As conversion row rages on, Adityanath says will go to Aligarh on Christmas

[INDIAPOSITIVE]

Despite a massive controversy around the alleged conversion of nearly 200 Muslims into Hinduism in Uttar Pradesh's Agra district earlier this week, a defiant Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh on Thursday said it will continue with another - and bigger - ceremony planned in Aligarh on Christmas this year.

While the BJP has denied its role in the Agra conversions, the party's firebrand MP Yogi Adityanath has said that he will go to Aligarh on December 25 for what the right-wing groups call a 'Purkhon ki ghar vapsi' (Coming home of the ancestors) ceremony. "This is not conversion but homecoming. My program is in Aligarh and it will happen - those who want to return voluntarily will be welcome," Adityanath said today as his party confronted a furious opposition in Parliament.

Senior RSS ideologue M G Vaidya defended the controversial ceremony, saying, "Let us not call this conversion. It is reconversion since all Muslims and Christians in this country were Hindus once." The RSS is the ideological mentor of the ruling BJP at the Centre.

Meanwhile, an FIR lodged against the conversions organized on Monday in Agra only names one Kishore Valmiki, a villager who allegedly informed the families about the ceremony. "Arrest is the next step. We will not allow forced conversions," Ram Gopal Yadav of the ruling Samajwadi Party in Uttar Pradesh said.

What happened in Parliament on the conversion row?

As opposition members protested in Lok Sabha on Thursday, Parliamentary Affairs Minister Venkaiah Naidu said the government has no objection in discussing the matter. "Conversion and reconversions are serious matters. We welcome a debate on the issue," he said.


Almost all opposition parties demanded the suspension of the question hour and a discussion on the Agra "conversions". As soon as the House met for the day, members of the Congress, Trinamool Congress, Rashtriya Janata Dal and CPM trooped near the speaker's podium, and also raised slogans like "Modi sarkaar hosh mein aao" (Wake up, Modi government) and "Hindu-Muslim bhai-bhai".

Congress leader Mallikarjun Kharge asked Speaker Sumitra Mahajan to allow a discussion on the issue. "You have full powers to suspend the question hour. The government has already agreed to a discussion, kindly allow us," he said.

Samajwadi Party leader Mulayam Singh Yadav said that the matter should be taken "seriously". "Otherwise, there might be riots," he said.

The opposition Congress has also given a notice for discussion on the issue in Rajya Sabha, which witnessed a massive protest on Wednesday too with the opposition demanding an explanation from Prime Minister Narendra Modi and his government.

Were the Muslim families in Agra misled into conversion?

Meanwhile, the 57 Muslim families in Uttar Pradesh's Agra district, who the RSS on Monday claimed to have "converted" to Hinduism, have said that they were misled by Dharma Jagran Samanvay Vibhag and Bajrang Dal activists into believing that the event was for BPL cards and not for religious conversion.

"We did not know anything about it. We were forced to convert our religion. We were promised that our IDs will be made. We were just asked to dress properly. The men were asked to wear skull caps," a woman at Madhunagar slum area of the city said.

The Bajrang Dal and the Dharma Jagran Samanvay Vibhag, an RSS offshoot, on Monday claimed to have converted the families into Hinduism at a 'Purkhon ki ghar vapsi' (Coming home of the ancestors) ceremony, where the right-wing groups said they were able to bring more than 200 Muslims "back to Hinduism".





Read more at: As conversion row rages on, Adityanath says will go to Aligarh on Christmas : India, News - India Today

 

[PlanetWarrior]

Krshna, Allah and Jesus must be holding their heads in their hands asking "where did we go wrong?"

 

[gslv]

if you want control religions ban all religions. there shouldn't be any selective bias for Abrahamic faiths. i am an agnostic myself still i believe there is no India if you remove dharmic faiths. all those who writing all these article should come to odisha .
my father was transferred to hilly area(kandhamal ,where 2008 or 09 riot happened) back in the 90's.. my father says that the christian people used chloroquine tab. to cure malaria and said to the illiterate and poor tribal dat it is Jesus who is curing them.
Another incident he saw that 2 locket of Jesus(made of steel) and Krishna(made of plastic) thrown into fire. obviously the former came out without burning , and they said to the tribal to see who is powerful enough to withstand fire.. hilarious but TRUE

 

[SarthakGanguly]

Krshna, Allah and Jesus must be holding their heads in their hands asking "where did we go wrong?"

Your statement betrays ignorance. Theologically speaking only Krishna can recognize Allah and Jesus as manifestations of divinity.
Allah will recognize Jesus as a Prophet alone.
Jesus will recognize no one.

They are not on the same level.

Ergo, this is a statement only an Indian steeped in Nehruvian secularism can come up with.

No offence sir and no offence to any faith above. The fallacy was too big and I felt it necessary to mention.

if you want control religions ban all religions. there should be selective bias to Abrahamic faiths. i am an agnostic myself still i believe there is no India if you remove dharmic faiths. all those who writing all these article should come to odisha .
my father was transferred to hilly area(kandhamal ,where 2008 or 09 riot happened) back in the 90's.. my father says that the christian people used chloroquine tab. to cure malaria and said to the illiterate and poor tribal dat it is Jesus who is curing them.
Another incident he saw that 2 locket of Jesus(made of steel) and Krishna(made of plastic) thrown into fire. obviously the former came out without burning , and they said to the tribal to see who is powerful enough to withstand fire.. hilarious but TRUE

Your post goes against India's secularism.

 

[PlanetWarrior]

Your statement betrays ignorance. Theologically speaking only Krishna can recognize Allah and Jesus as manifestations of divinity.
Allah will recognize Jesus as a Prophet alone.
Jesus will recognize no one.

They are not on the same level.

Ergo, this is a statement only an Indian steeped in Nehruvian secularism can come up with.

No offence sir and no offence to any faith above. The fallacy was too big and I felt it necessary to mention.


Your post goes against India's secularism.

I beg to differ. Krshna claims to be the Ultimate Creator or God. So does Allah. Therefore Krshna and Allah share the same components and are theoretically one and the same. Jesus claims to be the Son of God. Jesus therefore recognizes Krshna and Allah as the Father. The only part of your deduction which I am inclined to agree with therefore is that they are not on the same level unless offcourse the Son has gathered the army of angels/demi-Gods and staged a coup de' tat against the Father. There hasn't been any major rumblings in the universe lately so that remains a highly improbable scenario. I trust that this bit of Nehruvian secularism has helped

 

[Rafi]

I beg to differ. Krshna claims to be the Ultimate Creator or God. So does Allah. Therefore Krshna and Allah share the same components and are theoretically one and the same. Jesus claims to be the Son of God. Jesus therefore recognizes Krshna and Allah as the Father. The only part of your deduction which I am inclined to agree with therefore is that they are not on the same level unless offcourse the Son has gathered the army of angels/demi-Gods and staged a coup de' tat against the Father. There hasn't been any major rumblings in the universe lately so that remains a highly improbable scenario. I trust that this bit of Nehruvian secularism has helped

He is the one and the same, but we know him by different names.

 

[SarthakGanguly]

I beg to differ. Krshna claims to be the Ultimate Creator or God. So does Allah. Therefore Krshna and Allah share the same components and are theoretically one and the same. Jesus claims to be the Son of God. Jesus therefore recognizes Krshna and Allah as the Father. The only part of your deduction which I am inclined to agree with therefore is that they are not on the same level unless offcourse the Son has gathered the army of angels/demi-Gods and staged a coup de' tat against the Father. There hasn't been any major rumblings in the universe lately so that remains a highly improbable scenario. I trust that this bit of Nehruvian secularism has helped

Krishna claims to be the Ultimate Creator? OK, leave it man.

 

[PlanetWarrior]

Krishna claims to be the Ultimate Creator? OK, leave it man.

Alright. I hate religious debate but consider this as my way of enlightening you.

"I am the source of all of the material and spiritual worlds. Everything emanates from Me" [Bhagvad Gita, text 8]

"I am the Supersoul, O Arjuna, seated in the hearts of all living entities. I am the beginning, the middle and the end of all beings" [Bhagvad Gita, text 20]

"Furthermore O Arjuna, I am the generating seed of all existences." [Bhagvad Gita, Text 39]

Need more to convince you otherwise ? If no, consider yourself educated today

 

[SarthakGanguly]

Alright. I hate religious debate but consider this as my way of enlightening you.

"I am the source of all of the material and spiritual worlds. Everything emanates from Me" [Bhagvad Gita, text 8]

"I am the Supersoul, O Arjuna, seated in the hearts of all living entities. I am the beginning, the middle and the end of all beings" [Bhagvad Gita, text 20]

"Furthermore O Arjuna, I am the generating seed of all existences." [Bhagvad Gita, Text 39]

Need more to convince you otherwise ? If no, consider yourself educated today

You did not understand. State one that denies Allah as well. Like Islam has the first pillar that states that only Allah is worthy of worship. You need to point out situations where Krshna states that divinity is his monopoly alone and no other God is worthy of worship.

 

[Indrani]

Alright. I hate religious debate but consider this as my way of enlightening you.

"I am the source of all of the material and spiritual worlds. Everything emanates from Me" [Bhagvad Gita, text 8]

"I am the Supersoul, O Arjuna, seated in the hearts of all living entities. I am the beginning, the middle and the end of all beings" [Bhagvad Gita, text 20]

"Furthermore O Arjuna, I am the generating seed of all existences." [Bhagvad Gita, Text 39]

Need more to convince you otherwise ? If no, consider yourself educated today

Get Re-educated about the difference of God in monotheism and polytheism.

First, monotheism is the belief in a single Divine Person. But this is only a partial description of the cult. Some think that it is the oneness alone that matters. But it is not so.

For instance, one who thinks of the Divine as an impersonal Essence is not a

monotheist in the technical sense of the term. Those who quote the famous

Rigvedic verse that says that "The One Being the sages call by many names”

do not sufficiently realize that here the One Being (Eka sad) is in

the neuter, standing for the Divine Existence and not for a Divine Individual, and hence is not the same as contemplated by the well-known creeds that describe themselves as

monotheistic. To the monotheistic creeds God is a Person and not a

metaphysical Essence.


Secondly, as a Person the monotheistic Divinity can not be

conceived in any way one likes. For example, one who accepts a Single Divinity

as Mother or Maiden is not a monotheist in the practical sense of the term. To

the monotheist the Divinity is not only a Single Person but also a Masculine

Person. Thus the distinction between polytheism and monotheism is not one of

number alone but of gender also.


Thirdly, a monotheistic God cannot be any kind of male Person: He cannot, for example, be

a child or a boy. He can only be a Father. One would not be a monotheist if one

were to think of the Divine as Brother or any other relation. In other words,

the monotheistic God is not only a Person and a male Person, but He stands

in a single relationship to man-that of Father.


Fourthly, even as Father He must be believed to be a very elderly Person; not only a Father but a Patriarch.


Fifthly, as a Person the monotheistic God cannot exist anywhere; He has His special abode –heaven; He is a Father who is in heaven. He may go wherever He likes, but heaven is His

place of residence. Perhaps the most essential difference between monotheism

and polytheism lies here: that monotheism contemplates the Divine in heaven

and 'polytheism contemplates the Divine in the universe.


This makes a difference in the entire conception of

life and religion. To the monotheist heaven represents a superior plane of

existence and God a superior order of reality. To that order belong angels and

archangels, cherubim and seraphim, who also live on that plane. According to

this cult while heaven is sacred, the universe is profane; while God and the

angels who live in heaven are holy, man who lives on the earth is sinful; while

God is great, man is small.


Polytheism finds the Divine in the universe and hence there is but a thin dividing line between the sacred and the profane, the human and the Divine, the mortal and the immortal. In fact

polytheism contemplates heaven on earth and God in nature and among men. Hence while polytheism is attached to the earth and thinks in terms of life and the joy of living, monotheism is

attached to a hereafter and lives for heaven, looking down upon earthly things.

This trait of polytheism has been called Paganism.


Sixthly, monotheism is not a simple belief in a God in heaven who is a Father. Its God, a Patriarch, is a Ruler. He is the King of Heaven. And from heaven He also rules over the universe as its sole Monarch. Thus monotheism is monarchical theism.


Hence the ideology of monotheism is the ideology of monarchy. Heaven is the royal abode. The King is seated in His throne. He has his servants and emissaries. He appoints His vicegerents. He takes the best of His subjects to His heavenly court. The worst of them are flung into the dark prison-house, Hell.


As King, He claims unstinted allegiance and homage. The subjects must offer their respects often enough and regularly enough to satisfy His royal position. They must bow and bend before Him and thus honor and exalt Him. They must stand in dread of Him.


And as the only King He is jealous of usurpers and rivals.

He alone should receive the homage and no other. To offer homage to any but the

God of Heaven is to be a traitor to the Kingdom of God.

No wonder that ideal subjects of the Kingdom have thought that nothing can

please the King better than the punishment of those who try to offer their honor

and homage to persons or objects other than the God of Heaven.


Seventhly, the monotheistic God has His perpetual Adversary or Enemy - Satan, who

is a sort of Anti-God. Hence there is rivalry between God and Satan for the possession

of the universe. Men are in constant risk of going over to God's Enemy and

God's wrath is directed against them when they are suspected of having done so.


Eighthly, as monotheism centers in a Monarch, who is an absolute Ruler, the chief thing for

His subjects is to know His will. The Divine Will is the only guide for man in

his conduct on the earth. How to know the will of God? He sends His messengers

(Prophets) on earth to make His will known to mankind. Those men are virtuous

who bow to His will and make it prevail on earth as in heaven. Those are

sinners who disobey or defy His will or-it comes to that--the prophet who

conveys the will to mankind.


Religion, here, is the exercise by man of his own will to force himself to obey the Will

of God.


The difficulty with monotheism is that its prophets are not universally accepted. As a result there has been acute rivalry between monotheistic creeds, each claiming an exclusive relation with

the Ultimate Being.

 

[SarthakGanguly]

Get Re-educated about the difference of God in monotheism and polytheism.

First, monotheism is the belief in a single Divine Person. But this is only a partial description of the cult. Some think that it is the oneness alone that matters. But it is not so.

For instance, one who thinks of the Divine as an impersonal Essence is not a

monotheist in the technical sense of the term. Those who quote the famous

Rigvedic verse that says that "The One Being the sages call by many names”

do not sufficiently realize that here the One Being (Eka sad) is in

the neuter, standing for the Divine Existence and not for a Divine Individual, and hence is not the same as contemplated by the well-known creeds that describe themselves as

monotheistic. To the monotheistic creeds God is a Person and not a

metaphysical Essence.


Secondly, as a Person the monotheistic Divinity can not be

conceived in any way one likes. For example, one who accepts a Single Divinity

as Mother or Maiden is not a monotheist in the practical sense of the term. To

the monotheist the Divinity is not only a Single Person but also a Masculine

Person. Thus the distinction between polytheism and monotheism is not one of

number alone but of gender also.


Thirdly, a monotheistic God cannot be any kind of male Person: He cannot, for example, be

a child or a boy. He can only be a Father. One would not be a monotheist if one

were to think of the Divine as Brother or any other relation. In other words,

the monotheistic God is not only a Person and a male Person, but He stands

in a single relationship to man-that of Father.


Fourthly, even as Father He must be believed to be a very elderly Person; not only a Father but a Patriarch.


Fifthly, as a Person the monotheistic God cannot exist anywhere; He has His special abode –heaven; He is a Father who is in heaven. He may go wherever He likes, but heaven is His

place of residence. Perhaps the most essential difference between monotheism

and polytheism lies here: that monotheism contemplates the Divine in heaven

and 'polytheism contemplates the Divine in the universe.


This makes a difference in the entire conception of

life and religion. To the monotheist heaven represents a superior plane of

existence and God a superior order of reality. To that order belong angels and

archangels, cherubim and seraphim, who also live on that plane. According to

this cult while heaven is sacred, the universe is profane; while God and the

angels who live in heaven are holy, man who lives on the earth is sinful; while

God is great, man is small.


Polytheism finds the Divine in the universe and hence there is but a thin dividing line between the sacred and the profane, the human and the Divine, the mortal and the immortal. In fact

polytheism contemplates heaven on earth and God in nature and among men. Hence while polytheism is attached to the earth and thinks in terms of life and the joy of living, monotheism is

attached to a hereafter and lives for heaven, looking down upon earthly things.

This trait of polytheism has been called Paganism.


Sixthly, monotheism is not a simple belief in a God in heaven who is a Father. Its God, a Patriarch, is a Ruler. He is the King of Heaven. And from heaven He also rules over the universe as its sole Monarch. Thus monotheism is monarchical theism.


Hence the ideology of monotheism is the ideology of monarchy. Heaven is the royal abode. The King is seated in His throne. He has his servants and emissaries. He appoints His vicegerents. He takes the best of His subjects to His heavenly court. The worst of them are flung into the dark prison-house, Hell.


As King, He claims unstinted allegiance and homage. The subjects must offer their respects often enough and regularly enough to satisfy His royal position. They must bow and bend before Him and thus honor and exalt Him. They must stand in dread of Him.


And as the only King He is jealous of usurpers and rivals.

He alone should receive the homage and no other. To offer homage to any but the

God of Heaven is to be a traitor to the Kingdom of God.

No wonder that ideal subjects of the Kingdom have thought that nothing can

please the King better than the punishment of those who try to offer their honor

and homage to persons or objects other than the God of Heaven.


Seventhly, the monotheistic God has His perpetual Adversary or Enemy - Satan, who

is a sort of Anti-God. Hence there is rivalry between God and Satan for the possession

of the universe. Men are in constant risk of going over to God's Enemy and

God's wrath is directed against them when they are suspected of having done so.


Eighthly, as monotheism centers in a Monarch, who is an absolute Ruler, the chief thing for

His subjects is to know His will. The Divine Will is the only guide for man in

his conduct on the earth. How to know the will of God? He sends His messengers

(Prophets) on earth to make His will known to mankind. Those men are virtuous

who bow to His will and make it prevail on earth as in heaven. Those are

sinners who disobey or defy His will or-it comes to that--the prophet who

conveys the will to mankind.


Religion, here, is the exercise by man of his own will to force himself to obey the Will

of God.


The difficulty with monotheism is that its prophets are not universally accepted. As a result there has been acute rivalry between monotheistic creeds, each claiming an exclusive relation with

the Ultimate Being.

Come on. He won't even try reading this. @PlanetWarrior - right?

 

[Indrani]

Come on. He won't even try reading this. @PlanetWarrior - right?

Yeah, Born Moron should have been his baptized name.

 

[PlanetWarrior]

Yeah, Allah also plays flute and romances gopis. Allah also gets born as human time and again and is a cowherd. That is how Allah and Krishna are the same. Now go and sell this idea to the Muslims.

You are a Hindu by ego, not by practice. Read Srimadh Bhagvad Gita and then return to argue with me once you have done so

 

[Indrani]

You are a Hindu by ego, not by practice. Read Srimadh Bhagvad Gita and then return to argue with me once you have done so

You are not a Hindu by ego nor by practice. You are a doormat.

 

[PlanetWarrior]

Come on. He won't even try reading this. @PlanetWarrior - right?

Oh I read that garbage. Indrani is too busy trying to show how different he/she is from Muslims and Christians rather than focusing on the ultimate message of his/her religion. If a Muslim prays to the east hypothetically, Indrani will take joy in claiming that Hindus pray to the west to show that we are different. The fact that the prayer is ultimately the same holds no weight for Indrani

You are not a Hindu by ego nor by practice. You are a doormat.

Come now, stop with the affections. There is only so much love which any man can handle