HVK Archives: Gandhiji on conversion of Harijan
Gandhiji on conversion of Harijan - Organiser
Posted By Krishnakant Udavant (krishnakant@vsnl.com)
January 24, 1999
Title: Gandhiji on conversion of Harijan
Author:
Publication: Organiser
Date: January 24, 1999
Menace of conversions
...Untouchability is one of the most vulnerable points of the
Hindu society. As
has been in the past, so also today, others take advantage of
this weakness and convert this suppressed and down trodden
section of the society to their faiths. "It must remain an
impassable barrier in our progress" said Gandhiji. He regarded
it as "the greatest blot on Hinduism." He a Hindu and his
services to Harijans were "in fulfilment of his Hinduism." To
him untouchability was essentially a Hindu problem and it was
the Hindus who should solve it. No other religion had any
business to poke its nose into it.
Along with other facets of the problem he have his most serious
thought to the question of untouchables' conversion to other
faiths. He wanted "Hinduism is passing through a fiery ordeal.
It will perish, not through individual conversions, not even
through mass conversions, but it will perish, because of the
sinful denial by the so-called Savarna Hindus of the elementary
justice to Harijans. Every threat of conversion is, therefore,
a warning to Savarnas that if they do not wake up in time, it
may be too late."
Our Food Minister Shri Jagjivan Ram has done well to remind the
Hindus that India might face the demand for the creation of a
Christian state in 10 or 15 years, if conversions to
Christianity continue. It should be noted here that during the
last 30 yew the number of Christians in the Mizo Hills District
of Assam has gone up from 25 to 80 per cent. This is only one
example, showing at what rate conversion to Christianity is
taking place in secular India. As for conversion to Islam, 285
Hindus were converted to it at Delhi Jama masjid alone in the
year 1967!
Gandhiji was unsparing in his condemnation of caste Hindus for
their inhuman treatment of untouchables. He was equally
critical of the proselytising activities of Christian missions
in this country. At the same time, he deprecated the idea of
Harijans, though persecuted, embracing other religions for real
or imaginary mundane gains. Religion is not a matter of barter.
It does not lend itself to purchase in any shape or form. He
said, "Religious persecution is a thing as old as religion
itself. it purifies the persecuted who prove themselves staunch
in their faith. If Harijans can patiently bear persecution,
they are bound to come out triumphant in the end." He believed
that untouchability is no part of Hinduism. It is an
excrescence which is to be removed by every effort. There has
been and still is, quite an army of Hindu reformers who have set
their heart upon ridding Hinduism of this blot, he said.
His advice to the needy and impatient Harijans was: "They must
not use threats when they approach Hindu institutions or
individuals for help. They should rely upon the strength of
their own case. They must be the primary care of Hindu
reformers whether they complain or do not. Those who arc
enlightened enough to know and feel the degradation and know
also what the change of religion means are either too good
Hindus to desert their ancestral faith and deserve every help
they need or being indifferent as to religion may not claim help
from Savarna Hindus in exchange for their condescending to
remain in the Hindu fold. I would, therefore, plead with
enlightened Harijans for their own sake not to seek material
betterment under threat of conversion."
The fate of Christian untouchables
During Gandhiji's time Dr Ambedkar raised the standard of revolt
against Hinduism. On this Gandhiji said, "Secession of
stalwarts like Dr Ambedkar can but weaken the defence of
Harijans. We know, as a matter of fact, that non-Hindu
Harijans, no matter how eminent they many be, are not able to
help Harijans. Indeed they arc a class apart still in their
adopted faiths. Such is the hold untouchability of Indian type
has on the people of India."...
Incidentally this reminds one how the Christian Church once
supported slavery. When it was in vogue in America, the Bishop
of London wrote to the slave-owners in the South: "Christianity
and the embracing of the Gospel does not make the least
alteration in civil property or in any of the duties which
belong to civil relations; but in all these respects it
continues Persons just in the came State as it found them. The
Freedom which Christianity gives is Freedom from the bondage of
Sin and Satan and from the Dominion of Men's Lusts and Passions
and inordinate Desires but as to their outward condition,
whatever that was before, whether bond or free, their being
baptised and becoming Christians makes no manner of change in
them."...
Once 14 Church leaders issued a joint manifesto setting forth
their views on the missionary work among Harijans. The purpose
of the manifesto was not to condemn the method of converting the
illiterate and ignorant, but to assert the moral right of
preaching Christianity to the millions of Harijans. In reply,
Gandhiji asked them to recognise the fundamental difference
between rights and duties.
He said, "In the spiritual sphere there is no such thing as
right. There is no right but is legal. Divorced from legality,
moral right is misnomer. And, therefore, you either enforce a
right or fight for it. Whereas nobody asserts one's duty. He
humbly performs it. I shall take an illustration. You feel like
preaching to me the Gospel. I deny the right and ask you to go
away. But if you claim the right to preach to me, you call the
police and appeal to them for preventing my obstructing you.
That leads to clash. Duty is a debt. Right belongs to a
creditor, and it would be a funny thing indeed, if a devout
Christian claimed to be creditor. ... When you say I must accept
Jesus in preference to Ramakrishna Paramahansa, you will have to
go into deep waters."
There was an interesting dialogue between Gandhiji and one Dr
Mott who claimed to be the Chairman of the International
Missionary Council which included 300 missionary societies in
the world.
Dr Mott wanted to serve the Harijans, but Gandhiji said, "Of
course, you will, but not make conversion the price of your
service." Christianity was the sharing of life, Dr Mott pleaded
. To this Gandhiji replied, "If you must share it with Harijans,
why don't you share it with me, Thakkar Bapa and Mahadev? Why
should you go to the untouchables and try to exploit the
upheaval?"
He told Dr Mott, "The missionaries with the Musalmans and the
Sikhs came forward as soon as Dr Ambedkar threw the bombshell,
and they gave it an importance out of all proportion to the
weight it carried, and then ensured a rivalry between these
organisations. I could understand the Moslem organisations
doing this, as Moslems and Hindus have been quarrelling. The
Sikh intervention is an enigma. But the Christian claims to be
a purely spiritual effort. It hurts me to find Christian bodies
vying with Moslems and Sikhs in trying to add to the numbers of
their fold. It seemed to me an ugly performance and a travesty
of religion. They even proceeded to enter into secret conclaves
with Dr Ambedkar. I should have understood and appreciated your
prayers, but instead you made an appeal to these who had not
even the mind and intelligence to understand what you talked.
They have certainly not the intelligence to distinguish between
Jesus and Mohammad and Nanak and so on."...
Back
Top
|
