Islamists are known to target Hindus on fake blasphemy charges. But did you know just nine years after partition Bharat witnessed (Tweet archived here and here) riots and murders over alleged blasphemy against Islam? What is even more distressing is that Nehru protected the person who instigated the violence and he is someone who is now celebrated by both the English and Urdu Press.
1956: Independent Bharat’s first fake Islamist blasphemy charges
Just nine years after Partition, Bharat was already witnessing riots and murders over so-called blasphemy against Islam.
Both East and West Pakistan pressured Nehru into publicly condemning a book that allegedly triggered the violence. Ironically, this “blasphemous” book—written by two Americans—had circulated for 14 years without issue. Yet, when a Hindu publisher republished it, all hell broke loose.
The reason? The notorious Urdu press.
How Maulana Ishaq Almi propagated the myth of blasphemy
Maulana Ishaq Almi (Ilmi) was a Deoband-trained cleric and editor-publisher of the anti-Hindu Urdu newspaper Siyasat. He chanced upon the book titled Living Biographies of Religious Leaders by B. Henry and Dana Lee Thomas at a bookstand in Kanpur. The copy was an Indian reprint of the original American edition. The book had a foreword by the Uttar Pradesh (UP) Governor Kanialal M. Munshi who praised it as “worth reading.” Coincidentally, the book was published by Mumbai’s Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan (then Bombay) in which Munshi was a director.
Along with Mohammad’s biography, there was a story regarding Mohammad and his wife Khadija that Almi took offence to. He was enraged by what was written in the chapter on Islam’s founder. This was enough for Almi to raise charges of blasphemy and unleash Islamists against Hindus. The next day—August 28—Almi ran a front-page report with the provocative headline “Take Up the Challenge!” PROPHET INSULTED IN GOVERNOR MUNSHl’S PUBLICATION”!
He provoked Muslims with the jibe “Has the Moslem world become so docile that it cannot take up the challenge?” It helped that Kanpur’s Muslim community was eager to blame Hindus for their problems, be it poverty or other issues. It was easy to provoke them with ‘blasphemy’ charges. For the next 20 days, he relentlessly published incendiary articles, calling upon his community to protest, strike, and hold meetings in mosques.
Those who had not even read the book plodded through the streets demanding the banning of the book and raising slogans of “Down with Governor Munshi” for his so-called blasphemy. Kanpur, Bhopal, Aligarh, and other places witnessed Islamist violence with Islamists burning Governor Munshi’s effigy in Bhopal.
It neither helped that the book was taken out of circulation nor that Governor Munshi issued an apology. The narrative had already been set:
Islam was “under siege.” There was a “grand conspiracy” against Muslims. “Sanghis” were allegedly attacking “peaceful” Muslims with government backing. Almi’s propaganda fueled violent riots across Bharat, leaving many dead. Muslims went around stabbing Hindus, looting Hindu shops, and pelting stones at Mandirs.
International Fallout
On 1 October 1956, Time magazine described Almi as a rabble-rousing Moslem.
The Urdu press’s agitation quickly spread. At Aligarh Muslim University, students—triggered by his writings—took to the streets, chanting:
“Long live Pakistan! Death to India!”
“Hans ke liya hai Pakistan, lad ke lenge Hindustan” (We took Pakistan with a laugh, we’ll take Hindustan with a fight).
In Bareilly, mobs shouted:
“Hindustan Murdabad, Pakistan Zindabad.” (Death to India, Long Live Pakistan)
The unrest wasn’t confined to Bharat. In West Pakistan, 15,000 students rallied, demanding war on Bharat. In East Pakistan, PM Suhrawardy announced he was closely monitoring the situation while the East Pakistan legislature demanded a ‘ban’ on the book by both India and the US.
Hindu Response
Following bomb blasts in Delhi on 14 September, Hindu organizations—including the Hindu Mahasabha, Arya Samaj, Bharatiya Jana Sangh, Ram Rajya Parishad, and RSS—met to discuss the growing violence. Soon, Hindu students in Uttar Pradesh launched counter-protests, chanting:
“Panchmargi Bharat Chhoro” (Fifth Columnists, Leave Bharat).
On 16 September, Almi escalated his rhetoric, openly calling for the use of firearms. He urged his community to “teach Hindus a lesson” and “repeat the battle of Karbala.” In the Fahimabad area of Kanpur, he called for “jihad.”
A Serial Offender
Almi was eventually arrested—but for just a year. Police records revealed this wasn’t his first offence. In 1951, he falsely claimed that Hindu refugees from Pakistan were killing Muslim children and cooking their flesh in a hotel they operated. That same year, he called for mass cow slaughter by his community.
Nehru’s response and the politics of appeasement
Nehru’s response was on the expected lines. He went on an overdrive to warn anyone attempting to spread ‘communal trouble’ and ‘spy stories.’ “Our ears are too sensitive. The government would speedily put through legislation that will curb those opportunists who are fanning communal passions,” he said.
The Muslim appeaser that he was, Nehru seconded the ‘blasphemy’ charges. “When I read it carefully, there is no doubt that some wrong facts and often absurd things have been written in the chapter on Hazrat Muhammad. It was wrong, there was no doubt about it. A Muslim would not have tolerated it, for even I could not tolerate it,” Nehru said in his speech in Delhi on 23 September 1956.
The incident came at a time when Nehru was set to leave for Saudi Arabia to visit King Saud. And Nehru was ‘answerable’ to King Saud. When the King questioned him about the condition of Muslims in Bharat and the publication of the book, Nehru informed him that the book had been withdrawn and assured him that Indian law would be amended to ‘prevent’ such scandalous writing.
Nehru who saw blasphemy in this book, didn’t bat an eyelid before passing blasphemous comments against Hindu Dharma and Devi and Devatas. According to Nehru, believing in Bhagwan Mahadev, Prabhu Sri Ram, and Sri Krishna was the reason for Bharat’s slavery and poverty. He even opposed the restoration of Somnath Mandir post-independence as ‘encouraging Hindu revivalism’, as if that is something problematic. Shri Sitaram Goel rightly called him a bloated brown sahib who distrusted Hindus and Hindu Dharma.
The Legacy of Urdu Press
Today, the Urdu press—along with its English counterparts—celebrates a rabble-rouser and Hindudveshi Almi as a champion of “journalistic activism.” Publications routinely lament the decline of his newspaper, which still operates in Kanpur. A few years ago, Newslaundry ran a piece quoting his son, portraying Almi as a man “filled with ideas of socialism and secularism.”
Blasphemy charge exposes Islamist mentality
This is a classic case study in the Islamist playbook of using fake blasphemy charges to target Hindus and non-Muslims. Almi did not target the original authors Henry and Thomas but chose to charge Munshi, who was only a director of Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan, with ‘blasphemy.’ Funnily, even Henry and Thomas drew their story from the earliest and standard account of Mohammed’s life by Ibn Ishaq in the eighth century. However, Almi chose to charge Governor Kanialal Munshi with blasphemy while ignoring both the eighth-century Muslim writer and the American writers because, no prizes for guessing, neither of them were Hindus.
The same Islamist playbook is being used even today. Nupur Sharma was (and continues to be) hounded by bloodthirsty STSJ (Sar Tan Se Juda) Islamists after fake fact-checker and POCSO accused Mohammad Zubair circulated an edited clip to insinuate that Nupur had ‘insulted’ Islam.
It must be highlighted that the propagandist shared an edited clip of Nupur’s TV debate with Taslim Rahmani where the latter constantly provoked Nupur by passing insulting comments on the Shivling. It is to be noted that she neither interpreted something on her own nor invented a new story like Abrahamics do while denigrating Hindu deities. She had merely said what is already written in the Islamic religious scriptures. Yet Muslims descended on her TL to issue death threats not only to her but to her family as well.
As a fallout of the Nupur Sharma saga, it was not only Nupur Sharma but also many common Hindus who fell to the bloodlust of the Islamists while several Hindus received death and STSJ threats. Islamists have run amok in the country and are using Nupur Sharma’s statement as an excuse to unleash violence against Hindus. There have been several murders over this blasphemy madness.
As for the secular state, it appears to be hungover by the Nehru-Gandhi brand of minority appeasement, although there have been minor changes since 2014. Bharat was partitioned because Muslims considered themselves incompatible with Hindus. Yet, people like Almi not only stayed back but continued to provoke their community members to undertake Hindu genocide, even if it meant manufacturing blasphemy charges. The Indian Press celebrates Hindu haters like Almi as ‘champions of secularism.’
The Muslim continues to enjoy all privileges as minorities in Bharat while resorting to stone-pelting during Hindu festivals, making STSJ calls on imaginary blasphemy charges, grooming Hindu, Jain, and other non-Muslim girls, and in general continuing its agenda of Ghazwa-e-Hind, both overtly and covertly. Nehru should have acted against Almi for his false blasphemy claims that led to communal riots. However, the brown sahib had to bend backwards to please the Saudi king.
Hindus had hoped the partition would bring them much-needed peace but the failure to ensure a complete population exchange coupled with the Nehru-Gandhi brand of Hindudveshi (anti-Hindu) secularism has created a situation where an Almi or Zubair can easily unleash a bloodthirsty mob on a Kanialal or Nupur under made-up charges of blasphemy!
And what about insults of Hindu deities that Hindudveshis (including Neo-Ambedkarites) indulge in both online and offline? These insults are extremely vile. Doesn’t that amount to blasphemy? Are Hindus to silently bear such insults because Nehru-Gandhi decided that ‘Hindu majority’ Bharat would be ‘secular’ where secularism is only for Hindus and no one else? Only an assertive Hindu Samaj that refuses to give up on its rights and does not compromise every time in the name of secularism will be able to reverse the wrongs of 1947 and subsequent years of Nehru-Gandhi secularism under Congress and its allies!
(Featured Image Source: Swati Goel Sharma’s X (Twitter) Account)
All excerpts from the book shown basically narrate in copy-paste fashion from standard muslim sources. Still Nehru vaguely and provocatively declares without providing any basis that “some wrong facts and often absurd things have been written on Hazrat Muhammad”. The Time magazine linked article indulges in either moral equivalence or actually labeling the riot victim Hindus’ protests as “rioting Hindu extremists”. Even that Hindu unsympathetic article did not dare to say that “wrong”, “absurd” things were written, just that – ‘tone’ of the biography in the book “might well give offense to devout Moslems”, even though the book is actually copy-pasting narratives from muslim sources without adding any hostile adjectives of their own!
Nehru was not shy of calling Hindu rituals, Kumbh Mela as superstitious. He openly disparaged Ram and Krishna and irrationally and maliciously considered them responsible for Mohammadan and Christian invasions and consequent slavery and destruction wrought in this region. He had contempt for Hindu polite manners like he once kicked in contempt devout holy men who came to meet him, as they tried to touch his feet – him being a prime minister of the nation. This Nehru had the clownish bravado to say about the book that “A Muslim would not have tolerated it, for even I could not tolerate it”! So basically he is rationalizing and justifying criminal, unconstitutional rioting, murders and violence by Mohammadans upon Hindus, but any excess by Hindus on Mohammadans even in reaction is unforgivable fault of Hindus, that must be brutally suppressed! There are several examples of his brutality to Hindus.
Bottom line is – Hindus’ collective wretched, timid nature, extreme apathy can not be dignified in any way, nor can it be called “tolerance” or “pluralistic”. Sensitive Hindus would be endlessly whining and crying, naratting these heart rending cruelties. As the writer has implied, Hindu orgnizations protested in a very pacific manner. Time magazines account of “extremist Hindus” only exposes our emotional and knee-jerk nature of containing rioters and murderers and happened spontaneously. Organizing to contain rioters require a different mindset and not leave it as a job of “government” or as unorganized, knee-jerk spontaneous reaction. What all sundry Hindu organizations may as well find it useful is to actually plan through to secure our streets, contain these religiously motivated criminals and their Hindu lackeyes firmly. It requires real organization, real determination! It goes against our grain of actually justifying other people’s misfortunes either as due to past ‘Karma’ or as unavoidable destiny. Now this cultural blight may explain why it is so difficult for us to be motivated for action when others are abused.