By Robert Travis Scott
2008 Religion News Service
CHANDIGARH, India — When Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal converted to Catholicism during high school and college, he took a momentous step away from his inherited faith of Hinduism, the prevalent religion of his parents’ generation and Indian homeland.
But among Jindal’s relatives and among Hindus in India generally, his decision to adopt the Christian way is strongly supported.
Jindal’s personal path to Christianity was aided by an open-minded attitude among his relatives about theology. His infrequent visits to India as a child gave him little chance to acquire a deeply ingrained appreciation for Hindu culture.
His relatives’ perspective reflects a tolerant side of Hinduism, which for thousands of years has survived philosophical transformations, rebellious counter-religions and numerous sects, only to claim them all in time as part of the infinitely flexible cosmos of Hindu faith.
“If you find and see that you get more peace of mind, more solace, in that religion, then why not change religion?” said Jindal’s uncle Subhash Gupta, a practicing Hindu. “In India, many people change to the Christian religion. And I can understand that some people maybe find Christian religion more satisfying to their needs.”
Jindal, who was sworn in as governor Monday, grew up in Baton Rouge, La., under the guidance of Hindu parents. On a few occasions, he spent time with Hindu relatives in India. One of his earliest mentors was his multifaceted maternal grandfather, Krishan Gupta, a Punjab banking executive who was widely read and believed in the equality of religions.
Jindal would spend much of his time on those visits in his grandfather’s home, a place full of books, including the popular Hindu scripture the Bhagavad Gita. Gupta could read Urdu and was familiar with the Quran.
“They had a great relationship,” Subhash Gupta said.
The young Jindal posed “questions after questions” to the elder Gupta about Indian religion and philosophy. The grandfather “was amazed to see that such a question was coming out from this age of boy,” Gupta said.
Jindal’s aunt, Nirmal Aggarwal of New Delhi, also recalls a special bond between Jindal and her father, Krishan. She said Jindal’s conversion to Catholicism was a natural and spiritually healthy move.
“I am happy with it … because I think it is his own affair,”
Aggarwal said. “I really respect his decision. All religions, I think, they believe in one divine power, that is God.”
Although the relatives’ opinions might seem magnanimous, their views are typically Hindu. India’s large-circulation national newspapers viewed Jindal’s election as front-page news, and for the most part his conversion to Catholicism has received less comment than criticisms of his infrequent visits and seeming lack of interest in his parents’ home country.
India’s revered national figure Mahatma Gandhi espoused religious tolerance because he believed there were many paths to God — so long as the pursuit was sincere. Pandit Deoki Nandan Shastri, a Hindu holy man in Varanasi, made a similar point.
“Hindu is not a religion,” he said. “Hinduism is a way of life.”
“You pray to Christ, I pray to Rama, he prays to Muhammad,” he said.
“We are going the same way. God is one. His name is called a thousand names.”
Jindal has routinely delivered testimonies about his faith at Protestant and Catholic churches across Louisiana. It was a grass-roots approach aimed at least partially at making conservative voters feel comfortable with the notion that this son of immigrants was just a regular Louisiana guy.
When he explored Christianity in high school and college, he delved into the works of historic Christian writers and debated their philosophies with student friends and preachers.
While a sophomore at Brown University, Jindal was baptized a Catholic, a rite his parents did not attend. But when his wife, Supriya, also converted after the couple married, Jindal’s parents and her parents were present for her baptism.
Jindal’s parents, Amar and Raj Jindal, are practicing Hindus and emphasize that they are monotheists. Hindus say they believe in one God, who also takes the form of a trinity.
In addition, Hinduism recognizes thousands, and by some counts millions, of deities who are considered incarnations, or avatars, of the one God, sent to Earth to right some wrong.
Few Hindus worship Jesus Christ, but they might easily accept the idea that he was an avatar. Or they might draw a parallel between their worship of various Hindu deities and Catholic prayers to saints as couriers to God.
Most Hindus select one or at most a few deities to function as their personal gateways to an understanding of God and spiritual truths. They similarly might choose gurus to guide them, a type of holy worker that would have been in short supply in the United States during Jindal’s youth.
As Hindu children grow up, the parents encourage them to choose their own personal deities. The chosen gods are represented at home with small statues and pictures.
Members of most Hindu households do puja, or worship, at shrines in their homes morning and night. Jindal’s maternal grandmother would not enter the kitchen in the morning before saying prayers.
According to Jindal’s relatives, many Hindu stories were related to him as a boy. The incredible variety of scripture provides rich allegories, but it also makes Hinduism appear unfixed on any central liturgy. As some scholars have observed, Hinduism is not one codified religion, but a compilation of thousands of smaller belief systems.
While Jindal was exposed to Hindu theology during his boyhood, his relationship to Hindu culture was unlike the experience of children growing up in Punjab, where religion permeates everyday life in myriad ways.
Usha Gupta, the wife of Jindal’s uncle, Subhash, said Hinduism is difficult to instill in a child in the United States because the traditions and scriptural teachings are hard to come by there.
In her mind, Jindal’s adoption of Christianity was both laudable and practical for daily life in the United States, she said. “It is just a matter of faith in any form that brings you closer to the values of humanity,” Usha Gupta said.
Jindal’s other aunt, Pushpa Bansal of Mehal Kalan, said she did not know whether Jindal was a Hindu or Christian, and she was not concerned either way.
“She doesn’t mind if Bobby adopts the culture of that country, because he is living there,” a translator quoted Bansal as saying. “He should and he must adopt the culture of that country. She is delighted that he is more loyal to that country, that land where he lives.”
(Robert Travis Scott writes for The Times-Picayune in New Orleans.)
Copyright 2008 Religion News Service. All rights reserved. No part of this transmission may be distributed or reproduced without written permission.
Beliefnet
Advertisement
posted January 14, 2008 at 5:25 pm
It would seem he’s gone from a much more tolerant religion to a much less tolerant, but politically far more advantageous one.
If you want to know more about Jindal you can Google “Jindal Wiki” (don’t use the quotes) and get a fairly objective looking Wikipedia article. It looks like Jindal has drunk all the conservative Cool-Aid, and in Louisiana it’s served him well. I doubt he will serve them well.
It is encouraging they would elect a man of color; too bad he’s also a man of the right wing and doesn’t seem to think much for himself.
posted January 14, 2008 at 6:16 pm
Hindus sound as though they know what “unconditional love” is about. Now if Jindal can bring that belief with him into christianity that would be good.
posted January 14, 2008 at 6:28 pm
What an wonderfully tolerant religion! Too bad there are many Christians who can’t accept those who don’t accept Christ as their “Lord and Savior”.
I agree with the above 2 posts…let’s hope Jindal can be as tolerant in is Catholic religion as his former religion is.
posted January 14, 2008 at 8:07 pm
“It would seem he’s gone from a much more tolerant religion to a much less tolerant, but politically far more advantageous one.”
To be fair, they didn’t interview any Untouchables for this article.
posted January 14, 2008 at 8:07 pm
(P.S.: God bless.)
posted January 14, 2008 at 8:39 pm
The tolerance being applauded here is far from the norm in India. There are a number of states with laws that prohibit converting from Hinduism to other religions; and even where it’s not actually illegal, converts to Christianity are commonly ostracized and persecuted by their Hindu families and communities, especially among the higher castes. The BJP party makes conversion a prominent political issue, and for them converting from Hinduism means to cease being Indian. There are many well-documented cases of forced reconversions of Dalits and tribal peoples who have accepted Christianity, and Hindu-initiated violence against Muslims is not unusual.
posted January 14, 2008 at 9:19 pm
Jindal is an American, so it really has no affect on India. India has it’s religious problems just like many other countries. The interviews with the acceptance of his conversion seem to have been mostly with his relatives in India. (and his parents here). I wonder if he would have been elected governor if he was still a practicing Hindu.
posted January 14, 2008 at 10:32 pm
“I wonder if he would have been elected governor if he was still a practicing Hindu.”
In Louisiana? Not on your life. Anywhere in the US? I doubt it. But it is progress a man of color is elected in La. It’s unfortunate it’s this one.
I thought about the ills of Hinduism before I posted earlier but in my zeal to be positive about religion I didn’t mention them. But Joey and SRB, you are right: Hinduism, as it is practiced, is far from a perfect religion, too.
posted January 15, 2008 at 2:38 am
A Christian is (or at least should be) tolerant of others views, loving all as Christ loved us. There is no hatred of others in Christ’s teachings.
Now, tolerance for sin is not part of this. It is very possible to love someone deeply while praying they turn from a sinful lifestyle to the Truth of Christ.
Not that everyone follows these standards…
posted January 15, 2008 at 9:11 am
Every religion is “tolerant” and “open” in theory, just not so in practice… Hinduism is no exception, even though most Westerners know too little about real Hinduism except the periphery to know any better (but they pretend to be experts)… Did you know Hindus and Buddhists (the supposedly most “tolerant” religions [according to Westerners]) can’t always get along with each other? Yes, they fight too.
posted January 15, 2008 at 11:38 am
I guess I will dissent from the general thinking here. But what this article and most of you are celebrating as “tolerance” is not tolerance at all. Tolerance can only have meaning in the context of a difference or disagreement. The Hindus here aren’t tolerating a difference. They are claiming there is no difference. In effect they are saying it is ok to be a Catholic, because deep down it really is just a form of being a Hindu. Jesus was just an avatar. But right there Hindus are making a truth claim that is exclusive and if you don’t agree with them they have to say you are wrong. Catholics don’t teach that Jesus was just one of many avatars of god. They teach Jesus was God. Simple logic says that both Hindus and Catholics can’t be right. At least one of them has to be wrong. Either there is one expression of God in Jesus or there are many in the form of avatars. But both can’t be correct. So a Hindu will accept a Catholic ONLY as long as they change a central teaching to conform to Hindu thinking about the nature of God. If a Catholic won’t do that then the Hindu is obligated by his belief system to say the Catholic is wrong.
True tolerance in this situation would say, “I disagree with many Catholic teachings as they don’t conform to my Hindu beliefs. However, I still love and respect him because he has clearly thought this through and believes that is the right answer.” Tolerance is about the ability to agree to disagree in a civil manner. But these Hindus are not agreeing to disagree. They are saying Jindal really is one of us, even if he doesn’t admit it.
Like I said if you read what they are saying carefully they aren’t tolerating a Catholic as a Catholic. They are tolerating a Catholic as long as they are allowed to interpret it as a form of being a Hindu. There is a huge difference.
posted January 15, 2008 at 12:41 pm
Scott presents a very incomplete picture of Hinduism in India by assuming that what Jindal’s relatives are saying is typical of Hindu attitudes. Remember that the Mahatma was killed by one of his own (a fellow Hindu). There is a strain of (dangerous) fundamentalism in all the great religious traditions of the world, including Hinduism. The fundamentalist Hindus in India have been very successful in passing laws which make it a crime for a Hindu to convert to Christianity. In fact, as a Catholic priest who has visited India several times, I have had to sign a statement each time promising “not to engage in any preaching activities” in order to get my Visa. I love India and its people, but more people have died there in interreligious strife (primarily between Hindus and Muslims) than almost any other country in the past century. Scott’s article missed that element of the story.
posted January 15, 2008 at 2:17 pm
There is no “one true” religion in the world…each religion is true in the eyes of the people who follow them.
India isn’t perfect in it’s views of religion, but neither is any other country in the world, including the US.
posted January 15, 2008 at 5:14 pm
Anthony B. makes a very good point which can, of course, be carried much further. Hinduism as presented and Catholicism as he and I understand it can’t both be right. But of course Catholicism and protestantism can’t both be right since either a god is represented by a pope or it isn’t. And in fact name two religions that disagree on any religious issue (and what two don’t) and they can’t both be right.
This leads to two fairly obvious conclusions.
First, the probability of any one religion being right is incredibly low.
Second, since religion is not going away quickly, holders of religions (and other philosophies) that can get along with other people are far more valuable to the world than holders of religions and philosophies that can’t.
posted January 15, 2008 at 9:01 pm
Quote: Jindals’ parents Amar and Raj Jindal are practising Hindus and emphasize that they are “monotheists”. Hindus say they believe in one God, who also takes the form of a trinity.
I think they resolve their sons choice of religion in the manner they stated above. One God for both Hindus, and Christians, and they feel that God can be in the other parts of the Trinity as well, but they aren’t individual they are still from the one God. An Aunt of Jindals also said she didn’t mind if he were a Hindu or a Christian, if he wants to adopt the culture of the U.S. where he lives she thought that was fine. She’s saying it doesn’t matter how he follows his one God, just that he does in his choice. This as I said before is unconditional-love. We could do well to follow this joyful way of acceptance with each other.
posted January 16, 2008 at 6:47 pm
nnmna makes a very good point – “…the probability of any one religion being right is incredibly low.”
As Jesus says in the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 7:13-14), “Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it.” (NIV)