This document discusses religious conversion in India, focusing on conversions between Hinduism and Christianity among lower castes. It provides historical context on conversion in India and competing conceptions of conversion between Hindu and Christian traditions. It argues that for marginalized groups, religious conversion serves as an important tool for social mobility by allowing people to escape the caste system. However, with the rise of Hindu nationalism, anti-conversion laws are being proposed that threaten to criminalize conversion and reinforce existing social hierarchies by limiting people's ability to change their religious identities.

1. 1
India and the Politics of Conversion
India, a country rich with religious diversity, has long been an epicenter of religious
pluralism. As such, religious conversions have historically been commonplace within the Indian
state, often intersecting with political, economic, and social motivations—despite the
controversy that has typically ensued. However, renewed debates concerning conversion in
contemporary India have emerged with the right-wing Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) claiming
majority representation in the national parliament and state assemblies as of 2015. As a result,
Hindu nationalism has risen and the plurality that once flourished is becoming increasingly
threatened as the government asserts claims concerning religious authenticity.
The struggle over conversion in contemporary India has been the subject of political
debate amongst Hindus, in part because of its negative associations with colonialism, coercion,
and inauthentic motivations. Despite the negative perceptions that surround the process,
conversion can and has served important functions of providing increased social mobility and a
renewed sense of spiritual, individual, and group identities. As such, conversion is an important
process that, if restricted, could threaten personal freedoms and democracy. The BJP recently
proposed anti-conversion legislation, which threatens to criminalize such processes. Largely
concerned with maintaining the balance of the Hindu majority, the actions being taken by the
BJP have created an environment in which conversations concerning religious conversion have
become increasingly pertinent.
Through an examination of religious conversion in India, focusing specifically on the
process as it pertains to Christianity and Hinduism amongst lower-castes, it becomes apparent
that this process serves important functions on both a religious and social level, and is therefore
important to protect. This paper will demonstrate the ways in which religious conversion can and

2. 2
has served as an important tool for social mobility. It will then examine the ways in which such
motivations for conversion are increasingly coming under attack, as they threaten to offset the
current demographics of the Hindu majority, especially with the BJP maintaining majority power
governmentally. In doing so, I will examine previous anti-conversion legislation in light of the
newly proposed legislation, specifically exploring the ways in which this would serve as a
political tool for the BJP and Hindu nationalists as a whole. I find that, despite the complex
history of religious conversion in India, processes of conversion do serve important functions
that intersect with economic, political, and social landscapes. It will explore the significance of
religious conversion moving forward, finding that the legislation currently being proposed by the
BJP has the potential to threaten the secular ideal, as it operates specifically in the Indian context.
History
In order to understand the current situation in India, it is essential to first discuss the
important historical context through which the modern circumstances developed. India is no
stranger to religious conversion. It has a significant history of conversion between a variety of
religious communities. This includes conversions by lower castes to Buddhism, Islam, and
Christianity (Jenkins 2008 p.112). There is also a significant colonial precedent concerning
conversion that has, unfortunately, negatively contributed to much of the tension we see today.
In India, restrictions on religious conversion extend back to colonialism. With the arrival of
European colonists also came the arrival of Christian missionaries. The proselytization of Hindus
by such missionaries naturally produced a vehement objection by Hindus, who viewed Christian
missionizing as a politically motivated human enterprise, rather than a spiritual transformation
(Kim 2003 p.197). In response to Christian missionizing, Hindu’s began spearheading
“reconversion” programs. The first well-organized reconversion programs occurred from 1880 to

3. 3
1930 by Hindu nationalist movements, largely centered in Punjab. This initial reconversion
response was largely seen as a reaction against British colonialism and Christian proselytization
(Vandevelde 2011 p.35).
Despite this complex history, with the Indian state gaining independence in 1947, a legal
precedent for religious freedom was established with the creation of an official constitution.
Article 15 and 25 of India’s constitution explicitly protect freedom of religion as a fundamental
right. More specifically, Article 25 states that “all persons are equally entitled to freedom of
conscience and the right to freely profess, practice, and propagate religion subject to public
order, morality, and health” (“Constitution of India” 1947). These two portions of the
constitution are meant to maintain the secular ideal of the Indian nation, and prevent religious
discrimination, along with such comes conversion experiences. Additionally, there are various
governmental agencies that further aid in upholding this standard. The Ministry of Minority
Affairs, National Human Rights Commission, and the National Commission for Minorities are
all government agencies intended to investigate and protect against matters of religious
discrimination. However, these agencies lack logistical and procedural power, and are therefore
unable to actually enforce or implement any punitive measures if religious freedoms are in fact
being violated.
Conceptions of Conversion
This complicated history with conversion is further problematized because Christians and
Hindus hold conflicting conceptions and definitions of conversion, which puts them at cross-
purposes. The Hindu tradition, despite its own diversity, views conversion in sociological and
political terms, while conversely, Christianity views it in theological terms (Kim 2003 p.5).
Christianity typically proselytizes the notion of “truth,” arguing that Christianity is the one true

4. 4
religion and all others are false. In this sense, conversion is a means to “rescue” adherents of
other faiths from false religions (Vandevelde 2011 p.32). Conversely, Hindu traditions lack the
same conception of true or false religions. Instead, diverging religions are seen as various means
to the same end and same goal. This creates a tension with the notion of conversion, which is
seen as a strange and unnatural phenomenon within Hinduism, in that conversion is seen as an
earthly motivated process. In this way, the proselytizing of Christian missionaries has been and
continues to be seen as coercive and in direct contradiction to Gandhi’s claim that “all religions
are true” (Vandevelde 2011 p.32).
In this sense, there is an essential need to acknowledge that the issue of conversion has to
deal with an encounter between two radically different religious systems, and recognizing such
differences is crucial in order to untangle the conflict and debate that arises as a result.
The Issue of Personal Law:
One additional complication to the process of religious conversion in India has to do
specifically with the presence of multiple courts of personal law concerning various religions.
That is, in India, each religion has their own law and courts to deal with matters of personal law
for religious adherents of their faith. Who is subject to which “personal laws” in India is further
complicated by conversion (Jenkins 2008 p.110). This type of communalism allowing different
legal systems for different communities, was first implemented by colonists. It has added to
tensions around conversion because it essentially makes community borders more apparent and
vulnerable” (Kim 2003 p.4).
Marginalized People and the Political Act of Conversion
In India, religious identity is often a determining factor concerning certain rights. One’s
religious affiliation can impact rights regarding citizenship, affirmative-action benefits, alimony

5. 5
and more. (Jenkins 2008 p.111). For this reason, in a state where the caste system determines
social status for the Hindu majority, there is substantial merit for marginalized populations, like
dalits, to convert. Here, it is important to note that the caste system is a human construction,
legitimated by religion in order to “offer justification for conformity to a practice” that maintains
constructed social order (Martin 2014 p.94). This intersectionality between law and religion is
one of the primary motivations for individuals to convert. As a result, individuals who choose to
convert religions often do so as a political act, even more so than a religious one. The ability to
choose the future of one’s own destiny is a significant reason converts are inclined to embrace
other religious traditions (Kim 2003 p.2).
Facing heightened levels of structural oppression, marginalized communities face
difficult futures, and therefore represent a significant proportion of religious conversion from
Hinduism to Christianity. The trend of heightened conversion amongst certain groups further
emphasizes the “constructive role of Christianity in bringing about social change” brought about
by a tension that can be attributed to disparities among various socio-economic communities
(Kim 2003 p.2). Lacking social mobility within their own religious tradition, historically, such
groups have used religious conversion as an apparatus for achieving the social mobility they
previously lacked. Such socially motivated conversions to Christianity have allowed people to
shift between socially constructed categories.
Theorist William James described conversion as a transformative process that often
involves notions of redemption and is regularly preceded by despair (James 1902 pp.149,161).
This seems to parallel strongly with the phenomena of conversion amongst marginalized lower-
castes. As these individuals choose to convert from Hinduism to Christianity, they break free of
the religiously sanctified structure in which they have previously always existed and the

6. 6
hierarchical caste system that had always decided their roles within society. Through this
conversion, individuals are able to achieve significant social-improvement that was otherwise
impossible.
Here, it is important to note that for James, the conversion process is conceived of as a
total transformation of oneself: inwardly, outwardly, and emotionally. Under these conditions,
arguably, James would not conceive of the conversion of marginalized communities as authentic
in that, for converts, Hindu customs retained a key role in daily practice despite conversion.
Converts embraced new religious traditions conditionally, ensuring that they fit into pre-existing
value systems and “traditional religiosity” (Kim 2003 pp.2-3). In this way converts are
pragmatically adapting Christianity to their needs rather than adapting themselves to Christianity
(Kim 2003 p.3). While, for James, this notion of total transformation may not be represented
because of this continuation of certain traditions, I argue that these conversions do in fact
constitute an entire restructuring and transformation of the self.
Although converts themselves may not identify their experiences as an emotional
transformation, it most certainly is. Through conversion an entire life transformation occurs and
from that, emotional change is naturally produced as inward notions of redemption are also
produced. In this way, although the emotional transformations of converts may not directly
correlate to the conception James had in mind, the key themes of James’ argument are present.
Further, James states “the value of conversion depends not on the process, but on the fruits” and
this is exactly the logic we see operating in this specific context of marginalized communities,
who seek out religious conversion for its transformative results (James 1902 p.166).
James also says that “hope, happiness, security, resolve, emotions characteristic of
conversion can be explosive and emotions that come in this explosive way seldom leave things

7. 7
as they found them” (James 1902 p.151). This “explosivity” that James describes is exactly what
is under examination in the context of religious conversion experiences in India. These traits,
which James mentions, are highly characteristic of the conversion experiences of marginalized
communities. That is, conversion out of the caste system offers the promise of a renewed sense
of “security” and “hope” that was missing from their previous religious system. This process,
like James argues, has the ability to transform lives in both an emotional and pragmatic way and
as a result of both both theological and political motivations.
Mass Conversions:
One issue that has arisen as a result of marginalized groups using conversion to leverage
improved social status, and has been the principal-motivating factor for anti-conversion
legislation (at least on a surface level), is the occurrence of mass conversions.
In India, entire communities of marginalized groups have converted from Hinduism to
Christianity all at once. While the concern with mass conversion is most likely due to the fact
that large numbers of people converting away from Hinduism threatens to shift the power
balance in India, governmental agencies posing anti-conversion legislation typically state
concern over “coercion” as the main objection to mass conversions. There have, in the past, been
instances in which force was used to spur conversion, including instances of withholding
resources. While, in some cases, this concern is legitimate, it is hardly the norm, and there have
been similar complaints originating from all sides. However, along with mass conversions, there
have continually been assumptions concerning the vulnerability of group converts. That is, the
state has expressed concerns with group conversions by judging the apparent state of mind of
converts. More specifically, it has been assumed that woman and lower caste individuals who

8. 8
convert are not capable of making such decisions in an educated, autonomous way (Jenkins 2008
p.110)
However, this assumption is extremely problematic, simply because through these
conversions groups are in fact collectively employing a degree of agency, despite such socio-
economic constraints. This intersection of personal and group identities is very important in
understanding and analyzing religious conversion in the Indian context. In his chapter Rites of
Institution, Pierre Bourdieu touches on this phenomenon of collective identity. He suggests that
identities work collectively and without recognition from others, such identities would not
function effectively (Bourdieu 1991 pp.124-126). He goes further, suggesting “rites of
institution” are used for public recognition of such identities. It seems in this way, conversion is
the rite of institution through which people are recognized as having successfully shifted between
these socially constructed categories of religiosity. Conversion is able to “facilitate structural
change and that conversion movements represent caste mobility or the realization of communal
identity” (Kim 2003 p.2). Additionally, group conversion works paradoxically, because it is
precisely the groups of converts who themselves are recognizing each other as having new
identity.
In a unique way, this process of mass conversion and group identities also demonstrates
Victor Turner’s concept of communitas. Turner conceives of communitas as a bonded
community that resists the hierarchies of society. These communities, which exist subversively
outside of structures, if too developed, can threaten the stability of societal norms. Turner
elaborates on this point, saying that “structures of society must be maintained, anything without
structure must be labeled as dangerous” (Turner 1969 p.109). In the context of Indian religious
conversion, the communitas of group converts is viewed and framed of as dangerous by the BJP,

9. 9
precisely for this reason: they threaten the hierarchical social order promulgated by Hindu
nationalists. Through participating in group conversions, though these individuals are infact re-
entering some structural order by identifying with Christian traditions, the communitas which
they develop in resistance to the previous social order calls into question the legitimations
employed for Hindu social hierarchies, thereby presenting a “danger” to the state.
The State’s Monitoring of Religion:
Anti-conversion laws have previously been proposed in light of forced conversions in
which individuals have been misled or coerced into conversion. As such, the premise of such
laws is that these types of scenarios can be prevented. However such laws can also be leveraged
in ways that are equally discriminatory. In fact, scholars argue that Hindu counter-conversion
movements, spurred by the political rise of Hinduvta, have exacerbated the problem (Kim 2003
p.4).
The state has become increasingly involved in monitoring the religious practices of its
peoples. In recent years, laws requiring people to report conversions to local authorities have
come into effect (Jenkins 2008 p.112). Additionally, Indian states have also passed laws
restricting religious conversion, many relating back to previously implemented colonial laws
(Jenkins 2008 p.109). For example, “The Orissa Freedom of Religion Act,” meant to protect
against “forced conversion” states that “no person shall convert or attempt to convert, either
directly or otherwise, any person from one religious faith to another by use of force or by
inducement or by any fraudulent means nor shall any person abet any such conversion” (“Laws
of India” 1967). While on the surface level, the language of such anti-conversion bills seems
logical, the problem is that the state has the ability to conclude what counts as “force” and
“inducement.” For this reason, anti-conversion laws have problematically been interpreted in

10. 10
ways that benefit the Hindu oriented governmental body. The actions of the Indian state allude to
a “growing unease with conversions in a democratic country that recognizes freedom of religion”
(Jenkins 2008 p.112). Through this evolution, there continues to be an increasing tension
between religion, conversion, democracy, and the boundaries of each.
Reinforcing Social Hierarchies; Authority, Legitimation, and Authenticity:
The anti-conversion laws currently in place, in addition to those being proposed for the
future, reinforce social hierarchies. That is, they further cement portrayals of certain socio-
economically disadvantaged groups as “innately weak and credulous” (Jenkins 2008 p.113).
Additionally, such laws reinforce existing social categories by weakening the prospects for
people to change their own identities, thereby functioning to maintain the status quo.
In A Critical Introduction to the Study of Religion, Craig Martin addresses this tension
directly, pointing to the ways in which power is able to manifest according to definitions of
“authority.” He discusses an idea picked up by Hindu nationalists movements in which Hindu
identity is grounded in relation to “Bharta” (the native name of India) much like how Israeli’s
view Israel as the basis of their identity. As such, these movements, like the BJP, view
alternative identities (like Muslims and Christians) as foreign and unnatural to Bharta (Martin
2014 p.155). Therefore, according to this logic, the conversion experiences of marginalized
communities, like dalits, threatens the legitimacy of the Hindu state. In order to combat this, the
state relies on claims of authenticity in order prevent such trends, legitimate national identity,
and spawn Hindu cultural nationalism (Jha 2009 p.14).
The state's proposed anti-conversion legislation and its ambiguity largely enables the
state to use their political authority in order to make claims of authenticity. That is, the state’s
interpretation of what constitutes “forced” or “coercive” conversion, especially if specifically

11. 11
targeted at lower castes, would allow the state to legally decide what “authentic” conversion
looks like, or who can “authentically” convert. Such claims, like Martin suggests, “can function
to award special authority to one group” (Martin 2014 p.158).
Through these claims of authenticity, the state exercises its authority, and thereby further
legitimates operative social hierarchies. Theorist, Peter Berger, discusses this process of
legitimation, and its primary function of “reality-maintenance” (Berger 1967 p.32). He argues
legitimation functions to maintain social orders on both an objective and subjective level. The
legitimation the BJP is using for pushing forth this legislation, thereby works to maintain the
current social order of Indian society. For Berger religion plays an important role in this process
in that it has been the most historically widespread and effective instrument of legitimation.
Now, while the BJP is not directly employing religious legitimation, it is using its perspective as
a Hindu nationalist party in order to legitimate the religious order. In this context, we also see
Berger’s conception of a feedback loop operating in that the state is making claims about what is
or is not authentic but they are using previously established legitimations as proof of why this
legislation is needed.
Reconversion Phenomena:
Programs that promote people to “reconvert” back to Hinduism have continued to gain
momentum, and are widely supported by the ruling BJP. This activity is considered largely to be
a reaction against Christian and Islamic conversion in India (Vandevelde 2011 p.34). Currently,
reconversion programs are typically coordinated by Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS)
organizations, with the Vishva Hindu Parishad (VHP) playing the leading role (Vandevelde 2011
p.40). The RSS is a right-wing, Hindu-nationalist organization. Both the VHP and BJP belong to
the larger umbrella of Hindu nationalists organizations led by the RSS. The VHP was established

12. 12
in 1964 “in direct response to the perceived threat from Christianity, Islam, and the ‘third
religion,’ Communism,” and it started its reconversion activity in 1980 following the mass
conversion of about 3,000 outcastes to Islam (Vandevelde 2011 p.40). As a political wing of the
RSS, the BJP allows the RSS and VHP to carry out religious conversion and openly promote
reconversion activities, justifying this move as a step to “banning” conversion all together.
However, concerns have also been raised as a result of the reconversion activities of the
state, especially with the BJP taking power. Much like the concern the state has expressed with
mass conversions, these re-conversions often involve entire groups at once. Therefore, the same
possible elements of coercion and force are arguably just as present in the state’s reconversion
activities, as it in mass conversions.
Proposed Legislation:
With Hindu nationalist groups historically adopting dedicated anti-conversion positions,
the BJP is certainly no exception (Vandevelde 2011 p.31). However, because of BJP’s increased
position of power as of 2015, this stance has experienced an increased probability of producing
actual change. Therefore, exploring this link between the political and religious, as it relates to
conversion, is both important and relevant, especially in light of the recent anti-conversion bill
proposed in late 2015.
Currently, there are five Indian states which have anti-conversion laws in place: Orissa,
Madhya Pradesh, Gujarat, Chhattisgarh and Himachal Pradesh. These laws are intended to
prevent forced conversions. While, in many cases, the laws enacted in these states do require
converts to receive prior permission or give notification before officially converting, they do not
ban conversions so long as the conversions are voluntary (Seervai 2015). The proposed national
legislation would troublingly operate more restrictively than this previous legislation, effectively

13. 13
“making it a criminal offense to change one’s religion from Hinduism to another faith or to no
faith at all.” Like the laws operating in Indian states, this national legislation would also require
that prospective converts give notification and receive permission prior to being able to convert.
Because of the state's historical precedent in assuming marginalized communities do not
have the capacity to make such decisions, the conversion processes which I have outlined above
would foreseeably be invariably criminalized (Kuby 2016). Additionally, legal officials
worldwide have expressed concern that if this legislation is made official, “some magistrates,
under pressure from hardline Hindu groups, might prohibit any conversions from Hinduism but
be unlikely to act against radical groups who are forcing non-Hindus to convert to Hinduism”
(Seervai 2015). This would essentially give the government increased control over people’s
choices as they relate to faith and religion. In supposedly “protecting” minorities from
manipulative conversion practices, the state is actually itself enacting unfair legislation that
would be coercive and forcefully intervene in personal religion. Now that the BJP is in a
heightened position of power, the future of conversions in India are becoming increasingly
unclear, and the threat to the constitutional ideal of secularism (in an Indian context) is at risk.
With BJP in power, in conjunction with this recent development, there is an increased layer of
complexity to the process of religious conversion in India.
Looking to the Future:
Though the proposed legislation has been tabled for next session, the anti-conversion
legislation continues to be pushed by the BJP and other Hindu nationalist groups. Regardless
though, other religious traditions will continue to be in direct tension with the goals of the Hindu
nationalist leaders of the BJP, who hope to preserve a “pure” India, one that relies on a Hindu
majority. Therefore, we must view the proposed policy with Article 25 of the constitution, which

14. 14
concerns freedom of religion, in mind. As such it becomes apparent that the BJP is leveraging
their position in power to manipulate the legislative process in a way that is unconstitutional, and
aids in further consolidating the power of the larger Hindu nationalist organization RSS.
Patterns of conversion to Christianity amongst lower-caste individuals and groups
illustrates the unique ways in which agency can be made operative, even under highly
constrained circumstances. As such, religious conversion is currently one of the only viable
modes for social transformation for certain demographics of Hindus. Therefore, preserving the
process is important, not only for individuals seeking out religious conversion, but because
religious freedom and choice is a necessary component of a successfully operating democratic
state. The current government’s increased interjection in matters of religious freedom functions
to diminish this agency of people, especially those who seek to leverage conversion as a
mechanism for attaining the autonomy and agency they may already be lacking.
This paper has demonstrated the ways in which religious experiences, like conversion,
can be both functional and theological. In doing so, it has also demonstrated the ways in which
the behavior of the state and conversion trends are reflective of one another. That is, in
examining the state’s proposed legislation, it is clear that such legislation is in response to a
larger trend of conversion. Likewise, conversion trends continue as the state intercedes in matters
of personal religion, causing religious adherents to grow increasingly disillusioned with the
discriminatory hierarchy in which they are expected to exist.
In a society where aptitude for religious adherence is unambiguous, shifting between
categories of various religious traditions can play a significant role in completely restructuring
one’s life in positive and productive ways. With this in mind, moving forward it is necessary to
expand understandings of religious conversion and the complex intersectionality that often

15. 15
accompanies it. It is important to utilize a hybrid approach for understanding religious
conversion in order to also acknowledge the intersectionality that complicates and contributes to
the current climate in India. In doing so, society can more aptly address and advocate against
such legislation, ensuring that the bargaining power of the poor and excluded is not lost, thereby
developing a more hospitable environment where diversity can be fostered in the long term as a
result.
Work Cited:
Berger, Peter L. "The Sacred Canopy: Elements of a sociological theory of religion." New York
(1967).
Bourdieu, Pierre, and John B. Thompson. Language and Symbolic Power. Cambridge, MA:
Harvard UP, 1991. Print.
"Constitution of India, Article 15: Prohibition of Discrimination on Grounds of Religion, Race,
Caste, Sex or Place of Birth." Constitution of India, Article 15: Prohibition of
Discrimination on Grounds of Religion, Race, Caste, Sex or Place of Birth. N.p., n.d.
Web. 23 Apr. 2016.
James, William. The Varieties of Religious Experience: A Study in Human Nature. London:
Longmans, Green, 1902. Print.
"Laws of India : The Orissa Freedom of Religion Act, 1967." Laws of India : The Orissa
Freedom of Religion Act, 1967. N.p., n.d. Web. 24 Apr. 2016.
Jenkins, Laura Dudley. "Legal Limits on Religious Conversion in India." Law and
Contemporary Problems 71.2, Galanter-Influenced Scholars (2008): 109-27. JSTOR.
Web. 24 Apr. 2016.

16. 16
Jha, J.N. 2009. Rethinking Hindu Identity. London: Equinox Publishing.
Kim, Sebastian C. H. In Search of Identity: Debates on Religious Conversion in India. New
Delhi: Oxford UP, 2003. Print.
Kuby, Sophia. "EU Turns a Blind Eye to Growing Human Rights Concerns in India."
EurActivcom EU Turns a Blind Eye to Growing Human Rights Concerns in India
Comments. N.p., 11 Apr. 2016. Web. 13 Apr. 2016.
Martin, Craig. A Critical Introduction to the Study of Religion. New York: Routledge, 2014.
Print.
Seervai, Shanoor. "The Arguments For and Against a National Anti-Conversion Law." Wall
Street Journal. Dow Jones & Company, Inc., 9 Jan. 2015. Web. 27 Apr. 2016.
Turner, Victor W. The Ritual Process: Structure and Anti-Structure. Chicago: Aldine Pub., 1969.
Print.
Vandevelde, Iris. "Reconversion to Hinduism: A Hindu Nationalist Reaction Against Conversion
to Christianity and Islam." South Asia: Journal of South Asian Studies 34.1 (2011): 31-
50. Web.