Courtright strikes back

[Guest guest]

Elevating the Sacred

Little India

Sept. 3, 2007

 

By Paul Courtright

 

I thank Little India for the opportunity to respond to

Krishnan Ramaswamy's article in the last issue on his edited

collection, Invading the Sacred: An Analysis of Hinduism

Studies in America. Much of his article in the magazine

focused on my 1985 book, Ganesha: Lord of Obstacles,

Lord of Beginnings, alleging that many textual citations

were inaccurate and that the book's use of psychoanalytic

theory in the interpretation of Ganesha denigrated Hinduism

and was part of an overall hostile presentation of Hinduism

in America by scholars, colleges and universities,

publishers, and the media.

 

Vineeta Kalbag, in her review of Invading the Sacred titled

" Tresspassers Will Be Persecuted " in The Hindustan Times,

noted, " It is an angry book, but one where the anger is

neither focused nor fair. "

 

 

Before expressing my own view of Invading the Sacred, let

me address a couple of allegations in Ramaswamy's article.

He claims that my citations of Puranas regarding humans

and demons being " born from the divine rectum " is an error.

I don't have all the texts I consulted in my book available as

I write this, but let me quote at greater length one of the

sources I did use, from the Linga Purana (1.70.197-200).

" Thereafter he [brahma] was desirous of creating the four

groups, viz. Devas, Asuras, Pitrs and human beings. He

infused himself in the wasters. Even as he did so, even as he

assiduously meditated on creations, the particles of darkness

grew up in excess. Then out of his buttocks were produced

the Asuras. O Brahmins, the word 'asu' means vital breath.

Those born of the vital breath are called Asuras. " (The

Linga Purana, translated by A Board of Scholars. Delhi:

Motilal Banarsidass, 1973, p. 322-23).

 

Another allegation Ramaswamy makes is that I falsely

claim that Daksha committed incest with his daughter Sati.

Again, let me quote the source from the Devibhagavata

Purana (7.26-27), edited by B. D. Vasu. Vyasa is telling

relating the story to the Emperor Janamejaya.

 

" O King! Hear. I am describing to you the ancient history of

the burning of Sati. Once on a time, the famous Risi

Durvasa went to the bank of the river Jambu and saw the

Devi there. There he remained with his senses controlled

and began to repeat silently the root Mantra of Maya. Then

the Goddess of the Immortals, the Bhagavati was pleased

and gave the Muni a beautiful garland as her Prasada that

was on her neck, that emitted the sweet fragrance of

Makaranda (juice of flowers: Jasmine). Where upon the

bees were about to cluster. The Marharsi took it quickly and

placed it on his head. He then hurriedly went to see the

Mother to the place where Sati's Father, the Prajapati Daksa

was staying and bowed down to the feet of the Sati. The

Prajapati then asked him: -' " O Lord! Whose extraordinary

garland is this? How have you got this enchanting garland,

rare to the mortals on this earth!' The eloquent Maharsi

Durvasa then spoke to him with tears of love flowing from

his eyes:-' " O Prajapati! I have got this beautiful garland that

has no equal, as the Prasada (favour) of the Devi.' The

Prajapati asked that garland then from him. He, too,

thinking that there was nothing in the three worlds that

cannot be given to the devotee of the Sakti, gave the garland

to the Prajapati. He took that on his head; then placed it on

the nice bed that was prepared in the bedroom of the couple.

Being excited by the sweet fragrant smell of that garland in

the night, the Prajapati engaged in a sexual intercourse! O

King! Due to that animal action, the bitter enmity arose in

his mind towards Sankara and His Sati. He then began to

abuse Siva. O King! For that offence, the Sati resolved to

quite here body that was of Daska, to preserve the prestige

of the Sanatan Dharma of devotion to Her Husband burnt

Her body by the fires arising out of Yoga. The Sri Mad Devi

Bhagavatam. New York: AMS Press, 1974, p. 697-98.

 

 

The context of the story makes it clear that Daksa's

intercourse could only be with Sati, as she is the only female

mentioned. Other versions of the stories of Daksa and

Brahma's seduction of Sandhya - stories told in succession

in the Shiva Purana and other collections of narratives - sets

a wider context for the primal incest. The point of

discussing the story is not to denigrate Hinduism, but to call

attention to how the text presents the story of a " divine "

violation to create the precondition for a religious and moral

teaching about the dangers of erotic desire (symbolized by

the garland) and how the audience of the story can learn

from the mistakes of gods and heroes.

 

Now, I am not interested in engaging in footnote-wars over

a book that was published 25 years ago. If there are errors, I

regret them. They were not intentional and they were

certainly not part of a larger pattern of denigrating

Hinduism.

 

Beyond the question of " sloppy scholarship " there is the

issue of my applying psychoanalytic theory to Hindu

stories. What seems to have incensed the critics is not the

book as a whole - for indeed, they do not engage the

argument of the book as a whole - but a few fragments from

a few sentences from a 13-page discussion of

psychoanalytic interpretations of Ganesha's birth and

beheading story, which several Indian scholars had already

taken up. The other 261 pages are about Ganesha's

mythologies, ritual traditions, the festival in Maharashtra,

and one non-Hindu's attempt to bring an informed and

appreciative interpretation of this deity to his readers.

 

Of course, psychoanalytic theory is controversial in some

circles, but it also continues to be drawn upon by scholars

across a range of disciplines from anthropology, film

studies, history, philosophy, religion, and literature. Many

books have been published since Freud on interpretations of

Christian, Jewish, and Buddhist traditions from

psychoanalytic perspectives. Some people think

psychoanalysis as a theory is ludicrous and unscientific;

other people think it is insightful and illuminating. Indeed,

one of the most distinguished contemporary psychoanalytic

writers, Sudhir Kakar, is Indian and has a large following

internationally of appreciative readers.

 

Why psychoanalytic theory and Ganesha? When you have a

story like that of Ganesha - told for a couple of millennia

from ancient texts to contemporary comic books - a story of

a child created by his mother with her own hands from the

surface of her body, placed in the doorway to protect her

from intruders, confronted by a stranger who turns out to be

his father who cuts his head off and restores it with that of

an elephant, it would be irresponsible for a scholar not to

ask the (psychoanalytic) question: what is this story about?

Could the story offer an insight into the fundamental

dynamics of mother-child-father relations as they have been

imagined in India, and perhaps offer new perspectives to

those beyond its land of origin? Of course, the story has

many other meanings that may be drawn from the deep

reservoir of Vedic sacrificial tradition and rites of initiation -

the upanayana - of Hindu boys. I discuss some of these

angles of interpretation in the book as well.

 

All this fury that the critics have directed against this small

portion of my book strikes me as a case of - to quote

Shakespeare - " thou dost protest too much. " There is

something about a discussion of sexuality in relation to

Ganesha that has really gotten these critics burning red hot.

One psychoanalyst friend of mind quipped, " If they are that

upset, you must be onto something. " I can't help but think,

Ganesha, with his puckish sense of humor, is finding all this

quite amusing.

 

 

Ramaswamy raises the question about peer-review,

implying that my book was published without adequate

scholarly scrutiny. When I sent the manuscript to Oxford

University Press the editor sent it out for scholarly appraisal.

The anonymous reader made a number of helpful

suggestions and corrections. A year later a separate panel of

scholars reviewed the book when it was awarded a " best

first book " prize by the American Council of Learned

Societies, a national umbrella group of academic societies.

My book was further reviewed in conjunction with my

tenure and promotions at my university.

 

What is Invading the Sacred so angry about? The book

articulates a frustration stemming from a few ideologically

committed Hindu chauvinists failure to leverage influence in

how Hinduism is taught in American colleges and

universities. The book is parallel to the efforts last year in

California by some Hindu organizations to re-write social

science textbooks in the state school system, or efforts in

India to re-write Indian history textbooks to conform to

Hindu nationalist constructions of India's past.

 

It is simply false to claim that Hindus are excluded from the

academic study of religion in American universities. More

and more young Hindu American scholars are applying to

our programs. This is a good thing. But, the university is not

an ashram; it is a location of critical and appreciative study

of many religions: their texts, histories, practices, art, and

politics. In their admissions procedures American graduate

schools do not admit students on the basis of their religious

commitment and sentiments, but on their academic

achievement and potential. It is simply false to assert that

Hindu scholars are excluded from academic associations in

the United States. The American Academy of Religion has a

special section on the study of Hinduism, the steering

committee of which has included many Hindu scholars,

including Professor S.N. Balagangadhara, whose preface is

included in Invading the Sacred. It is simply false to claim

that there is a conspiracy to protect privileged non-Hindu

scholars.

 

The allegation that Hindus in America are having their

sacred tradition trashed in American universities is a

convenient untruth to buttress an effort on the part of a

number of Hindu-chauvinist organizations and leaders to

create a sense of victimization. The allegation is baseless

and unworthy. In my case, a few years ago, several persons

claiming to speak for the Hindu community met with my

dean (I urged him to meet with them) and insisted that

members of their community should be involved in faculty

recruitment in the teaching of Hinduism at my university.

Simply on the principle of academic freedom and

institutional autonomy no dean in her or his right mind

would concede such authority to any group alleging hurt

sentiments around any subject being taught.

 

Will the book generate the sort of debate and revolution in

the study of Hinduism that it asserts for itself? I have my

doubts. The claims at the base of the book are so bogus that

no reasonable person - Hindu or non-Hindu - will find them

persuasive. What and how Hinduism is taught in colleges

and universities in this country is not a state secret. Many

course outlines are available on the Web and course

descriptions appear in college and university catalogues.

 

Stepping back a bit from the heat emanating from this angry

book, there is something important to notice. Second

generation Hindu Americans - those who were born here

and have grown up here - face important questions about

how they will embrace their Hindu identity. America is not

India. The landscape for religious practice and affiliation is

very different here. The temples that have grown up around

America offer important centers for Hindu practice, and

help non-Hindus get a better and less exoticized

understanding of their Hindu friends and neighbors.

Scholarly organizations like DANAM: The Dharma

Association of North America (www.danam-web.org/) offer

new venues for philosophical and theological conversation

and publication.

 

In my own career I have been fortunate to witness and

participate in an extraordinary transformation. When I

began teaching courses on Hinduism in 1970, there were no

Indian Americans in my classes - indeed, not until the mid-

1980s. Over the years, more and more students of Hindu

heritage have taken courses with me. Last year I taught a

seminar of 13 students in which I was the only " white guy. "

It was one of my most enjoyable courses. In the 36 years I

have been teaching I have never received a complaint from

a Hindu student, nor has one come to my department chair

or other faculty member or university official to express

distress that her or his religion was being devalued,

denigrated, or damaged. Indeed, quite the opposite. Students

of Hindu backgrounds appreciate that their tradition is taken

seriously in the curriculum, and they embrace the

opportunity to study texts, rituals and arts of their own

religion in the context of the university. They find the

application of various theoretical approaches valuable and it

gives them a deeper appreciation of the heritage they share

with other Hindus.

 

I hope that the current inflammatory rhetoric of Invading the

Sacred, and similar polemical perspectives on Web sites will

burn out and more thoughtful readers will see behind the

book's claims to be a " fair and balanced " analysis and see it

for what it is: propaganda masking as scholarship.

 

We live in an age of identity politics and the politics of

sentiment. Religion often connects people with deep-seated

and volatile moods and motivations. Religion matters. A

more worthy enterprise for scholars and practitioners to

engage in is an open and generous discussion about religion,

in this context Hinduism. The university struggles to be a

free space for such open inquiry. Scholars struggle to be

genuinely fair and balanced. Practitioners seek respect and

recognition. These are each good things. Let's lower the

rhetorical temperature and get busy doing some constructive

and real work on understanding and representing this

extraordinarily rich, diverse, and complex religious

tradition.

 

Paul Courtright, professor of religion at Emory University,

is author of Ganesha: Lord of Obstacles, Lord of

Beginnings.

 

http://www.littleindia.com/news/135/ARTICLE/1857/2007-09-03.html

 

 

 

> , " drfmrls " <drfmrls@> wrote:

> >

> > Book Counters Academic Distortions of Hinduism in America

> >

> > By Francis C. Assisi

> >

> > URL of this page: http://www.indolink.com/displayArticleS.php?

> > id=071507063046

>