Shri Kanayalal M. Talreja was born on 10th August 1936 at Hayat Pitafi (Shadani Nagar), Taluka Mirpur Mathelo, Distt. Sukkur, (Sindh, now in Pakistan). After the partition of the country, he stayed in Sindh for 17 years, and obtained M.A. Degree in English literature from the University of Sind in 1962. He secured first position at four University examinations : Matriculation in 1955, First Year Arts in 1956, Intermediate Arts in 1957 and B.A. (Hons.) in 1959; and was, therefore, awarded four medals by the Governor of West Pakistan. He launched his career as a primary teacher and reached the position of lecturer in English at Government College Sukkur (Sirsh). In Sindh he fought dauntlessly for the rights of Hindus, and championed the cause of the depressed and down-trodden.
He migrated to Bharat in 1964. He served as Senior Lecturer in English at C.H.M. College Ulhasnagar (Mumbai) for ten years from 1965 to 1975. On account of his devotion, dedication and dashing
Shri Kanayalal Talreja has addressed through this small book the Hindu law-makers and law-enforcers of our country, as is amply clear from the title of the book. This is enough for the pseudo-secularists to jump to the conclusion that the approach of the book is wholly communal and wants to divide the law-makers on purely communal and religious lines. All these years they have been attempting to create an atmosphere in the country where even a mention of the term 'Hindu' would be enough to put a scare in any well-meaning educated individual's mind and inhibit him from expressing his free opinion on matters pertaining to the Hindu society for fear of being dubbed as communal and narrow-minded. Once such an atmosphere is created, so the pseudo-intellectuals think, there is no need for them to take the trouble of refuting well argued propositions (as is the case with the author of the present book) and continue to dominate the intellectual firmament by clinging to their time-worn and obsolete ideas.
The root-cause for this state of affairs lies in the inability of the English language to give a correct synonym for the term `Dharma'. They wrongly equated it with religion, though religion forms only a part of dharma. Dharma also encompasses in its fold the socio-politico-economic systems, which are necessary to maintain harmony between the individual and the society,.between individual and the environment, between the human society and environment, between the whole universe and the immanent `Chaitanya' or the Almighty and between the individual and the Almighty. Only the last relationship between an individual and the creator, comes under the realm of religion and the correct synonym for this in the Hindu parlance is `pantha', `sampradaya' or `upasana paddhati'. All the confusion prevalent today about Hinduism or Hindutva is because of this wrong connotation of dharma.
The Supreme Court has, however, given the correct interpretation of the word 'Hindu' by saying that it is not a religion but way of life. The three-Judge Bench headed by Justice J.S. Verma, in it's verdict of 11th Dec. 1995 says, ''Unlike other religions in the World, the Hindu religion does not claim any one prophet; it does not worship any one God; it does not subscribe to any one dogma; it does not believe in one philosophic concept; it does not follow any one set of rites or performances; in fact it does not appear to satisfy the narrow traditional features of any religion or creed. It may broadly be described as a way of life and nothing more.''
This way of life is based on the principle of 'unity in diversity', which allows everybody to choose his own way of worship that is best suited for his temperament and requirement. He has also been given the freedom to reject any religion if he so likes. But at the same time he is expected to respect other people's sentiments or their way of worship as well. The famous verse from `Shivamahimna stotra' which Swami Vivelcananda quoted in his address to the 'Parliament of Religions' in Chicago in 1893, is the essence of Hinduism :
''Just as the different rivers, meandering through straight or curved paths, ultimately go and mingle into the ocean, so also, the different paths undertaken by different seekers according to their likings. ultimately lead you on to the Almighty.''
This catholicity of outlook, however, came into direct conflict with the attitude of the Semitic religions who talked of 'we' and 'they'. They divided mankind into peoples of faith on the one hand, and benighted infidels on the other, people who were saved and people who were damned. Their rejection and hatred of 'other' is written in capital letters in their doctrines and in the pages of history. A single source of inspiration, a single sonship or a single prophethood has led to the concept of an exclusive brotherhood. A priviledged revelation has led to the concept of a chosen people or a chosen church. This concept made their morals tribal and their social organisation power-oriented. Their organisation is eminently suited for outward political expansion - though the religious dimension is not altogether lacking and it still does bring spiritual solace to their many followers. Hinduism on the other hand always spoke of 'man' and not of a priviledged brotherhood or church. It did not divide mankind into 'we' or `they'. It talked of `vasudhaiva kutumbakam' - the whole world as one family.
The semitic religions are still targeting the people following other faiths. They think that God has ordained them to forcibly bring the hell-bound souls on to their 'only correct' path. This has been the root cause for all the religious strife during the last two millenniums, not only between the Christianity and Islam, or between Christianity or Islam on the one hand and Hinduism and other pagan cultures on the other, but also amongst their own co-religionists due to minor theological differences or national aspirations.
The Hindu tradition has withstood the onslaught of exclusivist Islam and Churchianity for the last eight and two centuries respectively, though a sizeable section of the society went out of its fold with disastrous national, political and social consequences. We gave ourselves a secular political constitution, which was in keeping with the Hindu tradition, and accorded the right to profess, practise and propagate their religion to each religious group. But the proselytising religions have taken it to mean that it also gives them the freedom to convert. The third Assembly of World Council of Churches held in 1961 suggested an amendment to the definition of ''freedom of religion'':
8(c). It includes freedom to practise religion or belief, whether by performance of acts of mercy or by the expression in word or deed of the implications of the belief in social, economic and political matters, both domestic and international.
The Supreme Court of our country has however in its verdict held clearly that the right to propagate one's religion does not include the right to convert. But inspite of that huge funds from Western and Arab countries are pouring into our country with the declared objective of converting weaker sections of the Hindu society, specially the scheduled castes and the scheduled tribes.
Shri Kanayalal Talreja wants to draw the attention of law- making and law-enforcing agencies towards the destructive consequences that may ensue if conversion is not stopped by proper legislation. In doing so he has cogently built up his case with strong irrefutable arguments and relevant opinions of renowned personalities. He has culled important verses from the Holy Quran and the Holy Bible to bring out the temperament of the proselytising religions. He has also not ignored the verses with positive contents which the apologetics of both Islam and Christianity often cite to prove the peaceful nature of the teachings of their religions. But those who want to pursue their proselytising agenda with a political motivation take recourse to the negative verses, which impart a violent meaning to these religions which the Hindu society is very much worried about.
**Contents and Sample Pages**