200 thoughts on “Conversions”

1. they should not be ignored – India is what it is because of those people – more power to them

   the largest concentration of abjectly poor individuals in the world? 8=) sorry, that was just too easy….

2. Beige Siege:

   Yes, Jayalithaa’s AIADMK government in Tamil Nadu was the first state to enact a ban on forced conversions, and this was widely seen as a political move designed to appeal to the BJP at the center. In fact, after this, almost every BJP official in the country came out in praise of Jayalalithaa, and if I remember correctly, she was invited to Narendra Modi’s inauguration following his re-election. In another move designed to please the BJP and those toting the hardline Hindutva stand, she also banned animal sacrifice throughout the state.

   While I wasn’t in TN for the animal sacrifice ban, I was in Madurai when she enacted the ban on forced conversions.

   Madurai is comprised of three main communities: Thevars (Maravars), Nadars, and Dalits. There is a fierce rivalry between the Thevars and Nadars (both low caste Hindus), and there is constant conflict between the Dalits and each/both of the other communities.

   There is an existing impression that when Dalits convert to either Islam or Christianity, they all of a sudden become economically and educationally empowered. I’ve never seen any hard data to support or dispute this, but that doesn’t really matter in this case, since the impression does widely exist.

   When Jayalalithaa announced the conversion ban, the Thevars and Nadars took to the streets in celebration, holding rallies, etc. because this meant that it would not be as easy for Dalits to convert and rise above the Thevars economically.

   So by announcing this ban on forced conversions, Jayalalithaa became closer to the BJP and strengthened her hold among caste Hindus – particularly important in places like Madurai, where her rival DMK party is dominant. The close ties between the AIADMK and BJP continued until 2004, when the alliance failed to win a single seat in the parliamentary elections. Jayalalithaa got scared and quickly backed down from her Hindutva-friendly stance, staying the ban on conversions, and (I think) lifting the ban altogether on animal slaughter. She also dumped the BJP from her alliance in this year’s state elections, but that didn’t help her much.

   So while you are correct in saying that TN is by no means a majority Hindutva-friendly state, Jayalalithaa’s passage of these two bills was politically motivated to appeal to the BJP, and was therefore tied very closely to the general Hindutva agenda.

3. I tend to agree with the opinion that reducing this to a hindutva vs secularist debate is naive and an oversimplification. Religious conversion by evangelical christian groups have caused serious law and order problems in parts of India. There is a long running insurgency in Nagaland and parts of neighbouring states by evangelical fundamentalist christian groups, who want to carve out a christian state from parts of India and Burma. 40 years ago, this sort of problem did not exist (these are recent converts). Many of these groups are funded by evangelical organizations and churches in the USA.

   As far as freedom of religion is concerned, both Christian and Islamic religious organizations are the real offenders. As Saheli pointed out, comparing the hindutva types to them is sort of comparing apples to oranges. Besides, I dont think any hindu organization will have a problem with people becoming Buddhists or Jains or something similar. A lot of the reaction is to the poor taste and intolerance displayed by proselytizing organizations, at least among ordinary hindus. It is disturbing to hear the Pope declare proselytizing to be a goal of the church in India. I am sure there are many Indian christians who are also uncomfortable with this. Even Mother Teresa has been accused of coercing conversions from destitute and dying people. Personally, I find this somewhat dirty.

   Having said this, there is another dimension to this issue, brought about due to a lack of an uniform civil code-There have been some well known instances of individuals converting from one religion to another to divorce, or marry multiple times to avoid facing any legal action on their existing spouse’s part. I think this can be solved only through a uniform civil code.

   Finally, having said all this, it is likely that anticonversion laws may be a very flawed attempt to deal with this issue, given the arbitrariness of the definitions and the consequent arbitrary power such laws would confer on governments. A surface reading of this seems to indicate that these laws are ripe for abuse. I think it would be a lot more profitable and a lot less arbitrary if charities are scrutinized more strictly, especially those receiving any funds from outside the country or from religious organizations and foreign missionary activity monitored more carefully.

4. 40 years ago, this sort of problem did not exist (these are recent converts). Many of these groups are funded by evangelical organizations and churches in the USA.

   you are correct that the uniform christianity of the nagas is a recent phenomenon of the past few generations, but please note that the missions date back to the 19th century, so this isn’t a recent/short term process. naga fundamentalism is abhorrent, but using them as exemplars of what might occur in other parts of india seems implausible seeing as the nagas were not indianized to any extent prior to their absorption into british india.

   also, just a reality check, look at the literacy rates for indian states. 88% of the mizos are literate. pretty good, in large part to bible reading. i fail to accept that christian missions have a trivial material/social effect, or that it is wholly negative.

5. I’ve read through most of the comments, and one element that seems to be missing from the discussion so far is the political strategy of conversion and the power relations concerned.

   In late 2002, approximately 300 Dalits in the village of Koothirambakkam in Kancheepuram District, Tamil Nadu, threatened to convert to Islam if the district administration continued not to acknowledge their complaints that the caste Hindus in the village were abusing them.

   All 58 families in the Dalit colony at Koothirambakkam, 10 km from here, have unanimously decided to embrace Islam in front of the Kanchi Sankara Mutt here on December 6, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar’s death anniversary. A large number of Dalits from the village, led by Madurai and Elumalai, today submitted a petition to the Collector and another petition to the Revenue Divisional Officer, Kancheepuram, about their decision… Mr. Madurai told The Hindu that the Dalits in the village were being prevented from fetching water from the common tank, their rights to common property and right to worship in common temples curtailed, and a fine of Rs. 2,000 was being imposed on Dalits for talking to the Adidravidar community people. The district administration’s attitude was lethargic and it did not carry out several development works such as a drainage system and a fair price shop. [Link]

   Less than one week later:

   All 58 families in the Dalit colony at Koothirambakkam near here, who had unanimously decided on November 29 to embrace Islam in front of the Kanchi Sankara Mutt here on December 6, have now decided to postpone their conversion plan following assurance from the Collector, K. Rajaraman, that all their problems would be solved immediately. [Link]

   Some on this thread have argued that missionaries are tempting and forcing the uneducated masses to join Christianity, and that the benevolent government justly acted in protecting these masses. Well, this is one case where the “uneducated masses” organized themselves and petitioned the government, saying, “If you don’t give us what we want, we’re going to convert to Islam.”

   The anti-conversion ban was nothing more than a way to suppress such protests (which occur frequently in the state) through a bill which presented itself as having the best intentions in mind.

   Maybe instead of worrying about banning conversions, we should examine what systems exist in Indian society which compel people to use conversion as a political act, and also why it is effective as a political act – that is, why should government bodies like the Kancheepuram district collector’s office give two hoots if 300 Dalits in some podunk village convert to Islam? Apparently it’s mud in their face if they can’t keep their Dalits just happy enough so they don’t convert to another religion? Those power dynamics are totally fucked up, and washing them all under the rug by quashing such potential rebellion through a ban on conversion is even more fucked up.

   That said, I can’t stand the recent influx of evangelical Christianity to India – they bait the Hindu warriors and communal tensions flare up where they simply didn’t exist before. There was major drama in early 2005 when Benny Hinn came to Bangalore to sell Jesus and trounce Hinduism, and the VHP started throwing stones at Indian Christians who were there to attend.

   BUT

   The caste system and continuing caste oppression make it SO easy for the evangelists to come in and tell people that they’re being religiously oppressed – why? Because they are! Instead of banning conversions, state governments should start enforcing laws which grant equal rights to all citizens – enforcing the law is not allurement!

6. No time now, but I take issue with Vivek’s portrayal of the ground situation in TN. But few points before the holiday:

   That said, I can’t stand the recent influx of evangelical Christianity to India – communal tensions flare up where they simply didn’t exist before.

   Exactly.

   There is an existing impression that when Dalits convert to either Islam or Christianity, they all of a sudden become economically and educationally empowered. I’ve never seen any hard data to support or dispute this, but that doesn’t really matter in this case, since the impression does widely exist.

   I doubt this is true anymore with Christianity, perhaps with Islam. Dalit Christians themselves are battling such false impressions:

   The marginalisation of Dalit Christians in our Christian minority institutions (in admissions and appointment) all along the several decades has very severely affected their social and economic mobility and progress. The degree of marginalisation is alarming and appalling since Dalits are a majority in the Catholic Church, but they are only about 6% as students and employees in most institutions. Their exclusion or marginalisation in employments has caused enormous economic loss to the community over decades. If this continues how can poverty be alleviated in the community? The marginalisation in appointments is very severe in our Girls Schools and Women Colleges and needs specific attentions. Link

   Since things have not worked out particularly well within the Catholic Church, Dalit Christians now seek reservations in the SC/ST category. I do not support this at all, but upon reconversion to Hinduism (or Buddhism) and a suitable waiting period then perhaps the state should consider it.

   Also, people are forgetting the way Indians associate Christianity with colonialism, and the abject poverty that ensued during that period. Apparently the solution for the poverty created during western domination is western religion 🙂 What did Jomo Kenyatta say? …

7. What I’m saying is that the state and religious ideologues, either working in tandem or against each other, use members of marginalized groups as pawns in their numbers game. This is true of ideologues of all religions.

   But when members of the marginalized groups in question try to effect some social change by appropriating religion for themselves, they are crushed.

   risible (#114):

   Since things have not worked out particularly well within the Catholic Church, Dalit Christians now seek reservations in the SC/ST category. I do not support this at all, but upon reconversion to Hinduism (or Buddhism) and a suitable waiting period then perhaps the state should consider it.

   I don’t really understand how this is a solution that will benefit those Dalit Christians who continue to be marginalized and live in poverty. I hope you get this when you get back.

8. Micheal #106 put the truth bluntly. I agree with that comment. Evangalical activities would lead to many East Timors.

9. Evangalical activities would lead to many East Timors

   analogies have power if there are correspondences. east timor was brutally invaded by an alien power in 1975 by the indonesians. there are many christian minorities in indonesia, and not all are east timors. religious difference is not a sufficient condition even if it is an aggravating condition. i agree with the tenor of vivek’s comment. some commenters are breaking it down into a coupled dyad

   a) social anomie and civil war b) giving the right of individuals to convert to christianity

   if a ensues upon b, the argument is persuasive. but there are many c options which have to do with changing and altering the root structures which arise which result in b. sri lanka’s protestant elite was reconverted to therevada buddhism in the 20th century.

10. Amardeep, You don’t know the facts. Most Hindu leaders who support conversion-ban do so not because they do not believe in freedom of faith but as a part of strategy to force the government to free temples from government control. All religions in India, excepting Hindus, control (financially and administratively) their religious organizations. The competition amongst relgions in India is thus not on a level-playing field: http://www.sulekha.com/blogs/blogdisplay.aspx?cid=4776 . Hard to believe that this should be so in a secular country, but it is true.

    -Martin

11. on cursory inspection i think it would do more long term good to get the gov. out of the temple business. a lot of short term headaches though.

12. The amount of money controlled by the government for the temples dwarfs the amount held by Christian missionaries from abroad.

    can you give me a sense of scale? 1 order of magnitude? 2?

13. Why aren’t there more conversions to Islam in India these days? Islam seems far more attractive than Christianity if one is trying to escape caste or Hinduism’s confusing array of gods et al. Could it be because Muslims are no longer aggressively attempting to convert people in India today? In other words, it’s hardly Christianity’s inherent draw that attracts converts (I personally find that a laughable proposition), but rather its formidable infrastructure of conversion – a pipeline of money, literature and missionaries, all ready and eager to harvest souls.

    Given that this is the case, while it’s easy to say that Hindus should step up to the plate and take steps to stem conversions, they can never come close to matching US$$ and years of proselytization training. So the Indian state has every right to step in and use its heft to make things difficult for conversions. It was never a fully secular state to begin with! And no matter what it does, it’s never enough. Someone on this thread made a comment about the Hindu normativeness of Bollywood!! This an industry in which Muslims represent front and center more than any in India.

14. I wish India would do as South Asians do – declare itself a majoritarian state whose primary purpose is to safeguard the interests of its dominant religious community.

    They have our saffron balls in a vice and are painting them green. Or with white crosses. We’re being raped! Help us! Or we’ll be destroyed! The persecution and oppression!

    Don’t expect lefto-fascists who discuss sexuality and cross-breeding to understand this. Enough is enough.

    Minorities have been tickling our balls for long enough. And these balls are not for tickling. Time to get tough and show our tolerance, by enforcing a majoritarian religious state.

    Death to Wendy Doniger! No more East Timors! Dont fuck with us!

    Hail Majoritarianism Mogambo!

15. Someone on this thread made a comment about the Hindu normativeness of Bollywood!! This an industry in which Muslims represent front and center more than any in India.

    The f*@king bastards!

    Hail More Hindus front and center in Bollywood Mogambo!

16. Given that this is the case, while it’s easy to say that Hindus should step up to the plate and take steps to stem conversions, they can never come close to matching US$$ and years of proselytization training.

    First, people should be free to practice whatever religion they choose. If Hinduism, as an institution (a contradiction in terms, I think) wants to “stem conversions,” it should focus it’s efforts on building it’s own institutions, not knocking other religions.

    So the Indian state has every right to step in and use its heft to make things difficult for conversions. It was never a fully secular state to begin with!

    True, it was never a fully secular state, just as the U.S. is not a fully secular state. However, for the state to step in to stem conversions would be, in effect, a declaration that Hinduism is the official state of India. A) I don’t think such a move is realistic given the political atmosphere in India. B)I think taking such action would be a giant leap back. I can’t think of a single state that embraces one religion, in a practical sense (as opposed to a symbolic sense, like the Church of England) has any hope of become a developed democracy.

17. I wish India would do as South Asians do – declare itself a majoritarian state whose primary purpose is to safeguard the interests of its dominant religious community.

    How dare you! Aren’t you aware of Hinduism’s far reach in the world? Everyone knows, loves and respects us to a logical maximum already! We need no more! A majoritarian state would tip the love Hinduism gets to downright rage, and more importantly, require people to type the word majoritarian on blogs repeatedly. Both of these are non-negotiable.

    The BJP nuts start talking about crazy things like “safety” and “religious majority” and putting those two in the same sentence. It’s hogwash. To really learn we must look to our peaceful neighbors in the north, the pure ones. Our dirty haggard selves aren’t worth the dirt we repeatedly spit on.

    Hail non-majorita non-maroijaitanr non-majorrortoto non-what michael said!

18. I can’t think of a single state that embraces one religion, in a practical sense (as opposed to a symbolic sense, like the Church of England) has any hope of become a developed democracy.

    Israel.

    Islam will become dominant in hindustan and lower india by 2,200

    I hope so. Islam’s more recognizably Indian to me than evangelical Christianity.

19. any thoughts on this:

    http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/1945418.cms

    ?

20. Its interesting..what you say. I didnt realize we has such laws in place. For a sometime now I have been wondeirng why our birth certificates ask for our religon. Now someone mentioned that names are a big give away in terms of religon..but then again..my last name only tells you what religon my parents were of originally…! we have a different law for every religon..which the way I see it..is completely against secularism on all counts.

    We all know why people convert from one religon to other..because the other faith offers them better status then one.. why should be worried about any faith disappearing..cause in reality it wont na? how many people really practice their religon.. shouldnt there be a category of agonistics…who don’t necesarrily belong to a certain faith?

21. The main thing is modulating the abrahamic meme.

    we do not want to become abrahamo-anarachies like our neighbors

    razib the atheist calls them semi-savage, but they are not inherently savage, its what they believe that makes them do the things they do.

    In Evangelical Christianity, not the indian christianities,, much of what passes for conversation in those groups is hate speech against Hindus. Has anyone watched a tamil Christian channel????

    the trick is to keep India Hindu and democratic until there is the possibility of a broad based secularization, as someone above mentions, at which point you can believe whatever you want, shag whoever you want

    this is why hindutva has such broad middle class support, its not because people want to put on saffron and go chanting in the forests, they want to preserve the Indian state

    because they believe with some justification, that Hindus will not split the country into bits, because frankly, they cant go anywhere else.

22. I can’t think of a single state that embraces one religion, in a practical sense (as opposed to a symbolic sense, like the Church of England) has any hope of become a developed democracy. Israel.

    Touche. But, I don’t think India can ever expect the kind of foreign support that Israel gets. Also, according to this article, Judaism is not the official religion of Israel, though religion obviously is very entwined with government. Finally, who knows whether Israel would face the kind of threats it has to deal with if it didn’t mix religion and statehood to such a degree? It goes without saying that this hypothetical is way in left field, but it is something to think about.

23. deleted

24. deleted

25. watch “Invasion Thru Conversion” (Video)

    http://video.yahoo.com/video/play?vid=3c13e5d869a1ccff0620b77daf703c92.703761

26. Gautam,

    Dont waste your time responding to people like Rizab, none of his posts have been on point.

    There is a name for people like him. Look it up Rizab.

    Cheers,

27. Roger_the _atheist

    “faux god” – are you as an atheist implying that there are real gods? Ha! Exposed.

    “88% of the mizos are literate. pretty good, in large part to bible reading.” Really? Is that a fact? I guess you made that reason up too? And does reading the bible really make you literate? Pretty strange stuff for an atheist to be saying

    And as for joining a Korean church to get a date – how hard up do you have to be? BTW look up the definition of coed – the only place were its used to refer to a girl as you do is in the pages of playboy (did I already say hard up?).

28. deleted

29. razib the atheist bashes African Americans as low iq types undeserving of state aid, and yet for the dalits, the crocodile tears flow,,,He also wants an anglo saxon majority in the us but becomes very uncomfortable with the idea of a hindu majority in India or any hindu identity among abcds!!!! he also can’t stand any postive news stories about India???? as vivekananda said , once a convert, always an enemy, and that includes their progeny, atheist or otherwise

30. Martin (#118):

    All religions in India, excepting Hindus, control (financially and administratively) their religious organizations.

    Can someone give more information about this, please? What’s the government body in charge of maintaining these temples? Is it central? State?

31. razib the atheist bashes African Americans as low iq types undeserving of state aid, and yet for the dalits, the crocodile tears flow,,,He also wants an anglo saxon majority in the us but becomes very uncomfortable with the idea of a hindu majority in India or any hindu identity among abcds!!!! he also can’t stand any postive news stories about India???? as vivekananda said , once a convert, always an enemy, and that includes their progeny, atheist or otherwise

    LOL!

32. Razib is also known to beat up little kids and steal money from old ladies.

33. Vivek,

    Martin is right about govt control over temples. The temples are administered through Govt controlled Devaswom boards. I think the control is at the level of state govts. I know that Karunanidhi did a lot of damage to temples in TN by playing politics with them and refusing to support their maintenance. In many respects this policy is in direct contrast to Govt policies regarding other religious organizations. An example of this is the complete independence from any state control of the hereditary Imams of the Jama Masjid in Delhi. Imam Bukhari (both father and son) essentially run a mafia, and a number of corruption cases have been filed against them, to no effect, given their position.

    Michael Valentine Smith, If Islam becomes a dominant religion in India, I am afraid that any other religious minorities will not have a particularly strong legal position. This is at least the case with India’s neighbours-Pakistan and Bangladesh.

    Furthermore, it is not true that the caste system is confined to hindus in the subcontinent. It is equally prevalent in the Christian and Muslim communities. Pakistan which is an Islamic state has a pretty horrifying degree of caste based discrimination, without the mitigating effect of legal and legislative redress.

    Razib, I am not sure literacy rates in Mizoram have entirely to do with religion as you imply. I don’t think the relation between literacy and evangelical christianity is particularly clear. This assumption seems to me to be a particularly colonial one. And Evangelical Christianity is a serious problem, with Nagaland being a good example. This is in contrast to other forms of christianity which have been in India since the time of Christ. This is because evangelical christianity is a maximalist culture-it does not tolerate differences and other cultures. It is an extreme example of the problem of conversion related missionary activity in any of the Abrahamic faiths.

    Finally, dalits in India have greater rights by remaining hindu, thanks to reservations and the like. Furthermore, an acquaintance with Indian politics will make it clear that there has been a considerable restructuring in the distribution of power in Indian society. Dalit organizations have also become more assertive and politically powerful. This is all to the good, and will help greatly in reducing the level of discrimination (unless of course these groups become the new upper castes, which is not unlikely). So, I think the “root cause” argument is weaker than it appears, especially given that caste discrimination is not confined to hinduism. I think if any religions dont have it, it is probably Buddhism.

34. I am not sure literacy rates in Mizoram have entirely to do with religion as you imply. I don’t think the relation between literacy and evangelical christianity is particularly clear. This assumption seems to me to be a particularly colonial one. And Evangelical Christianity is a serious problem, with Nagaland being a good example. This is in contrast to other forms of christianity which have been in India since the time of Christ.

    it is not a necessary condition, but it maybe a sufficient condition. the reason that particular forms of protestanism and literacy are connected is two fold: many indigenous peoples had no literate tradition in their own tongue before christian missionaries introduced scripture in their language. second, scripture reading is an ostensibly essential part of protestant religious practice, so literacy is necessary. the standard model for europe after 1500 suggests that literacy penetrated to the greatest extant early in exactly those areas where protestantism was dominant because of the renewed importance on personal interpretation and understanding of scritpure because of sola scriptura, by scripture alone (in contrast, catholic areas lagged because bible reading was discouraged and reliance on priestly guidance was the norm). additionally, translation of the bible into native languages to some extent standardized and fixed the “classic” form that language, e.g., the king james bible english (which was a bit archaic even in its own time), or the “high german” of martin luther’s translation. in the particular cases like mizoram outside aid and monies probably played a role.

    there are interesting sociological and historical questions and dynamics here. i’ve actually looked at the process of conversion to various forms of sacred gibberish recitation (aka, religion) and the ‘science’ of missiology. i am pretty convinced that most human minds are conducive to gibberish repetition, and it is probably natural for people to kill each other because they chant the wrong gibberish, or someone worships a different rock or tree. catchall references to ‘colonialism’ are really simplistic and an excuse not to really examine the question of why groups like the nagas, mizos and khasis embraced christianity as opposed to buddhism or hinduism. my study of the process of christianization of ‘pagan’ groups in south and southeast asia leads me to one conclusion which some will not like here: these minorities are trying to avoid being colonized and assimilated by the majority by appealing to a outside ‘power’ or cultural complex which cedes to them their right to self-determination. contra the assertions some of the primitives on this thread if was the non-existent god i’d prefer that the christians of the northeast had become hindus because there are enough christians in the world and i don’t care the mizos, nagas or khasis are absorbed into bengali or assamese identities (as the chakma are being, and the ahom were). but i am not the non-existent god, and there are realities that need to be faced with an understanding of the priorities and practicalities on hand.

35. In terms of literacy rates, it may be because Christians and Muslims are allowed to recieve federal funding whilst being privately managed, whereas hindu religious schools must be fully privately funded or hindus must attend secular public schools. (public elementry schools in India tend to be really bad).

    Imagine if the American government funded only Muslim, Hindu, and Jewish private schools but refused to fund Christian schools. Imagene also if they decided to start controlling chruch money and land, but temple, mosque and synagogue were allowed to manage. There would be a bloodbath.

    In case you think I am exxagerating…

    Read this article, even fully privately funded hindu schools are critisized by Indian-American journalists. Here’s a quote from the article originaly published in the Boston Globe…

    “My family sent me here because they couldn’t afford me,” said Dyneswar Juang, a 7th-grader. “Here I get everything for free, and I have a future.”

    But sentence after that follows

    But human rights organizations in the eastern state of Orissa, which has the lowest per capita income in India, say the students are unwitting players in a political experiment driven by ancient Indian hatreds and partly funded by donors from the United States.

    How is this any different from what missionary schools are doing ?

    Yet he organization (Campaign to Stop Funding Hate) on whose website the article is posted on has been promoted on SM multiple times.

    I think that Sepia Mutineers generally mean well but are sometimes too willing to latch on to dominant ideas, without a critical analysis of the issue at hand.

    ---

    P.S. I don’t like Hinduism, I think its a silly hypocritical superstitious religion, but I also like to point out other hypocracy when I see it.

36. razib is also known to beat up little kids and steal money from old ladies.

    Perhaps all the debauching has made you loopy brained??? Go check gnxp.com and Razib’s writings on African Americans; he says they are not as smart as white ameericans.. His site even argued New Orleans should not be rebuilt baecause people were criminal and dumb. There he is against state aid. Here is says if missions go govt. should provide aid to tribal people???? Thats called hypocrisy.

    Consensus in India through reservations biases in favor of Hindu dalits, so its true your better off being hindu and northeast population is so trivial that it doesnt really matter. in north india, the missions have made nil ground. its onl parts of the south I worry about…kanyakumari district in TN for example.

37. Vivek (#140) and Anamak (#143),

    In addition to the column cited in my earlier post, check this out: http://www.hindu.com/2006/02/11/stories/2006021101080200.htm as starters. The temples are controlled by state boards and run by ministry.

    It is surprising that David Aikman in his column in WSJ displays such ignorance of the legal situation in India. He should know about the government control of Hindu institutions since he is an expert on religious affairs.

38. So, I think the “root cause” argument is weaker than it appears, especially given that caste discrimination is not confined to hinduism. I think if any religions dont have it, it is probably Buddhism.

    The Buddhists of Sri Lanka observe the caste system (about the same as the Sikhs in India, i.e., as reproacable). I’m not sure about Thai buddhists. Seems to me this is a problem localized to south asia and tends to eventually disappear in the diaspora. Hindus in Bali don’t follow caste rules. I have an Indian Guyanese friend who said that there is some level of conscioussness about caste in Guyana, (his family served as priests in Guyana and were Brahmins in India) but that caste is not a “problem” in Guyana.

    About the hindu temple funds – the politicians get to have their grubby little hands on the money and therefore this rule is still firmly in place. It is barely more deplorable whether the CM of a state controlling the hindu temple funds is xtian or hindu since they’re equally dirty as politicians, although it does seem outrageous that money offered by hindus for religious purposes should be govenned by a secular institution. Apart from lining the politicians’ pockets, such temple money is sometimes used for government work such as providing electricity, maintenance (not of temple grounds but generally for the state).

39. catchall references to ‘colonialism’ are really simplistic and an excuse not to really examine the question of why groups like the nagas, mizos and khasis embraced christianity as opposed to buddhism or hinduism.

    $$$$$. Plus xtians have an army of paid missionaries. Hindus have a ragtag bunch of volunteers. check out the joshua project to get an idea of the level of organization and zeal of the xtians for just one example. The global power and reach and wealth of xtianity is mindboggling. If left alone, groups such as nagas, mizos and khasis would have remained pagans, just as hindus are pagans. Unless of course the islamics got to them instead. But it’s simplistic to think that there are “deep” reasons for their conversions just because deep reasons often exist for social/cultural structures.

40. the answer is not to force christian missionaries to not offer their goods, it is for hindus to ramp up their goodie giving!

    Charity is not a pillar of hinduism. The low and the poor are reaping their karma.

41. $$$$$. Plus xtians have an army of paid missionaries. Hindus have a ragtag bunch of volunteers. check out the joshua project to get an idea of the level of organization and zeal of the xtians for just one example.

    yes, i am aware of that. i actually like the joshua project because they do a lot of ethnology and i like their data collection 🙂 the $$$$$ is the point. it is better to have money if you are poor than not. i can see arguments from social anomie, but the ideal solution is simply for hindus to start giving more. note that it is not the rich christian denominations like the episcopalians who give money to joshua tree, it is the poor cracker sects which are doing all the scary evangelism. hindus can’t attain parity, but i think they could do better.

    Charity is not a pillar of hinduism. The low and the poor are reaping their karma.

    ah, well, that is a religion which needs to be superseded then, no?

42. but the ideal solution is simply for hindus to start giving more

    Ideal for whom exactly? Hindus can always give IN ADDITION to what help they can get from the state of India. India seems to be chugging along pretty nicely with its semi-secular policies anyway and there appears to be NO good political reason for the state to give up interfering in conversions. Only bad things can come from stupidly allowing an increase in the numbers of Indians who believe that Ram and Krishna are fronts for Satan, etc. Let’s face it. No one would be complaining if Hindus were converting to Jainism or Buddhism or Sikhism- those religions don’t preach hatred against the majority religion of the country.

43. Ideal for whom exactly?

    the individuals who are converting.

    India seems to be chugging along pretty nicely with its semi-secular policies anyway and there appears to be NO good political reason for the state to give up interfering in conversions.

    you make serious consequentialist arguments, but life is more than about consequences. do you hold truths self evident, that the god one bows to (or doesn’t), that the demons one reviles, is a matter of personal choice? until the last few centuries this wasn’t self evident. i am simply trying to impose modern standards are on india a broad principled sense, but if is pre-modern, so be it. on the other hand, i think the ethnological literature makes it clear that the potential converts to christianity are often behaving as rational actors. and some hindus are behaving as rational actors in attempting to ban conversion. but, i hold that a happy medium might be attained if hinduism is more open to conversion and outreach (and so mitigate the inroads of evangelicals) as it preserves the principle of free choice in religion.

    (this obviously applies to muslims, unfortunately muslims are particular primitive and savage when it comes to reacting to conversionary attempts)

44. No one would be complaining if Hindus were converting to Jainism or Buddhism or Sikhism- those religions don’t preach hatred against the majority religion of the country.

    Exactly. This is why Hindus are foolish not to support Ambedkarite Buddhists. Most of them retain a significant portion of their Hindu customs, but have still psychologically freed themselves from the bond of being untouchables. Most Dalit intellectuals in India are Buddhist, they practice meditation, and not one of them has the evangelical hate meme, and are committed to the idea of India as a state.

    At the level of the intelligentsia, Christianity has no support (it seems to have support in China). If there was ever christian creep, Hindus would have to do no work. there is a battery of western scholarship shreding it to pieces. we’d just have to read

    At the political level, we will have to continue to support state intervention in religious conversion until such time as the playing field is levelled. And work towards limiting the missionary presence in India.

    At the personal level, give to charities that work with tribals. One ISKCON cahrity worth shouting out is foodrelief.org. In Orissa, there are still starvation deaths, and foodrelief works directly with tribal children. Its an ISKCON organization which some may find funky, but its better to have Krshna worshippers than Evangelical hate machines. Also, in Bangladesh, ISKCON is one of the few Hindu organizations even allowed to exist.

    Also Aikman – the guy who wrote the article and scurrilously compared Hinduism to sharia law is a christian partisan. some accuse him of turning Time Asia into an evangelical mouthpiece. he is very excited about conversions in china and is disappointed about India. just another member of the western arsenal of soldiers doing christs bidding. do some googling!!!!

45. aikman is biased.

46. i am simply trying to impose modern standards are on india a broad principled sense, but if is pre-modern, so be it.

    This is a complicated statement to respond to but let me keep things simple by saying that India isn’t modern (legally speaking) in innumberable ways. I’m frankly proud that India has tried to take pointers from classical western liberalism but ultimately hewed to the demands of its non-modern, multi-ethnic, multi-religious and multi-linguistic civilization. Here are various non-modern legal practices I can think of off the top of my head:

    • the absence of a UCC
    • even aside from the absence of a UCC, Indian laws frequently make exceptions for various religious and ethnic groups, governed by no discernible legal principle other than allowing groups to continue their traditional practices: for instance, certain adivasi groups in central India (in addition to Muslims) are allowed to be polygamous, animal sacrifice is forbidden in most Hindu temples in Tamil Nadu but allowed in certain temples that practice traditional Dravidian practices, etc.
    • depending on whether one is in a village or not, the lowest level of “courts” aren’t really courts, but village administered councils (panchayat raj), that administer their differing versions of binding justice, quite contrary to the fundamental liberal principle of equality under the eyes of the law. In actuality, the practice can be infinitely more diverse than just panchayat raj. I don’t know the bazillion folk communities that make up, for instance, the state of Rajasthan; most of them simply fall under the legal radar and there exists little legislation that applies to their lives. Panchayats try to deal with them but the IAS also takes a major role in resolving their disputes, i.e. the IAS officer posted to that area must often decide whether the state – incarnated in his/her person – will be cognizant of this or that traditional practice or law. Thus these individual officers have an unparalleled degree of discretion that simply does not exist in modern liberal states
    • not all of India’s constituent units have the same legal relationship with New Delhi (Article 370 w/r/t Kashmir is the most famous of these, but there are several other smaller examples that relate to northeastern, and other, states)
    • there’s also plenty of legal precedence for intervening in conversions – from Nehru’s time, the state has drawn distinctions in the sorts of proselytization activities that one could indulge in. For example, there’s no prohibition on Ahmed approaching me on a street in Bombay and speaking to me about Islam. However, the Indian state has ALWAYS stepped in on behalf of “vulnerable communities,” usually tribals or populations not part of any mainstream ethnic group (as for example, it did over 50 years ago in Arunachal Pradesh). The Indian state also draws a distinction between “foreigners” and “natives,” i.e. there are fewer restrictions on proselytizations by Indian missionaries than by foreign missionaries.

    Here is another argument for interfering with conversions – India’s behaving as any modern nation state would by taking steps to preserve itself. Arunachal Pradesh was kept off limits to Christian missionaries for years. Unsurprisingly, it’s the only state in the northeast that doesn’t have a raging insurgency.

47. Panchayats try to deal with them but the IAS also takes a major role in resolving their disputes, i.e. the IAS officer posted to that area must often decide whether the state – incarnated in his/her person – will be cognizant of this or that traditional practice or law. Thus these individual officers have an unparalleled degree of discretion that simply does not exist in modern liberal states

    Michael, Are you from India, or have you lived in India?? (Not a lot of “Smith”s in India, y’know !!!) If not I am really impressed about the fact that you know about the IAS officer’s role in India.
48. • there’s also plenty of legal precedence for intervening in conversions.

    100% true. Congress governments passed the first anti-conversion laws, The Gandhian anti-converson spirit has long since waned. Frankly, there are very few in the party with any national consciousness at all; with their current leadership, they will do the bidding of the Evangelical missionaries, I am afraid. That leaves the BJP, which is unpalatable to many, and even more unpalatable, the Sangh. But in the most vulnerable corners of the country, there is only Hindutva standing in the way of the bigoted Evangelicals, so many support them. I posted foodrelief.org because people who fashion themselves liberal Hindus try to keep away from the sangh, and that charity is not millitant at all.

    http://www.newindpress.com/Column.asp?ID=IE620060810110955

    Gandhiji’s ideas were still influencing the Congress when the Madhya Pradesh government constituted the Neogi Committee to study missionary activities in tribal areas. This was in 1954. S.K George, ‘a devout Christian and a nationalist belonging to the oldest church in India – the Syrian Christian Church’ was a member of the Committee. The Committee exposed the massive, fraudulent conversions of tribal people and recommended that a law be enacted to ban such fraudulent practices. The MP government, led by the Congress Party, enacted the Neogi-recommended law banning conversions in the year 1968. The Orissa government, again a Congress-led government, did so even earlier in 1967. And Arunachal Pradesh under the central rule of the government headed by another Gandhi, unrelated to the Mahatma, Indira Gandhi, also passed a similar law.

49. Charity is not a pillar of hinduism. The low and the poor are reaping their karma.

    ah, well, that is a religion which needs to be superseded then, no?

    Correct me if I am wrong, but the first poster was meaning to be sarcastic by pointing out the kind of “reasoning” used by some hateful evangelists. Apparently, Razib didn’t get it or was being equally so himelf. Or was the atheist trying to judge one religion over another?

50. Or was the atheist trying to judge one religion over another?

    jakob, read closer. i assume that most people will believe in a religion, so yes, i judge between religions. e.g., i prefer that a society be hindu rather than be muslim, since as an atheist a hindu society does not mandate the death penalty for atheists. judging between religions is like any other cultural practice. just because i believe it is all make believe doesn’t mean that i don’t think make believe doesn’t have real consequences for everyone. i prefer humans believe in made up gods of peace as opposed to gods of war if they have to believe in this stuff (and i assume there are strong psychological reasons most people do believe).