Skip Navigation



Journal of the American Academy of Religion Advance Access published online on September 13, 2009
Journal of the American Academy of Religion, doi:10.1093/jaarel/lfp051
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Nemec, J.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2009. Published by Oxford University Press, on behalf of the American Academy of Religion. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

Translation and the Study of Indian Religions

John Nemec

John Nemec, Department of Religious Studies, 120 Halsey Hall, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA 22904, USA.

E-mail: nemec{at}virginia.edu.


  Abstract

In this essay, I argue that scholars of Indian religions should produce unbroken translations of heretofore lesser-known texts in order to inform the academy's understanding of Indian religions. Granting high priority to such a translation agenda is ironic, however, given the Orientalist origins of the scholarly practice in question. Doing so is nevertheless justified by observing the following: (1) the vast majority of Indian religious texts remains untranslated or uncritically rendered—and often unedited or even unpublished—including many substantial and historically significant works; (2) though incomplete in scope, Orientalist conceptions of the canon of classical Indian literature, established in large part through the translation and analysis of a relatively narrow selection of religious and other works, remain influential today; (3) finally, a number of the Orientalists' translations, guaranteed by their rigorous language training, have stood the test of time and in some instances remain authoritative today, even if the Orientalist translators often harbored reviling opinions of India and Indians.

I would like to thank Douglas Brooks, Donald Davis, Timothy Dobe, Jack Hawley, Michael Linderman, and Rosane Rocher for reading various drafts of this essay; Shaman Hatley, Maya Jasanoff, and Andrew Nicholson for offering constructive suggestions during the composition of the same; and the anonymous reader whose detailed review was filled with many insightful suggestions that greatly improved this work. Finally, I offer my thanks to Carmen Lamas for patiently reading all the various drafts of this essay, and for her constant support and encouragement. N.B.: The unfortunate news of the discontinuation of the Clay Sanskrit Library was announced following the completion of this essay.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.