conference rethinking religion in india, 21-24 jan 2008

- 1 -

ORGANISED BY

Research Centre Vergelijkende Cultuurwetenschap (Ghent University, Belgium)

Centre for the Study of Local Cultures (Kuvempu University, India)

Karnataka Academy for Social Sciences and Humanities (Karnataka, India)

RIethinkingeligion

ndiain

“”

21 - 24 JANUARY 2008

VENUECONFERENCE HALL - IGNCA // 5, DR. RAJENDRA PRASAD ROAD // NEW DELHI - 110001 // INDIA

www.cultuurwetenschap.be/conferences

brochure.indd 16/01/2008, 18:461

- 2 - - 3 -

Organising Team §

Purushothama Bilimale, Dinesh Shenoy, Gurudath Baliga, Jakob De Roover, Raf Gelders, Nele De Gersem,

Sarah Claerhout, Marianne Keppens and Esther Bloch

Programming Committee §

S.N. Balagangadhara, Arjun Bhagat, Vivek Dhareshwar, Naomi Goldenberg, Sadananda Janekere,

Akeel Bilgrami, Purushothama Bilimale, Marianne Keppens and Esther Bloch

Inaugural Committee §

Prof. B.S. Sherigara • (Vice-Chancellor, Kuvempu University)

Sri Uday Kumar •(Registrar, Kuvempu University)

Prof. S.N. Balagangadhara •

(Director, Research Centre Vergelijkende Cultuurwetenschap, Ghent University) Prof. Sadananda Janekere •

(Director, Centre for the Study of Local Cultures, Kuvempu University)

§ The conference is sponsored by

• The Bhagat Family Trust• Kuvempu University• Ghent University

§ Thanks to

• Delhi Karnataka Sangha for their help

§ Contact

• Esther Bloch • [email protected]• +91 / 990 283 32 58

• Marianne Keppens

• [email protected] • +91 / 990 283 32 61

RIethinkingeligion

ndiain

“”

RIethinkingeligion

ndiain

“”

brochure.indd 16/01/2008, 18:462-3

- 4 - - 5 -

TABLE OF CONTENTS

WelcomeInaugural functionWell-wishing word

Practical informationConference at a glance

PLATFORM SESSIONS

Platform position paperPlatform question

Platform participantsScope of the question

Platform logistics

ROUNDTABLE SESSIONS

A position paperRoundtable speakers

Roundtable respondents

SPECIAL IASR PANEL

Panel abstractIndividual abstracts

4678

10

12

1315161717

18

192425

26

2628

Closing workshopConference output and documentaryParticipant listThe five-year conference cluster

SPECIAL IGNCA PANEL

Panel abstract

PARALLEL PAPER SESSIONS

Caste system and Indian religion 1Indians are Aryans, so what?Colonialism and religion in India 1Caste system and Indian religion 2Colonialism and religion in India 2Evolutionary explanations of religionCaste system and Indian religion 3Caste system and Indian religion 4

68697074

32

33

34

3844454852566064

brochure.indd 16/01/2008, 18:464-5

- 6 - - 7 -

As has often been pointed out, the

academic study of religion and cul-

ture has never really taken off in

India. Rather than lamenting this,

RETHINKING RELIGION IN

INDIA wants to change this state of

affairs. Many scholars have argued

that this situation has something to

do with the fact that the current the-

oretical framework of religious stu-

dies is firmly embedded within the

Western cultural history. Its inade-

quacy comes to light, when one stu-

dies non-western traditions. The aim

of the five-year conference cluster is

to rethink the current framework and

to develop an alternative approach to

the study of religion and culture in

India.

To achieve this goal, we decided to

go beyond the common conference

format of plenary and parallel paper

sessions. Often, the most interesting

and fruitful discussions at confe-

rences occur outside of the actual

conference sessions. Such discussions

generally take place when one is

progress over the five conference years

in answering some of the key ques-

tions and problems in the study of

tradition and religion in India.

Thirdly, the main focus in the con-

ferences lies on the debates and dis-

cussions, rather than on presentations.

Therefore, the number of speakers

and presentations has been kept to

a minimum in all sessions. More-

over, there are three distinct con-

ference modules. These modules

approach the ten themes and their

questions with different emphases on

discussion and interactions: (1) Plat-

form sessions; (2) Roundtable ses-

sions; (3) Parallel Paper sessions.

In the Platform sessions of the first

conference, a small group of experts

juxtapose their respective answers to

the question ‘Are there native reli-

gions in India?’ In the Roundtable,

a group of speakers and respondents

discuss some of the main problems in

the debate on colonialism and religion

in India. The Parallel Paper sessions

WELCOME

among a small group of people and

in a setting where there is the time

and space to reflect upon different

perspectives on a given problem. It

is with such gatherings in mind that

the concept of the conference cluster

developed.

Firstly, Rethinking Religion in India

is a five-year conference cluster. The five

conferences form an integrated whole,

with each conference building on the

previous one. Every year the issues

and problems to be addressed will be

delineated more sharply. In between

the annual conferences, intermediate

activities such as a conference

documentary and lectures are

planned. These will feed into the

formulation of the subsequent con-

ference themes and questions, and

will disseminate the conference results

to a wider audience, both inside and

outside the universities.

Secondly, we have selected ten recur-

ring conference themes. This limited

number of themes will allow us to

give space to a wide range of scholars,

coming from different domains to

share their ideas and research results

on: the relation between Hinduism

and the caste system; colonialism and

religion in India; the Aryan Invasion

Theory; and evolutionary explana-

tions of religion. Apart from these,

there is also a special IASR (Indian

Association for the Study of Reli-

gion) plenary panel on the approaches

to the academic study of religion

within contemporary India and a spe-

cial IGNCA panel on ‘Terminologies,

Interpretations and Religious Expe-

riences: Perspectives on the Religion

of the Self.’

The entire programming and orga-

nising committee of Rethinking Reli-

gion in India invites you to join us in

this endeavour.

brochure.indd 16/01/2008, 18:466-7

- 8 - - 9 -

WELL-WISHING WORD BY THE VICE-CHANCELLOR OF KUVEMPU UNIVERSITY

Rethinking Religion in India I will be inaugurated by Prof. B.S. Sherigara (Vice-Chancellor,

Kuvempu University). Prof. S.N. Balagangadhara (Ghent University, Belgium) will give a

keynote address, introducing the main idea behind Rethinking Religion in India.

Room: Ground Floor Hall 21 January 2008, 11.30-13.30

INAUGURAL FUNCTION

brochure.indd 16/01/2008, 18:468-9

- 10 - - 11 -

§ Conference venue

New BuildingIndira Gandhi National Centre for the Arts5, Dr. Rajendra Prasad Road110 001 - New DelhiEntrance to the new building is via Man Singh Road

Please note that IGNCA has a new and an old building. The old building is situ-ated at one end of the IGNCA compound and the new building at the other end. The conference will be held at the new building (entrance to the new building via Man Singh Road).

§ Lunch

A simple vegetarian and non-vegetarian lunch will be provided at the conference venue.

§ Conference dinner

The dinner is sponsored by the Indira Gandhi National Centre for the Arts on 23

January, starting from 7 p.m., at the out-side lawn of the IGNCA new building.

§ Map of the area

PRACTICAL INFORMATION >>>§ Transport in Delhi

Transport from the airport: pre-paid taxis charge approximately 220 INR from the airport to the YMCA Tourist Hotel and 180 INR from the airport to the Karna-taka Sangha. However, not all pre-paid services are reliable. Therefore, look for the pre-paid service desk of the Delhi Police Department. It is prominently displayed on its desk at the airport.

Transport from the railway station: If you arrive at New Delhi Railway Station, you can catch bus no. 604 to the centre of Delhi (conference and hotel area). If you arrive at Nizamuddin station, you can catch bus no. 711. You can also take a pre-paid auto rick-shaw, which costs approximately 75 INR (from both railway stations).

§ Transport to the conference venue

There will be daily transportation for par-ticipants staying at the Karnataka Sangha and the Delhi YMCA Tourist Hotel to and from the conference venue.

brochure.indd 16/01/2008, 18:4610-11

CONFERENCE AT A GLANCE Rethinking Religion in India, 21-24 January 2008

Tuesday 22 January

9.00-11.00 : Parallel Paper sessions 1

- Caste system and Indian religion 1Seminar room I (ground floor)- Indians are Aryans, so what?Seminar room II (ground floor) - Colonialism and religion in India 1National Mission for Manuscripts Hall (3rd floor)- Special IGNCA panel 1Conference Hall (ground floor)

11.00-11.15 : Tea break

11.15-13.15 : Roundtable session 1

Janapada Sampada (3rd floor)

13.15-14.30 : LunchOutside lawn

14.30-16.00 : Platform session 2

Conference hall (ground floor)

16.00-16.15 : Tea break



17.00-17.15 : Tea break

17.15-19.15 : Special IASR Panel

Approaches to the academic study of religion within contemporary India (plenary session)


Monday 21 January

9.00-11.30 : Registration

Tea, coffee and snacks available

Outside lawn

11.30-13.30 : Welcome and inauguration

Prof. B.S. Sherigara & Prof. S.N. Balagangadhara





16.00-16.15 : Tea break



Wednesday 23 January


- Caste system and Indian religion 2National Mission for Manuscripts Hall (3rd floor)- Colonialism and religion in India 2Seminar room I (ground floor) - Special IGNCA panel 2Conference hall (ground floor)

11.00-11.15 : Tea break






16.00-16.15 : Tea break



Starting 19.00 : Final Dinner

Indira Gandhi National Centre for the ArtsOutside lawn

Thursday 24 January


- Evolutionary explanations of religion Seminar room I (ground floor)- Caste system and Indian religion 3National Mission for Manuscripts Hall (3rd floor)- Caste system and Indian religion 4Seminar room II (ground floor)

11.00-11.15 : Tea break




14.30-16.30 : Closing workshop

Towards the future of rethinking religion in India


16.30-16.45 : Tea break

16.45-17.30 : Closing address

Sri Uday Kumar & Dr. Jakob De Roover


brochure.indd 16/01/2008, 18:4612-13

- 14 - - 15 -

Chair • Jakob De Roover

Platform session 1:21 January 2008, 14.30-17.00Speakers • David N. Lorenzen and Timothy FitzgeraldRespondents • Naomi Goldenberg and Laurie L. Patton

Platform session 2:22 January 2008, 14.30-17.00Speakers • Purushottam Agrawal and S.N. BalagangadharaRespondents • Naomi Goldenberg and Laurie L. Patton

Platform session 3:23 January 2008, 14.30-17.00Responses by Naomi Goldenberg and Laurie L. Patton, and discussion among all Platform participants

Room: Conference hall (ground floor)

PLATFORM SESSIONS ‘ARE THERE NATIVE RELIGIONS IN INDIA?’

Platform position paper

The platform discussions occupy a central place in the conference cluster Rethinking Reli-gion in India. Therefore, we would like to spell-out some of its key-elements in this note to the speakers and the public.

The Platform

The platform is both a state-of-the-art discussion and one that moves beyond it. One of the criteria used to choose the speakers has been that they represent very clear and important arguments in the field of religious studies. In this sense, the speakers are not only well-known in the domain but are also influential proponents of major arguments, which, if successfully carried out to their conclusions, could change the face of religious studies as we know it today. In the platform discussions, these speakers will address a single question but from a variety of perspectives. In doing so, they are expected to provide an answer (however tentative or hypothetical such an answer might be) to the platform question. The respondents (normally speaking, two) have also been chosen for their demonstrated abili-ties: not only should they be at home in the debate that the platform addresses, but they should also be able to assess the answers provided by the platform speakers. It is expected of the respondents that they represent the scientific ‘jury’: tell us which answers are more satisfactory than the others and why; which new or old questions require to be addressed before a decision is taken about the acceptability or otherwise of the hypotheses; and so on. In doing so, they take the platform beyond the state-of-the-art: they formulate the cutting edge questions.

However, unlike in the academy, there is a conscious role-reversal in the platform discus-sions. The majority opinion of the practitioners in the academy has a minority voice here

and the other way round. The justification for this is not far to seek: in the history of scien-tific research, it is in the clash between established and ‘heretic’ views that new questions and answers have been born.

brochure.indd 16/01/2008, 18:4614-15

- 16 - - 17 -

>>>PLATFORM SESSIONS ‘ARE THERE NATIVE RELIGIONS IN INDIA?’

It is expected of all platform participants that they are familiar with the writings of the platform speakers. This is a precondition for the success of the platform discussions. Only such an acquaintance will allow the platform to come up with the research questions for tomorrow.

We have selected four of these writings, representative of their work:

1. Russell T. McCutcheon (1997) Manufacturing Religion: the Discourse on Sui Generis Reli-gion and the Politics of Nostalgia (New York: Oxford University Press).2. Timothy Fitzgerald (2000) Ideology of Religious Studies (New York: Oxford University Press).3. S.N. Balagangadhara (1994) “The Heathen in His Blindness ...” Asia, the West and the Dynamic of Religion (New Delhi: Manohar, 2005).4. David N. Lorenzen (2006) Who Invented Hinduism? Essays on Religion in History (New Delhi: Yoda Press).

The Platform question

The first platform of the conference cluster addresses itself to the following question: ‘Are there native religions in India?’ In what follows, we will indicate the scope and the impor-tance of this question.

As in any field of study, we have to turn to the educational sphere (the text-books and instructions) in order to discover the reigning academic consensus. Here, despite multiple misgivings and many qualifications, the platform question is answered unambiguously: Yes, there are native religions in India; Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism, etc. name distinct phe-nomena in the world; they constitute the religions of the majority of the Indians.

First, arraigned against this point of view are the steadily increasing research papers, scientific articles and books, which challenge this consensus from a multiple set of perspec-tives. There is the orthodox questioning from within the field of religious studies itself: an argument, which goes back to one of the pioneers of religious studies in the USA, namely, W. Cantwell-Smith, is that the category of ‘religion’ is an artefact of the scholars’ study. Whether or not one traces the wide-spread usage of this word to the Enlightenment tradi-tion, it remains a fact that it does not help us much in understanding ‘living faiths’ and ‘cumulative traditions’. More and more scholars are beginning to gravitate towards this line of thinking. However, it is unclear what its consequences are to an academic study of the Indian cultures and traditions.

The second argument, by the ‘constructivists’, represents a plethora of positions. Some merely suggest that the so-called Indian religions are ‘constructed’; some others trace this construction to the British Colonial rule; yet others endorse these two claims but suggest that these entities now are as ‘real’ as anything else; and so on. Here too, it remains unclear what exactly is being argued and why. (The issue of colonialism and religion in India will

be addressed in the Roundtable sessions.)

brochure.indd 16/01/2008, 18:4616-17

- 18 - - 19 -

PLATFORM SESSIONS ‘ARE THERE NATIVE RELIGIONS IN INDIA?’

The third argument is more radical in nature. The platform question is also answered unambiguously: No, there are no native religions in India; there never were. However, even here multiple voices participate: from those who deny the very existence of religion in human communities to those who suggest that the Semitic religions are the only examples of religion we have.

The platform question aims to bring together some major participants in this debate and have them answer a single question: Are there native religions in India?

The Platform participants

Prof. McCutcheon (who will, unfortunately, not be able to attend the conference due to personal reasons) and Prof. Fitzgerald have been challenging the legitimacy of the domain of religious studies and, indeed, the very use of the category of ‘religion’ for over a decade now. Together, they represent a challenge that has not been adequately answered in the field of religious studies. For equally long, Prof. Balagangadhara has been arguing that there are no native religions in India and that entities like ‘Hinduism’, ‘Buddhism’, etc. do not exist in India but in the western universities and in the commonsense of the West and the western educated intelligentsia. They are expected to show that their research programmes, if carried out successfully, will provide us with a different answer to the platform question than what is the case today.

Against these minority positions in the academia, there is the work and person of Prof. Lorenzen. He has already shown that the post-colonial argument about the construction of Indian religions by the colonial West simply does not stand up to scientific scrutiny. He is expected to show that the current consensus in the academy about the platform question is robust and is capable of defending itself from the criticisms formulated against it.

Prof. Patton is a well-known and highly respected scholar on ancient Indian religions. Unlike many of her colleagues, she believes that the subaltern and post-colonial critics have something important to say and has critically engaged herself with them. Prof. Goldenberg is as much interested in the classical traditions of the western Antiquity as she is in Feminist

>>>theology. Without being dismissive of the meta-theoretical discussions in the field of reli-gious studies, she has managed to maintain a scholarly equilibrium between the critics and the academic consensus. Both respondents are expected to assess, to the extent that such an assessment is possible at all today, the platform debate and formulate their own considered responses.

The scope of the question

In India, this question is not merely of academic interest; it has extremely far-reaching prac-tical and political implications. If native religions exist in India, then it is possible to speak of ‘religious violence’ between the Hindus and Muslims; it makes sense to advocate ‘secularism’ as an antidote to religious violence; it is important to call for an ‘inter-religious dialogue’; it is imperative to fight ‘religious fundamentalism’; and so on.However, what if there are no native religions in India? What happens to each and every one of these questions? The violent clashes between groups in India might have nothing to do with ‘religious’ violence; our inability to control this kind of violence might have to do with a misdiagnosis of the conflict. ‘Secularism’ might be increasing the violence in society instead of reining it in; the impossibility of ‘inter-religious dialogue’ might have something to do with the nature of the parties in the dialogue. Fighting ‘Hindu Funda-mentalism’ might be sowing the seeds for ‘fundamentalisms’ instead of cutting their ground from underneath. In other words, many of our intellectual stances and political standpoints depend on which of these answers to the platform question is accurate and scientific.

The Platform logistics

The platform discussions will be plenary in nature and conducted over three days. Each

speaker and respondent will have a full 45 minutes to present his/her views and arguments to the audience. Time permitting, there will be plenary interactions between the platform participants and, if possible, between the audience and the platform. The platform will be moderated to increase the efficiency of the discussion but not to censure any point of view.

brochure.indd 16/01/2008, 18:4618-19

- 20 - - 21 -

ROUNDTABLE SESSIONS ‘COLONIALISM AND RELIGION IN INDIA’

Chair • Sarah ClaerhoutRespondents • Martin Fárek, Vivek Dhareshwar, Jakob De Roover and Raf Gelders

Roundtable session 1: 22 January 2008, 11.15-13.15Speakers • Richard King and Geoffrey Oddie

Roundtable session 2:23 January 2008, 11.15-13.15Speakers • Akeel Bilgrami and Laurie L. Patton

Roundtable session 3: 24 January 2008, 11.15-13.15Speakers • John Zavos and Sharada SugirtharajahChaired discussion among all Roundtable participants about the most important issues that have arisen during the Roundtable sessions.

Room: Janapada Sampada (third floor)

A position paper

The aim of the roundtable sessions is to have a focused debate on the impact of colonialism on religion in India. In this note, we will identify some of the central problems that remain unsolved in this debate.

Today, everyone agrees that colonialism has had a significant impact on religion in India. However there is disagreement as to the precise nature of this impact. Many suggest that there has been a colonial construction of ‘Hinduism’ in India (see amongst others Inden 1986 and 1990, Frykenberg 1989 and 1993, Dalmia and von Stietencron 1995, King 1999, Lorenzen 1999 and 2006, Dirks 2001, Sugirtharajah 2003, Pennington 2005, Oddie 2006). There are different versions of this account, but most of its proponents agree on the following points: (1) During the 19th century, the British colonial powers constructed ‘Hinduism’, a single religion that had not existed in pre-colonial India; (2) this process of construction involved the codification of religious laws and the classification of the Indian population into large aggregate categories such as ‘Hindus’, ‘Buddhists’, ‘Jains’, etc.; (3) it took place because of the administrative needs of the British colonial rule; (4) nevertheless, this process of construction was not a one-sided process: the British colonials and their native informants, the Brahmins in particular, collaborated in the creation of a uniform reli-gion; and (5) the resulting constructed entity reflects the utilitarian motives, social assump-tions and religious beliefs of both groups.

The importance of the constructionist accounts lies in the fact that they have pointed to a mismatch between the descriptions of ‘Hinduism’ on the one hand, and the realities of the Indian culture on the other hand. However, these accounts are confronted with a series of problems that threaten the validity of their arguments. Therefore, before further exploring this mismatch in the roundtable sessions, we need to develop a thorough understanding of the problems and questions in these accounts.

>>>

brochure.indd 16/01/2008, 18:4620-21

- 22 - - 23 -


One of the main problems in the debate about the construction of Hinduism is that it remains unclear what has been constructed: a concept, an object, or an experiential entity. Did the Europeans and their informants invent a new concept to describe and classify the religious and social phenomena of India? Or did they actually create a new religion, a real entity in Indian society? Or did they do both? Or does ‘Hinduism’ merely describe a pat-tern in the western cultural experience of India? Even though most authors try to defend one of these positions, they continue to vacillate between these very different and incompa-tible options. Moreover, the different answers to the question what has been constructed are themselves confronted with a series of difficulties:

1. One of the central claims in the debate is that ‘Hinduism’ came into being as a European concept or category that unified the variety of religious tradi-tions in India into one category ‘Hinduism’. Hence, Europeans denied and reduced the diversity of the Indian traditions. Here, the following problems come to the fore: (1) Rather than ignoring or denying the religious diversity of India, from the earliest contacts with India onwards the European writ-ings have often shown great awareness of the diversity of the Indian tradi-tions, which they brought under the label of ‘Hinduism’. (2) It is unclear why the categorisation of any number of traditions into the class ‘Hinduism’ should deny or reduce the internal diversity of that class. For instance, brin-ging 6 billion human beings under the class Homo sapiens does not reduce the internal diversity of the human species. If this is so, then why would the class ‘Hinduism’ do this? (3) If, instead of one Hinduism, a variety of reli-gions exists in India, the question arises as to what makes these different tra-ditions into distinct religions. The same problems that confront the notion of ‘one Hindu religion’ - namely, the absence of common beliefs, texts and practices that allow us to identify this religion - also return for each of these ‘religions’.

2. Often it is also claimed that the encounter between the colonials and their informants created a new religion, namely the object Hinduism. This claim raises another set of problems: to substantiate the claim that a small group

of British colonials created a new religion and imposed it on the whole of India in less than two centuries, one would need very strong empirical and theoretical evidence. Naturally, some of the British policies and the census in particular did have effects on the Indian society. But it seems a far stretch to suggest that these effects resulted in the creation of a new religion. Was Indian society like clay that could be manipulated at will by the British? Did the Indian subjects reform their society in the image that the colonial masters had? Moreover, in order to defend this stance, one would have to clarify which properties (or which structure) were lacking in ‘what existed in pre-colonial India’ and were introduced by the British. Moreover, one would have to show that these are the properties (or structure) of religion.

Another central issue in the constructionist accounts is who constructed Hinduism and why. On the one hand, it is claimed that the British colonials created Hinduism and that they created it because of their imperialist motives and colonial needs, and because they used a ‘Judaeo-Christian’ concept of religion to understand the Indian religions. On the other hand, many also refer to the native collaboration, especially of the Brahmins, in the construction of Hinduism. These approaches, too, face a range of problems:

1. Most often the western search for unity is explained by referring to the colonial needs or the motives of the colonial administration. The problems here are the following: (1) The Islamic colonial rule was in place for centuries before the British colonisation. If the needs of colonial administration caused the construction of a unified religion, then how can we account for the fact that the Mughals never created such a unified religion for their administra-tive needs? (2) Even though the British introduced the terms ‘Hinduism’ and ‘Hindu religion’, the general conception of Hinduism was already present in earlier European accounts of India. Long before the 19th century, Jesuit missionaries and European travellers had described a very similar pattern, which they saw in the Indian traditions. (3) In fact, the British descriptions of the Indian traditions were very much coloured by what their continental

>>>

brochure.indd 16/01/2008, 18:4622-23

- 24 - - 25 -


European colleagues wrote. If the colonial motives of the British inspired the construction of Hinduism, then how can we understand the fact that the Orientalist study of Hinduism flourished mainly and firstly in the Continen-tal European universities?

2. A second reason given for the creation of such a unified religion is that the study of Hinduism has been influenced by Christian theology. By using a western or ‘Judaeo-Christian’ concept of religion - with a focus on properties such as sacred texts, doctrines, a priestly authority and a belief in one God - the constructionists argue, the specific nature of Hinduism has been ignored or distorted. The problem here is that it remains unclear what is wrong with such a Christian-theological influence. For instance, Newton’s physics was deeply influenced by his Christian theological perspective, which told him that the world embodied God’s will. However, this does not have any impact on the truth value of his theory. Therefore, the claim about the influence of Christian theology is interesting only in so far that it shows how Christian-ity determined the western conception of religion in India and more impor-tantly what is problematic about the way it did it.

3. Many constructionist accounts refer to the native collaboration in the construction of Hinduism. It is suggested that, with the help of the British, the Brahmins imposed their own Brahminical view of religion on the rest of Indian society. Here, the tendency to blame the ‘Brahmin priests’ for all that goes wrong in Indian society prevents us from addressing more interesting problems: How did the dialogue between the colonial scholars and the native informants work? Did the Indian informants understand what the British meant when they said ‘religion’, ‘law’, ‘priests’, ‘scripture’, ‘god’, ‘caste’, etc.? Did the British understand the Indians when they said ‘dharma’, ‘jati’, ‘shas-

tra’, ‘deva’, ‘brahmana’, etc.? How did the different cultural backgrounds dis-tort the mutual understanding?

There is, of course, another way of looking at the relationship between colonialism and the Indian religions:

‘Hinduism’ does not refer to any reality in the world. It does not exist in contemporary India any more than it did in pre-colonial India. Instead, ‘Hinduism’ exists only as an expe-riential entity that has given structure and coherence to the European experience of the Indian culture. That is, the West has seen a (Hindu) religion in India, because of its own nature as a (religious) culture. Thus, the answer to the question ‘what has been constructed’ is that ‘Hinduism’ is a construct to the extent that it is a concept. It is also a construct because, as an experiential entity, it unifies the western experience. Yet, even though the British colonials and European scholars made this experiential entity into an object of study, colonialism did not bring Hinduism into existence. The Europeans spoke about such enti-ties as though they existed. They acted as though these entities were real. They instituted policies, law systems, legal categories, etc. as though these entities were central aspects of the Indian culture. However, neither before nor after colonialism have such entities or phe-nomena existed.

Instead of apportioning the blame for the construction of an alien religion and the subse-quent denial of diversity in India, the above argument generates questions of the following sort: What in the western culture compelled it to see a religion in another culture? How could the experience of one particular culture be mistaken for a true description of the world (or of another culture, in this case)? Moreover, why did so many of the Indians succumb to this description of the western experience of India and accept it as a self-description?

>>>

brochure.indd 16/01/2008, 18:4624-25

- 26 - - 27 -


Roundtable speakers

• Akeel Bilgrami is Johnsonian Professor of Philosophy and Director of The Heyman Center for the Humanities at Columbia University, USA. His areas of specialisation range from philosophy of language, through philosophy of mind, to political philosophy and moral psychology. He relates these subjects to broader social and cultural issues such as the problem of secularism in India, Gandhi’s philosophy, and the Muslim cultural identity.

• Geoffrey A. Oddie is Honorary Research Associate in the Department of History at the University of Sydney, Australia. His research experience on social change in South Asia, Hinduism and Christianity, especially in South India, has led to a series of important works on religious and social developments in nineteenth and twentieth-century India. His most recent book Imagined Hinduism (2006) is an important contribution to the research on missionary discourse and the impact of colonialism on religion in India.

• John Zavos is Lecturer in South Asian Studies in the School of Arts, Histories and Cul-tures at the University of Manchester, UK. His areas of interest are the relationship between religion and politics in South Asia, the South Asian Diaspora, the Hindu nationalist move-ment and the impact of the ‘invention of Hinduism’ debate on teaching about South Asian religious traditions. He has also worked on the World Parliament of Religions. He is the author of The Emergence of Hindu Nationalism in India (2000).

• Laurie L. Patton is Winship Distinguished Research Professor in the Humanities and Professor of Early Indian Religions at Emory University. Her interests are in the interpreta-tion of early Indian ritual and narrative, comparative mythology, and literary theory in the study of religion. She is author or editor of six books and thirty articles in these fields. Most recently, she is the editor of Jewels of Authority: Women and Text in the Hindu Tradition (2002), and the author of a book on the use of poetry in Vedic ritual, Bringing the Gods to Mind (University of California Press, 2004). Her book of poetry, Fire’s Goal: Poems from a Hindu Year (2003) will be followed by a translation of the Bhagavad Gita (forthcoming) from Penguin Press Classics.

• Richard King is Associate Professor of Religious Studies and Senior Research Fellow in the Center for the Study of Religion and Culture, Vanderbilt University, USA. He works on

Indian philosophy and the impact of colonialism on the Indian traditions. He has published a number of important essays on the study of religion in India. Especially his Orientalism and Religion (1999) has significantly influenced the field.

• Sharada Sugirtharajah is Senior Lecturer in Hinduism in the Department of Theology at the University of Birmingham, UK. Her research interests include the representations of Hinduism in the colonial and contemporary periods, women and spirituality, and inter-religious relations. She has recently authored an important monograph on the colonial descriptions of Hinduism from a post-colonial perspective: Imagining Hinduism (2003).

Roundtable respondents

• Vivek Dhareshwar is Senior Fellow at the Centre for the Study of Culture and Society in Bangalore, India. His research interests include the reconceptualisation of the human sciences, caste, and democracy. His current work is exploring the possibility of transforming the human sciences by rethinking the Indian intellectual traditions.

• Martin Fárek is Lecturer at the Department of Religious Studies and Philosophy, University of Pardubice, Czech Republic. He has published on the western descriptions of the Caitanya Vaishnava tradition. In his research, he also takes up the problem of defining Hinduism, the western constructions of the caste system, and the issue of transplanting the Indian traditions to the West.

• Jakob De Roover is Post-Doctoral Fellow of the Research Foundation (FWO) Flanders at the Research Centre Vergelijkende Cultuurwetenschap, Ghent University, Belgium. His research concerns the cultural history of toleration and secularism in the West and the impact of western political thought on colonial and post-colonial India.

• Raf Gelders is Doctoral Fellow of the Research Foundation (FWO) Flanders at the Research Centre Vergelijkende Cultuurwetenschap, Ghent University, Belgium. He is doing doctoral research on the genealogy of colonial discourse, where he focuses on the interplay between first-person reports and the scholarly disciplines in sixteenth and seventeenth-century Europe.

>>>

brochure.indd 16/01/2008, 18:4626-27

- 28 - - 29 -

SPECIAL IASR PANELAPPROACHES TO THE ACADEMIC STUDY OF RELIGION FROM WITHIN CONTEMPORARY INDIA

ORGANISED BY THE INDIAN ASSOCIATION FOR THE STUDY OF RELIGION (IASR)

Co-chairs • Asha Mukherjee and Joseph. T. O’ConnellRoom: Conference hall (ground floor)22 January 2008, 17.15-19.15

Speakers • Joseph T. O’Connell, Asha Mukherjee, Madhu Khanna, Amiya P. Sen, D.A. Gangadhar and Satyapal Gautam

Panel abstract

The practice of the academic study of religion - or ‘comparative religion’ as it is often called here in India - is still so recent and so very limited in scope that its typical contours are as yet indistinct. But we do think that if what is so recent and limited a phenomenon in India is to have a future that extends its scope significantly, it needs to be conceived of and implemented in ways that realistically address the religious traditions present in India and the historical environment of religion in India of today and tomorrow.

This panel examines the distinctive character and circumstances of the nascent profession of the comparative study of religion here in India through six presentations: Joseph T. O’Connell considers how scholars in India may contribute to our thinking globally about “method and theory” in the study of religion. Asha Mukherjee discusses what it means to do comparative religion in India among diverse pressures and challenges. Madhu Khanna examines seminal reasons for the historical exclusion of religious studies from the encyclo-paedia of academic studies in India. Amiya Sen questions the premise that religion is always a captive of our social environment. D.A. Gangadhar looks at Vivekananda, Radhakrishnan and Malaviya for clues on how the academic study of religion in the Indian context may

proceed. Satyapal Gautam looks at obstacles to the academic study of religion in relation to the religions of North-West India.

>>>

brochure.indd 16/01/2008, 18:4628-29

- 30 - - 31 -

Individual abstracts

PAPER I - INDIAN CONCEPTUAL AND SYMBOLIC RESOURCES FOR METHOD AND THEORY IN THE STUDY OF RELIGION

• Joseph T. O’Connell, Professor (Emeritus) in the Study of Religion University of Toronto (Canada); Visiting Professor of World Religions, University of Dhaka (Bangladesh) and Visva-Bharati (India)

Abstract

This paper draws attention to three respects in which the religio-philosophic traditions in India, from classical to modern, may be seen as having significant potential to contribute to a more globally adequate conceptual framework or discourse for ‘method and theory’ in the study of religion (the long history of systematic Indian attempts at understanding religious diversity; elaboration of methods of personal religious transformation; a wealth of symboli-cally pregnant religious terms-cum-categories). It also suggests that scholars native to and/or based in India, despite facing obstacles in other ways, may be especially well positioned to develop such potential for enriching and broadening how we think globally about ‘method and theory’. Certain examples will be elaborated.

PAPER II - COMPARATIVE RELIGION AS AN ACADEMIC STUDY IN CONTEMPORARY INDIA

• Asha Mukherjee, Professor and Head Department of Philosophy and Religion, Visva-Bharati Santiniketan (Santiniketan, India)

Abstract

This paper argues that the different forms of the ‘Academic Study of Religion’ in the West hardly have core characteristics on which there is a consensus of scholars. Further-more, in the Indian context it is the form designated ‘Comparative Religion’ that has re-levance and that brings an interesting methodology to the academic study. The presence of a large diverse population furnishes a diversity of backgrounds, sensitivities and language competences for Indian scholars of religion. Contemporary contributions to comparative methodology in the study of religion are discussed and the question how far its application in the Indian context is feasible are assessed. The paper concludes by proposing an answer to what it means to do ‘Comparative Religion’ of an authentic sort among diverse pressures, expectations, challenges and opportunities in India.

PAPER III - SOME REFLECTIONS ON THE ACADEMIC STUDY OF RELIGIONS IN INDIA - WHITHER & WHY?

• Madhu Khanna, Professor of Religious and Indic Studies Centre for the Study of Comparative Religions and Civilizations, Jamia Millia University (New Delhi, India)

Abstract

Even after sixty years of independence from British rule, there is no institutional forum in India that considers an academic study of world religions to be relevant. The secular perspective based on rationalist-empiricist and reductive positions, provides the dominant framework for educational planning in India. By denying an academic forum on the study of religions in our universities, India is unwittingly giving in to colonisation of knowledge.

While examining some of the seminal reasons for the historical exclusion of religious stu-

SPECIAL IASR PANELAPPROACHES TO THE ACADEMIC STUDY OF RELIGION FROM WITHIN CONTEMPORARY INDIA >>>

brochure.indd 16/01/2008, 18:4630-31

- 32 - - 33 -

dies from the Indian academia, the paper will comment on the positive reconstruction of religious studies in India that may stir a creative dialogue among and between scholars the world over.

PAPER IV - APPROACHES TO THE ACADEMIC STUDY OF RELIGION IN CONTEMPORARY INDIA

• Amiya P. Sen, ProfessorRabindra Bhavan, Visva Bharati Santiniketan (Santiniketan, India)

Abstract

Structurally, this paper may be divided into two parts. The first argues that the birth of an academic interest in religion followed certain momentous historical developments, a reaction to the abstract universalism of the Enlightenment. The growth of an interest in ‘comparative religion’ may justly be traced back to this new albeit somewhat positivistic intellectual environment. The second part deals with the anxieties that historians of free India have often revealed towards the pursuit of religion as an autonomous field of study; and consequently to its exclusion from the framework of ‘social history’. Academically speaking, one unhappy result is unimaginative reductionism that many scholars employ in their study of religion. My own endeavour, on the contrary, is to question the premise that religion is always a captive of our social environment.

PAPER V - ACADEMIC STUDY OF RELIGION IN INDIA: THROUGH DIALOGUE AND BHAKTI

• D.A. Gangadhar, Professor Department of Philosophy and Religion, Banaras Hindu University (Varanasi, India)

SPECIAL IASR PANELAPPROACHES TO THE ACADEMIC STUDY OF RELIGION FROM WITHIN CONTEMPORARY INDIA >>>

Abstract

India has been a land of study of religion since its antiquity. At the various stages of its development, religion has been a subject of intellectual as well as experiential enquiry here, from Upanishadic dialogues through medieval Sufi and bhakti mystics to modern intel-lectuals. In this paper my objective is to focus on the sources and materials available for the academic study of religion in India, especially as exemplified by Swami Vivekananda, Radhakrishnan and Pandit Madan Mohan Malaviya, thus highlighting the contribution of the philosophical and comparative study of religion. I would argue that we did not and need not follow the western path for an academic study of religion in India. We need to concentrate on our own experiences, knowledge and beliefs to guide such study.

PAPER VI - ACADEMIC STUDY OF RELIGION: PROBLEMS AND PROSPECTS;LESSONS FROM STUDIES IN NORTH-WEST INDIA

• Satyapal Gautam, Professor Department of Philosophy, Jawaharlal Nehru University (New Delhi, India).

Abstract

In North-West India, contemporary leaders and followers of various religions have often opposed either the academic study of religion as such or rejected its findings when they have not found them congenial to their vested interests or dogmatic concerns. Many of the scholars had to face social persecution (when members of the religious community which they were studying) or condemnation and harassment (when outsiders studying a particular religion), especially in the context of Sikhism recently. This presentation illustrates such obstacles with a view to explore the ways in which such obstacles could be minimised, if not

eliminated altogether. The social context of the difficulties in an interpretive / hermeneutic study of these religions will also be considered in the proposed presentation.

brochure.indd 16/01/2008, 18:4632-33

- 34 - - 35 -

ORGANISED BY INDIRA GANDHI NATIONAL CENTRE FOR THE ARTS

Panel 1:Room: Conference hall (ground floor)Tuesday 22 January 2008, 11.30-13.30

Speakers: • K.D. Tripathi, Professor Emeritus, Banaras Hindu University and Honorary Coordinator, IGNCA branch Varanasi (Varanasi, India)• Shrivatsa Goswami, Director - Chaitanya Prema Sansthan • Lokesh Chandra, Director - International Academy of Indian Culture (Delhi, India)• T.N. Madan, Professor Emeritus of Sociology - Institute of Economic Growth, Delhi University (Delhi, India)• J.S. Neki, leading Sikh scholar, formerly director of the All Indian Institute of Medical Science, Chandigarh

Panel 2: Room: Conference hall (ground floor)Wednesday 23 January 2008, 11.30-13.30

Speakers: • Kapil Tiwari, Secretary - Tribal Folk Art Academy (Bhopal, India)• G.C. Tripathi, Professor and Head - Kala Kosa, Indira Gandhi National Centre of the Arts (Delhi, India)• Veena Das, Professor of sociology - John Hopkins University (Baltimore, USA)• Madhu Khanna, Professor of Religious and Indic Studies - Centre for the Study of Com-

parative Religions and Civilizations, Jamia Millia University (Delhi, India)• Molly Kaushal, Associate Professor - Janapada Sampada, Indira Gandhi National Centre of the Arts (Delhi, India)

SPECIAL IGNCA PANELTERMINOLOGIES, INTERPRETATIONS AND RELIGIOUS EXPERIENCES: PERSPECTIVES ON THE RELIGION OF THE SELF >>>

Panel abstract

This special IGNCA panel will focus mainly on the religious experience of persons profes-sing Hinduism. The speakers will talk about their own spiritual experience, rather than analysing the phenomenon of religion in an academic or intellectual manner. They will try to elaborate what it means for them to be a Hindu. The scholars will also throw light on whether they consider Hinduism as a single religion, or rather a conglomerate of a number of religions; whether in their opinion it is a ‘religion’ at all (just like the monotheistic reli-gions) or rather simply ‘a way of life’. Some speakers will also try to define Hinduism and

religion from an Indian perspective and question some of the definitions that are commonly given for religion based on western concepts.

brochure.indd 16/01/2008, 18:4634-35

- 36 - - 37 -

The presenters of the Parallel Paper sessions have been selected on the basis of the submis-sion of abstracts. Even though the number of abstracts was unexpectedly high, the number of papers has been kept limited so as to ensure the possibility of having focused and qualita-tive discussions. In total there will be nine Parallel Paper sessions on the following four themes:

(1) Evolutionary explanations of religion(2) Indians are Aryans, so what?(3) The caste system and Indian religion(4) Colonialism and religion in India

22 January 2008, 09.00-11.00

Caste system and Indian religion 1Room: Seminar room I (ground floor)

Chair • Geoffrey Oddie

Speakers: • Paolo Aranha, Missionary constructions of Hinduism and caste in the controversy on the Mala-baric Rites (XVII-XVIII centuries)• Scaria Zacharia, Caste system and Indian Religion• Esther Bloch, The Puzzle of the Indian Religion and its Caste System • Sarah Claerhout, Hinduism, Caste and the Steps of Christian Conversion

PARALLEL PAPER SESSIONS >>>Indians are Aryans, so what?Room: Seminar room II (ground floor)

Chair • Martin Fárek

Speaker • Marianne Keppens, Indians are Aryans, so what?

Respondent • Rajaram Hegde

Colonialism and religion in India 1Room: National Mission for Manuscripts Hall (third floor)

Chair • Akeel Bilgrami

Speakers: • Amitava Chakraborty, Constructions of Hinduism: Understanding the Swarajist Interven-tions• Santanu Dey, Kedarnath Datta Bhaktivinode Thakur; Autobiographic and Hagiographic Imaging of a Vaishnava Reformer in Colonial Bengal• Purnendu Ranjan, Kabirpanth during Colonial Period

brochure.indd 16/01/2008, 18:4636-37

- 38 - - 39 -

23 January 2008, 09.00-11.00

Caste system and Indian religion 2Room: National Mission for Manuscripts Hall (third floor)

Chair • John Zavos

Speakers: • Cláudia Pereira, Religion and Caste: the Christian and Hindu Gaudde of Goa• Ülo Valk, Caste Divisions in Religious Narratives of Tamil Nadu• Sumio Morijiri, Rethinking Animism in India and Japan. A Comparative Perspective

Colonialism and religion in India 2Room: Seminar room I (ground floor)

Chair • Richard King

Speakers: • James Hegarty, On Mistaking Names for Things: Provincializing ‘Post-Westernisms’ and Delineating the Function of Imagination in the Study of Religion (or ‘Everything can be justified but not everything can be justified by anything’)• Raf Gelders, Dindimus and the Indian Priest. Orientalist Tropes in Sixteenth-Century Europe• Masahiko Togawa, Encountering Islam: Historiography of Caitany in the Gauriya Vaisnava Literature

24 January 2008, 09.00-11.00

Evolutionary explanations of religionRoom: Seminar room I (ground floor)

Chair • Sadananda Janekere

Speakers: • Jakob De Roover, Animal Religiosum? Human Evolution and the Universality of Religion• Peter Gottschalk, Scientism and the Evolution of Religion

Caste system and Indian religion 3Room: National Mission for Manuscripts Hall (third floor)

Chair • Vivek Dhareshwar

Speakers: • A. Shanmukha, The Practice of Untouchability and Hinduism• Dunkin Jalki, Stereotyped Stories and their Action Consequences• Rajaram Hegde, Fictitious Connections: Caste system and Hinduism

Caste system and Indian religion 4Room: Seminar room II (ground floor)

Chair • Sharada Sugirtharajah

Speakers: • Meera Ashar, The caste system and Indian religion• Rishabh Sancheti and Padma Priya, Spread of the Caste System Beyond Hinduism. A Law and Economics Perspective• Sindhu Shankar, The Debate on Conversion in India

PARALLEL PAPER SESSIONS I >>>

brochure.indd 16/01/2008, 18:4638-39

- 40 - - 41 -

Caste system and Indian religion 1

• Paolo Aranha, Doctoral Student Department of History and Civilization, European University Institute (Florence, Italy)

Missionary constructions of Hinduism and caste in the controversy on the Malabaric Rites (XVII-XVIII centuries)

The adaptationist methods followed by the Jesuits in their Madurai mission after the arrival of Roberto Nobili in 1606 produced both in India and in Europe the so called “Controver-sies on the Malabaric Rites”. The whole principle of “missionary adaptation” (accomodatio) was based on the belief that in regions as India or China it was possible to draw a clear line between social and cultural phenomena on one side and religious beliefs and practices on the other.

The Jesuits claimed that the caste system was purely social, so that neophytes could bring it with them once they joined the Catholic Church. Caste distinctions were seen as compa-tible with Christianity and even untouchability was supposed to be analogous to European forms of social distinction and exclusion. If castes were merely social, it was necessary to trace the borders of the “Indian heathenism” (“Hinduism” was not yet an available category) as a specific religion.

The paper analyses the implicit characters that the religion of the great majority of South Indians had in the eyes of the Jesuit missionaries and tries to verify whether this meant an interiorisation and privatisation of religion. It also considers the way the critics of the “Malabaric Rites” described the Indian native religion. The dichotomy between “aristocratic analogies” and “demotic descriptions”, proposed by Ines Županov in her book Disputed

Mission (OUP India, 1999), will be applied in order to see whether it allows us also to detect the line that connects different treatises against the Malabaric Rites written between the XVII and the XVIII centuries.

PARALLEL PAPER SESSIONS IABSTRACTS OF THE PARALLEL PAPER SESSIONS >>>

Finally, using the sources of the Roman Archives of the Holy Office and of the Congrega-tion for the Propagation of the Faith, the paper analyses reports and theological debates, substantiated with abundant ethnographic accounts, through which the central Catholic bureaucracy in Rome tried to interpret the Indian castes and particularly the practices of untouchability.

The aim is to extend the debate on the colonial construction of Hinduism to a phase and to actors which have not yet been sufficiently studied, i.e. the early modern Catholic missio-naries in South India and the pre-orientalistic interpretations they produced on the religion of the people they sought to convert. The paper will discuss to which extent these missio-nary constructions could be also interpreted as colonial productions, in a period and a region where France, Great Britain and other minor European nations were still competing with each other and all depended to a great extent on local South Indian powers.

brochure.indd 16/01/2008, 18:4640-41

- 42 - - 43 -

PARALLEL PAPER SESSIONS IABSTRACTS OF THE PARALLEL PAPER SESSIONS >>>• Scaria Zacharia, Professor Emeritus of Malayalam School of Letters, Mahatma Gandhi University (Changanacherry, India)

Caste system and Indian Religion

The question “are there native religions in India” has to be asked in the larger context of the everyday life of Indians. The colonial wisdom eschewed everyday life and drew from textual sources provided by the upper class priestly groups of Indian society. Indology and orienta-lism reinforced this process and developed it to the extent of influencing the self-perception of ordinary western educated Indians. So, there is justification in searching for alternative methodologies to understand the ‘religious’ heritage of India.

Let me draw your attention to Kerala, which had Jews, Christians and Muslims as distinct religious communities even during the first millennium of CE. These Semitic religious groups existed in Kerala society as distinct but totally integrated communities. (In this con-text, I’d love to describe Kerala society as a hyphenated society where oneness is maintained along with distinctions. It works like a hyphenated compound where hyphen maintains both distinctiveness of components and oneness of the compound.) The working principles of this model can be learned from the study of Tarisappally Copper Plate Grants to Thomas Christians (8th Century), Jewish Copper Plate Grants 10th Century. The identification of these religious communities during the pre-colonial period can provide clues for under-standing religious identification in India as a distinct process. The sixteenth century docu-ment of the Synod of Diamper refers to the traditional Thomas Christians’ claim that they are a distinct Jati ‘sect/community’. The colonial wisdom has no hesitation in translating Jati as ‘caste’. The terms kulam and Jati are used by Jews also to refer to their community. We find ample reasons to contest the colonial practice of translating Jati as Caste from the living experience of Indian Jews and Christians for the Jews and Christians Jati was and is their community identity. The leader of the Christian community was described in the pre-

colonial period as Jatikkukartavyan which means ‘the head of the community’.

The Portuguese and other colonialists translated Indian concepts and practices in terms of western Christian concepts and practices causing total intellectual confusion, which is

carried on to the present. For example, colonialists translated Marthomayude margavum Vazhipadum as law of St. Thomas. The arbitrary manner in which the marga is translated as law can be cited as the typical example of western intellectualisation of Indian Knowledge and experience. The critical concept in the pre-colonial Indian Christian discourse is inangu ‘communion’. The religiosity was performed during the pre-colonial India through Inangu ‘communion’ and it was not exclusivist or monopolistic. We hope this dimension of the everyday Indian religious life is pertinent in understanding the caste system of pre-colonial India.

• Esther Bloch, Doctoral Student Research Centre Vergelijkende Cultuurwetenschap, Ghent University (Ghent, Belgium)

The Puzzle of the Indian Religion and its Caste System

A central idea of Indology is that Indian history has gone through a religious evolution during which the Vedic religion degenerated into Brahmanism, which later found its popu-lar translation in what is now considered to be India’s main religion, Hinduism. Closely linked to this is another supposedly central aspect of the Indian culture, namely the social structure of the caste system. Looking at the juncture between the descriptions of a degene-rated religion and the conceptualisation of the caste system in the late nineteenth and early twentieth century, I will try to show that these descriptions are descriptions of the western cultural experience of India rather than of the Indian culture itself.

The consensus in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries took the following form: the Indian religion went through a movement of degeneration from Vedism over Brahma-nism into Hinduism. The Brahmin priests are supposed to have corrupted the Vedic reli-gion. Traditions such as Buddhism, Jainism, the Bhakti movement, etc., are regarded as

catalysts in this development, because they are thought to have threatened the survival of Brahmanical religion. Furthermore, it is presumed that, because of the degeneration, Hin-duism is characterised by the absence of a church authority and a common creed. Therefore, it also seems to lack any source of excommunication and means of conversion. This leads

brochure.indd 16/01/2008, 18:4642-43

- 44 - - 45 -

PARALLEL PAPER SESSIONS IABSTRACTS OF THE PARALLEL PAPER SESSIONS >>>to a fundamental puzzle about the existence of the Hindu religion: Can a religion (any reli-gion) exist and be transmitted, if these characteristics are lacking? The literature notices the difficulty, but translates the puzzle into the following question: ‘If the absence of these cha-racteristics jeopardises the existence, survival and propagation of the Hindu religion, what else made its stubborn persistence possible?’ The textbook answer to this question revolves around the Brahman priests and their caste system: it is said that the Brahmans recognised this challenge to their priestly hegemony and to the survival of their religion and cunningly developed the caste system as a means to sustain their religious authority. In order to understand why the puzzle is not taken seriously and dissolves into another question, we need to understand the background of the culture that has produced these accounts. My paper will briefly show how the central ideas in the late nineteenth- and early twentieth-century accounts about idolatry and false religion, about different traditions as rival and competing religions, about the corrupting influence of the priesthood and its oppression of the masses, had their roots in the Christian theological debates of Europe. Finally, I will indicate how these theological views have spread in a de-Christianised form.

• Sarah Claerhout, Doctoral Student Research Centre Vergelijkende Cultuurwetenschap, Ghent University (Ghent, Belgium)

Hinduism, Caste and the Steps of Christian Conversion

The question whether or not there is a link between Hinduism and the caste system is a constant in the literature on the Indian culture and society. Still, it is unclear how it is to be settled. The fact that Hindu beliefs and texts have been invoked to sanction (or to con-demn) caste discrimination does not establish a link (or its absence). Otherwise we would also have to say that there is an intrinsic connection (or opposition) between Christianity

and slavery. One could point out that the Hindu law books, the Manu dharmashastra in particular, prescribe the caste hierarchy. But it is unclear today what role, if any, these books have played in determining the social structures of India. Given such difficulties, how did the question about the link between Hinduism and the caste system appear a sensible one

in the first place?

My paper will argue that the issue emerged in the European descriptions of India, because it was essential to western Christendom to establish a deep link between the religion of India and the immorality in its society. This was to show how ‘false religion’ did not only prevent one from attaining salvation in the next life, but also condemned one to be either the victim or the perpetrator of injustice in the present life.

To understand this, we need to look at the historical developments in the European culture. After the Reformation, the concern of many Christians for following and spreading the ‘true religion of God’ had taken a new form. The struggle against all human interference in religion became pivotal. One attributed the degeneration and corruption of religion to this interference, especially in the form of the priestly hierarchy. The remedy was to be the introduction of a new process of conversion. Each individual believer had to live according to the will of God and turn to God when called. All human additions-that is, all that is absent in the Scriptures-had to be eradicated.

By describing the Indian traditions as ‘false religion’ and by locating the unity of this ‘false religion’ in the caste system and the Brahmin priests, western Christians had identified the enemy to be defeated in India. Educating the Indians was seen as the first step in this pro-cess: one had to teach them how the brahmanical Hinduism and the caste hierarchy were intertwined and how this corrupted the heart of Indian society. This was a major concern in the British educational efforts of the 19th century. This is where the question about the link between Hinduism and the caste system comes from.

brochure.indd 16/01/2008, 18:4644-45

- 46 - - 47 -

PARALLEL PAPER SESSIONS IABSTRACTS OF THE PARALLEL PAPER SESSIONS >>>Indians are Aryans, so what?

• Marianne Keppens, Doctoral Student Research Centre Vergelijkende Cultuurwetenschap, Ghent University (Ghent, Belgium)

Indians are Aryans, so what?

One of the most heated debates that has occupied scholars from several different domains over the last few decades is the controversy about the Aryan invasion theory. One side of the debate is represented by those who defend the standard Aryan invasion theory. The latter claim that a Sanskrit-speaking Aryan people invaded or entered India around 1500 BC and brought along a language, religion and social structure which they imposed on the indigenous population. The other side of the debate is represented by those who claim that the Aryan people, their language and religion have always been present in India and hence that an invasion could never have happened. However, when we look at the arguments given by both sides we can only conclude that India has known a long history of different groups of people, cultural elements and languages, etc. coexisting and mutually influencing each other. The question then becomes: what is problematic about this? It is in answer to this last question that we suggest to look at how the Aryan invasion theory was developed in the nineteenth century. In this paper we would like to argue that the theory itself was not based on any scientific or empirical facts about Indian languages, archaeo-logy or his-tory. Instead we will argue that it developed as an explanation of two main entities in the European experience of India: the caste system and the degeneration of the religion of the Vedas. The Aryan invasion theory not only explained how the caste system came into being, it also accounted for the degeneration of the religion of the Vedas and allowed for the clas-sification of its evolution into the three main phases, viz. Vedism, Brahmanism and Hindu-ism. When we look at the debate as it is taking place today we see that it is still not possible to defend the occurrence of such an Aryan invasion on the basis of the available linguistic, archaeological or other facts. Both the importance of the issue as well as its controversial nature are situated in the fact that the Aryan invasion theory never had any reference to events that took place in reality. Instead, it is a theory that explained entities that only exist in the European experience of India. As such, if we want to understand how the Aryan invasion theory, as well as the ‘caste system’ ‘brahmanism’ and other related concepts, came into being we need to study the development of western culture and its internal dynamic of Christian secularisation.

Colonialism and religion in India 1

• Amitava Chakraborty, Reader Department of Modern Indian Languages and Literary Studies, University of Delhi (Delhi, India)

Constructions of Hinduism: Understanding the Swarajist Interventions

While Post-colonial scholars will argue that Hinduism is essentially a colonial construct and the classicists shall assert that Hinduism as a religion did exist before colonial constructions came into work, we intend to look into the history of engagement with Hinduism during the colonial era from a different perspective. Our primary assumption is that Swarajist affili-ations played an important role in determining the nature of engagement of the Indians with Hinduism during the Colonial and Post-Colonial era and resulted in specific construc-tions of the idea of Hinduism; constructions which have influenced the practices and ideas of Hinduism irreversibly. Swarajist moments, moments which interrogated the questions of identity from a relatively independent disposition, have rendered Hinduism identities which were in visible contrast to those of the colonialist constructions. This paper offers a critical introduction to constructions characterised by Swarajist interventions arguing for a fresh look in the issues involved in the contemporary debate on the nature of the develop-ment of Hinduism through the colonial era.

• Santanu Dey, Lecturer History Department, RKM Vidyamandira (Belurmath, India)

Kedarnath Datta Bhaktivinode Thakur; Autobiographic and Hagiographic Imaging of a Vaishnava Reformer in Colonial Bengal

This paper tries to engage with the broad theme of ‘Colonialism and Religion in India’ by probing the life of Kedarnath Datta (1838-1914), a middle class Kayastha born at Birnagar

brochure.indd 16/01/2008, 18:4646-47

- 48 - - 49 -

in Nadiya District of present West Bengal who later went on to become a District Magis-trate in the colonial administrative set up. From the late 1860s Kedarnath became attracted to Chaitanya Vaishnavism and sought to retrieve its lost glory with a zeal that earned him the epithet ‘Bhaktivinod Thakur’ from a traditional Vaishnavite monastic establishment. Kedarnath’s role is crucial since we find in him an English educated bhadralok bureaucrat assuming the role of a ‘bhakta avatar’ and disseminating ‘Pure Bhakti’ (Shuddha Bhakti) through the formation of the Vishwa Vaishnava Sabha and the publication of a Bengali journal entitled ‘Sajjantoshani’. In this paper I analyse the dialectic between the self-con-struction of a Vaishnava identity in the textualised printed format of an autobiography by Kedarnath Datta in 1896 and the sacred eulogised construction of the image of the guru in a hagiography written on Bhaktivinod Thakur by his disciple Krishnadas Babaji around 1914.

Through an attempt to focus on the embeddedness of these texts to their colonial setting I contend that the colonial encounter with the Gaudiya Vaishnava tradition in Bengal produced a transformation that appropriated the pre-colonial past as much as its colonial present. The late 19th century Gaudiya Vaishnava reform process professed to recreate the pristine tenets preached by Lord Chaitanya and the Vrndavana Goswamis in the early 16th century but at the ground level it also sought to internalise the whole range of critiques of the Vaishnava Sahajiya sects emanating from the statements of 19th century colonial mis-sionaries and Census observers among others.

Through this paper I seek to raise broader questions on this colonial encounter; how did the introduction of print and the consequent multiplicity of bhakti journals influence the dis-semination of Gaudiya Vaishnava tenets? How far did the parampara tradition and canon formation processes in Gaudiya Vaishnava tradition work out in the colonial period?

• Purnendu Ranjan, Lecturer Department of History, Government College for Girls, Punjab University (Chandigarh, India)Kabirpanth during Colonial Period

Kabirpanth, a nirgun devotional sect named after the great Indian sant Kabir, has been in existence in various parts of north and central India roughly since the 17th century. As per the conservative estimate by some scholars, the sect presently has not less than 3 million lay followers in India alone. Certain other Asian and African countries; such as, Nepal, Mauritus and Somaliland are also said to have a sizeable number of Kabirpanthi followers, who had settled there as indentured labourers during British rule. Its activities and existence have been acknowledged by a number of British colonial officers, ethnographers and Christian scholars during the 19th and 20th centuries. Most of the scholars working on the history of Kabir-panth have been consulting the writings of H.H. Wilson of early 19th and G.H. Westcott and F.E. Keay of the early 20th century. I have also made use of the survey of Francis Buchanan Hamilton of 1809 and the first census of British India of 1872 in my doctoral study.

The description of the panth in all these works of the colonial period has been picturesque and very minute. On perusal of these descriptions, one tends to believe that such graphic presentation of the sect’s activities could not have been aimed just to construct a unified pan-Indian Hindu religion. In fact, descriptions of each of these British scholars themselves seem to have been influenced by their personal prejudices. For instance, Wilson exhausted all his sources of study to prove that Kabir was of Hindu origin, whereas G.H. Westcott and F.E. Keay tried to contradict Wilson’s view and prove that Kabir was a Muslim Julaha (weaver) or a Sufi. Unlike these, the survey of Buchanan and the censuses conducted under the over-all administrative control of the colonial government appear to be reasonably objective in the description of the Kabirpanth.

No doubt, in pursuit of their exercises, they must have been guided and influenced by their knowledge of the Christian and Islamic religions, yet we have no reliable evidence in these descriptions of Kabirpanth to say that they were following a well-planned objective of con-structing a pan-Indian religion of Hindus. In view of the above works I would like to state that instead of focusing on the ‘construction’ aspect of the Hinduism, we should rather try to understand the complex process of the changing character and elements of the different cults

and sects which ultimately came to constitute the Hindu or the Indic religion.


brochure.indd 16/01/2008, 18:4648-49

- 50 - - 51 -

Caste system and Indian religion 2

• Cláudia Pereira, Professor Department of Anthropology, University Institute for Social Sciences, Labour Studies and Technologies (Lisbon, Portugal)

Religion and Caste: The Christian and Hindu Gaudde of Goa

This article analyses the relationship between Hindus and Christians in a village of Goa (southern India) and the reciprocal social and political classifications, attempting to under-stand their dynamics as part of a plural India under transformation. Focus is given to the Gaudde who are at the bottom of the social system and who show an interesting sociologi-cal duality: although they hold the status of a caste at the social level, they have been classi-fied as a Scheduled Tribe, and have consequently started to claim economic and educational benefits ascribed by law to Scheduled Tribes.

As with other similar groups in British India, the Gaudde were depicted as the first inhabit-ants of Goa both by Portuguese colonialism and by postcolonial literature and are consid-ered as a tribe. In spite of the fact that, like other communities in South India, Christian and Hindu Gaudde share sacred entities and public spaces, historical, social and ritual singulari-ties have arisen between them as a result of Portuguese colonialism in Goa that need to be understood - namely the specificities of conversion to Christianity under colonial power.

The article therefore deals on the one hand with the production of colonial knowledge and, on the other, with the processes of self-identification, examining the nature of caste at the ritual, social and political levels, and addressing the transformation of the Gaudde’s ways of representation as opposed to those produced by the government, the Catholic church and

the Hindu temple and most of all by the other castes living in the village.


• Ülo Valk, Professor Department of Estonian and Comparative Folklore, University of Tartu (Tartu, Estonia)

Caste Divisions in Religious Narratives of Tamil Nadu

Religious traditions (aideegam) of rural Tamil Nadu are dominated by local deities such as Aiyanar, Muniesvaran, Veeranar, Mariamman and many others. These deities figure in oral narratives that link social reality with supernatural sphere and affirm the active participa-tion of deities in the everyday life of villages, whose social structure is marked by caste divi-sions. The paper argues that vernacular forms of religion, such as oral traditions, customs and rituals, are powerful factors that contribute to the formation of social borders and caste identities. Some deities are worshipped by particular castes (e.g. Dalits worship Veeranar, Udaiyar worship Aiyanar, Arundidi worship Madurai Veeran, etc.). Biographical narratives about several deities are linked with the caste system. Thus, Jabardaka Muni’s wife Renuka Devi becomes goddess Mariamman when her head is mistakenly replaced with the head of a woman from Dobi caste. In another myth Murugan wants to marry a girl from the low Koravar caste who has to pass several tests before she gets permission from gods and becomes goddess Kathayi. Although deities support the caste divisions, they promote social movement upwards within the caste borders. Narratives confirm that devout worship makes people wealthy and provides them with successful careers.

The paper is based on the analysis of fieldwork interviews and narratives that have been recorded from the region around T. Athipakkam in the districts of Villupuram and Tiruvan-namalai in Tamil Nadu. Most informants were men and belong to the following castes: Udaiyar, Vanniyar, Reddiar (all farmers), Vellalar, Mudaliar (both agricultural landlords), Shettiars (well diggers), Sakliers (leather workers), Konars (shepherds) and Dalits (untouch-ables and agricultural labourers).

brochure.indd 16/01/2008, 18:4650-51

- 52 - - 53 -

• Sumio Morijiri, Visiting Professor Department of Kannada, Mangalore University (Mangalore, India)

Rethinking Animism in India and Japan. A comparative perspective

The main purpose of my paper is to compare the Japanese concept of Kami with the Indian concept of Bhuta. Both belong to folk religion.

Shintoism is a popular religion of Japan based on animism. It never had a problem with Buddhism, which arrived in Japan from India during the 7th century BC. The earliest avai-lable written text Kojiki talks about the religious feelings of early Japanese communities. If we see the Kojiki text and existing rituals in rural Japan, the supreme power is termed as ‘Kami’, which is very difficult to explain with the help of western terminologies. Hence, it is necessary to find out some new ways and terminologies to explain the concept of Kami. Japanese ‘Kami,’ like Indian Bhuta (of Tulunadu, Karnataka State) comes on earth during certain rituals through a shaman or priest who mediates between man and god. In this paper, I want to throw some light on the concept of Amateras (sun goddess) and Bhagavati of South India to explain the concept of supreme power ‘Kami’.

Buddhism in Japan had no problems with Shintoism. Both were synchronised properly. This synchronisation could be seen in Japanese contemporary folklore. I want to show this synchronisation with the help of an example of a Mother Goddess in Hinduism and Kannon Goddess of Japanese Buddhism.

The Japanese, like the Indians, worship the Mountain and the Sea. We believe that this represents the birth of human beings in another world. However, the worship is for the benefit of mountain, water, and agricultural society. This is equal to the Bhuta worship of Tulunadu.

My paper includes a video presentation on Japanese Kami and Indian Bhuta.


brochure.indd 16/01/2008, 18:4652-53

- 54 - - 55 -

PARALLEL PAPER SESSIONS IABSTRACTS OF THE PARALLEL PAPER SESSIONS >>>Colonialism and religion in India 2

• James M. Hegarty, Lecturer School of Religious and Theological Studies, Cardiff University (Cardiff, UK)

On Mistaking Names for Things: Provincialising ‘Post-Westernisms’ and Delineating the Func-tion of Imagination in the Study of Religion (or ‘Everything can be justified but not everything can be justified by anything’)

This paper will explore the epistemological status of a range of key terms in the study of reli-gion with particular reference to the study of ‘Hinduism’. Particular emphasis will be placed on discrepancies and inconsistencies in secondary literatures that question the empirical basis of ‘Hinduism’ but which assume that the referential content of ‘Colonialism’ is clear. The central hypothesis will be that clarity with regard to the necessity, and particular histo-ries, of analytic terminology, combined with the awareness of the anthropological universa-lity of classificatory activity, can serve to refine and develop the relationship between theory and method in the Study of Religion. It will further suggest that the omnipresence of classificatory and heuretic and counter-classificatory and counter-heuretic activity in and between social groups must be aggregated to general social theory outside of the highly politicised contexts in which such activities were first drawn to scholarly attention.

Specifically, this paper will suggest that there has been a fundamental failure to acknowledge that the ‘Orientalist’ hypothesis that one interest-group should describe another group in self-serving terms is neither historically unique nor particularly significant in and of itself. Nor is it necessarily historically significant that a given theoretical term should fail to encap-sulate fully the phenomena or range of phenomena that it seeks to characterise. What is of fundamental interest is the how and why of these processes and failures and the forms,

and levels, of meta-awareness exhibited by participants in them. This is something that can only be ascertained on a source-by-source basis. We must also, of course, consider the social

function of the institutions that analyse and classify such processes retrospectively. Brief case studies will be presented on 18th, 19th and 20th century materials (both scholarly and lite-rary) that demonstrate the richness and complexity of the data-field in this regard.

The secondary hypothesis of this paper is that the function of ‘imagination’ in the study of religion is located precisely in the origination and application of heuristic orientations to data appropriate to a given investigative agenda. It will also be argued that imaginative activity of this kind must be both safeguarded and regulated by means of the protection and ongoing refinement of the academy as a global institution with a clear remit open, but not overly susceptible, to change. Building on these considerations, this paper will consider recent developments in Historiography and Social Theory with a view to con-textualising recent calls for the ‘provincialisation’ of Europe and the establishment of a ‘post-western’ hermeneutic in a wider theoretical, methodological, institutional and socio-economic framework.

• Masahiko Togawa, Associate Professor Graduate School for International Development and Cooperation, Hiroshima University (Hiroshima, Japan)

Encountering Islam: Historiography of Caitany in the Gauriya Vaisnava Literature

This study analyses the usage of the term Hindu in various contexts in the Gauriya Vaisnava literature, which is a series of hagiographies of the saint Caitanya (1486-1533). Caitanya is well-known as the medieval Bengali saint, who took the initiative in the Bhakti movement in the eastern and northern parts of India. In particular, the term hindu appeared on two masterpieces of the hagiographies, namely the Sri Caitanya Bhagavata (completed around 1545) and the Sri Sri Caitanya Caritamrita (around 1612-15).

Both texts are popular as religious scriptures among Bengali Hindus for many years, and are valuable as historical documents that describe the religious life and discourses among the Indian society of that time.

brochure.indd 16/01/2008, 18:4654-55

- 56 - - 57 -

It is well known that Joseph T. O’Connell has discussed the term Hindu in these texts, and several scholars have referred to his pioneering study for their arguments over the modern construction of the concept of ‘Hinduism’. This fact demonstrates the importance of these Bengali texts with respect to the issue; however, at the same time, it is interesting to note that some scholars, who supported the colonial construction theory, such as R.E. Fryken-berg and Richard King, referred to his study and made it the basis of their arguments. In the meantime, other scholars such as Wilhelm Halbfass and Arvind Sharma used it for their counterarguments. In this context, it is important to re-examine the usage of the term Hindu in these texts, and to analyse its implications in the context of self-consciousness and self-representation as Hindus, in contrast to the others, the Muslims.

In the Sri Caitanya Bhagavata, the term Hindu appears 14 times, and in the Sri Sri Caitanya Caritamrita, it appears 22 times. The author categorises the meanings of the term Hindu in each sentence, and points out the transition of the usages in both texts. This analysis sheds light on the process of the formation of ‘self-conscious religious identity’, to borrow David Lorenzen’s phrase, in which the native people of India became aware of a religious com-munity, who suppose to share the same norms and values as the Muslims. In particular, the usage of the term Hindu-dharma indicates that the Hindu people recognised their beliefs and practices as a ‘religion’ (dharma), in contrast to the different beliefs and practices of the Muslims, who were dominated the Bengal region of those days.

• Raf Gelders, Doctoral Student Research Centre Vergelijkende Cultuurwetenschap, Ghent University (Ghent, Belgium)

Dindimus and the Indian Priest. Orientalist Tropes in Sixteenth-Century Europe

The standard image of Hinduism that is generally associated with Orientalist scholarship

consists of two distinct branches. One branch identifies an ancient, monotheistic Hindu-ism in Brahmin scriptures, referred to as “philosophical Hinduism.” The second branch points to its corrupted manifestation in idolatry and ritual, referred to as “popular Hindu-


ism.” This distinction between “philosophical” vs. “popular Hinduism”-and the emphasis on a Brahmin priesthood as the axis around which both revolve-can be traced back to two composite images in sixteenth-century German scholarship.

The legendary tale of Dindimus the ascetic Brahmin was immensely popular in medieval Europe. The image of the Brahmins that emerges in popular consciousness said the following: Brahmins are proto-Christians. This image is a composite, yet its elements reap-pear with sufficient constancy to recognise a unified, pan-European mode of representa-tion. It became sharpened in the Scholastic disputes on salvation. Those who argued for the extra-Christian understanding of Christian doctrines pushed the Brahmins to the archetype of proto-Christians, prior to Christ. This positive image inspired the Orientalist notion of a monotheistic Indian religion and predates the age of exploration.

The explorers introduced another “ethnographic fact,” i.e. Indian idolatry. This “fact” was at once incorporated in German, Protestant scholarship: like the Catholics surrendered to the worship of saints and images, the Brahmins were similarly led astray by the Devil. A second composite image now emerges: Brahmins are crafty priests. Though constructed in Protestant books, the Catholics were familiarised with this imagery via Jesuit scholars, who adopted key elements of the Protestant critique against the Catholic Church. This negative portrayal inspired the imagery of “popular Hinduism.”

From the 1530s onwards, both images started to coexist in close textual proximity. The first image was simply relegated to the past tense, i.e. to descriptions of ancient India. In other words, Orientalist discourse merely secularised representations of India that emerged in the Scholastic theology of the Middle Ages and in debates in Reformation Europe. This paper therefore suggests that Orientalism has to be understood as a cultural instead of a colonising project.

brochure.indd 16/01/2008, 18:4656-57

- 58 - - 59 -

PARALLEL PAPER SESSIONS IABSTRACTS OF THE PARALLEL PAPER SESSIONS >>>Evolutionary explanations of religion

• Jakob De Roover, Post-Doctoral Fellow Research Centre Vergelijkende Cultuurwetenschap (Ghent University, Belgium)

Animal Religiosum? Human Evolution and the Universality of Religion

For an evolutionary explanation about the origin of religion to be true, it is absolutely neces-sary that religion has existed and exists in all human cultures at all times. If it originated only in a specific human community and spread elsewhere, the issue becomes a historical question, like, say, the origin and spread of democracy in human civilisation. In my paper, I will make four claims: (a) no one has, ever, in any field or at any time, provided theoreti-cal or empirical evidence for the universality of religion; (b) we do not know if religion is a cultural universal and do not possess theoretical criteria to determine whether or not it is; (c) the current crop of evolutionary biological explanations presuppose as true what they have to prove is true; and (d) the idea that religion is a cultural universal is Christian-theological in nature: Christianity claims that all peoples have religion because of the bibli-cal covenant. My paper will trace the debates about the universality of religion in order to show how this theological ‘truth’ has been transformed into an anthropological ‘fact’, which serves as the starting point for evolutionary explanations of religion. These can hardly be scientific explanations, since they reproduce theology as science.

• Peter Gottschalk, Associate Professor of Religion Department of Religion, Wesleyan University (Middletown, USA)

Scientism and the Evolution of Religion

Underlying the question of whether or not evolutionary biology can be applied to religion in a scientific manner is the presumption that modern science cannot only authoritatively explain the natural world, but also reduce all phenomena to the empirically observable. The possibility of imagining evolutionary understandings of religion results from scientism, the hegemonic position of the discourses and practices associated with western-originated science that situate these as authoritative in understanding the world. An examination of the ascent of scientism and evolutionary thought demonstrates that they have anything but a disinterested relationship with religion.

The utility of the term “scientism” rests in its usefulness for describing modern science’s role in societies while avoiding judgments of the truthfulness or accuracy of various ways of knowing. The contemporary cultural prominence and epistemological authority of modern science in the West and, increasingly, India, contrasts with medieval Europe where the sciences served as Christian theology’s handmaiden.

The recognition that nature changes gradually represented a departure for empirical science from the stasis suggested in certain biblical interpretations. Although Christian antagonism to Lyell’s geological arguments and Darwin’s evolutionary theory has prompted many to suppose that modern science inherently competes with, if not displaces, religion, evolu-tionary explanations of religion demonstrate continuity between scientific and Christian epistemes. Medieval Christians posited a history of gradual salvation from pagan origins, through Judaism, that concluded with Christianity. European science not only has reinter-preted this progress in secular terms (i.e., religion yields to science), it has also influenced

scholars to imagine progress in the development of religion (i.e., animism yields to polythe-ism) and progress in the evolution of humanity (i.e., biological changes yield neurological receptivity to divinity). The prevalence of evolutionary narratives demonstrates that the Christian paradigm has been not so much displaced as absorbed by science.

brochure.indd 16/01/2008, 18:4658-59

- 60 - - 61 -

PARALLEL PAPER SESSIONS IABSTRACTS OF THE PARALLEL PAPER SESSIONS >>>Caste system and Indian religion 3

• Rajaram Hegde, Professor Centre for the Study of Local Cultures, Kuvempu University (Shimoga, India)

Fictitious Connections. Caste system and Hinduism

The caste system is generally considered to be an integral part of Hinduism, sustained through the varna division, the Brahmanical priesthood, and an ideology provided by the Hindu texts. In this presentation, we will attempt to examine to what extent the aspects of the classical account of the caste system and its relation to Hinduism, correspond with the empirical reality. To do this we will draw on the findings of an extensive fieldwork project into caste, community and tradition in Karnataka.

We chose to test the awareness of the members of different jati groups in several villages in Karnataka about some of the central aspects of the general descriptions of the caste system: (1) are the different groups aware of the doctrines which the caste system is supposedly based on? (2) Do these jatis know the contents of the sacred texts in which these doctrines can be found? (4) Do the jati groups classify all groups in Indian society in terms of a hierarchy and do they consistently refer to the same hierarchy (of the caste system)? (5) Are the Brahmins generally recognised as an influential and powerful priesthood and does this priesthood know the tenets of its own religion?

In answer to these and more questions, we received a set of surprising responses: Except a few Brahmin pundits, the term varna was not understood by most of the informants. The so-called Brahmin priests are also unable to relate jati practices to any specific text or varna system. Informants told almost unanimously that they are following their ancestral practices

and did not refer to a religious belief system or prescriptive text. The origin stories of the different groups merely tell us a story about this group in particular and not about society

as a whole. Moreover, the respondents failed to locate themselves systematically within a hierarchical arrangement of caste and sub-caste groups. We also could not observe the Brah-manical priesthood acting as an authoritative group, controlling the practices of the other jati groups.

In brief, in this paper we will analyse some of the central aspects of the classical account of the caste system in view of the results of our fieldwork to see to what extent these descrip-tions help or do not help us in understanding the structure of the Indian society.

• A. Shanmukha, Lecturer Centre for the Study of Local Cultures, Kuvempu University

The Practice of Untouchability and Hinduism

The classical text book stories, from the colonial writers to the modern 21st century writers, argue that the practice of untouchability is generated by the caste system, which is based on Hinduism. This presentation attempts to show that these kinds of arguments neither identify the root of the problem, nor give any sensible solutions for them.

The classical accounts of the caste system and the practice of untouchability assume that Hinduism is a religion and that Manu Dharma Shastra, Purusha Sukta, etc. are its sacred texts. These texts, the classical descriptions hold, have given birth to the Varna system which has later generated the caste system. It is said that it is the belief system of the Indian religion that compels its people to practice untouchability.

If one uses the above descriptions to understand and explain the problem of untouchability then one has to show that people who practice untouchability believe that these textual

doctrines are sacred and that they follow them in their daily life. In our empirical investiga-tion in the State of Karnataka, we have found that some castes do experience some kinds

brochure.indd 16/01/2008, 18:4660-61

- 62 - - 63 -

of discrimination in hotels, public wells or taps, in the work place, etc. However, our field-work has shown that both those who practice untouchability (or certain kinds of inter-caste discriminations) and those who have been victims of untouchability have not even heard of the so-called sacred texts. Even if they have heard of them, they do not feel that these texts are sacred, nor are they following their doctrines.

Thus, our field experience shows that there is hardly any evidence to prove that the practice of untouchability is generated by the Indian social structure, i.e. the caste system, which is based on a religion, namely Hinduism.

• Dunkin Jalki, Doctoral Student Centre for the Study of Culture and Society (Bengalooru, India)

Stereotyped Stories and their Action Consequences

Since the last days of colonialism, we have grown used to talking about Indian society in terms that betray our moral attitude towards them. It is generally considered that Hinduism is predicated on a caste system which is inherently unjust. The only saving grace which often comes to the rescue of India’s national pride, whenever this story is told, are the indigenous movements against the caste system, like the bhakti movements. These movements are sup-posed to have risen in a dark period and to have fought against the caste system.

The vacana movement of the12th century Karnataka is one such bhakti movement. Scholars in the modern period have generally agreed that it was self-consciously anti-brah-man and anti-caste, led by Basava in the name of the low-castes. Such stories, which are part of common parlance by now, are deeply problematic: they are historically ungrounded, empirically inadequate, and conceptually brittle. Modern theories about Indian culture are

based on such stories. This can be shown by scrutinising those theories historically, empiri-cally and conceptually. In this paper, however, I do not talk about such theories but about the stories behind them, by focusing on the modern lingayata scholarship.

This scholarship is a composition of pieces of narratives borrowed from traditional Kavyas and Puranas. But what directs their selection and valorisation are the western stereotypes about the lingayata community. The modern understanding of the vacana movement, then, is basically a story: a narrativised stereotype, which functions like a story, albeit in a modi-fied way. This also means that they are not knowledge claims about the traditions, as they appear to be. This paper will discuss the impact that stereotypes have had on Indian stories during the colonial period. Stories, under the influence of stereotypes, get tagged with moral injunctions, which take the form of “the moral of the story.” If so, the action-consequences of stereotyped stories will be dangerously moralistic and decisive.


brochure.indd 16/01/2008, 18:4662-63

- 64 - - 65 -

PARALLEL PAPER SESSIONS IABSTRACTS OF THE PARALLEL PAPER SESSIONS >>>Caste system and Indian religion 4

• Meera Ashar, Teaching Associate Department of English, University of Pune (Pune, India)

The caste system and Indian religion

In the posthumously published Lectures on the Philosophy of History, G.W.F. Hegel wrote that India does not have a history. This assertion, which was not Hegel’s alone but repre-sentative of an identifiable intellectual position on India in the nineteenth century, sparked off a series of responses on history in India. Hegel and his controversial statements still find a mention in contemporary debates on Indian history, if only in negation of his charge. Little attention, however, has been given to the associated claim that India cannot have a history because it follows a “natural classification” or ‘caste.’ Caste, for Hegel and his con-freres is an embodiment of Indian religion or of the religion of the Hindoos. It is a limita-tion not of individual people or a group, community or nation that they do not and cannot have a history, but the constraints of a particular religion, Hinduism. So then, is the history that Hegel finds lacking in India a ‘secular’ one, inaccessible to a people confined by their religious worldview?

In this paper I wish to argue the contrary. A careful reading of the Hegelian emplotment of the historical drama of humanity and of the Marxist visionary politics of history would allow us to argue that Hegel’s lament about the lack of history in India was not actually a bemoaning of religiosity in India. It was in fact a plaint for the very lack of religion in India.

• Rishabh Sancheti, Student European Master in Law and Economics, University of Vienna (Vienna, Italy)• Padma Priya, Law Researcher Delhi High Court, Justice Hima Kohli (Delhi, India)

Spread of the Caste System Beyond Hinduism. A Law and Economics Perspective

To begin with, the caste system emerged in Hinduism. However, the converts of Hinduism

following various religions asserted their rights to receive a share in the affirmative action

plans. This and several other reasons led to a spread of caste system across religions in India.

The past decades have seen an upsurge in the litigation going on till the Supreme Court

of India, where litigants are seeking “lower caste” recognition to avail of the special be-

nefits. The constitutional mandate for affirmative action for limited time period has been

seemingly forgotten. The political parties are being blamed for “vote-bank-politics”, while

recent constitutional amendments are seen as perpetuating the caste-cleavages in the Indian

society. The caste system arising essentially out of religion, now has turned to a sui-generis

character.

This paper attempts to give a law and economics explanation of how “rational, self interest

seeking” of individual players in the society led to a spread of the caste system across religions

in India. It tries to locate why the ‘invisible hand principle” has been faulted within the

Indian societal setup, and if the caste system has gained prominence over religious identity.

It also attempts to explain the spread of the caste system from Hinduism to various other

religions in India, and tries to understand the role ‘religion’ plays in caste system dynamics.

The recent violent agitations by certain sects and communities to have them included in

the “lower castes” or “backward castes” surprise logic and common notions. An intuitive law

and economics explanation is that the benefits arising from the recognition as a “lower caste”

surpass the disentitlements attached thereto. However, if this is true than the whole concept

of caste system in the Indian religions and the constitutional and legal provisions in this

regard deserve a serious rethinking.

brochure.indd 16/01/2008, 18:4664-65

- 66 - - 67 -

PARALLEL PAPER SESSIONS IABSTRACTS OF THE PARALLEL PAPER SESSIONS >>>• Sindhu Shankar, Student National Law University (Jodhpur, India)

The debate on conversion in India

The past year has seen many a controversy brewing over the enactment of the anti-con-version laws in many parts of the country. While on the one hand, there are those who weigh their political winnings and vote for the bill, there are others who do so with the genuine intent of preventing forced conversions. Right on the opposite camps are those who vehemently oppose such legislation on the grounds that it places restrictions on Article 25 of the Constitution of India, which talks of Right to Propagate religion.

This paper aims to delve into the legislative history of the aforesaid laws and examine its implementation in the past and important judicial aspects of the same through case laws and its implications on our rights as well.

While some allege Hindutva fundamentalism to be the backbone of the alleged political facade, others maintain that it is a potent weapon against those foreign powers who aim to convert and corrupt the innocent and the poor using inducements and threats. It has also been alleged that the nationalist groups have now been emboldened and have taken over the States and are being backed by the local police and political elements through anti-conversion laws.

The loopholes in the proposed bills are many and the extremist facets need to be curbed. The implications of necessity of Government consent for a conversion to take place are a grave question of personal liberty at stake. It could result in excessive Governmental control, posing a threat to the very image of India as a democracy and a religious double standard might result.

This paper endeavours to analyse the interplay of politics and religion in this issue from a legal perspective and provide an objective analysis of the anti-conversion laws.

brochure.indd 16/01/2008, 18:4666-67

- 68 - - 69 -

CLOSING WORKSHOP TOWARDS THE FUTURE OF RETHINKING RELIGION IN INDIA

24 January 2008, 14.30-16.30

On the last day of the conference, we want to reflect upon the progress that has been made in answering the questions of the first conference. Therefore, we are organising a workshop session to allow the participants of Rethinking Religion in India to sit together and reflect on this. Jointly, we will try to identify the questions that need to be addressed in the sub-sequent conferences and brainstorm about the steps to be taken next. We invite you to actively partake in this session.

The closing workshop will be followed by a closing address by Dr. Jakob De Roover and Sri Uday Kumar.

Room: Conference hall (ground floor)

CONFERENCE OUTPUT AND DOCUMENTARY

Conference output

The proceedings of the Platform and Roundtable sessions will be published either in the form

of an edited book or as a special theme issue of a journal. Several publishers such as Routledge,

Manohar, BrownWalker, and Cambridge Scholars Publishing have already shown interest to

publish such an edited volume.

A selection of the best papers from the Parallel Paper sessions will be published in the Decem-

ber 2008 issue of the journal Man in India as a special theme issue on Rethinking Religion in

India.

Conference documentary and audio recordings

A 10-15 minute documentary will be produced of each conference in the conference cluster.

After the completion of the five-year conference cluster these separate documentaries will be

put together and made into one longer documentary. The respective documentaries will give

an overview of the different sessions and will include interviews with the invited speakers and

other conference participants. Moreover, the documentary will include interviews with people

outside of the academia on the conference themes and their day-to-day experiences with the

topics of the conference. In the course of the five years, the documentary should represent

the contribution of Rethinking Religion in India to answering some of the main questions in

religious studies and in developing an alternative framework for the study religion in India.

The overall objective of these documentaries is to make the conference themes and results

accessible to a wider audience, to further reflection and discussion about the conference themes

and questions in between the conferences, and to introduce the conference themes in institu-

tions of higher education in India and abroad. The documentaries will be made available on

the conference website and in the form of DVDs which will be sent to different universities

and institutions across India.

Apart from the documentary all the sessions of the conference will be audio recorded as well.

These audio recordings will also be made available on the website.

brochure.indd 16/01/2008, 18:4668-69

- 70 - - 71 -

PARTICIPANT LIST >>>A. Wati Walling, [email protected]

Aakash Singh, [email protected] Raoof Mir, [email protected]

Abhik Ghosh, [email protected]

Abir Lal Mitra, [email protected] Khurram, [email protected]

Ahmad Nadeem Khan, [email protected] Jaisinghani, [email protected]

Akeel Bilgrami, [email protected]

Akshaya Kumar Rath, [email protected] Aisher, [email protected]

Ami Shah, [email protected] Anurag, [email protected]

Amit Srivastava, [email protected]

Amitava Chakraborty, [email protected] P. Sen

Anil Vaghela, [email protected] Gupta, [email protected]

Anjaiah nannapaneni, [email protected]

Ansari M.T., [email protected] Bhuwania, [email protected]

Aparna Banik, [email protected]

Arjun Bhagat, [email protected] Sharma, [email protected] Dass, [email protected]

Aryya Bhattacharya, [email protected]

Aseem Kumar Jha, [email protected]

Asha Fernando, [email protected] Mukherjee, [email protected] Dutta, [email protected]

Ashok Kumar Mocherla, [email protected]

Ashok Yadav, [email protected] Rasheed, [email protected]

Athakarni Dronamraju, [email protected] Avinash Jha, [email protected]

Ayush Garg, [email protected]

B. Moharana, [email protected]

Bal Patil, [email protected] Devarakonda,

[email protected]

Balagangadhara S.N., [email protected]

Bennet Benjamin, [email protected], [email protected]

Bijoy Mukherjee

Bina DasBinod Narayan, bnsocioru@rediffmail,com

Bipin Aspatwar, [email protected] Nath Prasad, [email protected]

Bjarne Wernicke Olesen, [email protected]

Bulent Acma, [email protected] Kaldis, [email protected]

Carina Back, [email protected] Hutu, [email protected]

Chakraverti Mahajan,

[email protected] Shekhar Hota,

[email protected] Bhuvanagiri, [email protected]

Chinmayee Dutta, [email protected]

Chitharanjan Unni, [email protected] Karunakaran, [email protected]

Claudia Pereira, [email protected]

D.A. GangadharDalip Gosain, [email protected] Raveh, [email protected]

Darren Duerksen, [email protected]

David N. Lorenzen, [email protected]

Deboshruti Roychowdhury, [email protected] Samadder, [email protected] Aravind, [email protected]

Devendra Ingale, [email protected]

Dharmesh Upadhyaya, [email protected]

Diwakar Kishore, [email protected] Tschanz , [email protected]

Dunkin Jalki, [email protected]

Dyutimoy Mukherjee,

[email protected] Ansari, [email protected]

Eshan Sharma, [email protected]

Esther Bloch, [email protected]

Eva Hellman, [email protected] Abdelhakim, [email protected]

Florence Ricks, [email protected]

Frank Van den Bossche, [email protected]

G.C. Tripathi, [email protected] Ricks, [email protected]

Geetanjali Srikantan, [email protected]

Geoffrey Oddie, [email protected] S. Upadhyaya, [email protected]

Gyan prakash, [email protected] Mahfooz, [email protected]

Indudhara, [email protected]

Iris Vandevelde, [email protected] Vinay, [email protected]

J.S. NelciJakob De Roover, [email protected]

James Hegarty, [email protected]

Jananibalu j.be, [email protected] Cameron, [email protected]

Jasbir Singh, [email protected]

Jasdev S Rai, [email protected] Singh, [email protected] Bhattacharya, [email protected]

Jean-Francois Mayer, [email protected]

Jhikmik Kar, [email protected]

JodhsinghJohannes Dahmen, [email protected] Zavos, [email protected]

Joseph Reylan Viray, [email protected]

Joseph T. O’Connell, [email protected]. Tripathi

Kalsoom Kausar, [email protected] Ramnath, [email protected]

Kapil Tiwari

Kathiresan L., [email protected]

Kavitha, [email protected] Khan Sial, [email protected]

Kishore Kumar Reddy Areevidu,

[email protected]

KL Kamal, [email protected] Mohan Reddy Puttareddy,

[email protected]

Kriti Das, [email protected], [email protected]

Laurie L. Patton, [email protected] Laxman Vadhel, [email protected]

Liviu Bordas, [email protected]

Lokesh ChandraM. Radhakrishnan Radhakrishnan,

[email protected]. Shabbir Ahsen, [email protected]

Madhav Khosla, [email protected]

Madhu Khanna Maheed Ullah, [email protected]

Mahesh Kumar, [email protected] Sarma, [email protected]

Majken Young Mi Rasmussen,

[email protected] Ekka, [email protected],

[email protected]

Marianne Keppens, [email protected] Erwin, [email protected] Fárek, [email protected]

Masaaki Fukunaga, [email protected]

Mathew John, [email protected]

Meenakshi Rajan, [email protected] Ashar, [email protected] Kindred, [email protected]

Michael Dusche, [email protected]

Mithila Biniwale, [email protected] Gautam, [email protected]

Mohan Seenivasan, [email protected] Puri, [email protected],

[email protected]

Mohit Rajan, [email protected]

Molly Kaushal, [email protected] Roy, [email protected]

brochure.indd 16/01/2008, 18:4670-71

- 72 - - 73 -

PARTICIPANT LIST >>>Muhammad Abdullah Mansoor,

[email protected] Faheem Ikram, [email protected]

Mukesh Bhatt, [email protected]

Mukul Gupta, [email protected] Alam Rao, [email protected]

Nagaraju Gundemeda, [email protected] Rao Pullagummi,

[email protected]

Naomi Goldenberg, [email protected] De Gersem, [email protected]

Nigel Kumar, [email protected] mandalia, [email protected]

Nilima Chitgopekar, [email protected]

Nirmala Advani, [email protected] K. A., [email protected]

Nupur Pathak, [email protected] Joshi, aartistman2yahoo.com

P. Sriramamurti and Poornima Jain,

[email protected] Priya, [email protected]

Paolo Aranha, [email protected],

[email protected] Mehra, [email protected] Dass, [email protected]

Parimala V. Rao, [email protected]

Parnika Malhotra, [email protected]

Peter Gottschalk, [email protected] Raval, [email protected] Hazarika, [email protected]

Pooja Sharma, [email protected]

Poorna Mangala, [email protected] Gummadi,

[email protected] Shekhawat, [email protected]

Prakash C. Pattanaik, [email protected]

Prashant Khattri, [email protected]

Prathama Banerjee, [email protected], [email protected]

Purnendu Ranjan, [email protected]

Raf Gelders, [email protected]

Raghavendra Udupa, [email protected] Kumar Kalakotla, [email protected]

Rajaram Hegde, [email protected]

Rajeeva Ranjan Sinha, [email protected]

Rajesh S.V., [email protected] Goswami, [email protected]

Rakesh K. Tiwari, [email protected]

Ram Vikas, [email protected] Venkatanarayanan,

[email protected] Gangapatnam,

[email protected]

Ramanujachary N. C., [email protected] P. B. Singh, [email protected]

Rana Youab Khan, [email protected] Dutta, [email protected]

Ravi S. Singh, [email protected]

Reena Patel, [email protected] Jagannath, [email protected]

Rekha Natarajan, [email protected]

Richa Wahi, [email protected] King, [email protected] Uuksulainen, [email protected]

Rishabh Sancheti, rsancheti@erasmusmundus-

alumni.eu

Rita Roy Chowdhury, [email protected] Khangembam, [email protected]

Rosa Perez, [email protected]

Rupali Bansal, [email protected]. Sudha Sitharaman, [email protected]

Sadanand Janekere, [email protected] Muhammed, [email protected]

Sai Thakur, [email protected]

Sajit Malliyoor, [email protected]

Sameer Mottathan, [email protected] Tewari, [email protected]

Sanjeev Shrivastav, [email protected]

Sanjoy Kumar Nayak, [email protected]

Sanne Van der Kaaij, [email protected] Dey, [email protected]

Santhosh Kumar P.K., [email protected]

Santosh Nair, [email protected] Das, [email protected]

Sarah Claerhout, [email protected] S., [email protected]

Sathia Priya Robert, [email protected]

Satya Prakah, [email protected] Sundar Mishra,

[email protected] Gautam

Scaria Zacharia, [email protected]

Sebastien Mayor, [email protected] Mishra, [email protected]

Seema Vinayak, [email protected] Iyengar, [email protected]

Shanmukha A., [email protected]

Sharad Behar, [email protected] Sugirtharajah, [email protected]

Sharmila Ghosh, [email protected]

Shinaj P. S., [email protected] Swamy, [email protected] Kumbhojkar, [email protected]

Shrivatsa Goswami

Shruti Patel, [email protected]

Shweta Bhushain, [email protected] Shankar, [email protected] B. S., [email protected]

Soumya Patnaik, [email protected]

Sreedhar Barki, [email protected] Chandra, [email protected]

Subir Kumar Roy, [email protected] Amancherla,

[email protected]

Sujeet Kumar Dubey, [email protected]

Sujit Choudhary, [email protected] Reddy, [email protected]

Sumesh M. K., [email protected]

Sumio Morijiri, [email protected]

Sundara Thirukkovalluri, [email protected] Vasudeva Rao, [email protected]

Sunil Shriwastav, [email protected]

Supriya Aery, [email protected] Dayal, [email protected]

Surendra Soni, [email protected] Shukla, [email protected]

Surya Prakash Upadhyay, [email protected]

Susmita Chatterjee, [email protected]. S. Satyanath, [email protected]

T.N. MadanTamasin Ramsay,

[email protected]

Timothy Fitzgerald, [email protected] Tinh Van Nguyen, [email protected]

Togawa, Masahiko, [email protected] Gupta, [email protected]

Ülo Valk, [email protected]

Umakant Chaubey, [email protected] Chandra M.P., [email protected]

Usman Ghani, [email protected]

vajrala Anjireddy, [email protected] Das, [email protected] Prakash, [email protected]

Veda Nayak, [email protected]

Velliangiri Gounder, [email protected]

Venkatesh Kamath, [email protected] Nair, [email protected] Singh, [email protected]

Vineet Gupta, [email protected]

Vivek Dhareshwar, [email protected] Ahmad, [email protected]

Yuki Azaad, [email protected] Rao, [email protected]

brochure.indd 16/01/2008, 18:4672-73

THE FIVE-YEAR CONFERENCE CLUSTER

Rethinking Religion in India is a five-year conference cluster. The five

conferences form an integrated whole, with each conference building on the

previous one. Each year the issues and problems to be addressed will get

delineated more sharply. It is the objective of this conference cluster to come up

with a series of answers and new approaches to this set of questions.

PLATFORM

SESSIONS

Are there native

religions in India?

Is religion

susceptible to an

evolutionary

explanation?

Inter-religious

dialogue

Is there a

religious / secular

divide in India?

Hinduism

and the caste

system

PARALLEL PAPER

SESSIONS

(1) Evolutionary explanations of

religion (2) Indians are Aryans, so

what? (3) The caste system and

Indian religion

(1) Inter-religious dialogue

(2) Religious conversion in India

(3) Colonialism and religion

in India

(1) Secularism and tolerance in

India (2) Western representations

of Hinduism (3) Is religion a

cultural universal?

(1) The caste system and Indian

religion (2) Does India know of

religious rivalry? (3) Inter-religious

dialogue and conversion in India

(1) The Christian theological

framework of the religious studies

(2) The construction of Hinduism

and colonial consciousness

(3) Western representations of

India and its religions

ROUNDTABLE

SESSIONS

Colonialism and

religion in India

Aryan

immigration

theory

Religious

conversion

in India

Western

representations of

India

Did Buddhism

challenge

Hinduism?

YEAR 1

YEAR 2

YEAR 3

YEAR 4

YEAR 5

brochure.indd 16/01/2008, 18:4674

conference rethinking religion in india, 21-24 jan 2008

Documents