Where is ‘extremism’ in India and where in Pakistan?

How confused, uninformed and maybe mischievous the discourse on religion and extremism has become, was obvious again at the recent General Assembly of the United Nations. A Pakistani diplomat, in his reply to the speech by Indian foreign minister Sushma Swaraj, lambasted the “unabashed Hindu extremist Yogi Adityanath”, the chief minister of UP, for “advocating the religious superiority of Hindus”. He also bemoaned that in India claims of religious superiority get patronage all across the country.

Did anybody get the irony of it all?

Pakistan’s grouse is that there are Hindus who advocate Hindu Dharma as superior to Islam and Christianity. They call such Hindus as extremists or fundamentalists. They even claim that a Hindu organisation like the RSS is the “breeding ground of terrorism in the region”.

Now what is the reason for Pakistan’s existence? The reason is Islam. A part of India was cut off and became a separate country only, because those, whose forefathers converted to Islam for whatever reason, wanted to live among themselves according to the tenets of Islam which they believe are necessary to reach paradise. That severed part of India became the ‘Islamic Republic of Pakistan’. Islam was declared as state religion. Islam is advocated in Pakistani schools and everywhere else over Hindu Dharma and other traditions. Any criticism of Islam is banned. A blasphemy law is in force with death as punishment. Religious minorities had and have a tough time. Hindus have been almost wiped out – driven out, converted or killed. Their percentage dropped from at least 15 per cent at the time of partition to under 2 per cent.

So how can a person from such compromised country, who has some degree of fairness, object to Hindus advocating Hindu Dharma in India when his own country is not only advocating Islam, but suppressing and almost exterminating other traditions in the name of Islam? Yet in India, ever since partition, the percentage of Muslims is growing proportionally to that of Hindus. So where is ‘extremism’ in India and where in Pakistan?

The reason for his brazenness might have been that he was sure that nobody in this illustrious gathering at the UN was likely to mention any connection of Pakistan with Islam. Neither will mainstream media. It seems, Islam must not be mentioned, except if one praises it. Yet Hinduism can be freely vilified.

This Pakistani diplomat can even be sure of support for his comment within India. Why? Because NGOs, media and not least the Congress president Rahul Gandhi have already  scared the world that India under Prime Minister Modi is in great danger of becoming a Hindu nation where democracy is in danger and Muslims and Christians will be at the mercy of Hindus. There is clearly an attempt to paint Hindus as extremists and even as terrorists, and in this way deflect from the real danger which is jihadi terrorism and jihad is no doubt an important part of Islam.

Any terrorism has an objective. So what is the objective of jihadis? They want a world where ideally only Muslims live, or non-Muslims are at least subdued, because that objective is a core tenet in their doctrine. They believe they are not only allowed but will be rewarded for treating non-Muslims ‘harshly’ and even can kill them without committing a sin in the eyes of Allah. Millions were killed in the attempt to rid the world of infidels over the centuries, and the killing still continues –not only by ISIS. The difference between victim and perpetrator is only that the killers or their forefathers have converted to Islam and now believe that the Highest hates those who don’t acknowledge that Islam is the only true faith.

It is no doubt a strange faith where the Highest Power, who is the cause for this vast universe, is seen as hateful and jealous, and who will let those, who don’t accept his commands, burn forever in hell. Yet strange as it may seem, such faith is officially the belief of about half of the human population on earth – Muslims and Christians. The Christian god, too, is allegedly jealous and rejects those who don’t believe in him. And worse, such a hateful god is claimed to be the ‘true god’, and belief in him is enforced with the bogey of eternal hell, whereas the benign Hindu Dharma has been successfully, but highly unfairly, vilified as an oppressive, primitive, depraved, idol-worshipping religion.

Many diplomats at the UN might have fallen for this vilification campaign by vested interests and might have agreed with the Pakistani diplomat that it is an ominous sign when Hinduism is advocated in India and that this needs to be stopped, whereas it’s ok when Islam and Christianity expand their reach.

Yet nothing can be further from truth. Anyone who dives into Hindu Dharma will realise that it is clearly superior to those two religions which demand blind belief in unreasonable and divisive dogmas.

Here is just one reason for its superiority: Hindu Dharma propagates universal brotherhood of all human beings because the essence in all is the same divine consciousness. In contrast, Islam and Christianity propagate conditional brotherhood  – the condition is that one needs to belong to their particular religion to be seen as a brother, because the Highest allegedly loves only Muslims and Christians respectively.

What is more likely to be true? Even science supports the Hindu view by claiming that all is an interconnected whole.

Religions are supposed to be about truth. As there can be only one truth, it needs comparing the different contenders for the truth and find out what is more likely to be true.  That, which is more likely to be true and which can even be proven as true, is naturally also superior.

Don’t we even in daily life compare and choose what is superior? Any reasonable person would do that. How much greater is the need to choose the best option when the question is about how to live our lives in an ideal way and in tune with the cosmic laws?

The fact, that the superiority of Hindu Dharma is rather obvious to any intelligent person, may have been the reason why the dogmatic religions, which showed up relatively late in the long history of mankind, do not just claim superiority, because this would open them to being compared with the traditions before them. Instead, each one of the two claims that it alone is true, that their holy book contains the word of the true god, and all must follow it at the threat of eternal hellfire.

Such claim, drilled into kids early on, is preventing them even as adults from daring to make an informed choice. “What if this claim of eternal hell is true?” they may think – and remain stuck in blind belief not daring to intelligently enquire into what is true about themselves and this universe – to the detriment of humanity as a whole.

By Maria Wirth



  1. Excellent post, Madam. Please permit me to share this with my friends in my blog.

    1. sorry, didn’t i answer yet? of course you can share it.

  2. Laljee Verma · · Reply

    Excellent exposition! Extremism is against humanity. Any religion which distances from humanism cannot be for whole of humanity. Hinduism is closest to humanity and nature, and that is its beauty!

  3. Hemant Tulpule · · Reply

    Very well put forth, as always, thank you ma’am 🙏

  4. […] via Where is ‘extremism’ in India and where in Pakistan? — MARIA WIRTH […]

  5. […] Note: This article is borrowed with thanks from  HERE. […]

  6. Proud to be your reader and your fan. 🙂 An inspiration, as usual.

  7. Sanatana Dharma is humanistic and closest to the absolute truth. Islam exists only for Muslims, otherwise why all Muslim states declare that they are Islamic states at its inception. They lure or force conversion. There is no concept of proselytisation in Hinduism or in the sanatana dharma.

  8. Book lover: You’ve misread both Maria’s essay and the Indian constitution. Nowhere in her writings did Maria advocate extremism. She mentioned contemporary leaders of the democratically elected government of India. You may indeed be one the the Indians about whom she wrote in this essay, that the Pakistani diplomat will find support for his comment even within India, where certain members of the opposition have “scared the world that India under Prime Minister Modi is in great danger of becoming a Hindu nation where democracy is in danger and Muslims and Christians will be at the mercy of Hindus.” We know this is a political ploy and not a realistic view of the future of India. Additionally, Articles 25 -29 guarantee rights to minorities that are not grated to the majority population. Hindus, are denied the same rights as minorities in the very constitution that you site. Please do not advocate what is not correct. Btw, Medieval times in India were not dominated by Hinduism, but it was Hindus who were dominated by a strict, conservative Islam, the doctrine of which was alien to the more ecumenical spiritual traditions found in Bharat. Where in official offices are government officials discriminating against minorities? Doesn’t happen!

    1. Kindly, go through my reply too because I be condemned Pakistan as a chaotic state. It is Islamic fundamentalist state. They’ve never had a stable government. I don’t give them any importance but you are hell bent there.

  9. India’s constitution gives equal rights to all religions, colour, caste, creed. When people in office discriminate, they go against the constitution. Two wrongs don’t make a right. The new Hindu fundamentalists are not only diminishing the basic rights of an Indian citizens but also dragging it to medieval times. Please do not advocate what is not correct.

    1. Mitra Vinda · · Reply

      Book lover, it is strange that you pontificate to us, when we are the only nation in the world who have co-existed with all faiths on earth without obliterating them as the Abrahmics did(What happened to Egypt, Malaysia, Europe as a whole?), being a majority Hindu nation. Now what you see is a Hindu uprising against the Abrahamics and is bound to reach a crescendo and we by that time would not be caring for your pontifications

      Strange you do not know the story of Asia Bibi a Christian in Pakistan who is about to face the death sentence for “Blasphemy” and the entire Pakistan is baying for her blood. And that this diplomat attacks Sushma Swaraj and preaches to us, is the height off “Abrahamic hypocrisy”. Abrahamic rascals day and day out belittle Sanatana Dharma, its deities and practices. I do not find your pious self pontificating against that. We also have a sense of self respect and our good will and accommodating spirit has been taken for a ride for centuries. Rather you mouth platitiudes and hyperbole like “Two wrongs do not make right” and such similar BS. Enough is enough for us. One day push will come to shove and then you will see.

      1. Please go ahead and fight the rest of the world. It seems you need to went your anger, so go ahead. But remember one thing that Hinduism is in no danger but only from people like you. I wonder who has put you incharge of Hinduism. And please let’s not get into a debate. I would like to remind you that Hinduism is a peace loving religion. There is a lot to learn here. And please Pakistan is too insignificant and backward for me to even get into a debate about it. Let us as a nation know one fact that Pakistan is a chaotic nation and unfortunately our neighbour. Peace be with you. Jai Hind!

      2. Mitra Vinda · ·

        Sorry i am not saying i want to fight with the rest of the world. But i wont sit and watch by when a bloody rogue Jihadi nation whose very existence is based on the Sharia, ethnic cleansing of minorities etc is talking about us, a nation with one of the most number of Muslims in Asia. A nation were Muslims hold important positions in all walks of life like politics, sports, business etc etc. Show me one minority in Pakistan in such a position?

        Who has put in me in charge of Hinduism? What kind of crappy question is this to ask? You feel it as anybody would feel it and feel outraged by such things. Hinduism in its original form also had war in it. And it was this Kshatriya spirit despite all of our internal squabbles kept invasion at bay. See it is not a dharma which has an unrealistic view that “Everything is great and ok and all that matters is peace and love”. The same Hinduism adores the destruction and anger of Rudra just as it adores the nurturing protection of Vishnu. Raudra is very much part of life. And it was this Kshatriya spirit despite all of our internal squabbles kept invasion at bay. I am not sure you read
        the Panchatantra but it advocates war when the situation demands it and so does the hitopadesha, Mahabharata, Ramayana etc. This kind of impotent thinking is what makes us soft targets and encourages a nation like Pakistan to talk like this This kind of thinking coupled with the stupid impotent “Absolute non violence “ideology M.K. Gandhi has emaciated us and made us utter imbecile

        And for the record, Pakistan is a nuclear Jihadi state plush with Saudi/Wahabi cash, with the ISIS knocking the doors of India through them and threatening to rip apart the country and convert into a Sharia paradise. And “Your royal highness” considers Pakistan as too backward and insignificant??
        God!!!! which planet are you living in? Do you live in the same India as i live? Have you never heard of the Kashmiri pandit cleansing in 1981(500000 of them), which was perpetrated by Pakistani Jihadis ?? Not a voice was raised by the then congress government against this.Strange that you do not consider such Jihadis and the ISIS an existential threat to Hindus and consider me a normal peace loving Hindu who is enraged on seeing what is happening around him as a threat to Hinduism. What kind of a warped statement is this?

  10. But, no one is advocating Hindu fundamentalism, India is a secular country with secular constitution.

    1. Mitra Vinda · · Reply

      lkv1941 India is only secular because of the Hindu Majority. It was we Hindus who coexisted with religions who wanted to exterminate us for centuries. If it was not so it would be either a door mat for Arabic imperialism AKA Sharia country or a Vatican poop yard.

  11. Wow the truth is something isn’t it? But mostly because it is written or spoken far to rare in this ‘modern’ age. Thanks you for being you without fear or shame, my brother of the nation of the unified soul, love and light to you 🙂

  12. This is same as McDonald’s and fast food joints advocating that vegetables are bad for you. I don’t know why no one seems to understand this or chooses not to understand this. Isn’t this the case always and why are you fighting the tides.

  13. Chetram Sharma · · Reply

    Your views about Hinduism are simply true, open, just and obvious, for the Hindu thought process is natural and not an imposed doctrine. Your deep knowledge regarding ultimate truth and command over language moves anybody to go through your write-up till end. Thank you.

  14. Laljee Verma · · Reply

    Rather confusing article by Kapil Bajaj. Syncretism is great but it is there in monotheistic religions. These advocate that salvation is possible but only through their way, all others can go to hell. Syncretism is humane, but only if it exists. If Hindu is not acknowledged as a Hindu, then what term you like to use for all the Hindus in India and abroad? Bhartiyata cannot be the correct term as it is not only Hindus that reside in Bharat, or India, there are followers of other religions.

  15. Dear Maria, you do a grave injustice to your own cause by using terms like ‘Hinduism’ and ‘Hindu Dharma’ and putting them in the same category as ‘Christianity’ and ‘Islam’ which you call ‘religions’.

    You seem to suggest, at least in this blog post, that there is a ‘religion’ called ‘Hinduism’, just as there is a ‘religion’ called ‘Christianity’ and ‘Islam’.

    The problem is there is no such thing as ‘Hinduism’.

    And there is certainly no such thing as ‘Hinduism’ the religion.

    In fact, there is no such thing as ‘Hindu Dharma’ — when this term is meant to convey something singular and applicable to all — just like ‘religion’.

    There is certainly ‘dharma’ in plural — as perceived from an individual standpoint.

    I think there can also be ‘Dharma’ in singular — i.e. singular from individual standpoints without the possibility that any of these individual standpoints can ever be projected as some kind of dogma that can be imposed on vast numbers, a la ‘religion’.

    What is ‘religion’ then? It used to be synonymous with ‘Christianity’. That is ‘religion’ was once another descriptor for ‘Christianity’ and a term used only for ‘Christianity’.

    ‘Religion’ is a purely an artificial construct. It’s artificial because it rejects ‘syncretism’ which is an essential element of all human cultures that have ever existed.

    In fact, in its rejection of ‘syncretism’, ‘religion’ becomes an outright false and fraudulent concept.

    That is because no human community and culture can ever exist without ‘syncretism’.

    So rejecting ‘syncretism’ is like saying ‘I reject the air’ which words you can’t utter without breathing the same air!

    It’s like fish (to take another metaphor) saying ‘I reject the water’.

    (In fact, even the so called ‘Christian’ and even ‘Muslim’ societies — even those that are 100 per cent ‘Christian’ and ‘Muslim’ — cannot exist without ‘syncretism’.)

    I am sure you know it better than I do that ‘Christianity’ rejects ‘syncretism’ (as does Islam). Anyone not sure can go to Vatican’s website and check references to the term ‘syncretism’.

    (Islam rejects ‘syncretism’ through the false Quranic concept of ‘Shirk’. The concept of ‘Shirk’ is used as a means to brand people and to straitjacket cultural diversity into Islamic homogeneity.)

    Muslims use the term ‘Deen’ for Islam, but they seem to be OK with using the term ‘religion’ too for Islam. The so called Islam is, after all, built on the Judeo-Christian mythologies. (Their falsehood and fraud is derived from the falsehood and fraud of the so called Judeo-Christianity.)

    It should be easy to see for any sensible person that ‘religion’ is a colonial-imperial construct that should be used only and only for ‘Judeo-Christianity’ and ‘Islam’ — not for any other human culture.

    In fact, this colonial-imperial concept of ‘religion’ has always been alien to all human cultures — not just Indic cultures — across the world through history.

    Isn’t it easy for anyone to see that ‘religion’ is exactly synonymous with ‘imperialism’ when one looks at how Christianity started European colonialism 500 years ago — with Papal Bulls (formal papal decrees) of the 15th century giving explorers the right to claim lands they “discovered” for the Catholic Monarchs of Portugal and Spain?

    Imperialism (i.e. ‘religion’) must have started even before European colonialism, with the supplanting of the diversity and autonomy of cultures in parts of the world (particularly those that are now called the West) by the uniformity and heteronomy of ‘Christianity’.

    With imperialism (or ‘religion’) came the imperial epistemology — i.e. the practice of mislabeling human cultures as ‘religion’. Thus came ‘Hinduism’ the religion, ‘Buddhism’ the religion, ‘Jainism’ the religion, even ‘Shamanism’ the religion, and so on.

    This mislabeling is a pernicious manifestation of the colonial-imperial age in which we live, compelling everyone who exists in this ‘modern’ age to pretend as is there is some such thing as ‘religion’ — and that the world population is divided into adherents of ‘religions’.

    The fact is ‘religion’ has no real existence. Only ‘culture’ exists.

    (‘Religion’ exists only as a mental abstraction based on a reification of ‘belief’ which is non-material and by pretending as if everyone has the same ‘belief’ which is an impossibility.)

    (‘Culture’ lives and breathes and creates beautiful things only because of its gene-cum-meme called ‘syncretism’.)

    And ‘cultures’ get terribly eroded and damaged by the artificial and colonial-imperial construct of ‘religion’ (which rejects ‘syncretism’) —- so much so that the loss of cultural diversity ultimately threatens the human existence on Earth.

    What we have always had in India is the great Indian cultural matrix embodying mind boggling diversity as well as autonomy and including dharmas, panths, sampradays, gnan margs, bhakti margs, ways of living, etc.

    (So dharmas, panths, gnan margs, bhakti margs, etc. are all inherent in this great Indian cultural matrix and do not transcend this great Indian cultural matrix.)

    Let’s call it that — i.e. ‘the Great Indian Cultural Matrix’. We can also call it simply ‘Bharatiyata’.

    Let’s not call it ‘Hinduism’. Let’s not even call it ‘Hindu Dharma’.

    We should completely shun the root-word ‘Hindu’ and its derivatives (‘Hinduism’, ‘Hindutva’, etc.) and instead use the terms ‘Bharatiya’ and ‘Bharatiyata’.

    1. Haven’t I made it clear in so many posts that I do not consider them in the same category?

      1. You must have, but in this blog post you not only make them comparable, you also reinforce this comparability by deeming “Hinduism” as “superior” to Islam and Christianity.
        This assertion of “superiority” is unwarranted because any day, any human culture, anywhere in the world is “superior” to ‘religion’ (i.e. Christianity and Islam) as ‘culture’ gives a human being all she/he needs; there is no need for this grotesquely artificial construct called ‘religion’.
        ‘Culture’ is the real McCoy. ‘Religion’ is only a pretender.
        So any comparison of ‘culture’ and ‘religion’ is meaningless.

    2. this following reply is by Maria Lozano, who could not post it. so i post it for her:

      May I comment something? The world is mastered by the West, the frame is given by the West, the NU is commanded by the West.
      The West in its expansionist ambitions has developed laws that AFFECT THE WHOLE WORLD, including India and the so-called Hinduism. Even if we sanathana dharmis KNOW that “Hinduism” is not a religion as such, sometimes ONLY FOR THE SAKE OF convenience, one has to pay more attention to the results that to the term itself: I, a Hindu westerner, can tell you that, in certain contexts, it is more CONVENIENT for the benefit of Dharma to call it “religion”.

      Why? I will give you an example: here in my country, Spain, we are struggling for the official recognition of “Hinduism” AS A RELIGION, even though we know that it has nothing to do with the so called “religions”. But, given the circumstances (a western country), only if we get this recognition, it will be AT THE SAME LEVEL OF RIGHTS (AND DUTIES) THAN THE OTHERS; right to the performance of samskaras with its legal consequences, right to education in terms of EQUALITY with the others (and legal consequences), right to “religious” services in hospitals, etc. Will Dharma get any official recognition from our government if we say, for instance, that “it is a way of living”? They will say “keep on living in your way of living, what an official recognition can we give you for a way of living?”

      Let´s not get lost in petty things like terminology, and let´s try to help for beneficial results for our beloved DHARMA. Let´s go for the essence and not waste time in concepts. The essence is: there are religions that are aggressive, and in many aspects harmful for the rest of humanity; there are traditions like Dharma that are helpful for humanity, including for those belonging to other religions. Let´s walk around this TRUTH.

      (Sorry for my English, just want to make myself understandable)

      1. You talk as if you have already reached the be all and end all — “the essence” — of “DHARMA” (in singular).

        So you say “let’s not get lost in petty things” like “terminology” and “concepts” and that “it is more CONVENIENT for the benefit of Dharma to call it religion”.

        And who do you include in “we sanathana dharmis” and in “our beloved DHARMA”?

        I am sorry I have no idea what “DHARMA” you are talking about. I am sure like me many Indians won’t have the foggiest idea what you are talking about.

        But then there is a difference between you and the Indians like me.

        You are the Enlightened One, having already reached the “essence” of “DHARMA” (in singular) and so beyond any need to examine the terminologies and concepts.

        What or who stops you, the Enlightened One, from describing “DHARMA” as ‘religion’ or anything else?

        Certainly not I, nor any other unenlightened Indian.

        So please continue doing what you are doing in Spain. Have your own Dharma. Do whatever you want to do with it.

        But don’t expect unenlightened Indians like myself to live up to this “enlightened” logic of yours that delving into concepts is a “petty thing” because a Spaniard has to get “official recognition” from Spanish government for “DHARMA”!!!

  16. Mitra Vinda · · Reply

    Laughable, Pakistan is a Jihadi country right at it’s heart, a country with Blasphemy laws where a Christian Asia Bib is on the verge of a death sentence for supposedly Blaspheming Islam. Where And the Pakistani diplomat is lecturing about religious supremacy to us!!! Possibly miss Sushma Swaraj was not unaware of this fact. In fact if the diplomat had spoken to me like that i would have taken care of re-educating the scoundrel.

    All Abrahamic religions are supremacists religions at heart, and the adherents have the temerity to lecture to us about.

    @@@Kapil Ji
    Any day Sanatana Dharma is superior to the other Abrahmist religions. This can be unequivocally stated by considering the total manslaughter committed by all the 3 of them(Yes the Mosaic Jews too were slaughtering people around them like Canan etc as said in the old testament). That would amount to 100 millions in these 3000 years of their existence. It is also good to use today, terms in existence to combat those Abrahamist bullies of religions in a language they understand. If we use Bharatiyata we need to be clear that it means only the traditions that grew up here on this soil before any of these Abrahmic abberations were even conceived into existence. Also it is a very dangerous term since these Abrahamists may use Bharatiyata to include theirs into it. It can never be so. For example Christians shamelessly wear Orange robs, wear ashes, have flag posts in Churches, celebrate car festivals of Mary etc. It should be noted that Abrahmists hate their mother nation and its traditions and look up to the Vatican or Mecca or Judea or whatever. So all your terminological hair splitting is just a waste of time

    1. Dear Mitra Vinda, Why would you respond to my “terminological hair splitting” if you were so certain it was all “a waste of time”?

      All “dharma” that you talk about is inherent in Bharatiyata. And Bharatiyata is manifest only in the lives of people. There is no such thing as “dharma” outside a culture or cultural matrix.
      So “dharma” is a pretty abstract thing. It becomes meaningful only if the cultural matrix that sustains it is alive.

      If you turn “dharma” into a dead letter by comparing it with “Abrahmist religions” (you do that comparison when you call dharma “superior to the other Abrahmist religions”), you are left with only an illusion.

      You can spend your life in this silly illusion. I won’t.

      It’s like a child telling another child “my sneakers are better than yours” and the latter contradicting that and retorting with the same words.

      1. Mitra Vinda · ·

        But your “my sneakers are better than yours” wont apply for Abrahamics. If it is Islam the moment you say so, one of the many things might happen.

        1. If you uttered this in a Sharia(Sunni or Shia does not matter) country like Saudi or Pakistan, you will be beheaded or hanged for Blaspheming the prophet.

        2. If you uttered this in Sharia areas in the India, you are likely to be killed too or atleast hurt or threatened, like the Hindus in Khairana or in Malapuram. You might want to visit the places and try your concepts of cultural Matrix(Including the “Beautiful Abrahamic ones”) and see the results for yourself.

        If you utter my sneakers are better than yours” in Christian dominated areas of Kanyakumari and Tuticorin, you might want to be sure you know how to defend yourselves or your are in for a severe drubbing. Again i’m a native of Tamil Nadu and i know too well.

        So your example is utterly wrong and simplistic and does not take into account the intrinsic Heathen/Kafir hatred in these 2 supremacist religions. It is not as simplistic as two kids fighting over a pair of sneakers. You can only say the above in a Hindu area and country and extremely highly likely you will come out alive or even be entertained with a lively debate or best ignored as a lunatic and shunned. You wont come to harm my friend. Please understand this. This why even though i find your terminological discussions a waste of time, i find it utterly dangerous when you talk of 2 supremacist religions who wanted to always exterminate us even now as being same as sanatana dharma. Go and see wherever these 2 reign supreme none, of the other religions can exist. Can you think of building a Vinayaka temple in Saudi Arabia or the Vatican?

        Again i reiterate “Sanatana Dharma is far superior” to the Abrahamics a fact your mind refuses to accept.

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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

%d bloggers like this: