At 50, I recently learned that a Christian in India is often dismissed as a “rice bag convert.” To my surprise, some motherfuckers on social media labeled me the same because of my name—Kennedi Gopalan—despite the fact that I am Hindu by birth (with no allegiance to Sanatana Dharma whatsoever).
A couple of things to note:
• The rituals and practices followed in this land have no direct connection to present-day Hinduism or Sanatana Dharma. They were absorbed and repackaged over time.
• Hindu spiritual leaders once traveled across the subcontinent, converting culturally rooted communities, assigning them caste labels, and declaring that only Brahmins could stand at the top. They alone could communicate with the divine in a language no one else understood. By that logic, every motherfucker is essentially a converted Hindu.
• The concept of the Trinity—Brahma, Vishnu, Shiva—was an Aryan import. The indigenous people worshipped nature and their local deities. The Trinity was never native to this soil.
• Buddhism was the first organized religion here. By that standard, the first religious people were Buddhists, not Hindus. The label “Hindu” came later.
• Buddhist temples were destroyed, Buddhists were converted to Hinduism—sometimes through debate, sometimes through force. So, technically, the first converts on this land were Hindus, not Christians or Muslims.
• Buddhism had no caste hierarchy, no institutional discrimination. But Hindu converts, branded as lower caste, suddenly found themselves shackled.
• Many later embraced Islam to escape caste oppression. Some turned to Christianity through British influence. Dr. B.R. Ambedkar inspired thousands to return to Buddhism—a true ghar wapsi if there ever was one.
• Yes, perhaps some Christians converted for food or aid. But tell me—would anyone worship a new God for a lifetime just for a free bag of rice? By that logic, millions remain Hindu only because temples serve free prasadam and anna danam. If that stopped, would they switch faiths? Hardly.
• Christian missionaries left behind evidence of their conversions through food, education, and healthcare. But where is the record of why people converted to Hinduism? Was it fear? Coercion? Violence? If such records existed, kings and rulers would likely have destroyed them—just as today’s politicians erase their own shameful tracks.
• Which means this: every Hindu is, in truth, a convert—from some cultural identity to Hinduism. The only exceptions are Brahmins, who make up less than 10% of the population. They are the architects and crusaders of Hinduism—the only ones who can truly claim to be Sanatanis.
So the next time you label someone a “rice bag convert,” pause and ask yourself:
What might have led your ancestors to convert to Hinduism?