|Title:||In Search of Linguistics of Silence: Caryapada|
|Email:||click here TO access email|
|Institution:||La Filológica por la Causa|
|Linguistic Field:||Ling & Literature; Pragmatics; Psycholinguistics; Semantics|
The author of this paper did not bother about the (a) formal linguistic analysis (meta-speaking on speaking, i.e. formal linguistics and philology) of the text of Caryapada (approx. 9th C A.D. A Tantric Buddhist text written in a sandhyabhasa or anti-language a la Halliday); (b) retrospective (pratyabhijna) construction of genealogical fantasy or linguistic statist identity or imagiNATION, instead he was proposing a secret guide to exquisite kayasadhana (the praxis within the body within the ambit of corporal studies)by following the path of Bhartrihari and Abhinavagupta’s post-formal non-analysis. The author followed Munidatta’s Sanskrit commentary of the Caryapada-text (written in an anti-language to hide the secrets of physiological (not in the Western medical sense of the term) points that is shaped and perceived by the world views of the so-called lower caste Tantric Buddhists) and that was commented in Sanskrit by Munidutta. This reciprocal discourse-exchange bi-way traffic) in between so-called H(igh)and L(ow) was also being observed by the author.
The paper ironically started with the salutation to the contemporary interpreters of the said text, though the author said that they are missing the world-views of the Tantric Buddhists as the contemporary scholar-interpreters did not link the perceptions of Tantric kayasadhana that is meant for ‘care of self’ (epimelia heatue). Only Shashibhusan Dasgupta (1969) discovered the secrets of the kaya (corporeal). Thus, the scholarship was condemned by the Caryapada-composers, who were considered to be ‘illiterate’ according the norms of literacy. Dasgupta (ibid) thus described the “illiterates’”(?) aversion to the recondite scholarship.
After that the author elaborated the rhetoric-terms (utpreksa/metaphor, comparison in general, vyaja/ having only appearance of, deceitful, false, simulated..) used by Munidutta to explain the surplus meanings of the texts. Even the author supplied the architectural details of Kakhar (female-shaped shrines) temples (Orissa) to explain the boat-utpreksa as used in Caryapada. Lastly, the author had linked the cakras (so-called Hindu and Buddhist systems were amalgamated here — a case of syncretism) with different stages of speeches/non-speeches (a trajectory from parole to silenceme) and sleeping/non-sleeping to reach the point of “vakpathatia” (cf. caryapada, 37 a cordoned zone of silenceme or paravak) in a tabular form with illustration. One point must be noted: the authors selfhood as a scientist was condemned here by the author himself as he criticized (a) the recent neuro-physicists’ anatomo-bio-political intervention into in body of the sadhakas/ practitioners; (b) the gap between theory and praxis as it was found in recondite scholarship. Thus the paper was an addition to the author’s agenda of introducing two novel disciplinary technologies: Silence and Corporal studies.
|Publication Info:||2012. “চর্যা-চর্চায় নীরবতার ভাষাতত্ত্ব সন্ধান”[In Search of Linguistics of Silence : Caryapada] Pranab K. Chakroborty ed. Interaction VIII. (pp.23-31) Nabadwip, West bengal. India|
Add a new paper
Return to Academic Papers main page
Return to Directory of Linguists main page