This volume examines the multiple forms of reasoning in Indian politics and explores a framework to understand them. In the process, it looks at a series of issues involving the relationship between politics and philosophy, including the status of political theory, political practices, identity politics, and political ontology. The book argues that in the years leading up to and soon after independence, the task of conceptualizing politics was largely in the domain of practising politicians who built theories and philosophical methods, and further took those visions into the practice of their politics. It maintains that Indian politicians since then have not been as inclined to articulate their theories or methods of politics. This book traces the transition from philosopher politicians to politicians seeking philosophy in Indian polity in the post-independence era and its implications for current practices. It views Indian political philosophy from the standpoints of political theorists, philosophers, and practitioners. With expert and scholarly contributions, this volume will be of interest to students and researchers of Indian political thought and political philosophy, social sciences, and humanities.

At its core, politics is all about relations of rule. Accordingly one of the central preoccupations of political theory is what it means for human beings to rule over one another or share in a process of ruling. While political theorists tend to regard rule as a necessary evil, this book aims to explain how rule need not be understood as anathema to political life. Rather, by looking at some of the earliest traditions of political thought we can rethink rule in ways that evoke stewardship rather than domination. Stuart Gray argues that hierarchical ideas about rule coevolved with political divisions between the human and non-human in western theory. The earliest discernible Greek thought advanced an instrumental relationship between humans and their environment, a position that has persisted into our current age. While this seems a defensible position, Gray points out that such instrumental understandings of the nonhuman world have gotten us into serious trouble, including problems of deforestation, global warming, rising sea levels, species loss, and peak oil. To rethink the concept of rule, A Defense of Rule turns to early Indian political thought that suggests that rule is a relationship predicated on stewardship. The book compares these two traditions of thought in order to suggest that we have a normative duty to the environment, and thus to act in a way that takes the interests of non-human nature into account. Basing his argument on his own original translations of primary sources in ancient Greek and Sanskrit, Gray shows when and how early concepts of rule evolved to justify divisions between the human and nonhuman. In doing so, he argues for a reconsideration of our duties toward the nonhuman natural world.

Sohail Inayatullah takes us on a journey through Indian philosophy, grand theory and macrohistory. We understand and appreciate Indian theories of history, specifically cyclical and spiral theories of time. From other civilizations, we learn how seminal thinkers understood the stages and mechanisms of transformation. Ssu-Ma Chien, Ibn Khaldun, Giambattista Vico, George Wilhelm Friedrick Hegel, Oswald Spengler, Comte Pitirim Sorokin, and Michel Foucault are invited to a dialog on the nature of agency and structure, and the escape ways from the patterns of history. But the journey is centered on P.R. Sarkar, the controversial Indian philosopher, guru and activist. While Sarkar passed away in 1990, his work, his social movements, his vision of the future remains ever alive. Inayatullah brings us closer to the heart and head of this giant luminary. Through Understanding Sarkar, we gain insight into how knowledge can transform and liberate. This publication has also been published in paperback, please click here for details.