Volume 6, numéro 1, printemps 2025 Analyzing the Discourse of Religious Phobia

EN :

This introduction examines religiophobia as a product of misrepresentation and irrational fear, drawing on examples from Judaism, Islam, and Hinduism. Building on Wilfred Cantwell Smith’s comparative approach to the study of religion, it argues that dialogue, empathy, and attention to lived religious experience can challenge prejudice and foster greater interreligious understanding.

EN :

2024 marks the fiftieth anniversary of the Declaration on Judaism and Human Rights, issued by a distinguished group of international jurists, rabbis, and scholars at the 1974 McGill International Colloquium on Judaism and Human Rights. This article traces the emergence of a specifically Jewish religious human rights tradition to that moment of political crisis in the globalized Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Out of Montreal came three different meta-narratives about the relationship between Judaism and human rights each of which reflects a deep entanglement with questions of Zionism: a progressive humanism that stresses the unavoidable question of how Jewish rights and Palestinian rightlessness intersect; a revisionist conservatism that equates Jewish human rights with Zionist power; and a liberal antipolitics that seeks to partition Jewish human rights thought and activism from Zionism, freeing Jews from direct implication in the human rights crisis engulfing Israel and Palestine. Each of these meta-narratives is reflected in three different interpretations of the famous biblical verse that is a mainstay of contemporary Jewish human rights discourse: “Justice, justice, you shall pursue, that you may thrive and occupy the land that the Lord your God is giving you” (Deut. 16:20 [JPS]). The article closes by offering a fourth, alternative reading of the verse as a way to imagine a possible future for Jewish human rights.

EN :

This paper introduces the “Endogenous Cycle of Hinduphobia,” a theoretical construct explaining the perpetuation of stereotypical depictions and systematic omissions of Hinduism and Hindus in scholarship and media, which seed a biased master narrative about Hinduism in the public imagination. It highlights the role played by epistemic injustice in undermining Hindu testimony and scholarly contributions, sustaining a cycle of prejudice that entrenches this master narrative. Historical ties of American public education to colonial and missionary objectives are explored, illustrating how curricula have historically undermined Hindu religious and cultural identity by favouring narratives marked by violence, superstition, and moral degradation. The paper scrutinizes incidences where scholars and journalists trigger the endogenous cycle of Hinduphobia, arguing for an interrogation of the foundational premises upon which current representations are built. It also recounts the experiences of Hindu Americans who, as students, addressed the California Department of Education in 2016, highlighting the detrimental effects of such educational biases on their individual and collective identities. Ultimately, the paper aims to initiate steps toward dismantling the endogenous cycle of Hinduphobia, advocating for an educational paradigm that truly aligns with the tenets of democracy and pluralism.

EN :

This contribution to the special JCREOR issue on “Analyzing the Discourse of Religious Phobia” reflects on the political, professional, and personal dimensions of the theoretical discussions involved, by foregrounding my lived experience as a scholar who has been engaged with these questions for many years in North America. Distrust and discrimination based on religion have a complex history in North America, intertwined with the politics of race, culture and class. This paper builds on my own academic and personal experiences in interfaith cooperation, reconciliation, and healing in both Canada and the United States. I address two central themes: First, is there an opportunity to make peace and resolve the conflict? And second, can we use shared trauma as a bridge in ways that are mutually beneficial across communities?

EN :

This article challenges the conventional view of Hinduism as an “inherently” inclusive tradition, arguing that its historical realities and lived practices often reveal profound exclusivity. The author introduces a conceptual framework that distinguishes religiophobia – a spontaneous, emotional aversion to religious difference – from theophobia, a socially and politically conditioned fear of the religious “other” that fosters rigid “us versus them” dynamics in the public sphere. The paper demonstrates that psychological tendencies towards religious superiority are pervasive, affecting even renowned figures such as Mahatma Gandhi, who implicitly privileged Hinduism over other faiths. Furthermore, the paper documents a history of intra-faith sectarian disputes and inter-faith intolerance, describing the persecution, marginalization, and structural appropriation of other Indic traditions, mainly Buddhism and Jainism. Finally, the text delineates the distinction between traditional Hinduism and modern Hindutva. While Hinduism is described as an open-ended spiritual tradition, Hindutva functions as a narrow, monistic form of cultural nationalism. The paper concludes that Hindutva exploits xenophobic anxieties directed against external faiths to build an exclusive national identity, thereby undermining societal harmony by forsaking fundamental pluralistic principles.

EN :

This paper offers an overview of Hinduphobia, exploring its historical roots and contemporary forms in North America. Despite debates on its validity, this paper argues that Hinduphobia is a real and distinct form of prejudice combining racism and religious bigotry, fueled by fear and ignorance. Using historical analysis and a scholar-practitioner perspective, it traces anti-Hindu sentiment from colonial times to recent incidents like temple vandalism and digital extremism. To counter this intolerance, it bases its framework on Swami Vivekananda's pluralistic philosophy, especially his critique of sectarianism, bigotry, and fanaticism. The study proposes six strategies, including education, interfaith work, and reconciliation efforts, to promote acceptance, respect, and peaceful coexistence.