Vishnu- out of context

Submitted by Don (India), Nov 30, 2005 at 03:03

Dear Vishnu Gupta
Your Quote
--"Blue Eyed, Blonde Haired White Caucasian Hindus populated India after riding in on horseback coming from a fabled Aryan homeland in the Black Forest some 3,500 years ago, with their highly developed Sanskrit and Vedic literature and rituals?"--This justifies the Missionary Christian invasion of India?"

About the Blue Eyed, blonde Haired White Caucasians Hindus populating India, I think you should ask this questions to the scholars of Aryan Invasion Theorists (AIT) or the Aryan Trickle-in Acculturation Theory. May be they can give you a "better" explanation as how and from where they came. I'm merely stating here Hinduism has a "foreign origin" (as put by those same scholars) and this theory is sustaining for now. However this theory might be debunked anytime should other scholars "come up" with a better explanation. The question of the origin of Hinduism hence is an open question and we should go with the current explanation given till another theory arises with a better explanation.

But you are absolutely wrong Vishnu when you said, "Don says Aryan Invasion Theory (AIT) legitimizes missionary Christian and other invasion of India."

Did I really say that? Can you please quote my words? In which post have I said those exact words? No Mr. Vishnu is not good to malign someone by imagining or creating false accusation.

The question I put forward to Mr. Rakshas 10 Anan was since Hinduism is believed to have a "foreign origin" why does he feel negative when his Indian brethren accept Christianity (another foreign religion to India). Why don't you feel the same when one Hindu accepts Islam and becomes a Muslim? (Islam another foreign religion) This question I asked because when ever Christian missionaries operate in India, some Hindus feel negative as Christianity being a foreign religion being imposed on the "innocent Hindu brothers". They attach Christianity with Western ideas and values. The moment missionaries are mentioned people imagine "white man" , "America", "mass conversion", "Vatican" "India Christianized" "Indian losing its culture", "India adopting white man's culture!"…Which is totally wrong. Look at your Indian Christian brothers. Do they look "less Indian" than you? Have they abandoned their "India ness"? The former president of India who passed away recently K.R Narayan was a Christian. Do you think you are more Indian than him?

Hence my question was if Hinduism is supposed to have a "foreign origin" in its belief why does he feel negative when his Indian brother accepts another religion, which has a foreign origin?. Christianity is not a white man's religion, nor did it originate in white man's land.

I'm not assaying AIT legitimizes Indian invasion by missionaries. That is purely your wrong interpretation.You are out of context. Missionaries are religious organization don't need any "theory" to "invade" any country. If you think that is an "invasion" you still have enough time to kick out all missionaries out of India and close all their organizations. Who is stopping you?

Don.

---

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".