The california text book trial (Feel free to fwd it)

[Guest guest]

Can Hindus in the USA ask for parity with other religionists? Can they

demand that Hinduism in textbooks be taught using the same yardstick

applied to Islam and Christianity? Hindus in California thought so. In

the eyes of most unbiased observers, these would be the most

reasonable demands.

 

 

 

Portrayal of Christianity and Islam

 

 

 

Textbooks in California portray Christianity and Islam according to

the beliefs of insiders. Christianity and Islam are historicized

according to believers' traditions. Mainstream scholarship s

to two views regarding Jesus Christ. One school concludes that he

never existed and that all tenets, beliefs and legends found in the

Christian Bible are derived from pre-existing Pagan, Persian,

Buddhist, Jewish and Egyptian traditions. Professor G A Wells [The

Jesus Myth] is an excellent example of this school of thought. The

other school concludes that a shadowy figure called Jesus existed, who

was later fictionalized in the Christian Bible. But, there are

numerous hypotheses as to what his identity was. Professor Alvar

Ellegard [Jesus, Hundred Years Before Christ] is an example of this

school of thought.

 

 

 

But, all mainstream scholars tend to agree on several points:

 

 

 

1. There is no historical evidence that Jesus Christ, as narrated

in the Christian Bible, ever existed.

 

 

 

2. There is absolutely no evidence that the Jews were responsible

for the crucifixion of Jesus Christ. In fact, Professor Robert Price

[Deconstructing Jesus] even calls it cruci-fiction.

 

 

 

3. Many terrible social practices such as slavery and

anti-Semitism are enshrined in the Christian Bible. From the Catholic

Pope Pius XI to the Lutheran theologian Norman Beck, many scholars

have admitted that the Nazi anti-Semitism witnessed in the 20th

century was a mere culmination of a long tradition of Christian

anti-Semitism. Beck even summarizes the approximately 450 anti-Semitic

remarks found in just five of the books that constitute the Christian

Bible.

 

 

 

4. The versions of various stories told in the synoptic gospels

are often contradicted by other gospels which the Church suppressed.

Professor Morton Smith [The Secret Gospel], for example, discusses a

variant version of the life of Jesus discussed in a gospel. Of course,

many scholars, including theologians such as Raymond Brown [The

Virginal Conception and Bodily Resurrection of Jesus], have also

concluded that even the synoptic gospels present conflicting versions.

 

 

 

Yet, textbooks do not hint at any of these academic findings when they

discuss Christianity. Textbooks discuss the Sermon on the Mount as if

a historical Jesus delivered it. They state that the twelve disciples

of Jesus disseminated Christian teachings as if this claim is

historically valid.

 

 

 

It is the same with Islam. Textbooks report the revelation of The

Quran to Prophet Mohammad as a historical fact. Revelations are not

subject to scientific skepticism. No mention is made of how jihad and

jizyah were used as effective tools in the spread of Islam. Textbooks

are silent about the fact that the Christian Bible has pronounced

women inferior. A textbook reports that Prophet Mohammad was employed

by an Arab widow and businesswoman, Khadija, whom Mohammad latter

married. In the very next paragraph, it adds that Islam improved the

status of women who were oppressed in the pre-Islamic society. If so,

how did a woman run businesses in pre-Islamic Arabia? In a desire to

present Islam favorably, textbooks even let go logic.

 

 

 

In the treatment of both Christianity and Islam, the following salient

features are noted:

 

 

 

1. They are historicized according to the beliefs of their

practitioners and not according to the conclusions of mainstream

academics.

 

 

 

2. No terrible practice authorized in those religions such as

anti-Semitism or slavery is even mentioned.

 

 

 

3. Tenets of these religions are summarized, in an instructional

manner, as understood by practitioners.

 

 

 

4. Islam is not presented as an improvement on Christianity, nor

Christianity presented as a replacement of Judaism.

 

 

 

It is reasonable to conclude that textbooks are doing the right thing

in accordance with the guidelines of the California Department of

Education [CDE] which stipulate that religions must be dealt with in

such a manner as to instill pride in its followers.

 

 

 

Portrayal of Hinduism

 

 

 

On the other hand, Hinduism has all along been discriminated against.

The following have been the significant features of the treatment of

Hinduism:

 

 

 

1. It is historicized not according to its traditional beliefs

but according to the speculative, racist and unproven 19th century

colonial theories propagated by those highly hostile to Hinduism. For

example, Aryan Invasion Theory [AIT], which was invented to divide

India on racial grounds, justify British occupation and facilitate

conversion to Christianity, is used to historicize the origins of

Hinduism. This is being done even though many empirical evidences

actually refute AIT.

 

 

 

2. The tenets of Hinduism, a very pluralistic tradition, are

hastily summarized in a manner that is hardly instructional or not

even mentioned.

 

 

 

3. The caste system is portrayed in a selective and biased

manner, from the perspective of a hostile outsider. Social practices

such as untouchability [also found in non-Hindu societies like Japan,

Korea and Tibet] are depicted in graphic detail, and associated with

Hinduism, which could only make Hindu students feel ashamed of their

religion. Textbooks fail to mention that the most sacred books of the

Hindus such as the Vedas, Bhagavad Gita, Ramayana, Mahabharata and

Tirukkural were all authored by Harijan saints. Textbooks do not also

mention that many revered saints in Hinduism have been Harijans.

 

 

 

4. Textbooks make fun of Hindu gods and beliefs.

 

 

 

5. Buddhism is depicted as a cure all for the assumed evils found

in Hinduism. This is done contrary to facts.

 

 

 

The California Hindu Initiative

 

 

 

As their children attend California schools, parents come to know of

what is written in textbooks. Many have been astonished and pained.

Many Hindu groups, all of them non-political, have consistently worked

with teachers and schools, at a local level, to correct such

misrepresentations.

 

 

 

Over the last several months, two organizations The Vedic Foundation

and The Hindu Education Foundation have been working with the CDE. The

former is a religious organization while the latter is a social

organization that includes Hindus from all walks of life. Both

understood that to ensure a fair representation, the mandate itself

has to be revised. But, in the meanwhile, within the scope of the

mandate, they worked with the CDE, publishers, schools, scholars and

parents.

 

 

 

They reviewed many textbooks and suggested changes that would help

remedy the erroneous and hostile depictions, until the mandate itself

can be corrected. The CDE constituted a review process to review and

accept changes.

 

 

 

Some Academics Oppose the Hindu Initiative

 

 

 

Some 47 academics, including those known for their virulently

anti-Hindu stances and Communist affiliations, petitioned the CDE

urging them to dismiss the Hindu demands. They alleged that the

changes were unscholarly and politically motivated. Michael Witzel of

Harvard University led the charge.

 

 

 

Ironically, those who initiated this petition admitted that they had

absolutely no clue about the nature of changes proposed. Their

petition to the CDE too did not reveal any knowledge of proposed

changes. These changes had been on the CDE website for weeks, and

anyone could have reviewed those. Petitioners did not bother to go

through that trouble. Instead, they made wild allegations. Their

petition lacked substance.

 

 

 

They also volunteered to help the CDE with the revision process.

Surprisingly, the CDE accepted their proposal. It nominated Michael

Witzel, Stanley Wolpert and James Heitzman to review changes. The

first two had signed the petition while the third is a strong believer

in Christian miracles.

 

 

 

Over 30 distinguished archeologists and historians had written the CDE

supporting the Hindu initiative and explaining why falsified theories

like the AIT or AMT should not be included. The signatories included

such distinguished scholars as archeologist B B Lal, the most eminent

authority on ancient Indian archeology who had also definitely

established the direction of the Indus Valley script.

 

 

 

The CDE does not seem to have acted on this substantive communication.

On the other hand, it yielded to Witzel and others, whose petition

lacked substance. One does not know the logic behind this decision or

why the CDE allowed Witzel etc to circumvent the proceedings late in

the process.

 

 

 

Commissioners Uphold Hindu Suggestions

 

 

 

On December 1-2, 2005, the CDE held a hearing and the commissioners

reviewed and decided on the suggestions. Most of the suggestions

originally proposed by the Hindus and accepted during the initial

review process, were approved by the commission. During the hearing,

Heitzman urged the commission to at least retain Aryan Migration

Theory [AMT] in the place of AIT. Fortunately, Professor Metzenberg, a

distinguished biologist and a commissioner on the panel, pointedly

told that there is no genetic evidence for Aryan migration and added

that he would go by scientific evidence than accept the unproven

beliefs of some historians. The commission decided to add that some

historians believe in AMT.

 

 

 

What Motivates These Anti-Hindu Academics?

 

 

 

Even though Hindus succeeded, and got most of what they had asked for,

there are many disturbing questions worth asking.

 

 

 

1. What motivates Witzel and other signatories to maliciously

oppose a Hindu initiative even without bothering to know the nature of

changes proposed?

 

 

 

2. Why did some academics agree to the Hindu suggestions in

private but opposed that in public? What are they afraid of?

 

 

 

3. Will Witzel and other petitioners ever campaign that Islam or

Christianity be presented according to mainstream scholarship and

their crimes not whitewashed? Why are they silent when it comes to

these religions and only hostile to Hinduism and Hindus?

 

 

 

4. Witzel has made many derogatory remarks about Hindus. He has

made fun of Hindu immigrants to America. He has ridiculed their

practice of cremating their dead. He has called them " lost " or

" abandoned " people. He has ridiculously claimed that American Hindus

do not invest in their children's higher education. What motivates him

to make such disparaging remarks? What motivates other academics to

follow him and sign on the petition?

 

 

 

5. Why did the CDE nominate three academics with known hostile

stances against Hindus or Hinduism? Will they ever nominate someone

who makes such vilifying remarks about Christianity or Islam to review

suggestions from those communities? What compelled the CDE to

circumvent its own procedural guidelines and give a free run to such

anti-Hindu academics, more so when their petition made wild

allegations and lacked substance?

 

 

 

Conclusion

 

 

 

One can speculate on what motivates Witzel or others to attack Hindus,

even when their initiative is most reasonable. Many of those

speculations might be factual. But, Hindus can get justice only be

being proactive. Here are a few things they must do:

 

 

 

1. Create forums that can serve as focal for textbook review and

adoption process.

 

 

 

2. Review your child's textbook and compare the treatment of

Hinduism vis-à-vis Christianity and Islam in those. See if Hinduism is

discriminated against.

 

 

 

3. Validate if the portrayal of Hinduism is according to guidelines.

 

 

 

4. Ask the education department who is reviewing and authoring

textbooks. Do some background research on those academics. If they are

known for their anti-Hindu credentials, Hindus must demand that the

department replace such academics with neutral and sympathetic

scholars. This is a very reasonable demand. After all, religion and

culture, unlike science, are subjective. There is always a divide

between an interpretation by a sympathetic and neutral scholar and one

by a hostile person.

 

 

 

5. Form teams to work with publishers and insist that they do not

hire anti-Hindu academics to author textbooks. After all, there are

two million Hindus in the USA. There are numerous others sympathetic

to the Hindu rights. Publishers cannot ignore a group like this.

 

 

 

6. Form a task force to identify neutral scholars to author

textbooks. Work with publishers and education department to ensure

that such scholars are considered for writing and reviewing textbooks.

 

 

 

Hindus must remember that the Jews fought many such battles in the

courtroom and the media before getting justice. We cannot ignore the

importance of either.

 

 

 

The author is an India-born, Silicon Valley-based orthodox,

practising, agnostic Hindu. He can be reached at kalavai.venkat