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.

Religious Conversion - Is It Anti-National?

Religious Conversion - Is It Anti-National?:
by SHRI P. PARAMESWARAN

India is passing through a very delicate, dangerous and tricky situation. It has to be handled with subtlety, skill and intelligent planning. Emotional outbursts and violent confrontations are not only unhelpful, but will be even counterproductive. It has to be realised that the forces which are ranged against us are adept in the art of manipulation and have international roots and resources.

It is no secret that all the world churches- most important of them being the Roman Catholic Church and the Protestant Church -- have a common agenda which they call 'Evangelisation 2000 and Beyond'.

Missionary Ethics?

Missionary Ethics? by Valery Countryman

Christianity has misled people by hypocritical teachings and false writings for centuries. Its history is an unhappy one characterized by disunity, distrust and conflicting philosophical messages. Christian missionaries sought conversions in accordance with the laws of their "revealed" religion. They began ministerial efforts in Africa when the trade route by sea around the Cape of Good Hope was discovered in the 15th century. They felt driven by their god to thoroughly displace African concepts with Christianity and to rehabilitate native traditions into more acceptable (to them) viewpoints of Eurocentric Christianity.

To Christendom's mindset, African culture had little or no significance. One reason for this misperception was that only a handful of more than 800 languages were written ones before missionaries arrived. Christian zealots perceived this as an indication of ignorance. They developed means of writing these languages in order to provide religious textbooks (bibles). These tomes were utilized as primary tools for education and indoctrination into Christian thinking and belief. Some translations of biblical passages had already been produced. In Egypt, the book of Psalms had been scripted in a Coptic dialect as early as the fourth century. Christian efforts didn't result in printing of a complete missionary bible until the 1700's. Today, these mixtures of tales and legends are translated into over 100 African languages with selected chapters available in 400 others.

Deconstructing 'Secular' Historians

Tortured Souls Create Twisted History by Navaratna S. Rajaram

It is now widely recognized that Indian history has been distorted. The public too is gradually becoming aware of this fact. At first, it was blamed on the British rulers, who distorted Indian history to divide the people of India so it would be easy to rule. There is truth in this. Lord Macaulay who created the modern Indian education system, explicitly stated that he wanted Indians to turn against their own history and tradition and take pride in being loyal subjects of their British masters. In effect, what he envisaged was a form of conversion— almost like religious conversion. It was entirely natural that Christian missionaries should have jumped at the opportunity of converting the people of India in the guise of educating the natives. So education was a principal tool of missionary activity also. This produced a breed of ‘secular converts’ who are proving to be as fanatical as any religious fundamentalist. We call them secularists.

Macaulay made no secret of his intentions. In a famous letter to his father he wrote: “Our English schools are flourishing wonderfully. The effect of this education on the Hindus is prodigious. ...It is my belief that if our plans of education are followed up, there will not be a single idolator among the respectable classes in Bengal thirty years hence. And this will be effected without any efforts to proselytise, without the smallest interference with religious liberty, by natural operation of knowledge and reflection. I heartily rejoice in the project.”

Macaulay, and British authorities in general, did not stop at this. They recognized that a conquered people are not fully defeated unless their history is destroyed. It is best if this destruction takes place at their own hands: British ‘scholars’ would assist it of course, but ultimately, the Indians themselves should be made to destroy their past. So the plan envisaged cultural suicide rather than cultural genocide. To this end, a new discipline called Indology, and whole new tribe of scholarship called Indologists were created and supported by the British. The most famous of them all was a German by name Friedrich Max Muller who saw the opportunity and made a grand success of it by working for the British according to Macaulay’s plan. The plan was to translate, edit and publish Indian classics—especially the Vedas—in such a manner that it would turn the educated people of India against their history and tradition and make them take pride in being ruled by the British. It was hoped that with this, many would also give up Hinduism and opt for Christianity.

Max Muller is still regarded as a great lover of India and her civilization but the reality is that he was a British agent paid to give a derogatory interpretation of the Vedas. We have his word for it. There can be no doubt at all regarding Max Muller's commitment to the conversion of Indians to Christianity through his scholarly activity. Writing to his wife in 1866 he observed: “It [the Rigveda] is the root of their religion and to show them what the root is, I feel sure, is the only way of uprooting all that has sprung from it during the last three thousand years.” Two years later he also wrote the Duke of Argyle, then acting Secretary of State for India: "The ancient religion of India is doomed. And if Christianity does not take its place, whose fault will it be?"

The facts therefore are clear: like Lawrence of Arabia in the twentieth century, Max Muller, though a scholar was an agent of the British government paid to advance its colonial and Christian missionary interests. He was by no means the only one, but only the most successful. Bishop Robert Caldwell who created the Dravidian language theory once admitted his theory was “not only of considerable moment from a philological [linguistic] point of view but of vast moral and political importance.” By ‘moral and political’, he meant Christian missionary and British colonial interests. He was the founder of the Dravidian movement, which has proven to be highly disruptive. It is no accident that even today the field of Dravidian linguistics continues be dominated by Christian missionaries. Bishop Caldwell was the pioneer of this brand of political-missionary agenda masquerading as scholarship.

It is entirely understandable that the British authorities should have engaged in such tactics. They were only trying to make their own life as rulers easy, for no imperialism can work without native collaborators. Even Aurangazeb had to recruit Rajputs to run the Moghul Empire. The question today is— why do these so-called secularist scholars, born and brought up in India, continue to work within the framework handed down to them by their former colonial masters? And many of these scholars were not even born when the British left.

To understand this we need to see them as converted people who transfer their loyalties from the land of their birth to the land of their masters. This is compounded by their lack of confidence in their own generally weak scholarship— a state of mind that constantly seeks both patronage and protection. Before we examine this conversion phenomenon, it is worth looking at the nature and the magnitude of distortion that these men and women are engaged in.

RISA Lila - 2 - Limp Scholarship and Demonology

RISA Lila - 2 - Limp Scholarship and Demonology by Rajiv Malhotra

The growing Indian Diaspora is gradually learning how its heritage has been both portrayed and mis-portrayed in the American education system, and about the urgency to engage the system along the same lines as is already being done by other American minorities, such as Jews, Muslims, Chinese, Japanese, Koreans, African-Americans, Hispanics and Native-Americans.

This engagement requires the members of the Diaspora to be equal participants at the discussion tables where Indian traditions are the topic – including schools, colleges, museums, media, political think tanks and corporate policy meetings. However, getting such a seat involves a complex process of negotiation, because the incumbents who are entrenched in the institutions often see any power-sharing as a dilution of their authority.

Dating back to the earliest occupation of India by the British, academic scholarship has often studied and depicted India and its religious and cultural traditions as consisting of the exotic cultures of distant and primitive peoples. For generations, these views went unchallenged. Although more recently, a number of educated Indians, as well as contemporary American scholars, have sought to stimulate a rethinking of this approach and bring into the scholarly dialogue an expanding knowledge and awareness of the traditions, a significant portion of the scholarly community continues to adhere to and promote myopic and outdated views.

Moreover, such scholarship sadly fails to acknowledge that the adherents of these traditions are not primitive foreigners, but they are increasingly one's Indian-American neighbors, doctors, classmates and friends. Furthermore, it fails to recognize that these traditions are finding adherents among a significant number of Americans and other Westerners who find them compelling and important. This increasing presence and participation of Indians and Indian culture in American society not only provides new and valuable resources for scholarly research understanding, but it also demands that scholars become more aware of and sensitive to the traditions and their followers.

The events described below illustrate how the Diaspora is disadvantaged in its attempt to enter the negotiation process with the Western academic structure. Many Diaspora leaders have opted not to articulate their indigenous viewpoint (many, no doubt, never had a native Indian viewpoint in the first place, having been raised in a Eurocentric education system). Several spiritual leaders remain cocooned within the security of their introverted spiritual groups, and lack the required skills for successful negotiation in the global context on behalf of their cultural identity. Therefore, it is challenging to find knowledgeable individuals who are committed to a fair and balanced approach to tradition, and are willing to stick their necks out amidst a hostile environment, whereas it is not hard to find atheist, Marxist Indians in academia today, who are happy to trash Indian traditions.

This leadership vacuum has spawned a plethora of self-appointed activists, who often lack the sophistication to engage the systems effectively. Nonetheless, this may be a part of the cross-cultural learning process.

This dilemma in cultural discourse about Indian Traditions in the academy may be illustrated by the following fast-moving events which occurred recently. This essay is structured as listed below:

I. Petition against the “Limp Phallus” depiction of Ganesha.
II. Dialog with Paul Courtright.
III. Critique of the Petition.
IV. Threats and attempts to stop them.
V. Another RISA Lila begins.
VI. In India: Motilal Banarsidas withdraws the book.
VII. “Good boycotts” and “Evil boycotts”
VIII. “Good against Evil” witch-hunts begin
IX. Reality begins to sink in
X. The Myth of RISA
XI. (Re) negotiating our place in globalization
XII. Letter from a 14-year old Indian-American schoolgirl

RISA Lila - 1: Wendy's Child Syndrome

RISA Lila - 1: Wendy's Child Syndrome by Rajiv Malhotra

This essay's thrust revolves around the portrayal of India's religions in the West. Being unable to appreciate how and why academic Religious Studies is different from other activities that might appear similar, most Indians are ignorant of the abuses being caused in the West as a result of (a) the negative stereotyping of Indic traditions, and (b) the misappropriation from Indic traditions while erasing the sources.

Here is a typical anecdote that illustrates my frustration: I sent an article to an Indian journal about how Hinduism was (mis)portrayed in American academe. The editor was very interested. But the reviewers' comments were incredibly naïve about the basic structure and nature of the field of Religious Studies -- one reviewer was confusing academic Religious Studies with something that Hindu temples or ashrams in USA were already teaching, while the other reviewer wondered why this field was so important in a secular age! When I showed it to Western friends in academics, they found this Indian thinking amusing.

As with any large academic field, Religious Studies in the US is highly organized, with prestigious journals, chairs and programs of study. To carry out the studies and research, there is a well-defined system that uses the tools and methods that have come to be known as “hermeneutics”. This is the theory of interpretation, especially of religious texts, using a process of deriving new interpretations from a body of text or knowledge, so that (hopefully) our insights about the text or subject keep growing.

To control and regulate this field pertaining to Indian religions, there is the association known as RISA (Religions In South Asia). RISA is a unit within The American Academy of Religion (AAR), which is the official organization of academic scholars of Religious Studies in the Western world.

Around fifty years ago, there was a partition of the guild of scholars who studied religion, and two organizations were created: AAR and SBL (Society of Biblical Literature). AAR and SBL maintain very close relations and influences, and hold their annual conferences jointly. While SBL members study and promote the insiders' view of Judeo-Christianity, AAR members are supposed to pursue the objective view from outside a given tradition and to not promote anything. However, as I have noted many times, outsiders to Hinduism are insiders to Judeo-Christianity, and/or to Western Feminism, and/or to Marxism, and/or to other ideologies, and hence they are not “neutral” as advertised.

With a membership of over 10,000 scholars -- and growing -- the AAR has enormous clout over the future direction of Religious Studies, and indirectly, over the humanities at large.

Because the depictions of India in the West are inseparable from depictions of India's religious life (something that Indian secularists have tried to wish away unsuccessfully), the work done by RISA scholars has implications that go well beyond the discipline's boundaries. Religion is prominently featured in South Asian Studies, Asian Studies, International Studies, Women's Studies, Philosophy, Sociology, Anthropology, History, Literature, and Politics, and indirectly also influences Journalism, Film, and so forth. Therefore, the utter ignorance of Indians regarding such a discipline is a major gap that deserves attention and remedy.

Meanwhile, under Western control, Hinduism Studies has produced ridiculous caricatures that could easily be turned into a Bollywood movie or a TV serial. This Lila of the inner workings of RISA is the subject of this essay.

Negationism In India - Concealing The Record Of Islam

Negationism In India - Concealing The Record Of Islam
by Koenraad Elst

Negationism usually means the denial of the Nazi genocide of the Jews and Gypsies in World War 2. Less well-known is that India has its own brand of negationism. A section of the Indian intelligentsia is still trying to erase from the Hindus' memory the history of their persecution by the swordsmen of Islam. The number of victims of this persecution surpasses that of the Nazi crimes. The Islamic campaign to wipe out Paganism could not be equally thorough, but it has continued for centuries without any moral doubts arising in the minds of the persecutors and their chroniclers. The Islamic reports on the massacres of Hindus, destruction of Hindu temples, the abduction of Hindu women and forced conversions, invariably express great glee and pride. They leave no doubt that the destruction of Paganism by every means, was considered the God-ordained duty of the Moslem community. Yet, today many Indian historians, journalists and politicians, deny that there ever was a Hindu-Moslem conflict. They shamelessly rewrite history and conjure up centuries of Hindu-Moslem amity; now a growing section of the public in India and the West only knows their negationist version of history. It is not a pleasant task to rudely shake people out of their delusions, especially if these have been wilfully created; but this essay does just that.

Ethics of Conversion

Ethics of Conversion

by Dr. David Frawley

Conversion has always been a topic that arouses, if not inflames our human emotions. After all, the missionary is trying to persuade a person to change his religious belief, which concerns the ultimate issues of life and death, the very meaning of our existence. And the missionary is usually denigrating the person's current belief, which may represent a strong personal commitment or a long family or cultural tradition, calling it inferior, wrong, sinful, or even perverse.

Such statements are hardly polite or courteous and are often insulting and derogatory. The missionary is not coming with an open mind for sincere discussion and give and take dialogue, but already has his mind made up and is seeking to impose his opinion on others, often even before he knows what they actually believe or do. It is difficult to imagine a more stressful human encounter short of actual physical violence. Missionary activity always holds an implicit psychological violence, however discretely it is conducted. It is aimed at turning the minds and hearts of people away from their native religion to one that is generally unsympathetic and hostile to it.

In this article I will address conversion and missionary activity mainly in regard to Christianity, which has so commonly employed and insisted upon the practice. Indeed it is difficult to imagine the Christian religion apart from missionary activity, which has been the backbone of the faith for most of its history. Christianity has mainly been an outward looking religion seeking to convert the world. In this process it has seldom been open to real dialogue with other religions. It has rarely examined its own motives or the harm that such missionary activity has caused, even though the history of its missionary activity has been tainted with intolerance, genocide and the destruction not only of individuals but of entire cultures.

Missionary activity and conversion is not about freedom of religion. The missionary wants to put an end to pluralism, choice and freedom of religion. He wants one religion, his own, for everyone and will sacrifice his life to that cause. True freedom of religion should involve freedom from conversion. The missionary is like a salesman targeting people in their homes or like an invader seeking to conquer. Such disruptive activity is not a right and it cannot promote social harmony or respect between different religious communities. In fact people should have the right not to be bothered by missionaries unless they seek them out. Those of us in the West are irritated by local missionaries like the Jehovah's Witnesses that often come soliciting at our doors. Can one imagine the distress or confusion they could cause to some poor person in Asia? Once let into the door, it is hard to get them out.

Though most countries in the world today are secular, this still has not created a level playing field in the field of religion. Western religions are still taking an aggressive, intolerant, if not predatory role toward non-Western beliefs. They are using financial and media advantages, including mass marketing, to promote their agenda of conversion. Though missionary activity became less overt after the end of the colonial era it still goes on. And we cannot forget the bloody history of missionary activity or its potential for disruption, violence and destruction should the circumstance again arise.

Today it is illegal in most countries to promote racial hatred, to call a person of any race inferior or the product of the devil (which white Christians used to call the blacks until recently). But Hindus can still be denigrated as polytheists, idolaters and devil-worshippers. This is tolerated under freedom of religion, though it obviously breeds distrust, if not hatred and itself is prejudicial. Prejudicial statements that are not allowed about race are allowed about religion and missionaries commonly employ these derogatory remarks.

In the West there is a cry against cults, which any religious movement out of mainstream Christianity can be called. There is a tendency to regard Hindu based religious movements in the West as cults. Under the guise of being a cult a religious organization can be sued for millions of dollars if even one disgruntled or disappointed former disciple can be found who feels that they were taken advantage of. Many Hindu-based and yoga movements in the West have been sued as cults.

The criticism against cults is that they are outside the cultural religious norm, that they are intolerant of majority religions, that they divide families and turn individuals against their upbringing. Precisely the same charges can be leveled against missionaries all over the world. The early Romans for the same reasons regarded Christianity as a cult.

People in India may believe that in America all religions are treated equally. Certainly the law requires that, but this is not the fact of life. For example, it is still very difficult for Hindus to build temples in the United States, particularly in areas in which fundamentalist Christians are strong, like the Bible belt of the South. To put in perspective one would say that it over ten times harder in America to build a temple than it is to build a church. In many areas temples must not outwardly look like a temple, but should look like a school or church, or the local governments won't approve of them. While there are a few Hindu style temples in America these are exceptional and took special efforts to be allowed.

Western Monoculture and Indic Pluralism

Western Monoculture and Indic Pluralism
By David Frawley (Vamadeva Shastri)

Western civilization, in spite of claims to support diversity, is promoting a worldwide monoculture—the same basic values, institutions and points of view for everyone—which it calls ‘globalization’. Western commercial culture with its pursuit of markets and commodities eliminates all true culture, which is based on quality, not quantity. It creates a culture of money that submerges any true culture of refinement or spirituality, in which everything can be bought and sold, possessed or capitalized on.

If we visit shopping malls in America today, for example, it is hard to tell what state in the country we are located in. The shopping malls in Florida, California, New York or the Midwest have the same basic stores and sell the same basic products. The streets look the same, as do the houses, apartment buildings and office buildings. People eat the same basic types of food and have the same habits of work, sleep and relaxation. Almost everything is mass-produced and follows the same economy driven forces.

These same types of businesses pioneered in America are spreading worldwide, whether it is Coca Cola, McDonalds, blue jeans or Barbie dolls. One finds the same multinational corporations operating in nearly every major city of the world, whether Tokyo, Shanghai, Mumbai or London. While one finds foreign stores like Chinese restaurants in shopping malls even in America, which have their niche in the global scene, these operate according to the same commercial approach as standard western businesses. They do not represent real globalization but a co-opting of foreign businesses by the western commercial culture.

The world media is yet more of a monoculture. News services worldwide provide what are essentially the same stories from the same cultural slant. They are standardized in a western model and promote a western point of view with western ideals of free trade, social equality, democracy and affluence. People all over the world watch Hollywood movies, listen to the pop music of the US and Europe, and adulate American athletes.

Similarly, in the universities of the world, it is mainly western civilization that is taught, even if there is an old and profound civilization. In a country like India, Shakespeare is a much better known and quoted poet than Kalidas, the equivalent great Sanskrit poet. The West honors the Japanese for enthusiastically taking up western culture, music and entertainment. But it regards as close-minded or communal, cultures that try to hold their own ground and avoid the consumerist assimilation.

Indian virtues pre-date 'secularism'!

Indian virtues pre-date 'secularism'!:
by Chinmay Bajekal

Swami Vivekananda at the parliament of religions in Chicago (1893) mentioned in his speech, that he was proud to belong to a Nation that gave safe refuge to several persecuted communities of the world. In history we find examples of the Jews, Syrian Christians, Zoroastrians, and in recent times the Tibetan Buddhists who after being driven out of their homeland sought safe refuge in India. The native Indians back then � Hindus not just accommodated these refugees but also gave them the freedom to practice their respective faiths.

Long ago, even before the birth of the Greek and Roman Empires, our Vedic Seers had declared ‘Vasudaiva kutumbakam’ – “The world is one family”. Long before the modern world came out with the concept of ‘Universal welfare’ our Vedic prayer throughout the ages has been ‘Loka samastha sukinau Bhavantu’ – “May entire world attain bliss”. Even the modern concept of freedom of thought is respected in the Vedic verse, ‘Ekam sat vipraha, bahudha vadanti’ – “Truth is one the wise call it by various names". The verse expresses the matured understanding of the Human mind that the ancient thinkers of India possessed.

Centuries ago when sects like Buddhism, Jainism and Sikhism came as reformist movements to correct what their founders perceived as wrong or unwanted in the society, the Hindus did not suppress these reformers but gave them the freedom and space to grow. Sri Adi Shankaracharya brought many back to the Hindu fold not through force, coercion, incentives or threat but by preaching in the form of debates.

Thus, Indian virtues like ‘pluralism’, ’tolerance’, ’freedom of thought’ and ‘Universal welfare’ pre-date the arrival of the ‘secular’ concept in India. This point needs to be emphasized as in today’s India ‘secularism’ is unjustifiably credited for all these Indian virtues and the term is being misused to suppress the movement of ‘national renaissance’ also known as Hindutva that aims at preserving the very culture which actually deserves credit for these age-old virtues of India.

Secularism originated in Europe centuries ago when the Kings revolted and overthrew the theocratic hegemony of the Pope from over their kingdoms and established their own rule. But India has never known such a conflict, thus the western secularism never was relevant for India. However today many Indians perceive ‘secularism’ to be a synonym of ‘pluralism’ and ‘tolerance’, but they perceive the very culture that blessed the Indian society with these noble features from the Western perspective of being a “religion”.

The pseudo-seculars in India who swear by secularism would like to have us believe that any threat or challenge to the concept of secularism in India would endanger the age-old pluralism of the country. Little do these self-proclaimed defenders of secularism realize that wherever in the Indian subcontinent Hinduism declines, with it declines the support for secularism too (whichever kind of secularism that may be). Pakistan & Bangladesh two of our neighbouring countries were formed out of the same territory and people of undivided India, yet they are far from being secular.

The need of the hour for India is the recognition of the fact that India does not owe its great virtues of pluralism, diversity and tolerance to any western concept or ideology, but to the influence over India of Vedic culture and philosophy. And also to be understood is the fact that India’s age-old virtues shall not be endangered by the questioning of the relevance of secularism to the world’s oldest and most pluralistic civilization.

India has always been a country that has welcomed reforms, and encouraged new ideas. It has never resorted to prejudicial behavior. Unfortunately the manner in which the self-proclaimed seculars in India spew venom over the movement of ‘national renaissance’ and call for ‘de-saffronization’ is in reality an act that is ‘de-Indianizing’ as it does not go well with the ethos of our ancient country which tolerated different views.

Biases in Hinduism Studies

Biases in Hinduism Studies:

by Abhijit Bagal

The purpose of this essay is to highlight the growing dissatisfaction on the part of the Indian American Hindu Diaspora with the way Hinduism, Hindus, and India have been depicted and mis-portrayed in the American education system, and about the urgency to engage the system along the same lines as is already being done by other American minorities, such as the Native-Americans, African-Americans, Hispanics, Jews, Muslims, Chinese, Japanese, and Koreans. This article also explores how Hinduism and India studies directly or indirectly forms American perceptions of India and its culture, its products and services, and of the Indian American minority, and the need to bring objectivity and balance to these studies.

Myth of Hindu Sameness

Myth of Hindu Sameness
by Rajiv Malhotra

This essay examines the often repeated claim by Hindus and non-Hindus alike that Hinduism is the same as other religions. Some common factors that cause many Hindus to slip into sameness are as follows: Hindus arrogantly assume that other religions want to be the same as Hinduism, and hence they feel that they are doing these other religions a favor. Against this one may point out that the traditional Hindu teachings make a clear distinction between valid and not valid religious claims, by separating them as dharma and adharma, sat (truth) and asat (falsity), devika and asuric, etc.

Many Hindus misapply teachings about the Unmanifest when dealing with the diversity of the manifest, and the unity of transcendence in dealing with the diversity and conflict found in the worldly. Furthermore, they fail to distinguish between shruti and smriti. The unity of all shruti is assumed to mean that all smritis must be the same. In particular, Hindus fail to understand the critical history-dependence of the Abrahamic religions and the way their core myths and institutions are built around these frozen smritis. Often what Hindus really mean is that all religions are equal in the respect and rights they deserve, but they confuse this with sameness.

At the same time, there are strong arguments that religious differences lead to tensions and violence. Many Hindus have internalized these arguments, over simplifying the Hindu thought about there being one truth and all paths leading to it.

To address these and other issues, this essay presents a new theoretical framework for looking at religions and global religious violence. It classifies religious movements as History-Centric and non History-Centric. The former are contingent on canonical beliefs of their sacred history. Non History-Centric religious movements, as History-Centric and non History-Centric. The former are contingent on canonical beliefs of their sacred history. Non History-Centric religious movements, on the other hand, do have beliefs about history, but their faith is not contingent on history.

The essay advances the thesis that non History-Centric faiths offer the only viable spiritual alternative to the religious conflicts that are inherent among History-Centric religions.

In analyzing the predominantly non History-Centric Hinduism through this framework, the essay looks at the two main Hindu responses in its interface with the predominantly History-Centric religions of Christianity and Islam. These are: (1) how Hinduism is trying to become History-Centric, and (2) how Hinduism is self-destructing under the Myth of Sameness, by offering itself as a library of shareware for "generic" spirituality.

The essay cautions that Hinduism runs the risk of becoming either (1) History-Centric itself, or (2) losing its identity and becoming digested into Christianity via the Sameness Myth.

Scenario #1 leads to a three-way jihad among three History-Centric religions – Christianity vs. Islam vs. Hinduism – in which Hinduism cannot win. Scenario #2 leads to the dissolution of Hinduism through a combination of hostile and friendly takeovers by Christianity, which, in turn, worsens the two-way jihad between Christianity and Islam. Therefore, both scenarios ultimately feed the clash of Christianity vs. Islam, i.e. between conflicting History-Centric positions.

To construct an alternative framework, the essay debunks the Sameness Myth, which reflects naïve Hindus' wishful thinking about how other religions ought to be rather than how they actually are.

The essay calls for Hindu scholars to develop a rigorous approach to purva-paksha (scholarly critiques of other traditions within the framework of the Indian darshanas); to highlight the Hindu history of constructions through its own smriti traditions; and to refute false presuppositions about Hinduism that have spread into many academic disciplines.

The essay recommends the promotion of equality-with-difference as a core Hindu principle, also referred to within this essay as difference-with-respect. This entails asserting a positive Hindu identity that is neither History-Centric nor dismissive of its distinctiveness.

Faith, Civilization and Eurocentric Racism

Faith, Civilization and Eurocentric Racism:
by George Thundiparambil

This essay examines the concepts 'faith' and 'civilization' and traces Eurocentric 'white' racism to the 'faith' named Christianity. When one investigates 'faith', it is impossible to avoid the age-old controversy -- the 'faith vs. rationality' problem. Just as in post-renaissance Europe, it makes headlines in the world media even in the 21st Century, e.g., the BBC that runs programs on 'science and religion'. The 'faith vs. rationality' dilemma is peculiar to the Western civilization, though religious imperialism has done its best to spread it like a virus all over the world. The rationale for the problem offered in this essay clears up the mess surrounding the tower of Babel -- why human cultures fail to bridge gaps between themselves leading to the clash of civilizations despite the fact that the element of reason in thought and behavior unite the whole of humanity -- the singular mark of civilization. The article contends that the Western confrontationist equation of 'science vs. faith' gives 'faith' an undue recognition in cultures and becomes the root cause for differences and conflicts between them.

The essay points to the faith-based ideology and approach that have become a dominant force in the contemporary world, despite its opposition to rationality, the benchmark of human civilization. It examines the 'faith' ideology as reflected in Christian and Islamic cultures, and how this ideology threatens global peace by creating meaningless challenges that arise uniquely from their faiths.

The purpose is to show that in real terms the 'faith' has no rational basis and exists only in the form of a prejudice manifesting as racism and stands as a hindrance to the progress of civilization. The faith element gains enormous validity

The Axis of Neocolonialism

The Axis of Neocolonialism:
by Rajiv Malhotra

'In the modern planetary situation, Eastern and Western 'cultures' can no longer meet one another as equal partners. They meet in a westernized world, under conditions shaped by western ways of thinking.' --- W. Halbfass

This essay argues that intellectual svaraj (self-rule) is as fundamental to the long term success of a civilization as is svaraj in the political and financial areas. Therefore, it is important to ask: whose way of representing knowledge will be in control? It is the representation system that defines the metaphors and terminology, interprets what they mean in various situations, influences what issues are selected to focus on, and, most importantly, grants privileges by determining who is to control this marketplace of ideas.
As an implicit body of standards, a representation system disguises a meta-ideology � the substratum of contexts on which specific ideologies emerge and interact. It includes the language used and the unstated frames of reference, and acts as the subliminal filter through which positions are constructed and their fate negotiated.

A people without their own representation system, in a worst case scenario, get reduced to being intellectual consumers looking up to the dominant culture. In the best case scenario, they could become intellectual producers, but only within the representation system as defined and controlled by the dominant culture, such as has happened recently with many Indian writers in English. "

Stereotyping Hinduism in American Education

Stereotyping Hinduism in American Education:
by Rajiv Malhotra:

This essay addresses how the Greco-Semitic religious paradigms, being the prevailing undercurrents in Western civilization's narrative of the humanities, have influenced the portrayal of the Indic religions. Hinduism is used in this essay to make the points concerning Indic religions, but similar issues also apply to all Indic religions.

The intellectual spectacles formed by one's own culture determine how one perceives the world. According to the postmodern theory of constructivism, no meaning of any kind ever stands on its own. Instead, there is always mediation by prior mental programming and assumptions, even though these biases might be unconsciously applied. As W.C. Smith, E. W. Said and others have noted, we select, group, and organize the multiplicity of events experienced within our own conceptual categories to give coherence to the world.

Are we aware of the effects of mapping other religions onto Greco-Semitic theological categories, even when there is no intentional agenda? Is the narrative being colored by beliefs and even dogma, perhaps unconsciously, of the academic narrator? Does the process known as academic 'objectivity' in fact, facilitate a facade to cloak the prejudices of the scholar, and if so, how might one extricate oneself from the presuppositions of one's heritage? "

Washington Post and Hinduphobia

Washington Post and Hinduphobia
by Rajiv Malhotra

When Washington Post was recently approached by the public relations campaigns emanating from Emory University and other supporters of the powerful Wendy Doniger, a door was opened for the Post to play a responsible role in bringing out serious blind spots of Eurocentrism/American-centrism that reside deep in America's higher education. As shown below, the Post bungled up this opportunity by regurgitating the narratives supplied to it by the establishment of India Studies.

Washington Post's front-page article entitled, 'Wrath Over a Hindu God: U.S. Scholars' Writings Draw Threats From Faithful,' by Shankar Vedantam (April 10, 2004; Page A01) misrepresents the topic by failing to highlight the central issues being debated, namely, systemic ideological biases within academia, while caricaturing the community's dissenting intellectuals in ways that approach Hinduphobia. Its strategic timing on Easter weekend, which is charged with Christian emotions especially after the 'Passion' movie, was a serious setback to America's pluralism. It has the effect of misdirecting the casual reader towards an intellectual cul-de-sac and away from serious inquiry. The Post's article could discourage further dissenting discourse, which would stifle much needed reform and progress within academic scholarship.

Towards an Indian Pluralism

Towards an Indian Pluralism:

by Sankrant Sanu

Indian society faces a choice between maintaining a pluralistic approach, with mutual respect for different religions, or following the European intellectual secularism, where the state protects religious exclusivism.

The birth in Europe of ideas of religious tolerance, religious pluralism and ultimately the separation of church and state arose out of their experience with religious intolerance. This religious intolerance was a natural outgrowth of religious exclusivism - the idea that there is only One Way, and that One Way is controlled or determined by a particular church, tribe or book. Thus the liberal struggle in the Age of Reason was precisely against the ideas of religious exclusivism and authority, and the resultant foreclosure of free thought and speech in the name of curbing apostasy and heresy. Similarly in the Islamic world, the Shia-Sunni conflict and the persecution of Sufis, Bahais Ahmediyas arises from doctrinal exclusivism that applies both externally and internally.

By contrast, Indian traditions developed differently. The pluralism of paths and viewpoints is an essential Indian viewpoint, found as far back as the Rig Veda, that states: �Ekam Sat, Vipra Bahuda Vadanti� (Truth is One, the Wise describe it variously). This was a principle that was broadly accepted among followers of religions of Indian origin - Hindu, Buddhist, Jains and Sikhs and others such as the Bahais is slowly being understood throughout the world - in the Unitarian Church, among some liberal Christians and Muslims, and among humanistic groups such as the United Nations where Kofi Annan used this quote to point to a great and ancient teaching of religious pluralism that can offer succor in the world of religious conflict caused by exclusivist doctrines. "

Proselytization In India: An Indian Christian's Perspective by C. Alex Alexander

Proselytization In India: An Indian Christian's Perspective:
by C. Alex Alexander

Since colonial times to the present, the impetus for Christian proselytizing work in India has largely emanated from Western Christian Church groups and missions. The latter's continuing obsession for promoting religious conversions under the aegis of India's Constitutional guarantee of religious freedom has triggered a raging debate among religious and political leaders of that country. Many Hindus of the Indian Diaspora have also been drawn into it.

Over seventy years ago, Mahatma Gandhi stated that: �proselytizing under the cloak of humanitarian work is unhealthy, to say the least. It is most resented by people here'. The resentment that Gandhi alluded to has increased in India over the years, mostly due to the persistence of religious conversions engineered by Christian evangelists who derive their financial support from foreign sources. Fundamentalist Muslims too have entered the fray in recent years with substantive financial contributions from Muslim countries interested in furthering the spread of Islam in India. Some Hindu groups have resorted to reverse conversions. All these trends are destructive to India's time-tested culture of religious tolerance.

The muteness of liberal Indian Christians, both in India and overseas, is indeed surprising. The aim of this essay is to rectify that omission at least in part. I hope that liberal Indians of all faiths will debate this issue with their fundamentalist counterparts in a similar vein to prevent the spread of inter-religious conflicts in that subcontinent. At the end of this essay, I shall present for your consideration a plan for pre-empting the religious militancy embedded in the fundamentalist varieties of both Christianity and Islam.