10-29-2006, 12:59 AM
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->http://news. indiainfo. com/columns/ guru/010306secul ar-us-secular- india.html
<b>'Secular' US kinder to Hindus than secular India! </b>
by S Gurumurthy
The headlines of this short story, factually told, run
like this. 'Hindus worship 'statues', not deities'.
'Hindu God cannot have capital 'G' and have to be
content with the ordinary letter 'g' as, unlike the
Gods in Abrahamic faiths, there is no one God for
Hindus'. 'Who in sixth standard cares whether Ramayana
was written before or after the Mahabharata' .
This scandalous depiction of Hindus, their faith and
history is not the tirade of evangelicals luring
Hindus to their faith. But, this is how some US
scholars who supported the demeaning descriptions of
Hindus and India in textbooks proposed by the
California Department of Education (CDE) defended
their contents when Hindus protested and sought
corrections.
Since the US scholars were not Hindus, their defence
of the books lacked credibility. To fill the
credibility gap, Indian seculars stepped in, led by
Romila Thapar. They jointly petitioned the CDE that
the Hindu protests against the textbooks was actually
the protest of the 'Hindutva forces'. Hence, the
corrections suggested by them should be disregarded.
The issue is whether what Hindus say is true or not.
Does the truth lose its value because Hindus bring it
out? Fortunately the CDE, after giving some anxious
moments to Hindus, dismissed the seculars' petition
and accepted the corrections that Hindus had sought,
almost entirely. Now, some further detail.
The controversy was about the proposed textbooks on
India and Hinduism for 6th standard school children.
After the book publishers had submitted preliminary
editions of the books, according to procedure the CDE
called for comments and corrections from those
concerned. The Hindu community in California, after
months of work, submitted some 170 corrections or
'edits' as the CDE would call them, for improving
eight of the 10 textbooks. This is where the secular
megaphones stepped in to exert to perpetuate the
demeaning references to Hindus in the textbooks.
Dr Michael Witzel, a Harvard University professor who
is undeniably anti-Hindu and thus an icon of Indian
seculars, charged that the Hindu community's
corrections were motivated by 'Hindutva forces'. He
warned the CDE that it "would lead without fail to an
international educational scandal" if accepted. Romila
Thapars of secular India joined as co-petitioners of
Witzel, making it a kind of 'confession' on behalf of
Hindus. This forced the CDE to appoint a last minute
'Content Review Panel' which comprised three scholars
including Witzel himself. The panel rejected 58 of the
Hindu edits.
But the Californian Curriculum Commission decided to
accept all the corrections of Hindus adding a rider
that the Witzel panel's 58 rejections be reviewed one
by one. In the commission, an evangelist member
supported Witzel, but two others abstained on grounds
of lack of expertise.
While discussing the Witzel objections, the Curriculum
Commissioner took the position that the Hindus should
be able to recognise their religion when they read the
textbooks. On the much insisted and the equally
contested Aryan invasion issue, a compromise was
suggested that instead of the word 'invasion' the word
'migration' could be substituted as there was no
evidence of violent invasion. But the commissioner
said that hard evidence from DNA research, which is
more reliable than the study of historians, proved
there was no 'migration' also. Finally, the commission
agreed to allow this much to be said, namely, 'that
some historians believe there was an Aryan invasion'.
The commission accepted that the Hindus worship
'deities', the equivalent of 'murti' in Sanskrit, not
'statues' and also allowed the use capital 'G' for the
Hindu God saying that the same Hindu God has several
forms. It agreed that the Hindus go to temples to
'worship'. It is obviously important to know, when the
epic Ramayana was written? And so, the writing of
Ramayana pre-dates Mahabharata, needs to be stated in
the text books.
Yes, the Hindus got almost all they wanted. But was it
a favour done by the CDE to Hindus? No. The CDE merely
applied the rules it had made for evaluating textbooks
of different religious or national groups. This is
what the CDE rules mandate: the evaluation is to
enable all students to 'become aware and accept
religious diversity', while remaining 'secure' in
their own 'religious belief'.
To achieve this 'the diversity of religious beliefs
held' in US and elsewhere should be depicted 'without
displaying bias toward or prejudice against any of
those beliefs'. No religious belief or practice 'may
be held to ridicule'; no religious group be 'portrayed
as inferior'. 'Beliefs or practices' should 'not be
presented' 'to encourage or discourage disbelief', nor
indoctrinate. The rules are common for all, the
majority Protestants and the Rest, the minorities.
While CDE commission has concluded that there is no
evidence of Aryan invasion, it is still ridiculed as a
'saffron' view to deny Aryan invasion here in India.
In secular India, the views of scholars who are known
as secular, not the facts, are decisive. That is why
Aryan invasion is still the official view of history
despite total absence of any evidence whatsoever. The
secular US has thus overruled the anti-Hindu views of
secular Indians. Paradoxically, the 'secular' US seems
kinder to Hindus than 'secular' India.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<b>'Secular' US kinder to Hindus than secular India! </b>
by S Gurumurthy
The headlines of this short story, factually told, run
like this. 'Hindus worship 'statues', not deities'.
'Hindu God cannot have capital 'G' and have to be
content with the ordinary letter 'g' as, unlike the
Gods in Abrahamic faiths, there is no one God for
Hindus'. 'Who in sixth standard cares whether Ramayana
was written before or after the Mahabharata' .
This scandalous depiction of Hindus, their faith and
history is not the tirade of evangelicals luring
Hindus to their faith. But, this is how some US
scholars who supported the demeaning descriptions of
Hindus and India in textbooks proposed by the
California Department of Education (CDE) defended
their contents when Hindus protested and sought
corrections.
Since the US scholars were not Hindus, their defence
of the books lacked credibility. To fill the
credibility gap, Indian seculars stepped in, led by
Romila Thapar. They jointly petitioned the CDE that
the Hindu protests against the textbooks was actually
the protest of the 'Hindutva forces'. Hence, the
corrections suggested by them should be disregarded.
The issue is whether what Hindus say is true or not.
Does the truth lose its value because Hindus bring it
out? Fortunately the CDE, after giving some anxious
moments to Hindus, dismissed the seculars' petition
and accepted the corrections that Hindus had sought,
almost entirely. Now, some further detail.
The controversy was about the proposed textbooks on
India and Hinduism for 6th standard school children.
After the book publishers had submitted preliminary
editions of the books, according to procedure the CDE
called for comments and corrections from those
concerned. The Hindu community in California, after
months of work, submitted some 170 corrections or
'edits' as the CDE would call them, for improving
eight of the 10 textbooks. This is where the secular
megaphones stepped in to exert to perpetuate the
demeaning references to Hindus in the textbooks.
Dr Michael Witzel, a Harvard University professor who
is undeniably anti-Hindu and thus an icon of Indian
seculars, charged that the Hindu community's
corrections were motivated by 'Hindutva forces'. He
warned the CDE that it "would lead without fail to an
international educational scandal" if accepted. Romila
Thapars of secular India joined as co-petitioners of
Witzel, making it a kind of 'confession' on behalf of
Hindus. This forced the CDE to appoint a last minute
'Content Review Panel' which comprised three scholars
including Witzel himself. The panel rejected 58 of the
Hindu edits.
But the Californian Curriculum Commission decided to
accept all the corrections of Hindus adding a rider
that the Witzel panel's 58 rejections be reviewed one
by one. In the commission, an evangelist member
supported Witzel, but two others abstained on grounds
of lack of expertise.
While discussing the Witzel objections, the Curriculum
Commissioner took the position that the Hindus should
be able to recognise their religion when they read the
textbooks. On the much insisted and the equally
contested Aryan invasion issue, a compromise was
suggested that instead of the word 'invasion' the word
'migration' could be substituted as there was no
evidence of violent invasion. But the commissioner
said that hard evidence from DNA research, which is
more reliable than the study of historians, proved
there was no 'migration' also. Finally, the commission
agreed to allow this much to be said, namely, 'that
some historians believe there was an Aryan invasion'.
The commission accepted that the Hindus worship
'deities', the equivalent of 'murti' in Sanskrit, not
'statues' and also allowed the use capital 'G' for the
Hindu God saying that the same Hindu God has several
forms. It agreed that the Hindus go to temples to
'worship'. It is obviously important to know, when the
epic Ramayana was written? And so, the writing of
Ramayana pre-dates Mahabharata, needs to be stated in
the text books.
Yes, the Hindus got almost all they wanted. But was it
a favour done by the CDE to Hindus? No. The CDE merely
applied the rules it had made for evaluating textbooks
of different religious or national groups. This is
what the CDE rules mandate: the evaluation is to
enable all students to 'become aware and accept
religious diversity', while remaining 'secure' in
their own 'religious belief'.
To achieve this 'the diversity of religious beliefs
held' in US and elsewhere should be depicted 'without
displaying bias toward or prejudice against any of
those beliefs'. No religious belief or practice 'may
be held to ridicule'; no religious group be 'portrayed
as inferior'. 'Beliefs or practices' should 'not be
presented' 'to encourage or discourage disbelief', nor
indoctrinate. The rules are common for all, the
majority Protestants and the Rest, the minorities.
While CDE commission has concluded that there is no
evidence of Aryan invasion, it is still ridiculed as a
'saffron' view to deny Aryan invasion here in India.
In secular India, the views of scholars who are known
as secular, not the facts, are decisive. That is why
Aryan invasion is still the official view of history
despite total absence of any evidence whatsoever. The
secular US has thus overruled the anti-Hindu views of
secular Indians. Paradoxically, the 'secular' US seems
kinder to Hindus than 'secular' India.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->