Showing posts with label Indian. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Indian. Show all posts

2024/03/15

Full text of "Hinduism Misinterpreted: Encyclopedia Britannica insults Hinduism - Amit Raj Dhawan"

Full text of "Hinduism Misinterpreted: Encyclopedia Britannica insults Hinduism - Amit Raj Dhawan"

Full text of "Hinduism Misinterpreted: Encyclopedia Britannica insults Hinduism - Amit Raj Dhawan"
See other formats
Hinduism Misinterpreted 

Encyclopaedia Britannica insults Hinduism 

Amit Raj DHAWAN 

amitrajdhawan@gmail.com 



This work has been released under Creative Commons Attribution-No Derivative Works 3.0 Unported licence 
on May 5, 2009. For details visit: http://creativecommons.Org/licenses/by-nd/3.0/. 



This article will highlight some of the misinterpretations of Hinduism in EncyclopEedia Britannica, many of which are very offend- 
ing to any Hindu reader and those who know and respect Hinduism. The author has based this article on the contents of [1]. Text 
quoted from Encyclopcedia Britannica 2009 Student and Home Edition is in slanted red typeface. In the following lines an argu- 
ment is presented, which shows and questions the biased intentions of a popular reference source like Encyclopsedia Britannica. 
Information conveyed by an encyclopedia should be unbiased, impartial, based on facts, true to the greatest extent, and not any- 
body's personal opinion. In this light, the article on Hinduism in Encyclopaedia Britannica has been examined. The absurd choice of 
contributors of an article on Hinduism by the authorities of Encyclopaedia Britannica will also be analysed. It is felt that Britannica's 
article on Hinduism is written in a sense that ill-disposes a reader towards Hinduism, whereas this is not the case with Britannica's 
articles on other religions like Christianity, Islam, and Judaism. After thought and analysis, I have been left with an impression 
which can be best summarized in the following question: Why is EncyclopEedia Britannica hostile towards Hinduism? 



A Master's level physics text written in English 
can be read, at least most part of it, by a person 
who has a Bachelor's in English. But reading a 
text does not mean that it has been understood! 
To understand such a text on physics, at least 
one is required to have adequate knowledge of 
physics. Generally, a linguist is not a physicist. In 
this sense, what this person (who does not know 
physics) would infer from a physics text cannot be 
relied upon, and of course, before his or her find- 
ings are published, they have to be scrutinized. 
Religion is based on belief, and reliable informa- 
tion on any particular religion can be conveyed by 
a person who believes in it, has good knowledge 
about it, and therefore realises it. Authorities of 
EncyclopEedia Britannica had forgotten this fact 
when they had to publish about Hinduism, but 
they had well-remembered it when they had to 
publish material on Christianity, Islam, and Ju- 
daism. On the one hand they have chosen people 
like Rev. Henry Chadwick to write on Christian- 
ity, Fazlur Rahman, an alim, to write on Islam, 
and Rabbi Lou Hackett Silberman to write on Ju- 
daism, and on the other hand they have chosen 
Wendy Doniger, who is criticised for her nega- 
tive portrayals of Hinduism ([2], [3]), as a writer 
and editor of Hinduism. From the stated writers 
or editors of Hinduism in Encyclopaedia Britan- 
nica ([1]), none of them is a Hindu, or of Indian 
origin, or a holder of Hindu scholarship, e.g. an 
acharya. To write on Christianity, Encyclopaedia 
Britannica chose a Reverend (a priest of the Chris- 
tian church), for Islam, an alim (a Muslim learned 
in religious matters) was selected, to describe Ju- 
daism, a Rabbi (a religious leader and teacher in 
the Jewish religion) was opted, but for informa- 
tion on Hinduism they had to choose people who 
have been criticised by Hindus and academia. 
Why has Encyclopaedia Britannica been partial in 
its choice on religious matters? 

The lengthy article on Hinduism (approx. 



51 000 words) in Encyclopaedia Britannica ([1]), 
does not depict Hinduism in a positive man- 
ner, in general. It looks more of a critique of 
Hinduism, where several concepts — fairly clear 
to an average Hindu — have been predicted as 
tensions and confusions. Britannica has misrep- 
resented the concept and message of Hinduism, 
and Hindu values have been disparaged. The 
articles on Christianity, Islam, and Judaism have 
been written in a very good sense, and the evils 
of these religions have been subjugated by the 
way of presentation of those themes. In almost 
every section of [1], unnecessary contradictions 
and tensions have been mentioned with exag- 
geration. Why? It seems that the ambition of 
Encyclopaedia Britannica is to show Hinduism 
inferior to Christianity, Islam, and Judaism, but 
even then the question is: Why? 

Britannica disrespects more than 800 million 
Hindus by publishing mendacious statements 
about their religion. Some of these statements 
are extremely false, concocted, and rude. How 
painful they are to a Hindu heart, there is no 
account of that. About Lord Krishna, who is 
respected and revered by all Hindus, the article 
says ([1]): 

Krisiina was worshipped with his adulterous consort, 
Radha. 

According to reputed dictionaries [4] and [5], 
the word adulterous is related to adultery, and 
adultery refers to sex between a married man or 
woman and someone who is not their wife or hus- 
band. Consort means an associate ([5]). Neither 
through Hindu history nor through any reliable 
Hindu belief it can be stated that Lord Krishna 
had an illicit sexual relationship with Radha. 
They are symbols of pure divine love. How could 
the writers of this text, Arthur Llewellyn Basham, 
J. A. B. van Buitenen, and Wendy Doniger pub- 
lish such nonsense? How could authorities of 
Britannica allow this menace to Hindu belief? 



Amit Raj DHAWAN 



Hinduism Misinterpreted 



2/4 



Instead of mentioning the exemplary virtues of 
Lord Ram and Lord Krishna, their righteousness 
has been critically examined. Moreover, insane 
and illusionary fiction has been presented as a 
fact. In [1], it is stated: 

The story of Rama, like that of Krishna, also has a 
shadowy side. 

and 

The benevolence and beneficial activity of these fig- 
ures (Rama, Krishna, et al.) is, however, occasionally 
in doubt. Vishnu often acts deceitfully, selfishly, or 
helplessly; . . . 

And then starts the critical examination of virtues 
of Lord Ram, Lord Krishna, and Lord Vishnu. Is 
criticism the job of an encyclopedia? The sole 
task of the writers of [1] was to tarnish the image 
of Hinduism, its principles, its beliefs, its revered. 
Has Britannica examined the shadowy sides of 
Jesus, Mohammad, or Abraham? 

The preposterous imagination of the writers 
of [1] has presented an unacceptable statement 
which shows their lack of knowledge of Sanskrit 
language and Hinduism, past and present. The 
compound word shivlingam is composed of words 
shiv and lingam. Here shiv means Lord Shiv, and 
lingam means symbol. Therefore, shivlingam 
means the symbol of Shiv. Shivlingam is known 
to all Hindus as a symbol of Lord Shiv. In San- 
skrit language, it is common that one word has 
two or more meanings. Reference [6] provides 
more than 10 meanings of the word lingam. I 
state two other meanings: 1) gender, and 2) the 
male sex organ. Suppose a Sanskrit language 
student is asked to fill a medical form in San- 
skrit. There it is required to tick or cross the 
box called lingam. Common sense says that in 
the form to be filled, the word lingam means 
gender. It would not make any sense to adapt 
the second meaning (male sex organ) for this 
purpose, certainly not for female applicants. To 
clarify further, an example from English language 
will be discussed. In English language, the word 
PETER can be used in at least three different 
ways ([4]). PETER can mean: 1) name of a per- 
son, 2) to gradually stop or disappear, and 3) a 
penis. What would it mean if you ask a person, 
"Are you PETER?"? The answer is obvious, and 
so is the meaning of shivlingam. In [1], it is 
stated: 

Yet another epiphany is that of the lingam, an up- 
right rounded post, usually of stone, representing a 
phallus, in which form he is worshipped throughout 
India. 



and 



One of the most common objects of worship, whether 
in temples or in the household cult, is the lingam 
(phallus). Often much stylized and representing the 
cosmic pillar, it emanates its all-producing energy to 
the four quarters of the universe. As the symbol of 
male creative energy it is frequently combined with 
its female counterpart (yoni), the latter forming the 
base from which the lingam rises. 



Symbols can be given many meanings, but not all 
are accepted meanings. The accepted meaning of 
shivlingam is the the symbol of Shiv, and not the 
phallus. It is weird that the foundation on which 
the shivlingam rests could look like a vagina to 
the writers of [1]. The meaning of shivlingam as 
asserted by Britannica is not accepted by Hindus, 
then why has Britannica misinformed the reader, 
and hurt Hindus worldwide? Encyclopedia is not 
a stage to display insanity. The authors of [1] 
should restrict their epiphany only to themselves. 
If shivlingam represents a phallus then all cylin- 
drical objects like pens or lipsticks represent a 
phallus. 

The article does not hesitate to mention 
Hindus "killing" people of other religions, but it 
never mentions that Hindus were brutally mas- 
sacred by people of other religions. At this point, 
three excerpts from [1] have been quoted in the 
following lines. 

From time to time Hindus, especially Shaivites, took 
aggressive action against Buddhism. At least two 
Shaivite kings — the Hephthalite invader Mihirakula 
(early 6th century) and the Bengal king Sasanka 
(early 7th century) — are reported to have destroyed 
monasteries and killed monks. 



and 



These strands converged at the end of the 20th cen- 
tury in a campaign to destroy the mosque built in 
1528 by a lieutenant of the Mughal emperor Babur in 
Ayodhya, a city that has traditionally been identified 
as the place where Rama was born and ruled. In 
1992 Hindu militants from all over India, who had 
been organized by the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP; 
"World Hindu Council"), the Rashtriya Swayamsevak 
Sangh (RSS; "National Volunteer Alliance"), and the 
Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP; "Indian People's Party"), 
destroyed the mosque in an effort to "liberate" Rama 
and establish a huge "Rama's Birthplace Temple" 
on the spot. In the aftermath, several thousand 
people — mostly Muslims — were killed in riots that 
spread across North India. 

and 

It is hardly the case that Muslim rule was generally 
loathsome to Hindus. 

In [1], there is no mention of genocide of Hin- 
dus and demolition of Hindu temples by the 
Mughals [7], or sabotage of Hindu schools {gu- 
rukuls) during the British rule. Did Muslims, 
Christians, or Jews inflict any acts of ethnic 
cleansing ever? According to the articles of Is- 
lam, Christianity, and Judaism in Encyclopaedia 
Britannica — No! There is no mention of Hindu 
suffering during the Mughal empire, neither in 
the article on Hinduism ([1]) nor in the article 
on Islam ([8]) in Britannica. In recent affairs, as 
the 1992 Ayodhya episode has been mentioned, 
there is no mention of hundreds of thousands of 
Kashmiri Hindus who have been forced to leave 
their homeland by Islamic militants ([9], [10]). 
Ethnic cleansing of Hindus is not an issue for Bri- 
tannica. If one consults an encyclopedia to know 
about a religion, then he or she is interested 
in the concept of the religion. Other details, as 



Amit Raj DHAWAN 



Hinduism Misinterpreted 



3/4 



stated above in this paragraph, are not required. 
Still, if Britannica wants to publish such mate- 
rial then the publishing should be fair, and all 
religions should be treated in the same way. But 
this is not the case! In Britannica's article on 
Judaism ([11]), the atrocities imposed on Jews 
have been well-mentioned. Given below is a text 
from [11]. 

In the 20th century, particularly after the events sym- 
bolized by Auschwitz (a Nazi death camp in Poland, 
where approximately one million Jews were killed) 

The Struggle of Hindus in surviving the attacks of 
Muslim invaders in the past, and the present day 
pain of Kashmiri Hindus has not been mentioned 
anjTvhere by Britannica. Do Hindus feel pain 
without pain? 

There is no good mention of good deeds 
of Hindus or Indians in Britannica's article. It 
seems that Britannica wants to make sure that 
no Hindu feels proud after reading about his or 
her religion in Britannica, and people who would 
like to know about Hinduism from Britannica get 
the worst possible impression about Hinduism. 
The wisdom of Hindu thought has been kept in 
dark by Britannica, forget highlighting it. Words 
are very playful, little adjustment and toning can 
make a great difference. The language used to 
write Hinduism in Britannica is English but this 
English has a different "sense" than the English 
used to write Christianity, Islam, and Judaism. 
The editors of [1] have ridiculed Hinduism. They 
have mentioned, to a great extent maligned, 
Hindu history with such confidence as if they 
were witnessing the events themselves. Britan- 
nica's article ([1]) talks about one of the greatest 
spiritual orders in the world — Hinduism — but 
there is no reference to spirituality in a spiritual 
way. Britannica has well propagated the essence 
of Christianity, Islam, and Judaism, but in case 
of Hinduism, it has not. As an example of usage 
of language, an excerpt from Britannica's article 
on Islam ([8]) has been stated. 

In Baghdad the tomb of the greatest saint of all, 'Abd 
al-Qadir al-JItani, is visited every year by large num- 
bers of pilgrims from all over the Muslim world. 

In the above mentioned excerpt, the phrase: the 
greatest saint of all, sounds very positive. There 
is nothing wrong in stating your beliefs with 
pride, especially when it is a presentation of your 
core, your culture, your true self. But Britan- 
nica did not give Hindus a chance to present 
their religion, and the ones who were given the 
privilege to speak, have vilified and traduced 
Hinduism. 

Mahatma Gandhi is called father of the na- 
tion by Indians. About present-day obedience of 
his teachings, Britannica says ([1]): 

Although the memory of Gandhi continues to be 
revered by most Indians, his policies and principles 
carry little weight. The great bulk of social service 



is performed by government agencies rather than by 
voluntary bodies, whether Gandhian or other. 

From the above mentioned statement what does 
one learn about Hinduism? The statement is not 
required at all in an encyclopedia article on Hin- 
duism. Though it would be interesting to know 
if Britannica had conducted a nation wide survey 
in India to find out to what extent are Gandhi's 
policies followed there. There are many organiza- 
tions in India (too many to name) that have been 
inspired by Gandhi and are propagating his poli- 
cies and principles even today. There are many 
Indian non-governmental organizations that con- 
duct considerable social service, esp. at the time 
of national calamities. Indians have generously 
donated to the Prime Minister's National Relief 
Fund (PMNRF) to help humanity I fail to com- 
prehend on what grounds Britannica has made 
these claims. At this point, it should be adduced 
that Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS; "Na- 
tional Volunteer Alliance") that has been termed 
as a "militant" organization by Britannica, is very 
much respected in India and is known for its so- 
cial services. If it would have been a militant or- 
ganization then it would have been permanently 
banned by the Indian court of law. Fundamen- 
talist nature of Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh 
(RSS; "National Volunteer Alliance") has been 
elaborated in [1] but there no mention in [1] 
or [8], how the want for an only-Muslim state 
led to the partition of India. This resulted in the 
creation of Islamic state of Pakistan in 1947. Does 
not this show the intolerant face of Islam? One 
can say that there is no need criticise a religion 
in an encyclopedia article about it. Fine, but this 
rule should be applied equally to all religions. 
Britannica has failed to do this. 

The Christian church has been very well 
mentioned in Britannica's article on Christianity. 
In [12], an entire section with subsections has 
been written on Church and social welfare. It is 
mentioned how the Christian church has healed 
the sick, taken care of widows and orphans, and 
done good to society. Article [12] also elabo- 
rates Christian beliefs in charity and prosperity 
of all. Some excerpts from [12] are mentioned 
below. 

The Christian church has responded to the matter of 
human illness both by caring for and healing the sick 
and by expressing concern for them. 



and 



In the early church, the care of the sick was carried 
out by the deacons and widows under the leadership 
of the bishop. This service was not limited to mem- 
bers of the Christian congregation but was directed 
toward the larger community, particularly in times of 
pestilence and plague. 

and 

The Christian congregation has traditionally cared 
for the poor, the sick, widows, and orphans. 

In the above mentioned lines there is nothing 
to impugn; it is generally true. The contrast is 



Amit Raj DHAWAN 



Hinduism Misinterpreted 



4/4 



striking when one reads Britannica's view on Hin- 
duism. There is no mention of the social work 
done by Hindu organizations, e.g. provision of 
free schoohng and medical care, helping the 
needy, etc. There are many temples in India that 
offer all visitors a complete meal for free, but 
writers of [1] are blind to see the good done by 
Hindu organizations and temples. In everything 
they have tried to find a sexual angle. What was 
guiding them? About Hindu temples, all they 
have to mention is erotic art of Khajurao, where 
they have once again misinterpreted the details, 
and not to mention again, they have ridiculed 
Hindu customs and beliefs with their false asser- 
tions. In strict sense, the term devadasis, is used 
for a lady who has surrendered herself to God. 
About them [1] states: 

The god's handmaidens (devadasis) performed before 
him at regular intervals, watched by the officiants 
and lay worshipers, who were his courtiers. These 
women, either the daughters of devadasis or girls 
dedicated in childhood, may have also served as 
prostitutes. The association of dedicated prostitutes 
with certain Hindu shrines can be traced back to 
before the Christian era. 

Are these words trying to prove the connec- 
tion between Hindu shrines and prostitution? 
Several cases of sexual abuse and sex scan- 
dals concerning Christian clergy have been ex- 
posed ([13], [14], [15]). Does [12] mention these 
cases? Of course, not! Well, these things are not 
"religion" and need not to be mentioned in an 
encyclopedia article on religion. But is it fair that 
when Britannica mentions Hinduism, it spurts 
whatever ugly it feels, and when it mentions 
Christianity, it hides whatever ugly it wants? 

In the lines above, only a few of the many 
objectionable statements of [1] have been men- 
tioned and analysed. In general, Britannica's ar- 
ticle on Hinduism ([1]) is absolutely deplorable. 
The intention of my work is not to encourage 
religious rivalry. This writing is about Hinduism; 
it does not intend to show other religions in 
bad light. It was the reprehensible treatment 
of Hindu sentiments by Britannica that inspired 
this work. Academia and related works should 
endorse equality of all religions. EncyclopEedia 
Britannica has been very unjust and despicable 
in its writing on Hinduism. This can be felt very 
strongly by anyone who knows about Hinduism. 
Comparison of Britannica's articles on Hinduism, 
Christianity, Islam, and Judaism explicitly asserts 
that it has treated Hinduism unevenly and ab- 
horrently. It is strongly needed that Britannica 
replaces its mal-information about Hinduism with 
information and facts that are true, honest, and 
in which Hindus believe. After all, it is about 
their belief. Only in this way religion, which is 
based on belief, can be interpreted with the be- 
lief that it is truly interpreted and not maliciously 
misinterpreted. 



References 

[1] "Hinduism," Encyclopedia Britannica 2009 
Student and Home Edition, 2009. 

[2] K. Ramaswamy, A. de Nicolas, and A. Baner- 
jee. Invading The Sacred: An Analysis of Hin- 
duism Studies in America. New Delhi: Rupa 
& Co., 2007. 

[3] A. M. Braverman, "The interpretation of 
gods," vol. 97, no. 2, December, 2004. [On- 
line]. Available: http://magazine.uchicago. 
edu/0412/features/index.shtml [Accessed: 
May 4, 2009]. 

[4] Cambridge Advanced Learner's Dictionary. 
[CD-ROM]. Cambridge University Press, 
2003. 

[5] Merriam-Webster 11th Collegiate Dictionary. 
[CD-ROM]. Merriam-Webster, Incorporated, 
2003. 

[6] VS. Apte, The Practical Sanskrit-English Dic- 
tionary, 3rd ed. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 
1965. 

[7] H. Mukhia, The Mughals of India. Maiden, 
MA: Oxford: Blackwell Pub., 2004. 

[8] "Islam," Encyclopedia Britannica 2009 Stu- 
dent and Home Edition, 2009. 

[9] "Islamic terrorism and genocide of Kashmiri 
Pandits," [Online]. Available: http://www. 
kashmiri-pandit.org/sundry/genocide.html 
[Accessed: May 4, 2009]. 

[10] K. P S. Gill, "The Kashmiri Pandits: An eth- 
nic cleansing the world forgot," [Online]. 
Available: http://www.satp.org/satporgtp/ 
kpsgill/2003/chapter9.htm [Accessed: May 
4, 2009]. 

[11] "Judaism," Encyclopedia Britannica 2009 
Student and Home Edition, 2009. 

[12] "Christianity," Encyclopedia Britannica 2009 
Student and Home Edition, 2009. 

[13] "Timeline: US Church sex scandal," Septem- 
ber 7, 2007. [Online]. Available: 
http://news.bbc.co.Uk/2/hi/americas/ 
3872499. stm [Accessed: May 4, 2009]. 

[14] Jesmi, Amen - Oru Kanyasthreeyude At- 
makatha (Autobiography of a Nun). Kot- 
tayam: Di. Si. Buks, 2009. 

[15] C. Landau, "Sex abuse by nuns: the 
unknown story" October 2, 2007. [On- 
line]. Available: http://news.bbc. co.uk/2/ 
hi/americas/7022694.stm [Accessed: May 
4, 2009]. 

Wendy Doniger - Wikipedia

Wendy Doniger - Wikipedia

Wendy Doniger

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Wendy Doniger O'Flaherty
Wendy Doniger in May 2015
Born
Wendy Doniger

November 20, 1940 (age 83)
New York City, New York, U.S.
CitizenshipUnited States
Alma mater
Scientific career
Fields
InstitutionsUniversity of Chicago
Doctoral advisor
Doctoral studentsJeffrey KripalAlexander Argüelles[1]

Wendy Doniger O'Flaherty (born November 20, 1940) is an American Indologist whose professional career has spanned five decades. A scholar of Sanskrit and Indian textual traditions, her major works include The Hindus: An Alternative HistoryAsceticism and Eroticism in the Mythology of SivaHindu Myths: A SourcebookThe Origins of Evil in Hindu MythologyWomen, Androgynes, and Other Mythical Beasts; and The Rig Veda: An Anthology, 108 Hymns Translated from the Sanskrit.[2] She is the Mircea Eliade Distinguished Service Professor of History of Religions at the University of Chicago, and has taught there since 1978.[2] She served as president of the Association for Asian Studies in 1998.[3]

Biography[edit]

Wendy Doniger was born in New York City to immigrant non-observant Jewish parents, and raised in Great Neck, New York, where her father, Lester L. Doniger (1909–1971), ran a publishing business. While in high school, she studied dance under George Balanchine and Martha Graham.[4]

She graduated summa cum laude in Sanskrit and Indian Studies from Radcliffe College in 1962,[4] and received her M.A. from Harvard Graduate School of Arts and Sciences in June 1963. She then studied in India in 1963–1964 with a 12-month Junior Fellowship from the American Institute of Indian Studies

She received a Ph.D. from Harvard University in June 1968, with a dissertation on Asceticism and Sexuality in the Mythology of Siva, supervised by Daniel H. H. Ingalls, Sr. She obtained a D. Phil. in Oriental Studies from Oxford University, in February 1973, with a dissertation on The Origins of Heresy in Hindu Mythology, supervised by Robert Charles Zaehner.

Doniger holds the Mircea Eliade Distinguished Service Professor Chair in History of Religions at the University of Chicago.[4][5] She is the editor of the scholarly journal History of Religions,[6] having served on its editorial board since 1979, and has edited a dozen other publications in her career. In 1985, she was elected president of the American Academy of Religion,[7] and in 1997 President of the Association for Asian Studies.[3] She serves on the International Editorial Board of the Encyclopædia Britannica.

She was invited to give the 2010 Art Institute of Chicago President's Lecture at the Chicago Humanities Festival, which was titled, "The Lingam Made Flesh: Split-Level Symbolism in Hindu Art".[8]

Reception[edit]

Recognition[edit]

Since she began writing in the 1960s, Doniger has gained the reputation of being "one of America's major scholars in the humanities".[9] Assessing Doniger's body of work, K. M. Shrimali, Professor of Ancient Indian History at the University of Delhi, writes:

... it (1973) also happened to be the year when her first major work in early India's religious history, viz., Siva, the Erotic Ascetic was published and had instantly become a talking point for being a path-breaking work. I still prescribe it as the most essential reading to my postgraduate students at the University of Delhi, where I have been teaching a compulsory course on 'Evolution of Indian Religions' for the last nearly four decades. It was the beginning of series of extremely fruitful and provocative encounters with the formidable scholarship of Wendy Doniger.[10]

Doniger is a scholar of Sanskrit and Indian textual traditions.[2] By her self-description,

I myself am by both temperament and training inclined to texts. I am neither an archaeologist nor an art historian; I am a Sanskritist, indeed a recovering Orientalist, of a generation that framed its study of Sanskrit with Latin and Greek rather than Urdu or Tamil. I've never dug anything up out of the ground or established the date of a sculpture. I've labored all my adult life in the paddy fields of Sanskrit, ...[11]

Her books both in Hinduism and other fields have been positively reviewed by the Indian scholar Vijaya Nagarajan[12] and the American Hindu scholar Lindsey B. Harlan, who noted as part of a positive review that "Doniger's agenda is her desire to rescue the comparative project from the jaws of certain proponents of postmodernism".[13] Of her Hindu Myths: A Sourcebook Translated from the Sanskrit, the Indologist Richard Gombrich wrote: "Intellectually, it is a triumph..."[14] Doniger's (then O'Flaherty) 1973 book Asceticism and Eroticism in the Mythology of Śiva was a critique of the "Great tradition Śivapurāṇas and the tension that arises between Śiva's ascetic and erotic activities."[15] Richard Gombrich called it "learned and exciting";[14] however, John H. Marr was disappointed that the "regionalism" so characteristic of the texts is absent in Doniger's book, and wondered why the discussion took so long.[15][16] Doniger's Rigveda, a translation of 108 hymns selected from the canon, was deemed among the most reliable by historian of religion Ioan P. Culianu.[17] However, in an email message, Michael Witzel called it "idiosyncratic and unreliable just like her Jaiminiya Brahmana or Manu (re-)translations."[18]

Criticism[edit]

Beginning in the early 2000s, some conservative diaspora Hindus started to question whether Doniger accurately described Hindu traditions.[19] Together with some of her colleagues, she was the subject of a critique by Hindu right-wing activist speaker Rajiv Malhotra.[20] for using psychoanalytic concepts to interpret non-Western subjects. Aditi Banerjee, a co-author of Malhotra, criticised Wendy Doniger as grossly misquoting the text of Valmiki Ramayana.[21]

Christian Lee Novetzke, associate professor of South Asian Studies at the University of Washington, summarizes this controversy as follows:

Wendy Doniger, a premier scholar of Indian religious thought and history expressed through Sanskritic sources, has faced regular criticism from those who consider her work to be disrespectful of Hinduism in general.[22]

Novetzke cites Doniger's use of "psychoanalytical theory" as

... a kind of lightning rod for the censure that these scholars receive from freelance critics and 'watch-dog' organizations that claim to represent the sentiments of Hindus.[22]

Philosopher Martha Nussbaum, concurring with Novetzke, adds that while the agenda of those in the American Hindu community who criticize Doniger appears similar to that of the Hindu right-wing in India, it is not quite the same since it has "no overt connection to national identity", and that it has created feelings of guilt among American scholars, given the prevailing ethos of ethnic respect, that they might have offended people from another culture.[23]

While Doniger has agreed that Indians have ample grounds to reject postcolonial domination, she claims that her works are only a single perspective which does not subordinate Indian self-identity.[24]

Her authorship of the section describing Hindu Religion in Microsoft's Encarta Encyclopedia was criticized for being politically motivated and distorted. Following a review, the article was withdrawn.[25] Patak Kumar notes that Doniger has given a "dispassionate secular critique" of Hinduism, which is met with defensive responses by Indian scholars such as Varadaraja V. Raman, who acknowledged the "sound scholarship" of Doniger, but urged "appreciation and sensitivity" when "analyzing works regarded as sacred by vast numbers of people."[26]

The Hindus[edit]

Doniger's trade book, The Hindus: An Alternative History was published in 2009 by Viking/Penguin. According to the Hindustan TimesThe Hindus was a No. 1 bestseller in its non-fiction category in the week of October 15, 2009.[27] Two scholarly reviews in the Social Scientist and the Journal of the American Oriental Society, though praising Doniger for her textual scholarship, criticized both Doniger's poor historiography and her lack of focus.[28][29] In the popular press, the book has received many positive reviews, for example from the Library Journal,[30] the Times Literary Supplement,[31] the New York Review of Books,[32] The New York Times,[33] and The Hindu.[34] In January 2010, the National Book Critics Circle named The Hindus as a finalist for its 2009 book awards.[35] The Hindu American Foundation protested this decision, alleging inaccuracies and bias in the book.[36]

In 2011, a lawsuit was filed against Doniger and Penguin books by Dinanath Batra on the grounds that the book intentionally offended or outraged the religious sentiments of Hindus, an action punishable by criminal prosecution under Section 295A of the Indian Penal Code.[37] In 2014, as part of a settlement agreement reached with plaintiff, The Hindus was recalled by Penguin India.[38][39][40] Indian authors such as Arundhati RoyPartha ChatterjeeJeet Thayil, and Namwar Singh inveighed against the publisher's decision.[41][42] The book has since been published in India by Speaking Tiger Books.[43]

Recognition[edit]

Works[edit]

Doniger has written 16 books, translated (primarily from Sanskrit to English) with commentary nine other volumes, has contributed to many edited texts and has written hundreds of articles in journals, magazines and newspapers. These include New York Times Book ReviewLondon Review of Books, the Times Literary SupplementThe TimesThe Washington PostU.S. News & World ReportInternational Herald TribuneParabolaThe Chronicle of Higher EducationDaedalusThe Nation, and the Journal of Asian Studies.[citation needed]

Interpretive works[edit]

Published under the name of Wendy Doniger O'Flaherty:

Published under the name of Wendy Doniger:

Translations[edit]

Published under the name of Wendy Doniger O'Flaherty:

  • Hindu Myths: A Sourcebook, translated from the Sanskrit. Harmondsworth: Penguin Classics, 1975.
  • The Rig Veda: An Anthology, 108 Hymns Translated from the Sanskrit (Harmondsworth: Penguin Classics, 1981).
  • (with David GreneAntigone (Sophocles). A new translation for the Court Theatre, Chicago, production of February 1983.
  • Textual Sources for the Study of Hinduism, in the series Textual Sources for the Study of Religion, edited by John R. Hinnells (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1990).
  • (with David Grene). Oresteia. A New Translation for the Court Theatre Production of 1986. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1988).

Published under the name of Wendy Doniger:

Edited volumes[edit]

Published under the name of Wendy Doniger O'Flaherty:

Published under the name of Wendy Doniger:

See also[edit]

Notes[edit]

  1. ^ Curriculum Vitae, uchicago.edu; accessed June 16, 2016.
  2. Jump up to:a b c Shrimali 2010, p. 67.
  3. Jump up to:a b "Board of Directors: Past Presidents"Association for Asian Studies. Association for Asian Studies, Inc. Retrieved March 22, 2017.
  4. Jump up to:a b c The John U. Nef Committee on Social Thought,"Wendy Doniger profile, socialthought.uchicago.edu; accessed February 22, 2014.
  5. ^ Q&A with Wendy Doniger, the Mircea Eliade Distinguished Service Professor and author of The Hindus, news.uchicago.edu, November 5, 2009; accessed February 22, 2014.
  6. ^ History of Religions Editorial Board, press.uchicago.edu; accessed February 22, 2014.
  7. ^ "Past Presidents: Past Presidents of the AAR"aarweb.org. American Academy of Religion. Retrieved February 22, 2014.
  8. ^ Art Institute of Chicago President's Lecture[permanent dead link], chicagohumanities.org; accessed February 14, 2015.
  9. ^ Martha Craven NussbaumThe clash within: democracy, religious violence, and India's future, Harvard University Press, 2007 p.249.
  10. ^ Shrimali 2010, p. 68.
  11. ^ Doniger, Wendy, The Hindus: An Alternative History, Viking-Penguin, p. 35
  12. ^ Nagarajan, Vijaya (April 2004). "[Book Review: The Bedtrick: Tales of Sex and Masquerade]". The Journal of Religion84 (2): 332–333. doi:10.1086/421829JSTOR 421829.
  13. ^ Harlan, Lindsey (July 28, 2009). "The Implied Spider: Politics and Theology in Myth. By Wendy Doniger. American Lectures on the History of Religions 16. New York: Columbia University Press, 1998. xii + 200 pp. $26.95 cloth". Church History68 (2): 529. doi:10.2307/3170935JSTOR 3170935S2CID 154582655.
  14. Jump up to:a b Richard Gombrich, Hindu Myths: A Sourcebook Translated from the Sanskrit by Wendy Doniger O'Flaherty Religious Studies, Vol. 14, No. 2 (Jun. 1978), pp. 273–274
  15. Jump up to:a b Marr 1976, pp. 718–719.
  16. ^ Kakar, Sudhir (April 1990). "Book Review:Other People's Myths: The Cave of Echoes Wendy Doniger O'Flaherty". The Journal of Religion70 (2): 293. doi:10.1086/488386JSTOR 1203930.
  17. ^ Ioan P. Culianu, "Ask Yourselves in Your Own Hearts..." History of Religions, Vol. 22, No. 3 (Feb. 1983), pp. 284–286

    That is why, with the exception of Geldner's German translation, the most reliable modern translations of the Rgveda-W. O'Flaherty's being one of them-are only partial. However, W. O'Flaherty has, in her present translation, a wider scope than other scholars – Louis Renou, for instance, whose Hymnes speculatifs du Veda are a model of accuracy – who prefer to limit their choice to one thematic set of hymns.

  18. ^ Taylor 2011, p. 160.
  19. ^ The interpretation of gods
  20. ^ Shoaib Daniyal (2015), Plagiarism row: How Rajiv Malhotra became the Ayn Rand of Internet Hindutva, Scroll.in
  21. ^ "Wendy Doniger Falsehood".
  22. Jump up to:a b Christian Lee Novetzke, "The Study of Indian Religions in the US Academy", India Review 5.1 (May 2006), 113–114 doi:10.1080/14736480600742668
  23. ^ Martha C. Nussbaum, The Clash Within: Democracy, Religious Violence, and India's Future, (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2009), p. 248
  24. ^ "I don't feel I diminish Indian texts by writing about or interpreting them. My books have a right to exist alongside other books." Amy M. Braverman. "The interpretation of gods", magazine.uchicago.edu (University of Chicago Magazine, 97.2), December 2004; accessed February 14, 2015.
  25. ^ Sankrant Sanu (2002). "Are Hinduism studies prejudiced?".
  26. ^ Pratap Kumar, "A Survey of New Approaches to the Study of Religion in India," New Approaches to the Study of Religion: Regional, critical, and historical approaches, 2004, p. 132.
  27. ^ "Top authors this weekHindustan Times Indo-Asian News Service New Delhi, October 15, 2009
  28. ^ Shrimali 2010, p. 80: "There are several issues that need more detailed and nuanced analysis rather than straight-jacketed formulations that we read in The Hindus. These concern terminologies and chronologies invoked, perfunctory manner in which class-caste struggles have been referred to — almost casually, complex inter-religious dialogue seen only in the context of Visnu's avataras, and looking at the tantras merely in terms of sex and political power. The work rarely rises above the level of tale telling. On the whole, this is neither a serious work for students of Indian history, nor for those with a critical eye on 'religious history' of India, nor indeed it is the real Alternative History of the 'Hindus'.
  29. ^ Rocher 2012, p. 303: "She especially loves to illustrate ancient stories by interjecting comparisons with situations with which the audience is familiar: Doniger commands an unbelievably vast array of comparable material, often, though not always, from American popular culture. Doniger acknowledges that the book was not meant to be as long as it turned out to be, "but it got the bit between its teeth, and ran away from me" (p. 1). Several pages are indeed filled with "good stories" that are only loosely, some very loosely, related to the history of the Hindu religion. Going into detail on the drinking and other vices of the Mughal emperors, even though carefully documented, is a case in point (pp. 539–541). ...When it comes to legal history in the colonial period in particular, there are passages that are bound to raise ... eyebrows. ... the history of Hindu law was more complex than is represented in this volume. Anglo-Hindu law was far more than "the British interpretation of Jones's translation of Manu."
  30. ^ James F. DeRoche, Library Journal, 2009-02-15
  31. ^ David Arnold. "Beheading Hindus And other alternative aspects of Wendy Doniger's history of a mythology", Times Literary Supplement, July 29, 2009
  32. ^ David Dean Shulman'A Passion for Hindu Myths,' in New York Review of Books, Nov 19, 2009, pp. 51–53.
  33. ^ Pankaj Mishra, "'Another Incarnation'", nytimes.com, April 24, 2009.
  34. ^ A R Venkatachalapathy, "Understanding HinduismThe Hindu March 30, 2010
  35. ^ "National Book Critics Circle Finalists Are Announced", blogs.nytimes.com, January 23, 2010.
  36. ^ HAF Urges NBCC Not Honor Doniger's Latest Book Archived February 23, 2014, at the Wayback Machine, as reprinted in the Los Angeles TimesThe New Yorker and Sify
  37. ^ Kapur, Ratna (February 15, 2014). "Totalising history, silencing dissent"The Hindu. Retrieved February 15, 2014.
  38. ^ "Penguin to destroy copies of Wendy Doniger's book 'The Hindus'" The Times of India
  39. ^ "Penguin to recall Doniger's book on Hindus" The Hindu
  40. ^ "How Doniger's now-recalled 'The Hindus' ruffled Hindutva feathers" firstpost.com
  41. ^ "Academics, writers decry Penguin's withdrawal of Doniger's book, The Hindus", timesofindia.indiatimes.com; accessed February 14, 2015.
  42. ^ Buncombe, Andrew. "Arundhati Roy criticises Penguin for pulping The Hindus: An Alternative History"The Independent. Delhi. Retrieved February 14, 2015.
  43. ^ B Mahesh (December 8, 2010). "Doniger's Hindus returns, 20 months after its withdrawal"Pune Mirror. Retrieved December 16, 2015.
  44. ^ "Wendy Doniger"American Academy of Arts & Sciences. Retrieved December 16, 2021.
  45. ^ "APS Member History"search.amphilsoc.org. Retrieved December 16, 2021.
  46. ^ PEN Oakland Award Winners: Josephine Miles Award Archived January 4, 2013, at archive.today. Accessed February 22, 2014.
  47. ^ British Academy for the Humanities and Social Sciences. "The Rose Mary Crawshay Prize 2002 Awarded to Professor Wendy Doniger", britac.ac.uk; accessed February 22, 2014.
  48. ^ American Academy of Religion Martin E. Marty Public Understanding of Religion Award - Current and Past Winners, aarweb.org; retrieved February 22, 2014.
  49. ^ "Wendy Doniger Named 2015 Haskins Prize Lecture", ACLS News, October 22, 2013; accessed February 22, 2013. "A Life of Learning" by Wendy Doniger (with video; May 8, 2015 lecture at Philadelphia, PA) acls.com. Retrieved 2015-08-19.

References[edit]

  • Marr, John H. (1976). "Review of Wendy Doniger O'Flaherty: Asceticism and eroticism in the mythology of Śiva. (School of Oriental and African Studies.) Oxford University Press, 1973". Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London39 (3): 718–719. doi:10.1017/s0041977x00051892JSTOR 614803S2CID 163033725.
  • Rocher, Ludo (April–June 2012). "Review: The Hindus: An Alternative History by Wendy Doniger". Journal of the American Oriental Society132 (2): 302–304. doi:10.7817/jameroriesoci.132.2.0302JSTOR 10.7817/jameroriesoci.132.2.0302.
  • Shrimali, K. M. (July–August 2010). "Review of The Hindus: An Alternative History by Wendy Doniger". Social Scientist38 (7/8): 66–81. JSTOR 27866725.
  • Taylor, McComas (June 2011). "Mythology Wars: The Indian Diaspora, "Wendy's Children" and the Struggle for the Hindu Past". Asian Studies Review35 (2): 149–168. doi:10.1080/10357823.2011.575206S2CID 145317607.
  • Agarwal, V. (2014). New stereotypes of Hindus in Western Indology. ISBN 978-1-5058-8559-0
  • Rajiv Malhotra (2016), Academic Hinduphobia: A Critique of Wendy Doniger's Erotic School of Indology. ISBN 978-93-85485-01-5
  • Antonio de Nicolas, Krishnan Ramaswamy, and Aditi Banerjee (eds.) (2007), Invading the Sacred: An Analysis Of Hinduism Studies In America. Rupa & Co.

External links[edit]

Awards and achievements
Preceded byRose Mary Crawshay Prize
2002
and
Kate Flint
Succeeded by