• This forum contains old posts that have been closed. New threads and replies may not be made here. Please navigate to the relevant forum to create a new thread or post a reply.
  • Welcome to Tamil Brahmins forums.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our Free Brahmin Community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.

Hindu homecoming? Case of India religious conversions rings false.

Status
Not open for further replies.

prasad1

Active member
Standing in front of a new mud-walled Hindu temple in this Bengali village, Mangal Murmu stroked his chin and described an invitation to a Hindu feast in January for the temple's opening.




He enjoyed the feast, he says, and when he was handed flowers, he was happy to lay them on the altar – as did others who were asked to do so. It was a matter of respect. The village of Kharmadanga is part of a “stone belt” region – providing rocks for construction across India – and is mostly made up of tribal Santhal people, who like Murmu are animist and worship a variety of gods. The village lies 140 miles north of Calcutta and is quite remote.



Yet last month, Kharmadanga made the national spotlight when Hindu groups claimed to convert 150 tribals here to Hinduism, including Mr. Murmu. Prestigious national newspapers reported that Christians and a handful of Muslims had accepted a new Hindu identity and faith in a special ceremony of fire. In a society often riven with religious and ethnic tensions, conversions to different faiths, especially in high numbers, are a loaded subject. An estimated one-fifth of India's 1.27 billion people belong to faiths or sects other than Hinduism.


Conversions to Hinduism, called ghar wapsi or “homecoming,” are a main aim of the Hindu fundamentalist groups around Prime Minister Narendra Modi, known collectively as the Sangh Parivar. The groups want to see India become 100 percent Hindu, arguing this is its correct and natural state of affairs.



Last spring, after Mr. Modi and his BJP party, a political wing of the Sangh Parivar, were elected, homecomings and conversions. Whenever the issue is raised, Modi responds with a studied silence that some view as signaling tacit support. Indeed, news of the 150 Kharmadanga conversions came on Jan. 28, one day after President Barack Obama ended a state visit to Delhi, where, among much bonhomie with Modi, the US president also sounded a note of concern about religious freedom for minority faiths in India.

“Every person has the right to practice his faith without any persecution, fear or discrimination,” Mr. Obama told a town hall meeting of youth in Delhi. “India will succeed so long as it is not splintered along the lines of religious faith.” The very next day Hindu leaders announced that some 150 tribal Christians took part here in a conversion ritual of fire.


“They all took a pledge to follow a Hindu way of life,” said Sachindranath Singha, state secretary in West Bengal of the Vishva Hindu Parishad, the largest Hindu fundamentalist group and part of the Sangh Parivar.

The Indian Express reported that seven Muslims were converted at the ceremony as well. Jugal Kishore, national secretary of the VHP, defended the conversions, telling reporters that, “We are not committing any sin by bringing back our people to our own religion. This is a service to our country and we will continue with the ghar wapsi.”



Yet back in Kharmadanga, Murmu is perplexed at all the attention. He says he and others did not convert to Hinduism, and that he is not Christian but a follower of the Saridharam animist belief. He just attended the temple feast, he says. “Some Hindu religious people invited the surrounding villagers at the inauguration of the temple,” says Murmu, a day laborer. “I came here to take part in the feast. When the Babas asked me to [offer] flowers … I could not disobey what the fatherly men said.”


When Murmu's neighbors told him they read in the paper he had converted to from Christianity to Hinduism, “I fell from the sky … all along my life I have been a follower of Saridharam.”

News of the purported mass conversion of tribals a day after Obama's speech caused a national stir. Several NGOs, along with the Monitor, traveled to the village and confirmed that no actual conversions took place, and that those named in India news reports were neither Christian nor Muslim.
Rather, the event and story appears to have been cooked up as propaganda and as a way to create momentum to force Hindu religious conversions elsewhere in the country.

CONVERSIONS APPEAR BOGUS


“No Christian or Muslim converted to Hinduism at the Kharmadanga ceremony,” says Herod Mullick, president of the Bangiya Christiya Pariseba, a Calcutta-based umbrella Christian group, who led a team to the village. “The claim of ‘reconversion’ is just bogus… some key information related to the ceremony, as published in the media, is untrue.” A different tribal NGO that sent a fact-finding team found that villagers named in national reports were not Christian but animist, though some said they had occasionally visited local churches, just as they had visited the opening ceremony of the Hindu temple.

They “had never been Christian at all,” said Subodh Hansda, deputy general secretary of the Adibasi Socio-Educational and Cultural Association in West Bengal. “They were not Hindu in the past.”
Mr. Mullick said the Sangh Parivar used faked conversions to motivate efforts elsewhere to convert Christians and Muslims. Hindu nationalists argue that all persons from the subcontinent are once Hindus, and should return to the fold. Hindus were forcibly converted to Islam and Christianity after these faiths reached India, they contend. In December the international president of the VHP argued for India’s 84 percent Hindu population to become 100 percent Hindu.


PAVING THE WAY TO A NEW LIFE


Manmohan Vaidya of the elite right-wing Hindu group Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) charges that churches are forcing Hindu tribals into changing their religion. (The RSS is also a branch of the Sangh Parivar.)

“Taking advantage of the weakness and ignorance of the tribes people, either fraudulently or using force or allurement, the churches have converted them for many decades or centuries," he says. "The tribal Christians have now come back to their senses …We are just paving their way to the new life. We are not using any force.” John Dayal, former national president of the All India Catholic Union, calls the charge of forcible conversion by the church "ridiculous." He said the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) sought "to put severe limitations on constitutional freedoms of faith, belief and conscience."

As for Christian missionaries, most work in areas with large Hindu populations. “How can they use force or fraud on anyone as members of the small minority community?” he says. “They would be lynched.”
So far, Indian Prime Minister Modi of the BJP has said nothing for or against the conversion program. One prominent Indian Muslim leader, Imam Umer Ahmed Ilyasi, head of the All India Organization of Imams, faults Modi for this. “This is the nation of Mahatma Gandhi,” he said, “all religions are meant to be free here, but Modi has failed to address the fears of minorities.

http://news.yahoo.com/hindu-homecoming-case-india-religious-conversions-rings-false-000000121.html

It is an insult to Hinduism
 
When Hindus were converted so called secularists were silent! Where were you when mass conversions take place! Now a small percent is returning back! Why cry wolf, wolf now!!
 
When Hindus were converted so called secularists were silent! Where were you when mass conversions take place! Now a small percent is returning back! Why cry wolf, wolf now!!

Vgeneji,
Unnecessarily you are making it personal. I do not get paid for conversion of Hindu to Muslim, or Muslim to Hindu.
I am for personal Choice in matters of Religion. I am not a sheep to be herded together. I blaze my own trail.

Kabir das says:

Laalan ki nahin boriyan, hansan ke nahin paat
Sinhan ke nahin lehade, aur sadhu na chale jamaat

Rubies don’t fill sacks, swans don’t fly in flocks.
Tigers don’t roam in herds, and a true seeker walks alone.

In my post:
News of the purported mass conversion of tribals a day after Obama's speech caused a national stir. Several NGOs, along with the Monitor, traveled to the village and confirmed that no actual conversions took place, and that those named in India news reports were neither Christian nor Muslim.
Rather, the event and story appears to have been cooked up as propaganda and as a way to create momentum to force Hindu religious conversions elsewhere in the country.


If conversion took place by force it is wrong. I was probably not born when mass conversion of Hindu to Muslim faith happened under Aurangzeb regime.
So instead of blaming the messenger look at the message.
If a conversion is sham, then like a reasonable person you must call it. If you are towing the RSS line I have nothing to say, I will just have to add you to my ignore list.

When I pointed out that your party person Hemamlini and Dharmendra converted to Islam to practice Polygamy you were conveniently silent. Your party mouthpiece to called me names but could not give an honest answer. Then falsely claims that they converted back to Hinduism for BJP. If they converted back to Hinduism then they are criminal for having multiple legal wife.

I expected an ounce of honesty from you. I am disappointed.

Saying that I am crying wolf, for stating a fact is bad simile. You say "crying wolf" because the Shepperd boy lied in that story. It seems you can handle truth.
I can not say it any better:
<font size="3">[video=youtube;UXoNE14U_zM]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UXoNE14U_zM[/video]

 
Last edited:
.... Now a small percent is returning back! ....

Returning back where? I reckon only to be a vote bank for the BJP to come to power and amass wealth, fooling the natives in the name of religion and by stirring up religous sentiments, which is what they have been doing for years.
 


When I pointed out that your party person Hemamlini and Dharmendra converted to Islam to practice Polygamy you were conveniently silent. Your party mouthpiece to called me names but could not give an honest answer. Then falsely claims that they converted back to Hinduism for BJP. If they converted back to Hinduism then they are criminal for having multiple legal wife.



Come on Prasadji..I am neither a BJP member nor RSS member...I believe in the greatness of motherland...So if someone is poking at us and making a mountain out of a mole hill, I thought of giving a rebuttal and will continue to do so...My question is if Christians can lure the natives, why not Hindus enticing the Christians back..Is it not fair play??
 
Come on Prasadji..I am neither a BJP member nor RSS member...I believe in the greatness of motherland...So if someone is poking at us and making a mountain out of a mole hill, I thought of giving a rebuttal and will continue to do so...My question is if Christians can lure the natives, why not Hindus enticing the Christians back..Is it not fair play??


Are you the only person born Hindu? Are you the only person born in India?
How about others in this forum, most of us posting are born in India, and almost all of them are born in Hindu family.

So who are you lecturing? I am not Pakistan or China that attacked India. I am criticizing or pointing out things that is not right it is in the spirit of Adi Shankara, Swami Dayanada Saraswati, Raja Ram Mohan rai and others who had the courage to point out, and improve the situation.

A comment against "the government" is not against the country. A comment against a "practice" is not against a religion. Try to understand the context. You are a smart man see past your prejudice.

If you go back to see my earlier post I posted so many times these lines.
"Janani Janma-bhoomi-scha Swargadapi Gariyasi"

The first rule of lecturing is to know your audience, and not make it up.
 
Last edited:
Returning back where? I reckon only to be a vote bank for the BJP to come to power and amass wealth, fooling the natives in the name of religion and by stirring up religous sentiments, which is what they have been doing for years.
Well, they are returning to their original fold whatever that may be, while discarding the "alien" garb that had been thrust on them by means of force or cunning.

An who are the "natives" if I may ask, and how are they differentiated from others? Admitting the possibility of natives (whatever that means), does it not follow that there might be a native religion?

Would you consider yourself a native? (if you deem it personal, you dont have to answer this).

Regards,
 

When I pointed out that your party person Hemamlini and Dharmendra converted to Islam to practice Polygamy you were conveniently silent. Your party mouthpiece to called me names but could not give an honest answer. Then falsely claims that they converted back to Hinduism for BJP. If they converted back to Hinduism then they are criminal for having multiple legal wife.

First, Dharmendra is not a Hindu, but a Sikh. Hemamalini is from Thengali Iyengar community. I don't think it is illegal if they became Hindus, as it is not clear whether Hinduism approves or disapproves polygamy.

But, some Hindus are having two wives.

The late Gemini Ganesan, who was a Telugu Brahmin (Mulkanadu Sect), had multiple wives.

One of my colleagues, who is no more and belonged to Mudaliar community, had two wives, married the sisters.

Hindu Law is not very serious about it.
 
Well, they are returning to their original fold whatever that may be, while discarding the "alien" garb that had been thrust on them by means of force or cunning.

An who are the "natives" if I may ask, and how are they differentiated from others? Admitting the possibility of natives (whatever that means), does it not follow that there might be a native religion?

Would you consider yourself a native? (if you deem it personal, you dont have to answer this).

Regards,


Mr Auh,

I appreciate your question, which everyone of us should ask ourselves I think.

We call ourselves brahmins because our father was a brahmin, whose father was a brahmin in turn and so on.

Somewhere down the lineage (or up the lineage) one of our forefather was the first to be a brahmin. What was he before he became a brahmin? perhaps he chose to belong to hindu religion of his own choice and discretion, converted from no-religion or from some other religion to hinduism. when he could use his discretion and choose to convert to a hindu, why not every individual choose to convert to a religion of his choice using his/her own discretion!

Or, was that forefather created from nothing, like the Adam of the Christians, even while the world was created and did God tell him 'You are a hindu, you shall call yourselves a brahmin and your descendants shall call themselves likewise'? If yes, where did he get his brahmin wife from? did God pull out his rib, make a woman out of it and gave her to him and said, 'this shall be your brahmin wife. you both shall beget children and they shall marry only brahmins'?.

please clarify sir.

I am an ignorant, un-enlightened soul sir. please bear with my naive questions sir. but i am making all efforts and attempts to break out of this ignorance, darkness and naivete, aspiring to be a little like, if not match, stalwarts and highly intelligent intellectuals like you sir.
 
Mr Auh,

I appreciate your question, which everyone of us should ask ourselves I think.

We call ourselves brahmins because our father was a brahmin, whose father was a brahmin in turn and so on.

Somewhere down the lineage (or up the lineage) one of our forefather was the first to be a brahmin. What was he before he became a brahmin? perhaps he chose to belong to hindu religion of his own choice and discretion, converted from no-religion or from some other religion to hinduism. when he could use his discretion and choose to convert to a hindu, why not every individual choose to convert to a religion of his choice using his/her own discretion!

Mr. BRAHMACHARI,

I presume then you are ok with the "ghar vapsi" thing since you seem to hold the view that there must have been a conversion of some sort along the way (from times immemorial, that is). You are toting the same line as the VHPs and the BJPs - so no feathers ruffled, eh?

Or, was that forefather created from nothing, like the Adam of the Christians, even while the world was created and did God tell him 'You are a hindu, you shall call yourselves a brahmin and your descendants shall call themselves likewise'? If yes, where did he get his brahmin wife from? did God pull out his rib, make a woman out of it and gave her to him and said, 'this shall be your brahmin wife. you both shall beget children and they shall marry only brahmins'?.

please clarify sir.

Since we are on the issue, perhaps we should also think of a scenario where there are many forefathers who created their own part of the world; and so the fight between their followers. Are you sure that there is only one "forefather"? We seem to be billions of humans here!

Some god had to pull a rib for the women while he was able to create a man out of no raw material; other gods created out of their body parts...

I am an ignorant, un-enlightened soul sir. please bear with my naive questions sir. but i am making all efforts and attempts to break out of this ignorance, darkness and naivete, aspiring to be a little like, if not match, stalwarts and highly intelligent intellectuals like you sir.
Years ago when I was in school, I happenned to be in the precincts of the csi church in coimbatore since there was a book fair of some sort. A man came and sat near me, smiled and introduced himself. John, he was called, he said. A white man, frail looks and unassuming attire. He spoke english well enough to be understood by Indians, and that probably meant that he had spent some time in India. He was from the US, he said. He asked me my name, and where I studied. He expressed genuine appreciation of my name as he correctly fitted me as a brahmin. Then he said that he was an ignorant and was not much enlightened, and he questioned me on the castes and the hierarchy prevelant in India. Finally he offered me the bible to which I politely refused. He understood.
 
Mr. BRAHMACHARI,

I presume then you are ok with the "ghar vapsi" thing since you seem to hold the view that there must have been a conversion of some sort along the way (from times immemorial, that is). You are toting the same line as the VHPs and the BJPs - so no feathers ruffled, e...
.

Sir, you seem to have grossly misunderstood my query. indeed im questioning the need for a ghar vapsi. why don't you let people follow whatever they wish. how is conversion or re-conversion to Hinduism a ghar vaapsi. after all ghar vaapsi is a relative perception. what have I to do with that john you met in Coimbatore and how is it relevant here. I have read the Bible though and that does not make me a Christian as much as mere reading bagwad gita does not make me a hindu, or mere wearing a poonul does not make me a Brahmin.

I think true ghar vaapsi would be what is written in gita 18:66
 
Last edited:
Sir, you seem to have grossly misunderstood my query. indeed im questioning the need for a ghar vapsi. why don't you let people follow whatever they wish. how is conversion or re-conversion to Hinduism a ghar vaapsi. after all ghar vaapsi is a relative perception...

Well, I was merely extending the logic you expounded in your earlier post i.e., at some point of time in the history of humans, there ought to have been a conversion of some sort. Given that mindset, how does it really affect your world view if some group does a conversion? In your view, there may, perhaps, be no need, but not in theirs. You have said that it is a relative perception - quite true. It may perhaps require reflecting on our attitude to understand that everyone is entitled to their opinion as much as we are entitled to ours. While opposing the need for a ghar vapsi, you are indirectly trying to enfore a one-sided view.

What is the direct opposition that you have with christians and muslims converting to hinduism? You have said that it is a political tool. Well, that could be said of any conversion here and elsewhere, and hence does not cut any ice.
 
For bjp fans who did not get the PM's memo:

Prime Minister Narendra Modi reached out to all minority communities across the country on Tuesday assuring them that ``his government would stand by individual’s right to freedom of faith.’’

“My government will ensure that there is complete freedom of faith and that everyone has the undeniable right to retain or adopt the religion of his or her choice without coercion or undue influence,” he told the gathering that included Minority Affairs Minister Najma Heptullah and leaders of the church. “My government will not allow any religious group, belonging to the majority or the minority, to incite hatred against others overtly or covertly.”
 
What modi said is pure hindutva as expounded by RSS, as defined by the supreme court, as practised by majority of Hindus. This cannot be a one way rule. Denigration of hindu gods, conversion by force, bribe, lure, selective secularism, turning a blind eye to religious terrorism - these are some of the issues that work against Hindus and ought to be addressed. Modi has to fulfill many of his promises - kashmiri pundit return, bangladesi illegal entry and stay, subversive subjects taught in minority religious schools, art 370, common civil code etc.
 
........ Well, that could be said of any conversion here and elsewhere, and hence does not cut any ice.

are christians, muslims, sikhs, buddhists, jains, zoroastrians, shintoists, bahaaists etc, vote-bank elsewhere? does any political party in any other country play caste-vote-bank politics? im not aware sir. yet another ignorance of mine. please enlighten me sir.
 
......“My government will ensure that there is complete freedom of faith and that everyone has the undeniable right to retain or adopt the religion of his or her choice without coercion or undue influence,” ....“My government will not allow any religious group, belonging to the majority or the minority, to incite hatred against others overtly or covertly.”

result of the severe drubbing in delhi elections preceded by attack on minority religious institutions!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
are christians, muslims, sikhs, buddhists, jains, zoroastrians, shintoists, bahaaists etc, vote-bank elsewhere? does any political party in any other country play caste-vote-bank politics? im not aware sir. yet another ignorance of mine. please enlighten me sir.

Sure sir, but please remember the saying "ignorance is bliss"... :)

My elsewhere is to be construed as the conversions happening outside "ghar vapsi", i.e., conversions enabled by christion missionaries and "love jihad" types. But you construed it differently to mean other countries. Well, let me play it along.

I'd like to make brief points for you to reflect on, based on the backdrop of your query.

1) How many nations are true electoral democracies? And to what extent is the mix of ethnic representation there? What is the % of mix of religion in such countries?
2) Among muslims or muslim dominated countries, to what extent are the fundamental rights exercised realistically (including the right to religion)?
3) Do other countries ban any conversion activities?

To have any fair debate we must have common grounds. Similarly to compare, we must establish common grounds and I have given you a few points towards that.

But I noticed that you have conveniently omitted my question
What is the direct opposition that you have with christians and muslims converting to hinduism?
Can you reply to this, sir? Do you mean to say that in India, when christians and muslims convert to hinduism, it is a political tool but not so when hindus convert to christians and muslims (in India)?
 
ok sir. your 'elsewhere' is conversion outside ghar vaapsi. but Christians and muslims are a miniscule in india and hence are not a significant vote bank. to garner votes among the remaining section, i.e. hindus, the only way is touch their religious sentiment, act as protectors of their religion. are christian missionaries really converting or is it something else. what do the missionaries gain by converting. what do foreign countries gain by funding conversion. the traditional institutions v.i.z RC, Protestant etc are not engaged in conversion. the pentecostals are again a miniscule where people voluntarily join following a born-again experience. for muslim population to match hindus in india through love-jihad, will never happen given the enormous number of hindus in india. there could only be stray incidents here and there. i do see any motive other than enlarging the vote-bank through ghar vaapsi. what do the prodigals gain by returning to 'ghar'.
 
Last edited:
ok sir. your 'elsewhere' is conversion outside ghar vaapsi. but Christians and muslims are a miniscule in india and hence are not a significant vote bank. to garner votes among the remaining section, i.e. hindus, the only way is touch their religious sentiment, act as protectors of their religion. are christian missionaries really converting or is it something else. what do the missionaries gain by converting. what do foreign countries gain by funding conversion. the traditional institutions v.i.z RC, Protestant etc are not engaged in conversion. the pentecostals are again a miniscule where people voluntarily join following a born-again experience. for muslim population to match hindus in india through love-jihad, will never happen given the enormous number of hindus in india. there could only be stray incidents here and there. i do see any motive other than enlarging the vote-bank through ghar vaapsi. what do the prodigals gain by returning to 'ghar'.

That is a well thought out argument. I wish I had thought of it. :lol

 
ok sir. your 'elsewhere' is conversion outside ghar vaapsi. but Christians and muslims are a miniscule in india and hence are not a significant vote bank. to garner votes among the remaining section, i.e. hindus, the only way is touch their religious sentiment, act as protectors of their religion. are christian missionaries really converting or is it something else. what do the missionaries gain by converting. what do foreign countries gain by funding conversion. the traditional institutions v.i.z RC, Protestant etc are not engaged in conversion. the pentecostals are again a miniscule where people voluntarily join following a born-again experience. for muslim population to match hindus in india through love-jihad, will never happen given the enormous number of hindus in india. there could only be stray incidents here and there. i do see any motive other than enlarging the vote-bank through ghar vaapsi. what do the prodigals gain by returning to 'ghar'.


Some of your above observations are not correct.

1. Muslims have sizeable population, especially in States like J&K, Bihar, West Bengal, Maharashtra, Kerala, Assam and recently in Delhi.

2. RC and Protestants are also engaging in conversion. One of my boss, who was a Protestant
fanatic, arranged marriage of one of his relatives to a Brahmin woman, a doctor by profession, and the marriage was performed as per Christian tradition and she was also converted.

Once there is change in demography, everything will change according to the dominant religion. North Eastern States are examples.
 
ok sir. your 'elsewhere' is conversion outside ghar vaapsi. but Christians and muslims are a miniscule in india and hence are not a significant vote bank. to garner votes among the remaining section, i.e. hindus, the only way is touch their religious sentiment, act as protectors of their religion.

sir, in school, after we proved certain theorems in mathematics, we used to add "vice versa" :) I see that it holds good in certain other cases also.

If we were to accept that religion is a vote bank then it follows that the minority would stand to gain more, by conversions, than the majority. Why? you ask. A minority, by its very nature of being so, has an implicit insecurity feeling and seeks those means through which it can strenghten its position. And the most effective tool is in increasing its population thereby strenghtening its representative voice.

It is also seen that in India the minority communities vote as a united lot; it is bargaining power in the hands of the minority religion representatives. More recently was the case of an imam urging their community to vote for a particular party in Delhi.

This line of argument is a no-brainer, really.

are christian missionaries really converting or is it something else. what do the missionaries gain by converting. what do foreign countries gain by funding conversion. the traditional institutions v.i.z RC, Protestant etc are not engaged in conversion. the pentecostals are again a miniscule where people voluntarily join following a born-again experience. for muslim population to match hindus in india through love-jihad, will never happen given the enormous number of hindus in india. there could only be stray incidents here and there. i do see any motive other than enlarging the vote-bank through ghar vaapsi. what do the prodigals gain by returning to 'ghar'.
There is google for the uninitiated. Statistical data is available for everyone to see. All these years, nobody (including you) talked about conversions, and suddenly there is much debate about "re-conversions"!

The political motive that you ascribe is either prevelant in both types of conversions, or, in none. It cannot be one-sided.

Christianity and Islam are the main religions that have thrived through "active" conversions; let us not belie ourselves otherwise. By "active", I mean to say that they voluntarily seek people and try to influence them, by whatever means available, to convert.

sir, when a religion diminishes in strength of numbers, it slowly starts to lose its identity - first through symbolism - of rituals, culture and tradition, and then, in spirit.

What else would a father expect when the prodigal son returns home?
 
Some of your above observations are not correct.

1. Muslims have sizeable population, especially in States like J&K, Bihar, West Bengal, Maharashtra, Kerala, Assam and recently in Delhi.

2. RC and Protestants are also engaging in conversion. One of my boss, who was a Protestant
fanatic, arranged marriage of one of his relatives to a Brahmin woman, a doctor by profession, and the marriage was performed as per Christian tradition and she was also converted.

Once there is change in demography, everything will change according to the dominant religion. North Eastern States are examples.

chandru sir,

i am not going to contend or argue saying i am correct. you may be correct. i only wonder how conversion is a threat. i am convinced about my faith. why should i care if my neighbour converts to another religion. even if i remain the only brahmin on earth, i will remain a brahmin (who lives by principles of eternal truth).

are not brahmins who have lived for years in the usa remaining brahmins, holding on to brahmin rituals, traditions and culture? i read about a brahmin community in trinidad, who migrated from bengal during first quarter of 20th century, observing hindu traditions more diligently with austere severity, than indians in india. there are temples where every festival is celebrated with pomp, more than in india.

it is all about conviction sir.

what percentage of rss, bjp, bajrang dal, vhp know hinduism, hindu scriptures etc. how many of them can recite bagwad gita from memory completely. let alone entire bagwad gita. how many of them could quote at least one verse from the gita. are not all they trumpets about hindutva and as champions and watchdogs of hinduism hypocrisy?
 
Last edited:
chandru sir,

i am not going to contend or argue saying i am correct. you may be correct. i only wonder how conversion is a threat. i am convinced about my faith. why should i care if my neighbour converts to another religion. even if i remain the only brahmin on earth, i will remain a brahmin (who lives by principles of eternal truth).

are not brahmins who have lived for years in the usa remaining brahmins, holding on to brahmin rituals, traditions and culture? i read about a brahmin community in trinidad, who migrated from bengal during first quarter of 20th century, observing hindu traditions more diligently with austere severity, than indians in india. there are temples where every festival is celebrated with pomp, more than in india.

it is all about conviction sir.

what percentage of rss, bjp, bajrang dal, vhp know hinduism, hindu scriptures etc. how many of them can recite bagwad gita from memory completely. let alone entire bagwad gita. how many of them could quote at least one verse from the gita. are not all they trumpets about hindutva and as champions and watchdogs of hinduism hypocrisy?

Yes sir you are right.
 
chandru sir,

i am not going to contend or argue saying i am correct. you may be correct. i only wonder how conversion is a threat. i am convinced about my faith. why should i care if my neighbour converts to another religion. even if i remain the only brahmin on earth, i will remain a brahmin (who lives by principles of eternal truth).

are not brahmins who have lived for years in the usa remaining brahmins, holding on to brahmin rituals, traditions and culture? i read about a brahmin community in trinidad, who migrated from bengal during first quarter of 20th century, observing hindu traditions more diligently with austere severity, than indians in india. there are temples where every festival is celebrated with pomp, more than in india.

it is all about conviction sir.

what percentage of rss, bjp, bajrang dal, vhp know hinduism, hindu scriptures etc. how many of them can recite bagwad gita from memory completely. let alone entire bagwad gita. how many of them could quote at least one verse from the gita. are not all they trumpets about hindutva and as champions and watchdogs of hinduism hypocrisy?

Conversion by anyone voluntarily is never a threat to others.

Organized conversion destroys peace and creates war because those that plan conversion in a an organized way believe they are the only one who has God by their side.
 
What else would a father expect when the prodigal son returns home?

What would the father think when the son is returned in a coffin? Or the son returns in Chains?
There are too many conditions that a father may not want the son back.

Conversions should be up to the individual. There should be no coerced conversion. If some one is paying you (i doubt the whole premise) Million dollar, anybody would do a Hemamalini type conversion. And then claim they converted back. There is no faith involved, it is economy, and stupidity.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest ads

Back
Top