THE
HINDUS Review by Samhita Arni
The Hindus: An Alternative History
BOOK
REVIEWED
The Hindus: An Alternative History
By Wendy
Doniger
Penguin,
2009
Rs 999
Pages 779
ISBN
9780670083541
The
Chandogya Upanishad
recounts the creation of the world; it all began with a cosmic egg,
the text claims, that cracked in two. One half of this broken
eggshell formed the sky, and the other part the Earth. From the
egg-white came clouds, and from the yolk, mist. The veins in the egg
turned into rivers, and the fluid of the egg, the ocean. In the
Satapatha Brahmana, the
creator, Prajapati, hatches from a golden egg.
Eggs abound in creation myths across cultures – from the Greek
Orphic myths, to the Finnish Kallevala.
Perhaps it is fitting and ironic that the story of how The
Hindus: An Alternative History came into
being also begins with an egg - an English egg thrown at an American
Academic, during a lecture in London in November 2003.
Wendy
Doniger, the author of the Hindus, is possibly the most reputed
academic in the field of Hinduism today. In 2003, she was giving a
lecture at the School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS),
moderated by William Dalyrmple, when, in response to her comments on
the repressed sexuality of characters in the Ramayana,
an audience member threw an egg at Doniger.
An essay
written earlier, “Shadows of the Ramayana”seems to surmise the
contentious points of her lecture. The essay is brilliant and
incisive; more 'literary criticism' than anything else. In her
analysis, Doniger points out how characters like Surpanakaa and Sita
serve as foils to each other, how the relationship between Valin and
Surgriva articulates the tensions and potential threats that
underlie Ram's relationships with his brothers. She goes on to claim
that “the text suggests that Rama might fear his brother Lakshmana
might become another sort of double, that he could replace Rama in
bed with Sita. (107)” For devout Hindus, who perceive Ram as a God
and the Ramayana as a sacred text, only to be worshipped, such
readings are, no doubt, antagonizing. Doniger, after her lecture, was
attacked in the press and her internet for being sexually-titillating
and obsessed with sex. Dalrymple,
writing later about the incident, noted also the the egg-throwing
faction not only criticized Doniger's work, but also questioned her
right, as a non-Hindu, to write about Hinduism.
It's this
incident, Doniger claims in the preface to the Hindus, that spurred
her to write this book, which offers the reader an alternative to the
conventional and most widely-read narratives of Hinduism.
The
Hindus
is significant in light of the ongoing debate about the various
versions of Indian 'history' available, and the 'right' to write
about India and Hinduism. Dalrymple, in
an article titled "The War Over History" examined how
history has been politicized by the right and how anything that
represents an aberration from that perspective is attacked. He notes
that academics, in India and abroad, have been subjected to "hate
campaigns from Hindu extremists and the “cyber-nationalists” of
the Indian diaspora” and ends his article with a call for
“accessible, well-written and balanced histories of India.” The
existing histories, in his opinion, are scholarly works that do not
appeal to the general Indian reading public. The vacuum is filled
with the sort of 'unhistorical myths' (seen, most notably, in the
textbooks brought out a few years back during the BJP regime) that
present an artificial, constructed, airbrushed version of Indian
history at odds with historical evidence. In The
Hindus
Doniger has attempted to answer Dalrymple's call and provide a
readable history of India and Hinduism that presents not just a
narrative alternative, but also de-constructs many of the popular,
unhistorical myths that have been circulated in the last fifty years.
In
contrast to the defined, dogmatic Hinduism of the Hindutva brigade,
Doniger's Hinduism is protean and eludes definition. She also
discusses the impossibility of clearly defining Hinduism and traces
the origins of the word 'hinduism' to it's geographical roots. As she
explains, Hindus,
in the first instance, are a geographically defined people. Thus,
Hinduism is an ill-fitting term, harbouring a multiplicity of faiths
and ideological stances, and only coming to mean, in colonial times,
a religion. Her scope is immense: she traces the development of key
themes - the treatment of animals, women, the concept of violence and
dharma - through the entire period of habitation on the Indian
sub-continent – from the time that Godwanaland crashed into Asia
and created the himalayas, to the present day.
Hinduism,
Doniger claims, is not just about Brahmins, Vedas and Sanskrit –
it's also about women, lower-castes, pariahs, Buddhists, Jains,
Muslims and vernacular languages. Hinduism is presented as a constant
conversation between brahmins and pariahs, Sanskrit and vernacular
languages, the rulers and the marginalized. For example, the excesses
of Brahmins, ridiculed in vernacular languages, are eventually
articulated in Sanskrit, the 'brahmanical' language, in the Puranas.
I've
encountered some of these ideas in other places, particularly those
that deal with the interaction between Sanskrit and Vernacular
languages. AK Ramanujam (who was Doniger's colleague at the
University of Chicago) explained this dialogue in his essay (written
twenty years ago) “Where Mirrors are Windows” -
“...Cultural
traditions in India are indissolubly plural and often conflicting but
are organized through at least two principles, (a)
context-sensitivity and (b) reflexivity of various sorts, both of
which constantly generate new forms out of the old ones. What we call
Brahmanism, bhakti traditions, Buddhism, Jainism, tantra, tribal
traditions and folklore, and lastly, modernity itself, are the most
prominent of these systems. They are responses to previous and
surrounding traditions, they invert, subvert and convert their
neighbours.”
In
short, Ramanujan's statement captures a large part of Doniger's
thesis. As Ramanujan himself says, this is suggesting “the
obvious.” Towards
the end of this same essay, Ramanujan alludes to Doniger's early work
- Dreams,
Illusions and Other Realities
(1984), just after noting that “Doubles, shadows, upside-down
reflections are common in Indian myth and story.”
Doubles,
shadows and animals continue to haunt Doniger, and foreground her
analysis even in The
Hindus, written
over twenty years after Dreams
etc. In fact,
the double vision emerges as the metaphor Doniger uses for her
understanding of the multiple meanings, interpretations and
perspectives that proliferate in Hinduism. The double takes various
forms in Doniger's book. In her preface, she alludes to the shapes of
lunar craters – to some these shadowy shapes on the surface of the
moon look like a man, to others a rabbit. The double metaphor
resurfaces in the 'paradox of mutual creation' – the myth of
Brahma and Vishnu mutually creating each other. Even the ritual of
sacrifice, which opens up 'homologies between the human world and
corresponding parts of the universe,' is an instance of
double-vision. And towards the end of her book, Kipling and his Kim
also emerge as instances of the double – Kipling is racist but not
racist; likewise Kim is Indian but not Indian, British but not
British.
Doniger's
metaphor of the double, also owes something to AK Ramanajan. She
alludes, repeatedly, to the description of Ramanujan's father,
developed in his essay “Is there an Indian Way of thinking.”
Ramanujan's father - a mathematician-astronomer and an astrologer
embodied many contradictions that seemed inconsistent, but led
Ramanujan to his understanding of how the 'Indian way of thinking, '
on account of it's context-sensitive approach, eschews idealization
and tolerates (even nourishes) contradiction.
For
many of us in India, the fact that Hinduism accommodates many
contradictions; warring impulses towards orthodoxy and iconoclasm; is
something we experience on a daily basis. Although demure, chaste
heroines like Sita and Savitri populate our mythic landscape, we also
encounter fiery, non-conformist figures like Draupadi and Kunthi.
Many of us, hearing the stories of Ekalvya, Amba-Sikhandin and Karna,
have felt troubled. Moreover, growing up in South India, one can't
help encountering more recent subversive takes on traditional tales –
DMK-founder E.V. Ramaswami's Kemmayana
features Ravana as the hero.
Even
the creation hymn in the Rig-veda, subtly subversive and veering
towards agnosticism, is a text many might be familiar with -
Who
really knows?
Who
will here proclaim it?
Whence
was it produced?
Whence
is this creation?
The
gods came afterwards, with the creation of this universe.
Who
then knows whence it has arisen?
Whence
this creation has arisen
–
perhaps it formed itself, or perhaps it did not –
the
One who looks down on it,
in
the highest heaven, only He knows
or
perhaps He does not know.
(Wendy
Doniger O'Flaherty, The
Rig Veda: An Anthology,
25-26)
Consequently,
many of Doniger's ideas, coming to those of us who live in India, may
not hold too many surprises. With readers like myself (and there are
quite a few - even you, dear reader, may be one) Doniger is
preaching to the choir. Yet she has chosen to frame her work by the
debate that surrounds Hinduism and history. Perhaps Doniger's work is
best seen a sort of apologia
- written to
defend her work, her analysis and her right to write about Hinduism.
But who is Doniger writing for?
Earlier
this year, I had the opportunity to listen to Wendy Doniger discuss
the soon-to-be-released The
Hindus at the
Jaipur Literature Festival. The hall was half-filled, the audience
listened to Doniger respectfully and attentively. Questions were
asked – some that did challenge Doniger's interpretations – but
the tone was always polite and courteous, even
though right-wing ideologues like Tarun Vijay and Swapan Dasgupta
were reportedly roaming the grounds of the venue.
There were, remarkably, no eggs thrown.
Did
Doniger tone down her content? It's possible. But I also suspect that
an Indian audience, in some ways, is far less hostile and defensive
than the diaspora. Ashis Nandy, commenting on the failure of the BJP
in the general elections, used the term 'laptop hinduism' to describe
the ideology of the Hindutva brigade. He meant a cut-and-paste sort
of hinduism, easy to export, easy to carry – an identity in a box –
that appeals to those living outside India. Doniger too, notes in her
book, the affinity that Indian living in America have for Hindutva,
for a 'portable' identity and describes them as “cut-off..from the
full range of Hindus and Hinduisms that they would experience in
India.”
Is
her book directed at those who do not experience the contradictions
and chaos of India on a daily basis – foreigners, wishing to learn
more about Hinduism, and, more importantly, the Hindu diaspora, with
their narrow, constructed ideas of Hinduism?
Whatever
her audience may be, some of her concepts are extremely intriguing.
Her concept of the “three alliances” explains, in three steps the
evolution of Hindu society from a sacrifice-oriented society in Vedic
times (that zealously guarded the right to perform sacrifices and
access to texts) to one that valued ascetic and meditative power, and
finally developing into a society where devotion (Bhakthi) is supreme
(and knowledge and the right to worship are open to all through
temple iconography and domestic pujas).
She also frames the epics with a historical context that illuminates
the concerns that shaped each work. Thus, the Ramayana,
composed during a time of political instability in India, when
numerous dynasties rose and fell, not only favors a monarchic system
but is clearly concerned with the idea of legitimate male succession
and the 'ideal' monarch. In the case of the Mahabharata,
concerned with
dharma and the terrible violence of war, she discerns the influence
of Kalinga, Asoka and Buddhism. Even Doniger's egg-hurling
detractors, who would feel uncomfortable at the idea of a non-Hindu
writing about Hinduism, I think, could be won over by her nuanced,
sensitive discussion of suttee. Her argument that the treatment of
animals in texts and myths reflect the concerns and attitudes of the
caste-system is insightful, and her elucidation of the tripartite
paradigm (to support this idea), where the Cow-Horse-Dog hierarchy
reflects that of the
Brahmin/Sacred-Kshatriya/Warrior-Pariah/Outsider, brilliant.
Nonetheless,
the wide scope
of this work sometimes intrudes on and hinders the development of her
ideas. As this book aims to be a history, she is duty bound to
provide a historical background to the events and texts that she
refers to. However, in doing so, she often risks losing the reader.
For example, her exploration of the Indus Valley Civilization
(Chapter 2) is vast and detailed – but she concludes that the
Indus Valley Civilization may or may not have contributed to
Hinduism. (At which point, I couldn't help wondering – what was
the point of the last twenty pages?) In another instance – the
historical background provided seems insufficient -The South makes an
appearance for the first time rather late in chapter thirteen (on
Bhakthi) -what was happening in the South during the events discussed
in the preceding twelve chapters?
Perhaps
it is unfair to criticize Doniger for being too lengthy in one
situation and brief in another – but the intensity and the force of
her arguments is definitely reduced when interrupted by lengthy
summaries of historical background. The idea of an alternative
history, promised in the introduction, led me to expect that women
would be the main drammatis
personnae
of Doniger's account, but I was disappointed - there were far less
women than I expected. Very few female authors are mentioned –
there's a passing mention of Gargi, and it's only when we come to the
section on Bhakthi that Doniger mentions other women poets. Yet, as a
woman, I'm well aware of the fact that women often author their own
subversive versions of stories and events. Nabaneeta Dev Sen, in her
article on “Women Retelling the Ramayana” refers to two sixteenth
century female poets – the Bengali Chandrabhati and the Telegu
Molla. There must be others. Why are they all missing from this
'alternative history'?
Many
ideas and questions tantalizingly alluded to, but remain unexplored.
The myths of villainous brahmin-demons, such as Vrta and Ravana, are
brought up more than once in this book. But after the discussion of
the “brahmin imaginary” and the intellectual power wielded by the
highest caste, one can't help wondering exactly why these demons are
depicted as brahmins, particularly in brahmanical texts. Is this a
subversive streak? Doniger doesn't explain or explore.
Hinduism,
in The Hindus,
emerges as a space for competing ideologies and ideas. Through debate
and conversation, Hinduism has evolved and developed. Doniger traces
how ideas, at first subversive and alternative, challenge the
dominant order of the day. But these ideas and concepts are soon
co-opted into the mainstream and become part of the same dominant
order. For example, the Bhakthi movement was (originally)
revolutionary and inclusive, involving pariahs and women - those
ostracised from the dominant order. Yet while reading Doniger's book,
one realizes that the Bhakthi movement (in combination with many
other factors) have shaped the the Ram-centric, exclusive ideology of
the RSS and it's Hindutva associates.
Hinduism
defies definition and is open to debate because it's constantly
changing, partly in response to such debate. It isn't static. In the
past debates weren't fought just in intellectual spaces and stories,
but on battlefields. Maiming (in sectarian Vaishnava-Shaiva feuds),
death and war were, on occasion, part of this conversation.
Although
maiming (and it's less violent cousin - egg-throwing) is definitely
to be decried, Doniger's books provokes the realization that the
spirit of argument is essential to Hinduism. The latest avatar of
this debate features Doniger and the egg-throwers. Debate is
important. Perhaps for this reason alone – the fact that such a
debate (or conversation or 'war' – whatever term you choose) exists
at present should be celebrated. Without
debate - without either side - Hinduism would be just a term, and
not a living tradition.
A slightly different version of this review appeared in Caravan Magazine in December 2009.
