Admin Note: This is a Precedent Post.
“You seem to be underestimating how much the average Muslim dislikes Hindus (and vice versa). This is a sad reality.”
This comment on a thread conversation – yet again discussing partition on BP, jumped out at me. And I think it deserves to be dissected.
I for one, strongly disagree with the projection of personal animus, extrapolated all the way into the ‘average muslim’. And vice versa. I’m going to assume that Kabir is ‘only’ deigning to speak on behalf of the ‘average muslim’ of the subcontinent, and not beyond. But even then, I think this assertion is utterly inaccurate.
I do not believe that ‘disliking Hindus’ is baked into the character or mindset of the muslims of the subcontinent, whether in India, or beyond it, into Bangladesh of Pakistan. Now, I am aware of the ‘kufr’ attack lines that those suffering from Islamophobia often deploy and may even believe. But I am confident that this is the usual weaponization of the fringe by those with ignorant, or intentionally jaundiced agendas.
The Problem with Monolithic Thinking
To say that “Muslims dislike Hindus” is to treat over 500 million people across multiple countries as if they share a single mindset. This kind of thinking ignores differences in geography, class, education, political views, and personal experiences.
Communities are not monoliths. A Muslim family in Kerala may have vastly different social interactions and attitudes compared to one in Lahore or Dhaka. The same is true for Hindus across regions. Reducing such diversity to a single emotional stance erases individual agency and lived reality.
Historical Context Matters—but So Does Interpretation
It’s true that the subcontinent has witnessed periods of conflict, most notably during the Partition of 1947. That traumatic event left deep scars and continues to influence inter-community perceptions. However, it is a mistake to project historical violence onto present-day relationships without acknowledging the decades of peaceful coexistence that have followed.
In fact, millions of Hindus and Muslims continue to live side by side, working together, forming friendships, and even intermarrying. Everyday life in much of the subcontinent is not defined by hostility but by routine interaction.
The Role of Politics and Media
Modern tensions, where they exist, are often amplified by political rhetoric or media framing. Narratives that emphasize division can serve specific agendas, making it appear as though distrust is more widespread than it actually is.
It’s important to distinguish between politically motivated discourse and the attitudes of ordinary people. The loudest voices are not always the most representative.
Lived Reality: Coexistence Over Conflict
Walk through neighborhoods in cities like Mumbai, Delhi, Karachi, or Dhaka, and you’ll find markets, schools, and workplaces where Hindus and Muslims interact daily. Festivals are sometimes shared, businesses are jointly run, and friendships cross religious lines.
These everyday examples rarely make headlines, but they represent the true fabric of society.
Why Generalizations Are Harmful
Broad claims about mutual dislike do more than misrepresent reality—they can actively contribute to division. When people are told repeatedly that another group harbors negative feelings toward them, it can create suspicion where none existed.
Challenging such narratives is not about denying that tensions exist, but about refusing to let those tensions define entire populations.
A More Nuanced Understanding
A more accurate perspective acknowledges that:
Historical conflicts exist, but so does long-term coexistence
Political narratives can distort social realities
Individual experiences vary widely
Cultural interdependence is a defining feature of the region
If we are to understand the subcontinent honestly, we must move beyond simplistic narratives and recognize the complexity—and humanity—of its people. Resorting to ignorant tropes about ‘muslims dislike hindus and vice versa’ not only should be avoided, but deserves to be countered forcefully.
Agreed. I refuse to believe that all the muslims I work with, do business with, and live near have a hidden contempt for hindus. Even the hindu-muslim paradigm itself is overly reductive as sub communities of each interact in their own way, not mention they are not the only religions that exist here. Moreover, the muslims who could be said to have the most legitimate grievances like kashmiris live the most ordinary lives in places like Bangalore. They work in tech, open restaurants, are sports coaches, not just the old school dry fruits and carpet merchants of old.
We suspect Indian Muslims are increasingly more afraid; the pressure to de-Islamicise is there among the “modern component”.
Bangladeshi Muslims, we can’t speculate on but they seem to be admirers.
Pakistani (Punjabi) Muslims LOVE Sikhs but are Hinduphobic.
Yeah, I think Owaisi and millions of Indian muslims would hard disagree.
You really need to walk through and experience some of India’s muslim neighborhoods.
This trope of Daraa hua Hindustani Musalmaan is more a function of hype and social media conjecture than reality.
This is not to deny or gloss over genuine challenges of prejudice that Indian society needs to honestly front up to, of course.
Tbh the liberal strain of Islam followed by the Muslim elite in India is the best path forward for Indian Muslims.
If to integrate amongst the Indian mainstream, Muslims have to shed some of the more hardcore illiberal habits – nothing wrong with that.
For what it’s worth, current “interpretations” of Islam do have problematic elements not compatible with modern society.
Nothing wrong with getting rid of those illiberal elements. And I would say the same of such Hindu practices/beliefs. Difference is Hinduism has already gone through a lot of reforms both pre and post Independence.
Does it really matter if this change is done via “pressure”?
Even Ataturk’s changes were resisted and Turkey is the best example of a liberal secular Muslim society (Erdogan’s neo ottomanism not withstanding) and probably the only Muslim country to get rich in the modern era without oil.
Removal of triple talaq is a good thing, regardless of which party does it.
I’ve shared the observation before i presume, but I’ve been told directly by muslims that the last 12 years, if anything revealed, the limits of majoritarianism from the center in an “all politics is local” way. The feeling in 2014 was much more ominous, that there are unprecedented hardliners in charge, and anything could happen. Now it appears that yes, the most obnoxious person you know can rub it in your face that “his people” run the show. But on the ground, nothing has changed, the alarming scenarios have not played out and while the overton window has shifted to the hindu right, there’s also ideological fatigue. There has always been a very secular “modern component”, if anything, Pakistan has always had the largest share of modern muslims, right?
This is part of the Punjabi soap opera. They now love the perpetrators of the partition violence against them, the most committed to neutralizing islam, and project their indignation on culturally distant bengalis and telugus who weren’t party to it, because these people are so much easier to dislike. It goes both ways with Indian Punjabis not wanting to see Pakistan completely dishonoured, because it would be a kind of insult to their own pretenses, and pretend that partition and animosity weren’t precipitated by their own interests.
India has the largest share of modern muslims in the subcontinent imo.
This is possibly true now, i suppose, just given the avenues that exist to have a very transgressive lifestyle in India are quite broad in general. But if we define modern as comfortably bourgeois, then a city like Lahore has a healthy slice that lives like that, and its a huge denominator. Something we forget is that pakistan ethnic groups have their social analog in non-muslim Indian communities. For example, in the deccan, your typical district center has a very muslim character as it often had its origins as a medieval garrison town or trading hub. It was the inverse in Punjab where the towns and trade were disproportionately hindu, and the hinterland had the muslim biradari groups. So pak muslims often like to live in spacious extensions in detached homes, much like south indian reddys and gowdas. Their grooming styles are more secular than the avg deccani muslim “townie”.
I was mostly referring to the truly liberal Muslim who is fine with things like homosexuality and intermingling with other faiths including marriage and celebrating festivals.
Basically the Bollywood archetype.
Pakistanis can never become this due to the laws of the country as well as hardly having people of other faiths.
there are many Pakistans. BB this is just caricature tbh.
I am sure it can happen on the down low and there are quite liberal Pakistanis in elite circles of Lahore and Islamabad.
But growing up in a country where you can actually mingle with other faiths and where there are open pride parades is not an experience that can be replicated in Pakistan.
As an example, you could have truly open minded liberal people in India but the chances of an average Indian American being more liberal than an average Indian is very high.
Just the experience of growing up in the US cannot be replicated within India, even if you exist within elite bubbles in India.
Those are Western metrics..
I don’t think acceptance of homosexuality and tolerance of other faiths should be considered “Western metric”. These are just liberal humanist metrics.
Also I think a lot of the things people call “Western metrics” are not “Western metrics” at all but just progressive liberal ideology.
The Westerners were the first to get rich in the modern world (via lots of illicit means mind you) but that means they went through their reform movements earlier as well so the values they adopted got labelled as “Western values”.
But things like democracy, gender equality, sexual freedom, tolerance of different faiths, sexualities, races etc etc should not just be “Western metrics” but “Human metrics”.
Excellent comment.
Very good point about the inverted nature though. And not just Punjab, even Sindh.
And even in Indian Punjab now, cities are majorly Hindu including Amritsar while Sikhs are more rural.
And a better Indian analog for Pakistani muslims would be their own castekin on this side of the border in North India – Gujjars, Jaats, Rajputs etc.
Also Pakistani Muslims aren’t really “modern” per se.
There is an upper limit to how modern you can be in an “Islamic Republic”.
Both the laws and the demographics ensure it.
thought-provoking comment.
Excellent comments as per usual
//But on the ground, nothing has changed, the alarming scenarios have not played out and while the overton window has shifted to the hindu right, there’s also ideological fatigue. //
Maybe in North Karnataka where you live nothing has changed on the ground, I dont think the same can be said about about other parts of the country, such as Assam or UP or MP.
Is de-Islamicising not a good thing in a multicultural environment?
If anything it ought to be encouraged. Clearly the Islamicising and othering themselves hasn’t really worked out for either them or the majority, no?
Exactly my point.
I find the word choice here …more than a bit problematic. ‘de-Islamicising’ smacks more of demanding to throw the baby out with the bathwater and reminds me of the ‘dismantle and eradicate’ Hinduism nonsense that some Pak-sponsored ‘non-profits’ tried to peddle a while back.
Both are regressive examples of bigotry, not progressive push for modernity.
Discussing and calling for reform is one thing, going full Chinese Communist Party on Uighurs is…..totalitarian crime against humanity.
I don’t think people understand how integrated Muslims are in India, especially in urban India.
No Indian Hindu can go through life without sizable interaction with Muslims.
And if you go rural, muslims are hard to differentiate at all. The greatest anxiety and peak performative religiosity , as with most things, is among the aspiring middle class.
Your observations appear to be from North karnataka, where a larger group of Muslims reside.
In South karnataka Muslims tend to live in their own ghettos.
A generation ago our Muslims knew about Hindu faith and it’s lore better than the current one.
Years ago as a young engineer I was scolded by our Muslim driver for stepping into a Rama Mandir pandal with my shoes!!. We had Muslim staff perform ayudha Puja in dussera.
The recent generation has become more inward and sectarian and generally seems to have taken the Friday sermons rather literally.
On the other hand, Hindus have got some knowledge about islam from the internet.
Human behaviors and choices are ultimately shaped by incentives. It has become …. fashionable to assert a more Islamic identity for a time in the 90s and 2000s while the Indian economy was still starting to improve, and the middle east served as inspiration and funding source for a more …orthodox identity. These things continue to evolve, shift and adapt over time.
I am confident that India will largely succeed in continuing to take strides towards an iteratively stronger ‘unity in diversity’ nation. And Indian muslims are going to be trailblazers along with the rest of their Indian co-citizens in how to seize modernity without having to totally shed their heritage or faiths.
this generational change is true for North Karnataka as well at least in the parts that I visit.
It’s completely false to claim that the average Muslim ‘dislikes Hindus’.
Some of the most religious people in my family/friends (hijabis, bearded muslims) get along with Hindus the best with regular sharing of food/gifts between them.
There is a general disliked baked into Islam for polytheism and explicit idol worship at an abstract level BUT for reference I would even say this is much more milder than vegetarian Hindu dislike of meat eating.
and this is why I remain hopeful for an eventual rapprochement between Ind-Pak.
The vast majority of people are just that.
I know this may sound depressing but I wouldn’t be as hopeful as you are. From my personal experience, members of the two communities go along with each other inspite religious differences. Most Indian Muslims and Hindus seem to have overlapping caste, class and ethnic interest alongside a nice dapping of cognitive dissonance.
For example, the Nuh riots of 2023 displays this dynamic. There were main groups in the riots: Jat’s, Gujjars and Meo. Jat’s and Meo’s share a similar caste practice and clan structure, so they got along with each other. However, the Jat’s and Gujjar hate one another due to complex history in addition to the Gujjars hating the Meo due to their proximity to the Jat’s. During the riots, the Jat’s were nowhere to be seen and the Gujjars were at the forefront of the riot against the Meo. In this situation caste identity look precedence over religious in way that this overlap between Indians and Pakistanis can’t have since caste isn’t a major thing.
For cognitive dissonance bit, I remember this interview with the son of a Muslim shopkeeper by a media outlet, which partly interrupted by the arrival of a Hindu customer. They had a plenty conversation asking about each other’s parents and all that shebang. Well turns out the customer’s father had beaten up the shopkeeper during the past communal riot that happened in the region resulting in one being hospitalized and the other potentially being jailed (I don’t Rember the details clearly). It was cognitive dissonance in a way that I couldn’t explain, and I don’t think the resentment vanished, instead they acted like it never happened. Moral of the story: Cognitive dissonance can make you act nice, but the spite never truly vanishes.
Similar to what I’ve observed. Pious looking muslim uncle seems genuinely kind, it’s the recently politically awakened young person whos not particularly pious who carries the most angst (either religion). And yes, in my experience many cultural vegetarians have a disgust reflex for meat eaters, and this is a big blind spot of self awareness when it comes to how much tolerance they credit themselves with.
Hard realities. Islamists hate “idol” thing, solely due to influence and dictates of the “book” and traditions of 7th century Arabia. Hindus adore the use of murtis (idol has become a pejorative) and will never ever not give up. There are Hindus who do not resort to “murti” puja. So the collision is real (whole basis for partition) and reconciling is impossible.
Welcome to BP
That is why it is imperative for Indian government/society to create conditions for more of the SRK style liberal Muslim.
This has been attempted many many times throughout the subcontinent and eventually comes undone because liberalism challenges Ulema and you know what happens when Ulema are challenged.
That is why “Hindutva rule” is the perfect cover for this to happen when ulema is weakened.
Triple talaq bill passing – case in point
BJP ruled states are now rolling out UCC.
The form vs formless, sagun/nirgun tension exists within the dharmic tradition itself. I’m a bit sympathetic to those who get repelled at certain aesthetic expression of divinity, its meant to be evocative. Muslims would be sort of religiously groomed to see things that way, but they are far from the only ones. I’ve known hindus from the north to get put off by the “tropical gothic” sculptural grotesquerie of southern temples. I think this sort of critique is tolerable within a society, independent of the religious affiliation of the judgement.
7th century Arabian traditions were steeped in idol worship and paganism.
What changed?
Islam was anything but 7th century Arabian tradition.
Yes, aware of it.
Question is why the 180 degree turn from liberal polytheism to militant monotheism? What changed in 7th century Arabia that resulted in this?
And why can nobody move past 7th century Arabia in the 21st century? The intransigence towards reform is befuddling.
Kushal mehra on the failure of the non bigoted Muslim to speak up. Bit strong, but…
https://youtube.com/shorts/duY4goM2bLQ?si=3GTfSE7VZJJVRkj7
Tbh many right wingers themselves dont speak up on violent rhetoric from their side of the aisle. They are hardly the people to raise these complaints especially when most non bigoted muslims are either unaware or unsupportive of their bigoted compatriots.
Wouldn’t say Muslims dislike Hindus. In my state there’s a lot of Hindus (mostly Indians & Nepalis) working for Pakistani and Muslim owned restaurants, convenience and groceries stores. Many times majority of their employees are Hindus, if they felt any animosity there’s no way they would feel comfortable to work for Muslims and seek employment opportunities with Muslim owned businesses. I know many Pakistanis and Muslims working across various industries in Corporate America in managerial positions and have Indians/Hindus on their team and have never let politics influence their interactions with them. Similarly in Pakistan, I don’t think there’s a dislike for Hindus. There are also millions of Hindus from India working across the Arabian gulf and in southeast Asia (Malaysia & Indonesia) and living a much better quality of life than they would’ve gotten in their home country.
snarky potshot at the end aside, I largely agree with this comment.
Heartening to see that Kabir’s extrapolated Hinduphobia isn’t the norm on BP.
Not a potshot, just an acknowledgement of reality.
The reality is that Hindus do much better than Muslims comparatively, in a South Asian context.
Both in the homelands and diaspora, including the USA.
Dravidians do the best in the USA amongst the desi diaspora – Telugus especially.
Funnily enough, there are more Telugu Americans than Pakistani Americans (going off Wiki numbers).
I don’t want to get into a debate about those aforementioned communities since you’re sensitive about it but I will mention that your comment is both irrelevant and patently false, regarding “success”. About the numbers, that shouldn’t be surprising to anyone in this country and those in the know about what’s been happening with immigration over the past 20 years.
It literally isn’t false.
Just an acknowledgment of reality.
Not at all.
Which is the point you disagree with?
Indians are richer than Pakistanis in both the homelands and diaspora?
what’s “false”? The data on Indian immigrants success in US, Canada, UK, and even the UAE speaks for itself no?
What’s been happening with immigration over the past 20 years?
Some nationalities have been misusing immigration so badly they have been banned from immigrating.
https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/News/visas-news/immigrant-visa-processing-updates-for-nationalities-at-high-risk-of-public-benefits-usage.html
Just an acknowledgment of reality.
Not sure how that’s relevant in the context of the gulf and Malaysia/Indonesia. I think those countries should be given their props for giving Hindus the opportunity to thrive – an opportunity which is not mutual.
The entire original comment by @Kabir on which this post was made was specific to people of the subcontinent.
Even the post made by @RecoveringNewsJunkie mentions “muslims of the subcontinent”.
Referring to the Gulf and Malaysia/Indonesia, countries whose wealth isn’t due to subcontinent al Muslims and whose Muslims are ethnically distinct from subcontinental Muslims just doesn’t make sense.
There are countries in the subcontinent composed of majority of Muslims and they are poorer than India (this is not an opinion but a fact). Within India, also Hindus are richer than Muslims.
Similarly the mention of Indians/Hindus working under Pakistani managers in corporate America was again a subtle attempt to be sly.
Reality is there are more Indians/Hindus working in managerial positions in corporate America than Pakistanis (at least 7-8x if not more).
In all the examples you gave you slyly gave the examples of Indians working under Pakistanis in the US when you could have clearly mentioned about them working “together” but you chose to show the hierarchy to portray a sense of superiority.
Funny thing is this doesn’t even make sense because like I said Indian Americans outnumber Pakistani Americans by 7-8x and are way richer and influential.
Malaysia is literally the Islamic version of an apartheid state with Bhumiputra laws. You have no idea what you’re talking about.
Malaysia is literally the Islamic version of an apartheid state with Bhumiputra laws. You have no idea what you’re talking about.
The report also pointed to noticeable income differences between ethnic groups. Chinese employees recorded the highest median salary at RM4,445 in June, followed by Indian employees at RM2,800, Bumiputera employees at RM2,427 and other ethnic groups at RM2,200.
I think the low Indian income is due to Indian Plantation Labor, originally brought in as Indentured Labor by the Brits.
The white collar SL Tamil and South Indian Tamils are extremely well educated and well paid. If mixed, it is with Chinese (not Malay). eg my fathers cousins descendants who left Ceylon in the 1930’s
https://weirdkaya.com/malaysias-median-salary-grows-4-3-annually-chinese-employees-remain-highest-at-rm4445/
“Giving Hindus the opportunity to thrive”
Seriously?
India gives subcontinental Muslims an opportunity to thrive which is just not there in Bangladesh, Pakistan or Afghanistan.
There is no Sharhukh, Amir level actor from these countries nor a Azim Premji/Yusuf Hamied level entrepreneur/businessman.
Kabir’s threads are a bit like the Muslim enclaves of India.
But it does add to the freedom of BP; to paradoxically have pockets of illiberalism ..
By allowing him latitude in managing his own threads; it gives him more creative control. Mini Precedent 🙂
In WWE parlance, he is a popular ‘heel’. I geddit 🙂 Our very own version of ….. Zaid Hamid or whatever that red hat dude’s name was.
The entire comment is a snarky potshot constantly referring to Indians working under Pakistanis when in reality Indian Americans outnumber Pakistani Americans in vast numbers and are more successful/influential
so there would be a substantial number of Pakistani Muslims working under Indian Hindu bosses which is omited.
If the comment was made in good faith it would have mentioned “working together”.
The user has a chip on his shoulder regarding Indian Americans, due to their sheer size and influence drowning out his smaller Pakistani American community.
He also seems to dislike South Indians especially because they are dominant in the American diaspora and had a racist meltdown regarding them until he was warned by X.T.M after which he has tamed down.
this is RNJ’s thread; he can do what he likes. we now want Authors to moderate their own threads..
Of course, just informing him.
Let the man have his cope, why get so worked up over it. Just laugh at the delusion, maybe point it out a bit, and let it be.
Lets be civil and empathetic to our ‘Indus’ brethren. Kicking someone when they are down is declasse – at least in my subjective opinion.
When the so called caste discrimination thing was active in California /America, there were quite a few muslims joined to accuse Hindus. This looked rich.
Alas there are almost no Hindus left in Karachi.. those that are squirrelled away.
We are happy to be corrected.
What’s true in Pakistan, is likely to be not true in India. This is why clubbing India with Pakistan is questionable, beyond historical context.
One is a young nation born of determination and clarity on a clean slate. And another is a fuzzy experiment, directionless; burdened by its ancient history and archaic society.
Karachi I think was the only place in Pakistan with some non Muslim elite – Hindu/Parsi. Now mostly finished I think.
Almost all minorities are poor.
There have been a plethora of vlogs visiting Lyari post Dhurandhar by poorer lower caste Karachi Hindus. They might be transplants from rural Sindh.
The framing can be contested but group behavioral dynamics are observable regionally & globally.