Is Religion by Birth?

Forgive me for my sins


In the article to follow, I have neither intended to hurt feelings nor intended to weaken the faith or belief in Almighty of any person belonging to any particular religion, sect, caste or creed. If I have said any thing which appears to be wrong or incorrect, it is because of my ignorance towards the reality and has come out because of the devil sitting in me who overpowers me to think like this and makes me restless till we express the ideas to other friends of mine.

After all we are human beings born with divine and devilish features in us। That is why a person who behaves like a noble person at some particular moment, the same person behaves like an animal at some other moment. That is why we feel anger, express hate towards others and administer cruelty. So please forgive me for my sins.



Is Religion By Birth?



What constitutes a religion? In my personal opinion, most probably, our faith and belief in God, our customs and traditions are constituents of our religion. There is nothing which prevents a person from switching over from one set of these constituents to new set of such constituents.

Initially, a newly born child finds its religion from its parents and if parents change their religion, religion of the child also gets changed. Well, we can say that there is no religion of its own for a newly born innocent child. Faith and belief in God, customs and traditions are inherited by it. In case of adoption of a child, where a child is adopted by a person, belonging to a religion different from the religion of its parents, person adopting the child gives its own faith and belief in God, customs and traditions to the child. Such religion continues to be religion of the child till it becomes able to understand the religion and till it does not change its religion.

What happens when a person having faith in some particular religion adopts a new religion? He gets rid of earlier concept of God, customs and traditions; and expresses his faith and belief in new concept of God, customs and traditions. Religion gurus help him in getting social recognition in the new society. All this happens in the manner: “Vasanshi jeernani yatha vihay nevani gruhiyati naroparani” in the manner a man, discarding his old clothes, wears new clothes. Today, inter-religion marriages are also getting recognition. In that case also, religion of either male or female is changed. A person can change its religion even if there is no social recognition.

What is expected from a person in his particular capacity is also referred to as its religion. For example: religion of a warrior, religion of a student, etc. This is temporary phase of life but it reminds us that religion is by cultivation.

Suppose that a person, claiming to belong to a particular religion, acts in contravention of principles laid down in such religion, then can it be said that he is follower of that particular religion? In my opinion, it will be wrong to address him follower of that religion. Suppose, a person, born in a family which had been follower of religion “X”, acts in contravention of religion “X” but in accordance with principles laid down in another religion “Y”. On his death, followers of religion “X” dispose off his dead body in the manner laid down in religion “X”, can it be said that dead person had followed religion “X”? Most probably not, because those were the followers, of religion “X”, who acted in the manner laid down in religion “X”. Had the dead body been able to take decision about manner of its disposal, it is just possible that it would have preferred religion “Y”. My inference is that religion of a person must be recognized by acts and deeds of such person. I mean to say, the religion, which supports his acts and deeds, should be treated as religion of such person. That is why at one place, I have expressed my views about my religion as follows:

There is a limited religion for me and preaching of my religion are those which are defined or described by my acts and deeds.

One should pay full respect to religious books, but it does not mean that religious books are to be worshiped like statue of God. In my opinion, even if I read a particular religious book daily, I cannot claim that I follow the principles laid down in that religious book. Religion is to be cultivated and not to be read only. A foreigner comes in India and during his stay in India, he studies religious books relating to sanatan dharma, can he claim that he is follower of sanatan dharma? No, he cannot say himself to be follower of sanatan dharma unless he adopts and follows principles laid down in those books. Barring those few people whose duty is to study and memorize the religious books, (with my apology to all) I hate those persons who read religious books daily but do not incorporate the principles laid down in those religious books in their daily lives. They are like a foreigner quoted above. This was the feeling which compelled me to write:

Yadi dharma granthon ke pennon par likhe sidhhanton per prayog ka faruaa na chalaya gayaa, to dharma dharma na rahker ek kalaa aaveran hai jiske peechhe Bhagvan ka naam baar baar lene waaley vyakti manav nahin, aapes mein takaraate nirajeev shilakhand hain jinhen mai apanen visheshadhikar athava anadhikar chestaa se dharma ki nindaa kernaa athava makhaul uraanaa adi sangyaayen hi detaa hoon.



If we do not cultivate religion by doing spade work on what is written on pages of our religious books then religion has got no meaning for us, it is just like a black curtain before us behind which there are inanimate rattling stones creating noise and not human beings pronouncing repeatedly name of God. I, with my special right or in an unauthorized manner, call their act as their disrespect for religion or as making of mockery of religion by them.

As it relates to my faith and belief in God, I can neither describe my God nor know my God. Truly speaking, I cannot even tell every thing about any person because I can in no manner know what is going on in the mind of such other person. I am not his closest friend. I have expressed my this feeling as under:

Yadi tum apane ko saadhu kahate ho toa mai tumhein eisaaa maanene se inkaar nahin kartaa, kintu mai apani ore se tumhen saadhu bhee nahin kahataa kyonki meri apeksha tum apane bare mein adhik jaankaar ho.

If you claim to be a saint, I accept it but I do not address you a saint from my side because you know better about you than I.

God is our Creator and we all are among His creations. We even do not know all about ourselves, then how we can know all about other creations of God. Secondly, His capability is not limited only to creativity of all. Thirdly, creator is always greater than its creation. Our capabilities are limited and also we do not know even about our capabilities. In these circumstances, how one can expect from us to say some thing about God. What all can we say is that He is omnipresent and omnipotent and we can only express our faith and belief in God.

As it relates to His omnipresence, His omnipresence is not limited to any worship place. His omnipresence is such that follower of religion “X”, who believes in His omnipresence, also finds His God in worship places built by followers of Religion “Y” because worship places built by followers of religion “Y” are not the places outside the purview of omnipresence. Therefore, it is essential that followers of religion “X” should also see their God in the worship places built by followers of religion “Y”. If we assume that God of the followers of religion “X” also resides in worship place built by followers of religion “Y”, then worship place built by followers of religion “Y” is abode of God of followers of religion “X”. Then how followers of religion “X” can demolish abode of their God and if they do so, then they do not believe in omnipresence of God and their act is against their religion. Therefore, they cannot be said to be followers of religion “X”.