“no one here is advocating a saffronisation of history.” okay. we believe you, but what of the historians whom you love to quote?

you’re the one using weasel words. the invitation to harvard was nothing but disguised contempt. even talageri recognized it as an insult and refused to go. but if you want to be recalcitrant about it and call me a weasel when i clarified the situation, you’re weakening your own (infinitesimal) credibility. like i said, take your pick. are you foolish or are you malicious?

Dude, what the heck are you talking about? Invalidating AIT (Aryan Invasion Theory if you still don’t know) does not mean denying invasions and migrations that have impacted the ethnic and cultural character of India over time. Why do you pseudo-secs only deal in absolutes? These are reconcilable.

Second, my critique of Thapar is based upon my own study of her work be it A History of India Vol. 1, where that ridiculous theory (for which she offered no evidence) about the bhakti movement was made or her article on Somnath. In contrast, I have great respect for the man who schooled her, A.L. Basham. It is a pity she does not carry on in his footsteps. So I know you love painting people who disagree with you as saffronites, but again, I believe in a secular india, have indian muslim friends who are like brothers and sisters to me, and have a guru who is fakir…but that doesn’t stop me from calling out your BS and those who think having an italian babysitter ruling the country is the greatest thing since sliced bread.

Third, dude how bout some specifics on so called hindu persecution of other faiths within the indic tradition? If you are going to talk about Pushyamitra–that is laughable considering the Sangha continued to prosper under him. It was yet another colonial theory put together by a british imperial apologist named W.W. Tarn who made a career out of misinterpreting indian texts and touting Alexander as a humanist who simply wanted to unify mankind.

Please, educate me on the so-called hindu imperial project in cambodia? What indian ruler sent people to persecute buddhists there? The problem with people like you is that you first form an opinion then search for facts to defend it, rather than the converse. Of course, if you want to create a narrative about muslim victimhood then you first have to negate hindu tolerance and pluralism by spinning and lying about history.

How are jains and buddhists persecuted in modern india? Describe…give me facts. Don’t just pull lies out of your rear. India has given sanctuary to the most venerable buddhist leader in the world and jains are the most powerful businessmen in India (accounting for 48% of tax revenues). Where is the history of forced conversions, of female abductions and rape against practitioners of those traditions? Specifics dude, not obfuscation and lies.

Look, ultimately, you and you buddies want to create manichean world where in it’s either your twisted sense of secularism or the hindutva bogeyman. But news flash, there are people that fit in neither category, don’t care about ideology, and want all sides (hindu and muslim) to get over the cycle of victimhood. So why don’t you drop your ideological agenda for a change and embrace the very reason you tout…right now, it’s lacking…

Whoa, just great job on weasel words…yes, there was a long standing debate between witzel and talageri but that still does not negate the offer to earn a PHD. Good job, dude. Moreover, Witzel’s theories themselves which consist of odd interpretations of the Vedas are under a cloud of suspicion as well. Either way, way to contradict yourself.

Second, you ignored all the other scholars who are respected in their own right and whose research has at least enhanced the study of indian history if not completely invalidated AIT for all time. If anyone is blatantly lying and ignorant, it is you. So go ahead, continue touting failed colonial theories so you can advance the agendas of genocide deniers like bose. All you are doing is proving the point that the rest of us here have been making all along–double standards. Do you even have any understanding of indology and its origins? If you don’t then your comments, which consist of a haphazard google search and convenient cherry picking only show how in over your head you are.

Third, what arguments do you have against the theory of the Authochthonous nature of Indian civilization? I’m not saying it should be gospel–it shouldn’t. The point is between Mueller’s own confessions and western scholarship itself questioning the validity of AIT, you are only proving how tragically ideological you are. So enjoy your JNU cocktail parties and continue turning out the colonial bunk that somehow seems to put a smile on your face. No one here is advocating a saffronisation of history. Indian, and yes Hindu, civilization has had both triumphs and failures. It has both learnt from and taught the world. Only when all aspects are properly studied, instead of ignored (people don’t even learn about aryabhata in many schools), then indians can have both a healthy pride and skepticism about their history. People like you only seek to prevent that.

For many in the Muslim community, terrorism / gangsterism is a path to prominence. And they serve as role models.

in the light of the tacit approval of the community for terrorism who really cares about a few meaningless gestures?

yep, indian muslims are unreconstructed embodiments of evil. no bigotry there at all.

of course, i am secular, so won’t mention how “many” in the hindu community express overt support for actions such as gujarat and babri, or how their leaders launch political witch hunts and smear top cops who go after terrorists among their coreligionists.

regardless of the neverending hindu/muslim debates on SM, I’d have thought that Hindu + Muslim alike would be united in praising 1) Muslim liberalism 2) increasing western press recognition of (1) It won’t turn Pakistan into Switzerland overnight but it is the first step on a long path.

The expectation is that the actions are a meaningless gesture. NPR had featured a story on NYPD’s counter-terrorism unit. One of the anecdotes was how a plot to bomb the subway by terrorists was foiled because, the room-mate of the terrorists, who was also a Muslim, informed on them. The story went on to state that in a healthy society, the minority community polices itself and does not allow the potential troublemakers any opportunity to strike. And that when they do they are made an example of.

In India, this is not true. For many in the Muslim community, terrorism / gangsterism is a path to prominence. And they serve as role models. Afzal Guru should have been hanged by now, the Coimbatore bombers openly boast of their arrest and release, The mosque itself was staging point in Maraad, very few serial bombers are caught, and when they are, they are often released after a while because no one from their community steps up. Call me cynical, but in the light of the tacit approval of the community for terrorism who really cares about a few meaningless gestures?

incidents of infighting

yes, the others were isolated schoolyard brawls

The point, is, these are not the “same acts” in terms of scale, scope or, indeed contemporaneous written or current archeological evidence. The attempt to say that a protracted campaign of violence and destruction is equivalent to incidents of infighting is the Big Lie.

Let’s see: I say “indigeneous theory is BS”, and you counter with AIT. When I pointed out that this was a bogus dichotomy because commingling occured, you counter now by saying commingling occurred but the foundation of the civilization was in the subcontinent. sounds like a historically solid claim to me

i see that i have become a debater than a discusser since i didn’t directly concede your sangh given talking points about thapar. i am glad you brought up somnath. i am always impressed how hindu rulers persecutiing rival religions like jainism and buddhism, both in today’s india, as well as in erstwhile ceylon, or in cambodia are conceded as a natural consequence of conquest, but the same acts by muslim rulers from 500 years ago are extremely prejudicial and need to be “corrected” (“nonviolently” as you put it