Rethinking the absence of post-Western International Relations theory in India: ‘Advaitic monism’ as an alternative epistemological resource.

The transformation of the Eurocentric epistemological base of International Relations, without inadvertently generating a ‘derivative discourse’ of Western International Relations, requires an intellectual flight over rigid boundaries of Western scientism, thereby reorienting the discipline of International Relations itself towards a post-Western epoch. As such, post-Western International Relations theory can be largely viewed as an offspring of scholastic explorations aimed at breaking epistemological imperialism in International Relations. Not surprisingly, the non-Western ‘rising powers’ in global politics are taking particular interest in designing a post-Western International Relations theory. While the notion of ‘Tianxia’ has emerged as a Chinese conceptual response to the budding intellectual curiosity surrounding post-Western International Relations, the Indian scholarly scepticism towards formulating ‘systemic’ theories projects a hazy image of the status of post-Western International Relations theory in India. This article aims at reconsidering the absence of post-Western International Relations theory in India by evaluating the fundamental Indian scriptures as a potential epistemological guide to theorise International Relations. In order to do that, the article awakens the concept of ‘Advaita’ as an untapped epistemological resource. The article is divided into four sections. The first section traces the academic space for post-Western International Relations theorisation in India. The second section evokes the notion of ‘Advaita’ as an epistemological-methodological tool to craft post-Western International Relations theory. The third section compares ‘monism’ as the common underlying epistemological foundation of ‘Tianxia’ and ‘Advaita’. Finally, the fourth section sets out to establish the credentials of ‘Advaitic monism’ as an intellectual strategy to formulate post-Western International Relations theory. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]