Comment on "Do Hindus hate Jews?" by Ari Jacob

Submitted by a [keen] student of islam (India), Sep 24, 2005 at 05:09

There is no reason one can see why Hindus, doctrinally, should hate Semitic ("Biblical" might be a better qualifier) religionists in general and Jews in particular, unless of course Ari a.k.a. Mohd happens to be privy to one that others have missed for millennia! On the other hand, there certainly is a fundamental doctrinal one for Jews, Christians and Muslims, who regard every ‘other' faith as false, to hate all others.

Because pristine indigenous inspiration inculcates natural deference for every part of creation as "potentially divine", there is no earthly reason why the Hindu should hate anybody at all. In the Hindu view, even the greatest of villains – whether "Hindu" or not -will evolve spiritually to ultimately attain release from the cycle of births and deaths. Do Biblical persuasions grant that to even the saintliest among non-Jews, Christians or Muslims? Can the Pope say Gandhi has attained salvation? Or, can any Muslim ever say St. Francis of Assisi is in jannat? Moreover, Hindu tradition has ever held the right of opinion of another in utmost respect. This has been proven ad infinitum over the past 5 millennia of recorded history.

Without even contemplating a justification of any discrimination, we need to appreciate that the caste system was originally conceived on the principle of "division of labour" – something all management students are taught today as one of the basics of industrial organization. Merit alone determined the work one did, and intercaste mobility was the rule: a most despicable Chandala, Valmiki, who found an expression for his creative talent through inspiration from the life of Rama and advanced socially to become a maharishi, is a notable instance. Its degeneration into birth-determined social stratification came much later as the only way the peaceable Hindu could preserve his cultural identity in the face of inimical, self-righteous, inhumane and aggressive Biblical monotheistic doctrines like Paulinity and Islam. (With no intrinsic rationale or merit as thought-systems, their survival and growth has always depended upon annihilation of older and humane persuasions.) As an objective analysis of the growth of ‘castes' will show, a vast number of them emerged only after India began suffering and entertaining uninvited ‘guests' with their irrepressible penchant for unrecognizably dehumanizing their hosts!

It takes a long time for collective societal thinking to change, and the malady has lingered despite the fact that the original reason for its institution is no longer valid (or so one would like to believe). But, as stated admirably well by Swahili Dinaz in one of his many thought inspiring comments, the Hindu genuinely feels the need for reform, and is indeed taking steps to be done with it, as may easily be seen by Indian legislative and social activism.

By the way, the ‘Aryan Invasion' never happened in reality. The hypothesis was the product of cunning British skullduggery aimed at creating cultural schisms in an India that was rapidly showing sure signs of giving unified resistance to imperialist power. Unfortunately, it was so successful that even Indian ‘historians' continue parroting and purveying it. However, no serious and honest scholar subscribes to the imperially motivated and illogical construct any more. On the contrary, there is more evidence now of an opposite, westward migration OUT OF INDIA around the beginning of the second millennium BCE, following widespread hydrological upheavals. The linguistic and liturgical similarity between Zoroastrian scripture and the Vedas, the Sanskrit root of most European languages, similarities between ancient Sumerian, Egyptian and Indian mythology, patently Sanskrit names like Judah (Yadu), Abraham (Brahma), Sarah (Saraswati), and other well known features can be explained only on the basis of such a migration. Therefore, to be convincing, Ari needs to find another reason for wildly imaginative statements about a make-believe "Sudra holocaust", which, even assuming it was fact, is not even in the running when compared with even the mildest of umpteen gleefully recorded gory accounts one finds in the so-called ‘word of God' – the Old Testament!

If the "dalit" Ari met in Ahmedabad (which, by the way, was "Karnavati" before our gracious uninvited guests decided on "pakifying" it with Islamic nomenclature) was willing to become Christian, it was obviously for the prospect of lucre through migration to the UK than for anything else, like conviction for instance. It is sad that people are either ignorant or gullible enough to be taken in by the justification proffered.

The "right-wing" Hindu is merely reacting to millennia-old injustice. One wonders how amiably Ari might treat a bumptious guest who tells him that his house is badly designed and built, the furnishings are worse, that his wife is a lousy cook and how he exclusively has perfect knowledge of supplying every perceived deficiency! I rather think the presumptuous visitor will be shown the door without a second thought. In fact, being aware of how culturally and racially conscious a Jew can be, I feel Ari's spontaneous reaction would put the so-called Hindu "right-wing", with all its alleged misdemenour, to shame.

And I wouldn't blame Ari if it does!

---

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".