On Sunday 20 May 2007 10:30 pm, Rishab Aiyer Ghosh wrote: ... > to the extent that the majority of hindus avoid "critical thinking", and > could thus be seen to be criticised by the author,
In fact it is the same lack of crticical thinking that I am bothered about too. Recall that I never said anywhere that Martha Nussbaum has described Hindus in the manner that I did. Exactly. She has not described Hindus at all and has conveniently left out what "normal Hindus" may feel like or behave like in her anxiety to bash the right wing. Martha Nussbaum wants to tell Americans about the Hindu right wing without showing any inclination to say where being a "normal Hindu" ends and where a "right wing Hindutvadi" begins. In the process she has been critical of normal Hindu behavior. If one were to internalise Martha Nussbaum's views without critical thought, one would be inclined to believe that saying "Jai bolo Sri Ram ki" is a command to praise Rama. If one were to internalise Martha Nussbaum's words without critical thought, one would have to believe that enjoying the Ramayana is to be involved with a murderous plot to kill all Muslims. If you read Martha Nussbaum's article without critical thought, you will believe that the use of technology in a Hindu temple is a right wing plot connected with the murder of Muslims. We just need to check out who needs to use critical thought and where. The next time I hear anyone say "Praise the lord" I will accuse him of trying to force me to praise a god that I don't believe in. That is what Martha Nussbaum has implied is correct. And she talks of "accepting differences" and "syncretism". In my view Martha Nussbaum has intentionally or unintentionally posted a veiled and vicious attack on Hindus and Hinduism. The attack may be both justified and her right as far as she is concerned. But it is an attack on Hindus in the guise of an attack on the Hindu right wing. If it gets posted on silk list, I reserve the right to point out what I feel. shiv
