| rajendra |
Posted
on 02-Jan-01 02:10 PM
My point about bringing communal qualifications is NOT to say that you can't or don't have Newar friends (sure, they're the best people around!!). My point is it is imprudent to personally disqualify or dissuade someone (eg Biswoji) from discussing about Kumari because he is a non-Newar. Is it so that because we are all Nepalis, we can't even talk about American elections among ourselves??
By the way, the Kumari tradition is no longer just a Newari tradition. It is a NEPALI tradition, with a Nepali King bowing to her. Mixing in ethnic/communal qualifications to the Kumari dicussion, as I have feared, can only detract us from the real discussion on Kumari we started out with.
In the same token, we are not asking for your Newari qualifications here. So could you please spare us the details of your personal life: what you did last night, who your friends or enemies are, and what you talked until dawn? I believe it is you who said that what we are seeking in this debate is substance. Well, my friend, please do practice what you preach.
|
| Biswo |
Posted
on 02-Jan-01 04:19 PM
Of course, Ashu,you can argue whatever you think, but your
argument in this thread are dangerously fickle and devoid of
any substance.Furthermore, they verge on borderline of saying
nothing, while pretending to saying a lot.
I just want to ask you what new information did you furnish us
in this thread besides asking us to just shut up in the issues
relating to Kumari because I am 'non-newar'?
The reality is ,your arguments in this thread are really worthless
so as to make us doubt on what you think about 'argument' itself?
Should we stop talking about situation of Kamaiya because we're
not Kamiya? Should we stop talking about the situation of Moslem
women because they are Moslem? Should we stop talking about the
nomadic culture Praja because they are Praja? And we are not
what they are!
I am surprised that you say talking about Kumari ,the way I did,
was communal! The way you wrote ,excerpt here,
>>Communalism, I would argue, is the weapon of those in Nepal
who show little or no evidence of having understood OTHER group's cultural practices in micro, changing contexts, yet feel free -- assuming, perhaps, everyone will surely agree with them -- to show their indignation/concerns/anger in public by saying, on
a macro-level, yesto bha.ya.na, testo bha.ya.na.
has only served the trend of incrimination/innuendo that you
have been fostering gleefully in your own unique style of
argument!
The reality is if anybody is talking about Kumari on macro level
then it is you.Because my point from the start is sending them
to good schools etc..,which are micro concerns.Shutting every
argument up is macro, sizing up all other discussant as dilettante on the subject is ,at best, moronic and macro in itself
and writing communal words to prove nothing is a ludicrous
style of arguing.
Of course, we expect a better version of writing from as
thoughtful person as you!
|
