From Abbottabad to Worse

**ambidex** · 18 Jun 11,, 15:26

Bigfella: I'm querying a specific statement you made. You gave no qualification or context.

Your query is coming from a different space and mind set. You can not understand spread of Hinduism like you understand spread of Christianity or Islam. Before you understand how Hinduism spread into south east asia you have to learn what is Hinduism and how old its history is.

Furthermore the possibility of breding more hindus as you bluntly mentioned can not be ruled out. Given the population of hindus left irrespective of the time span hindus of India in contact with south east asia and south east asia being ruled by hindu kings on many occasions way before 200 BC, your statements seems to be in a haste and some time self contradicting. Why they look like locals has to asked from Darwin or left on the beauty of old age of hinduism in that part of the word; adjusting to the features more appropriate to that geography.

Boring mode on

.

The word used by me 'Hindu religion' or Hinduism is very modern, given the culture or values practised by so called Hindus since ancient times. There was no such thing like Hindu religion or many groups within Hindu religion. But for sake of addressing or referring to a group, I am using such vocabulary. There is cast system only and rest are different ways of life and more religious ways subscribe to achieving 'moksha' or truth or great soul or God.

There is no historic reference showing intent of a person or a group or a state that has enforced a particular way of religious life upon any one in India. Indians kings were ruling south East Asian countries. The kings were usually more concerned about rule of the earth than the faith of civilians. Different faiths were encouraged to spread than being suppressed. Kings like Chander Gupt Maurya accepted Jaininsm, Ashoka accepted Buddhism so and so forth even when orthodox Brahmins were appointees on higher state positions. New faiths were welcomed with curiosity to learn new religious ways because religion was considered as the only salvation by state and its people.

Vedas or any hindu religious book do not subscribe to this Idea of conversation. 'Ekam styam vipra bhuda vedyanti' truth is explained in different ways by different scholars. May be this was the reason they didn't subscribed to this Idea of conversation. They were pretty ok about others converting to different faiths. All faiths lead to one destiny i.e one God this how it has been seen. Even Islam irrespective of its infamous clashes with Hindus was accepted in co existence. Jews were accepted and never faced a threat from majority of Hindus since the time of King Solomon.

There was never a organized religious Hindu movement or spree of spreading Hinduism. The Hindus who accepted Buddhism were first who went on spreading Buddhism and were fairly backed by kings or states.

History of migration of Indians and trade with south Asian countries from India predates 200 BC may be more. A Hindu migrating to Burma marrying a local tribal lady will have a Hindu child. This how it worked and they bred in record numbers as you said, after then. You answered your question in your post. The population was never that overwhelming and majority was short lived because their spread was confined to this method only, where as Buddhism, Islam and then Christianity used faster tricks.

There are many examples of re conversions in recent times in India where goons of VHP have tried to reconvert Christians back to Hinduism by doing some of their own invented rituals. Also there are few examples in past when non Hindus were converted. A Greek diplomat in Chandergupt Mauray's court was converted after when he started practising Indian way of religious life. Few is the word which needs attention. Such examples were exceptions but not precedence for others to follow.

Let me tell you very interesting thing. In hinduism an end is a start, an end is more nearer than start, an end helps more to understand hindu history than a start. All dead are burnt and their ashes are submerged into Ganges. This how a hindu ends his journey. So what happens when ashes of a hindu are taken to the shores of Ganges (Haridwar). The family tries to find a priest looking after the record of his cast and area/state. Its mandatory to find him so that end rituals can be performed for departed soul to be in peace. The priest digs out a ledger from a room full of thousands of ledgers. Some people cry some laugh when they recognize handwritings of their dead parents/grand parent's. I know who is my priest and he has record of my family visiting Haridwar up to 365 BC (this is what he says). My grand father recognised his dad's hand writing when i visited my priest with him at the age of 15. We both recorded our purpose and signed. What i mean to say is that their is one unique thing in this religious practise which discourages conversion of a non hindu and that is 'Continuity'. You will find a 2000 year old temple of Shiva and a person named Shiva selling flowers outside that temple. But you will not find a person with name of Zeus in Greece today.

**ambidex** · 18 Jun 11,, 16:54

Bigfella: You've gone to some lengths to make it clear to me that many/most/all Indians don't accept that non-indians can be hindu. This indicates to me that an element of race/ethnicity has strongly attached itself to hinduism.

Religion is not an expression to be only defined by definitions invented by Christians or by modren civil rationalties.

Spread of Hinduism can not be compared with spread of Islam or Christianity. We know it because there is no authority to governs who is coming in and who is going out; no body cares.

Element of race or ethnicity should work both ways i.e. coming in or going out. A Hindu can convert to any other religion when ever he wants. If there is no provision to welcome outsiders then there are no restriction to stop who wants to quit as well (in any hindu script). A non Hindu can practise Hindu way of life, no orthodox Hindu stops him. There are thousands of foreigners in India living the Hindu way of life under the guidance of any sage or a guru. No body tells them they have no right on moksha (nirvana); they are trying to achieve by hindu ways or they are less closer to a hindu god than a typical hindu. Can non Christian live a Christian's life without being converted, can non Muslim pay daily namaz to Allah without being Muslim. I do not think think so.

A non hindu can not jump into the continuity of Hindu tradition or value he wants to follow. In which cast he will be grouped in? Is it deliberate? No it is not deliberate. It's just the way it is. Such practises are very very old, have pretty sought out concept about spirituality and bussiness of God, were not under threat by outsiders when grooming/developing well in isolation.

**nvishal** · 18 Jun 11,, 17:25

@bigfella
My opinion is just one of the thousand different opinions you'll find on the internet. "Conversion" is an alien term in hinduism. In the pure hindu context, you only switch philosophies(through debates). A different one. A better one. That was the only process equivalent to the modern day "conversion" in ancient india.

Hinduism is just a modern term to describe those people who 1) follow dharma and 2) lead an indic life. The term also carries an identity connotation.

"Dharma" means your sense of right from wrong. Do you as a christian(?) follow dharma(right/wrong)? If so, could that mean that you have unknowingly converted to hinduism? Getting me? Hence it is said that only indians can be hindus because they follow "indic" traditions and look indian.

An indian nationalist hindu's argument would be something like this:
a) you might be a follower of dharma but you cannot be a hindu
b) you are not a hindu because you are not an indian
b) indians are the only hindus
c) we don't care if any non-indian hindus exist because we don't consider them hindu
d) white people are christians and not hindus and can never be hindus

Indian hindus have varying opinions on non-indian hindus. Some accept and some don't. A balinese hindu will have a tough time convincing people in ayodhya that he/she is a hindu and the locals would still find it difficult to believe. General indians do not imagine non-hindus could be hindus. The british legacy has strongly affected the indian hindus psyche; ie, the whites are christian(ie not hindu) and we are hindu(ie not christian). The muslim/christian conquests too have influenced an indian hindus identity and his world view.

"Hinduism" is used as the equivalent word for "islam" or "christianity". That word also happens to provide the major amount of confusion. It can be used in borderline discussions but not in dedicated discussions.

**Double Edge** · 18 Jun 11,, 17:44