A MEDIA FAQ on `House Churches' and `Conversions'

By Dr. John Dayal

Answers to some frequently asked media questions on House Churches and the definition of Conversions in context of the laws on Religious Freedom in Rajasthan, Gujarat, MP, Chhattisgarh, Orissa and Arunachal [and Tamil Nadu]


HOUSE CHURCHES

The Constitution of India gives every citizen the right and freedom of Faith, including its practice, profession and propagation. This is clear in Article 25 which states that `subject to public order, health and morality', we have the right to freedom of conscience.

The only bar is, as for most other freedoms, that it should not create a public law and order situation, or be obnoxious in some other way. This rider is the one so often misused by governments and police who can claim that certain acts of one community can threaten the peace [for instance cow sacrifice at Eid, which is objected to by Hindutva groups]

The law as it exists in India recognizes places of religious worship as physical entities in public domain. The one mention that comes is with reference to the official and legal rulings which, in the aftermath of the violence during Partition of India in 1947, said places of worship which existed at the dawn of freedom could not have their identity or function changed. This was to prevent mosques being converted to temples or demolished or sold.. This was re-stated in Uttar Pradesh in the case of attempts to sell churches -- not all church property which could include schools or grounds, but church buildings which had functioned as churches

House churches, Small Christian Communities, Basic Christian Communities whether Catholic, Evangelical or Pentecost, and religious activity in a person's private home, which includes all property, is a private event protected by laws against trespass, criminal intimidation, breaking and forcible entry and similar criminal activity

The police have to take action as they would in case of attempted murder, assault, burglary or dacoity -- if assailants are armed, and there are more than five of them in number

They - the local police and magistracy -- have no excuse in not acting.

CONVERSIONS

The second question is of Conversions from one religion to another [giving up one's religion for joining irreligious or atheistic groups such as the Marxists, or lapsed believers do not find any mention in legal literature]

The Supreme Court judgment in the matter of earlier, and contradictory, High court judgments on the Orissa and MP Freedom of Religion Acts was clear that induced and forcible conversions at the hand hands of a religious functionary or priest were illegal, but it was NOT illegal - and therefore legitimate -- for a person to change his religion.

Therefore it is quite clear by analogy and deduction that the act of conversion theologically is different from the legal definition.

A person may have Christ experience through many ways or paths, and may consider him [or her] a follower or believer of Christ. He may have found Christ by personally reading the Bible which he bought by himself, saw in a library or his hotel room, or was given one by a friend, evangelist or priest. He may even have had the Bible read to him by his children, in case he himself was illiterate. He may have found Christ through the evangelical actions of others, either done actively as by missionaries, or passively as by watching Christian neighbours or friends. The person may surrender to Christ on his own; and to himself, he will deem to have become a Christian even if he has not undergone any rituals. Some even consider this the Amazing Grace and Work of the Holy Spirit.

For social purposes, however, and requirements of Civic life, which may include the need for passports or other diplomatic or government documents, however, marriage, or even burial of the dead, he may want to `belong to' or `to be admitted to' the larger Christian community, denomination, group or whatever else it is called. This process may involve ceremonies or rites of passage, which is also called baptism. This may vary with denominations. This is like membership of a club or organisation with its own entry and exit laws.

In fact in the knananite church, a part of the Kerala Catholic group, it admits only persons belonging to select families. No marriage outside the ethnic and linguistic sub-community is allowed or accepted, and of course no one can convert to this sect.

Pentecost and Evangelical groups and some mainline churches want full immersion of the adult.

The Catholic Church, especially in the Latin rite, accepts and encourages child or infant baptism -- I was baptized as a six day old, my daughter was a month old on her baptism -- with ceremonies of confirmation [or First Holy Communion] at an age when the child is able to understand what is happening

The Indian law, penal code or however, has no business entering this domain.

The Sikh faith has tasting of the amrit, or holy water consisting of water, sugar mixed together with a ceremonial sword in a groupware -- the Muslim faith has sunnat, circumcision as well as hearing and pronouncing the kalma -- god is but one god is one and Mohammed is his prophet

No one can convert to Zoroastrian. It can be by birth only. That is why they are a dying community. There are no half Parsees, so to say.

You can become a Jew by converting to Judaism but it is a long and tedious [process sand is discouraged if both or one parent is not a Jew.

Buddhism has a few simple rites.

I do not know the Jain rites.

By the way, the special position for Anglo Indians is not on religious grounds, but on genes and language. Their mother tongue has to be English and their descent from the father's side has to be European.

An Anglo-Indian woman's children by a non Anglo Indian man are not Anglo Indians

And, other than the civil powers of Christian priest in terms of Marriages [but not divorces], births and deaths [burial records]; there is no official administrative law or bureaucratic machinery to certify or license or otherwise formally recognize Christian clergy. Ordination and Consecration are strictly denominational activity. The State also does not recognize gradations in clergy and hierarchy. The titles of Father, Pastor, Bishop or Cardinal, are therefore not of legal consequence but are accepted because they are accepted by the concerned community or group. No denomination has monopoly on the titles and even Catholic priests can, and often do, call themselves Pastors. By the same argument, Episcopal and even Evangelical clergy no call themselves Bishops and Archbishops. They can.

John Dayal
New Delhi, July 2006

Why go for Conversion

Why go for Conversion
In 1935 at Nasik district, Maharashtra, Dr.Babasaheb Ambedkar had declared his firm resolve to change his religion. He had declared that he was born as a Hindu but will not die as Hindu. About a year later, a massive Mahar conference was held on May 30 and 31, 1936, in Mumbai, to access the impact of that declaration on Mahar masses. In his address to the conference, Dr.Ambedkar expressed his views on conversion in an elaborate, well- prepared and written speech in Marathi. Here is an English translation of that speech by Mr.Vasant Moon, OSD to the committee of Govt. of Maharashtra for publication of Writings & speeches of Dr.B.R.Ambedkar
Conversion is not a game of children. It is not a subject of entertainment. It deals with how to make man's life successful. Just as a boatman has to make all necessary preparations before he starts for voyage, so also we have to make preparations. Unless I get an idea as to how many persons are willing to leave the Hindu fold, I cannot start preparations for conversion.
For a common man this subject of conversion is very important but also very difficult to understand.
Class Struggle
There are two aspects of conversion; social as well as religious; material as well as spiritual. Whatever may be the aspect, or line of thinking, it is necessary to understand the beginning, the nature of Untouchability and how it is practiced. Without this understanding, you will not be able to realize the real meaning underlying my declaration of conversion. In order to have a clear understanding of untouchability and its practice in real life, I want you to recall the stories of the atrocities perpetrated against you. But very few of you might have realized as to why all this happens! What is at the root cause of their tyranny? To me it is very necessary, that we understand it.
This is not a feud between rival men. The problem of untouchability is a matter of class struggle. It is the struggle between caste Hindus and the Untouchables. That is not a matter of doing injustice against one man. This is a matter of injustice being done by one class against another. This "class struggle" has a relation with the social status. This struggle indicates, how one class should keep its relation with another class. This struggle starts as soon as you start claiming equal treatment with others...
Conversion not for slaves
The reason for their anger is very simple. Your behaving on par with them insults them. The untouchability is not a short or temporary feature; it is a permanent one .To put it straight, it can be said that the struggle between the Hindus and the Untouchables is a permanent phenomena. It is eternal, because the religion which has placed you at the lowest level of the society is itself eternal, according to the belief of the Hindu caste people. No change, according to time and circumstances is possible. You are at the lowest rung of the ladder today. You shall remain lowest forever. This means the struggle between Hindus and Untouchables shall continue forever. How will you survive through this struggle is the main question. And unless you think over it, there is no way out. Those who desire to live in obedience to the dictates of the Hindus, those who wish to remain their slaves, they do not need to think over this problem. But those who wish to live a life of self-respect, and equality, will have to think over this. How should we survive through this struggle? For me, it is not difficult to answer this question. Those who have assembled here will have to agree that in any struggle one who holds strength becomes the victor. One, who has no strength, need not expect success. This has been proved by experience, and I do not need to cite illustration to prove it.
Three types of Strength
The question that follows, which you must now consider, is whether you have enough strength to survive through this struggle? Three types of strength are known to man: (i) Manpower, (ii) Finance and (iii) Mental Strength. Which of these, you think that you possess? So far as manpower is concerned, it is clear, that you are in a minority. In Mumbai Presidency, the untouchables are only one-eighth of the total population. That too unorganized. The castes within themselves do not allow them to organize. They are not even compact. They are scattered through the villages. Under these circumstances, this small population is of no use as a fighting force to the untouchables at their critical moments. Financial strength is also just the same. It is an undisputed fact that you at least have a little bit of manpower, but finances you have none. You have no trade, no business, no service, no land. The piece of bread thrown out by the higher castes, are your means of livelihood. You have no food, no clothes. What financial strength can you have? You have no capacity to get redress from the law courts. Thousands of untouchables tolerate insult, tyranny and oppression at the hands of Hindus without a sigh of complaint, because they have no capacity to bear the expenses of the courts. As regards mental strength, the condition is still worst. The tolerance of insults and tyranny without grudge and complaint has killed the sense of retort and revolt. Confidence, vigour and ambition have been completely vanished from you. All of you have been become helpless, unenergetic and pale. Everywhere, there is an atmosphere of defeatism and pessimism. Even the slight idea, that you can do something does not enter your mind.
Muslim Example
If, whatever I have described above is correct then you will have to agree with the conclusion that follows. The conclusion is, if you depend only upon your own strength, you will never be able to face the tyranny of the Hindus. I have no doubt that you are oppressed because you have no strength. It is not that you alone are in minority. The Muslims are equally small in number. Like Mahar- Mangs, they too have few houses in the village. But no one dares to trouble the Muslims while you are always a victim of tyranny. Why is this so? Though there may be two houses of Muslims in the village, nobody dares to harm them, while the whole village practices tyranny against you though you have ten houses. Why does this happen? This is a very pertinent question and you will have to find out a suitable answer to this. In my opinion, there is only one answer to this question. The Hindus realize that the strength of the whole of the Muslim population in India stands behind those two houses of Muslims living in a village and, therefore, they do not dare to touch them. Those two houses also enjoy free and fearless life because they are aware that if any Hindu commits aggression against them, the whole Muslim community from Punjab to Madras will rush to their protection at any cost. On the other hand, the Hindus are sure that none will come to your rescue, nobody will help you, no financial help will reach you. Tahsildar and police belong to caste Hindus and in case of disputes between Hindus and Untouchables, they are more faithful to their caste than to their duty. The Hindus practice injustice and tyranny against you only because you are helpless.
Outside Support
From the above discussion, two facts are very clear. Firstly, you can not face tyranny without strength. And secondly, you do not possess enough strength to face the tyranny. With these two conclusions, a third one automatically follows. That is, the strength required to face this tyranny needs to be secured from outside. How are you to gain this strength is really an important question? And you will have to think over this with an unbiased mind.
From this, you will realize one thing, that unless you establish close relations with some other society, unless you join some other religion, you cannot get the strength from outside. It clearly means, you must leave your present religion and assimilate yourselves with some other society. Without that, you cannot gain the strength of that society. So long as you do not have strength, you and your future generations will have to lead your lives in the same pitiable condition.
Spiritual Aspect of Conversion
Uptil now, we have discussed why conversion is necessary for material gains. Now, I propose to put forth my thoughts as to why conversion is as much necessary for spiritual wellbeing. What is Religion? Why is it necessary? ... 'That which govern people is religion'. That is the true definition of Religion. There is no place for an individual in Hindu society. The Hindu religion is constituted on a class-concept. Hindu religion does not teach how an individual should behave with another individual. A religion, which does not recognize the individual, is not personally acceptable to me.
Three factors are required for the uplift of an individual. They are: Sympathy, Equality and Liberty. Can you say by experience that any of these factors exist for you in Hinduism?
No Equality in Hinduism
Such a living example of inequality is not to be found anywhere in the world. Not at anytime in the history of mankind can we find such inequality, which is more intense than untouchability... I think, you have been thrust into this condition because you have continued to be Hindus. Those of you who have become Muslims, are treated by the Hindus neither as Untouchables nor as unequals. The same can be said of those who have become Christians...
That God is all pervading is a principle of science and not of religion, because religion has a direct relation with the behaviour of man. Hindus can be ranked among those cruel people whose utterances and acts are two poles apart. They have this Ram on their tongues and a knife under their armpits. They speak like saints but act like butchers...
Thus we are not low in the eyes of the Hindus alone, but we are the lowest in the whole of India, because of the treatment given to us by the Hindus.
If you have to get rid of this same shameful condition, if you have to cleanse this filth and make use of this precious life; there is only one way and that is to throw off the shackles of Hindu religion and the Hindu society in which you are bound.
The taste of a thing can be changed. But the poison cannot be made amrit. To talk of annihilating castes is like talking of changing the poison into amrit. In short, so long as we remain in a religion, which teaches a man to treat another man like a leper, the sense of discrimination on account of caste, which is deeply rooted in our minds, can not go. For annihilating caste and untouchables, change of religion is the only antidote.
Untouchables are not Hindus
What is there in conversion, which can be called novel? Really speaking what sort of social relations have you with the caste Hindus at present? You are as separate from the Hindus as Muslims and Christians are. So is their relation with you. Your society and that of the Hindus are two distinct groups. By conversion, nobody can say or feel that one society has been split up. You will remain as separate from the Hindus as you are today. Nothing new will happen on account of this conversion. If this is true, then why should people be afraid of conversion? At least, I do not find any reason for such a fear...
Revolution - Not Reform
Changing a religion is like changing a name. Change of religion followed by the change of name will be more beneficial to you. To call oneself a Muslim, a Christian, a Buddhist or a Sikh is not merely a change of religion but also a change of name.. Since the beginning of this movement of conversion, various people have raised various objections to it. Let us now examine the truth, if any, in such objections...
A congenital idiot alone will say that one has to adhere to one's religion because it is that of our ancestors. No sane man will accept such a proposition. Those who advocate such an argument, seem not to have read the history at all. The ancient Aryan religion was called Vedic religion. It has three distinct characteristic (features). Beef-eating, drinking and merry-making was part of the religion of the day. Thousands of people followed it in India and even now some people dream of going back to it. If the ancient religion alone is to be adhered to why did the people of India leave Hinduism and accept Buddhism? Why did they divorce themselves from the Vedic religion?... Thus this Hindu religion is not the religion of our ancestors, but it was a slavery forced upon them...
To reform the Hindu society is neither our aim nor our field of action. Our aim is to gain freedom. We have nothing to do with anything else.
If we can gain freedom by conversion, why should we shoulder the responsibility of reforming the Hindu religion? And why should we sacrifice our strength and property for that? None should misunderstand the object of our movement as being Hindu social reform. The object of our movement is to achieve social freedom for the untouchables. It is equally true that this freedom cannot be secured without conversion.
Caste can't be destroyed
I do accept that the untouchables need equality as well. And to secure equality is also one of our objectives. But nobody can say that this equality can be achieved only by remaining as Hindu and not otherwise. There are two ways of achieving equality. One, by remaining in the Hindu fold and another by leaving it by conversion. If equality is to be achieved by remaining in the Hindu fold, mere removal of the sense of being a touchable or an untouchable will not serve the purpose. Equality can be achieved only when inter-caste dinners and marriages take place. This means that the Chaturvarnya must be abolished and the Brahminic religion must be uprooted. Is it possible? And if not, will it be wise to expect equality of treatment by remaining in the Hindu religion? And can you be successful in your efforts to bring equality? Of course not. The path of conversion is far simpler than this. The Hindu society does not give equality of treatment, but the same is easily achieved by conversion. If this is true, then why should you not adopt this simple path of conversion?
Conversion is a simplest path
According to me, this conversion of religion will bring happiness to both the Untouchables as well as the Hindus. So long as you remain Hindus, you will have to struggle for social intercourse, for food and water, and for inter-caste marriages. And so long as this quarrel continues, relations between you and the Hindus will be of perpetual enemies. By conversion, the roots of all the quarrels will vanish... thus by conversion, if equality of treatment can be achieved and the affinity between the Hindus and the Untouchables can be brought about then why should the Untouchables not adopt the simple and happy path of securing equality? Looking at this problem through this angle, it will be seen that this path of conversion is the only right path of freedom, which ultimately leads to equality. It is neither cowardice nor escapism.
Sanctified Racism
Although the castes exist in Muslims and the Christians alike, it will be meanness to liken it to that of the Hindus. There is a great distinction between the caste-system of the Hindus and that of the Muslims and Christians. Firstly, it must be noted that though the castes exist amongst the Christians and the Muslims, it is not the chief characteristic of their body social.
There is one more difference between the caste system of the Hindus and that of the Muslims and Christians. The caste system in the Hindus has the foundation of religion. The castes in other religions have no sanction in their religion ...Hindus cannot destroy their castes without destroying their religion. Muslims and Christians need not destroy their religions for eradication of their castes. Rather their religion will support such movements to a great extent.
Conversion alone liberates us
I am simply surprised by the question, which some Hindus ask us as to what can be achieved by conversion alone? Most of the present day Sikhs, Muslims and Christians were formerly Hindus, majority of them being from the Shudras and Untouchables. Do these critics mean to say that those, who left the Hindu fold and embraced Sikhism or Christianity, have made no progress at all? And if this is not true, and if it is admitted that the conversion has brought a distinct improvement in their condition, then to say that the untouchables will not be benefited by conversion, carries no meaning...
After giving deep thought to the problem, everybody will have to admit that conversion is necessary to the Untouchables as self-government is to India. The ultimate object of both is the same. There is not the slightest difference in their ultimate goal. This ultimate aim is to attain freedom. And if the freedom is necessary for the life of mankind, conversion of Untouchables which brings them complete freedom cannot be called worthless by any stretch of imagination...
Economic Progress or Social Changes?
I think it necessary here to discuss the question as to what should be initiated first, whether economic progress or conversion? I do not agree with the view that economic progress should precede...
Untouchability is a permanent handicap on your path of progress. And unless you remove it, your path cannot be safe. Without conversion, this hurdle cannot be removed...
So, if you sincerely desire that your qualifications should be valued, your education should be of some use to you, you must throw away the shackles of untouchability, which means that you must change your religion...
However, for those who need this Mahar Watan, I can assure them that their Mahar Watan will not be jeopardized by their conversion. In this regard, the Act of 1850 can be referred. Under the provisions of this Act, no rights of person or his successors with respect to his property are affected by virtue of his conversion...
Poona Pact
A second doubt is about political rights. Some people express fear as to what will happen to our political safeguards if we convert...
But I feel, it is not proper to depend solely on political rights. These political safeguards are not granted on the condition that they shall be ever lasting. They are bound to cease sometime. According to the communal Award of the British Government, our political safeguards were limited for 20 years. Although no such limitation has been fixed by the Poona Pact, nobody can say that they are everlasting. Those, who depend upon the political safeguards, must think as to what will happen after these safeguards are withdrawn on the day on which our rights cease to exist. We will have to depend on our social strength. I have already told you that this social strength is wanting in us. So also I have proved in the beginning that this strength cannot be achieved without conversion...
Political Rights
Under these circumstances, one must think of what is permanently beneficial.
In my opinion, conversion is the only way to eternal bliss. Nobody should hesitate even if the political rights are required to be sacrificed for this purpose. Conversion brings no harm to the political safeguards. I do not understand why the political safeguards should at all be jeopardized by conversion. Wherever you may go, your political rights and safeguards will accompany you. I have no doubt about it.
If you become Muslims, you will get the political rights as Muslims. If you become Christians, you will get the political rights as Christians, if you become Sikhs, you will have your political rights as Sikhs. In short, our political rights will accompany us.
So nobody should be afraid of it. On the other hand, if we remain Hindus and do not convert, will our rights be safe? You must think carefully on this. Suppose the Hindus pass a law whereby the untouchability is prohibited and its practice is made punishable, then they may ask you, 'We have abolished untouchability by law and you are no longer untouchables...
Looking through this perspective, conversion becomes a path for strengthening the political safeguards rather than becoming a hindrance. If you remain Hindus, you are sure to lose your political safeguards. If you want to save them, leave this religion. The political safeguards will be permanent only by conversion.
The Hindu religion does not appeal to my conscience. It does not appeal to my self-respect. However, your conversion will be for material as well as for spiritual gains. Some persons mock and laugh at the idea of conversion for material gains. I do not feel hesitant in calling such persons as stupid.
Conversion brings Happiness
I tell you all very specifically, religion is for man and not man for religion. To get human treatment, convert yourselves.
CONVERT -For getting organized.
CONVERT -For becoming strong.
CONVERT -For securing equality.
CONVERT -For getting liberty.
CONVERT -For that your domestic life may be happy.
I consider him as leader who without fear or favour tells the people what is good and what is bad for them. It is my duty to tell you, what is good for you, even if you don't like it, I must do my duty. And now I have done it.
It is now for you to decide and discharge your responsibility.
Reference: "Bhim Chakra 1996" published by Oil & Natural Gas Corp. Ltd. Tripura project, Agartala.

Why should we pray and act for the suffering church?

Why should we pray and act for the suffering church? - ChristianAnswers.Net

Living in fear

PURNIMA S. TRIPATHI


in Bhopal

Attacks on the Christian community have registered a sharp increase in BJP-ruled Madhya Pradesh in recent times.

A.M. FARUQUI





BAJRANG DAL DISTRICT convener Devendra Rawat arguing with Madhya Pradesh State Minorities Commission member Indira Iyengar (left) at a press conference she held in Bhopal.

FEAR has gripped the Christian community in Madhya Pradesh as right-wing Hindu organisations have stepped up their attacks in the name of preventing religious conversion. Christians, who comprise 0.3 per cent of the State's population, are afraid to organise prayer meetings even at their homes or hold religious functions in the open as these could attract the ire of Rashtriya Swayamsewak Sangh affiliates.

This was the experience of a group of Christians in Bhopal in April. Bajrang Dal activists stormed into the house of Rev. San Francis where a prayer meeting was on and beat up those present for "perpetuating conversion to Christianity". Eighteen of them were dragged to the police station. Although it became clear that no conversion had taken place, the authorities did not take immediate action against the assailants.

More recently, on June 5, when Indira Iyengar, who represents the Christian community on the State Minority Commission, addressed a press conference in Bhopal to highlight the plight of two tribal women from Khargone who were allegedly raped by some right-wing activists on May 28 for converting to Christianity three years ago, she was heckled. Bajrang Dal activists, led by district convener Devendra Rawat, warned her of dire consequences if she did not stop "maligning the RSS and other Hindu organisations".

If such blatant attacks, that too in full media glare, are possible in the State capital, the situation in the interior areas can only be imagined.

"The situation is bad in Jabalpur, Indore, Dhar, Jhabua and Ratlam. Attacks on Christians have gone up sharply in the past three years," says the Archbishop of Bhopal, Dr. Pascal Topno. Indira Iyengar says in Jabalpur more than 20 cases have been slapped on the Christians in the past two months for alleged conversion. "I have been writing to the government, highlighting the plight of the Christians, but nothing happens," she says. She said the press conference was organised to draw public attention to the plight of the two abused tribal women as no FIR had been registered.

What, however, is disconcerting, is that the Bharatiya Janata Party government does not appear to be taking the complaints seriously. How else can one explain the attitude of the Chief Minister or even senior government officials who dismiss the allegations?

"Things are being blown out of proportion by Indira Iyengar because she wants to project herself as the messiah of Indian Christians in order to be nominated to the National Commission for Minorities [NCM]," says Chief Minister Shivraj Singh Chauhan, echoing what Devendra Rawat told this correspondent.

Even if the incident involving Indira Iyengar is set aside, how can the Jhabua riots of January 2004 be ignored? Not a single right-wing activist has been booked until now for rioting against Christians. Instead, 16 Christians were arrested. They were released only recently after the High Court declared them "not guilty". Not a single person has been booked for the assault on Fr. Stan Fareira, principal of Don Bosco School in Jhabua. Fr. Fareira's life has been saved but he is in no condition to continue as the principal of the school. The NCM had, in a letter dated March 12, 2004, to the Chief Secretary of Madhya Pradesh, demanded "immediate action" against those responsible for the riots and against the officials concerned for dereliction of duty, an independent inquiry into the riots, and full security to members of the Christian community, missionaries and institutions including churches. The government is yet to act on it. "We had instituted an inquiry into the riots and its report has come only now. We are still studying the report. The report holds conversions responsible for those incidents," said the Chief Minister. The government's plan of action on the basis of this report is predictable.

The State government, he said, was greatly concerned about conversions, which he claimed were going on. "Even though we have a law in place to prevent this, conversions are happening in large numbers. We are determined to stop this and since the present law has not proved to be effective, we are considering either making suitable changes in the law or introducing a fresh law," he told Frontline. However, the Chief Minister's claims that his government is committed to providing freedom of religion to all, ensuring that no physical harm comes to anyone and preventing individuals from taking the law into his own hands, sound hollow.

"The Chief Minister may be a man of noble intentions, but his officials certainly lack in sympathy for Christians," said Archbishop Topno. According to him, Christians in far-flung areas feel insecure. "I keep getting reports from here and there. The number of complaints has certainly gone up," he says. According to him, if it is true that somebody resorts to forceful conversion, through either threats or allurements, there are provisions in the law to prevent this. But instead of "letting the law take its course, individuals are taking the law into their own hands and this is what we are protesting against," he says.

Surprisingly, the State Minority Commission, which is supposed to safeguard the rights of the minorities, speaks the same language as the Bajrang Dal or the Chief Minister. Instead of expressing concern at the attacks on Christians, Commission Chairman Anwar Mohammad Khan denied that the Christian community had come under any calamitous attack in the State. Also, instead of expressing solidarity with Indira Iyengar, he said he was planning action against her for "trespassing the propriety of her post as Commission member by addressing a press conference without bringing the matter to his notice first".

No wonder then that Hindu fundamentalist organisations feel emboldened to declare that "we will now run the campaign against conversions on our own, and will give and even take any sacrifice required for this". Rawat told Frontline that since the government had proved to be "ineffective" in stopping religious conversions, "the Bajrang Dal has decided to initiate direct action". Direct action, he said, would mean awareness campaigns and also action similar to the one witnessed at the recent Bhopal press conference. "We will not allow so-called intellectuals to continue indulging in unsubstantiated propaganda against Hindu organisations any more. We are committed to stopping religious conversions and the malicious campaign against us," he maintained.

Declarations such as this with a patronising government at the helm, make the Christian community tremble. "We can only protest peacefully and hope that the Chief Minister will ensure that we continue to get the rights enshrined in the Constitution."We only demand that the law should take its own course. Is that asking for too much?" wonders Bishop Topno.

Trial of faith

With malice towards one and all...

Khushwant Singh

June 1, 2006

I am partly the product of a Christian Mission College: I did my intermediate for two years at St. Stephen's College, Delhi. Every morning we had a half-hour class on the Bible. Attendance was optional. I was a regular because I wanted to know what Christianity was all about. Although earlier at Modern School, both the Principal, Kamla Bose, and her niece, Nilima, who was our English teacher, were Christians, I was not aware of it. Like most other Indians, I use to look down on Indian Christians as karantas. I remain grateful to Christian missionaries for what I have learnt about their work. The Bible opened my eyes to the richness of the English language. Though an avowed agnostic, I continue to read a passage or two every day, as I do of scriptures of other languages. They have a rich vocabulary and noble sentiments.

What impressed me most was the Christian contribution to the development of our country. They run the best schools, colleges and hospitals. Whenever any catastrophe like an earthquake or flood occurs, they are the first to arrive on the scene to provide medical assistance, food, shelter and whatever else is needed. If people in distress are impressed by them and some convert to their faith, it should not surprise anyone. It is neither force nor allurement that make them do so; only the setting of a good example of social service.

I spent some days with Mother Teresa in Calcutta. Although the institutions she set up to help the poor and the needy were headed by Christian nuns, almost all the men and women taken care of by them belonged to other faiths. She never asked anyone to convert to Christianity. The only words I heard her utter to people who were dying were in Bengali: "Bhoggoban aachhen."(There is God.)

I concede that conversions cause tensions in families. People either convert to another faith en masse when they think they will get a better deal or they do so when want to marry someone of another faith. Seldom, if ever, do people change their faith to save their lives. A lie perpetuated over the centuries is that Islam was spread by the sword. If that were true, all Indians would have been Muslims as Muslims ruled the country for several centuries. Islam spread in India through the influence of Sufi saints who preached equality and harmony. No Muslim army ever conquered Indonesia. Their forefathers accepted Islam on their own.

Why did Babasaheb Ambedkar ask his Dalit followers to convert to Buddhism? Did anyone force or bribe him to do so? No. He felt that upper-caste Hindus had treated them like dirt for too long and it was time to break. So what is this hoo haa about conversions now? Six states - Arunachal, Chhattisgarh, Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh and Rajasthan - mostly governed by Hindu fundamentalists, the BJP or its allies, have passed legislation forbidding conversion on pain of imprisonment for two to five years and a fine of Rs 50,000. Attempt to "convert directly or otherwise" has been made a non-bailable offence. They call this draconian law 'Freedom of Religion Bill'. It is exactly the opposite, as it deprives citizens of the right to choose their religion. I hope if and when the matter comes up before the Supreme Court, it will be struck down.

Meanwhile, the Sangh parivar led by the RSS is busy with a re-conversion programme of its own brand. It is called ghar vaapsi (return home) to Hinduism. It is mostly aimed at adivasis. The very nomenclature proves that they were not Hindus but animists with deities and rituals of their own. However, to be fair to the parivar, there are positive aspects of this zeal to bring them back into the Hindu fold. They have opened schools in tribal belts. If they really mean business, apart from persuading them to celebrate Hindu festivals, they might also want to do something to break the stranglehold of caste panchayats which continue to ostracise people who break caste rules. They have no place in a modern society.

Why objections to Pope's remarks are baseless

(IANS)
By Vishal Arora

The remarks of Pope Benedict XVI about India's anti-conversion law that New Delhi has protested neither constitute "interference" in a country's internal affairs nor suggest that Christian missionaries are converting Hindus "forcibly", as the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) has alleged.

The Pope had told India's new ambassador to the Vatican Amitava Tripathi that "the reprehensible attempt to legislate clearly discriminatory restrictions on the fundamental right of religious freedom must be firmly rejected not only as unconstitutional but also as contrary to the highest ideals of India's founding fathers who believed in a nation of peaceful coexistence and mutual tolerance between different religions and ethnic groups".

Today's international community accepts the principle that the way any state treats its citizens is in the public domain, and external criticism from other governments or foreign religious leaders does not constitute interference in the internal affairs of the country. The UN's International Covenant on Economic, Cultural and Social Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which India has ratified, allow international accountability vis-à-vis human rights record of the countries.

As regards the constitutional validity of the legislation regulating conversion, the so-called Freedom of Religion Act is seen as an anti-conversion law by religious minorities, which say the law implicitly seeks to restrict conversion in general in the garb of prohibiting "forcible" or "fraudulent" conversions - a concern that has a legitimate ground.

The Freedom of Religion Acts in the states of Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh and Orissa require that all conversions be reported to the state administration. Section 4 of the Orissa Freedom of Religion Rules, 1989, states that "any person intending to convert his religion shall give a declaration before a magistrate... prior to such conversion that he intends to convert his religion on his own will". Similarly, Section 5 makes it mandatory for the priest to intimate the details of the conversion to the government 15 days in advance.

If the priest and the prospective convert fail to inform the government of the conversion - even in case of a voluntary conversion - they can be prosecuted and, if found "guilty", punished like common criminals.

Besides, this provision overlooks the basic fact that conversion is not always tangible, as it has to do with a person's faith, which may change gradually over a period of time for various reasons and one may not be able to tell the exact time and place of his or her conversion. In fact, the provision reduces this mystic phenomenon to a time-and-place-bound ceremony.

This narrow, mistaken definition of conversion with the provision for mandatory reporting of conversions allows the state to interfere in the arena of a citizen's life that is extremely personal to him or her.

Christianity, in particular, faces the brunt of this provision, as the sacrament of baptism is deemed as a "conversion ceremony" and priests performing the ceremony are considered as those converting. Baptism, according to the Bible, is for those who have decided to follow the Christian faith and it is not a means to convert - this is why churches give baptism to all its registered members, whether they were born in a Christian family or have accepted Christianity from other backgrounds.

Further, these laws do not define the terms sufficiently, giving discretionary powers to the governments, which can be misused. For instance, "allurement" is defined as an "offer of any temptation in the form of any gift or gratification, either in cash or in kind or grant of any material benefit, either monetary or otherwise" that can both restrict religious and charitable activities and create ample opportunity for abuse and unjust prosecution. Such vague terms can leave a room for a government to indulge in religious policing like in Saudi Arabia.

Furthermore, the Rajasthan bill, which was passed by the state assembly on April 7 and endorsement to which was denied by the governor Thursday, violates the right to equality before law promised in Article 14 of the constitution. For the bill explicitly exempts "reconversion" to Hinduism from the purview of the law by defining conversion as adopting "a religion other than one's forefathers" along the same lines as the Arunachal Pradesh Freedom of Religion Act, 1978, according to which conversion means "renouncing an indigenous faith and adopting another faith or religion".

This restriction on citizens' conversion to minority religions with a blanket freedom for the likes of the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (World Hindu Council) to organise "home-coming" ceremonies also implies that the laws seek to make it difficult for the majority community to practise their liberty to convert to other religions.

The allegation that Christian missionaries go to "gullible" poor, illiterate Dalits and tribals living in remote areas to convert them using fraudulent means sounds like a Churchill statement at the time of the British leaving India - that the country was not capable of ruling itself, as a majority of its people were poor and illiterate.

The BJP owes an explanation as to how Dalits and tribals, if they are so naïve, can be allowed the right to cast votes to choose their representatives but not the freedom to decide what religion they want to follow.

One wonders why it is always the "other" who objects to conversions, and never those who have accepted the religion. We are yet to see a "Forum of Converts against Conversion" kind of group joining the BJP - which may never happen.

One also fails to understand why the party needs anti-conversion laws when not even a single person has been convicted of forcible or fraudulent conversion by any court in the country in the last more than 37 years.

(Vishal Arora is a writer on religious issues. The views expressed are personal. He can be contacted at vishalarora_in@hotmail.com)

Yet Another Challenge to the Constitution

Yet Another Challenge to the Constitution

Dominic Emmanuel

Will Vasundhara Raje have to wait for a poll debacle to withdraw the recently passed "Freedom of Religion Bill 2006", as Jayalalitha did after the drubbing she and her party received during the 2004 Lok Sabha elections? Well! Since Rajasthan has less than 1 percent Christian population, at whom, according to Home Minister Gulab Singh Kataria, the architect of the Bill, is aimed, "it was needed to check the activities of Christian missionaries in certain parts of the State, especially in Kota", there is little chance that there will be any alteration to it.

Gujarat, also BJP governed, is another State which passed such an unconstitutional law earning Narender Modi among other things, the singular distinction of being 'a modern day Nero', from no less an institution than the Supreme Court. That the Gujarat government has not yet framed rules for the said Bill or that so far no case either in Madhya Pradesh, Orissa or Arunachal Pradesh of 'forceful conversion' or 'conversion by allurement or fraudulent means' has come to light, is not really the concern of BJP governments. It is enough that such Bills and Acts, come handy to terrorize the minorities in general and the Christian missionaries in particular, who are rendering selfless service to the most neglected people in remote areas. It is also a useful tool to justify the actions of the likes of Dara Singh. False allegations in the name of 'conversion' serve many purposes.

In Rajasthan the Freedom of Religion Bill was spoken of ever since the BJP government came to power in 2004 but it caught momentum after the President of a certain Emmanuel Mission International (EMI), Bishop Samuel Thomas was arrested from NOIDA last month along with an arrest warrant issued against his father Archbishop M. A. Thomas, the founder of EMI. Both of them are being held responsible for propagating a book called Haqueekat, which allegedly contains material denigrating the Hindu religion, though neither of them has either written or published the book. Though we have not seen or read the book, we have, including me as the spokesperson of the Delhi Catholic Archdiocese, condemned in public, all such material containing insulting references to other religions or their believers.

There are also hundreds of booklets and pamphlets in circulation all over, particularly in North India, a bundle of which I have personally handed over both to the then Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee and the then Home Minister Mr. L. K. Advani making highly derogatory remarks against the Bible and Christianity. But is anyone, especially those working overtime to introduce such Bills, bothered about their plight?

On the one hand, we have the Sensex and the Nifty scaling new heights, in the BJP ruled States, on the other hand, such retrograde laws are being passed, targeting openly one particular Community. The Bill is so ludicrous and contradictory, to say the least, that it allows people to go back to their 'original religion', without attracting any punitive action.

Even if no one wants to listen to the constant shrill of the Christian Community in despair that it is not involved in any 'mass conversion', people are urged to believe at least the official Census of India showing a clear decline of Christian population in the last four decades, down from 2.6% to being just 2.3% at the last count.

But how does one convince a completely biased lot which is not only totally closed to see the 'truth' but which keeps harping on the two constant refrains against minorities, that of 'minority appeasement' (now riding on Advani's Rath) and that of 'mass conversion' (on Rajnath's Rath). That the Hindu voter, however, has become much wiser than those hardliners who get such draconian bills passed, has been proved by the result of the last elections and the poor attendance right now at the two Rath Yatras.

It was in order to boost the attendance around the Raths that the new BJP President Rajnath Singh lashed out at the Christian missionaries in Chattisgarh boasting, "as soon as I became the BJP President, I told all my party chief ministers to enact laws to check conversions and foil the designs of Christian missionaries". He then went on to say that the Jharkhand government was ready with the draft bill and Chattisgarh will soon follow suit. He had no hesitation in spewing venom at the Christian missionaries in the area. Both for Rajnath and Advani, and of course the Sangh Parivar, this is what democracy is all about.

The Catholic Church has clarified its position on conversion time and again as well as in the documents of the Second Vatican Council, stating, "In spreading religious faith. everyone ought at all times to refrain from any manner of action which might seem to carry a hint of coercion or of a kind of persuasion that would be dishonourable or unworthy, especially when dealing with poor or uneducated people. Such a manner of action would have to be considered an abuse of one's own right and a violation of the right of others" (cf. Declaration on Religious Freedom: no. 4. Vatican: 1965).

Similarly Pope Benedict XVI in his recent and first encyclical Deus Caritas Est reiterates, "Christian charitable activity must be independent of parties and ideologies. It is not a means of changing the world ideologically. Charity, furthermore, cannot be used as a means of engaging in what is nowadays considered proselytism. Love is free; it is not practiced as a way of achieving other ends" no. 31. b & c).

Such laws go against the very spirit of Article 25 of the Constitution which grants, "freedom of conscience and free profession, practice and propagation of religion" to every Indian citizen and Article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, to which India is a signatory, stating, "Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion: this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief and freedom either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice and worship and observance".

Among the many painful experiences for Christians in the context of 'conversion' there are two important ones. One, that those who do not understand the commandment of Jesus to "love one another as I have loved you" (John 15: 12) and "Whatsoever you do to the least of my brothers (sisters) that you do unto me" (Mt. 25: 40) completely misunderstand their motive for acts of love. Two, that millions who have passed through the Christian educational as well as other institutions and who were never once given so much as a hint to convert to Christianity, never stand up in their defense. The Archbishop Vincent M. Concessao of Delhi, however, holds, "Nobody really believes their lies against Christians and everyone is actually tired of them. Most people know that it is only a political game to be played and contested in the political arena".

Charioting the course of hate

By Kuldip Nayar

AN intelligence report says that L.K. Advani's rath yatra in 1990 caused the largest number of killings after the partition riots in 1947. Yet, he has the audacity to say before embarking on another yatra that the last one was peaceful. BJP chief Rajnath Singh, a new convert to yatras, wants to prove that his brand of Hindutva is more virulent than Advani's.

Such clamorous street rallies have a disturbing effect on the public. They are injurious to the health of a country which claims to be a true democracy. What happened at Aligarh may not be the direct result of rallies. But their preparation has fouled the atmosphere. Extremist Muslims are also joining the fray and making them take on the lax administration.

Whether Advani will damage India's plural society more than Rajnath Singh is difficult to predict at present. Both are determined to widen the chasm found between Hindus and Muslims in the urban India and deepen hatred the RSS parivar has spread in the BJP-ruled states like Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh and Rajasthan with the set programme of destroying every bit of commonality. The Rajasthan Government has gone a step further and armed itself with an anti-conversion law to forcibly sideline the small minority of Christians from the mainstream.

I am told that at one stage Atal Behari Vajpayee was not happy over reviving yatras, probably realising that they have served their "purpose." Advani even made Vajpayee's skepticism public. But then Vajpayee is atal (firm) only in name. He changes his mind when he finds the RSS and its coterie in the BJP are opposed to his thinking. It is widely known that he wanted to remove Narendra Modi after what he as the chief minister did to Gujarat. Vajpayee dropped the idea when the RSS told him not to disturb Modi.

Instead, Vajpayee attacked the Islamic countries at his next stop in Goa.

That Vajpayee has blessed Advani and Rajnath Singh does not mean that yatras have come to acquire better credentials. It only confirms that Vajpayee is a chip of the old block. He or, for that matter, his party has given yet another proof, if it was needed, that they are bent upon destroying the secular ethos of India. Only in whipping up sentiments against Muslims does the BJP see its future in election. It feels it has a chance in the country if it can divide it on religious lines as the pre-partition Muslim League did.

The country has withstood attacks on its secular ethos in the past. It will do so again. What disappoints me is that at a time when India requires all attention to grapple with the ill-effects of development at the cost of social justice, the BJP is resurrecting the Frankenstein of communalism. It does not mind even if the country goes to pieces in the process. The BJP should realise that it is already losing its base. Advani and Rajnath Singh cannot retrieve a party which wants to take India back to the middle-ages.

When it came to power at the centre, it was not because people returned the party in election but because some regional secular parties jettisoned their ideology to join the BJP government for loaves of office.

The situation has changed now. State leaders like Mulayam Singh in UP and Chandrababu Naidu in Andhra Pradesh believe that they can capture power at New Delhi by amalgamating with other regional leaders. The BJP is ruled out on yet another count: the crucial Left will back only those regional parties which have no truck with the BJP. The next Parliament may be dominated by regional parties, some of which have seen the BJP in its true colours. As for yatras, the response has been poor because an average Hindu is not taken in by the propaganda that the minorities will swamp him. The BJP has played the mandir card too often, much to the exasperation of people. In the last general election what hit the party was the countryside's abhorrence over changes in the fields of education, culture and information. The worst was the distortion of history. The BJP does not realise how deep the roots of pluralism in the country are. The latest book, Blood Brothers, by M.J. Akbar, an eminent journalist and author, has pointed this out. His is a saga of an Indian Muslim family, a story of three generations. He brings out boldly and objectively the innate strength of the subcontinent's common heritage. It is not one culture, not one language but a myriad of cultures and languages. Their accommodative living has made what India is - open, tolerant and cohesive. Akbar's span is wide. He explores Islam and Hinduism which moulds lives in India and impress their image on the history of times. The book deals with religion as a living element in today's culture, not as a museum piece. Akbar's book tells us how Hindus and Muslims believe in one Creator and that the author's grandfather "had not travelled too far when he was converted" from Hinduism to Islam. Both religions have so much in common. "The supreme God of the Vedas is Brahma. Brahma has no form; Allah also has no form. The Hindu philosophy of mimansa says that idols are only a means to assist the mind towards Brahma. The Hindu seeks release from life in nirvana, I seek assimilation in Allah. Both sufi and sanyasin reach God through meditation. The Hindu's kravana is my sama, we both listen; his manana is my muraqaba, we both obey; his nididhyanasana is my tawajjuh, we both contemplate. The buddhi of the Brahmin is my ilm; we both learn; his jnana is my marafat, we both seek emancipation through knowledge. What you call maya (illusion), I call alam-i-khyal, the world of fancy.

Akbar underlines the spirit of tolerance that has woven Hindus and Muslims into a mosaic that mirrors different thoughts while keeping it one. Take a small passage from his book: "…Dinner was placed before the guests; biryani for Muslims and dishfuls of savouries for the Hindus purchased from a Hindu sweetmeat shop. It was the best available…" Akbar does not harangue or lecture to make the point about the sense of accommodation. He quietly tells us how solicitous the Muslims were about the Hindus' belief in caste. The former purchases "savouries for the Hindus" from a Hindu sweetmeat shop. An era of sensitivity, the book traces from times immemorial.

Can Advanis and Rajnath Singhs ever imbibe that spirit? If they do not and continue to chip away at the country's institutions like pluralism they would be responsible for the harm to the society. They should understand that there can be no democracy without secularism.

Saffron strike

T.K. RAJALAKSHMI
in Kota and Jaipur

A Christian mission becomes the target of attack following a controversy over a book that allegedly insults Hindu deities.

GOPAL SUNGER

A rally in Jaipur on March 21 protesting against the attacks.

A BOOK by an obscure writer was all it took for a systematic targeting of the Emmanuel Mission International (EMI), a Christian organisation that runs a chain of schools in Rajasthan, in the third week of February. Minority organisations, political parties such as the Communist Party of India (Marxist) and the Congress, women's groups and the People's Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) came together on a common platform in the third week of March to condemn the attacks and the hounding of minorities in general in the State, timing the protests to coincide with the Assembly session.

These organisations also expressed their apprehensions about the Rajasthan Dharma Swatantrya Bill, 2006; passed by the Assembly on April 7, the new piece of legislation bans religious conversion. Offences under the new law are non-bailable.

There have been attacks on minority communities before, but the attacks on the EMI drew, for the first time, Christian organisations out on the streets in protest. The Rajasthan Christian Fellowship, which represents all denominations of the Christian faith, participated in the rally.

The provocation for the attacks was that the book "insulted" Hindu deities and thereby hurt the majority community's religious sentiments. Bunch of Truths (Haqeeqat in the Hindi translation) is written by C.G. Mathew, a lawyer based in Kerala. It was a rejoinder to RSS ideologue M.S. Golwalkar's Bunch of Thoughts. Mathew got his book translated into several languages. A professional translator based in Madhya Pradesh did the Hindi translation.

The EMI runs 49 schools in the State and has many majority community children among its students. It had nothing to do with either the writing of the book or its translations. However, it found itself a target of hostile attention after one Prahlad Panwar spotted the book at a bookstall during an EMI convention back in October 2005 and bought a copy for Rs.200. He filed a first information report (FIR) at a police station in Kota on February 14 saying the EMI was selling and distributing the book whose contents were objectionable.

Panwar, described by informed sources as an RSS activist, runs the Matantaran Virodhi Manch (translated, it means `anti-conversion front') in Kota, a city where the EMI runs four schools, an orphanage and a hospital. He says he visited the EMI convention to check if there were any conversion activities going on. Kota also happens to be the stronghold of Madan Dilawar, Minister for Social Welfare and Cooperatives, known for his stand against alleged conversions in the district.

After Panwar spotted the book in October, it also came to the notice of top police officers, including the Additional Director-General of Police (Crime). The Superintendent of Police in Kota received a letter from his superiors asking him to make an inquiry. He directed the Station House Officer at Bhimgajmandi, where the EMI is headquartered, to conduct an inquiry. The latter got hold of a copy, "studied" it and concluded that it contained inflammatory material. So on February 14, he filed an FIR.

So the EMI had two FIRs filed against it on the same day at two different police stations in Kota, with identical charges of trying to spread disharmony, which is an offence under the Indian Penal Code. The EMI premises in Kota were raided on the same day. Copies of the book were seized from the organisation's library and arrest warrants were issued against Archbishop M.A. Thomas, founder of the EMI, and his son Samuel Thomas.

Rakesh Pal Singh, Chief Investigating Officer in the case, said receipts showing the purchase of copies of the book were found during the raid. "It was clear that the book was bought, distributed and sold," he said. He also found the contents objectionable.

A police inquiry was now on into the EMI's role in distributing the book, but the attacks, which came soon after the raid, did not wait for its outcome. A group of people, allegedly members of the Bajrang Dal and the Shiv Sena, climbed the gate of the Emmanuel Mission School at Jhotwara and set fire to the cross on it. The buses of the mission's school in Kota were damaged. St. Paul's School in Kota was also attacked by some young men, who the police later said were Shiv Sainiks. On the night of February 26, they broke into the school and vandalised a statue of St. Paul. The police said that they were given a "good beating" before being released on bail, but the attacks continued. In Niwai in Tonk district, the manager of an EMI school and his wife were manhandled. In Taleda in adjoining Bundi district, a mission school was pelted with stones but the police prevented any further flare-ups; police sources in Bundi said the culprits were Bajrang Dal and Shiv Sena members. Two men in Kota announced a reward on Archbishop Thomas' head. They were arrested, but the Chief Investigating Officer dismissed the incident as a "non-event", likening it to the declaration by a Muslim cleric in the context of the Danish cartoons controversy.

The book was banned and on February 21 the Ministry of Social Welfare cancelled the registration of five societies run by the EMI. Their bank accounts were frozen, putting the Mission in a financial crisis. Five people, including the Mission's accountant, Samuel Thomas and the translator of Mathew's book, were arrested. Archbishop Thomas, whose whereabouts were not known, was declared an absconder.

There were indirect fallouts of the affair. Food and medical supplies to the orphanage and the hospital were disrupted, affecting 1,200 people, including children. The supplies were restored after political parties put pressure on the government; a CPI(M) team even visited the State from Kerala and Tamil Nadu.

This is not the first time that the EMI has been targeted. The police in Kota have never been able to prove charges of forcible conversions against the EMI or any minority organisation, but there have been allegations nonetheless. The district secretary of the CPI(M), R.K. Swami, and the president of the Kota Press Club, Pradyumna Kumar, said that every time there was an allegation of forcible conversion, the EMI opened up its activities for scrutiny.

There seems to be a pattern in the way in which these allegations are made and pursued. Lower-rung cadre of the Vishwa Hindu Parishad or the Shiv Sena, mostly unemployed men and belonging to the Scheduled Castes and backward castes, make the first noises. Then the Bajrang Dal picks up the issue. Ultimately, the Bharatiya Janata Party stands to gain as society gets polarised on communal lines.

Pradyumna Kumar thought vonversions of the kind alleged were unlikely in a prosperous place like Kota. Even the Sahariyas, the poorest community in the area, were dependent on the government, not on missionaries.

So what is it that the saffron brigade really has against the EMI? A lot of people in Kota think it could be the growing popularity and success of the Mission. Outfits owing allegiance to the Rashtriya Swyamsewak Sangh run some 30 schools in Kota and the success of the Mission's schools may not look like a good thing to them. So EMI-run schools, which are the most popular in Bundi, Kota and Jhalawar, become targets of attack.

Some people feel that the attacks were only a pretext to create a favourable atmosphere for the anti-conversion Bill. Legal experts of the PUCL say that the new piece of legislation will intimidate people who wish to convert as well as those who propagate the faith. Father Raymond Coelho, spokesperson of the Rajasthan Christian Fellowship, said that he had only noticed such attacks on the community in the past 10 years. In his mind, too, the recent attacks have a link with efforts to push the anti-conversion Bill through.

The Bill's Statement of Objects and Reasons says: "It has been observed by the State government that some religious and other institutions, bodies and individuals are found to be involved in unlawful conversion from one religion to another by allurement or by fraudulent means or forcibly.... In order to curb such illegal activities and to maintain harmony amongst persons of various religions, it has been considered expedient to enact a special law for the purpose." Clause (c ) defines conversion as the renouncing of one's "own" religion and adopting another; one's "own" religion is the religion of one's forefathers. Legal experts point to the partisan nature of the definition, which excludes re-conversions, significant in the context of the Ghar-Vaapsi programmes in Chhattisgarh and Madhya Pradesh.

CLick Here for Source

Adivasis: A Cultural Cooption

By Ram Puniyani

06 April, 2006

Countercurrents.org

From 1987 Sangh (RSS) has activated its offshoot Vanvasi Kalyan Ashram (VKA) into higher gear of activity. Adivasis, the most neglected part of society are being wooed through newly devised cultural mechanisms.

To begin with Vanvasi Kalyan Ashram used the word Vanvasi, instead of the correct nomenclature, Adivasi. The claim put forward by Hindutva is that these are parts of Hindu society who went to jungles to escape the conversion by Muslim kings. Due to their long stay in jungles they became untouchables and drifted away from the fold of Hindu society. This assertion kills many birds in one stone. On one side it tries to project that despite Aryans coming here from outside, Arctic zone, are not foreigners like the Muslims and Christians. Then aggressiveness of Muslim Kings is restated and the inner cruelty of Brahminical Hinduism is hidden as Adivasi 'problem' is projected to be coming from outside. A shifting of the 'blame' of inner ills to outside forces! Another aim achieved through this formulation is to bring Adivasis to Hindu fold and claim that its not a conversion but mere Ghar Vapasi, returning home, of these wretched of the earth. At the same time for the political project of intimidating the Christian missionaries working in the villages a ground is prepared to attack them as foreigners.

The forays of Sangh in Adivasi areas intensified from mid eighties when it was realized that by directly attacking dalits, the way they were attacked in 1980 and 1986 in Gujarat through caste violence, will be counterproductive at electoral level. The strategy evolved was to 'use' them as foot soldiers against Muslim minorities. At the same time electoral arithmetic brought to their attention this substantial chunk of population of Adivasis trying to come up through modern education and thereby disturbing the status quo, prevalent in the far off villages. Its here that the Christian missionaries were perceived as a big threat to the project of Sangh, which wants to maintain status quo vis a vis Adivasis dalits and women. Through the network of schools spread in the far off areas these Missionaries, whatever be their own motives, were instrumental in getting a section of Adivasis empowered and in the process the upper caste affluent base of Sangh was getting jittery.

The posting of RSS volunteers into the forest work was very systematic. Apart from attacking the Christian missionaries as foreigners the Ghar vapasi was brought in at a big scale in all the Adiviasi areas scattered from Gujarat to MP to Orissa. Around this time many a swamis, descended in these areas, Lakkhanand in Phulbani area, Aseemanand in Dangs, Asaram disciples in Jhabau and many other such efforts were unleashed. In Adivasi areas they resorted to intimidation, you are Hindus, Hindu rituals are like this and so these have to part of your life. Dilip Singh Judeo, of the 'God is money' fame, of Chattisgarhg, had the record number of Adiviasis converted in to Hinduism by newly devised baptizing techniques.

At the same time Hanuman was popularized as the God in this area and lately Shabri, the destitute women who had the privilege of offering wild berries to Lord Ram is being projected as the Goddess of Adivasis. The cultural symbolism cannot be missed in the selection of these deities. Hanuman was the unquestioning devotee of Lord Ram, with muscular power as the main virtue. He is capable of flying while carrying a huge mountain. But all the more he is carrying the mountain because he cannot identify the herb needed for treatment of Laxman, Lord's younger brother. This is what is the signal to Adivisis, unquestioning loyalty to Lord Ram, no need to have education. So what are the Christian missionaries doing here? Why should they be trying to educate you? They are foreigners. So Pastor Stains is picked up for the treatment which they want to meted out to the white robed priests and nuns.

Shabri, the embodiment of poverty is being glorified on purpose. Your great ancestress had the privilege to offer wild berries to the Lord. She is your role model, poor, powerless and with blind reverence and devotion for the upper caste. The recently held festival in Subir, Dangs district of Gujarat, celebrated Shabri and lakhs of Advasis were brought from neighboring Adivasi areas for the festival. The local people were scared that Sangh's festival may create the trouble and they may try to forcibly do the conversions to Hinduism. It was declared that Christians and Muslim are foreigners and are a threat to Hindu religion. This Kumbh is meant to protect the Hindus from the foreigners. In the beginning it was announced that conversions are the aim of Kumbh and than silence was kept on this point once various groups questioned their motives. This was boldly stated in the CD produced by Shabri Kumbh organizers. By the time the court ruling came to ban this CD was given, lakhs of its copies were already circulated and had the desired effect of threatening the Christianity community.

The Shabri samiti distributed saffron flags to the villagers and spread the word that those who do not put the flag will be regarded as anti Hindu, those who do not visit the Kumbh will also be regarded as anti Hindu. In this intimidating atmosphere the intervention of Human rights groups resulted in the Central government sending its observers. Also the Adivasi leaders realized the game being played by Sangh and mercifully a large section of native adivasis kept away from the festival. But Sangh has succeeded in spreading the seeds of hate and intimidation far and wide.

During Kumbh the inflammatory speeches were delivered by different leaders of Sangh. It remains to be seen as to what will be the long term impact of this festival. One thing is sure that the whole Adivasi area at some level has been shaken by this festival in which the major organizers were the city based traders, contractors and other supporters of Sangh. The native Adivasi festivals and gods are being undermined in various ways. Adivasis never used to have the temple or place of prayer within the four walls, most of their Gods were in the open. The festivals, dancing and feasting also were held in the open. With the new influence things are changing. The rift between the 'Hindu' and 'Christian' Adivasis is widening which surely will have adverse impact on the life in the area. In pursuance of the same tactics, now summer festival and Anjani mahotsav (festival) are being planned. Anjani, mother of Hanuman was never the object of veneration. Now she will be occupying a place amongst the deities.

During the festival of Shabri (Feb 11-13) in Ghubadiya, a place near Subir, the graveyard was dug up, the crosses on the graves were burnt. Not much notice of this has been taken in the local media and administrative circles. The increasing influence of Sangh and the religiosity is taking deeper turns. One understands that from the villages young girls in the age groups of 14-15 are being picked up to be trained as Sadhvis who can give recitation of Ramayana and other Hindu scriptures. The whole emphasis is on the cultural manipulation and the basic issues of Adivasis like land, education and health are being cleverly sidetracked through this culturo-religious manipulation.

One can see the social engineering in practice. The positive experience is that it seems that intervention of Human rights groups can partly change the direction of events in a healthy direction. Just before the Kumbh, human rights teams had investigated and put out a reort, which was taken note of by the authorities and local leaders. This put the Gujarat Government and Hindutva forces on the defensive. THeexpected turn out did not materialize and even the Ghar Vapasi was muted. The scare amongst the minorities was a bit less and the event passed off relatively peacefully as Hindutva forces had to be restrained. Question is, are the human rights groups willing, do they want to bring the real Adivasi issues on the social focus? Can we ask for social auditing of the activities of the relgio-cultural groups working in these areas? Can we halt the process of spreading hate against the minorities in these areas?

Ruthless and regular persecution of Gujarat's Christians and Muslims

Ahmedabad (AsiaNews) – The government of Gujarat “has conveniently forgotten that Article 25 of the Constitutions guarantees freedom of worship, and it does everything in its power to continue, and to justify, ruthless persecution against Christians and Muslims living in the state”. With these words, Fr Cedric Prakash – director of Prashant, a Jesuit-run centre for human rights, justice and peace – concluded an article he wrote about the “Carnage of Gujarat”: the massacre perpetrated three years ago by “unknown people” against the Muslim community.

Fr Prakash examines the anti-conversion law currently in force that was approved by the nationalist Hindu party, and poses a series of questions to which “the government simply gives no reply”. The Jesuit is well known for his work for human rights: the Indian president awarded him with the Kabir Puraskar prize “for his commitment to promote communal peace and harmony”.

We reproduce the article in full below:

The BJP government [Bharatiya Janata Party, India’s largest political party with nationalist, fundamentalist leanings] in Gujarat rode to a massive two-thirds majority victory in the Assembly Elections of December 2002. This was mainly due to a meticulously organized pogrom on the Muslim minority of the State which is infamously called the “Gujarat Carnage of 2002”.

There was another aspect in their Election Manifesto which they propagated far and wide prior to the elections, namely that an anti-Conversion Law would be in place after they came to power. This promise they did keep when on March 26 2003, three years ago, they rode rough-shod over a feeble opposition and unanimously passed “The Gujarat Freedom of Religion Act”.

Very ironically, that same day, Haren Pandya, a former Home Minister of Gujarat and a vociferous opponent of Narendra Modi, a nationalist leader, was gunned down in the heart of the city in broad daylight. The truth of his assassination has still not yet emerged but if one listens to Vitthalbhai Pandya, his father, then one will easily be convinced that the murderers of his son are not the “Muslim terrorists” who are being accused.

Very strangely, although the Act was passed, until today, the Gujarat Government has not been able to frame the rules needed to govern the implementation of the Act. In its essence, the Act “provides for freedom of religion by prohibition of conversion from one religion to another by use of force or allurement or by fraudulent means”.

The key clauses of the Act are :

1. Anyone wanting to convert or wanting to convert someone else from one religion to another needs prior permission from the District Magistrate.

2. Whoever contravenes this Act will be punished for a period extending up to three years and also liable to a fine which may extend to 50,000 rupees

3. However, if the “guilty” happens to be a minor or woman or a tribal or an outcast, the imprisonment extends up to four years and the fine extends up to 100,000 rupees.

Once this Act was passed, the government was not able to answer simple questions. Are there any instances of forced conversion in Gujarat? Has anyone complained? What does allurement mean? If for example, a person is promised “a more peaceful life” or a technique in the “art of living”, in the acceptance of another religion or way of life, does that amount to allurement? And what happens if one would like to embrace Hinduism, Sikhism, Jainism or even Buddhism? Does one need to have permission for that conversion?

Then there are certain draconian aspects of the law: Who is the District Magistrate to sit on judgment on matters related to faith and conscience? How does one decide if permission should be given or not? What happens if one decides to become an agnostic, an atheist? Does that amount to changing one’s religion? Why should there be more severe punishment for a women, dalit, adivasi or minor? Is it because these groups are lesser than the “brahminized males” who dominate our society?

On Christmas Day 2005, in a widely publicized debate on television, the Home Minister of Gujarat, Amit Shah was challenged as to why the rules which are necessary for implementing this law were not being framed. He had absolutely no answer.

Very obviously, the level of rhetoric and the ferocity of the demands were heightened at the Shabri Kumbh Mela [festival of Hindu purification] from 11 to 13 February 2006. At this time, anti-Christian venom and hate were spewed. One of the resolutions of this Mela was to ensure a national law to ban conversions. A couple of weeks later, in a much publicized meeting of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh [RSS, paramilitary formation of extremist Hindus, considered to be the armed wing of the BJP] in Orissa, a similar resolution was adopted.

The question is: why wasn’t such a law approved when the nationalists were in power? Why do they call on the current national government to pass it?

Whilst it is true that the law, as it is, is toothless, it is also a fact that it is like a Damocles’ sword, with some officials misusing it to threaten and intimidate tribals and dalits.

Mrs Jayalalitha in Tamil Nadu brought in a similar but less draconian legislation sometime ago, but she had to eat humble pie because of its impact, so very conveniently and strategically, she withdrew it. The Gujarat government is in a similar quandary: having passed the legislation, they are just afraid to frame the rules for this law. The fact is that when they do so, they know that it will be challenged. It is a political trap they have set for themselves.

Another question that needs to be asked is: “Is the government of Gujarat really afraid that hundreds and thousands of people will actually embrace Christianity?” If this is so, why don’t they ask themselves why people want to convert to another faith?”

In the meantime, the government continues to harass and intimidate Christians, Muslims and other minorities with a terrifying regularity. They are doing all in their power in order to justify this law and persecution. The government has conveniently forgotten that Article 25 of the Constitutions guarantees every single citizen, the freedom to practice, preach and propagate the religion of his/her choice.

26 March 2003 was indeed a bloody day in the history of Gujarat: civil society must speak out for justice, freedom and truth in order to guarantee that such days will never be repeated. And, we need to know…..Is the Gujarat government afraid of something?

Fishing in the troubled waters

Fishing in the troubled Waters: Advani's (W)rath Yatra For National (Dis)integration

By V.B. Rawat (March 11, 2006)

Lal Krishna Advani is back to what he has been an 'expert' for the past 15 years. After the bomb blasts at the Sankat Mochan temple in Varanasi, he hurriedly organized a press meet and informed the hungry journalists that he along with Rajnath Singh would embark on 'Bharat Jodo Yatra' (India integration Yatra) against the policies of the United Progressive Alliance government which have resulted in the blast at Varanasi. Advani says that the blasts were the outcome of 'minorityism' being shamelessly played by the UPA government.

While people of Uttar-Pradesh in general and Varanasi in particular should be complimented for a strong response to the antinational forces who tried to dismantle the communal harmony in the temple town, the Hindutva party was unable to understand the need of the people. Its TV face Prakash Javadekar informed that in democracy every one has a right to express their feelings. Problem with Javadekar is that they would not like this right to be given to Muslims.

However, it would be unfair to Advani if the issue of communalization has not been addressed properly. After the demolition of Babari Masjid, things were coming back to normalcy when the issue of Cartoon dominated the debates in India. There are few questions related to this. These questions are bigger than the religion and need introspection from all of us.

Violent Reactions to Dissent

Our feelings are being 'hurt' every now and then. When the Cartoon Controversy was in full swing, another TV channel was showing how 'Hindu' Gods and goddesses were being denigrated in Europe. Last year Christians also protested against film 'sin' which shows illegitimate relationship between a pastor and young girl who visit the church too often. The Sikhs blasted one play right in London for her blasphemy of their religion. Hence it is not just Muslims who are sensitive to 'criticism' but we all who have closed our windows and want to believe what we believe and feel right. The biggest casualty in this is truth.

Recently several Dalit right activists have been put behind bar when some of them garlanded the idol of Lord Rama with shoes. They burnt the Manu Smriti and Vedas for their alleged contempt towards the Dalits. The Shiv Sena 's goons attacked Zee TVs' office for allegedly offensive play against its Supreme high command Bala Saheb Thackerey. In Uttar-Pradesh the sensibilities of Bahujan Samaj Party were hurt when CNN-IBN report exposed the 'financial' deals of its Goddess Mayawati. Ambedkarites are unhappy with alleged publication of his letters with a British woman who helped him. The Gandhian's do not feel comfortable with ' Mee Naturam Godse Boltai'.

This culture of deification of leaders in the name of identity is a dangerous phenomenon in our part of the world. Whatever we may claim as 'secular' values for our democracy, 'secularism' and 'democracy' are not part of our social system. We live in a sham political democracy, which begin with politicians and end up with them. They use identity as a tool to strengthen their political bargain and purchase unquestioning loyalty from their 'caste' and 'religious' fellows. In other words, it is 'crony' and 'feudal' democracy as there is no space for the marginalized and 'minorities' in such a democracy. The erstwhile Rajas and Mahrajas, religious gurus, big land mafias, criminals, accused, all, have found best shelter in democracy. Any effort to question them meet with threat of dire consequences.

We pretend that the elections are being contested in the name of development. The fact is a big no. It is the identity politics that dominate our elections. Identities thrive not on success but on the fear. The only success that identities can do is to mobilize people and collect fund from them. The fear of the opposite identity subjugating the other one is exploited very well.

An atmosphere of fear is therefore necessary to flourish the identity politics. Once you instill fear by creating an artificial enemy for your community, none of the community poor are going to ask any further question. In fact, he or she would handsomely contribute for strengthening his community work. Ironically, there are no such initiatives for education, hospitals, social work where people can contribute at their own. They still wait for a messiah to come and provide support to them. But in the name of identity, people are ready to 'strengthen' their leaders by 'contributing' handsomely. The collection by the religious organization is matter of research for every one of us. What could be better than using caste and religion to spread their hateful ideology?

Living for Religion

After all, we are told, life is for religion, for our holy books, holy gods and goddess and not vice versa. All of them are unquestionable. The only question we ask is about other faith. Hindus have pernicious caste system say both Muslims and Christians. How can they tackle so many gods and goddesses? The upper caste middle class Hindus would often pretend to be more 'modern' by suggesting Muslim women are worst hit. 'Muslims are fanatic', they would often say. Muslim says George Bush and Christian world are killing the Muslims. They must apologize for attack on Iraq. True, Japan must apologize from Korea, Britain from India, Muslims from Hindus for they ruled over 400 years in India. The Upper caste Hindus should apologize from the Dalits. Men should ask mercy from women and so on. Communist should apologize from freethinkers in China, Soviet Union, Cuba and Venezuela. List is long and the only thing is to change ourself. Bring ourself out of these identities, which makes us doubtful about any one who is not conformity with us.

It is also important to understand that minority identity is easily targeted as 'communal' while majority identity become 'national'. Therefore, we can catch an Abu Salem and put an Interpol warrant against Dawood Ibrahim while our police can do nothing against Bal Thackrey and Lal Krishna Advani. Is not it shameful that the man headed the Ministry who had charge sheeted him on the Ayodhya demolition case. Remember, this man preaches us morality in public life. His 'devotees', mainly the journalists and Internet breed of Non Reliable Indians (NRIs) are ready to catch his words.

Tragically, it is not just Muslims who thrive on the international identity first and national identity later as Vir Sanghvi might make us feel. The Christians do the same. Their mission work irrespective of countries is basically to serve their religion first and national identity later, otherwise, why would mother Teresa come to India and serve the 'poor'.

But are Hindus so naïve not to do this identity business. Why should India open its border with Nepal and not with other countries? Why do we not bother that a porous border with Nepal could be equally dangerous such as with Bangladesh? But Nepal is not on the radar of Hindutva because its feudal Maharaja is serving the cause of Hindutva better than others hence none of Hindutva gangs would talk about feudlocracy rampant in Nepal.

It is not for nothing that Mr Advani during his tenure as home minister asked for dual citizenship. One need not to wonder why the Sangh Parivar and its hate mongering offshoots have the largest supporter groups in United States and United Kingdom. One wonders why they could not learn a lesson or two about diversity and democracy living in free societies.

Identity of 'enemy'

Hence when the Muslim protests in India against George Bush and the so-called Marxists joins it, it makes a lot of soul searching for us. It is easier for our leftist friend to condemn United States and United Kingdom who are much better and independent societies than us. But like Advani, they also need an enemy. Nobody, justify Bush and Blair for their deeds. Their people are against them and they will bite dust next time but how can we get rid of those 'nationalists' who are sitting overhead. The Muslim do not protest against the killing by their co-brotherns in Kashmir or when Saddam gassed the Kurds. The Hindus do not protest when the Dalits are hacked to death in the villages. The Christian right wing is happy with George Bush for his 'family' philosophy.

We all need an enemy in the identity business. Mulayam need a Yaqub Quraishi to incite Muslims for alleged blasphemous act of a cartoonist who 'painted' a picture of prophet. Interestingly nobody know how he looked like hence any drawing in the name of prophet are nothing but idiotic. In fact any drawing in the name of any Gods and Goddess are just by the artificial imagination of our mind. But we easily get hurt. Yaqub Quraishi was ready to give Rs 51 crore to kill the cartoonist. I would suggest him to start a 'Sarva Siksha Abhiyan' for Muslim girls with this money. That would serve him votes and name also. Once Yaqub suggested the killing, the Hindu leaders were ready to offer Rs 101 crore on the head of painter M F Hussein for allegedly insulting Hindu Goddesses.

It is ironical that our democratic values are guided by religious values and not by the human rights values, international code of justices and various reform movements, which challenged the religious hegemony. Any challenge to religion and its demagogues are met with strong protests.

It is not that the 'devotees' are against what is happening or what is being written against our Gods. People and institutions are targeted even if we keep quiet or we do not write or celebrate the birthday of certain particular leader or we do not moan the death anniversary of some. Sambhaji Brigade in Maharastra attacked the office of Marathi Daily, Lok Satta as the daily has not brought any special supplement on the day of Shivaji Jayanti.

When movement for Uttarakhand was gaining ground in the hills in 1994, Mulayam Singh Yadav, the then chief minister asked his supporters to burn the copies of two Hindi dailies named Amar Ujala and Dainik Jagaran. He alleged that these newspapers were inciting the people. The 'devotees' of Mulayam then followed the instructions and hit the vehicle carrying these newspapers.

Advani's Yatra therefore would not bring any change in the otherwise disgruntled Hindutva. The people of this country know it well that one 'enemy' created by either Muslims or Hindutva would not work in longer run. The democracy has taught the Muslim masses to ask more questions from their leaders. One must not forget that the benefit of Muslim identity politics in India has been usurped by the upper caste Hindus both the way. On the one hand it has helped consolidate the RSS, Hindutva and other such organization, the great beneficiaries the other side were Mulayam Singh Yadav or Mayawati.

It is not surprising that Gandhi used the same Muslim identity card to debunk Jinnah's claim to lead Muslim masses in India. Gandhi needed Mullahs to lead Muslims while Jinnah wanted a secular nationalist approach. Today, the same practice is being followed by Advani for Hindus and Mulayam for Muslims in the name of secularism.

Hunger-Poverty biggest Enemy

But then much water has flown in Sarayu and Ganga after the Babari Masjid and Shahbano case. Uttar-Pradesh is in the grip of micro identities and Advani is trying to kill those micro identities by projecting one big Hindu identity. One need to understand is that Advani in his Hindu identity is a Sindhi who do not have any vote bank. His other friends are upper caste Banias and a few Thakurs. BJP's Hindutva thesis revolve around these 'minority' castes added with a few of those 'minorities' who migrated from Pakistan . BJP in the grand Hindu scheme of things represent a tiny of minority upper castes and even those upper castes have now started drifting away from it.

In final analysis communalism is an offshoot of identity politics. Those who gain from caste politics opt for caste identities and those who have everything to lose from caste identities opt for a bigger 'nationalist' identity. There is no individual identity in this country. Religious and caste identities are the biggest challenge to democracy and human rights. India today needs a secular space for its politics and national life. This secular space mean that the state has to keep away from the religiosity and that any dissent on religion should be taken in a democratic spirit. It is too much to die for 400 years old mosque or so-called birthplace of a Lord which has no historic value. Thousands of people have already died in the name of pigs and cows. We need an India that takes care of its have nots, the Dalits and tribals. We need Indian who can feel the pain and agony of its women who suffers in the hate campaign and communal violence. We need Indians who feel ashamed of continuous hunger deaths. Yes, India need community of youngsters who are ready to come 'Swadesh' to fight against hunger, poverty and illiteracy.

Fight against violence, terror and hate go hand in hand. You cannot fight terrorism with a sectarian mindset. Off late, these 'protests' and 'Yatras' have become political tool for revival of 'dead' horses. We have seen such protests and marches against 'enemy'. Unlike the left, the 'enemy' for Advani lives around us. He hates them because their single-minded obsession failed his mission PM. It is time for all of us to heed the prophetic words of Dr Ambedkar when he said ' Hindu Rastra would be the biggest calamity for India.' I can say with conviction that not just Hindu Rastra but any kind of theocratic state would be dangerous for the health of our national life. Let free spirit prevail in India. Narrow parochial Hindtuvavadis cannot fight against the feudal Islamic Jehadis. We need proud secular Indian who can stand against the fanatics who want to keep people subjugated in the name of communal and caste identities. Let us throw these hate mongering identities into the dustbins of history.

Click Here for Source