Saffron Terror under lens



“One person’s delusion may be another’s salvation,” say psychologists Arthur S. Reber, et al.  That’s why religion has to be accepted as part of our social fabric.  Perhaps it is impossible to live out life on this planet of ours without labouring under many delusions or even sustained by them.

So, this blog is not against any religion.  That’s a hands-up from the writer for those who are going to take their machine guns out after reading this.

Of late, we have been told time and again by religionists that “terrorism has no religion.”  That is an absolute lie. Terrorism, more than anything else (like Maoism, for example) has religion.  The title of this blog article is borrowed from today’s Times of India [17 Feb].  The newspaper, like many others including this writer, thinks that there is a terror called “saffron terror” and that it is associated with a religion.

The report quotes the home ministry of India that at least six major terrorist attacks in the country were carried out by the saffron terrorists.  They are: Malegaon blast (2006), Samjhauta Express bombing (2007), Mecca Masjid and Ajmer dargah terrorist attack in Hyderabad (2007), explosions in Malegaon and Modassa (Gujarat) in 2008.

Many Muslims were arrested in the names of many of these attacks.  Many of them may be still languishing behind the bars though it is clear that they are innocent.

But there have been Muslim terrorist attacks too in the country.  Quite many of them.  So, terror has a religion.

The Frontline’s latest issue features Hindutva’s war by other means on its cover. I’m focusing on that war here because I think that’s deadlier than overt terrorism.

It is terrorism without any ideology or principle.  Can terrorism have an ideology or principle?  Of course, it can.  The Maoists, to repeat an example, have a clear ideology and are guided by a set of principles like protecting a particular section of people, attacking a particular form of governance and economy, etc.  The Frontline articles show how the Hindu outfits indulge in “multispeak”: they will keep changing their views according to situations.  They can distort history, again just to suit their temporary needs.  They can switch issues from minority-bashing to prevention of cow slaughter, again as demanded by the political situation.  They demand anti-conversion bills but perpetrate conversions themselves.  The list is quite edifying for the most venal politician of any colour.  To understand this more, you are encouraged to read the 5 articles and 2 interviews that Frontline offers.

The worst kind of terrorism is misuse of people’s delusions.

Distorting delusions into lies that become religious myths is to keep people in slavery.  In the slavery of ignorance and vicious attitudes.  It is to fill people’s hearts with poison.  It is to create a nation of hate-mongers, a nation of neurotics.

That’s the contribution of “saffron terror” to India: a nation of neurotics.  I think it’s high time thinking people start questioning such terrorism.  Can reason stand up against venal egotism (which is what drives the kind of terrorists with no clear vision, no ideology, no principles)?



About matheikal

My more regular blog can be accessed at
This entry was posted in india and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

7 Responses to Saffron Terror under lens

  1. Raghuram Ekambaram says:

    “They demand anti-conversion bills but perpetrate conversions themselves.” – you are slightly mistaken Matheikal. You see, when people come to Hinduism that can never be conversion. It is actually home coming of a soul that unfortunately wandered off and around.
    Hope you have been stripped of this delusion that Hindus convert :))))))


    • matheikal says:

      Yeah, Raghuram, it’s homecoming indeed. In that case, I can return to Brahminism as my family myth/history says that we were convereted from the Namboothiris. Likewise every Indian can make a homecoming, based on myth or history. And I’m sure the Hindutva vadis will accept it too. But the question then will be: what after that? Are we going to live a life of unity (not in diversity, but in homogeneity)? Won’t we then create new caste systems like the neo-homecomers vs others and the caste grades of the neo-homecomers…. The whole view of these people is wrong, I’m sure of that. They don’t want unity. They don’t. As simple as that.

      By the way, I enjoyed your comment also at the smiley level. I know you. And thanks for being there with this kind of comments.

      • Raghuram Ekambaram says:

        Matheikal, you said, “Are we going to live a life of unity (not in diversity, but in homogeneity)?” This is something That I had argued, homogeneity, for the past about 30 years. I have said that where there is homogeneity, there can be no concept of unity ir such a concept is trivial at best and analytical at worst. Thanks for bringing that thing out.



    i know you and your blog i s not against religion, but i personally feel, terror has no religion…
    But there are people who are as deadly as a terrorist in all religions…
    Murdered,rapist, pedophiles do exists in all religions and all countries
    But judging them with religion could not be fair….
    Overall a thought provoking post sir
    typical post of yours

    • matheikal says:

      Deepak, one of the greatest things in my life is being understood. Thanks for knowing that I am not against something. That I am FOR something, though my style often makes it appear otherwise.

      By the way, I’m not really “not against” religion. I don’t like religions. I think they do a lot of harm to humanity. I just tolerate them just as I tolerate my own delusions. [I am aware of my delusions unlike people who die and kill for religions.]

  3. extremely sensitive topic.

    time & again, we do see instances of religion being used more to harm than heal,to hate than love and that is a sad state we humans have driven ourselves into. a handful wrecking so much damage & loss of life is astounding

    • matheikal says:

      It’s those harms and damage perpetrated by religion that I’m questioning. I have no problems at all with the good side of religions. But the goodness is being sidelined by an increasing number of people. Worse, the wicked are increasing in number.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s