However, like all such radical rereadings of an old set of texts into a modern idiom for a modern audience, Hershock's interpretation, like that of Hall and Ames before him, runs the risk of shameless gerrymandering and fanciful looseness. To his credit, Hershock is well aware of this danger and, even more to his credit, realizes that the Buddhist vision of universal ambiguity to which he presents himself as committed already makes any other conception of scholarship quite untenable. Indeed, to the extent that Buddhist scholars with no more than a passing historical interest in their topic remain something of an exception, it is surely strange that this issue has not become the central methodological point of discussion in the field, inasmuch as certain readings of the doctrine of emptiness and its relation to worldly

---

http://www.buddhismtoday.com/english/book/