09-16-2005, 10:25 PM
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->September 16, 2005
Book review (To appear in the Quarterly Journal of Mythic Society)
National Resurgence in India, P. Parameswaran (Chief Editor),
2005. Published by Bharatheeya Vichara Kendram, Thiruvananthpuram, Kerala.
Pages, 296. Price Rs 400 (HB), Rs 350 (PB).
Reviewed by N.S. Rajaram
The volume consists of presentations made during the orientation course on "Research for National Resurgence" organized by the Bharatheeya Vichara Kendram held on August 21 - 23. As the Chief Editor P. Parameswaran observes in his introductory essay, the orientation course was organized because it was felt: "It is necessary not only to restore the academic health of the universities in Kerala but also to analyze and suggest solutions for the maladies eating into the vitals of the state."
From this statement two things become clear. First, it had a regional, more particularly Kerala focus; and second, the course was intended as a corrective measure to perceived maladies in the academic climate. But as the Chief Editor notes, the Kerala situation is not an isolated phenomenon, but part of a national malaise.
To address this somewhat general issue-not a specific area, but the more nebulous goal of improving the academic climate in Kerala, the organizers brought together a wide spectrum individuals ranging from the senior leader Murli Manohar Joshi and commentator S. Gurumurthy, to well-known academics like V.R. Panchamukhi and Chandrakala Padia as well as the enthusiast and popular writer Michel Danino. An immediately visible result is loss focus in trying to do too many things.
Such workshops and seminars can serve a useful purpose. Two notable examples, both organized by the Mythic Society in Bangalore come to mind. The first, a seminar on the Aryan problem 25 years ago, and a more recent one on the astronomical dating of the Mahabharata War. (The proceedings of both the seminars have been published by The Mythic Society.)
The next question is- do such programs add value? In the case of the two seminars just noted, the answer is an emphatic affirmative. They contain contributions by active researchers in the field and remain valuable sources even today. That is to say, they have stood the test of time.
In the case of the volume under review, the question of added value is harder to answer. To begin with, it is too recent, and secondly, the program was not a seminar with a topic but a general exhortation to initiate a national resurgence, and more particularly, Kerala resurgence. Nonetheless, this review will try to identify areas in the presentations that may continue to be relevant and a useful resource for the future.
The very goal of the program, of resurgence, proclaims unhappiness at the current state of intellectual life and the direction which it is taking. So it is no surprise that many of the contributions have a strongly defensive tone. A theme that underlies the whole program is the continued unhappiness at the Aryan invasion version of history. It is surprising this should be so, even in Michel Danino's paper (pages 71 - 98), the longest in the volume, when there is ample scientific and even literary evidence to demolish the whole thing. Since neither Danino nor any other contributor has mentioned it, here is a summary of the latest situation.
In the whole of the Rigveda, consisting of ten books with more than 1,000 hymns, the word "Arya" appears fewer than 40 times. It may occur as many times in a single page of a modern European work, like for example, in Hitler's Mein Kampf. As a result, any modern book or even a discussion on the "Aryan problem" is likely to be a commentary on the voluminous 19th and 20th century European literature on the Aryans having little or no relevance to ancient India.
This is simply a matter of the sources: not only the Rigveda, but also the whole body of ancient literature that followed it have precious little to say about Aryans and Aryanism. It was simply an honorific, which the ancient Sanskrit lexicon Amarakosha identifies as one of the synonyms for honorable or decent conduct. There is no reference to any "Aryan" type.
A remarkable aspect of this vast "Aryanology" is that after two hundred years and at least as many books on the subject, scholars are still not clear about the Aryan identity. At first they were supposed to be a race distinguished by some physical traits, but ancient texts know nothing of it. Scientists too have no use for the "Aryan race." As far back as 1939, Julian Huxley, one of the great biologists of the 20th century, dismissed it as part of "political and propagandist" literature.
Recently, there have been attempts to revive racial arguments in the name of genome research, but eminent geneticists like L. Cavalli-Sforza and Stephen Oppenheimer have rejected it. The M17 genetic marker, which is supposed to distinguish the "Caucasian" type (politically correct for Aryan), occurs with the highest frequency and diversity in India, showing that among its carriers, the Indian population is the oldest.
<b>It is not without reason that knowledgeable scholars today are calling the whole enterprise not AIT (Aryan invasion theory) but AIP (Aryan invasion propaganda). A similarly rigorous analysis of linguistic claims not only demolishes the linguistic version of Aryan theories, but also casts serious doubts about the assumptions that underlie the whole of Indo-European linguistics.</b>
Unfortunately, neither Danino not anyone else mention these recent epoch making findings. What we get instead are recycled arguments and polemics based on old, mostly European sources. The same participants who complain about Eurocentric distortions keep on using European sources, pitting one opinion against another. This leaves the reader to choose the particular authority that he or she happens to agree with!
The problem is unfamiliarity with the primary sources and not keeping up with progress in science and their implications for history. Only Dr. Murli Manohar Joshi, a scientist and former academic unequivocally states that persons aspiring to study India must master Indian languages, especially Sanskrit, and also science. As he pointedly notes- if we can learn English, we should certainly be able to learn Sanskrit.
Another weakness of the program, one that seems to run through other programs with similar goals and themes, is excessive emphasis on what is termed 'spirituality.' This often amounts to little more than religiosity or a religious view as understood by the follower of one or other particular mystical cult. It may be Sri Aurobindo or Ramana Maharhsi-both great souls no doubt-but it is seldom made clear how one could use them to inspire the youth today to undertake research for resurgence or anything else.
As far as the specific contributions are concerned, the reviewer found three that went beyond the routine fare that is the staple of well intentioned but poorly focused programs: (1) "Maladies in our social science research programs" by V.R. Panchamukhi; (2) "Decolonizing social sciences and women's studies" by Chandrakala Padia; and (3) "The Indian tradition in science and technology," by M.D. Srinivas. These contain valuable insights and research pointers that need further exploration.
In summary, national resurgence, including Kerala resurgence, cannot be brought about by adopting a defensive mindset and lamenting past injustices. It needs a positive approach and a willingness to come to grips with the challenges-and the opportunities-today. Every challenge is also an opportunity.
This reviewer would suggest that workshops like this can serve a useful purpose, but only if properly planned and organized. But they must offer more than platitudes and polemics. They must add value, meaning they must produce something that will remain useful to researchers a few years hence.
In order not to leave on an entirely critical tone the reviewer would suggest a workshop on two major areas of current activity: (1) epigraphy and paleography and their implications for ancient Indian history and chronology; (2) findings in natural history including genetics, which are revolutionizing our views of ancient populations and migrations. Even tutorials by experts would be invaluable.
The reviewer hopes that the suggestion will be taken up by individuals and organizations in a position to organize such programs. The youth should be brought into any such programs, which at the present time seems to be limited to veterans some of whom are no longer actively engaged in research. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Book review (To appear in the Quarterly Journal of Mythic Society)
National Resurgence in India, P. Parameswaran (Chief Editor),
2005. Published by Bharatheeya Vichara Kendram, Thiruvananthpuram, Kerala.
Pages, 296. Price Rs 400 (HB), Rs 350 (PB).
Reviewed by N.S. Rajaram
The volume consists of presentations made during the orientation course on "Research for National Resurgence" organized by the Bharatheeya Vichara Kendram held on August 21 - 23. As the Chief Editor P. Parameswaran observes in his introductory essay, the orientation course was organized because it was felt: "It is necessary not only to restore the academic health of the universities in Kerala but also to analyze and suggest solutions for the maladies eating into the vitals of the state."
From this statement two things become clear. First, it had a regional, more particularly Kerala focus; and second, the course was intended as a corrective measure to perceived maladies in the academic climate. But as the Chief Editor notes, the Kerala situation is not an isolated phenomenon, but part of a national malaise.
To address this somewhat general issue-not a specific area, but the more nebulous goal of improving the academic climate in Kerala, the organizers brought together a wide spectrum individuals ranging from the senior leader Murli Manohar Joshi and commentator S. Gurumurthy, to well-known academics like V.R. Panchamukhi and Chandrakala Padia as well as the enthusiast and popular writer Michel Danino. An immediately visible result is loss focus in trying to do too many things.
Such workshops and seminars can serve a useful purpose. Two notable examples, both organized by the Mythic Society in Bangalore come to mind. The first, a seminar on the Aryan problem 25 years ago, and a more recent one on the astronomical dating of the Mahabharata War. (The proceedings of both the seminars have been published by The Mythic Society.)
The next question is- do such programs add value? In the case of the two seminars just noted, the answer is an emphatic affirmative. They contain contributions by active researchers in the field and remain valuable sources even today. That is to say, they have stood the test of time.
In the case of the volume under review, the question of added value is harder to answer. To begin with, it is too recent, and secondly, the program was not a seminar with a topic but a general exhortation to initiate a national resurgence, and more particularly, Kerala resurgence. Nonetheless, this review will try to identify areas in the presentations that may continue to be relevant and a useful resource for the future.
The very goal of the program, of resurgence, proclaims unhappiness at the current state of intellectual life and the direction which it is taking. So it is no surprise that many of the contributions have a strongly defensive tone. A theme that underlies the whole program is the continued unhappiness at the Aryan invasion version of history. It is surprising this should be so, even in Michel Danino's paper (pages 71 - 98), the longest in the volume, when there is ample scientific and even literary evidence to demolish the whole thing. Since neither Danino nor any other contributor has mentioned it, here is a summary of the latest situation.
In the whole of the Rigveda, consisting of ten books with more than 1,000 hymns, the word "Arya" appears fewer than 40 times. It may occur as many times in a single page of a modern European work, like for example, in Hitler's Mein Kampf. As a result, any modern book or even a discussion on the "Aryan problem" is likely to be a commentary on the voluminous 19th and 20th century European literature on the Aryans having little or no relevance to ancient India.
This is simply a matter of the sources: not only the Rigveda, but also the whole body of ancient literature that followed it have precious little to say about Aryans and Aryanism. It was simply an honorific, which the ancient Sanskrit lexicon Amarakosha identifies as one of the synonyms for honorable or decent conduct. There is no reference to any "Aryan" type.
A remarkable aspect of this vast "Aryanology" is that after two hundred years and at least as many books on the subject, scholars are still not clear about the Aryan identity. At first they were supposed to be a race distinguished by some physical traits, but ancient texts know nothing of it. Scientists too have no use for the "Aryan race." As far back as 1939, Julian Huxley, one of the great biologists of the 20th century, dismissed it as part of "political and propagandist" literature.
Recently, there have been attempts to revive racial arguments in the name of genome research, but eminent geneticists like L. Cavalli-Sforza and Stephen Oppenheimer have rejected it. The M17 genetic marker, which is supposed to distinguish the "Caucasian" type (politically correct for Aryan), occurs with the highest frequency and diversity in India, showing that among its carriers, the Indian population is the oldest.
<b>It is not without reason that knowledgeable scholars today are calling the whole enterprise not AIT (Aryan invasion theory) but AIP (Aryan invasion propaganda). A similarly rigorous analysis of linguistic claims not only demolishes the linguistic version of Aryan theories, but also casts serious doubts about the assumptions that underlie the whole of Indo-European linguistics.</b>
Unfortunately, neither Danino not anyone else mention these recent epoch making findings. What we get instead are recycled arguments and polemics based on old, mostly European sources. The same participants who complain about Eurocentric distortions keep on using European sources, pitting one opinion against another. This leaves the reader to choose the particular authority that he or she happens to agree with!
The problem is unfamiliarity with the primary sources and not keeping up with progress in science and their implications for history. Only Dr. Murli Manohar Joshi, a scientist and former academic unequivocally states that persons aspiring to study India must master Indian languages, especially Sanskrit, and also science. As he pointedly notes- if we can learn English, we should certainly be able to learn Sanskrit.
Another weakness of the program, one that seems to run through other programs with similar goals and themes, is excessive emphasis on what is termed 'spirituality.' This often amounts to little more than religiosity or a religious view as understood by the follower of one or other particular mystical cult. It may be Sri Aurobindo or Ramana Maharhsi-both great souls no doubt-but it is seldom made clear how one could use them to inspire the youth today to undertake research for resurgence or anything else.
As far as the specific contributions are concerned, the reviewer found three that went beyond the routine fare that is the staple of well intentioned but poorly focused programs: (1) "Maladies in our social science research programs" by V.R. Panchamukhi; (2) "Decolonizing social sciences and women's studies" by Chandrakala Padia; and (3) "The Indian tradition in science and technology," by M.D. Srinivas. These contain valuable insights and research pointers that need further exploration.
In summary, national resurgence, including Kerala resurgence, cannot be brought about by adopting a defensive mindset and lamenting past injustices. It needs a positive approach and a willingness to come to grips with the challenges-and the opportunities-today. Every challenge is also an opportunity.
This reviewer would suggest that workshops like this can serve a useful purpose, but only if properly planned and organized. But they must offer more than platitudes and polemics. They must add value, meaning they must produce something that will remain useful to researchers a few years hence.
In order not to leave on an entirely critical tone the reviewer would suggest a workshop on two major areas of current activity: (1) epigraphy and paleography and their implications for ancient Indian history and chronology; (2) findings in natural history including genetics, which are revolutionizing our views of ancient populations and migrations. Even tutorials by experts would be invaluable.
The reviewer hopes that the suggestion will be taken up by individuals and organizations in a position to organize such programs. The youth should be brought into any such programs, which at the present time seems to be limited to veterans some of whom are no longer actively engaged in research. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->