Indian history has many unanswered questions like why the pain suffered by the Hindus for 1,400 years has not been adequately reflected. Why has this utterly painful, troubled, problematic, blood-drenched aspect of history been deliberately ‘neglected’? Were the Hindus not human enough? Are their suffering and humiliation not worth mentioning? Even if the Left-Liberal-Muslim Right cabal does not sympathize with the plight of the Hindus, does the truth not warrant being told? Why is it that our students are made to study the history of Muslim rule primarily in a political context—the story of their conquests and administration—as if we had been living in anarchy or in some Dark Age before that? Why they have downplayed the human aspect, particularly the achievements of the Hindus before the advent of the Muslims and their sufferings after them?
One can write falsified history on paper; one cannot falsify what is written on the collective subconscious of a people. The atrocities which the Hindus suffered at the hands of the Muslim invaders are imprinted indelibly on their subconscious and no false narrative can ever alter it.
Denial so shameful
While it was common for material from the temples to be used in building mosques and even put on stairs so that the ‘faithful’ could tread upon them, leaving an entire wall of the Kashi Vishwanath Temple intact and incorporated into the Gyanvapi mosque was done with a particularly diabolical motive so that the Hindus could see from a long distance that there stood their holiest of the holy temples once and which was desecrated thus—a constant reminder of their humiliation. And yet, the tragedy is that the Left-Liberal-Muslim Right refuses to even accept that temples were demolished. The British orientalist James Prinsep was neither in love with the Hindus nor did he hate Muslims. If he sketched the mosque and the original temple in the manner he did, it was because it appeared most odd to him.
If the logic of Audrey Truschke, one of the prominent faces amongst their ranks, is to be believed, rape and rapine were as much necessary to quell rebellions as was the destruction of places of worship! In other words, she is justifying every single atrocity of the Muslims on the fictitious ground that the motive was political!
Going by historical precedents from across the world, it is certain that during the age of Muslim invasions and rule, Hindu women must have been subjected to inhuman sexual atrocities. However, as V. D. Savarkar says in his ‘Six Glorious Epochs of Indian History’, to hesitate to acknowledge this hard fact under the guise of politeness is simply a puerile self-deception. As he put it, “Even if it were madness, there was a method in it!”
Nehru presided over the creation of a ‘manufactured history’
In his obsessive desire of appearing as the ‘messiah’ of his notion of secularism, Nehru did great injustice to the glorious heritage of the Hindus, for which he can never be pardoned. Fact is, as the celebrated historian Sir Jadunath Sarkar, in his legendary 1950 paper titled ‘The Condition of Hindus under Muslim Rule’ says, “Muslim rule had turned India into a sort of ‘Darkest Africa’ as regards culture, thought and character.”
Nehru is guilty of having presided over the creation of a manufactured and perverted version of history in which Hindus, Hindu religion, Hindu culture, Hindu intellectual achievements, Hindu valour and Hindu knowledge were not only relegated to the background and even if they found mentioned anywhere by mistake, it was in critical and derogatory terms as if they reeked of something primitive we ought to be ashamed of.
So vicious has been the Nehru-inspired onslaught against the Hindus that a deliberate attempt was made to whitewash the blood-drenched history of brutal atrocities against Hindus by methodically and subtly glorifying the Muslim invaders.
It was designed to suit their narrative, which projected almost all things Hindu as regressive and incompatible with their notions of modernity, whereas in the name of furthering what they had been tom-tomming as a composite culture, all things non-Hindu were accorded undue importance. Muslim orthodoxy was treated reverentially and accorded a sort of ‘touch-me-not’ status of delicate and sophisticated ancestry whereas Hindu orthodoxy was derided as primitive—a trait that was to crystallize into the trademark of the pseudo-secular ecosystem.
On the contrary, the fact is, as Sir Jadunath Sarkar, in his legendary 1950 paper titled ‘The Condition of Hindus under Muslim Rule’ says, “Muslim rule had turned India into a sort of ‘Darkest Africa’ as regards culture, thought and character.”
If, in spite of all the untold miseries Timur had inflicted upon the Hindus, the Khandan-i-Timuriyya (Timurid dynasty—the descendants of Timur, better known as the Mughals to the students of history) is ‘loved’ and held in high regard by the Left-Liberal-Muslim Right cabal as ‘one of our own’, merely because they stayed back in India to continue their mission of murder, plunder, rape and rapine, and did not go back to their home after that as many others belonging to their religion had done, it is both a tragedy and intellectual dishonesty of epic proportions. The cabal would generally not even mention that because of the strife there, it was not even possible for them to go back to their homeland.
They were very much invaders who founded an empire in India through ‘fire and brimstone’. There is no case, even by the cabal that theirs was a bloodless conquest, or that the poor Hindus had welcomed them with open arms. The empire was founded for their conquest and glorification, not for giving the Hindu subjects a better administration. As the contrived plea of the ‘White Man’s burden’ remains a farce in the context of British imperialism, any unstated plea of the ‘Mughals’ burden’ would be equally farcical.
Whitewashing history with an eye on the vote bank
One of the ways of making the Muslims happy was to present a whitewashed version of history—it was to pay great dividends in the politics of the vote bank.
The moment they grasped the immense value of the politics of the vote bank, they went into overdrive. Towards that end, they invented the policy of appeasement in words or deeds whichever was practicable; and infiltrated every space—educational, cultural, entertainment or social. They systematically undermined the role of the Hindus in India’s history and their immensely rich heritage of centuries in every imaginable field.
The role of the Muslim divines and the Sufis in conversions, for example, has been deliberately exaggerated by the cabal with the ulterior motive of downplaying the role of forced conversions. Hundreds of thousands of Hindus visit numerous dargahs even today; however, it does not result in probably a single conversion. Throughout the Muslim period, there was actually no reconciliation between the two communities and their fundamental differences remained as abrasive as ever. The Hindu kings had lost militarily; it did not mean that the Hindu masses had lost socially or culturally also to the invading Muslims, nor did they ever surrender their self-respect.
In any case, their systematic ‘perversion of history’ still failed to create a harmonious coexistence of the two communities—as amply proved by the record of communal violence in the country—the moments they spend together without violence erupting are only because of the ‘fear of the law’ and not any love for each other.
Congress’s policy of divide and rule
If the Congress was convinced that the British were pursuing the policy of ‘divide and rule’, then they should have tried to take the Muslim League into confidence to repudiate the British conspiracy. The Congress leadership never pointed out this anti-Indian policy during the parleys with the British officials and delegations.” After all, the historical fact is that despite the hackneyed criticism of the introduction of separate electorates for Muslims in 1909 as an example and the result of ‘divide and rule’, the Congress, just seven years later in 1916, accepted it through the Lucknow Pact with the Muslim League.
Indian history – the unfounded fear of the truth
To facilitate the perpetuation of the ‘manufactured history’, Hindus are told by the cabal implicitly, if not explicitly, that disclosure of historical truths could wound the susceptibility of the Muslims. And, this unholy effort continues to date even as it has been repeatedly proved wrong in the past century and a quarter. Hindus are often told to move on in life, to let bygones be bygones, etc. as if the responsibility of maintaining communal harmony is only theirs and nobody else’s. In fact, it is an insult to the Muslims to suggest that 25 crore Muslims of the country are so immature, and so fickle-minded that facing the truth of the past could wreck them psychologically and make them behave irrationally.
Also Read: Indian Muslims – ‘eternal outsiders’?
Similarly, we cannot treat 100 crore Hindus as sitting on a powder keg that would explode the moment they are told the truth of the history. We must grant at least this much maturity to our people. Imaginary fears about the rise in communal temperature cannot and must not be allowed to prevent the truth from being told as it is. Following the release of the film ‘The Kashmir Files, a majority of Indians, for the first time, became aware of the fact of the atrocities committed against the Kashmiri Pandits. However, acknowledging the truth did not lead to any violence against the Muslims in the country as the Left-Liberal cabal had been predicting; it merely exposed the evil designs of the cabal.