Faith, Diplomacy And India

[Guest]

via email...

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Nothing Secular about the Right to Convert

== Introduction ==

There were four letters published in ‘The Hindu’ during August 29, 2001 and September 5, 2001. Sri Ramagopalan of the “Hindu Munnani” published a letter on August 29. This was followed by letters attacking him and Hinduism (a ratio 1:4.)

The following is a record of my replies to the attackers. The Hindu has once proven its true credential that it is a communist worthy and unworthy of Hindus and had again suppressed the voice of Hindus. My replies were never published. This is for record and for publication. I feel that the anti conversion acts enacted in various states must in earnest be renamed as “The protection and preservation on endangered cultures, religions, flora and fauna, art, architecture, and heritage of particular Bharat (or of a state say Rajasthan).This is to give a positive touch to the legislations and also stop the poachers on their track. The act now renamed would have very wide scope and empower the state to act tough against evangelical poachers, to the extent of giving death sentence. The state need not feel defensive and bitter for having enacted an anti-conversion act that is being interpreted as interfering in religious freedom. This makes the act very broad with wide and sweeping powers and indeed very sophisticated in the arsenal. This will put the western powers not to give a negative portrayal of the act that seeks to prevent religious conversions.

-- Laura Kelly

* * *

Please refer to four letters from your readers (The Hindu: August 29th, August 30th, September 1st & September 5th, 2001) and the acrimonious debate that followed on the issue of the ‘Rights to convert’. Whereas the world over, anthropologists, sociologists, ecologists and all right thinking people are trying very hard to preserve Social, Cultural and Biological diversity.

To argue that every single individual in the world, be converted to one particular faith or religion is audacious. There is nothing secular about the ‘rights to convert’, even if it be permitted by the constitution of India, other than theological raison d'être, which do not withstand the scientific temper of the modern world except for fanatical Christian who alone buys the argument. Across the globe, the call is to preserve diversity-bio diversity, cultural diversity, linguistic diversity, religious diversity and even culinary diversity. These are as much endangered as the flora and Fauna. Many indigenous civilizations have simply vanished, and are vanishing due to various reasons. Many small tribes and native people are disappearing, and hence it is important to take into account the unique heritage of each group in the Socio-Religious and cultural (bio) sphere of the Indian subcontinent, and the dire imperative to protect it from evangelical poachers.

The best example for institutions that have understood the importance of attracting, retaining and developing diversity are the US universities that attract and retain the diverse student population. MNCS are dotted with multiplicity of employee profiles and language groups. It is discernible as well down-to-earth to foster alternative thinking patterns and for getting better solutions to the pressing problems that corporations are facing now, but also to the complex problems that they may face in the future.

“DIVERSITY EMBEDDED IN THE UNIVERSE” was the theme of a biodiversity convention. To bicker against this central law -- is to work against nature itself. A single religious credo cannot become the dominant idea that threatens the survival of all others. Nature has not designed the universe that way – that a set of human beings impose their dogma on all people as the ULTIMATE TRUTH. Gandhi made this momentous remark to a group of missionaries who sought his guidance on 12 March 1942 “among all agents of the many untruths that are propounded in the world one of the foremost is Theology, I do not say that there is no demand for it, there is demand in the world for many a questionable thing”. (Collected works volume 71, page 328.)1

== Endangered cultures ==

The destructiveness and belligerence of human beings are endangering not only the flora and fauna, but also the various religious cultural and linguistic groups. Innumerable original cultures and languages have simply vanished due to this vicious activity, and many others have become endangered. With the disappearance of each cultural group, the collective wisdom of the group also dies out. (E.g. pre-Christian Rome and Greece, and pre Islamic Egypt) Each civilization is a rich repository of collective knowledge, symbols, and insight; that may hold crucial keys not only to Eco logical wisdom--co-existence--medicinal ‘know how’, and -‘know what’-- but also to the centuries old life styles, values and sacred beliefs, that sustains these knowledge systems. Indian, Chinese and Japanese are three ancient civilizations that have withstood the test of Time. India has been a great repository of tribes and native people that are rapidly dwindling, much to the apprehension of anthropologists. Consequently, it is imperative to take into account the incomparable richness of each group, their role in the civilizing (bio) sphere of the Indian subcontinent, and the urgent call to protect them from poachers. It ought to be the central theme of the Indian constitution to care for all endogenous cultures and ensure their continuity -- the great families of homegrown faiths that have survived until now, after having evolved over thousands of years are being endangered now, and they need to be PRESERVED AND PROTECTED FOR POSTERIORITY. These cultures have as many rights to exist -- live to tell the tale -- and pass on their traditions to their children, grand children and their children. In this they are much like their contenders, who are ever keen to rub salt at the genuine rights and persuade these people to break with their traditions, cut family ties and destroy the connections, and thereby strike at the very roots of these magnificent cultures. That is why it is the bounden duty of the constitution of India to protect all these cultures and the people, who are citizens of the land, as much as their contenders are. If the civil rights are not applicable to all sections of the population uniformly at this instant – one has to take a closer look at what makes the charter of the Indian constitution undemocratic, and hence the dire need to amend it now.

Rev. Dr. Verrier Elwin the famed missionary anthropologist (who was impressed by Gandhi, and whose testimony is given elsewhere in the article) was alarmed at the destruction brought about conversion of tribals, married a tribal woman and renounced his missionary career altogether in order to work for their welfare without uprooting them. Now I have taken the opportunity presented by the readers of The Hindu, to reply to them in the framework of the most recent findings. The objective is to sort out the mess between, Myths, History, Doctrine and Theology of the primitive ideologies that spearhead conversions in India; versus, the policy of Hindus that aims “to live and let live”. The basic premises of the predatory policies of evangelicals are questionable. In addition, the evangelicals make use of the favorable host climate of tolerance amongst the Hindus, and the prevailing policy of secularism in India, to further ‘harvesting of souls’, which is greatly unfavorable not only to the Hindus in India, but also to Buddhists, Jains, Jews and Zoroastrians.

== Understanding the Debate ==


RAMA GOPALAN: [The Hindu: Wednesday, August 29, 2001] convener Hindu Munnani: kicked off the debate. He said: “This has reference to the news report ‘PM hopeful of solution to Ayodhya issue by March’. August 27. Your correspondent, Mr. J. P. Shukla, may have misquoted the Prime Minister, and / or misunderstood the constitution when he reports. In fact, Conversion had been guaranteed by the constitution.” Nothing can be farther from the truth, Article 25 of the constitution grants to every citizen “freedom of conscience and free profession, practice and propagation of religion”. This right is given not just to the minorities as is often made out, but to every citizen including Hindus (…) missionaries have insisted that article 25 provides them the constitutional right to proselytize and convert (…) then, through means of fraudulent representation an allurement of money (…) It is with these examples and dangers in mind the supreme court delivered that historic judgment”.

Mr. Rama Gopalan did not in fact furnish the verbatim text of the Judgment -- the Historical juncture, in which it delivered, during the emergency, not by a solitary judge, as alleged by I. D. Jawahar Raj in his letter dated 5th September--but by a constitutional bench of five judges.

Mr. N DHARMESWARAN: [The Hindu dated August 30th reacted]: “Mr. Ramgopalan put up a spirited rebuttal; the lacuna is that it is legalistic” (...) he continued, “ People also need material support, education, heath care etc, in this Hinduism lags way behind”. The reason, he stated, ‘that Hinduism lags way behind in charity’. Could this be an ample reason, to defy and negate the supreme courts’ Judgment, the law of the land? He made a stilted remark that the Hindus are woefully inadequate in charity is obsolete and old fashioned, and ill au fait. We are going to see how this myth perpetrated by those having stakes, will be demolished.


Dr. Ebe Sunder RAJ: [the Hindu: Saturday, September 1, 2001]: Joint convener, united Christian forums for Human rights 2. See his article “The Indian church and nationality”, published in the Hindu dated 7 November 2000 refers to his role].

Pastor Ebe Sunderarj comments: (…) “ Freedom of the seeker to profess, practice and propagate (…) Mr. Ramgopalan will do well to document ten cases of a dalit or tribal embrace the Christian faith by force or fraud, as convicted by a court of law in the last 50 years anywhere in India .A thousand repetitions do not convert false allegations into truth”. Well, authentic documentation is available for the asking, running into thousands of pages, but who will punish the guilty? Will missionaries and their western allies allow this to happen?

I. D JAWAHRARAJ: [The Hindu September 5th 2001 said]: (…) “The supreme courts’ pronouncement of 1977 on the propagation of religion has been lambasted by eminent non-Christians, who recommended its review by a large bench” (…) He further says “let us all strive to understand the tenets of each other’s religion for the sake of enduring peace and good will among different communities”. No doubt, his intension is a laudable one. He failed to substantiate as to who the ‘eminent non-Christians’ were. Moreover, when he stated, that these non-Christians “who recommended …to review of the supreme courts’ pronouncement by a large bench.” All these are grossly imprecise information.

Rama Gopalan did not spell out how the provisions of the constitution under the Article 25, 26 and 30 are wholly disadvantageous to the Hindus -- the Article 25 of the constitution that guarantees the rights to “Profess practice and propagate” is between uneven followers. Hinduism, Judaism and Zoroastrianism, do not have a tradition of proselytizing unlike Christianity and Islam. They both stretch lock, stock and barrel by proselytizing and thrive on proselytization. “It is like the wolves are given a right and also sheep given liberty to prey each other” 3

Reverent Stanley Jones, when he sought the counsel of Rajaji during the creation of the constitution, suggested to incorporate “Profess Practice and Preach”, instead of “Profess Practice and Propagate” in the constitution. The due weight of this proposal and the vision of the Gandhiji were discarded as ‘uncalled-for’ and during the creation of the three contentious articles: 25, 26 and 30.4

In a rejoinder like this, I am not going to examine the evidence of powerful lobbies that were at work; both Indian and overseas that were monitoring the day-by-day proceedings of the constitutional assembly and influenced its outcomes considerably.

The scope of the counter is restricted to:

Primarily the question is, is it indisputable to convert any body ‘as a matter of right’, to some other faith, just because the constitution permits even if the person is a minor?

To assume that these people are eager to convert just because they are economically and socially poor is but a grand delusion. These people are keen to protect their ways of life. Eager to follow the path of their forebears, that distinguishes them from the rest of the world, and have no will and desire to put an end to that way of life, come what may. They may not be modern, may be syncretic idolaters, animists, and pagans. Nevertheless, they have as much right to exist and they need not be apologetic for their existence, as those who try to convert them portray in their propaganda. It is worthwhile for to us examine, whether the law protects these vulnerable people and what it bellows?

The Judgment delivered in the Stanislaus versus the State of Madhya Pradesh in January 1977 {AIR 1977 SC 908} by the Supreme Court of India was a landmark Judgment. The verdict was emphatic. The judgment acquires paramount importance as it was delivered either by a solitary judge, or by a bench of two judges; neither by a bench of three judges – nor by a bench consisting of four judges; but by a full constitutional bench comprising five judges, having flawless professional acumen and credentials; Honorable Justices A. N. Ray, M. N Beg, R. S Sarkaria, P. N Shingal and Jaswant Singh. It was not a BJP in power at that time, but the Congress party. Indira Gandhi was the prime minister; she had, all her opponents, in Jail she was overriding with iron fists. Hence the pronouncement of the Judgment itself, at the heights of emergency, in January 1977, acquires paramount importance. The judgment itself is given in full. The verdict itself has not been superseded by any other judgment and so it stands. Therefore, this is the commandment.5

The Supreme Court’s JUDGMENT on “RIGHTS to convert” {1977, SC: 908}

“We find no justification for the view that if article 25(1) grants a fundamental right to convert a person to ones’ own religion. It has to be appreciated that the freedom of religion enshrined in the article is not guaranteed in respect of one ’religion only, but covers all religions alike, and can be properly enjoyed by a person if he exercises his right in a manner commensurate with the like freedom of persons. What is freedom for one is freedom for the other in equal measure, and there can, therefore, be no such thing as a fundamental right to convert any person to one’s own religion” 6.

Pastor Ebe Sunder Raj mentioned about his rights to convert, enshrined in the constitution and arrived at this conclusion “whether a santhaali or kuki or dalit or any section has the right to choose a faith of his choice.” He did not mention Muslims in the list, why is he selective … Santhals and kukis alone. He assumes that these people do not have a ‘faith already’; colonial missionaries from the days of Claudius Buchanan adopted the convenient missioligical position to launch proselytizing in India. It made Claudius Buchanan, a chaplain attached to the east India company to say: “No Christian nation, ever possessed such an extensive field for the propagation of Christian faith, as that afforded to us by our influence over 100 million natives of Hindoostan. No other nation ever possessed such facilities for the extension of the faith as we have in the government of a passive people, who yield submissively to our mild sway, reverence our principles, and acknowledge our dominion to a blessing” {Claudius Buchanan, Memories of expediency of an ecclesiastical establishment for British east India; both as a means of perpetuating Christian religions among our country men: and as a foundation for the ultimate civilization of the natives. London 1805. Part 2, paragraph 6.} The colonial ambitions were expressed without inhibitions, missions offered lucrative careers, and pastor Ebe the Joint convener, united Christian forum for Human rights, does not lag behind when he used warped reason “because vast segments do not practise any initiation ceremony through a priest. Our 200 million dalits belong to this category (…)” a missiological argument used to “create a vacuum and then fill it up with what? The answer is, “Christianity”.

“In the constituent assembly, debates initiated by K.M. MUNSHI. A Harijan member came up with a demand for a specific clause for prohibiting conversion by material allurements and fraudulent means.” Mr. R. P Thakur, who clarified his position: 7

“Sir, I am a member of the depressed classes. The clause of the fundamental rights is very important from the standpoint of my community. You know well, sir that the victims of these religious conversions are ordinarily from the depressed classes. The preachers of other religions approach these classes of people, take advantage of their ignorance, extend all sorts of temptations and ultimately convert them. I want to know from Munshiji whether “fraud” covers all these things. If it does not cover them, I should ask Munshi to redraft this clause so that fraud of this nature might not be practiced on these depressed classes. I should certainly call this “fraud.’ (Constitutional assembly debates vol 3.pp490-491). 8” Hence Mahatma Gandhi called “conversions a fraud on humanity”. 9


Ebe Sunder raj mentioned about (…) “the rights of santhalis kukis dalits etc’ (…). It is not known whether the church to which he belongs authorized to speak on its behalf or the kukis santhalis and dalits authorised him to do so….

Joseph Troisi, a Christian Anthropologist and author testifies about the santhlhalis on whose behalf, Ebe supposedly speaks. “While among the non Christian (santhalis) the most important part of the marriage ceremony is the sindhradhan, or smearing the brides’ forehead with Vermillion, among the Christians the exchange of rings by bride and groom marks them as husband and wife” the applying of sindhoor is tabooed. The clean break is also in evidence in funeral rites (...) the converts are, largely being alienated from their village communities. Moreover, converts also become estranged from their own kinsfolk. They are prohibited by their own religion from taking part in the ritual offerings and ceremonies… that act as a strong force among the family members’’10 (Joseph Troisi, Tribal Religions, p.270).

Eminent anthropologist Christoph Von Furer Haimendorf laments “The missionary influence has eroded much of the tribal cultural heritage, linked inseparably with traditional mythology, beliefs and rituals and wilted when these were abandoned. Above all, the conversion of part of a community tends to destroy the social unity of the whole tribe”. I would like to add, the whole knowledge and wisdom regarding flora and fauna and herbs that could prove to be sources of wonder drugs is lost with the loss of each tribal wisdom. Christian missionaries have done nothing to save this heritage, let alone caring for them.11 (C. Von Furer –Haimendorf: Tribes of India, pp.307 &308)

Sigmund Freud has studied the hatred of converts toward their mother religions See Sigmund Freud: Der Mann Moses und die Monotheistische Religion: Der Abhandkungen (1939), republished by Penguin Freud Library Volume 13. Vintage books, 1939, pp.117-117). (…) 12 “A good many nishi youths have been converted to Christianity (in the north east India) … this in itself need not have created any difficulty…and if the Christian converts had been equally tolerating, … However, the converts seem to have been lacking tolerance … to whom I spoke in 1980 complained bitterly that Christians deliberately disrupted the harmony of community life (…) old parents were abandoned by their converted children, who claimed that they could not stay in dwellings where ‘devils’ were worshipped (…). My informants insisted that the missions encouraged the establishment of separate settlements for Christians…the Christians refused to participate in village festivals, thereby demonstrating their dislocation from the tribal community.(…) Moreover, that converts, not satisfied with this symbolic withdrawal from village life , went a step further by abusing and physically attacking priests as they invoked the gods in the performance of traditional nishi rituals”(...)“Nishi teachers at the government schools in yazali, who were members of youth organization formed to promote traditional tribal culture, told me how frustrated they were because they could not match the large sums lavished by the missions on propaganda which is undermining the old Nishi life –style.(…) The conflict created by the impact of Christianity on the Nishis stands in striking contrast to developments taking place in neighboring kameng district, where tribal groups such as khovas have come under the influence of Tibetan Buddhism (…). Among the khovas, there is a spontaneous trend towards Tibetan Buddhism; in two villages small gompa are und construction, and the villagers have invited Monpa lamas to perform Buddhist rituals (…). Unlike the christian converts among nishis, those khovas who are attracted to Buddhism do not opt out of the social life of their community and continue to participate in traditional tribal rituals (…) among the Monpas too, elements of the ancient Bon religion co exist with the dominant Buddhist faith (…) and the practice of both religions within the same communities has not sparked off any conflicts comparable to those threaten to destroy the social fabric of nishis affected by rivalries”13 C. Von Furer –Haimendorf, Tribes in India. P.308, 309 and 319 (…)

== Theological Persecution ==

The letter of Rev. Ebe Sunder Raj is also full of missiological polemics; he calls it “ the rights to choose”, as “the rights to convert”, a term that no lay Hindu could understand. There is world of difference between, “choices” versus a “religious conversion”. The dictionary connotations for “choose” are: decide, want, prefer, desire, wish, opt, select and pick. You can choose toothpaste but cannot convert to toothpaste, however while pastors are adopting choose, marketing managers prefer a stronger word “Convert”-- Converting a customer from X brand to Y brand, much to the chagrin of ministers. While you can convert to a religion of your choice the significance for “Religious Conversion” would incorporate: “change, exchange, adapt, alter, translate, renovate, switch, and transform”. He has furthered the aims of proselytization, when he stated; (…) “the supreme courts verdict of 1977 deal only with the freedom of the seeker to profess practise and propagate and does not speak of the rights of the pastor or purohit or moulavi to convert” He said the purohits, mullahs and pastors to be engaged in “initiation’.

WHAT IS THE SANCTITY OF THE law IF It DIFFERENTIATES between individuals WHO DEFY THE LAW AND THOSE WHO ABET?

== Truncated meaning ==

The dictionary meaning of initiation which would include; “launch, start, commence, open, instigate, introduction”) while he could have restricted himself technically to the Judaic use of the word ‘Baptism’, instead of attempting to make an “ all inclusive” presentation. Hinduism, Buddhism and Jainism and does not have Baptisms in the English sense of term “Initiation”. John the Baptist in whose name the ceremony came to be known, who baptized Jesus ‘Christ’ the baptismal rite is not the same as the initiation rites into Mysticism of Meditative and contemplative religions. There is a world of difference between “Diksha”, a Hindu expression and “baptism” a Judaic one. Equating the Judaic meaning of initiation expressed in English, with Diksha in Sanskrit will give only a truncated meaning. May be the Hindu religion is ‘syncretic’ but not Sanskrit -- the language, its grammer and vocabulary and their meanings are precise and exact ---unlike the ambiguous English language. Hence, Sanskrit is considered most qualified for AI or artificial intelligence applications. Revelatory religions as Christianity and Islam have ceremonies those terminologies are not to be equated with that process, beliefs, rites and philosophy of Hinduism, Buddhism (Hinayana, Mahayana, ZEN) and Jainism. {Alternatively, is it the part of the larger proselytizing efforts of ‘inculturisation’? Where Christianity is trying to adopt and take over the symbols and practices of Hinduism? Like the ochre colour of Hindu Sanyasis adopted by missionary women instead of the traditional white skirts with European looks, a process that has been documented by missionaries themselves.} He argued, “The imagery of a converter comes into play because of the initiation ceremony done via the pastor, purohit or maulavi” .The roles and duties of Hindu purohits are prescribed for them in the Grihya sutras and by other sastras with references to the particular orientation; the agamas, they are trained in and to the deity; are not exactly the same, as that of the social agenda of the pastors. Further Hinduism does not thrive on proselytizing, unlike Christianity and Islam.


Hangs Kung, the fore most Christian Scholars and Catholic Theologian of Thubingen University Norway observed: “We have failed, because we have regarded Europe as the center of the world and have thought ourselves superior to the other parts of the world”. 14 He classified the Religions of the world as follows 1) Religions of Semitic origin; they have Prophetic character, always begin from, contrast between god and human beings, and are predominantly involved in confrontation (…) 2) Religions of Indian origin; they are primarily supported by a basic mystical mood, tending towards unity, and are dominated by inwardness … of Upanishads, Buddhism and Hinduism (…). 3) Religions of Chinese origin; they have wisdom stamp and are in principle characterized by harmony; Confucianism and Taoism (…). Hans Kung the catholic theologian coined the terminology “Semitic exclusivism”, when he sought to differentiate between different religions of the world”. A revelatory religion does not believe in exhorting its follower to taking personal responsibility towards one’s thought, word or deeds. These are secondary only to joining the community, the congregation, and the umma. The confrontational ideology was evident when a lone letter of Ramagopalan received three counters, representing Christian viewpoints.


Pastor Ebe sunder Raj has tried to give a superficial and simplistic interpretation of Hinduism to suit his needs “millions of syncretic believers who believe in more than one faith who do not go through any initiation”. He is optimistic when he stated, “our 200 million Dalits belong to this category” The motive of Ebe is clearly scheming when he said our constitution is “wisely silent”. This is precisely the “lacunae” pointed by Hindus, that is disadvantageous to them and that is exploited to the core by the Proselytizers.

The “yama” or “niyama” that a person has to adopt following the diksha by the ‘Guruswami’ as in the sabarimala yatra are rigorous, unlike in revelatory religions. Infact two to six crore Hindus in south India alone, under go these intense spiritual exercises voluntarily every year, and not as portrayed by Ebe So the attempt by the pastor that there is no religion for the dalits is farce and that would have to be filled with deviatory interpretation. Some statistics: (2 crore visit Mookambika every year, 3 crore visit Dharmasthala, 3-4 crore visit Tirupathy, 3-4 crore visit Palani 2-6 crore visit Sabarimala). Even to visit a village deity before undertaking the journey, often done on foot, they have to observe the set of formal procedure and its own accompanying diksha rites, like every year millions of Hindus under take ‘pal kavadi’ to palani,’ fire walking’ and ‘flower showering’ to hundreds of Maari Amman temples of Tamilnadu. Millions walk all the way to Thiruchendur Temple during Soorapada vadam. The rites prescribed for anchorites In Hinduism, Jainism and Buddhism are much tougher than that prescribed for a householder. The Upasanas themselves are graded in difficulty, from primary school to PhD levels. Accordingly diksha is given. What applies in one level does not apply at another level. What is apparently a paradox in one level is resolved in the next level, when we take into account that they are aimed at the ultimate spiritual need of the individual 13. The individual has extreme freedom to select his deity or Ishtadevata, or even an aspect unlike the “ the only” “my god” of Christianity. Ultimately one has to outgrow the dependence on deity. This in a vague way resembles the English saying “it is good to be born in a church but bad to die in it”15

The “Dikhsha” is not initiation, as often translated into English. Each of the mystical, philosophical and yoga methods are distinct from each other, and profoundly deep. It is not an intellectual study, of theology, as in seminaries, but the transformation of the entire change of constitution of the human personality and its nadis, and the five vital sheaths. It is again highly technical. The kriya yoga of Paramahamsa Yogananda is so vastly different from the traditional and popular Patanjali school. The Sri Vidhya Upasana as depicted in the Lalitha Sahasranama is again technically different from that of the raja yoga school. As often very few get diksha into this; in the life of the Kanchi senior Sankaracharya, he never gave diksha to more than a handful of persons (single digit) in the Sri Vidhya in his entire 80 plus years of spiritual service.) Even Paramahamsa Yogananda used to compare the real diksha, to connecting to a million volts power line, even though he taught kriya yoga to a hundred thousand persons. ‘Uttama Adikari’ or the ‘fitness-of-the-seeker’ is the criteria. The techniques change with the level and preparation of the seeker. The Zen masters and Jains talk about the right mental attitude and emptying the mind. While revelatory religions never speak of the disciplines related to mind. Their contents stop with prayer, confession, acceptance of the saviour etc this according to Hinduism is kindergarten school of religion. They are belief and dogma oriented. In addition, they do not have scientifically proven methods, to achieve higher states of consciousness. Even astronauts under go Yoga and Prananyama training to withstand the rigors of space travel. Yoga does not want any body to believe in anything. All of the eastern religions never speak of conversion in numerical terms, but speak of transforming the individual. They are against uprooting an individual from his family and culture moorings. While the ritualistic school necessitates the three Varnas to undergo the Dwija ceremony, so that one becomes eligible for performing the rites meant for a householder, the same is diksha into the effulgence of Gayathri, not in the English sense. For its inner meaning is opening the third eye or the inner spiritual eye. While diksha is given to all who opt for yogic training, whose inner self is much developed than the outside core, and are willing to under go the rigors of Tapasya and austerities. Valmiki the author of Ramayana was hunter, who was given diksha into Rama Nama, that he could produce a magnum opus. Hanuman was received diksha into Rama Nama from Naradha Muni. Ramana Maharishi in our own times advocated self enquiry or “who am I”, as the mantra, when he was a youth of 17 years. Among thousands of people who visited him, only Paul Brunton, who was in turn advised by Kanchi Sankaracharya in 1930s, to approach Ramana, for gaining insight into the ultimate-16 which in fact he realized. The Shankaracharya did not directly advice Paul Brunton; shows how complex indeed are human nature and how the path varies for every individual.

On the one end of the spectrum, it is qualified by rigidity and on the other end, extreme liberty. The higher a person goes up in the spiritual ladder, the more rigid are the controls16. The higher a person goes the less dogmatic he/she becomes17. Finally, diksha is not joining an organization, paying subscription, attending its ceremonies, but connecting oneself to ones’ roots.18 Yoga means seeking tracing the origin of oneself and connecting to it within oneself, not in any reveled dogma or son hood of god, not getting into formal organization and subscribing to its theology19. Yoga in Hinduism including the so-called ‘idolatry’ is only a tool to help in the concentration 20. While the other religionists are even bigger idolaters trapped by their organizations, the kitab, the ideologies of collective thinking and living. That is why the Hindus laugh at others, when pastors are pointing their fingers at them for, “syncretism” and as “idolatrous”.

Pastor Ebe, challenged Ramagopalan: “Mr. Rama Gopalan will do well to document ten cases of a Dalit or tribal embracing the Christian faith, on force or fraud as convicted by a court of law in the last 50 years any where in India. A thousand repetitions do not convert false allegations into truth”

Unlike Christian missionaries, Hindus have nothing to protect and hence do not pay much importance to document development. Further, in rejoinder we are going to see documented, well-documented evidence against the pastor that pastor Ebe had invited. They say one picture is equal to 100 words.’ Ebe said, “A thousand repetitions do not convert false allegations into truth”. I would like to add a new dimension; ‘one testimony is equal to 100 convictions.

== The testimony of Rev. Dr. Verrier Elwin ==

Verrier Elwin reported: ‘ In Madala, 1944: the situation has grown serious here, for the fathers of apostolic prefecture Jabalpur are proselytizing on an unprecedented scale, and on methods that would have been considered disgraceful in the middle ages ….The missionaries usurp the functions of Government officials, try to interfere in the work of the Courts and the business of local officials and gave the Gonds (a tribe) the impression that they are the real Sirkar (local government authorities) and the fathers finally have an extensive money lending business and that is one of the most effective means of bringing aboriginals under their control and forcing them into the church. ‘[Niyogi committee Report, July 1956, Volume 1.pp 107 –157 &Volume 2, Part B, p.61.] 21

== New harvest of Faith ==

Is money lending it ethical Mr Ebe and is it the permitted method of proselytizing? Well, you may have to produce enough evidence to disprove that missionaries are not adopting this method of money lending at present, contrarily enough evidence that they are engaged in large-scale money lending business even now, is available. Many are engaged in lucrative real estate business. “One of the dropouts of a famous missionary college in Bangalore confessed that he mainly dropped out because the priest in charge of his group was having extensive money lending business and having at least a dozen bank accounts”. (Roman Catholic Case no 291 Recorded, August 20th 2001). Another case of a Vedic Brahmin was literally purchased for Rs eight lakhs his debts up to three lakhs was cleared by a missionary (North American evangelicals Case no 486 Recorded, July24th 1995) and he was provided a modern house, and guaranteed free education to his children, on stipulated conditions, that he with wife and two children are converted to Christianity, that his duty would be to preach their version of Christianity using Vedas as reference text. He is very much in business twisting and distorting the Hindu scriptures to suit the missionary agenda. Last, I found him preaching a blatant lie that “the Gayathri Mantra refers to the Yeshiva and that Jesus completes the Vedas”. While the truth is, that Hinduism had achieved its present shape at least 1000 years before the arrival Clement of Alexandria a Greek theologian and missionary (circa 150-235 AD). The imperial design of Christianity started with 428-431 AD, when Nestorian the bishop of Constantinople demanded the fanatic emperor Theodosius. “Give O’, Caesar, the earth plunged of heretics, and I will give you in exchange the kingdom of heaven. Join me and exterminate the heretics and with you I shall exterminate the Persians” Within no time no pagans were left. Hundreds and thousands were burnt at stake. {See Paul Johnson, A History of Christianity, Penguin. 1973.} 22

In a lecture delivered in the late 1880s Sir Richard Temple a (governor of three provinces) said: “India is like a mighty bastion, which is being battered by heavy artillery. We have given it blow after blow and effect is not remarkable: but at last with a crash the heathen religions of India will come toppling down, and it is our hope that some day the heathen religions of India will in like manner succumb”. Richard temple, Oriental experience, essays and addresses delivered on various occasions, John Murray, London 1883, pp. 155, 165 and 142. 23. This is the great ambition of missionaries, then and now. However, the Great Britain crumbled before the half naked fakir, and before the dream of Richard temple could be realized.

Further Dr. Ebe, has not cared to explain the churchmen’s polemics when he hailed that “millions of syncretic believers”. Perhaps the utterance is a shade better than kafir used in Islam. Syncretism is a churchman’s choicest epithet used to explain away the Hindus’ belief of treating all religions as reflections of the same truth and very often used nastily against Hinduism by the colonial missionaries, to explain the “excusive nature of Christianity” and its superiority over other religions, about which progressive theologians like Hans kung, Dr. Herman H. Somers Edward Schillebeeckx and Jesuit Professor Vermeersch are critical.24

To a Swiss professor Rahm who was bewildered by many warring creeds Gandhi said, on 10 May 1936: “it depends on Christians, if only they would make up their minds to unite with the others! But, they will not do so. Their solution is universal acceptance of Christianity as they believe it.”25 (All annotated refernces are duly acknowledged)

== Psychology of Conversions ==

Professor William James has written a whole chapter on Religious Conversions, in his classic book on psychology, “Variety of Religious Experiences”16. He classified religious experiences, into various categories, and differentiated between genuine conversions and counterfeit conversions. A whole range of literature is available on the psychology of conversions. The religious conversion cannot become an object of “choice” that could be picked up in a supermarket shelf from varieties of toothpaste. Spiritual conversions are few and far in-between that happen to one in a million or even billion individuals. Genuine Spiritual conversions (not just religious conversions) like what happened to young Siddhartha, St. Paul on the road to Damascus (whose conversion has since been debated by theologians-researchers and psychiatrists like Dr Herman H. Somers 1986. It has since been traced to a heat stroke) Teresa of Avila, Ramakrishna and Naraendranath, (Vivekananda) (quoted by William James) 16 and we can include Mahatma Gandhi17. In all the cases of higher religious conversions the person tends become more Magnanimous and Universal, and less superstitious and fanatical and he /she has out grown the religion in to which he or she was born into.18

While forcible religious conversions, and human interventions on the contrary, tend to develop hatred and animosity towards others18. The individual tends to become more rigid, dogmatically attached to forms, rites, rituals and books and lesser to inward development and acquires an arrogant air of superiority.19 (Sigmund Freud has studied the hatred of converts toward their mother religions See Sigmund Freud: Der Mann Moses und die Monotheistische Religion: Der Abhandkungen (1939), republished by Penguin Freud Library Volume 13. Vintage books, 1939, pp.117-117) 20

Professor Samuel Reimarus (1694- 1768) a professor of oriental languages, of the University of Hamburg Germany, set the ball rolling when he wrote in secret, some 4000 pages, of Higher criticism of the Bible, which was posthumously published by his friend Ephraim lessing seven years after his demise. Lessing also published the last piece of the writing “The Aims of Jesus and his disciples” in 1778 21.

The first real psychopathological study of Jesus Christ as undertaken separately by three psychiatrists: W. Hirsch, Ch. Binet Sangle’ and G. L de Loosten. After examination of the Gospels, they independently reached the same conclusion. That Jesus was mentally ill and suffered from paranoia. 118. (See la’ folie de Jesus in French) Meaning “Jesus’ Madness”, Paris 1908-1912; W. Hirsch: Religion and Civilisation, Munchen 1910: G.L de loosen: Christus Vom Standpunkt des psychiaters (German; Jesus Christ the psychiatrist point of View Bamburg 1905.) 22

Edward Schillebeeckx a well-known Contemporary progressive theologian ascribes the gospel stories to the imaginations of primitive Church, which wanted to glorify Jesus Christ23. Another ex Jesuit professor Vermeersch said “If these Bible stories are only stories, do you think that common faithful will remain Christians if they are told about these mere “stories”? The crux of the Christian faith is precisely that God has intervened in history, by sacrificing his only begotten son and resurrecting him. Then the Christian myth is at best of the same order as all pagan myths and Christianity must forsake its claims to uniqueness and finality.”24

No Hindu Buddhist, Sikh, Muslim or Jew has had the least objection to Christians having their beliefs and look for salvation through Jesus (Ebe Sunder Raj the minister), nor do they bother about the dogmas as long as Christians keep it to themselves. It is only when they impose their beliefs trouble starts. When aggressive ministers impose their dogmas on unwilling Hindus, Buddhists, Jains, Sikhs and Jews they are forced to register a protest and take closer look at the History of Christianity. 25

Dr Herman H. Somers born on October 3rd 1921 studied at catholic University at Leuven and at Rome. MA in philosophy, PhD in Theology and PhD in Psychology and PhD in classical philology; was in the Jesuit order for 40 years, and led the Jesuit News paper De linie, studied the Bible with the eye of a scientist. He developed serious doubts about the divine origins of the bible and its authors. In 1986, he published the Book Jesus De Messiahs: Was het Christendom een Vergissing? Wrote it inDutch. EOP, Antwerp. (English “Jesus the Messiah was Christianity a Mistake?). In 1990 he published a very detailed work on his analysis of Old Testament Prophets titled; Toen God Sliep, Schreef De Mens De Bijbel, De Bijbel Belicht door een Psychloog (When God Slept, man wrote the Bible. The Bible explained by a Psychologist Faucet publishers Antwerp 1990) He has also written on the Jesuit order, A psychological study of Mohammed, and a study of Christian fundamentalist groups like Jehovah’s witness26.

He developed serious doubts and left the order. His studies deal with the psychology Prophetism of and Old Testament in the light of mental health. None of these books have made way into Indian bookstores.27

The church in India is jealous to guard its laity and clergy from coming anywhere near those research findings. The churches in Europe have long since forsaken that logic. The historicity and contradictions abounds within in the bible and Christianity has been brought to light28. The most recent findings of Dead Sea scroll little of which is known in Asian countries

== Higher criticism ==

These Critical Biblical studies have revealed, that the accounts narrated in the Gospels contradict each other and contains innumerable interpolations. The missionaries often use the following quote “go and preach to all nations”, is an interpolation. Most editions of the Bibles being published in western countries, faithfully document it in the footnote, but none of those Bibles being published and handed-out in India carry this footnote. The words ‘Good News’ in the New Testament also has been shown to be an interpolation. It is now widely known that Mark 16.9-20 was added at a future date. The original one stops at 16.8 in all the ancient manuscripts.

== Startling Discovery ==

Professor Morton Smith of Colombia University while he stayed in a monastery in Jerusalem in 1958 discovered startling correspondence between Clement of Alexandria, a Greek theologian and missionary (ca 150 –235 AD) and one Theodore. The most glaring case of expunction came to light as to what happened to the passages after Mark: 10.46, what happens to Jesus after he arrived in Jericho? With this discovery, the centuries old riddle was resolved. It is too sensitive to be mentioned in a newspaper article. See: Professor Morton Smith Clement of Alexandria and the Secret Gospel of Mark, Harvard University, 1973. USA.


Mr. N. DHARMESHWARAN [The Hindu: Thursday, August 30, 2001] reacted to Ramagopalan. “Mr Ramgopalan has put up a spirited rebuttal; the lacuna is that it is totally legalistic” (...) The reason he stated that “while religions provide spiritual sustenance, people also need (…) material support, education, heath care etc, in this area Hinduism lags way behind”. That ‘Hinduism lags way behind in charity’, and that it could not match the others charity; is it reason enough to justify evangelical poaching, and to defy and negate the Indian Supreme courts Judgment? 29

Dharmeshwaran implored Ramgopalan “to improve matters.” Further he added, “that the apex court has not only struck at forcible conversions, not at the right to propagate which is to spread one’s own religion … or proselytize; otherwise of what use is this right” 30. The writer did not draw the fine distinction between forcible conversions, and voluntary conversions. He was keener to defend the Christian missionaries right to convert, because they are numerically more in service, as compared to the paucity of Hinduism; which itself is a fallacy, as we are going to examine in detail. He did not refute the point of Rama Gopalan that illegal conversions are not occurring.

He probably does not know that, the Janatha regime 1977-78, made an attempt in the rightful direction to segregate between genuine conversions and forcible conversions, however, Powerful missionary lobby, thwarted this effort. He also presumably did not see any connection between Article 25 which “states that Freedom of conscience and free ‘professing’ ‘practice’ and ‘propagation’ of religion is directly linked with the following clause 1) “ subject to public order morality (…) and, clause 2). “Nothing in this article shall affect the operation of any law or prevent the state from making any law: a) regulating or restricting economic, financial, political or other secular activity which may be associated with religious practice (…) “. The right to profess practise and propagate religion is not absolute. These rights are subject to “public order, morality and health” (…) when this was violated, the state had to invade the Golden temple, when it was used as ‘fortress-golden-temple’ by Sikh extremists. 31

The clause 2 b emphatically states that the freedom of conscience to profess, practise and propagate does not come in the way of “the state providing for social welfare or reform”. Not only article 44 directs the state to formulate a common civil code for all citizens, the clause 2b of article 25 give the complete authority to the state to ensure “ social welfare and reform”. (Shah Bano case, regardless of the out come of the case, the state did attempt to provide alimony rights and welfare for the aged divorcee) 33

== Legal Discrimination ==

ARTICLE 29

“Article 29 says that every minority has the right to protect its religion, language, script and culture. Article 30 says that every minority group has the right to establish and run educational institutions of its choice.”34

“Under Article 30 of the Constitution, minorities have the most precious right of running educational institutions in accordance with their own cultures and values, but Hindus have been denied this right. This discrimination means that the Indian State is more liberal in helping propagation of alien cultures than the promotion of Hindu culture. You cannot find such a perverse provision in the constitution of any independent nation of the world.”35

ARTICLE 30

Article 30 of the Constitution lays down that the minorities can set up government-sponsored denominational schools, implying their right to a communal bias in recruitment of teachers and students and a religion-centered curriculum. When the Constitutional Assembly voted this article, many delegates probably assumed that the extension of the same rights to the Hindu majority was self-understood; but in practice, this right is denied to the Hindus.36

In 1980, when the Ramakrishna Mission deemed it necessary to declare itself a non-Hindu minority (a self-definition challenged in court by its own members and finally struck down by the Supreme Court in 1995) in order to prevent the Communist West Bengal government from nationalizing its schools. 37

Likewise for the Sikhs, the Lingayats, even the Hare Krishnas, who have all come to profess: “We are not Hindus”. The ultimate Supreme Court ruling surprisingly did give an assurance of protection against state interference to the R.K. Mission schools, on grounds not of Article 30 but of the recognition of special privileges for the R.K. Mission under an old Bengal state law. At any rate, Article 30 constitutes a very serious discrimination on grounds of religion, and is in conflict with the professed secular character of the Indian Republic.37

K. R. Malkani says: “Other private schools and colleges have to reserve teaching and non-teaching jobs for SC-ST-OBCs, but minority institutions can appoint whomsoever the like. …Private schools have to get prior permission of the Chief Educational Officer for appointing outsiders to higher posts; minority institutions do not have to follow this rule… the Department can withdraw recognition for violation of rules. However, authorities cannot withdraw recognition from a minority institution.38

However serious the violation of rules… while the Hindu institutions [have] no fundamental right to compensation in case of compulsory acquisition of their property by the state, a minority educational institution shall have the fundamental right to compensation. In Malkani’s view, “a lasting solution to this problem lies only in amending Article 30 of the Constitution, giving the right to establish and administer educational institutions of their choice to all religious denominations and not only to the minorities.”39

The combative CPM Government in West Bengal did go out of its way to harass the Ramakrishna Mission schools, but most Congress Governments never did anything of the kind. And sometimes, attempts are made to take control of minority institutions as well, for example in 1992, the Tamil Nadu Assembly passed the Recognised Private Schools (Regulation) Amendments Bill and Recognized Private Colleges (Regulation) Amendments Bill, empowering the state government to exercise some control over the private schools and colleges: “The Bills are strongly supported by the unions of university, college and school teachers and other staff. But they are equally strongly opposed by Christian and Muslim school and college managements.” 40

So, in practice, the discrimination against Hindus in education is limited. Nonetheless, it remains unjust that it is on the statue book, even if it were not actually implemented anywhere. Thomas Abraham from Madras, writes: “Let the Hindus also be given the same right as any other minority to run educational institutions, protect their language, etc. That is to say, the ambit of Article 30 in our Constitution should be changed. The state must be debarred from regulating, supervising or interfering in any way with the administration and practices followed in Hindu temples. Educational institutions run by Hindus will be free to propagate and preach Hinduism with the same constitutional protection now afforded to the minority religions.” What he proposes is simply the extension of the special rights enjoyed by the minorities to the Hindu majority. “41

On the crucial issue of Article 30, a very official form of support has come from very unexpected quarters: Syed Shahabuddin, who introduced “The Constitution (Amendment of Article 30) Bill” in the Lok Sabha, 1995. As already discussed, Article 30 discriminates against the Hindu majority by laying down the following provision: “all minorities, whether based on religion or language, shall have the right to establish and administer educational institutions of their choice.” This means that minorities can establish state-subsidized schools where they have a free hand in conducting religion-based curricular, admission and recruitment policies, but the majority cannot. Shahabuddin wants to change all that. The central part of the amended version of Article 30 would read like this, as per Shahabuddin’s bill: “Any section of the citizens residing in the territory of India or any part thereof, professing a distinct religion or having a distinct language, script or culture of its own or forming a distinct social group shall have the right to establish and administer educational institutions of its choice.” This is Shahabuddin’s statement of objects and reasons.42

“By judicial interpretation, the term ‘minority’ has been extended to include identifiable social groups which form a minority in the population of a State even if they form a majority in the Union as a whole… In a vast and complex plural society, almost every identifiable group, whether identifiable by religion, including denomination or sect, or by language, including dialects, forms a minority at some operational or functional levels, even if it forms a majority at some other levels. In the age of ethnicity that has dawned in the world, all identifiable groups are equally anxious to maintain their identity and they too wish to have the privilege of the right to establish educational institutions of their choice… The aspiration for conserving and communicating religious and cultural traditions and language to succeeding generations is legitimate and applies to all groups, big or small. It is, therefore, felt that the scope of article 30 of the Constitution should be widened to include all communities and all sections of citizens who form a distinct social group at any level. Of late, Article 30 has been criticized as bestowing a privilege on the minority communities, which the majority community does not enjoy. The majority community or any section thereof should also be allowed to establish and administer educational institutions of its choice, if it so desire.43

“Hence this Bill.

New Delhi, April 20, 1995.

“Syed Shahabuddin”

Like so many Private Bills, Shahabuddin’s Bill never made it to the voting stage, but it showed how he is aware of the mobilizing potential of the Article 30 issue. Apparently, he wanted to defuse it before the BJP would acquire the acumen to perceive and exploit this potential.”44

ARTICLE 370

Another de facto discrimination, though no religious denomination mentioned by Hindus, exists in the articles giving a special status to the Muslim-majority state of Jammu & Kashmir and the Christian-majority states of Mizoram and Nagaland.” 45

“Conversion in the constitution: “the constitution also contains several provisions which do not formally discriminate, but which are disadvantageous to the Hindus in practice. One sore point is the rights to convert, which in theory also protects the rights of rights of Hindus to convert non-Hindus to Hinduism, but was in fact enacted (overruling Hindu opposition to protect the rights of Christian missionaries to convert Hindus to Christianity” 46 Even Hindu minors are not protected under the constitution. True that the right to propagate applies to all religion, yet it is a competition among in equals. 47

Discrimination in the constitution: Article 29 and 30

According to this article minorities can set up schools, etc implying the right to have a communal bias in teachers selections, promotions and students and also a religious curriculum. But in practice this right is denied to Hindus. Article 30 constitutes a serious ground for discriminating against the Hindus. The state of India could be sued in the international court of justice, for meting out this injustice. 48


The article 29” protects the interests of minorities: religion, language and script “is and article 30 Right of minorities to establish and administer educational institutions …of their choice.” What are the characteristics of a minority institution? Controversies have centered on Articles 26, 29, and 30. These articles focus at different citizen groups. Article 26 guarantees rights to all citizens. While article 30 is specific about minority rights: whether based on religions or language. In addition, it gives “all minorities “… the right to set up religious institutions. Could it be that only religious minorities are permitted and not linguistic minorities? Article 30 has been interpreted to provide “an absolute right” for the minority institutions. Many Hindu institutions like Ramakrishna mission, Brahma Samaj have declared them as minorities, Hare Krishna’s, in order to take coverage, under this article 30. The article states: “ the state shall not, in granting aid to educational institutions, discriminate against any educational institutions on the ground that it is under the management of a minority whether based on religion or language”. Private (non minority) reserve posts for teaching and non-teaching jobs to BCs, OBCS, SCS and STS. Nevertheless, minority institutions are free to appoint the persons of their choice.49

This has put these institutions well beyond supervision and control. This is major lacuna in the constitution itself, a sore spot, and grievance for the Hindus, and gives opportunity for others to jibe at, that “the Hindus are less charitable”, Ludicrous. The articles 26, 29 and 30 have to be examined and re written, in order to ensure equal rights guaranteed under the constitution be covered to all Indian citizens. “The state should support only secular, non-religious, non-denominational institutions. All educational institutions must be recognized to be on par and no favorable treatment meted to any body.” Last but not the least, the exercise of rights under all articles in this section of the constitution must be subject to the domain of public national interest of the constitution. “One cannot expect the Hindus to run marathon race with both foot bound,” much to the chagrin of Hindus. Hindus should seek to remedy the disadvantage. They are pushed into the pit to compete against unequal competitors with rules of the game favoring the other side. Mr. Syed Shahbhuddin, did in fact recognize the problem faced by Hindus and made an attempt. He moved a private members’ bill in the parliament to amend the constitution suitably. (20 April, 1995). It never made it to the voting stage. Mr. M. M.Beg, Chairman of minorities’ commission recommended todisband the minorities’ commission. Justice Muhammad Currimbhoy Chagla wrote in his autobiography (1973): “I have often strongly disagreed with governmental policy of constantly harping upon minority status and minority rights. It comes in the way of national unity and emphasis the differences between the majority and minority. Of course, it may serve well as a vote catching device to win Muslim votes (also Christian) but I do not believe in sacrificing national interests in order to get temporary party benefits. Although the directive principles of state enjoin a uniform civil code, the government has refused to anything about it, on the plea that minorities will resent any attempt at imposition.” 50 (References 31 to 50 from K. Elst Decolonizing the Hindu Mind.) (All annotated refernces are duly acknowledged)

<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->