Supine summitry

Hindus brainwashed into believing that the Hindus of Bharat owe the Jews of the West some compensation for their ‘sufferings’ at the hands of their Christian compatriots, who believe there can be no questioning Jews on their claims to Palestine, and that dissent on any issue is out of the question, have had problems with the absence of a Jewish Infatuation on the part of this writer.

My objections are simple. Like Iranian president M. Ahmadinejad, I believe India as a nation and Hindus as a people have had no hand in the claimed historical sufferings of Jews through the millennia. Intellectual dissent about the Jewish story is now growing among Jerusalem and other Jews themselves, and should be followed with respect.

Leaving Jews to work out the internal dissent regarding their true history, what is undeniable is that Hindus of India cannot be made to accept ‘guilt’ for crimes they did not commit. We owe Jews, particularly the Ashkenazim dominant voice of International Jewry, no moral or historical restitution. They are, to us, like any other people towards whom we neither offer nor nurture any hostility.

Objections to Swami Dayananda’s Hindu Jewish Summitry is exactly as to the covert diplomacy with the Vatican – grave liberties were taken with the very definition of Hindu Dharma in the guise of promoting understanding between the two most ancient and living civilisations.

The First Hindu-Jewish Leadership Summit (6-7 February 2007, New Delhi) was held under the aegis of the World Council of Religious leaders and the Hindu Dharma Acharya Sabha and Aim for Seva. There were predictable noises about promoting understanding, tolerance, peace and conflict resolution through religion (whatever that means).

Some traditional mathams were present, but the Swamis spoke little or no English; the vocal Hindu component comprised of Indian and American Hindus whom Swami Dayananda ji is personally comfortable with; numbers were made up from Swamiji’s own organisations like Aim for Seva and Arsha Vidya family. Your writer was present as an observer and her objections to the meeting being conducted as a personal fiefdom of Swami ji were disrespected.

The Jews came with a heavy duty delegation led by Chief Rabbi of Israel Yona Metzger (Ashkenazim); Chief Rabbi David Rosen, President, International Jewish Committee for inter-religious consultation and International Director of Inter-religious Affairs, American Jewish Committee; Rabbi Professor Daniel Sperber, Professor of Talmud and Jewish studies, Bar Ilan University; Rabbi Dr. Israel Singer, Chairman, Policy Council of the World Jewish Congress and Chairman, International Jewish Committee for Inter-religious Consultation; Rabbi Moshe Garelik, Director of Rabbinical Center of Europe; Chief Rabbi Albert Guigui, Chief Rabbi of Belgium; and Chief Rabbi Isak Haleve, Chief Rabbi of Turkey. The reciprocal Hindu-Jewish leadership Summit took place in Jerusalem in February 2008, hosted by the Chief Rabbinate of Israel and the American Jewish Committee.

Semitic definition of Hindu Dharma

The core of my objections centered round the joint declaration signed by the Chief Rabbinate of Israel, Chief Rabbi, Shear Yeshuv Cohen and the Convener, Hindu Dharmacharya Sabha, Swami Dayananda Saraswati. Prepared in advance and accepted without application of mind by the Hindus, it read [emphasis mine]:

“The participants reaffirmed their commitment to deepening this bilateral relationship predicated on the recognition of One Supreme Being, Creator and Guide of the Cosmos; shared values; and similar historical experiences. The parties are committed to learning about one another on the basis of respect for the particular identities of their respective communities and seeking, through their bilateral relationship, to be a blessing to all.

“Recognised that the One Supreme Being, both in its formless and manifest aspects, has been worshipped by Hindus over the millennia. This does not mean that Hindus worship ‘gods’ and ‘idols’. The Hindu relates to only the One Supreme Being when he/she prays to a particular manifestation.

“Central to the Jewish and Hindu world view is the concept of the sanctity of life, above all, the human person. Accordingly, the participants categorically reject violent methods to achieve particular goals. In this spirit, the participants expressed the hope that all disputes be resolved through dialogue, negotiation and compromise promoting peace, reconciliation and harmony.”

The questions which Swami Dayananda is dodging are:

-        Is Hindu belief about the nature of creation the same as that in the Judaeo-Christian tradition?

-        Assuming that Hindus and Jews have shared values, what are the ‘similar historical experiences’? Surely Jews cannot credibly blame Islam or Muslims for their history.

-        Most unacceptable is the diminution of the glorious tradition of murti puja by claiming that Hindus do not worship ‘gods’ or ‘idols’ (a hideous colonial missionary term that has been accepted without consultation with thinking Hindus). The desire to conform to Semitic tradition is complete with the statement – ‘The Hindu relates to only the One Supreme Being…’ Without going into the theology of any faith, it should suffice to say that far from explaining the Hindu or Jewish traditions in terms of their own concepts, the convener HDAS allowed superimposition of Semitic categories upon Hindu dharma on Hindu bhumi.

-        Finally, the last point is cleverly worded to privilege human life and garner support for Jewish political objectives. The Vedic worldview recognises the sanctity of the whole creation, both animate and inanimate without distinction, and seeks the well-being of all; there is no privileging of the human person at all, and this is a common strain in the Hindu, Baudha, and Jaina sampradayas.

It may be pertinent to mention here that religion and politics go hand-in-hand in the Abrahamic traditions, of which Judaism is the first-born. The Hindu tradition however, has from its hoary origins dispersed spiritual-political-economic power amongst the populace via the Varna system, precisely to prevent concentration of power in any one social category. Hindu gurus inadequately aware of this critical difference could inadvertently advance a Jewish political agenda while supposedly discussing religion (as we shall see later)! Inter alia, we may note that the Rabbi David Rosen of the American Jewish Congress has close links to politicos and money bags all over America, and has been a frequent past contributor to the Democratic Party; as president of the so-called liberal-leaning American Jewish Congress he gave $100,000 to the Republicans when Bush decided to assault Iraq.

To conclude, there is nothing ‘Hindu’ in this joint declaration. I cannot say if the nuances of this declaration were properly explained to the Swamis who graced the occasion and spoke little or no English; but Swami Dayananda ji and his cohorts can have no such excuse.

The Hindu Swastika

The reciprocal Second International Hindu-Jewish Summit was held in February 2008 in the city of Jerusalem. I am at a loss to understand why, given the disputed nature of that city, the meeting was not held in the Israeli capital of Tel Aviv. To this day, I believe it was politically and civilisationally wrong of Swami Dayananda ji to privilege the Jewish claim to that city.  

The joint declaration reiterated the points of the Delhi declaration, and made a polite acknowledgement that all religions are sacred and valid for their respective peoples. It asserted that to promote ‘the correct understanding of Judaism, Hinduism and their histories, it was agreed that text books and reference material may be prepared in consultation with the scholars’ group under the aegis of this Summit.’

Here it will suffice to say that the Hindu component of the so-called scholars’ group had neither academic training nor standing for the said task [which enraged one of the members when I pointed it out to him]. HDAS did not even raise the issue of the powerful American Jewry taking an interest in correcting the hideous distortion of Hindu dharma in American school textbooks – such was the seriousness of the Hindu delegation.

HDAS was most triumphant that it got the Israeli and American Jews to accept that the ‘Svastika is an ancient and greatly auspicious symbol of the Hindu tradition… A distorted version of this sacred symbol was misappropriated by the Third Reich in Germany, and abused as an emblem under which heinous crimes were perpetrated against humanity, particularly the Jewish people. The participants recognize that this symbol is and has been sacred to Hindus for millennia, long before its misappropriation.’ It was ecstatic that the Jews agreed that there was no Aryan invasion of India!

So proud was Swami Dayananda Saraswati at his achievements at Jerusalem, that he wrote an article for New Indian Express (9 March 2008), saying the “Jerusalem meet concluded with a landmark declaration that Hindus worship ‘one supreme being' and are not really idolatrous.” Claiming this as a profound victory, he chortled, “Judaism was born of the complete repudiation of idol worship and rabbinic literature abounds with denunciations of idolatry in an entire tractate of the Talmud devoted to this… Hinduism has been perceived by them as idolatrous and promoting many gods…”

[This is outrageous. A Hindu guru who upholds the legitimacy for Hindus of the literature of another religion, and tries to make Hindu Dharma pass standards set by that intolerant sect, is betraying the Devas, the Dharma, the bhaktas, the Desh – nothing more need be said in this matter. In one stroke, he has also legitimised the missionary and jihadi hatred of and assault upon Hindu dharma in Hindu bhumi].

 
Swami Dayananda added, “When they understood that no form is separate from Isvara and the particular form enshrined in a temple is but an altar of worship, they did not see any real issue to contend with…” Once the fundamental misconception was removed, the Rabbinate also affirmed that the ‘svastika is an ancient and auspicious symbol of the Hindu tradition…’