Debate Rekindled: Yogi Adityanath’s Remarks on ‘Political Islam’ Spark Renewed Discourse on Faith, History, and Coexistence
By M Hasan
Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath’s recent remarks describing “Political Islam” as the “biggest threat to Sanatan Dharma” have reignited a long-standing debate that has divided historians, political thinkers, and religious scholars for decades.
Speaking at a Diwali event in Gorakhpur, the Chief Minister said that while British and French colonialism are widely discussed, “political Islam” remains largely undebated in India.
Referring to the recent arrest of Jalaluddin alias Changur, accused of orchestrating religious conversions through financial inducements —
Adityanath claimed that attempts to spread “political Islam” continue even today in various forms.
He linked these alleged activities to broader issues such as religious conversion and terrorism, asserting that they undermine India’s cultural fabric.
The Chief Minister also defended his government’s recent ban on Halal-certified products, alleging that funds generated from their sale were being diverted towards “conversion, love jihad, and terror-related activities.”
A Polarising Discourse
The Chief Minister’s remarks have once again polarized opinion. Supporters of the BJP and Hindu nationalist groups hailed his comments as a call to defend cultural integrity, while critics accused the government of stoking communal fears.
Former IAS officer and founding Vice-Chancellor of Khwaja Moinuddin Chishti University, Anis Ansari, criticized what he called the “RSS-BJP obsession” with Islam.
He said, “Politicization of any religion—be it Islam, Hinduism, Sikhism, Christianity, or Buddhism—is detrimental in a multi-religious society. Misuse of religion for political ends has historically harmed not just India’s unity but the faiths themselves.
” Ansari added that India’s past offers lessons for all political actors: dividing citizens on religious lines may yield short-term political gains but could “ultimately boomerang.”
The Historical Context
The question of whether political Islam threatens Sanatan Dharma has no easy answer. Scholars and historians remain deeply divided.
Writers like Will Durant and Jadunath Sarkar have described certain medieval invasions as systematic assaults on Hindu culture—marked by temple destruction and forced conversions—seeing political Islam as an inherently expansionist ideology.
From this viewpoint, the Partition of 1947 was the political culmination of centuries of Islamic assertion in the subcontinent.
In contrast, secular and revisionist historians such as Romila Thapar, Audrey Truschke, and members of the Indian History Congress argue that such interpretations oversimplify a complex past.
They maintain that while conflict existed, many Muslim rulers—including Akbar the Great—pursued policies of inclusion, religious pluralism, and multicultural administration.
Conversions, they argue, often arose from social and economic motivations rather than coercion, particularly appealing to marginalized communities seeking mobility and dignity.
The Cultural Dimension
Language barriers, too, have deepened misunderstanding. The original texts of Islam—written in Arabic and Persian—remain inaccessible to most Indians, creating a cultural distance.
The great Hindi-Urdu writer Munshi Premchand lamented that despite living together for over a thousand years, Hindus and Muslims “know little about each other’s faiths,” a gap he believed fuelled mutual suspicion and prejudice.
Voices of India’s Visionaries
Throughout India’s modern history, leading thinkers have engaged deeply with the idea of religion in politics.
Mahatma Gandhi viewed political Islam not as a threat but as a challenge to the moral fabric of both communities.
He believed that religious politics—whether Hindu or Muslim—was divisive and harmful. For Gandhi, “heart unity” between Hindus and Muslims was essential for national harmony.
He repeatedly warned that religion, when weaponized, becomes an instrument of control rather than compassion.
Rabindranath Tagore shared similar concerns. Though critical of communalism, he urged deeper interfaith understanding.
Tagore believed ignorance of each other’s traditions bred mistrust and advocated mutual respect through education and cultural exchange.
His establishment of the Department of Islamic Culture at Visva-Bharati University was a testament to his commitment to harmony and dialogue.
Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru, India’s first Prime Minister, considered both Hindu and Muslim communalism as obstacles to the nation’s secular and pluralistic vision.
He championed scientific temper and rational thought, warning that religious mobilization in politics could endanger national unity.
A Debate Without a Final Word
The discourse on political Islam and its relation to Sanatan Dharma remains one of India’s most complex intellectual and political debates.
History presents both conflict and coexistence—episodes of conquest as well as centuries of shared cultural evolution, from architecture and music to language and cuisine.
Ultimately, both Islam and Sanatan Dharma are dynamic, evolving traditions—far from the rigid monoliths often portrayed in political rhetoric.
The challenge before India today lies not in choosing one narrative over another, but in nurturing a dialogue that transcends fear and fosters understanding—a dialogue that upholds the constitutional promise of equality, liberty, and fraternity for all faiths.
(The writer, M Hasan, is a Former Chief of Bureau, Hindustan Times, Lucknow)
#PoliticalIslamDebate #YogiAdityanath #SanatanDharma #ReligiousPolitics #SecularIndia #CommunalHarmony #IndianHistory #FaithAndPolitics #Gandhi #Tagore #Nehru #Pluralism #CulturalDialogue #UPPolitics
