Authentic , 'Aestheticized', & 'New Age' Tantra: Part 1

[Guest guest]

Hello again, Mahahradanatha:

 

Thanks for your response. I can only reiterate what I said before.

The power of people like Malhotra is that their rage appeals to the

emotions not the intellect, and -- just as with propogandists

anywhere -- the ease of being able to criticize, denigrate and

dismiss something without examining it and deciding for yourself. I

don't mind an honest exchange of ideas; but I have little sympathy

for one who uses Malhotra's strategy of insulting (a la "Wendy's

children," etc.) and shouting over opponents rather than engaging in

an honest and open debate.

 

*** But i know that there is a long tradition of ridiculing indian

philosophy and religion amongst western scholars. ***

 

There is also a long tradition of respect. I would argue that White

belongs to this second tradition.

 

*** If we look at Abhinavaguptas versatile genius, the only

comparable person in the west i can think of would be Leonarda da

Vinci. ***

 

Certainly, and as stated the so-called "attack" on Adhinavagupta

appears only in Malhotra's creative edits, not in White's actual

book -- but of course, to know that you would have to read the book,

which is more than most people will bother to do. And that is what

the Malhotras of this world count on.

 

*** i must say i can understand and share Malhotras anger and his

statement: He (white) tries to undermine Hinduism's spiritual claims

and renders its philosophical texts as fake or hypocritical. ***

 

With all due respect to you (but not to Malhotra), that is

unadulterated bullshit. In fact, when I discussed this passage with

Sri Bhasurananda, his reply was that he found White's work to be

meticulously researched, entirely accurate, and not at all insulting

to him as an Indian, a Hindu or a Kaula. But hey, that's no fun, is

it?

 

*** During my studies i never gained the impression that the

differing traditions followed each other in a timeline ... ***

 

Nor do I; certainly not a linear, perfectly uniform timeline. As you

say there were many cults of many orientations, freely influencing

and borrowing from one another -- a process that continues to this

day. If I seemed to say otherwise, I apologize for not expressing

myself clearly.

 

*** Thats why i belive Malhotras argument that White is a typical

fualist blunt western scholar, that lacks the appreciation and

vision of peaceful coexistence of the different paths and their

interconnection is correct. Thats why his citing of Madhu

Khanna; "The Western approach that splits the erotic from the sacred

appears short sighted and deficient..." appears to me to hit the

mark. ***

 

I very much like Khanna's remark. She has a point. But White's work

is, in fact, almost an answer to Khanna -- an attempt to address the

shortcomings she perceives. On the contrary, Malhotra's argument is

not based on White's book, but rather on what he *wants* White's

book to represent. The book itself makes the subtle -- and often

simultaneous -- blending of influences quite clear in my view.

 

*** My mentioning that most probably White would count your teacher

and yourself (and of course also mine and me) amongst the new agers,

was only meant to serve one purpose, that the contents of a book,

and ones approvel or disapproval of the same is influenced by the

fact whether one perceives oneself on the receiving end of the

attack or the praise. ***

 

To which I can only restate my reply: This is a work of history. I

don not see any judgments (praise or disapproval) flying except

against those who deliberately or inadvertently misrepresent history

and expropriate cultural concepts out of context.

 

Again, that's the game of people like Malhotra, who operate on the

assumption that most people are too lazy to check the accuracy of

their assertions, or -- god forbid -- actually read the book for

themselves. And as Friedrich von Schiller once said, "Against

stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain."

 

*** But what would be th role White would praise? He does not seem

to favour Abhinavagupta, nor Avalons bengal masters, nor us western

traditional new agers:) ***

 

First, right or wrong I do not consider myself to be a "western

traditional new ager"; secondly (again, again) White does not pass

judgment on any of these people. He simply clarifies the contexts in

which their innovations arose.

 

*** i do not intend to defend all of Malhotras arguments, but to

dismiss him as being merely a fundamentalist is not justified. ***

 

It all depends on your definition of "fundamentalist." Certainly,

Malhotra's diatribe is laced with the ideas and rhetoric of

Hindutva. Now, that is not a put-down; I actually understand the

circumstances that gave rise to Hindutva and I can appreciate some

of its nobler aims, though explicitly not all of them.

 

Nonetheless, letting an obvious Hindu religious conservative like

Malhotra defend the Tantra is like enlisting Jimmy Swaggart or Billy

Graham (popular fundamentalist Christian preachers) to defend the

Gnostic Gospels!

 

*** as Malhotra puts it [White's book is] Bad scholarship, and i

would add belonging to the well-known tradition of western scholars

who delight in ridiculing indián masters and their genius. ***

 

With all due respect, Malhotra wouldn't know "bad scholarship" from

good if it bit him in the arse. ;-) As far as I can tell, his sole

definition of "bad scholarship" is any scholarship that doesn't

immediately reflect and advance his personal beliefs and agendas.

 

*** Not every indian or non-Indian like me, that is shocked by such

a blunt statement, typical of todays american scholarship, is a

hindu fundamentalist. ***

 

Again, the second part of this statement is an incredibly broad

rhetorical bash -- that "shocking" anti-Hindu statements

are "typical" of current "American scholarship." Come on. This is

the same kind of zero-sum, "if you're not 100% with us, then you're

100% against us" attitude that characterizes so much fundamentalist

thought. It shuts out debate, and encourages the kind of us versus

them thinking that has gotten the world into the mess it's in today.

 

Respectfully, respectfully!

 

DB

[Guest guest]

White happens to be the editor of many textbooks on Eastern religions and

mysticism, and while often the edited translations leave much to be desired,

he nonetheless maintains an even view of the subject, and as far as I have

ever been able to tell he does not ridicule his chosen topic of interest.

 

 

-

"Devi Bhakta" <devi_bhakta >

<>

Monday, July 17, 2006 2:45 PM

Re: Authentic , 'Aestheticized', & 'New Age'

Tantra: Part 1