> "entry qualifications"? If Sen knows this, it is a new discovery. I don't think anyone knows anything about how 'students' were granted 'admission' to 'study' at Nalanda. The entire presentation of Nalanda as a 'university' with 'students' who come to 'study' there is, to my mind, fantastical.

Is not the office of intellectually high-ranking dvārapālas, who were to decide about admission to Buddhist centres of learning of the Nālandā calibre,  mentioned in foreign pilgrims' accounts ? Their function would have been to test the mental skills of aspirants. I have only a very faint memory, certainly dating back more than thirty years, of having read about that in Chinese and/or Tibetan accounts. I am almost sure that for instance Śāntarakṣita, too, did hold such a position. Unless the function of a monastic dvārapāla was not entirely different from the one I am (hopefully correctly) recalling, it was probably an office of such a kind Sen might have borne in mind when writing about "entry qualifications".

Regards,
WS

-----------------------------
Prof. Dr. Walter Slaje
Hermann-Löns-Str. 1
D-99425 Weimar
Deutschland


2015-07-14 9:15 GMT+02:00 Jonathan Silk <kauzeya@gmail.com>:
Thank you Patrick! From the first: "Academics are good at deconstructing everyone’s privileges but their own."
Never a truer word was spoken!

Although it goes back a few days, may I take this opportunity also briefly to respond to Andrew's worthwhile question: "Maybe Jonathan can tell us what struck him as false, fantastic, ignorant, etc., as opposed to hyperselective."?

A catalog is not appropriate, and I am well aware that Sen is not an Indologist (although one might think that it is not very hard to run such a piece by a friend or colleague who is before one publishes), but:

"As an institution of higher learning, where the entry qualifications were high, Nalanda was supported by a network of other educational organizations that

provided information about Nalanda and also helped to prepare students for studying there."


"entry qualifications"? If Sen knows this, it is a new discovery. I don't think anyone knows anything about how 'students' were granted 'admission' to 'study' at Nalanda. The entire presentation of Nalanda as a 'university' with 'students' who come to 'study' there is, to my mind, fantastical. This spirit permeates the piece. 


"Special care was taken to demolish the beautiful statues of Buddha and other Buddhist figures that were spread across the campus."


Setting aside 'campus', I don't think again that there is any evidence for this, and rather, it seems to me that when monasteries were sacked in North India the goal was almost entirely economic. The 'beautiful statues' were often made of precious substances or encrusted with jewels; my guess--but it is nothing more than that--is that there is at least a whiff of some idea that one might connect this sack of Nalanda with the destruction of the Bamiyan Buddhas, which is historically, and typologically, an entirely unrelated event.

Birgit has already referred much more authoritatively than I could to the discussion of debate; I have nothing to add.


One more:


"The issue of the spread of knowledge was raised in a conversation in the seventh century when Xuan Zang completed his studies and

was considering going back to China. The professors at Nalanda asked Xuan Zang to stay on as a member of the faculty."


The professors? The faculty? Completed his studies? Andrew would perhaps not characterize this as fantastic, but I think it fundamentally and entirely misrepresents the very nature of Nalanda, and plops it right down in the European context to which Sen wishes to equate the Indian institution.


Finally, and unrelated, a random question: is it just because he thinks his NYRB readers will expect it that Sen refers to Lokesh Chandra as Chandra? It's one name, LokeshChandra, right?!


I would like to sincerely thank the colleagues who have helped place this discussion in the wider context, of which I was entirely ignorant, of contemporary Indian politics. It is an interesting, but depressing, story, which unfortunately seems to hold serious lessons for those of us in Europe also dealing with State control over education and resources.


Jonathan


On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 7:23 AM, Patrick Olivelle <jpo@uts.cc.utexas.edu> wrote:
Writing from my temporary home in Delhi, those of you interested in the Amartya Sen and Nalanda University fiasco, my profitably read these two essays. The first is by a friend, Pratap Bhanu Mehta (who taught at Harvard). He is a very incisive and insightful public intellectual and analyst of Indian politics and society.

http://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/columns/nalanda-is-a-syndrome/99/

http://thewire.in/2015/07/13/goodbye-sen-welcome-yeo/

With best wishes from monsoon soaked Delhi,

Patrick
_______________________________________________
INDOLOGY mailing list
INDOLOGY@list.indology.info
indology-owner@list.indology.info (messages to the list's managing committee)
http://listinfo.indology.info (where you can change your list options or unsubscribe)



--
J. Silk
Leiden University
Leiden University Institute for Area Studies, LIAS
Matthias de Vrieshof 3, Room 0.05b
2311 BZ Leiden
The Netherlands


_______________________________________________
INDOLOGY mailing list
INDOLOGY@list.indology.info
indology-owner@list.indology.info (messages to the list's managing committee)
http://listinfo.indology.info (where you can change your list options or unsubscribe)