[INDOLOGY] A regressive face of Indology at the World Sanskrit Conference

Tue Aug 14 18:08:50 UTC 2018

Dear colleagues and friends,

I’ve read Ananya’s article closely. The regressive face of Indology did indeed make its way into the WSC, even in Vancouver, unfortunately. The email Audrey sent us is an opportunity for us, I think, to reflect on how the current identitarian trend in India damages our studies. What could we do to resist political agenda that threatens our studies and our colleagues? It was my first WSC and I have to say that I was very much alarmed by the presence of a group of people who were trying to intimidate others and who were able to intervene without the slightest regard for academic etiquette, without the slightest regard for the moderators. They would talk without raising their hands and keep the floor for ages, ruining the discussions. Their talks were not scholarly criticism but invectives. One of them did say at the end of a lecture that we should not use the word “brahmanism.” During the panel on Śaṅkara, while an Indian philosophy doctoral student from Paris put Śaṅkara in his historical context, these people simply hijacked the discussion at the end of her talk to tell her right away that she could not say what she was saying. I don’t know who these people were, if they gave a paper themselves or if they came to the WSC only to try and ruin the discussions and to put pressure on scholars. I have been told about these two events that took place after Tuesday evening’s lecture on gender and caste that I attended. A good number of people in the audience yelled at Kaushal Panwar, Ananya Vajpeyi and Mandakranta Bose. And even though Adheesh requested these yellers many times to be respectful, it didn’t have any effect. I’m afraid they simply hijacked the discussion, not allowing other voices to be heard. This may be why Ananya has the feeling that “The Western academics present maintained an uncomfortable silence, as though passively witnessing an internal dispute among Indians.” I’m afraid we simply didn’t have the possibility to speak in the midst of all this yelling and had to witness this verbal abuse frustrated and powerless.

I’m mentioning these events but I’m sure some others happened during the whole conference. There was at least another instance at the end of Csaba Dezso’s talk: the way he elegantly dismissed the irrelevant objection that was made to him was very much enjoyable. There was also this little booklet produced by the RSS (samskrit samsthan and not svayam sevak even though it seems now that the two RSS are getting nearer and nearer) with a mention of astrolomy (sic) and all the other sciences that for sure originated in ancient India.  

I finally stood up and raised the issue during the general assembly on the last day. I said that the WSC was a scholarly event and that no one was entitled to tell us what we can say and what we cannot say, which words we can use and which words we cannot use, that any scholar should feel free to tackle any subject as long as it is done from a scholarly point of view. I tried to be diplomatic: I didn’t use the words “censorship, intimidation, ideology and political agenda” but unfortunately these are the issues we have to face. It seems to me that the members of the board didn’t really get my point but at the end of the assembly some of our colleagues, mostly Indian colleagues, came to thank me. Somehow I think it should have been up to an eminent professor to stand up. It would have had much more impact. After my speech one of the intimidators talked in Sanskrit. I was too tired to follow his speech, I’m afraid, but I could recognize the expression svayamsevak. If anyone was at the general assembly and listened to the speech of this person I would be very eager to know what he actually said. He was one of the persons who yelled at Ananya Vajpeyi and Kaushal Panwar.

Since I have returned from Vancouver, I’ve been talking about these problems with every colleague I meet. Some of them told me that it was worse in Delhi and Bangkok. I’m not sure that this is really a reason to feel reassured. I have been told by some eminent colleagues that they had decided not to attend any WSC after Delhi because of these problems. As far as I’m concerned even though I get their point of not wanting to give a seal of approval to these people, I wonder whether boycotting the WSC is not a dangerous move as it would leave the floor completely open for these people. Of course we could be wise enough to take the high ground and think with Dekker and Herman Tieken that “one should not argue with believers, as this only leads to frustration.” But is it really the wisest move? Shouldn’t we at least take an official stand to say that what happened is inacceptable? Maybe the board of the WSC should take the decision to prevent any politician from giving a speech during the WSC, even in the inauguration. The board could also make clear that scholarly etiquette has to be followed by all the participants during the discussions. I suppose these two decisions would be the least we could expect. In addition, efforts should be made to secure funding from sources that would not offer an open door to such elements, though I recognize that such funding may be hard to find. What else could we do to move the mountain, to defend our studies and our colleagues in India for whom, I have to admit, I feel quite worried? I’m wondering how free they can feel to pursue their research in such an atmosphere.

I went to the WSC very naively without knowing anything about the petition against Sheldon Pollock’s editorship of the Murty Classical Library of India and about the role that Kutumba Shastry, the president of the International Association of Sanskrit Studies, played in it. One can of course criticize Sheldon Pollock or Wendy Doniger or any scholar from an academic point of view, but the use of intimidation and censorship is simply inacceptable. 

Iris Iran FARKHONDEH, PhD
Université Paris 3 - Sorbonne nouvelle
Mondes iranien et indien

> Le 14 août 2018 à 17:44, Tieken, H.J.H. via INDOLOGY <indology at list.indology.info> a écrit :
> 
> When traveling by train I dip into Multatuli's seven-volume Ideas (Multatuli is the pseudonym of Eduard Douwes Dekker, 1820-1887). Somewhere (at this moment I am unable to locate the passage) he quotes a French contemporary author who would have said that one should not argue with believers, as this only leads to frustration. I think Professor Vajpeyi's article is a good example of such an experience.
> If you google "arguing with believers" you will find many references to the Bible and biblical studies There are many more academic fields where arguments don't hold (from my own experience, Old Tamil studies). I agree with Professor Truschke, however, that we should not give up. But what would be the best approach?
> Herman 
> 
> Herman Tieken
> Stationsweg 58
> 2515 BP Den Haag
> The Netherlands
> 00 31 (0)70 2208127
> website: hermantieken.com <http://hermantieken.com/>
> Van: INDOLOGY [indology-bounces at list.indology.info] namens Audrey Truschke via INDOLOGY [indology at list.indology.info]
> Verzonden: dinsdag 14 augustus 2018 14:15
> Aan: Indology List
> Onderwerp: [INDOLOGY] A regressive face of Indology at the World Sanskrit Conference
> 
> Dear Friends and Colleagues,
> 
> This article <https://www.thehindu.com/opinion/op-ed/how-to-move-a-mountain/article24682600.ece>, by Professor Vajpeyi, is a must-read. For many on this list, it will not be news that Indology has entrenched problems with sexism and elitism; many in our discipline are also soft on Hindutva. For others, some or all of these things may be surprising.
> 
> I encourage everyone to read with an open mind, rather than with a posture of umbrage and denial that has become all-too-common these days. As Professor Vajpeyi describes, the reception of the public forum at the 17th World Sanskrit Conference in Vancouver was an appalling display of unprofessionalism, misogyny, and class privilege, a "regressive face of Indology." My friends - We need to ask ourselves some tough questions about what sorts of prejudices and behaviours we are tolerating and harboring in our corner of the scholarly world. We tend to be quite good at exercising a critical gaze when it comes to mimamsa, kavya, and so forth. I hope we can do the same with ourselves.
> 
> All the Best,
> 
> Audrey
> 
> Audrey Truschke
> Assistant Professor
> Department of History
> Rutgers University-Newark
> _______________________________________________
> INDOLOGY mailing list
> INDOLOGY at list.indology.info
> indology-owner at list.indology.info (messages to the list's managing committee)
> http://listinfo.indology.info (where you can change your list options or unsubscribe)

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://list.indology.info/pipermail/indology/attachments/20180814/b21d382f/attachment.htm>