Skip to main content

Breaking India - Reading Now

Apart from being co-authored by Aravindan anna, which alone is reason enough to read the book, this is a path-breaking book. It brings into the limelight of Indian intellectual discourse the importance of Christian interference and indirect aggression into the sovereignty of India, through the artificially implanted Dravidian and Dalit identity politics.

I have just began reading it and currently sailing through Chapter 3: Inventing the Aryan Race. It traces how the discovery of Indian philosophy, culture and science amazed European scholars initially and reached a peak when they began to romanticize India as the cradle of civilizations, praising its language and grammar, art and literature, philosophy and spirituality. This quickly gave raise to the lucrative discipline of Indology and related discourses beginning from late eighteenth to early nineteenth century.

However, imperialism backed by Christianity and economic ambitions soon upturned the cart of Indian origin of the western civilization, creating this new wave of contempt and disgust for all things Indian. To justify colonization and enslavement of India, the scholarly ilk of white Europe began to spin elaborate hypotheses that culminated with Nazism and the holocaust. Prominent figures involved in such sullied research were Jones, Renan, Muller, Hegel, Pictet and others.

All of this is briefly covered in this particular chapter. This big roundabout by European scholarship alone is an important chain of reactions in history that will need a few volumes to elaborate. The book just gives us a glimpse.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Spiritual, but not religious...

The first time I came across the phrase "Spiritual, but not religious" was as an option for "Religion" when I signed up for Orkut. And I have found this phrase to be quite intriguing since then. As I started adding friends to my profile, I found many of them opting for this option. I doubt if they understood the meaning of this phrase properly. I am trying to understand this phrase too. Like jeans, pizza, coke, google, nuclear weapons, credit cards, gene modification, pollution, communism etc, this is an idea imported from the west. The two operating concepts here are "Religion" and "Spirituality" . And only if we understand what these two concepts really mean, can we understand the phrase "Spiritual, but not religious". When I think of religion these are what spring up in my mind - dogmas & doctrines, rituals & sacrifices, rules & restrictions, faiths & beliefs. These are considered as essential aspects of a rel

Questions

I ask a lot of questions. No, I change a lot of my statements to questions. Why? It induces people to respond. As a rule, questions beget more responses than statements. That way, I'm sure to elicit an answer - from myself or from someone else - most of the time. I naturally do ask a lot of questions - to myself. Even if it were intended to another person, I wait to ask. May be in the course of a talk or speech, my questions will be answered, instead of me jumping the gun. And many a time, I downplay my questions and don't ask them in public. I find it easier to approach someone and ask them questions face-to-face. This is also to create an opportunity to personally know someone. Asking questions crystallizes ideas or problems. It is then easier to express or execute the idea and find solutions to problems. Asking the right question, to the right person, at the right time is an art. It comes to a few people naturally; to a lot of others, with practice. So, if you need som

Are we honest?

These are protesting times. A large number of people have taken to the streets - I don't know the real numbers but I am being assured that there are thousands of people on the streets, taking long marches, holding candle-light vigils etc - protesting corruption. I have covered the movement and the ripples it is creating in my other blog. So, I am not going into those details again here. I have a few basic questions though (as usual). What is it that the people are protesting against, essentially? Yes, we know it is corruption, but corruption does not sustain itself. It is perpetrated by individuals. That raises the next question - who are the individuals that perpetrate corruption. Or to simply state - who are the corrupt individuals? Are only those who take bribes and get involved in scams corrupt and dishonest? What about those who pay to get driving licenses without attending the exams? What about those who encroach upon a few square feet next to their own properties an