On Friday, Saudi Arabia is scheduled to execute Lebanese TV host Ali Hussain Sibat
Subscribe to Rashtrakut by Email
Comments
[…] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Rashtrakut. Rashtrakut said: From the blog: The erosion of the limits of legal #jurisdiction http://goo.gl/fb/05mYe #religion #fanatics […]
Am wondering if Rashtrakut has done the necessary soul searching and analysis of his criticism of Saudi Islam in light of his “Who Gets to Define a Religion Pt. III.” My personal bias is that anyone gets to define it.
Ross
Yes, I am aware I have my own cultural biases from a secular upbringing on my interpretation of Wahabbi Islam (which until the Saudis found oil was dismissed by most of the Islamic world as a bunch of fanatic crackpots). The key difference is that I have not called for Doniger’s arrest for blasphemy, not said that she should be prevented from writing nor have I called for a book burning.
I subscribe to two critiques of Doniger’s work – factual inaccuracy and an unwillingness to concede that her biases color her analyses. My other concern is that given Doniger’s power in American Hinduism academia and the sheer absence of alternative viewpoints in American Hinduism academia, her work with will end up as a textbook used to define Hinduism in American schools. A long rant on the subject is here http://rajivmalhotra.sulekha.com/blog/post/2002/09/risa-lila-1-wendy-s-child-syndrome.htm
That I do have a problem with. It is one thing to use her work to explore alternative interpretations, another to use it as the definitive work on the subject which given her reputation (not subject to any serious domestic challenge until recently) is a concern. Given the colonial legacy, Indians can be tad sensitive about interpretations by non practitioners that leave practitioners baffled. I would be less concerned about Doniger if there was a true peer review for her work in the US rather than the typical back slapping society.
RSS Feed
