LA Times:Textbook Debate Over Hinduism

[Guest guest]

A Textbook Debate Over Hinduism

Some adherents seek changes in information taught to sixth-graders.

Their critics object.

By Teresa Watanabe, Times Staff Writer

February 27 2006

 

When Abhijit Kurup began learning about Hinduism at his Claremont

middle school, he could barely recognize his own religion.

 

Textbooks portrayed the 6,000-year-old tradition as a religion of

monkey and elephant gods, rigid caste discrimination and oppression of

women, he said.

 

"It degraded my religion," said Kurup, now a UC Riverside freshman. "I

felt a mixture of anger, embarrassment and humiliation."

 

Kurup has joined other Hindus in a campaign urging the state Board of

Education to correct those portrayals in new sixth-grade history

textbooks, which will come under review by a board committee today.

They have requested changes involving passages on women's rights, the

caste system, the origins of Hinduism and the nature of the divine,

among other things.

 

One requested change, for instance, would say women had "different"

rights than men, not fewer.

 

But their efforts have sparked a heated counter-campaign by scholars

and others who accuse the groups of trying to fabricate history and

gloss over the treatment of women and minorities in India, where

Hinduism is the dominant religion. Some also contend that the

requested textbook changes are so similar to those imposed by Hindu

nationalist groups in India that California should not put its stamp

of approval on them.

 

As a result, what began as a quiet academic exercise has exploded into

a vitriolic debate stretching across the globe, with partisans

exchanging charges of religious bigotry and promoting right-wing

political agendas.

 

Harvard University professor Michael Witzel, for instance, has warned

that the California school board will set off an "international

educational scandal" if it approves the requested changes. "It would

install mythology as history and get a right-wing point of view" into

the textbooks, said Witzel, a professor of Sanskrit.

 

Such comments outrage many Hindu community members. They say they are

merely seeking a fair and accurate portrayal of their religion and

culture, which many believe has been maligned in the West ever since

British colonialists invaded India more than two centuries ago.

 

"This is the first time Hindu groups are trying to protest against 300

years of prejudice," said Madhulika Singh, a Bay Area computer

networking specialist. She says her son told her he didn't want to be

Hindu anymore after studying ancient India and Hinduism in sixth grade.

 

Indeed, the issue is seen on both continents as the first major test

of Hindu political clout in the United States and showcases the

growing influence and political savvy of Indian Americans, now one of

the nation's fastest-growing ethnic groups. Led by the

California-based Hindu Education Foundation and the Vedic Foundation

in Texas, a broad-based group of temples, educators and community

organizations has mobilized on the issue, drawing extensive news

coverage in the Indian media here and abroad.

 

On the other side, opponents of the proposed changes include more than

100 South Asian scholars and the Friends of South Asia, a Bay Area

peace group.

 

Glee Johnson, state Board of Education president, said the issue drew

more than 1,500 letters and e-mails from the Hindu community last week

alone, the highest volume of comment she has received on any issue in

her two years on the board.

 

She said that of all subject areas, the board's reviews of history

textbooks tend to stoke the most fervent community passions. In the

past, she said, the board had been pressed to include in textbooks

Ireland's potato famine, the internment of some Italian nationals in

the U.S. during World War II and the genocide against Armenians by the

Turks during World War I, an event the Turkish government disputes.

 

In the current round of review, Hindu groups are not the only ones

asking for change. According to board materials, Jewish groups have

asked for deletion of references to any Jewish role in the crucifixion

of Jesus, King Solomon's use of forced labor and the lack of

archeological evidence that the Exodus ever occurred, among other things.

 

"To many people, it gets very emotional," Johnson said. "This is not

just about academics, but is tied in to people's view of themselves

and their history. What we really need to do is try to be as fair as

we can."

 

The state board reviews sixth-grade history textbooks, which explore

ancient civilizations through the fall of Rome in the 5th century,

every six years. Johnson said state-appointed experts had nearly

completed their review of newly revised editions last summer when

Hindu groups stepped in with a long list of requested changes. To

review those requests for accuracy, the board appointed Shiva Bajpai,

a Cal State Northridge professor of ancient Indian history.

 

Bajpai approved many of the changes requested. But in November,

shortly before the proposals were headed for final approval, Witzel

urged the board to reject them in what he called an "emergency

letter." Witzel wrote that the groups pressing for change were Hindu

nationalists who had rammed through similar textbook changes in India

that the U.S. State Department had characterized as "extremist."

 

The proposed changes are "unscholarly, are politically and religiously

motivated … and will lead without fail to an international educational

scandal," Witzel wrote in a letter endorsed by four dozen

international scholars.

 

The letter ignited a furor — which state education officials further

fanned by asking Witzel and two others to weigh in on the proposed

changes already reviewed by Bajpai. The Witzel panel challenged

several of Bajpai's recommendations, setting up a showdown between

scholars last month.

 

"It was a gladiator combat," Bajpai said. "I've never had such an

acrimonious meeting in my 48 years of professional life."

 

Today, the board's five-member history-social science committee will

review the competing claims and decide which to recommend to the full

board for final action at its March 8 meeting.

 

The most heated debate centers on four areas. Aside from the women's

issue, the Hindu Educational Foundation and its supporters argue that

the rigid caste system that eventually developed in India was, during

ancient times, simply a way to efficiently organize society and should

be portrayed as such. Under this system, social classes were grouped

by occupation.

 

They say textbooks should not portray Hinduism as a polytheistic faith

but as one that sees its gods and goddesses simply as different

representations of one supreme reality.

 

The most contentious issue involves the origins of Hinduism. The

common historical view, included in all textbooks, is that

Indo-Europeans from Central Asia, called Aryans, migrated to India and

laid the faith's foundation. But Bajpai and the Hindu groups hotly

dispute the idea of any Aryan migration, citing new DNA evidence for

their view that Hinduism developed indigenously. They have asked that

textbooks include both views.

 

Not all Hindus side with them. Vinay Lal, a UCLA professor of Indian

history, calls most of their contentions "ridiculous." Like all

religions, he said, Hinduism has its share of uncomfortable truths,

and he would prefer that his two children learn to deal with them.

 

"They will be better able to understand that the essential story of

humanity is the story of freedom from oppression," Lal said. "The onus

is on us to do justice to our history."