Social Consequences of
Conversion
The Commission would submit its report to the central government in due course. I am neither an expert on the subject and nor an academic but an alert common citizen with a long experience as a career diplomat would try to do my bit in this regard. My take on the subject will not go to the theories and dictums propounded by academics, researchers and historians. I would confine myself to a simple narration of social impact or consequences of conversion, both socio-cultural and socio-religious, the two important aspects of conversion as I see happening around, particularly in India.
I am of the view that generally one remained what he or she was born. Only a microscopic number of people convert to another religion due to socio-cultural or socio-religious considerations. With regard to India, this fact is fully supported by our history. Right from the ancient times, the Indo-Aryan identity of Hindustan or India that is Bharat remained Hindu oriented as ‘way of life’. From the 11th century onwards with the advent of Mugals and other Islamic dispensations, religious persecution and coercive conversion to Islam did happen but it could not change the overall scenario of Indo-
Aryan identity and Hindu ethos. These facts have been duly recognized and registered by the researchers and historians. During the British Raj for about 200 years, some conversion to Christianity did happen, mostly in the Southern States of India, mostly on socio-economic considerations. But India still retained its Indo-Aryan identity with diverse Hindu traditions.
Till the partition of India – Pakistan and India at the dawn
of independence from the British rule in 1947 on the basis of ‘Two Nation
Theory’, Indian communities, Hindus, Sikhs, Muslims, and Christians stood and
worked together in the freedom struggle against the British. But owing to
historical facts and compulsions, exploited to the hilt by the British rulers
as a policy of ‘divide and rule’, Hindus and Muslims could not hold and stand
together resulting in partition on the basis of religion. I would not go into
these details here. The rationale and inevitability of Pakistan was duly
analyzed and explained by Dr. B.R. Ambedkar in his book ‘Thoughts on Pakistan’,
a masterly treatise on the subject.
India consciously and decisively chose to be a secular state
with freedom of religion and faith as enshrined in the Article 25 of the
constitution to be a liberal and open society with all its diversities, not
that there was no demand and intention to make Bharat a Hindu nation by the
hardcore right wing Hindus, the main stream of the society and the majority
community. But we opted to be secular.
With this background, let us come to the theme, social
consequences of conversion. Experts are of the view that Religious
conversion gives new identity to the communities converted which in turn
leads to social mobility. The effects of conversion are not limited to personal
change but also social and cultural change. Religious conversion not only
transforms individuals but also transforms society as a whole.
A conversion from one religion to another can have the
following effects – inheritance rights, marital rights, and maintenance rights,
guardianship rights while affecting the entire social and political landscape
of the country concerned. Since conversion entails a wide spread change,
sometimes not desirable, conversion has become a big and alive issue, of late. The
main stream of the society, Hindus stand against conversion as asserted by RSS
Sarsanghchalak, “Religious conversions result in exclusivity (and) take people
away from their roots and origins. So we must try to prevent conversion.” The
right wing Hindu outfits intend to arrest the alleged disproportionate increase
in Muslim population by discarding the Muslim Personal Laws pertaining to
marriage and divorce and stand for Uniform Civil Code while Muslims intend to
retain Shariat laws and link their separate identity with Muslim Personal Laws.
The Hindu point of view on the subject remained a candid one as ‘Conversions
are the root cause of conflicts in the world. If there are no conversions in
the world, then certainly there will be no conflicts.’ wrote MSN Menon in the
weekly mouthpiece of RSS
The issue of
conversion remained a controversial issue not only in India but also in the
world as a civilization challenge. Mahatma Gandhi was also not in favour of
conversion and said, ‘Conversions are the cause of many an avoidable conflict.’
He believed all great religions were
fundamentally equal and that there should be innate respect for them, not just
mutual tolerance. He felt a person wanting to convert should try to be a
good follower of his own faith rather than seek goodness in change of faith. Of
late, the BJP governments in the States, fully supported by the central
government in Delhi, intend to address the issue of conversion; particularly to
Christianity and Islam which is taking place, as they view it, by illegitimate
means of money, allurement and coercion.
It may not be out of place to mention that the only mass conversion took place in the contemporary times, was on October 14, 1956 when Babasaheb Ambedkar converted and embraced Buddhism along with several lakhs of the socially weaker sections of the Hindu society. He did his every best to set the house in order by reforming
.jpg)
the Hindu society of the graded inequality based on the laws on Manu to begin with but failed miserably even after bringing in statutory provisions in the constitution of India to end caste based discrimination. Ultimately, he decided to leave the Hindu fold and cajoled his followers to do so. The impact of Ambedkar converting to Buddhism would have been, to my mind, different and long lasting on the Indian society and social fabric, had he remained alive for more years. Babasaheb Ambedkar passed away, on December 6, 1956, soon after the historic conversion took place in Nagpur, the Deekshabhoomi. Ambedkar was an ardent Indian nationalist to the core. He studied various religions before opting for the Buddhism and took about two decades in fulfilling his public vow ‘not die as a Hindu’ he took in 935-36. He did not intend to upset the social and national edifice but to bring about reform and make the large chunks of the depressed and oppressed humanity equal partners with dignity. This thoughtful decision of Babasaheb, fully explained and justified, did not get any organized opposition from the main stream of the society, rightly or otherwise, it is still a matter of debate and research. He said that ‘There are two aspects of conversion; social as well as religious; material as well as spiritual’ and added in his emotional outburst “Conversion is not a game of children. It is not a subject of entertainment. It deals with how to make man’s life successful.” On the issue of dalits converting to Buddhism, a scholar and an expert on the subject, Prof. Satish Prakash, has said which tends to set the matter in perspective, “Hindus don’t convert to Islam or other religions en masse. Only Dalits are inclined to leave Hinduism en masse, and are willing to say so publicly.” It fully explains the socio-cultural and socio-religious impact and consequences of conversion. Over the decades after independence in 1947, the successive governments instituted studies of the issue of conversion and reservation to integrate the marginalized sections of the society with the main stream of the society as desirable in a democratic and secular polity and diversified society comprising of a mind boggling population of 140 crorers – Hindus (75% including SCs and STs with 22%), Muslims (18%) and around 7% of Sikhs, Christians, Jains, Buddhists etc. In the process, Sikhs and Buddhists were included in the beneficiaries of reservation, a temporary measure of empowerment as an affirmative action, to the socially and educationally weaker sections of the society.
All said and done, as I said earlier, not as an expert but a
layman without propounding any theories and statistics, let me conclude this
with a sort of prognosis:-
·
Hindus,
the main stream of the society, need not be apprehensive of any large scale
conversion. They need to look inward and reform the society of caste based
discrimination. Same is true for the Sikhs also who have also registered their
resentment against the conversion activism of Christians.
·
It
has been observed, in the Indian context, conversion has not resulted in any
consequential socio-cultural change in the converts. They remained attached,
physiologically and emotionally, to the main stream of the society in one way
or the other.
·
Conversion
so far, in the Indian context, has not made any dent on the demography of the
country and it would remain so as analyzed by Pew Research Centre (PRC) and
said, “The Muslim population's share would rise to 18.4%, whereas the share of
the Hindu population would be 76.7% in 2050. This indicates no chance of
having a higher Muslim population in India sooner or later.”
·
Reservations
to the SCs and SCs have not done much in changing the mindset of the caste
Hindus and even Sikhs and also of the OBCs (with regard to ill-treatment and
oppression against dalits) with regard to the caste system. Reservations have
helped, to some extent, in bettering the economic and educational status of SCs
and STs as an empowering factor as an Affirmative action.
·
Since
the reservations are a temporary measure, it should not be perpetuated much
longer. There is no rationale to extend these facilities to Muslim and
Christian converts as reservations have not served as an effective tool to end
social discrimination.
India’s credentials as a “SOVEREIGN SOCIALIST SECULAR DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC” preserved and nurtured to maintain its
multi-racial, multi-cultural character. It would obliterate need of conversion and we will live in a just and equitable order that is Samrasta)
(Paper of Ambassador
Ramesh Chander for Conclave on Conversion and Reservation held on March 4-5, 2023 att Gautam Buddha University at Greater Noida (UP)
No comments:
Post a Comment