To: President Jonathan Holloway, Chancellor Nancy Cantor, SVP of Equity Anna Branch
We are writing to you as practitioners of the Hindu tradition to express serious concerns regarding the open bigotry and the perpetuation of a hostile environment against Hindus at Rutgers University. We are witnessing first hand the impact of this hostility on our children and our community at large. We are concerned about the Hindu students of Rutgers who are under relentless attacks and threats because of their religion and express our solidarity with them. True to our tenet of Ahimsa Paramo Dharma (non-violence is the highest virtue), we condemn violence and threats of violence against anyone.
We raise this concern, even though we are painfully aware of the history of western scholarship and academia misinterpreting our holy texts, religious practices and our way of life based on their biases. We are also well aware of the western white privilege that dominated and continues to dominate the discourse over most indigenous traditions, including Hinduism. Over the past few centuries, European colonizers projected their supremacist views and prejudices about our culture as scholarship, generally after discounting the practitioner's perspective and demonizing the natives as “savage” and “bizarre.” Today, the same practice is being condoned in the name of western scholarship and academic freedom. This phenomenon continues in spite of a severe need for a larger cultural context or understanding of the Hindu tradition and way of life. We register our dismay, but leave it for the conscientious administrators and academicians to introspect, recognize and address the broader issue.
Our country has a long history of respecting academic freedom. We have gone out of our way to promote open discussion of ideas in a classroom, to the extent of declaring that “academic freedom is a special concern of the First Amendment.” As Hindu Americans we fully subscribe to the open exchange of ideas in the classroom and the freedom of academics to pursue their inquiries without any restraints.
However, we cannot overlook the dishonesty of Associate Professor Audrey Truschke, who “misquoted” another scholar’s translation of the sacred Hindu epic, Ramayana, in order to perpetuate personal biases against all known Hindu interpretations of that portion of the text. Under the pretext of scholarship, she misinterprets Sita to have accused Shri Rama, one of the most popular deities of Hinduism and Jainism, of being a “misogynistic pig”. Misinterpreting and distorting another scholar’s work is not academic freedom. Even more troubling is that there are no consequences for this sort of academic dishonesty and bigotry. That the university tolerates such dishonesty naturally raises questions on the quality of education being imparted as well.
While we accept and applaud the freedoms given in academia, we cannot be blind to the facts on the ground and ignore the inherent imbalance of power in the classroom between the teacher and the student. Nor is there any effective recourse against a teacher who shuts down all opposition to her views by labeling it extremist. As an obvious example, all right minded people would agree that an anti-semitic professor of literature cannot use Shylock as a stereotype in her class and hide behind “academic freedom” without seriously offending her Jewish students.
Professor Truschke persistently seeks to disrespect and demonize Hindus - publicly on social media. She simultaneously also blocks any attempt from seasoned Hindu scholars to engage or debate her assertions- maintaining a facade of openness, while silencing all dissent. When such open hostility is part of the public record, one can only imagine what students are subjected to, when out of the public eye - in classes and during professional interactions. Free exchange of ideas cannot flourish in an environment where a professor can use her power to block all dissenting views with impunity.
Since history is almost always written by the winners, teachers of history have a special responsibility to be open to alternate narratives, especially those of the colonized and the enslaved. Today we place great emphasis, and rightly so, on the voices of the enslaved people of our country and the Native American voices. Where is the space for the voices of Hindus who reject the colonial, racist inspired theories of the last few centuries that depicted them as savage, ignorant and in constant need of the “white savior”?
Universities are supposed to be safe spaces, a melting pot for competing ideas and diverse identities. Increasingly, there is an obvious attempt to silence the voices of practicing Hindus at universities like Rutgers. Academics who indulge in petty partisan politics and vilify the Hindu community are eroding the little safe space that ever existed. The vilification is precise and methodical. Bhagavad Gita, arguably the most famous Hindu sacred text is portrayed as “rationalizing mass slaughter,” even though the text does no such thing and has greatly influenced several world leaders throughout history, including Gandhi, Thoreau, Emerson, Einstein and others. Along the same lines, Professor Truschke contends that the Mahabarata somehow rationalizes “rape culture” and hence Hinduism is directly responsible for the social problems of Indian society today.
This denigration and Hinduphobia have serious consequences, including threats of violence against Hindu community members. As members of an indigenous minority faith, Hindu students already struggle to find respect and understanding for their very different beliefs. But, thanks to Professor Truschke’s supporters, slurs like “dotheads” are back in vogue, harking back to the violent era of the “Dotbusters,” and the violent hate crimes against Hindus and even those who look like Hindus. She fails to condemn bigotry against Hindu students even while she blocks those who attempt to engage with her in a civil manner.
To make matters worse, she summarily dismisses and gaslights the Hindu students who are feeling unsafe or threatened and are vocal about it, as “right wing extremists” or handmaidens of a foreign government (“BJP IT Cell”). The very fact that Professor Truschke and others at Rutgers think that this is a manufactured issue shows the prevalence of Hinduphobia and the gaslighting of Hindus is at Rutgers. We cannot help but wonder at the irony of self-appointed protectors of free speech silencing American students by branding them with the political ideology of a foreign country.
This relentless bigotry against the Hindu American community has larger ramifications. As a small minority, composed primarily of people of color, we have been subjected to hate crimes and attacks for our religious beliefs. University campuses are supposed to be safe spaces for our children, family, friends and co-religionists. Unfortunately that does not appear to be the case when professors are openly biased against a specific religion. The fig leaf of “we are opposed to the Hindutva ideology, not Hinduism” falls apart when derogatory comments are directed at Hindu religious icons, texts and Hindus as a people.
We are very worried about the safety and well-being of our children and the Rutgers Hindu student community. We stand in solidarity with the students and the larger Hindu community at Rutgers and against all forms of bigotry, violence and threats of violence.
We urge you to prioritize the student concerns and the serious threat of gaslighting they continue to face, as they work with the administration in good faith to address Hinduphobia in the Rutgers community.
