FACTS againest MYTHS V0L-VI-8-2000.pdf
Media
- extracted text
-
VIKAS ADIIYAYAN KENDRA
Vol VI #8/2000
INFORMATION BULLETIN
©arfe bra or foundations of 5t|itcretism
Atijtfis on Atedievaf History — Fart J
R'diti Piittiyani
COMMENT
ommunalism derives its sustenance from also
C
the mythical projection of history. One
witnesses today the gross abuse of history in
the spread of communal hatred towards the ‘other’. It
is THE favourite weapon in the hands of those rooting
their politics on the hatred of others’ religions. Muslim
and Hindu communal forces, in contrast to the
nationalist forces, resorted to the gross communal
interpretation of history. “Our past it seems has never
been as crucial for our present and future as it appears
now. History - the image of the past - is being
conveniently and indiscriminately used for political
myth-making. They have comparisons between the
od” British rule and “bad” Muslim rule.” (Habib, TOI,
rch 13, 1994) It is another matter that the Muslim
ruling clans were socially mixed up with the local elite
and the synthetic culture evolved in contrast to the
British who remained socially aloof from the locals!.
Neither did Muslim rulers repatriate the wealth of the
country as the British rulers.
S
Since the two contesting streams of communalism
were Hindu and Muslim ones, the major period of
history, which has been subjected to such gross abuse,
is the medieval period when in major part of the country
the Mughal emperors ruled. The same period of history
is interpreted in two contrasting ways. While Muslim
communal historians glorify, Hindu communal historians
and the imperial historians project it as a period of
tyranny of Muslims over Hindus. While the former
project Aurangzeb as the greatest Muslim King
upholding the values of Islam, the latter see him as
the most bigoted and cruel king in India’s history.
Chausalkar observes, “The communalists used the
history as the opium of the people. They build up
illusions of great past". Similarly Prof. Arjun Dev writes
‘The two antagonistic communal trends complemented
each other, each finding in Aurangzeb justification of
his variety of communalism; the Hindu communalists
by believing that Aurangzeb’s fanaticism was the final
proof of irreconcilability of Hindus and Muslims. The
Muslim communalists found him to be the pious
Muslim who in a way laid the foundation of Pakistan.”
(quoted in Chausalkar)
Above all, communal historians, to justify their
concocted version of history also associate the stigma
of ‘Untouchability’ as the creation of the Muslims! The
myth is propagated very particularly by ideologues of
the Sangh Parivar, in pursuance of their political project
of denigrating Islam and Muslims. The vile propaganda
is an ulterior motive co-opting the Dalits and sections
of ‘low castes’ into their fold primarily for electoral gains.
The logic of Sangh ideologues borders on outright
mauling of history, showing their ‘capacity’ to distort
history to no end, to suit Sangh Parivars’ (SP) political
agenda.” Singhal (Sunday Observer, 30-7-95) in his
interview shows his ‘understanding’ of history as follows:
“all communities were equal and enjoyed the same
rightstill the advent of Islamic and Christian rule.
Humiliation began to be heaped only after the Islamic
invasion of our country. It was because of the repression
of different communities that fought the Islamic invaders
and defied conversion to Islam that they had to suffer
humiliation and torture. These communities were
uprooted from their home and hearth for defying the
Q FACTS against MYTHS-Vol VI #8/2000
£-7Q FOR PRIVATE CIRCULATION ONLY
invaders, and not giving up their religion, they became
poor (and) came to be treated as untouchables”
This quote demonstrates the depths to which the
ideologues of Sangh Parivar can stoop to ‘doctor’
mass-consciousness in a communal direction. In fact,
the truth is something, which exposes the brutality of
Brahminical ideology, which is at the core of Hindutva
onslaught.
MYTH: Indian culture was and is basically a Hindu
culture and had always been so but for the invasion.
of alien Islamic and Christian cultures.
FACT: On the contrary, Indian culture and civilisation
is a pluralistc one, encompassing the cultural diversity
of the country, incorporating and drawing deeply from
all those people, who migrated and settled here. Even
amongst Hindus there are multiple sects and culture
is not uniform. Only the culture of the elite is being
projected to be “the” Hindu culture at the exclusion of
the culture of the downtrodden. Let us see:
Right since ancient times an extensive trade and
commerce prevailed between the inhabitants on the
Malabar coast and Arabs on the East African coast.
India’s contact with Islam was first through Arab traders.
Many a coastal king had erected mosques for worship
of these traders and for the local Muslim community,
evolving through interaction with Arabs. The later arrival
of the Mughals on the political arena led to multiple
changes. Like any other rulers Mughals were ruthless
exploiters and tyrants who used coercion as well as
ideological maneuvers to govern. The impact of Islam
and Mughal culture, however, led to a cultural
synthesis i.e., the emergence of Hindustani culture, in
all the fields: music, sculpture, architecture, literature,
fine arts and so on. At the religious level Islam and
local Hindu traditions interacted and strengthened each
other. Sufi Saints and Bhakti Cults, both were very
popular amongst subalterns.
Sufis were more tilted towards the spiritual side of
Islam. They had to oppose the orthodox Ulema of Islam
(those learned in Islamic Theology) who were close to
the elite and power centres. These Sufis were close to
Christians and Jew mystics and also to the spirituality
of some Hindu sects. Moinuddin Ibn Arabi founded the
doctrine of Wahadat-AI-Wajud (i.e. Unity of being,),
promoting spiritual universalism and demolished the
barriers of caste and creed. It preached that a real
being is one and we are all His manifestations. Baba
Farid of Punjab wrote his poetry in Punjabi and his
verses were quoted in the Adi Granth, (Granth Saheb)
by Guru Nanak.
Mir Miyan another Sufi saint was requested to lay the
foundation stone of Harmandir in Golden Temple.
Sayyid Waris Shah wrote Hir Ranzha, greatest classic
of medieval Punjabi literature. Despite the personal
belief in the ‘one Allah’, according to Islam Nizamuddin
Awliya that as per the Islamic understanding there are
FACTS against MYTHS - Vol VI# 8/2000
as many ways of worshipping God as particles of sand.
He was fond of Bhajans and Kawwali. Once whilst
passing through bank of Jamuna in Dehli, accompanied
by his celebrated disciple and noted poet, Khoosro,
they saw some Hindu women bathing in Jamuna,
offering prayers to the Sun. Hazrat said “O Khoosro
these women are also praying to Allah. They have their
own way of praying”.
Sheikh Moinuddin Chishti was a great Sufi saint with a
large following amongst both communities. While
Ulema and Brahmins looked down upon others’ mode
of worship, Sufi and Bhakti Saints modified and
integrated these modes into a new synthetic
expression. They respected others’ spiritual practices,
and were away from power centers. Dara Shikoh was
a great scholar and he wrote a book called Majamaul- Baharayn (meeting of two great oceans, Hinduism
and Islam)
MYTH: The rich mosaic and wealth of Indian
literature is a legacy purely of the Hindus and Hindu
civilisation.
FACT: On the contrary! It is again hard to find anv^
reasoned basis for taking a “two nation" view of Hind^
and Muslims.The heritage of contemporary India
combines Islamic influences with Hindu and other
traditions, and the results of their interaction can be
seen in literature and the arts like music, painting,
architecture, any many other fields. For instance, Indian
literature witnessed a number of synthetic trends during
this era. Shaikh Mohammed wrote Marathi poetry.
Shivaji’s guru, Ramdas, was all praise for Sheikh
Mohhamed about whom he wrote- “Glory to Shaikh
Mohammad: You alone unfold the mystery of the
universe in such diction that baffles the reason and
logic of ordinary mortal. You have truly perceived the
fundamental unity and identity of the entire universe.”
Malik Mohamad Jayasi was a great poet of Avadhi and
wrote the classic” Padmavat." Abdur Rahim Khan-eKhan was a Hindi poet in the court of Akbar. Obviously,
there is no communal line dividing Indian literature and
the arts, setting Hindus and Muslims on separate sid^x
The tradition of integrated work continues strai^F
through to modem art forms, such as the cinema, where
Muslims and Hindus are thoroughly integrated; even
films on Hindu religious themes, both past and present,
frequently have Muslim actors and actresses.
MYTH: Hindus and Muslims have always been aloof
and thereby hostile to each other.
FACT: It is true that the elite among these
communities, given their vested interests, looked down
on the other communities and religions. On the other
hand, the poor in both communities visited pilgrimage
sites and venerated the holy seers irrespective of their
religious affiliations or persuasion.
Kabir had a large following amongst poor Muslims and
Hindus. He criticised the orthodoxy of both the Ulema
2
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
5
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Mazhar Jan-i-Jana said that Beda (Veda) was this revealed book of God and Ram and Krishna must have
been prophets of God.
Ramanand founded the Bhakti movement, propounded the devotion to Ram and threw open the doors of
his circle to all the low caste men and women and also to Muslims. Tulsidas was an ardent devotee of
Ram, in fact the greatest ‘Ram devotee’ of all the times. He wrote his literature not in Sanskrit, but in
popular Avadhi Language, so that it is accessible to all the people. Because of this he was not well
accepted amongst other elite saints of his time. He used to live in Ayodhya in a mosque.
A Slave of Rama is Tulsi
Whatever they say, let them say
On alms I live, the Mosque is my refuge
My give-and-take with this world is done!
TULSIDASA
from 'Kavitavall
and the Brahmins and pointed out that Ram, Rahim,
Allah and Hari are the expressions of the same spiritual
energy. As different ornaments are made from the same
gold so are these holy seers, the outer manifestation
of same divine power.
^uru Nanak founded a new religious movement blending
the concept of Unity of God, which was closely allied
to the Islamic concept with Hindu doctrine of rebirth,
moral and spiritual reform. Abul Fazal in Ain-i-Akbari
wrote that the king should be above all religious
differences and see to it that religious considerations
do not come in the way of duty, which he owes to
every class and every country. Under his all-embracing
care everyone should find peace and happiness so that
the benefits conferred by the shadow of God are
Universal.
To be more specific, there are records that document
how the first Muslim scholars came to India before the
advent of any Muslim ruler, in the spirit of learning rather
than as conquerors. These scholars carried back from
India several works of wisdom and these were then
FACTS against MYTHS - Vol VI # 8/2000
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
translated into Arabic. Acknowledging this intellectual
gift, Arab author Yaquibi wrote in 895: ‘The Hindus are
superior to all other nations in intelligence and
thoughtfulness. They are more exact in astronomy and
astrology than any other people. The Brahma Sidhanta
is a good proof of their intellectual powers. By this
book the Greeks and the Persians have also profited”.
Another Arab historian Qazi Said wrote, ‘The Hindus
have always been considered by all other people as
the custodians of learning and wisdom”.
Thus, the very first contacts were favourable, and these
were strengthened subsequently at the upper level by
certain liberal policies initiated by Akbar and retained
by several Muslim rulers of the smaller kingdoms such
as Bijapur, Mysore and Oudh. Akbar had initiated many
good traditions. He respected and listened to the view
of learned men from several religions including Hindus,
Muslims, Sikhs, Christians and others. He gave liberal
grants for the maintenance of Hindu temples. He even
launched a translations department to get the
Ramayana, the Mahabharata and the Bible translated
into Persian.More important, at the grassroots level,
these ties were strengthened by the Bhakti
and Sufi movements.
In the Deccan kingdoms, a 16th century king
Ail Shah followed a similar path. He
established a very good library to look after
which he appointed a Sanskrit scholar Vaman
Pandit. His descendent Ibrahim Adil Shah
was called the ‘Friend of the Poor’ and world’s
teacher due to his policies of benevolence
and goodwill. In his songs he often pays
respects to Saraswati, the Goddess of
Learning. He plays an important role in the
development of some Hindu religious places.
►►
r
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Then they also have built Tajmahal, Kutubminar,
Charminar
IVe gave Kalidas, Banbhatta, Ravindranath
We gave Jayadev, Kumar Gandharva, Bhimsen Joshi,
Jasraj
We gave Sahgal, Hemant, Lata
|
They gave Rafi, Noorjahan, Naushad
- Alok Bhattcharya
I
In Bengal, Nathan kings like Sultan Nazir Shah
and Sultan Hussein Shah followed similar policies
and arranged for the translation of the Mahabharata
and Bhagwat Puran into Bengali;
►►
Of great relevance was the impact of the Bhakti
and Sufi movements at the grassroots level. These
troubadours and poets spoke out against the
artificial and ritualistic divisions among
communities and in favour of the basic unity of all
religions.
Thus, despite several adverse setbacks and conflicts,
a certain integration and assimilation of Hindu and
Muslim population was taking place before the advent
of British colonial rule. For instance, despite the
colonial policy of divide and rule, this integration could
be seen in the 1897 uprising against British rule in
which Hindus united with Muslims to evict the colonial
rulers. While Hindu rebels accepted King Bahadur Shah
Zafar, the last Mungal ruler as their king, the Muslim
rebels, as a mark of respect of Hindus, banned cow
slaughter in the areas which were liberated for some
time.
A governor of the Vijanagar Empire at
Mangalore committed some excesses and
managed four mosques. On being informed
of this, the Officer in Charge of the empire,
Baicheya Dannayaka and to Emperor
Devaraya II, they ordered payment of
compensation to the Muslims and repaired the
mosques;
The Portuguese visitor, Barbosa, who visited
the Vijaanagar empire between 1512-14 said,
“The King allows such freedom that everyman
may come and go and live according to his
own creed without suffering any annoyance
FACTS against MYTHS - Vol VI # 8/2000
|
They gave Bade Ghulam AH Khan, BismiIla Khan, Dagar |
Bandhu
|
►►
►►
■
They also gave Khusaro, Galib, Firaq
In Kashmir, the 15th century king Zain-ulAbdin sent messengers to call Hindus
who had fled due to the intolerant policies
of a predecessor. He was scholar of
Sanskrit as well as Persian, and played an
important role in translating parts of the Upanishads
into Persian. He publicly participated in Hindu
festivals and constructed temples.
►►
I
If we have made Ajanta-Allora- Konark
and without any enquiry, whether he is a
Christian, Jew, Moor or Heathen”;
►►
Bahmani Sultan Alla-ud-Din II (1436-58) was
devoted to Narasimha Saraswati, a great Hindu
rishi. Ibrahim II, the Adilshahi ruler of Bijapur
(1580-1686) was also a devotee of Narasimi^
Saraswati. He built a small shrine near his'
place in Bijapur and placed the paduka
(footwear) of the saint here.
MYTH: Urdu is an alien language and all the Muslim
invaders used either Urdu or Persian.
FACT: On the contrary Urdu was a language, which
arose as an interaction of Persian and Hindi. This
language evolved in 13th century as a mixture of Persian
dialect with western Hindi spoken in and around Delhi.
This dialect was initially called Hindavi, Hindi, or
Hindustani and later it was called as Urdu. Raja
Todarmal, Akbar’s finance minister ordered that all the
accounts and correspondence to be kept in Persian.
Mullah Abdul Kadir Badaunni in cooperation with Hindu
Pundits translated Athrva Veda and Ramayana into
Persian. Greatest writers of Persian in Medieval India
were Abdul Fazl, Munshi Harakram, Chandrabhan
Brahman, and Munshi Madhav Ram etc.
9)
During Mughal times Persian was used in government
offices where large number of employees were Hindus.
In those times department of literary skills Dar-ul-insha
[secretariat] was mainly manned by Hindus, and the
word Munshi means a Hindu who could write good
Persian.
Even in architecture the interaction resulted in lot of
synthetic developments. Mughal architechtureral is a
mix of Persian and Hindu styles. Jama Masjid [Fatehpur
Sikri], gates [medieval period] and domes were built in
Jain style. Domes of the Mosque of Mount Abu are
also in Jain style. Mughal or Hindustani style can be
seen in palaces of Raja of Chatarpur, memorials of
Ranjit Singh [Lahore], and palace of Maharaja
Bakhtavar Singh in Alwar.
4
MYTH: Islam was preached and people converted
to Islam at the point of the sword!
FACT: Conversions were not the aim of Kings (except
Ashoka). Formation of Muslim community took place
in various stages. It first started emerging along Malabar
coast when the Arab seafarers came to trade during
7th Century AD. They had a religious influence and
many people through their interaction adopted Islam.
Arab army conquered Sind early in 8th century, but it
had a marginal impact on the society as far as
conversions are concerned. The 11th and 12th
Centuries Turkish invasion brought in a larger influence
of Islam. Initially this resulted in emergence of Muslim
military aristocracy. But this spread was restricted in
numbers. Another small trickle came from Hindu upperclasses, some of whom became Muslims either out of
conviction, or (mainly) out of hope of reward from the
Muslim ruler.
The main conversions among poor low caste
untouchables were severly oppressed by the upper
caste Brahmins and Brahminism. To quote Vivekanand
“Why amongst the poor of India so many are
^ohammadens? It is nonsense to say that the sword
Wbnverted them. It was to gain liberty from Zamindars
and Priests...” (Collected Works- Vol. 8- Page 330).
Later the converts swelled in number due to the impact
of Sufi saints, who used local customs and rituals to
propound humanistic aspects of Islam.
Finally, as Amarjeet Singh maintains in the journal,
Spectrum (January 1994), Muslim invasions failed to
vanquish cultural traditions that had grown and struck
deep roots over centuries in Indian soil. To reiterate
the initial clash inevitably led to co-existence and even
synthesis. Muslim rulers came to consider India as
their home and this resulted in the fusion of Hinduism
and Islam. The end result was a characteristic IndoIslamic culture by setting into motion the gradual
Indiansation of Islam, which positively emerged from
the 13th century onwards and went on till early 19,h
century. This assimilative process got manifested in
wery realm and sphere of Indian life and culture -tanging from the folk traditions of poetry and drama to
the architectural designs and culinary skills and the
art-forms of dance, music and theatre.
<
MYTH: Untouchability is a creation of Islam.
FACT: First and foremost, Untouchability was the
accompaniment of ‘caste’ system in the first century
AD.That is, from the first century itself, Untouchability
is the social practice here. Manusmriti, written in 2nd
and 3rd century AD. codifies the existing practices,
which show in utmost clarity the type of despicable
social practices, which the upper castes were imposing
upon the weaker, lower castes. Now the major incursion
i.e. invasions of Muslims began in the subcontinent
from 11century AD. And the British colonised South
Asia in 16-17th century AD.
C FACTS against MYTHS - Vol VI # 8/2000
r-————————————i
I
I
I
i
|
J Much has been said about Aurangzeb’s I
| demolition order of Vishwanath Temple at I
■ Banaras. But documentary evidence gives a I
I new dimension to the whole episode while I
I A urangzeb was passing near Varanasi on his I
I way to Bengal, the Hindu Rajas in his retinue I
| requested that if the halt was made for the I
| day, their Ranis may go to Varanasi, have a I
| dip in the Ganges and pay their homage to
I
■ Lord Vishwanath. Aurangzeb readily agreed,
n and army pickets were posted on the five mile i
- route to Varanasi. The Ranis made a journey I
{ on the Palkis. They took their dip in the I
j
j
Demolition of
Kashi Vishvanath Temple
■ Ganges and went to Vishwanath temple to pay
■ their homage. A fter offering puja, all the Ranis
I returned except one, the Maharani of Kutch.
I A thorough search was made of the temple
| precincts but the Rani was to be found
| nowhere. When Aurangzeb came to know of
| it, he was very much enraged. He sent his
| senior officers to search for the Rani.
■ Ultimately they found that the statue of Ganesh
I which was fixed in the wall was a moveable
{ one. When the statue moved they saw a flight
■ of stairs that led to the basement. To their
I horror they found the missing Rani
I dishonoured and crying. The basement was
I just beneath Lord Vishwanath’s seat. The
| Rajas protested. As the crime was heinous
] the Rajas demanded exemplary action.
| Aurangzeb ordered that as the sacred
| precincts have been despoiled, Lord
I Vishwanath may be moved to some other
. place, the Temple be razed to the ground and
J the Mahant be arrested and punished. ” This
J fact has been confirmed by the erstwhile
■ curator of the Patna Museum, Dr. P. L. Gupta.
1
I
I
I
i
I
I
I
1
I
8
8
1
8
I
8
0
I
I
I
I
8
I
Ba i=i saa tnza bbh aaa tsza aaa bbb beoi mb aaa aa bb mbw mb bmi e3
A late hymn of Rig Veda also provides the mythical
origin of the castes: “when the gods made a sacrifice
with the man as their victim, when they divided the
man, into how many parts did they divide him? What
was his mouth, what were his arms, what were his
thighs and his feet called. The Brahmin was his mouth,
of his arms were made the warrior Kshatriya. His thighs
became the Vaishyas, and of his feet the Shudrawere
born” (Thapar, History of India vol. I. Page 39 - 40).
Over a period oflime, caste was secured by hereditary
and the basis of eating together and defining marriage
limits etc. By and by the caste based hierarchy rigidified
and shudra caste was excluded from the eating
together, marriage limits, and became the victim of
‘pollution—purity’ paradigm, dictated by the Brahmins,
5
r—————————-—
—— n
j
The ‘credit’ of breaking temples is shared
I
by us along with them
■
|
We have also broken temples of Jains,
Buddhists
And erected temples of Ram, Hanuman.
I
I
For establishing the religious state
We unleashed crusades also
I
The punya of killing those belonging to
other religions
Is shared by us also.
|
■
_
■
It was our Pushyamitra Shung, who
changed the color of Earth from black to
saffron, with the blood of thousands of
innocent monks.
- Alok Saksena
j
■
!
|
and treated as untouchable. These found their reflection
in the rigid theories of Manu, whose ManavDharmashstra (Human Law Code) codified these
practices into laws. M. S. Golwalkar upholds Manu,
as the first greatest lawmaker of mankind, not only for
his time, but for all the times to come. The later social
struggles to escape the tyrannies of caste system are
presented by Ambedkar as revolution and counter
revolution. He divides the ‘Pre-Muslim’ period as (a)
Brahminism (the Vedic period) (b) Buddhism connected
with rise of first Magadh-Maurya states and
representing the revolutionary denial of caste
inequalities and (c) ‘Hinduism’, or the counter
revolution, which consolidates Brahmin dominance and
the caste hierarchy!’’ (Omvedt, Dalit Visions pg: 50).
Thus, long before the invasion of Muslim Kings shudras
were treated as untouchables and were the most
oppressed and exploited sections of society. The
intensity of caste system and untouchability worsened
from post-Vedic to Gupta period. With the foundation
of Muslim dynasties new social movements like Bhakti,
directly and Sufi, indirectly, partly reduced caste
oppression and untouchability. Later with Christian
missionary activities also, the upper caste Hindu outfits
felt the threat of ‘loosing’ their grip on the ‘low castes’,
and as a response diluted their caste rigidities to the
extent of merely superficially opposing the caste
system.
MYTH: Muslim kings and rulers were responsible
for the widespread destructions of Hindu temples.
FACT: Since the Babri-Masjid/Janam Bhoomi
controversy a false image has been created in public
mind of Muslim rulers as destroyers of Hindu temples.
While a few wrong acts of intolerance may have taken
place, the bigger picture is a) temples were also
destroyed by Hindu kings and rulers and b) one of a
large number of temples were maintained or even built
with the help of Muslim rulers.
FACTS against MYTHS - Vol VI # 8/2000
This makes it necessary to examine the policy of
Mughal rulers towards the temples and other relevant
details. For instantce, the timeless of VrindavanMathura region. The Hindu pilgrimage was nearest to
Delhi and Agra, the two main centres of Mughal rule
and so it is of significance to know the relationship
which the Mughal rulers had with these temples and
with their priests and devotes. Dozens of documents
of those days are available to reveal the policy of Akbar,
Jehagir and Shahjahan towards these temples. These
documents have available in Vrindavan Research
Institute and in some of the temples. Studies based
on these documents show that Akbar enlarged and
consolidated all grants to temples and temple-servants
in the Mathura region by his ‘firmans' (dated August
27,1598 and September 11,1598) in Vrindavan, Mathura
and their environs. Jehangir not only continued these
grants he substantially added to these. He also added
at least two temples to the list of the 35 already
supported by Akbar’s grant of 1598. In addition he
provided 121 bighas of land for 5 families of temple
sevaks. Jehangir also visited Vrindaban temples in
Sil
These documents also reveal that whenever temjW
priests had any serious problem they approached
Mughal rulers or their senior officials and generally the
rulers/officials took action to solve this problem. On
one occasion the water supply to Radha Kund was
stopped; in another case a tax was imposed on the
cattle kept by temples; in another case some trees
around a temple were pruned; and in yet another case
gardeners of temples were made by priests or others
connected with temples to the Mughal rulers or their
senior officials. And in all the above-mentioned cases,
prompt official action was taken to solve the problem.
The fact that the priest’s appeals were to the rulers/
officials even for minor problems, indicated they
expected to get favourable verdicts from them. In fact
there are also documents to show that even when there
were disputes among two priests or other religious
persons connected with temples, the intervention of
Mughal or their officials was sought to settle the dispij^x,
and the example of at least one such dispute between
Damodardas Radhaballabh and Kshan Chaitan is
mentioned in one of the documents.
Evidently, the plunder and destruction of temples was
carried out by rulers and kings irrespective of their
religion.Temples were repositories of enormous wealth.
Ideological veneer was drawn from religion for plundering
acts. The Marathas inTipu’s sultanat plundered Temples
also. The Shrirangapatanam temple was destroyed by
Maratha armies but was repaired by Tipu Sultan.
Attacking the temple was also a way of humiliating
the other kings.
Muhammed Gazani looted the famous temple of
Smooth. His main aim in this was to loot the huge
quantities of gold kept in the temple. On his way to
Smooth he first had to fight with Muhammed Fath
6
Dawood and in the process the mosque of Multan was
damaged. Further, he allied with Anandpal the ruler of
Thaneshwar, before attacking the temple. Many of his
army generals (Tilak.Sondhi, Rai Hind and Harzan were
Hindus and a substantial part of his army was
constituted by Hindu soldiers.) Later his son sent his
army to destroy a mosque in central Asia.
King Harsha (Kashmir) also looted Temples, 11*
century Kashmir. The mention of this is found in
Kalhan’s book “Rajtarangini', which says that he
appointed a special officer to uproot the gold idols from
the temples. This officer was designated as Devotpatan
Nayak’ (officer who uproots the Gods)
Parmar Kings (Shubhatvarman, 1193-1210 AD)
destroyed Jain temples in Cambay and Dabhoi in
addition to plundering temples in his own kingdom.
Similarly Aurangzeb not only destroyed some temples
and mosques, he also gave Jagirs to many a temples.
Mogul Kings like most other kings had political
calculations as the influencing factors in their policy
towards the places of worship, irrespective of the fact
whether they belonged to this or that religion, or sect.
WMathura Vrindavan region where number of places
of pilgrimage are located, the Mughal Kings had a very
liberal policy towards them including Aurangzeb. The
documents available from Vrindavan Research Center
show that Akbar, Jahangir and Shahajahan gave
number of Jagirs to these temples.
Finally, to believe that Muslim kings destroyed Hindu
temples to convert the Hindus to Islam is baseless.
“How can one imagine that the way of winning over the
people’s heart is to go and demolish its temples? It is
significant that generally they are not demolished in
Sultan’s own empire, unless the temples become the
centre’s of conspiracy.” (Mukhia) As shown above,
there are instances, when Muslim rulers were quite
cooperative.
MYTH: Medieval wars in the sub-continent were
primarily inter-religious wars between Muslims and
Qpdu Kings.
FACT: Many of the renowned battles during the reign
of the Mughal empire have been embedded in public
memory as those between Hindus and Muslims. But
this is far from the truth. The Mughal kings were
basically statist quoist and did not disturb the existing
social order or structure. Their empire had employed
people from all walks of life comprising of a large
numbers of courtiers, Rajas and Jamindars, belonging
to both these and other religions.
►►
Shivaji’s army had a significant number of Muslims
and that all through Aurangzeb’s prolonged fight
with Shivaji several Maratha nobles continued to
occupy an important place in Mughal court and
army. The names of these Maratha nobles in
Aurangzeb’s court are available in historical
documents. Above all, the number of these
FACTS against MYTHS - Vol VI # 8/2000
r
I
Babar’s Will
I
I Son, this Nation Hindusthan has different
I Religions. Thank Allah for giving us this
We should remove all the
I Kingdom.
differences from our heart and do justice
I to each community according to its
I customs. Avoid cow-slaughter to win over
I the hearts of the people of this land and to
I incorporate the people in the matters of
I administration. Don't damage the places of
I worship and temples, which fall in the
I boundaries of our rule. Evolve a method
I of ruling whereby all the people of the
1 kingdom are happy with the King and the
King is happy with the people. Islam can
I progress
noble deeds and not by terror.
I Ignore thebydifferences
of Shia and Sunni
I as this is the weakness of Islam. Keep the
I people following different customs
I integrated into a single whole so that no
I part of the body of this Kingdom becomes
I diseased.
I (Translated from the original - National
I Museum)
I
L n=3 M ■■■
bes
MB Ksas nx33 ez=3 era
e=i
1
I
I
I
I
i
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
cca mex bh mm J
Maratha nobles was higher in Aurangzeb’s court
than in the court of any other Mughal ruler before
him;
►►
It was also common for several Hindu kings and
chiefs to have Muslim nobles. For instance, at Haldi
Ghati, Sur and his Afghan soldiers had fought
valiantly on the side of Rana Pratap. On the Mughal
side there were many Rajput soldiers led by Raja
Man Singh. Still earlier, at the battle of Khanawa,
Mahmood Lodi and Hasan Khan Mewati had fought
on the side of Rana Sanga against Babur’s army.
The long and bitter battle between Rana Pratap and
Akbar is well known. On their death, however, their
sons had decided to stop fighting and called for peace.
Emperor Jehangir and Raja Amar Singh, a great
statesman himself, arrived at a highly honourable and
mutually satisfactory agreement. Jehangir made no
efforts at all to humiliate him in any way and in fact
showed him utmost respect
In especially today’s context historical events are
distorted by communal-oriented historians and brazenly
smuggled into especially discourses on history. The
various hero myths of various cultures and civilisations
around the world are no exceptions to the rule. But it
is common knowledge that heroes and villains exist in
all religions. It is not a feature or phenomenon of just
one particular community or culture as is being
projected today by the Hindutvadis. Today there are
attempts to depict all Hindu kings who fought for ’their*
Kingdoms against the Muslim empire as as
’National Heroes’: Shivaji, Rana Pratap, GuruGovind
Singh. But many of them and their descendants ’allied’
with Mughal Rulers e.g. Rana Pratap’s son Amar
Singh developed a friendship with Jehangir. Guru Govind
Singh came to an agreement with Aurangzeb’s
successor, Bahadur Shah 1. If the Guru was so great
as to forget and forgive even at that time, when the
wounds were still raw, how can there be any justification
to re-open them centuries later under the perverse logic
of righting wrongs of the past but in process spreading
hatred.
These illustrations clearly indicate that the famous
battles of the days of Mughal rule were not battles
between Hindus and Muslims; instead the armies
which fought each other were of a mixed composition.
In fact, there are even instances when Muslim
fundamentalists had ganged up against Muslim rulers,
and the Mughal ruler than sent an army under the
leadership of Hindu rajas to quell such rebellions.
Describing this rebellion Prof. S. Chandra writes, “The
rebellion kept the empire distracted for almost two years
(1580-81) and Akbar was faced with a very difficult and
delicate situation. Due to the mishandling of the
situation by local officials Bengal and almost the whole
of Bihar passed into the hands of the rebels who
proclaimed Mirza Hakim as toker ruler. They even got
a religious devine to issue a fatwa, calling on the faithful
to take the field against Akbar. Akbar did not lose his
nerve. He despatched a force under Todar Mai against
Bihar and Bengal, and Raja Mann Singh to check the
expected attack by Mirza Hakim”.
It is well known that Shivaji’s father, Shahji, had at one
time agreed to fight on the side of the Mughals, although
this agreement was soon breached - as the Mughals
did not give him the promised jahagir around Pune. It
is equally well known that Marathas had joined in large
numbers the armies of Malik Ambar and other Muslim
rulers of the Deccan region.
When the (Hindu) King of Bikaner was defeated by the
King of Marwar, his family sought refuge in the court of
Shershah Suri. When Shershah Suri defeated
Humayun, he sought refuge with the (Hindu) King of
Amarkot, Akbar’s birthplace. Later in Ayodhya, Nawal
Raj died fighting for Nawab Safdarjung.
The above makes it clear that the history of Mughal
India is not a history of battles between Hindus and
Muslims. Kings fought each other time and again, but
generally there were mixed armies on both sides.
Loyalty at all levels was for the region, land or for the
kingdom and never for any religion in the politics of the
past. At times a number of alliances were maqfl
between Muslim and Hindu rulers (see Box above) On
some occasions individuals who demonstrated great
valour and large heartedness happened to be Hindus,
on some other occasions they happened to be
Muslims. In fact the biggest heroes of the age were
those who rose above all sectarian considerations to
spread the message of universal love and brotherhood
e.g. Sant Kabir, Guru Nanak among others.
Please feel free to reproduce material from this publication but with due credit.
The website of Vikas Adhyayan Kendra has been launched and is now operational. Kindly visit us at
http://ivwTK vakindia. com and let us have your comments and suggestions about it.
r
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
1
Produced and Published by:
I
Vikas Adhyayan Kendra
I
D-1 Shivdham, 62 Link Road,
Malad West, Mumbai 400 064, INDIA I
I
S : 882 2850 & 889 8662
Fax : 889 8941
I
Email: vak@bom3.vsnl.net.in
I
I
Design & Layout: Kartiki Desai
I
Printed by : Omega Offset, 4574, Shetty Gaily
I
Bclgaum 590 002. ® 0831 -424124 / 433429
I
Facts Against Myths is a monthly bulletin offactual
information on a number ofdevelopment myths and
fallacies, etc, including information against alien
development models, paradigms and false concepts
on caste, creed and gender.
^gj^TEDMATi^^
BOOK-POST
7
The Secretary
Community Health Cell
No.367 Srinivasa Nilaya
dakkasandra, I Main? I Block
Koramangala? Bangalore 560 034
Not viewed