We are told repeatedly by many Seculars that they are atheists, and by extension “humanists”. It is, of course, a self-awarded certificate.
An Atheist around the world is described as “a person who disbelieves or lacks belief in the existence of God or gods.” No God. It is not that he believes in God A but not in God B. He believes in no God whatsoever.
India has become schizophrenic religiously and ideologically. Islamists have been showcasing themselves as atheists just to get freehand at abusing Hindus and the very culture of India. @Javedakhtarjadu Click To Tweet
But interestingly in India, the so-called atheists are not omni-atheistic. They do respect some gods, but not all gods. And the god they somehow always respect is the Islamic god.
I came across a tweet that embodied the whole thing so beautifully. A sick mind which demonstrates the caricaturization of Atheism so wonderfully.
There it is. A Muslim in India calls himself an “atheist” for the only purpose of abusing Hindus while furnishing the argument that he can do so because he doesn’t believe in god unless of course, it is the Islamic god. And, then such a hypocritical creature becomes the defining authority of atheism itself.
One may think that he is just a troll on the social web or a meme. But there are many who openly display Hinduphobia and quickly go take the asylum under Atheism when challenged.
As time and opportunity presents, they are perfectly comfortable in embracing the rituals, the symbols and even religious edicts of Islam. They can at once adopt the Islamic ideological identities while portraying their atheistic credentials.
It is a magic trick that can only be performed in India and only by those who self-righteously call themselves Atheist and Secular at once while embracing Islam for good measure.
Let us start our inquiry into these figures by looking at the most obvious.
The Three Jokers – Atheist Pants and Islamist underwear
I wanted to look at three public figures who have by their public conduct and utterances clearly demonstrated their Atheist pants and also bared, from time to time, their unmistakable Islamist underwear. Apart from them, there are enough trolls and closet Islamists, but these three people showcase three different varieties of Atheist-Islamist combination.
Sitaram Yechury – Communist Atheist who respects Islamic god
Sitaram Yechury: is a Politburo leader of the Communist Party of India (CPI). He is a self-admitted atheist. Here is an excerpt from his interview in Hindustan Times in 2016.
Do you believe in God?
No. I’ve been an atheist since my twenties. Spiritual upliftment is not confined to religion. I believe you can have atheistic spiritualism. (source)
Sounds good. He means perhaps that he does not believe in any god and that belief is not required for him to be spiritual. Sounds great.
But his atheism is only limited to abusing Hindus and Hinduism while taking refuge of righteously challenging “casteism”. But the moment he gets in the vicinity of Muslims or Islamic festivals, he only sees spiritualism. There is no mention of terrorism, for now mysteriously enough, all the ills of a people have no link to that group or religion at all. In fact, Hindus are violent because back in history someone fought a battle.
This is the great vanishing trick by the atheistic Seculars of India.
Now let us move on to another guy – Javed Akhtar.
Javed Akhtar – Atheist-Islamist Chameleon
Javed Akhtar calls himself an atheist. As he did in this tweet.
He was answering to a pertinent question from Anand Ranganathan.
But this was after he had launched an organization – Muslims for Secular Democracy. Amongst its declarations was this text. The website has since been hacked by Chinese hackers and disfigured.
Because it is committed to the goal of ‘Hindu Rashtra’, the ideals of secular democracy have never been acceptable to the sangh parivar since its ideology is embedded in notions of majoritarianism and a deep-rooted hatred for the country’s minorities.
Sustained hate propaganda, instigation of communal violence to polarise Indian society and painstaking organisation building have been its principal occupation for decades. Today, having made deep inroads into the mass psyche, having infiltrated and captured State institutions, the sangh outfitsare cynically misusing and manipulating the instruments and institutions of democracy to subvert them from within. (from the declaration of the organization – site no more available)
Do you see the drift?
Now, I am not aware of any violence for which RSS or its leaders have been either convicted or sentenced. NONE. The only example given is Dara Singh who was convicted of killing Graham Staines. Now Bajrang Dal had no link to the killing. And the investigation cleared that. That Dara Singh was once a Bajrang Dal “activist” has been used to malign everyone.
He was also linked to the Bajrang Dal though a subsequent probe revealed that Dara Singh worked alone and not on behalf of any organisation. (source)
Barring this, there is nothing about RSS, VHP or any other so-called Sangh Parivar organization and any killing. It is all rhetorical propaganda.
But what does Javed Akhtar do? He and his Muslim friends are so bothered about the violence and “hatred” of Hindu organizations, while he has nothing to say about the hatred spread by the “holy book”. Of course, as a fig leaf, they add the “handful of Muslim extremists” with ALL the “Sangh Parivar organizations”. Brilliant work huh?
On one hand, the Sangh Parivar and its affiliates are engaged in relentless hate propaganda and the militaristion of society to create the climate for violence against minorities. On the other are a handful of Muslim extremists who have no qualm in targeting innocents in the name of Islam. (source)
Name of Islam? Try following Islam as explained in these verses and see how you can do any different from the “handful of Muslim extremists”? That is why when Anand Ranganathan challenged him to denounce the Quranic verses, he did not and started his rants. And for good measure, Anand brought out the Islamist agenda of Javed Akhtar, however subtle it may be, to the fore in this brilliant series of tweets.
Javed Akhtar, you see, is also an Islamic apologist. It’s just that he is an even greater coward.
He is an Atheist wannabe in a Hindu crowd but a closet Islamist in a Secular crowd and has as much Hinduphobia as Hezbollah has hatred for Jews.
And now we come to our third specimen. Naseeruddin Shah.
Naseeruddin Shah – Son has no religion, except his name is after Mohd bin Qasim
Naseeruddin Shah’s son’s name is Imad Shah. What does Imad really mean? Let us take a look. It comes from Quran, where it means a person who is a strong supporter of Islam.
Imad is a direct Quranic name for boys that means “pillars”. It is usually short for Imad ad-Deen, which means “pillars of the religion”, i.e. a person who is a strong supporter of Islam. The word Imad is mentioned in the Quran in 89:7: (source)
In the Indian context, it has been used for one barbaric figure in our history – ‘Imād ad-Dīn Muḥammad bin Qāsim ath-Thaqafī. For someone whose heart beats so strongly for Indian society and harmony, that is quite a legacy to hand over to his son.
In fact, he had vociferously suggested in 2018 that he feared for his children, because they had no religion.
“Tomorrow if a mob surrounds them and asks, “Are you a Hindu or a Muslim?” they will have no answer. Because they have no religion.” (source)
Someone, whose very name means ‘One who strongly upholds Islam”, is being presented as one who has no religion. This is a euphemism for a warrior who fights for Islam. That is where this concept of “supporting religion” came from.
Now, maybe he just kept a “Muslim name” for his kid. But as someone who looks at things deeply and in context of harmony, isn’t it natural for that person to be careful about what name he is bequeathing his son?
And, for anyone in India, where everyone is always curious about the meanings of the name one gives his or her kids, no matter what religion, it is fairly odd that someone who prides himself as an intellectual named his son without going into the details and history of his name. Did he not know that Imad is short for Imad-ad-deen? That one of the most reviled and barbaric figures in Indian history was known by that “title”?
That should have given him an insight into what this kind of title, from which the name has been shortened, really conveys.
And, then we are to believe that such a person would have no religion. Sure, stands to as much reason as naming your son Ghazni was a way to prepare him for being a patriot. In India.
It is clear that these people are using doublespeak in a rather sophisticated way to fool a lot of people. Shame on those who cannot see through because they have amnesia regarding their earlier utterances. They forget on Thursday about what these guys said on Tuesday and will completely miss what they will again say on Saturday. And that is why, on next Thursday, they will take them to be Atheist or Secular when that very evening they will denounce Salman Rushdie for defaming Islam. Of course, unbeknownst to the foolish laypeople.
But the takeaway from all this is not about their hypocrisy. It is also not about how they mess up substantive public discourse with crafty doublespeak.
The real takeaway is that now Islam has become the only preserve of the Secular. You cannot be a publicly practicing Hindu and be an atheist. When the truth is that only in Hinduism can you find groups who are outrightly Atheist but within the fold. Atheism, meanwhile, is the very antithesis of Islam or other “religions of the book.”
How has such complete misrepresentation become part of India’s national character is not tough to understand if you see through Nehru’s ways of demeaning Hinduism to do what Jinnah did with carving out Pakistan.
India has become schizophrenic religiously and ideologically. Islamists have been showcasing themselves as atheists just to get freehand at abusing Hindus and the very culture of India. Strange that two complete anti-thesis – Islam and Atheism – have become synonymous, while the ONLY group which accepts atheism in its real sense within, the Hinduism, is made to be anti-atheistic.
Bottomline, this affords Islamists a free-pass at Hinduphobia.