‘Spit Jihad’: a conspiracy afresh to break the economic backbone of Muslims & Dalits

It is no wonder that it is BJP-ruled state governments, born of an ideology rooted in the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) that is itself unconstitutional, that has launched a slew of measures that are discriminatory by both conception and implementation

ABHAY KUMAR   

Several BJP-ruled states have recently introduced detailed guidelines aimed at preventing alleged incidents of individuals “spitting” in food. Under these new orders, the police verification of hotel owners and workers, as well as the installation of CCTV cameras in kitchens, have been made mandatory. The Pushkar Singh Dhami government of Uttarakhand even announced a fine of up to one lakh rupees for offenses related to spitting in food. Such measures do not merely violate the Indian Constitution (Articles 14, 15, 19, 21 and 25 of the Constitution) but are socially divisive and discriminatory. They have not however been condemned by a large segment of the political opposition.

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)

Courtesy : Sabrang India

Note: This news is originally published in sabrangindia.com and was used solely for non-profit/non-commercial purposes exclusively for Human Rights