透過耙梳德希達（Jacques Derrida）關於見證、虛構與哀悼的思考，本論文認為文學文本作為證詞肩負三個重要的工作。第一、它能藉著虛構提出虛擬的真相，呈現一些雖未實際發生、但卻真實存在的經驗。換句話說，文學證詞不同於歷史證詞，並不需要和史實相對照，但卻能在其所開展出的虛構居所裡，讓一些虛擬的可能性存在。第二、此「虛擬的可能性」即指涉死亡－事件糾纏不去的鬼魂性，讓即將到來的死亡與早已發生的死亡在文學證詞裡相遇、縫合。第三、文學證詞不只揭露、估量角色自己的死亡，還必須哀悼那些已經不在場的他者／逝者，尤其是那些沒有名字、無法在歷史中確認身分的他者／逝者。透過此角度閱讀翁達傑（Michael Ondaatje）的《菩薩凝視的島嶼》（Anil's Ghost），我們可以發現，帕利帕拿（Palipana）的「狂舉」的爭議性不在於他偽造任何歷史文獻，而在於他以自己的角度詮釋未被任何典籍註記的岩畫。所以一方面，他創造出的虛構文學證詞和歷史事件相平行（見證已死亡的歷史事件──六世紀的岩畫），但另一方面，這平行拉出的虛擬空間，容留了未能在歷史上驗明正身的人物與事件。這重要的伏筆提醒了我們文學證詞所需肩負的文本政治與倫理工作，所以翁達傑再透過安南達（Ananda）重建「水手」的臉龐告訴我們：這個虛構的創作／文學，作為安南達的證詞，依然可以傳遞虛擬的真實，並向正義的第三方（讀者、國際勢力⋯⋯）呼求協助；更重要的是，它得以讓更多的他者／逝者，尤其是那些沒有名字、辨識不出身分的他者／逝者，都能在文學書寫死亡的熱情場所中安息。
By drawing on Jacques Derrida's conceptions of witnessing, writing, and mourning, this paper argues that we can regard literature/fiction as testimony to convey ＂real and virtual, or real as virtual＂ truth. The task that literature undertakes includes rendering any unexperienced experiences, allowing the immemorial death of the witness/character to encounter his/her imminent death, and passionately mourning for those unidentified deaths in history. Reading Michael Ondaatje's Anil's Ghost in this way, we discover that Palipana's ＂gesture＂ is controversial not due to the fact that he forges any historical material but because he uses his own perspective to interpret it. Palipana's literary fiction/creation as testimony which is parallel to history reminds us of the textual politics and ethical task that literature has to undertake, and it becomes an important prefatory to Ananda's reconstruction of Sailor's face. This reconstruction is a fiction, but it becomes not only Ananda's testimony, testifying to the massacre prevalent on this island, but also his work of mourning, mourning passionately for the dead.
