The Inner Conflict of Tradition: Essays in Indian Ritual, Kingship, and Society c15.6

c15.6

The fragmentation inherent in the expansion-reaction paradigm seems, however, to cover another, perhaps somewhat unexpected, but fundamental fact. Namely, that the aims, terms of reference, modes of operation, and organization of the parties involved had little if anything in common.³ In other words, what we should like to construe as the complementary expansion-reaction pair takes place on two different and separate planes, in two distinct worlds, as it were. Their contacts and confrontations could only have an incidental and episodic character for lack of common ground. Even in those instances where it was actively pursued, the “dialogue” is more often than not a dialogue of deaf-mutes, or at least one of misunderstandings.