Cricket scandal part of psy-ops against Pakistan

 Efforts by American Muslims to influence US Policy

Dr.Omar Khalidi at Maulana Azad National Urdu University.

[14dec'09 6.45pm](Press-release-MANUU) Hyderabad:- Muslims in United States of America are law abiding and disciplined  citizens of that country. In the context of Islamo-Phobia and hate crimes Muslims are making concerted efforts to influence the American Domestic and Foreign Policy. Dr. Omar Khalidi Historian associated with Massachusetts Institute of Technology, expressed these views today while delivering a lecture on “Muslims in America: The Obama Election and After” at Maulana Azad National Urdu University. Directorate of Distance Education and American Consulate Hyderabad, jointly organized the lecture. Prof. K.R. Iqbal Ahmed Vice-Chancellor I/c presided over the function. Dr. Omar Khalidi who is of Hyderabadi origin, made it clear that Barak Obama’s Election as president of United States has not changed its foreign policy. United States is a country which is run by institutions. It is not possible for any individual to change the domestic and foreign policy at once. Referring to the efforts made by American Muslims post 9/11 Dr. Khalidi said Muslims in United States are pro-active in presenting their image in a better way. They are quite diligent in responding the media criticism and bias. Due to their interactive approach they are now being heard in think tanks and policy forums. According to Dr. Khalidi there is an ample scope to present your views with the support of facts, figures and logic. However reflection of mere emotions and sensitivities is not enough. The contemporary world is not willing to accept when you just say that Muslims are oppressed. We have to speak in Universal Language and Terminology. Muslims can use the terms of human rights and economic right to augur their case. Universal Language of Human Rights, Justice and Equality is heard about. US Administration has a lot of good elements. Majority of American people are not biased against the Muslims. On the contrary they have great interest in Islam. Dr. Khalidi pointed out that the interfaith dialogues started by the American Muslims are evolving keen interest from every section of the society. Showering praise on freedom of speech & expression, and the level of tolerance in American Society he also admitted that in United States Muslims have been facing hardship on airports and at border crossings. At the end of the lecture Dr. Khalidi opined that India, like US is a great Democracy and the Muslims should avail maximum liberty within the limits of law. Dr. Salma Farooqui Associate Professor welcomed the gathering and introduced the guest. Mr. C.M. Eshwariah Registrar I/c, Prof. S.A. Wahab, Ms. Juliet Wurr (I/c Consul General U.S, Hyderabad), Teachers and students attended the lecture. Dr. Khalidi also answered to the questions posed by the audience on the occasion. Mr. Abid Abdul Wasay proposed thee vote of thanks.       

*HINDUISING INDIA: SECULARISM IN PRACTICE *

*OMAR KHALIDI*

*ABSTRACT*

*Of all the postcolonial states of Africa, Asia, and the Middle East, India
is regarded in academia and media as a secular state. This paper challenges
the academic and media consensus of the notion that India is a secular
state. It does so by marshalling empirical evidence that far from being
state practicing neutrality between religious affiliations of Indian society
or equidistance from all religions, the Indian state is actually and
directly involved in Hinduization of the country. It does so by promoting
Hinduism through “reform” and favoritism at state expense.  While the
constitution guarantees educational and cultural autonomy as well as
religious freedom, in practice, there are widespread and systematic
violations by state institutions. In public employment, the state follows
discriminatory policies to perpetuate Hindu majority by restricting
religious freedom. The discriminatory policies are most visible in
affirmative action policies and recruitment in the army.  Contrary to some
academic writings, the paper establishes that Hinduization of Indian state
is not only associated with the votaries of Hindutva represented by a
“family,” parivar of Hindu militant groups.  The notion of India as a Hindu
state predates the creation of postcolonial state in 1947, and was inherent
in the militant, right wing of Congress Party that perceived Christians and
Muslims as foreigners.  There is, the paper demonstrates, major continuity
between the educational, cultural and employment policies pursued by Indian
state regardless of party in power. The paper is based on primary Indian
sources and interviews in India and abroad. *

*Political secularism may be defined as the separation of religious
activities from those of the state, customarily referred to as "the
separation of church and state” in the west. Secularism in theory then would
mean that religion and state cannot occupy the same space. The state in its
governmental capacity does not promote any religion or religious group, nor
intervene in religious affairs. It cannot even be involved in interpretation
or “reform” of any religion much less favor one over any other. This model
of secularism may be characterized as maximum separation between state and
religion except on manifest grounds of morality, health, and public order.
Theoretical formulation, interpretation, and implementation of secularism
have varied in several countries. Writing in 1963, Donald E. Smith posed the
question: Is India a Secular State? Replying in the affirmative, Smith
described India “a secular state in the same sense in which one can say that
India is a democracy.” 1 Prakash Chandra Upadhyaya “uses the term
“majoritarianism” to characterize the official nationalist brand of Indian
secularism.”2 According to Ashutosh Varshney, “Secularism, in its Indian
usage, has…come to mean religious equidistance, not non-involvement.”3 Gary
Jacobsohn in a comparative study of secularism developed three models. He
characterizes these models of secularism as assimilative (exemplified by the
United States), visionary (Israel), and ameliorative (India).  American
assimilative secularism seeks to preserve religious liberty in the private
sphere, while urging political assimilation in the republic.  Israel’s
visionary secularism involves the coexistence of the vision of Israel as a
state for the Jewish people with commitments to preserve religious liberties
and cultural autonomy.  India’s ameliorative secularism involves a
commitment to promote the transformation of enduring social inequalities,
some of which are related to religious belief and practice, while
recognizing the autonomy of religious groups in some ways. 4 My paper
challenges the formulations of these three authors as well as a host of
others who hold the view that India is a secular state regardless of the
particular model of secularism it follows. In challenging the conventional
wisdom, I demonstrate that far from upholding state neutrality or
equidistance between various religions and its adherents, the Indian state
is in fact engaged in Hinduising it by reforming, promoting and advancing
Hinduism, often at the expense of other religions.  India’s secularism in
fact translates into Hindu assimilationism. Evidence for Indian state’s
policy of Hindu assimilationism comes through an examination of a. state
promotion of Hinduism through reform and favoritism; b. promotion of Hindu
beliefs and practices; c. erosion of educational, cultural and religious
autonomy; d. conflation between Hindu and Indian cultures resulting in the
exclusion of Christians and Muslims from the national mainstream.*

*Promotion of Hinduism through reform and favoritism*

*Abolition of caste, untouchability, sati, and opening up Hindu temples and
the like may be desirable goals for societal amelioration.  Article 25 (2)
of the constitution calls for providing “social welfare and reform [and]
throwing open of Hindu religious institutions of public character to all
classes and sections of Hindus…” Pritam Singh questions, “why should a
secular state be concerned about the social welfare and reform only of one
religion? Why should a secular state be concerned with the…reform of only
Hindu temples?” 5 The answer Singh provides is familiar, “the overriding
concern behind these social reform measures was to prevent the exodus
of theDalits…from the Hindu fold.”
6 The state, whether run by Congress or BJP has been involved in favoring
Hinduism by promoting inter-caste marriages through financial incentives
including a complete package of gifts including the thread worn by married
Hindu women known as mangala sutra!7     Promoting inter caste marriages may
or may not be a desirable goal depending on individuals’ choice. In the
words of Pratap Mehta, the “Indian state has used state power to consolidate
Hindu identity in more ways than one can list.  The state, for the first
time, created a territorially unified body of Hindu law, transcending
numerous regional divisions. Supreme Court judges not only promulgate public
purposes; they act as authoritative interpreters of Hindu religion, defining
what is essential to it and what is not. The state runs thousands of temples
across the country, appropriated in the name of social reforms or financial
propriety.”8 *

*A forest has been destroyed writing about why the state has not changed
Muslim Personal Law, when it did so in the case of Hindus.  In other words,
since the state has changed the family laws of one segment of the
population, it ought to do so in the case of others in order to ameliorate
the condition of women. There is near consensus in the Muslim community that
while changes in the interpretation of the shariat as applied through Muslim
Personal Law is possible, the right to change it rests in the community, not
the state.  At a minimum, the initiative must come from within the community
in an environment free from threat to cultural and religious identity.
Given the acute sense of insecurity generated by the unending
state-sanctioned violence, state-sponsored pogroms (Bombay 1993; Gujarat
2002) and culturecide exemplified by the elimination of Urdu, most Muslims
resist assimilation through uniform civil code. The opposition to change in
personal law is not to be understood as approval of injustices to Muslim
women, who like women everywhere are less than equal in Islamic societies.
Those actively advocating change in the Muslim Personal Law from within the
community represent a minority opinion confined to a thin layer of
secularized intellectuals, with no influence in the community.  Liberal,
left-wing, centrist Congress opinion seeking reform of Muslim Personal Law
is genuinely motivated by a desire to ameliorate the condition of Muslim
women, but the motivation of the Congress right wing and Hindutva gang,
known as Sangh parivar is driven by Hindu assimilationalism.  As Rina Verma
Williams noted, “ethnic conflict over the personal laws was caused by Hindu
interference in Muslim Personal Law after 1984. Prior to 1984, different
communities refrained from interfering in each other’s personal laws. In
1984, however, part of the Hindu community began mobilizing to reform Muslim
personal law or even abolish the personal laws and establish, one, uniform
law (as in the traditional conception of the nation-state).  This
mobilization led to Hindu-Muslim conflict over the personal laws.  India’s
experience indicates that we must-rethink the assumption of legal uniformity
underlying the traditional conception of the nation-state….ethnic harmony
prevailed when the personal laws of different communities were not
threatened. A new conception of the nation-state, that accommodates legal
diversity, may be more relevant for many of today’s multi-ethnic states than
the traditional “one nation, one law” conception.” 9 One way to reform
Muslim Personal Law might be for the state to sponsor an elected Muslim
forum to legislate Islamic laws, thus legitimizing and institutionalizing
religious autonomy.10*

*Erosion of Educational, Cultural and Religious Autonomy*

*The constitution provides in Articles 15-17, 25-30 and directive principles
(Articles 330-339, and 350) for the benefit of minorities.  But as Ranu Jain
has shown, the implementation of the rights has been subject to the
interpretation of courts leading to an endless struggle between the state
and the minorities.11 Most famously and astonishingly, on narrow technical
grounds, the Allahabad High Court judged in 2005 that Muslims did not found
Aligarh University!  Only a concerted political campaign restored the
University’s minority character.12 Cultural rights of minority groups to
teach their languages has been under attack since independence. Aggressive
promoters of Hindi successfully prevented tribal languages such as Santhali
(spoken by 3.6 million), Bhili (spoken by 1.25 million) and Lammi (1.2
million speakers) from recognition in the constitution to inflate their own
numbers.13 Oomen has shown that “Bhojpuri, Brij Bhasha, Magadhi, Maithili,
Rajasthani, and Chhattisgarhi, to mention but a few, are treated as mere
dialects of Hindi, in order to project Hindi speakers as the biggest speech
community and to legitimize it as the national language.  In the process,
nothing short of a culturecide has taken place.”14 The provinces’
reorganization created states along linguistic lines a decade after
independence, a Punjabi subah was, however, delayed by a further decade due
to its association with Sikhs. The state also victimized Urdu, closely
associated with Islamic culture. Urdu literacy has all but perished in Delhi
and Uttar Pradesh outside the madarsas due to the relentless Hindization
policies pursed by Congress and BJP governments. No government school in
Uttar Pradesh teaches Urdu even as an optional subject and members of UP
legislature cannot take oath in any language other than Hindi.
15Urdu-speaking population is decreasing in UP since the 1960s, as
indicated
by the census, which is an evidence of successful homogenization campaign of
the successive Congress governments.16 The elevation of Hindi at the expense
of all other languages nearly fulfils the slogan "Hindi, Hindu, Hindustan"
coined by Pratap Narayan Mishra: *

*Cahuhu jusco nij kalyan to sab mili Bharat santan !*

*Japo nirantar ek jaban hindi, hindu, Hindustan !*

*If your well-being you really want, O children of Bharat !*

*Then chant forever but these words Hindi, Hindu, Hindustan. *

*Article 25 (1) of India’s constitution proclaims, “all persons are equally
entitled to freedom of conscience and the right freely to profess, practice
and propagate religion.”  However the Hindu assimiliationists in the
Congress Party have been opposed to it as can be gleaned from the debate in
Constituent Assembly. Puroshottam Das Tandon, later President of Congress
summed up their views by saying “We Congressmen deem it very improper to
convert from one to another religion or take part in such activities.”17
Some Hindu assimilationists equate conversion with denaturalization.   Soon
after independence, in 1954, the Congress government of Madhya Pradesh
pioneered anti-conversion legislation by constituting a committee to look
into the matter. Several hundred untouchables converted to Islam in
Meenakshipuram, an obscure village in Tamilnadu in 1981-82, prompting the
central government to take a series of coercive measures to prevent further
change of religion.18 Since that date to 2007, as many as eight
states—Arunachal Pradesh, Chhatisgardh, Gujarat, Himachal Pradesh, Madhya
Pradesh, Orissa, Rajasthan, and Tripura, passed legislation against
conversion. In Rajasthan, the BJP-headed legislature passed a law against
forced conversions in April 2006, but in May, the governor refused to sign
the bill, so it has not become law.  Gujarat, led by the pogrom-tainted
chief minister Narendra Modi’s BJP government passed a law in September 2006
restricting conversion to Islam but facilitating conversion of Buddhists and
Jains to Hinduism, forcing the governor to return it to the legislature.19
Only in one case there has been a move to rescind restrictions on religious
freedom. A new administration in Tamlinadu led by Karunanidhi rescinded
anti-conversion act of 2004 in June 2007, passed by a previous government
(1991-96) led by Jayalalita.20 *

*The laws apply against “forced” or “induced” religious conversions require
government officials—district collector in one instance—, to assess the
legality of conversions and provide for fines and imprisonment for anyone
who uses force, fraud, or “inducement” to convert another. In the case of
Gujarat, promising nirvana upon conversion to Buddhism, according to Fr.
Cedric Prakash, can come in the definition of “inducement.” 21 When poor
citizens do not have access to government officials on routine matters of
water and power supply, one can imagine what kind of access they will have
on sensitive matters such as changing faith. However, reports of persons
having been arrested, still less prosecuted, under these laws are not
common.  Nevertheless, these laws can sometimes result in a hostile
atmosphere for religious minorities, as states in which these laws exist
tend to be those in which attacks by extremist groups are more common—and
often happen with greater impunity than elsewhere in India.  For example,
the state of Madhya Pradesh, which is headed by the BJP, was the scene of an
increasing number of attacks in 2005.  In June 2006, a report by the NCM
found that Hindu extremists had frequently invoked the state’s
anti-conversion law as a pretext to incite mobs against Christians.  The NCM
report also found that police in Madhya Pradesh were frequently complicit in
these attacks. Since August 2008, there has been large-scale anti-Christian
violence in Orissa and Karnataka, the states in which BJP rules in a
coalition government or on its own. The anti-Christian violence is driven by
the BJP’s intolerance of conversion to faiths other than Hinduism.
According to them, people are being attracted towards other faiths since
there is nobody to explain the culture and traditions of Hinduism.”22 The
anti-conversion laws, both by their design and implementation favor Hinduism
over minority religions, as the law encourages conversion from other
religions to Hinduism but not vice-versa. Executive measures often do not
need legislation as evidenced by the promotion of Hinduism at state expense
with an explicit purpose to limit religious freedom. Almost every state has
a department of Hindu endowments, their mission is to look after the secular
aspects of religious establishments, but experience shows that they go
beyond their mandate. Andhra Pradesh, governed since 2004 by a Congress
administration, is led by a Christian chief minister Y.S. Rajasekhara Reddy.
Under his administration, the Hindu Endowments Department “decided to revive
pujas and rituals in old temples to prevent the possibility of religious
conversion at the village level.  Officials expect that regular spiritual
activity in villages will prevent people from converting to faiths other
than Hinduism.   The desire to keep a Hindu majority intact motivates the
state governments, whether run by Congress or BJP to prevent the exodus of
Dalits and other disadvantaged groups into Christianity or Islam.  The
Supreme Court judges have often defined who or what is a Hindu against the
wishes of groups wanting to define themselves otherwise, exemplified by a
case soon after independence. When Satsanghis, a puritanical sect declared
itself outside the Hindu fold, the Supreme Court ruled against them as it
did subsequently in many other cases, thus constructing a Hindu identity.23
*

*Promotion of Hinduism at State Expense*

*State-sponsored promotion of Hinduism began shortly after independence and
took many forms. Independent India began its course on the midnight of
14thAugust as Hindu astrologers declared 15
th August as “inauspicious.”24  The ubiquitous Congress Party poster issued
with the picture of Prime Minister Nehru in the first post-independence
national election of 1952 with the icon of a pair of sacred cows asked
voters to “vote Congress for a stable, secular, progressive [italics
supplied] state.” In fact the sacred cows remained the Congress Party
symbol. On the night of 22-23 December 1949, Hindu idols “mysteriously
appeared” in  a sixteenth century mosque, actively used for worship as the
Baburi Mosque, in Ayodhya, Fayzabad. The U.P. Congress administration
promptly locked the mosque through a court order, and effectively turned it
into a temple.25 In western India, the Somanatha temple in Gujarat stood
empty and forgotten through much of the period before independence.
Thereafter, Gujarati Congress leaders like Deputy Prime Minister Sardar
Patel and K.M. Munshi campaigned for its restoration. In May 1951, the
temple was built with money provided by Gujarat government.26 In addition to
the funds Gujarat provided, in the Congress-ruled Uttar Pradesh, “a system
of indirect taxation was devised to pay for the restoration of the temple.”
27 Overruling Nehru’s opposition, President Rajendra Prasad, “with the
chanting of Vedic hymns by Brahmin priests, hailed the partial restoration
of the temple… [and] took a prominent part in the functions by installing
the jyotilingam image in the temple.”28 Evidently, the Indian officials had
not heard of the axiom, “Public funds for Public Purposes.”29 To an academic
observer, it was “clear that the whole inspiration of this project, with
which high government officials (but not Nehru) were so closely identified,
was far indeed from the approach which is expected of the secular state.
The plea that the deputy prime minister and the president were acting as
individuals in their private capacities is not adequate justification for
such activities; the influence and prestige of high office inevitably
becomes associated with whatever they do in public.”30 Rajendra Prasad’s
successor S. Radhakrishnan “always went to pay respects to Sri
Shankaracharya whenever he visited Delhi,” which may have in turn pressured
a future incumbent to do likewise.31  When he became President, “Zakir
Husain called on Jagadguru Sri Shankaracharya of Srinegri. Placing flowers
and fruits at the feet of the Jagadguru, Husain…touched the Swamiji’s feet
in reverence and took leave.”32 While the conduct of the two immediate
successors of the first president was certainly against the spirit of
secularism, it was not directed against religious beliefs of anyone. But the
state-sponsored rebuilding of Somanatha had far reaching significance as it
encouraged Hindu extremists to claim, and in worst case, destroy the Baburi
Masjid. The UP administration led by Congress governments developed Ayodhya
as a Hindu religious site from 1949 to 1980s, including unlocking the Baburi
Masjid as a place of Hindu worship in 1986. Directly inspired by Deputy
Prime Minister Patel’s example, a future Deputy Prime Minister L.K. Advani
began his ratha yatra from Somanatha against Baburi Mosque in 1990,
culminating in its demolition two years later in 1992.33 The crazed Hindu
mob that applied the jack hammers on the mosque in December 1992 was merely
completing the task began under Nehru.34 Numerous examples may be cited of
state sponsorship of explicitly Hindu religious activities. The central
government for instance, promotes Amarnath yatra in Kashmir, officially
advertizing it in explicitly denominational terms as a “yearning for moksha
which can move the devotees to the challenging heights of Kashmir and will
be a fitting gesture of solidarity with our valiant soldiers who have been
fighting the enemy to defend our borders.”35 In other words, “what is merely
a religious pilgrimage of Hindus has been elevated as a patriotic
enterprise.”36 On a trip to United States in 1984, Telugu Desham’s A.P.
chief minister N.T. Rama Rao found nothing objectionable in spending state
funds on medallions with Hindu gods’ images for distribution among Indian
Americans of all faiths as part of a promotion kit to invite investments in
his state. 37  Post offices in U.P. sell bottled Ganga water, sacred to
Hindus, and marketed through Garhwal Vikas Mandal, a public sector
undertaking.38*

*Hindu Environment in State Institutions: The Armed Forces*

*According to Shashi Tharoor: "The Army is still a splendid advertisement
for India…  The army has no place for bigotry in its ranks: prejudice and
discrimination on account of caste or religion are completely unknown." 39
The Army emphasizes inter group harmony.  Every officer, junior commissioned
officer or jawan, whatever his religion attends and takes active part in the
festivals of all religions represented in a unit.  Religious teachers
whether pundits, maulawis, or granthis are trained to impart their
particular religious teaching but with due respect to all faiths.  Every
Sunday, the whole unit generally attends a religious gathering at a given
time. 40 Contrary to this rosy picture, the press reports the celebration
only of Hindu festivals, such as Dassera, Divali, Durga puja, Rakhi Poonam,
never of the Eids and Christmas for instance.41 Jhatka, not halal meat is
served in most officers’ messes and jawans’ langar forcing observant Muslims
to eat vegetarian. *

* Moreover, several events since the 1980s point to emerging problems.
First, the refusal of the army authorities to permit Friday prayers (an
Islamic obligation and must be performed in congregation) has given rise to
complaints similar to the refusal to allow Muslim soldiers to grow beards,
in contrast to the Sikhs, who are permitted to keep them.42 The Air Force
also requires existing staff to shave off beards.43  Second, the physical
environment of the cantonments, secular for quite some time, has undergone
changes. The “cantonment towns now have focal point—the Hanuman temple,
dedicated to the Hindu deity of valor.”44 A former Lt. General proudly
describes the erection of a Hindu temple in the Rajputana Rifles regimental
center on government expense.45 Unlike temples, permission to build mosques
in Kanpur and Pune cantonments was denied.46 Worse, an already existing
mosque in Danapur cantonment was demolished in July 2005, while an army
officer desecrated a Delhi mosque two years later.47 Private
sainik,military schools receiving grants from the state impart an
exclusively Hindu
notion of India rather than of a multi-religious nation.48  Given the
socialization centered on a single religious tradition, no wonder that the
foundation stone of Army Welfare Organization’s housing scheme began
with bhoomi
pooja, a Hindu ceremony.49 Concurrent with the Hinduization, army trucks
show images of Hindu deities, calls put to the army authorities begin to
play Hindu devotional music when put on hold, officers and men display
outward symbols of their religion such as vibhuti, sacred ash and
tilak,caste marks on the forehead.
50 Although the Army explicitly prohibited visible religious signs and
symbols over the uniform for men on active duty, yet there are reports of
violations.51 India’s modern military arsenals are christened with names
that resonate with Hindu religious overtones.  For example, the medium-range
and intermediate range missile is named Agni (fire); the short-range
surface-to-air missile is named Trishul, (trident), a weapon also wielded by
the Hindu god of destruction, Shiva.  The anti-tank missile is named Nag,
serpent missile.52  The proclivity of some top military officers to draw
values to be inculcated (even when universal in import) only from one
tradition, in this case from Hinduism can cause resentment.  For instance,
Gen. B.C. Joshi, the Chief of Army Staff exhorted his troops to "to follow
the Path of Dharma" and moral obligations "enshrined in the two Vedas—
Rigveda and Arthaveda."53 Rear Admiral Vijay Shankar announced that
henceforth new naval cadets would be supplied copies of Ramayana for class
room exercises.54   Third, invitation to politicians like Bal Thackerey and
Tarun Vijay (of Shiv Sena and RSS respectively) to military events caused
dismay among Indians committed to inter-group harmony. Gen. Shankar Roy
Choudhury evidently paid tributes to Hindu Mahasabha leader and founder of
BJS/BJP, a rabidly anti-minority organization.55 Fourth, by allowing the
anti-Muslim, anti-Christian Vishva Hindu Parishad to distribute
denominational gifts, such as the rakhis, (sacred Hindu wrist-bands given by
women to men as a token of sisterly love) to the jawans-regardless of
religious affiliation, the army has permitted its premises to be used for
sectarian purpose.56 Although the then chief Gen. V.P. Malik—having opened
the Pandora’s box by inviting the RSS and the SS chiefs—is reported to have
asked them to “leave the army alone,” 57 yet the VHP is clearly undeterred.
In February 2003, it sent anti-Christian, anti-Muslim inflammatory
literature to the armed forces. 58  The danger of introducing known
anti-minority politicians into the armed forces premises seems to have
either been lost on the authorities or to show that some of them may be
sympathetic to organizations such as the VHP.  However, this is not to
suggest that the army can or should ban all religious practices by the men
that constitute it.  Any such measures will be constitutionally invalid.  It
is the manner in which religion can be imposed on minorities or misused by
any group—minority or majority that is the heart of the issue. *

*Hinduisation of State Culture*

*The association of Hindu temples with Indian culture no doubt encourages
semi-government institutions to use Hindu images in publicity, for example
by banks. Underneath the slogan “Our service is religion,” an advertisement
of the State Bank of Hyderabad shows what is unmistakably a picture of Sri
Venkatesvara temple in Tirupati, popular among South Indian Hindus.59 A
large stone image of reclining Vishnu located at the entrance to the
inspector-general police’s headquarter in Bangalore greets visitors, many
non-Hindus mistaking it for a temple!60 Government’s official functions,
whether at state or central level, invariably begin with Hindu rituals and
songs, exemplified by the cases of lighting the lamps, or placing coconuts
on water-filled brass pots, and the recitation of slokas, hymns. Examples
are numerous. For instance, on 14 November 1986, India International Trade
Fair began with Vedic hymns by a choral group.”61 In September 1993, Air
India took delivery of a Boeing 747 in Seattle, Washington, where a “puja
was performed by Swami Gahananda of the Ramakrishna Mission invoking Lord
Ganesha.”62 The present writer witnessed a ship launch at Vishakhapatnam
amidst saffron-robed, ashen faced sadhus singing bhajans, fit for a Hindu
event than a national one. The central government honors scholars of various
languages through a hierarchy of awards named in Sanskrit such as Padma
Shri, Padma Vibhushan and the like, which seem proper for some languages but
not for others like Arabic, Persian and Urdu. British India honored literati
with titles such as Shams al-Ulama, “sun among scholars,” for Arabic,
Persian, and Urdu writers.  The colonial state, in retrospect, may have been
fairer than the national state.  The Andhra Pradesh Health Minister, S.
Aruna, a newspaper reported, “laid the foundation stone of the new building
of the state dental college with bhoomi puja…two ministers, an MLA, and a
host of officials including the Director-General of Health Services, joined
the puja.”  63 During a dry spell of weather, a Central Minister for
Agriculture S.B. Satyanarayana Rao suggested that “Yagnas should be
performed at all villages,” to solve the water crisis.” 64 In the same vein,
authorities came up with the idea of a pani yatra, pilgrimage to end water
shortage, unmindful of the fact that Osmanabad inhabits Hindus as well as
non-Hindus, to whom the pilgrimage was meaningless.65 Preparing for a blast
off, the Indian Space Research Organization scientists placed miniature
replicas of the rocket in Hindu temples and sought blessings before launch
amidst Vedic hymns, to no official disapproval.66 In an official environment
soaked with Hindu rituals, it is not surprising to see a sign that greets
bathers desiring to wash in the waters of a hot spring in a Bihar town,
“Entry of Muslims is prohibited by the order of the Patna High
Court.”67Regardless of religious affiliation, all airhostesses of the
official Air
India and Indian Airlines are required to wear bindi, a caste mark on their
forehead and greet passengers with folded hands in the Hindu fashion of
namaste, just as is required of Indian Administrative Staff officers. Door
Darshan newsreaders are also compelled to wear bindi in violation of secular
norms.68*

*Hinduisation Through All India Radio and Door Darshan*

*Before television broadcasting became widespread in the early 1980s, the
state-controlled All India Radio (AIR) was the major source of information
and entertainment. With virtual monopoly of airwaves, the AIR began its
morning programs with “Vande Mataram and Mangala dhwani, (auspicious
sonance) …a result of ministerial fiat in the early 1950s… [followed by],
Vandana, Hindu lyrics.”69  According to a former Director-General of AIR,
U.L. Baruah, “while in theory, the lyrics are chosen…for their noble words
and sentiments which should have a universal and nonsectarian appeal, the
songs actually included are in praise of one Hindu deity or the other, so
much so that days are earmarked for them. Thus Sri Venkateshwara Suprabhatam
is broadcast by practically all stations in Andhra Pradesh on
Saturdays…70What about the daily recital of Ramacharitramanas?
Evidently, the minister
for information and broadcasting decided the recital of this music as he
deemed it cultural rather than religious.  The same was held true of Braj
madhuri, recounting the legend of Sri Krishna.71  In response to the
criticism of Hinduisation through airwaves, the AIR began a program of
Quranic recitations on Fridays and Christian devotionals on Sundays but
these were exceptional and broadcasted only occasionally from select
stations. The language of AIR for most of its north and central Indian
stations was a healthy mix of Hindi and Urdu called Hindustani.  Just before
independence, Sanskritization set in when Sardar Patel removed those
favoring Urdu from AIR.72 India’s Central Board of Film Certification,
(CBFC) also known as Censor Board is a department of the Central government.
Among other functions, it certifies the language of motion pictures. The
CBFC denied Urdu its right by certifying films like Anarkali, Chaudhwin ka
Chand, Mughal-i Azam, Mere Mahbub, Mirza Ghalib, Taj Mahal, and Umrao Jan
Adaa as Hindi, whereas the songs and dialogues in the films are unmistakably
Urdu, highly Persianized at that.  Moreover, the CBFC routinely passes films
stereotyping Muslims as crooks, terrorists and rapists, while buckling under
pressure of police and Shiva Sena when a film was mildly critical of their
role in the pogrom of Muslims in 1993. The CBFC allowed preview of producer
Mani Ratnam’s Bombay to Bal Thackerey and police, and deleted portions of
film the Shiva Sena leader and his khaki- clad collaborators wanted.73 Bal
Thackerey had remarked during the 1993 pogrom that Muslims deserved the same
fate as Jews under Nazi Germany.74 Five years later, the CBFC forced
producer Mahesh Bhatt to delete portions of his film Zakhm critical of
police violence against Muslims.75*

*In January 1987 an eighteen month-long serial of the Ramayana based
on themanasbegan airing at prime time on state-run Door Darshan.
Directly inspired by
and cashing on the popularity of the show, ten months after the conclusion
of Ramayana, the Vishva Hindu Parishad, called on Hindus to make holy bricks
inscribed with Rama’s name for use at Ayodhya after demolishing the Baburi
Mosque.  Building on the success of Ramayana, the Door Darshan began a
48-episode series called Chanakya, about the “Indian Machiavelli,” at a time
when India was experiencing political convulsions generated by the movement
to build a temple atop Baburi Mosque.  Chanakya has long been central to the
construction of a Hindu identity of India, and Door Darshan, a state-run
institution helped advance the Hindutva perception of the nation.76  The
Door Darshan’s stereotypes Muslims as terrorists as exemplified during its
coverage of the violent decade of 1990s.77 When it broadcasts serials
pertaining to historical figures—Ghalib, Tipu Sultan— for example, they
are caricatured into modern stock characters, stripped of their cultural
identity.78  *

*Promotion of Hinduism: Beyond Beef*

*Article 48 of the Indian constitution titled “Organization of agriculture
and animal husbandry,” seems innocuous at first sight, but when read in its
entirety it is clear that under the guise of an economic measure, the state
is promoting Hinduism by “prohibiting the slaughter of cows and calves and
other milch and draught cattle.”79 In 1955, the Central government
instituted an award Gopal Ratna, presented to owners of highest
milk-yielding cows meeting “the most politically potent of the Hindu
demands.”80 According to political scientist Kancha Ilaiah, “beef cannot be
served in Air India, Indian Airlines, and armed forces dining halls,
Rashtrapati Bhavan, the presidential residence, and a host of other state
sites.”81 When Dalit students decided to open a beef stall on the Osmania
University campus in 2006, the then-Vice Chancellor M. Sulaiman Siddiqi
refused permission.82 Extending the meaning of cow-slaughter ban, the
Inspector-General of Prisons R.S. Gupta banned Eid in Tihar Jail with the
offensive remark that “since this festival is non-veg, so I cannot allow it
to be celebrated here.”83 Restrictions on Hindu food taboos are now
extending beyond beef. The Supreme Court upheld in 2004 in Om Prakash v.
State of UP, a ban on sale of any meat, fish or eggs at anytime in the year
in Rishikesh. In 2005, the Chhattisgarh High Court ruled that “eggs should
not be sold in public places as it hurts the sentiments of vegetarians,”
while Supreme Court held that the definition of cows includes buffaloes,
thus they cannot be slaughtered.”84 The court verdicts no doubt encourage
the Hindu groups clamoring to prevent inclusion of eggs in the lunch for
students in Karnataka.85 The imposition of Hindu taboos on others stems from
the framing of India as a Hindu state and society by Congress86 especially
in competition with BJP, as seen from its vociferous espousal of the same
issues as BJP.87 In a commercial broadcasted over Door Darshan for a
National Dairy Development Board product, Maneka Gandhi, the minister for
environment beamed in 1994, “I am a vegetarian because I am an
Indian.”88Kancha Ilaiah counteracts by rejecting the cow as the symbol
of all Indians,
for him and others the buffalo is more representative both because it more
ubiquitous as well as devoid of association with one religion.89 Student
lunch precede by a Hindu prayer in several states in violation of secular
norms.90*

*Hinduization Through Education and Public Culture*

*What kind of education would be imparted to the school children? Who would
write what contents in the books, especially those textbooks in history,
social studies and languages? This has been a contentious matter in India
since the 1930s. The Muslim League protested the inclusion of Hindu
mythology, ideas, and symbols in public-funded schools during the 1937-39
Congress rule in provinces.91 Disregarding Muslim protest, Congress
governments in post 1947 U.P. continued their pre independence educational
policies, prompting Syed Abulhasan Ali Nadvi to term it as “cultural
aggression” as far back as 1960s. 92 In the late 1970s, the first
non-Congress administration at the national level was unable to resolve the
issue of biased text books.93 Consonant with the Hindu intensification in
school curricula, the Ramayana and Mahabharata began to be taught in Delhi
to all students while nothing comparable from other religions in the wake of
the TV serial Mahabharata.94 Under a Congress administration, the annual
conference of union and state education ministers began since independence
with invocation of Sarasvati, the Hindu goddess of knowledge.95 The occasion
on 3 December 1997 was no different, as school children sang Sarasvati
Vandana, in the presence of the president and prime minister in New Delhi.
When some ministers objected, Murli Manohar Joshi, the central minister
belonging to BJP affirmed that “It is nothing new.  Right from the days of
Nehru, invocations have been sung.”96  At the same event in 1998, students
routinely recited the Sarasvati Vandana. This time the non-BJP ministers led
by the then Andhra Pradesh education minister and Dalit leader, K. Pratibha
Bharati objected and walked out of the conference.97 With the coming of BJP
to power in UP, the government ordered the compulsory recitation of Vande
Mataram and Sarasvati Vandana, but relented only when faced with Muslim
opposition. 98 Textbooks were not changed despite protest even after a new
administration took office in 2004 at the center.99 A judge in Allahabad,
U.P. High Court opined that “it is the duty of every citizen of
India…irrespective of caste, creed or religion to follow the
dharmapropounded by Bhagwad Gita.”
100 The BJP-led central government, among other Hindutva measures,
encouraged the University Grants Commission to “introduce graduate and
post-graduate courses in Vedic astrology.”101 A BJP-ruled state of Madhya
Pradesh, made Surya Namaskar, sun worship, compulsory on all students,
withdrawing the measure when Muslims protested.102 The Karnataka government,
formed by a coalition of BJP and other parties, decided in July 2007 to
scrap Christmas holiday, slipped in as part of the reorganization of school
year into a semester system, much to the dismay of minority Christians in
the state.*

*Discrimination on the Basis of Religion in Public Employment*

*Article 16 (2) of the constitution says that “no citizen shall, on grounds
only of religion be ineligible for, or discriminated against in respect of,
any employment or office of the state.” In practice, however the situation
is different. Right after independence, Kashmir’s largely Hindu army was
absorbed in the national army, while Hyderabad’s largely Muslim army was
disbanded rendering nearly 20,000 unemployed. As I have demonstrated
elsewhere, India’s 1.5 million army’s most important infantry units are
named after religious (Sikh for example), ethnic (Gurkha), and caste and
region (Rajput, Garhwal) regiments.  Anyone not belonging to these religions
or castes or regional groups is excluded. Given that these regiments
constitute a bulk of the army, the continuation of the
single-ethnic-religious regiments represents a clear violation of the
constitution.103 India’s new paramilitaries and espionage agencies excluded
Muslims for long and now Sikhs are also distrusted since the 1980s.*

*The Scheduled Castes have long been the beneficiaries of an affirmative
action system for public employment, education, and electoral system, but
only if they remain within the Hindu and Sikh religion per Presidential
order of 1950 and 1956 respectively. When several thousand Dalits converted
to Buddhism in 1956, the state governments quickly withdrew the
benefits,104restoring it with an amendment to the order only upon
massive protests in
1991. The affirmative action plan is not designed to benefit the poor on a
purely economic basis.  It is designed to benefit only those who have been
branded Hindu, thus it is not religion-blind. Christian and Muslim poor are
thus denied the benefits of reservation simply because they profess a
religion other than Hinduism.105 Tamilnadu removed a state employee on
conversion to Islam in pursuance of this policy as early as 1983 per
government order.106 In Andhra Pradesh, government forced an SC convert to
Islam to resign his position after he declared his conversion.107  Former
Prime Minister V.P. Singh echoed the views of many when he demanded the
state to “remove the “communal clause” from the constitution” in matters of
reservation.108 Benefits of affirmative action are contingent upon a person
remaining within the Hindu fold. If a person converts to another faith after
availing benefits, he or she must resign the job or return the money to the
state. As the courts have ruled, it is possible to resume Scheduled Caste
status if the SC person reconverts from any other religion back to Hinduism!
*

*Conclusions*

*Indian secularism may be “majoritarianism,” as Upadhyaya suggested if we
accept that Hindus constitute Indian majority population, which I contend
elsewhere that it is problematic.109  Contrary to Varshney, I demonstrate
that secularism in its Indian usage is in fact proximity to Hinduism, not
religious equidistance.  Its “ameliorative” character, contrary to Jacobsohn
is motivated at least partially by a desire to curb conversion to religions
other than Hinduism and to construct a Hindu out of a myriad of sects, a new
primordialism.  Again contrary to Jacobsohn, Indian state secularism in fact
restricts cultural, linguistic and religious autonomy. The root cause of the
state’s Hinduisation stems from the Indian elite’s perception of Christians
and Muslims as less Indian than Hindus.  Their notion of India, coterminous
with Hindus led them to draft the apparatus of the state in a manner
designed to assimilate into Hinduism whoever is not proven to be Christian
or Muslim. Article 1 of the constitution, describes “India, that is Bharat,”
110 to denote the founding father’s conception of the nation, which in the
words of Girilal Jain, the late editor of The Times of India,  has “In all
but name…been a Hindu rashtra since 1947.  This is unpleasant from the
Muslim point of view.”111 Given that Muslims are the “other” for many in
right wing upper caste Hindu elite, Jain mentions only Muslims as being
unhappy with the Hindu rashtra.  Had he been an academic he would have added
that many religious Hindus seeking church-state separation, Buddhists,
Christians, Dalits, STs, and Sikhs, not to speak of liberal to
Maoist/Naxalite shade of Indian opinion– are also unhappy with the Hindu
rashtra. But as William Gould has demonstrated, the making of Hindu
rashtra since
1947 has roots in Congress’s use of an explicit Hindu idiom in the political
language since late nineteenth century.112 The preface to the Hinduisation
of the state was written long before 1947.*

*The author is grateful to Professors Peter Flugel, SOAS, John Mansfield,
Harvard University Law School, Chris Queen, Harvard University, Haimanti
Roy, MIT, and Theodore P. Wright, Jr. emeritus, SUNY-Albany for comments on
the earlier drafts of the paper. Thanks also to Shiben Banerjee, a graduate
student at MIT’s Department of Urban Studies. I am responsible for views
expressed in the paper.*

* *

*NOTE ON CONTRIBUTOR*

*Omar Khalidi is on the staff of Aga Khan Program for Islamic Architecture
at Massachusetts Institute of Technology, in Cambridge, Mass and an
independent scholar. He is the author of Muslims in Indian Economy, 2006; Khaki
and Ethnic Violence in India, 2003; and edited Hyderabad: After the Fall,
1988, and wrote numerous articles on Indian politics, urbanism and
architecture.  His academic interests are in the upward and downward
economic mobility of ethnic groups, nationalism, and minorities in the
politics and society of India.* 
 

India is not a secular state: Dr. Omar Khalidi
Submitted by admin4 on 28 August 2008 - 8:05pm.
Articles
Indian Muslim
By Kashif-ul-Huda, TwoCircles.net,
Last July, a meeting of Rajasthan Minority Commission started with lighting lamps in front of a photo of Vagdevi, the goddess of learning. Rajasthan has declared Muslims, Christians, Buddhists, Sikhs, and Parsis as minorities and none of these light lamps before Vagdevi. Then what was the need to worship a Hindu deity in a Minority Commission’s meeting? To many who have seen all government functions begin with lighting of lamps, this comes not as a surprise.
Dr. Omar Khalidi, author of famous books ‘Khaki and the Ethnic Violence in India’ and ‘Muslims in Indian Economy,’ will argue that examples like this put serious question mark to India calling itself a secular state. In an interview with TwoCircles.net, Dr. Khalidi has argued that merely stating that state respects and follows the dictum of the Indian Constitution that India is a secular state is not enough, it has to be seen in the daily working of the state as well.
Unfortunately The process of saffronization of fuctions under the aegis state began in the time of Nehru itself. Every function of the Ministry of Education begins with Saraswati vandana (Homage to the Hindu deity of education). How can a secular state invoke a deity of any religion, asks Dr. Khalidi?
Dr. Omar Khalidi recalled the protest by the then Andhra Pradesh Education Minister K. Pratibha Bharathi, a Dalit woman, when Saraswati vandana was recited at the state education minister’s meet in 1998.
Muslim personalities are being removed from our textbooks, Islamic principles are being caricatured. Hinduism is being privileged at the expense of other religions and philosophies. There ought to be a strict separation of church and the state in a diverse society like India, points Dr. Khalid. The statement that India is a secular state must be judged against its performance.

What is wrong with showing respect to the majority religion?
The statement that India is a Hindu majority state needs to be questioned. We know that Hindus are a majority in India because census tells us that, but a close reading of census methodology will lead us to seriously question that notion.
Census of India treats everyone who is not Muslim, Christian, Sikh, and Buddhists as Hindu. This includes atheists, agnostics, those who have no religion and those like tribals who do not have organized religion. This methodology artificially boosts the number of Hindus. Census, as an institution of the state, needs to be neutral, says Dr. Omar Khalidi. Census should accurately reflect the diversity that exists in India. For example, Dalits who are outside the caste of Hindus should not be counted as Hindus. Their counting artificially boosts the number of Indians practicing or following Hindu religion. Thus manufacturing a majority where none exist and serving the interests of the Hindutva.
Dr. Khalidi says that we need to bring the caste enumeration back into census so that we have an accurate picture of the Indian community. This will show us that there is no one group that is in majority; rather we are a nation of minorities.
Giving reference to his book "Khaki and the Ethnic Violence," Dr. Khalidi said that some institutions of the state actively discriminate against certain religious categories. For example, Indian armed forces to this day recruit people on the basis of "martial races" that exclude Muslims. There is a Sikh regiment, Rajput regiment, Maratha regiment, Gurkha regiment but not a Muslim regiment. Dr. Khalidi says: either abolish these regiments or create a Muslim regiment, Christian, Parsi as well.
A start can be made by starting Minority Commission’s meeting without any religious ceremony. Since Minority commission is a public institution and comes under the definition of State it can not follow the Hindu way of starting its functions violating Articles 25-28 of the Constitution of India.

Why India Is Not A Secular State

Famous Theatre Personality Mohd. Ali Beg at MANNU.

Report on the Survey by M.Phil Students of MANUU.

Qualified and Trained Teachers required for better standards at Madarsas: MANNU

Urdu University Exams Postponed       

Hyderabad (24thDec,09)  :- Maulana Azad National Urdu University’s remaining papers of semester I, III and other examinations (Regular Mode) have been postponed in view of the current political situation. These examinations had begun on 21^st Dec, 2009. According to Prof. S.A. Wahab Controller of Examination I/c the remaining examinations will be held from 20^th January 2010 onwards. Classes for II & IV semester will commence immediately after the examinations.