This document is compiled by a follower of Rajiv Malhotra to provide his position/ comments after an out of court settlement to discontinue Wendy Doniger’s book “The Hindus: An Alternative History”. It includes

Rajiv’s note to followers and copies of his rediff interview – both online version as well as print version.

– Feb 2014

Rajiv Malhotra’s Note to Followers

Most of you know of the recent media controversy over Penguin's decision to withdraw Wendy Doniger's

book, "The Hindus". Almost daily there have been extensive TV and major print media discussions in

India. In the USA, NPR, CNN, New York Times, New Yorker and various other media majors have

featured this story in a big way.

Rediff recently interviewed me because I was the one who first started this debate around the year 2000

in a series of articles.

Soon after my initial articles, Wendy Doniger's own University of Chicago Magazine interviewed me and

did a large and balanced coverage. It was their leading story.

The debate quickly ignited the Indian diaspora and the American academy for a few years, with numerous

mobilizations and accusations from both sides. This fight was one of the defining moments in the

awakening of Hindu thinkers about the way their discourse was controlled and distorted by others. The

academic study of Hinduism has not been the same since.

The drama quickly intensified. With the help of her hordes of powerfully placed students, Doniger fought

back furiously. She arranged a front page article in the Washington Post and another feature article in the

New York Times. Unlike the magazine of her university, these were PR jobs tilted in her favor.

The theater widened across the academic and literary circles of Europe, North America and India. More

players join in on both sides.

Martha Nussbaum, the prominent feminist and University of Chicago colleague of Doniger, wrote a

scathing book against Hindus with a whole chapter dedicated to me - without bothering to interview me

even though that was suggested to her. She and Doniger have consistently ignored my request for a live

debate in public.

In response to what I felt was a one-sided portrayal of the events, I compiled a new book, titled, Invading

the Sacred: An Analysis of Hinduism Studies in America", and it was published in 2007. Its launch video

gives a good idea of our side of the story. And so does its web site.

The fallout of all this was very significant:

Wendy Doniger lost her clout in the American academy, and being on the defensive, she lost most of the

students who earlier thronged at her doorstep for PhDs in Hinduism.

The American academy made numerous changes (still not enough) to become sensitive to Hindus' views

concerning Hinduism, or at least these academics become less blatant in their denigration of Hinduism.

The most significant change was that there emerged a new appreciation among Hindus and a new

mobilization of their leaders. It became widely accepted that it was a bad idea to outsource the study of

our tradition to scholars whose lenses were programmed with Judeo-Christian and Marxist premises. In

fact, no other major world faith is studied by outsiders with the same authority and power as Hinduism is.

A brilliant compilation of these debates and controversies has recently been turned into a web site for

those who want to get a good overview.

Meanwhile, I moved on to many other projects of research and publishing, pretty much forgetting Wendy

Doniger as a closed chapter. But the story does not end here.

Some years back, Doniger struck a new alliance to help her make a dramatic comeback: She positioned

herself with the Indian Left as their "expert on criticizing Hinduism". Since Indian secularists are

uneducated in Sanskrit and only superficially informed about religious studies, Doniger was a useful ally

to supply them "masala" which they could use.

In turn, the well-connected Indian secularist/leftist media and writers helped reposition Doniger in India as

a great authority on Hinduism. Soon she was winning awards in India, even though back home in USA

her own academic colleagues had distanced themselves because she was seen as a tained scholar with

a bad reputation.

Then yet another new chapter began. Some Hindus in India decided to contest her relatively recent book.

They filed a lawsuit in Delhi alleging that it was biased and insulting to Hindus.

After four years, an out of court settlement was recently reached under which Penguin agreed to withdraw

the book from India. But the terms agreed to, do not ban electronic copies or foreign editions from being

sold in India. Doniger's massive PR machinery went to work overtime to put the matter into the limelight.

The largely ignorant Indian media and its love for sensationalism served her needs. As a result, her book

is once againt selling in India even though the Indian edition is withdrawn.

Bottom line: I have mixed feelings about the effectiveness of the litigation and settlement. My own

approach had been entirely through a scholarly debate. This takes a lot more hard work, rigor and

creativity. Undoubtedly Doniger and her followers had retreated. But now she has made a comeback,

ironically using the withdrawal of her book, to position herself as a victim.

The recent interview appearing in Rediff.com is the first time I have spoken on this development over the

past month. I wish to give my 15 years of perspective on this issue.

I hope you will read it with an open mind and form your own views.

Regards,

Rajiv

Copy of

Rajiv Malhotra’s Interview – Online Version Available at: http://m.rediff.com/news/slide-show/slide-show-1-when-westerners-make-fun-of-our-gods-theyre-instigating-trouble/20140217.htm

'When Westerners make fun of our gods, they're instigating trouble' February 17, 2014 10:43 IST

Arthur J Pais

'In theory, yes, Hindus are very open. I'm one of them. I've coined the phrase 'open architecture'.'

'But I think the Wendy Doniger group is not allowing open architecture. They are closing this architecture.'

'They are bringing a point of view in such a heavy-handed way that it tends to dominate and it tends to

suppress the alternative points of view. So some kind of counteraction is necessary and using the law is a

decent thing to do.'

Rajiv Malhotra, one of Wendy Doniger's most vociferous critics, speaks to Rediff.com's Arthur J Pais

about the prejudices created by American scholars about Hindu gods and Hinduism.

Rajiv Malhotra, left, a constant critic of Wendy Doniger and what he calls her Chicago school of writers

and thinkers, retired at age 44 some 20 years ago and put his money into the Infinity Foundation, an one-

man think-tank.

The Indian-American writer of books on India has devoted himself, for more than a decade-and-a- half, he

says, to "clarifying the many misperceptions about Indic traditions in America and among Indians."

When did the fight against the book start? How did it go through?

My involvement with this started in the year 2000. My kids went to Princeton Day School and one day the

teacher asked me for information on Vedanta, (Swami) Vivekananda and Ramakrishna (Paramhamsa)

because in their teaching of world religions they wanted to have knowledge of Hinduism.

One of the teachers told me that he has been advised by some American scholar not to teach

Vivekananda and Ramakrishna because the parents would object to this. When I asked why the parents

would object, he said it has been declared that Ramakrishna had a relationship with Vivekananda.

I have never heard of such a thing. We started investigating this and asked which scholar had said this

and that is how I discovered a whole genre of scholarship which has this kind of view that Wendy Doniger

and her students came up with. So, they used Freudian psychoanalysis to psychoanalyse (Hinduism).

Which book has talked about Swami Vivekananda and Ramakrishna Paramhamsa?

A book called Kali's Child by Jeffrey J Kripal. Then I found Paul Courtright, one of Wendy's students, had

a similar book called Ganesa: Lord of Obstacles, Lord of Beginnings. They had this very vulgar kind of

view.

So, I tried to take this around to the religious, Hindu community and they did not want to touch it. Many of

the Hindu leaders in this country (America) maybe were too arrogant, too cocky, or too embarrassed or

too scared to talk about it. They did not think it important to take any action.

So I took it upon myself to start writing articles expressing that these are not correct interpretations...

This issue has nothing to do with Christianity versus Hinduism, because most of these people are Jewish,

anyway. They are using a Marxist lens, a Leftist lens, a Freudian lens. The kind of theories they are using

are completely inapplicable to the Indian way of life.

Then, I started attending the conferences of religion to see why this is happening. It was very strange. All

religions had people represented from within.

You would see rabbis from Judaism, Buddhist monks, imams talking about Islam. In the case of

Hinduism, there was hardly any practising Hindu speaking for it. It was entirely non-Hindus who felt that

they have understood the text, learnt Sanskrit and they were able to interpret it. So, I felt that this is a

huge untold story.

I started writing articles. These articles created a huge stir. And, this is the situation with these people.

We compiled these arguments in a book called Invading the Sacred that came out in 2007, and since

then I have come out with three more books that are not on Wendy but other issues related to Indian

civilisation and Indian philosophy and thought and so on.

I personally moved on beyond Wendy Doniger. But I have created a huge awareness and awakening

among the Diaspora and among people in India. So many other groups started getting immersed and

started taking up my cause and they are the ones who started litigating on Doniger and her book and so

on in India.

There has been quite a bit of criticism against the group that filed the case against Doniger's

book.

The person who filed the case is a woman called Monika Arora. She is a very reputed Supreme Court

lawyer in Delhi. She filed this case.

Some people are trying to portray the Hindus involved in this case as some kind of savages, violent

people and all of that. The point is that the Hindus who filed this case used the rule of law; they used the

courts. There is no hint of any violence. They are very cultured, sophisticated people. They went to the

court and filed a case.

The case has been going on for over two years. There was never a hint of any violence or anything

indecent. It was a let's go to court and fight. So, the Hindu site put out a petition in the court citing many,

many instances of errors in the book, citing page numbers. Some of these are not matters of

interpretation, but factual errors and these are available online.

There is a petition that lists many, many pages of errors and so the opposing side of Penguin gave

Wendy Doniger's point-by-point response. This went back and forth several times.

It was not like it was an uncivilised mob. It was a very civilised legal due process going on.

I'm not privy to what was the thought process of the Penguin side. But they must have concluded that

they have the risk of losing. So, they reached an out-of-court settlement to withdraw the book.

Now, somehow, the Western scholars are making it sound like some kind of a Hindu mob pushed them

and forced them with violence. There is no evidence of such thing; on the contrary, the entire evidence is

that it was a legal due process by which a civilised country manages disputes.

Were you part of the litigation?

I deliberately decided that this should run its course through the legal system. I do not want any part of it.

I'm available as a scholar. My criticisms of the writings are very publicly available. I've always said

anybody can quote them freely, but I don't want to be drawn into a legal matter myself.

The reason being that Wendy is one of the issues that I have raised, you know, Wendy and her whole

lineage. But I'm a scholar with many things to write about. That is not the only thing I'm concerned about.

I'm writing about Indian history of science and technology; I'm writing about comparative philosophy; I'm

writing about India as a nation and what are its narratives.

I'm writing on many topics and I don't want to get stuck in one issue that will exhaust me. I realised that I

should not personally get involved and I therefore decided to stay behind.

How else did you support the case?

I did not support them in any tangible way, but they have my ideas. They are pretty self-sufficient in how

they funded it; the group has funded it, got the lawyers, and done the whole thing on their own. I basically

lit the fire in the beginning by highlighting that these are issues.

I also hope to create a process in which Hinduism is properly interpreted and presented not only to

Hindus, but to anyone.

The thing is that every religion gets criticised. But other religions are where they are producing people

who are very qualified to represent their own religions and therefore these seminary products become

scholars and they get launched in different universities for support. For Hindus, they never set up a

seminary. So, I am a kind of a one-man show. I can only do so much.

Given the number of Hindus in the world, there are a thousand people like me who are standing there to

study this, represent it, debate it, go and argue and be available to the media. But, right now, there aren't

that many Hindus who are really well read, highly sophisticated and being able to represent because we

don't have seminaries.

So, the real solution to all this is that Hindus should use seminaries which can produce a high calibre of

leaders and then these leaders can go out there to take a stand.

A good education system should respect the non-Western culture, be it India, China, Japan, the Middle

East -- whoever. They should respect those people because Americans will be trading with them, having

partnerships with them, having different relationships with them.

It will be good for America to train the next generation of Americans to be really appreciative of various

cultures.

What kind of education did you have in India?

I went to a Catholic school from kindergarten to the end of high school. I went to St Columbus School, a

Catholic school, and I got a very good education from there. I have many Christian friends and now some

of my closest friends are Christians.

I feel that the Western mischief of intervening and creating disruption inside India is a sad thing because

Indians have had a long history of being able to get along in a very pluralistic society.

When these Westerners get in and start making fun of gods and goddesses -- all these vulgar writings

about gods and goddess, all the vulgar writings about many of the symbols, the festivals, making fun of

the gurus -- obviously, they are instigating trouble. I see it in that way.

I see it as a very sophisticated form of intervention that causes internal problems in India and then they

can blame it on Indians, as the British used to do.

Have you tried to engage with American scholars?

I have always told the American Academy that for each religion you should always have certain people

who are insiders at the table. The American Academy of Religion has 12,000 members at their annual

conference.

You go to the panel on Hinduism, they should have a few Hindus able to represent their faith: Teachers,

preachers, Sri Sri Ravi Shankar, there are people from the Ramakrishna Mission, the well-known old-

established organisations.

When they are describing something about Hinduism, they can bring in many kinds of people. But right

now they do not bring outsiders of the academy. They only bring people who are qualified academics.

These qualified academics have very Western training and have a very narrow point of view on other

religions because they are relying only on the texts.

Hinduism is not a religion of the book where you can learn everything by reading a text. You have to also

understand how it is practised and how the people who practise it, see it and interpret it.

The proper way to learn Hinduism is not only to read the text as seen by outsiders but also what is the

insider practitioners' perspective. I've suggested to them that every time there are four speakers, three of

them could be the normal American academic types; but one of them could be a practitioner who is

brought in as a voice of the Hindu community -- who will kind of represent their point of view. But they

have never accepted this.

There is a kind of a power, arrogance and a sense of 'We know more than you guys know about your own

religion'. This kind of colonial hangover continues. I think these problems that we are now noticing are

examples of things getting out of hand because people feel very insulted.

So many Hindu parents complain that when their kids go to school, they are made fun of because they

are asked all these kinds of questions: Do you worship a monkey, why do you have this dot on your head,

and so on. So these kids are vulnerable and are embarrassed.

I've become a kind of clearing house for these Hindus. People bring their problems to me and I refer them

to somebody who can help. I get approached for advice by Indian students in colleges who write to me

that they are facing a certain issue and then I get involved.

But one man cannot do this. This should not just be my job. So I organise this representation of people

who are interested in this.

Was there any other way to deal with the Doniger book instead of asking for its withdrawal?

If Penguin had said that we are going to issue a new edition, thank you for telling us, sometimes books

have an error issue, I think that would have made things OK.

But, my feeling is that Wendy Doniger, as a matter of principle and arrogance, did not want to change a

single word.

Her books have been printed and stored in airport shops. Some Indian group in Mumbai also gave her

awards. These awards were given by businessmen and industrialists who do not know anything about

religion.

I know she has a good lobby firm. She gets her students to promote her work worldwide: In the US and

the Indian press. She has all of us who have given her a privileged position where she is beyond criticism.

And so what has happened is because she enjoys this high prestige, it is not acceptable to her that all of

a sudden -- in the last 10 years -- a lot of Hindus have started complaining about her.

But this is the reality of the Internet. And, what I have done and what Hindus are now doing about this

was only possible because of the Internet. On the Internet, because of social media, people creating

blogs, people tweeting.

In the last 24 hours, I've been tweeting, a lot of people have been re-tweeting and it has become a huge

thing.

So, if it had not been for the Internet, they would have simply ignored us and continued and said who are

you, we won't bother about you. Now, they cannot ignore. I think that is a big part of it.

Several people from Princeton University and elsewhere in America, including devout Hindus,

said they like the book.

I personally am not in favour of banning any book. I have never called for a book ban in my life. I will

never do that. I'm more interested that my counter-position should get an equal voice.

My complaint is that they have banned me from all academic forums. The same Western people when

discussing religions of south Asia, they do not include me in their reviews, in their panels, in their

conferences.

The academic presses will not publish me; the literary festivals in India are so controlled by Wendy

Doniger's wavelength and fan club that people like me who represent an alternative point of view are not

allowed.

So, there is a frustration that one side controls the forums. Their people control: They are on the editorial

boards, they are on the selection committees, and their particular point of view gets in and the opposing

voice does not.

It's not a free market of ideas. It's a market controlled by certain monopolistic ideas and the opposing

ideas are not given a fair share.

I can write and sell to my Hindu followers. But they will not allow my books into the academy; they will not

allow my books to be read in the courses and even in the mainstream media.

So what is happening is that as a matter of practical reality, one side is being represented in the

mainstream channels of communication and the other side is blocked.

The argument is that Hinduism is an open-minded faith and so are Hindus. It doesn't reflect well

on Hindus.

Mahatma Gandhi was also using satyagraha against a big empire because they had too much control

and power. And he was disrupting them and bringing them down. I consider what I'm doing is a kind of

satyagraha against a very corrupt system of knowledge because it is misrepresenting knowledge: They

control the printing presses, they control the academic presses, they control the journals, their friends are

running the media.

So, their ideology is the one that gets in and therefore that is a kind of a monopoly that has to be broken.

If there was a similar monopoly in business, it would be an anti-trust case. In the business of the

humanities and knowledge, you can (have) a monopoly and there's no anti-trust law that covers that. So,

that is an issue.

In theory, yes, Hindus are very open. I'm one of them. I've coined the phrase 'open architecture'. I fully

support it.

My new book is called Hindu Open Architecture. It says it is an open architecture, people are welcome to

join, all kinds of different points of view are invited, we can criticise one another, we are evolving, we are

not fixed in time, all that is fine.

But I think the Wendy Doniger group is not allowing open architecture. They are closing this architecture.

They are bringing a point of view in such a heavy-handed way that it tends to dominate and it tends to

suppress the alternative points of view.

So some kind of counteraction is necessary and using the law is a decent thing to do.

Could the withdrawal of the book create more demand for it? People could be reading it for the

first time.

I think that is always the case. But both sides will get something out of it. The people on the other side will

play victim, that the Hindus are bad people, they banned us; they are bad guys, so they will try to get

some sympathy.

But, on the other hand, the Hindu side will also get mileage by saying we know our fight... We can win. It

will give more publicity.

More people now want to reprint my books because they want to understand what exactly was the

criticism about Wendy Doniger. So, people on both sides will be interested in the published materials.

Some people will get interested in what Wendy Doniger is about because she is controversial; she always

was. More people will also be interested in what I have to say. I keep getting calls from people in the last

48 hours wanting to get more of my stuff out.

It is more a matter of principle; we're trying to make a statement. I don't think that they're expecting that

the book will disappear because certainly you can buy it as an e-book.

The point is that the book has been out for so many years, a lot of people have bought it and it has done

very well.

Penguin has made it into a bestseller. To bring the book down is more of a moral victory.

It's not a victory in a practical sense that will make a difference. It makes a moral statement that we have

a point against this very iconic author and we are able to make this point in a legal forum.

And we are able to make it so effectively that even the publisher agrees with that.

Arundhati Roy has talked about a fascist government coming to power and has suggested it was

a factor that made Penguin withdraw the book.

I think that's stupid. I think people are trying to link too many things. These are overdone. These are

people trying to over-sensationalise. Everything you can link with Narendra Modi and fascism, you can try

to get headlines.

I would not even waste time with her because that is stupid. Arundhati Roy is not a scholar of religion.

She has not read either Wendy Doniger or critics of Wendy Doniger. They are just trying to get some

quick mileage out of it.

None of the people who are criticising this move have actually read the petition and seen what the

complaint was in the first place.

They are just trying to link all these petitions as some kind of Hindu goals and Hindu terrorists and

fascists and Taliban and so on.

I know that these people are decent people. They are regular professionals and they have hired a very

well-known, prestigious Supreme Court lawyer who has filed this in a very legal, correct way. They

prepared an argument and they got counter-arguments back and forth and so this is how Penguin

decided to settle it.

Penguin is interested in big deals and they would not have bowed down. I don't think they would have

settled for this kind of reason. They have many other titles that are very controversial. They have titles

against Modi. They are not withdrawing those... So why would they withdraw only this one title?

Copy of

Rajiv Malhotra’s Interview – Print Version On next page…

A14 NEWS SPECIAL India Abroad February 21, 2014

Rajiv Malhotra, a constant critic of WendyDoniger and what he calls her Chicago schoolof writers and thinkers, ‘retired’ at age 44some 20 years ago and put his money into theInfinity Foundation, an one-man think tank.

The Indian-American writer of books on India has devot-ed himself, for more than a decade-and-a-half, he says,“clarifying the many misperceptions about Indic traditionsin America and amongst Indians.”

When did the fight against the book start? How did it gothrough?

My involvement with this started in the year 2000. Mykids went to Princeton Day School and one day the teacherasked me for information on Vedanta, (Swami) Viveka-nanda and Ramakrishna (Paramahamsa) because in theirteaching of world religions, they wanted to have knowledgeof Hinduism.

One of the teachers told me that he has been advised bysome American scholar not to teach Vivekananda andRamakrishna because the parents would object to this.

When I asked why the parents would object, he said it hasbeen declared that Ramakrishna had a relationship withVivekananda.

I have never heard of such a thing. Westarted investigating this and asked whichscholar had said this and that is how I dis-covered a whole genre of scholarship whichhas this kind of view that Wendy Donigerand her students came up with. They usedFreudian psychoanalysis to psychoanalyze(Hinduism).

Which book has talked about Vivekanandaand Ramakrishna Parahamsa?

A book called Kali’s Child by Jeffrey JKripal. Then I found Paul Courtright, one ofWendy’s students, had a similar book calledGanesa: Lord of Obstacles, Lord ofBeginnings. They had this very vulgar kindof view.

I tried to take this around to the religious,Hindu community and they did not want to touch it. Manyof the Hindu leaders in this country may be were too arro-gant, too cocky, or too embarrassed or too scared to talkabout it. They did not think it important to take any action.

So I took it upon myself to start writing articles expressingthat these are not correct interpretations…

This issue has nothing to do with Christianity versusHinduism, because most of these people are Jewish, anyway.They are using a Marxist lens, a Leftist lens, a Freudian lens.The kind of theories they are using are completely inapplica-ble to the Indian way of life.

Then, I started attending the conferences of religion to seewhy this is happening. It was very strange. All religions hadpeople represented from within.

You would see rabbis from Judaism, Buddhist monks,Imams talking about Islam. In the case of Hinduism, therewas hardly any practicing Hindu speaking for it.

It was entirely non-Hindus who felt that they have under-stood the text, learnt Sanskrit and they were able to inter-pret it. So, I felt that this is a huge untold story.

I started writing articles. These articles created a huge stir.And, so this is the situation with these people. We compiledthese arguments in the book called Invading the Sacred that

came out in 2007, and since then I havecome out with three more books thatare not on Wendy but other issues relat-ed to Indian civilization and Indian phi-losophy and thought and so on.

I personally moved on, beyond WendyDoniger. But I have created a hugeawareness and awakening among theDiaspora and among people in India. Somany other groups started gettingimmersed and started taking my causeand they are the ones who started liti-gating on Doniger and her book and soon in India.

The person who filed the case is awoman called Monika Arora. She is avery reputed Supreme Court lawyer in

Delhi. She filed this case. There has been quite a bit of criticism against the group

that filed the case against Doniger’s book. Some people are trying to portray the Hindus involved in

this case as some kind of savages, violent people and all ofthat.

The point is that the Hindus who filed this case used therule of law, they used the courts. There is no hint of anyviolence. They are very cultured, sophisticated people.They went to the court and filed a case.

The case has been going on for over two years. There wasnever hint of any violence or anything indecent. It was alet’s go to the court and fight.

So, the Hindu site put out a petition in the court citingmany, many instances of errors in the book, sighting pagenumbers.

Some of these are not matters of interpretation, but fac-tual errors and these are available online.

There is a petition that lists many, many pages of errorsand so the opposing side of Penguin gave Wendy Doniger’spoint by point response. This went back and forth severaltimes. It was not like it was an uncivilized mob. It was avery civilized legal due process going on.

I’m not privy to what was the thought process of thePenguin side. But they must have concluded that they havethe risk of losing. So, they reached an out-of-court settle-ment to withdraw the book.

Now, somehow, the Western scholars are making itsound like some kind of a Hindu mob pushed them andforced them with violence. There is no evidence of suchthing; on the contrary, the entire evidence is that it was alegal due process by which a civilized country manages dis-putes.

Were you part of the litigation?I deliberately decided that this should run its course

through the legal system. I do not want any part of it. I’mavailable as a scholar. My criticisms of the writings are verypublicly available. I’ve always said anybody can quote themfreely, but I don’t want to be drawn into a legal mattermyself.

The reason being that Wendy is one of the issues that Ihave raised, you know, Wendy and her whole lineage. ButI’m a scholar with many things to write about. That is notthe only thing I’m concerned about.

I’m writing about the Indian history of science and tech-nology; I’m writing about comparative philosophy; I’mwriting about India as a nation and what are its narratives.I’m writing on many topics and I don’t want to get stuckinto one issue that will exhaust me. So, I realized that Ishould not personally get involved and I therefore decidedto stay behind.

How else did you support the case?I did not support them in any tangible way, but they

have my ideas. They are pretty self-sufficient in how theyhave funded it; the group has funded it, got the lawyers,and done the whole thing on their own.

I basically lit the fire in the beginning by highlightingthat these are issues.

I also hope to create a process in which Hinduism is prop-erly interpreted and presented not only to Hindus, but toanyone. The thing is that every religion gets criticized.

Rajiv Malhotra, one of WendyDoniger’s most vociferous

critics, speaks to Arthur J Pais

‘I basically lit the fire’

Rajiv Malhotra

SIVARAM V/REUTERS

A performer dressed as LordShiva at the the 30th CochinCarnival at Fort Kochi, Kochi,Kerala, January 1.

Page A15

India Abroad February 21, 2014 A15NEWS SPECIAL

But other religions are where they are producing peoplewho are very qualified to represent their own religions andtherefore these seminary productsbecome scholars and they get launchedin different universities for support. ForHindus, they never set up a seminary.

I am a kind-of-a one-man show. I canonly do so much. Given the number ofHindus in the world, there are a thou-sand people like me who are standingthere to study this, represent it, debateit, going and argue and be available tothe media.

But, right now, there aren’t that manyHindus who are really well read, highlysophisticated and being able to representbecause we don’t have seminaries.

So, the real solution to all this is thatHindus should use seminaries which canproduce high caliber of leaders and thenthese leaders can go out there to take astand.

Your children are no more at PrincetonDay School, but are you in touch with theschool?

The people who teach world religionsin Princeton Day School are entirely onmy wavelength.

There is a very good teacher. Duringthe spring break, he takes 20, 25American students to India to visit allthe sites of different religions and he alsosupports me that the bias againstHinduism in the school system is not good for anybodybecause these American students will grow up and they willbe dealing with India in some capacity.

A good education system should respect the non-Westernculture, be it India, China, Japan, the Middle East, — who-ever. They should respect those people because Americanswill be trading with them, having partnerships with them,having different relationships with them.

It will be good for America to train the next generation ofAmericans to be really appreciative of various cultures.

What kind of education did you have in India?I went to Catholic school from kindergarten to the end

of high school. I went to St Columbus school, a Catholicschool, and I got a very good education from there. I havemany Christian friends and now some of my closestfriends are Christians.

I just went to Delhi and we had a reunion of the schoolalumni. Then, I went to St Stephens’s college, which isalso a Christian college.

I feel that the Western mischief of intervening and cre-ating disruption inside India is a sad thing becauseIndians have had a long history of being able to get alongin a very pluralistic society…

When these Westerners get in and start making fun ofthe gods and goddesses – all these vulgar writings aboutgods and goddess, all the vulgar writings about many ofthe symbols, the festivals, making fun of the gurus —obviously, they are instigating trouble.

I see it in that way. I see it as a very sophisticated formof intervention that causes internal problems in India andthen they can blame it on Indians, as the British used todo.

Have you tried to engage with American scholars?I have always told the American Academy that for each

religion, you should always have certain people who areinsiders at the table.

The American Academy of Religion has 12,000 mem-bers at their annual conference. You go to the panel onHinduism, they should have a few Hindus able to repre-sent their faith: Teachers, preachers, Sri Sri Ravi Shankar,there are people from the Ramakrishna Mission, the well-known old-established organizations.

When they are describing something about Hinduism,

they can bring many kinds of people. But right now theydo not bring outsiders of the academy. They only bringpeople who are qualified academics. These qualified aca-demics have very Western training and have a very nar-row point of view on other religions because they are rely-ing only on the texts.

Hinduism is not a religion of the book where you canlearn everything by reading a text. You have to alsounderstand how it is practiced and how the people whopractice it, see it and interpret it.

The proper way to learn Hinduism is not only to readthe text as seen by outsiders, but also what is the insiderpractitioners’ perspective. So, I’ve suggested to them thatevery time they are four speakers, three of them could bethe normal American academic types; but one of themcould be a practitioner who is brought as a voice of theHindu community — who will kind of represent theirpoint of view. But they have never accepted this.

There is a kind of a power, arrogance and a sense of ‘weknow more than you guys know about your own religion.’This kind of colonialhangover continues. Ithink these are problemsthat we are now noticingare examples of thingsgetting out of handbecause people feel veryinsulted.

So many Hindu parentscomplain that when theirkids go to school, they aremade fun of because theyare asked all these kindsof questions: Do you wor-ship a monkey, why doyou have this dot on yourhead, and so on. So thesekids are vulnerable andare embarrassed.

I’ve become the kind ofclearing house for theseHindus. People bringtheir problems to me and

I refer them to somebody who canhelp. I get approached for advice byIndian students in colleges who writeto me that they are facing a certainissue and then I get involved.

But one man cannot do this. Thisshould not just be my job. So I organ-ize this representation of people whoare interested in this.

Was there any other way to deal withthe Doniger book instead of asking forits withdrawal?

If Penguin had said that we are goingto issue a new edition, thank you fortelling us, sometimes books have anerror issue, I think that would havemade things OK.

But my feeling is that WendyDoniger, as a matter of principle andarrogance, did not want to change asingle word. Her books have beenprinted and stored in airport shops.Some Indian group in Mumbai alsogave her awards. These awards weregiven by businessmen and industrial-ists who do not know anything aboutreligion. They do not have knowledge,they are not qualified.

I know she has a good lobby firm. Shegets her students to promote her work

worldwide: in the US and the Indian press. She has all ofus who have given her a privileged position where she isbeyond criticism.

And so what has happened is because she enjoys thishigh prestige, it is not acceptable to her that all of a sud-den — in the last 10 years — a lot of Hindus start com-plaining about her.

But this is the reality of the Internet. And what I havedone and what Hindus are now doing about this was onlypossible because of the Internet.

On the Internet, because of social media, people creat-ing blogs, people tweeting.

In the last 24 hours, I’ve been tweeting, a lot of peoplehave been re-tweeting and it has become a huge thing. So,if it had not been for the Internet, they would have simplyignored us and continued and said who are you, we won’tbother about you. Now, they cannot ignore. So, I thinkthat is a big part of it.

‘I basically lit the fire’

A mother and child seek blessings from a six-legged cow before heading for an annual trip toSagar Island for the festival of Makar Sankranti, in Kolkata, January 11.

RUPAK DE CHOWDHURI/REUTERS

at the University of Texas at Dallas (6/8 - 6/25)Cornell University (6/29 - 7/18)University of California,Berkeley (7/22 - 8/10). Advanced mathematicsclasses for gifted middle and high school students.

2014 AwesomeMath

Please visit www.awesomemath.org

Page A17

Page A14

India Abroad February 21, 2014 A17NEWS SPECIAL

tradictions and paradoxes of her subject, themany Hinduisms of the people now known asthe Hindus. Her likening of theMahabharata, for instance, to ‘anancient Wikipedia, to which anyonewho knew Sanskrit, or knew someonewho Sanskrit, could add a bit’ isastute. Indeed, as others have pointedout — including high-caste Hindumales — the Bhagvad Gita was prob-ably a later interpolation into theMahabharata to neutralize the revo-lutionary (or subversive) message ofBuddhism.

However, Doniger’s book is asmuch a history of Hinduism as it isher determined argument with theHindu right, which to her is an undif-ferentiated mass with no nuances ordegrees of cogency. This shows in herbook’s refusal to concede that mythsand epics could perhaps contain akernel of admittedly unproven histo-ry.

For example, she is so dismissive ofthe legend of the Seven Pagodas inMamallapuram (near Chennai) sheeven rejects Archaeological Surveyexcavations after the tsunami of2004.

That aside, Doniger is unwilling toanalyze the impact early Islamic inva-sions may have had on the contem-porary Hindu mind, only resorting toconvoluted phraseology: ‘Some of thetheft, rather than destruction, ofHindu images by Muslim conquerorswas a kind of recycling, Indian style.Like cannibalism, consuming theparts of someone else’s religious monuments may either dis-honor the source (destroying and desecrating it) or honor it(taking to yourself the power and status of the source).’

This is fine in a 21st century television debate. Is it a fair

description of Hindu sentiment in,say, AD 1200?

None of this and none ofDoniger’s insistence on overly eroti-cizing and adding a psycho-sexualtwist to what would appear to beeveryday tradition to a practicingHindu merits a ban or a withdraw-al. Indeed, egregious acts of protesttend to take away from coherentcritiques of The Hindus, and thesehave been made.

This paradox is not limited toDoniger. In his biography ofShivaji, the American historianJames Laine refers to a vague oraltradition that sees not ShahajiBhosle, but Dadoji Konddeo,Shivaji’s mentor and teacher, as hisbiological father. Credible evidenceand citations are missing.

This is a glaring omission in whatis otherwise a rigorous work ofscholarship. If challenged intellec-tually and professionally, Lainecould have been put on the back-foot. By responding with vandalismand a government ban, his oppo-nents never gave him — or them-selves actually — that chance.

IVStrictly speaking Doniger’s book

has not been removed by mob vio-lence, court order or executive deci-sion. It has been withdrawnbecause Penguin India got cold

feet, shied away from a long legal battle and settled out ofcourt. This was not different from what the publisherBloomsbury did with The Descent of Air India, written byJitender Bhargava, a former executive at the airline. The

book blamed Praful Patel, former Indian civil aviation min-ister, for the airline’s problems. When Patel threatened tosue, Bloomsbury succumbed.

What caused Penguin (and Bloomsbury) to run awayfrom the battle?

In a press release, Penguin pointed to Section 295A of theIndian Penal Code (‘Deliberate and malicious acts, intendedto outrage religious feelings or any class by insulting its reli-gion or religious beliefs’), but didn’t explain why it didn’tchallenge this provision all the way up to the Supreme Courtand contend before a judge that it was potentially in viola-tion of free speech.

More than the ethics of liberty and freedom, the answermay lie in business economics. The English language bookmarket in India is small, especially for serious scholarship ornon-fiction. Two to three thousand copies sold can make fora best-seller.

In four years, The Hindus has probably sold most of thecopies it would have in India in the normal course. Penguinmay have reckoned a long and tiring and expensive legalbattle for the book was not worth the money.

An old-fashioned book editor would deem otherwise; inmodern corporations, the lawyers and financial managerstake more pragmatic calls. That is not a criticism; it is astatement of fact.

If a blockbuster Hindi film faced such protests, its produc-ers would find a way out. They would hire top lawyers, nego-tiate, cajole, persuade, run public campaigns — do anythingto release the film, with or without minor changes. Themainstream film market in India is massive; the Big FatBook market is not. That is the bottom-line.

India’s non-fiction, social-science, interrogativeEnglish-language books industry is endangered by mul-tiple vetoes because it is so small. Unfortunately,because India’s non-fiction, social-science, interrogativeEnglish-language books industry is endangered by mul-tiple vetoes, it will remain small.

In her book, Wendy Doniger illustrates Hinduism’spropensity for multiple narratives by quoting E M Forster:‘Every Indian hole has at least two exits.’

Where, bibliophiles may ask in the current scenario,are the openings?

Ashok Malik is a Delhi-based columnist.

Page A16 ‘Wendy Doniger illustrates Hinduism’spropensity for multiple narratives’

Several people from Princeton and else-where in America, including devout Hindus,said they like the book.

I personally am not in favor in banningany book. I have never called for a book banin my life. I will never do that. I’m moreinterested that my counter position shouldget an equal voice. And my complaint isthat they have banned me from all academ-ic forums.

The same Western people when dis-cussing religions of South Asia, they do notinclude me in their reviews, in their panels,in their conferences. The academic presseswill not publish me; the literary festivals inIndia are so controlled by Wendy Doniger’swavelength and fan club that people like mewho represent an alternative point of vieware not allowed.

So, there is a frustration that one sidecontrols the forums. Their people control:They are on the editorial boards, they areon the selection committees, and their par-ticular point of view gets in and the oppos-ing voice does not.

It’s not a free market of ideas. It’s a mar-ket controlled by certain monopolisticideas and the opposing ideas are not givena fair share…

I can write and sell to my Hindu follow-ers. But they will not allow my books intothe academy; they will not allow my booksto be read in the courses and even in themainstream media.

So what is happening is that as a matterof practical reality, one side is being repre-sented in the mainstream channels of com-munication and the other side is blocked.

Argument is an open-minded faith and soare Hindus. It doesn’t reflect well on theHindus.

Gandhi was also using satyagraha againsta big empire because they had too muchcontrol and power. He was disrupting themand bringing them down. I consider whatI’m doing a kind of satyagraha against avery corrupt system of knowledge because itis misrepresenting knowledge: They controlthe printing presses, they control the aca-demic presses, they control the journals,their friends are running the media.

So their ideology is the one that gets inand therefore that is a kind of monopolythat has to be broken. If there was a similarmonopoly in business, it would be an anti-trust case… In the business of the humani-ties and knowledge, you can (have) a

monopoly and there’s no anti-trust law thatcovers that. So, that is an issue.

In theory, yes, Hindus are very open. I’mone of them. I’ve coined the phrase ‘openarchitecture.’ I fully support it. My newbook is called Hindu Open Architecture. Itsays it’s an open architecture, people arewelcome to join, all kinds of different pointsof view are invited, we can criticize oneanother, we are evolving, we are not fixed intime, all that is fine.

But I think the Wendy Doniger group isnot allowing the open architecture. Theyare closing this architecture. They arebringing a point of view in such a heavyhanded way that it tends to dominate andit tends to suppress the alternative pointsof view. So some kind of counteraction isnecessary and using the law is a decentthing to do.

Could the withdrawal of the book createmore demand for it? People could be read-ing it for the first time.

Yes, I think that is always the case. Butboth sides will get something out of it. Thepeople on the other side will play victimthat the Hindus are bad people, theybanned us, they are bad guys, so they will

try to get some sympathy. On the other hand, the Hindus’ side will

also get mileage by saying we know ourfight… We can win. It will give more public-ity. More people now want to reprint mybooks because they want to understandwhat exactly was the criticism about WendyDoniger. So, people on both sides will beinterested in the published materials.

Some people will get interested in whatWendy Doniger is about because she is con-troversial; she always was. More people willalso be interested in what I have to say. Ikeep getting calls from people in the last 48hours wanting to get more of my stuff out.

It is more a matter of principle; we’re try-ing to make a statement. I don’t think thatthey’re expecting that the book will disap-pear because certainly you can buy it as ane-book. The point is that the book has beenout for so many years, a lot of people havebought it and it has done very well.

Penguin has made it into a bestseller. Tobring the book down is more of a moral vic-tory. It’s not a victory in a practical sensethat will make a difference. It makes amoral statement that we have a pointagainst this very iconic author and we areable to make this point in a legal forum.And, we are able to make it so effectivelythat even the publisher agrees with that.

‘I basically lit the fire’Page A15

A poster of artist M F Husain is burnt by Indianactivists from a hardline Hindu group in 2006. The Satanic Verses case led to an epidemic and hasin the past 25 years taken a toll on civil libertiesand artistic freedom in India. Victims have rangedfrom James Laine (who wrote a biography of Shivaji)to M F Husain (every exhibition of whose, eventhose featuring paintings not even remotely objec-tionable, was threatened).

JAGADEESH N/REUTERS