Abstract
Despite the prevalence of post-colonial theory in the humanities and social sciences, why is it that the two main secular formations in the study of religion(s), as philosophy of religion and history of religions, continue to deploy very similar mechanisms that reconstitute past imperialisms such as the hegemony of theory as specifically Western and/or the division of labor between universal and particular knowledge formations? To answer this question this paper stages an oblique engagement between the seemingly divergent discourses: (i) philosophy of religion, (ii) history of religion—more specifically the area specialism called South Asian religions, and (iii) post-colonial theory especially where these discourses intersect with the discipline of Indology and the representation of Indic phenomena. A different version of this engagement occurs in Hegel’s Lectures on the Philosophy of Religion (LPR). A post-colonial reading of the LPR reveals closer and often unacknowledged connections between the birth of these two disciplines. More importantly the LPR anticipates the auto-immunizing mechanism that underpins the continued lack of engagement between the various disciplines of contemporary religions. Ironically, this mechanism, it will be argued, is located in the very heart of the comparative enterprise itself.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Bibliography
Alliez, Eric, 1996,Capital Times: Tales From the Conquest of Time, trans. Georges Van Den Abbeele, University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis.
Ansell-Pearson, Keith (ed.), 1997,Edward Said and the Gravity of History: Cultural Readings of Imperialism, Lawrence and Wishart, London.
Bernal, Martin, 1987,Black Athena: The Afroasiatic Roots of Classical Civilization (Vol. 1), Vintage Books, London.
Bernasconi, Robert (ed.) 2001),Race, Blackwell Publishers Ltd, Oxford.
Chakrabarti, Dipesh, 2000,Provincializing Europe: Post-Colonial Thought and Historical Difference, Princeton University Press, Princetons and Oxford.
Dalmia, Vasudha, 1996,The Nationalisation of Hindu Traditions: Bharatendu Harischandra and Nineteenth Century Banaras, Oxford University Press, New Delhi.
Davaney, Sheila Greeve, 2002, ‘Rethinking Theology and Religious Studies’, inReligious Studies, Theology and the University: Conflicting Maps, Changing Terrains, (ed.) Linell Cady and Delwin Brown, State University of New York Press (New York).
Derrida Jacques, 1998,Religion, Polity Press, Cambridge.
Halbfass, Wilhelm, 1988,India and Europe: An Essay in Philosophical Understanding, Motilal Banarsidas, New Delhi.
Hart, William, 2000,Edward Said and the Religious Effects of Culture, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Hegel, G.W.F., 1987,Lectures on the Philosophy of Religion (Vol. 3: Determinate Religion), trans. R.F. Brown, P.C. Hodgson, J.M. Steward, California University Press, Los Angeles.
Hegel, G.W.F., 1956,the Philosophy of History, trans. J. Sibree, Dover Publications, New York.
Hegel, 1988,Introduction to the Philosophy of History, trans. Leo Rauch, Hackett Publishing, Indiana.
King, Richard, 1999,Orientalism and Religion: Post-Colonial Theory, India and the Mystic East, Routledge, London.
Masuzawa, Tomoko, 1994,In Search of Dreamtime: The Quest For the Origin of Religion, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
Marriott, McKimm, 1976, ‘Interpreting Indian Society: A Monistic Alternative to Dumont’s Dualism’,Journal of Asian Studies, 36, No. 1 (Nov. 1976), 89–95.
Perkins, Mary Anne, 1999,Nation and Word: Religious and Metaphysical Language in European National Consciousness, Ashgate Publishing, Aldershot.
Pollock, Sheldon, 2000, ‘Indology, Power and the Case of Germany’, inOrientalism: A Reader, (ed.) A.L. Macfie, Edinburgh University Press, Edinburgh.
Sakai, Naoki, 1997,Translation and Subjectivity: On Japan and Cultural Nationalism, Minnesota University Press, Minneapolis.
Sharma, Krishna, 1986,Bhakti and the Bhakti Movement, Motilal Banarsidas, New Delhi.
Spivak, G.C., 1999,The Critique of Post-Colonial Reason: A History of the Vanishing Present, Harvard, University Press, Cambridge.
Taylor, Mark, C.,Critical Terms For Religious Studies, Chicago University Press, Chicago.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Mandair, A. Auto-immunity in the study of religions(s): Ontotheology, historicism and the theorization of Indic culture. SOPHIA 43, 63–85 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02780512
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02780512