Orientalism

The term Orientalism—the study of the cultures of the East—has no single fixed meaning and historically has gone through various phases. In earlier discourse, it had a wider scope and was seen in a positive light. It was associated with the substantial contributions made by Western scholars in the field of Arabic, Turkish, Indic, Hebraic, Chinese, and Persian studies. It was the late Edward Said's groundbreaking 1978 work Orientalism that led to the term becoming a highly contentious one. In Said's view, Orientalism is not simply about the study of the East, it is about the West having power over the Orient by representing, codifying, and classifying knowledge about other cultures. Although there were other European and Islamic scholars who highlighted this aspect, it was Said who was largely instrumental in creating an awareness that the Western study of other cultures and production of oriental knowledge was not an innocent activity and that it was not free from political ramifications. Said was highly critical of classical Western portrayals of Arabic culture and Islam as depraved and effete. Although Said's study has mainly to do with the Near and Middle East in the context of colonial domination in the 18th and 19th centuries, its application extends to South and East Asia and has made an enormous impact on various academic disciplines, including religion. Said's own views underwent subsequent revisions and take note of the heterogeneity of cultures and the active agency of the indigenous people.

There are several marks of Orientalism. First, it is discernible in the assumption that the Western notion of “religion” is a universally applicable category and that Eastern religious traditions could be situated within it. Such a conception of “religion” is deeply rooted in Enlightenment notions such as rationality, modernity, and linear progress as well as in 19th-century Western Protestant theological presuppositions. For instance, Buddhism is seen as a version of “Hindu Protestantism” and Jainism as a form of “Hindu Calvinism.”

Second, it is seen in the privileging of certain ancient texts as authentic representations of religion, to the exclusion or marginalization of other legitimate forms of expression of religion through mediums such as dance, music, and art. In the case [Page 956]of Hinduism, Sanskrit texts were given preference, and other significant texts such as the Tamil Veda were ignored, and in the case of Buddhism, Pali texts were regarded as more genuine than Tibetan or Chinese Buddhist texts. Orientalists believed that true “Hinduism” or “Buddhism” was embedded in the ancient texts and a restoration of their original purity would cure these traditions of their current degenerate state. They also assumed that an accurate knowledge of ancient classical texts would give them insight into religious customs and practices and would assist in the governance of natives. A clear case of textualization was apparent in the publication projects commissioned by the East India Company, such as the translation and codification of Hindu laws by the Orientalist judge William Jones and the production of the Sacred Books of the East series by Max Mueller. The underlying assumption behind these textual ventures was that the written word was superior to orality and signified modernity. These textualization enterprises signified the link between knowledge and power, which, although it had been explored by earlier scholars, has become a crucial issue since the publication of Said's Orientalism.

...