[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: Religious conversion of Hindus to other faiths
>X-News: soc.religion.hindu:2098
>From: gopal@ecf.toronto.edu (Please Listen)
>Subject:Re: Religious conversion of Hindus to other faiths
>Date: 18 Mar 1996 01:19:50 GMT
>Message-ID:<4iidnm$s0m@babbage.ece.uc.edu>
>In article <4ickqt$s0@babbage.ece.uc.edu>,
<DCHATTERJEE@KUHUB.CC.UKANS.EDU> wrote:
> In the recent times, many Hindus in India and elsewhere have been
> converted to Islam. I was reading an article in India Today, where
> it was reported that one Mr. Gyanprakash Ghosh after being married
> to his wife for more than 16 years converted to Islam because he wanted
> live with his lover.
[....]
> What is most horrible is that Islam is used as a ready tool to tear
> apart the fabric of the Hindu society.
[...]
|*Imho, this is not an issue of religous conversion, but that of
|*subversion of laws. by Ghosh departure from hinduism neither
|*hinduism gets adversely affected, nor islam gets favourably
|*affected. that is just a notional conversion, and religios
|*lable is just a side effect.
It definitely is a favorable issue for Islam, because Islam
supports conversion (in any form possible) in order to realize
the all peravsive/ almighty Ummah.
Thus, if two lovers plan to be together, then Islam condones such
a conduct because Islam wants the numerical majority of its followers.
So, whether one was forced into conversion or one lovingly embraced
Islam is a different question. What is important is that conversion
did occur and that is good news for Islam.
|*It is just a matter of injustice to Mrs Ghosh, in the sense
|*that at the time of marriage she must have had expectations
|*arising out of hindu marriage, which must have been shattered.
|*to the best of my knowledge the marriage is voidable at her
|*discretion. [not that it is adequate protection].
Truly it is a matter of injustice to Mrs. Ghosh. However in her
case her husband, once he converts to Islam, can simply say NO to all
the secular laws of Indian Constitiution, since personal law for
Muslims - Sharia would override everything else.
This explains why conversion to Christianity for Hindus is not so
profitable, because Christians are " religiously " obligated to be
governed by the laws of the land (Indian Constitution).
|*i doubt if this can be a reasonable ground to do away with
|*separate personal laws in india.
In fact your doubts (or creative ambiguities) are paving stones for
the denigration of the Indian Constitution. No secular society that
I know makes constitutional compromises for its minorities. Freedom
to practise one's religion is not equivalent to mindlessly irresponsible
behavior. Moreover, this despicable saga of Gyanprakash Ghosh also
suggests that Islam condones such irresponsible behavior when probably
some Muslim would argue that such is far from the truth. However in the
realistic sense, we do not see mullahs and other local bigwigs preventing
such unfortunate incidents from happening.
This quiet endorsement of irresponsible behavior by the likes of Ghosh
creates the rift between Hindus and Muslims. A rift that always exists
and shall continue to exist because of the very nature of Islam and Hindu
culture. It is prudent for anyone to try to pacify matters rather than
exacerbate undesired situations.
It is basically this penchant for compromise, propelled by such ambivalence
and indecision, that has generated chaos and mistrust for each other in
the Hindu society.
In my opinion, Article 44 should be enforced and the Sharia (or Muslim
personal laws) should be abrogated, if both Hindus and Muslims are to
live amicably in India.
- cheers,
deb chatterjee
(a good samaritan)
