Why I Criticize Hinduism The Most
Why do you criticize Hinduism more than any other religion? This is a question often posed to us – the rationalists, secularists and atheists in India- by the proponents of Hindutwa?
The first time I heard this question it was not from a hardcore Hindutwa proponent, but a medical doctor in Kerala. It was in the late 1980s, when we, a group of young rationalist activists, approached this doctor for financial contribution towards a conference organized by our organization. We tried to explain our position telling him about the number of occasions when we had led campaigns against fundamentalists belonging to other religions, the number of publications brought out by rationalists in Kerala criticizing the religious texts as well as the obscurantist practices followed by Muslims and Christians. Our doctor, however, was not willing to lend his ears to our arguments and we were thrown out of his clinic with him refusing to give us any money.
Over the last two decades since then I have faced this question quite often, forcing me to think about it frequently. Let me hence enumerate the reasons why I find myself criticizing the beliefs and rituals of Hinduism more often than those of other religions.
1. The very first reason that comes to my mind is a question of statistics. More than 80% of the Indian population is Hindu. Naturally, more than 80% of our criticism would also be directed against the belief system of Hindus.
This is precisely the case in other countries too. I read quite a few well-known rationalist periodicals published from the US and Europe. In all these periodicals, most of the articles are devoted to criticizing Christianity, because that is the religion that the majority of their population follows. Wouldn’t it be irrational to criticize the rationalists of these continents as prejudiced against Christianity?
2. Second is my familiarity with the religion I was born into. I am more familiar with the beliefs, tenets, rituals, and practices of Hinduism than that of any other religion, and hence I am more confident in criticizing it.
So is the case with other rationalists, who were brought up among people adhering to other religious denominations. The writings of a Salman Rushdie, an Ibn Warraq or a Taslima Nasrin, for instance, are more frequently directed against Islamic fundamentalists than those belonging to other religions. (It should be emphasized here that I am not trying to elevate myself to the stature of these eminent writers).
The question of statistics referred to above once again comes into play here. Assume that one percent of any religious community in India become rationalists and start criticizing their parent religion. In India, according to Census-2001, we have 80.4% Hindus, 13.4% Muslims, and 2.3% Christians. This percentage would naturally get reflected in any given group of rationalists and, as a consequence, in the rationalist literature produced in India.
3. Third, there is a possibility that the liberalization or secularization of the religion of the majority in a country has a positive impact on the religion of the minority itself.
For instance, I have noticed, in Kerala, where I was born, the followers of Islam are much more liberal than many other parts of India. It is not possible for any section of a people, religious minority included, to be completely outside the sphere of influence of the society they are part of, however much the fundamentalist leadership is against it.
4. Fourth, the criticism coming from within a community is much more effective than those coming from people outside the fold. This is because criticism, however constructive they be, coming from people from outside a community would tend to be construed as xenophobia or even outright communal. In a perfect liberal-secular society, this should not be the case and every criticism, wherever it comes from, would be adjudged on its innate worth. But ours is not such a society. It still has a highly conservative, semi-feudal setup with a significant presence of religio-fascist elements intolerant of any kind of criticism.
For instance, in Karnataka, at the time of my writing this, a violent intimidation is being unleashed against Christians by fascist Hindu outfits such as Bajrangdal. Churches were ransacked, religious statues broken, and nuns physically abused. One of the ostensible reasons cited for this attack was that a certain Christian sect allegedly had published a book in Kannada (Sathya Darshini) denigrating Hindu religious figures. Excerpts from the book reproduced in Deccan Herald (September 18, 2008, Bangalore) shows that they are nothing in comparison to the celebrated rationalist-reformer E.V.Ramaswamy Naiker’s acerbic textual criticism of characters in Ramayana. Though the Hindu-right did agitate against EVR and his Periyarana, it never took such a violent turn as has been happening in Karnataka at present. One of the reasons for the less-violent reaction to EVR’s work was he was seen as an “insider” as against the Christian critique of Hindu religious texts. (I am not suggesting even for a moment that the intimidation of Christians seen in various parts of Karnataka today is a Hindu-reaction to this book. It is not. According to Deccan Herald, the book was printed in a press that was closed down a decade back. The attack in fact is a pre-meditated attempt of the Sangh Parivar to communalize Hindu society in Karnataka on the lines of Narendra Modi’s Gujarat).
5. The fifth and most important reason is the brutal fact that the Hindu fundamentalist forces (RSS, VHP, Bajrang Dal, Durga Vahini, etc) have been on the rise since the late 1970s.
The formation of Janata Party government (which included such disparate political formations as socialists and rightwing Hindutwa elements) in 1977 after the infamous emergency gave legitimacy to forces such as RSS. Since the 1990s, Hindutwa forces have used extreme violence to intimidate minorities and secularists. The violence in 1990 following the Ratha Yatra of L.K.Advani, the demolition of Babri Masjid in 1992, the 
state-sponsored violence (in which more than a thousand people were murdered) against Muslims following the burning of a train in Godhra in Gujarat in 2002, the continuing (even at the time of penning this essay) violence against Christians in various parts (especially in Orissa and Karnataka) of the country, the attempts to saffronise education and secular institutions during the NDA government, the attacks on exhibition of paintings of MF Hussain, etc are ample evidence of the presence and rise of Hindutwa fascism in the country. There is no point in calling myself a rationalist if I do not take a stand against this fascist intimidation and violence and speak for the rights of the intimidated.
I hope the above satisfactorily answers the question posed at the beginning. It is quite possible that other activists campaigning for secularism may have many other reasons to cite in addition to what I have attempted to point out. I would be glad if they come out with their arguments.
***
Related posts:
Subscribe to RSS
Follow us on twitter
Follow us on facebook
Flickr
Youtube
Firstly, apologies, I do realise this article is old but I would like to add my 2c worth to the reasons given.
1. The problem with statistics is that they are in the eye of the beholder. Yes over 70% Indians are Hindus. However, Hindus numbers grow by birth only, voluntary conversions numbers and ‘statistics’ will show more convert to other religions. So should you not try to address this growth?
2. Ahhh, so as a ‘Freethinker’ you have decided to rely on familiarity. I suppose freethinking for you does not mean learning new things or familiarising yourselves with the new. Still essentially Hindu are we?
3. There is a possibility!! sure and it is also possible that your mother is an alien. If you have a quick look at, lets say the Netherlans, you will see that a liberal majority makes no difference. Tell me how this has affected Islam in the Netherlands for the better?
4. If you still believe you are within the Hindu community you are being dishonest, If you are indeed an athiest then you belong to the Indian community same as Islam, christianity, Jain etc etc, so this argument is hogwash.
5. Why is this ‘fact’ brutal? How do they really compare to the Indian Mujahideen? come on, as a fellow athiest I find dishonesty in your arguments as the reason why you get asked the question in the first place.
Anyway, good luck.
1. How does it invalidate the fact that Hindu beliefs and superstitions are the major problem that most of us deal with in India? Also, you’re simply wrong about the numbers. As the article points out, the number is closer to 80%, not 70%.
2. This is a disingenuous argument. Freethinkers are much more likely to explore and adopt ideas that are new. But in this context, familiarity has to do with expertise and area of interest.
3. Firstly, the possibility of your ad hominem statement is much lesser than that proposed by the author. Likelihood and degrees of certainty are relevant when trying to ascertain the truth. Secondly, your example is not any more convincing because of its anecdotal nature, and considering that the author is only talking about a possibility, whereas you are asserting as truth, makes you full of it.
4. Your comment in this point is a perfect example of what the author was trying to convey when he says “In a perfect liberal-secular society, this should not be the case and every criticism, wherever it comes from, would be adjudged on its innate worth.”
5. The fact is there are plenty of BRUTAL fundamentalist Hindu elements in India, and you are whitewashing them, just like the Muslim moderates try to whitewash Islamic fundamentalism. It is you that is being dishonest, and it is people like you, apologists for a regressive religion that is damaging India, that are asking such questions in their religious fervor.
Let’s say there is a garbage dump right next to your house. Keeping that in mind,
Description of a indian atheist: – “i am a indian atheist, i justify criticizing hinduism more becuase i know i will be safe. i fear that i might be be attacked if i criticize islam or christianity. afterall everyone loves their life and me too, hehe”
Ignorance is bliss.
http://nirmukta.com/2010/06/16/everybody-bake-jesus-day-facebook-event/
http://nirmukta.com/2009/07/26/a-scientific-view-of-the-god-delusion/
http://nirmukta.com/2009/03/05/religions-silencing-dissent-the-global-resurgence-of-blasphemy-laws/
http://nirmukta.com/2008/12/26/the-literary-omnipresence-of-jesus/
http://nirmukta.com/2011/04/25/can-charity-preclude-criticism-sai-baba-pope-bill-gates/
http://nirmukta.com/2008/10/07/static-beliefs-on-shaky-ground/
http://nirmukta.com/2011/02/19/zakir-naik-doesnt-understand-atheism/
http://nirmukta.com/2010/05/21/celebrating-freedom-of-speech-and-expression-on-draw-muhammad-day/
“Ignorance is bliss”?
or may be lack of information, mr freethinkers?
1. “the state-sponsored violence against Muslims following the burning of a train in Godhra in Gujarat in 2002″
a. no mention of which community burned the train killing 59? and i thought atheist are religiously neutral, lol
b. if it was “state-sponsored” or one sided then how come about 254 hindus got killed?
’790 Muslims and 254 Hindus were killed’
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2002_Gujarat_violence
2. “violence against Christians in various parts (especially in Orissa and Karnataka)”
in the orissa violence a 80 yr hindu monk (who used to a run a girls school) was killed by christian missionaries for opposing conversion, go to youtube and see the video.
how about publishing a data of all riots in each decade and showing everyone a pie chart so people can see for themselves if ‘hindus’ are really that fanatics, instead of selectively quoting few major incidents.
You said – “i fear that i might be be attacked if i criticize islam or christianity. afterall everyone loves their life and me too, hehe”.
And I just showed you that you are wrong. Instead of admitting it, you indulge in strawmen arguments.
those articles are not even 5% of your website. btw, think over my suggestions, try to compile a list of violent incidents and publish a report, it will be enlightening for your readers. anyway, indian atheist has a lot to learn from western atheists who criticize all religions. bye bye.
The point was not about the number of articles. The point is about whether we criticize other religions or not. India has more Hindu believers than other believers. So obviously the criticisms will be more for Hindu beliefs.
Here is another exercise that will show you how wrong you are (again);
A “Western” atheist site – http://richarddawkins.net/. Please count the no. of articles that criticize Christianity and no. that criticize other religions.
I think there is an element of truth in Ravi’s statement, despite the number of articles NIRMUKTA has published criticising islamists as Satish Chandra shows.
I don’t want Hinduism (or any religion, for that matter) to be degenerated to such a level that Islam has reached today as a result of the activities of Islamists. That is why we should not allow the RSS, Bajrang Dal, VHP, etc to hijack Hinduism. That is why we need to uphold the ideals of secularism. Remember, Islam was not always as dogmatic as it is today. An Omar Khayam is not possible in an intolerent society.
=Manoj
You may be right. One thing, If you criticize Hinduism, there will be no harm to you. Try criticizing others, You can see what happens. Hope you know what happened to a professor in Kerala
This is a case of special pleading. There are multiple cases of Hindu violence instigated by those offended when their religion was criticized. There are thousands of examples of people, including us Indians, criticizing Islam and other religious belief systems. Of course modern followers of Islam are more fundamentalist in general that modern followers of Hinduism, but take it easy with the generalizations.
Sorry this comment was for the wrong article
Also, people who are supporting this, please give me the name and address of the supposedly good ones in and around Chennai, I will go and if allowed provide you a whole audio transcript.
I can’t make head and tail of this comment. Supporting what or whom? Supporing the arguments in my main article? Arguments in my last comment? Supporting Kanaada who commented on my article?
And, what is this audio transcript about? A rabid speech of a Hindu, Muslim, or Christian fanatic? Or even a secular fanatic!
- manoj
While I responded to Kanaadaa’s comments, I failed to mention the increasing religiosity seen among a large section Keralaites – not only Muslims, but Hindus and Christians too.
While Muslim women wearing Burkha is perhaps the most visible sign of this phenomenon, the religiosity shown by other groups also is equally disturbing. Young men wearing sandalwood paste on their forehead while roaming around in public places, married women sporting sindoor to indicate their marital status, celebration of alien festivals such as immersing of Ganesha idol in water bodies, Rakhi, etc were not part of Hindu community two decades back. Among Christians, prayer congregations such as in Pota are the obvious signs of this longing for this increased religious identity.
And it is wrong to say that the Christians and Muslims taken together outnumber Hindus, if one goes by the last official census. According to Census 2001, the percentage of Hindus in Kerala is 56.20% (See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kerala_ethnic_groups, accessed today).
Again, what is wrong even if the population of these communities exceeds that of Hindus? I am not asking this as a rhetorical question. Please tell me what precisely is wrong with that? From a liberal point of view it hurts me if any religious faith plays a decisive role in ones life. But tell me, what is the Hindu perspective?
- manoj
Though the comments seem like an accusation against rationalists, I find myself in agreement with every statement Kanaadaa makes. It is really a sad state of affairs that a very large number of Muslim women are now donning burkha/hijab, which was unheard of in Kerala two decades back.
I am also mostly in agreement with Kanaadaa’s remark on the formation of Malappuram district, though the explicit rationale of forming the district was the backwardness of the area. However, with the extremely limited political authority a district administration has, in what way this could have helped Muslim fundamentalists?
Proliferation of mosques also is a fact. But isn’t it also a fact that temples and churches have also been mushrooming across Kerala during the same period?
- Manoj
<>
Amusing! Islamic appeasement in Kerala has a long history. The supposedly rational Communists carved out a Muslim majority district – Malappuram – in the 1950s, for no other reason than to curry favour with the fundamentalists. For over 20 years now, the practices of Muslims in N.Kerala has been slowly but surely becoming more rigid and backward. Notice the increasing use of hijabs, and even burkhas, the proliferation of mosques, and the consolidation of jihadist groups such as Madhani’s PDP. Besides in Kerala the Muslims and Christians toether outnumber the Hindus. But while Hindus are not permitted to set up their own secular educational institutions, Christians and Muslims are, leading to a mushrooming of evangelical and jihadist freindly schools and colleges.