fanaticism

[Guest guest]

Dear list members,

 

since it has anyway become sufficiently clear that this list can't be viewed as

a scholarly list anymore and a few days ago my bibliographical reference to a

article by Sheldon Pollock, meant as a scholarly contribution, has been abused

for subtly, but recognizeably slandering an Indologist scholar, it is this time

me, who starts a *political* thread.

 

I just had a cursory glance at some of the interviews with and books by Sita

Ram Goel on the voice of india website. I came to the conclusion, that they

can serve to demonstrate what fanaticism in my view is, and especially what kind

of fanaticism we are confronted with on this list.

 

And here are the quotes:

 

"I am a Hindu, which to me means the inheritor of the oldest and the highest

spiritual culture known to human history."

This sounds comparatively harmless, although I for one would become very

suspicious when a fellow German would state similar things about German

culture. But this may be the result of the fact that Germans in the last

century have committed all those terrible deeds which are well-known to

everyone here on the list. So maybe I am not the right one to judge a statement

like this.

 

"The ancient works on dandaniti regard Bharatavarsha as Cakravrtya-kshetra, that

is a compact country which should be brought under one political sceptre without

uprooting regional provincial and local traditions and intitutions. The basic

notes of Indian nationalism were thus sounded at the very dawn of Indian

civilisation."

Again, this quote in itself sounds harmless, although I am of the opinion that

anyone who expressis verbis propagates nationalism, is a kind of (mostly

dangerous) fanatic.But maybe one could argue about this. In present-day

Germany, only Neo-Nazis would view themselves as nationalists. But once

again:this may be a result of German history.

 

A little bit later Sita Ram Goel concludes:

"The first implications is that *Bharatavarsha is an indivisible whole* and that

its present division into *Afganistan*, Pakistan, Hindustan and Bangladesh,

brought about by Islamic imperialism, must go."

This *is* blunt fanaticism and *agressive* nationalism! Especially instructive

is the fact that Sita Ram Goel views Afghanistan as an integral part of

Bharatavarsha as a political (see above) unit. So even a country, which has

been predominantly islamic for many centuries, should become a part of the

Indian state!

But even worse:

"The second implication is that closed creeds like Islam and Christianity which

are not in accord with the spirituality of Sanatana Dharma *have no place in

India*. *No quarter can be given* to these creeds in the name of secularism

which they are using in order to subvert India's ancient spiritual heritage."

Great! In this enlarged "India" including Afghanistan the vast majority would

not only lose independance, but even would lose the right to practice their

religion and their inherited culture (I can imagine, what will happen, when

they refuse to give up their way of living). Brave New India! Here speaks the

proud inheritor of Indian tolerance and practitioner of ahi.msaa Sita Ram Goel!

 

Two further quotes:

"I have found it quite apt to compare Christianity and Islam with Communism and Nazism."

"The *Muslims* also plundered the wealth of the Hindu kingdoms, *impoverished

the Hindu populace*, and destroyed the prosperity of Hindustan. [...] The

descendents of those who built the magnificent temples of Bhojpur and

Thanjavur, Konark and Kailas, invented mathematics and urban surgery, created

mind-body disciplines (yoga) of astonishing power, and built mighty empires

would almost certainly have attained technological superiority over Europe."

I see. The Muslim minority simply deserves the treatment sketched above, since

they are the reason for the wide-spread poverty in India and above all are not

better than Nazis. Sounds familiar to me. Hitler again and again told the

impoverished German population, that the Jewish minority is responsible for

this desolate situation and that this is the natural way of Jewish behaviour.

(At the same time they were responsible for all the "evil" -isms of that time,

especially for Capitalism and Communism). And as we all know from websites

like the Voice of India Muslims also can't help doing so.(There seem to be

some additional features in Nazism, which makes this ideology even more

dangerous than the one propagated by Sita Ram Goel. But that's pretty cold

comfort, isn't it?).

At other places Sita Ram Goel praises the demolition of mosques, i.e. the *use

of force*, as part of a "millenial struggle" (BTW: expressions like "millenial

struggle" also sound very familiar to me from the darkest times of German

history).

I think, it has become sufficiently clear that people like him are aggressive,

utterly intolerant and fanatic nationalists, who try to sow the seeds of hatred

against religious minorities in their own country and advocate an agressive

foreign policy.

 

Especially interesting for the question what is going on on this list, is the

fact, that in Sita Ram Goel's weird world-view two of the biggest world

religions with billions of followers and a very long and complex history, are

*intrinsically evil*, which can easily be seen from the equation (at another

place he uses the unambigious expression "the same as") of them with National

Socialism, an ideology that objectively has been destructive and murderous

right from the start and throughout its short-lived but terrible history.

This world-view is paranoid at the best, but perhaps it is more apt to view this

as a part of a perfidious strategy. Anyway, exactly equations like this, i.e

"all Western Indologists are racists" or even: "Nazis " abound in postings of

some of the members of this list. Often enough it is not stated explicitly, but

it is tried to create this impression by suggestive allusions to the homeland or

to the alleged Nazi commitment of the teachers of some Indologists.This *is*

perfidious. And when exactly the same (in this case anonymous!) persons who

instigate these attacks one day later start to set up a "code for ethical

behaviour" without apologizing for their previous postings, I call this

hypocrisy, or, once again, part of a perfidious strategy.

It is quite clear, that still the vast majority of the list members, whether

they are Indians or Europeans, Americans or Hindus, Muslims or Australians, are

persons who are serious scholars or at least non-professionals who have no

inclination towards policial fanaticism (thereby being representative for their

respective communities as a whole).

Unfortunately, fanatics, whether they view themselves as Christians, Muslims,

Hindus, nationalists or communists, always shout louder than the rest.

 

Now I have to return to my *scholarly* work on the great products of Indian

culture, so I guess there will be no further postings by me to this list in the

next few days or weeks.

 

Martin Delhey

Hamburg

[Guest guest]

INDOLOGY, "Martin Delhey" <mdelhey> wrote:

 

Bha_rata is so big that it cannot be contained in one list! So, David

Salmon, revise the proposal to three lists: indology A (super for

pundits), indology B (medium for the lay), indology C (mediocre,

politics of Bha_rata -- free for all). Bha_rata will be the only

country in the world whose politics will be discussed in a special

world group.

[Guest guest]

With due regards Dr. Delhey, we were not discussing Mr. Sita Ram Goel

on this list. Someone decided to throw adjectives like fanatics,

fascists and so on unprovoked, whip up a persecution mania amongst the

'insiders' and a 'lynch them' against the 'other.'

 

It is very typical of some Indologists to whip up such hysteria a la

demagogues to 'win' arguments. An example:

 

S S Mishra is labelled as a 'Hindu Nationalist' in the 1998 volumes on

Central Asian archaeology (ed. Victor Mair). This adjective is used to

'clinch' the argument. Mair is an Austrian. Recently I was informed

that he discovered that the IE homeland lay in/close to Austria. How

come he is not labelled an Austrian Nationalist, even after Hitler and

the Nazi President? No, I am not calling him a Nazi because he is not.

My point is that for a mere disagreement with the Indology

establishment, SOME 'mainstream' Indologists (and I am glad that most

are not like that) start abusing people as Indian Nationalists, Hindu

fanatics and so on

 

International Scholar Michael Witzel has his own hit list of 'New

Agers', and so on in an article in the Leftist magazine Frontline (the

previous issue absolved China of any wrong doing in Tibet. The latest

issue has euphoric articles on the victory of Left parties in W

Bengal). This hit list includes S S Mishra.

 

What have these people with differing opinions done to you that they

should be insulted and lampooned? You are quick to rush to the defence

of fellow Germans, other Europeans and Americans. Don't Indians need

to be treated with the same respect? You KNOW that MW is not a

fascist. I also know that. And I also know that some people in MW's

hit list are not fascists either. But unlike you, I am not narrow

minded you, rushing to defend only people of particular nationalities.

Mercifully, Dr. Hock was kind enough to absolve S S Mishra of

associations with Nationalisms!

 

You might say (as GT said earlier in the old Indology list) that

Indologists are not interested in Indian Politics. But THEY ARE. Else

why have they already decided the issue? Why do they take sides?

Why do some people like Mr. Fosse comment predominatly when

politicas in India is involved (anyone can chech the history of his

posts). Why are they quiet when K N Panikkar is appointed as V C of a

Sanskrit Univ but carry signature campaigns when the despicable

saffronization of history takes place? Why do they promote communist

ideologue 'historians' like R S Sharma/Thapar/Jha, why do they invite

a hard-core communist ideologues with known agenda like N Ram to talks

at their Universities? Why did GT call the 'vernacular press of India'

as 'fascist' (another example of his ingrained prejudices) in the Old

Indology list? Why does Witzel, who does not even read the Times of

India (per his admission in September 1999 on the old Indology list)

suddenly decide to wax eloquent on everything (and that too in a

disdainful, contemptuous manner) pertaining to India - politics,

education and so on. It is clear that vested interests are involved

here and this facade of 'objective scholarship' is a big farce.

 

Another Indologist who may be called a European Ethnocentric because

he sees all oracles for India in the European past, actually blames

'Hindu organizations' for the activities of LeT! Maybe he will blame

even the recent 'Star of David' like Taliban edict on Hindus. He may

say - well, I blamed Hindu organizations and not Hindus. But when

words like fanatics, fascists, fundamentalists and so on are used in

close association with 'Hindu' - a word that is dear to millions of

Indians and non Indians, it is something more than just a

dispassionate characterization. Rather, it assumes the status of a

patronizing or condenscending statements, full of disdain for the

'Ghentoos'.

 

Before calling others as Ultra-nationalists, fascists and so on, do

some introspection within the community of Indologists. You will see

that the Nazi style persecution/branding/harassment and so on is not a

thing of the past. There are a few rotton apples in your caucus, and

your silence is a support for their agendas.

 

Enrica of Italy, you from Germany, Fosse from Norway, and others from

England etc. are SO QUICK to rush to the defence of your brothers from

the Continent and save their honor. I hope that you sometimes extend

your sympathy for your Indian brothers and sisters as well instead of

indulging in one sided sermonizing and sympathizing. When we see such

a pattern of clannish, obnoxious behavior, there is a valid reason to

discern European ethnocentrism, and various nationalisms and

prejudices in the statements.

 

Do I expect to kindle the light of your conscience. No! I have no such

illusions. But I will put my protest on record.

 

Sincerely,

 

Vishal

 

INDOLOGY, "Martin Delhey" <mdelhey> wrote:

> Dear list members,

>

> since it has anyway become sufficiently clear that this list can't