The Politics of Translation: How Colonial Scholarship Systematically Misrepresented Maya to Marginalize Indigenous Knowledge

 J. Rogers, SE Ohio

Abstract
This paper examines how the colonial-era translation of the Sanskrit term maya (माया) as "illusion" or "magic"—rather than its etymologically correct meaning "measurement"—was not merely a linguistic error but a deliberate political act. Through analysis of 18th-19th century Orientalist texts, missionary writings, and colonial educational policies, we demonstrate how this mistranslation served three distinct political purposes: (1) establishing Western intellectual and cultural superiority, (2) justifying the colonial civilizing mission, and (3) creating epistemic dependency by discrediting indigenous knowledge systems. By examining primary sources from the British East India Company, missionary societies, and early Indologists, we reveal a consistent pattern of hermeneutical violence that transformed Vedantic philosophy from sophisticated measurement theory into "mystical superstition," thereby facilitating colonial domination.

1. Introduction: Translation as Colonial Tool

The colonial project in India (1757-1947) operated through multiple mechanisms of control: military, economic, administrative, and epistemic. Edward Said's concept of "Orientalism" identifies how Western scholarship constructed an image of the East as irrational, timeless, and mystical—thereby justifying colonial rule as a civilizing mission. Within this framework, the translation of Sanskrit philosophical texts played a crucial role.

This paper focuses on one pivotal case: the systematic mistranslation of maya. We argue that rendering maya as "illusion" rather than "measurement" was:

1. Politically motivated—serving colonial interests

2. Systematic—occurring across multiple translators and decades

3. Epistemically violent—erasing technical precision to create intellectual hierarchy

We examine how this seemingly academic decision supported larger colonial objectives while examining the alternatives available to translators at the time.

2. Historical Context: The Colonial Knowledge Project

2.1 The East India Company's Knowledge Imperative

After establishing political control, the British East India Company needed to "know" India to govern it effectively. This led to:

• The Asiatic Society of Bengal (founded 1784): Instrumental in translating Sanskrit texts

• Fort William College (1800): Training colonial administrators in Indian languages

• Survey projects: Mapping territory, cataloging flora/fauna, and translating texts

Sir William Jones, founder of the Asiatic Society, famously declared in 1786 that Sanskrit was "more perfect than Greek, more copious than Latin." Yet this apparent admiration masked a colonial utility: understanding Indian thought to better control Indian society.

2.2 The Missionary Agenda

Christian missionaries arrived with a clear objective: conversion. To succeed, they needed to:

1. Understand indigenous religious concepts

2. Demonstrate Christianity's superiority

3. Undermine the intellectual foundations of native religions

Reverend William Ward's 1811 Account of the Writings, Religion, and Manners of the Hindoos exemplifies this approach, consistently translating maya as "illusion" and presenting it as evidence of Hinduism's philosophical deficiency compared to Christian "truth."

3. The Etymology and Available Alternatives

3.1 Clear Etymological Evidence

As established in our companion paper, maya derives unequivocally from mā (to measure). Sanskrit lexicons available to colonial scholars—including those compiled by European scholars themselves—recorded this meaning:

• Monier-Williams Sanskrit-English Dictionary (1851): Lists "measurement" as the primary meaning, with "illusion" as a secondary, philosophical usage

• Horace Hayman Wilson's Dictionary (1819): Similarly notes the measurement root

The evidence was readily available. The choice to emphasize "illusion" over "measurement" was therefore selective.

3.2 Alternative Translations Available to Scholars

Colonial translators had multiple options for rendering maya:

Sanskrit Context	Accurate Translation	Colonial Choice	Effect
Measurement process	Delimitation, projection	Illusion, magic	Mystification
Technical philosophy	Dimensional decomposition	Cosmic appearance	Spiritualization
Epistemological term	Coordinate imposition	Divine creative power	Theologization

The consistent selection of mystical/theological translations over technical ones reveals a pattern beyond linguistic difficulty.

4. Political Motivations for the Mistranslation

4.1 Establishing Intellectual Hierarchy

The colonial project required establishing Western superiority in all domains. By rendering maya as "illusion":

1. Indian philosophy appeared subjective versus Western "objective" science

2. Indigenous knowledge appeared pre-rational versus Western Enlightenment rationality

3. Eastern thought appeared concerned with "appearance" versus Western concern with "reality"

This created a convenient hierarchy:

• West: Scientific, rational, empirical, progressive

• East: Mystical, superstitious, subjective, timeless

This hierarchy justified colonial rule as bringing "enlightenment" to "backward" cultures.

4.2 Undermining Indigenous Technical Knowledge

Pre-colonial India had sophisticated systems of:

• Mathematics (including calculus precursors)

• Astronomy (with precise planetary calculations)

• Measurement systems (for architecture, time, commerce)

By framing core philosophical concepts as "mystical," colonial scholars could:

1. Separate these practical systems from their philosophical foundations

2. Appropriate the useful technical knowledge while discarding the philosophical framework

3. Claim technical achievements as accidental rather than intellectually grounded

This allowed Britain to benefit from Indian technical knowledge while denying Indians credit for systematic intellectual achievement.

4.3 Creating Epistemic Dependency

For colonial education to replace indigenous systems, native knowledge had to be discredited. Macaulay's 1835 Minute on Indian Education explicitly stated:

"A single shelf of a good European library was worth the whole native literature of India and Arabia."

By translating maya as "illusion" rather than "measurement":

• Vedanta appeared incompatible with scientific thought

• Indian students would need to learn Western philosophy and science

• Intellectual authority shifted from native gurus to colonial educators

This created a market for Western education and ensured cultural assimilation.

4.4 Facilitating Christian Conversion

Missionaries faced theological competition from sophisticated indigenous philosophies. By mistranslating maya:

1. Advaita Vedanta (non-dualism) became "world-denying" rather than "measurement-aware"

2. The philosophical depth of Hinduism was reduced to "superstition"

3. Christianity could be positioned as offering "truth" versus Hindu "illusion"

Reverend John Muir's 1845 Matapariksha (Examination of Religions) explicitly uses the "maya as illusion" translation to argue for Christianity's philosophical superiority.

5. Case Studies in Mistranslation

5.1 Sir William Jones (1746-1794)

Despite his appreciation for Sanskrit, Jones consistently translated maya in theological terms. His 1789 translation of the Bhagavad Gita renders related terms with Christian parallels, establishing a pattern that would dominate for centuries.

5.2 H.H. Wilson (1786-1860)

As Boden Professor of Sanskrit at Oxford, Wilson's influential translations systematically chose "illusion" for maya, despite his awareness of alternative meanings. His position at Oxford gave this translation academic authority.

5.3 Max Müller (1823-1900)

Though later and more sympathetic, Müller's Sacred Books of the East series continued the "illusion" translation, reinforcing it through massive distribution. His private letters reveal awareness that this simplified complex concepts but justified it for Western audiences.

5.4 Paul Deussen (1845-1919)

A disciple of Schopenhauer, Deussen's translations explicitly framed Vedanta through Kantian "phenomenon vs. noumenon" distinctions, deliberately choosing "illusion" to fit Western philosophical categories rather than Sanskrit meaning.

6. The Consequences: From Mistranslation to Marginalization

6.1 Academic Exclusion

The mistranslation had concrete academic consequences:

1. Philosophy departments excluded Indian thought as "mystical" rather than philosophical

2. Science histories ignored Indian contributions to measurement theory

3. Comparative religion placed Hinduism in the "mystical East" category

4. Psychology dismissed meditation as "escapism" rather than phenomenological investigation

6.2 Educational Impact

Colonial education policies built on these mistranslations:

• Textbooks presented Indian philosophy as primitive

• University curricula separated "Western science" from "Eastern spirituality"

• Native intellectual traditions were excluded from serious academic consideration

6.3 Cultural Self-Perception

Perhaps most damagingly, Indians themselves internalized these mistranslations:

• English-educated elites adopted the colonial view of their own traditions

• Reform movements (like the Brahmo Samaj) accepted the "mystical" label

• Nationalist responses sometimes over-emphasized spirituality in reaction

7. Resistance and Correction Attempts

7.1 Early Indian Responses

Some 19th century Indian scholars challenged the mistranslations:

• Raja Rammohan Roy (1772-1833) argued for more accurate translations

• Swami Vivekananda (1863-1902) explicitly corrected "maya as illusion" in Western lectures

• Sri Aurobindo (1872-1950) wrote extensively on the distortions in Western Indology

However, their voices were marginalized within colonial academic institutions.

7.2 Post-Independence Scholarship

After 1947, Indian scholars systematically re-examined translations:

• S. Radhakrishnan offered more nuanced interpretations

• T.M.P. Mahadevan emphasized technical philosophical meanings

• K.S. Murty documented translation biases

Yet the colonial translations remained dominant in Western academia due to institutional inertia.

7.3 Contemporary Decolonial Scholarship

Recent scholarship explicitly addresses the political dimensions:

• Gayatri Spivak's "Can the Subaltern Speak?" examines translation as power

• Homi Bhabha's concept of hybridity addresses cultural mistranslation

• Dipesh Chakrabarty's "Provincializing Europe" critiques historical narratives

Our technical demonstration that maya = measurement provides the definitive corrective to centuries of political mistranslation.

8. The Broader Pattern: Not Just Maya

This mistranslation was part of a larger pattern:

Sanskrit Term	Accurate Meaning	Colonial Translation	Political Effect
Dharma	Natural order, duty	Religion	Reduced to sectarianism
Yoga	Union, systematic inquiry	Physical exercise	Stripped of philosophical depth
Brahman	Substrate reality	Personal god	Made analogous to Jehovah
Karma	Action-consequence	Fate, predestination	Removed ethical agency

Each case served to make Indian thought appear less systematic, less philosophical, and more "mystical" than it actually was.

9. Conclusion: Translation as Political Warfare

The mistranslation of maya was not an innocent error but a calculated political act serving colonial interests. By transforming a precise technical term for measurement into "illusion," colonial scholars:

1. Created intellectual hierarchy justifying Western dominance

2. Facilitated Christian missionary work by discrediting indigenous philosophy

3. Enabled educational colonialism by making native knowledge appear unscientific

4. Established epistemic dependency that persists in academic structures today

Our recovery of maya as "measurement"—supported by etymology, philosophy, and mathematical formalization—does more than correct a translation error. It:

1. Exposes colonial knowledge politics

2. Restores indigenous technical precision

3. Demonstrates the sophistication of pre-colonial thought

4. Provides a model for decolonizing other mistranslated concepts

The implications extend beyond academia to questions of cultural sovereignty, intellectual property, and the ongoing decolonization of knowledge systems worldwide.

When we correctly translate maya as measurement, we recover not just a word's meaning, but a civilization's intellectual dignity. We acknowledge that the Vedic philosophers were engaged in the same project as modern physicists: understanding how observation structures reality. And we recognize that colonial mistranslation was, fundamentally, an act of intellectual violence in service of political domination.

References

Primary Sources (Colonial Period)

• Jones, William. Translations of Various Sanskrit Works (1789)

• Ward, William. Account of the Writings, Religion, and Manners of the Hindoos (1811)

• Wilson, H.H. Essays and Lectures on the Religion of the Hindus (1862)

• Müller, Max. The Upanishads (Sacred Books of the East, 1879)

• Macaulay, Thomas Babington. Minute on Indian Education (1835)

Secondary Scholarship

• Said, Edward. Orientalism (1978)

• Spivak, Gayatri Chakravorty. "Can the Subaltern Speak?" (1988)

• Chakrabarty, Dipesh. Provincializing Europe (2000)

• Niranjana, Tejaswini. Siting Translation: History, Post-Structuralism, and the Colonial Context (1992)

• Cohn, Bernard. Colonialism and Its Forms of Knowledge (1996)

Sanskrit and Linguistic Sources

• Monier-Williams, Monier. A Sanskrit-English Dictionary (1851)

• Apte, Vaman Shivaram. The Practical Sanskrit-English Dictionary (1890)

• Coward, Harold. The Philosophy of the Grammarians (1990)

Contemporary Corrections

• Rogers, J. "Maya Is Literally Measurement, Not a Metaphor" (2025)

• Rogers, J. "The Structure of Physical Law as a Grothendieck Fibration" (2025)

• Various postcolonial retranslations and commentaries

Appendix: Timeline of Maya's Mistranslation and Correction

Year	Event	Significance
1784	Asiatic Society of Bengal founded	Institutional beginning of colonial Indology
1789	Jones translates Bhagavad Gita	Establishes "illusion" translation pattern
1811	Ward's missionary account published	Links "maya as illusion" to Christian critique
1835	Macaulay's Minute on Education	Explicitly devalues Indian knowledge
1851	Monier-Williams Dictionary published	Records "measurement" meaning but emphasizes "illusion"
1879	Müller's Upanishads translation	Reinforces mistranslation through authority
1893	Vivekananda's Chicago address	First major public correction by Indian scholar
1947	Indian independence	Begins formal decolonization of knowledge
1960s	Grothendieck develops fibration theory	Provides mathematical language to express maya
2025	Technical papers formalize maya=measurement	Complete correction with mathematical proof

This timeline shows how political power shaped academic translation for nearly two centuries before technical mathematics enabled definitive correction.