Consider what Ali Muhammad, a Merat, was told by an antagonist on 15 February 1996:

The icon-breaking episodes detailed in the previous chapter assumed that Muslims were responsible. Let us interrogate this assumption that came from the police administration, activists of religious nationalism and the anthropologist, that is, my own initial reaction, all of which came from our internalisation of the modern idea of Religion. Ali Muhammad's statement tells us of his bewilderment as some members of the family have been arrested for attacking gods, while some others are active followers of certain gods and goddesses. This is then the tension that is explored in these life histories—the introduction of the modern idea of religion as also what follows and what precedes it, not only temporally but as dissent. Mark the violence of Hindutva activists as they seek vengeance against members of their own community by attacking their ancestral deities which are, in effect, pagan practices from the standpoint of exclusive monotheism. The fraternal is not the site of either brotherhood or friendship but that of enmity.

This chapter is an ethnographic exploration of two interwoven strands, namely modernity and religion. It focuses on two interrelated fields, namely the work performed by the modern idea of religion and understandings of conversion. The two questions addressed are, What is the nature of religiosities before and after the advent of the modern idea of religion? What are perceptions and articulations of ‘conversion’?