As my friends,
particularly Christian friends, have been stunned and surprised over Gandhi’s
virulent rhetoric on conversion (refer my post गांधी, संघ परीवार और धर्मांतर in सेक्युलर गुजरात http://gujaratandsecularism.blogspot.in/2012/06/blog-post.html) I have been compelled to reproduce Master’s
original thought on the subject (from Dr. Babsaheb Ambedkar Writing and speeches, volume 5, unpublished writings, Untouchables or the Children of India's Ghetto and other essays on Untouchables and Untouchability social-Political-Religious, P. 446-450). It is soul
searching, scintillating and sparkling directly coming from heart of a great
man:
Mr. Gandhi's opposition
to Christian conversion is by now quite well known. And since
1936 he has become quite a virulent adversary of all missionary
propaganda. He particularly objects to the missionaries spreading
the Christian Gospel among the Untouchables. His antagonism to
Christian Missions and the conversion of Untouchables to
Christianity is based on certain propositions which have been enunciated by him in quite
unmistakable terms. I think the following four
propositions may be taken to sum up his position. I give them in his own words. He says:
1. “My position is that
all religions are fundamentally equal. We must have the same innate
respect for all religions as we have for our own. Mind you,
not mutual toleration but equal respect." (Harijan, 1936. P.330)
2. “All I want them (the
Missionaries) to do is to live Christian lives, not to annotate
them. (Harijan, 1936. P.353). Let your lives speak to us. The blind who do not see the rose, perceive its
fragrance. That is the secret of the Gospel of the rose.
But the Gospel that Jesus preached is more subtle and fragrant than
the Gospel of the rose. If the rose needs no agents, much less does
the Gospel of Christ need agents" (Harijan, April, 1937.
P.330)
As to the work of the
Christian Missions he says:
3."The social work
of the missions is undertaken not for its own sake, but as an aid
to the salvation of those who receive social service.4 while you give medical
help, you expect the reward in the shape of your
patients becoming Christians.” (Harijan, 18th July, 1936. P.178)
As to the Untouchables he
says—
4. " I do maintain………that the vast masses of
Harijans and for that matter of Indian
humanity, cannot understand the presentation of Christianity, and
that, generally speaking, conversion, wherever it has taken place, has not been
a spiritual act in any sense of the term. They are conversions of
convenience. (Harijan, 1936.
P.140-141). They (the Harijans) can
no more distinguish between the relative merits (words omitted?) than can a cow. Harijans have no mind, no
intelligence, no sense of difference between God
and no-God.” (Harijan, 1936. P.360)
Gandhi advises the
Christian Missions in the following somewhat offensive terms as to
what would be proper for them to do. He says—
"If Christian
Missions will sincerely play the game…….they must withdraw from the indecent
competition to convert the Harijans…
"Just…...forget that you have come
to a country of heathens and (to) think that they
are as much in search of God as you are;
"just....feel that you are not
going there to give your spiritual goods to them, but that
you will share worldly goods of which you have a good stock. You
will then do your work without mental reservation and thereby
you will share your spiritual treasures. The knowledge that you have
this mental reservation, i.e. you are expecting a man to be a convert in return
for service, creates a barrier between you and
me."
“The history of India
would have been written differently if the Christians had come to
India to live their lives in our midst and permeate ours with their
aroma, if there was any."2 This hostility of Mr. Gandhi to Christian
Missions and their work is of very recent origin. I do not know if it can be
traced beyond the Yeola Decision.
It is as recent as it is strange. I do not
know of any declaration made by Mr. Gandhi
expressing in such clear and
determined manner opposition to the
conversion of the Untouchables to Islam. The Muslims
have made no secret
of their plan to
convert the Untouchables. The plan was given out
openly from the Congress platform by the late Maulana Mohomed Ali when he
presided over the annual session of the Congress held at Coconada in
1923. In his Presidential address the Maulana pointed out in
clear terms that:
"The quarrels
(between Hindus and Musalmans) about Alams and pipal trees and musical processions are
truly childish; but there is one question which can easily furnish a ground
for complaint of unfriendly action if communal activities are not
amicably adjusted.
This is the question of
the conversion of the suppressed classes, if Hindu
Society does not speedily
absorb them. The Christian missionary is already busy and no one
quarrels with him. But the moment some Muslim missionary society is
organized for the same purpose there is every likelihood of an outcry in
the Hindu press. It has been suggested to me by an influential and
wealthy gentleman who is able to organize a (Muslim) missionary
society on a large scale for the conversion of the suppressed
classes, that it should be possible to reach a settlement with leading Hindu
gentlemen and divide the country into separate areas where Hindu
and Muslim missionaries could respectively work, each
community preparing for each year, or longer unit of time, if necessary,
an estimate of the numbers it is prepared to absorb, or convert.
These estimates would, of course, be based on the number of workers and funds
each had to spare, and
tested by the actual figures of the previous period. In this way
each community would be free to do the work of absorption and conversion, or
rather of reform, without chances of collision with one another".
Nothing can be more
explicit than this. Nothing can be more businesslike and nothing
can be more materialistic than this pronouncement from the
Congress platform. But I am not aware that Mr. Gandhi has ever
condemned it in the way in which he now condemns the endeavour of Christian
Missions to convert the Untouchables. Nobody from
Gandhi's camp protested against this outrageous suggestion.
Probably they could not because the Congress Hindus believed that it
was their duty to help the Musalmans to fulfil what they regarded as their religious
duty, and that conversion is a religious duty with the Musalman nobody can
deny. At any rate the Hindu leaders of
Congress, as stated by George Joseph in 1920, held "that it was the religious duty of
the Hindus to help Muslims in the maintenance of the
Turkish Khilafat over the Arabs in the Jazirut-al-Arab because Muslim
theologians and political leaders assured us that it was their religious duty. It went
against the grain because it meant the maintenance of a
foreign Government over Arabs; but Hindus had to stomach it because it
was urged on them as part of the religious duty of the Hindus.
(Harijan, 8th February,
1936, P.415) If this is true why should Gandhi not help the Christians to carry on conversion because
conversion is also a fulfilment of their
religious duty.
Why there should be a
different measuring rod today because it is the Christians that are
involved is more than one can understand. Mr. George Joseph was well
within bounds when he said:
"The only difference
is that there are 75 millions of Muslims and there are only 6 millions
of Christians. It may be worth-while making peace with Muslims
because they can make themselves a thorn in the side of
Nationalism: Christians do not count, because they are small in
numbers."
That Mr. Gandhi is guided
by such factors as the relative strength of the Musalmans and
Christians, their relative importance in Indian politics, is evident from the terms he
uses in condemning what he calls "propaganda by
vilification". When such propaganda emanates from Christian missionaries he uses the
following language to condemn it. (Quotation is not there in the MS.—Ed.).
On the other hand when he
comes out against a propaganda emanating from the Muslim
all that he says: (Harijan, August 8, 1936)
"It is tragic to see
that religion is dragged down to the low level of crude materialism to lure people into
mission which the most cherished sentiments of
millions of human beings are trodden under foot.
“I hope that the pamphlet
has no support from thoughtful Musalmans who should read
it to realize the mischief such pamphlets can create.”
“My correspondent asks me
how to deal with the menace. One remedy I have applied, viz, to bring hereby
the vilifying propaganda to the notice of the responsible Muslim world. He
himself can claim the attention of the
local Musalman leaders to the publication. The second and the most important thing to do
is purification from within. So long as the
position of untouchability remains in the Hindu body it will be
liable to attacks from outside. It will be proof against such attacks only when a solid and
impregnable wall of purification is erected
in the shape of complete removal of untouchability."
The ferocity of the
former and the timidity and softness of the latter are obvious enough. Surely Gandhi
must be regarded as an astute "respecter of
persons".
But apart from this
difference in his attitude towards Muslim and Christian propaganda,
have Mr. Gandhi's arguments against Christian Missions, which I have
summarized above, any validity? They are just' clever. There is nothing profound about
them. They are the desperate arguments of a man who is
driven to wall. Mr. Gandhi starts out by making a distinction
between equal tolerance and equal respect. The phrase "equal respect " is
a new phrase. What distinction he wants to make thereby is difficult
to recognize. But the new phraseology is not without significance. The
old phrase "equal tolerance" indicated the possibility of error. " Equal respect" on the other
hand postulates that all religions are equally true and equally
valuable. If I have understood him
correctly then his premise is utterly fallacious, both logically as well
as historically. Assuming the aim of religion is to reach God— which I do not think it is—and religion is the road to reach him, it cannot be said that every road is sure to lead to God. Nor can it be said that every road, though it may ultimately lead to God, is the
right road. It may be that all existing religions are
false and) the perfect religion is still to be revealed. But the fact is that
religions are not all true and therefore the adherents of one faith have
a right, indeed a duty, to tell their erring friends what they
conceive to be the truth. That Untouchables are no better than a cow is a
statement which only an ignoramus, or an arrogant person, can venture
to make. It is arrant nonsense. Mr. Gandhi dares to make it because he
has come to regard himself as so great a man that the ignorant masses will not
question his declarations and the dishonest intelligentsia will
uphold him in whatever he says. Strangest part of his argument lies in wishing
to 
share the material things
the Christian Missions can provide. He is prepared to share their
spiritual treasures provided the Missionaries invite him to share their
material treasures "without obligation".* What he minds is an exchange. It is
difficult to understand why Mr. Gandhi argues that
services rendered by the Missionaries are baits or temptations, and that the
conversions are therefore conversions of convenience. Why is it
not possible to believe that these services by Missionaries indicate that service to
suffering humanity is for Christians an essential
requirement of their religion? Would that be a wrong view of the process by which a
person is drawn towards Christianity? Only a
prejudiced mind would say, Yes.
share the material things
the Christian Missions can provide. He is prepared to share their
spiritual treasures provided the Missionaries invite him to share their
material treasures "without obligation".* What he minds is an exchange. It is
difficult to understand why Mr. Gandhi argues that
services rendered by the Missionaries are baits or temptations, and that the
conversions are therefore conversions of convenience. Why is it
not possible to believe that these services by Missionaries indicate that service to
suffering humanity is for Christians an essential
requirement of their religion? Would that be a wrong view of the process by which a
person is drawn towards Christianity? Only a
prejudiced mind would say, Yes.
All these arguments of
Mr. Gandhi are brought forth to prevent Christian Missionaries
from converting the Untouchables. No body will deny to Mr. Gandhi
the right to save the Untouchables for Hinduism. But in that
case he should have frankly told Missions "Stop your work, we want now to save the
Untouchables, and ourselves. Give us a chance!
"It is a pity that he should not have adopted this honest mode of dealing with the menace of
the Missionaries. Whatever anybody may say I have no
doubt, all the Untouchables, whether they are converts or not, will agree that
Mr. Gandhi has been grossly unjust to Christian Missions. For centuries
Christian Missions have provided for them a shelter, if
not a refuge.
This attitude of Mr.
Gandhi need not deter either the missionaries or the Untouchables. Christianity has come to
stay in India and, unless the Hindus in their zeal for nationalism misuse their
political, social and economic power to
suppress it, will live and grow in numbers and influence for good.
II
What Christianity has
achieved in India therefore becomes a proper subject for examination
from the points of view both of Christian Missions and of the
Untouchables.
That Christian Missions
have been endeavouring to provide the corpus
sanum for the people of India
and to create the Mens Sana among those who have
entered the fold is undeniable. It would be difficult in this place
to describe all the activities carried on by Christian Missions in
India. The work done by the Missionaries falls under five heads: (1) among children, (2)
among young men, (3) among the masses, (4)
among women and (5) among the sick.
The work done is vast.
The following figures will give an idea of the scale on which the work for
education and relieving sickness is being carried on........
