What do communists, evangelican Christians and Islamists have in common? Notwithstanding the irreconcilable differences between themselves, which group invokes hatred among all the three? Yes, as the title indicates, it is Hindu-hatred or Hinduphobia.
This is my attempt to
understand the core ideas that inform the perspective of evangelican
right and academic left and am thankful to Rajiv
Malhotra whose work forms the basis that I build upon.
Abrahamic perception of
Hinduism
To the more devout
sections of Christians and Muslims the fact that India is still majorly
populated by heathens despite their best
"efforts" [a millennium of Islamic aggression and two
centuries of Western imperialism ] is an eyesore.
The differences between
Judaism, Christianity and Islam is mostly about how the latest ideology
supercedes the earlier ones, rendering the earlier belief obsolete because the
newer one is more complete/ truthful.
- Moses [the
Lawgiver in Judaism] receives Ten Commandments from God
and upon seeing pagans committing the sin of idoltry [the
sin of golden calf] orders his men to slaughter the whole
community without mercy. The arrival of messiah is prophesized.
- Christians believe that Jesus
Christ is the prophesized messiah and therefore Jews should abandon
Judaism and convert to Christianity. But Jews don't accept Christ as the messiah,
earning Christians' displeasure and resulting in their harassment across
two milleniums.
- Islam, although it accepts
Jesus as a messenger of God, rejects his divinity. It sees Jesus as a
precursor to Prophet Mohammed. Prophet propagated the latest & most complete
version of truth. Therefore, Christians should now follow Islam as God has
willed his final message to Prophet. Christians refuse to accept this and
the crusade continues.
The point of crucial
importance is : notwithstanding their differences, these three religions
essentially believe in the same biblical God of Old Testament. The dispute is
mainly over the more complete version, not about the core
version itself. Commonly, all the three religions see idoltry and
polytheism as a punishable sin. One-God, One-Book and One-Messenger : that
underlines their understanding of what should constitute religion.
Also, these religions
are history-centric. They owe their very existence and claim to
exclusivity to a very specific incident in history and if the veracity of that
incident isn't a given, their entire edifice collapses.
In the eyes of many
devout Christians and Muslims worldwide, Hinduism as the last surviving
bastion of idoltry and polytheism represents the failure of their respective
religions to show the one-true path to the sinful idolters. Despite the
widening differences between Christians and Muslims today, the purists among
both commonly consider Hinduism as devil-worship [as
interpreted from their scriptures that contain harsh words for idolters.].
The [mis]conception that
all religions are same is a Hindu projection of others' beliefs. But why
superimpose your beliefs unto others, why don't you allow them to speak for
themselves. If all religions are equal, why do Christians and Muslims make such
tremendous efforts to convert heathens. Surely, beyond this facade of all
religions being same should be exposed for it is : an unsubstantiated hollow
claim which is infact vigorously opposed by the almost all serious
practitioners of both Christianity and Islam who are convinced that only their
religion is true and others are false or incomplete.
Left in the wilderness
The left ideology
generally sees societal evolution as passing through stages of Pagan religion,
Monotheistic religion and then Marxism as it happened in Europe. That other
civilizations (like Eastern ones) followed a different trajectory doesn't
appear to bother them. Rather, it continues the doctrinal traditions of
Abrahamic religions albiet in atheist trappings, with history-centrism intact.
Latest entrant is mere variant ! |
And by this token,
Abrahamic religions although inferior to Communism are still an improvement
over pagans. Philosopher Hegel, whose works inspired a host of
western political philosophers including Karl
Marx, believed that the West is the sole engine of progress/
development including scientific, technological and social aspects. The idea
rationalizes the western conquest of the east and subsequent colonization which
was done under the the mask of "civilizing" the natives (While Man's Burden). Marx by all means was a
Eurocentric thinker who thought that Indians were better under British rule and
didn't deserve to rule on their own. Theories of such a person are passed on as
gospel truth of understanding history today.
Also, communism speaks
the very language of the monotheist prophetic religions (to separate Judaism
which has given no problem to India). Despite radical differences with
religion, Communism is pretty much an atheist version of Abrahamic religions
and is as doctrinal, uncompromising and intolerant as the latter.
A table to highlight few
similarities.
Concept
|
Christianity
|
Islam
|
Communism
|
At some historical point,
God/Historical-forces created a saviour/thinker having monopoly on truth
& guiding humanity for eternity.
|
Jesus Christ , son of one-true
God, will atone for human sins for eternity
|
Prophet Mohammed received
only-true God's message ending period of darkness
|
The spirit of age, enabled Lenin
to break capitalistic stronghold in Russia ending a period of exploitation.
|
Division of humankind into
followers and non-followers. Uniting all believers & breaking their other
affiliations
|
Believers and heathens
|
Believers and kaffirs
|
Production class and capitalists
or [proletariat and bourgeoisie]
|
Divine Right to rule and
predicting eventual victory of believers at some point of time in future.
|
Save heathens from hellfire.
Convert them . Christianity will sway the entire world eventually.
|
Save kaffirs from hell. Convert
them Eventually rule of Sharia will be established worldwide.
|
Save society from capitalist
exploitation. Achieve Communist paradise which is a certainty in
future.
|
Self-righteousness – lure, force
and even violence justified for greater good of humanity. No compunction
about killing people and brutalizing them.
|
All means justified to achieve the
larger good of mankind i.e. Christianizing the world.
|
Any means, even deception, allowed
for larger good of humanity viz. Islamizing
|
No regret for using violence to
achieve one-party state.
|
Interaction
between Christianity, Islam and Communism
History is brushed with
violence whenever any of these three ideologies' geographic area intersected
with the other . Yet, at an intellectual level, they do not cause
"difference anxiety" between themselves, because none of them offer a
genuine alternative to the straitjacketed conception of society. All call for
an absolute control of state where every sphere of socio-cultural life is
guided by their theology.
The intra-party
criticism is largely confined to the same set of categories and any debate can barely
make progress beyond the advocation of tolerance. The exclusivist claims
of these ideologies make it impossible for them to genuinely respect others,
because if its conceded that other paths can be true too, they themselves
are no a longer unique sect claiming monopoly on truth.
However adapting to
modern times, since violent means to settle issues are no longer feasible,
these religions advocate tolerance. But the use of word tolerance as
Rajiv Malhotra explains, betrays their patronizing tone – you
tolerate someone/something (mostly inferior) because you want to leave them to
their fate, not because you respect or agree with them.
Abrahamic underpinnings
of the Modern Hindu debate
It is very hard for the
Western world, which has experienced variants of the same ideology, to
understand what Hinduism stands for. With its emphasis on neatly classified,
codified and orderly systems (One God, One Book, One Prophet), it finds chaos
and disorder in Hinduism (instead of seeing them as freedom and creativity).
The early Turkish tribes
in medieval India and European Christians who arrived India in modern era (like
Portuguese in Goa) were clear about their plans in India : eradication of
native heathen culture & religion and replace them with one-true religion.
And little has changed with respect to their motives although the means have.
The ongoing projects to Christianize India is in full swing in South India with
Andhra Pradesh being the latest [successful] experiment. Muslims with highest
fertility levels are fast changing demographic equations.
Even liberal Christians
/ Muslims, otherwise sympathetic to Hindus, cannot forego their principal
tenets due to a lifetime of conditioning. Salvation, according to even them, is
not possible outside their religion. Hence a Hindu are ineligible for salvation,
no matter how good a human he is. Period. And every effort to help or punish heathens
finds rationalization in their respective scriptures.
Prominent Indologists
were Eurocentric, convinced of Western supremacy and few even believed Biblical
Genesis of the origin of world around 6000 years back in toto which shaped
their perception of Indian civilization. Consider the hypocrisy of "rational"
west when few Indologists appropriated time-periods to suit their Christian
worldview per which no world existed before Genesis.
Likewise, the Left uses
the western template of racial discriminations, feudal system, class divide,
labor-production class of industrial society etc and imposes it India while
mapping local factors with their "universal" theory. That India
witnessed modern industrialization after Britishers masterfully decimated its
prosperous traditional industries is overlooked.
To impose its theory of
unidirectional progress across timeline (as true in West), it sees medieval
India as more progressive compared to pre-medieval times. But it requires
special pleading to argue that medieval India wreaked and ravaged by Islamic
aggression was better than the highly prosperous intellectual & liberal
civilization it replaced. Yet, they persist with this perverted interpretation
of history.
In Europe, the Left
correctly identifies the religious conservative majority as responsible for all
the ills of the society. But in India the majority community, the Hindus, were
largely themselves subjugated throughout the medieval age and barely held the
power to push their agendas. How can the blame for the ills of a society held
hostage to waves of invasion, plunder, mass-massacres etc be fixed on the
victim-community itself?
If Sanskrit was the
language of elite and Brahmins received unfair patronage in pre-medieval India,
why isn't the same logic applied to Persian (spoken by elites only) and
Muslim groups which gained undue advantage in Islamic India. If temples were a
symbol of toil of masses, how does it miss to treat the construction of huge
Churches at the expense of the taxpayer in British India in the same way.
Today, Church is the second largest landowner in India next only to Government
of India. Doesn't the leftist theory call for redistribution of such
ill-acquired wealth?
Unholy nexus of
Christians, Islamists & Communists in India
Early missionaries
actively supported the modern "rationalists" in South India like EV Ramasamy Periyar who took the Aryan Invasion Theory for granted and
rained abuses on Hindu gods and systems.
Marxists provided the
intellectual fodder for pro-Partition Islamists and even today desire to break
India based on local grievances. To uphold their theory that religion
is the opium of masses, it obfuscates truth and creates a non-existent,
totally nonfactual and unfair symmetry between Islamic crimes and
Hindu crimes. Islamic violence was systematic, pervasive even during peaceful
times, and most importantly was ideologically-driven. Hindu crimes in all
fairness was a knee-jerk reaction to Islamic atrocities and had no ideological
basis for prolonged sustenance.
Despite differences
between these three ideologies, they are united in their collective hate
towards Hinduism in India. Thus, Christian Right organizations coordinate with
left academians to undermine Hinduism and indulge in Hindu-bashing. A case in
point is Meera Nanda a prominent Marxist earlier,
later employed by John Templeton, a Christian lobby organization which
claims science as compatible with and even a product of Christianity. [as
observed by Koenraad Elst]. So what attribute of a Marxist can a Christian
lobby find useful? Hindu hatred or sheer Hinduphobia as amply indicated in her
works.
The network is far more
insidious that commonly understood and if you think I am exaggerating I direct
you to Rajiv Malhotra's Breaking India that provides ample
evidence that a determined effort is on to break India by the unholy nexus of
these three forces.
Why Hindu survival is
vital for World peace
Post 26/11, Islamists
coined the term Islamophobia to successfully hijack even
legitimate criticism of Islam, a classic instance of terminological terrorism.
Ever since, critics of Islam are accused of suffering from insane, irrational
hatred of Islam irrespective of sound logical reasoning or mountains of
objective evidence they employ.
The success of this
strategy has been remarkable only because Christians also understand that they
cannot go overboard in their criticism of Islam, lest it invites scrutiny of
its own belief systems. Historically, Islam hasn't been more cruel and inhuman
than Christianity. Islam's core scriptures aren't immensely
more bigoted than Christian ones. If Prophet's character is
criticized, so can the existence of real Jesus be disputed. Commonly, their
core theology is plain irrational and unscientific as nobody in the right mind
would accept the stories of Jesus and Prophet as true & factual. But
exactly belief in this historical event is central to
every practicing Christian/ Muslim.
Present-day Christianity
projects itself as a benign religion with genuine interest in uplifting the
global poor through charity works, but it hasn't abandoned its primary
duty to convert. The changed strategy, although sophisticated, actually works
better in this era. Church as a precursor to today's multinational companies
knows how to manage media, generate positive publicity, dissociate quickly from
any scandal, and use the politically correct jargon to make the right noises
and influence public opinion. Thus, Church notwithstanding its reformation,
isn't exactly respectful of other religions, it merely tolerates them.
But its record in fomenting ethnic tensions through creating
imaginary rifts among native populace as witnessed in Rwanda
Genocide [the church's complicity is fairly established]
or in creating a non-existent Aryan-Dravidian divide in South India is for all
to see.
Communism which rose as
a reaction to capitalist exploitation of workers, in all fairness offers a more
humanistic agenda, but only in theory, not so in practice. They operate largely
in paranoid zone, where they cast the net of guilt as wide as possible concoct
conspiracies where there are none. Hidden motives are attributed to otherwise
plainly visible ones. Justification of use of violence to achieve ideal state
has resulted in the most gruesome genocides in modern history.
So three mutually
irreconcilable global forces with imperialist ambitions – Church under US
leadership, Islamic forces intent on establishing the rule of Sharia worldwide
with its operational epicentre in the middle-east Asia, and Communists under
Chinese leadership which sees itself as the successor of US in foreseeable
future are competing with one-another to establish their supremacy worldwide.
None of these three
forces are ideologically inclined to co-exist with the other, although physical
constraints force them to maintain a diplomatic veneer. India on the contrary
offers mutual respect and not just tolerance for the other. This attitude is
imperative to the success of world peace and will act as a buffer the
three imperialist ideologies that have open ambitions of world conquest.
India's cultural conquest of much of South Asia was a bloodless spiritual coup, inspired
from within and not imposed from without.
India, as Sri Aurobindo
wrote (and I hope), will rise from the ruins of the western civilization.
Comments
Post a Comment