Author: Shrinivas Tilak
Publication: www.sulekha.com
Date: January 6, 2004
URL: http://www.sulekha.com/expressions/articledesc.asp?cid=307085
"The master's tools will never dismantle
the master's house"
Introduction
The present article is in response
to recent writings by Rajiv Malhotra on RISA-L scholarship and Hinduism
that appeared in Sulekha. It has been written in my capacity as a Hindu
living in the diaspora as well as a member (albeit marginalized!) of RISA-L
and is addressed to the readers and members of Sulekha as well as those
Indians and other scholars, researchers and sympathizers of Hinduism who
work with, alongside, and for disciplines that may come under the rubric
of Hindu studies as part of the larger discipline of Indology. More particularly,
it seeks to initiate a dialogue with the growing number of Hindus in the
diaspora whose professional field of research is not Hinduism or Hindu
Studies but who nevertheless have received training in the western academic
setting and are familiar with disciplinary methodologies of humanities
and social sciences.
The immediate context for this article
has been the growing dissatisfaction on the part of Hindus in diaspora
with the way Hindu deities such as Ganesha or Hindu religious leaders like
Shri Ramakrishna have been depicted by North American scholars of Hinduism.
This dissatisfaction has been voiced and reiterated in a number of articles
and comments on them on the Sulekha website. Hindu community activists
like Ms Mona Vijaykar have voiced their concern at gatherings such as the
recently held DANAM conference in Atlanta, Georgia, where some RISAL-L
members were also present. Others like Devendra Potnis (a graduate student
at the Louisiana State University) have successfully generated petitions
protesting misrepresentation of Hindu deities like Ganesha, which were
signed by thousands.
Credo, Quia Occidentale[2]
Professor Albrecht Welzer is one
of the few Western academics to acknowledge that scholars of Europe and
North America have frequently been the source of misinterpretation of many
key Hindu concepts. By way of illustration, he discusses the prevailing
notion of varna in Indology and in academic literature dealing with India
in general. Traditionally, varna means sounds of speech or language. In
the nineteenth century, however, scholars like H.H. Wilson wrongly identified
varna with 'a letter of the alphabet'. This misrepresentation was continued
in the works of Th. Benfey, H.T. Colebrooke, Franz Bopp, and others. Though
grammatically varna is derived from the social term denoting "class" (as
attested in Panini 2:1.69; 5:2.132, 6:3.85), it nevertheless acquired the
now commonly accepted (though incorrect) meaning of "colour" (Welzer 1994:
229-230). Following them, most modern Indic scholars (including K.V. Abhyankar,
Balakrishna Ghosh and Ganganath Jha) rendered varna as letter in Sanskrit
alphabet rather than sound.
Welzer raises the question: Why
did Indic scholars acquiesce to and even imitate such mistakes committed
by European Indologists, in spite of the fact that they could and should
know better. The answer, according to Welzer, lies in part in India's colonization.
He alludes to it in the Latin portion of the title of the article he wrote:
"Credo, Quia Occidentale"; viz. a widespread overestimation of western
culture and the blind belief that anything of western or European origin
cannot but be superior to the corresponding element of Indic culture (see
Welzer 1994: 232-234). The resulting "inferiority complex" has had a shattering
and traumatic effect upon Indic scholarship and academic output. Unfortunately,
this trend continues even in post-independent India and among Indians living
in the diaspora today.
Extant scholarship on Hinduism in
North America
Research was one dominant category
and way in which the underlying code of imperialism and colonialism was
both regulated and realized. It was regulated through the formal rules
of individual scholarly disciplines and scientific paradigms, and the institutions
and funding agencies (including the state) that supported and sustained
them. Exegetical imperialism similarly was instituted in manifold ways
of representation and ideological constructions of Hinduism as the 'Other'
in scholarly and popular works, which helped to select and re-contextualize
those constructions in such things as the media, official histories and
school curricula. Ashis Nandy argues that the structures of colonialism
contained precise codes and rules by which colonial encounters occurred
and dissent was managed (Nandy 1983: 2- 3). Recent controversies involving
scholars like Jeff Kripal and Paul Courtright and diasporic Hindus suggest
that such encounters indeed continue even today without much change in
the form and institutional mechanism set during the heyday of colonialism.
Many Hindus in the diaspora feel that exegetical imperialism and colonialism
continue to frame Hindu studies: whether in India or in diaspora[3]. As
a discursive field of knowledge, Indology is one such idea and spirit with
many forms of realization designed to subjugate the Indic/Hindu Other.
Writing, theory and history are key sites in which western research in
Indology and Hinduism has evolved. Modern academy claims theory as thoroughly
western and constructs the rules by which the Hindu world has been theorized.
Their western or modern education
precludes many Hindu scholars from writing or speaking from a 'real' and
authentic Hindu or Indic position and perspective. Those who do dare to
speak from a more traditional Hindu perspective are criticized for not
making sense. Alternatively, their arguments are 'suitably translated'
or reduced to some 'nativist' discourse by western (as well as by many
westernized Hindu) academics. More often, they are dismissed as naive,
contradictory and illogical. This positions today's Hindu in North America
in a difficult space both in terms of his/her relations with the general
Indic populations and within the western academy. For each Hindu scholar
who does succeed in the academy, there remains a whole array of unresolved
issues about the ways North American Hindus in general relate inside and
outside of Hindu studies, inside and outside the academy, and between all
those different spaces and worlds.
Taking back India's history
Historiography is a modernist project,
which developed in concert with imperial beliefs about the Other. The discipline
of history developed as a set of two interconnected ideas: (1) there is
a universal history with fundamental characteristics and values which all
human subjects and societies share; and (2) universal history is one large
chronology or grand narrative. History is about developments over time;
it charts the progress of human endeavour through time. The actual time
events take place also makes them 'real' and 'factual'. In order to begin
the chronology, a time of 'beginning' and 'discovery' has to be established.
Possession of chronology allows
one to go backwards and explain how and why things happened in the past.
Societies are believed to move forward through time in stages of developments
much as an infant grows into a fully developed adult being. As societies
develop, they become less primitive, more civilized, more rational, and
their social structures become more complex and bureaucratic. History is
similarly deemed to be about human moral development that moves in stages
through the fulfilment of basic needs, the development of emotions, the
intellect and culminating in morality. Just as the individual moves through
these stages, so do societies. The story of history therefore can be told
in a coherent narrative.[4]
A skilled historian can assemble
all the facts in an ordered way so that they reveal to the reader the truth
providing a very good idea of what really did happen in the past. History
as a discipline is held to be innocent since the "facts" speak for themselves.
A good historian simply marshals them and weaves them into a coherent,
concise and cogent narrative. Once all the known facts are assembled, they
tell their own story, without any need of a theoretical explanation or
interpretation by the historian. History therefore is pure as a discipline,
unsullied by ideology, interests, or agenda. All history has a definite
beginning and there are clear criteria of determining when it begins: literacy,
rationality, scientific spirit, social and political formations, etc (Smith
1999: 30-31).
In the context of Indology, the
upshot of the above view and understanding of history is the argument that
only a historian trained in historiography can write a "true" and accurate
history of Hinduism, Hindu culture and society. The disciplines of history
and anthropology, accordingly, were implicated from the beginning in the
construction of totalizing master discourses to control the Indian as the
"Other" and to deny the Indian's view of what happened and what the significance
of historical 'facts' may be to the colonized[5]. "If history is written
by the victor," argues Janet Abu-Lughod, "then it must, almost by definition,
'deform' the history of the others" (cited in Smith 1999: 67).
Research using western paradigms
describes an approach, which assumes that western ideas about the most
fundamental things are the only ideas possible to hold, certainly the only
rational ideas, and the only ideas that can make sense of the world, of
reality, of social life, and of human beings. This line of thinking has
been carried over into Hindu studies and conveys a sense of innate superiority
and a desire to overwhelm research in Hinduism spiritually, intellectually,
socially and politically.
It is such research imbued with
an `attitude' and a 'spirit', which assumes ownership of the Hindu and
Indic world. It has established systems and forms of governance, which
embed that attitude in institutional practices. These practices determine
what counts as legitimate research and who count as legitimate researchers.
In this enterprise, the objects of research do not have a voice and do
not contribute to research, science or knowledge. An object (in this instance,
Hinduism or Hindus) has no life force or spirit of its own, no humanity,
'it' cannot, therefore, make any active contribution. For all practical
purposes, the "benevolent" impulse of modern Indology to represent Hindus
and Hinduism effectively appropriates their voice, reducing them to the
category of the subaltern.
True, this perspective was not deliberately
insensitive. Perhaps the rules of practice did not allow such a thought
to enter the scene (this comes across in one of Paul Courtright's messages
posted on the RISA-L list). It nevertheless reaffirmed the West's view
of itself as the centre of legitimate knowledge, the arbiter of what counts
as knowledge and the source of all 'civilized' knowledge. It is generally
praised as 'universal' knowledge, available to all and not really 'owned'
by anyone: until non-western scholars make claims to it.
History is suitably revised whenever
claims like the above are contested, so that the story of civilization
continues to remain the story of the West. For this purpose, the Mediterranean
world, the ancient near east and ancient Greek culture are conveniently
appropriated as part of the story of the western civilization, western
philosophy and western knowledge (Smith 1999: 62-63). More recently, this
practice has also been extended to such elements as yoga from Indic civilization
and culture. Rajiv Malhotra's "U Turn" thesis has convincingly demonstrated
and documented its increasing prevalence.
The nexus between cultural ways
of knowing, scientific discoveries, economic impulses and imperial power
enabled the West to make ideological claims having a superior civilization.
The idea of the 'West' became a reality when it was re-presented to the
people of Africa, Asia and the Oceania through colonialism. Colonial education
was used to create new indigenous elites to colonize indigenous disciplines
of knowledge.
Contesting Western research and
methodologies
Under colonialism, Indians had to
reconcile with the western inspired studies and history of India. While
a few struggled against the received version of India and Hinduism, most
Indians complied with the dominant western view of Hinduism and its history.
Hindus allowed the history of their religion to be told to them and, in
the process, became alienated from it. They became outsiders as they heard
and read a contrived version of their religion and its history. The system
of education that the British introduced into India was directly implicated
in this process of alienation from Hinduism.
The problem of creating and legitimising
a genuine discipline of Hindu studies, therefore, represents a special
battlefield. Hindu intellectuals and scholars must bear a major responsibility
in this battle in a number of ways in the manner suggested by Franz Fanon,
who has left us a revolutionary manifesto of decolonisation and the founding
analysis of the effects of colonialism upon colonized peoples and their
cultures. Following Fanon, one may identify three levels through which
the westernised, diasporic Hindu intellectuals will have to make their
journey 'back over the line'.
In the initial phase, such intellectuals
and academics tend to be keen to prove to their western peers that they
have been thoroughly assimilated into the western culture of knowledge.
While most remain content to settle for status quo and spend all their
academic life submerged in this milieu, a small minority of them begin
to enter the second phase where they become restless and unsatisfied in
their assimilation. There is now a restless desire to recognize and to
find their academic and cultural roots and recover the fast receding connection
with their own past.
In the third phase, these intellectuals
begin to realign themselves with their own history, culture and tradition
and actively seek to awaken their brethren by producing 'revolutionary'
literature that is re-interpreted anew (Fanon 1966: 178-179). The growing
interest at present for doing away with misrepresentation of Hinduism in
the diaspora may be understood in this light. The challenge for many Hindu
intellectuals and scholars is how to position themselves strategically
as intellectuals (1) within the academy; (2) within India; and (3) within
the western world where many of them actually work. Following Gayatri Chakravorty
Spivak, one may argue that the major problem for Hindu scholars remains
the problem of being taken seriously.
For me, the question 'Who should
speak?' is less crucial than `Who will listen?' I will speak for myself
as a Third World person is an important position for political mobilisation
today. But the real demand is that, when I speak from that position, I
should be listened to seriously; not with that kind of benevolent imperialism...
(Chakravorty Spivak 1990: 59- 60).
Taking back Hindu history and Hindu
studies
Coming to know India's past must
become part of the critical pedagogy of decolonising Hindu studies. This
must be accomplished by creating alternative history of Hinduism, which
in turn would generate alternative pathways to knowledge about Hinduism.
Is history of Hinduism in its modernist and western construction relevant
and useful for Hindus of today? For most Hindus, the answer would seem
to be self-evident because they assume that when 'the truth comes out,'
a true account of Hinduism will be given. Wrong. How then to write a new
history of Hinduism and India? Particularly when Aimé Césaire
observed (in his Discourse on Colonialism) that the only history is white?
How can the Hindu find his/her voice? Can the Hindu subaltern speak?
I think a beginning must be made
by raising and debating issues for taking back Hindu history and studies.
Toward that objective, it is possible to extrapolate from the urgent claims
that Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak makes in "Can the Subaltern Speak" via
the critical theory of Theodor Adorno[6]. Following her lead, Hindus in
the diaspora and academics and students of Hinduism in India must begin
by asking: Who does research in Hinduism? Who funds, defines and owns it?
Whose interests does it serve? Who benefits from it? Who designs the research
framework and questionnaire and frames its scope? Who carries it and writes
it up? How are its results disseminated?
Hindu awakening in the diaspora
Taking back Hindu studies will require
Hindus to revisit site by site the history of Hinduism that was constructed
under colonial and western eyes. This in turn would require developing
a theory and approach to engage with, understand and then act upon the
received history of Hinduism. Rewriting history of Hinduism, reclaiming
Hindu studies, giving testimony to distortion of India's past will have
to be the basic strategies of decolonising Hindu studies.
It is unlikely that such an endeavour
will be readily accepted and acknowledged on the international scene. But
we must persist in this enterprise. Decolonisation need not mean a total
rejection of all theory or research or western knowledge. Rather, it is
implicated in focusing on concerns and worldviews about Hinduism as Hindus
understand it and then framing it within the broader theory and research
from the perspective of India and Indic culture in general.
Decoding the archive of the West
Michel Foucault uses the metaphor
of archive to convey the sense by which the West draws upon a vast history
of itself and multiple traditions of knowledge, which incorporate cultural
views of reality, of space and time. Particular knowledges, philosophies
and definitions of human nature form what Foucault has referred to as West's
cultural archive. It is a veritable storehouse of histories, artefacts,
ideas, texts and/or images that are classified, preserved and represented
(1970). Foucault suggests that this archive reveals 'rules of practice'
which the West and western scholars themselves do not necessarily ascribe
to because it operates within the rules and conventions that are thoroughly
internalised and therefore are taken for granted. It is using this archive
or storehouse that western scholars retrieve, enunciate and represent knowledges
of and from the Other (Smith 1999: 44).
In order to take back Hindu studies,
it will be necessary for Hindu researchers to decode the West's archive
and its rules of practice because theories about research are underpinned
by (1) a cultural system of classification and representation, (2) the
view about human nature, human morality and virtue, (3) conceptions of
space and time, and (4) conceptions of race and gender. Hindu scholars
will need to learn how ideas about these things are formulated in the West
in order to determine what counts for real in the eyes of the West and
western researchers. It is only after being confronted by the alternative
or competing conceptions of other societies or cultures that the reality
of the West-sponsored knowledge will become reified and may then come across
as something not necessarily 'better' or reflecting 'higher orders' of
thinking, etc.
The Hindu and Vedic conceptions
of spiritual relationships to the triple cosmos, the social and material
universe, to the landscape, to stones, rocks, insects and other things
(seen and unseen) have generally been difficult arguments for western systems
of knowledge to deal with or to accept. These arguments give at least a
partial indication of the alternative or different worldviews and ways
of coming to know and of being.
Hindu concepts of yoga and spirituality,
which Christianity and western scholars of Hinduism first attempted to
destroy, then to appropriate and then to claim, are therefore critical
sites of resistance for Hindu scholars. The values, attitudes, concepts
and language embedded in beliefs about spirituality represent, in many
ways, the clearest contrast and mark of difference and Otherness between
the Hindu and western worlds. To date, Hindu spirituality is one of the
crucial aspects which the West could not decipher, understand and therefore
could not control.
Ethical research protocols
The huge credibility problem the
western research community faces today with respect to Hinduism must be
addressed from within a Hindu agenda. It must be affirmed that the first
beneficiaries of knowledge of Hinduism must be the direct indigenous descendants
of that knowledge. Hinduism-centred research must be about bringing to
the centre and fore privileging indigenous values, attitudes and practices
rather than disguising them within Westernised labels.
Research activities on Hinduism
in the West are mostly organized around the interests of like-minded scholars
and Indologists. The development of particular research topics and research
groups tends to occur organically within the boundaries of what is known
as 'research culture' embedded in the values of academic life. Much research
on Hinduism operates as closely formed and protected cliques that share
common interest in methodologies of mutual interest. Thus, one often reads
in the messages posted on RISA-L requests for leads or references concerning
a Hinduism related topic of research "my" student has chosen.
Emic and etic of research on Hinduism
Many of the issues that may arise
while doing research on Hinduism are addressed in the research literature
in relation to both emic and etic dimensions of research. Most western
research methodologies assume that the researcher is an outsider who nevertheless
should be able to observe without being implicated in the scene. This stance
originates in positivism and notions of objectivity and neutrality.
But a Hindu researcher must problematize
the emic or insider model differently because the critical issue with emic
research is the constant need for reflexivity. At a general level, emic
researchers must devise ways to think and assess critically their thought
processes, their relationships to research subjects, cultures and societies.
They must safeguard against uncritical collection of their data and analysis.
True, the same caution applies to etic research and researchers, but the
major difference is that, as an insider, the Hindu researcher will have
to live with the consequences of his/her research and its outcome on a
day-to-day basis amongst and along with the subject of his/her research.
For this reason, as an emic researcher,
a Hindu scholar will need to build clearer research-based support systems
and relationships with his/her community. He/she will have to devise much
clearer 'lines of relating' specific to the project and 'at arms length'
from the regular lines of family and community networks. Spelling out the
limitations of a project, the issues or things that are not addressed will
also be important. The emic researcher must also devise a suitable model
for closure and must possess the courage to say 'no' and stand up to peer
pressure from insiders. Insider research has to be as ethical and respectful,
as reflexive and critical, as outsider, etic research. It also needs to
be modest and humble because the researcher may belong to his/her community
as a member with a different set of roles and relationships that may be
at odds with the demands of research in an etic setting (Smith 1999: 137-139).
Researched [Hindus] must become
researchers
A major challenge for Hindu researchers
is to retrieve sufficient space to convince the various fragmented but
powerful research communities (western and Hindu/Indian in the diaspora
or in India) of the need for greater Hindu involvement in research on Hinduism.
Yet another challenge is to develop approaches and ways of carrying out
research that takes into account, without being limited by, the legacies
of previous western dominated research and the parameters of both previous
and current approaches. Finally, Hindu researchers must devise a framework
to structure assumptions, values, concepts, orientations and priorities
for such research. When Hindus become the researchers and not remain mere
research subjects or the researched, the activity and direction of research
on Hinduism will be transformed. Questions will then be framed differently
and priorities ranked differently, problems defined differently.
Hindus must begin by questioning
the most fundamental belief behind western research on Hinduism: do all
researchers have an inherent right to knowledge and truth of Hinduism?
Research in itself is a very powerful intervention, even if carried out
at a distance because it has traditionally benefited the researcher, the
knowledge base of the researching community and the sponsoring agency.
Researchers are in receipt of privileged information, which is usually
interpreted within an overt theoretical framework. But it can also be interpreted
in terms of a covert ideological framework. The researcher has the power
to distort, to make invisible, to overlook, to exaggerate and to draw conclusions
based not on factual data, but on assumptions, hidden value judgments and,
often, downright misunderstandings. The researcher has the potential to
extend knowledge or to perpetuate bias and ignorance (Smith 1999: 176).
Indigenising research on Hinduism
Can a non-Hindu researcher carry
out research on Hinduism? The answer must be a qualified yes; but not on
his/her own. He/she would need to devise a way to suitably position him/herself
as a non-Hindu researcher. Research on Hinduism should involve 'mentorship'
of responsible Hindu/Indic scholar/s who in turn must satisfy the rigour
of research. Such research must be supervised by a Hindu/Indic researcher;
not by a researcher who happens to be an Indologist. Indigenising research
on Hinduism means drawing upon the body of knowledge and corresponding
code of values that evolved over the millennia through the input of indigenous
Hindu commentators and scholars.
Hindu indigenism is grounded in
the alternative conceptions of worldview and value systems that locate
individuals in sets of relationships with the environment and levels of
beings and existence. Reframing research on Hinduism is about assuming
larger control over the ways in which issues and problems pertaining to
Hinduism are discussed and handled. The reframing of an issue is about
making decisions; about its parameters; about what is in the foreground,
what is in the background; and what complexities exist within that frame.
It means resisting being boxed in and labelled according to alien categories
that may not fit.
Paradigms of theory and research
on Hinduism
A question will inevitably arise
whether Hindu directed 'Research on Hinduism' is or can be its own paradigm.
It would be unproductive to engage in a debate over this right now because
it may set up comparisons with western research on Hinduism. Suffice it
to say that given its incipient phase, `Hindu-directed research on Hinduism'
will remain in the near future both less than and more than a paradigm.
A beginning toward that direction may be made by undertaking research based
on articles compiled in India through Hindu categories, edited by McKim
Marriott (1990).
Creation of new parameters and methodologies
of undertaking research on Hinduism should also be informed by modern critical
theory, in particular by the notions of critique, resistance, struggle
and emancipation. It can be situated advantageously within the framework
of re-interpretation of the critical theory by the "Subaltern Studies Group"
led by Ranjit Guha and others in India[7]. Thus, intrinsic to the proposed
research on Hinduism will be analysis of existing power structures and
inequalities surrounding current research on Hinduism that is presently
dominated by western (and westernised Indian) scholars.
Research on Hinduism can draw upon
critical theory for the purpose of exposing underlying assumptions that
serve to conceal the power relations that exist within the institutions
of learning about Hinduism in the West and the ways in which dominant groups
construct concepts of 'common sense' and 'facts' to provide ad hoc justification
for the maintenance of inequalities in research. 'Research on Hinduism'
will likely remain a fledgling approach operating within the relatively
smaller community of Hindu/Indic researchers, which in turn exists within
a minority culture that continues to be represented within antagonistic
colonial discourses.
Taking back Hindu studies: the practical
dimension
The project of taking back Hindu
studies in the diaspora will necessarily have a practical dimension because
'Hindu-directed research on Hinduism' must simultaneously be a joint social
project weaving in and out of Indic and Vedic cultural beliefs and values
as well as western ways of knowing and patterns of lifestyle. Research
on Hinduism will be involved with sites and terrains that are also sites
of contestations and struggle since western researchers have also claimed
each of these sites as 'their' turf.
Approach to research on Hinduism
must be based on the assumption that research that involves Indians and
Hindus as individuals and as communities must make a positive difference
for those who are researched. This does not mean an immediate or direct
benefit. The point is that research has to be defined and designed with
some ideas about likely short-term or longer-term benefits. Obvious as
this may be, it must be remembered that, historically, Indians/Hindus have
not seen the positive benefits of research on their culture, society or
religions.
Research on Hinduism must incorporate
processes such as networking and community consultations to assist in bringing
into focus the research problems that are significant to Hindus in India
and in diaspora. In practice, all such elements of research will have to
be negotiated with individual communities. It means researchers will have
to share their 'control' of research and seek to maximize the participation
and the interest of Indians in general and of Hindus in particular. To
stimulate research on Hinduism, it will be necessary to induct young Hindu
researchers and students in projects in which they would be employed as
the 'trainee' group researcher. Support systems and mentoring processes
must be instituted in order to bring them in closer contact with senior
Hindu researchers and to prepare them for work inside their own communities
and within their own value systems and cultural practices.
Staging satyagraha for taking back
Hindu studies
Leaders of the Hindu community in
North America disagree with the claims of many RISA-L members and the faculty
teaching Hinduism related courses in North American teaching institutions
that there is no misrepresentation of Hindu values, norms, or practices
in the courses on Hinduism taught by the members of RISA-L. Developing
non-violent strategies based on the Gandhian principles of satyagraha,
as proposed by Rajiv Malhotra, can therefore be introduced as a practical
aspect of 'taking back' Hindu Studies. According to Gandhi, satyagraha
is the ideal way of resolving conflicts, which usually involve a clash
between both persons and underlying principles. Behind any struggle lies
another clash, a deeper one: a confrontation between two views that are
each to some measure true. Every conflict, to Gandhi, was on some level
a fight between differing angles of vision illuminating the same truth.
In trying to find a suitable solution
to a given conflict, one's initial temptation or response is to remove
the adversary by force and settle the argument quickly. But while it may
remove the person, forced victory leaves the underlying conflict between
principles intact and simmering. It may erupt again as soon as the adversary
has recouped his/her losses and mustered enough new strength. Common sense
and pragmatism may recommend accommodation and compromise with the adversary,
thereby allowing each side to win a little. This is often described as
a "win- win" situation. For Gandhi, however, this stance overlooks the
truth that each side loses a little as well[8].
Modern democratic spirit suggests
the use of arbitration and law to determine and judge which side is right.
This solution, however, may sacrifice the truth (or rather, the element
or share of truth) in the losing side's position. According to Gandhi,
satyagraha therefore would be a better way to fight injustice than any
one or more of the above attempts because it consciously avoids the pitfalls
in them and instead seeks a new position, which is more inclusive than
the old ones and moves into it.
Ideally, therefore, the practical
steps that diasporic Hindus will need to take in their struggle to remove
misconceptions about Hinduism should be based on the Gandhian principles
of satyagraha articulating (1) Negotiations over the differences with the
adversary and attempts to resolve them, and (2) mobilization and proper
training of supporters and volunteers to lead the struggle if negotiations
fail.
Ideally, negotiations would involve
the following sequence: recognize the truthful and untruthful elements
in each side; put the truthful elements from each side together; form a
new side and adopt it while struggling with your opponent; continue revising
and refining the new position as the negotiations or fight continues; end
the struggle only when both sides agree to occupy the same side.
satyagraha would involve creation
of small groups of dedicated Hindu scholars to study and document instances
of misrepresentation of Hindu values, practices, norms, etc. Other groups
will be needed to intensify and coordinate such activities as letter writing,
writing petitions and getting signatures and establishing dialogue with
the teaching faculties at the scholarly and university levels.
The real adversary in this struggle
is likely to be apathy, both on the part of Hindus in the diaspora and
the average North American. Such apathy will have to be shattered through
a dramatic demonstration of concern. This can be accomplished by creating
and opening several fronts simultaneously: making an appeal to the general
public in North America through articles in the newspapers and magazines;
writing and producing leaflets advertising forthcoming courses on Hinduism
to be offered at university departments across North America to attract
attention of the average North American; organizing rallies; and opening
alternative centres for teaching courses on Hinduism.
Experienced Hindu academics will
have to be recruited to act as consultants to guide diasporic Hindus in
the writing and circulation of petitions or for leading agitations against
misrepresentation of Hinduism. Annual inventory of outlines of courses
on Hinduism that are offered will have to be made and Hindu scholars invited
to evaluate them and offer suggestions for improving teaching of Hinduism.
Hindu scholars and community leaders will have to engage in ongoing dialogue
with book publishers in India and abroad. The latter may be invited to
send the manuscripts on Hinduism that they receive to a committee of Hindu
academics and scholars for fair evaluation and assessment in order to avoid
perpetuation of glaring misrepresentations or falsehoods concerning Hinduism.
According to the ideals of Gandhian
satyagraha, if the above steps fail, then launching of non-cooperation
movement will be necessary, which would include boycott, strike, peaceful
disruption, blockade, and sit- in. If these steps fail to produce a settlement
(i.e. fair and accurate representation of Hinduism and Hindus), then creation
of a parallel entity to replace the opponent's facilities would be necessary.
In the North American context, this would mean setting up of independent
Hindu schools and universities along the pattern of Catholic schools and
universities that have existed for centuries.
References
Chakravorty Spivak, Gayatri. 1990.
The Post-Colonial Critic: Interviews, Strategies, Dialogues edited by S.
Harasym, New York: Routeledge.
Elder, Joseph et al. Eds. 1998.
India's Worlds and U. S. Scholars. New Delhi: Manohar and American Institute
of Indian Studies.
Fanon, Franz. 1966. The Wretched
of the Earth translated from the French by Constance Farrington. New York:
Grove Press Inc.
Foucault, Michel. 1970. The Order
of Things: An Archaeology of the Human Sciences. London: Tavistock Publications.
Guha, Ranjit et al. Eds. 1982-2000.
Subaltern Studies: Writings on South Asian history and society.
Hanks, Craig J. 2002. Refiguring
Critical Theory: Jurgen Habermas and the Possibilities of Political Change.
Lanham: University Press of America.
Juergensmayer, Mark. 2002. Gandhi's
Way: a handbook of conflict resolution. Berkeley: University of California
Press.
Marriott, McKim. ed. 1990. India
through Hindu categories. New Delhi: Sage Publications.
Morton, Stephen. 2003. Gayatri Chakravorty
Spivak. London: Routledge.
Nandy, Ashis. 1983. The Intimate
Enemy: Loss and Recovery of Self Under Colonialism, Delhi: Oxford University
Press.
Smith, Linda Tuhiwai. 1999. Decolonising
Methodologies: Research and Indigenous Peoples. Dunedin: University of
Otago Press.
Welzer, Albrecht. 1994. Credo, Quia
Occidentale: A Note on Sanskrit varna and its Misinterpretation in Literature
on Mamamsa and Vyakarana. In
Studies in Mamamsa: Dr Mandan Mishra
Felicitation Volume edited by R.C. Dwivedi. Delhi: Motilal Banarasidass.
Young, Robert. 1990. White Mythologies:
Writing history and the West. London: Routledge.
