Paper for the Coimbatore Meet on Conversion 10-12 Oct 2006

8/14/2019 Paper for the Coimbatore Meet on Conversion 10-12 Oct 2006

1/16

RE -T HIN KING TOGET HERInter -Faith Dial ogue on Con ver sion

Organised by

The Office on Inter-Religious Relations and Dialogue,World Council of Churches, Geneva

Shanti Ashram, Coimbatore : 10-12 October, 2006

* * * * *A Hi nd u P er spec tiv e b y S udhee ndra Kulk ar ni(Political activist and aide to former Prime Minister of India, Shri Atal Bihari Vajpayee)

* * * * *

I am grateful to the World Council of Churches for inviting me, once again, toparticipate in this inter-faith dialogue on Conversion. I have pleasant memories

of the meeting we had on the same subject at Lariano, near Rome, in May this

year.

The Lariano meeting was marked by a broad diversity of views which were

exchanged in a free and frank manner. Understandably, divergences remained at

the end of the consultation. However, a certain degree of convergence also

emerged and it was articulated in a joint report whose unanimous acceptance

testified to the usefulness of the inter-faith dialogue process on a subject as

contentious as conversion.

Since the Coimbatore meeting is in some ways a continuation of the consultation

in Lariano, I would like to suggest that it pursue four inter-related objectives:

1) It should re-affirm and further expand/enrich the points of agreement

reached in Lariano.

2) It should discuss and adopt a plan of action to disseminate the agreed

set of views (on the code of conduct) in the larger universe of

religious establishments and civil society organizations around the

world, so as to reduce the contentiousness surrounding the issue of

conversion.

3) The points of divergence should continue to be debated more rigorously

in wider circles in an atmosphere of openness and mutual trust.

4) The spirit of inter-faith dialogue should be further strengthened despite

or rather, because of -- the persistence of differences and

divergences. For we must always remember that dialogue among various

1


2/16

faith-communities is needed not to dissolve all differences but to find an

ethic of co-living in peace and harmony in spite of differences.

In this paper, I shall present my views on points 2, 3 and 4 - in reverse order.

Need f or inter-f aith dialogue on con ver sionTo say that the issue of religious conversion is a divisive one is to belabour the

obvious. History of many countries, India included, is replete with instances to

show that it has high potential to cause misunderstanding, tension and even

occasional violence.

Why should it be so? After all, purely on a theoretical basis, religious conversion

understood as an individuals right to change ones faith is a matter of

inalienable human freedom. Therefore, why should there be social tension if any

member or members exercise their basic freedom of faith? Yet, the irrefutable

fact is that religious conversion often creates tension and disharmony between

communities. Evidently, there is a wide chasm between freedom, in abstract, of

individuals to choose or change their faith, and the actual socio-historical context

and power-equations within which such change of faith takes place. Many

extraneous factors, which often have little to do with the individuals free and

well-deliberated choice, come into play in the phenomenon of religious

conversion.

Some of these extraneous factors (employment of unethical means such asinducements of various kinds, often using foreign funds; targeting of vulnerable

sections of society; coercive methods that ride on use of political power; overt or

covert propaganda against certain faiths as being false and inadequate and in

favour of ones faith as being the sole savior, etc.) are not only irreligious and

besmirch the hallowed name of religion, but they also shrink the space of

religious freedom available to individuals and communities.

Def in itional iss ues: There is another source of discord, and it is definitional. Asstated earlier, freedom of faith of every human being is fundamental to his or her

existence. And freedom of faith includes freedom to propagate ones faith and tochange ones faith. No power on earth can legitimately snatch away this freedom.

However, whereas every individual has the basic human right to change his/her

faith and convert to another faith, does he/she also have a basic human right to

proselytize to convert others to ones own faith? To do so may be a religious

duty in some faiths, but it cannot be considered an inalienable human right.

2


3/16

Indeed, even as a religious duty, the concept of proselytization poses serious

problems for harmonious inter-faith living. For it presupposes that ones own

faith is the only God-legitimised path to salvation and that other faiths are either

false or defective.

Mankind is thus faced with a peculiar situation of conflict. On the one hand, theindividuals right to convert to any faith of his/her choice must be respected. On

the other hand, religious conversion becomes though not always but often a

source of mistrust, misunderstanding and, occasionally, violence between

communities.

In the age in which we live, the only fair, legitimate and civilized way to deal with

this dichotomy is through honest inter-faith dialogue.

Sam vaa d to re so lv e viv aad : There is an ancient saying in Sanskrit: Vaade, vaadejaayate tatvabodhah. That is, truth gets illumined through debate and discussion.

It is my conviction that our world needs more samvaad (dialogue) and less

vivaad(dispute). Not only on conversion but on all other contentious issues

between communities, and between countries. In fact, samvaad itself a reliable

way to resolve and reduce vivaad. Therefore, the World Council of Churches

deserves to be congratulated for organizing this samvaad.

In modern times, inter-faith dialogue has become both more necessary and more

possible. In an increasingly shrinking, integral and inter-dependent world of the

21st century, faith communities do not any longer live in isolated socio-cultural-

geographical spaces. With growing mobility within and between nations,

interaction and intermingling between faith-communities has become greater than

ever before. In addition to physical movement of people, they are also exposed,

through mass media and myriad socio-economic ties, to the lives, mores and

beliefs of other countries and communities.

Hence, the 21st century presents both an urgent challenge and an opportunity.

Prejudice, misunderstanding and miscommunication can now cause far greater

harm to peace and well-being in societies than ever before. (The quick worldwide

Muslim reaction to the Danish cartoons on Prophet Mohammed and the Popesrecent utterances on Islam are a case in point.) Conversely, mutual understanding

and harmony, nurtured primarily through mutual respect, can enable communities

to take even traditionally divisive issues like conversion in their stride, thus

reconciling the fundamental religious freedom of individuals with amicable inter-

community relations.

3


4/16

The inter-faith consultations in Lariano and Coimbatore are, therefore, extremely

useful as they address a crucial need of our times.

Significance of the Chris tian initia tiv e f or inter-f aith dialogueThe fact that the initiative for the inter-faith dialogue on conversion, both atLariano and Coimbatore, has been taken by major church organizations is

significant. And also commendable.

To a non-Christian like me, this signals a welcome willingness on the part of

sensitive Christians to recognize that people of other faiths (especially Hindus in

India, but also Buddhists in several Asian countries and those practicing

indigenous faith-traditions in Africa and Latin America) are concerned about the

conversion activities of missionary and evangelical organizations, often

generously funded by foreign sources.

Just as dialogues like these help Christians to understand the concerns of non-

Christians, they also enable non-Christians to understand the Christian viewpoint

better. It is especially refreshing and instructive to know that there is a great

plurality of views on conversion within various Christian denominations. The

papers presented by Christian representatives in Lariano and Coimbatore are

remarkable both for their introspective quality and for their eagerness to deepen

intra-Christian dialogue on conversion. This process of rethinking is little

known even among those non-Christians who debate the issue of conversion.

Out of ignorance, they believe that all Christians have a monochromatic view ofconversion, which they suspect is pursued by all church organisations with

uniform evangelical zeal.

Since Islam is another faith that believes in proselytization, one would like to see

Muslim religious organizations taking similar initiatives for inter-faith consultation

on conversion.

Hindu society: the chasm betw een spiri tuality and socialrealityHinduism does not have a church of its own to organise and guide the socio-

religious affairs of the community, nor does it follow any single scriptural source.

Nevertheless, what is common and central the belief system of all branches of

Hinduism is the freedom of thought, freedom of expression and freedom of faith.

The paths of all religions are believed to lead to the same destination, which is

also the origin of all paths. As such, respect for all paths and faiths (sarva panth

4


5/16

samaadar) is at the core of the Hindu belief system. There is no scriptural

injunction against and penalty for professing, propagating and changing ones

faith. As such, the concept of proselytization is alien to Hinduism.

This is the reason why India, more perhaps than any other country in the world,

became the welcome abode for a plurality of faiths, both indigenous and thosethat came from different parts of the world. This is also the reason why India, in

spite of having an overwhelming Hindu majority, did not declare itself a Hindu

theocratic state in 1947, when Pakistan carved itself out as a separate Muslim

nation on the specious Two-Nation Theory. Instead, India adopted a secular

constitution, in conformity with the secular ethos of Hinduism. It may come as a

surprise to many that even the Congres s Work ing Com mittee, the apexdecision-making body of the party that presently heads Indias coalition

government, adopted a resolution on January 16, 1999, in which it affirmed that

"H induis m is the most effecti ve guarantor of secularis m" .In saying this, I have no intention whatsoever to suggest that Hinduism is without

defects and failings. There is, unfortunately, a wide and all-too-visible gulf

between Hinduisms spiritual vision of equality of all human beings and the reality

of Hindu social life. Due to internal ossification and degeneration on the one hand,

and external aggression and subjugation on the other, Hinduism became stratified

and lost much of its spiritual nourishment. Castes and sub-castes, which once

served the needs of a well-organised society, got placed in a rigid hierarchy, with

the upper castes (especially Brahmins) taking advantage of their social position to

oppress and exploit others. The ev il of untouchability, whic h is acomplete negatio n of human dignity and justice, en tered Hindu sociallife an d becam e its curse. However, it is necessary to know that there is no scriptural legitimacy

whatsoever either for untouchability or for notions of birth-defined high and

low castes. Two examples suffice to illustrate this. The authors of the twogreat Hin du epics Ramayana and Mahabharata both belo nged tocommu nities that in later t imes were considered low in socialstanding. Valmiki, who wrote the Ramayana, was a tribal an d Vyas,who wrote the Mahabharata, belo nged to the commu nity of fisherme n.In other words, a mans greatness is to be judged by his/her karma (deeds) and

not by theirjanma (birth). It is because of their karma that both Valmiki and Vyas

came to be regarded as Rishis (great sages) in the Hindu tradition.

It is also necessary to know that numerous reform movements have arisen within

the Hindu fold, both in modern and medieval times, to fight various social evils.

5


6/16

Indeed, the arrival of Islam and Christianity catalysed and hastened the process of

social reform in Hindu society.

Why the Hindu disquiet over con ver sionAs I had argued in my paper for the Lariano meeting, the spread of Islam andChristianity in India followed a contradictory process. Being two great religions of

the world, and Gods two great gifts to mankind, they enriched and further

expanded Indias spiritual and cultural heritage. Thei r innate message ofequalit y and human dignity, and the saintly nature of many of the irpreachers, constitute d one set of reason s that prompted many Hindusto embrace Islam and Christianity. At the same time, it is undeniable that the growth of both Islam and Christianity in

India happened in the context of invasion, conquest and colonial subjugation. As

shown by many scholars most notably by Arun Shourie in his book Missionariesin India: Continuities, Changes, Dilemmasand by Shashi S. Sharma in his bookImagined Manuvad --, maligning of Hinduism was an essential part of theconversion drive by Christian missionaries during the British period. This haddeeply hurt even the most broad-minded Hindu thinkers and leaders of Indiasnational liberation movement, such as Mahatma Gandhi and Swami

Vivekananda, whose respect for all the faiths in the world is well known. In mypaper for the Lariano meeting, I have quoted extensively from Mahatma Gandhis

strongly critical views on Christian proselytization.

Swami Vivekananda, the great patriot-monk, described Jesus Christ, Mohammedand other prophets of humanity as Rishis. Quoting from the Hindu scriptures, he

said, "These great child ren of Light, who manifest the Lightthems elves, who are Light the mselves, they, being worshipped,become, as it were, one with us and we become one with them." In alecture he delivered on Christ the Messenger at Los Angeles in 1900, he said,

Our salutations go to all the past Prophets whose teachings and liveswe have inher ited, whatever might have been their race, cl ime, orcreed! Our salutations go to all those Godlike me n and women who a rewor king to help humanity, whatever be their birth, colour, or race!Our salutations to those who are coming in the future -- liv ing Gods-- to wor k un selfishly f or our desce ndant s.Yet, the same Swami Vivekananda, addressing a Christian meeting at Detroit,

gave vent to his intense displeasure over the vilification of Hinduism by Christian

missionaries in their zealous effort to convert Hindus in India.

6


7/16

He said, You train and educate and clothe and pay men to do what? Tocome over to my country to curse and abuse all my fore-fathers, myrel igion and ever ything They walk near a temple and say, youidolaters, you will go to hell. But they dare not do that to theMoham medan s of India, fo r the sword would be out.... And wheneveryour minist ers crit icise us, let them reme mber this : If all India stand sup and takes all the mud that is at the botto m of the Indian Ocea n andthrows it up against the Wes tern countries, it will no t be doing aninf inite simal part of that which you are doing to us. (The CompleteWorks of Swami Vivekananda, Vol. III, pp. 211-212)

Christian vir tue s tha t Hindus admir eUndoubtedly, not all Christian thinkers, religious personalities and social leaders

had a similarly malicious attitude towards Hinduism. Indeed, over the past two

hundred years, and especially after the end of the British rule, there has been a

heartening rise in mutual understanding and trust between Christians and Hindus

in India. The phenomenon of acculturation (where it is genuine and not guided

by the hidden agenda of proselytization) on the part of Christian churches has

contributed to Hindu-Christian amity.

It is equally true that many great Christian virtues such as compassion for fellow

human beings, dedicated service of the needy, community orientation of religious

practice, and emphasis on education have left a deep imprint on the Hindu mind.

Christian churches and community leaders are widely admired for these virtues.

Nevertheless, it is not as if anti-Hindu propaganda has stopped being a part of

those for whom proselytization is high on the agenda of their life and identity as

Christians. The manner in wh ic h many Ch ristian groups seek to converttr ibals and so- called lower-caste people in India, with generousfunding from foreign (mai nly western) sources, is a case in point.Recently, some Christian evangelist groups were active in the holy town of

Tirupati in Andhra Pradesh, distributing anti-Hindu pamphlets among pilgrims

coming to the shrine of Lord Venkateshwara.

Some Dali t-Chris tian or ganisa tion s anti-Hindu pr opa gandaHere is another example. A US-based group called the Dalit Freedom Network

has been popularizing and marketing, through its website, a trade-marked Clay

Cup sold for one dollar apiece. This is what its website says: DFN has chosen

the clay cup to be the symbol of the oppression of the Dalits. Throughout India,

7


8/16

Dalits are forced to drink out of clay cups which then are destroyed so that no

upper caste customer will ever use it and risk contamination by a Dalits

uncleanness. It is a fact that Dalits are still served in these cups and not other

cups made of glass or metal so as to avoid polluting others. Dalits being served in

separate cups and with different utensils is still a realityThe Dalit Freedom

Network has chosen the clay cup as a visual representation of the Dalitsbrokenness and oppression. We offer these cups to friends of DFN to act as a

daily personal reminder in your own home or office of the Dalit plight. Clay cups

available through DFN are handmade by the Dalit community outside of

Hyderabad, Andhra Pradesh.

How true is the above description of the condition of Dalits in India, as

presented to a foreign audience by a Dalit-Christian organization? To say that,in the 21st century, restauran ts in India still serve tea, coffee andwater in clay cups to Dalits is nothing but malicious fiction.Practice of untouchability in rural India is overwhelmingly les s thanwhat it used to be in the past, and almo st non-existent in urban Indiawhich now accounts for 40% of our population. Neverthele ss, Dalit-Christian organisations propaganda about it is a good way ofcollecting mo ney in the United States and other west ern countries.The DFNs website further says:

The Dalits, numbering 250-300 million, are those the Hindu caste system

designates as "low" or "backward" caste. Because of their low social

standing, affluent parts of society deny Dalits basic human rights. As a

result of this discrimination, Dalits suffer socially, economically, and

spiritually. Unable to access education, and because of the social stigma of

"untouchability", society forces Dalits to take low-paying jobs providing an

inadequate income. They cannot afford food, clothing and shelter. They

cannot afford medical care. They cannot afford an education. Society denies

Dalits human rights and shackles Dalits to a social and religious system that

removes personal freedom.

We believe that the four-fold model of EDUCATION, MEDICALSUPPORT, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, and HUMAN RIGHTS ADVOCACY,

in partnership with Indian organizations that actively share God's loveand

start new believers' fellowships, will provide the right combination of

efforts to see the next generation of Dalits freed from their present social,

economic, and spiritual tyranny. For the first time in history, the Dalits now

have a voice which can be heard socially, politically and spiritually in India

and around the world. DFN pledges solidarity with the AICC (All India

8


9/16

Christian Council) and with the Dalits, and together they are confident they

can help bring a notable transformation that will last for eternity. (Emphasis

mine.)

The falsehoods, exaggerations and innuendos should be apparent to any well-

informed and unbiased reader. If the term Dalits connotes what the IndianConstitution calls the Scheduled Castes, their number is by no means 250-300

million. And there is no sociological, theological, historical or constitutional basis

to include the Scheduled Tribals and Other Backward Classes (OBCs) in the

category of Dalits. Yet, the number of Dalits is inflated for purposes that are

clearly self-serving namely to misrepresent and malign India in general and the

Hindu society in particular in eyes of the rest of the world and, thereby, to cast

the net wider for catching new converts.

Notice how the DFNs description of the Indian reality equates Hinduis m withspi ritual tyranny . Also, notice how it suggests that Dalits can receiveGods love and experience transformation in eternity only by ceasing to be

Hindu and by joining new believers' fellowships (euphemism for converting to

Christianity).

Democr acy, Indian Cons titution and emp ower ment of DalitsDFNs claim that for the first time in history, the Dalits now have a voice which

can be heard socially, politically and spiritually in India and around the world,

because they have begun renouncing Hinduism, is preposterous, to say the least.Of course, there has been a major push for social, educational and political

empowerment of the Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and OBCs (other

backward classes) after Indias independence. But how did it happen? It happened

because of three factors: the progressive and democratic Constitution that we

adopted in 1950; our democratic system which has enabled SCs, STs, and OBCs

to gain growing representation in various power structures; and, last but not the

least, a general progressive awakening in society (among all castes).

The statutory provisions for reservations (affirmative action) for SCs, STs and

(later) OBCs in education and government jobs; the various laws againstuntouchability and caste discrimination; and the working of Indias democratic

system of governance; all these have gone a long way in creating a new

awareness among both low and high caste Hindus. Dalits and low caste

Hindus have become socially more aware of their rights and politically more

assertive, thanks to the power of the vote that democracy has given them.

Similarly, high caste Hindus have come to accept constitutionally mandated

9


10/16

affirmative action for socio-political empowerment of Dalits and other

traditionally marginalized people in the Hindu community as necessary for social

transformation and for balanced national progress.

There is no doubt that the Hindu society in In dia has a long way to goto reach the ideals of equal ity and social justice. But isnt that moreor less true also about non- Hindu societies in most other countries?I have quoted from the DFNs website at some length because it is in some ways

representative of how Christian evangelical organizations portray Hinduism both

within India and abroad.

Wr ong and self-ser ving notions a bout caste in Hindu socie tyDue to ignorance or by design, a notion is assiduous being given currency that

caste is the root cause of social injustice in Hindu society. This notion is

especially popular among proselytizers in both Christianity and Islam. Their

simplistic formula is this: existence of castes is the source of all the inequality

and oppression in Hindu society; but Hinduism cannot exist without castes;

therefore, Hinduism is incurably unjust, iniquitous and oppressive; therefore, for

the sake of liberation of hundreds of millions of people imprisoned within its fold,

Hinduism must vanish from the face of this earth; and it is the religious duty of

the followers of Christianity (and Islam) to rid mankind of this caste-ridden

community of heathens (and infidels).

Survey Dalit-Christian (or Islamist) literature, and you are bound to encounter

this formula being presented in ten different ways. Here is the latest example. Mr.

Kanshi Ram, a prominent Indian politician and founder of the Bahujan Samaj Party,

passed away in New Delhi yesterday (October 8). Along with Mayavati, who now

heads the BSP, he mobilized and empowered the Scheduled Caste people in Uttar

Pradesh. BSP also became a rallying point for the SCs in some other states in

India. Although both Mr. Kanshi Ram and Mayavati started their political careers

with a vituperative campaign against higher castes, in recent years they

consciously changed their tactics to include the very same higher castes in

their rainbow social alliance. Moreover, it must be reme mbered that onboth the occasion s that Mayavati beca me the chief minister of UttarPradesh, i t was with the support of the BJP, the pa rty that I wo rk for.In the wake of Mr. Kanshi Rams death, a prominent TV channel carried a news

item on Hindu fascism. It said,

10


11/16

Dalit intellectuals say Hinduism is a form of spiritual Fascism where those

at the top of the hierarchy are content and unwilling to change. They say,

reformation of Hinduism is essential, but impossible, because if you takeout the Vedasand all other references to caste, then what system are you

left with?

Says Dalit Activist Kancha Ilaiah, "To reform, it needs to throw away

existing spiritual texts. Which book do you read as a Hindu book without

reference to caste? On average 1, 5 0 0 people are converting toChr istian ity per day and about 10- 50 people per da y convertingto Islam ." (Emphasis mine.)

What is not mentioned here is that the so-called Dalit intellectuals, including Dr.

Kancha Ilaiah (author of the book Why I Am Not A Hindu), who call Hinduism

spiritual fascism are actually Dalit-Christian activists. It is they who have

been propagating that Hindu reformation is impossible because Hinduism cannot

discard castes and there will be nothing left in Hinduism if castes are done awaywith.

This is not the place for a detailed sociological and historical explanation of the

origin and evolution of castes in India. Suffice it to make two points here. Firstly,there is nothing inherently objectionable or illegitimate about castes,which are nothing but a natural social collective with distinct characteristics.

What is objectiona ble is casteis m that is, the notion of high and lowassociated with castes and sub-castes.

Secondly, castes in India do not dis solve the mselves once a personrenounce s Hinduism and embraces Christianity, Islam or evenBuddhism. As is well-known, castes and sub- castes are a real ity evenamong Indian Christians, Indian Muslims and A mbedkarites .Therefore, those who with seeming impunity say that Hinduism is spiritual

fascism because its society is based on castes are misrepresenting and vilifying

a community and faith-system. They are doing so in the belief that maligning a

faith helps them to gain more converts from that faith.

Sab Jaati Sama an, Sab Jaa ti Mahaan: Progressive and reform-minded people inHindu society are well aware that while castes cannot be wished away, casteism(false pride in ones own caste, looking down upon other castes, indefensible

rules governing the lives of people belonging to a certain caste, etc) must be

fought and eradicated. They are working on the belief which rhymes well in Hindi

and has a profound appeal for one and all: Sab Jaati Samaa n, Sab JaatiMahaan (All castes are equal; and all castes are great.)Dr. Ambedkar and the quiet social r evolution in Hindu societ y

11


12/16

In the context of the conversion debate, what is galling is the tendency of

Christian (and also Muslim) evangelical organizations to present only the Hindu

society as being marred by the blemish of social inequality and social injustice.

No less astounding is the unwillingness of even academics and publicists to

recognize and acknowledge the quiet social revolution taking place in the Hindusociety. Let me illustrate the latter point by turning to the role played by Dr.

Babasaheb Ambedkar, who, along with Mahatma Gandhi, is the most important

personality in the social history of the 20th century India.

Dr. Ambedkar, one of the main architects of the Indian Constitution, was a Dalit.

He did not belong to the Congress party. In fact, he was a trenchant critic of the

Congress party and its leadership, constituted by Mahatma Gandhi, Jawaharlal

Nehru (Indias first Prime Ministers) and other stalwarts of the Freedom

Movement. His criticism of the inequities in Hinduism was also not hidden from

anybody. Yet, after India became independent in 1947, it is the Hindu-majority

India, and the Congress partys Hindu leadership that conferred upon Dr.

Ambedkar the honour of drafting Indias Constitution. This was done in

recognition of the brilliance of his personality, his profound legal and

constitutional knowledge, and, above all, his intense passion for social reform.

Indeed, it was Mahatma Gandhi who prevailed upon Jawaharlal Nehru to include

Dr. Ambedkar as Indias first Law Minister in his interim government. Dr.Ambe dkars example again shows that in Hindu-majority India,greatnes s is deter mined by karma and not by jan ma .Two per tinent points about Dr. Ambedk ar s con ver sion to Buddhi sm: As iswell known, just months before he passed away in December 1956, Dr. Ambedkar

embraced Buddhism along with lakhs of his followers. In the context of the debate

on conversion, two things are pertinent about this major milestone in modern

Indias social history.

Firstly, one might expect that Dr. Ambedkars decision to leave his Hindu past and

embrace Buddhism, and that too in a public ceremony in Nagpur with lakhs of

followers (who are called neo-Buddhists), would invite severe criticism even

violent response from high caste Hindus. After all, he was an unforgivingcritic of Hinduism. However, the response of the Hindu society was quite the

contrary. Dr. Ambedkars conversion was widely seen as an event that merited

introspection and self-correction in the Hindu society.

Incidentally, 2006 marks the 50th anniversary of Dr. Ambedkars conversion to

Buddhism. The event is being celebrated widely by his followers, especially in the

state of Maharashtra. Anyone whose view is not jaundiced by the propaganda of

12


13/16

organizations like DFN can see for themselves that there are as many Hindu sas neo-Buddhists participat ing in functions extolling Dr. Ambedkarscontribution to social reform in mo dern I ndia.The second pertinent fact is why Dr. Ambedkar chose Buddhism and not any

other faith. According to his celebrated biographer Dhananjay Keer, he believedthat by jo ining Isla m or Christianity, the Depressed Clas ses wouldnot only go out of the Hindu rel igion, but also go out of the Indianculture..... Conversion to Islam or Ch ristianity will denationalise theDepressed Clas ses. (Dr Ambedkar, Life and Mission, 2nd ed., pp 278-9,Mumbai: Popular Prakashan, 1962.)

Accultur ation: Genuine and motiva tedThis gives rise to two important questions: Why was there no friction between

Ambedkarites (who converted to Buddhism) and the larger Hindu society, and why

is there acrimony between Christians and Hindus (or Hindus and Muslims) when

Dalits convert to Christianity or Islam? Why did even Dr. Ambedkar feel that

conversion to Christianity or Islam would uproot the Depressed Classes from

Indias cultural soil?

The phenomenon of acculturation encouraged by Indian churches appears to be a

response to the above questions. As I said earlier, if this response is sincere, and

rooted in genuine respect for Hindu customs and cultural traditions, it is indeed

welcome. However, if adoption of external manifestations of Hindu religiosity is

merely a tactic to attract ordinary Hindus to the Christian fold, then it is nothingbut deception. I mention this because I have heard many Hindu friends affirm that

the latter practice is quite prevalent in rural areas where church organizations

enter for the first time.

Why no con ver sion of Muslim s? Is it because of the thr eat ofthe s wor d?An equally important question is: Why are there no conversions from lower

caste Muslims in India to Christianity? And why do Christian missionaries in India

never indulge in any propaganda to highlight the flaws in Islam and in Muslimsociety? Is it because -- as pointed out by Swami Vi vekanan da in hisspeech men tioned earlie r, and as demo nstrated by the recen texplosi ve controversy over the Popes remarks about Islam -- Theydare not do that to the Moha mmeda ns of I ndia, fo r the sword would beout?

13


14/16

I am sorry if my words sound harsh. It is not my intention to show disrespect to

any faith or to hurt the feelings of the followers of Christianity or Islam. I do not

wish to even remotely suggest that violence is a justified response when

proselytization is carried out by questionable means. I believe that theviolence against Christians so metime s unleashed by Hindu extremistorganizat ion s in In dia is condem nable. Also, no true Hindu can condone theroutine spreading of anti-Muslim and anti-Christian prejudices by certain Hindu

communal organizations.

Nevertheless, in the context of the debate on conversion no honest and truth-

seeking participant can avoid the obvious question: Why do Christian evangelical

groups target only Hindus, Buddhists and followers of traditional faiths in Africa

and Latin America for proselytization and never Muslims?

Christian eq uiv alent of the Whit e Mans Burden: As a Hindu, I ask myselfanother question: as the recent controversy over the Popes remarks on Islam has

once again shown, church organizations are far more sensitive to Muslim criticism

of the Christian conduct in the past and now. But they have rarely publicly

acknowledged any wrong-doing vis--vis the Hindu community. On the contrary,

in the Chr istia n equi vale nt of the White Mans Burde n, they continueto believe that they have a di vine mission to liberate low-casteHindu s indee d, all Hindus -- by bringing the m within the Ch ristianfold. Making Asia Ch ristian is a much- discu ssed goal in evangelistliterature. The most cha ritable way of describing this notio n is that itis rel igious cond esce nsion. Islamic double-standar d on r eligious fr eedomSimilarly, no honest and truth-seeking participant in the debate on conversion

can avoid this question: Why does Islam have double-standards of religious

freedom? A convert to Islam is prized. However, a Muslim is bar red, on thepa in of scr ipturally invoked death penal ty, from embracing any otherfa ith.

This also leads to related questions: Not only is a Muslim denied the freedom ofreligion to accept any other faith if his/her conscience prompts them to do so, but

non-Muslims in Muslim countries are also denied the freedom of religion if it

entails free propagation of their faith and invitation (dawah) for Muslims to the

fold of a non-Muslim faith. Why? Musli ms insis t on this freedo m forthems elves where they are a minority in non- Muslim societies. ButMuslim- majorit y countries will rarely gran t the same freedo m to

14


15/16

minorities belonging to other faiths. Why? Muslims demand and rightly so adherence to secular, non-discriminatory principles in India and in all other

countries where they are a majority. But secularism is rejected as un-Islamic in

most Muslim majority countries. Why?

Plan of action: univ er sal code of conduct on con ver sionneededThis brings me to the last section of this paper. We must accept that the dos and

donts of religious freedom including in the area of conversion should have

universal application. There cannot be scriptural or theological arguments to deny

others the freedoms which are demanded for oneself. This is especially so in

todays rapidly shrinking, globalizing world.

And if there are scriptural tenets (or interpretations of tenets) that are

incompatible with universally applicable norms of religious freedom, then it is the

responsibility of the followers of the respective faiths to

reform/reinterpret/jettison such tenets. After all, Hinduism had to abandon and

renounce those social practices that were offensive to the modern notions of

human dignity and justice.

In this context, I would like to draw the attention of the participants in the

Coimbatore meet to three of the recommendations contained in the report

prepared by the Lariano group.

1. Freedom of rel igion enjoi ns upon all of us the equally non-negotiable responsibility to respect faiths other than our own,and never to denigrate, vil ify or misrepres ent them for thepurpose of af firming superiorit y of our fa ith.

2. We acknowledge that errors have been pe rpetrated and injusticecommitte d by the adherent s of ever y faith. Therefore, it isincumbe nt on eve ry community to conduct honest self- criticalexamination of its historical conduct as well as itsdoctrinal/theological precepts. Such self-cr iticism andrepentance should lead to neces sary reforms in ter a lia on theissue of conversion.

3. A particula r reform that we would comm end to pract itioners andestablish ment s of all faiths is to ensure that conversion byunethical mea ns are discouraged and rejected by one and all.

15


16/16

There should be tran sparency in the practice of inv iting othersto ones fa ith.

Together with other participants in the inter-faith dialogue in Coimbatore, I am

hopeful that well be able to further enlarge the area of consensus on the issue of

conversion. Having done that, we should also identify ways of disseminating ourconsensual views among religious organisations and civil society groups. This in

my view would constitute the success of the Coimbatore meeting.

(Coimbat ore Oct ober 9, 200 6)

16

Documents

Paper for the Coimbatore Meet on Conversion 10-12 Oct 2006