>  I don't defend "German Indology" because I am German. I defend it because German Indology has been good Indology.

-- If you defend German Indology because you are German, there is no anauchitya in it. You might be saying this to say that your statement German Indology is a good Indology is not a subjective or biased statement but an objective and unbiased one. that intention is well taken. But at the same time, reacting or responding to statements about our respective countries/nations as members of those nations has no anouchitya. 

Trying to appear as though we have overcame our love for our own individual prestige, prestige of our family, prestige of our educational institute of our affiliation, nation of our origin, nation of our current belonging etc. is unnecessary. 

Expressions such as का ते कांता?  कस्ते पुत्रः ? suit a संन्यासी, a renounced ascetic , not a संसारी  , a family person. Within the reference frame of  संसारी ,  expressions such as का ते कांता?  कस्ते पुत्रः ? are not only anauchitya but even infidelity and treachery to that system. In Telugu there is an idiom meaning "dry Vedanta" used in reference to such usages of extreme level ascetic Vedanta used by family people with mundane interests. 

-----------------------------

Coming to the word German Indology, I must confess that my understanding of -logy of -logy in the case of Indology is not adavanced enough to distinctly identify German Indology from other strands of Indology. Prof.s Vishwa Adluri and Joydeep Bagchee even talk of German Indology of 18th and 19th centuries as their focus. That is too much of a minute nuance to my level of understanding. Some time ago, some people asked me to respond to their posts and responses to their posts. I responded to them saying that the issues such as antisemitism in German Indology (of 18th and 19th centuries) etc. raised by them are not studied by me so well. 

Later, a few months ago, I got the opportunity to meet the two professors in India. That was their talk on Mahabharata. They were doing a poorvapaksha of the view that Mahabharata is full of self-contradictions etc. 

---------------------------------

Antisemitism might look to be straw man used by the critiques of early or old German Indology to malign it using the Hitler, Nazis, genocide etc.  

But 'Hinduism' and Indian nationalism have been greater victims of this straw man based on Hitler, Nazis and genocide because the symbol of swastika associated with 'Hinduism' and the word nationalism in Indian nationalism are repeatedly invoked to stereotype 'Hinduism', Indian nationalism etc. as fascist, Nazi-like, genocidal in tendency etc. The word German Indology is not popular beyond the readers of the publications of Profs Adluri and Bagchee. But the  repeated invoking of stereotypes of 'Hinduism', Indian nationalism etc. as fascist, Nazi-like, genocidal in tendency etc  is found almost everywhere including popular political discourse. Connection of German Indology with antisemitism may at least give an impression of being reasonable. But why Hinduism should be bad because Hitler used its sacred symbol or why Indian nationalism should be bad because Hitler and Nazis were 'nationalists' or because they used the unscientific racist term 'Aryan', is beyond the comprehension of any reasonable understanding. 

------------------------------

Those knowledgeable in German Indology of 18th and 19th centuries and its connection or lack of it with antisemitism might discuss with Prof.s Adluri and Bagchee. 

-------------------------------

I for one, am not in a reference frame of  का ते कांता?  कस्ते पुत्रः ? or what your nation? , what my nation ? not to respond when I see that misrepresentation of Sanskrit, India and Indian culture is being done particularly by those who are viewed in India as those who chose  Sanskrit, India and Indian culture  as their subject matter out of love and respect for that subject matter. 

On Mon, Sep 10, 2018 at 12:52 PM, Jonathan Silk <kauzeya@gmail.com> wrote:
I am sorry if I was unclear: mine was not a plea to allow a certain viewpoint (please do not assume that because I use that term I think "there are always two sides to any issue" or make any other assumptions about my position or motivation)--mine was not a plea to allow a certain viewpoint; it was a plea NOT to introduce Trump into the Indology list, and to introduce Modi only insofar as his policies directly relate to Indology (Skt, Tamil, etc). 
I may well be astonishingly naive, that obviously is something of which I would be the least qualified judge. And astonishment is naturally an entirely subjective experience, so you are welcome to it. But please please let us keep politics off this list. [Again, simply to make overly clear: this does NOT mean that I think discussion of the theories concerning the MBh propounded by whomever are not fair game. Certainly they are, but just because, for instance, the authors of those theories engage in ad hominem attacks does not mean that the proper response is to respond in kind. "Racist" anything stands or falls on its own merits. [this is a different, although not entirely different, perhaps, issue than whether we should acknowledge and take into account the work of persons whose history is absolutely clear -- eg the studies of Wust, or I would venture to say, although foreign to most of the readers of the Indology list, the research of Miyamoto Shoson, who was an incredible Japanese imperialist--one of his prefaces celebrates the day the Imperial Japanese army entered India, the land of the Buddha's birth. This, to be as polite as possible, turns my stomach, but that does not solve the question whether I should, therefore, stop reading his book at the preface. [you might, all of you, take solace in the fact that this proves that at least one person reads prefaces!]]] (sorry, lost count of my embedded brackets!)
Anyway, back to the point (there was one): I am far from the first person to notice that it hardly makes any sense at all to speak of "German" Indology in the first place, but whatever attacks are made against one approach or another, whether the nature of those attacks makes any sense is not to be determined by the motivation of the attacker. Let's sift the wheat from the chaff, and perhaps, after all, some ideas, even if published as scholarship, are not really worthwhile rebutting at all.

Hoping earnestly that I have clarified my ideas, as poor and unhelpful as they may be,

Jonathan

On Mon, Sep 10, 2018 at 12:40 AM, George Thompson <gthomgt@gmail.com> wrote:
re JOYDEEP

As long as you all allow this hindutva racist to post to this list, mr joydeep, who has regularly attacked "German Indology" over the years, then I will fight with you.  I don't defend "German Indology" because I am German. I defend it because German Indology has been good Indology. Joydeep's Indology is a racist Indology.  I think that Jonathan and Nagaraj are astonishingly naïve when it comes to Joydeep's ideology.  Have they read Joydeep's papers?

Shame on you both!  Please read some of  Joydeep's papers, and then get back in touch with the rest of us.

best wishes,

George Thompson




--
J. Silk
Leiden University
Leiden University Institute for Area Studies, LIAS
2311 BZ Leiden
The Netherlands

copies of my publications may be found at



--
Nagaraj Paturi
 
Hyderabad, Telangana, INDIA.


BoS, MIT School of Vedic Sciences, Pune, Maharashtra

BoS, Chinmaya Vishwavidyapeeth, Veliyanad, Kerala

Former Senior Professor of Cultural Studies
 
FLAME School of Communication and FLAME School of  Liberal Education,
 
(Pune, Maharashtra, INDIA )