Events & Issues
New
Delhi, 22 December 2014
Religion
‘Converted’ to Politics
NEW ERA
OF SECULARIZATION
By Dr S
Saraswathi
(Former Director, ICSSR, New
Delhi)
Parliament’s precious time has got
entangled in the controversy over “ghar
wapsi” (home coming) programme of thousands of Muslims and Christians to
the Hindu fold by the RSS and its affiliate organisations, dropping crucial
legislations on further economic reforms. The “reconversion” incidents across
the country have evoked enormous political exchanges between the Government and
Opposition. This reaction in Parliament confirms the actual and fabricated
secular role of religion in Indian politics.
After the “shuddi” function held in Agra
recently, where about 300 Muslims were re-converted, a series of programmes
were planned to be carried out all over the country. An event scheduled to take
place in Aligarh
on Christmas Day, described as the “biggest ever conversion camp” has since
been banned, and postponed. Pamphlets circulated in Aligarh seeking donations, admit that this was
going to be a very costly affair amounting to Rs. 5 lakh per Muslim and Rs.2
lakh per Christian. Indeed, religious conversion in India has never been a question of
belief or only of belief.
The idea and discussions on the
incident of re-conversion persist to play politics. Opposition parties in the
Rajya Sabha alleged that there was an “explosive situation” in the country due
to conversions. In reality, people living far away from the trouble spots seem to be engaged in completing formalities
to get their subsidies for cooking gas before the last date rather than
supporting or opposing conversions. Indeed, they are blissfully ignorant of
what is brewing in the politics of religion.
One’s religion is not solely a
matter of faith; it has political significance. India escaped the attempts of
Missionaries at Christianization in the days of the East India Company by the
firm stand of the Company that it would “result in political unrest”. The
Company adopted the policy of non-interference in the matters of religion.
British Parliament considered the proposition for wholesale conversion of
Indians as “absurd” – a clearly political decision.
Religious conversion is not a social
event in India.
It has more politics than religion in its implications and is discussed as the
politics of conversions. Mass conversions, in particular, do not take place on
genuine change of faith. Ambedkar’s call to Mahars to convert to Buddhism, for
instance, was a secular political call. His conversion programme was one
concrete component of his two-fold secular approach to achieve a very secular
objective, namely, to promote the welfare of Harijans and to obtain
preferential, statutory, political, and economic concessions. Periyar EVR tried
to repeat it in Tamil Nadu. Both had secular objects and intentions that were
inextricably intertwined with politics and required political action. As
expected, they provoked political reactions.
We are in an era of secularization
of religion itself – a novel feature of the sociology of religion. This is a
global development and takes different forms in different parts of the world
from Talibanism to terrorism.
The furore over “re-conversions” has
turned favourable to the BJP to seek consensus on a national “Anti-Conversion”
law - a long-standing demand of Hindu organizations and Hindu religious
leaders. They are worried about losing their numerical strength to
well-organized proselytizing activities of other, what they consider as
“imported” religions.
What happened in Agra and elsewhere is claimed “re-conversion”
as opposed to the clients’ earlier “conversion” by taking back those forcibly
converted. It is called “ghar vapasi”
programme. In Virat Hindu Sammelan held in Mumbai, several speakers were
reported to have spoken against conversion, but supporting the programme, thus
distinguishing re-conversion to the Hindu fold from conversion to other
religions.
Hinduism is, according to common
perception, not a proselytizing religion. A person is born a Hindu and cannot
be made a Hindu. There is no congregation; no one text; no common religious
head; and no compulsory baptism ceremony. There is perfect freedom within this
religion. There are even atheists among Hindus.
The phenomenon of religious
conversions is not new in India.
It has appeared as a result of political conquests, religious expansion, and as
means of material benefits. Conversions on account of convictions are rare
while conversions by fear, force and inducements abound. It is believed that
the Hindu religion is no match for others in the business of conversion.
Article 25(1) of the Constitution
guarantees freedom to “profess, practise, and propagate” one’s religion subject
to “public order, morality, and health”.
It is argued that complete ban on all religious conversions would
interfere with one’s fundamental right
to free speech and expression under Article 19
apart from directly violating the right under Article 25(1).
The right to “propagate” religion
was added to the original draft of the Constitution as a Fundamental Right, but
not without strong opposition from some members. It was finally approved, but
the controversy surrounding the term “right to propagate” continued though
members of the Constituent Assembly tried to distinguish propagation and
conversion. In any case, the right to propagate is given to all religions.
There was no law against conversion
in the British India. But, many Princely
States had. The Indian Parliament took up the Indian Conversion (Regulation and
Registration) Bill for consideration in 1954. It provided for a “strict system
of regulating conversion”. The issue was about conversions by force, fraud, or
material inducements. But, Prime
Minister Nehru was averse to the idea not so much out of legal hurdles but out
of likely political fall out of antagonizing minority communities. The bill was
dropped.
So also, the Backward Communities
(Religious Protection) Bill in 1960 failed to get political support. Another
attempt in 1979 to introduce the Freedom of Religion Bill was opposed by the
Minorities Committee.
However, some State governments
enacted anti-conversion laws. Among them
are Arunachal Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Gujarat,
Himachal Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Odisha, Rajasthan, and Tamil Nadu. Most of
these laws have made forced conversions a cognizable offence under Sections
295A and 298 of the Indian Penal Code.
The BJP-led Government at the Centre
called for anti-conversion laws in all the States and at the Centre after a
discussion in the Lok Sabha a week ago. Opposition parties are vociferous in
condemning “ghar vapasi” programme,
but are not willing to support anti-conversion legislation. There seems to be
an artificial distinction between conversion and re-conversion. Political
calculations based on “minority vote bank politics” standing in the way, there
seems to be no way out of the situation.
The importance of number in
electoral politics and the politics of building block votes are certainly
working from behind.
Competitive offer of benefits being
the crux of the controversy, there seems to be some point in the argument that
our attention should be on development and related matters. Whether it is
conversion or re-conversion, the event particularly when it is carried out on
mass scale, involves material transactions far removed from spiritual teaching
of any kind.
To end this unholy alliance of
religion and politics, there is no weapon better than all-round social and
economic development to reach a stage where subsidies, quota and reservation,
and package of welfare schemes will have no takers. That stage is not in sight.
–INFA
(Copyright,
India News and Feature Alliance)
|