In the past, whenever a so-called high-caste individual was ‘converted’ to Christianity, it was widely publicized with great pride and used as a promotional tool to secure more funding—especially from abroad—to fish for more souls in troubled waters. And if the convert happened to be a Brahmin, it would be considered a golden catch, quite literally recorded in golden letters in mission histories and reports.
Thankfully, such overt practices are not as common today, as many from these communities—particularly Brahmins—have awakened to the deeper implications of such conversions. However, they still remain trophies, albeit of a different kind, used subtly but strategically for mission objectives. Since these individuals can no longer be paraded as fresh ‘converts,’ a new kind of enterprise has taken root—one that has become a scholarly passion and a mark of missiological sophistication.
Now, projects are being undertaken to document and analyze the experiences of such individuals. This includes collecting detailed interviews, comparing their stories with past converts, and compiling it all into theses for Ph.D.s or books that mostly gather dust in mission libraries, with a few finding their way into seminaries.
Sadly, I was once made a subject of such analysis. I was studied, compared, and debated—particularly in theological circles—as an unusual case: someone who did not fit the familiar mold. My bhakti as a Hindu became a matter of theological curiosity. In the past, such ventures were mostly limited to Christian seminaries and scholars. But now, even some self-proclaimed ‘converts’ and those identifying as ‘Hindu bhaktas’ have started to join in this exercise.
But what is both irritating and shocking is that such individuals—especially those who are either ‘Hindu converts’ or so-called ‘Hindu bhaktas’—often don’t even have the decency to discuss their work with the very people who are going to become the subject matter of their thesis. Instead, they consult with and submit their project outlines to those who are willing to sponsor these ventures—typically foreign entities with their own mission agendas. After all, which Indian church or mission has the resources to fund such unnecessary and, frankly, wasteful projects? Even if they claim that they are undertaking this project not under the sponsorship of any church or Western mission, but purely on their own initiative and perceived need, it doesn’t change the point I’m making. To me, both efforts are equally futile.
If someone genuinely wants to undertake a serious and respectful study, it should begin with dialogue—at least with some of those whom they intend to study, particularly those with whom they already have some acquaintance, if not close friendship or fellowship. The fact that they bypass this step reveals not only a lack of integrity but also a deep mistrust toward their own people. Instead, they seek guidance and support from outsiders who have no real connection to the individuals being studied.
This only reflects the lingering slave mentality inherited from past generations of converts—who, having been constantly patronized by foreign missionaries, continue to operate under the illusion that such work is automatically for the sake of the “Kingdom of God.”
When approached recently for yet another interview, I responded clearly: I do not wish to waste anyone’s time by revisiting the same old story, only to become another feather in someone’s scholarly cap—whether it’s their first or just one more. If these individuals truly wish to serve, let them begin with those who are genuinely in need—within their own families, communities, and society at large. That would be a meaningful service to humanity, and indeed, to the Kingdom of God.
But if they’re simply going to repeat the legacy of their Christian predecessors by producing yet another academic exercise out of someone’s lived experience, I don’t even have the words to express my resentment than this: Please Leave me alone’.
Ashram, April 15th, 2025
Part two
“Leave me alone.” The reason I say this is because my bhakti in the Lord is a deeply personal journey. I don’t believe it is necessary to share it with anyone, just as we often say, “Don’t look into another man’s bedroom.” Long back I wrote a poem on this. [See Appendix]
Of course, there are those who insist that every bhakta has an obligation to bear witness to the Lord through both words and actions. I agree with this. But that too must be understood in its proper context.
To whom shall I bear witness? Especially when it comes to writing about my life and bhakti in the Lord?
I know that some, particularly from religious backgrounds, may feel the need to document what they see as my “fall” or “loss of faith,” perhaps turning my story into a cautionary tale or case study. Some might even frame it in theological or sociological terms, focusing on themes like conversion, deconversion, or the religious “marketplace” of India. However, I ask that you do not reduce my journey to a narrative that fits your expectations — whether religious, academic, or otherwise.
Frankly, I don’t think Christians need to hear it. Some—though not all—might simply celebrate another “convert,” missing the deeper truth that I never actually converted. Such stories could easily become tools for Christian propaganda or warnings against contextualization, fearing that it might lead Hindu converts to abandon their Christian identity and return to being Hindu bhaktas. Worse, they might influence others to do the same or even challenge traditional proselytization methods.
Some may view me as someone who “backslid,” reverting entirely to Hinduism and compromising the Christian faith—promoting a syncretistic cult that claims to be contextual but ultimately leans toward a dangerous incarnational approach. In the end, I could be turned into either a trophy to parade or a cautionary tale to warn others to stay away.
But this isn’t my story, nor the narrative I wish to live by. It’s not about falling or losing my faith; it’s far more personal, complex, and layered than any simple categorization can capture.
What about the Hindu world? Even if we assume some Hindus, mostly educated ones, do read this account—what would their response be? Playing devil’s advocate, let me imagine myself as one such Hindu, reading the life story of another Hindu bhakta of the Lord. My reaction might be: What’s new here? Changing one’s Ishtadevata based on personal need or revelation is nothing unusual in Hinduism. Every Hindu is free to do so. Since this person [DB] still identifies as Hindu and has not become a Christian—though I welcome that—I am not particularly impressed by his so-called witness. We have many such examples of shifting Ishtadevatas within our own homes. So rather than writing for us, he should write for those who are converting to Christianity or for traditional Christians who seek to influence others. If there’s a message in his book, it’s for them—not for us.
Despite all his claims to remain a Hindu bhakta of Muktinath, by our interpretation, he is still a prodigal son. Though we welcome him back, he cannot reclaim the same familial status as before.
Now suppose this book is intended neither for Christians nor Hindus, but for those “in between”—those who want to remain Hindu to Hindu and Christian to Christian. I doubt such people need another book to remind them of their confusion. Many case studies, past and present, are already available. If they haven’t learned from those or from genuine Evangelical Christians who encouraged them to remain Hindu bhaktas of the Lord, then this book isn’t going to change their mind. They’ll just continue being like the proverbial washerman’s dog—neither belonging to the home nor the riverbank.
And if this book is for those who are already Hindu bhaktas like me, then there is no need for another book to encourage us. Some of us already know others like us, though we are few and scattered.
In spite of all these reservations, if someone—particularly another Hindu bhakta—insists on writing a book by interviewing others like me, I would first suggest that he write about his own journey and share it with us in a small booklet. The way he presents himself will help me understand how he might present me. Because already, two portrayals of me exist—both written by Christians. I am not entirely happy with either. One was based on personal interviews and my writings, the other based only on online content. I won’t say they portrayed me completely incorrectly, but their interpretation of my life is not acceptable to me.
So, while I accept my obligation to remain a witness to the Lord as a Hindu bhakta, I believe I have already done so—both through my life and my writings. Though I am neither a scholar nor a professional writer, at least some of my poems and papers might help those who genuinely want to understand me.
If someone still feels there is a need for deeper research on me or others like me, and wants to write a comprehensive book from an insider perspective—meaning, as a fellow Hindu bhakta—then there is already enough material available: in my blog, on the internet, and on Facebook. I have shared much about my journey as a Hindu bhakta in the Lord. There is nothing more to add. Let them begin there. Let them study my writings thoroughly. That alone will help them assess my journey, as even I have forgotten many things I wrote in the past.
Only by reading those materials can someone understand my growth—my changing understanding of the Lord, Muktiveda, Christianity, missions, and, above all, myself. Any personal interview will only capture the latest stage of my journey and can never give a complete picture. A truthful account must include the early days, the various life phases, lessons learned through mistakes, corrections made along the way, guidance received from others, and my current life. Let them write a research paper based on my writings, share it with me, and then let me decide whether there is anything more to be said in person—anything I haven’t already written.
And regarding this particular person, who claims to be a Hindu bhakta, I honestly don’t know much about him. I met him briefly, for about an hour. He never actively participated in our gatherings. Though he joined a few discussions, he mostly remained a stranger to me, though perhaps not to others. I never visited his home or met his family to know their view of him. So, to me, he remains a stranger—though he may know me through my old friend from school.
Considering all this, I would encourage him to base any writing on my existing material rather than beginning with a personal interview. If reading through my poems, papers, and books feels like a Himalayan task to him, then so be it. There are no shortcuts in serious research. If he thinks he can write about me based on a few hours of conversation, the result will be incomplete. In most cases, my answer to his questions would simply be: Please read that paper, or this book, or those poems. If he finds that too demanding, then what he writes won’t reflect who I truly am—it will just be his own interpretation. And such work won’t do justice—to his time, to my trust, or to the reader.
I don’t say this out of arrogance or self-sufficiency. My only intention is to help those who, in my opinion, are wasting their time by trying to write yet another book about people like us—including me.
Though taken out of its original context, let me end with something relevant to our situation—something Jim Elliot once said when he was urged by fellow Christians to stay back and minister at home, rather than go as a missionary to the tribal people of Latin America:
“Your destiny is already written over the dust on your Bible cover and your bank balance book. Even if someone came from the dead and preached to you, you would not change.@ He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain what he cannot lose.$”—quoted from memory from his writings.
Ashram
17 April 2025
Notes:
@ I read this somewhere. At present I cannot document this.
$He penned this in his journal on October 28, 1949, during his time at Wheaton College. This entry is documented in Shadow of the Almighty by Elisabeth Elliot. Interestingly, this quote is a paraphrase of an earlier statement by English clergyman Philip Henry:
“He is no fool who parts with that which he cannot keep, when he is sure to be recompensed with that which he cannot lose.”—This information is assessed from ChatGPT on April 17, 2025
Appendix
BT Song 360 – மறக்க வேண்டுகிறேன்
கையெடுத்து கும்பிடுகிறேன்
கெஞ்சி ஒன்று வேண்டுகிறேன்
என்னைப் பற்றி எவருமே
ஏது ஒன்றும் சொல்ல வேண்டாம்
காலமென்னும் ஓட்டத்திலே
கால்கடுக்க ஓடுகிறேன்
இறுதியாக எப்படியோ
கரை நானும் சேர்வதற்கே
மனிதனாகப் பிறந்த போதும்
மனிதனாக வாழவில்லை
மனது ஒன்று இருந்தும் கூட
முழுமையாக புரியவில்லை
புத்தி பலதை மறுக்கிறது
பக்தி சிலதை ஏற்கிறது
புத்தி–பக்தி இரண்டினிடையே
சித்தம் ஊசலாலிடுது
புத்தியிலும் வளரவில்லை
பக்தியிலும் சிறக்கவில்லை
எப்படியோ இறைவன் கருணை
ஏந்தி என்னைக் காக்கிறது
அவன் சொந்தம் ஆகாவிட்டால்
அந்தக் கருணை யாரறிவார்?
அடையாமல் அறிந்தவர் போல்
வீண் வாதம் செய்கின்றார்
வந்தபோது ஒரு அடையாளம்
வையம் தானே தருகிறது
போகும்போது அதனுடனே
போகத் தானே சொல்கிறது
இடையில் எதனை மாற்றினும்
எந்த வேடம் போட்டினும்
இறுதியாக ஏதோ ஒன்றை
ஏற்க வேண்டி இருக்கிறது
என்னவாக அது இருந்தாலும்
எவர் அதைத் தந்தாலும்
“பக்தன்” என்ற ஒன்று மட்டும்
பணிந்து நானும் கேட்கிறேன்
பாவியாக வாழ்ந்திருந்தேன்
“பக்தனாக்கி” ஆட்கொண்டான்
அந்த ஒரு அடையாளம்
அடிமைக்கு என்றும் போதும்
எனவே ஒன்றை வேண்டுகிறேன்
என்னை மறக்க கெஞ்சுகிறேன்
அவனைப் பெருக்கி என்னைச் சிறுக்கி
அவனுள் புதைக்க விரும்புகிறேன்
புதைத்ததைத் தோண்டி எடுத்து
கூறுபோட்டு பார்ப்பீரோ?
கொடுமையான அந்தச் செயலை
செய்ய வேண்டாம், கெஞ்சுகிறேன்
13–12–2015, மத்திகிரி, 2.00, p.m.
BT Song 360 – “Let Me Be Forgotten”
Simple English Version
1
With folded hands I pray today,
Pleading softly, one thing I say:
About me, let no one speak,
Not a word, not even a peek.
2
In the race that we call life,
I run ahead, in this harsh climb—
All I seek at the very end,
Is somehow to reach the shore, my friend.
3
Though I was born as a human soul,
I never truly played that role.
Even though I had a mind,
Its meaning I could never find.
4
My mind denies many a thing,
But devotion lets some blessings in.
Between my mind and heart’s belief,
My will swings like a tender leaf.
5
I didn’t grow in mind or thought,
In devotion too, I achieved not.
Yet somehow, God’s mercy pure,
Holds me gently and keeps me secure.
6
If I am not His own by name,
Who would know His merciful flame?
Like those who speak of things unknown,
They argue loud, though truth’s not shown.
7
When we come, the world will give
An Identity to show that we did live.
And when we go, that Identity will say,
You must go with it, anyway.
8
Change what you will, wear any guise,
Put on masks or worldly ties—
Still at last, you’ll have to own
Something that calls your soul its own.
9
Whatever it is, no matter how,
No matter who may give it now—
Only this title do I seek:
“A devotee”—humble and meek.
10
I lived the life of a sinful one,
But He made me His devoted son.
That one mark, forever mine,
Is enough for this servant’s sign.
11
So now I ask just one thing more:
To be forgotten—I implore.
May He be praised and I made small,
And buried deep in Him—that’s all.
12
If you dig and bring me to light,
And study me with judging sight,
I beg of you, don’t be unkind—
Don’t do that cruel thing, be kind.
Mathigiri, 13–12–2015, 2.00, p.m.
This is a bit autobiographical. If it irritates you, please feel free to ignore it.
Today, I read two rebuttals that deeply moved me. They highlighted how Swami Vivekananda, rather than being an ideal case study for scholars, was often more of a victim—misunderstood, misrepresented.
That led me to think about myself. Whether I like it or not, there will likely be some debate about me in the future. In fact, two people have already done that in their books. I find it strangely amusing to imagine how others might interpret my life through the lens of their ideologies and agendas.
But if someone were to ask me, “How would you like to be remembered?” my humble answer would be: “Please forget me completely.” I don’t say this out of pseudo-humility, but with genuine conviction. Honestly, I would prefer to be erased from people’s memory. If that isn’t possible, then let me at least be remembered only as a bhakta of Muktinath—nothing more, nothing less.
I don’t subscribe to the myth that we are born without an identity or die without one. In my view, each of us is born and dies with an identity—cultural, social, religious, or otherwise. No matter how we change during life—be it religion, culture, nationality, gender—we still carry an identity into death. As for me, I want that identity to be simply this: a bhakta of Muktinath.
My rational mind struggles to understand or accept many aspects of the Lord’s life and mission. Yet my bhakti remains content to call me His bhakta, because I need no other proof than my own life. I have not lived an overtly immoral life, but knowing my inner nature, I have always regarded myself as a sinner—saved by the Grace of the Lord.
Many Hindu saints have had similar experiences and claimed to be saved by divine grace. But personally, I find the doctrine of prayaschitta—atonement carried out by the Lord Himself—far more compelling. It meets both my psychological and spiritual needs. Until my final breath, I will remain suspended between the poles of rationality and bhakti.
And so, as a sinner saved by the grace of Bhagavan Muktinath, I would rather be forgotten. But if forgetting me is too much to ask, then let my life serve only to increase His glory and decrease my identity. Let me be buried in Him.
And please—when I am gone—do not dig up my life to perform a post-mortem, crafting a report to fit your own ideologies or narratives.
Anxiety is inevitable when you start wondering how people will think of you after you’re gone. Back in Mahari (Rewa, Madhya Pradesh, with Shashi Kant Dube, 11-11-1994), I wrote a poem about this. I never consciously planned my life; many things simply happened—guided, I believe, by the invisible Hands of God.
Only those who have received that same grace will understand my life. Those who attempt to analyze it through their own agendas will end up offering a version of me that even I never fully understood or intended to live.
Db
13-12-2015
Endnotes:
1. Ashis Nandy “Vivekananda and Secularism: A Nineteenth Century Solution and a Twentieth Century Problem” (pp.291-295) and Nirmal Mukherjee, “Vivekananda and Secularism” (pp.296-301) to Krishna Prakash Gupta’s article ‘Swami Vivekananda: “A Case Study of the Hindu Religious Tradition and the Modern Secular Ideal” (263-290), and Gupta’s “A Response”(pp.302-306) in: A. Raghuramaraju, ed. Debating Vivekananda: A Reader, New Delhi, Oxford University Press, 2014)
1. குலம்பொல்லேன் குணம்பொல்லேன் குறியும்பொல்லேன்
குற்றமேபெரிதுடையேன் கோலமாய
நலம்பொல்லேனான்பொல்லேன் ஞானியல்லே
னல்லாரோடிசைந்திலேனடுவேனின்ற
விலங்கலேன்விலங்கலாதொழிந்தேனல்லேன்
வெறுப்பனவுமிகப் பெரிதும்பேசவல்லேன்
இலம்பொல்லேனிரப்பதல்லால் ஈயமாட்டே
னென்செய்வான்றோன்றினே னேழையேனே–
Evil, all evil, my race, evil my qualities all,
Great am I only in sin, evil is even my good.
Evil my innermost self, foolish, avoiding the pure,
Beast am I not, yet the ways of the beast I can never forsake.
I can exhort with strong words, telling men what they should hate,
Yet can I never give gifts, only to beg them I know.
Ah! Wretched man that I am, whereunto came I to birth?6
Tirunavukkarasu, F. Kingsbury, and G.E.Phillips, Hymns of the Tamil Saivite Saints, Calcutta, Association Press, 1921,
Secular 35, p. 44 – சுயசரிதை
(Mahari, Rewa, Madhya Pradesh – 11-11-1994)
என்னென்ன கூறுவார்கள்
இறந்தபின் என்னைப் பற்றி
இருக்கும்போது கேட்கமாட்டார்
என் மனநிலையைப் பற்றி
துறவறம் இவனும் பூண்டான்
துணிவற்றதால் வாழ்ந்துகாட்ட
போட்டதெல்லாம் வெறும் வேஷம்
காணவில்லை அவனில் மாற்றம்
காரணம் ஏதாய் இருக்கும் இவன்
வாழ்வைத் துறந்து இங்கு ஓட?
காதல் தோல்வியாய் இருக்கும் என
கதையும் கூறுவார் பலவே
துறக்கவில்லை வாழ்வை நானும்
தோற்கவில்லை வேறெதிலும் தானும்
வாழ்கின்றேன் வாழ்வில் நாளும்
வளமுடனே உம்மைப் போல
காசு, காதல், பெண், பிள்ளை
எல்லாம் உலகின் வெளிவேஷம்
போகும்போதுகூட வாரார் எனவே
இருக்கும் போதும் வேண்டாம் எனக்கும்
Secular 35 – Autobiography
What all they will say
About me after I die
When I was alive, none asked
About the state of my mind
They’ll say I took to renunciation
Because I had no courage to live
That all I wore was just a mask
That there was no real change in me
They’ll assume there was some reason
Why I left life and ran here
They’ll guess it must be heartbreak
And spin many stories about me
But I never renounced life
Nor was I defeated in anything
I’m still living life every day
With plenty, just like you all
Money, love, wife, children
All are just outer shows of this world
Even they won’t come with us when we die
So why do I need them now?
(Mahari, Rewa, Madhya Pradesh – 11-11-1994)
Leave a Reply