Holi Discussion Appreciation

[ACHARB at MSUVX1.MEMPHIS.EDU]

Rajagopalan wrote:

>	It is natural that people want to know about other cultures and hence ask
>ask questions either publicly or privately about variuos aspetcs of a cuture .
>Hinduism is no exception to this reasonable curiosity and knowledge of  people .	It will go a long way in promoting friendship and understanding
>when non-offensive words are used . ( especially when such words give 
>a wrong and bad interpretation of a society) It is enough if people ask ,
>" how can we know about holi " wothout adding " chaotic " in the description.
>If one wants the religious aspects of the festival one can say so 
>and if one wants the social aspects then one can say that too .
>So why should anyone insist on using the same insulting terms
>used by early aggressive missionaries that were intended to misrepresent and demean
>demean others ? That is not a scientific attitude .So the indologists should refrain from using the same wrong  and insuting descriptive words by early
>19th century missionary zealots in describing hinduism . m.rajagopalan
>
   I agree with him entirely on this.  I would also add that theoretical models
appropriate in one context, say the European, may not be appropriate in the
Indian context.  Indiscriminate use of such models would only lead to
confusion.  It is obvious that the Indian Society is much more complex compared
to the relative homogeneity of the European.
I recall an earlier heated discussion on another festival, DEEPAVALI.
   The suggestion by Narahari Rao to do a study of Indology itself is worth
following.  May be a discussion of the history of Indology, its beginning,
development and evolution may bring out clearly some of the prejudices of
colonial times and whether they still persist.
sincerely, -B. N. Narahari Achar