Hindu-Muslim Relations in India
Introduction
Hinduism and Islam are closely knit and have shaped India into the country it is today. Both are deep-rooted in Indian culture and society, having existed on the subcontinent for millennia. As well as fostering mutual acceptance and understanding in the diverse and pluralistic society, their confluence has also led to conflict. British colonialism played a tremendous role in the religious polarization and the tragic Partition marked the beginning of most modern tensions between Muslims and Hindus. The BJP’s advancement of their Hindu nationalist agenda has further intensified tensions in recent years. In 2019, Prime Minister Modi’s administration has taken measures such as the revocation of Article 370 in Kashmir, the passing of the Citizenship Amendment Act, and the enforcement of citizenship tests in Assam.
Hinduism in India
Hinduism is India’s primary religion, practiced by over 900 million citizens. As Hinduism historically consisted of a set of practices and traditions with no central body overseeing their implementation, its precise hearth and time of origin are unclear. However, historians agree that Hinduism likely originated in the Indus Valley Civilization around the 3rd Millennium BCE (Smith). Hinduism does not forcefully impose specific systems of philosophy or belief on adherents, instead allowing a variety of traditions to flourish. Due to the lack of a single, central leader or religious narrative, Hinduism is regarded as a way of life rather than an organized religion. Despite the decentralized nature of the religion and the plethora of interpretations and traditions followed, there are elements of Hinduism that most followers abide by. The concept of reincarnation and veneration of all animals, as well as abstinence from beef-eating, are nearly universally followed by Hindus in India.
The Caste System and Its Effects
One of Hinduism’s most influential creations, which permeated Indian society for centuries, the effects of which are discernable today, is the Caste System. The rigidly structured caste system orchestrated centuries of social, political, and economic inequality. Under the system, a social hierarchy based on one’s occupation dictated life. The uppermost caste comprises Brahmins — primarily scholars and priests — while the Dalits, who are assigned dirty jobs, such as cleaning sewers and preparing dead bodies, occupy the lowest caste. Although the 2000-year old system was formally abolished in 1947, lower-caste Hindus still suffer the consequences of years of repression and lack of opportunities. To level the socioeconomic playing field, the government has imposed quotas for employment and college admissions. Today, numerous lower-caste Hindus hold important positions in government and industry.
Islam in India
Islam, with nearly 200 million adherents, is India’s second most commonly practiced religion. Although not native to the Indian subcontinent, its diffusion to India was catalyzed by Islamic conquests as well as Arab traders. Initially, Islam gained the most acceptance among social outcasts and repressed groups, who welcomed the prospect of equality and liberation from the omnipresent caste system. However, Islam was not received as well by other Hindu groups, and it often faced violent reciprocation. In 712 BC, the Umayyads defeated armed resistance in Sindh, proving to be a decisive victory for Islam in the region. Although forced conversion was common in Muslim-controlled regions, some rulers such as Muhammad bin Qasim tolerated all religions and promised security to all regardless of faith. Due to the complex social fabric woven by the caste system, Islamic conversions happened sporadically and sometimes involved entire castes at a time. The faith gradually spread throughout the subcontinent and today Muslims’ population growth rate is higher than that of Hindus.
Historical Hindu-Islamic Relations
For a Millenium, Hindus and Muslims coexisted peacefully and India was largely syncretistic. The New Yorker writes that after centuries of interactions, aspects of the religions and their respective cultures merged, even resulting in the formation of new languages such as Urdu and Deccani. Sufi Muslims often regarded Hindu scriptures as celestial and adopted yogic practices such as smearing ashes on their bodies. However, with the introduction of the British in 1858, relations in India was changed profoundly. The British rulers were astounded by the joint Hindus-Muslim armies fighting in unison against their forces during the Revolt of 1857. Afterward, they vowed to prevent unified efforts to overthrow the government, by replacing citizens’ national identities with religious ones.
Divide and Rule: The British Colonialist Legacy
With the divide and rule policy, the British systematically fostered divisions between people of Hindu and Islamic faith. They propped up the Muslim League, a group of Islamic separatists that demanded a distinct Muslim state. In 1905, the British partitioned Bengal into the Muslim-dominated east and Hindu-majority west. The Viceroy of India, Lord Curzon, explained, “Bengal united is a power; Bengali divided will pull in several different ways.” A unified province posed a threat to British power: Bengalis were the first to receive English education, which empowered intellectualism, and Bengalis spearheaded the independence movement. Additionally, the Morley-Minto Act of 1909 created separate electorates for Muslim voters, much to the dismay of Hindu voters. Such tactics led to heightened enmity between people of different faiths as well as the eroding of age-old communal harmony.
Although the British played a substantial role in creating polarization, many strong Indian political and religious figures called for change. Muhammad Ali Jinnah, the head of the Muslim League, regularly clashed with Jawaharlal Nehru and Mahatma Gandhi of the Hindu-run Congress Party. Jinnah was a fervent Muslim nationalist and at the forefront of efforts to form the state of Pakistan. Although not a staunch Muslim himself, he considered himself the protector of Muslims from Hindu authority. On August 16, 1946, he organized riots in favor of Pakistan, resulting in civil unrest and thousands of deaths. The Congress Party, who initially disapproved of Partition, later conceded to Jinnah’s demands to appease the Muslim League.
Partition Intensifies Tensions
In the midst of WW2, the once strong and secure British control began slipping away and it was no longer economically viable to consolidate their rule. In a matter of 40 days, a hastily-drawn map of South Asia was designed, and the British promptly made an exit, leaving the country in a severely polarized and unstable state. After nearly 100 years of the British Raj, India was demarcated into Hindu-ruled India and Muslim-ruled Pakistan. The hastily-planned Partition led to one of the most deadly and disputed mass migrations in modern history. In the process, nearly 2 million lost their lives, almost 20 million were left displaced, and billions of rupees worth of property was destroyed. Chaos ensued, with pillaging and rape running rampant. Although the bloodshed was short-lived, the Partition’s legacy lives on through current conflicts and is one of the primary causes of Hindu-Muslim disputes today.
The Longstanding Conflict over Kashmir
In Northwestern India lies Kashmir, the epitome of Hindu-Islamic disputes and largely a product of the division inflicted by the Partition. Kashmir experienced a multireligious past: Buddhism was introduced in the 3rd century BCE, followed by rule by Hindu dynasties until 1346, when Muslim Shah Mir Dynasty assumed control for the next 5 centuries. In 1857, the land fell under British control. At the time of Partition, it was indeterminate how the land would be allocated. At the time, Kashmir was dominated by Muslims, but the Hindu Maharaja, Hari Singh, chose to remain independent. He signed a standstill agreement with Pakistan, but not India, guaranteeing the free flow of communication and trade between the regions. When Pakistani-backed insurgents took over the region, Singh appealed to India for help. India declared that in order to receive aid, Singh had to concede the territory to India. The move was heavily contested by Pakistan, which claimed tighter cultural and geographical ties with Kashmir. The government also claimed that the acquisition of land was not allowed because they were still abiding by the standstill agreement. In January 1949 a ceasefire line was drawn with the UN’s assistance, effectively resulting in the current borders. In the present day, the northern and western portions belong to Pakistan, and the Southern regions of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh belong to India. Despite the systematic efforts to establish a solid border, it remains one of the most violently disputed territories in the world.
In the late ’80s, militant groups with the aim of countering Indian control emerged. Armed Jihadist groups commenced attacks on Indian-controlled Kashmir and in the early 1990s, India began cracking down on rebel activity. Although the Indian government claimed the Pakistani government was actively arming these organizations, Pakistan, on the other hand, claimed they were simply giving “moral and diplomatic” aid to activist groups. In a standoff in 1998, India launched five nuclear missile tests, with Pakistan retaliating by launching six. A car bombing by Jihadists killed 38 people at an assembly in Srinagar in 2001. However, attacks culminated in 2008, when Pakistani-backed gunmen launched a series of attacks in Mumbai, causing over 160 deaths. Despite recent peace talks, the Indian government has taken a harder line towards Pakistan ever since.
Article 370: Withdrawal of Kashmir’s Special Privileges
On August 5, 2019, India revoked the special status enjoyed by Kashmir for the past 70 years, placing it under full administration of the Indian government. Prior to this, Article 370 of the Indian constitution awarded Kashmir numerous special privileges, such as the right to its own constitution and freedom over all affairs excluding “foreign affairs, defense, and communications.” Additionally, Kashmiri statehood was repealed, establishing a new Union Territory run by a BJP-elected lieutenant governor. Subsequently, India cut off communication, enforcing a 5-month internet blackout and cutting off cell phone service. The historically Buddhist Ladakh will be separated from Jammu and Kashmir, forming a new Union Territory. This is in hopes of bringing tourism and development to the rugged and resource-rich, but undeveloped region.
Hindu Nationalism: The BJP and Anti-Muslim Sentiment
The decision to remove Kashmir’s special status faced immense criticism from abroad, but was celebrated throughout India. For decades, one of the most substantial platforms of the reigning Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party was to integrate Kashmir into India. The majority of Indians and nearly all political parties, as well as leftist parties, backed the decision. Rakesh Sinha, a BJP lawmaker, explained, “The slogan of ‘One Nation, One People’ is now a reality for Indians.” Moreover, the Indian Consul General in New York defended the choice, saying its purpose was to “improve good governance and deliver socio-economic justice to the disadvantaged sections of the people in the State.” Public sentiment towards Kashmir is predominantly negative, mainly due to the expulsion of 400,000 Kashmiri Hindu Brahmins whose presence in the valley dates back six centuries. On social media, hashtags such as #ServeIndiaNotPak, #KashmirForAll, and #IndiaAgainstAntiNationals grew popular. As well as the decision was received by the Indian public, international perceptions were mixed. Human rights activists considered the BJP’s interference in Kashmir was part of larger efforts to destroy Kashmiri culture and promote Hindutva, or Hindu nationalism. Foreign governments, on the other hand, were largely unconcerned. In the face of rising tensions with China, the US has increasingly propped up India, which they see as an important protector against Chinese interests in the region.
Citizenship Tests in Assam
Only a few weeks after Article 370 was terminated, India once again drew controversy for issuing citizenship tests in the state of Assam to find illegal immigrants. Assam, which shares a border with Bangladesh, is among India’s most ethnically diverse areas. One in three Assamese is a Muslim, but illegal immigration from Bangladesh has concerned the government. The NRC, or National Registry of Citizens, lists legitimate Indian citizens in Assam. However, when it was recently updated, 1.9 million people were left out, the majority of whom were Muslims. Unless they could provide tangible evidence of Indian genealogy, they were dismissed as undocumented immigrants. The Foreigners Tribunals, which oversee appeals for citizenship, are widely considered a sham and riddled by corruption. Vice News journalist Rohini Mohan discovered that “78% of the orders were delivered without the accused being ever heard.” Additionally, many cannot present documents verifying their citizenship because they are illiterate or because they lack organized records. The massive amount of now-stateless families poses questions as to where they will be resettled. Assam plans to construct almost a dozen detention camps to accommodate them but Bangladesh refuses to accept the migrants, although a large number are ethnic Bengali Muslims. Many Muslims, as young as 14 years old, have committed suicide after learning about their ineligibility to citizenship or fear of being sent to detention centers. Although Muslim inhabitants were harmed, many indigenous Hindus from Assam saw it as beneficial — there is widespread anti-migrant sentiment, as they believe Bangladeshis are stealing their jobs and property.
The CAA: Further Citizenship Controversy
In December of 2019, Modi’s administration was the subject of further controversy with the ratification of the Citizenship Amendment Act, which “uses religion as a criterion for determining whether illegal migrants in India can be fast-tracked for citizenship.” Immigrants of all faiths — from Christianity to Zoroastrianism — were eligible for naturalization. However, the bill excludes Islam. BJP spokesperson Raveesh Kumar explained, “The bill provides expedited consideration for Indian citizenship to persecuted religious minorities already in India from certain contiguous countries…It seeks to address their current difficulties and meet their basic human rights.” Although some persecuted minorities are protected, other groups, such as the Rohingya Muslims of Myanmar, would be excluded. The bill faced massive backlash, and protests ensued throughout the country, especially in the northeast. In the Southern city of Hyderabad, over 100,000 demonstrators congregated. In response, the BJP sponsored its own rallies, including one in the city of Jodhpur. Despite the protests, the government’s stance remained firm; BJP President Amit Shah said, “we won’t backtrack even an inch.”
The Citizenship Amendment Act and the withdrawal of 370 are regarded as part of India’s broader aim to marginalize Muslims and wholly interweave the Hindu religious and cultural identity with the state. Modi has a long history of attempting to quell the force of Islam. The New York Times writes, “since Mr. Modi took office in 2014, government bodies have rewritten history books, lopping out sections on Muslim rulers, and changed official place names to Hindu from Muslim.” Faizabad became Ayodhya; Allahabad became Prayagraj; there are efforts to make Ahmedabad Karnavati. Lynchings against Muslims and those suspected of cow consumption grew in number, but the perpetrators are rarely charged. Although the government has been pushing far-right Hindu beliefs, India’s founding fathers firmly opposed nationalizing religion.
India’s Secular Roots
Mahatma Gandhi and Jawaharlal Nehru fought for India on the grounds of secularism. They wanted India to preserve its pluralistic traditions despite British imperialism and the divisive policies enacted during the colonial era. Rather than wanting to suppress religious beliefs, Gandhi believed that people of all faiths should exist harmoniously and no religion should dominate another. In one of his speeches, he declares, “I believe in the fundamental Truth of all great religions of the world. I believe they are all God-given and I believe they were necessary for the people to whom these religions were revealed. And I believe that if only we could all of us read the scriptures of the different faiths from the standpoint of the followers of these faiths, we should find that they were at the bottom all one and were all helpful to one anot-her.” Nehru, India’s first Prime Minister, shared Gandhi’s beliefs. He believed that in order for India’s vastly diverse population to coexist, religious affairs should be separate from stately affairs. India’s Constitution espouses secular values, as well: Article 25 states, “all persons are equally entitled to freedom of conscience and the right freely to profess, practise and propagate religion.”
The Youth: India’s Future?
Hinduism and Islam both have long and storied histories in India. Tensions severely escalated as a result of the British divide-and-rule policy and flared up further after the Partition. In recent years, public sentiment towards Muslims has hardened and the BJP’s sustained efforts to create a Hindu-dominated nation have polarized the nation further. This contradicts the wishes of India’s founding fathers Nehru and Gandhi, who desired secularism and religious harmony to prevail. The future of religious relations in India is unclear, but it is reasonable to guess it is in the hands of the youth. No country has more youths than India — half its 1.4 billion-strong population is under 25 years old. As they have demonstrated during the protests against the Citizenship Amendment Act, a large number of young people, regardless of religion, are capable of banding together to fight for secularism. On the other hand, the BJP is by far the strongest political force in India, and in 2019, the party’s vote share with youth was higher than its general vote share.
Regardless of the fate of Hindu-Islamic relations, it will be the youth’s say.
