[Y-Indology] On the Sulekha Posting

[Guest guest]

Alternatively, there is the possibility that professional

Indologists would be better occupied in the research they

have made their life's work, rather than in wasting their

time trying to satisfy the vocal but minuscule minority of

"Hindus/Indians" (a term on whose problematic nature I see

not reason to dwell here) who can find nothing better to do

with their time than start a "Kulturkrieg" against honest

intellectual enquiry.

 

Actually, I suspect they are.

 

Just a thought.

 

Regards,

Rohan.

 

 

On Sun, 8 Sep 2002, V.V. Raman wrote:

 

> ON MR. RAJIV MALHOTRA'S ESSAY

>

> By now, many professional/academic Indologists must have heard of, and quite a

few might have also read, Mr. Rajiv Malhotra's posting in Sulekha. Whether one

agrees or disagrees with his tone and style, it is hard to ignore three aspects

of this essay:

>

> (a) It has elicited a groundswell of support from a great many Hindus/Indians

who keep track of current exchanges on matters related to their religion and

ethnic roots. The essay has, within a couple of days, elicited more than a

hundred enthusiastic accolades.

>

> (b) Unlike some other of Mr. Malhotra's postings, this one is presented as a

scholarly paper, end-notes, references and all.

>

> © Above all, he does make a valid point which is simply this: Western

commentators on Indic traditions ought to be versed not only in the lore and the

language via books and manuscripts; they must also have some sensitivity for the

culture on which they are commenting and which they are trying to interpret, not

only for themselves but for countless readers who may be only vaguely familiar

with the very complex and sophisticated culture that the Indic is.

>

> To me, filtering out all the understandable astonishment and rage at some of

the more jarring commentaries on Hindu gods and goddesses, Malhotra's seems to

be a fairly reasonable position which, with due respects to him, is not all that

original, because it is shared by millions of others: not just practicing

Hindus, but some Non-Hindu scholars as well. Indeed, the current collective

reaction to some of the more objectionable writings on Hinduism is mild compared

what one might expect elsewhere if corresponding statements were to be made on

the prophet and scripture of another major non Judeo-Christian religion.

>

> My own view in this context, which I have repeatedly articulated, is that one

cannot, indeed one should not, dissect a living religion as one dissects a dead

butterfly, or even a dead religion, for that matter. Talking about Shiva or

Sarasvati is not like talking about Zeus or Diana. Shiva and Sarasvati still

touch the heart and soul of millions, provoke prayer and prostration, are

venerated in places of worship, and celebrated in festivities.

>

> To the outsider, the Bhagavad Gita may be another classic of world literature,

a philosophical or metaphysical monograph presented as a dialogue. But it is

also a sacred book for many Hindus, and is often regarded as the equivalent of

the Bible or the Koran. Hindu scholars many argue about the divinity of Krishna

or the historicity of Rama, but those not of the tradition should be sensitive

in what they have to say.

>

> True, many Western scholars will not be offended if the Old Testament is

described as a narrative of bloody wars and savage behavior, or if one talks of

the Last Temptation of Christ. This is because the scholars themselves have

severed their religious loyalty to their tradition. But most practicing

Catholics will certainly be incensed if one speaks of Christ's lust for

Magdlena.

>

> The point is, in a multicultural world where English and French have become as

universal as curry and chowmein, one cannot just get away with irresponsible and

culturally offensive public statements, whether on popular radio or in serious

text-books.

>

> I for one have often applauded the dedication of Western scholars who

elucidate and expound the intricacies of Indic civilization, their compilation

of dictionaries and translations of classics, slanted or distorted as they

sometimes might be. But when serious academics publish books that are blatantly

insulting to the sensibilities of a billion people, and are also frequently

distorted, and write in utter ignorance of how the practitioners currently feel

about their deeply religious symbols, then somebody should say, "Stop this

nonsense!" I think that is what Mr. Malhotra has done, and in doing so, he is

giving voice to millions of his co-religionists.

>

> If professional Indologists are indifferent to or contemptuous of what Mr.

Malhotra has unleashed, I fear the situation could get even worse for the whole

world of Indological scholarship. Indeed, if we don't wish this episode to

degenerate into an uglier Kulturkrieg of even greater proportions, then

Indologists would do well to say openly that sometimes they have indeed been

insensitive, and that in the future they would be more respectful of the culture

about which they write. It would be even nicer if the offending authors offered

a formal apology to the Hindu world. Such a gesture is not required of them, but

it is likely to initiate a healing process which, in my view, is sorely needed

in the current context.

>

>

>

> V. V. Raman

>

> September 8, 2002

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

> indology

>

>

>

> Your use of is subject to

>

>

[Guest guest]

Though the psychoanalytic approach to religious scholarship is not my cup

of chai, the type of study that Kripal, et. al. do is commonplace within

Christian scholarship at the SBL. Mr. Mahlotra's reactions to scholarly

dissections of a living tradition are reminiscent of Christian reactions to

the documentary hypothesis of Wellhausen over a century ago. The rise of

Christian the fundamentalism of the twenties and thirties was in part a

reaction to German scholarship.

 

Perhaps Mr. Malhotra and the "millions" that he represents could learn from

the example of the Christian laity. Over the last century, the vast

majority of Christians (with a few exceptions) have learned to ignore

Christian scholars. True, when their children go to college, they learn

things like Christianity borrowed heavily from the cult of Mithras and that

Christ probably did have female apostles. But Christian parents either tell

their children not to take those classes or they simply dismiss their

child's curiosity as a phase.

 

Alternately, Mr. Malhotra could learn from the example of Christian

scholars themselves. Many of the scholars who point out the complicity of

Christianity in causing suffering on a massive scale are Christian

themselves. A more mature view of religion, I contend, is to see that

Religion is a mixed bag. Yes, religions have supported oppression and often

things are not as they seem. The Bhagavad Gita can be read (and has been

read) as supporting warfare and the caste system. As scholars and

practitioners we have to be honest about that. But that is not the end of

the story. As scholars and practitioners, we also have to acknowledge that

religion has been used for social as well as personal liberation. In

defense of the academy, I would argue that scholarship on religion, taken

as a whole, tends to be decently even handed even if individual works place

the emphasis on one side or the other.

 

Joseph Walser

Tufts University

[Guest guest]

INDOLOGY, Joseph Walser <jwalse01@e...> wrote:

> In

> defense of the academy, I would argue that scholarship on

> religion, taken as a whole, tends to be decently even handed

> even if individual works place

> the emphasis on one side or the other.

>

> Joseph Walser

> Tufts University

 

Unfortunately you seem to have totally missed the

main point of Mr.Rajiv Malhotra's writings !!

 

The point that Mr.Malhotra makes is that Jeff Kripal

got a PhD on a dissertation that was heavily based

on Bengali texts and culture - without even one

Bengali expert on his panel !!

 

What Rajiv Malhotra has pointed out are the unethical

and anti-scholarly works of Wendy Doniger and her

cohorts.

 

Also the so called 'academy' (in the US atleast)

is totally funded and controlled by Christian

Organisations and quite a large number of

scholars on Hinduism are products of Christian

theological schools. In addition to Christianity

many others to European religions

like Marxism or Feminism

 

So while it may be your assumption that scholarship

on religion is fair - many Hindus like me do not

think so.

 

Regards,

S.Subrahmanya

[Guest guest]

This is in response to Joseph Walser's post in response to Rajiv

Malhotra's latest articleon Sulekha.

 

Shri Walser's critique is severely flawed and he does not appear to

have given the issue much thought. Among the many points Shri

Malhotra makes, one should be acceptable to all: that conclusions

ought to be made based on available evidence. Wendy and her Kids

have not imbibed this basic precept. Therefore, in my opionion, they

do not deserve to be called "scholars" or "intellectuals." "Vandals"

would be more appropriate.

 

Shri Walser also issues a prescription that we Hindus should ignore

Wendy and her Kids just like American Christian children have done.

But Walser should note that Christian children in America have

recourse to a strong corpus of native interpretations of their

traditions while growing up and as adults (I don't even mention

Sunday school here). Hindus have not yet had a chance to develop a

strong native interpretation that would serve the needs of their

modern English-speaking constituents. As a result, very often the

interpretation offered by the likes of Wendy is held out as the canon

not only here in America but even in India. A corrective is,

therefore, most urgently needed. Shri Malhotra's article must also

be seen parenthetically as a clarion call for Hindus that we have

slept for too long, that it is time to wake up and get to work. I

must therefore reject Shri Walser's nostrum, asking us to look the

other way while the Wendels go about their business of intellectual

defecation.

 

Warm regards,

 

Rajan P. Parrikar

[Guest guest]

First of all, I do agree with you and Mr. Malhotra that there is something

quite problematic about the Kripal situation, and I should have stated my

agreement in my previous post. There are other good points that he makes,

but let me focus briefly on one that bothers me. What concerns me is the

perception that what is being taught as Hinduism in the US is exemplified

by the works that he cites. "Introduction to Hinduism" is one of the

courses that I teach and I usually have about 60-75% of my students from a

Hindu background. As you can imagine I am very concerned about giving a

balanced presentation. When I have spoken with other professors who teach

Hinduism, I have yet to find any of them relying heavily on either Doniger

or Kripal's works. The books used most often (granted, I have not done any

kind of formal survey) are the Bhagavad Gita, the Ramayana and one of the

numerous anthologies of Hindu texts. A few of us used C.J. Fuller's Camphor

Flame until it went out of print. Hardly radical texts. I confess to using

one of Sudhir Kakar's books once in a fit of psychoanalytic curiosity.

 

As far as institutional bias is concerned, you make the following point:

On Monday, September 09, 2002 7:47 PM, subrahmanyas2000 > Also the

 

so called 'academy' (in the US at least)

> is totally funded and controlled by Christian

> Organisations and quite a large number of

> scholars on Hinduism are products of Christian

> theological schools. In addition to Christianity

> many others to European religions

> like Marxism or Feminism

>

> So while it may be your assumption that scholarship

> on religion is fair - many Hindus like me do not

> think so.

 

I think that you don't understand the way the American academy works on a

practical level. I have a masters degree from a Christian seminary. I am

not Christian. It was a good program and I spent my time there studying

Kant and Nietzsche. I taught for a year at a Jesuit University. Still

wasn't Christian. The job market was tight and that was the only job

available. The Jesuit professors that I worked with made it clear to me

that I was free to teach and do research on whatever I liked. I never felt

any kind of coercion, and for the most part the other professors did not

know what I was teaching in the classroom. There are a few schools where

professors have to sign a statement that they will not teach anything that

contradicts the Bible. To my knowledge, these schools do not teach Hinduism

at all and I doubt whether any Hindu students go there. So I am not sure

exactly how the American academy is "controlled" by Christian

organizations. On the other hand, there are a few scholars out there who

are avowedly Christian (Francis Clooney S.J. comes to mind) and yet whose

scholarship is quite sympathetic to the tradition he studies.

 

As far as the "other religions" of Marxism, feminism, etc., again, I

wouldn't read too much into this. My own work has been influenced by Mar

xist thought and yet I am still going to celebrate Ganesha Caturthi with my

family tonight. I also try to provide a feminist perspective as a part of

my Hinduism class. I think that there is nothing wrong in pointing out that

there is oppression of women, so long as it is also pointed out that this

oppression is a contingent phenomena and not the essence of Hinduism. I do

not see why being a Hindu Feminist should be a contradiction in terms any

more than being a Christian Feminist. All of this brings me back to one of

the points I made in my last posting. It is possible to be critical of

one's religion while still adhering to it.

 

Do I give my students the same kind of education in Hinduism that they

would receive in India? No. Do I try to get them to think critically about

Hinduism? Yes. And yet, I have many of my Hindu students tell me that they

were never interested in going to temple until after they took my class.

That might be the best we can hope for.

 

I am going to stop here. I have probably gotten myself in enough trouble by

now. My apologies in advance if I have offended anyone further.

 

Joseph Walser

Tufts University

[Guest guest]

I would like to draw your attention to this response on Sulekha.

concerning "WHAT MANY PSYCHOANALYSTS THINK OF WESTERNERS EROTICIZING

NON-WESTERN SPIRITUAL TRADITIONS." If the link below does not work,

please see Readers' Comments entry #203.

 

http://www.sulekha.com/allcomments.asp?type=column&cid=239156#240462

 

 

Warm regards,

 

 

r

[Guest guest]

To an extent the publication of the article itself was an anti-

climax. After reading about many 'threats' and 'personal safety', I

was expecting something something like Last Temptation of Christ or

Satanic Verses.

 

This is not to say I disagree with the article with itself. It is

call for fairness and empathy in studying Hinduism in American

academia.

 

But to think that Wendy or her 'children' are going to lose sleep

over this article is overstating the importance. While the article

itself is a repackaging of what other scholors like Witzel or Sil say

about some academics, W and her 'chldren' are already inured against

these kinds of criticisms. America is not arabia. The vested

interests are solidly ensconsed in their place and it is a long and

arduous struggle.

 

While I agree with the thrust of the articlearticle, it is not the

one to set Mississippi on fire as was reported.

[Guest guest]

Namaskaaram.

I can see your point, but I don't quite understand what exactly you mean when

you say <America is not arabia. The vested interests are solidly ensconsed in

their place and it is a long and arduous struggle.>

Kindly explain.

VVRaman

 

-

V.C.Vijayaraghavan

INDOLOGY

Tuesday, September 10, 2002 2:23 PM

Re: [Y-Indology] On the Sulekha Posting

 

 

 

 

To an extent the publication of the article itself was an anti-

climax. After reading about many 'threats' and 'personal safety', I

was expecting something something like Last Temptation of Christ or

Satanic Verses.

 

This is not to say I disagree with the article with itself. It is

call for fairness and empathy in studying Hinduism in American

academia.

 

But to think that Wendy or her 'children' are going to lose sleep

over this article is overstating the importance. While the article

itself is a repackaging of what other scholors like Witzel or Sil say

about some academics, W and her 'chldren' are already inured against

these kinds of criticisms. America is not arabia. The vested

interests are solidly ensconsed in their place and it is a long and

arduous struggle.

 

While I agree with the thrust of the articlearticle, it is not the

one to set Mississippi on fire as was reported.

 

 

Sponsor

 

 

 

indology

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

INDOLOGY, "V.V. Raman" <vvrsps@r...> wrote:

> Namaskaaram.

> I can see your point, but I don't quite understand what exactly

you mean when you say <America is not arabia. The vested interests

are solidly ensconsed in their place and it is a long and arduous

struggle.>

> Kindly explain.

> VVRaman

 

 

Perhaps my wording is confusing. These two sentences don't follow

from each other and they stand separately.

 

 

America is not a culture or country where personal threats or safety

is at stake while attacking academics or academical system. This is

unlike Arab countries where academics who go against popular

prejudices or powers-that-be have had a rough time.

 

 

In the US,the academic system esp. concerning religion is too supple

and the system mature enough not to be rocked by Mr.Malhotra's

essay. That is what I meant and I think putting in 'vested

interests' was inappropriate, on second thoughts.

 

Mr.Malhotra's intention of Hindu studies treated being empathically

and to a large extent being run by Hindus themselves has got a long

way to go and there are no quickfixes around the corner.

 

 

 

> -

> V.C.Vijayaraghavan

> INDOLOGY

> Tuesday, September 10, 2002 2:23 PM

> Re: [Y-Indology] On the Sulekha Posting

>

>

>

>

> To an extent the publication of the article itself was an anti-

> climax. After reading about many 'threats' and 'personal

safety', I

> was expecting something something like Last Temptation of Christ

or

> Satanic Verses.

>

> This is not to say I disagree with the article with itself. It

is

> call for fairness and empathy in studying Hinduism in American

> academia.

>

> But to think that Wendy or her 'children' are going to lose

sleep

> over this article is overstating the importance. While the

article

> itself is a repackaging of what other scholors like Witzel or

Sil say

> about some academics, W and her 'chldren' are already inured

against

> these kinds of criticisms. America is not arabia. The vested

> interests are solidly ensconsed in their place and it is a long

and

> arduous struggle.

>

> While I agree with the thrust of the articlearticle, it is not

the

> one to set Mississippi on fire as was reported.

>

>

> Sponsor

>

>

>

>

>

> indology-

>

>

>

> Terms of

Service.

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

INDOLOGY, "V.C.Vijayaraghavan" <vij@b...> wrote:

> America is not a culture or country where personal threats or

safety

> is at stake while attacking academics or academical system. This is

 

 

This is not entirely true. It pays to be vigilant. Some years ago I

wrote a review on Usenet of a concert by a famous Indian musician.

There was a very menacing and threatening message on my answering

machine by one of the ustad's American students. Of course, I refuse

to be intimidated by such thuggery. At any rate, the point is that

when big careers, money and reputations are at stake, America and

Americans are not exempt from laws govering human beings. Especially

true when someone is trying to shake up an entrenched mafia-like

system.

 

 

> Mr.Malhotra's intention of Hindu studies treated being empathically

> and to a large extent being run by Hindus themselves has got a long

> way to go and there are no quickfixes around the corner.

 

This is a gratuitous and trite utterance. I don't think Malhotra or

any of us think there are going to be quick fixes.

 

Warm regards,

 

 

r

[Guest guest]

INDOLOGY, "Rajan P. Parrikar" <parrikar> wrote:

> INDOLOGY, "V.C.Vijayaraghavan" <vij@b...> wrote:

> > America is not a culture or country where personal threats or

> safety

> > is at stake while attacking academics or academical system. This

is

>

>

> This is not entirely true. It pays to be vigilant. Some years ago

I

> wrote a review on Usenet of a concert by a famous Indian musician.

> There was a very menacing and threatening message on my answering

> machine by one of the ustad's American students. Of course, I

refuse

> to be intimidated by such thuggery. At any rate, the point is that

> when big careers, money and reputations are at stake, America and

> Americans are not exempt from laws govering human beings.

Especially

> true when someone is trying to shake up an entrenched mafia-like

> system.

 

 

"laws govering human beings" ? That is news to me. We can't stretch

words like mafia too much because the analogy does not hold. Which

mafia prevented Indians from appointing a committed Hindu as a Hindu

professor after raising money among themselves?

 

 

 

>

>

> > Mr.Malhotra's intention of Hindu studies treated being

empathically

> > and to a large extent being run by Hindus themselves has got a

long

> > way to go and there are no quickfixes around the corner.

>

> This is a gratuitous and trite utterance. I don't think Malhotra

or

> any of us think there are going to be quick fixes.

>

> Warm regards,

 

 

You miss the point. Since you are not planning a sudden mafia-like

overthrow, but a long-term evolution of attitudes , nobody feels to

be threatened and the scenario you painted in the first para is very

remote.

[Guest guest]

INDOLOGY, "V.C.Vijayaraghavan" <vij@b...> wrote:

> "laws govering human beings" ? That is news to me. We can't stretch

 

I meant to say "laws governing human behaviour." If that is also

news to you, so be it.

 

 

Warm regards,

 

 

r