Exposing Academic Hinduphobia
Title: Invading the sacred: An analysis of Hinduism Studies in America, edited by Krishnan Ramaswamy, Antonio de Nicolas, Aditi Banerjee, Rupa & Co. New Delhi, India. 2007.
Roots of the book
Like the multiplicity of the authors who have contributed to this volume, many factors have converged to create this book. These include a growing dissatisfaction with Western images of the non-West, the application of inappropriate methodology for understanding traditional worldviews, and the continued hegemony of the West even in matters that don’t concern it, such as what Hindus think about their puranas. Already in the first decades of the twentieth century, many Indian thinkers declared that Indic culture cannot be subjected to, much less analyzed through the blurred lens of Western rationality. Indeed it may be said more generally that scientific probing and cold rationality can never grasp the full significance of any living tradition.
But the primary catalyst for this book is Rajiv Malhotra, a thinker, scholar, idealist, and activist, besides having been a highly successful entrepreneur more than a decade ago. He is a thinker in that he reflects deeply on important issues, a scholar in that he is widely read in history and current cultural debates, an idealist in wanting to see a world where all cultures and civilizations receive equal and fair treatment; and an activist in that he has been participating in conferences, organizing meetings, giving lectures, writing provocative essays, and funding projects, all with one goal in mind: To correct what many people perceive as distortions and misrepresentations of the Hindu world and of Indic traditions in North America. In a single decade he has achieved more in this endeavor than many authors who are read and appreciated by countless people.
The book’s relevance and thesis
No matter how one reacts to it - and it is bound to touch large numbers of people, lay and scholarly - this book is likely to become a landmark in the history of India-related studies. It dissects a number of cases in which scholarly commentaries on aspects of Hindu thought, lore, and religion have been incorrect and offensive. It focuses primarily on the writings of six authors (of whom I will mention but three), and it argues that their callous misrepresentations are systemic to Eurocentric commentaries on other cultures.
The book is a strong and considered response to Western Freudian dissection of Hinduism, which, the authors contend, has missed the mark altogether. Essentially the thesis is this: Obsessed by the Freudian approach to life and literature, some American scholars have transformed Puranic mythopoesie into pure pornography, examined a highly revered spiritual personage's life in homo-erotic terms, and desecrated the lofty vision of a time-honored Hindu deity by reducing it to sexual allegory.
Aside from deliberately sinister analyses of scriptures, saints and symbols, the journalistic portrayal of Indic culture has often been in terms of cows and castes, superstitions and satis, daughters-in-law and dowries, monkeys and masalas. A growing number of English-reading Hindus in the West are not willing any longer to tolerate such selective sketches of a dynamic civilization to which they are heirs. Such writings have pushed many Hindus in America beyond what Eric Sharpe called the response threshold. Put differently, that's when the target group says, "Enough is enough!"
The chapters in the book are by different authors, and most of them are inspired by the extensive writings of Rajiv Malhotra. They examine the questionable, and to Hindus also objectionable, theses based on gross psychoanalytic interpretations. The chapters are replete with examples of unwarranted extrapolations, distorted interpretations, and ridiculous caricatures. Such writings may be okay for Western specialists who examine Hinduism like entomologists dissecting bees and grasshoppers. But they are confusing and misleading, distorted and dangerous.
New framework and clumsy translations
With the awakening that has come about after European de-colonization of the world, non-Western intellectuals have begun to challenge Western scholars on their own terms. They are no longer constrained by the subservient posture which a hundred years of British colonialism had inflicted on the Hindu psyche. Yet, the historical rancor against the West inevitably lingers on in the pages of this book.
Viewed as grades from professors for reports submitted by students, the appraisal of the Western scholars who are probed in this book are pretty low.
Considered as serious reactions of thoughtful people of the tradition, the chapters take on a punishing tone. The expertise or lack thereof in Sanskrit of Wendy Doniger, a scholar who has published extensively on the Vedas and the Puranas, is ridiculed with devastating quotes from a leading Harvard authority on Sanskrit. One of these is to the effect that an erudite Sanskritist could ”count 43 instances (in a hymn of 18 stanzas translated by Doniger) which are wrong or where others would easily disagree.“
Jeffrey Kripal, author of the now notorious Kali’s Child that received an award from the American Academy of Religion, is castigated for (among other things) his audacity to translate texts from Bengali, a language he had by no means mastered, in order to use them for his psychoanalytic evaluation of Sri Ramakrishna. We read of him (as judged by a renowned professor of psychology in Kolkata) that his ”understanding of a mystic such as Ramakrishna is ... a mishmash of psychoanalytic apples and oranges...“
Paul Courtright, a professor of Religious studies at Emory University, is severely taken to task not only for his callous indifference to millions of Hindus in publishing his obscene doctoral dissertation (which contains numerous Sanskrit errors) on the First God of Hindus, but also for his repeated misconstruing of the puranas on which much of his work on Ganesha is based. Referring to Courtright’s libidinous interpretation of the staff used in the upanayanam ceremony, the authors write, ”One would normally expect such interpretations from juveniles who have watched too many Hollywood movies. Not from an academic in an ‘award winning’ book.“
It may be unfortunate that the footnoted writings of some reputed scholars who have dedicated their professional careers to what they thought were serious studies of Hinduism have been mercilessly downgraded by scholars from within the Hindu tradition. But this was unavoidable. Sooner or later it had to come.
It must be emphasized that though here and there broad generalizations are made about Western views on Indian culture, this book is essentially about scholarly Freudian fantasies in the Hindu context. It details the history of these publications and the reactions of Hindus, as also the way American academia in this field handled those reactions. This was either by ignoring them or by ad hominem attacks on their critics. In this context, the book draws attention to media bias in mainstream American press, even in pieces written by Hindu journalists. It also reports that Hindu voices have sometimes been suppressed in the academy’s listserv. The broader theme of Eurocentrism is not of central concern here, though there are hints that the books cited represent the intrinsic urge of the West to look down upon the non-West. Indeed, that could well be the subject matter of another book.
Multiplicity of views among Hindus
I applaud this work for the thorough, systematic, and incisive critiques it has launched from Hindu perspectives on writings by people who have no empathy for the tradition about which they write profusely, basing themselves on book knowledge, a few field trips, and anthropological participation in Hindu festivities. But it should also be mentioned that not all Hindus share the views expressed in this volume. There are Hindu academics, both in India and abroad, who look upon some of these matters not very differently from how some Western scholars do. The person in charge of the American Academy of Religion’s listserv, who is said to be insensitive to Hindu perspectives, is a Hindu scholar. What this means is that there are vigorous intra-cultural debates on these issues, as there should be in any dynamic civilization. Unfortunately, those who speak for the tradition are sometimes caricatured as mindless fundamentalists wearing trousers instead of saffron robes, and skeptical non-traditionalists are sometimes looked upon as unwitting agents of the colonizers, pathetic victims of Thomas Babington Macaulay, by their respective ideological adversaries. Mutual name-calling only hurts the larger cause.
In any case, it is commendable that traditional Hindus by and large have not resorted to threats or violent behavior in their anger and frustration on reading some of the passages in the works analyzed here.
Possible impacts
This book could have three kinds of impact: From now on, many scholars, Hindu and non-Hindu, may become extremely cautious about what they publish on traditional Hindu themes. This could be viewed as a damper on freedom of expression, but also as an antidote to irresponsible commentaries. Another effect of the book could be that in the future there may be a decreasing number of non-Hindus who choose to pursue Hindu studies as a life-long commitment, because they may see this to be a rather risky profession. Opinions may differ as to whether this will or will not a major loss for Hindu scholarship. Or thirdly, the whole field may be influenced in positive ways if outsiders take seriously the insights and perspectives that insiders provide.
Given that throughout the book there is little of anything positive in Western scholarship and attitudes, I am somewhat concerned that those unfamiliar with the openness of Western societies and the positive contributions of Western science and enlightenment, and are legitimately ill-disposed towards America at the present time for various other reasons might get the impression that every American harbors Hinduphobia, and that all American scholars are working in cahoots to denigrate Hinduism and Hindu culture. I am not persuaded that this is the case.
As a Hindu American I am as much concerned about the demonization of all Americans as of all Hindus. There is potential for this despite the fact that the book explicitly limits itself to criticize one hermeneutics only, namely, Freudian psychoanalysis. However, while the book rightly exposes many intolerable aspects of Hindu studies in the U.S., it does not explicitly mention that there are also scholars in the United States who have genuine regard and respect for Hindu culture, religion, and civilization. In fact, some of them have contributed to this book. Others have embraced Hinduism themselves. Yet others are secular scholars who speak and write just as harshly or cold-bloodedly about Christ and the Virgin Mary. It is also true that a Hindu woman was recently elected President of the American Academy of Religion, Hindu scholars teach Hindu philosophy in American universities, one of them is Head of the Department of Religion in a Christian College in America, American universities host conferences on Hindu philosophy and Vedanta. The Metanexus Institute on Science and Religion elected a Hindu as their Senior Scholar prior to giving that honor in succeeding years to a Catholic theologian and a Jewish scholar. Many schools in America invite local Hindus to come and speak to their students about Hinduism, its worldviews, festivals, etc. There is a growing number of Interfaith Forums in the country where Hindus play important roles. Recently Hindu prayers were introduced in the American Senate.
There is no question but that courses on Hinduism taught in the United States could and should be vastly improved. This book is certain to contribute to that need. But it is also a fact that there are not many good textbooks for such courses written by competent Hindu scholars.
A note on the writing
Aside from the scholarly ammunition with which the fortress is stormed, every chapter in the book is written in exceptionally good English. The contents are cogently presented without being pedantic, the thesis is intelligently argued without being unduly offensive, the style is clear without being simplistic, and the language is elegant without being pompous. There are no awkward phrases or vernacularisms in the texts. English has certainly become yet another Indian language.
Concluding thoughts
This is, as I have noted earlier, undoubtedly an informative and provocative book, and it deserves to be read by all who are intellectually or emotionally affiliated to Hinduism. I hope that Western scholars will take due notice of it and don’t brush it off as the angry outburst of emotionally driven Hindus. It would be good if Indian scholars who may disagree with the contents or perspectives of the book also engage in healthy discussions on its basic thesis. This publication may be taken as an opportunity to enter into mutually respectful and productive dialogues and debates, which can only serve the greater cause of Hindu culture at this important juncture in our history.
The issues relating to the portrayal of Hinduism and the nature of Western scholarship on Hinduism will be gaining importance in the coming years. All parties will be losers if the current state of inimical tension is allowed to fester and persist for long, and the diverging perspectives between insiders and outsiders are looked upon by both groups as classic conflicts between devas and asuras. The book diagnoses a serious problem, but now we must take the next step, which would be to explore effective ways to enhance the understanding of Hinduism, and elevate the quality of Hindu scholarship in the West and in India
My hope is that all the dust of divisive disagreements will settle down some day, and then scholars will write with empathy and respect for their subject, be critical when necessary without being biased or prejudiced, and will be honored and judged, not on the basis of their ethnicity or religious background, nationality or popular appeal, but for the significance, value, and validity of what they write. This book may well be the first step towards that goal.
| In defence of Hindu gurus
When Marxist leader Brinda Karat attacks Swami Ramdev, she is not attacking Ramdev in particular, she is attacking Hinduism in general.
This guru or that guru makes no difference to her; she is against all gurus.
Other gurus might think they are safe, that Ramdev committed some sin for which he is paying. But one of them will be the next in the line of fire!
Hindu gurus are all vulnerable in today's India: The Kanchi Shankaracharya has already been hit. So has Satya Sai Baba. Amritanandamayi has to live under the constant shadow of a hostile Kerala Communist-dominated government. Dhirendra Brahmachari is dead and Sri Sri Ravi Shankar is periodically targeted as the 'Guru of the rich', the 'Glib Godman' etc.
May I be forgiven my arrogance, but what Indian gurus have to understand is that for Indian Communists, Hinduism is the Number 1 enemy. Mao called religion 'the opium of the people'. But for Indian Communists, what stands between their ambition for absolute power in India (and eventually the triumphant return of Communism in the world -- as Indian Communists believe) is the hold Hinduism has in the hearts of the rural people of India, who constitute 80 per cent of this country.
Yet, the humble farmer from Uttar Pradesh to Tamil Nadu has a natural understanding of the universality of God, who takes many names throughout the ages who could be Buddha, Jesus Christ, Ram or Mohammad. This humble farmer possesses the knowledge that there is a something deeper than the skin and the mind, and a life beyond death. This knowledge is inbred, it is not in his head, not even in his heart, but in his or her genes from generation to generation.
Of course, the English-speaking media is too happy to oblige Brinda Karat and come down hard on gurus with all kind of accusations.
Before Ramdev, they came down on the Kanchi Shankaracharya, before him on Osho, before him on Dhirendra Brahmachari. You can even go back to Sri Aurobindo, who was accused in the early 1900s by the moderate Congress-controlled press to be a 'fanatic', when he was only demanding total independence from the British long before Gandhi took it up.
Accusations against Hinduism of superstition, brainwashing, ritualistic ignorance, date back from British missionaries and have been taken up today by the Communists. Yet, Hinduism -- at least the Hinduism which goes beyond the rituals and becomes universal spirituality -- has nothing to do with superstition and conmanship: it is all about science, knowledge and light.
Look at Pranayama, a science that has known for thousands of years how to harness breath and use it for controlling the mind, for a better, more healthy, more spiritualised life. If you read Osho's books today, you find a lot of solid common sense, wisdom, even light.
Satya Sai Baba cannot have millions of disciples from the most humble to the Presidents of India without 'something' which is beyond superstition. So goes for Amritanandamayi, Sri Sri Ravi Shankar, Ramdev, or Guruma of Ganeshpuri.
And why should Brinda Karat target Ayurveda, the most ancient medical system in India still in practice, the first medicine to realise 3,000 years ago that plants and minerals offer the best cure, that many illnesses have a psychosomatic origin, the first to practice plastic surgery on patients?
In India today, every third shop is an allopathic medical shop, whose profits go to Western multinationals (hello Mrs Karat!) at a time when Ayurvedic medicine is becoming increasingly popular in Western countries, after being disillusioned by antibiotics and other heavy-handed medicines.
We are witnessing an interesting phenomenon in India today. Some Communists, some Christians, some Muslims and some Congress leaders -- all of whom have nothing in common and often hate each other are united against Hinduism and Hindu leaders.
In contrast, look at the Hindus: Swami Ramdev himself criticised Sri Sri Ravi Shankar live on television, advising his followers not to practice Art of Living breathing techniques. During the tsunami relief operations in Nagapattinam, disciples of Amritanandamayi and Sri Sri Ravi Shankar nearly came to blows over who would give relief to whom, instead of networking and uniting their efforts.
And who came to the rescue of Osho when he was maligned to death, or Dhirendra Brahmachari when the entire press came down on him, or Satya Sai Baba, when he was slandered, or the Shankaracharya when he was thrown into jail, or Sri Sri Ravi Shankar, when Javed Akhtar accused him of coming 'from a cave to live in a palace' (and not from a palace to a cave like the Buddha)? None of the previously mentioned. Yet, Indian politicians can commit any crime, have any number of court cases against them, and they still end up as Union ministers and get positive press coverage.
The greatest curse of Hinduism throughout the ages has been its disunity -- and more than that -- its betraying each other. The British did not conquer India, it was given to them by its warring Hindu princes, jealous of each other. The same is true of Islam: the last great Hindu empire, that of Vijaynagar, was betrayed to the Muslims by the Lingayats.
I know there is something mysterious and unfathomable in the manifestation of the Divine upon earth, and that each guru has a defined task to fulfill and that the combined task of all the gurus may solve the great puzzle that is this ignorant and suffering earth.
Thus, it may not be necessary for each guru to communicate with each other. But nevertheless, it is of the greatest urgency today that Hindu leaders unite to save Hinduism, rather than 'each one for his own' that we see today.
The Catholics have their Pope and his word is binding on all Catholics. Muslims have Prophet Mohammed's words and that binds all of Islam together. Indian Communists have the words of Marx and Lenin, even if it has become irrelevant in Russia, Germany, and also in China. But the poor Hindus have nobody to refer to, so as to defend themselves.
Yet, if you take the combined people power of Satya Sai Baba, Amritaanandamayi, Sri Sri Ravi Shankar, Swami Ramdev, Guruma of Ganeshpuri, the Shankaracharya of Kanchipuram, and so many others I cannot mention here, it runs in hundreds of millions.
Again, in all humility and conscious of the limitation of mind compared to some of these great gurus whom I have met, I propose that a Supreme Spiritual Council, composed of at least seven of the most popular Hindu leaders of India, be constituted, maybe under the leadership of Sri Sri Ravi Shankar, the most travelled of all these, the one who has disciples and teachers of all religions, both from India and the West.
It should be a non-political body, and each group would keep its independence but nevertheless. It could meet two three times a year and issue edicts, which would be binding on 850 millions Hindus in India and one billion over the world.
Then and then only can this wonderful spirituality which is Hinduism, this eternal knowledge behind the outer forms, the wisdom to understand this mad earth and its sufferings, be preserved for the future of India, and for the future of humanity.
I bow down to each of these gurus mentioned above and to all those not mentioned, to Swami Vivekananda, the initiator of modern Hinduism, to Sri Aurobindo, the great avatar of the supramental, and to all the great gurus who have graced over the ages, this wonderful and sacred land which is India and beseech them to hear my prayer:
Hindus leaders, unite, if you want eternal Dharma to survive.
|
Hindu Student Council to explain origins of swastika
It is a symbol that is iconic and infamous - a cross with bent arms - known as the swastika. Though the swastika has long carried a negative connotation in the Western world, the Hindu Student Council hopes to dismiss misconceptions about the symbol in their presentation "Swastika Awareness."
"We just want to erase preconceived notions about the swastika," said Teja Kavi, a junior biomedical science major and the public relations officer for the HSC. "Some people relate it only to the bad part of the symbol, but there's more to it."
The swastika was established before Hitler attached the symbol to armbands or displayed it on raised red flags. Derived from the Sanskrit "svastika," meaning "good to be," the swastika began as an Indo-European mark meant to bestow good luck.
One of two main symbols in Hinduism, the swastika represents the cycle of birth, suffering, death and rebirth. Jainism and Buddhism use the symbol for positive representation.
The event will detail different values and implications of the symbol, touching upon perceptions and uses of the symbol around the world.
"We're fighting for people to know other meanings to it," Kavi said. "There are two main ways the symbol can be portrayed."
The swastika is a cross with bent arms that form right angles to the left or right. Hitler's swastikas tilted to the left with bright red arms popping off a whitewashed background, while the Hindu swastika stands upright and sometimes includes four dots inside.
"I think a lot of people are unaware that there is a difference, and when you're aware, there's more respect," Kavi said.
Swastika education was not well received in 2007 in one of the residence halls when a description of both meanings was exhibited. The display was defaced and eventually torn down.
"They want to educate what it means to them," said Patrick Lukingbeal, graduate student in education administration. "Some people are going to be upset about it because how it was used in Nazi Germany, but they have been trying to be very intentional about how they advertised this event."
E-mails, fliers and Facebook were tools used to spread the word about the event. The HSC has plans to display the Hindu swastika and doesn't want to shock the campus or isolate themselves from fellow Aggies.
"We are having the symbol put on our T-shirts," Kavi said. "We want people to be aware of it and not just think we're wearing Nazi symbols."
The HSC informed student organizations about the event, working to notify rather than cause controversy. Rabbi Yossi Lazaroff, director of the Chabad Jewish Center, said toleration is necessary for Hindus and Jews.
"Everyone should understand that Hindus are not being insensitive to Jewish people, and the Jewish people have to understand that Hindus and their swastika have nothing to do with Nazi Germany," he said.
Lazaroff said he clings to a simple motto: challenging the student body to value enlightenment over common misconception.
"We need to be respectful of other people's religions," he said. "Live and let live."
The Department of Multicultural Services helped coordinate the informational. Lukingbeal worked with the department and said that a willingness to understand is what the HSC asks of the student body.
"It's going to invoke feelings, but the students want to paint the picture that the symbol came from a peaceful religion, being the Hindu faith," he said.
"We are trying to enlighten A&M," Kavi said. "We're doing something different. I know it's a conservative campus, but it's about time that people are notified about what's good and what's bad. I think our students are ready to see that. Someone has to start somewhere. I think we're taking the first step."
According to the organization's website, the purpose of HSC is to "to spread the awareness of Hindu religion and culture while promoting individual spiritual growth." The roughly 50-member group welcomes everyone willing to learn, offering students a cultural experience rather than a religious event.
|
Historic Hindu prayer opened Colorado State Senate
A milestone was created on Tuesday in Colorado when Rajan Zed, prominent Hindu chaplain and Indo-American leader, opened the Colorado State Senate with a Hindu prayer for the first time since its formation.
After sprinkling traditional Gangajal (water from holy river Ganga in India) on the podium, Zed recited from Rig-Veda, considered the oldest scripture of the world still in common use, dated from around 1,500 BCE; besides from Brahadaranyakopnishad, Taittiriya Upanishad, and Bhagavad-Gita (Song of the Lord), all ancient Hindu scriptures. He started the prayer with "Om", the mystical syllable containing the universe, and ended with "Om Shanti, Shanti, Shanti", which he then translated as "Peace, Peace, Peace be unto all".
Reading from Taittiriya Upanishad, he prayed, "…May we work together with great vigor, May our study be enlightening…" Quoting from Bhagavad-Gita, he urged the senators to "Fulfill all your duties; action is better than inaction."
Sporting a ruddraksh mala (rosary) and traditional orange sandalpaste tilak (religious mark) on the forehead, Zed, after reciting the original lines in Sanskrit, then read the English translation of the verses. Sanskrit is considered a sacred language in Hinduism. After the prayer, Zed presented a copy of Srimad Bhagawad-Gita to Peter C. Groff, President of Colorado Senate, who introduced Zed.
Andrew Romanoff, Speaker of the Colorado House of Representatives; Ken Gordon, Senate Majority Leader; Cary Kennedy, Colorado State Treasurer; whom he met after the prayers, personally welcomed and thanked Zed for the opening prayer.
Zed was accompanied to the Colorado Senate by Ved P. Nanda, Vice Provost of University of Denver; Sridhar Talanki, Trustee of Colorado Telugu Association; Sudhir Verma, Trustee of Hindu Temple and Cultural Center of the Rockies; Sridhar Ponnapalli, General Secretary of Colorado Telugu Association; Katherine Nanda, attorney; Mohan
Ashtakala, publisher of The Himalayan News newspaper and his wife Radha.
"This is a great day for Colorado and a historic day of honor for us," Zed said at the start of the prayer. The prayer was well received in the Senate where everybody stood silently with heads bowed down.
Rajan Zed created history on July 12 last when he opened the United States Senate session in Washington DC with Hindu prayer for the first time in its 218 years history. He has also read first Hindu prayers in California, Nevada and New Mexico State Senates and Nevada State Assembly.
Hinduism, oldest and third largest religion of the world, has no datable beginning but some scholars put it around 3,000 BCE. It has no founder, no one authoritative figure, and no single prophet or holy book. One of its scriptures, Mahabharata, is the longest poem ever written, comprising over 100,000 couplets. Hinduism in North America was introduced in 1830s with Ralph Waldo Emerson and Henry David Thoreau studying Hindu scriptures like Upanishads and Bhagavad-Gita. Vivekananda made a strong impression at World´s Parliament of Religion in Chicago in 1893 and he then founded Vedanta Society. Protap Chunder Mozoomdar of Brahmo Samaj delivered his first American address on September 02, 1883 in Concord, Massachusetts.
Colorado State Senate is composed of 35 members, with each district having a population of about 123,000. Colorado has the highest mean elevation of any state of USA, with more than 1,000 rocky peaks over 10,000 ft high and 54 towering above 14,000 ft. Breathtaking scenery and world-class skiing make Colorado a prime tourist destination.
Photo: Rajan Zed (fourth from left) with Andrew Romanoff, Speaker of the Colorado House of Representatives (third from left) and leaders of the Hindu community of Colorado after the prayer.
for more information about Hinduism visit ramakrishnananda.com
|
