Body connections: Hindu discourses of the body

and the study of religion

Barbara A. Hoidrege

In the past decade there has been an explosion of interest in the 'body' as an
analytical category in the social sciences and humanities, particularly within the
context of cultural studies. Studies of the body have proliferated, representing
a range of disciplinary perspectives, including philosophy, anthropology,
sociology, history, psychology, linguistics, literary theory, art history, and
feminist and gender studies. Despite the proliferation of scholarship on the body
in the human sciences, until recently relatively few studies have focused on
discourses of the body in religious traditions--on the ways in which the body
has been represented, regulated, disciplined, ritualized, cultivated, purified, and
transformed in different traditions. In recent years a number of scholars of
religion have begun to reflect critically on the notion of embodiment and to
examine discourses of the body in particular religious traditions. However, the
body has yet to be adequately theorized from the methodological perspective of
the history of religions.
Hindu traditions provide extensive, elaborate, and multiform discourses of the
body, and I would suggest that a sustained investigation of these discourses can
contribute in significant ways to the burgeoning scholarship on the body in the
study of religion. I have argued elsewhere (Holdrege 1999) that the Brahman. ical
Hindu tradition in particular constitutes what I term an 'embodied community,'
in that its notions of tradition-identity are embodied in the particularities of
ethnic and cultural categories defined in relation to a particular people (Indo-
Aryans), a particular sacred language (Sanskrit), and a particular land (,Ary,~varta).
The body is represented in the Br~hman.ical tradition as a site of central signifi-
cance that is the vehicle for the maintenance of the social, cosmic, and divine
orders. The body is the instrument of biological and sociocultural reproduction
that is to be regulated through ritual and social duties, maintained in purity,

International Journal of Hindu Studies 2, 3 (December 1998): 341-86

© 1998 by the World Heritage Press Inc.
342 / Barbara A. Hoidrege

sustained through proper diet, and reproduced through appropriate sexual

relations. In the present essay I would like to map out a broader terrain of Hindu
discourses of the body. Before turning to an analysis of these discourses, I will
briefly survey certain trends of scholarship on the body in the human sciences
that have had a significant impact on recent studies of the body in religion.

THEORIZING THE BODY IN THE HUMAN SCIENCES

Scholars in the social sciences and humanities have theorized the body from a
variety of disciplinary perspectives. In attempting to demarcate their respective
methodological approaches, scholars speak of the phenomenology of the body,
the anthropology of the body, the sociology of the body, the biopolitics of the
body, the history of the body, thinking through the body, writing the body,
ritualizing the body, and so on. Among the plethora of perspectives and theories,
three areas of scholarship in particular have influenced studies of the body in
religion: the body in philosophy, the body in social theory, and the body in
feminist and gender studies.

The body in philosophy: The rived body and the mindful body

The growing importance of the body in philosophy is closely tied to critiques

of the hierarchical dichotomies fostered by Cartesian dualism and objectivism:
mind/body, spirit/matter, reason/emotion, subject/object. One trend of critical
analysis stems from the philosophical phenomenology of Maurice Merleau-
Ponty (1962), who sought to overcome the dualities of subject/object and mind/
body by positing the notion of the lived body based on a continuum of
consciousness-body-world. Medeau-Ponty's theory of embodiment has had a
significant impact beyond the domain of philosophy, particularly in the areas of
phenomenological psychology, phenomenological anthropology, and phenome-
nological sociology.t Such studies tend to emphasize the role of the lived body
as the phenomenological basis for experience of the self, world, and society.
A second trend of analysis focuses more specifically on a critique of the
mind/body dichotomy in which the disembodied mind reigns over and above
the mind-less body. A number of recent studies have suggested that the
relationship between the mind and the body needs to be reevaluated and the
model of hierarchical dualism jettisoned for a more integrated model of mutual
interpenetration: the mindful body, alternatively characterized as the 'mind-in-
the-body,' 'embodied mind,' or 'body-in-the-mind. '2 Critiques of the mind/
 Body connections / 343

body dichotomy constitute an integral part of studies of the body not only in
philosophy but also in other fields, as will be discussed further below?

The body in social theory: The social body and the body politic

While theories concemed with the phenomenology of the body emphasize

the lived experience of the body-self, social theories that seek to develop an
anthropology of the body or sociology of the body are generally founded on the
assumption that the body is a social construction rather than a naturally given
datum. Such theories involve an analysis and critique of the discursive practices
that constitute and inscribe the social body and the body politic. These theories
emphasize, moreover, that the body has a history, and thus one aspect of the
social theorist's task is to reconstruct the history of the body and its cultural
formation.
Among the various theoretical perspectives on the body developed by
anthropologists, sociologists, and historians, three types of approach are central.
The first approach focuses on the body as a symbolic system that conveys social
and cultural meanings. This approach builds upon the insights of Mary Douglas
(1966, 1973), whose work on the symbolism of the body emphasizes the
dialectical relation between the physical body and the social body. A second
trend of analysis is concerned primarily with the body as the locus of social
practices. Among the theoretical bases of this approach are Marcel Mauss's
(1979) conception of 'techniques of the body' and Pierre Bourdieu's (1977,
1984) notion of the 'socially informed body' as the principle that generates
and unites all practices. A third approach focuses on the body as a site of
sociopolitical control on which are inscribed relations of power. This approach
builds upon the seminal contributions of Michel Foucault (1973, 1979, 1980,
1988-90), applying and extending his conception of the 'technologies of power'
through which the body is regulated, disciplined, controlled, and inscribed?
Following the lead of Foucault, a number of social theorists have sought
to chronicle the history of the body, its representations, and its modes of
construction. 5 This has resulted in a variety of specialized studies focused on
particular types of embodiment and the discursive practices that contribute to
their formation. Among the different categories of the body singled out for
attention by social theorists are the sexual body, the alimentary body, and the
medical body. The sexual body is constituted by sexual norms and practices,
including models of sexual difference, rules and techniques regulating sexual
intercourse, codes of sexual restraint and decorum, traditions of celibacy and
asceticism, and reproductive regulations and technologies. 6 The alimentary body
is constituted by food practices and dietary regulations, including taxonomies
344 / Barbara A. Holdrege

classifying types of food substances, laws regulating the preparation, exchange,

and consumption of food, norms of table fellowship and etiquette, practices
of fasting and control of food intake, and dietetic managemenC The medical
body is constituted by medical discourses and practices, including taxonomies
delineating categories of diseases, classifications of human bodies in terms of
physical body types and pathologies, theodicies of illness and pain, traditional
methods of healing and medicine, and modern medical technologies and
regimens, a

The body in feminist and gender studies: The gendered body

The body is a central focus of analysis and cultural critique in feminist and
gender studies. Feminist critiques of the 'phaliocentric' discourses of Western
culture generally involve a sustained critique of the dualisms fostered by these
discourses, with particular attention to the gendered inflection of the mind/
body dichotomy. The distinction between mind and body, spirit and matter, in
its various formulations in Western philosophy from Plato and Aristotle to
Descartes, is a hierarchical and gendered dichotomy: the mind, characterized as
the nonmaterial abode of reason and consciousness, is correlated with the male
and is relegated to a position of superiority over the body, which is characterized
as the material abode of nonrationai and appetitive functions and is correlated
with the female. Thus one aspect of the feminist project involves challenging
the tyranny of male:reason by re-visioning the female:body and ultimately
dismantling the dualisms that sustain asymmetrical relations of power.
Theories of the body in feminist and gender studies generally focus on the
gendered body and its relation to the sexual body, with the validity of the sex/
gender distinction itself a topic of contention. Among the wide range of perspec-
tives on the body in feminist and gender studies, four types of approaches are of
particular significance. One trend of analysis, consonant with early American
feminists' emphasis on the irreducible reality of women's experience, centers on
experiences of the female body, focusing on those bodily experiences that are
unique to women, such as menstruation, pregnancy, childbirth, lactation, and
menopause. A second approach, inspired by French feminists Julia Kristeva
(1980, 1982, 1986), Luce Irigaray (1985a, 1985b, 1993), and H61~ne Cixous
(1976, 1994; Cixous and Cl6ment 1986), focuses on the role of discourse in
constructing the female body, emphasizing that the body is a text inscribed by
the structures of language and signification and hence there is no experience
of the body apart from discourse. Cixous and Irigaray, exponents of (criture
f(minine (feminine writing), propose 'writing the body,' generating new inscrip-
tions of the female body liberated from 'phallocentric' discursive practices
 Body connections / 345

and celebrating the alterity of woman's sexual difference? A third approach,

represented by British and American Marxist feminists and other proponents of
social reform, challenges French feminists' preoccupation with the discourse of
woman's body and emphasizes instead the politics of bodily praxis in which the
female body is a site of political struggle involving concrete social and material
realities, ranging from socioeconomic oppression and violence against women
to reproductive rights and female eating disorders/° A fourth trend of analysis,
especially prevalent among American scholars, focuses on representations of the
female body in the discourses of Western culture--philosophy, religion, science
and medicine, literature, art, film, fashion, and so on? ~

The body in religion

In recent years a number of scholars of religion have begun to contribute to

scholarship on the body in the human sciences. This interest in discourses of the
body is evidenced in the increasing number of scholarly forums and publications
dedicated to sustained reflections on the body in religion, including interna-
tional conferences and seminars, special issues of religious studies journals,
edited collections, review articles, and book series? 2 The emerging corpus of
scholarship on the body in religion is a multidisciplinary enterprise, involving
the collaborative efforts of scholars of religion, philosophers, anthropologists,
sociologists, historians, feminist theorists, and other scholars in the human
sciences. The majority of recent studies have focused on discourses of the body
in particular religious traditions. ~3A number of these studies are concerned with
categories of the body, discussed earlier, that have been theorized by scholars in
philosophy, the social sciences, or feminist and gender studies: the lived body,
the mindful body, ~4 the social body, the body politic, ~5 the sexual body, ~6 the
alimentary body, 17the medical body/8 and the gendered body. 19
While scholarship on the body in religion has made significant advances in
recent years, the dominant trends of analysis are problematic in two ways. First,
scholars of religion have tended to adopt the categories theorized by scholars in
other disciplines, as noted above, and have consequently not given sufficient
attention to generating analytical categories and models that are grounded in the
distinctive idioms of religious traditions. For example, in addition to categories
such as the medical body and the gendered body, other forms of embodiment
that are of particular significance to religious traditions--such as the divine
body 2° and the ritual body2~--need to be more fully explored from the methodo-
logical perspective of the history of religions. Second, as a result of the tendency
to appropriate categories from other disciplines, we are left with a bewildering
profusion of scholarly constructions of the body. While this fragmented approach
346 / Barbara A. Holdrege

to the body may be appropriately postmodern, such an approach is not adequate

to account for the complex integrative frameworks and taxonomies that are
constructed by certain religious traditions to delineate the interconnections
among various types and modalities of bodies. This integrative tendency is
particularly evident in Hindu discourses of the body, as we shall see, which
construct multileveled taxonomies that distinguish hierarchies of different types
of bodies--for example, the divine body, the cosmos body, the social body, and
the human body--that are interconnected through a complex network of trans-
actions mediated by the human body in various modalities--including what I
term the ritual body, the ascetic body, the purity body, the devotional body, and
the Tantric body. While the modalities of the human body delineated in Hindu
discourses may subsume certain categories of the body theorized by scholars,
such as the sexual body and the alimentary body, these categories assume
different valences in relation to each of these more encompassing modalities.

HINDU DISCOURSES OF THE BODY

The body has been represented, disciplined, regulated, and cultivated from
a variety of perspectives in the discourses and practices of different Hindu
traditions, including ritual traditions, ascetic movements, medical traditions,
legal codes, philosophical systems, devotional (bhakti) movements, Tantric
traditions, drama and dance, the science of erotics, and martial arts. Although
Hindu discourses of the body have assumed diverse forms, it is nevertheless
possible to isolate certain fundamental postulates that are shared by most of
these discourses.

1. The human body is a psychophysical organism that has both gross and
subtle dimensions.

In contrast to Western philosophy's emphasis on the mind/body polarity, Hindu

discourses generally represent the human body as a psychophysical continuum
encompassing both gross physical constituents and subtle psychic faculties.22
This notion is elaborated in two types of conceptions: the doctrine of the five
sheaths (pahcako~a) of the embodied self, and the distinction between the gross
body (sthaladar~ra) and the subtle body (liilga~arfra or sak.smagadra). The
doctrine of the five sheaths, which is first formulated in the Taittirfya Upanis.ad
(2.1-5), maintains that the embodied self (gadra atman) is composed of
multiple layers, from the gross, outermost sheath constituted by food (anna-
 Body connections / 347

mayakoga) to the increasingly subtle sheaths made of breath (pra.namayakoga),

mind (manomayakoga), and consciousness (vijaanamayakoga), to the subtlest,
innermost sheath consisting of bliss (anandamayako~a). The distinction between
the gross body and the subtle body, which also has its roots in the Upani.sads,
is elaborated in S~m.khya philosophy within the framework of the tattvas
(elementary principles): the gross body is constituted by the five gross elements
(mahabhatas), while the subtle body is made up of the intellect (buddhi or
mahat), ego (aham. kara), mind (manas), five sense capacities (buddhgndriyas),
five action capacities (karmendr(vas), and five subtle elements (tanmatras). 23
An alternative formulation is proposed in Advaita Vedanta, which distin-
guishes three bodies: the gross body, which is composed of the five gross
elements; the subtle body, which is made up of the intellect, mind, five sense
capacities, five action capacities, and five vital breaths (pra.nas); and, the causal
body (karan.a~ar~ra), which is ignorance (avidya, aj~ana) and is the cause of
the gross and subtle bodies. The Advaita tradition, moreover, correlates the
three bodies with the five sheaths of the embodied self, identifying the sheath
constituted by food with the gross body; the sheaths made of breath, mind, and
consciousness with the subtle body; and, the sheath consisting of bliss with the
causal body. 24
In these various formulations the mind, along with other psychic faculties,
is represented as a subtle form of embodiment--a subtle sheath or an aspect of
the subtle body--while the physical body is represented as a gross form of
embodiment. The mind, like the physical body, is a type of matter, although it
is a more subtle form of materiality than the physical body. The mind/body
problem that has preoccupied Western philosophy is thus not a central concern
in Hindu philosophical traditions. The principal problem is rather the relation-
ship between the psychophysical organism--the body-mind continuum--and
the Self--variously termed ,~tman, Brahman, or Puru.sa--which is represented
as the ultimate reality that in its essential nature transcends all forms of
embodiment. In S~m.khya this problem is formulated in terms of the relation-
ship between Prak.rti, primordial matter, and Puru.sa, pure consciousness. In
Advaita Ved,~nta the problem is reformulated in terms of the relationship
between the phenomenal world of embodied forms--which is ultimately deemed
to be maya, an illusory appearance--and Brahman (see Koller 1993).
Hindu conceptions of the subtle body and subtle materiality find their most
elaborate expression in Tantric traditions, which, drawing on the ontological
and psychophysiological categories of S,~m.khya, Yoga, and Advaita Ved,~nta,
re-figure the subtle body as a subtle physiology constituted by a complex
network of channels (na.d~s) and energy centers (cakras) and the serpentine power
of the kun.d.alinL
348 / Barbara A. Holdrege

2. The human body has a transmigratory history, in which the subtle body
reincarnates in a succession of gross bodies.

From the Upani.sadic period on, the distinction between gross and subtle bodies
assumes soteriological import as an integral part of the doctrine of karma and
rebirth. The subtle body is represented in this context as the transmigratory
body that reincarnates in a series of gross bodies. The character and destiny of an
embodied self in any given lifetime is determined by the combined influence of
the two bodies: the karmic heritage from the subtle body, which is the repository
of the karmic residues accumulated from previous births, and the genetic
heritage from the gross body, which is the repository of the genetic contributions
of the current father and mother. In the Upani.sads and later ascetic traditions, all
forms of embodiment--gross and subtle--are represented as a source of bondage
because they bind the soul to sa.msara, the endless cycle of birth and death.
Mok.sa, liberation from sa.msara, is construed as freedom from the fetters of
embodiment and realization of the essential nature of the Self beyond the body-
mind complex.

3. The body manifests on multiple planes in a hierarchy of encompassing

wholes: the divine body, the cosmos body, the social body, and the human
body.

Vedic taxonomies posit a system of inherent connections (bandhus) among

the different orders of reality: the divine order (adhidaiva), the natural order
(adhibhata), and the human order (adhyatma), which includes the psycho-
physical organism as well as the social order. These orders of reality are at times
represented as a hierarchy of structurally correlated bodies, nested one within the
other: the divine body, the cosmos body, the social body, and the human body. I
shall term these bodies integral bodies in that each is represented as a complex
whole that is inherent in the structure of reality. In early Vedic representations of
this fourfold hierarchy of bodies, the divine body is the encompassing primor-
dial totality, which replicates itself in the structures of the cosmos body, the
social body, and the human body; the cosmos body is the body of the universe,
which is the differentiated manifestation of the divine body; the social body is
the system of social classes (yarn.as), which is inherent in the structure of the
divine body; and, the human body is the microcosmic manifestation of the
divine body, which is ranked according to class and gender in the social body.
A system of homologies is thus established between the macrocosm, which
includes both the divine body and the cosmos body; the microcosm, which is
the individual human body; and, the mesocosm, which is the social body that is
 Body connections / 349

the intermediate structure between the microcosm and the macrocosm, z~ This
model persists in later Vedic and post-Vedic discourses of the body, although,
as will be discussed below, the relative importance of, and interrelationship
among, the four bodies is reconfigured to accord with the epistemological
perspective of each discourse.

4. The human body assumes various modalities in order to mediate trans-

actions among the divine body, the cosmos body, and the social body.

In Hindu traditions the human body is generally represented not as 'individual'

but as 'dividual'--to use McKim Marriott's term--that is, a constellation of
substances and processes that is connected to other bodies through a complex
network of transactions. 26The human body is represented in different traditions
as assuming distinctive modalities--which I shall term processual bodies--in
order to mediate transactions among the divine body, the cosmos body, and the
social body. Among the various types of processual bodies that have assumed
central importance in certain Vedic or post-Vedic traditions, we can distinguish
the ritual body, the ascetic body, the purity body, the devotional body, and the
Tantric body. Each of these processual bodies is constituted by specific practices
and adopts a distinctive configuration of transactions with the various integral
bodies (see Figure I). 27 For example, whereas the ritual body is constructed to
enliven the inherent connections among the four integral bodies, the cultivation
of the ascetic body involves minimizing relations with all forms of embodiment
in order to attain liberation from the bondage of samsdra.
The following analysis will examine how the four integral bodies--the divine
body, the cosmos body, the social body, and the human body--are represented
in relation to particular processual bodies in three distinct discourses of the body
found in the Vedic Sam hitis and Brahman.as, Upanis.ads, and Dharma~astras.
My analysis will focus on the ways in which each genre of texts, first, recasts
the divine body and other integral bodies to accord with its specific epistemo-
logical perspective and, second, gives precedence to a particular processual body
as the preferred mode of mediating transactions among the various integral
bodies. As we shall see, while the Vedic Sam.hit,s and Brahman.as give priority
to the ritual body, the Upanisads give precedence to the ascetic body and the
Dharmag~tras to the purity body.

Sa.mhitas and Brahman.as: The ritual body

In the Vedic Sa .mhiths (ca. 1500-800 BCE) and the Br~ma.nas (ca. 900-650
BCE) the ritual body is ascribed central importance as the processual body that
 Integral Bodies

Processual Bodies

Figure 1. I n t e g r a l Bodies and Processual Bodies

 Body connections / 351

mediates the connections among the fourfold hierarchy of integral bodies. The
earliest formulation of this quadripartite model is found in the R.g Veda Samhita
(ca. 1500-1200 BCE) in the Puru.sa Sakta (10.90), which is the locus classicus
that is frequently invoked in later Vedic and post-Vedic discourses of the body.
The Puru.sa Sakta celebrates the ritual and cosmogonic functions of the divine
body, which is identified in the hymn as the body of Puru.sa, the cosmic Man
who is the unitary source and basis of all existence. The divine body of Puru.sa
is represented as the primordial totality that encompasses and interconnects the
cosmos body, the social body, and the human body. The hymn depicts the
primordial sacrifice (vaj~a) by means of which the wholeness of Puru.sa's body
is differentiated, the different parts of the divine anthropos giving rise to the
different parts of the universe.

When they divided Puru.sa, into how many parts did they apportion him?
What was his mouth? What were his arms? What were his thighs and feet
declared to be? His mouth became the Brahman.a; [from] his arms the K.satriya
was made; his thighs became the Vai~ya; from his feet the Sfidra was born.
The moon was born from his mind; from his eye Sfirya, the sun, was born;
from his mouth came Indra and Agni, fire; from his breath Vayu, wind, was
born. From his navel arose the midregions; from his head heaven originated;
from his feet came the earth; from his ear, the cardinal directions. Thus they
fashioned the worlds (R.g Veda 10.90.11-14). 28

In these verses the divine body is portrayed as coextensive with the cosmos
body: the three principal sections of Puru.sa's body (head, navel, and feet) are
correlated with the three worlds (heaven, midregions, and earth), while specific
parts of his psychophysiology (mouth, breath, eye, ear, and mind) are correlated
with specific components of the natural order (fire, wind, sun, cardinal directions,
and moon), together with their presiding deities (Agni, Vayu, and Siirya).
The hymn also depicts the body of Purusa as encompassing the social body,
establishing homologies between particular parts of his corporeal form--mouth,
arms, thighs, and feet--and particular social classes (va.mas)--Brahman.as
(priests), Ksatriyas (royalty and warriors), Vaigyas (merchants, agriculturalists,
and artisans), and Sfidras (servants and manual laborers). The Brahma.nical social
order is thus re-presented as part of the natural order of things, inherent in the
structure of the divine body since primordial times. In this organic model the
social body, like the body of the divine anthropos, is organized according to
a hierarchical division of functions in which each part has its own separate
function to perform that is vital to the efficient operation of the whole, and yet
some parts inevitably perform more 'exalted' tasks than others. The head of the
352 / Barbara A. Holdrege

social body--the Br~hman.a class--takes the lead, supplying the organizing

principles of intelligence and speech that direct the activities of the other
members of the body.
The body of the cosmic Man is thus depicted in the Purusa Sakta as a
macrocosmic totality, the microcosmic counterpart of which is the human
body--more specifically, the male body. However, the divine body of Puru.sa
extends beyond the limits of both the human body and the cosmos body, for
Purusa is portrayed as simultaneously immanent and transcendent. On the one
hand, as the immanent principle that manifests as the universe, the body of
Puru.sa is the body of the cosmos and is represented in the form of a cosmic
Man with circumscribed boundaries, possessing a head, two eyes, two arms,
two feet, and so on. On the other hand, as the transcendent reality that is beyond
the cosmos, Puru.sa cannot be contained within boundaries and is represented as
a limitless form, possessing 'a thousand heads, a thousand eyes, a thousand
feet.' The hymn asserts that only one quarter of Puru.sa is manifested here as all
beings, while the other three quarters are immortal (R.g Veda 10.90. I-5).
Although the Puru.sa Sakta makes reference to the different body parts of the
divine anthropos, it does not describe any emblematic characteristics of the
physical appearance of Purusa that might serve to distinguish his corporeal form
from other divine bodies--apart from his thousand heads, thousand eyes, and
thousand feet, which are at times invoked as a distinctive feature of Purus.a's
form in later Vedic and post-Vedic texts. This lack of concrete specificity in
portraying the divine body is characteristic of Vedic texts, which tend to make
formulaic allusions to the bodies of the gods while eschewing individualized
descriptions of their corporeal forms. This tendency is consonant with the
aniconic orientation of the Vedic tradition, which is characterized by an absence
of iconic representations of deities as well as of temples or other permanent
shrines. 29 It is only with the advent of popular bhakti traditions in post-Vedic
'Hinduism' that we find a shift to iconic forms of worship, with temples and
paja ceremonies centered on images of the gods. In accordance with this iconic
orientation, bhakti texts--in striking contrast to the minimalist portrayals of
Vedic texts--tend to provide elaborate and particularized descriptions of the
bodies of the gods.
In the Purus.a Sakta the divine body is celebrated not for its distinctive
appearance but for its ritual and cosmogonic functions. Purus.a, as the sacrificial
victim, is identified with the sacrifice itself, and it is this primordial sacrifice
that provides the prototype for all future sacrifices. 'With the sacrifice (yajha)
the gods sacrificed (root yaj) the sacrifice (yajha). These were the first rites
(dharmas)' (R.g Veda 10.90.16, cf. 10.90.6-7). The divine body of Puru.sa is
thus celebrated as the paradigmatic ritual body, the body of the sacrifice itself.
 Body connections / 353

The hymn describes how from the ritual body of Puru.sa emerge certain elements
that form an essential part of subsequent ritual performances: in particular, the
Vedic mantras--verses (rcs), sacrificial formulae (yajuses), and chants (samans)
--and meters (chandases), which provide the sound offerings that are an integral
aspect of the sacrificial ritual, and certain animals---horses, cattle, goats, and
sheep--which are the primary offerings used in animal sacrifices (R.g Veda
10.90.9-10). This primordial ritual body, as we have seen, has not only
cosmogonic but also sociogonic functions, for its differentiation serves as the
means of manifesting both the cosmos body and the social body.
The divine body in its role as the ritual body manifests itself in multiple
bodies and then mediates the connections among its embodiments. In later
Vedic texts the homologies that the Purus.a Sakta establishes between the
various parts of the divine body and the components of the cosmos body, the
social body, and (implicitly) the human body are brought together in a more
systematic, tripartite classificatory schema that correlates the faculties of speech
(mouth), breath, and eye; the three worlds, earth, midregions, and heaven; the
elements fire, wind, and sun, together with their presiding deities, Agni, V~yu,
and S~rya/,g,ditya; the three higher yarn.as, Br~thman.as, Ks.atriyas, and Vaigyas;
and, the three Vedas, R.g, Yajur, and Sama.
In the Taittir~ya Sam.hita (ca. 900 BCE) the divine body that is celebrated as
the source of all embodied forms is the body of Praj,~pati, the supreme creator
god, who assumes a role in this Sa .mhit~ tantamount to that of Puru.sa in the
Puru.sa Sf~kta. The divine body of Praj~pati is first and foremost a ritual body,
for, like Puru.sa, Praj~pati is identified with the sacrifice.~ Praj~pati is also
extolled as the creator of the sacrifice3~and its first performer. He is depicted as
the primordial seer (.r.si) who cognizes certain verses (rcs), ritual formulae,
meters, and sacrificial rites 32 and then, assuming the role of the first priest,
performs the various sacrifices in order to bring forth beings. 33
Taittir~ya Sa.mhita 7.1.1.4-6 describes the divine body of Praj~pati as a ritual
body, from whose body parts emerge certain aspects of the sacrificial ritual
along with various components of the cosmos body and the social body. From
his mouth, chest and arms, torso, and feet, respectively, Praj~pati brings forth
certain lauds (stomas), chants (samans), and meters, as well as particular gods,
animals, and social classes.

Praj~pati desired, 'May I reproduce.' From his mouth he measured out the
triv.rt (nine-versed) stoma. Subsequently the deity Agni was brought forth, the
gayatrT meter, the rathantara saman, among human beings the Brahman.a,
among animals the goat. Therefore they are foremost, for they were brought
forth from the mouth. From his chest and arms he measured out the pahca-
354 / Barbara A. Holdrege

daga (fifteen-versed) stoma. Subsequently the deity Indra was brought forth,
the tris.tubh meter, the brhat saman, among human beings the Ks.atriya,
among animals the sheep. Therefore they are strong, for they were brought
forth from strength. From his middle he measured out the saptadaga
(seventeen-versed) stoma. Subsequently the deities the Vi~vadevas were
brought forth, the jagat~ meter, the vairapa saman, among human beings the
Vai~ya, among animals the cows. Therefore they are to be eaten, for they were
brought forth from the receptacle of food. Therefore they are more abundant
than the others, for they were brought forth after the most abundant of the
deities. From his feet he measured out the ekavimga (twenty-one-versed)
stoma. Subsequently the anus.t.ubh meter was brought forth, the vairaja
saman, among human beings the Sfidra, among animals the horse. Therefore
these two, the horse and the SQdra, are dependent on others. Therefore the
SQdra is not fit for the sacrifice, for he was not brought forth after any deities.
Therefore they support themselves by their feet, for they were brought forth
from the feet (Taittir~ya Sa.mhita 7.1.1.4-6; cf. Jaimin~ya Brahman.a 1.68-
69; Pa~cavim. ga Brahman. a 6.1.6-11).

In this passage a number of the components that are depicted in the Puru.sa
Sakta as emerging from the sacrifice of the divine body--samans, meters, gods,
animals, and yam.as--are incorporated in a fourfold taxonomy that directly
correlates these various components and ranks them hierarchically. This fourfold
set of correspondences is at times reformulated in later Vedic texts as a threefold
taxonomy that eliminates the bottom stratum in the hierarchy and focuses on the
correlations between certain triads.
In the Brahman.as reflections on the body are subsumed within the discourse
of sacrifice, and thus the ritual body assumes primacy of place as the processual
body that mediates the connections among the divine body and its multiple
manifestations. The sacrificial discourse of the Br~hma.nas is founded upon the
speculations of the Purus.a Sakta and in this context evidences three principal
concerns: to establish the identity of Purusa with Prajfipati, who is celebrated as
the supreme god and creator in the Brfihma.nas; to establish the cosmic import
of the sacrifice as the counterpart of the Puru.sa Praj~pati; and, to delineate the
creative and renovative power of the sacrificial order (adhiyaj~a) as the instru-
ment for enlivening the inherent connections (bandhus) among the human order
(adhyatma), the natural order (adhibh~ta), and the divine order (adhidaiva).
As Brian Smith has emphasized, this system of bandhus is founded on the
Vedic principle of 'hierarchical resemblance,' which as a 'central principle of
Vedism' (1989: 78) encapsulates the 'ancient Indian notion that the universe was
composed of mutually resembling and interconnected, but also hierarchically
 Body connections / 355

distinguished and ranked, components' (1994: vii). The connections among the
various components of the universe operate on two axes: vertical and horizontal.

Vedic connections are of two sorts: what we might call vertical and horizontal
correspondences. The former connects an immanent form and its transcendent
correlative .... This type of connection operates between the elements of the
same species located on different and hierarchically ranked cosmological
levels. Horizontal connections link resembling components of...different
species located within the same cosmological plane which share a similar
hierarchical position within their respective classes (Smith 1989: 73).

This system of bandhus is elaborated in the Brahman.as in complex, multi-

leveled taxonomies that, building on the classificatory schemas of the Sam hit~s,
establish homologies among the various categories of existence--words, gods,
time and space, natural elements and forces, animals, plants, psychophysical
components, social classes, ritual elements, and so on. In these taxonomies the
image of the divine body, as a composite of hierarchically arranged parts, is
often invoked as an encompassing model that interconnects the hierarchically
differentiated parts of the cosmos body, the human body, and the social body.34
In the Brfthman.as the archetypal divine body is the body of the creator
PrajApati, who is explicitly identified with Puru.sa 35 and, like Puru.sa in the
Puru.sa Sakta, is described as both immanent and transcendent, pervading the
entire universe36 and yet at the same time extending beyond it. 37 Praj~pati is
above all celebrated in the Brfihmanas for his role in the primordial sacrifice, in
which his divine body is divided into parts--either by Praj~pati himself or
by the gods---in order to generate all embodied forms. As in the TaittirTya
Sa.mhita, he is extolled as the creator of the sacrifice, 38 the first performer of the
sacrifice, 39and the sacrifice itself. 4° The Satapatha Brahma.na declares:

Having given his embodied self (atman) to the gods, he [Praj~pati] then
brought forth that counterpart (pratima) of himself which is the sacrifice
(yajFta). Therefore they say, 'The sacrifice is Praj,~pati,' for he brought it forth
as a counterpart of himself (1 1.1.8.3).

The notion that the sacrifice is a counterpart of Praj~pati has important ramifica-
tions in the Br~man.as' ritual ideology. Smith remarks:

The construction of a sacrifice, an ideally continuous and complete entity

made out of the joining of discrete parts (rites, performers, implements,
offerings, etc.), is a reconstruction of the universe itself in the sense that the
356 / Barbara A. Holdrege

one supposedly reproduces---in a different form--the other. They are not

identical but resembling forms of unity, sharing the same essence but mani-
festing themselves differently. The sacrifice is composed of the counterparts to
the cosmic prototypes (each element of the ritual being vertically connected to
transcendent correlatives), and the sacrifice as a whole is the counterpart to the
prototype that is PrajApati, the universe. The sacrifice operates with 'images,'
whereas Praj~pati's body or self is comprised of the 'originals,' but both
participate in the same ontological essence (1989: 74).

The sacrifice, as a counterpart of Praj~pati, connects the divine body with

its other counterparts--the cosmos body, the human body, and the social
body. The sacrifice is represented in the Br',ihma.nas not only as the means
of mediating the connections among the macrocosmic, mesocosmic, and
microcosmic manifestations of the divine body but also as the means of
constituting these multiple bodies. The theurgic efficacy of the sacrifice is
described in this context in terms of its cosmogonic, theogonic, anthropogonic,
and sociogonic functions. First, the sacrifice serves as the cosmogonic instrument
through which Prajapati generates the cosmos body, setting in motion the entire
universe 4~ and bringing forth all beings. 42 The initial generative act of Praj~pati
is generally represented in the Brf~daman.as as resulting in a chaotic creation rather
than an ordered cosmos. The sacrifice therefore serves not only as the instrument
of creation but also as the instrument of rectification by means of which Praj~pati
structures an ordered cosmos. Second, the sacrifice serves as the theogonic
instrument through which the divine body of Praj~pati himself, which is
disintegrated and dissipated by his creative efforts, is reconstituted and restored
to a state of wholeness. 43 Third, the sacrifice serves as the anthropogonic
instrument through which the defective human being produced through
biological reproduction is born anew out of the ritual womb and reconstituted
through ritual labor. The BrAhman.as emphasize in particular the role of the
sacrifice in perfecting the embodied self (atman) of the patron of the sacrifice
(yajamana), the human counterpart of Prajapati, and ultimately in ritually
constructing for him a divine self (daiva atman) through which he may ascend
to the world of heaven (svarga loka)?4 Finally, the sacrifice serves as the
sociogonic instrument that constructs and maintains the social body as a
hierarchy of bodies differentiated according to class and gender,a5
The ritual body, as the body that is constituted through the sacrificial ritual,
thus has multiple significations in the Bffthma0as' discourse of sacrifice,
encompassing the divine body that is revitalized, the cosmos body that is
renovated, the human body-self that is reconstituted, and the social body that is
constructed through the sacrifice. The Bl"ahmao.a priests are ascribed a central
 Body connections / 357

role in the discourse of sacrifice--and in the discourse of power--as the earthly

embodiments of Praj~pati who periodically reenact the primordial sacrifice as a
means of reconstituting and interconnecting the divine body, the cosmos body,
the human body, and the social body. 'Praj~pati indeed is that sacrifice (yajha)
which is being performed here and from which these beings were produced, and
in the same manner are they produced thereafter even to the present day.'46
The theurgic efficacy ascribed to the sacrifice as the instrument that constructs
and interconnects the divine body and its corporeal counterparts is particularly
evident in the Satapatha Brahma.na's discussion of the agnicayana ceremony.
The construction of the bird-shaped fire altar is represented as the ritual construc-
tion of the body of Praj~pati. The body of Praj~pati, disintegrated and exhausted
from the process of creation, is reconstituted through the building up of the fire
altar so that the divine body can be offered anew to regenerate and sustain the
universe. The fire altar is represented in the Satapatha Brahman.a as a concrete
material manifestation of the divine body in the form of a brick edifice. The five
layers of bricks that make up the fire altar are correlated, respectively, with those
parts of Praj~pati's psychophysiology that become immortal--mind, speech,
breath, eye, and ear--while the layers of earth that separate the layers of bricks
are correlated with those parts of the divine body that remain mortal--hair, skin,
flesh, bones, and marrow (Satapatha Brdhmana 10. i.3.4-5). The fire altar, as
the concrete manifestation of the divine body, also incorporates the cosmos
body. For example, the first, third, and fifth layers of bricks are homologized,
respectively, with the three worlds, earth, midregions, and heaven, as well as
with the elements fire, wind, and sun, together with their presiding deities,
Agni, Vfiyu, and ,~ditya (Satapatha Brahman.a 6.2.3.1-6). The five layers of
bricks are also correlated with the categories of time and space--the five seasons
and the four cardinal directions together with the zenith (Satapatha Brdhman.a
6.1.2.18-19). Finally, the fire altar is homologized with the human body, and
in particular with the body of the yajamana, whose measurements are used
as the basis for the measurements of the altar. The image of a golden man
that is placed at the base of the brick altar is identified with the archetypal
Man, Puru.sa, representing both the divine prototype, Praj~pati, and his human
counterpart, the yajamana. The golden man represents more specifically the
divine form that is ritually constituted for the yajamdna as the vehicle through
which he may ascend to the world of heaven and become immortal (Satapatha
Brahman.a 7.4.1.15, 7.4.2.17). 47

Upanisads: The ascetic body

In the Upani.sads (ca. 800 BCE-200 CE) the epistemological framework shifts
358 / Barbara A. Holdrege

from the discourse of sacrifice, the karmaka.n(l.a, to the discourse of knowledge,

thej~anakan, d.a, and correspondingly the ritual body is displaced by the ascetic
body as the processual body that is central to Upani.sadic reflections on the
body. The metaphysical speculations of the Upani.sads reflect the sectional
interests of certain forest-dwelling sages and ascetic groups that began to define
themselves over against the priestly sacrificial tradition from the eighth century
BCE onward. In contrast to the priestly exponents of the Br~ma0as' concern
with ritual action (karman) as a means of regenerating the realm of embodied
forms, the Upani.sadic sages give priority to knowledge (j~ana)---in the sense of
both intellectual understanding and direct experience----of ultimate reality as a
means of achieving liberation (mona) from the bondage of sam.sara and its
endless cycles of embodiment.
The body assumes new valences within the context of the Upani.sads'
ontological and epistemological concerns regarding ultimate reality. Thus while
discussions of the body in the Br~hma.nas center on the paradigmatic body of
the creator Praj,~pati, the primordial sacrificer, the Upani.sads reframe the discus-
sion in terms of the relation of the body-mind complex to the ultimate reality--
generally designated as Brahman or .~tman--that is the source not only of the
phenomenal world but also of the creator himself. Moreover, in Upani.sadic
reflections much of the concrete mythological language and imagery used with
reference to the body in the Sa.mhit:~s and Bffthmanas is stripped away and
replaced with more abstract metaphysical terminology and categories. For
example, it is in the Upani.sads, as discussed earlier, that we first find the
conception of the five sheaths of the embodied self as well as the distinction
between the gross body and the subtle body.
In their discursive reshaping of the body, the Upani.sads generally ascribe
central importance to two categories: Brahman-,~tman, as the paradigm for the
divine body, and the ascetic body, as the processual body to be cultivated as a
means of realizing Brahman-,~tman. The divine body is recast in relation to
Brahman-Atman---either directly, through references to the body of Brahman or
the body of ,~tman, 48 or indirectly, through references to the body of Puru.sa,
who is generally identified as an aspect of Brahman-,~tman. 49 While in certain
passages Purus.a is associated with the transcendent aspect of Brahman-,~,tman
that is formless, nonchanging, and without parts, 5° he is more often depicted as
the immanent, all-pervading aspect of Brahman-,~,tman that abides within the
ever-changing realm of embodied forms. In this context, as we shall see, Puru.sa
is frequently represented as the inner Self (antaratman) that is hidden in the
hearts of all embodied beings, sl
Aitareya Upani.sad 1.1.1--4 gives a cosmogonic account of the differentiation
of the divine body of Puru.sa that recalls the account of the sacrifice of Puru.sa
 Body connections I 359

in the Purus.a Sakta. However, the narrative is reconfigured to accord with the
metaphysical perspective of the Upanis.ads. The account portrays the Self,
•~tman, as existing alone in the beginning and as subsequently drawing forth
from the waters and shaping a Man, Puru.sa. The account goes on to describe the
process of differentiation by means of which the various parts of Puru.sa's body
are separated out and give rise to the different components of the universe.

In the beginning the Self (,~tman), one alone, was here. No other being
whatsoever blinked an eye. He thought to himself, 'Let me now bring forth
the worlds.' He brought forth these worlds .... He thought to himself, 'Here
then are the worlds. Let me now bring forth the guardians of the worlds.'
From those very waters he drew forth and shaped a Man (Puru.sa). He brooded
upon him. From him who was thus brooded upon a mouth was separated out,
like an egg; from the mouth, speech; from speech, Agni, fire. Nostrils were
separated out; from the nostrils, breath; from breath, V~yu, wind. Eyes were
separated out; from the eyes, sight; from sight, ,~ditya, the sun. Ears were
separated out; from the ears, hearing; from heating, the cardinal directions.
Skin was separated out; from the skin, body hair; from body hair, plants and
trees. A heart was separated out; from the heart, mind; from the mind, the
moon. A navel was separated out; from the navel, the downward breath; from
the downward breath, death. A generative organ was separated out; from the
generative organ, semen; from semen, the waters (Aitareya Upanis.ad 1.1.1-
4).

In this passage the incipient taxonomy of the Purus.a Sakta, which posited
homologies between the various parts of the divine body of Puru.sa and the
components of the cosmos body, is extended in a more complex and systematic
classificatory schema. As in the Puru.sa Sffkta, the body of Puru.sa is represented
as coextensive with the cosmos body. The different parts of Puru.sa's psycho-
physiology, including bodily orifices and organs (mouth, nostrils, eyes,
ears, navel, generative organ, heart, and skin) and their associated functions
(speech, breath, sight, hearing, downward breath, semen, mind, and body hair),
are correlated with different components of the natural order (fire, wind, sun,
cardinal directions, death, waters, moon, and plants), together with their
presiding deities. The divine body thus encompasses the cosmos body as well
as, by implication, the human body that is its microcosmic counterpart.
Apart from providing a more elaborate taxonomy, the Aitareya Upani.sad's
cosmogonic account diverges from that of the Purus.a Sakta in three significant
ways. First, ,~tman is interjected into the narrative as the ultimate source of
creation and of Puru.sa himself. Second, the language of the Upani.sadic account
360 / Barbara A. Holdrege

is more abstract, and the concrete imagery of the sacrificial ritual is eliminated
altogether. Third, the social body is not mentioned in the account. These points
of divergence are consonant with the Upani.sads' discursive re-figuring of the
body, which generally gives precedence to Brahman-,~tman, as the ultimate
reality to which the divine body is assimilated, and to the ascetic body, as the
processuai body that is defined in opposition to the ritual body and the social
body.
While the Aitareya Upanis.ad's account appears to distinguish Puru.sa from
A,tman, in most Upani.sadic speculations Puru.sa is identified as an aspect of
.~tman--more specifically, that aspect which abides in the heart of all things as
the inner Self (antardtman)? 2 The Upani.sads emphasize Purus.a's role not only
as the all-pervading reality whose divine body is coextensive with the cosmos
body but, more important, also as the inner Self that resides within the cosmos
body. Puru.sa is represented in this context as the animating intelligence of the
cosmos body that, on the microcosmic plane, resides within the hearts of all
embodied beings and endows them with consciousness.
This dual role of Puru.sa--as the divine body qua cosmos body and as the
inner Self of the cosmos body--is evident in ¢Svetagvatara Upani.sad 3.11-21.
On the one hand, invoking the language and imagery of the Purus.a Sakta, the
passage celebrates the thousand-headed Puru.sa who is 'greater than the greatest'
and whose body is the body of the cosmos. On the other hand, the passage
depicts Puru.sa as the inner Self that is 'subtler than the subtlest' and that abides
in the hearts of all embodied beings.

He who is the face, the head, and the neck of all, who abides in the heart of
all beings, and who is all-pervading--he is the Lord .... Purus.a, the measure of
a thumb, is the inner Self (antaratman), ever seated in the heart of living
beings .... With a hand and foot on every side, with an eye, head, and face on
every side, with an ear on every side, it stands encompassing everything in
the world .... He is swift, and he grasps yet has no foot or hand; he sees yet
has no eye; he hears yet has no ear .... They call him the great primordial
Purusa. Subtler than the subtlest, greater than the greatest is the Self (,a,tman)
that is established here in the heart of a living being (f;veta~vatara Upani.sad
3. i 1-20).

Puru.sa's relationship to the body is thus multileveled. First, his divine body,
with its omnipresent heads, eyes, ears, hands, and feet, is represented as
encompassing the cosmos body in its totality on the macrocosmic plane and the
bodies of all beings on the microcosmic plane. Second, he is depicted as the
Self, Atman, that is hidden in the hearts of these embodied beings. Finally,
 Body connections / 361

Puru.sa is portrayed as without form--without eyes, ears, hands, and feet--and

hence as ultimately that transcendent reality which is beyond all embodiment.
The last two points are connected, for, according to Upani.sadic metaphysical
speculations, the Self that is hidden within the body is itself bodiless, formless.
The Self is subtler than the subtlest, beyond the gross and subtle realms of the
cosmos body and beyond the gross and subtle manifestations of the human
body.
The Upani.sadic sages locate the source of bondage in the embodied self's
attachment to the body-mind complex and consequent failure to recognize its
true identity as the Self, which in its essential nature is unmanifest, formless,
nonchanging, and unbounded. Deluded by ignorance, the embodied self identifies
itself with the body-mind complex and becomes bound in the endless chain of
embodiment, sam.sara. In this context the human body is often ascribed negative
valences in the Upani.sadic discourse of knowledge, becoming associated with
ignorance, attachment, desire, impurity, vices, disease, suffering, and death. The
Maitri Upani.sad asserts:

In this foul-smelling, unsubstantial body, which is an aggregate of bone,

skin, muscle, marrow, flesh, semen, blood, mucus, tears, rheum, feces, urine,
wind, bile, and phlegm, what good is the enjoyment of desires? In this body,
which is afflicted with desire, anger, greed, delusion, fear, despondency, envy,
separation from what is desired, union with what is not desired, hunger, thirst,
old age, death, disease, sorrow, and so on, what good is the enjoyment of
desires? (1.3, cf. 3.4).

The Upani.sadic sages emphasize that the goal of human existence, mok4.a,
liberation, can only be achieved through overcoming one's attachment to the
body-mind complex and attaining realization of the ultimate reality, Brahman-
,4,tman, beyond all embodied forms. They generally advocate, moreover, the
adoption of an ascetic way of life as the most expedient means to attain
realization of Brahman-,~tman. The Brhadaran.yaka Upani.sad declares:

[The Self] transcends hunger and thirst, sorrow and delusion, old age and
death. Having known that Self (,~tman), Brahman.as abandon the desire for
sons, the desire for wealth, and the desire for worlds and undertake the
mendicant life (bhik.sacarya) (3.5. I, cf. 4.4.22).

The ascetic mode of life, as initially formulated by the forest-dwelling

Upani.sadic sages and elaborated in later post-Vedic ascetic traditions associated
with the mendicant renunciant (sam.nyasin, parivrajaka, pravrajita, bhik.su,
362 / Barbara A. Holdrege

yati, muni), 53 involves the cultivation of an ascetic body. In contrast to the ritual
body, which is constituted as a means of enlivening the connections among the
divine body, the cosmos body, the social body, and the human body, the ascetic
body is constituted as a means of overcoming attachment to all forms of
embodiment. The cultivation of the ascetic body involves minimizing trans-
actions with the cosmos body, which is renounced as the field of sam.sara and
hence the domain of bondage. The ascetic, in seeking to disengage from the
entanglements of life in the world and to free himself from the binding influence
of the realm of embodied forms, must also abandon attachment to the divine
body that encompasses the cosmos body. For Brahman-,4,tman, the ultimate
reality that the ascetic seeks to realize, is in its essential nature formless and
beyond all embodiment.
The construction of the ascetic body also involves the 'deconstruction' of the
social body, as Patrick Olivelle (1995) has emphasized. The ascetic body is
defined in direct opposition to the social body constituted by the Br~man.ical
norms of dharma, for the realm of worldly dharma is viewed as inextricably
linked to sa.ms~ric existence. The world-renouncing ideologies and practices of
ascetic traditions are antithetical to the world-maintaining ideologies and
practices promulgated by Br~hman.ical authorities to regulate the human body
and perpetuate a social hierarchy of bodies ranked according to class and gender.
The renunciant ideal is predicated on the abandonment of the prescribed rituals,
including Vedic sacrifices as well as domestic rites, and rejection of the social
duties of vam.agramadharma delineated in the Dharmas~tras and the Dharma-
~stras. Br~hma.nical householder traditions concerning marriage and sexuality,
which are concerned with regulating the transactions of the sexual body as the
instrument of procreation, are countered by ascetic practices that renounce
householder life, marriage, and procreation altogether and seek instead to restrain
the sexual impulse through the observance of celibacy. Br~thman.ical food
practices and norms, which are concerned with regulating the alimentary body
through a complex system of food transactions and dietary laws, are countered
by ascetic disciplines that are aimed at minimizing food production and
consumption through such practices as begging and fasting. BrSahma0.ical
constructions of the social body--together with the concomitant constructions
of the ritual body, sexual body, and alimentary body--are thus negated and
supplanted by renunciant constructions of the ascetic body) 4
Having abandoned the accoutrements of worldly dharma--home, family,
sexuality, food production, ritual practices, and social duties--the ascetic adopts
a regimen of practices designed to discipline and control the individual psycho-
physiology and overcome the fetters of the body-mind complex that impede
realization of the Self. The practices that constitute the ascetic body include
 Body connections / 363

techniques of meditation and various types of mental disciplines, breathing

exercises, and physical austerities aimed at controlling the mind, senses, and
bodily appetites. The encompassing term that is at times used for this complex
of ascetic practices is tapas (literally, 'heat'), which refers to the spiritual
'heat' that is generated through such practices and that burns up ignorance and
attachments, leading to the ultimate goal of the ascetic path: realization of
Brahman-,~tman35

Dharmagastras: The purity body

In the Dharma~stras (ca. 200 BCE-600 CE) the body is re-figured in accordance
with the Br~man.ical discourse of dharma, and the purity body is ascribed
a central role as the processual body that mediates transactions among the
divine body, the cosmos body, and the social body. The ideology of purity
serves in particular to legitimate the Br~thma.nical system of vam.agramadharma
delineated in the Dharmagfistras, and thus the purity body's relation to the social
body is of paramount significance. The importance of the categories of purity
and impurity in the Hindu caste system has been emphasized by eminent
anthropologists and sociologists, such as M. Srinivas (1952), H. Stevenson
(1954), Henry Orenstein (1965, 1968, 1970), Louis Dumont (1970, 1980), and
Stanley Tambiah (1973). Dumont, in his classic study of the caste system,
Homo hierarchicus (1970, 1980), maintains that the opposition between the
pure and the impure constitutes the fundamental ideological principle that
undergirds the social hierarchy. Although, as Dumont's critics have argued, the
pure/impure opposition alone is not sufficient to account for the historical
actualities of the caste system,56 issues of purity and pollution are nevertheless a
central preoccupation in the Dharma~stras' ideological representations of the
social hierarchy. My analysis will focus on the ideology of purity in which
the body is embedded in the Dharmag~stras, with particular emphasis on the
Manusm.rti (ca. 200 BCE-200 CE).
The Manusmrti, which is the only Dharma~stra that contains an extensive
account of creation, mentions the divine body a number of times in its
cosmogonic narrative in Book I. The narrative describes how the self-existent
Lord (BhagavAn), 'desiring to bring forth various kinds of beings from his own
body (garTra)' (Manusm.rti 1.8), generates a golden egg, from which he himself
is born as the Puru.sa Brahm~. Brahm~, who in his role as the creator principle
is designated as Prajapati elsewhere in the text (Manusm.rti 2.76-77, 5.28), is
depicted as dividing the egg into the three worlds----earth, midregions, and
heavens--and as subsequently drawing forth from himself certain tattvas--mind
(manas), ego (aham.kara), intellect (mahat), the five sense capacities, and so on.
364 / Barbara A. Holdrege

These elementary principles in turn constitute the body (mfirti, ~arira) of the
creator, from which he generates all beings (Manusm.rti 1.1-17).
In contrast to the Vedic cosmogonies discussed earlier, the creation account in
the Manusmrti does not give a detailed description of the process of differen-
tiation through which the divine body is divided into parts to form the various
components of the universe. In accordance with its focus on the discourse of
dharma, the Manusm.rti is primarily concerned with connecting the divine body
to the social body, and thus it is only in the text's accounts of the emergence of
the four varn.as that we find references to specific parts of the divine anthropos.
Invoking the imagery of the Purus.a S~kta, the Manusm.rti declares: 'For the
sake of the welfare of the worlds, he brought forth from his mouth, arms,
thighs, and feet the Brahman.a, the K.satriya, the Vaigya, and the ~;fidra' (1.31).
The text interjects the same image again at the conclusion of its creation
narrative, in order to provide a transition to the discourse of dharma that is its
primary concern. 'In order to preserve this entire creation he, the effulgent one,
assigned separate functions to those who sprang forth from his mouth, arms,
thighs, and feet' (Manusmrti 1.87). The text goes on to describe the duties of
the four varnas and concludes with extended praise of the Br~daman.a class,
which is born from the purest part of the divine body--the mouth--and hence is
deemed to be preeminent among the social classes (Manusm.rti 1.88-101).

Man is declared to be purer above the navel. Therefore the purest [part] of him
is stated by the Self-existent (Svayambhfi) to be the mouth. As the Bffahmaoa
sprang from the highest part of the [divine] body, as he was the first-born, and
as he preserves the Vedas, he is, according to dharma, the lord of this entire
creation. For the Self-existent, having performed tapas, brought him forth
first from his own mouth in order to convey oblations to the gods and manes
and to preserve this universe .... The very birth of a Br'~mat3a is an eternal
embodiment of dharma, for he is born for the sake of dharma and attains
realization of Brahman (Manusm.rti 1.92-98, cf. 5.132).

The image of the four yarn.as emerging from the divine body is also invoked
elsewhere in the Manusmrti, where it is used to define the Dasyus, or non-
Aryans, as 'all those peoples in the world who are outside [the community of]
those born from the mouth, arms, thighs, and feet [of the divine body]' (10.45).
The image of the divine body is thus used in the Manusm.rti to legitimate
the Br~hman.ical system of social stratification and to establish a hierarchy of
purity based on a series of successive dichotomies. First, the Aryans, as the four
varnas born from the divine body, are distinguished from the non-Aryans, who
are excluded from the claim to divine origins. Second, among ,/~ryans, the
 Body connections / 365

twice-born Br~daman.as, K.satriyas, and Vai~yas are distinguished from the once-
born Sfidras, who are born from the most impure part of the divine body, the
feet. Third, among the twice-born classes, the Brahman. as, as the first-born who
emerge from the purest part of the divine body, the mouth, are distinguished
from the K.satriyas and Vai~yas, who are born from less pure portions, the arms
and thighs, respectively. The Brahman. as, as the quintessential embodiments of
purity and of dharma, thus claim for themselves the status of the lords of
creation.
In the purity codes of the Manusm.rti and other Dhanna~stras, the hierarchy
of purity is extended beyond the social body to include the cosmos body that is
the differentiated manifestation of the divine body. Through the taxonomic
enterprise the cosmos body is divided into a variety of distinct categories of
bodies--gods, humans, animals, plants, minerals, and so on--and each of these
categories is further subdivided into a series of classes ranked according to a
scale of purity and impurity. In accordance with this scale, some classes of
natural phenomena are deemed to be inherently pure, while others are categorized
as intrinsically polluting. For example, certain animals, such as the cow, are
ascribed a high degree of purity (Manusm.rti 5.133), while other animals, such
as the dog, pig, and cock, are held to be impure (3.239). Metals are similarly
classified according to their relative purity, with gold ranked as purer than silver
and copper. Among natural fibers, silk is ranked as purer than cotton. In these
taxonomies certain organic substances and processes are especially associated
with impurities, and in this context events such as birth and death that are
integral to embodied existence are regarded as particularly polluting. 57 At the
other end of the scale, certain elements and substances are ascribed special
purificatory potency--in particular, water, earth, fire, wind, the sun, and the
five products of the cow (milk, gM, curd, urine, and dung) (Manusmrti 5.105,
5.133).
The human body, as a component of the organic world, is also associated
with impurities. The parts of the human body are themselves classified, as we
have seen, with those parts above the navel--and the mouth in particular--
deemed to be pure, while the lower portions of the body below the navel
are held to be impure (Manusm.rti 1.92, 5.132). Natural bodily processes and
functions, such as eating, sleeping, urinating, defecating, sexual intercourse, and
menstruation, are considered polluting (Manusmrti 5.138, 5.145). The bodily
secretions associated with such processes, including urine, feces, semen, menses,
saliva, phlegm, and sweat, are similarly classified as inherent impurities of the
human body. The Manusm.rti declares: 'Oily secretions, semen, blood, fatty
brain substance, urine, feces, nasal mucus, earwax, phlegm, tears, rheum, and
sweat are the twelve impurities of human [bodies]' (5.135, cf. 5.123).
366 / Barbara A. Holdrege

A number of the impurities listed in the Manusm.rti's enumeration also appear

in the Maitri Upani.sad's (1.3, cf. 3.4) diatribe against the body that was cited
earlier. However, the evaluation of the human body in the two passages is
fundamentally different. The passage in the Maitri Upanisad forms part of a
broader discussion concerning the bondage of sam. sara, and in this context the
body is denounced as the locus not only of impurities but also of the binding
influences of sa.ms~ic existence---desire, delusion, vices such as anger and
envy, disease, suffering, and death. The passage in the Manusm.rti, on the other
hand, forms part of an extended discussion of purity and impurity, and in this
context the primary concern is not to denounce the body per se but rather to
prescribe purificatory procedures that should be undertaken in order to counteract
the impurities that are an intrinsic aspect of corporeal existence. Since the
human body is itself the locus of certain polluting substances, the purity body
is not a given but rather an ideal to be approximated. The purity body, its
boundaries constantly threatened by the inflow and outflow of impurities, must
be continually reconstituted through an elaborate system of regulations and
practices. In contrast to the cultivation of the ascetic body, which involves
renouncing the cosmos body and the social body in order to obtain liberation
from sa.msara, the construction of the purity body involves highly selective
transactions with the cosmos body and the social body in order to maintain the
smooth functioning of the social and cosmic orders. The male members of the
twice-born yarn. as, in upholding the ritual and social duties of va.~grama-
dharma, are enjoined in the Dharmag~stras to minimize contact with impure
persons and substances, to maximize contact with pure persons and substances,
and to undertake a regular program of purificatory procedures to mitigate the
polluting effects of embodied existence.
The Dharmag~tras are particularly concerned with the purity body's relation
to the social body, as we saw earlier in our analysis of the Manusm.rti's
representations of the divine body. However, the social body is more highly
differentiated than the image of the four varn. as issuing forth from the divine
body suggests. The social body includes not only the four yarn. as but also
the numerous jarls, or castes, which the Dharmag~stras claim were generated
through the intermixing of the varnas (varn. asam. kara). The hierarchy of purity,
in addition to ranking the four yarn.as according to their relative purity, is
extended to include the mixed castes (jatis) that have been produced either
through permissible anuloma (literally, 'with the hair') unions between a man of
a higher varn. a and a woman of a lower varn. a (hypergamy) or through unsanc-
tioned pratiloma (literally, 'against the hair') unions between a woman of a
higher v a ~ a and a man of a lower varn. a (hypogamy). In this extended pyrami-
dal hierarchy the Brahma.has maintain their place at the apex, as the paradigmatic
 Body connections / 367

representatives of the purity body, while the large number of 'debased' castes
generated through illicit pratiloma unions are deemed to be of impure origin
and relegated to the bottom of the hierarchy. Moreover, the debased castes are
generally assigned polluting occupations that involve constant association with
impure substances, such as working with leather, handling corpses, or slaying
animals, and that serve to reinforce their purported condition of congenital
impurity. 5s
Thus while all human bodies--even Brahman. a bodies--are to a certain extent
tainted by the impurities of organic life, different degrees of natural defilement
are ascribed to different human bodies by virtue of their birth in a particular
caste with its associated occupation. However, the purity status of a caste, as
well as of its individual members, is not fixed but may be modified through
interactions with other castes--more specifically through a complex network of
transactions involving the exchange of women (in marriage), food, and services.
The regulations and procedures delineated in the Dharma~stras for structuring
the purity body thus include laws of connubiality to regulate the transactions of
the sexual body as well as laws of commensality to regulate the transactions of
the alimentary body. The laws of connubiality delineate the effects of various
types of marriage transactions--in particular, endogamous, hypergamous, and
hypogamous unions--on a caste's purity status. 59 The laws of commensality
circumscribe food transactions among castes, determining who may receive food
and water from whom, and thereby serve to strengthen the hierarchical gradations
of purity that both separate and connect castes. 6° The Br~ma.nical food system
also includes taxonomies classifying foods as pure or impure; rules pertaining to
the purity of cooking vessels and utensils; and, regulations that rank different
methods of food preparation in terms of their relative resistance to pollution,
distinguishing in particular among raw food (most resistant), food cooked in oil
(pakka) (less resistant), and food cooked in water (kacc~) (least resistant).6t
Castes that are ascribed a high purity status are considered to be more
vulnerable to polluting influences than lower castes and are therefore enjoined in
the Dharma~tras to follow a stricter system of purificatory procedures and
rituals. 62 Tambiah comments:

The logic of these rules [concerning external pollution] stems from the simple
precept that the higher the purity status of a man the greater his defilement
by impurity, especially that stemming from a lower level person or object.
Conversely, the logic says that a lower caste person in so far as he is perma-
nently more polluted than a higher caste person does not proportionately
heap more pollution upon himself through defiling contact, and can return to
his status quo ante more easily than a superior status person whose fall is
368 / Barbara A. Holdrege

proportionately steeper and the purification entailed correspondingly more

elaborate (1973:213-14).

In accordance with this logic, the laws of purity are most stringent for
Br~man.as, who epitomize the purity body. Bffahma0.as are enjoined in the
Dharma~stras to guard with constant vigilance the boundaries of the purity
body, regulating what goes into and out of the body--food, drink, bodily secre-
tions, and so on. In order to accomplish this goal, they are instructed to adopt a
rigorous regimen of purificatory practices, which generally includes a vegetarian
diet, a regular routine of baths, ablutions, and purificatory rituals, and avoidance
of contact with impure persons and substances. The laws of connubiality, for
example, proscribe a male BrAhmana, in the case of his first marriage, from
marrying a woman of the impure class of Sfidras, lest he become an outcaste,
degrade the caste status of his offspring, and sink into hell (Manusm.rti 3.14-
19). The laws of commensality similarly prohibit a Br~man.a from accepting
food from persons deemed to be in either a permanent or a temporary state of
impurity, including a ~ d r a , an outcaste, an eunuch, a menstruating woman, a
woman who has just given birth, a sick person, or a person with an impure
occupation, such as a washerman, physician, or harlot (Manusm.rti 4.205-23, cf.
11.176, 11.181). Even the glance of an impure person or animal is defiling to
the purity body of a Br~hman.a. 'A can.dala (outcaste), a pig, a cock, a dog, a
menstruating woman, and an eunuch must not look at Brahman.as when they
eat' (Manusm.rti 3.239). 63
In the Dharma~stras a person's level of purity is determined not only by his
or her caste but also by such factors as stage of life and gender. In the ideal
schema of four stages of life (agramas) prescribed for male members of the three
higher va~as, the householder (grhastha) is ranked as the least pure, followed,
in order of increasing purity, by the student (brahmacarin), forest-dweller
(vanaprastha), and renunciant (sa.mnyasin or yati). 64 With respect to gender,
significant distinctions are made between men and women, both in terms of
their respective contributions in the process of procreation to the purity status of
the offspring and in terms of the relative purity ascribed to male and female
bodies. First, according to the Dharma~stras' theory of reproduction, the male
'seed' is more important than the female 'field' into which it is sown, for it is
the seed that ultimately determines the status and characteristics of the offspring.
Thus although endogamous unions between a man and woman of the same caste
are considered the norm, anuloma unions between a man of a higher va.r(ta and a
woman of a lower varn.a are permitted because the power of the male seed
prevails in determining the status of the offspring, even though that status will
be somewhat tainted by the mother's less pure status. Pratiloma unions between
 Body connections / 369

a woman of a higher varn. a and a man of a lower varn. a are prohibited for the
same reason, for even though the female field may be relatively pure, the status
of the offspring will be debased by the polluting influence of the male seed
(Manusm.rti 9.33--40, 10.69-72, 10.5-6). Second, although women are at times
extolled in the Dharma~stras for their purity, female bodies are generally
characterized as less pure than male bodies because of their association with
polluting processes such as menstruation and childbirth. Hence women are
excluded, along with S~dras, from activities that require a state of ritual
purity--in particular, studying and reciting the Vedas and performing sacrificial
rituals .65

CONCLUDING REFLECTIONS

The model that emerges from our study of a variety of Hindu discourses of the
body is both structural and transactional. The structural aspect of the model
delineates a multileveled hierarchy of structurally correlated bodies corresponding
to different orders of reality, which I have termed integral bodies: the divine
body, the cosmos body, the social body, and the human body. The transactional
aspect of the model delineates a range of possible transactions among the
integral bodies that are mediated by the human body in various modalities,
which I have termed processual bodies: the ritual body, the ascetic body, the
purity body, the devotional body, the Tantric body, and so on.
The earliest formulation of this model, as we have seen, is found in the
Puru.sa Sakta, which represents the divine body of Puru.sa as the paradigmatic
ritual body that encompasses and interconnects the cosmos body, the social
body, and the human body. This model is extended and adapted in the
Brahman.as' discourse of sacrifice, which centers on the divine body of the
Puru.sa Praj~pati, the primordial sacrificer, and on the theurgic efficacy of the
sacrifice as the instrument that constitutes the divine body and its corporeal
counterparts--the cosmos body, the social body, and the human body--and
then enlivens the connections among this fourfold hierarchy of bodies. In the
Upani.sads this model is reconfigured from the epistemological perspective of
the discourse of knowledge, which supersedes the discourse of sacrifice. In
accordance with the ascetic interests of the forest-dwelling Upani.sadic sages,
this discourse interjects two new emphases: first, the divine body is recast in
relation to the ultimate reality, Brahman-,~tman, and, second, the ascetic body
displaces the ritual body as the processual body that is to be cultivated through
minimizing transactions with the cosmos body and the social body in order
370 / Barbara A. Holdrege

to attain realization of Brahman-,~tman beyond the body-mind complex. The

Dharma~stras provide an alternative reformulation of the model that accords
with the epistemological perspective of the discourse of dharma. In recon-
figuring the fourfold hierarchy of bodies, the Dharma~stras give primary
emphasis to the social body, as evidenced, first, in the use of the image of
the divine body to legitimate the Br~hman.ical social system and, second, in
ideological representations of the purity body as the processual body that must
be continually reconstituted through highly selective transactions with the
cosmos body and the social body.
This model, which posits a multileveled hierarchy of bodies interconnected
through a complex network of transactions, has been further extended and
reformulated in other Hindu discourses of the body--in particular, in construc-
tions of the devotional body in bhakti traditions and in constructions of the
Tantric body in Tantric traditions. Although the Tantric body has been explored
in several recent studies, 66 relatively little attention has been given to the
devotional body as a category of analysis.67 My own research on bhakti and
Tantric traditions suggests that an extended analysis of representations of these
processual bodies in relation to the hierarchy of integral bodies would prove
fruitful in illuminating the distinctive contributions of these discourses of the
body. However, such investigations are beyond the scope of the present inquiry
and must be postponed to a further study.
This model of integral and processual bodies, which has been appropriated
and reconfigured in a variety of Hindu discourses of the body, provides a well-
documented example of the complex hierarchical taxonomies that religious
traditions construct to distinguish, rank, and interconnect different types of
bodies. Moreover, a number of the specific types and modalities of bodies that
are delineated in Hindu discourses are also found in other religious traditions,
although the relative importance ascribed to the various bodies, as well as
the pattern of relations among them, is of course different from tradition to
tradition. Hence Hindu constructions of embodiment may serve to illuminate
comparable constructions in other traditions.
An analysis of Hindu discourses of the body can thus contribute in significant
ways to our ongoing investigations of the body in the history of religions, as
well as in the human sciences generally, by bringing to light new categories and
models that are grounded in the idioms of religious traditions themselves. In
contrast to the fragmented approach that has tended to dominate our scholarly
inquiries, in which scholars in different disciplines posit a variety of different
categories of the body that are discussed in isolation from one another, Hindu
traditions exemplify the more systemic approach of religious traditions, which
tend to construct elaborate integrative frameworks that emphasize the connec-
 Body connections / 371

tions and interactions among different types of bodies. As we have seen, certain
categories that have been theorized by scholars, such as the sexual body and the
alimentary body, are ascribed entirely different valences when they are incorpo-
rated in the more encompassing modalities delineated by Hindu discourses, such
as the ascetic body and the purity body. These processual bodies themselves
assume distinctive valences when they are incorporated in an even more encom-
passing interpretive framework of hierarchically differentiated integral bodies.
Hindu constructions of embodiment thus posit a multileveled network of body
connections.

Notes

1. Among works on the phenomenology of the body, see, for example, Zaner 1964,
1981; Schrag 1979; Levin 1985; Jackson 1983; O'Neill 1989; Csordas 1990.
2. See, for example, Kasulis 1993; Kasulis, with Ames and Dissanayake 1993;
Midgley 1997. See also Johnson 1987; Lakoff 1987, who challenge the mind/body
dichotomy in the context of broader critiques of objectivism. For current debates
among contemporary philosophers concerning the relationship between mind and
body, see Warner and Szubka 1994.
3. See, for example, Scheper-Hughes and Lock 1987; Strathem 1996. As discussed
below, critiques of mind/body dualism are central to many feminist theories of the
body.
4. For discussions of perspectives on the body in social theory, along with
references to relevant works, see Turner 1996b, 1991a; Dissanayake 1993; McGuire
1990; Frank 1990; Freund 1988. Among works concerned more specifically with
the anthropology of the body, see Benthall and Polhemus 1975; Blacking 1977;
Polhemus 1978; Jackson 1983; Scheper-Hughes and Lock 1987; Csordas 1990;
Strathern 1996; Asad 1997. Among works concerned with the sociology of the body,
see Freund 1982; Armstrong 1983; O'Neill 1985, 1989; Scarry 1985; Featherstone,
Hepworth, and Turner 1991; Shilling 1993; Synnott 1993; Scott and Morgan 1993;
Falk 1994; Turner 1996a.
5. The most ambitious work concerned with the history of the body is the three-
volume Fragments for a history of the human body, edited by Feher, with Naddaff
and Tazi (1989). The third volume includes an extensive annotated bibliography by
Duden (1989).
6. See, for example, Foucault 1988-90; Gallagher and Laqueur 1987; Rouselle
1988; Brown 1988. For reviews of these and other works concerned with the sexual
body, see Culianu 1991: 62-63, 65-72, 1995: 2-4, 5-9; Frank 1990: 145-48.
7. See, for example, Douglas 1966: 29-57; Elias 1978; Bell 1985; Bynum 1987;
Mennell 1991; Turner 1982, 1991b, 1996a: 165-96. Bell and Bynum are reviewed in
Culianu 1991: 63-65, 1995: 4-5.
372 / Barbara A. Holdrege

8. See, for example, Foucault 1973; Armstrong 1983; O'Neill 1985: 118-47;
Scheper-Hughes and Lock 1987; Turner 1992. For a review of other works concerned
with the medical body, see Frank 1990:134--45.
9. The notion of sexual difference has been developed in a variety of distinctive
ways by Anglo-American feminists. See, for example, Gallop 1988; Butler 1990,
1993; Grosz 1994. For critical analyses of debates among Anglo-American and
French feminists, see Moi 1985, Dallery 1989.
10. As an example of this approach, see Bordo 1989, 1993.
! i . See, for example, Suleiman 1986; Michie 1987; Martin 1987; Gallagher and
Laqueur 1987; Miles 1989; Jacobus, Keller, and Shuttleworth 1990; Laqueur 1990;
Maiti-Douglas 1991; Bynum 1991.
12. An international conference on 'The body: A colloquium on comparative
spirituality,' held at the University of Lancaster in England in 1987, resulted in two
publications: a special issue of the journal Religion, 'The body: Lancaster collo-
quium on comparative spirituality' (1989), and the recently published collection of
essays, Religion and the body, edited by Coakley (1997). A second collection of
essays, Religious reflections on the human body, edited by Law (1995), was engen-
dered by a two-year international forum on the body in religion. The Law collection
contains a review article by Culianu (1995, cf. 1991) that surveys recent scholarship
on the body in Western culture. A review article by Sullivan (1990), which appeared
in a special issue of History of religions on 'The body' (1990), focuses more specifi-
cally on recent works on the body that are relevant to scholars of religion. See also
LaFleur's (1998) recent essay on the body as a critical term for religious studies.
With respect to book series, the SUNY Series, The Body in Culture, History, and
Religion, edited by Eilberg-Schwartz, published twelve volumes in the period
between 1992 and 1997.
13. The edited collections by Law (1995) and Coakley (1997) include essays
by specialists focusing on different aspects of the body in particular religious
traditions. With respect to recent books on the body, a number of seminal studies
focus on Christian traditions: Bell 1985; Bynum 1987, 1991, 1995; Brown 1988;
Camporesi 1988; Miles 1989. Among recent studies of discourses of the body in
Jewish traditions, see Eilberg-Schwartz 1992; Boyarin 1993. For an analysis of
Islamic discourses of the body, see Malti-Douglas 1991. For an extended study of
the body in Aztec culture, see L6pez Austin 1988. Studies of the body in Asian
traditions include edited collections such as Kasulis, with Ames and Dissanayake
1993 as well as works focused on specific traditions: South Asian (Daniel 1984;
Griffiths 1986; Flood 1993; White 1996; Wilson 1996); Chinese (Schipper 1993;
Zito and Barlow 1994); and, Japanese (Shaner 1985; Yuasa 1987, 1993; Nagatomo
1992).
14. A number of works have been concerned with reevaluating the mind/body
problem from the perspective of Asian traditions. See, for example, Shaner 1985;
Griffiths 1986; Yuasa 1987, 1993; Nagatomo 1992; Kasulis, with Ames and
Dissanayake 1993.
 Body connections / 373

15. A number of scholars have emphasized the need for sociologists and anthro-
pologists of religion to undertake extended research on the ways in which the body
is represented and constructed in religious traditions. See, for example, McGuire
1990; Simpson 1993; Ruth 1974. With respect to studies of the body as a site of
sociopolitical power in specific religious traditions, see the collection of essays
edited by Zito and Barlow (1994) on Chinese discourses of the body.
16. See, for example, Rouselle 1988; Brown 1988; Biale 1992; Boyarin 1993;
White 1996; and, the essays on the sexual body in Eilberg-Schwartz 1992.
17. See, for example, Bell 1985; Bynum 1987.
18. See, for example, Larson 1993; White 1996: 19-32; and, the essays on the
medical body in Zito and Barlow 1994.
19. See, for example, Miles 1989; Malti-Douglas 1991; Bynum 1991; Boyarin
1993; Cooey 1994; Wolfson 1995; Wilson 1996. See also the essays on the
gendered body in Law 1995; Zito and Barlow 1994; Eilberg-Schwartz 1992.
20. Among recent studies, see Waghorne and Cutler, with Narayanan 1985;
Malamoud and Vernant 1986; Hopkins 1993; Wolfson 1995; and, the essays on the
divine body in Law 1995; Eilberg-Schwartz 1992; Feher 1989.
21. The central importance of the ritual body has been emphasized in particular by
Bell (1992: 94--117). See also the essays on the ritual body in Law 1995; Zito and
Bariow 1994.
22. For discussions of the ways in which Hindu theories of the body challenge the
mind/body dichotomy posited by Western philosophy, see Koller 1993; Staal 1993;
Larson 1993.
23. For S~m.khya perspectives on the gross and subtle bodies, see Larson and
Bhattacharya 1987.
24. For Advaita perspectives on the three bodies and the five sheaths, see Potter
1981. It is important to note that the Ny,~ya, Vaige.sika, and Yoga schools of Hindu
philosophy reject the notion of a subtle body.
25. My use of the term 'mesocosm' follows that of Lincoln (1986: 4).
26. See Marriott's (1976a) discussions of the notions of 'dividual' and 'trans-
actional.'
27. Figure 1 provides a schematic representation of the integral bodies and
processual bodies. The specific configuration of the integral bodies in the figure
reflects early Vedic constructions of the ritual body, in which the divine body is the
encompassing totality within which the cosmos body, social body, and human body
are subsumed. A separate figure could be generated for each of the other processual
bodies, in which the integral bodies would be reconfigured to highlight the relative
importance of, and changing relationships among, the four bodies.
28. The translations of all Sanskrit passages are my own.
29. Malamoud remarks:

The India of the Vedas is...'aniconic.' To be sure, there exists neither any rule
nor any account condemning the manufacture of divine images. It remains the
374 / Barbara A. Holdrege

case, however, that Vedic India has left no vestige whatsoever that might bear
witness to the prior existence of sculpted or painted effigies....There is no
mention whatsoever--in this enormous agglomeration of hymns, prayers,
aetiological narratives and prescription, bearing on the most minute details of
worship---of objects depicting the gods (1996: 208).

Malamoud emphasizes the links between Vedic aniconism and the perspectives on
divine corporeality propounded in Vedic texts. It is important to note that we do
find some evidence of aniconic--as opposed to iconic--representations in the Vedic
period, for example, the bird-shaped fire altar in the agnicayana ceremony, which, as
will be discussed below, is understood to be a representation of the body of the
creator Praj~pati.
30. See, for example, Taittir~ya San.~hita 5. !.8.3-4.
31. See, for example, Taittir~ya Sa.mhita 1.6.9.1, 3.3.7. I, 6. ! .2.4.
32. Taittir~ya Sa.mhitB 5.1.8.3, 7.2.5.1, 3.3.5.2, 6.6.10.1, 7.2.4.1, 7.3.8.1.
33. See, for example, Taittirfya San.lhita 7.1.1.2, 7.1.1.4, 3.5.7.3, 7.2.5.1, cf. 1.7.4.1,
7.2.4.1, 7.3.8.1. Praj~pati is also described as distributing the sacrifices to the gods.
See Taittir[ya Sa~.nhitd 1.7.3.2, 6.6. I I. 1.
34. For analyses of the taxonomies of the Br~hma.nas, see Holdrege 1996: 43-62;
Smith 1994.
35. See, for example, Kau.sTtaki Brahmat.m 23.4; Taittir[ya Brdhman. a 2.2.5.3;
~atapatha Brahman a 6.1.1.5, 6.1.1.8, 6.1.3.1, 6.2.2.9, 7.4.1.15, 11.1.6.2; Jaimin~ya
Brahman. a 2.47; JaiminTya Upani.sad Brahman a 1.49.3.
36. Regarding the immanent nature of Praj.~pati, Gonda remarks:

In the case of the Vedic Prajapati creation is a process of emission and exterioriza-
tion of some being or object that formed part of, or was hidden in, the creator
himself, yet does not become completely independent of him, because Praj~pati,
being the Totality (sarvam), embraces his creatures....The creator god is 'identical'
with, that is immanent, inherent in, his creation (1983: 18).

The all-pervading nature of Prajapati as the unitary principle of the cosmos is

expressed in references to Prajfipati as 'all' (sarvam) or 'this all' (idam sarvam). See,
for example, Kau.sitaki Brahma~a 6.15, 25.12; Satapatha Brdhmat.za 1.3.5.10,
4.5.7.2, 5.1.1.4, 5.1. !.6, 5.1.1.8-9, 5.1.3.1 I, 13.6.1.6; Jaiminiya Upani.sad Brahman. a
1.46.2. See also Gonda 1955, 1982.
37. See, for example, Satapatha Brahman. a 4.6.1.4, which describes Praj~pati
as the fourth over and above the three worlds of heaven, midregions, and earth.
Compare R.g Veda 10.90.3-4, which maintains that one quarter of Puru.sa
encompasses all beings, while the other three quarters extend beyond and are
immortal.
38. Aitareya Brahman.a 5.32, 7.19; Kaus.Ttaki Brahman.a 6.10, 6.15, 28.1;
Taittir~ya Brahman. a 3.2.3.1; Satapatha Brdhrnat.la 11.1.8.3, 13.1.1.4; Paacavi .mga
 Body connections / 375

Brahman. a 8.6.3; Jaimin~ya Brahman.a i.83, 1.321, 1.358, 3.155, 3.274.

39. Aitareya Brahman.a 4.23, 4.25, 5.32; Kau.s[taki Br,~hman.a 5.3, 12.8;
~atapatha Brahman.a 2.2.4.4-7, 2.3.1.22, 2.4.4.1, 3.9.1.4, 6.3.1.18, 6.6.3.1;
Paacavi.mga Brdhman.a 4.1.4, 6.1. I, 6.3.9.
40. Aitareya Brdhman. a 2.17, 6.19; Kau.s~taki Brahman. a 13.1, 26.3; Taittir~ya
Brahman.a 3.2.3.1, 3.7.2.1; Satapatha Brdhman.a 4.2.4.16, 4.5.5.1, 4.5.6.1, 4.5.7.1,
5.1.4.1, 1.1.1.13, 1.2.5.12, 1.7.4.4, 2.2.2.4, 3.2.2.4, 5.2.1.2, 5.2.1.4, 5.4.5.20-21,
6.4.1.6, 11.1.1.1, 12.1.8.3, 14.1.2.18, 14.2.2.21, 14.3.2.15; Pa~cavin.zga Brahman. a
7.2.1, 13.11.18; Jaimin~ya Brahman. a 1.135.
41. See, for example, Paacavi.mga Brdhmat3a 25.6.2, 25.17.2.
42. See, for example, Aitareya Brahman.a 4.23; Kau.sTtaki Brahman.a 6.15, 5.3;
~atapatha Brahman.a 2.5.1.17, 2.5.2.1, 2.5.2.7, 2.6.3.4; Pa~cavim.ga Brahman. a
6.1.1-2, 8.5.6, 4.1.4, 22.9.2; Jaimin~ya Brahman.a !.67.
43. For a discussion of the role of the sacrifice in constructing an orderly cosmos
and reconstituting the creator Praj~pati, see Smith 1989: 50-81.
44. For a discussion of the anthropogonic function of the sacrifice, see Smith
1989:82-119.
45. For an extended analysis of the ways in which the taxonomies associated with
the discourse of sacrifice in the Brahman.as serve to perpetuate and legitimate the
varn.a system by presenting the social hierarchy as divinely ordained and part of the
natural order of things, see Smith 1994.
46. This formula is frequently repeated in the ,~atapatha Brahman.a. See, for
example, Satapatha Brahman.a 4.2.4.16, 4.5.5.1, 4.5.6.1, 4.5.7.1.
47. The agnicayana ceremony is discussed in K~0d.as 6 to l0 of the Satapatha
Brahman.a. For an extended analysis of the agnicayana ritual, see Staal 1983. For
discussions of the symbolism of the fire altar, see Malamoud 1996; Tull 1989: 7 2 -
102.
48. See, for example, Kau.s~taki Upanis.ad 1.7; B.rhaddran. yaka Upani.sad 3.7.3-
23.
49. In B.rhadaran.yaka Upani.sad 1.4.1, for example, ,~tman is said to exist alone
in the beginning in the form of Puru.sa. However, the Upani.sads at times appear to
distinguish ,~tman and Puru.sa, as, for example, in Aitareya Upani.sad !. !. I-4, which
will be discussed below.
50. See, for example, B.rhadaran.yaka Upani.sad 2.3.3, 2.3.5; Mun.d.aka Upanis. ad
2.1.2; Pragna Upani.sad 6.5.
51. B.rhadarat.~yaka Upani.sad 1.4.7, 2.5.1-15, 2.5.18; Kat.ha Upani.sad 4.12-13,
6.17; Mund.aka Upani.sad 2.1.4, 2.1.9-10; Sveta~vatara Upani.sad 3.9, 3.11-21;
Maitri Upani.sad 2.5-6; cf. Kat.ha Upani.sad 6.8-9; Pragna Upanis.ad 5.5.
52. For references, see n.51 above.
53. For a discussion of the history of the terms 'sam.ny~sa' (renunciation) and
'sa.mnyasin' (renunciant) and their relation to other terms used to designate a
renunciant, such as 'parivrajaka' (wanderer) and 'bhik.su' (mendicant), see Olivelle
198 l, 1984:81-82.
376 / Barbara A. Holdrege

54. For an illuminating discussion of ascetic modes of deconstructing the social

body, see Olivelle 1995. See also Dumont's (1960) seminal analysis of the
dialectical relationship between the ideal types of the 'renouncer' and the 'man-in-
the-world.'
55. For a discussion of the role of 'meditative tapas' in the Upani.sads and later
ascetic traditions, see Kaelber 1989.
56. Among the numerous critiques of Dumont's work, see in particular Marriott
1969, 1976b; Marriott and Inden 1977; Marglin 1977. With respect to the debates
between Dumont and Marriott, see n.60 below. See also the recent collection of
essays edited by Carman and Marglin (1985), which examines the relationship
between the pure/impure dichotomy and the auspicious/inauspicious dichotomy in
Indian society.
57. For the laws of purification pertaining to birth and death, see Manusm.rti 5.57-
104.
58. For a discussion of the mixed castes that result from anuloma and pratiloma
marriages, see Manusm.rti 10.5-72, 3.12-19. See also Tambiah's (1973) incisive
analysis of the generative rules that govern the production and ranking of mixed
castes in the Manusm.rti's account.
59. For references, see n.58 above.
60. See, for example, Manusmrti 4.205-23, 11.176, 11.181. My analysis here
concurs with Tambiah's 'transactional theory of purity and pollution' (1973: 217),
which emphasizes not only the boundaries that separate (Douglas 1966) but also the
interactions that connect castes. Such an approach provides a mediating position
between Dumont's (1970, 1980) structural model of a fixed caste hierarchy based on
the pure/impure opposition and Marriott's (1968, 1976a) transactional model of a
dynamic system of caste interactions involving the exchange of food, women, and
services.
61. See, for example, Manusm.rti 5.4-56 and 11.91-99, !1.146-62, which
delineate, respectively, categories of permitted and forbidden food and the penances
for ingesting forbidden food and drink. For analyses of Hindu food taxonomies,
food transactions, and culinary practices, see Stevenson 1954: 52-59; Marriott
1968, 1976a; Khare 1976; Khare and Rao 1986.
62. For an analysis of the 'grammar' of the Dhanna~stras' pollution laws, see
Orenstein 1965, 1968, 1970. See also Tambiah's (1973: 208-15) critical assessment
and revision of Orenstein's classification of types of pollution.
63. See also Manusm.rti 5.85, which gives a similar list of impure persons and
entities with whom one should avoid contact.
64. See, for example, Manusm.rti 5.137, which stipulates that the purification
process prescribed for the householder should be doubled for the student, tripled for
the forest hermit, and quadrupled for the renunciant. See also Orenstein 1968: 120,
123.
65. See Manusm.rti 9.18, 4.205-6, 11.36-37. However, the presence of the
yajamana's wife is required at grauta sacrifices. See also Orenstein 1968: 122-23.
 Body connections / 377

66. For extended studies of the Tantric body, see in particular Flood 1993; White
1996.
67. Although scholars of Hindu devotional traditions have of course noted the
role of the body, relatively few studies have attempted to theorize the body as a
central category in bhakti texts and practices. For recent studies of modes of
embodying the divine in bhakti traditions, see Waghorne and Cutler, with Narayanan
1985; Hopkins 1993. See also Hopkins's forthcoming book on the divine body in
South Indian devotional traditions.

References cited

Aitareya Br~hman.a. 1895-1906. The Aitareya Brahman.a of the R.g Veda (ed.
Satyavrata S~ma~rami). 4 vols. Calcutta: Asiatic Society of Bengal.
Aitareya Upani.sad. 1958. Aitareya Upani.sad. h~ V. P. Limaye and R. D. Vadekar, eds.,
Eighteen principal Upani.sads, 62-67. Poona: Vaidika Sam.~odhana Man.dala.
Armstrong, David. 1983. Political anatomy of the body: Medical knowledge in
Britain in the twentieth century. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Asad, Talal. 1997. Remarks on the anthropology of the body. In Sarah Coakley, ed.,
Religion and the body, 42-52. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bell, Catherine. 1992. Ritual theory., ritual practice. New York: Oxford University
Press.
Bell, Rudolph M. 1985. Holy anorexia. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Benthall, Jonathan and Ted Polhemus, eds. 1975. The body as a medium of
expression. London: Allen Lane.
Biale, David. 1992. Eros and the Jews: From biblical Israel to contemporary
America. New York: Basic Books.
Blacking, John. 1977. The anthropology of the body. London: Academic Press.
Body, The. 1990. History of religions 30, 1.
Body, The: Lancaster colloquium on comparative spirituality. 1989. Religion 19, 3.
Bordo, Susan. 1989. The body and the reproduction of femininity: A feminist
appropriation of Foucault. In Alison M. Jaggar and Susan R. Bordo, eds., Gender/
body~knowledge: Feminist reconstructions of being and knowing, 13-33. New
Brunswick: Rutgers University Press.
Bordo, Susan. 1993. Unbearable weight: Feminism, Western culture, and the body.
Berkeley: University of California Press.
Bourdieu, Pierre. 1977 [1972]. Outline of a theory of practice (trans. Richard Nice).
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bourdieu, Pierre. 1984 [1979]. Distinction: A social critique of the judgement of
taste (trans. Richard Nice). Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Boyarin, Daniel. 1993. Carnal Israel: Reading sex in Talmudic culture. Berkeley:
University of California Press.
B.rhadiran.yaka Upani.sad. 1958. B.rhadaranyaka Upanis.ad. In V. P. Limaye and R. D.
378 / Barbara A. Holdrege

Vadekar, eds., Eighteen principal Upani.sads, 174-282. Poona: Vaidika Sa.m-

~odhana Man..dala.
Brown, Peter. 1988. The body and society: Men, women, and sexual renunciation in
early Christianity. New York: Columbia University Press.
Butler, Judith. 1990. Gender trouble: Feminism and the subversion of identity. New
York: Routledge.
Butler, Judith. 1993. Bodies that matter: On the discursive limits of 'sex.' New York:
Routledge.
Bynum, Caroline Walker. ! 987. Holy feast and holy fast: The religious significance
of food to medieval women. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Bynum, Caroline Walker. 1991. Fragmentation and redemption: Essays on gender
and the human body in medieval religion. New York: Zone Books.
Bynum, Caroline Walker. 1995. The resurrection of the body in Western Chris-
tianity, 200-1336. New York: Columbia University Press.
Camporesi, Piero. 1988 [1983]. The incorruptible flesh: Bodily mutation and
mortification hi religion and folklore (trans. Tania Croft-Murray and Helen
Elsom). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Carman, John B. and Fr6d6rique Apffel Marglin, e d s . 1985. Purity and
auspiciousness in Indian society. Leiden: E. J. BriU.
Cixous, H61~ne. 1976. The laugh of the medusa (trans. Keith Cohen and Paula
Cohen). Signs I, 4: 875-93.
Cixous, H61~ne. 1994. The HYlkne Cixous reader (ed. Susan Sellers). London:
Routledge.
Cixous, H61~ne and Catherine CI6ment. 1986 [1975]. The newly born woman (trans.
Betsy Wing). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Coakley, Sarah, ed. 1997. Religion and the body. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Cooey, Paula M. 1994. Religious imagination and the body: A feminist analysis.
New York: Oxford University Press.
Csordas, Thomas J. 1990. Embodiment as a paradigm for anthropology. Ethos 18, I :
5-47.
Culianu, loan P. 1991. A corpus for the body. Journal of modern history 63, ! : 62-
80.
Culianu, loan P. 1995. Introduction: The body reexamined. In Jane Marie Law, ed.,
Religious reflections on the human body, !-18. Bloomington: Indiana University
Press.
Dallery, Arleen B. 1989. The politics of writing (the) body: Ecriture feminine, in
Alison M. Jaggar and Susan R. Bordo, eds., Gender/body/knowledge: Feminist
reconstructions of being and knowing, 52-67. New Brunswick: Rutgers
University Press.
Daniel, E. Valentine. 1984. Fluid signs: Being a person the Tamil way. Berkeley:
University of California Press.
Dissanayake, Wimal. 1993. Body in social theory. In Thomas P. Kasulis, with Roger
 Body connections / 379

T. Ames and Wimal Dissanayake, eds., Self as body in Asian theory and practice,
21-36. Albany: State University of New York Press.
Douglas, Mary. 1966. Purity and danger: An analysis of concepts of pollution and
taboo. London: Routledge.
Douglas, Mary. 1973 [1970]. Natural symbols: Explorations in cosmology. London:
Barrie and Jenkins.
Duden, Barbara. 1989. A repertory of body history. In Michel Feher, with Ramona
Naddaff and Nadia Tazi, eds., Fragments for a history of the human body, 3 : 4 7 1 -
554. New York: Zone Books.
Dumont, Louis. 1960. World renunciation in Indian religions. Contributions to
Indian sociology 4: 33-62.
Dumont, Louis. 1970 [1966]. Homo hierarchicus: An essay on the caste system
(trans. Mark Sainsbury). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Dumont, Louis. 1980 [1970]. Homo hierarchicus: The caste system and its
implications (trans. Mark Sainsbury, Louis Dumont, and Basia Gulati). Chicago:
University of Chicago Press.
Eilberg-Schwartz, Howard, ed. 1992. People of the body: Jews and Judaism from an
embodied perspective. Albany: State University of New York Press.
Elias, Norbert. 1978 [1939]. The civilizing process. Volume I: The history of
manners (trans. Edmund Jephcott). Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
Falk, Pasi. 1994. The consuming body. London: Sage Publications.
Featherstone, Mike, Mike Hepworth, and Bryan S. Turner, eds. 1991. The body:
Social process and cultural theory. London: Sage Publications.
Feher, Michel, with Ramona Naddaff and Nadia Tazi, eds. 1989. Fragments for a
history of the human body. 3 vols. New York: Zone Books.
Flood, Gavin D. 1993. Body and cosmology in Kashmir Saivism. San Francisco:
Mellen Research University Press.
Foucault, Michel. 1973 [1963]. The birth of the clinic: An archaeology of medical
perception (trans. A. M. Sheridan Smith). New York: Pantheon Books.
Foucault, Michel. 1979 [1975]. Discipline and punish: The birth of the prison
(trans. Alan Sheridan). New York: Vintage Books.
Foucault, Michel. 1980. Body/power. In Colin Gordon, ed., Power~knowledge:
Selected interviews and other writings 1972-1977 (trans. Colin Gordon, Leo
Marshall, John Mepham, and Kate Soper), 55-62. New York: Pantheon Books.
Foucault, Michel. 1988-90 [1976. 1984]. The history of sexuality (trans. Robert
Hurley). 3 vols. New York: Vintage Books.
Frank, Arthur W. 1990. Bringing bodies back in: A decade review. Theory, culture
and society 7, I: 131-62.
Freund, Peter E. S., with the assistance of Miriam Fisher. 1982. The civilized
body: Social domination, control, and health. Philadelphia: Temple University
Press.
Freund, PeterE. S. 1988. Bringing society into the body: Understanding socialized
human nature. Theory and society 17, 6: 839--64.
380 / Barbara A. Holdrege

Gallagher, Catherine and Thomas Laqueur, eds. 1987. The making of the modern
body: Sexuality and society in the nineteenth century. Berkeley: University of
California Press.
Gallop, Jane. 1988. Thinking through the body. New York: Columbia University
Press.
Gonda, Jan. 1955. Reflections on sarva- in Vedic texts. Indian linguistics 16: 5 3 -
71.
Gonda, Jan. 1982. All, universe and totality in the Satapatha-Br~hman.a. Journal of
the Oriental Institute (Baroda) 32, i-2: 1-17.
Gonda, Jan. 1983. Vedic gods and the sacrifice. Numen 30, l: !-34.
Griffiths, Paul J. 1986. On being mindless: Buddhist meditation and the mind-body
problem. La Salle: Open Court.
Grosz, Elizabeth. 1994. Volatile bodies: Toward a corporeal feminism. Bloom-
ington: Indiana University Press.
Holdrege, Barbara A. 1996. Veda and Torah: Transcending the textuality of
scripture. Albany: State University of New York Press.
Holdrege, Barbara A. 1999. What have brahmins to do with rabbis? Embodied
communities and paradigms of religious tradition. Shofar 17, 3: 23-50.
Hopkins, Steven P. 1993. In love with the body of God: Eros and the praise of icons
in South Indian devotion. Journal of Vai.sn.ava studies 2, 1: 17-54.
Hopkins, Steven P. n.d. Singing the body of God: The hymns of Vedantadegika in
South Indian tradition. New York: Oxford University Press.
Irigaray, Luce. 1985a [1974]. Speculum of the other woman (trans. Gillian C. Gill).
Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
Irigaray, Luce. 1985b [1977]. This sex which is not one (trans. Catherine Porter, with
Carolyn Burke). Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
Irigaray, Luce. 1993 [1984]. An ethics of sexual difference (trans. Carolyn Burke and
Giilian C. Gill). Ithaca: CorneU University Press.
Jackson, Michael. 1983. Knowledge of the body. Man (n.s.) 18, 2: 327--45.
Jacobus, Mary, Evelyn Fox Keller, and Sally Shuttleworth, eds. 1990. Body~politics:
Women and the discourses of science. New York: Routledge.
Jaiminiya Br~hma.na. 1986 [1954]. Jaimin[ya Brahman.a of the Samaveda (eds.
Raghu Vira and Lokesh Chandra). Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.
Jaiminiya Upani.sad Br~hma0a. 1894. The J~iminiya or Talavak~ra Upani.sad
Brahmana (ed. Hanns Oertel). Journal of the American Oriental Society 16, 1: 7 9 -
260.
Johnson, Mark. 1987. The body in the mind: The bodily basis of meaning, imagina-
tion, and reason. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Kaelber, Walter O. 1989. Tapta marga: Asceticism amt initiation in Vedic India.
Albany: State University of New York Press.
Kasulis, Thomas P. 1993. Introduction. h~ Thomas P. Kasulis, with Roger T. Ames
and Wimal Dissanayake, eds., Self as body in Asian theory and practice, xi-xxii.
Albany: State University of New York Press.
 Body connections / 381

Kasulis, Thomas P., with Roger T. Ames and Wimai Dissanayake, eds. 1993. Self
as body in Asian theory and practice. Albany: State University of New York
Press.
Ka.tha Upani.sad. 1958. Kat.ha Upanisad. In V. P. Limaye and R. D. Vadekar,
eds., Eighteen principal Upanis.ads, 11-27. Poona: Vaidika Sam.~odhana
Man.d.ala.
Kau.sitaki Br~hman.a (Safikhay~na Br~hma0a). 1970. ~afTkhaydna-Brahman.a.m (ed.
Harinarayan Bhattacharya). Calcutta: Sanskrit College.
Kau.sitaki Upani.sad. 1958. Kau.s~taki Upani.sad. In V. P. Limaye and R. D. Vadekar,
eds., Eighteen principal Upani.sads, 301-24. Poona: Vaidika Sam.godhana
Man.d.ala.
Khare, R. S. 1976. Culture and reality: Essays on the Hindu system of managing
foods. Simla: Indian Institute of Advanced Study.
Khare, R. S. and M. S. A. Rao, eds. 1986. Aspects in South Asian food systems: Food,
society, and culture. Durham: Carolina Academic Press.
Koller, John M. 1993. Human embodiment: Indian perspectives, hi Thomas P.
Kasulis, with Roger T. Ames and Wimal Dissanayake, eds., Self as body in Asian
theory and practice, 45-58. Albany: State University of New York Press.
Kristeva, Julia. 1980 [1977, 1979]. Desire in language: A semiotic approach to
literature and art (trans. Thomas Gora, Alice Jardine, and Leon S. Roudiez; ed.
Leon S. Roudiez). New York: Columbia University Press.
Kristeva, Julia. 1982 [1980]. Powers of horror: An essay on abjection (trans. Leon S.
Roudiez). New York: Columbia University Press.
Kristeva, Julia. 1986. The Kristeva reader (ed. Toril Moi). New York: Columbia
University Press.
LaFleur, William R. 1998. Body. In Mark C. Taylor, ed., Critical terms for religious
studies, 36-54. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Lakoff, George. 1987. Women, fire, and dangerous things: What categories reveal
about the mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Laqueur, Thomas. 1990. Making sex: Body and gender from the Greeks to Freud.
Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Larson, Gerald James. 1993. ,~yurveda and the Hindu philosophical systems. In
Thomas P. Kasulis, with Roger T. Ames and Wimal Dissanayake, eds., Self as body
in Asian theory and practice, 103-21. Albany: State University of New York
Press.
Larson, Gerald James and Ram Shankar Bhattacharya, eds. 1987. Sam.khya: A dualist
tradition in Indian philosophy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Law, Jane Marie, ed. 1995. Religious reflections on the human body. Bloomington:
Indiana University Press.
Levin, David Michael. 1985. The body's recollection of Being: Phenomenological
psychology and the deconstruction of nihilism. London: Routledge.
Lincoln, Bruce. 1986. Myth, cosmos, and society: Indo-European themes of creation
and destruction. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
382 / Barbara A. Holdrege

L6pez Austin, Alfredo. 1988 [1980]. The human body and ideology: Concepts o f
the ancient Nahuas (trans. Thelma Ortiz de Montellano and Bernard Ortiz de
Montellano). 2 vols. Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press.
Maitri Upani.sad. 1958. Maitri Upani.sad. In V. P. Limaye and R. D. Vadekar, eds.,
Eighteen principal Upani.sads, 325-57. Poona: Vaidika Sam.godhana Man.d.ala.
Malamoud, Charles. 1996 [1989]. Cooking the world: Ritual and thought in ancient
India (trans. David White). Delhi: Oxford University Press.
Malamoud, Charles and Jean-Pierre Vernant, eds. 1986. Corps des dieux. Paris:
Gallimard.
Malti-Douglas, Fedwa. 1991. Woman's body, woman's word: Gender and discourse
in Arabo-lslamic writing. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Manusm.rti. 1972-85. Manu-Sm.rti (ed. Jayantakrishna Harikrishna Dave). 6 vols.
Bombay: Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan.
Marglin, Fr6d6rique Apffel. 1977. Power, purity and pollution: Aspects of the caste
system reconsidered. Contributions to Indian sociology (n.s.) 2, 2: 245-70.
Marriott, McKim. 1968. Caste ranking and food transactions: A matrix analysis. In
Milton Singer and Bernard S. Cohn, eds., Structure and change in Indian society,
! 33-71. Chicago: Aidine.
Marriott, McKim. 1969. Review of Homo hierarchicus: Essai sur le systbme des
castes, by Louis Dumont. American anthropologist 71, 6: 1166-75.
Marriott, McKim. 1976a. Hindu transactions: Diversity without dualism. In Bruce
Kapferer, ed., Transaction and meaning: Directions in the anthropology of
exchange and symbolic behavior, 109-42. Philadelphia: Institute for the Study of
Human Issues.
Marriott, McKim. 1976b. Interpreting Indian society: A monistic alternative to
Dumont's dualism. Journal of Asian studies 36, I: 189-95.
Marriott, McKim and Ronald B. Inden. 1977. Toward an ethnosociology of South
Asian caste systems. In Kenneth David, ed., The new wind: Changing identities in
South Asia, 227-38. The Hague: Mouton.
Martin, Emily. 1987. The woman h~ the body: A cultural analysis of reproduction.
Boston: Beacon Press.
Mauss, Marcel. 1979 [1950]. Sociology and psychology: Essays (trans. Ben
Brewster). London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
McGuire, Meredith B. 1990. Religion and the body: Rematerializing the human body
in the social sciences of religion. Journal for the scientific study of religion 29,
3: 283-96.
Mennell, Stephen. 1991. On the civilizing of appetite. In Mike Featherstone, Mike
Hepworth, and Bryan S. Turner, eds., The body: Social process and cultural
theory, 126-56. London: Sage Publications.
Merleau-Ponty, Maurice. 1962 [1945]. Phenomenology of perception (trans. Colin
Smith). London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Michie, Helena. 1987. The flesh made word: Female figures and women's bodies.
New York: Oxford University Press.
 Body connections / 383

Midgley, Mary. 1997. The soul's successors: Philosophy and the 'body.' In Sarah
Coakley, ed., Religion and the body, 53-68. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Miles, Margaret R. 1989. Carnal knowing: Female nakedness and religious meaning
in the Christian West. Boston: Beacon Press.
Moi, Toril. 1985. Sexual~textual politics: Feminist literary theory. London:
Methuen.
Mun.d.aka Upani.sad. 1958. Mun.d.aka Upanis. ad. In V. P. Limaye and R. D. Vadekar,
eds., Eighteen principal Upani.sads, 38--47. Poona: Vaidika Sam~odhana
Man dala.
Nagatomo, Shigenori. 1992. Attunement through the body. Albany: State University
of New York Press.
Olivelle, Patrick. 1981. Contributions to the semantic history of saqmy~sa. Journal
of the American Oriental Society 101, 3: 265-74.
Olivelle, Patrick. 1984. Renouncer and renunciation in the Dharmagastras. In
Richard W. Lariviere, ed., Studies in Dharmagastra, 81-152. Calcutta: Firma
KLM.
Olivelle, Patrick. 1995. Deconstruction of the body in Indian asceticism. In Vincent
L. Wimbush and Richard Valantasis, eds., Asceticism, 188-210. New York: Oxford
University Press.
O'Neill, John. 1985. Five bodies: The human shape of modern society. Ithaca:
Cornell University Press.
O'Neill, John. 1989. The communicative body: Studies in communicative philosophy,
politics, and sociology. Evanston: Northwestern University Press.
Orenstein, Henry. 1965. The structure of Hindu caste values: A preliminary study of
hierarchy and ritual defilement. Ethnology 4, I: 1-15.
Orenstein, Henry. 1968. Toward a grammar of defilement in Hindu sacred law. In
Milton Singer and Bernard S. Cohn, eds., Structure and change in Indian society,
115-31. Chicago: Aldine.
Orenstein, Henry. 1970. Logical congruence in Hindu sacred law: Another
interpretation. Contributions to Indian sociology (n.s.) 4: 22-35.
Paficavim.~a Br~hman.a (T~0d.ya Brahmana). 1870-74. Tan.d.ya Mahabr~hman. a (ed.
•~nandachandra Ved~ntavigi~a). 2 vols. Calcutta: Asiatic Society of Bengal.
Polhemus, Ted, ed. 1978. Social aspects of the human body. Harmondsworth:
Penguin Books.
Potter, Karl H., ed. 1981. Advaita Vedanta up to Sam.kara and his pupils. Princeton:
Princeton University Press.
Pra~na Upani.sad. 1958. Pra~na Upani.sad. In V. P. Limaye and R. D. Vadekar, eds.,
Eighteen principal Upani.sads, 28-37. Poona: Vaidika Sam.~odhana Ma.nd.ala.
R g Veda Sam.hita. 1890-92 [1849-74]. Rig-Veda-Sam. hita (ed. F. Max Mi~ller).
London: Oxford University Press.
Rousselle, Aline. 1988 [1983]. Porneia: On desire and the body in antiquity (trans.
Felicia Pheasant). Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
384 / Barbara A. Holdrege

Ruth, David N. 1974. The social reference of body symbols in religion. In Allan W.
Eister, ed., Changing perspectives in the scientific study of religion, 227-47. New
York: John Wiley and Sons.
Satapatha Brahma.ha. 1964 [1855]. The ~atapatha-Brdhma.na (ed. Albrecht Weber).
Varanasi: Chowkhamba Sanskrit Series Office.
Scan'y, Elaine. 1985. The body in pain: The making and unmaking of the world. New
York: Oxford University Press.
Scheper-Hughes, Nancy and Margaret M. Lock. 1987. The mindful body: A
prolegomenon to future work in medical anthropology. Medical anthropology
quarterly (n.s.) l, I: 6-41.
Schipper, Kristofer. 1993 [1982]. The Taoist body (trans. Karen C. Duval). Berkeley:
University of California Press.
Schrag, Calvin O. 1979 [1972]. The lived body as a phenomenological datum. In
Ellen W. Gerber and William J. Morgan, eds., Sport and the body: A philosophical
symposium, 155-62. Philadelphia: Lea and Febiger.
Scott, Sue and David Morgan, eds. 1993. Body matters: Essays on the sociology of
the body. London: Falmer Press.
Shaner, David Edward. 1985. The bodymind experience in Japanese Buddhism: A
phenomenological perspective of Kukai and DOgen. Albany: State University of
New York Press.
Shilling, Chris. 1993. The body and social theory. London: Sage Publications.
Simpson, J. H. 1993. Religion and the body: Sociological themes and prospects. In
W. H. Swatos, Jr., ed., A future for religion? New paradigms for social analysis,
149-64. Newbury Park: Sage Publications.
Smith, Brian K. 1989. Reflections on resemblance, ritual, and religion. New York:
Oxford University Press.
Smith, Brian K. 1994. Classifying the universe: The ancient Indian varn.a system
and the origins of caste. New York: Oxford University Press.
Srinivas, M. N. 1952. Religion and society among the Coorgs of South India.
Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Staal, Frits. 1983. Agni: The Vedic ritual of the fire altar. 2 vols. Berkeley: Asian
Humanities Press.
Staal, Frits. 1993. Indian bodies. In Thomas P. Kasulis, with Roger T. Ames and
Wimal Dissanayake, eds., Self as body in Asian theory and practice, 59-102.
Albany: State University of New York Press.
Stevenson, H. N. C. 1954. Status evaluation in the Hindu caste system. Journal of
the Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland 84, I-2: 4 5 -
65.
Strathern, Andrew J. 1996. Body thoughts. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Suleiman, Susan Rubin, ed. 1986. The female body in Western culture: Contempo-
rary perspectives. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Sullivan, Lawrence E. 1990. Body works: Knowledge of the body in the study of
religion. History of religions 30, I: 86-99.
 Body connections / 385

~vet~vatara Upani.sad. 1958. ~vetdgvatara Upani.sad. h~ V. P. Limaye and R.

D. Vadekar, eds., Eighteen principal Upanisads, 283-300. Poona: Vaidika
Sam.~odhana Man.d.ala.
Synnott, Anthony. 1993. The body social: Symbolism, self, and society. London:
Routledge.
Taittiriya Br~hman.a. 1979 [1898]. Taittir~ya-Brahman.a (ed. N~r,~ya.na ~fistri
God.abole). 3 vols. Poona: ,~nand~t~rama Press.
Taittiriya Sam.hit~. 1860-99. The Sanhita of the Black Yajur Veda (eds. E. R6er, E. B.
Cowell, Mahe~achandra Nyayaratna, and Satyavrata Sama~rami). 6 vols. Calcutta:
Asiatic Society of Bengal.
Taittiriya Upani.sad. 1958. TaittirTya Upanis.ad. hz V. P. Limaye and R. D. Vadekar,
eds., Eighteen principal Upanis.ads, 50-61. Poona: Vaidika Sam.~odhana Man.d.ala.
Tambiah, Stanley J. 1973. From varn.a to caste through mixed unions. In Jack
Goody, ed., The character of kinship, 191-229. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Tull, Herman W. 1989. The Vedic origins of karnm: Cosmos as man in ancient Indian
myth and ritual. Albany: State University of New York Press.
Turner, Bryan S. 1982. The government of the body: Medical regimens and the
rationalization of diet. British journal of sociology 33, 2: 254-69.
Turner, Bryan S. 1991a. Recent developments in the theory of the body. In Mike
Featherstone, Mike Hepworth, and Bryan S. Turner, eds., The body: Social process
and cultural theory, 1-35. London: Sage Publications.
Turner, Bryan S. 1991b. The discourse of diet. In Mike Featherstone, Mike Hepworth,
and Bryan S. Turner, eds., The body: Social process and cultural theory, 157-69.
London: Sage Publications.
Turner, Bryan S. 1992. Regulating bodies: Essays in medical sociology. London:
Routledge.
Turner, Bryan S. 1996a [1984]. The body and society: Explorations in social theory.
London: Sage Publications.
Turner, Bryan S. 1996b [1984]. Introduction to the second edition: The embodiment
of social theory. In Bryan S. Turner, The body and society: Explorations in social
theory, 1-36. London: Sage Publications.
Waghorne, Joanne Punzo and Norman Cutler, in association with Vasudha
Narayanan, eds. 1985. Gods of flesh/Gods of stone: The embodiment of divinity in
India. Chambersburg: Anima.
Warner, Richard and Tadeusz Szubka, eds. 1994. The mind-body problem: A guide to
the current debate. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
White, David Gordon. 1996. The alchemical body: Siddha traditions in medieval
India. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Wilson, Liz. 1996. Charming cadavers: Horrific figurations of the feminine in
Indian Buddhist hagiographic literature. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Wolfson, Elliot R. 1995. Circle in the square: Studies in the use of gender in
kabbalistic symbolism. Albany: State University of New York Press.
386 / Barbara A. Holdrege

Yuasa, Yasuo. 1987 [1977]. The body: Toward an Eastern mitut-body theory (trans.
Shigenori Nagatomo and Thomas P. Kasulis; ed. Thomas P. Kasulis). Albany: State
University of New York Press.
Yuasa, Yasuo. 1993 [1986]. The body, self-cultivation, and ki-energy (trans.
Shigenori Nagatomo and Monte S. Hull). Albany: State University of New York
Press.
Zaner, Richard M. 1964. The problem of embodiment: Some contributions to a
phenomenology of the body. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff.
Zaner, Richard M. 1981. The context of self." A phenomenological inquiry using
medicine as a clue. Athens: Ohio University Press.
Zito, Angela and Tani E. Barlow, eds. 1994. Body, subject and power in China.
Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

BARBARA A. I-IOLDREGE is Associate Professor of Religious Studies at

the University of California, Santa Barbara.