Amir Khusro is a legend for good reason. The Sufi giant of the 13th century had his Urs celebrated in Hazrat Nizamuddin dargah in Delhi on Saturday The Indian media hailed him as the champion of India’s unique “composite culture” which is under threat, in their vicious propaganda, by the BJP at the Centre.
Khusro deserves all the accolades for introducing “Urdu”, “qawaalis” the instruments of tabla and sitar and the musical genres of Khayal and Taraana in India. His ghazals, Masnavi (poems in Persians) and Rubai are landmarks. But don’t be a sucker to this “composite culture” nonsense.
Khusro was everything but the champion of “composite culture” over which Pt. Jawaharlal Nehru swooned in his Discovery of India. Nehru was just one in the long line of historians and academicians who created, swallowed and spread the bogus credentials of Khusro as a shining symbol of “composite culture.” We have all grown up reading in our school textbooks on Khusro and his “composite culture.” These “secularists” and their bastard child, Indian media, would invent new phrases but never criticize the Islamic intolerance as and when it occurred.
Dr. Rajendra Prasad, India’s first President, wrote: “The beginning of India’s composite culture could be traced to Amir Khusro’s efforts.”
Really? Do you see a neutrality in this mention by Khusro?
“Had not the law granted exemption from death by payment of poll-tax (jizia), the very name of Hind, root and branch, would have been extinguished.”
Do you see “composite culture” in Khusro’s below views on Hindu temples?
“There were many capitals of Devs where Satanism had prospered from the earliest times…but now with a sincere attempt the Emperor removed these symbols of infidelity.”
Khusro’s contempt for Hindu women below would never be mentioned in anything you read. Sample:
“The stone idols called Ling Mahadeo…on which women of the infidels (Hindus) rubbed their vaginas for (sexual) satisfaction…The Musalmans destroyed all the lingas..and the Deo Narain fell down.”
In Khusro’s view, Muslims were “master” and Hindu “slaves.” Sample:
“Turk is like a tiger and the Hindu a deer…Hindus exist for the sake of the Turks. Hindu happens to be a slave in all respects—it does not become one to scowl at a goat which is being reared for one’s meals.” (That’s why Mr. Saif Ali Khan, Hindus have taken an exception to you naming your son, Taimur, for his name is a symbol of Islamic atrocities against the original inhabitants of this land).
Do you see any sign of “composite culture” in these utterances of Khusro?
This is what perplexed famous historian R. C. Majumdar (who refused to write history as Indira Gandhi wanted at one time—By the way, does Sagarika Ghose mention this in her book on Indira?):
How come Khusro could never appreciate the architectural marvels of Hindus? Why his literary and artistic accomplishments contain no Hinu poetry, Puranic or Bhakti ideals, Upanishadic mysticism? Without such inclusion, could he be described as the rockstar of “composite culture”?
You might not have read of this all because there is an academic apartheid in India against those who go against the grain. Just make sure your children don’t fall to the nonsense by this devilish clique. These are inbreeding Huns in saddle, hell-bent on taking away your culture, pride, heritage–and in consequence your identity.
Ashutosh, a spokesperson of the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) has appeared in the op-ed page of Indian Express today (April 27, 2017) which is one place to meet/read most of those who are plotting overtime to break India along communal lines and put the blame on RSS and Modi-government.
We, at the NewsBred, make it a point to confront such a narrative. Much of RSS’ and Hindutva’s idealogues mistake has been to concentrate on social reforms and leave the field of academic and media manipulation to Nehruvian-Left combine. It has had a disastrous effect. The Left-Liberals have worked overtime to divide the people on sectarian and communal lines. India First thus could never get off the ground.
Ashutosh, a JNU alumni, largely targets two of RSS’ main idealogues—M.S. Golwalkar and VD Savarkar. He quotes from their works to show they were anti-Muslims and anti-Christians and their concept of Hindu Rashtra didn’t have any scope for minorities. He says this philosophy is being brought to fruition under the present dispensation. Says Ashutosh: “This is a desire for civilizational conquest.”
Ashutosh quotes from Golwalkar’s Bunch of Thoughts: “There are three enemies of India–Muslims, Christians and Communists.” He further accuses Golwalkar as a fascist who was inspired by Hitler.
Dear Ashutosh, are you aware of these words of Golwalkar: “The Muslims must realize that we are all one people and it is the same blood that courses in all our veins.”
Or, “Let Muslims be more devout Muslims. We will help them to be more devout.” (He wrote in Spotlight (P 48).
Or, “Let the Muslims evolve their own laws.” (as a caution against the Uniform Civil Code).
Before we come to the Hitler part, let’s dwell on the Muslim/ minority bit a little longer. It’s a fact that Golwalkar was embittered by partition and the two-nation theory. He also feared the religious identity of Muslims could keep them emotionally in sync with Pakistan and work to India’s disadvantage.
While evaluating this sentiment of Golwalkar, as well as on Hitler, we must remember that men are product of their times. India was hurting under the yoke of British and an enemy’s enemy is one’s friend is perfectly logical. Hitler thus could have been seen as useful to fight British; as imperialist Japan was seen to be useful by Subhas Chandra Bose. It’s also pertinent to remember that Jewish people were the role model of Golwalkar. Its not a profile of a man who was anti-Semitic or proponent of Hitler’s fascism.
Ashutosh further claims that Veer Savarkar’s idea of India was not “common love” but “common blood.” Well, this is what Savarkar wrote in Essentials of Hindutva, and I quote:
“Afer all, there is throughout this world so far as man is concerned but a single race—the human race kept alive by one common blood, the human blood.”
This doesn’t look like words from a man who wanted Hindu supremacy. Indeed, when confined in Ratnagiri, Savarkar invited all untouchable families in his house and dined with them. The Pan-Hindu canteen and Patit Pavan Mandir are standing symbols of his efforts.
It’s been the ploy of mischief-makers to take a sentence or two out of context and paint an individual, organization or a movement in a poor light. Let’s make a few points in this regard:
One, RSS doesn’t follow a book. Indeed, Hinduism doesn’t follow ANY book. Golwalkar’s Bunch of Thoughts isn’t a recommended reading in RSS. Indeed, take a head count and you won’t find 10 persons in RSS who would’ve read the book
Two, RSS has no qualms in denouncing or apologizing their own actions. It was Golwalkar himself who repudiated and withdrew his book “We the Nationhood Defined” in 1948. RSS also officially disowned the book in 2006.
Three, not all BJP men are from the RSS. For example, the present chief minister of Uttar Pradesh, Yogi Adityanath is not from RSS. (So Ashutosh stop suggesting that RSS, VHP, BJP are all the same).
Because of this brain-wash, Muslims in India consider RSS to be an existential threat. It’s time they consider the points below and repudiate this propaganda of India-breakers who are anybody’s friends but theirs.
- RSS doesn’t look to restrict Muslims from doing Namaaz;
- It doesn’t call for Burqa ban;
- It doesn’t ask to butcher Muslims or have them kicked out of India;
- Indeed; it asks government to promote Madrasas;
- It’s not against Muslims getting subsidy for Haj; or mosques not getting aids
- It doesn’t say that why “pakhandi” babas have alone been jailed and not certain Maulanas who are less than pious;
- Why government has control over Hindu temples and not over Masjids or Mosques;
- RSS has backed bans of animal sacrifice in a few Hindu temples, such as Dakhineswar Kali Temple in Kolkata. They haven’t made any such appeal against Bakri-Eid.
Attend any Hindu festival in RSS shakhas and you would see all caste participate equally. There is complete harmony among followers of all religions. Many of them are untouchables and yet they distribute “prasads.”
The harder men like Ashutosh try to create a communal divide, the stronger should be our resistance to it. India First should always supersede our religious identity.
To this very day, May 11, 1857, Mughal Emperor Bahadur Shah Zafar received a few hundreds of East Indian Company cavalrymen in Red Fort, Delhi who sought his blessing to throw out the yoke of British rule in India.
As a letter from one of the rebels’ leaders put it: “The English are people who overthrow all religions…As the English are the common enemy of both (Hindus and Muslims), we should unite in their slaughter…By this alone, will the lives and faiths of both be saved.”
This heralded the start of the greatest revolt against colonial powers, English or otherwise, of the 19th century. Practically everyone in the Bengal army turned against their British officers. Civilian unrest soon kicked in in support of the rebelling sepoys across the country.
The discontent had been building to a climax. The British, who arrived as traders in the 17th century, showed their true colours by the 18th. Britain wanted to dominate the world and be the sole global power in a new British century. Lord Wellesley, governor general of India from 1798-1805, vowed to remove any European or Muslim regime which became an obstacle to this dream.
So fervent was this ambition, the so-called Forward Policy, that Britain pulled out all stops to bring the “jewel” India under complete subjugation. Local laws were abolished. A massive drive began to turn the “godless natives” into Christians.
The building discontent had more than one dimension to it. Along with interference in local customs and evangelical drives, Indians resented the use of English in schools as well as the coercive powers of judicial- social interventionist methods.
Indian industries lay in ruins. Handicrafts and agriculture only caused indebtedness. The “gang” of money lenders, such as landlords and zamindars, had joined hands with the Britishers.
So insistent were British in bringing “sovereign” Muslim native rulers under its yoke that they manipulated and spread all kind of lies. In order to annex the flourishing Avadh region, they produced a “fake dossier” before parliament. It was so full of distortions and lies that one British officer, involved in the operation, termed it as “a fiction of official penmanship.” The locals though preferred the “slandered regime” of the Nawab…to rose-coloured government of the company,” as the official put it.
This combustible situation needed a spark and it was provided by the greased cartridge affair. The revolt spread quickly, a tribute to the secrecy with which the uprising had been planned. British asserted its force by September, British forces attacked Delhi, already under the siege. The massacre included those of ordinary citizens. In one neighbourhood, Kucha Chelan, 1400 unarmed locals were hacked to death. Delhi was pillaged torched, completely ruined by the vengeful foreigners.
Emperor Zafar was trialed and hanged. He was slapped with an absurd charge: A Muslim conspiracy to subvert the entire British Empire, stretching from Mecca and Iran to Delhi. The fact that it was an uprising largely planned by Hindu sepoys was conveniently ignored.
The outcome is well-documented: The 1858 Government of India Act ensured that the control was passed on from East India Company into the hands of the British Empire. The make-up of military forces was dramatically altered. The rule was so heavy-handed that between 1858-1947, there were only 20 minor mutinies mounted by Indian regiments. But coercive methods also sparked an awakening of Indian nationalism and the signs of an emerging modern India was everywhere—in schools, colleges, universities.
Britain couldn’t have afforded to let India go. It was a major destination of investment for traders and bankers. The high-growth sectors were rail, tea and cloth. The British was unwilling to allow India, the “great barracks whose taxpayers supported up to half of the British regular army” to slip out of its grasp.
As in now, there is striking similarity in West’s methods. Like today, the rulers blamed it on “Muslim fanaticism.” They termed their opponents as “incarnate fiends,” Their heavy-handedness bears a striking resemblance to the present tale in Middle East and elsewhere. The intrusion has radicalized the people against them, like it was in 1857.
You have read about this “hit-man” in NewsBred this week itself. Mr Harsh Mander is forcing upon a discussion on himself again with his column in Hindustan Times (March 16, 2016).
The thrust of Mander’s argument is that terrorists and those who cause communal riots must be treated as guilty of similar crime. Both spread panic, if not divisions in the society.
The second point he makes at the fag end of his piece is that most communal riots in independent India have been caused by Hindus—by inference they must thus also be treated as terrorists.
It’s a long and rather boring piece but you kept up with his terrorists vs communal rioters theme for hundreds of words, knowing that the thrust of his “bite” would make an appearance at some stage. Presto, lo and behold, right at the end of his piece he did drop his guard: “A majority of those charged with terror crimes are religious minorities. While a majority of those charged with communal crimes are from the majority Hindu community, its victims are mostly religious minorities…”
Mander’s entire premise is wrong. Terrorists and communal rioters aren’t the same thing he believes them to be. Terrorists take innocent lives without any provocation. Communal rioters take innocent lives at a perceived provocation. A community has hurt your religious feelings and say raped your women—it thus must be avenged with. A terrorist who drops a bomb in a mall or blows up a train has no such specific provocation.
There is another distinction: communal riots are largely local in character. Terrorism is a global phenomenon. If men from Algeria cause killings in Paris, it isn’t because they don’t like the lovers at the bridge on river Seine which they cross everyday on way to work.
Terrorism is also often cold-blooded—and planned months in advance. Communal riots are usually a burst of emotional upheavals which mostly finish in a week or two.
Communal riots are also done in open daylights. There is no effort to hide their identity. Terrorists, on the other hand, have a very different persona. Try to provoke the image of a terrorist and a communal rioter in your mind and you would immediately spot the difference.
Besides, you won’t find a terrorist using lathis, knives or swords in trying to strike down their target. They, at the minimum, use a sophisticated guns and bombs, if not surface-to-air missiles to go after their objects.
Terrorists are also massively funded and have training camps to be readied for their mission. Communal riots could also be engineered—but to say that it’s a cold-blooded and carefully planned is stretching the comparison too far.
This brings us to Mander’s second assertion: that Hindus largely cause communal riots on religious minorities.
Before we go into the “Hindu bit,” Mander must be told that communal riots have drastically declined under the Modi government in the last two years.
Mander’s claim that Hindu cause majority of communal riots on religious minority is also stupid. Hindus are not in majority in all the areas of this country. In Hyderabad for instance we learnt of an incident when ringing of bell in Sri Bhagyalakshmi Temple in Char Minar area was banned a few years ago.
There are many areas in India where muslims are in a majority. When communal riots happen, it’s not Hindu “majority” who are behind communal riots on “religious minorities.” It’s rather the other way around.
That is not to say that Hindus are not guilty of communal excesses. There are always fringe elements who go over the boil and cause havoc. But to say that Hindus, by and large, are reason for communal riots in this country is mischievous. If anything, it’s part of “Anti-Hindu Agenda” presently sweeping the country.