whenthe Koran states "recite or read" the text. So one must infer
that there are many interpretations of many interpretations; thus the
haditha, as with the Talmud, as with Christian commentary and glosses
on scriptures; as with literary commentary on literary
text; But a la Vico and a la Platon; all knowing is recollected,
all is memory, the greek daughter of memory who brings forth
the recited spoken memory of previously written texts
written in the blood as Artaud would say; And Homer was not
Homer but many; his metaphors are stock classical figures
an what he does, and his genoius is variation/invention;
two trope figures of Ren. Lit. practice/criticism; However
writing precdes speech, as in In the Beginning was the Word.
Now I have to ask why all this resistance among readers to
the written preceding the spoken?? Do you really think
that there is proof for either case? it is not a question one ca
prove, but simply a matter of foundations with bounds in
infinity. I don't mind if some group of humans imagine that
their totem pole talk goes back to the primary scene
of instruction; they too are living a mythos; but
the logos and the grapheme were always there. From,
as the Talmud might say it, from the beginning before the
beginning.
I am Jean-Paul Sartre and his son
and Simone the Castor Beaver
whose daughter we are as well.
------------------------------------
I love all
your posts
and came with each one
Ah!
|