[Reader-list] Assault upon the Delhi University History

[Vivek Narayanan]

Dear Radhikarajen,

Can you show me exactly how, and where, the essay by A.K. Ramanujan is 
denigrating to Hinduism?   Please quote at least one sentence, or even 
one phrase, if you can, from the essay which denigrates Hinduism.  (I'm 
assuming that you have actually read the complete essay.)

As far as I can tell, Ramanujan's essay is a great tribute to Hindu 
(and, more generally, South Asian) storytelling traditions.

Vivek

radhikarajen at vsnl.net wrote:
> Hi, with one billion and more people, let there be that many Ramayanas in their freedom of expression and creativity, but the issue here is does freedom of expression is only to denigrete others faith. ? Those places of learning which are filled with chamchas and hangers on who deride hindu faith should write that many bibles and qurans also, that is secularism at work. !
> Regards.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Prem Chandavarkar <prem.cnt at gmail.com>
> Date: Monday, March 3, 2008 9:58 am
> Subject: Re: [Reader-list] Assault upon the Delhi University History
> To: Aditya Raj Kaul <kauladityaraj at gmail.com>
> Cc: reader-list at sarai.net
>
>   
>> On 03/03/2008, Aditya Raj Kaul <kauladityaraj at gmail.com> wrote:
>>     
>>> We were well know that originally there are only two Ramayan's 
>>>       
>> that we
>>     
>>> recognise; one by Tulsidas and another by Valmiki. There maybe a few
>>> hundred
>>> more stories based on poetry from various places etc. But, lets 
>>>       
>> for a
>>     
>>> change
>>> concentrate on the original source while studying history in an
>>> institution
>>> rather then secondary and modern opinions, translations etc etc.
>>>       
>> To me, such a statement is the heart of the problem, and is the 
>> reason why
>> this discussion thread started in the first place.  It implies 
>> that there is
>> a primary authoritative history which must be regarded, and many 
>> secondaryhistories which can be immediately dismissed as inferior 
>> and ignorable.
>>
>> Such a classification should also be accompanied by an ethical and
>> intellectual justification of the basis on which it is made.  It 
>> cannot be
>> merely stated that this must be so because it is a majority belief 
>> or a
>> historical imperative that has endured for ages, for that is the 
>> argumentthat was used to defend colonialism, slavery and apartheid.
>>
>> Let me link this to an earlier thread on history and archive, and put
>> forward the following proposition:  The archive is an ethical, 
>> rather than
>> epistemological, imperative of history as a discipline.  History 
>> cannot be
>> ethically validated without the discipline incorporating an
>> ongoing discourse on the basis of which something is to be 
>> categorised as
>> archive, or dismissed as non-archive.
>> _________________________________________
>> reader-list: an open discussion list on media and the city.
>> Critiques & Collaborations
>> To subscribe: send an email to reader-list-request at sarai.net with 
>> subscribe in the subject header.
>> To unsubscribe: https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/reader-
>> list 
>> List archive: <https://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/>
>>     
> ________