by
Umm Zahra – Hiba magazine’s content writer
Since the BJP came to power in India, they decided to distort history, shaping false narratives. Their self-serving ideology was pioneered in the early 20th century by some Hindu bigots.
Let’s consider some facts from international authors and historians about the subject.
- India has never been homogenous as a host land
Indo Aryan migrations are recorded from Central Asia to India as far back as 4000 years ago. For nearly 2000 years, India has been a multi- racial and multi-cultural region which is what makes it diverse. For centuries, multiple ethnicities have been living side by side. To paint a narrative that India belonged to one race and one religion is an untruth.
- Temples were always targeted by invaders, even by Hindu kings
Richard Eaton in his book titled “India in the Persianate age” records that temples were a source of immense wealth during those times as worshippers offered silver and gold to their idols. Hence, invaders, including Hindus, for centuries used this as a war strategy. They looted the temples to strengthen their armies and broke idols to demoralize their opponents. This was an Indian phenomenon even before the Muslims arrived.
- Sultan Mahmood Ghaznavi of Afghanistan is wrongly singled out as an evil invader
Sultan Mahmood Ghaznavi ruled India from Ghazni for 30 years, from 999 to 1030, as a powerful sultan. He followed a war tactic already prevalent. Earlier the British, and now Hindu extremists, wrongly accuse Sultan Mahmud Ghaznavi alone as an initiator of the practice of desecrating temples. He was the first one to invade from the north, calling it Jihad against oppression. The Ghaznavis remained in power for nearly 200 years. They built universities, brought progress and justice in the lands they conquered.
- The Ghauris of Afghanistan first and the Delhi Sultanate take over next
The powerhouse of Muslim politics was Lahore at that time. Shahabuddin Ghauri defeated the Indian king, Prithvi Chohan in 1192 and the Delhi Sultanate was established and ruled from Delhi. Ghauri died in 1206 and his rule was taken over by his slaves who formed the Slave Dynasty which ruled for nearly 330 years until Baber came to rule India in 1526. “Islam in South Asia” is a powerful book by Jamal Malik that talks about the Muslim rule during this era.
- Delhi kings and the Mughal Sultanate did not pursue anti-Hindu policies
Hindus flourished as lenders, traders and bankers during the Muslim rule. This is an indication that the Muslim kings allowed everyone to prosper and progress under their rule. In Delhi, Hindus celebrated Divali and Holi and were given protection by the Muslim sultans. Next the British arrived as traders and they too were allowed to operate.
- With the Battle of Plassey in 1757, the British became the colonial masters
The British assessed the weaknesses of the Mughal rulers and took advantage. Undercover as traders of East India Company, they actually had a private, modern and sophisticated army of their own. They orchestrated the fall of the Mughal Empire and annexed princely states one by one. Bengal, Bihar and Orissa were taken over by British rule.
- The 1857 ‘mutiny’ was led by a Hindu soldier, Mangal Panday, in the barracks of Meerat
This was an uprising against the British Raj and the Muslims and Hindus united in revolt. However, the mutineers were defeated and the British rule continued, blaming the Muslims alone. David Saul writes a book titled ‘The Indian Mutiny 1857’ that discusses the reasons for its failure. But authors have written in ways that serve as an apology for the British colonial rule.
- The last Mughal Emperor Bahadur Shah Zafar was a mere figurehead
He was not a warrior king, but a mere figurehead and a poet. After the Mutiny, he was exiled to Rangoon (Burma) where he eventually died. Propagandists were hired to tarnish the image of the Muslim rulers and portray the British in a favourable light as compared to them.
- Hostile passages and excerpts that were written during the Muslim rule were selectively chosen
This was put together by Elliot and Dowson in the 19th century, in the form of chronicles on behalf of the British. They blemished the great achievements and monuments of 700 years of Muslim rule. They projected Muslims as looters, barbaric rulers, mass murderers and temple demolishers.
- In the early 20th century historians debunked this collection as colonial propaganda
They were exaggerated and unreal accounts to praise the British Raj and to legitimize them as champions of progress and humanity. The same narrative is used by the Hindutva movement against Muslims today to put them on the back foot and make them apologize for crimes they never committed. Islamophobes such as Robert Spencer from USA and the discredited Indian historian K.S.Lal (an R.S.S. activist) were at the forefront of this propaganda.
An important question to raise is that if Muslims resorted to genocide of other faiths, forced conversions to Islam and unleashed terror during their rule of the Subcontinent, why are they still in a minority in India and the Hindus a powerful majority today?
Partially adapted from Adnan Rashid’s video “Hindutva, History and Islamophobia”
About author
