What's new

Why 'Hindus' hate Muslims ?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Hafizzz

SENIOR MEMBER
Joined
Jun 28, 2010
Messages
5,041
Reaction score
0
Why 'Hindus' hate Muslims ?
Why 'Hindus' hate Muslims ?, The Milli Gazette, Vol. 3 No. 9

After Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee's open season on Muslims and Islam, the first for any leader of any nation in the world in recent memory, that gets the honour to directly target Muslims and Islam, as world's pariah number one, Indian Muslims do not need any further evidence to know that they are a hated lot.It is time for them to reflect and introspect as to why they became the prime target of Gujarat mob attacks that took the ominous shape of 'ethnic cleansing' and genocide in India, widely believed to be under direct state sponsorship, as amply proved by the constant defiant and unrepentant tone of all the officials who were constitutionally bound under their oath of office to protect the lives and properties of all the citizens of the country.

However, before we proceed any further, we must define the word 'Hindus'. The word Hindu has acquired a gross representation to mean all diverse castes and regional groups that are generally and even legally referred to as 'Hindus'. In fact, different castes, like Brahmins, Thakurs, Baniyas and the rest, have acquired different social and political equations with Muslims in the aftermath of Mandal. Still, it can be safely assumed that the predominant ideological confrontation with Muslims is spearheaded by upper castes, specially the Brahmins. They see themselves as the leaders of all non-Muslim communities vis - a - vis Muslims, given the high status accorded to them by socio-religious order commonly known as Manuvad.

It would be appropriate to stress that even without Muslims coming into the picture, the caste hierarchy had remained a source of constant friction, all through thousands of years of recorded history in India; mainly due to inherent or assumed injustices meted out to each other in the name of religiously ordained caste groupings. As rights and responsibilities of each of such groups and sub-groups were spelled out, both by scriptures, local traditions and common practices, the interaction between all such groups, though part of that greater identification as Hindus vis-a-vis Muslims, remained always on the boiling point.

Post-independence, the Brahmins emerged as the ruling group, not on the basis of their numerical strength in a democratic set-up (they are a very small minority of around 4% of the total percentage of 85% of the total population of India) , but on the basis of caste superiority as well as intellectual and professional merits acquired over a period of time. Though it is not publicly acknowledged, it is none the less always in all equations, that all Brahmins are Aryans, and had been known to have come to India thousands of years back from Central Asia. They are a distinct race as could be made out by their appearance being of light skin and Caucasian features. They brought with them a language, that still shares very broad but basic similarities with other language groups in northern areas of Asia and Europe. They also brought with them a fairly distinct set of spiritual traditions, that later crystallised in a highly developed form of beliefs and rituals and is commonly referred to as Sanatan Dharam.

There is a new trend born of political considerations of self-preservation as well as competition with the 'invader Muslims', to evolve new theories declaring Aryans/Brahmins as indigenous people and not immigrants from the north. Spurious findings and elaborate theorising has not yet accomplished this desperate attempt to ' belong eternally to India', as one further basis to assume the role of 'legitimate' rulers of the vast and diversified mass of communities and ethnicities. But the campaign borne of deep-rooted insecurities, is even promoted at State level, now that RSS and Sangh Parivar is ruling the center. Revision of Indian history too is part of the same obsession borne of insecurities. The recent difficulty in accepting Italy-born Sonia Gandhi as possible Prime Minister of India, too is directly related to the constant attempt at branding Indian Muslims as foreigners and therefore without any legal rights per se to be counted as Indian citizen.

Though throughout India's last 50 years of independence and specially during the long stretch of Congress rule, Muslims were completely sidelined from the national mainstream, they never-the-less were exploited by the Congress as a captive vote bank. Congress nourished Muslim vote bank, not through any perks of office, employment, economic upliftment, land grants etc. It had its own brand of pseudo-secular empty propaganda on one hand and the crack of communal riot-whiplash to keep the community in its stranglehold on the other hand. This spurious 'appeasement' ensured that neither Muslims progress even in comparison to ST/SC and OBCs; nor they jilt Congress at the time of elections.

The 40 long years of sitting in the opposition, convinced RSS parivar, obsessed as they were with their cherished dream of Hindu Rashtra, that they could never come anywhere near the seat of power, as long as Muslims keep Congress in harness. That continued frustration crystallised in perpetual hatred of Muslims well as the whole system of democracy and secularism.

It is ironical that both systems that were competing to put their stamp on Indian governance, were basically formulated and promoted by Aryan/Brahmins themselves, as the sole intellectual leaders of the new nation. The only difference was that Nehruvian democracy and socialism were 'handicapped' as it needed the Muslim votes to prop up its absolute majority.In the case of Hindutvad, they had determined to write off Muslims altogether; so much so that even Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee did not flinch in throwing an open challenge to UP Muslim voters during recent assembly elections in UP, that their party will win without Muslim votes.

The results proved that Muslims’ votes did make a difference in the eventual low ranking of BJP. Many would trace Gujarat riots to be directly related to BJP's defeat in UP, as a revenge on Muslims in a state where BJP still ruled all by itself. Though the genesis of Gujarat genocidal planning does expose the more sinister and sustained long term agenda by the BJP and Sangh Parivar to tackle the Muslim problem in a direct action strategy, not awaiting the pretext of any untoward election results.It is primarily, this combination of continued frustration and imagined guilt of Muslims being the king-pin of their misfortune that became the driving force of the typical Aryan/Brahmins logic to hate the Muslims. The hate is now being institutionalised as the main concern of all Hindus; but the fact cannot be kept hidden that except for a small percentage, all Brahmins are not enamoured of Sangh Parivar's untenable claims of congenital superiority in this egalitarian age.

Within a wider perspective, Aryan/Brahmins being at the head of caste hierarchy, had appropriated a host of privileges in the form of accepted and ritualistic traditions. All caste groups had to abide by the descending order of servility. The shudras, now a big majority, being the lowest of the low in the Manu-ordained hierarchy. Any rebellious challenge at any level, was immediately put down, even by physical violence; or it may be safely said, the preferred mode of teaching an uppity group to know their place, was through physical violence. These traditions have very long history.

In the modern democratic set-up, the numbers game becomes important. Though Aryan/Brahmins have been able to conjure up their majorities by marshalling all 'Hindu' castes against the 'foreign invaders', the Muslims, the progeny of Babar, the attempt requires constant efforts. The Aryan/Brahmins cannot keep their ruling privileges, if they relent anytime and let the Muslims consolidate or team up by other lower caste groups; thus threatening their natural constituencies.

All their attempts to absorb the distinct Muslims into the religious and tradition-bound caste social order, has failed, due to Muslims' own identities, specially drawn out of their religion: Islam and their links with world wide Muslim Umma.

This cannot be long tolerated without in fact creating more dispersion in their own caste order. Muslims are a constant challenge as a group of people, who cannot be tamed to accept Aryans/Brahmins as naturally or religiously superior by any yardstick, as per the basic teachings of Islam. Their aura of independence, freedom from Manu-order, with their own personal laws and their preferred associations with their brothers in Islam across the world, is a permanent problem. There is no solution in sight, except the 'final solution' that the fool-hardy Hitler had thought of, to the utter destruction of his elaborately built up Reich.

Besides being believers of a 'foreign' religion, 'Muslims' have ruled India for close to a millennium. This history gives the group a sense of superiority, whether felt or lived at grass-root level or not, but deeply reacted to by the current ruling class. They feel that Muslims are still a threat and can always make a come-back; through means, fair or foul. The wholesale migration of the elite to Pakistan and the current social and economic conditions of Muslims are not any consolation to the rulers. They want to see them out. In earlier times, even brothers and fathers were slaughtered to make sure there is no claimant to the throne. The same primitive logic seems to be working behind the attempt to create a campaign of hate towards Muslims.

The gist of Hindutva philosophy that was formulated by Hedgewar and Golwalker in the dying years of British colonialism, to forestall the coming to power of Muslims again, is to divide and destroy Muslims of the subcontinent in a very sophisticated, multi-pronged and structured manner to 'liberate' India for the exclusive and unchallenged rule of Aryans/Brahmins. Muslims may live in India, but not as Muslims, or rulers, or high castes, but as shudras owing allegiance to Aryan/Brahmins and their dictats, at the sole pleasure of the Aryans/Brahmins, the unchallenged spokesmen of a contrived majority.Ignored generally is the fact that Muslims are not poised to challenge the Aryans/Brahmins in any thought out strategies to take over India in a competitive leadership contest, ----- simply because they lack motivations and ambitions; and are not really the progeny of 'Babar' as is erroneously made out. In fact, majority of them are the real sons of the soil. However, as Muslims, they are not prepared to change their religious and psychological sense of identities, anytime soon. The more they are subjected to Gujarat like pogrom, the more they will be forced to mobilise their faculties to secure a safe place in the polity; ----- but that could never be at the cost of their allegiance to Islam and their aspiration to remain part of the international brotherhood of Muslim Umma.The current ruling class will have to come to terms with them and could positively co-opt them with all their bag and baggage, specially in view of the potentials of their global lines of communication in this age of globalisation. Being intellectually more resilient and flexible, the task is not beyond them. Given cooler heads, Muslims could become India's biggest assets.

Hindus should stop hating Muslims.
 
.
Attitude towards religious freedom

Mahmud, according to several contemporary accounts, considered himself a Ghazi who waged jihad on the Hindus. His plunder of Hindu temples and centers of learning is noted later in the article. Al-Biruni writes:
"In the interest of his successors he constructed, in order to weaken the Indian frontier, those roads on which afterwards his son Mahmud marched into India during a period of thirty years and more. God be merciful to both father and son! Mahmud utterly ruined the prosperity of the country, and performed there wonderful exploits, by which the Hindus became like atoms of dust scattered in all directions, and like a tale of old in the mouth of the people. Their scattered remains cherish, of course, the most inveterate aversion towards all Muslims. This is the reason, too, why Hindu sciences have retired far away from those parts of the country conquered by us, and have fled to places which our hand cannot yet reach, to Kashmir, Benares, and other places. And there the antagonism between them and all foreigners receives more and more nourishment both from political and religious sources."[12]

Various historical sources such as Martin Ewans, E.J. Brill and Farishta have recorded the introduction of Islam to Kabul and other parts of Afghanistan to the invasions of Mahmud of Ghazna
“ The Arabs advanced through Sistan and conquered Sindh early in the eighth century . Elsewhere however their incursions were no more than temporary , and it was not until the rise of the Saffarid dynasty in the ninth century that the frontiers of Islam effectively reached Ghazni and Kabul . Even then a Hindu dynasty the Hindushahis , held Gandhara and eastern borders .From the tenth century onwards as Persian language and culture continued to spread into Afghanistan , the focus of power shifted to Ghazni , where a Turkish dynasty , who started by ruling the town for the Samanid dynasty of Bokhara , proceeded to create an empire in their own right. The greatest of the Ghaznavids was Muhmad who ruled between 998 and 1030. He expelled the Hindus from Gandhara (Afghanistan) , made no fewer than 17 raids into India ,[13] ”
“ He encouraged mass conversions to Islam , in India as well as in Afghanistan [14] ”


Attack on 'Kafiristan' :
“ Another crusade against idolatry was at length resolved on; and Mahmud led the seventh one against Nardain, the then boundary of India, or the eastern part of the Hindu Kush; separating as Firishta says, the countries of Hindustan and Turkistan and remarkable for its excellent fruit. The country into which the army of Ghazni marched appears to have been the same as that now called Kafirstan, where the inhabitants were and still are, idolaters and are named the Siah-Posh, or black-vested by the Muslims of later times. In Nardain there was a temple, which the army of Ghazni destroyed; and brought from thence a stone covered with certain inscriptions, which were according to the Hindus, of great antiquity[15] ”
Massacres of Ismailis : In 965 CE, Multan was conquered by Halam b. Shayban, an Ismaili da’i. Soon after, Multan was attacked by the Ghaznavids, destabilizing the Ismaili state. Mahmud of Ghazna invaded Multan in 1005 CE, conducting a series of campaigns during which the Ismailis of Multan were massacred.[16]
[edit]Destruction of Krishna Janmabhoomi Temple

Mahmud of Ghazni destroyed important Hindu shrine- Krishna Janmabhoomi Temple (known as Kesava Deo Temple) in 1017 AD along with several other Hindu and Buddhist temples in the holy city of Mathura.[17][18]

Destruction of Somnath Temple
Mahmud of Ghazni destroyed and looted one of the most sacred temple of Hindus- Somnath Temple in 1025 AD[20] killing over 50,000 people who tried to defend it.[21]The defenders included the 90-year-old clan leader Ghogha Rana. Ghazni personally broke the gilded lingam to pieces. He took them back to his homeland and placed them in the steps leading to the newly built Jamiah Masjid, so that they would be stepped upon by those going to the mosque to pray.[21][22]
The following extract is from “Wonders of Things Created, and marvels of Things Existing” by Asaru-L- Bilad, a 13th century Arab geographer. It contains the description of Somnath temple and its destruction:[23]

“Somnath: celebrated city of India, situated on the shore of the sea, and washed by its waves. Among the wonders of that place was the temple in which was placed the idol called Somnath. This idol was in the middle of the temple without anything to support it from below, or to suspend it from above. It was held in the highest honor among the Hindus, and whoever beheld it floating in the air was struck with amazement, whether he was a Musulman or an infidel. The Hindus used to go on pilgrimage to it whenever there was an eclipse of the moon, and would then assemble there to the number of more than a hundred thousand."
“When the Sultan Yaminu-d Daula Mahmud Bin Subuktigin (Mahmud of Ghazni) went to wage religious war against India, he made great efforts to capture and destroy Somnath, in the hope that the Hindus would then become Muhammadans. As a result thousands of Hindus were forcibly converted to Islam. He arrived there in the middle of Zi-l k’ada, 416 A.H. (December, 1025 A.D.). “The king looked upon the idol with wonder, and gave orders for the seizing of the spoil, and the appropriation of the treasures. There were many idols of gold and silver and vessels set with jewels, all of which had been sent there by the greatest personages in India. The value of the things found in the temples of the idols exceeded twenty thousand dinars."[24]

More at:

Mahmud of Ghazni - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
.
Hindus should stop hating Muslims.



I think this will be more appropriate.

Muslims should stop hating Hindus
 
.
This thread is now about Coke vs Pepsi.


Go! :D
 
.
Ok i do not know what is the significance of this thread, but I am a Hindu and I do not hate any muslims. I have many friends who follow islam and they too don't hate me because I am a Hindu.

In India, Hindu Vs Muslim is a political stunt which political parties play for its vote bank. Simple.
 
.
Not relevant as such to Pakistan's current social status..
also holds the potential of being a pure flame thread..
Closed.
 
.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom