This paper has an expressed desire to re-invent hermeneutics of suspicion from contemporary Indian realities. In order that our exercise is fruitful, we are challenged to trace the trajectory of desire in our society. Desire was studied by psychoanalysis for some time. Lately, another mode called schizoanalysis has emerged as a profound way of understanding the trajectory of desire. This mode of analysis was proposed by Deleuze and Gauttari. Schizoanalysis focuses on the productive hermeneutics rather than semiotic hermeneutics. The former asks how desire works while the later seeks the meaning of desire. Like psychoanalysis, schizoanalysis is both a clinical and a critical tool. We shall strive to conduct a schizoanalysis of desire in this paper and try to produce different paths for the emergence of hermeneutics of suspicion. We find that schizoanalysis is an important tool in this regard. India has plural traditions of hermeneutics of suspicion. Unfortunately, their critical power is often silenced and overshadowed by the social location of Brahmanism, which is anthropocentric, patriarchal and casteist. Indian society is Brahmino-centric. The brhaminocenricity of has grown into a body where all aspects of our life have become its organs. Everything in contemporary Indian is an organ of a brahminical body. This is the reality of contemporary India. We hope schizoanalysis might help us to disentangle these Brahmino-centric chains and thus set their emancipative potentials free.
The first three parts of this paper are mainly an exposition of schizoanalysis as developed by Deleuze and Gauttari, although we do try to find some parallels to their conceptual apparatus. We do not carry it out in the spirit of comparative philosophy which has steadily come in vogue today. All this is done only to let us assimilate the conceptual tools of Schizoanalysis so that we can apply it to our realities. The next two parts of the paper are doing Schizoanalysis of Indian realities to develop several pathways to hermeneutics of suspicion.
To begin our task, we shall try to map the trajectory of desire with the help of schizoanalysis. To conduct this analysis, we will have to use the conceptual apparatus developed by Deleuze and Gauttari. Having opened the trajectory of desire, we then try to follow the trajectory of body without organs, the force that slows down the dynamism of the restless desire. We follow this analysis with the analysis of desiring machines. This study opens us to the dynamism of the unconscious of our society. Having mapped the unconscious of our society, we then strive to construct a hermeneutics of suspicion. We begin this task by examining how our thinking is trapped into the Oedipus complex which upholds the phallic logic. We then try to manifest how phallic logic becomes caste-rating brahmanical logic in our society and in the final section attempt to seek alternate and salubrious ways of being Indian.
Cartographies of Desire
Like Psychoanysis, Schizoanalysis studies the trajectory of desire. It relies on the productive power of desire and manifests insightful ways that we can employ to understand our society in its power structure.
The Eccentric Self, Desire and Emergent Unconscious
The psychoanalytic work of Lacan has already demonstrated that the self is eccentric. The eccentric self became a Schizo in the work of Deleuze and Gauttari. We can relate the Schizo to the non-substantive self of Buddhism. The self in Buddhism is split into a stream of new larvae self that are entangled into an ocean of desire. Buddha teaches that desire is the cause of all suffering. Deleuze and Gauttari point out that since the self is eccentric, desire is also split or detached from the self. Desire is productive and swings to seek gratification or jouissance. It does not necessarily oedipalize. It is anti-oedipal. But humans are both products and agents of desire. As products and agents, humans work within social codes. Social codes belong to beliefs, myths rituals, taboos, kinship structures etc., of a society. These codes do not just operate symbolically but work economically by distributing debts and obligations across the social body. Thus, we can race territorialisation as well as deterritorialisation of the dynamics of desire at play in the self. In the context of this productive desire, we also produce the unconscious. This means unconscious only exists to the extent we produce it. Desire has two poles, two regimes or two fundamental ways of organizing or distributing itself. This means desire invests in two different ways at once. Desire wishes to become part of the megamachine (status quo) to keep it going, while at the same time it wishes to revolt against it. Deleuze and Gauttari revolt against Freud who taught that Infant is a homo natura whose subjection to the Oedipus Complex resolves the conflict between anti-social (incestuous) desire and desire in its socialized form (submission to the law of the Father). They hold that desire is social and celebrate the revolt against the law of the father. Sudhir Kakar translates the Oedipus complex as Ganesha Complex. Oedipal behaviour is rendered as Ganesha afraid of losing his head. From this point of view, anti-oedipal behaviour would mean standing up against the sword of Shiva.
Desiring machine, Aggregates and Assemblages
Anti-oedipal behaviour is a refusal of the symbolic castration/ beheading of Ganesha. Anti-oedipus becomes a desiring multipliciteous subject. This may relate to the no-self of Buddha. Maybe no-self of Buddha could be reinterpreted as several selves (larvae selves). It embodies what Deleuze and Gauttari call desiring production, the cycle of producing production that is repressed by the Oedipus complex. They teach that desiring production is the function of the desiring machines. It is by being a desiring machine, that humans belong to nature. In fact, there is no real distinction between nature and humans. Humans are no special beings. Humans are not lords over created nature. Humans belong to the natural cycle of producing production. It is being coupled with other desiring machines (internal desires) that become identifiable as aggregates. Everything is an aggregate or assemblage and stays in the flow of production. That means desiring machine carry other machines grafted onto them. Thus, for instance, mouth that is attached to the food becomes a desiring machine/ assemblage. The desiring machine stays immersed in multidirectional linear binary flows. The oedipal submission to the patriarchal authority is the price that we have to pay to suppress our desire. This is why it is opting to chase a death drive. It is becoming a body without organs. It is trying to gain stability of identity. It is choosing death. Being part of this cycle of producing production, it can be viewed as a parallel to the death-rebirth cycle of transmigration that several Indians believe. Staying with the Karmic flows, humans and other creatures become manifestations of desiring machines that seek to inter-relate. Maybe the Buddhist notion of non-a substantive self becomes a strong parallel to the perpetually becoming subject of Deleuze and Gauttari. We may even think that the stream of non-substantive selves (larvae selves) freeze into the atman of the so called astika schools.
Body without Organs and Schizoid Subject
Deleuze and Gauttari teach that Body without Organs is produced every time the flows of desiring-production stop momentarily before resuming again with the renewed coupling of machines. It is an enormous undifferentiated thing that may be viewed at the most as spectral subject of sorts, which evaporates as soon as it seems to materialize. To understand it we cannot ask what it means but have to consider what it does. In a most general sense, it provides a relief moment for the restless desire. Let’s take up an example from an Indian tradition. We may imagine that the Buddhist stream of non-self/ larvae selves that are moving at quick space are slowed down and solidified into a singular substantive self/ atman. That which slows down this stream is a body without organ. Deleuze and Gauttari identify capital as a body without organs in our contemporary society. Thus, they invite us to think about capital as nothing concrete but a process of reducing-transforming ghost-like all values (intrinsic as well as use values) to exchange values. They teach that a Schizoid Subject become the result of the decoded flow of capital which they view as a body without organs. They see the capital as a body without organs as it does not exhibit a character of ‘fixity’ that an ego or object-identities usually display. The Schizo is the end product of these flows because the principle of exchange value whose major signifier is money decodes or replaces intrinsic and use value of things. Thus, for instance, the watch given by a lover to the beloved is merely reducible to its exchange value and nothing more. The loss of intimate value of the watch translates as surplus value via exchange value in favour of the capitalist. Love that it symbolizes is totally deterritorialized but offering other options to the watch it recodes and reterritorialize love as a product of an exchange value. This means like love everything returns under capitalism but as this flow of capital. Capitalism further splits the subject as it de-tolalizes meaning and accommodates to all civilizations. India is not free from this grip of capitalism. We can clearly identify the rise of Schizo Indian with the growth of neo-liberal economic policies of our Government.
Cartographies of Body without organs
The concept of body without organs moves beyond the notion of the body that is already gendered and degraded by patriarchy, caste and religion. It enables us to understand what makes something desirable.
Body without organs, an anti-production Force
Desire incessantly demands fulfilment. Deleuze and Gauttari set the Body without organs as relief from the desires incessant desire . They say that it is synonymous with Freud’s death instinct. It is not an object. It is a state that desire desires. It is not something that desire lacks. It is what desire desires the most. What desire desires the most is not to desire. It is a point when desire is unable to exert any pressure. It is a moment of Samadhi, which brings about the cessation of the vruthi of desire. It is like a momentary escape from samsara, the wheel of continual birth and rebirth. It is this desire that take control of the self. Thus, if Psychoanalysis of Lacan views desire that is pushed by a lack , Deleuze and Gauttari view desire as productive and wishes to reach a point of no desire, a body without organs. Thus, body without organs does not pre-exist desire. It is not ultimate gatekeeper. It comes into being as an effect of the desiring process. There is not a single body without organs. There can be many of them. Thus, for instance, in the case of a schizophrenic, desire goes into a hyperproductive drive and it fires off thoughts, associations at accelerated speed that is higher than the subject can process. In this context, body without organs emerges as a counterweight and becomes a force of anti-production, slowing things down and eventually bringing them to a halt. It is almost like the tamasic forces that counter the satvic and rajasic energies yet within this oppositional dialectics releases the satvic as well rajasic energies. The desire to become a Brahmin becomes a body without organs in India as it provides a relief to the demands of desire at play in our society. The desire to mimic a Brahmin ultimately castrates everyone as it halts the limitless possibilities of being and self imposes an enclosed identity of the Brahmins which always remains at a distance and one has to simply settle to be a counterfeit image of a Brahmin.
Body without Organs, a death instinct
Freud taught that death instinct exhibits an obsessive compulsion to repeat a particular set of ideas, rituals and behaviours almost in defiance of pleasure principle. Freud affirms that it is the repetition process that itself gives rise to pleasure and not the set of ideas, rituals and behaviours. Using the instance of the ‘fort da’ game of his nephew, he asserts that repetition is a means employed by the unconscious to gain mastery over discomforting stimuli. It is both a mechanism of self defence and self cure. Death instinct belongs to the level of drives and is therefore, the subject is helpless and cannot easily resist them. When Freud speaks of death instinct, he is speaking of the other domain, the domain before life rather than the domain after life. Therefore, he is not saying that in the midst of life, we wish to die. The death we seek is not end of life but a return to inanimate state that preceded life. We seem to seek the peace and quiet of inanimate state that we enjoyed before we took the first breathe. This is the exactly the point of Arthaud’s body without organs. Faced by so many demands from within, he longs for a body without organs. Deleuze and Gauttari borrow their view of body without organs from Arthaud. Closest that we may think about it in the power of our Indian thought is the Purusha who gets entangled with Prakruti and sets on an evolutionary journey wishing to release itself from Prakruti. It brings out the desire of Atman for moksa from the bondage of body only to join the cycle of transmigration.
Body without organs, a driving force of desire
Following Melanie Klein, Deleuze and Gauttari develop the notion of desiring machines. Melanie Klein speaks of a splitting of an object that which an infant attaches itself to both as a matter of necessity as well as a matter of love. This object of attachment is maternal breast. For Klein all subsequent attachments or investment of libido follows this path of latching on to and in the process separating off the object. The Jaina tradition of the six blind men and the elephant may be close to the partial objects. But these partial objects are not fetishized and are inappropriate to our context. Maybe we need the look at tantric traditions to seek parallels to partial objects. The ‘invested’ breast is disassociated from the maternal body as is the infant’s mouth from its own body. In this dynamic process both, the maternal breast and the mouth of the infant take a life of their own, thus becoming what Deleuze and Gauttari call machinic. This process is highly complex and the object/machine is prone to be good and bad. The maternal breasts are good when it feeds the infant and becomes bad when it is withdrawn from infant’s eyes and its milk is withheld. Besides, these objects/machines are highly mobile and completely unstable. Hence, Deleuze and Gauttari teaches that the maternal breasts as partial objects are split into good and bad but are aggressively emptied, slashed to pieces or broken into crumbs. The good partial objects/ machines are adopted by the child as constitutive to its sense of self (introjections) while the bad partial objects are in rejected (projection). This dynamism continues as good partial objects are further to split into good and bad and are further absorbed and expelled (reintrojection/reprojection). This is how desiring machines operate. Thus, for instance, mouth becomes chiefly a speaking machine, it detaches from other functions. Thus, it will have to stop eating, vomiting, crying etc while speaking. A speaking machine/ object enters another realm. Now what matters is words that flow from it and not the mouth itself. Deleuze and Gauttari call it deterritorialisation. It is within this train of thought that they are talking of Body without organs is a plenum to which we attach ourselves, others, things, cultures, philosophies which then functions as organs of that body and drive our desire.
Cartographies of Desiring-machines
Freud opened us to the existence of the unconscious. But for him it was terra incognita. Lacan taught that it is linguistically structured. Deleuze and Gauttari reveal us the machinic nature of the unconscious.
Synthesis of partial objects
Schizoanalysis strives to transmute the theatre of representation (dominated by semiotics) to the order of desiring production. It attempts to discover the nature and functioning of desiring machines in a human being. Deleuze and Gauttari construct their own return to Freud. They remind us that Freud had argued that the unconscious knows no negations, contradiction, opposition, or objects but only connections. Thus, they teach that Freud views the primary process as being unmoored by any sort of representational realism or instinctual or natural relation to sexuality. But unfortunately, Freud failed to follow his own findings and instead of relating to partial objects and flows, he views primarily attachments as attachments to fully formed objects (mother, father, son etc). Hence, schizoanalysis stays with the partial objects and examines how they are gathered together and redistributed by the passive ego or Body without organs. This process is called passive synthesis. Schizoanalyis scrutinizes how passive synthesis is capable of taking plurality of different forms or entering different assemblages. Deleuze and Gauttari teach that different historical eras exhibit ways of organising passive synthesis, although their chief focus is on the way an individual subject has his own particular way of synthesis. From the Indian point of view, Brahmanism is chief body without organs and organises and redistributes partial objects both collectively and individually. Brahaminism is like capitalism. It drives our need for equivalence. Like capitalism, Brahmanism bridges the dissimilar through a symbolic exchange of what may be called as caste dividend. Deleuze and Gauttari call it the process of axiomatization. Caste castrates us. It ranks and subordinates us as well as inhibit us from being our true self. We mimic the Brahamins. Brahmanism becomes the measure through which everything in India is organised. It allows everything in our country grows organs. All these only become organs into the body of Brahmanism. Everything has to be born again and be grafted into the body of Brahmanism. Thus, all God’s , cultures, languages and even religion are to be born again.
Unconscious as a desiring -machine
Deleuze and Gauttari invite us to think of the unconscious as a machine. They view a machine from the perspective of what it does and propose that machine connects to other machines. Just like the partial objects connect so to machine connects and forms assemblages and facilitates flows of energy that runs through it. Thus, they reject the Freudian view that sees the unconscious as theatre where the dramas like the Oedipus are played out. This means they shun aside the idea that the unconscious is a dark forbidden place where desire is buried. Quite contrary to these Freudian positions, they view the unconscious as a factory that produces desire and tries to plug into varieties of other machines and processes. They point out that the desire to connect with other machines begins with the desire to connect with the breast machine of the mother and follow it up with other social machines like school, church, workplace, market etc. Indeed, the pursuit of desire renders us into sockets and plugs desiring to couple with other humans as well as social machines. This let them think of the unconscious without relying on the notion of lack. It allows them to conceptualize desire as productive which emanates from our unconscious that passes through us to connect us to the outside world. They connect as well as cut to all further connections that are unheard. It is rhizomatic. Desire to connect is at the heart of the materialist psychiatry which they christened as schizoanalysis. Schizoanalysis maps the flows as they appear. It does not interpret but attempt to map the where the desiring machines are heading to. This is why we attempt to tract the path of desiring machines in our society and consider how we can ride them to produce a hermeneutic of suspicion from the prevailing realities in our country. It is here that Indian realities become important to produce several hermeneutics of suspicions. We can take inspiration from the Indian protestant movements like the nastika darshanas or the tantric traditions that break free from the Brahmanism and provide alternate ways of seeking life and emancipation.
Becomings and desiring-machines
Becomings are always in a process of becoming and changing. All becomings are rhizomatic and do not follow any structured progression. They are creative. We may liken them to Buddhist doctrine of dependent origination. Delueze and Gauttari speak of three main types of becomings: becoming-animal, becoming-child and becoming-women. All becomings are attempts to become molecular. Becoming do not imitate or identify with someone. They are not molar. They position becoming-woman as primary to all becomings as they all pass through it. Becoming-women contests man/woman binary of psychoanalysis. There is no becoming-man as it cannot become-molecular. Just because women is positioned as oppositional to man/phallus/ masculine, the absolute representative of standard or norm, all becomings have to come through becoming-woman. They further teach that becoming-woman is not limited to man but women also have to become-woman. Woman also has a molar identity. It concerns what is expected from a normal woman. This is imitative while becoming-woman cannot be mimetic. No one can become a woman by wearing a dress or makeup. Becoming-woman is molecular transformation and is different to every person. Becoming-woman involves dismantling of molar identities, like wife, mother, sister, virgin, prostitute etc. It involves staying in a continues process of transformation, always changing. All becoming is becoming a minoritrain. Hence, becoming-child as well as becoming-animal contest the privileged binaries of adult/child and human/animal respectively. By these becomings Deleuze and Gauttari try to dismantle the imposition of molar identities of man and woman . This way of thinking and being can assist us to interrogate and dismantle the patriarchal and casteist value hierarchies that control our life in our country.
Inventing a Hermeneutics of suspicion
Schizoanalysis enables us to generate a hermeneutics of suspicion that will dislodge the one that is submissive to the Oedipus complex. Setting our thinking free from the Oedipal stranglehold can produce new emancipative hermeneutical keys to view our society.
Living beyond Oedipus complex
Unfortunately, we in India are trapped into webs of the binary logic. As a society dominated by the purity/pollution principle, we are also dominated by hierarchical thinking. National and the anti-national, Hindus and Muslims, man and woman, dalits and upper caste, meat eaters and vegetarians etc., are well known binary oppositions that clutter our thinking. The binary structure of our thinking is trapped in the Oedipus complex and forces us to oedipalize in favour of the Law of the father, the oedipal superego. This means our thinking follows phallic logic and maintains the power equations in our society. The phallic logic brings all our thinking into the framework of a family and we triangulate between mother, father and son, only to oediplaize in favour of the law of the father. It suppresses our desire to contest what passes of as knowledge, tradition and authentic mode of life. All our thinking appears to have arisen though the unfolding of Oedipus complex. It maintains already established caste and patriarchal hierarchies that control our societies. Hence, the anti-oediopal thinking challenges the phallic structure of our thought. It dismantles the mother, father, son triangle that strangulates and hierarchizes our thought. We can trace anti-oedipal thought visions or darshana’s like the nastica traditions of Buddhism, Jainism, Carvaka that rejected the astica schools based on Vedic authority. Besides, the above, the agamas of the Shaivas and the Samhitas of the Vaishnavas  which included the Vaishnavaite Bhagvatas and the Shaivaite Pasupatas that do not toe the Vedic line can viewed as anti-oedipal. Some Shaivaites from south assert that the spirit of agamas is Dravidian but the present material form that they have today is degradation in the shape of sanskritization. We may also place the Upanishadic water shed that challenged the sacrificial ritualism within the anti-oedipal framework though it is stays within the caste tangle and loses its critical power. Besides, we have the tantric traditions that question the mainstream beliefs and practices. Even lingayatism of Basava can provide resources to interrogate caste-laden oedipal thinking in our society. We might also find critical resources entangled with their respective popular theologies in the vachanas and kirtanis of the Bhakti traditions of Shaivism, Shaktism as well Vaishnavism. Some may even do a deconstructive reading of the Ramayana and Mahabarata reading it through the less of those people that are invisibalised as well as marginalised by the text. Unfortunately, these classical critical hermeneutical approaches have lost their teeth and are in need of reinterpretations and re-appropriations. Besides, these systems, we can draw inspirations from contemporary Indian masters of suspicion like B R Ambekar, Ramaswamy Periyar, Narayana guru etc. We have the duty to seek the critical power of the tribal and dalit thought is rooted in the land-life symbiosis.
Embracing a Body without Organs
Caste castrates the power of body. This is why the notion of body without organs assists us to dismantle the caste-rated bodies in our societies. Becoming body without organs is a resistance to body stained and scripted by the caste system in our society. Caste system is a body politics that hierarchies the bodies based on the principle purity/pollution. Operation of this principle inscribes the relation of lack into our bodies and places them on to a hierarchical ladder. The three gunas theory of the brahaminical metaphysics which characterizes the satvic, rajasic and tamasic bodies, then becomes the defining principle of hierarchy in a caste ridden society. Hence, the body without organs that we have embraced in this analysis assists us to raise our thought beyond the caste tainted thought that is in control of our society today. Karl Marx thought that economics determines our society and it’s thought. Jean-Francois Lyotard disagrees and teaches it is the libidinal economy of a society that determines the structure of our society. Following their mode of thought, one can hold that it is the caste thinking that is structuring our society and its thought. From the Deleuzian point of view capitalism is a body without organs that has produced all the organs of our society that we are living today. In India, we have to critically admit that it is Brahmanism or casteism that is the body without organs that has given rise to the kind of society that we are living today. All our myths, beliefs, taboos, rituals, kinship structures, politics etc., move towards that brahmanical transcendental point. It is this point that structures our society based on the consequent distribution of caste-dividend. What we need is to castrate the cast-rated subject. This may require a total reorientation of our desire which is today is feeding on the caste-dividend. To bring about a transformation, we require a new body without organs that will not define our desire by the principle of lack but will let its productive power free.
Accepting Organs without body
Developments in biotechnology and cloning have made it possible today to produce organs without bodies. This movement outside the body to create organs and even babies is paradoxically supposed to give us healthy bodies. Deleuze and Gauttari teach that social production is an outcome of distribution of debts in a particular society which itself arises out of modes of energy-flows. They suggest that society organizes itself on the basis of debts which take different forms in different modes of social production. It is the system of anti-production that maintains the debt relations in any society. Debt is never paid to anyone. It is a general name under which social obligations are enforced by the system of anti-productions. Social production is a result of mode of flows of energy in a society. Deleuze and Gauttari teach that there are two ways in which this organisation takes place: qualitative or symbolic and quantitative or economic. They hold that savagery and despotism were organised symbolically via codes and over-codes while capitalism is organized economically via axioms. Caste afflicted Indian society is organized on the basis of caste dividend that produces homo hierarchicus. Here we may introduce the notion of organs without body. The debts distribution in our society can create hierarchical ladder that deny some communities fuller communion in social life. These communities can be seen as organs without bodies. The Hindu Nationalism that is reining has converted Indians other than the Hindus into organs that lack the body. The mutilation that is inscribed in Hindutva nationalism is literally mutilating Indians from the body of mother India. Hence, we need to reject the social production that produces organs without organs. Thus, the deterritorialized communities can be reterritorialised into the embrace of our country.
Mapping a Disrupting Hermeneutics of Suspicion
Hermeneutics of suspicion is dynamic, embracive of the other and profoundly salubrious. Our attempt to develop sign posts for such a hermeneutics also remains open to its discomforting and disrupting power.
Contesting Processes of Passivity
Passivity takes different forms. It castrates contestations. It prefers silence. It lets the Phallus be installed so that the law of the father prevails and phallic logic wins. Schizoanalysis draws our attention to the way passivity is being organised. Passivity is not inactivity. It consists of activities that produce an active submission to Oedipus complex. Brahmanism has organized passivity and oedipalization in multiple ways in our society. Our writings, paintings and even our philosophizing has often produced despotic signifier that maintains the dominance of the upper cast. This is why schizoanlysis becomes a way of understanding and contesting processes of passive synthesis in our society. Hermeneutics of suspicion has this important task of contesting and even arresting the processes of oedipalizations or passive synthesis in our society. This means it has task of restoring the critical power of our thought by enabling us to contest the master narratives that are reining and produces various forms of infantalizations in our society. This takes us on the path of dismantling of the ways in which often the unconscious prefers the comfort of silence produced by the operation of phallic logic. If we are develop Hermeneutics of suspicion from Indian realities, we will have to discern how brahminism produces passivity of resignation to ones fate and maintains its dominance and produce perspectives of its contestations so that new voices of interrogation and emancipation are produced in spaces of knowledge production and circulations. ACPI has an important role in production of emancipative philosophical orientations. Hence, the production of a hermeneutics of suspicion is both urgent and inevitable. It has a significant Indian and Christian dimension.
Repositioning the Other
The Other is often viewed as spoiler. Lacan views our unconscious as the discourse of the Other. The Other becomes the (m)other and defines the boundaries of desire. It lays out the field in which desire can appear. Brahmanism has opened the field of desire as well as closed it as there is no room for desire beyond it. Somehow all desire in our society is echoing or mimicking the desire of the Big Other, the Brahmin. We can territorialise only within psychic as well as physical boundaries marked by Brahmanism. This is why the Hindutva forces cannot tolerate desire that fails to mimic and reproduce within the Brahmanical boundaries. It seems that our desire has to stay within the limits of the brahminical desire. Brahmanism has thus evolved as a despotic signifier and the rest of us in our cast-rated society can only mimic or repeat the desire of a Brahmin. That is why the process of sanskritzation has become a nationwide phenomenon and has to come to define what passes of as patriotism or nationalism in our country. Schizoanalysis has the power to reposition the tyrant Other that has come to constraint the boundaries of our desire in our country. It takes us beyond the Phallic logic structured by the either/ or structure which has a teleological closure towards the position of male. This re-position of the other becomes an important coordinate for the production of an authentic Indian hermeneutics of suspicion. It opens fields for desire to ride waves other than those opened by patriarchy and the either/ or Boolean logic. This means Schizoanlysis can dislodge the cast-rating brahminical logic that is rating and subordinating us according to caste. It opens us to desire alternate ways of being Indian. We can dismantle the brahamanical desire by refusing to mimic it in our thought, feeling and action. Hermeneutics of suspicion requires us to reject the brahmanical censor of our desire. Hence, ACPI has the challenge encourage thought and life that can trigger alternate ways of Being Indian as well as Christian in India.
Schizoanalysis like Psychoanalysis is both critical and therapeutic. The reigning caste-rating brahaminical logic is wounding our society continuously. It deterritorializes us constantly. Schizoanlysis does not seek to represent the existing hierarchies and power equations that play upon our desire but strives to expand desire to embrace other possible ways of being. That is why we may see how new salubrious ways of being Indians can emerge through application of schizoanlysis as alternatives to the homogenizing and wounding way of being Indian enforced by the hindutva forces. While hindutva forces present repeatable models form the past that are often stained with hate of the other, schizoanlysis has the challenge as well as the power to open us to new salubrious ways that can enable us to be Indians. It takes us into a future that is yet to come. But this future that is yet to come is not merely a utopia. It is not a platonic pie in the sky but one that focuses on the actualisable salubrious possibilities. A hermeneutics of suspicion suspects the past and opens ways to engage the future. ACPI has the imperative to seek within these multiple ways of engaging the future salubrious way of being both Indian and Christian. In order to let all create this alternate future be will have declare the death of Brahmanism and every other oppressive structures that afflict our society. The Brahmin has to die so that new ways of being Indians can arise. A new body without organs has to be constructed to replace exploitative and oppressive Brahmanism so that a new and salubrious ways of being Indians can spring forth.
Schizoanalysis that we have attempted in the context of this study opens us ways of producing hermeneutics of suspicion. It takes us beyond the triangulation and strangulation of Oedipus complex and manifests us several ways of thinking and being Indians. These expansive and dynamic processes that are unleashed by schizoanalysis have profound critical, emancipative and therapeutic power. Once we understand how the desiring machines of our society operates, we can trace several flows of desire and ride our way to contest the casteist Brahmanical body without organs that has grown organs into our society. We need to critically and therapeutically evolve other bodies without organs that would grow emancipative ways of being Indians.
 Jin Y. Park, Ed., Buddhisms and Deconstructions (Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass Publishers, 2011).
 See Dylan Evans, An introductory Dictionary of Lacanian Psychoanalysis (London: Routledge, 1996), 51-54.
 Gilles Deleuze and Felix Guattari , Anti-Oedipus : Capitalism and Schizophrenia , trans. Robert Hurley, Mark Seem and Helene R, Lane (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2000), 3-5.
 Ibid, 16.
 Oedipalize mean to submit to the Oedipus complex.
 Distribution of debts can be understood as the distribution of the symbolical capital that produces social hierarchies which then would produce mimetic desire and resistance within societies.
 Ian Buchanan, Tim Matts, Aidan Tynan, Eds. Deleuze and Schizoanalysis of Literature (New Delhi: Bloomsbury Academic, 2015), 12
 Ibid, 13.
 Ibid, 11.
 Gilles Deleuze and Felix Guattari , Anti-Oedipus, 3-5.
 Ibid, 6.
 Ibid, 8.
 Ian Buchanan, Tim Matts, Aidan Tynan, Eds. Deleuze and Schizoanalysis of Literature, 26.
Ibid , 28.
 Ibid, 32.
 Ibid, 35.
 Ibid, 36.
 Ibid, 32.
 Ibid, 33.
 Ibid, 34.
 Catherine Anie Harper and Robert L. Brown, Eds., The Roots of Tantra (Albany: St. University of New York Press, 2002).
 Ian Buchanan, Tim Matts, Aidan Tynan, Eds. Deleuze and Schizoanalysis of Literature, 36-37.
 Ibid, 37.
 Ibid, 67-68.
 Paul Eliot, Gauttari Reframed (New York: I.B. Tauris, 2012), 56-59.
 Kathryn M Blake, A Contemporary feminist Critique of Psychoanalysis through Gilles Deleuze and Felix Gauttari , A thesis submitted to the graduate school-New Brunswick, Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey, in partial fulfilment of degree of Masters of Art, 38-46.
 J Gonda, Ed. A history of Indian Literature, Vol. 2, fasc.1 (weisbaden: Harrosswitz, 1977), 4.
 Ibid., 5.
 See H ShivPraskas , Keep Vigil of Rudra, the Vachanas , sourced online, https://books.google.co.in/books?id=6YUtAAAAQBAJ&pg=PT42&lpg=PT42&dq=i+keep+vigil+of+rudra+the+vachanas+pdf&source=bl&ots=4DWUcacEDU&sig=rt8A3JcxggRsfwggDTM- accessed on 25th Sept.2017.
 Jean-Francois Lyotard, Libidinal Economy, trans. Iain Hamilton Grant (Indianapolis : Indiana University Press, 1993).