Anti-Hinduism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Part of a series of articles on Discrimination

General forms Racism Sexism Ageism Religious intolerance Xenophobia

Specific forms Social Homophobia · Transphobia Ableism · Sizeism · Heightism · Adultism Misogyny · Misandry · Lookism Gerontophobia · Classism · Elitism

Against cultures: Americans Arabs Armenians Canadians Chinese Europeans Croats French Germans Greeks Indians Iranians Italians Japanese Polish Quebecers Roma Russians Serbs Turks

Against religions: Catholics Christians Hindus Jews Mormons Muslims Protestants

Manifestations Slavery · Racial profiling · Lynching Hate speech · Hate crime · Hate groups Genocide · Holocaust · Pogrom Ethnocide · Ethnic cleansing · Race war Religious persecution · Gay bashing Pedophobia · Ephebiphobia

Movements Discriminatory Aryanism · Neo-Nazism · Supremacism Kahanism Anti-discriminatory Abolitionism · Civil rights · Gay rights Women's/Universal suffrage · Men's rights Children's rights · Youth rights Disability rights · Inclusion Social model of disability · Autistic rights

Policies Discriminatory Segregation: Racial/Ethnic/Religious/Sexual Apartheid · Redlining · Internment Anti-discriminatory Emancipation · Civil rights · Desegregation Integration · Reservation · Reparations Affirmative action · Racial quota

Law Discriminatory Anti-miscegenation · Anti-immigration Alien and Sedition Acts · Nuremberg Laws Jim Crow laws · Black codes · Apartheid laws Anti-discriminatory List of anti-discrimination acts

Other forms Nepotism · Cronyism Colorism · Linguicism Ethnocentrism · Triumphalism Adultcentrism · Isolationism Economic discrimination

Related topics Prejudice · Supremacism · Intolerance Tolerance · Diversity · Multiculturalism Political correctness · Reverse discrimination Eugenics · Racialism This box: view • talk • edit

Anti-Hindu prejudice is a negative perception against people who practice Hinduism, Hindus and Indian or Hindu culture. This ideology is stated to be a form of religious intolerance. While stereotyping of Hindus in the west has decreased somewhat as a result of political activism of Hindus, it is possible to cultivate a negative perception of Hinduism by carefully conflating social evils as religious evils and portraying Hinduism as an evil religion. Western stereotypes of Hinduism do exist in academia and society,^[1] and hate-crimes against Hindus have risen in some European countries.

Because Hinduism tends to be naturally accepting of non-Hindu philosophies and practices, it can be hard to arise passions against Hinduism.^{[citation needed]} However Christian missionaries seeking to gain converts have persuaded tribal and poor communities in India that their problems are due to evils inherent in Hinduism.

There are several group within India and many working in western countries that are specifically anti-Hindu. In addition, anti-Hindu sentiments have been expressed by Muslims in Pakistan, Bangladesh, and by Fundamentalist Christian regimes in Fiji, leading to significant Persecution of Hindus in those regions, such as the 1971 Bangladesh atrocities by Pakistan, and the recent demolition of Hindu temples in Malaysia.

Contents 1 Anti-Hindu stereotypes 2 Historical instances of anti-Hindu views 2.1 During Islamic Rule in the Indian Subcontinent 2.1.1 Barrani 2.1.2 Babur 2.1.3 Aurangzeb 2.1.4 Tippu Sultan 2.2 During the Christian Invasion of Goa 2.3 During the British Raj 3 Contemporary instances of Anti-Hindu views 3.1 In the West 3.1.1 Academia 3.1.2 Society 3.2 In South Asia 3.2.1 Afghanistan 3.2.2 Pakistan 3.2.3 Bangladesh 3.2.4 India 3.3 Other Countries 3.3.1 South Africa 4 Anti-Hindu crimes 4.1 HAF report 5 Anti-Hindutva 6 See also 7 Further reading 8 Notes 9 Links

[edit] Anti-Hindu stereotypes

Part of a series on Hinduism
History · Deities
Denominations · Mythology
Beliefs & practices
Reincarnation · Moksha
Karma · Puja · Maya
Samsara · Dharma
Vedanta ·
Yoga · Ayurveda
Yuga · Vegetarianism
Bhakti
Scriptures
Upanishads · Vedas
Brahmana · Bhagavad Gita
Ramayana · Mahabharata
Purana · Aranyaka
Shikshapatri · Vachanamrut
Related topics
Dharmic Religions ·
Hinduism by country
Leaders · Devasthana
Caste system · Mantra
Glossary · Hindu festivals
Vigraha · Criticism
This box: view • talk • edit

Certain individuals, such as those associated with the Hindu right, accuse some personalities, organizations, and even certain academics in India, as well as in western countries, have used often use the "Caste, Cows and Curry" stereotype against Hindus, ^[2].^[2].

The Indian Caste System, a social stratification system in South Asia which has been criticized for its discriminatory problems, is uniquely blamed on Hindus and the religion of Hinduism. This is a common stereotype, as adherents of other religions such as Islam and Christianity also practice Caste segregations in India (for details, see Caste system among South Asian Muslims) and is generally regarded in India as a social issue, rather than a religious one. Anti-Hindu polemicists often deliberately muddle or confuse this distinction in order to defame and denigrate the Hindu people.^{[original research?]} Several organizations in India and abroad have been criticized by Hindu advocacy groups for these types of attacks.

The devotion to bovine animals (regarded as holy in Hinduism) is also used as a pretext to mock the Hindu people by many in the west. In addition, the Hindu tradition of cremating their dead is used to mock the people^{[original research?]}.

Anti-Hindu attacks often accuse Hindus of being "Blasphemers" for committing "idolatry" and "polytheism" (Hinduism is more accurately described as henotheistic than polytheistic). Some Anti-Hindus have a mistaken interpretation of Hinduism, relating it more to Ancient polytheistic religions as opposed to one that relates to enlightenment or moksha. This accusation is prevalent among adherents of monotheistic religions like Islam and Christianity. Many Christian missionaries, particularly those of Fundamentalist Christianity, denigrate Hindu deities as "evil" or "demonic". Many advocacy groups in the west, such as the Hindu American Foundation and the Simon Wiesenthal Center have spoken against anti-Hindu bigotry and prejudice.

[edit] Historical instances of anti-Hindu views

See Also:Persecution of Hindus

[edit] During Islamic Rule in the Indian Subcontinent

India has historically been subject to Islamic rule from the period of Muhammad bin Qasim to the Delhi Sultanate and the Mughal Empire, as well as smaller kingdoms like the Bahmani Sultanate and Tipu Sultans kingdom of Mysore. In almost all of those regimes, Hindus have had an inherently inferior status to the Muslim overlords. Hindus were first awarded the status of the "people of the book" (ahl-al-kitab) under bin-Qasim.Islamic law demands that when under Muslim rule "polytheists" or "infidels" be treated as dhimmis (from the Arab term) ahl-al-dhimma.^[3]The writer Bat Ye'or introduced the modern word Dhimmitude as a generic indication of this Islamic attitude. Dhimmis were granted "protection" of life, the right to residence in designated areas, worship, and work or trade, and exemption from Muslim religious duties, personal law and tax on certain conditions such as paying the poll (jizyah) and land taxes as set by Muslim authorities (and mandated by Mansabdars and Zamindars). At the same time they were subject to various restrictions in relation to Muslims and Islam.

It can be argued that while, in theory, the idea of dhimmitude was anti-Hindu, in practice, the Muslim rulers were more pragmatic and did not wish to disparage or oppress educated , literate and often industrious Hindus who could be used in their service. Muslim conquerors such as Muhammad bin-Qasim was believed to develop more liberal attitudes to towards Hindus as his regime developed over time.Also, the Muslim Emperor Akbar, had a Hindu prime minister Birbal in his employ, whom he regarded very highly.Akbar was well-known to exhibit religious tolerance and pluralism during his reign.In addition, Muslim rulers such as Tipu Sultan, had Hindus in his employ as well.

During the Muslim conquest of South Asia, Muslim scholars would often chronicle the conquests of Hindu regions, the desecration of Hindu temples and the massacres of Hindu populations with gusto and glee. Works such as the Chach-Nama, Baburnama, Tarikh-i-Yamini,Tarikh-i-Feroze-Shahi and others describe how "polytheists" were "rightly killed" and honor bestowed upon Muslims and Islam. It can be argued that some degree of poetic license should be taken into account in these writings.

Several Islamic scholars, theologians and Emperors held virulently anti-Hindu stances during the Islamic invasion of India. They regarded Hindus as "infidels" who had to be slaughtered with no mercy. In particular, the Arab invaders in the 8th century held anti-Hindu attitudes, such as the testament of the superior of Muhammad bin-Qasim, Hajjaj, who quoted the Quran to justify the slaughter of Hindus.^[4]

[edit] Barrani

Under the reign of Muhammad bin Tughlaq, the Muslim cleric Ziauddin Barrani wrote several works, such as the Fatwa-i-Jahandari, which contained disparaging statements against Hindus. Barrani has been described as a "fanatical protagonist of Islam"^[5] and wrote that there should be "an all-out struggle against Hinduism", advocating a militant and dogmatic religiosity.^[6] He developed a system of religious elitism to that effect.^[6]

[edit] Babur

The first ruler of the Islamic Mughal Empire, Zahiruddin Muhammad Babur expressed anti-Hindu views in the Bāburnāma:

“

Hindustan is a place of little charm. There is no beauty in its people, no graceful social intercourse, no poetic talent or understanding, no etiquette, nobility or manliness. The arts and crafts have no harmony or symmetry. There are no good horses, meat, grapes, melons or other fruit. There is no ice, cold water, good food or bread in the markets. There are no baths and no madrasas. There are no candles, torches or candlesticks.[7]

”

The comments made by the Emperor Babur, echo in the slighest terms the disparaging and often hateful opinion that some of the Mughals had towards Hindustan and in particular Hindus.

[edit] Aurangzeb

The Mughal emperor Aurangzeb was known to be a fanatical anti-Hindu and destroyed many Hindu temples and other places of worship, as well as the genocide of hundreds of thousands of Hindus. Aurangzeb adopted various measures to promote Islam in its wholesome moral standards. In many instances he even undertook demolition of Hindu temples in his effort to subdue influence o f the Hindu religion. He issued regulations and imposed religious taxes to prevent the progress of his rival religion. The imposition of Jizya on the Hindus in 1679 which was an anti Hindu policy resulted in the rise of the Rajput in a revolt in 1669. This struggle continued till 1681 when Aurangzeb made peace with the Rajputs.The other sect affected by the Anti-Hindu policy of Aurangzeb were the Satnamis. Their revolt was crushed by Aurangzeb. Next was the revolt of the Jats of Mathura which was an opposition to the policy and oppression under Aurangzeb. Though they were suppressed in the early period they carried on the struggle till the death of Aurangzeb.^[8]

[edit] Tippu Sultan

The attitudes of Muslim ruler Tippu Sultan have been criticized as anti-Hindu. While some Marxist historians claim that he had an egalitarian attitude towards Hindus and was harsh towards them only when politically expedient,^[9] others, including British scholars of the period, noted a systematic hatred of Hindus in Tipu. Newspaper reports from the 1780s confirm that Tippu was a cruel ruler.[5] In the first part of his reign in particular he appears to have been notably more aggressive and religiously doctrinaire than his father, Haidar Ali.^[10] There are several historians^[11] who claim that Tippu Sultan was a religious persecutor of Hindus. In 1780 CE he declared himself to be the Padishah or Emperor of Mysore, and struck coinage in his own name without reference to the reigning Mughal Emperor Shah Alam II. H. D. Sharma writes that in his correspondence with other Islamic rulers such as Shah Zaman of Afghanistan, Tippu Sultan used this title and declared that he intended to establish an Islamic Empire in the entire country, along the lines of the Mughal Empire which was at its nadir during the period in question.^[12] His alliance with the French was supposedly aimed at achieving this goal by driving his main rivals, the British, out of the subcontinent.

In addition, H.D. Sharma points out that, contrary to the claims of other scholars such as Mohibbul Hasan, he did not carry out the conversions as a punitive measure for rebellion, but as part of a campaign to eradicate Hinduism from his kingdom.^[12] In addition, he cites examples such as Tippu's conquest of Malabar in 1788 CE, when he appointed a "Shaikh ul-Islam" in each village to carry out forced conversions in an organized manner. This was primarily done to the well-educated Nair Hindus in the region, including those in Coorg, as Tippu perceived their intellect to be a threat to his Islamic rule.^[12] C. K. Kareem also notes that Tippu Sultan issued an edict for the destruction of Hindu temples in Kerala.^[13]

Historians such as Sharma cites letters that Tippu wrote to the Ottoman Sultan in 1792 CE as proof of his claims of Tippu's religious persecution. In the letters Tippu expressed his disdain for Hindus as "polytheists" and "infidels", as well as his intent to Islamize his territories.^[12]Sharma further states that Tippu's disdain for Hindus manifested in the fact that he ranked his army according to Muslim Castes, with the Arab-descended Ashraf castes at the top ranks, the converted "Ajlaf" castes at the middle ranks, and Hindus at the lowest rank. Mir Hussain Ali Khan Kirmani wrote in his Neshan-e Haidari that Tippu "developed a great aversion to Brahmins, Hindus and other tribes and he did not consider any but the people of Islam to be his friends, and, therefore, on all accounts, his chief object was to promote and provide for them. At this time he tried to eliminate Hindu worship from his territory. He confiscated funds from the temples being intended to balance the loss of revenue derived so far from intoxicating substances, the production of which he has banned earlier." Tippu also changed the names of towns from Dravidian names to Urdu ones. He destroyed Calicut because it was named after Kali, then depopulated the surrounding areas to repopulate the renamed town of "Ferozabad". The Hindus "returned jubilant" when the town was liberated.^[12]

Historian Hayavadana C. Rao wrote about Tippu in his encyclopaedic work on the History of Mysore. He asserted that Tippu's "religious fanaticism and the excesses committed in the name of religion, both in Mysore and in the provinces, stand condemned for all time. His bigotry, indeed, was so great that it precluded all ideas of toleration". He further asserts that the acts of Tippu that were constructive towards Hindus were largely political and ostentatious rather than an indication of genuine tolerance.^[14]

Whilst no scholar has denied that, in common with most rulers of his period, Tippu’s campaigns were often characterised by great brutality, some historians claim that this was not exclusively religiously motivated, and did not amount to a consistent anti-Hindu policy. Brittlebank, Hasan, Chetty, Habib and Saletare amongst others argue that stories of Tippu's religious persecution of Hindus and Christians are largely derived from the work of early British authors such as Kirkpatrick^[15] and Wilks,^[16] whom they do not consider to be entirely reliable.^[17] A. S. Chetty argues that Wilks’ account in particular cannot be trusted.^[18] Irfan Habib and Mohibbul Hasan argue that these early British authors had a strong vested interest in presenting Tippu Sultan as a tyrant from whom the British had "liberated" Mysore.^[19] This assessment is echoed by Brittlebank in her recent work^[20]

[edit] During the Christian Invasion of Goa

During the Goa Inquisition, thousands of Goan Hindus were massacred by Christian missionaries, starting from the year 1560. The inquisition was proposed by St. Francis Xavier, who held the anti-Hindu view that Hindu temples and places of worship had to be destroyed.^[21]

[edit] During the British Raj

During the British rule of the Indian Subcontinent, several evangelical Christian missionaries spread anti-Hindu propaganda in India during the 19th century as a means to convert them to Christianity. Examples include missionaries like Abbe J.A. Dubois, who wrote that, in order to make a "New race of Hindus", the foundations of Hindu civilization have to be undermined, and they be turned into "Atheists and barbarians".^[22]

In particular, journalist and writer Rudyard Kipling was known for his intensely disparaging views against Hinduism. The same was true for several Englishmen such as Lord Macaulay, and European colonialists such as Max Mueller whose anti-Hindu views created a negationist social mindset in India that prevails to this day.

In Charles Grant highly influential "Observations on the ...Asiatic subjects of Great Britain" (1796),^[23] Grant criticized the Orientalists for being too respectful to Indian culture and religion. His work tried to determine the Hindu's "true place in the moral scale", and he alleged that the Hindus are "a people exceedingly depraved".

Lord Macaulay, who introduced English education into India, claimed: "I have never found one among them who could deny that a single shelf of a good European library was worth the whole native literature of India and Arabia."^[24] He wrote that Arabic and Sanskrit works on medicine contain "medical doctrines which would disgrace an English Farrier - Astronomy, which would move laughter in girls at an English boarding school - History, abounding with kings thirty feet high, and reigns thirty thousand years long - and Geography made up of seas of treacle and seas of butter".^[25] He advocated to create a middle Anglicised class that was "Indian in blood and colour, but English in taste, in opinions, in morals, and in intellect".^[25] This class of anglicized Indians would then in turn anglicize the Indian people.

One of the most influential historians of India during the British Empire, James Mill was criticized for being prejudiced against Hindus. His work "History of British India" (1817) may be the "single most important source of British Indophobia and hostility to Orientalism".^[26] The Indologist H.H. Wilson wrote that the tendency of Mill's work is "evil".^[27] Mill claimed that both Indians and Chinese people are cowardly, unfeeling and mendacious. Both Mill and Grant attacked Orientalist scholarship that was too respectful of Indian culture: "It was unfortunate that a mind so pure, so warm in the pursuit of truth, and so devoted to oriental learning, as that of Sir William Jones, should have adopted the hypothesis of a high state of civilization in the principal countries of Asia".^[28] Karl Marx's writings were also prejudiced against Indians.^[29]

[edit] Contemporary instances of Anti-Hindu views

[edit] In the West

Elements in the Western Academia have also been criticized for defaming and denigrating Hinduism with the purpose of a political agenda to meant to segregate and marginalize the growing Hindu communities in the west, in much the same way that anti-Semitism has evolved in the same part of the world.^{[original research?]} Accusations of slander and racist libel against Hindus such as those of Wendy Doniger and Michael Witzel^[30] have achieved relative prominence in certain circles in recent years.

[edit] Academia

Claims of Bias against Hindus in South Asian Studies have often been made. Such real or perceived bias can imply old-fashioned and prejudiced outsider interpretations of Eastern cultures and peoples:

The portrayal of the Hindu God Rama and the Puranic text Ramayana by academics such as Susan Wadley has been criticized by other academics such as David Gray as "partisan and political readings of the epic, as well as outright inflammatory 'cheap shots' at a sacred text". Wadley's works have been criticized for portraying Rama as "an invading-outsider, imperialist, oppressor, misogynist, and a racist and that the workbook sounds more like the rant of an over zealous racist than that of an objective and neutral scholar".^[31]

In addition, RISA scholars are accused of holding the Hindu diaspora in the United States with contempt and making derogatory remarks about Hindus and Hinduism that are "patently false".^[32] RISA is also criticized by the same organisations and individuals for stressing on obscure practices within Hinduism that were never widely implemented (such as the Ashwamedha horse sacrifice) in what they portray as a 'deliberate' ploy to characterise Hinduism as a "repulsive religion" while almost completely ignoring normative Hindu scripture and normative Hindu practices.^[32]

The Hindu American Foundation, together with organizations like the American Jewish Committee, have worked to counter biases against Hindus and Jews in college campuses like Stanford University. Both groups claim to have identified cases of academic hostility against both minorities.^[33]

[edit] Society

By the late 19th century, fear had already begun in North America over Chinese immigration supplying cheap labor to lay railroad tracks, mostly in California and elsewhere in the West Coast. In xenophobic jargon common in the day, ordinary workers, newspapers, and politicians uniformly opposed this "Yellow Peril". The common cause to eradicate Asians from the workforce gave rise to the Asiatic Exclusion League. When the fledging Indian community of mostly Punjabi Sikhs settled in California, the xenophobia expanded to combat not only the East Asian Yellow Peril, but now the immigrants from British India, the Turban Tide, equally referred to as the Hindoo Invasion (sic). Although "Hindu" is the correct spelling (and Sikhs do not identify themselves as Hindus), the spelling "Hindoo" was popular at the time.^[34][35][36]

The rise of the Indian American community in the United States has brought about some isolated incidences of attacks on them, as has been the case with many minority groups in the United States. Attacks specific to Hindus in the United States stem from what is often referred to as the "racialization of religion" among Americans, a process that begins when certain phenotypical features associated with a group and attached to race in popular discourse become associated with a particular religion or religions.The racialization of Hinduism in American perception has led to perceiving Hindus as a separate group and contributes to prejudices against them.^[37]

In addition, there have been anti-Hindu views that are specific to the religion of Hinduism as well as mistaken racial perceptions. Christian televangelists such as Pat Robertson in the United States has made remarks that are regarded as anti-Hindu, if not racist,^[38] denouncing Hinduism as "demonic" and evoking similar canards against Hinduism. These remarks were widely condemned and rebutted by Indian Americans and many non-partisan advocacy groups.^[39]Other Fundamentalist Christian evangelicals such as Albert Mohler have defended the anti-Hindu remarks and made disparaging statements about Hinduism as "satanic", laced together with anti-Buddhist and Islamophobic rhetoric.^[40]

In 2001, an American talk show host Tony Brown, made several derogatory anti-Hindu remarks in his talk show on WLS 890 AM that began with the concern among American workers about the influx of software engineers from India. he evoked anti-Hindu canards such as exaggerating the importance of the Caste System in Hinduism, and made patent falsehoods about Human Rights in India. Protests by Indian-American community leaders led to the radio host publicly apologizing for his remarks against Hindus and Hinduism. In his apology, Brown said:

“

The statements I made were derived from either books or articles that I read. Still, I had not considered the possibility of bigots using the information to persecute the Hindu minority in this country.That does not excuse me from the pain that I have caused by not being more circumspect.[41]

”

After his apology, Brown also invited Swami Atmajnanananda of the Washington branch of the Ramakrishna Mission and an Indian journalist based in Chicago, J V Lakshmana Rao, to participate in the talk show. Atmajnanananda said one must draw a distinction between caste and casteism. He said:

“

The assumption that Hindus are inherently racists is dangerous.Caste does not play a role in one's occupation any more. One should not use the pitfalls of the Indian culture to attack Hinduism.[41]

”

Refuting Brown's statement that lower castes were being persecuted in India, Rao spoke of affirmative actions in favor of the lower castes by the Government of India.

On April 28, 2004, an article on the Denver Post, authored by thoracic and general surgeon and a commentator on National Public Radio in USA Pius Kamau, portrayed the entire Indian community and the Hindus with "bigoted views". Widespread letter-writing and protests from the Indian American community, the Denver post responded by conveying the writer and editor's apologies.^[42]

On May 6 of that year, Denver Post also published a strong rebuttal to the original article By P.K. Vedanthan titled "Healing ethnic wounds".^[42]

In 2005, The Hindu American Foundation protested against the defamation of Hinduism in an article in the San Francisco Chronicle alleging the false anti-Hindu canard of rape being a "just punishment for criminal behavior". The author removed the statement following the protest.^[43]

In the same year, HAF also protested against an anti-Hindu article published in the Los Angeles Times where the writer, Paul Watson also equates Hinduism with the worship of cows and snakes.^[44]

It has been alleged that Hindus are mis-represented and stereotyped by other Indian non-Hindu organizations in the United States, such as the Friends of South Asia. Many such organizations that have been accused of spreading hate-literature against Hindus have been criticized by Hindu Advocacy groups of being ideologically biased in favor of Liberal Socialism, which has been identified by many to be in opposition to religion in general. However, it has also been alleged that South Asian organizations in the US that defame Hinduism are funded and supported by several Islamist organizations prevalent in Pakistan, Afghanistan and Kashmir, as well as Christian Missionary organizations. These organizations have generally an anti-Indian, pro-Communist agenda.

The Russian Orthodox Church has recently endorsed several anti-Hindu remarks, referring to the Hindu deity Krishna as an "evil demon". For details, see Hinduism in Russia.

[edit] In South Asia

[edit] Afghanistan

The Taliban regime in Afghanistan was known for its extremist attitudes and views on Islam, including their strict enforcement of Islamic sharia law in the society. The Taliban regime declared that Hindus would be required to wear badges in public identifying themselves as Hindus, ostensibly to "protect them". This was part of the Taliban's plan to segregate "un-Islamic" and "idolatrous" communities from Islamic ones.^[45]

The decree was regarded as an anti-Hindu one by several lawmakers and congressmen in the United States, as well as by the Indian Government.^[46] There were widespread protests against this decree in both India and the United States.In the United States, chairman of the Anti-Defamation League Abraham Foxman compared the decree to the practices of Nazi Germany, where Jews were required to wear labels identifying them as such.^[47] In the United States, congressmen wore yellow badges on the floor of the Senate during the debate as a demonstration of their solidarity with the Hindu minority in Afghanistan.^[46]

[edit] Pakistan

In Pakistan, anti-Hindu sentiments and beliefs are widely held among many sections of the population. There is a general stereotype against Hindus in Pakistan. Hindus and Jews are regarded as "miserly".^[48] Also,Hindus are often regarded as "Kaffirs" and blamed for "causing all the problems in Pakistan".^[49]Islamic fundamentalist groups operating within Pakistan and neighboring Afghanistan have broadcasted or disseminated anti-Hindu propaganda among the masses,^[50] referring to Hindus as "Hanood" and blaming them for "collaborating with the foreigners" against the people of the region.

The Muttahida Majlis-i-Amal (MMA), a coalition of Islamist political parties in Pakistan, calls for the increased Islamization of the government and society, specifically taking an anti-Hindu stance.The MMA leads the opposition in the national assembly, held a majority in the NWFP Provincial Assembly, and was part of the ruling coalition in Balochistan. However, some members of the MMA made efforts to eliminate their rhetoric against Hindus.^[51]

The public school curriculum in Pakistan was Islamized during the 1980s. This included the adoption of a number of textbooks that included derogatory remarks against minority religious groups, particularly Hindus and Jews, and the generalized teaching of religious intolerance as acceptable. The government of Pakistan claims to undertake a major revision to eliminate such teachings and to remove Islamic teaching from secular subjects.^[51] The bias in Pakistani textbooks was also documented by Y. Rosser (2003). She wrote that

“

in the past few decades, social studies textbooks in Pakistan have been used as locations to articulate the hatred that Pakistani policy makers have attempted to inculcate towards their Hindu neighbours”, and that as a result "in the minds of generations of Pakistanis, indoctrinated by the 'Ideology of Pakistan' are lodged fragments of hatred and suspicion.

”

(Rosser 2003)^[52]

The bias in Pakistani textbooks was studied by Rubina Saigol, Pervez Hoodbhoy, K. K. Aziz, I. A. Rahman, Mubarak Ali, A. H. Nayyar, Ahmed Saleem, Y. Rosser and others.

A study by Nayyar & Salim (2003) that was conducted with 30 experts of Pakistan's education system, found that the textbooks contain statements that seek to create hate against Hindus. There was also an emphasis on Jihad, Shahadat, wars and military heroes. The study reported that the textbooks also had a lot of gender-biased stereotypes. Some of the problems in Pakistani textbooks cited in the report were:

“

Insensitivity to the existing religious diversity of the nation”; "Incitement to militancy and violence, including encouragement of Jehad and Shahadat”; a “glorification of war and the use of force”; "Inaccuracies of fact and omissions that serve to substantially distort the nature and significance of actual events in our history"; “Perspectives that encourage prejudice, bigotry and discrimination towards fellow citizens, especially women and religious minorities, and other towards nations” and “Omission of concepts ... that could encourage critical self awareness among students”. (Nayyar & Salim 2003).The Pakistani Curriculum document for classes K-V stated in 1995 that "at the completion of Class-V, the child should be able to "Understand Hindu-Muslim differences and the resultant need for Pakistan.

”

[pg154]

A more recent textbook published in Pakistan titled "A Short History of Pakistan" edited by Ishtiaq Hussain Qureshi has been heavily criticized by academic peer-reviewers for anti-Hindu biases and prejudices that are consistent with Pakistani nationalism, where Hindus are portrayed as "villains" and Muslims as "victims" living under the "disastrous Hindu rule" and "betraying the Muslims to the British", characterizations that academic reviewers fond "disquieting" and having a "warped subjectivity".^[53][54][55]

The Government of Pakistan does not restrict religious publishing; however, the Government restricts the right to freedom of speech with regard to religion. Ameer Hamza, a leader of the banned terrorist group Lashkar-e-Toiba, wrote a highly derogatory book about Hinduism in 1999 called "Hindu Ki Haqeeqat" ("Reality of (a) Hindu"); he was not prosecuted by the Government.^[56]

Several Islamic clerics in Pakistan have broadcasted anti-Hindu sentiments, such as Sayyid Abul Ala Maududi, founder of the Jamaat-e-Islami in Pakistan, who has gone so far as to criticize moderate Muslims in the Jamiat Ulema-e-Hind for their composite nationalist theory which "exposed Muslim India to the serious dangers of religio-cultural absorption into Hinduism".

[edit] Bangladesh

In Bangladesh, the ruling Bangladesh National Party is regarded as an anti-Hindu party, and reportedly encourages anti-Hindu views and sentiments among the Muslim majority. Prominent political leaders frequently fall back on "Hindu bashing" in an attempt to appeal to extremist sentiment and to stir up communal passions. In one of the most notorious utterances of a mainstream Bangladeshi figure, the current Prime Minister Khaleda Zia, while leader of the opposition in 1996, declared that the country was at risk of hearing "uludhhwani" (a Hindu custom involving women's ululation) from mosques, replacing the azaan (Muslim call to prayer) (eg, see Agence-France Press report of 18 November 1996, "Bangladesh opposition leader accused of hurting religious sentiment").

Even the supposedly secular Awami League is not immune from this kind of scare-mongering. The current leader of the opposition, Sheikh Hasina, while Prime Minister, was alleged to have accused Bangladeshi Hindu leaders in New York of having divided loyalties with "one foot in India and one in Bangladesh". Successive events such as this have contributed to a feeling of tremendous insecurity among the Hindu minority.^[57]

The fundamentalists and right-wing parties such as the Bangladesh Nationalist Party and Jatiya Party often portray Hindus as being sympathetic to India, making accusations of dual loyalty and allegations of transferring economic resources to India, contributing to a widespread perception that Bangladeshi Hindus are disloyal to the state. Also, the right wing parties claim the Hindus to be backing the Awami League.^[58]

As widely documented in international media, Bangladesh authorities have had to increase security to enable Bangladeshi Hindus to worship freely^[59] following widespread attacks on places of worship and devotees.

[edit] India

Anti-Hindu sentiments in India are expressed by extremist elements in the Neo-Buddhist movement, who regard Hindus as inherently inferior to them. Most Neo-Buddhists are Dalits who have converted to Buddhism. The centuries-long mistreatment of the Dalits in Indian society are often exploited by Neo-Buddhist leaders to rake up prejudices and hatreds against Hindu people. Neo-Buddhist Personalities such as Kancha Ilaiah and Udit Raj are often accused of anti-Hindu sentiments due to their derogatory remarks against Hinduism and incitements to violence against Hindus.

Anti-Hindu sentiments also come from far-left groups who support Islamic Terrorism and Islamic Fundamentalism against Hindus. Islamist groups who have anti-Hindu views include Students Islamic Movement of India, terrorist groups like Lashkar-e-Toiba.

Fundamentalist Christian missionary organizations spread anti-Hindu propaganda in order to incite people into converting to Christianity.In 2006, a Kerala based Christian evangelist named M.G. Mathew released an anti-Hindu book titled 'Haqeeqat' (Hindustani for 'reality') and had Christian Fundamentalist organizations like the All-India Christian Council distribute the text in the Indian state of Rajasthan. The book attacked Hindu and Jain beliefs and practices and was widely criticized as a propaganda tool created for missionary purposes. The book is presently banned by the Indian government (for details see: Haqeeqat).

In addition, extremist fringes within the broader movement for the legitimate emancipation for the Dalits, such as Dalit Voice have expressed anti-Hindu views and sentiments, demanding the eradication of Hindus and expressing support for various Islamist groups around the world, as well as support for anti-semitic ideologies such as holocaust denial.They have also alleged that Indian Jews, together with Jews in the west, are engaged in a systematic conspiracy with Hindu Brahmins in India to "crush Muslims, Blacks and India's [ largely Hindu ] Dalits".^[60]

[edit] Other Countries

[edit] South Africa

South Africa is home to a small Hindu minority. In 2006, the son of a firebrand Islamic cleric named Ahmed Deedat, circulated a DVD that denounced South African Hindus. The elder Deedat, former head of the Arab funded "Islamic Propagation Centre International" (IPCI), had previously circulated an anti-Hindu video in the 80's where he said that Indian Muslims were 'fortunate' that their Hindu forefathers 'saw the light' and converted to Islam when Muslim rulers dominated some areas of India. His video was widely criticized. While Hindus in South Africa have largely ignored the new anti-Hindu DVD circulated by Deedat Junior, he has been severely criticized by local Muslims, including other members of the IPCI.The IPCI said in a statement that Yusuf Deedat did not represent the organisation in any way. Deedat Junior, undeterred by the opposition from his own brethren, continues to circulate the material.He has placed advertisements in newspapers inviting anyone to collect a free copy from his residence to see for themselves "what the controversy is about".^[61]

[edit] Anti-Hindu crimes

See Also: Persecution of Hindus

Recently, hate crimes against Hindus have risen in European countries such as the United Kingdom and Russia. In the UK, many Hindus have been assaulted and killed. However, a strong undercurrent of deliberate Hinduphobia does exist in many radical fringe elements of British society, for example, certain members of the British National Party and various Neo-Nazi groups that have been classified by advocacy organizations such as the anti-defamation league as hate groups. In Russia, hate crimes against Hindus has risen both due to racial ideologies perpetrated by rising Neo-Nazi factions, as well as religious intolerance exhibited by some elements of the Russian Orthodox Church.

Hate crime statistics against Hindus in North American countries are unavailable. However, it is believed that sporadic bouts of communal and institutional hatred against Hindus have occurred, though their frequency may have decreased in recent years. In the late 1980s a Jersey City street gang calling themselves the "Dotbusters" targeted, threatened and attacked South Asians, specifically Hindus.^[62]

On July 20, 2006, The Hindu American Foundation represented Hindus as a part of a coalition of civil rights, educational and religious submitting comments to the Department of Justice on its implementation of the Hate Crime Statistics Act (HCSA). Enacted by Congress in 1990, the HCSA requires the Justice Department to acquire data on crimes which "manifest prejudice based on race, religion, sexual orientation, or ethnicity" from law enforcement agencies across the country and to publish an annual report of its the findings.^[63]

[edit] HAF report

The Hindu American Foundation, an advocacy group for Hindus, released a report in 2005 on the status of the human rights of Hindus, mainly in Bangladesh, Pakistan, and the Kashmir valley. The report attempts to increase awareness of anti-Hindu views propagated and used to justify violations of the human rights of many Hindus in the region. The report introduces as:

“

Human rights are by definition universal. Hence, in an ideal world there would be no need to write a separate report on the human rights of Hindus, or for that matter any other group. In the real world, unfortunately, there is a gaping hole when it comes to the awareness of human rights for Hindus, mainly in Bangladesh, Pakistan and in the Kashmir valley.[64]

”

The 71-page report compiles media coverage and firsthand accounts of human rights violations perpetrated against Hindus because of their religious identity. The incidents are documented, often quoting from well-known international human rights organizations.^[64]The Hindu American Foundation presented the report to the co-chairs of the US Congressional Caucus on India and Indian-Americans, Representatives Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, a Republican, and Gary Ackerman, a Democrat. Both of these members of Congress endorsed it.^[65]Rabbi Abraham Cooper, Associate Dean and co-founder of the Simon Wiesenthal Center, praised the HAF for the report.

“

The Simon Wiesenthal Center welcomes this report which will help the international community and Non-governmental Organizations to have a broader understanding of the human rights situation in that important region of the world.[65]

”

Several academics on campuses around the U.S. also reviewed this year’s report. Florida International University Professor of religious Studies, Nathan Katz, remarked on the promulgation of various anti-Hindu sentiments recorded in the report:

“

“This report by the Hindu American Foundation…is a real eye-opener”.“As a minority in Islamic societies that consider them to be ‘idolaters,’ Hindus in Bangladesh, Pakistan and Afghanistan face unimaginable persecution routinely.[65]

”

The report documents the long history of anti-Hindu atrocities in Bangladesh, a topic that many Indians and Indian governments over the years have preferred not to acknowledge. Such atrocities, including targeted attacks against temples, open theft of Hindu property, and rape of young Hindu women and enticements to convert to Islam, have increased sharply in recent years after the Jamat-e-Islami joined the coalition government led by the Bangladesh National Party.

The report concludes with:

“

Some Indians may feel uncomfortable with this report because they do not want to be reminded about the problems of Hindus outside their milieu. And for some in the Indian intelligentsia, it is a badge of honour to distance themselves from these pogroms as a mark of their supposed enlightenment, oddly trashing their own ethos in the process. Many more Indians are reluctant to speak out against atrocities committed against Hindus for fear of being labeled "communal". Merely speaking about human rights for Hindus is for them a form of communalism

”

The people whose persecution is amply documented in this report are being persecuted because they are Hindu, not because they are poor or because of their political views. Human rights activists in Bangladesh and Pakistan, many of whom are not Hindus, have painstakingly documented the violations of basic human rights of Hindus in their country.

[edit] Anti-Hindutva

Many Anti-Hindu groups and organizations prefer to call themselves Anti-Hindutva, claiming to oppose the alleged ideology of Hindu Nationalism in India. Although some organizations discuss the three big problems with the Hindutva movement -- abrogation of Article 370, Uniform Civil Code, and the restoration of a temple at Ayodhya -- others use the criticism of Hindutva as an excuse to attack Hindus in general.

[edit] See also

• Hinduism
• Persecution of Hindus
• Dalitstan
• Anti-semitism
• Antiziganism
• Self-hatred
• Muslim League Attack on Sikhs and Hindus in the Punjab 1947

[edit] Further reading

• Talib, Gurbachan (1950). Muslim League Attack on Sikhs and Hindus in the Punjab 1947. India: Shiromani Gurdwara Prabandhak Committee. Online 1 Online 2 Online 3

[edit] Notes

[edit] Links

• Crimes against Hindus, Sikhs on the rise in UK: Report
• Introduction of "decadent" Hindu culture in Nagaland, anti-Hindu propaganda
• 'HAQEEQAT' has denigrated Hindu deities
• Strategic Planning For Evangelization of Hindus through misinformation and propaganda
• Row over Krishna temple in Moscow
• World Hindus furious as Russian Archbishop calls Lord Krishna an ‘evil demon’
• Actual Letter to Moscow Mayor from Russian Archbishop calling the Hindu God Lord Krishna a Satan or Demon and forbidding the construction of the Hindu Temple in Moscow, Russia
• Petition to Govt. of Russia, USA , India and UNO to safeguard the rights of Hindus in Russia and their right to build a place of worship Temple.