Wendy Doniger’s unconscious ‘indecent’ exposure

 

The Departments of Religious Studies and many other departments have little to produce of value than vicissitudes of their imagination and their theorizing about the past, as religion itself is losing much of its pride of place in the lives of modern generations.  In addition, the Universities, Departments, and Academicians are rated with statistical measures rather than the depth of their scholarship, academic integrity, and the value of their contribution to new knowledge, or even the quality of their work.  It is a form of academic prostitution but the bean counters rate them by the number of citations in other academicians' publications and peer reviewed journals and drive their behavior.  That has given rise to this unconscious or conscious conspiracy of academic cartels to publish something "controversial" not unlike the "yellow journalism" or sensationalism of the modern day journalists and writers.  In this manner they (the academicians) have devised a way to survive in this bean counting world or even to get promoted academically, if they are not full professors, or not tenured ones, etc. That is what I mean by academic prostitution. When the academicians degenerate to that level, the "academic freedom" becomes a great defense to promulgate "crap" like "Paul Courtright, Lane, Kripal, and even Witzel" do.  Wendy has not been any different.  Writing style and readability makes the works attractive and they cater to their admirers and their "Churchy" or "Eurocentric" pride. The book will sell and there will be many citations securing Wendy's academic standing in her own world.  To say the least, Aditi Banerjee's response is scholarly and to the point. However, it is up to us to publicize such responses widely.  As a trained Addiction Psychiatrist, and more familiar with Psychoanalytic discipline in treating patients rather than doing wild analysis of myths like these scholars of religion claim to have the freedom and authority to engage in, let me say that "Kama" is not "Sex" and "Aasakti" is not addiction. 

 

The concept of "SEX ADDICTION" is a "BASTARDIZED" CONCEPT emerging in the psychological watered down folklore literature (of the least trained Chemical Dependency counselors who are not psychoanalysts) and it is NOT A PSYCHOANALYTIC CONCEPT. To make it worse, it is not even in the terminology or vocabulary in the traditional English language nor in the traditional Western world view leave alone in the psychoanalytic parlance.  It is a concoction of the 1980's when the political power of the alcoholics and drug addicts in the American Mental Health Field became more and more perceptible and their concepts were enlarged to treat the "gambling addiction" and later "sex addiction", expanding the applicability of the twelve step programs and AA, etc. which are both rationalizations for irresponsible pleasure-seeking behaviors so the "sufferers" can take a sick role and claim helplessness. There may or may not be such thing as a gambling addict, and Yudhishitira cannot be judged to be one by using the concept of the twentieth century folklore psychology.  Similarly, to say that Lakshmana had knowledge of the word "Sex Addict" to describe his father "Dasharatha" (when the epic Ramayana was composed by the sage Valmiki) as one of the "Sex Addicts of his time" is a wild leap of imagination.  There is nothing psychoanalytic about it and one needs to explore the unconscious of the writer and see if she is dealing with sex addict ex-husbands, or friends, and/or has suffered from such ailment some time in her own life, and has not recognized that her imagination is a product of her own cultural upbringing and her own past experiences.  Fortunately, psychoanalysis is a tool, and if she wants to use it, she should know that it reveals the deep recesses of her own Unconscious more that the reality outside. That is the wonderful power of Freud's discovery and that the therapist has to be very careful that his/her interpretations of the patient's problems are not his own projections from his own past and are truly objective and applicable to the patient's problems without contamination from his own unconscious.

 

Wendy is, of course, not trained in these matters, and therefore, cannot even see how far away from reality she is in her own La-la Land when she attributes such meaning to the word "Kamaasakta." Her knowledge of Hinduism with all due respect to her scholarship and her knowledge of psychoanalysis too are at a very elementary level but highly inflated in her own self-estimation and in the estimation of her similarly ignorant colleagues in the field of religious studies who have traditionally dreaded Freud all these years and denigrated his theories because the Western Religions are fully rooted in the concept of sex as "BAD" and the guilt about sex from Adam downwards to the point of their concept of immaculate conception all indicative of their pathological handling of "sex" as a sin.  When they run into "Kama Sutra" they cannot place it in proper perspective nor do they have any healthy perspective for Tantrism (Vama Marga).  They do not realize that their value-based explorations in these areas in Hindu thought spring from their voyeuristic drives of their own phallic-oedipal phase and because of their cultural background they lose their ability to be non-judgmental. That also means they are exhibitionists at the core when they make wild interpretations revealing in a strange way their own Unconscious like Paul Courtright did and no one so far has pinned him down challenged him to see how much "cock sucking" he was exposed to in his own upbringing and in his own culture before he wildly proclaimed irresponsibly without any authentic references that (non-human character like Winnie the Pooh") "Ganesha" was a "homosexual."  Publishing readable material about sex and such is a million dollar sport in the American culture (by writing books that are semi-pornographic a la Monica Lewinski).  Wendy's unconscious exhibitionism similarly is nothing but a money making sport and to obtain more academic citations and that is what I mean by academic prostitution.  The more one becomes aware of the psychopathology of such people like Wendy, more one would need to keep away from them and leave them alone.  These academic prostitutes like Wendy, Paul Courtright, Lane, Kripal and even Witzel need no more respect than what they deserve for what they really are. These "pissing mares and horses" that are pissing on Hinduism are depleted in their estrogens and testosterones in their stage of life and have to resort to what Freud called "upward displacement" and be preoccupied with morbid perverted sexuality in their preoccupations to get their base pleasure instincts satisfied.  They are not true scholars although they have the credentials in their own disciplines, and even that is doubtful, but not at all in the field of psychoanalysis and even less so in Indology.  They cannot hold candle to Sigmund Freud and not even to Joseph Campbell. It is a shame that they are invited by the Indian scholars to have a dialogue with them in respectable Indian Universities. I hope you circulate this message to your readership.

 

Wendy is exposing strangely her own encounter with exhibitionism, her own exhibitionistic drives, and exposure to chemical dependency (addictions) and guilt over her own sexuality from her own past, and I can bet my booties you will find these all in her background if you analyze her or if she comes out clean with her background. Thanks for reading.

 

Shree Vinekar Nov. 28, 2009

Decline of indology in the West, swansong at Harvard or Chicago?

http://www.docstoc.com/docs/14440398/Decline-of-indology-in-the-West Decline of indology in the West  Post-colonial Indology was political at all levels  By Dr NS Rajaram October 18 - November 8, 2009 (Organiser) ...Ever since he moved to Harvard from Germany, Witzel has seen the fortunes of his department and his field, gradually sink into irrelevance. Problems at Harvard are part of a wider problem in Western academia in the field of Indo-European Studies. As previously noted, several ‘Indology’ departments-as they are sometimes called-are shutting down across Europe.

...Summary and conclusions  We may now conclude that Western Indology is in steep decline and may well become extinct in a generation. The questions though go beyond Indology. Sanskrit is the foundation of Indo-European Studies. If Sanskrit departments close, what will take their place? Will these departments now teach Icelandic, Old Norse or reconstructed Proto Indo-European? Will they attract students? Can Indo-European Studies survive without Sanskrit? A more sensible course would be for Indian and Western scholars to collaborate and build an empirically based study of ancient Indian and European languages- free of dogma and free of politics.  A basic problem is that for reasons that have little to do with objective scholarship, Indologists have been trying to remove Sanskrit from the special space it occupies in the study of Indo-European languages and replace it something called Proto-Indo-European of PIE. This is like replacing Hebrew with a hypothetical Proto-Semitic language in Biblical Studies. This PIE has literally proven to be a pie in the sky and the whole field is now on the verge of collapse. The resulting vacuum has to be filled by a scholarship that is both sound and empirical, based on existing languages like Sanskrit, Greek and the like. Additionally, Indian scholars will have look more to the east and search for linguistic and other links to the countries and cultures of Indonesia, Cambodia, Vietnam and others that have historic ties to India of untold antiquity.  Notes and references  This is explained in more detail in this writer’s The Politics of History and also in Vedic Aryans and the Origins of Civilization, Third Edition, by Navaratna Rajaram and David Frawley, both published by Voice of India, New Delhi. Some recent developments may be found in Sarasvati River and the Vedic Civilization by N.S. Rajaram, Aditya Prakashan, New Delhi. For the record the full name of Max Müller was Friedrich Maximillian Müller, but he is better known as Max Müller, the name used also by his descendants.  Max Müller’s aristocratic Indian friends included the Raja of Venkatagiri (who partly financed his edition of the Rigveda) as well as Dwarakanath Tagore, the grandfather of the Nobel laureate Rabindranath. When Max Müller was a struggling scholar in Paris, Tagore helped him with Sanskrit as well as financially. He knew also British and European nobility having met Queen Victoria and Prince Albert. In his early years his patrons included Dwarakanath Tagore and Baron Bunsen, the Prussian Ambassador to Britain. It is a tribute to Max Müller’s personality and liberal character that he could attract the friendship of such a wide range of people.  3. It should be noted that the Nazis appropriated their ideas and symbols from European mythology, not India. Hitler’s Aryans worshipped Apollo and Odin, not Vedic deities like Indra and Varuna. His Swastika was also the European ‘Hakenkreuz’ or hooked cross and not the Indian svasti symbol. It was seen in Germany for the first time when General von Luttwitz’s notorious Erhardt Brigade marched into Berlin from Lithuania in support of the abortive Kapp Putsch of 1920. The Erhardt Brigade was one of several freebooting private armies during the years following Germany’s defeat in World War I. They had the covert support of the Wehrmacht (Army headquarters).   (The writer can be contacted at F2, Rajatha Manor, 42, Patalamma Temple Road, South End Circle, Basavanagudi, Bangalore-560 004.) Read on... http://www.docstoc.com/docs/14440398/Decline-of-indology-in-the-West

http://www.organiser.org/dynamic/modules.php?name=Content&pa=showpage&pid=316&page=38

Hinduism Studies And Dhimmitude In The American Academy

 

Written by M. Lal Goel

THURSDAY, 22 OCTOBER 2009 11:03

PoliticalIslam.com M. Lal Goel Professor Emeritus of Political Science, www.uwf.edu/lgoel

http://www.rightsidenews.com/200910226954/global-terrorism/hinduism-studies-and-dhimmitude-in-the-american-academy.html

Hinduism Studies And Dhimmitude In The American Academy

 

Written by M. Lal Goel

THURSDAY, 22 OCTOBER 2009 11:03

PoliticalIslam.com M. Lal Goel Professor Emeritus of Political Science, www.uwf.edu/lgoel

http://www.rightsidenews.com/200910226954/global-terrorism/hinduism-studies-and-dhimmitude-in-the-american-academy.html

Oct. 29, 2009

Wendy Doniger (1) falsely and unfairly brands all of her critics as right-wing Hindutva fundamentalists, and (2) grossly mischaracterizes (and misquotes) the text of the Valmiki Ramayana Aditi Banerjee

http://www.outlookindia.com/article.aspx?262511

Dr. Karen Carr's Monkey Business

 

Originally published on www.sookta-sumana.com on November 23, 2008

 

On Peer Review of Ramayana References by Dr. Karen Carr

By Seshachalam Dutta, M.S.,Ph.D.

There is enough said about Dr. Carr’s adventures into the interpretation of Ramayana. My adding to it may be superfluous. I have to take issue with her insistence on peer review and that the commentators be Ph.Ds.

She has absolute misunderstanding of peer review process. First of all, who are peers? Peers for journal reviews are those who are specialists in a narrow discipline, peers are your colleagues or of same standing as you are as in American jury system. My being a Ph.D and a scientist with several peer reviewed publications I have something to say to Dr. Carr and she may pay attention to the nature of peer review in publications.

The difficulty in obtaining valid peer review in the U.S for Indian literature, especially Sanskrit, is that there are no recognized authorities in the U.S.  In the U.S "PhDs" are dime a dozen and one calling himself an Indologist does not insure that he/she has read original Sanskrit texts, he/she has adequate knowledge of Sanskrit, and is capable of interpreting them. Like Karen Carr, PhD, they are self-styled experts reviewing each other’s articles.  This lady is terribly mistaken that reviewers or commentators should be Ph.Ds. I would like to draw her attention to one case.

The case in point is of Sir. S. Radhakrishnan, who never earned a Ph.D. He had M.A. from Madras. But, he was the recognized authority on interpretation of Hinduism. He was Higgins Professor of Eastern Religion at Oxford and was awarded hundred honorary doctorates. Mahatma Gandhi had no Ph.D.  Karen cannot argue they would not be qualified to judge her writings. She may also know that one may not get a competent “peer" for a review. Einstein’s paper on quantum mechanics was not peer reviewed for lack of peers! It was published by the editor Max Planck, who became later another Nobel Laureate. Because of the political nature of peer review system with factors like ethnic bias or conflict of interest influencing decisions open peer review became common during 2000s. So much about her obsession with peer review.

Now a word about Ramayana, "maha kavya." The legendary story of Ramayana was known via tradition by the time Valmiki wrote it as Ramayana, as depicted in a finely illustrated one act play of Tagore. The details and embellishments were the product of the genius of Valmiki. I suggest Karen to read the original Ramayana of Valmiki to grasp the greatness of this legend and to appreciate Vanaras (mistranslated as monkeys) who were not depicted as inferior beings - no Dravidians (not South Indians)! They were superior to humans (like Superman). Hanuman could fly across the ocean, had the ability to become miniaturized being and change his form. Whole south was not filled with Vanaras. Rama encountered other humans like Gaya, a boat man, Shabari, an old lady, and there were other humans in the forest beside Vanaras. The myth that Dravidians are dark and Aryans are white is also a foolish assumption. Rama (as well as Krishna) was described as dark and extremely handsome. Neither the Vanaras nor the Rakshasas** were Dravidians. There was no concept of "Aryan race" or for that matter there was no concept of "race" then.

I commend any non-Indian who learns and writes about these works; but before that, they have to spend time and effort to learn emulating a few like David Frawley are doing it with great dedication. Until then a little humility may serve them well. 

Addendum by Shree Vinekar, M.D.

Finally, if Karen said sky is green and Indian authors without Ph.D. after their name said it is blue, the latter do not have to produce peer reviewed articles to prove their point. Everyone knows sky is blue and everyone knows there are no South Indian "bad monkeys" in Ramayana and what Karen calls Monkeys are Vanaras that are mostly Rama's friends, and allies, who are viewd for millennia as the "good monkeys." Such gross errors are indicative of the author having never read the original epic with any diligence.  Wendy Doniger, a University of Chicago Indologist, stated on the second page of her "Introduction" to Paul Courtright's infamous book on Ganesha that "Ganesha dictated Mahabharata to sage Vyasa."  It is a gross error and the reverse is the generally accepted fact all over India for millennia as presented in the authentic versions of Mahabharata. To argue that Indian scholars should produce peer reviewed articles to prove Wendy is wrong in her assertion would reflect arrogance on the part of the debator.  This is what we mean by the Monkey Business of the Western Indologists. Please see "Demystifying Shri Hanuman" on www.swaveda.com .

**P. S.  by Seshachalam Dutta

**Rakshasas  were not demons. They were demigods(Asuraas versus Suraas), endowed with super human powers, not stub-nosed short midget Dravidians as envisioned by the so called Indologists. Ravana himself was described as a dark, magnificiantly handsome person.  The greatness of Valmiki's work is to raise the standards of humanity to lofty levels even with human failings and to define nobility; Rama being described as a perfect man. When Hanuman beheld Ravana on the throne at the first sight he exclaims, what a beautiful, majestic , magnanimous, valourous and firm personality fit enough to protect the heavens, if only he would be righteous!! ( Aho rupa maho dhairya maho satwa maho dhrutih Rakshsarajasya sarvalakshana yukta- Sundara Kanda). Rama himself was astounded at the sight of Ravana in the battle field, perceiving him "as brilliant as mid day Sun," not withstanding that his enemy held his wife as captive!  Such was the grace and nobility portrayed in the epic. It is not a story of cowboys and Indians – bad guys against good guys, from the Western cartoons as comprehended by a racist Dr. Karen Carr who is probably just an anthropologist who is projecting her own conscious and unconscious conflits and guilt on the great ancient Indian poet's magnificent work of art.  Those  looking for anthropology in a classics such as Ramayana, not grasping the enormity of beauty of humanities in a classic epic that has resonated in the Hindu culture for two millennia are pathetically uninformed, looking for pits in a bowl of cherries to achieve their own ignoble goals discolored by their Christist or racial and imagined moral superiority which are replete in their Unconscious and conscious minds.

 

 Monkey business of Ms. Carr

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Shree Vinekar <shreevinekar@yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, Nov 19, 2008 at 2:34 AM
Subject: Fw: On Peer Review of Karen Carr and Ramayana
To: Karen Carr <carrk@pdx.edu>, "N.S.Rajaram" <nsrajaram@airtelmail.in>, DAVID FRAWLEY <pvshastri@msn.com>, seshachalam Dutta <seshachalamd@sbcglobal.net>, siaram <siaram@bellsouth.net>, Geeta Athreya <geetaathreya@gmail.com>, Srinivasan Kalyanaraman <kalyan97@gmail.com>, Kishen Kak <kishenkak@gmail.com>, Subhash Kak <subhashkak@gmail.com>, rajendra paladugu <paladugurajendra@yahoo.com>, Subramanian Swamy <ilky@sify.com>, n Kataria <katarian@aol.com>, "Khanderao Kand (Yahoo)" <khanderao@yahoo.com>, Pramod Pathak <drpvpathak@yahoo.co.in>, Subramanian Swamy <swamy@post.harvard.edu>, Kartini Shastry <shastry@fas.harvard.edu>, shibani joshi <sjoshi@mba2004.hbs.edu>, Jay Vinekar <jayvinekar@yahoo.com>, Sanjivani Vinekar <steve_and_sanju@yahoo.com>, Sandhya Jain <sandhya176@sify.com>




Date: Tuesday, November 18, 2008, 9:11 PM

On Peer Review of Ramayana References by Dr. Karen Carr

By Seshachalam Dutta, M.S.,Ph.D.

 

There is enough said about Dr. Carr’s adventures into the interpretation of Ramayana. My adding to it may be superfluous. I have to take issue with her insistence on peer review and that the commentators be Ph.Ds.

 

She has absolute misunderstanding of peer review process. First of all, who are peers? Peers for journal reviews are those who are specialists in a narrow discipline, peers are your colleagues or of same standing as you are as in American jury system. My being a Ph.D and a scientist with several peer reviewed publications I have something to say to Dr. Carr and she may pay attention to the nature of peer review in publications.

 

The difficulty in obtaining valid peer review in the U.S for Indian literature, especially Sanskrit, is that there are no recognized authorities in the U.S.  In the U.S "PhDs" are dime a dozen and one calling himself an Indologist does not insure that he/she has read original Sanskrit texts, he/she has adequate knowledge of Sanskrit, and is capable of interpreting them. Like Karen Carr, PhD, they are self-styled experts reviewing each other’s articles.  This lady is terribly mistaken that reviewers or commentators should be Ph.Ds. I would like to draw her attention to one case.

 

The case in point is of Sir. S. Radhakrishnan, who never earned a Ph.D. He had M.A. from Madras. But, he was the recognized authority on interpretation of Hinduism. He was Higgins Professor of Eastern Religion at Oxford and was awarded hundred honorary doctorates. Mahatma Gandhi had no Ph.D.  Karen cannot argue they would not be qualified to judge her writings. She may also know that one may not get a competent “peer" for a review. Einstein’s paper on quantum mechanics was not peer reviewed for lack of peers! It was published by the editor Max Planck, who became later another Nobel Laureate. Because of the political nature of peer review system with factors like ethnic bias or conflict of interest influencing decisions open peer review became common during 2000s. So much about her obsession with peer review.

 

Now a word about Ramayana, "maha kavya." The legendary story of Ramayana was known via tradition by the time Valmiki wrote it as Ramayana, as depicted in a finely illustrated one act play of Tagore. The details and embellishments were the product of the genius of Valmiki. I suggest Karen to read the original Ramayana of Valmiki to grasp the greatness of this legend and to appreciate Vanaras (mistranslated as monkeys) who were not depicted as inferior beings - no Dravidians (not South Indians)! They were superior to humans (like Superman). Hanuman could fly across the ocean, had the ability to become miniaturized being and change his form. Whole south was not filled with Vanaras. Rama encountered other humans like Gaya, a boat man, Shabari, an old lady, and there were other humans in the forest beside Vanaras. The myth that Dravidians are dark and Aryans are white is also a foolish assumption. Rama (as well as Krishna) was described as dark and extremely handsome. There was no concept of "Aryan race" or for that matter there was no concept of "race" then.

 

I commend any non-Indian who learns and writes about these works; but before that, they have to spend time and effort to learn emulating a few like David Frawley are doing it with great dedication. Until then a little humility may serve them well. 

 

Addendum by Shree Vinekar, M.D.

 

Finally, if Karen said sky is green and Indian authors without Ph.D. after their name said it is blue, the latter do not have to produce peer reviewed articles to prove their point. Everyone knows sky is blue and everyone knows there are no South Indian "bad monkeys" in Ramayana and what Karen calls Monkeys are Vanaras that are mostly Rama's friends, and allies, who are viewd for millennia as the "good monkeys." Such gross errors are indicative of the author having never read the original epic with any diligence.  Wendy Doniger, a University of Chicago Indologist, stated on the second page of her "Introduction" to Paul Courtright's infamous book on Ganesha that "Ganesha dictated Mahabharata to sage Vyasa."  It is a gross error and the reverse is the generally accepted fact all over India for millennia as presented in the authentic versions of Mahabharata. To argue that Indian scholars should produce peer reviewed articles to prove Wendy is wrong in her assertion would reflect arrogance on the part of the debator.  This is what we mean by the Monkey Business of the Western Indologists.

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Yamuna Harshavardhana <yamuna.harsha@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, Nov 17, 2008 at 8:31 AM
Subject: Ramayana on Kidipede -- Dr. Karen Carr
To: rossa@pdx.edu, luckettt@pdx.edu, karen@historyforkids.org

To

The President, Portland State University

 

My name is Yamuna Harshavardhana. I am a Hindu and Indian with a fair amount of knowledge of our ancient literature. In fact, I too am a writer for children on the same subject as Dr. Carr with my writings including stories from The Holy Bible. However, I should own that I have no qualification in this field but that of having read the scriptures and re-told them in the best light possible by me.

 

With this introduction, I request you to take time to look into what is happening to the image of your University's history department.

 

You could see a series of messages between Dr. Karen Carr and several scholars and practising Hindus about the way Ramayana is presented on her website Kidipede here: http://sites.google.com/site/hindunow/motivated-distortions

 

There are several fallouts of such writings:

 

For Hindus:

1. False propaganda of our history and image. VERY FALSE in the light of recent scientific knowledge where the Aryan invasion has been proven utterly false. In fact, the very term 'Aryan' has no racial mention anywhere in the ancient Indian literature.
2. Promotion of hatred between peoples. VERY BAD as history is meant to be a subject to learn about the negatives of the past and avoid them in the present for a better future. However, Dr. Carr is only continuing and perpetuating colonial ideas and attitudes.

For you:

 

1. A projection showing how ignorant your Institute can be. Remember there are people who have assimilated the epics of India like no academic can:  they breathe these epics in everyday activities and it is not merely a matter of study alone. Dr. Carr, by her own admission, is not a scholar on the Ramayana. So, she has to follow standards. The Wikipedia, for example. Better not to allow for imaginative interpretation where there is none present previously. Safe for her and for you.
2. That you are have a Christian Proselytist agenda. Certainly, there is a lot of ground to show that you are as the presentation of Jesus is VERY VERY DIFFERENT from the way Rama is presented.
3. That you are racist. That you still see 'other' people in different light. Her sympathies with 'bad monkeys' show that she is unable to see people as people but only as those with different external -- and purely cosmetic -- appearances.

For the others:

 

1. A poor exposure to the  rich and ancient epic of India, the oldest in the world and held in high esteem by the Hindus.
2. A later dawning of the truth would again debase your University.

It is, therefore, clear that you stand to gain by learning quickly from what is presently happening. You can erase out all that by doing the following:

 

1. Replace the pages with such objectionable content gleaned from not so well accepted sources with the accepted versions. It is seen that the earlier page has been replaced by another one -- better but not totally correct, not yet.
2. Get the ideas of what the practising Hindus have to say about their heritage and history before throwing in your views about an alien and completely different culture and people.
3. Apologise openly and honestly for the mistakes done. That would matter a lot to a billion people on the globe and they would all applaud your honesty and be more than willing to suport your site/University in future.

Thanks. May truth prevail. May peace prevail. May we work toward a beautiful world.

 

Sincerely,

Yamuna

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Yamuna Harshavardhana <yamuna.harsha@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, Nov 17, 2008 at 6:14 AM
Subject: Re: Monkey business of Ms. Carr creating Portland State University's fraudulent version of Ramayana
To: "S. Kalyanaraman" <kalyan97@gmail.com>

Dr. Kalyanaraman

She has changed the contents of the page now.

It was earlier this:

http://www.historyforkids.org/crafts/india/ramayana.htm

It is now this:

http://www.historyforkids.org/learn/india/literature/ramayana.htm

However, there are several mistakes -- intentional or otherwise -- and also she has again called Hanuman the 'villain' in the 'read these books' section whereas the authors of the book merely call the book 'Hanuman' and the book has been well received by HIndus and others.

Dhanyavaadah

Yamuna

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Shree Vinekar <shreevinekar@yahoo.com>
Date: Mon, Nov 17, 2008 at 12:33 AM
Subject: Fwd: Geeta Athreya's letter on Portland State University's version of Ramayana

Dear Ms. Athreya: Thank you for writing the letter to Ms. Carr.  You are absolutely correct that the characters in Ramayana are symbolic of the global comprehension of the philosophic and spiritual worldview of that time. It is a lofty literature-poetry and not meant for the concrete narrow minded Westerners who are bigots hiding behind their Ph.D.'s from Universities that teach without "knowing" and create their own versions supported by cartels of Mutual Admiration Societies in the West (West, maning Christian-European Culture).  They lack the depth, capacity to abstract, cultural nuances and meanings, and also have a "don't care" attitude.  Nevertheless, the leaders in our culture like you have the duty to at least give a corrective feedback.  The idiotic and stubborn defensiveness as well as a defiant, rude attitude of "Dr." Carr gives more insight into her character than her scholarship or her methodology for elucidating historical facts which incidentally are only tangential (non sequitur) to her assertion of South Indians being called "bad monkeys" (contrary to the authentic versions of Ramayana which depicts them as his friends and allies on the 'good' side, so even the bad monkeys is her own nonfactual distortion, she will be able to cite a reference unlike Paul Courtright who could not come up with one reference for his "limp phallus" or "homosexual, or eunuch Ganesha"). Changing this version of hers means to her losing her face and that is humiliation for her. She needs the props of her academic-peer-review type of credentials of  false "pride" even in a cheap University (compared to Princeton) like hers to propogate the falsehoods created by people of her ilk, may be in the last three centuries. She will call it her academic freedom. That is nothing but crap stirred up by these cross-cultural proctologists (and many such are cropping up in the US recently, Courtright, Singh, James, etc.) The British never comprehended and did not want to comprehend the true Indian culture, and if they did, they wanted to assign it a place in their own system to suit their colonial motives. I have described this in my writings as the Monkey Business of Oxford scholars and later emulated by Harvard, University of Chicago, and Emory and others in the US. The many American and even some German scholars are of the same lineage.  If you are interested, I would like you to read three part article on "Demystifying Shri Hanuman" on www.swaveda.com and I will be honored if you send me your comments.  Thanks for reading, Sincerely, Shree Vinekar, MD, DLFAPA, LFAACAP, MACP (No Ph.D.)

----- Original Message -----

From: Geeta Athreya

To: carrk@pdx.edu

Cc: Krishen Kak ; B Shantanu

Sent: Sunday, November 16, 2008 3:26 PM

Subject: Re: The Portland Ramayana

Dear  Ms. Carr,

 

I wonder why Universities in America would teach kids racism and animosity where there was and is none. I am a South Indian -- Tamilian to be very precise. Wonder how much you know what it is to be Tamilan born in Madras in Tamilnadu. I have never heard through out my life -- I am pretty old -- your Aryan invasion into the South story and depicting the South Indians as Bad Monkeys story!!!!!   Bad Monkeys?!!! Bad Monkeys?!!! In fact the Monkeys are so good and revered -- that recently -- there was a story by Discovery Channel how much Monkeys are revered in India and therefore how difficult it is to curtail them in urban areas.  

 

So even if the south Indians were monkeys -- in fact all of us were monkeys if you remember Darwin  ---- A Monkey is a Big Time God in India and quite rightly so !!! Hanuman the Great Monkey God is the one of most powerful concepts ever conceived and you have to be either Indian or imbibed being Indian like Dr. Frawley or Francois Gautier to know, understand  and feel all these things.  

 

In the first episode of the Story of India by the BBC South India is almost referred to as the Mother of the World because in the beginning there was probably only the South-- and we are referring to times when the Indian peninsular broke away from the Africa landmass.

 

The Ramayan is a fabulous text. It is in several languages and is a much revered text. You would do well to teach your kids that in India today it is a well loved story and text. It is also quite complicated-- so do not try to interpret and read into it knowing little. For example it is erroneously concluded that Ravan the King of Lanka was a so called Dravidian and therefore was against Aryans. It is nothing of that sort. Ravan's father was a Brahmin and therefore for all practical purposes Ravan was the Brahmin !!!! ( and if you know what that means) and Rama was the Kshatriya, helped by the monkeys. But you ignorant of the World-- Ramayana has not only the monkeys, it has eagles, bears, squirrels, other birds all helping Rama. All Indian mythology is always like this. A composite environment-- with water, wind, sun, earth, animals, birds people all coexisting, performing their roles and living according to their DHARMA. Ms. Carr go research on the word DHARMA-- there is no equivalent to it in the world.   

 

Believe me I have no animosity towards you or your university. I only say " Forgive them they know not what they say". I am always amazed how Universities -- particularly-- in the West research on people and conditions round the world and sometimes when I come across these texts or books-- I feel like saying -- Why on earth would you waste your time writing about something which you study for a short period of time and then write your thesis?  It makes no difference to us who actually live these things -- I have come across books written about my community or caste --- and I can only laugh. Well if you consider us so important go ahead and write books about us -- in the end they will all get destroyed anyway when the Great "Pralaya" ( flood) comes . Only spoken words remain-- that is why the Vedas have survived. Now don't ask me what the Vedas are  !

 

Jai Hanuman,

 

Yours sincerely,

 

Geeta Athreya. 

Annexed is a blurb about a website for kids with absolute rubbish. How to refute the nonsense indulged in by Ms. Karen Carr to teach falsehoods to kids under the aegis of Portland State University, Portland, Oregon and Archaeological Institute of America?

A good initiative is to provide for a fair account of the Hindu traditions. See website of Hinduism Today at http://www.hinduismtoday.com/education/

Clearly more needs to be done to remove the evils in the genre of what Mahatma Gandhi called the drain-inspector's report of Katherine Mayo. 

Following Gandhi, one may say that Karen Carr's is "the report of a drain inspector sent out with the one purpose of opening and examining the drains of the country to be reported upon, or to give a graphic description of the stench exuded by the opened drains."

Contrast the statement of Karen Carr with what Jules Michelet (1798-1874), the famous French historian said about  the Ramayana :

The year 1863 will remain cherished and blessed. It was the first time I could read India's great sacred poem, the divineRamayana.... This great stream of poetry carries away the bitter leaven left behind by time and purifies us. Whoever has his heart dried up, let him drench it in theRamayana. Whoever has lost and wept, let him find in it a soothing softness and Nature's compassion. Whoever has done too much, willed too much, let him drink a long draught of life and youth from this deep chalice.... Everything is narrow in the Occident. Greece is small — I stifle. Judea is dry — I pant. Let me look a little towards lofty Asia, towards the deep Orient. There I find my immense poem, vast as India's seas, blessed and made golden by the sun, a book of divine harmony in which nothing jars. There reigns a lovable peace, and even in the midst of battle, an infinite softness, an unbounded fraternity extending to all that lives, a bottomless and shoreless ocean of love, piety, clemency. I have found what I was looking for : the bible of kindness. Great poem, receive me !… Let me plunge into it ! It is the sea of milk.[i]

---

[i] Michelet, La Bible de l'humanité, volume 5 of Œuvres (Paris : Bibliothèque Larousse, 1930), p. 109-110.

kalyanaraman

[quote] Kidipede - History for Kids began in 1995 as a community service learning project for sophomores at Portland State University in Portland, Oregon. Since 2000, however, it has been entirely organized and run by Karen Carr. Dr. Carr holds a PhD in Classical Art and Archaeology from the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, and is an associate professor of History at Portland State University. Her interests lie especially in the Greek and Roman worlds, which is where this site began; we have been gradually expanding into other periods in response to audience demand. If you would like to help with this expansion by writing a page, or a whole section, we'd be delighted. We'd even pay you if we used your page. We'd also be willing to pay for peer review. If you've got a PhD in a relevant area, or similar experience (ABD is fine), and would be willing to do peer review, let us know. [unquote] 

http://www.historyforkids.org/whoweare.htm

History and Science for Middle School kids... Ramayana Project for Kids...

"The Ramayana is partly about the Aryans trying to invade the people of southern India. It's an Aryan story, and they show the people of southern India as bad monkeys - not even human. How should we feel about this? Should we not perform the play? Should we try to show that Hanuman and the monkeys are people too? How could we rewrite the play from the point of view of the southern Indians?" 

http://www.historyforkids.org/crafts/india/ramayana.htm   

Contact: e-mail Karen Carr at carrk@pdx.edu http://www.historyforkids.org/AIA.htm

AIA Society