Assamese Neo-Vaishnavism & Animal Ethics (PDF)

1 of 22 Assamese Neo-Vaishnavism and Animal Ethics: An Unexplored Horizon Dr. Ivy Borgohain Abstract This paper delves into the lack of systematic studies on the ethical dimension of Assamese Neo-Vaishnavism, despite its well-do...

1 of 22 Assamese Neo-Vaishnavism and Animal Ethics: An Unexplored Horizon Dr. Ivy Borgohain Abstract This paper delves into the lack of systematic studies on the ethical dimension of Assamese Neo-Vaishnavism, despite its well-documented compassionate stance towards all living beings. While bhakti or devotion is central to this faith, it consistently emphasises compassion and non-violence towards all sentient creatures. However, there has been minimal exploration of this ethical aspect in Neo-Vaishnava theology, and non-human animals’ status within the religion remains unexamined, both theologically and conceptually. Recognising the significance of this compassionate ethos in Assamese Neo- Vaishnavism, this paper aims to address this gap by proposing a new approach to studying Śaṅkaradeva through the lenses of animal ethics and theology. Exploring the integration of the animal ethics Neo-Vaishnava with the Philosophy of modern animal rights promises a deeper understanding of ethical treatment towards non-human animals. Conversely, Neo-Vaishnavism can benefit from animal rights philosophy, providing it with a theoretical foundation for its animal ethics and increasing its relevance in contemporary discourse.  2 of 22 Comparative analyses with animal ethics of other world religions can highlight the unique nature of Neo-Vaishnava animal ethics and promote a broader understanding of its radical stance. Keywords: Śaṅkaradeva, Neo-Vaishnavism, Animal Ethics, Animal Theology INTRODUCTION Śaṅkaradeva Studies is one of the primary mainstays of the Assamese literary and cultural criticism. In the last two centuries, there have been numerous studies that have explored and highlighted different faces of Assamese Neo-Vaishnavism and the life and works of the Neo-Vaishnava saints Sri SriŚaṅkaradeva and Sri Mādhavdeva.These studies mainly focus on issues like Neo-Vaishnava literature, biography, history, culture, religion, philosophy, ethics, etc. Some of them also compare Assamese Neo- Vaishnavism with other theological systems. However, few of these studies talk about how animals are portrayed in various Neo-Vaishnava scriptures. Even when they do, they oftenparaphrase original texts without engaging in deeper analysis. To say the least, this is quite surprising, as one of the most distinctive features of Assamese Neo-Vaishnavism is its compassionate attitude towards all living beings. This faith is largely consistent in its non-violent philosophy and prohibits all kinds of cruelty towards humans and animals alike. Even though bhakti or devotion to the Lord is the core component of this faith, such Bhakti or devotion is always accompanied by a  3 of 22 strong ethical element. We can safely say that in Neo-Vaishnava theology, bhakti is often synonymous with compassion and non-violence towards all sentient creatures. Despite this, there have been few or almost no systematic studies of Neo-Vaishnavism that consider this ethical aspect of the faith. Furthermore, there are also no attempts to look at the status of nonhuman animals in this religion, whether theologically or conceptually.This is particularly striking as the ethical and compassionate attitude of Assamese Neo-Vaishnavism towards non-human animals has long been recognized by scholars and laymen alike, at least in Assam. When we look at this aspect of the faith in the light of the contemporary animal rights philosophy, the need for paying special attention to these aspects of Neo-Vaishnavism becomes quite clear. Therefore, the primary objective of this paper is to investigate the critical trend in contemporary Śaṅkaradeva Studies and to propose a new approach to looking at this area through the lens of animal ethics and animal theology. In recent years, there has been a growing emphasis on the moral rights of animals and their protection against human exploitation and abuse. This awareness is influenced by the animal rights movement in the West, which has profoundly impacted the personal, social, and academic spheres in Western societies. Additionally, this moral awareness prompts us to re-evaluate our religious and cultural traditions and make a fresh appraisal of our own attitudes toward animals. It also urges us to view our behaviour towards animals with a fresh pair of eyes. So, there is an urgent need to re- examine the theological and ethical foundations of Assamese Neo-Vaishnavism in the light of this animal turn in the academic sphere. RELIGION AND ANIMAL ETHICS  4 of 22 Ethical concerns for non-human animals are nothing new, especially in the sphere of religion. The need to show compassion to all living beings is one of the core teachings of almost all the major religions of the world. This is particularly true of the religions of Indian origin, such as Buddhism, Jainism and Hinduism. Ahimsa or non-violence to all life forms is fundamental to these traditions (Linzey, 2000, p. 51). Moreover, the shared belief of these religions in the law of karma and rebirth strengthens the idea that all life is one, which consequently gives rise to a more egalitarian worldview. This concept of rebirth, which holds that souls are reborn as different beings in the course of their cosmic journey, has a profound implication for the concerned religions’ ethical view of animals. Whereas, on one hand, such religions talk about showing compassion to living beings, on the other, they also give rise to a complex conception of animality and humanity. In these religions, the ontological positions of the animal and the human are not as distinct and static as in the Western Abrahamic faiths but form a continuum. However, before the animal turn in academia, there had been few, if any, systematic investigations of the status of animals in different religions. In the last two decades or so, many studies have been carried out on different religions of the world and their various denominations. They include Anglican Christianity, Evangelical Christianity, Orthodox Christianity, Roman Catholicism, Judaism, Mormonism, Confucianism and Daoism, Rastafarianism, Sikh Dharam, Jainism, African religions, Native American religions, etc. Moreover, there have also been many studies about animals in different mythologies and ritualistic practices of the world.In Hinduism, we come across various studies like Nelson (2000, 2006), Doniger (2005, 2006, 2015), Kemmerer (2012), Valpey (2002), and Rosen (2020) etc, which address the question of animals in the faith from different perspectives. However, considering the heterogenous and polytheistic characteristics of the Hindu tradition, and its immense philosophical  5 of 22 and ritualistic variations across time and space, such studies are far from exhaustive. Moreover, as we can see from the references above, most, if not all, of these studies have been conducted by scholars from outside of India.As a result, they naturally lack the nuances of an insider’s perspective. For instance, Rosen (2020) discusses the history of Vaishnavism vegetarianism as mentioned in the Vedas and the Puranas. He discusses how Vaishnavism provides a solid ground for ethical consideration of animals through its powerful promotion of vegetarianism. However, his study does not take into account how the Vaiṣṇava Bhakti movement was initiated in the southern part of India by the alwars and organised systematically by the great Vaiṣṇava saint Ramanuja. It also omits the various sub-sects and regional varieties of the faith such as Assamese Neo- Vaishnavism. Such an omission is crucial as the Bhakti Movement was essentially a regional phenomenon, with each local variation of the faith influencing the other. Moreover, most existing studies often focus mainly on the Sanskrit texts andignore the vernacular scriptures. This is very much true of Assamese Neo-Vaishnavism as well. In the existing research on Hinduism,conducted from the point of view of animal ethics, one hardly finds any reference to Assamese Neo-Vaishnavism. This is even though this faith offers a superb example of love and reverence towards all living beings, bugs and insects included. Likewise, many of the regional Bhakti texts, including the scriptures of Assamese Neo- Vaishnavism, too remain to be translated into and discussed in English and other languages. As a result of this, the outside world’s knowledge of these traditions and philosophies remains far from complete. It is in the context of this absence of relevant discussions that we have to situate any study of the place of animals in the Bhakti Movement in general and the Assamese Neo- Vaishnavism in particular.  6 of 22 THE ANIMAL TURN AND SANKARADEVA STUDIES Before we explore Assamese Neo- Vaishnavism’s treatment of non-human animals, it is important to review the critical scholarship produced in the last few decades and examine how previous research has approached (or overlooked) the ethical treatment of non-humanentitiesin this faith. That would underscore the importance and urgency of looking at Assamese Neo-Vaishnavism from the perspective of animal ethics and animal theology. With that view in mind, below I briefly focus on select scholarly works on Assamese Neo-Vaishnavism and its founding figures, spanning over six decades. Here, I consider both English and Assamese scholarship on the topic, and primarily concentrate on those works that address or touch upon the ethical dimension of the faith (even though such works are arguably few and far between). Works that overlook the ethical and non-human aspects of the faith are omitted from this concise review, as their number is quite large. The purpose of this discussion is to highlight the possible areas of further work in Śaṅkaradeva Studies, particularly from the perspective of animal ethics and animal theology. As I have already mentioned, there has been extensive discussion and research on various aspects of the Neo-Vaishnava religion (or the “mahāpurushia dharma”)in Assam. For instance, in the bilingual Descriptive Bibliography of Śaṅkardeva Studies, edited by Mazumdar (n.d.), it is mentioned that till the end of the first decade of the twenty-first century, a total of 44 PhD theses, 13 M.Phil dissertations, one D.Litt thesis and 214 books (monographs as well as anthologies) were written, edited and published in this particular area, both in English and Assamese. The primary thrusts of these studies, as evident from their brief descriptions, are literary, biographical, historical, sociocultural, theological, philosophical, ethical (in an anthropocentric sense), etc.  7 of 22 Many of these studies also regard Neo-Vaishnavism comparatively with other philosophical systems. Though a very small number of these studies discuss the portrayal of nature and environment in Neo-Vaishnava texts or scriptures, such discussions are at best descriptive; they do not engage with their subject matter in any conceptual manner. What’s more, none of these works appears to deal exclusively with the issue of animals. One of the foundational texts of Śaṅkaradeva studies is undoubtedly Maheswar Neog’s Śaṅkardeva and his times: Early history of the Vaiṣṇav faith and movement in Assam (1965). This book was Neog’s doctoral dissertation. Here, Neog (1965/2018) thoroughly and systematically discusses the historical, sociocultural, religious and economic background of the Neo-Vaiṣṇava faith. In the context of the present study, chapter 12 of Neog’s book, titled ‘Social implications of Śaṅkaradeva’s Bhakti movement’, remains most important. Neog dedicates a part of this chapter to a discussion of the faith’s strict opposition to cruelty towards animals. He quotes from various Neo-Vaishnava hagiographies or carit-puthis to illustrate Śaṅkaradeva’s compassionate attitude towards non-human animals and highlights the measures took to stop human cruelty and violence towards non-humans. Neog (1965/2018) also offers different examples that show how Śaṅkaradeva’s disciples followed this path of compassion and non-violence and carried forward their Guru’s teachings. Though such discussions are very important for my study, it should be noted that Neog (1965/2018) gives very little space to the ethical aspect of the Neo- Vaishnava faith, particularly to its animal ethics. A similar tendency to overlook the animal ethics of the faith can also be seen in SatyendranathSarma’s The Neo-Vaishnavsim of Assam and the Satrainstitution (1966/2016).This book discusses the social, political and religious aspects of the faith,  8 of 22 particularly about the Neo-Vaishnava monastery system called sattras. Despite this specific focus, Sarma (1966/2016) very briefly discusses Neo-Vaishnavism’s ethical concern for non-human animals and the moral significance of this faith. Chapter 3 of this book is the most important for my study, which talks about the “moral virtues” of Neo-Vaishnavism under the heading “Fundamental teachings of the sect.” In this section, Sarma (1966/2016) notes that Assamese Neo-Vaishnavism “highly commended” non-violence and never encouraged killing of animals for meat (p. 62). He also gives an example from one of the hagiographies where Mādhavdeva admonishes some of his disciples for catching fish in a drying pond (p. 62).The saint says that such cruelty towards animals has no place in his guru Śaṅkaradeva’s teachings (p. 62-63). However, naturally, Sarma does not discuss these issues from the point of view of animal ethics, and in any case, his references to the faith’s compassionate and ethical attitude towards animals are few and far between. Viewed from the perspectives of animal ethics and animal theology, Neog (1965/2018) or Sarma (1966/2016) naturally exhibit several limitations. But as I have noted above, we cannot criticise them for not paying close attention to the nonhuman ethics of Neo-Vaishnavism as they both were writing long before the animal turn in academia. Both these works predate the animal rights movement, and they consider Neo-Vaishnavism’s empathy towards living beings from a predominantly anthropocentric standpoint. In their assessments, the various practices, beliefs, religious injunctions, etc., of the mahāpurushia dharma often gain a greater prominence than the faith’s deploring of the exploitation, suffering, and mortality of animals. As a result, the compassion and moral responsibility towards animals that underlie these beliefs and injunctions are often overlooked.  9 of 22 What is more striking about the current critical trend in Śaṅkaradeva Studies is that almost none of the subsequent critical works on Neo-Vaishnavism have engaged with the faith’s animal ethics. This includes studies that have been published as recently as 2023. In some of these studies, the issue of Śaṅkaradeva’s prohibition of blood sacrifice and meat eating is discussed only as a part of Neo-Vaishnavism’s social and cultural impact, without any reference to the burgeoning field of animal ethics and animal rights. Because of this narrow anthropocentric focus, very few of these studies are relevant or helpful in highlighting the strong animal ethics and animal theology of the Neo-Vaishnava faith. What I say above is true not only of the monographs and edited volumes on Neo- Vaishnavism and its founders, but they equally apply to the numerous essays published in various Assamese periodicals and journals. Therefore, to see how the issue of animals in Neo-Vaishnavism has been received in Assamese scholarship, I also reviewed various essays published in four leading Assamese periodicals from the year 1999 to 2020, covering a period of roughly 20 years. These periodicals are Gariyosi, Satsori, Prantik, and Prakash. In these four periodicals, I have come across a total of 133 essays on Assamese Neo-Vaishnavism and its founding figures, and all of these essays were published after the ‘animal turn’ in Western academia. Despite that, there has been almost no work in these periodicals that investigate the faith from the perspective of animal studies. Here, it should immediately be pointed out that this time range of 20 years is not very water-tight, as two of these periodicals, namely Satori and Prakash-2, did not come into being in 1999. In their case, I have reviewed them from the time of their inception. In the case of Prakash, which was originally published from 1975 onwards, I have taken into account only its second, reissued edition, which was launched in 2012.  10 of 22 Moreover, sometimes it was difficult to locate some of the past issues of these periodicals in the public libraries. Including those issues might raise the number of such essays slightly higher. But in any case, the number of such omissions is too small to affect my conclusions in any considerable manner. Therefore, the figures that I cite below represent only the total number of essays I reviewed and not the total number of essays that were published in this area. So, keeping this caveat in mind, in Gariyosi, between 1999 to 2019, I found a total of 48 articles that focus on various aspects of the Neo-Vaishnava faith. Of these essays, 11 adopt a socio-cultural perspective; 6 discuss the Neo-Vaishnava faith from philosophical and religious viewpoints; 4 consider the historical and biographical aspects of different Neo-Vaishnava saints (primarily of Śaṅkaradeva); and 9 examine the scriptures of this faith from literary and linguistic points of view. Only one article (Barman, 2019) discusses the writings of Śaṅkaradeva from an ecological perspective. This article, too, shows a rather superficial engagement with the issue at hand. The rest of the essays include various reviews of books. Overall, in all these pieces, the absence of an ecocentric or zoocentric awareness becomes all too apparent. In the periodical Prantik, from 2003 to 2020, I came across a total of 53 essays on Neo-Vaiṣṇavism and Śaṅkaradeva. Of these essays, 12 are on different socio-cultural aspects of the faith; 11 are on the lives of the Neo-Vaishnava saints; and 6 are on philosophical and religious issues. Then there are essays from the point of view of legal studies and performing arts. However, only one essay (Sarma, 2014) discusses the environmental awareness of Śaṅkaradeva’s writings. Even in this essay, we do not find any reference to the saint’s compassionate and ethical attitude towards animals. The rest of the essays comprise book reviews, linguistic and literary analysis, comparative studies and various debates and letters to the editors, all touching upon the  11 of 22 area of Neo-Vaishnavism and Śaṅkaradeva Studies. Despite this variety of approaches, not one single essay published in this periodical refers to the animal ethics of Śaṅkaradeva in particular or the Neo-Vaishnava faith in general. In the same way, in Satsori, another Assamese periodical, we see a total of 23 essays on the Neo-Vaishnava faith published in the period between 2007 to 2019. Of these, 6 focus on the socio-cultural aspects of the faith and of Śaṅkaradeva’s teachings; 5 on religious and philosophical issues; 2 on the lives of saints; 4 on historical and sociological issues; and 3 on literary and linguistics aspects. The rest includes discussions on performing arts, comparative studies of Neo-Vaishnavism with other religious traditions, etc. The fourth periodical that I have reviewed is Prakash (the re issued edition), from 2015 to 2018. It includes a total of 9 articles, of which 3 articles discuss the faith’s socio-cultural aspects; 4 religious and philosophical issues and the other 2 feature book reviews. These essays broadly represent the scholarly trend prevalent in the field of Assamese Neo-Vaishnava studies. As the above discussions make it amply clear, most of these works mainly focus on the socio-cultural, biographical, religious and philosophical aspects of the faith. None of these works takes the issue of nonhuman animals as the main subject of discussion, despite the pervasive presence of this concern in Śaṅkaradeva’s writings. As we have already seen in my discussion of Neog (1965/2018) and Sarma (1966/2016), this absence is a characteristic of the various monographs as well. SITES OF POSSIBLE INVESTIGATION  12 of 22 Whenever Neo-Vaishnavism’s treatment of non-human animals is discussed, it is done from an anthropocentric perspective, keeping in mind its socio-cultural implications for humans. Works done from such anthropocentric perspectives discuss Śaṅkaradeva’s prohibition of blood sacrifice only to highlight its socio-cultural and religious implications; they rarely consider how such an injunction contributes to the welfare of non-human animals. Moreover, most of such studies are quite often descriptive and contain limited textual or theological analysis. Therefore, it is hardly surprising that in Śaṅkaradeva Studies we do not come across any scholarly work, whether a monograph or even an essay, that is devoted solely to the ethical status of animals in Assamese Neo-Vaishnavism. It is in the context of such critical gaps that we have to understand the importance of looking at the position of animals in the Neo-Vaishnava faith. One exception to this trend is the PhD thesis and essays by Borgohain (2023a, 2023b, 2024). The brief review of the literature I presented above underlines some significant gaps in the existing scholarship on Neo-Vaishnavism. First and foremost, in the current scholarship, there is no systematic study of the ethical and theological status of animals in the faith. Such discussions often overlook the generous and compassionate attitude towards animals advocated by Śaṅkaradeva and Mādhavdeva, as well as the countless examples of such behaviour evident in their personal lives. When animals are mentioned in the scholarly studies of Neo-Vaishnavism, it is typically within the context of the religion’s customs and prohibitions regarding animal husbandry and meat consumption. Unfortunately, the morality and compassion underlying these restrictions are often overlooked, as is the religion’s strong position against violence towards animals. This is despite the fact that non-human animals, both as living entities or as a conceptual category, occupy an important place in Neo-Vaishnava ethics and theology.  13 of 22 The few references to Neo-Vaishnavism’s treatment of animals that we come across in the existing literature refer almost exclusively to the ethical status of animals, and there is no discussion of the theological status of animals in the faith. If the theological position of animals is evoked at all, it is done without exploring its inherent complexities. As a result, we do not come across any discussion of how the theology and ethics of the faith are closely linked and how they inform one another. Moreover, in the little discussion that we come across about Neo-Vaishnavism’s prohibition of animal cruelty and animal slaughter, we can hardly see any awareness of the recent developments in the academia such as animal rights philosophy or animal theology. While such an omission is quite understandable for studies published in the middle of the last century, it is not the case for studies done in recent times. This lack of any reference to recent philosophical developments remains a serious gap in the Neo- Vaishnava scholarship and Śaṅkaradeva Studies. It is not only that Assamese scholars have paid little attention to the animal ethics of Neo-Vaishnavism, but scholars whoexplore the role of animals in Hinduism and Indian thought also tend to overlook Neo-Vaishnavism almost entirely. This omission is regrettable, given the ample opportunity for fruitful dialogue between Neo-Vaishnavism and animal ethics. Peter Singer, in chapter five of his book Animal Liberation (1975), says that the theology of Christianity is primarily human-centric and is often very biased against animals, a sentiment echoed by Andrew Linzey as well (2009b, p. xii). Despite this, Christianity has seen considerable discussion from an animal theological perspective. Therefore, we must undertake similar studies on Neo-Vaishnavism as well, a religion that espouses equality and the divinity of all living beings. Such studies would provide the followers of this faith with a fresh understanding of the teachings of Śaṅkaradeva and Mādhavdeva and at the same time enrich the discourse on animal  14 of 22 ethics and animal theology. It is within this view that I have tried to identify the possible sites of investigation outlined above. ANIMAL THEOLOGY AND ANIMAL ETHICS OF NEO-VAIṢṆAVISM The philosophy of Neo-Vaishnavism is non-dualistic. It is encapsulated in its motto, “eka deva, eka seva, eka bine nāhi kewa.” This means, “There is only One God. We should worship only Him. Except Him, there is no one else.” This non-duality extends beyond the worship of God to encompass the entire cosmology and ontology of this religion. Expressing the concept that God is singular and that the entire universe is an integral part of Him, Śaṅkaradeva addresses God in abargīt entitled “Nārāyan kāhe bhakati karo” in the following manner: “jata jiva jangama, kīta patangama, aga naga jaga teri kāyā” (Mahanta, 2017). This means that in essence, all animate beings and inanimate objects, including insects and mountains, are part of God’s being or body (“kāyā”). From the perspective of animal theology, these lines underscore a fundamental concept of Neo-Vaishnavism, where all living beings, be they humans, insects, or otherwise, are regarded as part of God, and hence, having an ontological equality. Even the entirety of the inanimate world is viewed as part of the Lord and thus as possessingequalglory. Such an idea is also conveyed in the following lines from the Kirtan Ghoxā: “samasta bhutata byāpi āso maihari, sabāko mānibā tumi viṣnu-buddhi kari.” This translates as, “I, the Supreme Being or Hari, am pervading the entire creation. So, consider everything as divine, suffused by Lord Vishnu.” Similarly, in the Bhakti-ratnākara, Śaṅkaradeva (2016) defines a “mahābhāgawat” or a great devotee as someone who sees all living beings in God and conversely God in all living beings (“xamasta prāniko dekhe iswara krixat, harika dekhaya jito prāni xamastat, hena dekhe  15 of 22 xito xehi mahābhāgawat”) (p. 128). These examples show how care for non-human animals is a primary characteristic of Neo-Vaishnava metaphysics. However, Śaṅkaradeva’s philosophy extends beyond mere metaphysical considerations about animals and prescribes practical applications of this animal ethics. In the subsequent lines of the above bargīt “Nārāyan kāhe bhakati karo,” Śaṅkaradeva moves from theology to ethics, expressing self-condemnation for his lack of mercy towards living creatures, having needlessly caused the deaths of countless beings to satisfy his hunger. In these lines, he laments: “xaba kahu māri pura taohi udara, nāhi karata bhutadāya” (Mahanta, 2017). These words mean: “Killing every living creature, who are manifestations of God Himself, I fill up my stomach and show no mercy.” This profound realisation ignites intense self-reflection within Śaṅkaradeva. Addressing God, he says that he is unworthy of worshipping Him, as his malevolent mind has frequently engaged in acts of violence against living beings: “Nārāyan kāhe bhakati karo, meri pā maru mana, mādhava ghane ghana, ghātuka pāpa nāchorā” (Mahanta, 2017). From the eight lines of this bargīt, Śaṅkaradeva arrives at a profound realisation: since Hari or God resides within all living beings, any condemnation or violence directed towards animals is, in essence, directed towards God Himself. Consequently, Śaṅkaradeva humbly surrenders at the feet of God, seeking forgiveness for his sins through devotion and promises a cessation of such violent acts. We can find a resonance of this sentiment in Śaṅkaradeva’s Bhakti-Ratnākara (2016) as well, where it is said, “He who harmsthe Divine residing withina living creature’s body is condemned to a dreadful hell” (“iswaraka hingxā kare para xarirata, paraya abasye xito ghora narakata”) (p. 183).  16 of 22 In this way, thisentire bargīt is interwoven with threads of theology and ethics. On one hand, it espouses the ontological equality of all animals, while on the other, it advocates for a nonviolent lifestyle that demonstrates kindness and compassion towards animals in daily life. Thisbargīt unequivocally asserts that cruelty towards animals is incompatible with devotion to the Lord.This idea is fundamental not only to this holy song but also to the broader Neo-Vaishnavite tradition. For instance, we can cite verses from the NiminavasiddhaSamvād, where Śaṅkaradeva (2015) unequivocally says, “Nāmaribeb jibaka eribe māngx aāxā/Debako uddeshi jiba nakaribā hingxā,” which means, “Do not kill animals; forgo the greed for meat. Do not commit violence to animals even to worship gods” (p. 64). A similar injunction is also found in Śaṅkardev’s Assamese rendering of Canto 8 of the Bhāgavata Purāna: “Avoid cruelty toward living beings; adopt a celibate life and avoid worldly temptations. Keep Lord Krishna in your heart and chant His names day and night” (Dutta Barua, 2011, p. 658). To appreciate the significance of Neo-Vaishnava animal ethics and theology for the animal rights philosophy, it is important to understand the significance of these principles. On one hand, Neo-Vaishnavism espouses theoretical equality for all beings, while on the other, it advocates a non-violent lifestyle rooted in kindness and compassion towards animals in day-to-day life. The bargīt discussed above unequivocally asserts that animal cruelty is antithetical to devotion to God, and that these two concepts are utterly incompatible. These examples demonstrate how the theological insight (“God dwells within all beings”) and moral imperatives (“all beings merit service and compassion”) of Assamese Neo-Vaishnavism in general and the teachings of Śaṅkaradeva in particular are inseparable from one another.  17 of 22 From the perspectives of animal ethics and theology, it is evident that there is still much to be done in Assamese Neo-Vaishnavism. A deeper engagement with the faith makes it clear that we cannot overlook its robust animal ethics while trying to grasp its non-dualistic philosophy. As evidenced in the above discussion, both the theoretical and moral dimensions of this faith are intricately connected. The monotheistic and non- dualistic tenets of Neo-Vaishnavism carry a significant moral and practical implication: the imperative to demonstrate kindness, compassion, and empathy towards all living beings. In his Assamese rendering of Canto 8 of the Bhāgavata Purāna, Śaṅkaradeva unequivocally declares, “There is no greater dharma than saving the life of another. Doing that, even at the cost of one’s own life, earns one a greater merit than the performance of ten million horse sacrifices” (“parajiva rākhe diyā jiva āponār, abhaya dānata para dharma nāhi āna, koti asvamedho tār nuhike xamān”) (Dutta Barua, 2011, p. 609). This compassion must extend not only to larger animals but also to the smallest of creatures, such as ants and worms (Dutta Barua, 2011, p. 609). NEO-VAISHNAVISM AND ANIMAL ETHICS: THE WAY FORWARD Whereas there is an urgent need to engage with the animal ethics of Assamese Neo- Vaishnavism in light of recent developments in animal rights, animal ethics and animal theology, there is also a need to exercise caution. That is becauseNeo-Vaishnavism and animal rights emerged in different periods and in different socio-cultural contexts. Whereas the Neo-Vaishnava movement originated in the fifteenth century Assam, with its roots going back even further, the animal rights movement is quite recent in its inception and has its origins in Western ethics and metaphysics. As such, a  18 of 22 straightforward comparative study of the philosophical positions of these two movements would not be very productive. Therefore, it can be said that any study of Neo-Vaishnava animal ethics must consider it in its own context and light, even if it uses the philosophical and theological insights offered by the animal rights philosophy. That being said, though the Neo-Vaishnava movement emerged at a time when the notion of animal rights was absent as an organised movement, the insights offered by a study of this faith have much to offer to the discourse of animal rights and animal ethics. This is due to an important similarity between Neo-Vaishnavism and modern animal rights, namely, their shared concern for the welfare of non-human animals. Both Neo-Vaiṣṇava ethics and animal ethics emphasise our duty towards non-human animals as our fellow creatures. While Neo-Vaishnavism takes a more theological and ethical approach, animal rights philosophies adopt a rationalistic one. But their ends remain the same, which is, preventing anthropogenic cruelty towards non-human animals. The inclusion of Neo-Vaishnava animal ethics in modern animal rights philosophy could bring significant benefits to both. One such benefit is the addition of a reverential element to the contemporary animal rights movement. The theological basis of the faith can provide a firm grounding for the ethical treatment of non-human animals, as pointed out by Linzey (1994) in the context of Christianity. This can pave the way for animal rights theories to be released from their current philosophical limitations. Also, discussion of Neo-Vaishnavism in this new light could bring animal rights philosophy closer to people with a religious bent of mind. After gaining a different perspective on the faith, people may become more open to accepting animal rights as a moral and ethical obligation. Lastly, the integration of Neo-Vaishnava animal ethics can broaden the scope of animal rights philosophy. By including religious perspectives,  19 of 22 animal rights philosophy can become more diverse and inclusive. This can also help to address criticisms that the animal rights movement is a secular and Western-centric movement. Overall, the incorporation of Neo-Vaishnava animal ethics into modern animal rights philosophy has the potential to provide a deeper and more nuanced understanding of the ethical treatment of nonhuman animals. Similarly, Neo-Vaishnavism can also benefit from the animal rights philosophy, which can provide the faith with a clear theoretical foundation for its animal ethics and make it relevant in contemporary times. A greater communion with animal rights philosophies can also showcase the faith’s animal ethics on a bigger platform and highlight its radical nature. Such studies can promote a comparative analysis between Neo-Vaishnavism’s animal ethics and animal ethics of other world religions and help establish the uniqueness of Neo-Vaishnava animal ethics. References Barman, J. (2019). Sankardevarsahityatparibexiksetona. Goriyoshi, (27)3, pp. 30-32. Borgohain, I. (2023). Animals in Assamese Neo-Vaiṣṇavism of India. Journal of animalethics,13(1), 1-13. Borgohain, I. (2024). Paxu-dharmatattvaāru śrimantaŚaṅkardevardarxan. Aalaap, 7, pp. 267-275. Borgohain, I. (2023). Neo-Vaiṣṇavism of Assam and animalrights: A critical study. [PhD Thesis, North-Eastern Hill University, Shillong, India]  20 of 22 Bruce, A. (2019a). Buddhism: Paradox and practice: Morally relevant distinctions in the Buddhist characterization of animals. In A. Linzey& C. Linzey (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of religion and animal ethics (pp. 43-55). Routledge. Bruce, A. (2019b). Buddhist rebirth, reincarnation, and animal welfare. In A. Linzey& C. Linzey (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of religion and animal ethics (pp. 349-360). Routledge. Doniger, W. (2005). Zoomorphism in ancient India: Humans more bestial than the beasts. In L. Datson and G. Mitman (Eds.), Thinking with animals: New perspectives on anthropomorphism (pp. 17-36). Columbia University Press. Doniger, W. (2006). A symbol in search of an object: The mythology of horses in India. In P. Waldau and K. Patton (Eds.), A communion of subjects: Animals in religion, science and ethics (pp. 335-350). Columbia University Press. Doniger, W. (2015). The Hindus: An alternative history. Speaking Tiger. (Original work published 2009) Dutta Barua, H. N. (Ed.). (2011). Śrīmad Bhāgavad: Sampurna. DuttaBarua Publishing. Kemmerer, L. (2012). Animals and world religions. Oxford University Press. Lekharu, U.C. (Ed.). (2020). Katha-gurucarit. Dutta Barua Publishing. (Original work published 1952) Linzey, A. (1994). Animal theology. SCM Press. Linzey, A. (2000). Animal gospel. Westminster John Knox Press. (Original work published 1998) Linzey, A. (2009b). Creatures of the same God: Explorations in animal theology. Lantern Books. (Original work published 2007). Kindle version. Mahanta, B. C. (Ed.). (2017). Borgeet. Student's Stores. (Original work published 1992)  21 of 22 Mazumdar, B. (Ed.). (n.d). Śaṅkardevadhyayanargranthapanji. Gauhati University Press. Nelson, L. E. (Ed.). (2000). Purifying the earthly body of God: Religion and ecology in Hindu India. D.K. Printworld. Nelson, L. (2006). Cows, elephants, dogs, and other lesser embodiments of ātman: Reflections on Hindu attitude toward nonhuman animals. In P. Waldau& K. Patton (Eds.), A communion of subjects: Animals in religion, science, & ethics (pp. 179-193). Columbia UniversityPress. Neog, M. (2018). Śaṅkardeva and his times: Early history of the Vaiṣṇava faith and movement in Assam. LBS Publication. (Original work published 1965) Rosen, J. S. (2020). Vaishnava vegetarianism: Scriptural and theological perspectives on the diet of devotion. In V. Narayanan (Ed.), The Wiley companion to religion and materiality (pp. 395-413). John Wiley & Sons Ltd. Śaṅkardev. (2011). Kirtan-ghoxā (H. N. Dutta Barua, Ed.). Dutta Baruah Publishing. (Original work published 1989) Śaṅkardev. (2015). Nimi navasiddhasamvād. (N. C. Sharma, Ed.). Ashok Book Stall. Śaṅkardev. (2016). Bhakti-ratnākar.(T. N. Goswami, Ed.). Golaghat: Kshirod K. Goswami. Sarma, B. (2014). Śaṅkardevarracanāt paribexsintā. Prantik, 33(8), 46-48. Sarma, S. N. (2016). The Neo-Vaisnavite movement and the satra institutions of Assam. Gauhati University Press. (Original work published 1966) Singer, P. (2002). Animal liberation. Ecco. (Original work published 1975) Tlili, S. (2012). Animals in the Qur'an. Cambridge University Press. Tlili, S. (2014). All animals are equal or are they? The ikhwan-al sal-safa’s animal epistle and its unhappy end. Journal of Qur’anic Studies, 16(2), 42-88.  22 of 22 Valpey, K. R. (2002). Cow care in Hindu animal ethics. Palgrave Macmillan. Waldau, P. (2002). The specter of speciesism: Buddhist and Christian views of animals. Oxford University Press. Waldau, P. (2011). Animal rights: What everyone needs to know. Oxford University Press. Waldau, P. (2013). Animal studies: An introduction. Oxford University Press. Waldau, P. & Patton, K. (Eds.). (2006). A communion of subjects: Animals in religions, science, & ethics. Columbia University Press.