Indian Secularism Views Indian Muslims As Pakistanis

Subjugated by the secular Hindus and Islamic clerics, the Muslim youth is not a carrier of new ideas.

Secularism as practised in India is a threat to Indian Muslims as this essay will demonstrate. As per purely academic definitions, there are primarily two meanings of secularism.

First, it is a movement of ideas that slowly removes influences of religion from social life. In this meaning, secularism undermines religious orthodoxies, frees individuals from the clutches of religion and empowers people to live their daily life in rational and meaningful ways.

pakistanSecond, there is a constitutional meaning of secularism which requires the state to maintain distance from religion in policymaking and to treat all citizens equally.

However, there is a third, behavioural meaning of Indian secularism. In its behavioural meaning, secularism influences us as individuals in how we understand day-to-day developments in our societies and impacts on the minds of policymakers, government leaders, journalists, politicians and others.

To fully grasp the phenomenon of secularism, one has to understand the habits of secularism in India, and comprehend its influences on our communities and leaders at the practical level. In its practical meaning as secularism is practised in India, secularism is a threat to Indian Muslims, preventing their socio-economic and educational progress for the following reasons.

Secularism views Indian Muslims as Pakistanis, not as Indians. To convey this latent message to Indian Muslims, secular Hindus rush to release books and attend conferences in Pakistan, or to dine with Pakistani leaders such as General Pervez Musharraf. By any definition, Musharraf was the architect of the largest jihad against India in modern times. He not only launched the jihadist invasion of Kargil in 1999, it was on his watch that the 26/11 attacks on Mumbai were planned.

To look good, secular Hindu journalists routinely invite Musharraf and other Pakistani leaders to our television studios for celebratory interviews, i.e. interviews which are unwarranted by current affairs developments. This is because secular Hindus unconsciously, subconsciously and sometimes consciously view Indian Muslims as part of the Pakistani identity.

Indian secularism is a form of latent racism, notably against Bangladeshis. For example, secular Indians do not speak in favour of Bangladeshi writer Taslima Nasreen when she is attacked in Hyderabad, India. Secular Hindus who love to visit Pakistan do not visit Bangladesh.

India has played a critical military role in the creation of Bangladesh, but secular Hindus do not appreciate this Indian role. Bangladesh has truly liberal editors, unlike their Pakistani counterparts, but secular Hindus do not invite Bangladeshi journalists and writers to India for book events or conferences.

nitishA number of secular Indian editors are from West Bengal but they identify themselves with Pakistanis, not with next-door Bangladeshi journalists. Even Nitish Kumar loves to visit Pakistan, certifying the message to his voters that Indian Muslims are with Pakistan.

Secularism is another word for communalism. Indian secularism sows seeds of communal poison that causes riots and creates siege mentality among Muslims. Secularism resides in the siege mentality of Muslims.

For example, at a village called Kangla Pahari in West Bengal, secular Hindu officials have banned Durga Puja because it is disliked by Muslims. Such secular Hindu decisions give birth to what is known as Hindu extremism.

Secularism engenders Hindu communalism and fosters Muslim insecurity. There were no ‘Hindutva’ forces in India before the secular Rajiv Gandhi made the following three decisions in the 1980s: the law that annulled the Supreme Court decision to give alimony to the destitute Muslim woman Shah Bano, the opening of Ayodhya locks that led to the demolition of Babri Mosque and the ban on The Satanic Verses.

Secularism does not seek to serve the interests of Muslims. It tells Indian Muslims: I will give you secularism and five per cent quota in educational institutions and government jobs. Secular Hindus know that there are not more than 40 lakh central government jobs and even if 100 per cent government jobs were given to Indian Muslims, it will not ensure their progress.

The progress of communities is empowered by new ideas. But secularism doesn’t tell Indian Muslims: I will give your daughters mathematics, economics and science from Grade 1. As per the Right to Education Act, all citizens of 6-14 years age must receive the same educational outcomes. But secular Hindus do not promise the same education to Muslims that they give their own kids. This is because secularism’s purpose is not to serve the interests of Indian Muslims. Secularism is anti-Muslim.

Secularism loves to forge Muslim communalism, more so at election times. For example, in the just-concluded Bihar elections, secularism drove about 84 per cent Muslims to vote communally for a single party.

Secularism creates herd mentality and pushes Muslims towards the minority syndrome. Over the past six decades, riots were caused by the Congress, but the Congress was routinely presented as secular.

Secularism thrives in the minority syndrome created by secularism itself. It prevents Indian Muslims from seeing that their actual progress could result from studying economics, mathematics and material sciences. But secular Hindus ally with orthodox Islamic clerics such as Imam Bukhari. Both serve each other. Secularism wants to give a few computers to madrasas but doesn’t advocate educational transformation or police reforms to end the minority syndrome.

Indian secularism is anti-women. Secularism is essentially against the interests of Muslim women. For example, secular Hindu intellectuals and journalists are totally silent on the issue of ending the Shah Bano legislation that denied alimony to Muslim women. This legislation was created by the secular Rajiv Gandhi to serve the cause of secularism in India. Secular Hindus know that if Muslim women progress, their secularism will die.

Secular writers and intellectuals do not advocate the cause of the Uniform Civil Code, one of the objectives of the Constitution. Even feminist Hindus do not oppose the mushrooming of Burqas and Islamism among Muslim communities. The silence of feminists serves secularism. At this point in time, the only section of Indian society advocating equality for Muslim women is the so-called Hindu right-wing, the hope of liberty.

The secular Hindu is a coward who walks away from responsibility by arguing this: change must come from within Muslims. Throughout the course of history, social change has essentially come through external sources: from interaction with foreign ideas occurring through wars, technologies and globalisation.

It is not surprising that there are no liberal Muslim writers and reformers in India. This is because if a true liberal Muslim writer arose, secularism would shun him. Secularism’s purpose is served not by liberal Muslim writers but by Islamists. The cause of Muslim reform in India is currently limited to interpreting Islamic texts, whether it be the case of late Marxist writer Asghar Ali Engineer, or social activist Shaista Amber. The secular Hindu will not welcome any Muslim who dares to question basic ideas of Islam.

India spends billions of rupees on departments of Arabic, Persian, Urdu and Islamic studies in universities across the country. However, graduates from these departments do not even attempt to think. They do not ponder over the human condition or the power of new ideas to drive change; they fear new ideas, innovation and progress.

Subjugated by the secular Hindus and Islamic clerics, the Muslim youth is not a carrier of new ideas. In between there is a species called ‘Moderate Muslim’ who is mostly sleep-walking. But if a liberal Muslim challenges religious orthodoxies and clerics rose against him, the moderate Muslim rises up and attacks both. The moderate Muslim serves the purpose of secularism just in time. Indian secularism is a plot against Indian Muslims.

(Published first in

Former BBC journalist Tufail Ahmad is the executive director of the Open Source Institute, New Delhi. Ahmad is the author of “Jihadist Threat to India – The Case for Islamic Reformation by an Indian Muslim.” He tweets @tufailelif
  • AnalyseAbhishek

    Each article from My Ahmad is eye opening and thought provoking. They are worthy of discussions and MUST be discussed. Unfortunately, the mainstream media shies away from its responsibility.

  • Saurav

    Hats off to you sir…you have bravely called out & exposed the fake secularism of hypocrites within India.

  • Mitr Manav

    very very good! Tufail sir you are truly a discerning person. Best reads… khudos! ..keep up the good work
    hope its an eye opener for Indian secularists like Burka dutt, JNU secularists/communists etc

  • Indroneel Mollik

    Intrusively frank and insightful.

  • daffodil20

    This article talks about Congress secularism, not Indian secularism.

  • Pingback: The truth behind Indian Secularism and the curious case of Aamir Khan | anandavinash()

  • Mahesh

    There are some facts missing here Maharashtra BJP govt has started a campaign to get the regular curriculum taught in madarasas,but so called Muslim parties have vehemently opposing it on the grounds of religious intolerance to their faith.So there is some effort on the part of so called Hindu party govt to get all Muslims in mainstream & be benefitted from the development knocking on the door.

  • Arun

    It is a bargain Muslims have willingly embraced and entered into with the secularists. ABove all else, they wanted to secure a separate communal existence for themselves and not be clubbed with Hindus. The separatism without was called Pakistan and it was only one particular manifestation of Muslim separatism. THe failure of Pakistan does not mean that Muslims have given up on separatism. THe separatism within remains alive and kicking and is given the sexy nom de plume of Minority welfare and Minoritystan. Secularism wanted forces aligned and narratives shaped adversarially to Hindus. Muslims wanted the same. So it is a bargain willingly entered into by Muslims.

  • Darshan

    Well articulated. Great article. Hope young Muslim youths realize this secular plot of dividing communities. Secularists are continuing British policy of divide and rule.

  • arunprasad n

    This is another excellent piece from the author. Everyone, not just Muslims, should understand the so called Indian Secularism by the Secular Hindus.

  • Chandra Ravikumar

    Do not place the “Hindus” in the same dimension as the Christian and Muslim extremists. SELF-PROTECTION IS NOT EXTREMISM.

    Please watch this and ask our ” secular” Jaichands ( recall our history? That part the Congress govt. left out from our text books?) to watch it.

    • Krispy K

      What complicates the issue further is that the understandable and perfectly reasonable fear of mass Muslim migration is being used to feed white supremacy and plain racism. Racists often mask their wider racial agenda under the guise of combating Muslim demographic invasion. And the counteraction to racism discourages recognition of the dangers of Islamic migration in general.

      Unfortunately, conflation of such issues means that the real problems don’t get properly addressed. This would seem to increase the chances of one disaster or another.

      • Kraken

        You have aptly described the catch-22 situation that well-meaning westerners might find themselves in. However, in the Indian context, the Muslims were/are the aggressors, yet we Hindus have become so pusillanimous that we have swallowed the libtardian discourse line, hook and sinker. I have yet to see the Hindus calling a spade a spade. And in today’s age of the internet, I see no reason to remain ignorant. But the problem does not end there, for even if ample evidence is presented to these lazy buggers, they still prefer to dwell in their Utopian fantasies (All religions are same, No religion teaches violence and the like). Add to this, we have the atheists having no sense of recognizing “the greater evil”. These scumbags are in “cut the nose to spite the face” mode and are often the first ones to mock our belief-system (with little understanding of what it actually entails).
        I remember in one of your comments, pertaining to western reaction to islamification, you said, “my
        gut feeling is that if and when it does happen, it might be too little, too
        late”. On the contrary, as can be gauged from the French reaction to the Paris terrorist attack, we see the Europeans positioning themselves unitedly against Islamism (not yet against Islam however). Check out this article in case you are interested,
        The French have exhibited tremendous solidarity in the aftermath of the attack and across the spectrum from journalists to politicians, we see a united opposition to this ghastly act. On the other hand, in our very own country, we have sickular journos, writers, politicos and other such leeches mollycoddling the Jihadis and pampering a community that engages in wanton victimhood (for reasons you are well aware of). This is not to absolve the other Abrahamic minority – the hideous intentions and actions of which are yet to be widely grasped – though. In light of this, I think the very idea of “India” is ephemeral and rests on a precarious premise that a national identity of “being Indian” triumphs over socio-religious priorities. Such a precept harbors a complete disdain to anything even remotely native, no matter how benevolent or enriching it might be. The french have been able to be unite because of their distinct value system, something we Indics struggle to foster even today (because seemingly, the only sacrosanct ideal is “Secularism”). The result of this asymmetry – widespread outrage against ban on cow slaughter, Yoga day, etc, all the while turning a blind eye to the privileges bestowed upon the so-called minorities (Scholarships, Hajj subsidy, monthly salary to Imams and what not) and the supremacy accorded to their “precious” sentiments.
        In conclusion, I strongly believe that western response to Islamism would be swift and brutal. It’s the Indian reaction to this threat that troubles me. The situation is further exacerbated when geopolitical underpinnings are factored in.

        • Krispy K

          Let’s wait and see. Any major terrorist event that affects Westerners (which, let’s face it, is basically a euphemism for white people), results in an increase in both anti-multiculturalism and anti-immigration rhetoric (which is more general than simply focusing on Muslim immigration, betraying the essentially racist motivations underneath), as well as an amplification of the counteracting “terrorism has no religion, Islam is peaceful” narrative, driven mainly by those with a left-wing agenda. This constant dance around the real issue, infused with these peripheral agendas, just leaves things open for further deterioration of the situation.

          Very few people seem to be able to find a balance in between these two poles and understand that multiculturalism and immigration per se are not the problem, it is accommodation specifically of intolerant ideologies that are incompatible with modern, liberal societies. Those who rally against multiculturalism want to throw the baby out with the bathwater (wittingly or otherwise), and most of those who rally against “Islamophobia” are either ignorant or too cowardly to face facts. But if the latter didn’t exist, the former would make life very hard for non-white people in the West, Muslim or otherwise. The issue of Islam is caught between, and feeds the battle between, racists and blind liberals.

          For the West to suddenly to suddenly come to their senses, acknowledge the fundamental nature of Islam and respond forcefully against the ideology in general (not just Islamism), will require the former nature to overcome the latter. I do not think we are anywhere near that happening. The French reaction to the Paris atrocities might move things along a little, but nowhere near enough. And frankly I don’t think anyone wants the West to devolve into some genocidal, pseudo-Nazi mentality.

          As for India, while we may well be even less likely to face facts, we are more able to resist the phenomenon, however paradoxical that may seem. The Indic mindset is more flexible and less brittle than the Western one, and more able to take punishment without breaking.

          • Kraken

            I absolutely concur with your argument that multiculturalism and immigration per se are not the problem and that very few people seem to be able to find a balance between these two poles.

            Regarding your assertion that the West may not suddenly acknowledge the fundamental nature of Islam, I think it could be owing to its colonial past and to some extent, the Christian belief system (although the chronological progression of its violent character is opposite to Islam’s and separation of religion and state was possible in the case of the former. Nevertheless, few westerners bother to base their arguments upon this premise). In that sense, your contention that we are not anywhere near resolving this ideological conflict is well-founded. As you said, let’s wait and see.

            Here’s where I disagree. While I accept that the Indic mindset is more flexible and less brittle than the Western one, you perhaps do not seem to realize that the so-called flexibility is not a one-sided affair and that it has also got to do with Muslims acknowledging and retaining their former Indic culture. Not to mention their fewness in numbers. Unfortunately, the younger generation, distanced from its parent tradition, seeks to Islamicize India rather than Indianize Islam. And the growing population of Muslims further fuels this desire to dominate the identity landscape and spread the Islamic influence (in perfect line with the circumstantial transmogrification of Islam during the days of Mohammed). And the ones supposedly liberal have scant regard for the Hindu tradition, just like their Indic counterparts sadly. Furthermore, a few of these guys are dangerously insidious as they are liberal from outside (so as to lull Non-Muslims into complacency and inaction) but radical from the inside . Where is the flexibility and trustworthiness when “Bharat Mata ki Jai”, “Vande Mataram”, “Chanting of AUM”, etc are deemed “Haram” and hardly any voice is raised by the so-called liberal/moderate Muslims against such shenanigans? Does it augur well when the funeral of a terrorist is attended by about 15000 people and the seriousness of this episode is blatantly swept under the carpet? Be advised that centuries of Muslim track record shows anything but their nationalism. It proves their treason, treason and treason. For instance, when the Hindus fought to liberate the lands from the invading Turko mongols, Brits, french, Portugese et al, the Muslims were more bothered about breaking up the subcontinent to carve out an Islamic pakistan. This is the difference between showing patriotism as a group vs treason as a group. For instance, when the Vijayanagara was fighting to liberate the lands from the invading sultans, the Muslim segment defected to ditch the natives. For instance, when Pakistan invaded Kashmir soon after independence the Muslim segment of Kashmiri army defected to Pakistan by committing massive treason against the state and nation both. For instance, when Indians were struggling against British trying to get rid of colonizing, Indian Muslims were busy murdering fellow Indians in the name of caliphate. And so on. As individuals when the group identity is not invoked, Muslims could be just like others, but when group identity is involved they are invariably treacherous against non-Muslim nations.

          • Savarkar’s Disciple

            A muslim always has a group identity as the follower of Islam and are all brothers under the Ummah infact thats the difference between them and us.They will always resort to all kinds of Goondaism and Gangsterism when something is done which might be contrary to what the Mullahs advocate.This is how they have functioned for centuries ie to kill a few and scare the rest of the masses.Muslims are still stuck in medieval era and without force you can not change them.

            Gita Rahasya, that he wrote in the Mandalay prison, the Lokmanya invokes Sri Samartha, ‘Meet boldness with boldness; impertinence by impertinence must be met; villainy by villainy must be met.’ Large-heartedness towards those who are grasping? Forgiveness towards those who are cruel? ‘Even Prahlada, that highest of devotees of the Blessed Lord,’ the Lokmanya recalls, has said, ‘Therefore, my friend, wise men have everywhere mentioned exceptions to the principle of forgiveness.’ True, the ordinary rule is that one must not cause harm to others by doing such actions as, if done to oneself, would be harmful. But, the Mahabharata, Tilak says, ‘has made it clear that this rule should not be followed in a society, where there do not exist persons who follow the other religious principle, namely, others should not cause harm to us, which is the corollary from this first principle.’ The counsel of ‘equability’ of the Gita, he says, is bound up with two individuals; that is, it implies reciprocity. ‘Therefore, just as the principle of non-violence is not violated by killing an evil-doer, so also the principle of self-identification [of seeing the same, Eternal Self in all] or of non-enmity, which is observed by saints, is in no way affected by giving condign punishment to evil-doers.’ Does the Supreme Being not Himself declare that He takes incarnations from time to time to protect dharma and destroy evil-doers? Indeed, the one who hesitates to take the retaliatory action that is necessary assists the evil to do their work. ‘And the summary of the entire teaching of the Gita is that: even the most horrible warfare which may be carried on in these circumstances, with an equable frame of mind, is righteous and meritorious.’

          • Krispy K

            “Muslims acknowledging and retaining their former Indic culture. Not to mention their fewness in numbers.”

            Did the Indic mindset influence in Indian Muslims come first, or did it come later? Were the invaders who terrorised our ancestors influenced by the Indic mindset before they crossed the borders and committed their massacres and temple destruction? Would those invaders not have converted the whole of India if they could? Why didn’t they?

            “…growing population of Muslims further fuels this desire to dominate the identity landscape and spread the Islamic influence”

            Sure, the growing population is a problem. Like I have said before, I would not be surprised if Islam does eventually dominate the world. That may be the low point of kaliyuga and induce the next avatar. What I’ve been arguing is that India may be the *last* to go (at least, after the Europeans), rather than before them, because of our ability to absorb it better.

            The rest of your post I know very well.

          • Kraken

            “Did the Indic mindset influence in Indian Muslims come first, or did it come later?”

            A very relevant question. The Indic mindset influence in Indian Muslims is on account of the temporal proximity to their parent tradition and is found among those inhabiting places where Muslim rule has had a relatively less debilitating impact. For instance, Konkani Muslims are quite progressive, unlike their Hyderabadi counterparts, despite the geographical proximity between the two. In fact, a few decades ago, even Bengali Muslim women used to wear a bindi. So, in my opinion, it’s a combination of factors, not solely chronological, that caused this influence. But, the organised entity that Islam is, the Indic influence is waning in the younger generation of even the progressive lot.

            “Were the invaders who terrorised our ancestors influenced by the Indic mindset before they crossed the borders and committed their massacres and temple destruction?”

            Absolutely not, for they were invaders. In other words, they were the perpetrators, not the victims. The present-day Indian Muslim populace is the progeny of the latter. It’s a different matter that they proudly identify themselves with the aggressors though.

            “Would those invaders not have converted the whole of India if they could? Why didn’t they?”

            Surely they would have done that. They could not do so because of the heroic resistance shown by the Hindu rulers of that time.

            “What I’ve been arguing is that India may be the *last* to go (at least, after the Europeans), rather than before them, because of our ability to absorb it better”

            India may be the last to go not because of our ability to absorb it better, but because of our sheer size (both in terms of population and land area). Let’s consider the case of Kashmir. Have we managed to even acknowledge, much less resolve, the root cause of this crisis, which is a perfect example of Muslim aggression and subsequent victimhood-mongering? Do we even acknowledge the threat that Bengal’s/Kerala’s gonna face in the coming years? Let me tell you Krispy, if push comes to shove, the Europeans will blow the hell out of these guys, of course it’ll be bloody, but the whites will simply not give away their hegemony. Yes, there’s absolutely no doubt that we absorb the better, unlike the westerners who have rigid social norms. But behind what we believe to absorb is the innate assumption that the entity being absorbed is simply one of the pathways to God – an absolutely self-destructive presumption, to say the least. What we dangerously overlook is the very position such an entity undertakes while dealing with the “other” and the heinous motivations thereof. Thus, what you call “ability to absorb” morphs into “ability to be absorbed”. Moreover, I think, in our context, “bending over backwards” aptly substitutes the notion of “absorbing”. And this “pampering of the intolerant” will only cause further shrinkage of our motherland, unless immediate corrective actions are taken by the Hindu society.

          • Savarkar’s Disciple


            Republican presidential frontrunner has suggested he would “strongly consider” shutting down mosques, instituting a national Muslim database, and requiring all Muslims to carry special identification cards. In the wake of the Paris attacks and the debate over Syrian refugees that followed, Donald Trump tweeted, “WE NEED A BIG & BEAUTIFUL WALL!”

          • Kraken

            But do you think he would win? Moreover, his ascendancy to the presidency might harm our interests.

          • Savarkar’s Disciple

            You never know he might win coz noone else seems to be in the race and America is WASP-Judeo-Christian along with Manifest Destiny and American Exceptionalism at core of Foreign Policy and often Americans are known to vote taking foreign policy into accounts.If George Bush could win so can this guy and as far as our interests are concerned the Left and the Right in US behave similarly as far as Foreign Policy is concerned with regards to India.Only hope is once and for all Pakistan is neutralised for all time sakes.Also they need an ally to counter China and Hindu India might not be the best choice but the only choice to counter certain countries/ideologies.

          • Krispy K

            Like you say, it doesn’t matter who’s in power in the US, they seem determined to stand against Indian interests on a regular basis. As long as they continue to fund their munna to the west the relationship can only go so far.

          • Kraken

            However, from our perspective, Trump might prove to be a threat to the IT guys who migrate to the US. Also, Christian Evangelists have stronger ties with the Republicans than the Democrats. Let’s wait and see.

          • Savarkar’s Disciple

            You should read VigilOnlines Kishen Kak & Radha Rajan’s Ngo Activists and Foreign Funds n Rajiv Malhotra’s Breaking India and Being Different.They don’t stop their evangelical missions irrespective of whose in power. Our IT folks not being accepted could be a blessing in disguise the current model causes us serious brain drain and all at cost of citizens tax money.The IIT walas get their degrees which is highly subsidised by GOI and what amount you think they return back in form of US$,many settle there permanently and forget India and ordinary tax payers role in their going up the ladder.If Trump decides in favour of what you say may be Modi’s Make in India will be successful anyways even today the Medium and Small Scale Industries contribute the most to our GDP.



          • Kraken

            Thanks for the pointers, but too many assumptions regarding the IT/IIT part. Let’s save this discussion for a later time.

          • Krispy K

            I’ll be amazed if that ever actually happens the way it’s described. But it would be a sensible step, that’s for sure. Actually to refine it, I wouldn’t shut down all mosques, but I would make it illegal to build any more, and I would make sure the few left standing (so Muslims can at least practice) were carefully monitored.

  • ksi

    secularism and seculars exposed ! thanks

  • Rajeshkumar Srivastava

    This is not the Hindu Fundamentalism . It is Hindu Revivalism from the black shadow of Islamic socioeconomic and political era as well as the western Imports of dishonest cultures.

  • Shubhangi Raykar

    A fantastic article as usual with razor sharp analysis of the plight of the Muslims in India which they do not understand.


    This is a terrible communal article. Is this what passes for scholarship in India? O my heart bleeeeeds. The author is clearly a fascist. Don’t give up your day job, Elvis has left the building, it takes two to tango, etc etc etc. Arvindji saaaaave uuuuus.

    This post should hopefully have proven to you bloody Hindus why this article is completely wrong, and if it doesn’t it’s because you are too stupid to understand. And I know because I am a Hindu myself, honest, and I pray to Rom (or whatever you call him) every day at my local Hindu church. So you should listen to me.

    Provide prrrrooooof of otherwise if you can, fascists! I’m here to learn, don’t abuse me.

    • toxic delirium

      I notice that you call everyone you don’t agree with a fascist. Do you even know what a fascist is?

  • Krispy K

    Stop using the phrase “Hindu extremism”. The word extremism has a particular connotation which doesn’t apply here. What is the motivation for Christian *extremists*, or Muslim *extremists*, or white-supremacist *extremists*? These are exclusivist ideologies for which the (colloquially understood) term applies – it denotes the endeavour to apply those ideologies to their limit, in the process of which people on the other side lose their rights, their identity or even their life.

    That concept is essentially absent in the Hindu ethos. Hindus who accommodate everything and live entirely by the notion that God is everywhere and in everything, and truth manifests itself in a multitude of ways, and who as a result never discriminate against non-Hindus, might more logically be called “extremists” (if it didn’t have such a negative connotation) since they have internalised the essence of our world-view to or close to the limit. To use “Hindu extremist” to describe people who are committing criminal acts, whether out of delusion, selfishness or because they are pissed off with the way things are, is completely misleading and counterproductive to correcting perceptions. Using this phrase is doing damage to the cause.

    • Savarkar’s Disciple

      Your absolutely right the author like many others seems to have internalised the Marxist abuse hurled at Hindus hence the word Hindu *Extremism*
      Hindus never instigate its always a reaction to Abrahamic Child’s Extremism as a form of self defence.

      • Krispy K

        Precisely. It is also feeding the completely false notion that “Hinduism” is a “religion” just like Islam or Christianity, which is the viewpoint of a simpleton.

    • AnalyseAbhishek

      It is mentioned as “what is known as Hindu Extremism”. It may or may not be so.
      Although it must be understood that ‘Hindutva’ is simply Hinduism with political consciousness and a focus on civilizational unity and nation building. Some zealots may go a little overboard but that does not demean the broader cause itself.


    For example, at a village called Kangla Pahari in West Bengal, secular Hindu officials have banned Durga Puja because it is disliked by Muslims. Such secular Hindu decisions give birth to what is known as Hindu extremism.

    But when Azam Khan makes a similar justification for the genesis of the Paris terrorists , then it is stoking a controversy ? What is sauce for the goose is not sauce for the gander ?

    • Krispy K

      What the fuck are you blabbering about, you sputum-sucking bag of donkey dung? Have Hindus been attacking civilians in the street with automatic weapons and bombs? Do we travel abroad and commit terror there? Do we have dozens of armed terrorist groups kidnapping, beheading, exploding, shooting etc. people over the globe? No, we have a general annoyance at injustice which is increasing throughout the Hindu population, and there are a handful of incidents by some criminals which are quickly labelled by bastards like you as “Hindu terror”, most of the time which turn out to be nothing of the sort. Yet according to you, an analysis of why fake-“secularism” in India is feeding communalism is the same as a shitbag like Azam Khan justifying the murder of hundreds of innocent people. You couldn’t write this kind of script.

      There is this overriding need for scum like you to deliberately misrepresent everything. Are you able to go through a single day without lying about something or other? Do you lie to your mother when she asks you the time?

      These are the two situations:

      (1) Hindu reaction to oppression – caused by imbalanced treatment, anti-Hindu propaganda, one-sided laws, hate from Abrahamics, lying scumbags like Narayan Rao, and so on

      (2) Muslim reaction to “oppression” – caused by the fact that non-Muslims exist, or reactions by non-Muslims to actions instigated by the pain that non-Muslims exist, creating a never-ending cycle

      The situations are almost opposite to one another. Despite widespread second-class treatment in their own country, Hindus have largely swallowed the abuse and the injustice, only to be faced with whining from people like you should they DARE to stand up for themselves. Despite primacy in Islamic countries, Muslims have continued to kill each other and non-Muslims with alarming regularity, only to be faced with complete capitulation from cowards like you all lubed up and bent over ready to take it in the shitter from the nearest rabid, foaming-at-the-mouth mullah ranting about “kafirs”.

      Not that I expect someone with a brain the size of half a tomato to absorb this. Just fuck off already.

      • toxic delirium

        I notice you use the term “Abrahamic.” Does this include Jews and Christians? While I know that both Judaism and Christianity would like everyone to convert to their belief, I don’t think they “hate” anyone in general, and certainly won’t force anyone to convert at the point of a gun, unlike with Islam, which is pretty much all they do.
        Otherwise, I really liked your response to Narayan Rao, and I found your discussion with Savarkar’s Disciple, Sibby, and Kraken to be very enlightening and intelligent.

    • nairps

      Your comparison of the Durga Puja incident and the recent Muslim terror attacks in Paris is shocking because the two are not comparable. No one was killed in the West Bengal incident whereas the Paris attacks cost more than a 100 innocent non-Muslim lives. Don’t you know that the genesis of the Paris terrorists can be traced back to their so-called holy book?


        Don’t be silly fascist they are exactly the same. Don’t ask me why, just accept it. Stop being communal.

        • nairps

          Why do you expect people to accept what you assert without providing any supporting evidence? Don’t ordinary Hindus like us have no right to put questions to secularists? You are dubbing us ‘communal’ and ‘fascist’ simply because we Hindus sometimes ask inconvenient questions. Well, your days of success by swearing and abuse are clearly over. Internet is here, whether you like it or not.

  • subodh1945

    admirable analysis by tufail ahmed

  • Luffy

    I genuinely admire Tufail Ahmad’s perspective of things. And I am not saying it is wrong either. But there is a quintessential problem with this belief. Its not practical.

    Problem for Muslim is their Prophet did most of the acts that Islamists and Terrorists do today. I remember a case in UP where the father-in-law raped the daughter-in-law and made her pregnant. The Islamic Cleric gave judgement in favor of father-in-law and told the daughter to treat her husband as son and her father-in-law as new husband. Seems outrageous for most but if you read about the Prophet Marriage to Zaynab bint Jahsh it won’t appear so. True Zaid was adopted son but son none the less.

    If you go through the life of the Prophet (the highest source of reverence, second only to Allah) you would find instances which could come under heavy scrutiny in present times. What Mr. Ahmad’s is proposing is revolutionary but not practical. Muslims in India are more under the impression then other countries that Islamic Prophet could do no wrong.

    • Slasher

      Your response is absolutely correct.

      What amazes me is that Muslims act perfectly rational when criticizing any other religion but it has been 1400 years since a Mad Man came out of a cave and composed One Book based on the “Voices” he ALONE heard and based on that little Book, millions of Hindus and Christians and people of other religious beliefs were killed and their houses of worship and cultural monuments destroyed.

      Yet the response of all the Children of these Islamic Rapists is to worship the God and Man that raped them.

      Why have millions of Muslims NOT denounced Islam and Mohammad after the rape was over? Will they take the rapes by Hindus and convert to Hinduism?

      • Luffy

        Your views on Islam seem to be influenced by Western Narrative. Search ‘Afghanistan 1960’ and ‘Iran 1970’ images first. The writer of this article is 100% right that Secularists do get in the way of modernization of Indian Muslims. If Iran and Afghanistan both majority Muslim Countries could be modern some 40-50 years back why not Indian Muslims today?

        Hindu Narrative is based on equality, empathy and progress for all while Western Narrative is based on a sense of superiority. That is why Indians especially Hindus need to research about Islam and do so with an open heart. Radicals cannot be saved but majority moderates can be saved.

        • Slasher

          My views on Islam are absolutely not based on Western narratives. It is based entirely on reading the Islam Holy Books, Quran and the Hadiths. I ask every reader here to read the Hadiths – in this day and age, there is no excuse for an Indian who reads his cell phone everyday for every trashy story about his Bollywood celebrities, to not read the Hadiths (must Google the Hadiths and read them). He/She will absolutely understand why ISIS exists and why Islam has attacked and will continue to attack every Culture that worships a different way than Islam. The West is deluded in their own way about the nature and birth of Christianity but let me not bring that up now.

          • Luffy

            Hmm… I agree that Hadiths and Quran contain all the fuel to the fire called ISIS. I also agree Indians especially Hindus need to learn a little of invaders history, strength and weakness.

            Happy chatting to you. Would keep a keen eye to your future posts. Hopefully more people like you follow and keep others updated about what I believe is necessary information in present times.

      • Anshul Singhal

        christianty have same blooded history,

        • Dr. A.V.Pathak

          These organised religions perhaps knew that they would not be accepted by the masses purely on strength of their merits hence they used violence for proselytising. I dare the spiritual content in their precepts was low. Educated minds could easily see through their limitations thus came fear of death as tool for spread.They still do it especially Islam while Christianity does it in subtle ways by hanging carrots to the needy.

    • Dr. A.V.Pathak

      If you dissect the deeds done by him, the prophet has done many things, which by standard of civilised society, were inappropriate. Blind following is the only way he can be revered other wise he wasn’t the highest moral authority to inspire awe and reverence. What Tufail has written has crystallised because his education gives him the ability and liberty to contemplate and express freely.

  • Sibby

    Like your sarcasm!!! These liberal secular journalists and intellectuals are giving rise to Islamic terrorism and Hindu extremism. They overly victimize muslims and claim that hindus are responsible for their situation (ex. poverty, hunger, unemployment). They overly criticize Hindus and curb their voices. This leads to a divide and riots. Media then gains TRP and money by reporting these riots and blackmail political parties to show them in poor light if they dont bribe them. Many Hindu and Muslim organization criticized dadri lynching, but our media went to most foul mouth “hindu” leaders and most anti hindu “muslim” leaders and asked for their statements.

    Media is very fond of sting operations on politicians and officers. I ask people to do a sting operation on media itself. Remember, Tehelka, a news magazine popular for its sting operation, its Tarun Tejpal is guilty for sexual assault. I ask people to do sting operation to expose the bribery taken by these paid media.

    • Shubhangi Raykar

      Currently many Hindus have discovered that they also can voice their opinion and this seems to be perceived as threat and insecurity by the so called minorities.This just positive Hindu awakening.


        No it is communal and fascist. If Hindus want to voice their opinion you cannot complain when Muslims commit murder. They are obviously both the same thing. I’m here to learn, don’t abuse me.

        • guest

          Please learn then…share and learn, rather than only have your say…:)

          • NARAYAN MAO

            I don’t have to do anything fascist, all the obligation is on you. I’m here to learn, don’t abuse me.

          • guest

            so long as you continue to amuse us….even as you learn…

          • NARAYAN MAO

            More abuse. Oh woe is me, Kejriwalji save India from fascists like you.

          • Savarkar’s Disciple

            So khujlimal Moochi worshipper noones replying back to your shenanigans except Bhola Bhala Guest here.You should change your strategy use something new.

          • NARAYAN MAO

            So what will you do, fascist? Eat me like you ate that Muslim this morning? Was he tasty? Yum yum!

          • Savarkar’s Disciple

            Come up with something new and innovative all this has become boring.

          • NARAYAN MAO

            More abuse.

          • Savarkar’s Disciple

            Common mao beta u can do better seriously or else I will stop upvoting and replying your comments.Come up with something better and may be I will pet u on the head.

          • NARAYAN MAO

            Why do you think I care if you reply to my comments, fascist? I’d rather slap you in the face. Now bugger off and eat some more Muslims.

          • Savarkar’s Disciple

            More abuse.

        • Shubhangi Raykar


          • NARAYAN MAO

            No, just Hindus voicing opinion.