‘The Battle for Sanskrit’ – A Preview of Rajiv Malhotra’s latest book

Following his seminal and voluminous works published in three books, Rajiv Malhotra (RM) is about to launch his fourth book, ‘The Battle for Sanskrit’. The following briefly describes the main points of this forthcoming book and the import of the cover page of this book. This is based on RM’s essential points on his new book discussed within his Discussion group recently. The texts under inverted commas are his original words. The underlined text and italicised text in parentheses are my additions to RM’s words, which have been inserted for the sake of clarity to the article. Moreover, some Sanskrit words are also italicised.

This forthcoming book is a continuation of RM’s thesis published and disseminated previously. It is therefore recommended by RM himself that readers wishing to read this book, and get the most out of it, should get acquainted with RM’s thesis. He specifically gives references to his recent lectures at the World Sanskrit Conference (Bangkok - June 2015), Goa (Feb 2015), and Delhi University (Jan 2015). The youtube links to these videos are provided below for ease of access. His previous three books are Breaking India [2011], Being Different [2011] and Indra’s Net [2014]. Of course, there are a host of other public lectures by RM, but the aforementioned lectures are focused on the nature of Sanskrit studies in the West.

At the outset, RM makes it clear that this current book is a Purva-Paksha on the West regarding their Sanskrit scholarship. Purva-paksha, for those who don’t already know, is an integral part of the ancient Indian practise of debate (called Shaastraartha) between different philosophical views where one school of thought diligently educate themselves on the ideologies of the other school and vice-versa. For instance, the Buddhist school would do a Purva-paksha on the Vedanta school and vice-versa. As such, this book is not political nor is it an angry response. Continuing along the lines of the ancient Indian tradition of Shaastraartha, subsequent to the Purva-paksha, one school would challenge the ‘leader’ of the other school. The story of Adi Shankracharya of the Advaita Vedanta school challenging Mandana Mishra is one for the ages. With this in view, RM has identified Sheldon Pollock as the leader of the Sanskrit studies in the West. This book is respectful towards Pollock and as RM states, “there is no ad hominem attack on anyone”. RM believes that “both sides stand to come out ahead in such debates by explaining their positions better”. He also hopes that “both will also benefit from the opposing stance and ought to reconsider their own in some cases”.

So which are the two sides, i.e. ‘both sides’ that RM refers to? The schools of thought that differ in ideas about Sanskrit have been called the ‘Insiders’ and ‘Outsiders’ by RM. These are the two sides. The ‘Insider’ camp holds a Traditional view of Sanskrit while the ‘Outsider’ view looks at Sanskrit from a purely Social studies point of view. Here I have used the word ‘Traditional’ and ‘Social science’ as proper nouns, i.e. labels for the point of view in question. Thus the distinction between ‘Insider’ and ‘Outsider’ is solely on the basis of their respective point of view. Indeed, RM is categorical in stating that the ‘Insider’/’Outsider’ division is “not based on race, ethnicity or nationality”. Thus, while in general the Western view looks at Sanskrit with a Social science lens, any Westerner holding the Traditional viewpoint on Sanskrit would be called an ‘Insider’. By the same token, Indians holding a Social science point of view would come under the ‘Outsider’ camp.

RM’s thesis is his concern about the Western view of India and the Sanskrit studies with the Western lens of Social science falls under this purview. This is amply depicted in the proposed cover of the book itself that shows an artwork of the motif that is still being displayed at the University of Oxford.

Motif depicting Sir William Jones at the Oxford University. Getting a picture of this motif was not straightforward. RM had to spend a year getting this picture! (Source: http://rajivmalhotra.sulekha.com)

The motif shows Sir William Jones on an elevated seat surrounded by people of Indian origin listening to what Jones is articulating. The message underneath reads “He formed a digest of Hindu and Mohammedan Laws”. The irony of the motif is not lost on those who know the history. RM explains the marble carving motif. ”It is Sir William Jones (in late 1700s) talking down at the pandits. Earlier he had learned at their feet, but back home he claimed to have 'discovered Sanskrit' and 'given the Hindus their laws'. Hence it is an image of arrogance.”

According to RM, the goal of the book is “to highlight how, why and by whom the Traditional [Insider] views are being replaced by the social sciences [Outsider] views”. This book also explains ‘the implications [of this replacement] to the future of the Tradition’. Those familiar with RM’s thesis will readily see the continuity of his work in this book. RM’s major concern is that the ‘Insiders’ are blind to this, and hopes that this book will help raise awareness about this hidden agenda amongst the ‘Insiders’. He hopes that after reading the book, the ‘Insider’ will find a gateway to perform a thorough Purva-paksha on the ‘Outsider’ camp vis-à-vis Sanskrit studies in the West. Keeping this in mind, the book looks at Sanskrit studies from an ‘Insider’ (Traditional) versus ‘Outsider’ (Social science) viewpoint. With the ‘Traditional’ vis-à-vis ‘Social science’ viewpoint the book is written within three sub-themes - Is Sanskrit: Dead or Alive? Oppressive or Liberating? Political or Sacred? These form the bylines of the title. While ‘Alive’, ‘Liberating’ and ‘Sacred’ are the ‘Insider’ views based on Tradition, the West/’Outsider’ view takes a Social science lens at Sanskrit and calls Sanskrit ‘Dead’, ‘Oppressive’ and ‘Political’. Within these sub-themes the book discusses Philosophy, Metaphysics and History as seen under the two ideologically different lenses. The book argues that there are parallels between the Social science view and the William Jones’ motif and raises concern that this Social science view is a deliberate attempt at hijacking the Traditional view of Sanskrit. As an aside, it should be clear that this book does not teach Sanskrit grammar or how to converse in Sanskrit!

This book on Sanskrit has been welcomed by all in RM’s Discussion group. The book cover-page has also been discussed within the Discussion group and several good points were raised – the motif, title and the artwork of the motif. Attempts will be made to incorporate these comments as the book launching date nears. Indeed, several group members have already placed bulk orders ranging from 10 to as many as 100 books, for distribution in their local communities.

'Outsider' community campaigns against Rajiv Malhotra prior to his book release

Finally, an important comment on the recent turn of events which has some bearing on this book. About a fortnight ago, a plagiarism charge was laid against RM on one of his previous books by Richard Fox (RF). RF works in a seminary in New Jersey and his work supporting conversions in India was exposed in RM's book 'Breaking India'. These plagiarism charges against RM have since been proven to be false by independent scholars, and a petition filed by Madhu Kishwar supporting Rajiv Malhotra's outcry against the 'Outsider' academia has more than 10000 signatures in support so far. A lot has been written in the last few days both for and against RM. This link  provides a compiled list of articles in support of RM, with articles against him nested within the support articles. Of special mention is Western Indologist Koenraad Elst's post, who takes a neutral stance. He states,"Do I agree with Malhotra? Firstly, we don’t entirely work on the same subjects. Secondly, where we do, there are still differences,...". However, he does go on to emphatically say that the powerful Western academia on Indology has a few questions to answer. Revealing the modus operandi of the 'powerful establishment', Outsiders in this case, Koenraad states, "...serious debate is indeed being avoided. The first step of an establishment against a vocal opponent is always to deny him legitimacy, [KE's original writing in bold] then to pretend that there is no real debate, only a querulant rebelling against established common sense. These mechanisms can be seen at work now against Rajiv Malhotra".

We wait in anticipation for the book to come out!

Did Jeffrey Long 'Out' Rajiv Malhotra's new book before publication?

This post covers a controversy created by the actions of a Western scholar, who appears to have misused a pre-publication draft of the yet-to-be titled new book authored by Rajiv Malhotra, from whom he privately obtained the copy.

Jeffrey Long first showed up in this forum in Feb 2012 (#2270), where he was the subject of some positive feedback re Hinduism. Next, he appears in regards to the DHANAM conference, in November 2012 (#3373), where he was the steering committee member (despite which, there was room for just a single book discussion on BD).

July 2013
Please dont hijack my new book before it comes out
Rajiv Malhotra writes: Earlier this month, I shared with a small number of scholars the full draft of my new book that is a thorough refutation of the thesis of Neo-Hinduism started by Hacker and continued by others like Rambachan.  One of the very few scholars I trusted sharing my draft with is Jeffrey Long, who is a follower of RK Mission and whom I respect. It was done under strict confidentiality. He promised to write me his comments and suggestions, which I am still waiting for. Then I met Jeff at the recent Vedanta Congress, and we went to a private room to discuss his feedback to my draft....

Today, I see the following post written by him in the RISA List (where I am banned as are most scholars who do not "obey" the authority of Western hermeneutics.)

Clearly, Jeff is reflecting our conversation and my book thesis. Sadly, he chose the forum of his peer group to express this idea, while I had shared my book on the hope (and promise) to get useful feedback from him. I wonder why he could not wait for my book to come out first, and LET IT BE THE SOURCE OF THIS NEW DEBATE...

My disappointment is that he replaces all my work with other references, as though my hard work is to be ignored. Had I known this earlier, I would not have shared my draft with him. He was very keen to have my draft, as he said it would help him in his work, but I expected him to refer to it. (People often cite a work with the author's permission and say it is "forthcoming." So the means to do this attribution exists.)

Rajiv adds:
"...I wish to clarify that I do NOT accuse anyone here of plagiarism. However, if my ideas, which have been written and discussed in so much detail, "trigger" similar ideas in another scholar, it would be normal academic practice to cite me as a source. Even if one's ideas are independently derived, one cites others with similar ideas. Jeff certainly goes out of his way to cite academicians in this regard, but ignores me as if I do not exist. This is a double standard. Yet I see him as a friend and hope he will change this approach.

I am being treated like the "native informant" who has no voice, whose ideas "become valid" only when regurgitated by a "credentialed scholar". This asymmetric posture towards the native informants became the subject of so many of my writings over a decade ago. One sulekha article that summarized this was called "The asymmetric dialog of civilizations". There were many more I wrote on
this issue. That started a whole movement which has snowballed in many directions ever since.

The Europeans started this trend to appropriate the knowledge of pandits and publish it as their own. This is how "Sir" William Jones became established as the "discoverer" of Sanskrit in the eyes of the West - like Columbus being called the discoverer of America as though the natives who lived there for 10,000 years had not discovered it. In a massive wall carving in his honor at oxford, he is referred to as the man "who gave the Hindoos their laws".

To declare only those scholars with western credentials (and hence under their system of management) as being valid, is the worst form of colonization. By this criteria, none of our acharyas, gurus, and even the most advanced yogis would be legitimate. So Ramakrishna, Vivekananda, Gandhi, Aurobindo, etc. - none of them and others like them qualify as voices of authority in their own right.

... You may disagree with many of Gandhi's positions (as I do myself). But what I found remarkable in his life was his courage to defy the colonial apparatus and set an example of resistance. We need scholars to be satyagrahis in this sense."

thepatrika adds: "....I am once again appalled  -- not surprised -- at the intellectual dishonesty among some of the Academicians in th US, even in fields which does not involve great amount of money. 

No wonder secrecy has become the hall mark of academic research in Science, Technology and Management, which the possibility of making a "killing" with patents, invention disclosures, or membership in national and int'l organizations, or corporate board memberships, even as they brag about academic freedom and "open" environment for enquiry in universities"

Surya wonders: "...I suspect that Jeffrey may already be engaged with other AAR members in dissecting the contents of the book. I would conjecture that Jeffrey will likely not offer any useful feedback to Rajivji but use the early access to direct his own research.

I hope Jeffrey has access to this forum and offers public response."

Shashi comments:
"...This is sad.

This emphasizes why the book "Invading the Sacred" commissioned by Rajivji is a must-read. Specially relevant is Yvette Rosser article. It exposes how RISA folks operate as a cartel. What is particularly sad in this case is betrayal at even person-to-person level trust.

Rajiv's response:
Thanks, Shashi ji.
I want people to know that Shashi drove from out of state just to attend my talk at the Vedanta Congress. He can verify that I spoke on this thesis in my forthcoming book. 

Ashish comments:
"...I am a dalit residing in India. And I am very very impressed by your work. Have read both of your books. Even though I am dalit I still love my country INDIA. India has given me opportunity to rise above the poverty in which I was born. I am a s/w engineer in a multinational firm in India..."

Madhu adds:
"... it is equally true that most westerners do look at us through a lens of superiority even if some manage to hide it, that is just the social conditioning they got via history, culture, church, society. There is nothing racial about this. There is still some time to go before these attitudes change. Until then there is no harm in being pragmatic about it."

Rajiv's response: 
"...   It has to do with the ego's mixed up loyalties and projects. I once reprimanded Sarah Caldwell who was simultaneously (1) a practicing Hindu in the academy and
very active in organizing Hinduism related events, and yet (2) more loyal to her academic peers than to dharma, and hence compromising 1 to benefit 2.

There are similar instances I encounter daily among Indian Hindus - conflict between their private domain of Hindu practice and their public domain of career or "reputation" or business interest, etc. "

Rahul thinks:
"... even as the new book is launched with an attempt to steal the limelight with an attitude that might go like "RM is treading a path that has already been examined critiqued  and debunked". They are likely going to launch a propaganda war with a head start having had time to read the transcript and formulate the approach to attack the new book (or RM)." 

Karigar provides additional context on Jeffrey Long:
"... I've had some personal interaction with him in the past. He's definitely a very nice guy, but -

I've no hesitating in completely agreeing with Rajiv's nuanced critique of his actions. Also, during last year's AAR (where a separate Panel featured Being Different) I recall some behind-the-scenes controversy at another panel where Jeff Long was involved. There his semi-public comments were an interesting study in virtually ignoring Rajiv, while off handedly (back handedly?) agreeing that the points made were serious enough to warrant a high level discussion/response.

I'd like to add just one point to what Rajiv has already said. It seems that he is a symptom of the Social Sciences scholar mentality, where one gets one's authority/credibility by subjective means, mostly by how "impressive" one sound/writes, etc. This just won't fly in the hard-sciences, technology or business, as one's capability can be very easily evaluated. 

For a religion scholar, to stay above the glass ceiling (& be called a scholar) it appears one has to ignore non-academia people's work as long as one can afford to get away with it. Jeff Long seems to be following this standard-operating-procedure. Of course it doesn't say much for his personal behavior & sense of judgement, when he does this to Rajiv.

Firstly, Rajiv has pretty much broken thru this 'glass ceiling' a long time ago; and secondly, he seems to be using private discussion material from Rajiv's work to preempt it's impact when it's published, even if he claims it was not intentional."

Jeffrey Long is welcome to respond at the 'Being Different Forum'.


Update: October 19
Jeffrey Long responded in the comments section below, as well as the forum (link here) defending his position, and Rajiv provided a counter response. After some followups, this thread was closed. I've summarized the final comments of Rajiv Malhotra below (emphasis mine):
"... I had made a remark on Jeff's writing many weeks ago, and he exercised his right to respond, and this started a brief back and forth discussion. I am glad he and I have agreed to cooperate as friends sharing our passions as Hindus. It is good when such episodes lead to solidarity and clarity going forward. So no point in further discussion as the [matter] is happily resolved. I look forward to Jeff's participation on this forum."
 

RMF Summary: Week of March 17 - 23, 2013

The first discussion started last week as a comment on the seemingly unfair treatment to Hindu institutions in India. The discussion trajectory has turned into a very useful debate. Is Hinduism a religion? a way of life? or it is something else? What exactly is it?

March 18 (continuing from March 15)

Shiva-worship-not-a-religious-act-income-tax-tribunal-says

[from member Kiran ] Just wanted to post this news I read amongst the group members to get their suggestions on what should be done for the kind of... 

Ganesh adds:

".... This news is just a re-run of what appeared in 2012.

As you can see, there's a mere re-wording of the above article. Typical of ToI to grab eyeballs by filling up spaces with such re-runs. Indian journalism has no ethical values, whatsoever.

This link .. gives a much more details analysis on how to understand this tax angle to this issue. Expense on worship of Hindu Gods and temple maintenance cannot be regarded to be for religious purpose "

Arun responds:

"As per the Economics Times article... the Income Tax Tribunal cited the 1954 ruling of the Supreme Court, in COMMISSIONER, HINDU RELIGIOUS ENDOWMENTS, MADRAS V/S SRI LAKSHMINDRA THIRTHA SWAMIAR OF SRI SHIRUR MUTT.

The judgement can be downloaded via the Supreme Court of India web-site. I've read it and the Income Tax Tribunal is wrong. In the 1954 judgment, the Court ruled that religion is not just a matter of doctrine, it also includes
practices, and the prescribed rituals in Hindu puja are religious acts and therefore under the freedom of religion, Article 26 of the Constitution, cannot be regulated by the state.

In this case, it seems to be that the Income Tax Department says that the Shiva Sansthan is a religious, not a charitable institution, and therefore contributions to it are not tax-exempt, and the Tribunal overruled that saying
that pooja, etc., are not religious. This may help some Hindus fund their organizations, but it also opens up the specter of state regulation - the protection of freedom of religion will no longer apply, if the IT Tribunal
decision finds its way into the judiciary..."  

Ravindra comments:

"......you can not translate Dharma as religion, and that is clearly one of our failings. For example, every finite entity has Dharma. Space has Dharma, Air, water, fire, earth all have Dharma. The friendship has Dharma, a wife has dharma. In fact Dharma patni has no analogue of "religion wife". And that is what it would have been if Dharma was translated as religion. And Air, water, space, tree, animals have no religion. Clearly Dharma is pointing to something that religion is not pointing to. Dharma in fact refers to the sustaining and supporting principles of an entity whose Dharma is under consideration. It arises from two sanskrit roots, Dhr(from Dhrinya) + Ma (from Mange through an unadi suffixing.

Pooja also does not mean worship, it arises from Po +Jaayate. i.e by which pavitrataa grows or is born. So Pooja is a mechanism to remove your internal and external Mala (dirt). Removing that makes one pavitra and saatvicta grows. So it is not worship. To tis extent it is fine.

But the question is why should a religion (that is an alien construct of different land) get the preference for tax status and not Dharma based on Inidian ethos. That is what Hindus should fight for. In fact if because Dharma is not religion, all Dharma texts must be mandatory learning in schools, since now secularism can to b eased to by pass learning of India's internal knowledge and ethos. That I believe should be the real battle. In fact Dharma and the associated Samskrut should be made foundation of development, since it will not violate the secular principles, because Dharma is not religion" 

Brahma suggests an alternative:

"It is true to say "Dharma" cannot be translated as "religion ... But it is also important that we don't allow the Abrahamic paradigm of religion stand as the only denotative/connotative content for the word "religion," in the field of thought/discourse. This leads to the ridiculous and very dangerous statement that "Hinduism is not a religion but a way of life" (originally declared by an Irish Catholic Priest, according to Swami Chinmayananda) which we see now playing out in this tax debacle.

Rajiv comment: I disagree. It is better to REPLACE the statement "Hinduism is not a religion but a way of life" with the accurate statement:

 "Hinduism is not a religion but a dharma". 

Now you must know how to explain what dharma is and how it differs. That's what BD was written to be able to do.

This issue is where S.N. Balagangadhara failed. He wrote one book many, many years ago. All it did was to say that "religion" comes from an earlier word that got distorted. But so what? How does that help us? Besides that is a well know point by zillions of westerner themselves. He NEVER defines dharma in term of positive qualities. He also makes the mistake of saying things like "Hindus (or maybe Indians?) lacked the notion of science", when he ought to have introduced the notion of adhyatma-vidya as inner science. Ditto for the claim that Hindus lack ethics when the point ought to be to explain how dharmic ethics differs.

His was the typical postcolonial critique of the West and its religion category, but like all post-colonialists to date, it was unsuccessful in replacing this with anything positive about dharma itself. In BD I explain that postodernists
criticize Western universalism without any alternative worldview to replace it with. This leaves a vacuum, and hence we have a generation of "intellectual morons" who are not grounded." 

  

Saket shares a link:

"....

Hence at least for this one word which I feel is most important, members may refer to this book which explains this one word.

DHARMA The Global Ethic by Justice M Rama Jois ..."

March 18

Varna as alternative to Capitalism

Rajiv Malhotra shares a link:  In the 1990s I had numerous personal discussions as well email exchanges with a Marxist who had left that tradition in search of new ideas. I argued varna as an organizing principle that has some merit to consider. While I did not pursue the matter after a few years of discussions/debates with him, it seems he continued that line of thinking and influenced various others to take this up. Now there seems to be a tiny beginning of such thought in respectable circles. The above article should make many of you smile. Its a Post-Marxist view of varna. I have not read the major book that is being announced: No doubt there are many issues we will find with his treatment from a strictly dharma interpretation. But I consider such openings an opportunity for us to show intellectual rigor and vigor in order to take the ideas forward. Sudhir responds: "Ravi Batra who is a professor of economics in South Methodist University in Texas has written a book Quite a old one but it touches on the merchant class, soldier class, proletariat class and the intellectual class. He goes into the history of the world using this and on the basis of this understanding he believes India, US and Europe are at a phase of merchant class dominating the planet ... ...He is a follower of Prabhat Ranjan Sarkar who made 'Anandmarg' famous or infamous... PR Sarkar apparently has written extensively on this issue. I do not subscribe to their views but its worth considering. My take after reading your book - BD- is the reason why we are seeing a downfall of west ( And I am sure its perhaps in the best interest of Dharma that the west falls) is they lack integral unity. The people who make money feel no responsibility for the world at large. Thats manifested as exploitation of the world in the pursuit of happYness (moneyness). Varnashram is looked down upon by elite Indians with western education as they believe it encourages 'Brahmanism'." Jayant adds: "The analysis of the author is good but when talking about 'Varnas' one should not forget that its Varnashrama Dharma. The word Dharma attached to it make the whole difference in the context of India. In India ruling class was always Kshatriyas and there was no conflict among the castes for domination. In other varnaless civilizations, such competition may have taken place. " March 19 Oxford Hindu centre looks for permanent base Saket posts: The Oxford center for Hindu Studies is trying to raise 1 million pounds to become an international hub of Hindu studies. Rajiv comment: I was invited by them when it first opened to give a talk. Then it was called Center for Vaishnav Studies. I recommended they change the name and scope to include Hindu Studies, and I am glad they did that. But the rest of the story is not so good. ....They wanted recognition by their peers rather than the courage to stand up to them. Gradually, I saw Judeo-Christian digestion of Hinduism being encouraged. This is done in a subtle way via speakers, visiting professors, etc. who on the surface are teaching "positive" things about Hinduism. Yes, they are better than the blatant Hinduphobia in some places (which also has quietened down over the past 20 years since I started calling out their biases). But they are not going to name names of fellow academics - without which it is useless. Three important (positive) things happened as a result of my visit: 1) I ran into Ursula King accidentally after my talk, as the group walked to dinner. Her work became important in my subsequent research - she was the PhD adviser to Anantanand Rambachan dissertation. More in my forthcoming book. 2) I finally managed to get a nice picture of the huge carving of William Jones and the Pandits.I used it for the cover of our book... 3) I discovered English translations of Pierre Bourdieu from French. I have considered this is important to my research. After that episode which was probably in the 1990s, I was never invited, and never went back. I kept criticizing them as I saw them slip into encouraging the digestion of Hinduism, especially Vaishnavism, into Judeo-Christianity. They want naive Hindus of which there are plenty to give them lots of money, in exchange for putting their smiling faces next to some white people who are supposedly "prestigious" to be associated with. Kirit comments: "In the link below about Oxford news, Shri Rishi Das stated, "Religious studies doesn't really exist in India so we want to help them and anyone in the community understand Hinduism." What a arrogance and ignorance! .... To me it seems that Oxford center itself is taking shape of a camouflaged "tiger", and it would be in the interest of Dharma to engage with them diplomatically and slowly help them understand BD.   Rajiv comment: The statement is valid that ACADEMIC STUDY of Hinduism is virtually non existent in India. I have raised this issue and given talks on it for 2 decades. We organized a few large conferences in India to spread awareness of the issue. The comment above betrays a common ignorance - not knowing the distinction between academic study of religion and he teaching by gurus, acharyas, etc. At the same time, it is dangerous to let western religious studies folks be the ones who export their model of religious studies to India. Unfortunately this is whats happening in a big way. Both the western exporters and the Indian importers are engaged with enthusiasm. ..... we are still ignorant as the above comment suggests, on the distinction between emic and etic approaches. This post by Kirit lead to a followup from Kusum with responses (numbered for clarity) from Rajiv: 1. Rajivji mentions that Academic Study of Hinduism is virtually non-existent in India. While I agree partially, I feel that there are institutions that I have personally visited and feel that they could be better than any outfit in the world... Rajiv: I made this case a hundred times in the past years. Nothing new. But have you gone beyond blue sky into actual implementation exercises, to get experience and be able to articulate based on that? 2. Instead of reinventing the wheel, why not nurture what is already there? The two places that come to mind are the ones I have visited, albeit briefly. The first one is Banaras Hindu University (BHU). I was there last month and met with the VC and heads of other departments. While the main purpose of my visit was a different one (Greening & restoration of pilgrimage sites),  I found the leadership open to new ideas.... he promised any help needed. Rajiv: Again, this is the typical Hindu habit of always starting from scratch ... Watch the Youtubes from my day long seminar on BD at BU. See the BD videos at the web site. I got to know the dean, dept heads, etc far more than your "meeting" suggests. Yes, they talked big as expected. But no action after...The BHU folks are so digested that its sad. 3. Would it be possible to convince BHU to establish a world-class School of Hindu Studies?  All the apparatus are already in place. What if there were to be a collaborative effort with a US university? Rajiv: What would it take to get out people to move beyond the ad hoc "off the top of head" ideas which everyone is so full of? ... .....When asked for CONCRETE deliverables the person usually runs away. I no longer waste time chasing such "offers". Sorry. Its for YOU to get hands dirty and then develop something concrete.... ...But hope you read prior thread where I explained our funding a decade ago to U of Hawaii to start a project to teach purva paksha of the west to Sanskrit pandits in Indian universities? As a serious scholar surely you will work hard to do some due diligence on all this stuff and not discuss so superficially. Especially when lots was done before and lots of lessons available to learn from. Kaushal adds: "BHU: Except the term Hindu in its name, it has nothing to do with Hinduism. BHU is a central university, similar to JNU. Of course, BHU has its own history being started by Shree M. M. Malviya ji. But today, they are things of past. .... occupied by the same set of "digested & sold Intellectuals", whom RM has been criticizing here. Why not look towards our traditional Math and Akhara. They are the real defenders of our Dharma. They gave their life and blood to protect it in worst of scenario in the past. But, they are neglected in independent Bharat where Hindus are well off. If you want to do something, plz do think once in this direction. Rajiv ji gave a session in Dharma Sansad in Ahmedabad to explain the issues mentioned in BD. It will take some time and effort, but it will help Dharma in real terms. Rajiv comment: This is a true observation about BHU. It got secularized over the past several governments in the type of appointments and selection of activities. Besides, there is ZERO competence in other religions, making a broad Religious Studies not viable. The changes required would be sweeping to say the least."    Pushpa adds: "....Interesting topic that needs to be explored further. I do have some questions though. First & foremost, does the Oxford Center for Hindu Studies (OCHS) have a mandate to represent all Hindus? Second, is OCHS an entity of U of Oxford ? Third, who is Shaunaka Rishi Das the guy who calls the shots at OCHS?...." Rajiv comment: ... The person(s) in charge have encouraged digestion by the type of visiting scholars and lecturers they selected. Not always but often enough to be a concern.  The above statement about OCHS being independent of Oxford U is valid. But gradually over time, such independent centers gain recognition and collaborations become closer. This is how the game is played. Most prominent universities in the US have several such groups that are officially unrelated but exert influence. Kishor comments: "Originally it started as OCVS, with full endorsement and support of ISKCON. Later, with a view to gaining universal Hindu approval, they changed this to OCHS. The feelers that I have been getting from ISKCON leaders for last few years indicate that they have distanced themselves from OCHS. Most Hindu orgs here are also keeping distance with OCHS, for they have doubts about the direction OCHS seems to have taken by projecting "scholars" whose presentations, verbal and written, confuse ordinary Hindus, most of whom are devout followers of their respective gurus or sant-mahatmas - the same has happened to ISKCON devotees. Hindu sampradaayik organisations will not touch OCHS even with a barge pole. ... In the beginning, an eminent Hindu scholar, Shri Kirit Joshi, was appointed, with seconding from Hindujas, to head OCHS, but he disappeared in no time. ...As far as the new generation is concerned, I believe from experience that they are vigilant and far from gullible they enquire and question. Rajiv comment: Most of the above points match what I know except: Kireet Joshi (whom I have known since the 1990) did his work with Dharam Hinduja Center for Indic Studies, but that had no relationship with OCHS a far as I was aware. The Hinduja centers were set up in UK, India and USA (at Columbia U) in the memory of the billionaire's son who had died suddenly . Eventually folded. I only knew the folks at Columbia - thats here Jack Hawley was in charge and he nurtured many Hinduphobics in the academy like Jeffrey Kripal, several JNU radical leftists getting trained to be deployed in various academic places. Used Hinduja money and yet lambasted what Hindujas stood for behind their backs. Kireet Joshi himself is excellent, a great expert on Sri Aurobindo. Now settled in Pondy in not great health. See: and: There have been dozens of such initiatives to bring change and these need to be studied in order to learn why they all failed in the end.....This is getting worse as there are more people craving instant prestige as sponsors who are too arrogant and lazy to do their homework...   Kishor adds: I got OCHS mixed up Hinduja`s  project.   March 19 This thing we call 'Life' Vish shares some links: For this week, I am tempted to send out a video story - an extremely modern story. It comes with a warning; It is not for the squeamish. It is as real as one...

March 19 Ravi shares: (Interview) Zareer Masani lauds Macaulay, denies the concept of India ...  'Everyone wants to be English-speaking in... Arun responds: "... far from being some kind of liberator for the Indian underclass, Macaulayite policies can be considered to be the cause of the massive Indian illiteracy, e.g., less than 10% in 1901. The argument is as follows - Macaulay's minute of 1835 was the winning argument in a debate about education in India - so you should read the losing side's arguments to know what they were proposing. I do that briefly here: William Adams, on the losing side of the argument, wanted to use the educational system that Dharampal documented in "The Beautiful Tree" as the foundation for education of Indians. Macaulay's own thoughts should be noted. He explicitly wrote that English education would be provided only to an Indian elite, and it would be that elite that would educate the masses. It is obvious from this - usually the focus is on the first sentence; but focus on the second for now: "We must at present do our best to form a class who may be interpreters between us and the millions whom we govern - a class of persons, Indian in blood and colour, but English in taste, in opinions, in morals and in intellect. To that class we may leave it to redefine the vernacular dialects in the country, to enrich those dialects with terms of science borrowed from Western nomenclature and to render them by degrees fit vehicles for conveying knowledge to the great mass of the population." So, Zareer Masani is playing to an audience rather than providing any kind of historical truth."

March 19 (Kerala) Catholic Church pressurised Chief Minister not to act preci Ravi shares: This is an interesting scenario wherein the Vatican-Italian interests appear to precede's India's interests. The Vatican's nominees in the Kerala Catholic Church interfere and forestall action (on the killing of two Indian fishermen by Italian Marines) by pressuring the authorities, following which these two men are allowed to quietly slip away to Italy where they cannot face the Indian judicial system..." March 21 GURUs & Sanskrit non-translatable usage Nitin shares snippets from an interesting conversation with a Guru with some following: "Here is my conversation with one of the Gurus with sizable followers on the net. BD was at full use in trying to convince him of using right terminology. Unfortunately they are simply not aware of the concept of digestion. I'm shipping him copy of BD. GURU: ...finally attains salvation N:Salvation is the wrong word. It indicates saving from original sin. It contradicts your basic teachings of SatChitAnanda! GURU:We can not avoid the limitations of any language while getting translated. N:Calling Dosa as Indian Pizza is a disservice to the South Indian tradition. It is like killing a part of the culture. People all over the world have now learnt to use the word Dosa. We need to be firmly in control of certain sanskrit categories or someone else will define these categories and will misinterpret it especially in your absence. Using salvation instead of Moksha (or may be something better that you may know) is outright disservice to the very tradition that you are preaching. GURU: And what may be the English equivalent to Moksha? N:There are certain Sanskrit words that cannot be translated in English so no need to translate those words at all. You can keep it as it is... In fact 'Moksha' can also be found in Merriam-Webster English dictionary. GURU:I think "Emancipation" may be more appropriate. N:That's not right either. You must keep it as Moksha. see how Buddhists never translate nirvana to salvation....Otherwise Dharma is not represented accurately on a global platform like this. GURU:Yeah...true.I did not find the exact translation of word "Guru" yet.." March 22 Pope Francis calls for "respect" for all religions Tapan shares: Is it the first time that a pope said something like this? If true Rajivji's stand on mutual respect is accepted:Pope Francis calls for 'respect' for all... Rajiv's response: "Lets push them rather than declare victory prematurely. Does his "respect" for dharma mean he will respect specific things like: - karma, reincarnation - our murtis - our mantras - our avataras - etc. If so, he ought to end conversion campaigns against such a faith as ours. To implement his principle he should start a complaint investigation group where we can file complaints against any Catholic who is violating the principle of respect for us, and if the person is found guilty then punishment should be enforced by the church against such members. In other words it should not be mere diplomacy talk but a policy that gets enforced." Saket shares an update: This subsequent statement of pope was reported in Reuters Alex shares a NYT link and comments: ".... Hope Pope Francis is serious about being open-minded, inclusive of his call for "respect" of all faiths. The fact that Buddhist, Sikh, Hindu and Jain faith leaders were represented at the installation ceremony is encouraging. Hope that the Dharmic faith leaders will take the initiative and PUSH the Pontiff to make a more decisive declaration on where the Vatican stands in relation to truly respecting the non-Abrahamic faiths. .... In my opinion, the Leaders of the Dharmic Faiths should ask for a separate meeting with Pope Francis specifically to seek his stance on proselytization among peoples of Dharmic faiths. Even if such a request is denied that would be telling enough to discern his true commitment to his expressed sentiments of "respect" for all faiths." Basant comments: "...A true Christian especially a pope will never give equal respect to the Dharmic people. This is because of the fundamental dogma of Christianity that man is a born sinner and he or she can only be saved through Jesus Christ. Also the old testament forbids worshipping of false gods. To give equal respect to us will mean they would not be Christians any more..." March 22 (continuing discussion from February 19) Evangelical Christian group helps sue California school over yoga cl [original link] ... Ravi shares an update:  More on this issue [beliefnet]: Here's the second and concluding part of Masani's interview... Ignore the initial segment on politics and read the hagiography on Macaulay towards the middle and end of the interview.." March 22 Re: Tamil movie : Paradesi The word paradesi has the same meaning as the Hindi word but is used more in a derogatory sense in Tamil unlike in Hindi that has a aura about it. There is new movie in Tamil with that name running well, in Theaters across TamilNadu. Masterly crafted, that shows thread bare and naked the work of the evangelicals. It could not have said better..."   March 23 Hijacking of Wharton - republished Kanchan: The HP blog has been republished for the Global Indian audience: Also it is in the print...