LTNeabejotina, kad kolonialinė Europos politika darė įtaką Indijos religijai ir kultūrai ir stipriai pakeitė jos prigimtį. Ideologinė Vakarų kolonizacija prie bendros hinduizmo religijos prisidėjo dviem būdais. Pirmiausia Indijos religingumo esmę lokalizuojant tam tikruose sanskrito tekstuose, ką galėtume pavadinti Indijos religijos tekstualizavimu. Antra, palaikant akivaizdžią ir/arba tik numanomą tendenciją apibrėžti Indijos religiją normatyviomis religijos paradigmos sąvokomis, kurios grindžiamos šiuolaikiniu vakarietiškuoju judėjų ir krikščionių tradicijų supratimu. Šie du procesai yra glaudžiai susipynę ir apibendrintai galėtų būti pavadinti Indijos religijos vesternizavimu. Nepaisant viešai religijotyros postuluojamos nekonfesionalios ir neteologinės orientacijos, esminė jos problema tebėra „tikros religijos“ apibrėžtis. Žvelgiant iš istorinės perspektyvos, akivaizdu, jog religija gali būti ir buvo įvairiai apibūdinama. [Iš Įvado]Reikšminiai žodžiai: Hinduizmas; Tarpreliginis dialogas; Orientalizmas; Postkolonijinis diskursas; Hinduism; Colonialization; Orientalism; Religious; Postcolonlal dlscurse.
ENArticle deals with the epistemic violence of Orientalism and is a response to the colonial past of the field of Indology problematizing the way in which Indian religion has been represented within Western scholarship. Attention is drawn to the fact that Western literary bias has much contributed to a textualisation of Indian religion and "semitification" of Hinduism in the modern era. As a Western explanatory construct, the myth of "Hinduism" reflects the colonial and Judaeo-Christian presuppositions of the Western Orientalists who first coined it. "Hinduism" was conceived of in terms of Western conceptions of religion so that it can then be meaningfully contrasted with the normative (i.e. Western) paradigm itself. The concept of "neo-Hinduism" in turn is inseparable from the modernization and Westernisation of traditional Indian culture. The Invention of "Hinduism" as a single "world religion" was accompanied by the rise of a nationalist consciousness in India since the nineteenth century.While analysing the contribution of Western colonization to the modern construction of "Hinduism" the author discusses the development of the conception of Orientalism in the context of postcolonial discourse, revealing the necessity to take account of religious pluralism and to deepen comparative dialogism both between and within cultures. Scholars wishing to explore alternative cultural models for understanding religion must be prepared to accept a proliferation of "ethno-critical" perspectives within the study of religion to counteract the Christian theological factors that have conditioned the history of the discipline. This is vital for the comparative study of religion, not only in avoiding an unintentional reinforcement of the Europeanization of other cultures, but also in order to take account of religious pluralism. Taking the "postcolonlal turn" must necessarily involve the transformation of Indology as a discipline and regime of knowledge. [...]. [From the publication]