DISKUS Vol. 3 No. 2 (1995), pp.74-82

RESEARCH REPORT

Self-accounting for Conversion by Western Devotees of Modern Hindu Religious Movements.

Bob Exon
Postgraduate student
Department of Theology and Religious Studies, 
University of Leeds, 
Leeds 
LS2 9JT, UK



When I began my research just over a year ago, my intention was to look at contemporary sectarian Hinduism in Britain in such a way as to establish a `bridge' between the existing work on Hinduism as a `community religion' and a personal interest in modern Western religiosity.  I planned to make a comparative study of certain neo-Hindu religious groups with a `Western' membership, and to structure that study through an analysis of the conversion/affiliation experiences of those Western members or devotees.<1>  My initial strategy was to review the literature on conversion studies in search of a suitable (and I hoped, in my naivety, the definitive) theory of conversion and to begin to collect conversion accounts by personal interview and from printed (auto-) biographies and other sources.  

It quickly became evident that firstly no such `definitive' theory or model of conversion existed, or might even be possible, and secondly much of the work that had been carried out in the field was inadequate for the task of framing the diverse accounts that individual devotees give of their own experiences.  With this realisation, my own focus of interest began to shift away from a sociological study of the particular groups in question to an analysis of these individuals' personal testimonies and `spiritual (auto)-biographies'.

Examples of the diverse ways in which devotees may account for their experiences and `conversion' are found in the following quotations, all of which are taken from interviews with Sai Baba devotees.  Carol,<2> for example, talked in terms of a natural progression, and of the time being right, in what might be called a `maturational' model:

     "I think I was `ripe' for that at the time... There is a saying that when you're ready the guru comes along; when it's the right time the right thing comes along.  It was exactly the right time for me to get involved with Sai Baba because his teachings were so appropriate to my life."

Rachel, on the other hand, understood her coming into contact with the Sai Baba group in Bradford not just in terms of a theoretical belief in re-incarnation, but with the conviction that in a previous lifetime she had lived in India and had already had a relationship with Sai Baba.  Her experiences were reported in terms of a process of remembering and `return'; of rediscovering knowledge and memories she believed she already had:

     "In my case it's not really like a conversion, it's more like a re-awakening...  Have I converted?  No!  I've just come home!" <3>

Another devotee, Robbie, made the distinction between conversion as a lateral shift in affiliation and what was for him the more important process of deepening faith:

     "No, there's no conversion... probably `going deeper'.  Conversion is only moving across, at the same level; it's just choosing which form of worship to do... so that's not important.  But what's happened [in my case] is that I've actually been given the opportunity to go deeper into a religion.  I've not found the waters yet... but [it] certainly helped me to go deeper."

Peter, in contrast, had a background of several years' intensive meditative practice and the exploration thereby of altered states of consciousness and the `paranormal'. His conceptualisation of both his own spiritual quest and the notion of `conversion' was informed by these former experiences:

     "No conversion is ever complete until you reach paramatma... until you give up the body [and] become eternally unified with the whole.  Even in transcendental states there's still a sense of duality; the sense of there still being a creation.  The fullest extent of conversion is when that creation ends and there's not even the slightest concept of otherness."


These quotations are not offered as a comprehensive list of the ways Sai Baba devotees model their conversion experiences, but they do serve to confirm the diversity of self-accounts being presented even within an (as yet) relatively small sample of members from one particular neo-Hindu movement.  Such diversity in itself represents something of a challenge to Western models of conversion and suggests that these models may be inadequate for the task I have set myself.

As well as personal accounts by individual devotees, the teachings and rhetoric of the Sai Baba movement also represent a challenge not only to established theories of conversion, but also to the very notion of `conversion' itself.  Throughout the ample material printed and distributed by the movement there is for example frequent reference to the notion of the `unity of all faiths'.  In an introductory pamphlet for new devotees one is informed that:

     "[Sathya Sai Baba] invites people to go to Him, and to experience Him, and having done so to return to one's own religious community and be a better Christian, a better Hindu, or a better Buddhist.  He says one should not change one's religion.  He says, `Let the different faiths exist, let them flourish, let the Glory of God be sung in all languages and in all variety of tunes.'  That should be the ideal." <4> 

This universalist message is also evident in the educational programmes of the movement.  Both the internal Bal Vikas programme and the `Education in Human Values' programme designed to support the moral education of children of all religious backgrounds (or none) in state schools <5> are based on values identified not as religious, Hindu or even Sai Baba values, but as the universal human values of love, peace, truth, right conduct and non-violence.  Such universalist and inclusive rhetoric would appear to render the concept of `conversion' redundant.


Conversion and religious authority

Approaching the theme from another angle (and making a tangential connection with the `Authority' theme of the BASR conference at which this short report was presented), Donald Taylor distinguishes two levels or types of authority within the Sai Baba movement. One is the charismatic authority of Sai Baba himself (as the avatara of the current age), the other the legal-rational authority of the movement at the functional level.<6>  The distinction between these forms of authority could be said to parallel individual self-identity as, on the one hand, a `devotee' and, on the other hand, a `member' of the movement in question.  The `devotee' submits to the authority of the charismatic leader, whereas the `member' submits to the authority of the movement, through adherence to the established rules and regulations and participation in the activities of the local group.  

Among members interviewed to date, many explicitly or implicitly confirm this distinction, often in terms of having both a sense of a personal relationship or direct line of communication with Sai Baba, and a practical involvement with the movement through the activities of the local mandir or the charitable organisations and activities it supports.  There is, inevitably, an interrelationship between these two `levels' of identity and involvement but their relative significance differs in each account. Consequently, when discussing patterns of conversion and affiliation it is necessary for the writer to be clear about whether one is referring to individuals as members, as devotees, or as both. In this regard, the theoretical distinction between `conversion' and `recruitment' becomes worthy of further consideration.

I have suggested that Western theories of conversion may be inadequate when applied to the self-accounts already quoted, and possibly also, by implication, in any wider analysis of Hinduism or neo-Hindu religious movements.  There is not space in this short report fully to rehearse the arguments for this claim, but among the key inadequacies of Western theories of conversion might be numbered (1) the inclination to characterise conversion primarily in terms of changing affiliation, (2) the tendency towards conceptualising the processes of conversion in terms of an inclusive sequential stage-model, (3) the failure of researchers to pay sufficient regard to gender (and other) differences in relation both to the experiences themselves and to the subsequent accounts of those experiences, and (4) an apparently competitive quest among and between workers in different fields to generate the `definitive' model or theory.  

It seems to me however that there are some concepts and ideas that have emerged from Western research which may prove quite useful in any wider consideration of conversion, including that in the Hindu context.  Travisano, for example, makes the useful distinction between conversion and `alternation'.  `Conversion' for Travisano is reserved for a change in orientation, with a clear discontinuity of belief or world-view; that is, an active rejection of a former position in order to take on the new. `Alternation' by contrast involves change without compromising the essential continuity of perspective; the individual adapting, building upon or `expanding' on what has come before.<7>  

James Richardson drew upon Travisano's paper when he characterised the contemporary Western religious scene as one of `an age of alternation' and went on to acknowledge the growing incidence and significance of multiple affiliation in religious biographies.  Richardson is particularly noted for coining the phrase `conversion careers' to represent serial patterns of multiple affiliation<8> and for stimulating the debate about `passive' and `active' models of the convert, suggesting that there had been a paradigm shift in conversion studies from the former to the latter model.<9>  This debate of course continues in relation to arguments about coercive recruitment techniques (`brainwashing') and the prevalence in medical and legal circles of 'passive' models which justify the actions of anti-cult campaigners and `deprogrammers'. Although it has been important to explore the contrast between ideas of the individual as the active agent or passive victim in the conversion process, I would suggest that the debate has at times become based on an over-simplified 'either/or' (i.e. active/passive) distinction.  In individual biographies there may often be a degree of ambiguity around this issue.  Rachel, for example, who as noted above characterised her experiences in terms of the recollection of `memories' from a previous existence, was unclear who was in charge of what was going on:

     "I think it was me making it happen, in the sense that I was relearning, remembering all the things I had learnt in previous lives.... which is down to me.  But at the same time there was also a feeling that I didn't have control over things.  It was like being in a river, and the river was taking me... the river being Swami [Sai Baba], God."

Another researcher whose empirical and theoretical work in the field demands mention here is Larry Shinn, for his studies of ISKCON <10> (another of my future `target' groups) and his more recent general contributions to conversion studies, not least within the `brainwashing' debate.<11>  An important distinction to which Shinn regularly refers is between conversion process and conversion decisions. In any given biography there is likely to be evidence of continual transformational processes taking place, but these will usually be punctuated with incidents of conscious decision-making by the individual concerned, and the pattern of relationship between the two is likely to be different in each biographical account.  Associated with this distinction is the notion of `conscious alignment' between the world-view/belief system of the new member and that of the group or movement, achieved through various processes of socialisation and education, individual self-reflection and the provisional adoption of the `convert' role.  Although Shinn possibly over-emphasises the conscious dimension, this model nevertheless moves on from the simple active/passive debate to a model in which the individual is neither controlling agent nor victim, but is engaged in a two-way process of self-conscious negotiation and relative `alignment' with the group in question.


Conversion in a Hindu context.

Turning now to a consideration of the notion of conversion from a broader Hindu perspective, if one is able to talk of `conversion' at all in this context it would not be in terms of changes in belief or adherence to a set of doctrines; the focus would be on behaviour rather than belief. It has been suggested by Paul Hiebert that the Hindu world-view emphasises the personal and unique character of a person's spiritual quest towards self-realisation and liberation (moksha), determined by individual svadharma.<12>  In addition to the prescribed duties of svadharma, the individual also exercises personal choice of spiritual path (sadhana). With many possible roads to salvation ("there are many paths up the mountain") any notion of conversion might be better framed in terms of a commitment to action ("embarking on the journey"), rather than the completion of a process ("arriving at one's destination").  

Although this approach would not necessarily apply in all Hindu contexts (e.g. in sects like ISKCON with a well-defined and exclusive theological perspective and world-view), any notion of Hindu inclusivity, such as that of the Sai Baba movement, would appear to render the concept of conversion itself quite meaningless.  This is not to suggest, however, that conversion studies have nothing to contribute in the Hindu context, but that religious studies' scholars perhaps need to develop an understanding (a model or theory) of religious experience and transformation that encompasses a wider range of religious perspectives, including those of contemporary Hinduism, than those to which conversion studies have already been addressed.<13>

It is interesting that the notion of Hindu inclusivity, where it is found, is often invoked in positive terms as the foundation of Hinduism's characteristic attitude of tolerance and non-dogmatic flexibility.  Anecdotally, one has also heard it invoked as a justification for dismissing Hinduism as shallow, contradictory and lacking in any clear philosophy or message.  In a similar way, contemporary (modern) patterns of multiple religious affiliation might also be `dismissed' as shallow and inauthentic.  Reference to `new age' religiosity in terms of its eclectic "pick and mix" approach, making selections from the "supermarket shelf" of diverse religious, cultural and lifestyle options, often implies a certain insincerity and fickleness on the part of the individuals so constructing what are perhaps quite novel, unique and private religious `portfolios'.  The point I would make here is that while multiplicity of this kind may sometimes foster shallowness and insincerity, multiple religious affiliation need not necessarily imply superficiality and inauthenticity.  Individuals may well report and value their own encounters with new or multiple traditions (whether serially or concurrently) and claim a strong sense of continuity and consistency (of `broadening their outlook' and `deepening their faith' whilst retaining a focus on an underlying or universal `truth', for example) within a dynamic framework of transformational process.  If individuals themselves report such a sense of existential continuity, then religious studies' scholars should at least admit the possibility that multiple affiliation is an authentic option for some religious people in the modern context.  If so, then theories and models of `conversion' need to account not only for interest and involvement in particular Hindu religious groups, as suggested above, but also for patterns of multiple affiliation such as those associated with NRMs and `new age' religion, including affiliations involving a Hindu element.

One possible way forward in this venture is to focus not on `conversion' as such, however it may be understood or defined, but on an analysis of spiritual biographies and the notion of `faith development'.  In this regard, James Fowler's endeavour to generate a maturational stage-model of faith development has been of some interest.<14>  Although much of Fowler's detailed theory demands critical analysis and may prove problematic in application, nevertheless the broad notion of `faith development' speaks well to the principle of existential continuity reported by many devotees.  It is interesting to note, as one studying Hinduism, that in his consideration of the notion and definition of `faith' Fowler alights on the Hindu term sraddha as the most valuable of many options drawn from a range of religious and scholarly sources.  Sraddha is defined in terms of faith as `an act of aspiration', emphasising that faith itself is best viewed as a verb rather than a noun, a dynamic process and open-ended act of striving towards (perhaps never attaining) some transcendental goal or ideal.  Within such a framework, any notion of `conversion' which implies some sort of completion, end-point or ultimate attainment would seem not to be at all appropriate.

I conclude this report by identifying a few of the key issues that have arisen to date, and which I expect to explore further over the coming months and years.  Methodologically, the questions around autobiographical subjectivity, biographical reconstruction and the role of language in processes of religious transformation will continue to challenge any who wish to adopt a broadly phenomenological approach to religious studies.  Not unrelated to this, and once again linking to the theme of the conference, is a consideration of the authority of the devotee.  Having located primary authority with the devotees, and endeavouring to work within frameworks they themselves define (explicitly or implicitly) through their self-accounts, any models employed or generated to structure and analyse their experiences should ideally take account of all the testimonies collected and the different frameworks defined therein.  Several such themes have already been suggested in the quotations from devotees, such as the inclusivity/exclusivity of Hindu world-views, the understanding of re-birth and karma, the nature of faith, etc..   Another theme of major significance, not yet noted but which one would expect to find in the biographies of many individuals, and certainly within the wider Indian religious context, is of course the role of the guru and the nature of the guru-disciple relationship.

Taking a cue from the characterisation of modernity in terms of the provisionality of knowledge <15> and the `institutionalisation of doubt', <16> the notion of `provisional faith' is one that also presents itself here, not as a condition that pertains only in the early stages of encounter with a new group or perspective but as an on-going characteristic of what it is to be human, or to be `modern'.  This would seem to sit well with the `sraddha' definition of faith as a continuous act of aspiration presented above, although if one accepts `faith' as a verb, then it would be better to talk in terms of `provisional belief' rather than `provisional faith'.  If belief is understood as a category of knowledge, then provisionality of belief may also be said to characterise the modern condition.<17>  Within such a dynamic framework, the relationship and contrast between change (the transformational processes of `conversion') and (the reported sense of existential) continuity offers an interesting theme for further development.  

A final thought, taking my lead from James Richardson (1980), is the possibility of generating a typology not of conversion itself but of the various patterns of multiple affiliations for which Richardson coined the phrase `conversion careers'.  Since the term `conversion career' seems to refer specifically to serial patterns of multiple affiliation, and as I would also like to acknowledge and account for concurrent multiple affiliations, I favour the more general expression `spiritual biography' over `conversion career'.  A useful contribution to Religious Studies, therefore, might be an inclusive typology of spiritual biographies which accounts not only for those aspects of religious experience that have already been categorised under the term `conversion', but also those transformational events and experiences that do not so easily fit Western definitions of conversion, such as those reported by members of some modern Hindu religious groups to be found in Britain today.


Notes

<1>. One group immediately available to me was the Sathya Sai Baba movement, and most of my comments for this report are drawn from my work with members of the two Sai Baba groups in Bradford.

<2>. I use pseudonyms throughout.

<3>. The notion of conversion as 'return', curiously, resonates with early Biblical references in which what was later translated as 'conversion' implied a certain 'turning back' or 'returning home' to an original relationship with God, or to the state of divine grace.

<4>. Sathya Sai Baba Council of the United Kingdom, 1991, 'Introductory Brochure for New devotees'.Sathya Sai Baba Council of the United Kingdom, London.

<5>. This applies primarily in India, but I understand that there has also been some INSET work organised in Bradford and elsewhere in Britain based on the EHV programme.

<6>. Taylor, Donald, 1987, 'Charismatic authority in the Sai Baba movement' in R. Burghart (ed), Hinduism in Great Britain. Tavistock, London, pp.119-133.

<7>. Travisano, Richard V, 1970, 'Alternation and conversion as qualitatively different transformations' in G P Stone and H A Faberman (eds), Social Psychology through Symbolic Interaction. Ginn-Blaisdell, Waltham, Massachusetts, pp.594-606.

<8>. Richardson, James T, 1980, 'Conversion Careers', in Society, 17:3, pp.47-50.

<9>. Ibid., 1985, 'The Active vs. Passive Convert: Paradigm Conflict in Conversion/Recruitment Research', Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 24:2, pp.163-179.

<10>. Bromley, David G and Shinn, Larry D (eds), 1989, Krishna Consciousness in the West. Bucknell University Press, Lewisburg.

<11>. Shinn, Larry D, 1993 'Who gets to define religion? The conversion/brainwashing controversy', in Religious Studies Review, 19:3, pp.195-208.

<12>. Hiebert, Paul G, 1992, 'Conversion in Hinduism and Buddhism' in H Newton Maloney and Samual Southard (eds), Handbook of Religious Conversion. Religious Education Press, Birmingham, Alabama, pp.9-21.

<13>. This would of course need to take into account the characteristically ethnic character of Hindu self-identity for many Hindus, determined by birth and related to caste.

<14>. Fowler, James, 1981, Stages of Faith: The Psychology of Human Development and the Quest for Meaning. Harper and Row, San Francisco.    Fowler, James,   Nipkow, Karl Ernst and Schweitzer, Fredrich (eds), 1991, Stages of Faith and Religious Development: Implications for Church, Education and Society. SCM Press, London.

<15>. For example Berger, Peter L. and Luckmann, Thomas, 1967, The Social Construction of  Reality. Penguin, Middlesex.

<16>. Giddens, Anthony, 1991, Modernity and Self-Identity. Polity Press, Cambridge.

<17>. This is not to imply that conversion is reducible to belief alone, but that the condition of provisionality applies to all aspects of religious experience, including belief, in the same way that it is said to apply in other areas of the 'modern' experience.

END