This decision by the Dhami government came shortly after the Yogi Adityanath government in Uttar Pradesh also implemented similar strict guidelines. In the name of preventing contamination of food by saliva (thook) and human waste, a new regime of surveillance is being put in place. Reports from Uttar Pradesh indicate that the Yogi government has vowed to take strict action against any eatery worker found to be an “intruder” or “illegal foreign citizen.”

At a function held on October 13 in Kichha, Udham Singh Nagar district, Uttarakhand Chief Minister Dhami stated, “Religious conversion, encroachment, land jihad, and thook jihad will not be allowed in Devbhoomi Uttarakhand.” Two days later, Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath announced that strict measures would be implemented to prevent food adulteration. As he put it, “Recent incidents involving contamination of food items such as juice, lentils, and bread with human waste or other dirty substances have been disturbing and adversely affect public health. These incidents also harm social harmony and are utterly unacceptable.” Their statements were reported in The Organiser (October 16, 2024), the English weekly and mouthpiece of the RSS.

According to media reports, Yogi Adityanath held a high-level meeting with officials on October 15 to discuss these proposed laws. While supporters of these guidelines claim they aim to prevent any form of food contamination and ensure consumer safety, growing concerns suggest that these measures are likely to be misused against marginalized communities, particularly Muslims and Dalits.

These fears are not unfounded when considering the larger campaign surrounding a newly created pejorative term, “spit jihad.” Supremacist Hindutva-led campaigns around purity and pollution have further entrenched existing social prejudices, exacerbated stigmatisation, and fuel racism. Moreover, this deliberately and politically created frenzy around “spit jihad” threatens to weaken the broader movement towards equality and non-discrimination by legitimising casteist and communal reactionary forces.

The very term “spit jihad” itself reveals the underlying anti-Muslim prejudice driving these campaigns. There is no logical connection between the act of spitting and the concept of jihad. The deliberate choice of the word “jihad” by right-wing forces suggests a sinister agenda, as it perpetuates harmful stereotypes against Muslim and Islam and promotes communal divisions.

Islamic scholars provide a nuanced definition of the term jihad and the debates surrounding it, but the broader consensus is that the term refers to making efforts for a just cause. It has nothing to do with violence, nor is it directed against non-Muslims or a threat to the safety and well-being of Hindus. There is no historical record of Muslims, as a community, declaring jihad against Hindus. In simple terms, jihad means striving for a legitimate and just cause. In other words, it is a struggle against injustice and oppression. In a catholic sense, jihad has two primary dimensions. There is the outward jihad, which may be waged for a just and noble cause, but there is also the inner jihad—a personal struggle against the self. It is widely accepted that this inner jihad, aimed at purifying one’s character and conduct, is the “greater” jihad. Reforming oneself, striving to be a good human being, and purifying the heart is considered a far more difficult and noble pursuit than the external jihad.

However, today, in India’s vitiated political landscape, the misuse of the term jihad has been twisted to mean an unholy conspiratorial assault by Muslims and through that, by Islam. The Taliban and Islamists have not helped matters (recall the Bamiyan Buddha destruction in March 2001 following a February 26 order by Taliban leader Mullah Mohammad Umar)

Political Islam and Islamists have assisted in extenuating a growing Islamophobia world over. Some hawkish scholars declared the Muslim world a threat to the West, fear of Muslims began to spread among non-Muslims. With the help of a powerful propaganda machinery, myths were ingrained in the minds of many that Muslims are preoccupied with waging violent jihad against “infidels.” False claims such as Muslims increasing their population through polygamy, converting non-Muslims by force or deceit, or harbouring “nefarious” plans to revive the Caliphate by dismantling democratic and secular institutions have been repeated endlessly. Lies, when told often enough, can start to be perceived as truth. This is why even some liberals have developed an unfounded fear of Muslims.

The truth, however, is far different. For a vast section of silent, worshipful Muslims, the ideal figure for Muslims is the Prophet Muhammad, whose life is filled with examples of friendship and cooperation with non-Muslims. He often entered into treaties with them, and the Holy Quran emphasizes that His message is for all of humanity, not just Muslims. The Quran repeatedly underscores the importance of serving humanity, regardless of faith. It frequently mentions worship of God and service to both Muslims and non-Muslims in the same breath. History also bears witness to the peaceful coexistence of non-Muslims under Muslim rule, where they were allowed to freely practice their religious beliefs. Even Jewish communities, often persecuted elsewhere, lived peacefully during Muslim rule.

It needs to be stressed however that a violent and supremacist version of political Islam, spread in the Middle East and many other countries in which Islam is the accepted official religion has extenuated both the prejudice and the real divide. Besides, the misinterpretation and manipulation of religious concepts are not unique to Islam. Sections of Muslims, do exploit religious symbols to serve their own selfish interests. There are even instances of upper-caste Muslim men denying rights to lower castes or women within their own community. Similarly, there are Muslims who might misuse Islamic concepts and commit acts of violence. However, such anti-social behaviour is not confined to Islam. For instance, the Hinduism espoused by Mahatma Gandhi and that practiced by his assassin, Nathuram Godse, were starkly different. This shows that any religion can be misused, and it is unfair to view Muslims through a narrow, prejudiced lens as a monolithic community stuck in medieval practices.

Even before the rise of the RSS and BJP to political dominance they have been ideologically wedded to a Hindu civilization, a Hindu nation based on supremacy and the notion of the “the other.” These outfits, now in power have long since not only absorbed global anti-Muslim propaganda but have also redefined and weaponised it, making it even more dangerous. The global fear of Muslims, which began intensifying after the Cold War in the 1990s, was skilfully exploited by right-wing forces in India. Instead of challenging this harmful narrative, they embraced it to further their anti-Muslim agenda. Hindutva ideologues drew from the writings of Western anti-Islamic and anti-Muslim figures, repackaging these prejudices for an Indian audience.

The relentless injection of anti-Muslim rhetoric by the commercial and big media has proven to be equally troubling. Even a rational mind, once exposed to this toxic content over time, can become infected with hatred towards Muslims. Media, dominated by the upper castes, has played an alarmingly irresponsible role in perpetuating this hate. A case in point is a special show aired by a prominent Hindi news anchor, which distorted the concept of jihad to suit a Hindutva narrative. The anchor claimed that Muslims were waging jihad in numerous domains—economy, education, history, media, music, and even by influencing secular intellectuals. Additionally, the anchor alleged that Muslims were deliberately increasing their population to change India’s demographic balance and trap non-Muslim women in what has come to be known as “love jihad.”

The underlying message from such rhetoric is clear: Hindus are being told to “wake up” to the supposed danger posed by Indian Muslims –who could be neighbours even– who are accused of weakening the Hindu community in every sphere of life. The recent spit jihad campaign is just another extension of this ongoing narrative, which portrays Muslims as a threat to Hindu identity and culture.

This divisive strategy has found various outlets, including the repeated targeting of food-related practices. Take, for example, the Muzaffarnagar police’s recent order requiring shopkeepers and food vendors to display their names to avoid “confusing” Hindu pilgrims. While authorities claim there is no communal motive behind such measures, Yogi Government minister Kapil Dev Agarwal openly revealed the true agenda. Speaking in Agra before the Kanwar Yatra, he said, “During the yatra, some Muslims run their shops under the names of Hindu gods and goddesses. We have no objection to them running their shops, but they should not name them after Hindu deities because devotees sit there and drink tea and water.”

Although the Supreme Court stayed this order, declaring such policies inappropriate in a secular state, the underlying communal agenda persists. The spit jihad campaign, purportedly designed to prevent food contamination, is nothing but another attempt to deepen religious and social divisions. By pushing the idea that contamination comes specifically from Muslims, the campaign fuels long-standing anti-Muslim and anti-Dalit prejudices. In most of the viral videos accusing people of spitting or contaminating food, the perpetrators are invariably portrayed as Muslims.

For years, Hindutva forces have circulated rumours among Hindus that Muslims deliberately spit in food before serving it to Hindus. Ironically, in northern India, especially Uttar Pradesh, Sunni Muslims have also been brought up with prejudices of a similar kind vis a vis Shias! These divisive tactics have now today got a powerful supremacist state backing. Used to discredit the practice of inter-dining, a critical aspect of building communal harmony and the overall secularisation of society. Rather than countering such harmful biases, current communal forces are further demonizing inter-dining—a practice that Dr. B.R. Ambedkar had strongly emphasized as essential for bridging societal divides. By attacking inter-dining, which could help foster unity, the Hindutva forces are undermining efforts to build an inclusive society, promoting division instead.

Finally, the spit jihad narrative is less about food safety and more about deepening religious and caste divisions. By creating an atmosphere of suspicion and prejudice, these campaigns undermine the very foundations of India’s pluralistic and secular fabric.

The issue of “spit jihad,” often framed as primarily targeting Muslims, actually has far-reaching consequences for both Muslims and Dalits, as it taps into deeply entrenched social prejudices that affect both communities. Historically, the notion of purity and pollution, which is central to the caste system, was first imposed upon Dalits. The practice of untouchability, grounded in the belief that Dalits were impure, was justified by upper-caste Hindus through the lens of caste segregation. Dr. B.R. Ambedkar critiqued this social hierarchy, noting that the caste system fosters contempt, especially for those at the bottom. For Ambedkar, this was why Hinduism lacked the feeling of fraternity and community bonding, prompting him to convert to Buddhism as a form of protest.

In independent India, the practice of untouchability was outlawed, and the state was tasked with implementing measures to uplift Dalits, Adivasis, and other marginalized groups. However, campaigns like “spit jihad” represent a counter-revolution to these democratic gains. By justifying social segregation and reinforcing the idea of “purity” in the name of food safety, these measures indirectly revive old forms of untouchability, especially in relation to Dalits and Muslims.

This modern version of the purity-pollution binary is being repurposed by communal forces to deepen divisions, not just against Muslims but also Dalits. The upper-caste Hindu perception of pollution—historically linked to caste—now manifests in their reluctance to share food or dine in eateries owned by Muslims. This phenomenon is not new for Dalits, who have long faced similar discrimination. Many Dalit business owners conceal their caste to avoid losing customers, and the same applies to Muslim-owned businesses today, where communal forces push for a clear division between “Hindu” and “Muslim” food establishments.

Even today, upper-caste-owned food chains and eateries are more widely accepted, while those owned by Dalits or Muslims are viewed with suspicion. As a result, Dalits and Muslims often have to hide their identities in business dealings to avoid losing customers from upper-caste Hindus, reinforcing both caste-based and religious discrimination.

In this context, the “spit jihad” campaign is not just an attack on Muslims but a reaffirmation, negatively, of the social prejudices and hierarchies that have oppressed Dalits for centuries. Both groups are treated as impure and “othered” by the dominant caste and religious forces, perpetuating the same exclusionary logic. The division between “Hindu” and “Muslim” food shops today echoes the historical exclusion of Dalits from spaces and resources.

Recently, I visited the old city areas of Lucknow, specifically the old city area. I needed to purchase sweets for my relatives. When I asked my Muslim friends to help me with the purchase, one of them mentioned a sweet shop called “Maulana Sweets,” known for its reasonable prices and good quality. However, they cautioned that my relatives might not accept sweets from there. When I responded that it could be possible, my friend suggested taking me to a nearby Hindu-owned shop, named after a Hindu god, to avoid any potential issues.

This communal and caste-based discrimination in the food industry is an extension of the broader socio-economic marginalization of these communities. By reinforcing social distancing and fostering a sense of distrust, these campaigns aim to erode the gains made towards social equality, targeting the economic livelihoods of Muslims and Dalits alike. Such policies and campaigns don’t just seek to control hygiene or safety; they represent an insidious attempt to deepen societal divides along both religious and caste lines.

If we truly want to build a secular India based on the principle of fraternity, we must combat social prejudices. However, reactionary forces are moving in the opposite direction, with a vested interest in further dividing society along religious lines. Their measures aim to benefit upper-caste businessmen by excluding Muslims and Dalits from competition. This is why it appears that the true motive behind the BJP government’s decision to disclose the names of hotel owners and staff is to exploit the reactionary sentiments prevalent in society, ultimately benefiting their financial backers. Therefore, I contend that these laws are not primarily designed to protect consumer health or prevent food contamination. Instead, they are intended to economically weaken the already vulnerable Muslim and Dalit communities.

There is a striking irony here. While the BJP governments are so proactive in ensuring food safety for consumers, they make little effort to secure the rights of workers in eateries. Across the country, the conditions in hotels are deplorable. Visit any dhaba, and it is likely you’ll see a child working there. Child labour is rampant in many hotels and dhabas. Why doesn’t the government take serious steps to address these issues? Even more troubling is that most of the workers cleaning utensils are Bahujans. Their fingers rot from constant exposure to water, they are paid meagre wages, and they are forced to work long hours under inhumane conditions. Why is there no initiative from the BJP government to improve the welfare of these workers?

In conclusion, I would like to reiterate that the primary aim of these guidelines against so-called “spit jihad” is reactionary. Their main objective is not to ensure consumer safety or protect food from contamination. Instead, these policies are designed to economically marginalize Muslims and Dalits while intensifying the regime of surveillance. Not long ago, a campaign against halal food was launched by Hindutva forces to exclude Muslim businessmen, and these new regulations are a continuation of the Hindutva agenda. Secular-democratic and social justice forces must unite to oppose these divisive policies.

(Dr. Abhay Kumar is an independent journalist. Email: debatingissues@gmail.com)

The post ‘Spit Jihad’: a conspiracy afresh to break the economic backbone of Muslims & Dalits appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Having made such a wild allegation, he tried to intimidate people that “while the population of Muslims in the state is about 18 per cent, these areas have a higher concentration. Moreover, he alleged that there is a strong presence of the banned PFI across the state. So the situation poses a grave challenge to the country’s internal security”.

He proceeded thereafter to criticise the JDU and the RJD-led Government in Bihar for appeasing the Muslim community and ignoring the threat of the mushrooming growth of “illegal” madrasas and mosques in the state. But the statement of Giriraj Singh has been brushed aside by the leaders of the RJD and the JDU and they have accused him of playing a communal card.

There may be multiple reasons why Giriraj Singh has consistently used polarising words and imagery in his public exhortations, the latest being about madrasas and mosques. By claiming that madrasas and mosques have been “illegally constructed”, he is playing to the gallery of the party’s hard-core supporters. Sources suggest that the party may deny him a ticket in the upcoming Lok Sabha election. Fearing his exclusion, he has tried to establish his relevance and resumed making such statements to re-consolidate his position as a fire-brand leader of the state BJP.

Giriraj Singh is aware of the fact that the myth of the population rise of Muslims has penetrated deep inside the psyche of a section of the majority community with the help of continuous propaganda. By raising such an issue, he is trying to attract media attention for himself and the party. Such a communal card may also work to counter the “re-assertion” of Mandal politics in the state.

Under the leadership of Chief Minister Nitish Kumar and Deputy Chief Minister Tejashwi Yadav, the Bihar government has recently conducted a caste survey in the state. Based on the findings of reports, the Bihar assembly passed a unanimous resolution to increase the quota for the marginalised castes to 65 per cent. Although the opposition BJP supported the resolution for the quota increase, the upper caste lobby within the BJP was not happy with the party’s decision. The upper castes lobby believes that the quota increase would be detrimental to their “dwindling hold on the state politics”. A section of the upper caste leadership has always demanded that the BJP should promote upper caste leaders in the state, rather than using the mascot of Nitish Kumar. After Nitish parted ways with the BJP the same lobby is now once again trying to strengthen the upper caste hold within the party.

But the top leadership of the BJP understands the compulsion of Bihar politics. In the state, the upper castes are numerically a minority and they alone cannot help the saffron party win elections. Therefore, the BJP is trying to maintain “a balance” in Bihar. While it has supported the quota increase to woo marginalised castes, it has often promoted firebrand leaders within the party who are capable of polarising voters on religious lines. Giriraj Singh is one of them and he is trying to do what the hard-core supporters may feel appeased.

However, this statement may fetch the BJP some votes but would certainly also strain the social fabric of Bihar. Such a statement is also historically erroneous and misleadingly portrays what has been a rich tradition of India’s freedom fighters.

The act of linking madrasas with security threats and terrorism is a relatively recent phenomenon. The act of demonising madrasas is a part of wider Islamophobic discourse. The writings of orientalist writers (including historians), at first systematically demonised Muslim rules in their education and culture and called Muslims essentially (only) a religious community.

It was these Orientalist authors who created a false binary. For them, western society is based on the values of secularism, science, rationality and democracy, the Muslim society has an inherent bias against secularism, and are mired in “fanaticism” and “bigotry”.

Now, the post-2001 war on terror discourse, first fuelled after the end of the Cold War has further ignited Islamophobic discourse, generating a fear of madrasas. The demonisation of madrasas is, hence the re-calibration and continuance of the same Orientalist prejudice against Muslims.

Under the influence of Islamophobia, the madrasas are suspiciously looked at by both the right and unfortunately a section of the left. Such discourse has also been used by majoritarian parties, such as the BJP, to polarise society on religious lines. When Atal Bihari Vajpayee came to power, the establishment launched a campaign against madrasas and wild charges were made against madrasas. They were linked to “anti-national” activities, the way Giriraj Singh has not yet elaborated. But these charges were never proven. Yet, proof does not matter, such an anti-Muslim narrative is often invoked to target the minority community.

Targeting of madrasas or calling them a “den” of “anti-anti-national” activities is, besides being prejudicial and Islamophobic, also an act of insulting our freedom fighters and undermining India’s anti-colonial struggle. Historians have shown how, the Khilafat Movement in the early 1920s shook the foundation of the mighty British Empire. Under the leadership of Mahatma Gandhi and the Ulema of Deoband Seminary, millions of people turned mobilised British rule.

It is a historical fact that the success of the Khilafat Movement turned out to be the result of the rock-solid alliance between the Congress party and the Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind. Formed in 1919, the organisation was an integral part of Darul Uloom Deoband.

A large number of nationalist leaders, who worked with the Congress party, had a madrasas education background, including the Deoband seminary that was set up in 1866.

Apart from Gandhi, Dr Rajendra Prasad, the freedom fighter, the Congress leader and the first President of India, had intimate relations with madrasas. In his autobiography, Rajendra Prasad devoted the third chapter to fondly remembering his association with “Maulvi Saheb”, who “initiated” him “into the alphabet”. Prasad, the big Congress leader from Bihar, went to Maktab in his childhood where he learnt Persian. It was because of his Maulvi Saheb that Rajendra Prasad learnt to read Persian texts such as Karima, Gulistan, Bostan etc. Paying tribute to the Maulvi Saheb, Rajendra Prasad wrote in his autobiography, “The little Persian we learn goes entirely to this Maulvi’s credit. We had started liking him and we felt sorry to leave when we had to go to Chapra” (Rajendra Prasad, An Autobiography, NBT, New Delhi, 2018, p. 8).

History is witness to the fact that a large number of Hindu scholars also attended madrasas for education. Learning Urdu and Arabic, Persian and going to madrasa were open to all. Similarly, Muslim scholars also learnt Awadhi, Braj Bhasha, Hindi and Sanskrit and went to the educational centres run by Hindu teachers.

The composite culture of India and the historical reality are witness to the fact that madrasas were never called a place for breeding “anti-Hindu” or “anti-national” feelings, the way Giriraj Singh has alleged.

In the same statement made last Friday wherein he reviled mosques and madrasas, Giriraj Singh called for imparting science to Muslim students and implied that they should desist from going to madrasas. Similar rants have also been attributed to the BJP chief minister of Assam Himanta Biswa Sarma. In 2018, Prime Minister Modi too made his infamous statement that he would like to see “Muslim Youth hold the Quran in one hand and a computer in the other”.  Exhortations apart, this ground reality exposes the questionable intentions of BJP leaders.

For example, several news reports from Uttar Pradesh reveal that the madrasa teachers, who were recruited to impart computer education and science along with English in these institutions, have not been paid a salary by the government for months.

Similarly, the Modi Government rolled back the Maulana Azad scholarship for minorities, even though Muslim youth are underrepresented in higher education. Worse still, the BJP government continues to cut the budget for minority education and their welfare schemes.

Recently the BJP has invoked the Pasmanda Muslim issue and tried to project itself as a “champion” of their rights. But such an act appears to be the classic instance of shedding crocodile tears. Had it not been the case, the BJP governments would not have failed to give protection to the Muslims from communal forces whose large population compromised Dalit and backward caste Muslims. The saffron party has also failed to take concrete steps to address their social and economic backwardness.

The BJP, which raises the issues of the Pasmanda Muslims, has so far failed to give proportional representation to them. While it is at the forefront to point out how they are discriminated against by the upper caste Muslims, it has offered no concrete programmes to address their social and economic backwardness.

For example, the Pasmanda Muslims are yet to get adequate seats in the assembly and Parliamentary elections from within the BJP. Ali Anwar, the leader of the Pasmanda Muslims, has rightly raised a question on the BJP’s intention to give justice to Pasmanda Muslims by saying that Bilkis Bano was also a Pasmanda but why she had been denied justice.

In his Bhopal meeting last summer, Prime Minister Modi raised the issue of “untouchability” within the Muslim community but when the Supreme Court asked the Government to spell out its stand on giving SC status to Dalit and Christian Muslims, the Government spoke a different language by saying that caste does not exist in Islam to weaken the case for SC status to Dalit Muslims and Dalit Christians.

What could be a better example than this about speaking in forked tongue?

It appears that the statement of Giriraj Singh has less to do with historical facts and ground reality and more to do with fermenting communal polarisation. Amidst these disturbing trends, the need of the hour is to maintain communal harmony and fight for social justice.

(Dr Abhay Kumar, the author is a Delhi-based journalist.)

[1] Union Minister Giriraj Singh stirred controversy on Friday December 1, 2023 with a call for the closure of “illegal madrasas” in Bihar, citing concerns over the rising numbers and saying that they pose a “threat to the internal security of the state and the nation.”

Related:

Azizia Madrasa: Burning of just a Madrasa or Cultural Genocide?

After UP Madrasas Survey, Centre Stops Scholarships For Students of Class 1- 8

UP: After Madrasas, Yogi Govt to Survey Waqf Properties; Muslim Citizens Doubt ‘Intention’

The post Demonising the Madrasa is insulting India’s freedom fighters  appeared first on SabrangIndia.