Bias in Indology?

C.R. Selvakumar selvakum at VALLUVAR.UWATERLOO.CA
Thu Oct 26 17:28:31 UTC 2000

'>'C.R.Selvakumar evidences a more fundamental problem
'>'in understanding other cultures or times
'>'in stating that Tamil writings only include the brain as
'>'the center of being.

     I'm sorry you are misinterpreting my words. When you claimed
     the following, I cited some examples from Tamil.


     The modern West is oriented to thinking and the brain,
     whereas, the East and older documents write more of
     feeling (and intuition) centered in the guts.

     </END QUOTE>

     Would you please quote my words where I claim 'Tamil writings only
     include the brain as the centre of being' ?


     C.R. Selvakumar

'>'This countering statement to mine of separate centers may be based upon
'>'differences in experiencing the identity of the =91self=92 with the brain=
'>'. In
'>'the States the separation of mind and brain was rejected by many who
'>'insisted that the mind and brain were one and the same. The discovery of
'>'memory and action centers in other organs has diminished this school of
'>'thought however, as well as the failure of the computer to replace many
'>'mental functions. Modern psychology likewise generally ignores the mind
'>'aspect of thought and has generally thrown out the concept of the earlier
'>'accepted term of conation that was similar to many Indian views of though=
'>'As I read original religious documents, one common theme seems to be to
'>'teach the methods for finding the separation of mind and brain. In the
'>'States, many individuals are introduced to what is called =93yoga and
'>'meditation=94 wherein many classes introduce the idea of tat tvam asi.
'>'Supposedly the practices offered by the class will assist the student in
'>'=91feeling=92 the truth of the expression.
'>'It is interesting to observe that many original Christian writings seem a=
'>'to point to the separation of mind and brain although the majority of mod=
'>'Christian churches seem to stress only the brain.
'>'Perhaps my concern can be stated as two questions. How can a culture be
'>'understood with a bias based upon a different conditioned religious or
'>'experiential relationship of the self and world. How can Indology be trul=
'>'objective without religious or spiritual (and scientific) considerations?
'>'Another concern of mine is the seemingly difference in the inner vital
'>'forces of early writings and modern interpretation.
'>'Bob Peck

More information about the INDOLOGY mailing list