Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 30

Thread: answering those who say Hindu adoptees are adharmic

  1. #1
    Join Date
    June 2014
    Location
    Phoenix, Arizona, U.S.
    Age
    57
    Posts
    90
    Rep Power
    710

    answering those who say Hindu adoptees are adharmic

    Namaste,

    In another (non-Hindu) forum in which I participate, the subject of Hindu adoptees came up. At least three Hindu members said that no one is permitted to become a Hindu, that you are either born a Hindu or you aren't one. One member claimed that the scriptures prohibit conversion to the Hindu Dharma (somewhere). I have two questions for the learned members here:

    1. Where does this idea originate? In other words, is there some specific textual basis for it or is this just an opinion that some individuals have because they live among born Hindus?

    2. How might someone answer this claim?

    This was my attempt to answer this claim:

    "In the last several centuries, Hindu gurus have been accepting Western disciples. In ancient times, the people of the island of Bali were converted to the Hindu Dharma. Certain highly textual Hindu traditions, such as the śrī vaiṣṇava sampradāya and the hamsa vaiṣṇava sampradāya, have always required an initiation. Support for this practice is found is scattered across numerous texts, including the bāṣkala saṁhitā of the ṛg veda and the mahābhārata (see Vaiṣṇavism: Its Philosophy, Theology, and Religious Discipline by S.M. Srinivasa Chari for more information). Thus conversion has been part of the Hindu Dharma for millennia. If there is a specific passage in the vedas that is understood by some Hindus to prohibit conversions, I'd be very interested to see it. Thank you."

    I attempted to find the answer here with the search function, but didn't notice anything relevant. If the answer is in a thread here already, please let me know.

    Thank you.

    praṇām
    śrīmate nārāyaṇāya namaḥ

  2. #2
    Join Date
    March 2014
    Posts
    554
    Rep Power
    1405

    Re: answering those who say Hindu adoptees are adharmic

    Quote Originally Posted by anucarh View Post
    Namaste,

    In another (non-Hindu) forum in which I participate, the subject of Hindu adoptees came up. At least three Hindu members said that no one is permitted to become a Hindu, that you are either born a Hindu or you aren't one. One member claimed that the scriptures prohibit conversion to the Hindu Dharma (somewhere). I have two questions for the learned members here:

    1. Where does this idea originate? In other words, is there some specific textual basis for it or is this just an opinion that some individuals have because they live among born Hindus?

    2. How might someone answer this claim?

    This was my attempt to answer this claim:

    "In the last several centuries, Hindu gurus have been accepting Western disciples. In ancient times, the people of the island of Bali were converted to the Hindu Dharma. Certain highly textual Hindu traditions, such as the śrī vaiṣṇava sampradāya and the hamsa vaiṣṇava sampradāya, have always required an initiation. Support for this practice is found is scattered across numerous texts, including the bāṣkala saṁhitā of the ṛg veda and the mahābhārata (see Vaiṣṇavism: Its Philosophy, Theology, and Religious Discipline by S.M. Srinivasa Chari for more information). Thus conversion has been part of the Hindu Dharma for millennia. If there is a specific passage in the vedas that is understood by some Hindus to prohibit conversions, I'd be very interested to see it. Thank you."

    I attempted to find the answer here with the search function, but didn't notice anything relevant. If the answer is in a thread here already, please let me know.

    Thank you.

    praṇām
    Namaste Ji,

    Whatever may be the textual basis for such ideas you mustn't bother much.The knowledge present in the scriptures is meant for the whole world.Sri Maha Vishnu is the father of the whole universe, not just of those born in the four Varnas.

    Initiation into a particular tradition is optional and not compulsory.Not every Hindu is initiated but he/she follows most of the practices advised in the scriptures.

    From what I read in history books,conversion has been around for thousands of years.Whenever Vedic pundits defeated other Indian philosophy proponents in debates,the defeated party would convert to the winner's tradition.Srimad Ramanujacharya converted a Jain King to Vaishnavam.Similarly,the 63 Shaiva saints defeated many Jains and converted whole Kingdoms to Shaivam.
    He dances in the golden hall of Chidambaram, Let us worship His rosy anklet girt Feet.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    July 2012
    Age
    52
    Posts
    2,088
    Rep Power
    2640

    Re: answering those who say Hindu adoptees are adharmic

    Namaste,

    I have read elsewhere that other religions besides Sanathana Dharma started emerging in late Dwapara Yuga (5000 yrs ago). Which means, Sanathana Dharma is the oldest and was practiced all over the world. So it is natural to convert back those who started practicing other religions to Hinduism again.

    I am sure if you mention this point, most people will not have anything to argue against!

    Best regards.
    jai hanuman gyan gun sagar jai kapis tihu lok ujagar

  4. #4
    Join Date
    September 2007
    Location
    Canada
    Age
    70
    Posts
    7,191
    Rep Power
    5038

    Re: answering those who say Hindu adoptees are adharmic

    Vannakam anucarh: Firstly, you're right that it is a myth. Anyone can convert to Hinduism.

    There are a few factors at play. One is just racism. This is a result of feeling that Europeans did an injustice to India, (and they did) and therefore all whites are bad. It runs in families and in groups, and is passed on from generation to generation. That's one possible cause.

    Another is possible dealings with converts who do act foolishly. Sorry to say, but some adoptives or converts practice Hinduism for 6 months or a year, and then start spouting off like they know everything. If born Hindus happen to run into a few of these types, little wonder they've formed the opinion they do. I've run into people like that, and they do leave a bad taste. Note that this isn't meant as criticism, but jut an observation. When anybody has a new and wonderful experience, one of the first things the ego does is take over and go tell everyone. Not just with religion, but with all kinds of things ... "Hey everyone, look at my new car!"

    The myth is also perpetrated by certain Christians not wanting anyone to leave their faith, so they say you can't. If conversion is only allowed one way, it gets closer to their goal: converting all humans to Christianity.

    Personally, because I know that this is not the norm, I just ignore it. It shouldn't in any way stop you from practicing Hinduism. I don't even bother arguing unless there's a hint of open mindedness somewhere.

    Aum Namasivaya

  5. #5

    Re: answering those who say Hindu adoptees are adharmic

    Namaste Anucarh-ji,

    On a personal level no Hindu bothers or is terrified by any other Hindu's chosen path or sect. However, on societal levels, stereotypes do propagate.

    I am not justifying or opposing anything here; just laying it out.

    It is a fact that Indian Hindus don't think that Western Hinduism will ever be anything of consequence (either to their respective countries or to the future of India). On the other hand, many do think that Hindu ideas will continue to be appropriated by other Westerners.

    And this is no mere conspiracy theory. The Rsis in all probability controlled the amount of information that went out. The concept of Zero - present in the Veda - is one such information, which finally went out and became the driver of core advancements in the 20th century.

    This can be a rude shock to some when I therefore say that many native Hindus look down upon the so called guru-s who went West to preach Dharma. In this way, Vivekananda becomes a "neo Hindu", Prabhupad becomes "who Prabhupada?", while their contempories who chose to work within India such as Sri Ram Sharma are the ones who are really cherished.

    When we think of such Hindus, we should also understand that they have only disdain for entities such as Osho, Asaram, Nithyanaanda, Sai Baba part 1 and part 2, and so on; only reflective of what people at large in Kaliyuaga deservingly get as their leaders.

    To take the example of US, many here believe that only harm will come out of that country to this nation and the region. In addition, the US seems to be slipping fast into the holds of Left escapism (not that Hinduism doesn't know left traditions). Moreover, Church is instinctively seen as in the end waging a war against Hinduism in open cohorts with other religions/ political ideologies of the world. There is also a growing hate towards Hindus who left India for greener pastures in the developed countries; at least, people are not interested to hear about them (and from this far, they see only growing ugliness/ awkwardness in the later generations of such NRI's).

    Further, since only limited information flowed out from India in the past, the native Hindus feel there are some genuine blind spots staring at those Westerners who adopt the Dharmic path. As an example, a few will even make joke of them (key word: mlechcha) when they incorrectly pronounce Sanskrit sounds.

    Regarding racism, however, I don't see any native Hindu into that, because irrespective of their personal opinions, they are highly appreciative of achievements of the Westerners. So anything coming from that direction is most likely a reaction about their interactions with madcap missionaries and past atrocities (which they are not going to forget).

    But, again, on a personal level, a Hindu respects another Hindu for His/ Her chosen path- irrespective of the place they come from. Pundits such as David Frawley have been great source of inspiration for all Hindus.

    One small step can be to look around Western Hindus right here on HDF who are held in deep regard by all of us. What works for them? Are they into big philosophy and all, or are they really into small things (and even "small gods"?). Even from this scarce stock, great Hindus in the West are sure to be born (if their parents are already Hindus for generation or two) who will not only guide Hinduism there in accordance to it own dynamics and vastu of the globe, but will also be the guiding lights of Hindus all across the world.

    If we understand all this, it is in a way good to know that Eastern Hindus don't expect anything from Western Hindus.

    Another topic is the word "Hindu" itself, which tautologically is equal to Indu or Indian. In not so distant future I can see a better term such as Āstika or some other replacing Hindu word, but till then Hindu can continue to be a catch all word for the denomination, and I don't see nationalistic Indians having too much of a problem lending us the word for some more time.

    I am so lucid here, may be you may think what side I am really speaking from, besides "just laying it out"?

    Will I treat a Western Hindu as my own own brother when He comes to my door, or happens to come across?

    I will be on guard somewhat; I will like to know if he is a beef eater. That's all.


    KT
    Things to remember:

    1. Life = yajña
    2. Depth of Āstika knowledge is directly proportional
    to the richness of Sanskrit it is written in
    3. Āstika = Bhārata ("east") / Ārya ("west")
    4. Varṇa = tripartite division of Vedic polity
    5. r = c. x²
    where,
    r = realisation
    constant c = intelligence
    variable x = bhakti

  6. #6
    Join Date
    June 2014
    Location
    Phoenix, Arizona, U.S.
    Age
    57
    Posts
    90
    Rep Power
    710

    Re: answering those who say Hindu adoptees are adharmic

    Namaste Ram ji,

    > The knowledge present in the scriptures is meant for the whole world.
    > Sri Maha Vishnu is the father of the whole universe, not just of those
    > born in the four Varnas.

    This is a great point. Thank you. If He is the Lord of the entire universe, then how can it be a problem that He is my God? I will remember this.

    > Initiation into a particular tradition is optional and not compulsory.

    This part surprised me. I seem to be getting conflicting information on whether one has to be initiated to be a Śrī Vaiṣṇava. Sri Karalappakam Anantha Padhmanabhan and S.M. Srinivasa Chari see initiation as a requirement. I'll keep digging for information.

    > Srimad Ramanujacharya converted a Jain King to Vaishnavam.
    > Similarly,the 63 Shaiva saints defeated many Jains and converted whole Kingdoms to Shaivam.

    Thank you for this. These are good counterexamples. The conversion of the Jain king sounds very familiar. I'm going to look for it in my books.

    praṇām
    śrīmate nārāyaṇāya namaḥ

  7. #7
    Join Date
    June 2014
    Location
    Phoenix, Arizona, U.S.
    Age
    57
    Posts
    90
    Rep Power
    710

    Re: answering those who say Hindu adoptees are adharmic

    Namaste Viraja ji,

    > I have read elsewhere that other religions besides Sanathana Dharma started emerging in late Dwapara Yuga (5000 yrs ago).
    > Which means, Sanathana Dharma is the oldest and was practiced all over the world. So it is natural to convert back those
    > who started practicing other religions to Hinduism again.

    Thank you for this. This is excellent. In a sense Hindu adoptees are really Hindu returnees.

    > I am sure if you mention this point, most people will not have anything to argue against!

    I think you're right.

    praṇām
    śrīmate nārāyaṇāya namaḥ

  8. #8
    Join Date
    June 2014
    Location
    Phoenix, Arizona, U.S.
    Age
    57
    Posts
    90
    Rep Power
    710

    Re: answering those who say Hindu adoptees are adharmic

    Quote Originally Posted by Eastern Mind View Post
    Vannakam anucarh: Firstly, you're right that it is a myth. Anyone can convert to Hinduism.

    There are a few factors at play. One is just racism. This is a result of feeling that Europeans did an injustice to India, (and they did) and therefore all whites are bad. It runs in families and in groups, and is passed on from generation to generation. That's one possible cause.

    Another is possible dealings with converts who do act foolishly. Sorry to say, but some adoptives or converts practice Hinduism for 6 months or a year, and then start spouting off like they know everything. If born Hindus happen to run into a few of these types, little wonder they've formed the opinion they do. I've run into people like that, and they do leave a bad taste. Note that this isn't meant as criticism, but jut an observation. When anybody has a new and wonderful experience, one of the first things the ego does is take over and go tell everyone. Not just with religion, but with all kinds of things ... "Hey everyone, look at my new car!"

    The myth is also perpetrated by certain Christians not wanting anyone to leave their faith, so they say you can't. If conversion is only allowed one way, it gets closer to their goal: converting all humans to Christianity.

    Personally, because I know that this is not the norm, I just ignore it. It shouldn't in any way stop you from practicing Hinduism. I don't even bother arguing unless there's a hint of open mindedness somewhere.

    Aum Namasivaya
    Namaste Eastern Mind ji,

    Thank you for the explanations. They are very informative and good to keep in mind. They are also a great reminder to practice humility and to be aware of how we are affecting others.

    > Personally, because I know that this is not the norm, I just ignore it.
    > It shouldn't in any way stop you from practicing Hinduism. I don't even
    > bother arguing unless there's a hint of open mindedness somewhere.

    This sounds like great advice. Thank you.

    praṇām
    Last edited by anucarh; 17 September 2014 at 11:54 PM. Reason: deleted a word to improve comment
    śrīmate nārāyaṇāya namaḥ

  9. #9
    Join Date
    December 2007
    Age
    63
    Posts
    3,218
    Rep Power
    4728

    Re: answering those who say Hindu adoptees are adharmic

    Namaste,

    None of Hindu scriptures say how one becomes a Hindu. Hindu scriptures assume that it apply to all mankind. They don't differentiate between a Hindu and non-Hindu. Hindus accept everyone as part of their own family. Our scriptures say, "Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam" ===> The whole earth is one family. So, where can be any discrimination ?

    Let me tell you that within Hindu Dharma there are so many paths which follow widely varying customs (even just opposite and they have contradicting philosophies) and rituals and yet all are considered Hindus. You will be surprised to know that even atheists have a place in Hindu Dharma Differentiating one human being from the other on the basis of his faith came from advent of Abrahimic religions. Hindu Dharma was under attack from Christianity and Islam for centuries and there the Hindus learnt to discriminate people on the basis of their faiths.

    ... and form there these issues come. There is no conversion in Hindu scriptures because we never thought that any conversion was needed. It was a matter of faith and anyone was free to have his faith as suited him. What and where was the need of "conversion" ? So, some people believe that you can be only born as a Hindu and not convert to become a Hindu. It is wrong. They don't understand that the Hindu Dharma, principally never had a notion of differentiating one from the other on the basis of faith and that is why they didn't keep any special method of converting people.

    So, you are a Hindu if you start living as a Hindu does. That is all. In Hindu Dharma there is no authority who can act as a Pope or a Mullah to dictate terms to you. You have full rights to act as you deem fit as per scriptures.

    Whether there is a need to convert ? In today's environment, in my opinion, it is better if you do it formally. There are organisations which help you in this : Arya Samaj, Ramkrishna Ashram, ISKCON, Swami Laxmanju's organisation etc. We have quite knowledgeable Hindus here on this forum whose parents were not Hindus. I find them even more knowledgeable than thousands of born Hindus I know.

    To be a good Hindu is what is important and not whether you came to Hindu fold by birth or otherwise. Don't engage with people who have strong ideas on "Hindu by birth theory" ... there is no point wasting your time in such useless discussions. These people have no authority to say what they say.

    OM
    "Om Namo Bhagvate Vaasudevaye"

  10. #10
    Join Date
    July 2010
    Location
    The Holy Land - Bharat
    Posts
    2,842
    Rep Power
    5499

    Re: answering those who say Hindu adoptees are adharmic

    Namaste,

    And some facts which contradict the earlier post....

    Our scriptures say, "Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam" ===> The whole earth is one family. So, where can be any discrimination ?
    "The earliest reference to this phrase is found in the Hitopadesha, a collection of parables, and is not part of any Hindu canon or philosophy. In the parable, a cunning jackal uses this phrase to dupe a naive deer to accept him as his friend, so he could devise an opportunity to eat the deer."

    These two words are misused more than anything else. It is non-scriptural and was used to cheat a being rather than as words of peace and inclusiveness.

    ...So, you are a Hindu if you start living as a Hindu does. That is all.......
    .....In today's environment, in my opinion, it is better if you do it formally....
    So, what is the final verdict? convert or just start living like one?

    You have full rights to act as you deem fit as per scriptures.
    Most people start jumping up and down when it comes to the question of need for a guru in one's spiritual life. If we accept that a guru is needed to understand/practice the religion and to advance spiritually, it is a given that one has to surrender to him and obey him. So, you do what your guru tells you to, you have no rights to act as you please, or to assess if your thoughts are per the scriptures. Your guru will interpret the scriptures and tell you what to do, not you. You do not act as you deem fit per the scriptures. You act per your guru's instructions!

    These people have no authority to say what they say.
    And with whose authority does the poster make all the claims as if it was the gospel truth?

    Pranam.

    -

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 44
    Last Post: 06 April 2014, 06:07 AM
  2. khalsa rejects
    By GURSIKH in forum Sikhism
    Replies: 44
    Last Post: 26 March 2012, 02:28 PM
  3. Replies: 17
    Last Post: 18 March 2012, 09:38 PM
  4. Defending Hindu Dharma against the Onslaught of Adharmic Religions
    By saidevo in forum Abrahamic Religions (Closed For Posting)
    Replies: 119
    Last Post: 17 January 2012, 02:38 PM
  5. Was TAJ MAHAL a temple called TEJO MAHALAYA?
    By brahman in forum Hot Topics
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: 26 March 2011, 09:32 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •