http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/review/014311669X/R10UJP16SRT3XP/
So much for an alternative history. Now, how about some mundane, regular history stuff? Let’s go back to the Mahabharata, an epic that Ms. Doniger brings up dozens of times in her book (she even calls the Mahabharata “100 times more interesting” than the Iliad and the Odyssey). Let’s ask two questions: When did the main events of Mahabharata occur? And exactly how long is the epic?
Ms. Doniger mentions the years as: between 1000 BCE and 400 BCE, most likely 950 BCE, or around 3012 BCE, or maybe 1400 BCE. That narrows down the chronology quite a bit, doesn't it? Really, there is more to writing history (particularly the alternative kind) than looking up the reference books and throwing in all the numbers one could find. But in Ms. Doniger’s defense, she is not a historian per se (and she clearly tells us so), so let’s let this one slide by. I’d even say she does deserve some credit here for at least bothering to look up things. On the next topic, she fails to do even that.
Ms. Doniger says the Mahabharata is about 75,000 verses long. Then she helpfully adds, “sometimes said to be a hundred thousand, perhaps just to round it off a bit." My goodness, 25,000 verses is some rounding error, don't you think? Most sources put it between 75,000 and 125,000. It took me all of two hours to find a very detailed account (not on the Internet though), compiled in the 11th century, putting the total at 100,500—and I’m not a researcher, not by a long shot. And yes, the exact number of verses is secondary to the big picture. What bothers me is the offhandedness with which Ms. Doniger brushes off 25,000 verses as a rounding issue. Why this half-baked research?
Oh well, maybe we expected too much from the bestselling book on Hinduism and it’s our fault. So, let’s try again, one last time. Where is India located?
Ms. Doniger states, very clearly, without any ambiguity, on page 11 (footnote): “Most of India… is in the Northern Hemisphere.”
Logging you in...
Guest · 520 weeks ago
The Mahabharata is the longest known epic poem and has been described as "the longest poem ever written".[7][8] Its longest version consists of over 100,000 shloka or over 200,000 individual verse lines (each shloka is a couplet), and long prose passages. About 1.8 million words in total, the Mahabharata is roughly ten times the length of the Iliad and the Odyssey combined, or about four times the length of the Ramayana.
EdMeasure · 520 weeks ago
I wonder if the reviewer has actually read the book, or just somebody else's critique. The number of examples of completely misunderstanding what Doniger actually wrote is so large it's hard to take his conclusions seriously. For example, he bashes Doniger for being indefinite about the number of verses in the Mahabharata. Here is what she wrote:
The Mahabharata was retold very differently by all of its many authors in the long line of literary descent. It is so extremely fluid that there is no single Mahabharata; there are hundreds of Mahabharatas, hundreds of different manuscripts and innumerable oral versions (one reason why it is impossible to make an accurate calculation of the number of its verses).
Doniger, Wendy (2009-02-24). The Hindus: An Alternative History (p. 263). Penguin Group US. Kindle Edition.
To completely ignore this fundamental point and use it to construe careless scholarship is either obtuse or dishonest. While India is indeed entirely rather than "mostly" in the Northern Hemisphere, all his other critiques has the same type of failings. Another big attack is based on the several dates cited for the composition of the Mahabharata and the events described in it. Since no datable physical artifacts are known, these dates are inherently uncertain. Neither was the composition of the work contemporaneous with those events - as the Mahabharata itself explicitly notes. Neither were the hundreds of versions all composed contemporaneously. That accounts for most of the dates he cites with scorn. The outlier - 3012 BCE - was noted in a footnote as "frequently cited."
Who exactly is it frequently cited by? My own investigations find it cited by certain Indian scholars who believe that it describes events in Indus Valley Civilization. I know of no independent evident confirming such a date, which is probably why Doniger confined it to a footnote.
Finally, I would note that although the reviewer claims to be reviewing the Kindle edition (available only from Amazon), neither he nor any other of the numerous highly critical reviews is a verified purchaser.
macgupta 81p · 520 weeks ago
Secondly, in a modern history, would Wendy Doniger mention that the world might have been created 5000 years ago? At most, one would say, the traditional Hindu date for the Mahabharata war is that the war marks the beginning of the Kali Yuga, and this is computed to be 3012 BC; ;this computation is attributed to the 5th century Indian astronomer and mathematician Aryabhatta, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aryabhata
So, is Wendy Doniger's book merely the equivalent of gossip gathered on Google? If so, doesn't it deserve the tomatoes thrown at it?
(Added later): Actually, your comments are an ample indictment of the book, or you would know enough not to write some of what you did.
macgupta 81p · 520 weeks ago
macgupta 81p · 520 weeks ago
One could say, it is in English, it is in prose, it was written in the last 50 years, "it is so incredibly fluid that there is no single Mahabharata". And saying that is a patently obvious misrepresentation of the situation. The critical edition is a constructive existence proof of a proper representation.
EdMeasure · 520 weeks ago
EdMeasure · 520 weeks ago
You don't know, and can't know, because you haven't read it. We are left with prejudice and arguments that don't address any of my points. You are a highly intelligent person. Why not try engaging that intellect instead of just your personal prejudices?
macgupta 81p · 520 weeks ago
I will read no more of her works than listen any more to Rush Limbaugh or Bill O'Reilly. After a point, any intelligent person knows to discount what they say, without any further effort. You can't brush that off with "oh, Bill O'Reilly doesn't fairly represent your personal vision of the world, so you are prejudiced". You have read one book, Wendy Doniger's, on Hinduism, good for you, congratulations, you now know so much more than I do with my entire life's experience, the hundreds of books on Hinduism I have, and my experience as a practitioner, a critic, and observer of the Hindus I've lived among my entire life. Ultimately, one has to be know-nothing to be unprejudiced is it not? Well, good for you, you fit the bill perfectly. Your view of life is always the latest book you read.
EdMeasure · 520 weeks ago
If that's your reason for hating me, well good luck to you. I hope you have a happy life anyway.
macgupta 81p · 520 weeks ago