Intelektinės indų kultūros recepcija Vakaruose: komparatyvizmo metamorfozės

LTRemdamiesi istoriniais šaltinias bei kritiniais tyrinėjimais, šiame darbe glaustai apžvelgsime komparatyvistikos raidą Vakarų indologinių tyrinėjimų kontekste, atkreipdami dėmesį į esmingesnius šios tarpkultūrinės sąveikos raidos procesus, metamorfozes ir išryškinsime metodologinių komparatyvizmo principų formavimosi dinamiką. Kaip formavosi klasikinė religinės-filosofinės Indijos kultūros regmė Vakaruose? Kokias prieštaras, transformacijas ir lūžius ši vizija patyrė? Kokius metodologinius lyginamųjų kultūrologinių tyrimų principus ji iškėlė?. [Iš straipsnio, p. 91]Reikšminiai žodžiai: Indija; Indologija; Komparatyvizmas; India; Indian studies; Comparative studies.

ENPresent research gives a brief survey of the development of comparative studies in the context of the history of Indology, and deals with an analysis of the main models of reciprocity of the Western and Indian philosophical epistemes. The development of Indian studies reflects the main changes in the methodological approaches to comparative studies. Our investigation leads us to the following four main conceptual generalisations of these approaches. The first model of the superiority of Western culture goes back to the time of ancient Greece and appears in new conceptual forms.The most rigid background to it was shaped by Hegel’s conception of the progressive development of human history and philosophy. For that reason, comparative studies were considered as meaningless and worthless. The second comparative model, contrary to the first, was a eulogy and laudation of Indian intellectual and spiritual culture. Such an antiscientistic approach can be seen in the works of the Romantic Age and later as the attitude of the representatives of the various New Age movements and the new traditionalists. The third model has flourished since the middle of the 20th century, putting an emphasis on the contrasting characteristics of Western and Indian thought.So the cultural East-West dichotomy was overly stressed. The fourth model is based on the concept of "parallel developments" and insists on the fact that in different areas of the world similar intellectual problems and philosophical ideas emerge at certain stages of cultural development. It becomes clear that the old East-West cultural dichotomy is simply inadequate, and that the East is not a cultural unit. According to a representative of this comparative model, H.Nakamura, the history of ideas in each cultural area has undergone a similar development with respect to intellectual problems. The conclusion is drawn that India almost always served as a screen for the projection of the predominant conceptual attitudes of the West and as an area for its ideological manipulation. Allegedly neutral, the purely theoretical and objective scientific approach itself is the result of the particular historical and cultural development of the West. And this explains why India and the West still cannot meet as equal cultural partners. [From the publication]