Westerners who study Indian Languages as a full time profession are almost always subversionists, well integrated in the anti India ecosystem. Sadly they get too much limelight and support, way disproportionate to the worth of their scholarship.
That’s why I keep saying that in hierarchy of identities language should be below religion. Hence, delighting in poetry or grammar or linguistics is for me at an entirely lower level than the religious content presented in that medium. I take an even more drastic position that linguistics for linguistics sake is quite an empty exercise.+++(4)+++ It takes value only when it is a tool for cracking philological issues pertaining to the root culture of the language. Let us not forget that were not far from a Sanskrit speaking sultanate under the ghaznavids or have a Shaiste Khan spout a delicate vasantatilaka on the shapeliness of one of his begam-s below the burka that would get the Sanskritists nodding approvingly on the demonstration of vyAkaraNa & vR^itta. But Shaiste remains a Shaiste. The holiness the language comes from containing the first praises of the gods by our ancestors rather from something intrinsic to itself. Even if that were so it comes from identification of the phonemes with the deities.+++(5)+++
More practically, there are 3 broad phenomena (leaving pretabhANaka-s aside):
-
- Some occidental students like Pollock &his parampara are intrinsic subversionists with deep roots connecting them to the founders of navyonmAda in the shUlajana-desha. These are svabhAva-vairin-s of functional societies for navyonmAda & its predecessor rudhironmAda are. Hence, H is a natural enemy that they sabotage by penetrating it acting like friends & using the internal enemies as allies.
-
- Then we have the Malhotran u-turners who start with good intentions but are unable to find real society because of racial difference, cultural vAsana-s or disillusionment. E.g., they came for maithuna but did not get the kAma they wanted. Thus, they make the malhotran u-turn. Alternatively, they are led down that path by professors like Pollock-parampara. One cannot succeed in the mlechCha academia without professing the new ekarAkShasonmAda that spits on H. I heard from a non-Anglospheric mlechCha woman that she left academia after a Skt PhD because her intention was to become & practice H but the mlechCha academia was mostly anti-H.
-
- Interest in 3rd person analytics, especially linguistics. You can be interested in infectious disease without actually wanting to spread infectious diseases or becoming emotionally involved with viruses or bacteria. This especially comes from those interested in just linguistics. You can often hear them blather atrocious things about the actual history & culture of the people whose languages they study. This is not limited to non-H. I’ve personally seen good H with interest in language more than religion being easily waylaid by the tyranny of conformity that characterizes the Euro-Americn academe. Some practicing H can also take up navyonmAda.