Span Toward

Hello, everyone,

"Brahman cannot be a bridge, since there is nothing beyond for it to be a span toward."

The above quote is from The Encyclopedia of Indian Philosophies, Volume 3: Advaita Vedanta up to Samkara and His Pupils edited by Karl H. Potter

https://books.google.co.in/boo...0toward.&f=false

1. Can one replace 'toward' with 'between' in the above sentence?

2. Can 'for' be done away with without changing the meaning drastically?

Thanks.

 

 

Original Post
ahmad posted:

"Brahman cannot be a bridge, since there is nothing beyond for it to be a span toward." [. . .]

1. Can one replace 'toward' with 'between' in the above sentence?
2. Can 'for' be done away with without changing the meaning drastically?

Hello, Ahmad,

The answer to both your questions here is "yes," though DocV and I have debated whether something which is between two things can properly be said to touch the endpoints. He may wish to differ with me.

I think the sentence would read better if "span" were a verb: "to span towards/between." If it is converted thus, then "a" will need to be deleted and "for" will need to be retained.

It has not escaped my attention that the subject matter of the sentence is metaphysical in the extreme. If Brahman is Ultimate Reality, then referring to it as an "it" and talking about "something beyond it" are just ways of speaking.

P.S. Sorry for the delay on your "perambulatory" question. We'll get to it.

David wrote:

DocV ... may wish to differ with me.

I accept your kind invitation, my friend.

I do have a bit of a problem with "between", but not for the reason you mention.

Rather, if the preposition were changed to "between", it would lack the requisite number of objects.  If Brahman were a bridge, it would span between "nothing beyond" and what?

DocV

ahmad posted:

Has anything ever?

Greetings,

It's kind of you to ask, Ahmad. Yes, of course, things have occasionally escaped (and still do occasionally escape) my attention, though I try to minimize the occurrence of this on the Grammar Exchange.

Ironically, the very thread in which you have asked me this pseudo-question has supplied a regrettable instance of something having escaped my attention right here on G.E. I must concede that DocV's objection is right on the money.

Doc V posted:
I do have a bit of a problem with "between", but not for the reason you mention.

 

Rather, if the preposition were changed to "between", it would lack the requisite number of objects.  If Brahman were a bridge, it would span between "nothing beyond" and what?

Excellent point, DocV. "Between" really does not work, Ahmad, for the reason DocV has given. If you wanted to use "between," more radical revisions would be needed -- and the authors of the philosophy encyclopedia might not approve.

(X) Brahman cannot be a bridge, since there is nothing before it and beyond it between which it can span.

 

Add Reply

Likes (0)
×
×
×
×