11-09-2003, 09:46 AM
Cowassjee publishes in his column letters from two Indians.
Hindus and Muslims - II
By Ardeshir Cowasjee
[url="http://www.dawn.com/weekly/cowas/cowas.htm"]http://www.dawn.com/weekly/cowas/cowas.htm[/url]
When writing under such a title and on such a contentious issue one should not be surprised at the reactions prompted. Sixty-six e-mails from everywhere other than Pakistan poured in. Most were repetitious from Hindus in India and from Hindu expatriates in other countries. Excerpts from a couple of reactions from our Hindu friends are illustrative.
One strong reaction from a seemingly rather rabid and unforgiving Hindu from India:
"Your column is misleading in its primary emphasis that historians in independent India deliberately twist history to portray Muslims as congenitally ill-disposed to Hindus.
"There is incontrovertible evidence that Mahmud [Ghaznavi] attacked the famous Somnath temple 11 times and pillaged it at will. [Mohammad Ghori] was repulsed several times by Prithviraj Chauhan before he was betrayed and captured. [Ghori] dragged him in chains to Afghanistan, blinded and killed him. Prithviraj's grave is still in Kabul awaiting consecration by an Indian government - that will show enough pride in its heroes who had the courage to stand up to Muslim marauders.
"The slave dynasty that ruled Delhi was the first that directly targeted Hindus by levying the hated poll tax, jizia, for the first time. Most Muslim rulers of India, one exception being Akbar, subsequently levied Jizia.
"The Bahmanis who ruled in the Deccan ensured that all Hindu temples were razed to the ground after they overran the Vijaynagar Empire in 1565 AD. For over three centuries, there was no worship at the famous temple of Lord Venkateshwara in Tirupathi as Hindus wanted to protect it from Muslim plunder and desecration.
"The Tipu Sultan you speak about so proudly was instrumental in forcibly converting over 10,000 Hindus in the Mysore kingdom to Islam, besides taking several Hindu mistresses more out of spite rather than mere sexual gratification. And he made Urdu the so-called court language. Even I, then a resident of Mysore, had to study Urdu as my first language when I started school in 1947!! It was abolished only in 1950 when the princely state of Mysore became part of the Indian Republic.
"Only the deliberately blind would fail to see the desecration of Hindu temples in Varanasi where the tyrant Aurangzeb deliberately built the Gyan Vapi mosque on the half razed Lord Shiva's temple lest Hindus ever forget their subjugated status. Babar's general Mir Baqui razed Lord Rama's temple at Ayodhya and built the Babri mosque that was destroyed in December 1992 by Hindu fanatics. And in Mathura the very same Aurangzeb built a mosque next to Lord Krishna's birthplace. Every Hindu's blood boils when he sees these atrocities being 'preserved' till today. After independence it was at Sardar Patel's insistence (and notwithstanding Nehru's opposition) that the Somnath temple was rebuilt and reconsecrated. Would any other country have countenanced such assault on its heritage? And would attempts to redeem their pride, self-esteem and past glory be deemed revanchist and anti-secular?
"Nehru had nothing but contempt for Hindus. His 'secularist' pretensions meant irreligion at its most benign and constant search for 'Hindu fundamentalists' at its most virulent. He could get the Hindu Code Bill (which overturned the centuries old Manu Dharma Shastra which governed Hindu personal law) made into law despite opposition from conservative Hindu leaders like President Rajendra Prasad. This was indeed a very progressive move as it gave Hindu women several rights (widow remarriage, divorce rights, equality in inheritance). Yet the same Nehru balked at making any changes in Muslim and Christian personal laws as he was scared of inviting a backlash!! So even today Muslim personal laws in India are far more obscurantist (i.e. against the interests of women) than those prevailing in even Pakistan (triple talaq, no rights for divorced women, polygamy for men without any hindrance).
"Nehru and his successors in the Congress party were tolerant of Muslim communalism considering it no more than a minority trying to feel secure!! Today this very same Muslim communalism has taken the form of radical Islamization, harbouring of Pakistani terrorists and a defiant display of Islamic identity as separate from mainstream Indian identity that members of all other religions follow. No wonder this gave rise to Hindu counter-terrorism and being far fewer in numbers and blinded by fanaticism (where calm thinking is a casualty) Muslims in India invariably get the stick in every violent confrontation.
"Which textbook in which school in modern India portrays Muslims as violent, fanatical villains as you claim? Unless to you the chronicling of the atrocities perpetuated by Muslim rulers before the arrival of the British is itself taboo. People are not so naove that they do not know (or wish to know) the evil deeds of their forefathers.
"India has more Muslims than ... Pakistan. India is an open, secular, liberal democracy. Muslims, who were 3.5 crores in number in 1947, today number 13 crores. They are represented in all walks of life and are equal citizens along with Hindus. Only those Muslims who kept out of the mainstream, shunned modern education and stuck to orthodoxy remain poor and incapable of securing gainful employment (like those who enrol in your madrassahs). Muslims, who embraced modern education, did not wallow in self-pity nor pine for Pakistan, prospered. They knew that Pakistan was the greatest source of misery for them as it tried very hard to infiltrate them with ISI-trained agents and lured them to commit terrorist activities. Many impressionable Muslims fell prey to these Paki designs and paid through their lives, having been shot by the police / army or lynched by Hindu fanatics.
"But what is Pakistan's record in treating the unfortunate Hindus who remained in Pakistan after 1947? From one crore then, their population is now about 10 lakhs. What happened? Answer - these hapless Hindus were brutally raped, murdered, forcibly converted and many driven out! The venom that is now poured about Hindus in your school textbooks is to instil among Paki kids permanent hatred about India. To Pakistan, India is synonymous with Hindus - ignoring its 13 crore Muslims, 2.5 crore Christians. Lip sympathy is expressed in Pakistan for the so-called 'plight' of Indian Muslims.
"Unfortunately, Pakistan's designs are not working out as planned as the world, post-9/11, is a very different place. The financial support the Saudis have been giving Pakistan to build its nuclear bombs, its madrasshas and creating Frankensteins like Osama and the Taliban is now dwindling. The whole world categorizes all Muslims as terrorists, actual or potential - unjustly perhaps, but in times like these reason is the first casualty."
And one from a young Indian student in a foreign land :
"It'd be nice if we can hark back to the 1971-87 era when Kashmir was put on the back burner. The only practical solution to the Kashmir dispute appears to be the conversion of the LoC into [an] international border. The Indian political leadership... across all party lines is more or less prepared for this solution, but the Pak military wants the Kashmir Valley. A lot of Indians are against this idea because that would be tantamount to polarizing the people on communal lines. It would have an impact on the rest of India. The Hindus would blame the Muslims and God knows what would happen then.
"We in India are inclined to believe that all Pakistanis are Jihadis. If that notion is incorrect, it would be a good idea for quite a few of us non-Muslims to visit Pakistan and see for ourselves.
"But first, terrorism has to stop. Quite a few Pakistanis are convinced that Kashmir would be in the headlines only through terrorism. Maybe that's true, but at what cost? I still can't understand how people can kill just to gain a place in heaven and courting death in the process. Terrorism hasn't been able to retard India's progress; in fact, in the last 10 years we have grown as never before. It's Pakistan that's feeling the pinch and keeps needing begging bowls and bailout packages.
"I'm afraid I'm only a student and not a policymaker, not even a media person. But I know that there are quite a few students like me spread over all of India... who aren't swallowed by anti-Pakistan sentiment. That's because of our liberal education policy where rational thinking is encouraged. I'd like to know how many Pakistani students share similar ideas."
A good sign - the Indian youngsters are more tolerant, they have more hope than have their parents' generation. And on the count of a 'liberal education policy', it would seem that India is ahead of us.
Hindus and Muslims - II
By Ardeshir Cowasjee
[url="http://www.dawn.com/weekly/cowas/cowas.htm"]http://www.dawn.com/weekly/cowas/cowas.htm[/url]
When writing under such a title and on such a contentious issue one should not be surprised at the reactions prompted. Sixty-six e-mails from everywhere other than Pakistan poured in. Most were repetitious from Hindus in India and from Hindu expatriates in other countries. Excerpts from a couple of reactions from our Hindu friends are illustrative.
One strong reaction from a seemingly rather rabid and unforgiving Hindu from India:
"Your column is misleading in its primary emphasis that historians in independent India deliberately twist history to portray Muslims as congenitally ill-disposed to Hindus.
"There is incontrovertible evidence that Mahmud [Ghaznavi] attacked the famous Somnath temple 11 times and pillaged it at will. [Mohammad Ghori] was repulsed several times by Prithviraj Chauhan before he was betrayed and captured. [Ghori] dragged him in chains to Afghanistan, blinded and killed him. Prithviraj's grave is still in Kabul awaiting consecration by an Indian government - that will show enough pride in its heroes who had the courage to stand up to Muslim marauders.
"The slave dynasty that ruled Delhi was the first that directly targeted Hindus by levying the hated poll tax, jizia, for the first time. Most Muslim rulers of India, one exception being Akbar, subsequently levied Jizia.
"The Bahmanis who ruled in the Deccan ensured that all Hindu temples were razed to the ground after they overran the Vijaynagar Empire in 1565 AD. For over three centuries, there was no worship at the famous temple of Lord Venkateshwara in Tirupathi as Hindus wanted to protect it from Muslim plunder and desecration.
"The Tipu Sultan you speak about so proudly was instrumental in forcibly converting over 10,000 Hindus in the Mysore kingdom to Islam, besides taking several Hindu mistresses more out of spite rather than mere sexual gratification. And he made Urdu the so-called court language. Even I, then a resident of Mysore, had to study Urdu as my first language when I started school in 1947!! It was abolished only in 1950 when the princely state of Mysore became part of the Indian Republic.
"Only the deliberately blind would fail to see the desecration of Hindu temples in Varanasi where the tyrant Aurangzeb deliberately built the Gyan Vapi mosque on the half razed Lord Shiva's temple lest Hindus ever forget their subjugated status. Babar's general Mir Baqui razed Lord Rama's temple at Ayodhya and built the Babri mosque that was destroyed in December 1992 by Hindu fanatics. And in Mathura the very same Aurangzeb built a mosque next to Lord Krishna's birthplace. Every Hindu's blood boils when he sees these atrocities being 'preserved' till today. After independence it was at Sardar Patel's insistence (and notwithstanding Nehru's opposition) that the Somnath temple was rebuilt and reconsecrated. Would any other country have countenanced such assault on its heritage? And would attempts to redeem their pride, self-esteem and past glory be deemed revanchist and anti-secular?
"Nehru had nothing but contempt for Hindus. His 'secularist' pretensions meant irreligion at its most benign and constant search for 'Hindu fundamentalists' at its most virulent. He could get the Hindu Code Bill (which overturned the centuries old Manu Dharma Shastra which governed Hindu personal law) made into law despite opposition from conservative Hindu leaders like President Rajendra Prasad. This was indeed a very progressive move as it gave Hindu women several rights (widow remarriage, divorce rights, equality in inheritance). Yet the same Nehru balked at making any changes in Muslim and Christian personal laws as he was scared of inviting a backlash!! So even today Muslim personal laws in India are far more obscurantist (i.e. against the interests of women) than those prevailing in even Pakistan (triple talaq, no rights for divorced women, polygamy for men without any hindrance).
"Nehru and his successors in the Congress party were tolerant of Muslim communalism considering it no more than a minority trying to feel secure!! Today this very same Muslim communalism has taken the form of radical Islamization, harbouring of Pakistani terrorists and a defiant display of Islamic identity as separate from mainstream Indian identity that members of all other religions follow. No wonder this gave rise to Hindu counter-terrorism and being far fewer in numbers and blinded by fanaticism (where calm thinking is a casualty) Muslims in India invariably get the stick in every violent confrontation.
"Which textbook in which school in modern India portrays Muslims as violent, fanatical villains as you claim? Unless to you the chronicling of the atrocities perpetuated by Muslim rulers before the arrival of the British is itself taboo. People are not so naove that they do not know (or wish to know) the evil deeds of their forefathers.
"India has more Muslims than ... Pakistan. India is an open, secular, liberal democracy. Muslims, who were 3.5 crores in number in 1947, today number 13 crores. They are represented in all walks of life and are equal citizens along with Hindus. Only those Muslims who kept out of the mainstream, shunned modern education and stuck to orthodoxy remain poor and incapable of securing gainful employment (like those who enrol in your madrassahs). Muslims, who embraced modern education, did not wallow in self-pity nor pine for Pakistan, prospered. They knew that Pakistan was the greatest source of misery for them as it tried very hard to infiltrate them with ISI-trained agents and lured them to commit terrorist activities. Many impressionable Muslims fell prey to these Paki designs and paid through their lives, having been shot by the police / army or lynched by Hindu fanatics.
"But what is Pakistan's record in treating the unfortunate Hindus who remained in Pakistan after 1947? From one crore then, their population is now about 10 lakhs. What happened? Answer - these hapless Hindus were brutally raped, murdered, forcibly converted and many driven out! The venom that is now poured about Hindus in your school textbooks is to instil among Paki kids permanent hatred about India. To Pakistan, India is synonymous with Hindus - ignoring its 13 crore Muslims, 2.5 crore Christians. Lip sympathy is expressed in Pakistan for the so-called 'plight' of Indian Muslims.
"Unfortunately, Pakistan's designs are not working out as planned as the world, post-9/11, is a very different place. The financial support the Saudis have been giving Pakistan to build its nuclear bombs, its madrasshas and creating Frankensteins like Osama and the Taliban is now dwindling. The whole world categorizes all Muslims as terrorists, actual or potential - unjustly perhaps, but in times like these reason is the first casualty."
And one from a young Indian student in a foreign land :
"It'd be nice if we can hark back to the 1971-87 era when Kashmir was put on the back burner. The only practical solution to the Kashmir dispute appears to be the conversion of the LoC into [an] international border. The Indian political leadership... across all party lines is more or less prepared for this solution, but the Pak military wants the Kashmir Valley. A lot of Indians are against this idea because that would be tantamount to polarizing the people on communal lines. It would have an impact on the rest of India. The Hindus would blame the Muslims and God knows what would happen then.
"We in India are inclined to believe that all Pakistanis are Jihadis. If that notion is incorrect, it would be a good idea for quite a few of us non-Muslims to visit Pakistan and see for ourselves.
"But first, terrorism has to stop. Quite a few Pakistanis are convinced that Kashmir would be in the headlines only through terrorism. Maybe that's true, but at what cost? I still can't understand how people can kill just to gain a place in heaven and courting death in the process. Terrorism hasn't been able to retard India's progress; in fact, in the last 10 years we have grown as never before. It's Pakistan that's feeling the pinch and keeps needing begging bowls and bailout packages.
"I'm afraid I'm only a student and not a policymaker, not even a media person. But I know that there are quite a few students like me spread over all of India... who aren't swallowed by anti-Pakistan sentiment. That's because of our liberal education policy where rational thinking is encouraged. I'd like to know how many Pakistani students share similar ideas."
A good sign - the Indian youngsters are more tolerant, they have more hope than have their parents' generation. And on the count of a 'liberal education policy', it would seem that India is ahead of us.