the frameworks of objection

The controversy around the Doniger book continues. I am following it, as far as i am able, because this whole discursive space has become fascinating for me. Outlook, which printed the initial interview with the author, the interview responsible for my initial interest in the (then forthcoming) book, has now printed a piece by Aditi Banerjee, who claims the following:

1. The Doniger book is not the definitive take on Hinduism
2. Doniger herself is a bad scholar
3. All the people who criticize her are not Hindutva (like Aditi herself, I assume)

So i'm going to go down the article by Banerjee, taking her points, and not necessarily refuting, but engaging with them. I am doing this because i see someone like AB as a counterpart in the West, someone who did not perhaps grow up seeing Hindu (with the tensions that have become integral to the area) as a particularly primary identity, but has felt the need to reclaim it as she has grown older. In doing this, i will refer to blogposts she has put up on the internet, and try to distinguish her experiences from mine.

In other words, this is as much about myself as it is about her objections to Doniger. Am thinking this will be an interesting exercise, starting with the next post.