亚色影库app

An open access publication of the 亚色影库app & Sciences
Fall 2005

Indian traditions & the Western imagination (1997)

Author
Amartya Kumar Sen

Amartya Sen, recipient of the 1998 Nobel Prize in Economics, has been a Fellow of the American Academy since 1981. Sen is Lamont University Professor and Professor of Economics and Philosophy at Harvard University, positions he held at the time of this essay鈥檚 appearance in the Spring 1997 issue of 顿忙诲补濒耻蝉. He also served as Master of Trinity College in Cambridge, U.K., between 1998 and 2004.

This essay is concerned with Western images of Indian intellectual traditions and the interactions between those representations and a contemporary 鈥渋nternal鈥 understanding of Indian culture.1 I focus particularly on the elementary diversities that characterize Indian society and its intellectual traditions, as well as on the biases that result from paying inadequate attention to them. In an obvious way, this applies to seeing India as a 鈥渕ainly Hindu鈥 country (as Western newspapers often describe India, as do the newly powerful Hindu political parties within India); this 鈥渕ainly Hindu鈥 country is also the third-largest Muslim country in the world (with nearly 110 million Muslims).

Less conspicuously, the contrast applies also to Indian intellectual traditions. This home of endless spirituality has perhaps the largest atheistic and materialist literature of all the ancient civilizations. To be sure, this accounting of the amount of unorthodox writing may be a little misleading, since Indian traditions are characterized by some prolixity. For example, the Sanskrit epic Mahabharata, which is often compared with the Iliad and the Odyssey, is in fact seven times as long as the Iliad and the Odyssey put together. One of the more striking Bengali verses I remember from my childhood is a lamentation about the tragedy of death in a nineteenth-century poem: 鈥淛ust consider how terrible the day of your death will be. / Others will go on speaking, and you will not be able to respond.鈥 But even this extreme fondness for speech is associated with an enormous heterogeneity of programs and preoccupations. Irreducible diversity is perhaps the most important feature of Indian intellectual traditions.

The self-images (or 鈥渋nternal identities鈥) of Indians have been extremely affected by colonialism over the past centuries and are much influenced鈥揵oth collaterally and dialectically鈥揵y the impact of outside imagery (what we may call 鈥渆xternal identity鈥). However, the direction of the influence of Western images on internal Indian identities is not altogether straightforward. In recent years, separatist resistance to Western cultural hegemony has led to the creation of significant intellectual movements in many postcolonial societies鈥 not least in India. This has particularly drawn attention to the important fact that the self-identity of postcolonial societies is deeply affected by the power of the colonial cultures and their forms of thought and classification. Those who prefer to pursue a more 鈥渋ndigenous鈥 approach often opt for a characterization of Indian culture and society that is rather self-consciously 鈥渄istant鈥 from Western traditions. There is much interest in 鈥渞ecovering鈥 a distinctly Indian focus in Indian culture.

.  .  .

To read this essay or subscribe to 顿忙诲补濒耻蝉, visit the 顿忙诲补濒耻蝉 access page
Access now

Endnotes

  • 1This essay draws on an earlier article entitled 鈥淚ndia and the West,鈥 The New Republic (June 7, 1993). For helpful discussions, I am grateful to Akeel Bilgrami, Sugata Bose, Barun De, Jean Dr猫ze, Ayesha Jalal, Dharma Kumar, V. K. Ramachandran, Tapan Raychaudhuri, Emma Rothschild, Lloyd Rudolph, Suzanne Rudolph, Ashutosh Varshney, Myron Weiner, and Nur Yalman.