When Language Became a Weapon;How Hindus and Buddhists Were Defeated First by Words, Then by Armies’ 

A civilization can fall in silence before it falls by force. Hindus and Buddhists lost before their cities were sacked, before their armies were broken—they lost by language. Centuries before the cannonball, a people were named kāfir, heathen, idolater, savage. These names were not neutral; they were weapons. When the conqueror’s vocabulary becomes your identity, resistance is hamstrung. Once you accept that label, every move you make is judged against it. The name draws a moat around your dignity; the sword merely asserts what the insult declares.

Monotheism is built on exclusion: one God, one truth, one people. If there is one true book, one prophet, one path, then everyone else is necessarily outside—a kāfir, a pagan, a gentile. Judaism generated the category of gentile to mark those outside the covenant; Christianity universalized that divide into the baptized and the “heathen”; Islam made kāfir a juridical identity of guilt, not just unbelief. The dhimmi status codified second-class citizenship. Language made violence ordained, conquest sanctified.

Hinduism and Buddhism stand on another architecture. The Upaniṣads declare tat tvam asi—you are Brahman. The Ṛg Veda warns ekam sat viprā bahudhā vadanti—truth is one, sages call it many ways. Buddhism’s śūnyatā reveals that no essence withstands conceptual division. In both traditions, the “Other” is never ontologically sealed. You may stray, err, fall—but you are never cast as eternally damned. That refusal of exclusion is their moral oxygen.

Before conquest, India was dynamic, porous, plural. Non-Brahmins became kings. Saints emerged from every caste. The Buddha was a Kṣatriya, not a Brahmin. Śaṅkara, legend says, bowed before an untouchable in Varanasi and accepted him as guru. These stories remind us that Hindus and Buddhists were not locked in a caste prison—they had room to repent, rethink, dissent. Ideas flowed across regions, languages, castes. That river of reform ran until its banks were breached.

Then came the invasion of names. From Sindh to Delhi to the British Raj, the conquerors spoke first. Kāfir, idolater, savage—these were the heralds of conquest. To call someone a kāfir was to mark him as culpable, not simply mistaken. The dhimmi contract institutionalized disgrace. Later, Christian missionaries refined the move: “pagan,” “heathen,” “primitive,” “native,” “darkie.” What Islam had called kāfir, Christianity turned into a racial vocabulary. The language changed; the demeaning persisted.

Conquest was vocabulary before territory. When a people repeat the insult, the wound becomes internal. Who will build temples if your gods are called “idols”? Who will preserve your law if your scripture is dismissed as superstition? Who dares to reform a creed you are told is inherently backward? The names kill imagination, not just bodies. That is why half the fight is to rescue words.

Yet words can be reclaimed. If kāfir means one who covers truth, then what is more truth-concealing than a religion that demands exclusivity, that collapses plurality into one stone, one temple, one prophet? If “pagan” once stigmatized folks tied to soil, then who is more pagan than those who sanctify a patch of desert or a hill in Jerusalem? The insult boomerangs when turned sharply. You need not mirror monotheism; you only need to expose its locus of hypocrisy.

The reversal is not revenge; it is diagnosis. Christianity and Islam masquerade as gestures of peace while their vocabulary carries conquest in its marrow—as a prostitute posing as the Virgin Mary. Their colonies bear witness. Continents stolen under veneer. Now they lecture others on tolerance. Their discourse is a child of conquest, not compassion.

This is not to romanticize Hindu or Buddhist societies. Caste wounds ran deep; social cruelty was real. But caste is a deformity, not a cosmology. It was contested, reimagined, reformed from within. Monotheism’s Otherness is fundamental and immovable. Remove it, and the system collapses.

A hundred years into independence, India is cracking the old grammar. A tribal woman as president. A man from a once-despised caste as prime minister. Judges from communities once excluded. Reservation laws force society to account for long insult. The symbols matter because they pierce the vocabulary of inferiority. “Untouchable” loses sting when the supposed untouchable holds national authority.

Yet the old insults survive in subtle dress. A preacher murmurs kāfir. A report calls Hinduism “intolerant.” A scholar reduces Indian civilization to caste alone. The empire of insults is still alive, speaking through policy briefs and media euphemisms. It is the language of the conqueror hidden in a suit and tie.

The strategy is not hate—it is clarity. Teach children that kāfir, pagan, heathen, dhimmi, “native” are not neutral descriptors but instruments of humiliation. Speak in your own categories. Dharma is not “religion.” Mokṣa is not “heaven.” Śūnyatā is not “nihilism.” Translation is not surrender but resistance.

When you are called kāfir, you may answer: what truth are you hiding? When they call you pagan, you ask: what stone can you cease from worship? To refuse their vocabulary is the first act of freedom. Names fracture souls. Take them back, speak your own, and the first prison falls.

Whoever names you, frames you. Whoever frames you, rules you.

Emancipation begins with words. Then comes the rest.

References 

Assmann, Jan. Moses the Egyptian: The Memory of Egypt in Western Monotheism. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1997.

Bronkhorst, Johannes. Greater Magadha: Studies in the Culture of Early India. Leiden: Brill, 2007.

Cohen, Mark R. Under Crescent and Cross: The Jews in the Middle Ages. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1994.

Cox, Jeffrey. The British Missionary Enterprise since 1700. New York: Routledge, 2008.

Dirks, Nicholas B. Castes of Mind: Colonialism and the Making of Modern India. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2001.

Eaton, Richard M. Temple Desecration and Muslim States in Medieval India. New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 2004.

Garfield, Jay L., trans. Nāgārjuna. Mūlamadhyamakakārikā (Fundamental Verses on the Middle Way). Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995.

Olivelle, Patrick, trans. Upaniṣads. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996.

Patton, Laurie L., trans. Bhagavad Gītā. London: Penguin Classics, 2008.

Pollock, Sheldon. The Language of the Gods in the World of Men: Sanskrit, Culture, and Power in Premodern India. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2006.

Qur’an. Translated by M. A. S. Abdel Haleem. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004.

The Rig Veda. Translated by Wendy Doniger. London: Penguin Classics, 1981.

The Bible. New Revised Standard Version. New York: HarperCollins, 1989.

Thapar, Romila. A History of India, Volume 1. New York: Penguin, 1966.

Jaffrelot, Christophe. India’s Silent Revolution: The Rise of the Lower Castes in North India. London: Hurst & Company, 2003 

---