जिन्होंने हिंदू धर्म को त्यागा...

[swaich]

Good question howevere a name can be integral part of a particular way of life. A way of life represents a culture and how you name and on what names are based are part of culture. A language and literatures are probably most important part of a culture and they shape the opinions on which people name their kids. Michael Porter would be alien to this culture.

John Abraham would also be an alien name? Shah Nawaz Khan? Jeje Lalpekhua? These names are not exceptions by the way. Their would be many others with such names.

A culture is bigger than just some specific type of names. If Hinduism is a way of life then these three names above would be a part of it as they are all Indian with a shared culture. And that is the diversity of Hinduism as a culture. Those ex-Muslims were already Hindus by culture. There was hardly a need for conversion.

But the funny thing is that by offering benefits and converting some alleged Bangladeshi Muslims, the right-wing has fallen into its own trap. Its following the methods of the Catholic Church which it so vigorously opposed all these years.

 

[virj]

Well, dont know what is your point however John Abrahim is indeed a foreign name. These days some people choose modern international name. In any case you are free to choose any name for your kid and still be a Hindu. As a culture it doesn't restrict you like a relgion does.

Right Wing--I don't know what this word mean but there are people in all religion who try to comvert other people by force, by money or by sermons.

 

[virj]

Sikhism doesn't denote a tag. Most Sikhs practicing it or we can generalize and say Sikhs do. There's a difference.

The goras converting to Sikhism in the West are not given any caste as there's no caste under the Granth sahib. But its different for Hinduism. There's an inherent varna/caste system in the religious texts of Hinduism which sanctions the caste system.

First of all learn the difference between caste and varna. There are some text as per those in a society there are basically 4 varnas (read again in a society not just Hindu society) which are based on one's occupation. Later some corrupted people exploited it but you can't put the blame on the religion/culture itself as such. These are our ancient texts and cannot be classified as Religious text.

If Sikhs are practising caste then in my eyes sikhism is failed as a religion.

 

[swaich]

Well, dont know what is your point however John Abrahim is indeed a foreign name. These days some people choose modern international name. In any case you are free to choose any name for your kid and still be a Hindu. As a culture it doesn't restrict you like a relgion does.

Right Wing--I don't know what this word mean but there are people in all religion who try to comvert other people by force, by money or by sermons.

How do you decide which is foreign? Is there a time limit on how long a person's ancestors should have been in India to be classified as non-foreign?

Btw John Abraham is a Syrian Christian name and they have been around for just 2000 years. Hardly foreign I'd say. Its a Hindu name by the cultural definition, just like yours and mine.

Hence, there's no specification of a type of name signifying a culture.

 

[swaich]

First of all learn the difference between caste and varna. There are some text as per those in a society there are basically 4 varnas (read again in a society not just Hindu society) which are based on one's occupation. Later some corrupted people exploited it but you can't put the blame on the religion/culture itself as such. These are our ancient texts and cannot be classified as Religious text.

If Sikhs are practising caste then in my eyes sikhism is failed as a religion.

Agreed, the followers exploited it but the idea was germinated and detailed in the texts. So which ones are the religious texts according to you?

 

[virj]

Well you can stretch it like rubber if you want but foreign means the origin is not Indian. No wise person would say John Abrahim is Indian/Hindu name. Sometime even if the origin is foreign it may considered as indegenious if it is very common. Hope it make sense to you.

 

[virj]

Agreed, the followers exploited it but the idea was germinated and detailed in the texts. So which ones are the religious texts according to you?

What is that idea? Can you quote original text? If there is no religion then how can there be religious text ?

I am a hindu and there is no religious book at least in my house.

 

[vdhillon]

Yes, makes sense, I like the comment bhai ... Thanks for exploring it in further detail.

Religion and cultural, both two distinct constructs, influence each other. Sometimes culture influences the religious practices e.g. varna system, similar marriage customs, etc followed across multiple religions of India. And some times religion influences culture e.g. arabization of muslim communities of India.

True, all Indians follow a caste/class system but texts of no other religion apart from Hinduism detail and classify society in Varnas. I am not trying to show Hinduism in a negative light but stating things as I understand.

Manu smriti details and solidifies the varna/caste based differentiation. From what I understand Rig Veda mentions the Varnas as a fluid concept but it acquires more defined and hereditary status in the later Vedas.

 

[vdhillon]

Not necessarily, some strains of Hinduism e.g. Arya Samaj is "suppose" to be CASTELESS and EGALITARIAN.

Sikhism doesn't denote a tag. Most Sikhs practicing it or we can generalize and say Sikhs do. There's a difference.

The goras converting to Sikhism in the West are not given any caste as there's no caste under the Granth sahib. But its different for Hinduism. There's an inherent varna/caste system in the religious texts of Hinduism which sanctions the caste system.

 

[vdhillon]

John Abraham would also be an alien name? Shah Nawaz Khan? Jeje Lalpekhua? These names are not exceptions by the way. Their would be many others with such names.

Agree

A culture is bigger than just some specific type of names. If Hinduism is a way of life then these three names above would be a part of it as they are all Indian with a shared culture. And that is the diversity of Hinduism as a culture.

Makes sense.

Those ex-Muslims were already Hindus by culture. There was hardly a need for conversion.
But the funny thing is that by offering benefits and converting some alleged Bangladeshi Muslims, the right-wing has fallen into its own trap. Its following the methods of the Catholic Church which it so vigorously opposed all these years.

Not negating it entirely, but I want to add that there is another way to look at it, these conversions highlight that there is no level playing field when it comes to conversion. When Hindus reconvert there is big hoopla, and when mass conversions continue unabated from Hinduism to other religions through economic enticement of financial weaker section and targeting of minors for conversion (NO fair INFORMED CONSENT), hardly any eyelids are raised. This brings the SKEWED (against Hindus) "rights to conversion" issue to the table for discussion as a national issue. So it is worth watching the debate with OPEN MIND to see where it leads.


PS: Overall, you came, you saw, zoom zoom and you blasted many comments, I liked most of those, you had few NEW POINTS (at least for me) to learn and think. So, many thanks. Please keep writing more

 

[vdhillon]

True, if we want to know someone or something then judge them by their ACTION, not words (empty preaching).

For example, I remember a study, they found that texts of most religions have verses that eulogize women, but they have disproportionately SEVERAL TIMES MORE VERSES THAT SHOW WOMEN AS SUBSERVIENT TO MEN. To quote one verse and say xyz religion is great because it puts women at higher padestal, while ignoring a much higher quantum of verses in the same religious text that treats women as men's property or substandard, it no good way. One has to analyze the whole text of a religion to make a quantitative analysis (number of verses) and qualitative analysis (actual actions of the followers) to make the judgement.

"Motive or reason is inconsequential. Lives lost are lives lost."
Well, if a guy kills another guy for revenge or another particular reason, it will not evoke as much concern as a racial or religious murders evoke. Because in latter case, there is a pattern. It may be followed by other similar type of crime. There is an ideology in latter crime which may be shared by many people not only culprit. Similarly upper caste Hindus are criticized for ill treatment of dalits, because it has something to do with their beliefs, for similar reasons Muslim can also be criticized for ill treating minorities and smaller Muslim sects.

 

[vdhillon]

Good point, I will extend it to say ALL RELIGIONS have failed to deliver what they promise.

A PRODUCT (including religion) must be judged based on its ACTUAL PERFORMANCE, not on its MARKETING BROCHURES (some verses that talk about peace, equality, etc). In fact all religion end up doing opposite of what they claim to do. Some people blame it on followers i.e. religion is good but followers are bad. Blaming the end-users (followers) for a failure of product (religion) is not good. Granted, some vested interests may misinterpret but some religion are more prone to misinterpretation because they may have few good verses (about peace, love, etc) but they have several times more verses on killing, forced conversions, zajia, jehad, dharam vudh, discrimination, INTOLERANCE, etc, hence (religions are... some religion more than others) very much enabler of divisiveness.

Without religion, we have one less reason to kill each other.

We can follow the good virtues (don't kill, don't steal, love each other, be kind, etc) without the superstition of mass-OCD-inducing rituals (religious rituals are nothing but MASS OBSESSIVE COMPULSIV DISORDER that followers practice daily to sooth their anxiety and they call it faith/ibadat/prayer/pooja) and dangerous divisive force called religion.

There is only one TRUTH, there is only one way to FIND AND PROVE IT...that is through RATIONAL SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE-BASED INQUIRY (not faith abased fluffy myths). Where the faith begins, rational reasoning stops, in that sense religion is also anti-knowledge, anti-further-discovery and anti-science.

If Sikhs are practising caste then in my eyes sikhism is failed as a religion.

 

[samarkadian]

You thought quite right. All Indians should adopt this way of life. It gives mental freedom. So no Muslim, Christians, Budhists, Sikh or Jains. All are Hindu in India. All should adopt Hindu names and customs as it is just way of life.

Upender Bhai, mental freedom at-least in present scenario is akin to be the slave of numerous useless cults and then getting exploited at the hands of astrologers,karmkaddi Bahmans. All these cults put together only make one fearful and when there are enough fears and issues in the life why one need to chain oneself to a greater complicated chain.

 

[swaich]

Not negating it entirely, but I want to add that there is another way to look at it, these conversions highlight that there is no level playing field when it comes to conversion. When Hindus reconvert there is big hoopla, and when mass conversions continue unabated from Hinduism to other religions through economic enticement of financial weaker section and targeting of minors for conversion (NO fair INFORMED CONSENT), hardly any eyelids are raised. This brings the SKEWED (against Hindus) "rights to conversion" issue to the table for discussion as a national issue. So it is worth watching the debate with OPEN MIND to see where it leads.


PS: Overall, you came, you saw, zoom zoom and you blasted many comments, I liked most of those, you had few NEW POINTS (at least for me) to learn and think. So, many thanks. Please keep writing more

I like looking at things with an open mind and the comparison is interesting. Don't you agree in both cases Hindus/Tribals converting to Christianity and Muslims converting to Hinduism, voices are raised? It doesn't become a national debate yes, but Hindu groups like the VHP regularly raise their voices either in Orissa, Jharkhand and Chattisgarh. Eg. Kandhamal riots or the burning alive of Graham Staines. There's reaction happening al right.

But stepping away from the above, I accept the concept of conversion. A man is free to choose his religion and change it for whatever reasons. If the Muslims or Christians are opposing what happened in Agra, they are being hippocratic. After all, these two religions have been spread the most by their respective missionaries.

 

[swaich]

Well you can stretch it like rubber if you want but foreign means the origin is not Indian. No wise person would say John Abrahim is Indian/Hindu name. Sometime even if the origin is foreign it may considered as indegenious if it is very common. Hope it make sense to you.

Your concept of what's foreign and what's Indian is biased and I dare say symptomatic of a closed mind and lack of exposure to the diversity that is India. Travel the North east, the South and away from the Hindi heartland and your definition of what's Indian will change.

 

[vdhillon]

Bhai, if I may rephrase your words you are trying to say that some elements are trying to politicize the conversion issue for the electoral gains, and your are singularly pointing put VHP. Yes, I would agree to that. They may be PARTIALLY DRIVEN by electoral gains, but they may want electoral gains to install the laws to eliminate anti-hindu bias when it comes to discrimination. Politicising the issue is good (politics should aim to become issue-based) provided it does not entail violence, exploitation, vote-bank with empty promises.

Not only VHP (they are outloud), more dangerous are Sick-Ull-re parties, Khangress is the culprit-in-chief (who created Bhindrawala and Punjab problem?, who fostered J&K terrorists through appeasement, who engages in religion-based appeasement which results in MASS, MULTI-GENERATIONAL, SYSTEMATIC, INSTITUTIONALIZED REVERSE-DISCRIMINATION against HINDUS/MAJORITY while keeping them divided in the name of CASTEs who they can never be one force to fight the religion based discrimination).

KEEPING AN OPEN MIND ALSO MEANS LET US BE NON-PARTISAN. Before we blame VHP, we have to take the bigger evils-in-action Khangress and pseudo-seculars to task (they had been in power through exploitation of these pseudo-secular dirty tricks), then we can come to the lesser

PSEUDO-SECULAR parties are more dangerous, a hidden enemy (aastin k sanp) is more dangerous, VHP toh jo dil mein woh munh mein, saaf saaf hai.

I have my own political preferences but I wont let it corrupt my ideology and issue-based support, I dont give clean chit to BJP/VHP but I will first prosecute the bigger evil of pseudo-seculars, khangress, UPA, Mulla mulayam, etc.

I like looking at things with an open mind and the comparison is interesting. Don't you agree in both cases Hindus/Tribals converting to Christianity and Muslims converting to Hinduism, voices are raised? It doesn't become a national debate yes, but Hindu groups like the VHP regularly raise their voices either in Orissa, Jharkhand and Chattisgarh. Eg. Kandhamal riots or the burning alive of Graham Staines. There's reaction happening al right.

But stepping away from the above, I accept the concept of conversion. A man is free to choose his religion and change it for whatever reasons. If the Muslims or Christians are opposing what happened in Agra, they are being hippocratic. After all, these two religions have been spread the most by their respective missionaries.

 

[vdhillon]

Good point.

Indian does not equate to HINDU-ONLY.

Hindu also does not mean INDIAN-only. Someone may have Latin, Greek or Arabic origin names specially if they belong to that race and yet be Hindu. e.g. go to any ISKON temple in west and you will find heaps of Hindu goras with Angreji names. Even Indian parents may chose a non-sanskritized name.

I suggest, instead of using the broader term "Hindu/Indian name", it is better to discuss this concept by using the more specific term "sanskritized name", which in MOST (not always) cases is Hindu/Buddhist of Indian origin.

Your concept of what's foreign and what's Indian is biased and I dare say symptomatic of a closed mind and lack of exposure to the diversity that is India. Travel the North east, the South and away from the Hindi heartland and your definition of what's Indian will change.

 

[abhikrana]

Indian culture has for thousands of year been Hindu (Way of life) culture. A culture based on peace, harmony, respect for and sanctity of life, welcoming others with open arms etc.

Yet over the ages, this culture was adulterated through non-peaceful measures by things of foreign origin including the faiths which assert supremacy over others. For more than a thousand years, Hindus have suffered enormously at the hands of these barbaric people from the west. There has been onslaught brought about upon Hindus both by sword and psychological pressure tactics.

The strength of the Hindu faith lies in the fact that it still flourishes despite all odds for thousands of years, though its area of influence has gradually constricted over these thousands of years to a region which we call India.

If the people re-convert to Hinduism as Ghar Wapsi the so-called secularists smell a rat and start crying foul. Is secularism a one-way street? Yes, to the educated lot whose minds have been conditioned to take that line of reasoning or perception irrespective of the ground realities which are just the opposite.

Your concept of what's foreign and what's Indian is biased and I dare say symptomatic of a closed mind and lack of exposure to the diversity that is India. Travel the North east, the South and away from the Hindi heartland and your definition of what's Indian will change.

 

[swaich]

Good point.

Indian does not equate to HINDU-ONLY.

Hindu also does not mean INDIAN-only. Someone may have Latin, Greek or Arabic origin names specially if they belong to that race and yet be Hindu. e.g. go to any ISKON temple in west and you will find heaps of Hindu goras with Angreji names. Even Indian parents may chose a non-sanskritized name.

I suggest, instead of using the broader term "Hindu/Indian name", it is better to discuss this concept by using the more specific term "sanskritized name", which in MOST (not always) cases is Hindu/Buddhist of Indian origin.

Agree with many goras being Hindus and by default very much Indian in their way of living.

Going by a name or defining certain 'types of names' as Indian is being close minded.

 

[swaich]

Bhai, if I may rephrase your words you are trying to say that some elements are trying to politicize the conversion issue for the electoral gains, and your are singularly pointing put VHP. Yes, I would agree to that. They may be PARTIALLY DRIVEN by electoral gains, but they may want electoral gains to install the laws to eliminate anti-hindu bias when it comes to discrimination. Politicising the issue is good (politics should aim to become issue-based) provided it does not entail violence, exploitation, vote-bank with empty promises.

Not only VHP (they are outloud), more dangerous are Sick-Ull-re parties, Khangress is the culprit-in-chief (who created Bhindrawala and Punjab problem?, who fostered J&K terrorists through appeasement, who engages in religion-based appeasement which results in MASS, MULTI-GENERATIONAL, SYSTEMATIC, INSTITUTIONALIZED REVERSE-DISCRIMINATION against HINDUS/MAJORITY while keeping them divided in the name of CASTEs who they can never be one force to fight the religion based discrimination).

KEEPING AN OPEN MIND ALSO MEANS LET US BE NON-PARTISAN. Before we blame VHP, we have to take the bigger evils-in-action Khangress and pseudo-seculars to task (they had been in power through exploitation of these pseudo-secular dirty tricks), then we can come to the lesser

PSEUDO-SECULAR parties are more dangerous, a hidden enemy (aastin k sanp) is more dangerous, VHP toh jo dil mein woh munh mein, saaf saaf hai.

I have my own political preferences but I wont let it corrupt my ideology and issue-based support, I dont give clean chit to BJP/VHP but I will first prosecute the bigger evil of pseudo-seculars, khangress, UPA, Mulla mulayam, etc.

I mentioned VHP only in context of past conversions related issues and not in the wider political context as you have mentioned above.

Of course, Congress and it politically motivated tactics is very much to blame for much of the mess in the country. But that's a different topic for another thread.