DID CONVERSION START WITH AGRA?

By S R Ramanujan

Is conversion new to India? Or, for that matter re-conversion? If we listen to the discourses of our fake liberals, it appears so. As if, it all started at Agra! If there is one subject on which there is pretentious ignorance, palpable prejudice and bias in the media narratives, it is the hyporcritic blabber on conversions.

A senior citizen journalist (I don’t have a word to describe a journalist of the colonial era), may be, we can call “vintage journalist” talks about conversions away from Islam/Christianity to Hinduism as “”BPL conversions”” because the reverse was branded as “”rice conversions””. In a way he admits, though not directly, there is “”inducement”” in both the formulae. Does our Constitution guarantee such a right to convert with inducements when it guarantees the right to propagate one’s religion? And that is what was and has been happening all these decades when our (il)liberals looked the other way. If a society fails to act on such a naked aggression on the indigenous faith of its people, pro-active resistance is sure to follow and that is what we are witnessing today.

Let’s admit. India is a nation of conversions. And all these centuries, it was just one way track. May be, the faultlines of the indigenous religion were exploited for “”harvesting of souls””. May be, the followers of indigenous faith were so passive and powerless that the invaders could convert them with tremendous  ease. There was resistance at different stages in history. But such a resistance was quite feeble. The state power was in alien hands, first with Moghuls and later with the Missionaries, followed by the Communists who enjoyed state patronage under Jawaharlal Nehru and whatever the Left historians might write “force” was the only instrument used for conversion. There was no conversion which was out of one’s own sheer will. Either there was allurement and fraud or threat to life. 

Well, one may argue that it’s all history and what we should be concerned about is what is happening post- Independence. Quite right. But, let’s ask this basic question.  Why did six states of the Indian Union pass an anti-conversion law? All of them were not ruled by right wing parties at the time of such a legislation. For example, Odisha had to enact an anti-conversion law because the tribals in the state were exploited for conversion away from Hinduism to Christianity. So is the case with Madhya Pradesh, Gujarat, Arunachal Pradesh. What is more, these legislations were endorsed by the highest court in the land. When this verdict doesn’t suit the agenda of the fake seculars, there is clamour for revisiting this judgment.

Now, that is, in the background of Agra programme, liberals argue “that (such) programmes no doubt carry enormous potential to incite violence and hatred between communities; they are immoral, wicked and capable of producing dire consequences…Such legislation (anti-conversion law) can produce even greater damage; it would render nugatory our rights to freedom of conscience and religion, and in the process, it would scuttle any genuine attempts at achieving a peaceful, democratic society””.

Yes, the liberals are right. But the problem is selective amnesia. What they apprehend for Ghar Vapasi programme equally applies to conversion from Hinduism to other non-Hindu religions. No! That is not acceptable. Only “Ghar Vapasi”” is criminal or unconstitutional. Conversion of Hindus is perfectly Constitutional and it reinforced the fundamental right to freedom of conscience.

What happened in Kandhamal (Odisha), despite an anti-conversion law, is a classic example as to what could happen when conversions from the indigenous culture or religion to other alien faiths take place. When an Australian missionary and a Hindu saint were brutally killed in Odisha, none of these liberals raised their finger against conversions through inducement or ridicule of indigenous beliefs which were responsible for communal violence and hatred; but directed their wrath against “”fascist forces””. It was a clash of civilizations. Followers of indigenous faith whose tradition was to rever cows was not merely challenged by the alien faith, but ridiculed. What was the outcome of this clash is now part of history. 

When the Hindu saint was murdered as he was performing a religious ritual, the blame was put on naxals. For the post-murder violence, saffron forces were hauled up. First of all, why was he murdered? He could successfully arrest the pace of conversions among the tribals with foreign funds. The same liberals who now say that such conversions (mind you, they only refer to reconversions) were immoral, wicked and capable of producing dire consequences did not recognise the dangers involved in the business of conversion by missionaries imported from abroad. None of these liberals took time for honest introspection. Only when Agra happens, their conscience is aroused. Freedom of conscience comes into play.

Those who cry hoarse over Agra should ponder over the reality that conversion is the antithesis of secularism or secular spirit. Our founding fathers of the Constitution would not have imagined that billions of dollars would flow into the country for conversion by all foul and fraudulent means. Otherwise, they would have made a specific provision against conversions by inducement or allurement. Why does one convert a person belonging to another faith? Because he thinks that his faith is superior to the other and only when he/she follows his religion he/she can attain salvation. How does it gel with the spirit of secularism which warrants that all religions should be treated with equal respect? Do the converters endorse the indigenous faith “”Sarva Dharma Samo bhav””.

In today’s political jargon, “”secularism has an anti-Hindu animus””. Christian missionaries believe that India was a land of darkness, of heathenism, of paganism, of unbelievers and they want the entire country had to be converted into a land of Christ. India is poor, according to them, and backward because the land is full of unbelievers, and Joshua Project targets these heathens for the “”harvesting of souls””. When it comes to Islam, any religion that does not owe allegiance to the Prophet is “false religion” worshipping false gods. Does this square up with the spirit of secularism? If someone raises such questions, he will be immediately branded “”communal”” by our secular warriors.

When will our seculars see the reality?