Sheldon Pollock

Sheldon I. Pollock
File:Sheldon Pollock.jpg
Occupation	Professor, Indologist

Sheldon I. Pollock is a scholar of Sanskrit, Indian intellectual and literary history, and comparative intellectual history. He is currently the William B. Ransford Professor of Sanskrit and South Asian Studies at the Department of Middle Eastern, South Asian, and African Studies, Columbia University. He is also General Editor of the Clay Sanskrit Library and the Murthy Classical Library of India.

Career

Pollock has previously taught at the University of Chicago and the University of Iowa. He received his Ph.D. from Harvard University's Department of Sanskrit and Indian Studies, where he studied with Daniel H. H. Ingalls. Pollock's dissertation, completed in 1975, was entitled "Aspects of Versification in Sanskrit Lyric Poetry."

In 2010 Pollock was awarded the Padma Shri, India's fourth highest civilian award, by the government of India.

Theory of literary cultures

In a series of articles in the 1980s and 1990s, Pollock became known as one of the most innovative theorists working in the discipline of Indian intellectual history. Besides his interests in Sanskrit poetry (kavya), poetics (alamkarasastra), and the Mimamsa school of Vedic exegesis, he has published articles dealing with Hindu nationalism and the history of Orientalism. He has authored The Language of the Gods in the World of Men: Sanskrit, Culture, and Power in Premodern India (2006).

Interest in exploring Sanskrit

Speaking to TehelkaTV's correspondent Pragya Tiwari, Sheldon Pollock says he was basically a Classicist, and Sanskrit was an extension of his interest. A kind of critical appropriation of classical past. In his own words:

"I wish, it were the case that Saraswati had visited me in my dreams one night and invited me to be her lover!, but that did not happen. I said that in Latin and Greek in Harvard and took Sanskrit as part of my interest in Classical antiquity."

When the interviewer was shocked and asked, wouldn't that be scandalous to consider Goddess Saraswati as your lover?. "Yes, that's very scandalous!. Normally, you people think yourself as Saraswateyahs - the sons of Saraswati," he replied.

It seems, he took interest in Sanskrit as Western Classical antiquity has already been explored to last nugget and partly because he saw intellectual opportunities in India, especially in Indian cultures and scope for work in inventions and discoveries in India.

He argues that Sanskrit is not just about religious rituals, rites and practices;moreover, not a monopolised possession of certain narrow minded communities as it is also adapted by Chinese and Japanese Buddhist's too. He would like to convey that Sanskrit is not a language of religions;instead, a language for the expression of 2000 years past and sophiscated consciouness that the world has ever seen in other languages. He means Sanskrit as a language for 2000 years was about inventions, intellectual discoveries, and new poetry.

He believes India as a repository of millions of Manuscript's and are deliberately not being given access to outside world from 20th century. He and his abroad colleagues would like to explore the indian knowledge before British Raj Colonialism catastrophe. He seems to be interested in knowing indians knowledge in Epistemology, Aesthetics, Astrosciences, Life sciences etc., under a project named Indian knowledge on eve of Colonialism.

He apparently seems to be interested in exploring the missing literature and works of 'Bhatta Nayaka' and 'Dharma Kirti'. He says 'Bhatta Nayaka' from Kashmir wrote 'Hridayadarpana'(Mirror of the Heart) in 9th century AD, one of the greatest works on aesthetics in pre-modern world. He seems to have an obsessive fantasy that he could find the missing book and Bhatta Nayaka would visit him in his dreams. He also says, he was aware of 12 verses and 3 proses of Bhatta Nayaka's works are still available in india, but the works are translated by his enemies. He feels that the works of 'Dharma Kirti' too are missing, and says Dharma Kirti was a buddhist, greatest philosopher, and deepest logician in 7th century AD.

Speaking on his book, 'The Language of the Gods in the World of Men: Sanskrit, Culture, and Power in Premodern India', he wanted to prove how local languages in India like say, Kannada can maintain its individuality while continuing its friendship with Sanskrit. He even takes the reference of Persian language saying: "When persian language had become a major cosmopolitan language, it had intimate enmity with lot of North Indian languages, but shared a certain kind of intimacy at a certain distance." He apparently, wanted regional languages in India to maintain its beauty, their presence and protect its individuality, while maintaining a kind of relationship with Sanskrit.

He also observes that India is the only place where Vernacular could live with Cosmopolitan that seems impossible in the globalised West. He further criticizes 'McDonalization'(apparently, Globalization) of the world turning everything into a horrible uniformity. He lauds, incredible india's "Unity in Diversity," maintaining a kind of common network of ideas and conversations, while maintaining certain kind of "localism". In his own words:

The study of the past is the study of the possible future. The resources of the past are certainly the resources of the future.

Criticism on indian mentality towards Sanskrit

On one hand, he boasts indians, for their intelligence, depth and coherence, and longevity;thereafter, criticizing indians mentality on Sanskrit as a language in expecting something to prove them. He denounces indians as wanting Sanskrit to provide a cure for cancer, to find a recipe for cold fusion, to resurrect the past, and expects Aerodynamics theory in Vedic texts.

Criticism on indian epics

He looks, totally against the politics surrounding indian Classical studies in contrast to Classical studies in West. He strongly denounced the North Indian politics of BJP and RSS in mobilising people around epic figures through 'Rathyatra', for consolidation of Hindutva by attacking Babri masjid. He seems to have understood Hindu epics and literature as a sight of political manipulations, over the period.

He is very much concerned about the dangerous sedimentation of Mahabharatha and Ramayana mythic formations. "Mahabharatha is dangerously political story. It is a deep meditation on civil war," he said. He also says, Ramayana epic on the other hand is a political struggle displaced on others. "Ramayana is other sedimentation of the mythic. It is the story of othering," he said.

Criticism

Some defenders of traditional Oriental studies, such as Reinhold Grunendahl, have argued that Pollock exaggerates the connection between Nazism and German Indology in his "Deep Orientalism? Notes on Sanskrit and Power Beyond the Raj" (1993). Pollock has also been criticized for his emphasis on secular aspects of Sanskrit literary culture and his lack of interest in the field of religious studies.

External links

• Pollock's faculty webpage at Columbia University, including a bibliography of selected works
• - TehelkaTV interview - In conversation with Pragya Tiwari on Hindutva and the Life and Death of Sanskrit
• * Glimpse into Sanskrit literary culture