Conversion

It took me several years to understand what Vivekananda implied when he said that a Hindu coverting to another religion becomes an enemy of Hinduism. The sage was clearly against conversion.

But, why not? Why shouldn't we have the freedom to embrace any religion?

This is not a matter of freedom, but that of psychological burden. When someone leaves his/her religion and embraces another, he/she feels compelled (subconsciously) to defend his/her decision. This is why, the new born Christians, or Hindus, or Muslims, or Confucian - whatever - become more fanatic, radical and extreme in their views than those born in the same religion.

In countries like Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Bangladesh, India, and Indonesia (as pointed out by VS Naipaul, though India was not on his list), we suffer from cultural shock and inner conflict. The imported religions in all these countries tend to force the imported culture as well, which in many cases is totally different from the local culture and indigenous wisdom.

Solution? In my opinion, there is only one - stop conversion. Stop all efforts of conversion. Drop the missionary zeal to save others' souls. Let go of the notion that my religion is the best, even if such words are not uttered and remain on our minds only.

Love n blessings

Tags: Afghanistan, Anand Krishna, Bangladesh, Christianity, Confucian., Conversion, Cultural Shock, Hinduism, India, Indonesia, More…Inner Conflict, Islam, Pakistan, Vivekananda, iran

Views: 30

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Sulaiman Charles Neave on January 21, 2010 at 10:43am
I completely agree with this idea about spiritual nutrition. So much of our education system now is about learning 'for a reason' - ie. to get a job, make money etc. Within this modern approach there is often no room for spirituality.

I think encouraging people to investigate and discover their own faith is really important. Obviously, children will always look up to the faith of their teacher - but essentially every young soul should be encouraged to find their own path. What Anne Engel doesn't understand in her comments is that some people (me included) were 'religion less' before my conversion. To argue against conversion on the basis that we may later in life feel nostalgic towards our original religion is not valid, if we never felt we had one.

My biggest fear with this discussion thread is that arguing against conversion is intolerant. Surely it is every human's right to find their own path to divinity. While analogies like Anne Engel's crystal are lovely, we must understand that people love their religions and do not want to subscribe to a globalised, homogenised religion.

Randall Apps comments about tyrant religious leaders really hit the mark. If we all truly celebrated our differences and enjoyed the kaleidoscope of religion and culture then 'conversion' would not matter. We could all become whatever we want and whatever felt right to us without causing problems in our community.

Paul Williams said:
ps. To push the analogy a bit further, what we, as teachers and leaders of spirituality need to be doing is educating our people about spiritual nutrition rather than prescribing their diet.
Permalink Reply by Anne ENGEL on January 21, 2010 at 10:55am
Sulaiman Charles Neave said:
I completely agree with this idea about spiritual nutrition. So much of our education system now is about learning 'for a reason' - ie. to get a job, make money etc. Within this modern approach there is often no room for spirituality.

I think encouraging people to investigate and discover their own faith is really important. Obviously, children will always look up to the faith of their teacher - but essentially every young soul should be encouraged to find their own path. What Anne Engel doesn't understand in her comments is that some people (me included) were 'religion less' before my conversion. To argue against conversion on the basis that we may later in life feel nostalgic towards our original religion is not valid, if we never felt we had one.

My biggest fear with this discussion thread is that arguing against conversion is intolerant. Surely it is every human's right to find their own path to divinity. While analogies like Anne Engel's crystal are lovely, we must understand that people love their religions and do not want to subscribe to a globalised, homogenised religion.

Randall Apps comments about tyrant religious leaders really hit the mark. If we all truly celebrated our differences and enjoyed the kaleidoscope of religion and culture then 'conversion' would not matter. We could all become whatever we want and whatever felt right to us without causing problems in our community.

Paul Williams said:
ps. To push the analogy a bit further, what we, as teachers and leaders of spirituality need to be doing is educating our people about spiritual nutrition rather than prescribing their diet.
Permalink Reply by kathryn julyan on January 21, 2010 at 7:44pm
Thank you for sharing what is happening in Indonesia. In Western moral/political culture, "conversion" is an assumed extension of "freedom of religion." "Anti-conversion" is thus assumed to go against "freedom of religion." But this position is rooted within a deep cultural bias. Until we meet people like yourself or the people I met in India who feel as you do, it is difficult for Westerners to wrap their mind around "interfaith spiritualists" speaking against even friendly voluntary conversion. But I am trying to learn and listen. I also understand the Western perspective. Due to the horrible atrocities performed on our own indigenous people, we simply do not have a point of reference for relating to religion indigenously as say Hindus in India. Conversion in such places totally uproots people from their culture. In the West, the spirit of conversion, choosing one's own way, is our culture. So much more learning to take place! Love to all.

Anand Krishna said:
Paul, great... I love it, "nutrition" - this is important... so it is the "spirit" of religion, which is essential.

By the way, i must mention here, that in my country, Indonesia, what you have left behind, is actually being adopted now.

Our religious ministers actually tell you to part with your indigenous culture. So, a Muslim becomes more Arab, a Christian becomes more Westerner (i thought Jesus was Asian, anyways...), a Hindu more Indian, and a Buddhist more Chinese (was Siddhartha a Chinese? who cares...), and so on, and so forth....

Tragedy.

This is the same country, where the first translation of Bhagavad Gita was done by a Muslim SCHOLAR back in 1920s. This is the same country, where a JESUIT painstakingly collected the indigenous literature and translated them. This is the same country where a Balinese Hindu PRINCE donated part of his property for building a mosque.

This is the same country where our first president SUKARNO would freely quote from Dhammapada, Bible, Qur'an, and Gita with equal zwal and sense of appreciation.

Alas, that Indonesia is lost....

Please keep us in our prayer, my brother....


Paul Williams said:
ps. To push the analogy a bit further, what we, as teachers and leaders of spirituality need to be doing is educating our people about spiritual nutrition rather than prescribing their diet.
Permalink Reply by Istiqomah Hastari on January 21, 2010 at 10:31pm
I'm agree with Mr Anand Krishna said, if the follower religion found peace and beauty from his religion, the Follower will never do a conversion, he/she must be very confident
Permalink Reply by Istiqomah Hastari on January 21, 2010 at 10:32pm
I'm agree with Mr Anand Krishna said, if the follower religion found peace and beauty from his religion, the Follower will never do a conversion, he/she must be very confident
Permalink Reply by Sulaiman Charles Neave on January 23, 2010 at 4:13pm
Kathryn Julyan's answer is very perceptive. I think these cultural misunderstandings are exactly what Peace Next and the Parliament of the World's Religions is for. There is a completely different concept of 'conversion' for people in East and West (as I acknowledged in some of my initial comments on this thread). So I hope we can all learn from one another's perspectives.

With peace and love... Sulaiman

kathryn julyan said:
Thank you for sharing what is happening in Indonesia. In Western moral/political culture, "conversion" is an assumed extension of "freedom of religion." "Anti-conversion" is thus assumed to go against "freedom of religion." But this position is rooted within a deep cultural bias. Until we meet people like yourself or the people I met in India who feel as you do, it is difficult for Westerners to wrap their mind around "interfaith spiritualists" speaking against even friendly voluntary conversion. But I am trying to learn and listen. I also understand the Western perspective. Due to the horrible atrocities performed on our own indigenous people, we simply do not have a point of reference for relating to religion indigenously as say Hindus in India. Conversion in such places totally uproots people from their culture. In the West, the spirit of conversion, choosing one's own way, is our culture. So much more learning to take place! Love to all.

Anand Krishna said:
Paul, great... I love it, "nutrition" - this is important... so it is the "spirit" of religion, which is essential.

By the way, i must mention here, that in my country, Indonesia, what you have left behind, is actually being adopted now.

Our religious ministers actually tell you to part with your indigenous culture. So, a Muslim becomes more Arab, a Christian becomes more Westerner (i thought Jesus was Asian, anyways...), a Hindu more Indian, and a Buddhist more Chinese (was Siddhartha a Chinese? who cares...), and so on, and so forth....

Tragedy.

This is the same country, where the first translation of Bhagavad Gita was done by a Muslim SCHOLAR back in 1920s. This is the same country, where a JESUIT painstakingly collected the indigenous literature and translated them. This is the same country where a Balinese Hindu PRINCE donated part of his property for building a mosque.

This is the same country where our first president SUKARNO would freely quote from Dhammapada, Bible, Qur'an, and Gita with equal zwal and sense of appreciation.

Alas, that Indonesia is lost....

Please keep us in our prayer, my brother....


Paul Williams said:
ps. To push the analogy a bit further, what we, as teachers and leaders of spirituality need to be doing is educating our people about spiritual nutrition rather than prescribing their diet.
Permalink Reply by kathryn julyan on January 24, 2010 at 6:53pm
My deep Pranams to Anand Krishnan for beginning this discussion which I believe is of vital importance. If I were to come to Indonesia, most certainly I would sit at his feet to learn and become more rooted in the One. So please recognize that I only come here to share in dialogue and to gain a deeper understanding of us all. I have contemplated this issue for some time and I would like to share some more of my thoughts. Pranams and Peace to all.

First, I attached a file that includes a great little book on Conversion by Swami Dayananda of Arsha Vidya Gurukulam. The title of the book is “Conversion is Violence.” This title may invite resistance to some, but the book offers an honest, Indian Hindu perspective. Swamiji speaks from his own experience, but he also leaves space for secularist values. I recognize that the hurt he has experienced is indeed perhaps shared by many of you. I highly recommend this book to all who have an interest in this issue!


What Swami Dayananda says about the source of human compassion is simple: we do not wish to be hurt and we recognize that others do not wish to be hurt. Our faith traditions are an expression of our most basic person. When we infringe upon anothers' freedom to belong to their tradition of choice, we perform violence against their basic person. He then expands on this idea by speaking about his own experience as a native Indian Hindu. He talks about his own hurt resulting from the expansive conversion practices of Christianity and Islam. However, I also apply this to our present conversation. Our brother, Sulaiman converted to Islam as an expression of his basic person, and he did so freely, as a citizen of a Western country. I cannot find a reason whatsoever to criticize him for this. For me, to do so, is to harm, however slightly, his basic person. He may have remained Christian and blended Islam in with his Christianity. But in his case, it seems this would not have been enough for him, nor as appropriate for him, given the time and place, and his own background.

The idea of blending other traditions with our own is beautiful and also reflects a more traditional religious model. In traditional African culture, no one converted. Traditions blended together through marriage and cultural exchange. Yet religion, from the traditional African perspective, is a way of life, a culture, an expression of one’s ethnic identity. To “convert” to another groups’ faith practices is as ridiculous as it is for me to try and convert from being Dutch American to Swedish American. It would be nonsensical. The traditional model of blending religious faiths through community and social interaction is a lovely vision. It is my understanding that this vision is still very much alive in different countries in Africa, where the lines between Christianity, Islam, and Traditional Religions are often quite grey. Religion, in many countries in Africa, is simply not so much about belief.
As a global unity, I think we can gain a lot from returning more to this traditional model. A model where religions are not opposed to one another by creed or theology, where religions do not negate one another, but rather, where religions blend together as a sort of “many in One” celebration of Truth. However, I am not sure if Western socio-political institutions would ever adopt a value of “anti-conversion” as a means to this. The reason is simply because, for better or worse, in the West, religion is about belief! This is something Karen Armstrong talks a lot about. Given this is true, the idea of infringing upon someone’s freedom to believe in what they want to believe in, is, from the Western perspective, the highest infringement upon someone’s moral personhood.

I agree that conversion should most definitely not be solicited or even encouraged. However, I believe that voluntary conversion deemed necessary and important by the practitioner his or herself is often an authentic expression of one’s basic self and should not be criticized. Yet, I also believe that as Westerners we need to become much more educated about the experience of people in other countries in this regard. We live a highly privileged life, one of freedom, and, one of at least relative affluence and security. The freedom and affluence we possess has often been at the great expense of others, especially our native indigenous people. We have incurred a huge debt. In this regard, if we recognize that adopting a universal value of “anti-conversion” will genuinely help other countries, we ought to stand at least somewhat open and willing to promote this in some way. But practically and culturally speaking, we have to contemplate such a vision within the Western framework as well. Love and Peace to all.




Sulaiman Charles Neave said:
Kathryn Julyan's answer is very perceptive. I think these cultural misunderstandings are exactly what Peace Next and the Parliament of the World's Religions is for. There is a completely different concept of 'conversion' for people in East and West (as I acknowledged in some of my initial comments on this thread). So I hope we can all learn from one another's perspectives.

With peace and love... Sulaiman

kathryn julyan said:
Thank you for sharing what is happening in Indonesia. In Western moral/political culture, "conversion" is an assumed extension of "freedom of religion." "Anti-conversion" is thus assumed to go against "freedom of religion." But this position is rooted within a deep cultural bias. Until we meet people like yourself or the people I met in India who feel as you do, it is difficult for Westerners to wrap their mind around "interfaith spiritualists" speaking against even friendly voluntary conversion. But I am trying to learn and listen. I also understand the Western perspective. Due to the horrible atrocities performed on our own indigenous people, we simply do not have a point of reference for relating to religion indigenously as say Hindus in India. Conversion in such places totally uproots people from their culture. In the West, the spirit of conversion, choosing one's own way, is our culture. So much more learning to take place! Love to all.

Anand Krishna said:
Paul, great... I love it, "nutrition" - this is important... so it is the "spirit" of religion, which is essential.

By the way, i must mention here, that in my country, Indonesia, what you have left behind, is actually being adopted now.

Our religious ministers actually tell you to part with your indigenous culture. So, a Muslim becomes more Arab, a Christian becomes more Westerner (i thought Jesus was Asian, anyways...), a Hindu more Indian, and a Buddhist more Chinese (was Siddhartha a Chinese? who cares...), and so on, and so forth....

Tragedy.

This is the same country, where the first translation of Bhagavad Gita was done by a Muslim SCHOLAR back in 1920s. This is the same country, where a JESUIT painstakingly collected the indigenous literature and translated them. This is the same country where a Balinese Hindu PRINCE donated part of his property for building a mosque.

This is the same country where our first president SUKARNO would freely quote from Dhammapada, Bible, Qur'an, and Gita with equal zwal and sense of appreciation.

Alas, that Indonesia is lost....

Please keep us in our prayer, my brother....


Paul Williams said:
ps. To push the analogy a bit further, what we, as teachers and leaders of spirituality need to be doing is educating our people about spiritual nutrition rather than prescribing their diet.
Attachments:
Permalink Reply by Anand Krishna on January 24, 2010 at 7:46pm
My dear Kathryn, thank you for your kind remarks.
I also thank you for the booklet by Swami Dayanand, i read it with great interest. Perhaps, the situation in India is similar to that in Indonesia - although not exactly the same.

One thing that i am very clear about, and this is from my own experiment and experience, "whatever, whichever path one follows" - one comes to the same narrow way, from where the journey is very individual and private. So, with due respect to Swamiji, i would say that, yes, all paths lead to same narrow way to the journey within.

The problem is this. Many of us are engaged in glorifying our respective paths, without walking the path. We are standing still. And, we feel that by performing the prescribed rituals, we have fulfilled all our obligations.

My dear Kathryn, i am not a guru, i am an activist, i have no preconceived ideas, i am open to all ideas. Right now, i am working on this. If we truly understand the gist of all religions, the spirit of all religions, we shall not find it necessary to convert. As long as i try to convert you, i have this complex that my religion is better than yours. As long as i am willing to be converted, i have the complex that my religion is inferior to yours. And, as long as these complexes are there - we are getting nowhere.

I am not trying to convert anyone, i am merely extending an invitation: Please study all religions on your own, practice them with the same zeal like Ramakrishna did, say 6 months for each religion - and find out for yourself what happens.

We are a small group, and out of this small group about 100 of us have tried it over past 12 years, working on religions and traditional beliefs, and we are now convinced that if "one knows about his/her religion, and appreciates the beliefs of others, conversion becomes unnecessary.

Our ashram has a Muslim lady as the chair, and Balinese indigenous Hindus, Christians, Buddhists, Confucian, and followers of the indigenous belief systems as office bearers in Jakarta, Bali, Yogyakarta and other cities. None of us finds it necessary to convert to another religion, albeit we have a multitude of avatars, messiahs, and prophets now, instead of few.

If this experiment is working here, in this small group, then it should also work elsewhere with larger groups. For, once again, my sole concern is this. When a person leavers his/her birth reiigion and adopts another, he/she has the psychological burden to prove that the decision was right, and they become fanatics. This kind of fanaticism has done much damage to our society here.

Namaste and Pranaams to you Kathryn...

kathryn julyan said:
My deep Pranams to Anand Krishnan for beginning this discussion which I believe is of vital importance. If I were to come to Indonesia, most certainly I would sit at his feet to learn and become more rooted in the One. So please recognize that I only come here to share in dialogue and to gain a deeper understanding of us all. I have contemplated this issue for some time and I would like to share some more of my thoughts. Pranams and Peace to all.

First, I attached a file that includes a great little book on Conversion by Swami Dayananda of Arsha Vidya Gurukulam. The title of the book is “Conversion is Violence.” This title may invite resistance to some, but the book offers an honest, Indian Hindu perspective. Swamiji speaks from his own experience, but he also leaves space for secularist values. I recognize that the hurt he has experienced is indeed perhaps shared by many of you. I highly recommend this book to all who have an interest in this issue!


What Swami Dayananda says about the source of human compassion is simple: we do not wish to be hurt and we recognize that others do not wish to be hurt. Our faith traditions are an expression of our most basic person. When we infringe upon anothers' freedom to belong to their tradition of choice, we perform violence against their basic person. He then expands on this idea by speaking about his own experience as a native Indian Hindu. He talks about his own hurt resulting from the expansive conversion practices of Christianity and Islam. However, I also apply this to our present conversation. Our brother, Sulaiman converted to Islam as an expression of his basic person, and he did so freely, as a citizen of a Western country. I cannot find a reason whatsoever to criticize him for this. For me, to do so, is to harm, however slightly, his basic person. He may have remained Christian and blended Islam in with his Christianity. But in his case, it seems this would not have been enough for him, nor as appropriate for him, given the time and place, and his own background.

The idea of blending other traditions with our own is beautiful and also reflects a more traditional religious model. In traditional African culture, no one converted. Traditions blended together through marriage and cultural exchange. Yet religion, from the traditional African perspective, is a way of life, a culture, an expression of one’s ethnic identity. To “convert” to another groups’ faith practices is as ridiculous as it is for me to try and convert from being Dutch American to Swedish American. It would be nonsensical. The traditional model of blending religious faiths through community and social interaction is a lovely vision. It is my understanding that this vision is still very much alive in different countries in Africa, where the lines between Christianity, Islam, and Traditional Religions are often quite grey. Religion, in many countries in Africa, is simply not so much about belief.
As a global unity, I think we can gain a lot from returning more to this traditional model. A model where religions are not opposed to one another by creed or theology, where religions do not negate one another, but rather, where religions blend together as a sort of “many in One” celebration of Truth. However, I am not sure if Western socio-political institutions would ever adopt a value of “anti-conversion” as a means to this. The reason is simply because, for better or worse, in the West, religion is about belief! This is something Karen Armstrong talks a lot about. Given this is true, the idea of infringing upon someone’s freedom to believe in what they want to believe in, is, from the Western perspective, the highest infringement upon someone’s moral personhood.

I agree that conversion should most definitely not be solicited or even encouraged. However, I believe that voluntary conversion deemed necessary and important by the practitioner his or herself is often an authentic expression of one’s basic self and should not be criticized. Yet, I also believe that as Westerners we need to become much more educated about the experience of people in other countries in this regard. We live a highly privileged life, one of freedom, and, one of at least relative affluence and security. The freedom and affluence we possess has often been at the great expense of others, especially our native indigenous people. We have incurred a huge debt. In this regard, if we recognize that adopting a universal value of “anti-conversion” will genuinely help other countries, we ought to stand at least somewhat open and willing to promote this in some way. But practically and culturally speaking, we have to contemplate such a vision within the Western framework as well. Love and Peace to all.




Sulaiman Charles Neave said:
Kathryn Julyan's answer is very perceptive. I think these cultural misunderstandings are exactly what Peace Next and the Parliament of the World's Religions is for. There is a completely different concept of 'conversion' for people in East and West (as I acknowledged in some of my initial comments on this thread). So I hope we can all learn from one another's perspectives.

With peace and love... Sulaiman

kathryn julyan said:
Thank you for sharing what is happening in Indonesia. In Western moral/political culture, "conversion" is an assumed extension of "freedom of religion." "Anti-conversion" is thus assumed to go against "freedom of religion." But this position is rooted within a deep cultural bias. Until we meet people like yourself or the people I met in India who feel as you do, it is difficult for Westerners to wrap their mind around "interfaith spiritualists" speaking against even friendly voluntary conversion. But I am trying to learn and listen. I also understand the Western perspective. Due to the horrible atrocities performed on our own indigenous people, we simply do not have a point of reference for relating to religion indigenously as say Hindus in India. Conversion in such places totally uproots people from their culture. In the West, the spirit of conversion, choosing one's own way, is our culture. So much more learning to take place! Love to all.

Anand Krishna said:
Paul, great... I love it, "nutrition" - this is important... so it is the "spirit" of religion, which is essential.

By the way, i must mention here, that in my country, Indonesia, what you have left behind, is actually being adopted now.

Our religious ministers actually tell you to part with your indigenous culture. So, a Muslim becomes more Arab, a Christian becomes more Westerner (i thought Jesus was Asian, anyways...), a Hindu more Indian, and a Buddhist more Chinese (was Siddhartha a Chinese? who cares...), and so on, and so forth....

Tragedy.

This is the same country, where the first translation of Bhagavad Gita was done by a Muslim SCHOLAR back in 1920s. This is the same country, where a JESUIT painstakingly collected the indigenous literature and translated them. This is the same country where a Balinese Hindu PRINCE donated part of his property for building a mosque.

This is the same country where our first president SUKARNO would freely quote from Dhammapada, Bible, Qur'an, and Gita with equal zwal and sense of appreciation.

Alas, that Indonesia is lost....

Please keep us in our prayer, my brother....


Paul Williams said:
ps. To push the analogy a bit further, what we, as teachers and leaders of spirituality need to be doing is educating our people about spiritual nutrition rather than prescribing their diet.
Permalink Reply by kathryn julyan on January 24, 2010 at 8:20pm
Thank you Anand for your kind response. I am thrilled and inspired by your "experiment" in Indonesia. What an amazing oasis in the midst of all that is happening in your country. There is minimal religious violence where i live, but there is a lot of ignorance, although unintended. I try to be an ambassador for HInduism, Islam, and traditional religions, and others as I grow in my understanding of them, to the Christian community and through teaching courses at the University. We have a nice interfaith group just beginning to expand there. I would LOVE for our group to also study and practice different traditions together. I am also deeply inspired by Ramakrishna's practice of different traditions, discovering the same One truth. Thank you so much for your living example. It is exciting to see. Love and Peace to All.
Anand Krishna said:
My dear Kathryn, thank you for your kind remarks.
I also thank you for the booklet by Swami Dayanand, i read it with great interest. Perhaps, the situation in India is similar to that in Indonesia - although not exactly the same.

One thing that i am very clear about, and this is from my own experiment and experience, "whatever, whichever path one follows" - one comes to the same narrow way, from where the journey is very individual and private. So, with due respect to Swamiji, i would say that, yes, all paths lead to same narrow way to the journey within.

The problem is this. Many of us are engaged in glorifying our respective paths, without walking the path. We are standing still. And, we feel that by performing the prescribed rituals, we have fulfilled all our obligations.

My dear Kathryn, i am not a guru, i am an activist, i have no preconceived ideas, i am open to all ideas. Right now, i am working on this. If we truly understand the gist of all religions, the spirit of all religions, we shall not find it necessary to convert. As long as i try to convert you, i have this complex that my religion is better than yours. As long as i am willing to be converted, i have the complex that my religion is inferior to yours. And, as long as these complexes are there - we are getting nowhere.

I am not trying to convert anyone, i am merely extending an invitation: Please study all religions on your own, practice them with the same zeal like Ramakrishna did, say 6 months for each religion - and find out for yourself what happens.

We are a small group, and out of this small group about 100 of us have tried it over past 12 years, working on religions and traditional beliefs, and we are now convinced that if "one knows about his/her religion, and appreciates the beliefs of others, conversion becomes unnecessary.

Our ashram has a Muslim lady as the chair, and Balinese indigenous Hindus, Christians, Buddhists, Confucian, and followers of the indigenous belief systems as office bearers in Jakarta, Bali, Yogyakarta and other cities. None of us finds it necessary to convert to another religion, albeit we have a multitude of avatars, messiahs, and prophets now, instead of few.

If this experiment is working here, in this small group, then it should also work elsewhere with larger groups. For, once again, my sole concern is this. When a person leavers his/her birth reiigion and adopts another, he/she has the psychological burden to prove that the decision was right, and they become fanatics. This kind of fanaticism has done much damage to our society here.

Namaste and Pranaams to you Kathryn...

kathryn julyan said:
My deep Pranams to Anand Krishnan for beginning this discussion which I believe is of vital importance. If I were to come to Indonesia, most certainly I would sit at his feet to learn and become more rooted in the One. So please recognize that I only come here to share in dialogue and to gain a deeper understanding of us all. I have contemplated this issue for some time and I would like to share some more of my thoughts. Pranams and Peace to all.

First, I attached a file that includes a great little book on Conversion by Swami Dayananda of Arsha Vidya Gurukulam. The title of the book is “Conversion is Violence.” This title may invite resistance to some, but the book offers an honest, Indian Hindu perspective. Swamiji speaks from his own experience, but he also leaves space for secularist values. I recognize that the hurt he has experienced is indeed perhaps shared by many of you. I highly recommend this book to all who have an interest in this issue!


What Swami Dayananda says about the source of human compassion is simple: we do not wish to be hurt and we recognize that others do not wish to be hurt. Our faith traditions are an expression of our most basic person. When we infringe upon anothers' freedom to belong to their tradition of choice, we perform violence against their basic person. He then expands on this idea by speaking about his own experience as a native Indian Hindu. He talks about his own hurt resulting from the expansive conversion practices of Christianity and Islam. However, I also apply this to our present conversation. Our brother, Sulaiman converted to Islam as an expression of his basic person, and he did so freely, as a citizen of a Western country. I cannot find a reason whatsoever to criticize him for this. For me, to do so, is to harm, however slightly, his basic person. He may have remained Christian and blended Islam in with his Christianity. But in his case, it seems this would not have been enough for him, nor as appropriate for him, given the time and place, and his own background.

The idea of blending other traditions with our own is beautiful and also reflects a more traditional religious model. In traditional African culture, no one converted. Traditions blended together through marriage and cultural exchange. Yet religion, from the traditional African perspective, is a way of life, a culture, an expression of one’s ethnic identity. To “convert” to another groups’ faith practices is as ridiculous as it is for me to try and convert from being Dutch American to Swedish American. It would be nonsensical. The traditional model of blending religious faiths through community and social interaction is a lovely vision. It is my understanding that this vision is still very much alive in different countries in Africa, where the lines between Christianity, Islam, and Traditional Religions are often quite grey. Religion, in many countries in Africa, is simply not so much about belief.
As a global unity, I think we can gain a lot from returning more to this traditional model. A model where religions are not opposed to one another by creed or theology, where religions do not negate one another, but rather, where religions blend together as a sort of “many in One” celebration of Truth. However, I am not sure if Western socio-political institutions would ever adopt a value of “anti-conversion” as a means to this. The reason is simply because, for better or worse, in the West, religion is about belief! This is something Karen Armstrong talks a lot about. Given this is true, the idea of infringing upon someone’s freedom to believe in what they want to believe in, is, from the Western perspective, the highest infringement upon someone’s moral personhood.

I agree that conversion should most definitely not be solicited or even encouraged. However, I believe that voluntary conversion deemed necessary and important by the practitioner his or herself is often an authentic expression of one’s basic self and should not be criticized. Yet, I also believe that as Westerners we need to become much more educated about the experience of people in other countries in this regard. We live a highly privileged life, one of freedom, and, one of at least relative affluence and security. The freedom and affluence we possess has often been at the great expense of others, especially our native indigenous people. We have incurred a huge debt. In this regard, if we recognize that adopting a universal value of “anti-conversion” will genuinely help other countries, we ought to stand at least somewhat open and willing to promote this in some way. But practically and culturally speaking, we have to contemplate such a vision within the Western framework as well. Love and Peace to all.




Sulaiman Charles Neave said:
Kathryn Julyan's answer is very perceptive. I think these cultural misunderstandings are exactly what Peace Next and the Parliament of the World's Religions is for. There is a completely different concept of 'conversion' for people in East and West (as I acknowledged in some of my initial comments on this thread). So I hope we can all learn from one another's perspectives.

With peace and love... Sulaiman

kathryn julyan said:
Thank you for sharing what is happening in Indonesia. In Western moral/political culture, "conversion" is an assumed extension of "freedom of religion." "Anti-conversion" is thus assumed to go against "freedom of religion." But this position is rooted within a deep cultural bias. Until we meet people like yourself or the people I met in India who feel as you do, it is difficult for Westerners to wrap their mind around "interfaith spiritualists" speaking against even friendly voluntary conversion. But I am trying to learn and listen. I also understand the Western perspective. Due to the horrible atrocities performed on our own indigenous people, we simply do not have a point of reference for relating to religion indigenously as say Hindus in India. Conversion in such places totally uproots people from their culture. In the West, the spirit of conversion, choosing one's own way, is our culture. So much more learning to take place! Love to all.

Anand Krishna said:
Paul, great... I love it, "nutrition" - this is important... so it is the "spirit" of religion, which is essential.

By the way, i must mention here, that in my country, Indonesia, what you have left behind, is actually being adopted now.

Our religious ministers actually tell you to part with your indigenous culture. So, a Muslim becomes more Arab, a Christian becomes more Westerner (i thought Jesus was Asian, anyways...), a Hindu more Indian, and a Buddhist more Chinese (was Siddhartha a Chinese? who cares...), and so on, and so forth....

Tragedy.

This is the same country, where the first translation of Bhagavad Gita was done by a Muslim SCHOLAR back in 1920s. This is the same country, where a JESUIT painstakingly collected the indigenous literature and translated them. This is the same country where a Balinese Hindu PRINCE donated part of his property for building a mosque.

This is the same country where our first president SUKARNO would freely quote from Dhammapada, Bible, Qur'an, and Gita with equal zwal and sense of appreciation.

Alas, that Indonesia is lost....

Please keep us in our prayer, my brother....


Paul Williams said:
ps. To push the analogy a bit further, what we, as teachers and leaders of spirituality need to be doing is educating our people about spiritual nutrition rather than prescribing their diet.

▶ Reply to Discussion

RSS