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