印度中國學的文化取向：以Krishna Prakash Gupta的中國研究為例

Abstract

From the early struggles to shake off the yoke of colonialism, to the transformation into modern nation states in the 20th century- and - the two regional superpowers of today, have stunned the world with their economic and political clout, exerting increasingly greater influence over regions in Asia and beyond. The 1962 Border war, which at one point plunged relations into a deep freeze, did little to dampen the prospects their bilateral ties. Following the normalization of the Sino-Indian relations in the 1980s, private exchanges and political dialogues have steadily been growing between the two. While some Indian scholars study the Sino-Indian relations in the context of historical factors, others study them by analyzing current events. Nonetheless, both examine the complexities of the bilateral relationship in civilizational terms. This paper glances over the evolutions of Studies in India, which is divided into two parts: the history-related research, and the political/strategic analysis. The first part describes scholarly activities that came along with the anti-colonialism sentiment: the focus and motives of the Indian scholars on studies and the historical and cultural ties with India's neighboring states, including Buddhism and aspects. The second part describes Indian scholar's focus, developed after the war in the 1960s, with their know our enemy mantra. Against the backdrop of India's need to groom more sinologists in the 1960s, Krishna Prakash Gupta became a member among the first batch of Ford Foundation Scholarship recipients to study in the United States. Upon his return to India, he had taught in Delhi University, joined the informal Chinese Study Group, and served as the editor of the Indian journal Report. This study group and journal once were forming the core of study in modern India. Gupta's study on affairs in the 60s and 70s rhymed with themes found in the writings of the Report, examining issues based on contextual thinking and reflecting political reality. However, issues written in the Report shifted focus between in 80s and 90s - the period when priviate, cultural and governmental exchanges between and became increasingly frequent - to focus on the examination of the effects and policy surrounding economic and political transformation. (both local and national area ) Despite this paradigm shift, Gupta remained steadfast in the areas of his political study, comparing the social-historical contexts among the Chinese, Indian and the Western societies. He then asked whether China's image in reflected China’s political reality or just Indian’s perception of romantic imagination. After examining the theoretical frame and Indian perspectives on China, Gupta suggested to India's sinologists a proper method: to be aware of the standpoint, and to prevent the prejudice bringing from their own cultures. Reading between the lines the works of Gupta and his colleagues, we can see the a civilization from the cultural perspective. And by comparing the Indian and Japanese works on studies, we can gain even more depth about Indian's “Cultural China. Indian scholars view a vague, changeable but uninterrupted civilization, and the Japanese, by contrast, study in a more concrete, detailed fashion. The main reason attributing to these differences in approach lies in how the identities of the Japanese and Indian people were formed. The Chinese culture and institution, more or less, served as the foundation of the Japanese culture. Therefore, the influence of the Chinese culture, as well those from the West, became an important element in the Nation building in Japan. Meanwhile, the historians found that India was a geographical nomenclature with complex cultures before the days of the British colonization, a historical event which helped turn the colonial land into a country. In modern India, the context of other in a sense of defining its identity refers to the British Empire or its colonialism. Similarly, the Indian intellectuals viewed a civilization similar to that of India, with each of its complex cultures wrapped within its own nation frame. And the contemporary studies in India, the perspective of Cultural China remains.