DISTORTION OF INDIAN HISTORY
FOR MUSLIM APPEASEMENT - Part 2
Dr. Radhasyam Brahmachari
What is the utility of studying history? From history,
one learns the achievements of his ancestoes and their successes and failures.
It enables him to analyse the reasons that brought the said successes and
failures and hence helps him taking correct steps in present crises. So, if
that history is erroneous or distorted, one fails to take proper steps to
confront the national problems. There is no doubt that a faulty step in the
moment of a crisis may lead to a disaster. From this viewpoint, it
becomes evident that distorting national history is not only a serious offense,
but an unpardonable crime.
Therefore, every citizen of a country must have the right
to know the true history of his nation. But in India today, this right is
being pitiably denied. They are permitted to know the history which is horribly
distorted due to political reasons. Particularly the history of
Muslim conquest and the period of Muslim rule, that lasted for nearly eight
centuries, has been so distorted that it is almost impossible for an individual
to salvage the true history from those garbage of lies and deceits. The most
unfortunate part of the episode is that, children after learning this distorted
history in their text books, are developing wrong ideas about their past. They
are therefore confused to identify or distinguish a friend from a foe.
It has been pointed out earlier that Mohandas
Karamchand Gandhi, the prophet of nonviolence, was the originator of the
politics of Muslim appeasement in India. As we know, he was the
most trusted as well as the most loyal stooge of the British Empire, it was not
possible for him to demand India's independence. In fact, his real intention
was to prolong British rule in India. So, to hoodwink the hoi polloi, he imported
a vague and mystical term "swaraj" and used to say that he was fighting for
that.He further declared that, it was not necessary to terminate British rule
for bringing his cherished swaraj, but Hindu-Muslim amity was the most
important precondition for that.
It should be noted that his concept of Hindu-Muslim amity
was entirely biased and prejudiced. Only Hindus were to make every
sacrifice for the sake of the said Hindu-Muslim amity. To
achieve that Hindu-Muslim amity, Gandhi suggested alteration or distortion of
Indian history, partcularly the period of Muslim rule. and two major
guidelines, he set for this purpose, were, (1) Muslim rulers were not
foreign invaders as they lived in India and died in India and
(2) the Muslim rule in India was not a colonial rule but a golden period of
Indian history. And following these guidelines, a group of
dirty people called the secular historians, set to distort Indian history in a
big way.
But what was
the real nature of that Muslim colonial rule and what was the nature of
Dhimmitude the Hindus had suffered for centuries after centuries? It is best
described through a dialogue between Sultan Alauddin Khilji and a qazi called
Mughisuddin. The incident has been narrated by Alauddin's court chronicler
Ziauddin Barni in Tarikh-i-Firozshahi.
Barni wrote,
"One
day Qazi Mughisuddin visited the court of Sultan Alauddin Khilji and the Sultan
asked the qazi, ‘How are Hindus designated in the (Islamic) law, as payers of
tribute (Kharaj-gauzar) or giver of tribute (Kharaj-dih)?' The kazi
replied, ‘They are called payers of tribute and when the revenue officer demands
silver from them, they should, without question and with all humility and
respect, tender gold. If the officer throws dirt into their mouths, they must
without reluctance open their mouths wide to receive it. By
doing so they show their respect for the officer. The due subordination of the
Zimmi (tribute payer) is exhibited in this humble payment and by this throwing
of dirt in their mouths. The glorification of Islam is a duty. ... Allah holds them in
contempt, for He says, ‘Keep them in subjection'. To
keep the Hindus in abasement is especially a religious duty because they are
the most inveterate enemies of the Prophet and because the Prophet has commanded us to
slay them, plunder them and make them captive, saying, ‘Convert them to Islam
or kill them, enslave them and spoil their wealth and property. No doctor
but the great doctor (Hanifa), to whose school we belong, has asserted to
the imposition of the jizya (poll tax) on Hindus. Doctors of other schools
allow no other alternative but ‘death or Islam'." (H.
M. Elliot & J. Dowson, HISTORY OF INDIA: As Told by It's Own Historians, III,184).
In the First Part of the
article, it has been narrated that, how the so called secular historians of
India are wrongly projecting the barbaric Muslim ruler Shahjahan as the author
of the famous Red Fort of Delhi, which was built by the Hindu Kings several
centuries before the times of Shahjahan. In this Second Part, we shall discuss
how these secular historians are narrating another cruel,barbaric
and lecherous Muslim ruler Akbar as the author of the
invincible fortress of Agra.
(0 vote)