Indian Knowledge Systems: A Philosophical Perspectives by Prof. Indra Narain Singh, Department of Buddhist Studies, Faculty of Arts, University of Delhi

There is a need to understand Indian society and philosophy from a multidimensional perspective: Prof. Ananta Giri

A lecture on the topic ‘Rethinking and Transforming the Indian Knowledge System’ was organized by the Indian Research Scholars Association on Wednesday, April 17, 2024 at 7 pm. The main speaker of this topic was Prof. Ananth Kumar was present from Giri, Chennai. At the beginning of the program, our guest wished and congratulated the entire team of this institution and said that it is necessary to have such forums where students and researchers together organize any program. At the beginning of the program, Vikas Kumar, Researcher, Political Science and Human Rights Welcome address was given by the Department, Indira Gandhi National Tribal University, Amarkantak. He welcomed and congratulated our guest and explained the nature of the program. The coordinator of this lecture was Nandini Harshad Rai Dwivedi, Gujarat Vidyapeeth. The co-coordinator of the program was Govind Pandey, research scholar, Amarkantak University and the other was Sunita Yadav, research scholar, Maharashtra. Secretary of the program Shubhangi, researcher, Maharashtra. Prof. Giri said that revisiting sociology requires a fundamental interrogation of the foundations of sociology – its Eurocentric formation and continued Euro-American dominance. It calls for interaction with many traditions of social, political and philosophical thought from around the world, including Indian thought traditions and knowledge systems. But this is not one of uncritical replacement of modern sociological knowledge with uncritical and non-critical ethnocentrism of many kinds, including the claim by some that all the knowledge of the world is already in the Vedas. The challenge here is responsible and rigorous education and a deep understanding of world traditions of knowledge, including Indian traditions of social thought and sociological reflection and Euro-American traditions. The challenge here is to have an open and impartial practice of learning from Indian traditions, Euro-American traditions, African, South American and other traditions of social thought. It also calls for rethinking Indian, Euro-American, African and other traditions and knowledge systems historically and contemporarily as plural and part of world traditions. We need to realize India as Bharat Varsha – India flowing through time, a dynamic and meditative movement through time that embodies the meditative practices of co-realization. India which is Bharat, Bharat Varsha and also Al-Hind. Therefore, dialogue with sociology and Indian traditions invites us to realize India as Bharat Hind Bharat. Since it is a part of the world, we need to realize India as Bharat Hind Bharat Vishwa-Vishwa. G.B. In Reflections on “Revisiting Sociology” as a concept note for the workshop. Pant Institute of Social Sciences tells us, “Thus Indian sociology will not be context-specific social knowledge, it will also be a sociology interactive with global sociology.” Such a pluralistic perception of India challenges us to understand the pluralistic streams of Indian knowledge – Hindu, Buddhist, Islamic, Christian, Jain, Swadeshi, and the six philosophical streams of India and many more. With this plural sense of India and Indian knowledge systems, I discuss the dialogue between Upanishadic and sociology and develop the pathways of Upanishadic sociology and then I connect this to a new ecology of hope – the hope of integral sociological knowledge. Along with our life practice also. Self, culture, society, state, world and universe. Michel Foucault, in his influential Archeology of Knowledge, talks about how the archeology of knowledge involves studying texts in archives as well as interrogating monuments built in the name of knowledge and power, which forces us to ask ourselves It also challenges whether we are knowingly or unknowingly carrying out acts of memorialization in the name of Indianness and Indian sociology. But Foucault’s archeology of knowledge does not involve engagement with movements. We need a new archeology of knowledge that involves engagement not only with texts and monuments but also with movements that are multifaceted. These are movements of ideas as well as political and spiritual movements.They are also movements of consciousness. We need a new archeology of knowledge that is an archeology of life that includes engagement with texts, monuments and movements that also include movements of love, labor and learning in the different layers and realities of India and India. G.C. Pandey is a creative historian, philosopher, poet and social thinker who helps us develop the path of India India World Sociology. For Pandey, sociological knowledge is not just knowledge of society and others, but knowledge of self and soul. Pandey’s seminal work, Bharatiya Samaj: Historika aur Tatvik Vivenchana [Indian Society: Historical and Theoretical Considerations] demands careful consideration. For Pandey, sociology is concerned with human beings and the knowledge of human life is linked to their self-realization – self-knowledge – and, in fact, should be based on it. But in Pandey’s thinking the self is not merely a social being or even a ‘reflective self’ – but a soul – a soul that is primarily transcendent and divine. This seems close to the Heideggerian attention to Dasein’s own sources and can be thought of creatively with Alain Touraine’s perspective on a sociology of subjects that is not merely a reproduction of the Dasein. Functional and systemic logic of society. Taking inspiration from Pandey and Indian traditions, sociology becomes the study of the workings of the soul in the sphere called society. Here the soul is not merely an object of knowledge; This is also his subject. Pandey explains that in a deeper sense, while being a matter of knowledge, it is also not entirely subjective. The soul occupies an intermediary position between the subjective and objective dimensions of the pursuit of knowledge. Yet a focus on the soul dimension of self and society without paying attention to the soul’s integral diverse relationships, including the challenge of ethics, aesthetics, and responsibility, can get trapped in what Daya Krishna calls a self-centered predicament. At the end of the program, many queries of the researchers and students were resolved through a question-and-answer session. All the listeners benefited from the thoughts of our chief guest. Many researchers, students and listeners were present in this lecture. Ganeshi Lal, Researcher, Ashwini, Researcher, Naina Prasad, Researcher, Neha Prasad, Researcher, Kolkata etc. remained connected. This lecture was organized through Google Meet.