Look at the book of Ramchandra Guha, who has received tremendous publicity for no reason. Among the makers of modern India, there is no Ram Mohan Roy, Swami Vivekananda, Sri Auroindo, Dayananda Swami, PC Roy, JC Bose, SN Bose, UN Bramhachari,SC Bose, Surendranath anerjee or any of the revolutionaries, ut a number of pets of Nehru, Nehru and Nehru.
Re: They are not historians
by g kapuria on Feb 17, 2014 09:45 PM
I wondered if any of the Nehrus played cricket, Ramchandra Guha's cricket history book would be about how cricket in India started from Motilal and rose in popularity with Rahul Gandhi.
Re: Re: They are not historians
by Dipak Bose on Feb 17, 2014 10:44 PM
I can only imagine MK Gandhi with Langoti playing Cricket and then sipping Chota Peg.
Re: They are not historians
by French Cuisine on Feb 18, 2014 06:30 AM
That is bcoz Guha focuses on post-independence India and highlights the lesser known character. BTW he has written extensively on Rammohan Roy
Re: Re: They are not historians
by Dipak Bose on Feb 18, 2014 10:53 AM
The title of the book is Makers of modern India, there are motilal nehru, gandhi, jl nehru etc etc. You have not read the book.
Folks, you should read the book. Only then you will find out what a sham people like Wendy Doniger are. But please, do not buy the book. It will only make her richer.
Re: Don't buy, but read the book
by g kapuria on Feb 17, 2014 08:58 PM
I will summarize in one word what her kind of western scholars think about Hindus. They call us HINA (Hindus in North America). They think of us as hina people, whether in north America, India or elsewhere.
Re: Don't buy, but read the book
by Raj Reddy on Feb 17, 2014 10:55 PM
You know the best thing I did, short of reading the actual book, was to read comments/reviews on Amazon for the book.
You guys should too, and that pretty much will sum up the nonsense she wrote.
I have read many articles now, for and against, the issue. However, no one has given any factual example. If the Wendy book has so many factual errors, instead of just saying so, why not put some examples and let the common reader know it firsthand ?
Re: Indirect batting
by Raman TS on Feb 17, 2014 09:22 PM
My experience as a scientist is that repudiating the errors in a scientific article will often involve writing a new article, longer than the original. Then there will be a still longer rejoinder by the original authors, and then ... endlessly. Similarly, pointing out and listing the errors and deliberate falsehoods and misinterpretations in Doniger's book would be a futile exercise.
Re: Indirect batting
by Ankush Poddar on Feb 17, 2014 09:49 PM
If you have actually followed the debate, you would have noticed. If not, google Vishal Agarwal's critique or Aseem Sukla's critique. The former gives a page by page rebuttal while Aseem's is more broad brushed.
Just as a sample - Hinduism motto is to follow the monkey..or the horse... She calls Gandhi's work on Gita as Asakati (infatuation) Yoga while it is Anasakti (devoid of infatuation) Yoga
It is a culture not religion, as this country always had diversity in worshipping and acceptability of various GODs, as such Culturally all Hindus are secular.
Re: Hindu
by Joonda Moonda on Feb 17, 2014 05:37 PM
seehowtolerantisourediffand rediffmooderatorwhonever deletesanymessages!even againstislam&christainity! jaiHO Redifff&mooderator!
history must be true history and not what marxian/western historians writes.fellows claiming to be historians have stalled the rejuvanation and reconstruction of our nation.
