Author: Dave Freedholm
Publication: www.sulekha.com
Date: February 5, 2003
URL: http://www.sulekha.com/column.asp?cid=291759
In a recent article on Sulekha,
Sankrant Sanu examined Microsoft Encarta's treatment of Hinduism, Islam
and Christianity. He concluded that Encarta's portrayal of Hinduism was
decidedly skewed and negative in comparison to the more even-handed and
sophisticated treatments granted Islam and Christianity. Sanu's article
[i] prompted me to look closer at the world religions textbook I have often
used in my teaching. This textbook, Mary Pat Fisher's Living Religions
(5th ed., Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 2002), is published by
one of the largest textbook publishers in the U.S. and is an often-used
text in American colleges, universities and prep schools.
In my view, Fisher's book is, on
the whole, a very good textbook and, in comparison to others, presents
relatively balanced and sympathetic portrayals of the world's religions.
But, that being said, I have always contended that Hinduism and, in comparison
to the other major world religions, does not receive equal treatment in
Fisher's book and is at times painted in decidedly negative ways. What
follows is a brief case study comparing how Fisher treats women's issues
in Hinduism, Christianity and Islam.
Fisher gives relatively short attention
to women's issues in Hinduism despite her claim in the introduction to
the 5th edition that "coverage of women's contributions and women's issues
has been increased."(p. 13) Fisher's treatment of women's issues in Hinduism
comes in the context of a longer section on devotion to various forms of
the devi. Her transition sentence is quite telling and reveals the overall
tone of her coverage of women's issues in Hinduism:
Worship of the goddess in India
and Nepal continues to exist side by side with social attempts to limit
and confine women's power. (p. 105)
Fisher goes on to accent the historical
and contemporary "ambivalence" in Hinduism towards women which is revealed
in the contrast between the veneration of the feminine in Hindu thought
and practice and the pronounced patriarchalism of Hindu society.
In the three short paragraphs that
follow this opening, Fisher stresses what she sees as the negative treatment
of women in Hindu society. She notes that while the ideal of Hindu marriage
is for husband and wife to be "spiritual partners,"
A women's role is usually linked
to that of her husband, who takes the position of her god and guru. For
many centuries, there was even the hope that a widow would choose to be
cremated alive with her dead husband in order to remain united with him
after death. (p. 105)
This is a rather astonishing shift
of gears which leaves the impression that sati was somehow the ideal historically
in Hinduism. There is no explanation or qualification of this claim. The
uninformed reader, most of whom are young American students, would assume
that sati, the burning of widows on their husbands' pyres, was and maybe
even is the normal expectation for Hindu wives.
What Fisher does not say is that
sati was never widely practiced in India and in the modern period is very,
very rare. Also, as Madhu Kishwar (editor of Manushi, one of India's foremost
feminist journals) writes of the practice of widow burning "There is absolutely
no evidence that any of our vast array of religious texts sanctified such
murders as sati."[ii] As well, Fisher fails to note that sati is universally
abhorred by Hindu leaders, thinkers and practitioners. Placing such an
unexplained and unqualified statement in this context is very misleading
and unfair. As Yvette Rosser has said:
Defining Hindu practices through
a discussion of sati is no more accurate than defining Christianity by
delving at length into the "Burning Times" in Medieval Europe when as many
as nine million women, and even children, were burned at the stake as witches
through the encouragement and official approval of the Christian Church.
The burning of women does not define Christianity any more than the burning
of widows defines Hinduism - both are long discarded practices of the past.[iii]
In fact, given that the objective
in the American classroom should be to help students gain an appreciation
of a minority religion's central ideas, the topic of sati is as irrelevant
and unsuitable as witch burning would be for a discussion of Christianity.
If this isn't disconcerting enough,
Fisher concludes her brief treatment of women's issues by again contrasting
the ideal view of women in Hindu society with the very bad treatment that
women actually receive. She says:
By the nineteenth century, however,
wives had become the virtual slaves of the husband's family. With expectations
that the girl will take a large dowry to the boy's family in a marriage
arrangement, having girls is such an economic burden that many female babies
are intentionally aborted or killed at birth. There are also cases today
of women being severely beaten or killed by the husband's family after
their dowry has been handed over. Nevertheless many women in contemporary
India have been well educated and many have attained high political positions.
Again, Fisher does not indicate
in what manner horrible practices such as infanticide and dowry murder
are linked to Hindu thought and practice (because, of course, they are
not). She simply implies that they must be linked, because there are such
societal problems in India they must somehow be related to Hinduism. This
would be akin to claiming that because there is considerable violence against
women in American society it is due to Christianity!
All in all, the above paragraph
is a rather remarkable string of sentences which seems to claim that some
women in India have succeeded despite the widely prevalent "slave" status
of wives, infanticide of female babies, and dowry violence and murder.
The uninformed reader would assume from Fisher's four paragraphs on women's
issues that, due to Hinduism, women are very seriously mistreated in Hindu
society and have very unequal status. Before commenting further on this,
it will be helpful to look at how Fisher deals with women's issues in her
chapters on Christianity and Islam.
In contrast to Hinduism, Fisher's
treatment of women's issues in Christianity concentrates not on the historical
role of women in Christian societies nor on the current attitudes towards
women in contemporary Christian societies but on Christian feminist theology.
In so doing, Fisher completely separates societal treatment of and attitudes
toward women from Christian institutions and theology. This is a move that
Fisher refused to make with Hinduism. Given that Christian societies have
not been any less patriarchal than Hindu societies, either historically
or in many current contexts, one wonders why Christianity is exempted from
the same responsibility. Would it be any less true, for example, to declare
of Christianity that "Devotion to Mary in Christian societies continues
to exist side by side with social attempts to limit and confine women's
power"? As well, why doesn't Fisher note that domestic violence against
women and murder of wives and girlfriends is a widespread (and, by the
way, is statistically far more frequent than in Indian society) in Christian
societies?
Well, one of the reasons seems to
be that Fisher contends that patriarchy and the mistreatment of women is
not consistent with the ideals of Christianity. In fact, she goes to great
lengths to make this clear this in her section on women's issues, explaining
that,
The Church institution has historically
been dominated by men, although there is strong evidence that Jesus had
active women disciples and that there were women leaders in the early churches.
(p. 354)
Also, acknowledging that one can
find statements in Christian scripture that "seem oppressive to women"
(p. 354), Fisher explains that Christian feminist theologians have tried
to "sort out the cultural and historical as well as the theological contexts
of such statements" (p. 355) and have looked to stress the positive "role
models for women in the Bible." (p. 355) Fisher also recognizes that while
church dogmas about Mary "may be inflated, they nonetheless reveal a wellspring
of hope for women." (p. 355)
What is interesting here is that,
in contrast to her portrayal of Hinduism, Fisher has tried to paint Christianity
in the best possible light with regard to women's issues. In her Hinduism
chapter, Fisher went to great lengths to emphasize the large inconsistency
between Hindu veneration of the devi and the supposed widespread mistreatment
of women in Hindu society. However, the same inconsistency between the
actual treatment of women in Christian societies and the egalitarian ideals
of Christianity is ignored. In fact, in the case of Christianity, Fisher
goes to great pains to highlight feminist reinterpretations of Christian
history and theology so as to show the true egalitarian ideal of Christianity!
Of course, the efforts of Hindu feminists like Madhu Kishwar to interpret
Hindu history and thought in egalitarian ways are not mentioned in Fisher's
textbook. The reader of Living Religions is then left with a very stark
contrast between the violent patriarchy of Hinduism and the feminist egalitarianism
of Christianity.
Moving to Fisher's chapter on Islam,
the reader is given a highly nuanced look at women's issues. Coming in
her section on Muslim resurgence in the modern world, Fisher speaks somewhat
candidly about the severe restrictions placed upon women in many Islamic
societies. She informs the reader about the very serious mistreatment of
women by the Taliban in Afghanistan and in other strict Islamic societies.
Tellingly, Fisher attempts to show that such treatment of women is really
against the ideals of Islam itself. She says,
Some customs thought to Muslim are
actually cultural practices not specified in the basic sources; they are
the result of Islamic civilization's assimilation of many cultures in many
places. Muhammad worked side-by-side with women, and the Qur'an encourages
equal participation of women in religion and in society. (p. 403)
Also, as with Christianity, Fisher
plays up the work of contemporary Muslim feminists who see Islam as inherently
egalitarian. She includes a long quote from Qur'anic scholar Amina Wadud,
who says:
The more research I did into the
Qur'an . . . the more affirmed I was that in Islam a female person was
intended to be primordially, cosmologically, spiritually, and morally a
full human being, equal to all. (p. 403)
What this reveals is that again
Fisher has gone to considerable effort to separate the actual treatment
of women in society, in this case Islamic society, from the ideals of the
religion in question as interpreted by contemporary feminist scholars.
In so doing, a distinction is drawn between "cultural practices," i.e.
the very real oppression and mistreatment of women in many Islamic societies,
and Islamic ideals of equality and egalitarianism.
What this brief comparison reveals
is that Hinduism is not afforded the same balanced and nuanced treatment
with regard to women's issues given to Christianity and Islam in Fisher's
textbook. Hinduism and Indian society are portrayed as schizophrenic in
that they venerate the devi and idealize women on the one hand and on the
other treat wives as "slaves," encourage sati, kill infant girls and condone
dowry murder. In contrast, the oppression and mistreatment of women in
Christian and Islamic societies are either ignored or seen as against the
true ideals of Christianity and Islam. Feminist scholarship and theology
are given wide play in the chapters on Christianity and Islam, but Fisher
is silent about feminism in Hindu thought. All of this leaves a very negative
impression of Hinduism vis a vis the other religions. It also can, unintentionally
perhaps, further stereotypes of what is seen as a backward and violent
Hinduism in contrast to a more progressive and liberated West.
A number of important observations
deserved to be made at this point. First, I am not trying to deny that
women have been oppressed at times in Hindu society. Of course, they have
been oppressed and have been the objects of violence from males, just as
women have received similar treatment in Christian and Islamic societies
(and in other societies as well). But what is the relationship between
theology and religious practice and societal oppression of women? It is
clear that religion and theology can be and is often used to sustain and
reinforce patriarchal attitudes in societies, whether they be Hindu, Christian
or Muslim. It is also clear that religion and theology can and have been
used in ways to challenge, break down and replace patriarchal attitudes
in these same societies. Which role is to be emphasized in a general introduction
to a religion? It is apparent that in the case of Fisher's textbook, the
former role is emphasized with Hinduism while the latter is played up in
the cases of Christianity and Islam. This raises the question of fairness
and balance in portrayals.
Secondly, what this short case study
shows is that care needs to be taken when making editorial decisions in
a textbook intended for beginning students. In this case, very little space
is allotted to women's issues within Hinduism. Is it fair to leave American
students with the impression that sati and dowry murder are the most characteristic
and important ways women are treated in Hindu society? How would Christians
feel if Indian textbooks spoke only of domestic violence against women
in their treatment of Christianity and women's issues? Why isn't contemporary
feminist thought in Hinduism given equal time? Why aren't Hindu ideals
and the attitudes of the vast majority of Hindus which abhor sati and dowry
murder talked about? Why does the author not discuss the Hindu women saints
in history, the enlightened and outspoken Hindu women in the Mahabharata,
the impressive statistics of the advancement of women in India in the past
fifty years in a variety of fields that compares favorably to similar statistics
in other former colonies, and, in many respects, with the West? Why does
she not discuss the fact that in the state of Maharashtra, a large number
of women priests have assumed leadership of Hindu worship?
In conclusion, this short study
focused only on the way women's issues are portrayed in Mary Fisher's Living
Religions. My experience in using and reading other textbooks on world
religions reveals that the unfair and unbalanced way that Fisher portrays
Hinduism in this case is quite typical unfortunately. Also, I would contend
that this unfair and inaccurate treatment of Hinduism extends to other
areas as well including portrayals of the caste system, descriptions of
the meaning of some religious symbols (e.g. the lingam), and characterizations
of modern Hindu movements. I would hope that textbook authors and publishers
would seek to remedy the imbalance in portrayals through a process of revisions
or by publishing new textbooks.
[i]http://www.sulekha.com/column.asp?cid=245733
[ii] Madhu Kishwar, "Deadly Laws
and Zealous Reformers: The Conflicting Interpretations and Politics of
Sati," http://www.infinityfoundation.com/ ECITdeadlylawsframeset.htm
[iii]Yvette C. Rosser, "The Clandestine
Curriculum in the Classroom," Education About Asia, Vol. 6:3 (Winter 2001)
