Traditional interpretation of the Sanskrit kavya literature is that it is essentially “sacred” in nature and hence Malhotra points out that one needs to approach it accordingly to understand it in the right spirit. This is really a very professional and dignified way to approach criticism and I am quite impressed with that!Ĭoming to the core topic of this book, I am surprised that there are intellectuals like Pollock who think that Sanskrit language itself is a “language of oppression”! Of course the Sankrit Kavyas are blamed by people like Pollock for portraying patriarchy, hatred, social oppression and what not, but to take it further and blame the language itself is something only intellectuals can do! Rajiv Malhotra does not deny that these “dangerous elements” pointed out by Pollock exist in Sanskrit literature but he does not treat these as the “core characteristics” of the Sanskrit language/literature. Rajiv Malhotra mentions that he even met Pollock twice to discuss their disagreements. Malhotra speaks of Pollock respectfully, presents Pollock’s views well and gives a dispassionate counter view-point. It concerns itself with criticizing Sheldon Pollock’s views on Sanskrit and its social impact on Indian society (I heard his name for the first time in this book). This is the first Rajiv Malhotra’s book I read. The Battle for Sanskrit: Is Sanskrit Political or Sacred, Oppressive orLiberating, Dead or Alive? by Rajiv Malhotra
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |