Bishop Edghill needs to investigate Thomas

Jun 27, 2011 Letters

---

Dear Editor,
Response is made to the call by Mr. Evan Thomas for Bishop Juan Edghill to censure Dr. Ravi Dev (KN Jun 19) — but for what? We don’t have an answer. Thomas suggested “an evil intent” about Dev writing about the use of flour in Hindu ceremonies.  So I went back and read and re-read Dev’s ripostes (Jun 15, 16) and asked some scholars to do same.  No one could decipher the “evil” mentioned by Thomas. Dev’s ripostes are well organized, effective and flawless. Thomas’s retort is illogical and disrespectful. It clearly shows he is “seeing things” that don’t exist, conjuring up evil images when none exist. His retort has incurred the wrath of many I have spoken with as they see a malicious intent to promote ethnic and religious strife and disunity. What Thomas offered is a loony response to an intelligent commentary from Dev and he comes across as a quack.
Thomas says Dev needs to liberate his mind but he does not tell readers how and why this should be done.
People have a right to their ethnic cultural food, dress, language, etc. and any effort to curb these freedoms is tantamount to cultural genocide. No one can dispute that roti (made from flour not from grounded cassava and plantain), dhal, and alou are basic staples in the Indian diet.  When you deny them the right to eat these foods, when you criminalize their consumption, you are engaging in cultural genocide.  Denying people their cultural food can also lead to physical genocide. Grounded rice, cassava, plantain does not provide the same nutrients as flour (wheat).  Because of cultural and religious practices, Indians have a restricted diet and as such the above staples are a must in their diet.
Contrary to what Thomas penned, access to flour or roti has nothing to do with “Indians planting and milling flour centuries before Christians or Africans”. It is the right of a group to have access to their ethnic foods.  Thus, Indians have a right to flour, dhal, alou, etc., essential food items brought from India and shared with the rest of the population through cultural diffusion.
Evan Thomas applauded the editor for making “pertinent observations to moot Dev’s contentions” and he “was heartened that Dev’s one sided comments were exposed”. The editor’s interjection — “In India the Hindus do not rely explicitly on wheat flour. Further, in Guyana, Hindus, … relied on rice flour.  … what happened during the World Wars when food imports were hard to come by. Surely, Hinduism did not die”  — is wholly inappropriate and incorrect.  Indians always used wheat for their poojas, Koran Shariefs, and Christian services. Grounded rice was only used for the preparation of a special prasad called Panjiri, not for mohanbhog because the scriptures do not allow it, and not for puri, rote, lapsey, and roti – all require wheat.
It should be noted that in the US, there was a shortage of gas during the 1970s and people were forced to conserve energy. Using Thomas’s logic, would it be okay to ban the imports of gasoline because of a political situation? When a nation is at war, like the world wars, one has to make do with what is available.  But Guyana was not at war during the 1970s and 1980s except the war waged against the political opposition, racial discrimination, and victimization. The ban on essential foods and criminalization of their consumption could not be justified.
Dev’s ripostes offer no inference that Hinduism is superior to any religion. He never intoned religious or ethnic superiority.  Only a quack and sick mind can draw such an inference. Like me, Dev feels Indians have a right to their food just like Africans and Christians have a right to theirs. Burnham had no right to deny anyone their cultural foods or religious paraphernalia no matter the political situation – no amount of defense from Thomas can justify Burnhamism.
Unlike Thomas, Dev has a pure mind and it is evinced from his writings. He led the call for ethnic equality and shared governance through federalism. It is Thomas’s mind that “reeks of a cesspool of filth”, to use his own term.
And Thomas can never substantiate his charge of bigotry. Dev, like me, never suggested that Africans or Christians did not suffer from the bans – no bigotry there.  It is Thomas who is bigoted for refusing to accept the right of Indians to their cultural and religious items. It is Thomas who called on Dev to accept Jesus in his life when there is no relevance. It clearly shows who has a bigoted mind and who is thinking about superiority of faith and race.
I agree with Thomas that “he and others need to go out and find people like Burnham” and condemn them for wanting to deny people access to their ethnic foods. Once that is done Dev, Bisram and others “will be silent” because they can eat roti and dhal without fear.
Clearly, Thomas has committed “a travesty”, to use his own word, by leveling accusations that cannot be substantiated from the writings of Dev and myself. Bishop Juan Edghill needs to investigate him for bigotry, hate, prejudice, etc.
Vishnu Bisram

---

---