Desicritics Comments on Merits of Religious Conversion: Let the Youth Decide

Comment by Anoop

Fri, 22 Dec 2006 10:29:55 EST

Converting a person from one religion to another is simply changing the outer skin – and this won't do any good if we can not uplift the moral and spiritual values of a person from with in. But in India, religious conversions are done purely for outer reasons, normally by offering material comforts, or by exploiting sentiments about a 'better life' after death. By banning religious conversion in some of its states, India just send a clear message to the world that all the religions are equal, and we are committed to keep our well acknowledged religious tolerance and commitment towards communal harmony. It is high time that we should get around the banana skin (which are the rituals and symbols in religions), and move towards the religious values which is the real banana. The values in all religions are the same – and they are eternal and universal. If a Christian can not find God through Christianity, he is not going to do that just by changing his outer label to a Hindu. Similarly, a Hindu or a Muslim can not realize himself or the Divine or the unseen consciousness or Allah, just by changing to another religion. As I got enough opportunities to interact with a number of so called 'converted' people, I can clearly state that these types of conversions only mounded up their religious confusions and worries. This happens often, mainly because suddenly these people are coming to a new set of rituals and symbols which may contradict with their present rituals and existing beliefs. Their new ideology will not match with their existing thinking and traditions, and add up their mental frustrations. Freedom of a person is limited by laws - to protect him, and to protect the society. Even if a person interested in suicide himself, there are laws that prevent it. Similarly, in present day society, a religious conversion can be considered as a spiritual suicide – since it causes frustration and self-conflict in ones own mind – and hence it should be banned by law. It is the responsibility of the state to protect people from undergoing such problems and exploitations, and hence, I strongly feel that religious conversions should be banned all over India. It is important to understand that this is not about infringing in to the religious freedom of people. India has already shown the world that human values, peace and harmony can be promoted with out mixing any colour of religion to spirituality. Various spiritual leaders in India have done that in the past, and India is still doing it. We have a lot of spiritual leaders who clearly set the examples – like Sri Sri Ravi Shankar, Mata Amritanandamayi, Sri Satya Sai Baba etc. Around the world, they are converting people from stressed and strained ones to self contented, service minded, peace loving people. They are not even worried about the religious labels associated with the people they influence. And they even ask people to think beyond religion, to move towards the real values and spirituality. This is because, religion is often used as a measure by most to achieve one's own selfish desires – while spirituality is all about service, caring and sharing. The church may take a clue out of this. It is not required to worry about the laws that prevent religious conversions – since these laws simply ban the assignment of a new religious label to a converted person. And everyone will agree that simply assigning a new religious label won't do any good to anyone. At this point, I would like to mention that we should think and talk about spirituality and human values – and not about the outer covering – i.e, the symbols, rituals and labels associated with religions. You can find good water any where, but you should dig deep enough. We should learn to take the spirit-uplifting human values and knowledge from all religions - to help us deepen the faith in our own religion and to instil human values and self contentment with in us. Self Realization or realizing the global consciousness, and finding the Kingdom of God with in, is not limited to the people in a particular cast or community. This is the great vision of Sanathana Dharma, which forms the root of India's history and culture. Hence, the laws that prevent religious conversions will not cause any threat to the religious equality and religious harmony of the country.

Comment by balaji

Wed, 18 Oct 2006 15:20:11 EDT

i guess in a liberalized and globalized world let the market forces decide. and as we love to say the 'consumer' is the king/queen. if people want to convert so be it. a particular religion has better marketing abilities and has better USP it wins. and who cares? how does it change the demographics? warm regs balaji

Comment by NV

Wed, 18 Oct 2006 09:23:21 EDT

Uncontrolled religious conversions lead to demographic changes which in turn could affect the security of the country. No religion is perfect...and no religion is better than the other....while conversion is a personal choice...but someone deceiving people into conversion is a social terrorism.

Comment by Subhash

Tue, 17 Oct 2006 00:36:09 EDT

I agree with Sumanth. However, I am not asking - what is the need to convert? My objection is to the fact that some missionaries exploit the poor & illiterate. They provide food for a day & enslave them for life. (Remember the story - "Imp & the Peasant"?) Others use force & fear tactics for convertion. No religion is bad. However, some feel they are "holier than the pope" & follow unethical means as some do to sell their products. But religion is not a product & cannot be compared hence for that matter.......

Comment by Sanjay

Sun, 15 Oct 2006 01:12:41 EDT

Let me decide whom I want to hire, and don't force me to hire whom you want, purely on the basis of ethnicity. Let me hire whom I want. If you can dictate to people what their choices should be in hiring people, then don't hypocritically whine about choices being controlled on what to worship. If you want freedom, give it to others too.

Comment by Sumanth

Sat, 14 Oct 2006 08:38:19 EDT

Rohan Venkat, These basic modules (bhakti, jnana, gyana yogas) can be extracted from all religions as well so that some Open Source Architecture comes out (even while we keep Bhagwat Gita and religious structures out). To add to your points, in Bangalore alone people across faiths are going heading towards all these yogas (with different mixtures). As you said, Sri Sri Ravishankar has introduced a mix of Bhakti and Jnana yogas. Sufism is a mix of Jnana yoga and Dhyana yoga. In Orissa, Sufism and Bhakti movement got integrated more than 300 years back. Prayers in many religions are modules of Bhakti yoga. The (by Buddha) is a module of Dhyana yoga. The "" goes heavily into Karma yoga and Jnana yoga and makes people journey inwards. I have even found that these guys sometimes share the modules in the background. Its truely a multi-dimensional architecture. Now, religious fanatics have nowhere to go, but to start preaching "touch me not" ideologies. Its a battle between Open Source vs MyCrow-Soft.

Comment by Rohan Venkat

Sat, 14 Oct 2006 07:20:25 EDT

There's another factor, IMO, that has differentiates the decline of religion in the west vs. the cycle of prominence and background in India, and that's the flexibility of (so called) Hinduism. "Enlightened" Westerners left their faith-based religions, and started broaching material philosophy or science. That would be unnecessary here though, because all you'd be doing is moving from bhakti-yoga (faith based) to jnana yoga (logic based). And the popularity of Ravishankar's Art of Living is a prime example of this, he encourages bhakti, but bases many of his exercises and ideas on jnana. Not to sound too gita-toting (in fact, I'm not a big fan of that book), but this "intra-religion conversion" works pretty well. So in the end, you're right, and the question is, how do we legislate between "those who have the capacity to analyze, assimilate and practice" and those who dont?

Comment by Sumanth

Sat, 14 Oct 2006 04:24:13 EDT

Do we ponder, What is the difference between religion and spirituality? Why the hell one has to convert? Can not one do percentage allocation of their faith taking modules from different religions? Spirituality started as "Open Source" GNU environments. Then some buggers started to make proprietory religions (just like MyCrowSoft) and started selling it with a language of "With us or Against us". Then, they started milking and murdering people. In Open Source Religion/Spirituality, conversion becomes Irrelevant. One can go to Mosque, temple, Synagogue and Church. Truth is in Open Source and not in religious firms and organisations.

Comment by Sujai

Sat, 14 Oct 2006 01:33:17 EDT

Nice Article, Shantanu. You are absolutely right when you say religion is 'pretty much around and resurgent'. It hasn't died and there are enough signs to suggest it won't. One of the biggest identities for urban people is turning out to be religion. The tools are modern, the packaging has changed, but the message is old one. You ask the relevant question: "Why see other religions as a conspiracy?" Its usually the religious people (of one religion) who see the other religion as conspiracy. Do they believe that if your numbers are more then it means your religion is more true?