If you work on Indian Philosophy in North America, you are probably in a department of Religious Studies (or of Philosophy, or of South Asian Studies), you are a member of the RISA newsletter, attend the annual AAR conference (perhaps also the APA one), publish and read books by North American University Presses, have the problems usually connected with attaining a TT position or a tenure, etc. etc. More importantly, your environment suggests you to include Indian texts in great philosophical enterprises. You need to be aware of the last methodological advancements and to know the jargon and the methods of religious studies (and/or of anthropology, philosophy, etc.).
If you work on Indian Philosophy in Europe, you are probably in an Institute of classical Indology or of Oriental Studies (or of Classics, only rarely of Philosophy or of Religious Studies), you are a member of the Indology newsletter, attend once in three years the World Sanskrit Conference, the IABS conference, perhaps also the DOT and the other various national and international conferences, publish and read books by Brill, Routledge, Harrassowitz, Peter Lang, OUP or CUP and other European University Presses, have the problems usually connected with having your projects financed, etc. etc. More importantly, your environment often suggests you to be precise, analytic, historically, philologically and linguistically accurate in collecting and analysing your data.
Mutatis mutandis, similar differences apply to scholars in Japan and India (where there are also important scholarly communities working on Indian philosophy).
I know, these are gross generalisations and as such they are also incorrect. There are many North American, Indian and Japanese scholars in the Indology mailing list, or publishing on Journal of Indian Philosophy, or at the WSC; as well as there are many European scholars in the RISA mailing list, at the AAR conference or publishing on Philosophy East and West. Similarly, there are Indian scholars publishing on Indogaku Bukkyōgaku Kenkyū and North American ones publishing on the Adyar Library Bulletin and so on.
Yet, it is a pity that, although our community is extremely small (a middle sized bank in a state capital has more employees than there are scholars of Indian philosophy in the world), we often ignore our colleagues’ work, which are published in journals and presses we are not used to check. Thus, European scholars often ignore the achievements of their North American, Indian and Japanese colleagues and vice versa.
Personally, I hope that this blog will be a small contribution towards the goal of knowing each other and working together to the shared goal of improving our knowledge of Indian thought. In this sense, our different methodological strengths could make a cooperation even more important and fruitful.