BJP Minority Morcha national president Jamal Siddiqui stirred a significant debate on Wednesday with his controversial remarks about Sanatan Dharma and Islam, asserting that the foundational roots of Indian civilization lie in Sanatan Dharma and that Muslims in India are inherently tied to it through culture and ancestry.
Speaking to India Today, Siddiqui stated:
“Sanatan Dharma came much before Islam. It is the foundation of our civilization.”
He emphasized that Indian Muslims should acknowledge figures like Lord Ram and Lord Krishna as part of a shared cultural and possibly spiritual heritage. He claimed that Muslims who do not recognize Lord Ram and Krishna cannot be considered true Muslims, a statement likely to provoke strong reactions from religious scholars and community leaders.
Expanding on Islamic teachings, Siddiqui cited the belief in multiple prophets:
“The Quran names 25 prophets, but Islamic tradition holds that there were 1,24,000 prophets sent to different parts of the world. How can we say Lord Ram and Lord Krishna were not among them? They may well have been our messengers of God.”
He positioned this idea as consistent with the plurality of prophetic traditions within Islam, proposing a spiritual overlap between Hindu and Islamic figures.
One of Siddiqui's most striking assertions was:
“All Muslims are descendants of Lord Ram.”
He explained this by suggesting that conversion to Islam in India changed modes of worship, not civilizational identity:
“We changed our method of worship, not our culture. Our identity is still Sanatani.”
This framing seeks to establish cultural unity between Hindus and Muslims under the umbrella of Sanatan Dharma as a civilizational ethos, rather than a solely religious concept.
However, Siddiqui's comments are likely to generate controversy within both religious and political circles. Islamic scholars may reject the inclusion of Hindu deities in the prophetic tradition, while some Hindu groups may find the reinterpretation of Lord Ram and Krishna within Islamic terminology problematic. Politically, his remarks could be seen as part of the BJP’s broader narrative of cultural nationalism and attempts to integrate minorities into a unified Indian identity rooted in ancient traditions.
The statements may also raise concerns about religious syncretism, identity politics, and freedom of belief, particularly in a pluralistic and constitutionally secular country like India.
