[Reader-list] Assault upon the Delhi University History

[Sadan Jha]

Dear All,
Today, I have read this mail from H-ASIA and thought to share it with you.
This is in solidarity with faculty members and students of History
Department, D.U.
sadan.


H-ASIA: Assault upon the Delhi University History Department   H-ASIA
Frank Conlon <conlon at u.washington.edu>  to H-ASIA


H-ASIA
Feburary 25, 2008

Assault by Hindutva mob on the Delhi University History Department
************************************************************************
From: Frank Conlon

Earlier this month, our colleague Sumit Guha, forwarded some posts
regarding a protest that had been generated by the VHP-linked ABVP
(Akhil Bharatiya Vidyarthi Parishad)--a highly politicized "student"
movement of the Hindu right in India.  Some of our readers will take
exception to that
description, but on the basis of all press accounts, I feel
comfortable writing it.

Like everything else, the story requires some context, and,
remarkably, as in the debacle fifteen years ago when a
Hindutva-inspired crowd demolished a mosque at Ayodhya on the pretense
that it was built on the actual historical birthplace of the god Rama,
Rama once again figures prominently in the story.  Over the past
months there has been a resurgance  "Rama"publicity arising in part
out of a proposed dredging of the sea bed near the southern tip of
India for creation of a safe deepwater passage for coastal vessels.
This was seized upon by interested parties who argued that this
dredging would involve disruption of a natural feature in the seabed,
known as "the Rama Setu"  that has been credited in mythology to
Rama's conquest of Lanka in the Ramayana epic poem.

In popular consciousness mythology usually trumps geology and
hydrology--(and I refer here not only to India!) if they ever mix it
up in the ring of public affairs.  So, much has been written in the
past months about reasserting the vitality of Lord Rama and the
preservation of the Rama legacy.

Ever alert for issues upon which to mobilize followers and generate
press, a substory of the above emerged in Delhi earlier this year.
Protests were mounted over what was called a "book" "published" by the
Delhi University History Department--and attributed--erroneously--to
Professor Upinder
Singh, a Professor of Archaeology and Ancient Indian History.  The
fact that Professor Singh happens to be the daughter of Prime Minister
Manmohan Singh is, one suspects, not coincidental with the association
of her name with the protest.  The  "book" was in fact not a
publication at all, but a
collection of "readings" for the Delhi University concurrent course on
Ancient Indian Culture in the B. A. (Honours) programme.  The packet
included an essay by (late) A. K. Ramanujan, titled "Three Hundred
Ramayanas: Five Examples and Three Thoughts on Translation", which has
appeared earlier in a collection of the works of Ramanuman edited by
Vinay Dharwadker and previously in Paula Richman's path-breaking
collection of essyas _Many Ramayanas: The Diversity of a Narrative
Tradition in South Asia_ (U California Press, 1991).  Of course, many
readers of H-ASIA are
familiar with the broad corpus of A. K. Ramanujan's contributions to
the study of the history and culture of India including his wonderful
translations of Tamil and Kannada bhakti poetry.

At some point, a packet of these essays was photocopied in a Delhi
shop with a "title page" crediting Upinder Singh, and out of that was
manufactured a "new outrage regarding the hurting of feelings of
devout Hindus"  by the Delhi University History Department.

An example of the rhetoric plied against Ramanujan's essay may suffice
to give a flavor of the campaign.

>From http://www.hindujagruti.org/news/3819.html
The Hindu Janajagruti Samiti  Jan 18, 2008 post proclaims that
Ramanujan in his essay "even sorts out a tale from Santhal folklore
and puts forth the greatest outrage to Hindu psyche before the
students of literature that Ravan as well as Lakshman both seduced
Sita. No one on Earth so far dared to question the character of Sita
so brazenly as Shri Ramanunjan has done, though, all through under the
convenient cover of a folklore!
"Sorting and picking out anything negative found in different versions
of Ramayana spread all over the world with malicious intention has
become a practice under the UPA [current Indian coalition government].
Despite the repeated protests by Hindu leaders, Shiksha Bharati and
Shiksha Bachao Andolan, the practice still continues.

"In a latest instance, the Delhi University for its BA (Hons) second
year course has included portions defaming and denigrating the
characters of Lord Ram, Hanuman, Lakshman and Sita and projecting the
entire episode as fallacious, capricious, imaginary and fake."   and
it goes on to cite a
groundswell of Hindu indignation that such blasphemies could be
perpetrated by the Delhi University History department, and, of
course, in particular, the daughter of the Prime Minister.

On February 2, 2008, the Delhi University History Department issued
the following statement:

DEPARTMENT OF HISTORY, UNIVERSITY OF DELHI,
IN ITS MEETING OF 04/02/2008

1.      A number of groups have organised protest and have raised
objections to the inclusion of an essay by (late) A. K. Ramanujan,
titled "Three Hundred Ramayanas: Five Examples and Three Thoughts on
Translation".  The essay had been published in Vinay Dharwadker (ed.)
The Collected Essays of A. K. Ramanujan, New Delhi: Oxford University
Press, 1999, pp. 131-60;  [this was an expanded version of a piece
that first
appeared in Paula Richman (ed.) Many Ramayanas: The Diversity of a
Narrative Tradition in South Asia Berkeley: niversity of California
Press, 1991].  The said essay is one of he readings for the Delhi
University concurrent course on ncient Indian Culture in the B.
A.(Honours) programme, which has been offered in several Colleges from
July 2006 onwards.
2.      The sole purpose of this course is to create an awareness and
understanding of the rich and diverse cultural heritage of ancient
India among students, and to acquaint them with original sources.
Apart from the reading mentioned in the letter, the course includes
readings on Kalidasa's poetry, Jataka stories, ancient Tamil poets and
poetry, ancient
iconography, and the modern history of ancient artifacts. The essay is
part of a unit titled 'The Ramayana and Mahabharata - stories,
characters, versions.'  It is accompanied by an excerpt from Iravati
Karve's book, Yuganta: The end of an epoch. Supplementary readings
include the Introduction of Robert P. Goldman's The Ramayana of
Valmiki: an epic of
ancient India (the most recent and most authoritative English
translation of the epic), which gives a detailed, scholarly
introduction to the Valmiki Ramayana.

3.      The late A. K. Ramanujan (recipient of several honours,
including the Padmashri) was a widely acclaimed scholar with
impeccable academic credentials. His expertise in a range of languages
including Sanskrit,Tamil and Kannada was perhaps without parallel. His
credentials as a scholar, writer, and teacher with extensive knowledge
of ancient Indian literary traditions are incontestable. It is sad to
see his name and work
being subjected so such ill-informed controversy. In the article in
question, he illustrates and analyses the great dynamism and variety
in what he describes as 'tellings' of the story of Rama within India
and across the world.

4.      The concurrent course on Ancient Indian Culture and the
readings for it went through the same procedure as all other courses
in the University of Delhi pass before being adopted. The readings
have not been devised or 'compiled' by any individual. Like all the
other University courses, they are the product of a consultative
process involving many members of the University community. The
content and readings for this
course were discussed extensively among Department members and College
teachers, and were approved through the regular University procedures
in statutory bodies, namely the Committee of Courses, Faculty of
Social Sciences, Academic Council, and the Executive Council, which
include
teachers of all disciplines. The Academic Council is the highest
statutory body on academic matters in the University.

5.      We would like to emphasize that there is no published
compilation of the course readings by Dr. Upinder Singh or any other
member of the Department of History.  However, it has come to our
notice that there is a spiral-bound collection of photocopies of the
individual articles and excerpts related to this course at certain
photocopying shops. This set of hotocopies has a covering page on
which Dr. Upinder Singh's name has been typed, without any
authorization whatsoever, as a 'compiler.' It is this collection of
photocopies that is being incorrectly described as a 'book' compiled
by her. There is in fact no book.

6.      When readings are prescribed in a course, it is not essential
that the course-designers, teachers, or students should agree with or
defend each and every word therein. In fact debate, dissent, and
dialogue are important parts of the discipline of history. It may be
pointed out that the terms that have apparently caused offence to
certain individuals should in no way be construed as mischievous or
slanderous. There is no question whatsoever of intending or attempting
to denigrate or hurt the sentiments of any culture, religion,
tradition, or community.

7.      The aim of the course in question is to teach University
students (who are, after all, young adults) to be able to analyze a
variety of source material academically, analytically, and without
embarrassment or denigration. That is the spirit in which the course
was framed and that is the spirit in which we believe it is being
taught.

------
On the same day _The Telegraph_ (Kolkata) reported that Mayawati, the
Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh had demanded that "the book" be
banned. (http://www.telegraphindia.com/1080203/jsp/nation/story_8857319.jsp)
under a headline:
"PM daughter in Ramayan row"

New Delhi, Feb. 2: Uttar Pradesh chief minister Mayavati has asked the
Prime Minister to ban a text recommended for Delhi University history
students that allegedly contains  objectionable references to
characters in the Ramayan.

Mayavati made the written request to Manmohan Singh after the Akhil
Bharatiya Vidyarthi Parishad (ABVP), the BJP's student wing, protested
in Delhi and Lucknow, claiming the contentious text was part of a book
compiled by the Prime Minister's daughter Upinder Singh.

Upinder Singh, a professor of ancient Indian history at DU, has,
however, denied she had compiled the piece or recommended it to her
students.
"I have absolutely nothing to do with this text. The contentious
article is not written by me. Nor is there any book of mine which
contains the article. I fail to understand why I am being linked to
the text," she told The Telegraph.

Sources close to Mayavati confirmed that the chief minister had not
yet seen the "book", but said her letter to the Prime Minister was
motivated by concerns over law and order in her state."

The report continued with a quotation from the ABVP Delhi General
Secretary Ms. Niharika Sharma "This is a deliberate attempt to hurt
the sentiments of the Hindu community." Asked why the ABVP was seeking
a ban instead of allowing college students to debate the contents of a
research publication, Sharma said the organisation was worried
students would feel pressured to replicate Ramanujan's version in
their exam.

"If the article is taught, students will be expected to reproduce it
in exams as well. IN OUR EDUCATION SYSTEM, UNLESS YOU WRITE WHAT IS
TAUGHT IN CLASS, YOU DO NOT GET MARKS [emphasis added] Hindu students
will be
forced to write something they do not believe in," she said.

The ABVP has already sent memoranda to the DU vice-chancellor and the
head of the history department seeking deletion of Ramanujan's essay
from the course. "Upinder Singh has most definitely compiled a book
with the objectionable text as a chapter. The book has not yet been
published but we have a copy," Sharma said."

Karl Rove has nothing to teach the Hindu Right when it comes to
generating controversy (and here I will adopt the standard American
ploy  for remarks that generate offense--I apologize to those who may
be offended by my editorial comment. FFC]

To make a long story longer, today I received a report that a group of
ABVP activists vandalized the office of the Delhi University History
department and physically manhandled the head of the department.  The
following is reproduced as received including a note from the Head of
Department Professor S. Z. H. Jafri and an open letter from department
students.  It was forwarded by Professor Indrani Chatterjee.

Dear Colleague,

This is to inform you that the ABVP activists had come to the
Department around 2.00 p.m. with the intention of causing some damage
to the structure and gaining some mileage from it.  They partly
succeeded in their venture.  No injuries to anybody except  the glass
doors has been caused.  The other details you can see from the
students letter which follows.

Professor S.Z.H. JAFRI

DOWN WITH ABVP VIOLENCE ON CAMPUS!
PUNISH THE CULPRITS!

25th February 2008. At about 2 pm in the afternoon an organised mob of
more than 100 people from outside the university led by the ABVP
activist Vikas Dahiya gathered outside the building of the School of
Social Sciences. Some 8-10 people came to the office of the Head of
the Department of History, Prof S.Z.H. Jafri saying that they wished
to speak
to him and to Prof B.P. Sahu about the curriculum of BA Part II,
History (Concurrent). They insisted on speaking only once the media
was present.
Once the media arrived, in place of speaking to the  department
members, they began to ransack the department. Even without speaking
or giving a chance to the people present there from the department to
speak, these people toppled the table and ransacked the office of the
head of the
department. One of them also manhandled Prof. Jafri and held him by
his collar and hurled abuses at those present there. Considerable
damage to the property of the department by breaking the glass panes,
damaging books, office files and other objects in the office was done
and all inthe presence of the media personnel and the very passive
police! The outsiders threatened the faculty members and warned them
of dire consequences. This is a clear act of vandalism. It is clear
that they had come with the clear intention of perpetuating violence
in the department and it was a planned action to create an atmosphere
of terror.

This incidence occurred in the very presence of the police personnel
as well as the media. The media footage would clearly show all that
happened in the office of the head of the Department of History on the
25th afternoon. The attack by 8-10 robust hooligans, not belonging to
the university, on absolutely defenceless faculty members of the
Department of
History is a shameful act in itself. Trying to force the faculty
members to change the curriculum of history which has been passed by
the due legal process of the University through the use of force is a
clear act of fascism which is not acceptable in a democracy. Freedom
of expression is a fundamental right of every individual and any
encroachment on the same is
not tolerable. It is democratic structures and values which are
seriously threatened.

This  is an appeal from the students of history department  to
everyone in the University to raise their  voice against this
vandalism and this fascist attempt to scuttle the freedom of
expression . We appeal to all students, staff   and teachers

To JOIN the Protest March at 10.30 a.m. at Vivekanand Statue, Faculty
of Arts on the 26th of February, 2008.

Whether one feels that A. K. Ramanujan was a great intellectual or
not; and whether one agrees that India's past is a fit subject for
critical analysis, I believe that H-ASIA members will deplore this
'media-savvy' creation of a physical assault on an academic department
at Delhi University.

As of the moment, I have not received an e-mail address to which
comments may be relayed, but one immediate possibility would be to
send comment for forwarding to Dr. Mahesh Rangarajan
<rangarajan.mahesh at gmail.com> at Delhi University.  The postal address
for the head of the department is:
Prof. Saiyid Zaheer Hussain Jafri,
Head,
Department of History,
Faculty of Social Science building,
University of Delhi,
Delhi-110007.

I will add one more personal editorial note that again will offend
some folks (and not the ones offended earlier either)--this episode
offers, in my view, the fruits of politicizing the past and our study
of it--and while concepts of secular humanistic research in Europe,
America and other parts of the world may not resemble the Indian
concept in which secularism means "no offense to any religion"--we
frequently find urselves as scholars and teachers facing the
"concerns" of various practitioners of what may be called 'identity
politics'--in the secure world of North America, the risks of mob
action are small--but there are far too many university
administrators--wedded to the concept of 'student as customer' who
wring their hands over anything academic which smacks of  ontroversy.
In other words, Delhi University's misfortune is not quite as exotic
as some folks on this side of the kala pani would like to believe.


Frank

Frank F. Conlon
Professor Emeritus of History, South Asian
     Studies & Comparative Religion
University of Washington
Seattle, WA 98195-3560      USA
Co-editor, H-ASIA
President, H-NET Humanities & Social Sciences Online
Managing Director, Bibliography of Asian Studies Online
******************************************************************
        To post to  H-ASIA  simply send your message to:
                        <H-ASIA at h-net.msu.edu>


-- 
Sadan Jha
Assistant Professor,
Centre for Social Studies.
Vir Narmad South Gujarat University Campus. Udhna-Magdalla Road.
Surat. Gujarat. India.
blog: mamuliram.blogspot.com