A recent
essay by Wendy Doniger on the website of The Christian Post (December
30, 2010) is titled: Is Yoga a form of Hinduism? Is Hinduism a form of
Yoga? Which leads me to ask: Is American anthropology a form of
Donigerism?
Or does Doniger manifest a form of American anthropology? More amazing
to me than Doniger's inventiveness is
her reputation as an infallible authority on Hinduism. Many Americans
would sooner turn to her than to a Hindu for answers on Hinduism, even
if
the latter were a scholar. Anyway, what is someone with Doniger's
personal and publishing
history doing on a conservative Christian website that publishes
strongly
anti-gay viewpoints? Hoping she won't be
noticed, perhaps?
Like
many whose responses roiled the blogosphere, I was outraged by Joel Stein's columnin
TIME magazine (July 5, 2010)
in which he described how Indian immigrants have altered his hometown of Edison, New
Jersey. But
when I shared the letter of protest I sent TIME's editors, I found to my
surprise that several on my email list thought I had overreacted to the column.
I found similar sentiments reflected in the Wall Street Journal blog IndiaReal Time. A
commentary
on the furor by Pranay Gupte appeared in the Indian newspaper, The Hindu. (July 1 2010). In it, Mr.
Gupte says "I know Mr. Stein well, and he is scarcely a racist." I'm
sure that is true. I'm sure too, that Mr. Stein has soft puppy-brown eyes; that
he is kind to his grandmother; and that he writes columns that many find
hilarious. All of the above does not change the fact that the column in
question is just plain offensive.Which
is why it baffles me when, instead of rapping him on the knuckles for knuckleheaded
writing, fellow Indians jump up to provide more creative excuses for Stein than
does Stein himself.
The goal of this chapter is to examine the Hindu understanding of ahimsa or non-violence by comparing the personalities of Yudishthira in the Mahabharata and the Mauryan Emperor Ashoka.Doniger's arguments present both personalities as being much more ambiguous in their convictions than is widely held: she cites more than one instance to support her claim that they were "hedging," implying that they allowed themselves strategic loopholes in their interpretation of morality.The author's central purpose in this chapter is to highlight the violence towards animals in the Mahabharata, as well as violence among them, and derive metaphors for human relationships from these conflicts.Also novel is Doniger's contention, with no credible basis other than personal bias, that certain narratives about animals are really coded guidelines for the treatment of Pariahs.
The goal of this chapter is to examine the Hindu understanding of ahimsa or non-violence by comparing the personalities of Yudishthira in the Mahabharata and the Mauryan Emperor Ashoka.