Leftist Scholarship in India

By David Frawley

As a westerner writing on Hinduism in a positive light it is strange that the main opponents I have run into are Hindus them selves, that is the Marxist Hindus, who like many rebels are the most negative about their own cultural traditions which they have but recently abandoned. The views of these leftists are often on par with the anti-Hindu views of Christian fundamentalists while the latter see Hinduism as a religion of the devil, the former see it as a personification of social evil, the manifestation of caste division which is their devil (though curiously Marxism works to encourage class hatred, not to promote social harmony and peace between the classes).

Hindus today, like followers of other religions, should no longer accept the Marxist view of their religion and their history, but to do so they must first unmask it. This does not mean that Hindus have done no wrong or that they should not reform their social system or become more compassionate. The proper social changes that need to be done in India or anywhere else in the world do not require rejecting religion in the true sense, or adapting communist-socialist policies which are failing every-where. On the contrary, the appropriate changes follow from a better understanding of the spirit of universality in Hinduism, which is the essence of its religious view, its recognition of God as the self of all beings.

Observing such Marxist thinkers one is reminded of the Katha Upanishad: "Living in the midst of ignorance, considering themselves to be wise, the deluded wander confused, like the blind led by the blind. The way to truth does not appear to a confused immature mind, deluded by the illusion of wealth (materialism). Thinking that this world alone exists and there is nothing beyond, they ever return again and again to the net of death." The Upanishads saw long ago that materialistic thinkers who regard that this world is the only reality only lead us to ignorance and sorrow. It is about time that people in India started to heed the words of their ancient sages, even if it means questioning modern professors.

The Christian Story : A Warped Indian Media

by Francois Gautier

While there is no doubt that the ghastly murder of Graham Stewart Staines, the Australian missionary and his two innocent sons, should be universally condemned and that the culprits should be severely punished, the massive outcry it has evoked in the Indian Press (let us forget for a moment the politicians, whose cynical opportunism is now known to all), raises several important questions, which can only be answered by a Westerner, as any Indian who would dare utter the below statements would immediately be assimilated with the Sangh Parivar :

1) Is the life of a White Man infinitely more important and dear to the Indian Media than the lives of a hundred Indians ? Or to put it differently : is the life of a Christian more sacred than the lives of many Hindus ?
It would seem so. Because we all remember not so long ago, whether in Pendjab or in Kashmir, how militants would stop buses and kill all the Hindus - men, women and children. It even happened recently, when a few of the last courageous Hindus to dare remain in Kashmir, were savagely slaughtered in a village, as were the labourers in Himachal Pradesh. Yet, very few voices were raised in the Indian Press condemning it - at least there never was such an outrage as provoked by the murder of Staines. When Hindus are killed in pogroms in Pakistan or Bangladesh (please read again Taslima Nasreen’s book “Lajja”), we never witness in the Indian Media the like of yesterday’s tear jerking, posthumous “interview” of Mr Staines in Star News. Does this really mean, as many of the early colonialists and missionaries thought, that the life of a hundred Hindus is not worth a tear ?

2) This massive outcry on the “atrocities against the minorities” raises also doubts about the quality and integrity of Indian journalism. Take for instance the rape of the four nuns in Jhabua. Today the Indian Press (and the foreign corespondents - witness Tony Clifton’s piece in the last issue of Newseek) are still reporting that it was a “religious” rape. Yet I went to Jhabua and met the four adorable nuns, who themselves admitted, along with their bishop George Anatil, that it had nothing to do with religion - it was the doing of a gang of Bhil tribals, known to perpetrate this kind of hateful acts on their own women. Yet today, the Indian Press, the Christian hierarchy and the politicians, continue to include the Jhabua rape in the list of the atrocities against the Christians. Take the Wayanad incident in Northern Kerala. It was reported that a priest and four women were beaten up and a Bible stolen by “fanatical” Hindus. A FIR was lodged, the communists took out processions all over Kerala to protest against the “atrocities” and the Press went gaga. Yet as an intrepid reporter from the Calicut office of the Indian Express found out, nobody was beaten up and the Bible was safe. Too late : the damage was done and it still is being made use of by the enemies of India. Finally, even if Dara Singh does belong to the Bajrang Dal, it is doubtful if the 100 others accused do. What is more probable, is that like in Wayanad, it is a case of converted tribals versus non-converted tribals, of pent-up jealousies, of old village feuds and land disputes. It is also an outcome of what - it should be said - are the aggressive methods of the Pentecost and seventh Adventists missionaries, known for their muscular ways of converting.

3) And this raises the most important question : why does the Indian press always reflect a westernised point of view ? Why does India’s intellectual “elite”, the majority of which happens to be Hindu, always come down so hard on their own culture, their own religion, their own brothers and sisters ? Is it because of an eternal feeling of inferiority, which itself is a legacy of British colonisation ? Is it because they considers Hindus to be inferior beings - remember the words of Claudius Buccchanan, a chaplain attached to the East India Company : "...Neither truth, nor honesty, honour, gratitude, nor charity, is to be found in the breast of a Hindoo"! Is it because the Indian Press is still deeply influenced by Marxist and communist thoughts planted by Nehruvianism, like it is in Kerala, where the communists have shamelessly and dangerously exploited the Christians issue for their own selfish purpose ?

Whatever it is, the harm is done. Because even though it is not the truth which has been reported from Jhabua, from Wayanad or from the Keonjhar district in Orissa, it has been passed-off as the truth and it has been believed to be so by the masses. And the result is that it has split India a little more along religious and castes lines, as the communist and those who want to see India divided, diminished, humiliated, have always wished. How sad that such a beautiful country, with such a wonderful tradition of tolerance, spirituality and greatness, is slowly sinking into self-destruction… And the best is that the Hindus - they who were colonised, beaten-up, converted by force or guile, their temples destroyed, their women raped, are blamed - and not those who raped, converted, destroyed, colonised…

And finally, Christianity has always striven on martyrdom, on being persecuted. It was so in Rome, it was so in Africa, it is so in India. Before the murder of Mr Staines, the Christian story was slowly dying; the culprits of the Jhabua rape would have been condemned and the Wayanad fraud exposed. In one stroke the burning of Graham Stewart Staines has revived the controversy and insured that it does not die for a long time. Was the joy of martyrdom for the cause he fought for 34 years his last thought before dying ?

The “persecution” of Christians in India

by Francois Gautier

Firstly, it is necessary to bring about a little bit of a historical flashback, which very few foreign correspondents (and unfortunately also Indian journalists) care to do, which would make for a more balanced view of the problem…

…If ever there was persecution, it was of the Hindus at the hands of Christians, who were actually welcomed in this country, as they have been welcomed in no other place in this Planet. Indeed, the first Christian community of the world, that of the Syrian Christians, was established in Kerala in the first century; they were able to live in peace and practice their religion freely, even imbibing some of the local Hindu customs, until the Jesuits came in the 16th century and told them it was “heathen” to have anything to do with the Hindus, thereby breaking the Syrian Church in two.

Is India Really Independent?

by S. Bakre

August 15th, 2004 will signify 57 years of freedom for India. Jawaharlal Nehru, India’s first prime minister gave a speech to Constituent Assembly at midnight on August 14, 1947. “At the dawn of history India started on her unending quest…she has never lost sight of that quest or forgotten the ideals which gave her strength. We end today, a period of ill fortune and India discovers herself again.” His speech inspired us with ideals about a new beginning for India.

Has India lived up to these ideals?

Although the British no longer occupy India, is she really independent of their influence?

While they were in India, we began to follow their traditions, their philosophies, and their lifestyle. We silently allowed them desecrate our heritage, culture and religion. Yet now, it is we, the Indians that continue to propagate their regime. We continue to honor those that tried to destroy our culture.

Perhaps the biggest tragedy has been in the area of religion. We have continued to carry the torch for the British missionaries in their attempts to dissuade our belief system. We continue to allow the desecration of the essence of Bhartiya culture and tradition - the scriptures. Not only do we believe in wrong information, we allow for the propagation of it through textbooks in prestigious Indian schools and universities. Fictitious theories about the Aryan invasion, the history of Indian civilization, the origin of our scared Sanskrit language are being taught to our youth even today.

Let’s take one example of a great Indian philosopher, Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan, President of India from 1962 - 1967. Widely renowned for his philosophical writings and lectures, he was highly influenced by the books of the European writers who wrote about Hinduism and the history of India. His own writings perpetuated the British belief system rather than the knowledge of Bhartiya scriptures.*

For example he wrote in his book Indian Philosophy Vol.1, “Rama is only a good and great man, a high-souled hero, who utilized the services of the aboriginal tribes in civilizing the south, and not an avatar of Vishnu. The religion it reflects is frankly polytheistic and external.”

Further, Radhakrishnan remarked that “brahamanization of Krsna religion and elevating Vishnu as the great God took place around 300BC.” In his writings he has called the early Hindus ‘the beast,’ the Divine wisdom of the Rishis ‘the God-making factory,’ and defined the Vedic religion as ‘the religion of the primitive man in the world of ghosts and goblins who were only satisfied with bloody sacrifices.’ He described the teachings of the Upnishads and the Puranas as ‘speculation, myth, parables and heretical doctrines,’ called Mahabharat ‘a non-Aryan epic poem’ and tells that ‘the higher mysticism of Yog Darshan was mixed with drug intoxication.’

In fact, Hinduism, originally called Sanatan Dharm, is a universal religion intended for the whole world, not for any specific race. The Vedic culture is the heritage of world civilizations and we should be proud that it originated in India, not shy away from it. The spiritual wisdom of ancient India is a gift to mankind and we as Indians need to cherish, nurture and be proud of it.

Many of us want to be “like the West”. We wear Western clothes, watch cable TV, send our children to convent schools and allow them to be taught by the very books that were authored by the British. The impressions of our freedom struggle are from a history book in English rather than our national language. Trousers and shirts replace traditional dress. Urban youth are shying away from Indian culture and gravitating towards Western assimilation. Modernization has been equated with Westernization. Somewhere along the way 150 years of the ‘Raj’ has definitely left its mark.

We have somehow lost our way towards the pursuit of independence, and have continued to be ruled by an invisible ‘Raj’. We have lost sight of our quest. We have forgotten the ideals which gave us strength. There is still time to change the future, to return to our roots. We can re-discover India’s timeless teachings, we can change the generations to come. Perhaps the question is not whether we have the ability to do it, but rather will we take on the challenge?

Sanskrit - The Mother of All Languages

The one which is introduced or produced in its perfect form is called Sanskrit. The word Sanskrit is formed from “sam + krit” where (sam) prefix means (samyak) ‘entirely’ or ‘wholly’ or ‘perfectly,’ and krit means ‘done.’ Sanskrit was first introduced by Brahma to the Sages of the celestial abodes and it is still the language of the celestial abode, so it is also called the Dev Vani.

Sanskrit was introduced on the earth planet, by the eternal Sages of Sanatan Dharm along with the Divine scriptures such as the Vedas, the Upnishads and the Puranas. A famous verse in Sage Panini’s Ashtadhyayi tells that the Panini grammar that is in use now is directly Graced by God Shiv.

Yoga, Ahimsa and the Recent Terrorist Attacks

Yoga, Ahimsa and the Recent Terrorist Attacks
by Dr. David Frawley

The Yoga tradition emphasizes the principle of ahimsa or non-violence for its ideal way of action in the world. Therefore, we might assume that the yogic response to the terrorist attack on America would not involve any violent action against the terrorists. However, a deeper examination of the Yoga tradition, which has several teachings about political and military situations, shows that this might not be the case. The Yoga tradition can under certain circumstances recommend a violent response in order to prevent greater harm from occurring. This is like a surgeon removing a harmful tumor so that it does not grow and damage the whole body.

Many people in the Yoga tradition look to the non-violence of Mahatma Gandhi, which was applied against the British, as the appropriate yogic response to the current situation. They don’t realize that perhaps even greater yogis, like Sri Aurobindo, who headed the Indian independence movement before Gandhi, felt that Gandhian non-violence was too weak a strategy. He supported the allied military action both in World War II and during the Korean War. One is also reminded of the situation of Kashmir in 1947 in which Gandhi, though reluctantly, approved of bringing in the Indian army to deal with bands of brigands or terrorists who were plundering the area. In this regard, the Yoga tradition recognizes a warrior or Kshatriya path that did involve military training. So let us examine this difficult question further.

Ahimsa literally means "non-harming". It refers to an attitude that we should wish no harm to any creature, even to those attacking us. But ahimsa is not simply a passive strategy. It has an active side. It entails reducing the amount of harm that is going on in the world, which requires effort or even struggle.

Ahimsa does not simply mean "non-violence" as a physical action, nor is it not necessarily opposed to the use of violence in order to prevent harm from happening. In addition, ahimsa must be applied with courage and fearlessness, in order to expose and eradicate evil. It is not an attitude of tolerating or excusing evil. It is not a form of appeasement in which one lets bullies get away with their action or which rewards violent action by surrendering to its perpetrators in order to prevent them from causing more harm.

The Hindu View of Society: Dharma and Its Global Relevance

The Hindu View of Society: Dharma and Its Global Relevance
by Dr. DavidFrawley

Hindu Dharma contains a wealth of thought on social issues and a long tradition of social sciences. These begin with an extensive ancientliterature of Dharma Shastras and Dharma Sutras, of which the well-knownManu Smriti is not the only one (or the last word for that matter). Even epics like the Mahabharata have many passages on the social order. Manymodern Indian gurus, like Sri Aurobindo, have written on social issues. Of course, the role of Mahatma Gandhi in this respect is well known. Many modern Indian spiritual movements aim at social upliftment, like the recent Swadhyaya movement of Pandurang Shastri Athavale. In fact, the term Dharma in Hindu parlance first refers to the social dharma.

According to Hindu Dharma, Self-knowledge and the yogic approaches to achieve it are eternal and remain largely the same, differing in externalities of name, form and approach from age to age. However, the social dharma is less fixed and subject more to variations of time, place and culture. Therefore, Hindu Dharma (unlike, for example, Islam and its Sharia law code) does not have a single social dharma or social law for all time or for all cultures. It recognizes the need of different societies to define their social and political orders and is open to any number of possible social systems. The main issue for Hindu Dharma is that a social order encourages spiritual development and grants religious freedom and freedom of inquiry in all areas of life.

Strangely, these traditional social sciences are not well known to Hindus, much less to those who write about Hinduism. Few people understand that Hinduism projects both a spiritual and social order aimed at spiritual freedom and Self-realization. Hindu social thought is not the rigid authoritarian social order that people usually consider Hinduism to project through the caste system. It is also very different from Islamic or Christian views of the world divided between the believers and the non-believers. Hindu thought does not divide the world on the basis of religion into those who are saved and those who are not.

Most people look at Hindu social thought in the stereotyped form of the caste system, not realizing that this does not represent the real tradition at all. Caste by birth is a distortion of an originally more fluid system of social division and derives mainly from the medieval period as a defensive reaction against foreign invasions. The foundation of classical Hindu society is a recognition of individual needs and capacities, defined in spiritual as well as material terms.

Most people look at Hindu social thought in the stereotyped form of the caste system, not realizing that this does not represent the real tradition at all. Caste by birth is a distortion of an originally more fluid system of social division and derives mainly from the medieval period as a defensive reaction against foreign invasions. The foundation of classical Hindu society is a recognition of individual needs and capacities, defined in spiritual as well as material terms. Hinduism calls itself Sanatana Dharma, a universal or eternal tradition of dharma or natural law. It seeks both an individual and a collective order of Dharma harmonizing the human being within the greater universe of consciousness. The highest Dharma in Hinduism is Moksha ,which means freedom or liberation of consciousness, not simply of the body. This implies the full development of individual potentials in order to expand one's consciousness from the egoic level to a divine and cosmic realization. To this end all other human pursuits of earning a livelihood, raising a family, career achievement, and creative and cultural advancement have their value, but are not in themselves the ultimate. Without such a transcendent goal to turn these into liberating factors they lead to bondage and become factors of disintegration. After all, these factors deal with the transient and outer aspect of our nature. Only Self-realization has an eternal value.

There are four pillars of the Hindu view of society.

1. Family - Jati
2. Class - Varna
3. Individual Dharma - Svadharma
4. Differing Capacities - Adhikara Bheda

The Re-emergence of the Hindu Mind

The Re-emergence of the Hindu Mind

from Hinduism and the Clash of Civilizations
By David Frawley (Vamadeva Shastri)

The Hindu mind represents humanity’s oldest and most continuous stream of conscious intelligence on the planet. Hindu sages, seers, saints, yogis and jnanis have maintained an unbroken current of awareness linking humanity with the Divine since the dawn of history, and as carried over from earlier cycles of civilization in previous humanities unknown to our present spiritually limited culture. The Hindu mind sustains a connection with the cosmic mind and the blueprint of creation and evolution in this physical world, as well as our connection to worlds more subtle and spiritual. The Hindu mind has a vision of eternity and infinity. It is aware of the vast cycles of creation and destruction that govern the many universes and innumerable creatures within them.

the Hindu mind, being the native intelligence of the country, could not be suppressed. It continued in India through the religious and spiritual concerns of the common people. In the late twentieth century, it gradually emerged again. New groups are arising today that find great value in the Hindu tradition and look once more to Vivekananda and Aurobindo. They are adding a Hindu voice to the social and political concerns of the country, to uphold the traditions and civilization of the region. They have discovered a pride in being Hindu that is not sectarian or belief-oriented but based on a recognition of a great literature, culture and yogic science. They are reexamining history from a Hindu perspective and exposing the colonial distortion of their Vedic heritage that fails to recognize the spiritual root of Indic civilization. They are realizing that appeasing minorities, a prime leftist policy, is not the way to bring India forward but that what is needed is re-expressing the country’s dharmic concerns and practices.

Not surprisingly, outside interests are suspicious of any Hindu awakening in India, though they do not mind the ruder Islamic awakenings in other countries! It is true that some new Hindus groups may be tinged with fanaticism and extremism, but to a slight degree. We should note that when oppressed groups begin to assert themselves, like a person who has long been beaten down, they can express an anger that is not always appropriate to the current situation. In addition, most Hindu groups have not been media savvy. They are often intellectually unsophisticated or inarticulate in the modern context or in the current global English idiom. Some naively extol everything Hindu, including out of date social customs and regressive beliefs.

Yet more commonly, leftists in India have made the allegation of extremism against Hindu forces that is at best an exaggeration and at worst a complete invention. This anti-Hindu propaganda has been a ploy to discredit the Hindu cause and protect their citadels of power that a Hindu revival would take away from them. The leftists have thrown their typical denigrating slurs against Hinduism as fascist, Nazi or fundamentalist, perhaps hoping that these distortions will arouse negative reactions and keep people from really looking at the Hindu cause.

Yet the Hindu cause is not alone and is discovering new allies. First is the Western Yoga and New Age movement that honors the spiritual and ancient culture of India, chants mantras, honors deities and practices vegetarianism. Many westerners come to India to study with Hindu gurus, visit temples and ashrams and attend religious festivals like the Kumbha Mela. A New Age movement has also arisen in India, bringing in western new age views of healing and spirituality as well as western versions of Indian teachings. This is very helpful because in India, intellectuals denigrate Hindu traditions as backward, right wing and conservative. To have them supported by progressive and futuristic elements in western society neutralizes these charges.

The second group of new allies is the neopagan movement in the West and the resurgence in native traditions and ethnic religions all over the world. Such groups now recognize Hinduism as an important kin and ally, the main native tradition that has survived the modern world. A new movement to promote religious diversity and pluralism, including protecting native cultures from missionary assault, has arisen often led by Hindu teachers.

Third are allied dharmic traditions in Asia, particularly the Tibetan Buddhists who have taken refuge in India, largely because of the tolerant nature of the Hindu mind, not because the socialist government of the country that was sympathetic to the Chinese. The Dalai Lama himself has supported India’s nuclear testing, India’s defense in the Kargil War in Kashmir, and the criticisms of Christian missionary activity by Hindu gurus. He visited the Kumbha Mela in 2001.

Fourth are new western thinkers in ecology, psychology and spirituality, who are finding an affinity with the Asian traditions of honoring nature and respect for the Earth. They are receptive to native ways of looking at culture and the land, which makes them more receptive to Hindu Dharma.

Fifth are Hindus overseas who now have a significant and often affluent presence in the United States, the Caribbean, the UK, Malaysia, Singapore and Indonesia. They are building temples and schools worldwide, showing a modern image of Hindu culture that is successful in the western world, particularly in cutting edge fields of software, engineering and medicine. The presence of successful Hindus in their West is a great remedy against stereotypes of Hindus as poor, uneducated and superstitious.

As a result of these concurrent factors the Hindu mind is coming forth again. We can now recognize an emergent Hindu view on religion, on spirituality, on history, on ecology, on medicine, on the social order and on science. A comprehensive Hindu view of all aspects of life is slowly gaining articulation. The coming century, with a probable shift of civilization once more to Asia, will witness the continuing expansion of the Hindu mind and its global influence.

The western world will have to face a Hindu critique as well, questioning the materialism and commercialism of the West that is often culturally at a juvenile level. Christian missionaries will face Hindu criticism and debate, questioning their very need to convert, and the basis of their theology that requires only one Son of God for everyone. The Islamic world will encounter a dynamic Hindu mind that cannot accept the rigid Islamic formula of One God, one scripture, a last prophet, paradise for the believers and hell for the non-believers as an adequate formulation for a true religion. At the same time, the tolerant and synthetic Hindu mind will welcome and absorb into itself genuinely spiritual, mystical and occult knowledge from all traditions, even from the very groups that have traditionally opposed it.

Naturally, there will continue to be a tremendous civilizational bias against the reemergence of the Hindu mind because it threatens the political and culturally hegemony of the other groups that have already divided the world’s territory among them. In spite of such opposition and possible deliberate obstruction, the Hindu mind will continue to unfold. It is quite at home in the planetary age, in tune with cosmic intelligence, and capable of tremendous transformation and adaptation. The Hindu mind has the strength and insight of innumerable yogis and seers. Its links go beyond the earth and the physical plane to the very roots of creation in the cosmic mind, to the very Self of all beings.

The world need not fear the Hindu mind. The Hindu mind treats all beings and all cultures as sacred. It works to promote Self-realization on both individual and societal levels. It has no agenda of conversion or conquest. It is not seeking to defame or eliminate any genuine impulse to truth whatever name or form it takes. The Hindu mind is not trying to impose a single name, savior or institution on the world. It is not rushing to any historical goal or fearing any Armageddon. All time is with it and it honors the great civilizations of the ancient as well as of the modern world. Its purpose is to help us reclaim our true nature and live in harmony with the nature of all. It is not motivated by money, power, and territory or by the need to save souls. One could compare the Hindu mind to the grace of the Divine Mother who is seeking to foster her own children according to the needs of their nature, with a special regard for each and favoritism for none. As Sri Krishna states in the Gita IX.29, “I am the same in all beings. I have no favorite and no enemy. Those who worship me with love, I am in them and they are in me.”

Language Hegemony and the Construction of Identity

Language Hegemony
by Rajiv Malhotra

For most industries, packaging and distribution are more critical than production, and those in control of distribution often end up controlling production as well. This was a lesson from the spice and textile trade, where India was complacent being merely a producer, and abandoned the distribution role to Europeans who eventually also ended up controlling production and the producers. In the case of tea, until Tata's recent acquisition of Tetley, the British kept most of the end-user revenue because of their marketing role in packaging and distribution. Their value-added had expanded to making tea bags, developing ice tea and de-caffeinated tea. A dominant distributor eventually uses its power to also control development and production. This pattern has also been true of Indian ideas and heritage that went into Western civilization via the Arabs, Persians, and Greek. This non-involvement attitude towards the distribution of ideas was viable in the old days when the guru could wait for the right student to arrive, and any move to 'promote' knowledge was below his dignity. But in today's competing worldviews, this attitude is not viable and is often the mark of arrogance, psychological complexes, and an introverted mentality.

In this age of information and intellectual property, packaging, distribution and marketing of ideas is more key than their development. Language is the vehicle through which this packaging and distribution is accomplished. Hegemony of language is therefore comparable to control of ideas by controlling their distribution. Since language is ultimately a 'game' of contexts and meanings, whoever defines the language of discourse controls the rules of the game. Georg Feuerstein writes, "Language pre-structures the facts in a certain way and introduces various blind spots". Language battles, especial implicit or invisible, are more critical than battles over the ideas.

Ignoring that ours is in an age of global competition is foolish, howsoever noble and visionary the supporting rhetoric. It would be similar to not abandoning business or career success just to be nice to others. Lawyers have their own language of due process and contracts, and often the outcome can depend on mastery of this, rather than merit in a pure sense. Academicians have their scholar's language, involving games for publishing, peer reviews, career advancement, and market share of ideas. The whole case over Microsoft's breakup is about control of technological standards, which is equivalent to the hegemony of language.

The Dominance of Angreziyat in Our Education

The Dominance of Angreziyat in Our Education

by Madhu Kishwar

Societies which have put vast amounts of energy and thinking into providing good quality education and opportunities for acquiring diverse skills for their people are today not only prosperous but also well ordered. We seem to have done the very opposite. On the one hand our policy makers have helped destroy through wilful neglect and contempt the vast reservoir of indigenous skills and knowledge systems acquired and nurtured over centuries by our own people. On the other hand they have failed to create a viable system for the acquisition of modern skills and education for all those who are abandoning their traditional occupations. Consequently, it is not just corruption but also sheer incompetence which is leading to a breakdown in our society.

The New Colonisers

So far the world knows India primarily as a country which has earned the dubious distinction of producing the largest number of illiterate people in the world. In the next 50 years we will also be able to claim that we are among the distinguished few nations of the world which has the largest number of people illiterate in their own mother tongue! By retaining English as the medium of elite education, professions and government functioning, even after being formally freed from colonial rule, we have ensured that the schism that was deliberately created by our colonial rulers between the English-educated elite and the rest of society has grown even further and acquired deadly dimensions. A hundred years ago our intelligentsia, even when it learnt English, still remained rooted in its respective regional languages and mother tongues. Tagore knew English but chose to write in Bengali, thereby nurturing his language as well as the overall intellectual climate of Bengal. Likewise, Mahatma Gandhi could express complex ideas in English more simply, elegantly and effectively than most British. Yet he wrote with even better grace in Gujarati and even Hindustani. However, the great-grandchildren of our Tagores, Ranades, Premchands and Gandhis are today all writing mostly in English. Worse still, even our scriptures and ancient literary texts are read by our educated elite mainly in English. Consequently, the mental, emotional and intellectual colonisation has proceeded with greater rigour and pace in post-Independence India than during colonial rule. The brown sahibs of the British era spoke English only in office. The brown sahibs of today have let English become their language for love making, talking to their infant children and even scolding their pet dogs!

However, this does not mean that they have acquired enough proficiency in the language for it to act as an effective instrument of knowledge aqcuisition and communication. Far from it. Teaching quality is so poor even in our English-medium schools that, barring a few exceptional institutions, too many of our students are ill-equipped to make sense of even newspaper reports, leave alone read serious books in English. The few who have a good command over the English language consequently behave and get treated like an imperial race, and the others who cannot are viewed as a sub-human species. The former are largely cut off from the lives, feelings, problems and aspirations of the non-English knowing population. Their aspirations are directed either towards migrating abroad or attempting to create small pockets of affluence for themselves so that while being situated, for example, in New Delhi, they can pretend they are living in New York.

In well-functioning societies, the educated elite tend to provide intellectual leadership to the rest of the society. In our case, our colonised intelligentsia is so alienated from its own people that it has made our society resemble a body whose head has been severed from its torso. However, the head is arrogant enough to pretend it can manage on its own. In reality, both are rotting, the headless body and the bodiless head.

This communication gap exists not just between the different strata of society but also within families. The elderly, especially grandparents, have traditionally played an important role in the socialisation of children, giving them sanskars and an initiation into their community's culture, values and knowledge systems. Today's English-educated children tend to treat their non-English speaking relatives as ignorant and illiterate. Tarzan comics and cartoon films are taken more seriously than grandmother's stories. Thus the future generations of the educated minority may be more information-rich about computers and business opportunities, but will grow up lacking wisdom which can best be imbibed from a close intergenerational interaction.

This dual system of education has taken away so many opportunities from the vast mass of our people that the new generation which is being denied good quality English education is going to grow up feeling even more demoralised, incompetent and inferior than the present cohort. In the next few decades, as India integrates more with the global economy, the lifestyles of the Indian elite will become even more alienated from the rest of the people. Since the moneyed elite of today flaunt their opulence more and more before the deprived through television, cinema and even the print media, the anger and rage of those excluded are going to get far more explosive than at present. They will avenge themselves in the Laloo Yadav way through politics. A person who knows no English at all is virtually unemployable except as a peon or labourer. However, he/she can, like Phoolan Devi, become an M.P., or like Yadav, hope to become a Chief Minister and get power and money through politics because he/she cannot hope to get it through education and talent.

The Asymmetric Dialog of Civilizations

The Asymmetric Dialog of Civilizations

by Rajiv Malhotra

In contrast with the clash of civilizations now being popularized, I would much rather propose a dialog among them. But what are the historical reasons for lack of this dialog, and what prevents this from becoming the top priority for humanity today? I researched the writings of eminent scholars in a variety of specialties, such as history, multiculturalism, colonialism, Eurocentrism, to name a few. Serious work by many mainstream scholars abundantly establishes the mutual dependency between the asymmetry of power and institutionalized prejudices in research and education. These asymmetries of power and intellectual representation prevent genuine dialog among the peoples of the world.

Repositioning India's brand

Repositioning India's brand

by Rajiv Malhotra

India is under-represented in American academia compared to China, Islam/Middle East and Japan, among others. Even the study of Tibet is stronger than that of India. Worse than the quantitative under-representation is the qualitative one: While other major countries positively influence the content of the discourse about them, pro-India forces rarely have much say in India Studies.

I have found that American audiences are very open and even eager to learn about India's contributions to American culture. But most professors of India Studies in American universities consider such themes irrelevant or, worse still, chauvinistic. In doing so, they apply a different standard to India as compared to other non-Western civilizations. This has a lot to do with the cultural shame that many Indians in academe feel burdened with – in contrast with successful Indian executives who project positive identities.

Consider the following examples that are usually not emphasized in the academic research/teaching in India Studies, when equivalent items concerning China, Islam, Japan, etc are emphasized:

America's 'Discovery' was the result of venture capital from the Queen of Spain to explore new trade routes to India, because Indian goods were highly sought after. Most persons find it hard to believe that India could have had such prized export items, and some find such suggestions troubling given their preconceived images of India's culturally linked poverty. Any genuine exploration of India's economic history is nipped in the bud.

1. The New Age Movement is neo-Hindu, with 18 million Americans doing yoga, meditation, and adopting vegetarianism, animal rights and other Indian values. Eco-Feminism was brought to America by Vandana Shiva, who explained to Americans the philosophies of the sacredness of the environment. American Pop Culture owes a great deal to Indian music (via the Beatles and others), film, art, fashions and cuisine.
   
2. Icons of American Literature, such as Emerson, Thoreau, Whitman, Eliot, the Beats, among others, were deeply involved in the study and practice of Indian philosophy and spiritual traditions. While they are widely read and admired, the Indian wellsprings of their inspiration is often downplayed, to the detriment of all students.
   
3. Modern Psychology, since the work of Jung and others, has assimilated many theories from India, and this has impacted mind-body healing and neurosciences.
   
4. American Religion has adopted many Indian theological ideas transmitted via Teilhard de Chardin's study of Ramanuja. Transcendental Meditation was learnt in the 1970s by monks in Massachusetts and repackaged into the popular 'Christian Centering Prayer.' The study of the Hindu Goddess became a source of empowerment for many American Christian women.
   
5. American Civil Rights drew inspiration from Gandhi: Martin Luther King, Jesse Jackson and others wrote about satyagraha as their guiding principle with great reverence in the 1960s, but this has faded from the memory of African-American history as taught today. How many Indians know that Indian social theories influenced J S Mill, who is regarded as the founder of modern Western liberalism, and that many Enlightenment ideas also originated in India and China? The Natural Law Party is considered a pioneer in American political liberalism, but it is generally unknown that it was started by, and is run by, Maharishi Mahesh Yogi's Western followers.

Such positive themes are rarely reflected in the humanities curricula concerning India. The disciplines are populated by scholars who typically entered the US after the Soviet collapse, when funding by Soviet-sponsored sources ended. They still continue to espouse sociological models that have been discarded for decades, thereby hindered India's progress in the global economy. They continue to promote divisive scholarship about India. One wonders why the West legitimizes such persons and positions them as representatives of India. Now they have reproduced their mindsets in a whole new generation of confused Indian-Americans with PhDs in the humanities.

Courtright's Depiction of Shri Ganesha - Authentic Scholarship or Bigotry

Courtright's Depiction of Shri Ganesha - Authentic Scholarship or Bigotry

by Shree S. Vinekar, MD, DFAPA, FAACAP, MACP

Prof. Courtright's use of psychoanalytic theory is a veneer to his bigotry. The issue highlighted by the protesting concerned citizens in U.S., who are knowledgeable of Hindu culture, is not an attack on Prof. Courtright's freedom of speech or academic freedom. The Hindu scholars are not oblivious of the lofty democratic principles. The crucial issue is Prof. Courtright's scholarly responsibility to the arcane fields of Hindu Philosophy and Mythology, as well as the appropriate use of Applied Psychoanalysis. The limitations of his knowledge of both of these subjects makes his book on "Ganesa" comparable to the pseudoscientific arguments, used in the disciplines of Humanities, to justify racism and eugenics in the 1960's. Such fallacious “logic” was designed to gain academic respectability. Such ploy or subterfuge is likely to mislead and misinform other honest but gullible academicians in the U.S. Prof. Courtright has distracted them into believing that his work published under the banner of Emory has authentic scholastic merit. He would view any attack on his blatant "cross-cultural vandalism" as an encroachment on his academic freedom. Such defense and other arguments used by Prof. Courtright are nothing but smoke and mirrors. His counteraccusations against his critics further demean and discredit the Hindu scholars who have taken a serious exception to the contents of his book. His scholastic sounding exterior is a cover up for the deliberate and malicious maligning of a respectable culture. The defensive response of Prof. Courtright is a gross misuse of the concept of academic freedom. It is clearly a form of “anal sadistic” attack on another respectable society under the disguise of authentic scholarship. In short, Prof. Courtright has ulterior motives in attempting to publish his book from New Delhi, India. The considered action of the Parliament of India taken against his book and the recall of his book by its Indian publisher must not be viewed as a disregard of the democratic principle of freedom of expression. Simply speaking, the liberty to act cannot be translated as a freedom to urinate on the pole on which a national flag is hoisted. These views are respectfully submitted for consideration by the Emory University authorities that may have been unwittingly but sincerely defending Prof. Courtright, previously losing sight of the above-mentioned implications.

GodWars: The Battle for Humanity's Soul

God Wars - THE TRIUMPH OF THE JEALOUS GODS

The trend of the global religious competition for market share and influence is clearly towards the dominance of the two “Jealous-God” religions: Christianity and Islam. Both have replaced many traditional belief systems and continue to use any means necessary to suppress the animist religions of Africa, much of Asia and the Pacific Islands, and the surviving remnants of native beliefs in the New World and Australia. It is obvious that the dominant religious belief for the century to come will be quasi-monotheistic (if you ignore the angels and devils and the Christian Trinity and the Catholic emphasis on Mary) and based on the ideas that god is a creature that thinks and designs and plans (in other words, these religions idolize human traits just as much as any pagan Greek). Even those religions that have not yet been crushed (Hinduism, Buddhism, Sikhism) are being forced to adapt to the dominant ideology. Polytheism, Pantheism, and other worldviews are no longer politically correct due to the constant propaganda of Christians and Muslims.

If there is any threat of a “one world religion” it comes from Christianity, which shows little sign of slowing its assault on “false religions” using bribes, social pressure, political control of governments, local and national persecution, and a propaganda campaign that is second to none. Although Christianity has had little success against Islam except by direct conquest, how long can its supremacy in fundraising and firepower be held at bay by any other faith?

This dominance of our world by a limited set of beliefs is not a good thing for humanity. There are several important reasons why we should fear the loss of diversity in beliefs.

1. The spread of "world" religions such as Christianity and Islam has destroyed most of the world's traditional religions. Many beliefs once sacred have now been regulated to museums and anthropology texts. The loss of so many "living" religions is a profound blow to human culture. (The loss of languages and other cultural traditions due to increased secular homogenization is a similar issue). Beliefs such as a spiritual connection to dead ancestors, or a nature that is filled with spirits, or even much-maligned polytheism, have provided humanity with a rich and beautiful diversity of worldviews.

2. The benefits of religious diversity go beyond simply keeping the world "interesting". If all Humanity had the same religion, even a peaceful one (which Christianity is not), we would lose most of our creativity and the capacity for philosophical insight. Religious diversity expands the mind; when a single belief system dominates a society, it limits the mind. This is dangerous even in a modern, scientific society because the scientists themselves need to be able to rethink their (culturally-conditioned) views of the universe. Otherwise, important discoveries (such as the heliocentric solar system or the evolution of life) are delayed even though the evidence may be readily available.

3. There is an even greater danger in religious homogenization: it will stop the moral development of humanity. Most of the sacred values that Americans take pride in, such as Democracy, Freedom, and Equal "Rights" have little to do with any single religious tradition, while in every religion once-acceptable ideas (Slavery in Christianity, Castes in Hinduism, female inferiority in almost all faiths) have been thrown out. Our values are constantly being shaped and improved by the clash of new ideas against old; foreign ideas against native. But diversity in thought is required for future moral advancement. If, instead, one belief system starts to dominate the world, the open thought and debate required to improve laws and values will be extinguished. Even if freedom of speech is preserved, the absence of any source for new and different ideas will be fatal. Instead of becoming moral beings, most humans will simply follow orders as they have always been taught, and continue to do countless evil things just because the one dominant religion has declared those acts acceptable. Just as in genetics, a social monoculture of religious beliefs is a dangerous thing for the survival of a species.

If you believe that a "free market of ideas" is the best possible way to handle the existence of diverse views, it is imperative that the competition between beliefs be based only on the value of the ideas and not the ability of religious organizations to use political or financial advantages to establish a monopoly. Today, there is an unfair bias in the contest of conversions because the two largest, best-financed and most widespread faiths—the "Jealous-God" religions of Christianity and Islam—got that way by conquest and persecution. The monopoly that Christianity has on the Americas, Australia, and much of sub-Saharan Africa and Europe is a strength for that faith—they can keep these areas free of competition with little effort while pouring their propaganda and "charity" into targeted regions where other religions struggle to emerge and recover from the impact of European colonialism and forced conversions. Islam’s dominance of the Middle East, Indonesia, and North Africa is a similar fortress. If these two faiths continue to dominate, who will point out that their spread is not based on having a better message but because of unfair advantages caused by the atrocities and conquests of the past? [Of course one could argue that the bloody and repressive history of Christianity and Islam is the result of a few corrupt individuals hijacking a peaceful and tolerant faith. This is wrong.]

It is clear that we face the elimination of much of humanity’s religious diversity in the next century due to the dominance of the two Jealous-God religions. We have a lot to lose if these intolerant ideologies are allowed to dominate the world. An effort must be made to protest all unfair conversions that are based on force, or economic or social pressure, or a huge disparity in advertising budgets (including charity “bribes”). This is not an argument against conversion itself; Buddhism for example has been a very successful missionary religion while avoiding these unethical tactics for most of its history; and every religion, even those that today restrict themselves to a single ethnic group, at one time had to spread from person to person. Conversion between worldviews is part of the human experience. But just like a Mafia business violates the ideal of ethical capitalism, or a One-Party Regime’s election violates the spirit of democracy, the current tactics of Christianity and Islam are unethical and must be reformed if we are ever to have a free and fair exchange of spiritual ideas. Otherwise, we can never consider the adoption of an idea by a majority of a nation’s people to be based on the merits of the idea instead of the ruthlessness of whatever combination of power and propaganda that was used to spread it.