Hindus Under Siege – The Way Out

[wundermonk]

I have never understood why Western Academia is interested in Indian history/philosophy. How many faculty members in Indian Academia research the history of the West? What would the relevance of such research be given that one is so geographically distant from the culture/ethos/religion/philosophy that one is researching?

Now, there are research departments in the US that tend to produce research output on Indian Philosophy. University of Hawaii comes to mind - the university also publishes the Journal of Indian Philosophy/Philosophy East and West (I dont remember which exactly) where I have found top-class articles on Indian Philosophy. But why would you research Indian Philosophy unless you find it superior to other philosophies? If you DO find Indian Philosophy superior to other philosophies, why would you be so anti-Hindu/India as some of these Witzels, Donigers, et al?

Witzel, is apparently a professor of Sanskrit studies. Why would I, an Indian, be a professor of Hebrew Studies in the Indian Institute of Science? Why would I publish a book saying that the Jews dont have a claim on Palestine Biblically? Why would I be a virulent anti-semite? Something doesnt click.

[Sahasranama]

I have never understood why Western Academia is interested in Indian history/philosophy.

It is an escape valve for c-rate scholars who were unable to make any significant contribution in any other field. In Indology you can publish any nonsense and call it research. You can even earn your PhD by taking a video camera and filming some undocumented religious ceremony in India and take credit for discovering it.

[Eastern Mind]

I have never understood why Western Academia is interested in Indian history/philosophy. How many faculty members in Indian Academia research the history of the West? What would the relevance of such research be given that one is so geographically distant from the culture/ethos/religion/philosophy that one is researching?

Vannakkam: Personally, I think its a leftover from the crusades, and history of criticising India and Hinduism. When western scholars first arrived in India, they were just amazed at the religiosity of the place.

I went to an interfaith lecture at one of my teacher conferences a few years back, more as an observer, to see what they were saying about us. The presenter, a Catholic father, first asked, "Which country on the planet is the most religious in terms of time spent, and number of people?" Nobody got the answer (India) so he had to tell them. I just say this to illustrate how little the west gets us.

So my theory is historical jealousy as the root cause. The scholars and religious ones in history realised the only way they could maintain their evangelical nature in their own religion was to contrast and compare, but only in the one-sided way of putting the other one down. So that's how it started, as straight up jealousy, and the fear that westerners would come along, immediately see the vast superiority of Eastern faiths in logic, in practice, in getting along, in humanity, in ecology, etc. etc. So they figured they'd better do damage control, in order to keep their own flock. Damage control means finding all the little picky things you can about a faith, and distorting them, blowing them out of proportion, etc. and getting back to your own flock way before the Hindus can.

Over time others continued in the tradition of the bash, and so we have it today, in high places.

The California textbook controversy was a case in point, and resulted in Himalayan Academy producing one, called 'The History of Hindu India" (bold mine) for that's what it really is. You can't separate India's history from Hinduism. Still the Hindus didn't get all they wanted from the California curricula committee because Witzel and others objected vehemently to the truth being told. (obviously) .

But yes, I think the cause is straight forward jealousy and insecurity. You can see it in the body language of these guys and gals. They're really just trying to convince themselves, because somewhere deep inside their minds (very deep) they know ours is the superior faith.

Sorry for the rant ... just my morning conjecture.

Aum Namasivaya

[Sahasranama]

The California textbook controversy was a case in point, and resulted in Himalayan Academy producing one, called 'The History of Hindu India" (bold mine) for that's what it really is. You can't separate India's history from Hinduism. Still the Hindus didn't get all they wanted from the California curricula committee because Witzel and others objected vehemently to the
Aum Namasivaya

Now you mention it, the book is available online for free. I will check it out.
http://www.hinduismtoday.com/modules...php?wfc_cid=20

[charitra]

“But yes, I think the cause is straightforward jealousy and insecurity.”-EM

I came to that conclusion long time ago.Europe , instead of developing its own belief system, devoid of any religiosity for eternity had lamely imported a ramshackle faith from a desert corner of west asia. Every trick in the book was applied to rub this inadequate faith on all europeans, force and connivance remained the major means to accomplish the goal ( I was watching Borjias TV series these couple of years).Now that the westerners are stuck with this inadequate doctrinalconstruct (Acharya David Frawley) they have no choice but ‘somehow’ keep it floating. Bash other existing faiths and rate yours higher is the only leftover option for them. But then as information became available much easier in recent decades and more importantly that westerners started to have a critical outlook about life and philosophy, they pushed away the misinforming pastors and started exploring these distant faiths without bias or agenda. Most westerners became disinterested in their born faith, a tiny fraction moved on and explored dharmic faiths and remained happy campers there.

There is a serious case for introspection here. Why an Indologist like say Doniger turns hostile to Hinduism, we can quote a few more names here. Sita sings blues fame Nina Paley has an agenda beyond all doubts- she was dumped by a hindu man and that resulted in her taking revenge on his faith instead. Likewise, a hindu must have rubbed Doniger on the wrongside and the jewish woman wrote a distorted history of Hinduism (calling it an alternate history). Antihindu sentiments overpowering these once serious indophiles (hinduphileis more accurate) may have everything to do with their personal experiences with a few bad hindus and has nothing to do with the great faith itself. Take home message is that hindus must shed their suspicion and be warm and welcoming to those who come knocking at the door of the faith. We simply cant separate (bad)behavior of hindus from Hinduism.
We cant change the Billy Grahams and Pat Robertsons ever, who gleefully spread misinformation about Hinduism, but then at least we can help stop creating more Nina Paleys and possibly Donigers with some sensible conduct on our part. If you want to pick on someone please go argue with the likes of Ramachandra Guha, who says he is from a pujari family and relentlessly badmouths hindus, and is happily making loads of money doing so!! Namaste.

[Eastern Mind]

Vannakkam: Academia is really difficult to change. Its fill of cliques, like literary publishing, politics, and a few more. So a person gets a doctorate by being 'peer-reviewed'. In other words, you tow the party line or don't get your doctorate. So the club controls new members, and in this way maintain the status quo. So academia is almost lost cause. Fortunately, as charitra says, Everyman can actually think these days, and can go beyond academia to more legitimate sources for information, the Hindus themselves. But we need more information just 'out there' so there is at least a choice.

In literary publishing, you have to write a certain literary style (full of metaphor, obscure language, vague ideas, uncertain plots, depression, weird sexuality, etc. or else your peers consider you a buffoon, because they're all too 'smart' (read egotistical) for lay material. Tough club to break into, but who really wants to?

Aum Namasivaya

[charitra]

........... Tough club to break into, but who really wants to? Aum Namasivaya

We can throw in an open challenge to the likes of Witzel and Doniger 'to say a few lines on weather in Boston and Chicago during winter times, all in sanskrit'. Then their Sanskrit proficiency will be disclosed to the world in no time. To ask them to translate vedic verses, on the other hand, is too much of a work for these ‘ sanskrit scholars’. Get the standards of sanskrit professors in the west?

Here is a link for a short and complex book review piece on the latest work of Konrad Elst , an Indophile, you all might enjoy. There are many westerners who genuinely bleed for the hindus, believe me.

http://www.dailypioneer.com/sunday-edition/sundayagenda/books-reviews/109262-hindus-and-their-enemies.html

[Sahasranama]

...but then at least we can help stop creating more Nina Paleys and possibly Donigers with some sensible conduct on our part.

You are shifting the blame towards Hindus. Somehow Hindus are responsible for the Donigers and Paleys? What nonsense.

You are using the same argument Christians and Muslims use when their religion gets criticised. "We get blamed for the few bad apples." How do you know that the man who dumped Nina Paley was a bad apple? He may have had very good reasons to dump that hag. Why do you think some bad Hindu must have tipped of Doniger to become an anti Hindu vermin? So for every anti Hindu academician, there must have been some very bad bad Hindu stepping on their toes?

When should we send out the memo to all Hindus not to step on the toes of academicians?

[philosoraptor]

I have never understood why Western Academia is interested in Indian history/philosophy. How many faculty members in Indian Academia research the history of the West? What would the relevance of such research be given that one is so geographically distant from the culture/ethos/religion/philosophy that one is researching?

Now, there are research departments in the US that tend to produce research output on Indian Philosophy. University of Hawaii comes to mind - the university also publishes the Journal of Indian Philosophy/Philosophy East and West (I dont remember which exactly) where I have found top-class articles on Indian Philosophy. But why would you research Indian Philosophy unless you find it superior to other philosophies? If you DO find Indian Philosophy superior to other philosophies, why would you be so anti-Hindu/India as some of these Witzels, Donigers, et al?

Witzel, is apparently a professor of Sanskrit studies. Why would I, an Indian, be a professor of Hebrew Studies in the Indian Institute of Science? Why would I publish a book saying that the Jews dont have a claim on Palestine Biblically? Why would I be a virulent anti-semite? Something doesnt click.

Pranams,

I can probably offer a few insights:

1) The government gives these universities grant money with the idea that they are doing all sorts of research in the humanities. If government hand outs were not the rule, these scholars and the universities that employ them would have to go to the community for donations. The public treasury has become a public feeding trough.

2) There is an advantage to knowing other cultures when one formulates one's foreign policy, and Rajiv Malhotra in a couple of his writings alludes to American foreign policy towards India being colored by attitudes about India coming out of Western Academia.

3) Indian kids in Western private schools do study English and Shakespeare and all the other so-called "literature" of the West. Why? It's to prepare them to integrate with the Western world. In contrast, Americans study Indian culture the way a biologist would use a microscope to undertand the inner workings of a microorganism, or a vivisectionist would through dissection.

4) They don't research Indian philosophy because they find it "superior" in any way. Many academics are Left-wingers who see the State as an inherently virtuous institution, and their own roles as equalizers to expose alleged inequality. Thus, it goes without saying that a Western academic will only see casteism and sexism while the Hindu sees humility and devotion.

[dogra]

Can we launch cyber statements on truth of hinduism, via twotter, facebook, and question wendy doniger