Bible interpretation for Asians The views of RS Sugirtharajah & SJ Samartha Hermeneutics for Asia Hermeneutics, the disciplined and study and interpretation of scriptures, is not the monopoly of western scholars. The Asian question is not so much the rules of interpretation as the perception of Truth or Reality. Hermeneutics by itself cannot yield truth in its fullness without a purified mind and disciplined body. In cultures such as Hindu and Buddhist, it was the recital of the scriptures that operated as authority. the written text introduces an element of rigidity into the fluidity of the spoken word, by imposing a form, a structure of logical precision. Quite often, it misses the symbolic meaning that speech conveys.   How should the Bible, a) a Semitic book formed through oral and written traditions in a entirely different context (historical, geographic, cultural), b) appropriated and interpreted for centuries by the West through their own tools - be now interpreted in Asia by Asian Christians for their own people? Given the rich religious Asian heritage and the limited and narrow experience of Israel or the epistles of Paul, how can western scholars justify their negative theological judgments against Asian faiths? Asian Christians are heirs to a double heritage - that of the Bible and other scriptures. They are the ones who should be providing a bridge to share an array of insights with communities worldwide.   The Asian scholar and principles of interpretation It is usual to distinguish between the historical (author-centered), literary (text-centered) and contextual (reader-centered) approaches to reading the Bible. The last is favoured by Asian scholars. The meaning of the text is produced by mutual interaction between the reader and text. A specific meaning is perceived by certain readers  because of their particular social, cultural and religious location. Third World bible interpreters are primarily deconstructionists - their interpretation emerges from their common experience of colonialism and neo-colonialism and may be called liberation hermeneutics.   In a religious plural world, certain principles should be kept in mind when interpreting scripture: 1. There is a plurality of scriptures. Each cultural community cherishes its own scripture, holding it sacred and authoritative. 2. The manner in which an oral tradition comes to be written down, the way in which a text becomes canonical and how scripture functions in a faith community - are determined by cultural differences and historical circumstances. Particular scriptures were formed and the canon developed without reference to what was happening at other times and in other places. The criteria derived from the study of one scripture cannot be applied to pass judgment on another scripture. 3. There are certain exclusive elements within each scripture leading to truth claims by a faith community. Thus, the Gita teaches about many avataras; the New Testament speaks of Jesus Christ as 'the way, the truth and the life'; the Koran describes Mohamed as the 'seal' of the prophets; the Jewish Torah is still awaiting the Messiah. These claims should be accepted as legitimate for a particular faith community. They cannot to be extended to other faiths. 4. The language of religion does not depend solely on texts but also on symbols that point to something deeper. 5. In every living religion, scriptures are not just sources of doctrine but also of personal devotion and spiritual sustenance. 6. Scriptures should not be regarded as petrified texts, written once and for all. That would amount to blocking out the possibilities of fresh insights.   References 1. Voices from the Margin (Orbis 1995)     - RS Sugirthrajah (Ed), Introduction, SJ Samartha, Chap 1