Term Paper 2 - Ramanujan's "Is There An Indian Way of Thinking?"

“Is there An Indian Way of Thinking?”: Analysing Context –Sensitivity, ‘Inconsistency’, and ‘Hypocrisy’ in Indian Thought

           

                        A. K.Ramanujan in his cultural essay "Is There an Indian Way of Thinking?” explains cultural ideologies and behavioural manifestations in terms of an Indian psychology which he calls "context-sensitive" thinking. Here, providing certain personal life information on Ramanujan would help to know and elucidate his position and reason to write this essay. He was born into a Tamil Brahman family in Karnataka, South India. He was raised in a tri-lingual environment: English, Tamil, and Kannada. Wendy Doniger points at the early attempts to bring forth several mother tongues such as Tamil and Bangla into mainstream attention and recognition at a time when Sanskrit was considered as all about Indian literature. She reminds the contribution of Ramanujan in this task which was a major turning point in the literature history of India (Doniger 4). His father, Attipat Asuri Krishnaswami, was an internationally reputed mathematician and an astronomer and his mother, an orthodox Brahman of her time.

            Ramanujan wrote in both English and Kannada language and was a philologist, folklorist, translator, and playwright. He had translated classical and medieval Kannada and Tamil poetry into English and made it available in America. Vinay Dharwadkar, the general editor of The Collected Essays of A. K. Ramanujan opines that repetition and variation were persistent features of Ramanujan’s style as a thinker, teacher, poet, and essayist (Dharwadkar ix). He held on to them for great lengths of time even as he constantly sought out new concepts, new location, and new insights. He used newly emerged theories such as new criticism, French structuralism, German critical theory, and also some aspects of French deconstruction vigorously and comprehensively to attempt to elucidate many different texts, genres, and themes. But, Dharwadkar notices that he didn’t use these theories without important modifications of his own and he brought significant variations on what he had thought and said earlier. He states that his essays were written in such a way that he would work upon his readers as much by allusion, echo, and suggestion. Each piece was structured simply, and never strayed far from its stated theme. They led the reader to move in multiple directions at once and he calls it as the “ripple effect” of Ramanujan as a prose writer who used wit, irony, humour and polyphony which enabled to him to condense several perspectives or insights into a few aphoristic phrases. He constructed an essay much like a poem, which shows more than it tells, suggests more than it reveals, and echoes more than it acknowledges (Dharwadkar ix-x).

            As Wendy Doniger states “Is There An Indian Way of Thinking?” sets out the paradigm of stressing different words in a question to ask multiple questions, which in turn establishes a paradigm of the question of cultural specificity (Doniger 3). He asks, “Is there an Indian way of thinking? The answer to this question can be rendered in two ways: there was an Indian way of thinking but it does not exist now. The Indian way of thinking can be located in the Vedas and other religious texts, or when one goes to the 'pundits'. However, on the contrary to this answer one can also say that since our thinking is still largely shaped as per the Vedas, it would not be completely wrong to say that there still is an Indian way of thinking. The second question he asks is: Is there an Indian way of thinking? He proposes two kinds of answer:  that there has always been the existence of Great Tradition and Little Tradition. In India, we celebrate diversities and highlight these differences. Therefore, a single Indian way of thinking does not exist. The third question is: Is there an Indian way of thinking? and the focus is on the Indian way. What is ‘Indian’ in its origin is there in India? Philosophical, social theories are nothing but a product of the influences of foreign cultures, languages, religions and social evolutions - therefore, one might say that what we see in India is nothing unique to India. However, India is capable of adapting to the changes and accommodating these external influences into its culture. The ‘Indian’ way of thinking would turn all things and make other feel it is “Bigger Than All of Us”. The last question he asks is: Is there an Indian way of thinking? here the stress is given to ‘Thinking’ and  Ramanujan says that, here too, it can be answered in these ways. It is the West that is capable of thought. The West is projected as materialistic and rational. Indians have no philosophy,only religion, no positive sciences, etc. The logic, in India is rationalized with religion and superstitions. Here, actions are projected, not the thoughts behind those actions (Ramanujan 41-42).
            As a youth, Ramanujan was perplexed by his father’s seemingly paradoxical belief in both astrology and astronomy. It is this ‘paradox’ which he mentions in the essay in a process of analyzing Indian way of thinking. He expresses his curiosity: how could one man blend the rational and irrational in this way? In the essay he mentions that this essay is the result of the inspiration by the contemplation of his father.  He wore a combination of English and Indian blend of attire, he had American and English mathematicians visiting him along with the local pundits and astrologers, while he read the Bhagavad Gita religiously every morning after taking a bath, he would talk about Russell and Ingersoll also with the same amount of passion. Ramanujan finds ‘inconsistency’ in this attitude for who consistency meant sticking only to one stream of thought. But, unlike his father, he had his own way of blending paradoxes between the East and the West, between seemingly unrelated things.

            The feeling of ‘inconsistency’ can also be drawn from his early career when he chose to perform magic in front of audience where a willing suspension of disbelief, from both audience and the performer, occur though he was decidedly rational. Later, when he entered into a career as a lecturer, just like a magician he mesmerized his audience. He drew brilliant unforeseen conclusions from the pockets of his mind (Dimock xv).

   The open mindedness that Ramanujan got from his father, though he could accept him partially, has made him get engaged in various not so much related disciplines such as philosophy, zoology, literature, anthropology and eventually made his father call him ‘intellectually promiscuous’. But, later on, we can see this essay, subtitled as “An Informal Essay” by ‘intellectually promiscuous’ Ramanujan, as very formal and relevant in the arena of comparative literary studies. It is these sorts of interdisciplinary studies that are focussed and given larger recognition and acceptance in Comparative literary studies. Also, the discipline gains relevance through and focuses on the need to reorganize literary studies along larger democratic frames, to include what is present in reality, but rendered absent in areas of practicing mainstream discourses as the issue was highlighted in the Fifth Biennial International Conference of the Comparative Literature Association of India (James x). An unprecedented way of dealing with knowledge in the literary circle is the cause and result of development of comparative literary studies which undoubtedly occurs with the crossing of borders of languages, literary genres, territories, disciplines and cultures.
           

            In the third part of the essay, Ramanujan interrogates the concept of ‘inconsistency’ in a larger context by making a comparative analysis of Indian and Western mode of thought. He points out that Indian thought was considered by many modern Indian intellectuals as the ‘trait of hypocrisy’ for Indians do not act as they say.  He talks of the concept of 'karma' and that of 'talaividi' to explain this ‘hypocrisy’. Though the term ‘karma’ is used repetitively used in various religious texts of Brahmans, Jainas and Buddhists, it is not at found in any other Kannada tales told by themselves in other contexts as well. Sheryl Daniel points out that ‘talaividi’ or head-writing and ‘karma’ are used alternately by her Tamil village as explanations to whatever things happening around but, ultimately both these terms are inconsistent. Karma implies the self's past as determining the present and future. ‘Talaividi’ on the other hand is about destiny which cannot be altered.

            Ramanujan provides an account of European stereotypes of orients.  Many Europeans argue that Indians are yet to develop the notion of 'data' or 'objective facts'. The ‘logic’ of Indians is considered by several as a characteristic feature of earlier stage of cultural evolution. According to Sudhir Kakar, a psychologist, opines that in the oriental world, there is no clear difference between self and non-self and it is this mode of perception of reality which brings about inconsistency. According to Kissinger, India is not influenced by Newtonian thoughts and there is no concept of the universal. The Indian way of thinking lacks universality and he argues that India is a traditional society constituting of inconsistency and hypocrisy. Since the society is traditional in nature, the approach towards the entire society is not secular according to him. Zimmer, however, tend to appreciate the attitude of Indians towards outside reality for clinging on to the objectivity and identification of the self with the external world. Indians can imagine a time in history without man whereas, West cannot do that as it is egoistic in nature. 
            Ramanujan observes that while the West has universality, there are subjective positions maintained in India. The reality that is perceived and understood in India is always context-sensitive and it is not context-free. In order to elucidate this he provides examples: in India, even the perception of truth is not a universal concept. In the West commands such as 'man shall not kill' is a universal statement but in India, punishments are meted out owing to a person's social status. But in the Manusmriti, we find that moral codes need not be followed under all circumstances. Even one can lie and can get angry depending upon the circumstances. In aggregate, in India context-sensitive rule is preferred.
           

            In the fourth part of the essay, Ramanujan examines how context-sensitivity is an important part of Indian knowledge system and texts. He states that in India all additions are in fact a subtraction from any universal law. Stories get their context with reference to the frame in which they have been placed. Indian texts are historically dateless, but their contexts, uses and efficacies are explicit. If we look at Ramayana and Mahabharata, we find that there are several episodes and each story is encased in a meta-story. And within the text, one story becomes the context for another story within it and the outer-frame story as well as the inner sub-story provides relevant contexts for the other's existence. Aristotle's theory of unity of time, place and action cannot be applied to our narratives. The Granthas or the Indian texts seek, however, coherence rather than ‘unity’ at the end (Ramanujan 49). Ramanujan brings the case of Tamil poem where there is a continuum of other than contrast between man and nature and the iniversa contexts are not uniform and neutral but do affect the nature of men. He states that contrary to the notion that Indians are ‘spiritual’, they are really ‘materialistic’ since there is continuity from context to object, from non-self to self. Ramanujan opines presumes that the pervasive emphasis on context is related to the Hindu concern with Jati: each jati would define a context, a structure of relevance, a rule of permissible combinations, a frame of reference, a meta- communication of what is and what can be done. Therefore, the factor which stops one from raising the question of whether there are universals of other types is, definitely, the confinement to the consideration of jati (Ramanujan 53).

            The way we divide time in India is also very different from the way it is done in the West. Here, there are time durations such as auspicious, inauspicious (rahu kala), and also the past and present seem to merge together. Here, houses have moods (vastu shastra). Indians are prone to blame their wrong-doings on fate, vaastu and it is not possible for us to remove this context-sensitivity. It is latent in our society. With modernity, we are widening our context in the way we want to rather than doing away with all the traditional practises. It is as a result of this that the original context seems to be lost. 

           

            Ramanujan says that all societies have context-sensitive behaviour and rules but the dominant idea is always context-free. In the fifth part of the essay, he observes that societies that are context-free have movements which are context-specific in nature: in Europe, there is instances of rebellion against general universal law.  Whereas, in societies like India, which are context-sensitive, there is a dream to be free of context - this gives rise to the concept of 'rasa' in aesthetics, 'moksha' in the aims of life and 'sanyasa' in the end of life-stages. However, Bhakti- the last of the great Hindu anti-contextual notion denies the need for context and defies all contextual structures and Ramanujan says that it is different from all of the aforementioned context bound behaviours. He states that Bhakti defies all contextual structures: every pigeonhole of caste, ritual, gender, appropriate clothing and custom, stage of life, the whole system of homo hierarchicus (‘everything in its place’) is the target of its irony” (Ramanujan 54). There are numerous number of Bhakti poets such as Kanaka Dasa, Purandara Dasa, Kabir Das, Akka Mahadevi, Meera Bai, Dasimayya who were dedicated to a life of Bhakti or  devotion to the supreme and against whose feelings no contextual barriers of caste, creed, or gender could stand.
           

            In the last part of the essay, Ramanujan states how we have moved towards form a context-sensitive to context-free situations in India. He says that cultural borrowings from India to the West made it possible to move from highly individual and contextual confinements to universal stature as it happened with Eliot’s borrowing of ‘DA DA DA’  from Indian Brahadaranyaka: datta, dayadhvam, damyata. It is with modernization that there occurred a movement like this. He substantiates his proposition by adding that today people can listen to any raga at any time rather than strictly sticking to the time prescribed. Print leaf pamphlets made all caste and class people to avail knowledge, Indian Constitution made birth, region, sex, and creed irrelevant. But, however, the new thoughts and behaviours that are borrowed from the West do not replace the old religious ideas. They get incorporated with the existing tradition. In 'Ayudhapuja', even computers and type-writers are worshiped instead of weapons. Therefore, Ramanujan concludes that, no matter how hard we try to move to become a context-free society, the result is that the context-free nature ends up becoming yet another context i.e. the 'modern' context.

            An urge to consider Comparative Literature as an open platform to deal with texts in an interdisciplinary mode succeeds with this piece of writing by A. K. Ramanujan. Milton B. Singer comments on this essay in this way: “Beginning often with a provocative question, such as 'Is there an Indian way of thinking?', Raman would proceed to present such a diversity of texts and contexts, oral and written tales, poems, interviews and conversations, that the answer to the question would become inescapable, not as a dogmatic assertion, but as an invitation to look at the posed question from a fresh perspective (Singer xiii). Here, one can view, how various dimensions of language, philosophical streams-Indian and Western, theoretical stands, social phenomena- caste and class issues, music,  science etc. gets a new, innovative and comparative blend and result in a text which in itself is complete but yet paving way for further examination. In the guise of an informal piece of thoughts regarding Indian way of thinking, Ramanujan’s essay acts as an exemplary of comparative literary analysis where comparison is made but not in its literal sense of the term ‘comparative’. Amiya Dev demands for such kind of analysis where comparison must not be considered and done in its literal sense (Patil 184).  The essay in its subject matter does points at the Indian ways of thinking where one can encounter ‘inconsistency’ and ‘hypocrisy’ which, he thinks is the result of context-sensitive mode of thinking.

            Bibliography

James, Jancy, et al. Studies in Comparative Literature: Theory, Culture and Space. New Delhi:             Creative Books, 2007. Print.

Dharwadkar, Vinay. Preface. The Collected Essays of A. K. Ramanujan. New Delhi: OUP, 2004.             Print.

Dimock, Edward C., Jr. And Krishna Ramanujan. “Introduction: Two Tributes to A. K.             Ramanujan.”   Introduction. The Collected Essays of A. K. Ramanujan. Ed. Vinay             Dharwardkar. New delhi:       OUP, 2004. Print.

Doniger, Wendy. “Introduction by Wendy Doniger.” Introduction. The Collected Essays of A. K.             Ramanujan. Ed. Vinay Dharwardkar. New delhi: OUP, 2004. Print.

Patil, Anand B. “The New Indian Comparative Literatureand Culture Studies.” Studies in             Comparative   Literature: Theory, Culture and Space. Et al. Jancy James. New delhi:             Creative Books, 2007.            Print.

Ramanujan, A. K., “Is There An Indian Way of Thinking?: An Informal Essay.” Contributions to             Indian Sociology. 23.41 (1989): 41-58. Web. 15 Sept. 2015.             http://cis.sagepub.com/cgi/content/refs/23/1/41 

Singer, Milton B. “Introduction: Two Tributes to A.K.Ramanujan.” Introduction. The      Collected Essays of A. K. Ramanujan. Ed. Vinay          Dharwardkar. New Delhi: OUP,        2004. Print.