HaindavaKeralam - Salman Rushdie Not Competent to Judge Hinduism

Home

Media Watch

Kerala Focus

Bharath Focus

World Focus

Communist / Cult Agenda

Dharma Smriti

Seva

HK Special

Salman Rushdie Not Competent to Judge Hinduism
19/03/2010 20:48:09 Dr Vijaya Rajiva

Salman Rushdie, the novelist, is now Distinguished Writer in Residence at an American university, Emory University.

After a long stint at writing and the publicity that went with the fatwa on his head after writing Satanic Verses, Rushdie has shown both that he is a skilful writer and a determined outlaster
of fatwas. One should admire him for both and wish him all success in his present avatar .

But is he competent to be an authoritative judge on Hinduism?

Clearly not. He knows next to nothing on the subject, not only because he is not well informed, but also as a Muslim growing up in India, he did not absorb anything of the religion, even by osmosis, as even a non practicing Hindu would. He simply does not know the tradition or its scripture and philosophy or its practice. Yes, he learnt a lot from Wendy Doniger’s book The Hindus: An Alternative History.

What other source did he have ?

Therefore, his pronouncement on Doniger’s book is embarassing to say the least. His further admission that he found her writing an invaluable resource, is a naïve expression of his own ignorance of Hinduism. This is what he had to say in India Today (March 14, 2010):

“ She is the most eminent scholar in the field. She is not a fly-by-night operator. I have read her and found her writing an invaluable resource,” said Rushdie, adding , “Ninety- nine point nine per cent of those who call themselves Hindus would learn and value her colossal work.”

He, Salman Rushdie, is overawed by the quantitative length of the book (as Ms. Doniger merrily and scurrilously goes along!) and is truly overwhelmed by his own ignorance of the subject . Is it any surprise that he has been taken for a ride ?

Doniger’s translations from Sanskrit have been critiqued by many scholars (both Hindu and non Hindu, Indian and Western). There are gross factual errors in the book. Does
Rushdie think he can identify them or that he is a Sankritist who can testify to the authenticity of her translations from the Sanskrit ? Does he know the Hindu tradition at all ?And although he grew up in India does he have any knowledge of Hinduism’s daily practices ?

Rushdie, buoyed by his new found successes has rushed in (no pun intended!) to evaluate an ancient civilisational religion of which he knows next to nothing. In Satanic verses, he can claim
some knowledge and understanding since it is his own faith. He is writing as an insider, so to speak. But with Hinduism, his endorsement of a fraudulent (in many people’s opinion) author’s views leaves one wondering what his motives are.

More importantly, the ninety nine point nine per cent of Hindus that Rushdie is referring to are the majority of practicing everyday Hindus who do not need his misplaced advice on what Hinduism is, thank you.

This pronouncement of Rushdie’s is an indication of the arrogance/stupidity of literary

artists who assume that success in their chosen field, automatically guarantees that they are experts and gurus in other fields.

Having read the book and reviewed the comments and criticism of Doniger’s scholarship by qualified experts, the present writer is of the opinion that Doniger’s claim to fame and name as an expert on Hinduism, is fraudulent. The NBCC (National Book Critics Circle) in
the U.S., it is believed , withdrew her name from a potential book award, after receiving criticisms and complaints about the poor quality of her scholarship.

She claims to “love Hindus” but contradicts this by writing a lengthy book that trashes everything the everyday Hindu believes in and holds sacred. This may appeal to Mr.Rushdie since he is not a Hindu. The millions of every day Hindus have not heard of this woman, but surely would be shocked and scandalized by her outpourings on a tradition that she is not familiar with and at best, has only a distorted knowledge of.

Rushdie, in supporting her alleged scholarship and touting her book as an invaluable source, is not only revealing his own ignorance of Hinduism, but is also spitting on the everyday Hindu.

(Dr.Rajiva taught Political Philosophy at a Canadian university).

Share on Facebook


Arp 24/03/2010 05:46:19	to Siddeeque Valiyakath faithfreedom.org/content/ali-sinas-challenge Siddeeque , Don't ever compare Mohammed with any other persons, Read from the above link first. 5
K.Venugopal 22/03/2010 09:26:35	Rushdie's favourable opinion would not transform fallacies into facts In all discussions about anyone's viewpoint, whether supportive or condemnatory, the motive of the person holding a particular viewpoint is often a point of consideration. Unfortunately, we also often read motives into a person's viewpoint that may not have existed in the person's intention. I think it is somewhat perilous to read motives into any person's viewpoint. Therefore a viewpoint, methinks, would be best considered if it is considered on the face value of its expression. However, the question of going beyond motives in viewpoints is applicable only in works of art or opinion. Works claiming to be non-fiction should go solely on facts. While an expression of opinion may elicit contrary and contrarian opinions, a work claimed to be non-fiction should not elicit contrary opinions. Either the fact is right or wrong. And the onus of proving it right lies squarely on the author of the work. If Ms. Doniger's work falls short in proving the facts stated therein, that parts which fail to do so would be nothing less than trash. While no one is perfect and a margin of error in any claimed piece of non-fiction can be allowed for, an unproportional amount of error would qualify the whole work as trash. Since I have not read her book in question and may not be qualified to judge where she might have been liberal with truth, some of the errors pointed out by critiques seem to me to justify the questioning of her scholarship. Rushdie may have been impressed by her scholarship because he might not be otherwise knowledgeable of the subject and may not have subjected himself to reading her critiques. Rushdie is not known to be a Hinduism expert. Therefore his opinion of Ms. Doniger's book does not amount to much. 5
Hary Nambiar 22/03/2010 08:50:05	It is a poor way to make a living Mathew would clarify that phrase he used. I took it to mean only as a criticism. Satanic Verses and De Vinci Code may be fiction, but they parallel two important concepts which the human civilization has come to respect. Despite being fiction, people associate them to those respective religious texts and one cannot deny that the authors had not intended such assumption. In that context I would consider them selfish and wicked. MF Hussein and that Danish cartoonist also fall in that category. Their claim of serving humanity through literary and artistic expression to promote freedom of expression is an effrontery to intellectual tolerance. Only like minded people would accept their work as contribution to humanity. I have no plan of buying that book and reading it. There are plenty books with less scholarly and fraudulent content. One should log into the Internet and browse contents in respect of ancient Indian civilization. There are essays written by American middle school teachers with assumptions of scholarship with foot notes “I am not a scholar on Indian history or Indian religion, etc.” It is noteworthy that Salman Rushdie also makes that assumption. That is the disadvantage of the Information age and growth of technology. All fruits on the same tree would not be of the same quality. They are of various sizes and taste. By experience, one learns to discard some while relishing others. People who object to them should write to the publishers. They could also write blogs on the Internet. The agency that should actively protest the case is the Indian Ministry of Culture. That agency could ban its publication in India. 5
Hary Nambiar 22/03/2010 08:46:25	It is a poor way to make a living I looked at the list of her publications. She does not seem to be friendly towards Indian religion, mythology or deities. On the contrary her objective seems to be to highlight Indian mythology in a disrespectful manner. No wonder her publications are available at Amazon Books at throw away price. Most academicians in religious schools in the west seems to learn Sanskrit, teach in those schools and write books on Indian Culture, Hinduism etc with a view to mudslinging against Hinduism. There is market for their output. However, I see it as a poor way to make a living. 5
Siddeeque Valiyakath 22/03/2010 03:45:51	Hats off Mr. Hary Nambiar Hats off Mr. Hari Nambiar. Your words below should be printed in golden letters. You are a light in the darkness: Love for other human beings and other creatures and recognizing the rights of every creation to be equal is a divine quality which only some teachers have accepted throughout history. Blessed are those who gave their lives to teach that simple idea. I have great respect for those religious leaders who gave up all comforts in life and even had to die for that love. I would not doubt that such divine motivation came without blessings from God. The sacrifices endured by some people are worthy of emulation and they deserve our respect. Sri Ram, Moses, Buddha, Jesus Christ, Prophet Muhammad, Gandhi, Martin Luther King etc are only a few examples. There is an individual languishing in prison in Myanmar. She stands in that category too. 5
Dr Vijaya Rajiva 22/03/2010 03:57:06	Mr.Nambiar, briefly and to the point 1. Satanic Verses and the Da Vinci Code are works of fiction. 2.Doniger's book claims to be a scholarly work and should be so judged. 3. If the scholarship is fraudulent then it must surely be critiqued ! 4.That has already been done by competent scholars in the field. Salman Rushdie is not a competent scholar in Sanskrit or Hinduism studies. I do not know who Mathew is or whether he is a scholar of Sanskrit or Hinduism Studies. 5. The people who wrote in to NBCC are competent to judge Doniger's work. That was obviously a factor in NBCC not giving the award to Doniger's book. 6. Why does Mathew call this a "hate" campaign ? Has he seen any of the letters and its contents ? 7. Why does he jump to that conclusion ? 5
Siddeeque Valiyakath 22/03/2010 03:45:51	Hats off Mr. Hary Nambiar Hats off Mr. Hari Nambiar. Your words below should be printed in golden letters. You are a light in the darkness: Love for other human beings and other creatures and recognizing the rights of every creation to be equal is a divine quality which only some teachers have accepted throughout history. Blessed are those who gave their lives to teach that simple idea. I have great respect for those religious leaders who gave up all comforts in life and even had to die for that love. I would not doubt that such divine motivation came without blessings from God. The sacrifices endured by some people are worthy of emulation and they deserve our respect. Sri Ram, Moses, Buddha, Jesus Christ, Prophet Muhammad, Gandhi, Martin Luther King etc are only a few examples. There is an individual languishing in prison in Myanmar. She stands in that category too. 5
Hary Naambiar 21/03/2010 20:03:06	I would not hurt the feelings of a billion people for the Sun and the Moon Mathew’s opinion that “emotion driven ………… fails eventually,” are meaningful and accurate and I agree with him that “Intellectual engagement is a better option in such cases.” He is a scholar whether or not he knows Sanskrit. One may probably find his word “hate” in the hate campaign he mentioned. I don’t read it negatively. Salman Rushdie, despite what I wrote about him before, is also a scholar. He is well informed and positive. One could be a scholar without knowing Sanatana Dharma and Indian philosophy. However one should not hurt the feelings of a billion people for the Sun and the Moon. I too feel that religion managers exploit weak and less informed people. God is an important concept. It would be ignorance to say that there is no God or even to doubt divinity. Love for other human beings and other creatures and recognizing the rights of every creation to be equal is a divine quality which only some teachers have accepted throughout history. Blessed are those who gave their lives to teach that simple idea. I have great respect for those religious leaders who gave up all comforts in life and even had to die for that love. I would not doubt that such divine motivation came without blessings from God. The sacrifices endured by some people are worthy of emulation and they deserve our respect. Sri Ram, Moses, Buddha, Jesus Christ, Prophet Muhammad, Gandhi, Martin Luther King etc are only a few examples. There is an individual languishing in prison in Myanmar. She stands in that category too. Painters don’t paint for the fun of it. Writers don’t make it a career for their literary interest. Musicians don’t devote their life because they are music lovers. They are all in it to make money. Some people do it honestly and competently while some others do it dishonestly, without talent or scholarship, like (what is her name?) 5
Shrinivas Tilak 21/03/2010 19:16:10	Salman Rushdie supports Professor Doniger I agree with Dr Rajiva that [Wendy Doniger] claims to “love Hindus” but contradicts this by writing a lengthy book that trashes everything the everyday Hindu believes in and holds sacred." The same is true of Salman Rushdie as his 1995 novel The Moor's Last Sigh suggests. 5
Hary Nambiar 21/03/2010 13:32:35	Campaigns against malicious work may not work, but must continue I agree with you Mathew. Campaigns against malicious information dissemination in the form of literary and artistic expression rarely work. It did not work against Salman Rushdie and MF Hussein. It would not work against the Doniger woman either. People read materials which are in tune with their belief. So an anti Muslim book in the Western Christian world would become a best seller overnight and the author of that book would be invited to Carnigie Hall to read his book before a Christian millionaire audience. Similarly a disgraceful Indian painter’s nude pictures would be a great draw in a Muslim country and the painter would be protected celebrity in those countries. I would not qualify those individuals as great achievers. They probably could sit patiently and write in readable English, or paint something well, but in order to be qualified as a great writer or an artist, one must have positive thoughts and expressions. Nothing positive was accomplished by Salman Rushdi’s writing other than making him rich. One billion or more people in the world consider Prophet Muhammad as Messenger of God and Quraan as the words of God. Regardless of the indescribable atrocities committed by Muslims through history, peoples’ reverence to the Prophet must be respected. The writer and film maker of De Vinci Code, Salman Rushdie, that Danish Cartoonist (what is his stupid name?), MF Hussien, this Doniger woman, and that stupid writer who wrote a Telugu book titled “Droupadi,” have one thing in common. They enriched by taking advantage of the divisive thoughts and attitudes of people who have certain beliefs and find the faiths of other people inferior. They are no different from the terrorists who cowardly place bombs or send suicide bombers in crowded places where innocent people mingle. I that context, I don’t see anything wrong with the “fatwa” by the Ayatollah of Iran. 5
Hary Nambiar 21/03/2010 13:28:27	Qualities of greatness against travesty and insignificance When Mr Gorbachev lost power in USSR many Universities in Japan and in western countries offered him lucrative teaching and advisory positions. He could have made a great life earning millions. However, Gorbachev refused. He lives a simple life in his native land. When Neil Armstrong became the first human being to walk on the Moon, he was offered talking assignments and advertising career worth millions of dollars, but he chose a teaching assignment and lives a quite and simple life without ever appearing in the limelight. People must have positive thoughts and attitudes. Their intellectual expressions and actions must promote peace and goodwill and make lasting contribution to humanity. In that respect, Gorbachev would be hailed throughout history for his contribution to ending the Cold War and opening up the Soviet Union for “Perastroika” and “Glassnot” – openness. How noble! As against that all those people mentioned in the first paragraph are insignificant and they should be ashamed off. In the Christian western countries people who bash and ridicule non Christian faith sell quite well and they make a good living. In Islam dominated countries, Hindu, Jewish and Christian bashers make good money too. This is not because of the lack of merits in those religions, but because people are inherently ignorant and disrespectful of other peoples’ faith and belief. Salman Rushdie getting a job at Emory University, MF Hussein getting Qatari citizenship and Rajendra Sachar getting felicitated in Saudi Arabia etc are similar examples of pampering by vested interests. Indian media’s double standards while reporting news, their interpretation in respect of what they don’t know – about Hinduism – also fall in the same category. 5
Dr Vijaya Rajiva 21/03/2010 13:18:15	Follow up to Mr.Mathew Why do you call it a hate campaign ? Have you actually seen any of the letters ? And have you read Doniger's book ? What are your thoughts on the subject ? Do you endorse it in the way Salman Rushdie has rushed to judgment about it ? Or do you know Sanskrit and Hinduism well enough to think that Doniger's work is a work of scholarship. It comes in the category of non fiction (as far as the NBCC is concerned). 5
Dr.Vijaya Rajiva 21/03/2010 12:53:26	To Mr.Mathew Your link seems not accurate. At any rate, it is quite long and the response from the website was inaccessible. Be that as it may, on the face of it your comment seems eminently sensible: intellectual engagement. However, your comment is incomplete, because the people who wrote in presumably were engaging in intellectual engagement. They were people who knew their Sanskrit, people who found many factual errors in the book and so on. In my opinion they were well within their rights to do so. Further, since you are not a Hindu (your name suggests this)it is not possible for you to understand the nature of Doniger's false interpretations. Are you a Sanskritist or a Hindu Studies scholar ? The comparison with Satanic Verses and Da Vinci code is inaccurate. Both these books are works of fiction. They do not claim to be scholarly works. 5
mathew 21/03/2010 07:06:11	Not sure.. Quote: ..the NBCC (National Book Critics Circle) in the U.S., it is believed , withdrew her name from a potential book award, after receiving criticisms and complaints about the poor quality of her scholarship. Unquote: The above does not appear to be correct. The book was not withdrawn from the list, even though it did not win. It can be checked out on this link: http://bookcritics.org/blog/archive/30_books_in_30_days_the_hindus_an_alternative_history_by_wendy_doniger/P15/. What is true is that CBCC realized there was a hate campaign against the book and disabled the comment section related to the book. It only shows how ineffective such campaigns are. In my opinion such emotion-driven campaigns creates, rightly or wrongly, prejudices against the campaigners and not against the intended target. In the cases of Satanic Verses to D Vinci Code, we have seen how it fails eventually. Intellectual engagement is a better option in such cases. 5
Rashmi Sahu 20/03/2010 22:40:40	Who is competent to teach or write about sanatan Dharma / Hinduism As far as hinduism is considered it is not one book one prophet , Hinduism is vedas in truest sense.It include all the knowledge maths, science metaphysics, astronomy, physics, health etc.The one who is competent to talk and tell with his own experience of samadahi, and in whose heart God has manifested by tapasya of yoga only is competent to speak and talk of sanatan dharma. But still i will say such soul will be like:- 1. Intense knowledge of sanskrit. 2. Whatever they will preach with experience in samadhi (Nirvikalpa) will tally hundred percent with vedas and literature written by rishis 3. Ther will follow Truth, Ahinsa, Purity(bodily and mental)and all 5 yam and Niyama of Yoga. 4. Will know all secrets of Universe through practice of Yoga including advance and will talk to God directly. 5. whatever they say will come true as They have never spoken untruth. If they say to a dead man you will live, the soul will return after leaving the body such is the power they have due to tapasya and austerities. 6. Intense knowledge of Vedas. 7. They will always say vedas and our Rishis are epitome of Truth and receptacles of only truth. 8. By reading any literature of truth they by their experience can tell what is truth and untruth. Such souls in India are 1. All ancient and present Rishis. 2 Rama Krishna, Adi shankara, swami dayanand saraswati, ramanna rishi, Trailanga swami etc 3. Sai Baba, Swami sammarath, Nityananda Bhagwan,Lahiri Mahashyaa and his chain of disciple (paramhansa yogananda). 4. All saints like Gyaneshwar, Tukaram, Tukdoji maharaj etc. We on this pure land of bharat (which means veda vaani) have countless such souls since creation. Including Jesus who only TAUGHT SANTAN DHARMA BUT NOT TODAYS DISTOTED CHRISTANITY. SAME GOES WITH BUDDHA AND JAINA TEACHERS. Truth is only one .Such soul will only utter God's word in samadhi and generally say I Ekam sat Bahuda vadanti Viprah vadanti (A veda mantra). 5
Ram 20/03/2010 06:15:35	Cultural Consolidation Rushdie may be naively/fraudulently assuming that Wendy is genuine. Naively because he may be seeing himself and his satanic verses in Wendy and her book. But we should be clearly bothered by a non ignorable segment of so called Hindus who place a similar faith in such trash as was reeled out by Wendy. This, as well know is attributable to lack of pride in dharma which is a direct fall out of continuing cultural enslavement. We should consciously strive to learn Samskritam, do sadhana, reduce English content in our daily communication, Enhance Bharateeya content in English, Regularly do Abhishekhams and Homams at home both for adhyatma sadhana & for positive influence, reduce dependence on MNC's, Replace the brush and toothpaste by neem twig / finger with Dant Manjan, eliminate bathing soap and shampoo with plain massage / Rita, Shikhakai & flour, Encourage positive TV channels like Bhakti, SVBC, aastha, samskar etc, Stop seeing the poison being dished out by cinema dominated by Khans and crosses, Encourage Hari Katha, Bharat Naatyam, Kathakali, Odissi, Mohiniattam etc, encourage children to learn traditional Bharateeya arts, Sending children to learn Vedas, Performing Upanayana, Paanigraha and other samskaraas as prescribed by shastras, making family piligrimages with bhakti and not as entertainment, visiting our mathams, performing sandhyavandanam regularly thereby leading by example etc. Not that anyone of us does not know any of the above. But we need to strive to put this into practice to stop the cultural drift and erosion of Bharateeyata in our societies and families with immediate effect. After all it is Dharmo rakshati Rakshitaha. While vocal expression of indignation at such poison is necessary, nothing can be a substitute to Sadhana, be it social / political activism. Even Dharma Prachar is secondary. What is of Urgent importance is Dharma acharana. Only this would redeem us from the mlecha onsluaght. 5

vidya kondu prabuddhar avuka
sanghatana kondu shaktar avuka
prayatnam kondu sampannar avuka

Become enlightened, through education
Become strengthened, through organization
Become prosperous, through hard work

Sri Narayana Guru