My Views on Hindutva, Hindu Rashtra, Conversion, and Freedom of Religion Laws

Cultural Indianness or Hindutva is often misinterpreted and equated with Hinduism. Hindutva or Indianness doesn't demand allegiance to any deity. There are Atheists, Jains, Buddhists, Sikhs, and even Christ-followers who are part of this movement. They are culturally Indian, but they have their own unique religious beliefs. Hindutva emphasizes non-violence (Ahimsa), truth (Satya), peace (Shanti), vegetarianism (Shakhahar), vernacular languages (Hindi, Sanskrit, and regional languages), Indian products (Swadeshi), and self-governance  (Swaraj). None of these stand against faith in God or worshipping a specific deity. Besides, Hindutva has no casteism, and Hinduism requires caste-based differentiation.

Shyama Prasad Mukherjee launched the Bengali Hindu Homeland Movement after the Noakholi genocide of Hindus by Muslim League mobs. Mr. Mukherjee wanted Bengal to stay united with Bharat. He also recommended Bengal's partition in 1946 to prevent including Hindu areas in East Pakistan. Imagine what would have happened to Hindus in that region if they became a part of East Pakistan. Today, in Pakistan, the Hindu population has declined from 14% to 1% due to isolation, sidelining, second-class citizenship, and persecution. That is why many people in our country consider various alternatives, such as a Hindu Rashtra.

Bharat is already a Hindu-majority nation. We can learn a little from Pakistan, which chose to become a religious Islamic nation. Now, it is filled with terrorists. We can suggest a constitutional republic instead of Hindu Rashtra. In a constitutional republic, all people participate. Sabka Saath Sabka Vikaas. Again, Socialist and Secular do not define India properly. We are no longer socialist. We were never secular. All our people are religious: Hindus, Jains, Buddhists, Sikhs, Christ-followers, Muslims. That is why a Constitutional Republic is a more appropriate word for our kind of pluralistic democracy.

The founder of the RSS, Dr. Hedgewar, wanted to obliterate caste from among Hindus. He wanted cultural nationalism. Therefore, he did not form a political party. Instead, he formed a group to serve the Hindu society and deliver it from caste consciousness. Still, some political party leaders hate this group. They demonize it for its lack of participation in the Freedom struggle. Even so, the truth is that Hegdewar allowed RSS members to participate in the Freedom Struggle in their personal capacity. He also took part but in his personal capacity. He did so because the doctor only wanted a casteless Hinduism with inclusivity and care for one another, not a political movement.

Many people point out that their issue with RSS is its emphasis on preventing Hindus from joining other faiths. The Anti-Conversion laws were enacted due to the prevalence of many fraudsters, particularly those of the Islamic faith. The first case is where Muslim boys coerce young Hindu girls to convert to get married.  Second, some people, posing as pastors, offer employment or financial assistance to help others believe in their God. Both are wrong. Jesus never told people to believe in Him because He could alleviate their poverty, provide them with employment, or offer them a new relationship. If a person knows God, they will naturally draw near to Him without any coercion or allurements.

Regarding the Anti-Conversion laws, the third aspect relates to changing people's cultural ways of life, which affects the whole community. For instance, Hindu family members persecuted a family in Orissa because after joining the church, the women refused to wear Sindoor and Mangal Sutra. These are illiterate people. If you change their cultural ways of life, they won't accept the changes without challenging them. Neither Jesus nor Paul demanded that people change their culture, language, or food habits to become Christ-followers. Paul didn't necessitate Gentiles to follow the Jewish diet, language, attire or ceremonial rites to become Christians. Therefore, in all these three areas, the fault lies with the people who lead others to their faith.

The Anti-Conversion laws are wrongly termed as Freedom of Religion laws. Hindutva groups argue that people have the right to remain in their original or native religion. I disagree with this assertion. For, it is a person's choice whether they want to believe or not believe in a God, ideology, or way of life. Our constitution gives people the right to practice, preach, and propagate our faith without coercion or allurement (Articles 25-28). The Freedom of Religion Act of any state cannot violate or contradict these fundamental rights. Even so, if people have a complaint that someone is forcing them to believe in a certain way of life or a Particular God, they do have the right to seek legal assistance.

However, sometimes, the New believers are persecuted by their new community, Islamic or Christian. There are no laws to protect them. The only option for such individuals is to return to their original faith, provided their community will accept them back. I can give you many examples of Hindu girls and boys who converted to Christianity, and then Christian Pentecostals ruined their lives. It happens more frequently in Kerala. I know two women, one from a Hindu family and another from a Muslim family, who got many mistreatments from the Christian community. They can't go back to their original faith because they believe in Christ, and they can't continue in this community because of the way they were treated. I pray that God will bring laws to help cases like these as well. 

In sum, we may not need to assert the formation of a Hindu Rashtra knowing that 80% of Bharat is still Hindu. However, we need to advocate for Hindutva as cultural Indian-ness that de-emphasizes casteism and caste-based discrimination. Its key aspects may include Ahimsa, Swadeshi, Swaraj, Shanti, Satya, Shakhahar, and Sanskrit (and indigenous languages). Besides, we must emphasize freedom of religion without coercion or allurement. Furthermore, a new believer's rights to retain their cultural ways of life must be protected.