Hindutva History Defeated in Sacramento

By Raju Rajagopal

As I had predicted in my previous articles on the CA textbooks controversy, the Superior Court in Sacramento has just handed a clear and unambiguous defeat to the Hindu American Foundation (HAF) and its Hindutva allies in their challenge to the contents of the sixth-grade History-Social Science textbooks. The court ruled that the books "broadly and accurately describe the outlines of Hindu religious belief"; that "petitioners have not demonstrated that the challenged textbooks violate applicable legal standards…"; and that "The relief…shall not include…requiring respondent to rescind its approval of the challenged texts or take steps to remove them from use."

In short, Hindutva groups lost their substantive arguments that the textbooks were inaccurate and that they did not treat Hinduism on par with other religions. Even more importantly, it means that California's 495,000 students, who had been held hostage to Hindutva's view of history, will soon have the new textbooks in their hands -– minus the Hindu Education Foundation and the Vedic Foundation's blatantly sectarian and flawed versions of history.

The court's ruling in each of the areas contested by HAF were very much in line with the arguments made my South Asian scholars and South Asian advocacy groups, which were described in detail in my previous articles. The ruling was also consistent with my own conclusions in those articles. (see http://www.sulekha.com/blogs/blogdisplay.aspx?cid=76370 and http://www.sulekha.com/blogs/blogdisplay.aspx?cid=85758)

Here are some of the highlights from Hindutva's defeat in Sacramento today, in the words of the Superior Court [underlines and headings are mine]:

The Caste System:

"The caste system is a historical reality, and indisputably was a significant feature of ancient Indian society. Nothing in the applicable standards requires textbook writers to ignore a historical reality of such significant dimension, even if studying it might engender certain negative reactions in students. Indeed, it appears to the Court that to omit treatment of the caste system from the teaching of ancient Indian history would itself be grossly inaccurate."

"Just as the regulation does not require textbooks to ignore unpleasant historical realities, it does not require them to present such realities in an unnaturally positive light…the texts…have satisfied the requirement of neutrality."

Women's Status in Ancient India:

"The Court reaches a similar conclusion with regard to the texts' discussion of the status of women in ancient Indian society…These discussions appear on their face to be neutral, objective, dispassionate, factually accurate, not derogatory or accusatory in their tone, and not such as would instill prejudice against the Hindu religion or believers."

"…the possibility, or even probability, that some students might react negatively, based on their own religious, political or social beliefs, to what they read in these books does not make the books legally invalid. The law does not insure against negative reactions or prejudices, it merely requires that the textbooks not instill them. The challenged books meet that requirement."

Treatment of Hinduism vs. other religions:

"Petitioners' contention that the textbooks have the effect of comparing the Hindu religion unfavorably to other religions is also unpersuasive. Where the books describe the development of Buddhism, for example, as in part a reaction against certain Hindu beliefs and practices, they do so in an objective and dispassionate manner that has not been demonstrated to be historically inaccurate. Moreover, the books also appear to accept the idea that Buddhist teachings reflected and accepted many Hindu ideas."

"Similarly, petitioners have not persuaded the Court that the textbooks tend to favor religions such as Christianity or Judaism over Hinduism…The fact that the discussion of Christianity and Judaism is longer than that of Hinduism, or that one religion or another is illustrated by more pictures (or, allegedly, more attractive pictures)…by itself does not establish a violation of the applicable legal standards. As noted above, the essential inquiry is whether the texts appear to be neutral. In this case, the Court finds that they are…"

"Inaccuracies":

"Petitioners claim that there are a number of significant inaccuracies in the challenged texts, such as the listing of the `Major Hindu Deities', the identification of a particular Hindu deity in a picture caption, and the translation of certain words, among others…The Court finds that petitioners have not demonstrated that respondent's approval of the challenged texts should be invalidated on this basis…there is substantial evidence to show that where actual errors were involved…the inaccuracies have been corrected in the final versions of the texts."

"In other cases, such as the list of major Hindu deities, the description of a certain text as the `most sacred' in the Hindu tradition, or the translation of the word `namaste', there is not any gross inaccuracy, but at most a difference of emphasis or opinion."

"It is true that the books do not explore these topics in great scholarly detail, but there is no legal requirement that such a level of detail be contained in grade-school school textbooks. In the Court's view, the books broadly and accurately describe the outlines of Hindu religious belief, which is all the law requires.

The Origin of Aryans:

"Petitioners also argue that the books are inaccurate in their treatment of the so-called `Aryan invasion' or `Aryan migration' theories…[which] are the subject of debate among scholars in the field, and that such debate should be acknowledged explicitly in the books. This argument is not persuasive…First, it appears…that the publishers…have in fact been directed to recognize the ultimate uncertainty of these theories…More fundamentally, even if such direction had not been given, the texts would not be invalid for that reason. While some scholars may question the Aryan invasion or migration theories, there is no showing that such theories are not widely or even generally accepted at this point, such that presenting them without significant qualification would be grossly inaccurate."

"Moreover…the History-Social Science Content Standards…specifically require sixth-grade students to study and recognize the significance of the Aryan invasions of India. Those standards are not challenged in this action. At some point, the state of historical research and the scholarly consensus in the field may change to the point where it would no longer be accurate to refer to a viable Aryan invasion or migration theory in a discussion of ancient Indian culture. Petitioners have not demonstrated that such a condition exists now. The Court therefore does not find that the references to Aryan invasions or migrations make the textbooks grossly inaccurate or otherwise in violation of law."

Overall:

"…petitioners argue that the texts violate legal requirements because their descriptions and depictions of the Hindu religion are not neutral, but tend to portray the Hindu religion in a negative light or even as inferior to other religions… In this area, petitioners' argument is not based on alleged inaccuracies in specific facts, but on the overall `read' of the passages regarding the Hindu religion, evaluated in their entire context by themselves…"

"Having reviewed all of the selections from the challenged textbooks that have been put before it by the parties, the Court finds that the manner in which the books treat the Hindu religion does not violate this standard. The various texts appear to the Court on their face to be dispassionate and neutral with regard to religion, objectively describing the features of the Hindu religion and others without overtly or covertly `taking sides' with one over another. Moreover, the Court finds nothing in the way of derogatory language or examples from sacred texts or other religious literature that could be classified as derogatory, accusatory or that would instill prejudice against the Hindu religion or its faithful." To put it very simply, Hindutva groups lost on all of their substantive allegations with regard to the contents of the textbooks.

Of course, HAF is sure to make much of the fact that the Brief of Amici Curiae filed by South Asian advocacy groups was not in the end admitted by the Court; but that non-acceptance, presumably based on technical/procedural grounds, is somewhat academic at this point as the court's ruling described above makes it abundantly clear that substantive issues covered in that brief had already been fully taken into account by the court.

Hindutva groups, I am sure, will also make much of the court's ruling directing the State Board of Education (Board) to prepare more formal regulations governing the future adoption process. "...respondent has not complied with a specific statutory mandate that it enact regulations governing its textbook approval process as formal regulations pursuant to the Administrative Procedures Act."

As I stated in a previous article, the State of California already bends over backwards in its process to allow communities to comment on textbooks -- which is probably what landed them in such a mess in the first place, by allowing unfettered access to sectarian and cultish groups like the Vedic Foundation and RSS groups like the Hindu Education Foundation, which claimed to speak on behalf of all Hindus and sought to inject their sectarian versions of history. So, it is not altogether a bad idea for the State to better regulate the future textbook adoption process.

As Diane Ravitch of the Hoover Institution, who was on a committee that revised California's History curriculum in the 1980's, wrote in the Los Angeles Times (May 16, 2006): "Telling publishers that their books must instill pride only guarantees a phony version of feel-good history…Certainly, textbooks should accurately portray society in all its complexity. But to impose contemporary political requirements on how the events are portrayed only ensures that the history we teach our students is inaccurate and dishonest…What the state should expect of publishers is that they produce books that are as honest and accurate as possible. Such narratives would be far likelier to instill humility, a recognition of human folly, an understanding of conflict and differences and a sense of our common humanity rather than a sense of pride." The Superior Court in Sacramento seems to have sided with her view that books should be honest and accurate and not pander to the `false pride' of any community.

It is time for Hindutva groups to stop manipulating Hindu students and parents by appealing to their baser instincts through a contrived sense of "Hindu Pride." It is time for the South Asian scholarly community to get more intimately involved in the preparation of school curricula, instead of reacting to Hindutva onslaughts from time to time. And it is time for concerned Indian parents to join together in contributing to Indian history that is reflective of the plurality of Indian and Hindu thought, and which does not elide over the lived realities of women, Dalits and other lower castes, and religious minorities.