Wednesday, April 21, 2010

SCHEME FOR THE WORKSHOP DISCUSSION





1. Wider context of the enquiry:



The present workshop is an attempt to explore the nature and different aspects of the spiritual dissent. This is undertaken here with view to examine the creativity of spiritual practices. The wider context of the issue of creativity is enquiry into the specificity and creativity of intellectual practices of a region, in relation to the extent of their conversancy with life-situation of the respective population. By the attempt of analyzing the creativity of spirituality in terms of its conversancy with the life-situation of the people, what is intended to examine is the potential of spiritual conceptions and practices for enabling people at large in their everyday liberative commitments to the authentic expression of life.


2. Logic:


If what is said to be spiritual is capable of providing an enduring source of inspiration for creative re-valuations for the sustenance of the dynamics of life, then no less demarcation seems to be possible between spiritual and, what is said to be, non-spiritual pursuits life; such as being ethically, socially, politically or aesthetically just to one’s own potentials and their supportive sources. Further, if doing spiritual justice becomes a matter of owing respect to the everyday commitment to the inclusive dynamics of life, then whatever comes on its way would be providing oppressive controls of action, and parameters of truth and goodness. Any moment of resistance to such regimentations of life; be that in the name of unitive spirit or universal reason, could keep the assertion of everyday commitment to life goes on. Hence, it would relevant to ask what are the issues involved in spiritualistic imaginations.





3. Intellectual domain:



The question of creativity of spirituality/religion is considered on the basis of treatment of it as an intellectual domain of human engagement. In the prevalent ways, it has been treated as mere emotional affiliations or irrational beliefs.




4. Assumption:

There exists the phenomenon of spiritual dissent. The dissident streams in spirituality are the historical facts, which go intertwined with the multiplicity of civilization, culture, religion, ethnicity, nationality, race, tribe, clan, language, etc. t

They are also seen expressed on the lines of specificity of regions and class/gender divisions. The spiritual plurality is not exhausted with any of these category divisions, but further prevails in the intra-category diversities. Hence, the articulation of spiritual dissent has further linkage with the sub-divisions of each category.



5. Contested site:


The domain of spiritual/religious beliefs and practices is taken to be a location of persisting contestations of power, influence, and supremacy, despite there exists strong traditions of practice on the assumption that is a realm of realization and lived existence, which cannot be articulated through language; hence, it is unspeakable. Since the ineffability of spirituality is not the topic of the present concerns, a fore closure seems to be possible for exploring the nature and implications of what are talked about spirituality.




6. Capturing the moments of spiritual dissent:



Since the aim of the workshop is to explore different dimensions and implications of the spiritual dissent, it would be requiring a survey of different streams of dissident spirituality. The point of such a survey could be none other than capturing some of the representative moments of spiritual dissent.


7. Different modes of spiritual dissent:



Spiritual disagreements and protestations could be taking place on varying grounds. Do all spiritual disagreements imply a re-conceptualization of spiritual reality? A criterion for the identification of spiritual dissent becomes important in this regard. Spiritual plurality has to be examined in view of their re-conceptualization of spiritual reality.



8. Specificity:


It may possible for tracing different streams of spiritual dissident in terms of specificity of gender, culture, language, sub-culture, nationality, sub-nationality, syncretic practices, ritual reforms, societal interventions, inter and intra religious differences and conflicts, etc. In this regard, the dissent might not be articulated merely in the mode of protestation and disagreement. It could rather be in the nature of certain shift in the angle of perception, or re-orientation in projection and elaborations.






9. Dialectics of Canons:



Aspects of a conception of integrated or universal vision, as against the narrow-minded mundane considerations, appear to bear the marks of spirituality. The projection of such a reality is found running through in the doctrines and history of most of the mainstream spiritual establishments, which are, however, running on contrary path with respect to the question of specificity and superiority of each one’s perception of the universal reality. Despite that, the instances of charging heresy and marginalization are aplenty when there is any kind of deviation from or mismatching with the ideals of spirituality necessarily involves a notion of integral whole. If so how do we make sense such a dialectics of canons?



10. Dissident as conformist:



There may have many instances of the one-time creative or liberative voice later turn out to be retrogressive and conformist. What is termed as the process of creative re-valuations might be taking place from within the dissident turned conformism. However, there is seen to be emerging a moment of irony when the one-time dissident itself is perceived as none other than as another variant of conformism. How do we go about with such moments of historical paradox where the new bondages are created in guise of liberation?



11. Alternative ways of conceiving spirituality.



Many of the spiritual disagreements are not seem embarking on a re-formulation of spiritual concepts and entities, except being an indulgence in superficial skirmishes, hierarchical criticisms, and other formalistic reforms in ritual practices and textual interpretations. Whereas, in the case of those streams which put up critical engagement with the conceptual structures of certain formal and sterile notions of spirituality, even if there lacks outward clamors of protest and violence, there are overtures to accommodate everything that sustains and recreates dynamic potentials of living authentic. When the everyday commitments to the authentic expressions of life are seen to have the dimensions of spiritual pursuit, where they would be harboring to?



12. Spirituality as everyday commitment:



The expressions of responsibility, obligation, care, autonomy, reciprocity, freedom, solidarity, well being, subsistence, co-existence, sustainability, inclusiveness, plurality, tolerance, mutual-respect, creativity, productivity, hard work, devotedness, integrity, dignity, happiness, peace, etc could be seen as the functional modes of spirituality as everyday commitment. If so, if anything comes on the ways of their articulation and actualization; even if in the name spirituality of any other kind, there might be emerging a context of resistance. There could possible creative interactions with the transcendentalist expressions of spirituality, if the wholesome nature of the values of everyday commitment is not affected. Everyday spirituality assumes to be a critique of transcendentalist and elitist spirituality, if contrary is the case.


13. Future Planning:



The present workshop is the fifth one in the series. Since it is undertaken here with view to examine the creativity of spiritual practices, in the wider settings of enquiry into the specificity and creativity of intellectual practices of a region, there requires formulation of specific study of the issues involved in this direction

No comments:

Post a Comment