A Reflective Account of the National Seminar–Workshop on IKS and English Studies
23–24 March 2026 | Department of English, Maharaja Krishnakumarsinhji Bhavnagar University, Bhavnagar
Some academic experiences remain limited to certificates, attendance sheets, and formal discussions. Others quietly reshape the way we think. The National Seminar–Workshop on Indian Knowledge Systems (IKS) and English Studies, organized by the Department of English at Maharaja Krishnakumarsinhji Bhavnagar University in collaboration with the Knowledge Consortium of Gujarat (KCG), became one of those transformative experiences for me.
The two-day seminar was not merely an academic event; it became a space where literature, philosophy, language, pedagogy, ecology, translation, and cultural identity entered into meaningful dialogue. More importantly, it challenged one of the most deeply rooted assumptions within English Studies in India — the idea that serious literary inquiry must always begin through Western theoretical frameworks.
Until this seminar, like many students of English literature, I instinctively approached texts through theories such as structuralism, psychoanalysis, postcolonialism, feminism, Marxism, or deconstruction. These frameworks had become so normalized within academic practice that I had rarely paused to question whether Indian intellectual traditions possessed equally rigorous methodologies for literary interpretation.
The seminar changed that completely.
Day One: Questioning the Frameworks We Inherit
The opening sessions immediately established the intellectual tone of the seminar. One of the central concerns raised during the discussions was the dominance of Eurocentric approaches within Indian academia. Rather than rejecting Western theories, the speakers encouraged participants to rethink dependency on them.
Indian Knowledge Systems as Methodology
Prof. Dushyant Nimavat argued that Indian Knowledge Systems should not be viewed as nostalgic cultural artifacts but as sophisticated epistemological frameworks capable of contributing to modern research and literary criticism.
His discussion of Nyaya philosophy introduced concepts such as:
- Pratyaksha (direct perception)
- Anumana (inference)
- Arthapatti (postulation)
These were presented not simply as philosophical ideas, but as practical interpretive tools that could be applied to literary analysis. What struck me most was the realization that Indian intellectual traditions already possess methods of reasoning, interpretation, and textual analysis comparable to globally recognized critical theories.
The session made me reconsider my own academic habits. Often, while writing research papers or assignments, I unconsciously tried to fit Indian texts into Western frameworks instead of asking whether indigenous interpretive systems might offer more culturally relevant readings.
The lecture also connected Indian methodologies with debates surrounding decoloniality and the need for culturally rooted scholarship, especially within the framework of the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020.
Ecology, Emotion, and the Thinai Tradition
Another deeply engaging session was delivered by Dr. Kalyani Vallath, who explored the ecological and aesthetic dimensions of classical Tamil poetics through the concept of Thinai.
Initially, the discussion seemed specific to Sangam literature, but it quickly expanded into a powerful comparative literary framework. The Thinai system connects landscape, emotion, ecology, time, and human experience into an integrated structure. Mountains, forests, coasts, agricultural lands, and deserts are not treated merely as settings; they become emotional and philosophical landscapes.
What fascinated me most was how differently this framework understands the relationship between nature and human emotion compared to many Western traditions. In Thinai aesthetics, nature is not symbolic decoration — it is inseparable from human emotional experience.
The session demonstrated how these ancient ecological ideas remain relevant even today, particularly within ecocriticism and environmental humanities. By connecting Thinai aesthetics with Romantic poetry, modern ecological theory, and comparative literature, the lecture showed that Indian literary traditions can actively contribute to global critical discourse.
This session significantly expanded my understanding of literary ecology. I realized that landscapes in literature are not passive backgrounds; they actively shape emotion, memory, identity, and narrative meaning.
Rethinking Pedagogy and English Studies
Dr. Kalyan Chattopadhyay focused on the colonial foundations of English education in India and argued for the integration of Indian Knowledge Systems into pedagogy and curriculum design.
One of the most thought-provoking aspects of his lecture was the critique of the “banking model” of education, inspired by Paulo Freire, where students are treated as passive recipients of knowledge rather than active participants in intellectual inquiry.
Instead, he proposed a dialogic approach rooted in traditions such as the Bhagavad Gita, where learning emerges through questioning, debate, and discussion. He explained how Indian frameworks such as:
- Nyaya for logical reasoning
- Vedanta for metaphysical interpretation
- Rasa Theory for aesthetics and emotion
- Dhvani Theory for implied meaning
can function alongside Western critical theories within English Studies.
This session reshaped my understanding of learning itself. I began to see education not as memorizing accepted interpretations, but as engaging critically with texts through multiple intellectual traditions.
Day Two: Comparative Thought, Language, and Translation
The second day of the seminar expanded the conversation into comparative literature, linguistics, translation studies, and feminist thought.
Indian Philosophy and Western Literature
Prof. Ashok Sachdeva explored the influence of Indian philosophy on British and American literature. His lecture demonstrated that Indian intellectual traditions were not peripheral inspirations for Western writers but often functioned as deep philosophical influences.
Through discussions of writers such as:
- T. S. Eliot
- W. B. Yeats
- Ralph Waldo Emerson
- Henry David Thoreau
the lecture revealed how concepts from the Upanishads, Vedanta, Karma, Maya, and spiritual unity shaped Western literary modernity.
One of the most memorable comparisons was between Hamlet and Arjuna. Both characters struggle with moral conflict, hesitation, and existential crisis; however, while Arjuna receives philosophical guidance through Krishna, Hamlet remains trapped within uncertainty and tragedy.
This comparative perspective showed how Indian philosophy can become an interpretive framework for reading canonical Western texts.
Language as Knowledge
Prof. Atanu Bhattacharya delivered a fascinating lecture on language traditions within Indian Knowledge Systems.
His central argument was that traditional Indian linguistic philosophy viewed language not merely as communication, but as a producer of knowledge itself. Referring to Panini’s Ashtadhyayi, Bhartrhari’s philosophy of language, and multilingual traditions of learning, he demonstrated how Indian grammatical systems were remarkably sophisticated and intellectually advanced.
The lecture emphasized that literature, narratives, poetry, and storytelling historically played a central role in language education. This challenged the modern tendency to separate language learning from literary and cultural engagement.
I found this particularly important because it transformed my understanding of language. Language is not simply a medium through which knowledge is transmitted; it actively shapes thought, interpretation, and reality.
Translation as Cultural Reinterpretation
Prof. Sachin Ketkar discussed translation not as mechanical word replacement, but as a creative and cultural act of reinterpretation.
His explanation of the concept of Anuvad — “speaking after” — was especially powerful. Translation, according to this perspective, is not about achieving perfect equivalence between words. Instead, it involves interpretation, transformation, and cultural negotiation.
Using examples from translators such as Sri Aurobindo and A. K. Ramanujan, he showed how translations are shaped by ideology, historical context, and literary sensibility.
This session changed how I think about translated texts. I no longer see translation as a secondary copy of an original work, but as an evolving intellectual and cultural dialogue.
Reclaiming Feminine Spirituality
The final plenary session by Dr. Amrita Das explored divine femininity through the feminist theories of Luce Irigaray.
Her lecture examined how Hindu goddess traditions offer alternative frameworks for understanding women’s identity, spirituality, embodiment, and empowerment. By connecting concepts such as Shakti, Prakriti, and divine femininity with contemporary feminist theory, the session demonstrated that Indian traditions already contain powerful symbolic and philosophical models of female agency.
The discussion of modern texts such as The Girl and the Goddess revealed how contemporary literature continues to reinterpret goddess traditions in ways that remain relevant to modern feminist discourse.
This session gave me a more nuanced understanding of feminism — one that moves beyond imitation of Western models and recognizes indigenous philosophical resources for thinking about gender and identity.
Student Presentations and Academic Engagement
Alongside the plenary lectures, the paper presentation sessions demonstrated how these theoretical ideas can be applied to actual literary research.
The presentations explored themes such as:
- Comparative mythology
- Ecocriticism through Thinai aesthetics
- Advaita philosophy in Romantic poetry
- Indigenous oral traditions
- Translation studies
- Comparative mysticism
- Feminist reinterpretations of mythology
Watching students engage confidently with Indian intellectual traditions in literary research was genuinely inspiring. The sessions proved that IKS is not limited to abstract theory; it is fully capable of functioning as a practical research methodology.
One particularly memorable aspect of the seminar for me was the opportunity to anchor a plenary session. Having studied under the guidance of one of the speakers during my undergraduate years, introducing and hosting my own professor became a deeply meaningful academic moment.
What I Learned from the Seminar
The seminar left a lasting intellectual impact on me. Some of my most important learning outcomes include:
- Understanding Indian Knowledge Systems as rigorous analytical frameworks rather than supplementary cultural references.
- Learning how Nyaya, Rasa, Vedanta, Dhvani, and Thinai can function as literary methodologies.
- Developing a comparative perspective between Indian and Western literary traditions.
- Recognizing translation as an interpretive and creative process.
- Reconsidering pedagogy through dialogue-based learning rather than passive memorization.
- Understanding language as a producer of knowledge rather than merely a communicative tool.
- Exploring ecological consciousness through indigenous literary traditions.
- Viewing feminist discourse through both Indian spirituality and contemporary theory.
- Expanding my research perspective toward interdisciplinary and culturally rooted scholarship.
Concluding Reflection
The National Seminar–Workshop on IKS and English Studies was far more than an academic event. It became a space of intellectual reorientation.
I entered the seminar with an academic mindset shaped largely by Western critical traditions. I left with a broader understanding of how Indian intellectual traditions can participate equally in global literary discourse. The seminar did not encourage rejection of Western theories; instead, it promoted intellectual balance, plurality, and dialogue.
Most importantly, the seminar reminded me that meaningful scholarship begins not by choosing between “East” and “West,” but by learning how to think critically across traditions.
The real significance of those two days lies not only in the lectures I attended, but in the questions they continue to leave behind — questions that will shape the way I read, write, research, and think in the years ahead.
.jfif)
