1dlady),itisthetransformingpowerofattending
totheBuddha'sword(BuddbavacanajasDharmathatisgiventhecredit.
In stillothercasesthe effectsareunderstood to resultfrom the spe-
cially constituted power of the mantra or dhârapî,orfrom the powerof
the com passion of the Bodhisattva invoked by that mantra or dbörapî.
Avalokitejvara gave practitionersthe GreatCompassion Dltâratît-in order
(amongotherthings)toprotectthem from demonicdisturbanceintheir
practice, an effect that is noticeable in a transform ation of one's ow n
experience.6o
TlteSymbolicM ode
One oftheintriguing featuresofthehistory ofthe Buddhisttradi-
tion isthe appearance of Rthe cultofthebook''in the early M ahàyâna.
Asmentioned above,there isevidence thatsûtrasattimesreplaced relics
asthe supreme sym bolofthepresenceoftheliving poweroftheBuddha.
Itisno longercom mon practice forsatrasto be enshrined asthe central
objectofworshipin amonasteryorconvent.Yetenoughremainsofthis
idea- thatsûtra isthe m ost appropriate symbolto stand for Buddha or
D/lfir-l- to m ake it unsurprising that a study of the role
86 RETHIN KIN G SCRIPTU RE
ofwordsin aChineseconventwould lead oneto attend to afourth m ode
of reception,the reception of words as symbols of ultim ate truth and
pow er.
In thismode,wordsand textsarereceived assymbolsthatstand for
and convey a sense ofthe ultimate truth and its power.Here textsare
read and recited,or alluded to in representation,notso much with their
contentin mind,noreven w ith an eyeto theirtransformativeand transac-
tionalpowers,butratherassymbolsofthe powerfultruth in which they
are grounded.
Two kindsofsymbolic meaning can bedistinguished,even though
agiven symbolusually carries170th.Thefirstkind issocialmeaning.For
example,a textsetves as a symbolthat carriessocialmeanings when it
symbolizesthe sourcesand bearersofthe authority ofthe tradition,and
even when itsymbolizesthe nature ofthe tradition and ofthe world it
im agines.
The second kind isultim ate meaning.Religioussymbolshave the
powerofpointing to thatwhich transcends even traditions,thatwhich
isontologically and ethically ultimate.AsW ilfred CantwellSm ith says
in an article on Rlleligion as Symbol'':
There is more to human life than meetsthe eye.M ore to oneself;
m oreto one'sneighbor;m oreto theworld thatsurroundsus.There
ismore to the pastoutofwhich we com e;and especially,itwould
seem,m ore to the present mom ent,maybe even infinitely more.
There ism oreto the interrelationshipsthatbind ustogetherasper-
sons.And the furtherweprobe,men havealwaysfound,the deeper
the mystery,or the reward,orthe involvem ent.It isthisttmore,''
perhaps,thatprovidesatleastone ofthebasesforhuman religion.
W e men have seldom been content to be Hsuperficial,''to remain
on the surface,to im agine thatreality doesnottranscend ourfinite
grasp;and throughoutm ostofourhistory on thisplanetwe have
ordered our lives, 170th personal and cultural, in term s of that
transcendence.
Yethow is one to pointto what one does notvisually see?
How to resortto am ilieu beyond al1space?How to talk orto think
aboutwhattranscends notonly wordsbutthe reach ofthe mind?
How even to feelaboutwhatone doesnottouch? M an'sinherent
and characteristic capacity to do these things finds expression
through hisspecialrelation to symbols.Thesehaveproven overthe
centuriessometimesm ore,sometimesless,adequate to such a task,
butin any case indispensible,and ubiquitous.6l
A textin a religioustradition carriesthiskind ofmeaning when it
SCRIPTU RE AN D ITS RECEPTIO N
isa symbolofthe true nature ofthingsand ofthe locusof true power
forgood.
Both are important dim ensions of the sym bolic reception of
scripture,w hich like otherreligioussymbols,ispolysemic.Butthe most
importantdim ension to the continued reception of scripture asscripture
isundoubtedly the second.
lt isimportantto remember thatsymbolsdo more than uexpress''
or ttrepresent''ultim ate truth ormeaning:AsSm ith continues:
Such symbols,itturnsout,have the power not merely to express
m en's othetv ise inchoate awareness of the richness of what lies
underthe surface,butalso to nurture and to com municate and to
elicitit.They havean activating aswellasarepresentationalquality,
and an ability to organize the entotionsand theunconsciousaswell
asthe consciousmind,so thatinto them men m ay pourthe deepest
range oftheirhum anity and from them derive an enhancementof
the personality.W ithout the use of symbols,including religious
symbols,m an would be radically lessthan human ....62
To point out that symbols have this activating power is to draw
attention to thedeep connection between thesymbolicm odeofreception
and them odesdiscussedabove- particularly,ofcourse,thetransformative
m ode.Indeed,theburden ofm y argumentisthatscripture iswhatitis
because ofthe waysitisread and used,and because itcan sustain being
read and used in such ways:informative,transactional,transformative.In
turn,the factthatscripture can be read and used in such waysenablesit
to becom easymbolofthetranscendent,a sacralizing agent,even attimes
an icon of the sacred,w ithin a religious com munity.Thus symbolic
reception dependsupon the other modesofreception,and vice versa.
TbeSymbolicReceptionof Hbrl.
çintLe.
BNJJ/If-
CITradition.lntheBuddhist
tradition,wordsbecome symbolsnotonly ofsocialrelationships,thatis,
of the authority and power of the tradition,but also of that which
transcends.One way ofstating thisisto say thatthey notonly are,but
also symbolize,Dbarma.
At the outset it is useful to distinguish two differentdegrees of
sym bolizing thatwordsand textsareunderstood to be ableto do.' W ords
and textscan be symbolsin a weak sense and in a strong sense.
In theweak sense,wordscan stand forthe truth ofthetradition,or
make itpresentsymbolically in ritualaction w ithoutin themselvesbeing
understood asagentsofpowerin any strong sense.
W ordscan also be symbols in a stronger sense,one thatm ightbe
callcd ç<magical.''In thisunderstanding,powersare given to the hum an
88 M TH IN KIN G SCRIPTU RE
mind and to hum an agency through words,dueto acosmically instituted
link between the words as essentialmediatorsofritualagency and the
cosmic powersthey invoke.The waysin which mantrasand dllârattîare
understood in Chinese M ahâyâna Buddhistcomm unitiesoften exempli-
fiesthismode.They areinterpreted asrepresentation-in-sound ofcosmic
powers(or,sincethecosmosisoftenunderstoodtobealsothemind,of
mentalpowers);theyelicitthose;butbeyondthis,theygivethosepowers
arealpresence,understood in away partly analogousto theway thepres-
ence ofthe divine isunderstood in W estern Christian sacram entsorin
Eastern Orthodox Christian icons.63
Itison theweakerofthese senses,thewaysin which sgtrassymbo-
lize Dharma,thatIwish to focus,for thisisthe sense thatillustratesthe
symbolicm odeofreception atthepointofitswidestcomparativeapplica-
tions.W hatisthe basisfor saying thatsûtras,which are Dbarma,also at
the same tim e sym bolizeD harmaî
In Buddhism theauthorityand powerofDbarmaand the authority,
mystery and powerofBuddha are closely linked.The Buddha did not
vestauthority and transform ing agency in a lineage ofgurus;he did not
even appoint a successor as supreme teacher.The tradition recordsthat
he instead told his disciples to take refuge in the Dbarma that he had
taught.The im plication seem ed to be thatitisDharma,correctly under-
stood and diligently followed,thathasthepoweroftransforming thelife
ofthe disciple.The D harma at the sam e time isthe suprem e truth,full
knowledge ofwhich isequivalentto liberation.Laterin thetradition,in
accord with what seem s to be a generalIndian assumption that in the
realm of gnosisone becomesthe Truth thatone knows,itisstated that
hewho seesDharma seesthe Buddha,and,beyond that,in theM ahâyàna,
thatthefundam ental<body'ofBuddhahood,transcending time,spaceand
all apprehension by the discriminating mind, is the xbody of Dharma'
(Dharmâkaya).Similarly,thetruenatureofthingsastheyreallyarecomes,
amongothtrnames,tobecalledYD/lflrpmness'(Dharmatâ).
ThusDharma on onelevelisbxpressed in words;on thatlevel,sûtras
not only symbolize Dharma, they are Dltarma, teachings. They are
Buzlhavacana,the Buddha-word, a chief medium through which the
Buddha chose to m ake Truth present in the world of thought and
Perception.6'
f why isthisparticularmeritoriousactivity chosen?Perhapsto recitesûtras,
Yet the teaching in words also providesthe bridge to a gnosis,a
perceptionofDltarmatö(thetruenatureofthings),andDharmaköya(the
truenatureofBuddhahood).Both ofthesearebeyond form and inex-
pressible in words. Thus D harma stands not only for the words,the
bridge,within the tem poral,conditioned realm,but also thatultimate,
unconditioned to w hich the bridge leadsand on which itdepends.M ost
SCRIPTU RE AN D ITS RECEPTIO N 89
M ahàyànaschoolsmaintain thatD barma,asthetruenatureofthings,also
transcendswords;wordsand thoughtcannotgrasp it.Itisintriguing that
the recitationsofwordscan serve assymbols,indeed in the conventthe
mostimportantsymbols,ofthe ineffable Truth thatgroundsthem .The
accessibleto mentation and im agination standsfortheinaccessibleground
ofthatmentation and imagitlation.6s
TbeSymbolicReceptionofI'
FJ/'
JJintheConvent.lndeed,wheretheconvent
isconcerned,the recitation ofsûtrasand the making ofofferingsare its
mostimportantactssymbolizing:1)itsintentionsandrole;2)thenature
ofthetransformingprocessthatitfosters;and3)thetradition thatitcon-
tinues.The very large role thatpreaching,explication and recitation of
the tradition-sanctioned wordsplaysin the Chinese conventconveysthe
m essage that the Buddhist monastic order isthatbody thatuturnsthe
wheeloftheDbarma,''continuously re-presenting and offering thewords
ofthe Buddha to the mindsofsentientbeings.
Theconvent'slibrary continuesthistheme,while atthe sametime
conveying a socialm essage about the nature and authority ofthe tradi-
tion.Conventsand monasteriesthatcan afford them wantto haveacom-
plete copy ofa Chinese Ta-tsang-ching,and the fourhousesofthiscon-
vent com munit' y were not exceptions. Each one had a complete
Ta-tsang-ching,keptasapreciouspossession in a locked buttransparent
bookcase,and virtually neveropened.Although itwascertainly intended
to be available to any scholarly nun who m ightneed it,itsimportance
wasatleastpartly symbolic.ThisTa-tsang-ching symbolizes,asdoesthe
monastic library in largermonasteries,the extentoftheBuddha'steach-
ing and the tradition'sclaim to be a partofthehigh culture,asnothing
else can d0.66
Furtherm ore,itis significant that in the convent's publicpractice
thesacredness(Dharmanature)ofmanysacredactsisexpressedbysym-
bolicreferenceto thesb jtraassymbolofD barma.To take an examplefrom
rites of passage, in funerals and all cerem onies of merit-making and
transferenceforthedead thereading/reciting ofasûtraisthecentral,
even defining,practice,and thereforethe centralsymbolofwhatisbeing
donefor thedead.O n onelevelthiscan be explained away by saying that
yp/rfarecitation isone ofthe moreconvenientformsofmerit-m aking.But
ratherthan toperform som eothermeritmaking act,invokesthemystery
andpowerofDharma,andasserts(makespresent)thewholeauthorit'
yof
the tradition,at the moment of crisis,in a way other form sof merit-
making could not(10.67
A number of other exam ples that include a significant symbolic
dim ension have already bcen mentioned.Two in w hich the symbolic
90 RETH IN KIN G SCRIPTU RE
dim ension ism oststriking are the case ofthe herm itwho hasvowed to
read through the entire Ta-tsang-ching,and the case ofT'an Lao-shih's
copying ofsûtrasasa meditative discipline.In 170th ofthese instances it
is clear that there is a central informative or transform ative purpose:
encounteringusefulreflection on experience,concentratingthem ind.Yet
in 170th casesitseem sthatthereisan importantsymbolicdim ension.T'an
Lao-shih in choosing satrasto co' py,even ones she doesnotunderstand,
expressesherrededication toD barmain al1ofitssenses.Theherm itgives
himself through its symbol to the entirety of Dharma, even the vast
amountofitwhich he may never in thislifetim e understand.
A CH IN ESE TH EO M T ICA L FM M EW O RK
A sixth century Chinese or CentralAsian text attributed to Aùvaghofa
providesan ontology cum psychology thatmay be helpfulin understand-
ing Chinese Buddhist reflection on the power and activity of sacred
words.Accordingtothistext,calledtheuAwabeningofFaithintLeMJ/lJ-
yâna,''there is only one reality,which can be pointed to by the term
<suchness'andby theterm uo neM ind.'68Aboutthisreality in itsabsolute
self-nature nothing can be said, exceptby analogy- thus the ultim ate
inadequacyofal1wordsin conveyingultimatetruth referentially.Butthis
one reality manifestsitselfasthe phenom enalworld.In individuals,itis
manifestin two dim ensions.In itstrue nature asreality,itismanifestas
the originally enlightened mind which allpossess,and which isonew ith
Suchnessor the One M ind itself.Thism ind knowsno distinctions,sees
things asthey are,and in itsfreedom isinfinitely creative ofw ise and
compassionateacts.
Due to beginningless ignorance,however,thisoriginally enlight-
ened mind iscovered overby deluded mind.D eluded mind arisesbecause
of itsfundam ental ignorance of itsonenesswith Suchnessor the O ne
M ind ofenlightenment.Hopeliesin thefactthatalthough deludedm ind
iscontinually contaminating and obscuring enlightened mind,w ithin us,
enlightened mind isalso,and m orepowerfully,influencing deludedm ind
so thatwithin deluded mind willarise those thoughts and motivesthat
willlead to itsdestruction.6gw ithin the world ofdistinctions- that is,
the world created by deluded m ind- the appearance of Buddhas,
Bodhisattvas,teachings,sbjtras,and other forms of sacred word such as
mantras and ibârafgîs thathave powerfuleffects on the mind are on the
deepest levelto be understood asbeneficialforceswhich are created by
ourdeluded mind under the influence of,and due to the activity of,our
originally enlightened mind. This latter, since it is universal,
SCRIPTU RE AN D ITS RECEPTION
isalso the m ind ofthe Buddha.Those who are on the lower stages of
the path willperceive these Buddhas,Bodhisattvas,sûtras,mantras,and
so forth asencountering us,orbeing given to us,from outsideourselves.
Theirorigin isindeed outsidedeluded mind,in asense,yeteven they are
skillful creations of deluded m ind under the influence of enlightened
m ind within us.
M odern ChineseBuddhistswould add to this,aswehaveseen,that
faith and sincerity provide the connective,the electric cord,by which
deluded mind allowsenlightened m ind topenetrateitsdelusion and m ake
itsinfluence felt.Sim ilarly itisthatsam e enlightened m ind in Buddhas
andBodhisattvas(tousetheexternalmetaphor)thatiscapableofcreating
st
jtras,mantras,ff/ilrnprsand otherform sofsacred word,oficonicsym bol,
which areperfectly suited to the condition ofdeluded mind within their
hearers and reciters,so thatthey produce beneficialeffects.To express
thisin theinternalmetaphoroftheAwakeningofFaitb,onemightsay
that enlightened m ind creates within deluded mind the perception of
apparently externalBuddhasand Bodhisattvas,w ho offerstjtras,vflrllras,
andotherformsofsymbolsasdevices(Sk.upöya,C..
#-p;en)suitedtothe
condition ofdeluded mind.
Thus,if wordsassymbolsofD ltarmakâya werc not in some sense
revelation- thatis,didnotcometo usin somesensefrom beyonddeluded
mind- we could notrely on them to bring our minds further toward
enlightenment.Yet,being words(orimages)they fitthe condition of
deluded mind,and can in asense occurwithin itasitscreations,bridging
thc 'other'of 'enlightened mind'and the im mediately experienced <self'
ofdeluded mind to bring aboutan ultimate transformation.
TH E M O D ES O F RECEPTIO N A N D SCRIPTU RE
1hope thatthe above exam pleshave supported my suggestion thattexts
are scripture for theirreaderswhen they can sustain avariety ofwaysof
being received,including in some manner the four thatI have tried to
illustrate here.Textsin theBuddhisttradition worthy ofthenameGscrip-
tures''aretextsin w hich comm unitiesand individualsfind authoritative
information and guidance,textsthrough thereception ofwhich they are
enabled to actin thepowerofthe ultimate,textsthatcom eto symbolize
thatultimate,and textsthatcan be approached in the confidentexpecta-
tion ofpersonaltransformation.Iwould suggestthatcomparative study
would disclose,notauniform pattern ofsimilarity in the form orcontent
ofscriptures,butthepresenceofatleastthesefourfundamentalmoiesof
reception.
 U

92 RETH IN KIN G SCRIPTU RE SCRIPTURE AN D lTS RECEPTION 93

N O TES 4.Thism eeting isusually called the GFirstcouncil,''butthe term trans-

lated ucouncil',sömgiti,meansRreciting together'';thenotion ofrecitingforthe
1.A book that becam e available to us after these essays were in pressis sake ofarriving at a Gcanon'
'isincluded in the term.On thiscouncil,cf.J.
Frederick M .Denny and Rodney L.Taylor,eds.,TbeHolyBook in Comparative Przyluski,LeConcdeJcRöjagha (Parisw.192$,especially Ch.Miand André
Permective(ColumbiaUniversity ofSouthCarolinaPress,1985).Thisexcellent Bareau,LesPremiersConcilesBoviibiques(Paris:PressesUniversitairesdeFrance,
book containsan essay by Sam D .Gillsuggestingatwo-fold wayoflookingat 195$,pp.21-30.
how sacred textsareused:ç 'inform ative''and ïtperformative''AsbestIcan tell 5.Cf.Kôgen M izuno,BudibistSûtras:Origin,Development, Transmission
from thebriefessay,hisçdperform ative''category would include my Gsymbolic'' (Tokyo:KoseiPublishingCo.,Englishedition1982).Ontheç4canonizing''ofthe
modeasw ell.Likewise,whatlcalltheRtransactive''andGtransform ative''modes Tripiyaka,seeAndreBareau efal.,DieReligionenfrlfffen:111:Buddbismus-jinismus
would perhaps130th be intended w ithin hisdiscussion ofthe uperform ative'' - Primitivvölker(Stuttgart:W .Kohlhammer,1964).pp.23-32.Concerninglater
dim ension of sacred texts. Reflection on the Buddhist case, in which criteria for inclusion ofnewly reported teachings in the Gcanon''of authentic
ttransactive''and Gtransform ative''dim ensionsareclearly conceptually distinct, Dbarma,see. E.Lamotte,Gl.acritique d'authenticité,''where criteria,articulated
aswellasreflectionon otherexam plesleadsm etobelievethatafour-fold char- in thePaliand SanskritversionsoftheM al mlmdefaandin certain otherlatertexcs
acterization hasdistinctadvantages.lt allow sone to give due w eightto the (such as the Mqluyânasûtrâlathköra, the Bodbicaryövatârapanjikö, and the
transformativeand symbolicm odesofreceivingscripture,withoutw hich scrip- Abbiiltarmakojhjarediscussed.
ture would not continue to be scripture on the levelofpersonalpiety.Further,
lbelievetherearebenefitsfrom clearlydistinguishingtheperformative(which 6.The term upresentational'isused here in the specialsenseof<
çmaking
Icallthetransactional)andthesymbolic,thepoweroftexttoserveasanicon Presenty''asanicon orasacramentmakesthesacredpresenttoEastern Orthodox
ofthesacred;certainly thisistruein theBuddhistcase,wheresuch aseparation Christians,oran image makesthe sacred presentto many Hindus.My usageof
isnecessarily made. this derives from Roger Schmidt, Exploring Religion (Belmong, California:
Wadsworth,1980),pp.89-92.
2.TheclassicreferencehereisMaljimaNfIJ)?J1,p.265(PaliTextSociety
edition).Etienne Lamottetranslatesfrom theChinesetranslation ofthistext, 7.Leon Hurvitz,trans.from the ChilleseofKumàrajlva,Scri ptureof tbe
Cbun.fa-hanf fi-rzfncb'
a-t'iching,asfollows:tfgrheBuddha)addressedhismonks LotusBlossom oftbeFineDllgrplc(New York:ColumbiaUniversityPress,1976),
in theseterms:tN ow,monks,thatyou understandandthinkthus,shouldyou say: P.288.(HereaftercitedasH. Lpffu-'l
W ehonortheM aster,and outofrespectfortheM aster,wesay thisorthat?'- sW e
8.Açtasöl -yfplrlnrflf
ï,translatedbyEdwardConzeasTbePer fection
wouldnotdothat,Lord.'- tW hatyoushallaffirm ,O monks,isitnotthatw hich . vsribâlart
i
you have yourselves well recognized,seen and grasped?'- t-f'
he sam e,Lord.' of Wisiom inEi gbtT/louycnlLinesand itsPr erycSummary (Bolinas:FourSeasons
Lamotte,<'LaCritiqued'authenticitédansleBouddhismey''IniiaAntiqua(Leyden: Foundation,1973),p.266-67.Hereaftercitedasaper fedion.'k
E.J.Brill,1947),pp.220-21;mytranslationfrom theFrench.Thetextiscon- 9.tKAnd on accountofwhatcircumstance,Ananda,isa Tathâgata,an Able
tainedintheTaisböSbinsbuDf kfzllyl0.TakakusuandK.Watanabe,eds;Tokyo: AwakenedOne,worthyofacairn?Atthethought,Ananda,<rrhisisthecairn of
Taishôlssai-kyoKanköKai,1924),no.26,vol.1,p.76917.,lines14-19(Hereafter thatExalted One,ofthatAbleAwakened One,'theheartsofmanyshallbemade
citedinthestandardBuddhologicalform of1.26.1.76917.14-19.)A translationis calm and happy;and since they there had calm ed and satisfied theirheartsthey
also found in I.B.Horner,M iidleLenzft
bSayings1(PaliTextSocietyTranslation willbereborn afterdeath,when the body hasdissolved,in the happy realmsof
Series,no.29;London:LuzacandCo.,Ltd.,1954,reprinted,1967),p.321.The heaven.Itison accountofthiscircumstance,Ananda,thata Tatbögata,an Able
besttranslation ofthispassage seemsto be by RuneE.A.Johansson in hisPali AwakenedOne,isworthyofacairn.''(Trans.byT.W.RhysDavidsinDialogues
BuiibistTexts(Stockholm:Studentlitteratur),pp.19-22.Onthetopicoflndian oftheBuiil
v,PartII,p.156.
Buddhist attitudes toward the verbal tradition of the Buddha, cf.James P. 10.On thistopic,seeespecially Akira H irakuwa,u'
T'heRiseofM ahâyàna
M cD erm ott,uscripture asthe W ord ofthe Buddha,''N umen 31:22-39.
Buddhism anditsRelationshiptotheWorshipofStt jpas,''Memoirso
ff/leResearch
3.Cf.T.'
W .RhysD avids,trans.,BuiiltistSuttas,SacredBooksoftheEast, Departmentoftbe'
rc
-lBunkö22(1963),pp.57-106,andB.C.Bagchi,G' TheEight
vol.11(reprintedinDelhilndiabyMotilalBanarsidass,1968),pp.37-8.(Also GreatCaityasandTheirCult,''IndianHistoricalQuarterl
p 17(1941):223-235.
inT.SV.Rhys-Davidsand C.A.F.Rhys-Davids,DialoguesoftLeINJJ/ICI,PartII, 11.Cf.GregorySchopem R'
T'hePhrase.saJrfllfvfrrflfelblcaityabbûtobbavet'
SacredBooksoftheBuddhists,vol.3,4thed.Sondon:LuzacandCo.Ltd.vol.
3,1959),p.108.)SuttaisthePaliwordfortheSanskritsûtra.Asarule,theSan- in the Vajraccbedikâ: Notes on the Cult of the Book in the Mahày:na,''
skritform of the Buddhist term isused in thisbook,buthere the Paliword is Iniodranian Journal 17, (Nov.-Dec. 1975): 147-87. Cf. Lama Govinda,
used todistinguish itfrom alaterM ahàyànatext,theM abâparinirvöpaStètra. Psycbo-cosmicSymbolism o
ftbelf
xf/fl/lf
yfStupa(London:LuzacandCo.Ltd-,1976
94 RETHIN KIN G SCRIPTU RE
andBerkeley:DharmaPublishing,1976))and SukumarDutt,The.
BUJJ/IJani
FiveAherCenturies(London:LuzacandCo.Ltd,1957).
12.Cf.Perfection,pp.105-108.
13.Cf.Lotus.p.178-79
14.Forageneraldiscussion ofthis,seeDaisetzTeitaro Suzuki,Stuiiesin
theLankavataraSutra(London:Routledge& KeganPaulLtd-,1930),pp.105-10.
(Hereaftercitedasinstuiies.''l
15.Thisformstheclimaxofchapter9ofKumârajlva'stranslationofthe
Vimalaktrti-niriej'
a Sb
àtra,1.14.551c.23-24.
16.See,e.g,,Daisetz Teitaro Suzuki'sreference to thisstatem entin the
Latïkâvatâra q
sfjfrf
7in hisStudies,p.17.Forvery radicalstatementsofitspoleof
thetradition,seethetwoexcerptsfrom the Vijkslv-ct entalrf7/lpm-yurfArcc/lltrans-
latedinEdwardConze,Buiibist' TèxlaThrougbthea41e.s(New York:Harperand
Row Torchbooks,1964),pp.278-280.
17.On adlti
ttluna(thespiritualpoweroftheBuddhawhichisaddedtoa
Bodhisattvaandsustainshim through hiscourseofdiscipline),prabllâva(sover-
eignpower)and anubhâva(thepoweroftheBuddhamovingthedevoteesfrom
within,and enablingthem toactinthiswayorthatway),seeDaisetzTeitaro
Suzuki,Stuiies,pp.202=205 andp.356,and glossary.
18.Cf.Shih Tao-an,Jib-cbiao lun,T.52.136b-143c;and Shih Fa-lin,
Pien-cbeng lun,usan-chiao chih-tao p'iem''T.52.4491.Cf.KobayashiM asam i,
<çsankyô köshö niokeru kyö no kannen,'in YoshiokaYoshitoyo hakasekanreki
kinen ronshu kangyokai,eds.,Dökyö /eenlyg ronsbu (Yoshioka Hakasekanreki
kinen)(Tokyo:Kokushökangyokai,1977),pp.249-69.
19.Cf.J.W .DeJong,Buddlv's Wz brffin Cbina (Canberra:Australian
NationalUniversity,1968),foradiscussionofthisprocess.
2O.Indian and CentralAsianBuddhistshaddistinguishedbe- een authori-
tativetextswhosem eaningwasexpressed directly,and texts,no lessauthoritative,
whosemeaning required interpretation.In thecaseofthelatter,theBuddhawas
assumed to havehad some motivefornotexpressing theplain truth fully,orfor
sayingsomethingatvariancewiththefundamentalprinciplesofhisteaching.(Cf.
E. Lam otte,t<La Critique d'interpraation dans le bouddhisme,''A nnuaire ie
l'institutienbilologieetd'bistoireorientalesetJ/ctze-
s,U niversité Libre deBruxelles,
IX (19491,pp.341-61.)TheChineseclassificationschemesbuiltuponthesedis-
tinctions and insights,butwent somewhatbeyond the earlierm odelsin their
sweep and creativity.A factor thatprobably affected the creation ofthismore
sweeping,moreradicalhermeneuticalform wasadifferencebetween thewaysin
w hich Indian and CentralAsian Buddhistshad understood theirrelation to the
tradition and theway the ChineseBuddhistsunderstood it.lndiansand Central
Asiansappearto havefeltfreeto preservetheirfresh discoveriesofthem eaning
ofDbarmabycreatingnew sgtras.SomeChinesealsocreatednew Jfplrcs;butmany
SCRIPTU RE AN D lTS RECEPTION
chinese,perhaps feeling them selves to be heirs of the Buddha at one remove,
introduced fresh m eanings of D barma through these hermeneutical strategies
instead.
21.Lin-chiquotesscripture back to the scripturalist!The quotation seem s
to be made up of phrases from two sûtras, the Latïkâvatâra q snlrfi and the
Vimalakîrti
-nirieh Sûtra.
22.T.47.496b-c.ThetranslationisthatofRuth F.SasakiinherTbeRecors
o
ff-fn-c/if,(Kyoto:TheInstituteforZenStudies,1975),pp.1-2.
23.O nthexdthreestudies,''cf.Andrew Raw linson,H'
T'heAmbiguityofthe
Buddha-natureConceptinIndiaand China,''in LewisLancasterandW halen Lai,
eds-,Earl
'
tChaninCbinacsffTibet,(Berkeley:Asian HumanitiesPress,1983),
.
pp.259-279.Anotherusefulthreefold division ofthe path isthatinto <view'
(iarfana),practice(ccryl)andaction @4rpIJ).Cf.Reginald A.Ray,GBuddhism:
SacredTextW rittenandRealized,''in DennyandTaylor,eds.,Holy.
800:,p.166.
24.Leon Hurvitz writesthatGçtf;nchJany 'thestandard equivalentofthe
SanskritBoiltimapi
.
J,is,in purely Chinese term s,the nam e forthem editation
hallin amonastery.''(Gl-lsfian-tsang(602-6641andtheHearts'cn/fure,''inLewis
Lancaster,ed.,Prajt
ïâpöramitöaniRelatedSystems:StuiiesinHonorofEiwariConze
(Berkeley:RegentsoftheUniversityofCalifornia,1977),p.121,no.58.)This
m ay betrueofanearlierperiod.Now,however,cheterm seem storefertoaplace
forreligiousofferings,to aplacewheretheW ay iscultivated,and by extension
to thetem pleorm onasteryasaw hole,andthustohaveam eaningm oresim ilar
.a
to the originalmeaning ofbodbimapd .Cf.Ting Fu-pao,Fo-l uileb ta-tz'u-tien,
(1921; reprint ed. Taipei: Hsin-wen-feng ch'u-pan kung-ssu, 1978) p.
2368a.
-1).
25.Tlleconceptisthatthelaypeoplecultivatem eritin theirgiftstothe
nuns,with thenunsserving through theirpracticeasparticularly fertileRfields''
in which to grow merit.
26.TheTa-tsang-chingincludesa1lofthetextclassesincludedintheBud-
dhistTripifakasofthevariousM ahây:na and non-M ahâyàna Buddhistschools,
thatis,sûtra,vinaya,abhiibarma and jhstra.In addition,itincludes:ritualtexts,
tantrictexts(mantraandibörapî),treatises.essaysandcommentarieswrittenby
ChineseBuddhists,collected sayingsofCh'an (Zen)masters,and historiesof
Buddhism written in China.Onem ightconsiderita ratherinclusive archival
canon.D ecisionsaboutwhattextswerew orthyofinclusionintheTa-tsang-ching
wereoften madeatthe Chinese imperialcourt.
27.Although theChinese term sare different,Itake thisto beparallelto
theview setoutin thefollowing passageoftheLatïkâvatâra qsélrfl,an important
M ahàyânatextoftheYogàcuraschool:
Twofoldaretheaspectsofpersonalrealization (siddhânta)...thepersonal
realization itself (siddhunta) and the externalteaching (delanâ) about
 RETH IN KIN G SCRIPTU RE
it....The ç
xpersonalrealization''itself indicatesthe incomparability of
personalexperience,and ischaracterized by having nothing to do w ith
words,discrim inations and letters....W hat is m eant by the external
teaching(delanu)?Itisvariouslygivenintheninedivisionsofthedoctri-
nalworks;itkeepsoneaw ay from thedualisticnotionsofbeing andnon-
being,ofonenessand otherness;firstm aking use ofskillfulm eansand
expedients,itinducesa11beingstohaveaperception(ofthisteaching)so
thatwhoeverisinclinedtowardsit,maybeinstructedinit.(D.T.Suzuki,
trans.,TbeLankavatara Sutra,(London:Routledge & Kegan Paul,Ltd.
19321pp.128-29.)
O nthistopicseealso D.T.Suzuki,Stuiies,pp.348-50.
28.Cf.Schopen RCult,''andGraemeM acoueen,GlnspiredSpeech inEarly
MahàyànaBuddhism 1,''Reli
gion11,(1981):303-19.Cf.alsoJ.LeroyDavidson,
R'
TracesofBuddhistEvangelism inEarlyChineseArt''Artibuswdaffle,11(1948):
251-65.
29.Cf.J.J.M.DeGroot,LeColeJuMaltöyönaerlCbine:soninfluencesur
laviemonacaleetsurlemonielaique(Amsterdam:JohannesMuller,1893),pp.
133-43.
30.Foradescription ofJ:frl-lecturingand study in monasteriesin China
priorto 1949,cf.HolmesWelch,TLePracticeofC/lfrleseBuiibism.1900-1950
(Cambridge:HarvardUniversie Press,1967),pp.310-14.(Hereaftercitedas
G&practice-'')HolmesW elchcomments:
Lectureshaveplayedan im portantroleinChineseBuddhism from theear-
liestdays.Probably one ofthereasonswhy Buddhism succeededin China
wasthatitincluded thevery Chineseinstitution ofhaving disciplesstudy
acanonicaltextundertheguidanceofam asterw ho useditto shapetheir
character.There wasa certain parallelto Confucius and M enciusin the
m onksw hoeven in thiscenturytraveledfrom placeto place,afew follow-
ersattheirside,lecturing on thesûtras.
31.Cf.thetranslationinSeikanHasegawa,TlteCaveo
fpoisonGrass(Arling-
ton,Virginia:GreatOceanPublishers,197$,p.3)cf.alsohiscommentsinfoot-
note 1,p.167.
32.A popularpracticeinthePureLandtradition isrecollectionofaBuddha
calledAm itàbhabyrecitinghisnameoverand over,aimingforperfectconcentra-
tion on thenam e.
33.Thisattitudetow ard theteaching and hearing thattakeplacein sgtra
lecturing doubtless has a long history in the M ahuyàna.The attitude of the
preacherorexpositorhaslongbeen regardedasim portanttothegoaloftransfor-
mation.Forexam ple,the q'PreachersofDbarma'kchapteroftheLotusq sélrlcon-
tainsthe following passage:
SCRIPTU RE AN D ITS RECEPTIO N
O M edicineKing!Ifa good man orgoodwoman aftertheextinction ofthe
ThusComeOne(i.e.,theTathâgata,atitlefortheBuddhajwishestopreach
thisScripture...,how ishe or she to preach it?Thisgood man orgood
wom an isto entertheroom oftheThusCome One,don thecloak ofthe
ThusCome O ne,siton the throneoftheThusCom eO ne,and only then
preach thisscripturebroadlyto thefoudbldassemblygi.e.,theassemblyof
Buddha'sfollowersthatincludesmonks,nuns,laymenandlaywomen).The
room oftheThusCome Oneisthethoughtofgreatcompassion toward a11
living beings.Thecloak ofthe ThusCom e One isthe thoughtoftender
forbearanceandthebearingofinsultw ithequanim its ThethroneoftheThus
Come One isthe emptinessofal1dharmas.ltisonly by dwelling securely
amongthesethatheorshe can with unabating thoughtbroadly preach this
ScriptureoftheDl
mrmaBlossom....(Lotus,p.179-80.)
Furtherm ore,thenotion thattheheareristobetransform ed by listening
isan ideathatinform sthevery form ofM ahâyânaandnon-M ahâyânaJélrls.After
theBuddha'ssermon,thereisregularly an accountofthe transform ation under-
oneby thehearersin response.
34.Forausefulbriefdiscussion,seeDaigan andAliciaM atsunaga,TbeBui-
dltistConcepto
fHell(New York:Philosophicallibrary,1972),pp.23-39.They
notethatinearlyBuddhism wholesomeacts(Palièusalakamma,Sk.kujhlakarma)
SVCrC
further divided into two differentspheres:the first relating to worldly
actions(Jltul,whichlargelypertainedtothelaity;andthesecond,toreli-
giousornon-worldly actions(J. stwfl
).Itwason the levelofwholesome
worlily actionsthatnunna wasconsidered to be merit....Although punna
signified aform ofgood conduct,itwasbelieved tobeconfinedmainlyto
the sphere ofworldly morality sinceitsgoalwasdeemed to bebirth in a
happyheaven....(A)soneadvancedtothelevelofreligiousspiritualaware-
ness,theaim ofattainingpunnaforhappy rebirth had to berenounced in
favorofthenonworldlyBrahmacariyaconduct.(p.25)
35.Cf.YuichiKajiyama,G'
rransferandTransformationofMerits,'unpub-
lishedpaperdeliveredattheKurodalnstituteConferenceonBuddhistH erm eneu-
tics,June,1984.Seealso sectionon thequestionofwhether1ay peoplecan trans-
fer merits in H elen H ardacre,Lay Buiibism in Contemporary Jclun;Rei
. yukai
Kycdcrl,(Princeton:PrincetonUniversityPress,1984),pp.128-31.
36.Cf.the Yû-lin Kuo-shihyink'o-sungx/lf/sc/ll xç,a
grl ttached asapreface to
theFo-menJ' f-/vfb'o-sungpen,oneofthetwodailyofficetextsusedintheconvent.
On theconnection between reciting asûtra and m erit,even when one doesnot
understand the m eaning of the sb àtra, cf. the following passage from the
SattttbinirmocanaSt ktra,aproto-Yogâcârin work:
Therearel neingswhodonotunderstand thctruemeaning(ofthistext),
neverthelesstheyadhereto(thetext)andhavefaithinit.Theyadhereto
itsaying,ttrrhissntrapreached by theBlessed Oneisprofound,and (its
 N

98 RETH IN KIN G SCRIPTU RE SCRIPTU RE AN D lTS RECXPTION

meaning)isdifficultto see,difficulttoknow,beyond(verbal)discussion, thestktra isrecited prim arily forthem eritoftheact,which isnotconnected to

alien to (verbal)discussion,subtleand known by thewiseones....The itscontent,butto itsstatusasastbtra.
knowledgeandtheview oftheTathàgataareinfinite;ourow nknow ledge
and view are like the plodding ofacow-''In thisspirit,they revere this 45.Two daily office textsfrequently used today in Hong Kong and Taiwan
st
jtra,they copy itout,they transm itit,spread itabroad,venerate it,teach aretheFo-menAfvefk'o-sung1?esand theFo-chiaoc/lzflp--uk'o-sung.TheBuddhist
itand read and study it.Al1thewhile,they do notunderstand my true Association ofthe People'sRepublicofChinaunderChao P'u-ch'u hasrecently
intention,they are incapable ofcarrying out the m editation.In thisway, (betweenthesummerof1985andthesummerof1986)publishedaversionenti-
theiraccum ulation ofm eritandw isdom growsandfinally,thosew ho had tled Fo-cbiaonien-sung cLifor use in monasteriesand conventsthroughout the
notripened theirbeings,do ripen theirbeings. country.(1am gratefultoRaoulBirl
abaum forshowingmea-
copy)Allcpntempo-
rary daily office textsare quite similar,and owe a greatdebtto Yùn-ch'iChu-
(EtienheLamotte,ed.andtrans.,Satnibinirmocatm Sûtra:I'
ExplicationJe.
sMystères hung'scompilationof1600entitled Chu-cbingjih-sung,foundin Yiîn-cb'ifa-hui
(UniversitédeLouvain,Receuildetravaux,2eseries,34efasc.Paris:Maisonneuve, (Collected WorksofMasterYtïn-ch'i,hereafterabbreviated YCFH),chûan 12.
1935),pp.199-200;quotedin Ray,GBuddhism:Sacred TextW rittenand Rea- Fora fullerdescription ofche meaning ofthe textsin the daily office,though
lized,''p.166.1 from aparticularsectarianpointofview,seeH uangCh'ing-lan,Cb'ao-mub'o-sung
Jwi-/lrfccbiell-sbib,reprinted in Taiwan in 1978by the Fo-chiao Ch'u-pan she.A
37.Fan-wany ching,1.24.1009a.20.Tradition held thatthisw asatransla- shortdescription appearsin W elch,Practice,pp.53-58 and 71.Iam currently
tionfrom SanskritintoChinese,andattributedittoKumârajlva,butitwasproba- workingon abook-length study ofthese offices.
bly written in China ca.A.D.431-481.Translated into French by J.J.M .de
GrootinLeCoiedeM ahayanaen Cltine. 46.Cf.the J'J-/ïn Kuo-sbibyin b'
o-sung y/li/l-c/llfnl.
38.Onthissubject,seeJanYun-hua,f
sMf'
hePowerofRecitation,''inStuii 47.Cf.N.Dutt,EarlyBuiillistMonacbism (London:KeganPaul,Trench,
StoricoRebkiosi,vol.1,no.2(1977). Trubner& Co,1924),pp.90-106)forabriefdiscussion,seeHelenHardacre,Lay
39.Cf.PeterN .Gregory,u'T'lzeTeachingofM enand Gods:TheD octrinal Buiibi sm,pp.132-33.
and SocialBasisofLay Buddhist'Practice in the Hua-yen Traditiom ''in Robert 48.Actually,by am onk who livedin thenon-chineseTangutkingdom of
M.GimelloandPeterN.Gregory,eds.,StuiiesinCb'ananiHuagen(Honolulu: Hsi-hsia,in what is now Chinese territory.Cf.Huang Ch'ing-lan,Cb'ao-mu,
Universit
'yofHawaiiPress,1984),pp.283-93forsomeexamplesofthisexpecta- c/lfft
;nb,p.12.
tionfrom recitingtheAvatatttsaka(Huagen)q
séfrc.
49.Thenotion seemsrelated to theideaofselecting to focuson establish-
40.Po-sbib clt'any clt'ing-clti,5'
lrf-.pu ts'uny k'an edition,p.59.7a-81).M y
translation ism odified from thatofPeterN .Gregory,u'reaching,''pp.292-93. ingaconnectionwith theLûpen-tsun'g.go-honzonj,thatBuddhaorBodhisattva
with which itissuitableforpersonsin a currentworld orcircum stanceto have
Also translated in Kenneth Chen, Tbe C/lfna;e Transformation o
f IUJJJIfI'
- a specialconnection.
(Princeton:PrincetonU.Press,1973),pp.210-11.
5O.Thisofcourse reflectsaPure Land Buddhistinfluence on the daily
41.Ibii.
officedating back atleastasfarasChu-hung in 1601.
42.Form oreon this,seeW elch,Practice,pp.179-202.
51. A Sanskrit version of this nam e is sometim es reconstructed
43. Ti-tsang-p'u-sa-pen-yûan-ching,1.442.13.777c-790a; could be recon- â
sullam lnana.''
structed in SanskritasKçiti garbba Boibisattva.rl
rt:nfl/llrlf;sûtra,butno Sanskrit
52.T.16.779a-c.Fora recentand comprehensivestudy ofthe festivalof
originalhasbeenfound.Theusb
àtraoftbeOri
ginalP-
a4?''hasbeentranslatedinto Yïi-lan-p'en,w hich includesa sum mary ofmuch previousscholarship on 170th
English by TripitakaM asterH suan H uaand theBuddhistTextTranslation Soci-
thefestivaland theYii-lan-yaen cbing,seeStephenF.Teiser'sdoctoraldissertation,
etyasSutrao ftbePastPrawwofEartbStoreBodbisattva(SanFrancisco,1974).On t'TheYù-lan-p'enbestivalinMedievalChineseReligion''(PrincetonUniversity,
Kjitigarbha,M arinusW illem de Visser,TlteBoibi
sattva n -f-
scrl
.ç(
Iizo)in Cbina
JSJ/JAJK(
- Berlin,19t4),though notinformedbymorerecentresearch,remains February,1986)andhisforthcomingbook,TLeGbostFe- sffvc/inMeiievalCbina.
the bestreference in English. See also hisarticle GGhostsand Ancestorsin M edievalChinese Religion:The
Yû-lan-p'enFestivalasMortuaryRitual,''HistoryofReli
gions26,(August,1986):
44.Therecitation thustakesplaceinacontextofspecialinvocationofthis 47-67.There is so m uch speculation involved in positing an originalSanskrit
Bodhisattvaand thespecialrem em branceofancestors.Still,the chiefstatedpur- word forwhich d
tytt-lan-p'en''isa translation thatitseem swiserto do asTeiser
poseofreciting thesb
jtraisto createm erittobetransferredto ancestors.Thatis, and othershavedoneand leavetheword in Chinese.
 r

100 RETH IN KIN G SCRIPTU RE SCRIPTU RE AN D lTS RECEPTIO N 101

53.TextcanbefoundinKamataShigeo,Cbb
àgokunoBukbyögirei(Tokyo: andsentientbeingsare(atleast)minda''Dàarmais,atleast,an addressinwords
TökyöDaigakuTöyöBunkaKenkyt-
t
jö,1986),pp.873-87.. to thatwhich iscapable ofconsenting inwardly to them ,ofseeing thingsanew
in theirlight.And sentientbeingsare,atleast,those whom words transform ,
54.Fora description ofthis text,see '
W elch,Practice,p.188. thosewho find enlightenm entthrough listeningto,reciting,understanding,and
55.Lianpbuang cb'an-
fa;Cf.textentitledLiang-huanglup-cllucncb'uan-cbi embracingthemeaningsofwords.
in Kamata Shigeo,Gireipp.888-912. 66.ltwould beinteresting to tracethe developmentofthe iconographic
56.Cf.' W elch,Practice,pp.185-87)cf.also Kam ata Shigeo,G inei,pp. representationofMaijusrl,theBodhisattvaparticularlyassociatedwithW isdom,
117-22 and 214-21)text isincluded,pp.826- 872. with asatrascrollin hislland.
57.Lotus,pp.311-319. 67.Itis170th interestingand significantthatthispracticeofrecitingsûtras
58.Found in Cb'ien-sbou c/l'fcs-yéw buan-sltibyin,'rI-Jckuang-tayfkcs--f;s
(C.cbingjatfuneralsandritesofinterventiononbehalfofthedead(including
u'x-cfta-yei-bsin to-l
o-niclting,T.20.1O6a-111c;theihârapîison p.107c.
uallsouls''festivals)appearsalsoinTaiwanizzceremonieswheretheofficiantsare
Taoistsand specialistsin ufolk''religioustraditions.Itseem stobeageneralcon-
59.Ifrequently worked with Ch'en-chih shih in thekitchen,and found ceptthatonething onedoesforthedead isrecite textsforthem .
thistobetrue.Sheisanadm irableperson:warm ,simple,clear,completely genu- 68.T.32.575b-583a)translated into English by Yoshito S.HakedaasTbe
ine,and atpeacewith herselfand others.
AwabeningofFaitb(New York:ColumbiaU.Press,1967).
6O.Evenininstancesinwhich them etaphorsusedplacethesourceoftrans- 69.Themetaphorused isxtperfum ing,''in thesenseofperm eatingwith an
formation outsidethemind (in theBodhisattva,intheexternallygivenmantra, invisibleodor.
intheBuidltavacanaofthesatra,in themeritearnedfrom recitation),thetrans-
formingpowers(theBodhisattva,mantraandsoforth)areatthesametimeunder-
stood to be aspectsof one's own true mind (e.g.,the compassion of the
Bodhisattvaisnototherthan thecompassionofone'sown truemindorbuddha-
nature).Thenunsand1ay peoplewith whom Ispokealmostalwaysused170th
internaland externalm etaphorsin describing how and why practicesthattake
truewordsasmentalobjectslead to transformations.Thewordsbecomenot
merely references to Dlvrma,representationalsym bols,referentialuse oflan-
guage,butconstitutetheactivityofD ltarmaköyaacting withinthemind atsom e
levelotherthan thatofrationalcontent.
61.'
W ilfred CantwellSmith,Glntroductionto PartEight:ReligionasSym -
bolismz'intheIntroductiontoç
<propaedia,'EncylopediaBritannica,15thed.(Chi-
cago,1974),Vol.1,p.498.
62.Ibii.
63.An illuminating com parison ispossiblebetween the understanding of
mantra in theyogictradition and the understanding oficon ashypostasisin the
Eastern Orthodox tradition.
64.Thereareofcourseothers:itm ightbeargued thatsilenceisanother,
andvisibleform (image)andgestureLmuirö)athird.
65.Inourcallingthewordsandstructuresofthesûtras,mantras,andiltârapi
that constitute the teaching,uDltarma,''they become like metaphorsthrough
whichwespeakofandpartiallyunderstandthenatureofeternalTnzth.W eestab-
lish the m etaphor, aDharma is,am ong other things,transform ing,powerful
word-''Thisin turn goesalong with,even im plies,asecond metaphor,GBuddha
 U
4 m orepronounced,we now know,asonebeginsto considertheliterature
ddscripture''in India:
Tow ards a Typology of the
W ord in H indu Life
ThomasB.Coburn
I theirrespectivefieldsin lightofgenericconsiderations.ltisto thisexplo-
Atfirstglance,itappearsobviousthatthereligioustraditionsoftheworld
have scriptures.lVirtually a1lofthe major traditions,and many ofthe
m inor,have produced written documents, and the m ere fact of their
tw rittenness'invitescom parison betv een one tradition and another. The
logic behind F.M ax M ûller's massive editorial undertaking som e one
hundredyearsago- thepublication in English translation ofthefifty vol-
umesoftheSacred BooksoftheEast- isa compelling one. And asimilar
logic runsthrough much ofwhatwe do today in the scholarly study of
religion.W hen wedo research,a majorfocusofourattention isupon.
the literary rem ainsoftheworld'sreligiousm ovements. W hen we teach,
afairportion ofwhatweask ofourstudentsisthatthey become fam iliar
in som em easure, with thew ritten documentsofwhatever tradition they,
may be studying.Atone level,the association ofreligionswith scriptures
isso obviousasscarcely to m eritcom ment.
Atanotherlevel,however,thiseasy association callsforcloserexam-
ination.W e now know,for instance,in a way that wasless obviousin
M uller'sday,thatw hile theAvesta, theLotusq
s:frl,and som eoftheUpa-
GSCRIPTU RE'
'IN IN D IA 103
nijads may clam or for inclusion in any roster of ''Sacred Books of the
Easty''there areimportantdifferencesin the waysthese documentshave
been regarded,and in therolesthey have played in theZoroastrian,Bud-
dhist,and Hindu traditions respectively.Such differencesbecome even
that,for one reason or another,wasdenied inclusion in M ax M ùller's
canon.Itis,ofcourse,the detailed examination ofparticulardocum ents
in particulartraditionsthathasbeen one ofthe chief gloriesofm odern
scholarship.Thesheerm assivenessofwhatwenow know aboutindivid-
ualscriptures,particularly thoseoftheJudeo-christian tradition,isover-
whelm ing.Andyetin theteeth ofthiserudition,therepersistsasuspicion
thatwehavenotbeen askingthemostsalientquestionsofourdocuments,
that,for allof our methodological sophistication,we remain bound by
certain preconceptionsasto whatscriptureis,and how itsstudy oughtto
proceed.ItwasW ilfred CantwellSm ith w ho raised thesequestionsm ost
pointedly forbiblicalscholarship overadecadeago.2Subsequently,similar
questions,and sim ilarly novelsolutions,havebeenposed by Gerald Larson
forourunderstanding oftheBhagavai GrlJ,3and by Smith4and W illiam
GrahamsforourunderstandingoftheQur'àn.ThefirsthalfofGraham's
essay is an effort to cast these discussions- and,in fact,the whole of
scholarship on scripturalmatters- in a mold thatwillfacilitate scholarly
considerations of xçscripture''as a generic phenomenono6As Graham is
aware,the utility ofsuch a conceptwillbe determ ined gradually,asspe-
cialistsfrom acrossthe Spectrum ofreligiousstudiesexam ine the datain
ration thatthepresentessay seeksto contribute,through reflection upon
various features, uscriptural'' and otherwise, of the Hindu religious
tradition.
Having admitted an aspiration to explore thenotion ofscripture in
India,however,onefindsoneselfim mediately in thatfam iliarposition in
com parative studies,where the term s in which the originalquestion is
asked turn outto be ill-suited forunderstanding the dataathand.Three
considerationsm ay indicate why itisnecessary to conceptualize ourven-
ture here as a typology of the <' W brd,'rather than one ofscripture,in
Hindu life.
The firstpertainsto the connotationsofthe English word ''scrip-
ture.''AlthoughtheOxforiEnglishDictionaryreportsthatthespecifically
Jewish andChristian senseofscripture(andalliedtermssuchasholywrit,
canon,and bible)hasbeensupplementedoverthecourseofthepastcen-
tury or so by a generic use of the term ,whathas rem ained constant is
theassumption thatwe havehereto do primarily with awrittenphenome-
non,with something thathasbeen inscribed on apage.7lndeed,onesus-
 N
RETH IN KIN G SCRIPTU RE
Pectsthatthe Latin scrfrfurl,t'writing,''and scrfàerc,'to w rite,''are never
farfrom awarenessin much discussion ofscripturalm atters.And yetitis
precisely the thrustofGraham 'sarticle,and ofhisongoing work, asevi-
denced by his contribution to the present volume,to show how this
expectation ofwrittennessm ay mask certain importantfeaturesofhow
holywordshavebeenoperativeinhumanhistory:Theyhavebeenoral/
auralrealitiesatleast as much as they have been written ones,and the
way thatthey have found theirway itlto hum an livesisnotthrougllthe
eye,butthrough the ear.To argue the contrary isbutto admitthatwe
areheirsofGutenberg,forthe very notion ofsilent,individualized read-
ing isscarcely known prior to the adventofthe printing press.8conse-
quently,in an effortto appreciate the spoken and heard quality ofscrip-
ture, we here embark upon a study of the W ord in India, som e
embodimentsofwhich havebeen reduced to writing,butmostofwhich
haveretainedtheoral/auralqualityasprimary.
Oursecond consideration pertainstoadistinctivefeatureofIndian cul-
ture.lfone leavesasidethe crypticevidencefrom the IndusValley, w riting
seem sto havebeen known in thesubcontinentfrom perhaps600 s.c. E.9This
isatleasthalfam illenium aftertheearlieststrataoftheVedic corpuswere
composed,and there has never been a happy marriage betaveen the holy
wordsofIndia,composed,and transmitted orally,and thewriting process.
Particularly in contrastwith,say,China,scribesin India havebeen of1ow
socialstanding,and the very actofwriting was held to be ritually pollut-
ing.loA lateVedictext,theAitarqaWrapyula(5.5.3),statesthatt<apupil
should notrecite the Veda after he haseaten meat,seen blood or a dead
body,hadintercourseorengaged in writing.nllThcprofoundly spoken char-
acterofIndia'sholy wordsisamatteron which we shallreilectbelow, but
forthe momentitwillsuffice to notethatweshould notbe misled by the
factthatmostofthesewordshaveeventuallyfound theirway onto thewrit-
ten orprinted page.Thisisnottheirprimary home,andJ.F.Staalisnot
simply being mischievousin discerning a symbolic significance to the fact
thatIndian booksf'stilltend to fallapart.nlz
Ifourfirsttwo considerationsaddressthefactthatscripture in India
isnotnecessarily som ething written,then the third raisesthe possibility
thatthevery notion ofscripture asareified,boundaried entity failsto do
jus't
t
ice to the Hindu situation.l3Assuggested earlier,such assertionsas
-
thefixed and established booksofGod...form thecore ofworld
. . ..
religions''l4- are not,on the face ofit,absurd.One éan clearly observe
whatm ightbe called a <tprocessofcrystallization ofscripture,''and the
''coherence of tradition around scripture,''in a greatvariety ofsettings.
RSCRIPTU RE'
'IN IN D IA
In some,such astheJewish orChristian,thecrystallizationprocessmay
be drawn out,whilein others,such astheM uslim ,itmay bequiteabrupt.
Following ourearlierargument,itispossible to conceive ofthe scripture
thuscrystallizedasconstitutingafundamentally oral/auralpresencein
the lives of the faithful,but we must go still further in refining our
expectations,lthink,ifweare notto misconstrue theH indu scene.lndia
has,in fact,known verbalm aterialthat is highly tcrystallized,'that is,
quite specific,boundaried,and even written.Such itemsastheprincipal
Upanijads,orTulslDâs'sRâmâyapa,appearto be roughly com parable to
W estern notionsofscripture in thisregard.Forreasonsthatwillbecome
clear in the sequel,however,Iwould propose thatwe understand such
com pactand circum scribablephenomena asasubsetofhow Hindushave
dealtwith holy verbalphenom ena in general,thatis,with whatm ight
be designated the W ord, som e of whose m anifestations are dynamic,
open-ended,and nonrcvertible,rather than boundaried and reified.
Asa starting point,letm e propose thatthe mostusefulunit,the
atom or lowest com mon denom inator,if you will, for discussing the
Hindu situation is simply the verbalutterance ofa particular individual
at a particular point in tim e.H e or she m ay,of course,be reading the
wordsfrom awritten document,orreciting afixed pattern ofwordsfrom
memory,buthe orshemay also betelling afam iliarstory in an engaging
new way.Iwould urge that a1lof these possibilitieshave a bearing on
scripturalmatters in India,and,in particular,Iwould urge thatwe not
be obsessed with either the <writtenness'or the verbalfixity of sacred
utterancesaswe approach the H indu situation.
The specific utility of this apparently oblique way of discussing
çscripture'in India willbecom e apparent after reviewing the traditional
ways of conceptualizing Hindu religious literature- ways that we have
inherited 170th from ourscholarly predecessorsin the' W estand,in adif-
ferentfashion,from H indusliving in varioustimesand places- and then
indicating some difficultiesthat arise when these concepts are brought
face-to-face with the factsofreligious history.Part 11 ofthisessay will
therefore rehearse common viewsaboutthe scripturallife in India.Part
IIIwillisolate and comm entupon some unresolved difficultiesand often
unarticulated implications of our inherited views. Part IV will then
broach atypology ofholy verbalutterance in H indu life.By approaching
the matter in thisway,we willnotsim ply be testing a ' W estern notion
against H indu data,butwe m ay also,through fidelity to H indu view s,
glimpse new dim ensions to the phenom enon of scripture when it is
enerically conceived.
 RETH IN KIN G SCRIPTU RE
11
Virtually a1ldiscussionsofthereligiousliterature oflndiath
takecognizanceofHindu categoriesalso seefitto begin with a tsee fitto
adiscussion
ofjkutiand smçti.t'M/'emay takeJ.A.B.van Buitenen'sopeningremarks
on u'
T'he conceptofa sacred book in H induism ''asrepresentative:
Ort
i hodox Hindu authorscomm only divide their sacred literature
ntot'woclasses,ârutiands'plfff:âruti(literallyGlearningbyhear -
ing'')istheprimaryrevelation,whichstandsrevealedatthebegin -
ning of the creation.This revelation was useen''by the prim eval
seers(cf)whosetinmotionanoraltransmissionthathascontinued
from generation to generation until today. The seers were the
f Truthwasfullyrevealed('xheardr'
oundersofthelineagesofBrahmins(Hindupriestlyelite)through
which the textshave been, and continue to be, transmitted.From
thisheritagethe Brahminsderive theirfunction assacred specialists
and teachers.Smçti(literally urecollection'')isthecollectiveterm
forallothersacred literature, principally in Sanskrit, which iscon-
sideredtobesecondarytojruti, bringing outthe hidden m eanings
oftherevelation, restating itforawider audience providing more
, (P
p
sreciseinstructionsconcerning moralconduct, and complementing
rutiinmattersofreligion.'
W hilethedistinctionbetween Yrutiand
Smçtiisa usefulone, in practice the Hindu acquireshisknowledge
ofreligion alm ostexclusively through .Smçti.b6
This awareness of two levels of sanctity in H indu sacred literature has
prompted som esimply to declare thatRto the expression tlloly Scripture'
- Preted orexplained in smt' tl.
there correspondsin the case ofthe Indiansthe
expression Esruti'y'but
even in such cases itis recognized thatfrutiadm its ofvarious subdivi-
sions.l;O fthese,itis'tthe Vedic San-
Shrutiliterature,nl8and hitasjhat)occupyprideofplacein
f , oft
he Samhitàs,itistheR . gp r
ct / ,datingperhaps
Sraom 1200 s.cs.
. ,thatisforem ostin 170th antiquity and sanctity. The four
m hitls- ,Rg,Yajus S'
JSIJ,Atllarva-xreunderstood ascorrespondingto
the fourkindsofritualspecialist, and a1lfourSap hitàsare seen to have
gathered other subdivisions of sacred literature a
round them during the
subsequent m illenium :lg the Brâhmapas or ritual discussions
A , the
thraltyakasorforestbooks,theUpanisdsoresotericmysticteachings, and
ise Srauta,Gyhya,and Dharma Stttrasor manualsofritualand ethics.It
possible to schematizethisgrow th ofhuti, known asthe Vedic corpus
in term s of acha rtthat indicat
es how individua ltext s
theparticular categoriesand schoolsofthe Vedictradi atrie
onassociated with,
zo
.
RSCRIPTU RE''IN IND IA
l7here are severalwaysofindicating the relationship between this
Vediccorpus,which appearsto be reasonably welldefined, and the much
m oreheterogeneousynirlfliterature. LouisRenou hasoffered thcintrigu-
ing suggestion thatuthe division between jrutiand Smîtialso marksth
frontier between orality and editing,nzlw hich e
,if borne out by further
r
fesearch,hasmajorimplicationsfortheideaofscripturein India.22M ore
ully developed at presentisthe idea broached carlierby van Buitenen.
thathutiisofdivineortranscendentorigin, and thatithasreceivedsubse-
quentelaboration and interpretation athuman handsin theform ofsmfti.
M
ackenzieBrow n,in discussing the Puràpas, putsitthisway:
,asJrtftf)inthepast. TlaeVedas
...
arerevealed truth,and even the perfectexpression ofthattruth. But
. ..
theyarereservedforthetwice-bornclasses(upperthreecastes)
and arenotto berecited in public. jt-tdrasand women areprohibited
from even hearing theVedas. The Purâpas,on the otherhand
be heardby all,especially in the kaliyugawhcnD harmaisin uni , may
ver
-
sa1decline.The Puràpas are an ' teasier''form oftruth, adapted to
the conditions of class and world age. . . .
ltisassumed thatthe
uràpic)revisionsaremadein completeharmony with thetruth
contained in fruti.The Puràpasrepresent, then,an interpretation or
clarification ofthej'
ruti, revealing the eternal,immutable truth in a
comprehensibleform to a1lm ankind in hischanging, historicalsitu-
ation.Theprocessofrevealing truth by itsvery natureisneverend -
'ing.The truth,once revealed in fruti, must ever by newly inter-
.l
3
I
jn addition to the Purupas, smïtiseemsclearly to include the Dharma
astras,the two epics,the Rnmâyapa and the M abâbhârata, the Tantras,
and assorted other item s. The fullscope of that assortm ent cannot be
s
Wpehcified,however,for the concept ofsmçtiis necessarily open- ended.
atvalidation assmïticonsistsofis t'acceptance among the sam e cl
in society who were the source of the knowledge ofLruti ass
, the Brahm in
c1ass.''24Since thematerialsthathave received such validation havevaried
enormously 170th through thecenturiesand by region, itissenselesseven
to attemptto circum scribe the materialthatH indushave designated as
-r?
5 .
irfJ
'
.
.
Recently,however,ithasproven popular, and illum inating,to sche-
matize the growth oftheHindu tradition and itsliterature through adia-
gram arranged on cllronologicalprinciples.zsIn these two diagram s,itis
hutithat occupiesthe left-hand third ofthe chartand thatcomesto an
 U
108 RETHIN KIN G SCRIPTU RE
end,in the sense of 170th telos and terminus, with the Upanifads, the
<'Vedànta''or t'end ofthe Veda.''The balance ofthe chartiscomprised
ofsmçtimaterial.An alternativeway of making thissam ebasicpoint is
in term softhedistinction between Brahmanism ,thereligion oftheIndo-
Europeans,revolvingaroundthesacrifice(ytp'fk),andthepost-Buddhist
congeriesofm ovem entscollectively referred to asuHinduismy''revolving
around devotion to apersonaldeity (bhaktij,especially in imageform
V%$'26
Finally,we m ay note thatwhile virtually a11discussions ofH indu
religiousliteraturem ake mention ofthecategoriesofjkutiand .splf.ff,these
categoriesare notusually employed asorganizingprinciplesin discussing
the specific contentsofthe literature.Instead,the tendency hasbeen to
presentsumm ariesofparticular docum ents,which are grouped together
accordingtolabel(Samhità,Purâpa,etc.),accordingtotheirapparentsec-
tarianpreference(jaiva,Vaijpava,etc.),or,when thediscussion ranges
beyond thespecifically religiousliterature,accordingto genre(drama,
poetry,etc.)orthelanguageemployed.27' W hileitisapparentthatsome-
tim esthefruti-smïtidistinction hasbeen implicitly operative in the deter-
mination ofsalientsubdivisionsofthematerial(e.g.,Vedic,post-vedic,
etc.),thereapparentlyhasbeenlittleefforttothinksystematicallyabout
thefullrangeofterm sthatareemployed in thediscussion ofHindu reli-
giousliterature.The prevailing view of thatliterature,which hasbeen
summ arized here,is,ofcourse,reasonably apt.Ithasprovided uswith a
fram ework for understanding an enorm ousvariety of m aterial,and for
orienting thedetailed study ofparticulartexts- which in India,asin the
'
w est,hasbeen the strong suit ofm odern scholarship- into the overall
pattern ofgrowth ofthe Hindu tradition.N onetheless,thereare reasons
to believe thatcertain importantfeatures ofH indu scripture have been
either overlooked orunderstated by thisview.Itisto these featuresthat
w e now turn.
III
Comprehensive inquiry into the terminology and phenomenology of
H indu scriptureisclearly beyond the scopeofthisessay.A highlypromis-
ing direction forfuture research,forexample,isinto thevariety ofways
that the term Gveda''hasbeen em ployed,by 170th H indusand W estern
scholars,along w ith an inquiry into ourotherinherited term sforHindu
scripture: Upanifad, Purâpa, lruti, yvl/'lf and the like. Sim ilarly, the
nuanced interplay of ttext'and ucontext'showsevery sign ofcontinuing
to beamajorfocusofmonographicstudiesofIndian phenomena.z8The
salientm aterial,however,ism assive and itsfullanalysismustbe leftfor
''SCRIPTU RE''IN IN DIA 109
anotheroccasion.W hatcan be doneatpresentisto indicatein aprelimi-
naryway why thetimeisripeforsuch acomprehensiveinquiry into what
m ight appear to be familiar m atters.As a prolegomenon to such an
inquiry,wem ay herefocusupon three issuesto which insufficient-i
ustice
appearsto have been done in ourcurrentwaysofthinking aboutHindu
scripture.
1.The firstissuepertainsto whatm ightbe called the prim acy of
experience and the ontology of language.The centralrevision
orclarification ofourinherited viewsthatiteffectsisitsdemon-
stration that,whileitistemptingto say thathistoricallyhutipre-
cedessmçti(as,forinstance,theThomasJ.Hopkinsand David
R.Kinsleychartsindicate),thedistinctionofthetwocategories
on groundsofrelative chronology cannotbe sustained.
To appreciate thispoint,letusreturn to the basic affirm ation that
j'
rutiisthatwhichhasbeent<tseen'bytheprimevalseers(p'ï).''29Thever-
balrootofj' rutiisthecom mon verb lru,to hear,which suggeststhatthe
notion ofçholy hearing'may be an appropriate way to conceptualize the
çti'sexperience.The rootofçt' iislesscertain- itmay come from #r. #,Hto
SCC',''or from rf,Rto flow,''and isperhapsrelated to arcor ïc,Rto praise''
- butthere is no quarreloverthe factthatitrefersto one who hashad
them ostintim ate apprehension ofcosmic truth.3oThefactthatthemeta-
phorsof bearing and seeing are applied to the giin relation to thistruth
issignificant.Thisidentification of two sensesasm ediatorsofthe ni's
experience isno mixing ofm etaphor,butan effortto convey the holistic
and suprem ely compelling nature of that experience. It engages one
through,and yettranscends,the senses.It seizesone with a unique and
irresistible im mediacy.Itisin such experiencesthatthe hum an becomes
contiguous,even identical,with the divine.In discussing a word often
alliedwith çêi,kavi,poet,J.GondanotesthatthisRisoneofthosewords
which show thattherewasin principle no differencebetween mentaland
other qualitiesattributed to divine atld human persons.''3lElsewhere,he
observes:
The lndian aestlleticians...wcre...ofthe opinion thatthe cxperi-
encesofthepoet,representing thehero ofhiswork and thatofthe
listener,reader,or,in generalemployerofthe word are identical.
. . . Thi
s consciousnessof the presence of truth,ofthe divine,the
eternalorultimate reality in a work ofartwhich hasbeen created
by a truly inspired artist,togetherw ith the almostuniversalbelief
that words, especially duly form ulated and rhythmically pro-
 r
RETH IN KIN G SCRIPTU RE
nounced words,arebearersofpower,hasgiven riseto thetraditional
Indian conviction that <tformulas''are a decisive power:thatwho-
everuttersamantrasetspowerinmotion....jMcrlfrnyjrepresentthe
essence oftheç< ods.''They arenotm ade, butt'seen''by thosem en
who have had the privilege of direct contactwith divinity orthe
supra-mundane.3z
U ltimate reality,on thisview , may in fact be greater than whatever is
predicated ofit(tîeti,rlelf)butitisaffirmedatleastto havesound-form.
By virtue ofthe extraordinary perspicacity and auditory acuity ofcertain
individualsI '
flillotempore,therestofusare now ableto participate in that
ultim ate reality.It ismantrasthatare the sacram entby means ofwhich
thisparticipation iseffected.
W emust,however,go further,forH indushave notrestricted them -
selvesto using the language of thc senses to talk aboutthis revelatory
experience.The crucial concept here ispratibl lâ, which carries a basic
m eaning of''a flash oflight,a revclation,usually found in . . . the sensc
ofwisdom characterizedby im mediacy and freshness,nM butitisalsoused
in technicaldiscussionsofphilosophy, yoga,and aestheticsto m ean Rthat
function ofthem ind which,w hile developing withoutany specialcause,
isableto lead one to realknowledge,to an insightinto thetranscendental
truth and reality.nM Thisnotion hasa bearing on a wide range oftopics
but, forourpurposes,one ofitsfeaturesiscentral:itisnotlimited to thc,
greatseersofthepast.35Itisaccessiblein thepresent. Ini llotemporeis(or
canbe)now.ThoughtheconcludingremarksoftheillustriousGopinath
KavirajhavesomethingofaTantricringtothem,they capturetheessen-
tialinterrelationship ofthe divine, the human,and the verbalin H indu
life.
W e have seen in the preceding pagesthatthe developmentofthe
faculty ofomniscience can notbe affected unlessthe m ind ispuri -
fied and freed from the obscuring influence of the dispositions
clingingto itfrom timeim memorial. W hatisknown astheHdivine
eye''is really the mind in itspurified condition. . . . It isapparent,
therefore,thatevery man,in so farashe is gifted with a mind, is
gifted with thepossibility ofomniscience.... (1fwewouldaskhow
theimpuritiesofthe mind areto becleared away,)thewholeques-
tion turnsupon thepracticalissuesofmystic cultureand wecan do
no more than briefly touch upon the matter in thisplace. . . . This
help com esfrom the Guru,a spiritually awakc person, in the form
ofan influx ofspiritualenergy from him . . . . Concurrently with the
opening of thisvision to the Yogin he beginsto hear the eternal
RSCRIPTU RE'
'IN IN D IA
and unbroken sound of Nàda (i.e.Orhkâra),the sweetand al1-
obliterating Divine H armony....'W hen this light and sound are
fully realized,butbeforeplunging into the Absolute,the Yogin is
elevated into the highest plane of cosm ic life....Being himself
saved,he now becom es,ifhe so desiresit,thesaviourofhum anity.
. . .H ei
stheldealofPerfectHumanity which isDivinity itselfin
concrete shape and isthe source of lightand lifeandjoy to the
world,deep in darknessand sorrow.Itisfrom him thatthe <çscrip-
ures''proceed and theworld receives guidance and inspiration.36
Ifthiskind ofultimately transform ing experience continuesto be a
liveoption and producesRscriptures''throughoutthecourseofHindu his-
tory,an importantqualification mustnonethelessbe added.AsKaviraj
makesclear,itisthe.p rx-studentrelationship thatiscentralto the spirit-
ualperfection ofthe student.' W hile scripturesm ay proceed from a per-
fected individualasby-products of his perfection,they are in no way a
substitute foran aspiring yogi'spersonalrelationship with aguru.To put
it another way,the Jylru-student relationship may welltake a w ritten
docum entasitsstarting point,butso intim ate and personalisthatrela-
tionship,and so essentialisitto the correctunderstanding ofthew ritten
(ororallypresetwed)word,thatthereexiststhewidespreadcustom that
ifateacherdoesnotfind astudentworthy ofinheriting hismanuscripts,
he will,in his old age,simply discard them by throwing them into a
river- asone would ashes that had been crem ated.' W ritten docum ents,
unvivified by personalrelationship,are lifeless.
A corollaryofthe qualification isthat,ifwewould identify theves-
sels in which the ni's orguru's transform ing experience is,asit were,
çpreservedy'weoughtnot,forreasonsalready cited,look intowritten doc-
uments.' W eoughtrather,perhaps,to look atotherinstancesw here Hin-
dus speak of holistically engaging, sensual, and particularly visual,
apprehension ofthe divine.' W hile Icannotpursue this matterin detail
here,theuse oftheword dç- l,uto see,''oritsderivativesin othercontexts
is surely notcoincidental.Darfana,for instance,<seeingv'isthe standard
word for <philosophy,'and one ofthe reasons thatH indu philosophy is
said to bepervasively salvific isbecause itbearsthisheritage oftspiritual
apprehension.'The sam e word isalso em ployed in whatappears,to the
outsider,to bequiteadifferentcontext,to labelRthesinglemostcom mon
and significantelem entofHindu worshipy'namely,whathappensRwhen
Hindusgotothetemple,(and)theireyesmeetthepowerful,eternalgaze
ofthe eyesof(the imageoflGod.''37One could argue,in fact,that
ttim agesare notonly visualtheologies,they are also visualscriptures.''M
If we spread our net wider, to include other than the sight sense,
 U
RETHIN KIN G SCRIPTU RE
wemaynotethatrasa,taste,loomsasamajorconceptinIndian aesthetics
and in various theologies,particularly those of Krishna,to convey the
nature ofthedivine-human encounten3gItwould appear,therefore,that
notonly hasthekind ofexperiencethatH indusunderstand to have gen-
erated Lrutibeen current throughout Hindu history.4o Beyond this,the
holy words that are huti must be seen alongside other transforming,
sacramentalactivities,such asphilosophicalargum entation,the worship
ofthe divine image form,and the highly nuanced moods (bhavasjof
Krishnadevotees.
W hen theexperientialfoundationsofIrutiasan ongoing phenom e-
non in H indu lifeisacknowledged in thisfashion,then anumberofoth-
erwisepuzzting(or,moreoften,ignored)aspectsoftheHindutradition
may be viewed in a new light,with a new clarity.' W e may glance briefly
atone ofthem .
The traditionalHindu view isthatthereare 108 Upaniëadsand,of
these,a dozen or so are identified as uearly,' that is,composed in the
half-m illenium orso afterabout700 s.c.E.
41And yetin theword index of
Vedic material that began appearing five decades ago, the Vaidiba-
padânukrama-koéa,n no fewer than 206 Upanijadsare indexed and some
ofthese Ghave been written occasionally even in modern timesand cer-
tainly rightup totheM iddleAges.''43Therelativelyrecentorigin ofthese
Upanijads,togetherwith the factthatsome ofthem arehighly sectarian
and thatthereeven existsan 'kAllah Upanijadn- written in praiseofIslam
atthe instance ofD arah Shikoh in the seventeenth century- is exceed-
ingly problematicalforany view thattakes only the early Upanijadsas
norm ative and thatseeshutiashistorically priorto smçti.M Thetendency
(underBrahmanicaland/or'
W esterninfluence?)hasbeentodismissthese
compositionsprecisely because oftheir lateness and their alleged Rcor-
rupt''character.4sThe fact remainsthatsome Hindus have called them
''U panijads.''This fact becom es far less problematical,and is actually
highly illum inating,when seen in relationship to ourcontention thatIruti
mustbe seen asongoing and experientially based feature of the H indu
religioustradition.46
2.The second issue on w hich ourinherited expectationsforscrip-
ture in India appearlessthan fully adequate m ightbe called the
ç'sociology oflanguage''and the 'tpowerofholyhearing.''W hile
it is tempting to assum e that scriptures,either read or heard,
servea didactic role in human lives,the centralfacthere isthat,
form any Hindus,the holinessof holy wordsisnota function
oftheirintelligibility.O n thecontrary,sanctity often appearsto
be inversely related to comprehensibility.
GSCRIPTU RE''IN IN D IA
To appreciatethispoint,1etusreturn to Brown'sobservation thatthe
significanceofthe Purw asisthatthey t<m ay be heardby al1.''47Noticethat
hedoesnottietheirsignificanceto the factthatthey could be untkrstoodby
all,for they have scarcely been an open book.Nor,for thatm atter,have
mostoftheitemsusually considered thescripturesofIndia.And thereason
thatthesescripmres,even ifuniversally heard,wereneverw idely understood
isbecause they were composed in Sanskrit.Over thepastthirty years,the
sym bolic significance ofthe Sanskritic languageand culturehmsgenerated a
widespread discussion ofKsanskritization'which itisnotnecessat'
y toreview
here.W hatwem ay simply note isthatuthe name ofthe language,one of
the few not derived from a region or a people,states its own program :
samskta s/laja isthe ritually perfected and intellectually cultivated lan-
guage.48To be ableto speak and understand Sanksritisabadge ofreligious
and intellectualprivilege,foritisthere
finedorawell-cookeft'language,in
contrasttothePrakrits,thoseuncouth grtmtsofhoiyolloi.Sanskritwasthere-
forealwaysan individual'ssecond language,unintelligibleto speakersofthe
many localvernaculars,butalways,for one who knew it,the language of
preference.4g simply hearing this cultured language bordered on being a
numinousexperience.
Thereisan additionaldimension,however.ItisnotjustthatSan-
skrithas an aura of elegance in the present.It also provideslinkage to
the prim altime.Van Buitenen putsitthisway:
Centralto lndian thinking through the agesisaconceptofknowl-
edgewhich ...isforeign to the m odern 'W est.' W hereasfor us,to
putitbrieily,knowledgeissomethingtobediscoverel,fortheIndian
knowledge is to be recovered....One particular preconception,
related to this concept of knowledge concerning the past and its
relation to the present,isprobably ofcentralsignificance:thatatits
very origin the absolute truth stands revealed; that this truth
- which issimultaneously away oflife- hasbeen lost,butnotirre-
coverably;thatsom ehow itisstillavailablethrough ancientlifelines
thatstretch back to the originalrevelation;and thatthepresentcan
be restored only when this original past has been recovered..
. . Sanskritis felt to be one ofthe life-lines,and Sanskritization in
its literal sense,the rendering into Sanskrit,is one of the prime
m ethodsofrestating a tradition in relation to a sacralpast.50
Al1ofthisisnot to say,ofcourse,that Sanskrithasnotbeen used
- by those capable ofusing it- with every intentto com municatem ean-
ing.ThecaseofRâmânuja- thegreattheologian ofjrlVaifpavism who
standsatthejunctureofthe two traditionsofTamildevotionalism and
 r
RETH IN KIN G SCRIPTU RE
Sanskrittorthodoxy'- isa splendid instance of som eone whose piety is
deeply indebted to non-sanskritic sources,butwho writes in Sanskrit
because ofitsprestige and symbolic significance,and who doesso with
greatclarity and precision.
Such an instance,however,m ustnotdistractusfrom thebasicpoint,
namely,that the sanctity of Hindu scripture- m ost of which has been
composed in Sanskrit- doesnotnecessarily depend upon itsintelligibility
to one who hearsorrecitesit.Nowhere hasthisbeen more clearly dem-
onstrated than in theway theR . grzal- apparently the centerpiece ofthe
entire scripturaltradition- hasfunctioned in Hindu life.Like al1verbal
com positions,theR . g Vedawasproduced in an historically particularcon-
text,ofwhich them ostvivid briefaccountisCharlesR.Lanman's:sl<<To
the student ofthe Veda itisa source ofperhapscontemptuoussurprise,
and to theteacherasource ofsom elittleembarrassment,thatthisvenera-
b1e docum entsmellsso strong ofthecow-pen and thebyre.''52Bethatas
itmay,these particularized featuresofthe R . g Veda have been essentially
irrelevant,have passed virtually unnoticed,throughout mostof Hindu
history because ofwhatRenou callsthe ''characteristically lndian preoc-
cupation w ith form rather than m eaning.ns:w hatthishasm eantisthat
''at a1ltimes,recitation constituted the principal,if not the exclusive,
objectofVedic teaching,the same astoday...whilsttheinterpretation
ofthetextsistreated asapoorrelation.ns4such recitation hasbeen under-
taken foravariety ofritualpurposes,especially asan instrumentorinter-
m ediary ofdevotion,and,in thiscontext,m attersofverbalsignification
pale in significance.ssThis haselicited a suggestive comparative remark
aboutthe role ofthereciterVrotri
ya,masteroffrutilk'vthehotriyawho
reciteswithoutunderstanding should notbe compared with aclergym an
preaching from thepulpit,butratherwith amedievalmonk copyingand
illum inatingm anuscripts,and to someextentwith al1thosewho arecon-
nected with book production in modern society.''s6Itmay,ofcourse,be
thatthe R. g I/JJ and other Vedic m aterialshave been particularly prone
to this m anner of treatm ent,because of their composition in the pre-
classicalform ofSanskritknow n asVédic:itseem slikely thattheir exis-
tence in an arcane,archaic language would have reinforced the prior
disinclination to interpreton ritualgrounds.However,thepropensity to
mem orize and to reciteholy words- perhapsasa manifestation ofdevo-
tion (bltabti),perhapswith the aspiration ofhaving one'sconsciousness
transform ed by the mantras, as noted earlier- runs very,very deep in
Hindu life.There isscarcely a festivalin India thatisnotaccompanied
by the recitation ofsome classicaltext,m ostoften in Sanskrit,in which
case,aswe have seen,itcannotbe intelligible to more than a selectfew,
orin an archaicand therefore,atbest,ratheropaqueform ofthevernacu-
T'SCRIPTU RE''IN IN D IA
lar.57 w hatever else we m ay conclude aboutthe scripturallife ofIndia,
justicemustbedoneto factthat,atleastsomeofthetime,Hindushave
affirmed thatthe holinessofthe '
W brd isintrinsic,and thatone partici-
patesin it,notby understanding,butby hearing and reciting it.
3. The third issue on w hich it appears necessary to rethink some
ofourfamiliarpatternsofthoughtmightbecalled the t'dialectic
between hutiand smïti,''orthe tEdouble desideratum ofliterally
presetwing and dynam ically recreating the 'W brd.' '
W hile it is
tempting to assum e thatconsiderationsofcontent,or genre,or
label,orname m ay enableusto categorizea given textaseither
bIrutiorsmçti,closerexam ination revealsasubtle and highly sug-
gestive movementbetween these two kindsofholy ' W brd.
Let us begin with the observation that Rscripture,''like ttcousin,''
'tweed,'' or t'Poison'' seem s necessarily to be a relational concept: it
dependsforitsdefinition,notupon itsintrinsicproperties,butupon those
propertiesin relation to people,who valueitforbetterorworse.58w hile
the im plicationsofthisfactare only gradually coming to be explored,it
seemslikely thatthe existence oftwo centraltermsforHindu scripture,
hutiand smçti,may bea reflection oftwo differentkindsofrelationship
thatcan be had with holy verbalm aterialin the Hindu tradition.sgw e
have already had grounds to question the sufficiency of understanding
irutiaschronologically priorto smt'tiand to obset'vethatjkuti,in theform
oftheso-calledlateUpanijads,hasdefactofunctionedasanopen-ended
category in H indu life.W e must now go one step further,however,to
observe that,in some cases,there hasbeen an obsetwable shiftovertime
in the way a particular instance ofthe 'W brd,a particular çtext,'ifyou
m ust,hasbeen regarded by individuaiswithin the tradition.
Letusbegin with the Bbagavad Gfàl.The logic for understanding
the Gîtâ assmçtiisstrong,and thecase forsuch an understanding isregu-
larly m ade.6OThe textis,afterall,situated in the M ahöbbârata,which is
perhapsthe prem ier instance ofsmçti,and itsdidactic intent converges
magnificently w ith the traditionally understood role ofsmçti.Bharatiis
Surely correctin lam enting che recentfacile identification ofthe Gîtö as
<tthe H indu Bible,''61butmattersare also more complex than he allows.
ln hislastrem arkson this text,to which he devoted so much attention
throughouthiscareer,van Buitenen concludesthatthepost-G fflevidence
(theviewsofvariouscommentatorsandtheauthoroftheVedântast
jtras)
atteststo the near-/rulfprestige ofourtextatavery early date.''62There
''
isadditionalevidence to strengthen such an interpretation.Itisafact,for
instance,thatthe m aterialthathastraditionally been understood ashuti
 U
RETH IN KIN G SCRIPTURE
(theVedas,Bràhamapas,etc.)hasshownamuchhigherdegreeoftextual
integrity than smçtim aterial,thatis,textualvariantsarefarfewerin huti.
It isworth noting then that,in the criticaledition of the M ahâbhnrata,
the variant readings in the text of the Bhagavad Grrf p are substantially
fewerthan in therestofthe epic.Beyond this,thetestimony ofthe colo-
phonsisthatthe G'tt kisofapiece with the Upanijads,for,atthe end of
the firstchapter,outofthe fifty-three manuscriptsused to constitute the
Gîtö portion ofthe Bhijmaparvan,forty-seven read bhagavadgîtâsu upani-
sf-fpl,''in thesongs(verses)oftheBlessed One,which areUpaniëads.n63
Finally,in theVedicword index referred to earlier(VPK),thereareno
intrinsic grounds for including Gîtö at all,since,in its origin,it isnot
Vedic. In the volum es that index the Upanijads,however,the Gîtâ i s many a version,since Vàlmlki'soriginalSanskritcomposition a millenium
included,based on therationalethatitisubased on or...very intimately
related to the Upanifads.64TheBltagavai Gfflmay haveori ginatedassmfti,
butitappearstohavefunctionedinHindulifeverymuchasj'
ruti.
h similarshifthasoccurred with regard to theD evî-M a/llfvl
yfl,also
known as the Capd .forDurgâ-saptaiatî,700 (Verses)toDurgâ.Thistext
appearsas thirteen chaptersin one of the early Purâpas,where itseem s
to bea cleverly accomplished insertion in an oldertext,with theSaptah tî
itselfprobably dating from the sixth century c. E.In terms ofcontent,it
isavivid and utterly appropriate pieceofsmçti.Butin term soffunction,
(1)ithashadanindependentliturgicallifeofitsown;(2)intheliturgical
context,itttistreated asifitwerea Vedichymn orversew ith ni,meters,
pradbânaievatn,andviniyoga(for)hpa)''
,65and (3)ithasgathered around
itselfno fewerthan sixty-seven com mentaries,the mostcom mon concern
ofwhich isw ith how the mantrasofthe text,and the m odestnum berof
variants,should be properly divided so as to arrive at the requisite 700
versesforrecitation.66
Ifwe enlarge the scope of our discussion here beyond the specific
termss lrutiand smçti,itbecom espossible to identify acentraldynam ic of
H indu treatmentoftheW ord.Thatdynamicrevolvesaround the tension
bctween(1)thedesiretopreserveandrecite,andnotnecessarilytounder-
stand,averballyfixed(usuallyoral)text,and(2)thedesiretounderstand,
1)0th foroneselfand forothers,religiousideasthatarepresented in verbal
form.67 Since we have just seen that the treatment accorded the
Devî-M âllâtmyaseemsto bea reflection oftheformerofthesedesires,we
m ustnote thatthere isa complem entary processthatis also atwork in
the functioning ofthe text.According to Babb:
Itis importantto realize that the Saptasbati,like a11 Hindu texts,
hastwo distinctkindsofreligioussignificance.Ithas,firstofall,a
kind of intrinsic potency asa collection ofsacred utterances.The
''SCRIPTU RE''IN IND IA
chanting ofthe mantrasofwhich itiscomposed isawayofpleasing
the goddessand tapping herpowers.Butthe mantrashavem eaning
of another sort,for together they constitute one of the principal
scripturaldelineationsof the goddess.The textis to beunderstool as
wellas chanted,and consequently in the editions available in the
Raipur bazaar the Sanskrit stanzas are given together with their
H inditranslation.68
A similar dialectic may be discerned with regard to the HindiRâmâyatta
(Râmacaritamânas)ofTulslDàs.Inotiginasixteenth century Kre-creation''
or'Etranscreation''oftheRàma story,which had been told m any atim e,in
an ahalfearlier,TulslDâs'sRâmâyapa hasbeen experienced asso powerful
and so holy thatitisnow recited verbatim during lumlllâ even though,as
noted earlier, its classical Hindiis scarcely transparent to modern Hindi
speakers.H eld in counterpointto thisrecitation,however,arethedialogues
between the actorsin thefestivaldrama,which occurin modern H indiand
which b0th translateand elaborate upon thewordsofTulslDàs.69Asa final
nuance in thisdialectic,we should note the evidence recently presented in
Hawley'saz lrPlay witb Krishna.The story of the cowherd Krishna has,of
course,been retold in vitaland compelling fashion on innumerable occa-
sions,and a direct line runs from its first appearance in the Harivathfa,
through thep'k?IlfandBhâgavataPf
/rfltlfl
-
ç,intothemodern vernaculars.On
someoccasions,such asintheBlugavata,orinJayadeva'sGfflGovinda,the
story hascrystallized into aform thatmightbedeemed Rcanonicalo- which
in the Hindu casewould thusmean Rworthy ofbeing recited verbatim .''As
the Krishnatradition livesin the dram asofcontemporary Brindavan,how-
ever,there is no çcanon,'because there is no xtext.'There are,of course,
familiar songsand plotstructures,and linesare remembered from pastper-
formances,but uthe playsare constantly being recom posed,''and the ele-
ments of independence and spontaneity are crucial to the vitality of the
perform ancesa7oIndia,itwould appear,wants170th the literalpreservation and
thedynamicrecreationoftheW ord,andthemovem entbetween thesetwofoci
- w hether or not they be called Nr/gfi''and sçsmt'ti'' respectively- is170th
subtle and conrinuous.7l
lA?
W e turn now from aconsideration of specific issuesin the Hindu tradi-
tion to atypology thatarisesoutofthisconsideration,and thataspiresto
alleviate som eofthe conceptualdifficultiesencountered in trying to talk
about H indu scripture.Ioffer the t'
ypology in t'wo differentform s,the
 RETH IN KIN G SCRIPTU RE
form er,I think,quite defensible and clearly related to what has gone
before,the latterm ore speculative.
The typology is designed to indicate the varied ways thatHindus
haverelated to arangeofverbalm aterialsthathaveoriginatedatdifferent
tim esand places.At the outset,Iurged the reader to think ofthe basic
unitfordiscussing theH indu situation astheverbalutteranceofapartic-
ularindividualata particularpointin time, and itwillnow be apparent
whywemustproceed to such an extremeatom izingofthematerial. M ore
abstract approaches,based on prevailing conceptualizations, getus into
difficulties:the same verbalevent- the sam e utterance- has been vari-
ously regarded atdifferenttim es,and even such fam iliarcategoriesashuti
and 4u panijad'appearto break down when pushed hardenough. In order
to keep from being m isled by ourexisting terminology,Iam proposing
thatwe letthe atomization process go asfaraspossible, to the levelof
individualverbalutterance.And then 1etussee the mannerof relation-
shipsthatHindushavehad with theutterancesthatareconsidered sacred.
Irefercollectively to such utterancesasçthe W ord.'
There isafurtherreason why Ihave called this, nota typology of
scripture,buta typology ofthe W ord.W e have seen thatH indushave
emphasizedtheoral/auraloverthewritten aspectofwords.Morethan
that,however,they have understood thatwhich ismediated through qis
and gurus to be verbal-and-yet-m ore-than-verbal.To convey its nature,
they haveused avariety ofmetaphorsnotjustofaudition,butofsight.
Andifweallow thelaterusesofdarhnla)asclues,itsmacksalsoofphilo-
sophicaltruth (vela,ofcourse,meansçtknowledgen),and ofreciprocal
sight,theexperienceofknowingandbeingknown.Andifitbeobjected
thatthissoundsm ore likea typology ofrevelation than oneofscripture,
then so be it.lt has to be noted imm ediately,however, thatwhile the
W ord (fzJc,Veda,etc.)may bemorelike <revelation'than tscripturey'the
closestanalogy thatwe ordinary m ortalshave for its nature isthatitis
verbal,hassound-form .Gonda explainsitsdistinctivenessasfollows:
The categoriesoflanguage are,so to say, a diaphragm ,an obstacle
which com es between the reality and our consciousness. W hereas
in ordinary usage thisdiaphragm m akesitsexistence and influence
felt,poetical language is devoid of these categories and therefore
attains to reality before its solidification into discursive thought.
Thus poeticallanguage is related to other extraordinary forms of
expression,for instance,on the religiousplanewith mantras.72
The W ord,therefore,asIam using ithere hasa deliberate multivalence:
Itindicatesa verbaland hum anly articulated reality butitalso hasm eta-
''SCRIPTU RE''IN IN DIA
physicalovertonesand m orethan a hintofthe mysterium tremendum.
The first formulation of the typology suggests thatH indus have
donefivethingswith theseholy verbalevents.Thereisoverlap,ofcourse,
and few pure ttypes'exist.Nonetheless,forthe sake of convenience we
m ay think of there being five waysthat Hindushave engaged with the
W ord.
1. They have frozen it,captured it verbatim,treated it as sound
eternal,thehum ofthe universe.'W hileitisprimarily theVedic
, g Ve
matcrial,and particularly theR da,thatbelongshere,other
materialmay be treated in thisfashion,aswe have seen.Thisis
the way,itsseemsto me,Hindus have treated thatwhich they
regard asfruti.There are obviously many caseswhere non-lrulf
material hasbeen com mitted to memory,but itwould appear
thatthe majorthing Hindusaresaying when they callcertain
verbalevents'.jkuti''isthatthey are eternal,intrinsically power-
ful, and suprem ely authoritative. They are never outm oded.
They are worthy ofrecitation,regardlessofw hether they are
understood.Indeed,mantrasdo not amean''anything in the con-
ventional sem antic or etym ological senses.Rather,they mean
everytbing.
And if we are bewildered by thataffirm ation,the H indu
responsewould beforeach ofusto find an appropriateguru,to
receive from him (among otherthings)amantra,to reciteit
faithfully,and eventually wewillcom eto seethepoint.Thisis,
in many ways,the most characteristically H indu view of the
'W ord,and ofthevariousview sin India,itappearsto bethem ost
radically disjunctivewith '
W estern notionsofscripture.
2.Hindushavealsotreatedcertainstoriesassalvificand/ornorma-
tive,and so they have told them over,and over,and overagain.
Particularly compelling versions of a story m ay hold people's
attention forcenturies,and a really powerfulversion may come
to beregarded asifitwerej' ruti.N onetheless,even in thosecases,
what is importantis that the story be intelligible to those who
hearit.And thism ay,ofcourse,entail<transcreation'outofSan-
skritinto oneofthevernaculars.Thisiswhatseemstohavebeen
happeningthrough thecenturiesto thestoriesofKrishnaGopàla
and Ràma,and,perhaps, more broadly in the rich corpus of
H indu mythology.
3. Hindushave com posed com mentariesasaway ofmaking some
embodiments of the w ord intelligible in the present. Certain
 U
RETH IN KIN G SCRIPTU RE
kindsofthe W ord,such asthest
jtraliterature,inviteorvirtually
demand commentariesbecauseoftheirdeliberatebrevity.(Itis
said thattheauthorofsuch atextwould sellhisgrandson to save
asyllable.)Otherkindsdemandcommentariesbecausethey are
in Sanskrit and therefore require a vernacular com mentary in
order to m ake them intelligible:instances ofthiswe have seen
in the treatm entaccorded theD urgbsaptafatîand the Râmâyana
ofTulstDàs.The pattern ofwriting comm entaries,however,is
uneven, clustering around certain texts such as the sfttra and
bllaktiliterature,and sometimessurprisingly absent,asin thecase
of m ost Pur:pas.O ne suspectsthatinquiry into the pattern of
texts that have attached comm entaries is a matter that would
repay further investigation.
4. Som e embodim entsofthe ' W brd in India have generated im ita-
tions of them selves.The terms of im itation,however,that is,
whatitisthathasbeen deem ed worthy ofemulating,havevar-
ied.Van Buitenen shows how, for the Bhâgavata Pxrlpl, it is
archaic language, Vedic Sanskrit, that is being reproduced.7:
Parameswara Aiyar,alternatively,indicates the huge variety of
texts that have called them selves uGîtâs''in spite of som etimes
departing fantastically from the concerns of the Bbagavai GrlJ
proper.74 If one were inclined to such terminology,one m ight
say thatthisresponseto the' W brd isakind ofGim itativem agic,''
while our fifth type would be magic of the Rsym pathetic''
variety.
5.Finally,som eembodimentsofthe' W brd havelived on by receiv-
irpg additions into them selves.Indeed,a large portion of what
H induscallusmçti,''specifically the epicsand Purâpas,seem sto
welcome additionswith open bindings.One m ight expectthis
- with its attendant problem s for the task of critical editing
- where the material is what has traditionally been called
Asmçti,''forthevery conceptisthatofan authoritative,butopen-
ended W ord.Even in whathastraditionally been called ukruti,''
however,we have seen thatthere hasbeen a defacto open-
endedness.The urge to enfold the new into the o1d isbut one
way thatH indushave dealtwith the ' W brd,butitappearsto cut
acrossthe fullrange ofH indu Ascriptural'materia1.75
The second formulation ofthe typology isa drastic simplification
ofthe first,and it,in turn,willbring usto a finalremark.M ightitbe
possible,onemay ask,to reducethisfive-fold mannerofdealingw ith the
GSCRIPTURE'
'IN IN DIA 121
W ord to two basic types? The former mightbe called Rscripture,''and
the latter Rstory.''Or following Karman's distinction in sacred art,one
m ight callthe form er Rsacramental,''and the latter t<didactic.''76 One is
tempted,perhaps,to suggestacorrespondencew ith the Greek discrim ina-
tion oflogosand mythos.Regardlessoftheappropriatenessofterm sdrawn
from other contexts,the basic distinction isthis.H indus have shown a
propensity to treatcertain instancesofthe W ord aseternaland imm uta-
ble,and they have engaged with some ofthem (the R
.g Pr
elalnow for
aboutthree-and-a-half-millenia:thisistype one in ourfirstformulation
of the typology.H indus have treated other instances of the W ord as
dynamic, as spawning a1l manner of elaboration, som e of it being
verbal- and therefore including typest'
w o through fiveabove- butmuch
ofitbeing found in festivallife,im ageworship,philosophy,and aesthet-
ics,thatis,inlarlanla)andrasa.Thetestofwhethersuchelaborations
areauthenticisthesimple one ofwhetherornotthey receivethesanction
ofwhatwe m ightcalldtverbalspecialists'':attim es,thism eansthesanc-
tion ofBrahm ins,r butitcan also refer to thosewhose spiritualcreden-
tialsareexperiential,theperfectedyogiscited by Gopinath Kaviraj.78IfI
werethen to pressthe casethatforH indus,itistheformerofthesetypes
thatcom esclosestto <scripture'asa generic phenom enon- because itis
compact,boundaried,and therefore capable ofbeing <canonized'- then I
have enabled m yselfto observe that,in a Hindu context,the W ord has
been operativein scripture,butthatitisalargerthan scripturalphenome-
non.79And thatisan assertion forwhich Ithink Iwould find som etheo-
logicalsupportin otherreligioustraditions.
In pressing such a case,however,Iwould then have to note that the
distinctively Hindu way ofengaging w ith thiscompact,boundatied verbal
m aterialisto reciteit,notnecessarily to understand it.And thatislikely to
contraststrikingly with the scripturalsituation elsewhere in theworld.
In anticipation offurther effortsto attain clarity on such matters,a
finalword mustbesaid aboutthe contextin which thestudy ofanyparticu-
1a1-scripttzraltradition is undertaken.The thrustofourexploration in this
essay hasbeen into theconceptsand natureofthe Hindu religiouseadition.
Itiswell-known,however,thattheveryconceptEl-lindu'isalateone,dating
only from the m ivalofthe M uslims,to say nothing ofthe m ore general
danger of reification in conceptualizing the religious 1ife.80 w e must be
reminded ofthese factsbecause there isevidence thatthe developmentof
the nm owly xl-lindu'phenomenon ofscripture hasoften been intertwined
with non-Hindu matters.Staal,forinstance,arguesthatitwastheBuddhists
who firstcommitted a sacred oraltextto writing,in 35-32 B. c.B.
81W hile
the Buddhistuse ofholy wordsisitselffarfrom clear,itwould be fruitful
to explore Staal's contention here in relation to Renou's suggestion,cited
122 RETH IN KIN G SCRIPTURE RSCRIPTU RE'
'IN IN D IA 123

earlier,that the division between hutiand smt'tialso marks the boundary 7.Graham ,p.207.
between orality and editing.8zsimilarly,while we know that Sàyapa,the
greatfourteenth century com mentatoroftheR . gP '
JJa,had hispredecessors, 8.Jack Goody and lan ' W att,<tr
f'
he ConsequencesofLiteracs''in Jack
itisafactthathe flourished aftertheM uslim entry into India,and onethen Goody,ed.,Literacy in TraiitionalSocieties(Cambridge:The University Press,
wonderswhether he might reilectthe Islamic tradition that texts are for 1968),p.42.
exegeting,aswellasforreciting.83Bethatasitm ay,itisnow clearthatthe 9.Kathleen Gough,'lmplicationsof Literacy in TraditionalChina and
greatsignificance ascribed to theR, gI/?J; in modern India derivesin large lndia,''inJack Goody.ed.,LiteracyinTraditionalSocieties(Cambridge:TheUni-
measurefrom thelaborsofan Oxford professorto accomplish theunprece- versityPress,1968),p.73.
dented task of publishing that text in its entirety.The professor was,of 10.LewisLancaster,ïtBuddhistLiterature:ltsCanons,Scribes,and Editors,'
course,M ax M fll1er.84 in '
WendyDonigerO'Flaherty,ed.,TLeCriticalStuiyofSacrei '
Tèxf.
ç(Berkeley:
Finally,there areindicationsthat' W estern notionsofcriticalediting BerkeleyReligiousStudiesSeries,1979),pp.224-225.
and ofan v'originaltext''haverepresented a som etim esstartling intrusion
upon Hindu reality,with consequences thatare complex and often ill- 11.J.G.Staal,Sdr
f'
heConceptofScripturein theIndianTradition,''inM ark
understood.8s Al1 of this evidence would suggest that, while we are Juergensmeyer and N.Gerald Barrier,eds.,Sibh Stuiies:ComparativePermectives
becom ing more alertto the greatvariety ofwaysthatverbalmaterialhas orlaCbangingTradition(BerkeleyReligiousStudiesSeries,1979),pp.122-123.
functioned religiously in human lives,b0th Hindu and other,afully ade- 12.Ibid.,p.123.
quate understanding isnotyetupon us. 13.ln lightof170th the ease ofm isunderstanding here,and the importance
ofthe notion ofSoraltradition'in pastscripturalstudies,itisworth emphasizing
N OTES thatwhenwespeakoftheorality/auralityofscripture,wearenotindicatingan
oral supplement to a w ritten tradition.Rather,we are calling attention to the
1.A much earlierdraftof thisessay waswritten for the N ationalEndow - vocal,spoken quality ofholy w ords,w hich com e to life,asitwere,only in utter-
mentforthe Hum anities 1982 Summ erSem inaron Rscripture asForm and Con- anceandhearing.O urrem arksbelow ontheyrfru-studentrelationshipareapposite
cept.''lam much indebted to the mem bersofthe Sem inar,and particularly to here.The ongoing work of'W illiam A.Graham ,asevidenced by hisessay in the
theD irector,W ilfred CantwellSmith,fortheirvery helpfulcom ments.Thisarti- presentvolume,standstoilluminategreatlytheoral/auralqualityofscripturein
a variety of historicalcontexts.
cle first appeared in the Journal o
f the American Academy o
f Religion 52
(198$:435-459,andIam gratefultotheeditorsforpermissiontoreprintitin
the presentvolume.
2.W ilfred CantwellSm ith,R'
T'he Study ofReligion and theStudy ofthe 15.GtînterLanczkowski,Sacred Writings:.4 GuiietotbeLiteratureofReli-
Bible,n-#prr gions,trans.Stanley Goodman (New York:Harperand Row,1961),p.82;J.B.
lc/oftLeAmericanAcademyo fReli gion39 (1971):131-140. Noss,RsacredScriptures,''EnqclopediaBritannica111,Macropaedia 16:126-128)J.
3.GeraldJamesLarson,çt-
f'
heBhagavad Grfl as Cross-CulturalProcess: A.B.van Buitenen,Rl-
linduSacredLiterature,''EncyclopeiiaBritannica111,M acro-
Toward an AnalysisoftheSocialLocationsofaReligious'
Textvbk-yut
mloftbez'
l-cr- paedia8:932-940)BenjaminW alker,HinduWorld:a'l.
nEncyclopedicSurvq ofblitv
icanAcademyofReligion43(1975):651-669. Juf-
frrl(London:GeorgeAllen& Unwin,Ltd.,1968),p.372.
4.'
W ilfred CantwellSm ith,R'
T'
he TrueM eaning ofScripture:An Empirical 16.J.A.B.van Buitenen,Rl-
lindu SacredLiterature,'pp.932-933.
Historian'sNon-reductionistInterpretationoftheQur'àn,''Internationallournalo
f 17.M.' W internitz,.
,
4Historyo
flndianLiterature,trans.Mrs.S.Ketkar(New
MidileEastStuiies11(1980):487-505. York:RussellandRussell,1927),vol.1,p.55.
5.'
W illiam A.Graham,Rour'àn asspokenAvbrd:An IslamicContribution 18.Lanczkowski,Sacrei W ritings,p.83.
to the U nderstanding ofScripture,''in Richard C.M artin,ed.,Islam and l/ltrH i
s-
toryofReli
gions(Tucson:UniversityofArizonaPress,1984). 19.J.N.Farquhar,zd
lrlOutlineoftbeReli
giousLiteratureofIndia(London:
6.Graham 'sfirsttwenty-threefootnotesprovide the basic bibliography for OxfordUniversityPress,1920),pp.4-23.
thisphenomenology. 2O.J.A.B.van Buitenen,Rl-lindu Sacred Literature,'p.935.
 R
124 RETHIN KIN G SCRIPTU RE GSCRIPTURE''IN IN DIA 125

21.LouisRenou,TbeDestinyoftlteVedainIniia,trans.DevRajChandra 37.DianaL.Eck,Darfan:Seeing r/l:DivineImageinIndia(Chambersburg:

(Delhi,Patna,Varanasi:MotilalBanarsidass,1965),p.84. AnimaBooks,1981),p.1.
22.SeealsoRenou'sequally suggestiverem ark pertainingtothesubstance, 38.Ibit
i.,p.32.
rather than the form,ofthese two kindsofliterature:dt-
f'
he Smytiintroducesa
directform ulation,which couldbecalledarationalthought,consistingoferudite 39.Edward C.Dimock,Jr.,RDoctrine and Practice among the Vaijpavas
textsor(pre-)scientifictexts;thejruti,quitetothecontraryisessentiallysym- ofBengal,''inMiltonSinger,ed-,Krishna:Myths,Rffas,andAttitudes(Honolulu:
bolic,basingitselfonan indirectandçsecond'semantic''(Destiny,p.16). East-westCenter,1966),pp.41-63. ,JohnS.HawleyandDonnaM.W ulff,eds.,
RJJ/?J ani f/leGotlessesof Iniia (Berkeley:Berkeley ReligiousStudiesSeries,
23.CheeverM ackenzieBrown,GoiasM other..
,
4. FeminineTbeologyinzkfffc 1982).
(Hartford,Vermont:ClaudeStark& C0.,1974),pp.18-19. 4O.ThoughT.M .P.M ahadevansharesthecomm onview thathutiisvirtu-
24.CorneliaDimmittandJ.A.B.van Buitenen,eds.and trans.,Classical ally synonymous with the Vedas- a view of hutithat I am here urging be
T-ArIJUMytbology:z1.Readerin tbeSanskritPurâpas, (Philadelphia:TempleUniver- enlarged- heprovidesan understanding ofthej'
ruti-smçtirelation thatworkswell
sityPress,1978),p.4.SeeMadeleineBiardeau,RsomeMoreConsiderationsabout in the largercontext:ujrutiisprimary becauseitisaform ofdirectexperience,
TextualCriticism,''Puröpa10(1968):121. whereassmçtiissecondary,sinceitisarecollectionofthatexperience.''(Outlines
25.ThomasJ.Hopkins,Tbef' ffrllf
ïReligiousTraiitiott,(Encino andBel- ofHintuism (Bombay:ChetanaLimited,1961),p.28.)Such adefinitionwould
then allow usto reinterpretvan Buitenen'srem ark,cited above,thattheH indu
mont,CA:DickensonPublishingC0.,1971),p.142)DavidR.Kinsley,Hiniuism: acquireshisreligiousknow ledgefrom smîtiasm eaning:mostHindusdonothave
.
4 CulturalPerspective(EnglewoodCliffs,NJ:Prentice-l- lall,1982),p.12. experiences of mystical consum m ation.butthey base their religious lives on
26.Vrilliam TheodoredeBary,et.al.,eds.,Sourceso flhdianTradition(New recordsofsuch experiences.
York:ColumbiaUniversityPress,1958),pp.XVII-XXI,3-6,205-210. 41.J.A.B.van Buitenen,I
'Hindu Sacred Literature,''p.935.
27.Edward C.Dimock,Jr.,eta1.,TbeLiteraturesp/-. - Inlfc;x
d.nItttroiuction 42.Vaiiika-padânubrama-boja (Lahore (parts 1-5)and Hoshiarpur(parts
(Chicago and London:University ofChicago Press,1974);Farquhar,Outline; 6-16):VisvesvaranandaVedicResearchInstitute,1935-1965).Theappearanceof
LouisRenou,IndianLiterature,trans.PatrickEvans(New York:' WalkerandCom- thisword-index isitselfareflection ofthe novelapproach to theVedasthathas
pany,1964);LouisRenouandJeanFilliozat,L' IndeClassique.Manuelffe.sétuies emerged over the course ofthe pastcentury;see ourconcluding rem ark on the
iniiennes(Paris:Payot,1947),vol.1;'W internitz,History. role of M ax M ûller.
28.M ilton Singer,u'
Ibxtand Contextin theStudy ofContemporary H in- 43.Lanczkowski,Sacred W ritings,p.88.
duism,''TheAiyarLibraryBulletin(Madrasj25(1961):2741-
f.
44.Benjamin' Walker,HiniuPlbr/l,p.534.
29.J.A.B.van Buitenen,çdl-lindtlSacred Literature,''p.933.
30.MonierMonier-'
W illiams,. ,
4Sanskrit-EnglisbDictionary(Oxford:Clar- 45.A.C.Bouquet,Hiniuism (London:Hutchinson'sUniversity Library,
endon Press,1899). 1948),p.47;'
W alker,Hindu P#br/l,p.534.
46.A similar argum ent,w hich lhere om itin the interestofbrevity,could
31.J.Gonda,TbeVision of tbeVeiicPoets(TheHague:Mouton & Co., be m ade with regard to theinterpretation ofthe usupplem ents''orkbilasto the
1963),p.45. R.f Veia,some ofwhich are virtually m odern:see C.G.Kashikar,xspreface' 'to
32.Ibiâ.pp.61,63-64,66. Rgveia-sanbitâ,witb thecommentary of Sâyapâcarya.N.S.Sontakke and C.G.
Kashikar,eds.,(Poona:VaidikaSamjdhanaMandala,1946),vol.IV,esp.p.907.
33.Gopinath Kaviraj,Amectso
f Iniian F/zofu/;f(Burdwan:University of
Burdwan,1967),p.1. 47.Brown,Go1 asM otber,p.18.
34.Gonda,Vision,p.319. 48.Dimock,etal.,Literatureso
flndia,p.1O.
35.SeeKaviraj,Asyects,pp.1-44andGonda,Vision,pp.318-348. 49.Ibii-,p.11.
36.Kaviraj,Asyects,pp.41,42,43,44;seealsoGonda,prf-
çipn,p.341. 50.J.A.B.van Buitenen,ttonTheArchaism oftheBllâgavatapf/rlsfiz''in
 N
126 RETH IN KJN G SCRIPTU RE RSCRIPTU RE'
'IN IN D IA

MiltonSinger,ed.,Krisbna:Mytlu,Rffes,aniAttitudes(Honolulu:East-AvestCenter 67.ltm ayappearbanalto say thatwordspresentiâeas.However,aswestrive

Press,1966),pp.35-36. for a phenom enology ofscripture,it isimportantto realize thatwords do not
necessarilyservethisfunction,astheHinduphenom enon ofmantradem onstrates.
51.J.F.Staal,RsanskritandSanskritizatiomn/pursu/o
- fuqsi
anStuiies22(1963): conversely,we need to be reminded that ideascan also be vividly conveyed
261-275. through such nonverbalmedia asm usic and art.
52.Charles R.Lanman,GsanskritD iction as Affected by the Interestsof 68.Lawrence A.Babb,TLeDivineH ierarcby:PopularHinâuism in Central
Herdsman,Priest,andGamblers''Journalo
ftbeAmericanOrientalSociet
y20 (189$: p/t
ïfc (New York and London:ColumbiaUniversity Press,1975),p.218,my
12-17. italics.
53.Renou,D estiny,p.25.
54.Ibid.,p.23;seeDanielIngalls,u'lnheBrahmanTraditiom ''inM iltonSinger,
70.JohnS.Hawley,zl.fPlayTf/fl/lKrisbna:Pil
grimageDramasfromBrinzavan,
ed.,TraditionalIndi
a:Structurec/ilCbange(Philadelphia:TheAmericanFolkloreSoci- ln association with ShrivatsaGoswami(Princeton University Press,1981),pp.
etyl'PP'3-4. xii-xiii.
55.Renou,Destiny,p.4O.
71.TheargumenthasbeenmadebyHarryBuck(RsavingStoryandSacred
56.J.F.Staal,NambudiriPUlRecitati
on ('s-Gravenhage:Mouton and Co., Book,''in J.M .Myers,etal.,eds.,Searcb theScri
ptures:NeuzIèstamentStuiiesin
1961),p.17. Honoro fRaymoni'E Stamm gl-eiden:E.J.Brill,19691),drawingonHindumate-
.
rial,andbyPeterSlater(TbeDynamicsofReligiongsanFrancisco:HarperandRow,
57.See Richard Schechner and Linda H ess,R'
I'he Ram lila of Ramnagar 19781),onabroaderscale,thatstoriesmayfruitfullybeunderstoodaslivingatthe
glndiaj,''TbeDramaRepft
xz21(1977):79ontheroleofTulslDâs'sHindiRâmâyapa heartofthereligiouslife,atldofreligioustraditions.'
W hileappreciatingthatthey
in Rum lllu. have presented an importantdim ension ofhum an religiousness,lfind theiranaly-
58.Iam indebted to W ilfred Sm ith for thiscomparative way ofputting sesdonotgototheheartof(atleastHindu)matters:aswehaveseen,lndiadoes
m atters. indeedlovetore-createtraditionalstories,butshealsolovestopreserve(through
recitation)thememorablecreationsofthepast.ThetypologythatIwillbroach
59.For example,Sm ith,çtrf'
rtzeM eaning.'' below m ay be understood asendeavoring to retain the bestofthe Buck-slater
argument,w hile seeing it in relation to othercrucialfeaturesofthe '
W ord in
6O.Agehananda Bharati,tïrrhe Hindu Renaissance and itsApologetic Pat- Hindu life.
-/
teçns,nlournaltl-ag
l-
çff
:nStuiies29(1970):274)Larson,R'
T'
heBbagavadGflJasCross-
CulturalProcess,''p.661.
61.Bhamti,Hl-
lindu Renaissance,'pp.274-275. 73.J.A.B.van Buitenen,Ron theArchaism oftheBhâgavata.
Pur4?,J.''
62.J.A.B.vanBuitenen,Tbe. B/IJéUSUJX
PJinl/leMaltâbbârata(Chicagoand 74.Parameswara Aiyar,ç
dlm itationsofthe Bhagavad-Gitaand Later Gita
London:UniversityofChicagoPress,1981),p.12. Literature,''inTbeCulturalHeritageo
flhiia(Calcutta:RamakrishnaMissionInsti-
tuteofCulture,1962),vol.2,pp.204-219.
63.V.S.Sukthankar,etal.,TbeA1b/lls/llrcfl,Fortbefirsttimecriticall
yedited,
(Poona:BhandarkarOrientalResearchlnstitute,1933-1959),19vols.Thecolphons' 75.ltisworth em phasizing thatthetwo epicsofIndia,so often lumped
useofthepluralofu.panis .t
liisfascinating,butwecannotpursuethematterhere.At together in discussions ofthe literature,m ight,according to thistypology,best
a minimum,itsubstantiatesourclaim thatthe termsforvariouskindsofH indu be understood as representing differentways thatH indushave dealtwith the
scripturestand in need ofcarefulreexam ination. '
W brd:thestoryofRàmaiscomparativelybriefandsimpleand,whileanyparticu-
64.Vaiiika-paiânukrqma-kma,vol.111,parti,Introduction,p.xiv.
larversionmayadmitofbeingmemorized(Type1),ithasprimarilyretainedits
vitalitythroughbeingretoldinavarietyofways,inavarietyoflanguages(Type
65.P.V.Kane,History ofD/ çlrplclllfrl (AttcientJSJ MedievalReli
gioust
mfl 2).TheMaböbbörata,bycontrast,isnotastory,butalibraryorencyclopedia.(See
CivilLaw gpoona:BhandarkarOrientalResearch Institute,19581,vol.V.part1p. Dimock,et.a1.,Literaturesoflhdia,p.53forasuperbaccountofwhatwouldbe
155n. involvedinconceptualizingaMr esternequivalent).Anditseemstohaveretained
itsvitalitybyincorporatingdiverselocaltraditionsintoitself(type5),aprocess
66.Harikp.pajarma,Dur
gösaptafatîJfl
/vflfr/
ef
lf
ivlf
zfi/fff
T(gBombayj:Venkatejvara inwhichwritingappearstohaveplayedasignificantrole(' W internitz,.
,
4.History
gpressj,191$. oflniianLiterature,pp.464-465).
 r

128 RETHIN KIN G SCRIPTU RE

76.James'
W .Karman,<çArt,''in T.'
W illiam Hall,ed.,Introiuction to the
Studyo
fReli
gion(SanFrancisco:HarperandRow,1978),p.119.
77.Dim m ittandvan Buitenen,ClassicalH fSJNMytl
mlogy,p.4.
78.Kaviraj,Amects,p.44. 5
79.Buck,Gsaving Story and Sacred Book,''p.93.
80.W ilfredC.Smith,TbeMeaningJsJEn?ofReli
gion(New York:Macmil-
lan,1963).
Scripture as Spoken W ord
82.Cp.Dimock,et.al.,TheLiteratureso
fIniia,p.11andK.R.Norman, W illiam .4, G raham
uMiddleIndo-AryanStudiesVIII,'Journalo
ftheOrientalInstitute,M.S.University
o
fBaroia20 (1971):329-331.
ForBooksare notabsolutely dead things,butdo contain a potency
83.Renou,Destiny,p.23. oflifein them to beasactive asthatsoulwasw hoseprogeny they
84.LudoRocher,uM ax M ttllerandtheVeda,''inA.D estrée,ed-,M élanges arc....
ArmaniAbel(Leiden:E.J.Brill,1978),vol.111,pp.221-235. John Milton,Areopagitica
85.Thom asB.Coburn,G'
TheStudyofthePuràpasand theStudyofReli-
gion,'Reli
giousStudies16(1980):341-352.

In theprefaceto Part11ofhisGerm an works,M artin Lutheratonepoint

characterizesChristian scripture (udieBiblia''jasutheHoly Spirit'sown
specialbook,writ,andword''(G.iesHeili gen Geisteseigen,sonderlichBuch,
Scbri
ftun1Hbrl'').1Luther'suseofthreeterms,ç<book,''uwrittingl,''and
uword,''to describeChristian scripture m ay wellbe morerhetoricalthan
analyticalin thisinstance,butitpointsto someofthe often forgotten or
unnoticedcomplexityofscripture170th asaspecificallyChristianorJew-
ish phenomenon and asa generic conceptin the generalhistory ofreli-
gion.Specifically,histhree term ssuggestrubricsforconsideration ofthe

This article was written in 1983 as a prelim inary study to a longer,now com-
pletedbook,BeyondtLeWrittenHzbrfr'OralAmectso
fscri
ptureirltbeHistoryo
fReli-
//,1(CambridgeUniversityPress,1987).Thebulk oftheworkon thisproject
.
wasmade possible by generousfellowshipsfrom theJohn Simon Guggenheim
Foundation andtheAlexandervon Hum boldtStiftung in 1982-83.Becausethis
article wasw ritten at an earlier Stage in my work on the problem of scriptural
orality,Ihave made some revisionsto iton the basisofmy book.However,those
who w ish to see fuller docum entation and developmentofthe ideaspresented
herearereferred to thelongerwork.

129
 RETHIN KING SCRIPTU RE
functionaldiversity of scripture in religiouslife.Thisdiversity has gone
largely unattended,even am ong scholars,in the comm on acceptance of
a definition of 'scripture'that rarely goesbeyond çsacred book,'in the
sense ofa written orprinted textonly.Ihave argued elsewhere against
thiskind ofobjectification in favorofafunctionalor<relational'under-
standing of scripture and tried to show through consideration of the
lslamic case l
zow mucl aa scripture can be an oralaswellasoreven more
than a written reality.z In what follows,I want to elaborate on these
points,particularly thatregarding thedegreetowhich awritten text, and
afortioriawrittenscripturaltext,functionsasanoral-auraltextinal1but
them ostrecentperiod ofm odern W estern culturalhistory.
To thisend l intend to use Luther's triad of 'çbook,''Gwrity''and
ddword''as an organizing scheme.The burden of my argument is that
scriptureis'sacred book,'butthattbook'mustbeunderstood asm ostpeo-
plesin mosttimesand places otherthan ourown have understood it:as
both 'writ' and <word,'as written word and spoken word. This will
become clearer aswe proceed,considering firstthe m ore familiar aspect
ofscripture as written word,then the specifically oralphenom enon of
sacred spoken word,before coming atlastto scripture assacred book in
itsdualaspectasbotb written and spoken text.
SC RIPT U R E AS W RIT
Asawriting,ablack and whitephysicalentity,scriptureisaphenom enon
utterly familiar to us.This isthe concept ofscripture thathascome to
beprim ary in the modern 'W estern world,and itistheaspectofscripture
upon which m odern scholarship hasfocused virtually allofitsattention.3
Today itissimply taken forgrantedthattscripture'meanstholywritt-
ingl,'tsacred book,'or whatever formulation expressesthe essentially
written(orprinted)characterofholytextasatangibledocument.
The reasons for this orientation are not difficult to discover.To
begin with,ourfocusupon thewritten,documentary aspectofthesacred
textisnaturally reinforced by the particular historicallinguistic associa-
tionsofthevery terms'scripture,'tbible,'iholy writ,'and the like in the
Jewish and Christian traditions.W ehaveautomatically assumed thatthe
useoftheseterms(ortheircognateequivalentsin otherEuropean lan-
guagesl4in theJewish and Christian contextsisapplicableto any andal1
sacred textsaround the world.Thisuse turnsoutto beheavily oriented
to the written ratherthan the oraland auralaspectsofthe sacred text.
Nowhere isthism ore obvious than in the etym ologicalbackgroundsof
thewordsthemselves.(Scriytures,(Schri
ft,'tscrittura,'and the like are
derived from theLatin singularscri
ytura,<<awriting,''w hich wasatransla-
SCRIPTU RE AS SPOKEN W ORD
tion ofthe Greek grapl
gë,oritspluralgrapbai.Similarly,.bible,J*bi
jbel,,
tbibbia,?and so forth are formstaken from the late Latin biblia,which i7
a feminine singular formed from a neuter plural.That pluralhad been
usedtotranslatetheGreekbiblia(acollectionofwritings),thepluralof
biblion(paperorscroll).Inform,biblionisadiminutivesingularofbiblos
(paperorbookl.sThesederivationaltieshave madeitseem a1lthemore
self-evidentwhen moving beyond the Judaic and Christian worldsto
equatetscripture'(asalso,iflessoften,<bible')with<sacredwritingtsl'of
any kind,andtothinkthereby ofapurely written orprinted objectthat
is held to be sacrosanct and authoritative by a given religious
com munity.6
Such a conception of scripture aswritten word isbolstered in our
culture by the im mense importance thatwe attach to writing and the
written or printed word.There willbe occasion below to consider the
implicationsofthisforournotion ofbook,butitishelpfulin considering
the specifically written aspect of scripture to remind ourselves how
importantwriting isto our own valuation ofhistory and culture.? The
EgyptologistAlan Gardinerhasrem arked thatum an'ssuccessivediscover-
ies,atvery great intervals,of the respective techniques of Speech and
'W riting,have been the two main stagespassed by him on hislong road
to civilization,''8and thisexpresseswelloursenseofthemomentouschar-
acterof the breakthrough to the written word forthe onsetofciviliza-
tion.W e com monly use,as Robert Redfield notes,<çabsence ofliteracy
and literature...asa criterion of primitive as contrasted with civilized
living,''g so strong isthe idea thatç
ionly phoneticwriting hasthepower
to translateman from thetribalto thecivilized sphere.nlo'w e divideçtpre-
history'' from history on the sam e grounds: absence or presence of
writing.ltisnotthatthe so-called K'preliterate''culturespastorpresent
have no history in the absolute sense of existence over tim e,butrather
thathistoryasnarrativeinvestigationofpastevents,asItistoria(Gr.Listorça,
literally,<ilearningbyinquiry'
'),isineluctablytiedtothecriticalordering
and evaluation ofhuman affairsin theircontinuity and change.Such rep-
resentation ofthepastin any extensive,criticalfashion only becom espos-
sible with the uliterate revolutionnllthat alphabetic culture introduces.
The written word encouragesreflective analysisaswellasrecord-keeping
on a new scale.12t4study''becom espossibleatthispoint,and with it,the
ttabstractly sequential,classificatory,explanatory examination ofphenom-
ena or of stated truths'' that is uimpossible without writing and
reading.nl3
Although contemporary ' W estern society hasplacedunusualempha-
sis on the written,and especially the printed word,written textshave
virtuallyalwaysenjoyedaSpecialstatusinliteratesocieties.'
W iththenot-

RETH IN KIN G SCRIPTU RE
able exceptions of classical Greece and especially India,14 the writing
down ofa text,m ostofalla sacred text, hasfrom ancienttim eslentit
specialauthority andmadeitoften even theobjectofovertveneration.ls
W here the written word replacesoraltransmission, written fixation of
the centralreligioustextsofthe society usually follows. Thiscomm only
enllancestlleirstatusasvisibleheritagesofthepastand physically present
sourcesof guidance.In many casesitcan even affirm orcreate for the
holy textwhatKarlKerényi, borrow ing from ThomasM ann, hascailed
Uttsterblicbkeitscbarakter,orimm ortality, in the eyesofthe faithful.l6The
very perm anenceand fixity ofthewritten pagelendscredenceto theidea
that its sacred word has always existed and alwayswill. AncientEgypt
seemsto be atextbook case forthe developm entofsuch an idea.17 O nce
written,the sacred text acquired a visible solidity or even im mutability
in the eyesofmany ofthe faithful. Thisprocesscan hardly be reversed,
even though thefixing ofthe holy word in writing isnotwithoutcorre-
sponding dangersforthe spontaneity and living quality ofthe scriptural
tCXt.18
There are num erous examples oftraditionsin which the written
fixation and transmission ofparticularly sacred or otherwise significant
and authoritative textshave been crucialto thc definition and sustaining
of the traditions themselves. After the particularly striking case of
Pharaonic Egypt,lgclassical China comesimm ediately to m ind, for the
written textsofthefiveClassics(cbing)werethebasisaswellastheovert
symbolsofal1culturefrom atleastthe firstcentury Ao.,when the Confu-
.
ciantraditionj'
ucbiao)hadbecomedominant.zoIntheHellenisticworld
we càn follow a cumulative developm ent of the importance ofwritten
textsofbooksthatwereconsidered to bexclassics'orçscriptures'ofvarious
kinds.The culm ination of thisdevelopmentseemsto have come in the
Christian m ovement,w ith itseventualdevelopmentofconceptsofcanon
andbible.21In traditionsasdiverseastheRabbinicJewishandtheThera-
vadaBuddhist,thefixing ofawritten canon ofscripturesisalso evidence
ofhow importantto atradition thedelineation oftholywrit'can be, even
when greatemphasis is placed upon m emorizing and reciting aloud the
wordsofthe writ.22
A corollary of the elevated place ofthe written word ofscripture
in many culturesisthe notion ofa divineprototypefortheearthly exem
plar.Geo 'W idengren hasdevoted awholeseriesofstudiesto tracing how
the concept of holy writ in the form ofa heavenly book emerged and
flowered in thetraditionsoftheancientN earEastern and M editerranean
world from the earlieststagesof civilization in M esopotamia and Egypt
down to theapotheosisofthe heavenly-book idea in Is1am .23.As' W iden-
gren presentsit,thenotion ofawritten heavenly textthatisgiven physi-
N
SCRIPTU RE AS SPO KEN W ORD
cally or revealed to a human Gbearer of revelation''(Offenbarungs-
trâger)forhumankind isakitmotifofreligion in thispartoftheworld.
H enotesthat,whilethe holy writso revealed issubsequently recited and
orally taught,uthew ritten tradition isthenormativeone,thefirm model,
foritisscripture(diescbri
ft)asthedocumentofdivinerevelation,acopy
ofthe sacred book thatthebearerofrevelation him selfreceived from the
divinity oz4
Although the degree of importance ascribed to this pattern by
W idengren isperhapsexaggerated,the peculiarimportance ofthe holy
book aswritten docum entin theancientM editerranean and N earEastern
world isunderscored by thewidespread occurrence oftheheavenly-book
motif.25Even where thism otifdoesnotoccur,the ideaofthedivine ori-
gin ofholy writusually does,and thisideaisfound aseasily in Eastand
South Asia asin theW est.26
Them ostcomm on explanation ofthebasisforthespecialtreatm ent
and statusofthewritten word ofscripture hasbeen the common percep-
tion ofwriting and thc written word aspossessing an inherent magical
power.27(Similarly,ofcourse,scholarshavesoughtto locatetheimpor-
tanceofthespokenholywordintheprimordialmagicalpowerofsound.)
Alfred Bertholetmaintainsthat<srespectparticularly forwhatiswritten
haspenetrated deeply into thehuman soul...,',28and G .van derLeeuw
says:
'
W riting,then,is magic:r-one m ethod ofgaining power over the
living word....Comm itting sacred texts to writing therefore was
. . .i
ntended...to attain power,since with the written word m an
can dojustwhathewill....*29
Certainly the magicalor quasi-m agical quality of the w ritten word is
abundantly visible in thepopularusefordivination and talism ansofcop-
iesofsacredbooks,betheyBibles,Qur':ns,lsma<iliGinans,orBuddhist
ç;lrfls.30
.
The reverence for the written sacred word goes,however,beyond
thepurely m agicalin therecurring veneration and even adoration shown
to it around the world.W e have today little accessto the sense of awe
-
and respectbefore thephysicalcopy ofany textthatprevailed in agesand
(eventodayprevails)inplacesinwhichabookwas(is)ararething,and
a scripturalbook often the only book.AsErnstCurtiushaspointed out,
such a sense of awe before a volum e of textwasstillvivid for Shake-
spvarei3lhow m uch greater,then,the reverenceofw holly illiterate folk
(whohavebeenthemajoritythroughouthistory)inthepresenceofholy
writ? Yetitisnot only among the illiterate massesthat such holy-writ
 r
RETH IN KIN G SCRIPTU RE
veneration hasflourished.The Sikh veneration of the Granth Sahib isa
prime case in point,32 asis Tibetan Buddhistreverence for the physical
copies ofthe s:lrcs.33 Recent research by Gregory Schopen haspointed
to a Gcult ofthe book''even in early M ahàyâna tradition,M and certain
form sofProtestantChristian treatm entoftheBiblecan rightiybetermed
bibliolatry.3sN ichiren BuddhistreverencefortheLotususfi
lra,likeJewish,
M uslim,or M orm on reverence for their particular holy writ, is also a
well-known factofreligiouspractice and piety.36
The natural and w idespread reverence for the physicalcopies of
sacred textsisalso,atleastin some degree, theresultofthedesire to set
such textsapartfrom allotherformsofwritten word in definitive, tangi-
b1e ways.37Thisseemsto have been a major motivation forthe early
Christians'appropriation ofthe little-usedparchm entcodex, which they
m ade theirdistinctive vehicle forsacred texts.38similarly,both early and
laterBible manuscriptstestify to the elaboratecare given to the copying
and ornamentation oftheBible asa holy object.39Such piouscopying
and illumination orillustration ofsacred textsiswidely attested. W eneed
think only ofM ani'sillustrated booksofscripture, the staggering variety
and artistry ofQur'àn calligraphy andillumination,themassiveandele-
gantblock printcoliection oftheTibetan Buddhistcanon, orthereverent
artistry and traditionalistzealwith which synagogalcopiesofthe Torah
areprepared amongJewstothisday.40
A11ofthe preceding,then, points us to the centralimportance of
the written characterofscripture for an understanding ofitsfunction in
religious history.This aspect of scripture is, to be sure,the one with
which we are mostat home in our typographic culture, with its strong
print-orientation and book-consciousness. Yet,asalready suggested,the
very fam iliarity with which we m ove am ong booksand handle theubi-
quitousprinted page hasbred in usitsow n kind ofcontempt;we have
some difficulty empathizing with personsforwhom acopy ofatextwas
or is a seldom and wonderful thing,perhaps a magical and awesom e
thing,before which the proper response is fearfulveneration orfervent
worship.The power ofscripture as holy w ritis, however,very much a
partofmosttraditionspastand presentin which scripturehasfigured at
a11prom inently.Any comprehension of whatscripture is must include
awarenessofitsrole and function aswritten text.
SCR IPTU RE A S W O RD
Ifsom e of the traditionalformsofreligiouspiety concerning holy writ
seem foreign to modern culture because ofourmatter-of-factness about
SCRIPTU RE AS SPO ICEN W ORD 135
thewritten orprinted word,they' are neverthelessm uch easierforusto
grasp than arethoseformsofpiety thatcenteron thespoken word. Even
if the sense of awe before the written copy of the Bible haswaned for
many modern W estern Christiansand forsomeJews,itisstillprobably
stronger than isthe awarenessam ong these sam egroupsofthepowerof
the biblical text as a memorized and recited word that is çlived with'
orally and aurally,notjustin devotionalandliturgicalpractice,butalso
in everyday life.
This isevident,for example,in the modern Christian,especially
the ProtestantChristian,em phasisupon scripture aswrit.The comm on
habit of referring to Holy Scripture as Gthe word of God''no longer
reflects so much an auralsense ofhearing God speak asitdoesa fixing
orreifying of''W ord''into a synonym for uBible''in the sense ofuholy
writ.'Such reification masksin many instancesthe degree to which the
W ord istheologically and functionally notawritten textbuttheliving,
spoken m essage ofthe Gospelfor Christians.The identity ofthisvocal
messageofthe Gospelpreaching with the vocalword ofGod thatspoke
from the pages ofscripture wasstillvivid forM artin Luther.H e could
speak oftsthe earsalone''asRthe organsofthe Christian''and ofthe ears
and tongue as the two things upon w hich the Kingdom of Christ is
based.4lFor a1lofhisand other Reformers'emphasis upon Scripture as
Schri
ft,écriture,ordçwrit,''theheartofthetfbookreligion''oftheProtes-
tantm ovem entwasavivid sense ofthe living,spoken word ofGod that
iscom municated b0th in Christian preaching and in thereading ofScrip-
ture.42The Christian wassupposed to listen to and to hecd thisword as
the one certain word of truth.Sola scri ptura was not an idea fixed upon
written word,butupon the authority of the word of God.In Luther's
words:Hlt isafter al1notpossible to com forta soul,unless it hear the
word of itsGod.Butwhere isGod'sword in a11booksexceptScripture?
Comfortcan no book save Holy Scripture.''4:
In m odern,print-dominated culture,aswe shallsee in theconclud-
ing section below,such an oralsense of scripture asword isno longer
easy to understand intuitively. Recognition of the importance of oral
speech and the oralsacred utterance altogetheristoday largely limited to
scholarship,prim arily in anthropology and religion,that focuses upon
nonliterate culturesof Rextra-civilizational''peoples orthe preliterate or
semiliteratebeginningsofthegreatcivilizations.44Thisisunderstandable,
since,asGustav Menschingputsit,çtthewordthatisheardprecedes(not
everywhere,butinmanyinstances)thewrittenword....''45Logicallyand
historically the sacred word ofholy writisan extension oftheoralsacred
word,aswe shalldem onstrate shortly with avariety ofexamples.
 r
RETH IN KIN G SCRIPTURE
Yeteven thisrecognition doesnotsuffice to indicate the imm ense
significance oftl
ae spoken holy word.Itsim portance isnotonly limited
to the distantpastorto m arginaltribalculturesoftoday)in atleastone
great world civilization,thatof India,the centrality of the oralsacred
word haspersisted and retained itsprecedence overthew ritten word as
the consum mate form for the comm unication ofreligioustruth.Thus,
weshallconcludethefollowing brieflook atscripture aswordw ith some
consideration ofthe Hindu case.
ln oralorpredominantly oral cultures,the transmission of sacred
lore aswellasthe sustenance ofrituallifeare dependentupon the sacred
spoken word.The centrality ofthe wordsofmyth and ritual has been
com monly and persuasively traced to the presence in such culturesofa
sense ofthespoken word assomethingalivewith magicalortranscendent
power.46W ord and acthere are notto be separated.There isno cleavage,
asthere isformostofus,saveperhapsin mom entsofdeepestengagement
in oralactsofworship,between legomenon and irömenon,(uwhatissaid''
and 'çwhat is donen). Speech is action here, never merely Hamlet's
''WOrds,words,words.''47
<t-fheword ...isadecisivepower:whoeverutterswordssetspower
in motionao48Thisrecognition has1ed studentsof170th archaic and mod-
ern nonliterate culturesto see in the inherentpowerofthespoken word
oneoftheprim alelem entsin religiousfaith and practice.Theoversimpli-
fied extreme in emphasison thepowerofthe word is theview ofH er-
m ann U sener,and after him ErnstCassirer,in which the identification
ofthe word thatnamesa deity with thedeity itselfiscarried so farasto
seeinthenamingthecreationofaRmomentarydeity''(2u:csô/fcly-:0lf).49
Asa hypotheticalmodelofthe <dorigin''ofhuman personification ofthe
transcendent,thisview hasatm ostheuristic value;butasareminderof
thepowerthatwordscarry,itisinstructive.Thereismuch to be said for
theperception thatespecially in thecult-orientedworld oforaltraditions,
and to alesserdegree in any ritualactivity,theactofnaming makespres-
ent,oratleastsummonsthepowerof,thatwhich isnamed.50w hatJ.F.
Staal says of Vedic recitative transmission is probably applicable to the
function ofthe oralsacred word in mostculticcontexts,and allthem ore
in nonliterate cultures:
There is no sharp distinction between word and meaning and
between form and contents.In thisGarchaic''world liethe rootsof
the efficacy and power of m antra recitation,which is related to
Kxm agical''identification aswellasto thecreativeforce oftheword
in poetry,in divine and in human speech.sl
SCRIPTU RE AS SPO KEN W ORD 137
Thesenseofword asovertactisespecially vivid in thecosm ogonic
myths ofdiverse peoples,ancientand m odern,in al1partsofthe globe.
Accountsofthe origin ofthe world ascribe the initialcreativeactagain
and again to thegenerativeW ord.N otonly the opening oftheChristian
GospelofJohn orthedivinecommand ofGen.1:3,Glaettherebelight,''
but also the creative word of the god Ptah described in the M em phite
cosmogony of ancientEgypt are eloquent testim ony to this.52sim ilarly
striking is the role of rqc, Rspeech,''as prim ordial being or creator-
goddess in the R.g :1 4,53 or the creation story of the South American
W itoto tribeand thatoftheAfrican Dogon tribe.54Notsurprisingly,the
Qur'ânemphasizesGod'seternalcreativepower:onwhateverHedecides,
<<Hehasonly tosay,<Be!'anditis(kunX-yllunl''(Sttrah 40:68).The
m agical,creativepowerofthe spoken word isapparently one ofthe most
basic and w idespread ofreligiousthemes.
In many ofthemajor,literate traditionsofhistory,theideaofthe
prim ordialword ofpowerislinked to the powerofscripture itself.This
ism ostexplicitly evidentin theologicalform ulationssuch aswe find in
RabbinicJudaism andmedievalIslam aboutthepreexistenceofthedivine
word ofscripture.ssTheideaoftheeternalityoftheBuddha-word orthe
wordsof the Veda also reflects the transference of the primalpowerof
the originalword oftruth to the presexved scripturaltexts.56Even in the
traditionsoftheheavenly book studied by Geo W idengren,wefind m ore
than once that the heavenly w ritbegan before tim e asthe spoken word
of God.57
Itbearsrepeating thatin m any senses,speech alwaysprecedeswrit-
ing,cosm ically and anthropologically as wellas historically.If there is
anything thatcan be called proto-scripture,itis surely the utterancesof
ecstatics,prophets,and seersin which itiscommonly held tobenotthey
butthe divinity who speaksthrough them astheirchosen mouthpieces.s8
In societiesin which transcendenceisnotw holly personified noranthro-
pomorphically conceived,the primalword oftruth isalso an oralone:in
India,it is referred to asJruff, Rwhat is heard''by the p'is,or seers of
ancient tim es;in classical China, uhearing much''is w hat constituted
uknowledge''forthe ancientsages.59
Theprimacyoftheoralword and itspowerarenotofcourselimited
to nonliterate orarchaic stagesofculture and religion.Truth isbound up
in significantwayswith the spoken word,whetherthatofa divinity or
thatofa hum an teacheror sages.6oIn theocentric traditions,scripture is
t<theplacewhere God speaksto m en.''61In others,itis in scripture that
the prim ordialwisdom heard and taughtby generations ofprophetsor
spiritual teachers is recorded, and in the ongoing tradition of oral
 r
I
138 RETHIN KIN G SCRIPTU RE
teaching,beitoftheword ofthe Buddha orthe vedic mantra,scripture
comes alive as the sacred word of truth spoken,and onl y spoken,by
teacher to pupil.H ere the role ofscripture asoralword takeson central
significancewithin the larger tradition.
N owhere hasthissignificance been m ore central,more dominant,
than in the Hindu tradition.H ere the oralword hasremained the only
fully acceptable and authoritative form forsacred textsforovertwo,pos-
siblyovertwo-and-one-halfmillenniaaftertheintroductionofwriting.62
The fundamentally oralnature ofIndian sacred textshasbeen noted and
comm ented on by m ost students of the Hindu tradition,among them
scholarsofthe stature ofGeorg Bùhler,M orizW internitz,LouisRenou,
J.A.B.van Buitenen,andJan Gonda.63M oresignificant,however,forour
interestsarethe thoughtfuland perceptivediscussionsofthebasicorality
of Indian texts by J.F.Staal,W alther Eidlitz,and especially Thomas
Coburn.64These treatmentsof Hindu scripture offerclear evidence that
the pattern in India hasbeen notmerely one ofprominentoraluse of
written texts,butone of nearly exclusively oraluse and transm ission in
preference to dealing with written textsatall.
TheprototypicalsacredtextsoftheHindusarecalledulzrefff
;''(uwhat
isknown''),in theabsolutesense oftrueknowledgeoreternalwisdom
thatistranscendent(apauruéqa),unotofpersonalorigin.''6svedaisthe
knowledgeofeternalrealit
'
y firstperceived by the ancientseers,ornisas
sound(fabda)orspeech (pr
Jc/l.Q#).Thep'
is'apprehension ofthesacred
sounds ofultimate truth isdescribed variously as Gseeing''or tthearing''
-
metaphorical expressions that, as Coburn aptly characterizes them ,
together convey Rthe holistic and supremely compelling nature''ofthe
indescribable revelatory experience.66But the abiding and fundam ental
form ofthe vedicwisdom isthe spoken word- indeed,vâcissaid in the
BçbadöranyabaUpani4ad(4.1.2)tobethesupremeBrahman,transcendent
reality.I'
Qcpersonified asa goddessisidentified in âatapata Brâbmapa
(2.1.4.10)with Brahman,67anddescribedinR
,g PUJ(1.164.46)asRthe
O ne Real.''68Thisassociation ofspeech with eternalreality or truth is
reflectedin thestandard traditionalcategorization ofa1lvedictextsashuti
(whatisheard),asdistinguishedfrom othersacred textsreferredtoas
smçti(whatisremembered).ârutiasaconceptemphasizes170ththeaudi-
tory characterofvedic truth and itstranscendent,revelatory nature.Itis
thatwhich wasdçheard''by those in closesttouch with ultim ate realits
or Brahman.The auraltruth ofhutiis also linked to Brahm an in the
formulation Labda-brabman (word ofBrahmanl.6gIn theactualsounded
syllablesofthe Vedalie the pointsofcontactwith transcendentreality.
The Veda isoralscriptureparexcellence.The m any vedic textsthat
have com edow n to thepresentin apparently highly accuratetransm ission
SCRIPTU RE AS SPO KEN W O RD 139
from perhapsasfarback asthe end ofthe second millennium s. c.,ifnot
earlier,have been viewed astoo holy to be com m itted to writing save in
relatively recent tim es.7oThisisnicely illustrated in the answer that an
eighteenth-century European Christian reports he was given when he
asked an Indian punditaboutRthe vedicbooks.''Hvedaisthatwhich per-
tainsto religion;booksare notVeda''tP- elum est,quidquid ad religionem
pertinetpvedam n0nsunt/iôri).71VedaisnotatextOrtextsgivenby agOd
and written down asameansofpreservingthe divineword.Itistheword
ofimm em orialtruth,andthesubsequentoraltransmission ofitfrom gen-
eration to generation represents the effort to conserve and convey this
truth in its exact original vocal form with al1 its pristine purity and
power. .
This transmission,and the elaborate cultus that large parts of it
accom panied,havebeen the specialistresponsibilitiesand prerogativesof
Brahmin castegroupsoverthecenturies.(Neitherawomannoranyman
who isnottutwice-born''- thatis,abrâhmapa,kêatriya,orvaiya- kseven
supposedtohearthesacredvedicwordrecited1etalonestudyit.)Both
theliturgicaltextsofthefourSatnhitös(Rcollections'')andtheirappend-
ages,and thelaterphilosophicalvedictexts(primarily theUpanifads),
havebeenpassedfrom teacherQuru)topupil(li
ôyajdownthecenturies.
Thishasestablished theguru-liéyarelationship asthe only modelfortrue
learningin India.'W ritten textshavebeen used,certainly,butatextwith-
outa teacher to teach it directly and orally to a pupilisonly so many
uselessleavesorpages.TheAitarqaArapyaka,alateVedictext,can even
speak of writing as a ritually polluting activity,afterwhich the student
mustpurifyhimselfbeforelearning(byreciting)thevedictexts:ç&He(the
j'
iêya)shouldnotlearnwhenhehaseatenflesh,orseenblood,oradead
body,or done what is unlawful,...or had intercourse,or written,or
obliterated writing.n7z
Such a view of scriptural authorit 'y seem s to us ustrangey'' as
Avinternitz puts it,because we cannot grasp t<thatin India,from most
ancienttimesdow n to thepresentday,the spoken word and notwriting
was authoritative for allliterary and scholarly activity.o73 This attitude
toward thetransmission ofsacred textshasextended wellbeyond theVeda
proper.' W hiletheIrutitextshave retained theirauthority asholy sources
forBrahm anicritual,philosophicalspeculation,andrecitativemantras,the
functionalscripturesofthe masses in India have been other texts,most
ofwhich arecategorized assmftiratherthan j' ruti.74TheVedictexts,espe-
cially the liturgicalbooks,havebeen alm ostascripturaabsconlitain Hindu
life,butthey have nonethelessprovided the modelfororaltreatm entof
popularscripturalworkssuch asthe Purâpasand Tantras,theRâmâyapa,
the Gïtâ Govinda,theBhagavahîtö,and othertextsofwhich,asvan
 r
RETH IN KIN G SCRIPTU RE
Buitenen putit,Ritiswidely believed orbelieved by particularreligious
groupsthatrecitation and listening bestow aspecialmerit.''75He goesstill
further and notesthat
formany religioussects,themanneroftheVedictransm ission wasthe
prototype oftheir own transmission.Followersof sectswillspeak of
theRhandingdown''(sampradâya)orofausuccessionofgurusorteach-
ers''kuruparamparh,anditiswellknownthatwritten textscontain
only partofthe doctrinesactually handed down in a sect.76
Itwould bepossible to go on atlength aboutthe oralfunction and
character of scriptural texts in India: mantra recitation, public perfor-
mancesofmöbötmyas,thesinging ofBhaktihymns,festivalrecitationsof
theRl-f pylna- the listwould be long.Thepoint,however,rem ainsthe
same:for Hindus,scripture is,if not exclusively,then overwhelmingly,
spoken,oralword ratbertban holy writ.Thediverseand numeroussacred
texts of lndian history have al1been written texts only in the second
instance ifatall;theirauthoritative form hasalwaysbeen thatoftheoral,
recited word.77
SCRIPTU RE AS BO O K
The Hindu case suggeststhatany functionally adequate conceptofscrip-
ture as a truly generic term for important sacred texts cannot be tied
exclusively to the written word. Given the close connection between
'scripture'and writing treated in thefirstpartofthisstudy,itmightseem
logicalto argue forreplacing çscripture,'atleastin scholarly use,with a
moreneutralterm ,perhapssimply 'sacred text.'Such an argum entwould
not,however,have a greatdealm ore than theoreticalvalidity to recom-
mend it,even ifithad aremote chance ofsuccess.xscripture'doescarry
in conventionaluseseveralconnotationsthatofferasolid basisforamean-
ingfulconceptofsacredreligioustext.78Themoreim portantoftheseare:
thenotion ofarelatively sizeable,usually compositetext(asopposed to
asinglenarrative,legalcode,discourse,orthclike);theideaofacollec-
tion of material that,w hatever its history, is perceived as a unitary
w hole'
,79 and the implied authority and sacrality of a textwith unique
claim to transcendenceand truth.
M ost im portantly,the close identification of <scripture'with the
idea of'book'need notbe the limiting factor thatone m ightassum e it
to be.A properunderstanding of'book'in more than the limited sense
ofwritten orprinteddocumentwillrestoreto ititslegitim ateoraldimen-
sion asafunctionally living text.Thisin turn makespossible an expanded
SCRIPTU RE AS SPO KEN W ORD
understanding ofscripture as sacred book,one that is130th historically
and functionally more encompassing than the presently comm on defini-
tion ofitassacred book onty in tl4e narrowestsense ofholy writ.80
Such an understanding demandsa clearerideaofthe historicalrole
of the book in general and the scriptural,sacred book in particular. In
thisessay,we can look only atafew salientaspectsofthisrole primarily
in the'W estern world,butthese willshow clearly how sharply thisrole
contrastswith our usualassumptionsin m odern 'W estern culture about
booksin particular aswellasthe written word more generally.The fol-
lowing examples,drawn from ' W estern religious traditions them selves,
indicate how much these assum ptionshave skewed ourunderstanding of
scripture'sactualrole even in the traditionsoffaith and practice closest
to us. Specifically, in the history of the book-centered spirituality of
Christianity,which isthetradition mostprone to limittheword ofscrip-
ture functionally to holy writ,we can see clearly how significantly oral
the t'Book ofbooks''hasactually been form ostofits history.
SiegfriedMorenzhasspokenofRbookreligion''(Buchreli
gion)asthe
essentialcharacteristic ofthe '
W estern m onotheistic traditions.H e traces
itsorigintoabasicpredilectionorgeniusforhearing(eineGenialitötdes
Hlrcrsl,which wasthe greatgiftofthe ancientHebrews,with whom
çbook religion'can be said to havebegun.8lHisperception oftheintimate
link between book religion and the auditory ratherthan the visualsensi-
bility suggests abasic oraland auraldim ension ofscripture,notm erely
in theuniquely oraltradition oftheH indus,butspecifically in thebook-
dominatedtraditionsofJews,Christians,andM uslims.IntheHinducase,
the W estern treatmentofVeda or Puràpa asholy writby analogy with
the Bibleremainsan obviousfactualerror.M uch more subtle an erroris
ourcom mon modern assum ption that'W estern scripturaltexts- Bibleor
Qur':n- can beunderstood primarily asEblack and white'documentsof
the written or printed page,and their oralaspects relegated to a minor
roleatbest.(IntheIslamiccase,certainly,theerrorshould notbesubtle
to anyonewhoknowsthetradition,butitliketheJewish and Christian
caseshas com monly been dealtwith simply in term softhe visiblepres-
enceofacentrally importantholywrit,evenby scholars.l8z
lwantto go beyond the admittedly striking butapparently unique
case ofIndian sacred textsto arguethatscripturein virtually any religious
contcxt hasbeen,and should be recognized explicitly ashaving been, a
significantly oral phenom enon,w hatever its written form and impor-
tance.W hatisatissue here are notthepurely oraltextsofreligiouslife
and history nor the oraloriginsof written scriptures,butthe generally
overlooked oralfunction and quality ofsacred textsgenerally,even those
m ostfirmly fixed aswritten books.
 r
142 RETHIN KIN G SCRIPTURE
Thisisnotto deny that<scripture'or'sacred book'asa conceptis
linked by farmore than itsetym ology to textsthatcan be,and atsom e
pointvirtually alwayshave been,written down.The importance of the
writing down ofa texthasbeen amply indicated above,and the history
ofsacred textsalmosteverywhere showsatendency towardsan elevation
of thew ritten word atthe expense ofthepurely oralform ofthe text.
Indeed,itisa tendency visible even in India,and also in the highly oral
world ofls1am .83Thesignificance ofthewritten copiesofa scripture or
itsfixation asholy writisnotin question.O urconcern isratherwith the
degree towhich the written textstillfunctionsalso,and often primarily,
asan oraland auraltextin religiouslife.
In our m odern 'W estern frame of reference,<scripture'or tsacred
book'isconsidered to be identicalwith <holy writ'fora numberofrea-
sonsalready noted above.Them ostimportantofthese isto befound in
our more basic identification of book w ith writing or,m ore precisely,
with Kprinted texty'in itsm ost concrete,reified sense.In our minds,a
bookisawritten/printeddocumentofreasonablelengthtowhichthe
basic access isthrough an individual's private,silentreading and study.
To ourusualway ofthinking,thefixed,visiblepage ofprintisthefunda-
mentalmedium ofinformation (andthereforeknowledge:to adegree
unknow n in any other culture of history,knowledge for us is çbook-
learning'l.84M orethan that,foruswritingisthebasicform oflanguage:
ttthe speaker or writer can now hardly conceive of language,exceptin
printed orwritten form ;...hisidea of language isirrevocably modified
by hisexperienceofprinted mattenn8sw ehavelostany awarenessofthe
essentialorality of 1anguage.86
ln particular,it is uthe relentless dominance of textuality in the
scholarly mind''87thatisproblematic,foritism odern scholarship thatis
the bastion of our literate culture and therefore the key to ourattitudes
toward books.The custodiansof learning in our culture havebeen espe-
cially prone to exaltthe written or,even more,the printed word asthe
chiefbulwark of learning and progress.The printed page goes hand in
handwiththevaluesofmodern,ççscientific''scholarship,thesebeing(1)
suspension ofsubjective emotions and personalengagementin favor of
objectivity and visualverification- the valuesessentialto experimental
science;(2)obsetwationandanalysisofthedataofsenseperceptionrather
than im mersion in them- whatGeorge Steinerhassum med up tellingly
asGthecultofthepositive,the exact,and thepredictive,''oruthem irage
ofmathematicalexactitudeandpredictabilityn88;and (3)rapid and easy
accessto uraw datan- the Ktgrow ing thirstforquantitative information,''
whichJohn U.Nefdescribesasakey elementin the riseofindustrial
civilization.8g
SCRIPTU RE AS SPO KEN W O RD
'Objectivity'has been an especially importantvalue in modern
W estern thought,and increasingly so sincetheEnlightenment.W ith sci-
entific detachment have come,however,otherkindsofdetachmentand
in generalan increasedobjectification oftheworldaround us.This,too,
hasbeen hastened by theprinted word ofthemodern book.Ashley M on-
tagu hasobserved thatRthe more literate people become,the more they
tend to become detached from the world in w hich they live,''9Oand cer-
tainly ourmodern print-literacy farexceedsany previouskind ofliteracy
in term sof1)0th facility with and dependence upon alphabetand script.
The virtually endless replicability made possible by the printing press
addsgreatly to thesenseofthereliabilityand objectiveneutrality ofthe
written word.'W ith print,wordsand bookslosetheirdynamism and per-
sonal quality and become themselves things- that is to say, m ass-
produced,impersonalobjects.glAssuch,they areto besurewell-suited
totheirrolesasneutralbearersofobjectivecontentaccessibletoanyliter-
ateperson who can understand thatcontent.How much m oresure,fixed,
and unam biguous than the merely spoken oreven written word isthe
printed word, or still more, the technical diagram or mathem atical
symbol!
Thus,itisno cause for wonderthat the whole trend ofeducation
in thepost-Enlightenm ent'
W est,especially in thiscentury,hasbeen away
from memorization (inessenceanoralactivity),readingaloud(together
withrecitingbyheartanddeclamation),andrhetoric(formerlythecore
disciplineofliterateeducation andculture).92In theirplacehascomeever
greater em phasisupon swifter,more efficientcomprehension ofprinted
textsby the silent,scanning reader,and increased relianceupon reference
aids and massive information storage of all kinds,from encyclopedias
(which cameinto theirown in the'
Westin theeighteenth century)to
the computerbanksofthe presentday.The anonym ousand impersonal,
universally accessible,and ''independently verifiable''word oftheprinted
book,which wasthefirsttruly mass-produced com modity in historyyg:is
thebackboneofmodern scholarship and ofm odern,technologicalsociety
asaw hole.
Thepointofallthisisthatthe decisive em phasisupon thewritten
orprintedpageattheexpense ofthememorized,recited,and orally trans-
mitted word istiedclosely to thecircum stancesofthem odern technolog-
icalage- an age thatfirstcame to maturity in W estern Europe between
about 1600 and 1900,and isnow beginning to revolutionize forbetter
orworse m ostothersocietiesin the world in similarifvariously config-
ured fashion. Presaged if not inaugurated by the coming of the
moveable-type printing press,these circumstancesinclude the growth of
literacy ratesand spread ofmassmedia,the extension ofmodern scholar-
144 RETH IN KIN G SCRIPTURE
ship and education with their mixture of hum anistic and scientific
assumptions,and thc explosion ofscienceand technology in every realm
of life.
These circum stancesarenew in history,andthushaveconsequences
for any effort to understand other societies past orpresent.The great
chasm in form sofcomm unication,religious or secular,is not between
literate societiesand nonliterate societies,butbetween our own modern
W estern,post-Enlightenm entworld oftheprinted page and allpastcul-
tures(includingourownpredecessorsintheW est),aswellasmostcon-
tem porary ones.94w e stand on thisside ofthe epochaltransition made
in good partby about1800 in the urban culture ofW estern Europe,and
now stillin progresselsew here,from ascribalorchirographic,stillhighly
oralculturc to aprint-dominated,primarily visualcu1ture.95o ur Rbook
culture,''like ourRbook religion,''isnoteven the sam easthebook cul-
ture(orbookreligion)ofsixteenthcenturyEurope,1etalonethatofclas-
sicalAntiquity,the medievalW est,or the greatliterary civilizationsof
Asiapastand present.
Theconsiderablegapbetween ourexperienceand perception asiçprint-
persons''and those ofotherpersonsin otherplacesor timeshasbeen noted
by severalscholars,al1ofwhom have something to contribute to an aware-
ness of the eccentricity of our relationship to books and words. H.
J.
Chaytor'sfinestudy ofmedievalsctibalcultureraisesclearly theissue ofthe
fundamentally different,because fundamentally oraland autul,character of
thementalityofchirographicliteracy in theM iddleAgesascompared with
our modern,visual,typographic literacy.The radicalpsychologicaldiffer-
ence ofthese t'
wo orientationshasbeen convincingly elucidated byJ.C.
Carothersin a study thatcontrastsoralmentality in contemporary African
children with theirEuropean counterparts'highly visualand spadallyorgan-
izedwaysofdealingwith reality.W alterJ.OngandM arshalMcLuhansub-
sequently have dealtatmuch greaterlength with whatOng termsthebasic
ualteration in the ratio ofthe senses,''orusensorium,''ofthe W estern mind
thatthe printrevolution hasbroughtabout- an alteration that170th see as
uniquelytheconsequenceofthetypographicage(whichMcLuhanidentifies
asutheGutenberg galaxy''l.W ith respectto theimpactofGutenberg's
introduction ofmoveabletypeprinting,Elizabeth L.Eisenstein hasprovided
a massively documented,if also controversial,study ofthe key role played
by the printing pressastuan agent of change''in virtually every sector of
European-Am erican life sincethe 1500s.96Asshewould have it,the scien-
tificarcna isby no meansthe leastofthcse,primarily because,qin contra- st
to scribalculture which had fostered ghearing therulesofa given science,'
printmade possible thesimultaneousdistribution oftwellmadefiguresand
Charts'.''97
SCRIPTU RE AS SPOKEN W ORD
W hile some ofthese studiesindividually m ay overstate theircase,
togetherthey provide aconvincing argumentforthe noveland peculiar
nature ofm odern 'W estern attitudesto thewritten orprinted word vis-à-
visthe spoken word.They emphasizethatorality doesnotceasewith the
advent of writing.lt may wellbe that scribalculture represents a first
stage in the demise of the spoken word and itspower in the face ofan
emergingt<literateconsciousness''(Havelock):inthe'
W est,forexample,
the transition often associated with Aristotle from oral culture to book
culture is not an inconsequentialone.98However,scribalculture itself is
stilla significantly,even predom inantly oralculture,in which reading is
stilllargely vocaland illiteracy widespread.Atleastuntilavery latestage
in chirographic culture(and perhapsuntiloreven forawhileafterthe
adventofprintinglgg,thereobtainsaRdynamictension''betweentheoral
and the literate,a situation 'iin which language m anaged acoustically on
echo principlesismetwith competition from language managed visually
on architecturalprinciples.nlooAsH avelock,Ruth Finnegan,and earlier
scholarssuch asM osesH adasand FredricKenyon have emphasized,liter-
acy in ancientGreeceand Romewashighly ora1.101Indeed,whateverthe
expansion ofliterate consciousnessafterAristotle,the fundamentalform
ofpublication and dissemination ofbooksrem ained thatof oralreading
and recitation from ClassicalAntiquity rightthrough theEuropean M id-
dle Ages to the coming of printing.loz AvhatVirgilunderstood under
'book'and whatD ante orLutherunderstood underthe sam eterm ,were
much closer to one another than either isto whatwe today conceive a
book to be.Similarly,theyweremuch closerto whatpersonsin theother
culturesofthe world haveconceived,and stilltoday in many placescon-
ceive,a book to be:something to be read aloud orrecited from ,an aide
mémoireand repository ofthe vocalwordsofitsauthor.
Oneofthem ostvivid exam plesofthe conceptualgap thatseparates
usfrom nonprintsocietiesisfound in an Egyptian New Kingdom papy-
rus- a relic ofaculture thatweassociatewith loveforthew ritten word
and production of calligraphic and epigraphic inscriptions consciously
intended forposterity:t<A human being perishes,and hisbody becomes
dirt;allhisfellows dissolve to dust.Butwritings1et him live on in the
mouth ofthereader(lector)....',103w ritingforthisauthorwassome-
thing thatwasconceived to be realizableonly in the vocalactofreading
aloud.Itsassociationsin hismind wereauralratherthan visualin thefirst
instance- exactly the opposite of our own ingrained response,which
would beto think ofthefixity oftheblack andw hitepage,notthesound
of the words of the text, as the enduring monument to a writer's
m cm ory.
It isultimately the functional differencesbetween the m anuscript
 Y
146 RETH IN KIN G SCRIPTURE
book and theprinted book that are decisive.These are certainly related
to thephysicaldifferencesin legibility,easeofrapid reproduction,and so
forth.Butatbase,itisthe reading processperse,170th in itspsychological
and its physicalaspects,thatis today differentfrom whatitwasin the
W est twenty-five hundred,and in large degree even two hundred and
fifty years ago- or from what it is in more traditional cultures in the
m odern world.
Reading forustoday isasilent,seeminglywholly mentalprocess:uour
implicit modelofwritten literature''isuthe m ode ofcom munication to a
silentreader through the eye alone,from adefinitive written text.''104W e
mssume thatreading issimply mentalcognition ofvisualsymbolson apage.
O urwhole training in reading is aimed at ridding usof vocalization and
even subvocalization.To çsound'a text aloud is an exercise for som eone
learning to read and pronouncealanguage:itisassociatedwith semiliteracy
orreading disabilities.Thereis,however,much to be said forO ng'sconten-
tion that Rreading''a text means converting it to sound,aloud or in the
imagination,syllable-by-syllable in slow reading or sketchily in the rapid
reading common to high-technology cultures.nlosoralspeech rem ainsthe
intrinsic form ofhum an communicatiom lo6and formostliteratepeoplesof
history outside ourpresentsociets reading hasalwaysbeen avocal,physical
activits even for the solitary reader.One mouthed the wordsofthe text
and preferably voiced them aloud,not only in reading them but even in
composing orcopying them into writing.
Classical and late Antiquity knew nothing of silent reading in
which thewordsofthe textare notsounded automatically w ith thelips,
aswasremarked long ago by N ietzsche,and emphasized by thegreatphi-
lologistEduard Norden.lo;The classic example ofthisisthe passage in
Augustine'sConfessionsinwhichtheyoungAugustineregistershisamaze-
m ent atseeing the venerable Ambrose reading silently:Gldiseye glided
over the pages,and his heart searched out the sense,but hisvoice and
tongue werc atrest.''108A panoply of furtherexamples from lateAntiq-
uity,m edievalEurope,and even the Renaissance have been adduced by
Josef Balogh in his masterly study of this phenomenon of voiced
reading.logchaytor also remindsusthat the medievalreaderconfronted
am anuscriptoften crabbed in scriptand fullofcontractions,and his
instinctive question,when deciphering a text,wasnotwhetherhe
had seen,butwhether he had heard thisor thatword before;he
broughtnotavisualbutan auditory memory to histask.Such was
the resultofhisup-bringing:he had learntto rely on the memory
ofspoken sounds,notupon the interpretation ofwritten signs.And
when he had deciphered aword,he pronounced itaudibly.llo
SCRIPTURE AS SPOKEN W O RD
Balogh points further to the fact that writing was itself oralso
long asthevaluesofclassicalrhetoric held sway;where Christian oppo-
sition to these valuesand the slow copying ofthe m onasticscriptorium
held sway,silentwriting probably firstbegan to be com mon.lllN ever-
theless,'w .'W attenbach can cite at least one m edievalcopyist'svivid
confirmation oftheinnately oralnatureofhisscriballabor:G'Three fin-
gerswrite,twoeyeslook (atthepagel;onetonguespeaks,thewhole
body works....''112
Examplesofthe oralcharacterofreading orwriting are,ofcourse,
hard to find precisely becauseitwasforso long assum ed thatonly excep-
tions(suchasthatofAmbrose)meritedanyone'sspecialnotice.ll:Likeso
many ofthe m ostbasicfactsofhuman existence,thisone hasbeen little
discussedorremarkedsolongasitwastakenforgranted.(Theoneadvan-
tage ofdistance for the historian writing ofearlier agesisthatitsome-
timesenables him or her to see the shape of a forestthatcould notbe
compassed from within itsown treesand thickets.)And apparently this
factofvocalreading wastaken for granted much longerthan one m ight
im agine.Balogh citesa few examples that suggestthathowever much
silent reading m ay have been increasing in the later M iddle Ages,the
humanistsfrom Petrarch to Erasm usonce again turned to ççtherhetorical
beauty ofthe literature ofantiquity''and consequently emphasized read-
ing with the voice still.114
M arshallM cLuhan and otherslook to thecom ing ofprinting asthe
decisive blow that eventually felled the practice oforal,vocalized read-
ing.115<Asthe Gutenberg typography filled theworld,the human voice
closed dow n.Peoplebegan to read silently and passively asconsum ers.nll6
Thisdid not,however,happen overnight.Steven Ozm enthasremarked
thatHthe firsthalfofthe sixteenth century remained very m uch an oral
age''fora11them assiveupsurge in printdistribution.ll;' W idespread illit-
eracy lasted much longer than thisperiod in ' W estern Europe,and even
literatereadersofthe sixteenth and seventeenth centuriesworked w ith a
Punctuation system designed Rfortheear and notthe eye.''118
The triumph ofthe silent page and reader needs stillto be m ore
accurately and precisely documented,but itwasprobably notcomplete
even am ong literateclassesuntilatleastthe eighteenth century,ifthen.119
Schiller,asapoet,can stillrefertot<thespeakingpage''(dasreiendeBlatt),
butAdam M flller,in hisR' Twelve Speecheson Eloquence''of 1812,can
only lam entthevictory ofthe silenthand,eye,and pageofcontemporary
literacy overthevoice,ear,and word ofprevioustimes.120Atleastby this
time in ourW estern,post-Enlightenmentworld,visual,typographic cul-
ture seemsto have replaced oral,chirographic culture.
The foregoing indicates thatit isonly in relatively recenthistory
 r
148 RETH IN KIN G SCRIPTU RE
in ourmodern W esternworld thatthebook hasbecomeasilentobject,
thewritten word a silentsymbol, and thereadera silentspectator.lfthis
istrue forthebook in general,itisarguably truealso forscripturalbooks
in particular.O ur modern documentary orientation in scripturalstudies
is a reflection ofa widercontem porary conception ofscripture asbuta
particulargenre ofw ritten orprinted word.121Itisincontestable thatthe
oralword nolongerholdstheprominentplacein the everyday lifeofour
secular culture thatit did in pre-m odern times,any more than reading
aloud orhearing thescripturesrem ainstheprimary m ode ofcontactw ith
theW ordforthefaithfulChristian orJew thatitoncewas.Andbycom-
parison with thecontemporary M uslim world,notto m ention thatofthe
H indus,the oraland auralpresence ofsacred textsistruly m eager.
Yet where scripture stillfunctions actively in the lives ofm odern
'
W esternJewsorChristians,itmorethanotherkindsofbookhasretained
some oral-auraldimensionsbecause ofitsongoing use in devotionallife
and liturgicalpractice.Thefamily gathered around the dining room table
tolistentothepaterfamiliasreadfrom theGoodBookmayseem tomany
a nineteenth century scene,butitisalso one notyetvanished from our
contemporary world,any m ore than Bible-m emorizing and recitation of
the psalterare only thingsofthepast.Noristhe reading from theTorah
in tl
aesynagogueany lesscentraltoJewish worshipnow than itwasfor
the devoutin tim espast.
Thus,we have atleasta slenderthread of contactwith the funda-
m entally oralcharacterofscripture thatwasprominenteven in ourown
W estern world in the not-so-distantpast.Yetwe are notwellprepared
by ourow n experienceand education to recognize,letaloneto appreciate,
thisoralcharacter.I wantto conclude this essay on scripture with brief
consideration ofthisoncemajorandnaturaloralityofthescripturalbook
in the specific contextof'
W estern Christianity.lzzIn the preponderantly
Christian W esttoday,itm ay seem possible to dismisseven the orality of
Jewish Scripture,nottomentionthatofHindusorMuslims,assomething
ultimatelyforeign orunusual.W emay even try to projectanachronisti-
cally ourpresentfocuson thewritten word back into earlierChristian as
wellasotherreligiouspiety.However,once the historicalorality ofthe
Christian Bibleisrecognized,the generaloralquality ofscripture cannot
be so easily dism issed and m issed.
Christianity did notbegin by being a religion ofthe sacred book,
buttrueto itsJudaicoriginsitsoonbecameoneto adegreeunknownin
any other tradition in the H ellenistic mi1ieu.123Itisnotunfair to speak
even ofGan addiction to literacy''in theearly Christian movement.lz4Yet
thiscannot obscure the factthat the public oralreading of the Hebrew
SCRIPTU RE AS SPO KEN W O RD 149
scriptures(attested already in the Christian New Covenantitself:cf.1
Tim.4:13),aswellastheoralcharacterofthePaulineepistleswerethe
mainstaysof the early Christian cu1ture.125The importance ofthe posi-
tion oftheearly Christian lectorin thechurch order,126the development
ofthe liturgy with itsreadingsfrom Law and ProphetsaswellasGospel
and t'A postolos,nlz; the chanting or singing ofpsalms,128and the early
characterofthe sermon aseither a cento from scripture orexegesisof a
scripturalpassage testify to the m anifold ways in which scripture func-
tioned orally in the early Church.129Laterdevelopmentin Eastand W est
ofcollectionsofscripturalpassagesspecifically arranged fororalrecitation
in divineservice(e.g.,theevangeliarium andtheepistolarium,aswellasthe
psalterand breviary)pointsalso to the centrality ofthe scripturalword
in Christian worship.l3o
Ithasalso been noted thateven asearly astheend ofthethird cen-
tury m any 1ay persons,notto mention the early desertm onks,knew uthe
majorportions''ofscripturebyheart.l3lFortheChristiansofthePatristic
age,asJeromePutit,Hljnoratioscripturarum ignoratioChristieJf.''132And
Augustine gives us an oblique proofof widespread 1ay fam iliarity with
the scripturalwordwhen hecriticizesthereading ofJonah inJerome's
new Latintranslation(latertowinrecognitionastheVulgate):Augustine
complainstoJeromehimselfthatthenew version differedfrom thetext
which çiwasrooted in the affection and m em ories ofallthe people and
repeated in so m any succeeding generations.nl33 H e asserts on another
occasion thatratherthan asermon,itisbetterforthe Christian congrega-
tion to which he wasto preach to beputin directcontactwith theword
ofGod through hisreading scripture instead.134The lection,orIectio,rep-
resented in effectGod speaking,l3sa phenom enon by no meanslimited
to form alscripturalreading in worship only.
Historically,oneofthe mostsignificantsectorsofChristian life in
which theoralfunction ofscripturalword hasbeen predominanthasbeen
the monasticlife.In m any ways,the monastictraditionswere thelifelines
ofChristendom from the daysof the later Rom an Em pire down to the
Reformation and Counter-Reform ation in the'W est,and even to thepres-
ent in m ay sectors of the Christian world.These were the consetwing
traditionsas wellasthe intensifying,concentrating forcesof Christian
piety and practice through the European M iddleAges.
From the outset,m onastic piety centered upon the sacred word of
the O ld and N ew Covenants,preeminently the Psalms, Gospels,and
Apostolic w ritings ofthe still somewhat lluid canon of scripture.The
fundamentaldiscipline and spiritualoccupation ofChristian monkswas
the oralrecitation and contemplation ofthe divine word, which cam eto
150 RETHIN KIN G SCRIPTU RE
be expreysed explicitly in the term smelitatioand lectiodivina.bM N otethe
wordsofHorsiesius(fourth century),the successor ofPachomius,the
father ofChristian monasticism :
Considernow themany(scriptural)testimonies,inwhichtheWord
of God sum mons us to meditation on scripture,in order thatwe
make our ow n in faith thatwhich we constantly repeatby m outh
Vre170/$?fJ
'
#lNJ).137
John Cassian (d.435),chronologically the next giant ofearly
monasticism after Pachomius,feltthatRasa beginnerthem onk can only
drive outthe worldly m em ories that invade hishead by meditation on
scripture, prolonged and stable.'138 Such practice of oral m editation
became the heartofthe Christian monasticenterprise:thelectiodivinaor
contemplative,m editative reciting orreading aloud ofthedivineword of
scripture in worship,during work,and in the solitudeofone'sce11.139In
the Pachom ian Rule's radical stress on the m em orization and constant
repetition of the Psalm s,Gospels and apostolic epistles,we have notan
aberrantphenom enon in Christian monasticism thatwaslaterabandoned,
butaparticularly clearexampleofthedegreetowhich monasticspiritual-
ity in b0th Eastern and W estern Christendom has been founded upon
constantinvolvem entwith the repeating and hearing ofScripture.l4o
W e have seen how even the act of copying a manuscript was in
medievaltimesan oralprocess.M onastic scribesspoke theirtextasthey
wrote, and the m edieval person thought of the written as som ething
sounded and heard. Gregory the Great can speak,for example,quite
unselfconsciouslyofthatGwhichweheardinthesacredpages'(quaein
sacrispaginisaudiebamus...).141For the greatmajority ofpre-modern
Christians- monk,cleric,and 1ay person alike,theprim ary contactwith
scripturewasalwaysin the divine service,in liturgy.W e need only think
ofthe degree to which the repetition ofscripturally-derived prayers,the
chanting and singing ofpsalm s,and the preaching ofscripturally-based
sermonsperpetuated the oraland auralpresence of the biblicalword in
everyday lifein scribalculture.Then werealize how prim ary the spoken
wordofscripturewasintheperceptualworldofthemajorityofmedieval
ChristiansEastand W est.
N oristhebasic functionalorality ofChristian scripturesomething
that endswith the M iddle Ages in Europe.The great Reform ersthem-
selves evidence a profoundly oral sensibility to the divine word.Their
emphasison bringing thatword through vernacularscriptureand sermon
to the public,literate and illiterate alike,focused upon the divine serdce
SCRIPTURE AS SPOKEN W O RD 151
of the word (Wort gottesdienst) as divine serdce of scripture
(Scbri
ft
gottesdienstjin which thepointofdeparturewasuthereadingof
the W ord of God.''142Similarly,teaching Scripture became the basis of
Protestanteducation aswell.In thenew world ofGerm an Protestantism,
the only booksthatapproachedtheBiblein influencewerethecatechism
and the hym nal.G'rhe first...wastaken in partfrom Luther'sBible and
reflected throughoutthesamespiritand thesamelanguage,(andjthe
same held trueforthe hymna1.''143M emorization ofthevernacularBible
also proceeded apace am ong the Protestant laity and clergy,as anyone
who reads thè serm ons or tracts of these people can recognize.It is
remarkablehow completelyaMartinBucer,JohnCalvin,orlohnBunyan
talksa scripturally saturated language- thatis,thinks,speaks,and writes
with and out of the vocabulary, stylistic m odes,thought world, and
imagery of the Bible.Such persons do not so much quote Scripture or
useitforproof-texting asthey simply t'speak Scripturen- a scripturethat
they can and do recite largely ifnotwholly by heart.144
lf one looksatthe giantfigure ofLuther himselfand any partof
hisvolum inousworks,itiseasy to see how vividly the scripturalW ord
lived forhim asGod'sactive speaking to the earsofhum ankind.He can
refer quite simply and naturally to K
dhearing a letter (Buchstabe)from
God's W ord.''145 Luther him self had the words of Scripture in Greek,
Latin,and Hebrew largely by heart- a productofhisown Augustinian
monastictraining,nodoubt.146TheRhearingoftheWordofGod''(J4s
HörendesH'brle.
sGottes)wastheonlysourceofChristiantruth,guidance,
andjoy,according tohim.HearingtheBookofGod alonesuffices:only
d<thehearingofthewordofGod''gflf ;.
çHörenffe.
slz
pbrfG Golltwjcanbring
truejoy such thattheheartfindspeace in God'spresence.l4;And when
he speaksofm editation,he saysthat thatmeans
alwaysrepeat the oralspeech and the literalword in theBook and
comparethem with each other,notonly in yourheart,butalso out-
wardly,read them and reread them w ith diligentattentivenessand
rellection,(toseejwhattheHolySpiritmeansbythem.148
Finally,God'sW ord should ofcourse notonly be heard and heeded,but
ualso learned and retained.nl4g
ltistrue that much of Luther's rhetoric ofthe W ord reflects not
only his identification of the W ord of God with the revealed text of
Scripture,butalso hisconviction ofthepossibility ofpreaching and shar-
ing by w itnessthe W ord in the sense oftheevangelium,the ugood new s''
ofthe Christ.lsow hathepreachesisRtheoralGospel''(dasmûndliche
 r

RETH IN KIN G SCRIPTU RE SCRIPTU RE AS SPO KEN W O RD 153

Euangelionj,kskand thisisthecontentstillmorethan thespokenwordsof N O TES

theliteraltextitself:ug'rhejGospelisnotreallythatwhichisinbooks
and composed in letters,butratheran oralpreaching and living word, 1.Rvorrede zum zweiten Theilv. 1548,**in D.M artin Lutbers m rle.
and avoice thatresoundsthrough the whole earth and isshouted forth Kriti
scbeGesamtausgabe(Weimar:HermannBöhlau,1883- )(hereafterI'
Faz
j,54:
474.
abroad.nlsz still,thispreached W ord of the Gospelisinseparable from
the W ord oftheBible.ltsspecialclaritascomesthrough the Holy Spirit, 2.W illiam A.Graham,Rour'ân asSpokenW ord:AnIslamicContribution
to theUnderstandingofScripture,'inRichard C.M artin,ed.,ApnroacbestoIslam
which ucan be found now here more imm ediately and more alive than
inReligiousStudies(Tucson:UniversityofArizonaPress,1985),pp.23-40,and
preciselyinits(theSpirit'sjownholyletters,whichitwrote.''153 idem,uscripture''
,inTbeEncyclopediaofReligion (16vols.New York:Macmillan,
M any otherpassagesfrom Luthercould be added to these,butthe 1986),s.v.Seealsotheintroductiontomyrecentbook,Bqonif/leWritten Wz brl;
pointwouldremain thesam e:hislanguageand imagery belongto aworld OralAmectsofscri ytureintbeHistoryo
fRelt
jion(cambridgeandNew York:Cam-
in which thewritten word issimultaneously theword spoken and heard bridgeUniversityPress,1987).
in fullim mediacy.Thisisa world in which theword spoken and heard 3.O n thetextualorientation ofBiblicalscholarship,seeW ilfred Cantwell
isprim ary becausethe written word isinseparable from it,not,asin our Sm ith.u'T'
heStudyofReligion andtheStudyoftheBibleyo-/àurs//o
world,an independent,silent notation thatm ay,but need notbe read ftbeAmerican
aloud.This is a world in which the book's pages were not so many Acaiemy ofReligion 39 (1971):131-140,esp.pp.136ff.Cf.idem,u'
rheTrue
M eaning ofScripture:AnEmpiricalHistorian'sN onreductionistInterpretation of
printed sheetsofpaperbutliving pagesthatRspoke''to tl4e reader.H ere theQur'ân,'InternationallournalofMiddleEasternStudies11(1980),487-505.
holy writand holy word are one and the sam eholy book.
W e have com e,then,back where we began:Luther's dictum on 4.ForexampleGer.Scbri ft,Bibel;Fr.écriture,bible;Dutch scbrf
it,bqbel;
Ital.scrittura,bibbia.
Holy Scripturc as Rbook,writ, and word.' W e can now surmise how
m uch these three term sm usthave overlapped and interpenetrated in the 5.DictionnaireJelaBible(Paris,1895- ),Supp.vol.2(1934):457a-462%
conceptual world of sixteenth century Europe. t' W rit' and tword'are (ç<Ecrituresainte,'part1:exlwenom'');TbeologiscbesBegri
yslexiconzumNeuenTealc-
really butchangesrung on thethem eofibook,'apaired glossthatampli- ment,2vols.in3,ed.LotharCoenenefal.('Wuppertal,1967-1971),1:151-153
fiesthe definition of scripture to its fullness asbook- the book that is (<<Buch''),2.ii:1084-1092(Rschrift'');Encyclopaedialudaicaoerusalem,1971-72)
sim ultaneously writand word. (hereafter F./14:816-817,820-821; Tbe CatholicEnqclopedia (New York,
In conclusion,1wantto reiteratewhathasbeen explicitand implicit 1907-1912) (hereafter C. E12:543-544 (ç<Bib1e''),13:635-637 Cscriptureo);
throughout:the need to recognize the culturalbias of the commonly JamesHastings,ed-,Dictioncryoff/icBible,rev.ed.F.C.GrantandH.H.Rowley
assumed lim itation ofscripture to sacred writing in the narrow sense of (New York:Scribner's,1963)(hereafterND. Bj,sbv.GBible'uscripture-'
a documentary text.A closerlook atthe role ofsacred textsnotonly in 6.Thistendency waslongago reinforced by F.M ax M filler'spublication
India or Islam ,buteven in our ow n Christian W estbefore the present ofhisfamoustranslation seriesofnon-w estern scripturaltextsunderthetitleTbe
age,revealsthe relativenarrownessand povertyofaprim arily docum en- Sflcrek.
llth
tl/eyoffleEast(1879ff.).Seealsobelow,pp.142-147.
tary,reified notion ofsacred book.uscripture'isarelational,notan abso- 7.Cf.Jack Goody and Ian '
W att,R'
T'
heConsequencesofLiteracyy'inJack
lute term .ltrefersalwaysto a text thatisprecisely morethan m eetsthe Goody,ed.,Literacy in TraiitionalSocieties(Canibridge:The University Press,
eye,to onethatlivesin the faith and piety ofparticularpersons.A textis 1968),p.27;1.J.Gelb,. p1.Studyof Writing(1952)rev.ed-,ChicagoandLondon:
only scripture insofar as it exists in relation to a comm unity of UniversityofChicagoPress,1963),pp.221-223.
faith- personswho zhear'it in the fullest sense ofthe word,who listen 8.EgyptoftbePbaraobs:,1. sIntroiuction(1961)repr.ed-,New York:Oxford
to itswords,love and cherish them ,and liveby,with,and forthem .Rec- UniversityPress,1966),p.19.
ognition ofthisbasic dimension ofscripture ism ade easierfor usin our
modern typographic world by an awarenessof the oralit 'y ofthe sacred 9.TbePrimitiveH'
br/kaniItsTrans
formations(Ithaca,N.Y.:CornellUniver-
book thatisexperientially largely closed to mostofus.And such recogni- sit
'yPress,1953),p.7.Cf.HansJensen,DieSchri ftinVergangenheituniGegenwart
tion isimperative for anyone who seeksto study and to understand the (Glùckstadtand Hamburg:J.J.Augustin (1935j),p.2,wheretheauthorspeaks
of t<die Bedeutung der Schrift fïir die kulturelle Aufwârtsbewegung der
religiousfaith and practice ofotherpeoplespastorpresent. M enschheit-''
 r

RETH IN KIN G SCRIPTURE SCRIPTU M AS SPO KEN W O RD 155

1O.MarshallMctzuhan,TheGutenberg Gc/fi,
x-
y,
'TbeMakingof Tyylrv/lfc (Apollon,p.161):GAgypten istein positivesBeispieldaffir,daf!dasVerhxltnis
Man(Toronto:UniversityofTorontoPress,1962),p.27;cf.pp.18,45,48.See einerKulturzu ihrerschriftlichenAusdrucksform fttrdasW esen derbetreffenden
alsoJ.C.Carothers,Rculture,Psychiatry,andtheW ritten W ord,''Pqchiatry 22 Kultur bezeichnend ist.''
(1959):307-320.
20.W m.TheodoredeBaryetal.,comp.,SourcesofC/lfseaeTraiition(New
11.Thisterm isEricH avelock's:seeTheLiterqteRevolution in GreeceJAIJIts York:ColumbiaUniversityPress,1960),p.6)Edwin0.ReischauerandJohnK.
CulturalConsequences (Princeton:Princeton Universie Press,1982),esp.pp. Fairbank,EastAsia:TheGrecfTraiition(Boston:HoughtonMifflin,1958,1960),
23-24.Cf.alsoWalterJ.Ong,TbePresenceofl/lt!Plz brfl'SomeProlegomenaforCul- p.72;Y.Chu W ang,Rldeasand M en in TraditionalChina,''M onumentaSerica 19
turalaniReligiousHistory (1967.2nd ed.Minneapolis:UniversityofMinnesota (1960):213.
Press,1981),p.45,ontherevolutionaryforceofalphabetization.
21.W ilfredCantwellSmith'sarticleinthepresentvolume(Rscriptureas
12.Goodyand W att,ç'ConsequencesofLiteracy,'pp.56-57,62,64. Form andContent'')makesaconvincingargumentforthis.SeealsoLeipoldtand
M orenz,Heili geusc/lrfff
- eél,pp.41-52;ErnstRobertCurtius,EuropöiscbeLiteratur
13.WalterJ.Ong,Oralit
yflsflLiteracy:Tlte'
Ièchnologizingo
ftbeW'
brff(Lon- uni LateiniscltesMittelalter(1948)2nd rev.ed.,Bern:A.Franke,1954),pp.
donandNew York:Metltuen,1982),pp.8-9)cf.pp.t4-15. 254-261.
14.OnancientGreekmistrustofwritingandbooks,seeJohannesLei
poldt 22.On thefixing ofaRcanon''ofHebrew scripture,seeGunnarOstborn,
and Siegfried Morenz,Heili geScltriften.Betraclttungen zurReli
gionsgeschichteJer CultflrIJ Canon:.
:1.Study in tbe Canonization of tbe 0li Testament,Uppsala
antikenMittelmeerwelt(Leipzig:OttoHarrassowitz,1953),pp.12-14;FredericG. Universitetsârsskrift,1950,10 (Uppsala:A.-B.Lundequistska;Leipzig:Otto
Kenyon,BoobsaniReat krsinAncietttGreeceJSJRome(1932)2ndrev.ed-,Oxford: Harrossowitz,1950).OntheGcanonizing''oftheTripipka,seeAndréBareauet
ClarendonPress,1951),pp.24-25)KarlKerényi,Apollon,StudienfiôerantikeReli- al.,DieRehkionen Iniiens111.Buddhismus-linismus-primitivvölker(Stuttgart:W .
gionundHumanittit(1937)Mrdijrev.ed.,Dusseldorf:EugenDiederichs,1953),p. Kohlhammer,1964),pp.23-32(furtherliterature:p.23,n.1).Cf.A.K.Warder,
166)CarlSchneider,Kultur geschicbtedesHellenismus,2vols.(Munich:C.H.Beck, IndianIUJJ/I/JVI(Delhi,Patna,Varanasi:MotilalBanarsidass,1970),pp.4-14.
1967-1969)2:228.ThelocusclassicusforthenegativeGreekattitudeisSocrates'
discussion ofthe harm fuleffectofwriting on the memory in Plato, Pbaeirus 23.Tbex' bcenyfeno
ftàeApostleanjlàeHeavenly. Bo0h,KingandSaviour,3,
274-275.O n thelndian attitudes,seebelow,pp.138-140. UppsalaUniversitetsârsskrift,1950,7 (Uppsala:A.-B.Lundequistska;Leipzig:
15.GustavMensching,DaskflkeI'Forl.Efserelkïonsplu no-esploz/scl,eUn- OttoHarrossowitz,1950);Mubammad,TlteAnostleofGod,cnJHisAscension,King
.
and Saviour, 5, Uppsala Universitets ârsskrift, 1955, 1 (Uppsala: A-B.
tersuckung (Bonn:LudwigRöhrscheid,1937),pp.80-81,85-87;LeoKoep,Das Lundequistska;W iesbaden:Otto Harrossowitz, 1955);Reli gionmbanomenolofe
Himmli
sclteBucltinAntikeuSJ Cbristentum.Einereli
gionsgeschiclttlicbeUntersucltung
(Berlin:WalterdeGruyter,196$,pp.546-573.
zur altcbri
stlicben Biliermrache (Bonn:Peter Hanstein, 1952),pp.4-6)Kurt
Goldammer,DfeFormettweltde. çReligiösen.Gruszri/
îJersystematiscltenRe/kf/nywfs-
. 24.Religionmlanomenologie,p.566 gtranslationmine).
senscl
vft(Stuttgart:AlfredKröner,1960),p.252;AlfredBertholet,GDieMacht 25.Koep,DasbimmlisclteBucb(esp.pp.1-2,127-128))Curtius,Europöiscbe
derSchriftin Glauben und Aberglauben,''Abbatolungen ierDeutscllerlAkaiemie
Literatur,p.315,n.3)M ensching,D asheili
geWz
brl,pp.73-75.
JcrWissenscbaftenzuBerlin.Philos--hist.Klasse.1948,no.1,pp.43-46.
16.Apollon,pp.165-166.Cf.Goldam mer,Formenwelt,p.250. 26.Heiler,Erscbeinungs
formen,pp.350-352;Mensching,DasbeiligeWzbrl,
pp.72-73;LeipoldtandMorenz,HeiligeScbri ften,pp.29-36.Cf.thestatement
17. Siegried Morenz,Agypti
sche Relt
kion (Stuttgart:'
W .Kohlhammer, aboutthe superhum an nature ofthe Lotusq
sl
qlrflby N ichiren cited in M asaharu
1969),pp.230-233;LeipoldtundMorenz,Heili geScbriften,p.11. Anesaki,Nichiren.tbeBudiltistOrv/lcl(1916)repr.ed.,Gloucester,Mass.:Peter
18.On them orenegativeresultsofscripturalfixation inwriting,seeRob- Smith,196$,p.16.
ert'W ill,Leculte./!l/Jei'ltistoireetieJl/lf/o-
sozàfereli
gieuses,3vols.(Strasbourgand 27.Franz Dornseiff,Das a4/ p/lcselin Mystib und M cxçk (1922),2nd ed.
Paris,1925-1935)2:363;AlfredBertho1et,çxschriften,heilige,'RGGZ5:266; (Leipzig and Berlin: B. G. Teubner, 1925), p. 1)JE 3: 202-205 (J.v.
Friedrich Heiler,Ersclteinungs formen und H' aserlierReli
r gion (1961;2nd rev.ed-, RBibliomancy''); Haniwörterbuclt Je.
s ieutscben Aberglaubens 9: 379-381 (. s.1/.
Stuttgart,etc-:'W .Kohihammer,197$,pp.354-357;Gustav Mensclling,Die Gschreibenn).
Religion.Erscbeinungsformen,Strukturt
ypen und Lebensgesetze(Stuttgart:CurtE. 28.Bertholet,Gschriftem''p.264 gtranslationmine).
Schwab,195$,pp.328-329.
19.SeeMorenz,AgyptiscbeReli
gion,pp.224-243.Cf.Kerényi'sobservution 29.GerardusvanderLeeuw,Reli foninEssenceaniManf iestation,trans.J.
156 RETH INKIN G SCRIPTU RE SCRIPTU RE AS SPO KEN W ORD

E.Turner,with Appendicesincorporating theAdditionsofthe second Germ an qur'ânicmanuscripts,seeMartin LingsandYasin Hamid Safadi,TlteQurMn:Cata-

editionbyHansH.Penner(New YorkandEvanston:Harper& Row,1963),pp. Iogueo
fanExbibitionofQur'JnManuscriptsattbeBriti
sbLibrary JApril-5August,
435-436 (=p.495 of German ed.:PbönomenolofederReli
fon,2nd rev.ed. 1976(London:WorldofIslam,1976).OnTibetan collections,seeforexample
(Tùbingen:J.C.B.Mohr(PaulSiebeck),1956)). David Snellgrove and Hugh Richardson,.,
4 CulturalHistory of Tibet(Boulder,
30.Seeforexam ple:Bertholet,RM achtderSchrift''
,pp.18-32;Encyclopae- Colo.:Prajha,1980),pp.160,170;Lanczkowski,Heili geSchriften,p.124.Fora
recentexampleofthecontinuingJewish emphasison thespecialpreparation of
Jfcof Reli
gion f
;s#Etbics,13 vols.,ed.JamesHastings.(Edinburgh:T.andT. Torah scrolls:&*h new Torah...an old Tradition,n&Tl1eBoston Globe(May 3,
Clark,1908-1926)ghereafter.
E.R.EI2:615b-618b,s.v.GBibliolatry':(A.Dorner); 1982),pp.13-14.
JE 3:202-205,s.v.RBibliomancy''(M.GnmwaldandKaufmannKohler).
41.LutbersVorlesung ûberienHebröerbrie
fnacbJervatikaniscbenHanischri
ft,
31.EuropöischeLiteratur,p.307)cf.p.323. Latintexted.EmanuelHirsch andHannsRùckert(Berlinand Leipzig:Walter
32.W .O wen Cole,and Piara Singh Sambhi,Tbe Sikhs:TheirReli
gious de Gruyter,1929),p.250;m rle;KritiscbeGesamtausgabe(Weimar:Hermann
Belie
fsaniPrccffce.
s(London,Henley,andBoston:Routledge& KeganPaul,1978), Böhlau,1883ff.)(hereafterI'
FX'
I.J37:512-513.
pp.43ff.,esp.54-55)58-66;107)112-135passim.Cf.W .H .M cLeod,R'
I'he 42.+. .
4 10:625-627,Passim.Cf.W ill,Leculte2:335,365;HeinrichKarpp,
Sikh Scriptures:SomeIssues,''in MarkluergensmeyerandN.GeraldBm ier,eds., .
<çDieFunctionderBibelinderKirche,'':pt.4ofart.ç<Bibel,''Theologische.
R.el/eél-
SikbStudies:ComlmrativePermectivesonflClvngingTradition(Berkeley,Cal.:Gradu- zyklopdiie(1977-)6:71,73.TheidentityofthegospelRword''thatisuheard''
ateTheologicalUnion,BerkeleyReligiousStudiesSeries,197$,pp.97-111. w ith scripturethatist
xheard''isbynom eansastraightfotw ardissueinLutheror
otherreformers'usage.SeefurtherGraham,BqondtheWritten H' brl,chapter12.
33. Gùnter Lanczkowski, Heili ge Scbriften. Inhalt, Dxl gesffi/l und
Ueberlie
ferung(Stuttgart:W .Kohlhammer,UrbanBïicher,1956),p.124.A con- 43.+.4 10.i.2:7432-754.<<.Esistyhenichtm uglich eyn seelezu trosten,
,
temporary exam ple ofwhat Lanczkowskicallsuungeheure Verehrung''ofthe sie hore denn yhresgottiswortt.W o isabergottisworttynn allen buchernn
Tibetan canonicalcollectionsisthedaily circumam bulation oftheSûtralibrary aufàer der heyligen scrifft?...trosten m ag keyn Buch, denn die heyligen
inm onasticcompoundssuchasthatoftheexilecomm unityofDharam sala,India schrifft.''
(personalcommunication,M.DavidEckel,November,1983).
44.Forexpample,Heiler,Erscbeittungs
formen,pp.275,277-279,283-286;
34.R'rhe Phrase ê
sa prf/
. ifj
zf
/rtifflt
zlcaityabltb
jto5/IJ1z:lJintheVajraccheddikö: M ensching,DasLeili
geHz
brl,pp.71-72;van derLeeuw,Reli
gion in Essence,pp.
Notes on the Cult ofthe Book in Early M ahâyâna,''IniodranianJournal 17 422-434 (=pbönomenologie,pp.480-494);RobertH.Lowie,PrimitiveReli gion
(1975):147-181. (1924;New York:Liveright,1948),pp.321-329;Bronislaw Malinowski,t<Myth
inPrimitivePsychology,''inMagic,Sciencefi/9flReli
gioncsJOtberEssays(1948;
35.ERE2:616b-6171CBibliolatry''). Garden Citp N.Y.:DoubledayAnchor,1954),pp.93-148.
36.Anesaki,N ichiren,pp.15ff.,80-86;Y.K.Dykstra,GM iraculousTales 45.DasJlef/f
ycrFàrl,p.71.
of the Lotus Sùtra; Tbe Dainilmnbobu Hollz.jr
crllf,''M onumenta Nflztwfcc 32
(1977):189-198passim. 46.Van derLeeuw,ReligioninEssence,pp.403-412 (=pltönomenologie,pp.
457-468))W.BredeKristensen,TbeMeaningo fReli
fon:LecturesfrltbePhenome-
37.D.Gerhard Ebeling,u'
W brt Gottesund Hermeneutik,''in lz
fbrlunt
l nologyofRehkion,transJohnB.Carman(TheHague:MartinusNi jhoff,1960),
Glaube(Tùbingen:J.C.B.MohrjpaulSiebeckj,1960),p.327. pp.224-226 (cf.pp.86-87))Mensching,Dasàef/l ke e rl,pp.112-117.Cf.
38.T.C.Skeat,REarly Christian Book Production:Papyriand M anu- NorthropFrye,TLeGreatCoie:TàeBibleandLiterature(San Diego,New York,
scripts'':inTbeCambriigeHistoryoftbeBible,3vols.(Cambridge:TheUniversity London:HarcourtBraceJovanovitch,HarvestBooks,1983),p.6.
Press,1963-1970)ghereafter,Camb.Hist.. Bi5,
j2:54-79. 47.On the unity oflegomenon and drömenon:JaneEllen Harrison,Tbemis:
39.Erich Bethe,Bucb undBili im Altertum,comp.and ed.posthum ously 4.Studyoff/leSocialOnkinsofGreekRelt
. kiott(1912)2ndrev.ed.Repr.ed.London:
byErnstKristen (LeipzigandVienna:OttoHarrassowitz,1945),p.103. Merlin Press,1963),pp.42-45,328-331.Onspeechasactfrom aphilosophical
perspective:J.L.Austin,How toJoTbingsuzff/lI'
fz
brfl
.
ç(Cambridge,Mass-:Harvard
40. On M anichaean books, see Hans-loachim Klimkeit,$<Vom W esen UniversityPress,1962).
manicluischerKunst,''Zeitscbri
ftfûrReli
gions-uniGeistesgescbichte34(1982):esp. 48.VanderLeeuw,Reli gioninEssence,p.405(=pbinomenologie,p.460).
pp.201-204;idem,M anicbaeanArtandCb//f
grv /c,IconographyofReligions20
(Leiden:E.J.Brill,1982),pp.20-23.Forfineexamplesofthemagnificenceof 49. Hermann Usener,Götternamen.Vèrsucb einerLebre wélder religiösen
 N

158 RETH IN KIN G SCRIPTU RE SCRIPTU RE AS SPO KFN W O RD 159

Begr@ billung(Bonn:Friedrich Cohen,189$,pp.279-301)ErnstCassirer,.

I-crl- Blossom o f tbeFineDharma,trans.from the Chinese ofKumâiajlvaby Leon
guageandMytb,trans.SusanneK.Langer(1946;New York:Dover,1953),pp. Hulwitz(New York:ColumbiaUniversity Press,19761,pp.237-244).Seealso
33-43.
SukumarDutt,BuiibistMonksandMonasteriesoflndia:TbeirHistoryanitbeirCon-
5O.Heiler,Erscbeinungsformen,p.276.Cf.BarbaraStollerMiller,ed.and tributiontoIndianCulture(London:AllenandUnwin,1962),pp.261-264.Con-
cerning theVeda'seternalcharacter,seebelow,p.138,and Graham , Bqoni the
trans.,LoveSongoftbeDlr)Lord:Jayadeva' srtWfgnlzfrlf/fi'(New York:Columbia Iz
p-
rflren Wf
brfl,chapter6.
UniversityPress,1977),p.18.
51.NambudiriVedaRecitation(TheHague:Mouton,1961),p.16. 57.AscensionoftlteApostle,pp.45,59-62)MuhammadtkeApostle,p.129.
52.M orenz,zjgyytischeReli
gion,pp.172-174. TheM emphitenarrativeis 58.Heiler,Erscbeinungs
formen,p.281.
translatedinJohnA.W ilson,trans.,TheAncientNearEast:..
4rlAtttl
mlogyofDxl.
ç 59.On Ghearingm uch,''seeArthurW aley,ulntroduction''to TbeAnalect
s
t
lndPictures(Princeton:PrincetonUniversit
'
yPress,1958),pp.1-2. ofConfucius,trans.andannotatedby ArthurWaley(1938)New York:Random
53.W .N orm an Brown, M an in f/le Universe.SomeContinuitiesin Iniian House,VinageBooks,n.d.),p.51.Cf.theremarksofW illiam G.Boltz,R'T'
he
Tbougbt(1966)Berkeley,LosAngeles,London:University ofCaiiforniaPress, Religiousand PhilosophicalSignificanceofthe<l-
lsiangerh'LaoTzuintheLight
1970),p.28;iiem,ç
<r
f'heCreativeRoleofthegoddessVâcin theRigVeday'in oftheMa-wang-tuiSilkManuscripts,'Bulletinofl/IcScboolo
fOrientalandAfrican
Pratidânam:Indiant
:rlt
/Inio-European StudiesPresenf
zt
ftoFranciscuslerrlcrflus-ff
lcosu.
s s'frff/fc.
s(London)45:101-102,n.17.
Kui peronHi sSixtietblfrf/lfl
c)?
,ed.J.C.HeestermanetaI.(TheHagueandParis: 60.LeipoldtandMorenz,HeiligeScbri
ften,pp.15-17.;Mensching,DieReli-
Mouton,1968),py.393-397.SeealsoLouisRenou,Rlzespouvoirsdelaparole gion,p.327;H eiler,Erscbeinunzvformen,pp.298,351-352;F.MaxMùller,ed.,Tbe
dansleFgveda,''EtudesJ ZJJMUG elTöpinéennes1(Paris:deBoccard,1955):1-27) SacreiBoobso ftbeEast,vol.1(Oxford:ClarendonPress,1879),p.xiii.Cf.Ong,
AlbrechtW eber,Hvâcund lögos,' 'IndiscbeStuiien(Leipzig)9(1865):473-480. Oralit yaniLiteraq,pp.96-101(drawingheavilyuponM.T.Clanchy,FromMem-
54.On theW itoto:KonradTheodorPreuss,Rel%ion unjMylllo/t/eier orytoWrittenRecori:Englani,1066-1307gcambridge,MA:HazvardUniversity
Uitoto.' Ièxtaufnaltmen undBeobachtungen beieinem Indiatterstamm inKolumbien, Press,19791,esp.pp.230-241).
ksfiffapserïl
ec (Göttingen:Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht;Leipzig:J.C.Hinrichs, 61. Basil Hall,GBiblical Scholarship: Editions and Com mentaries,''in
1921-23),pp.633-634.On the Dogon:Marcel Griaule,Conversations witb Camb.Hist.Bib.3:39.
Ogotemmeli(Oxford:Oxford University Press,197$,pp.16-40 (reprinted in
BarbaraC.Sproul,ed-,PrimalMytbs:CreatingtbeWorligsanFrancisco:Harper& 62.J.F.Staal,NambudiriRecitation,p.15.Thispoint,and the following
Row,1979),pp.49-66). discussion ofthe Indian caseisamplified and extended in chapter6 ofW .Gra-
ham,BqondtLeWritten P/rf/.Cf.T.W.Rhys-Davids,BuddbistIndia(1903)repr.
55.Concerning Torah:Leipoldtand Morenz,Heili geScbri
ften,p.25;a ed-,Calcutta:SusilGttpta,1957),p.119,ontllepossibilitythatBuddllistswere
detailed survey oftheideaofTorah asprimordialwisdom and theinstrumentof thefirstto makeuse ofwriting in India.Ourearliestwriten sourcesin India,
creation,summedupintherabbinicdictum,td-f'
heTorahisfrom Heaven''(Torab other than theundeciphered Indussealsofthe second millennium B.c.,are the
minlta-sbamayîm),isgivenbyBarbaraA.Holdredgeinherarticleinthepresent inscriptionsofthegreatBuddhistMauryanKingAjoka(reg.ca.269-ca.232B.c.):
volume,urr'heBride oflsrael:The O ntologicalStatusofTorah in theRabbinic
and Kabbalistic Traditions''pp. 180ff.Concerning the Qur'ân, see the credal see,forexample,RomilaThapar,. ,4.Historyoflndia,vol.1(Baltimore:Penguin,
statementsoftheGf pfyct.4àfH 1966),pp.72-74)A.L.Basham,TbeIz lz
bsfferTbatI'
Ff;JIndia:.4StuiyoftheHi
story
. f
lnf
-f
à/ltart.9)andtheFiqhx'
lhl
?cr11(art.3),trans.
in A.J.Wensinck,TbeMuslim Creei:ItsGenesisJKJHistoricalDevelopment(Lon- aniCultureoftbefnf/ff
lnSub-continentbe
foretlteComingo
ftbeMuslims(1954;2nd
rev.ed.,New York:HawthornBooks,1963),p.396.Basham (ibii.,pp.396-398)
don:FrankCass,1932),pp.127,189.Cf.HarryAustrynWolfsom TbeP/li/tsvlly believesthatby Ajoka'stime theBrâhmlscripthad already had years,perhaps
oftl
teKalam (Cambridge,MA andLondon:HarvardUniversityPress,197$,pp. centuriesofpriordevelopment.D.D.Kosambi,AncientInjia:.4HistoryofltsCul-
235-244;cf.pp.244-303.
tureandCivilization(New York:Random House,1966),p.88,arguesforadate
56.Thiscanbeseen intheBuddhistcasein theshiftfrom themoreliteral of700A.D .asatermittuspostquem fortheintroductionofwritingfrom M esopota-
understanding oftheBuddha-Word (buddbavacanam)astransmitted in thePali m iato India.
ucanonical''textsoftheTripiyaka(butcf.GeorgeD.Bond,u'
TwoTheravadaTra- 63.Georg Bûhler,IndischePalaeograpltievon circa350 a.Cbn-circa 1300,.
ditionsoftheM eaningofStheW ordoftheBuddha'y' 'TkeMahaBodbi83(1975j: Cbrï,GundriflderIndo-Arischen PhilologieundAltertum skunde, ed.G .Btihler,
492-423)totheMaluyànanotionofthecosmicteachingoftheeternalBuddha. vol.1,no.2 (Strasbourg:KarlJ.Triibner,1896),pp.3-4)MorizW internitz,
Cf.theBuddha'sstatementsin ch.16 oftheLotusD frl(Scri ptureoftheLotus GesclticbteJ:riniiscben Litteratur,2nd ed-,3 vols.(Leipzig:C.F.Amelangs,
160 RETHIN KIN G SCRIPTU RE SCRIPTURE AS SPOKEN W O RD 161

1905-1920)1:31 (=1:33-34 ofEng.trans-,.4.HistoryoflhdianLiterature,trans. t<on the Archaism oftheBhâgavata Purugay''in Krishna:Myths)Rifez,anidffi-

GMrs.S.Ketkar,''vols.1,2 (1927)New Delhi:OrientalBooksReprintCorp., tudes.ed.Milton Singer (Chicago and London:University ofChicago Press,
1972));LouisRenou,LedestinduP' CJJiansI'Inie,ttudesvédiquesetpzpinéennes, 1966),p.24.
vol.6 (Paris;deBoccard,1960),pp.37-39;LouisRenou,Jean Filliozat,eta1., 75.J.A.B.van Buitenen,fçl-lindu Sacred Literature,''p.9331).
L'inieclassique.Manueliesétudesfrlflienses,2 vols.(Paris:Payot,1947 (vol.1);
ImprimerieNationale,1953(vol.2j)1:270-271;J.A.B.vanBuitenen,Rlqindu 76.Ibii.
Sacred Literature,''EncyclolmediaBritannica (15th ed-,1974)(hereafter,EB .
1J.
I),
Macropaedia8:9331))Jan Gonda,DieReligionen Indiens,2 vols.(Stuttgart:' W. 77.See Thoma!cB.Coburn,<f<scripture'in India.''
Kohlhammer,1960-63)1:9,21-26. 78.Thisdespitethetelling observationsofCoburn,ibitl-,concerningthe
64.J.G.Staal,NambudiriRecitation,pp.11-17;W alterEidlitz,DerGlaube misleadinguseofç<scripture''(in itsusualmeaning)toapply to manyormost
f
ïsfldielteiligen Scbri
ftenierInder(OltenandFreiburg:Walter,1957),pp.7-29) Indian texts.
Thom asB.Coburn,ç <xscripture'in India:Towardsa Typology ofthe W ord in 79.On theunicity ofscripture,seeSiegfried M orenz,Gschriften,heilige,''
Hindu Life,''in thepresentvolume.
RG G 3 5:1538)Leipoldtand M orenz, pp.37-52.
65. Jan C. Heestermann, tfDie Autoritxt des Vedaa'' in Gerhard 80.Onthispoint,seemyarticle,uour'ànasSpoken'
W ord'(above,n.2),
Oberhammer, ed-, Offenbarung. Geisti ge Realitöt Jel Menschen (Vienna: esp.part 1,Gscripture asa Generic Category-''
glndologischesInstitutderUniversitâtW ien),1974),p.31;Staal,NambudiriReci-
tation,p.11.Seealso Graham,BqonitheWritten Hz
brfl,chapter6,n.9. 81.uEntstehungundW esen derBuchreligiony''TbeologiscbeLiteraturezeitung
66.utscripture'in Indiay''in thepresentvolume. 75(1950):709-716.Cf.Morenz,AgyptischeReligion,pp.224-225.
82.On the emphasisupon the written text of the Bible in Jewish and
67.CitedinHeiler,Erclteinungs
formen,p.333.Cf.thestatementoftheAito- Christian textualscholarship,see,for example,the articles ç<Bib1e,''EJ 4:
rqaW rcpyfl/ec:utAsfarasbrabmanextendssofardoesVàc,'whereverthereisbrab-
814-969)GBibleCanonrn/euz flàEncyclopeiia(New YorkandLondon,1901-1906)
plcs,thereisVàc,whereverVàc,thereisbrabman,iswhatismeant''(TheAitarqa -
3:140-154;<<Bib1e,'CE 2:543-544;GScripture,''CE 13:635ff.,esp.635-637)
Arapyaka,ed.andtransArthurBerridaleKeith (1909)repr.ed.,Oxford:Claren- Rcanon ofthe Old Testam enty''HDB,pp.121-123)fTcanon oftheN ew Testa-
donPress,196$,p.186.Seealsop.163,n.8,forfurtherreferencestosimilar ment,''HDB pp.123-127)uBibel''(<<IB.Gsammlung und Kanonisierung des
statementsinothertexts.Cf.PaulThieme,uBrahmam''ZDMG,n.s.102(1952): AT';UIIB.Rsammlung und Kanonisierung des NT''),RGG3 1:1123-1126,
91-129. 1131-1138.M uch ofthisfocusresultsfrom theacuteawarenessin modernschol-
68.aYkam .
çJI''
,cited by Brown,GcreativeRoleofVâc,'p.393. arship ofthebook/tradition dichotomy in Christian thoughtandthewritten
Torah/oralTorahdichotomyinJudaicthought.Cf.H.Bachtgmisspelledontitle
69.Eidlitz,p.12. pageasC<H.Bracht'l,H.Fries,andR.J.Geiselmann,Diemfinfl/fc/leCberlie ferung.
70.FritsEJ.F.1Staal,G'
TheConceptofScriptureintheIndianTraditiom'' Beitrögezum Begri
ffJerTraiition,edd.MichaelSchmaus(Munich:Max Hueber,
in Sikh s'
luflfas; Comrarative J'
er-
ç
zecffl?e.
s on a C'
/llrl
gfrl
.ç Tr
adition, ed. M ark 1957))BirgerGerhardsson,Memory andManuscri pt:OralTraiition ani Written
Juergensmeyer and N.Gerald Barrier,eds.(Berkeley:Graduate Theological TransmissioninRabbinicludaism andEarlyChristianity(UppsalaandLund:C.W .
Union,BerkeleyReligiousStudies,197$,pp.121-122;WayneHoward,Sâmaveiic K.Gleerup;Copenhagen:E.Munksgaard,1961).Thealmostexclusivefocusof
m odernqur'ânicscholarshiponthewrittentextcanbeseeninvirtuallyanymon-
Clvnt(New HavenandLondon:YaleUniversityPress,1977),pp.2-8. ographic study in thefield,with thenotableexceptionsofKristinaNelson,Tlte
71.TheodoreZachariae,review ofW .Caland,DeO ntdekkinzvgescheitknis /-pzcfffrf
A rtc-' .
çtlteQffr'ln(Austin;UniversiryofTexasPress,1985),andAngelika
van ien P'
/l;I(Amsterdam,1918),in GöttingiscbegelebrteAnzeigen 183 (1921): Neuwirth,StuiienzurKompositioniermekkqniscllenSuren(BerlinandNew York:
148-165.Cf.LeipoldtandMorenz,Heili geScbri
ften,p.13. W.deGruyter,1981).Cf.,forexample,thestandardEnglish workofRichard
Bell,IntroiuctiontotheQur'ân(Edinburgh,1953;rev.ed.,Bell'
sIntroiuctiontol/le
72.5.5.3(Keith trans-,pp.301-302). Qur'ân,Completel
y Revised csffEnlatyei by Wz
:M ont
gomery l'
Ft
'
zl/.Edinburgh:The
73. Geschicbte 1:31 (=Eng. trans. 1:33). W internitz's term is UniversityPress,1970))orthearticleuA1-Jtur'àn,''byA.T.W elch,intheEncp
ttm erkwùrdig.'' clopaediao
fljlam.NeuzEiition(fasciclesfrom 1954)5:400-428,inwhichonlythe
finalshortsection on ç<r
f'
heJfur'àninM uslim LifeandThought''givesanyatten-
74.J.A.B.vanBuitenen,Gl-
linduSacred Scriptures,'pp.933,94017)idem. tion to theoralcharacterofthetext.Chapters7-9 ofGraham,BqonitheWritten
162 RETHINKIN G SCRIPTU RE SCRIPTU RE AS SPO KEN W ORD 163

Hzbrl,aredevoted to rectifying thisimbalance ofem phasis on thew ritten and
recited Qur'xn.
83.In b0th casesthere isconsiderable emphasisplaced upon printed text
editionsnotonly ofVedasorQur'àn,butofcountlessancillary worksrelatedto
theseandothersacredtextsinthetwotraditions(e.g.,Purâpas,Jqadlth).Fora11
the salutary resultsofsuch emphasis,itdoesrepresenta significant change over
only onehundred and fiftyyearsago in theavailabilit'
y androleofsuch textsin
scholarly aswellaseveryday contexts,w ith correspondingeffectsupon attitudes
towardsthesetexts.Cf.Helmuth von Glasenapp,Relt kiöseReformbewegungenim
LeutigenIniien (Leipzig:J.C.Hinrichs,1928),p.V.Cf.also G.Bergstrâsser,
Gltoranlesungin Kairo,'DerIslam 20(1932),esp.pp.2-13(onthefirstofficial
printededitionoftheQur'ântext).
84.G.S.Brett,PsychologyAncientcnffMoiern(London:Longmans,1928),
pp.36-37,ascited in M cLuhan,Gutenber
g Galaxy,p.74.
85.H.J.Chaytor,From Scri
pttoPrint:zz
lsItttroductiontoM eiievalVernacular
Literoture(Cambridge:MLHeffer,1945),p.6.
86.H avelock,LiterateRevolution,p.50.Cf.Ong,OralityandLiteraq,p.8:
Gw rittentextsa1lhaveto berelated somehow,directlyorindirectly,tothew orld
ofsound,the naturalhabitatoflanguage,to yield theirm eanings.Reading atext
meansconverting itto sound....W ritingcan neverdispensew ith oralits''
87.Ong,Ibii.,p.10.
88.Languoge csffSilence:Essayson Language,Literature)ani f/leInbuman
(New York:Atheneum,1982),pp.18,19.
89.CulturalFouniationso
flhiustrialcfvf/fzllfnntcambridge:TheUniversity
Press,1958),pp.6-17.
90.Man:HisFirstMilliony/rl(1957;New York:New AmericanLibrary,
MentorBooks,1958),p.150.AlsocitedinMcLuhan,Gutenberg(Q/cx' y,p.76.
91.Ong,Presenceoftherfzbrl,p.114.Cf.hisstatementinOralityJKJLiter-
aq,p.118:Gprintsuggeststhatwordsarethingsfarm orethan writingeverdid.''
Cf.also Carothers,ç<culture and theW ritten W ord,''p.311:G'
W hen wordsare
w ritten...,they becomestaticthingsand lose,assuch,the dynamism which is
so characteristic ofthe auditory world in general,and ofthe spoken word in
Particulan''
92.JosefBalogh,R<vocespaginarum.'Beitrxge zurGeschichtedeslauten
LesensundSchreibens,''Pbilologus82 (1926-1927):237-238;Ong,Orc/iy ani
Literacy,pp.108-112.On rhetoric,see T.0.Sloan and CghaimlPerelman,
Rlkhetoric,''EBIIL Macropaedia,15:789b-80517:George A.Kennedy,Classical
RbetoricJélflItsCbri
stianJnJSecularTraiiti
onfromAncienttoMoiernn-e.
ç(Chapel
Hil1:UniversityofNorthCarolinaPress,1980),esp.pp.220-246.
93.David Reisman,R'
T'heOraland W rittenTraditionsy''Explorations:Stui-
iesinCulture6(1956):25;' WalterJ.Ong,GllamistMethodandtheCommercial
Mind,''StuiiesintheRenaissance8 (1961):167;Mclzuhan,Gutenber
g Galaxy,pp.
124-125.
94.Thisisnotto deny the legitim atedistinctionsthathave received so
much attention inrecentyearsbetween oraltraditionalcultureand chirographic
culture.Cf.JackGoody,ed.,LiteracyinTraditiottalSocieties(Cambridge:TheUni-
versityPress,1968))JanVansina,OralTraiition:-4StuiyinHi storicalMetlmiology
trans.H.M.' Wright(French orig.ed.:DeIatraâitionorale:EssaiJemetbot k Jlf.
s/0-
rique,1961)(Chicago:Aldine,1965))Ruth Finnegan,OralLiteratureinAfrica
(Oxford:Clarendon Press,1970);idem,OralPoetry:1tsNature,Si gni
ficanceand
SocialContext(Cambridge,London,etc.:CambridgeUniversityPress,1977).
95.See Ong,Oralit y aniLiteracy,esp.pp.117-138,157-179)Carothers,
t'Cultureand the'
W ritten '
W ordr''esp.p.310)Chaytor,From ScripttoPrint.esp.
pp.7-8(includingimportantcitationfrom A.LloydJames,OurSpokenLanguage
gLondon,19381,p.29).
96.Chaytor,From q
scrf
zftoOrfnf;Carothers,uculture,Psychiatry,and the
'
W ritten'Word'';Ong,(esp.)ThePresenceoff/
= l4z-
orlandOralit
ycsffLit
eraq;Mcl-u-
han,TLeGutenbergGc/cxy;Eisenstein,T/lePrintingfare
o'
.
sasanAgentofCbange:Com-
municationsandCulturalTrans
formationsinEarl
pModernEurope,lvols.(1979)One-
vol.repn,Cambridge,Londonetc.:CambridgeUniversityPress,198$;idem.n'
rhe
AdventofPrinting and the ProtestantRevolt:A New Approach to the Disruption
of'WesternChristendom,''inTransitionJAIJRevolution.ProblemsJrl(
/IssuesofEuropean
RenaissanceJnf
/Reformati
onHistory,ed.RobertM.Kingdon (Minneapolis:Burgess,
1974),pp.235-270(offersessentialllyaresumeofherbook'sarguments).
97.Eisenstein,Printing Press,p.698.
98.Kenyon,BoobsandReaiers,pp.24-25)M osesHadas,AncillatoClassical
Reaiing(1954;New York:ColumbiaUniversityPress,1961),pp.21-22(quoting
theIocusclassicusonthesubject,Strabo13.1.54);Goodyand'Watt,RConsequences
ofLiteracy,''p.55;H avelock,LiterateRevolution,p.11.
99.M clvuhan,Gutenberg Galaxy,pp.21,90.
100.H avelock,LiterateRevolution,p.9.
101.Ibii.,p.29 (cf.pp.39-59))Finnegan,OralPoetry p.166)Hadas,
Ancilla,pp.50-59)Kenyon,BoobsandReaders,pp.20-21.
102.Ruth Crosby, Ro ral Delivery in the M iddle Ages,''Speculum 11
(1936):88-110.Cf.Chaytor,From ScripttoPrint,esp.pp.10-13.
103.M y trans.from the German trans.ofthe originalby Em ma Brunner-
Traut,inHllie'WbisheitslehredesDjedef-Hor,''zcflyc/lrff/JrAgytiscbeSpracheund
Altertumsbunde76(1940):8.
104.Ruth Finnegan,OralPoetry,p.29.Cf.Balogh,utvocespaginarum ',''
pp.84-87.
 RETHIN KIN G SCRIPTU RE SCRIPTU RE AS SPO KEN W O RD 165

105.O ng,O ralit

y andLiteracy,p.8.
106.Havelock,LiterateRevolutionsp.50.
107.Nietzsche,I'
I'
iric(Leipzig:Kröner,1912)8:248,ascitedinBalogh,
S<<vocespaginarum'y''p.231.NietzscheremarkshereGdafàdieeigentlicheProsa
desAltertum sdurchausW iderhallderlauten Redeistund an deren Gesetzensich
gebildethat;wâhrend unsereProsaimmermehrausdem Schreiben zu erkhren
ist...';N orden,D ieantikeK unst
prosa vom Vlk-phr
hundertv.CltnbisindieZeitder
Renaissqnce(Leipzig,g1898?j;5th ed-,1vol.in 2 pts.(continuouspagination),
D arm stadt:W issenschaftlicheBuchgesellschaft, 1958),p.6.
108.TbeConfessionso fSaintAugustine,trans.EdwardB.Pusey(New York:
Random House,ModernLibrary,194$,p.98;Latin orig.:2nded.,ed.J.Gibb
andW.Montgomery(Cambridge:TheUniversityPress,1927),p.14110-11.
109.Gtvocespaginarum'y''pp.237-238(above,n.92).
110.From Scri
ptto Print,p.14.
111.ç<vocespaginarum'lpp.237-238.Cf.n.92 above.
112.G'Tresdigitiscribunt,duooculivident.Unalingualoquitur. totum
cor-
puslaborat....''
W .' Wattenbach,iasScbri
ftwesen fplMittelalter(1871;4th ed.,
Graz:AkademischeDruck-undVerlagsanstalt,1958 kphotogr.repr.of3rd rev.
ed-,Leipzig:S.Hirzel,1896)),p.495.AlsocitedinChaytor,From Scri nttoPrint,
p.14,n.1.
113.Norden,Kknsyrosg,p.6.Balogh'sentirestudy,l<vocespaginarum'''
isan attemptto ferretoutasm any such exam plesaspossible.
114.GçvocesPaginarum',''pp.234-236.Seealso Graham,Bqond tbeWrit-
lerlH'
brd,chapter3.
115.M arshallM ctauhan,G'T'
heEffectofthePrinted Bookon Languagein
the 16th Century,''in Edm und CarpenteràndM arshallM cLuhan, eds.,Explora-
(fous fn Cbplplunfct
llfos:.
zd
ln znlàology (Boston:Beacon,196$,pp.125-135)
Chaytor,From Scri
pt to Print, esp. pp.6-8;Balogh,Gvocespaginartzm,''pp.
237-238; Ong, Or ality and Literacy,p.118;M clauhan,Gutenberg Galaxy, pp.
124-
125,141;Carothers,Rcultureand theW ritten W ord,''p.310.
116.M clauhan,Gutenberg Galaxy,p.250.
117.TbeAgeo fRe form 1250-1550:,4/IntellectuqlcsJReligiousHi
story o
f 125.N orden,K unst
LateMedievalfl
Al#Re
formationEurope(New Haven and London:YaleUniversity
Press,1980),p.204.
118.Mclmhan,Gutenber
g Gfl/axy,p.84.
119.Ong,Presenceoff/leH/brfl,pp.63,64,71-72.
120.Schiller'slinesread:Rllorperand Stimmeleihtdie Schrift/ dem
stummen Gedanken;/ Durch derJahrhunderte Strom trâgt/ ihn dasredende
Blatt''(citedinJensen,DieSchrift,p.2).Adam Mùllerhasthefollowingtosay
in hisZwöl fReien f
'
ikrJfeBereisamkeitI/AIJderen Wr
fallinDeutschlqni((1816?j;
Frankfort/M.:lnsel,1967),p.69:t <Nachdem dieRedeausdem GebietdesOhrs
in dasGebietdeslesenden Auges,nachdem sieausdem Gebiete derStim m ein
den W irkungskreis der schreibenden H ënde einm alhöchstunnatùrlichezw eise
versetztworden,soerstirbtsienun auch,schrum pftzusamm en,vertrocknetmehr
und mehr: Das W ort schwindet ineinander und w ird m ehr und mehr zur
Zahl.''
121.Seethereferencesgivenin n.82 above.Forahistoryofbiblicalstudies
in the modern W est,see Hans-loachim Kraus,Geschichteierbistorisclvkritiscben
ErforschungJ:.
JAlten Testament
s(2nd ed.,Zurich:NeukirchenerVerlag,1969);
W ernerGeorg Kùmmel,DasNeue Testament.Gescbichte derEr forscbung seiner
Probleme(FreiburgandMunich:KarlAlber,1958).Shortersummariesareavail-
able in the following RGG3 articles:uBibelkritik:AT''(F.Baumgârtel),1:
1184-1188;GBibelkritik:NT''(E.Dinkler),1:1188-1190)GBibelwissenschaft
desAT''(C.Kuhl),1:1227-1236)RBibelwissenschaft:NT''(' W .G.Kummel),1:
1236-1251.A surveyofm odernscholarship onotherscripturaltextsoftheworld
is harder to find,but some impression can be gained by referring to Jacques
W aardenburg,Classicalzlyprtuc/le.
rtotbeStudyofReli
gion:Aims,MetboisaniTbeor-
iesofResturc/l,vol.1or2 (TheHagueand Paris:Moutom 1973);EricSharpe,
ComparativeReli gion:.4 History (New York:Scribner's,1975).Cf.CharlesJ.
Adams,ed.,z1.Recfler'.sGuiietofk GreatRelifons(1965)2nd ed.,New York:
Macmillan;London:CollierMacmillan,1977).
122.For am uch moreextensive consideration ofthe oraldim ensionsof
theChristian Bible,seeGraham,BqonitbeWritten Hz
brft chapters10-12.
123.Curtius,EuropöisckeLiteratur,p.263.Cf.hiscom m enton p.314also:
t<seine höchste W eihewurdedem Buch durch das Christentum zuteil.Eswar
eine Religion desheiligen Buches.Christusistder einzige Gott,den uns die
antikeKunstm iteinerBuchrolledarstellt-''Seealso LeipoldtandM orenz,H eili
ge
Scbri
ften,p.118.
124.Ong,PresenceoftheH'
brl,p.14.Forsomewhatmoresoberdocumenta-
tion ofChristian zealforbooks,seeT.C.Skeat,uEarlyChristian Book Produc-
tiom''Camb.Hist.Bib.2:512-513.Cf.Adolfvon Harnack,Cberdenprivaten
Gebrauckderbeili
genSchri
fteninJeraltenKirche(Leipzig:J.C.Hinrichs,1912),
pp.33-37;LeipoldtandMorenz,Heili geSchri
ften,pp.115-122.
prosa,p.538,speaksofPaul'slettersasfor the most
partnothingbutGein notwendigerErsatzfurdiem undlicheRede-''O nscripture
readingin theearly Church liturgy,seeLeipoldtand Morenz,Heili geSchriften,
pp.106-114)W .0.E.Oesterley,T/leJewishBackgroundo f theCbristianLitur
gy
(1925.Repr.ed.Gloucester,Mass-:PeterSmith,1956),p.111-112)PaulGlaue,
Die Vorlesung heiligerScbriften im Gottesdienste.1.Df/.BiszurEntsteltung Jer
altkatbolischen Kircbe (Berlin:Alexander Duncker,1907).Note that Glaue's
 166 RETH IN KIN G SCRIPTURE
emphasisontheimportanceofthelectionfrom theJewishscripturesintheearly
Christian community hasbeen contestedbyW alterBauer,oerK rt gottesdietutJer
öltestenCltristen(Tùbingen:J.C.B.MohrgpaulSiebeck),1930), pp.39-48,but
BauerdoesnotdenytheimportanceoftheseScripturesfortheearliestcommunity
norapparentlythepossiblelaterinfluenceofTorah-readingon Christianworship
(afterca.A.
0.100-150).
126. Carl Andresen,DieKircben der alten Cltri
stenheit (Stuttgart)W .
Kohlhammer,1971),p.209.Adolfvon Harnack,DieQyellen fersqcntmnfen
apostoliscbenKircltenordnung nebsteinerUntersucbung fiôerden Urmrung ffasLectorats
untfJeranierennieierenH/ ir
iàen(Leipzig:J.C.Hinrichs,1886),pp.57-103. Cf.2
Clement19.1.
127.E.von Dobschfitz,GBible in the Churchy''ERE 2:601,citingJustin
Ma
b rt 'yr(sc.Apology67.3)in aboutA. o.150;cf.p.602also.SeeGlaue,pbrlesu'q
eilkerScltri
ften,pp.62-71.Cf.2 Clement2.4.
128.Egeria,Diaryo faPikrimage,trans.GeorgeE.Gingras(New Yorkand
Paramus,N.J.:NewmanPress,1970),chapters24,25;EricP.Werner,TlteSacrei
Briige:LiturgicalParallelsin 3'
ynfwtyf/eandEarly Clturcb (New York:Schocken
19
Pl 70 ),pp.12 9-133;Do bschùtz,GBib l
e i
n t
h eChurch,''p.605)J.A.Lamb,GThe,
l aceoftheBiblein theLiturgy,''Camb.H ist.Bib.1:568-570)O esterleys /awfl -
cckrounfl,pp.148-149.ThispracticewastobecomemostimportantinChris-
tianm onasticism ,wherethem em orizingofthepsalm swasaprerequisiteforpar-
ticipation in theiife oftheearlyaswellaslaterorders. Seemy discussion ofthe
Pachomian monasticsin particularin BqonitlteWritten W4rl, chapter11.
(Ch 129.Dobschùtz,HBiblein the Church,'p.603;JamesStalker,upreaching
ristianl,:ERE 10:215a;Lamb,GplaceoftlleBible,'pp.568-570,withmany
Prim ary-sotlrcc refercllccs.
130.Friedrich Heiler,DieOstkircben, rev.ed.ofUrkircheUSJ Ostkircheby
Anne Marie Heiler,with HansHartog (Munich and Basel:ErnstReinhardt,
1971),pp.197, 199-204,213;Andresen,Kirclten ieralten Cbristenlteit,pp.
237-240(cf.p.660);V.Schultze,txEvangelarium,'NewScbaffHerzogEnqclonedia
qfReligious Akaw/ctke (Grand Rapids,Mich., 1952)4:220-221;J.Pascher,
RBrevierq''Lexibon#rTl teokgieundKfrc/le(2adrev.ed.)2:679-684.
.
131.Leipoldtand Morenz,Heili geScltrf
iten,p.120.In an ageoflow lay
literacy,such mem orizationw asavirtualnecessity. SeeM .L.W .Laistner,Chris-
tianityJrlJPagan Culturefs tbeLaterRomanEmyire(lthaca,N.Y.,andLondon:
CornellU niversity Press, 1951.Repr.ed.1978),pp.9,29.
132.InIsaiam,prol.1(=PL 24:17).
133. 6t...quam erat om nium sensibus m emoriaeque inveteratum , et tot
aetatum successionibusdecantatum''(Letter71,in(UjPL 33:242-243.Citedin
W .Schwarz,Princi plesJrIJProblemsofBiblicalTranslation:SomeRe
formationContro-
versiesaniTbeirBackground(Cambridge:TheUniversityPress,19551,p.38).
SCRIPTURE AS SPOKEN W O RD
134.<<Etegolegerevolo.Plusenim medelectathujusverbiesselectorem,
quam verbim eidisputatorem y''Serm on 355,1,in PL 39:1574)citedby D enys
Gorce,Lalectioiivinafc.
sorginesducénobitismef
)SaintBenoitetCassiodore. 1:Saint
. //rt
svleetlalecturesacréedanslemilieuascétiqueromain('Wépion,Belgium:Monastère
duMont-vierge,andParis:AugustePicard,1925),p.x.
135.LiepoidtandMorenz,HeiligeScbri ften,p.53,n.1(CitingAdolfvon
Harnack).Ambrosespeaks,forexample,explicitlyofreadingscriptureaslistening
toChristspeak (Deo yiciisministrorum 1.20.88(ed.GeorgKrabinger,Tubingen,
1857,p.621.
136.Jean-claudeGuy,<:Lemonachisme,''subsection ofart.t<écrituresainte
etviespirituelle,''DictionnaireJemiritualité,ascetiqueetmystique,doctrineethi
stoire
(Paris,1932ff.)4:163.Guy speaksin anotherpassage(p.160)ofGsacrorum
- lectionem meditationemque librorum''asone ofthe basicpracticesofthe first
monks,whoRserelayaientdejouretdenuitdanslechantdespsaumesetlarécita-
tion des tcritures.''On meditatio and its oral character, see Heinrich Bacht,
uxMeditatio'indenâltestenMönchsquellen,''GeistundLeben28(1955):360-373;
Adalbert de Vbgtte, ulves deux fonctions de la méditation dans 1es Régles
monastiquesancienness''Revuei'ltistoireJeIamiritualité51(1975):3-16.Cf.Jean
Leclercq,FrançoisVandenbroucke,and LouisBouyer,LaJyriluc/fféf;u moyen fktr
(Paris:Aubier,1961),p.113:Rt,
améditationestl'effortparlequelotlfixedans
lam em oire,en1esrépétant,1esparolessacrées-''On lectiodivina, see Gorce,Lectio
iivina.Cf.CorbinianGindele,ullieSchriftlesung im Pachom iuskloster,''Erbeuafl
Auftrag41(1965):114-122.
137.Cited by Heinrich Bacht,DasVermöcbtnisJo.Urmrungs.Stuiienzum
w frfi/ltw Möncbtum 1(Wùrzburg:Echter,1972),pp.202-203 (trans.minej.
138.According to BerylSm alley'sdescription of the goals of Cassian's
monasticdiscipline:Theuslffflyof tbeBiblein l/;cMiidlea4.çe.
s,2nd ed.(Oxford:
BasilBlackwell,1952),p.28.
139.Jean Leclercq,L'amourJ:JlettresetleJ/ oïrJeDieu(Paris:tditionsdu
Cerf,1957),pp.20-23 (Eng.trans.by CatherineMisrahi,TlteLoveofLearning
andf/leDesireforGod(New York:New American Library,1962),pp.23-26).
Gorce,LectioiivincCf.also referencesin n.136above.
140.See,forexample,DenysGorce,Lectioiivina,pp.xvi-xxix, 63-80.Cf.
Jean-Marie Leroux, RM onachisme et communauté d'après Saint Jean
Chrysostome,''in Théologieiela vie monastique.Y'
tudessurla traiitionpatristique
(Paris:Aubier,1961),p.156;Jean Leclercq,Gtzalecturedivine,''LaMaison-Dieu
(1946),no.1,pp.21-22;ClaudePeifer,çT' heBiblicalFoundationsofMonasti-
cism,''CistercianStuiies1(1966):7-31.SeealsoJamesMcMurray,G' T'heScrip-
turesandMonasticPrayer,'Ci stercianq
slrffffûç2(1967):15-37.
141.CitedbyJ.deGhellinck,RpaginaettsacraPagina'.Histoired'un mot
ettransformation del'objetprimitivementdésigné,''inMélangesAugustePelzer
(Louvain:Bibliothèquedel'Université,1947),p.33.
168 RETH IN KIN G SCRIPTU RE SCRIPTU RE AS SPO KFN W ORD
142.Friedrich Heiler,KotbolischerSI/Jevangeli
scberGottesiienst, 2ndrev.ed. offentlich wirtaussgeschryen.''Cited by PaulSchempp, LutbersStellungzurHeili-
(Munich:ErnstReinhardt,1925),p.43. :,
:,7Scbri
ft(Munich:Chr.Kaiser,192$,pp.33-34.
143.Mytrans.from W ilhelm Walther,LutbersDeutsclteBibel.Festsckri
ftzur 153.H' x.
'z
l7:972-3.( t .nusquam praesentiusetvivaciusquam in ipsissacris
Jahrhuniert
feierierRe
formation(Berlin:ErnstSiegriedMittler,1917),p.188. suis,quasscripsit,literisinveniripotesta''
144.Cf.Gerhard Ebeling'sStatem ent:S çu nsern Vorvâtern wardie Bibel
Sprachheim at,wenn auch mitw echselnderIntensitàtund strittigem Versundnis;
und
( deshalb war Gott gewissermassen Sprachzentrum . . .''(Gott uni Wz brl
Tfibingen:J.C.B.MohrgpaulSiebeckj,196$,p.1$.
145.I'F.
'I 16:4118-21uD enn ich hab eszuvorofftgesagtund sag esnoch,
?
dasesein theuerundköstlich ding ist,wenn man GottesW orthöret, U nd man
soltalleLand durchlauffen,dasman wirdig sein möchte,einen buchstaben von
Gotteswortzu hören....'
146.Evidenced in such asidesas:H'rhen 1ran through the scripturesasI
hadthem inmemory''(ç xDiscurrebam diendeperscripturas,uthabebatmemoria'':
H'
H 54:18610-11).Luther'sAugustinianmentorStaupitzwrotehimselfconcerning
the importanceofmemorizing scripture forthe novice monk:uD erN ovizesoll
dieH eiligeSchriften begieriglesen,ândâchtig hören, undeifriglernen'
'(citedin
K.Thimme,LutllcryStellungzurHeili
genScllrf
/ (Gtttersloh:Bertelsmann,19031,
p.7).On Luther'sknowledgeofHebrew,Greek,German,andLatin,seeW il-
helm W alther,LuthersdeutscheBibel,pp.39-54.
147.W'
'
..
I 4O.ii:40923-26
148.l'
fz'
..
z
l50:65922-25:N ichtallein im hertzen,sondernauch eusserlich die
mfindlichereddeund buchstabischewortim Buch imertreiben undreiben, lesen
und widerlesen,mitvleissigem auffmercken und nachdencken, wasderheilige
Geistdamitmeinet.'Cf.I' F.
'I32:6424-656.
?
149.'l
z'
lz
-.
'
l30.i:146:G...auch solgelernetundbehalten werden.''
150.Cf.thestatem entofHansRùckert:RLutherverstehtunterdem W ort
Gottes immer die viva vox evangelii,daslebendig in derKirclte verkùndigte
W ort,so dafàdamitdie GeschichtedieserKirche mitum griffen ista1sdasEle-
ment,in dem Verkfindigung und Weitergabe erlblgen''(as quoted by R.J.
Geiselm ann,ulnasKonzilvonTrientùberdasVerhâltnisderH eiligenSchriftund
der nicht geschriebenen Traditioneny'' in Bacht, Fries, and Geiselm ann,Die
vlfïsff/fc/lcUberlie
ferung,p.126.
151.I/
l'
.?l 18:13621.
r
152.l'
I'
.
pl12:259:0.t<Euangelion isteygentlich nichtdas, dasynn biichern
stehetund ynn buchstaben verfassetwirtt,sondern mehreyn mundlichepredig
und lebendig wortt,und eyn stym ,die da ynn die gantz welltereschalletund
 r
6 use ofa generalnotion ofsacred book,and the unhesitating extension of
T he dc anons'of tscripture'
Kendall I'M Folkert
Thepurposeofthisessay isto introduce atypology ofscripturalmaterial
thatwillserve t'
wo purposes:(1)theproperframingofsuch material
withinthestudyofdifferentmajorreligioustraditions;(2)theillumina-
tion of our own scriptural heritage in such a way as to enable serious
reflection on theway Christian scripture isstudied and taughtwithin the
study ofreligion.
Thistypology willbeillustrated byreference170th to aspecificnon-
Christian scripturalcase,namely,theJain tradition,and to severalinter-
pretive contextsin the Christian use oftheBible.The basicthesisofthe
articleisthatatleastt'
womajorcategoriesofscripturemustbedelineated,
170th in study and in teacl
aing,170th in Christian and non-christian reli-
gioushistory;and thatsuch a delineation can clarify and possibly trans-
form the way in w hich the study of religion approaches scriptural
materials.
T H E O VER ALL SC O PE O F T H E PRO BLEM
The study of religion has assumed- to an extraordinary degree- and
omitted to reflectupon- to an equally extraordinary degree- thegeneral
presence in religioustraditionsofbodiesofscripture,thatis,normative,
in some sense <inspiredy'in some sense fsacred'literature.A significant
measureof170th thebreadth oftheassumption and theabsenceofprobing
analysiscanbefoundbyexaminingamajorproductofscholarshipinthis
170
<CAN ON S'OF ESCRIPTU RE'
area:themassiveSacreiBoobsoftLeEastseries,publishedfrom themid-
1800s onward,in the heyday of scholarly tdiscovery'of non-christian
traditions.The very title of the series (including itsreference to the
<t
East'')isan index oftheproblem thatwantsaddressing:thewidespread
this notion into the earlieststagesof collection,editing, and translating
ofthe literatureofmajortraditions.
Atthesam etime,onecan read painstakingly thewritingsofF.M ax
MùllerandhiscollaboratorsintheSacredBoobsoftbeEastwithoutfinding
any degree ofsustained reflection on eitherof these two criticalpoints.
M filler presents,at various places, a nascentthesis concerning what he
callsç<book religion'';butneither doeshisthesis addressthe question of
sacrednessasitappliesto 'books';nordoesitanywherefully explore the
matterofjusthow thesetbooks'wereandareactuallyutilizedwithinthe
varioustraditions.Theexistenceoftsacred booksy'in short,seemsto have
needed nojustification.
Giventhis,itseemsproper,andbest,tounderstandtheSacredBoobsof
tLeEastnotprimarily asa failed effortto comprehend the scripturesofreli-
gioushistory,butratherasan accuratereflection ofageneralmodeofthink-
ing aboutreligioustraditionsand theirliterature,a mode thatpersistseven
now,welloveracenturyaftertheSacreiBoobsoftbeEastbegan toappear.
The generalpresence ofthismode isindicated,albeitagain negatively, by
the fact that one can also pore over the somewhat later efforts of
phenomenologistsandcataloguists(e.g.,GerardusvanderLeeuw),andfind
no system atictreatmentofthe statusofsacred books.Thekey pointseems
to be this:thatscripture wasnotand hasnotbeen recognized asareligious
phenom enon itself,one in need ofasmuch analysisin itsown rightasany
othermodcofreligiousactivit 'y orexpression.
Two notesneed to be added to thisopening obsetvation.First,this
entire matterclearly isnotunrelated to generalmodesofhistoriography
in Avestern academ ic circles.The historian and hum anist's unrelenting
focuson textualdocum entation,and theaccompanying bifurcation ofthe
study of human comm unities into history and socialscience- the latter
relentlessly discounting literary evidence- com prises one of the back-
dropsagainstwhich the matterofscriptureisplayed out.Second,ascon-
cerns scripture perse,the scholarly failure to treatit as a phenomenon
itselfisintimately tied to the stateofBiblicalStudiesin the same period
asthatoftheSacreiBooks(a -/
-ràcEastandotherearlycomparativehistorical
study ofreligion.The Christian,specifically Protestant,fascination with
the Bible asa 'sacred book'- afascination thatisactually adim ension of
Christian faith itself- provides another of the background sets for the
problem ofscripture in general.
 r
RETHIN KIN G SCRIPTU RE
To explore fully these two contextsisbeyond thisessay,butboth
willbetouched upon in whatfollows.Anddespitethissketchy treatment,
it should em erge thatthe matter ofscripture ram ifiesbroadly into t'wo
problem areasin the study ofreligion thatare related to these contexts:
the relationship between classicaland literary religiousformsand day-to-
day practice,and the relationship between BiblicalStudiesand the study
ofreligion asabroaderdiscipline.These problem atic scholarly areasare
ripe fornew approaches,and itishoped thatanew view ofscripturecan
helptobreaksomeofthementallogjamsthatonefindsinthefield,from
curriculum (up and down)to specializedstudy.
SC RIPT U RE AS PH EN O M EN O N
Asnoted above,the recognition ofscripture asan analyzablephenome-
non,and the analysisofit,are tasksthathave notbeen done and were
notdone in the timew hen the broad notion of<sacred books'entered the
process of organizing and understanding the history of religious tradi-
tions.Thisstate ofaffairs shows itselfm ostclearly in the profusion of
names- would-be synonymsi- thatlitterthefield:scripture,holy word,
sacred book,sacred literature,Bible,canon,to name only some of the
mostprominent.
Each of these potential names for the phenomenon bears careful
analysisand usage;butthetitlesofseriesand anthologies,and thevocabu-
lary oftextbook authors,show slittle,ifany,consistency ofusage orcare
in matching namesto specificpiecesofliterature.(Theonly reliefthat
occursisthe occasionalrefusalofauthorsto translate,and the resultant
useofindigenousterm sforthem aterial,forexample,siidhânta,tpx cbing,
etc.).Thissuggeststhatamorebasicforceisatwork:theassumption of
a general,loosely grasped model to which a11other apparently similar
occurrences are assimilated.Thatm odel,quite clearly,is the Protestant
imageoftheBible.A more importantpoint,however,isthatthismodel
hascom e to dominate the field by default,asitwere.Thisreveals itself
ifonesimply takesthetimeto considerhow theseveralnamesofscripture
work outwhen applied with care to the ProtestantBible.To anticipate
the resultsof som e subsequentanalysis,each name revealsand impliesa
significantly differentdimension of the statusofthe Bible- or,atleast,
itshould do so.
Butthe truth is that,much ofthe time,the nam esare themselves
applied nearly interchangeably to theBible.The sum ofsuch an observa-
tion isthatthe nature and characterofthe Bibleasa religiousphenom e-
non hasnotbeen handled clearly.O rthe pointcan beputanotherway:
the Protestantview oftheBible issignificantly restricted to only certain
'CAN O N S'O F GSCRIPTURE'
dimensionsofthe phenom enon represented by the severalnamesapplied
to it;butthe inapplicability ofsom e of the namesis notrecognized by
scholars.H ence,although m any terms are in use, the term sare actually
subservientto an f7priorinotion ofscripture on theProtestantmodel.
Given this,thefirsttask in dealing w ith thephenomenon ofscrip-
ture isto find and fix adequate term inology,and to recognize thatsuch
term inology is not equivalentto Bible as the latteris generally viewed.
The term inology suggested hereisthew ord canon. Theterm isin som e
waysthe least ofthe available evils;butitsselection from the clusterof
possible namesisdriven by the way in which itsbasic m eaning- thatof
law and rule,fundamentalaxiom , principle or standard- lendsitself to
the developm entofatypology ofscripturalphenomenawithin which the
otherwould-besynonym s,and thespecificm aterialforwhich they ought
to stand,can be clearly laid outand understood.
The proposed typology is the following:thatscripture be under-
stood to occur as a religiousphenom enon in two generalforms, which
can be called <'Canon I''and Hcanon 11.''(Theobviouspaucityoftermi-
nologicalgeniusisregrettable,buttheprosaicchoicedoeshavearationale
behindit.)Moreover,each form can anddoesoccurwithinsinglereli-
gioustraditions,the two even existing simultaneously attim es. In 170th
cases,the underlying etymologically truesense ofcanon isactive;butthe
waysin which CanonsIand 11are actually presentin a tradition are sig-
nificantlydifferent,andthefailuretoperceivethisdifferenceisthemajor
cause ofconfusion in dealing with scriptures.
'
W hat,then,ism eantby these terms? Canon I denotesnormative
texts,oralor written,that are present in a tradition principally by the
force ofa vector orvectors.Canon 11refersto norm ative textsthat are
more independently and distinctively presentwithin a tradition, thatis,
aspieces ofliterature m ore or lessassuch are currently thoughtof, and
w hich themselvesoften function asvectors.
Furtherexplanation isclearly in order,though typesofm aterialwill
be explored by example,below.By ivector'ismeantthe m eansorm ode
by w hich something is carried) thus Canon I'S place in a tradition is
largely dueto its'being carried'by som eotherform ofreligiousactivity;
and Canon I'ssignificanceforatradition cannotbe grasped fully without
referenceto itscarrierand to the relationship between thetwo. Thesame
m eaning appliesto vectorwhere Canon 11m ay function asa icarrier'of
religiousactivity.
The m ost comm on vector of Canon I isritualactivity, but other
significantcarriersare also to be found. Canon 11m ostcomm only set wes
asa vector ofreligiousauthority, butitisaiso to a large degree acarrier
ofritualiconolatryand/orindividualistpiety.Bygivingcarefulattention
 RETH IN KIN G SCRIPTU RE
to130th thevectorsand the activitiesvectored, onecan delineatesub-types
undereach Canon;and in thisfashion, asystematictypology ofscripture
asaphenom enon can bedeveloped.
A word ofcaution isin order. The proposed typology doesnotpre-
Sumeacausaland/ordevelopmentalrelationshipbetween Canons1and
ll,norcan ityetbe asserted to cover every instance ofscripture. M ore-
over,the preceding paragraphsm ay strike oneasthesortofterminologi
-
calobfuscation better ieft to smaligroupsat conventions. W hetherthe
latterisso,the follow ing section should settle. The form erconcernsare
those that accompany any hypothesis, and itmustbe adm itted thatthe
validity of Canons 1 and 11 as fundamental categories in ordering our
thinking aboutscripture willrrquire m uch future testing in many con-
texts.They are offered asa hypotheticalmodel, butnotasone thathas
no basisasconcernsitsability to shed lighton someproblemsin studying
scripture.
T W O EX AM PLES O F APPLY IN G T H E M O DEL
To show clearly theutility ofthe typology, itwillbeused hereto explore
two blocs ofscripturalmaterial. Thisprocesswillalso enable usto see
some of the subtypes that can be found within each larger category of
Canon.Thefirstexamplewillbethenormativetextsofthelaintradition;
the second willbe the Christian Bible.
From almosttheearliestscholarlyeffortstoportraytheJainsup to
themostrecent,ithasbeen held thattheJainshave aspecific, clearly
delim ited body ofscripture consisting ofsom e forty-fivetextsin various
fixed categories.Ithasbeen assumed thatthisbloc ofscripture datesto
theperiod around 50O c.s.,when itwasedited into a collection;and itis
further assumed thatindividualparts ofthisbloc existed as'4scripture''
throughoutsom e six to eightpreceding centuries. It isalso widely held
thatonecommunityoflains,theSvetambaras,acceptthisscripture, while
anothercom munity,the Digambaras, rejectitoutofhand.Such hasbeen
the generalportraitoftheJain scripturessincethe 1870s;yetthere are
severalnagging problem sassociated with itthatrefuse to go away.
The firstproblem is thattexts from the sixth century cE.(afteror
..
contemporary with the editing ofthe collection)do not,when they
describetheJains'normativeliterature,listthesametextsasaregivenin
the currentportrait,nor restrictthemselves to forty-five titles, nor use
the kam e categories for tl
ae texts. Bedeviled by these inconsistencies,
scholarshave generally chalked up the variationsto lossof texts, altera-
tions,orotheraccidentalcauses;butno satisfying accounting forthedif-
ferenceshasbeen putforward.
ECAN O N S'O F CSCRIPTURE'
Thesecondproblem isthatwhen oneaskscontemporaryJainswhat
their scriptures are,one receives widely varying answers, responsesthat
vary notbecause ofignorance,butbecausethere doesnotappearto be a
wholly acceptedbody ofscripture thatisofequalvalueto theentirecom-
munity.M oreover,itdoesnotappeartrue thattheD igam barasroutinely
rejectthebodyoftextsostensibiy acceptedby theSvetambaras;certainly
thisproposition mustbe significantly qualified.
Amid allofthiswelter,examination ofthehistory ofJain scholar-
ship revealsasignalfact:theforty-five textbody ofliterature wasorigi-
nallyputforwardastheJain scripturesbyonescholar,GeorgBûhler,who
wasrelied upon on this pointby allothersin the nineteenth and early
twentieth centuries.Bûhler obtained his information from a single oral
sourcewithin theJain community;andwhilehefound itattested to by
otheroralsources,healsoknew thatitdid notjibewith stillothersuch
sources,orwith the olderliterary testimony.Yethe putitforward,and
lived to see itperpetuated by otherscholars.
Beyond this,acharminganomaly surfacedveryearly inJainschol-
arship.W hen Hermann Jacobiwas asked to make translationsofJain
textsfortheSacred.
B0c,
/o*oftbeEast,oneofthefirsttwotextssotranslated
and publishedwastheKal
paSntra.Yet,asJacobihadto admit,theKal
pa
s'fjrrn thatwasbeing published asa sacred book wasnotin theforty-five
textscripturebloc.D espitethis,hechoseitbecauseofitsenormouspopu-
larity and value to the com munity,a factthat is attested by the Kal pa
qsfirra'soverwhelming presence in m anuscript collections and its domi-
nanceasatextchosen forillustration by manuscriptartists.Ergo,farfrom
being am inormatterassociated with obscuretexts,theproblem ofincon-
sistency in theJain Rscriptures''provedtobean immediatedifficulty for
scholars.Yetthe notion ofthe forty-five text bloc continued to be put
forward.
'
W hatwereBûhlerand the othersdoing?The simplestanswer,and
theonethatperm itsthebestexplanation ofthewhole range ofproblem s
involved,isthis:Bùhlersuperimposed aCanon 11m odelofscriptureonto
a tradition whose literature wasof the Canon lvariety.Thisconclusion
can be illum inated by reference to two criticalpoints.
First,scripturalm aterialofthe Canon Itypeneedstobeunderstood
ata11timesin termsofitsvectors.TheJain tradition exhibits170th the
ritual-activity-vectorm entioned above,and othersaswell;and theplace
ofscripturesinJain religiouslifeisonlyfully intelligiblein termsofthe
vectorsto be found in varioussituations,Theproblem oftheKalpa q sfifrfl
clarifiesitsclfatonce in these term s,forthetextin question isvectored
by amajorritualactivity.Itisfestively read aloudinacommunalgather-
ing during Paryufana,the penitentialand confessionalperiod atthe end
 RETHIN KIN G SCRIPTURE
oftheJain religiousyear,aritualtimeofintenseactivity fortheentire
community.HencetheKal pas'fjrrufindsitsprominencein theJaincom-
munity;itisoneofthetextsmostfrequentlycopied and illustrated;Jains
speak of it as a normative text,a scripture.Thatit isttotfound in the
forty-five textbloc of scriptures isnoteven a matterofmom entto the
com m unity.
Onemoreexample:theolder,sixtlwcentury accountsoftheJains'
textsthatareatvariance with the forty-five textm odelare also vectored
by specificreligiousactivities.They are carried largely by aritually struc-
tured m onastic course ofinstruction,one thatleapsinto view assoon as
the commentarieson the textsare draw n into the picture. And so vari-
ancesbetween the older accounts and the forty-five textm odelare not
simply the resultof happenstance,or, atleast,the olderm odelwas not
m erely the prototype ofthe m ore recent one,with loss and confusion
intervening.Butthe rationale forthe olderm odelw illnotemerge from
the textsalone;itsvectorfinally clarifiesitsstatus.
One notesalso thatthislattervectorisdiscoverable only w ith the
aid ofthe commentarieson thetexts;and thisleadsto thesecond critical
point concerning Btthler's superimposition of Canon types. C anon 11
scriptureis,amongothermajorfeatures,especiallycharacterizedbybeing
viewed asindependently valid and powerful,and assuch,asbeing abso-
lutely closed and complete.'W hatisin Canon 11isnormative, true,and
binding;whatisoutsideofitissecondary in allthese respects. Therefore,
forBùhlerand his successors,the existence ofdifferentaccountsofthe
rangeand contentsoftheJain scripturesposesaproblem,butthisprob-
lem doesnotnecessarilyaffecttheJains.In Canon1instances,thevector
and itsvalidity are atleastasdeterm inativeasany limiton the scripture
itself.Further,scholarswho thought(and think)ofscripturesin Canon
11modesare likely to do whatJain scholarshavedone:they ignore or
depreciate the com mentaries.Som e exoneration is called for here;the
commentaries were often not fully accessible to scholars.Yet,in their
Canon 11orientation,theearly editorsand translatorsdid notwaitforor
insiston a fullcomm entorialcontextbeforepushing ahead with publica-
tion and analysisofthe scriptures.Norneed one look farin the study of
religion to see numeroussimilarcasesin the handling oftraditionsother
than theJain.
It appears,then,that the Canon IJain texts have been much
obscured,andtheirroleinJain religioushistoryandlifemuchmisunder-
stood,in virtue oftheirhaving been forced into a Canon 11 mold;itis
hoped thatthisexamplehasshed some lighton the workingofthe Can-
onsland 11typology.Yetthismethod oftreating Scriptureisnotnecessar-
i1y offullvalue if it illuminatesonly one tradition, or ifitspringsonly
SCAN ON S'OF ESCRIPTU RE'
from apeculiarexample ofm isapplied conceptsin comparative religion.
A greatertestof itsvalue is to turn itonto the tradition thatinform ed
the '
W estern scholars,thatis,to testiton theBibleitself.And so we turn
to oursecond exam ple.
The basic thesis issimple:that the ProtestantBible isa Canon 11
phenom enon,and thatthrough m uch ofChristian reiigioushistory, and
even stillatpresent,theBible also functions- attimeseven prom inantly
functions- asa Canon ltext.The startling factisthatscholarshave not
only imposed Canon 11m odelsonto non-christian traditions;they have
also, as W ilfred Cantwell Smith has pointed out, forgotten the rich
multidimensionality of the Bible's ow n role within Christianity.The
loosely held,butdominant,Protestantm odeloftheBiblem entioned ear-
lierisalso thedom inantm odelforBiblicalStudies,and itisan altogether
Canon 11model.
How,specifically,doesthe adoption ofCanonsIand 11in viewing
the Bible shed lighton itsstatusasa phenom enon?To see thisquickly,
itispossible to look attwo areas ofm aterialand evidence.The first is
theuse oftheBiblein Christian churches,and the second istheproblem
ofthe Christian relationship to the H ebrew scriptures.
Itisan interesting exercise to obselwe the specific statusand use of
the Bible in various Christian denom inations.The available evidence is
obvious,and significant.Two basic questionscan beasked:(1)how are
theBible'scontentsused in thechurch service?(2)whatistheBible's
physicalstatus,qua book,in the service and church building?
'
W ith respectto the first question,one obsetwes a division within
Christianity between churchesthatuse alectionary and thosethatusethe
Bible's contentsin am ore random fashion.In the formercase,the con-
tentsoftheBibleareclearlybeingvectored.They arecarried by theritual
pattern ofthe Christian year,and are even more specifically vectored by
the internalrhythm ofthe service itself- forexample,a Lesson from the
O ld Testament,a Psalm ,a Lesson orEpistle from the New Testament,
and finally,hedged by chanting and changing postures,aGospelportion.
In those churchesthatdo notuse alectionary,such clearpatternsofvec-
toring are notprom inent;nor even would the theologiesof some such
churches accept any such limitation on or division within the scripture
and itsuse.Itisalso clearthatsignificantcorrespondence existsbetween
churchesthatuse a lectionary and churchesw hose emphasisin worship
in eucharistic,that is,the greater prom inence of ritualcom munion is
linked to a structured 'carrying'ofthe Bible.
'
W ith respectto the second question,itis also clearthatchurches
differ m arkedly in terms of the Bible's physical presence. In som e
churches, an oversized Bible is prom inently displayed, and is usually
 RETHIN KIN G SCRIPTURE
accompanied by the presence of Bibles in the pews.In others,nary a
Bible,oversized or not,is to be found.And again,the correspondence
holds:the presence ofa ritualvectorimpliesthe physicalabsence ofthe
Bible.Also highly revealing is the link between Bible and clergym an;
hereoneconsistently observesarangeofphenom ena, from novisiblelink
atall,to the presence ofthe Bible on the lectern before the clergyman,
to the physicalholding ofthe Bible by the clergym an. O nce more,the
correspondence holds:the clergym an whoseroleispriestly hasno Bible;
the Protestantevangelistsportshisaloft, elevated in hishand.
Fora11ofthismaterialthe Canon Iand11typology ism ostapt. The
observerwould concludethattheliturgicalchurches'Bible isclearly best
understood,if one is seeking its full function in the comm unity, as a
Canon Iphenomenon;and thatthe non-liturgicalchurches'Bible isofa
Canon 11variets Thetypology can befurtherverified by notingthatthe
Canon 11Bible,whilenotbeing vectored by theritualprocessesofeucha-
ristandsacredcalendar,isitselfvectoringatleastt'
wothings:(1)itsphysi-
ca1presence asan Gicon''ofsortsin churches isa clear index of those
churches'near-venerationofitasaKsacredbook';(2)itslinkwithclergy-
menisasignofitscapacitytovectorauthority(thislatterpointmaybe
reduced to an axiom :the lessbishops, themoreBibles).
In termsofthisessays's generalcontext,the following isclear:the
Protestantchurches,by and large,arethosewhoseBibleisCanon 1I. And
thespecificpatternsofusein those churchescorrespond to basicassump-
tionsthatprovidetheframeworkforBiblicalStudies:(1)thattheentire
Bible is of equal significance in al1 its parts, and that the reading and
studyofal1ofitisanecessaryandevensalvifictask(theparallelistothe
random useofthewholeBiblein church services);(2)thattheBible
itself is the chief focus of concern, and that, though its contextual
setting- rites,com mentaries,and otherreligious acts- may be usefulto
the scholar,they are distinctly secondary in value (a paraliel:the
iconization oftheBibleasadistinctphysicalobject);(3)thatBiblical
Studiesitselfisan absolutely distinctive and separate discipline from the
tasksoftheology,church history, and liturgics( aparallel:theauthority
intheclmrchisvectoredbytlleBible).
These obsetwationsconcerning the Christian Bible, and theway in
which BiblicalStudiesreflectonly aportion ofitsmultiplecharacter, can
bc related back to the generalutility ofthe Canon Iand 11t'ypology sim -
ply by substituting itxto the tluee propositions given above the word
siddltânta(themostcommonindigenousJainterm fortheforty-fivetext
Gscriptures''discussedearlier).Theresultisthreebasicmisperceptionsof
theJains'normativetexts,a11ofwhich ceaseto apply when thosetexts
areconsidered in aCanon Icontext.Even more revealing isthefactthat
'CAN O NS'OF <SCRIPTU RE'
these misperceptions would com e distressingly close to describing the
modesofthoughtthathavelong governed thestudy ofreligiousliterature
in non-christian traditions',the reader isinvited to substitute hisorher
own choice of non-christian norm ative text in order to test the
proposition..
To finish offthepresentation ofexamplesfrom the Christian heri-
tage,it willbe usefulto cite very briefly the problem of the H ebrew
scriptures,and to offer a thesisthat stillrequiresdetailed exploration. It
isthis:the O1d Testament,that is,the Hebrew scripturesasChristians
use them ,had themselves undergone a process of becoming Canon 11
materiats'
u/fl/
lfsJudaism priorto theirinclusion in Christianity'sbodyof
texts.Assuch,the Law,Prophets,and ' W ritingsasthey stand are once-
rem oved from many oftheiroriginalvectors;and the O1d Testamentdoes
notcontain many thingsthatwerevectored by activitiesonce prom inent
in Israelite religion and now gone,forexample,liturgicalmaterials.
ThisJudaicCanon 11wasthen used,asbestitcouldbe,in various
Canon Im odes in Christianity prior to the Protestant Reformation- a
reversal,alm ost,ofthe squeezing into m olds done by scholars of non-
Christian scriptures. Finally,with the rise of the Canon 11 Protestant
Bible,those Hebrew textsunderwenta second de-vectoring, so to speak,
with interpretive consequenceswhoseperm utationsare truly dazzling.
The foregoing proposalsfornew looksat170th Christian andJain
scripturesin thelightofCanon Iand 11analysisshouldbe- and aremeant
to be- provocative.Butthey also constitute a serioustypologicalpropo-
sal.Such a venture calls out foratleast one more thing, in addition to
the detailed working-out ofitstheses:a Rconcluding Anti-Reductionist
Postscript.''The power,the sacredness,ofthe word or textisnottruly
seized by such functionalanalysesalone.Yetourapproachesto theprob-
lem ofscripture m ustbe pushed outward,and abroaderview with sys-
tematicforce developed,ifweare to escape the one-dimrnsionalview of
theBibleand ofothertextsthatourunwitting relianceon Canon 11mod-
elsand modeshas generated.

7 In the context of scriptural study, W irkungsgescbichte encompasses the
T he B ride of Israel:
T he O ntological Status of
Scripture in the R abbinic and
K abbalistic Traditions
Barbara d .Holdrege
IN TRODU CTIO N
Theterm <scripture,'originally derivedfrom aJudaeo-christian context
hasgenerally been used by m odern scholarsto designate theSsacred texts,
'
thathave been canonized orotherwise officially recognized assacrosanct
andauthoritativeforaparticularreligiouscommunity. Thestudy ofscrip-
turesince thenineteenth century hasbeen almostexclusively thedomain
ofbiblicaland orientalistscholars, who have focused on particularreli-
gioustextsrather than on scripture as a generalreligious phenomenon.
These scholarshaveused thetoolsofcriticalanalysis- textual, philologi-
cal,historical,and literary- in orderto determ ine tltecultural, historical,
and literary influencesthathave given rise to individualtexts. H ow ever,
in theirfocuson lAistoricalantecedents,m any scholarshavetendedtotreat
these textsprimarily ashistoricalorliterary docum ents, w ithoutplacing
much emphasis on their sacrosanct status in relation to a religious
com m unity.
180
BRIDE O F ISM EL 181
Thisprevalentemphasison the Tntstehungsgeschichte ofa textr-the
history ofthe causesand conditionsthatproduced it- has1ed to a corre-
sponding neglect of W irkungsgeschichte- tse history of effects that the
textitselfhasproduced in the cumulativetraditionlofa given com munity.
jm going rolesthata sacred texthasassum ed 170th asa norm ative source
of authority and as a prodigious living force that has inspired, guided,
nurtured,andtransform ed thelivesofcountlessadherentsthroughoutthe
centuries.i
In addition to alack ofemphasison theeffective historyofparticu-
1arscripturaltraditions,relatively tittleattention hasbeen given to the
çategory ofscripture asa generalreligiousphenom enon.The study of
icriptureasagençralreligiousform and conceptcan beapproached from
avariety ofperspectives.W hil: a numberofscholarshave been prim ar-
i1y concerned with the functional status of scripture within religious
çom munities,the focusofm y investigationsisthe ontologicalstatusof
scripture.M y study ofscriptureisconcerned notwith w hatpeoplehave
donewith scripture,butratherwith whatthey have chnceived scripture
to be- itsorigin and cosmologicalimport,itsroleasa cosm icreality in
creation and revelation.The functionalstatusofscripturewithin apar-
ticularreligiouscomm unity is to a certain extentshaped and informed
by the comm unity's conceptionsofitsontologicalstatus,and yetrela-
tively little attention has been given to this important dimension of
scripture.
On the mostfundam ental level,the sacrosanctstatusofscripture,
which isclosely linked with itsauthority and function within areligious
çommunity,is often held to be derived from itsontologicalstatusasa
divine,cosmic,and/oreternalrealitsThesacredpowerofscriptureina
numberofthemajorreligioustraditionsoftheworld isattributed to its
divine ortranscendentorigin.As such scripture is considered in certain
yraditionstobeadirectrevelationorcognitionthatdisclosesitsdivine/
yranscendent source,reveals the nature of reality,and unfolds its own
.
divine/eternalstatusasstructured in the very nature ofthe cosmos.
W hetherconceived asa divinerevelation ofthe W ord ofGod- asin the
Judaicconception ofTorah andtheIslamicconception ofQur'àn- oxas
adirectcognition oftheeternalimpulsesofknowledge reverberating forth
from the Transcendent- as in the H indu conception ofthe Vedas- the
sacrality ofscripture in these casesisderived from itsontologicalstatus
asadivine/eternalreality.Thisstatusisevidencedeveninthoseinstances
in which scripture is said to have been derived from inspiration rather
than direct revelation,as in the Christian conception ofthe Gospels in
 r
182 RETH IN KIN G SCRIPTU RE
which God isbelieved to havespoken through the inspired mindsofthe
Gospelwriters.
The scriptures of certain traditions are ranked according to their
levelofspiritualauthority In such casestheprim ary criterion forranking
is generally an ontologicaldistinction in which those scripturesthatare
held to be a divine revelation ordirectcognition ofreality are ranked as
most sacred and authoritative, above scripturesthatwere composed by
i
(ns
Ppired hum an authors.For example, in theJudaictraditiontheTorah
entateuch),which isheldtobethedirectrevelationofGod'sW ord,is
rankedhalakhicallyabovetheinspiredwritingsoftheNevi'im (Prophets)
andKetuvim (W ritingsorHagiographal.zSimilarly,inIslamitheQur'ân,
asdivinerevelation,isrankedabovetheUad!th,whichrecordsthesayings
and deedsof M uhamm ad.In the H indu tradition the Vedas, w hich are
upheldasdirectcognitionsofrealityandthustermedhuti(thatwhich is
heard),areconsideredtobemoreauthoritativethan a1ltheothersacred
yextsthatare said to have been composed by personalauthorsalld that
arethereforecomprehensivelyreferredtoassmçti(thatwhichisremem-
beredl.:In theChristian tradition the Gospels,even though notconsid-
ered directrevelation,are ncverthelessranked abovetheEpistlesand O1d
Testam entasthe recordsofGod'scentralrevelation in Christ.
In certain traditions,in particularthe Confucian tradition and early
Taoisttradition,scripture is viewed as the record of hum an wisdom in
the form ofthewordsand deedsofthe sagesand assuch isnotgranted
a divine or eternal status.However, even in such instancesontological
çonceptionsof scripture may develop over time asthe sagesthemselves
.- -
attd hence their words- are elevated to divine status. The Buddhist
conceptofBudlba-vacana(wordoftheBuddha)presentsaninteresting
case.ln the Theravâda tradition thewordsofthe Buddhaasrecorded in
the Buddhistk stylrflsare granted a specialRsupradivine''statusin thatthe
Buddha's wisdom ,as an enlightened human being, is said to transcend
thewisdom ofthe gods. I nthelaterMahàW-natraditiontheBuddhahim-
selfiselevated to an eternal, cosmicstatus,and thushiswordsand teach-
ings assum e a correspondingly cosm ic aura. The ontological status of
scripture thusconstitutesa significantareaofinvestigation thatcan help
yo illumine ourunderstanding notonly ofthesacred status, authority,and
function ofscripturewithin particularreligiouscomm unities, butalso of
s broadersensewe mightconclude that the Torah thatM osesreceived con-
dcr
iiptureasageneralreligiousphenom enon. IntheJudaicandHindutra-
tionsin particular,which havebeen the primary focusofmy investiga-
tions,theontologicalconceptionsofscripturehaveapervasiveand endur-
ing significance notonly asarecurring motifin the traditionaltexts, but,
perhapsmore importantly,asaliving force infiuencing the attitudesand
practices ofthe exponentsofthe rabbinic tradition and the Brahm anical
BRIDE O F
ISRAEL 183
custodiansofthe Vedic recitative tradition from ancient timesuntilthe
presentday.4Thepresentessay willfocuson the ontologicalconceptions
ofTorah intheJudaictradition andwillattemptto giveaschematicover-
view of some of the most important them es presented in rabbinic and
m edievalkabbalistictextsw ith respectto the statusand roleoftheTorah
asa divinereality in creation and revelation.
OntologicalConceptionsof Torah
Theterm <srrorahy''according to thegeneralconsensusofmostmod-
ern scholars,isconnectedwith thehiphilconjugation oftherootyr/l,Rto
Point out,direct,teach,''and thus m eans uteaching'
'or uinstruction.''s
The term hasavariet'
y ofmeaningsin biblicaland rabbinic texts. I11rab-
binicliteratureTorahisusedinatleastthreedifferentsenses:(1)todesig-
nate the Pentateuch,as distinct from the other t'
w o sections of the
Hebrew Bible,Nevi'im and Ketuvim;(2)torefertotheHebrew Bible
asawhole;and (3)toincludenotonly thePentateuch,Nevi'im,and
Ketuvim,which constitutetheW rittenTorah ('
13rJ/lJebi-ktâbj,butalso
-
the M ishnah, Talmud,and M idrash, which contain the halakhic and
aggadicteachingsthatconstitutetheOralTorah(TôrâltJebe-talAe/l).
ln order to clarify what is meant by uontological conceptions of
Torah,''wem ustbegin with a consideration ofthe nature and meaning of
revelation in theJudaictradition.W hatwastheW ord ofGodthatissaid
to havebeen revealed atM ountSinai?How istheprocessofrevelation itself
described? The revelation ofthe Torah atM ountSinaiisa favozite them e
ofrabbinic and kabbalisticliterattzre and isdepicted in the Pentateuch itself
asoccuning in two main phases.In the firstphase ofthe revelation, God
himselfspoke directly with the people of Israelwho stood atthe footof
MountSinai,declaringtothem theG'T'
enWords''(Weretlf7-lrlrlf)ofthe ..-
Decalogue.6In the second phase ofthe revelation, M osesascended M ount
Sinaiand rem ained there for forty daysand nightswhile God imparted to
him the detailed teachingsand commandments (miswôt of the Torah.
.
According to thestrictestinterpretation theTorah thatwasrevealed by God
toM osesconstituted the Pentateuch,whileaccordingto am orefar-reaching
interpretation it included not only the Pentateuch but also the N evi'im ,
Ketuvim, M ishnah, Talmud, and M idrash.7 W hen understood in this
sisted ofaconcretewritten texttogetherwith an oraltradition ofinterpreta-
tion thatwould be capableofclarifying and elaborating the implicationsof
itslaw sanJ teachingsforsubsequentgenerations.However, ifwe examine
more closely theimagery thatissom etimesused to depicttherevelation,w e
can discern yetanotherdim ension oftheTorah thatisnotencompassed by
any ofthe notionsdiscussed thusfar.
 N
184 RETH IN KIN G SCRIPTU RE
The revelation ofthe Torah at M ountSinaiissometimesdepicted
in rabbinicliterature asaweddingceremouy. In onetradition thewedding
celebratesthe betrothalofthe Lord to hisbride Israel. The Lord presents
theTorah to Israelasthemarriagecontract(klûbâh)binding them in an
everlasting covenantosA second traditionportraystheTorah notasam ere
legaldocumentbutasthe bride herself, w ho ispresented in marriage by
God,herfather,to thebridegroom , Israel.9Yearafteryearthesedifferent
versionsofthem arriage ceremony areenacted in the two annualfestivals
dedicated to theTorah.Them arriagesymbolism isthusnotsimply atex-
tualphenomenom Itisapartofthe livingJewish traditiom
80th versions of the wedding are rellected in the customs of
Shavuot,theyearly festivalthatcomm em oratesthe theophany on M ount
Sinai.In many Sephardic comm unitieson the first day ofShavuotprior
t transhistoricaldimension in which itisconceived to bethatpreexistent,
io theTorah reading aKeLûbâh/e-JJ#û'd!(marriagecertificateofShavuot)
.
sread out,dated the sixth ofSivan- thedatetraditionally designated for
the revelation ofthe Torah atM ountSinai- and the eternalcovenantis
sealed.The mostwidely used version oftheKlûböh /e#4f
b - )r(
4,composed
by
rattes
heSafedKabbalistandpoetIsraelNajara(ca.1550-1625cs.
the marriage between God himself ),cele- .
who isthe bridegroom ,and
, dialdivinewisdom continuesto anim atethebook with secretlife beck-
hisbride Israel.However, in other versionsof the Kejûbâltthe Torah is
portrayed asthebridewho isgiven away by herfather, God,to thebride-
groom ,Israel.
In the custom softhe otheryearly festivaldedicated to the Torah
SimllatTorah (RejoicingoftheTorah),thesymbolism ofTorahasthe,
bride ofIsraelpredominates. O n this day,the lastday of the festivalof
Sukkot,the annualcycle ofreading oftheTorah iscompleted and a new
cycle ofreading isim mediately begun. Them atlwho iscalled up to the
l
Gec
b tern to read theconcluding portion oftheTorah iscalled H. JIJK n rl/l,
ridegroom ofthe Torah,''whilethe man who isasked to begin thenew
cycleby reading from thefirstportion oftheTorah iscalledH.
ubridegroom ofthebeginning JIJ,IB'rë'
jh,
, thati
s,of Genesis-'
Implicitin these two versions ofthe m arriage symbolism are two
di
i stinctyetinterrelated conceptsofthe Torah. In one version tlleTorah
spresented asalegalcontractestablishing the conditionsofthecovenant
between God and Israel. Thisversion pointsto a concept ofthe Torah
with which we are already fam iliar:theW ritten Torah togetherwith an
oraltradition ofinterpretation, which specify the lawsand teachingsthat
are to be upheld by the people ofIsraelin fulfillmentoftheircovenant
with God.The otherversion ofthe m arriagesymbolism , w hich portrays
the Torah asthe bride ofIsrael, goesbeyond these more familiarnotions
and personifiesthe Torah asa living, organic entity capable ofentering
into a dynamic relationship with the people of Israel. In thisview the
BRIDE O F ISRAEL 185
Tor
i ah representssomething more than aholy book to be recited, studied,
nterpreted,and followed.It represents som ething m ore than the text
inscribed on theTorah scrolland even more than thevastcorpusoflaw s
and teachingsthatconstitutesthe OralTorah.
W hen the Torah isdepicted asthe bride ofIsraelitisrepresented
ashaving a life of itsown.Itis notsimply a body ofteachings;itisthe
embodimentofdivinewisdom . ltisnotSimply wordsinscribed on parch-
m ent;itistheliving W ord ofGod. The W ritten Torah wasrevealed on
earth ata particular time and in a particular place within history, but
accordingtocertainstrandsoftheJudaictraditionthisearthlydimension
of the Torah represents only one aspect of its reality. The Torah,as
described in certain rabbinic and kabbalistic texts, also llas a divine,
prim ordialwisdom which hasexisted in heaven Hfrom thebeginning''as
aliving aspectofGod and theim mediate sourceofcreation. Attlletim e
of the revelation atM ount Sinai the Torah descended from its seat on
high in order to make its abode on earth asthe bride ofthe people of
Israel.Itassum ed the finite form ofthe W ritten Torah, butthe prim or-
,
oning thosewho study itto penetratebeyond theouterbody to itsinner-
mostsoul.Thosewho are capable offathom ing the deepestmysteriesof
theTorah are called in certain kabbalistic textstrue Rbridegroom softhe
Torah,''forthey alonehave succeeded in entering into divinecommunion
w ith thebride ofIsraelin herfullglory.lo
Both oftheseconceptsoftheTorah- tl)theTorah asawritten
docum ent,the m eaning ofwhich isunfolded and elaborated through an
ongoingoraltradition,and(2)theTorah asalivingaspectofGodwith
w hich onecan enterinto directcomm union- m ustbetaken into account
foracompleteunderstandingoftheJudaicnotionofscripture. Ifwewere
to focuson the firstconceptwe would be prim arily concerned with the
functionalstatusof Torah, w ith the waysin which itlusbeen studied
interpreted, applied,andreverencedinJewish education,in 1 aw andjuris-,
prudence,in daily observanceand practice, and in synagogueworship and
personalpiety Each of these areas hasbeen treated in depth by other
scholars.Thepresentessay, in contrast,w illbeconcerned with theonto-
logicalrather than the functionalstatus ofthe Torah and willfocuson
thesecond conceptm entioned above, which presentstheTorah asaliv-
ing,divine reality.
Despitethe significance ofthe ontologicalconceptionsofTorah as
apervasive and persistentmotifin rabbinicand kabbalisticliterature, few
scholars have given seriousconsideration to these conceptions. Abraham
H eschel grapples with some of these conceptions in D râb min /IJ-
6 186 RETH IN KIN G SCRIPTURE
BRIDE O F ISRAF.L 187
Sâmayîm.l,H e suggests that there were at least two essentiall
approaclzes to the statusand authority oftheTorah i y distinct Although speculations regarding the ontological status of the Torah find
represented by the schoolof R. Akf n rabbi
nicthought, thcirm ostfully developed expression in kabbalisticliterature
l)
a (
ca.
sized the transcendeut signfllcalwe of ever
110-
.ja5 c,
s), wj
uch empsa. speculationsare atleastadumbrated in rabbi , many ofthese
and thes yjotand tittle oftheTorah, orientation and mode oftreatm entoftheseni c texts. H ow eve
ideas is diff
r, the rabbinic
pragmaticcho olofR.Ishmaeltznd c c. s.
).
,whj
stance thatthe Torah speaksin the ch maintaiued themore
lang the Kabbalistsin thatthey areneversystematicall erentfrom thatof
fphraim Urbach hasprovided some im uageofhumau beings. y developed aspartofany
consistentcosmology. Itisthereforedifficultto assesswhethersu
concept of ' Wrrftterl Torah azld o ral Toraholz Amight
portant ins
oug
sinto therabbirgc
other signij-icant
reflect a gen
uine interest in cosmologicalspeculation or whethech notions
studiesare Gershom scholem'silluminating essay on the simply homil r t
eticalpraises ofthe Torah. Itisalso difficult to detenninehe y are
T
orah in kabbalisticthoughtand hism m eaning ofthe
whatextenta particularview represent to
theory oflanguage orerecentarticleou thekabbalistic ext sa consensusofopinion,or towhat
entitrepresentsthe opinion ofa single individualorschoolofrabbinic
ofthe roleofTorah.l3inAuot lzerjandm ark study isM osheh Idel'sanalysis
the Hêkalô!literature thought .W ehavealready noted H eschel' ssuggestion thattherewereatlea
W hile these studiesfocus-on particul ofM erkabah mp ticism .l4 two contending schoolsofrabbinic thought st
-
tion, my study wfllprovidea diachronic ana arystrandsoftheJewish tradp with differentconceptionsof
the Torah'sstatus.
interpretation and reinterpretation through l sisofthevariouslayersof
whi In contrastto theratherfragmentarynatureofther
ceptionsofTorah wereelaborated and m odified ilc z
.
h the ontological corl-
tlaecourseofthe tradi- in which aggadic speculations about the nature of the a bbinicm aterial,
tion'sformatfvedevelopment, spersed throughout the texts, in kabbalistic literature theas Tor h are inter-
peculati
ofrabbilûc and medievalkabbalistic speculation,ala
incl
ud il
lg an exami n
o
tion ofmajorthreads
ng with a Ilriefcon- aboutthenature ofthe Torah are generally presented aspartofa grand ons
sideration ofthe antecedentsofth cosmologicalscheme. The ideasthatare found in seed form i
in pre-ralnbfnic Iiterature. econceptofprimordialwisdom/lbrah literaturc are fully elaborated and cosm ologized by th n rabbinic
E M y prim ary concern will not be wkth beyond metaphorical personification to cl e Kabbalists,going
ntstehungsgeschicbte, wjth attemptiug to determ ine the hist ear hypostatization. Although
dentsand caus
e-effectrelationshipsin thedevelopm eutofthe oricalantece- we thusrecognizea difference iu perspecti ve and em phaseswith respect
con
ceptionsofTorah. M y concern israther to trace thebroadontological to the ontologicalconceptionsofTorah found
lit in rabbinicand kabbalistic
the W irkungsgeschicltg the tyu jtjou oj-jjaterpretationsofcertaoutlinesof
notions, with a view ,to in semfual
illuminating the lines of continufty aswell as
erature,wealso discern sufficientthreadsofcontin
taposing thesetwo diffcrentapproaches. uity towarrantjux-
di
vergence between the rabbiuic alad kabbanstic treatments of these f The strands of the rabbinic and kabbalistic traditionsthatare the
notions.The kabbalisticphase oftheanalp iswin s cusprim arily on the ocus ofthe presentstudy do notofcourse r
speculative Kabbalah ofthirteenth- Judaictradition,w hich includesa complex range epreof
sendi
tvthetotality ofthe
sisotlthe zohar. som e attention wi century spafu,wfth particularempha- peti ersified and com-
tions ofth llalso begiven to theearlierspecula- ng pcrspectives and schools in every historicalperiod. Aswe have
seen, even within the rabbinic tradition there are a
eept
to theconc Prio
ovenç
ns oa
fl'rKa
orb
abalistJsaactheBlind(12th c c. perspectives.There are also a variety ofschoolsandnumber of different
es),aswellas
.
h found isz the writings ofsfxt
.
Kabbalistsofthesafed schooland laterI enth-century m edievalKabbalah orientationswithin
Th -ur fazlic Kabbalfsts. the primary focus,of including notonly the Rspeculative Kabbalah''thatis
eseparticularstrandsoftheyudaictradition havebeen chos the presentstudy, butalso the tçecstatic Kabbalah''
the focus of the presentstudy for th en as or
R td
prophe t
ic Ka bbalah''ofAbraham Abulafia and hisfollowersand the
major straudsill the tradition's format
reieveredeve
asonslopment;second,ti
: Ffr
s t
, they co nst tute practical Kabbalah'' of the theurgists. The present study focuses on
strandsinclude 170th exoteric and esoteri hes e schools thatwere particularly concerned with the ontologicalstatusof
strandsallow usto trace the history ofint c or i
ent ations; and thi rdy thes e the Torah.The prim ary aim ofthe Zohar
e rpr etations of the out olo ical purported rabbinic M idrash ,forexam ple, in itsrole asa
conceptionsofTorah from theirseed expression totheirm ostfully elgbo , isto revealthe mostprofound mysteriesof
rated m anifestations.ls s - t he
di ffTorah,and thusitscosm ologicalspeculationsinclude a quite highly
The sem i
nal conce pt
iousfound i
n the
Bibleand Apocryphaare furtherdevelopedwi insrdom literatureoftheH ebrew theeTor rentiated treatmentofthevariouslevelsand stagesofm anifestion of
ah in creation and revelation. Another very importantapproach
theelaborat abbinictexts, culminating in
ecosmogoniesoftheZoharand othermedievalka bbalistictexts. to questionsofthe origin and ontology ofthe Torah can be found in the
speculationsofmedievalJewish philosophers. However,consideration of
188 RETH IN KIN G SCRIPTU RE
these philosophicalspeculationsisbeyond the scope ofthepresentessay
and m ustbe reserved fora separate study.l6
Thefollowinganalysiswillexaminethreemajorareasofspecula-
tion presented in rabbinicandkabbalistictextswith regard to theontolog-
icalstatusofTorah:Torah and creation,Torah and revelation,and Torah
and interpretation.The firstsection willbriefly suzvey the pre-rabbinic
antecedentsoftheconceptofprimordialwisdom/rorah beforemoving
on to a discussion ofrabbinic and kabbalistic speculationsconcerning the
status and role ofthisprim ordialTorah in creation.Particular attention
will be given to three types of speculation found in rabbinic and
kabbalistictexts:theTorah personified orhypostatizedasaliving,organic
entity thatisthe immediatesource ofcreation;the Torah astheblueprint
orplan thattheCreatorem ploysin fashioninghiscreation;andtheTorah
asthedivinelanguagethatthe Creatorspeaksin order to bring forth the
m anifold forms and phenomena of creation.The second section ofthe
essay will briefly review som e of the m ost important rabbinic and
kabbalistic traditions concerning the revelation atM ountSinai,focusing
particularly on those traditionsthatdepictthe revelation asa recapitula-
tion ofcreation and thatemphasizetheutliqueexperientialdim ension of
the revelation asa direct cognition ofthe living W ord ofGod.Finally,
the last section willbriefly consider the extent to which rabbinic and
kabbalistic traditions concerning the meaning and interpretation of the
Torah point to an underlying conception of itsspecialstatusasa divine
reality.
Itism y hopethatthrough illuminating thepervasiveand enduring
significance of the ontological conceptions of Torah in rabbinic and
kabbalisticthought,thisessay willchallengeusto Rrethink scripture,''to
m ove beyond our tendency to delimitscripture to the black and white
text of <holy writ'and to embrace a broader conception that can also
accountfor theongoing roleofscripture asaprodigiousliving force and
active,immediaterealit 'y in people'slives.
TO M H AN D CREATIO N
Torab and Creation in Pre-Rabbinic T?xf.
s co-workerin creation.
ln order to gain an understanding of the rich and complex layers
of tradition that underlie and inspire the rabbinic and kabbalistic
speculations regarding the preexistence of the Torah and its role in
creation,wewillbriefly sulwey the stagesthrough which the conceptof
primordial wisdom em erged in pre-rabbinic literature and becam e
identified with the Torah.After considering the nature of personified
w isdom in Proverbs8.22-31,wew illhighlightthe contributionsofthe
BRIDE O F ISRAEL 189
wisdom books of the Apocrypha- the W isdom of Ben Sira, Baruch
3.9-4.4,and theW isdom ofSolomon- and ofthe AlexandrianJewish
philosophersAristobulusand Philo to the developmentofthe conceptof
primordialwisdom/Torah.l;
Proverbs8.22-31:Personi
fielWisdom astheArtisantfCreation.Thenamre
andorkinofProverbs8.22-31,inwhichpersonifiedwisdom speaksofher
prim ordialbeginningsas the ilrstof God'sworks,has long been disputed
by scholars. The passage is generally considered to be an independent
wisdom hymn thatform spartofalargerliteral. y unit,Proverbs1-9,which
is disdnguished from chapters 10-31 of Proverbs in strucmre,style,and
content.Proverbs1-9,with itscosmologicalspeculationsaboutwisdom and
creation,isgenerally placed by scholarsin thelaststage in thedevelopment
ofthe lsraelite wisdom tradition,ascharacterized by theologicalwisdom yl8
and has been variously dated from the Persian periodlg to the early
HellenisticperiodSetween330and250B.c.s.
).20
ln Proverbs 8.22-31 the figure of personified wisdom declares,
SirrheLordmademeasthebeginning(rJ'.
9Uf ofHisway,thefirstofHis
worksofold''(v.22).Inverses23-26wisdom elaboratesonherunique
statusasthe primalcreation ofGod who wasbroughtforth before the
creation of the world,when there were no depths and no springs'and
beforethem ountainsand hillshad been established.W isdom goeson to
proclaim in verses 27-30 that she was already present when God
performed the actsofcreatiom uW hen He established tlle heavensIwas
there,...when He m arked out the foundations ofthe earth,then Iwas
besideHim asanartisan (u-dn).''21
The exact nature of wisdom 's role in creation hinges on the
interpretation of the term 'âmôn in verse 30. This well-known crux
interpretationis has generally been vocalized in rabbinic and kabbalistic
interpretations of verse 30, as well as by m odern scholars,as 'ûmön,
Rartisan,craftsman''- aterm thatisthoughtto havebeen borrowed from
theAkkadiangmmânu(craftsman).Thisinterpretationissupportedbythe
translationsin theSeptuagint,harmozousa,and in theVulgate,componens.lz
According to this interpretation wisdom is here depicted as God's
Theothercontendinginterpretationvocalizes'âmônas'ömûn(Qa1
Passiveparticiple from 'öman,uto nurse'')or 'emun (noun),unursling,
darling.'Thissuggestion issupported by Aquila'stranslation of'âmôn as
tithènoumenè,unursling,foster-child,darling.''Alternative interpretations
have also been proposed.zs
Itisnotpossiblein thepresentstudy to enterinto thedetailsofthe
scholarly debate. However, for the purpose of our analysis the inter-
pretation of'âmôn asûmön,Gartisany''w illbe given precedence,since this
 190 RETH IN KIN G SCRIPTU RE
isthe vocalization upon which rabbinicand kabbalistic interpretationsof
Proverbs8.30 arebased.
A num ber oftheories have been proposed by scholars concerning
the nature of the personification of wisdom expressed in Proverbs
8,22-31.These theoriescan be grouped in threemain categories:(1)
wisdom asapoeticpersonificationofanattributeofGod;(2)wisdom as
an objectification oftheworld order;and (3)wisdom asamythological
figure.24The firsttwo theoriestend to locate the ultimate source ofthe
figure of personified wisdom in Proverbs 8.22-31 in an indigenous
Israelitetradition,whiletheproponentsofthethird theory generallylook
for itsderivation in the wisdom traditionsand creation m ythologies of
Egypt,M esopotam ia,and Canaan.25 .
It is not within the scope ofthe presentanalysis to enter into the
complex range of issuespresented by these various theoriesofthe namre
and origin ofthefigureofpersonifiedwisdom depicted in Proverbs8.22-31.
However,itdoesnotappear that the Israelite speculationsaboutthe nature
ofwisdom can bereduced to merepoeticalpraises,norcan they beexplained
assim ply mpllologicalvestigesborrowed from neigl aboring culmres.One
could argue that the notion ofpersonified wisdom,togetherwith itslater
expression in the personifkation ofthe Torah,hassurvived throughoutthe
ages asa vitalpartof the ongoing Jewish tmdition precisely because it
representsm orethattalifelessconceptorfancifulflightofimagination.The
portrayalofwisdom in Proverbs1-9 asa dam selwho seeksoutthosewho
love her and invites them to partake of her innetnnost secrets reveals a
profound dimension oftheIsraelitepeople'sexperienceoftheirGod andhis
revelation in creatiomz6 This portrayal is expanded and elaborated in the
wisdom books of the Apocrypha and in the writings ofthe Alexandrian
Jewish philosophersAristobulusand Philo,culminating in the depiction
found inrabbinicand kabbalistictextsofwisdom/rrorah asthebrideof
Israel,who representsalivingaspectofthedivinewith whom onecan enter
into intimate com munion.
PrimordialW isdom in LaterPre-RabbinicTàxl-
ç;From Ben Sira toPhilo.The
reflectionsaboutthe nature ofw isdom in theApocryphalwisdom books
are founded on Proverbs 8.22-31. The primary contribution of the
W isdom ofBen Sira(between 198and 175s.c.s.
)isin identifyingthe
primordialrevelation ofw isdom in creation with thehistoricalrevelation
ofthe Torah on M ountSinai,in w hich primordialwisdom descends to
earth asthebook ofthe Torah and m akesherabodew ith the people of
Israe1.27The identity between wisdom and Torah isdepicted in another
bookoftheApocrypha,Baruch (ca.164-116B.c.s.
),in awisdom psalm
(3.9-4.4)thatdrawsnotonlyonBen Sirabutalsoon ProverbsandJob
foritslanguage and im agery.
BRIDE O F ISRAEL 191
W isdom ofSolomon 6.12-9.18,which wascomposed in Greek in
the first half ofthe first century c.
E.,describesthe figure ofpersonified
wisdom in more vivid and elaborate imagery than any of the other
wisdom writings,canonicalaswellasApocryphal.Unlike Ben Sira and
Baruch, the author of the W isdom of Solom on does not explicitly
identify wisdom with the Torah,but rather em phasizes the status of
wisdom as a cosm ic revelation and all-pezwading ordering principle in
creation, thus betraying the increasing influence of H ellenistic
conceptions.
The influence ofH ellenistic ideasiseven more pronounced in the
writings of two representatives of Alexandrian Jewish philosophy:
Aristobulus(ca.170 s.
c.
z.)and PhiloJudaeus(ca.20 B.
c.
E.-ca.50 c.s.
).
Aristobulusstandsattheopposite end ofthecontinuum in relation tothe
Palestinian sage Ben Sira,who lived atabout the same tim e.In contrast
to Ben Sira'sdepictionofwisdom astheuniquepossessionoftheJewish
people in the form ofTorah,Aristobulusfocuseson theuniversal,cosm ic
dim ensionsofwisdom ,explicitly identifying itwith the LogosofStoic
philosophy without any mention ofTorah.28Philo,on the other hand,
incorporates theJewish conceptionsof wisdom and Torah within his
philosophy oftheLogos,which wasthe governing conceptofhisworks.
H arry Austryn W olfson has emphasized the ultimate identit'
y between
Logos,wisdom ,and Torah in the philosophy of Phi1o.29 Through its
association withtheLogos,theroleofwisdom/rrorahin creationfinds
expression in Philo'sphilosophy in the im age of an architectwho first
conceivesthe blueprint ofhiscreation in hism ind before bringing it to
fruition in concrete form.30The dualimages of architectand blueprint
are also used in the rabbinic tradition to describe the cosmogonic role of
the Torah,asw illbe discussed below.
Torah and Creation in Rabbinic'
p xf.
s
Torab asPrimordialW isdom.W e havebriefly surveyed thedevelopmentof
the Israelite conceptofprim ordialwisdom from itsearliestexpression in
Proverbs8.22-31through theprogressive stagesofitsunfoldm entin the
Apocryphal w isdom books- Ben Sira, Baruch, and W isdom of
Solomon- and in thewritingsof theAlexandrian Jewish philosophers
Aristobulusand Philo.Therabbinic tradition standsatthem eeting point
of m any stream s that converge in the concept of prim ordial
wisdom/TorahasthefirstofGod'sworks,existingfrom Rthebeginning''
as the instnzment of creation. The streams of the Egyptian, M eso-
potam ian, and Canaanite wisdom traditions and creation mythologies
appear to have interm ingled with the stream of the indigenousIsraelite
w isdom tradition thatgave rise to Proverbs 8.22-31.Thisstream gained
 RETHIN KIN G SCRIPTURE
new mom entum as it flowed through Ben Sira and the W isdom of
Solom on,whereitwasfed by thespringsoftheHellenistictradition. The
stream widened to encompass even greater currents of H ellenistic
influenceasitencountered Aristobulusand Philo.
lt isim possible to distinguish the variousstream sthathad becom e
inseparably merged by the time they reached the rabbinic tradition, nor
can we hope to determ ine definitely which stream sinfluenced rabbinic
speculationsaboutthe primordialTorah more than others. It should be
pointed out,however,that it is unlikely that mostrabbinic sages were
even aware ofPhilo'swritings,letalonedirectly influenced by them . O n
theotherhand,rabbinicspeculationsaboutthe preexistence ofthe Torah
and itsrole in creation frequently invoke verses 22 and 30 ofProverbs
8.22-31 asprooftexts.U nderlying such speculatonsisthe fundamental
assumption that the Torah is identical with the prim ordial wisdom
described in Proverbs 8.22-31.Proverbs 8.22 isthe primary verse cited
in rabbinic literature to establish the existence of the Torah prior to
creation,3lwhile Proverbs8.22 and 8.30,32aswellasProverbs 3.9-10,33
aregenerally cited asproofoftherole ofthe Torah in creation.
TbePreexistenceoftbeTorah.ThenotionofthepreexistenceoftheTorah,
which is foutlded upon the concept of primordialw isdom in Proverbs
8.22-31,isexpressed inrabbinicliteraturein threebasicways:(1)The
Torah isoneofseveralthingscreatedpriorto creation;(2)theTorah
remained hidden for nine hundred and seventy-four generationsbefore
tlleworldwascreated;and (3)theTorah precededthecreation ofthe
universeby two thousand years.
An anonymous M idrash, which appears at least twice in the
Talmud,includesthe Torah as one ofthe seven things created prior to
the world. The other six preexistent things are enum erated as:
repentance,the Garden of Eden, Gehenna,the Throne of Glory, the
Temple,and the nam e ofthe M essiah.M
A similar notion appears in an anonym ous M idrash in Genesis
Rabbah,which enumeratesonly six preexistentthings:theTorah and the
ThroneofGlory,which wereactually created, and the Patriarchs,Israel,
the Temple, and the nam e of the M essiah, whose creation was only
contemplated. The addition of a seventh preexistent entity-
repentance- isascribed to thePalestinian Am oraR.Ahabah b.R . Ze<ira.35
Finally,the Palestinian Am oraR.Abbab. Kahana issaid to havedeclared
thatofa11thesethingstheTorah wasthe firstofGod'sworks,preceding
even the Throne ofG1ory.36ThisconceptoftheTorah asone ofseveral
preexistentthingsgoesback to theTannaiticperiod, whereitisexpressed
in lesselaborateform in SigrêD euteronomy3;The Palestinian Am oraR.
Leviissaid to be the ultim ate source ofaM idrash thatdeclaresthatthe
Torah preceded the creation of the universe by six things, listing six
BRIDE OF ISRAEL
expressions used in Proverbs 8.22-31 to express the Torah'sprim ordial
nature.38Al1ofthe M idrashim melttioned abovereferto Proverbs8.22 as
ProofoftheTorah'spreexistence.
The notion that the Torah rem ained hidden as God's uprecious
treasure'' (h
.Jé?;g-
fz/, fnûzöh) for nine hundred and seventy-four
generations before the world was created is expressed in at least two
M idrashim in theTalmud,oneofwhichisattributedtoR.Joshuab.Levi,
oneofthe mosteminentPalestinian Am oraim in thefirsthalfofthe third
century.39Thisnotion isderived from the factthat,according to Psalm
105.8, the Torah was to have been com manded to one thousand
generations,butin actuality itwasrevealed after twenty-six generations
(ten generationsfrom Adam toNoah,tenfrom Noah toAbraham,and
six from Abraham to M oses- lsaac,Jacob,Levi,Kohath,Amram,and
Mosesl.4oW hathappened totheotherninehundred and seventrfour
generations(1000- 26= 974)?R.Hunaissaidtohavedeclaredinthe
name ofthe Tanna R.Eliezerb.R.Jose the Galilean that they were
blotted out- thatis,they rem ained uncreated.4l
Thetradition thatthe Torah preceded thecreation oftheworld by
two thousand yearsisattributed to two sagesfrom the second generation
ofPalestinian Amoraim :R.Sim eon b.Lakish and R. H am ab.R.H anina.
Thisassertion isderived from Proverbs8.30,G'rhen Iwasbeside H im as
an artisan ('âmôn) and I was His delight day after day Vôm
yl-ln-focusing on the repetition ofyôm.The sagesconcluded from
Psalm 90.4,uForathousand yearsin Thy sightarebutasyesterday when
it is past,'' that each day of the Lord is a thousand years, and thus
according to Proverbs8.30 theTorah waswith God fortwo divine days,
or two thousand years,before theworld wascreated.4z
Closely related to the notions discussed above regarding the
preexistence of the Torah are the assertionsfound throughoutrabbinic
literaturethattheworld wascreated forthe sakeoftheTorah,43aconcept
that assum es that the Torah was at least contemplated,if not actually
created,by God prior to creation.Such a notion finds expression in a
slightlydifferentform intheaphorism attributedtoSimeoxttheJust(ca.
300 s.c.s.
),who isthefirstin thelong lineofrabbinicteacherswhose
nam eweknow,in which heproclaimsthatthe Torah isone ofthethree
thingsupon which the world stands.44
Theconceptofaprim ordialTorah thatprecedesthecreation ofthe
universe is closely linked in rabbinic literature to the notion that the
Torah itself has a centralrole to play in the process of creation.The
rabbinic concept that the Torah istlle uinstrum entby meansof which
the world was created''dates back to the Tannaitic period,where itis
attributed to t'
w o leading Tannaim,R.Eleazarb.Zadok . (
ca.100c.E.)and
R.Akiba (ca.110-135 c.E.
)45Thisnotion hasbeen elaborated in the
 RETHIN KIN G SCRIPTURE
rabbinic tradition in a variety of ways.There appear to be three basic
sensesin which therole oftheTorah in creation isunderstood in rabbinic
literature:(1)TheTorahispersonifiedasthelivingtotalityofwisdom,
which God employsashisarchitectorco-workerin creation;(2)the
Torah istheblueprintorplan ofGod'screation;(3)the twenty-two
letters of the H ebrew alphabet that compose the Torah are the basic
structuralelem entsofcreation.
TorabastheArtisanofCreation.h numberofimagcsareusedinrabbinic
literatureto expresstherole oftheTorah asGod'sco-workerin creation.
SeveralM idrashim describehow God took councilwith the Torah before
he created theworld.One tradition understandsthepluraluteetusmake
man''in Genesis1.26 asreferring to God and theTorah.46In theopening
M idrash of the Tanllum a, the Torah is described not only as God's
consultantin creation,butisalso depicted asassuming am oreactiverole
astheartisan ofcreation.Vocalizing the 'âmôn ofProverbs8.30 as'ûmân,
the M idrash invokesthe language and im agery ofProverbs 8.22-31 to
describe how through the aid ofhisartisan,the Torah, God established
theheaven and earth,fixed theboundariesofthedeep, broughtforth the
sun and moon,and form ed allofthe worksofcreation.zr
Two other M idrashim , which appear to stem from a comm on
tradition,similarly describe theTorah asthe artisan ofcreation. Like the
Tantmma170th Midrashim takeforgrantedthatthepersonifiedwisdom
ofProverbs 8.22-31 isidenticalwith the Torah and, in the contextof
describing the Torah's role in creation, vocalize 'âmôn in verse 30 as
'ûmân,Rartisam''M oreover,170th M idrashim interpret the firstverse of
the Torah- àerlz
.
c!bârâ'E/c/ff-- in lightofthe r?'J4 darkôin Proverbs
8.22,understanding berë'
jh in Genesis1.1to mean be-l
mkmöl
gLuBy means
ofwisdom/rrorahGodcreatedgheavenandearth1.'48
The shorter of the two M idrashim isattributed to the Tanna R.
Judahb.Il<ai(ca.150c.i!.
).
TheHolyOne,blessedbeHe,looked(mabbît
.)intotheTorah and
created theworld.Thisiswhatismeantby u'
Then IwasbesideHim
asan artisan ('ûmnn)(Prov.8.30).Thisiswhatiswritten,G' W ith
rë'lîlGod creat
- .
ed''(Gen.1.1),andrl/à
rf!meansnothingotherthan
t
bhe Torah,as it is said, R'T'he Lord made me r?'#f!(E.V.-çasthe
. duringthenightand executed duringtheday,orwhetherb0th theplanning
eginningj ofHisway' '(Prov.8.22).Thisiswhatismeantby
tt'
W ith r?J.
lA (E.V.- <InthebeginningjGodcreated.n4g
ThisM idrash is repeated almostverbatim in the lastsection ofthe
openingproem Lpetih.JJl)ofGenesisRabbah,attributedtoR.Hoshaiahof
the firstgeneration ofPalestinian Amoraim (ca.225c. E.).Theproem
offersfourpossible interpretationsofMmôn in Proverbs8.30,culm inating
BRIDE OF ISRAEL 195
in afifth interpretation,in which 'ömôn isunderstood to m ean Gartisan.''
ThisMidrash elaborateson the earliertradition ascribed to R.Judah b.
Iliai,developing the image ofthe artisan further to encompassb0th the
im age ofthe architectwhom theking employsto build andtheblueprint
thatthe architectconsultsin building.
R.Hoshaiah opened:R'
rhen I wasbeside Him as an 'ömôtt,and I
wasHisdelightdayafterday''(Prov.8.30)....'Amônisan artisan
(J;-Jél).TheTprahdeclares,KIwastheworkinginstrumentofthe
Holy O ne,blessed be H e.''In the norm alcourse ofaffairs,when a
m ortalking buildsa palace he does notbuild itby hisown skill,
butby the skill of an architect.M oreover,the architect does not
build itoutofhishead,butm akesuse ofplansand tabletsin order
to know how to makethe chambersand thewickets.ThustheHoly
One,blessedbeHe,looked(mabbît)intotheTorahandcreatedthe
world. And the Torah declares, R' W ith rë'jh (E.V.-<In the
beginning''jGodcreated''(Gen.1.1),andr?'.
9Ameansnothingother
than theTorah,asitissaid,u'rheLordmademerë'- lît(E.V.-&as
thebeginning')ofHisway''(Prov.8.22).50
TorabastbeBlueprintofCreation.Inaddition totheactiveimageofthe
Torah asan architector artisan,we find in rabbinic literature the more
passive im age of the Torah as the blueprint or plan of creation.The
Midrash attributed to R.Hoshaiah (cited above)incorporates170th of
these im ages, although their interrelationship is not clarified. W ith
respectto the imageoftheblueprint,in theM idrash ascri
o bedtoR.Judah
b.Il4ai(citedabove)Godissaidtohavetulooked'
'(mabbîtjintotheTorah
and created theworld;however,this idea isnotexplicitly elaborated in
term sofablueprintasitisin theM idrash attributed to R.Hoshaiah.sl
The notion thatcreation wasfirstconceived asan idea orplan in the
mind ofGod,which wasthen broughtto fruition in theconcreteformsand
phenomena ofthe manifestworld,isexpressed in anumberofM idr%him .
One tradition recordsa dispute between the Schoolof Sham maiand the
Schoolof Hillelconcerning whether the plan ofcreation wasformulated
and execution took placeduring the day.Thenatureoftheplan itselfisnot
discussed,norisany explicitmention made ofthe Torah in thiscontext.52
However, another anonymous M idrash directly links the Torah,through
referencetoIChronicles16.15(=Psalm 105.8mentioned earlier),tothe
plan ofcreation thathad been conceived in the mind ofGod forathousand
years.53 w hen the time of creation came the plan effortlessly- in one
day- materialized asthe multiple formsofcreation.
 N '
196 RETH IN KIN G SCRIPTU RE
uMyhandlaidthefoundationsoftheearth''(Isaiahxlviiil3l-said
the Holy O ne, blessed be He: GFor M y thoughts are not your
thoughts...Forasthe heavensarehigher than the earth . . .'
l '(ï5ifl.
v8-9)-amansitsandcalculates,saying:Thisishow Ishallbuild,
thisishow Ishallm ake it;he thinksoutin alittle whilewhathe
doesnotaccomplish iu a decade.ButtheHoly O ne,blessed be He,
isnotso;for(what)hethinksoutinathousandyearsHebuildsin
one day,asitis said:GRem ember Hiscovenantfor ever, the word
whichHecommandedtoathousandgenerations''(1Chroniclesxvi
15).Theheavenswerecreated in oneday,foritissaid:GBythe
wordoftheLordtheheavensweremade''(Psalmsxxxiii6).54
HebrewLettersastlteStructuralElementsofCreation.Inthelatterpartofthe
hom ily cited above,therole oftheTorah in creation isdescribed in term s
ofthe t'
w enty-two lettersthatcompose it.
And when he created thc world,the Torah,asitwere, gave H im
light,for the world wasw ithoutform and void, asitis said:uFor
the commandm entisalam p.and theTorah islight-''Said theHoly
One,blessed be H e,Iseek workmen.The Torah answered Him :I
shall put at your sezvice twenty-two workmen, namely the
twenty-two lettersoftlteTorah....55
Thet'
wenty-t'
woletters('&)oftheHebrew alphabetthatcompose
the Torah are considered in certain strandsoftherabbinictradition to be
the basic structural elem ents of creatiom Rabbinic literature contains
m any homilieson the individual letters of the H ebrew alphabet, their
form and sound and cosm ic role in creation. Certain homiliesexplain
whytheTorah- andthereforethecreation-beginswith theletter54.56
Other homiliesm aintain that the world wascreated with the letter llë
and the futureworld with the letteryd-J.57These speculationsregarding
the creative power ofthe H ebrew lettersreceived their mostelaborate
expressionintheSèperF%
.îrâlt(BookofCreation)(2ndor3rdc.c.
E.
),the
earliest extant Hebrew text of a speculative nature, which describesthe
process of creation as arising through different permutations and
combinationsofthetwentp two lettersofthe Hebrew alphabet.58
Itisthese ulettersby which heaven and earth were creatednsgthat
compose the Torah.The converse ofthe creative powerofthe lettersof
theTorah istheirpotentially destructivepoweriftheperfectstructure of
the Torah is tampered witlz in any way.Thus we find the admonition
attributed to R.lshmaelwhelkspeaking to R.M eirof' niswork asascribe
oftheTorah:Klfyou should perhapsomita single letteroradd a single
BRIDE OF ISRAEL
letter,you would thereby destroy the w hole world.60 The Palestinian
Amora R.Ze<ira issaid to havedeclared thateven the thin strokesofthe
lettersoftheTorah have the power to bring aboutthe destruction ofthe
wor1d.61
Thepowerattributed to the Hebrew lettersislinked to 170th their
form and their sound.W hen viewed from the perspective oftheirsound
value thelettersbecome intim ately linked with the creativepowerofthe
divine speech.The roleofthe divine speech in bringing forth creation is
embodied in therabbinicepithetforGod,ul-lewho spoke and theworld
cam e into beingo6l- and whathe spoke,according to the sages,wasthe
H ebrew language.W hen God said Rtzettherebelight''hespokeH ebrew,
the divine language. The sounds of the Hebrew alphabet are the
fundam entalelem entsofthe divinelanguage,and assuch they constitute
the basicsound impulsesthatunderlieand giveriseto themanifold form s
ofcreation.
The factthatGod simply spokeand thedifferentaspectsofcreation
came into being is,according to a numberof M idrashim ,an indication
of the com plete effortlessness with which H e creates.Psalm 33.6,içBy
theword (J4Jr)oftheLordweretheheavensmade,''isinvoked asa
proof text to show that for the alm ight'y Creator speech is action63
uBlessed beH ewho saysand does,who decreesand accomplishes.''64God
sim ply speaks and it is accomplished, he comm ands and his will is
done.
R.Berechiahopeùed inthenameofR.Judahb.R.Simon:ç<Bythe
word(dabar)oftheLordweretheheavensmade,anda1ltheirhost
by thebreath ofHismouth''(Ps.33.6)...notwith toilorwith
labor did the Holy One,blessed be He,create hisworld,but Rby
theword ofthe Lord' 'and Rthe heavenswerealrealy m ade.''N ow
moreover,itisnotwritten,Rtherewaslight''but(God said)Rlet
therebelight''(Gen.1.2),andatonceitcameintobeing.65
W hatwere thewordsby w hich God called the world into being?
Ten utterances are generally enumerated in the M idrashim ,a tradition
which datesback to an early M ishnah:RBy ten utteranceswastheworld
created.o66Two contending enum erationsoftheten utterancesarefound
in rabbinic literature.According to an anonym ousM idrash in Genesis
RabbahXVII.1,thefirstwordoftheTorah,berejh (Gen.1.1),together
with thespirit/voiceofGod overthewaters(Gen.1.2)and theeight
comm andsuAnd God said,''67constitutethe ten utterancesby which God
created theworld.According to an alternativeinterpretation attributed to
thePalestinian Am'oraR.Jolpnan,thespiritofGod isnotincluded as
198 RETH IN KIN G SCRIPTUM
one ofthe ten utterancesbut isreplaced by the ninth comm and GAnd
God said''(Gen.1.29).68Thesetenutteranceswillbediscussedin more
detailin the following section.
StagesofMani
festation.Therelationship between thethreeaspectsofthe
Torah'srolein creation discussed in theprevioussections- asGod'sarchitect
or co-worker,asthe blueprint,and asletters- is generally notdiscussed in
rabbinic texts.These speculationsaboutthe Torah appear ratherasisolated
fragments throughout the texts and are not developed in terms of a
consistentcosmology.Itisonly on thebasisofthe M idrashim concerning
the ten utterancesby which the world wascreated thatwe can begin to
develop an interpretive schem e in which these different aspects of the
Torah'scosm ogonicrole,as God'sco-worker,blueprint,and letters,can be
viewed asprogressiveaspectsorm anifestationsofasingleprocess.TheTorah
conceived as God's co-worker is a living, organic entits which in its
identification with prim ordialwisdom alm ostappearstotakeon an existence
independentofGod.YetatthesametimeitisGol' swisdom ,theprimorclial
thoughtofcreation conceived in the mind of God,which containswithin
itself the idealplan ofthe universe.Thisplan could in a sense be said to
contain the uideas''ofa11the formsin creation.These ideasarethen spoken
outby God,expressed by him in uttered soundsembodied in the lettersof
the Hebrew alphabet.These subtle impulsesofsound arethen precipitated
to fonn the concrete phenomena of creation.From a single thought to
differentiated thoughts to uttered words to concrete forms: this is the
progressive process of creation in which the Torah participates at every
stage.
The relationship between these various aspects of manifestation is
expressed in the M idrashim enumerating the ten utterancesby which the
world wascreated.In 170th oftheinterpretationsmentioned above,5erJ,
J4,
thefirstword ofthcTorah,isconsidered to be thefirstutterance,which is
linked by R.Joh.anan to Psalm 33.6,<<By theword ofthe Lord werethe
heavens made.''Berè'
jh in thiscontext constitutesthe originalunspoken
W ord,which containswithin itselftheothernineutterancesalzd thetotality
of creation- heaven and earth- yet undifferentiated.A word thathas not
been spoken outon thegrosslevelofspeech remainsasan ideain the mind.
Theword berë'jh callthusbeunderstood asthe unspoken ideaofcreation
thatfirstarosein themindofGod.Asdiscussed earlier,thisprimalunspoken
W ord,bertjh,isdirectly linked by anumberofM idrashim to thecreative
roleofTorah asprimordialwisdom.69
According to the enumeration in GenesisRabbah XVII.1,the second
creative utterancewasthe voice,yetunexpressed,thathovered asthe spirit
ofGod overthewaters(Gen.1.2).Thenthevoicebecamevocalizedalld
burstforth onto the expressed levelofspeech:RAnd God said:dtzettherebe
BRID E O F ISM EL 199
light'''(Gen.1.3).Thisisthefirstofeightcommands7othatprogressively
unfolded thedetailsofcreation from the originalwholenessoftheW ord.
W ith each command,t<laettherebe...,''itwasso.The Lord spoke the
nam e and the corresponding form appeared.
In thisportrayalofcreation we find a progressive developmentfrom
unspoken thoughttospokenword to concreteform .TheTorah astheW ord
of God embraces170th unspoken thoughtand spoken word.The unspoken
thought in the m ind ofGod iswisdom ,which isthe contentof the word.
The word isspoken by meansofGod'svoice,which isthevehicle forthe
expressionoftheword.W isdom andthevoice/speech-bothoftheseaspects
of the word are necessary in order for the process ofmanifestation to be
complete.On theonehand,withoutspeech the contentoftheword,which
iswisdom,would rem ain hidden,undisclosed.On theotherhand,without
wisdom speech would have no contentto express.
Toraltan1 Creation in Kabbalistic'Tèxf.
s
ThePrimordialTorah.TheZoharand othermedievalkabbalistictextsreit-
erate the rabbinic notion that the Torah preceded the creation of the
world by two thousand years.7lHowever,the medieval Kabbalistsulti-
mately maintain thatthe Torah notonly precedesthe world chronologi-
cally,butalso ontologically.7zTheTorah isgiven priority notonly in time
butalso in being,fortheTorah in itsprimordialstate participatesin the
reality ofthesepîrôL,thehidden realm ofdivine em anationsthatunderlies
and givesrise to the created worlds.
The kabbalistic conception oftheprimordialTorah mustthereforebe
understood in the contextof the kabbalistic doctrine ofthe ten syîrh,the
tenspheresofdivinelightthrough which thehidden,unmanifestGod,'An-
Sôp,manifestshimself:(1)KeyerçElyôn(supremecrown),(2)Uo- kmâh(wis-
dom),(3)Blnàlz (intelligence),(4) Uesek (love),(5) Gebfluh (power),
(srrip'ere!(beauty),(7)Nefâ.
ll(lastingendurance),(8)H(
V (majesty),(9)
Yest
v (foundation),and(10)Malkûy(kingdom).Theteny epîrh function
togetherasasingle,unified organism ,representing thedynam ic,pulsating
lifeoftheGodhead.In theirtotalitythestbîrôLareoften depicted in thefonn
ofa man,each slpîröb representing adifferentpartofthecosm icbody.Each
stbîrâb represents a specific aspect of the Godhead and is responsible for
bringing outparticularaspectsofcreation.
TheauthoroftheRJMyJ,Mebêmenö'(TheFaithfulShepherd)andthe
'
IhqûnêZohar,thelatestsectionsoftheZoharwrittenattheendofthe13th
centtzry, distinguishes between t'
w o different aspects of the Torah: Tôrâh
Je-zt
i.
sc//
4,ixrrorah in the state ofemanation,''and ' n râh Je-ôerrl/;,urrorah in
thestateofcreation.''' IbrâhJe-lasg/$
4 istheuncreatedToralzthatiscompletely
self-contained and one with God in the divine realm of the stbîrôL.This
 RETH INKIN G SCRIPTURE
Torahischamcterizedbythewords,<tT' heTorahoftheLordisperfect''(Ps.
19.8).Tôröhf/e
-ôerrl/z,ontheotherhand,ischamctetizedbythewords,R'
rhe
LordmademeasthebeginningofHisway''(Prov.8.22),foritisthisTorah
thatmanifestswhen God himselfemergesfrom hishidden abodeand reveals
him selfin theworksofcreation.73
W ithintherealm oftheseyîrôLtheTorahisdescribedbytheKabba-
listsasemerging in stagesthatrecapitulatetheprocessthrough which the
sl
tîrôlemanatefrom theunmanifest';n-Sôp.Initsearliestandmosthid-
den stage ofm anifestation itissom etim esreferred to by thirteenth-cen-
tury KabbalistsasT/rl/lkeéûmöh.theprimordialTorah,which issome-
tim esidentified with H okmâh,wisdom,thesecond :e
. ,frJ/
1.74
EplfTuflrfosofKegr,f.folplf
ï/l,Jlltflfsf
Tfl.TheroleoftheprimordialTorah
in the process ofcreation can bestbe understood by briefly examining
the process through which the first three Je
'
pfrqr-lteler, Uokm:h,and
Bînàh- which are frequently associated with the primordUlal Torah,
unfold from theunmanifest'En-Sôp.Thisphaseofouranalysisisbased
on theZohar'sdescriptionsofthisprocess.
In the cosmogonic schem eoftheZohar,theultimatesource ofcre-
ation is'tn-sôp (literally,t<withoutlimit''),which isdescribed asan
unmanifest, unbounded, transcendental reality that is whidden and
rem oved farbeyond all ken.''75w hen the tim e of creation daw ns, the
unmanifest'An-sôp,theucauseabovea11causes,r6emergesfrom itshid-
den abode in ten spheresofm anifestation, ten spheresofdivine light,or
se
pîrh.Thefirstse
pîröbisKeter(crown),thesupernalManonwhichasa
chariot the unmanifest'tn-sôp descendsinto the realm ofmanifesta-
tion.77 Keyer is the super'
nal effulgence of the Godhead known as
Rbrightness''(zohar),containing within itselfa1lthelightsoftheother
sl
pîrôt and the totality of creation yet undifferentiated.78 Keyer is the
supremew illthatsçtsthe processofcreation in motion.79
TheZohardescribeshow w ith the txdecision oftheKing''to create,
the effulgence ofKeterwithdrew into itselfand a hidden supernalpoint
shone forth.8oThis prim ordial point is the thought of the Creator, in
which he enfolds himself and the totality of the universe in potential
form .From this single concentrated impulse of thought the entire cre-
ation unfolds.8lThisprimordialpointofdivine thoughtisidentified in
theZoharwith the second Je
érrli- uokmâh,wisdom.Uokmâh isthat
primordialwisdom which isexalted in Proverbs8.22-31 asexisting from
Rthebeginning(rJ'J4)''astheartisanofcreation andisidentifiedinthe
Zoharwith the Torah.82
u'
rhe Lord by wisdom founded the earth;by understanding he
BRID E OF ISRAEL 201
established theheavens''(Prov.111,19).W hen God...created the
world,H e saw thatitcould notexistwithoutthe Torah,asthisis
theonly source ofa11law sabove and below,and on italoneare the
upperand lower beingsestablished.Hence,ççthe Lord by wisdom
founded the earth;by understanding he established the heavens'' ,
inasm uch as it is through W isdom that al1 things are enabled to
existin the universe,and from ita11thingsproceed.83
W hiletheTorah isgenerally identifiedwith Uokm âh,wisdom ,in
-
theZohar,itisalso attimesdescribed ashaving itssourcein Uokmâh.
There isno Torah withoutwisdom and no wisdom withoutTorah,
170th being in the sam e grade,the root ofthe Torah being in the
supernalW isdom by which itissustained.84
TheTorah in itsidentificationwith Uokmàh ishypostatized asthe
Father,85w hose seed is deposited in the womb of the M other,Bînàh
(intelligence),thethirdse
pîrâhvu6who iscalled the GreatVoice.87The
child thatisbornfrom theunion ofUokmâh and Bîluh isidentified in
theZoharwith Tip'ere!(beauty),the sixth sl pîrâlt,who asthe lower
Uokmàh representsthesecond phaseofmanifestation oftheFather.
UnfoldmentoftheDivineSpeech.Thesuccessiveemallation ofthesqpîrôLis
described in severalpassages in the Zohar asa processthrough which the
divinespeech unfolds.Therealm ofthesqpîrh isthehidden worldofdivine
language,thetensl pîrôtbeingidentifiedwith theten primordialutterances
through which the world wascreated.88The stagesof unfoldment ofthe
divine speech are ultim ately correlated with the stagesofm anifestation of
theTorah,aswillbediscussed in the following section.
The processthrough which the divine speech unfoldsbeginswith
theemergenceoftheprimordialpointofdivinethought,Uokmâh,wis-
dom ,which istherJ,
Jr!,ubeginning,''ofcreation.Asin rabbinicliterature
thewordbtrejh,with whichtheTorahopens,isunderstoodin theZohar
tomeanSiwithwisdom (=rrorahjo8g-thatprimordialwisdom whichhas
existed Gfrom the beginning (rJ'J4)''(Prov.8.22) asthe instrument
through which God created heaven and earth.go
W hen God designed to create theuniverse,Histhoughtcom passed
a11worldsatonce,and by meansofthisthoughtwere they a11cre-
ated,asitsays,$$1nwisdom hastthoumadethem a1l''(Ps.CIV,24).
By
wort
lhi
ds thought
above -tewhi
crea d.glch isHisW isdom- were thisworld and the
 2O2 RETH IN KIN G SCRIPTU RE
How doesthisprim ordialpointofdivine thoughtgive rise to cre-
ation? The m echanicsof creation are described in a number ofpassages
in theZoharasthe mechanicsthrough which thoughtdevelops, forcre-
ation isviewed assim ply aprocessofunfolding theoriginalseed-thought
ofwisdom,Uokmâh,through progressivestagesofdevelopmentuntilit
findsexpression on the levelofvocalized speech.
W hen the Holy O ne,blessed be He,willsthatH isglory should be
glorified,there issues from His thought a determination that it
should spread forth;whereupon itspreadsfrom theundiscoverable
region ofthoughtuntilitrestsin gflros (throat),aspotthrough
whichperenially (.
sfcJflowsthemysticforceoftheE tspiritoflife''
. dom , and the female aspect discloses the content, giving it manifest
W hen the thought,afteritsexpansion,com esto restin thatplace,
itiscalledElobim hayyim (livingGod).Itthenseekstospreadand
disclose itself further,and there issue from that spotfire, air,and
water,a11compounded together.There also emergesUacob,the
perfçct matt'',symbolic of a certain voice thatissues and becomes
audible.Thusthe thoughtthatwashitherto undisclosed and with-
drawn in itselfisnow revealed through sound. I1lthefurtherexten-
sion and disclosure ofthethought,thevoice strikesagainstthe lips,
and thuscomesforth speech which isthe culm ination oftllewhole
and in w hich the thought iscompletely disclosed. Itisthus clear
thatalliscomposed oftltatundisclosed thoughtwhich waswith-
draw n in itself,and that thewhole isone essence.92
In thisdescription themajorstagesin theunfoldmentofthedivine
speech- will,thought,inaudible voice, audiblevoice,and vocalized speech
-
correspondtothefivesl
pîrôLKeler,Uokmâh,Blnàh,Tip'eret,andM alklk, -
respectively.ThedivinewilloftheHoly OneisKeyer, theflrstJyjîra/l,from
which issuesa thought- uokmâh,the second stbîrâh.Thisconcentrated
impulseofthought,arising from thatuundiscoverableregion,'' expandsand
creates an abode for itself in the throat, where it is called Elohim
Uayylm-Bînàh,thethirdsl
pîrâh.ThevoiceofJacob,which isTi
pkret,the
sixth stbîrt
jb,then issuesforth and,striking against the lips, culminatesin
audible speech thatcan be heard without- Malkûl(kingdom),thetenth
. heard without,to wit,Rtaetthere be 1ight.''97
sl
pîri
tb,which isthe Shekhinah,the divine presence.
In anotherpassagethe Zoharclearly separatesthese differentphases
intofourmainstages(notincludingthedivinewill,Keler):(1)supernal
wisdom (Uokmâh),whichislocatedinthethoughtandisnotdisclosed
orheard;(2)theGreatVoice(B1nàh),whichisthelivingspirit(Elohim
Uayyîm)thatissuesforthfrom wisdom anddisclosesitalittlexçinawhis-
perwhich cannotbe heardy''flowing on withoutceasing in theregion of
BRIDE OF ISRAEL 203
thethroatandformingahouseforthesupernalwisdom;(3)thevoiceof
Jacob (Tip'eret
-),which istheaudiblevoicethatissuesforth from the
inaudibleGreatVoice;and(4)theouter,articulatedspeechorutterance
(Malkl#)throughwhichthevoiceofJacobemergesintheopenandfinds
expression on thevocalized level.93
Supernalwisdom (H.okmàh)and thevoiceofJacob (Tip'erel)are
considered to be male, representing the upper Uokmàh and lower
Uokmàh,orFatherandSon,respectively.TheGreatVoice(Bîn:h)and
the outer, articulated speech (Malk#) are female,representing the
M other above and the M otherbetow,or M other and Daughter,respec-
tive1y.94In 170th casesthe maleaspectprovidesthecontent,which isw is-
expression through speech.
Thefirsttwo stagesin theunfolclmentofthedivinespeech- supernal
wisdom and the Great Voice- are said to be inaudible,taking place in
silence, while the last two stages-the voice of Jacob and vocalized
speech- are audible.95Another passage ofthe Zohar placesthese various
stagesin the contextofthe overallmechanicsofcreation and clarifiesthe
distinction between the inaudible and audible phases. The first two
stages- in which theprimordialpointofthought,Uokmàh,expands and
-
createsa t<house''orRpalace''forhimself,implanting hisseed in the womb
ofBlnâh,the M other- occurin silence,and therefore ualthough theword
bereshithisacreativeutterance(maamarj,theactualwordsEand (God)said'
are notused in connection with it.''96Thewordsddand God said''are used
for the firsttime in the creation nm ative ofGenesis 1 atthe pointwhen
the child,conceived through the union of the Father and M other,issues
forth from thewomb oftheM otherasavoice uttering audiblespeech that
can be heard from without.
Hence S<and God said''meansthatnow the above-mentioned palace
generated from the holy seed w ith w hich itwaspregnant.W hile
itbroughtforth in silence,thatwhich itbore was heard without.
Thatwhich bore,borein silencewithoutmakingasound,butw hen
that issued from itwhich did issue,it becam e a voice which was
Thisvoiceappearstoencompass1)0ththevoiceofJacob(Tip'erey),
whichissuesforth from theGreatVoiceofBlnâh (thepalace),and the
outerspeech (Malkû-t)through which itisuheard without.''Itisthis
voice that is responsible for unfolding the detailsofcreation '
from the
originaltotalit'
y by means of the series of specific com mands that are
introduced in thefirstchapterof Genesisby the wordsuand God said.''
204 RETHIN KIN G SCRIPTU RE
StagesofMani
festationoftheTorah.Thedifferentstagesintheunfoldment
ofthe divine speech,with their corresponding syîrh,are identified in
kabbalistic literature with the different stages in the m anifestation of
Torah.TheKabbalistsgenerally distinguish atleastthreem ain manifesta-
tionsoftheTorah:(1)Torah/ee- #:f
lsll/z,theprimordialTorahdiscussedear-
lier,which isgenerally identifled with H okm:h,thesecond syîrâl
. - t;(2)
the W ritten Torah,which isidentified with Tip'erel,the sixth syîröh;
and(3)theOralTorah,whichisidentifiedwithMalkûl,theShekhinah,
thetenth se
pîrölt.
In the Zohar a1lthree aspects ofthe Torah are allotted a role in
creation.TheTorah asUokm àh,theprimordialpointofdivine thought,
- meansof primordialwisdom and hidden knowledge.Thus at the
contains the totality of creation in potentialform and is said to be the
source of b0th the W ritten Torah and the Oral Torah.98 w hen the
wholenessofUokmâh,wisdom,differentiates,writingissuesforth in the
form of the letters of the H ebrew alphabet inscribed in the W ritten
Torah.
Letters were imprinted on the fabric of the W hole,on the upper
and on the lowerfabric.Afterwardsthe letterswere distinguished
and inscribed in the Scripture.gg
From thepowerofthewriting thatissuesforth from Uokmâh,the
- R.Isaacgoeson to discusshow from the notyetunfolded Torah,which
W rittenTorah(Tip'ere!lissaidtohaveproducedtheworld,wlliletheOral
Torah(Ma1kû# issaidtoberesponsibleforcompletipgandpreservingthe
world.loo In the Zoharic conception the W ritten Torah and OralTorah,
hypostatizect as Tip'ere! and Malkûl, complement and support one
another,lolrepresenting theunity ofthe maleand femaleprinciples,lozthe
unityoftheupperand lowerworlds,lo:andtheunityoftheHoly N am e.104
TheW ritten Torah rem ainsundisclosed,hidden-on thesubtlerlevelsofcre-
ation,while the OralTorah isrevealed to human beingson earth.105The
W ritten Torah onhigh rejoicesin theOralTorah be1ow.106
The ProvençalKabbalist Isaac the Blind of Posquières,who lived
in them iddleofthetwelfth century priorto theappearanceoftheZohar,
givesadetailed description ofthe differentstagesofmanifestation ofthe
. Malkûl,thelastse
Torah and their corresponding stbîrôt,which expandsand elaborateson
the threefold conception of the Torah found in the Zohar and other
m edievalkabbalistic texts.
In God'srighthandwereengraved alltheengravingsginnermost
formsjthatwere destined some day to risefrom potency toact.
From the emanation of a11 ghigherjsefirotb they were graven,
scratched,andmoldedintothesefiraltofGrace(Iteseh,whichisalso
BRIDE O F ISRAEL 205
called God'srighthand,and thiswasdonein an inward,inconceiva-
b1y subtle way.This formation iscalled the concentrated,notyet
unfolded Torah,and also the Torah ofGrace.Along with a11the
otherengravingsgprincipallyjt'
woengravingsweremadeinit.The
one hasthe form ofthe written Torah,the other the form ofthe
oralTorah.The form ofthewritten Torah isthatofthe colorsof
white fire,and the form ofthe oralTorah hascolored form sasof
black fire.And a11these engravingsand the notyetunfolded Torah
existedpotentially,perceptibleneitherto aspiritualnorto asensory
eye,untilthewill(ofGodjinspiredtheideaofactivatingthem by
beginning ofa1lactstherewaspre-existentially thenotyetunfolded
Torah (lnrf;/lkelulahj,whichisin God'srighthandwitha1lthepri-
mordialformsgliterally:inscriptionsandengravingsjthatarehidden
in it,and this iswhat the M idrash implieswhen itsaysthatGod
took theprimordialTorah (torahkedumahj,which stemsfrom the
quarryofurepentance''(lBlnâhljandthesourceoforiginalwisdom
(gtlokmàhll,andinonespiritualactemanatedthenotyetunfolded
Torah in order to give perm anence to the foundations of a11 the
wor1ds.107
correspondsto Uesek,these
pîrâlgofgrace,emerged the W ritten Torah,
which correspondsto Tip'eret,these
pîrâh ofdivine com passion,and the
OralTorah,which correspondstoMalkt-
tl,these
pîröhofdivinejudgment,
the Shekhinah.
In the above passage four different stagesofm anifestation of the
Torah canbedistinguished,each correspondingtoadifferentsepîrâb:(1)
theprimordialTorah (Tôrâhkef/ivlljl,which stemsfrom Uokmàh and
Bînàh,thesecondandthirdse pîrh;(2)thenotyetunfoldedTorah(T&J/l
belûlâh),whichcontainsa11theprimordialengravingsandcorrespondsto
thefourthsttîrâlt,Uesek;(3)theW ritten Torah,which correspondsto
Tip'erel,thesixthsepîrâltkand(4)theOralTorah,whichcorrespondsto
pîrölt.
R.Isaac's description adds several elements to the more common
threefoldconceptionoftheTorah.(1)TheprimordialTorahisdescribed
asstemmingnotonlyfrom Uokmàhbutfrom Bînâh aswell,aconception
also found in atleastonepassage ofthe Zoharin which theTorah issaid
tobeanemanationof170thUokmâhandBînâh.108(2)h fourthstageof
m anifestation isadded to theusualthreefold scheme:thenotyetunfolded
TorahcorrespondingtoUese/.(3)Thepassageindicatesthatpriortoany
of the four stages of manifestation the Torah existed in an unmanifest
2O6 RETH IN KIN G SCRIPTU RE
form ,in which the engravingsofthe W ritten Torah and Oral Torah,
along with theotherengravingsofthe notyetunfolded Torah,uexisted
potentially,perceptible neither to a spiritualnor to a sensory eye.''Itis
onlywhen,atthebeginningofcreation,thedivinewill(Keler,thefirst
se
pîrâll)ççinspiredtheideaofactivatingthem''thatthewholenessofthe
primordialTorah em erged and em anated forth thedifferentiated engrav-
ingsof the notyetunfolded Torah,from which in turn emanated the
more particularengravingsofthe W ritten Torah and O ralTorah.
TorallastbeNameofGOJ.Thekabbalisticconceptionsdescribedin the
above sections can be schem atized in a threefold set ofcorrespondences
in which fourse
pîrh are primary.
Stageof Stageof
Se
pîrâ;t Divineqszeec/l Mani
festationo
fTprc/l
H. okmkh (
Father) thought PrimordialTorah
Bînâh (Mother) inaudiblevoice
Tip'ere!(Son) audiblevoice W ritten Torah
Malkl'i!(Daughter) vocalized speech OralTorah
W hilethe differentstagesofmanifestation ofTorah havethusbeen
correlated with particularsl
pîrôt,theTorah isultimately described by the
Kabbalistsasencompassing the influence ofa11theJr #Cré!.109In itsstages
ofunfoldmentfrom theunmanifest'An-sôp through Uokmâh andBlnâh
toTip'ere!andM alkûl,theTorahencompassesal1ofthese
pîrh,a11ofthe
spheresofthe Godhead.TheTorah astheW ord ofGod encompassesall
of the ten words or utterances through which God brought forth
creation.
The Torah asthe W ord ofGod isintimately linked in kabbalistic
thoughtwith the conception of Torah asthe N am e of God.The stbîrôl
are described in the Kabbalah notonly asten creative wordsbutalso as
ten divine nam es, and the Torah is correspondingly described as that
totality ofdivine unity which istheone W ord containing al1words,the
oneN am e containing a1lnames.
The conception thatthe Tprah isthe one greatN ame ofGod first
appear's among the .thirteenth-century Spanish Kabbalists of Gerona,
where itwaselaborated by the m ore seniorcolleaguesofNah.manides.llo
Ezrab.Solomon proclaim ed,içrhefivebooksoftheTorah are the N am e
of the Holy O ne,blessed be He.111 Thisconception was developed by
severalother membersofthe Gerona circle.112A similarthesisisfound
in Sëper ha-H. ayyîm,a text that em erged independently of the Gerona
Kabbalists and wasprinted in the first three decades of the thirteenth
BRIDE OF ISRAEL 207
century in France.ll3The Zohar,the classicaltext ofSpanish Kabbalah,
expressly assum esthe identity oftheTorah and the N ame ofGod,declar-
ing that the Torah isthe one supernalname of the Holy One.114 The
Zohar ultim ately proclaim sthatGod and the Torah are one,forhe and
hisN ame are o11e.115
The fullsignificance ofthisdeclaration can only be understood on
the basisofthekabbalistic conception ofthecreativepoweroflanguage,
which in turn is founded on corresponding rabbinic teachings.Implicit
in the traditionalrabbinic conception ofthe creative powerof theword
isthe notion thatan existentialrelationship existsbetween theword and
whatitsignifies,between the nam e and the form thatitdesignates.The
Hebrew term (lâbttritselfconveysthe double meaning ofuword'
'and
Rthingy''for in the ancientconception found throughoutthe N ear East
thename participatesin thereality and essence ofwhatisnamed.U nder-
stood in thiscontextthe notion thattheTorah isthe N am eofGod ulti-
mately leadsto the conclusion thatGod and the Torah are one,for the
Torah as God's Name represents the total manifestation of the divine
essence and power,which are concentrated in hisN am e.Thisisthecon-
clusion arrived'
atnotonly by theZoharbutalsobyJoseph Gikatilla,a
prom inent thirteenth-century Spanish Kabbalist who was undoubtedly
influenced by the Zohar.
HisTorah is in H im,and that is what the Kabbalistssay,nam ely,
that the Holy O ne,blessed be H e,isin H isN ame and H isName
isin Him ,and thatHisN am e isHisTorah.ll6
H efurtherexplainsthisstatem entwith referencetoa form ulafrom
the hym nsofthe M erkabah m ystics.
Itisan importantprinciplethattheancientsexpressed in thewords:
G'
rhy N am e isin Theeand in TheeisThy Name.''For the letters
ofH isN ame are He H im self.Even though they move away from
Him,theyremainfirmlyrooted(literally,flyawayandremainwith
Him1.117
The letters,according to Gikatilla,are the mysticalbody of God,while
God isthe soulof the letters.The conceptthat God and theTorah are
onewasalso expressed by otherKabbalists,such asM enatlem Recanati
(ca.1300c.
E.),whomaintainedthatRtheTorahisnotsomethingoutside
Him ,and H e isnotoutside the Torah.ll8
According to the m ost abstract level of interpretation,then,the
Torah as the N am e of God m eans that the Torah participates in the
208 RETH IN KIN G SCRIPTU RE
essence and powerofGod and thatultim ately theTorah and God areone.
The Torah in its most complete m anifestation encom passes al1 of the
se
pîrôL,a1laspectsofthe Godhead;itisthe one greatN ame of God that
encompassesa11ofthe divine nam es.
How doesthisabstractconception oftheTorah asaliving manifes-
tation ofthe Godhead relate to the concreteearthly form ofthebook of
theTorah,which iscomposed ofwordsand sentencesthatconvey specific
m eanings?Gikatilla provides an interpretation thatlinksthe divine and
earthly formsoftheTorah.The Torah asitappearson the earthly plane,
according to Gikatilla, is a living texture of names that is ultim ately
woven from the one true N am e ofGod,the tetragram maton YHW H .
A11ofthe n>mesofthe Torah are contained in thetetragramm aton,and
the tetragramm aton isitselfwoven b0th directly and in a secret,hidden
waythroughoutthefabric(tanàa)oftheTorah.llg
Thew hole Torah isa fabric ofappellatives,/ef?fnxyfvl- the generic
term fortheepithetsofGod,such ascompassionate,great,merciful,
venerable- and these epithets in turn are woven from the various
namesofGod(suchasE(Elohim,Shaddaij.Buta11theseholynames
are connected with the tetragrammaton YH W H and dependent
upon it. Thus the entire Torah is ultimately woven from the
tetragram m aton.lzo
The conception ofTorah asa fabric ofnameswasfirstarticulated
by M osesb.N ah.man (Nah
.manides),theeminentTalmudistand most
authoritative representative oftheearly Spanish Kabbalists.In thepreface
to hiscom mentary on theTorah,N ah. manidescitesa tradition in which
the Torah can simultaneously be read on two levels:in the traditional
m anner as historical narratives and comm andments, or according to a
m ore subtle levelofinterpretation asa seriesofdivine nam es.
W e possess an authentic tradition showing that the entire Torah
consists ofthe nam esof God and that the wordswe read can be
divided in avery differentway,so asto form gesoteric)names.
... The statem entin theAggadah to the effectthatthe Torah was
originally written with black fire on whitefire obviously confirms
ouropinion thatthewriting wascontinuous,withoutdivision into
words,whichmadeitpossibletoreaditeitherasasequenceof(eso-
tericjnamesgk!lerekhJlfi-l/lcplcf/ljorinthetraditionalwayashis-
tory and comm andments.Thusthe Torah as given to M oseswas
divided into wordsin such away asto be read asdivinecomm and-
BRID E O F ISRAEL 209
ments.Butatthesam etim ehereceived theoraltradition,according
to which itwasto be read asa sequence ofnames.lzl
N ah. manidespointsoutthatitisthissubtle strucmreofthe Torah as
asequenceofdivinenam esthataccountsfortherigorousM asoretictradition
concerning thewritingofascrolloftheTorah,in which ascrollisdisquali-
fied ifeven a single letter is added oromitted.Nah.m anides'colleaguesin
Gerona elaborated on thisconception,emphasizing theorganicullity ofthe
TorahastheNameofdod,whichconstitutcsaperfectdivine'edifice(binyân
,
?/4flinwhichthereisnotasinglesuperfluousletterorpoint.TheTorah,
according to Ezra b.Solomon,Gin itsdivine totality...is an edifice hewn
from the Nam e ofthe Holy O ne,blessed be He.'122Both Ezra and his
younger contemporary Azrielb.M enal lem of Gerona maintain thatnota
single letteror pointcan be eliminated from thisorganic totality without
harming the entire body.Azrielwrites,
Justasin thebodyofaman therearelimbsandjoints,justassome
organsofthebodyaremore,othersless,vital,so itseem sto bewith
the Torah.To onew ho doesnotunderstand theirhidden m eaning,
certain sectionsand versesofthe Torah seem fitto be thrown into
the fire;butto onewho hasgained insightinto their true meaning
they seem essentialcomponentsoftheTorah.Consequently,to omit
so much asone letterorpointfrom theTorah islikerem ovingsom e
partofa perfectedifice.Thenceitalso followsthatin respectofits
divine character no essentialdistinction can be drawn between ihe
sectionofGenesis36,settingforththegenerationsofEsau(aseem-
inglysuperfluouspassagej,and theTen Commandments,foritis
a11onewhole ind oneedifice.123
The kabbalistic conception of Torah as the N am e of God thus
embracesatleastthreelevelsofunderstandingtheTorah:(1)theTorah
as the one greatN ame of God thatrepresentsthe totalmanifestation of
God'sessenceandpower;(2)theTorah asasequenceofdivinenames
andappellatives;and(3)theTorahasasequenceofwordsandsentences
with earthly referents.W hatisthe relationship between these different
levelsofthe Torah?
In the kabbalistic view the basicstnzcturalelem entsofthe Torah in
a1litsm anifestationsare the lettersoftheH ebrew alphabet, which com -
binein variouswaysto give riseto the differentform softheTorah.The
scrollofthe Torah,according to the Kabbalists,contains no vowels, no
punctuation,and no accentsprecisely asan allusion to the fact that the
Torah, while remaining nonchanging and inviolable in its essential
21O RETHIN KIN G SCRIPTU RE BRIDE OF ISRAEL

nature,can be read in differentwaysaccording to the m annerin which ofy%.îrâh.Finally,in the fourth world,the world of .âii
yyâh,the Torah
one combinesand dividesthe lettersinto words. appearsin itstraditionally transm itted form .125
M oses Cordovero, a leading sixteenth-century Kabbalist of the Combining thisanalysiswith thatofM oses Cordovero,the fourdif-
Safed school,describesfour levelsofmanifestation ofthe Torah thatare ferentfonnsoftheTorahcanbesummarizedasfollows:(1)'f iff/ë-rlbrah
distinguished notonly by the manner in which the letterscombine but asasequenceofletters;(2)krfu/l-rlbrahasafabricofnamesofGod;(3)
also by the degree ofm aterialization of the letters.In itssubtlestphase pr rl/l-rrorah asa sequence ofappellatives orangelic names;and (4)
ofm anifestation,according to Cordovero,theTorah iscom posed ofsub- '
f
i-
ûyyl/l- rorah asasequenceofwordsand sentencesreferring to concrete
tle letters thatare different configurationsofdivine light.In the subse- materialobjectsand earthly events.ThesedifferentfonnsoftheTorah are
quent phase of manifestation the letters progressively m aterialize and ultim ately encompassed in the conception ofTorah as the Name of God,
combine in variouswaysto form ,first,namesof God,then appellatives forin the kabbalisticperspective itistheN ame ofGod thatisthesource of
and predicates referring to the divine, and finally words form ed from a11language,the source ofa1lletters,atld hence the source ofa11possible
m aterialletters thatrefer to earthly events and phenom ena.Cordovero çombinationsoflettersthatfonn names,appellatives,words,alld sentences.
usesthisprogressive processofmaterialization to explain the state ofthe Al1theconcreteand subtlemanifestationsoftheTorah arein thefinalanaly-
Torah prior to the fall,after the fall,and in theM essianicAge.124 sismodificationsofthe one greatName ofGod.
Torab in theFour Worlds.Cordovero'sformulation ofthe four form sof lt is interesting to note in this context thatcertain Kabbalists,in
particular the Lurianic school, correlated the four letters of the
the Torah- subtle letters, names of God, appellatives, and material
words- isdeveloped in asomewhatdifferentm annerin writingsoriginat- tetragrammaton- Yô/-Hë-W àw-Hë- with the four worlds- uff/fi
l,
serfu/l,y%.îrâh,and êâfi
yyâh,respectively- andby implication with thefour
ingintheschooloflsraelSarug(ca.1600c.
E.),aLurianicKabbalist.In form s of the Torah in the four worlds.The four letters and the four
these textseach ofthe fourformsoftheTorah correspondsto one ofthe
four worldsthatare described by Kabbalistsfrom the sixteenth century worlds are in turn correlated with the four Jy/frgk- uokmâh,Blnàh,
onwardasexistingbetweentheunmanifest'An-sôpandthegrossmaterial Tip'eret,and M alkûy,respectively- thatcorrespond to the majorstages
ofm anifestation ofthe Torah discussed earlier.Ourpreviousschem acan
world:(1)'kîlûj,theworldofemanation,whichistheabodeoftheten thusbe expanded to incorporate a numberofnew elem ents.
sepîrh;(2)berî'âh,theworldofcreation,whichistheabodeofthethrone,
theMerkabah (throne-chariot),and thehighestangels;(3)y% .îrl/l,the
world offormation,which isthemain domain oftheangels;and (4) Lettero
f Stageof Formof
êâj:i
yyâh,theworld ofmaking oractivation,which isthe spiritualarche- ie
/frlà W'
brlf lktragrammaton
' Mani
festationofTorab Torah
type ofthe materialworld. tlokmàh '
âjllt
-
tt Y(
54 PrimordialTorah Letters
Thetextsdescribehow theunmanifest'Gn-sôp,inself-rapture,begins Blnkh Berl'àh Hë NamesofGod
to movewithin itself,generating the movementoflanguageand weavinga Tip'erey Yejlràh W âw W ritten Torah Appellativesor
texture(malbûh ofthet'
wenty-two lettersoftheHebrew alphabetin the Angelic Names
substanceof'ên-sôpitself ThisconstitutestheoriginalTorah,inwhich the Malkt
-
t! 'âjiyy:h H: OralTorah Wordswith
letters,in theiroriginalsequence,contain within them selvestheseedsofa1l Earthly Referents
possibilitiesforfurther linguistic expression.In the nextphase the Torah
assumesdifferentfonnscorresponding to the fourworlds.ln the highest TorahastheBlueyrintofcreation.TheTorahastheNameofGodexpresses
world,the world of'tkîîlûL,the Torah manifests,asin the originaltexture, thataspectof God which isrevealed in and through creation.Itencom-
asa sequence of combinations of the H ebrew consonants.In the second passesthe totality ofGod'sm anifestationsin theworld ofem anation,the
world,theworld ofberî'öh,theTorah appearsasa sequence ofholy names realm ofthe slpîrôt,and in the created worlds.ThelettersoftheH ebrew
ofGod,which are formed by certain furthercombinationsofthe elements alphabetthathavetheirrootand source in theN am eofGod are thebasic
found in theworld of'âsîl%.Asitbecom esincreasingly more manifest,the structuralelem entsthatcombinein variouswaysto giveriseto thediffer-
Torah appearsasa sequenceofangelic nam esin the third world,theworld vntform softhe Torah corresponding to each ofthefourworlds.Accord-
 RETH IN KIN G SCRIPTU RE
ingto the schoolofIsraelSarug the particularconfiguration oflettersin
each form ofthe Torah reflectsthelawsand structureofthe correspond-
ing world.Implicitin thisconception isthe notion thatthe Torah in a11
itsm anifestationsconstitutesthe perfectand all-comprehensiveblueprint
of creation that reveals the law s and structure of every level of
existence.
Thisrathersophisticated conception ofthe Torah asthe blueprint
ofcreation appearsin a m ore simplified form in earlierkabbalistic texts.
Forexam ple,the Zohar depictsthe Torah asa blueprintin the sense of
a plan composed ofwordsthatGod Glooksat''or contem platesin order
to bring forth the m anifold form sofcreation.
W hen theHoly O tle resolved to create theworld,H e guided Him -
selfby theTorah asby aplan,ashasbeen pointed outin connection
withthewordsttrrhenIwasbyhim asamon''(Prov.VIII,30),where
the word amott (nursling) may also be read uman (architect).
whenHejheHolyOne)resolvedtocreatetheworldHelooked
.. .
into theTorah,into itsevery creativeword,and fashionedtheworld
correspondingly;fora11thewords(-
çfcjanda11theactionsofa11the
worldsare contained in the Torah.Therefore did the Holy One,
blessed be He,look into itand create the world....God looked at
Hisplan in thisway.ltiswritten in the Torah:tsln the beginning
God created the heavensand the earth'';He looked at thisexpres-
sion and created heaven and earth.In the Torah itiswritten:Rteet
therebe light'';He looked atthese wordsand created light;and in
thismannerwasthew holeworld created.126
In anotherpassagethe Holy O ne notonly looksatthewordsofthe
Torah;he uttersthewords.Commenting onJob 28.27,R'
rhen did He
see it and declare it;H e established it and searched it out,''the Zohar
explainsthatGod firstsaw orcontemplated thew ordsoftheTorah;then
he uttered them forth and thereby established theformsofcreation. See-
ing, declaring,establishing, and searching out correspond to the four
operations tlzrouglz w hich God brings forth creation.lz; Jn the Zolzar's
form ulation ofthem çchanicsofcreation weonceagain find aprogression
from unspoken thoughtto spoken word to concrete form .
TheZoharm aintainsthatin creatingtheworld God used theTorah
asthe plan b0th ofthew hole and the partsofcreation.lz8Through the
Torah a11theworldsand a11beings,170th aboveand below , werecreated.129
Through the Torah hum an beings were created.l3o According to the
Zoharthe human being isam icrocosm ,the structure ofthe human body
reflecting the structure of the macrocosm .The microcosm and macro-
cosm are in turn organized in accordancewith the plan and structure of
BRIDE O F ISRAEL 213
the Torah,which itselfconsistsofdifferentpartsthatcombine to form a
singlebody.
. . . . whoever laboursin the Torah upholdsthe world,and enables
each partto perform itsfunction.Forthereisnota memberin the
human body buthasitscounterpartin theworld asawhole.Foras
m an'sbody consistsofmembersand partsofvariousranksallacting
and reacting upon each otherso as to form one organism ,so does
the world atlarge consist of a hierarchy ofcreated things,which
when they properly actand reactupon each other together form
literally one organic body. Thus the whole is organised on the
scheme of the Torah,which also consists ofsections and divisions
which fit into one another and,when properly arranged together,
form one organic body.131
T O M H A N D REVELAT IO N
The rabbinic and kabbalistic conceptions of Torah can thus be seen to
encompassfarm ore than abook orscrollinscribed with letters.Although
the kabbalistic conception ofTorah isofcourse much m ore fully devel-
oped aspartofaformal,elaborate cosm ologicalscheme,thereare never-
theless certain recurring themes that are found in b0th rabbinic and
kabbalistic formulations.In particular,the Torah isdescribed on atleast
threedifferentlevelsin rabbinic and kabbalistic texts,which can besum-
m arized asfollows.
1.The Torah is personified- or, in the case of the Kabbalah,
hypostatized- asa living,organicentity,a living aspectofGod,
which isvariously described asprim ordialwisdom ,theW ord of
God,and the one greatN ame of God.On thislevelthe Torah
constitutes that undifferentiated wholeness of divine wisdom
which isthe im m ediate source ofcreation.
2.The Torah isthe subtle blueprintofcreatiom w hich containsthe
fundam entalstrucmralelementsthat1ie atthebasisofa1lcreation.
On thislevelthe Torallhasdifferentiated from itsoziginalstate of
unity into thelettersofthe Hebrew alphabet,which combineinto
names/words.TheoneNamedifferentiatesintonames,theone
Worddividesintowords.Onthemostsubtlelevelthesenames/
wordsconstitute the Gideas''ofa11the formsofcreation conceived
in the mind ofGod asthe idealplan ofthe universe.These ideas
are then spoken outby God asuttered words,which arethen pre-
cipitated to form the m anifold phenom ena ofcreation.
 RETHIN KIN G SCRIPTU RE
3.TheTorah isaconcretew ritten textcomposed ofwordsand sen-
tences inscribed on parchm entthatrefer to earthly phenom ena
and events in the form of historicalnarratives and com mand-
m ents.This is the transm itted Torah that is said to have been
revealed to M osesand the people ofIsraelatM ountSinaiata
particular tim e in history.
W hatistherelationship between the finite, historicalTorah ofrev-
elation and the preexistent, primordial Torah thatserved asthe instru-
mentofcreation?These two aspectsofTorah can beviewed asdifferent
levels of manifestation corresponding to different levels of creation:
earthly and heavenly,grossand subtle. In rabbinic terms atthe time of
the revelation atM ount Sinaithe prim ordialTorah descended from its
heavenly abode onto earth, assum ing the finite form of the W ritten
Torah. In kabbalistic term s at the tim e of the revelation the Torah
emerged from itshidden abodein theunmanifest'An-sôp andprogres -
sivelyunfoldedin stagescorrespondingtothedifferents'
pîrôtandworlds
untilitmanifested on earth asthe concretebook ofthe Torah.
In certain strandsoftherabbinicand kabbalistictraditionstheproc -
ess of revelation is depicted as a recapitulation of the process through
which creatiou itselfunfolded. In thisview the mechanicsofrevelation
mirrorthemechanicsofcreation, fortheW ord ofGod revealedatM ount
Sinai is the sam e W ord of God that brought forth creation Rin the
beginning.''
Thissection willbriefly considersome ofthe m ostimportantrab-
binicand kabbalistic traditionsconcerning the natureofthe revelation at
M ount Sinai,with particular emphasison those traditionsthatimply an
ontologicalconception ofthe Torah.
Torab and Revelation in RabbinicKxfs
.
DescentoftheTorahtoEarth.h numberofMidrashim describehow atthe
tim e of the revelation atM ount Sinaithe Torah, which had existed on
high since Rthe beginning''as God's co-worker in creation descended
,
onto theearth and became em bodied in thewordsoftheW ritten Torah.
W ith the revelation atM ountSinaithe Torah entered into creation in a
new way,m aking itsabode on earth am ong thepeople ofIsrael.
SeveralM idrashim describe M oses'ascentofM ouutSinaiin terms
ofan ascension to the heavens, which arethe naturalabode oftheTorah.
A TalmudicM idrash ascribed to thePalestinian Amora R. Joshuab.Levi
relates how when M oses ascended to heaven to rcceive the Torah and
bringitback toearth.theangelsarguedwith Godthathisglory(the
Torah)shouldnotbegiventothesonsofmen.
BRIDE OF ISIG EL
W hen M osesascended on high,the ministering angelsspoke before
the Holy One,blessed be He,Gsovereign ofthe universe, whathas
oneborn ofwoman to do am ong us?''Hesaid to them , <<Hehascome
to receive the Torah.'' They said to him ,ur
rhat precious treasure
(D
.mqâh,oJzJ/l),whichhasbeenhiddenawaybyTheeforninehun-
dred and sevene-fourgenerationsbefore theworld wascreated, Thou
desirest to give to one of flesh and blood? E'
W hatisman thatThou
arem indfulofhim,and the son ofman thatThou dostcareforhim ?
O Lord ourLord,how majestic isThy namein al1theearth!Thou
whohastsetThyglory(theTorzjupontlleheavens.'''(Ps.8.4,2).132
In reply to the angelsM osesargued thatthe Torah containspositive and
prohibitive com mandm ents that only concern human beings in their
earthly abode and do notapply to theangelsin heaven.The angelscon-
ceded and as recompense bestowed gifts upon M oses. M oses then
descended to earth with the Torah.133
An anonymousM idrash relatesthat when God was aboutto give
theTorahhedecreedthatu'rhosewhoarebelow gMosesjshallascendto
thosewhoareonhigh,whilethosewhoareonhigh rtheLordHimselj
shalldescend to thosewhoarebe1ow.''134W hen M osesascended on high,
according to another M idrash,he was with God and dwelt am ong the
angelsand seraphim .l3sA M idrash declared in the nam e oftheTanna R.
M eirexplainsthatthe reason M osesfasted forforty daysand nightswas
in order to em ulatethe heavenly exam ple while on high,where there is
no eating and drinking.l36
W hen M oses descended from the heavens,he brought the Torah
back with him to earth.A Midrash in Pesktâ'Rabbllldepictshow the
heavensweptandlamentedwhiletheearthrejoicedwhentheTorahwent
forth to make itsabode on earth.
W hen the Holy One,blessed be He,gave the Torah to Israel, the
earth rejoiced buttheheavenswept....TheHoly One,blessed be
He,said to theheavens,RYou who abide on high should givepraise
to my glory and my daughter,even m ore than the carth does.''
They said to him,Rsovereign ofthe universe,the earth, to whom
theTorah isbeing given,m ay wellofferpraise,butwefrom whom
the Torah goes forth, how can we give praise and not be
rieved?''lr
ThedescentofthcTorah isdepicted in Pesku'Rabbàlland other
M idrashic textsasam arriage cerem ony in which theTorah asthebride
of Israeldeparts from the home of her father on high and makes her
216 RETHINKIN G SCRIPTU RE
abodewith herspouseon earth.O ne anonym ousM idrash comparesGod
to aking who giveshisonly daughter to anotherking in marriage and
then asks ifhe m ay dwellwith them since he cannotbear to leave his
daughter.
Thusthe Holy O ne,blessed beH e,said to Israel,<<Ihave given you
aTorah from whom lcannotbe separated,and yetIcannotsay to
you,<Do not take hen'However,in every place to w hich you go
m ake for me a housew herein Imay dwell.''138
W hen theTorah descended to earth to becom ethe brideofIsrael,God's
presence descended with it.U ltim ately itisnotonly the Torah who is
wed with IsraelatM ount Sinai;it isGod him self.H ence we find that
the marriage sym bolism isused notonly to depictthe union betveen the
Torah and Israel,but also to portray the eternalcovenant between the
Lordandhischosenpeople:Gtzikeabridegroom (1 )J1Jn)whogoesforth
tomeetthebride(kallölt),Hewentforthtogivethem theTorah,asit
issaid,tO God,when Thou wentestforth before Thy people'(Ps.
68.7).,'139Asmentionedearlier,inthisversionoftheweddingceremony
theTorahissometimesdepictedasthemarriagecontract(ketûbölt)stipu-
lating the conditionsofthe union between God and Israel.140
RevelationastheRecapitulationofCreation.Inadditiontodescriptionsofthe
descentofthe Torah from heaven,rabbinic literature containsnum erous
traditionsconcerning the nature oftherevelation ofTorah on earth.The
knowledge that was revealed directly to the people of Israelat M ount
Sinaiistraditionally understood to haveconsisted ofthe Ten Com mand-
m ents,l4lwhich aresaid to contain theentireTorah in seed form . Accord-
ing to an anonymousM idrash the six hundred and thirteen lettersfrom
'ânöqî(1am)to 'Her/e-rëk-
kâ(whichbelongstothyneighbor)symbolize
thesixhundredandthirteencommandments(miêwôtjoftheTorah,while
- know thatthereisnonebeside Him .Then He said,<lam theLord
the seven extrawordscorrespond to the seven daysofcreation.l4z
ThisM idrash establishes a directrelationship betv een the creation
and the revelation,with the Torah serving asthe common link between
the- 0.143A M idrash in Peskt:'Rabb:llconnectstheTen W ordsofthe
revelationw ith theten woxdsbyw hich theworldwascreated.144Thereve-
lation to thepeopleofIsraelatM ountSinairepresented theseed expression
of the totalknowledge ofTorah,and it is this sam e knowledge that is
upheld in certain strands ofthe rabbinic tradition as the source and basis
ofcreation.A number ofdescriptionsofthe unfoldmentofthe W ord in
revelation recall the mechanics through which the W ord unfolds in
creation.
BRIDE O F ISRAEL 217
The story ofrevelation,like the story of creation,is described as
beginning in silence- the unbounded silence ofthew ilderness.Itishere,
in the limitlessexpanse and freedom ofthe wilderness,thatthe knowl-
edge ofTorah wasgiven- auniversalknowledge true foral1peoples,al1
times,and a11places.145
TheTorah wasgiven publicly and openly,in afreeplace.Forifthe
Torah had been given in the land ofIsrael,theIsraelitescould have
said to the nationsof the world,uYou have no portion in it.''But
since itwas given in the wilderness,publicly and openly,in a free
place,everyone desiring to acceptitcould com e and acceptit.146
A number ofM idrashim describe how when God gave the Torah
toIsraelhisvoice(#/)resoundedfrom oneendoftheearthtotheother
and washeard by a11the nationsofthewor1d.147Butbefore hebegan to
speak,the Lord firsthushed the world into silence.From utter stillness
the W ord ofGod wentforth.
R.Abbahu said in thename ofR.Jotlanan:W hen theHoly One,
blessed be H e,gave the Torah no bird cried out,no fowlflew,no
ox lowed,the Ophanim did notspread their wings,the Seraphim
did notproclaim Kl-loly,Holy,''the sea did notroar,the creatures
did notspeak.The wholeworld becam ehushed and silent,and the
voicewentforth:<dIam theLord thy God'
'(Exod.20.1)....He
broughtthe wholeworld to a standstilland silenced 170th those on
highandthosebelow,andthewholeworldbecamewaste(fJ/I;)and
void (bôhû),asiftherewasnocreaturein theworld,asitissaid,
RBut there was no voice,nor anyone who answered,nor anyone
whoheeded''(1Kings18.29)....whenGodspokeonMountSinai,
thewholeworldbecamesilentin orderthat(alljcreaturesmight
thy God.*148
At the tim e ofrevelation the whole universe becam e ttwaste and
void,''asifreturning back to the originalstate ofunmanifestsilencefrom
w hich the creation arose.Therevelation isdepicted asa recapitulation of
creation,the almighty voice of God resounding forth from out of the
silence and infusing the entire universe with new life.Every particle of
creation wasrenewed and revitalized through the powerofGod'sW ord.
An anonymousM idrash describeshow theearth trembled,themountains
quaked,and the pillarsofheaven shook;a11ofIsraeltrem bled when they
received the W ord of1ife.149AnotheranonymousM idrash vividly depicts
218 RETH IN KIN G SCRIPTU RE
the all-pervading power ofGod'svoice,which spread forth in a11direc-
tions,encompassing the four quartersofthe universe.
W hen the Holy One,blessed be H e,gave the Torah on Sinai,He
showed wondersupon wondersto Israelwith Hisvoice.W hathap-
pened? The Holy O ne,blessed be He,spoke and the voice went
forth and reverberated throughoutthewholeworld.Israelheard the
voice coming to them from the south,so they ran to the south to
receive the voice.From the south itshifted to the north,so they
ran to thenorth.From thenorth itchanged to theeast,so they ran
to the east.From theeastitchanged to thewest,so they ran to the
west.From the westit shifted to the heavells.W hen they raised
their eyesto the heavens,itshifted to the earth,so they looked to
the earthaas it said,Ho ut of heaven He caused you to hear His
voice,thatHe mightinstructyou,and on earth He caused you to
see Hisgreatfire,and you heard H iswordsoutofthe m idstofthe
fire''(Deut.4.36).150
In theanalysisofthe role ofthe Torah in creation itwasseen that
theW ord firstem ergesin itswholenessand then differentiatesinto many
words,many individualized impulses of sound,which are then precipi-
tated to form the m anifold phenomena ofcreation.A sim ilarprocessof
differentiation oftheW ord isdescribed astaking placeattherevelation.
A traditionattributed tothePalestinian AmoraR.Joh.ananrelateshow at
the revelation the one voice ofGod splitinto seventy voices, each voice
speaking one ofthe seventy languagesoftheworld so thatevery nation
could hearand understand the revelatiomls:
A numberofM idrashim attemptto convey the unique experiential
dimension oftherevelation atM ountSinai,em phasizing in particularthe
compelling power,imm ediacy,and holisticnature oftheexperience.The
overpowering natureofthe experience isdepicted in a num berofM idra-
shim.Forexample,theabovementionedMidrash ascribedtoR.Jolpnan
relates how when the nationsofthe world heard the all-powerfulvoice
of God in theirown vernaculars they could notendure the experience
and their soulsdeparted,and Israelalone survived.lszAnother tradition
attributed to R.Jotmnan'spupilR.Levirelatesthatthe soulsofIsrael
also departed upon hearing God'sall-powerfulvoice,buttheirsoulswere
restored.ls:The lsraeliteswere so overwhelm ed upon hearing thevoice
ofthefirstcomm andment,accordingto aM idrash in Pirqê de-ll.Eliezer,
that they fell upon their faces and died.They were revived when the
voice ofthe second comm andm entwentforth,butthey wereso terrified
that they pleaded with M oses,Etour teacher!W e are notable to hear
BRIDE OF ISRAEL
ganymoreofjthevoiceoftheHolyOne,blessedbeHe,forweshalldie
inthesamewayaswegjustjdied,...asitiswritten,GYou speak tous,'
they said to M oses,tand we willhear?but 1et not God speak to us,lest
we die'(Exod.20.19).''154Forthisreàson only thefirsttwo command-
mentswere spoken directly by God to thepeopleofIsrael;therestofthe
comm andmentshe spoke through the mouth ofM oses.155
The imm ediacy ofthe Israelites'experience atM ountSinaiiscon-
veyedbyanumberofM idrashim,w hich emphasizethatthevoice ofGod
wasapprehendedbyeachindividualIsraelitein accordancewithhis/her
own strength and levelofconsciousnessols6
Just see how the voice went forth to each Israelite,to each in
accordance with hisindividualstrength- to the o1d in accordance
with their strength,and to the youth according to theirs;to the
children,to theinfants,and to thewomen,in accordancewith their
strength,and even to M osesaccording to hisstrength....157
The voice ofthe Lord washeard w ith the powerofal1voices,adapting
itselfto the needsof each individual,and yet the voice thatwentforth
W 2.S O 11C.158
Thepeople ofIsrael'sexperience oftherevelation isdescribed asa
holistic experience that directly engaged- and at the sam e tim e
transcended- the sellses,involving thesense ofsightaswellasthe sense
ofhearing.The revelation ofTorah wasnotonly heard by thepeopleas
theall-powerfulthunderingsofGod'svoice,159itwassimultaneously seen
asthe all-consuming brilliance ofGod'sglory.
R.Levi said:lsrael asked of the Holy One,blessed be He,two
things- that they should see His glory and that they should hear
Hisvoice.And they did see H isglory and hear H isvoice,asitis
said,RAnd you said,EBehold,the Lord ourGod hasshow n usH is
glory and His greatness,and we have heard Hisvoice out of the
midstofthefire'''(Deut.5.24).160
According to one tradition at the tim eofthe revelation thepeople
ofIsraelsaw theLord him self,in a11hisresplendentglory,eyeto eyeand
faceto face:u'
rhereupon the Holy One,blessed beH e,opened theseven
firmaments(rJgC'J)andappeared overthem- eyetoeye,in Hisbeauts
in H isglory,in Hiscountenance,w ith H iscrown,and upon H isthrone
ofg1ory.''161The people ofIsraelaresaid notonly to have seen theglory
of God;they also saw his voice blazing forth in words of fire.Exodus
20.15,RAnda1lthepeoplesaw thethunderings(qôlôl,lit.,uvoices''la''is
 r
RETH IN KIN G SCRIPTU RE
interpreted by R.Akibato m ean thatthepeople ofIsrael'
notonly heard
the voice of God,but çxthey saw a word offire come forth from the
m outh ofthe Almighty and hewn outupon thetablets, asitissaid,urhe
voiceoftheLordhewedoutflamesoffire'(Ps.29.7).0162Accordingto
a tradition ascribed to the Palestinian Am ora R Si
.meon b.Lakish,the
Torah waswritten in black fire on white fire.163
The revelation atM ountSinaiasdescribed in rabbinicliteraturewas
lzot simply a passive experience bestowed on the recipients;it was an
activecall,challenging thosewho heard theW ord ofGod to respond and
accept it.A frequently cited rabbinic tradition maintains thatalthough
the W ord of God wentforth to allthe nationsoftheworld, in theend
none exceptIsraelwould acceptit.164God offered theTorah to the chil-
dren ofEsau,theAm monites, theM oabites,and the Ishm aelites,buteach
in turn refused to undertake its obsetwance.l6s The Lord chose Israel
because Israelalone chose the Lord and his Torah.166Israel'sacceptance
ofthe Torah isviewed by therabbinic sagesasa crucialturning pointin
creation.ltisthrough theTorah thattheuniverseemerged from thepri-
m evalchaosin the beginning ofcreation.The revelation atM ountSinai
wasin sense arecapitulation ofcreation,arenovation and reconsolidation
oftheuniverse.IfIsraelhad notaccepted the Torah then thisrenewalof
creation would nothave been brought to fruition and theworld would
have been reduced to itsoriginalstate ofchaos.167
Resh Lak
.ish said:'W hy isitwritten,uAnd there wasevening and
therewasmorning,thesixth day''(Gen.1.31)?'Whyistherean
additionalt'the''? This teachesthat the Holy O ne, blessed be H e,
stipulated with the worksofcreation and said to them , ulf Israel
acceptsthe Torah,you shallbecom e established, butifnot,l will
turnyoubackintowaste(fJ/lJ)andvoid(5J/1f
1).''168
Theworld issaid to have becom eestablished on a firm foundation when
Israelaccepted theTorah.169
W ritten Torah and Oral Torab.As discussed above, the Ten Comm and-
m entsthatwere revealed directly by God to the people ofIsraelare said
to contain the entire Torah in seed expression.Al1the ram ificationsand
finenuancesoftheTorah aresaid to bewritten between every comm and - arethosewhowere already created- and also uwith him who isnot
m ent,170and in thissense theTorah itselfissimply a detailed elaboration
ofthe meaning inherentin the Ten Comm andments.
After the initial revelation of the Decalogue to a11 the people of
Israel,M osesascended them ountain and remained on high forfort 'y days
and nights in order to receive the fully elaborated know ledge ofTorah.
Certain strands of the rabbinic tradition maintain that the knowledge
BRIDE OF ISRAEL à21
received by M oses included not only the Pentateuch, but also the
Nevi'im ,Ketuvim,M ishnah,Talmud,and Aggadah.l7l Only the Holy
Scriptures,consisting of the Pentateuch,N evi'im ,and Ketuvim ,were
given in w riting,w hile the M ishnah,Talmud,and Aggadah were given
orally.172God thusgave M osestwo Torahs- the W ritten Torah and the
OralTorah.173A M idrash in Pirqê de-m Eliezerdescribes M oses sitting
before God onthemountain forforty days,ulikeadisciplewho sitsbefore
histeacher,readingtheW rittenLaw (/J!)in thedayandrepeatingthe
OralLaw (JJJ / atnight.''TheOralTorah thatMoseslearnedinvolved
expounding(lâras-jthemeaningofthewordsoftheW rittenTorahand
examining(h.Jt
sr)its1etters.'
174
According to am orefar-reaching interpretation oftheO ralTorah,
MosesreceivednotonlythewrittentextoftheTorah (Pentateuch),but
also a11the subtledistinctionsand interpretationsofitslaw sand teachings
thatwould be introducedby thescribesand sagesin a11subsequentgener-
ationsaspartofthe oraltradition.l7s
W hen God wasaboutto give the Torah,He declared itto M oses
in dueorder-Bible(miqrâ'),Mishnah,Aggadah,and Talmud-as
itissaid,RGod spoke allthese words''(Exod.20.1).Even the
answers to questions that scholars in the future would ask their
teachersdid God declare to M oses,forasitissaid,SiGod spoke all
these things.''l76
Al1the teachingsofthe sagesin every generation were ultimately
R<given from oneShepherd'(Eccles.12.11).OneGod gavethem,one
leaderdeclared them from the mouth ofthe Lord ofa11creation,blessed
beHe,asitiswritten,VndGodspokeaIlthesewords'(Exod.21.1).0177
A tradition attributed to the Tanna R.Isaac maintainsthatthe prophets
and sageswerethemselvespresentatM ountSinaiand received theteach-
ingsthatthey were to expound to future generations.l78
R.lsaac said:Everything thattheprophetsweredestined to proph-
esy they received from M ount Sinai,as it iswritten, God spoke
Rwithhim whostandsherewithusthisday''(Deut.29.14)-these
herewithusthisday''(fsftl-thesearethosewhoweredestinedto
be created....Thisnotonly appliesto the prophets,butto al1the
sagesthatwere destined to arise....179
A TalmudicM idrashattributedtotheBabylonianAmoraRabJudah
in thenam eofhisteacherRab vividly iliustratesthefar-reaching implica-
 RETH IN KIN G SCRIPTU RE
tionsofsuch an all-encompassing interpretation ofthe O ralTorah.Tl le
M idrash relates a story about how when M oses ascended on high to
receive the Torah the Lord showed him R.Akiba,who wasdestined to
arise as one of the greatest sages of future generations, sitting and
expounding the Torah to his disciples. M oses was at first i11 at ease
because he could notfollow theirarguments.However,when they came
to acertain subjectand thedisciplesaskedthemaster,'KW hencedo you
know this?''R.Akibareplied,Gitisalaw given unto M osesatSinai,'' and
M oseswascomforted.lBo
TorfTllani Revelation ïn KabbalisticTexts
The rabbinic traditions concerning the revelation ofthe Torah at
M ount Sinaiare elaborated and reinterpreted in kabbalistic literature in
accordancewith the cosmologicaldoctrinesofthe Kabbalists.
Hz-rflles Tort
z/rJrlf/OralTor//z;.4 Refuterprcffljfcn.M oses'ascension to the
heavensto receive the Torah isinterpreted in kabbalistic literatureasan
innerascenton the lcvelofconciousnessin w hich M oseswasable to sta-
tion hisawareness' Kon high,''on thesubtlerlevelsofcreation,and directly
cognize theTorah in itsmore subtle statesofm anifestation.The descent
ofthe Torah onto earth isinterpreted asarecapitulation ofthe original
processof creation,in which the Torah emerged from itshidden abode
in theunmanifest'An-sôp andunfoldedinprogressivestagesofmanifes-
tation corresponding to particularse
pîrôluntilitwasrevealed on earth.
. element,that can be known or conceived ofby creatureswho are
W e discussed earlier the three main stagesofm anifestation ofthe
Torah:thewholenessoftheprimordialTorah,corresponding to H. okmàh
and Bînâh,and thedifferentiated uengravings''oftheW ritten Torah,cor-
respondingtoTip'erel,and oftheOralTorah,correspondingtoM alkûl.
In accordance with thiscosmologicalschem e the rabbinic conception of
the W ritten Torah and O ral Torah is radically reinterpreted by the
Kabbalists.The W ritten Torah issaid to rem ain undisclosed, hidden on
the subtlerlevelsof creation,w hile the OralTorah alone isrevealed on
earth-l8l
In interpreting the rabbinic Aggadah that the Torah was given in
black fire on white fire,Isaac theBlind understandsthe whitefire to be
the W ritten Torah,in which the form ofthe lettersisnotyetexplicit.
Itisonly through thepowerofthe black fire,w hich isthe OralTorah,
thattheconsonantsand vowelpointsfirsttakeform .uAnd so thewritten
Torah can take on corporeal form only through the power of the oral
Torah,thatisto say:without the oralTorah itcannotbe truly under-
stood.'182According to R.Isaac only M oses,the suprem e prophet, w as
established in thatsupreme state ofconsciousness in which he was able
BRIDE OF ISRAEL 223
to station hisawarenessuon high,''on the subtler levelsofcreation,and
enjoyEtunbroken contemplation''ofthewhitelightoftheW ritten Torah.
The other prophets attained only fleeting glimpses of the W ritten
Torah.183 From this concept of the W ritten Torah and O ral Torah
Gershom Scholem concludes,
strictly speaking,there isno written Torah here on earth.A far-
. ..
reaching idea!w hat we call the written Torah has itself passed
through the medium ofthe oralTorah,itisno longeraform con-
cealed in white light;rather,it hasemerged from the black light,
which determ inesand lim itsand so denotesthe attribute ofdivine
severity and judgment.Everything thatwe perceive in the fixed
form sof the Torah,written in ink ollparchm ent,consists,in the
last analysis, of interpretations or definitions of what is hidden.
There is only an oral Tt?rl/l:that is the esoteric meaning of these
words,and the written Torah is a purely mystical concept.It is
embodied in a spherethatisaccessible to prophetsalone.Itwas,to
be sure,revealed to M oses,butwhat he gave to the world as the
written Torah hasacquired itspresentform by passing through the
m edium ofthe oralTorah.The mysticalwhite oftheletterson the
parchment is the written Torah,but not the black of the letters
inscribed in ink.In the mysticalorganism of the Torah the two
spheresoverlap,and there is no written Torah,free from the oral
notprophets.l84
RevelationastbeFruitionofCreation.Intheirdescriptionsoftherevelation
of the Torah at M ount Sinai the Kabbalists elaborate on the rabbinic
notion that the revelation notonly recapitulated the processofcreation
butalso broughtitto completion by firmly establishing theworlds.This
section willfocuson the Zohar'sdepiction ofthe revelation,which pro-
videsa numberofprovocative amplificationsand reinterpretationsofthe
rabbinic conceptions.
The Zohar emphasizes that even though the upper and lower
worldshadbeen supported and maintained by theTorah since thebegin-
ning ofcreation,185theywerenotcompletelyand unshakeably established
until Israelreceived the Torah atM ount Sinai.186 It describes how the
earth shook and desired to return to chaoswhen it saw that God had
offered the Torah to a11nationsand they had refused it.Butw hen Israel
accepted theTorah theearth becam ecalm again andrested atease.187One
passage relatesthatthe lettersofthe alphabet,which are responsible for
holding together the universe,had been in inverse ordersince the tim e
224 RETHIN KIN G SCRIPTU RE
ofAdam 'stransgression,and itwasnotuntilIsraelstood atM ountSinai
to receive the Torah that the letters recovered their proper order as on
theday when heaven and earth werecreated.Through therevelation the
creation wasonce again securely established and broughtto fruition.l88
N or yet wasthe world finally completed untilIsraelreceived the
Torah on M ountSinaiand the Tabernacle wasset up.Al1worlds
were then finally established and perfected,and higher and lower
creatureswere properly based.l8g
Theworldswere firm ly established when the Torah wasaccepted
atM ountSinaibecausetherevelation itselfisheld to beasecond creation.
In the beginning ofcreation theTorah issued forth asthe W ord ofGod
containing the ten utterances or words from w hich the universe was
broughtintobeing.Atthetim eofrevelation theTorah again issued forth
from the heavensasthe W ord of God and splitinto Ten W ords,repre-
sented by the Decalogue.lgo The Ten W ords ofrevelation are directly
identified in the Zoharw ith the Ten W ords of creation,which corre-
spond to the ten se
pîrôt, the ten spheres of the Godhead.lgl The
unfoldm ent of the Ten W ords at M ount Sinai thus represented the
unfoldmentofthefullvalue ofGod'sglory in al1itsaspects,encompass-
ing allofthe divine emanations- a recapitulation ofthe originalrevela-
tion at thebeginning ofcreation.
N everbefore,since the Holy One created the world,had such a
revelation oftheDivine Glory taken place....the gloryoftheHoly
O ne wasm ade know n b0th above and below,and H ewas exalted
overa11.192
According to theZoharthe lsraelitessaw thesplendorofthe glory
oftheLord face to face and eye to eye.193They saw thedivinem anifesta-
tion asclearlyasoneseesalightstreamingthrough theglassofa1amp.194
In the one light of God's glory were contained all the ten spheres of
divine1ight.195A11thetenJe
écrq wererevealedasone,formingthehead
and body ofthe King.196
Asin the descriptions ofthe revelation found in rabbinic texts,in
the Zohar therevelation ofTorah isdepicted b0th in termsofsightand
in term sof sound.God's glory is sim ultaneously seen as the one light
containinga11lightsand heard asthe oneW ord containing al1words,the
oneNamecontaininga11names.TheTenWords(sejtîrôLjareengravedin
theN am eoftheHoly One,197which aspreviously discussed isidentified
throughoutthe Zoharwith the Torah.198
BRIDE O F ISRAEL 225
For the Torah isthe N ame ofthe Holy O ne,blessed be He.Asthe
NameoftheHoly One isengraved in theTen W ords(creative
utterances)ofCreation,soisthewholeTorahengravedintheTen
W ords(Decalogue),andtheseTenWordsaretheNameoftheHoly
One,and the whole Torah is thus one N am e,the Holy N am e of
God H imse1f.199
The processofrevelation,like the process ofcreation,isdescribed
asunfolding through progressive stepsofdifferentiation.The oneW ord
becam eTen W ords,and each W ord becam eavoice.Each ofthetenvoices
then divided into seventy voices,zooa concept that islinked in rabbinic
literature to the seventy languagesspoken by the nationsoftheworld.In
the Zohar'sdescription the langage spoken by these voicesencompassed
farm ore than human language,for itwasthe language ofthe Creator
himself revealing the mysteries ofcreation to the people of Israel.The
Zohar goesbeyond therabbinic interpretation ofExodus20.15,RAnd all
thepeoplesaw thethunderings,''interpreting theGthunderings''orvoices
notsim plyaswordsoffirebutasconfigurationsofdivinelightthatshone
and sparkled before theeyesoftheIsraelites,illum ining the hidden mys-
terieso'fcreation.zol
Said R.Abba:<çltiswritten:W nd al1thepeople saw the thunder-
ings'(Ex.XX,18).Surelyitoughttobehearithethunderings?We
have,however,been taughtthatthe <voices'weredelineated,carved
out,asitwere,upon the threefold darkness,so thatthey could be
apprehended assom ething visible,and they saw and heard al1those
wonderful thingsoutofthe darkness,cloud and cloudy darkness;
and because they saw thatsightthey wereirradiated with asupernal
light,and perceivedthingsbeyond the ken ofa1lsucceeding genera-
tions,andsaw facetoface(Deut.V,4).''Andwhencedidtheyderive
thepowerso to see?Accordingto R.Jose,from thelightofthose
voices,fortherewasnotoneofthem butemitted lightwhich made
perceptible allthings hidden and veiled,and even al1 the gener-
rationsofm en up to the daysofKing M essiah.Therefore it says:
uAnd a11thepeople saw the voices'';they did actually see them .202
The words that issued forth were thus sim ultaneously heard as audible
voicesand seen asconfigurationsofdivinelight.TheZoharreiteratesthe
rabbinic tradition thatthewordswereinscribed on thetabletsin theform
ofblack fire on white fire.203'
SequentialUnfolimentofCompleteKk- /efkc.AccordingtotheZoharthe
know ledgethatthevoicesrevealed encompassed a1lthe.
hidden mysteries
226 RETH IN KIN G SCRIPTU RE
ofheaven and earth.204TheTen W ordsthatwereperceived by thepeople
oflsraelatM ountSinaicontained in seed form the entire knowledgeof
Torah,including notonly itsconcrete expression aslawsand comm and-
m ents,but also its subtle m anifestation as the blueprintcontaining in
potentialform a11ofthephenom ena ofcreation.zos
R.EleazartaughtthatintheTenWords(Decalogue)a11theother
commandmentswereengraved,with a1ldecreesand punishments,a11
lawsconcerning purity and im purity,allthebranchesand roots,all
thetreesand plants,heaven and earth,seasand oceans- in fact,a11
things.206
The totalknowledge ofTorah is said to have been revealed in the
veryfirstwordoftheDecalogue:<<I''('
JnJ.
Y).207Theknowledgethenpro-
gressively unfolded in differentsizepackages.Theknowledgeofthefirst
word waselaborated in the firstfiveofthe Ten W ords,which contained
the second five W ordsin potentialform.208
W e have a dictum that the first five commandm entsinclude by
implication the other five aswell:in otherwords,in the firstfive
the second five are engraved,five within five.209
According to theZoharw hen the Ten W ordswereinscribed on the tab-
lets,the second five W ords were included in,and could be seen from
within,the firstfive W ords.210
The revelation isthusdescribed assequentially unfolding in stages
- from one W ord to five W ords to Ten W ords- each successive stage
expressing the totalknowledge ofcreation and evolution thatwascon-
tained in thepreviousstage,butin m oreelaborated form .Thefivebooks
ofthe Torah are said to representa furtherelaboration ofthe firstfive
W ordsof the D ecalogue,zllwhile the Torah illits totality is a detailed
explication of the potentiality of a1l knowledge contained in the Ten
W ordstogether.N otonly do the Ten W ordstogetherrepresentthetotal-
ity ofthe Torah;each ofthe Ten W ordsisin itselfapotentseed contain-
ing the entire tree ofknowledge.
. ..every word contained a11mannerof legalimplicationsand deri-
vations,aswellasal1m ysteriesand hidden aspects;foreach word
wasindeed like unto a treasure-house,fullof a1lpreciousthings.
And though when one W ord was uttered itsounded butasitself,
yetwhen itwasstamped upon the stone seventy different aspects
were revealed in it....212
BRIDE O F ISIG EL 227
TO RAH A N D IN TERPR ETAT IO N
In the previoussectionswe havebeen concerned with tracing thehistory
of interpretationsof the ontologicalconceptions of Torah in their pro-
gressive unfoldment through the successive layers of pre-rabbinic,rab-
binic,and kabbalistictexts.Thesenotionsarenotm erely lifelessconcepts
em bedded in thetraditionaltexts;they are living,activating symbolsthat
havedirectlyinfluencedJewishattitudesandpracticeswithrespecttothe
modesofpreselwation,transm ission,and study oftheTorah.Thedetailed
laws(bâlakôj)and highlydevelopedscribalartsforpreparingandpreserv-
ing thew ritten textofthe Torah scroll,togetherwith the otherregula-
tionsandcustoms(minltâgîmjregardingtheornamentation oftheTorah
scroll,thepublicrecitation oftheTorah,andtheproperwaysofreverenc-
ing the Torah scrollin synégogue worship,point to a living awareness
amongtheJewishpeopleofthesacredstatusoftheTorah asaholybook
thatism orethan abook,forastheliving W ord ofGod itparticipatesin
the reality of God himselfand m usttherefore be treated accordingly.In
thiscontext study of the Torah,togetherw ith the sophisticated herme-
neutical methods evolved to understand and clarify the m eaning of its
everyjotand tittle,assumescentralimportanceasameanswherebyone
fathom sthe divine mysteries and,by gradually penetrating to progres-
sively subtlerlevelsofmeaning,entersinto comm union w ith the divine
reality embodied in thebook oftheTorah.
Therabbinicand kabbalistic conceptionsoftherole oftheTorah in
creation and revelation directly inform and shapethem ethodsand princi-
ples of interpretation of the text of the Torah.The mostfundam ental
starting pointof170th rabbinicand kabbalistic hermeneuticsistheunder-
standing thatthe textthatisbeing interpreted isnotahuman docum ent
butadivinely revealed text- itistheW ord ofGod,nottheword ofman.
On them ostobviouslevelthe Torah astheW ord ofGod meansthat
theentiretextoftheTorah wasdivinely revealed- indeed dictated- by God
to M oses,with M oses simply acting as a scribe and recording the divine
words.On amoresubtle leveltheTorah astheW ord ofGod pointsto the
conception thattheTorah istheblueprintofcreation,itswordsconstituting
the subtle impulses ofsound thatGod spoke in order to bring forth the
fonnsofcreation.O n thesubtlestleveltheTorah astheW ord ofGod means
thatthe living W ord ofGod isitself incarnated in the book ofthe Torah
asa soulwithin abody,animating the book with secretlife.
Rabbinic and kabbalistic herm eneutics,founded on the perspective
that the Torah isthe W ord ofGod,have evolved various methods and
principlesofexegesisto unfold the m ultilayered and ultimately infinite
possibilitiesofm eaning contained in the divine W ord.
 228 RETH IN KIN G SCRIPTU RE
Torah andInterpretation in Rabbinic'
p xr
.s
InfinitePotentialit
yofueaning.AsmentionedearlierAbraham Heschelhas
suggested that there were essentially two distinct approachesto herme-
neuticsin rabbinic thought:the more pragm atic schoolof R. lshmael,
which maintained thatGtheTorah speaksin thelanguage ofmen,'213and
them orem ystically inclined schoolofR. Akiba,w hich found divinesig-
nificance in everyjotand tittleoftheTorah.
In suggesting that the Torah was customary human Speech, the
schoolofR.Ishmaelwasnotdenying the divine statusofthe Torah as
theW ord ofGod.On thecontrary,thethirteen hermeneuticalprinciples
ofR.Ishmael,like the interpretive methodsofthe schoolof R. Akiba,
proceed from the fundam entalassumption that the Torah in itsentirety
isdivineand therefore constitutesaperfectand complete unity in which
there are no errors,no contradictions,and no superfluouswordsor let-
ters.214R.Ishmael'sawarenessofthe perfectstructureoftheTorah isviv-
idly expressed in hisadmonition,cited earlier, regarding the work of a
scribe ofthe Torah:Rlfyou should perhapsomita single letteroradd a
single letter,you would thereby destroy thew holewor1d.''215
Therabbisofcoursewereawareofthecontradictions, redundancies,
and anomaliesin the text of the Torah,and yet thisawarenessdid not
altertheirconviction thattheTorah constitutesaperfectunity They used
sophisticated hermeneuticalprinciplesto demonstrate thatifone probes
deeply enough into thesubtlenuancesofeach expression hewilldiscover
that any contradictions and inconsistencies are only apparent and ulti-
mately serveto illum ine som e aspectofthedivinewillthatmightother-
wise go unnoticed.
W hile the herm eneutical principles of the school of R. Ishmael
werebased prim arily on logicalinference, thehermeneuticsoftheschool
ofR.Akibafocused on textualscrutiny,closely examining every detailof
the text for possible divine implications. R.Akiba's hermeneutics took
into accountevery linguisticpeculiarity,hisinterpretationsextending not
only to theH ebrew particlesand letters,buteven to theapparently orna-
mentalutittles''(crowns)attachedtocertainlettersoftheTorah.
TheschoolofR.Akiba'semphasison thesignificanceofeveryjot
and tittle oftheTorah iselaborated in anumberofAmoraic M idrashim ,
which emphasize the inexhaustiblepotentiality ofm eaning contained in
every word and letter.According to one tradition thereareseventym odes
ofexpounding theTorah,216anotion thatisapparently linked to thecon-
cept thatevery word thatissued from God' s mouth atM ountSinaiwas
heard in seventy languages. In auotherM idrash thewordsofthe Torah
are compared to a fig tree with an unending supply of figs or to a
mother's breastwhose flow ofm ilk is inexhaustible, for the more one
BRID E O F ISRAEL 229
studiesthewordsofTorah themoremeaning(tae
am,literally,urelish'')
one findsin them .217According to a tradition ascribed to theBabylonian
Am oraR.H amnuna,Solom on uttered threethousand proverbsforevery
singleword oftheTorah.218TheBabylonian AmoraR.Uisdaissaidto
havedeclaredinthenameofanotherBabylonianAmora,M arduyba,that
every singlestrokeofthelettersoftheTorah requiresKm oundsofexposi-
tions''in order to unfold the fullrichnessand depth of itsmeaning.219
Understood in this context the process of interpretation itself
becomes a m eans of drawing out and unfolding the potentiality of a11
knowledge contained in seed form in the W ritten Torah.Atthe tim eof
revelation atM ountSinaithevasttree ofprim ordialwisdom,which con-
tained thetotalknowledge ofcreation,descended onto earth and became
concentrated in theseed expressionsoftheW ritten Torah.Thesageswho
interpret and expound the words of the Torah are thus not generating
any new knowledge.They aresimply transform ingpotentiality into actu-
alit
'y; they are elaborating and making explicit different aspects of the
knowledge thatare already im plicit in the W ritten Torah.Itisthrough
the OralTorah that thetree ofknow ledge contained in the'seed expres-
sionsofthe W ritten Torah unfoldsand bearsfruit.
The value of the OralTorah in draw ing out or uextracting''the
meaning of the W ritten Torah is illustrated in a M idrash in Sëker
'tliyyàhû Zûp',which comparesGod to akingwho gavehistwo servants
each am easure ofwheatand a bundle offlax.W hilethefoolish servant
did nothing atallwith thewheatand flax,the wise setwantbaked bread
from the wheatand spun a c10th from the flax.uNow when the Holy
One,blessed be He,gavetheTorah to Israel,he gave itto them only in
the form ofw heat,to extractfrom itfine flour,and flax,to extractfrom
ita garm ent.''zzo
The potentiality ofknow ledge contained in the Torah isultimately
held to be inexhaustible,for no matter how m uch one studiesand inter-
prets,no m atterhow much meaning one unfolds,an infinit' y ofm eanitzg
remains yet to be fathomed.Even the greatest of the Tannaim whose
knowledge ofTorah wasvastand unsurpassed proclaim ed thatthey had
extracted no more than a drop from the unbounded ocean of
know ledge.
R.Eliezersaid:Ifa11the seaswere ink,and the reedspens,and the
heaven and earth scrolls,and allhum ankind scribes,theywould not
besufficienttowritethe Torah thatIhave learned,and Ihavetaken
from itno more than am an would takeby dipping thepointofhis
pen into the sea.R.Joshuasaid:Ifa1ltheseaswere ink,and the
reedspens,and the heaven and earth scrolls,and a11hum ankind
 RETHIN KIN G SCRIPTU RE
scribes, they would not suffice to write the Torah that I have
learned,and Ihave taken from itno m ore than a man would take
by dipping thepointofhispen into thesea. R.Akibasaid:Itisnot
possible form e to speak asmy teachersspoke,for my teachersdid
take som ething from it,while Ihave taken no more than onewho
smellsa citron- he who smellsenjoysit,whilethecitron isnot
thereby diminished- or than onewho fillsa pitcherfrom a body
ofwater,orone who lightsa lamp from another.221
Torab and Interpretation in Kabbalistic'
p xfç
. the rabbinic tradition,m entioned earlier,that the revelation atM ount
FatbomingtheHiJJe,Mysterieso
f Torc/l.TheKabbalists,liketherabbinic
sages,soughtto fathom the infinitepotentiality ofknowledge contained
in theTorah.FortheKabbaliststheprocessofinterpretation wasnotsim-
p1y ameansto understand thewordsofTorah inscribed on parchment;it
wasa meansto fathom the mysteriesofcreation and ultimately to com -
mune with the living W ord of God that pulsates within the book of
Torah asitsinnermostsoul.222
TheZoharupholdstherabbinictradition thatthereare atleastsev-
enty differentwaysofexpounding each word oftheTorah,223correspond-
ing to the seventy voices thatissued forth from each ofthe Ten W ords
atM ount Sinai.224 Asdiscussed earlier,in its depiction ofthe revelation
theZohardescribesthesevoicesasconfigurationsofdivinelightthrough
which <$a1lthingshidden and veiled''werem adeperceptibleto thepeople
ofIsrae1.225Sim ilarly,the Zohar proclaim sthatevery word ofthe Torah
radiateslightin many directions,226through which the mysteriesofcre-
ation are revealed.Every single word and letter of the Torah contains
Gprofound allusionsand holy indications''ofthewaysand pathsofwis-
dom.227Al1 the hidden mysteriesof creation thatwere unfolded to the
people atM ountSinaiare stillavailable to those who seek to know the
Torah in its full value on a11 levels- gross and subtle, disclosed and
undisclosed.228
TheTorah containsa11thedeepestand mostrecondite mysteries;a11
sublime doctrines,170th disclosed and undisclosed'
, a1
1essences170th
ofthe higherand the lowergrades,ofthisworld and oftheworld
to com e are to be found there,but there isno one to fathom its
teachings.229
The infinite potentiality of meaning contained in the Torah is,
according toJoseph Gikatilla,reflected in theway in which thetextof
theTorah itself iswritten:The scrollofthe Torah iswritten only with
consonantsand no vowelsin orderthattheinfinitepossibilitiesofm ean-
BRIDE OF ISRAEL 231
ing inherent in the consonants would not be limited by a particular
method ofvocalization.In accordancew ith thisthesis,which wasgener-
ally held by theKabbalistsofhistime,GikatillaconcludedthattheTorah
isread and interpreted in a differentm annerin each ofthe worlds- for
example,in theworld ofthese
pîrôj,theworld ofangels,and the earthly
world ofhuman beings- in accordance with the natureoftheworld and
the powerofcomprehension of itsinhabitants.z3o
The notion thatthe Torah can be read in differentwaysin accord-
ance with one'spower of comprehension appears to be an extension of
Sinaiwasheardby each individuallsraelite accordingto his/herown
strength and levelofconciousness.z3lThe sixteenth-century Kabbalistsof
Safed,elaborating on thisconception,developed the idea thatthere are
600,000 aspectsorm odesofexpounding the Torah,which correspond to
the 600,000 souls who are traditionally said to have been present at
M ountSinaiand w ho,according to the lawsoftransm igration,are pres-
entineverygenerationofIsrael.MosesCordoveroofSafed(d.1570cx)
proclaimed thateach ofthese 600,000 prim ordialsoulshasitsown special
portion of the Torah,Kdand to none other than he,whose soulsprings
from thence,willitbegiven to understand itin thisspecialand individual
way thatisreserved to him .''232
LevelsofMeaning.Inthekabbalisticconceptionthemanylightsthatshine
in every wordofTorah involveahierarchy ofdifferentlevelsofmeaning.
W e discussed earlierthe variouslevelsofm anifestation ofthe Torah cor-
responding to the different se
pîrh and worlds.According to the m ost
developed form of thisconception,as expressed in the school of Israel
Sarug,the Torah appearsin a differentform in each ofthe fourworlds.
AccordingtotheearlierconceptionformulatedbyJoseph Gikatilla,these
differentlevelsof manifestation are in actuality differentlevelsofinter-
pretation,forwhileremaining nonchanging in itsessentialstructurethe
Torah isread and interpreted differently in each world.
Underlying these variousformulationsisthe fundamentalconcep-
tion thattheTorah in itstotality formsan organicunity thatiscomposed
of different levels,different layers.One ofthe analogies often used by
the Kabbaliststo convey the m ultilayered nature ofthe Torah isthatof
a nut,which wassaid topossessahard outershell,two finerinnercover-
ings,and a kernel.In the M idrasb /lrI-N ef?/J- to the Book of Ruth the
image ofanutisused to describethefourbasic levelsofm eaning in the
Torah.
The words of the Torah are likened to a nut.How is this to be
understood?Justasanuthasan outershellandakernel,eachword
 232 RETH IN KIN G SCRIPTU RE
oftheTorahcontainsoutwardfact(maçaseh),midrash,llfl
.
l/flaJI,and
mystery (sod),each of which is deeper in meaning than the
Preceding.233
In this passage ltaggadah apparently refersto some allegoricalor tropic
form ofinterpretation,while midrashrefersto the hermeneuticalmethod
ofbiblicalexegesisemployed by the Ta1mudists.234
These fourlevelsofmeaning received theirclassicalformulation in
thewritingsofM osesde Leon, aSpanish Kabbalist(d.1305c. E.
)whois
generallyheldby modern scholarsto betheauthoroftheZohar. H eused
theacronym PaRDeS(1it.,Rparadise'')torefercollectivelytothefourlev-
els,eachconsonantdenotingoneofthelevels:(1)pej-ât, theliteralmean-
.
ing,which includesthehistoricaland factualcontentoftheTorah;(2)
Jerlgl/l,the hermeneutical m eaning, which includes the halakhic and
aggadicinterpretationsandcommentaries;(3)remez,theallegoricalmean-
ing,which comprisesthe corpusofphilosophicaltruthscontained in the
Torah;and (4)JN,themysticalmeaning,which includesthetotalityof
kabbalisticcomm entaries,in which thewordsoftheTorah areinterpreted
asreferencesto eventsin theworld oftheJyfrl!or to the relationship
between thebiblicalheroesand thatwor1d.235
TheauthoroftheTîqqûnîm callstheShekhinah, thedivinepresence
conceived as the last of the ten Jyfrlt lmrt
. ks/;l-73rl/l(paradiseofthe
Torah),fortheShekhinahrepresentstheTorahinthetotalityofitsmani-
festations,encompassing al1ofitslevelsofmeaning.236TheShekhinah as
thepardës lltl-e
rlrl/lis com pared to the innermostkernelofa nutthatis
covered by the fourlevelsofmeaning.
TheShekhinah inexileiscalledpardes(becauseitisclothedasit
wereinthefourlevelsofmeaning),butitselfistheinnermostker-
nel.Accordingly,we also callitanut, and King Solomon said when
lleenteredthisparadisegofmysticalspeculationj:<<Iwentdowninto
thegarden ofnuts''(SongofSongs6:11).237
According to theauthorofthe TîqqûttêZobarand RrlMyl'M eblmenâ'
theouter garmentofthe Shekhinah isthecreated Torah, '
D rlj k-bert
n h,
the Torah as itappearsto hum an beings on earth.238Theliteralèe
l .Q()
evel of meaning of the Torah represents the somber garm ents of the
Shekhinah thatm ustbe stripped away through insight and replaced by
theradiantgarmentsofthemysteries(J(
5$ oftheTorah.239
The author ofthe main body ofthe Zohar also speaksof the gar-
mentsoftheTorah,which shedonswhen descending to earth. According
to thisconception the narrative storiesconstitute the outer garm ents of
BRIDE O F ISRAEL 233
the Torah,while the comm andm entsconstitute itsbody and the hidden
mysteries itssoul.The Zohar emphasizes that in order to comprehend
the totality of Torah one m ust penetrate beyond the outer garments,
beyondtheliteral(peJJl
,)levelofmeaning,toitsinnermostsoul,where
thehiddenmysteriesofs4 areeternallyilluminedbythelightofprimor-
dialwisdom.O nly the truly wise penetrate to the innerm ost soul,the
innermostkernelofthe Torah,w here God and Torah are one.
RabbiSimeon said:Alasfor the man who regardsthe Torah asabook
ofm eretalesandprofanematters.Ifthiswereso,wemighteven today
write a Torah dealing in such m attersand stillmore excellent.In re-
gard toearthlythings,thekingsandprincesoftheworld(in their
chronicles?)possessmorevaluablematerials.Wecouldusethem asa
m odelforcomposing aTorah ofthiskind.Butin realitythewordsof
the Torah are higher wordsand higher mysteries.W hen even the
angelscomedownintotheworld(tofulfilamissionjtheydonthe
garm entofthisworld,arld ifthey did not,they could notsurdvein
thisworld and theworld could notendure them.And ifthisistrue
even oftheangels,how much trueritisoftheTorah,with which He
created them and a11the worldsand through which they a11subsist.
W hen she descendsinto the world,how could theworld endure itif
she did notdon earthly garments?ThetalesoftheTorah areonly her
outward garments.Ifanyone should supposethatthe Torah herselfis
thisgarmentand nothing else,1ethim giveup the ghost.Such a man
willhaveno sharein theworld to come.Thatiswhy David (Ps.
119:18jsaid:Ropen thou mineeyes,thatImay beholdwondrous
thingsoutofthy Toralv''namely,thatwhich isbeneath the garment
oftheTorah.Comeand behold:therearegarmentsthateveryonesees,
and when foolsseea man in a garmentthatseem sbeautifulto them ,
they donotlook more closely.Butm ore im portantthan the gm nent
isthebody,and m oreimportantthan thebody isthesoul.So likewise
theTorah hasabody,which consistsofthecom manclm entsand ordi-
nancesoftheToralz,whicharecalledgufefnrl/l,KbodiesoftheToralu''
Thisbody is cloaked in garments,which consist ofworldly stories.
Foolssee only the garment,which isthe nm ative partofthe Torah;
they know no moreand failto seew hatisunderthe garmetzt.Those
who know more see notonly the garmentbut also the body thatis
under the garment.But the truly wise,the servants of the Supreme
King,thosewho stood atthe footofM ountSinai,look only upon the
soul,which is the true foundation ofthe entire Torah,and one day
indeed it will be given them to behold the innerm ost soul of the
Torah.240
 RETH IN KIN G SCRIPTU RE
Intem retation as Appropriation.In the rabbinic and kabbalistic traditions
study and interpretation oftheTorah areviewed astheprimary m eansof
appropriating the Torah.Thisprocessofappropriation through interpre-
tation can be understood on two levels:on the exotericlevel, asa process
ofappropriating the meaning ofthe Torah,and on the esoteric level, as
a m eans through which one ultim ately transcendsa11specific meanings
and entersinto com m union with thedivinereality em bodied in thebook
oftheTorah.U nderstood in the second sense, theinterpretiveexperience
ultim ately culminatesin mysticalexperience.
The Zohar contains a passage thatvividly describes the stage-by-
stage processthrough which thehermeneuticalexperienceunfoldsuntil
itfinally culminates in divine comm union w ith the Torah. Thepassage
depictstheTorah asa living,organicentity who wantsto revealhertotal
reality tl
) sincere seekers of wisdom .The Torah draws those who seek
her ever closer to herself and progressively reveals the deeper levelsof
herm eaning to them .Thepassagecomparesthe Torah to a dam selwho
ishidden in apalacewhileherloverconstantly pacesback and forth out-
side thepalace,watching to catch a glimpse ofhisbeloved.O ccasionally
sherevealsherfaceto him momentarily butthen shequickly hidesagain,
everenflam ing him with renewed passion forher.
. ..theTorah resemblesabeautifuland stately dam sel,who ishid-
den in a secluded cham berofherpalace andwho hasasecretlover,
unknown to al1others.Forloveofherhe keepspassing the gateof
her house,looking thisway and that in search of her.She knows
thatherloverhauntsthe gate ofherhouse.W hatdoesshe do?She
opens the door of her hidden chamber ever so little,and for a
momentrevealsherface to herlover,buthidesitagain forthwith.
W ere anyone with her lover,he would see nothing and perceive
nothing.H ealone seesitand he isdrawn to herwith hisheartand
souland his whole being,and he knowsthatfor love ofhim she
disclosed herselfto him forone mom ent, aflamewith loveforhim .
So isitwith theword ofthe Torah,which revealsherselfonly to
thosewholoveher.TheTorahknowsthatthemystic(hakim libba,
literally,thewiseofheartlhauntsthegateofherhouse.W hatdoes
she do?From w ithin her hidden palace she disclosesher face and
beckonsto him and returnsforthwith toherplaceand hides. Those
who are there see nothing and know nothing, only lle alone,and
he isdrawn to her with his heartand soul and hiswhole being.
Thus the Torah reveals herselfand hides, and goesoutin love to
herloverand arouseslove in him .241
BRIDE O F ISRAEL 235
In the beginning the Torah only discloseshersecretsm omentarily
and then retreats.Aftersome time,however,theloverofTorah isinvited
to enter the palace and explore itsinnerchambers.Ashebecom esmore
and more fam iliarwith herthe Torah gradually unveilsthesubtlerlevels
ofhermeaning- from pe nt
. toderânhtohaggadah(=re-ez)tosq.Finally
the Torah reveals herself to him face to face,and he becomes a true
Rbridegroom ofthe Torah''and aum asterofthe house''fora1ltim es.
Com e and see:this is the way of the Torah.At first,when she
wishesto revealherselfto am an,she giveshim a mom entary sign.
Ifhe understands,welland good;ifnot,she sendsto him and calls
him asimpleton.Tothem essengershesendsto him theTorah says:
tellthe simpleton to come here thatI may speak to him.Asitis
written gprov.9:471:''W hosoissimple,lethim turninhithecshe
saith to him thatwanteth understanding.''W hen he comesto her,
she beginsfrom behind a curtain to speak words in keeping with
hisunderstanding,untilvery slowly insightcomesto him ,and this
is called derashah.Then through a lightveilshe speaksallegorical
wordsLmillindehidajandthatiswhatismeantbyhaggadah.Only
then,when he hasbecom e fam iliarwith her,doessherevealherself
to him face to face and speak to him ofa1lher hidden secretsand
a1lherhidden ways,w hich havebeen in herheartfrom thebegin-
ning.Such a man isthen termed perfect,a Rmaster,'thatisto say,
a Gbridegroom of the Torah'' in the strictest sense, the master
ofthehouse,to whom she disclosesa1lhersecrets,concealing noth-
111g.242
The above passage describestheherm eneuticalprocessasinvolving
a dynam ic,symbioticrelationship between theTorah and the interpreter,
in which on the one hand the divine reality ofTorah extendsherselfto
the interpreter and progressively revealsher m eaning to him ,while on
the otherhand the interpreterisdrawn to the Torah and seeksto unfold
and fathom the subtleties of her m eaning. The more the interpreter
understands,the more the Torah reveals.The unfoldment ofeach new
layerofmeaning resultsin an increasing degree ofintimacy between the
Torah and herinterpreter:(1)W hen theinterpreteronly understands
pe
nt., t
heliterallevelofmeaning(which isnotexplicitlymentionedin
thepassage),heremainsoutsideofthepalaceandonlycatchesoccasional
glimpsesoftheTorah;(2)when insightdrawshebecomescapableof
comprehending Jerlpj,the hermeneuticalmeaning,in which theTorah
speakstohim from behindacurtain;(3)whentheinterpreterpenetrates
to hagvdab(=rc-ez),theallegoricallevelofmeaning,theTorahspeaks
 RETHIN KIN G SCRIPTU RE
tohim through alightveil,and (4)finally,when hebeginstofathom
thehidden mysteriesofsq,theTorahrevealsherselfto him facetoface,
disclosing a11of her secrets and concealing nothing.Each stage in the
hermeneuticalprocessbrings the Torah and interpreter into closer and
closercontactuntilfinally they areunited fora1ltimesasbridegroom and
bride.
BEYO N D A TEX TU AL D EFIN IT IO N O F SC RIPT U RF.
In the above passage the marriage symbolism thatportraysthe Torah as
the bride of Israelfindsitsm ostvivid expression.This symbolism does
not simply provide a convenient m etaphorical personification of the
Torah;it also conveysthe essentialliving reality ofthe relationship that
can exist bet
v een hum an beings and the Torah.In thisconception the
Torah isnotsimply abook to bestudied;itisaliving aspectofGod with
which one can enterinto divinecom munion.N otonly can aperson love
theTorah;theTorah herselfseeksfora person'slove and draw sllim ever
closer to her heart.ltis thisintimate love between the people oflsrael
and the Torah thathassustained them throughoutthe ages.
Itisonly by taking into consideration thisliving dim ension ofthe
Torah thatwe can come to afullunderstanding ofthenature ofscripture
intheJewish case.Although theJewishpeoplehaveoftenbeen preoccu-
pied with theouterbody ofthe Torah,with preset wing and studying the
written word of scripture,they have alwaysm aintained an awarenessof
the living soul,the living W ord ofGod,thatpulsateswithin the words
and infusesthem with eternallife.Thisawarenessisnotsimply alifeless
conceptthatwascherished by a few mysticsin the M iddle Ages.Asthe
above analysishasshown,thenotion thatthe Torah isa living aspectof
God is expressed in various form snotonly in kabbalistic literature,but
also in traditionalrabbinic texts.W e m ightbe tempted to relegate the
rabbinic speculationsto m ere poeticalpraisesofthe Torah ifwe did not
discern underlyingtheseexpressionsacertain experientialdim ension that
isstillevidenttoday in modernJewish lifeand practice.
W hatisitthatha5inspiredJews,generation aftergeneration,to
spend endlesshoursday afterday poring overevery word ofthe W ritten
and O ralTorah,penetrating into every subtlenuance ofmeaning?W hat
isitthatelevatesthe study ofthe Torah to the highestpossible statusso
thatiteven takesprecedenceoverhonoring one'sm otherandfather,earn-
ing aliving,and therescueofhuman 1ife?243W hatisitthathasmotivated
countlessJewstoabandonal1desireforwealthandpowerand,facedwith
persecution and martyrdom ,even to risk theirlivesin order to study the
Torah?244Although study ofthe Torah may bring certain rewardsin this
BRIDE OF ISRAEL 237
world and in the world to come,the prevalentview,expressed in 170th
rabbinicand kabbalistic sourcesaswellasbycontemporaryJews,isthat
onestudiestheTorahforitsou?rl.
sf:/ee.245StudyoftleTorahishsown
reward because such study isa directm eansofentering into com munion
withthedivine.Every timeagroup ofJewscomestogethertostudy the
Torah,the Shekhinah,God'spresence,issaid to hoveroverthem .Such
an endeavorisviewedbypiousJewsnotasmerely an intellectualenter-
prise but as a quasi-experientialtechnique whereby one penetratesinto
the divine mysteries and,by uncovering layer after layer of meaning,
comescloserand closerinto contactwith therealityofthedivineem bod-
ied in thebook oftheTorah.
TheJewishconception ofTorah asalivingaspectofGodchallenges
usto m ovebeyond a textualdefinition ofscriptureastsacred writings'or
<holy writ'to abroaderdefinition thatcan also accountforthe ontologi-
ca1dim ension ofscripture asaliving,im mediaterealit'
y in people'slives.
The distinction between text/reality points to a further distinction
betweenearthly/divine,inwhichscriptureasconcretetextconstitutesthe
earthly dim ension of scripturew hile scripture asliving reality pointsto
itsdivine dimension.However,in the finalanalysisthese distinctionscol-
lapse,foritisprecisely astextthatthedivinebecom esembodied on earth.
IntheJudaictradition theliving W ord ofGod assumesaconcreteform
on earth through the medium of the W ritten Torah,and the W ritten
Torah thereby serves as an interm ediary between the human and the
divine.
The Islamic tradition's conception of the Qur'àn presents some
interestingparallelsto theJudaicconception ofTorah.TheQur'ân,like
theTorah,isdescribed asacosm icreality thathas170th earthly and divine
dimensions.In itsdivinedimensiontheQur'ânisconsideredtobepreex-
istent and uncreated and to participate in the reality of God's eternal
W ordinscribedontheheavenlytablet,RtheMotheroftheBook''Lumm
al-Kitâbj,orsimplyd:theBook''(al-Kitöb).Thedivinerealit'
yoftheheav-
enly Book findsitsquintessentialexpression on earth in the Arabic text
oftheQur'ân,which constitutestheembodimentoftheeternalW ord in
history.
Ifwe search foran equivalentconception in the Christian context,
we are im mediately struck by the inadequacy of attem pting to draw a
parallelbetween thc Torah and Qur'àn on the one hand and the New
Testam ent on the other.W ilfred Cantwell Smith has pointed out that
God'scentralrevelation for Christiansisin theperson ofChristhim self
and notin theN ew Testament,which constitutesarecord ofthatrevela-
tion.Smith'sproposition thatuour'ân isto MuslimswhatChrististo
Christians''z46canbeextendedtoincludetheJewishcase:TorahistoJews
238 RETHIN KIN G SCRIPTU RE
whatQur'àn isto M uslimsand whatChrististo Christians.Thisfunc-
tionalparallelofcoursetranscendstheboundariesofthe genusxscripture'
and restsinstead on thecomm on ground oftrevelation'asdefinedby each
tradition.In al1three casesthis revelation constitutesthe m eeting point
between thedivineand earthly planesin which the eternalW ord ofGod
breaksthrough into history and becomesembodied in a concrete form on
earth.
Smith hassuggested a furtheranalogy between the significance of
memorizing theQur'ân foraM usli
. m andthesignificanceoftheEucha-
ristfora Christian.
By Qur'an one means,ofcourse,notthe z
tink and paper''butthe
contentoftheQur'an,itsmessage,itswords,ultimately itsmean-
ing.The h.n-/'
f.
?r(freely,the Rmemorizer'';butmore literally the
uapprehender'')hasinsomesenseappropriatedthistohimself,has
interiorized itin away thatcould conceivably suggestto aChristian
som eanalogy with w hathappenswhen theChristian in the Com -
m union Serviceappropriatesto himselfthebody ofChristW ho in
hiscaseisthem undaneexpression ofGod,thesupernatural-natural,
the embodimentofeternity in time.247
ThefunctionalequivalentintheJewishcasewouldbethestudyofTorah,
which setwesasa meansforaJew notonly to appropriatethemeaning
ofthe Torah,butultim ately to penetrate beyond al1localized m eanings
and partake ofthe divine reality embodied in the book ofthe Torah.
W hat are we, as scholars trained in the W estern tradition of
historical-criticalscholarship,to m akeofsuch anotion ofscripture?W hen
m ostscholarsthink oftheTorah they m ostlikely envision thePentateuch,
which they deem to beacompilation ofdisparatesourcesdating from dif-
ferentperiods.How are we to reconcile such aperspectivewith thatofa
piousJew whoperceivestheTorah asaliving,organicunityfrom which
noteven asinglelettermay beextractedwithoutharmingthe entirebody?
Thehistorical-criticalscholarproceedsfrom theassumption thattheTorah
isa human docum entand attemptsto explain the variouscontradictions,
redundancies,and anomalieswithin the textby pointing to the factthata
human editor hasclumsily patched togetherdifferentstrandsofm aterial
derived from different schoolsofthoughtwith decidedly differentview-
points.A Jew groundedin traditionalrabbinichermeneutics,ontheother
hand,proceedsfrom the assumption that the Torah isadivine docum ent
thatconstitutesaperfectunits and 11e248thusexplains,by meansofsophis-
ticated hermeneuticalprinciples,anyapparentcontradictionsand anomalies
in thetextasmeaningfulsignpoststhatcan serveto illumine som ehidden
BRIDE O F ISRAEL
dimension ofmeaning thatmightotherwise remain unnoticed.
Isthisjust some superstitious,dogmatic beliefthattheJew has
inherited from hisforefathers,oristhere som ething in his own experi-
encethatallowshim to m aintain such claim seven in theface oftheevi-
dence ofhistorical-criticaischolarship?Even ifhewereto admitthatthe
textoftheTorah asweknow ittoday hadbeen tampered with and altered
in someway by a human author,would he cease to believein the divine
reality ofTorah?W ewould contend that,even ifhewereto acknowledge
thattherewere imperfectionsin theexternalbody oftheTorah- thatis,
in the written textitself- hewould stillcontinue to probe itsmysteries
in order to commune with itsinnerm ostsoul.H istorical-criticalscholars
mightanalyzethePentateuch into varioussourcesand proveto theirown
satisfaction thatitisahum an document,and yetno am ountofevidence
willalteraJew'sfaith inthedivinerealityofTorahifeachtimehestudies
the Torah he experiencesthe fullnessofthe divine presence.249
In refutation ofthepiousJew'sclaim thattheTorah isdivine,one
mightpointto the factthatnoteveryonc experiencesthedivinepresence
when studying theTorah.ThepiousJew musttherefore beprojecting
hisow n faith into thebook;thebook itselfhasno divinereality.To such
an argum ent he might respond that the Torah only reveals herself to
thosewho loveher.IfoneapproachestheTorah asone doesany ordinary
book,without proper reverence and respect,then divine wisdom will
rem ain hidden like the dam selin thepalace and willnotshow herface.
On the otherhand,ifonelovestheTorah with a11hisheartand w ith al1
his souland ever watchesather door,she willgradually revealherself
m oreand m oreuntilfinally she beckonshim to com einto herinnermost
cham berswhere the eternallightofwisdom evershines.
W isdom isradiantand unfading,
and she iseasily discerned by thosewho love her,
and she isfound by thosewho seek her.
Slae hastensto m ake laerselfknown to those who desire her.
He who risesearly to seek herwillhave no difficulty,
for he willfind her sitting athis gate.
(W isd.ofSol.6.12-14)
N O TES
1.Theterm W irkungsgescbicltteisusedbyH ans-GeorgGadamerto describe
the tradition ofsuccessive interpretationsin thehistoryofatextthatimplicitly
influenceseach new interpretation ofatext.SeeH ans-Georg Gadamer,Wabrbeit
240 RETH IN KIN G SCRIPTU RE
undMetboie:Grf /rlzff
p einerr/lfb.
st
v/lf
lc/leélHermeneutik(Tubingen:J.C.B.Mohr
(Paul Siebeckj, 1972),esp.pp.283-290.In the present context the term
W irkungsgescbicbte isbeing used in a broader sense to include the text'srole as
scripturein theongoinglifeofaparticularreligioustradition.
2.TheTorah isdistinguished halakhically from theothert'wo sectionsof
the H ebrew Bible as having a higher degree of sanctity. This distinction is
reflected in anumberofregulations,such asthestipulation thatw hereasaTorah
scrollm ay beplacedontop oftheN evi'im and Ketuvim ,theN evi'im and Ketu-
vim maynotbeplacedontopofaTorah scroll(J.T.Meg.73d).Foradiscussion
oftheregulationsconcerningtheclassificationofthebooksoftheH ebrew Bible,
seeSidZ.Leiman,TheCanonizationo
fblebrewScri
pture:TheTalmudicandMidrasbic
Eviience,Transactionsofthe ConnecticutAcademy ofArtsand Sciences,vol.4
(Hamden,CT:ArchonBooks,1976),esp.pp.14-16,56-72.
3.The theoreticalranking ofthe scripturesmay ofcourse notalwaysbe
followedinpractice.InpracticetheTalmudinludaism,theworksoffiqbinIslam,
and the Dharma-jâstrasin Hinduism arethe authoritativefoundationsofortbo-
praxis.Theirauthority ultim ately derivesfrom theprim ary scripture- w ritten
Torah,QurYn,Vedas- buttheirscopefarexceedsit.
4.Fora comparative historicalanalysisofthe ontologicalconceptionsof
scripture in the Judaic and Brahmanical Hindu traditions,one may refer to
BarbaraA.Holdrege,uvedaand Torah:OntologicalConceptionsofScripturein
theBrahmanicalandJudaicTraditions,''PIZ.D.Dissertation,HazvardUniversitp
1987(inpreparationforpublication).Forabriefanalysisoftheseconceptions,see
Holdrege,Rveda and Torah:The W ord asEmbodied in Scripture,''in Between
Jerusalem aniBanaras:Explorationsin ComparativeReligion,ed.HananyaGoodman'
(Albany:StateUniversityofNew YorkPress,1990-forthcoming).
5.Itshouldbenoted,however,thatthereareavarietyofopinionsconcerning
theorigin andm eaningoftherootyrb.Foradiscussion ofthescholarly debateone
may referto MichaelFishbane'sarticleR'
Ibrah''in EnqclopeiiaMkrlïl.
6.Accordingtoanalternativetraditionrecordedinanum berofM idrashim ,
onlythefirstt'wo com m andmentswerespoken directlyby Godto thepeopleof
Israel;theothereightcomm andmentswere spoken by him through the mouth
ofM oses.See,forexample,Pirqê de-ll.Eliezerb41,discussed on pp.218-219.
7.Foradiscussion ofrelevantrabbinicsourcesseepp.220-221.
8.See,forexample,Tanl.l.Be-mi
/barj5,f.242a.
9.See,forexam ple,Exod.R.XXX III-I,discussed on pp.215-216 along
w ith otherrelevantM idrashim .
10.See,forexample,ZoharlI.99a-99b,discussed on pp.234-236.
11.Abraham Joshua Heschel, '
rlrlà min llc-q
o plcyc- be-'az
leflç/crylj .
Iel
lla-Ddrq,2vols.(LondonandNew York:SoncinoPress,1962,196$.
BRIDE OF ISRAEL 241
12.Ephraim E.U rbach,u'rheW ritten Law andtheO ralLam 'chapter12
ofhisTheqsbgea;TlteirConcept
sfirllBeliefs,trans.IsraelAbrahamsgerusalem:
MagnesPress,Hebrew Universitp 1975),vol.1,pp.286-314)cf.e <HeW ho
Spoke and the W orld Cam e into Being,'' chapter 9 of ibid.,vol. 1,pp.
184-213.
13.Gershom Scholem,'
Kq'heM eaning oftheTorah inJewish Mysticismy''
chapter2ofhisOntheKabbalahandJ/ ahmbolism,trans.RalphManheim (New
York:SchockenBooks,1965),pp.32-86;idem,R' rheNameofGodandtheLin-
guisticTheoryoftheKabbala,''Diogenesno.79:59-80(Part1),Diogenesno.80:
164-194 (Part2).Iam particularlyindebtedtoScholem'sgroundbreakingessay
u'
T'
heMeaningoftheTorah inJewishM ysticism,'whichprovidedtheinspiration
formy initialinquiriesinto the ontologicalconceptionsofTorah in 1973.Asa
resultofmy own study ofthe Zoharand otherkabbalistictexts,aswellofTal-
m udicand M idrashicsources,Ihaveevolvedan interpretivefram ework thatdif-
ferssubstantially from Scholem 'scategories.
14.M osheh Idel,Hr.
re
pîsâ! ha-Tbrâh be-siprû! ha-lqêkalt
'
d we-Gilgûlghâ
be-oabbàlàh,''Jerusal
em q
sfulfe
.rin/euzf
. l/lTboughtI(1981):23-84.Idel'sarticle,
which appeared afterthebulk ofm y own research wasalready completed,pre-
sentsavery differentand inform ativeperspective on thesources.See also Idel's
recentarticle on kabbalistic herm eneutics,ulnfinitiesofTorah in Kabbalah,'in
Midrasb aniLiterature,eds.Geoffrey H.Hartman and Sanford Budick (New
HavenandLondon:YaleUniversityPress,1986),pp.141-157.
15.TheontologicalconceptionsofTorahfoundinrabbinictextsareofcentral
importancetothepresentstudy,sinceitistherabbinictraditionthathasbeenrespon-
sibleforpreserving,interpreting,arldtransmittingtheTorahfornearlytwothousand
years. These conceptions were elaborated and reinterpreted by the medieval
kabbalistictradition,w hich,asGershom Scholem hasshow ninhisnumerousworks
onKabbalah,representsanoutgrow th ofcurrentsofthoughtthatareevidentin cer-
tain mystically-orientedrabbiniccirclesasearlyastheflrstcenturyc.
E,Ihavechosen
tofocusinparticularon thecosm ogonicspeculationsoftheZohar,whichconstitutes
themajortextoftheKabbalah.Thistextdidnotremainconfinedtotheintellectual
elite,butwaswidely circulatedforseveralcenturiesamongthegeneralpopulaceand
hasperhapsexercised amoreprofound influenceonJewishthoughtthan arlyother
singlebook nextto theHebrew Bibleatld theTalmud.
ThestrandsoftheJudaictradition thatarethefocusofmyanalysisdonot
representonlyasingletypeoforientation orschoolofthought,butincludeb0th
exotericand esoteric,pragm aticand mystical,orientations.Therabbinictradition
generally represents the more exoteric strand,with its emphasison I vlakbah,
which encompasses all aspects of Jewish law- ethical, cultic, civil, and
crim inal- and on agv dab,which includes ethical and theological teachings.
Therew ere,however,certain m ore mystically-oriented circlejwithin the early
rabbinictradition- among whom were such leading Tannaim asR.Joh.anan b.
Zakkai(1stc.c.
E.
)andR.Akiba- thatwereconcernednotonlywithmoretradi-
tionalm attersofltalakl
vb and aggaiah,butalso with the usecretsoftheTorah'
'
242 RETH IN KIN G SCRIPTU RE
(siLrêrlrl/;,rlzéfJrJ/l),inparticularwiththemysteriesofcreation(maê âsehôerclà
rf/,
lit.,çsworksofcreation'')describedin Genesislandthemysteriesofthethrone-
chariot(ma.t ïselî'merkâbâb,lit.,Rworksofthe chariot'')depicted in Ezekiel1.
M edievalkabbalistic speculationsrepresentthe mostfully developed expression
ofthisesotericstream withinJudaism.TheZoharitselfpurportsto bearabbinic
M idrash derived from the Tanna R.Sim eon b.Yoh.ai,a famous disciple of R.
Akiba,and thusclaim sadirectlineofcontinuitybetween itsow n esotericteach-
ingsandtheteachingsofthoseTannaim who soughttofathom thesecretsofthe
Torah.
16.Foradiscussion ofthetreatmentofthesequestionsin medievalJewish
philosophy,seeH arry Austryn W olfson,t<rf'hePre-existentKoran and thePre-
existentLaw,'chapter4ofhisReyercussionsoff/lcKalam fs-/awfs/lPhilosonlt
y(Cam-
bridgeandLondon:HarvardUniversityPress,197$,pp.85-113.
17.Foram orelengthy discussionofthecontributionsofthesetextstothe
developmentoftheconceptofprimordialwisdom/Torah,seeHoldrege,Rveda
and Torah:OntologicalConceptionsofScripturein theBrahmanicalandJudaic
Traditionss' pp.126-136.
18.Foradiscussionofthedifferentstagesin thedevelopmentoftheIsrael-
itewisdom tradition,andofthecontributionofProverbs1-9tothatdevelopm ent,
seeGerhardvon Rad,O/# TestamentTbeology,trans.D.M.G.Stalker(New York
andEvanston:HarperandRow,1962),vol.1,pp.418-453,esp.pp.441-453)
WalterEichrodt,Tlteologyof l/lc0li 'hstament,trans.J.A.Baker(Philadelphia:
WestminsterPress,1967),vol.2,pp.80-92;JamesL.Crenshaw,OliIèstament
Wisiom:xg
lélIntroduction(Atlanta:JohnKnoxPress,1981),pp.91-99.
19.R.N.W hybray,Wi siom inProverbs.T/leConceptof Wisdom inProverbs
1-:(London:SCM PressLtd.,1965),p.106.
2O.M artin Hengel,-/ufllf-
ç- aniHellenism:q
sfut
ffc.
sintbeirEncounterin.
Pc/eJ-
tineiuringf/lcEarlyHellenisticPerioi(Philadelphia:FortressPress,1974),vol.1,
p.153,with n.289.
21.The term Mmôn hasgenerallybeen interpreted byscholarsasm eaning
eitherGartisan,craftsm an'
'or Rnursling,''aswillbe discussed imm ediately below.
22.Thism eaning isalmostcertain for '
âmmân in Song ofSongs7.2 and
also makesreasonable sensefor'ömôn inJeremiah 52.15.
23.Forthedetailsofthescholarly debateseeGerhard von Rad,W isiom in
Israel,trans.JamesD.Martin(London:SCM PressLtd.,1972),p.152)W hybray,
Wisiom inProverbs,pp.101-102)Hengel,Juiaism csJ Hellenism,vol.1,p.153,
with n.291)R.
B.Y.Scott,GW isdom in Creation:The 'Amon ofProverbsVIII
30,':Pr
eluyhstamentum 10(1960):213-223.
24.Thefirsttheory,which isespoused byR.N .W hybray,am ongothers,
maintainsthatwisdom in Proverbs8.22-31isessentially a divine attributethat
hasbeen personified to thepointofhypostatization.O n thebasisofhisanalysis
BRIDE O F ISRAEL 243
ofcertain key wordsin thepassage,' W hybray concludesthattheorigin ofthis
portrayalofw isdom isprimarily m etaphorical,not mythological,although there
m aybesom eevidenceofmythologicalinfluence.SeeW hybray,W i siom in Prov-
erbs,pp.72-104,esp.pp.98-104.
The second theory,proposed by Gerhard von Rad,suggeststhatw hatis
personified in Proverbs8.22-31isnotan attributeofGod,butan attributeofthe
world,immanentinnature.Thet<primevalorder''oftheuniversewasobjectified
bytheIsraelitesaswisdom,andthisobjectification,vonRadasserts,Gwasneither
amythologicalresiduew hich unconsciously accom panied theidea,nor...wasit
afree,poeticand didacticuseofim agery....Itwasm uch morethan sim ply the
objectiverealizationofsuchaprimevalorder;itwas,rather,aquestionofcrystal-
lizing specificexperienceswhich man had had in hisencounterw ith it.Hehad
experienced itnotonly asastaticorganism oforder,he felthimselfassailed by
it,hesaw itconcernedaboutm an,heexperienced itasabestowerofgifts.''Von
Rad,W isdom inIsrael,p.174.Seealsopp.144-176.
The third type of theory maintains thatw isdom in Proverbs 8.22-31
derivesfrom an originally independentm ythologicalfigure,and therefore its
provenancemustbesoughtinthemythologiesofancientIsraeland/oritsNear
Eastern neighbors- Egypt,M esopotam ia,and Canaan.For referencesseen.25
below.
Som e scholarshaveproposed theoriesthatcombine elem entsfrom these
three typesofinterpretation.Forexample,H .Ringgren hassuggested thatwis-
dom isfundamentallythepersonificationofadivineattributetowhich mytholog-
ical characteristics taken from other traditions have been added in order to
enhance the vividnessofwisdom 'sportrayal.See Helm erRinggren,H' brl and
Wisiom:Stuiiesin1/1:HqvostatizationofDivineQslclifiesaniFunctionsintheAncient
NearEast(Lund:Ohlssoms,1947),pp.132f,148.
25.Some scholars have sought the provenance of personified wisdom in
theEgyptian conceptofM aat.See,forexam ple,von Rad,W isdom in Israel,p.
153;cf.ErnstW iirthwein,ç
i gyptianW isdom andtheO 1dTestam ent,'in Stuiies
inAncientIsraeliteWisdom,ed.JamesL.Crenshaw (New York:Ktav Publishing
House,Inc.,1976),pp.117-118;GeorgFohrer,Gsophia,''in StuiiesinAndent
IsraeliteW isiom,pp.65-67.O therscholars,such asB.Gemserand H .Ringgren,
haveattemptedto locateaprototypeforProverbs8.22-31in Egyptian and M eso-
potam ian creation hym ns.Forasum m ary and critiqueofthesetheoriesseeR.N .
W hybray,d<proverbs VlIl 22-31 and lts Supposed Prototypesy''in Studies in
AncientIsroelite W isiom,pp.390-400.For a discussion of possible Canaanite-
Phoenician sourcesofthe Israelite figure ofwisdom ,see W .F.Albright,Gsom e
Canaanite-phoenicianSourcesofHebrew ' W isdoms'in W isdom inIsraelflnflin tbe
AncientNearEast,eds.M .N 0th and D.W inton Thom as,SupplementstoVetus
Testamentum,vol.3(Leiden:E.
J.Brill,1955),pp.1-15,esp.pp.7-8.G.Boström
arguesthatthefigureofAstarte-lstar,thegoddessoflove,liesbehindthepersoni-
ficationofwisdom in Proverbs.SeeGustavBoström ,Proverbiastuiien:D ieP isbeit
NAIJdasfremiePFà'fsin5yn 1-9 (Lund:C.W.K.Gleerup,193$,pp.156-174.
However,accordingtothistheoryAstarte-lstardid notservethepositivefunction
244 RETH IN KIN G SCRIPTU RE
ofaprototype,butratherposed asan antitheticalfigure overagainstw hich the
Israelitefigure ofwisdom wasestablished asarival.
In addition to theabovetheories,which look fortheoriginsofthefigure
ofpersonifiedwisdom in ProverbsinAncientN earEastern cultures,someschol-
arshavesoughttoestablish Greek influenceasthebackground forsuchaconcept.
See,forexample,Eichrodt,Tbeologyoftlte0li'
Ièstament,vol.2,p.85.However,
M .H engelhascautionedagainstsuch theoriesofH ellenisticinfluenceonIsraelite
w isdom speculation,sincetheGreeksophiawaspersonifiedasadivineentityrela-
tivelylate.SeeL
bjengek,luiaism andHellenism,vol.1,p.154,withn.298.
Forrefutationsofeach ofthesevarioustheoriesthatattemptto derivethe
personified wisdom of Proverbsfrom Egyptian,M esopotam ian,Canaanite,or
Greek sources,seeW hybray,Wisdom inProverbs,pp.82-92;idem,GproverbsVIlI
22-31and ItsSupposed Prototypes,''pp.390-400.
26.Asindicated in n.24,von Rad hasem phasized the experientialbasis
underlying Israel's formulation of personified wisdom ,w hich represents an
im portantdim ension thatisoften ignored by m odern scholars.
27.Seeespeciallythe hym n topreexistentwisdom in chapter24,which is
thecenterand climax ofBen Sira'swork.Although theW isdom ofBen Sirais
theearliestdatablework thatelaborateson therelationshipbetween wisdom and
Torah,theseedexpressionofsuch anidentificationcanbelocatedasearlyasDeu-
teronom y 4.6 and becomeseven m ore developed in Psalm s 111 and 119.97ff.
W hile recognizing thatRthecomplete identification ofwisdom with the Torah
isan accomplished factw ith ben Sirachy''von Radassertsthatuthiswascertainly
no absoluteinnovation,forin the lightofthislaterage'sthoughtthisequation
hasto beregarded assimply atheologicalconclusion already latentin principle
in Prov.I-X and now come to m aturirs' 'Von Rad,Oli TestamentT/lep/pgy,vol.
2,p.445.George FootM oore pointsoutthatthe m annerin w hich Ben Sira
introducesthisidentification um akesthe im pression thatitwasacomm onplace
in histim e,when thestudy ofthelaw and thecultivationofwisdom wenthand
inhand,and asin hiscasewereunited in thesam eperson.''GeorgeFootM oore,
Juiaism intbeFirstCenturiesof tbeCltristianEra,Theal.çeoftheTannaim (Cam-
bridge:HarvardUniversityPress,1927),vol.1,p.265.Hengelhassuggestedthat
perhapsthisidentification originated in thecircle ofsagesaround Sim eon the
Just,theHigh Priestwho iseulogized in thelastsectionofBenSira'swork along
withtheothergreatGfathers''oftheJewishtradition.Hengel,lkffcfl.
- andHellen-
ism,vol.1,pp.161,132.See p.193 regarding the aphorism aboutthe Torah
attributedtoSimeontheJust.Seealson.44concerningthedisputedidentification
ofSimeon theJustwith Simeon IorSimeon II.
Eveniftheidentification ofw isdom and Torah didnotoriginatewith Ben
Sira,hewasthefirstsagetoglorifyandexpandonthenotioninmajestichymns
that served to link indissolubly cosm ic,prim ordialwisdom with the historical
phenom enonofTorah,bringingtolightthesupra-historicalandheavenlydim en-
sionsoftheGbook ofthecovenant-''
28.HengeldescribesAristobulus'doctrine ofwisdom and creation asa
BRID E O F ISRAEL 245
fusion ofutheoriginalJewish-palestinian conception ofpersonified ehokmö'asthe
consortofGod atthecreation oftheworldw ith thebiblicalaccountofcreation
inGen.1-2.41...w ith conceptionsofGreekphilosophicalcosm ologyandepiste-
mology,yetwithoutgivinguptheirspecificfeatures-''Hengel,Jkflf-
ç- andHellen-
ism,vol.1,p.167.
29.W olfson writes,
w isdom,then,isonly another word forLogos,and itisused in a11the
sensesoftheterm Logos.80th theseterm smean,in thefirstplace,aprop-
erty ofGod,identicalwith Hisessence,and,like Hisessence,eternal.ln
thesecondplace,theymeanareal,incorporealbeing,createdby Godbefore
thecreation oftheworld.Third,...Logosmeansalso aLogosimmanent
in the world,and so,also wisdom ...isused in thatsense.Fourth,170th
Logosand wisdom are used by him in the sense of the Law ofM oses.
Finally,Logosisalso used by Philo in the sense ofone ofitsconstituent
ideas,such,forinstance,astheideaofmind.
HarryAustrynWolfson,Pbilo:FoundationsofReli giousP/lf/p-
çpp/l
yinluioism,G'
/lrf-
ç-
tianity andIslam (Cambridge:HarvardUniversityPress,1968),vol.1,p.258.See
also pp.253-261.
30. ...(Ajtrained architect...firstsketchesin hisown mind wellnigh
a11thepartsofthecitythatistobewroughtout,tem ples,gym nasia,tow n-
halls,m arket-places,harbours,docks,streets,wallsto be built,dwelling-
housesaswellaspublicbuildingsto besetup.Thusafterhaving received
inllisownsoul,asitwereinwax,thefiguresoftheseobjectsseverally,he
carriesabouttheimageofacity w hich isthe creation ofhismind.Then
by hisinnatepowerofmemory,herecallstheimagesofthevariousparts
ofthiscity,and imprintstheir typesyetmore distinctly in it:and like a
good craftsman he beginsto build the cityofstonesand timber,keeping
hiseyeuponhispatternandmakingthevisibleandtangibleobjectscorre-
spond in each caseto the incorporealideas.
(Op.17-18)
Sim ilarly,Philowrites,whenGodbegantocreatetheworld,<çH econceived
beforehand the models of its parts, and...out of these He constituted and
broughttocompletion aworlddiscernibleonlybythem ind,and then,with that
forapattern,theworldwhichoursensescanperceive''(0p.1$.Thisworldof
archetypalideasistheblueprintofcreation containedinthemindofthearchitect,
who,accordingto Philo,istheLogos(wisdoml-theinstrumentemployedby
theKingofa11tobringforthmanifestcreation (Op.20,24-2$.TheLogosis
identified in otherpassageswith theTorah,w hichastheidealpatternofcreation
isustam pedwiththesealsofnature''andisGthemostfaithfulpictureoftheworld
(cosmic)polity''(IIMos.14,51;cf.Op.3).
31.See,forexample,Pes.54a. )Ned.391);Gen.R.1.4)Gen.R.1.8;Siprê
Deut.j37,j309,9317.Proverbs8.30 isused asaprooftextin Gen.R.VIII.2
and Lev.R.X IX .I.Thesetextsw illbe discussed below.
246 RETHIN KIN G SCRIPTU RE BRIDE OF ISRAEL 247

32.Seeespecially Gen.R.1.1;Tanl
y,ed.Buber,Berë'jl!j5,f.2b;Tanl
.l
. anarchitectandblueprintand Philo'suseofthesameimages,inthepassagecited
Berë'sk j1,f.6a-6b;and Targ.Jer.1,which willbediscussedon pp.194-195. in n.30,havelongbeen recognized by scholars.SeeM oore,Juâai
sm,vol.1,pp.
33.See,forexample,Exod.R.XLVII.4;cf.Gen.R.1.4.SeealsoUag.12a; 267-268;Hengel,Judaism t
lAIJHellenism,vol.1,p.171)Urbach,TbeSqes,vol.
1,pp.198-200.Otherscholarshavenotedthesim ilaritiesbetweenR.Hoshaiah's
Ber.55a.;Exod.R.X LVIII.4 regarding theroleofw isdom in creation,w ith no M idrash andPlato'sTimaeus27f.See,forexample,H enryA.Fischel,u'
TheTrans-
explicitm ention oftheTorah.
formationofW isdom intheW orldofMidrashy''inAmectsof Wisdom inJuiaism
34.Pes.54:.)N ed.391
7. andEarlyCbristianity,p.8O.ItisinterestingtonotethatM aimonides,inhisGuide
35.The classification ofa1lTannaim and Amoraim follow sHerm ann L.
totbeJ' crp/cxef
t wonderedabouttheexpression bistakkëlCtolook at,contem-
plateo),whichcorrespondstotheexpressionhibbît
.usedintheMidrashim attrib-
Strack,Introiuction totLeTalmud an1Midrasb (Philadelphia:Jewish Publication utedtoR.HoshaiahandR.Judahb.lltai,andremarkedtlutthisveryexpression
SocietyofAmerica,195$.Pleasenotethattraditionsthatareattributedtopartic- isusedbyPlatowhen hestatesthatGodcontemplatesthew orld ofIdeasandthus
ularrabbinic sagesm ay in som e casesbe pseudepigraphal.Itisnotpossible to
determ inewith certaintywhich traditionsstem from which sages. producesexistingbeings.MosesMaimonides,Guiieforf/lePer
plexed,pt.2,ch.6.
SeeUrbach,Tlte. Sgas,vol.1,p.199,with n.69.
36.Gen.R.1.4.Notethatin contrastto theTalm udicM idrash,thisM id- Scholars are not in agreem ent concerning the extent to which R.
rash substitutesthePatriarchsand IsraelfortheGarden ofEden and Gehenna. Hoshaiah's depiction of the Torah as the architect and blueprintof creation
reflectsthedoctrineofPlatonicldeas,particularlyasexpressed in Philo'sconcept
37.SiprêDeut.j37;cf.j3O9;j317. oftheLogos.U rbach hasargued againstsuch ahasty conclusion andhasem pha-
38.Gen.R.1.8. sized theessentialdifferencesin thelanguage and im agery used by R.Hoshaiah
and Philotoexpresstheanalogyofthearchitect.
39.Shab.881);Zeb.116a.
R.Hoshaçia'shom ily containsnotthe slightestreferenceto theworld of
40. Gen. R. 1.4; Gen. R. 1.10; Song of Songs R. V.11.
4; cll Ideasortothelocation oftheIdeas.In theanalogy,Gthearchitectdoesnot
XX IlI.3. plan thebuildingin hishead,buthemakesuseofrollsand tablets''- afact
41.Gen.R.XXVIII.4. thatPhilo carefully refrained from m entioning,becauseitcontradicted his
purpose in adducing theanalogy.Like thearchitectw ho looksattherolls
42.Lev.R.XIX .1;Gen.R.VIlI.2. and tablets.so the Holy O ne,blessed be He,looked in the Torah,butit
containsnoform sand sketchesoftem ples,gym nasia,marketsandharbours,
43.See,for exam ple,Gen.R.1.4)Gen.R.1.10; Gen.R.X II.2;Lev.R. and thisTorah isnot a conceptbut the concrete Torah wi' th its precepts
XX III.3;N um .R.XIII.15,16;Song ofSongsR.V.11.4. andstatutes,which areinscribed in letters.
44.'Ab.1.2.ThedategivenforSimeontheJustfollowsStrack,Introiuction U rbacllgoeson to assertthattheanalogy in R.Hoshaiah'sM idrash isçdonly a
totbeTalmuifiélf/M idrash,p.107,w hoidentifieshim withtheHighPriestSimeon literary embellishment.''SeeUrbach,TLeSages,vol.1,p.200.
1.Otherscholars,including Hengel,takeSimeon theJusttobe Simeon II,who Although Urbach iscorrectinpointingoutthedifferencesbetween Philo's
according to Josephuslived at the beginning of the second century s.c.B.See depiction oftheblueprintasam entalplan andHoshaiah'sim ageryofRplansand
H engel,/kllf
- -
sm aniHellenism,vol.1,p.131. tablets,'hegoestoo farwhen heattemptsto limitR.Hoshaiah'sconception of
45.SiprêDeut.j48;'Ab.111.14;cf.Exod.R.XLVll.4. Torah to theconcretebookoftheTorah.O uranalysishasshow nthatlongbefore
the timeofR.Hoshaiah,asupra-historicaldimension hadbeen superimposed on
. . Be
46.See,for example,Tanh rë'jîtj1,f.6a;Tanh.Peqt
-
ldê j3. the historicalphenomenon ofTorah through itsidentification with prim ordial
wisdom .Thisidentification isassum edby R.Hoshaiah,and thushisanalogy of
47.Tanh.Berë'sl!j1,f.6a-6b. thearchitectandblueprintmustbeviewedagainstthebackgroun 'dofaconception
48.A similarconjunctionofGenesis1.1andProverbs8.22isfoundinTar- ofTorah thatencom passedheavenlyaswellasearthly dimensions.Thisdoesnot
gum Jeremiah 1,in which berë'jh lplrl,Elobim isinterpretedasbe-ltokmö'5JrJ,.Cf. m ean to suggestthatR.Hoshaiah necessarily appropriated a1loftheH ellenistic
Targ.Neof.1. elementsthatwereincorporatedintotheJewishconceptionofTorah/wisdom by
thewritersofthewisdom booksoftheApocryphaandby theAlexandrianJewish
49.Tanh.,ed.Buber,Berë'sk j5,f.2b. philosophersAristobulusand Philo.In particular,it ishighly unlikely that R.
Hoshaiah borrowed directly from Philo in hisanalogy ofthearchitect.lndeed,
50.Gen.R.1.1. hewasprobablynotevenawareofPhilo'swritings.Thesimilaritiesbetweentheir
51.The obviousparallelsbetween R.Hoshaiah'sanalogy oftheTorah as usesoftheanalogycanbetterbeexplainedbytheiraccesstoacom montradition.
248 RETHIN KIN G SCRIPTU RE BRIDE OF ISRAEL 249

which intermingled traditionalJewish wisdom speculation with Greek thought 71.See,forexam ple,ZoharII.84b;II.161a;III.91b;III.159a.
categories.
72.Thenatureandm eaningofthepreexistenceoftheTorah wasdiscussed
52.Gen.R.X II.14. by medievalJewish philosophers.A numberofthinkersraised the problemsof
53.TheideathattheTorah served astheblueprintofcreation waselabo- tim eand placeand ultimatelyconcludedthattheTorah'spreexistenceshould be
rated by lsaacArama,IsaacAbrabanel,M osesAlshekh,Judah Loew b.Bezalel, understoodmetaphoricallyratl
aertl
unliterally(e.g.,Abralmm ibnEzra,Judahb.
and otherlatem edievalw riters. BarzillaiofBarcelona).OtherphilosophersdebatedwhethertheTorahprecedes
theworldintermsofchronology(HasdaiCrescas),ontology(IsaacibnLatii),or
54.CitedinUrbach,TbeSages,vol.1,pp.200-201.(noreferencegiven) teleologygudah Halevi,JosephAlbo).
55.Ibid-,p.201. 73.TîqqûnêZobar,Preface,6b;no.22,f.64a.
56.See,forexample,Gen.R.1.10;T.P.Uag.11.5)Sëper'Gliyyàht'
iR.b29 74.See,forexample,theletterofEzrab.Solomon,publishedbyGershom
(31). Scholem inSëperBialib(1934),p.159;Azriel,Pêrû.
lD-W.JJJ/,ed.Tishby(Jeru-
57.See,forexam ple,M en.2917)Gen.R.X1I.10 salem,1945),p.77.Noted in Scholem,G' T'
heMeaningoftheTorahillJewish
M ysticism y'' p. 41.See also Isaac the Blind's description, discussed on pp.
58.Forabriefdiscussion oftheSëperF%,
.Crl/l,seeGershom Scholem,G'
The 204-206,ofthe primordialTorah asstemming from Uokm - âh and Blnàh,the
SeferYezirah,''in hisKabbalab,LibraryofJewish Knowledgegerusalem:Keter second and thirdse
pîrh,respectively.
PublishingHouseJerusalem Ltd.,1974),pp.23-30;idem,R' T'
heNameofGod 75.Seeforexample,ZoharI.1O3a-103b;II.42b;II.239a.
and theLinguisticTheory ofthe Kabbala,''Part1,pp.72-76.Foratranslation
andcommentaryonthetext,onemayrefertoDavidR.Blumenthal,.
êse
feryàf.
sfrfl: 76.ZoharI.22b;Il.42b.
TextandCommentary,''chapter3ofhisUnderstaniinglewisbMysticism:.4Source
Reaier.TheM erkabaltTraiition flsfltbeZol
v ric Traiition,The Library ofJudaic 77.ZoharII.42b.
Learning,ed.Jacob Neusner,vol.2 (New York:KtavPublishingHouse,Incv, 78.ZoharI.15a.
1978),pp.13-44.
79.Zohar I.15a;II.239a.
59.Ber.552.
80.ZoharI.2a;l.3b;I.15a;I.18a.
60.IEl'
uB.13a.
81.ZoharII.2Oa;l.29a;I.3b;l.21a;III.5b;cf.III.42b-43a-
61.Lev.R.XIX .Z.
82.Zoharl.5a;I.47a;I.134a-134b;I.207a;II.161a;l1I.35b.
62.Trub.13b;Qid.30b;Sanh.19a;Meg.13b;Gen.R.IV.4;cf.Ber.57b.
83.Zohar I.207a.
63.Shab.119b;Gen.R.111.2)Gen.R.IV.6;Gen.R.X Il.10.
84.Zohar III.81a;cf.II.121a.
64.Ber.571).
85.Seeforexample,ZoharII.85a.
65.Gen.R.111.2;cf.Gen.R.XII.10.
86.ZoharI.15a-15b;I.16b;III.65b;lI.85a.
66.'Ab.V.1;cf.RH 32a.
)M eg.21b;Gen.R.XVII.1.
87.See,forexam ple,ZoharI.50b.
67.Gen.1.
3,6,9,11,14-15,20,24,26.
68.RH 32a.
;M eg.21b.Cf.thealternativeinterpretation attributed to the 88.See p.224.
TannaMenatzem b.R.Josein Gen.R-XVII.1. 89.Zohar I.3b;I.15a-15b;I.24b;I.29b;I.30b;I.31b;I.145a;cf.I.56a;
I.89a.
69.See,forexample,Gen.R.I.1 and Tanh.,ed.Buber,Berë'sq j5,f.2b,
discussedon pp.194-195. 90.ZoharI.5a;I.47a;I.134a-134b;l.207a;II.161a;III.35b.
70.Gen.1.3,6,9,11,14-15,20,24,26. 91.ZoharII.20a.
250 RETH IN KIN G SCRIPTU RE BRIDE O F ISRAEL 251

92.Zohar l.74a. Scholem ,uTheN am eofGod and theLinguisticTheoryoftheKabbala,''pt.1,

p.78.
93.ZoharI.5Ob.
114.Zohar II.9Ob;II.124a;Il.87a;II.161b;III.35b,36a.)IlI.73a;III.80b;
94.Zohar I.5Ob. III.113a;III.298b.
95.ZoharI.5Ob. 115.Zohar II.6Oa;II.90b;ll.86a;II.87a.
96.Zohar I.16b. 116.M SJerusalem,80 597,f.21b.Cited in Scholem,G' T'
heM eaning of
97.ZoharI.16b. theTorahinlewishMysticism,''p.44.Gikatilla'sworkiscontainedinthismanu-
scriptunderthename ofIsaacb.Farhi
. or Per
ahia.
98.ZoharIII.5b.
117.Ibid.,f.22817.
99.Zohari.29b-30a;cf.I.2a.
118.M enallem Recanati,T.(
I'JPT/llflMfjttél(Basel,1581),f.3a.Citedin
100.Zohar I.47b. Scholem,tx-
f'
heMeaning oftheTorah inJewish Mysticismy''p.44.
101.ZoharI.17b;I.47b;cf.l.71b-72a. 119.JosephGikatilla,Jflf
lr/é/'Orl/l(Offenbach,1715),f.2b,4b;cf.51a.
.
SeeScholem 'sdiscussion in tuT'heN am eofGod andtheLinguisticTheoryofthe
102.Zohar11.2381);ll.205b-206a.
Kabbala,',pt.2,pp.178-179,andinG'
T'
heM eaningoftheTorah inlewishM ysti-
103.ZoharII.161b;lI.205b. cism ,''pp.42-43.
104.ZoharlII.113a;II.161b. 120.Ibido,f.2b.Cited in Scholem,R'
TheMeaning oftheTorah inJewish
M ysticism ,''p.42.
105.ZoharII.200a.
121.Citedin Scholem,u'
T'
heMeaningoftheTorah inJewishM ysticism,''
106.ZoharlI.2O5b. p.38.
107.ç
<lkabbilsaacthe Old,''MS 584/699,Enelow MemorialCollection, 122.M S Leiden,W arner32,f.23a.Cited in Scholem ,RrheM eaning of
Jewish TheologicalSeminaryofNew York.Citedin Scholem,H'
TheM eaningof theTorah inJewish M ysticism,''p.44.
theTorah inJewish M ysticism,''pp.48-49.
123.Azriel,Pêrb
u àJ-J
,
2r JJJI,p.37.Cited in Scholem,R'
T'
heM eaning of
108.ZoharII.85a. theTorah in Jewish Mysticism,''p.45.
109.See,forexam ple,ZoharII.85a.Cf.AzrielofGerona'sinterpretation: 124.MosesCordovero,z Lî*b
îrQJPIJ/J(W arsaw,1883;reprint,Jerusalem,
REachsingleoneofGod'sse
firotbisnamedTorah.''Azriel,Pêrl
u JIJ-/
-.
1rJJt
' î
I,p. 1965/6$,f.6317.A numberofKabbalistsspeculatedaboutthenatureandstruc-
77.Cited in Scholem,G'
T'
heM eaning oftheTorah inJewish Mysticisrm''p.42, tureoftheTorah indifferentages- in particularbeforethefallandintheM essi-
n.1. anicAge.Fora.discussion ofthesevariousspeculationsseeScllolem , xçTl1e M ean-
110.TheTorah isconnectedwith theNam eofGod in rabbinicliterature ingoftheTorah inlewishMysticism,''pp.66-86.Forasurveyofthepre-rabbinic
aswell,although thenatureofthisconnection isnotexplained.See,forexample. and rabbinictraditionsconcerningthenatureoftheTorah in theM essianicAge
Ber.21a;Shab.881))cf.Song ofSongsR.1.3.1. see W .D .Davies,Toraltin l/;cM essianicx4.
zç
eandhrtbe.4.
çctoCome,Journalof
BiblicalLiteratureMonographSeries,vol.7(Philadelphia:Socieq ofBiblicalLit-
111.Ezrab.Solomon,Commentaryon theTalmudic'Aggàjpd,Vatican erature,1952).
M S Cod.Hebr.294,f.34a.Cited in Scholem,R'
T'heM eaning oftheTorah in
125.Thisdoctrine isfirstdeveloped in Lîmmû-dê'
.
/hr/f4 (Munkacs,1897),
Jewish Mysticism,'p.39. f.3a,15a-15b,21d-22a,which isprinted underthe nameofUayyim Vitalbut
112.SeeAzriel,Pêrbu JIJ-'WrJJJI,p.76;Jacobb.Sheshet,Sëper/IJ-'
fpl;rlJ/l in Gershom Scholem 's view was undoubtedly written by Israel Sarug. Cf.
we-llam it.â
.t l
pqn,ch.19(erroneouslyprintedunderNatmlanides'name).Notedin M enah-em Azariah Fano,li-bê
îm fyllrl
yîplY'
etfîrq (Lvov,1867);NaphtaliBacharach,
Scholem,G'
T'
heMeaning oftheTorah inJewish M ysticism,''p.39. œmeqlta-Mele-k(Amsterdam,1648;reprint,1972/73),ch.l,sects.1-61,esp.sect.
113. Sëper La-H. ayyîm,MS Parma de Rossi(1390),f.135a.Noted i
4;Mosesb.Menahem GrafdePrague,rFksy'
ct
y/lg/Mojr
eh(Dessau,1699),f.1-10.
n Cf.Scholem'sdiscussionin u'
T'
heNameofGod andtheLinguisticTheoryofthe
252 RETHIN KIN G SCRIPTU RE BRIDE O F ISRAF.
L 253

Kabbala,''pt.2,pp.181-182,and in R'
T'heM eaningoftheTorah inlewishM ysti- 145.Mek-,eds.Horovitz-lkabin,Ba-tlôdesj1,p.205;j5,p.222;Mek-,ed.
cism ,'pp.73-74. Lauterbach,Ba-lzt
ves j1,vol.2,p.198;j5,vol.2,pp.236-237)Num.R.
XIX .26;N um .R.1.7;Pes.K.107a.
126.Zohar lI.161a.
146. M ek-, ed. Lauterbach,Ba-h
-ö/ed j1,vol.2,p.198;cf.Mek.,eds.
127.Zohar I.5a. Horovitz-lkabin,Ba-llödesj1,p.205.
128.ZoharI.134a. 147.See,forexample,Zeb.116a;Exod.R.V.9.
129.Zohar l.207a;cf.llI.152a;II.161a. 148.Exod.R.X XIX .9.
130.ZoharIII.35b;cf.III.69b;I.134b. 149.Exod.R.XXIX.9;cf.PRE j41.
131.ZoharI.134b;cf.I.186b.Thecorrespondencebetween theTorah,the 150.Exod.R.V.9;cf.Zeb.116a.
hum an body,and the universe is also recognized in rabbinic literature and is
expressedintheconceptthat,ofthe613commandments(miéwô.
t
.
joftheTorah, 151.Exod.R.V.9.Analternativetradition,alsoascribedtoR.Joh
.anan,says
the365negativepreceptscorrespond to the num berofthedaysin ayear,while thattheone voicesplitinto seven voices,which then divided into seventy lan-
the248positivepreceptscorrespondtothenumberofmembersjoints,orbones, guages.SeeExod.R.XXVIII.6;Tanh.Yilrô j11,f.124b.Sevenvoicesaremen-
coveredwithfleshandsinews,excludingtheteeth)inthehumanbody.SeeMak. tionedin Psalm 29.Thetraditionofseventylanguagesisultim ately attributedin
231);cf.Lev.R.X II.3;ZoharlI.25a. aTalm udicM idrash to theschoolofR.Ishm ael,w hich issaid to have declared
thatuevery singlewordthatwentforth from them outhoftheHoly One,blessed
132.Shab.8813)cf.Zeb.116a. beHe,dividedintoseventylanguages''(Shab.88b).
133.Shab.88b-89a. 152.Exod.R.V.9.
134.Exod.R.X lI.3;cf.M en.2917;Num .R.X IX.7. 153.Exod.R.X X1X .4;cf.êxod.R.XX IX .9.
135.SiprêDeut.0306. 154.PRE j41.
136.Exod.R.X LVlI.5. 155.PRE â41.
137.Pes.R.j20,f.95a. )cf.Ber.25b. 156.Exod.R.V.9;Exod.R.XX IX .I;Exod.R.XX XIV I.
138.Exod.R.XXX II1.1.Cf.Pes.R.j20,E 952,and fxod.R.XXIX .4, 157.Exod.R.V.9.
inwhich thegiving oftheTorah issimilarly depicted asaking givinghisdaugh-
teraway in marriage.Pirqê de-lk.Eliezer#41presentsa slightvariation on this 158.Exod.R.XX VI1I.6;Exod.R.XX 1X .1.
theme,depicting lsraelastheson ofGodwho iswedto thebrideTorah. 159.Exod.R.V.9;Song ofSongsR.1.2.3.
139.PRE j41.In anotherpassage ofthe samechapter,Israel,the son of
God,isdepicted asthebridegroom towhom theTorah iswed asabride.Pirqê 160.Exod.R.XX IX .4;cf.Exod.R.XLI.3.
de-ll.Eliezerthuspresents170th versionsofthem arriagesymbolism . 161.Pes.R.j20,f.981).
140.See,for exam ple,Tanl.xBe-mi/bar5,f.242a. - öde
162.M ek.,ed.Lauterbach,Ba-h - s j9,vol.2,p.266)cf.Mek.,eds.
141.Seepp.218-219 foradiscussion ofan alternative tradition in which Horovitz-lkabin,Ba-tlo/esj9,p.235.TheTorah issaidto havebeen givenin
firein anumberofM idrashim .See,forexam ple,Lev.R.XVI.4;T.P.Sheq.VI.1,
onlythefirsttwo commandmentsaresaid to havebeen spoken directly by God f.49d;N um.R.1.7)M ek.,eds.Horovitz-Rabin,Ba-h.ö-desâ4,p.215;M ek-,ed.
to Israel. Lauterbach,Ba-h.ödesj4,vol.2,pp.220-221.
142.N um .R.X llI.15,16. 163.T.P.Sheq.VI.1,f.49d,etal.Thistraditionform edthebasisofanum-
143.Cf.Gen.R.IV.Z. berof im portantkabbalistic speculations.N ah
.m anides'interpretation hasbeen
cited above on pp.208-209.IsaactheBlind'sspeculationson thisAggadah will
144.Pes.R.j21,f.108a-108b. bediscussedbelow.
254 RETH IN KIN G SCRIPTU RE BRIDE OF ISRAFL 255

164. M ek., eds. Horovitz-Rabin, Ba-h.ôdes j5, p. 221) M ek., ed. 182.RlkabbiIsaactheO1d,''MS 584/699,Enelow MemorialCollection,
Lauterbach,Ba-h desj5,vol.2,pp.234-235;SijrêDeut.0343;cf.AZ 2b;Exod.
-o- Jewish TheologicalSeminary ofNew York.Citedin Scholem,t
<r
f'
heM eaning of
R.XXVII.9;N um .R.XIV .10;Lam .R.III.I.I. theTorah inJewish Mysticism,'p.49.
165. M ek-, eds. Horovitz-lkabin, Ba-h.ödes j5, p. 221; M ek., ed. 183.lbid.
Lauterbach,Ba-h dejj5,vol.2,pp.234-235;SiprêDeut.j343;cf.AZ 2b;Lam.
-ô-
R.111.1.1. 184.Scholem,t
dr
f'
heM eaning oftheTorah inJewish M ysticismy''p.5O.
185.Zoharl.24b;I.185a;I.207a;II.161b;II.200a;III.152a.
166.(
Nurn.R.(
XIV.10;Exod.R.7(.
LVII.3.
186.ZoharIII.117a;lI.94a.
167.Shab.88a.
)AZ 3a;AZ 5a;Exod.R.X LVlI.4;Gen.R.LXVI.2;Tanh-
Berë'dl!j1,f.6b;cf.D eut.R.VIII.5. 187.ZoharIIl.193a;III.91b;I.89a;lI1.298b;cf.I.134b;l.77a;I.
47a.
168.Shab.88a.ReshLakishthusinterpretstheversehom iletically:thecon- 188.ZoharI.55b-56a.
tinuanceofm orning and eveningw asdependenton thesixth day,i.e.,ofSivan, 189.ZoharIII.117a.
when lsraelwasoffered theTorah atM ountSinai.
190.ZoharII.83a-83b.
169.Gen.R.LXVI.2;cf.Lev.R.XXlIl.3)Ab.1.2.Thefactthatheaven
and earth couldnotcontinue to endurewithouttheTorah isemphasized by the 191.ZoharII.43a;Il.93b;II.90b;II.82a.
sageswith reference toJeremiah 33.25:Rlfnotformy covenantby day and by 192.ZoharII.94a.
night,lwould nothaveappointedtheordinancesofheaven and earth.''SeePes.
681))N ed.32a;AZ 3a;AZ 5a;Exod.R.XLVll.4;cf.Shab.137b;Shab.33a. 193.ZoharlI.82b;II.94a;II.146a;cf.lI.83b.
170.N um .R.X llI.15,16. 194.ZoharII.82a.
171.Tanh
. ., ed.Buber,KlTill:'j17,f.5817)Exod.R.XLVII.I;Ber.5a;cf. 195.ZoharII.146a.
Tanh.,ed.Buber,Re'ëh j1,f.10a;M idr.Ps.on 78.1,f.172b. 196.ZoharII.82a.
172.Tanh.,ed.Buber,KlIijjâ.'j17,f.5817-59:.
;Exod.R.XLVII.I;Exod. 197.ZoharIl.90b;II.86a;cf.ll.60a.
R.X LVII.3;Tanh.'
W a-yërâ'j5,f.33a.
;Tanh
. . KlTi
jsà'034,f.16417-165a)Pes.
R.j5,f.14a-14b;Num R.XIV.10;cf.Giy.60b;Tem.l4b. 198.Zohar II.90b;II.124a;II.87a;II.161b;III.35b,36a.
;l1I.73a;IlI.80b;
III.113a;IlI.298b.
173.Exod.R.XLVII.3;N um .R.X IV.10;N um .R.X III.15,16;Song of
SongsR.1.3.2;Shab.31a. 199.Zoharll.90b.
200.ZoharII.146a;cf.Il.83b.
174.PRE j46.
201.ZoharII.146a;II.81a-81b.
175.Siprâ',Be-huqqötav k8sf.112c;M ea.19b;Tanh.,ed.Buber,KîIill:'
î17,f.581);Exod.R.XLVII.I. 202.Zohar II.81a-81b;cf.II.93b-94a.
176.Tanh.,ed.Buber,K1Tijjà'j17,f.58;cf.Exod.R.XLVII-I. 203.ZoharII.84a;IlI.154b;cf.II.83b.
177.Uag.3b;cf.Pes.R.j3,E 8a;Num.R.X1H.15,16. 204.ZoharII.93b;II.81a-81b;II.83b;cf.I.134b-135a.
178.Tant.
uYitrô j11,f.124a-124b;Exod.R.XXVIII.6;cf.Exod.R. 205.ZoharII.9Ob;II.93b;II.81a-81b;II.83b;cf.I.134b-135a.
X LII.8. 206.ZoharII.90b.
179.Tanh.Yilrô j11,f.124a-1241). 207.ZoharIl.85b.
180.M en.291). 208.ZoharII.90a-90b;II.84a-84b.
181.See,forexam ple,ZoharII.2OOa. 209.Zohar II.90a.
256 RETHIN KIN G SCRIPTU RE BRIDE O F ISRAEL 257

210.ZoharII.84a-84b. 229.ZoharI.134b-135a.
211.Zohar Il.90b;cf.II.82a. 230.Joseph Gikatilla,Jcrf
iréSekeg.Seetheconclusion ofthisworkpub-
.

212.ZoharII.83b.
lishedinE.Gottlieb,Tarbiz39 (1970):382-383.SeealsoScholem'sdiscussion
in G'T'
he N am e of God and the Linguistic Theory ofthe Kabbala,''pt.2, pp.
213.Ber.31b,etal. 179-180.

214.Forabriefdiscussion ofthethirteenprinciplesofR.Ishm aeland the 231.See p.219.

hermeneuticalmethodsofR.Akiba,seeLouisJacobs,Gl-lermeneutics,''inEnqclo- 232.MosesCordovero,Derîàh-.
lhyânêMtC/'JèfpI,ed.R.Margaliotoerusa-
peiiaJuiaica.h moredetaileddescription ofthehermeneuticalprinciplesofR. lem,1945),p.70.CitedinScholem,H'
T'heMeaningoftheTorahinlewishMysti-
Ishm aelisgiven in Bernard Rosensweig,R'
I'
he Herm eneuticPrinciplesand their cism ,''p.65.
Applicationy''Traiition 13,no.1(1972):49-76.Forageneralintroduction to
M idrashandAggadah,seeBarryW .Holtz,GM idrash,''inBacbtofàeSources:Read- 233.ZobarHJJJ.
#83a.Cited in Scholem ,R'
T'
heM eaning ofthe Torah in
ingtbeClassiclewi sbTàxl-ç,ed.BarryW .Holtz(New York:SummitBooks,1984), Jewish Mysticism,''p.54.
pp.177-211;JamesKugel,ççr f'
woIntroductionstoMidrash,'Prooftexts:z4.#f/rrlc/ 234.Scholem,RTIU M eaningoftheTorah inJewish M ysticism,''p.54.
oflewishLiteraryHi story3,no.2(1983):131-155)JudahGoldin,RFrom Textto
Interpretationandfrom ExperiencetotheInterpretedText,''Prooftexts:. 4Journal 235.Foradiscussion ofthehistoricaldevelopmentofthekabbalisticcon-
.
p/7awf.s/ILiterary History 3,no.2 (1983):157-168;Joseph Heinemann,R' T'he ception ofthefourfold meaning oftheTorah aswellasofthehistoricalantece-
NatureoftheAggadah,''inMidrashcAlJLiterature,pp.41-55)Judah Goldin,t
def'
he dentsofthisnotioninPhilo,ChristianandIslamichermeneutics,andlewishphi-
Freedom and RestraintofHaggadah,''inM iirash JélfLiteraiure,pp.57-76. losophy,see Scholem,tçrf'
he M eaning ofthe Torah in Jewish M ysticism,''pp.
215.Trub.13a. 50-62.

216.Num .R.X III.15,16. 236.ZobarHJJJJ('

Ihqûnîm section)102d.
217.çErub.54a-541). 237.Tîqqûnêzojcr,no.24,f.681-68b.Cited in Scholem ,G'
T'heM eaning
oftheTorah inJewish Mysticism,''pp.58-59.
218.I rub.21b.
238.Zohar1.23a-231
7(TîqqûnêZobar).Seepp.199-200regardingthedis-
219.T rub.21b;cf.Lev.R.X IX .Z. tinction madein the TîqqûnêZobarbetween '
Tôröb Je-serfu/land '
Törl/lie-'âêîlh.
220.Sëderttliyyâhû Z.j2. 239.See,forexample,Rlrlyl'M eltêmnn'1lI.215b,Citedin Scholem ,G'
T'he
221.Song ofSongsR.1.3.1.
M eaning oftheTorah inJewish Mysticism,''p.67.
222. For a discussion of kabbalistic herm eneutics, see M oshe Idel, 240.ZoharlIl.152a.CitedinScholem,R' rheM eaningoftheTorahinlew-
ish M ysticism y'pp.63-64.Cf.ZoharIlI.202a,in which the differentlevelsof
ulnfinitiesofTorah in Kabbalah,''in M idrasbaniLiterature,pp.141-157)Betty m eaning in theTorah arecom pared to the differentpartsofatree.
Roitman, Rsacred Language and Open Text,''in M iirash ani Literature, pp.
159-175;JosephDan,RM idrashandtheDawnofKabbalah,''inM idrasbcsJLiter- 241.ZoharIl.99a.CitedinScholem,urheM eaningoftheTorahinlewish
ature,pp.127-139. M ysticism ,''p.55.
223.ZoharI.54a;1.471))cf.II.15b. 242.ZoharlI.99a-99b.Cited in Scholem ,tue
l'heM eaning oftheTorah in
224.ZoharII.146a;cf.II.83b.
Jewish Mysticisms'pp.55-56.
243.See,forexample,M eg.16b;Pe'ah 1.1.
225.ZoharII.81a-81b;Il.146a)cf.II.93b-94a.
244.SeeBer.61bfortheparadigmaticstoryofthemartyrdom ofR.Akiba.
226.Zohar lIl.2O2a. Seealso Ber.631),which declaresthatt<thewordsoftheTorah endureonly with
227.ZoharII.59b;I.145b;I.135a;ll.12a;III.202a. him whowould sufferdeath on itsaccount.'
228.ZoharI.134b-135a;lII.73a;Il.230b;III.159a. 245.'Ab.VI.1;SiprêDeut.j48;Ber.17a;Ned.62a.
;Pes.50b,eta1.
258 RETH IN KIN G SCRIPTU RE BRIDE O F ISRAEL 259

246.SeeW ilfred CantwellSm ith,GscriptureasForm and Concept:Their lowsthescientificsystem adoptedby&elournalofBiblicalLiterature,with

Em ergence for the W estern W orld''in thisvolume,pp.29-57.See also Sm ith's two exceptions:(1)spirantizedbya-
ike
pa.
jlettershavebeen marked,and
article usom e Sim ilaritiesand D ifferencesbetween Christianity and Islam :An (2)ahyphenhasbeeninsertedafterthedefinitearticleha-(withconse-
EssayinComparativeReligion''in Thefz
lzbr/ffofljlam:s'luflfasinHonourofP/lf/f
.
p quentlossofdoubling);theprepositionsbe-,le-,andke-;and theconjunc-
K.Hitti,ed.JamesKritzeck and R.Bayly W inder(London:Macmillan;New tion ,
lwc-,in order to facilitate reading by the nonspecialist.
York:St.Martin'sPress,195$,pp.47-59. In the case of well-known Hebrew terms (e.g., Shekhinah,
247.Sm ith,Rsom eSim ilaritiesand Differencesbetween Christianity and Kabbalah)andtexts(e.g.,Torah,Mishnah,Talmud)thecommonconven-
lslam ,''p.57. tionalspellinghaSbeenretained.Therenderingofnamesofrabbis(e.g.,
248.Ihave used male pronounsdeliberately in thissection,since the rab- Akiba,Joh.anan)andkabbalisticscholars(e.g.,AzrielofGerona,Moses
biniccustodiansoftheTorah tow hom Ireferhavebeen partofan exclusively Cordovero)also followsconventionalusagewhereverpossible,although
maletradition.Itisonlyinrecenttimesthatwomen,particularlyinReform Juda- itissom etim esdifficultto determinewhatconstitutesthe m ostcom mon
ism,havebegun toassumeamoreactiverolein thestudy ofTorah. convention with respectto propernam es.
249.A numberofem inentBiblicalscholarshaveemphasizedthattheBible
simultaneously has170th human and divinedimensionsin which itssacred status ABBREV IATIO N S
asthe W ord ofGod iseverpresezved.Forexample,Rudolph Bultm ann insists
thatw hile the Bible should be approached like any historicaldocum ent,using Tractatesoff/l:Misbnah,PalestinianTalmuz,orBabylonianTalmud
thetoolsofhistorical-criticalscholarship,atthesam etime itm ustbesetapart
from otherhistoricaldocumentsin thatHitclaimsfrom the outsetto be God's 'Ab. 'Abô(
word.''ultremainshissovereign word,which weshallnevermasterand which AZ KAbôdâh Zàràh
can only bebelieved asan ever-living miracle,spoken by God,and constantly Ber. Berâkôy
renewed.''See Rudolph Bultm anm Rl- low DoesGod Speak to U sthrough the uErub. Trûbln
Biblei'inExistenceaniFaitb,ed.SchubertOgden(New York:MeridianBooks, Giy. Gilgn
1960),pp.166-170. Yag. klàjlj:h
M ak. M akkôt
T RAN SLATIO N AN D TR AN SLITEM TIO N O F M eg. M ejillâh
H EBREW AN D AR AM A IC M en. M enzhô!
N ed. Nedàrîm
The translationsofHebrew passagesfrom biblicaland rabbinic textsare Pes. Pesâhlm
my own.The translationsofAramaic passagesfrom the Zoharare cited Qid. Qiddû4ln
from the translation by H arry Sperling and M auriceSim on,TkeZoL r,5 RH Ro?4ha-jânâh
Sanh. Sanhe-drln
vols.(London:Soncino Press,1931-1934),unlessothezwiseindicated. Shab. jabbu!
W ith respect to the translations of passages from other medieval
kabbalistictexts,Ihave cited Gershom Scholem 'stranslation ifthesource sheq. jequllm
Tem . Tqnûràh
wasoriginally cited in hisessay R'
rheM eaning oftheTorah inJewish zeb. zebâhîm
M ysticism ,''chapter 2 of his Oa tbe Kabbalah and Its Symbolism,trans.
Referencesto the Palestinian Talmud are prefixed by T.P.
RalphManheim (New York:SchockenBooks,1965).Eveninthosecases
in which Ihavenotgiven my own translation,Ihaveconsulted the origi-
nalHebrew orAramaic source,w ith theexception ofafew H ebrew m an- O therTexts
uscriptsthatwere notavailable to m e.For editionsofH ebrew and Ara- D eut.R. Deuteronom y Rabbàh
m aic texts cited and consulted,please refer to Etl-lebrew and Aramaic Exod.R. ExodusRabbàh
Editions.'' G en.R . GenesisRabbâh
The transliteration ofH ebrew term sand book titlesgenerally fol- Lam .R . Lam entationsRabbàh
 RETHIN KIN G SCRIPTURE BRIDE O F ISRAEL 261

Lev.R. LeviticusRabbâh Prsîqtà'de-lkab Kahana,ed.S.Buber(Lyck,1868);ed.B.Mandelbaum (New

Mek. M ekîlu'de-lk.Ishmael York,1962).
Midr.Ps. MidrashPsalms(Midrash Tehillîm) Pesîqu'Rabbug,ed.M.Friedmann (Vienna,1880).
Mos. Moses(Phi1o)
N um .R. N umbersRabbâh Pirqêde-R.Eliezer(Warsaw,1879).
Op. OpificioMundi(Philo) Sëier'êliyyuhûRabbàh,ed.M .Friedmann (Vienna,1902).
Pes.K. Pesktà'de-Rab Kahana
Pes.R. Peslqtâ'Rabbàll Së/er'Eliyyàht'
kZfgà',ed.M.Friedmann (Vienna,1904).
PRE Pirqê de-ll..Eliezer Siprâ',eds.I.H.WeissandJ.Schlossberg(Vienna,1862).
Së/er'tliyyâht'
tR. Së/er'tliyyàhû Rabbàh
Sëker'êliyyàht-
tZ. Sëper'Eliyyâht
'
tZlvà' SiprêDeuteronomy,ed.M.Friedmann(Vienna,1864))ed.L.Finkelstein(Berlin,
Siprê Deut. Siprê Deuteronomy 1939).
Song ofSongsR. Song ofSongsRabbâh SongofSongsRabbâh,ed.Rom (Vilna,1887).
Tanlp Tanllûmâ'
Targ.Jer. Targûm Jeremiah Tanhûmâ',ed.Stettin (186$;ed.S.Buber(Vilna,188$.
W isd.ofSol. W isdom ofSolom on
Kabbalistic Dxl
.
ç
HEBREW AN D AM M AIC EDITION S .e
Azrielb.M enah m,Hrl
u JIJ-'W.JJJI,ed.TishbyU'
erusalem,1945).
Bacharach,Naphtali,'
LmeqIta-Mele-k,(Amsterdam,1648)reprint,1972/73).
Bible
Cordovero,Moses,Derîjh se-T lkyf
lséMal'akîm,ed.R.Margaliot Uerusalem,
Hebrew Bible,ed.R.Kittel(Stuttgart,1966-1967). 1945).
RabbinicTèxf.
ç . Jf
rf
krQômâb(Warsaw,1883;reprint,Jerusalem,1965/6$.
Fano,M enahem Azariah,Yiblm J-Jl uyf- Fe
#'J((Lvov,1867).
BabylonianTalmud,ed.1.Epstein(London,1960-). . - .

Deuteronomy Rabbâh,ed.Rom (Vilna,1887))ed.S.Lieberman oerusalem, Gikatilla,Joseph,.%' JrJé/'örl/l(Offenbach,1715).

.

1940). Nahmanides,Be'ûrfJ!lta-Drâlt(1805).
ExodusRabbâh,ed.Rom (Vilna,1887). Recanati,M enahem,Tak
- - âmê/ll-M#wll(Basel,1581).
GenesisRabbâh,ed.Theodor-Albeck(Berlin,1903-192$. Sarug,Israel,Lîmmqê' .
,.
hr/g/(Munkacs,1897)gascribederroneouslyto Uayyim
LamentationsRabbàh,ed.S.Buber(189$. Vitalj.
LeviticusRabbuh,ed.M.Margulies(Jerusalem,1953-1960). SëperF%,frl/lgerusalem,1964).
Mekîltà' de-lk. Ishmael, eds. H.S. Horovitz and I.A. Rabin (Frankfurt, TîqqûnêZohqr,ed.R.Margaliotgersualem,1948,1978).
1928-1931);ed.J.Z.Lauterbach (Philadelphia,1933-1935). Zohar,ed.R.Margaliotoerusalem,1964.
MidrashRabbâh,ed.1.Epstein(Te1Aviv,1956-1963). ZobarHJEJA,ed.R.Margaliot(Jerusalem,1953,1978).
MidrashTehillîm,ed.S.Buber(Vilna,1891).
NumbersRabbâh,ed.Rom (Vilna,1887).
PalestinianTalmud,ed.Krotoschin (1866).
 C ontributors

THOM AS B.COBU RN received his PH.D.in Comparative Religion

from Halward University in 1977.H ehastaughtatSt.Law renceUniver-
sity since 1974,wherehe haschaired theD epartm entofReligiousStud-
iesand ClassicalLanguagesand sew ed asAssociate and Acting Dean of
theCollege.HeistheauthorofDevi-Maltatmya:TheCrystallizationofthe
GOJJG.
STradition(1986),aswellasnumerousarticles.
BARBARA A.H OLDREGE received herPII.D.in ComparativeReligion
from Harvard U niversity in 1987.In thatyearshe assum ed her present
postasAssistantProfessorofReligiousStudiesattheU niversity ofCali-
forniaatSantaBarbara.H erdissertation isacomparativestudy ofthecos-
mologicalconceptionsofVeda in the Hindu tradition and Torah in the
Judaictradition.
KEN DALL W .FO LKERT received hisPIA.D.in Comparative Religion
from Hatward University in 1975.H e taughtatCentralM ichigan U ni-
versit'
y from 1974 untilhisdeath in 1985,and wasChairofthe Depart-
ment of Religion,Chair of the Academ ic Senate,and Presidentofthe
Association ofM ichigan Collegiate Faculties.He isthe authorofnumer-
ousarticleson theJainacommunit
'y in India,asubjecton which hewas
one ofthe leading N orth Am erican authorities.Atthe tim eofhisdeath
hewasengaged in pioneering field research on a comm unity ofwander-
ingJain asceticsunderthe sponsorship ofthe NationalEndowmentfor
the Humanities.

W ILLIAM A.GRAHAM received his PIA.D.in Comparative Religion

from H arvard University in 1973.He hastaughtatHarvard U niversit' y
in the field ofIslam ic Religion since 1973,and is now Professorofthe
ComparativeHistory ofReligion and N earEastern Languagesand Civili-
zations.He istheauthor ofDivine H' brl and PropheticHz
brl in Early Islam
(1977)andBqondtheWrittenPlbrl.
'Ora/AspectsofScriptureinf/leHistory
ofReligion(1987),aswellasnumerousarticles.
M IRIAM LEVERIN G received herPIA.D .in Com parative Religion from
Hatward University in 1978. She has taught at Bates and Oberlin

263
264 CO N TRIBUTO RS

Colleges,and is currently Associate Professor of Religious Studiesand

member ofthe Asian StudiesCom mittee atthe University ofTennessee
in Knoxville.In 1979-80 she did field work in aChineseBuddhistcon-
ventin Taiwan underan ACLS-M e1lon grant.Sheistheauthorofnumer-
ousarticleson ChineseBuddhism and native Chinese religionsand phi-
Inlex
losophies,as well as LiteratiBuddàism ,'
AlSung Cqina: The Ièachings c.f
n-/zxfTsung-kao(forthcoming).Currently sheisatworkon astudyof
the practice of the daily office in Chinese Buddhism since 1600 as a
reflection ofthe Chinese construction ofBuddhism . Aramaic language,51n21
Arapyakas,104,106,139,1601167
W ILFRED CAN TW ELL SM ITH isprofessorEmeritusofthe Compara- Abba,b.Kahana,192 Arbats,61
tive History of Religion,and former Chair of the Com mittee on the Abbiibarma,951126 Aristobulus,189-192,2441128,247115
Study ofReligion,atH arvard University.H e istheauthor ofOn L/kf/er- Abbiibarmabofa,93115 Aristotle,40,145
staniingIslam (1981),TaumrzstkHzbrlflTheology (1981),FaithJnflBelief Abulafia,Abraham ,187 Ajokan inscriptions,159n62
(1979),BeliefaniHistory(1977),ReligiousDiversit
y(1976,1982),Questions Adad,41 Ashurbanipal'slibrary,541141
(fReli giousTruth(1967),MolernizationfaTraditionalSociety(1965),The Adhi
êhöna,64,94n17 Assyria,44,56n60
MeaningandEndofReligion(1963,1965,1978),TlteFaithofOtherMen AdiGranth (Granthjàhîb),8,32. Astarte-lstar
(1962,1963,1967,1972),Islam inMolernHistory (1957,1958,1959, 52n28,134 prototypeofIsraelitew isdom fig-
1977),ModernIslam inIndia(1943,1947,1964,1972,1979),andnumer- Aeschylus,40 ure,243-244n25
pusarticleson Islam icsand on ComparativeReligion.Translationsofhis Aggadah,183,187,208,221,232 Astrology,38-39
writings have appeared in French, German, Swedish,Arabic,Turkish, Ahabah b.R.Zeçira,192 Alvaghoja,90
Urdu,Indonesian,andJapanese.Among numeroushonors,hehasbeen Ahura M azda,44 Athens,40-41
president of a num ber of learned societies,including the M iddle East AitarqaArapyaka,104,139,1601167 Augustine,146,149
Association ofN orth Am erica,theCanadian TheologicalSociety,and the Aiyer,Parameswara,120 Avalokitejvara(Kuan-yin),77,80-81,
Am erican Academy ofReligion,and isa Fellow ofthe RoyalSociety of Akiba,186,193,220,222,228,230, 84-85
Canada and oftheAmerican Academy ofArtsand Sciences. 241n15,25711244 Avatafnsaka q
sglrc,70,74,981139
Akkadian language,541141 Avesta,8,32,35,47115,102
Alcuin,51n23 AwakeningofFaitbinf/leMahöyöna,
Alexandria 90-91
role in scripturalizing process,37, Azrielb.Menatlen,2O9
40-41
Aliah U paniëad,112
Alphabet, 43,143.See:H ebrew alpha- B
bet
Am brose,146-147 Babb,Law rence,116-117
Am itàbha,67,71,78,96n32 Babylonia
Antitbesis,38 role in scripturalizing process,31,
Apocrypha,51n21,521124,186, 36,39,42,44
189-t91,2471151 Babylonian TabletsofDestiny,41
Apotelesmatika,531135 Balogh,Josef,146-147
Aquila,189 Baruch,189-191
Arabic language,33,237 Bauer,W alter,166n125

265
 IN DEX
Behistt-
tn (Bîsitùn)inscription,44,
57n63
Bhagavad GrfJ,46,103,115-116,
120,139
Bhâgavata flurlpc, 117,12O
Bltabti, 108,114,120,140
Bharati,Agehananda,115
Bible(Christian)
in Am ericanpioneerhom esteads,
25
bibliolatry,134
asbasisofw estern conceptof
scripture,3,6-7,9,17,29,32,
45,141,172-173,177,180
derivation of term ,33,37,131
display of,177-178
English,34
historicalcriticism ,45,258n249
ashistoricalforce,24-28
illustration of,134
impactofprinting upon,24-26,
51
incommensurability with Qur'àn,
30
incorporation ofJewish Bible,23
KingJamesVersion,34,52n24
asrevealedbook,42-43
study of,2,5,15,19-20,22-28,
45-46,103,153113,1611182,
170-172,178-179
astwo Testaments,23,521429
translationsof,36-37,50n21,
521124,149
Vulgate,37,51n1121-23,521124,
149,189
See:Canon,Christian;Christian
viewsof scripture;Recitation of
Bible
Bodllicarpvatörayatï
jibâ,93n5
Book
Avesta as,32,35,47115
Bibleas,33,37,51n24,131,171,
177-178
asearthly manifestation ofheav-
enly prototype,42-43,
132-133,208,237
asform atof scripture,42-43,
56n55,129-134,140-146,
148,152,1611182,171
Greek mistrustof,154n14
Sanskritterm for,471 43
Torah as,42,190,213,227
See:H eavenly tablets
Bookoflobn(Mandaean),501119
Book ofM orm on,32
Brâhmapas,106,116
Bruhm ïscript,159n62
Brahmins(Hindupriests),106-107,
121,139
Bïhadâranyaka U.pf
i/ikf
il,138
Brown,M ackenzie,107,113
Bucer,M artin,151
Buck,Harry,127n71
Buddha,36,60-66,69,71,73-74,
76,78-79,81-83,85,88-91,138,
158n56,182
Buddhistviewsofscripture
CentralAsian,63-64,70,78,90,
941120
Ch'an,10,65-66,69
Chinese M ahâylna,6O,64-91,
94n20,96n30,98n44
Indian M aluyàna,60-65,67,69,
71-73,85-86,88,941120,
158n56,182
N ichiren school,9,134
Pali(earlyandTheravada),8,
61-62,93114, 132,1581156,182
Taoistinfluencesupon,65
Tibetan,134,1561133
See:Sb
àtras(Mahày:na)
Bûhler,George,138,175-176
IN DEX
Bultm ann,Rudolph,27,258n249 Christian views of scripture,3,7,
Bunyan,John,151 23-28,32-40,42-43,52,103,
105,141,148-152,161,166,
170-173,177-179,181-182,
237-238
m onastic,149-150,166n128
Calvin,John,151 Protestant,3-5,1O,12,16n6,
Canaan 33-34,68,134-135,150-152,
influences on scripturalizing proc- 171-173,177-178
ess,31,36,39,42,190-191, See:Bible
2431125 Chuang-t zu,65.See:Chinese classics
Canon Classics,1-2,13.See:Chinese clas-
Gactualcanons,''13 sics;Greek classics
as alternative term for dscripture,' Clay talalets,42
4-5,103,172-179 Codex Amiatinus,511122
boundednessof,7-9,12,37, Com puter,43,143
51n24,105,121 Confucian view sofscripture,64,132,
Chinese Buddhist,69,77,89-90, 182.See:Chinese classics
95n26 Confucius,64,961130
Christian,37-38,491115,5On21, CorpusH erm eticum ,38
5111n23-24,52n27,149 CouncilofJavneh,39,541137
ofGreek classics,31-32,40 CouncilofTrent,51n24
Hindu,121 Cuneiform ,41,43,561156
Jewislt,7,39-41,51n21,132 Curtius,Ernst,133
M anichee,36
M uratorian,511123
ofSumerian literature,54n41
TheravadaBuddhist,8,61-62,
93n4,132,158n56 Damasus(Pope),51n23
Tibetan Buddhist,134,156n33 D ante,145
Zarathushtrian,47n5 D arah Shikoh,112
Carothers,J.C.,144 Darius,44
Cassiodorus,511122 D arjana, 111,118,121
Cassirer,Ernst,136 Decalogue.See:Ten Com mandments
Cassian,150,16711138 Deuteronomy,571163,2441127
CharlesThe Great,51n23 D evï-M âhâtmya,116-117
Chaytor,H.J.,144,146 Dltarma(Buddhist),61-66,69-71,
Childs,Brevard,45 75,78-80,82,84-85,87-90,
Chineseclassics,9,43,46,64-65, 941120,100n65
132,137,182 D barmabâya,62,91,100n60
Cbing,64,132 Dbarma(Hindu),107
268 IN DEX IN DEX

Dharmajastras,107,240113 Gikatilla,Joseph,207-208,230-231 Hebrew Bible,183,186, 240112, lsrael

D harma Sfttras,1O6 Gill,Sam D .,14.92n1 241n15.See:Torah asbridegroom of Torah,184-185,
D iamondcspfr/,79,83 Ginan, 133 H ekalotliterature,186 190,216
Dï gb.
aNr/tcyl,62 Ginza,50n19 Hengel,M artin,244n1125 and 27-28 asonly nation to acceptTorah,
D urgâ-saptajhtï,116-117,120 Grfl Govinia,117,139 H ephaestosofThebes,38 220,223
Gnostic scriptures,36,39,43 H ereaclidesPonticus,40 aspreexisting creation,192
Gonda,Jan,109,118,138 H eschel,Abraham,185-187,228 revelation ofTorah to,214,
E Gospels,37,5On21,149-150, H esiod,40-41 216-220,223-226,229,231,
181-182 H ieroglyphics,43,561156 240n6
Eastern O rthodox concept oficon,
Grammatikoi,40 H illel,Schoolof,195 w isdom tradition of,190ff,
52,88,93n6,1001163
Granth jàhîb(AdiGranth),8,32, H indu Bible,115.See:BbagavadGrf: 2421118,242n24,243n25,
Csypt 52n28,134 H indu viewsofscripture,7-9,12, 244n1126-27
role in scripturalizing process,31,
Greek classics,31-32,39-40,54, 34-35,43,102-122,1241122, IsraelNajara,184
40-41,44,132,190-191,
132,145,154 125n40,132,136-142,148, IsraelSarug,210,212,231,25111125
243n25
Gregory the Greaq 150 1621183,181-183.
Eidlitz,W alther,138
Eisenstein,Elizabeth,144
Gyhya Sùtras,106 See:jrutiandsmîti;Vedas
Guru Uisda,229
Eleazarb.zadoy,193 asinrerpreterofscripture,111, Hom er,40-41
Eliade,M ircea,3-4,16n6 118-119,121,139-140 Hopkins,Thom as,109
Eliezerb.R.JosetheGalilean,193 Gutenberg,25,104,144 Horsiesius,150
Jacobi,Hermann,175
En-me-du-ran-ki,41 Hoshaiah,194-195,2461151 Jain scriptures,12,174-176,178-179
Enb
àmaelisb,541141 H suan-tsang,10 Jayadeva,117
Erasmus,147 H Jerome,37,50n21,149
H ua-yen Buddhism ,65
Esther,Book of,51n21
H uagen q
s:rrc,7O,74,98n39
Jerusalem temple,43
Euripides,40 H adas,M oses,145 JesusChrist,36-37,151,182
Huna,193
Exodus,Bookof,225 Uadïth,2O,30,1621183,182 asChristian counterpartofQur'an,
Ezekiel,2421115 Hagiographia,182-183,221,240n2 2O,30-31,237-238
fzra b.Solom on,206,2O9 Halakhicteachings,183,232 Jewish viewsofscripture
Ham ab.R.Hanina,193 Canaanite influencesupon. ,42
H amm urabi,41-42,561151 ldel,Mosheh,186,241n14 Greek influencesupon,32,40-41
F Ham nuna,229 Iliad,40 H ellenistic influences upon,41,
Harivamia,117 Illiteracy.See:Literacy 191-192,247n51
Figk 240113 H arnack,Adolf,521127 lndusseals,104,159n62 kabbalistic,182-188,199-214,
Finnegan,Ruth,145 H avelock,Eric,145 Instrumentum,38 222-227,230-234,236-237,
Hawley,John,117 Iran 251n124
G Hearts'nfrc, 10,83 influenceson scripturalizing proc- asoral,34-35,38,491114,105,
Heavenly tablets,36,39,41-42, ess,32-34,44,47n5,491114 141,148
Gadamer,Hans-Georg,239n1 132-133,137,237 Isaac the Blind ofPosquières,186, pre-rabbinic,186,188-191,227
Gardiner,Alan,131 Hebrew alphabet 204-205,221-223 rabbinic,137,182-199,207,
Gelasian Decree,51n23 asbuildingblocksofcreation,194, Ishm ael,186,196,228,253n151 213-224,227-231,234,
Genesis,26,184,2421115 196-198,204,209-211,213, Islamic viewsofscripture.See:M us- 236-238,25211131
GenesisRabbah,192,194,197-198 223-224,228 1im view sofscripture See:Torah
 IN DEX
Jol
pnan b.Zakkai,197-198,
217-218,241n15,15311151
Jonah,Book of,149
Joshuab.Levi,193,214
Josiah reform,43,561160
Judah b.llGai,194-195,2471151
Judah ha-Nasi,42
Judith,Bookof,511121
K CO1lCCPtOfScripture aswritten
Kabbalah
Gecstaticl''187
Lurianic,186,210-211
M asoretic,209
M erkabah,186,2O7
asoutgrowth ofm ysticalrabbinic
thouzht,2411115
al--,187
- ractic-
P
RProphetic,' 187
Safed school,186,210,231
schoolofIsraelSarug,231
Spanish KabbalistsofGerona,186,
206-209,232
:<sPeculative,''187
See:Jewish viewsofscripture,
kabbalistic;Zohar
KalyaSglrl,175-176
Karman,James'W .,121
Kaviraj,Gopinath,110-111,121
Kenyon,Fredric,145
Kerényi,Karl,132
Ketuvim ('
W ritings),182-183,221,
240112
Khosrow Anoshïravàn,47115
*
Kinsley,D avid R.,1O9
Köan,66
Krishna,112,117,119
Kristensen,'W .Brede,3-4
Këitigarbha,75
Kuan-yin.See:Avalokitejvara
Kûm mel,' W erner,51n23
Laûkàvatâra q
snfrc,94n16,95n1121 and
27
Lanman,Charles,114
Larson,Gerald,103
LetterofAristeasto Philocrates,
55n45
Levigotlanan'spupil),192,218-219
Literacy,25,33,42-43,131,133,
143-145,147-148,150
Liveso
fEminentMonks,70
LotusStktra,9,61-62,67,69-70,76,
80,84,961133,102,134,1581156
Luther,M artin,129-130,135,145,
151-152,157n42,16811146
.
M influenceson scripturalizing proc-
M aat,2431125
M abâbhârata,107,115-116,1271175
MabâlmrinibbnnaSutta,61
M allölmrinirvöpaq sgfrc,92n3
M allâyönasfttrâlathkâra,93115
M ahopaiejh,93115
M aimonides,247n51
MahïmaNfllyc,92112
M andaean
scriptures,31,39,50n19
view sofscripture,36,43
M ani,35-36,134
M anicheescriptures,31,35-37,39,
43,134
Mafjulrf,101n66
M ann,Thomas,132
M antrasandtlbârapïs
Buddhist,14,64,67-68,73,
77-78,80-82,84-85,88,
90-91,95n26,1001165
GreatCompassionD börapï,77,
84-85
IN DEX
H indu,110,114,116-119, M UJrJ,78,80,100n64
1271167,136,138-140 M uham m ad,30,182
YûraàgmaM antra,77 M ttller,Adam ,147
M anusmfti,9 M ttller,M ax,16n4,33-34,102-103,
MarEuyba,229 122,1251142,153n6,171
M arcion,23,37-38,521127 M uratorian ucanon,''511123
M arduk,42 M uslim viewsofscripture,2O,23-25,
M audgalyâyana,79 30-32,34-35,38,47n5,105,122,
M cl-uhan,M arshall,25,144,147 130,132,137,141-142,148,152,
M editerranean 181-182,237-238
See:Qur'àn
book,132-133
M eir,196,215
M encius,961130 N
M ensching,Gustav,135
MesopotamianAssemblyoftheGods, Natunanides,206,208-209
42 N an-ts'ao,74
M esopotamia N ear East
scripturalizing process,31,34-35,
ess,49n14,132,190-191, 39,43-44,132
2431125 wisdom traditiom ,191,
M iddleAges,144-147,149-150,236 243111124-25
Midrash,183 Nef,John,142
M ishnah,38,42,183,221 N evi'im ,182-183,221,240n2
M odesofreception,13-14,59,76, N ew Testam ent,31,33,35,38,
91 49n15,50n21,511123,521m 24 and
informative,13,60-61,68-70,87, 27 and 29,177,237-238
90,921 11 N ichiren,9,134
sym oblic,14,60,85-90,92n1 N ietzsche,Friedrich,146
transactive,14,6O,72-81,87,91, N orden,Eduard,146
92n1 Nuns(TaiwaneseBuddhist)
transform ative,14,60,70-72, usesofscriptures,13-14,66-68,
81-85,87,90-91,92111 70-85,89,95n2,99n45
M ontagu,Ashley,143
M oore,George Foot,244n27
M orenz, Siegfried,141 O
M oses,37,42,44,183,193,214,
219-223,227,240116 O dyssey,40
Mosesb.Natlman.See:Nah
.manides O1dTestament,23s31,33,35,37,
M osesCordovero ofSafed,210-211, 40,50n21,521124,177,179,182.
231 See:Septuagint
M osesde Leon,232 Ong,W alter,144,146
272 INDEX IN DEX

Ozment,Steven,147 Qur':n ofM esopotamian texts,39,133 Sanskritization,113

asanalogoustoJesusChrist,20, ofQur'ân.See:Qur'sn,oralnature âatapataBrâhmapa,138
30-31,237-238 of S:yapa,122
centrality to Islam ,22,30-31 ofTorah,40,132,148,16611125, Schiller,Friedrich,147
asculm ination ofN earEastern 227 Scholem ,Gershom ,186,223,
Pachomian monasticism scripturalizingprocess,30-34, of Vedas,7,104,107,114-115, 241nn13 and 15
usesofscriptures,150,16611128 42,45 119,121,136,139,183 Schopen,Gregory,134
Pahlavi,35 derivation ofterm ,33-34,48n6 ofZarathushtrian scriptures,34 Scripture
Palestine,24,40,44 asheavenly tablet,42,132,137, Redfield,Robert,131 aural,12,33-34,48-49,104-105,
Paryupna,175-176 237 Reformation,24,26,33-34,51,135, 107,109-110,112-115,
Penanceo
fLiangH&-lf,80 ashistoricalforce,20-21 149,1571142,179 118-119,138,142,145,148,
Pentateuch,37,4O,42,491414, iilum ination of,134 Renaissance,146 150-151,157
182-183,221,238-239 oralnatureof,24-25,33-34,48n6, Renou,Louis,107,114,121,124n22, asauthoritative,10,16n5,58,62,
People ofthe Book,31 491114,130,141-142,148 138 94,119,139,180-182,240113
Per
hvtion(?
JWi
sdom inEi
gbtTbousantl aspreexistent,31,137,237 Revelation derivation ofterm ,33-34,
Lines, 61-62,69 asrevelation,1,30,33,36,41-42, Avesta as,47115 103-104,130-131
Petrarch,147 181-182 Bibleas,42-43,151 as generic concept,3-11,14,20,
Philo ofAlexandria,41,189-192, study of,21,103,1611182,1621183 ofheavenly book asN earEastern 29,34,43,45-46,58-59,91,
24511n29-30,2471151 usefordivination,133 motif,132-133 102-103,105,121,129,152,
Philocrates,55 M ahâyânasûtrasas,91 1611178,171,181-182
Pirqê de-ll.Eliezer,218,221, in person ofChrist,30,237-238 asobjectofworship,62-63,85,
25211n138 139
- 1t Qur':n as,1,30,33,36,41-42, 133-135
Plato,4O,1541114,247n51 181-182 oral,7,12,20,33-35,38,4O,42,
PoChu-i,74-75 RJ'J)?JMeltêmnâ'(FaithfulShepherd), ofTorah,42,181-185,187-188, 47115.48116,491114,61,64,68,
Prajt
ïöpâramitâ(PerfectionofW is- 199,232 199,214,216-220,223-227, 104-105,107,109-115,
dom),65,79-80 RabJudah,221-222 229-231 118-119,121-122,1231113,
Prakrits,113 Ràm a,117,119,1271175 ofVedas,106-107,110,118,138, 130-136,138-140,142-143,
Printing Römacaritamânas.SeelRJ-JIUnC 181-182.SeelYrutiand smîti 145-146,148-150,16211n86
effectonconceptofscripture, Rânunuja,113 Revelation,Book of,52n24,571163 and 91,173,227
24-26,104,130-131,134-135, Râmâyapa, 105,107,117,120, Rg Veda.See:Vedas,R.g western modelsof,4-7,10-11,
t40,142-145,147,1621183 139-140 Ringgren,H elm er,243n24 16n6,29,34-35,561155,103,
Proto-scripture,137 Rasa, 112,121 Rsis,106,109,111,118,137-138 112,119,122,130-131,
Proverbs.See:Torah asprim ordial Recanati,M enalsm ,207 141-142
wisdom Recitation w ritten,7,12,20,32-34,38,40,
Psalms,149-150,224n27 ofAm it:bha'snam e,71,961132 S 42-43,47,64,102-105,111,
Ptah,137 ofBible,34,135,148-152, 118,121,123n13,130-136,
Purupas,7,107-108,113,116,120, 165-166,177-178 SacreiBookso
ftbeEast,16n4,33, 138-140,142-143,145-146,
139,141,1621183 in early Buddhism,61,93n4 102,153n6,171,175 148-150,161-162,173
PureLand,66-67,76,78-79,961132, ofEnb jmaelisb,541141 Sacred text See:Canon)M odesofreception;
991150 ofH indu textsotherthan Vedas, asalternate term ofçscripture,' Recitation;Revelation
Pustaba,47n3 116-119,121-122,1271 171, 4-6,10-11,14,140,18O Seng Chao,65
140 Safaitic inscriptions,44 Septuagint,31,35,37,40-41,51n21,
ofM aluyâna sûtras,61,63-64,68, Samas,41-42 189
Q 70,73-80,82-86,89,97n36, SafndhinirmocanaSb jtra,97n36 Shakespeare,133
98n44,100n6O,101nn65 and Sapahitas,106,108,139.See:Vedas Shamm ai,Schoolof,195
Qoheleth,40 67 Sanders,James,13 Shavuotfestival,184
 IN DEX IN DEX

Siiâhönta,172,178 aspersonally transformative,9,71, asbrideofIsrael,184-185, U panijads,7-8,102-103,105-106,

Sikh scriptures,8,32,38,521128,134 81-85,88,91,96n33,1O0nn60 215-216,234-236, 108,112,115-116,118,1261163,
Simeon b.Lakish,193,220 and 65 2521111138-139 138-139
Sinaeon b.Yotlai,2421115 aspossessing magicalpowers,10, comparability ofQur'àn,237 U rbach,Ephraim ,186,2471151
Simeon theJust,193,244n27 87-88,133 correspondence with hum an body, U sener,Hermann,136
Sim hatTorah festival,184 setin writing,64,121 252n131 Ussher(Bishop),26
SijrêDeuteronomy,192 study of,68-72,81 ascovenant,184
Smith,Joseph,32 assymbolofBuddha orDl
vrma, m eaning ofterm ,42,183
Smith,W ilfred Cantwell,2-3,5-6, 61,63,85-91,92n1,1O0n60 inexhaustibilityofwisdom of,
11-12,15,86-87,103,177, asteachingsofeternalor cosm ic 228-230 f
zr
lc, 1,118,137-138
237-238 Buddha,1581156,182 aslight,199-200,210,223-225, Vslmîki,117
Smîti.See:Yrutiandsmçti unboundednessofcanon,9,12 23O Van Buitenen,J.A.B.,106-107,113,
Socrates,1541114 See:Recitation ofM ahâyàna sbàtras asN am eofGod,206-211,213, 115,120,1251140,138-140
Soderblom ,N athan,47112 224-225,25011110 Van derLeeuw,Gerardus,3-4,30,
Solascnttura,135 T ornamentation of,134,227 133,171
Sophocles,40 aspreexisting creation,13, Vedânta,108
Spinoza,Baruch,45 192-194,199,214,237, W döntasb
jtras,115
sphujidhvaja,53n34 Talmud,12,35,192-193,221,232, 249n72 Vedas
prautaSùtras,1O6 240n3,241n15 asprim ordialwisdom ,158, Atllarva,Sama,Yajutl106
Yrutiand smçti,34,106-109,112, Babylonian,35,42 185-186,188-193,198-203, eternality of,119,137,139,181
114-120,122,124n22,1251140, Jerusalem,35,42 213,229,243n25,2441127 m eaning ofterm ,118
137-139,182 Tanakh,33 stagesofmanifestation of,187, oralcharacterof,34,104,107,
Staal,J.R,104,121,136,138 T'ang dynasty,79 198-206,210-211,214, 118-119,121-122,136-143
Staupitz,Johann,16811146 Tantluma,194 225-226 asrevealed through nis, 106,111,
Steiner,George,142 Tannâ',49n14 studyof,185,228-229,234-239 118,137,138
Stoic pllilosophy,191 Tannaitic period,192-194 W ritten vs.O ral,49n14,161n82, Rg,8,34,106,114,119,
Stùpas,62 Tantras,107,139 183-186,204-206,208,214, 121-122,1251146,137-138
sukkotfestival,184 Taoistview sof scripture,8,65,182. 220-223,229,236-237,239 ritualnature of,7-9,106,114,
Sum erian language,541141 See:Chinese classics written with black fire on white 136
Satra a-
/-lrl/l-c'.
sNet,73 Ta-tsang-ching.See:Canon,Chinese fire,208,220,222,225 subdivisionsof,106
sb
jtra(
?/-tlePastIzr
l
AI
,
I
J.
Fo
ftLeEarthStore Buddhist See:Hebrew alphabet;Recitation of See.Recitation ofVedas;jrutiand
Boâbi
sattva,75 Teiser,Stephen,991152 Torah;Revelation smçti
Sntras(Mahàyâna) TenCommandments(Decalogue),1, Tracy,David,13 Vedic Sanskrit,114,120
classificatory schem esof,65, 42,183,209,216,218-220, Tripipka Vimalakfrti,63
94n20 224-226,240116 Chinese.See:Canon,Chinese Bud- Vimalakïrti-nirjeh sélrl,951121
asconveyingBudda'spresence, Iètrabiblos,38 dhist Vinaya,73,95n26
61-63,65,84,88,90-91, Tetragramm aton,208,211 Pali.See:Canon,Theravada Bud- Virgil,145
100n60 T'ien-taiBuddhism,65,70 dhist P'flesllt
z-cfltrl.
Brt
lllf
'
ltT-lurfprcc/fl,941416
.
copying asareligiouspractice, TîqqûnêZJ/IJ6 199,232.See:Zohar TulsïDàs,105,117,12t) Vit'pu Purâpa, 117
63-64,68,73-74,83-85,90, Tobit,511121 Von Rad,Gerhard,2431124,244n26
981136 Torah U
asnon-authoritative,62-63 asblueprintofcreation,191, W
asobjectofworship,62-63,85, 195-199,211-213,227, Ujjain,531134
134,156n33 2451130,2461151,1481153 UllambanaSbjtra,79,991151 W ach,Joachim,3-4
276 IN DEX

r'
rzaraniPeace,43 non-alphabetic,41,43,561156
W attenbach,W .,147 oralcharacterof,145,147,
Wellhausen,Julius,27 162n86
W hybray,R.N .,242n24 See:Alphabet
W idengren,Geo,41-42,47115,5O,
132-133,137 Y
W internitz,M oriz,138-139
W isdom ofBen Sira,189-92,244n27
W isdom ofSolomons189,191-192, Yavanajâtaka,53n34
229,239 Yavanejvara,531134
W ittgenstein,Ludw ig,36:50n18 Yogàcàra,951127
W olfson,H arry A., 191
W riting Z
Buddhistuseof,121,159,162 .
calligraphy,31,83,145
asconferring authority,43-44, Zarathushtra,32,36,47115
131-132,142 Zarathushtrian scriptures,31-35,39,
in Egypt,43,145 43,47115
Greek mistrustof,1541114 Zefira,197
in India,104,121,127n75,132, Zen.see:Buddhistviewsofscripture,
138-139 142 159n62 Ch'an
asmagicallypowerful,133 Zollar,186-187,199-204,207,212,
asm nem onic device,3s 223-225,230,232-234,241n15

f
RETITIN K IN G K RTF IXTRE:
Essays from a Com parative Peo pective
M lrlam Ievering edltor

Exploringthenatureoftexts,thisbookexplainshow scripturesfunctionwithin
religions.Topicscovered includetheoraldim ensionsofscripture,canonform a-
tion,a study ofthew ord in Hindu life;and the roleoftextin Buddhism .

t'
l'heessayssucceed in challenging oursetideasaboutw hatsacred textsare
and how they function.Itprovokes us to think in term s outside ourJudeo-
Christian view .Many booksdealwith the nature ofsacred texts, butfew are
willingtolookattheproblem ofwhatitm eanstobeasacredtext.Thisworkm akes
an importantand mostunique contribution to the literature.''
- -/rhom la P.K t z.
qulls,NoH hlnnd College

d-
rhere is a universalscope to the essays thatinvites thoughtfulreading,
discussion and furtherresearch across a wide range offields within religious
studies:textual,contextual,historical/developmental,ritual,sym bolic,andmany
others.''
- Frederick M .Denny,Departm entofRellglous Studles
U nlversity ofColorM o,Boulder

M lrb m laeverlng isaProfessorin theD epartm entofReligiousStudiesatthe

UniversityofTennessee.

STATE UNIVERSIW O F NEW Y ORK PRESS