SV: [Y-Indology] Ganesh

[Guest guest]

Dear Dr. Fosse,

Here is a link, which has reproduced some of the statements made in

the book. I have not read the book yet.

 

Signatory Link : http://www.petitiononline.com/HSCULL/petition.html

 

 

 

With regards,

Dr. Markandeswar Panda

Department of Biochemistry

Univ. Texas Health Science Center

San Antonio, TX 78229-3900

U.S.A.

Lars Martin Fosse wrote:

 

> What exactly is it that is so objectionable about the book?

>

> I found the following description of it on Amazon:

>

> Synopsis

> The elephant-headed god Gane'sa is one of the most important and popular

> gods throughout India and Hindu Southeast Asia. His image is found in

> virtually every Hindu home. In this detailed and comprehensive study of

> Gane'sa, Paul Courtright looks at the mythology and the psychological

> meanings of this god, his rituals and festivals, and the part played by

> Gane'sa in contemporary Indian politics. The American Council of Learned

> Societies named "Gane'sa" the best first book in the history of

> religions published in 1985.

>

> I am just curious.

>

> Lars Martin Fosse

>

>

> Dr.art. Lars Martin Fosse

> Haugerudvn. 76, Leil. 114,

> 0674 Oslo - Norway

> Phone: +47 22 32 12 19 Fax: +47 850 21 250

> Mobile phone: +47 90 91 91 45

> E-mail: lmfosse

> DO NOT OPEN UNEXPECTED ATTACHMENTS.

> MY EMAIL ADDRESS IS BEING ABUSED BY

> MALICIOUS OPERATORS.

>

>

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

INDOLOGY, "Lars Martin Fosse" <lmfosse@o...>

wrote:

> What exactly is it that is so objectionable about the book?

>

> I found the following description of it on Amazon:

>

> Synopsis

 

I learnt about a petition circulating on this book today. I have not

read the book personally, nor have signed the petition so far as I

would like to read the book forst. However, FYI, the petition

contains the following quotations from that book -

 

"Its (Ganesha's ) trunk is the displaced phallus, a caricature of

Shiva's linga.

It poses no threat because it is too large, flaccid, and in the wrong

place to

be useful for sexual purposes" (page 121)

"So Ganesha takes on the attributes of his father but in an inverted

form, with

an exaggerated limp phallus-ascetic and benign whereas Siva is "hard"

(un-dhvalinga) erotic and destructive." (page 121)

"Both in his behavior and iconographic form Ganesha resembles in some

aspects,

the figure of the eunuch,…Ganesha is like eunuch guarding the women

of the

harem." (page 111)

"Although there seems to be no myths or folk tales in which Ganesha

explicitly

performs oral sex; his insatiable apetite for sweets may be

interpreted as an

effort to satisfy a hunger that seems inappropriate in an otherwise

ascetic

disposition, a hunger having clear erotic overtones." (page 111)

"Ganesha's broken tusks, his guardian's staff, and displaced head can

be

interpreted as symbols of castration." (page 111)

 

Now, some academics are saying that the quotations have been taken

out of context. I personally wonder how ny context (except if

Courtright cited them as a purvapaksha) could justify such a

statements, Freud or no Freud.

 

So I would slightly disagree with V V Raman and argue that such books

merely reflect the perversity of the author, not just insensitivity.

 

BTW, defenders of the author are now in turn threatening MLBD that

they will boycott the publisher and will not submit any manuscripts

in future and will withdraw manuscripts submitted to him and under

publication. I find this much more intimidating than the petition. It

is plain academic terrorism.

 

For that matter, how would the RISA-jans feel if Freudian techniques

were applied to the author ('He suffers from Penis-Envy vis a vis Sri

Ganesha) or to them as a group ('Risajans, who are defending the

author of the book have a secret wish to be a part of a swinger's

club')?

 

Vishal

[Guest guest]

Dear V. V. Raman,

 

Sorry about a somewhat belated response.

 

> 2. I feel that in this age of interfaith conflicts and

> inter-cultural misunderstandings, it is the moral

> responsibility of scholars to help bring about greater mutual

> understanding, appreciation, and respect among the cultures

> and traditions of the world, rather than emphasize aspects

> which can only serve to increase mutual misunderstanding and

> disrespect.

 

This is of course what we should ideally do. But perceptions of other

religions by outsiders are always different from the perceptions of

those who are inside the religion. Things do not get better if two

religions take opposite positions on social and moral issues. Then

mutual understanding is difficult. The best thing we can hope for, is an

agreement between adherents of various religions not to use violence

against people they disagree with, and a tacit mutual understanding that

we should not wilfully and knowingly step on each other's toes for no

good reason at all. But religious history shows us that this is a

difficult proposition indeed. Some religions are "born to conquer", and

they are in no mood for peaceful chitchat. Another problem is that

modern civic rights and religious values don't match, with the

inevitable result that the state and adherents of minority religions

collide. Here, the ombudsperson for equality between the sexes is on the

warpath targeting both Christian sects and Muslim congregations for

discrimination of women.

 

> 4. It is ironic that in spite of more than a century and a

> half of dedicated Western Indology, the understanding of

> Hinduism among the educated in the West is at an appallingly

> deplorable level. So many Hindus rightly wonder what the

> goal of this scholarly enterprise is all about.

 

I think this is slightly unfair. The great problem is that since the

turn of the 19th century, educated Europeans and the public at large

have simply not been very interested in Islam or Hinduism. The study of

these religions have been for a few interested souls, and their job was

not to educate a public that couldn't care less. Today, the situation is

different. Now the problem is also: which version should be fed to the

public at large? The "indigenous" one, or the academic one - which is

likely to differ in many ways from the "indigenous" versions.

 

> It is also interesting that few Western scholars publish (or

> should I say, dare to publish) anything on the seamy side of

> Islamic culture and Quar'anic pronouncements. Does one "shut

> up and look politely the other way" because the subject is

> not that interesting or perhaps because of an instinct for

> survival, I am not sure.

 

I believe this is primarily an American phenomenon. In Norway (and I

believe in the rest of Europe) Muslims have been criticized relentlessly

since the Rushdie affair, when they managed to lose the sympathy of the

liberal urban class in less than 24 hours. Yesterday, our minister for

municipal affairs, a typical Nordic iron lady with one death threat to

her "credit" so far, demanded that Muslims "modernize" and take note of

the fact that they are living in Europe. Here, it's the Hindus who don't

get any attention.

 

Best wishes,

 

Lars Martin Fosse

 

 

 

Dr.art. Lars Martin Fosse

Haugerudvn. 76, Leil. 114,

0674 Oslo - Norway

Phone: +47 22 32 12 19 Fax: +47 850 21 250

Mobile phone: +47 90 91 91 45

E-mail: lmfosse

DO NOT OPEN UNEXPECTED ATTACHMENTS.

MY EMAIL ADDRESS IS BEING ABUSED BY

MALICIOUS OPERATORS.

[Guest guest]

Dear Lars,

 

I have read some of your reasonings and some of the postings on

this book elsewhere. They appear to me as attempts to rationalize

a misconcieved and half-baked scholarship under the pretext of academic

exploration. I have also read some of your assertions of various kinds

and they also appear ill-cooked to pass the tradition of scholarship.

 

The question is what's knowledge and what's scholarship. The earth

can never look round if you stand on any ground or a tree or a mountain.

It's a much deeper perception and more wholesome observation that

can help you understand the truthfulness of a sight. Similar is

the origin of life and the origin of universe. When two groups of

people make different interpretations to the same sight, one should

ask the other what one sees that the other does not. At this point,

the academic robes come in and present that they see it right.

This becomes the difference between the faith-based thinking through

living and the assumed academic thinking of interpreting pictures.

 

I do not have much idea how deeply a general academic scholar is really

indulged in faith-based research. I have met a very small sample.

It's not impressive. The depth, analysis, comprehension and the

intelligence to interpret are rather shallow and limited. There is

an urge to publish and possibly there is a market. People in India

have never analyzed their own story well and hence some of the material

published goes out under the guise of readable knowledge. Ignorance

leads to production of trash and with various shades of liberalism

the trash appears in people's book shelves. This is both convenient

and opportunistic in the timeline of the earth's civilization. This

has happened before in different situations.

 

Such processing has led to the formation of a new militant group in India,

which is unfortunate for the country. This is not a welcome event

for millions of Indians who have developed a lifestyle of tolerance

irrespective of the faith they profess. The faith-based academics

do not get awed by the sustenance of the nation through hundreds of

faiths, but expose their ignorance to compare an icon to an object.

The faith scholars do not wish to research who Siva was and if clothing

was invented when he lived. They are stuck with a picture and have

the inability to date it either through science or intuition.

 

What I see is a very formative period of research in Indian Studies

with some asserting "facts" to claim security in their position and

possibly funding. Whether the interestd individuals can really

come to the plate and look at the sky is debatable and has not

happened. India itself has suffered since it prepares more engineers

for service tasks than to support learning about its own soil and

traditions. We will all do better to Indology and Indian Studies

if we objectively look at our own scholarship and compare to the

production of knowledge in the world's history.

 

Best regards,

 

Bijoy Misra

 

 

On Wed, 5 Nov 2003, Lars Martin Fosse wrote:

 

> Dear V. V. Raman,

>

> Sorry about a somewhat belated response.

>

> > 2. I feel that in this age of interfaith conflicts and

> > inter-cultural misunderstandings, it is the moral

> > responsibility of scholars to help bring about greater mutual

> > understanding, appreciation, and respect among the cultures

> > and traditions of the world, rather than emphasize aspects

> > which can only serve to increase mutual misunderstanding and

> > disrespect.

>

> This is of course what we should ideally do. But perceptions of other

> religions by outsiders are always different from the perceptions of

> those who are inside the religion. Things do not get better if two

> religions take opposite positions on social and moral issues. Then

> mutual understanding is difficult. The best thing we can hope for, is an

> agreement between adherents of various religions not to use violence

> against people they disagree with, and a tacit mutual understanding that

> we should not wilfully and knowingly step on each other's toes for no

> good reason at all. But religious history shows us that this is a

> difficult proposition indeed. Some religions are "born to conquer", and

> they are in no mood for peaceful chitchat. Another problem is that

> modern civic rights and religious values don't match, with the

> inevitable result that the state and adherents of minority religions

> collide. Here, the ombudsperson for equality between the sexes is on the

> warpath targeting both Christian sects and Muslim congregations for

> discrimination of women.

>

> > 4. It is ironic that in spite of more than a century and a

> > half of dedicated Western Indology, the understanding of

> > Hinduism among the educated in the West is at an appallingly

> > deplorable level. So many Hindus rightly wonder what the

> > goal of this scholarly enterprise is all about.

>

> I think this is slightly unfair. The great problem is that since the

> turn of the 19th century, educated Europeans and the public at large

> have simply not been very interested in Islam or Hinduism. The study of

> these religions have been for a few interested souls, and their job was

> not to educate a public that couldn't care less. Today, the situation is

> different. Now the problem is also: which version should be fed to the

> public at large? The "indigenous" one, or the academic one - which is

> likely to differ in many ways from the "indigenous" versions.

>

> > It is also interesting that few Western scholars publish (or

> > should I say, dare to publish) anything on the seamy side of

> > Islamic culture and Quar'anic pronouncements. Does one "shut

> > up and look politely the other way" because the subject is

> > not that interesting or perhaps because of an instinct for

> > survival, I am not sure.

>

> I believe this is primarily an American phenomenon. In Norway (and I

> believe in the rest of Europe) Muslims have been criticized relentlessly

> since the Rushdie affair, when they managed to lose the sympathy of the

> liberal urban class in less than 24 hours. Yesterday, our minister for

> municipal affairs, a typical Nordic iron lady with one death threat to

> her "credit" so far, demanded that Muslims "modernize" and take note of

> the fact that they are living in Europe. Here, it's the Hindus who don't

> get any attention.

>

> Best wishes,

>

> Lars Martin Fosse

>

>

>

> Dr.art. Lars Martin Fosse

> Haugerudvn. 76, Leil. 114,

> 0674 Oslo - Norway

> Phone: +47 22 32 12 19 Fax: +47 850 21 250

> Mobile phone: +47 90 91 91 45

> E-mail: lmfosse

> DO NOT OPEN UNEXPECTED ATTACHMENTS.

> MY EMAIL ADDRESS IS BEING ABUSED BY

> MALICIOUS OPERATORS.

>

>

>

>

> indology

>

>

>

> Your use of is subject to

>

>

[Guest guest]

Markandeswar Panda <panda wrote:

 

| Here is a link, which has reproduced some of the statements made in

| the book. I have not read the book yet.

|

| Signatory Link : http://www.petitiononline.com/HSCULL/petition.html

 

This link will not work, because the petition has been taken off the

active list at www.petitiononline.com, as of Nov 5th. I don't know if the

site has an archive of discontinued petitions.

 

The petition was not addressed to presumed principals such as the author

(Courtright) or the publishers (Oxford University Press 1985 and Motilal

Banarsidass 2001). It was addressed to various authorities calling on

them to take steps to secure an apology, commit corrections and suppress

the present form of the book; in short, a call for patently censorious

action.

 

That the petition has been taken down following only MLBD's retraction may

be significant. I would hope that the full text of the petition, rather

than the excerpts from the book, were posted to mailing lists, websites

and other such outlets for publicity. The only copy I've seen so far is

this one:

 

http://www.sandiego.edu/theo/risa-l/archive/msg07216.html