In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

513 Notes INTRODUCTION 1. According to the 2001 census of India, India’s population on March 1, 2001 was 1,027,015,247 persons. The growth rate between 1991 and 2001 was 21.34 percent. Annual growth is estimated at ca. twenty million. In 2001 35 percent of India’s population was under fifteen years old. 2. There is a website that lists and describes all Hindu temples in North America with impressive detail: 3. Francis C. Assisi, “The Hinduization of America.” 4. “De-anglicizing Asian Academia.” 5. Recently Oxford University Press was forced to withdraw a book authored by Professor P. B. Courtright of Emory University, giving a Freudian interpretation of Gaṇeśa that was not only found offensive by Hindus but also is untenable from a scholarly standpoint, although it fits into the postmodernist paradigm. On the wider context see Alan Roland, “The Uses (and Misuses) of Psychoanalysis in South Asian Studies: Mysticism and Child Development.” 6. See W. Halbfass, “Indien und die Geschichtsschreibung der Philosophie.” 7. L. Dumont, “A Fundamental Problem.” 8. Among “Western scholars” are also included Indian scholars who have adopted the presuppositions of contemporary Western scholarship, and among “Indian scholars,” non-Indians have been included who have accepted traditional principles of Indian scholarship. A very detailed and well-documented analysis of this situation has been presented by Y. G. Rosser in “The Groan: Loss of Scholarship and High Drama in ‘South Asian’ Studies.” 9. Malati J. Shendge, an Indian scholar who also had studied in the West, made a strong plea for “The Interdisciplinary Approach to Indian Studies.” 10. Agehananda Bharati, (alias Leopold Fischer) a Western scholar who spent years in India, noted in a paper entitled “Psychological Approaches to Indian Studies: More Cons than Pros”: “I strongly believe that psychological models are infertile and quite inadequate for Indian studies, particularly for antiquarian research.” 514 A SURV EY OF HINDUISM 11. L. Dumont, “A Fundamental Problem,” 161. The emphases are L. Dumont’s. 12. In 1991 the University of California at Berkeley established its first chair for Tamil as part of its Indian Studies program. Hinduism Today (November 1991): 28. Philip Lutgendorf, in an essay on “Mediaeval Devotional Traditions: An Annotated Survey of Recent Scholarship,” in A. Sharma (ed.), The Study of Hinduism, 200–60, has documented a great number of translations from diverse Indian languages. 13. The usual way the name is written on local road signs is Vrindaban. The correct transliteration would be Vṛndāvana, “Vṛnda Forest.” One can also find Brindaban, Brindabon, and Brindavan. 14. K. Klostermaier, In the Paradise of Krishna and “Remembering Vrindaban.” 15. K. Klostermaier, “Hinduism in Bombay.” 16. According to the 2001 Indian census, Hindus form 82 percent of India’s population , Muslims 12.12 percent, Christians 2.34 percent, Sikhs 1.94 percent, Buddhists 0.76 percent, and Jains 0.40 percent. 17. See Alexandra George, Social Ferment in India, chapter 9, “The Tribes of India,” 233–55. Also: Nirmal Minz, “Anthropology and the Deprived.” 18. George, ibid., “The Scheduled Castes,” 202–32. An interesting document shedding light on the life of an untouchable community is the so-called Kahar Chronicle by Tarashankar Banerjea. See Raja Kanta Ray, “The Kahar Chronicle.” 19. R. Inden, “Orientalist Constructions of India.” 1. THE BEGINNINGS OF HINDUISM 1. It would be wrong, however, to accuse the English as beings the “inventors of Hinduism,” as Hadwa Dom, a Dalit activist does, in a recent internet article The English Invention of Hinduism “The Myth of One Hindu Religion Exploded.” 2. The latest and most detailed exposition of the views and arguments of the two hostile camps is provided in the lengthy articles that have appeared in the Journal of Indo-European Studies (JIES) under the title “Indo-Aryan Migration Debate.” Vol. 30/3&4 (Fall/Winter 2002) and Vol. 31/1&2 (Spring/Summer 2003). The controversy is brought to a sharp focus by the lead article of N. Kazanas, “Indigenous Indo-Aryans and the Rigveda,” M. Witzel’s response “Ein Fremdling im Ṛgveda,” and N. Kazanas “Final Reply.” In these articles the whole phalanx of pro- and anti-invasionist arguments is arrayed, and sharp taunts and missiles are exchanged reminiscent of religious wars of the past. Vishal Agarwal published on the Internet “A Reply to Michael Witzel’s ‘Ein Fremdling im Ṛgveda’” refuting not only Witzel’s arguments but also highlighting the uncivil and offensive tone of his writings. It is telling that Witzel used the popular...


Additional Information

Related ISBN
MARC Record
Launched on MUSE
Open Access
Back To Top

This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. Without cookies your experience may not be seamless.