Middlesex University Research Repository An open access repository of Middlesex University research http://eprints.mdx.ac.uk Ngaihte, Samuel (2018) Dharma and the enjoined subject: Jaimini’s Mmsstras and the study of ritual. PhD thesis, Middlesex University / Oxford Centre for Mission Studies. [Thesis] Final accepted version (with author’s formatting) This version is available at: https://eprints.mdx.ac.uk/25912/ Copyright: Middlesex University Research Repository makes the University’s research available electronically. Copyright and moral rights to this work are retained by the author and/or other copyright owners unless otherwise stated. The work is supplied on the understanding that any use for commercial gain is strictly forbidden. A copy may be downloaded for personal, non-commercial, research or study without prior permission and without charge. Works, including theses and research projects, may not be reproduced in any format or medium, or extensive quotations taken from them, or their content changed in any way, without first obtaining permission in writing from the copyright holder(s). They may not be sold or exploited commercially in any format or medium without the prior written permission of the copyright holder(s). Full bibliographic details must be given when referring to, or quoting from full items including the author’s name, the title of the work, publication details where relevant (place, publisher, date), pag- ination, and for theses or dissertations the awarding institution, the degree type awarded, and the date of the award. If you believe that any material held in the repository infringes copyright law, please contact the Repository Team at Middlesex University via the following email address: [email protected] The item will be removed from the repository while any claim is being investigated. See also repository copyright: re-use policy: http://eprints.mdx.ac.uk/policies.html#copy ‘Dharma and the Enjoined Subject: Jaimini’s Mīmāṃsāsūtras and the Study of Ritual’ OCMS, Ph.D July 2018 ABSTRACT This thesis is an enquiry into the conception of dharma by Jaimini in his Mīmāṃsāsūtras with the aim of arguing for its contemporary relevance, particularly for the scholarship on ritual. It seeks to do this by offering a hermeneutical re-reading of the text, primarily by investigating the theme of the relationship between subjectivity and tradition in the discussion about dharma, and bringing it into conversation with contemporary discourses on ritual. The central argument that is proposed in this thesis, based on this re-reading, is that Jaimini’s conception of dharma can be read as a philosophy of Vedic practice that is centred on the enjoinment of the subject, whose stages of transformation can be seen to possess the structure of a hermeneutic tradition. This argument, which places subjectivity and tradition at the heart of the explanation of Vedic practice, is then discussed with the scholarship on ritual in order to indicate its contemporary relevance. Therefore, the explication of the central argument, which is based upon the insights gleaned from this hermeneutical re-reading of Jaimini’s Mīmāṃsāsūtras, will be broken down into two main aims. The first aim will attempt to demonstrate that the significance of Jaiminian enquiry lies in its conception of dharma as an embodied traditionary practice that possesses the structure of a hermeneutic tradition. The second aim will attempt to demonstrate that this re-reading of Jaimini’s enquiry can offer both substantive and methodological insights to the contentions within the contemporary study of ritual. Jaimini’s conception of dharma enables me to introduce the notion of subjectivity at the heart of the explanation of ritual and allows the possibility of re- imagining a way beyond the reductionist explanations of ritual in contemporary scholarship. ‘Dharma and the Enjoined Subject: Jaimini’s Mīmāṃsāsūtras and the Study of Ritual’ by Samuel Goumuanlal Ngaihte B.A. (Delhi University) M.A. (Indira Gandhi National Open University) Director of Studies: Professor Gavin Flood, Ph.D Second Supervisor: Dr. David Singh, Ph.D House Tutor: Dr. Marina Behera, Ph.D A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the degree of Doctor of Philosophy July 2018 Oxford Centre for Mission Studies DECLARATION This work has not previously been accepted in substance for any degree and is not being concurrently submitted in candidature for any degree. Signed (Candidate) Date 27th July 2018 STATEMENT ONE This thesis is the result of my own investigations, except where otherwise stated. Where correction services have been used, the extent and nature of the correction is clearly marked in a footnote. Other sources are acknowledged by midnotes or footnotes giving explicit references. A bibliography is appended. Signed (Candidate) Date 27th July 2018 STATEMENT TWO This copy has been supplied on the understanding that it is copyright material and that no quotation from the thesis may be published without proper acknowledgement. I hereby give consent for my thesis, if approved, to be available for photocopying by the British Library and for Inter-Library Loan, for open access to the Electronic Theses Online Service (EthoS) linked to the British Library, and for the title and summary to be made available to outside organizations. Signed (Candidate) Date 27th July 2018 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This research has been a lived experience of witnessing a numbers of generous components coming together harmoniously to facilitate every stage of the journey and ensure its timely consummation. My sincere appreciation and gratitude are reserved especially for the following institutions and individuals: 1. My family, for allowing me the costly privilege of pursuing dreams, and for trusting, encouraging and supporting me through every step unconditionally. 2. Touch India Trust, New Delhi, for providing me the opportunity to hone my professional and research skills through my formative years. Dr. Brainerd Prince, for introducing me to the world of Hindu studies, and for guiding me through my applications both at the University of Oxford and at OCMS. 3. OCMS, for welcoming me into their unique community of practitioner-researchers and for supporting my project with yearly financial grants towards my tuition fees. Dr. Wonsuk Ma and Mr. Paul Bendor-Samuel, for leadership, guidance and encouragement, and for believing in me as an ‘institution’. Dr. Tom Harvey, for honest conversations, timely encouragements and for pushing me to ask the ‘so what’ question for post-PhD contribution. Dr. David Singh, for agreeing to be my second supervisor, and also for being a mentor, guide, and family. Thank you for urging me back to Oxford with your timely counsel and encouragement. Ms. Jessica Abel Smith, for guiding me patiently through the process of sorting out my visa complications. Mr. Ralph Bates, for resources, advises and concern, for proof-reading my final draft and above all for friendship. All other staff for support and encouragement. 4. OCHS, for academic support, and for ushering me into the depths of Hindu wisdom. Mr. Shaunaka Rishi Das, for welcome, encouragement, and conversations. Dr. Rembert Lutjeharms, for resources, teaching, and for sparing ample time for my pre-viva examination. 5. The Oriental Institute, University of Oxford, for academic support. Dr. James Benson, for the one-year Sanskrit classes that equipped me to translate my primary text at the standard set by Oxford. 6. The Late. Dr. (Uncle) Montague Barker, for all the long walks and stories, for prayer and genuine care. 7. Mr. Peter Shin, for friendship, conversations, honesty, and generous support. 8. Mr. Terry Garde, for conversations, friendship, and always ensuring I have a bike for travel in Oxford. 9. Mrs. Khumi T Burton, for motherly care, concern and laughter. For all the support letters (visa, rents) and kind generosity. 10. Revd Canon Geoff & Mary Bayliss, for kindness, generosity and unconditional love. My home away from home and my quiet inspiration. 11. Ms. Kimte Guite, for compassion, love and care. For helping me appreciate and understand the gift of dialogue, and for journeying together with me. 12. Finally, Professor Gavin Flood, for agreeing to be my supervisor and director of studies, and for guiding, teaching and weaning me in the academic world of Hindu studies, hermeneutical phenomenology, and comparative and dialogical approaches through conversations, lectures, reading groups and tutorials. Your gentle supervision and patient guidance have helped me appreciate and appropriate the dialogic perspective not only as a research skill, but also as a way of negotiating and appreciating the mystery and beauty of life itself. 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT ............................................................................................................................................................... I CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................ 6 PRELIMINARY BACKGROUND .............................................................................................................................. 6 CENTRAL ARGUMENT AND TWO AIMS ........................................................................................................... 13 DIALOGUING TRADITIONS OF ENQUIRY: MĪMĀṂSĀ AND RITUAL ............................................................. 14 THE PATH AHEAD.............................................................................................................................................