(A report submitted by one of our
well-wishers in the USA.)
From: Hindu Vivek Kendra
Dr. Prema Kurien gave a talk on
"The Emergence of American Hinduism" on Wednesday, March 21st at Columbia
University's South Asian Studies Department. Dr. Prema Kurien, a woman
in her 20s, originally hails from Kerala. While a Christian herself, she
did her PhD from California specializing in Hinduism. Her goal is to become
the leading authority on the emerging phenomenon of American Hinduism.
An organized effort is going on to study about the American Hindus, but
undertaken largely by Christians. At the very least, this should provoke
the question as to whether Hindus should place greater priority to study
their own identity and community. Rather than being mere informants for
scholars, mere straw men and women to fit others' theories and agendas,
should they take responsibility over their own academic scholarship? Otherwise,
they should not complain over the re-engineering of their identities, often
a first step before harvesting their souls.
She presented an intriguing and
provocative analysis of the way in which diasporic Indian Hindus in America
end up supporting Hindutva ideology (often unconsciously) while at the
same time being dedicated to the notion that "Hinduism" is an all-inclusive,
tolerant religion. She argued that these two apparently opposing stances
are in practice blended by the needs for cultural identity. By proudly
identifying with a "universalistic religion" rather than with a nation,
continent, or race, Indians avoid the racial stereotyping and pigeonholing
that befalls many other immigrant groups. She argued that this helps immigrant
Indians feel less "third-worldly" and more "modern/global," etc. Perhaps
the unintentional effect of this is, however, that it supports the notion
that to be Indian is to be Hindu - hence the Hindutva connection.
She positions Hindutva as an attempt
to universalize Hinduism so as to escape the third worldliness of being
seen as Indian. However, the South Asianization project (by departments
such as the one that invited her to give the talk) is luring young Indians
precisely into giving up their Indian identity by becoming South Asians
instead. Also, it has been said that the conversions in India are often
motivated by the quest for 'phoren' identity that Christianity is presumed
to grant. She fails to acknowledge these attempts to escape from third
world identity. She also finds it a contradiction that Hinduism presents
itself as a tolerant and universal religion. Yet, she does not go into
details as to why this is a contradiction. [Presumably, she feels that
the image of universality and tolerance should be exclusively reserved
for her own religion.] Her research questions appear designed to validate
preconceived conclusions.
Regarding "Hindutva" itself, she
is fairly good at nuancing and problematizing that term as well. And she
has some interesting analyses of the kinds of overseas Indians end up funneling
money to Hindutva organizations, and how, and why, etc. It is interesting
how she examines the flow of funds into Hindu organizations in India, while
not making any comparison with the flow of funds via Christian organizations
on a hundred-fold grander scale. An audience well equipped with facts and
figures could make the Q&A session much more lively.
Her observations are based not on
mere speculation but rather on her extensive field research/interviews
of Indians in Southern California. When pressed, she acknowledges that
hers is a single case study, and that her findings may or may not apply
to Indians elsewhere in the U.S. (e.g. one person pointed out that the
experiences of Indians in urban areas like NYC are quite different).
She is very intelligent, seems to
do good research, and is very open to discussion and criticism. She would
no doubt add richness, breadth, and depth to the perspectives of any panel.
She did not want to share a hard
copy of her paper - some of it will be submitted for journal publication
in a couple months (doesn't know which journal yet), and the bulk of her
research will come out as a book later. Among the topics she is researching
and will cover in her book are: The immigrant computer workers and internet
Hinduism; case studies of local satsang organizations and bal vihars; case
studies of Hindu temples in USA; case studies of Hindu 'umbrella' organizations
in USA; case studies of various Hindu student organizations in USA.
There is an impressive speed and
efficiency with which certain Christian organizations are going about developing
their next generation of intellectual samurais. At Princeton University's
Center for World Religions, Dr. Kurien, a newly arrived post-doctorate
faculty, is already seen by some as an expert on Hinduism. Many Indian
students on American campuses cannot see through this seemingly 'objective'
scholarship.
This should be cause for introspection
by those Hindu 'intellectuals' who have held the attitude that: (a) they
don't care about the humanities in education; (b) they are better off focusing
on temples, ashrams, family based education; and (c) they don't know enough
to dispute the claims of 'objectivity' by scholars. One should ask whether
these are world-negating positions.
This is NOT suggesting that Dr.
Kurien's work is shoddy or that Christians stop their 200-year old project
of intensely studying Hinduism. However, at such talks by so-called 'experts',
there should be a respondent from the tradition being portrayed, as that
is very much within the norms of academic practice. It would be unthinkable
to have a talk on African Americans by a white scholar in which no black
scholar is invited to the panel or to give a response. It would be unimaginable
to have a talk on women by a male researcher without the gender balancing
of having a woman scholar's response with equal time allotted. Hence, why
is it considered ridiculous, impolite, and sometimes 'fundamentalist' to
suggest that practicing Hindu scholars be included in events on Hinduism?
In this regard, the few practicing
Hindus in US academia, both ethnic Indians and non Indians alike, are very
scarce and deserve to be morally supported for what they have to put up
with in their careers. Until the numerical imbalance in academe changes
with more Hindu practitioner-scholars, one cannot expect much change along
the lines of what has happened already with Jewish, Islamic, Buddhist,
African American, women's, and gay/lesbian studies.
