Abstract
The study of textual reuse is of fundamental importance in reconstructing lost or partially lost texts, passages of which can be partly recovered through other texts in which they have been embedded. Furthermore, the study of textual reuse also provides one with a deeper understanding of the modalities of the production of texts out of previous textual materials. Finally, it constitutes a unique chance to reconsider the historicity of concepts such as “author”, “originality” and “plagiarism”, which do not denote really existing universals, but have rather evolved—and still evolve—in different ways in different cultural milieus. After a general introduction and an analysis of the historical background of textual reuse in India and Europe, the essay attempts some general conclusions regarding the formulas introducing instances of textual reuse in Classical South Asian texts.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
In accordance with the theme of this article, I quoted from many studies. Due to the lack of specific studies about the extent of the phenomenon in India, I relied also on materials about the Western scenario, which had the benefit of stressing unexpected similarities and dissimilarities.
Bartels, H. (2009). Die Piratenpartei. Entstehung, Forderungen und Perspektiven der Bewegung. Reihe Netzbürger 1. Berlin: Contumax.
Berti, M. (2013). Collecting quotations by topic: degrees of preservation and transtextual relations among genres. Ancient Society, 4, 269–288.
Bronkhorst, J. (1986). tantra and prasaṅga. Aligarh Journal of Oriental Studies, III(2), 77–80.
Büchler, M., Geßner, A., Berti, M., & Eckart, T. (2013). Measuring the influence of a work by text re-use. In S. Dunn & S. Mahony (Eds.), The digital classicist. Bulletin of the Institute of Classical Studies Supplement 122 (pp. 63–79).
Burrow, J. A. (1982). Medieval writers and their work: Middle English Literature 1100–1500. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Cao, C. (2012). Per una poetica del plagio: il caso di Kathy Acker. Between, II(3), 1–23.
Colas, G. (2012). Histoire, Oralité, Structure. À propos d’un tournant dans l’oeuvre de Madeleine Biardeau. Journal Asiatique, 300(1), 17–32.
Collins, S. (1990). On the very idea of the Pali Canon. Journal of the Pāli Text Society, 15, 89–126.
Finnegan, R. (2011). Why do we quote? The culture and history of quotation. Cambridge: Open Book Publishers.
Freschi, E. (2012). Proposals for the study of quotations in Indian philosophical texts. Religions in South Asia, 6(2), 161–189.
Freschi, E., & Maas, P. A. (Eds.). (forthcoming a). Adaptive reuse of texts, ideas and images in classical india adaptive reuse of texts, ideas and images in classical india adaptive reuse of texts, ideas and images in Classical India. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.
Freschi, E., & Maas, P. A. (Eds.). (forthcoming b). Introduction. In E. Freschi & P. A. Maas. Adaptive reuse of texts, ideas and images in Classical India. Wiesbaden: Deutsche Morgenländische Gesellschaft. Harrassowitz.
Freschi, E. & Pontillo, T. (2013). Rule-extension Strategies in Ancient India: Śrautasūtra, Mīmāṃsā and Grammar on tantra- and prasaṅga- principles. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
Graheli, A. (2008). In praise of repetition. IIAS Newsletter, 48, 24.
Hegewald, J. A. B. & Mitra, S. K. (Eds.). (2012). Re-use: the art and politics of integration and anxiety. New Delhi and Thousand Oaks, Calif: SAGE.
Kellner, B. (2007). Jñānaśrimitra’s Anupalabdhirahasya and Sarvaśabdābhāvacarcā: A critical edition with a survey of his Anupalabdhi-theory. Wiener Studien zur Tibetologie und Buddhismuskunde 67. Wien: Arbeitskreis für Tibetische und Buddhistische Studien, Universität Wien.
LaFollette, M.C. (1992). Stealing into print: Fraud, plagiarism and misconduct in scientific publishing. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Lancaster, L. R. (2005). Buddhist books and texts: canon and canonization. In L. Jones (Ed.), Encyclopedia of religion (pp. 1251–1258). Detroit: Macmillan Reference USA, Thomson Gale.
Lasic, H. (Ed.). (2000a). Ratnakīrtis Vyāptinirṇaya, Sanskrittext, Übersetzung, Analyse. Wiener Studien zur Tibetologie und Buddhismuskunde 49. Wien: Arbeitskreis für Tibetische und Buddhistische Studien, Universität Wien.
Lasic, H. (Ed.). (2000b). Jñānaśrimitras Vyāpticarcā. Sanskrittexts, Übersetzung, Analyse. Wiener Studien zur Tibetologie und Buddhismuskunde 48. Wien: Arbeitskreis für Tibetische und Buddhistische Studien, Universität Wien.
Mac Allister, P. (2011). Ratnakīrtis Apohasiddhi. A Critical Edition, Annotated Translation, and Study. PhD thesis. Wien: Universität Wien.
McCrea, L. (2002). Novelty of Form and Novelty of Substance in Seventeenth Century Mīmāṃsā. Journal of Indian Philosophy, 30(5), 481‒494.
McCrea, L. (2008). Playing with the system: Fragmentation and individualization in late Pre-colonial Mīmāṃsā. Journal of Indian Philosophy, 36(5–6), 575–585.
Mesquita, R. (2000). Madhva’s unknown literary sources: Some observations. Delhi: Aditya Prakashan.
Mesquita, R. (2008). Madhva’s quotes from the Purāṇas and the Mahābhārata: An analytical compilation of untraceable source-quotations in Madhva’s works along with footnotes. Delhi: Aditya Prakashan.
Mizuno, K. (1982). Buddhist Sūtras: Origin, development, transmission. Tokyo: Kosei.
Mülke, M. (2008). Der Autor und sein Text: die Verfälschung des Originals im Urteil antiker Autoren. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
Nakassis, C. V. (2013). Citation and citationality. Signs and Society, 1(1), 51–78.
Nikolsky, R. (2010). Ishmael sacrificed grasshoppers. In M. Goodman, G. H. van Kooten, & J. T. A. G. M. van Ruiten (Eds.), Abraham, the nations, and the Hagarites: Jewish, Christian, and Islamic perspective on kinship with Abraham (pp. 243–262). Leiden and Boston: Brill
Okita, K. (2011). Review of Roque Mesquita, Madhva’s Quotes from the Purāṇas and the Mahābhārata: An analytical compilation of untraceable source-quotations in Madhva’s works along with footnotes. Indo-Iranian Journal, 54, 185–192.
Orwin, M. (2005). On the concept of “definitive text” in Somali poetry. Oral Tradition, 20(2), 278–299.
Preisendanz, K. (2005). The production of philosophical literature in South Asia during the pre-colonial period (15th to 18th centuries): The case of the Nyāyasūtra commentarial tradition. Journal of Indian Philosophy, 33, 55–94.
Preisendanz, K. (2008). Text, commentary, annotation: Some reflections on the philosophical genre. Journal of Indian Philosophy, 36, 599–618.
Said, S. S. (1982). Oral poetry and Somali nationalism: The case of Sayyid Mahammad ‘Abdille Hasan. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Schulze, C. (2004). Das Phänomen der “Nichtkommentierung” bedeutender Werke. In W. Geerlings & C. Schulze (Eds.), Der Kommentar in Antike und Mittelalter Bd.2 Neue Beiträge zu seiner Erforschung (pp. 21–33). Clavis Commentariorum Antiquitatis et Medii Aevi. Leiden: Brill.
Steinkellner, E. (1988). Methodological remarks on the constitution of Sanskrit texts from the Buddhist Pramāṇa-tradition. Wiener Zeitschrift für die Kunde Südasiens, 32, 103–129.
Steinkellner, E., Krasser, H., & Lasic, H. (Eds.). (2005). Jinendrabuddhi’s Pramāṇasamuccayaṭīkā. Chapter 1, Part 1: Critical Edition. Part 2: Diplomatic Edition. Wien, Beijing: Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften, China Tibetology Publishing House.
Strauss, O. (1925). Indische Philosophie. In G. Kafka (Ed.), Geschichte der Philosophie in Einzeldarstellungen. München: Ernst Reinhardt.
Theophanidis, P. (2012). The origin and development of the quotation mark. http://aphelis.net/origin- development-quotation-mark/.
Tieken-Boon van Ostade, I. (1996). Lindley Murray and the concept of plagiarism. In I. Tieken-Boon van Ostade (Ed.), Two hundred years of Lindley Murray (pp. 81–96). Münster: Nodus Publikationen.
Trikha, H. (2012). Perspektivismus und Kritik. Der epistemische Pluralismus der Jainas angesichts der Polemik gegen das Vaiśeṣika in Vidyānandins Satyaśāsanaparīkṣā. De Nobili Research Library 36. Wien: De Nobili.
Trikha, H. (forthcoming). Facets of a fragment: Evaluation and classification of intertextual elements in a philosophical Jaina Sanskrit work. In E. Prets & H. Marui (Eds.), Transmission and reflection. The meaning and the role of ‘fragments’ in Indian philosophy. Proceedings of a symposium on quotations and paraphrases from and allusions to ancient texts on Indian philosophy. Wien: Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften.
Tubb, G., & Boose, E. R. (2007). Scholastic Sanskrit. Treasury of the Indic Science Series. New York: AIBS.
Wezler, A., & Motegi, S. (Eds.). (1998). Yuktidīpikā: The most significant commentary on the Sāṃkhyakārikā. Stuttgart: F. Steiner.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits any use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and the source are credited.
About this article
Cite this article
Freschi, E. The Reuse of Texts in Indian Philosophy: Introduction. J Indian Philos 43, 85–108 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10781-014-9232-9
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10781-014-9232-9