The Brahmo Samaj, with its rational and monotheistic orientation, inevitably found itself at odds with several religious constituencies of its time. Most prominent was the tension with orthodox Hindu groups, who regarded the rejection of idol worship, caste hierarchy, and elaborate ritual as a direct challenge to long‑established patterns of devotion and social order. For many conservative Hindus, the Brahmo emphasis on a formless, singular God appeared to undermine traditional polytheistic and image‑centered worship. This resistance often took the form of social ostracism and public denunciation, as Brahmo teachings on social reform—such as criticism of entrenched customs—were perceived as destabilizing to the inherited fabric of Hindu society.

Relations with Christian missionaries were also marked by a complex blend of engagement and conflict. While Brahmo thinkers drew on certain ethical and philosophical currents associated with Christianity, they firmly rejected central Christian doctrines such as the unique divinity of Christ and the authority of the Church. Missionaries, in turn, frequently portrayed the movement as incomplete or “half‑converted,” regarding its attempt to articulate a universal, rational theism as a rival rather than an ally. The Brahmo insistence on reforming Indian religious life from within, rather than embracing formal conversion, sharpened this sense of competition in the missionary field.

Within the movement itself, conflicts took on a more introspective yet equally intense character. Disagreements over the pace and scope of reform, the adoption or rejection of certain ritual forms, and the degree of openness to Western influences led to notable schisms. The emergence of distinct bodies such as the Adi Brahmo Samaj and the Brahmo Samaj of India, and later further divisions, reflected divergent visions of how best to embody monotheistic faith and social transformation. These internal rifts did not merely fragment organizational structures; they also shaped how the wider religious world perceived and responded to the Brahmo experiment.

Tensions with Muslim groups, though less pronounced than those with Hindu orthodoxy and Christian missions, also surfaced in certain contexts. Conservative Muslim leaders sometimes viewed the Brahmo critique of rigid custom and its syncretic, reformist ethos as unsettling to established Islamic norms in regions where the movement was active. The Brahmo aspiration toward a universal, reason‑guided spirituality thus placed it in a delicate position: seeking harmony across traditions while simultaneously questioning the very practices that many believers held sacred. In this sense, its conflicts can be seen as the inevitable friction generated when a reforming monotheism encounters deeply rooted religious worlds.