Abuses of Indology

[Zesheng He]

3/1/96

Mr. Rajagopalan's attacks on Western Indologists are really
uncalled for. I regret this happening in Indology listserv.
I don't believe he is interpreting Khajuraho for  what it is.
He is obliged to provide the inscription he claims is in Khajuraho.
Which volume of Epigraphica Indica (EI) or Annual Report of Indian
Epigraphy (ARE) is the citation?

It is a joke that Asamese, etnically closer to Burmese & Southeast
Asia that South Asia, speak in Sanskrit!! Because Brahmin priests
were always closer to Kings, the temples in the North have Sanskrit
inscriptions. It does not mean that all strata of the hierarchically
arranged Hindu society spoke in Sanskrit. Thanks to Western scholars'
& the analytical methodolgy they fostered, we understand India's past
well. Dalit scholars, Subaltern specialists, Dravidianists would
hardly believe Mr. Rajagopalan's line of explanations.

I think Indian sculptural representaions, and literature like Kavyas
& prabandhas must be studied together. Neo-Hindu attempts to cover
them under a carpet are wrong. Equally the old Western Missionaries'
Victorian viewing lenses.

What about the Telugu & Tamil erotic Pathams. V. Narayana Rao &
A. K. Ramanujan & D. Shulman have translated them. How to interpret them?

I am neither a scholar of classical/medieval India nor my profession
is Indology. But I learnt a great deal about India by books from
University presses, written by academics in the West. We must really
welcome & nurture them. I still feel that there are too few Indologists
compared to people interested in China or Japan. For various reasons,
this happens. An Indian arthistorian told me once: If we find oil,
lot more will be interested in India's past. Also the Chinese pictorial
traditions are easy to study in a museum rather than the sculptures at
remote temples of India.

I am really ashamed of the abuses of Indology listserv.

Sincerely,
R. Ananthanarayanan