Resisting Religion by Religion

On October 14, 1965, Dr. Bhimarao Ambedkar, the architect of India’s constitution, announced that he was moving away from Hinduism, which he embraced since his childhood, and converting to Buddhism. After an extensive process of search and research, he finally came into conclusion that he rejected Hinduism and Hindu philosophy.

In his point of view, Hinduism cannot be separated from the caste system which trapped him as a Dalit (the untouchable or the outcaste). He believed that religion will be no more whenever it preserves oppression. When religion enslaves humanity, the answer will be this: leave this religion. His conversion to Buddhism is a symbol of resistance against years of caste discrimination and oppression upon his people.

However, not everyone agree with Ambedkar. His criticism is aimed at the Hindu fundamentalists who develop puritan spirit called as Hindutva. This spirit preserves inter-religious conflict in India and asserts negation of the others (of different faith). They believed that India is Hindu and Hindu is India. Therefore adherent of different religion should be regarded as second class citizen.

Although Hindutva is not dominant among modern Indian society, this movement’s voice is loud and it preserves conflict and caste discrimination across India. Consequently, resistance against Hinduism becomes medium of resistance for the marginal people. We would be amazed to hear about the recent fact in India.

On Sunday, 27th of May 2007, more than fifty thousand of tribals and dalits gathered at Mahalaxmi Race Course in Mumbai to commemorate the 50th anniversary of B.R. Ambedkar’s conversion. They held Dhamma Deeksha ceremony. These people came from various Indian regions to escape the rigid Hindu caste system and embrace the Buddhist faith in what is considered the largest mass conversion in the country. On October 2006, the similar event involved fifteen thousand people. Although some of them did not follow Hinduism, the Hindu leaders treated them as a part of Hindu and therefore justified the oppression upon them.

They were born again human. They took refuge in Buddhism because this is religion without proselytizing spirit which used to be political and attention on the institutional aspect of religion. And more importantly, Buddhism provides them the right answer about equality and justice among humankind.

This case indicates that whenever religion did not appear in peaceful form and respect humanity, its adherent will move away. When it is being rigid and nonnegotiable with the context, it will lose its prophetic mission. When religious institution becomes dominant, the politic of identity and power relation will take over.

Interestingly, Indian society regarded this conversion as an ordinary incident. Despite of some reactions from Hindu leaders, the conversion did not result any conflict. As a democratic country, India is an example for us. Preferring certain religion or embracing no religion is the right of every citizen.

Although the Indonesian constitution guarantees this freedom, conversion has always been huge matter in this country. Instead of being inward criticism and introspective medium for religion, we often blame and persecute anyone who move away from our religion.