Marking Identity: The Debate on the Śrīvaiṣṇavas’ Forehead Marks

IF 0.1 0 RELIGION
Manasicha Akepiyapornchai
{"title":"Marking Identity: The Debate on the Śrīvaiṣṇavas’ Forehead Marks","authors":"Manasicha Akepiyapornchai","doi":"10.1093/jhs/hiad015","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Marking one’s forehead plays a role in identifying one’s identity in various sectarian traditions in India, from the premodern period to the modern day. One such tradition is the Śrīvaiṣṇava tradition, the most influential Vaiṣṇava tradition of South India, of which the practice of marking one’s forehead was well established since the premodern time. In this article, I investigate the meanings of forehead marks or the ūrdhvapuṇḍra within the Śrīvaiṣṇava tradition. In particular, I compare the premodern discussions in the Sanskrit texts from the time of the most influential Śrīvaiṣṇava ācārya, Rāmānuja (traditional dates ca. 1017–1137), to the time of one of the most significant post-Rāmānuja ācāryas, Vedāntadeśika (traditional dates ca. 1268­­–1369), and the contemporary positions presented by Prativādi Bhayaṅkaram Aṇṇaṅkarācārya (1891–1983) in his Satsaṃpradāyārthasāranidhi (1947). I argue that the premodern debate on the superiority of the ūrdhvapuṇḍra among the sectarian marks of the Vaiṣṇavas and Śaivas was transformed into the dispute between the two Śrīvaiṣṇava subcommunities, the Teṉkalais and Vaṭakalais, in the present context. Moreover, the arguments and authoritative sources of the premodern authors differ markedly from what we find in the modern text, the Satsaṃpradāyārthasāranidhi. Despite this difference, marking one’s forehead has always been a way for the Śrīvaiṣṇava tradition to indicate their religious identity and sectarian belonging from the past to the present.","PeriodicalId":42357,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Hindu Studies","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Hindu Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jhs/hiad015","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"RELIGION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Marking one’s forehead plays a role in identifying one’s identity in various sectarian traditions in India, from the premodern period to the modern day. One such tradition is the Śrīvaiṣṇava tradition, the most influential Vaiṣṇava tradition of South India, of which the practice of marking one’s forehead was well established since the premodern time. In this article, I investigate the meanings of forehead marks or the ūrdhvapuṇḍra within the Śrīvaiṣṇava tradition. In particular, I compare the premodern discussions in the Sanskrit texts from the time of the most influential Śrīvaiṣṇava ācārya, Rāmānuja (traditional dates ca. 1017–1137), to the time of one of the most significant post-Rāmānuja ācāryas, Vedāntadeśika (traditional dates ca. 1268­­–1369), and the contemporary positions presented by Prativādi Bhayaṅkaram Aṇṇaṅkarācārya (1891–1983) in his Satsaṃpradāyārthasāranidhi (1947). I argue that the premodern debate on the superiority of the ūrdhvapuṇḍra among the sectarian marks of the Vaiṣṇavas and Śaivas was transformed into the dispute between the two Śrīvaiṣṇava subcommunities, the Teṉkalais and Vaṭakalais, in the present context. Moreover, the arguments and authoritative sources of the premodern authors differ markedly from what we find in the modern text, the Satsaṃpradāyārthasāranidhi. Despite this difference, marking one’s forehead has always been a way for the Śrīvaiṣṇava tradition to indicate their religious identity and sectarian belonging from the past to the present.
标记身份:关于Śrīvaiṣṇavas“额头标记”的争论
从前现代到现代,在印度的各种教派传统中,标记自己的额头起着识别身份的作用。一个这样的传统是希里韦ṣṇ瓦依传统,最具影响力的瓦依ṣṇ印度南部的一种传统,自前现代以来,在额头上做记号的做法就已根深蒂固。在这篇文章中,我研究了前额标记或“”的含义ṇḍ在西里韦ṣṇava传统。特别是,我比较了最具影响力的希里韦时代梵文文本中的前现代讨论ṣṇavaācārya,Rāmānuja(传统日期约1017-1137年),到最重要的后Rānācáryas时代,吠陀(传统日期1268-1369年),以及Prativādi Bhaya提出的当代立场ṅ卡拉姆Aṇṇ一ṅkarācārya(1891–1983)ṃpradāyārthasāranidhi(1947)。我认为,前现代关于瓦尔德瓦普优越性的辩论ṇḍra是Vai的宗派标志之一ṣṇ阿瓦斯和西瓦斯之间的纠纷转化为两个西瓦之间的纠纷ṣṇava子社区ṉ加莱和瓦ṭ阿卡莱,在目前的背景下。此外,前现代作家的论点和权威来源与我们在现代文本《萨莎》中发现的明显不同ṃpradāyārthasāranidhi。尽管有这种差异,但在额头上做标记一直是西瑞瓦人的一种方式ṣṇ阿瓦传统表明了他们从过去到现在的宗教身份和宗派归属。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
9
期刊介绍: The Journal of Hindu Studies is committed to a critical approach to Hindu Studies, focusing on themes that address overarching issues within the field, publishing the proceedings of research projects and conferences, and providing a forum for peer-reviewed articles. The journal aims to create a forum for constructive interdisciplinary discourse by linking the wider community of scholars in an exploration of key questions, through the lens of their own research.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信