What do you think?
Rate this book
Blasphemy: Let me speak
226 pages, Paperback
Published March 18, 2026
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews
April 28, 2026
Kushal Mehra has logically divided his book into 5 thematic chapters. He has taken great pains to break down the idea of blasphemy systematically and to expound the importance of free speech. The book took me on a journey from the etymological beginnings of the word blasphemy, to how the root idea was conceptualised, to how it was transplanted in India, to its impact on the legislature, to how it affects our current society, and finally, to the author’s primary concern, to how blasphemy laws should be struck down for free speech to prevail in a healthy democracy.
The Beginnings of Blasphemy
In the initial chapters, the book describes how the idea of blasphemy originated in the Abrahamic religions because of their uncompromising beliefs. Once religion was integrated with the state, blasphemy became a sin and a crime viewed either religiously or politically. This was the beginning of restrictions imposed on speech.
Introducing the Indian dharmic traditions, the book informs us that debates and discussions were integral to Indian culture. The author strikes a contrasting point in the way both the Abrahamic religions and the Indian dharmic traditions viewed blasphemy. He writes, “The deep tension between Abrahamic and dharmic traditions is not a conflict over gods, scriptures, or rituals — it is an epistemological one. Abrahamic traditions tend to view the truth as singular, exclusive, and revealed; dharmic traditions consider truth to be plural, inclusive, and dynamic. While the former protect boundaries, the latter erase them. While the former dread blasphemy, the latter encourage argument.”
Transplantation of Blasphemy in India
One of the best sections in the entire book is the setup of colonial India, where the implementation and subsequent removal of the restrictions on the press led to the rise of polemic pamphleteering. The Rangeela Rasool controversy was the tipping point that led to the imposition of blasphemy laws by the British in India. This entire section is covered in such detail that it transports you back to that volatile time, when street power was decided by polemic pamphleteering.
The Original Sin
Lately, it has become fashionable to criticise Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru for his past political decisions. Some of the accusations made in today’s parliament hold weight, while the others are an easy way to distract people from the current failures of the government. This book, however, rightly points out the original sin of the first Prime Minister by calling out the First Amendment of the Indian Constitution, which, in a way, introduced the “reasonable restrictions” clause into free speech. “[Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru] did not just inherit colonial speech restrictions; he constituionalized them.” Kushal goes into great depth on this topic, explaining why and how this action undid the Constitution’s original framers’ design to provide citizens with free speech.
The flaws in Blasphemy, The Social Fabric of India, and Pakistan’s blunder
“Governing a state on emotion is like legislating the weather; every breeze is actionable.“
The book keeps getting better as it reaches modern society and how blasphemy laws have wreaked havoc in countries like Pakistan. Discussing Pakistan’s infamous ‘295 Rajab Butt perfume’ controversy, the author highlights how horrible the state of affairs is in societies that impose the blasphemy laws to their full extent and weaponise them to silence dissent, crush political opponents, and hinder a state’s growth.
India, the author believes, is in a much better state than Pakistan in terms of freedom of speech. However, India has its fair share of problems. Whether it is the recent Samay Raina and Ranveer Allahabadia controversy or the Kunal Kamra Habitat fiasco, there has been a steady decline in the freedom of speech in India.
The book introduces the concept of the “Abrahamization” of the Hindu mind. By this, it means the push by a certain section of the Hindu community for the support and imposition of the blasphemy laws. Kushal calls this an alarming trend, as it tends to reduce the multifaceted philosophical nature of Hinduism to a dogmatic ideology.
“Abrahamization refers to the tendency for Hinduism, as an originally open, pluralistic tradition, to take on the dogmatic, rigid qualities of Abrahamic faiths such as Islam and Christianity.”
One might question that free speech is great and all, but how does it deal with hate speech and venomous bigots? You guessed it right, it’s through free speech, rather more of it!
“The best way to refute a bad idea is to allow its supporters to feel free to talk about it — and so subject it to their own weaknesses for all to consider.”
Same words, different consequences
The final chapter of the book discusses the various inflammatory verses in holy scriptures from all around the world. The author takes the effort to point out the exact verses and lines where the world religions have decided to be sexist, misogynistic, narrow-minded, and outrightly violent. Similarly, the author also points out Indian politicians who have spoken horrible things and yet have not faced any backlash from the state. If a common person were to have uttered any of the things written in the holy books or said by the politicians, they would have faced the wrath of the state. With this, the book raises an important question: why are the rules for free speech different for religions, politicians and common citizens?
Conclusion
I believe that Kushal Mehra has done an exceptional job with this book. This is a rare attempt to educate the masses in India about absolute free speech. In certain sections, the book gets repetitive to enforce a point. There are places where the writing flow feels off. The legal terms and jargon may seem difficult to get through. But it is a matter of grave importance that the core message this book contains reaches to a large crowd in India.
I may not personally align with Kushal on all of his political opinions. But this book review is not about my political stance. It is about a bigger principle. Possibly the biggest principle upon which the future progress of India rests. We, as Indians, should make every possible effort to uphold the freedom of speech in our country.
Highly recommended read!
The Beginnings of Blasphemy
In the initial chapters, the book describes how the idea of blasphemy originated in the Abrahamic religions because of their uncompromising beliefs. Once religion was integrated with the state, blasphemy became a sin and a crime viewed either religiously or politically. This was the beginning of restrictions imposed on speech.
Introducing the Indian dharmic traditions, the book informs us that debates and discussions were integral to Indian culture. The author strikes a contrasting point in the way both the Abrahamic religions and the Indian dharmic traditions viewed blasphemy. He writes, “The deep tension between Abrahamic and dharmic traditions is not a conflict over gods, scriptures, or rituals — it is an epistemological one. Abrahamic traditions tend to view the truth as singular, exclusive, and revealed; dharmic traditions consider truth to be plural, inclusive, and dynamic. While the former protect boundaries, the latter erase them. While the former dread blasphemy, the latter encourage argument.”
Transplantation of Blasphemy in India
One of the best sections in the entire book is the setup of colonial India, where the implementation and subsequent removal of the restrictions on the press led to the rise of polemic pamphleteering. The Rangeela Rasool controversy was the tipping point that led to the imposition of blasphemy laws by the British in India. This entire section is covered in such detail that it transports you back to that volatile time, when street power was decided by polemic pamphleteering.
The Original Sin
Lately, it has become fashionable to criticise Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru for his past political decisions. Some of the accusations made in today’s parliament hold weight, while the others are an easy way to distract people from the current failures of the government. This book, however, rightly points out the original sin of the first Prime Minister by calling out the First Amendment of the Indian Constitution, which, in a way, introduced the “reasonable restrictions” clause into free speech. “[Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru] did not just inherit colonial speech restrictions; he constituionalized them.” Kushal goes into great depth on this topic, explaining why and how this action undid the Constitution’s original framers’ design to provide citizens with free speech.
The flaws in Blasphemy, The Social Fabric of India, and Pakistan’s blunder
“Governing a state on emotion is like legislating the weather; every breeze is actionable.“
The book keeps getting better as it reaches modern society and how blasphemy laws have wreaked havoc in countries like Pakistan. Discussing Pakistan’s infamous ‘295 Rajab Butt perfume’ controversy, the author highlights how horrible the state of affairs is in societies that impose the blasphemy laws to their full extent and weaponise them to silence dissent, crush political opponents, and hinder a state’s growth.
India, the author believes, is in a much better state than Pakistan in terms of freedom of speech. However, India has its fair share of problems. Whether it is the recent Samay Raina and Ranveer Allahabadia controversy or the Kunal Kamra Habitat fiasco, there has been a steady decline in the freedom of speech in India.
The book introduces the concept of the “Abrahamization” of the Hindu mind. By this, it means the push by a certain section of the Hindu community for the support and imposition of the blasphemy laws. Kushal calls this an alarming trend, as it tends to reduce the multifaceted philosophical nature of Hinduism to a dogmatic ideology.
“Abrahamization refers to the tendency for Hinduism, as an originally open, pluralistic tradition, to take on the dogmatic, rigid qualities of Abrahamic faiths such as Islam and Christianity.”
One might question that free speech is great and all, but how does it deal with hate speech and venomous bigots? You guessed it right, it’s through free speech, rather more of it!
“The best way to refute a bad idea is to allow its supporters to feel free to talk about it — and so subject it to their own weaknesses for all to consider.”
Same words, different consequences
The final chapter of the book discusses the various inflammatory verses in holy scriptures from all around the world. The author takes the effort to point out the exact verses and lines where the world religions have decided to be sexist, misogynistic, narrow-minded, and outrightly violent. Similarly, the author also points out Indian politicians who have spoken horrible things and yet have not faced any backlash from the state. If a common person were to have uttered any of the things written in the holy books or said by the politicians, they would have faced the wrath of the state. With this, the book raises an important question: why are the rules for free speech different for religions, politicians and common citizens?
Conclusion
I believe that Kushal Mehra has done an exceptional job with this book. This is a rare attempt to educate the masses in India about absolute free speech. In certain sections, the book gets repetitive to enforce a point. There are places where the writing flow feels off. The legal terms and jargon may seem difficult to get through. But it is a matter of grave importance that the core message this book contains reaches to a large crowd in India.
I may not personally align with Kushal on all of his political opinions. But this book review is not about my political stance. It is about a bigger principle. Possibly the biggest principle upon which the future progress of India rests. We, as Indians, should make every possible effort to uphold the freedom of speech in our country.
Highly recommended read!
May 1, 2026
I finished Blasphemy: Let Me Speak by Kushal Mehra with more disappointment than disagreement. This was a book I wanted to like. I’ve heard the author in long-form conversations, and he often chooses topics that deserve attention. That made me willing to give the book the benefit of the doubt going in. It didn’t earn that benefit.
The core issue is clarity. The central argument never quite settles into a clean, coherent line of reasoning. Ideas are introduced, but not always developed or connected in a way that builds cumulative force. At several points, the book feels like it is circling around arguments rather than making them.
The writing style makes this worse. There’s a noticeable tendency toward verbosity—big words, heavy phrasing, and an effort to sound “literary” that ends up obscuring rather than sharpening meaning. Instead of communicating ideas more effectively, the prose often gets in the way of them. It’s striking because the author is far clearer when speaking. If the book had simply adopted that conversational clarity, it would have been significantly stronger.
Structurally, the book lacks discipline. Chapters don’t always feel purposefully constructed, and the overall progression is uneven. Arguments appear and fade without being fully resolved, and the conclusion doesn’t meaningfully tie things together.
There are moments where the intent behind the book comes through—particularly in its willingness to tackle contentious subjects—but intent alone isn’t enough. Without tighter reasoning and clearer expression, the impact is diluted.
What made the experience more frustrating is the sense of missed potential. This is a space that genuinely needs sharper, more disciplined writing. The ideas may be worth engaging with, but they require a level of clarity and rigor that the book doesn’t consistently deliver.
In the end, this is less a book that changes your mind and more one that makes you wish it had been written differently.
The core issue is clarity. The central argument never quite settles into a clean, coherent line of reasoning. Ideas are introduced, but not always developed or connected in a way that builds cumulative force. At several points, the book feels like it is circling around arguments rather than making them.
The writing style makes this worse. There’s a noticeable tendency toward verbosity—big words, heavy phrasing, and an effort to sound “literary” that ends up obscuring rather than sharpening meaning. Instead of communicating ideas more effectively, the prose often gets in the way of them. It’s striking because the author is far clearer when speaking. If the book had simply adopted that conversational clarity, it would have been significantly stronger.
Structurally, the book lacks discipline. Chapters don’t always feel purposefully constructed, and the overall progression is uneven. Arguments appear and fade without being fully resolved, and the conclusion doesn’t meaningfully tie things together.
There are moments where the intent behind the book comes through—particularly in its willingness to tackle contentious subjects—but intent alone isn’t enough. Without tighter reasoning and clearer expression, the impact is diluted.
What made the experience more frustrating is the sense of missed potential. This is a space that genuinely needs sharper, more disciplined writing. The ideas may be worth engaging with, but they require a level of clarity and rigor that the book doesn’t consistently deliver.
In the end, this is less a book that changes your mind and more one that makes you wish it had been written differently.
March 29, 2026
Don't bother with this even if someone gives you a free copy. Within 1-2 paragraphs you can see why this guy had to self-publish and why no respected publisher will take him seriously. Writes like someone who is studying in Class Four and makes no sense at all. Not even good as toilet paper because the quality of the self publishing is so poor. Just embarrassing.
March 28, 2026
Bretty good 5/5 :D
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews